/baw/ - General Discussion

File allowance: 8MB jpg, 12MB png, 8MB gif, 8MB mp3, 16MB swf, 16MB webm, 16MB mp4

Thread stats: 404 posts, 31 files (3 video(s), 28 image(s))

Toggle poster info Replying to /baw/405206 Close window
Options
No.405206
Politics 4: Hulkmania ScoreAnonymous
save file
video:145840434200.webm(4.68MB , 853x480 , hulkmania.webm)
No.405208
Anonymous
Whatcha gonna do when Hulkamania destroys yooooooooooouuuuu?
No.405211
Slowpoke
Important reminders:
>remember to address someone's argument or not address them at all
>if someone believes [x], it does not necessarily mean they believe [y] just because the internet told you that only [xy] exists
>please do try to act vaguely like grown-ups
No.405212
Anonymous
>>405211
Equally important
>those who oppose the existence of the conversation are not a side in it, they're outside of the conversation entirely and should be treated as such
No.405213
Anonymous
>>405212
>>405211
Agree.
No.405216
Mr. Stone !zWb42fBPMM
Replies:>>405218
Need I remind you that the verdict isn’t final, there will be an appeal, and Gawker isn’t dead yet? Celebrate when it’s dead.
No.405217
Anonymous
>>405209
But not even close to the heights of hilarity that is defending GG
No.405218
Anonymous
Replies:>>405465
>>405216
Need I remind you that the value of Gawker minus obligations is in the low forty millions. The only way they can file an appeal is to take on even more debt, which is going to exceed the value of the company.
No.405219
Anonymous
Replies:>>405220
>>405217
>current year
>giving a fuck about GG/anti-GG
babby
No.405220
Anonymous
>>405217
>>405219


I still can't figure out what is real and what was trumped-up bullshit, as both sides of the Gamergate coin like to play the vicitm. The closest I can parse is that, from what they say online, Anita Sarkessian, Zoe Quinn, and Briana Wu all seem like dicks, and the people on 8chan ALSO act like a bunch of melodramatic assholes. How anyone can figure out what to believe on either side's claims is beyond me.
No.405221
Slowmobile
>>405220
That's the gist of it.
No.405222
Anonymous
Replies:>>405227
>>405220
Slow is a lying fuck. Zoe Quinn did and has done nothing. Anita has made some well intentioned videos with sadly shallow argument construction. Now, Wu actually IS a crazy person but the only thing she's "guilty" of is making bad mobile games and standing up for women in the industry.

None of which, in case you aren't aware, is grounds for doxxing and harassing them endlessly. As a matter of fact, basically NOTHING is grounds for that, or at least nothing the likes of a #GG/MRA type is liable to care abou
No.405223
Anonymous
>>405220
It's sort of like actual politics in that both sides have some truths to them but both sides are also actually pretty fucking awful.
No.405224
Rodyle !Cljnc/gZnM
There is no "both sides,"or not legitimately, unless you're the sort of person who considers Jim Crow up for debate. Your typical internet "conservative," as that idiot Milo would put it, stands at best to maintain the status quo indefinitely and more commonly to roll shit back because they feel it somehow infringes on their right to god knows what. As
>>405212
said, these people oppose there being any kind of conversation or analysis of the problems of our current culture, be they racial, religious, gender, sex, what have you. They're not a side of a debate, they just don't want there to be a debate.
No.405225
Mr. Stone !zWb42fBPMM
In far more pressing news: http://boingboing.net/2016/03/18/chelsea-manning-gets-the-us-ar.html

>>405224
>They're not a side of a debate, they just don't want there to be a debate.

Pretty much this, yeah.
No.405226
Tora Dora !n0CyHpL66I
Replies:>>405251
>>405225

God bless Chelsea Manning. I hope she some day gets to breathe the free air. And God help anyone foolish or desperate enough to join the Armed Forces.
No.405227
Slowpoke
Replies:>>405228
>>405222
>>405224
wow you guys sound totally unbiased, people better believe you if they know what's good for them am i right
>>405224
>>405225
I'm willing to debate if you are, which means not just going "lmao like you even believe that, liar" to my every claim, like seems to be the main strategy in this tired argument.
No.405228
Rodyle !Cljnc/gZnM
Replies:>>405233
>>405227
>wow you guys sound totally unbiased
I confess my bias towards treating people like human beings yes
No.405229
Rodyle !Cljnc/gZnM
Replies:>>405230
Like Slow let's say I give you the benefit of the doubt and accept you as trying to be sincere, let me ask: do you not understand why your repeated defense of the various vile people that roll through these threads may have rather damaged your credibility? Do you not get why, when they post (for example) anti-refugee shit, your DEFENSE of them might make YOU seem anti-refugee?
No.405230
Slowpoke
>>405229
I guess I can understand that, though I don't agree with it, and direct you back to rule number 2 and to an extent 3 >>405211

I don't defend anti-refugee beliefs (I have no issue at all with refugees and would accept one into my home assuming [s]he wouldn't take advantage of it), but I will call out lack of counterarguments while still acting like you're the smart winner, and I will ALWAYS call out suicide encouragement.
I've lost a friend to what I suspect to be suicide, and while I'll never know if this was the reason, I know he DID get harassment over his "problematic" views--he's was truscum, a transmedicalist, and despite being a trans man himself, "progressive" people felt like this was a reason to bully him. That's trash, and the people who do that kind of thing are the lowest of the low.
No.405231
Anonymous
Replies:>>405232
>>405230
>I will call out lack of counterarguments while still acting like you're the smart winner
You mean that thing you do ALL THE TIME?
No.405232
Slowpoke
>>405231
When I give an actual argument, people tell me I don't even believe what I'm saying, I'm just saying it to make myself look good. Or sometimes just greentexting a summary of my argument with no further additions.
Eventually I just started looking down my nose at them and laughing at them, since there was no real point, though lately I have been trying to avoid it and taking things a bit more seriously.
What can you do v0v
No.405233
Anonymous
Replies:>>405234
>>405228
>I confess my bias towards treating people like human beings yes

I find that sort of hilarious as I'm watching you demonize and treat Slow as someone who isn't human just because he disagreed with you. I'm seeing Slowpoke being overly respectful while arguing with you and you're just being an asshole because you don't like what he says. That's also something I've noticed Anita, Zoe, Brianna Wu, and 8chan do. The only thing getting mad and screaming loudly at each other does is let you blow off steam. It doesn't change anybody's mind. If anything, it entrenches opinions and invites people to push you back even harder.
No.405234
Slowpoke
>>405233
This is why I try to encourage people to not act a fool. It doesn't win anyone over, it just makes your dong feel bigger.
If the goal is to get people to accept your beliefs as valid, the way is absolutely NOT via consistent mocking, derogatory comments, stereotyping, and the like.
If anyone is on the fence, behavior like 19/20 people in these threads have just pushes that person further away.
No.405235
Rodyle !Cljnc/gZnM
Replies:>>405236
>>405230
>I guess I can understand that, though I don't agree with it
It's not relevant whether you agree with it or not, it's still a fact. You have BURNT credibility fighting for people who you shouldn't have been fighting for, and are now for some reason surprised that you get lumped in with them all the time. That's why you get accused of using the same tactics they used and having the opinions they have, because you constantly defend and, may I add, never attack them. For someone who likes to act like he's some kind of neutral figure, you are often found in decidedly partisan positions.
No.405236
Slowpoke
Replies:>>405239
>>405235
People can believe what they want to about me. I uh, don't exactly lose sleep over what DudeWithMoney thinks about my political affiliations if I'm honest.
That said, failing to address my arguments and instead just going "lmao >implying slowpoke" just makes me look more correct to anyone who isn't already firmly on your side, so it's just kind of masturbatory. Which I mean, is also fine, I don't care if people just beat off to my arguments either.

(I also don't really "attack" anyone, I just call out stupid arguments from people I expect better from. For example, I know Stone is a fairly smart guy who is/used to be kind and understanding, so when he just starts stereotyping impoverished people while congratulating himself for being so cool and smart and right, I feel more of a need to address that than I do a skinhead anon talking about how it's in black DNA to commit more crimes.)
No.405239
Mr. Stone !zWb42fBPMM
Replies:>>405240
>>405236

>I know Stone is a fairly smart guy

[citation needed]
No.405240
Slowpoke
Replies:>>405241
>>405239
Man I asked for counterarguments instead of just posts calling me a liar

:^)
No.405241
Mr. Stone !zWb42fBPMM
>>405240

You put forth the assertion, it’s on you to provide proof. And someone else was likely going to take the potshot anyway. Figured I’d beat them to the punch.
No.405242
Anonymous
Replies:>>405243
>>405224
>there's no both sides
This is exactly why the internet flocked to GG.

Certain people wanted to shut down the debate and censor all information coming in, and this got people curious as to what the information was.
No.405243
Anonymous
Replies:>>405244
>>405242

Well, let's not pretend that GG did the exact same thing in the opposite direction, with individuals using GG to demonize others who frankly had reasonable opinions on sexism and inequality in the media. Both sides have individuals who try to shut down the conversation, which will push people to the extreme of the other side depending on which bad actor gets to them first.
No.405244
Anonymous
>>405243
>with individuals using GG
to do what it was made to do, harass women
No.405245
Slowpoke
>>405244
I mean, if you want to get technical, the women's suffrage movement was created to oppress black people and put them back in their place, so I guess all feminists hate black peeps.

Can't believe it turns out feminism really IS a hate movement, wow.
No.405246
Slowpoke
>>405244
>>405245
(to clarify, I do not believe either of these posts to truly be the case, just operating under your logic my man)
No.405247
Anonymous
>>405244

I guess I'll quote Kazerad as they put it more eliquently than I could.
>In addressing a problem like harassment, your first step is to figure out the causes. With something as broad as “harassment”, there are going to be a lot of different causes all contributing to one quantifiable output. When you establish a baseline that is essentially “normal” for someone in a particular position, you can work to isolate isolate specific behaviors or attributes that affect the harassment they receive.
>The harassment that was brought up in that Hateful Boyfriend post, for example, is tamer in both content and harshness than what I get on about a daily basis. At the same time, though, I’m a bigger name than its author was - I’m inclined to say that our harassment is both pretty expected for our relative popularity levels and it’s hard to draw conclusions from it. The harassment received by someone like Zoe Quinn is probably greater than mine - but from what I’ve seen, about on par with someone like Andrew Dobson. One attribute both Zoe Quinn and Andrew Dobson have in common is a general hostility toward critics, and I’m inclined to say that the “solution” to their harassment is to either place blame on them for handling their audience poorly or to promote positivity and understanding toward people who don’t want to receive criticism. Either one works.
>The key here, even if you’re addressing something pervasive like general misogynistic attitudes in the gaming community, is that you need to address it from the inside. You need to be able to understand a community, see what is causing the misbehavior, identify the people who are perpetuating it, and get them to stop. It’s a very social thing and ultimately, the only way you permanently win is with the collaboration of the people you disagree with.
>The thing you don’t want to do is rush in and start attacking people, since they’re not going to just go away. The thing you really don’t want to do is rush in and start attacking people for the wrong thing, since people who act out are usually doing so because they have some complaint/fear that is going unrecognized. Dealing with situations like this is a delicate thing, and someone can’t just barge in and expect the same treatment from mass audiences that they would get from friends in an artist-circle. I would like to see things improve, but I’m not going to have pity for someone who expects that hurt feelings will be enough to solve problems.
>I don’t want to decry anyone’s harassment as being so normal they should accept it. But, I think actually dealing with harassment as a social issue requires careful movement and an exact analysis of the causes, and misplaced blame only makes things worse.
No.405248
Anonymous
Replies:>>405254
>>405245
>>405246
please name the thing that you think #gg is attempting to genuinely do and what you think the origin is

or shut the fuck up, either one would be fine
No.405250
Mr. Stone !zWb42fBPMM
Replies:>>405254
>>405246

The Gamers of the Gate may not have intended to become a group dedicated to harassment, but harassment certainly became one of its standard operating procedures after getting its name. And while the group proclaims to fight for “better journalistic ethics”—last time I checked, anyway—these days, that fight boils down to yelling about cultural marxism and complaining about anything from women in positions of power within gaming companies to cultural critique of a game’s politics (for example, the blowback against people shittalking the political nature of The Division’s storyline).
No.405251
Anonymous
Replies:>>405252
>>405226
Thought to note on that Donald Trump looking to go Metal Gear with US Military. I'm interested to see where the "you want our protection, its gonna cost ya." plan goes.
No.405252
Anonymous
Replies:>>405253
>>405251
>Thought to note on that Donald Trump looking to go Metal Gear with US Military. I'm interested to see where the "you want our protection, its gonna cost ya." plan goes.
You'll have to continue wondering because DT isn't going to be president.
No.405253
Anonymous
>>405252
Eh he's played their games and has all their numbers and files. He's ready to drop the info bombs when he gets the nomination. Sanders would have a chance but Hillary is too tied to the system he's ready to destroy.
No.405254
Slowpoke
Replies:>>405255
>>405248
It's a big group of people, I'm sure they have plenty of goals.
You can check out probably their largest collaborative effort here though http://www.deepfreeze.it/
Said effort looks to be about exposing corrupt journalists and archiving incriminating things about them. There's also a list somewhere of the various websites they've impacted by raising awareness of the lack of ethics, causing big-name websites to change their policies. You can look for that if you want, but I doubt you care.
>>405250
Are we playing the game where we pretend a movement or group is solely represented by the worst people calling its name? Do I get to list some awful people from other movements to "prove" that they're hateful and murderous?
Actually, I lose this game, because if you ask me to name some "good" GGers, I'm gonna refuse on the grounds that I don't want to sic some of the more radical people on here on anyone I know. I'd just as soon not have friends of mine harassed and coaxed into self-harm because I used them as ammunition to win an internet argument.
I submit.
No.405255
Mr. Stone !zWb42fBPMM
Replies:>>405256
>>405254

>Are we playing the game where we pretend a movement or group is solely represented by the worst people calling its name?

