Yes, because it's disingenuous bullshit.

As it was with "campus protests violate free speech!" from the folks who immediately turned around and banned voluntary diversity programs at universities.

As it was with "Twitter bans violate free speech" from the folks who bought it and banned @elonjet and the word cisgender.

▲

icapybara 2 days ago | parent [-]

Are people not allowed to suggest models may be too censored? Is that idea censored?

▲

ceejayoz 2 days ago | parent [-]

Am I not allowed to suggest it's disingenuous bullshit to pull the "both sides" thing?

▲

icapybara 2 days ago | parent [-]

That's right. It was uncalled for. I see no evidence OP was making a bad faith argument, but you assumed that right away.

	▲	2 days ago \| parent \| next [-]
		[deleted]
	▲	AlecSchueler 2 days ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Because it's incredibly frustrating to see the government remove women and men of colour from government websites, deleting climate data, and sending out violent mobs to round people up while people sit around saying their main worry is that regulatory bodies will move to make things "too woke." There's no "woke" equivalent to the insanity being acted out by the US administration.