CuriousCat Archive Page 41 of 202

  1. Hey there, you conveniently left out the part in your playbook series where Harry Reid was the one who instituted the “51 votes” for cabinet and SCOTUS nominees.

    I devoted an entire video to how Democrats are useless cowards, Reid is in keeping with that

  2. Do you think it would be a positive thing if we could charge people like Jonah Hill criminally for emotional abuse? It's clearly different from kidnapping, but maybe it could be like a misdemeanor or something similar?

    certain types of emotional abuse *are* criminal, but probably not Hill's

  4. Toby Fox

    in response to Weird Al

    Toby Fox is a pixellated dog

  5. "toxic" masculinity was invented by women.

    in the sense that most men were birthed by women, this is probably correct

  6. How would they be able to fit the small ring on any of their giant talons? I thought that there was something intrinsically important about actually putting the ring on a finger.

    in response to okay mr smart guy, explain the eagles

    no, that just makes you visible to the nazgul. it corrupts even those who wear it around the neck, that's why Frodo finds it so heavy.

  8. ever try deep rock galactic? i feel like you haven't really talked much about that flavor of shooter, so i don't know if you're interested in coop left 4 dead type games

    I prefer a single-player campaign, I'm not much for dealing with other people

  9. Do you put the toilet seat down after you do your business

    yes. it's generally advisable that you put the seat down before you flush, because you'd be surprised how much particulate gets sprayed into the air upon flushing and I keep my toothbrush in the bathroom.

  10. Okay but what if, like, they stuck the Ring inside a soccer ball and repeatedly punted it in the direction of Mt. Doom.

    in response to okay mr smart guy, explain the eagles

    never get past shelob that way

  12. i thought the communists had the music?

    in response to Your taste in music in 4 men... Go!

    I've never met a capitalist nb

  13. (diff anon) They're asking for 4 men who, put together, would describe your taste in music, I think

    in response to Your taste in music in 4 men... Go!

    that's even more ridiculous, do men even MAKE music??

  14. okay mr smart guy, explain the eagles

    in response to Your taste in music in 4 men... Go!

    THEY COULDN'T CARRY THE RING CUZ IT WOULD HAVE CORRUPTED THEM SAME AS IT DID EVERYONE ELSE, ONLY HOBBITS ARE ABLE TO CARRY IT LONG ENOUGH TO GET TO MORDOR

  16. If a lady blocks you on social media, but you coincidentally bumped into her and engage in small talk (she starts the convo first, rather than you/me first), will you still be willing to continue the conversation?

    obviously it depends on why I got blocked. if she blocked me cuz I endorsed trans rights or refused to cancel this week's whipping girl, then I'm not interested in talking to her anyway. if she blocked me for her own reasons, then I will assume she's being polite and be polite back, but keep the conversation brief unless she actively tries to continue it. I generally try to respect a person's boundaries, stated or implied, in different contexts.

  17. Are you not open to the idea that some of the opinions of people in your circle could be flawed, and if, by your own admission, you aren't super familiar with debate spheres is it not possible that your view of those spheres is misplaced and concocted by seeing a sliver of the worst of it? I'm not necessarily saying this is the case but I think one of the biggest issues on any side, as much as there are even "sides" here is the complete failure to admit that there's even potential for wrongdoing on one end or the other.

    i am always open to being wrong and willing to admit as much, but, also, sometimes people On Here make very ignorant arguments and, I'm sorry, sometimes I just know for a fact I'm right and it's hard to be humble about that, you know? I'm not perfect, and I've fucked up plenty, and I do my best to own it when it happens. but, also, I have control over what questions do and don't get answered, so anything I don't feel confident weighing in on I just don't answer. so, yeah, I'm gonna come off as a know-it-all sometimes. but I, like, CHRONICALLY caveat my opinions and admit my biases, and have always encouraged people to come to their own opinions.

