Illiberal Left Shuts Down Free Speech with Violence (Again)
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
23-02-2017, 10:46 AM
RE: Illiberal Left Shuts Down Free Speech with Violence (Again)
(23-02-2017 09:59 AM)Emma Wrote:  
(20-02-2017 12:38 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  Dude goes full NAMbLA and poof! there goes whatever empire he was looking to build. Bye bye pedo.

"In the homosexual world, particularly, some of those relationships between younger boys and older men — the sort of ‘coming of age’ relationship — those relationships in which those older men help those young boys discover who they are and give them security and safety and provide them with love and a reliable, sort of rock, where they can’t speak to their parents." - Milovelyboy Yappenpous.

Stupid dick. Stupid. You were on a roll.

Still bugging me- it's so very transparent that CPAC actually doesn't care about free speech. Conservatives DON'T care about free speech. They care about speech with which they agree. Just like everyone else. They aren't calling for government intervention any more than I am. But when he said something that cross their lines- suddenly they don't want to give him a platform either.

Why is it okay for Milo to attack jewish people, black people, gay people, trans people, feminists, women, immigrants, etc... But it's not okay for him to defend pedophilia? Why is that suddenly crossing a line? Because all of those other things are okay with the conservative platform- if not outwardly encouraged, then tolerated or touted on the sly. It was NEVER about free speech. Never.

Don't think that any of the minorities he attacked didn't notice that, either. We noticed that it was okay when it was us in his sites, but that wasn't enough for people to take a stand against him.

For fucks sake. If it's okay for him to attack me or my family, or my friends, based on lies he uses for justification, then it should be just as okay for him to defend pedos. Why is one okay, but not the other, if we're defending free speech?

This is a question that everyone should ask themselves- including CPAC.

Did Simon & Schuster drop him because they morally disagreed with him, or because his audience suddenly dried up? They could have banked on selling books to conservatives and outrage buyers, but now, would they make enough to make it worth it? Or did they take a moral stand? Or did he just become too hot a potato to hold?

Same with Breitbart.

Also, by these things he's said- even though it was a year ago he said it- he's basically, in the eyes of the Right, validating the argument homophobes have been using for years... that gay people are all pedos and you need to keep your kids away from them. Which is obviously not true. But in the eyes of the Right, it's validation enough. And, that argument is used against all of the LGBTQ rainbow.

Idk... I still have thoughts on this mess.

Fame is a fickle bitch. Popularity gained by saying provocative things, which can become easy soundbites for the masses, especially when the message aligns with thoughts the masses have but were afraid to express.

Sure, you can pick on this group or that group (comedians do this all the time and with some success), but when you become so full of yourself that you think you can say anything and instantly people will applaud, jumping to your defense, you're really mistaken.

His book deal was likely pulled because they worried about it becoming
1. A forum for his apologist attitude about his statements.
2. Backlash from the public that could affect other writers.
3. He can still write a book, he can even get his message out there by having it published -- this particular publisher doesn't need to be involved. There are plenty others (and he can certainly self publish).
4. We don't know if they already had misgivings about giving him a book deal, especially as his nature was more revealed before these comments were brought to light. Being completely controversial can bolster sales, but when a line like that has been crossed, the publishers are seen more as a villain. This ties in nicely with my second point.


But as if to knock me down, reality came around
And without so much as a mere touch, cut me into little pieces

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Momsurroundedbyboys's post
23-02-2017, 05:09 PM
RE: Illiberal Left Shuts Down Free Speech with Violence (Again)
(23-02-2017 10:44 AM)Emma Wrote:  I also have thoughts on this idea of humor as discussed by Bill Maher and Milo in that interview clip posted earlier.

They both agree that nothing in humor should be off-limits. Everyone is fair game in humor. Everything is okay as long as it has a purpose.

This was such a softball to Milo, it gave him such an out that he didn't have to answer to his hurtful actions.

So maybe that's a better question- and maybe it's worth its own thread if people care enough to post about it. But is everything allowed in humor? And what does that really mean? And does context matter? If it does matter- what does it mean to matter?

Are people allowed to get upset at a joke made at their expense? Does the intent of the joke play a part? Does the victim of a joke at someone's expense matter?

I do feel strongly that the government should not put boundaries on humor. Satirists, story-tellers, comedians, etc. all need to be free to criticize the government and society at large. But can society push back? Do people have a right to get upset when careless jokes play a role in their marginalization?

