Milo Yiannopoulos & Martin Shkreli event canceled at UC Davis after violent protests - Polidicks

[QUOTE=The_J_Hat;51669171]Part of that is because when Milo came to DePaul there was a pretty big protest that lead to the whole campus being shut down with a couple students arrested, if I remember correctly.[/QUOTE] [media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=unoBT8Te13g[/media] But that's the point. If you are a conservative speaker, you will get a more violent/agitated response when going to universities, despite Milo and Ben actually disliking/disagreeing with each other.

[QUOTE=Sonador;51669142]It just occurred to me that this is the next logical iteration of online trolling. These are literally IRL shitposters, complete with stupid smug attitudes, and the tons of rageposting responsors who fall for the bait. I wish the cops could be like forum moderators and just ban both parties from IRL forever. Man, I don't want to live anymore.[/QUOTE] Don't worry seeing the WBC in action you can get away with way more than this before an arrest. Coming soon to a campus near you, milo crashes a liberal funeral!

[QUOTE=Xubs;51669185]Have you ever once considered the idea that the reason they get a more violent response is not because of what side of the isle they are on but because of what they say?[/QUOTE] No, because there's no excuse for violently stopping speech that isn't violent in itself.

[QUOTE=Tudd;51669160]Correct. There are plenty of male feminists. Ofcourse, I personally would rather be called egalitarian. Feminism has been co-opted by some crazier elements.[/QUOTE] That's true. It's one of those terms that's meaningful on paper, but in actual parlance people frequently apply the label to regressive ideas that render the term unusable. It's a common problem with loads of political terms.

[QUOTE=Sonador;51669113]Whatever happened to being a mild-mannered, reasonable individual?[/QUOTE] It's much easier to be an awful person than to be someone who is considered "reasonable". We also have a tendency to forget about past events. [QUOTE=Sonador;51669142]It just occurred to me that this is the next logical iteration of online trolling. These are literally IRL shitposters, complete with stupid smug attitudes, and the tons of rageposting responsors who fall for the bait. I wish the cops could be like forum moderators and just ban both parties from IRL forever.[/QUOTE] I'm hoping this isn't going where I think it's going.

[QUOTE=sgman91;51669187]No, because there's no excuse for violently stopping speech that isn't violent in itself.[/QUOTE] Outing transgender students and their private information and prompting an angry crowd to take action to the point where they drop out is pretty violent tbh Also illegal but hey, it's Milo, [I]he's dangerous![/I]

[QUOTE=Xubs;51669190]Then we're in agreement, because I said Nobody should be treated with violence for their opinions. Protest, however, is by its nature disruptive.[/QUOTE] Yet you're trying to present the violence against conservative speakers, even the non-shock jock kind, as more justified than violence against liberal speakers, even the more extreme kind.

[QUOTE=sgman91;51669180]You said: "Turns out if you're a disingenuous propagandist who is unwilling to listen to outside influence and shows a complete and total willingness to lie to get whatever you want, people aren't willing to reason with you like a human being in the same way you aren't willing to reason with people like human beings. Funny, how that works." I pointed out how that was utterly false. These people are find accepting and giving awards to disingenuous propagandists as long as they agree with the conclusion.[/QUOTE] Continually saying Sarkeesian is a disingenuous propagandist isn't going to make it any more true. She has been steadfast with her beliefs well before Gamergate when she started vlogging in 2009. Criticisms levied at her, even during the height of Gamergate, tend to be pretty overblown (such as believing she thinks video games should be censored when she criticised the violence of Doom and Fallout 4) or downright false (her "everything is sexist" quote is quote mined. The full quote is actually about her being "the most obnoxious person to be around" because she started pointing out everything is sexist, racist etc) Perhaps I should make an accusation at you. I'm going to say that you believe Sarkeesian is a "dishonest propagandist" not because you've done that much research about her yourself, but because you don't like what she has to say.

[QUOTE=Dr. Kyuros;51669192]I'm hoping this isn't going where I think it's going.[/QUOTE] So long as people aren't IRL tubgirling at the local coffeeshop I'll live

[QUOTE=sgman91;51669187]No, because there's no excuse for violently stopping speech that isn't violent in itself.[/QUOTE] Exactly. Universities should be inviting more conservative voices, not less. If liberals want to win out, they need to put their best voices on stage to either debate, or to offer rebuttal on separately scheduled events. If liberals truly believe in their ideology (as I do) then we should be able to win over the general population. I strongly believe that one of the biggest reasons we've seen a conservative resurgence as of late is specifically because the liberals would rather shut out and ignore dissenting views rather than addressing and defeating them.

[QUOTE=Sonador;51669193]Outing transgender students and their private information and prompting an angry crowd to take action to the point where they drop out is pretty violent tbh Also illegal but hey, it's Milo, [I]he's dangerous![/I][/QUOTE] To be clear, I don't like Milo at all. I don't like his attitude, I don't like his positions, and I despise his presentation. He is everything I think is wrong with this new wave of right wing populism in one package. If he encouraged violence against a trans student, then I would be all for going after him legally. The problem is that these leftist students protest many right wing speakers, even those who don't do anything of the sort that you've mentioned. So to point to specific actions by Milo doesn't really answer the problem.

[QUOTE=Sega Saturn;51669200]Exactly. Universities should be inviting more conservative voices, not less. If liberals want to win out, they need to put their best voices on stage to either debate, or to offer rebuttal on separately scheduled events. If liberals truly believe in their ideology (as I do) then we should be able to win over the general population. I strongly believe that one of the biggest reasons we've seen a conservative resurgence as of late is specifically because the liberals would rather shut out and ignore dissenting views rather than addressing and defeating them.[/QUOTE] Thank you so much for some reason on this, and I agree.

[QUOTE=sgman91;51669163]Yes, they don't protest Anita because they agree with her politics... that's my entire point. They don't care about honesty, intellectual arguments, etc. They care about whether they agree with your conclusions. Anita is a dishonest fraud who was loved and embraced by academia because they liked her conclusions.[/QUOTE] Funny you should say that about being embraced by academia considering my professor and class critiqued her videos and offered somewhat negative criticisms overall

[QUOTE=Samiam22;51669197]Continually saying Sarkeesian is a disingenuous propagandist isn't going to make it any more true. She has been steadfast with her beliefs well before Gamergate when she started vlogging in 2009. Criticisms levied at her, even during the height of Gamergate, tend to be pretty overblown (such as believing she thinks video games should be censored when she criticised the violence of Doom and Fallout 4) or downright false (her "everything is sexist" quote is quote mined. The full quote is actually about her being "the most obnoxious person to be around" because she started pointing out everything is sexist, racist etc) Perhaps I should make an accusation at you. I'm going to say that you believe Sarkeesian is a "dishonest propagandist" not because you've done that much research about her yourself, but because you don't like what she has to say.[/QUOTE] So purposefully misrepresenting games in order to make them look sexist isn't disingenuous propaganda? (The Hitman example comes to mind.)

[QUOTE=sgman91;51669202]To be clear, I don't like Milo at all. I don't like his attitude, I don't like his positions, and I despise his presentation. He is everything I think is wrong with this new wave of right wing populism in one package. If he encouraged violence against a trans student, then I would be all for going after him legally. The problem is that these leftist students protest many right wing speakers, even those who don't do anything of the sort that you've mentioned. So to point to specific actions by Milos doesn't really answer the problem.[/QUOTE] I suppose I'd say something along the lines of getting a better sense of timing, then. Criticize them when they're doing it to people who don't deserve it instead of doing it to someone who has ruined lives. Either way, though, I can respect someone who also has an appropriate view of Milo and his actions, so, I get you're trying to do the right thing. Just remember the masses are reactionary, not analytical.

[QUOTE=sgman91;51669207]So purposefully misrepresenting games in order to make them look sexist isn't disingenuous propaganda? (The Hitman example comes to mind.)[/QUOTE] Firstly, the decision that something is racist or sexist is subjective. If she finds something sexist but you don't, that doesn't make her wrong. Secondly, the point of her argument against Hitman was that the developer purposefully included strippers that were either designed to be looked at by the player or attacked in some fashion. To put it into better terms, if the developers didn't want people interacting/looking at strippers, why did they make a level inside a strip club?

:snip: bad reading, I'm sorry!

[QUOTE=sgman91;51669129]What? I brought up Anita because she's a [B]comparable example on the left.[/B] I don't care if you like her or not. I'm simply pointing out how silly it is to talk about these violent protestors as if they care about deception when it's clear that they only care about deception on one side of the spectrum (just like Milo fans only care about it on the other side. With that said, I don't remember violent people on the right attacking speakers on college campuses).[/QUOTE] Except for the fact that she isn't. The whole point of Anita's series on video games was to present feminist points of view removed from the radical political context that feminism has normally been accompanied with. Not that "on the left" really means anything anymore, given that leftist positions haven't been on the US political spectrum for over 30 years. Anita is a mild liberal feminist, and she makes stupid videos about dumb games, but that has little to do with the not-so-mild beliefs that people like Milo put forward.

