A professional, objective, apolitical future for The Escapist...

[Addendum_Forthcoming]

Yes, this. He also so happens to have basically agreed that he hasn't found rational or reasonable trans folk, so he in his mind has every reason to treat you with disrespect. And again, one of his tweets I linked had that example and he picked one of the worst options, if it wasn't already the worst.

[tweet t=https://twitter.com/MadScientist212/status/569244522019860480]

Next on the hire list is Davis Aurini it seems.

Transphobic again... I keep seeing that spring up more and more. Please, show me where he is attacking, calling for attacks, or denying basic rights because someone is trans then.

(Oxford Dictionary)

transphobia
Line breaks: trans|pho¦bia
Pronunciation: /tranz'fəʊbɪə , trans'fəʊbɪə /
Definition of transphobia in English:
NOUN

[MASS NOUN]
Intense dislike of or prejudice against transsexual or transgender people:
more than 120 complaints concerning transphobia in the media were made
MORE EXAMPLE SENTENCES

I honestly can't be bothered replying to the rest. You're wrong. Have a nice day.

You're right. Free Speech is a right AND a responsibility. You can say whatever you want, but you are only allowed protection against arrest and prosecution, not from actual consequence. If you're a hateful moron, no employer is required to hire you (I know there are legal protections there as well, but let's be honest, you'd have to prove that they're not hiring you on political grounds), and no other human being is legally required to associate with you (though there are some that act and think like you that will).

You obviously didn't read my message. You don't get to call it 'freedom of speech', or that you're defending 'free speech' ... if you go around dengrating people for the sake of their expression. You're not a proponent for free speech if people call your attacks on another's liberty of expression bigoted. Something that you so will for yourself, but will not allow for others.

That was the point of my message. Anybody that uses 'free speech' proponency argument to denigrate homosexuals or the transgender community is an autocrat in disguise. They and their argument are the furthest thing from true freedom of expression, and they are willingly advocating against one's freedom of expression.

Free speech is not just a liberty, it's a responsibility.

In the same way you shouldn't be allowed to run your mouth off at work, where a co-worker should be able tell you to sit down, and shut the fuck up, because they have no opportunity to reasonably avoid having to listen to your bile.

You can't create a platform for the defence of 'free speech' if you go out of your way to attack freedom of expression in others. You're not defending free speech from 'political correctness' ... you're just a fuckwit. A fuckwit that deserves to be called out for their bigotry. One that hides like a coward because their argument could never stand as one within even earshot of being about liberty.

 

[Sleepy Sol]

I mean heck, the other day I got given a warning because a mod didn't like the tone of my post.

It's never what you say, but how you say it. Or at least, generally it is. Unless what you say is self-evidently offensive to just about anybody.

On the topic of Morse, I would say that what Morse has said before and seems to be sticking by is rather self-evidently offensive to me. Especially considering the community of this site.

 

[KyuubiNoKitsune-Hime]

snip

The whole problem with everything you wrote is two fold. Firstly you're not trans, so you don't get treated like dirt on a daily basis for just being who you are. Second a good parallel this: For a long time in the united states people said they didn't have a stance on racism, accepted that it was wrong, or more often than not supported it. The problem there is that this allowed the really hateful racists to basically lynch people left and right with no push back what so ever. Because when good people do nothing; evil wins by default.

This guy is basically spreading anti-trans hate speech by saying he has no respect for people because they identify in a way that differs from his world view. He's marginalizing an already marginalized and heavily persecuted group, when that happens it justifies what people do violently to that group through silence.

 

[dragonswarrior]

snips

I see a running theme throughout your posts... You seem to be under the (common I'll grant you) impression that violence is a direct thing. That only actively hitting or insulting someone counts as violence... And that's simply not the case.

There is a term called micro-aggression's. It's the small things in life that we do that's caused by the underlying and ever pervasive... "miasma" lets call it... of sexism/racism/homo-trans-phobia/abelism/etc/what have you.

It's the mostly male board meeting talking over and ignoring the two female members... then taking credit for their ideas. The men don't even realize it's happening, it's just the way it is.