Personally, I think that people owe it to their fellow humans to try to recognize WHY a joke is funny. When someone else says that a joke hurts them or contributes to their victimization, we have a duty to them to analyze it through their eyes and hear their argument before dismissing them. Does that mean that sometimes it goes too far? Sure it does. We all know that there is a such thing as political correctness run-a-muck. But if our humor is never to be uncomfortably pushed to evolve, we will always hurt the people in need of help the most.

So, humor is a rightly well-guarded facet of a free society, but that free society does have a right and obligation to evolve to uplift rather than tamp down.

So- what do you all think? What are your thoughts on this subject?

I think most humor deflates its target in some way (or at least aims to). Maybe that's why people with a lot of power and people with very little power feel more wounded by humor: there's more at stake for them. Humor is intrinsically hostile and only sometimes leveling. I don't know how to balance it, but over time as marginalized groups gain power, jokes about them do tend to go out of fashion or underground.

By some accounts our current puppet in chief decided to run for president in 2016 because he was so angry about the jokes President Obama made about him at the White House Correspondents Dinner in 2011. So...thanks, Obama.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes julep's post
23-02-2017, 11:03 PM
RE: Illiberal Left Shuts Down Free Speech with Violence (Again)
Milo lost his spot at Breitbart and his lucrative book deal?

Couldn't have happened to a nicer piece of human garbage. Drinking Beverage

(What's that alt-right? Free-speech my ass!)

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes EvolutionKills's post
25-02-2017, 05:29 PM
RE: Illiberal Left Shuts Down Free Speech with Violence (Again)
(21-02-2017 05:28 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  
(21-02-2017 09:21 AM)RocketSurgeon76 Wrote:  I watched him on Bill Maher, and was much more upset to see Milo offer several loads of conservative bullshit that went totally unchallenged, such as the allegation that trans* people "have a mental disorder". The guy is a walking pile of Conservapedia, and I can't believe Maher and his crew didn't know to just have someone patiently sitting at a Google-equipped laptop with PubMed already open on the screen, ready to refute every piece of bullshit upon which he bases his "oh so reasonable" expressions of "common sense". Rolleyes

The guy's a fraud, and the only reason he keeps getting away with his schtick is that no one effectively calls him on it. Maher had an opportunity to do so and squandered it. Putz.





Edit to Add: My apologies to Aliza and any of our other Jewish members for my unlicensed use of Yiddish... but frankly, when you have to express the degree of contempt that Milo and Maher have coming to them, really only Yiddish expressions will suffice! Laugh out load

Does anyone else have a love/hate thing with Bill Maher? Sometimes I like him, and other times I think he's just a smug asshole that is wrong as often as he's right.

Maybe I'm just moody?

No, it's not you, it's Bill. I feel exactly the same way.

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-02-2017, 05:30 PM
RE: Illiberal Left Shuts Down Free Speech with Violence (Again)
Double-post. Delete as deemed appropriate.

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-02-2017, 05:40 PM
RE: Illiberal Left Shuts Down Free Speech with Violence (Again)
(22-02-2017 08:21 AM)GenesisNemesis Wrote:  
(22-02-2017 12:14 AM)morondog Wrote:  I've only seen him in religulous. Some of the stuff in there was dodgy as well IIRC. If the guy's gonna be an atheist cheerleader then for fucks sake be factual.

Don't forget he's an anti-vax nut. Fuck him, I say.

As I understand it, he was never an "anti-vaxer", he simply said, in Maher-style albeit, let the science prove anti-vaxers wrong rather than just dismiss them with name-calling... basically what you just did. That's a perfectly respectable position to take, IMO. At the same time, I would have to say you'd have to be a nut to be an anti-vaxer if you've done a bit of reading on the topic, but humans are susceptible to bullshit science all the time, even the most brilliant among us. It's preferable to point a false conspiracy believer to evidence if their open to it. However, they often aren't open to facts once they've been indoctrinated into a belief system. Don't forget Isaac Newton, one of the most brilliant minds in recorded human history believed in alchemy.

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-02-2017, 06:25 PM
RE: Illiberal Left Shuts Down Free Speech with Violence (Again)
(23-02-2017 11:03 PM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  Milo lost his spot at Breitbart and his lucrative book deal?

Couldn't have happened to a nicer piece of human garbage. Drinking Beverage

(What's that alt-right? Free-speech my ass!)

