Hate Halts Cartoonist from visiting Halifax

[Silvanus]

I'm sorry sweetheart, but tell me your criteria EXACTLY for what constitutes a right-winger. Maybe we can get rid of this ridiculous misunderstanding(whether it be intentional or not). Maybe even use the private messaging function so that this thread doesn't get anymore derailed than it already is.

Or you can keep playing with your label maker and continue to contribute absolutely nothing to the conversation.

I don't know enough about your politics to make any calls, one way or the other, so I won't. That'd be trite of me. But I can see where this particular skirmish is coming from.

I'm trying to play arbitrator here, so do genuinely stop me if I get this wrong. Your post above-- this one [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.950826-Hate-Halts-Cartoonist-from-visiting-Halifax?page=2#23976126]-- seemed to criticise Smithnikov for condemning various responses on the first page, as well as for labelling them "the usual conservatives".

The fact is that numerous responses on the first page (not from yourself, note) were, frankly, quite odious, including deadnaming and victim-blaming. I called one out myself. At least one of the respondents self-identifies as conservative. Smithnikov's post is fairly accurate, and the tone is forgivable.

This is why the above post of yours is off-target, and why qualifying that you're not a right-winger doesn't address the root of the issue. The criticism was not towards you: it was towards some genuinely mean-spirited stuff. When you get a little defensive, it's taking issue with something which was not taking issue with you, and just entrenches the camps.

 

[Here Comes Tomorrow]

Jesus Christ this thread need to be fucking locked. Unless the mods are using it to bait arseholes on both sides into exposing themselves.

 

[Wrex Brogan]

Hate the strip and have a big problem with the mindsets behind it.

But I find the reaction of the usual conservatives to this very intriguing. I guess the tired old "No bad tactics..." meme cuts both ways, doesn't it?

Why is always "just the usual conservatives"? Why is always "just the alt-right"?

I mean, I've been called alt-right on here in private messages because I said that Trump wasn't the absolute worst event in the history of the world. And I have firmly placed myself as a centrist, and somehow my position keeps shifting to the right even though my politics and priorities really haven't changed at all, especially around here.

Just saying that I'm getting more than a bit fed up with the mentality that's sorta become the norm around here that is all about beating words to death and slapping "alt-right", "conservative", "Republican" onto people that have different opinions and then effectively screaming at them over the internet simply because of that. We used to have a pretty wide range of opinions around here, but most of them have been driven off because "conservatives are traitors", "usual alt-right suspects", "THE POLITICAL RIGHT, URGH".

I mean, when did tolerance stop being something you strived for as a community? Why is it everytime these politics comes up, you're slapped with the label of "conservative alt-right hate machine" within posts of saying something that isn't exactly in line

Tolerance is still something to be strived for as a community, it's just a... little hard to do when you've got someone misgendering a transgender artist on page one. And given there's a number of transgender people in this community...

And I mean... it is often the 'usual conservatives', since last I checked Inu-kun and Zontar are both right-wingers, and they both keep pulling this kind of shit, soooo... everyone's complaints about 'usual right-wingers' is less 'fuck right-wing politics' and more 'God dammit it's those knuckleheads again', at least in the context everyone's been using it so far. Shit, I'm a right-winger (at least economically, which still probably makes me left-wing given the sheer balls-to-the-wall social focus all the right-wing parties have moved too these days) and whenever I see them (and a couple others, granted) posting I always strap myself in because wooo boy, that thread is going to be in for a wild ride.

And how does that make the statement "Reproduction happens without the help of heterosexuality" anti-science?

Did you seriously just ask that question? Apparently we've left basic logic behind now.

Just think about sexuality as a political thing instead of scientific and voila - The Problematic lies before you.

I dunno man, non-heterosexual reproduction is still pretty scientific. Quite a lot of science going down around homosexual reproduction last I heard, though like any good science it's not in an active production phase just yet. Like Jetpacks, just with less fire and more 'how can we use the genetic material from one woman's egg to inseminate another woman's egg'.

 

[Smithnikov_v1legacy]

Never liked image boards, nope

Stay away from them. Trust me.