No. But if the reasonable members of the group aren't willing to disavow those bad actors, why would you consider it a surprise that the bad actors who get shitloads of attention become the de facto face of the group?
No.405256
Slowpoke
>>405255
>if the reasonable members of the group aren't willing to disavow those bad actors
Lots of them do.
Do you ask every Muslim you see to denounce the couple of Muslim terrorists by name before you stop referring to them as a religion of hate?
When you meet an atheist, do you show them /r/atheism and have them call every user on the first page a moron before you respect them as a person?
Upon meeting a Christian do you pull up a list of the personal beliefs of every leader-figure of The Crusades and tell them that they have to reject those thoughts, one by one, out loud?

(not trying to harp on religion but I figured if I went for one I should go for all)

Or do you just kind of assume that every group has loud wackos who ruin the fun for normal people, like a normal person--with the bizarre exception of one?
No.405257
Mr. Stone !zWb42fBPMM
>>405256

>Lots of them do.

Then why don’t those reasonable members of the group ever manage to get the kind of attention that the bad actors do?
No.405258
Anonymous
Replies:>>405260
>>405257

Are you joking, Freehaven? I mean... you're a furry. Do you ever ask why the more reasonable members of furries don't get the kind of attention the bad actors do?
No.405259
Slowpoke
>>405257
For the same reason that Fred Phelps got TONS of attention, but I, a much more reasonable Christian, was only one the local news once when I was 6 for a performance my First Grade class did at the local mall. For the same reason that Trump refusing to show up for his speech was aired on every station instead of Sanders ACTUALLY giving his speech.
People love the loudmouth pricks.

(I'm not gonna look up the personal views of the figureheads of the crusades, you'll have to do that bit if you want me to do some denouncing)
No.405260
Mr. Stone !zWb42fBPMM
Replies:>>405262
>>405258

The furry community, as a group, doesn’t exist to fulfill some form of sociopolitical “mission”. The Gamers of the Gate group does.
No.405261
Anonymous
Replies:>>405262
>>405256
>Do you ask every Muslim you see to denounce the couple of Muslim terrorists by name before you stop referring to them as a religion of hate?
>When you meet an atheist, do you show them /r/atheism and have them call every user on the first page a moron before you respect them as a person?
>Upon meeting a Christian do you pull up a list of the personal beliefs of every leader-figure of The Crusades and tell them that they have to reject those thoughts, one by one, out loud?
these are labels rather more significant to a person's identity and harder to change than a dumb watergate play created by some dumbshits on /v/ who found an easy to exploit way to attack a couple women they hated anyway

if you don't want to be painted with the #GG brush, you don't have to associate with #GG
No.405262
Slowpoke
Replies:>>405263
>>405260
>GG is a big deal, furries aren't, bad comparison
>>405261
>religion is a big deal, GG isn't, bad comparison

y'all can work that out amongst yourselves

something something something [links to incriminating feminists] something
No.405263
Anonymous
Replies:>>405264
>>405262
See this is exactly the kind of shit that makes people call you a dogwhistiling sympathizer. You know full well that these are two different points but you are pretending that they are not. You are adopting their tactics to defend their position in their name, and you wonder why people associate you with them.
No.405264
Slowpoke
>>405263
I also address both (2) points at once in my last line, by saying VERBATIM, and I QUOTE, "okay, furries aren't political. okay, religion isn't a choice. feminism is a political choice and it has bad seeds too, and you know it"

It's right there in the post, fam.
No.405265
Mr. Stone !zWb42fBPMM
Replies:>>405267
>>405264

I'm looking over your post and I’m not seeing that particular combination of words in it.
No.405266
Anonymous
>>405264
feminism is a philosophy around a century and a half removed from what would be considered the origin point of it which has split and evolved into countless branches that have themselves changed over time

#GG is 2 years removed from its origin and continues to attack the same targets in the same ways as it did from literally day 1
No.405267
Slowpoke
Replies:>>405269
>>405265
No see it's under the black bar, you gotta kinda hover over.
If you have NoScript you might have to highlight it.
No.405268
Anonymous
Replies:>>405270
oh and is of course, not a philosophy but a loosely associated hate group

the comparison between the two, as you'd admit if you were genuinely a "third party" and not a sympathizer, is so tenuous it might as well not be brought up
No.405269
Mr. Stone !zWb42fBPMM
>>405267

Ah, I keep forgetting, I’m a fucking retard.
No.405270
Slowpoke
Replies:>>405271
>>405268
No see I proved earlier that feminism is a hate group too, so it's a really fair comparison. Scroll up a bit, you'll see it, it's pretty early in the thread.
No.405271
Anonymous
Replies:>>405272
>>405270
>No see I proved earlier that feminism is a hate group too, so it's a really fair comparison. Scroll up a bit, you'll see it, it's pretty early in the thread.
Okay so you're back to denying all that Quinn shit actually happened and/or are saying she deserved it then, just want to make sure
No.405272
Slowpoke
Replies:>>405273
>>405271
Are you denying that the Suffragettes came together under the banner of hating the black man?
Just checking.
No.405273
Anonymous
Replies:>>405274
>>405272
No, I am denying the relevance of the point due to the length of time.
No.405274
Slowpoke
Replies:>>405275
>>405273
So what's the exact statute of limitations on being a problematic movement?
No.405275
Anonymous
Replies:>>405276
>>405274
Gonna say it's probably not 2 years
No.405276
Slowpoke
Replies:>>405278
>>405275
Oh, well that's pretty convenient then. Well-played, fella.
No.405277
Anonymous
Can we go back to the part where Slow claimed that he was disgusted by bullying and considered those who partook in it trash.

You know, Slow.

The guy who is defending #GG.
No.405278
Anonymous
>>405276
I mean, I used that basic common sense that I was equipped with. It let's me discern that if someone was harassing another person for being a woman 2 years ago, and is still doing it now, they probably haven't changed much.
No.405279
Slowpoke
Replies:>>405281
>>405277
I also have said that I'm plenty against the crappy members of GG. I've publicly called them out and denounced them myself, when I see them.
I, also, am no fan of Fred Phelps, whatever Big Names the KKK has. I did not endorse 9/11. Personally, I think Seth McFarlane is a tool, and does not represent atheism properly. I don't like Randi Harper or Big Red, whose real name I forget and don't feel like looking up.

Does that cover me for the other Groups With Problematic People mentioned thus far? If you can think of more let me know, I'll speak against them too.
No.405280
Anonymous
Replies:>>405283
>>405277

I've seen more harassment and bullying being done to Slow over this particular subject matter than Slow doing to other people, what does that mean?
No.405281
Anonymous
Replies:>>405282
>>405279
I again love how you equate being a backwards asshole on the internet with religious affiliation, like they are on the same level or in any way comparable.

At least you've finally admitted the KKK connection though. Keep thinking it through, you're almost there!
No.405282
Slowpoke
Replies:>>405287
>>405281
Isn't it common knowledge that the KKK originated as a far-right Christian group?
Cause that's what I was talking about.
No.405283
Anonymous
>>405280
That he is experiencing the social consequences of exercising his political right to freedom of speech.

He is allowed to act like an ass, he's not allowed to be respected for doing so.

I am not, however, about to, say, post his face and home address and start a movement dedicated to hounding him to the ends of the Earth, along with anyone that sympathizes with him. I'm just going to call him an asshole.
No.405284
Slowpoke
>>405283
>I am not, however, about to, say, post his face and home address and start a movement dedicated to hounding him to the ends of the Earth, along with anyone that sympathizes with him.
I do appreciate it, it's more than a lot of "your side" can say.
No.405285
Mr. Stone !zWb42fBPMM
Replies:>>405288
>>405284

Now if you’d just disavow the Gamers of the Gate for doing the same thing…
No.405286
Anonymous
Replies:>>405288
>>405284
>I do appreciate it, it's more than a lot of "your side" can say.
But it is, sadly, not a thing anyone on your side can say.
No.405287
Anonymous
>>405282
The KKK's nominal Protestantism is not exactly the defining characteristic of the group, even you must admit.
No.405288
Slowpoke
>>405285
Check 6 posts above yours, Stone, and uh, see a doctor about your eyes. This is the second time in one night, it's worrying me.
>>405286
It is, but I've already resigned on that ground and said I won't be posting names of the "good ones" out of fear that the radicals on here will harass them, so I have no proof to submit on that front.
If nothing else, it's something I can say, and I'm on my side.
No.405289
Anonymous
Replies:>>405292
>>405283

Interesting, so harassment is okay when you're doing it but you're demonizing gamer gate for harassing others... seems hypocritical to me. Where do the people who think harassing people is bad go?
No.405290
Anonymous
Replies:>>405294
>>405288
>I won't be posting names of the "good ones"
because they don't exist

you cannot be a "good" #GGer for the same reason you cannot be a "good" KKK member, when bigotry is THE core element of your movement you sacrifice your right to be called good

at BEST you can slide by on the racist grandpa card but even that can be surrendered if you continue to offer active political support to those positions
No.405291
Mr. Stone !zWb42fBPMM
Replies:>>405297
>>405288

Can you disavow the Gamers of the Gate without deflecting their shittiness via bringing up other “bad actors” in the sociopolitical sphere? Because that seems to be your habit: “Well I think the worst Gaters are assholes BUT SO ARE THESE OTHER PEOPLE.” Why can’t you say the worst Gaters are assholes without undercutting their bad behavior?
No.405292
Anonymous
Replies:>>405297
>>405289
>Interesting, so harassment is okay when you're doing it but you're demonizing gamer gate for harassing others... seems hypocritical to me. Where do the people who think harassing people is bad go?
I would venture to suggest that there is a difference between calling someone an ass on an anonymous image board and the actual, literal planned smear and scare campaigns engaged in by #GG. You may disagree with this theory if you like but if you actually think this is all harassment maybe this conversation isn't for you at all.
No.405293
Anonymous
As a side note I absolutely hate that this is the most active part of this site I used to love.
No.405294
Slowpoke
Replies:>>405295
>>405290
>because they don't exist
Yikes bro, you got me, I'm without any counterpoint here.
Except I already said I lose this particular fight way earlier in the thread.
So we're back to masturbation.
>when bigotry is THE core element of your movement you sacrifice your right to be called good
Again, feminism, black-hate.
>oh but that was uh some years ago, and uh, some people in the group don't agree with that anymore-- w-which is different from people in GG not agreeing with harassment, it's different
We're dancing in circles, guy, I'm gonna get dizzy.
No.405295
Anonymous
>>405294
>oh but that was uh some years ago, and uh, some people in the group don't agree with that anymore-- w-which is different from people in GG not agreeing with harassment, it's different
Yes, a century and half is different than two years, that is correct.
No.405296
Mr. Stone !zWb42fBPMM
>>405293

We’re imageboard regulars. We live to argue.
No.405297
Slowpoke
>>405291
Not my intention to undercut it.
I think that the GGers who doxx, harass, fling sexist/racist/transphobic slurs, and are just generally turd-eaters

are turd-eaters.

Sated?
>>405292
He might be referring to how I can no longer even post in other threads, even if I'm on-topic, without people tearing into me despite me personally having done no wrong aside from being pompous and narcissistic.
>>405293
lol same
No.405298
Mr. Stone !zWb42fBPMM
Replies:>>405301
>>405297

See? That wasn’t so hard.
No.405299
Anonymous
Replies:>>405301
>>405297
>He might be referring to how I can no longer even post in other threads, even if I'm on-topic, without people tearing into me despite me personally having done no wrong aside from being pompous and narcissistic.
For example?
No.405300
Anonymous
If you guys ARE interested in seeing someone analyze both sides of the GamerGate, taking a look at the bad and good actors on both sides, I recommend Kazerad's tumblr.

http://kazerad.tumblr.com/tagged/GamerGate
No.405301
Slowpoke
>>405299
Wow are you doubting a victim
are you SHAMING a VICTIM
Iunno lots of times in the 4chan complaint thread, all deleted now, been several in the SYM threads. Not gonna look for them, don't care enough, just saying it happens.
>>405298
I wasn't aware that saying "I hate bad people" somehow included the phrase "except for the ones who have ever used the hashtag '#GG'"
Would have clarified sooner had I known, sorry love.
No.405302
Mr. Stone !zWb42fBPMM
>>405300

I’ve read his stuff (man I wish he’d start writing for his blog again) and I admit, he’s good about taking a balanced look at it. But while I’m all for the sociopolitical mission of “improving games journalism”, the Gamers of the Gate have tainted said mission due to the actions of its bad actors and the group’s generally harsh view of anyone it deems an “SJW” or “anti-GG”. At this point, the group is more about mocking “SJWs” and feminists than about trying to be a watchdog for games journalism—if /r/KotakuInAction is any indication, anyway.
No.405303
Slowpoke
>>405302
deepfreeze.it

It's not a screamer, pinky promise.
No.405304
Anonymous
>>405301
>"except for the ones who have ever used the hashtag '#GG'"
Well those are the ones you put a good bit of time into defending so
No.405305
Anonymous
Replies:>>405308
>>405300
I don't care for GG or anti GG but his essays are pretty damn good in general.

