@Jinx

hey thanks for keeping this conversation going and not just making assumptions and allowing us both to come to a better understanding.

though i am not really surprised,i am gladdened.

in my opinion,i think this situation may be a problem with indentifying with labels and maybe putting too much weight on them to convey complicated and complex human interactions.

i would call myself a social justice warrior,but i would never identify as those who behave is the extremists do.but to imply that the responsibility is on ME,or any other critic,to redefine these radical social justice warriors as somehow not being representative of the majority,is a false dynamic,because that is how they define themselves.

basically the "No true scotsman" fallacy.which is employed ad-nauseum by these extremists.that somehow if you do not adhere to their radical agenda you are somehow not qualified to label yourself:feminist,anarchist (this has been directed at me),socialist, etc etc.

this is just a silly and binary way of breaking down peoples complex human perceptions and understandings to fit a narrow,and restrictive narrative,in order to achieve an agenda.

so while we all viewed GW bush's "if you're not with us,you're against us",as an inane and utterly stupid statement.how come there is little push back when the EXACT same tactic is used to silence someone who may not be 100% on board with a certain agenda?

does me posting this video automatically translate to me being "anti-social justice warrior"?

of course not! that is just silly,but in todays climate that is exactly how some people view complex situations,and it HAS to stop!

you brought up police.
good.
lets use that as an example.
the fact the americas militarized and dysfunctional police force has accounted for more police shootings than soldiers have died in iraq.do we REALLY need to be told that it is not ALL cops.

of course not.again,that is silly but it DOES mean that maybe there is a problem within the institution that needs to be addressed.

here is a perfect case for social justice warriors to bring this corruption and rot to the surface,and here we have black lives matter.which is receiving mixed coverage in the media,but they have gotten people talking and even some incremental reforms in the woks AND,just recently..6 cops fired from a cleveland precinct for shooting civilians.this is where social justice warriors are not only necessary but vital!

but what if.....

those cops who were feeling threatened,or intimidated by the criticism and examination of their institution coming from black lives matters decided to use a tactic right out of these extremists playbook?

maybe some doxxing?
exposing personal information about the protesters?
how about a few false accusations of rape?
maybe personal harassing calls to friends and family members of the black lives matter movement?
how about some false charges of harassment and sexual discrimination?

that would effectively shut down the black lives matter movement within weeks,and how would we respond to that kind of underhanded tactics?

we would be outraged.
we would be furious at the absolute abuse of power.a power bestowed by the state.

and our outrage would be justified.

do you see where i am coming from here?

in the example i have given,which may or not be the best analogy.we can easily see the abuse of power as a form of bullying to get a group that is a dissenting ideology..to shut..the fuck..up.

freedom of speech is NOT just speech you or i agree with,or happen to support,but it also speech that we may dislike,disagree and even find offensive.

but by allowing those we dislike or disagree to say their piece,allows us and everybody else to examine,discern and ultimately discard as ridiculous.or,converesly,find some merit that was previously hidden from us,due to our lack of knowledge or understanding.

i realize i am reiterating my previous point,but i think it is so very important.

free speech allows the free flow of ideas and dialogue and allows good ideas to be absorbed into the body politic and the bad ones discarded into the trash bin.

but there MUST be the allowance of the free flow of thought!

so when i post a video such as this i am not ridiculing actual socially conscious people.i am exposing bad ideas,supported by narrow minded people who wish to impose THEIR sense of how a society should be and attempt to circumvent the very slow process of discussion,argument and debate by hijacking the conversation and shutting down all dissent and disagreement with the most fascist tactics possible.

up until a month ago i was fairly ignorant to things like gamergate and whatnot.i thought i had a pretty fair understanding of what a social justice warrior was,and even included myself as one.

but then,quite by accident,i fell upon a few stories that highly disturbed me.one ,in particular was the case of greg allen elliot who was being criminally prosecuted for harassment on twitter.

