I was wondering whether his organization (World Human Rights Forum) was a big thing over in the UK or Ireland – they don’t seem to have an entry in Wikipedia, which seems telling.
It wasn’t her activity that drew me to the videos though, but rather the outrage they generated. Her videos in and of themselves did not. It’s the same reason I played Depression Quest, I wanted to see why the author was so reviled. I still don’t get the vitriol, but the game corresponded to what I’ve observed in those who suffer from that condition. Without the hatred and deranged threats, I wouldn’t have bothered with either.
Teiman
3943
“State terrorism” is terrorism, the same way the “Democratic People’s Republic of Korea” is a Democracy. Sure, “State terrorism” has terrorism in it, so much I accept, but the DPRK has democratic in the name and is not a democracy. You are making a clbuttic error.
I am not saying you are completelly wrong here. You have more than a point, but you miss the qualifier that would push what you say from laughtdable to reasonable. I think (I could be totally wrong).
This isn’t a battle in search of a victor. Just another example of how those obsessed with identity politics are often self-projecting, hypocritical sociopaths, like Virgil. Dude was a director of a human rights organization and yet he committed one of the more obscene acts of racism, just like Virgil is a bigger bigot than this board has previously ever allowed.
Terrorism as a tactic has been used since the dawn of warfare. You can argue it’s more effective now due to modern media and the instant reaction it creates, but as a means to an end it’s ancient.
It’s hilarious that Desslock has started calling anyone he disagrees with a bigot. No, people’s intolerance of your intolerance does not make them bigots. Similarly and related, public shaming and calling out of bad behavior does not make one a bully.
LMN8R
3947
Same here. I didn’t watch Anita Sarkeesian’s videos because of what she said or tried to publicize about them, I watched them because of all the obviously insecure hyperventilating nerds trying to claim she’s the devil incarnate and will ruin our precious hobby that actually in no way needs such a defense from impotent little shits.
Then, after watching them, I basically said “huh, that’s interesting”, and went on with my day.
GamerGate has basically thoroughly accomplished the exact opposite of everything they set out to accomplish. They’re making a whole lot of people a whole lot of money, notoriety, and sympathy that they’d otherwise not get. Good job, I guess!
I think that even with your extremely rigid definition of terrorism that you’re totally wrong. For as long as we as a species have had political institutions, others have been using fear as a means to change or destroy them.
Yeah, perhaps Teiman is locked into a definition that’s a little different than ours. Modern terrorists absolutely do try to use mass media of all varieties to spread their message and increase their effectiveness, but it’s not a necessarry part of committing terrorism. It’s kind of like an accoustic/electic guitar; you can play without an amp and do perfectly fine, or you can plug in and crank it up to 11.
The origin of the term lies with the deliberate state terrorism of the Jacobin regime in revolutionary France, only much later did it come to be applied to non state actors. But the main point is that terrorism is a deliberate strategem, it does not really matter who employs it.
The qualifier “state” or “non state” I don’t think is super necessary unless your intent is to lend a veneer of legitimacy to states which engage in terrorism.
You want to narrowly define terrorism but I think the only reason to do that is political.
I’m still struggling to even create a strawman point for you. Because that guy is racist…
Nobody is racist? Well, nobody except for me.
Everybody is racist? Well, everybody except the people involved in the entertainment industry or criminal justice system, because we’ve established that anyone who mentions racism is a SJW trying to hurt Desslock’s feelings.
#GamerGate!
If you’d care to make a substantial, meaningful point, feel free. Elevate the discourse beyond just accusing me of being a bigot. (Bigoted against who?) Maybe lawyers in Canada get taught that “I know what you are, but what am I?” is a rhetorical masterstroke, but you’re not really using your words here, bud.
Well it sure ain’t hilarious that you think judging people based upon them being a particular race, sex or sexual orientation isn’t bigotry, in any context. Similarly and related, idiots who harass people by calling them vile names unrelated to their actual conduct and try to drown out speech or views they politically disagree with, whether it’s against Sarkesian or Michelle Malkin or a Jewish speaker at university is bullying, insular, regressive and ultimately self-destructive, even if misanthropes try to rationalize their “public shaming” with hypocritical moral rhetoric.
I just don’t understand how posting inflammatory non-sequiturs at strangers is endlessly amusing to you - so much so that you created an alias solely to harass and create strife on a message board that you don’t otherwise enjoy as you don’t participate in conversations on other topics - it’s your sole raison d’etre here, and you just seem to wallow in creating as toxic an atmosphere as you can. Even when posters who generally have different views on a topic reach some sort of consensus opinion here, you lash out in every direction to try to refuel antagonism again.
So perhaps you can explain why that’s rewarding to you or otherwise explain what you’re doing here, and maybe that’ll give us some insight into the mentality that’s rampant online and spawns behavior that’s repellant to people. You can’t be so lacking in self-awareness that you think you have moral superiority or constructive motivations, so why do you do it? How is it fun for you? Why are you here?
Just explain once sincerely, without hyperbole or devolving into fantasy, and I’ll ignore your trolling forever afterwards.
There’s no need to get that profane here. You’re among friends. That sort of thing only happens in comic books.
Really? I take it you haven’t read Virgil’s posts? He’s one of the few people in my ignore list. Bigot is about the nicest thing you can say about him. The best solution for him is to point and laugh.
Busbecq
3956
This is 100% what it’s about. It’s one upmanship wrapped in a rainbow flag to make it more palatable.
It’s hard to get a sense of agency through a message board. This stuff really has no bearing on reality whatsoever. You can deny this by being delusional or by disingenuously raising the stakes and dispensing with any sense of proportion or contingency. “Terrorism” is saying mean things on twitter or a plane flying into a skyscraper; “rape” is big boobed characters in LoL or unconsensual sex; “discrimination” is an online conversation conducted through pseudonyms with someone who has no ability to affect your life besides that which you give them by paying attention to their arguments, or it’s the Tuskegee syphilis experiments.
Philosophy is talk on a cereal box. Religion is a smile on a dog.
The Internet is madness. Madness.
I… thought it was Sparta.
How can that dog be lying under the shady tree?
All I asked was for you to concisely explain what exactly you and your #GamerGate brethren are mad about and it’s practically brought you to tears.
But obviously that was too much. So how about this one: What “consensus opinion” do you think we can reach here?
