Categories
#gamergate gaslighting mansplaining men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny PUA rape rape culture vox day

Did Vox Day, #GamerGate-r and Sci Fi douchebag, just confess to serial rape on the David Pakman Show?

Vox Day:
Vox Day: “I’m smarter than practically everyone else out there.”

Earlier today, several readers alerted me to a new video out with an alarming title: Vox Day Admits to Sex with Women Without Consent, Says Gay is a Birth Defect.

The video, a 46-minute interview of Science Fiction’s biggest asshole conducted by YouTuber David Pakman, doesn’t quite live up to its sensational title (which I now see Pakman has changed).

While Day — real name Theodore Beale — does indeed say that gayness is a birth defect, he’s evasive when Pakman asks him point-blank about some of the more amazingly wrong and creepy things he’s written about rape. Indeed, he’s so evasive in his answers it’s easy to lose track of what exactly Pakman is trying to get him to clarify.

So let’s look at the actual quotes that Pakman was asking him about. In a 2005 blog post (archived here), Day wrote:

If the definition of rape is stretched so far to include women who have not given consent, then I am absolutely a serial rapist. So, too, is every man I know.

Pakman is of course correct to see this as a rather startling admission. Because the very definition of rape is sex without consent; there is no stretching going on here.

In the interview, Vox doesn’t repudiate these comments, but he doesn’t exactly affirm them either; he tells Pakman that he has indeed had sex with women without first obtaining explicit written consent, introducing a qualifier that was not there in the original. He goes on to say that he’s had sex without getting explicit verbal consent for each and every sexual act, a la the famous Antioch College rules. Again, that wasn’t the question. Pakman makes a valiant effort to pin Day down on this, but he wriggles away every time.

If you look at some of the other things Day was writing about rape around the same time of that 2005 post, you can see that he’s been using the “written permission” nonsense to muddle the issue for a very long time.

Less than a week before his “serial rape” comment, Day posted a long, victim-blamey disquisition on rape (archived here), in which he drew a distinction between “genuine rape” and date rape, saying that

most so-called “date rape” is not rape nor a crime of any kind, because he said-she said is no basis for a system of justice. If sex without written permission is a crime, then all sex is rape and all men are unrepentant criminals.

Never mind that “written permission” is never the issue in rape cases.

In another post from around the same time (archived here), he seems to suggest that the difficulty in proving date rape in court means that it doesn’t really exist:

“Date rape” is distinguished from real rape as it involves inherently sexual situations where there is seldom any possibility of obtaining evidence of either criminal activity or criminal intent, both of which are necessary to demonstrate in the conviction of real crimes.

Back to the present. Pakman asks Day about another kind of rape that he thinks doesn’t exist: rape in marriage. In a blog post last year, as you may recall, Day wrote that

The concept of marital rape is not merely an oxymoron, it is an attack on the institution of marriage, on the concept of objective law, and indeed, on the core foundation of human civilization itself.

So why isn’t marital rape rape? As Day sees it, “marriage grants consent on an ongoing basis.” So once a woman says “I do” on her wedding day, he believes, she can no longer say no to sex with her husband, as sex is part of her marital duty.

In his interview with Pakman, Day reiterates this basic argument, though he is notably elusive about just which sexual acts a married woman has intrinsically said yes to when she agrees to be married. Pakman asks Day if he believes married men should go ahead and force their wives to have sex when they’ve explicitly said no; Day allows that this might not be such a good idea.

Pakman devotes a decent portion of the interview to the troubling things Day has said about rape; he could easily have devoted an entire hour or two to Day’s odious opinions on the subject. Pakman, for example, doesn’t ask Day about his bizarre assertion, in a blog post last December, that any woman who says a white man raped her is lying. No, really. This is what he wrote:

White American men simply don’t rape these days. At this point, unless a womann claims it was committed by a black or Hispanic man she didn’t previously know, all claims of rape, especially by a college woman, have to be considered intrinsically suspect.

