File: Why I Left the Left.swf-(8.59 MB, 528x304, Other)
[_] Anonymous 02/12/17(Sun)09:59:16 No.3214243
>> [_] Anonymous 02/12/17(Sun)10:07:45 No.3214244
>>3214243
still a fucking degenerate
>> [_] Anonymous 02/12/17(Sun)10:22:37 No.3214246
>>3214243
YYYEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
>> [_] Anonymous 02/12/17(Sun)10:51:46 No.3214249
I was with him until he mentioned trigger warnings. Still don't understand how they differ at all
from any other kind of content advisory warning.
Describing content that people might not want to watch/read/whatever is a pretty basic courtesy
and everything from porn to vidya does it.
>> [_] Anonymous 02/12/17(Sun)10:54:14 No.3214250
>>3214249
just don't watch /pol/ youtuberips and you'll be fine
>> [_] Anonymous 02/12/17(Sun)11:12:01 No.3214252
>>3214250
This is not /pol/ and this is not ok.
#notmyvideo
>> [_] Anonymous 02/12/17(Sun)11:30:24 No.3214254
>>3214249
There's a difference between an MPAA warning that a film contains mild language, and a trigger
warning that a film uses exclusively binary gender pronouns
>> [_] Anonymous 02/12/17(Sun)11:36:54 No.3214255
>>3214254
Has anyone ever actually done this? Like, could I have an example? I'm not even calling you a
liar or anything, it's just that I've never come across this before and that would be fucking
stupid if this really happened. Graphic rape or lynchings or shit like that I'd get people
warning about, but gender pronouns? seriously?
>> [_] Anonymous 02/12/17(Sun)11:41:36 No.3214257
He was sopt on about pretty much everything
Only the trigger warnings that are actually not a deal at all; only the most retarded libshit
actually use this and people that mock them
>> [_] Anonymous 02/12/17(Sun)11:52:58 No.3214259
>>3214255
Go to college.
Then neck yourself.
>> [_] Anonymous 02/12/17(Sun)11:53:09 No.3214260
>>3214243
Anyone know what he was talking about with the catholics? I hope he wasn't equating taxing the
church to forcing them to pay for abortion.
>> [_] Anonymous 02/12/17(Sun)11:53:45 No.3214261
>>3214252
/pol/, lgbtq or any other guaranteed replies youtuberips belong to their respective boards or
simply to >>>/trash/
>> [_] Anonymous 02/12/17(Sun)11:54:40 No.3214262
>>3214259
So that's a no?
>> [_] Anonymous 02/12/17(Sun)12:02:30 No.3214263
don't like this channel.
they spread as much stupid right winged ideologies as the left does.
although I must say I do tend to agree with them more than their left winged counterparts.
>> [_] Anonymous 02/12/17(Sun)12:05:20 No.3214264
>>3214262
Apparently someone hasn't been to college.
You can pick at least thousands of examples of both censorship, and straight up rioting because
the regressive left hates certain ideas.
>> [_] Anonymous 02/12/17(Sun)12:05:48 No.3214265
>>3214255
>>3214262
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7m9Hh9fACxw
The ride has begun.
>> [_] Anonymous 02/12/17(Sun)12:10:48 No.3214266
>>3214264
did he say anything about censorship? How about you go to preschool so you can learn to read. He
was asking for a real example of trigger warnings being used frivolously.
>> [_] Anonymous 02/12/17(Sun)12:15:00 No.3214267
>>3214264
I'm at college now. The only time I've ever gotten a "trigger warning" was for stuff that
discussed sexual assault, generally speaking. There was also a chick in the anime club who was
really big on them, but who gives a shit about that?
What bothers me a lot more than "trigger warnings" (which, at their worst, really are just
content warnings, not censorship) are Republican efforts to legislate what can and can't be
taught at colleges: for example, republican senators trying to strip funding from schools that
happen to have Simone de Beauvoir or whoever on the syllabus because "gender theory" sounds like
they're teachin mah kids to be queermos! Restricting what ideas can and can't be taught using the
carrot & stick of federal funding to what are supposed to be public schools sounds a lot more
like "regressive censorship" than "hey guys, this one's about murderrape in case that makes
anybody uncomfortable."
