Support NeoGAF

[Mael]

So he has to prove that he feels different today than 20 years ago. Wow, this is crazy on so many levels.

His views of men/women relationship seens the same he did 20 years ago.
He didn't outright say that lately but we've got no indication that he ever thought that was a problem, why should we assume he thinks any differently when everything points to him having the same opinion.
In all the other cases he's an ignorant oaf who will cling to his shitty views, by looking at the pattern we have no reason to believe he thinks otherwise.
If you have anything but weak deflections, please provide them.

 

[dakun]

Isn't that part of what we do here on GAF? Do we not try to change people's positions on different matters for the betterment of society?

lol what? i must've been watching the wrong forum.

 

[ColdPizza]

Did you watch the episode with Milo in it at all? Maher never tried to change Milo's opinion on anything, and if you think he's actually going to put any effort into it, you're deluding yourself.

I did, and no, I guess he didn't. Maybe he will on the next appearance. I'm not for censoring at all, if that's what the main gripe in this thread is.

 

[ShironRedshift]

That's not moving goalposts, that's digging deeper into the discussion. My point was going to be, if you don't like it, simply change the channel instead of trying to silence him.

Problem with that is a.) that's not how ratings work. It only matter if you have a Nielsen box, which most people don't and b.) whether I myself actively watch or not doesn't change the fact that he's propping up people like Coulter and Conway (and desiring to do the same with Milo) regardless. My watching him or not has no bearing on that and his decision to actively work to give such individuals more influence and he certainly deserves criticism for that regardless.

 

[EdibleKnife]

So he has to prove that he feels different today than 20 years ago. Wow, this is crazy on so many levels.

Yes. That's called growth.

 

[ColdPizza]

lol what? i must've been watching the wrong forum.

Then what's the point of discussing anything on this forum other than to just shout someone down?

 

[RumbleHumble]

So he has to prove that he feels different today than 20 years ago. Wow, this is crazy on so many levels.

When someone says they believe in something on the onset, it is fair to assume they still hold that belief until they state otherwise and such statement appears trustworthy enough to be understood as more credible as belief than the prior statement. It's basic impeachment.

 

[Lord Frieza]

I did, and no, I guess he didn't. Maybe he will on the next appearance. I'm not for censoring at all, if that's what the main gripe in this thread is.

Censoring lol

 

[ShironRedshift]

I did, and no, I guess he didn't. Maybe he will on the next appearance. I'm not for censoring at all, if that's what the main gripe in this thread is.

Censorship =/= deliberately making the decision to prop-up terrible people and give them more influence. Two completely different things.

 

[ColdPizza]

Problem with that is a.) that's not how ratings work. It only matter if you have a Nielsen box, which most people don't and b.) whether I myself actively watch or not doesn't change the fact that he's propping up people like Coulter and Conway (and desiring to do the same with Milo) regardless. My watching him or not has no bearing on that and his decision to actively work to give such individuals more influence and he certainly deserves criticism for that regardless.

Yes, but if enough like-minded people like you opt to pull your support for HBO such that it affects their bottom line then they will probably do something.

 

[Trokil]

His views of men/women relationship seens the same he did 20 years ago.
He didn't outright say that lately but we've got no indication that he ever thought that was a problem, why should we assume he thinks any differently when everything points to him having the same opinion.
In all the other cases he's an ignorant oaf who will cling to his shitty views, by looking at the pattern we have no reason to believe he thinks otherwise.
If you have anything but weak deflections, please provide them.

So you have no prove, but instead of saying you have no prove you just assume something because it fits your narrative. You have no idea of what he is thinking now, neither do I, but at least I admit that, but I am also not on crusade against him.

 

[Enzom21]

I did, and no, I guess he didn't. Maybe he will on the next appearance. I'm not for censoring at all, if that's what the main gripe in this thread is.

Censoring? Not having that piece of shit on the show doesn't mean he is being censored. No one is owed a platform.

 

[Deepwater]

AFAIK Maher's point wasn't only terrorism, it was the treatment of women, gays, general attitudes etc. all backed up by polls.

I don't watch him much if not at all, but this is what I gathered from that time he had Sam Harris and Ben Affleck on where Affleck ended up looking like a clueless tool, shouting racism and islamophobia at them both.

It's wrong to generalise and speak of Muslims as an entity, but I think Islam, same as any other religion, should be subjected to critique.

But only if it's well researched and backed up by facts, that I agree with you.

I've said this on here before, but it's impossible to separate practitioners from a religion. Islam (or any religion) does not exist outside the people who practice it. The critiques people have of it are carried out by people. When you have a critique of Islam, you have a critique for Muslims, just like when you have a critique for Christianity, you have a critique for Christians.