  18. Your taste in music in 4 men... Go!

    "music for men" is like aliens. I believe it exists, and may even be inevitable, but I don't believe we've thus far encountered such a thing.

    all music is for women and nbs.

  19. Help how do i tell if my preference to express/present masc and dislike doing the same as fem is because those are my raw feelings or because I'm playing into the idea that it's better to aspire to normative masculine expression? Man i hate being in a society and being affect by it

    oh it'll always be both, and you'll never know the exact proportions, so just keep unpacking your biases and if the masculine urge stays strong it's probably a core part of you!

    (as a cis man I can speak to having similar experiences and settling on "I think I'm still male" but I have no experience with egg-cracking so I can't speak to what that's like)

  20. (diff. anon) Just say you have friends who are sex workers and you're biased enough to believe that the truth is whatever they say it is. It couldn't be more obvious.

    in response to Regulations exist to make illegal behaviors less likely in the first place, and create enforcement mechanisms that are less onerous on the harmed party than litigation. "It's already illegal; nothing more to be done" is a... weird take. (having realized I'm Controling the Conversation a bit: "All likely regulations would negatively impact sex workers in excess of any benefit to others" is here unchallenged and probably true)

    just say you've never spoken to a single sex worker in your life, know nothing about their lives or profession, and are biased to believing you know better than them

  21. I like Destiny, he seems pretty normal and he's a socialist which isn't bad.

    I don't even watch Destiny and I know he's had long arguments where he insists socialism always fails, what are you talking about

  22. IAN! i don't even know who brendan lee mulligan is, but i've seen your tweets about him plaguing your youtube frontpage. now he's starting to appear on mine. twice now, in two days!

    fuck dude I didn't know it was contagious!

  23. Regulations exist to make illegal behaviors less likely in the first place, and create enforcement mechanisms that are less onerous on the harmed party than litigation. "It's already illegal; nothing more to be done" is a... weird take.

    (having realized I'm Controling the Conversation a bit: "All likely regulations would negatively impact sex workers in excess of any benefit to others" is here unchallenged and probably true)

    in response to Are they not both in this case? I'm sure lots of quacks would like to be able to practice medicine and call themselves doctors without oversight but we don't allow that, or people that run like one man food carts and I think they should still be accountable to the people through the government for the good of public health and safety?

    in the world of pure rhetoric, I suppose, but we do not in fact have a chronic problem of sex workers seriously injuring clients so our legal system is either already handling the problem or the problem doesn't really exist

  24. Different anon. I think this person isn’t saying that capitalism will protect the workers so much as they are acknowledging that we live under capitalism, and that probably isn’t going to change in the immediate future, so sex workers need some protection within capitalism. A grey market can still be capitalism and it makes it hard for regulations to be enforced. I know that legalization does not automatically mean regulations will be imposed, let alone enforced, but they are more likely if it is a legal industry. The same goes for destigmatization.

    in response to Scenario A: During work, a sex worker accidentally bends a client's leg back too far and dislocates a hip. If it were legalized they would probably be required to have business insurance to cover this kind of liability, like licensed massage therapists. I don't think if it's just decriminalized that they would. Scenario B: A condom breaks and an STD is passed along from worker to client. If it were legalized, the worker would have had testing requirements to get licensed which would limit exposure. Scenario C: A 15 year old run away engages in sex work and lie about their age. Later, they return home and tell their parents who have the clients (who had no way of knowing) arrested for CSA. If it was legalized and licensed, age would have been verified. Now I'm not saying this scenario wouldn't have happened anyway, there are still plenty of people that would have done so but I do also think some would have done it on accident. I don't want them to have that deniability. I'm sure there are others I haven't thought of. And probably decriminalization is the easier, immediate step that should be taken. If we got rid of capitalism and everyone had free healthcare and housing and all their needs met, I don't think the distinction would matter as much. But in the world we do currently live in, it feels like if we want to destigmatize sex work and treat it as actual labor, it needs to be legalized and regulated like actual labor, not let to just exist in a gray market. But I'm also willing to admit maybe I'm wrong? My priorities might be off or I might be thinking too long term or some other error

    op is still coming up with hypothetical scenarios that are either covered by the legal system or already regulated and protect bosses rather than workers or clients, and all are rather far-fetched edge cases

  26. Do you like Jedi Mind Tricks?

    haven't listened to them much, but the DJ's spin-off trip-hop album, A Bright Cold Day, is one of the best trip-hop albums since the 90's, so he's got chops!

    where should I start with JMT?

