SJW campaign leads to porn star suicide.

neonsofa

Sweetemotion wrote: »

I'd say people are pouncing on Candies posts because she is always going about people victim blaming and how wrong it is, but it's perfectly fine for her to do it herself in this thread by blaming it on this young girls depression.

Attributing something to an illness is not victim blaming? The victim is not in control of their illness. It's not like candie said she chose to have depression.

Sweetemotion

neonsofa wrote: »

Attributing something to an illness is not victim blaming? The victim is not in control of their illness. It's not like candie said she chose to have depression.

Attributing it to her illness and not the hate campaign that lead to her suicide is victim blaming.

retro:electro

Sweetemotion wrote: »

I'd say people are pouncing on Candies posts because she is always going about people victim blaming and how wrong it is, but it's perfectly fine for her to do it herself in this thread by trying to blame it on this young girls depression.

That's not victim blaming? That's being realistic and acknowledging that while others were wrong to hound and bombard her- there was more than likely other factors at play here and she was, as said by friends, already suffering from depression.

The speed in which she killed herself is not the default response of a rational mind. The Twitter saga merely exacterbated an existing problem. But that's not to take the blame away from the idiots who hounded her. It's just being realistic about it and acknowledging all determinants.

neonsofa

Sweetemotion wrote: »

Attributing it to her illness and not the hate campaign is victim blaming.

It's really not. Once again,an illness is out of the victims control, there is no blame being attributed to the victim,it is being attributed to the illness- it is in fact not putting any blame on the victim whatsoever. Its blaming an illness. Not a person.

tomwaterford

Sweetemotion wrote: »

Attributing it to her illness and not the hate campaign that lead to her suicide is victim blaming.

No....victim blaming would be saying she deserved all the despicable online abuse for refusing to have sex with this lad?

Sweetemotion

neonsofa wrote: »

It's really not. Once again,an illness is out of the victims control, there is no blame being attributed to the victim,it is being attributed to the illness- it is in fact not putting any blame on the victim whatsoever. Its blaming an illness. Not a person.

I'm just giving my opinion as to why people have criticised Candies posts.

Biggest lickspittle on boardz

Sonics2k wrote: »

This person is not a campaigner. This is scum under the guise of a campaigner.

I've spent near 20 years of my life actively campaigning for things like gay marriage in Ireland, my mother has spent nearly 40 years doing the same.

We campaigned by speaking to people, not attacking people. That is someone who cares more about their own self-gratification and smug self-satisfaction than actual equal rights.

Hold up, hold up, hold up.

Gay people, like every other segment of society, has good and bad members. Suggesting that the entire group "campaigns by speaking to people, not attacking people" is not exactly true.

I have personally witnessed a small minority of gay people getting very nasty when it comes to arguing, including throwing a pint glass at someone in a disagreement over the marriage referendum.

Again, this is a very small minority.

But let's dispel this notion that all gay people are harmless, cuddly, fun personalities who can do no wrong.

Some are more than capable of being incredibly hateful, as we saw what happened with August Ames.

neonsofa

Sweetemotion wrote: »

I'm just giving my opinion as to why people have criticised Candies posts.

But I doubt anybody else viewed them as victim blaming...cause it's not.

Sweetemotion

tomwaterford wrote: »

No....victim blaming would be saying she deserved all the despicable online abuse for refusing to have sex with this lad?

Not blaming it on the hate campaign that drove her to her a suicide and blaming it on the victims health is not victim blaming?

Sweetemotion

neonsofa wrote: »

But I doubt anybody else viewed them as victim blaming...cause it's not.

I guess you've doubted wrong. All just my opinion though.

neonsofa

Sweetemotion wrote: »

I guess you've doubted wrong. All just my opinion though.

You're the only one here saying that blaming an illness is victim blaming.

tomwaterford

Sweetemotion wrote: »

Not blaming it on the hate campaign that drove her to her a suicide and blaming it on the victims health is not victim blaming?

No....Unless you think she is to blame for her mental health problems?

This could happen anyone and people have no control over....who would blame someone for that??




**this is not to be taken as absolving any of blame from the online hate campaign

Sweetemotion

neonsofa wrote: »

You're the only one here saying that blaming an illness is victim blaming.

I'm just giving my opinion.

