Support NeoGAF

[GymWolf]

Speech defined by law, but which law? These companies are international, but different countries have different laws when it comes to free speech. For example, in France it's a crime to deny the Holocaust happened, but this doesn't breach free speech rules in the USA.

I'm happy and content that social media companies are taking the correct approach and banning the right people. But then again, I live in the UK and I'm used to stricter free speech rules.



Everyone does receive the same treatment.

Lol sure buddy.

 

[Stitch]

 

[IDKFA]

Lol sure buddy.

Come on GW, you can do better than that. You're normally one of the better posters round here.

I believe my statement currently because I haven't seen any evidence to convince me otherwise. If you think I'm wrong, then please provide the data for me to look at. You might convince me that I'm wrong.

I'm a big boy. I can admit to changing my mind.

 

[Clear]

I'm not frightened because I live in the UK. We put people into prison for using hate speech on Twitter, or arrest old people for sharing an image of a pride flag to look like a swastika on twitter because it gave someone anxiety.

Yes and change to these ludicrous policies should be forced through protest and pressure. Its not good, but there's at least a pathway to legislative reform.

On the other hand you can't say the same thing about the media giants despite them "serving" constituencies larger than an almost any nation-state on Earth.

Nihilism and ironic detachment won't save you when you can hear their standard-issue boots kicking in your door.

 

[GymWolf]

Come on GW, you can do better than that. You're normally one of the better posters round here.

I believe my statement currently because I haven't seen any evidence to convince me otherwise. If you think I'm wrong, then please provide the data for me to look at. You might convince me that I'm wrong.

I'm a big boy. I can admit to changing my mind.

I already made an example, that old black politician lady (can't remember the name), everyone who advocate for violence against police or patriarchy or some shit, it is real and no one get banned (if they were benned you would have way less people speaking like that in social media for the fear of being banned)

Tate is a moron but all that rape thing was just a farce to attract mysoginist men to his channel\persona, an extremely poor taste thing to do, but still mostly a farce.

If that is the limit that you can't surpass, there are a fuckload of people to ban before him.

But like someone said, i'm still against censoring people words just because they can be bad for young people, or you would have to censor everything, from vg to books to movies etc.

 

[Kraz]

Yes, the limits are clearly defined by law. The few megacorps that control the vast majority of speech on the internet and thus the biggest public forum on the planet should not be the ones deciding which narratives should be allowed (and even often promoted) and which should be censored especially since these megacorps are actively colluding to create a cartel. Either break them up into a million small pieces using antitrust laws that should have been activated a LONG time ago if the politicians weren't getting bribed by them or stop them from mass-censoring speech a democratic society hasn't deemed dangerous.

No wonder you're so upset. You don't live in reality. Throwing buzzwords and loose threads together to feel fuel some conspiracy of "allowing narratives" whatever that means.

It's hilarious and good to see how powerless the type of opinion you're peddling is at influencing anyone sensible.

Badgering, oversimplifying and screeching platitudes is only convincing others that someone is trying to force their opinion.

If level headed and educated people truly felt this was happening in the way you're describing then in a democratic society there would be reputable people speaking up on the issue.

This is just a storm in a teacup. A small group of overprivileged loudmouth whiners being held accountable and to standards. At least they're tiring themselves out punching the air.

 

[Konnor]

Speech defined by law, but which law? These companies are international, but different countries have different laws when it comes to free speech. For example, in France it's a crime to deny the Holocaust happened, but this doesn't breach free speech rules in the USA.

I'm happy and content that social media companies are taking the correct approach and banning the right people. But then again, I live in the UK and I'm used to stricter free speech rules.



Everyone does receive the same treatment.

The law defined by each respective country because they're the ones who should be responsible for policing it anyway, not the goddamn corporations. If the UK wants to keep arresting old people for pride flag "offenses" they can keep doing it, afterall the UK is a great warning to the Western world of what could happen in a country with loose free speech protections when woke nutjobs take over. They can also request the posts of their citizens that broke the law to be taken down, you know, like it happened with that horrific hate speech video of Count Dankula.