Even though Pakman is unable to get straight answers from Day on most of the questions he asks, the interview is well worth watching. No, scratch that: It is largely because he is unable to get straight answers from Day that the interview is so compelling.

Day is weirdly and floridly evasive on virtually every topic Pakman brings up, from rape to the intentions of #Gamergate, and while he’s never willing to say outright that he was wrong about anything Pakman puts before him, he’s remarkably unwilling to take responsibility for the words he’s written, sounding very little like the “alpha male” he so often proclaims himself to be.

Here’s the video, if you have 45 minutes to spare:

H/T —  on Twitter, the first of several people who alerted me to this video

EDIT: I noted that Pakman has changed the title of his video.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

131 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Michael (contemplativemoorings)

“because he said-she said is no basis for a system of justice”

Isn’t that exactly how our justice system works? The prosecution presents one theory and the defense presents another? Who knew the concept of justice was so hard to grasp.

katz
6 years ago

It’s kind of convenient that the cases where people throw up their hands and go “Welp, no way to know what happened, I guess we can’t prosecute this as a crime” are always crimes against marginalized groups.

Paradoxical Intention
6 years ago

@katz: No kidding. But if it was a prominent cishet white man, everybody’d be clamoring to find the one who victimized him.

Woman gets raped? Black man gets shot? Trans person is beaten to death? Queer person is assaulted?

No proof, can’t prosecute.

dhag85
6 years ago

This is exactly the kind of thing I love to have playing in the background while I play Minecraft. 🙂

Ellesar
Ellesar
6 years ago

I do not think that men with shaved heads typically look like Fascists, but he looks JUST like a fascist.

So funny that he says that if you do not understand his points it is because you do not share his intellectual level! Or maybe he is just spewing a pile of crap?

Lordcrowstaff
Lordcrowstaff
6 years ago

I wonder how this asshole get’s a written contract every time he buys something at a store, since verbal consent is the basic element of everyday shopping.

Oh, wait, he’s just a racist, rapist fuck. And yeah, I agree with the other posters: anytime somebody goes on about how smart they are, chances are they aren’t, and anytime somebody goes on about how rape is really easy to comit under the current laws, chances are they’re rapists.

AltoFronto
AltoFronto
6 years ago

@ Catalpa

I’m in the top, you know, tiny fraction of 1% when it comes to intelligence. I’m smarter than practically everyone else out there.

There are over 7bn people on the planet. He could be in the top 0.001% and still be dumber than 70,000 people.
Though frankly, I’d be amazed if he’s even in the top 60%. Not that I think Vox has taken any kind of objective, standardised IQ test (he only cares about objectivity when it suits his assfax).

But anyone with real intelligence knows that IQ is based on a specific kind of testing, and doesn’t account for all of the different ways of being intelligent.

I scored very highly on most tests in secondary school, but I’m not by any measure smart in engineering, or good at completing mathematical sequences. I bet I could still beat Vox at most things, though.

Can we all challenge him to a series of IQ puzzles? I’ll bet the Mammotheers could all leave him buried in the dirt at a game of wits. 🙂

Spindrift
Spindrift
6 years ago

@Alan Robertshaw

Thanks for pointing that out, I know next to nothing about contract law.

I still think a consent contract would likely get used to victimblame/slutshame rape victims who had signed it but withdrew their consent during sex. And I have my doubts about how useful it’d be in court beyond establishing that at the time of the signing they both consented to sex. Unless you had a third party act as a witness to both the contract signing and the sex, to establish whether there was/wasn’t ongoing consent.

The kind of person who thinks affirmative consent is so confusing that they’d need a contract to avoid being an accidental rapist is not the sort of person I’d feel comfortable having sex with, or being asleep near, or whatever. Affirmative consent is a pretty simple concept.

Sarah
Sarah
6 years ago

This man is unappealing in every possible way. Again, why does he have any following?