now the case was finally resolved,and elliot was found not guilty.
so hooray for justice right?
free speech won in the end right?
or did it...did elliot actually win?
i am not so sure.

you see.
he was a web designer.
and once he was charged 3 years ago,he was banned from any internet use.so effectively he was jobless.
on top of that his defense cost 100k.
sounds like a loss to me.

now let us examine stephanie guthrie.a prominent toronto feminist and tedtalk speaker:
1.she made the accusation of harassment and brought the charges.
2.even though this all started with a man who created a game where anita sarkesians faced was punched,and was the supposed imetus for all this fuss,guthrie never laid charges against the creator of the game.though she did,along with her followers harassed and bullied this man until he closed down his account.so chock one up for feminism? i guess?
4.what guthrie found so reprehensible about elliot was that he had the audacity to question guthries rage and called for a calm interaction.(mainly because there are literally 100's of face-punching games).
5.guthrie and her followers found this call for calm offensive and doxxed elliot and proceeded to harass his employer,his family and ffirends.
6.elliot lost his job.his employer could not handle the harassment.so feminist win again? i guess?
7.when guthrie blocked elliot on twitter she continued to publicly accuse him of misogyny,bigot and even a pedophile.
8.she then brought accusations against elliot for criminal harassment,and that she "felt" harassed.
9.guthrie has paid ZERO for her accusations.she has suffered no accountability nor responsibility.

now the court case is over,and elliot has been vindicated and free speech is still in place for today.

but lets look at the bigger picture.
and let us imagine how easily this situation could be abused.
can we really look at guthrie vs elliot as ANY form of justice? or is it MORE liekly that guthrie was abusing a court system to punish a man she happened to disagree with?with ZERO consequences.

now maybe you agree with guthrie.
maybe you are one of those people that believe in your heart that words are weapons and people should be held accountable for those words.they should be stripped of wealth,work and home..they should be punished.

ok.
thats fine.
maybe you agree because it is a matter you support?
a racist pig loses a job for saying racists things.
or a bigot gets kicked out of his apartment for being a bigoted asshole.

but how about this..
hypothetically:
a devout chritian woman is protesting an abortion clinic with her children in tow.

and lets say a pro-choice atheist comes over to her and starts to berate her i front of her children.ridiculing her for her beliefs and saying jesus was a zombie.that she is a horrible person for believing in such a tyrannical deity,that this so-called all-loving entity punishes all no-believers in a lake of fire for all eternity.that as a mother,teaching her children to worship such a god is tantamount to child abuse.berating her so badly that her children begin to cry?

now what if that interaction was filmed?
then posted to youtube?
what if a "social justice warrior" of the religious flavor decided that berating person needed to pay for his words?
what if that person got doxxed?
and the end result was he loses his job (because corporations are notoriously controversy allergic),and maybe his landlord is notified and he is kicked out of his apartment?

would you be ok with all that?
because that is the EXACT same metric that radical social justice warriors use!

and what about false accusations?
you dont even have to be actually offended and /or harassed,you just have to accuse and the rest takes care of itself.

are you ok with that kind of creative abuse?

so when i bring things like this to the forefront and attempt to expose the underlying idiocy.what i just wrote is where i am coming from.

and yes.these radicals and their underhanded tactics need to be exposed and all the attention brought to them the better.

why? because what and how they are behaving is anti-democracy anti-freedom and anti-liberty.

and i am all for debating specific issues,and will gladly do so..with glee,but i will not and cannot respect what the radical elements are doing to an otherwise worthy cause.

and YOU should be calling them out as well.

i know this is long and i probably lost the plot somewhere,but this is very important,becuase it threatens all of us and if we simply ignore these nimrods they will just become even more entrenched,self-righteous and arrogant in their own little bubble worlds.

that bubble needs to be popped,and soon.

anyways.thanks for hanging (if you made it this far)
there will be danishes and punch in the lobby!