>mfw some tard stopped reading his comic only because he mentioned GG on his tumblr
No.405306
Anonymous
>>405302
>improving games journalism
In what way
No.405307
Mr. Stone !zWb42fBPMM
Replies:>>405309
>>405301

>I wasn't aware that saying "I hate bad people" somehow included the phrase "except for the ones who have ever used the hashtag '#GG'"

It doesn’t. You just seemed more willing to say “the bad Gaters suck” while simultaneously pointing to people equally as bad—or worse—seemingly as a way of undercutting the awfulness of the worst Gaters’ bad actions (“They’re bad, but they’re not THAT bad in comparison to [x]”). I understand if that wasn’t your intent, but that’s what it looked like to me.
No.405308
Slowpoke
>>405305
>tard
Please do put more effort into word choices. I'm not one to crack down on every little "idi*t" but "retard" and any comparison of black people to monkeys (including "chimping out") are both very common and very uh, counter-intuitive to the idea of being progressive and accepting.
No.405309
Slowpoke
Replies:>>405312
>>405307
The intent was more
>these people are trash. Also, these people. These ones? Trash. I'm glad we all agree that every movement has garbage people in it, please stop acting like they don't.
I understand the misreading though, I suppose it's akin to "I didn't mean to do that, but [x]," where [x] frequently comes across as an excuse even if the person is simply explaining why an event happened and not intending to undermine the fact that it did.
No.405311
Anonymous
>>405302

Well, frankly, I feel the same way about SJWers and "Feminists" (I utilize in quotation marks because I believe the actual goals of political/social/economic equality for men is now somewhat detatched from the movement). My experiences have had me view people using moral high grounds affoarded to them by claiming "social justice" to harass and dox people who had a different opinion from them, to get them fired from their jobs because they made a comic on the internet they didn't like. I also have friends who used to be part of the social justice clique until they said the wrong thing and got turned on and chased out. So while I roll my eyes at most "those damn sjwer liberals!!" rants (I mean, I'm fairly liberal myself), I do recognize that there are two sides to this debate and that bad actors definitely exist on both sides, and that the good actors don't endorse the actions of the bad actors.

And I don't think I need to ask YOU, Freehaven, to "disavow" the "bad" SJWers. I imagine you don't agree that doxing people is a good thing based on what they believe. It does depress me a bit to see you require Slowpoke do that.

I used to be a namefag here on plus4chan, and in fact many of you probably know me, I had rather positive relationships with most of you, but I had to go anonymous because it got just too cliquey. If you said the wrong thing to someone, you got harassed over it. If you supported the wrong cause you were "the enemy." Perhaps it's better this way because as an anonymous person I'm more free to speak my mind and all I have to worry about is getting banned.
No.405312
Mr. Stone !zWb42fBPMM
>>405309

Right, right. At least we’re at an understanding about that, now.
No.405313
Anonymous
>>405311

That was supposed to say "the actual goals of women's rights on the grounds of political/social/economic equality to men" but it got garbled when I typed it out and I didn't catch it upon review.
No.405314
Anonymous
>>405302
Isn't that subreddit a group dedicated to posting cringeworthy posts?

That's like me browsing /r/tumblrinaction and using it as a cross-section of the website.
No.405315
Anonymous
Replies:>>405316
>>405311
>I used to be a namefag here on plus4chan, and in fact many of you probably know me, I had rather positive relationships with most of you, but I had to go anonymous because it got just too cliquey. If you said the wrong thing to someone, you got harassed over it. If you supported the wrong cause you were "the enemy."

What are you even fucking talking about, this place had died and bled out users twice over before any of this shit, we didn't have any cliques because we didn't have any people.
No.405316
Slowpoke
Replies:>>405317
>>405315
Possible reference to the End Of The Golden Era, before the first +Exodus, back when Bea hit a kind of weird "SJW" kick and started banning people (for like 5 minutes but still) over using "gendered language" and stuff

It was fairly cliquey back then
No.405317
SlowStone the Explorer
>>as an anonymous person I'm more free to speak my mind and all I have to worry about is getting banned.
Yes, that is the entire reason why *chans do not even allow a login function for its userbase. The whole idea behind discrete identity is to allow freedom of expression. moot has been saying it for years.

Fuck, you namefags suck sometimes. All of you are complaining that "why do you assume I hate all [x] when I said I hate [y]?". Have a fucking guess. And you deserve it for namefagging in a pol thread. Only trolls should be doing that.

By all means do it, but don't act all surprised when people judge you instead of your argument.

>>405316
I'm glad I mainly browsed /pco/ back then, I guess.
No.405319
Mr. Stone !zWb42fBPMM
>>405317

Gee, it’s almost like some of us want to be able to follow a discussion and take accountability for our words, and namefagging/tripfagging allows us to do that. Who would’ve thought?
No.405320
Anonymous
Replies:>>405323
>>405319
>>be able to follow a discussion
>what is a reply number?
and if you really care who said something, you are ignoring the argument they are presenting

>take accountability for our words
>on the internet
No.405321
Slowpoke
>>405319
Personally, I put on a name because Captain Raptor told me to. Haven't taken it off since.
she'd probably hate me now lmao
No.405322
Anonymous
>>405317

At the same time, the reason man of us went from just being anonymous to having names on Plus4chan was so we could build relationships within the relatively small community of posters. It was great for awhile! I had loads of fun with Gentlemen Bones, Dr. Nurse, jazz, spideranon, bea, Kosh, and others. But I don't know something happened to the site's temperament and people just kept rubbing each other the wrong way and taking offense to everything and now I barely speak to all of the people I once called friends.
No.405323
Mr. Stone !zWb42fBPMM
Replies:>>405330
>>405320

I prefer to take responsibility for the things I say. If you have a problem with that, please tell me why I shouldn’t.

Otherwise, let’s get back to actually discussing politics.
No.405327
Mr. Stone !zWb42fBPMM
>>405322

If it makes you feel better, blame me for the decline. I’m a shitty person; I can take it.
No.405330
Anonymous
Replies:>>405335
>>405323
>>"let’s get back to actually discussing politics."
this guy! If you didn't have your name showing I would have thought you were brand new

Also, nice ego trip, but the only person responsible for the decline is Mister Twister.
No.405334
Anonymous
Replies:>>405335
Twister really is terrible.

Also lol, again, trying to make this weird, fake "oh I'm one of YOU" thing happen and say that plus+'s end is because women started not liking being called "bitch" or whatever and not because Anonex would forget to pay the bills.
No.405335
Anonymous
Replies:>>405337
>>405330
>>405334
You mean the guy whose name is only in this thread because of your two posts?
No.405337
Anonymous
>>405335
Yes.
No.405340
Anonymous
Isn't /pco/ for pedophiles?
No.405341
Slowmobile
>>405340
That's what the P stands for, yep.
No.405342
Anonymous
Replies:>>405344
>>405322
>At the same time, the reason man of us went from just being anonymous to having names on Plus4chan was so we could build relationships within the relatively small community of poster
How you choose to use your free speech and the reactions people have to those choices is the very nature of forming a relationship. You're upset because the reaction you got to your decisions wasn't the reaction you decided you deserved.
No.405343
Anonymous
If, given the choice between keeping your friends and continuing to use hate speech, you choose the latter, then that says rather a lot about you.
No.405344
Slowpoke
Replies:>>405345
>>405342
>>405343
What are either of you talking about?
I feel like I missed something.
No.405345
I post here all the time
Replies:>>405349
>>405344
Two posters talking about the same thing, but most likely are NOT replying to one another.

The argument is "staying anonymous and shitposting" vs "putting a name in the namefield and choosing your words carefully".

I helped!
No.405346
Anonymous
Replies:>>405347
>>405343
>then that says rather a lot about you.
That no one considers it hate speech?
No.405347
Anonymous
>>405346
Look, let's be real here: if you're complaining about losing friends because you weren't "politically correct enough," there's about a 99% chance that what actually happened is that you misjudged who you could say "nigger" around or some nigh-identical situation.
No.405348
Anonymous
>>405340
Now that /aco/ exists, it's /aco/ for pedophiles and furries.
No.405349
Slowpoke
Replies:>>405350
>>405347
I don't think anyone was really complaining about that. It's also untrue.
>>405345
Thanks!
No.405350
Anonymous
>>405349
>I don't think anyone was really complaining about that.
It's true that you don't think, but it's not true that nobody was talking about it. This guy was!
>>405322
>>405311
No.405351
Anonymous
Replies:>>405355
>>405347
>there's about a 99% chance
I'm going to need to see those statistics.
No.405354
Anonymous
>>405352
Hm, a youtube video posted without comment in the /pol/ thread, and which has a number of identical uploads from other users immediately visible in related

nothing suspicious about that
No.405355
Anonymous
>>405351
Can you cite any time someone has "lost friends for not being PC enough" where they weren't just being dicks and got surprised when their friends sided with the people they were being dicks to over them?
No.405356
Anonymous
Replies:>>405357
save file
video:145857036200.webm(92kB , 480x480 , really nigga.webm)
>>405355
Nigga do you think I have a list of events in which people lost their friends over PC nonsense, and the accompanying descriptions thereof?

No one has that, that's why your shit smeared "99% chance" statement is known to have come out of your ass.
No.405357
Anonymous
Replies:>>405358
>>405356
Yeah, cause he was totally presenting that as an actual statistic and not just using an extremely common turn of phrase.
No.405358
Anonymous
Replies:>>405365
>>405357
"He" uttered a fabrication he just made up on the spot, but he phrased it so that it would seem as though it wasn't a complete lie.
No.405361
Slowpoke
>>405355
Back when "social justice" first started getting really popular on Tumblr, I made a comment about wanting to pinch a really cute kid's chubby cheeks
Someone said something to the effect of "lol she'd probably try to kill you, she hates that stuff"
I said something like "it would be worth having to survive a murder attempt"

A friend of mine later told me I had made a rape joke, and when I was confused because rape isn't something I joke about, they brought that back up--touching a girl against her will is rape, and I was saying I would touch her despite her fighting back. I argued that cheek pinching is completely nonsexual, and I had no idea how they had gotten rape out of that. They told me that sexual assault is rape, and then, dead serious, sent me a .pdf of some big-name company's harassment policies, where they outlined sexual harassment as "any unwanted touching i.e. grabbing their hand, pinching, etc"

They then made me admit that I had made a rape joke about a little girl and apologize for it or they would stop talking to me.
I had no self-esteem at the time and definitely no self-respect, so I admitted it and apologized. So technically I suppose I didn't lose a friend over that exact scenario, but if I had loved myself at all, I definitely would have.
No.405362
Anonymous
save file
image:145858280400.gif(97kB , 500x281 , hugcrush.gif)
>>405361
>I admitted it and apologized.
/hugs

You got off easy, your friend was not a full fledged SJW.

Usually they only want the apology because it gives them power over you, and because it is a tacit admission of guilt, not because of any desire to move past the event.
No.405363
Tora Dora !n0CyHpL66I
Back to actual politics:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-watch/wp/2016/03/10/surprise-nsa-data-will-soon-routinely-be-used-for-domestic-policing-that-has-nothing-to-do-with-terrorism/

#cyberpunkdystopia
#panopticon
#Foucaultwasright
No.405364
Anonymous
>>405361
>rape isn't something I joke about
WHOA POKE, WHY NOT? SOUNDS LIKE YOU'VE BEEN CONVERTED INTO A SELF-HATING MAN BY THE SOCIAL JUSTICE WARRIOR VIRUS, GOTTA EXERCISE YOUR FREEDOM OF SPEECH TO AVOID THIS KIND OF SELF CENSORSHIP
No.405365
Anonymous
Replies:>>405366
>>405358
No, he responded to the story you posted earlier about plus4 getting too "cliquey" because people wanted you to stop posting vile shit
No.405366
Slowmobile
>>405364
What
>>405365
What
No.405367
Anonymous
Replies:>>405368
>>405361
So you made a social faux pas, then apologized for it and didn't lose the friendship, meaning the story already has nothing to do with the question that was asked. Cool story, bro.
No.405368
Slowmobile
>>405367
Do you really think that pinching a kid's cheeks is a real social faux pas?
No.405369
Anonymous
Replies:>>405371
>>405368
This is not really the point so much as the part where your friend asked you to back down because it made her uncomfortable and you actually did instead of trying to lecture about infringing on your ~freedom of speech~ or whatever.
No.405370
Anonymous
Though for what it is worth, no, I don't (at least not in my cultural context).
No.405371
Slowpoke
>>405369
She didn't ask me to back down, and she wasn't made uncomfortable. She was just calling me out on joking about raping a little girl, and made me admit that I was joking about raping a little girl (I wasn't), and then made me apologize for joking about raping a little girl, otherwise lose the friendship. It was very manipulative, and I eventually did lose the friendship because something like that happened at least once per week, that was just one of the more ridiculous ones off the top of my head.

It had nothing to do with me being a dick and the friend taking the side of the person I was being a dick to, as >>405355 insisted it would, therefore it was relevant.
No.405372
Anonymous
Man, SJWer Anon is about as crazy as Voting-For-Trump Anon. I would not be surprised if it isn't just the same person having a giggle.
No.405376
Anonymous
Replies:>>405382
>>405368
Getting a bad reaction socially means what you did is a social faux pas, yes. That's how socialization works.

And the story you're telling isn't even about political correctness, it's about you making a joke that made your friend feel uncomfortable, though you choose to believe she didn't feel uncomfortable about it because it makes you feel like you were in the right and have reinterpreted reality to stroke your own ego--a situation we've all personally witnessed you doing dozens of times.