No wonder you're so upset. You don't live in reality. Throwing buzzwords and loose threads together to feel fuel some conspiracy of "allowing narratives" whatever that means.

It's hilarious and good to see how powerless the type of opinion you're peddling is at influencing anyone sensible and that their won't be a change. It's just keep screaming pointlessly into the void until they get tired.

Badgering, oversimplifying and screeching platitudes is only convincing others that someone is trying to force their opinion.

If level headed and educated people truly felt this was happening in the way you're describing then in a democratic society there would be reputable people speaking up on the issue.

This is just a storm in a teacup. A small group of overprivileged loudmouth whiners being held accountable and to standards. At least they're tiring themselves out punching the air.

Five paragraphs of whining and you managed to say nothing of value or even attempted to make a proper argument. Congrats

 

[Kraz]

The law defined by each respective country because they're the ones who should be responsible for policing it anyway, not the goddamn corporations. If the UK wants to keep arresting old people for pride flag "offenses" they can keep doing it, afterall the UK is a great warning to the Western world of what could happen in a country with loose free speech protections when woke nutjobs take over. They can also request the posts of their citizens that broke the law to be taken over, you know, like it happened with that horrific hate speech peddling video of Count Dankula.






Five paragraphs of whining and you said nothing of value or even attempted to make a proper argument. Congrats

Town squares have municipal laws.

 

[John Bilbo]

I'm not frightened because I live in the UK. We put people into prison for using hate speech on Twitter, or arrest old people for sharing an image of a pride flag to look like a swastika on twitter because it gave someone anxiety.

 

[Kraz]

Why doesn't this dude sign up on one of the other social media platforms from other parts of the world?

 

[Konnor]

Why doesn't this dude sign up on one of the other social media platforms from other parts of the world?

Jesus fucking Christ, at this point this is just trolling. Do even even try to make an honest argument?

 

[Kraz]

Jesus fucking Christ, at this point this is just trolling. Do even even try to make an honest argument?

Funny. That is my thought about you.

 

[IDKFA]

I already made an example, that old black politician lady (can't remember the name), everyone who advocate for violence against police or patriarchy or some shit, it is real and no one get banned (if they were benned you would have way less people speaking like that in social media for the fear of being banned)

Tate is a moron but all that rape thing was just a farce to attract mysoginist men to his channel\persona, an extremely poor taste thing to do, but still mostly a farce.

If that is the limit that you can't surpass, there are a fuckload of people to ban before him.

But like someone said, i'm still against censoring people words just because they can be bad for young people, or you would have to censor everything, from vg to books to movies etc.

You actually make a good point. Now I've thought about it, there are lots of double standards. I see racist shit on social media against white people all the time (not so long ago Mayo Monkey was trending on Twitter), but for some reason racism against white people is okay?

However, there needs to be limit on what somebody can and cannot say on a social media platform. We can agree that racism should be banned right, and anybody who is racist on social media should lose their right to use the platform? If so, then why not misogyny as well?

 

[Kraz]

The companies are doing company things to Western standards. That is all. There is no attack on human rights coming from the companies. There is no conspiracy. There is no town square.

 

[GymWolf]

You actually make a good point. Now I've thought about it, there are lots of double standards. I see racist shit on social media against white people all the time (not so long ago Mayo Monkey was trending on Twitter), but for some reason racism against white people is okay?

However, there needs to be limit on what somebody can and cannot say on a social media platform. We can agree that racism should be banned right, and anybody who is racist on social media should lose their right to use the platform? If so, then why not misogyny as well?

Because they are just words in the end, nobody force anyone to follow these people, for me it is like the internet bullying meme, like just turn off the pc broh.

We had politicians in italy who where happy if etna (an active volcano) would burn the entire south italy to the ground, and they are still a strong political party, that is fucking worse than anything tate ever said and we sicilians just ignore these people just fine.

