Social Justice Warriors LOL

[JimC]

Forty Two wrote:

They do in this situation, since they were hired to be there.

There's your problem right there. After becoming mercenaries, they are automatically partisan to their paymasters...

[pErvinalia]

I didn't just say it; I posted it. Are you engaged in this discussion, but didn't bother to watch the incident in question?

Here we go again. Black is white. You didn't post any video (of that incident).

The entire thing is on the video linked in the OP. Gateway Pundit link. The whole thing is there, you just had to click the link and read it.

Didn't you just say it was a video?

Indeed, if you click the link and read, you'll get to a video.

You posted text excerpts from an article. That's how I am engaged in this discussion. I read your fucking OP.

Apparently, it was too much trouble for you to click the link

It's not really about it being too much trouble or not. It's about care factor. This is just yet another minor minor issue that you are getting your panties in a twist about. I really don't care what happened past what you decided were the relevant bits in your OP quotes. You mentioned there was video evidence, and I took you at your word for it. And you had a little hissy fit because I decided to take your word for it instead of watching the video. Same old broken record with you. It's why my care factor for your never-ending series of "feminists under my bed" threads is pretty low.

Well, don't chime in as if you know what you're talking about, if you haven't done the bare minimum of looking at what happened. You're sitting their pontificating about who the real problem was, that the police were incompetent, and such, and yet you're not even sure there was a video.

No, I did not hissy fit because you took my word. I pointed out that you're a douche for sitting here arguing about a matter, and claiming to have an opinion, when you didn't even bother to look at the first source cited, and see what happened at the event.

If you can convince me that the video explains how a police force should be compelled by any party other than their own hierarchy to ignore crime happening before there own eyes, then I will watch it. If not, then the video can't possibly have any relevance to my comments.

If your care factor is so low, then don't participate in my "feminists under my bed" threads. There are tons of threads on the forum here I don't care about. You know how many posts I make in those threads? Approximately zero. And, i don't try to interfere with and piss on the threads that other people enjoy, just because I don't care about them. Douche.

No, I think I'll continue to point out your hyperbolic overreaction to minor events. I'll continue to do this to make the point that liberals are ultimately selfish and conservative.

[Scot Dutchy]

I'll continue to do this to make the point that liberals are ultimately selfish and conservative.

Which is the definition of a liberal in the Germanic sense.

[Forty Two]

If you can convince me that the video explains how a police force should be compelled by any party other than their own hierarchy to ignore crime happening before there own eyes, then I will watch it. If not, then the video can't possibly have any relevance to my comments.

LOL - you'll watch a video of the event we're talking about if someone convinces you that a video of the event is relevant to a discussion of the event. Got it.

Look, of course no other party other than their own hierarchy SHOULD be able to compel them to ignore crime happening right before their eyes. The reality is, crime happened before their eyes, and they ignored it -- and it appears it's because the perpetrators were social justice warriors and members of a "marginalized" group.

If your care factor is so low, then don't participate in my "feminists under my bed" threads. There are tons of threads on the forum here I don't care about. You know how many posts I make in those threads? Approximately zero. And, i don't try to interfere with and piss on the threads that other people enjoy, just because I don't care about them. Douche.

No, I think I'll continue to point out your hyperbolic overreaction to minor events. I'll continue to do this to make the point that liberals are ultimately selfish and conservative.

I haven't overreacted at all. Discussing the event, and laughing and being scornful at the social justice warriors who engage in this garbage is not an overreaction at all. Point out whatever you want, but you've made no argument that liberals are selfish or conservative. You've said it. But, you've not actually "made" the point. You just make declarations without evidence. Unsupported nonsense.

[Forty Two]

Overreaction to "minor" issues. O.k.

Let's look at another minor issue. I mean, it's a daily occurrence. These are not isolated instances or one-offs. It is what these creeps really think.

At Yale University -- usually a university ranked 2 or 3 in the world -- students are demanding that the university "decolonize" the English curriculum. https://www.theguardian.com/books/2016/ ... le-writers

This is one of the battles being fought by Social Justice Warriors. So, non Anglos learning English is not "cultural appropriation." No. Teaching English by means of ethnically English writers is "colonization" of the English language.

Undergraduates at Yale University have launched a petition calling on the English department to abolish a core course requirement to study canonical writers including Chaucer, Shakespeare and Milton, saying that “it is unacceptable that a Yale student considering studying English literature might read only white male authors”.

