Leighanna Rose Walsh / Princess of the Crystal / ScarletJusticeWitch / Wetflame - Irish Phil & Pro Ronald McDonald Cosplayer.

[ScarletJusticeWitch]

So why then is it not okay for us to look at the things you say and mock them? You're a colorful individual too.

Context. Notice how I didn't even ask people to remove the thread(though really, it shouldn't exist if you guys had a shred of decency/sense of irony, I knew it was going to happen) but I did say things like "if you are going to do this, at least keep it factual".

I don't mind people occasionally making fun of things I say(though that's not what I was talking about with regards Chris, read again). However the fact is that I've been an actual victim of several ongoing hate campaigns and general abuse and people make fun of the idea that I've been victimised at all. Much of this thread is based on denying my experiences and justifying the idea that it's acceptable to bully and make transphobic comments against people like me.

It's vastly different from just laughing at Sonichu comics for being kinda silly. There's an obvious malice here that isn't present in how I related to Chris.

I'm not perfect, I fuck up sometimes and I will say things that probably deserve to be made fun of. But you guys aren't really the ones to do it, being so deeply problematic yourselves.

 

[Bassomatic]

Honestly I think western discussions of free speech/freedom of expression are disgusting becuase they almost always seem to revolve around the idea of using said "speech" to persecute others.

I think there should be freedom of expression overall but it doesn't mean people shouldn't be held morally responsible for abusing others.

That sounds like SJW talk for,
I want to sound SJW so I'll say yes because muh prugrezzziv but in reality, not at all, at least me and anyone I like has free range but no one else.

Be honest about it at least.

 

[Funnybone]

I love how showing how crummy of a person you are on a forum for lolcows is on the same level as abuse. (Especially rape)
Keep fighting the good fight.

 

[ScarletJusticeWitch]

You either support free speech or you don't. There is no "I believe in free speech, but...."

There are always logical contradictions with unlimited freedom of everything.

I believe in maximising freedom overall, instead of in individual cases, and on paper(which is what right wing libertarians do).

Look up Karl Popper's paradox of tolerance. It echoes my views somewhat.

 

[Cynical]

@ScarletJusticeWitch

I give up on getting my answer, and I'm not repeating myself again.

 

[Rabbit Bones]

ONCE AGAIN.

Wah wah wah I'm a victim.

 

[Vorkken]

I've been an actual victim of several ongoing hate campaigns

 

[MrTroll]

You go out of your way to harass and stalk people who are less well off than you, in most cases. That's a reasonable reason for someone like me, who works with disenfranchised people, to get angry.

Throwing around VICTIM COMPLEX and ATTENTION SEEKER doesn't change that basic fact.

"works"

 

[OBAMATRON]

problematic

 

[ScarletJusticeWitch]

@ScarletJusticeWitch

May I please have an answer to my earlier question?

does anyone know what asqwn asked me? I really wanna go get food but I don't want to be a dick and keep ignoring them.

 

[Takayuki Yagami]

... but Chloe IS a vulnerable target. She's trans, Romani, and has a history of mental illness.

Whether you like or not, whatever she's done, she's still a vulnerable person. Hell, Laurelai is a fucked up person but
she's "vulnerable "in her own way too.

All these arguments are based on the idea that you don't
have to sympathsie with someone and it's ok to abuse them.

Sagal appears to be of German ancestry, not Romani. Remember, we have (according to Smutley) her deadname. History is easy to get from that.

 

[Bassomatic]

There are always logical contradictions with unlimited freedom of everything.

I believe in maximising freedom overall, instead of in individual cases, and on paper(which is what right wing libertarians do).

Look up Karl Popper's paradox of tolerance. It echoes my views somewhat.

But none of that is true or correct.

It's never been covered under free speech to be abusive that's libel or slander. It's also never been ok to make threats.

Calling you a butt hurt failure, is covered by free speech yet you treat it as the same as screaming fire in a croweded theater.

 

[ScarletJusticeWitch]

I think "safe spaces" are the problem. People being constantly patted on the back despite their idiocy is what creates most of the lolcows in the first place. The worst part is that they're completely oblivious to what they're doing.

Let's take you for example. Believe it or not, there have been lots of people in the thread who are being very honest with you, trying to call attention to what you've been wrong. Because you're so used to the "safe spaces", you see those posts as attacks because they're far more blunt than what you're used to. When you're done here, you'll likely retreat back to your safe space where people will pat you on the back and tell you that everyone here was mean to you.

I know you'll never understand this, but although we're here to have fun at the expense of people making asses of themselves, there are a big chunk of people who would be more than happy to see you gain some self-awareness so that you don't keep making a laughingstock of yourself.

