5 ms·

Painting insults and threats and bullying as legitimate criticism is the main rhetorical fallacy of the alt-right movement. They have a guarantee of free speech

Painting insults and threats and bullying as legitimate criticism is the main rhetorical fallacy of the alt-right movement. They have a guarantee of free speech in this country but they do not have a guarantee of Twitter access.

imaginenore 10y ago
Twitter allows threats and bullying when it comes from the left. They refused to ban the freaking jihadists. They have SJWs posting #killallmen, #KillAllWhiteMen #maletears in droves. Nothing ever happens to them. This move is simply political censorship.
- kelukelugames 10y ago
  Speaking of male tears...
  - imaginenore 10y ago
    Another great example! Good job demonstrating!
    - throwaway-hn123 10y ago
      A great example of what? I'm having trouble working out what's upsetting you here.
- adekok 10y ago
  For all the people downvoting, it's true: https://twitter.com/hashtag/killallmen https://twitter.com/hashtag/killallmen About half of the tweets are serious "killallmen" comments. The other half are people complaining about it. And, complaining that twitter won't do anything, despite their terms of service saying such behavior is ban-worthy. Or look at twitter banning Milo... because other people engaged in harassment. People who had no clear tie to Milo. At no point could Twitter point to Milo's behavior, and say "this violated our terms of service, so he's banned". They just banned him, despite their terms of service. I've mentioned this before on HN, and asked "What, exactly, did Milo do? Please point to something he did." I received no replies, but got plenty of downvotes. Which says to me that the people involved (like the ones downvoting here) know their opinions are contrary to all facts and reason. So if you're thinking of downvoting, try instead to convince me I'm wrong. Adult discussions are much more productive than naive attempts at censorship.
  - dmschulman 10y ago
    You're being intellectually disingenuous to believe that #killallmen is a legitimate threat of violence towards men. Find me some examples of violent feminists lynching and murdering men on the basis of feminist dogma. Meanwhile, those with racist, bigoted, homophobic, and anti-semitic viewpoints continue to commit actual hate crimes, murders, campaigns of intimidation, and worse. So yeah, you're making a typical strawman argument to deflect legitimate criticism and turn the conversation away from the topic at hand. Not worth engaging you further on this point, but if you want to discuss the topic at hand, I'm all ears.
    - adekok 10y ago
      > You're being intellectually disingenuous to believe that #killallmen is a legitimate threat of violence towards men Many (not all) of the people who say this really do believe it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCUM_Manifesto https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCUM_Manifesto http://www.dailywire.com/news/8386/feminist-journalist-all-men-are-rapists-and-should-amanda-prestigiacomo# http://www.dailywire.com/news/8386/feminist-journalist-all-m... > Find me some examples of violent feminists lynching and murdering men on the basis of feminist dogma. How about violence towards men, based on their dogma? See Jordan Peterson in Toronto, among many others. > Meanwhile, those with racist, bigoted, homophobic, and anti-semitic viewpoints continue to commit actual hate crimes, murders, campaigns of intimidation, and worse. Which are all bad. And should be stopped. But you're being intellectually disingenous if you believe that fighting all bigotry is bad, because some bigots are more violent than others. > So yeah, you're making a typical strawman argument to deflect legitimate criticism and turn the conversation away from the topic at hand. Only if you ignore all facts and reason. Sorry. > Not worth engaging you further on this point, but if you want to discuss the topic at hand, I'm all ears. i.e. you don't want to admit to the bigotry and hostility I dislike, because you think it's not as bad as the bigotry and hostility you dislike. And, you're so full of yourself, that you're unwilling to learn from people who disagree with you. People who just might have reasons for their opinions. In this mindset, the good people are (by definition) good, and can do no wrong. The bad people are (by definition) bad, and can do no right. You don't need to engage the bad people as people, because they're evil and despicable. You can just dismiss them out of hand. Or, you can do what Daryl Davis did. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daryl_Davis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daryl_Davis A black man befriended KKK members, talked to them as people. He used friendliness, along with facts and reason, to convince them that racism was wrong.
- cossatot 10y ago
  Are you calling actual jihadists left wing? Or are you calling SJWs jihadists?
  - imaginenore 10y ago
    SJWs generally support anything Islam (which never made much sense to me, because how anti-woman Islam is).
    - devsquid 10y ago
      waaa you are a confused individual.
concernedmale 10y ago
Versus simple rioting, beating people, and threatening assassination from the alt-left?