So, they're talking about "a" core requirement. It's not "the only" core requirement. Other core requirements exist, and certainly other non-core options exist, where English-language writers of all eras and geographical locations are explored.

But, they are objecting to 14th century Chaucer. 16th and early 17th century Shakespeare. Milton in the 17th century --- core requirement of English being a reading of writers from fucking England, writing in late Middle English and Early Modern English, etc. -- almost all of whom were fucking white, and almost all of whom were fucking male, because they were writing in the 14th, 15th, 16th and 17th centuries -- is "colonization"???

Are these people fucking insane? They don't want to read them? Well what "persons of color" were writing in English from the 14th through the 17th century?

The prestigious Connecticut university requires its English majors to spend two semesters studying a selection of authors it labels the “major English poets”: “Geoffrey Chaucer, Edmund Spenser, William Shakespeare, and John Donne in the fall; John Milton, Alexander Pope, William Wordsworth, and TS Eliot or another modern poet in the spring”.

The course is Major English Poets. The only person on that list born after 1800 is TS Eliot - and he is the only one not born in England, although he became a British citizen. And, the objection to studying "major" -- "English" -- "poets" --- is that it's colonization. Too many white guys. I mean, that's like arguing that studying French literature at university needs to be modified to diversify away from Frenchmen when studying the great classic French poets....

They want the university to abolish the major English poets requirement, and to refocus the course’s pre-1800/1900 requirements “to deliberately include literatures relating to gender, race, sexuality, ableism, and ethnicity”.

They don't want to add other courses that have non-white and non-male writers. They want to "abolish" the major English poets requirement, and then change the curriculum to include all the 14th, 15th, 16th and 17th century writings related to "gender", "race", "sexuality", "ableism" and "ethnicity." Obviously, the gender bending of Twelfth Night and such, that kind of thing isn't good enough. All the people of color and women writing in English in the 16th and 17th centuries - about lesbianism, transsexuality, and gender queer issues, and such, well, those are the writers that should be focused upon...in a study of the early English poets.....

And, it's not just a question of fair representation, either -- oh, no.

The petition says that “a year spent around a seminar table where the literary contributions of women, people of colour, and queer folk are absent actively harms all students, regardless of their identity”, and that the course “creates a culture that is especially hostile to students of colour”.

Yes, they think studying the early English poets - those that wrote in the 14th through 17th century -- and who have for hundreds of years been studied, because, well, those are the writers whose writings have survived, and they are foundational to modern English writing, which is built upon the late middle English and early modern English (after the Great Vowel Shift) writings -- studying those folks -- it's HARMFUL. It HARMS people. That's what they think. That's what social justice warriors think. Having a core requirement of studying the major early English writers is HARMFUL to "people of color." LOL -- indeed - the fact that English people are ethnically white, and therefore the early English writers were white -- just as early Kenyan writers were black, and early Arabic writers were Arabic, and early Chinese writers were fucking Chinese -- that's HARMFUL. Well, not when studying Chinese or African writing, of course - we'd expect those to be made up largely of ethnically Chinese and African writers -- but, for early English writers to be white, well, that's an outrage. We ought not study them, because it's HARMFUL to do so.

The article does not specify the list of ethnically African, Asian, or meso-American Indian writers in the 16th century that ought to replace William Shakespeare, John Milton, John Donne, and Alexander Pope.....

Social Justice Warriors. Someone fucking hit them with something.

[Forty Two]

Forty Two wrote:

They do in this situation, since they were hired to be there.

There's your problem right there. After becoming mercenaries, they are automatically partisan to their paymasters...

Sure, and the college republicans who brought Milo in and Milo/Breitbart split the cost of the security. The school, shortly before the event, demanded something like $3000 extra be paid such that security could be supplied for the event. The money was paid. Yet, the security stood by and watched, at the behest of the school administration, because marginalized asshats are allowed to commandeer stages, because, you know, these are voices that aren't traditionally heard, and they don't have privilege, and white male patriarchy.

[pErvinalia]

If you can convince me that the video explains how a police force should be compelled by any party other than their own hierarchy to ignore crime happening before there own eyes, then I will watch it. If not, then the video can't possibly have any relevance to my comments.

LOL - you'll watch a video of the event we're talking about if someone convinces you that a video of the event is relevant to a discussion of the event. Got it.

Look, of course no other party other than their own hierarchy SHOULD be able to compel them to ignore crime happening right before their eyes. The reality is, crime happened before their eyes, and they ignored it -- and it appears it's because the perpetrators were social justice warriors and members of a "marginalized" group.

