Tanoomba's Toxic Tank of Traducement

fanaskin said:

Usually the point is to stop thinking abstractly, so you clear your mind and use your senses, if i'm on a hallucinogen and alone often I try to practice creating images out of phosphenes when you close your eyes. If i'm with people usually i'm trying to yuck it up with the people there.

Click to expand...

Cool.

fanaskin said:

third wave feminism which incorporates internationality and post modernism, go look at gender studies on college campuses they'll say the same things. she preaches it to whomever will listen. that was easy.

Click to expand...

Feminism, even third-wave feminism, even intersectional third-wave feminism, isn't inherently harmful. You also haven't yet shown how Sark is post-modernist (it's certainly not a given). Heck, after all these posts you still can't seem to differentiate between something being harmful and something having the potential to be used for harm. Why didn't you answer my question about gun owners?

Again (again, again, again, again), can you quote her saying something you think is inherently harmful? Do you believe expressing concerns about how women are portrayed in media is inherently harmful? Do you believe suggesting that creators of media use the imaginative potential of their medium instead of relying on dated clichés is inherently harmful? Do you believe taking a stance against the very harassment you were personally excessively targeted by is inherently harmful?

You're arguing as though you've never heard Sarkeesian speak, but you're terrified of what you think she represents. Your argument is (and I say this with zero exaggeration or hyperbole) "She is X, and X can theoretically be linked to Y, and Noam Chomsky explained how Y can potentially cause harm, therefore she causes harm." This is not a logical stance by any means.

Wait...fana

What hallucinogenics?

fanaskin said:

Sure it is, it's illogical nonsense

Click to expand...

Illogical nonsense isn't inherently harmful. Heck, can you find me something Sark said that you consider "illogical nonsense"?

fanaskin said:

Chomsky pointed out how it was illogical nonsense that caused real world harm, you keep ignoring that and sticking your fingers in your ears denying that.

Click to expand...

I didn't ignore anything. He was talking about how post-modernism can be used to ignore facts (something you have PROVABLY done on multiple occasions, lest you forget). He didn't say post-modernism is inherently harmful, he didn't say post-modernists are inherently harmful, and he certainly didn't say that Sarkeesian is a post-modernist.

Again (again, again...), "X can be used in a harmful way" DOES NOT EQUAL "X is harmful".

fanaskin said:

No tardnoob, i've probably listened to her more than you, i just add in context and don't repeat what she says unquestioningly which is what you do.

Click to expand...

I've literally never repeated what she says unquestioningly, and you can't find a single quote where I have. How often are you going to resort to simply making things up about me? Also, I think I found your mistake: You're not supposed to ADD context, you're supposed to consider the context that's ALREADY THERE. When you ADD context, it's YOU that's changing the meaning of what is said and separating it further from the speakers actual intended meaning.

fanaskin said:

I mean sure, if you ignore the machine like production of said ideology to a significant portion of society, then you realize you're using taxpayer dollars to train revolutionaries who believe nonsense, 20+ years of that and you have a real problem on your hands.

Click to expand...

What?

fanaskin said:

Was she talking about hitman?

Click to expand...

Are you willing to consider context? You claim you are but it seems to me your idea of "context" is "stuff other people have said that allows me to justify ridiculous hyperbole".

fanaskin said:

No he said it was nonsense that rich society can afford and poor society can't, he said it was broadly harmful.

Click to expand...

Quote him.

fanaskin said:

Does biology have anything to do with gender differences tanoomba? Anything at all mind you.

Click to expand...

Of course. Wait, did you find a quote of Sarkeesian claiming otherwise?