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

Little CuChulainn

B0jangles wrote: »

Do you really think Milo has received even 1% of the harassment and abuse Sarkeesian received? If he had, do you not think he'd tell everyone about it, considering how addicted to attention he is?

Never really heard of him before this thread so I don't know. I did have a look into the incident this thread started with and his "victim" gives out just as much abuse as she gets and it wasn't very publicised so I'd say it goes both ways alright.

Outlaw Pete

El_Dangeroso wrote: »

You just imagine that it has because presumably you read about it all the time given how much you talk about it.

Oh, an ad hominem. Nice.

The rest of us are just getting on with it living our lives blissfully oblivious to the evil feminist conspiracy threatening the very foundations of society. :rolleyes:

Well, you can roll your eyes as much as you like but that won't make you right. You say that you (and "the rest of us" - whoever the hell they are) are "blissfully oblivious" to the negative effects third wave feminism has on society and I don't doubt it. As they say: ignorance is bliss.

Give me one concrete example of feminism having a negative impact in Ireland.

Sure. The Hunky Dory ads were taken down because of feminists whinging. I used to like looking at those billboards as I drove home. To deprive men of giant poster boobage is a God damn sin.

Non AH answer:

Third wave feminism (tail-end of the 2nd) began spreading misandry well over forty years ago now and it has been pervasive and systemic. Dworkin, Greer, MacKinnon etc all played their part in the denigration of males and without question that is still being felt today and every effort since feminists have been trying to brain wash as many young women as they possibly could into believing that they too are victims of patriarchal oppression. Gender and Women's Studies are pretty much just indoctrination classes. Propaganda through the education system. Today it's even evident that children are affected at a very young age by feminist dogma. Couple of years before she died Doris Lessing wrote:

"Great things have been achieved through feminism. We now have pretty much equality at least on the pay and opportunities front, though almost nothing has been done on child care, the real liberation.

"We have many wonderful, clever, powerful women everywhere, but what is happening to men? Why did this have to be at the cost of men?

"I was in a class of nine- and 10-year-olds, girls and boys, and this young woman was telling these kids that the reason for wars was the innately violent nature of men.

"You could see the little girls, fat with complacency and conceit while the little boys sat there crumpled, apologising for their existence, thinking this was going to be the pattern of their lives.

"This kind of thing is happening in schools all over the place and no one says a thing.

"It has become a kind of religion that you can't criticise because then you become a traitor to the great cause, which I am not.

"It is time we began to ask who are these women who continually rubbish men. The most stupid, ill-educated and nasty woman can rubbish the nicest, kindest and most intelligent man and no one protests.

"Men seem to be so cowed that they can't fight back, and it is time they did."

That's not Ireland I hear you cry, as if the UK was a world away and our schools aren't being similarly impacted. You'd sweat we lived in vacuum here. Well, given the hateful views I read a female teacher post on Boards recently, I'd say our children are being fed the very same nonsense as elsewhere but lets have an Irish example of how feminist misandry effects males: Take the Romeo and Juliet law which was lobbied for by the NWCI and granted by the legislature. Ever since, when two underage kids have sex, boy is criminal but not the girl.

Family courts are notoriously difficult on men and again, women's rights groups are generally the only voices listened to. Hence men resorting to all sorts of nonsense in an effort to be heard. Equality? Feminists make sure that changes come slowly for men. One man was so stressed at the system in Ireland he took his life. Yet we have the law here preoccupied with gender quotas for political parties. God forbid there wasn't enough female politicians.

The UCD 200 nonsense was another example of how feminists (Louise O'Neill this time) are just chomping at the bit to label men as sleazy creeps and portray women yet again as victims. With crap like that how long will it before men are arrested on the Luas for manspreading like they were in New York.

All the crap in the UK (and beyond) championed by feminists about how women are not able to consent if even a little drunk is taken on board here also. Never mind that the man might be similarly drunk, who cares about them. Need proof of women here buying in that rubbish, read this thread. Then we have the likes of Una Mullally telling us that all men are responsible for other men raping, cause men could stop 'em if we wanted to, apparently.

One feminist this week has even unbelievably had the gall to blame the patriarchy on the recent murders in Cavan.

