Twitter permanently suspends Milo Yiannopoulos over row with 'Ghostbusters' actress

timthumbni

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

I didn't mind the movie so much, humour just seemed immature to me, far more than the original was. I think for that reason any young kids seeing it would most like enjoy it maybe a little more. The annoying stuff would just (hopefully at least) go over their heads, like them all shooting the ghost in the balls and making a joke about hitting him there. Then we have images like this from the premiere with Leslie suggestively standing on his balls and it's all a bit, well... fashionable pandering really.

https://twitter.com/shoe0nhead/status/754835055386562560

You do realise that this is a kids movie though. I really can't see why people get so annoyed over a fecking ghostbusters movie. The director and the actors got that much stick that you can hardly blame them for taking the Mickey a wee bit like in the photo.

When I went in I wasn't expecting Lawrence of Arabia style film making. But It was ok and quite entertaining. The kids loved it and that's really all that matters. I liked the cameos from the original cast. Where was Rick moranis though? Or did I miss him?

Elliott S

timthumbni wrote: »

Where was Rick moranis though? Or did I miss him?

He doesn't act anymore. Sadly, his wife died of breast cancer in her early 30s. He took time off acting to focus on raising his kids and he said that he found he didn't really miss acting so never went back to it.

Outlaw Pete

timthumbni wrote: »

You do realise that this is a kids movie though.

Well, tbf, it's not exclusively a kids film and nor was the original. It's pretty much a family comedy. I know many adults who liked both versions, I consider myself one of them in fact.

When I went in I wasn't expecting Lawrence of Arabia style film making. But It was ok and quite entertaining. The kids loved it and that's really all that matters.

Absolutely and for sure there is no way it deserves all the condemnation it has received and like I said in the film forum, there were at least a half dozen laugh out loud moments in it for me.

Arcade_Tryer

Bad move by twitter. Banning opinions and people like that from having a platform doesn't beat them. It just makes them think up more creative ways to get their views across, and garners them more support.

I long for the day when liberals realise that the way to beat the other side is to make better arguments. And to crush them with those arguments. Sadly all too often you see crap like this from Twitter and other popular message boards.

Mardy Bum

Arcade_Tryer wrote: »

I long for the day when liberals realise that the way to beat the other side is to make better arguments. And to crush them with those arguments. .

You do know what trolling is? You do know he was a self proclaimed troll?

Arcade_Tryer

Mardy Bum wrote: »

You do know what trolling is? You do know he was a self proclaimed troll?

Trolling as a singular term is a false dichotomy, and one too easily thrown about by mostly liberals. Trolling can be and often is as worthy an endeavor as the vast amount of criticism and discourse seen online. Thoughtful and intelligent trolling can be as effective as good satire.

Mardy Bum

Arcade_Tryer wrote: »

Trolling as a singular term is a false dichotomy, and one too easily thrown about by mostly liberals. Trolling can be and often is as worthy an endeavor as the vast amount of criticism and discourse seen online. Thoughtful and intelligent trolling can be as effective as good satire.

Calling people fat and ugly is intelligent?
Trolling is the opposite of argument which you expounded upon earlier. Socrates was never one to troll.

InTheTrees

Arcade_Tryer wrote: »

Trolling can be and often is as worthy an endeavor as the vast amount of criticism and discourse seen online.

I thought you were longing for the day "when liberals realise that the way to beat the other side is to make better arguments"?

InTheTrees

Arcade_Tryer wrote: »

Bad move by twitter. Banning opinions and people like that from having a platform doesn't beat them.

Nobody's banning him from having a platform. He can go anywhere he likes and say whatever he likes.

He can go full westboro baptist church on her if he wants.

TSMGUY

I'm desperately trying to unsubscribe from this thread but I don't know how goddamnit. I think the discussion's been had.

Cliffs
Milo's a prick
Being a prick isn't a good reason to ban someone from Twitter.
The Ghostbusters reboot sucks unless you're a kid.
RIP Harold Ramis

THE END

But seriously, how the **** do I unsubscribe from this thread?