>> [_] Anonymous 02/12/17(Sun)12:18:32 No.3214268
>>3214255
the closest thing I saw to shit like that was some company that was selling movies, but you could
set the movie to have no nudity or vulgar language or slave related instances and it would skip
those scenes with those parts.
the company ended up getting sued by the publishers of those movies since they were selling the
movies for 2 dollars depending on how manny filters you had on.
>> [_] Anonymous 02/12/17(Sun)12:54:38 No.3214276
>>3214264
why do cuckservatives act like colleges and universities are fucking breeding grounds for easily
offended SJWs?
they are a few students at a few universities, not the entire fucking student body
get your head out of your ass
>> [_] Anonymous 02/12/17(Sun)12:59:12 No.3214279
>>3214264
Because the right has totally never tried to insert their own shitty opinions into the education
system.
>> [_] Anonymous 02/12/17(Sun)13:04:03 No.3214281
>>3214276
probably cause they need to justify themselves never having attended one.
>> [_] Anonymous 02/12/17(Sun)13:06:45 No.3214282
fucking waste of human life
>> [_] Anonymous 02/12/17(Sun)13:16:28 No.3214283
>>3214255
>Has anyone ever actually done this?
My campus bookstore started putting trigger warning stickers on books
>> [_] Anonymous 02/12/17(Sun)13:56:48 No.3214288
>>3214283
But that's even LESS restrictive than MPAA ratings -- any motherfucker can pick up a book and
ignore the stickers, but if a film has an R rating the theatre isn't supposed to let kids in on
their own. You're just proving his point that trigger warnings literally do not matter.
>> [_] Anonymous 02/12/17(Sun)14:09:03 No.3214290
I'm from the second world and what is a trigger warning?
I mean I've read the thread but I just can't put my head aorund it
>> [_] Anonymous 02/12/17(Sun)14:19:44 No.3214292
>>3214290
Like the Anon above said, it's basically a content warning so that people who've been raped
before or whatever know that they're about to watch a movie with a rape scene in it or whatever.
They make Republicans and /pol/tards very upset
>> [_] Anonymous 02/12/17(Sun)14:20:55 No.3214293
>>3214290
trigger warnings are warnings for things that might trigger someone
for example, if you are obese you might have a trigger for food and you will start eating food if
you see images of food. so they want to put in a warning that an image of food is going to show
up before it shows up so people that might be triggered by food can choose to look away
although the warning is just as effective as the image itself
another example is that people who do not identify as male or female go by different pronounce.
so if you get their pronounces wrong they will get triggered or something I'm not sure how it
works
>> [_] Anonymous 02/12/17(Sun)14:22:35 No.3214294
>>3214288
That's theater policy (which may be informed by trade groups the theater or chain is associated
with). Technically, they could let anyone into anything. It saves them time and trouble in the
long run (such as by not running afoul of local obscenity or corruption of minors laws) to just
prevent legally defined children from seeing R-rated films.
>> [_] Anonymous 02/12/17(Sun)14:29:59 No.3214297
>>3214294
Ah, that's true. But that still means they're more relevant than trigger warnings.
>>3214293
>I'm not sure how it works
There's no shame in admitting you don't know what you're talking about, except when you waste
~100 words talking about it anyway.
>pronounce
sasuga ESL-kun
>> [_] Anonymous 02/12/17(Sun)14:32:30 No.3214298
>>3214290
It can be used to drive agendas by making hypersensitive people create interpersonal conflict
over mundane things. A trigger warning divides the social space.
>> [_] Anonymous 02/12/17(Sun)14:34:02 No.3214299
>>3214290
A trigger warning is a warning that there may be content that can trigger strong emotional
responses without warning. Despite what you read on 4chan and certain other websites, the basic
concept isn't that bad and is not in any way intended to restrict free speech.
