Microaggressions

[Black Dog]

So you are saying the entire audience was the minority of the population which is already obsessed with the cult of the victim? Usually these kinds of efforts set higher objectives.

Well, thing is, there is no "cult of the victim," so....yeah.

In fairness to you, I completely missed out that one could be an ideologue and an idiot. Mea culpa.

[TimG]

Well, thing is, there is no "cult of the victim," so....yeah.

Well you don't call it that but there is an entire industry obsessed with blaming every problem on racism. The entire notion of any entire group of people being 'privileged' by virtue of the skin colour is one of the more ridiculous absurdities dreamed up by the cult of victim.

[Black Dog]

Well you don't call it that but there is an entire industry obsessed with blaming every problem on racism. The entire notion of any entire group of people being 'privileged' by virtue of the skin colour is one of the more ridiculous absurdities dreamed up by the cult of victim.

This is one of those things where I go, "So why don't you actually challenge it?" and then you go "Uh...it's so dumb it's not worth my time? Yeah, that's it!" and I go "Ok bruh." So there's four pages saved.

Edited September 30, 2015 by Black Dog

[-1=e^ipi]

Your boy Milo, for example, is a raging righty as we're many of the other high profile champions of this cause.

Yes, the raging right flamboyantly gay guy who is dating a muslim.

What double standard?

Insults that use someone's sex count as sexist when used against women, but not when used against men.

Edited September 30, 2015 by -1=e^ipi

[-1=e^ipi]

Well you don't call it that but there is an entire industry obsessed with blaming every problem on racism.

Don't you understand? Everything is sexist, everything is racist, everything is homophobic and you have to point it all out!

[TimG]

This is one of those things where I go, "So why don't you actually challenge it?"

The issue you have your religion that defines the dogma that you accept as truth and seem to think that people who do not follow your religion are idiots (which is quite ironic for someone who claims to believe in tolerance). "Priviledge" is the same as "Transubstantiation" in the sense that it is a myth with believers accept as true because it supports their belief system. But belief does not turn either into real facts. Edited September 30, 2015 by TimG

[Black Dog]

Yes, the raging right flamboyantly gay guy who is dating a muslim.

And? Gay people can't be right-wingers?

Insults that use someone's sex count as sexist when used against women, but not when used against men.

I don't recall saying any insults "don't count".

The issue you have your religion that defines the dogma that you accept as truth and seem to think that people who do not follow your religion are idiots (which is quite ironic for someone who claims to believe in tolerance). "Priviledge" is the same as "Transubstantiation" in the sense that it is a myth with believers accept as true because it supports their belief system. But belief does not turn either into real facts.

This is hilariously incoherent. I bet you had to wipe your computer screen off after this.

[-1=e^ipi]

And? Gay people can't be right-wingers?

You are moving goal posts here. Maybe you should define 'raging righty'.

I don't recall saying any insults "don't count".

Now you are purposely misinterpreting what I wrote.

[Black Dog]

You are moving goal posts here. Maybe you should define 'raging righty'.

I would think it has more to do with political stances than who they fuck.

Now you are purposely misinterpreting what I wrote.

Ah. I see you are also a person who needed "as well" at the end of #BlackLivesMatter.

Edited September 30, 2015 by Black Dog

[-1=e^ipi]

Ah. I see you are also a person who needed "as well" at the end of #BlackLivesMatter.

No, I don't have a problem with people saying black lives matter. Nor do I have a problem with people saying all lives matter.

What I do have a problem with is SJWs trying to censor people.

[Black Dog]

No, I don't have a problem with people saying black lives matter. Nor do I have a problem with people saying all lives matter.

What I do have a problem with is SJWs trying to censor people.

But only SJWs.

[-1=e^ipi]

But only SJWs.

No, I have a problem with crazy fundamentalist Christians trying to impose blasphemy laws and censor people, I have a problem with idiots like Jack Thompson trying to ban games due to some deluded belief that they cause violence (much like Anita Sarkeesian is doing now). I have a problem with Saudi Arabia beheading people that disagree with the government. I have a problem with the North Korean government oppressing its people. I have a problem with crazy imams demanding that no one is allowed to depict the prophet Mohammed. Etc.

Edited October 1, 2015 by -1=e^ipi

[Bonam]

This is hilariously incoherent. I bet you had to wipe your computer screen off after this.

