Support NeoGAF

[Dame]

Youre implicitly suggesting that I am sympathetic towards GGs views and I don't appreciate it. If youre telling me that i MUST treat everyone in GG with the same level of contempt, regardless of thier actions, then I disagree with you. I obviously would view people who actively harassed people with more contempt than those who have not. To suggest otherwise is ridiculous.

Lets just break down your argument further: Imagine three imaginary Gators. The first is willfully attacking other people in cyberspace and generally being a shithead. The second is knowingly using GG as a smokescreen to further thier ideals, the third has been duped by the second and argues for free speech alongside GG supporters.

These three are all equally contemptable? The first is actually committing abuse against others. The third is a victim himself.

You're not listening.
You saw thepart where i basically said "of course they are not all rapists, harrassers, etc"? Because it's there.
In my previous post, i referenced your idea of both of them as "sides", not displaying in any way that i've implied you picked one, but sure. If the strawman of me needing to think that you're on a side of the GGers is there to detract from what i've said, have at it. You distorting the narrative to make it seems like both views are equally spear-chucking at each other was just disingenuous is all.

Part of the multiple thing's i was saying, was that despite however many of them possibly being good people otherwise, and meaning well otherwise, they need to realise that they share culpability in upholding sexism when they support a movement founded on such. Furthermore, that person being "duped" as you claim, is throwing their weight and moral views on a topic they, by your own admittance, apparently know very little about. Kind of like that dude i also cited. Nobody was saying to hold them in contempt or view them as the scum of the earth, but their views need reevaluation and they would behoove themselves to be educated about something before blindly supporting it. Any type of scrutiny they face based on the evidence needn't thus be met with the idea they are being "attacked". GG as a movement in your example isn't even just the smokescreen, it is the ideal in it's entirety. The third is certainly a victim himself. You, as an individual,have the ability to ask "what is this really about". When someone arrogantly champions a cause that harmfully impacts women, yet remains ignorant of the cause, it's implications, and the movement, like i've said before, they need to reevaluate. In that reevaluation comes the realization that they've partaken in a harmful structure.

 

[LPride]

In that reevaluation comes the realization that they've partaken in a harmful structure.

(I apologize for just slicing out a small section of your post, but I actually don't disagree with mostly everything you say, Im just trying to streamline things a bit)

I feel like we are talking past each other. My question is just HOW harmful is this? I get the feeling that you think the individual level of harm this oen person is creating just by being a member is much, much higher than I think the individual level of harm is.

Like, this is a difficult topic to even discuss because we don't have a way to quantify harm. I think thats a big reason of why I am dismissive of the average GG member, as opposed to being disgusted by them, since I have no grounded way to calculate the level of harm they are creating.

 

[stuminus3]

Of course it's a real thing, but some people have redefined sexism in a way to exclude it from the discussion.

Ah, OK. I think I see.

Its a semantic game people like to paly. The argument goes "Racism against a priveledged group cannot exist, because Racism is Power + Privilege". This argument was borne when talking about groups, and it ONLY MAKES SENSE when talking about groups.

When talking about an individual, an individual man can certainly not have any power, while an individual woman can. So if a mans female boss fires him, for being a man, he is certainly a victim of sexism, despite being a member of a privileged group. In this case the mans powerlessness, as a result of his powerlessness in the organization he is a part of trumps any institutional or social sexism that may pervade every other part of his life and gives him power.

My personal issues with sexism against men aren't relevant to this discussion though. There is no reason for me to bring it up as a counterpoint to the issue of young boys and men taking to the internet to threaten rape and violence against women just because they have opinions on videogames. It would make no sense to do so, there's no correlation.

 

[Dame]

Sorry to hijack your discussion because this is way off on a tangent but what do you mean by this? I'm a father of four and I find sexism towards men is a very real thing because of it, but obviously nobody is threatening to rape or abuse me on the internet about it so it's not something I discuss often (other than maybe with my wife). Maybe I'm misunderstanding because everything else you're saying is on point!

So sexism works like this:


What you, anecdotally as a male face, is prejudice, not sexism. If a woman hated you because you were a man, a talking point of many anti-feminists i find laughable half the time, that is prejudice. When a woman is called a slut, slut-shamed, thought of as intellectually inferior, denied the autonomy of her own body to decide wether or not she wan't to carry a fetus to term whilst men deliberate, have ads from the 50s and 60s tellign her that her only place was the kitchen (i'm not kidding) that it sexism.

Prejudice is discriminatory toward the individual.Sexism relies on institutions. Acting like it doesn't is a talking point people unsettled by the idea of male privilege like to bring up. Sexism itself, like racism, only operates, and has ever operated in the real world, from power structures their creators put in place. Bear with me here. Who holds power, disproportionately so, in this world? Who represents more than 85% of all positions of electoral power/ Which gender has opposed the other gender's right to vote historically, or raped the other gender at disproportionately high amounts? Which gender is marketed toward more by having women sold as body parts to them? The list is a mile long, and while it may not seem detrimental to our views of women, the impacts are well researched. Sexism relies on us men being the status quo. Thus, while it is possible for a woman to be prejudiced against you, she has no judiciary committee to uphold the privilege of telling you what to do with your body, pay you less worldwide for multiple generations, deny you birth control, etc. A woman denying you entrance into a general store for example, would be anecdotal. Women being the target of domestic violence, hell, violence in general from men, being threatened with rape, being largely underrepresented in films/games/movies, etc is something systemic. It happens as a system that upholds certain ideas about women which are detrimental to them. Even any of the things MRA claim are sexist, are things originally upheld by men, like telling a man that "men don't cry". None of such notions against men has ever originated from women...ever...at all. I'd give a minute to let someone try to come up with one but they couldn't.

Why is it so important to make such a distinction, you may ask? "can't i just say we have bad people on both sides and wash my hands of it? Can't sexism and prejudice be the exact same thing?" Well, you can say they are, but it would be a major injustice to people being mistreated on a much greater level than men would ever have to worry about. Like you said, you'll almost never worry about being raped anywhere you go. Cat-calls that make you feel like an object will never happen to you. You'll never worry about your bodily autonomy, or being sexually objectified to sell diet coke. If they did, they wouldn't carry with them near the same weight that they would for a woman who faces them every day. I was astonished at the number of women who were cat-called when they admitted. Blew my mind. Then i realized, oh yeah. I'm a guy. Never came across my mind. So just know that those girls you're raising, while they may dominate the household and tell you when it's tea time, the world targets them simply because of their sex, and they do it often. Sexism being called just prejudice based on sex is an oversimplification without sociological understanding.

