Love to see some lib on chud violence.
'her constant hand-wringing about how activists might possibly upset terfs' lol i watched the video and its entirely about how terfs should get fucked, regardless if the activists are 'upsetting', and also how the media turns homophobes and terfs into victims by elevating/distorting/framing said 'upsettings'
i see vaush fans are just lying now
yeah and there's a part right in the end where hillary clinton is in the hall of fame of women who are unfairly demonized by society, right next to AOC. in the same video where suffragettes were cool and good for doing terrorism for their cause.
but given that this is a video that connects two generations of lgbt panic and the thesis is that 'media is biased towards bigots, whose comeuppance is very much warranted', i'm left with the uncharitable gaze of twitter users on one hand and an important message on the other.
i know contra is a rich lib and that she sucks from time to time. i hadn't watched her videos for a long time now. but this definitely does feel like something to rally against.
She also said the suffragette terrorists were counter-productive (debateable)
in the UK they stopped doing terrorism because of world war one and didn't get the vote until '28 and there was more :ukkk: shit into the 1960s before it was "real"
as much as i love terrorism i'm not sure how connectable those efforts were to them eventually getting partial rights in '28 but i also wouldn't call "didn't work" equivalent to "counterproductive"
b) counterproductive when people lose the plot about where these problems they purport to fight actually come from
That is an interesting point to me. That final caveat is doing a lot of work, as in, its only counterproductive as soon as people lose sight of their policy goals. Because in reality the video is about how it's extremely productive as long as they keep the eyes on the ball. The gay rights movement may have galvanized against Anita Bryant and the trans rights movement might yet galvanize against JK, but they are hardly the only example of groups that haven't lost sight of their goals.
Hillary is an interesting case study of this. Right-wingers demonize her for all sorts of insane reasons. They are so delusional you can probably make the case that their minds are as far removed from policy making as possible. Were they ineffective? Not at all. And you can also make the case that different demographies within the reactionary movement haven't lost sight of their goals. Christian fascists, for an instance, wanted those Supreme Court seats.
Meanwhile Lefties and and left-ish liberals occasionally demonize Hillary for all of her evils as a politician, as a ruler, and as a toxic divisive person with ungodly amounts of whitewashing to her media presence. They too wanted Hillary down for real policy reasons, and they failed. The only people who lose sight of real political goals in this scenario are the honest to god Liberals who go beyond and defend Hillary. Which is probably the reason why that section of the video ended up irking me: only someone who's blind to what the Clintons as a family stand for would uncritically add her to that finale.
But even so, I think its just a matter of Contra being like 'I don't want to make a video where these TERFs and an ancient female homophobe became totems that galvanized the struggle for civil rights without pointing out that society often treats women as the Chaotic Other, I'm not :jordan-eboy-peterson:'. Her choices at the end only makes me wonder wether people like AOC and Hillary made the list because conservatives demonize them for all the wrong reasons, or because Contra is enough of a liberal that she'd rather not criticize them. Beyond that brief questioning however I feel like losing sight of the central thesis of the video is in itself very counter productive.
All JK Rowling had to do was shut the fuck up and she could have been almost uncritically beloved for like a century
Vaush, Vaush, Vaush. All you had to do was stop here and you could've taken an easy W.
It’s even more true when you remember the Reason Natalie blocked him originally was because he revealed her private issues with drug addiction live on stream
They weren't exactly revealed, she's always been doing the "ironic" alcoholism and pill popping thing in her vids, but the way V*ush dealt with that in the clip she showed was just ... :yikes:
it really sums up what a dishonest, weasely fuck he is.
Absolutely. And the way how he casually drops it and then pretends to backpedal on it .... that's such a :funny-clown-hammer: moment.
Debate bros start begging to be let out of the locker it's dark in here I'm scared can I have some water please you can't do this to me let me out challenge.
He had to add something edgier to it because that first quote is a phrase I definitely heard before his tweet. It's just recycle left wing talking point and then make offensive. Absolute op.
How the fuck does Vaush continue to have any clout to lose when he's openly been a pedo?
Radlibs want to feel validated for having extremely lazy views on everything.
He is the God king of his own personal self sustaining streamer clout kingdom with all the bells and whistles and possibly a dozen streamer vassals. Many who are quite famous themselves.
I have this suspicion that for a lot of people accusations of pedophilia are about social power games and don't actually have anything to do with concerns about CSA. It's "Won't someone think of the chldren!" for the 21st century.
Also, people have extremely strong opinions about him and won't shut up about it, which drives engagement, which makes the algo cum, which makes the algo put him in front of more faces, which leads to more outrage, more engagement, more audience, more outrage, until the end of time when God finally returns to judge us for our sins.
until the end of time when God finally returns to judge us for our sins.
People's incorrect perceptions of God: :angel-biblical:
The correct perception of God: :funny-clown-hammer:
Bruh if someone says "X is morally equivalent to pedophilia" while doing x, they might just be a pedo
He's built a cyber cult of personality, of course he and his goons are gonna mald over the slightest thing
Thinking about that time that someone drove past a cop car with a laptop showing a :funny-clown-hammer: stream.
Humility doesn't generate flame wars and slap fights on twitter that drive more engagement with his content. He's financially disincentivized from being normal.
He didn't mean it, it was a joke, you just don't understand his humor, obviously just too edgy for your weak left ideals.
Hey, if some girl's a lady-comrade that's great. I think you're equal or whatever. But when some [misogynist slur] is a nazi, all bets are off. I'm going to rant about women, but I only let my misogyny out against bad women so it's actually good really!
-radlibs
As I recall that was the basis for the white women struggle session
White women are evil, not because they’re women, but because they’re white. It’s the devil skin.
there was a whole thing of people just doing misogeny but putting white in front
saving all my removed and removed for when ann coulter comes around.
so much edge we gotta drop a "tactical" n-word to "win" a debate :PIGPOOPBALLS: :unlimited-genocide-on-the-first-world:
He remember when vaush revealed the personal and private info about Contra having drug problems to his fans and then had a pity party when she blocked him?
Was that even a secret? pretty sure I remember her alluding to drug problems more than a few times in the early videos. I can definitely imagine Vaush being enough of a peice of shit to to reveal something like that but also pathetic enough to act like something already well known and basically part of someone's persona is some kind of truth bomb.
Not a fan of either of them, but I thought it was a shocking failure of basic social skills and interpersonal decency for him to air a bunch of their private disagreement (and her personal baggage) for the sake of milking e-drama viewership.
Natalie is bad at being a public figure. Vaush is bad at being at a decent person.
Isn't that his whole model for generating profit? Stirring up petty drama over nominally leftist topics then riling up his followers to start fights about it?
What order are you supposed to read this image in???????????
The circle has no end and no beginning; the content flows in all directions.
were contrapoints videos always this long? i have relapsed (e: finished. not bad but I feel like I could have gotten more out of an actual movie)
On a scale of "Morbius" to "Barry Lyndon," how was it, and did it use inexplicable costumes that would have been appropriate in either film?
I regret to inform you that I have seen neither movie and also the costumes (outfits really) were pretty subdued. No more catgirls or whatever
