[figglesonrails]

Err, no. I was hoping you could clarify what is meant, like I said. I get the idea of "casual [xxxx]ism", where something is so internalized and normalized that it doesn't even register as shitty.

However, I was specifically asking if you thought it was possible to have discussions on sensitive topics in a civil way or if having a discussion, e.g., "the pros and cons of slavery in America" or "was the prophet of Islam a fraud?" itself is some kind of expression of privilege over the person who would be offended by said discussion.

I'm not too worried about censorship in general, but sometimes the whole "don't be offensive" seems like an open problem and at odds with "have and discuss an opinion that disagrees with others". Just wanted your thoughts on that...

[solipsism]

I never asserted that one should always be civil. I welcome honesty and open conversation. My point was that a conversation - a whole set of comments on a story, for example - can be civil and still overwhelmingly racist or sexist or what have you. I took the original poster's comment to be saying, "Well, as long as we keep it civil.". I'm saying " Come on, we can do better than that if we want, and we should." I'm also saying "YC doesn't get a pass for keeping it civil but overlooking a general culture of objectification or ignorance."

I could do without the civility, to be honest. I'd rather be compassionate and thoughtful and inclusive but irreverent and disrespectful.