Some people think he sock-puppets on his own blog. I’ve seen twitter convos from people discussing him and his antics, and some people who go down into the comments (as I rarely do) have said that many of the comments purportedly not from VD himself have the same grammar and syntax as what is seen in the main posts. I know that I was reading something of his which quoted a commenter allegedly from Making Light, and halfway through the wall of text from this supposedly pseudonymous person I realized what I was reading was indistinguishable in tone and style from what I’d read of VD’s “main” writing. That creeped me the hell out for some reason I can’t put my finger on.

Buttercup Q. Skullpants

I’m in the top, you know, tiny fraction of 1% when it comes to intelligence. I’m smarter than practically everyone else out there.

It’s an interesting thing…Mensa members, for all their test smarts, seem to be a lot more susceptible to woo than the average population. Speakers at Mensa meetings frequently include “UFO experts” and anti-vaxxers. Isaac Asimov once had an anecdote about being at a Mensa meeting in which someone came up to him and tried wholeheartedly to convince him to believe in astrology.

Test smarts and good pattern recognition don’t preclude credulousness and shit analytical thinking skills. People like Vox Day suffer from a sort of arrogant self-blindness. Because the tests tell them they’re smart, they think their opinions are infallible, even when their belief system includes obvious nonsense, flimflam, amd bigotry.

Also – and I wish I could remember where I saw this – there was a sci fi discussion thread where Vox Day’s Mensa claim was being discussed. One woman said she actually contacted Mensa (their membership list is public) to see if she could verify the claim. They had no record, ever, of a Theodore Beale or a Vox Day, or even a Theodore Day or Vox Beale. If he is a member, he must have joined under an assumed name. Or possibly, he believes he’s smart enough to join Mensa based on some IQ test score and that’s just as good as actually being a member, so why not just claim the title because who’s ever going to check? Like Space Bunny, it’s whatever he says it is.

zyvlyn
zyvlyn
6 years ago

“My shitgolem is different from regular shitgolems. It’s like my shitgolem is in the top percentage of shitgolems!

…I couldn’t resist.”

Very nicely done. *golfclap*

Isn’t it funny how everyone who talks about their IQ on the internet is invariably

A) Above 140 and
B) Insufferable

It’s almost like they’re lying because they know no one can fact check them.

Juliana
Juliana
6 years ago

I believe in the end it’s always the same logical fallacy people like this fall for: The idea that the absence of resistance implies consent.

Linax5
Linax5
6 years ago

ugh These men have no class at all.

gilshalos
6 years ago

I’ve been told about the percentage thing once. My doctor when I was first diagnosed pointed out that just by being accepted into St Andrews University I was in the top 3%. It as meant to help my slef-hatred. Didn’t work.

weirwoodtreehugger
6 years ago

Michael,
That’s what I always thought? With every other crime we seem to be able to accept the testimony of the victim, defendant, and witnesses as evidence. But with rape, all of a sudden, there better be video evidence. Even then, if the victim was passed out drunk,video isn’t enough.

Sarah,
So Vox is like David. Only, instead of ferrets in a David suit like we are, his commenters miniature Nazi goblins in a Vox suit.

Tyra Lith
Tyra Lith
6 years ago

Ew. ew ew ew. What an awful human being.
There is so much wrong and so much stupid in this video, it’s unbelievable! Top 1%, yeah, keep telling yourself that. ^^

Spindrift
Spindrift
6 years ago

He’s probably in the top 1% in terms of horribleness.

Tyra Lith
Tyra Lith
6 years ago

Oh and I don’t know about US law but as far as I am aware in many (most? all?) European countries verbal contracts are legally binding. for some contracts a different form is required but those are exceptions from the rule. And if the court tries to figure out what exactly the people involved meant by the words they used, it also interprets their behaviour and the general circumstances.

chapwilliams
6 years ago

Even if he weren’t a rapist, misogynist, racist arseface he is still contemptible for his arrogance and stunning stupidity. He thinks of himself as having some sort of towering intellect while his logic falls around his ankles; his definitions are sloppy, he believes in anecdotes over data, he makes arguments from ignorance, selectively views evidence and utterly fails to understand the nature of science.

