|
Little did we realize it was a campaign promise, not a condemnation.
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2020 02:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 08:26 |
|
|
ElMaligno posted:TBF, she aligned herself with some very transphobic people and she handled the criticism extremely poorly, And some other people like HBomberGuy were upset that she didn't tell them that that would be part of the same project as the transphobes until after the video was posted.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2020 06:08
|
|
|
Can I get a TL;DR version of this?
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2020 06:23
|
|
|
A Bad Poster posted:Can I get a TL;DR version of this? MRC48B posted:Leftists eat their own.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2020 06:28
|
|
|
stealie72 posted:This is pretty much what America does. Just make being poor a loving crime and be done with it already. poo poo or get off the pot !
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2020 13:23
|
|
|
ElMaligno posted:TBF, she aligned herself with some very transphobic people and she handled the criticism extremely poorly, TBF, you're a loving idiot.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2020 13:29
|
|
|
Kobal2 posted:TBF, you're a loving idiot. Yo can you tell me why im an loving idiot, please?
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2020 15:24
|
|
|
Kobal2 posted:TBF, you're a loving idiot. Qualify the statement or gently caress off hombre
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2020 16:22
|
|
|
From c-spam. bonus cursed image: 
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2020 16:24
|
|
|
Kobal2 posted:TBF, you're a loving idiot. EBB posted:Qualify the statement or gently caress off hombre
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2020 16:50
|
|
|
EBB posted:Qualify the statement or gently caress off hombre Kobal just watched a 100 minute video detailing the people Contrapoints is said to have aligned herself with, the examples the communities use to support their claims against her and builds a case that those examples don't seem to aggregate into a rational claim but rather a series of simplifications and associations that lead to equivocation. Much of this was about her. I expect bias. I would trust a case study much more than a defensive argument, but it is what it is. Beyond her own case, much of that video models a recurrent format of communication. The proposed model: peole observe a complicated point of view or incident. It is summarized as a contextless phrase that tends towards vilification without nuance. That imprecise argument is then used to support another argument in a chain which ultimately forms an inaccurate description of a situation. And in the cases in question, those inaccurate descriptions fuel anger that: will not be resolved in a satisfying way to the angry because of its imprecision, are impenetrable to outsiders who cant figure out what's going on, and is unproductive for the target who cannot be motivated to make changes since no solution will sate the detractor and the claims don't match their observations. I think ElMalingo's statement, and its lack of nuance, has all the trappings of what Kobal just watched somebody convincingly spend an hour and forty minutes explaining is bad. Kobal also knows (unlike me apparently) that answering is likely a trap, one that may form dangerous associations amongst the audience, at least in ideas. Kobal can't or wont produce an argument as effective as a 100 minute video which has already not satisfied ElMalingo. Kobal thinks they will not convince any readers of their point of view, and long term those readers will distill his argument into 'Kobal supports the transphobic supporting Contrapoints'. This was probably frustrating to Kobal, and so Kobal wrote a pointless insult without nuance instead of expending time writing a poorly edited and unreadable diatribe.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2020 17:34
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2020 17:38
|
|
|
piL posted:Kobal just watched a 100 minute video detailing the people Contrapoints is said to have aligned herself with, the examples the communities use to support their claims against her and builds a case that those examples don't seem to aggregate into a rational claim but rather a series of simplifications and associations that lead to equivocation. This is a really good post. And yeah. gently caress the Contrapoints haters. She rules. She did nothing to warrant the poo poo and her friends got.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2020 17:55
|
|
|
Bored As gently caress posted:gently caress the Contrapoints haters. Well actually, this is kind of the opposite of my point. Elaboration: what I mean is gently caress no one*, because grouping people and picking sides and etc is what creates this imprecision and inaccuracy on intangible internet message boards that results in real actual harm. *unless they consent, you want to do it, and when you do please recognize theres a lot of emotion tied to the act, so you should be careful piL fucked around with this message at 18:27 on Jan 4, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2020 18:09
|
|
|
i would like to clarify that i have nothing against contrapoints, as i liker her video style and the way she can succinctly explain things to dumb people like me. What i don't like about her is that she willingly associated herself with Jesse Singal (Who loves writing about trans issiues, but he is Cis), Blaire White (A conservative Transwoman who supports the trans ban in the military) and Buck Angel (A trans porn actor who allegedly outed transwomen for money). And when people pointed this out to her, her answer was extremely milquetoast and her trans/queer fans didn't liker said response. Do i as a straight Cis man hate contrapoints? No. Do i dislike the way she handle? Yes. There, there is my hot take.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2020 18:31
|
|
|
*receives ANY public criticism* WE NEED TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT THIS POLITICALLY CORRECT CANCEL CULTURE!!! THE LEFT JUST EATS ITSELF!!
