this is not the hill to die on. it is not that hard to use other words. and even if there were zero other reasons, keeping fascists away is enough.

as a marginalised person you should know that a slur you reclaim may be extremely offensive to someone else in the same grouping. take your example: a lot of people have reclaimed it but there are others still who have been hurt by that slur and are very sensitive to hearing it. this is true for many slurs.

if someone you were close to irl was like “hey, that word makes me uncomfortable” you would stop using it around them. because it would be disrespectful and hurtful for you to continue to do so. sure, people on the internet are strangers, but does that mean you potentially subject marginalized people to harm just because you don’t know them?

Hong Kong riots

support for the riots is not “support of anti-censorship”. it had nothing to do with censorship. a brief summary of how things began:

1. a man murdered his pregnant girlfriend while on holiday in taiwan
2. taiwan wanted the man extradited to face charges but hong kong did not have an extradition treaty with taiwan
3. an extradition bill is introduced in hong kong listing 46 crimes for which extradition may be requested by taiwan, macau, and the PRC. nine crimes listed were financial (these were later removed)
4. angry rich kids realized they would not be able to commit the same financial crimes their parents did

it was never about being censored. it was about wanting to continue to exploit others without consequence.

protonmail didn’t just “come out and support” the color revolution by merely making a statement. i’m not making the assertion that their support means that they are a honey pot. i am asserting, however, that their support means that, unlike their claims, they are decidedly not “pro-freedom” (unless, of course, their definition of “freedom” is getting away with murder).

i’m missing something here. what is the point?