Those intelligent enough in Goofygoob to claim Vox doesn’t represent them are completely wrong.

Only someone as fractally wrong (and ideologically disgusting) as Vox could represent that douchenado.

Alan Robertshaw
Alan Robertshaw
6 years ago

@ Michael & WWTH

With every other crime we seem to be able to accept the testimony of the victim, defendant, and witnesses as evidence.

There’s an interesting history to this. As you point out, these days a person can be convicted just on the word of one witness (e.g. the victim), but that wasn’t always the case.

Some offences, rape being one of them, required ‘corroboration’. In other words there had to be at least two independent pieces of evidence in order to convict.

That rule has been abolished in England (expect for speeding and perjury) but it’s still the rule in Scotland.

There have been moves afoot North of the border to remove the corroboration requirement in order to make it easier to prosecute rape cases, but it’s proving controversial.

sparky
sparky
6 years ago

Wow.

Wow.

It’s like Vox Day is trying to win the “Absolute Worst Person in the World” contest. A sexist, racist, homophobic and probable rapist. He’s the whole package, there.

The concept of marital rape is not merely an oxymoron, it is an attack on the institution of marriage, on the concept of objective law, and indeed, on the core foundation of human civilization itself.

Did he just say that civilization will crumble if you can’t rape your spouse? Why yes, yes he did.

He also said it’s not rape when a white man does it, and that a woman not consenting to sex isn’t rape. And homosexuality is a birth defect. Vox Day believes all these things.

And he’s got fans out there who think he’s right.

Yep. I think I’m done with humanity for the day.

sunnysombrera
6 years ago

@sparky
I believe this classic gif is in order here.
comment image

Spindrift
Spindrift
6 years ago
Spindrift
Spindrift
6 years ago

Kittyninjad by sunnysombrera!

sparky
sparky
6 years ago

sunnysombrero and Spindrift:

Thanks, folks. Adorable animals are always good. <3

http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s–7kp6UdSB–/18uzodohufsy4gif.gif

penguincatmobiles
6 years ago

The gator crowd is showing their true colors in the comments now.

Aunt Edna
Aunt Edna
6 years ago

@Sarah:

Re: VD sockpuppeting on his blog — ha! That would explain his popularity, lol. Also Space Bunny* or whatever she’s called.

—-

Re: Mensa — I work for Mensa. Membership requires only (yes) high IQ confirmed by performance on a standardized IQ test administered by a qualified professional.

But high IQ by itself is not all that, especially when not accompanied by equally high emotional intelligence. In fact, sometimes it can be more of a liability than an asset when a person’s emotional and social skills are not up to his or her IQ — and they often are not in the highest IQ range.

It is frighteningly easy to be a total d-bag (to use clinical language) with an IQ of, say, 150+, as evidenced by, for example, the existence of manurespherians who claim to be up there. I have no reason to doubt their high IQ claims, but one should not be unduly (if at all) impressed by them. If anything, it is sad that people with so much intellectual potential are nasty human beings, wasting their lives on spreading misery and hate.

*After watching that video, I am confident that Space Bunny or whatever she’s called is imaginary.

Hambeast, Social Justice Hoo-Ha Glitterer
Hambeast, Social Justice Hoo-Ha Glitterer
6 years ago

This is all very unsurprising; I’ve been reading on Mr. SOSG (shit of shit golem) Day for years now on FtB (even back in the old SciBlog days). He seems to intermittently break out like a rash on the internets. I feel a bit like he does this deliberately for the attention and lulz to keep his awful fans interested in him.

