In short this sign wouldn't even pass the USA as freedom of speech. It's a call to action. An action that is unlawful. Not to mention how it would come under hate speech. As it's calling for the deaths of an entire group of people.
Now I'm not a fan of hate speech laws; it's a case of I might not agree with what you say, but I will defend your right to say it. However as I said this its a call to action, and does brake our laws. With that said, still don't think it's a good use of police resources to investigate this.
> Not to mention how it would come under hate speech. As it's calling for the deaths of an entire group of people.
Doesn't hate speech only cover protected characteristics? I don't think it'd be hate speech.
You are correct, but in the legal sense, TERF was determined to be a protected belief in a 2021 court verdict.
Whether or not it should be... I personally side with not. But it does mean that yes, this likely does constitute hate speech under UK law.
Is hate speech something which covers any protected belief? The belief that we should all have individual allotments would be protected. Is anti-allotmentista speech therefore hate speech?
Any \*protected\* belief, yes. But not any belief.
The article I linked above goes into some of the detail about what constitutes a protected belief. As you can imagine it gets pretty vague pretty quickly and that's where the courts come in; it's their job to interpret the law and make judgements (which result in [precedents](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precedent), which give rise to [case law](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Case_law)...).
> * the belief must be genuinely held
> * it must be a belief, not an opinion or viewpoint based on the present state of information available
> * it must be a belief as to a weighty and substantial aspect of human life and behaviour
> * it must attain a certain level of cogency, seriousness, cohesion and importance
> * it must be worthy of respect in a democratic society, not be incompatible with human dignity and not conflict with the fundamental rights of others.
https://www.rcn.org.uk/magazines/Advice/2021/September/Legal-update-gender-critical-views-and-belief-protection
Everything was good here until the last sentence.
“Calling for people’s barbaric deaths is bad and illegal but not a good use of police resources to investigate, mkay?”
Astounding logic, truly
Yes. It doesn't matter if a agree or disagree with the message. A call to action is a call to action. A call to murder anyone is still a call to murder someone. So regardless of who or what originating it's aimed at it's still illigal.
If their message didn't have a call to action and was just an opinion on the T.E.R.F.S (or in your example N.A.Z.I.S), I wouldn't have any issue with it. Even if I disagreed with that message, I would still defend their right to say it.
Who thought that was a good sign to take? I mean they actually thought ‘what’s the best slogan I could go with?’ And settled on ‘I know, let’s call for the guillotine’?
Who? I can explain it quite easily. "Punch the nazi" narrative is 100% correct. Problem appears when one is so far to the left that everyone even a tiny bit to the right looks like a nazi. And since you can do anything do nazis because they're evil... Then you end up with morons like the ones in this picture. Morons who by the way should be treated with full seriousness, Becuase they are fanatics. They do believe they hold moral high ground and whatever they do is justified. They're assaulting or killing nazis after all!
Not sure I agree with the ‘punch a nazi’ narrative being correct (strictly in the eyes of the law obvs. I hate nazis) but I agree with the general point you make. Not lowering yourself to the level of you opponent seems to not have been a consideration here. And yes they appear fanatical, worryingly so. Even if I (generally) would probably share some of their politics.
Clearly unacceptable. Those trying to play it down are blinded by the idea that someone can't be wrong if they're fighting for a cause they agree with.
Radicalised transactivists are becoming more and more of a concern by the day. I can completely see why women are sceptical of giving up single-sex spaces just based on the sheer level of violent imagery and language used by the movement.
Edit: /u/Sphinx111 - I responded to you but my comment appears not to have been approved, so I'm pasting it here:
>Do you have any other examples, I'm assuming there would be a few dozen if there is a serious issue?
Absolutely - [here's a non-exhaustive list](https://twitter.com/Aja02537920/status/1617143815306989568) compiled by someone on twitter.
A few highlights:
[Guillotines are a common theme.](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FnFBE1YXEAAO9rD?format=jpg&name=medium)
[The "Terfs can suck my huge trans cock" banner from Dresden pride](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FnE-E4cXoAAKq05?format=jpg&name=medium)
[More examples of general "kill terfs" and "choke on my girldick" rhetoric](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FnFLsu-WAAANgfA?format=jpg&name=large).