  27. Scenario A: During work, a sex worker accidentally bends a client's leg back too far and dislocates a hip. If it were legalized they would probably be required to have business insurance to cover this kind of liability, like licensed massage therapists. I don't think if it's just decriminalized that they would.

    Scenario B: A condom breaks and an STD is passed along from worker to client. If it were legalized, the worker would have had testing requirements to get licensed which would limit exposure.

    Scenario C: A 15 year old run away engages in sex work and lie about their age. Later, they return home and tell their parents who have the clients (who had no way of knowing) arrested for CSA. If it was legalized and licensed, age would have been verified. Now I'm not saying this scenario wouldn't have happened anyway, there are still plenty of people that would have done so but I do also think some would have done it on accident. I don't want them to have that deniability.

    I'm sure there are others I haven't thought of. And probably decriminalization is the easier, immediate step that should be taken. If we got rid of capitalism and everyone had free healthcare and housing and all their needs met, I don't think the distinction would matter as much. But in the world we do currently live in, it feels like if we want to destigmatize sex work and treat it as actual labor, it needs to be legalized and regulated like actual labor, not let to just exist in a gray market. But I'm also willing to admit maybe I'm wrong? My priorities might be off or I might be thinking too long term or some other error

    in response to Are they not both in this case? I'm sure lots of quacks would like to be able to practice medicine and call themselves doctors without oversight but we don't allow that, or people that run like one man food carts and I think they should still be accountable to the people through the government for the good of public health and safety?

    A: the lack of industry regulation doesn't magically make injuring a person legal, the client can still sue or press charges

    B: porn is regulated and does not do this; herpes is considered a guarantee of working in porn because bosses have the financial leverage to compel performers to take that risk

    C: see B

    all these arguments presume that capitalism can do a better job at protecting workers/consumers than the workers, consumers, or legal system, and I wanna ask why that would be

  28. what services do you provide when you freelance (diff. anon)

    in response to Regardless of whatever legal status Innuendo Studios operates under, how you receive money is materially different from sex workers. Sex workers have decided rates for pre-determined services and are expected to deliver based on pre-determined guidelines, whereas people basically have decided to give you money just for existing simply cause they like you and have little, if any, strings expectations. Contractors are definitely a business, you are not.

    animation, audio editing, video editing

  29. You ever read a Jane McAlevey book?

    no but I loved him in Atonement

  30. Regardless of whatever legal status Innuendo Studios operates under, how you receive money is materially different from sex workers. Sex workers have decided rates for pre-determined services and are expected to deliver based on pre-determined guidelines, whereas people basically have decided to give you money just for existing simply cause they like you and have little, if any, strings expectations. Contractors are definitely a business, you are not.

    in response to Isn't that kinda like saying a shop that's run by only the sole proprietor isn't a business? Like, if you want sex workers to own their own bodies they would still be a business; they're providing services

    camming and onlyfans are also sex work, and I don't only do youtube but freelance as well

  31. It's more that crossing boundaries is harassment, by definition.

    in response to there is nothing more dangerous to women than men who honestly think they've never crossed any boundaries. shows that you don't examine your own behavior and how you might make people feel uncomfortable. it's a more insidious form of nice guyism.

    no, harassment is, by definition, crossing boundaries, in the same way a square is definitionally a rectangle.

