Protected Speech

The modern world is constantly changing, as conventions of gender, sexuality, race, and more are being overturned. Accompanying this change, unsurprisingly, are people unapologetically spreading their opinion, and with the Internet growing in every sense of the word, the conversation about freedom of speech is becoming more complicated by the day. What constitutes protected speech? What should be protected, what should be censored?

The people voicing their opinions publicly are, to some degree, exposing themselves to discomfort in order to better understand the world, reflected by the visceral and uncomfortable presentation of a mouth without a body. The protection they have, however, is flimsy and paper-thin. Especially as a student journalist, I’m noticing more and more the silencing of opinions that people don’t agree with (take, for example, the New York Times reporter who people were lobbying for to be fired, after writing an article supporting J.K. Rowling). We cannot deny that it’s hurtful to hear outdated and prejudiced opinions, but what people often forget is that these opinions come from humans trying to reconcile what society trains them to believe with what they’re seeing in the world.

Freedom of speech exists so that we can have conversations and connect on a human level. Let people raise their voices: not for us to look up to or idolize, but rather to examine the center of their beliefs. We need to see the person, the mouth at the center of the speech. The conversation cannot end with “I’m right, you’re wrong”. That is how racism, sexism, homophobia, and discrimination survive, when we degrade those we disagree with into monochrome and one-dimensional people, defined by their opinions. People are as malleable as clay and capable of change. Give them room to grow. See them as humans. Let them talk.

And talk back.