It's the person on the street who tells a woman to smile and that she's beautiful... He's just trying to make her feel better, he doesn't realize he's creeped her out and made her feel like an object at the same time.

And it's in the guy on twitter who refuses to acknowledge that you exist. That you matter. That who you want to be known as can and should be a thing.

And then this guy is given an outlet at that website you love...

And this is happening every day, all over the world. (Well, maybe not the website bit, that's happening right here and now. Dunno about the world.)

And not only is it born of and feeds into that overt violence that you think about, it IS violence. It makes people feel like shit. It causes depression and anxiety and hate and suicide. People like this guy are the reason that thirteen year old children commit suicide. Because they see people denying them the right to exist.

 

[runic knight]

Transphobic again... I keep seeing that spring up more and more. Please, show me where he is attacking, calling for attacks, or denying basic rights because someone is trans then.

(Oxford Dictionary)

transphobia
Line breaks: trans|pho¦bia
Pronunciation: /tranz'fəʊbɪə , trans'fəʊbɪə /
Definition of transphobia in English:
NOUN

[MASS NOUN]
Intense dislike of or prejudice against transsexual or transgender people:
more than 120 complaints concerning transphobia in the media were made
MORE EXAMPLE SENTENCES

I honestly can't be bothered replying to the rest. You're wrong. Have a nice day.

Such depth of conversation and argument. I never would have thought someone would have gone with the "I'm right" argument.

I would like to ask a follow up though. Going off the information provided in the tweets, the perspective he has is something to the effect of "transpeople are wrong to be called something they aren't because biological gender is binanry" I am curious, how does that equal prejudice? Even intense dislike seems a stretch.

 

[James Nettum]

Well, I'm happier every day that I canceled my Publisher Club renewal.

On a personal note, here's a simple rule I've chosen to live by: if someone asks me to use a different gender-pronoun to refer to them than I normally would use, I'll do it to be polite. It doesn't matter if I do or don't agree with how they identify. It's a matter of courtesy, and it avoids unnecessary conflict. (Examples of unnecessary conflict can be found in the previous pages.)

 

[Vault101]

Such depth of conversation and argument. I never would have thought someone would have gone with the "I'm right" argument.

I would like to ask a follow up though. Going off the information provided in the tweets, the perspective he has is something to the effect of "transpeople are wrong to be called something they aren't because biological gender is binanry" I am curious, how does that equal prejudice? Even intense dislike seems a stretch.

[sub/]oh sweet tap dancing jesus[/sub]

even if you don't "belive" in transpeople, much like you don't "belive" in gay people its possable to be a dick about it

and even if you do wrap it all up in scientific sounding whatever its STILL dismiss and/or transphobic and a lot of people are gonna take issue with that

 

[mecegirl]

I will only say this to you lot, the whole lot of you, look exactly like Gamergaters when it first started, digging through people's twitter feed to find something incriminating, accusing them of things. The only difference is, you feel you are morally correct and therefore have no shame in doing so, you feel you are correct so what does it matter if you go down to your oppositions level, hey I'm right, they are wrong fuck em.

If I had any doubts that you are the new moral panic like that of the Christians in the 90s it was erased when there was a Crusade to get that Mozilla founder to step down, it's nice to see you all following the trend though. Have fun being the man you used to fight against.

Except that his politics are about all there is to talk about with this guy. Like, the bulk of his work is political and then there are these tweets. Sure he may like geeky things but that's totally different than writing about them, or making a video exploring/discussing them. Why do we need to wait to see his content to judge? Why doesn't he have something for us to judge him by already? People keep bringing up Movie Bob as a comparison to this guy, but at least Bob had his own youtube series before he began creating content for the Escapist. What exactally did this dude do to show that he would be a good content creator for this site? Shit...she who must not be named has a stronger record with creating content about geeky media than this guy. Like really, what has he done? To quote another poster

[HEADING=1]Who, in the jiminy fuck, is this guy?[/HEADING] AND why should I care?

 

[Addendum_Forthcoming]

Such depth of conversation and argument. I never would have thought someone would have gone with the "I'm right" argument.

Given that you didn't bother to look up the word and only assume what it means, I'd say 'depth' is the least of your concerns.

