The alt right - Mod Warning in OP

marienbad

Sand wrote: »

I'm not making a fuss - I'm testifying as to how these people are ruining the world by killing hope, human kindness and rational and reasonable exchanges of views.



You don't see the 1984 style newspeak tones? Trying to control thinking by controlling language? People react negatively to anyone trying to control their language for political purposes because they know that its rooted in an attempt to control them.



You mean the female colleague who made it for him should have pulled him aside? That colleague? The guy drew his references for what was acceptable from himself, his colleagues and his experiences. The guy just landed a probe on a comet travelling at near unimaginable speeds. He could have shown up wearing a bin bag and still have been acclaimed as a king.

The SJW reaction was the same sort of bitter jealous nomark bullying that was evidenced by the joyless people who tormented the Sean O’ Brien for daring to have fun and dance. I guess that fat guy should have known though right? It was his fault he was bullied because he ought to have known the reaction to him dancing was for people to point and laugh. One of his colleagues should have pulled him aside. What did he think was going to happen?

Come on ! These people both from the right and the left are not ruining the world . Lets maintain some sense of proportion . I would be much more worried by the likes of HRC,Trump,Putin ,Assad , Global Corporations etc - people with real and immediate power than this lot squabbling on the internet .

And no I don't see echoes of 1984 in the use of 'ze' - language changes, adapts all the time - if there is a place for an expression it will survive , if not it won't .

The fact that the t shirt was made by a female colleague is just an irrelevance . I don't care about the t-shirt either way , but the fact that a huge scientific achievement was overshadowed by this triviality tells you all you need to know .

I happened just by chance to see the press conference in the company of a fairly large group of people of both sexes and all ages and everyone was gobsmacked at it . Please don't say you didn't at least raise an eyebrow .

I wasn't aware of the O'Brien video until you mentioned it , I agree with you utterly cruel and appalling .

oscarBravo

AnGaelach wrote: »

And it's not everyone getting an apple that bothers me, what bothers me is that it's an absolute farcical portrayal of "fairness".

If you don't think "you've got a box like everyone else does, now shut up already" is an equally farcical portrayal of "fairness", then I don't know what else to say.

Sand wrote: »

A piece of your soul didn't die when you saw the Oxford University ze/he/she rubbish? Or the witch-hunt of Matt Taylor? How about the grim realisation that Bahar Mustafa chief troll/first world problems/diversity officer/racist of Goldsmiths University is an actual person and not a satirical character? Bahar of course picking up the torch dropped by transracial pioneers like Rachel Dolezal. Or the people like Cora Gales/Trigglypuff who spend their lives harrassing equally sad people like Milo Yiannopoulos and in the process humiliate themselves.

If you think those things have "destroyed the world", you're paying far too much attention to them.

Widdershins wrote: »

With regards to the 'Ze' stuff. I agree that it's controlling, but it's also time wasting. Is this really the most productive use of time and energy for feminists?

It's not. Happily, it's not - by an enormously wide margin - the most important issue for most feminists. In fact, it seems the only people to whom it's important is people who are delighted to talk about it instead of the issues that actually are important to most feminists.

Brian?

Count Dooku wrote: »

Correct, mission of alt rights is to bring balance back to this world ruined by SJWs
Since elites incorporated SJWs, alt rights become the main anti-establishment opposition, which wasn’t afraid to challenge mess created by SJW together with political establishment, such as uncontrolled immigration, replacing equality by privileges for minorities, failed attempts to impose political correctness, etc.
Because Newton's third law requires every force be accompanied by counterforce, alt rights just become such counterforce. Like car requires engine and breaks, this world needs an opposition to out of touch with reality SJWs

1. How did these mythical SJWs ruin the world.

2. Stop trying to apply Newtonian physics to policitical discussion. There is no "force". There are ideas, concepts, theories etc. . Newtons laws cannot be applied to political discourse.

Widdershins

oscarBravo wrote: »

If you don't think "you've got a box like everyone else does, now shut up already" is an equally farcical portrayal of "fairness", then I don't know what else to say.

