# SenorBeef And The Streisand Effect **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [December 19, 2024, 1:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senorbeef-and-the-streisand-effect/1011866 "2024-12-19T13:49:19Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![keeganst94](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/a6a055/32.png) [@keeganst94](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/keeganst94)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2024, 8:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senorbeef-and-the-streisand-effect/1011866/41 "2024-12-19T20:47:30Z")
> [@DocCathode](#): > > **Miller** handed **SenorBeef** his ass in the first thread. (Am I wrong folks?) Yes, you’re completely wrong. Neither you or Miller have substantively responded to SenorBeefs position in any way. ---
**Author:** ![SenorBeef](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senorbeef/32/2220_2.png) [@SenorBeef](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SenorBeef)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2024, 8:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senorbeef-and-the-streisand-effect/1011866/42 "2024-12-19T20:49:26Z")
> [@DocCathode](#): > > You doubled down again by starting the ATMB thread. Nope. I wanted to ignore him. I couldn’t, because of limitations of the board software. So I asked if there was a workaround. I absolutely did not “double down” on my argument with him by asking that question on ATMB. I didn’t even reference who I was talking about or what my motivations were. Your fixation on the idea that somehow my question in ATMB was designed to double down on the GD argument is completely without merit and it’s a stupid reason to pit someone. I also don’t think I lost the debate. I don’t think he actually argued anything very substantial in it. I think my assessment of why he said what he said was accurate. You also haven’t brought anything substantial to the debate either, you just keep repeating over and over that I lost it and think that somehow is scoring points in your favor. ---
**Author:** ![DocCathode](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/doccathode/32/18773_2.png) [@DocCathode](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DocCathode)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2024, 8:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senorbeef-and-the-streisand-effect/1011866/43 "2024-12-19T20:59:53Z")
> [@SenorBeef](#): > > I would have to think that what I’ve said was wrong and shameful and be embarrassed about what I’ve said in these threads. I am not. You think I should be, The fact you are not ashamed of taking a racist and misogynist position, failing to provide cites, accusing **Miller** of straw manning and not arguing in good faith, then saying my and **Miller** ’s requests for cites prove you have won the debate, and so on is one of the reasons I am Pitting you. Usually, I am on the other side of such an argument. But, here we are. > [@SenorBeef](#): > > But those are really just a continuation of the arguments in the GD thread and don’t support whatever Streisand gambit you think you’re playing. Did you read past the title?? > [@SenorBeef](#): > > I don’t think anyone here thinks you landed your convoluted “gotcha” and is impressed with you for pitting me over asking a technical question on ATMB. There was no convoluted “gotcha”. There was 'point and laugh at what an idiot **SenorBeef** was. You continue to reliably provide comedy material ---
**Author:** ![SenorBeef](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senorbeef/32/2220_2.png) [@SenorBeef](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SenorBeef)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2024, 9:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senorbeef-and-the-streisand-effect/1011866/44 "2024-12-19T21:03:13Z")
You’re deluding yourself that you’re in the right and other people are agreeing with you. Now you’re just repeating yourself over and over. This is a weak pitting. I’d say mildly backfired. No one else has supported your supposed reasons for the pitting – there are people who disagree with my argument, but none that support your idea that you somehow won one over on me with this ATMB/Streisand stuff. Anyway, next time you post and repeat the same shit I’m not going to engage with it. ---
**Author:** ![DocCathode](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/doccathode/32/18773_2.png) [@DocCathode](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DocCathode)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2024, 9:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senorbeef-and-the-streisand-effect/1011866/45 "2024-12-19T21:07:45Z")
> [@SenorBeef](#): > > You’re deluding yourself that you’re in the right and other people are agreeing with you. Do you have any kind of cite or is this telepathy again? > [@SenorBeef](#): > > Streisand stuff. Again, why are you so fixated on the literal meaning of Streissand Effect? Did you even read the rest of my OP? ---
**Author:** ![SenorBeef](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senorbeef/32/2220_2.png) [@SenorBeef](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SenorBeef)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2024, 9:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senorbeef-and-the-streisand-effect/1011866/46 "2024-12-19T21:16:53Z")
> [@DocCathode](#): > > Do you have any kind of cite or is this telepathy again? Lol what the fuck do you mean a cite? Do I have a scientific paper that shows you’re deluding yourself? My cite is this thread. You keep repeating over and over again OH YOU CLEARLY LOST without actually explaining why and when other people clearly disagree with you. > [@DocCathode](#): > > Again, why are you so fixated on the literal meaning of Streissand Effect? Did you even read the rest of my OP? Your fixation is bizarre. You’re trying to manifest a win by repeating the same shit over and over. Remove Streisand from my posts and replace it with “the connection you believe there is between my posts in the GD thread, the ATMB thread that look bad for me” and I have the same meaning. I explained, in detail, what I’m saying, and then you fixate on one word and say “BUT I SAID THAT ONE WORD DOESN’T APPLY!!! ARE YOU EVEN READING MY POSTS!” Yes, I’m reading your posts. You aren’t reading mine. This is pathetic. You’re pathetic. ---
**Author:** ![We\_re\_wolves\_not\_werewolves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/838e76/32.png) [@We\_re\_wolves\_not\_werewolves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/We_re_wolves_not_werewolves)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2024, 9:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senorbeef-and-the-streisand-effect/1011866/47 "2024-12-19T21:40:45Z")
> [@DocCathode](#): > > **Miller** handed **SenorBeef** his ass in the first thread. (Am I wrong folks?) well, you’re certainly not right. I think it was more like two people largely talking past each other than anything else. ---
**Author:** ![WalterBishop](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/aeb1de/32.png) [@WalterBishop](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WalterBishop)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2024, 10:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senorbeef-and-the-streisand-effect/1011866/48 "2024-12-19T22:05:48Z")
@SenorBeef - my understanding of your position is, in a nutshell: _“A straight, white, Christian liberal man who’ll probably win and who’ll advance minority rights if he does, is a better pick for minorities than a brown woman who’d also advance minority rights if she wins but who’d probably lose due to entrenched, systemic racism and sexism._ Do I have that right? Thanks. ---
**Author:** ![SenorBeef](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senorbeef/32/2220_2.png) [@SenorBeef](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SenorBeef)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2024, 10:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senorbeef-and-the-streisand-effect/1011866/49 "2024-12-19T22:11:37Z")
Yes, that’s a reasonable summary. Although in this case I would say simply racism/sexism rather than systemic racism/sexism, as I think it falls on the individuals having negative reactions to women and POC more than systems that keep them out. It should be noted that the opposite - if the candidate loses - isn’t neutral. The opposite is a facist win that will rapidly roll back the human rights of disadvantaged groups, so the consequences for losing are extremely high. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2024, 10:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senorbeef-and-the-streisand-effect/1011866/50 "2024-12-19T22:12:59Z")
I think that is correct, _as long as this hypothetical person is never given an actual name_. As soon as an actual person is named that person becomes an “extreme liberal” and lies, rumors and innuendo will flow from the right like a mighty river of shit. ---
**Author:** ![DocCathode](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/doccathode/32/18773_2.png) [@DocCathode](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DocCathode)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2024, 10:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senorbeef-and-the-streisand-effect/1011866/51 "2024-12-19T22:14:49Z")
> [@SenorBeef](#): > > Lol what the fuck do you mean a cite? > [@SenorBeef](#): > > when other people clearly disagree with you. You just said other people clearly disagree with me. IIRC you and one other poste have disagreed that you lost the debate. I, and I am assuming **Miller** feel you lost quite badly. Nobody else who has posted in this thread has given an opinion on the matter. So you can either show me some proof, or thinsg are tied at most. ETA While I was typing this, somebody else posted that there was no winner. > [@SenorBeef](#): > > Your fixation is bizarre. _My_ fixation? You keep using the words Streissand and Streissand Effect to mean something I explicitly deny in my OP. > [@DocCathode](#): > > Well, that isn’t quite the right term. [The Streissand Effect](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect). However, as always I wanted a title I could link to in other forums. > [@SenorBeef](#): > > Remove Streisand from my posts and replace it with “the connection you believe there is between my posts in the GD thread, the ATMB thread that look bad for me” and I have the same meaning No, you most certainly would not have the same meaning. How can we replace a word with a defined and accepted meaning with something that means something entirely unrelated and not change the meaning? > [@SenorBeef](#): > > You aren’t reading mine Except I keep including quotes with a clear meaning and responding to them. You have put words in my mouth repeatedly. When I ask for a quote proving I said any of what you claim, you do not respond. You have repeatedly responded to what you claim I am thinking and feeling, rather than the words I actually wrote. > [@SenorBeef](#): > > this ATMB/Streisand stuff. > [@SenorBeef](#): > > I explained, in detail, what I’m saying, and then you fixate on one word and say Yeah. If that is not what you meant, you should not have used that word. Your failure to choose words that convey what you really mean is not my fault. > [@SenorBeef](#): > > Yes, I’m reading your posts. It sure doesn’t seem that way. OTTOMH, I have repeatedly said your position was racist and mysogynist. You accused me of calling _you_ racist and misogynist and “every other ist you can think of” > [@SenorBeef](#): > > You accuse me of being sexist and racist and every other ist you can think of, just like them, because it allows you to dismiss me and ignore the uncomfortable truth that your approach may have backfired and actually harmed rather than helped your cause. When I ask you to prove that by quoting the post where I called you “every other ist you can think of” you do not respond. This is just one example. > [@SenorBeef](#): > > You aren’t reading mine. Clearly, I am. > [@SenorBeef](#): > > This is pathetic. You’re pathetic. That would be very hurtful if your opinion actually mattered to me. ---
**Author:** ![SenorBeef](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senorbeef/32/2220_2.png) [@SenorBeef](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SenorBeef)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2024, 10:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senorbeef-and-the-streisand-effect/1011866/52 "2024-12-19T22:20:51Z")
> [@DocCathode](#): > > You just said other people clearly disagree with me. IIRC you and one other poste have disagreed that you lost the debate. I, and I am assuming **Miller** feel you lost quite badly. Nobody else who has posted in this thread has given an opinion on the matter. So you can either show me some proof, or thinsg are tied at most. ??? > [@Munch](#): > > Moral victories for everyone!! If you never want to lose, simply declare a moral victory! “My candidate didn’t win, but they were the best candidate who best exemplified my cause - therefore I declare a moral victory!” The needle may never move in our favor ever again, but we’re no longer measuring success by any measurable outcome - simply that we have rallied around a non-leader who will champion causes that will never see the light of day. Reality be damned - come see the glorious victory here deep in the sand. If you can’t see it, your head isn’t far enough in it! > [@robby](#): > > I agree with most of what you’ve written here as well in the [related thread](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kamala-should-run-for-president-again-in-2028/1011774/1). I posted something similar myself in that thread. > [@Hamlet](#): > > I really hope the superiority we feel by nominating a woman of color (a well qualified, intelligent, perfectly awesome woman of color who would have done a great job as president to be sure) in the face of a nation that is still full of a majority of bigots, haters, and idiots, outweighs the lack of health care for trans people, especially minors, the rollbacks on anti-discrimination policies, the possible loss of equal rights for wide swathes of minorities, and the sharp turn to a fascist nation is worth it. > [@YamatoTwinkie](#): > > “Realpolitik” was my take on your post as well, and I’m struggling to figure out why it deserved a pitting. > [@keeganst94](#): > > Yes, you’re completely wrong. Neither you or Miller have substantively responded to SenorBeefs position in any way. > [@We\_re\_wolves\_not\_werewolves](#): > > well, you’re certainly not right. I think it was more like two people largely talking past each other than anything else. These posts all disagree with you. > [@DocCathode](#): > > No, you most certainly would not have the same meaning. How can we replace a word with a defined and accepted meaning with something that means something entirely unrelated and not change the meaning? Did you get dropped on your head a lot as an adult? You admit that my position on this issue isn’t worth a pitting. Cite: > [@DocCathode](#): > > By itself, I agree his position was not worth a pitting. So your whole line of attack relies on this idea that somehow the fact that I went to ATMB to ask if it was possible to ignore a mod was somehow the mechanism by which I was hoisted by my own petard. It is a nonsensical attack and no one agrees with you. > [@DocCathode](#): > > That would be very hurtful if your opinion actually mattered to me. It’s clear that no one’s opinion matters to you. You’re lost in your own little world desperately trying to repeat yourself to manifest your reality into the universe. Are you like, an actual crazy person? ---
**Author:** ![WalterBishop](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/aeb1de/32.png) [@WalterBishop](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WalterBishop)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2024, 10:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senorbeef-and-the-streisand-effect/1011866/53 "2024-12-19T22:22:56Z")
> [@SenorBeef](#): > > Yes, that’s a reasonable summary. Although in this case I would say simply racism/sexism rather than systemic racism/sexism, as I think it falls on the individuals having negative reactions to women and POC more than systems that keep them out. It should be noted that the opposite - if the candidate loses - isn’t neutral. The opposite is a facist win that will rapidly roll back the human rights of disadvantaged groups, so the consequences for losing are extremely high. Thanks for the clarification. I can’t understand how anyone acting in good faith could possibly think your position is racist or sexist. ---
**Author:** ![Thing.Fish](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thing.fish/32/9168_2.png) [@Thing.Fish](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Thing.Fish)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2024, 10:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senorbeef-and-the-streisand-effect/1011866/54 "2024-12-19T22:28:28Z")
> [@WalterBishop](#): > > Thanks for the clarification. I can’t understand how anyone acting in good faith could possibly think your position is racist or sexist. The issue is whether there is a meaningful distinction between actually _being_ racist and sexist, as opposed to merely doing racist and sexist things for the sake of political expediency. FWIW, I definitely felt SenorBeef got his ass handed to him in the original thread. This one, however, is just tedious. ---
**Author:** ![Zoobi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/13edae/32.png) [@Zoobi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zoobi)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2024, 10:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senorbeef-and-the-streisand-effect/1011866/55 "2024-12-19T22:33:18Z")
But what he said was much more extreme than that. No one is saying it _has_ to be brown woman. He’s saying it _must not_ be anything other than a white man. Enforcing such a policy can’t be anything other than racist and sexist ---
**Author:** ![SenorBeef](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senorbeef/32/2220_2.png) [@SenorBeef](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SenorBeef)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2024, 10:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senorbeef-and-the-streisand-effect/1011866/56 "2024-12-19T22:35:39Z")
I think it’s an uncomfortable thought. It’s good to be on the side of good, the side of progress, the side that expands human rights and brings justice to the oppressed. It’s morally unambiguous. It’s righteous. How amazing would it be to elect a person who will advance the cause of humanism and tolerance and justice AND that person herself represents that very progress because she’s the first woman to reach the presidency? How amazing would that be? But what if that’s not the choice in front of you? What if you have to acknowledge the real world – that we haven’t made that level of progress, that there are a lot of shitty people holding that progress up? What if moral compromises have to be made, like dialing back the push for representation because it the consequences will ultimately be bad for the movement? That doesn’t feel quite so righteous. That’s an ugly real-world consideration. That might feel like morally selling out. And by implication, because Trump beat two women that they enthusiastically supported, I may even be implying that their support was part of the reason Trump won. That creates discomfort and hostility towards me. So how do we relieve that discomfort? Well, we could do some soul searching and wonder when real world consequences are different from the pure path of righteousness, but that’s complicated and feels like we’re somehow selling out our principles, so let’s not do that. Instead, let’s attack the messenger, poison the well. Because he’s acknowledging the reality that there are a lot of shitty people out there holding back progress, and he’s getting in the way of the simple righteous conclusion, then HE is also holding back progress! He’s just as sexist and racist as the people who wouldn’t vote for a woman or a person of color! Now that they think I’m fully evil, my arguments can be dismissed, and we can avoid thinking about some uncomfortable realities. Attacking the messenger feels better than acknowledging that reality sucks. Back to simple righteousness. Feels good. ---
**Author:** ![WalterBishop](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/aeb1de/32.png) [@WalterBishop](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WalterBishop)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2024, 10:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senorbeef-and-the-streisand-effect/1011866/57 "2024-12-19T22:35:46Z")
> [@DocCathode](#): > > It sure doesn’t seem that way. OTTOMH, I have repeatedly said your position was racist and mysogynist. Imagine two parallel realities: Reality 1: Kamala Harris is nominated as the Democratic candidate in 2028. Reality 2: A generic straight, white, Christian man who I’m gonna call Bill Jones is nominated as the Democratic candidate in 2028. Both are liberal, and both, if elected, will advance minority causes. In both realities, Harris or Jones will be facing off against a real piece of shit. Someone like JD Vance or Ron DeSantis. If you believe that male privilege and white privilege are real (and I’d bet my bottom dollar that you do), then you must acknowledge that the odds of a Democratic victory in 2028 are higher in Reality 2. Therefore, if we genuinely care about minority rights and don’t want to see them torched by some far-right scumbag, we should try and make Reality 2 happen. Because we’re not going to get rid of sexism and white privilege in four years. That’s all **SenorBeef** is trying to say. It’s absurd to call that position racist or sexist. ---
**Author:** ![DocCathode](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/doccathode/32/18773_2.png) [@DocCathode](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DocCathode)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2024, 10:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senorbeef-and-the-streisand-effect/1011866/58 "2024-12-19T22:44:31Z")
> [@SenorBeef](#): > > These posts all disagree with you Let us say for the sake of for the sake of argument that your cites are good (some are. I’ll deal with that in a bit). What was this post about then? > [@SenorBeef](#): > > Lol what the fuck do you mean a cite? Do I have a scientific paper that shows you’re deluding yourself? My cite is this thread. You keep repeating over and over again OH YOU CLEARLY LOST without actually explaining why and when other people clearly disagree with you. If you knew all the time, why post that. If you didn’t understand before but do now, what helped clear things up? **robby** does say he agrees with your position, However he makes no statemen one way or the other about who won the debate. Before anybody protests, the two are different things. It is most certainly possible to agree with somebody’s position and believe they lost a debate. **Hamlet** again, no comment on who won the debate. **YamatoTwinkie** no comment on who won the debate. **keeganst94** This cite actually backs you up. This poster is clearly saying that you won the debate. **We\_re\_wolves\_not\_werewolves** This cite says nobody won. So, it disagrees with me > [@SenorBeef](#): > > Did you get dropped on your head a lot as an adult? What in the hell are you responding to? You said that when you used Streissand or Streissand Effect I should both substitute a phrase that has an entirely diffferent meaning and you claimed that this did not change the meaning of your posts. > [@SenorBeef](#): > > You admit that my position on this issue isn’t worth a pitting. Cite: No, while it is racist and misogynist it does not rise to the level of a Pitting. > [@SenorBeef](#): > > So your whole line of attack relies on this idea that somehow the fact that I went to ATMB to ask if it was possible to ignore a mod was somehow the mechanism by which I was hoisted by my own petard. It is a nonsensical attack and no one agrees with you. How is it nonsensical? Other than you, I have not seen any poster in this thread disagree with my summary. > [@SenorBeef](#): > > It’s clear that no one’s opinion matters to you. You’re lost in your own little world desperately trying to repeat yourself to manifest your reality into the universe. Once again, I am in awe before your awesome psychic abilities. ---
**Author:** ![Zoobi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/13edae/32.png) [@Zoobi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zoobi)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2024, 10:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senorbeef-and-the-streisand-effect/1011866/59 "2024-12-19T22:47:39Z")
How far are you willing to go to win? How far will you let realpolitik push you away from your ideals? For example, let’s say it was a guarantee that you’d win in 2028, but only if you prevent Black people from getting any positions of power in the Democratic party is it worth it? How do you convince Black Americans that you pinky swear you’ll allow them back after you can defeat the other side enough? What kind of the deal with the devil are you willing to make? Power is addictive. If your party can gain power by deliberately excluding non white men from power, why would you ever go back? ---
**Author:** ![SenorBeef](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senorbeef/32/2220_2.png) [@SenorBeef](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SenorBeef)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2024, 10:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senorbeef-and-the-streisand-effect/1011866/60 "2024-12-19T22:49:38Z")
Alright, since DocCathode desperately needs validation from the audience: Would anyone like to support (or explain) his idea that while my argument is not pit-worthy, the fact that I went into ATMB to ask a question as to whether it was possible to block a mod (while not naming the mod, why, or linking to the thread) – THAT is pitworthy? That I was somehow hoisted by my own petard by doing that? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senorbeef-and-the-streisand-effect/1011866.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/senorbeef-and-the-streisand-effect/1011866.md?page=4)