3 ms·

Just so we’re clear, Matt Walsh has never said any of the things you straw manned, he has never called for violence against anyone, explicitly or implicitly, I’

by vxNsr 4y ago

Just so we’re clear, Matt Walsh has never said any of the things you straw manned, he has never called for violence against anyone, explicitly or implicitly, I’ve seen many people call for violence against him. In one breath you decry the supposed calls for violence against your chosen victims and in the very next sentence claim you must commit violence against others because it’s your only option. Do you not see the extreme irony in that? You’re saying not only are you alone allowed free speech but also you alone are allowed to decide when to commit acts of violence, lest those you disagree with are allowed to speak and say something you find unacceptable and thus “verbal violence”.

komali2 4y ago
https://www.losangelesblade.com/2022/10/20/matt-walsh-police-need-to-break-down-the-doors-of-drag-shows/ https://www.losangelesblade.com/2022/10/20/matt-walsh-police... > . For one thing, the pronoun situation is all over the map, okay? It’s not clear of the various people mentioned here, which are actually females, though they all use female pronouns. > the adults are creeps and degenerates and worse either way, > I was not previously familiar with the term drag mom, though from context it seems that this is just another way of describing a professional groomer. > And just like cancer, stopping it is not a gentle or a painless process. The farther along the cancer is, the more aggressive you have to be in fighting it. Culturally, we are approaching, if we haven’t already reached, a terminal state, which means we have to be all the more aggressive, which calls for two things. > You know, this doesn’t stop until police are breaking down the doors at these places and carting the adults away in handcuffs. Charge them all as pedophiles. Throw them in prison, and whenever they get out, if they do get out, put them on the sex offender registry for life. - Matt Walsh on drag show performers > In one breath you decry the supposed calls for violence against your chosen victims and in the very next sentence claim you must commit violence against others because it’s your only option. Do you not see the extreme irony in that? I find it ironic that you're arguing from a position that usually rejects the notion that speech can be considered violence, then accusing me in a post where I never mention physical violence, only forms of speech, as calling for violence against the intolerant. > You’re saying not only are you alone allowed free speech but also you alone are allowed to decide when to commit acts of violence, lest those you disagree with are allowed to speak and say something you find unacceptable and thus “verbal violence”. Doesn't need to be me, but if you can't tell the difference between "intolerance," and "tolerant, yet intolerant of the intolerant," that says more about you than me. Do you want to give some examples of people you think were unfairly labeled as intolerant? Maybe some people you thought were "cancelled?" I use quotes because I still haven't found a good definition for that word, people just seem to use it.
- vxNsr 4y ago
  If you perform a sexual show in front of children you’re a pedophile. The negative effects of ultra sexualization on children are well documented. That being said, that article and clip are presented without context. It’s not at all clear what he’s talking about, he appears to have just shown a 3rd party video of some kind and is now commenting on it. Without seeing the video we have no idea what he’s actually talking about. He could have just shown a pedophile attempting to justify cp under the guise of a drag show and is now saying these people (rightly) deserve to be jailed if they’re abusing children, alternatively maybe he’s talking about a male person putting on a hyper-sexual dress and reading to toddlers in a library (which I also find abhorrent as it objectifies women in the worst possible way to young impressionable minds that literally cannot comprehend nuance). But it’s not actually illegal or necessarily something we want to make it illegal. Additionally it is not a call to violence to say the law should be followed. Until you can present a clip in context of him calling for violence you’ve shown nothing. You on the other hand do call for and justify violence against those who you disagree with in your GP comment. Not sure why you’re denying it now: > Leftists are forced to lash out So far in this thread I’ve seen you be intolerant of the tolerant and call for violence against those who tolerate your intolerance. You’ve responded to me twice in this thread with the same dishonest link attempting to present a false narrative in hopes of not being called out.
  - komali2 4y ago
    > If you perform a sexual show in front of children you’re a pedophile. You're creating a dangerous precedent here. You should know that various cultures have various things that are considered sexual. I really hope you won't wander into a culture that doesn't sexualize women's breasts and start accusing shirtless women of pedophilia. I also really hope you won't do the same of women showing their ankles in the USA! Please remember that whatever you find gross, icky, and sexual about a drag show, people genuinely felt the same about regarding women showing ankles, cleavage, etc. In some cultures, people feel the same about women showing their hair! Given this massive fluctuation in what we all find sexual, perhaps you should err on the side of caution, and save the accusations of pedophilia for the actual pedophiles, you know, the ones that are actually interested in sexually harming children. A pretty easy cross-cultural definition that spares us from disarming a word that should only be used for a crime anybody could relatively safely describe as "the worst we can imagine." > So far in this thread I’ve seen you be intolerant of the tolerant and call for violence against those who tolerate your intolerance. I never called for violence, I've always been referring to protest and the like. If you agree with me that speech can be violence, I find that actually quite delightful, but contradictory with the rest of your apparently conservative position.