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2020 18:42
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2020 18:52
|
|
|
"NOBODY HERE HAS SEEN ACHMED DED TERRIST RITE?!" *Pulls up badly compressed WMV from Outlook -25% of my existence in AETC
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2020 18:55
|
|
|
ElMaligno posted:i would like to clarify that i have nothing against contrapoints, as i liker her video style and the way she can succinctly explain things to dumb people like me. I think that's a more useful post for discussion. In the video, I only recall her addressing Buck Angel and I assume a bias in that treatment. What she elucidated on that most interests me are the generalization of the relationships into 'associates with'. That phrase could equally mean, 'owns and operates a business within the same 1.3 million person city as one another' as it does 'close allies who worked hand-in-hand to push agendas of terror[1]' So when I read your post, I see that she associates with these individuals, and am left to make my own assumption on what that entails. Maybe the depths of which are explained, maybe they're not but as time goes on what I recall as the point is merely the association. Which of those does she associate with more? With whom less? And in what level--as comrades, rivals, co-conspirators, individuals with shared interests, acquaintances, conversationalists, or coworkers? All is lost and only the lose term association remains. Again: I am not informed enough about any of these people to make a clear determination whether Natalie Wynn's relationships is appropriate or indicative of deeply held offensive belief. I don't aim to defend her. I also haven't looked at her responses to stuff to see if she acted like a public internet moron, but I am rarely surprised when people act like public internet moron, so I don't find it implausible that she did. But I see a certain danger in the practice as observed. For some definitions, you are all associates of all of the people that just got banned from FYAD for example, but most of them and most of us are not public enough we need to be concerned about that. When we vilify people for working together instead of what was worked on or towards, I think you create more division. And all of this says nothing about how we apply a presumption of permanence to ethics, persons, and their works. It's a troublesome element of our current media and we're still adapting to it. [1] See the second sentence of the Wikipedia Page on villain,fascist, and anti-semite Joseph Goebbels, "He was one of Adolf Hitler's closest and most devoted associates, and was known for his skills in public speaking and his deeply virulent antisemitism, which was evident in his publicly voiced views." emphasis mine
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2020 19:20
|
|
|
Punkin Spunkin posted:*receives ANY public criticism* I don't think anyone here is saying that.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2020 19:23
|
|
|
piL posted:I don't think anyone here is saying that.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2020 19:25
|
|
|
I don't know how many of you actually watched the video, but she goes over a lot of what people said to her / about her, and wanting to "cancel" her. Some extremely hateful things said by probably the leftest of the left on Youtube and Twitter. These same people harassed Ollie of Philosophy Tube, HbomberGuy, and a few others just because they were friends / previous collaborators on videos with Natalie, even though they are completely unrelated to the entire Buck Angel thing. I'm pretty sure that's an attempt of some parts of leftist twitter trying to "eat their own." With the justification of the "canceling" requiring incredible leaps of logic and assumptions and simplifications and cherry picking and taking poo poo out of context. This was an overreaction.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2020 19:38
|
|
|
Now explain gamergate
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2020 19:46
|
|
|
Bored As gently caress posted:I don't know how many of you actually watched the video, but she goes over a lot of what people said to her / about her, and wanting to "cancel" her. Some extremely hateful things said by probably the leftest of the left on Youtube and Twitter. These same people harassed Ollie of Philosophy Tube, HbomberGuy, and a few others just because they were friends / previous collaborators on videos with Natalie, even though they are completely unrelated to the entire Buck Angel thing. I don't know about the others, but Harry was pissed at Natalie for not telling him that Buck Angel and others would be involved in the project until after the video was posted. It's not "cancel culture" or an overreaction for someone to be angry that they were not told who would be involved in something before they joined the project so that they would be able to make an informed decision about their own participation. She prevented Harry and others from having informed consent about their participation.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2020 19:52
