This post is a play on the phrase 'freedom of speech'. Freedom of laughter.
Imagine two scenarios. 1. Where someone is directing hateful language at you. 2. Where someone is telling you how funny you are.
Are you there yet?
Now think about this, with extreme care: in both cases you were faced with a choice where you could respond either with anger or laughter.
In the one case it is almost exclusively common to be angry and the other happy.
Now imagine this: next time you are in scenario 1 respond with laughter and see what happens. I do not mean that you should do it because you are some kind of diplomat.
I do mean you do it because you had the choice to be angry or not angry about it. And this time you made the right choice. It was a matter of freedom or slavery for you and you chose freedom this time.
Every time you're angry about hateful speech you are signalling obedience to the tribe. And the signal says, "I submit my freedom to you, the tribe. You to me are everything" as Hot Chocolate once sung to us.
There is no known way physically and scientifically that even someone being hateful to you can force you to respond with anger. The anger was entirely a choice that you made. And every time it is a bad choice.
The right choice is to respond with laughter, meaning you have used you right to use freedom of laughter.
If everyone acted like this not only would the hate be ignored. Freedom of speech and DLL the nonsense that comes with would be totally obviated.