People need safe spaces. There was a time when there were no true "hugboxes" and it was frightening. ANd again, now you have tumblr and the like, people like you rally against them.

I'm not used to the safe spaces at all. I spent years online completely vulnerable. I spent 8-9 years on and off on 4chan too, mostly keeping to myself but becoming more open in the last few years. Which was not pretty.

 

[ChurchOfGodBear]

There are always logical contradictions with unlimited freedom of everything.

I believe in maximising freedom overall, instead of in individual cases, and on paper(which is what right wing libertarians do).

Look up Karl Popper's paradox of tolerance. It echoes my views somewhat.

So "It's not my job to educate you". That's original.

 

[ScarletJusticeWitch]

But none of that is true or correct.

It's never been covered under free speech to be abusive that's libel or slander. It's also never been ok to make threats.

Calling you a butt hurt failure, is covered by free speech yet you treat it as the same as screaming fire in a croweded theater.

... i'm really curious as to how that's not abusive.

or at least, how many of the posts in this thread aren't.

I'm not getting into this discussion, regardless. No, I don't believe in unlimited freedom of speech, I believe in cases of incitement to violence or abuse there should be some form of protection.

But that's not even my point. My point is that you guys don't believe in freedom of speech, you believe in the right to kick people without being criticised for it. That's completely different. You talk about free speech and feminists limiting what you have to say but you scream SJW when anyone disagrees with you. You're worse than feminists for this and at least feminists have the excuse of protecting the vulnerable.

 

[sugoi-chan]

Context. Notice how I didn't even ask people to remove the thread(though really, it shouldn't exist if you guys had a shred of decency/sense of irony, I knew it was going to happen) but I did say things like "if you are going to do this, at least keep it factual".

I don't mind people occasionally making fun of things I say(though that's not what I was talking about with regards Chris, read again). However the fact is that I've been an actual victim of several ongoing hate campaigns and general abuse and people make fun of the idea that I've been victimised at all. Much of this thread is based on denying my experiences and justifying the idea that it's acceptable to bully and make transphobic comments against people like me.

It's vastly different from just laughing at Sonichu comics for being kinda silly. There's an obvious malice here that isn't present in how I related to Chris.

I'm not perfect, I fuck up sometimes and I will say things that probably deserve to be made fun of. But you guys aren't really the ones to do it, being so deeply problematic yourselves.

Chris believed that most of the people who were reading his comics were TRUE and HONEST fans. Chris' comics were also deeply autobiographical - they were as much about him as they were about Sonichu (even more so by the end). By laughing at them, you contributed to laughing at an autistic man and his tribulations.

So again, I come back to the central questions:

- where do you get off claiming to be composed of a higher moral makeup than us?

- Why do you think your personal statements and content online is immune to the same kind of mockery that Chris' was subject to?

 

[Bassomatic]

People need safe spaces. There was a time when there were no true "hugboxes" and it was frightening. ANd again, now you have tumblr and the like, people like you rally against them.

I'm not used to the safe spaces at all. I spent years online completely vulnerable. I spent 8-9 years on and off on 4chan too, mostly keeping to myself but becoming more open in the last few years. Which was not pretty.

Now you are saying you rather cower in them? You are scared of free speech, didn't you just pretend to say it's important and you support it?

Oh a /b/ PTSD member lulz.

 

[autism420]

Much of this thread is based on denying my experiences and justifying the idea that it's acceptable to bully and make transphobic comments against people like me.

I will repeat this since you have trouble understanding because of your self-diagnosed (fake) autism:

Words on a screen are not bullying or abuse. You can log out of this forum at any time you wish. You could never go on the internet again if you wanted. Many other lolcows have broken away from the web and are now "free" - see Jay Geis "The Golden Knight".

What do you mean by "acceptable"? Because it's not ok with you, then no one is allowed to do it?

You keep talking about logical fallacies and using all these big words, but the fact of the matter is that you are not a very intelligent person. You can't just pull the plug because people you don't even know are saying things you do not like.

 

[ChurchOfGodBear]

... i'm really curious as to how that's not abusive.

or at least, how many of the posts in this thread aren't.

I'm not getting into this discussion, regardless. No, I don't believe in unlimited freedom of speech, I believe in cases of incitement to violence or abuse there should be some form of protection.

Calling you a "butthurt failure" is not abuse if you actually are a butthurt failure.

 

[Hat]

There are always logical contradictions with unlimited freedom of everything.

I believe in maximising freedom overall, instead of in individual cases, and on paper(which is what right wing libertarians do).

People saying mean things about other people on the Internet does not compromise anyone's freedom.

Look up Karl Popper's paradox of tolerance. It echoes my views somewhat.

Either you believe in free speech and expression—even for those you deem "intolerant"—or you do not.