An example of an appropriately applied Trigger Warning might be a warning in advance that the
classical literature Salo, or The 128 Days of Sodom contains intense scenes of both forced and
statuatory rape and violence of underage persons children both male and female, as well as
numerous other forms of sexual abuse. It also contains descriptions of murders, kidnappings, and
other disturbing acts and the intesely debased men and women who perform these acts. This work
was so controversial that the opening several pages are essentially one long trigger warning to
the original 18th century audience.
Another appropriate usage might be in warning that a film includes intense scenes of realistic
war footage, which might provoke flashbacks in soldiers and others who have been in those
circumstances.
An inappropriate usage of a trigger warning would be a suggestion that a book may only include
binary gender pronouns. There is no reasonable expectation that any rational person would have an
intense emotional reaction to the terms "him" and "her." These sorts of trigger warnings are
designed to restrict speech by suggesting that normal speech patterns and words are inappropriate
from a moral perspective.
>> [_] Anonymous 02/12/17(Sun)14:36:38 No.3214301
>>3214298
what a great way to not convey any useful information about trigger warnings. You quite literally
just told him what to think about trigger warnings based on your agenda. Quite ironic actually.
>> [_] Anonymous 02/12/17(Sun)14:38:45 No.3214302
>>3214301
Not Anon, but maybe you should define it for him rather than belittle his opinions from a
spectator point of view.
>> [_] Anonymous 02/12/17(Sun)14:40:26 No.3214304
>>3214302
there are already adequate definitions posted here, that would be redundant.
>> [_] Anonymous 02/12/17(Sun)14:44:34 No.3214307
>>3214304
Adequate in that they don't describe why people make Youtube videos about them.
>> [_] Anonymous 02/12/17(Sun)14:46:45 No.3214309
>>3214307
Anon, nobody gives a shit about your YT channel.
>> [_] Anonymous 02/12/17(Sun)14:51:03 No.3214313
The particular group of conservative-minded folks he is talking about switch sides to whatever
political party or social movement is in power or popular every few years. Happened to the
beatniks, to the mods, to the hippies, to the furries, happened during G.W. Bush's
administration, and again during Obama's. They're loud and tend to either parrot what someone
else in the group told them without understanding what they're talking about or try to twist it
to their own conservative desires. Good example would be the Tea Party, the last handful gaggle
of these conservative conformists upset that their right wing president lost after the
republicans were in power for so long, out of desperation and desire for any sense of control in
their lives they formed a political party without a super-unified message or any research of
their own stance (originally protesting paying taxes Obama put into place but they were
protesting tax codes that George W Bush put in place).
I'm still doing research and hope to write something about it and don't have a good name for this
group that doesn't sound dumb or especially demeaning, but sheeple was a popular term for a while.
>> [_] Anonymous 02/12/17(Sun)15:02:14 No.3214333
>>3214313
Don't bother. By calling them a "group," you've already made a mistake: this "group," as you're
calling it, allegedly spans 70+ years and takes up similar causes each time? That's obviously
untrue. They're not that homogeneous. They're just conservatives, and they have just the same
tendencies to parrot as liberals do.
The interesting stuff, the actually interesting research, is in how to get people to STOP
"parroting," or to examine how parroting might differ nominally between groups (one interesting
example: traditionally, in American politics, conservatives "parrot" their stances from talk
radio, while liberals "parrot" their stances from actors and comedians). You're not doing that:
you're just saying, "look at those people, so different from me and so, so stupid." Here's a
hint: if you're even considering using "sheeple" unironically, you've already fucked up.
>> [_] Anonymous 02/12/17(Sun)15:04:35 No.3214334
>>3214313
Forgot to mention they also ruined shit for salad bar christians across the US as well as
atheists with the whole atheism+ bullshit.
