4chan, memes, language, Trump, alt-right, etc.

riseagainstrocks · 03-06-2017, 01:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frownland

My other two thoughts are (1) really? It took the air of being pro-paedo to cut his book deal? and (2) I really hope this is the nail in the coffin of his career and that he doesn't manufactroversify himself back into the news so that free speech advocates can have a better face to represent them.

I'll take this one I too.

I've heard Milo referred to as a 'free speech advocate' on several occasions. But the epithet seems inconsistent. Didn't he compare Islam to AIDS and Liberalism to the flu? Something about how AIDS catches on quicker when you're already weak from the flu? I half-remember his incendiary comment, mostly because it's the same kind of ignorant bluster that Ann Coulter is much better at, but I do remember thinking that it didn't quite jibe with his 'personal liberty' stance.

The implication is that Western values cannot coexist with Islam. Setting aside the 1000 years of Islamic culture that outshone the entirety of Europe (with regard to health, personal freedom, and ethnic integration) his comments were so sweeping that it crushes human identity into neat little cubes, all with a label. Hardly what you would expect a self-proclaimed champion of the enlightenment to support. Rather amusing that he's OK with blacklisting 1.2 billion people over the actions and statements of .0001% of them, but he then cries foul when caught speaking about Victorian moral judgement that preclude underage sexual relationships. It's not a straight line of hypocrisy, but it's sure dotted.

Long story short, Milo blows a lot of hot air, makes a lot of baseless, inflammatory statements, and finally got burned for essentially saying that underage sex isn't wrong for everybody (which is a separate rant, but Frownland hit the nail on the head with the power dynamic comment). I wish it was for something more incontrovertible - pick any number of his statements about feminism, immigrants, etc. - but whatever results in less of his smug, anti-intellectual nonsense is OK by me.

So when you say free-speech advocate, what do you mean? What makes you refer to him like that?

riseagainstrocks · 03-06-2017, 01:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Exo

How about we just let people f*cking enjoy things?

Hey, no one is saying they can't. I might find it weird, but I'm perfectly happy to let people express themselves as they wish.

I've noticed some overlap between that group and people pushing bathrooms-by-birth-sex laws and a general intolerance of so-called "deviant" behavior (seriously, just spend some time poking around the these facebook groups). The cognitive dissonance is interesting to me. People embracing their own "deviant" behavior, the fetishizing of a drawing, but seeking some form of control over what they view as aberrant.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frownland

I think anime is just getting more popular and accepted.

If that's the case, then wouldn't you expect the behavior of adopting, say, Zooey Deschanel avatars to have predated it? You don't have to have an answer, I'm not sure there is one, but I would guess it's the total, fantastical control these men, often with very little control over their lives, can imagine they have with, and it has to be said, with these Lolita-esque characters. Man, I wish there was real psychological research into this topic. I have pretty strong biases here and I'd like to see them either confirmed or corrected.

The Batlord · 03-06-2017, 01:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by riseagainstrocks

Hey, no one is saying they can't. I might find it weird, but I'm perfectly happy to let people express themselves as they wish.

I've noticed some overlap between that group and people pushing bathrooms-by-birth-sex laws and a general intolerance of so-called "deviant" behavior (seriously, just spend some time poking around the these facebook groups). The cognitive dissonance is interesting to me. People embracing their own "deviant" behavior, the fetishizing of a drawing, but seeking some form of control over what they view as aberrant.

I've never been into the anime community, but my impression is that many of the more hardcore people are the kind of immature, autistic, socially isolated people who are like dogs who bark at black people cause they're not properly socialized. They are sheltered and repressed and don't know how to deal with ideas different from their own. Easy prey for social conservatism in other words.

**Frownland** · 03-06-2017, 01:53 PM

More on weaboos: most everything I've seen on the subject was usually ironic or mocking those types of people, so I wonder how my anecdotal evidence stacks up to the real world.

Quote:

Originally Posted by riseagainstrocks

So when you say free-speech advocate, what do you mean? What makes you refer to him like that?

I'll preface this by saying that I think the dude is an embarrassment to philosophy and journalism alike. I would say that he is definitely a free speech advocate because (1) the dude absolutely never shuts up about it and (2) one of his big talking points is the idea that any type of speech should be allowed, no matter how awful or how wrong it might be. None of those things that you listed in the rest of your post really conflict with free speech specifically, though I do understand how he's a huge hypocrite.

**Frownland** · 03-06-2017, 01:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by riseagainstrocks

If that's the case, then wouldn't you expect the behavior of adopting, say, Zooey Deschanel avatars to have predated it? You don't have to have an answer, I'm not sure there is one, but I would guess it's the total, fantastical control these men, often with very little control over their lives, can imagine they have with, and it has to be said, these Lolita-esque characters. Man, I wish there was real psychological research into this topic. I have pretty strong biases here and I'd like to see them either confirmed or corrected.

I'd liken it to a rise in superhero/comic related avatars.

Trollheart · 03-06-2017, 03:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Batlord

who are like dogs who bark at black people cause they're not properly socialized.

How do you know if black people are properly socialised or not? That's a big call to make...

The Batlord · 03-06-2017, 03:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trollheart

How do you know if black people are properly socialised or not? That's a big call to make...

Who are you to suck dick?

**Goofle** · 03-07-2017, 08:21 AM

Spoiler for riseagainst:

**Frownland** · 03-07-2017, 08:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Goofle

1. My argument was that he isn't being racist (as you hinted at in your initial question), he's being openly opposed to radical Islam and Islam by association. He's also openly against illegal immigration from Mexico. People who claim he seems to be focused on "preventing people of colour" from entering the USA need to provide evidence for that claim. And the fact that most Mexicans and Arabs are slightly more brown than your average white person isn't evidence.

I think that the idea is that Trump's over-inflated concern with these regions that are essentially non-issues for the US is fueled by a racist/xenophobic/unjustifiably prejudiced perspective of the people and their countries. Why does he have that ass-backwards perspective? Because he only appears to understand white America, and that's what he's sought to preserve with his whole campaign. So it might not be that crazy to assume that he's unfairly targeting minorities.

The argument has the same amount of objective, scientific weight to it as firmly saying that he's not racist, fwiw.

**Goofle** · 03-07-2017, 09:09 AM

Yeah you've posted that several times. And I'm sure you will again.