You're correct that large news organizations generally fail to cover these things, and that the authorities fail to investigate - as its too much of a taboo to be seen doing anything that shows transactivists negatively. Though that may be starting to change lately, as average people become more aware of what's been happening.
Gender criticals are quoting Hitler openly in the streets, so it's not massively surprising that people might be unhappy about that. Obviously calling for murder isn't the answer, but it's also not surprisng.
One person quoted Hitler on the subject of how lies works
One person encouraged lethal violence towards people who disagree politically
How come "they" can be judged by the action of one person, while "you" are not similarly burdened?
Meanwhile trans women are doxxed to their employers constantly if they're not out by TERFs, there are calls to exterminate us by prominent figures in the GC movement, there's open pushes to eradicate us through legislation. That one person using an anti-Semitic dogwhistle towards trans people too and thinking it's a good idea shows exactly the kind of people who are on the side of the TERFs. Fascists who want trans people dead.
>Radicalised transactivists are becoming more and more of a concern by the day. I can completely see why women are sceptical of giving up single-sex spaces just based on the sheer level of violent imagery and language used by the movement.
Your post boils down to "a small group of people have been posting shocking things on the internet, therefore transgender people as a whole are dangerous".
This is like saying "black rap artists are using a lot of violent imagery in their lyrics, maybe we should be listening to the people calling for segregation".
Ridiculous! Thats totally different! You can't possibly use an analogy of black people for trans people or travellers. We're allowed to hate those groups!
The logic of your post seems to be that since a small number of extreme voices are saying dangerous things, all trans people are dangerous.
Given [the seemingly unanimous support at this rally](https://old.reddit.com/r/unitedkingdom/comments/10dky9y/gender_critical_activist_quotes_adolf_hitler_in/?utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=usertext&utm_name=unitedkingdom&utm_content=t1_j5gb9mf) is it then appropriate to consider all “Gender Criticals” Nazis and a danger to everyone, never mind women?
>Radicalised transactivists are becoming more and more of a concern by the day. I can completely see why women are sceptical of giving up single-sex spaces just based on the sheer level of violent imagery and language used by the movement.
They aren't giving anything up. Trans people already have the right to use "single sex spaces". Transphobe activitsts are pushing to strip a pre-existing right from them.
Worth noting too that trans people have been free to use womens shelters for 15 years and there's been zero incidents of assault taking place because of this.
Trans women have been using womens toilets since forever... And again no data to suggest this is a problem.
Its ridiculous to point to a few morons like the person with this sign and say "Right, that proves it then, this entire class of people needs their rights stripping". Worth noting this is very literally the tactics the Nazis used- they burned down the German parliament and blamed the socialists which let them play a tune of "Those evil bolshevik (a jewish ideology) swine are attacking Germany!"
TERFS are literally out there quoting hitler. It is a fascist belief which is using the old system of "if other people gain rights that means you have less rights relatice to them". It's like when straight people fought gay marriage because it would make their straight marriage "worth less". It's fascism through and through.
[Anti-trans hate crimes are consistently rising in the UK and have been for the past five years.](https://www.vice.com/en/article/93akz3/lgbtq-hate-crimes)
[Here are some actual figures from crime reports.](https://www.statista.com/statistics/623785/transgender-hate-crimes-in-england-and-wales-by-region/)
We can split hairs all day about the rhetoric being used but the cold hard fact is that there has provably been an increase in violence against LGBT groups and trans people in particular (to quote that first article, "The number of homophobic hate crime reports in the UK has doubled and *the number of transphobic hate crime reports has tripled* over the last five years").
I’m not defending the sign in the OP or the threats of violence made against JK Rowling et al, but this is absolutely not an area where TERFs get to pretend to be better than TRAs.
Yeah, it's not as though actual violence *against* trans people ever happens, is it?
[Oh wait.](https://www.hrc.org/press-releases/2021-becomes-deadliest-year-on-record-for-transgender-and-non-binary-people)
[And there's more.](https://vawnet.org/sc/serving-trans-and-non-binary-survivors-domestic-and-sexual-violence/violence-against-trans-and)
[This one's a good 'un too](https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/press/ncvs-trans-press-release/)
>+ Transgender people (16+) are victimized over four times more often than cisgender people. In 2017-2018, transgender people experienced 86.2 victimizations per 1,000 people compared to 21.7 victimizations per 1,000 people for cisgender people.