Disclaimer: I, being not a woman, realise i'm wholly unqualified to talk to you about the sexism women face, so just ask other women. This is something i will need to keep learning about till i'm old and grey.

 

[riskVSreward]

Or, much simpler, sexism is prejudice based on sex. There's no reason to exclude one of the sexes from the definition, and you can make your points without silly semantics.

 

[Tetsuo9]

One of the times I felt worse in my life is when a group of 4 girls started coordinating bulling against me in high school. Now imagine having hundreds of people non-stop looking things about you and posting them online to make your life miserable.

At the same time, it's hard for me to understand how she says she lost 2 years of her life just because of harassment of social media. I would have probably just shut down from social media and go work/live to the countryside for a while. It's not that I don't believe her pain, but the concept of the "internet being real" is not something I have experienced and surely lawmakers and politicians neither.

I hope that by dropping this she can find peace in her life.

 

[Dame]

(I apologize for just slicing out a small section of your post, but I actually don't disagree with mostly everything you say, Im just trying to streamline things a bit)

I feel like we are talking past each other. My question is just HOW harmful is this? I get the feeling that you think the individual level of harm this oen person is creating just by being a member is much, much higher than I think the individual level of harm is.

Like, this is a difficult topic to even discuss because we don't have a way to quantify harm. I think thats a big reason of why I am dismissive of the average GG member, as opposed to being disgusted by them, since I have no grounded way to calculate the level of harm they are creating.

Here's the thing,though. Trying to quantify the level of harm is another beats altogether. realising that it is harmful is the thing. Knowing that they are perpetuating something very negative and misinformed, that has real life impacts of harm, is part of the important steps. When people denied service to people who loked like me in the 50's because of the colour of their skin, they did harm. Should they have been jailed for their bigoted,backward views of POC, or their support of racism, perhaps not. They are free to exercise their support. They then deservedly called out on their participation/support. We weren't asking to jail racists for being racist, but when their actions promote or cause violence or anything akin to it, then what're we supposed to do? twiddle our thumbs and shut up? Now attribute that to this. You focus on whatever part of the population just ignorantly supports gg without knowing the facts, but lets talk about who is being called into question here: the doxxers, the people threatening rape, the harrassers, stalkers etc. I personally am disgusted by any type of GG member's views period, but that is irrelevant to them speaking of what they do think they know.

 

[John Rabbit]

One of the times I felt worse in my life is when a group of 4 girls started coordinating bulling against me in high school. Now imagine having hundreds of people non-stop looking things about you and posting them online to make your life miserable.

At the same time, it's hard for me to understand how she says she lost 2 years of her life just because of harassment of social media. I would have probably just shut down from social media and go work/live to the countryside for a while. It's not that I don't believe her pain, but the concept of the "internet being real" is not something I have experienced and surely lawmakers and politicians neither.

I hope that by dropping this she can find peace in her life.

why should she have to walk away from her chosen field/career/personal desires because a bunch of internet psychos decided to make her a scapegoat?

 

[POWERSPHERE]

The more I think about this the less angry I get. She has shone a huge spotlight on thr mysoginy of this industry and shown the average person what women have to deal with just to exist in male dominated areas. Its digusting and sad that in this small but loud minority of video games, which is a refuge to lots of outcast, lonely males, acts against women from a point of bitterness not giving girls the same feeling of community. Games for me are an escape, somewhere to feel safe and detached from the hardships of life and it breaks my heart that is ruined for some by this kind of bullshit.

 

[stuminus3]

Explanation

I really would say this really is just arguing semantics though. Sexism literally is a form of prejudice. Just because the sexism I experience is different from the sexism being discussed in this topic doesn't mean it's something else entirely. It's just not relevant to the plight being discussed in this topic.

It surprises me that you aren't able to find any real examples of sexism against men that aren't perpetuated by women but - although I can't presume to know your situation - maybe this is something to do with me being a parent, this is a pretty common occurrence for me. I put an enormous amount of work into raising my children as equal to my wife and I'm not just talking about bringing home the bacon. It could be something as simply as my wife letting one of the kids go out with shoes that don't match. "Dad must have dressed them" will be what other people will say to my wife while I'm standing right there. A more upsetting example might be the consistently high grades my kids get in reading and writing related activities. My wife will tell you this is because of me because I've always placed so much importance on it. Not a single day goes by that I don't read with my kids. I can't tell you how many times my wife has been given credit for this because it couldn't possibly have been Dad because men are stupid.

To be clear - and I've already said this - I would never use my experiences with the above examples as an excuse to "say we have bad people on both sides and wash my hands of it". Absolutely not. It's not comparable. It's not even relevant. If anything this I would say this doesn't mean we should just paint sexism against men as something else or even something that doesn't exist. Quite the opposite. The people who use male sexism as a counterpoint need to have it thrown right back at them because it's not relevant. That women think Dads are stupid does not correlate to the abuse being discussed here in any way. That doesn't mean it doesn't exist or should be called something else - it just means that it's not a valid or relevant argument. The abuse the likes of Zoe has had to endure is sick and wrong regardless of the fact that apparently I'm a failure as a parent because men are dummies.

 

[L Thammy]

Ugh. I wish there was a simple way to deal with this.


At the above discussion. If you look at some of the early posts when Gamergate was starting out, you'd see that it was deliberately designed to encourage arguments like this in order to prevent themselves from blame. They could specifically lay out certain kinds of behaviour that is acceptable and unacceptable, they could attempt to remove people from the group that could make them look bad, but that's not how they work. Instead they deliberately create a group that accepts the any kind of behaviour, but switch between claiming to be a group and claiming to be a bunch of loosely affiliated individuals depending on whether or not it suits them at the moment. That allows them to enable harassment even if they aren't actively participating in it.

You can't compare Gamergate to something like the feminist movement because the feminist movement isn't totally unified. There are subgroups which clearly and pointedly define themselves away from each other and make it clear where they disagree with each other.

 

[Doctor Ninja]

It's really shameful.

No matter what you think of Zoe Quinn, she doesn't deserve to be harassed like those assholes did to her. I wish her the best of luck.

 

[The Technomancer]

While it was not a thing that should have been done you cannot act like Eron Gjoni was expecting GamerGate to spring into existence when he made the Zoe Post.

