I'm looking here, I'm trying to find it in the essay, but there's a paragraph where he talks about more animated ways of expressing oneself. I think he references satire and he takes on the argument that, okay, speech might be allowing for vigorous expression might be okay, but only if it's argued rationally. But I can't find where it is in the essay and there's a lot else to go into there. Right.

You know, one thing he says, and this may be the passage that you have in mind and it's toward the end of the chapter is that to the extent that we're going to try to enforce any kind of rules on the way in which this course is conducted, the kinds of speech that are allowed, that we ought to be much more protective of the people who are expressing unpopular views than we are people who are expressing more popular words. So often what happens is that people who express unpopular views are criticized for the way that they do that, that they're too dramatic, too provocative. It's hard not to think about Colin Kaepernick right now, for example, given that he was just in the news because of this work out that he had. People will say, well, you know, it's okay for you to believe that, but you shouldn't express it in this way. And I'm not going to try to figure out what Mill might think about Colin Kaepernick, but in general he thinks we have to be more permissive when we're looking at people who express unpopular views than people who are expressing the mainstream view that if anybody ought to be given more latitude in terms of how they express themselves,

it's them.