 

[Kraz]

Because they are just words in the end, nobody force anyone to follow these people, for me it is like the internet bullying meme, like just turn off the pc broh.

We had politicians in italy who where happy if etna (an active volcano) would burn the entire south italy to the ground, and they are still a strong political party, that is fucking worse than anything tate ever said and we sicilians just ignore these people just fine.

Your point doesn't contain any of it but that's the argument used to get all manner of detestable content in public. That's not what any of these companies want or the majority of the people in the societies which they operate in.

From what can be gleaned from his content it belongs in the same category as pedophilia and antisemitism.

 

[Konnor]

You actually make a good point. Now I've thought about it, there are lots of double standards. I see racist shit on social media against white people all the time (not so long ago Mayo Monkey was trending on Twitter), but for some reason racism against white people is okay?

However, there needs to be limit on what somebody can and cannot say on a social media platform. We can agree that racism should be banned right, and anybody who is racist on social media should lose their right to use the platform? If so, then why not misogyny as well?

Obviously though this isn't going to change because the same people who say mayo monkey and kill all men are the same people who police these social media, San Francisco is full of them. What is your solution to that? It's usually these kind of hypocrites that want shit banned.

Also, if so misogyny why not transphobia? Transphobia obviously includes pronouns which should be imposed (like twitter does) and implying that you wouldn't want to have sex with a trans person (which is why the Supersexual subreddit was banned). And if so transphobia why not furryphobia? Can't make fun of those either. Calling someone a cuck? That's a slur aimed at making fun of someone's sexual fetish. Moron? That's a slur that was first used as a scientific term against special needs people (also been banned in certain subreddits btw). Let's not forget of non-binary people and the oppressive use of pronouns in other languages that use gendered vocabulary. When will the use of stuff like "Latinx" become mandatory? Who knows.

The slippery slope never fucking ends and we're seeing the proof of that in real time.

 

[GymWolf]

Your point doesn't contain any of it but that's the argument used to get all manner of detestable content in public. That's not what any of these companies want or the majority of the people in the societies which they live operate in.

From what can be gleaned from his content it belongs in the same category as pedophilia and antisemitism.

I never heard that rape thing before reading it on gaf, the vast majority of his content is just alpha male moron with some misogynistic stuff to attract other morons, not really that bad compared to many other people who are still free to write violent inducing bullshit on social media.

Nobody force you to listen to his podcast and like other people said, if western society wasn't already fucked with the family concept being at his weakest ever, young guys would ignore people like tate, not his fault if society is breaking down and young people have no people to look at.

 

[Blade2.0]

Because they are just words in the end, nobody force anyone to follow these people, for me it is like the internet bullying meme, like just turn off the pc broh.

We had politicians in italy who where happy if etna (an active volcano) would burn the entire south italy to the ground, and they are still a strong political party, that is fucking worse than anything tate ever said and we sicilians just ignore these people just fine.

I disagree that they are just words. Words can lead to very bad places and outcomes. I hate to go there, but the Holocaust started out as "only" words as well. "Only" words led to the January 6th insurrection. Words can and do cause tremendous harm and so things that are only words and can lead to detrimental outcomes should try to be curbed in some fashion.

 

[Kraz]

I never heard that rape thing before reading it on gaf, the vast majority of his content is just alpha male moron with some misogynistic stuff to attract other morons, not really that bad compared to many other people who are still free to write violent inducing bullshit on social media.

Nobody force you to listen to his podcast and like other people said, if western society wasn't already fucked with the family concept being at his weakest ever, young guys would ignore people like tate, not his fault if society is breaking down and young people have no people to look at.

Stopping the gap while addressing an educational issue involving children can be reasonable. It's not like all problems in society are solved. This issue may be like a medical dye that can be used to trace a core issue then provide children with the necessary education to recognize the awfulness of content.