Badmouthing your ex when you find out youve been cheated on (or are under the assumption that you were cheated on) isnt a mature, healthy thing to do but its not like he was plotting an internet revolution when he made a mean spirited post on The Something Awful Forums

Yes

He did

http://www.bostonmagazine.com/news/article/2015/04/28/gamergate/

As Gjoni began to craft “The Zoe Post,” his early drafts read like a “really boring, really depressing legal document,” he says. He didn’t want to merely prove his case; it had to read like a potboiler. So he deliberately punched up the narrative in the voice of a bitter ex-boyfriend, organizing it into seven acts with dramatic titles like “Damage Control” and “The Cum Collage May Not Be Accurate.” He ended sections on cliffhangers, and wove in video-game analogies to grab the attention of Quinn’s industry colleagues. He was keenly aware of attracting an impressionable readership. “If I can target people who are in the mood to read stories about exes and horrible breakups,” he says now, “I will have an audience.”

One of the keys to how Gjoni justified the cruelty of “The Zoe Post” to its intended audience was his claim that Quinn slept with five men during and after their brief romance. In retrospect, he thinks one of his most amusing ideas was to paste the Five Guys restaurant logo into his screed: “Now I can’t stop mentally referring to her as Burgers and Fries,” he wrote. By the time he released the post into the wild, he figured the odds of Quinn’s being harassed were 80 percent.

By August 16, Gjoni had assembled his semantic pipe bomb. He first planted it on two video-game sites, Penny Arcade and SomethingAwful, and it quickly found its way to a third, 4chan, whose online communities had a history of harassing women gamers. But moderators at the first two sites deleted it almost immediately. Gjoni had anticipated that might happen, so he moved to Plan B: He posted it himself, on a WordPress blog. Gjoni visited his friend Rachel Martin, a freelance designer, and sat at the edge of her bed as she proofread it one last time to make sure that “The Zoe Post”—which was packed with Quinn’s personal information—didn’t violate the website’s terms of service. At 12:42 a.m., on August 16, Gjoni clicked “publish.”

This guy knew what he was trying to do

 

[Massive Duck. C.M.]

I dont see how that changes his mindset when he made the post. Are you suggesting that Eron is now a psychic?

After reading this disingenuous response and others you've made, I think it would just be easier for you to admit you sympathize with him and move on. No one will do anything to you.

His mindset when he made the post should be fairly obvious from the fact he made the post at all. He has also shown no remorse about having done so, and even gone so far as to blame Quinn for trouble he had getting hired after the post was made.

If you haven't been following the whole 18 months thus far, there's a link in a post I made earlier in this thread with a good summary of events by another poster.

ED: Or even just read the post above mine

 

[Deleted member 126221]

It surprises me that you aren't able to find any real examples of sexism against men that aren't perpetuated by women but - although I can't presume to know your situation - maybe this is something to do with me being a parent, this is a pretty common occurrence for me. I put an enormous amount of work into raising my children as equal to my wife and I'm not just talking about bringing home the bacon. It could be something as simply as my wife letting one of the kids go out with shoes that don't match. "Dad must have dressed them" will be what other people will say to my wife while I'm standing right there. A more upsetting example might be the consistently high grades my kids get in reading and writing related activities. My wife will tell you this is because of me because I've always placed so much importance on it. Not a single day goes by that I don't read with my kids. I can't tell you how many times my wife has been given credit for this because it couldn't possibly have been Dad because men are stupid.

I'd say this has less to do with "sexism against men" and more with the stereotype that women are always the ones taking care of kids. It's stereotyped gender roles, something a lot of feminist movements are combating.

 

[L Thammy]

Yes

He did

http://www.bostonmagazine.com/news/article/2015/04/28/gamergate/





This guy knew what he was trying to do

Unless I missed it, the article doesn't even mention how he was participating in early Gamergate IRC chats. He's even more involved than just being the initiator.

 

[Mael]

There's still people naive enough to believe that the little cowardly ex didn't know what he was doing and didn't get the exact result he wanted to have?
The guy even publicly blamed others over his inability to keep a steady job and how his work would have helped save the world against cancer or some shit when he can't even focus on anything but his petty vendetta.

 

[VibratingDonkey]

Might as well repost this from another thread.

Twitter is unacceptably slow at coming up with solutions for protecting against and discouraging harassment.
Just recently, over a year after Gamergate diarrhea'd, and a year after the then CEO admitted they're terrible at handling abuse, Twitter announced they've formed a trust and safety council with the purpose of providing input "as we develop products, policies, and programs".
Who knows how long before anything tangible comes out of that. And these social media companies are the ones who have to step up to protect people in the interim, as the justice system catches up to how the internet works, which is going to take even longer. None of which was helped by the handling of this case.

 

[stuminus3]

I'd say this has less to do with "sexism against men" and more with the stereotype that women are always the ones taking care of kids. It's stereotyped gender roles, something a lot of feminist movements are combating.

What you just described is sexism (the stereotyped gender roles, not the feminist movements!).

 

[L Thammy]

Looking at that article The Technomancer posted, I realize that I never saw these parts before:

But before he emptied the contents of Quinn’s private life into the gaping maw of a bloodthirsty Internet, back before he instigated the most vicious online backlash against feminism in a generation, there was a first date. A date that began, not unlike many other 21st-century first dates, on OkCupid. The algorithms spoke: Gjoni and Quinn were a 98 percent match.



Neither Gjoni nor Quinn was particularly good at dating. He’d had a handful of flings in college and she’d had a number of short-term relationships. Both seemed stuck in adolescence—the types of young adults who tend to burn hot and flame out fast.

Their first date lasted three days. They met one December night at a dive bar in Harvard Square, snuck into Harvard Stadium, stayed over at Gjoni’s apartment in Chelsea, and got breakfast the next morning at Veggie Galaxy before continuing to hang out. Over the next few weeks, they went to karaoke bars around Boston, talked philosophy, and shared vulnerabilities. Gjoni regarded himself as a talented programmer and enjoyed cuddling and coding with Quinn late into the night. But he treated Quinn’s principled stands on gaming, social justice, and loyalty as if they were the behavior of some exotic creature.

Gjoni fell for her hard—maybe too hard, given how brief their relationship was. He began idealizing Quinn as “this perfect ethical thing,” he says, and less as a gifted and flawed woman who battled chronic depression. Quinn often traveled to speak at gaming conferences, and they saw each other at most once a week. After just five months, they broke up. But Gjoni wouldn’t let go.

This makes me sad too. If all he wanted had been sympathy, I think he could have gotten it. I mean, I think it still reflects how his views on women are screwed up, but if he had focused on his own issues instead of this hate crusade that's just grown in scope... I dunno. But it's obvious that his motivations in the real world aren't so quaint and harmless.

