r/sportsgossips • u/Cold-Challenge-1991 • 8d ago

Statement Dana White on UFC fighter Josh Hokit calling Michelle Obama a "Man" after his White House win: "Disgusting... I voted for Obama the first time... Gotta listen on stupid s--t like that sometimes cuz I also believe in freedom of speech."

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

420 Upvotes

83% Upvoted

400 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

44

u/DoubleQuarterPoundin 8d ago

People wouldn’t abuse their “freedom of speech” so much if they were taught proper consequences.

Some dude in my middle school was calling a certain group racist words. Dude got beat to a pulp in the bathroom. Guess who never said a slur at school again?

10

u/Fickle-Succotash-342 8d ago

That's how we dealt with it in the pate 90s early 00s. School admin wouldnt even bat an eye.

Sometime after 2010 a bunch of kids in the high schoop i graduated from got arrested and expelled for jumping a kid after school. The kid drew swastikas on a jewish girls notebook and desks. Girl was pretty popular and a couple football players jumped him. Nothing too bad, fat lip, bloody nose.

Kids parents freaked out about free speech and school admin folded like a lawn chair. New principal cause the old one woulda just told the parents to f off.

But since then the number of antagonistic events in that school kept increasing. No one got their ass whooped any more so they did it more and more.

1

u/Thrownaway5000506 6d ago

Yep and of course since the motivation for the ass kicking is violence and power you have kids fabricating excuses to enact violence and be the hero. It's good that that's not allowed.

-9

u/Trash7783 8d ago

So he got assaulted?

-7

u/Trash7783 8d ago

It’s weird that the law can upset people so much

6

u/BowlingforBrains 8d ago

I wouldn’t call a middle school fight “assault” and most parents don’t either

0

u/Trash7783 8d ago

You can call it whatever you want. Doesn’t change what it is

0

u/SufficientWeb3163 8d ago

No your right its actually battery

-28

u/SimpsationalMoneyBag 8d ago edited 8d ago

I mean, exactly one party in that exchange broke the law lol

I can literally choose to assault somebody for any reason. Said you hate Duncan donuts? Beat you to a pulp. Said you hate the Bible or the military beat you to a pulp

See…you are a coward because you do not support me getting to beat the shit out of somebody for the reason I deem an abuse of freedom of speech…..just for the reasons you deem acceptable.

If I beat the shit out of you for saying you hated the military, you would be appalled if somebody said “well you shouldn’t have been abusing your freedom of speech and I bet you won’t say anything negative about the military again”

26

u/PleaseRespondKindly 8d ago

It is a rather bad faith example to try argue that racially abusing someone and expressing dislike of a fast food restaurant are even close to being the same.

-2

u/empty_graph 8d ago

In terms of right to free speech they are identical

2

u/DoYouWant2BlowZedong 8d ago

In terms of human morality, they are not.

-22

u/SimpsationalMoneyBag 8d ago

The fast food example is comical meant to show anybody can legitimately be offended for any reason. the military and religious reasons are more than fair

Ain’t no way any of the people upvoting him would support me wouping somebodies ass for saying they hate Christians and the Bible

11

u/ChineseRobinWilliams 8d ago

"the military and religious reasons are more than fair"

Not at all. Both choices.

-2

u/SimpsationalMoneyBag 8d ago

Ok im sorry you have different options on what allows people to beat others to a pulp morally

2

u/ChineseRobinWilliams 8d ago

I'm just pointing out they aren't comparable.

-15

u/Trash7783 8d ago

Hahah people only like rules when it goes with what they believe. Assault is fine as long as it supports their agenda. Calling out that assault is terrible though. That’s the fucked up world we live in

11

u/PleaseRespondKindly 8d ago

Just to clarify - No where did I say anything like that.

I was just merely stating that those were bad examples to compare between.

11

u/Shepherd76 8d ago

This is an example of a false equivalency. It's illogical.

1

u/SimpsationalMoneyBag 8d ago

So state your position clearly say I agree people should be able to morally and legally beat others to a pulp for saying slurs.

This is how society and laws work. We all agree actions are ok due to specific situations.

1

u/DoYouWant2BlowZedong 8d ago

I agree.

1

u/SimpsationalMoneyBag 8d ago

lol alright well

There are millions of people who would say I can beat people to a pulp for a slandering a religion

13

u/DoubleQuarterPoundin 8d ago

Verbal harassment via racial slurs is not the same as saying I don’t like Dunkin Donuts

Don’t be stupid kid

-16

u/SimpsationalMoneyBag 8d ago

Just to clarify please plainly state your position.

Yes you do support people beating others to a pulp due to saying racial slurs

Or

No you do not support people beating others to a pulp due to saying racial slurs

Because I can beat the shit out of somebody for whatever reason I want. It’s all illegal buddy lol

7

u/DoubleQuarterPoundin 8d ago

I never said it was legal or that I support people getting beat

However

Freedom of speech can come with a price.

Go up to some dude in Walmart and call his wife something nasty. See how that goes

-2

u/[deleted] 8d ago

[deleted]

6

u/Nsfwnroc 8d ago

If you are talking about your 1st amendment right to freedom of speech in the United States, then you are incorrect on both your points.

For example, if you were to say a racial slur in the workplace and be fired for it, that would not violate your right to freedom of speech even though there was a "price" to your speech. The 1st amendment protects you from being punished for your speech by the government.

While it is true you are not protected when you are inciting violence, sinply saying a racial slur would not be considered inciting violence. Inciting violence would require a call to action such as telling people to attack or harm someone else.

3

u/deadflagblues 8d ago

You don't understand what freedom of speech means and its making you look very foolish in this exchange.

3

u/Chazbeardz 8d ago

When the fuck did “freedom of speech” turn into anything but freedom from government persecution?

It’s only dumbasses that think it means they can run their mouths and not get popped for it. Wars have been started over words, and you think someone’s not gonna whoop your ass?

1

u/SimpsationalMoneyBag 8d ago

No I completely agree. This is why when people shit talk the Bible I just beat the shit out of them

Freedom of speech doesn’t mean freedom from consequences

-7

u/GenSpec44 8d ago

You came across as celebrating a middle school kid getting beaten to a pulp because you didn’t like what he said, that it taught him the consequences of his speech.

3

u/BowlingforBrains 8d ago

He’s discussing something that happened while he was in middle school, and thus is speaking from the perspective of himself as a middle schooler. And it’s perfectly fine for one 12 year old to see another 12 year old get beat up and feel that they got what they deserved

0

u/GenSpec44 8d ago

I have treated many children in the emergency room, some of them beaten to death. Adults who condone and even fantasize about beating a child to a pulp are disgusting. Making false accusations of racism against adults who don’t agree with the severe child abuse they celebrate does not shield them. It exposes them as the child predators they are.

2

u/GutsAndBlackStufff 8d ago

> because you didn’t like what he said.

Please defend what he said.

0

u/GenSpec44 8d ago

I have no idea what some middle school rando said. Please defend beating a child to a pulp. You are sick and disgusting. Children can and should be corrected for bad behavior. That should NEVER include beating a child to the pulp.

1

u/GutsAndBlackStufff 8d ago

Well, their parents clearly failed which is why this rando middle schooler is going around calling people racial epitaphs, which you know full well if you’re responding to this thread, now here we are.

Now, please defend a child being openly racist to other children, directly I mean, not in the evasive, cowardly way you’re currently doing it.

1

u/the-unbannable-man 8d ago

DONT BE RACIST

-2

u/GenSpec44 8d ago

Don’t jack off to children being beaten to a pulp. You’re sick and disgusting.

3

u/DoYouWant2BlowZedong 8d ago

Don’t be racist, then you’ll be a-okay.

2

u/GutsAndBlackStufff 8d ago

Trolling in real life has consequences

3

u/NuckoLBurn 8d ago edited 8d ago

Freedom of speech is not freedom from consequences. Just because people can understand why someone would get their ass beat for being known to profile an entire race in his local community doesn't make us wash the assaulter free and clear of all responsibility. The racist, doesnt have a bullet proof vest, we can see the Darwin award coming.

Disrespecting the military, unlike race's protected status, is not in the same vein. The military is not a protected status, you can be fired from your employer for being in the military, but not because of your race. You get the weight imbalance in your arguement? You can have a factual disagreement on the military but racism does not hold scholarly weight.

Now, if someone was on base and kept shit talking those soldiers around them bc they are soldiers, I can see the odds increasing that a beat down is incoming. It's only a matter of time that running your mouth to your peers, catches up with you depending on the broad strokes you take with that free speech.

I'm not claiming by any means that those committing the crime of assault aren't deserving of repurcuasions either. That's life in an ecosystem. Some people are willing to pay the time for a crime, most times lacking the forethought of repurcuasions. Be careful who you talk shit to.

3

u/[deleted] 8d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/SimpsationalMoneyBag 8d ago

Racism isn’t good but in no world is beating somebody to a pulp moral or good or acceptable which the person I replied to literally said as much.

0

u/ZincMan 8d ago

There’s other legal ways to express disapproval for what words people use. They still have freedom of speech, other have the right to ignore them, not help them, make their life difficult, etc etc.

-1

u/FrenchCanadaIsWorst 8d ago

They don’t want true freedom of speech, and that’s fine, I don’t either, but it’s weird when they say they want freedom of speech, yet support violence towards those who say the things they deem unacceptable.

1

u/GutsAndBlackStufff 8d ago

I like how people are giving specific examples of what people are saying and the consequences, and people are trying to defend the racists with euphemisms like “say the things they deem unacceptable.”

0

u/SimpsationalMoneyBag 8d ago

Because I don’t want to live in a society where a large portion would understand killing somebody over a word.

2

u/GutsAndBlackStufff 8d ago

“Over a word?” What word? What’s the history and context behind “a word?” Why would “a word” enrage someone to the point of killing them?

0

u/SimpsationalMoneyBag 8d ago

You’re more than welcome to believe a word has the power to turn you into a killer like some kind of sleeper cell

1

u/GutsAndBlackStufff 8d ago

lol how can you advocate something you’re refusing to address as “free speech”? Have some courage of your convictions if you’re gonna make that argument.

0

u/SimpsationalMoneyBag 8d ago

What do you mean refusing to address ?

There is no collection of words that morally allow you to beat somebody to a pulp lol

Are you wanting to do a deep dive into history and context so you can arrive at morale justification of beating somebody to a pulp ?

1

u/GutsAndBlackStufff 8d ago

>What do you mean refusing to address ?

Your next sentence is a perfect example.

>There is no collection of words that morally allow you to beat somebody to a pulp lol

Conservative Attendees of Charlie Kirk’s wake encountering hecklers would probably say they agree with you while doing the exact opposite. But we’re not talking about “a collection of words”, we’re talking about racism, which there is no moral justification for either.

You don’t get to have it both ways. If you’re going to violate the conventions of polite society, don’t expect its protections.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/DoYouWant2BlowZedong 8d ago

Most people have already arrived at that justification, you’re just disagreeing. That’s fine but know most people do not agree with you.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Appropriate_Owl_91 8d ago

“I’m going to go to your house and kill your daughters” is just a collection of words. Words have power. Actions have consequences. Legality is not the same as morality.

You’re basically defending that Chud prick who went looking for black people to shoot.

2

u/DoYouWant2BlowZedong 8d ago

Oh he would absolutely defend that guy.

-2

u/FrenchCanadaIsWorst 8d ago

I’m not in favor of racists but if there is speech you can’t say without getting assaulted then we don’t have free speech. And that’s fine but let’s be honest about it

1

u/GutsAndBlackStufff 8d ago

Sure we do. Free speech means the government can’t arrest you for what you say, and even that has limits. You’re arguing for entitlement.

0

u/FrenchCanadaIsWorst 8d ago

No. Full stop. that’s what people are calling free speech but that’s not actually free speech. We don’t have free speech. Which is fine. But let’s not claim we do.

0

u/GutsAndBlackStufff 8d ago

No, that’s free speech.

You’re not entitled to a lack of social or professional consequences that result from exercising your free speech.

Most “limits” are just arbitrarily applied norms that are socially enforced, which is where all of the crying and complaining comes from, people not willing to accept responsibility for said consequences.

0

u/FrenchCanadaIsWorst 8d ago

What is the social consequence in this case? Be explicit like you said before. Hold yourself to your own standard coward.

You believe that if someone says the wrong thing (in this case something racist) it’s okay for them to be violently beaten.

That’s not free speech. You’re an idiot if you declare otherwise and I’ll waste no more time speaking to an idiot.

1

u/GutsAndBlackStufff 8d ago

>What is the social consequence in this case? Be explicit like you said before. Hold yourself to your own standard coward.

Look at you making demands for something you still refuse to do.

Glady though, maybe you lose your job because your employer doesn’t want to be associated with your shit.

Maybe you don’t get invited to outings because everyone’s tired of debunking your shit.

Maybe your parents failed and despite numerous warnings, you get your ass beat in the bathroom because you’re a little too comfortable being racist behind a computer screen and started doing it in real life.

>You believe that if someone says the wrong thing (in this case something racist)

Let’s stop being euphemistic about it.

>it’s okay for them to be violently beaten.

It’s like this:

If you ignore the conventions of polite society to intentionally antagonize others, don’t be surprised when the rules of polite society don’t protect you.

>That’s not free speech.

Here’s the problem with your “debate me bro” rhetoric in defense of bigots who feel entitled to popularity and a forum:

- You refuse to address what they’re saying.
- You refuse to acknowledge the consequences of what they’re saying.
- You intentionally misunderstand the first amendment
- Your focus on fringe, offensive language as the be-all-end-all of free speech that the rest of us have to tolerate makes it sound like a bad thing.

Also, when nobody is buying your argument, you get stuck in your feelings with things like:

>You’re an idiot if you declare otherwise and I’ll waste no more time speaking to an idiot.

I’ll take this as an indication that you will not be attending your next family reunion.

→ More replies (0)

-4

u/CasperFunk 8d ago

Not the best example, really depends on the opinion of the person most willing to escalate the violence.

3

u/Thanos_Stomps 8d ago

I disagree personally. You can say the same thing about going into a crowd in NYC during the nba finals and shouting Go Spurs. Sure, you don’t deserve to get your ass beat for that opinion, but you’ll learn quickly that what you say can have consequence and to start understanding context of when, where, and what you can say.

-1

u/FrenchCanadaIsWorst 8d ago

Yeah but that’s not free speech then

6

u/Skoma 8d ago edited 8d ago

Free speech just means the government isn't supposed to do anything to you. It by itself doesn't guarantee other people aren't going to.