>>3214290
Basically warning against words that might bring back horrible memories of something that
inflicted PTSD on a person such as being raped or grievously wounded or watching someone die was
the initial idea, but that definition was twisted to cover much less devastating and more mild
discomforting things. But some example words that might trigger those sorts of flashbacks to some
event that gave a person PTSD would be "viscera" "cannibalism" "murder" "rape" "incest" "child
porn" "forced prostitution" and similar terms. It's expanded a lot to only using
male/female/nonspecific gender pronouns and things like "pomegranate" and "carnivore"
>> [_] Anonymous 02/12/17(Sun)15:13:43 No.3214338
>>3214334
The croutons in my Cesar salad will never be the same.
>> [_] Anonymous 02/12/17(Sun)15:19:27 No.3214341
>>3214333
I concur and couldn't think of a proper term other than group. And I am loathe to the term
sheeple, I simply brought it up as it's a term that's been used in the past but don't think it's
a good term at all. They don't take up similar causes each time, just ones that are popular and
in power. It's difficult to write this without falling prey to the whole "othering" that
alienates a lot of folks. They're not necessarily stupid, but tend to conform to whatever popular
mob mentality is going on at the time.
A common thread though is that these folks frequently demand power to their kind of people, and
once they have power, there's the old adage of "power corrupts" and all that.
I don't have a stance that agrees or disagrees with the notion to stop parroting, but I'd say
perhaps critical thinking courses at younger ages but that also carries a lot of baggage and its
own set of conflicts and problems.
>>3214338
The term refers to how many christian denominations across the US pick and choose whatever parts
of the old and new testaments to adhere to and to ignore. And the bacon bits are those faux ones
that are a little rubbery, shame about the croutons, I am sorry for your lots.
>> [_] Anonymous 02/12/17(Sun)15:31:20 No.3214348
This whole thread is full of liberals trying to justify trigger warnings.
It would be funny if it wasn't so pathetic, and a startlingly accurate cross-section of modern
western academia, which is now a global laughingstock.
>> [_] Anonymous 02/12/17(Sun)15:36:51 No.3214354
>>3214348
Not at all if you actually read, many liberals hate the notion of trigger warnings and
censorship. But I'm sure you're just shitposting/baiting.
>> [_] Anonymous 02/12/17(Sun)15:39:16 No.3214355
The wonderful thing about triggers,
is triggers are wonderful things!
They don't need a doctor's prescription,
they're self-diagnosable things!
But the most wonderful thing about triggers is you can have more than one!
>> [_] Anonymous 02/12/17(Sun)15:42:22 No.3214357
>>3214298
>>3214299
>>3214334
those triggers are very specific
I mean if I wanted to watch something I research it if it has these kinds of things so I know
what I'm going to watch/read
I double mean that a fucking book wouldn't throw at me a child rape or a suicide attempt out of
nowhere
I triple mean if I'm a depressed fuck I'm not going to read/watch deppresing shit
or am I getting this wrong?
>> [_] Anonymous 02/12/17(Sun)15:43:38 No.3214359
>>3214354
Yeah? Probably, but if it wasn't for banter and funposting, liberals would have run trigger
warnings into our ascending colons by now.
I will not, nor shall I ever kowtow to the mental midgets of the degenerate Left. Oops, I should
have put a trigger warning on that word.
>> [_] Totally not :v 02/12/17(Sun)15:43:40 No.3214360
>>3214348
I think what people see is the loudest shit flingers and that's it.
I went to an American Unis had a great time. No problems with safe spaces triggers or any of that
because I was too busy with what I went there to do.
IMO people on both sides have too much free time and would much rather spend it complaining when
they could be working.
Every class I help teach has pretty much zero awareness of what's going on campus because they
simply don't have the time to play make-believe social revolutionary.
>> [_] Anonymous 02/12/17(Sun)15:44:01 No.3214361
>>3214354
shutup
YOU'RE A WHITE MALE
HOW DARE YOU GROW UP IN A COUNTRY BUILT BY YOUR WHITE MALE ANCESTORS
PRIVILEGED
PRIVILEGEDDDDDDDDDDD
>> [_] Anonymous 02/12/17(Sun)15:46:34 No.3214363
>>3214357
So essentially trigger warnings are spoilers so the babies masquerading as adults can mentally
prepare for the consumption of a given media?