 

[Deleted member 126221]

What you just described is sexism (the stereotyped gender roles, not the feminist movements!).

Yes, but it's not "sexism against men". If anything, it's sexism against women as society at large assume it's their burden to take care of children. Of course it ends up affecting men like you, but that's another reason why gender roles are shitty and it would benefit everybody to abolish them.

But enough about that, I already derailed the thread more than enough!

 

[Dusk Golem]

It's disgusting that harassers get off free in this story. I hope this gets broken down and discussed and worked out more, and the more it is brought to light, the more serious this gets treated. No one should get away with this behavoir, woukd less likely in a real life scenario, we need better ways to tackle serious harassment online.

As always, it's a multi-sided issue with more than one thing needing to happen, and more than one issue at heart.

I think the core of the issue is less a man vs woman thing, even if the issue originates from a sexist environment and hostility. The core issue is online harassment needing to be taken more seriously. Women are definitely likely to be harassed simply because of their gender, but this can transcribe also strongly to anyone in a public eye, and I believe the core issue lies in online harassment needing to be taken more seriously in a world where being connected is almost a must.

Sexism is a long and complicated issue that can in no way be summed up easily, and has many forms.

Sexism against men is very real. The biggest case I have ever experienced of this, and this is a true personal story, involved two seperate scenarios, one where my sister got molested and one where I got molested. One day sfter school my sister was taking longer than usual to come out of school to go home, so I went around the school to check-up on her. I heard and then found her a bit latter, pinned by a guy in the stairs who was feeling her up and her trying to escape. I kicked him down the stairs off her and pinned him down and told my sister to get any faculty. He was appropriately severely punished and she found a lot of support, which has me happy. A few years later, my family and I had gone out to eat and I had asked to go to a bookstore. I had bought a few books, and we were heading out when suddenly out of the blue in public a hobo came up to me, started rubbing his chest against me, and reached his hand into my pants to... yeah. I completely froze and my thoughts from that moment stick with me, and of course my family reacted shortly get him off me and throw him to the curve. A lot of people were there to witness it, but no one around did anything. My brother was smart and took a few pictures to identify him. But no one took the situation seriously outside of my family. We did go to report it and give the evidence we had. I was told everything from just to shrug it off, incidents happen. It wasn't looked into at all despite being countless witnesses and pictures of the perpetrator. Among peopke who heard about it, I was told far more disgusting things, ranging from jokes that I should be glad for a freebie or being toted with my manhood.

There's a lot of sides to this, but from my viewpoint, harassment is maliciousness, and just because it's online doesn't make it different than offline. Moreso, there are solid ways to track someone online, and in a world where online is of growing importance in many workplaces and persinal lives, it needs to be taken far more seriously and the crimes committed on it in turn.

 

[Dame]

There are a couple of misconceptions here. Namely this:

I really would say this really is just arguing semantics though. Sexism literally is a form of prejudice. Just because the sexism I experience is different from the sexism being discussed in this topic doesn't mean it's something else entirely.

and this:

It surprises me that you aren't able to find any real examples of sexism against men that aren't perpetuated by women but

Remember what i was saying about how dominant social groups are the originators of whatever regressive ideas harm people? Whilst a woman can perpetuate the idea that a man doesn't have as much style as a woman does, this is in no way the same as women being brutalized, targeted, harassed, simply based on the basis of their sex. Again. People placed in the non oppressed group have such a hard time understanding that anecdotal evidence isn't systemic, therefor it isn't back by any institutional power. It isn't semantics, maybe from your perspective when you don't have these lived experiences sure, but to everyone else, it is real.

Those people who may think that your wife did all of the schoolwork live in a world where there are more mothers present in the household as parents, and guess what, that idea has negatively impacted women, being as they're culturally perceived to need to be in the house, raising the kids etc. That has served at the detriment toward women's rights to vote and their ability to be employed, which is why it would never be "equal sexism" like this guy Brainfreeze below me thinks it is. If your example of "sexism" is a few people thinking you don't know how to dress your kid, you are ignoring the impacts of what sexism is, feel me? It's violence, it's brutalization, it's targeting, raping, denying jobs, etc etc on a broader scale than your friend across from you who told you you dressed her like a man would that one time back in '08. You will never suffer injustice and inequality based on your sex in this life. Period. Full stop. Women will and do. That is sexism as it is applied in the real world.

Arguing the "dumb dad",trope, something originated by men, which sure, women can perpetuate , as being an equal measure of what qualifies as sexism is not understanding what sexism is. You don't face inequality at the expense of a homer simpson joke.You still, at large, on a wide societal scale, are afforded the privilege of being seen as an individual moreso than women are. Go back to my "women drivers" statement. "Dumbd dad" has never stopped you from having any rights or form of autonomy as a man. You can't say the same for 'you're pretty smart for a girl","oh, where's your boss...you're the boss?". The only thing that will ever get hurt are your feelings, and it is this pervasive problem that people in the non oppressed group want to argue oppression so bad. It's kind of odd.

To bring the point home, racism and prejudice are not the same thing in that you can't find men who face opression due to their sex, which is what prejudice+power=sexism means. Even in this historically altered magical universe, you still won't find it on a large scale outside of anecdotal evidence. Women being the target of rape however, you can find in droves. Them being turned down for investigations due to their perceived lying about rape "prejudice+power". Prejudice against men exists, not sexism. I can't repeat this enough. It's important. There is no institutional power stopping you from doing thigns simply because you are a man. None. Nowhere. You can even have an opinion on what women should do with their bodies. In that, you are right about one thing, the two are incomparable, and that is one of the laundry-list of reasons why. My paragraphs long discussion explaining the social paradigms of sexism won't do this justice. You are free to disagree with what real-world sexism is, but if you are interested, i highly recommend you look at articles of racism vs prejudice and sexism vs prejudice. That and white fragility, which would tie into male entitlement and come full circle to this Zoe Quinn discussion.

It's really hard for us as men to not yell "but my feelings too!" and the things we think are sexist toward us, are built by other men which only hurt both genders but never deny us access to things.

Yes, but it's not "sexism against men". If anything, it's sexism against women as society at large assume it's their burden to take care of children. Of course it ends up affecting men like you, but that's another reason why gender roles are shitty and it would benefit everybody to abolish them.

But enough about that, I already derailed the thread more than enough!

I don't know who you are, but i'm shaking your hand through the internet right now. It's too late to turn it down. Just let it happen.