What you are attempting to do is divorce the (alleged) tangible effects of ideology from practitioners. Can you imagine having a critique for Alt-Right or Neo-Nazism (and I'm by no means comparing Islam to either of them) but then turning around to say "but I'm not speaking generally of alt righters or neo nazis as a whole"

When you speak on Islam, in however broad of terms as you decide to, you're speaking on Muslims.

 

[Armaros]

So he has to prove that he feels different today than 20 years ago. Wow, this is crazy on so many levels.

So you don't believe that a Holocaust denier has to prove they dont believe that stuff 20 years later in order to stop being called one?

How about a KKK-loving racist?

How about believing in conspiracy theories?

 

[dakun]

Then what's the point of discussing anything on this forum other than to just shout someone down?

i'm not saying that isn't the ideal. But GAF hasn't been anything but shouting someone down people and calling names for the last year or so.

 

[ColdPizza]

Censorship =/= deliberately making the decision to prop-up terrible people and give them more influence. Two completely different things.

I meant censoring as in people not wanting Maher to host Milo again at all. The same with people shitting on Fallon for hosting Trump.

 

[CopperPuppy]

So he has to prove that he feels different today than 20 years ago. Wow, this is crazy on so many levels.

LOL. What the fuck are you on about? What's "crazy on so many levels" is the heinous belief he espoused about older women with young boys. Fucking disgusting. You best believe if I knew someone who talked some shit like that in '97 I wouldn't press the reset button just because it's 2017. Fuck outta here.

 

[Tarydax]

I did, and no, I guess he didn't. Maybe he will on the next appearance. I'm not for censoring at all, if that's what the main gripe in this thread is.

Huh?

No one's trying to censor Maher. People are just pointing out that the guy's worse than useless and that Real Time would be a better show without him. There's no attempted censorship going on here.

I meant censoring as in people not wanting Maher to host Milo again at all. The same with people shitting on Fallon for hosting Trump.

That isn't censorship.

 

[Wolfgunblood Garopa]

What's the point of being a commentator if you don't have your own set of values or sense of what is right and wrong? Or your own judgment of character, or even judgement overall? If it's just a matter of throwing his hands up and saying 'maybe this or maybe that', then why bother.

 

[Armaros]

I meant censoring as in people not wanting Maher to host Milo again at all. The same with people shitting on Fallon for hosting Trump.

So criticism = censorship?

 

[Ponn]

He's free to give anyone he wants a spot on his platform. When he keeps digging himself a hole with shitty viewpoints, saying racist shit and supporting shitty people he shouldn't be surprised his platform disappears. You're not entitled to certain platforms and too many arrogant people forget that.

 

[Trokil]

Yes. That's called growth.

When someone says they believe in something on the onset, it is fair to assume they still hold that belief until they state otherwise and such statement appears trustworthy enough to be understood as more credible as belief than the prior statement. It's basic impeachment.

So I can assume everything you are saying today is still valid for the next 20 years unless for everything you ever said you will tell me if you have changed your view. Else I can rightfully assume it i still the same, because something you once said is valid forever.

 

[ColdPizza]

Censoring? Not having that piece of shit on the show doesn't mean he is being censored. No one is owed a platform.

Certainly not, I definitely worded my post wrong, but if Maher wants to have him on he will. He doesn't seem like the type to bend to criticism.

 

[Mael]

So you have no prove, but instead of saying you have no prove you just assume something because it fits your narrative. You have no idea of what he is thinking now, neither do I, but at least I admit that, but I am also not on crusade against him.

We have proof of him holding that position before.
He may have changed but until he claims he does we will hold him to his prior position.
He's not Trump where you can't even claim he hold a position for longer than I can hold an open flame.
It meshes well with his general view of women which are not exactly stellar either (according to people who worked with him).
And you're not on a crusade against him, you're on a crusade FOR him.

 

[HStallion]

Well at least Bill Maher is making it abundantly clear that he's not someone whose views or opinions I should ever care about except perhaps to deride and laugh at. That and I don't think I'll give anything he works on a view. Dude thinks he is clever and he is anything but, he's fucking transparent.

 

[excelsiorlef]

I would rather someone make an attempt to change or soften Milo's position such that Milo's followers have a chance at changing, too. It's certainly better to me than having his group of followers continuing to harbor the same positions.

Isn't that part of what we do here on GAF? Do we not try to change people's positions on different matters for the betterment of society?

Do you know who Milo is?

Maher doesn't.

Did you see Milo's appearance?

Maher just nodded at his transphobic nonsense and found common ground with him and praised him

 

[woolley]

I did, and no, I guess he didn't. Maybe he will on the next appearance. I'm not for censoring at all, if that's what the main gripe in this thread is.

That's not what censoring is. He is allowed to keep spewing the shit that comes out if his mouth, it doesn't mean you have to give him a blow horn while he does it.

 

[EdibleKnife]

So you have no prove, but instead of saying you have no prove you just assume something because it fits your narrative. You have no idea of what he is thinking now, neither do I, but at least I admit that, but I am also not on crusade against him.