It's all just more and more misandric nonsense day in day out and it all adds up. Are men and women (especially young men and women) really not supposed to be negatively effected by all this?

El_Dangeroso

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Sure. The Hunky Dory ads were taken down because of feminists whinging. I used to like looking at those billboards as I drove home. To deprive men of giant poster boobage is a God damn sin.

OMG!! An AD WAS TAKEN down!!! Gosh i just don't know what to say.. I'm so sorry you had to endure that.

Outlaw Pete

El_Dangeroso wrote: »

OMG!! An AD WAS TAKEN down!!! Gosh i just don't know what to say.. I'm so sorry you had to endure that.

Sigh. I was quite clearly joking. Hence why I premised the rest of my post with:

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Non AH answer:

dd972

Will it be on the next Foals album?

Outlaw Pete

B0jangles wrote: »

Would it be hypocritical to raise money for grants for poor white male students and instead have the donations sent to your personal account then fail to do anything whatsoever to actually create the promised scholarships?

Tritium has succinctly addressed the above nonsense so no need for me to add anything further.

Yiannopoulos doesn't 'tackle' anything...

Au contraire. Milo has been a very much needed voice against what was increasingly becoming a never ending rad fem victimolgy din.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IBNc-fDr-mg

El_Dangeroso

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Sigh. I was quite clearly joking. Hence why I premised the rest of my post with:

Ah, I get it now, hahaha! Very funny. Thanks Pete, my eyes have been opened. This is clearly a really serious problem. More important than the world refugee crisis if you ask me. I bet top minds are looking into it right now.

B0jangles

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Tritium has succinctly addressed the above nonsense so no need for me to add anything further.



Au contraire. Milo has been a very much needed voice against what was increasingly becoming a never ending rad fem victimolgy din.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IBNc-fDr-mg

Au contraire mon petit ami, Tritium addressed nothing.

Have you anything to say about Milo collecting money for a (so called) charitable cause and then doing nothing whatsoever for them?

El_Dangeroso

You're absolutely right, it's clearly the greatest problem that faces humanity right now.

Sweetemotion

El_Dangeroso wrote: »

You're absolutely right, it's clearly the greatest problem that faces humanity right now.

You are the only one saying that, because you are trying to deflect and conquer.

People are getting really tired of that bully tactic.

SeanW

El_Dangeroso wrote: »

You're absolutely right, it's clearly the greatest problem that faces humanity right now.

So you're fine with all that then?

El_Dangeroso

Sweetemotion wrote: »

You are the only one saying that, because you are trying to deflect and conquer.

People are getting really tired of that bully tactic.

Yes you got me, it was all part of a diabolical conspiracy, but you saw right through it.

Sweetemotion

El_Dangeroso wrote: »

Yes you got me, it was all part of a diabolical conspiracy, but you saw right through it.

I sure did and so does everyone else.

El_Dangeroso

Sweetemotion wrote: »

I sure did and so does everyone else.

Well done, gold stars all round.

Sweetemotion

El_Dangeroso wrote: »

Well done, gold stars all round.

It's not gold stars all around, people are just tired of being labelled and bullied.

El_Dangeroso

Sweetemotion wrote: »

It's not gold stars all around, people are just tired of being labelled and bullied.

I bet they are.

SeanW

El_Dangeroso wrote: »

I bet they are.

El_Dangeroso wrote: »

Well done, gold stars all round.

El_Dangeroso wrote: »

Yes you got me, it was all part of a diabolical conspiracy, but you saw right through it.

El_Dangeroso wrote: »

You're absolutely right, it's clearly the greatest problem that faces humanity right now.

Do you actually have a point? Because this just looks like thread hijacking.

DEFTLEFTHAND

Milo has being really floating some ideas out there recently. Most notably that homosexuality in his case was more nurture based rather than nature.

I've heard this theory put across before by other gay men and it is quite interesting.

Milo himself cites his grandmother as having an influence over him as a young child. She used to dress him in women's clothing and put make up on him. Apparently his mother did her absolute nut when she discovered this was happening.