Test smarts and good pattern recognition don’t preclude credulousness and shit analytical thinking skills. People like Vox Day suffer from a sort of arrogant self-blindness. Because the tests tell them they’re smart, they think their opinions are infallible, even when their belief system includes obvious nonsense, flimflam, amd bigotry.

This is so true and it does kids no good when they’re tested. I was one of those kids and I had a mild superiority complex for most of my life. I don’t think I was very obnoxious about it, but it was still there.

I figured out that I’m not all that intellectually when I started reading blogs on the internet and figured out that I didn’t even know how to argue properly, let alone reason. Luckily for me, I lurk more than I comment and don’t put my foot in it too often. Even more luckily, I learn a LOT! I’m so grateful that I stumbled on the blogs I did when I did.

mildlymagnificent
6 years ago

There’s also a problem with quite a few people who are smart and know it even without the Mensa membership. The parade of Nobel Prize winners who’ve gone for total woo-dreck-nonsense as soon as they stepped off the narrow path of their academic endeavours is one group. There are others who have a contrarian smart aleck bent – even in their own field they like to go against the grain just because it doesn’t suit them to agree with other people.

There was a great comment about one well-known contrarian like this.
He’s probably been the smartest guy in every room he’s ever walked into – but he’s nowhere nearly as smart as he thinks he is.”

Hambeast, Social Justice Hoo-Ha Glitterer
Hambeast, Social Justice Hoo-Ha Glitterer
6 years ago

After watching that video, I am confident that Space Bunny or whatever she’s called is imaginary.

While I don’t doubt that there are women out there who are assholes enough to gravitate to Mr. SOSG Day, and that it’s possible that some of those women are also drop-dead gorgeous, AND that said drop-dead gorgeous asshole women might be extremely publicity shy, the existence of Mrs. SOSG Day does seem a bit unlikely.

My reasoning is partly this: I’m very camera shy in general and have never put pics of myself on the internets and yet, there are photos of me floating around, despite my best efforts. If I were well-known in any small circle, I’m sure those pics could easily be found by someone with the right knowledge and skills.

dhag85
6 years ago

I’ve only heard the beginning of this interview so far, but I already hade two major laugh out loud moments.

First, when Vox is asked to describe what GG is really about, he says (I’m paraphrasing, since I can’t remember the exact wording, althought the important part is his actual wording): “We want the right to create and enjoy the games that we like, without being criticized for it.”

Get it? Without being criticized!!! Hahahahaha. Sorry dude, that’s never gonna happen in a country with freedom of expression.

Second, Pakman asks him a question related to how some GGers have said Vox is not really supported by GG. The question goes something like: “If GG is inherently a leaderless hashtag movement, then how can anyone in that movement claim that someone else is NOT a supporter of the movement?”

Vox’ answer: “They can’t, and those people who say that are not real GGers.”

Hahahahaha. It’s a self-contradiction within the span of a split second. I literally burst out laughing and scared the cats.

Ty
Ty
6 years ago

“If you look on Wikipedia…” lost all credibility right there, if he hadn’t already.

GrumpyOldMangina
6 years ago

We’ve gone over this several times already in the past, but I think it always bears repeating.
In my freshman psychology class, 50 years ago, the professor quipped that the definition of IQ was “that which is measured by IQ tests.” IQ probably has some meaning, but the idea that an incredibly complex phenomenon like human intelligence can be accurately measured and expressed by a single integer value is … not very intelligent. And how would you ever measure things like creativity or the quality of one’s shit detector with a test where all the right answers are known in advance and must be objectively verifiable? So much of intelligence involves making judgments about the quality of evidence available for a certain proposition. One of the defining characteristics of the MRAs and their fellow travelers is to take a small and usually mostly irrelevant anecdote and use it to make a universal categorical statement about women or feminists or whatever. The idea that you need to evaluate and weigh evidence in order to produce cogent opinions seems to escape them entirely.

