Terrorists at Utah State force speaker to cancel

[Senethro]

Not to my taste, just sort of glazed over it, and rambling semi-stream of consciousness is usually a guilty pleasure of mine.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

It may be worthwhile to point out (for the benefits of those who may not know) that the "Montreal Attack" referred to in the letter is the 1989 Polytechnique shooting, in which the killer let men leave the room because he explicitly wanted to kill only women ; and he left documents being stating that he was doing so because women's presence in men-jobs prevented him from getting a job.

THAT is the specific attack the people behind this threat chose to compare it to. Go ahead and tell me it's not misogyny.

What a shame it took 199 posts to make this point. No university should ever brush aside such threats of violence.

 

[Evie]

Sorry. Took me a while to remember that while the reference was obvious to me it may not be so much for non-Quebecer let alone non-Canadians.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

It was obvious to me, too. But the thread was so long, I just kept reading in hopes that someone would have mentioned this.

 

[BvBPL]

Hes referring to your post here:

Thanks.

 

[Agent327]

It may be worthwhile to point out (for the benefits of those who may not know) that the "Montreal Attack" referred to in the letter is the 1989 Polytechnique shooting, in which the killer let men leave the room because he explicitly wanted to kill only women ; and he left documents being stating that he was doing so because women's presence in men-jobs prevented him from getting a job.

THAT is the specific attack the people behind this threat chose to compare it to. Go ahead and tell me it's not misogyny.

Let's see. A stupid man cannot get a job and thinks this is because women. So he decides to kill some women at a specific location. I think we can safely say this is a classic case of stupidity - with a gun. Now what are the chances of that? No, that's not misogyny. That's stupidity beyond belief. And because stupid the man cannot see the actual cause of him not getting a job: his own stupidity. But there's another reason why this isn't misogyny: the man thinks killing some women at a specific location will solve a 'problem' that is essentially political in nature: women in 'men-jobs'. (The real problem of course is: why is a man this stupid allowed to carry? "Oh, he appeared perfectly normal when applying for a permit." So do most criminals until they actually commit a crime.)

 

[Evie]

I'm a bit flabergasted what you think misogyny is, if that's not misogyny in your world.

Of course it's stupidity, but that's what misogyny, like other gender-, race- and orientation- based hatred and hostility, is - a particularly vile manifestation of stupidity and self-serving thinking.

Your entire post sound like an attempt at apologism for something, (misogyny? How can one be an apologist for misogyny?), and I'm not quite sure what.

 

[Antilogic]

Dude.

Like, dude.

That's explicitly misogyny.

I don't get why you are hung up on the location dependence. It's the motive.

 

[useless]

The guy literally shot women dead because he hated women.

How is that not misogyny?

 

[Evie]

More specifically, he specifically singled out women to shoot at. Told the men to leave the room at gunpoint, kept the women in, shot them all.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

Let's see. A stupid man cannot get a job and thinks this is because women. So he decides to kill some women at a specific location. I think we can safely say this is a classic case of stupidity - with a gun. Now what are the chances of that? No, that's not misogyny. That's stupidity beyond belief. And because stupid the man cannot see the actual cause of him not getting a job: his own stupidity. But there's another reason why this isn't misogyny: the man thinks killing some women at a specific location will solve a 'problem' that is essentially political in nature: women in 'men-jobs'. (The real problem of course is: why is a man this stupid allowed to carry? "Oh, he appeared perfectly normal when applying for a permit." So do most criminals until they actually commit a crime.)

There is no doubt whatsoever that it's misogyny.

École Polytechnique massacre

 

[Hygro]

Let's see. A stupid man cannot get a job and thinks this is because women. So he decides to kill some women at a specific location. I think we can safely say this is a classic case of stupidity - with a gun. Now what are the chances of that? No, that's not misogyny. That's stupidity beyond belief. And because stupid the man cannot see the actual cause of him not getting a job: his own stupidity. But there's another reason why this isn't misogyny: the man thinks killing some women at a specific location will solve a 'problem' that is essentially political in nature: women in 'men-jobs'. (The real problem of course is: why is a man this stupid allowed to carry? "Oh, he appeared perfectly normal when applying for a permit." So do most criminals until they actually commit a crime.)