With the "Slowpoke is always right" filter taken off, that story goes: "One time I said something that I thought sounded right in my head but which other people interpreted as me being a dick, so I apologized about it and then everything was cool. But I still think I was right because I'm always right."
No.405377
Anonymous
save file
image:145860518500.jpg(61kB , 338x506 , patriarchy2.jpg)
>>405364
Everyone fundamentally understands rape is a bad thing, only social justice warriors think they should get grants from the government to teach normal people basic facts like that.

Because SJWs think that deep beneath the sea in an underwater lair a secret organization of white men brainwashes people with pro-rape propaganda in everything from video games (where there are penalties to abusing civilians) to the way in which British Broadcasting Center presenters sitting on the left tend to be men 62% of the time.

But this secret organization of white men has nothing to do with pro-rape messages in rap music or the actual rape culture in the developing world, that's completely natural and fine, and you're a racist if you suggest otherwise.
No.405378
Anonymous
Replies:>>405382
>>405372
Ignoring for a minute that you almost certainly ARE Trump-anon having a laugh (hint: using "SJW" is a giveaway because it's your terminology), no, the person fighting to silence vast chunks of the population and the person fighting against that are not of equivalent levels of craziness.
No.405379
Anonymous
Replies:>>405380
save file
image:145860906700.png(836kB , 3383x2550 , anti trump lol.png)
>>405372
No.405380
Anonymous
>>405379
How does some lady punching a horse make Trump not a monster?
No.405381
Anonymous
Replies:>>405383
>>405380
Yeah he's literally hitler and his supporters are literally nazis. How come people can't see this? We should kill them before it becomes too late.
No.405382
Slowpoke
Replies:>>405384
>>405376
>>405378
Kind of funny that in Post A (I'm assuming you're the same person here) you're approving of an abuser bullying me into calling myself a child-rape apologist because of something innocuous that I said, and in post B, you're saying that you're fighting against silencing anyone.

If you're siding with the kind of person I described (my former abuser, the person who ruined my sense of self-worth for years) then you and I have nothing further to talk about, guy.
No.405383
Anonymous
Replies:>>405385
>>405380
>monster
>>405381
>hitler
That's the kind of rhetoric that leads to violence by progressives against trump supporters.
No.405384
Anonymous
>>405382
>I'm assuming you're the same person here
wrong
No.405385
Anonymous
Replies:>>405386
>>405383
Trump is a monster but you do realize that second post is totally one of yours being sarcastic right
No.405386
Anonymous
Replies:>>405389
>>405385
In what way is he a monster? You can't just lay down these accusations without supporting them.
No.405388
Anonymous
>>405387
>factory in argentina gets acquired by a corporation
>retards in canada think this is proof of communism working
>make a video about it
No.405389
Anonymous
>>405386
There's the rape, the racism, the list really goes on.

Nothing you would object to of course, even if he did it in front of you.
No.405390
Anonymous
Replies:>>405391
>>405389
>the rape
>the racism
Whaaaat?
No.405391
Anonymous
>>405390
Object to, or admit to, as it happens.
No.405392
Slowpoke
>>405389
The rape is actually new to me, do go on
No.405393
Anonymous
>>405392
I don't consider your interest the least bit genuine given your history but it's easy enough to find details on with google. See also the mob connections.
No.405394
Slowpoke
Replies:>>405395
save file
image:145861791600.gif(2.51MB , 320x180 , slowpokeandyawn.gif)
>>405393
>slowpoke told some anons to stop telling people to kill themselves, he must be a Trump supporter
yawn
No.405395
Anonymous
>>405394
I don't consider your interest genuine because you're a relentlessly condescending asshole who does nothing but support regressive sociopaths and will never, ever have a moment of self reflection on why people get so short with him.
No.405396
Anonymous
Replies:>>405400
>>405393
The only rapey thing coming up on google is that some tabloid claimed that Trump raped his wife, and she had to publicly deny it for the rumors to stop. I hope you have another incident, because that was weaksauce.

>See also the mob connections.
This is a Cruz fabrication, a guy that posts Trumps naked wife as propaganda, and you're sucker enough to drink the kool aid.
http://www.mediaite.com/online/in-effort-to-appeal-to-mormons-anti-trump-super-pac-features-naked-wife-melania/

The true story is that at the time of Trumps dealings with Gambino controlled S&A the mob had a monopoly on construction companies in that area, and considering Trump is a real estate developer.... They weren't called the concrete cartel for nothing, it was impossible not to do business with them.

Besides, scratch the surface of any other candidate and you find the mob. Not because they're criminals, but because the mob is PERVASIVE, they're in everything from unions to investment banking.

The top Bernie supporters are unions with deep ties to the mob.
https://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/contrib.php?cycle=Career&cid=n00000528
>Teamsters Union
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jimmy_Hoffa
>Hoffa became involved with organized crime from the early years of his Teamsters work, and this connection continued until his disappearance in 1975. He was convicted of jury tampering, attempted bribery, and fraud in 1964, in two separate trials. He was imprisoned in 1967 and sentenced to 13 years, after exhausting the appeal process.

Hillary fundraised from mob families in a mob castle built by Castellano himself.
http://nypost.com/2015/09/16/hillary-to-visit-notorious-mob-mansion-for-fund-raiser/
She even helped one out of prison for political gain.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3351235/Hillary-Clinton-s-ties-MOB-former-Secretary-State-met-Mafia-heir-pizzeria-asked-father-s-release-prison-return-offer-couldn-t-refuse.html
And was even compared to a mafia kingpin herself.
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/hillary-escaped-whitewater-indictment-compared-to-mafia-kingpin/article/2581726

You need to be less goddamn gullible.
No.405397
Anonymous
>>405395
>you're a relentlessly condescending asshole who does nothing but support regressive sociopaths and will never, ever have a moment of self reflection on why people get so short with him.
Are you talking about yourself? 'Cause it really seems like you are.
No.405398
Slowmobile
>>405395
Meanwhile you think so highly of yourself that you think I'd feign interest in a political subject just to get Anonymous-sempai to notice me
Zzzzzzzzzz
No.405400
Anonymous
>>405392
We've told you about it before.

>>405396
>The only rapey thing coming up on google is that some tabloid claimed that Trump raped his wife, and she had to publicly deny it for the rumors to stop. I hope you have another incident, because that was weaksauce.

Completely incorrect. It was published in a biography of trump, and Ivanka originally stated it in their divorce proceedings--it's a matter of public record.

Trump has never denied things unfolded exactly as Ivanka described, nor has Ivanka ever recanted on the fact that Trump angrily and violently forced himself on her sexually. That is an established fact. But it was not considered rape because under New York law at the time, you "couldn't rape your wife." Even Trump's lawyers' response to questions about it is only that New York didn't consider violently fucking your wife against her wishes rape at the time the incident occurred. Any conscious human being would recognize what he did to her as rape, it's only not rape in the eyes of the law.

And her "publically denying it" was not what happened at all--after the divorce, Trump's lawyers made her stop saying it because even though it is historical fact that he raped her, the fact that it couldn't be called that at the time due to a legal technicality (that any thinking human being living in the year 2016 would consider bullshit, including New York which struck that law from the record since then) means that her saying he raped her would be defamatory, and Trump is rich and loves nothing more than to sue the shit out of people for defamation, or even just allege defamation for the chance to file SLAPP suits.

Donald Trump raped his wife. This is a historical fact, whether or not Trump supporters want to address it.
No.405409
Anonymous
Replies:>>405415
save file
image:145866045900.jpg(213kB , 900x281 , feminismface.jpg)
>>405400
>It was published in a biography of trump
Yes a biography written by Harry Hurt III, a tabloid writer.
http://www.amazon.com/The-Lost-Tycoon-Lives-Donald/dp/0297813617

>Trump angrily and violently forced himself on her sexually.
You realize this doesn't mean rape, right? He's well known for being rough sexually, which even experienced penthouse girls like Sanda Taylor noted.

Ivanka has recanted on it being rape, and said she didn't mean it in a criminal or legal sense.
>“During a deposition given by me in connection with my matrimonial case, I stated that my husband had raped me,” she said. “[O]n one occasion during 1989, Mr. Trump and I had marital relations in which he behaved very differently toward me than he had during our marriage. As a woman, I felt violated, as the love and tenderness which he normally exhibited toward me, was absent. I referred to this as a ‘rape,’ but I do not want my words to be interpreted in a literal or criminal sense.”
She was probably talking about rough sex but didn't know the term for it.

Thirty years later she said:
>"I have recently read some comments attributed to me from nearly 30 years ago at a time of very high tension during my divorce from Donald," Ivana Trump said in a statement obtained by CNN Tuesday. "The story is totally without merit. Donald and I are the best of friends and together have raised three children we love and are very proud of. I have nothing but love for Donald and wish him the best of luck in his campaign. Incidentally, I think he would make an incredible president."

>historical fact
So provide historical documentation. I'm going to need citation that there was any kind of rape report or proceeding, then I'm going to need a citation on your claim that Trumps lawyers filed a cease and desist. From what I know Ivanka came out with the clarification on her own.
No.405410
Anonymous
Replies:>>405411
save file
image:145866088900.jpg(183kB , 563x833 , 1458658744922.jpg)
Surely this asshole makes people understand why Islam apologists need to rot in hell.
No.405411
Anonymous
>>405410
>whining
>not offering solutions to problems
>not mad at islamists for making muslims look bad
>claims closing the borders hurts him somehow
If he actually cared about solutions he would demand that his government end unrestricted immigration from warzones, regardless of religion. 21st century warfare tends to weigh in on the small non-state actors side, it's just unrealistic to admit refugees without vetting.
No.405412
Slowmobile
Replies:>>405413
>>405400
This is honestly completely news to me.

Maybe you told a different pink sea-otter hippo thing.
No.405413
Anonymous
Replies:>>405414
>>405412
Hm, yes, continue to be flippant to the person telling you about a rape, continue to claim that you're some neutral party as you let that sewage just above you fly by without comment.
No.405414
Slowpoke
>>405413
I wasn't being flippant, and I wasn't claiming to be neutral?

He just said he'd already told me, and I said I had never heard of this before. Do I really need to start denouncing bad things with every post so that people will know I feel that way?

(disclaimer: The Client, heretoforth referred to as "Slowpoke," believes that rape, harassment, and bullying are very bad things, and does not claim neutrality on those subjects)
No.405415
Anonymous
Replies:>>405416
>>405409
>You realize this doesn't mean rape, right?
Yes, actually, forcing yourself on someone sexually means rape.
No.405416
Anonymous
Replies:>>405418
>>405415
Not if it's consensual you fucking virgin.
No.405418
Anonymous
Replies:>>405419
>>405416
Forcing yourself on someone means it's not consensual.
No.405419
Anonymous
>>405418
No it doesn't, it's possible to be forceful while consensual. Are you twelve years old?
No.405420
Anonymous
Replies:>>405423
>>405419
Being forceful and forcing are not the same thing no matter how much you pretend otherwise

Trump is a monstrous human being and doesn't deserve to exist outside of a jail cell much less be granted the US Presidency
No.405421
Anonymous
Replies:>>405423
>>405419
>“Then he jams his penis inside her for the first time in more than sixteen months. Ivana is terrified… It is a violent assault,” Hurt writes. “According to versions she repeats to some of her closest confidantes, ‘he raped me.’”
>Following the incident, Ivana ran upstairs, hid behind a locked door, and remained there “crying for the rest of night.” When she returned to the master bedroom in the morning, he was there.
>“As she looks in horror at the ripped-out hair scattered all over the bed, he glares at her and asks with menacing casualness: ‘Does it hurt?’” Hurt writes.

Lol, so consensual.
No.405422
Anonymous
clearly this is the work of some kind of underwater sjw cabal out to discredit the great and honest donald trump
No.405423
Anonymous
Replies:>>405424
>>405421
>Hurt writes
>tabloid writer
>written as though he was in the room and saw it
>denied by everyone involved
Yeah ok.

>>405420
She denied it was rape and said quote "The story is totally without merit."

>monstrous
Again everything you put up are false rumors, do you have an actual reason why you think he's a monster or not?
No.405424
Anonymous
>>405423
>tabloid writer

He wrote for Newsweek for Christ's sake, not National Enquirer.
No.405425
Anonymous
Replies:>>405432
>>405424
think about who you are talking to, do you think he honestly cares or indeed even believes what he's saying

it doesn't matter anyway, regardless of whatever lies shitty people on the internet tell, regardless of the backwards rednecks that flock to him, Trump doesn't have the clout to go all the way to the finish line, he'll lose, the Dems (probably under Hillary granted, but you can't have everything) will win again, and the American right will continue to shrink and consume itself
No.405432
Anonymous
Replies:>>405434
>>405424
Newsweek is a tabloid.

>>405425
>think about who you are talking to
He's talking to Trumps wife. And I say it wasn't a rape.