I have no idea because I haven't seen an authoritarian measure that I could say is Left or Right, since it's sorta a different spectrum, the only thing that changes is the language and who they claim they want it for, and yes, because I have yet to meet a human that didn't want to throw someone else out of a helicopter at some point in their lives. The question you should be asking is from how far up and what they're landing on. Also I'm confused, since I don't think that helicopters fall under the second ammendment and I don't think Right-wingers have the helicopter market cornered...

Google the execution method using helicopters and Pinochet. It'll make more sense.

And it's always about payback and sticking it to the man, ain't it?

Yes. It is. Especially when I'm considered part of The Man. Along with Jews, Feminists, and The Illuminati.

Those that deserve what happens and all name-calling being fine because they're "bullies", "nazis", "fascists", etc. Can't possibly take the "not playing that game" road can they? Always gotta get in the shitpile and somehow still play the moral highground card.

Considering they don't get that same finger wagging, yea, I will get in there and mix it up. Why am I under the obligation to "not play" but they aren't?

I dunno, maybe it's who you defend and the way you defend them. Some of the highest profile rape cases in the last few years have ended up being mistaken identity caused by actual trauma to the point of never finding out what really happened, outright lies, about "starting a conversation", and just plain ol' 'I was drunk and woke up and realized I made a mistake, instead of owning up to it, I called rape'(again, note, I'm not saying all are, just enough to have made it a fucking joke).

Oh, so they DOI have a reason to say I'm a white knight who enjoys watching my wife have sex with other men, and yet, you expect me to be civil when you accuse me of such shit? Nuh uh. Not working that way.

Just wondering, it's the internet and all, you sorta have to make yourself known to exist to get most legitimate helicopter drop threats.

That's where you're wrong. Those Helicopter Tours are for anyone found guilty of supporting the wondefully nebulous "Cultural Marxism".

Also, please, label me away, and pretend that I'm labeling you, do exactly what I'm talking about in my post.

You labelled me a cuckold, slick, so you can bet I'm slapping a few right back at ya in the future.

 

[Shadowstar38]

The way humans reproduce, it'd be more beneficial for everyone to be attracted to the opposite sex by design. The cases where this doesn't happen or the sex is vague are exceptions where wires got crossed along the way. It's "natural" so far as it occurs naturally in nature, but it's not suppose to.

More beneficial in what sense? If we simply wanted as many babies as possible to be born, then sure, but that would not be a good thing to happen-- we are already experiencing overcrowding and scarcity, not to mention the current pressures the foster system is under.

We're talking about nature. There is no "supposed to", because there is no intention behind it. Nature is a complex system of relationships, orders, and smaller systems. There is no mind to "suppose".

Beneficial in that if offspring are needed, they can be pumped out cheaply by tossing a ballpark frank into some bubblegum as opposed to whatever hoops you'd have to go through to do it artificially.

 

[Redryhno]

You labelled me a cuckold, slick, so you can bet I'm slapping a few right back at ya in the future.

Oh really? Then I would very much like to know where and when I did this. Preferably with a link to exactly where it was said.

 

[Smithnikov_v1legacy]

You labelled me a cuckold, slick, so you can bet I'm slapping a few right back at ya in the future.

Oh really? Then I would very much like to know where and when I did this. Preferably with a link to exactly where it was said.

Just go back to the previous page.

I dunno, maybe it's who you defend and the way you defend them. Some of the highest profile rape cases in the last few years have ended up being mistaken identity caused by actual trauma to the point of never finding out what really happened, outright lies, about "starting a conversation", and just plain ol' 'I was drunk and woke up and realized I made a mistake, instead of owning up to it, I called rape'(again, note, I'm not saying all are, just enough to have made it a fucking joke).

Who, exactly, have I defended and how did I defend to warrant those epithets you agreed with?

 

[Lieju]

Do people not realize "natural" in the context being argued just means normal most common? It's not a value judgement.

Playing video games isn't natural. Wearing shoes isn't natural.
You're right, whether something is natural or no has no bearing on whether it's right, but let's not pretend like 'homosexuality/being trans is unnatural' isn't used to deny rights from those groups.
If it isn't a value judgement, why bring it up?
And her comic addressed that common argument directly. 'If you think gay couples are unnatural for not being able to have kids, do you also think sterile couples are similarly unnatural?' etc.

Honestly, I'm not the biggest fan of that comic but I just ignore it. Or try to. Every time I hear about it's from people who hate it. Funny that.

The way humans reproduce, it'd be more beneficial for everyone to be attracted to the opposite sex by design.

