Great article by a writer who hung out with Milo’s posse on his bus tour.
Read the whole thing, but here’s a taste:
You got me there, I made up an opinion on an issue, guilty as charged.
You don’t make up your own opinions? How do you go about in life, let other people think them up for you?
I’m going to get roasted for this as well, but there’s a peculiar bit of hypocrisy that always seems to escape comment. As unseemly as the Yiannopoulos/Jones affair was, Milo never explicitly sicced his followers on Leslie Jones. Yeah, he made fun of her. Yeah, he re-tweeted obviously fake tweets that purported to be from her but weren’t. But he never actually told anyone to attack Leslie Jones. He never actually said “Hey everybody, let’s go rip on Leslie Jones”. Despite this, everyone seems to think that he did. For millions of people, the only thing they know about Milo is “He led a hate mob against Leslie Jones!!”, even though he didn’t - at least, not explicitly.
Lesley Jones, however, actually did explicitly sic her followers onto somebody. What I mean by that is she actually said “Hey everybody! Go get this bitch!”. Leslie Jones literally commanded her audience of hundreds of thousands to attack some random internet troll with about 40 followers. That’s literally an actual thing that she did.
Just something to remember the next time someone uses the Leslie Jones affair to pretend Milo is literally Hitler or whatever.
I know. Wasn’t hard.
Charles Manson never told his family to go out and kill people either. How’d that work out as a defense?
I’ve not seen such a tweet.
But no matter: please tell us what Nyberg or Harper did to deserve Milo’s mob attention?
No, the reason Yiannopoulos gets venom and vitriol thrown his way is because he’s saying things that nobody should be saying. Such as encouraging online harassment/doxxing campaigns, misogynistic and racist (and even homophobic) trolling, malicious lies such as posting faked tweets from Leslie Jones on Twitter, etc. etc. (Not to mention, of course, the pedophilia-apologism thing, which has been floating around the web for a year and which many gay and non-gay liberals were already aware of, even if Yiannopoulos’s conservative and white-nationalist fanbois are just now discovering it.)
None of this is really relevant to why liberals despise Yiannopoulos. There are plenty of conservative gay pundits like Andrew Sullivan (and conservative female pundits, conservative black pundits, etc.) who “don’t do or think what is expected of them”, at least in your simplistic view of liberal “expectations”. These people don’t get the flak that Yiannopoulos gets.
Because it’s not about being a conservative member of a group that have historically been victims of conservative bigotry, as you’re trying to argue. It’s about being a malicious inflammatory shit-stirring hateful asshole.
Andrew Sullivan, much as I disagree with him on many issues, is a gay conservative who is (mostly) not a malicious inflammatory shit-stirring hateful asshole. Yiannopoulos, on the other hand, is a gay conservative who is a malicious inflammatory shit-stirring hateful asshole. That’s why he’s so vehemently despised whereas Sullivan is not.
Your insistently repeating this wishful-thinking fantasy doesn’t make it true. If you really think that opportunistically cozying up to a hateful racist misogynist troll like Yiannopoulos made conservatives look “welcoming” to gays in general, you’re delusional.
Do you think the part were the writer advocates violence is great too?
“students and allies are entitled to throw fireworks and smash things until the trolls run away. Which is exactly what has happened.”
“the whole place is evacuated because of the real possibility of everyone inside getting a serious — and arguably deserved — kicking.”
Pretty rich for the author to later say: “These are men, in short, who have founded an entire movement on the basis of refusing to handle their emotions like adults.”
By the way, The Tooth, you may want to chew on this part “I don’t believe that Yiannopoulos endorses pedophilia”
Umm…pretty sure he did, actually.
Google it.
Nope. No idea who they are and don’t particularly care. Besides, most people who hate Milo hate him because of what he did-but-actually-didn’t-do to Leslie Jones. They’ve never heard of Nyberg or Harper either.
Get it straight: I don’t like Milo. I’m not a fan. I think he’s an asshole. But I also think the people who carry on like he’s literally Hitler are assholes too. He isn’t. He’s just an internet douchebag who managed to parlay his web presence into 15 minutes of notoriety because idiot leftists decided to treat his every utterance like an appendix to Mein Kampf. This relentless overreaction is not only stupid and boring, it’s dangerous too. It’s dangerous because if people keep diluting words like ‘Nazi’ and ‘White Supremacist’ by throwing them at cartoon characters like Milo, then no-one’s going to take sensible people seriously when they point out actual Nazis and white supremacists.
No, you just had to violate the forum rules regarding altering the content of a post to make it look like you came up on top.
Pathetic. :rolleyes:
Hey, doc? I think you’ve got some symptoms of something.
Too subtle for me, sorry 
Dopers may find this link of interest:
No, I didn’t have to. It was inadvertent. I’ll revise my post and add an ellipsis to be in accordance with the rule.
[QUOTE=Ale]
You got me there…
[/Quote]
I still know. You’re argument is based on positions you’ve imagined other people hold. You’re arguing with the nasty liberals in your head, not the people in the real world. Have fun. I imagine you’ll still lose.
[QUOTE=Ale]
“I don’t believe that Yiannopoulos endorses pedophilia”
[/Quote]
Well, you’re wrong.
Once again, you’re blaming liberals for boosting Yiannopoulos’s signal by denouncing him, while you completely ignore the deliberate complicity of conservatives in boosting Yiannopoulos’s signal by publicizing, promoting, and paying him.
Some liberals may have been unwise or unprincipled in how they chose to oppose Yiannopoulos, but that pales in comparison to the foolishness and lack of principle of the conservatives who chose to support him. When conservatives fall all over themselves to give money and attention and legitimacy to a hateful douchebag just because they enjoy seeing liberals get upset about his hateful douchebaggery, it’s not the liberals who really end up looking like idiots there.
Well, goodness! I’m rarely accused of being too subtle.
Harper rings a bell, buy Nyberg I remember; she is a self professed, honest to goodness pedophile (you may search for her leaked chat logs). I’ll let the irony of that name being thrown into the rink sink in.
Here’s the full first quote:
She didn’t advocate for anything in this paragraph. She reported what happened, including the position of the protesters. There was no advocacy from the writer in this paragraph. You misread it or are deliberately mischaracterizing it.
I disagree with her “arguably deserved” aside from the second quote. Such asides, even if they aren’t meant seriously, should probably be avoided due to the extreme fragility of so many (not all!) Trump supporters and conservatives right now. These special snowflakes can only handle so much negative language.
I’m not wrong for saying that, because I didn’t say that.
If you wouldn’t have, again, altered the content of my post you (and anyone else) could see that the quoted text is not my words but a quote from an article iiandyiiii linked to.
And I don’t believe for a second that you inadvertently edited my post to change its meaning.
And deservedly so.
“Nice place a’ bizness ya got here. Shame if somethin’ wuz ta happen to it… What!? I didn’t say nothin’ – at least not explicitly…”
You should attribute quotes properly in order to avoid similar confusion in future.
[QUOTE=Ale]
And I don’t believe for a second that you inadvertently edited my post to change its meaning.
[/Quote]
Well, you’re wrong. I just omitted an ellipsis. And I didn’t change it’s meaning. If you had originally said something like “I needed a ride to the post office and you got me there. Thanks for giving me a ride, The Tooth!” then I would have been changing the meaning of your post. But that’s not what you posted. What you posted was an admission that I had correctly identified your argument as lacking merit. I left everything else out because it was not relevant. Sorry for missing the ellipsis, I’m sure with therapy you’ll recover.