How was TimG's statement incoherent? It was completely understandable. The fact that you might not agree with a statement or find it offensive does not make it "incoherent".

[-1=e^ipi]

South Park recently made fun of pc culture and microaggressions in season 19 episode 1.

[Black Dog]

How was TimG's statement incoherent? It was completely understandable. The fact that you might not agree with a statement or find it offensive does not make it "incoherent".

The first portion was actual gibberish ("The issue you have your religion that defines the dogma that you accept as truth..." LOL wut), the second wasn't even an attempt to refute the idea he's contesting, just a dismissal. Which, I must point out, is exactly the tactic I said he'd resort to because no one ever even tries (you included).

[TimG]

The first portion was actual gibberish...

Nope. Just reminding how the fact that you fervently believe something to be true does not make it true. There is no material difference between the belief that skin colour confers privilege and the various mystical beliefs held by followers of more traditional religions.

the second wasn't even an attempt to refute the idea he's contesting, just a dismissal.

A dismissal like your response to my argument that "blacklivesmatter" is ambiguous? (ideologue or idiot were your words). People living in glass houses... Edited October 1, 2015 by TimG

[Black Dog]

Nope. Just reminding how the fact that you fervently believe something to be true does not make it true.

That wasn't what the first, barely English, sentence said.

There is no material difference between the belief that skin colour confers privilege and the various mystical beliefs held by followers of more traditional religions.

Sure there is. There are lots of physical characteristics and personal traits that can give people certain advantages over others (hell, some people arguing against white privilege also suggest that men are disadvantaged by their gender), why would race be any different? Want examples? How about this one: as a white guy, I'm far less likely to be stopped by the cops for doing nothing than a black guy.

A dismissal like your response to my argument that "blacklivesmatter" is ambiguous? (ideologue or idiot were your words). People living in glass houses...

Yes, which you responded to not by making a reasoned argument, but with a bunch of nonsense about race cults.

Edited October 1, 2015 by Black Dog

[WIP]

SJWs are a disenfranchised group now? How? They are the ones that have the power in universities and are trying to silence those that disagree with them.

Who has the money? I've never been to university, but I know for a fact that the so called "radical" professors are aging out and being replaced with adjunct teachers with no opportunities for tenure...in other words - no opportunity to speak freely on any subject that the university administration considers of importance. Economics and MBA programs are being funded directly by business (even in my hometown university), and profs that speak out forcefully against racism and zionism are being pushed out, and unable to find work in other institutions. So, this rightwing theme you're repeating all the time here of colleges and universities being bastions of radicalism is pure bullshit that started changing way back in the 60's! Now, with non-tenured professors, direct corporate funding, and students who will graduate with debtloads that will keep them from buying a first home until their about 50, real radicalism....which I would argue is necessary because radicals come up with new ideas and new approaches) doesn't exist here anymore! But your despicable crew defines radicalism as any marginalized group attempting to push back.

They are the ones trying to make it illegal to disagree with certain people on twitter and are at the UN trying to get the UN to impose internet censorship.

I haven't really looked into the UN Report, but since 75% of women who go online report varying levels of sexual harassment, it seems that online geeks and gamers wouldn't be threatened with the prospect of censorship in the first place, if they were dealing with the problem to begin with!

1. I was referring to all the females that identify with #gamergate, which is far more than big enough for your living room as evidenced by #notyourshield. You are moving goal posts here by now referring to 'antifeminist female aggit-propagandists'.

Like I said before, I don't really know online gaming, and it's your issue to begin with/ not the original point of the rightwinger who started the thread. It's just part of the picture of how our culture has become more/not less misogynistic in modern times....countering a lot of liberal hopes and dreams of the future.

2. When Galileo was around, the number of people in Italy that openly advocated the Earth revolves around then sun was probably small enough to fit in your living room. The value of an opinion is independent of the number of people that believe in it.

Galileo is like Hitler! A trump card played by everyone trying to advance bad logic!

In actual fact, Galileo wasn't alone in positing that the Earth revolved around the Sun, and even more important: his critics were not the equivalent of today's flatearthers and creationists.

During that time, nearly all science and philosophy was taught directly and indirectly by the Church, and the adherents of a geocentric universe had a good argument against Galileo and other proponents of heliocentrism: when objects in the night sky were charted (as best they could at the time), the early astronomers couldn't detect any change in position of the stars during the course of one year.