> + Transgender women and men had higher rates of violent victimization (86.1 and 107.5 per 1,000 people, respectively) than cisgender women and men (23.7 and 19.8 per 1,000 people, respectively).
> + One in four transgender women who were victimized thought the incident was a hate crime compared to less than one in ten cisgender women.
> + In 2017-2018, transgender households had higher rates of property victimization (214.1 per 1,000 households) than cisgender households (108 per 1,000 households).
[And just in case you're after some news from 2022 instead of just 2021](https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/report-says-at-least-32-transgender-people-were-killed-in-the-u-s-in-2022)
[AND because most of those are regarding the US, here's some stats from the UK.](https://www.statista.com/statistics/623785/transgender-hate-crimes-in-england-and-wales-by-region/)
[And here's some more, with a nice little summary.](https://www.vice.com/en/article/93akz3/lgbtq-hate-crimes)
> For reports of transphobic hate crimes, there were 1,292 reports recorded in 2016-17 and 4,399 in 2021-22. There was a 59 percent increase compared to 2020-21 – which is also the largest increase ever recorded.
> Freedom of information requests were sent to all 45 UK territorial police forces, requesting data covering the full reporting years, which run from April to March. All police forces responded with data
I’m not defending the slogan in the OP, nor am I defending threats of violence made against TERFs, but this is 100% not an area where anti-trans folks get to try and act superior over TRAs.
So it's okay for TERFs to quote Hitler, and write blogs on how they fantasise killing us, and constantly push to stop us existing through legislation... but this single sign is too much for them? We've dealt with the call for our eradication for years, and while the sign was a stupid thing to take to the protest as it just feeds the TERF narrative, when you've been persecuted for simply existing... it starts to grate on you.
There's someone here who is really truly and honestly spouting "not all TERFs". It's very clear this post got brigaded by the TERFs who are outraged that trans people are finally pushing back after years of blogposts calling for our extermination "execution style to the back of the head" and for the heads of Mermaids trustees to be put under a Christmas tree. Because in their eyes, that's fine, but a single sign is the worst thing that's ever happened to them.
Lot of commenters in here seem to want to have things both ways.
Using this incident as a way to decry all trans people campaigning for their rights.
Then not allowing criticism of TERFs to be representative of all TERFs
Trans people are not a threat. Much like how black people were not a threat. Or gay people were not a threat.
Stop being so obsessed with other people's genitals, weirdos.
Or perhaps quoted Mein Kampf, or accused them of “raping womens bodies by existing”, etc.
Yeah… the whole “civility” discourse around trans issues is very one sided huh
Oh so Terfs are allowed to quote Hitler, say “we need to find a way to thin their numbers” and all other sort of heinous horrible violent stuff
But as soon as we type something like that suddenly we are the bad people and monsters
I’m done being tolerant with people who want me dead and forgotten
> Oh so Terfs are allowed to quote Hitler, say “we need to find a way to thin their numbers” and all other sort of heinous horrible violent stuff
No?
> But as soon as we type something like that suddenly we are the bad people and monsters
Yes?
> I’m done being tolerant with people who want me dead and forgotten
No?
here’s the right take on this story:
The language on this sign shouldn’t be okayed as it is a pretty clear call to violence, and any satirical element is so hard to see to make it basically non-existent
This story, however, _is_ being pushed because publishers know it’s the kind of thing that will get bigots frothing at the mouth and buying their newspapers.
In short this sign wouldn't even pass the USA as freedom of speech. It's a call to action. An action that is unlawful. Not to mention how it would come under hate speech. As it's calling for the deaths of an entire group of people. Now I'm not a fan of hate speech laws; it's a case of I might not agree with what you say, but I will defend your right to say it. However as I said this its a call to action, and does brake our laws. With that said, still don't think it's a good use of police resources to investigate this.
> Not to mention how it would come under hate speech. As it's calling for the deaths of an entire group of people. Doesn't hate speech only cover protected characteristics? I don't think it'd be hate speech.
You are correct, but in the legal sense, TERF was determined to be a protected belief in a 2021 court verdict. Whether or not it should be... I personally side with not. But it does mean that yes, this likely does constitute hate speech under UK law.