He lost it because there aren't enough pedophiles to sway them(Breitbart) against firing him.

We have to remember that what we observe is not nature herself, but nature exposed to our method of questioning ~ Werner Heisenberg
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-02-2017, 06:43 PM
RE: Illiberal Left Shuts Down Free Speech with Violence (Again)
(25-02-2017 05:40 PM)Dark Light Wrote:  
(22-02-2017 08:21 AM)GenesisNemesis Wrote:  Don't forget he's an anti-vax nut. Fuck him, I say.

As I understand it, he was never an "anti-vaxer", he simply said, in Maher-style albeit, let the science prove anti-vaxers wrong rather than just dismiss them with name-calling... basically what you just did. That's a perfectly respectable position to take, IMO. At the same time, I would have to say you'd have to be a nut to be an anti-vaxer if you've done a bit of reading on the topic, but humans are susceptible to bullshit science all the time, even the most brilliant among us. It's preferable to point a false conspiracy believer to evidence if their open to it. However, they often aren't open to facts once they've been indoctrinated into a belief system. Don't forget Isaac Newton, one of the most brilliant minds in recorded human history believed in alchemy.
The science has been proving this and it's continually done little to change the minds of anti vaxers spreading the ideas or follow science.. it's not really reasonable when it's demonstrable many of the people are scientifically illiterate, trust social circles more, and are more moved by anecdotal evidence than statical evidence.

And there was limited hard science or formal understanding of elements to give adequate reasons for newton to not still believe in alchemy and experiment with it.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-02-2017, 05:39 AM
RE: Illiberal Left Shuts Down Free Speech with Violence (Again)
(25-02-2017 06:43 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  
(25-02-2017 05:40 PM)Dark Light Wrote:  As I understand it, he was never an "anti-vaxer", he simply said, in Maher-style albeit, let the science prove anti-vaxers wrong rather than just dismiss them with name-calling... basically what you just did. That's a perfectly respectable position to take, IMO. At the same time, I would have to say you'd have to be a nut to be an anti-vaxer if you've done a bit of reading on the topic, but humans are susceptible to bullshit science all the time, even the most brilliant among us. It's preferable to point a false conspiracy believer to evidence if their open to it. However, they often aren't open to facts once they've been indoctrinated into a belief system. Don't forget Isaac Newton, one of the most brilliant minds in recorded human history believed in alchemy.
The science has been proving this and it's continually done little to change the minds of anti vaxers spreading the ideas or follow science.. it's not really reasonable when it's demonstrable many of the people are scientifically illiterate, trust social circles more, and are more moved by anecdotal evidence than statical evidence.

And there was limited hard science or formal understanding of elements to give adequate reasons for newton to not still believe in alchemy and experiment with it.

I disagree. I think science has done a lot to sway a lot of people into vaccinating their children. Even their vapid de facto leader Jenny McCarthy has walked back any of her more extreme statements she used to make. You'll never convince everyone of anything, but I think the public's trust in our scientific community's research has done much to legitimize the non-sense of anti-vaxers. Just look at the public reaction to professional actor and idiot, Robert DeNiro last year. He almost immediately walked back his BS.

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-02-2017, 05:49 AM
RE: Illiberal Left Shuts Down Free Speech with Violence (Again)
(26-02-2017 05:39 AM)Dark Light Wrote:  I disagree. I think science has done a lot to sway a lot of people into vaccinating their children. Even their vapid de facto leader Jenny McCarthy has walked back any of her more extreme statements she used to make. You'll never convince everyone of anything, but I think the public's trust in our scientific community's research has done much to legitimize the non-sense of anti-vaxers. Just look at the public reaction to professional actor and idiot, Robert DeNiro last year. He almost immediately walked back his BS.

That's a bold statement, since when I was little, everyone vaccinated and there were regular mass vaccinations at school. I even am vaccinated against the pox. Virtually nobody second guessed the use and necessity of vaccinations. The anti vaxers only rose out of the internet when all kinds of unchecked informations were readily available. Such as fringe scientists, who aren't reputable enough to stand the test of the scientific community.

This, as with any of these internet phenomenons, is an uphill battle. Both kinds of information are out there and people make their choice of whom to believe. And since the broad mass isn't sufficiently educated in these matters, they will pick their choice based on individual appeal and gut instinct.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: