YouTube titles like this end up cringier than the people they're criticizing.
[QUOTE=wauterboi;50237820]YouTube titles like this end up cringier than the people they're criticizing.[/QUOTE]
actually, I've seen some cringe I don't want to think about ever again the involves that they are talking about.
Thought a more more accurate title could be said on the topic issue, "Regressives: The neo-left to the neo-con and tea party, why this is an issue that needs to be solved now". That way you can focus on the situation of people bulling others to go along the lines of groupthink, like using PC as a means of control.
[QUOTE=wauterboi;50237820]YouTube titles like this end up cringier than the people they're criticizing.[/QUOTE]
im pretty sure thats the name of the actual event :v:
[QUOTE=Piciul;50237972]im pretty sure thats the name of the actual event :v:[/QUOTE]
Why if as a regressive go to an event titled "The Triggering"? That is walking right into a trap.
[QUOTE=Daysofwinter;50238028]Why if as a regressive go to an event titled "The Triggering"? That is walking right into a trap.[/QUOTE]
watch the video, they just sit around and bicker and yell out things like "homophobe" and "racist" at the gay dude who has a fetish for blacks
they probably think theyre "sticking it to the system" by going to this event in some form of protest or something, i have no idea really
[QUOTE=Piciul;50238045]watch the video, they just sit around and bicker and yell out things like "homophobe" and "racist" at the gay dude who has a fetish for blacks
they probably think theyre "sticking it to the system" by going to this event in some form of protest or something, i have no idea really[/QUOTE]
If this was an event you had to pay to go see, I don't see how going is "sticking it to the system". Seems like plain old narcissism to me.
[QUOTE]YouTube titles like this end up cringier than the people they're criticizing.[/QUOTE]
Keep your hate speech off our campus! Keep your hate speech off our campus!
[QUOTE=Daysofwinter;50238079]If this was an event you had to pay to go see, I don't see how going is "sticking it to the system". Seems like plain old narcissism to me.[/QUOTE]
The poster at the start of the video says it's free, unless Five-College is different from University of Massachusetts.
Anyway I'd just chalk it up as college students having nothing better to do on a Monday night. Not going to start making assumptions about their personal lives, but if you don't have homework or an exam to study for going to an event, even a shitty event, is usually a better waste of your time than hiding in a dorm.
Can you spot the annoying beached whale constantly interrupting?
[thumb]http://i.imgur.com/6feMvva.jpg[/thumb]
[QUOTE=Dah-thla;50238125]Can you spot the annoying beached whale constantly interrupting?
[thumb]http://i.imgur.com/6feMvva.jpg[/thumb][/QUOTE]
it's hard to spot, oddly enough :v:
My god she just wont shut the fuck up!
Its so annoying and distracting, like seriously.
Its like she wants to prove them right!
And milo is a cocky douche.
It seems only the professor woman is the nice one, and she actually makes intelligent points and anecdotes intestead of just "FEMINISM IS CANER BAH" bullshit that milo says.
Its funny he gets mad when they say stupid buzzwords like RACIST! but all he says is CANCER!
anyway overall I agree with the speakers, sjws are retards and american campuses are fucked.
[QUOTE=Piciul;50238045]watch the video, they just sit around and bicker and yell out things like "homophobe" and "racist" at the gay dude who has a fetish for blacks
they probably think theyre "sticking it to the system" by going to this event in some form of protest or something, i have no idea really[/QUOTE]
Milo aside, I think there was probably quite few mixed-race children born in the 1700 and 1800's who might have disagreed with your criteria of not being a racist.
[QUOTE=Mingebox;50239445]Milo aside, I think there was probably quite few mixed-race children born in the 1700 and 1800's who might have disagreed with your criteria of not being a racist.[/QUOTE]
Are you seriously that mentally incapacitated?
You are right now comparing a guy with high self esteem(possibly narcissism) to a 19th century slave owner because he is sexually attracted to black males.