Not going to post in this thread anymore. I'll bow out before the usually clique gang up on me for sharing a different view.

neonsofa

Sweetemotion wrote: »

I'm just giving my opinion.

Not going to post in this thread anymore. I'll bow out before the usually clique gang up on me for sharing a different view.

I dont know what clique you're referring to as i am not part of one. I am just giving my opinion. I just don't see how you can hold that view and you are the only one I have seen referring to it as victim blaming because it really is just attributing blame on an illness not a person.
No need at all to leave the thread. Don't think anybody wants that.

23 years old, already married, had cosmetic surgery and is credited with 290 porn performances. Jeeeeesus.

Yet people think she did herself in over folks on the internerd getting offended because she won’t take a hammering from a dude who does dudes.

Unbelievable guff.

SJW’s aren’t responsible for it. I’d be looking at the parents and ‘husband’ and asking exactly WTF good they ever did for her.

PeterParker957

JayZeus wrote: »

23 years old, already married, had cosmetic surgery and is credited with 290 porn performances. Jeeeeesus.

Yet people think she did herself in over folks on the internerd getting offended because she won’t take a hammering from a dude who does dudes.

Unbelievable guff.

SJW’s aren’t responsible for it. I’d be looking at the parents and ‘husband’ and asking exactly WTF good they ever did for her.

Now THAT'S victim blaming.

eviltwin

Sweetemotion wrote: »

I'd say people are pouncing on Candies posts because she is always going about people victim blaming and how wrong it is, but it's perfectly fine for her to do it herself in this thread by trying to blame it on this young girls depression.

She wasn't victim blaming, she was pointing out that one thing - the tweets- is unlikely to be the only reason this woman took her own life. They were possibly the straw that broke the camels back but I think Candie would acknowledge that.

Mental health and suicide are complicated things, to put the blame on the bullies while ignoring the mental health of the victim is simplifying the issue.

PeterParker957

PeterParker957 wrote: »

Now THAT'S victim blaming.

Victim blaming is a BS construct used to deflect when a valid point is made for which you struggle to find an answer. She took a pounding from 290+ actors and actresses and yet people think some online bitching and bullying led to her demise at her own hand.

Eh, no.

SterlingArcher

JackTaylorFan wrote: »

Well, way to go supporting transpeople by citing that "satirical" trope of a tranny "dressed like a stereotypical drug-addicted hooker outside a motel that you'd see in American movies" - it's not like you are perpetuating the myth or nothing, I guess.. :rolleyes:

And, furthermore, I don't see the logic of you bringing up transpeople at all in the thread - it has sweet f-all to do with it.

While you may have a point on the last part of your post.

the poster described their experience of that night ? So you try paint them as some bad person because their descriptions of that night displeased you? Pathetic.

Heaven forbid. He should edit his post and say that the transperson was wearing a gucci dress would that suffice.

I can honestly say garlIT was very accommodating of your thought policing.

Frankly you got some neck calling other posters in after hours "the dregs".

Sonics2k

Biggest lickspittle on boardz wrote: »

Hold up, hold up, hold up.

Gay people, like every other segment of society, has good and bad members. Suggesting that the entire group "campaigns by speaking to people, not attacking people" is not exactly true.

I have personally witnessed a small minority of gay people getting very nasty when it comes to arguing, including throwing a pint glass at someone in a disagreement over the marriage referendum.

Again, this is a very small minority.

But let's dispel this notion that all gay people are harmless, cuddly, fun personalities who can do no wrong.

Some are more than capable of being incredibly hateful, as we saw what happened with August Ames.

Eh, I never said there aren't awful people in the LGBT community. I've met dozens of absolute asses.

But again, I'd happily say a lot of them weren't really campaigners, they just wanted to fight the world and found things to get angry about.

But that's totally off-topic to this thread.

anna080

anna080 wrote: »

I'm not sure Candie ever said otherwise?
I really don't understand why people are pouncing on Candie's posts as if there is any malice behind them. Anyone with half a brain can see that simply isn't the case.

Edit.. you seem to have deleted your post.

Thanks, Anna, of course I never blamed the girl for any aspect of what happened. She's a victim here, and the whole thing is tragic.

Sufferers can't be blamed for depression, and only bullies can be blamed for bullying. I have never, and would never, say otherwise.

