I suppose it’s just a convenient coincidence that your argument automatically invalidates ANY other reason anyone might have for disagreeing with anyone, huh? :dubious::rolleyes:
…nobody gives a flying fuck about his “flamboyantly gay persona”. You are in a thread with plenty of people who have given their opinion about Milo. Name one person who hates him because of his “flamboyantly gay persona.” Name a single one.
They do give a flying fuck about the articles that he writes, about the hate speech that he espouses, about the the hate mobs that he incites. Stop trying to guess what people think. We’ve told you what we think. Read our words.
Dollars to doughnuts that Ale thinks that everyone is lying.
:dubious: Dangerous? Nonsense. It has always been crystal clear that right-wingers were tolerating Yiannopoulos solely because he was pissing off the liberals, not because they gave a rat’s ass about actually supporting acceptance and full civil rights for LGBTQ people. In fact, one of the reasons they found Yiannopoulos tolerable is that he’s pretty disdainful about acceptance and full civil rights for LGBTQ people too.
Don’t get me wrong: I’d be thrilled if mainstream conservatism did decide to embrace genuine LGBT-friendliness and stop all these bullshit attacks on marriage equality and transgender rights and LGBT-headed families behind a smokescreen of “religious liberty”. Any “political capital” that liberals may actually get out of not being homophobic bigots (and tbh I doubt it’s really all that much) would be a trivial issue compared to the importance of finally attaining full civil rights and social acceptance for LGBTQ people.
But it’s a moot point, because we’re nowhere near the happy day when conservatives in general will genuinely support full civil rights and social acceptance for LGBTQ people. And liberals have always been fully aware of that.
Believe me, despite what your wishful thinking may suggest to your imagination, conservatives did not suddenly start looking principled and compassionate and “LGBT friendly” just because they briefly took up with an attention-whoring Nazi-propitiating malicious racist misogynist troll who liked to call himself a faggot.
Milo is a contrarian. He admits as much. In one of his writings he said that he started homosexual acts cause he knew it would piss off his parents. He found he liked it better than straight sex; which he had also had.
He is no more a representative LGBT community than a 20th century White Eugenicist was for advancement of coloured people just because he was proud of his minute Red Indian ancestry.
Frankly, ignore the fucker. He’ll land on his feet and doubtless find some other medium to get attention; which is the first last and only thing he cares about; he would join ISIS if he thought that would keep him in the news.
How so?
Where did I even suggested that anyone here hates him for being gay?
It really takes a lot of chutzpah to then tell me to read your words. I do wonder though if your hatred for the man is not based on similar uncharitable interpretations of what he says.
My opinion is that he gets an extra level of venom and vitriol thrown his way because he is saying things a gay man shouldn’t be saying, it throws a wrench in the Identity Politics works.
It’s not just him, I have observed the same being done against other people that don’t do or think what is expected of them.
I gave the example of a black person being called an Uncle Tom for not agreeing with BLM, on the same vein I’ve seen transexuals attacked as being transphobic, a Muslim called a “House Muslim”, women denounced as being traitors to their gender, etc… all because they fail to validate the ideological position that *“As a insert identity here I believe in this or that”.[/I when they voice opposing beliefs. In the case of Yiannopoulus it’s a double whammy, as I said, him as a gay man shouldn’t be saying those things, and right wingers shouldn’t be welcoming a gay man among them, it runs against the stereotype, the horror!
Well, you’re probably not a net negative.
Fucking cosigned.
Your mother is a whore and your rights should be taken away because you’re a bastard child.
…Aw, what’s that, you don’t want to debate me on that?
Because time is a finite resource. There are an almost unlimited amount of bigots and crazy people out there; debating the vast majority is a total waste of time.
“People don’t hate you because you’re mutants, they hate you because you’re assholes!” --Spider-Man to the X-Men (after Spidey got caught up in one of their stupid psychodramas)
Except I don’t think it did. All the previous stuff; the stuff that liberals focused on to bring Milo down; Gamergate, the harassment of Leslie Jones, the protests at Berkeley, that one writer cancelling her book deal with Simon and Schuster because they were publishing his book, and so on, none of that hurt him at all. If anything, all that helped him, because his supporters were glad he was pissing people off. What brought him down is that he gave an interview where he made comments that sounded pro-pedophilia, which pissed his own supporters off.
That wasn’t anything that liberals did, though. It wasn’t that liberals appealed to the decency of others and it wasn’t even that liberals shouted louder until Milo was drowned out. In the end, liberals didn’t bring down Milo. Milo did.
You’re in the right county but on the wrong road.
Milo isn’t just gay: he performs publicly in a gay minstrel show. Strands of pearls, limp-wristed gestures, exaggerated crooning vocal styling–he flames it up when he’s on-stage.
There’s a good reason for this. Lots of homophobes HATE to imagine that they’re actually homophobes. Seeing someone who says all the things they love to believe, while also mincing and prancing their way around a stage? It simultaneously validates their stereotypes and gives them an out for charges of bigotry (“I can’t be homophobic, some of my best invited speakers are gay!”)
To the extent that Milo receives pushback from the left for his sexual identity, I think it’s for this minstrelsy he engages in.
…“the relevant variable is that his flamboyantly gay persona is accepted by people on the right, and that makes him dangerous to people on the left that derive political capital from painting themselves as the LGBT friendly side, the idea that a person can be gay and on the right threatens their demographics.”
My reference to “flamboyantly gay persona” should have made it crystal clear exactly what I was talking about. This “cabal on the left” that “derive political capital from painting themselves as the LGBT friendly side” doesn’t exist outside of your feverish imagination. Nobody is threatened.
It takes a lot of chutzpah to make the claims you are making in this thread.
How do you charitably interpret this?
https://storify.com/freebsdgirl/a-lesson-in-dogpiling
I watched exactly what he did. For three years. I watched him incite harassment. I read his hit pieces Harper and Nyberg and his attacks on women and transgenders.
Your opinion is full of shit. People throw venom and vitriol his way because of what the articles that he writes, about the hate speech that he espouses, about the the hate mobs that he incites. It really is that simple. There are no wrenches.
You haven’t observed jack shit. Where are all these people you’ve observed? Show me a single person that doesn’t like Milo because he is saying things that a “gay man isn’t supposed to be saying.”
But what exactly leads you to believe that this is what happened here? Where are these people?
Why can’t you simply accept what people have told you? Why invent a conspiracy theory?
Hey, focus, where did I say that people here hate him for being gay? That quote from me doesn’t say that, does it? Can you admit you were making stuff up?
Until you show some intellectual honesty there’s no point in discussing anything with you.
Well one charitable interpretation is that he is a mental defective?
But you also said this:
I think I see the problem here. You see the second paragraph I quoted? The one that starts “I also suspect…”? That’s something you made up. It’s the fascists in the Breit House (clever, no?) who tolerated him until it was no longer politically convenient to do so. Your straw man doesn’t stand up.
Actually, a bunch of Breitbart staffed threatened to resign if Milo wasn’t canned. I’m sure the conservatives enjoyed employing a gadfly in liberal clothing to piss off the liberals, but his departure was anything but convenient. Milo will still embarrass them while looking for new ways extend his 15 minutes of fame. They can at least keep a nutcase like Sarah Palin at arm’s length, as long as she doesn’t testify to committing crimes against humanity.
The worst part for me is seeing all the wannabes auditioning for Milo’s old slot by putting out obnoxious, content-free posts on message boards. I’m sure there’s some sort of standard for outrage they measure themselves against, and it’s irritating to see people padding their resumes for them.
Well, now I’m just waiting for the alt-right to start claiming that Yiannopoulos was never really a conservative or gay, but just a plant to try to embarrass conservatives.
Y’know… a false-fag operation.
OK, I have to admit something, and I’m probably going to get roasted big time for this.
Milo has become interesting to me.
Don’t get me wrong, I tried really, really hard to ignore him. I first heard about him via the GamerGate fiasco. At the time, I thought “Why is this making headlines? It’s just another internet squabble. There’s millions of them. Why give this any more importance than the rest?” So, I dismissed GamerGate as sound and fury, signifying nothing, and it eventually went away.
Eventually, Milo’s twitters about Leslie Jones made headlines, and again I thought “Why is this news? Every celebrity has their share of boo birds. So fucking what?” Again, I dismissed it as sound and fury, signifying nothing, and it eventually went away.
Now all the sudden Milo is making public speeches, appearing at Republican conventions, earning volumes of hate and derision, but getting more famous. Again, I thought “Why is this troll getting so much exposure? What makes him any more remarkable than the usual one-note trolls who just want to stir shit up?”
I haven’t figured out the answer to this yet. It baffles me as much as PewDiePie getting famous for filming himself playing video games. I’ve heard talk of a girl in Brazil who has a YouTube channel that’s just videos of her opening new toys and playing with them. She picked up sponsors from toy manufacturers and is making millions. I’ve published games and books on the web and so far, I’ve made a whopping 70 cents in royalties. How is this random person resonating with the rest of the world enough to get so rich? I was born long before the Internet age and didn’t grow up in the culture like these people, so maybe it’s just impossible for me to connect.
So, all I really know about Milo is what I’ve read here, and it’s mostly negative. I’ve tried my best to ignore him, but he’s ubiquitous. Somehow, despite all the hate, Milo found his place in history. *Now *he’s interesting.
If taken in a humorous context, would his comments have a similar feel to dialogue from a show like Absolutely Fabulous? The main characters are horrible bitches that say some really scandalous and racist shit, casually alluding to criminal acts and despicable sexual congress, but it’s funny when they do it. Milo could easily be a character from that show. “Don’t disparage religion, darling. I learned how to give great head from my priest.”
It’s weird to me that you think GamerGate and the Leslie Jones affair have gone away. They haven’t gone away. They reveal a cancer at the heart of the internet, and the right wing has gleefully denied chemotherapy and radiation.