Not fussed about whether or not that was "real" / one take with audio direct from video recording, because musically it was *awesome*.

Whole thing was great, but I got the "whoa, this is f*&king awesome" goosebumps when he broke into the Smooth Criminal part!

To think that the USA has for once not used proxies to deliver weapons, is, to put it mildly, insane. They had training camps since the beginning in Jordan. Same as the UK and France. There were huge old stockpiles of weapons in the Balkan for example. They somehow found their way to Syria into FSA hands, even though Saudis, Qataris, and Turkish mainly supported Al Nusra and IS. TOWs found their way to those extremists. Actually the USA sent those officially.

Of course Russia has its own interests there, but its not destabilization. That alone is reason enough to support them instead of the USA and their lackeys and boot lickers.

It has never been proven that Assad used chemical weapons. The investigators couldnt even find good indications for it. But that the extremists used chemical weapons in other cases was later confirmed. Funnily there wasnt such a huge fuss about it. Hmmm... wonder why.
The extremists also made it clear from the beginning that they dont want a successor from the current leader. They want power. They want a Sunni regime.

You then saying the ABM shield is only directed at Iran is ridiculous to say the least. MAD has its reason and saved us from otherwise certain global nuclear war quite a few times in the past. A shield like that can circumvent MAD, which is a wet dream of the neocons, always has been. Thats why the USA left the ABM treaty, NOT Russia.

Sad to see you didnt read the link (or ignored it) I linked you before. Instead you keep spewing out lies.

There is a reason to go gender neutral but personally I advocate copying your brain and cloning yourself as both a man and a woman, and then a gender neutral cherub to follow your female and male selves around, shooting love arrows and playing a harp on a cloud with a My Little Pony that carries your personality back ups.

Of course, technologically we aren't there yet, but yeah that's the path to my heart's content.

And while I wait for that time, I'll spend the remainder of my life alternating between male, female, and neutral. Of course... it's hard to alternate sometimes when I have acrylic nails, threaded eyebrows, and henna up and down my arms. People are just confused by my appearance no matter how masculine I act.

The problem I have is that the effort to go through the process of feminizing makes the process of returning to a masculine state difficult. And often times I don't want to return to a masculine state. Though, being masculine is much easier aesthetically, it makes the return to a feminine state easier to achieve than going from my female self to male.

The thing is, I was never super masculine until around my midtwenties when I started hanging out in bars, drinking a lot, and basically mimicking alpha male behavior. I had to really put forth the effort to be a man's man, but once you learn to fake it long enough, you make it become part of your reality.

So in the reality that is my brain, although I am genderfluid, I lean more towards neutrality and femininity aesthetically, even if I also enjoy a good masculine diatribe every now and then. See, on the internet I can be anything I want to be at any time without the material requirements, which MEN do not fully realize (you ignorant pigs). So my genderfluidity is more natural and honest in this realm of 1s and 0s than "the desert of the real."

Edit: As an aside, I would like to point out that I'm not transgender or genderfluid because of Caitlin Jenner. It's not a fad or a trend, it's how I've always been, I just don't make a big fuss about it, unless it is appropriate to do so, such as now.

Seriously, how the fuck can you & Bobknight consistently say ..

..the Most Thinly Veiled Racist Comments & Opinions Evar..

..for years on end, and still not be banned..

Yet I got temp banned for SUGGESTING how actually insulting i could be.

Why do you think it's okay @lantern53 to tell me and other black people to stop complaining or "makin' a fuss"..

When someone who looks exactly like us is murdered by the a government official, swore to protect & serve everyone equally..

But it's fine for you to get all "butthurt" when someone mentions that a cop "got what they deserved"

Hypocrisy much?

So I been avoiding layin' into the racists on the site for a bit.
Because it's like fighting with a brick wall with your forehead, stupid and bad for my health.

But this point - 1:36 - about how racists are much more politically correct than openly, unapologetically racist is true.