 

[Brainfreeze]

Yes, but it's not "sexism against men". If anything, it's "sexism against women" as society at large assume it's their role to take care of children. Of course it ends up affecting men like you, but that's another reason why gender roles are shitty and it would benefit everybody to abolish them.

But enough about that, I already derailed the thread more than enough!

I really hate arguments like this. How are gender roles, which by their very definition effect both genders by imparting some rules that they each must play by, sexist towards women but not men? Or, by another metric, just so much more sexist towards women, to the point that when these discussions come up someone always has to point out that it's actually sexist towards women when a man mentions problems he's having.

The roles here are "women are good at taking care of kids, men are bad." That's equal sexism. You could argue that it negatively effects women more (though, not really in this case specifically), but that doesn't make it more sexist towards them.

I agree with what Charlie Brown's saying here. I'm not trying to imply anything greater here. But when it comes to things like gender roles, and someone always has to be there to jump in and make sure everyone understands "well, it's actually sexism towards women!" before they let the discussion continue it just, ergh, it grates on me. You not only helped detail the whole topic, but you had to jump in and derail his specific point too. You added nothing, you just reframed it in a way to try and make it seem like he has it less bad or something, even when his whole point was "yeah, it's not as bad as this topic, not even close, but it exists, is all."

But I don't want this to come off as a personal attack so on another note I like your avatar!

Also, to stay semi on topic, fuck gamergate and all that.

 

[PMS341]

Yeah, that doesn't surprise me.

Yup, we're Trump supporter headquarters essentially; the average IQ can't exactly be too high.

 

[PtM]

While it was not a thing that should have been done you cannot act like Eron Gjoni was expecting GamerGate to spring into existence when he made the Zoe Post.

Badmouthing your ex when you find out youve been cheated on (or are under the assumption that you were cheated on) isnt a mature, healthy thing to do but its not like he was plotting an internet revolution when he made a mean spirited post on The Something Awful Forums

GG existed before the Z post, and that fucker embraced them.

 

[wsoxfan1214]

I will never understand what makes this shitty excuse for a "movement" or its disgusting "supporters" tick.

 

[viveks86]

Man, I was having a good day so far, until I came across this thread... :/

 

[imfinnegan]

Eron Gjoni is a coward. Regardless of how the situation with Zoe Quinn left him feeling, it's no measure of honor to air personal grievances on the internet for all to see and double down when said actions result in the unending harassment of someone he once loved.

He doesn't have a modicum of respect for either himself or others, and worse, all the attention he's gained as a result of the terrible situation he created only furthers his delusion that what he did was right. That's the truly horrifying thing about this -- he started as a nobody and now because of this people know his name. We should let time do its thing, and let this moron fade back into the obscurity from which he spawned.

 

[True Fire]

This is a huge demographic issue. When you have Boomers and Early Xers in positions of power, institutions have no awareness of any of these problems.

If the judge was a Millennial they would know right away how harmful online mobs can be.

 

[PMS341]

This is a huge demographic issue. When you have Boomers and Early Xers in positions of power, institutions have no awareness of any of these problems.

If the judge was a Millennial they would know right away how harmful online mobs can be.

Unfortunately, not everyone shares the same sympathy. The Internet and reality are intertwined and yet the standard thought is "get over it".

 

[stuminus3]

@ Dame, I'm just going to leave it at that. You're putting a lot of effort into words that I honestly think would be best directed at someone who isn't me. I can understand why, but you've got the wrong person. No sense in wasting your time or mine.

Prejudice comes in all shapes and sizes but for this topic there is only one simple truth - any form of harassment or abuse against women is both sick and indefensible.

 

[Gattsu25]

A threat of violence is not violence though. Its a threat.

...did I ever say otherwise?

 

[PtM]

Shoutout to Dame for preaching the truth. Would read again.

 

[Vinland]

@Dame

You are working way too hard to convince people of things you aren't supporting with facts. To try to apply one interpretation of sexism while dismissing the idea of others defeats the purpose of intellectual discourse.

Furthermore, saying "dumb dad" is a male construct that is simply perpetuated by women is perplexing. You provide nothing to support your notion. Not even an argument from authority.

What makes you right? Where are your citations? What high level degree and what thesis do you offer up? Why should your conclusions, based on what seems to be your own personal deductions woven in from a single perspective education on the matter, be more right than anyone else's?

You seem to be suggesting sexism cannot exist for one of the sexes. Do you realize how utterly illogical that sounds. Like it is a penenjulum that has swung to one side and is forever frozen in time. Never to swing the other way again. That it can never find an equilibrium again. That society couldn't actually over correct and completely flip flop. Like sexism in its entirety is a gauge from 0 to N where 0 is equality for women and N is the level of sexist boundries and acts toward them. Do you not see how utterly idiotic that sounds? It is as if you are suggesting all men are genetically dispositions to dominate women and the patriarchy is a physical manifestation of it. Where does it stop? Are all white men genetically predispositioned to be racists too? Because gauges just visualize recorded data.

I urge you to have an open dialog about sexism. We know women are targeted far, far more that it's not even in the same hemisphere as sexist acts targeting men. That is undeniable but Sexism against men and women do exist under the same atmosphere. If your response to this post is in the same vain as your last several attempts... Save it for someone else who wants to be in that echo chamber of regression disguised as progression.

Anyways...

It is utter bullshit that Zoe has had her life ripped apart for no other reason for the sake of people on the internet unleashing pent up sociopathic tendencies mixed with hate speech and there is no Legal protection without more suffering. Over video games, things that make me happy. It makes my stomach hurt thinking about it.

No one deserves it not even the sick fucks doing it. They deserve jail time though or some form of reparation for the direct and indirect anguish they have caused everyone especially Zoe and everyone close to her.

 

[Zaptruder]

Is Dame really trying to say sexism isn't a problem for men, but a problem for women?

If sexism weren't a problem for men, we wouldn't be the most frequent victims of violence and murder.

We're literally more likely to end up dead or maimed because we're men.

Granted, that most of that violence is coming from other men - but that's what's fucked up about it. Societal attitudes that say it's ok (or kind ok) for guys to beat on each other is part of the system of prevailing social norms.

Society shoe horns both men and women into tighter niches than reasonably accommodates for all individuals preferences and proclivities. Sets a base standard where men have more 'direct' forms of power (but women have significant amounts of 'indirect' power), but where neither gender really has the power to be properly authentic to themselves.

And you... you perpetuate the harm of this system by insisting that one side is necessarily weaker than the other, without recognizing the nuances inherent in such a flawed system. Don't you realize that part of the problem of gender inequality is that we implicitly devalue the kinds of things that women on average are better at?

