Ravelry, a crochet and knitting social site, has implemented a No Trump Support ban because

We cannot provide a space that is inclusive of all and also allow support for open white supremacy. Support of the Trump administration is undeniably support for white supremacy.

Let’s leave aside for a moment that it is absolute insanity to seriously equate President Trump with white supremacy; this is in no way factually correct and is, in fact, a delusion of the left. No, wait. I’m going to come back to that in a minute.

The idea that banning certain speech (e.g. speech in support of President Trump) is an act of inclusivity is a logical contradiction. If there’s one thing I despise, it’s a failure of logic.

You cannot create an inclusive space by excluding people with whom you don’t agree.

Let me repeat that because some folks on the left are really so ignorant of the application of logic that they don’t understand how hypocritical such a policy is.

You cannot create an inclusive space by excluding people with whom you don’t agree.

I don’t know the exact impetus behind the implementation of this logically inconsistent policy, but I have a feeling the last straw came when a (clearly left-leaning) user posted a pattern of a hat alternating a hand with the middle finger raised and an image of President Trump. It was a hateful, vile, and derogatory pattern and a clear violation of Ravelry’s hate speech policy. I’m positive it generated a lot of less than civil discussion when Trump supporters objected. I’m sure the discussion escalated, as these things do, and seems to have culminated in some users being banned from the site.

Which they should’ve been if they violated Ravelry’s community guidelines in a grossly egregious manner. Ravelry is a private site and the administration has a perfect right to set standards for behavior among users.

Art, however, is a form of speech, and if it targets a certain individual because of his race and gender (which is exactly the motivation behind that pattern), doesn’t it stand to reason that said art is hate speech?

That wasn’t the first time derogatory patterns have been posted on Ravelry either. An earlier pattern (that seems to have been removed) showed President Trump with poo on his head. Another pattern clearly states “Fuck Trump.” There are plenty more anti-Trump patterns on Ravelry as of this writing. By not deleting them, Ravelry is sending a clear message that some “hate speech” is protected while other “hate speech” is not; thus are administrators supporting censorship with their No Trump Support ban. Heinous, isn’t it?

Truthfully, hate speech resides in an uncomfortably ambiguous gray area. Some speech clearly should be labeled as hate speech (though I would argue that all speech should be protected or none can be, but I won’t get into that here). Burning a cross on someone else’s property? Calling someone a derogatory racial epithet? Chasing people out of restaurants? Spitting on someone?

Oh, wait. That’s not just hate speech but assault, and liberals are becoming quite good at it. But I digress…

Is it hate speech if it’s merely offensive to some people, as the above patterns are? Or is it hate speech when you simply don’t agree with the other speaker? I know folks on the left and the right who would agree with both definitions.

Do you see how easy it is to go from truly hateful speech to something that is merely offensive but otherwise not a threat?  And that is exactly why we should be very careful about labeling any speech, no matter how intolerant, ugly, or offensive, as hate speech.

For the record, I find most of those patterns to be quite funny. But I’m not a huge Trump fan either, so that’s probably my own bias speaking.

Speaking of bias, let’s get back to the white supremacist thing. Trump is an asshole. I’m just going to put that out there, because there’s no denying it. And while many of his economic policies have been of great help to minorities in general, some of his other policies aren’t favorable to particular subsets of minorities, especially those that have been deemed in some way “dangerous” to the US or its citizens, like jihadist Muslims and illegal immigrants. Additionally, some white supremicists support Trump. Of that, there’s no doubt; it’s all over the news.

Do any of those things make Trump a white supremicist?

No, they do not.

Those things don’t make Trump a white supremicist any more than the support of the Black Panthers, a black supremicist group, or Louis Farrakhan, a black supremicist, made former President Obama a black supremicist. The support of jihadist Muslims does not make President Obama a terrorist. And supporting President Obama does not make said supporter a black supremicist either.

I mean, that kind of reasoning gets awkward when the supporter is of the “incorrect” race. For example, Obama wasn’t elected solely by minorities; plenty of non-minority folks voted for him, too.

And what about black people who support Trump? Are those folks white supremicists? Are they “traitors” to their race, as some radicals claim? Or are they simply tired of economic policies that take money out of their pockets and food out of their mouths, as Obama’s policies did, and have decided to back someone whose economic policies, while deeply flawed, have helped black Americans in particular?

The world isn’t so cut and dried as some people would have you believe. Black people voted for Trump. And that’s ok. White people voted for Obama, and that’s ok, too. I disagree with both, but guess what? That’s also ok! See how logically consistent I’m being there, in allowing that everyone has a right to their own opinions regardless of race or any other factor?

The truth is that if you’re looking for logic coming out of those on the mid- to far left, which exactly describes the crew running Ravelry judging by the blog posts, you’re not going to get it. There is no logic in a policy that is 1) based on a lie, and 2) inconsistent in its application.

I understand the whys behind the new policy, even though I believe it’s motivated more by squee-worthy virtue signaling than a true understanding of diversity and inclusivity.

No, really. I do understand it. I’ve been the subject of bullying and ridicule more than once. I wouldn’t wish it on anyone, and I will not participate in a community that tolerates such behavior, not because it’s hate speech, but because it’s downright rude and ugly. I’m a Southern lady, or would’ve been if my mama had had her way, so I have a low tolerance of socially rude behavior, on top of despising bullies.

But even if you take the whole he’s-a-white-supremicist argument out of the equation, Ravelry’s No Trump Support policy is still a logical nightmare of mind-blowingly hypocritical proportions.

To Ravelry’s credit, the policy includes language that is protective of conservatives and their beliefs. Kudos on that.

But until all political speech is banned on the site, I’m not going to believe they actually mean that they will protect conservatives and conservative speech until I see it happening. And good luck calling yourself an inclusive site from here on out.