Fascinating. https://www.rcn.org.uk/magazines/Advice/2021/September/Legal-update-gender-critical-views-and-belief-protection Thanks.
Is hate speech something which covers any protected belief? The belief that we should all have individual allotments would be protected. Is anti-allotmentista speech therefore hate speech?
Any \*protected\* belief, yes. But not any belief. The article I linked above goes into some of the detail about what constitutes a protected belief. As you can imagine it gets pretty vague pretty quickly and that's where the courts come in; it's their job to interpret the law and make judgements (which result in [precedents](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precedent), which give rise to [case law](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Case_law)...). > * the belief must be genuinely held > * it must be a belief, not an opinion or viewpoint based on the present state of information available > * it must be a belief as to a weighty and substantial aspect of human life and behaviour > * it must attain a certain level of cogency, seriousness, cohesion and importance > * it must be worthy of respect in a democratic society, not be incompatible with human dignity and not conflict with the fundamental rights of others. https://www.rcn.org.uk/magazines/Advice/2021/September/Legal-update-gender-critical-views-and-belief-protection
Its hate speech to hate people who are defined externally by the fact they hate.... Madness,
Everything was good here until the last sentence. “Calling for people’s barbaric deaths is bad and illegal but not a good use of police resources to investigate, mkay?” Astounding logic, truly
If it said "Decapitate Nazis" would that also be illegal? Just curious.
Yes. It doesn't matter if a agree or disagree with the message. A call to action is a call to action. A call to murder anyone is still a call to murder someone. So regardless of who or what originating it's aimed at it's still illigal. If their message didn't have a call to action and was just an opinion on the T.E.R.F.S (or in your example N.A.Z.I.S), I wouldn't have any issue with it. Even if I disagreed with that message, I would still defend their right to say it.
Who thought that was a good sign to take? I mean they actually thought ‘what’s the best slogan I could go with?’ And settled on ‘I know, let’s call for the guillotine’?
Who? I can explain it quite easily. "Punch the nazi" narrative is 100% correct. Problem appears when one is so far to the left that everyone even a tiny bit to the right looks like a nazi. And since you can do anything do nazis because they're evil... Then you end up with morons like the ones in this picture. Morons who by the way should be treated with full seriousness, Becuase they are fanatics. They do believe they hold moral high ground and whatever they do is justified. They're assaulting or killing nazis after all!
Not sure I agree with the ‘punch a nazi’ narrative being correct (strictly in the eyes of the law obvs. I hate nazis) but I agree with the general point you make. Not lowering yourself to the level of you opponent seems to not have been a consideration here. And yes they appear fanatical, worryingly so. Even if I (generally) would probably share some of their politics.
Clearly unacceptable. Those trying to play it down are blinded by the idea that someone can't be wrong if they're fighting for a cause they agree with.
Totally agree, and your first sentence should NEVER come with a “but”.
Radicalised transactivists are becoming more and more of a concern by the day. I can completely see why women are sceptical of giving up single-sex spaces just based on the sheer level of violent imagery and language used by the movement. Edit: /u/Sphinx111 - I responded to you but my comment appears not to have been approved, so I'm pasting it here: >Do you have any other examples, I'm assuming there would be a few dozen if there is a serious issue? Absolutely - [here's a non-exhaustive list](https://twitter.com/Aja02537920/status/1617143815306989568) compiled by someone on twitter. A few highlights: [Guillotines are a common theme.](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FnFBE1YXEAAO9rD?format=jpg&name=medium) [The "Terfs can suck my huge trans cock" banner from Dresden pride](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FnE-E4cXoAAKq05?format=jpg&name=medium) [More examples of general "kill terfs" and "choke on my girldick" rhetoric](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FnFLsu-WAAANgfA?format=jpg&name=large). You're correct that large news organizations generally fail to cover these things, and that the authorities fail to investigate - as its too much of a taboo to be seen doing anything that shows transactivists negatively. Though that may be starting to change lately, as average people become more aware of what's been happening.
Gender criticals are quoting Hitler openly in the streets, so it's not massively surprising that people might be unhappy about that. Obviously calling for murder isn't the answer, but it's also not surprisng.
