A Letter on Justice and Open Debate

[Thomas Eckhardt]

I am certainly not going to wade into the topic either...

Am 17.07.2020 um 11:51 schrieb John Bailey:
> I'm not attacking or defending Rowling, or wading into the topic she waded into.
> But the angry tweets referred to in Thomas' article aren't censorship.

I am not saying they are. They are misogynist insults, however, hate 
speech and cyber bullying. Of course, the tweets have been selected for 
maximum effect, but still.

> That's what democratic 'open debate' looks like. 

No. This is hate speech, not debate. It should not be censored but it 
should certainly also not be treated as a legitimate contribution to 
reasonable debate.

> If you say something
> that some people find hateful, some of them might respond in ways that
> you don't like. 

Yes.

> If you're truly committed to open debate you'll engage
> in dialogue with these foul dissenters.

You believe a woman should engage in dialogue with people calling her a 
c*nt, inviting her to choke on their d*cks and publicly expressing their 
wish to slap her around, smack her up and punch her in the head? And if 
she doesn't, she is not committed to "open debate"? Sorry, but this is 
ridiculous.

> Or you can just demonise them. That's a tactic.

The people who wrote these tweets are not demons but idiots who are 
ideologically blindsided to a degree that makes me almost feel sorry for 
them.