 

[Dame]

At this point, i wouldn't blame a mod for banning me for slightly derailing, but for people to understand what sexism is, i feel like these points need be adressed. Prejudice and sexism are two different words with real lived applications.

If sexism weren't a problem for men, we wouldn't be the most frequent victims of violence and murder.

We're literally more likely to end up dead or maimed because we're men.

Granted, that most of that violence is coming from other men -

So you admit that men are perpetuating this violence toward men and that thus isn't the example of one group systemically targeting ANOTHER group due to prejudice, which is what sexism is. Our 'being the most frequent victims" disingenuously pressuposes that the large death count is because of our sex, without taking into account things like women having been prevented from the draft in wartime due to sexist ideas toward women in military regimes, compunding that with viewing them as the "weaker sex" historically. It also conveniently ignores women being disproportionately targetd by domestic violence http://www.vpc.org/press/more-than-1600-women-murdered-by-men-in-one-year-new-study-finds/, transmisogyny where trans women are targeted, killed, harmed, due to their being trans, at an alarming rate: http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/06/transgender-women-disproportionately-targeted-violent-hate-crimes.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/23/domestic-violence-statistics_n_5959776.html
The thing about sexism is that it is born from psychological and physical harm imparted by multitudes of people.

(but women have significant amounts of 'indirect' power),

Please explain

And you... you perpetuate the harm of this system by insisting that one side is necessarily weaker than the other, without recognizing the nuances inherent in such a flawed system.

Where in any of my posts did i claim women to be weaker? I mean i'll wait.

Highlighting how society in it's toxic way, deems women as weaker and inherently subservient, is not me saying they are. At all. You guys are adept at insisting i insinuate thigns i'm actively arguing against.

Don't you realize that part of the problem of gender inequality is that we implicitly devalue the kinds of things that women on average are better at?

Thank you for reiterating my point about sexism. Women are devalued, so much so their lives are devalued, as is their intellect, their capability, and their autonomy. Men are valued, even with ridiculous gender roles that encourage our worst behaviours toward each other, things like "men bring home the bacon" stopped women from getting jobs. "Men don't cry" gave us the cop-out that women are overly emotional, irrational creatures.

You are working way too hard to convince people of things you aren't supporting with facts

so mentioning that women get paid less, are frequently targeted for online harassment soley based on their sex, get victimized, brutalized, hurt, again, soley based on their sex isn't factual? Ok. Sure.

Furthermore, saying "dumb dad" is a male construct that is simply perpetuated by women is perplexing. You provide nothing to support your notion. Not even an argument from authority.

Well apparently that's the last time i should sarcastically play devil's advocate to tear the argument down seconds later.

What makes you right? Where are your citations? What high level degree and what thesis do you offer up? Why should your conclusions, based on what seems to be your own personal deductions woven in from a single perspective education on the matter, be more right than anyone else's?

Going back to what i said about my word not being the divine wisdom of the gods, acting like this is a single perspective not echoed through years of women speaking out against the inequality they face, is just something else. We realize there is inequality, yet somehow try to act as if men and women suffer equally. That is reaching.

That it can never find an equilibrium again. That society couldn't actually over correct and completely flip flop.

People slut-shame Zoe Quinn, but wouldn't call a man a "slut" or any derogatory sexual term societally.
Where and when in history has this "pendulum" ever swung on the side of women having institutional power to oppress men? I'll wait.
tell me again about that narrow perspective that lacks citations.

Save it for someone else who wants to be in that echo chamber of regression disguised as progression.

Where does it stop? Are all white men genetically predispositioned to be racists too?

my dear sweetness with the sweeping strawman statements, trying to project guilt-tripping...what?


I realise that this is a difficult concept to swallow, that us men don't actually suffer sexism at the hands of women, because women cannot be sexist toward men, but everythign you and him highlighted are harmful gender roles imposed and enforced by men on a large and worldwide scale, not women. I'd ask you to please show me otherwise and i'll be the first to say that women can be sexist toward men, but that isn't a reality in this world. I sincerely hope that this difference of perspective doesn't keep making some of you folks defensively err on the side of " oh this isn't civil discourse cuss it ruffles my jimmies". You, as a man, will never suffer oppression based on your gender from women. Point that instance to me please. Again, because it's just fun saying this, i'll wait.

 

[Dusk Golem]

I realise that this is a difficult concept to swallow, that us men don't actually suffer sexism at the hands of women, because women cannot be sexist toward men, but everythign you and him highlighted are harmful gender roles imposed and enforced by men on a large and worldwide scale, not women. I'd ask you to please show me otherwise and i'll be the first to say that women can be sexist toward men, but that isn't a reality in this world. I sincerely hope that this difference of perspective doesn't keep making some of you folks defensively err on the side of " oh this isn't civil discourse cuss it ruffles my jimmies". You, as a man, will never suffer oppression based on your gender from women. Point that instance to me please. Again, because it's just fun saying this, i'll wait.

Okay, I came to the thread to read some opinions on the topic at hand, but this was the newest post. If you honestly believe this to be true, you need to do some serious reevaluation of the world. Maliciousness is not a male construct, it's a construct of humanity. I get one side of what you're attempting to say, that the world as we live in it as been by majority been constructed by men through history, which would be the pillar of the argument I suppose. But the attitude and perception and the result of what you're saying is an unhealthy attitude to truly conquer the issues of sexism, and in extension, equalization. It's the same train of logic that says that all racism is created by white people, all religious war is created by Christians, all sexual orientation discrimination is created by heterosexuals, and so on. It follows a logic that these groups of people are in the wrong, and all others are victims who can do no wrong because they were influenced by these other groups, who are the root of all evil.

Not only is that a radicalist idea that is completely untrue, it also defeats the very thing that equalization stands for. I don't want to derail the thread to much, because the topic isn't about global issues like these but a very specific issue that deserves more discussion and attention, about a very sick minority of people who harass women for being women on the internet in a public eye fixture and claim to these people and threaten do sick things, and harass people continually who try to have a voice in online communities and focus on being women is a misconceived 'male environment' (but even this is not a completely male construct might surprise some people). Let me clarify, I think sexism is a complicated issue that has not one side to it, not one form, nor one easy solution to 'fix' it. I think it's something like the multi-headed dragon, that grows more heads when you cut one head off. At the core, I believe the issue stems from humanity's weird fear or lack of compassion or understanding for those different than themselves as individuals, a perceived painting of the world that they perceive as true and those that differ to much from their depiction of a normal world is something that deserves attacking, which for some individuals consumes them to a point they become blind to obvious truths and do monstrous, disgusting things to try to fuel some idea of right over themselves, for power, for kicks.