@lantern53
@bobknight33
@quantumushroom
@Trancecoach
And @shinyblurry if I remember correctly

Most of the comments these numbskulls post are inherently racist as fuck.

But they always use the excuse of some political or religion cop-out, like.

"If black people started voting Republican, instead of supporting Libtard Democrats who only want to keep them poor.."

I'm convinced they all think, on a daily basis:
"Well my white, middle-class life was tough. And I overcame!

I know! Better take to the interwebs and give those silly black folks some advice.

Yeah, some helpful, common sense advice like.. GET A JOB YOU LAZY VIOLENT SAVAGES!

Wow, ahem.. excuse me...

But really, your struggles are just imaginary black people.

Stop complaining about the VIOLENT THUGS erm.. questionably innocent people the police murder because they definitely deserved it.

Besides black people kill black people all the time, I heard on Fox News once.

So it's definitely not okay to make a big fuss when Law Enforcement Office very clearly unlawfully execute one of you coons.. er.. folks.

Just get up off your lazy asses and vote. It's always worked for me and my elder white voting block friends who are in no way disenfranchised by our current voting laws ."

*Crack knuckles, dusts shoulders*

"Yuuup. Good thing I helped those ignorant jiggaboos understand how the world REALLY is.

And that's why White Americans are god's SUPERIOR chosen people.

Oh yeah! and clearly no I said can be construed as racist because I'm not because Obama is the first black president.

..an UNTRUSTWORTHY, FOREIGNER who's really from KENYA or INDONESIA (you know, one of those icky brown countries) and that DOESN'T STAND FOR MURICA VALUES!!

But he's blackish and the president so, see.

Ding Dong! No racism here."

Anywho have fun jerk your collect bigot boners about how i'm wrong.

How blacks are just as equals as whites because you say so.

How your not racists even tho you say shit only racist say.. ugh.

What a sad and cynical outlook on life. If life is not sacred, why is so much fuss made about the taking of it?

Actually, the people who really feel that life is not sacred is the left...they love their abortions! Another thought...the only life that is sacred for the left is the life of those on death row...can't take their life!

I would bet that George would be the first to scream for the sacredness of life if someone held a gun to his head and told him he was about to lose his.

I agree, but to play devil's advocate here are two counterpoints:

1) The YT-1300 was designed as a freighter, and the Millennium Falcon only became a capable warship after pretty extensive modification by Lando and Han Solo. So, perhaps some of those flaws can be justified with "not really intended to be a combat vessel" rationale.

2) Or even ignoring that, shielding seems to be established as being much more important than armor plating around wires and pipes in the Star Wars universe. TIEs (at least the lower models) have no shielding whatsoever, and the only thing that separates them from just being pure cannon fodder is size, agility, and numbers.

But even in medium fighters that DO have shields, it seems like they at best protect against a very low number of glancing hits -- we see X and Y wings with shields go down after 1-2 hits a LOT in the movies. In that scenario, I guess there isn't a whole lot of need to slow yourself down with heavy armor plating that might let you survive another hit if you are lucky. Kinda like how modern police officers and soldiers don't wear heavy steel plate armor; they either wear kevlar (think "shields") or nothing but clothing/uniform.

So, maybe the larger ships in Star Wars stock up on shields and aren't too fussed about physically covering up systems -- once the shields are down you're pretty much toast anyway.

They have a lot of discretion and in this case they don't deserve it (mainly the big guy who I think was the one who escalated the encounter and tased the victim). The increase in cell phone video cameras are making these wrongful arrest cases more common every day thankfully.

'People who make a fuss' This goes back to the discretion issue, but talking yourself into an arrest when not guilty is really the crime of the officer (unlawful arrest). How about the right to not have police make a fuss with people?

Cops have a lot of discretion when it comes to making arrests. In general, people who act civilly when questioned by the police go on their way. People who make a fuss, even when innocent of any wrongdoing, talk themselves into an arrest on the basis of acting in such a way that a disorderly conduct arrest becomes imminent. Loud, boisterous, foul language will get you arrested plenty fast.

This is not all directed @Januari, i lost track of how to separate quotes in comments about 4 years ago, but yours was the most detailed feedback i could use so i thought it polite to reply to you. In the approximate order in which things occured:

The only business of who that person was is them and i, and that has already been resolved. That should have no impact on this video, it is merely what the video reminded me of because that was what had recently happened to me. Perhaps that's why i saw the side i saw to it. I honestly do not understand the fuss, the fuss that has NOT been made by me. I clearly asked for feedback on my description, unfortunately no actionable feedback has come in - "i don't like it" isn't a recommendation.

I'll happily make a few modifications, but no one seems to like it anyway so i'd just as readily get rid of it if i knew how - you have already judged it on the description. If/when i find out how to, i'll do so, and until then if you'd like to say which bits in particular think are disingenuous? I'll make what changes i think have been suggested, but so far the feedback comes across more as a slight more than actual feedback so i still don't really know what changes to make. That's why i asked people!

I don't like the behaviour of the men at all. I don't condone violence towards anyone if it can possibly be avoided, but i didn't think that i needed to agree with the people who recorded a video in order to post it.

Did she "get what she deserved"? She was arrested, no harm came to her. Last time i checked we entrusted the law to settle things like that, and they made their decision. Carrying on like that wasting police time when there's real people out there in the world who need help? Does she even consider that she's making it harder for the next person who really does get shoved over to get the protection they need? Sorry, but yes i do think she got what she deserved here. The guys who shoved her deserved a little karma too, for more reason than one.

@Yogi - in both the original and now the new descriptor, i made it absolutely clear that this woman did not represent what feminism is. I can't understand why you are suggesting that i said such a thing when i specifically said the opposite. I do not even claim to understand how people like this lady thinks either. I recommend you re-read the descriptor. This woman is not a feminist, and i do not therefore "understand how all feminists think" as you falsely accuse.

Please at least limit yourself to insulting/berateing me for things i am guilty of. Like, for example, being naive enough to think that people on the internet can resolve a problem peacefully with discussion.

@dystopianfuturetoday - i hope that whatever species of male you represent is ok with that statement!

Apart from the fact that executing people is wrong and useless, what's the fuss about? Just get a damn shotgun. Aim it right and it'll work with absolute efficency. If makes you feel bad to blow deathrow inmates' heads away, maybe you shouldn't do it in the first place. Executing people was, is and will never be clean and humane, it'll only appear that way. Just like war.
Don't go into the kitchen if you can't stand the heat.

why is @Darkhand 's comment so hard to comprehend?
i would even take it a step further,because i have done it,and point the customer to another venue who would better serve them.

no muss.
no fuss.
and nobodies wittle feewings got hurt.

now if we take @Hanover_Phist 's analogy.
well thats a whole different animal.thats about integrity.
if i have committed myself to a venue,i honor my promises.if something about that venue bothers me then i better suck it up and maybe next time pay closer attention to who i was dealing with at the time of contract negotiations (been there as well).

so the disagreement between darkhand and hanover are really semantics and not relevant to each other.

and @VoodooV ,you are confusing 'artist" with "whore"....difference.

though there is no shortage of "artists" who "whore" themselves,but im gonna guess that darkhand is not one of those artists.

come to think of it,i can see how that can be confusing looking at the current state of art in regards to pop culture....

fuck me im getting old...and cranky.

dont judge me!
and get off my lawn!

Really didn't like Frozen, could not understand what the fuss was all about. Tangled was great, Frozen sucked

The funny thing about the 'Muhammad in a bear suit' is that they had an earlier episode a whole bunch of gods acting like super heroes and he was in it. Nobody made a fuss, nobody got death threats, nobody cared.

Such hypocracy has got to make you laugh. Though I think the episode that got the most grief was the episode were a statue of Mother Mary bled out the ass lol.