The editors notes for Milo's book are amazing.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 NEXT
 

RikuoAmero:
Bastardofmelbourne, when you asked what Milo was protesting Sarsour for if he is serious about wanting her to be able to speak...this just shows how language itself has been warped.
One can protest, say nasty things about other people, all the while allowing them the opportunity to speak.
I'm reminded of a thunderf00t video from seven or eight years ago. He's a YouTube atheist and he literally sits down to talk with Westboro Baptist church. He had previously criticised them and did so again afterward. At no point did he try to prevent the church from speaking.

So again I ask you when and where has Milo attempted to prevent Sarsour from speaking? As in, has he done anything like what happened during his college tour. Something anything at all to ensure that Sarsour is unable to speak.

You're missing the point. Milo does not care about free speech because when Milo wants to protest a speaker, he does it and says "this is my free speech!" When people gather outside one of Milo's events and protest against him, he points at them and says "they're suppressing my free speech!"

Milo is imposing one standard for his speech and another standard for the speech of his critics. When people are protesting him speaking, that is evidence that they hate free speech. When he protests other people speaking, that is evidence that he loves free speech.

The reason Milo does this is because Milo does not care about either standard; Milo only cares about getting attention, because he is a socially deformed man-child. He uses free speech as a shield to troll people. That's all.

bastardofmelbourne:

RikuoAmero:
Bastardofmelbourne, when you asked what Milo was protesting Sarsour for if he is serious about wanting her to be able to speak...this just shows how language itself has been warped.
One can protest, say nasty things about other people, all the while allowing them the opportunity to speak.
I'm reminded of a thunderf00t video from seven or eight years ago. He's a YouTube atheist and he literally sits down to talk with Westboro Baptist church. He had previously criticised them and did so again afterward. At no point did he try to prevent the church from speaking.

So again I ask you when and where has Milo attempted to prevent Sarsour from speaking? As in, has he done anything like what happened during his college tour. Something anything at all to ensure that Sarsour is unable to speak.

You're missing the point. Milo does not care about free speech because when Milo wants to protest a speaker, he does it and says "this is my free speech!" When people gather outside one of Milo's events and protest against him, he points at them and says "they're suppressing my free speech!"

Milo is imposing one standard for his speech and another standard for the speech of his critics. When people are protesting him speaking, that is evidence that they hate free speech. When he protests other people speaking, that is evidence that he loves free speech.

The reason Milo does this is because Milo does not care about either standard; Milo only cares about getting attention, because he is a socially deformed man-child. He uses free speech as a shield to troll people. That's all.

What exactly do you mean by protests? Is he standing somewhere saying things? Or is he physically blocking access to someone else's speech?
Protesters against Milo physically prevented people, or tried to, from entering areas where he was speaking or scheduled to speak. Or they stormed the stage. Or stood up draped in fake blood making loud noises so as to drown out his speech.
Has Milo done anything of the sort? Or is he just standing somewhere away from where Sarsour is, and talking about her?

RikuoAmero:
What exactly do you mean by protests? Is he standing somewhere saying things? Or is he physically blocking access to someone else's speech?
Protesters against Milo physically prevented people, or tried to, from entering areas where he was speaking or scheduled to speak. Or they stormed the stage. Or stood up draped in fake blood making loud noises so as to drown out his speech.
Has Milo done anything of the sort? Or is he just standing somewhere away from where Sarsour is, and talking about her?

image

Look dude, we get it. Milo tells you things that give you psychological validation. That doesn't mean he's right. It doesn't mean you get to control the conversation or determine the direction/boundaries of it for us. You need to be a little more critical of people who tell you what you want to hear.

Adam Jensen:
Meanwhile, I'm still trying to figure out why people give a fuck about this guy?

I'm trying to figure out why you entered to this thread then (if it isn't worth of even giving a fuck about him).

Catnip1024:

starbear:
Milo's claim is that Simon & Schuster "canceled in deference to pressure from authors, bookselling accounts, business and special interest groups." Simon & Schuster claim that they cancelled because the book was unpublishable. To prove that the book was unpublishable the 1st draft and editors notes have been entered into evidence. If Milo didn't want that to happen he shouldn't have sued Simon & Schuster. Once he did that: the release of the 1st draft was inevitable.

Ah, thanks for the clarification.

I'd still have thought that there'd be some restrictions on publication of evidence submitted in court, but I'm not a lawyer, so whatever.

What happens in court doesn't stay in court.

Gethsemani:

You've obviously not even read Milo's op ed. His points are that gay men should marry women and have babies and keep their sexuality a secret for various reasons (one of which is to prevent a Muslim population bomb).