I dunno, I hear so much about complaining from straight people it seems far more beneficial and logical for everyone just be gay and keep sexual attraction bit out of the whole having kids thing.

Nothing has made me think heterosexuality was a mistake more than the straights complaining about how horrible the opposite gender is.

 

[Erttheking]

So we get word that a cartoonist is getting harassed to the point where she doesn't feel safe to make a visit, something that would get her haters fucking crucified if they were SJWs, but since they're not, the people who hate SJWs just either focus on the quality of her work or just act like she's doing in on purpose or is just lying about it. I'm not surprised, just disappointed. The people who harassed her? Bunch of infantile and probably hypocritical little children. They can all get fucked. My condolences to this woman and all of the shit she has to put up with.

Lady has serious problems so dealing with that on top of it really isn't something that's warranted.

She has some seriously warped views on reality.

Fixed your posts for ya. Try not to misgender people in the future.

Literally none of that is anti-science.

"Reproduction happens without the help of heterosexuality"

I'm sorry, I must have missed the breakthrough in reproduction where humans suddenly stopped needing a man and a woman to accomplish it.

Yeah, you're missing the bit where a woman can have a penis and a dude can have a vagina.

But that's a hermaphrodite, not a woman with a penis or a man with a vagina.

You do know that hermaphrodites identity as a gender, right? They don't go through life actively identifying as being neither male or female. That's non-binary, not hemaphrodite. Therefore, there are men with a vagina and women with a penis. This comic is talking about gender, not sex. Gender = social construct, sex = biological.

Oh, someone decided to get some free promotion for a shitty webcomic. How cute and cuddly.

That is a claim that I doubt you have any evidence to back up.

 

[shrekfan246]

Honestly, I'm not the biggest fan of that comic but I just ignore it. Or try to. Every time I hear about it's from people who hate it. Funny that.

I'd literally never heard of it until this thread. Considering the quality of the people who seem to vehemently hate it, I think it's something I'd probably enjoy if I cared enough to actually bother following it.

Nothing has made me think heterosexuality was a mistake more than the straights complaining about how horrible the opposite gender is.

As a mostly straight dude, I've gotta concur that straight people can be pretty bloody awful. Though I think it ties in with that "quality of people" thing, 'cause everything I've seen suggests that straight guys who hate women hate men just as much, they just couch it behind pompous language. 'Cause, you know, men built all of civilization and everything, y'know. *snrk*

 

[Erttheking]

Oh, someone decided to get some free promotion for a shitty webcomic. How cute and cuddly.

That is a claim that I doubt you have any evidence to back up.

Such a sweet naivete. Use Occam's razor and learn some real life please, before wasting tons of time on pointless, useless and counter-productive arguments.

I fail to see how of the two possible explanations, people are hateful dickheads or one person crafted a false story to generate fake publicity, people being hateful dickheads is the more complex option. I also fail to see how the sixty seconds I took to write up your reply is "tons of time."

 

[Silvanus]

Beneficial in that if offspring are needed, they can be pumped out cheaply by tossing a ballpark frank into some bubblegum as opposed to whatever hoops you'd have to go through to do it artificially.

Right. But more offspring are not needed: we have a sustainable population without everybody being heterosexual, as do most animal species.

This is a little like saying that it would be more beneficial if everybody had a much higher sperm count, or if nobody was sterile, or if people didn't lose libido as they grew older. 1) A total irrelevance, as that's not the case; 2) Not even true from the perspective of population or quality of life; and 3) Totally glosses over personal choice in raising a child, which is the paramount concern.

Such a sweet naivete. Use Occam's razor and learn some real life please, before wasting tons of time on pointless, useless and counter-productive arguments.

"Learn some real life" is not a substitute for evidence. You made a claim about the motivations of somebody you've never met, and accused them of secretly being behind the media coverage on them.

That assumption requires a great many extra steps and assumptions. It's the very opposite of Occam's Razor.

 

[Parasondox]

This person should not be abused nor threatened because of their created contented. Art is subjective which means you have the right to either like or dislike said work without inciting hatred towards the creator and those who choose to have an interest in the art work.

 

[Rastrelly]

Oh, someone decided to get some free promotion for a shitty webcomic. How cute and cuddly.

That is a claim that I doubt you have any evidence to back up.

