I repeat:
It is not clear exactly what situation the author of the meme meant by “being followed at a Walmart by some creepy dude”. But it seems to me that the people who approve of the meme are most probably interpreting it along the lines of “being followed at a Walmart by some dude behaving in a definitely intimidating, lewd or criminal manner”.
Nobody at all, AFAICT, is expressing any support for physical violence merely on the grounds of “seeing a dude in a Walmart who looks creepy”.
Stand your ground laws allow you to do just that. Shoot someone because you feel threatened. But not clock them with a can of beans because they might be creepy and you feel threatened.
No, it does not mention “looking creepy”. Nowhere in that meme does the word “look” or “looking” appear.
You are reading a reference to “being followed at a Walmart by some creepy dude” and deliberately imposing on that your own interpretation of “seeing a dude at a Walmart who looks creepy”. It might mean “seeing a dude at a Walmart who looks creepy”, or it might mean “being followed at a Walmart by some dude who’s creeping on me in an outright criminal fashion”, or it might mean anything in between.
I have now explained this point to you at least three or four times, as have other posters. If you haven’t managed to comprehend it by now, there’s no more help I can give you.
Yep.
Why are you looking to stir up outrage where no documented issue exists?
Is your life so blessed that you literally have nothing better to worry about?
In fact that meme specifically recommended it. And commenters on it supported it.
“Stories about a guy following a woman around and masturbating, and following a woman around and touching himself and then grabbing her ass”… have nothing whatsoever to do with that meme and the violence it was promoting. That’s like sharing horror tales of crimes done by black men and using that to justify killing that black youth that “looked suspicious”.
If that meme said “if a man sexually assaults you, here are some things you can do in a store to defend yourself” that would be entirely different. But nowhere were such assaults mentioned or even alluded to. It was simply a guy for* looking creepy.* **Period. Full stop. Nothing at all about sexual assaults. **
So stop making up stories that this has anything at all do do with defending yourself from sexual assaults. Because it doesn’t.
You’re being insensitive to (alleged) stalkers with legume allergies. Nice.
If you found a meme that suggested violence upon black youth that “look suspicious” would you defend that meme? Or would you condemn it? I mean, “no documented issue exists” right? :rolleyes: It’s perfectly Ok to advocate violence upon someone based upon their appearance, right? :rolleyes:
Well, **I think advocating violence upon someone based upon their appearance is wrong. ** sue me.
Evidently this needs to be repeated. Again.
And to be clear, I don’t approve of stand your ground laws. Heck I don’t approve of being able to defend your property with lethal force.
The first sentence of the stupid fucking “meme” that you refused to even show us when you dragged us in here to waste all our time with this crap is apparently:
Kimstu has done your homework for you and showed some examples of those stories. They are as I described.
What stories do you think your bête noire was talking about, if not those ones? You holding out on us? Being coy?
I stopped being a nice person when I was raped by my creeper boss. I should have had a fucking can of beans.
Creepyness doesn’t have anything to do with the color of your skin. Why would you single out an already unfairly profiled minority as an example?
Because it does. “by some creepy dude”. Does it mention going on line and looking up his criminal history? Come on, the only way you are saying that guy is “creepy” is based upon how he looks.
“Suspicious black youth” = 100% appearance, not how he was acting.
“I was leered at, then groped, then followed into and chased through the parking lot by this guy today.”
“Ew, sounds creepy!”
“Oh, I don’t know about that! I didn’t get to know him very well.”
Perhaps she could have quoted one? Or used a man performing sexual assault instead of * by some creepy dude*?
Yeah, and I *“dragged us in here to waste all our time with this crap *” by a shotgun to your head. It’s a fucking MB, dude, *99% of it is time wasting crap. *
And again:
kayaker
123 Main Street
Anytown, US 12345
DISTRICT COURT OF SDMB Land
kayaker,Plaintiff, vs. DrDeth, Defendant) Case No.: 123456-123 COMPLAINT
Plaintiff kayaker brings forth the following causes of action and alleges the following: 1. Plaintiff is an individual and resident of Anytown, USA. 2. Defendant is a corporation and at the time of this complaint, a resident of Anytown, USA.
Plaintiff brings forth the following counts and allegations supporting his cause of action: COUNT 1 – NEGLIGENCE
Defendant was negligent in his posting behavior.
DAMAGES
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff seeks compensatory damages in the amount of $6,000 together with attorney fees and court costs.
Dated this 27th day of June, 2019
ETA: you have been served.
Everybody knows this? Or just you, here, now, and for the record?
It’s a very reasonable demand. I’d settle if I were you.
The fact that we’re all ultimately just wasting time because it’s just a messageboard discussion is one thing. But your repeated attempts to defend idiotically illogical arguments within the messageboard discussion are wasting our time in a less excusable fashion.