Adults can't offload their responsibilities either and let children be exposed to anything. There are irresponsible people, pollyannas and whatnot that don't care or understand due to their limits. There's always going to be threats to respond to and things to learn about and adapt to education. Children are vulnerable.

 

[GymWolf]

I disagree that they are just words. Words can lead to very bad places and outcomes. I hate to go there, but the Holocaust started out as "only" words as well. "Only" words led to the January 6th insurrection. Words can and do cause tremendous harm and so things that are only words and can lead to detrimental outcomes should try to be curbed in some fashion.

You ban tate, you still have billions of bad stuff in social media, it seems like an impossible battle to win, especially when corporations are who decide what is okay to said and what not.

You end with a spectrum of ideas completely banned and an equal toxic spectrum being ok because reasons, not sure how this is gonna help people tbh.

 

[PaddyOCanager]

I disagree that they are just words. Words can lead to very bad places and outcomes. I hate to go there, but the Holocaust started out as "only" words as well. "Only" words led to the January 6th insurrection. Words can and do cause tremendous harm and so things that are only words and can lead to detrimental outcomes should try to be curbed in some fashion.

Fucking No. Words themselves are meaningless, they're only used to express ideas. Curbing speech does nothing to quell an idea, it only gives that idea legitimacy.

A person's reality is defined by their own perspective. You don't change someone by trying to destroy or delegitimize their reality. You have to offer them a new and better perspective, and they will in turn change their own reality. People have been using this tactic to de-radicalize individuals for years.

Without an open exchange of good and bad ideas, you don't offer someone a path to change. There will always be extreme people who'll never be convinced, but the goal is to keep average people from ending up in the extreme. "Bad words" can only be defeated by "better words", not by trying to silence them.

Also, your statements regarding the Holocaust and January 6th are idiotic. Distilling the causation of those events like that is objectively wrong.

 

[Blade2.0]

Fucking No. Words themselves are meaningless, they're only used to express ideas. Curbing speech does nothing to quell an idea, it only gives that idea legitimacy.

A person's reality is defined by their own perspective. You don't change someone by trying to destroy or delegitimize their reality. You have to offer them a new and better perspective, and they will in turn change their own reality. People have been using this tactic to de-radicalize individuals for years.

Without an open exchange of good and bad ideas, you don't offer someone a path to change. There will always be extreme people who'll never be convinced, but the goal is to keep average people from ending up in the extreme. "Bad words" can only be defeated by "better words", not by trying to silence them.

Also, your statements regarding the Holocaust and January 6th are idiotic. Distilling the causation of those events like that is objectively wrong.

how is it wrong? they started as ideas.

 

[DeepEnigma]

I'm not frightened because I live in the UK. We put people into prison for using hate speech on Twitter, or arrest old people for sharing an image of a pride flag to look like a swastika on twitter because it gave someone anxiety.

 

[Kraz]

You ban tate, you still have billions of bad stuff in social media, it seems like an impossible battle to win, especially when corporations are who decide what is okay to said and what not.

You end with a spectrum of ideas completely banned and an equal toxic spectrum being ok because reasons, not sure how this is gonna help people tbh.

While the corporations are the ones to enforce it's not a conspiracy of a few in those but the enacting of a consensus of Western ideals in the capitalist sphere where they operate. If the consensus went the other way these corporations would be the first to take advantage of it if to simply make them money. It's their fiduciary duty.

In this particular issue it does have indirect implications that make the peoples of countries which continue to repress women look primitive, but that's the difference between being an advancing society and not a stagnant one.

 

[PaddyOCanager]

how is it wrong? they started as ideas.

The Holocaust is one of the most studied events in human history. If you think bad ideas are the cause, I recommend doing some actual research.

Furthermore, your own argument is defeated by the fact the Nazi's were censored prior to their rise to power, and when they achieved power they subsequently weaponized censorship. Hitler was banned from speaking in several German states from 1925-1927. German hate speech laws were enforced against leading Nazi party members, and some served prison terms. Anti-Semetic newspaper editors were taken to court dozens of times.