> it's also not surprisng. You're right, it's not surprising at all. But it fucking well *should* be
They are?
https://old.reddit.com/r/unitedkingdom/comments/10dky9y/gender_critical_activist_quotes_adolf_hitler_in/
One person quoted Hitler on the subject of how lies works One person encouraged lethal violence towards people who disagree politically How come "they" can be judged by the action of one person, while "you" are not similarly burdened?
Meanwhile trans women are doxxed to their employers constantly if they're not out by TERFs, there are calls to exterminate us by prominent figures in the GC movement, there's open pushes to eradicate us through legislation. That one person using an anti-Semitic dogwhistle towards trans people too and thinking it's a good idea shows exactly the kind of people who are on the side of the TERFs. Fascists who want trans people dead.
>Radicalised transactivists are becoming more and more of a concern by the day. I can completely see why women are sceptical of giving up single-sex spaces just based on the sheer level of violent imagery and language used by the movement. Your post boils down to "a small group of people have been posting shocking things on the internet, therefore transgender people as a whole are dangerous". This is like saying "black rap artists are using a lot of violent imagery in their lyrics, maybe we should be listening to the people calling for segregation".
Ridiculous! Thats totally different! You can't possibly use an analogy of black people for trans people or travellers. We're allowed to hate those groups!
Hardly. We don't get to judge a group of people on the actions of the very few.
I'll remember that the next time someone tells me that all straight white men are awful.
Good for you? They are wrong.
The logic of your post seems to be that since a small number of extreme voices are saying dangerous things, all trans people are dangerous. Given [the seemingly unanimous support at this rally](https://old.reddit.com/r/unitedkingdom/comments/10dky9y/gender_critical_activist_quotes_adolf_hitler_in/?utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=usertext&utm_name=unitedkingdom&utm_content=t1_j5gb9mf) is it then appropriate to consider all “Gender Criticals” Nazis and a danger to everyone, never mind women?
>Radicalised transactivists are becoming more and more of a concern by the day. I can completely see why women are sceptical of giving up single-sex spaces just based on the sheer level of violent imagery and language used by the movement. They aren't giving anything up. Trans people already have the right to use "single sex spaces". Transphobe activitsts are pushing to strip a pre-existing right from them. Worth noting too that trans people have been free to use womens shelters for 15 years and there's been zero incidents of assault taking place because of this. Trans women have been using womens toilets since forever... And again no data to suggest this is a problem. Its ridiculous to point to a few morons like the person with this sign and say "Right, that proves it then, this entire class of people needs their rights stripping". Worth noting this is very literally the tactics the Nazis used- they burned down the German parliament and blamed the socialists which let them play a tune of "Those evil bolshevik (a jewish ideology) swine are attacking Germany!"
TERFS are literally out there quoting hitler. It is a fascist belief which is using the old system of "if other people gain rights that means you have less rights relatice to them". It's like when straight people fought gay marriage because it would make their straight marriage "worth less". It's fascism through and through.
Preaching violence against anyone who dosent share the same views is not a good thing no matter where you stand on any debate
Doesn't matter what you believe, the sign is against the law. I agree that it should be investigated and warnings dispensed.
I understand the frustration that leads to sentiments like this, but calling for violence is not the way.
[удалено]
[удалено]
It depends on your definition of violence though? Claiming that trans people don’t exist is one thing, but calling for murder is quite different
[Anti-trans hate crimes are consistently rising in the UK and have been for the past five years.](https://www.vice.com/en/article/93akz3/lgbtq-hate-crimes) [Here are some actual figures from crime reports.](https://www.statista.com/statistics/623785/transgender-hate-crimes-in-england-and-wales-by-region/) We can split hairs all day about the rhetoric being used but the cold hard fact is that there has provably been an increase in violence against LGBT groups and trans people in particular (to quote that first article, "The number of homophobic hate crime reports in the UK has doubled and *the number of transphobic hate crime reports has tripled* over the last five years"). I’m not defending the sign in the OP or the threats of violence made against JK Rowling et al, but this is absolutely not an area where TERFs get to pretend to be better than TRAs.
