Funny events in anti-woke world

[Dwarvenhobble]

Ok, good chat.

I look forward to seeing you cite any successful litigation in the Western world for the use of a term such as "harmful", which is used every day in countless national publications.

Not harmful but similarly vague claims

ABC settled 'pink slime' lawsuit for $177 million, leaving the beef company feeling 'vindicated'

ABC News and Beef Products Inc. reached a settlement of $177 million in lawsuit that claimed a story ABC ran in 2012 misled viewers.

www.businessinsider.com

Claims over low cost beef

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

Although I'm a couple of pages too late on this reply, but when your retort is basically a cartman sketch, I think it's time to take a step back and look at yourself in the mirror.

Slight difference. I also presented options including one that allowed people to say that wasn't their position.

I really do find it funny that people keep being accused of Sea-Lioning (that's the term you're looking for) if they do ask awkward questions.

 

[BrawlMan]

The rule of the left is, "If you don't like what someone says, call them a bigot and scream until they stop talking."

For someone that claims that both the left and the right are almost as bad as each other, you seem to favor or give the right a bit more leeway most of the time in these discussions. This isn't the first time you've done this. As far as I'm concerned, there's almost literally no one decent nor sensible on the right. Just a bunch of insane and insecure chuckle-fucks that like causing misery on everyone else. They don't give a fuck about my ass because of my skin color. Not unless I'm sucking their genitals and be the head house negro. Even if I was as highly rich as they were, they would still see me as less than human.

 

[AnxietyProne]

She has money. I'm pretty sure that means it's illegal to empathize with her in 2021.

That strawman is so big it's on the cover of an Iron Maiden single.

 

[AnxietyProne]

The rule of the left is, "If you don't like what someone says, call them a bigot and scream until they stop talking."

Works for the right wing too. Just insert "SJW" "Marxist" or "Communist" for bigot and voila.

 

[Silvanus]

Claims over low cost beef

So, a media defamation case rather than a private citizen or libel case. The complainant is able to point to material losses. And it was settled, rather than actually vindicated in court.

Slight difference. I also presented options including one that allowed people to say that wasn't their position.

Like Cartman is presenting the option for Wendy to say that she's not spending money on drugs.

 

[BrawlMan]

Slight difference. I also presented options including one that allowed people to say that wasn't their position.

I really do find it funny that people keep being accused of Sea-Lioning (that's the term you're looking for) if they do ask awkward questions.

That's all you've been doing the majority of the time on these forums. Constant extending the goal post and a whole bunch of what aboutsim that has nothing to do with anything.

Don't bother responding back, I'm not going to answer.

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

So, a media defamation case rather than a private citizen or libel case. The complainant is able to point to material losses. And it was settled, rather than actually vindicated in court.



Like Cartman is presenting the option for Wendy to say that she's not spending money on drugs.

Libel would come under defamation laws.
Private citizens normally have more protections than companies in such cases.
US law vs UK law means under US law you have to prove loss under UK law you don't.
It was settled because it was likely seen as something that would go on longer and cost more if it went to judgement.

As for the Cartman comment, so what other option does Cartman give than Wendy spending it on drugs?

Again funny to see people yelling about Sea-Lioning when in the past it was generally religious types on about don't ask questions etc etc.

 

[Buyetyen]

That's all you've been doing the majority of the time on these forums. Constant extending the goal post and a whole bunch of what aboutsim that has nothing to do with anything.

The Reddit-honed, pussy-drying debate skills of the right aren't intended to find true conclusions, but to make it harder to tell what is real and what is not. Just put him on ignore.

 

[BrawlMan]

The Reddit-honed, pussy-drying debate skills of the right aren't intended to find true conclusions, but to make it harder to tell what is real and what is not. Just put him on ignore.

I already do. I just felt the need to respond to that one. I've had him on ignore for months.

 

[Terminal Blue]

Ok first of all, everyone everywhere judges people based on their appearance. That is why appearances are important, at least on first impression basis. You can't show up to a job interview with your hair a mess and wearing dirty clothes for example.

And yet, you can show up to a job interview as a balding, doughy cis man with the body of a rejected garbage pail kid, and noone's going to make any weird assumptions about your ability to live in this society.

Again, just consider the transparency of this glass house for a second. If I had to pick any group in society who put the least effort into their appearance, it's not going to be transfemmes. Consider that everything you think is bad or ugly about the specific transfemmes you seem to be very invested in the appearance of for some reason, everything that indicates what you see as a lack of effort, is actually just a perceived resemblance to cis men.