I would like to ask a follow up though. Going off the information provided in the tweets, the perspective he has is something to the effect of "transpeople are wrong to be called something they aren't because biological gender is binanry" I am curious, how does that equal prejudice? Even intense dislike seems a stretch.

Also, because they're wrong? Provably wrong? More than enough times given ample time spent showing they are wrong ... and yet they persisted to denigrate trans people seeking their equal right to fairest representation of free speech that he would afford so dearly for himself. Something he advocated was his personal mission.

Yeah, he's a bigot. And yes ... he's a fuckwit. And no, this isn't about my accosting him about free speech but rather my defence of freedom of expression. As a true libertarian ... of which he cannot understand as an essentialist and yet will wave the banner of 'libertarianism' if only to hide behin the shield of faux 'liberty'. And yes ... that makes him a hypocrite.

 

[runic knight]

snip

The whole problem with everything you wrote is two fold. Firstly you're not trans, so you don't get treated like dirt on a daily basis for just being who you are. Second a good parallel this: For a long time in the united states people said they didn't have a stance on racism, accepted that it was wrong, or more often than not supported it. The problem there is that this allowed the really hateful racists to basically lynch people left and right with no push back what so ever. Because when good people do nothing; evil wins by default.

This guy is basically spreading anti-trans hate speech by saying he has no respect for people because they identify in a way that differs from his world view. He's marginalizing an already marginalized and heavily persecuted group, when that happens it justifies what people do violently to that group through silence.

1st. Personal experience doesn't change arguments, and the appeal to personal experience (or lack there of) is an emotional one, not a rational one. My arguments would be of the same validity if I was a trans, a straight man, a gay woman, a biological talking dog or the son of the secret clone of hitler. Furthermore, you know nothing of what I have gone through in my life, and nothing I have gone through in my life would relate one way or another to the discussion being had anyways.

2nd. You are then blaming everyone for the actions of individuals. There is no such thing as "collective guilt" no matter how it is bent, twisted or spun. It is a logical fallacy for a reason, and while what has happened to people because of their race, gender or sexual identity is terrible, the attempt to blame the actions of horrible people for a belief held by someone else that is similar in your eyes. There is a reason I argued the way I have about action as opposed to belief. The reason is even stupid beliefs based on falsehoods are themselves not the same as actions, regardless how many times people try to present the concept of "it excuses the behavior of others". It does, the behavior committed is abhorrent regardless if a similar belief relating to the action is held by 1% of the population or 99%.

snips

I see a running theme throughout your posts... You seem to be under the (common I'll grant you) impression that violence is a direct thing. That only actively hitting or insulting someone counts as violence... And that's simply not the case.

There is a term called micro-aggression's. It's the small things in life that we do that's caused by the underlying and ever pervasive... "miasma" lets call it... of sexism/racism/homo-trans-phobia/abelism/etc/what have you.

It's the mostly male board meeting talking over and ignoring the two female members... then taking credit for their ideas. The men don't even realize it's happening, it's just the way it is.

It's the person on the street who tells a woman to smile and that she's beautiful... He's just trying to make her feel better, he doesn't realize he's creeped her out and made her feel like an object at the same time.

And it's in the guy on twitter who refuses to acknowledge that you exist. That you matter. That who you want to be known as can and should be a thing.

And then this guy is given an outlet at that website you love...

And this is happening every day, all over the world. (Well, maybe not the website bit, that's happening right here and now. Dunno about the world.)

And not only is it born of and feeds into that overt violence that you think about, it IS violence. It makes people feel like shit. It causes depression and anxiety and hate and suicide. People like this guy are the reason that thirteen year old children commit suicide. Because they see people denying them the right to exist.

I'll be honest, I hold no respect whatsoever for the concept of "microaggression. The very idea seems flawed as any argument can be made with regards to that, and in any direction. Hell, I have seen Christians unironically using it to describe the steady decrease of their legal excess in classrooms, public displays or courts. It always is used to apply individual actions towards a larger group either party is associated with. Even your examples demonstrate this, as though it is part of an overall social scale that must be balanced. Does fit with the previous post's point though. Sadly, that is not a good thing for the argument.