  32. Are they not both in this case? I'm sure lots of quacks would like to be able to practice medicine and call themselves doctors without oversight but we don't allow that, or people that run like one man food carts and I think they should still be accountable to the people through the government for the good of public health and safety?

    in response to Is decriminalization of sex work(over legalization) the best thing for society at large? I know sex workers argue it's the best for them, but many businesses would argue operating in a gray market with no oversight and regulations would be best for them and we don't bend to that desire(or shouldn't).

    where we going with this analogy? is the idea that sex workers will do something shady if not regulated? cuz I thought the main concern about lack of regulation was that people will exploit or assault them. I'm trying to think about what threat they are supposed to pose to consumers that isn't already illegal.

  33. Would conservative Americans oppose the term “American exceptionalism” if they knew it was coined by Joseph Stalin?

    lol, no, they don't care where things come from. they hate the labor theory of value even though it was championed by their hero Adam Smith. nothing needs to make sense on the Right.

  34. Can you help someone who doesn’t want to be helped?

    in my opinion, people change when they WANT to change or when they NEED to change. so, yes, you can help someone in need even if they don't want it.

    what they don't do is change because YOU want/need them to.

  35. When do you think Toy Story should have ended?

    I've so far enjoyed all 4 TS movies and appreciated their endings. 3 was a good place to finish up and I think 4 is weaker, but still a valuable addition.

  37. In what was is Jonah Hill demonstrative of the inverse of this position

    in response to there is nothing more dangerous to women than men who honestly think they've never crossed any boundaries. shows that you don't examine your own behavior and how you might make people feel uncomfortable. it's a more insidious form of nice guyism.

    op uses "crossing boundaries" to downplay assault and rape, Hill uses "crossing boundaries" to elevate petty complaints like being hot where other men can see you

    y'all will get your heads around feminist lingo in time, I believe in you

  38. The only reason anyone cares about what Jonah Hill did is because he's fat. Reddit nerds don't usually have the confidence to bully good looking men.

    in response to there is nothing more dangerous to women than men who honestly think they've never crossed any boundaries. shows that you don't examine your own behavior and how you might make people feel uncomfortable. it's a more insidious form of nice guyism.

    I have a storied history of bullying hot men

  40. Isn't that kinda like saying a shop that's run by only the sole proprietor isn't a business? Like, if you want sex workers to own their own bodies they would still be a business; they're providing services

    in response to Is decriminalization of sex work(over legalization) the best thing for society at large? I know sex workers argue it's the best for them, but many businesses would argue operating in a gray market with no oversight and regulations would be best for them and we don't bend to that desire(or shouldn't).

    I'm a sole proprietor, and it would be ludicrous to call me a business. more sensible to consider them contractors.

  41. But I thought the main goal of companies above all else is to make a profit?

    in response to If women make 77 cents for every dollar a man makes, why don’t companies only hire women?

    it's curious, isn't it?

    right now, women make less than men. they also get hired less often than men. many women don't know they're making less than men because asking a man what he makes is somewhat stigmatized. acknowledging these tendencies, we can deduce that women often accept lower payer because they are in some ways lucky to get hired at all, and they are often unaware of BY HOW MUCH they are being underpaid. and, from that, we can assume that, if companies hired more women, women would talk more amongst themselves and, by making up more of the work force, be better able to demand fair wages.

    in effect, hiring more women would negate the financial incentive to hire more women. the number of women in the workforce will trend towards the equilibrium between how little you can pay them and how many you can hire before it becomes a problem. fewer women, and you have too many higher-paid men; more women, and they're in a position to make demands.

    all this makes sense in pure economic terms.

    BUT ALSO: men in power don't do what makes money, they do what they THINK makes money, and if their gut tells them than hiring men is worth the greater expenditure, they'll do it, because it flatters their own male ego, which they will trust even if all the data says they'd do better with greater diversity. same reason movies are stingy with roles for Black actors despite the success of Black Panther. capitalists often lose money by favoring their other privileges, because wealth and wisdom are inversely correlated.

