Does anybody get the joke?

[Mizike]

I'm entitled to my facts.

https://thefederalist.com/2022/04/13/ny ... dentities/
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2022 ... -in-pre-k/
https://www.dailysignal.com/2021/06/02/ ... -ideology/
https://charliekirk.com/news/trio-of-de ... all-school

Thank you for proving the point. When you read publications with no fact-checking departments and no policy on correcting false information, you believe in "facts" that aren't real. Like all of this made-up garbage from the worst places online. I will confess that I'm surprised that a fan of this radical feminist webcomic would also be a fan of these radically anti-feminist news sources.

A good rule of thumb is that when Wikipedia has declared that a website cannot be used for any articles (as they've done with Brietbart and the federalist other than attributing opinions) then maybe you should not trust that source.

In addition, it would be a good idea to start reading about real news from the real world now. That way you have a chance to repair your relationships with all your loved ones who are avoiding you now. It's never too late to become a better person -- just be brave enough to acknowledge that sometimes the world is a scary and complex place and that's ok. We should just never let fear turn into hate for no reason -- it's that easy.

[grabachair]

It's never too late to become a better person -- just be brave enough to acknowledge that sometimes the world is a scary and complex place and that's ok. We should just never let fear turn into hate for no reason -- it's that easy.

It sounds like you are trying to regurgitate advice others have given you, and reasonably so. You should learn to operate from a place of truth and love, and leave the fascist bubble that the American Left has become.

I don’t think the world is scary, though it is complex! For instance, you appealed to Wikipedia as an authority, despite the fact that its own creators have disavowed it as horribly, perhaps irredeemably biased.

Maybe you could try what I do for news and see how it goes? Read two known liberal sources and two known conservative sources each day. See how their reporting stacks up over time.

And ‘steel man’ you opponent’s arguments, looking for the best version to consider. Also, don’t talk down to people. It’s a huge turn off.

[Mizike]

I don’t think the world is scary

And yet, you invent boogeymen of which to be scared. The world is actually quite a nice place when you're not hateful. Sure, it could use some work -- after all we have a lot of media operations solely devoted to misleading their readership into believing insane things. I've even seen people believe that government officials are inhuman invaders trying to control humanity -- an old anti-Semitic conspiracy theory lightly redressed with some QAnon flourish. And of course, the lies that these "others" are hurting -- even eating! -- children.

But it's all lies meant to make you afraid of other people. I hope you realize that before it's too late. But if you don't, that's on your own hateful heart. No one can or will force you to be better. But you do have the ability.

[quil]

Several baseless assertions (in the precise sense of not even attempting to give a basis for the assertions)

Out of hand dismissals of arguments and/or evidences against the correctness of those assertions (again, baselessly, in the sense previously mentioned. The one exception to this is your argumet regarding the absence of fact checking in certain outlets and no policy of correction regarding false info. That DOES offer a basis for calling into question certain newsoutlets. This, however, wasn't direct at me or our conversation. But, just because I want to highlight that providing a basis doesn't settle a question, as the basis itself may be questionable, I will point out that it's the case that your claim regarding the lack of editorial policies on retractions in such sources is demonstrably false. I don't read breitbart, ever. But a quick Google search shows they publish their editorial policy re:corrections here: https://www.breitbart.com/policy-information/ Obviously, that doesn't prove they follow said policy or are unbiased (I'm positive they are deeply biased) in its implementation, but the specific claim that such agencies have no fact verification process or policy regarding retraction/correction of errors is, again, demonstrably false).

Character attacks about fears, confusions, needing help, etc.

This is what I mean. It's not a persuasive way to dialogue, because it's not even willing to engage with points made. It's not even dialogue. Just a brute force, unilateral style of trying to persuade: "I'm obviously right. You're obviously wrong, and probably messed up for not agreeing with me, and you even wanting to try to examine this issue from any other angle than my obviously correct one shows you're stupid and/or evil and/or deranged."

This is, as said, a huge problem on all sides of every remotely political divergence of views these days.

[quil]

I guess two questions to try to move the dialogue forward is to ask:


1) What 'sources' would you consider to be reliable, and worthy of taking into consideration?

I mean, in trying to talk to you about 'what is and is not happening' I referred to the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal, MTV, personal branding of individuals, medical studies, and even the Guardian. I didn't give citations at the time, but offered to do so, and was met with accusations that I'm getting my info/viewpoints/information from radical right wing sources. So, what would count? I'm happy to dig into sources you claim to respect to try to demonstrate the same points solely from them, through specific citations of the same. I read them regularly enough to know that such things aren't hard to find.

2) What would constitute sufficient evidence, in your mind, that "such things" are happening? (whether by "such things" we mean drag shows performed for children, drag shows performed by children, individuals being 'pushed' toward both broad acceptance of trans ideology, individuals being 'pushed' into adopting a trans identity by either individuals or institutions)?

[Russly]

Please note that I'll update the new arc titles into the forum within a day or two, only just got back and the way I'm on here right now even took a lot haha! Thank all for your patience. Let's see what happened in my absence....

Sinfest is my news source. It does a perfect job of cutting out the need to look up everything because it's so self explanatory. It weeds out trolls, vultures and so on like no tomorrow. It's only at that point do topics like the joke even become apparent.

That tether appearance was perfect.

Monique actually is the one who currently isn't cancelled, her and Miko's opinion, along with Squig's, are the ones which turn up in the past month or two. Perhaps certain instances are representative when the idea infects a reality. Therefore something on the surface would seem the opposite of the reality, just imagine Miko's glasses on a few other characters for a while.

Trans recruitment and trans mafia are potentially a side effect of violence in general in the world slowly yet surely finally in itself dying down. People are clearly too dumb or too invested in novelty at minimum, everything gets corrupted, mutation is a part of life after all. Perhaps the flow or channel of corruption happens with order, signaling order's remainder presence somewhere or another. Yes, the feminist waves and the opening of lgbt etc and birth control and so on into the world are largely good, however all large forces defintely are with their large bad side somewhere out there, which gets that bad. The fringe makes it to the mainstream. The pills that will change the physical form you take and the reality of your personal filter are around the corner after all.

"Atheletes don't force you to do anything" is too funny a line on all counts. The clownery's real. Some people can't handle reality. Talk about a horseshoe theory. Yall literally just proved Wikipedia is the reliable source these days, but to me it originally was the way to fact check anyway. It always had its citations! School would get mad because I made a point to make citations with the Wiki clarifier.

Talk about hilarious that now the topics themselves are so outlandish that you guys have realized you are being charicatures of yourselves to end up ultimately realizing it's worth it to directly cherish the humanity personally in each other. Talking down and punching down is the way to save humanity. If the first joke was a punch up then it's too bad the chicken beat the egg that day. Don't believe me? Punch me down right now!

-Russly