And even here, I can't actually pretend to be sincere, because judging people's worth on the basis of their appearance is not a good or normal thing to do, and even pretending to do it hurts my brain.

Typical liberal bullshit. "Oh you mention a name I don't like therefore your argument is completely invalid fuck you."

Firstly, how dare you imply I'm a liberal.

Secondly, is that what you took away?

You could have never mentioned Blair White and I would know where you got these second hand arguments from, because it sounds like you watched a bunch of her videos and based your entire view of trans people on the content thereof. It's all there. You've got the preoccupation with cringe, this obsession with who is or isn't "letting the side down." We've got the specific people Blair White won't shut up about (still waiting for Jessica Yaniv, let's see how long that takes).

Most revealingly, we've also got the mistakes. Riley Dennis is a fairly typical trans youtuber who makes videos for a predominantly trans audience and who has a pretty normal and uncontroversial perspective on being trans. Blair White deliberately misrepresented Riley Dennis in order to score points with her cis audience, because let's be real. That's her content. That's her brand. That's literally all she does, and she gets away with it because people like you eat it up for some reason.

Fair enough, but I will also judge the dude in a red dress with a full on beard in return.

For what?

Do you have a better dress, brick?

 

[Silvanus]

Libel would come under defamation laws.
Private citizens normally have more protections than companies in such cases.
US law vs UK law means under US law you have to prove loss under UK law you don't.

Sure, libel would be a form of defamation. But you can surely recognise that the standard to which national publications and media companies are held is somewhat higher than random commentators on the internet.

In the UK, a statement being one's "honest opinion" is also a defence against libel. That guy believed he was harmful in some way? Then it ain't actionable or libel.

This is why pretty much every national newspaper uses terms like "harmful" on a daily basis.

As for the Cartman comment, so what other option does Cartman give than Wendy spending it on drugs?

The option of saying "I didn't do that".

Pretty much the same option you gave people: a completely worthless one, considering the original "question" wasn't being asked in good faith.

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

Sure, libel would be a form of defamation. But you can surely recognise that the standard to which national publications and media companies are held is somewhat higher than random commentators on the internet.

Yes,

In the UK, a statement being one's "honest opinion" is also a defence against libel. That guy believed he was harmful in some way? Then it ain't actionable or libel.

This is why pretty much every national newspaper uses terms like "harmful" on a daily basis.

The comment was that he had harmed people. Harmful is more clearly subjective but has harmed people is more of a statement they have taken action that has harmed.

The option of saying "I didn't do that".

Pretty much the same option you gave people: a completely worthless one, considering the original "question" wasn't being asked in good faith.

and yet the ascription of faith falls to you a person who 19 times had to be told something wasn't my position. Seems like some-one is projection their own position a bit here.

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

That's all you've been doing the majority of the time on these forums. Constant extending the goal post and a whole bunch of what aboutsim that has nothing to do with anything.

Don't bother responding back, I'm not going to answer.

Dude after you proudly declared you'd put me on ignore a few months back I really didn't expect a reply from you nor expect you to read my reply.
Thus this reply is more for the "audience" than to you.

Rather than get angry at me kindly direct your annoyance to those employing sophistry to try and claim that the ball that went flying off into the stands should could as a goal because they think the goal is out there and keep arguing that they were sure we agreed to put the goal there when it's been pretty clear where the goals are.

 

[MrCalavera]

The rule of the left is, "If you don't like what someone says, call them a bigot and scream until they stop talking."

Damn, i wish it worked.

 

[Baffle]

And yet, you can show up to a job interview as a balding, doughy cis man with the body of a rejected garbage pail kid, and noone's going to make any weird assumptions about your ability to live in this society.

Help! I'm wounded!

 

[BrawlMan]

I saw Dwarvenhobble recent post. I read part of it, got bored, and stopped caring immediately. Not worth the eye muscle.

 

[Silvanus]

Snip

Cool, same old talking points again.

Still waiting for any instance at all of a subjective term like "hurt" (which is the word actually used in the subreddit comment) being successfully upheld in court as an example of libel.

 

[Terminal Blue]

Help! I'm wounded!

Aw..

I know you're kidding, but as someone who has gone through the experience of really, truly hating the way they look quite a lot, the empathy is real so, for my benefit, let me tell you what I would tell myself.

Whatever you think you look like and however you feel about it, you are still worthy of being treated with respect, and you deserve the chance to be loved and recognized for the good qualities that you have.

One of those good qualities is that you aren't the person here trying to hold others to your weird personal standards of social acceptability, and that's nice, it's kind, and it is deserving of nothing but kindness in turn. Thus, nothing unkind that I have said actually applies to you.