Well don't forget, Overwatch is sexist according to her. It really is all propaganda when you get to the point that you call the number 1 game that purposely tries to not be sexist, sexist. [media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kmirXYzXzcU&t[/media]

[QUOTE=Sonador;51669232]Strongly disagree. It is extremely simple to objectively define something as sexist or racist[/QUOTE] I don't think so. Things like context and cultural values get in the way all the time. Don't get me wrong, there are plenty of things that are pretty much always sexist and always racist, but to think that there is an objective truth to where, to the point, any given concept is sexist/racist and when it is not is a little difficult for me to believe. For instance, you could say that objectifying women is sexist. That's fine on its own, but then you have to consider all the external factors that go in with that. How are they being objectified? Why are they being objectified? Are they objectifying themselves? Do they agree that it is objectification? If you decree that it is sexist, but the woman in question does not, are you then being sexist by assuming that your definition of "sexism" trumps hers? If not, why not? So on and so forth. [editline]14th January 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=Tudd;51669244]Well don't forget, Overwatch is sexist according to her. It really is all propaganda when you get to the point that you call the number 1 game that purposely tries to not be sexist, sexist. [media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kmirXYzXzcU&t[/media][/QUOTE] [img]http://i.imgur.com/5rfxtba.jpg[/img] Forgive me if I don't think this uploader is going to be unbiased and moderate.

[QUOTE=Samiam22;51669250] [img]http://i.imgur.com/5rfxtba.jpg[/img] Forgive me if I don't think this uploader is going to be unbiased and moderate.[/QUOTE] Totally fine with that considering he isn't/doesn't try to be. Just use the beginning of the clip I posted then. Cause I can't be bothered to try to find the specific long video/segment where she goes into Overwatch. The point is still very true imo.

Milo is a piece of shit but he shouldn't be treated like that. Shkreli even less so.

if there's one thing i'll say about anita is that she seems much more genuinely invested in her beliefs than milo. her manipulation often seems to be a byproduct of her laziness and inability to think critically. i'm not saying she's not manipulative on purpose, just that milo's manipulation seems a lot more calculated

[QUOTE=Samiam22;51669250]I don't think so. Things like context and cultural values get in the way all the time. Don't get me wrong, there are plenty of things that are pretty much always sexist and always racist, but to think that there is an objective truth to where, to the point, any given concept is sexist/racist and when it is not is a little difficult for me to believe. For instance, you could say that objectifying women is sexist. That's fine on its own, but then you have to consider all the external factors that go in with that. How are they being objectified? Why are they being objectified? Are they objectifying themselves? Do they agree that it is objectification? If you decree that it is sexist, but the woman in question does not, are you then being sexist by assuming that your definition of "sexism" trumps hers? If not, why not? So on and so forth.[/QUOTE] Racism or sexism is the ideal or belief that a particular sex or race is inferior or superior to another. Nothing more, nothing less. Any other claim is objectively incorrect, although the claim may have merit in intent.

There was one amazing post about "sjw"'s and stuff a while ago but it was too true to handle. anita is a joke but other peoples dumb opinions I can handle. [editline]14th January 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=Sonador;51669276]Racism or sexism is the ideal or belief that a particular sex or race is inferior or superior to another. Nothing more, nothing less. Any other claim is objectively incorrect, although the claim may have merit in intent.[/QUOTE] sucks being a subhuman while watching people bang girls I used to bang :(

[QUOTE=Samiam22;51669230]Firstly, the decision that something is racist or sexist is subjective. If she finds something sexist but you don't, that doesn't make her wrong. Secondly, the point of her argument against Hitman was that the developer purposefully included strippers that were either designed to be looked at by the player or attacked in some fashion. To put it into better terms, if the developers didn't want people interacting/looking at strippers, why did they make a level inside a strip club?[/QUOTE] Her videos are based on the assumption that sexism is objective and that she's there to tell you about it. So, no, I don't buy it. Secondly, right, that's what she said. What she failed to mention is that you were there to kill some bad dude who wouldn't surprisingly be found in a seedy place like a strip club, and that there's literally no reason to kill the strippers. It actually makes the mission harder. She either purposefully misrepresented the game or she was so incompetent that she had no idea what she was talking about.

[QUOTE=gukki;51669279]sucks being a subhuman while watching people bang girls I used to bang :([/QUOTE] what the fuck is this post tbh

[QUOTE=sgman91;51669290]The entire point of her videos is that it's not subjective. So, no, I don't buy it.[/QUOTE] huh does she need to add "in my opinion" to the end of every single sentence or what

[QUOTE=Zukriuchen;51669300]huh does she need to add "in my opinion" to the end of every single sentence or what[/QUOTE] Her whole point is to show the world how sexism shows itself negatively in video games. If the existence of sexism was subjective, then the videos would be totally pointless.

[QUOTE=Sonador;51669299]what the fuck is this post tbh[/QUOTE] [URL="https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/2488893/SSD/IMG_20170114_091959.jpg"]accidental 24 pack[/URL], sorry.