You know, I can actually agree with that idea at a fundamental level. The problem is, that's not what happens at all, by any stretch of the imagination.
Someone will say something, and then a fanatic activist will twist their words, toss a label onto them, and pretend that their interpretation and their view of that person is somehow representative of real life, when it's definitely not.
That's not a "consequence" for what they said; it's a fabrication and twisting of reality created to ruin and silence them.
As an example, if someone said: "I don't feel children should learn about [insert topic] until they're older."
The "consequence" they create is: "You're clearly an -ist/-phobe who doesn't support [insert activist movement]. Does your boss know? How about your family?"
Followed by them attempting to ruin the person.
They can make that "consequence" statement seem as innocent as they want, but in reality, it's nothing more than a thinly veiled threat.
You know, I can actually agree with that idea at a fundamental level. The problem is, that's not what happens at all, by any stretch of the imagination.
Someone will say something, and then a fanatic activist will twist their words, toss a label onto them, and pretend that their interpretation and their view of that person is somehow representative of real life, when it's definitely not.
That's not a "consequence" for what they said; it's a fabrication and twisting of reality created to ruin and silence them.
As an example, if someone said: "I don't feel children should learn about [insert topic] until they're older."
The "consequence" they create is: "You're clearly an -ist/-phobe who doesn't support [insert activist movement]. Does your boss know? How about your family?"
Followed by them attempting to ruin the person.
They can make that "consequence" statement seem as innocent as they want, but in reality, it's nothing more than a thinly veiled threat.