Glad we cleared that up.
>> [_] Anonymous 02/12/17(Sun)15:53:21 No.3214369
>>3214348
Nobody ITT has had to justify trigger warnings, because nobody's shown an actual example of how
they're used to "censor" speech.
>> [_] Anonymous 02/12/17(Sun)15:53:58 No.3214370
>>3214360
You're clearly the exception, not the rule.
Meanwhile, this hilarious shit is happening.
http://i.4cdn.org/pol/1486919944537.jpg
History-illiterate Antifa "social revolutionaries" beat and chase a Jewish student while calling
him a Nazi pig.
This shit literally writes itself, man. Why even be tangentially related to what is essentially
an anarchic terrorist group?
>> [_] Anonymous 02/12/17(Sun)15:58:59 No.3214373
>>3214370
>/pol/ calling people out for being antisemitic
>> [_] Anonymous 02/12/17(Sun)15:59:57 No.3214374
>>3214369
>I don't want to read this book on history because there's a trigger warning on it.
>I don't want to go to that movie with my friends/family because the trigger warning I read on
some website.
>I don't want to complete this course because I heard there's a trigger warning on the course
books.
The censorship is both real and insidious. While it does not overtly proscribe the publication of
such material, it invites the weaker minded to engage in self-censorship. Willful ignorance is a
right, but it is very very wrong.
>Trigger Warning: You die at the end.
>> [_] Anonymous 02/12/17(Sun)16:01:16 No.3214376
>>3214373
>/pol/ is one person in an SS uniform; instead of the most populous and, ironically, diverse
board on 4chan
Ya, nah, you're a cunt. Put a trigger warning on that you spastic gremlin.
>> [_] Anonymous 02/12/17(Sun)16:12:07 No.3214379
>>3214374
>I don't want to read...
>censorship
Censorship is not being able to read something, not being advised about the content. MPAA
warnings aren't censorship, either, nor are EXPLICIT CONTENT labels on CDs.
>While it does not overtly proscribe the publication of such material...
It doesn't proscribe publication in the first place. For most people advocating trigger warnings,
many books they'd consider essential (e.g., books on gender theory and politics relating to
sexual assault) would also necessarily contain trigger warnings, wouldn't they?
>...it invites the weaker minded to engage in self-censorship.
Yeah, which totally wasn't a thing before people already bubbled themselves into Rush Limbaugh &
Fox / HuffPo & Buzzfeed political spheres, right? In any case, trigger warnings aren't supposed
to be used for political opinions in the first place. I could possibly find the argument that
they can promote isolation reasonable if you had even a single example of them being used like
this... which you don't. Further, even if you did, showing that they promote ideological
isolation STILL doesn't equate them with censorship.
>> [_] Totally not :v 02/12/17(Sun)16:14:23 No.3214382
>>3214374
Stupid people have a right to be stupid anon, I'm sorry but that is just the way it is.
>"weaker minded"
>That fedora really brings out your eyes anon kun~~~
>> [_] Anonymous 02/12/17(Sun)16:18:30 No.3214386
>white people lookin out for minorities
>"minorities"
>not knowing that white people are the minority on a global scale
Go to their country and see if they look out for you.
>> [_] Anonymous 02/12/17(Sun)16:22:08 No.3214387
>>3214379
The fact that you think Fox & HuffPo are on equal grounds just shows how delusional you are.
And no, the modern day left & right are not two sides of the same coin.
The left are the radicals pushing an illogical/demented/evil ideology while the right are simply
pushing back against said changes.
In simpler terms.
When everyone started losing their mind some years after the new century and started taking
seriously all the absurd things which used to be mocked by all of society, they didn't, they
looked on in horror.