I seriously don't understand what goes on in your "brain". I figured I'll check the video out to see whether the police really did ignore a crime. There's NO VIDEO OF THE EVENT AT THAT LINK! There's a screen cap of a video, and there's a 20 second video of some chick calling the camera operator a "rapist". That's it. I really don't get you. Are you off your face on drugs when you post?

[pErvinalia]

Overreaction to "minor" issues. O.k.

Let's look at another minor issue. I mean, it's a daily occurrence.

What does it's frequency have to do with whether it is a minor issue or not? It's minor because it's largely inconsequential to the big problems in the world. Global warming is major. Crony capitalism is major. Dickhead SJW's aren't major.

[pErvinalia]

Forty Two wrote:

They do in this situation, since they were hired to be there.

There's your problem right there. After becoming mercenaries, they are automatically partisan to their paymasters...

Sure, and the college republicans who brought Milo in and Milo/Breitbart split the cost of the security. The school, shortly before the event, demanded something like $3000 extra be paid such that security could be supplied for the event. The money was paid. Yet, the security stood by and watched, at the behest of the school administration, because marginalized asshats are allowed to commandeer stages, because, you know, these are voices that aren't traditionally heard, and they don't have privilege, and white male patriarchy.

As we keep trying to tell you, the biggest problem here is that the public servants that are supposed to enforce the law have been turned into mercenaries for hire in your ridiculous uber-capitalist society. Like I said regarding scales of problems. That is a BIG problem. If the power of the State is available to the highest bidder, then you've got a lot more problems than some ranty twats in the corners of academia.

[Forty Two]

Overreaction to "minor" issues. O.k.

Let's look at another minor issue. I mean, it's a daily occurrence.

What does it's frequency have to do with whether it is a minor issue or not? It's minor because it's largely inconsequential to the big problems in the world. Global warming is major. Crony capitalism is major. Dickhead SJW's aren't major.

It's a major issue, because they are attempting to destroy the education system. And, they are activists, and their nonsense is making headway.

[Forty Two]

The video is here http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/05 ... niversity/

[pErvinalia]

The video is here http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/05 ... niversity/

WTF?!? Where is the assault in that video??! There's a reason why the police did nothing... no fucking crime occurred.

[L'Emmerdeur]

Hmm, assault: "Intentionally putting another person in reasonable apprehension of an imminent harmful or offensive contact. No intent to cause physical injury needs to exist, and no physical injury needs to result." The Illinois definition agrees with this.

I skipped through the video, because watching the entire thing would have given me severe indigestion, but around 47:25 to around 47:28 the young woman appears to engage in an assault on Yiannopoulos.

[pErvinalia]

Ok, well that reduces assault to almost specious levels.

I don't think you were supposed to watch the two hour video. Below it there was a video with a 25 second clip of the incident. I mean, seriously, if that's what constitutes a crime in the US, you guys need to remove the sticks from your arses. That level of thing must happen literally thousands of times a day in the US. Imagine if the courts were to get bogged up with cry babies taking that sort of stuff to the judiciary?

And in any case, I presume Milo could still request charges be laid, as he has video evidence? I suspect he's sensible enough to realise how fucking embarrassing it would be to bring charges against that sort of thing.

[Forty Two]

Forty Two wrote:

They do in this situation, since they were hired to be there.

There's your problem right there. After becoming mercenaries, they are automatically partisan to their paymasters...

Sure, and the college republicans who brought Milo in and Milo/Breitbart split the cost of the security. The school, shortly before the event, demanded something like $3000 extra be paid such that security could be supplied for the event. The money was paid. Yet, the security stood by and watched, at the behest of the school administration, because marginalized asshats are allowed to commandeer stages, because, you know, these are voices that aren't traditionally heard, and they don't have privilege, and white male patriarchy.

As we keep trying to tell you, the biggest problem here is that the public servants that are supposed to enforce the law have been turned into mercenaries for hire in your ridiculous uber-capitalist society. Like I said regarding scales of problems. That is a BIG problem. If the power of the State is available to the highest bidder, then you've got a lot more problems than some ranty twats in the corners of academia.

Don't claim a "we" when there isn't one. It's just you, and nobody is suggesting the power of the State is available to the highest bidder. If it were, then the folks that paid for the security would have gotten some results. In Milo's case - he and the college republicans were the highest bidder -- and the event was allowed to be shut down.

The problem was DePaul's administration sided with the violent disrupters, because they oppose Milo's positions, and think it's justified for marginalized groups (so called) to act out in this fashion. That's the problem.