We seem to be losing our grasp on the idea of freedom of speech. Disagreement with popular consensus, or even the mildest sort of dislike expressed reasonably and without venom, becomes "hate" just as much as the entirely unreasoned ejaculations of "THEY SUCK!". And so, any debate on the issue is prematurely cut off, by making the "hater" appear to be some sort of grotesque, subhuman thing, not deserving of serious consideration. Then again, the people who use this word seriously aren't capable of "serious consideration" or debate. ******** conformists. stare
I think we need to get back to a few common-sense principles:
1) Disliking a band's music =/= hate.
2) Discussion between people with differing opinions is much more interesting than everyone putting on a phony smiley face and pretending to agree out of fear of being branded a "hater".
3) If someone criticizes a band, it's not an attack on you personally. I love The Smiths, but do I give a s**t if other people don't like them? No. And if they say nasty things about Morrissey, it doesn't affect me on a personal level. (Besides, as much crap as he's talked about other singers, he deserves it.)
I know people aren't going to stop using that term any time soon. I'll just have to suck it up and put up with it. But it annoys the hell out of me. The second definition on Urban Dictionary sums it up nicely:
Quote:
Overused word that people like to use just because someone else expresses a dislike for a certain individual.
PERSON 1: I don't like Beyonce's new song.
PERSON 2: You're a hater!!!
PERSON 1: I don't like Beyonce's new song.
PERSON 2: You're a hater!!!
xp
Community Member