11126

I think maybe part of me is very numb to Kevin merchant being a piece of shit, so this really doesn’t register. But my main issue way talking about the kind of coverage or was getting on MSNBC yesterday when I was watching, where they were engaged in breathless outrage that Kevin McCarthy was threatening Pelosi with violence. The reaction was just way over the top.

11127

Posting some of that as context instead of making it seem like you were reacting to posts in the thread probably would have been helpful.

Also, that numbness is part of what people are talking about when talking about normalization.

11128

Possibly, but I don’t think I would really be outraged by anyone saying this about anyone. It just wasn’t really that outrageous a comment by McCarthy.

In terms of normalization, I guess I feel like there are other things McCarthy did which make this seem like a drop in the ocean. Not that those things are somehow less bad.

11129

Exactly.

11130

Hey guys, remember when the GOP Congressmen were all totally cool with the tourists that literally tried to assault Pelosi, AOC, and others? But yeah, McCarthy is just joking and we’re all overreacting. Just locker room humor!

11131

I just want you to realize I’m not trying to be argumentative here.

Think about what you just did. Mention of a casual “joke” involving violence against political opponents and/or women not only does not inspire at least a facepalm in you, but you went out of your way to criticize those that criticized the original comment. So when it comes to the topic of normalization, I I’m honestly not sure if you are making an acknowledgement or a defense here because either way it’s basically an admission. This has been normalized for you. The minority leader making a casual joke about beating the current speaker with a hammer is not only normal, but something you feel others should be called out for for criticizing.

I mean just think about that.

11132

Yeah, but when I think of it entirely out of this context, if some random person said this about someone, I can’t find myself ever thinking it was a serious threat, or really that bad at all.

So that’s why I can’t really find myself finding it super outrageous in this context either. I feel like if I found it super outrageous, I would only be doing so because I think McCarthy is a piece of shit, which he is. For that reason, I don’t find it to be normalizing anything by not being outraged over it. On the contrary, I find the outrage to be somewhat contrived, because I wouldn’t be upset about it in any context, regardless of who said it.

11133

Jokes about violence against women just don’t fly any more. Ever.

11134

Are only serious threats risible? Should casual threats go without shame unless they materialize into serious threads?

Nobody asked you to get super outraged so again if you are responding to something not on this forum you really need to make that clear. WTF?

And to add, I’m still not sure if your post is a defense or a recognition of how the normalization of this has gotten you.

11135

11136

What if he had said – in the same joking manner – that once the GOP had control of the House again, he was going to rape Pelosi. In the way that a lot of gamers use it to say they’re going to pwn someone.

Still a “pick your battles” moment or should people be upset about that kind of language, even if he wasn’t really saying he was going to rape her? If the latter, then surely hitting a woman with a hammer would be something to call out as well?

11137

I mean… yeah? There are “threats” which aren’t actually threats at all. I think this one probably falls into that category.

Like, if I said, “i’m gonna bonk you on the head”, you wouldn’t freak out about it. It doesn’t even rise to the level of a real threat at all.

Sorry, I didn’t mean to suggest you did. I was just explaining how this doesn’t really cause that much outrage for me, and I don’t think it would in any other context. So I’m not sure that this is a case of “normalization” as much as it’s a case of it “always being normal”.

Yeah, I think that would be significantly more outrageous.

11138

You still seem to be equating any negative comment about the “joke” with taking it as a serious threat.

11139

Odds of this happening: slim and none.

Odds this is just another daily Timex sealioning: extremely high.

11140

Perfect.

11141

Put me on mute, please.

11142

Timex, just because some of the outrage you might be seeing is performative doesn’t mean the comment isn’t worth being upset about. Let’s assume a whole lot of people, including some here, don’t think this kind of rhetoric is appropriate from our elected officials and that our level of being-upset-about-it is calibrated properly. I didn’t see anything here that needed you to come handwave it away.

I also don’t know why you’re trying to take it out of context into the regular world (bonk you on the head) when the context in which it happened is the entire problem here.

11143

Timex is just one person. He doesn’t get to choose what we do or don’t talk about, or what we do or don’t get outraged about.

Gatekeeping, or at least attempting it, is kinda his deal here.

11144

If we are to accept that it’s not in fact a serious threat, then why should we be outraged? Do we think that it will somehow lead to serious threats in the future?

I guess I don’t see that happening either. As I said, I don’t really see this as a case of “normalizing” some minor threat of violence, that will lead to acceptance of more serious threats.

11145

I don’t think that’s really supportable. Or was it meant sarcastically? Timex has a unique perspective on many things but is not being disingenuous or trying to lay rhetorical traps.