Such a sweet naivete. Use Occam's razor and learn some real life please, before wasting tons of time on pointless, useless and counter-productive arguments.

I fail to see how of the two possible explanations, people are hateful dickheads or one person crafted a false story to generate fake publicity, people being hateful dickheads is the more complex option.

As I said, you are a naive person. Of course there were some sort of threats, maybe a lot of them. But this happens not for the first time, not for the second, it happens with every single person of even the least level of controversy surrounding them. All you have to do afterwards is take on a mantle of victim and wait for additional clicks based on exactly what happens in this thread, while doing nothing AT ALL. Just take your pink-tinted glasses away and look at people the way they are.

 

[Erttheking]

Oh, someone decided to get some free promotion for a shitty webcomic. How cute and cuddly.

That is a claim that I doubt you have any evidence to back up.

Such a sweet naivete. Use Occam's razor and learn some real life please, before wasting tons of time on pointless, useless and counter-productive arguments.

I fail to see how of the two possible explanations, people are hateful dickheads or one person crafted a false story to generate fake publicity, people being hateful dickheads is the more complex option.

As I said, you are a naive person. Of course there were some sort of threats, maybe a lot of them. But this happens not for the first time, not for the second, it happens with every single person of even the least level of controversy surrounding them. All you have to do afterwards is take on a mantle of victim and wait for additional clicks based on exactly what happens in this thread, while doing nothing AT ALL. Just take your pink-tinted glasses away and look at people the way they are.

Uh-huh. I've seen plenty of claims that people have done this, but I've seen it proven approximately zero times. Do you have any, you know, actual evidence that this is what's happening? Because just saying that I'm naive and that this is obviously what is happening just feels like you're assuming what you want to believe and calling me stupid for not agreeing with you.

 

[bluegate]

"Grow back your pair of balls and just go."

Joke aside, she should have just gone to Halifax rather than to give in to threats, but then again, this does make a better story and probably will have garnered more attention to that crummy blog than any old visit to Halifax ever could. Playing the victim card seems to have paid off.

 

[Combustion Kevin]

So we get word that a cartoonist is getting harassed to the point where she doesn't feel safe to make a visit, something that would get her haters fucking crucified if they were SJWs, but since they're not, the people who hate SJWs just either focus on the quality of her work or just act like she's doing in on purpose or is just lying about it. I'm not surprised, just disappointed. The people who harassed her? Bunch of infantile and probably hypocritical little children. They can all get fucked. My condolences to this woman and all of the shit she has to put up with.

I fail to see how her haters get a pass for being "non-SJW's", rather, the identities of the people making threats can only be assumed because they either hide behind anonymity or the threats in question are not at all shown, her haters would be crucified if people actually had a target. (not that I support vigilantism, the police should be involved with the people making actual threats on her well-being, that's an offense yo!)
Then again, we have plenty of video evidence that the so-called SJW's can stage mass protests, block access to public buildings, hurl abuse and pull fire alarms without repercussions, so I'm really hoping it's not those loonies going after her, considering her content though, I find that unlikely.

OT:
Let it be said, though, harassment is not cool and nobody should be subject to it, however, any person with the least bit of publicity and an opinion seems to be subject to it, in the age of easy, instant communication and anonymity that is simply the world we live in.
And on the subject of "faking it for publicity", she wouldn't be the first, but I don't think she needs to fake it either.

She may have made the better choice for not showing up though, she strikes me as someone that suffers from social anxiety and, combined with the alleged threats being made, this could really go two ways for her:

1) Her anxiety is relieved a little by an exposing experience.

2) She has a panic attack and has to cancel anyhow, on top of the mental strain.

Were I in her situation, I probably would have made the same call.
Third possibility is an actual violent act taking place, but this is about her personal circumstances, and I find that quite unlikely to be honest, public place, lots of security and many like minded individuals around, on top of the point that most "threats" I've seen are not the "I'm going to do things to you." kinda threats and more along the lines of "I hope bad things happen to you." kinda threats.

I'm not a fan of her work, but I wish her the best.

 

[Erttheking]

Snip

Mainly because just about everyone in this thread who would normally jump on people who they see as SJWs, anon or not, are glazing over this.

You aren't and I thank you for that.

 

[Basement Cat]

The head count from this thread has reached saturation point, folks. The gutters are filled with blood.