imaginenore 10y ago

Twitter allows threats and bullying when it comes from the left. They refused to ban the freaking jihadists. They have SJWs posting #killallmen, #KillAllWhiteMen #maletears in droves. Nothing ever happens to them. This move is simply political censorship.

kelukelugames 10y ago
Speaking of male tears...
- imaginenore 10y ago
  Another great example! Good job demonstrating!
  - throwaway-hn123 10y ago
    A great example of what? I'm having trouble working out what's upsetting you here.
adekok 10y ago
For all the people downvoting, it's true: https://twitter.com/hashtag/killallmen https://twitter.com/hashtag/killallmen About half of the tweets are serious "killallmen" comments. The other half are people complaining about it. And, complaining that twitter won't do anything, despite their terms of service saying such behavior is ban-worthy. Or look at twitter banning Milo... because other people engaged in harassment. People who had no clear tie to Milo. At no point could Twitter point to Milo's behavior, and say "this violated our terms of service, so he's banned". They just banned him, despite their terms of service. I've mentioned this before on HN, and asked "What, exactly, did Milo do? Please point to something he did." I received no replies, but got plenty of downvotes. Which says to me that the people involved (like the ones downvoting here) know their opinions are contrary to all facts and reason. So if you're thinking of downvoting, try instead to convince me I'm wrong. Adult discussions are much more productive than naive attempts at censorship.
- dmschulman 10y ago
  You're being intellectually disingenuous to believe that #killallmen is a legitimate threat of violence towards men. Find me some examples of violent feminists lynching and murdering men on the basis of feminist dogma. Meanwhile, those with racist, bigoted, homophobic, and anti-semitic viewpoints continue to commit actual hate crimes, murders, campaigns of intimidation, and worse. So yeah, you're making a typical strawman argument to deflect legitimate criticism and turn the conversation away from the topic at hand. Not worth engaging you further on this point, but if you want to discuss the topic at hand, I'm all ears.
  - adekok 10y ago
    > You're being intellectually disingenuous to believe that #killallmen is a legitimate threat of violence towards men Many (not all) of the people who say this really do believe it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCUM_Manifesto https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCUM_Manifesto http://www.dailywire.com/news/8386/feminist-journalist-all-men-are-rapists-and-should-amanda-prestigiacomo# http://www.dailywire.com/news/8386/feminist-journalist-all-m... > Find me some examples of violent feminists lynching and murdering men on the basis of feminist dogma. How about violence towards men, based on their dogma? See Jordan Peterson in Toronto, among many others. > Meanwhile, those with racist, bigoted, homophobic, and anti-semitic viewpoints continue to commit actual hate crimes, murders, campaigns of intimidation, and worse. Which are all bad. And should be stopped. But you're being intellectually disingenous if you believe that fighting all bigotry is bad, because some bigots are more violent than others. > So yeah, you're making a typical strawman argument to deflect legitimate criticism and turn the conversation away from the topic at hand. Only if you ignore all facts and reason. Sorry. > Not worth engaging you further on this point, but if you want to discuss the topic at hand, I'm all ears. i.e. you don't want to admit to the bigotry and hostility I dislike, because you think it's not as bad as the bigotry and hostility you dislike. And, you're so full of yourself, that you're unwilling to learn from people who disagree with you. People who just might have reasons for their opinions. In this mindset, the good people are (by definition) good, and can do no wrong. The bad people are (by definition) bad, and can do no right. You don't need to engage the bad people as people, because they're evil and despicable. You can just dismiss them out of hand. Or, you can do what Daryl Davis did. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daryl_Davis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daryl_Davis A black man befriended KKK members, talked to them as people. He used friendliness, along with facts and reason, to convince them that racism was wrong.
cossatot 10y ago
Are you calling actual jihadists left wing? Or are you calling SJWs jihadists?
- imaginenore 10y ago
  SJWs generally support anything Islam (which never made much sense to me, because how anti-woman Islam is).
  - devsquid 10y ago
    waaa you are a confused individual.

concernedmale 10y ago

Versus simple rioting, beating people, and threatening assassination from the alt-left?