>> [_] Totally not :v 02/12/17(Sun)16:24:33 No.3214388
>>3214387
Don't you dare say happy holidays to them
>A LINE MUST BE DRAWN
>> [_] Anonymous 02/12/17(Sun)16:39:07 No.3214392
>>3214387
>No, you don't understand! Liberals BAD, conservatives GOOD!
great argument fagtron way to convince me with those hot opinions
>> [_] Anonymous 02/12/17(Sun)16:42:53 No.3214394
>>3214374
Excuse me but i'm pretty sure we've all avoided reading an article because we didn't like the
contents. How many buzzfeed videos have you sat through? have you gone to any of the apparently
plentiful symposiums on social justice? Face it you "weak minded individual", you are guilty of
self censorship, humans have been doing it since forever and it's not the end of the fucking
world. So please, settle the fuck down.
>> [_] Anonymous 02/12/17(Sun)16:45:13 No.3214395
>>3214386
In the developed world, whites are the majority.
The developed world exists because of a white majority.
>> [_] Anonymous 02/12/17(Sun)16:45:17 No.3214396
>>3214392
I don't care about convincing you of shit you pickled ingot.
I don't care about team sports either.
I just know that one side has completely lost their minds along with their common sense and that
side is far left of the center.
Believe what you will.
Good day.
>> [_] Anonymous 02/12/17(Sun)16:48:24 No.3214397
>>3214396
>Good day.
*tips*
>> [_] Anonymous 02/12/17(Sun)17:03:12 No.3214402
See, just because the terms have been corrupted and overtaken by a group of retards doesn't mean
the terms themselves have actually changed meaning.
I'm politically left and fairly progressive, and like he says that he himself is, pretty much a
classical liberal.
The thing is, the people calling themselves progressives nowadays, aren't very progressive, so
why should we acknowledge them as such?
>> [_] Anonymous 02/12/17(Sun)17:04:19 No.3214403
>>3214402
But classical liberals are right wing.
>> [_] Anonymous 02/12/17(Sun)17:14:13 No.3214407
>>3214403
Liberalism is centrist.
>> [_] Anonymous 02/12/17(Sun)17:18:03 No.3214408
>>3214276
>they are a few students at a few universities, not the entire fucking student body
They're literally the entire student body, cuck.
>> [_] Anonymous 02/12/17(Sun)17:20:04 No.3214410
if still have something on your eyes, we are going to comunism. We are robbed from privacy and
freedom. I still dont understand why citizens just don't kick out the presidents. "we" the
citizens are more powerfull than gowerment, us are more.
>> [_] Anonymous 02/12/17(Sun)17:22:54 No.3214411
>>3214255
Yes some people do it, but it's basically a side thing done by small communities on the internet
and only people who it bothers, or who want to complain, know it even exists.
>> [_] Anonymous 02/12/17(Sun)17:23:04 No.3214412
>>3214403
The right wing threw those values out however with Eisenhower and left the left wing to adopt
them instead, as such we're backwards with most of our political terminology. And libertarians
are closer to neoliberals.
>> [_] Anonymous 02/12/17(Sun)17:25:10 No.3214414
>>3214403
Almost every political position older than 50 years is considered as right wing nowadays. That's
because the fucking 68 generation has shifted the whole political range towards left wing.
>> [_] Anonymous 02/12/17(Sun)17:26:38 No.3214415
>>3214264
some of us went to engineering college and never encountered such things
:^)
>> [_] Anonymous 02/12/17(Sun)17:51:58 No.3214425
>>3214267
But why should we pay, with our tax dollars, for things that won't be useful? College should be,
first and foremost, about educating people to get jobs. So many classes that don't lead to work
related to them should not be funded.
>> [_] Anonymous 02/12/17(Sun)18:02:42 No.3214430
>>3214260
When the subsidised provision of abortion is a part of public spending, you ARE being forced to
pay for it as a taxpayer.
>> [_] Anonymous 02/12/17(Sun)18:12:34 No.3214437
>>3214299
>needing a trigger warning for such tame porn as 128DoS
Anon please, is this your first day on the internet?