You're assuming he changed because it fits yours. If he was willing to say out loud "I believe X" on his popular show at one point but isn't willing to say "I no longer believe X" why should I believe he's changed? Just because the world has changed? The world changes all the time and people still hold on to backwards, ancient and harmful views today that were in vogue centuries ago.

 

[firehawk12]

Fuck Bill Maher.

 

[Deepwater]

What's the point of being a commentator if you don't have your own set of values or sense of what is right and wrong? Or your own judgment of character, or even judgement overall? If it's just a matter of throwing his hands up and saying 'maybe this or maybe that', then why bother.

People like straddling the fence in an attempt to feel superior to others who have already decided which side they stand on.

 

[Kurdel]

Censoring lol

Self censoring, if anything.

If Maher fell in line with the mainstream ideology, he would be praised for how much he dunks on conservatives.

But that would require him to keep certain beliefs to himself.

He looks like an idiot when he talks about these topics, but I am glad he is out there ruffling feathers and (rightfully) getting taken down for his kooky beliefs.

 

[Blader]

I meant censoring as in people not wanting Maher to host Milo again at all. The same with people shitting on Fallon for hosting Trump.

You can't retroactively censor someone. Nobody went back in time and censored Fallon from having Trump on his show. He had Trump on the show, looked like a fool for doing so, and has been deservedly shit on for it. That's not censorship. That's just criticism.

 

[Crossing Eden]

I did, and no, I guess he didn't. Maybe he will on the next appearance. I'm not for censoring at all, if that's what the main gripe in this thread is.

Oh my fucking god.....not living harassment, transphobia, xenophobia, misogyny, racism, and anything you can think of a platform isn't censorship. And no Bill Maher won't, because Bill Maher is an idiot.

 

[Fudgepuppy]

Maher is like the typical example of someone stupid, sounding smart.

 

[Martinski43]

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/daily-ratings/friday-cable-ratings-june-2-2017/

Still highest on paid PREMIUM cable packages by a wide margin.

Making good money for HBO. The N word thing is, by far, not the most inflammatory thing he's ever said or will say, and honestly, it's really more due to the nature of television SAP that he had to apologize, opposed to how he really feels.

But yeah, as with most things, the answer is

Ancient Aliens has THAT many viewers?? Now that is shocking.

 

[RumbleHumble]

So I can assume everything you are saying today is still valid for the next 20 years unless for everything you ever said you will tell me if you have changed your view. Else I can rightfully assume it i still the same, because something you once said is valid forever.

Given that the only evidence to go on are those statements, then the statements are the only thing we have to determine belief. When Maher said something 20 years ago and hasn't said anything to contradict that 20 year old statement, it is safe to assume that he still believes the 20 year old statement. The statement being 20 years old doesn't change its validity as a reflection of his beliefs. It is his onus to show that he no longer holds that belief if he wants us to think he doesn't.

 

[Trokil]

So you don't believe that a Holocaust denier has to prove they dont believe that stuff 20 years later in order to stop being called one?

How about a KKK-loving racist?

How about believing in conspiracy theories?

How about people making false equivalency, do they ever change. Will they not try to make some argument up, to prove something.

It is funny that the left has now adapted right wing tactics so successfully. When they called people traitors, because they burned a flag 20 or 30 years ago. It is crazy how similar both sides have become.

 

[cromofo]

I've said this on here before, but it's impossible to separate practitioners from a religion. Islam (or any religion) does not exist outside the people who practice it. The critiques people have of it are carried out by people. When you have a critique of Islam, you have a critique for Muslims, just like when you have a critique for Christianity, you have a critique for Christians.

What you are attempting to do is divorce the (alleged) tangible effects of ideology from practitioners. Can you imagine having a critique for Alt-Right or Neo-Nazism (and I'm by no means comparing Islam to either of them) but then turning around to say "but I'm not speaking generally of alt righters or neo nazis as a whole"

When you speak on Islam, in however broad of terms as you decide to, you're speaking on Muslims.

I can see your point and I mostly agree.

Still, if critiquing Islam in the end means critiquing Muslims, I have no problem with it as long it's constructive and truthful. If bad things are happening, bad things are happening. We can't just stop and turn our heads away.

 

[ColdPizza]

Do you know who Milo is?

Maher doesn't.

Did you see Milo's appearance?

Maher just nodded at his transphobic nonsense and found common ground with him and praised him

Yes, I know how he is, and yes, I saw the appearance. And yes, he hand-waved Milo's appearance and didn't challenge him like people thought he was going to.

Still, I don't have any issue with having him reappear on his show. It's his choice. Hopefully he'll do something more meaningful next time.

 

[Shake Appeal]

Maher is garbage. Stop paying attention to him.