At a time when the Universe was believed to be much smaller than it is today, most of the astronomers (who included highly placed clerics) reasoned that a parallax effect at six month intervals, would have shifted the position of the stars from season to season. And since the stars always seem to hold their place in the night sky, they decided that the only way to resolve the movements in the heavens was to create elaborate models of overlapping spheres around an Earth at the center of God's Creation.

Of course, now we know they were wrong, and even today's telescopes with equatorial mounts do not show any change from diurnal parallax, except among the nearby stars in our Local Group. But, just to set the record straight, Galileo did not have a ready answer for the apparent lack of shift and the Pope at the time, was dealing with rising protestant movements across Europe and determined to enforce uniformity in all things. So, if Galileo's colleagues agreed with him, the Pope would have likely demanded that everyone change and adopt the new theory of the universe.

I know this is going way offtrack, but I am getting so sick and tired of having Galileo dragged out as the lone man of science persecuted by the forces of ignorance, I had to add it in.

In that case, don't label #gamergate as a right wing movement, or opposition to this microaggression nonsense as right wing.

As I see it: every argument that is made to give individual rights and freedoms a veto power over obvious examples of discrimination and persecution of marginalized groups is a right wing argument!

[WIP]

Yes, the horror of being inclusive and thinking all lives matter. Clearly it's a microaggression that is due to being racist against black people.

Clearly we need to hijack Bernie Sanders rallies to fight racism. *sarcasm*

I watched that Netroots Nation Sanders speech where he had his first encounter with Black Lives Matter. It would have never have been a problem for him if, during all of his time in Washington, he had delved into the issue a little or had some understanding of how law enforcement is applied more frequently and with greater violence against black communities than among whites. And let's face it, on a personal level, Sanders has long been understood to be an asshole when dealing with people.....even his own supporters! And maybe you can tell us what this has to do with microaggressions!

[-1=e^ipi]

why would race be any different?

Sexism stems primarily from Reproductive Utility differences between men, women and non-binary people. Racism stems from tribalism. Both have very different evolutionary psychology origins.

I've never been to university

Then maybe you should try going to one, or listening to people that do (Such as Dr. Gad Saad or Dr. Janice Fiamengo, go see their youtube channels)?

but since 75% of women who go online report varying levels of sexual harassment

Could you provide evidence for this claim?

I don't really know online gaming

More stuff you don't know. Yet you somehow 'know' that I'm wrong.

Why not go to twitter and look up #notyourshield and figure out what I am referring to?

Galileo is like Hitler!

Spoken like a true believer of a religion and dogmatic thinking.

[Freddy]

Sexism stems primarily from Reproductive Utility differences between men, women and non-binary people. Racism stems from tribalism. Both have very different evolutionary psychology origins.

Then maybe you should try going to one, or listening to people that do (Such as Dr. Gad Saad or Dr. Janice Fiamengo, go see their youtube channels)?

Could you provide evidence for this claim?

More stuff you don't know. Yet you somehow 'know' that I'm wrong.

Why not go to twitter and look up #notyourshield and figure out what I am referring to?

Spoken like a true believer of a religion and dogmatic thinking.

It's Black dog and WIP.

Everyone has a hard time taking anything they say seriously.

[Black Dog]

Sexism stems primarily from Reproductive Utility differences between men, women and non-binary people. Racism stems from tribalism. Both have very different evolutionary psychology origins.

Which doesn't address the issue.

Why not go to twitter and look up #notyourshield and figure out what I am referring to?

Or google "GamerGate Astroturf campaign 4Chan".

It's Black dog and WIP.

Everyone has a hard time taking anything they say seriously.

*looks at post*

*looks at Freddy's posting history*

*looks at post again*

Mmmmhmmm.

Edited October 1, 2015 by Black Dog

[Michael Hardner]

Reminder to report posts that need to be reported. DON'T respond with 'Reported', or quote the post as it takes us time to remove all of those posts.

Thank you.

[Gleason]

This is a very good thread and I have to agree with Michael's perspective here. The "rule-writing" cannot be performed after the fact IMO.

[Black Dog]

Yeah, it's not like western universities have diversity officers that tweet #killallwhitemen or anything...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/11633305/University-union-officer-who-wrote-kill-all-white-men-tweet-will-remain-in-post.html

I assume now that she's been charged with a criminal offence, you will be leaping to her defense?