  42. Do you think Matt Walsh is a bad person?

    doy

  43. What do you think of Leon Trotsky?

    great hair

  44. If women make 77 cents for every dollar a man makes, why don’t companies only hire women?

    for the same reason they don't pay women as much: they prefer men

  45. Its fascinating how definitions of words like Fascism and Communism can become precise or vague, depending on necessity or the hour of the day for leftists

    in response to Well it wouldn’t become a communist regime, for one…

    that's because fascism is a subset of authoritarianism and communism is an umbrella term with dozens of subsets. you might as well be saying "fascinating how the definitions of words like 'parallelogram' and 'shape' can become precise or vague for geometrists"

  47. Are you getting more "Discoursey" folks lately or are you just deciding not to prioritize your health?

    uh... both.

  48. Independent polling centers continued to exist under trump in the us

    in response to After the recent mutiny, russian rags published that 94% of russians love putin and then an independent polling center ran a poll that showed 68% are willing to re-elect him in 2024. Sounds like a popular support to me.

    Trump is a fascist, but he did not have the time, support, or intelligence to successfully institute a fascist government. he signaled many times that his ideal would be to shut down news orgs that criticized him.

  49. Aside from talking to angry Jack, is there anything past-you expresses in your videos that current-you disagrees with?

    I could've been more nuanced about where and how people become abusers in We Don't Talk About Kenny, but I wouldn't say it's an about-face

  50. When someone says "communist regime" you know exactly which type of government they're referring to. Don't play semantics here.

    in response to Well it wouldn’t become a communist regime, for one…

    yes, which is why I didn't ask them to clarify what they were referring to. but many people who say "communist regime" imply (intentionally or otherwise) that communism can only ever be a regime, so it's good to clarify for the rest of the people reading. just so nobody gets the wrong idea.

  51. The United States and most Western liberal democracies are *already* small enough. But I don't want them to become much bigger and overtake my life, which is what I mean when I say I'm for "small government."

    in response to Well it wouldn’t become a communist regime, for one…

    sure, I don't want an authoritarian system that invades my privacy, either. that's not really a factor of large vs. small, though - Republicans are the party of "small government" and they are also the biggest proponents of authority and surveillance. a government can be small AND invasive. so it's more a question of WHAT the government does, not its size.

  52. purplo

    in response to pinko

    ...thanks?

  53. Is decriminalization of sex work(over legalization) the best thing for society at large? I know sex workers argue it's the best for them, but many businesses would argue operating in a gray market with no oversight and regulations would be best for them and we don't bend to that desire(or shouldn't).

    sex workers are not the business, they are the laborers, and you should do what the workers say is good for them

  54. Does fascism get a bad rap?

    NO, IT IS LITERALLY IMPOSSIBLE TO HATE FASCISM TOO MUCH

  55. Well it wouldn’t become a communist regime, for one…

    in response to What’s so bad about having a small government to just take care of things private individuals and organizations can’t handle? Like I wouldn’t trust a company to run the military or the police.

    "communism" can mean a massive state-run economy like in the USSR or it can be stateless anarcho-communism like in Chiapas, and everything in between, so, again, what specifically would your hypothetical government stop doing in order to become smaller?

  56. there is nothing more dangerous to women than men who honestly think they've never crossed any boundaries. shows that you don't examine your own behavior and how you might make people feel uncomfortable. it's a more insidious form of nice guyism.

    in response to That means that 93% of men have never even harassed women - kind of odd if all men are sexist and patriarchy is everywhere

    kind of amazing how you think rape, harassment, and assault are merely "crossing boundaries," like wow what a pathetic weasel argument, you're like an inverse jonah hill

  58. Kind of bad faith that he said "raped assaulted or at least harassed" and you focused on rape...

    in response to feminist men are annoying af because 99% of them are in it to protect women from other men, never from themselves, and the thought that they might have crossed boundaries at some point triggers them beyond reason. almost every man (save maybe some monks) has raped or assaulted or at least harassed at least one woman in his lifetime, and women would be better off if men approached feminism with that understanding

    kinda bad faith to imply the burden of proof was ever on me in the first place, dickhead