I wont say that you aren't right in regards to how people are treated, that such behavior can make people feel like shit and it sucks. I wont say anyone has to support someone they disagree with or has to watch them.

 

[Fappy]

Holy fuck, this thread has turned into a PR nightmare! The staff's going to come back to the office on Monday and just be like:

Spoiler

Things have never been quite this bleak before. Sad day.

 

[Tsun Tzu]

Oh, hai. Admitted GG supporter here.

This guy comes off as a dick, just like Bob, and I would love to see an official statement on this...but in the mean time? Let's see some content. He can be a total prick on twitter and I can completely disagree with his assertions regarding trans folks. Fine. But if he brings any of that shit into columns on here, you know, like Bob did? Oh, you bet your ass I'm going to complain/actively ignore his work.

See? Consistency isn't a particularly difficult thing to manage, whether you 'agree' with the opinions being expressed or not.

Perhaps some of you folks would like to try it? Maybe? Further nakedly passive aggressive whinging on my part?

Please!?

Such depth of conversation and argument. I never would have thought someone would have gone with the "I'm right" argument.

Given that you didn't bother to look up the word and only assume what it means, I'd say 'depth' is the least of your concerns.

Exactly, dude.

It's all about the girth.

 

[runic knight]

Such depth of conversation and argument. I never would have thought someone would have gone with the "I'm right" argument.

I would like to ask a follow up though. Going off the information provided in the tweets, the perspective he has is something to the effect of "transpeople are wrong to be called something they aren't because biological gender is binanry" I am curious, how does that equal prejudice? Even intense dislike seems a stretch.

[sub/]oh sweet tap dancing jesus[/sub]

even if you don't "belive" in transpeople, much like you don't "belive" in gay people its possable to be a dick about it

and even if you do wrap it all up in scientific sounding whatever its STILL dismiss and/or transphobic and a lot of people are gonna take issue with that

That is fine. But holding a belief that is "being a dick" is not the same as the examples being tossed at me. It isn't prejudice in its own right unless he is treating trans people different for being trans, and for all the dislike of his opinion on transfolk I haven't seen him suggesting or promoting the treatment of them as different from other people (hell, this argument started because of a comment where he says he will call someone the same as other genders). It isn't intense dislike displayed in those posts, as nothing there suggests he dislikes transfolk as people so much as the concept of transpeople because of his gender binary. And he sure as hell hasn't been shown to be promoting violence, encouraging suicide or anything like that.

So yeah, he is a dick, people disagree with him, and they are right to. But none of that goes beyond "I disagree with his opinions" in the end, which was the crux of the counter argument itself to people calling for him to not be on the sight because of it.

It's all about the girth.

Ok, this had me laughing.

 

[KyuubiNoKitsune-Hime]

snip

Alright, you made your point on what I don't know about you, it's a fair point, I'll give you that.

The crux of the whole issue is that words can hurt and no amount telling someone to grow a thicker skin, suck it up, or the like will stop those words from hurting. The other part is that it's not collective guilt that I'm really on about, and perhaps I didn't express myself well enough here. But if him saying he won't accept the existence of transfolk causes even one suicide then at the very least the blood for that death is on his hands, insofar as his words pushed someone over the edge. The other thing is I'll still stand on my point that when good people do nothing; evil wins. That's not collective guilt, that's an inability of good people to stand up against something wrong, and it's proven historically to be true. Just look at what the Nazis did and all of the good people who did nothing to stop them. While those good people aren't at fault, their lack of action also didn't stop the Nazis.

No if this man says something that incites someone else into a violent act against a transperson. it's not his fault that happened. On the other hand he should at least have the common decency to not have said something so insensitive and hurtful.

 

[Ncrdrg]

Okay so I admit, I was pretty disappointed to see his comments on this. Man/Woman can and should be inclusive for the trans community. Going with 'A transwoman is still a man because chromosomes' is just wrong. It's a situation outside their control, as numerous brain scans have shown and I also saw a documentary on the subject.