You don't know what the fuck you're talking about.

 

[*Nightwing]

Not a great conflict resolution method society is teaching our youth here despite the harmful message.

The Holocaust is one of the most studied events in human history. If you think bad ideas are the cause, I recommend doing some actual research.

Furthermore, your own argument is defeated by the fact the Nazi's were censored prior to their rise to power, and when they achieved power they subsequently weaponized censorship. Hitler was banned from speaking in several German states from 1925-1927. German hate speech laws were enforced against leading Nazi party members, and some served prison terms. Anti-Semetic newspaper editors were taken to court dozens of times.

You don't know what the fuck you're talking about.

If we don’t learn from history we are doomed to repeat it

 

[IDKFA]

Obviously though this isn't going to change because the same people who say mayo monkey and kill all men are the same people who police these social media, San Francisco is full of them. What is your solution to that? It's usually these kind of hypocrites that want shit banned.

Also, if so misogyny why not transphobia? Transphobia obviously includes pronouns which should be imposed (like twitter does) and implying that you wouldn't want to have sex with a trans person (which is why the Supersexual subreddit was banned). And if so transphobia why not furryphobia? Can't make fun of those either. Calling someone a cuck? That's a slur aimed at making fun of someone's sexual fetish. Moron? That's a slur that was first used as a scientific term against special needs people (also been banned in certain subreddits btw). Let's not forget of non-binary people and the oppressive use of pronouns in other languages that use gendered vocabulary. When will the use of stuff like "Latinx" become mandatory? Who knows.

The slippery slope never fucking ends and we're seeing the proof of that in real time.

Transphobia is already a hate crime in the UK. Misogyny however isn't, but there is a big push to make it a hate crime.

And yeah, I can see this as a slippery slope. I was born in the 80s and I've seen how the world has changed, but I can't decide if it's for the good or not. In some instances I think it's great that people are punished for being racist ass holes. Give them the strictest punishment and maybe it'll send a message. However, it doesn't seem to be working and it only works one way. Nobody is being banned or punished for racist remarks against white people for example, or for misandry.

Things have changed so much in such a short space of time that I often wonder where we'll be in 10 years. I've currently seen people online try and defend pedophiles by insisting they're now called "maps" (minor attracted person) and how they have rights. I've even seen videos on Twitter of people trying to justify how it's normal to be attracted to kids. This shit terrifies me! In 10 years are we going to be seeing people advocating for MAP rights and bringing out a MAP pride flag soon? Will I be a bigot for being against pedos?

The line for what is right and wrong to say is shifting all the time. It's changing at such a pace that I sometimes don't know what to say/post in case I get into trouble, or get labeled a bigot.

Fuck. This thread has been an eye opener.

 

[West Texas CEO]

Andrew Tate's final message:

 

[dr_octagon]

Andrew Taunt is like the gym version of the guy named after the Roman salad.

After working his arms to exhaustion, he says 'Et tu Bicep?'. He never returned after rest day and then the internet burned down.

 

[Konnor]

Transphobia is already a hate crime in the UK. Misogyny however isn't, but there is a big push to make it a hate crime.

And yeah, I can see this as a slippery slope. I was born in the 80s and I've seen how the world has changed, but I can't decide if it's for the good or not. In some instances I think it's great that people are punished for being racist ass holes. Give them the strictest punishment and maybe it'll send a message. However, it doesn't seem to be working and it only works one way. Nobody is being banned or punished for racist remarks against white people for example, or for misandry.

Things have changed so much in such a short space of time that I often wonder where we'll be in 10 years. I've currently seen people online try and defend pedophiles by insisting they're now called "maps" (minor attracted person) and how they have rights. I've even seen videos on Twitter of people trying to justify how it's normal to be attracted to kids. This shit terrifies me! In 10 years are we going to be seeing people advocating for MAP rights and bringing out a MAP pride flag soon? Will I be a bigot for being against pedos?

