4 ms·

> He's pretty offensive, but doesn't really go much further than Colbert, John Oliver, etc. I'm sorry, what? > Last week, Maza called out the abuse in a super

by untog 7y ago

> He's pretty offensive, but doesn't really go much further than Colbert, John Oliver, etc. I'm sorry, what? > Last week, Maza called out the abuse in a supercut of comments Crowder has made on his popular YouTube channel in the last two years. They include: “lispy sprite,” “little queer,” “Mr. Gay Vox,” “Mr. Lispy queer from Vox,” “an angry little queer,” “gay Mexican,” and “gay Latino from Vox.” https://news.vice.com/en_us/article/xwn54q/google-says-right-wing-youtube-star-can-continue-his-racist-and-homophobic-abuse https://news.vice.com/en_us/article/xwn54q/google-says-right... It's been a while since I watched John Oliver or Colbert, I guess I'm missing some information that would make the comparison even slightly accurate?

mikeEnoch 7y ago
Carlos Maza’s twitter and ig handle is “gaywonk”. He also speaks with a lisp. He also makes it a point to always point out that he’s “queer” and “latino”. Calling him those things is not an insult. This is what his whole identity and claim to fame is.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
dvt 7y ago
> It's been a while since I watched John Oliver or Colbert, I guess I missed them using slurs on air? Colbert literally called Donald Trump Putin's "c--k holster" on live TV (but was obviously bleeped). Samantha Bee called Ivanka Trump a "feckless c--t." Both of these are easily Google-able. Again, I'm not a fan of this kind of language on either side, but let's at least be fair.
- untog 7y ago
  So, two late night hosts (one of which isn't John Oliver) have used obscenities directed at a person once each. And that's comparable to Crowder's output? He's very obviously been targeting that guy repeatedly, for a long time.
  - dvt 7y ago
    I gave you two examples (the ones most cited by conservative media), and I'm sure you can dig more up. But if that's your line of reasoning, you're headed towards the sorites paradox, and that's not a good place to be.
    - untog 7y ago
      It is not "heading towards the sorites paradox" to suggest that there is a difference between a one off insult and repeated, targeted harassment.
      - dvt 7y ago
        Do you really think you're being fair when you're framing one as a "one-off insult" and the other as "targetted harassment"? Not to mention that I watch John Oliver ever week and just about every episode (without fault) he makes fun of Trump or someone in his cohort. Is that also "repeated, targeted harassment"?
        pdkl95 7y ago
        I don't think John Oliver ever incited his fans to dox and harass/denial-of-service anyone. He's gone after a few organizations and government agencies like the FCC that had already asked for comments from the public. Perhaps more important is that John Oliver is inciting people into political action; political speech by the press - even hen the press tells jokes - is protected very strongly in the US because it's named in the 1st Amendment. Crowder doesn't seem to be making a politically statement and generally seems to have acted like an asshole that says homophobic slurs. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20200019 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20200019
        dvt 7y ago
        And now we're in full-blown sorites paradox mode, where the goalpost keeps changing. At first it was "repeated harassment" and now it's "incite to dox and harass." It's now okay for John Oliver to go after organizations -- even though he very clearly goes after the President (not to mention Gorsuch and Kavanaugh) on a fairly regular basis. As I hope you can see by this point, due to the originally-used ambiguous predicates, this is a fruitless line of argumentation. By the way, even some cursory research would show that Crowder is extremely clear about his views on not harassing or doxxing, but it's clear that you haven't even done me (your opponent in this debate) the courtesy of some basic knowledge-gathering. I do agree that Crowder is an asshole. I also think that assholes have a right to be assholes as long as their behavior doesn't violate Mill's Harm Principle.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]

by untog 7y ago

mikeEnoch 7y ago

Carlos Maza’s twitter and ig handle is “gaywonk”. He also speaks with a lisp. He also makes it a point to always point out that he’s “queer” and “latino”. Calling him those things is not an insult. This is what his whole identity and claim to fame is.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]

dvt 7y ago

> It's been a while since I watched John Oliver or Colbert, I guess I missed them using slurs on air? Colbert literally called Donald Trump Putin's "c--k holster" on live TV (but was obviously bleeped). Samantha Bee called Ivanka Trump a "feckless c--t." Both of these are easily Google-able. Again, I'm not a fan of this kind of language on either side, but let's at least be fair.

untog 7y ago
So, two late night hosts (one of which isn't John Oliver) have used obscenities directed at a person once each. And that's comparable to Crowder's output? He's very obviously been targeting that guy repeatedly, for a long time.
- dvt 7y ago
  I gave you two examples (the ones most cited by conservative media), and I'm sure you can dig more up. But if that's your line of reasoning, you're headed towards the sorites paradox, and that's not a good place to be.
  - untog 7y ago
    It is not "heading towards the sorites paradox" to suggest that there is a difference between a one off insult and repeated, targeted harassment.
    - dvt 7y ago
      Do you really think you're being fair when you're framing one as a "one-off insult" and the other as "targetted harassment"? Not to mention that I watch John Oliver ever week and just about every episode (without fault) he makes fun of Trump or someone in his cohort. Is that also "repeated, targeted harassment"?
      - pdkl95 7y ago
        I don't think John Oliver ever incited his fans to dox and harass/denial-of-service anyone. He's gone after a few organizations and government agencies like the FCC that had already asked for comments from the public. Perhaps more important is that John Oliver is inciting people into political action; political speech by the press - even hen the press tells jokes - is protected very strongly in the US because it's named in the 1st Amendment. Crowder doesn't seem to be making a politically statement and generally seems to have acted like an asshole that says homophobic slurs. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20200019 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20200019
        dvt 7y ago
        And now we're in full-blown sorites paradox mode, where the goalpost keeps changing. At first it was "repeated harassment" and now it's "incite to dox and harass." It's now okay for John Oliver to go after organizations -- even though he very clearly goes after the President (not to mention Gorsuch and Kavanaugh) on a fairly regular basis. As I hope you can see by this point, due to the originally-used ambiguous predicates, this is a fruitless line of argumentation. By the way, even some cursory research would show that Crowder is extremely clear about his views on not harassing or doxxing, but it's clear that you haven't even done me (your opponent in this debate) the courtesy of some basic knowledge-gathering. I do agree that Crowder is an asshole. I also think that assholes have a right to be assholes as long as their behavior doesn't violate Mill's Harm Principle.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]