If you think those things have "destroyed the world", you're paying far too much attention to them.

It's not. Happily, it's not - by an enormously wide margin - the most important issue for most feminists. In fact, it seems the only people to whom it's important is people who are delighted to talk about it instead of the issues that actually are important to most feminists.

I didn't say it's the most important issue for feminists. For the feminists who do get involved in that kind of campaign, I'm questioning why they spend their time on it at all, especially if it isn't the most important thing to them. It's only one symptom of a wider obsession with controlling every minute detail of society's attitudes to the *groups they campaign for. I personally know women whose facebook posts are comprised of exactly this sort of thing. They're not so rare.


*I'm in at least one such group in society and I don't feel spoken for or well represented by the feminists I know who are outspoken about the ''issues'' that they say affect people like me.

Sand

marienbad wrote: »

Come on ! These people both from the right and the left are not ruining the world . Lets maintain some sense of proportion . I would be much more worried by the likes of HRC,Trump,Putin ,Assad , Global Corporations etc - people with real and immediate power than this lot squabbling on the internet .

You're playing both sides there. Everyone is more concerned with real and immediate problems. That is why the ze/she/he thing is soul crushing, not grand like you claimed it was just a post ago. In this very post you go on to claim 'these people' and their concerns trump a guy who accomplished something that will be remembered in the history of human space exploration.

And no I don't see echoes of 1984 in the use of 'ze' - language changes, adapts all the time - if there is a place for an expression it will survive , if not it won't .

Well, you'll equally not be aware of another Orwell criticism: 'The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, but he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them.'

The fact that the t shirt was made by a female colleague is just an irrelevance . I don't care about the t-shirt either way , but the fact that a huge scientific achievement was overshadowed by this triviality tells you all you need to know .

Yes, it highlights the nomark nature of the SJWs who tormented him. Get a sense of proportion. Guy accomplishes historical feat, wears a shirt. Apply some perspective.

I happened just by chance to see the press conference in the company of a fairly large group of people of both sexes and all ages and everyone was gobsmacked at it . Please don't say you didn't at least raise an eyebrow .

Of course, I was hugely impressed by the feat accomplished. People lose their minds about a footballer putting a ball into a net from 30 yards. He managed it from millions of kilometers.

I wasn't aware of the O'Brien video until you mentioned it , I agree with you utterly cruel and appalling .

Well, he had it coming, didn't he?

AnGaelach

oscarBravo wrote: »

If you don't think "you've got a box like everyone else does, now shut up already" is an equally farcical portrayal of "fairness", then I don't know what else to say.

I think you should go back to my first reply to you about that picture, I specifically spoke about resources being finite, so your idea of "fairness" is ludicrous. It's a zero sum game, you can't just magic it up out of nowhere like they did with those extra couple of boxes.

Professor Moriarty

This from an article about the teeshirt in the Guardian: "Everything that followed was utterly predictable, but not especially edifying. The story went through the five cycles of internet rage: initial amusement; astonishment; outrage; backlash to the outrage; humiliated apology."

Pretty much sums it up.

K-9

osmiumartist wrote: »

I never said he was insulting me. You seem to think he was.
I am not and have never claimed to be "alt-right".

I said if it was below standard, if it was a personal attack I'd have said so. Pm me if you want to discuss this further.

Widdershins

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

This from an article about the teeshirt in the Guardian: "Everything that followed was utterly predictable, but not especially edifying. The story went through the five cycles of internet rage: initial amusement; astonishment; outrage; backlash to the outrage; humiliated apology."

Pretty much sums it up.

This bit: I especially understand the frustration felt by female scientists who feel marginalised enough in their profession without high-profile men wearing shirts featuring half-naked women

Can someone explain to me why the female scientists would feel that way?

marienbad

Sand wrote: »

You're playing both sides there. Everyone is more concerned with real and immediate problems. That is why the ze/she/he thing is soul crushing, not grand like you claimed it was just a post ago. In this very post you go on to claim 'these people' and their concerns trump a guy who accomplished something that will be remembered in the history of human space exploration.