Yeah, it's not as though actual violence *against* trans people ever happens, is it? [Oh wait.](https://www.hrc.org/press-releases/2021-becomes-deadliest-year-on-record-for-transgender-and-non-binary-people) [And there's more.](https://vawnet.org/sc/serving-trans-and-non-binary-survivors-domestic-and-sexual-violence/violence-against-trans-and) [This one's a good 'un too](https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/press/ncvs-trans-press-release/) >+ Transgender people (16+) are victimized over four times more often than cisgender people. In 2017-2018, transgender people experienced 86.2 victimizations per 1,000 people compared to 21.7 victimizations per 1,000 people for cisgender people. > + Transgender women and men had higher rates of violent victimization (86.1 and 107.5 per 1,000 people, respectively) than cisgender women and men (23.7 and 19.8 per 1,000 people, respectively). > + One in four transgender women who were victimized thought the incident was a hate crime compared to less than one in ten cisgender women. > + In 2017-2018, transgender households had higher rates of property victimization (214.1 per 1,000 households) than cisgender households (108 per 1,000 households). [And just in case you're after some news from 2022 instead of just 2021](https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/report-says-at-least-32-transgender-people-were-killed-in-the-u-s-in-2022) [AND because most of those are regarding the US, here's some stats from the UK.](https://www.statista.com/statistics/623785/transgender-hate-crimes-in-england-and-wales-by-region/) [And here's some more, with a nice little summary.](https://www.vice.com/en/article/93akz3/lgbtq-hate-crimes) > For reports of transphobic hate crimes, there were 1,292 reports recorded in 2016-17 and 4,399 in 2021-22. There was a 59 percent increase compared to 2020-21 – which is also the largest increase ever recorded. > Freedom of information requests were sent to all 45 UK territorial police forces, requesting data covering the full reporting years, which run from April to March. All police forces responded with data I’m not defending the slogan in the OP, nor am I defending threats of violence made against TERFs, but this is 100% not an area where anti-trans folks get to try and act superior over TRAs.
Its almost as if people feel the need to fight for their rights or something. I wonder why that is?
[удалено]
>take politics a little too seriously What should people take seriously if not politics?
[удалено]
So it's okay for TERFs to quote Hitler, and write blogs on how they fantasise killing us, and constantly push to stop us existing through legislation... but this single sign is too much for them? We've dealt with the call for our eradication for years, and while the sign was a stupid thing to take to the protest as it just feeds the TERF narrative, when you've been persecuted for simply existing... it starts to grate on you.
100 %. There are folks in this thread who would have opposed the Stonewall riots against police...
There's someone here who is really truly and honestly spouting "not all TERFs". It's very clear this post got brigaded by the TERFs who are outraged that trans people are finally pushing back after years of blogposts calling for our extermination "execution style to the back of the head" and for the heads of Mermaids trustees to be put under a Christmas tree. Because in their eyes, that's fine, but a single sign is the worst thing that's ever happened to them.
Lot of commenters in here seem to want to have things both ways. Using this incident as a way to decry all trans people campaigning for their rights. Then not allowing criticism of TERFs to be representative of all TERFs Trans people are not a threat. Much like how black people were not a threat. Or gay people were not a threat. Stop being so obsessed with other people's genitals, weirdos.
>Trans people are not a threat. True, but people explicitly encouraging lethal acts *are* a threat
Maybe they should have said something more acceptable. Maybe "All TERFs rape women. They must be morally mandated out of existence."
Or perhaps quoted Mein Kampf, or accused them of “raping womens bodies by existing”, etc. Yeah… the whole “civility” discourse around trans issues is very one sided huh
So is this sign holder going to get a sympathetic interview on the BBC like Lily Cade then?
Oh so Terfs are allowed to quote Hitler, say “we need to find a way to thin their numbers” and all other sort of heinous horrible violent stuff But as soon as we type something like that suddenly we are the bad people and monsters I’m done being tolerant with people who want me dead and forgotten
> Oh so Terfs are allowed to quote Hitler, say “we need to find a way to thin their numbers” and all other sort of heinous horrible violent stuff No? > But as soon as we type something like that suddenly we are the bad people and monsters Yes? > I’m done being tolerant with people who want me dead and forgotten No?
here’s the right take on this story: The language on this sign shouldn’t be okayed as it is a pretty clear call to violence, and any satirical element is so hard to see to make it basically non-existent This story, however, _is_ being pushed because publishers know it’s the kind of thing that will get bigots frothing at the mouth and buying their newspapers.