The regressive left needs to stop, the Colin Moriarty controversy.

[Endus]

you do understand that its actually possible to get people to change their behavior by argument and debate right? Like if i present a really good argument rational people will actually sometimes change their behavior.

Then you'd be attacking the specifics of their complaint, not that they made complaints. That's the difference.

And regardless, you were still acting like anyone was forced to do anything in this, and that's false. Moriarty made a mildly sexist joke. A bunch of people complained to his employer. They apologized. Moriarty quit. None of that was forced by anyone at any point.

lol wtf, he made a joke based off of a stereotype. he never said anything attacking women or stating them to be inferior to men. I don't get how you can stretch what he said so ridiculously far as to call it sexist

If that stereotype is about gender stereotypes, as this was, that's literally the definition of sexism.

[Trifle]

lol wtf, he made a joke based off of a stereotype. he never said anything attacking women or stating them to be inferior to men. I don't get how you can stretch what he said so ridiculously far as to call it sexist

Sexism
noun
1. attitudes or behavior based on traditional stereotypes of gender roles.

[Xarkan]

If that stereotype is about gender stereotypes, as this was, that's literally the definition of sexism.

Tough which gender is it against then? Is the stereotype the joke plays on about females or males (male chauvinist picure of women)

You take it at face value but if the joke is seen as a bit more selfreflective it means something.. else

[PosPosPos]

Tough which gender is it against then? Is the stereotype the joke plays on about females or males (male chauvinist picure of women)

You take it at face value but if the joke is seen as a bit more selfreflective it means something.. else

You can read yourself, can't you? Why do you need us to hold your hands through something as simple as a single phrase?

[Mistame]

Indeed, the KKK did not violate anyone's civil liberties, because they are not a government entity.

This is like me saying that I don't like powdered milk and you telling me that I must be lactose intolerant. We were talking specifically of freedom of speech, only. And while it does fall under "civil liberties" umbrella, the only actual "freedom of speech" is legal protection from government, period. Nothing else is relevant.

[Deleted]

Because the issue is you keep saying "no one should be forced", and then you try and tell people how they should act.

Yeah that's not the same thing.
I tell people not to smoke, because i think its bad, but i also would be opposed to banning it.
There are other forms of influencing people's behaviors than force...

- - - Updated - - -

This is like me saying that I don't like powdered milk and you telling me that I must be lactose intolerant. We were talking specifically of freedom of speech, only. And while it does fall under "civil liberties" umbrella, the only actual "freedom of speech" is legal protection from government, period. Nothing else is relevant.

Okay, so the KKK did not violate black people's free speech rights, glad we cleared that up.
Just read the next few posts and you will either get what i'm saying, Or not.

[Canpinter]

Then you'd be attacking the specifics of their complaint, not that they made complaints. That's the difference.

And regardless, you were still acting like anyone was forced to do anything in this, and that's false. Moriarty made a mildly sexist joke. A bunch of people complained to his employer. They apologized. Moriarty quit. None of that was forced by anyone at any point.

i have been attacking them on the specifics, namely that this joke is so mild and tame that anyone who found it offensive enough to warrant trying to get him fired is an overly thin skinned cry babies who cant handle the most trivial of offenses. And that giving into them over these people will only encourage them to behave in more and more extreme ways.

and i have never implied anyone was forced to do anything, people can make bad choices without anyone forcing them to.

[Deleted]

As opposed to the overprivileged snowflakes, to use your term, rushing to this guy's defense?

It's the same damn thing. The difference is that the ones you're upset about are taking issue with women being denigrated, and you folks are taking issue with a sexist remark being called a sexist remark.

Don't pretend that outrage is somehow a uniquely left-wing thing. This entire thread is outrage because a comment was pointed out as being sexist. Why the apologism for sexism? How is THAT the hill you want to die on?



The problem is that what you describe as "not-PC" is, by definition, some variation of sexist or racist or whatnot.

Why get so upset that a comment like this is correctly described? Why is the anger directed at those who pointed it out, rather than the guy who made it? That's mind-boggling.

The fuck? The guy LOST HIS JOB, try reading better.

[Deleted]

There you go, that's the definition of sexism.

And you are welcome, you and all the others refusing to consult a dictionary.

Are you against any and all jokes that invoke some kind of stereotype?

[PosPosPos]

Are you against any and all jokes that invoke some kind of stereotype?

No, what makes you say that?

[Endus]

The fuck? The guy LOST HIS JOB, try reading better.

http://www.polygon.com/2017/3/13/149...r-sexist-tweet

"It’s with a heavy heart and great sadness that I announce my resignation from Kinda Funny, effective immediately."