  59. That means that 93% of men have never even harassed women - kind of odd if all men are sexist and patriarchy is everywhere

    in response to feminist men are annoying af because 99% of them are in it to protect women from other men, never from themselves, and the thought that they might have crossed boundaries at some point triggers them beyond reason. almost every man (save maybe some monks) has raped or assaulted or at least harassed at least one woman in his lifetime, and women would be better off if men approached feminism with that understanding

    weird to move the goalposts to the exact opposite of your previous argument.

    rape culture is not a majority of men assaulting women, it's 1 in 15 nom-incarcerated men being rapists and no one doing anything about it

  60. After the recent mutiny, russian rags published that 94% of russians love putin and then an independent polling center ran a poll that showed 68% are willing to re-elect him in 2024. Sounds like a popular support to me.

    in response to You said in an earlier answer that you didn't think Russia and North Korea were fascist. (To be fair it might've been just a throw-away quip in response to a right winger.) I've always thought of North Korea, and nowadays also Russia, as fitting quite well into this authoritarian mass politics you describe. Do you think describing them as fascist is inaccurate? What are your thoughts on categorizing them?

    the existence of an independent polling center that can challenge the government's report is evidence against Russia being fascist

  61. What’s so bad about having a small government to just take care of things private individuals and organizations can’t handle? Like I wouldn’t trust a company to run the military or the police.

    in response to The smaller the government, the freer the people?

    "large government" pretty much always means handling things private individuals can't, like universal healthcare and building railroads and going to the moon. what things would this small government stop doing?

  64. You said in an earlier answer that you didn't think Russia and North Korea were fascist. (To be fair it might've been just a throw-away quip in response to a right winger.) I've always thought of North Korea, and nowadays also Russia, as fitting quite well into this authoritarian mass politics you describe. Do you think describing them as fascist is inaccurate? What are your thoughts on categorizing them?

    in response to Was Rome not fascist? if not, what was it? What about the proto-indo europeans who were being fascist long before capitalism even existed?

    I don't know enough about North Korea to say. Russia is... eeeuughhj? it's got a lot of the hallmarks but I don't think the authority has the popular support nor is there the cultish breakdown between the self and the state that we see in fascist regimes. I could be wrong, but Putin just seems like your average military dictator. (which, if it's not obvious, is still VERY BAD.)

  65. (Diff anon) Can you really say that there are there more than two "Big Names" in the "debatebro world"? If not, why the pretense?

    in response to Do you think debatebros are bad for the left?

    I am so barely connected to that space that I have no sense of how many there are. I know if at least three, and that's maybe very ignorant of me.

    as for why I would avoid name-dropping this handful of guys who seek out drama for clicks, clearly google themselves a lot, and have very aggressive fans, I think you can answer your own question there.

  66. Feel like a lot of "debate" encourages "South Park Centrism" more than it encourages intellectual curiosity, research and efficient communication of findings tho.

    generally, using curiosity, research, and efficient communication of findings to talk to a person with an opposing view, it's more likely to feel like a "conversation" or "discussion" than a "debate." debate, as it is done on YouTube these days, is mostly pageantry. and pageantry has its uses, but let's not pretend it's anything it's not.

  68. Was Rome not fascist? if not, what was it? What about the proto-indo europeans who were being fascist long before capitalism even existed?

    in response to Fascism precedes capitalism by many thousand years.