Arcade_Tryer

Mardy Bum wrote: »

Calling people fat and ugly is intelligent?
Trolling is the opposite of argument which you expounded upon earlier. Socrates was never one to troll.

No. Maybe. It's not necessarily unintelligent. The core problem is, if liberals can't either beat, or simply ignore, trolling, then they are essentially as pathetic as those who are trolling. Banning this guy from twitter is the totally wrong move. And I'm amazed, though not surprised, that people can't see that.

InTheTrees wrote: »

Nobody's banning him from having a platform. He can go anywhere he likes and say whatever he likes.

He can go full westboro baptist church on her if he wants.

That's quite disingenuous. He has a worldwide audience on twitter.

InTheTrees wrote: »

I thought you were longing for the day "when liberals realise that the way to beat the other side is to make better arguments"?

Also longing for it here too.

Outlaw Pete

Arcade_Tryer wrote: »

Bad move by twitter. Banning opinions and people like that from having a platform doesn't beat them. It just makes them think up more creative ways to get their views across, and garners them more support.

I long for the day when liberals realise that the way to beat the other side is to make better arguments. And to crush them with those arguments. Sadly all too often you see crap like this from Twitter and other popular message boards.

I agree, it's always the way: a character assassination followed by a cop out of how private companies can do what they like. Funny thing is many of those same voices didn't make that same argument when a Christian baker refused to bake cake for a gay couple. Seems private companies are only excused for doing what they like when it suits.

There always seems to be much hypocrisy from far left liberals. They are rarely consistent with their views and often blatantly contradict them. One of the most liberal voices online is The Young Turks who are all about doing the right thing, tolerating and respecting others views but yet what did one of their presenters (Jimmy Dore) do two nights back at the Republican National Convention, but spit in the face of Alex Jones. Very tolerant.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=412aatJqbzo

Arcade_Tryer

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

I agree, it's always the way: a character assassination followed by a cop out of how private companies can do what they like. Funny thing is many of those same voices didn't make that same argument when a Christian baker refused to bake cake for a gay couple. Seems private companies are only excused for doing what they like when it suits.

There always seems to be much hypocrisy from far left liberals. They are rarely consistent with their views and often blatantly contradict them. One of the most liberal voices online is The Young Turks who are all about doing the right thing, tolerating and respecting others views but yet what did one of their presenters (Jimmy Dore) do two nights back at the Republican National Convention, but spit in the face of Alex Jones. Very tolerant.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4QVYSU3TzCU

Twitter and the Christian Bakery both acted within the limits of the law (I'm hoping the bakery win their appeal). But their respective actions were both pretty repugnant, regardless of what Milo or the holy book might have said.

circadian

Milo is an attention whore, plain and simple. I seen a picture a few weeks ago where he was fat shaming a guy at the gym.

He didn't have the stones to actually say anything directly to the person but was happy enough to broadcast it all over the net.

Just like Alex Jones, he's a coward that hides behind his grandstanding and attention seeking rhetoric.

I'd almost throw Willie Fraser into the group but I'm convinced he's actually nuts.

Outlaw Pete

circadian wrote: »

Milo is an attention whore, plain and simple. I seen a picture a few weeks ago where he was fat shaming a guy at the gym.

He didn't have the stones to actually say anything directly to the person but was happy enough to broadcast it all over the net.

Yeah I seen that and thought it was a dickish thing to do for sure, as was the Playboy bunny who pretty much did the same thing last week.

Both deleted their respective postings but most likely because of the backlash rather than genuine regret for what they had done.

Milo it would seem has this fat shaming works belief which him and Jones got into at the 39min mark in the following recent appearance Milo made on his podcast.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ZiQ8nLScpM

20Cent

What is the regressive left?

InTheTrees

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

which him and Jones got into at the 39min mark in the following recent appearance Milo made on his podcast.

Oh god...that was hard to watch. Self important millennials getting social media confused with real life.