Straight from Moriarty's mouth. He didn't lose his job. He quit his job.

[Xarkan]

You can read yourself, can't you? Why do you need us to hold your hands through something as simple as a single phrase?

Reading is not the issue but the same joke, the same words, can be used to make a joke where the implication is the speaker is sexist and wrong. Your assumption is that it can only be one way and to condemn him for it that way?

[Mistame]

Okay, so the KKK did not violate black people's free speech rights, glad we cleared that up.

No, they violated their (other) civil liberties and human rights.

Just read the next few posts and you will either get what i'm saying, Or not.

I get what you're trying to say, but it doesn't make any sense. You're making some abstract association between "free speech" and "civil liberties" but the association, in that respect, is restricted to the legal aspect. The law states your speech is protected from government. That's where the protection, and association, ends and that is the only relevant argument.

In this case, you're trying to imply that the threat of social or societal "consequences" is somehow a violation of his "civil liberties". That's only true if one of those "consequences" actual breaks the law governing one of his [other] civil liberties, in which case it's that civil liberty that was violated, not "free speech", because as we've discussed, "free speech", by law, only protects you from government.

Are you against any and all jokes that invoke some kind of stereotype?

He just pointed out that literally, it is a "sexist" joke. Just keep in mind that a word has only as much value as its weakest connotation. So, in this case, it means nothing.

[Deleted]

I get what you're trying to say, but it doesn't make any sense. You're making some abstract association between "free speech" and "civil liberties"

Ye because free speech is a civil liberty.

but the association, in that respect, is restricted to the legal aspect. The law states your speech is protected from government. That's where the protection, and association, ends and that is the only relevant argument.

So again:

Okay, so the KKK did not violate black people's free speech rights, glad we cleared that up.

That you don't get that this is an untenable position is amazing frankly.

[GennGreymane]

Im so sick of this 4chan/tumblr/facebook/reddit/youtube/forum conglomerate crap

[Illuminance]

http://www.polygon.com/2017/3/13/149...r-sexist-tweet

"It’s with a heavy heart and great sadness that I announce my resignation from Kinda Funny, effective immediately."

Straight from Moriarty's mouth. He didn't lose his job. He quit his job.

You really believe this was voluntary? He just woke up the next day and thought it would be great to quit over a tweet that he didn't feel the need to apologize for?

[Endus]

You really believe this was voluntary? He just woke up the next day and thought it would be great to quit over a tweet that he didn't feel the need to apologize for?

Well, I mean, we just have his word, and Funny Games' word, that it was voluntary, and a complete lack of any evidence to the contrary. So yeah. I really believe what literally all the facts point to.

[Orange Joe]

Maybe the left should start following Trump.


https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-sen...211954555.html

A 17-year-old is the target of legal attention by President Donald Trump’s general counsel over a site where kitten paws bat around images of President Trump’s face

Awwwww poor poor Trump.

[Mistame]

Ye because free speech is a civil liberty.

Civil liberties are "personal freedoms that the government cannot abridge, either by law or by judicial interpretation, without due process".

Okay, so the KKK did not violate black people's free speech rights, glad we cleared that up.

That you don't get that this is an untenable position is amazing frankly.

I was clarifying the difference. No, the KKK didn't "violate their freedom of speech", because they can't. That's not how that works. "Civil liberties" and "civil rights" are two distinctly different concepts. The latter being, "the basic right to be free from unequal treatment, based on certain characteristics which we deem important, like race, gender, and disability". And that, along with violating their human rights, is the context of what the KKK did. Not "violate their civil liberties". To reiterate, unless there are laws in place that specifically protect an individual's freedom of speech from people other than government, it's literally impossible for anyone but government to infringe on it.

[Deleted]

Civil liberties are "personal freedoms that the government cannot abridge, either by law or by judicial interpretation, without due process".



I was clarifying the difference. No, the KKK didn't "violate their freedom of speech", because they can't. That's not how that works.

Again, you do not understand my point.
I told you to read the posts following the one you initially quoted.
Here:

But all of that is actually besides the point, because the point was that the argument that 'unless it's the government, your civil liberties are not being violated' is a dumb and facile argument.
If for no other reason than the fact that the KKK clearly did violate people's civil liberties, and under that facile definition, none of this counts:
Do you get the point or are you going to presume i'm shilling for the KKK some more?

But I will say it again, It's a dumb and facile argument to pretend free speech involved nothing more than freedom from governmental repression.