The line for what is right and wrong to say is shifting all the time. It's changing at such a pace that I sometimes don't know what to say/post in case I get into trouble, or get labeled a bigot.

Fuck. This thread has been an eye opener.

This is honestly the tip of the iceberg, if you want to have a small taste of what tech censorship is really like behind the scenes and the terrible slippery slope we're on all you need to do is use one of these sites that undo reddit censorship.

For example, this is the r/games discussion on the mod that was censored because it was hiding pride flags from Spiderman.

Now let me show you what it really looked like: https://www.unddit.com/r/Games/comments/wqy28x/nexus_mods_deletes_antipride_mod_for_spiderman/

472 comments out of the 793 (59.5%) censored. Comments like:

From what i read, apparently it's not actually a "mod" but it just switches something over to the russian/arabian/chinese/whatever version which has it disabled by default. So people could probably do it themselves in some of the config files if it bothers them that much. Technically this "mod" is in the game at all times, just disabled.

But on the other hand... if a flag bothers you that much... get some help. Haven't played the game, but i doubt that there are pride flags everywhere.

or

I just don't understand. Who cares if there's a mod that replaces a flag?
Go for it, replace all the pride flags with American flags.
Or get a mod that changes all flags into pride flags.
Or get a mod that turns all flags into dick butt flags.
It all just sounds like the professionally offended making a big deal out of nothing.

These people won't even stop at pronouns, or no-no words or "dogwhistles" or even "offensive" opinions. They want complete control of the narrative and will succeed if regular people don't push against them

 

[Jsisto]

So thankful I didn't even know who this guy is until now. Good? Bad? Who the fuck knows what's the right stance to take anymore. At this point I think the healthiest thing is for all of us to just cheer on the slow rot eating away our society from all sides and enjoy the fireworks.

 

[Mithos]

"Or get a mod that changes all flags into pride flags."

This mod exists and were posted after the other mod was removed, AND its fully protected my moderators that locked down the comments, AND any mod that add lgbt flags switching now are monitored and authors and the site is straight up taunting the fact that theses mods are ok, but not the other.

 

[Horns]

This approach works. Look what happened to Milo. The dude needed a platform of hate in order to be relevant. Once he no longer has a platform his brand died off.

 

[PaddyOCanager]

This approach works. Look what happened to Milo. The dude needed a platform of hate in order to be relevant. Once he no longer has a platform his brand died off.

Are you serious? Milo's messaging was tame compared to some of the shit that's gaining traction online these days. And these new influencers are starting to build their own platforms, or just appear as guests on platforms they are banned.

Edit: And Milo didn't become irrelevant because he was deplatformed. He became irrelevant because he scammed people for hundreds of thousands of dollars, burnt every bridge he ever built, and was replaced by worse.

 

[Horatius]

i like how some people on neogaf can't see the cognitive dissonance required to not be ok with resetera style forum moderators making decisions about their video game forum, but being perfectly happy with people of the exact same ideological, progressive, authoritarian ilk being moderators for participation in civil and commercial society

you'd think people here of all places would put 2 and 2 together and notice where this road leads

 

[ManaByte]

This approach works. Look what happened to Milo. The dude needed a platform of hate in order to be relevant. Once he no longer has a platform his brand died off.

The gulags are coming.

 

[poppabk]

i like how some people on neogaf can't see the cognitive dissonance required to not be ok with resetera style forum moderators making decisions about their video game forum, but being perfectly happy with people of the exact same ideological, progressive, authoritarian ilk being moderators for participation in civil and commercial society

you'd think people here of all places would put 2 and 2 together and notice where this road leads

People still get banned here. They had to ban political talk and nuked the entire politics forum because people were being assholes.

 

[DeepEnigma]

The gulags are coming.

CNN is already getting rid of their useful idiots, and will be replacing them with new ones.

 

[Kraz]

The gulags are coming.