[editline]2nd May 2016[/editline]
This has nothing to do with political correctness or political views in general. This lecture, although hosted by a campus republican group is meant to explore the current attitude towards any media or opinions that can be perceived as offensive. The Triggering is representative of an approach that has seemed to become the norm in approaching offensive persons. By simply reacting to what is being presented without fully comprehending, or even making an effort to look at the issues from the viewpoint of the other side you are doing nothing but pushing yourself and the party you argue with into two extremes. Being "Triggered" isn't simply disagreeing with what is being presented, but also reacting to it in an overt and over the top manner. This event is an embarrassment to academia not because it's content is offensive or wrong, but because it's hypothesis is correct.
University and higher education should be used to expand and refine your viewpoints, exposing you to a multitude of cultures and political sidings to learn how to survive in the world. The issue is that now many students are simply using their higher education experience as an excuse or justification of their political and or religious beliefs, learning only what fits into their outlook of the world and blocking out the rest.
By blocking out the other side of a debate you are only hurting yourself and your chances of convincing the other side of your thoughts. You can't truly change someone's opinion without understanding why it is their opinion in the first place.
[QUOTE=A_Pigeon;50239688]Are you seriously that mentally incapacitated?
You are right now comparing a guy with high self esteem(possibly narcissism) to a 19th century slave owner because he is sexually attracted to black males.
[/QUOTE]
Not mentally incapacitated enough to miss the first two words of a post, apparently.
I gave you too much credit.
Technically speaking you implied a comparison between everyone with a fetish for African American men to a 19th century slave owner.
While also giving the underlying implication that having a fetish is comparable to being someone who sexually assaults people with that trait.
That's fucked up dude
i love this video
[QUOTE=RichyZ;50240662]Having a fetish for a race doesnt make you not racist towards that race, troops in vietnam were pretty turned on by the locals but still considered them subhuman in some cases[/QUOTE]
Which is completely ignoring the context of the original post. The parties arguing against Milo are using terms such as racist and homophobe targeted at Milo without even having a basic understanding of the individual they are insulting.
Calling a homosexual a homophobe and racist in retaliation is an extremely weak argumwnt with no actual basis, and comparitively makes his not so well constructed argument about feminism stronger in comparison.
In fact by diverting the debate to an attack on the personal beliefs of an individual involved in the lecture is once again supporting the entire hypothesis.
It takes more than simply trying to discredit the other party to prove that you are right
[QUOTE=A_Pigeon;50240640]I gave you too much credit.
Technically speaking you implied a comparison between everyone with a fetish for African American men to a 19th century slave owner.
While also giving the underlying implication that having a fetish is comparable to being someone who sexually assaults people with that trait.
That's fucked up dude[/QUOTE]
Well evidently it's more than just the two words you seem have trouble with, since on no level did my post imply anyone attracted to black people was like a slave owner, "technically" or otherwise. I suppose my mistake was forgetting that there's quite a few people on the internet utterly unable to grasp the concept that using analogy does not imply two things are equal in magnitude or severity.
His argument may not have been well constructed on the racism side of things, but that doesn't make the entire question irrelevant.
[editline]2nd May 2016[/editline]
You aren't discrediting his argument about the retaliation to Milos remarks, you're attacking him over a potentially offensive remark regarding the definition of racism
[editline]2nd May 2016[/editline]
One could say that triggered you to go full attack on the wrong subject
[QUOTE=A_Pigeon;50240719]His argument may not have been well constructed on the racism side of things, but that doesn't make the entire question irrelevant.
[editline]2nd May 2016[/editline]
You aren't discrediting his argument about the retaliation to Milos remarks, you're attacking him over a potentially offensive remark regarding the definition of racism
[editline]2nd May 2016[/editline]
One could say that triggered you to go full attack on the wrong subject[/QUOTE]
I didn't really care about the rest of his post, hence the "Milo aside", I just thought his criteria for someone not being a racist as pretty awful and deserved comment. And if anyone here was triggered, it's the one disregarding how a basic rhetorical device works in order to take the worst possible interpretation of a post.
[QUOTE=Dah-thla;50238125]Can you spot the annoying beached whale constantly interrupting?
[thumb]http://i.imgur.com/6feMvva.jpg[/thumb][/QUOTE]
[vid]https://i.imgur.com/52qeumy.webm[/vid]
[QUOTE=A_Pigeon;50239688]You can't truly change someone's opinion without understanding why it is their opinion in the first place.[/QUOTE]
There's far too many people in this world who fails to grasp this concept.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