Well, you'll equally not be aware of another Orwell criticism: 'The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, but he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them.'



Yes, it highlights the nomark nature of the SJWs who tormented him. Get a sense of proportion. Guy accomplishes historical feat, wears a shirt. Apply some perspective.



Of course, I was hugely impressed by the feat accomplished. People lose their minds about a footballer putting a ball into a net from 30 yards. He managed it from millions of kilometers.



Well, he had it coming, didn't he?

Soul crushing ? soul crushing ? really , you really do need to broaden your horizons , what is happening in Aleppo is soul crushing , the introduction of a new word doesn't even get on the scale .

The internet as has often been said is like the wild west , that coupled with anonymity has unleashed forces we have yet to learn to deal with , but lets not confuse that with reality or the loads of good stuff we can see online .
You are just cherry picking stuff that suits your beliefs

And as for the t shirt - let me ask you a question - your son is going for a interview with Price Waterhouse and he comes down wearing that t-shirt .
What do you do ? Do you say ' I have a pair of fake tits upstairs that match your ensemble , let me get them for you ' or do you say '' if you want the job lose the shirt '' .

A bit of common sense would have not gone amiss - the guy was announcing an achievement that millions of taxpayers had paid for and he comes out looking like Jack Black ! It is not just political correctness it is plain common sense.

AnGaelach

Widdershins wrote: »

This bit: I especially understand the frustration felt by female scientists who feel marginalised enough in their profession without high-profile men wearing shirts featuring half-naked women

Can someone explain to me why the female scientists would feel that way?

I feel marginalised whenever a male actor has his shirt off in a movie. It must be why I didn't become an actor myself.

We should ban women watching movies wear men are shirtless, unless they have the body of Ricky Gervais.

Professor Moriarty

Widdershins wrote: »

This bit: I especially understand the frustration felt by female scientists who feel marginalised enough in their profession without high-profile men wearing shirts featuring half-naked women

Can someone explain to me why the female scientists would feel that way?

I'm not a woman so I'm going to try this on for size (so to speak):

I especially understand the frustration felt by male scientists who feel marginalised enough in their profession without high-profile women wearing shirts featuring half-naked men.

I think if that was my persistent experience, I'd get a little pissed off.

Widdershins

marienbad wrote: »

And as for the t shirt - let me ask you a question - your son is going for a interview with Price Waterhouse and he comes down wearing that t-shirt .
What do you do ? Do you say ' I have a pair of fake tits upstairs that match your ensemble , let me get them for you ' or do you say '' if you want the job lose the shirt '' .

A bit of common sense would have not gone amiss - the guy was announcing an achievement that millions of taxpayers had paid for and he comes out looking like Jack Black ! It is not just political correctness it is plain common sense.

But he's already well and truly proven himself by the time he came out into a tv interview wearing a racy shirt. He can afford to and is entitled to just wear something he thinks is fun, and casual, and not worry like he might when he was starting out because he wasn't well known and had few ways to make a good impression. The lad going for an interview is making his first impressions and has a long way to go before proving himself..he doesn't want his clothes to be too loud or unusual.

Widdershins

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

I'm not a woman so I'm going to try this on for size (so to speak):

I especially understand the frustration felt by male scientists who feel marginalised enough in their profession without high-profile women wearing shirts featuring half-naked men.

I think if that was my persistent experience, I'd get a little pissed off.

I did try it that way and still can't understand why it would be frustrating. Don't you see your colleagues behaviour towards you as the important thing..and their conduct at work in general?

I'm assuming these silly shirts are only ever worn on his own time and they wear some standard uniform type of outfit at work so it's not that you even have to look at cartoon cleavage at work..

AnGaelach

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

I think if that was my persistent experience, I'd get a little pissed off.

Do you think on NASA's casual Fridays, they wear clothes with scantily clad women on it?