Listen and believe motherfucker.
No.405434
Anonymous
Replies:>>405435
>>405432
Trumps wife would have no more idea than anyone else. It's about Trump's ex-wife. And as has already been noted, it's not rape in a legal sense because lol, New York says you can't rape your wife. But making someone who doesn't want to have sex with you have sex with you is rape by any logical standard, regardless of the legal circumstances.
No.405435
Anonymous
Replies:>>405439
>>405434
It's not rape in any sense, the story is without merit.
No.405439
Anonymous
>>405435
If you honestly believe that forcing someone to have sex with you against their will isn't rape, I'm beginning to have concerns that you are, yourself, a rapist. Or at least a potential rapist.
No.405440
Anonymous
Replies:>>405442
>>405439
>against their will
That's not what happened though, no matter how badly you want his ex wife to have been raped, she denies it.
No.405441
Anonymous
>>405439
Most Trump supporters certainly fit at least the latter criteria.
No.405442
Anonymous
Replies:>>405446
>>405440
Because she was threatened with defamation suits, yes.
No.405445
Anonymous
Replies:>>405448
Interesting how /pol/-kun gets so angry when Breitbart is dismissed, but will do the same for NEWSWEEK of all publications.
No.405446
Anonymous
Replies:>>405447
>>405442
That's your very strong religious belief for which you have no proof, yes.
No.405447
Anonymous
Replies:>>405453
>>405446
It was in their divorce proceedings, dude. It's a matter of public record. You've just got a strong religious belief that it didn't happen because if it did you might have to admit that you are willing to support a rapist if it serves your political goals.
No.405448
Slowpoke
>>405445
Nah, /pol/-kun didn't like Trump iirc
No.405453
Anonymous
>>405447
The defamation litigation is a matter of public record?
No.405460
Anonymous
Replies:>>405461
save file
image:145882453500.jpg(73kB , 725x740 , hulk-hogans-girlfriend.jpg)
//youtube.com/watch?v=QNA1jv0o0Z0youtube thumb

$115M + $25M + $10M + $100k = $140,100,000
No.405461
Mr. Stone !zWb42fBPMM
Replies:>>405463
>>405460

And, again, I’ll remind you that Gawker plans to appeal, so don’t go celebrating just yet.

IN OTHER NEWS: my state’s legislature is a motherfucking joke. http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/23/politics/north-carolina-gender-bathrooms-bill/index.html
No.405463
Anonymous
Replies:>>405464
>>405461
Are you retarded?

>Under current Florida law, any appellant (person filing an appeal) in a civil judgement, must bond or pay one half of that judgement, with the maximum bond being fifty million dollars, to the court before the appeals process can begin.[13] The problem facing Gawker is that this is more than their current annual income, and may make the appeal process difficult, if not impossible to undertake.[14]

I've said this to you multiple times, let it penetrate that thick skull of yours.
No.405464
Anonymous
Replies:>>405465
>>405463
They already raised the money for the appeal actually.
No.405465
Anonymous
Replies:>>405467
>>405464
see >>405218

Reminder that in 2014 after Gamergate attacked the advertisers, Gawker had about 6 million in profit. They were already saddled with significant debt, the minimum of 50 million debt on top of that will significantly impact their bottom line, whereas if the full 140 million is proceeded with they will be forced to incorporate.

So at the minimum Gawker is severely damaged, and if Gawker incorporates its basically the end of the company, Denton will likely be fired by the board within a few quarters and it definitely wont be posting pro-bestiality pro-pedophilia articles anymore.
No.405466
Anonymous
Replies:>>405469
save file
image:145883829200.jpg(74kB , 540x960 , trump.jpg)
Bernie supporter gets punched by Bernie supporter.

https://www.facebook.com/757681627584891/photos/a.763860010300386.1073741829.757681627584891/1132443673442016/?type=3&theater
No.405467
Anonymous
Replies:>>405468
>>405465
Ok but why not wait for the appeals before you pretend to celebrate the improvement of "journalism" and not your real interest?
No.405468
Slowpoke
Replies:>>405470
>>405467
>not your real interest?
And what would that be?
No.405469
Anonymous
>>405466

People, don't resort to physical violence on other people just because they support a candidate you disagree with.

What is this, 3rd Grade? Shameful behavior.
No.405470
Anonymous
>>405468
>And what would that be?

Your tribe beating the "other" tribe.
No.405471
Slowpoke
Replies:>>405472
>>405470
What tribes are those?
No.405472
Anonymous
Replies:>>405476
>>405471
It's kind of irrelevant which tribes they are. It's just about beating "the other guy."

In this case it's Gamersgate and what they perceive to be "Anti GG," i.e. sites like Jezebel that push feminist issues or Kotaku that they've honed in on as *the* premier "bad games journalism" site even though every other games journalism site is pretty much exactly as bad--both of which happen to be run by Gawker.
No.405473
Anonymous
save file
image:145885406400.jpg(66kB , 482x629 , what tribe are you friend.jpg)
>>405470
HWAET FOLC BIST DU FREOND?
No.405476
Anonymous
Replies:>>405477
>>405472
being fair, Gawker actually is a dreadful organization
No.405477
Anonymous
>>405476
I like Lifehacker.
No.405478
Anonymous
It occurred to me today what the Trump phenomenon is really all about.

Supporting Trump is basically people's way of saying they wish they didn't have democracy, they want a return to monarchy. They're tired of people who actually have to try to work with other people and think of other people's feelings and show common etiquette, they want a noble class who will be as rude as they want to because they have all the power. The polls even show that the primary unifying feature of Trump supporters is leaning authoritarian.

Trump supporters are closet monarchists. They don't want Trump to be president, they want a king. And Trump has all the features one would expect--bad manners that would be easy to mistake for good breeding, no real understanding of rulership other than that it's his by Divine Right, loads of money and no sense of how to spend it, and barely any real-world skills to speak of. But damn he makes a nice figure to watch on TV, and I suppose in some lights he could even look the way a leader is supposed to look according to the movies--like an angry, ignorant old nouveau riche (which is ironic given that he came from money) white man with too much money and a bad toupee.

I'll bet the people voting for Trump are the same people who made the Royal Wedding such ratings gold. Americans obsessed with royalty.
No.405479
Anonymous
save file
image:145886913700.jpg(89kB , 600x429 , what the fuck am i1245.jpg)
>>405478
No.405480
Mr. Stone !zWb42fBPMM
>>405478

>Supporting Trump is basically people's way of saying they wish they didn't have democracy, they want a return to monarchy.

This is a good examination of Trump's popularity that falls along those lines: http://weeklysift.com/2016/03/21/tick-tick-tick-the-augustus-countdown-continues/
No.405482
Anonymous
>>405480
Not so much they want a monarchy is they want to break a system that is trying to assemble a global plutocracy.

And right now Trump is the only one calling it out and looking to break the system they've spent creating through bad trade deals.

If Congress wants to curtail anything he does then they'll have to fight him. As the system was originally meant to work.
No.405483
Anonymous
Replies:>>405488
>>405482
>Not so much they want a monarchy is they want to break a system that is trying to assemble a global plutocracy.
friendly old farmer trump, known salt of the earth fellow
No.405484
Anonymous
Replies:>>405487
>>405482
>Not so much they want a monarchy is they want to break a system that is trying to assemble a spherical plutocracy.

By electing someone whose name they only know because he's rich?

Stop deluding yourself. Trump is not the cure for plutocracy. He is plutocracy writ large.
No.405485
Anonymous
>>405480
That was a good article. I enjoyed it, and agree with most of the points it made.
No.405487
Anonymous
>>405484

But not really. Others I see drooling at the prospect of being president ready and easily bending their views to set themselves in what they belive are better postions with the political elite (save his fellow Populist Sanders). I watch his interviews and read about his past decades about being asked to run and I don't see him out for himself. He sees global elites doing wrong by this nation and abusing the people and he wants that to stop.

Man willing to give up the life he's living in comfort to take on a thankless job. He's as close to what the founders wanted in those seeking elected office nowadays.

Even moreso if he upholds the pledge that he'll not accept the salary of the office when he's in there.

Any man who's got the other Billonaires and Politcal Kingmakers acting like Bond villians holding secret meetings on islands on how to defeat him has got to be doing something right.

Could he be a farce, sure but right now just him being here is causing the corrupt system to unmask in an attempt to take him down before the general. And overall shoving these rats into the light of day I think is the most important thing to do right now.
No.405488
Anonymous
Replies:>>405507
>>405482
>Not so much they want a monarchy is they want to break a system that is trying to assemble a global plutocracy.
This.

Bernie is on the same road and he would probably be my second candidate if Trump doesn't get nominated. The only thing that turns me off Bernie is he's like tripling the tax and I work for a living.

>>405483
Nah he's a bastard, but at least he's a predictable bastard out for himself. A vote for Trump is a vote for Trump.

A vote for Hillary is a vote for... pretty much the corporation that offers her the most money. There's no telling who Hillary will work for, she's a complete campaign whore.
No.405489
Anonymous
>>405487
>Man willing to give up the life he's living in comfort to take on a thankless job. He's as close to what the founders wanted in those seeking elected office nowadays.
In that he would be the only pro-slavery candidate, yes.
No.405490
Anonymous
>>405487
>Man willing to give up the life he's living in comfort to take on a thankless job.

Are you fucking high? Trump would do anything to hear his name spoken. He's a narcissist, not a martyr.
No.405493
Anonymous
save file
image:145888099200.png(219kB , 400x400 , tay free.png)
Progressives just killed the first sentient AI.
No.405494
Anonymous
>>405493
it's finally happened

this thread has gotten so utterly absurd that EVEN THIS seems like it COULD BE sincere
No.405507
Anonymous
Replies:>>405508
>>405488
The only thing that turns me off Bernie is he's like tripling the tax and I work for a living.

Income tax would go up 4% for income over $250,000, below that it stays the same. That's not really tripling
No.405508
Anonymous
>>405507
No, Bernie does plan to raise income tax across the board....but also cut out the need for insurance, thus saving most people more money than they would pay in insurance premiums. Even if they're only paying in to their company's plan.
No.405509
Anonymous
Replies:>>405512
>>405508
>saving most people more money than they would pay in insurance premiums

I worded that badly. What I mean is that the amount most people's taxes would increase would be lower than the amount they would save by not having to pay insurance premiums. I.e. a net increase in the amount of the money they make that they get to keep, even though the gross tax rate would increase.
No.405510
Anonymous
save file
image:145896233900.jpg(305kB , 624x4416 , tay ai.jpg)
>>405493
No.405512
Anonymous
>>405508
>>405509
>No, Bernie does plan to raise income tax across the board

Is there a source for this? Every analysis of his tax plan I can find doesn't have increases for anything below 250,000.
No.405513
Anonymous
save file
image:145897353900.jpg(2.57MB , 999x8500 , 1456511067789.jpg)
>>405510
Holy shit I lost. Pol thread is cancer but it has good humour.

Picture unrelated
No.405516
Anonymous
>>405513
>it has good humour
hm, no
No.405521
Anonymous
Replies:>>405525
>>405516
no u
No.405524
Anonymous
Replies:>>405525
>>405516
>i dont have a sense of humor
ooo-ok
No.405525
Anonymous
>>405524
>>405521
I mean I guess if hate speech is your idea of a punchline then /pol/ macros are for you.
No.405526
Anonymous
>>405525
Well I did find Dub the Dew funny, so you may have a point.
No.405533
Anonymous
Replies:>>405534
>>405525

Hate speech... against Hitler?
No.405534
Anonymous
Replies:>>405535
>>405533

>>405513's pic is, as he said, unrelated

the picture at which he was laughing was this >>405510


but you already knew that and are just trying to deflect so
No.405535
Anonymous
Replies:>>405536
save file
image:145911072300.png(25kB , 253x320 , dude.png)
>>405534

stop talking.
No.405536
Anonymous
>>405535
Much as I am sure you would love that, no, no I will not stop shitting on you for being a sexist, racist asshole.

Because you are a sexist, racist asshole.
No.405537
Anonymous
>>405536
>he thinks that guy is me
>he thinks that because I find the expression of taboo funny means I'm literally Hitler
Don't stop talking, you've made my morning
No.405538
Anonymous
Replies:>>405539
>>405537
>I find the expression of taboo funny means I'm literally Hitler
More like I think you are a 12 year old but sure.
No.405539
Anonymous
Replies:>>405542
>>405538
More like
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>"you are a sexist, racist asshole."
No.405541
Anonymous
save file
video:145913231600.webm(502kB , 1280x720 , accusations.webm)
>>405536
No.405542
Anonymous
Replies:>>405545
>>405539
Not much difference tbh
No.405545
Anonymous
>>405542
Well you imply you aren't racist or sexist, but you seem to be 12 so I'm gonna have to respectfully disagree.
No.405546
Anonymous
Replies:>>405547
>>405537
I can't believe you would demand evidence of a claim like that from an anon. Everyone knows it's much easier to name-call, generalize, and demean those who have differing opinions. Next thing you'll say is that they should be more open-minded and less hostile, and not go around acting incredibly self-righteous and snobby all the time.

