How to destroy the alt-right

[ADigitalArtist]

On reprisals, I think he welcomes good debate. As far as adding to the debate, he comes armed with factual claims and statistics. For example he cites several recent polls in which women overwhelmingly want equality of the sexes, and at the same time overwhelmingly don't identify as feminists. This is important data, how is it not adding to the discussion?

On another front, he discusses actual police statistics and murder statistics and concludes that BLM is largely hypocritical - based on statistics! How is this not adding to the discussion?

Now you might do some research and come to believe that you disagree with his interpretation of the data. Well hooray! Now we have an actual debate. But to label him a "colossal git" does none of that.

A homophobe trying to cite CDC statistics on HIV as a reason to a homophobe is not adding to the debate. A neo-nazi citing the aggregate wealth of Jews as a reason to be a neo-nazi is not adding to the debate. A white supremacist pointing to crime by race statistics as a reason to be a white supremacist is not adding to the debate. And a sexist citing statistics about the feminist identity as a reason to be a sexist is not adding to the debate.
I call him a colossal git because he is worthy of the title. At this point I wouldn't even be surprised if his identity was a facade to pander to the #notmyshield gamer gate nonsense. I trust his sincerity to accurately address social issues about as well as...well, Larry the Cable Guy.

 

[icehorse]

A homophobe trying to cite CDC statistics on HIV as a reason to a homophobe is not adding to the debate. A neo-nazi citing the aggregate wealth of Jews as a reason to be a neo-nazi is not adding to the debate. A white supremacist pointing to crime by race statistics as a reason to be a white supremacist is not adding to the debate. And a sexist citing statistics about the feminist identity as a reason to be a sexist is not adding to the debate.
I call him a colossal git because he is worthy of the title. At this point I wouldn't even be surprised if his identity was a facade to pander to the #notmyshield gamer gate nonsense. I trust his sincerity to accurately address social issues about as well as...well, Larry the Cable Guy.

Again, citations would be helpful. And I have to say, he often employs sarcasm and satire, are you accounting for that?

And more broadly, what's your stance on the use of sarcasm and satire when addressing important issues?

 

[ADigitalArtist]

Again, citations would be helpful. And I have to say, he often employs sarcasm and satire, are you accounting for that?

And more broadly, what's your stance on the use of sarcasm and satire when addressing important issues?

I already cited this earlier, and gave my view on this sort of 'sarcasm' and 'satire', namely that I don't believe it is. Just thinly veiled rhetoric pretending to be a joke when convenient to diminish people calling out his bull, just like schoolyard bullies.
But I'm bowing out of this. I can't see us coming to any sort of agreement on this.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Fiscal conservative, latent misogyny, pro LGB (generally intolerant of the T)

One thing I thought was interesting was his "gender roles work." For one, probably no more than a handful of people are actually hostile enough towards the idea of gender roles to the point that even marriage is unacceptable, but also because it's very often brought up as a point against transgender, especially when it comes to the "stop ignoring the differences." But here that wasn't the case, but rather a stepping point to use an anecdotal that "women usually aren't happy if they aren't married by their mid-30s." He said he was the idea of being angry at a woman who wants to get married (if anything, I've seen plenty of bitterness towards women (and even towards men to a degree) who don't want to get married or have children), but yet follows with a made up statistic and positive correlation between age and marital status.
I'm very sure we did evolve to have gender roles, and we even find them in societies that aren't so very patriarchal, and we also even do find them in other primates (and even in some other animals). But there are just so very few people that care anything beyond unequal statuses. Gender roles are probably even a normal part of our psychological and biological development. But I know of absolutely no one who is so against gender roles that they would go out of their way to criticize and apparently verbally harass and attack women who want to get married, and I've only ever heard of stories of it happening. I would agree there is too much of an emphasis placed between marriage and a woman's happiness (playing into the "Prince Charming/Princess" myths), but that wasn't his point, and rather it was the opposite and he enforced the idea that for a woman to be happy she has to be married.

 

[icehorse]

I would agree there is too much of an emphasis placed between marriage and happiness, but that wasn't his point, and rather it was the opposite and he enforced the idea that for a woman to be happy she has to be married.

The role of the provocateur is to bring to the surface that which is uncomfortable, and to be a bit confrontational. And in this case I seem to recall he said "most women" not all women, and that is a CRUCIAL distinction.

One thing that seems clear is that a lot of these issues cannot accurately be reduced to sound bites. Now it's clear that the videos that tend to get posted are those in which audience members are misbehaving, but there are enough of them to warrant concern. And if those audience members are at all representative, then that adds credibility to his claims.

 

[icehorse]

I already cited this earlier, and gave my view on this sort of 'sarcasm' and 'satire', namely that I don't believe it is. Just thinly veiled rhetoric pretending to be a joke when convenient to diminish people calling out his bull, just like schoolyard bullies.
But I'm bowing out of this. I can't see us coming to any sort of agreement on this.

There are NUMEROUS videos of talks at universities in which either feminists, or BLMers, or apologists are acting EXACTLY the way Milo claims they do. That's hard evidence. So Milo comes with polls and statistics, and there are many videos to support his claims. I'm not sure exactly what you're saying you "disagree" with? Do you doubt the polls? Do you think the videos are all staged?

 

[Notanumber]

He used the washing machine and the pill to get a reaction from feminists knowing that they will not say anything about Muslim women being chained to the kitchen sink.