Those were suppose to be for homeless people. They never get any breaks.

 

[chromhound]

 

[EviLore]

Andrew Tate's final message:

I'd rather watch the full, unabridged New Year's Eve celebration hosted by Ninja with my balls in a hydraulic vise.

 

[DeepEnigma]

I'd rather watch the full, unabridged New Year's Eve celebration hosted by Ninja with my balls in a hydraulic vise.

No kinks!

 

[LegendOfKage]

That reminds me, just because I don't like the idea of him being simultaneously banned from all social media for being a douchebag, I hope no one thinks I'm defending him because I like what he says, because I do not.

From the sound of it, he seems like a real life version of the Tom Cruise character from the movie Magnolia. If you haven't seen it, that's not a compliment.

 

[Relique]

You actually make a good point. Now I've thought about it, there are lots of double standards. I see racist shit on social media against white people all the time (not so long ago Mayo Monkey was trending on Twitter), but for some reason racism against white people is okay?

However, there needs to be limit on what somebody can and cannot say on a social media platform. We can agree that racism should be banned right, and anybody who is racist on social media should lose their right to use the platform? If so, then why not misogyny as well?

I actually liked Elon's idea of turning twitter in an open "town square." I am all for freedom of speech.

Transphobia is already a hate crime in the UK. Misogyny however isn't, but there is a big push to make it a hate crime.

And yeah, I can see this as a slippery slope. I was born in the 80s and I've seen how the world has changed, but I can't decide if it's for the good or not. In some instances I think it's great that people are punished for being racist ass holes. Give them the strictest punishment and maybe it'll send a message. However, it doesn't seem to be working and it only works one way. Nobody is being banned or punished for racist remarks against white people for example, or for misandry.

Things have changed so much in such a short space of time that I often wonder where we'll be in 10 years. I've currently seen people online try and defend pedophiles by insisting they're now called "maps" (minor attracted person) and how they have rights. I've even seen videos on Twitter of people trying to justify how it's normal to be attracted to kids. This shit terrifies me! In 10 years are we going to be seeing people advocating for MAP rights and bringing out a MAP pride flag soon? Will I be a bigot for being against pedos?

The line for what is right and wrong to say is shifting all the time. It's changing at such a pace that I sometimes don't know what to say/post in case I get into trouble, or get labeled a bigot.

Fuck. This thread has been an eye opener.

You pretty much came to the same conclusions as I have. With the way things have been going, sooner or later you will likely end up on the wrong side of all of this. Something you disagree with will become "protected", and you will not be able to say a word in opposition of it. I'm a very accepting and tolerant person, but in the last few years I've seen some shit in the streets that I consider very indecent. I can't and won't say a thing about it because it's not worth it. We already let things get too far.

 

[West Texas CEO]

I'd rather watch the full, unabridged New Year's Eve celebration hosted by Ninja with my balls in a hydraulic vise.

I understand where you're coming from, but it appears Andrew Tate's over-the-top persona (Top G) has started to break down;



It looks like he's ditched the sunglasses, too.

 

[playsaves3]

Isn't this the cunt who said women should be held accountable for being raped?

Getting banned is child's play, he should have his dick chopped off and shoved down his throat.

TBf men are held accountable when this happens to them so…

 

[Mohonky]

Didn't think this forum would care about this guy, but I agree with the following take that banning him from anything is putting a band-aid over an infected wound and will pretty much make this a martyr situation:

Old mate nailed it; symptom, not cause.

It's why I hate so much media. All the blame games, all the exclusionary comments and shunning but somehow, they think these issues will go away and when someone does speak up it immediately gets shut down by the latest buzz word for 'I don't like thing' label.

 

[WhatDidHeSay?]

Isn't this the cunt who said women should be held accountable for being raped?

Getting banned is child's play, he should have his dick chopped off and shoved down his throat.

What, again?!!

 

[Star-Lord]

What, again?!!

I'm confused. What do you mean again?