Widdershins

AnGaelach wrote: »

I feel marginalised whenever a male actor has his shirt off in a movie. It must be why I didn't become an actor myself.

We should ban women watching movies wear men are shirtless, unless they have the body of Ricky Gervais.

Hmm. I think I understand now. Marginalised is one word for it..

Sand

marienbad wrote: »

Soul crushing ? soul crushing ? really , you really do need to broaden your horizons

I am not the one getting bothered by a shirt. You're trying to pretend you're being reasonable, but that's all it is. A pretence.

And as for the t shirt - let me ask you a question - your son is going for a interview with Price Waterhouse and he comes down wearing that t-shirt .
What do you do ? Do you say ' I have a pair of fake tits upstairs that match your ensemble , let me get them for you ' or do you say '' if you want the job lose the shirt '' .

Matt Taylor wasn't doing an interview for your approval. He just accomplished something great in the human exploration of space. He could wear whatever he liked.

The guy who owns PWC can show up to work in shorts and flip flops if he likes. You know why? Because he's not doing an interview either.

A bit of common sense would have not gone amiss - the guy was announcing an achievement that millions of taxpayers had paid for and he comes out looking like Jack Black ! It is not just political correctness it is plain common sense.

Common sense? Like the Ze/He/She common sense?

The man displayed some individuality and a piece of himself whilst marking his achievement. And SJWs - who claim to be all for individuality and being yourself - lynched him for it because they are false. Same way those nomark bullies targeted Sean O'Brien for being himself.

Your advice in both cases is to keep your head down and don't draw attention to yourself. Tell me, does the victim blaming extend to women who wear short skirts?

marienbad

Widdershins wrote: »

But he's already well and truly proven himself by the time he came out into a tv interview wearing a racy shirt. He can afford to and is entitled to just wear something he thinks is fun, and casual, and not worry like he might when he was starting out because he wasn't well known and had few ways to make a good impression. The lad going for an interview is making his first impressions and has a long way to go before proving himself..he doesn't want his clothes to be too loud or unusual.

Yeah I understand he thought it was fun . I personally had no problem with it , I have seen far worse . But as Professor Moriarty has pointed out below it was as obvious as the nose on his face where this was going to go .

And the agency the space guy works for was also trying to make a good impression to the taxpayers that fund them . So what a we talking about a brilliant scientific achievement or a t-shirt .

PR 101 - never distract from the main message .

Or maybe on second thoughts it was a brilliant PR coup - how do we stick in the public consciousness ?? I know lets wear a nudie t-shirt

Widdershins

marienbad wrote: »

Yeah I understand he thought it was fun . I personally had no problem with it , I have seen far worse . But as Professor Moriarty has pointed out below it was as obvious as the nose on his face where this was going to go .

And the agency the space guy works for was also trying to make a good impression to the taxpayers that fund them . So what a we talking about a brilliant scientific achievement or a t-shirt .

PR 101 - never distract from the main message .

Or maybe on second thoughts it was a brilliant PR coup - how do we stick in the public consciousness ?? I know lets wear a nudie t-shirt

If he knew where it was going to go and everyone else around him knew, or just should've known, the problem is big enough for even a preeminent scientist to worry about it, to worry that his funding might even be questioned or threatened. It's not a few petty oddballs.

marienbad

Sand wrote: »

I am not the one getting bothered by a shirt. You're trying to pretend you're being reasonable, but that's all it is. A pretence.



Matt Taylor wasn't doing an interview for your approval. He just accomplished something great in the human exploration of space. He could wear whatever he liked.

The guy who owns PWC can show up to work in shorts and flip flops if he likes. You know why? Because he's not doing an interview either.



Common sense? Like the Ze/He/She common sense?

The man displayed some individuality and a piece of himself whilst marking his achievement. And SJWs - who claim to be all for individuality and being yourself - lynched him for it because they are false. Same way those nomark bullies targeted Sean O'Brien for being himself.

Your advice in both cases is to keep your head down and don't draw attention to yourself. Tell me, does the victim blaming extend to women who wear short skirts?