20Cent

Casual sexism racism etc used to be normal. Now people are sticking up for themselves and the bullies are crying about it. Shoe is on the other foot. Fools like Milio who think they can push others around are getting a taste of their own medicine. Zero sympathy for them.

Realt Dearg Sec

20Cent wrote: »

Casual sexism racism etc used to be normal. Now people are sticking up for themselves and the bullies are crying about it. Shoe is on the other foot. Fools like Milio who think they can push others around are getting a taste of their own medicine. Zero sympathy for them.

Hey, stop that, you're trampling on my free speech!!! And that's all I'm standing up for, idealism!!!! Nothing to do with hatred or supremacy, you authoritarian beta sjw!!!!

Call Me Jimmy

i hate the young turks as much as anyone but on a basic human level alex jones is not someone i have any sympathy for ever. he's a deeply manipulative individual.

Realt Dearg Sec

Call Me Jimmy wrote: »

i hate the young turks as much as anyone but on a basic human level alex jones is not someone i have any sympathy for ever. he's a deeply manipulative individual.

I haven't been following thisv that closely but if the Milo types are grouping around ALEX JONES then they really need to reevaluate their stance. I mean, the guy is a certifiable tin foil hat conspiracy nut job. Made piers Morgan look good ffs.

Realt Dearg Sec

TSMGUY wrote: »

I'm desperately trying to unsubscribe from this thread but I don't know how goddamnit. I think the discussion's been had.

Cliffs
Milo's a prick
Being a prick isn't a good reason to ban someone from Twitter.
The Ghostbusters reboot sucks unless you're a kid.
RIP Harold Ramis

THE END

But seriously, how the **** do I unsubscribe from this thread?

Click unfollow. I'm from the other side and I did the same thing. But just when i thought I was out...they pulled me back in...

Outlaw Pete

20Cent wrote: »

Casual sexism racism etc used to be normal. Now people are sticking up for themselves and the bullies are crying about it. Shoe is on the other foot. Fools like Milio who think they can push others around are getting a taste of their own medicine. Zero sympathy for them.

Your post doesn't make much sense. Do you really think users should be removed from Twitter for 'causal sexism? Seriously?

Look, nobody would have a problem with Milo's account being permanently suspended if everyone that did what he did faced the same wrath, but they don't, far from it. Again, Azealia Banks did all of what you condemn and then some, but Twitter pretty much just said 'Work away girl'. She was eventually removed for racially abusing Zayn Malik but it shouldn't have had to get as far as that.

This is why people are convinced that Milo has not been removed for the reasons given but more that it has all just been used as a stick to hit him with. Especially given that he nothing in comparison to what is seemingly allowed to take place on Twitter on a daily basis. It's not about people thinking he is a swell guy, some of things he says are despicable, most would concede that. It's about consistency and a fair, unbiased application of the rules. There are blacklivesmatter suporters (genuinely) calling for the killing of members of the police force and jihadists on twitter ffs but wait, a black woman has had some fake tweets attributed to her.. oh noes.

And before you come back and start citing racist tweets and how Milo orchestrated users to attack her... he did neither. Leslie however, did both, given than she retweeted one user and said to her followers "Get her" and retweeted another who said Milo was the 'Uncle Tom of gay people'. They are the facts, be nice if those justifying the actions of Jack & Co here paid some heed to them. Why should Milo be subjected to a standard that nobody else is? Answer that question please as anything else is irrelevant.

Junkyard Tom

20Cent wrote: »

What is the regressive left?

A term primarily used by people whining about views they don't like, views mostly confined to university campuses, but played up as a threat to western civilisation itself.

At best the term 'regressive left' could be applied to people/groups/businesses who want to silence 'dissent' as the entire mainstream media did with Corbyn's and Sanders' support which is far more worrying than an attention-whore like Milo getting pushed off the twitter stage.

Wibbs

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

I didn't mind the movie so much, humour just seemed immature to me, far more than the original was.

