Okay, the numbers are different now than they used to be in the 80's. Why do you think that this MUST be due to sexism, frat-boy environment, etc? There is no evidence for any those things you believe in.

And I'm proposing that there is nothing illogical and inconsistent in asserting that speech itself is without harm. Luckily for you, everyone agrees with me and you are allowed to say what you like, the way you are currently saying what you like, without legal remedies being applied to yourself.

If, as you propose, speech itself is found to be harmful then, due to you not following society's norms, society would prevent you from expressing your thoughts due to someone, somewhere, who considers your speech to be harmful.

I'm constantly amazed by people who espouse that speech should be limited, but ironically do not realise that such a rule would prevent them from stating their opinion in the first place.

(1) So was Python.

(2) So does Python.

Python is only slightly more consistent than PHP, but gets much more bad press than PHP. I always wonder why that is.

Not me, society does. I'm just agreeing with society. You're the one proposing the change, you provide society with reasons.

Like I keep pointing out, the world doesn't care about your feelings. Trying to equate words to a physical quantity such as half a kg of water doesn't mean the world is going to decide differently.

Regardless of your personal belief, a water balloon has a physical quantity while words do not. You are unlikely to find many people agreeing with you if you maintain that words flying through the air and a water-filled balloon flying through the air are similar.

I didn't make any claim to retract, other than (let me try again because you seem to be a slow learner):

The world does not care about your feels,

Neither do I, as a matter of fact.

His point was regarding dick jokes, which Monty Python proved to be wildly popular with in Life of Brian. My point still stands, in that society saw nothing wrong with an extended "dick jokes" scene before and they are thus unlikely to do so now.

You are quite welcome to believe that society is siding with you and the rest of the peanut gallery, but the evidence indicates otherwise. Dick jokes in all sorts of contexts remain to be seen as funny by the world.

Well, you *have* been following me around and replying to my every comment even when you have nothing to say that's on-topic, so I tend to agree that there is something pathological going on. I mean, after all, I don't reply to your every comment with an off-topic post, do I?

Why? Is it better to kill yourself in steps or does the slow bleed-out from slit wrists put too many of them off?

:-)

I'm not sure they have a delivery system that will work *before* a first strike.

Yes, you can, inaccurate though it may be. You can also note, like I've already said, that the world doesn't think your "feels" are important enough to be protected and that's the way it should remain (and probably will for the foreseeable future). Interestingly enough, no one objected to Monty Python making dick jokes, but if a techie does it, then your oh so precious feels are hurt...

In case your lack of comprehension skills hurt your feels again, let me reiterate - the world does not care about your feels, because then it has to care about my feels too.

The world seems to have disagreed with you already; just ask my friend Biggus Dickus. Let's face it - a great deal of british humour (especially from the "carry on" series and Monty Python) revolved around genitalia.

Well, if you're going to use your free-speech ability to condemn it, you hurl insults at those who use the very same fee-speech ability to condone it without looking a little bit hypocritical, right?

Oh, right, it's you - the one who hurls insults at people and then wonder why so few women want to join his "community"...

I'm sorry, I didn't realise you were drafted into the comedy police who gets to decide what is funny and what is not...

Oh, wait...