Talk:Hate speech

"Theories of hate speech" section was a mess.
The entire thing read like an essay - there were no secondary sources supporting the premise that these sources represented major sources of thought on the topic; the paragraph on J. S. Mill had just a single primary citation to Mill and no citations that mentioned hate speech at all, and the final paragraph made a tenuous connection to sources that weren't really discussing hate speech and only mentioned it in passing, grouping them together as a major thread of thought on the topic without any real sources supporting that perspective. Some aspects here might be worth addressing as attributed interpretations of the subject in the commentary section (although I think much of it is already there) but I think we should lead with a history of the subject and its more general context, focusing on what we can cite to secondary sources that actually discuss its history and larger context. --Aquillion (talk) 20:40, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

Is Hate Speech 1 word or 2?
I have a problem with this term. To me it is 2 words of which each has a meaning, and it should be my right to speak about how much I hate to eat certain foods.

It doesn't even appear to be a compound word. It it is just a phrase then why overload the normal two words meanings with another? It makes it nonsense.

There should be some clarification as to what has happened to these two words which obviously mean different things to different people... yet the article seems to think there is only one meaning. 120.18.188.137 (talk) 14:34, 9 September 2023 (UTC)


 * Red herring.  signed, Willondon (talk)  15:03, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
 * The article uses it as two words and I don't think that anybody at all is suggesting that it is a single word. I don't think there is anything here that requires discussion or clarification. DanielRigal (talk) 15:07, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
 * See Etymological fallacy: "an argument that a word is defined by its etymology, and that its customary usage is therefore incorrect." TFD (talk) 21:01, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Gender, Race and Computing
— Assignment last updated by NavyBear314 (talk) 14:36, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

Hate speech is not just a phrase with a legal meaning, it is also 2 English words with English meanings...
I.e. in English, a hate speech can very well be a speech about how much you hate bitter melon... and when I speak English, I often vocally produce hate speeches about how much I hate bitter melon. 101.119.171.90 (talk) 10:45, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
 * I'll treat this as a serious comment about improving the article, even if a couple of your other edits seem less serious. Your argument is a kind of etymological fallacy, since the phrase "hate speech" has a more specific meaning than just "hate" and "speech" combined. Hate speech is not any hateful speech, but the meaning of the phrase "hate speech" is limited to the definition given in the article. We can see the same change in meaning in other set phrases. For instance, if some women are waiting in line, the first woman in line is not the first lady.
 * You might also want to read the talk page sections The scope of the definition and Is Hate Speech 1 word or 2? that discuss similar questions. Sjö (talk) 15:47, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
 * My comment is a serious one and for someone to think thst those 2 words cannot mean what they should is a fallacy. Likewise I believe the first lady in a line of ladies is indeed the first lady. Absolutely. Now imagine if governments were to disallow anyone to be a first lady? That would be very sexist to force the head of every line to be men... it would mean no ladies could be in line as, when a man is finished being first in line the lady would run afoul of the law. Same with hate speeches. I absolutely should have the right to make as many speeches "hate speeches" about how much I hate bitter melon without restriction. Hate speech is 2 words. So is dwarf planet and other silly "hijacked combinations of words". 120.19.139.66 (talk) 15:07, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Just an elaboration, first lady to someone who has nothing to do with the USA means what you would think it means, the lady that is first. Not something to do with a president. A person of colour also seems to imply there are colorless people to those who are not from the USA. Perhaps such phrases that become ambiguous with normal English should be capitalized or hyphenated... or they will forever be ambiguous. 120.19.139.66 (talk) 15:24, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

Stanford Encyclopedic Definition
I have restored the source in one place that cites the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

It is notable not just that "hate speech" has no clear definition, but that attempted definitions are usually vague.

If you believe that this is less notable than the two dictionary definitions and a lone scholar, discuss here. DenverCoder19 (talk) 18:07, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I don't think that that accurately summarizes the main thrust of that source; to the extend that it pulls one part of that definition out, it was giving it undue weight. The first sentence of that source says Hate speech is a concept that many people find intuitively easy to grasp, while at the same time many others deny it is even a coherent concept; your summary leaned more towards treating the second group there as being objectively correct and ignored the first part, but the source doesn't really take that position. In any case this is all handled in more depth and nuance further down the lead, so I don't think your addition is an improvement - There is no single definition of what constitutes "hate" or "disparagement". Legal definitions of hate speech vary from country to country already covers what you're trying to add in a more neutral tone. --Aquillion (talk) 18:37, 15 March 2024 (UTC)