Redditors are arguing that because the case in question is about prolonged harassment that makes it fine, as reading over the info the name calling appears to have been an intentional choice that someone knew annoyed the person filing.

However...

This case now sets precedent towards name calling under that specific term*. Regardless of intent. So future cases can now argue this case as a point in their defense when prosecuting someone while any counter points need to establish how their case differs from the OP story. Sure that can happen but then that requires the judges involved to not be complete asshats and make their own decision on things for whatever personal reasons are involved.

As ever Redditors not seeing the forest for the trees.

*Edit: As well as opening up avenues towards other terms "someone" may not like despite whatever common usage there is. "Bird", and other related avian terms are quite widespread in various parts of the UK as someone points out in another comment [hens, chicks, ducks] and there are plenty of other animal based terms used like "stag" ['stag do' being the bachelor equivalent of a 'hen night'].

While not actually an animal based term I'm waiting for the day a wokester tries to use this avenue as a reason the term "dear" is wrong despite it not even being the same spelling as "deer". That retarded twitch furry will be all the ammo someone needs to point out that trying to remove the term is transphobic by using their own idiocy against them, and that's before even getting on to the point that DEER DON'T EAT GRASS YOU STUPID FUCK!

Redditors are arguing that because the case in question is about prolonged harassment that makes it fine, as reading over the info the name calling appears to have been an intentional choice that someone knew annoyed the person filing.

However...

This case now sets precedent towards name calling under that specific term. Regardless of intent. So future cases can now argue this case as a point in their defense when prosecuting someone while any counter points need to establish how their case differs from the OP story. Sure that can happen but then that requires the judges involved to not be complete asshats and make their own decision on things for whatever personal reasons are involved.

As ever Redditors not seeing the forest for the trees.