I think the people insisting I did know that too.

One eyed Jack

eviltwin wrote: »

Mental health and suicide are complicated things, to put the blame on the bullies while ignoring the mental health of the victim is simplifying the issue.

Her mental health is a completely separate issue though to the issue of the behaviour of those people who condemned her for speaking out about an issue in the industry. In that respect, whether or not she already had issues with her mental health is neither here nor there. The issue is the behaviour of the people who drove her to the point where she took her own life.

I don't think that's simplifying the issue, I think it's acknowledging the actual issue of the behaviour of the people who engaged in the online bullying and harassment that led to a young woman taking her own life.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

eviltwin

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Her mental health is a completely separate issue though to the issue of the behaviour of those people who condemned her for speaking out about an issue in the industry. In that respect, whether or not she already had issues with her mental health is neither here nor there. The issue is the behaviour of the people who drove her to the point where she took her own life.

I don't think that's simplifying the issue, I think it's acknowledging the actual issue of the behaviour of the people who engaged in the online bullying and harassment that led to a young woman taking her own life.

It's likely all connected though. You can't look at her suicide and just focus on the trolls without also taking into account her mental health at the time of her death.

Permabear

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Her family are far from at fault when you see where that poor young woman ended up in life at 23 years of age.

I'm not okay with people going nuts about SJW's and other internet bullies being at fault and pretending everything would have been fine were it not for their action in the last few days.

She was banjaxed before any of this recent stuff even started.

Edit: They're all to blame, to be clear about it. All of them. They failed to protect her on one hand, while the other hand dealt the final blow to the woman. It's bloody disgusting.

major bill

JayZeus wrote: »

Her family are far from at fault when you see where that poor young woman ended up in life at 23 years of age.

I'm not okay with people going nuts about SJW's and other internet bullies being at fault and pretending everything would have been fine were it not for their action in the last few days.

She was banjaxed before any of this recent stuff even started.

Edit: They're all to blame, to be clear about it. All of them. They failed to protect her on one hand, while the other hand dealt the final blow to the woman. It's bloody disgusting.

Sorry but by working in the Porn Industry you are automatically assuming she had a tough life and mental health issues?? I know it's a big taboo over here but just cause she ended up in Porn doesn't mean she went down the wrong path.

major bill

major bill wrote: »

Sorry but by working in the Porn Industry you are automatically assuming she had a tough life and mental health issues?? I know it's a big taboo over here but just cause she ended up in Porn doesn't mean she went down the wrong path.

Nobody ends up in porn by going down anything other than a wrong path. :rolleyes:

major bill

JayZeus wrote: »

Nobody ends up in porn by going down anything other than a wrong path. :rolleyes:

And you know this? thousands of performers in the USA alone, some of which have gone on to earn massive amounts of money. Roll the eyes all ya want but you are making assumptions on your own ill informed beliefs

One eyed Jack

eviltwin wrote: »

It's likely all connected though. You can't look at her suicide and just focus on the trolls without also taking into account her mental health at the time of her death.

You can though, because the focus should be entirely on the behaviour of the online trolls, because it's not just this young woman in particular, it could have been anyone, and still we should be focused on the behaviour of the online trolls IMO. I just think that if we go down the route of "they had mental health issues", I know it's not the intention, of course it's not, but the effect it has is that it provides a mitigating factor which lessens the responsibility of the online trolls for their behaviour.

It's the equivalent of the much debunked analysing how a person was dressed may have contributed to their being raped. I know that's not the intent, but that's what it does IMO. The people who commit the harassment should be held entirely responsible for the consequences of their actions, and in a case where a person takes their own life, the people who caused that should be held responsible and accountable for their actions.

I think that's where the OP was coming from, that it should apply to anyone who commits the act of online bullying, as opposed to examining anything about their victim.

major bill

major bill wrote: »

And you know this? thousands of performers in the USA alone, some of which have gone on to earn massive amounts of money. Roll the eyes all ya want but you are making assumptions on your own ill informed beliefs

This isn't really the place to be getting into this, but you're truly naive to think that anything about the life of a female pornstar is representative of a successful, healthy and fulfilled adult life.

Seriously, at 23 years of age, she's been in 290 porn films. That's not something a healthy and happy young woman does.