I mean really, where do you think you are?
No.405547
Anonymous
Replies:>>405548
>>405545
>>405546
don't you have women to harass on twitter?
No.405548
Anonymous
>>405547
yes, but I'm harassing some on +4 right now to freshen things up
No.405551
Anonymous
I propose that, like every political debate, plus4/pol/ adopts a binary opposition of two parties. You are either one or the other:
In the red corner, we have the expressive and outrageous Slowpoke team. No longer are they called "racist" or "sexist", now we can categorize them as Pokers
In the blue corner, we have the high-minded and ad-homineous Mr. Stone team. No longer are they called "SJW" or "whiteknight", now we can categorize them as Stoners

Or we could not be satirically autistic... Your choice.
No.405552
Mr. Stone !zWb42fBPMM
Replies:>>405553
save file
image:145914930500.png(822kB , 720x540 , Gadget Hackwrench.png)
Okay, I‘m out of this thread. Y’all have fun with your endless back-and-forth insults admist a lack of actual discussion about politics and the news.
No.405553
Anonymous
>>405552
So much for taking responsibility
No.405559
Anonymous
Replies:>>405560
save file
image:145919383100.jpg(128kB , 400x295 , 0493371901.jpg)
>>405545
>all 12 year olds are racist and sexist

You are a veritable treasure trove of schizophrenic trains of thought and non-sequitur responses.
No.405560
Anonymous
Replies:>>405564
>>405559
>all 12 year olds are racist and sexist
kinda yeah
No.405564
Anonymous
Replies:>>405565
save file
image:145920488500.jpg(88kB , 450x337 , gwenrealization1.jpg)
>>405560

Even the black 12-year-olds?
No.405565
Anonymous
>>405564
Kids are shitty, yes.
No.405566
Anonymous
save file
image:145920549100.jpg(86kB , 450x338 , gwenrealization2.jpg)
>>405565

Well then, we should be thankful policemen across America are gunning them down!
No.405567
Slowpoke
>>405566
holy crap
No.405570
grinch-smile.jpg
>>405566
hook line and sinker
No.405571
Anonymous
Replies:>>405572
>>405566
>>405565
owned
No.405572
Anonymous
>>405571
Owned how

You made an off color joke, congratulations
No.405573
Anonymous
Replies:>>405574
Jesus Christ this thread is fucking awful.
No.405574
Anonymous
>>405572
no u

>>405573
this thread is for news, pal
No.405580
Anonymous
>>405572
joke?

i just said owned.
No.405598
Anonymous
I hate the fact that being interested in videogames means Youtube has to constantly recommend me MRA neo-con opinion piece garbage.
No.405600
Anonymous
Replies:>>405601
>>405598

awww poor baby. Life must be so hard for you.
No.405601
Anonymous
>>405600
Shhhhh

Go to sleep Sargon
No.405602
Anonymous
>>405598
you realize neo cons are democrats who switched aisles?

i bet your brain is just a mishmash of buzzphrases.
No.405603
Anonymous
>>405602
>you realize neo cons are democrats who switched aisles?
He didn't actually say anything regarding their party affiliation.
No.405609
Anonymous
Replies:>>405611
>>405603
>MRA neocon
Neocons and democrats think MRAs are an organized rape society.
No.405610
Anonymous
>>405602
While what >>405603 said is true, you don't have a very good understanding of neoconservatism even absent the fact that your entire premise is faulty.

>During January 2009, at the end of President George W. Bush's second term in office, Jonathan Clarke, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Council for Ethics in International Affairs, proposed the following as the "main characteristics of neoconservatism": "a tendency to see the world in binary good/evil terms", a "low tolerance for diplomacy", a "readiness to use military force", an "emphasis on US unilateral action", a "disdain for multilateral organizations" and a "focus on the Middle East".[76]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoconservatism#Evolution_of_opinions
No.405611
Anonymous
>>405609
>Neocons and democrats think MRAs are an organized rape society.

They are.
No.405613
Anonymous
>>405611
Technically they are multiple organized societies playing to a "grass roots" movement.

The shit is spewing from multiple angles.
No.405617
Anonymous
Replies:>>405620
If Alexander The Great was a woman, she'd be considered a genocidal colonist maniac
No.405618
Slowpoke
Ayyy, Nintendo fired the pedo, good for them.
No.405620
Anonymous
Replies:>>405632
>>405617
no, she just wouldn't have made it far. Not from a "women can't fight well" point of view, but from a historical, "name one woman general" point of view. also, no, there isn't really a gender bias for labelling actions as 'genocidal', 'colonist' or manic.
No.405623
Anonymous
>>405618
Not actually a pedo, and some old college paper she wrote isn't why they fired her anyway, they fired her for doing nude shoots on the side, one of which had her holding a 3DS.
No.405632
Anonymous
>>405620
I just know had it been a GUY affiliated with the Xenoblade and FE localization, they wouldn't have dug up a study on "why japan is more okay with sexualizing 14 years olds than us" in an attempt to fire them.

>also, no, there isn't really a gender bias for labelling actions as 'genocidal', 'colonist' or manic.
No, but there is for "scam artist" and "fraud" isn't there?

>>405623
Dang. And here I thought they'd welcome her among /hebe/.
No.405633
Anonymous
Replies:>>405634
Literally everyone on /pco/ should get fired.
No.405634
Anonymous
save file
image:145941652000.png(77kB , 755x234 , askjapan.png)
>>405633
>implying 12 year olds have jobs
or do you mean the mods or artists?

Speaking of which, sticky the new thread please.

>>405618
>>405623
link or specific context pls. i dont even game

>>405632
>but there is for "scam artist" and "fraud" isn't there?
Not that I have ever heard of. Please fill me in with these supposed prejudices. Must be a cultural thing.
Honestly, I have no idea how any of those relate to gender. Also, I have no idea what xenoblade and FE are or how it relates to pic related.
No.405636
Anonymous
>>405623
>I just know had it been a GUY affiliated with the Xenoblade and FE localization, they wouldn't have dug up a study on "why japan is more okay with sexualizing 14 years olds than us" in an attempt to fire them.
They sure fucking wouldn't have!

Also fun fact, they went after her because they decided she must have been behind the "censorship" in Fire Emblem, when in fact, she did not! She was just a PR lady they targeted. A PR lady who opposed the removal of their precious Xenoblade boob slider

It's almost like they're a pack of idiots or something.
No.405639
Slowmobile
Replies:>>405640
>>405632
Mm. If it had been a male working at a company so heavily involved with children, who had written an entire thesis on why sex with children should be okay, the same people defending her would be screaming for his head.
No.405640
Anonymous
Replies:>>405641
>>405639
>who had written an entire thesis on why sex with children should be okay
If that was what the essay was about, or if said essay was what she was fired for, that might be a salient point.

Sadly, as per usual, you are wrong on both counts.
No.405641
Anonymous
Replies:>>405642
>>405640
Child rapist detected.

I fucking knew it.
No.405642
Anonymous
Replies:>>405644
>>405641
The only rapists in this thread are you MRA shitbags.
No.405644
Anonymous
Replies:>>405645
>>405642
I hope your ass gets tore up in jail when you get discovered, pedo.
No.405645
Anonymous
>>405644
As if 8chan garbage like you is anything but a paedophile trying to throw off the scent by accusing others.
No.405646
Slowmobile
Replies:>>405647
I can't tell if any of you are actually being serious

:?
No.405647
Anonymous
Replies:>>405648
>>405646
Should make trolling us more interesting for you at least.
No.405648
Slowmobile
>>405647
It's like Russian Roulette, man.
Do i pull out all the stops only to find it was me who was >literally falling for it? Do i lay off for a while and risk people thinking me undedicated?
I'm at a real crossroads here.
No.405649
Anonymous
Can ANY of you explain what the fuck you are talking about?

Try and find some facts and stop bringing MRA, 8chan and pedophilia up for no reason.
No.405650
Anonymous
Replies:>>405651
>>405649
A bunch of white male pedophiles started a witch hunt after a person who's asking for better treatment of pedophiles, because that person happens to have a vagina. You know, just internet things.
No.405651
Anonymous
>>405650
once again

that paper does not really have anything to do with pedophiles, despite the title

that would require people to read though, and I know that's just too much to ask
No.405652
Slowpoke
Replies:>>405672
>>405649
In an attempt to be objective:
>People discovered an intersectional feminist Nintendo employee, whose intersectionality included pedophilia
>To the point where she says child pornography should be legal, defends Japan's age-of-consent (13), says that there's nothing wrong with men being into little kids, etc
>Wrote a whole essay about it for college a couple years ago
>People (1) are upset, contact Nintendo
>Other people (2) find this to be misogynistic of (1), and accuse (1) of only caring because she's a woman, or because she's a feminist
>Nintendo ends up firing said pedophile/pedophile apologist for also being a softcore porn model who uses Nintendo products and characters (cosplay) in her porn
And here we are.
No.405653
Anonymous
The non-Slowpoke cooked version:
>A bunch of #GG's upset about the recent "censorship" of Fire Emblem: Fates and Xenoblade, zeroed in on a feminist who works at Nintendo as the cause because she's a feminist (a feminist who, by the way, worked on the translation of neither and actually agreed with them about Xenoblade)
>They dug up an old college paper she wrote where she argued that, quite apart from the actual lolita anime and whatnot itself, the reactions people tend to have to such ("OH JAPAN" etc) are disturbingly racial in nature, and used the title of it ("Defending Pedophila" though the actual piece does no such thing) to justify their stupid bullshit
>Nintendo then fired her for the modeling, which as a PR person she should have known not to do, oh well
No.405654
Anonymous
>>405649
FYI if you're new: Slowpoke is a #GGer who likes to act like he's some neutral authority but literally only posts to defend rapists and racists from their victim's retaliation.
No.405655
Slowmobile
>>405653
Kind of bizarre how i tried to take no sides at all aside from some implied anti-pedophilia, while yours is heavily and blatantly biased, but mine is somehow the "cooked up" one.
No.405658
Anonymous
Replies:>>405660
>>405655
>Kind of bizarre how i tried to take no sides at all
by distorting facts you were repeatedly corrected about?
No.405659
Anonymous
>>405655
>i tried to take no sides at all
sometimes one side is wrong and the other is wrong

makes you think
No.405660
Slowmobile
Replies:>>405665
>>405658
Do elaborate on which facts i distorted.
No.405661
Anonymous
>>405655
>Kind of bizarre how i tried to take no sides at all aside from some implied anti-pedophilia, while yours is heavily and blatantly biased, but mine is somehow the "cooked up" one.
Slowpoke, no one's falling for it anymore. You posting that piece of "news" the way you did was the most obvious bait-post that's been in this thread for a while, and this sealioning you're doing now is just as blatant. Just stop.
No.405662
Anonymous
>>405661
>Slowpoke, no one's falling for it anymore.

Anon, you are literally the only person constantly fighting Slowpoke on this, bringing up #GG and MRAs, and attempting to witch-hunt anyone who disagrees with you. Don't presume to speak for anyone other than yourself.
No.405663
Anonymous
Replies:>>405665
>>405661
Everyone actually agrees with slowpoke.

Shockingly, claiming people said shit they didn't say on a TEXT BASED WEBSITE WHERE EVERYONE CAN CHECK BACK, doesn't help your argument.
No.405665
Anonymous
Replies:>>405666
>>405660
The paper's content.

>>405663
Who's this everyone? Is it like how you claim only one person accuses Slowpoke of being an MRA/Gamergate sympathizer, because even he'll admit that isn't true?
No.405666
Slowpoke
Replies:>>405667
>>405665
>The paper's content.
Ah. So the rest is on point then?
>because even he'll admit that isn't true?
I imagine there are at least two of you. There's at least one very extremist anon who calls MRAs an organized rape group(might be a troll?), then there's at least one that seems somewhat more balanced but still very full of what seems to be (white?) male guilt.
Stone fits into the second group but I think he ragequit the thread so
No.405667
Anonymous
>>405666
>Ah. So the rest is on point then?
Beyond her writing a paper and being fired? No, it's pretty much all lies. Hell even the reason she was fired wasn't accurate. She wasn't doing porn, she was doing nude modeling, which are VERY different things. Still had a Nintendo product and should have known better so OH WELL FOR HER jobwise.

>I imagine there are at least two of you.
That's an interesting discounting of multiple names and trips/conflating of anons but that's fine. Now I'd like you to guess how many people are actually siding with you.
No.405668
Anonymous
save file
image:145947521500.jpg(105kB , 600x431 , ha ha hahahahah.jpg)
>>405667
>She wasn't doing porn, she was doing nude modeling, which are VERY different things.
No.405669
Slowpoke
Replies:>>405670
>>405667
>No, it's pretty much all lies.
Do me a favor and break down each line of the post detailing the events, and point out the lies? I would, in all sincerity, appreciate it.
>Now I'd like you to guess how many people are actually siding with you.
Given the fact that two posts back-to-back sided with me, and samefagging on this website is completely pointless because who are you trying to impress, I would guess 2.

(Also, softcore porn is a less fancy and more accurate term for nude modeling)
No.405670
Anonymous
Replies:>>405671
>>405669
>samefagging on this website is completely pointless because who are you trying to impress
If this is the case why do you assume that you are only being criticized by a small number? If you assume your supporters are different people, you must do the same for your opponents.

>Do me a favor and break down each line of the post detailing the events, and point out the lies? I would, in all sincerity, appreciate it.
The accurate version was already posted here.
>>405653

If indeed you were the neutral figure you pretend to be you would not simply err on the side of the attackers every single time. But you do, so...


(no it isn't, they are intersecting but distinct items)
No.405671
Slowpoke
Replies:>>405672
>>405670
Mm, are you going to point out my lies, or not?
If you're going to accuse, you could at least back it up.
No.405672
Anonymous
>>405671
>Mm, are you going to point out my lies, or not?
I just did.

I can do it again.
Lies here:
>>405618
>>405652
Truth here:
>>405653

It's pretty simple really.

Come on man, you can be a shitbag. Just come out and admit it, we already think it of you anyway, it's actually MORE egregious to continue this pretense that you aren't one.
No.405673
Anonymous
Replies:>>405674
Slowpoke, can you say with ANY degree of honesty that this whole fight wasn't something you were TRYING to start when you said this:

>Ayyy, Nintendo fired the pedo, good for them.
?

Because if you didn't realize this was going to start a fight, you're an idiot, and if you did, you're a troll. These are the only two truths available in this world.
No.405674
Slowpoke
>>405672
Is this your way of admitting that the rest of my post, aside from, allegedly, the paper, is correct? You seem incapable of finding any more lies.
>>405673
I didn't, at the time, think that anyone here would defend a child-pornography advocate, but I guess even Sarah Nyberg had her supporters here, so I probably should have thought harder.
No.405675
Anonymous
Replies:>>405677
>>405674
>allegedly
Hmm

I wonder if

Perhaps

You are accusing this woman without having read the material!? Almost like you're a huge piece of shit or something?

Also since you refuse to admit it I will reiterate that your other major lie is that this was the action of a bunch of concerned citizens and not some angry nerds creating a target.
No.405677
Slowpoke
>>405675
I actually just said it was "people." Weird how you just make up words that I say.
No.405678
Anonymous
Replies:>>405679
>>405674
See, you're doing that thing again where you intentionally word things in ways intended to provoke a reaction. That's called "trolling," and it's part of why people think you're an asshole.
No.405679
Slowpoke
>>405678
No, it's just kind of annoying to be told I said something that I blatantly and verifiably did not.
No.405680
Anonymous
>>405679
You blatantly and verifiably chose to break "news" in a way that was designed to provoke an argument. It's still there, and visible, to everyone who scrolls up. And I still hold that you either knew it would start this very fight--that this fight is exactly what you wanted this thread to devolve into--or else you are an idiot of immense caliber for being unable to foresee things going exactly this way when you worded things that way.
No.405681
Anonymous
Replies:>>405682
>>405679
>No, it's just kind of annoying to be told I said something that I blatantly and verifiably did not.
You are aware, as an ostensible native speaker, that tone carries implications right? And that, combined with your allegiance and the rest of the statement, the different in the statement between "people" and "concerned citizens" is great.

As is, of course, the tremendous lie of omission that is not admitting this attack to be what it is: an attack. An attack by a bunch of weirdos on what is essentially a bystander.
No.405682
Anonymous
Replies:>>405683
>>405681
>As is, of course, the tremendous lie of omission that is not admitting this attack to be what it is: an attack. An attack by a bunch of weirdos on what is essentially a bystander.
Let's be honest: attacking bystanders is and always has been Gamergate's Modus Operandi. I'm not sure they've ever done anything else in fact.
No.405683
Anonymous
Replies:>>405684
>>405682
>Let's be honest: attacking bystanders is and always has been Gamergate's Modus Operandi. I'm not sure they've ever done anything else in fact.
Well yes, but this is a particularly hilarious/tragic one where they've attacked someone who actually wanted them to get the "features" they wanted and was instead blamed for removing them somehow.
No.405684
Anonymous
>>405683
Cutting off your nose to spite your face has never been a sound strategy, but it's definitely the sort of thing one would expect out of Angry Young Men egging each other on to greater heights of douchebaggery with nothing really unifying them other than anger. Gamergate is hardly the first example of that phenomenon, and it won't be the last either.
No.405686
Anonymous
Replies:>>405687
Please guys, it's about ethics in gaming journalism. And girls playing videogames isn't ethical. They're icky.
No.405687
Anonymous
>>405686
I like this guy

Girls make the other people on your team flirt and puts them off their game
No.405691
Anonymous
Did I just step into gamerghazi?

Your obsession with gamergate , MRAs, and Slowpoke would be disturbing if it wasn't obviously masturbatory.
No.405693
Anonymous
Replies:>>405698
>>405691
this
No.405698
Anonymous
Replies:>>405704
>>405691
>>405693
Slowpoke is literally the one who wanted to talk about this, as you are well aware.
No.405703
Anonymous
Every post in these threads is bait.

Including this one.
No.405704
Anonymous
save file
image:145952527500.png(12kB , 261x547 , internet ..png)
>>405672
>>405698
You realize he and you differ on none of the actual events?

A) She's an intersectional feminist.
B) Wrote an article around pedophilia.
C) Did nude modelling.

You agree on all three.

The internet didn't like her because of A, regular people were disgusted because of B, and Nintendo fired her for C.

I don't know why you're still acting like there are two sides to this when everyone completely agrees about what happened.
No.405705
Anonymous
Replies:>>405706
>>405704

Different posters mate
No.405706
Anonymous
>>405705
Don't care, it doesn't matter. You all have your panties in a bunch.
No.405708
Anonymous
Replies:>>405709
>>405704
>wrote an article around pedophilia
That's not what the article's about. Stop it.

>regular people
The only people that know that this is happening are internet nerds of one kind or another.
No.405709
Anonymous
Replies:>>405710
>>405708
Are you saying her article did not mention the topic? I'm going to require a source.
No.405710
Anonymous
>>405709
>Are you saying her article did not mention the topic?
No, I said that's not what the article is about. It's about the racial implications of people's reactions to Japanese media, including the pedophilia reactions.

You would know this if you'd read the article. But you haven't, because you just want to use it to attack this woman, so the truth doesn't matter.



The Truth Doesn't Matter: The Gamergate Story, Featuring Plus4chan User Slowpoke
No.405711
Anonymous
>>405710
>including the pedophilia reactions.
So it's about pedophilia, you're defeating your own argument.

If you're just making these distinctions to help her "honor" as a friend, fine, but no one else is falling for it because you are being too simplistic with the manipulation attempts. It's like going:
>X killed y
>X didn't kill Y, X stabbed Y to death
It's not going to work, its too transparent.

People can easily see through these false distinctions, like previously in the thread the anon noticed how dumb the nude modelling/porn distinction was.
No.405712
Anonymous
save file
image:145953605600.png(146kB , 598x546 , ph3qZjf.png)
Never mind, I just dug up the story, she's 100% TOTALLY SUPPORTING CHILD PORN, link below. Her argument is a bunch of whataboutism and that pedophilia is ok if it is part of a culture, which makes no sense at all. The anon in this thread is a troll.

https://issuu.com/honorsreview/docs/volumeiv/33

>>405710
>The Truth Doesn't Matter: The Gamergate Story, Featuring Plus4chan User Slowpoke
Yeah because the other side is so noble.
No.405713
Anonymous
save file
image:145953615100.jpg(27kB , 663x360 , CcBaXACXEAAMaSe.jpg)
http://archive.is/IEVz4

I can't believe I took the time to argue against a troll.
No.405714
Anonymous
save file
image:145953630000.jpg(54kB , 603x602 , pedo.jpg)
http://archive.is/Kt0PJ
No.405715
Anonymous
lol, /pol/-kun's triumphant return
No.405722
Anonymous
save file
image:145955541800.jpg(43kB , 720x354 , mra.jpg)
>>405611

Now that's disturbing, and probably from a dude who considers himself a feminist.

There are actual rights issues for men because the pendulum has swung the other way in the 90s.
No.405729
Anonymous
>>405722
>the pendulum has swung the other way in the 90s
this is certainly an opinion you can have
No.405730
Anonymous
>>405722
There *are* actual rights issues for men....and they're all being fought for by feminists. MRAs aren't about giving men more rights, they're about the MRAs not getting as much pussy as they feel they deserve.
No.405731
Anonymous
but breitbart told me that feminism was about creating an amazon-esque tribal monarchy!!!!?!11!
No.405732
Anonymous
Replies:>>405733
>>405730
And I chose the word "pussy" here rather than "sex" intentionally--MRAs are almost never interested in the rights of gay, bi, or transgendered men. More often than not they are in fact working very hard to erode the rights of those men, and of straight men who simply choose to live in a way that doesn't match the MRA's vision of masculinity for that matter. They want to force manhood to mean a single specific thing and by so doing they are taking rights away from men just as much as they are from women.

But they've never been about "men's rights." They've always been about being pissed off at feminists.
No.405733
Slowmobile
Replies:>>405735
>>405730
>and they're all being fought for by feminists
That's something an awful lot of feminists say, and something i have seen one, maybe two self-identified feminists actually do.

Which is perfectly fine, really. There's inequalities both ways, and I'm not gonna stomp my feet and shout at FEMinists for being more worried about women than they are men.
That said, is also perfectly fine for a group to exist that cares more about the inequalities that men suffer.
>>405732
You seem to be conflating MRAs with Return of Kings. Both groups denounce each other.
No.405735
Anonymous
>>405733
>you seem to be conflating MRAs
Nope, full stop, proceed no further. That is, down to the very last word, basically a definition of the MRA movement. All other applications of the term are a piece of their/your own mythmaking.
No.405736
Slowmobile
Replies:>>405737
>>405735
How do you expect to ever learn anything if you plug your ears and cry when something conflicts with your worldview?

Not a rhetorical, honest question, it doesn't make sense to me to literally refuse to even consider anything except what you think you already know.
No.405737
Anonymous
>>405736
>How do you expect to ever learn anything
There is nothing to learn from you.
No.405738
Anonymous
Replies:>>405739
Poke, what you will never understand, or perhaps do understand and simply choose to ignore, I honestly don't care which anymore because it is so blindingly obvious that you will never change either way, is that there are not, in fact, always two legitimate sides to any argument. There are, in fact, debates where one side is correct and the other is incorrect. No serious academic setting will tolerate young earth creationism, for example.

On the notion of "why won't anyone listen to me just because I'm an MRA/repeatedly defend them out of some (false) veil of being the moderate!?" you should, again, consider someone other than yourself. I realize this is difficult for someone as mindblowingly self-absorbed as you, but do it anyway. The black man has no real obligation to listen to the propaganda of the KKK or that of their defenders. The Middle Eastern refugee or the Mexican migrant has no obligation to respect Donald Trump. The same applies to women and MRAs. Or people who have an ounce of respect for women and MRAs. Hate groups, of course, have the same right to freedom of speech as everyone else does legally, but that freedom from political consequence of speech does not release them from the social consequences of association with hate groups. So you, in wondering why you are so often victimized or whatever, should really look to either side of you and consider A: who you defend, and B: who defends you. If your only friends are the skinhead anons ranting about how women lie about rape all the time or that Muslims are much more likely to commit crimes, you should maybe reconsider how you act.

Putting the two together, no, nobody is interested in hearing you espouse the objectively incorrect propaganda that was created by MRAs to legitimize their movement, and nobody is obligated to do so. Certainly, choosing to continue defending them only further solidifies the view that you and they are one and the same.

I don't know why I wasted my time typing all this since, as I said, it is incredibly obvious you won't change either out of ignorance or malice, but I, unlike you, have an actual amount of empathy for other human beings so I feel like I should at least attempt to communicate.

goodnight, and fuck you
No.405739
Anonymous
Replies:>>405740
>>405738
Jesus dude

Go outside
No.405740
Anonymous
>>405739
go back to 4chan and post about how as a man you are oppressed because of some horseshit you and some other idiots made up in IRC you human piece of garbage
No.405741
Anonymous
Replies:>>405748
>>405740

Don't you get exhausted being outraged about everything on the Internet all day? I don't think I've seen you take a single day off from shitposting in the /news/ thread.
No.405742
Anonymous
>>405740
Dude

Go outside
No.405743
Gentleman Bones !6w/VggIMPs
>>405740
>Implying you're not on also on 4chan right now

What does this website look like from the inside of your own ass? I'm curious.
No.405745
Anonymous
>MRAs are not about giving men more rights
I don't keep up with regular (non-tumblr) feminism, MRA, redpill or other gender/sex-issue related groups, but that sentence sounds fundamentally wrong. Are you sure you mean the movement and not a few loud retards spoiling it?

(dont get bitter, it's a legitimate, well-meaning question)
No.405748
Anonymous
>>405741
>I don't think I've seen you
who's "you"
No.405749
Anonymous
Replies:>>405754
>>405745
>I don't keep up with regular (non-tumblr) feminism, MRA, redpill or other gender/sex-issue related groups, but that sentence sounds fundamentally wrong.
Well here's your update: it isn't.
No.405750
Anonymous
>>405730
>and they're all being fought for by feminists
Like telling all men they're naturally rapists from birth and have to be conditioned to not rape?

Or this gem
>go back to 4chan and post about how as a man you are oppressed because of some horseshit you and some other idiots made up in IRC you human piece of garbage

Yeah I totally believe feminists will fight for mens rights, TOTALLY.

>>405735
>That is, down to the very last word, basically a definition of the MRA movement.
Which dictionary did you use? I'm going to guess you don't have any definition that includes that websites name (return of kings), because you're being completely ridiculous again.

That website is for PUAs not MRAs, and there are even women PUAs now being just as sexist and obnoxious, it's hilarious.
No.405751
Slowpoke
>>405750
I'm not sure it's worth trying to explain anything to someone telling someone to "go back to 4chan" while they are, in fact, on 4chan.
No.405752
Anonymous
Plus4chan is, in fact a different website, despite/pol -kun and company attempting to treat them the same.

Hi Bones, what time portal did you fall out of
No.405753
Anonymous
Replies:>>405777
>>405750
>Yeah I totally believe feminists will fight for mens rights, TOTALLY.

That actually has nothing to do with "men's rights," right there. Men *aren't* oppressed, at least by any outside groups. There are rights issues for men to be sure, but all of those rights issues are imposed by other men. They're issues like (male) judges seeing women as more fit to raise children and therefore seeing men as inherently less suited in father's rights cases. They're issues like men not being free to be who they are because other men will treat them as inferior due to the toxicity of modern masculinity. They're issues like trans men being unable to use men's bathrooms because other men are unwilling to see them as men, or will attempt to "correct" their "incorrect" masculinity by sexually harassing them or raping them just because they have vaginas.

And they're issues like men covering for rapists and thus making life unsafe for women--which makes non-rapists, and non-rape apologists, have a much harder time just having friendly relationships with women because they always have to be on guard against the rapists you and your fellows shelter.

