Clearly, she was taunting and triggered and we're not supposed to have any empathy for that (according to conservatives and Kirk), but we should. The truth is that her taunting while out of place was a reaction to feeling taunted herself. The racist language and attacks on Black women by Charlie Kirk were a contributing factor to activating her.
Do you genuinely believe that someone saying hurty words in a generalized sense is justification for such behavior? We should have empathy for the instigator behaving in an uncivil and aggressive manner... because her feelings were hurt by something said many months ago?
All you're doing is justifying the use of aggression and violence in response to words. That can turn against you very, very easily. We all have a duty and responsibility to behave civilly toward our fellow citizens regardless of whether we agree with them, and regardless of whether we even like them.
If Andy says something mean about Bob, that's not at all a good reason for Carl to attack Dave.
Your question,
“Do you genuinely believe that someone saying hurty words… is justification for such behavior?” builds on a problematic premise. By calling racist speech “hurty words,” you’re minimizing it, which stacks the deck rhetorically. That’s a form of a
loaded question fallacy—like the old example,
“Have you stopped beating your wife?” It forces me to accept your framing before I can even respond.
Two clarifications:
- I never said her actions were justified. Please show me where I did. You won’t find it.
- I did say empathy is important. Empathy ≠ justification. Empathy means trying to understand why someone acted as they did. It’s descriptive, not prescriptive. Understanding the causes of behavior doesn’t excuse it, but it can sometimes mitigate how harshly we respond.
On that basis: yes, her behavior was uncalled for and immature. No, it wasn’t “justified.” But it is
understandable in context. Charlie Kirk has made repeated derogatory remarks about Black women and has built a career provoking 18–20 year olds on college campuses for the sake of viral clips and quote mines. When racist rhetoric becomes mainstream—amplified by political parties, media, and influencers—it’s predictable that some young people will react emotionally, especially in a so-called “free speech zone.” To act like this is simply “hurty words” ignores the broader reality of systemic racism and propaganda campaigns.
Now, as for the hat incident: technically, yes, it could be considered minor assault. But context matters. College students have had far more serious scuffles without facing multiple criminal charges. To treat this like a major criminal event is disproportionate. One disorderly conduct citation? Maybe. Only a $50 fine? Maybe. But three, four, five, or six charges and an expulsion? That’s not justice; that’s punitive performance theater.
You also wrote:
“We all have a duty to behave civilly.” I might agree in principle—but let’s not pretend racism is “civil.” Racist speech presented politely is still racist speech. Kirk showing up at campuses with cameras, baiting students, and then weaponizing, cherry-picking and quote mining their reactions into viral clips is not civil discourse—it’s propaganda dressed up as free speech. As the saying goes: “Artillery adds dignity to what would otherwise be a vulgar brawl.” Racist rhetoric dressed in suits and podiums is still harmful, no matter how flowery the delivery.
So again: her reaction was not justified. But it was predictable and understandable. If you ignore that distinction, you’re not arguing in good faith—you’re just minimizing racism while magnifying an 18-year-old’s bad decision.
Good lord, that's disconnected from what I said. No, I did not in any way characterize Trump as a leftist; neither did I in any way imply hate per se is a leftist slur. You are cherry-picking my words and dropping them in a blender along with a bunch of your own baseless assumptions, and setting it on max. So no, I cannot "acknowledge" making an alleged "mistake" that's a confabulation of your imagination. You evidently either didn't read or have forgotten the posts that led up to the exchange, so how about you acknowledge your mistake? JH and I weren't talking about Trump; we were talking about Tyler Robinson.