There’s a difference between protest and harassment. I strongly believe the right to express all opinions–even stupid, bigoted ones–should be protected, but that doesn’t mean you get to harass other people and try to intimidate them into submission.
I’d rather they were punished and rehabilitated. Both are necessary.
and it’s the government model that is to blame?
Yes, because it leaves itself so prone to authoritarian takeover. As I’ve said before, this is a feature of communism, not a bug. A single, one-party “transitional” government is intended. You might as well just put up a sign that says “Dictator Wanted.” This is why there isn’t a single instance of communism on a nation-state scale that hasn’t quickly devolved into an authoritarian state. It’s not hard to understand this. Your government model has to account for the reality that people are going to disagree on things and faction out. Your model has to be able to manage that process. Communism insists everyone adhere to the same ideology, and those that don’t just get “re-educated.” It’s a horrible ideology, a horrible government model; naïve utopian fantasy at best, cynical authoritarian scheme at worst.
Lemmy overall is just different shades of red. Picking your instance just allows you to select pink vs. crimson.
Don’t use California as a metric for American homelessness. California has made itself a veritable Mecca for homeless people by passing laws that allow them to set up camp virtually anywhere. Those laws, combined with its naturally temperate climate have resulted in 30% of America’s homeless population living in California. No other state in the U.S. has such a hard-on for homeless people and we have much more sensible laws that reflect that.
It wouldn’t surprise me in the slightest if Lemmy is rife with these trolls. And I’m not just talking about the tankies.
I will never understand people who advocate for communism as opposed to democratic socialism. Every major country that has ever gone down the communist road has ended up a dictatorship. That’s not a bug of communism, it’s a feature. I get the criticism of capitalism, I really do, but we can enact socialist laws that rein in the excesses and extremes of capitalism without sacrificing our democracies for one-party governments.
“From the river to the sea” is a phrase used by Hamas and other anti-Israel groups in the region to talk about wiping Israel out. I don’t think Tlaib was actually calling for the destruction of Israel, but her choice of phrase was absolutely moronic, and I don’t believe she ever apologized for it. That’s what I meant about her comments not being as bad as these, but still bad.
Lemmings are rightly furious about these comments, but I don’t recall you all being upset about Tlaib’s tone-deaf implication that Israel should be wiped from the map.
I’m not pretending Tlaib’s comments are as bad as these, because they’re not, but I am absolutely for censuring Tlaib over them. They were totally out of line, no matter what she meant.
If someone hates me because of something I have in common with literally every human on the planet it doesn’t feel nearly as personal as if they hate me because I’m different from them in ways that I can’t control.
Misanthropes generally don’t hate individual people, and can even sometimes enjoy socializing with others. It’s not even all that accurate to say misanthropes hate humanity; they’re actually more profoundly disappointed in it. This is why they don’t engage in mass shootings or other forms of violence, and instead tend to just isolate themselves.
Kill every insect within 10 yards of me with a thought.
And thus, a cross-franchise meme was born…
For non-trekkers’ context: Andorian Hooker.
To be fair, in space we would explode.
It is not surprising that a community that associates and labels itself with a negative aspect of themselves would devolve into an irrational and hateful space.
So, a community about depression or addiction is doomed to devolve into irrational hatred? I don’t think I follow your logic here.
“Involuntary” means against one’s will, which in this context implies an entitlement to sex.
??? I definitely don’t see how “involuntary” implies entitlement. It just means you want it, but for one reason or another haven’t been able to get it. Entitlement reflects the attitude that you deserve it, which I don’t think the term implies.
As for your characterization of the group, when I visited the subreddit years ago, I saw posts from men complaining about overwhelming anxiety stopping them from approaching women they were attracted to, feelings of low self-esteem or body/facial image issues, and even disabled men trying to contend with how their disabilities limited their options. You’re probably right about some of them, but definitely not all of them.
It makes no sense now to act like it still has the old meaning
I mean, yes, there’s no sense in refusing to acknowledge the present association, but the meanings of words can change, and it isn’t impossible for the term ‘incel’ to return to it’s former meaning if enough people are made aware of its history.
Interesting. Thanks for the history lesson. I have a hard time believing that all of even just most of the men that initially joined her group had “concerning views” if that’s meant to refer to the misogyny we see in those most associated with the term today, but I do know that plenty of the posters I saw on the subreddit years ago when I visited were not of that ilk.
I’m not sure I agree with you though about how the term should be used. I see your point, but I think if the term was originally coined to represent people who were genuinely suffering from external circumstances that put them in the position they’re in, it should remain for them and not those who sabotage themselves via their own toxic behavior. Even if this Alana you mentioned feels otherwise, I still stand by that. People who feel entitled to sex from the people they’re attracted to are not celibate involuntarily in the same way that people who aren’t that way are. One group deserves empathy and compassion; the other deserves scorn and derision. I don’t think it’s productive or fair to the former group to use the same term for both.
That would certainly be interesting if that’s actually the case! I visited the subreddit a long time ago out of curiosity and all the posts I saw were straight men complaining about not being able to get a girlfriend, so I dunno, but maybe. There’s certainly no reason the term can’t be used for someone regardless of gender or sexual orientation.
I heard about it early on and actually went to visit the sub out of curiosity when it was still somewhat innocent. There were definitely misogynistic posts there already, but plenty of innocent ones as well that didn’t blame women for the outcome. I remember later on there was even a post made by one of the mods about how he was retiring from the sub, because it had been taken over by the misogynists and no longer served the purpose it was intended to. I would bet you have met men that qualify under the original definition, but who don’t identify with the label now because of what it’s come to be associated with.
I actually disagree that the cruelty is intentional. I think conservatives have proven pretty clearly at this point that they devote a considerable amount of mental effort to believing their views are correct, no matter what the data show. I think they genuinely think transsexuality is a farce, just like they believe homosexuality is a mental illness, and that they’re protecting children from bad influences by preventing them from transitioning. The problem is willful ignorance and lack of appreciation for critical thinking.