FA Hayek

As I mentioned before, the likes of Milo and his like is a reaction to the politically correct cultured that has manifested itself over the past number of yeas. Rubin is correct in that Milo and the 'Alt-right' uses outrage culture against itself.

Outlaw Pete

B0jangles wrote: »

Au contraire mon petit ami, Tritium addressed nothing.

Mon chéri, he most certainly did:

tritium wrote: »

......all im seeing here is a project that is delayed, an explanation that may or may not be true but is at least plausible, and a number of sources who have a different political leaning to Milo seeing a chance to engage in slightly thrashy journalism under a "public interest' shield.

Most people would probably wait and see what happens here rather than calling Milo out as a crook or hypocrite at this stage.

I'm not above condemning Milo by the way if I feel it is warranted. I think taking the pictures of the overweight guy at the gym was disgusting.

B0jangles

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Mon chéri, he most certainly did:

Thats not an explanation, that is an excuse, an exceptionally weak one too.

Outlaw Pete

B0jangles wrote: »

Thats not an explanation, that is an excuse, an exceptionally weak one too.

Look, you, and others, are just scraping the barrel here, in an obvious attempt at deflecting away from the issue at hand (Jack Dorsey). Maybe there are some hiccups? More to it all than he first thought? None of us know either way and as Tritium suggested: it's really just a case of 'watch this space' right now but the relevant website does state:

The full grant program will be administered for the 2017-2018 school year. More details will be released in the coming months.

Not sure what more you want from people but if you believe this some kind of 'gotcha moment' for Milo, and that it shows that he is some kind of thief.. well then it's quite a poor one as it does nothing of the sort.

B0jangles

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Look, you, and others, are just scraping the barrel here, in an obvious attempt at deflecting away from the issue at hand (Dorsey). Maybe there's some hiccups. More to it than he first thought. None of us know either way and as Tritium suggested, it's really just a case right now of 'watch this space' right now. The relevant website states:



Not sure what more you want from people but if you believe this some kind of 'gotcha moment' for Milo, and that this shows that he is some thief.. well then it's quite a poor one as it does nothing of the sort. Next.

Yeah....btw I have the deeds for the Eiffel Tower for sale if you're interested?

Wibbs

El_Dangeroso wrote: »

Ah, I get it now, hahaha! Very funny. Thanks Pete, my eyes have been opened. This is clearly a really serious problem. More important than the world refugee crisis if you ask me. I bet top minds are looking into it right now.

So let's recap; you want to play right into the usual stereotype of "women are always victims feminist who never actually delved into her recieved dogma folds at first factual response to their dogma/nonsense and reverts to deflection and ad hominems"? Nice. *thumbs up* If it helps maybe suggest the posters shaking your house of cards have a small penis, no girlfriend and live in basements practicing onanism as a religious faith. Go for broke like.

In short your dogma fails on the first contact with facts. Read more, come back, try again.

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote:

Milo has being really floating some ideas out there recently. Most notably that homosexuality in his case was more nurture based rather than nature.

I've heard this theory put across before by other gay men and it is quite interesting.

Milo himself cites his grandmother as having an influence over him as a young child. She used to dress him in women's clothing and put make up on him. Apparently his mother did her absolute nut when she discovered this was happening.

Nature versus nurture has been bandied about for donkey's years when it comes to homosexuality. It seems nature holds the lion's share of the influence. Genetics and varying exposure to hormone levels in the womb seem to be the bulk of it. In men anyway. There may be other/different factors with lesbians and bisexuality appears to be largely ignored in research for some reason.

Milo is actually and laughably pulling the victim card here, so he can play to the cheap seats of his American "no homo" lunkhead followers. Basically "I know I'm a screaming queen who loves chugging the Black pipe, but I'm one of you, it's not my fault. It's a woman's". GTFO Milo.

steddyeddy

El_Dangeroso wrote: »

OMG!! An AD WAS TAKEN down!!! Gosh i just don't know what to say.. I'm so sorry you had to endure that.

Jesus what a way to engage in debate. We also had the case of a scientist who landed a rocket on a comet being told what to wear by feminists.