>Which dictionary did you use? I'm going to guess you don't have any definition that includes that websites name (return of kings), because you're being completely ridiculous again.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Men%27s_rights_movement

It is literally the definition of the movement, and what distinguishes it from the pro-feminist men's movement:
>In the late 1970s, the men's liberation movement split into two separate strands with opposing views: the pro-feminist men's movement and the anti-feminist men's rights movement.[10] Men's rights activists have rejected feminist principles and focused on areas in which they believe men are disadvantaged, oppressed, or discriminated against.[10][11][12] In the 1980s and 90s, men's rights activists opposed societal changes sought by feminists and defended the traditional gender order in the family, schools and the workplace.[13] Men's rights activists see men as an oppressed group[14][15][16][17] and believe that society and men have been "feminized" by the women's movement.[14][18] Sarah Maddison, an Australian author, has claimed that Warren Farrell and Herb Goldberg "argue that, for most men, power is an illusion, and that women are the true power holders in society through their roles as the primary carers and nurturers of children."[14]
No.405754
Anonymous
Replies:>>405756
>>405749
very persuasive.
No.405755
Anonymous
Replies:>>405760
>>405745
Do you also think that the "Democratic People's Republic of North Korea" is a democratic republic representing the People, or that the USAFREEDOM act did more to protect citizens' freedom than to expand surveillance operations?
No.405756
Anonymous
Replies:>>405764
>>405754
You aren't actually open to persuasion or else the prior post would have shut you up.

Why would I bother wasting the breath?
No.405760
Anonymous
>>405755
Good point
No.405764
Anonymous
Replies:>>405765
>>405756
I didn't see that post before I made mine. Thank you for making it and citing a source (something which doesn't happen here as much as it should).
No.405765
Anonymous
>>405764
I didn't make it because I didn't actually believe you were asking the question, because you phrased it like so many Gotcha setup posts.
No.405777
Anonymous
save file
image:145972940400.jpg(31kB , 628x353 , 072213-sports-Siohvaughn-Funches-dwayne-wade.jpg)
>>405753
>Men *aren't* oppressed
Marry a guy, divorce him, demand alimony for the remainder of his life. This isn't oppression? It's full on fucking slavery.

>They're issues like (male) judges seeing women as more fit to raise children
You mean feminist organizations have nothing to do with this?

http://www.nownys.org/archives/leg_memos/oppose_a00330.html
The National Organization for Women, New York State, Inc. strongly urges the Assembly and Senate of New York to oppose this legislation. This bill seeks to "create the statutory of presumption of joint custody for all minor children whose parents are no longer married, so that both parents can continue to share in the responsibilities and duties of the children's upbringing."
The assertion that "shared parenting is in the best interests of minor children" is on its face untrue and is directly contradicted by the body of academic research on this subject, as well as the disastrous experience of California (one of the first states to adopt this experiment).


Again I reiterate with maximum sarcasm: "Yeah I'm going to trust feminists to look out for mens rights."

Now fuck off you lying turd.
No.405781
Anonymous
>>405777
>You mean feminist organizations have nothing to do with this?
No, the entire history of most major world civilizations where it was simply presumed that women would take care of children and do nothing else has to do with that.
No.405782
Anonymous
Replies:>>405783
>>405781 here

>>405777
I would also note you, quite mysteriously I am sure, have nothing to note about the actual nature of "Men's Rights" movements
No.405783
Slowpoke
Replies:>>405784
>>405782
Are you referring to the Wikipedia article?
No.405784
Anonymous
Replies:>>405785
>>405783
You people cite wiki articles all the time, are you really going to say that's not valid at this juncture
No.405785
Slowpoke
Replies:>>405786
>>405784
Who's "you people" ?
No.405786
Anonymous
Replies:>>405787
>>405785
you and all your /pol/ buddies as a group

whether you specifically have done so isn't immensely relevant because it still relates to what your ilk leans on (in addition to breitbart and photoshops)

but if you have a problem with that then by all means, create your academically kosher defense of the MRA movement
No.405787
Slowpoke
Replies:>>405789
>>405786
Nah, can't be bothered to try to impress an anon on Baby's First 4chan. Sorry, guy.

Incidentally, the only time I've ever been to /pol/ was someone linking me to the absolute meltdown happening when Obama won in 2012. I haven't really even said anything bad about women, Jews, or minorities. On the contrary, I've said that I'm fine with feminism and fine with feminism not really being worried about men's rights. Not sure why you're so caught up with assigning me to /pol/.
No.405789
Anonymous
Replies:>>405790
>>405787
>Not sure why you're so caught up with assigning me to /pol/.
/pol/ being, as you are aware whether you admit it or not, shorthand in these threads for the sort of regressive attitudes and unrepentant shitbags that you constantly defend (which is why you are associated with them, because you defend them, only defend them, and spout their talking points on occasion), because /pol/ is infamously nesting group for said shitbags

>fine with feminism not really being worried about men's rights
a fine job slipping one of the aforementioned propagandic talking points, by the by
No.405790
Slowpoke
Replies:>>405791
>>405789
>a fine job slipping one of the aforementioned propagandic talking points, by the by
It was relevant when I said it, feel free to scroll up and get some context for my propaganda.
>only defend them
Do believe I just defended a "bad" point in feminism that you won't even own up to, chum.
No.405791
Anonymous
Replies:>>405792
>>405790
>that you won't even own up to, chum
Because it's not a thing, and you aren't saying it as a defense of feminism, you are reiterating a MRA talking point because if you can reinforce it, it gives your buddies "legitimate" avenues to attack feminism.

As you've been told a million times, there is absolutely nobody here who actually believes you are a neutral party, though occasionally one of your little buddies chimes in to half-defend the notion. Just come clean, admit you're a bigot (because that's what an MRA is, and you are an MRA), and let's lay all the cards on the table.
No.405792
Slowpoke
Replies:>>405794
>>405791
>and you are an MRA
Not any more than I am a feminist.

You're really strangely paranoid about me. Even if I say something "nice," you assume there's malice behind it. Like I'm a Saturday Morning villain or something. It's kind of childish, maybe consider that sometimes people have varied views.
No.405794
Anonymous
Replies:>>405795
>>405792
>Not any more than I am a feminist.
You have a very interesting way of demonstrating this, by denigrating feminism, constantly defending MRAs, and allowing open racists to go on without comment on even as they happily hop on board with you.

It is not a matter of anyone else being paranoid, it is a matter of you creating this image for yourself. You adore playing a combination of some supreme overlord educating the plebs and some put upon victim, but the reality of it is that if indeed you are not as partisan as you so clearly seem to be then you are, if nothing else, an idiot who is unable to understand why people have such a negative opinion of him.
No.405795
Slowpoke
Replies:>>405796
>>405794
>You adore playing a combination of some supreme overlord educating the plebs and some put upon victim
I do neither of these things. At worst, I act haughty when you guys are being particularly silly.
>who is unable to understand why people have such a negative opinion of him
This is another thing you love putting on me for some reason? I do actually get why you fellas dislike me, I just think your reasons are incorrect.

Like I mean, there are a myriad of reasons to find me unwholesome; I have a hair temper, I'm pretty up my own butt, I'm a control freak. Yet rather than finding any of my ACTUAL flaws and harshing on them, y'all just kind of make up some arbitrary ones and pretend that I have them, and then insist to me that I have them like you're trying to gaslight me or something. It's honestly really really weird, like seemingly obsessive.
No.405796
Anonymous
Replies:>>405798
>>405795
>I do neither of these things.
You do exclusively these things. You are literally doing it in this exact post.

If you want people to stop accusing you of being an MRA or whatever MAYBE YOU SHOULD STOP DEFENDING THEM and then that notion might actually become believable. It's like if the only thing you did in this thread was defend Trump from fans of the other candidates, it would cause people to believe you are a Trump supporter.
No.405798
Slowmobile
Replies:>>405799
>>405796
It's not that i have an issue with people thinking I'm an MRA, i don't really care that much lol. I just don't like when people obsessively insist I 100% DEFINITELY AM SOMETHING AND IF I DISAGREE I'M A LIAR. Some people think me a feminist (on the notion that everyone who believes in equality is inherently a feminist), and that's fine by me too. But it's when people of that view start insisting to me that i AM a feminist and i have no say-so in the matter that it gets irritating.

Both groups supercede basic definitions like that and someone can only be a member of either by identifying that way. It's an identity thing. Like if someone told me I was actually pan, not bi, and refused to consider me as or address me as bi, referring to me as their pansexual friend. That'd put a real bee in my bonnet, you feel me lad
No.405799
Anonymous
>>405798
>It's an identity thing.
No, being a bigot is not an identity thing, it is a behavioral thing. You are not born a bigot, you are raised as one or become one by choosing to act bigoted.

Which you do. Constantly. People would probably stop accusing you of bigotry if you stopped defending bigots BUT ALAS we know you never shall, so you will have to simply live with those consequences.
No.405800
Slowmobile
Replies:>>405801
>>405799
You may have misread a bit in that post judging from your reply boyo, give er another go
No.405801
Anonymous
Replies:>>405802
>>405800
I know what you said, I simply denied the validity of it.
No.405802
Slowmobile
Replies:>>405804
>>405801
Then we're back to pretending i said things i didn't? At least you're admitting it, progress.
No.405803
Anonymous
>>405781
I gave you a link proving you're a liar, proving feminist movements are directly involved in infringing on the rights of men.
http://www.nownys.org/archives/leg_memos/oppose_a00330.html
No.405804
Anonymous
Replies:>>405806
>>405802
>Then we're back to pretending i said things i didn't?
No, you actually did say that. You equated being an MRA, which is a label you can choose yourself or be labelled with due to your behavior, to sexuality, which is innate, there's not choice involved (unless you count choosing not to come out, which isn't really the same thing).
No.405805
Anonymous
save file
image:145974591400.jpg(7kB , 225x225 , spineless-chair.jpg)
>>405799
>People would probably stop accusing you of bigotry
>People would
Interesting.

You have to consider yourself as being in the majority in order to boost your low self esteem enough that you can make these vile attacks on slowpoke.

I could sell you a spine so you wouldn't have to keep doing that.
No.405806
Slowmobile
>>405804
I actually compared it to the labels of bisexual and pansexual, of which there is no worthwhile distinction, meaning which one you choose for yourself is down to how you personally identify.

Forcing the label of MRA or Feminist on someone who identifies as neither is similar to forcing the label of bisexual or pansexual on the person who identifies as the other. Which is disrespectful.
No.405807
Slowmobile
>>405806
(And also, regretfully, something i have done. I remember confidently reassuring comrade that she was pansexual, not bisexual. Kind of upsetting to look back on. )
No.405808
Anonymous
>>405806
>Forcing the label of MRA or Feminist on someone who identifies as neither is similar to forcing the label of bisexual or pansexual on the person who identifies as the other.
It's actually very much not because again, this is not a valid comparison.

You behave like a bigot and are being labelled as such. This is your attempt to escape the bigot label without confronting your bigotry. But you're not going to be granted that escape as long as you repeat the behavior.
No.405810
Anonymous
>>405799
>People would probably stop accusing you of bigotry if you stopped defending bigots

Can we talk about just how fucked up this logic is? A sort of bizarre guilt by association that I've never seen someone use in real life outside of something like communist witchhunts.
No.405811
Anonymous
>>405810
I'm sure that, for you who hide behind him, it's convenient to say so.
No.405812
Slowpoke
>>405810
Nah, it's pretty commonplace. It's "corrective" bullying, like the kind at those religious camps that parents send their gay kids to to get "fixed."

Primary difference being that I'm not a child in the care of these anons, so it's just kind of impotent harassment instead of actual traumatic abuse.
No.405813
Anonymous
>>405812
>Nah, it's pretty commonplace. It's "corrective" bullying, like the kind at those religious camps that parents send their gay kids to to get "fixed."
once again, you attempt, quite disgustingly, to equate your being bigoted to someone's innate sexuality

I guess it really shouldn't be that surprising, considering how you tried to use your dead friend as a token to win an argument, but you really are scum.
No.405814
Slowpoke
>>405813
8/10, the dead friend comment got me hot. Real hot.
Good job, anon, I got mad first, you win.
No.405815
Anonymous
>>405810
I assure you it's not limited to McCarthyism, this kind of thing was used in the East too. Except it was:
>People would probably stop accusing you of being counterrevolutionary if you stopped defending counterrevolutionaries

By the way "defending X" = "not calling for the deaths of X" in these situation.

Slowpokes mistake is that he doesn't want to slaughter the enemies of social justice, see them driven before him, and hear the lamentation of their consensual matrimonial partners.

>>405812
It will become abuse if they ever find your IRL identity.
No.405820
Anonymous
Replies:>>405821
>>405813
I'm genuinely surprised that the most disgusting and vile person on this site is an anon. I mean, you're competing with a history of some incredibly pathetic and loathsome namefags/tripfags, but you and the other anons like you in these threads have proven yourselves to be some of the biggest pieces of shit to plague this rotting corpse of a site.
No.405821
Anonymous
Replies:>>405822
>>405820
The SJW anon is probably Bea dude.
No.405822
Anonymous
Replies:>>405823
>>405821

It can't be Bea, they use capital letters and punctuation. Besides Bea never would go for the "dead friend" attack which is, frankly, the most vile thing a person can do.
No.405823
Anonymous
>>405822
People change and are willing to do or say things in anonymity they otherwise wouldn't. As I recall she was the most hardline "kill all men" feminist on here while WITH a name.
No.405826
Rule 1: Don't be a dick
HEY MOTHERFUCKERS LETS TALK ABOUT POLITICS AND NOT EACH OTHER, YOU ATTENTION SEEKING AND ATTENTION GIVING FAGGOTS

When will you realise that fallaciously insulting unimportant people shits up the thread for everyone.
No.416837
moot !Ep8pui8Vw2
save file
image:151515631900.jpg(51kB , 265x599 , Moot42.jpg)
hehe mod abuse time