by vxNsr 4y ago

komali2 4y ago

https://www.losangelesblade.com/2022/10/20/matt-walsh-police-need-to-break-down-the-doors-of-drag-shows/ https://www.losangelesblade.com/2022/10/20/matt-walsh-police... > . For one thing, the pronoun situation is all over the map, okay? It’s not clear of the various people mentioned here, which are actually females, though they all use female pronouns. > the adults are creeps and degenerates and worse either way, > I was not previously familiar with the term drag mom, though from context it seems that this is just another way of describing a professional groomer. > And just like cancer, stopping it is not a gentle or a painless process. The farther along the cancer is, the more aggressive you have to be in fighting it. Culturally, we are approaching, if we haven’t already reached, a terminal state, which means we have to be all the more aggressive, which calls for two things. > You know, this doesn’t stop until police are breaking down the doors at these places and carting the adults away in handcuffs. Charge them all as pedophiles. Throw them in prison, and whenever they get out, if they do get out, put them on the sex offender registry for life. - Matt Walsh on drag show performers > In one breath you decry the supposed calls for violence against your chosen victims and in the very next sentence claim you must commit violence against others because it’s your only option. Do you not see the extreme irony in that? I find it ironic that you're arguing from a position that usually rejects the notion that speech can be considered violence, then accusing me in a post where I never mention physical violence, only forms of speech, as calling for violence against the intolerant. > You’re saying not only are you alone allowed free speech but also you alone are allowed to decide when to commit acts of violence, lest those you disagree with are allowed to speak and say something you find unacceptable and thus “verbal violence”. Doesn't need to be me, but if you can't tell the difference between "intolerance," and "tolerant, yet intolerant of the intolerant," that says more about you than me. Do you want to give some examples of people you think were unfairly labeled as intolerant? Maybe some people you thought were "cancelled?" I use quotes because I still haven't found a good definition for that word, people just seem to use it.

vxNsr 4y ago
If you perform a sexual show in front of children you’re a pedophile. The negative effects of ultra sexualization on children are well documented. That being said, that article and clip are presented without context. It’s not at all clear what he’s talking about, he appears to have just shown a 3rd party video of some kind and is now commenting on it. Without seeing the video we have no idea what he’s actually talking about. He could have just shown a pedophile attempting to justify cp under the guise of a drag show and is now saying these people (rightly) deserve to be jailed if they’re abusing children, alternatively maybe he’s talking about a male person putting on a hyper-sexual dress and reading to toddlers in a library (which I also find abhorrent as it objectifies women in the worst possible way to young impressionable minds that literally cannot comprehend nuance). But it’s not actually illegal or necessarily something we want to make it illegal. Additionally it is not a call to violence to say the law should be followed. Until you can present a clip in context of him calling for violence you’ve shown nothing. You on the other hand do call for and justify violence against those who you disagree with in your GP comment. Not sure why you’re denying it now: > Leftists are forced to lash out So far in this thread I’ve seen you be intolerant of the tolerant and call for violence against those who tolerate your intolerance. You’ve responded to me twice in this thread with the same dishonest link attempting to present a false narrative in hopes of not being called out.
- komali2 4y ago
  > If you perform a sexual show in front of children you’re a pedophile. You're creating a dangerous precedent here. You should know that various cultures have various things that are considered sexual. I really hope you won't wander into a culture that doesn't sexualize women's breasts and start accusing shirtless women of pedophilia. I also really hope you won't do the same of women showing their ankles in the USA! Please remember that whatever you find gross, icky, and sexual about a drag show, people genuinely felt the same about regarding women showing ankles, cleavage, etc. In some cultures, people feel the same about women showing their hair! Given this massive fluctuation in what we all find sexual, perhaps you should err on the side of caution, and save the accusations of pedophilia for the actual pedophiles, you know, the ones that are actually interested in sexually harming children. A pretty easy cross-cultural definition that spares us from disarming a word that should only be used for a crime anybody could relatively safely describe as "the worst we can imagine." > So far in this thread I’ve seen you be intolerant of the tolerant and call for violence against those who tolerate your intolerance. I never called for violence, I've always been referring to protest and the like. If you agree with me that speech can be violence, I find that actually quite delightful, but contradictory with the rest of your apparently conservative position.