fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #3279 ]

[ SECRET POST #3279 ]

⌈ Secret Post #3279 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06.

__________________________________________________

07.

__________________________________________________

08.

__________________________________________________

09.

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 064 secrets from Secret Submission Post #469.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Do you believe this? I think I can kinda see it. I was thinking specifically in the Democrat vs Republican situation, but then it occured to me I kinda feel the same way about #BLM. It might apply elsewhere as well. Your thoughts?

Explain please

I first hear about it from opponents of gamergate who were advocating doxxing and physical harm to gamergaters. The idea being that the things gamergate were doing were not wrong, that harassment and threats and doxxing and ting were not bad in themselves, and ccould be useful tools for justice if aimed at the right people, and that gamergate was wrong because of who they targeted. It wasn't their tactics that were bad but their targets. Then I heard it in defence of anonymous committing cyber crimes... but against the clan. And now I'm hearing all the Hilldog supporters advocating "whatever it takes" to get her into power, and that she will be just as bullish and hardcore as the republicans, but since she'll be doing it for the right side they need her in power, and that Sanders is too much of a liberal wuss to make any real damage of our side.

So yeah. Is sketchy actions acceptable if it's bringing down the right people? Or do we need to stay pure and untouched and basically never win because the other side is willing to be bastards?

No. Not at all. I believe there are limits and some things that are wrong regardless of who does them.

No. If you support bad tactics on your side, how can you justify telling your opponent not to do something?

'Do as I say not as a do' doesn't work for parents, it sure as fuck ain't going to work for a group of strangers.

Most opponents don't do what they're told. socially regressive fucks won't stop being socially regressive just because we tell them "That's racist" or "That's sexist". They just call us social justicce warriors and go about their racist sexist business.

They will do what they are supposed to when we take away their ability to be socially regressive. When we make being socially regressive so painful that they have no choice but to grow up. And with that as the goal, adopting their tactics would be the way to go.

Your fundamental mistake is assuming an "us." Plenty of people who call themselves feminists will readily screw you over for their own gain. An environment in which they are praised for doxxing is an environment in which they will be praised when they doxx you for some perceived or fabricated betrayal.

Edited 2015-12-27 04:36 (UTC)

Trying to decide right now whether you are a troll or an actual, straight-up fascist.

History indicates you're wrong. Like, all of it. I get that it feels nice to tell yourself that anything you do is okay, but you're factually wrong. Also, what you're doing is what evil people do.

"You can't reason with their kind, they only understand one thing." Who says that, historically? Look at the list you're joining.

Anyone you're capable of meaningfully arguing with (that is to say, not ISIS or the KKK) is better addressed as an individual than as a group member. And when opposing an individual instead of a group, it's their tactics, not their beliefs, that determine the threat they pose and any "badness" related to them. No MRA is bad for being an MRA, any more than a feminist is bad for being a feminist. An MRA or feminist who doxxes is bad for being a doxxer.

No MRA is bad for being an MRA

Begging to differ.

Failing to reason why.

What about the Bureau of Land Management??

>Being antigamergate
>Taking Bob Chipman seriously
Get out you hypocrites.

Edited 2015-12-27 08:46 (UTC)

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

[ SECRET POST #3279 ]

There are no bad tactics, only bad targets.

Re: There are no bad tactics, only bad targets.

Re: There are no bad tactics, only bad targets.

Re: There are no bad tactics, only bad targets.

Re: There are no bad tactics, only bad targets.

Re: There are no bad tactics, only bad targets.

Re: There are no bad tactics, only bad targets.

Re: There are no bad tactics, only bad targets.

Re: There are no bad tactics, only bad targets.

Re: There are no bad tactics, only bad targets.

Re: There are no bad tactics, only bad targets.

Re: There are no bad tactics, only bad targets.

Re: There are no bad tactics, only bad targets.

Re: There are no bad tactics, only bad targets.