El_Dangeroso

Wibbs wrote: »

So let's recap; you want to play right into the usual stereotype of "women are always victims feminist who never actually delved into her recieved dogma folds at first factual response to their dogma/nonsense and reverts to deflection and ad hominems"? Nice. *thumbs up* If it helps maybe suggest the posters shaking your house of cards have a small penis, no girlfriend and live in basements practicing onanism as a religious faith. Go for broke like.

In short your dogma fails on the first contact with facts. Read more, come back, try again.

Ahahaha! Thank you so much. I honestly haven't had a belly laugh like that in a really long time! Wow. You argue about this a lot online don't you? Or else have made-up shower arguments about it. I can tell because you're bursting with the seams with your little talking points that no one has actually brought up.

Haha again thanks for the laugh though. I'm a firm believer that humour keeps us from taking ourselves too seriously, and I can always tell a zealot from their lack of ability to laugh at themselves or the more absurd aspects of their philosophy.

Wibbs

El_Dangeroso wrote: »

Ahahaha! Thank you so much. I honestly haven't had a belly laugh like that in a really long time! Wow. You argue about this a lot online don't you? Or else have made-up shower arguments about it. I can tell because you're bursting with the seams with your little talking points that no one has actually brought up.

I'm not sure whether I'm fascinated by the level of irony displayed or the staggering lack of insight. It's a coin toss really. Sorry, I'll update my advice list for you: If it helps maybe suggest the posters shaking your house of cards have a small penis, no girlfriend, live in basements practicing onanism as a religious faith, argue online about it and have shower arguments(you might have added; "if they shower at all" for more colour. Another time perhaps?). *waits for penny to drop*

Haha again thanks for the laugh though. I'm a firm believer that humour keeps us from taking ourselves too seriously, and I can always tell a zealot from their lack of ability to laugh at themselves or the more absurd aspects of their philosophy.

Irony overload. Again. I would argue one can always spot the true zealot by their inability to debate points backed up by facts with points of their own, instead resorting to deflection and attempted insult, hopefully playing to the gallery for support. You have literally become the stereotype. *slow handclap* We await the final death rattle of what passes for your argument with hysterical hoots of misogyny.

Again I offer you a simple choice; debate the points if your argument has merit or deflect because you know full well it doesn't. So far all anyone has seen is the latter.

SeanW

El_Dangeroso wrote: »

Ahahaha! Thank you so much. I honestly haven't had a belly laugh like that in a really long time! Wow. You argue about this a lot online don't you? Or else have made-up shower arguments about it. I can tell because you're bursting with the seams with your little talking points that no one has actually brought up.

You seem to be posting an awful lot about an issue you supposedly don't care about. The problem is that all of it is sarcasm and insults. I'll ask one more time - do you actually have a point?

FA Hayek

El_Dangeroso wrote: »

I can always tell a zealot from their lack of ability to laugh at themselves or the more absurd aspects of their philosophy.

Zealot is quite apt here. Pot kettle etc..

El_Dangeroso

Wibbs wrote: »

I'm not sure whether I'm fascinated by the level of irony displayed or the staggering lack of insight. It's a coin toss really. Sorry, I'll update my advice list for you: If it helps maybe suggest the posters shaking your house of cards have a small penis, no girlfriend, live in basements practicing onanism as a religious faith, argue online about it and have shower arguments(you might have added; "if they shower at all" for more colour. Another time perhaps?). *waits for penny to drop*

Irony overload. Again. I would argue one can always spot the true zealot by their inability to debate points backed up by facts with points of their own, instead resorting to deflection and attempted insult, hopefully playing to the gallery for support. You have literally become the stereotype. *slow handclap* We await the final death rattle of what passes for your argument with hysterical hoots of misogyny.

Again I offer you a simple choice; debate the points if your argument has merit or deflect because you know full well it doesn't. So far all anyone has seen is the latter.

Thanks for the reply, I can see this is something you really care deeply about. So it's understandable that you project the same level of obsession and fervour on to other people. So in your head right now I'm like this big fascist who you want to multi-quote for the next 20 pages, nitpicking quoting sources and facts that you've probably quoted at least 30 times before.

I am deeply sorry I can't be that person for you. And luckily for me, I don't have to select either of your two options. More so I can sit back and laugh at the absurdity, something you've forgotten to do in a while.