Moggie
Moggie
6 years ago

Regardless of whether IQ is a meaningful metric of anything, I think the important point here is that if someone feels the need to tell you how intelligent they are, that’s pretty much an admission of failure. They have failed to demonstrate their high intelligence through their words and accomplishments, so they fall back on bald assertion. You can see VD’s problem: what does he have to show for the awesome smarts he keeps in that thing on top of his neck? His achievements are mediocre, his arguments unpersuasive, his followers an embarrassment. What can he point to?

gilshalos
6 years ago

I have to admit that I am curious about how I rated in my first ever IQ test. Before I knew the questions. But that was at 9 and my school refused to tell us the results.

Jenora Feuer
Jenora Feuer
6 years ago

Regarding Mensa and woo:
In some ways, high intelligence without proper critical thinking can actually be a detriment, as mentioned above. In particular, people like that are often much better than most at constructing rationalizations for whatever they want to believe. This on top of the usual defensiveness people tend to have when criticized on issues they’ve made part of their identity, When you have someone who is:
– Convinced they’re smarter than most other people
– Convinced they came by their current opinions rationally and are therefore right
– Convinced that they’re under personal attack for those opinions
All of those start supporting each other and it becomes really difficult to do anything to prove them wrong to their satisfaction because they keep coming up with outs and rationalizations to discard your arguments.

theladyzombie
6 years ago

If anyone is interested about an in depth and exhaustively researched account about Day, the Sad Puppies, the Rabid Puppies, and the Hugo Awards, here you go. It’s a long post but Philip Sandifer really outlined what is going on and what Beale’s motivations are.

http://www.philipsandifer.com/2015/04/guided-by-beauty-of-their-weapons.html

Steve Mosby (@stevemosby)

“While I don’t doubt that there are women out there who are assholes enough to gravitate to Mr. SOSG Day, and that it’s possible that some of those women are also drop-dead gorgeous, AND that said drop-dead gorgeous asshole women might be extremely publicity shy, the existence of Mrs. SOSG Day does seem a bit unlikely.

My reasoning is partly this: I’m very camera shy in general and have never put pics of myself on the internets and yet, there are photos of me floating around, despite my best efforts. If I were well-known in any small circle, I’m sure those pics could easily be found by someone with the right knowledge and skills.”

I find Day and his views abhorrent, and disagree with pretty much everything he says, but I’ve always found this idea that his wife doesn’t exist a bit bizarre. There are a number of different photos of her, including two incredibly obvious photos of the pair of them together (one on his Twitter account; one on hers). There’s also her Facebook page (linked to on a previous thread here). And photos he’s posted on his blog. It’s all obviously the same woman. Not to mention the fact he has kids.

There are enough legitimate reasons to argue with him and his ideas without implying that an attractive woman could never consider having something to do with him. It’s a line of attack (on both him and her) that feels like it should be beneath people.

Paradoxical Intention
6 years ago

Buttercup Q. Skullpants | April 25, 2015 at 6:33 am
Speakers at Mensa meetings frequently include “UFO experts” and anti-vaxxers.

I did hear something interesting about the anti-vaxxers: most of them are rich, college-educated, white people who live in rich neighborhoods.

And most of them are trying to live a “natural” lifestyle. By allowing measles to come back.

opium4themasses
6 years ago

You’re always smart enough to fool yourself.

I find studying philosophy to be a good break point. If you study a number of philosophers and feel justified in saying you are smarter than everyone else and have the most objective viewpoint, you are most likely a complete ass. Reading philosophy was both humbling and instructive. (I have a particular asshole in mind as I write this)

Paradoxical Intention
6 years ago

Gah. All this talk about IQ and “accurately” measuring a concept of humanity that is so varied and has so many factors is reminding me of Death Parade.

I just finished it last night, and I’m still recovering from the feels.