I am being reasonable ! You are the one comparing the proposed use of a word and the wearing of a t-shirt to some Orwellian revival of Nazism.

Of course he can wear what he likes , but both you and he are extremely naïve if you are unaware of the reaction it would cause .

And just in case you try to shoehorn some other notion you have on to me , knowledge of an outcome does denote approval of that outcome .

I didn't ask you about the guy who owns Price Waterhouse.

Professor Moriarty

AnGaelach wrote: »

Do you think on NASA's casual Fridays, they wear clothes with scantily clad women on it?

Dunno to be honest. Maybe you missed the bit about 'feeling marginalised'. That would piss me off it was a persistent experience.

marienbad

Widdershins wrote: »

If he knew where it was going to go and everyone else around him knew, or just should've known, the problem is big enough for even a preeminent scientist to worry about it, to worry that his funding might even be questioned or threatened. It's not a few petty oddballs.

don't know what you are saying here .

oscarBravo

AnGaelach wrote: »

I think you should go back to my first reply to you about that picture, I specifically spoke about resources...

...and that's where you missed the point. It's not about resources. It's a metaphor.

I bet if you thought really really hard about it, you'd be able to figure out what the actual point of the metaphor is. But that wouldn't do, would it?

Widdershins

marienbad wrote: »

don't know what you are saying here .

The type of people-presumably they would identify as feminists-who would hector the scientist about his shirt, are not unusual people on the fringes of feminism. If it should have been obvious what reaction there'd be to his shirt.

I still honestly don't understand why colleagues wearing shirts with images of half-naked women while they are away from work, make other women feel marginalised.

osmiumartist

marienbad wrote: »

Yeah I understand he thought it was fun . I personally had no problem with it , I have seen far worse . But as Professor Moriarty has pointed out below it was as obvious as the nose on his face where this was going to go .

Ah right. So you don't mind if feminists get death threats online as "this is the way things go"? OK.

marienbad

Widdershins wrote: »

The type of people-presumably they would identify as feminists-who would hector the scientist about his shirt, are not unusual people on the fringes of feminism. If it should have been obvious what reaction there'd be to his shirt.

I still honestly don't understand why colleagues wearing shirts with images of half-naked women while they are away from work, make other women feel marginalised.

Widdershins , are you seriously telling you didn't raise an eyebrow when you saw the shirt ?

AnGaelach

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Dunno to be honest. Maybe you missed the bit about 'feeling marginalised'. That would piss me off it was a persistent experience.

Marginalised how exactly? By being twice as likely to get a job in STEM fields as men are*? Don't give me that marginalised trollop, it's a falsehood.




*http://www.news.cornell.edu/stories/2015/04/women-preferred-21-over-men-stem-faculty-positions

Widdershins

marienbad wrote: »

Widdershins , are you seriously telling you didn't raise an eyebrow when you saw the shirt ?

The first time I saw it was about 20 minutes ago, on Google. I thought ''that's loud'. I had to magnify it to see the details. I didn't raise an eyebrow in the sense of ''that's inappropriate'', no.

From the original fuss I expected the shirt to be very different.

osmiumartist

marienbad wrote: »

Widdershins , are you seriously telling you didn't raise an eyebrow when you saw the shirt ?

I noticed it was a colourful Hawaiian looking shirt sure. Did I lose my life and get straight to the Twitter SJW batphone? Nope. I was too busy listening to what he had to say.

AnGaelach

oscarBravo wrote: »

...and that's where you missed the point. It's not about resources. It's a metaphor.

I bet if you thought really really hard about it, you'd be able to figure out what the actual point of the metaphor is. But that wouldn't do, would it?

A terrible metaphor that people use, not to offer any policy change or debate, but just to make themselves feel good.

The metaphor is tacky, wishy-washy nonsense to make the people who make them feel good. The same way Christians make "like and share = prayer" posts, or how atheists make up diagrams showing the "knowledge gap left by Christianity" graph.