Article 19 of the United Nations protect freedom of opinion and express ideas through any media.

Ideas seems to me include proposition of judgments, the ability to form opinions.

Prejudgements are defined as judge before sufficient examination.

Are synonymous with preconceived judgements as said Merriam-Webster in "preconceived"voice.

Misogyny was until 2012 defined by the same dictionary as hatred of women, as reported in Wikipedia on the voice "misogyny". Now, all dictionaries and online legal institutions adopt a new version of he term misogyny including prejudice against women and girls.

There are numerous example of labeling misogyny as hate crime in UK, Australia, Canada, Europe.

This should drive toward a police State, but with exceptions.

The historical oppressed minorities are exempt to be condemned of misandry defined as hate speech and prejudice against men and boys (cf. Lawrence III et al., 1993).

Why?

I don't understand how can be legal this double standard on modern democracies: is constitutional?

Anyone has survived by a murder attempt is allowed by law to kill the attacker?

The basis of democratic law isn't avoiding violence in any form?

If prejudices against men are misandry, misandry is hate speech, hate speech is condemned, why historically oppressed groups are allowed to incite violence?

Where is the trick here?