Well played if a bit too meta.





Please tell me this was a case of trolling misogyny apologists

 

[Traitorfish]

Guys, was Hitler really an anti-Semite, or was he just stupid? I am merely opening the floor for discussion!

 

[Antilogic]

Well played if a bit too meta.

Please tell me this was a case of trolling misogyny apologists

On a fresh reading the next day, I am open to considering this a case of Poe's Law.

Guys, was Hitler really an anti-Semite, or was he just stupid? I am merely opening the floor for discussion!

Hey, those jews died in discrete, particular locations that stupidly happened to contain poisonous gas. Probably not anti-Semitic.

 

[brennan]

what ideology threatens theirs, you seem to have reversed MRA thinking

What ideology is that and why do you think feminists see their goals clashing?

MRAs and many others find certain basic principles of feminist thought to be lacking in explanatory value, such as the notion of the patriarchy, or of 'rape culture'. Feminists find that simple objection extremely threatening (since there is a strong undercurrent in feminism that that anyone who appears to defend what they see as the Patriarchy, even by questioning the idea itself, is the enemy), which is why they try to use their vastly superior media presence to demonise the MRM.

I'll agree with that if you'll agree that, regardless of whatever good intentions started it, the majority of GamerGate has descended into misogyny. Because it has.

No it hasn't and I think it's pretty poor form to suggest that your agreement upon a matter of fact should involve some sort of silly give-and-take.

It does look like you're saying that saying stupid and offensive things and allegedly resorting to underhanded image management tactics are the cause of death threats.

If I say 'X causes Y'and someone chooses to infer from this that I personally think 'X justifies Y' then... that's really not my problem.

 

[JollyRoger]

Link to video.

 

[Kyriakos]

How nice that a base web theorist (Sarkeesian) gets to have her own niche now.

I suppose it is less sinister than what happened to that Boxxy girl, so maybe it would be progress, if it wasn't so obviously another bubble.

 

[Agent327]

The guy literally shot women dead because he hated women.

How is that not misogyny?

Is being a mysogynist supposed to be an apology for killing people?

Guys, was Hitler really an anti-Semite, or was he just stupid? I am merely opening the floor for discussion!

Is an apple a pear? I'm open for discussion on the subject.

On a fresh reading the next day, I am open to considering this a case of Poe's Law.

More like Godwin's law, sadly.

Hey, those jews died in discrete, particular locations that stupidly happened to contain poisonous gas. Probably not anti-Semitic.

Seeing as antisemitic measures were in place since day 1 of the Third Reich, I feel confident saying you seem to be missing a point or two.

Well played if a bit too meta.

Thanks. Nice to see someone getting the point.

 

[Bugfatty300]

The problem with the laws is that the campus cannot do anything at all to prevent people from being in their concealed weapons in light of a public safety threat. The adage that if you outlaw guns then only criminals would have guns is inapplicable because the law prevents any safety measures at all.

Carrying a concealed weapon outside of private property is a crime in Utah as far as I know. That state has a licensing system for qualifying individuals which is what this law is referring to. You seem to speak as if this college campus is a Somali free-for all?

A checkpoint that barred people from bringing in their weapons because of a public safety threat would have been a reasonable means to prevent the threat.

I highly doubt that the college's lack of interest in providing a TSA security screening force for Sarkeesian has anything to do with alleged legal limitations. I suspect that the college simply didn't want to fly in metal detectors, wands, or have rubber glove-clad officers groping people's genitals.

 

[JollyRoger]

I suspect that the college simply didn't want to fly in metal detectors, wands, or have rubber glove-clad officers groping people's genitals.

The private sector does that better for about $300 per hour in my neck of the woods.