|
|
|
Toshokan posted:I don't know about the others, but Harry was pissed at Natalie for not telling him that Buck Angel and others would be involved in the project until after the video was posted. It's not "cancel culture" or an overreaction for someone to be angry that they were not told who would be involved in something before they joined the project so that they would be able to make an informed decision about their own participation. She prevented Harry and others from having informed consent about their participation. Oh poo poo, I didn't catch/remember that part. Yeah, in retrospect, that seems really bad. Real bad. Yeah, he definitely deserves an apology for that. You're absolutely right that she should have told everyone involved in the project about a controversial figure being also involved, even though it was an extremely small part of her video. So he's got a right to be angry for sure. Does anything she did justify the response she's gotten from randos, though? I don't think so.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2020 19:57
|
|
|
Toshokan posted:She prevented Harry and others from having informed consent about their participation. That's an equivocation not provided sufficient support if true. Did Harry ask and did Wynn deceive Harry? Just because you worked lighting one day on a production that a photographer you hate worked on another day without being provided a list of possible and confirmed participants prior to your participation doesn't mean consent was violated. Edit: this is actually idealistic of me and perhaps not fair. I believe it shouldnt matter, and the example compares it to working a normal gig. But obviously that's not what this is as evidenced by the very discussion we're having and the vitriol surrounding it. A more appropriate metaphor may be the 18th century aristocratic society this all resembles with the primary currency being some sort of social capital. Then maybe Wynn violated some social more by inviting opposing houses to the same party, but in that metaphor I have little sympathy for any of the participants. piL fucked around with this message at 20:23 on Jan 4, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2020 20:02
|
|
|
piL posted:That's an equivocation not provided sufficient support if true. Did Harry ask and did Wynn deceive Harry? The onus is not Harry and other people to ask if Buck Angel or other assholes are involved in a project. Natalie knew drat well how people feel about Angel and chose not to tell others that he was involved. It's deception by omission. piL posted:Just because you worked lighting one day on a production that a photographer you hate worked on another day without being provided a list of possible and confirmed participants prior to your participation doesn't mean consent was violated. You'er completely mischaracterizing the situation. It's not a matter of people having individual animus with Buck Angel and others (e.g., that they just don't get along), which is how your analogy here is characterizing it. People object to Buck Angel for his exclusionary beliefs and practices towards non-binary people, emphasis on gender affirming medical treatment (which is thereby exclusionary to those who haven't had these procedures), creation of a pyramid scheme to exploit transfolk needing help paying for their procedures, and a variety of other reasons. https://www.reddit.com/r/ContraPoints/comments/djdtiq/if_you_go_around_asking_natalies_friends_to/f467kuy/ https://www.reddit.com/r/ContraPoints/comments/djf86p/why_does_everyone_assume_that_buck_angels/f44vi3r/ It's analogous to having Stefan Molyneaux or some other rear end in a top hat included without telling anyone else. piL posted:Edit: this is actually idealistic of me and perhaps not fair. I believe it shouldnt matter, and the example compares it to working a normal gig. But obviously that's not what this is as evidenced by the very discussion we're having and the vitriol surrounding it. Just stop. This is terrible writing and makes you sound like a smug rear end in a top hat.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2020 21:38
|
|
|
Toshokan posted:
On the first link, I wasnt really convinced, but the second link did the job of showing how much more contemporaneous Mr. Angel's antagonism is; it's not leftover decades old quoting from an unappreciated and unrecognizable point in history, that poo poo's from September. Ok, Buck Angel sucks, you convinced me. I don't mean this as a throwaway; I was unwilling to do the legwork, and was satisfied with merely doubting Wynn's characterization as presented. Thank you for that clarification. But I still think its problematic that people would have a lesser opinion of Brewis because his name is on the same credits roll as Angel, that being in the same production without forewarning is a violation of his consent. And people must, or none of it matters. I don't like that the language to describe 'worked in a YouTube video without knowing other contributers' is the same we use to describe assault. Am I completely off base? Am I wrong to think expectations here are abnormal when compared to lives of the non internet-famous? quote:Just stop. This is terrible writing and makes you sound like a smug rear end in a top hat. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2020 22:42
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/Acyn/status/1213347974081679360?s=20
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2020 23:24
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2020 23:44
|
|
|
Stolen from the ww3 thread
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2020 02:54
|
|
|
For what it’s worth I liked your break downs and didn’t mind it. So keep doing what you want.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2020 04:02
|
|
|
Nystral posted:For what it’s worth I liked your break downs and didn’t mind it. So keep doing what you want. Yeah me too
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2020 04:27
|
|
|
Same. Ignore the idiots from games.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2020 05:26
|
|
|
Why the gently caress are we having so many problems with Games posters lately?
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2020 05:33
|
|
|
To be honest, i appreciate that both sides carried it with civility and a surprising amount of argumentative detail. I don't feel like the name calling was warranted over someone misusing the word "resemble" or something, and I don't feel like Tosh should just be ignored for resorting to name-calling at the very end of what was otherwise a pretty humane affair. I'm legit surprised that this discussion went down the way it did. I'm only three posts in, so I still don't have my head wrapped around the details, but still...I'm impressed at the conduct.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2020 05:40
|
|
|
McNally posted:Why the gently caress are we having so many problems with Games posters lately? Lately?
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2020 05:43
|
|
|
Yeah god forbid posters from other parts of the forums come in here and see our discussions
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2020 05:49
|
|
|
its bc of my death stranding posts prolly
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2020 07:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 08:26 |
|
|
ElMaligno posted:Yo can you tell me why im an loving idiot, please? She didn't "align herself" with anyone - she had him do one voice on one video that had nothing whatsoever to do about his beliefs re:trans people or transmedicalism or whatever. She didn't invite him on her loving talk show to gravely opine as he expounds on the necessity and rationale of the ethnostate, FFS. As for answering the critics, apologizing, and providing the context and nuance and self-awarness & whatnot of her various problematic statements : that's quite literally what half of her last video is about. piL posted:Kobal just watched a 100 minute video [...] This was probably frustrating to Kobal, and so Kobal wrote a pointless insult without nuance instead of expending time writing a poorly edited and unreadable diatribe. Kobal2 did pretty much that, yeah  . Also Kobal2 was drunk at the time, which doesn't tend to help his patience, or eloquence, any. But regardless, thanks for the advocacy and wording what I pretty much thought and felt more accurately that I really ever could.Like, I was already not *quite* clear on the justification for such a towering campaign of hate against her and anyone near to her before the video ; to me even to the extent that what she did was regrettable the retribution definitely left all sense of proportion back in another pair of pants, in another country ; but anybody still banging that drum after she published her latest... like, what do you expect her to *do*, exactly, before you consent to stop talking poo poo about her ? Lindsay Ellis did a pretty good TED talk about the effects relentless nazi trolling had on her life, but that's expected of them - they're, yanno, nazis. So, assholes. It's *so* much more discouraging and infuriating when it comes from supposedly intelligent/progressive people who are expected to come from a place of empathy, humanism, all that... Kobal2 fucked around with this message at 10:13 on Jan 5, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2020 09:48
|
|