    "fascism" is not a synonym for "authoritarian" or "dictatorship" or even "totalitarian" (though it's closely related to that third one). fascism is a specific type of authoritarian government, first created by Benito Mussolini when he created the Italian Fasci di Combattimento in Italy's Po Valley after World War 1.

    the thing that makes fascism unique among authoritarian systems is it is an authoritarian MASS POLITICS, the first (and so far only) of its kind. prior to the 20th century, politics in "civilized" society were carried out by elites. kings and emperors, and, when citizens were given power, they were aristocrats, title-owners, landed gentry. the PUBLIC had no real say in what happened and simply had to do what they were told.

    but, in the early 20th century, after the French and Russian Revolutions and the English Civil War, this started to change. it was clear we were entering an era of mass politics, in which the public was going to have a say in how they were governed. monarchy was under threat, and more and more rulers were giving SOME degree of voting rights to their citizens, pulling together parliaments in an attempt to not get their heads chopped off. communist movements were blooming all over Europe after Lenin's victory over the Tsars. at the time, it seemed not only clear that government by the masses was the future, but that socialism was the only form of government mass politics could take.

    fascism was the authoritarian response to this. barely a decade from the October Revolution, Mussolini invented the term "fascism," which was an "alternative" form of mass politics. what makes fascism so strange is it is, functionally, a government in which THE PUBLIC SUPPORTS THE STRIPPING OF THEIR OWN RIGHTS. where most authoritarian governments rule merely through power, fascism rules with a bizarre mixture of power and CONSENT. not full consent, obviously, because it's still based on demonizing and brutalizing the "illegitimate" portion of the public, but even the people it empowers are WILLINGLY giving up their rights in exchange for that power.

    I'm not pulling a "no true Scotsman" here: I will gladly agree that Rome, Israel, and the American South are/were/have been DEEPLY authoritarian. but, just as "capitalism" is not "any economy that has markets" (as people often assume), fascism is a SPECIFIC THING, and when I say Trump, Bolsonaro, and Le Pen are fascists, I don't mean they are power-seekers who don't like democracy much. I am saying they are, SPECIFICALLY, fascists.

    and fascism is the most dangerous and horrifying form authoritarianism takes.

  69. Is Indiana Jones in any way related to Indiana the place?

    in response to Is Indiana Jones a white savior?

    he is related to Indiana the dog

  71. Do you think debatebros are bad for the left?

    as a concept? no. it's not my favorite form of praxis but it CAN be productive. and I gather there are people in that space doing good work.

    are any of the Big Names in the debatebro world good for the left? no. not a single one of them.

  72. please daddy i'm so fucking ready you have no idea

    in response to And what, exactly, is edging worth?

    I'll tell you when you're fucking ready

  73. (diff anon) Did you just do a #NotAllMen?

    in response to feminist men are annoying af because 99% of them are in it to protect women from other men, never from themselves, and the thought that they might have crossed boundaries at some point triggers them beyond reason. almost every man (save maybe some monks) has raped or assaulted or at least harassed at least one woman in his lifetime, and women would be better off if men approached feminism with that understanding

    yes, this is the correct context to say #NotAllMen

  75. A Destiny tweet came across my Twitter and I remembered you mentioning a holding space space for people who are still bigoted, but working on it. What are your thoughts on the Fandom of this creators being that social holding space? Obviously Destiny and those like him have their issues, but he/his fans are at least a half step towards being a better person compared to outright bigots, right? Or do you think it's just a step in a comparably bad direction as going further right wing?

    I think it is possible for a debate community to foster this kind of deprogramming, and they are (ostensibly) better at reaching the target demographic than a lot of lefty spaces, but they have a number of drawbacks:

    1) holding spaces need to be private; debate communities are public
    2) holding spaces need to be judgment-free; debate communities are centered on "destroying" bad opinions
    3) holding spaces need to present an alternative to cults of personality; debate communities trend towards cults of personality centered on their preferred debate bro
    4) holding spaces are meant to build bridges towards healthier communities that are progressive and diverse; debate communities are primarily white, male, and many get downright toxic at times

    Destiny is particularly bad on all these fronts. but there's no rule that says debate communities CAN'T be holding spaces! if a debate streamer decided they wanted to BE an estuary for people exiting the Far Right, they could mitigate all these problems without a ton of difficulty.

    but I haven't seen anyone in the debate sphere doing that, and none have happened into it by chance.

Anon commented:
Ian replied: