Men’s Rights subreddit regular Demonspawn (remember him?) is back again with some deliberately vague but definitely threatening talk about judges and politicians:
Not a lot of “plausible deniability” here, though I am sure various MRAs will try to excuse this as not being what it obviously is: a threat of violence against judges, politicians and others who work for the government.
He’s done this before; I wrote about it here.
And while we’re on the topic of Demonspawn, here’s a little followup comment of his from the thread we discussed the other day. It’s a giant wall of text, I know, but it contains gems like: “When women mouth off to men and get their faces bashed in, they’ll know equality.” At least this comment of his got as many downvotes as upvotes.
I’m banned from the Men’s Rights subreddit, of course, but Demonspawn, despite repeatedly violating the subreddit’s rules about posting comments advocating violence, continues to post away. See his comment history for more lovely thoughts on, among other things, why women are parasites who don’t deserve the vote.
Saying it don’t make it so.
DRST threw in a very balanced explanation with each counterpoint showing where the original goalposts were, where you tried to move them, and where you are now.
If you can’t handle the original goalposts, just say so.
no im saying that white supremacists us ‘inner city gang violence’ as a shorthand for: a) those people are just animals who are running around wiping each other out and b) the cities are unsafe places for white people so we should just wall them off and let them kill each other off
im not saying you did this intentionally, i assume you pretty much swallow every reactionary talking point without thinking too hard about it. just letting you know that’s what people generally mean by that term, and if you keep using it people are going to assume that’s what you mean too. so you can get pissed off about it as much as you want, but sorry, racists have pretty much made that term off limits by using it to mean racist shit. take it up with them, not us.
i honestly don’t. can you explain it without any ragey all caps shit?
I’m just guessing here, but throwing out descriptor terms without the word ‘people’ in there is a very potent dehumanizing move. (see also: trans vs. trans person)
(see also–‘people-first’ language)
@Sharc – actually I always make a deliberate effort to source any point I argue from outside any kind of so-called “conspiracy theorist” blog. It’s called skepticism and fact checking, you know.
The gang war issue in Chicago I read up on CNN recently.
I also check links from this Jamaican American fella:
http://field-negro.blogspot.co.uk/
who is pretty much the opposite to “conspiracy theorists” poilitcally.
Reading different perspectives – it’s a thing.
It was blitzgal who jumped to conclusions about where I was going, because: she has a work colleague who whatthefuckever! 0.o
yeah, i notice joe has picked up mikey’s, ‘you’re arguments don’t count because i said so shit’
Joe, you still haven’t gotten back to me on just how Anarchist political theorists count as “mainstream”. Care to explain that or are you just ignoring me at this point?
So, what do the cool kids call inner-city gang violence? And what do they call feudalism?
im sure you think you do this but the problem is you sound exactly like every other right wing conspiracy theorist on the internet, so maybe it comes down to you are just really bad at communicating.
also, i’ve never met a self-identified ‘skeptic’ who wasn’t aware of the scientific evidence against eye witness testimony, so maybe you should look into that.
@howardfurniture – no, she just failed to follow the maths.
Also, as far as you’re concerned:
You apparently believe that buying sex from consenting adult sex workers is evil or something, whereas I support full decriminalisation of all consenting adult sex work
(see Germany, Spain, New Zealand etc. also read this blog: http://maggiemcneill.wordpress.com/ )
So, as you don’t believe in freedom for adult human beings, I’d say you and I will probably never agree on anything.
and were back into the posturing libertarian horseshit
@whoever – I’m not a conservative. I’m an argorist / voluntaryist.
The progressives aren’t going to accept you as one of their own, which exiles you to the conservative camp whether you like it or not.
Joecakes, ancap is ancap, no matter what you call it, agorism, voluntaryism, libertarianism, whatever, it’s still ancap, and it’s still bullshit.
…bully for you, but you were pretending a minute ago that those laws were somehow awful… when you know full well they’re a progressive step forward from the laws that preceded them.
I’ll ask again, do you really not understand why we would prefer that to the alternative THAT PRECEDED THEM??
And ‘consenting adult’ sex work? Yeah, that’s definitely who’s most impacted. (please, please, please don’t let Mr. Martin pop up now… I do NOT have the spoons for that)
Or did you ignore that, too?
scrapemind, are you jealous that someone else is getting all the attention?
You know the gorilla thing.. Iwatched, noticed the gorilla and immediately dismissed it because it made zero sense…
Kinda lends credence to the doctors Tardis being so unnoticable.
@Howard –
“I’m just guessing here, but throwing out descriptor terms without the word ‘people’ in there is a very potent dehumanizing move. (see also: trans vs. trans person)”
Oh, and you just proved me wrong. Ok, small kudos.
Yes, this. And also the racist use of “blecks” & “cullereds” during apartheid. :@
@Sharc – see this an Uhmerrikan vs. UK thing.
There are a lot of US phrases that are apparently supposed to imply “allthisotherstuff” that I have no idea about.*
Here, gang wars, mean just that, nothing else.
I absoluteley do NOT subscribe to any of that latter day apartheid BS.
How could I be a race separatist? I’d have to separate from myself!
I want to see those lads helped, to have a half decent future – not abandoned to a hopeless life, that is often cut brutally short.
(*Someone told me recently that “democrat” is an insult over there? WTF???)
@aworldclueless – speak for yourself, I’ve been making argorism work in my own life for years, in cooperation with other people.
@howard – I didn’t say / imply that the reverse was better. You assumed that.
Oh, and you should go and read what I told Tom Martin in that thread.
No, really.
Joe, honey, just because something works in an individual’s life doesn’t mean it’s what’s best for society.
@scrapemind – I’m not expecting to “join a club” here. I just hate it when people misrepresent me.
Okay. …reread my question. For clarity.
I specifically asked you if you DID NOT UNDERSTAND WHY WE WOULD PREFER A SYSTEM SUCH AS THAT SYSTEM YOU WERE MOCKING.
Do you not understand how that is a step forward?
…
Really?
not per se. wingnuts have this tic where theyve started referring to the democratic party as the ‘democrat party’ (because theres nothing democratic about them [because the kenyan muslim socialist used the new black panthers to steal the election])
…
a significant portion of american politics involves people coming up with creative new ways to be racist in public. this right wing considers this a a feature, not a bug.
@aworldpatronising – it worked for Catalonia in the Spanish Civil War too, until the Communists betrayed the Anarchists and the Fascists rolled in over both.
By the way, what you and I understand by argorism / voluntaryism may be quite different, as you’re an Uhmerrikan.
@howard – Not really, no. There are lots of ?unintended? negative impacts on the sex workers themselves from the “Swedish model”. Maggie McNeil has plenty smart stuff to say on this (see link above)