Even more baffling is that he seems to think being gay is a choice, which is so laughably wrong I don't even know where to start. Though he's correct that the radical left is trying to use the LGBT community as a bludgeon to try forcing priests to marry them even if it's against their views. Which, even as a supporter of gay marriage and adoption, I can't condone. I'm on board with anti-discrimination laws but not when they're used as weapon to force religious people to change their practices. For the record, I'm atheist.

He did touch something interesting with the pronouns stuff though and it's something I agree with. I don't believe in non-binary genders. You can call yourself whatever you want, don't care but when I see a girl getting mad because she wants to be called 'they/them' because she's 'genderless' and lashing out at anyone that refuses to change their entire grammar system to conform to their demands, I get mad. Because they're shooting themselves in the foot. The transgender community has very legitimate grievances and they're watering it down by trying to get people to call them by a bunch of nonsensical pronouns. And anytime someone disagrees with that, no shortage of them will flip out to call you transphobe and then say it's a matter of respect, etc. But in my book, it's disrespectful to demand the entire world's grammar to change because you made up new pronouns when the existing ones are already flexible enough to be quite inclusive. Not to mention they keep making up new ones as if it was a fashion thing. But that's just me.

But the good thing is that this is a gaming site and The Escapist has made it pretty clear they want their content to be about games and not the politics surrounding them so you shouldn't be hearing about any of this stuff from either him or lizzy. Which is good because let's be honest, if you start pandering either way, you're going to start excluding a part of your audience on the basis of politics and I don't think that's a good move. Besides, most gamers don't care about any of that stuff, they just wanna play games.

 

[Addendum_Forthcoming]

Exactly, dude.

It's all about the girth.

I was going to say angle of penetration! You have to work the angles to get the most stimulation.

 

[runic knight]

Such depth of conversation and argument. I never would have thought someone would have gone with the "I'm right" argument.

Given that you didn't bother to look up the word and only assume what it means, I'd say 'depth' is the least of your concerns.

I would like to ask a follow up though. Going off the information provided in the tweets, the perspective he has is something to the effect of "transpeople are wrong to be called something they aren't because biological gender is binanry" I am curious, how does that equal prejudice? Even intense dislike seems a stretch.

Also, because they're wrong? Provably wrong? More than enough times given ample time spent showing they are wrong ... and yet they persisted to denigrate trans people seeking their equal right to fairest representation of free speech that he would afford so dearly for himself. Something he advocated was his personal mission.

Yeah, he's a bigot. And yes ... he's a fuckwit. And no, this isn't about my accosting him about free speech but rather my defence of freedom of expression. As a true libertarian ... of which he cannot understand as an essentialist and yet will wave the banner of 'libertarianism' if only to hide behin the shield of faux 'liberty'. And yes ... that makes him a hypocrite.

He is, as you put it, a fuckwit, I never protested that. And he is wrong, never protested that one either. In fact, I think I said he was as such on both accounts before. You know, I have to ask, have you been following along with the entire point of this argument or just reacting to the latest posts? Because I get the impression it is the second one.
The point of my argument was a counter-point to reasons to kick him off the site. Namely, that regardless the factual validity of his opinions, nor him being a fuckwit or not, the reaction to kicking him off the site is motivated by the difference of his opinion alone, and not from added weight such as the various appeals to trans suicides, violence rates and so forth.

If your opinion is "I dislike him and therefor don't want him on the site" then fine, I respect that and got no argument with that. Many others though seem to be boosting the difference of opinion as something more then it really comes off as. Ignorant and stupidly stubborn, yes. Contributing to the culture of trans oppression and suicides and therefore shouldn't be allowed because it will lead to increased violence against them, not quite. Believe the initial start of this line was the idea that ignorance equals malice to which I oppose.

 

[Sleepy Sol]

But the good thing is that this is a gaming site and The Escapist has made it pretty clear they want their content to be about games and not the politics surrounding them so you shouldn't be hearing about any of this stuff from either him or lizzy. Which is good because let's be honest, if you start pandering either way, you're going to start excluding a part of your audience on the basis of politics and I don't think that's a good move. Besides, most gamers don't care about any of that stuff, they just wanna play games.

I think it's quite easy to not alienate your audience based on political opinions.

1. Don't frigging insult them.
2. Don't talk down to them since the majority of the audience on The Escapist are thinking adults like any potential contributor.

