PoC: "My theory about ContraPoints is that it...
- *chuckle* "It"
PoC: I won't refer to it, I feel like there is a weird Riley Dennis mental illness.
- You should say "them", like a plural pronoun, because of all the different personalities. And even the term ContraPoints is plural, right? I think plural pronouns make the most sense.
PoC: I don't want to be, I am not doing this as a harassment thing, it's more that I really sincerely doubt in the pit of my soul that this person is actually trans. There are so many instances, direct evidence, that this person decided to start feeling like maybe they had gender dysphoria while they were in their late twenties and went on hormones after crossdressing for a while on Youtube. That makes me really, I don't want anyone to think that that's some sort of normal transition story. Like, don't tell the kids that that's what happens. And that's why I refuse to, like, I don't want to be like "he", I'm not that guy, because I am not saying that trans people aren't real and that they don't deserve our respect. But I also don't want to give this person validity as a valid and normal transition, because I think it's so suspect. That's why I say "it" or "Contra".
PoC: I wasn't done talking about Contra though, I think that Contra has a team working with them, like Anita Sarkeesian did. Because the video quality improved so dramatically right around the time that there was a 25 million budget coming from Youtube.
PoC: And I think that ContraPoints deliberately obfuscates their arguments to make them hard to [gauge], with run-on sentences, and a lot of irrelevant information everytime, to the point where you have to really really, most people would have to take notes on what is actually being said within any given 5 minutes and write it down for themselves, "What was the point?". And the point will only be a sentence long, but [in the video] it will be this 5 minute thing. And you can boil down this 45 minute video into something that you could write out in a page, and then you would be like: "Great" and "I disagree with it.". And that's what bothers me about ContraPoints. I feel that ContraPoints is fairly sophisticated propaganda. And I don't feel like ContraPoints itself, this person named "Natalie", is coming up with it. I think it's a team and that's what creeps me out about it.
- What's interesting is that ContraPoints was originally part of the Atheist community, a long time ago. We're talking like 11...
PoC: Wasn't it, like, Nykytyne or something?
- No, ContraPoints, always was ContraPoints, I am pretty sure.
PoC: No, I searched, I have a video about ContraPoints being a transtrender. It's called What If ContraPoints Really Isn't Trans. I have old footage. I am pretty sure it was Nykytyne-something.
- Well, I think that at one point they were also called ContraPoints because someone who was also in the Atheist community remembered it as ContraPoints. It's interesting cos when they came back with that video, I remember that video, they didn't show their face, if I remember correctly. It got loads of views, for somebody who had been gone for years.
PoC: Yeah, something very strange was happening. And then they had that framed picture of Anita Sarkeesian in the background.
- I think that might have been later, maybe.
-- Did you see that video come out, "Exposing more political shills on Twitter"?
PoC: Lordy, I am curious what you're having to say. Does that directly related to what we're talking about now.
-- You are talking about ContraPoints being potentially a strategic paid for sophisticated propaganda machine.
PoC: Oh, there is no potentiality about it. This is definitely what's going on with this person. I want to make a whole video called "ContraPoints is Anita Sarkeesian 2.0" cos it's not just 2 or 3 things, it's like 20 pieces of very obvious evidence that this person is, um, this person has never admitted out loud "Yes, I get the same corporate money that Anita Sarkeesian got". But, you know, it pretty obviously is, you know?
twitter.com
archive.li
