"adverse psychological impact” is a very relative term, so it can be applied as someone wished. What they are proposing is twitter level of censoring at a national level.
That is exactly how I am reading it. It is not illegal or wrong but it causes psychological "harm", the harm of course is neither proven or measured in anyway.
You can say that about immigration, crimes done by immigrants, all gender related issue, everything is going to be labeled as wrong.
And any theory about globalists or government abuse will of course be labeled as misinformation.
"adverse psychological impact” is a very relative term, so it can be applied as someone wished. What they are proposing is twitter level of censoring at a national level.
I wonder if they're trying to open the door to "This speech is not illegal. It is illegal for you to say it though."
That is exactly how I am reading it. It is not illegal or wrong but it causes psychological "harm", the harm of course is neither proven or measured in anyway.
You can say that about immigration, crimes done by immigrants, all gender related issue, everything is going to be labeled as wrong.
And any theory about globalists or government abuse will of course be labeled as misinformation.
Misogyny law through the back door. Yay.
For all that I think you focus on this specific issue a little much, yeah, that could easily be used for that.
Carrie Symonds strikes again.
Dominick Cummings was right.