Aye, but it's not aimed at you. The penny dropped for me after watching it. It's a Chick Flic(™) version of a US frat party flic. American Pie for women. It's aimed squarely and cynically at that audience, just like every soppy rom com where the mousey but quirky lass unlucky in love gets the Earl of Billionaireshire.

It's got the pretty Himbo, it's got the Sassy Black Woman(™) "Ah Hell no!"©, it's got the quirky oddball with freaky hair for the lesbians, it's got the cut price Jenny Aniston type and the Fat Lass who Kicks Aaassss(™)© and of course none of the women break that certain level of beauty where the "that bitch!" sensor is triggered. It's akin to taking a 1950's buddy movie aimed at men and putting it through the Reverso Machine. The Ghostbusters bit is merely an overlay for all that. If anything it gets in the way. So yeah IMHO that's the mistake reviewers are making, it's got eff all to do with Ghostbusters really. It would be like watching a porno based on Toy Story, the Toy Story bit isn't what's being sold.

conorhal

InTheTrees wrote: »

Oh god...that was hard to watch. Self important millennials getting social media confused with real life.

I couldn't tell if he was a real person or a character from a Brett Easton Ellis novel.
Clearly he's a agent provocateur and little more, but I'm uncomfortable banning such people, he has a point when he said that without douchbags like him challenging the consensus then nobody's required to critically evaluate their own thinking or defend it. Unchallenged thinking can quickly become dogma, which is why there is a lot to be said for the long tradition of the 'Devil's advocate'.

It's been mentioned how acceptable casual racism and sexism was at one time, it was pervasive in society. Well somebody had to stand up at some point and express the unpopular and challenging opinion that talking like that was not on, and face down the consensus that it was harmless fun.
If you don't stand up for (as he refers to himself) 'the dangerous fags' then you shouldn't be all that surprised when nobody stands up when they come to silence you. Even the likes of Germaine Greer (another controversialist) once beloved of the left is suddenly getting banned from college campus's by the triggerypuff brigade.

.

Thoie

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Look, nobody would have a problem with Milo's account being permanently suspended if everyone that did what he did faced the same wrath, but they don't, far from it. Again, Azealia Banks did all of what you condemn and then some, but Twitter pretty much just said 'Work away girl'. She was eventually removed for racially abusing Zayn Malik but it shouldn't have had to get as far as that.

Azealia Banks did x,y,z (I've no idea who that person is) a number of times by the sounds of it, and was eventually removed. Milo Wotsit also did x,y,z a number of times, and was eventually removed.

Looks consistent to me.

A Little Pony

The young Turks is an echo chamber and that Cenk presenter is the worst debater I have ever seen. He debated a guy recently at a political event and all he could do was be personal and he lost the debate. Ben Shapiro would literally annihilate him in a debate.

Which is why he never has any such people on his show.

InTheTrees

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Why should Milo be subjected to a standard that nobody else is? Answer that question please as anything else is irrelevant.

Unfortunately Twitter is just a business and he signed the T&C's. That other people dont get the same treatment means little. Its like removing fakes from amazon.com.

The Company always wins because the customer signed up and agreed to their rules.

Arcade_Tryer

InTheTrees wrote: »

Unfortunately Twitter is just a business and he signed the T&C's. That other people dont get the same treatment means little. Its like removing fakes from amazon.com.

The Company always wins because the customer signed up and agreed to their rules.

Again. Disingenuous reasoning.

Twitter is not "just a business" in the spectrum of modern society. Twitter is recognized as the number 1 social media platform for famous people and ordinary folk. A shared meeting place. That is happens to be a private company is only relevant if you agree that suppressing speech is a good thing. Twitter has done both itself and the fundamental selling point of its company a disservice. Not to mention all those who believe in free speech.

And for the record, I don't know much about this Milo character. But he sounds like a prick. And a lot of what I've read from him is repugnant. Which makes it all the more important that he is heard, and subsequently ignored or ridiculed, provided his "trolling" cannot be defeated with reasoned argument.