I wouldn't speak for anyone but yourself as far as gamers caring about political subjects goes. Many people here are very passionate about political subjects. And there is a certain benefit to be had by discussing such subjects as one might believe they apply to a game or gaming. The problem is when people take that as an opportunity to personally insult others. Or freak the fuck out that someone has a different opinion (though I'd say getting rather upset at Morse's opinion is extremely justified).

Even if we haven't seen whatever Morse will be contributing yet, I can't blame parts of the audience for being heavily upset or wary based on his conduct. Especially when what he's been saying denies their identity, or insinuates that they totally chose to be gay.

 

[KyuubiNoKitsune-Hime]

He is, as you put it, a fuckwit, I never protested that. And he is wrong, never protested that one either. In fact, I think I said he was as such on both accounts before. You know, I have to ask, have you been following along with the entire point of this argument or just reacting to the latest posts? Because I get the impression it is the second one.
The point of my argument was a counter-point to reasons to kick him off the site. Namely, that regardless the factual validity of his opinions, nor him being a fuckwit or not, the reaction to kicking him off the site is motivated by the difference of his opinion alone, and not from added weight such as the various appeals to trans suicides, violence rates and so forth.

If your opinion is "I dislike him and therefor don't want him on the site" then fine, I respect that and got no argument with that. Many others though seem to be boosting the difference of opinion as something more then it really comes off as. Ignorant and stupidly stubborn, yes. Contributing to the culture of trans oppression and suicides and therefore shouldn't be allowed because it will lead to increased violence against them, not quite. Believe the initial start of this line was the idea that ignorance equals malice to which I oppose.

Well my argument wasn't really that he shouldn't have the right, it was that he should have the common decency to not berate other people just because he disagrees with their lifestyle. But that was me responding to a later post with out taking into account previous lines in the argument. I may have gotten a bit too irritated with you and said essentially things I didn't intend, or more likely made a point that back up the points of people who want to violate his right to free speech.

Then again the whole line of arguments basically just kept irritating me on a very personal level.

 

[runic knight]

snip

Alright, you made your point on what I don't know about you, it's a fair point, I'll give you that.

The crux of the whole issue is that words can hurt and no amount telling someone to grow a thicker skin, suck it up, or the like will stop those words from hurting. The other part is that it's not collective guilt that I'm really on about, and perhaps I didn't express myself well enough here. But if him saying he won't accept the existence of transfolk causes even one suicide then at the very least the blood for that death is on his hands, insofar as his words pushed someone over the edge. The other thing is I'll still stand on my point that when good people do nothing; evil wins. That's not collective guilt, that's an inability of good people to stand up against something wrong, and it's proven historically to be true. Just look at what the Nazis did and all of the good people who did nothing to stop them. While those good people aren't at fault, their lack of action also didn't stop the Nazis.

No if this man says something that incites someone else into a violent act against a transperson. it's not his fault that happened. On the other hand he should at least have the common decency to not have said something so insensitive and hurtful.

I readily agree the guy seems to be an ass and is quite wrong about trans people. That said, I think he is ignorant, not malicious and as such the protest of him on the site because of his ignorance without even seeing what he would be doing here seems premature to me. All the more so when the use of his tweets have been pointed to to the point of near absurdity in what they are responsible for.

Now, you do touch on what seems to be a core argument here, that of what is a person responsible for with regards to what they say. You are right, on the one hand, what he says is not kind and the emotional pain can be disastrous. Yet on the other, we can only control our own actions and as the panicked morality police of the past have showed us with D&D and rock music, blaming others for actions they didn't commit is incorrect too.

To me, I draw the line on intent and maliciousness. If they are actively trying to remove human rights, calling for violence, encouraging death or detrimental treatment, then I will call it out. What I have seen here though, it doesn't do that. It is flawed and factually dead, but there is no maliciousness in it. And there is a logical consistency that explains the motivation, even if I know the logic is based on flawed information. At the end of the day, I can't feel justified calling for the guy to not be on the site for that alone. I dislike him, but his opinions being based on bullshit is not enough for me to go beyond that.

Does that make sense?