There's some really helpful links I could post here in retaliation of 'wanting to see proof', but I don't want to fill the thread with them. I'll simply choose to post video I was reminded of off the top by Karen Straughan on Feminism and Male Disposability: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vp8tToFv-bA

And I won't respond to this issue in this thread after this, I am very interested in the core topic and would rather discuss that. Zoe has been through terrible things, and people being able to disgustingly and easily get away with it against her and others is a serious problem and threat in my eyes, and something I think deserves serious analysis, discussion, and awareness.

 

[Zaptruder]

Please explain

Emotional manipulation is a significant and potent power. Direct forms of power include violence and material control and use. Indirect forms include control of those elements indireclty through the manipulation of others.

I suppose this characterization sounds bad from the perspective of someone that thinks I'm implying a negative valuation of these traits - but I'm not. It's a recognition that there are systemic gender differences brought on by culture and genetics, and that some of those differences can provide significant utility and leverage for those that wield them.

It shouldn't be surprising to us that women on average, incentivized by culture and genetics (testosterone, lack of muscle mass, etc) to take a 'softer' less direct approach to confrontation, will also be provided with the motivations and opportunities to develop and hone their instincts for better manipulating others for their end.

Where in any of my posts did i claim women to be weaker?

Weaker is perhaps the wrong word to use - but in insinuating that the things that women do are of lesser value.

Of course, if that's not what you're insinuating (and you're claiming you aren't), then I can only claim there was a fault in my reading.

A broader point to be made is very much that - framing gender inequality as a problem that only effects one side is counter-productive. If you want society to really examine this problem - you want to appeal to the self interests of all parties. It is in the self interest of men and women to reexamine and resolve the issue of gender disparity, because it harms both genders in different ways.

 

[Sblargh]

A person gets her life destroyed because she dared to break up a relationship and the real threat against freedom of speech is protecting her freedom to speak about it without someone saying he will hunt her down.

It baffles me to no end that a safe way for hate groups to harass people has creeped into society just as we were learning to squash the old brands of hate groups.

Evil recreates itself. Pettyness always find friends.

And what the fuck is this post above mine? Genetics leading women into being manipulative? Next I will be reading about how jews are racially more talented making money.

 

[Dame]

Emotional manipulation is a significant and potent power. Direct forms of power include violence and material control and use. Indirect forms include control of those elements indireclty through the manipulation of others.
...some of those differences can provide significant utility and leverage for those that wield them.

I won't even touch this profoundly sexist notion that women have this "indirect power" which gives them advantage. I mean man. You had me at your other paragraph though.

Maliciousness is not a male construct, it's a construct of humanity. I get one side of what you're attempting to say, that the world as we live in it as been by majority been constructed by men through history, which would be the pillar of the argument I suppose. But the attitude and perception and the result of what you're saying is an unhealthy attitude to truly conquer the issues of sexism, and in extension, equalization. It's the same train of logic that says that all racism is created by white people, all religious war is created by Christians, all sexual orientation discrimination is created by heterosexuals, and so on. It follows a logic that these groups of people are in the wrong, and all others are victims who can do no wrong because they were influenced by these other groups, who are the root of all evil.

I'm not sure why i'll entertain this but:Sexism is a male construct. Race was a social construct invented to enslave people of colour. While i can't say that "all" racism was created by white power structures, i'd be hard-pressed to find a form of racism that wasn't. The similarity is is that all of the major groups you've listed benefit from oppressing that other group, another facet of sexism. Women don't benefit from engaging in any prejudices which apparently are such a problem among some of you. Does this stop marginalized groups from upholding that racism toward each other? Certainly no. None of what you purport actually goes into my train of logic. Nobody says that women are infallible and incapable of prejudice or negative bias, but it shouldn't be hard to see how without power to enforce and uphold these anecdotal prejudices, they are not in the same scale, nor the same realm as what it's counterpart look like. You guys are so focused on trying to make the "not all men" argument that you don't get "oh yeah, we as men do benefit and don't have to worry about being disadvantaged due to our gender". Nobody is claiming all men are tyrants who don't suffer regressive gender roles perpetuated by men. We do, but it is not something historically enforced by women now is it? This is neither a radical nor new idea.
I'd go into the ins and outs of this slippery slope argument, but you're right. I've derailed enough.

Pardon me folks, back to Quinn.

 

[Dusk Golem]

I won't even touch this profoundly sexist notion that women have this "indirect power" which gives them advantage. I mean man. You had me at your other paragraph though.



I'm not sure why i'll entertain this but:Sexism is a male construct. Race was a social construct invented to enslave people of colour. While i can't say that "all" racism was created by white power structures, i'd be hard-pressed to find a form of racism that wasn't. The similarity is is that all of the major groups you've listed benefit from oppressing that other group, another facet of sexism. Women don't benefit from engaging in any prejudices which apparently are such a problem among some of you. Does this stop marginalized groups from upholding that racism toward each other? Certainly no. None of what you purport actually goes into my train of logic. Nobody says that women are infallible and incapable of prejudice or negative bias, but it shouldn't be hard to see how without power to enforce and uphold these anecdotal prejudices, they are not in the same scale, nor the same realm as what it's counterpart look like. You guys are so focused on trying to make the "not all men" argument that you don't get "oh yeah, we as men do benefit and don't have to worry about being disadvantaged due to our gender". Nobody is claiming all men are tyrants who don't suffer regressive gender roles perpetuated by men. We do, but it is not something historically enforced by women now is it? This is neither a radical nor new idea.
I'd go into the ins and outs of this slippery slope argument, but you're right. I've derailed enough.

Pardon me folks, back to Quinn.

All I'm going to say is Sexism isn't a movement or a hivemind, it wasn't created simply by one group of people with one trait in common. It is something that is constructed inside an individual that's source comes from a number of social, societal, and personal aspects at its heart.

 

[gunslikewhoa]

Police in my area have gotten sick of things so now if you even make a joke online about shooting up a school or any place, you're going to jail.

By "your area", I assume you mean your entire nation.

 

[commedieu]

Jesus.

 

[Zaptruder]

I won't even touch this profoundly sexist notion that women have this "indirect power" which gives them advantage.