Irene
Irene
6 years ago

I agree with Steve Mosby. I see no reason to suppose that Heather Mulheron Beale is not real. See, e.g., this obituary of her grandfather: http://www.rhielfuneralhome.com/obituaries/345/Mulheron-Clair-C

Robert
Robert
6 years ago

If someone who is convinced of his* intellectual superiority restricts himself* to established areas of expertise, it is easier to maintain an attitude of smug self-satisfaction. One thing I do is try to learn about things that I do not already know. No illusion of genius can survive an encounter with the newspaper’s bridge column (you either know all about bridge or nothing; it’s like ballroom dancing that way). Me, I’m still trying to figure out what syncopation is – I can talk intelligently about a host of subjects, but music and math are not among them.

A good friend of mine is in Mensa, and corroborates everything said above.

*I would have used gender neutral pronouns, but it’s almost always men.

Shaenon
6 years ago

“I have a high IQ!” is the “My mom says I’m handsome!” of the Internet.

I find studying philosophy to be a good break point. If you study a number of philosophers and feel justified in saying you are smarter than everyone else and have the most objective viewpoint, you are most likely a complete ass. Reading philosophy was both humbling and instructive. (I have a particular asshole in mind as I write this)

Reading and learning in general ought to give a person a sense of perspective. Maybe this has something to do with the Puppies’ disdain for literary/intellectual science fiction: they don’t like to read books that are smarter than they are.

Buttercup Q. Skullpants

His wife is absolutely real, but “Space Bunny” comes across as a sock puppet. Her comments and tweets are vindictive and nasty, but the tone doesn’t match her facebook page, which is bland and sweet and somewhat self-deprecating about her looks. It’s odd. Given his history of socking, it’s quite possible he might have created an online persona for his wife (with or without her blessing) to bolster his own online reputation as an alpha visionary sci fi writer/thinker/War Mouse developer or whatever the hell he claims to be.

I don’t think anyone here is saying attractive women can’t possibly date and even marry assholes with no visible redeeming attributes (even Nice Guys are occasionally right). It’s just that, in addition to “mah high IQ”, Beale and supporters often play the “my wife is so HOTTTtT!!” card as a Q.E.D. to whatever horrible retrograde point they’re trying to argue. Whenever he does that, it’s just so tempting to poke holes in that balloon.

Sarah
Sarah
6 years ago

Well. It seems that Vox Day is really REALLY mad about the fallout from his Pakman interviews and vowing that he will have his revenge. See https://archive.is/WAimr and https://archive.is/o4EcC

Also the “marital sex cannot be rape” post is archived here https://archive.is/1uSly

I blocked David Pakman on twitter and I’ve been refusing YouTube recs for his videos ever since the way he treated Arthur Chu, and the way he called down the goobergate horde on Zoe Quinn when she declined his interview. I may reconsider after this, though.

Pelagic
Pelagic
6 years ago

Vox day is pretty much the example for why freedom of speech does not work, and certain ideas should be criminal.

Paradoxical Intention
6 years ago

Eh, I think he’s more of an example of what Freeze Peach is NOT.

Like so many people have it in their heads that Freeze Peach is them getting to say what they want with no repercussions, but they can use it to silence their critics from what they have to say, not realizing what an utter paradox that is.

Flint
Flint
6 years ago

“We want the right to create and enjoy the games that we like, without being criticized for it.”

You’ve betrayed Shiva, Mr. Day.

In all seriousness, unless the critics in question are threatening him with physical harm or trying to sabotage his life/livelihood/rights/etc. in some way, shape or form, he should either accept the criticism or, if he really does believe what he says is right, just ignore the criticism altogether.

opium4themasses
6 years ago

I am more than happy for Vox Day to have his free speech. I would rather let the assholes prove it loudly.

I ran into what I think is a TERF post complaining about Laverne Cox. The comments really got to me. http://feministcurrent.com/11632/laverne-coxs-objectified-body-empowers-no-one/