 

[ShironRedshift]

We have proof of him holding that position before.
He may have changed but until he claims he does we will hold him to his prior position.
He's not Trump where you can't even claim he hold a position for longer than I can hold an open flame.
It meshes well with his general view of women which are not exactly stellar either.
And you're not on a crusade against him, you're on a crusade FOR him.

I mean... Just reading shit like that reminds me of just how raw of a deal people like Hillary Clinton got. She went out of her way to make it clear that stuff like the Crime Bill and the Iraq War vote no longer represent her views at all in any way, but despite her repeatedly apologizing and making it clear she regrets both thing, people just disregarded that entirely and insisted that she was nothing but a war-hawk liar who's only just now trying to pander to blacks.

But Bill Maher doesn't ever apologize or anything for those statements or gives any indication whatsoever that his views have in fact changed, but we're supposed to give him the benefit of the doubt anyway that he his views have changed, based on nothing? Must be nice...

 

[Enzom21]

Certainly not, I definitely worded my post wrong, but if Maher wants to have him on he will. He doesn't seem like the type to bend to criticism.

He just did rant about how people should stop apologizing and then he apologized for making a nigger joke.

If that criticism threatens his show he most certainly will bend to criticism.
Milo should not have a platform and people should criticize Maher for giving him one.

 

[Armaros]

How about people making false equivalency, do they ever change. Will they not try to make some argument up, to prove something.

It is funny that the left has now adapted right wing tactics so successfully. When they called people traitors, because they burned a flag 20 or 30 years ago. It is crazy how similar both sides have become.

So you dont have any real response?
And whats false equivalent about the examples? they are all beliefs or ideas people can hold.

And right on queue, the classic BOTH SIDES argument comes out, when you have literally done nothing to defense your argument for why we should give Maher the benifit of the doubt regarding his beliefs that we have no evidence of him changing.

 

[Zvonimir Boban]

if he thinks there's no such thing as moderate then he should think twice about the guests he has on his show. Mos Def is Muslim, I remember him being on the show once; is he automatically an extremist just because there is no such thing as moderate?

also just out of curiosity what's the origin of your avatar, where is it from? i've seen people on my facebook using that too

https://www.bostonglobe.com/arts/20...ple-posters/4f3Fp8gRgDXCd5Xtreq2QN/story.html

As far as those Sharia Law surveys go, are you really surprised that Muslims living in countries with a large Muslim majority responded positively to the idea of Sharia law? Don't confuse that with the idea that Muslims all over the world are a hivemind that wants to overthrow the legal systems in Western Europe and the USA.

Hell, look at the figures in more western countries with Muslim majorities like Bosnia and Turkey, or Lebanon with a better standard of education than most of the other places surveyed. It's almost like socio-economic factors play a massive part in people's attitudes, rather than it being a binary "Are you a Muslim?" issue.

Of course that's too complicated for a spiteful dipshit like Maher, just like the idea that smoking weed and inviting Snoop and Mos Def on your show doesn't make him black enough to say nigger.

 

[Blader]

Yes, I know how he is, and yes, I saw the appearance. And yes, he hand-waved Milo's appearance and didn't challenge him like people thought he was going to.

Still, I don't have any issue with having him reappear on his show. It's his choice. Hopefully he'll do something more meaningful next time.

You must be a libertarian.

 

[Mael]

How about people making false equivalency, do they ever change. Will they not try to make some argument up, to prove something.

It is funny that the left has now adapted right wing tactics so successfully. When they called people traitors, because they burned a flag 20 or 30 years ago. It is crazy how similar both sides have become.

Because being on record condoning pedophilia is similar to burning a flag...

 

[L Thammy]

A: "shitpost"
B: "that's dumb, stop that"
A: "censorship"

 

[Astral Dog]

Bill at this point just wants to see everybody fucked up

 

[BrutishMrFish]

Still, I don't have any issue with having him reappear on his show. It's his choice. Hopefully he'll do something more meaningful next time.

That's no excuse. Everyone makes decisions, and plenty of people make terrible choices that get called out. That's all that's happening here.

 

[Sianos]

i'm not saying that isn't the ideal. But GAF hasn't been anything but shouting someone down people and calling names for the last year or so.

Turns out that The Revolution Against Political Correctness had some unforeseen consequences.

Who would have ever seen it coming that the left would ever respond back with inflammatory rhetoric of their own after the right took the bold move of declaring that the very concept of "taking offense" was invalid and relentlessly misinterpreted and mocked safe spaces from harassment as being for "snowflakes".

I guess "maybe they should try being less sensitive" was a principle to be only selectively applied to minorities. The right should have made that more explicit if they didn't want to be held to their own standards.

Thankfully, NeoGAF has a dedicated moderation team that enables nuanced discussions. Only issue is that the pesky TOS invalidates quite a lot of the social views in resurgence among the right wing.