What I'm not saying is that this is a power exclusive to women - it's certainly not. But, it gives them an advantage in some spheres of life (social relationships and family life for example) - which have as much importance and meaning to ones overall welfare as the ones that you're trying to emphasize that men have.

And that's what I mean by implicitly devaluing the advantages of women - looking past the things that they have and seeing only what they don't have.

To flip the notion on its head - if society as a whole didn't value financial contribution at all, and only valued localized social contribution, without changing much else, we'd say that men are structurally disenfranchised by the system.

I'm also not claiming that these advantages bring the balance back to equality in and of themselves - rather that equality is more complex than a linear scale of power. Less like balancing two weights, and more like balancing 6 different weights with a dynamic center of gravity simultaneously.

Difficult to balance the overall system if you only consider two of them!

 

[besada]

Get back on topic. If you want to discuss sexism against men, feel free to make a thread about it in OT.

 

[pelican]

It's really shameful.

No matter what you think of Zoe Quinn, she doesn't deserve to be harassed like those assholes did to her..

I agree.

I have little time for Quinn, but even less time for the harassers.

 

[Weltall Zero]

penenjulum

Penenjulum is now my favorite word.

Like sexism in its entirety is a gauge from 0 to N where 0 is equality for women and N is the level of sexist boundries and acts toward them.

Perhaps it's you who has difficulty understanding the situation? Since you used the 0 to N paradigm, let's extend it by saying that -N woud be an hypothetic society where the exact same sexism that is levelled at women in ours, would instead levelled to men, and viceversa. This is the concept you seem to be defending, that a society like that is conceivable, which I agree, but interesting as a philosophical exercise as it is, I think we can all agree that it does not actually exist.

Do you not see how utterly idiotic that sounds?

Do you?

It is as if you are suggesting all men are genetically dispositions to dominate women and the patriarchy is a physical manifestation of it.

Hardly a need to suggest it when, in fact all humans, but particularly men, are genetically disposed to dominate everyone else, especially other men. The patriarchy is a social (not physical, obviously) manifestation of, indeed, the genetic need of males to compete and dominate (be the alphas). If anything this could be construed as an antifeminist argument, as it's not fair to blame men for their genetic imperatives, but of course it doesn't excuse us as a society from trying to do better.

Where does it stop? Are all white men genetically predispositioned to be racists too?

Again, that's correct. Every single human being is naturally predisposed against anyone that looks different to them. The greater the differente, the greater the distrust. Again, simple evolutive behaviour.

I urge you to have an open dialog about sexism. We know women are targeted far, far more that it's not even in the same hemisphere as sexist acts targeting men. That is undeniable but Sexism against men and women do exist under the same atmosphere. If your response to this post is in the same vain as your last several attempts... Save it for someone else who wants to be in that echo chamber of regression disguised as progression.

Having men's right advocates derail the conversation on sexism with cries of "but men suffer sexism too!" is the opposite of having a dialog. It's the equivalent of going to the ER because you broke your leg and having the nurse sending you home because she fell the other day and bruised her arm.

I'll be clear and blunt: discussions of sexism against women are not, I repeat, NOT the time and place to discuss sexism against men.

Is Dame really trying to say sexism isn't a problem for men, but a problem for women?

If sexism weren't a problem for men, we wouldn't be the most frequent victims of violence and murder.

We're literally more likely to end up dead or maimed because we're men.

Granted, that most of that violence is coming from other men - but that's what's fucked up about it. Societal attitudes that say it's ok (or kind ok) for guys to beat on each other is part of the system of prevailing social norms.

It's kind of hard to take this argument seriously when what you should be looking at is perpetrators:

Males were convicted of the vast majority of homicides in the United States, representing 90.5% of the total number of offenders.[46]

2011 arrest data from the FBI:[47]

Males comprised 98.0% of those arrested for forcible rape[47]
Males comprised 89.0% of those arrested for robbery[47]
Males comprised 85.0% of those arrested for burglary[47]
Males comprised 83.0% of those arrested for arson.[47]
Males comprised 81.5% of those arrested for motor-vehicle theft.[47]
Males comprised 81.7% of those arrested for stolen property.[47]
Males comprised 81.7% of those arrested for vandalism.[47]
Males comprised 79.7% of those arrested for offenses against family and children.[47]
Males comprised 77.8% of those arrested for aggravated assault[47]
Males comprised 58.7% of those arrested for fraud.[47]
Males comprised 57.3% of those arrested for larceny-theft.[47]
Males comprised 51.3% of those arrested for embezzlement.[47]

Particularly, for any definition of sexism to even make any sense, let alone apply, you'd have to compare numbers of men killed by women, versus women killed by men. Want to take a wild guess in what direction the scales tip?

My intention wasn't to ask a million questions and have them answered, I was just trying to illustrate how many different facets there are regarding this topic. That its an extremely complicated problem that nobody seems to put ANY thought into and all or nothings into "Complete free speech for all!" or "Everything said on twitter is an actionable threat" which is why I consider everyone going "Gators are so stupid! Lock 'em all up!" just doing the same embarassing cheerleading that pro-GG people are doing on reddit.

Your intention was to say "but it's complicated" to shut down any and all criticism of GamerGate and stop there. At no point have I seen you contribute anything to the conversation, other than to prop you up as the one guy who realized the nuances of each case (as if anyone here was asking for the death penalty for every stupid redditor). We're not idiots, we know and assume the law should be applied proportionally to the offense, but for that, first, there has to be a law.

Someone earlier mentioned the appeal to moderation, but I dont feel Im being fallacious here when I make that appeal. Everything on the internet gets wound up to 11 and immediately blown up into hyperbole, so much so that appealing to moderation is often useful advice, and not a fallacious argument.

"Thanks for pointing out the obvious fallacy in my argument, but I don't feel like it applies to me because of this justification that is textbook appeal to moderation fallacy".

At some point you're going to have to entertain the notion that all your superiority and condescension a) doesn't make you right, b) doesn't make you exempt of fallacy checks, c) doesn't mean you're better informed about either the issues or how to face them (and you have demonstrated neither), and d) isn't driving the discussion forward one inch.

 

[Mobius and pet octopus]

This is a huge demographic issue. When you have Boomers and Early Xers in positions of power, institutions have no awareness of any of these problems.

If the judge was a Millennial they would know right away how harmful online mobs can be.

lol... have you heard of ageism? And no, not every millennial agrees with your views. That is incredibly offensive.

 

[Shaanyboi]

UGH

Just... ugh.

I can't imagine how fucking rough this roller-coaster has been for Quinn and all other victims of this fucking hate campaign, but this just sucks.