There is a raging debate over Section 18C of the Australian Racial Discrimination Act in Australia at present.
RACIAL DISCRIMINATION ACT 1975 – SECT 18C
Offensive behaviour because of race, colour or national or ethnic origin
(1) It is unlawful for a person to do an act, otherwise than in private, if:
(a) the act is reasonably likely, in all the circumstances, to offend, insult, humiliate or intimidate another person or a group of people; and
(b) the act is done because of the race, colour or national or ethnic origin of the other person or of some or all of the people in the group.
(2) For the purposes of subsection (1), an act is taken not to be done in private if it:
(a) causes words, sounds, images or writing to be communicated to the public; or
(b) is done in a public place; or
(c) is done in the sight or hearing of people who are in a public place.
(3) In this section: “public place” includes any place to which the public have access as of right or by invitation, whether express or implied and whether or not a charge is made for admission to the place.
Which means that it is an offence to criticise anyone on the basis of their skin colour, nationality or ethnicity.
And for those who practise ‘Critical Theory’, this means it is also unlawful to criticise anyone on the basis of colour, nationality or ethnicity.
So expressing hateful speech by describing someone perjoratively a ‘white male’ is literally in breach of the Act.
Except that it seems not to be and this paints the supporters of Section 18C as banal hypocrites, and there’s no law proscribing hypocrisy, mores the pity.
The stupids are literally in charge.