In that case I'd say to Milo the same thing that I say to everyone one of these "MUH BURFRATES" people: for some reason, it's legal to have as many children as you want for no other reason than a batshit conspiracy theory about white people dying out, so if you're so worried about it then what's stopping you from just going out and doing that?

You know, why is Milo fucking around with this college speaking tour and chasing black guys instead of finding some pure Aryan maidens to impregnate? Why is Lauren Southern wasting her peak fertile years making YouTube videos? Why is Felix Lace's fat ass (Black Pigeon Speaks) living in Japan, where presumably there are not many white women?

Fucking hypocrites, though I will say that I'm glad they're not reproducing.

renegade7:
Why is Lauren Southern wasting her peak fertile years making YouTube videos?

I'm mean she's beautiful, but "something, something, don't [naughty things] in crazy".

Addendum_Forthcoming:

image

How can anyone be so disconnected from reality as to actually believe this is true?

CaitSeith:
What happens in court doesn't stay in court.

Except when it does. I've done jury service - the video evidence you see in court does not get released to the wider public, necessarily. I don't know the reasons why it would not, or the criteria it needs to meet to be kept confidential. I don't know the US legal system, which could be completely different (and this being civil rather than criminal, different again). I just raised a question, is all.

Zontar:
How can anyone be so disconnected from reality as to actually believe this is true?

Are you alleging that Simon and Schuster submitted falsified information to a court of law?

Because that would be a very serious allegation..

evilthecat:

Zontar:
How can anyone be so disconnected from reality as to actually believe this is true?

Are you alleging that Simon and Schuster submitted falsified information to a court of law?

Because that would be a very serious allegation..

I see this as a ray of hope, in that even Zontar has seen what Milo is said to have wrote, and found it stupid to the point of implausibly.

maninahat:

evilthecat:

Zontar:
How can anyone be so disconnected from reality as to actually believe this is true?

Are you alleging that Simon and Schuster submitted falsified information to a court of law?

Because that would be a very serious allegation..

I see this as a ray of hope, in that even Zontar has seen what Milo is said to have wrote, and found it stupid to the point of implausibly.

I never believed that Milo was some deep intellectual, I found and still find him entertaining. These are not the same thing.

BeetleManiac:

RikuoAmero:
What exactly do you mean by protests? Is he standing somewhere saying things? Or is he physically blocking access to someone else's speech?
Protesters against Milo physically prevented people, or tried to, from entering areas where he was speaking or scheduled to speak. Or they stormed the stage. Or stood up draped in fake blood making loud noises so as to drown out his speech.
Has Milo done anything of the sort? Or is he just standing somewhere away from where Sarsour is, and talking about her?

image

Look dude, we get it. Milo tells you things that give you psychological validation. That doesn't mean he's right. It doesn't mean you get to control the conversation or determine the direction/boundaries of it for us. You need to be a little more critical of people who tell you what you want to hear.

Let's see the conversation again, shall we? On page one of this thread, I asked
"Why all the effort to make damn sure he [Milo] doesn't sell his book, doesn't speak at engagements?"
I asked that, thinking that others would know of what I meant. The threats of not reviewing any more S&S books if S&S published Dangerous, and the times where protestors either trashed the areas where Milo was to speak, or disrupted them, all in an effort to make sure he either couldn't speak, or that other people couldn't hear him.

In post number 16, bastardofmelbourne replied saying
"Might as well ask Milo the same thing about Linda Sarsour.

It's almost as if he doesn't care about free speech at all!"
With Linda Sarsour being a hyperlink to a news article. Where it is mentioned there was a protest, people decrying the presence of Sarsour...but at no point does the article or melbourne tell us anything like what happened to Milo.
Of course one can protest the presence of someone else. Did Milo prevent Sarsour from speaking though? Or did he simply speak his mind regarding her?
Did he or one of his cronies enter Sarsour's talk, and prevent Sarsour in some way from speaking?

evilthecat:
Are you alleging that Simon and Schuster submitted falsified information to a court of law?

Because that would be a very serious allegation..

maninahat:
I see this as a ray of hope, in that even Zontar has seen what Milo is said to have wrote, and found it stupid to the point of implausibly.

Either that or it's a really clumsy attempt at coming out of the closet.

So I decided to take a look at the manuscript, see how far in I could get without dry heaving. Turns out, not very far. Milo proposed a prologue, epilogue and 12 chapters for the book. They are in the following order:

Prologue - The Art of the Troll
1 - Why the Progressive Left Hates Me
2 - Why the Alt-Right Hates Me
3 - Why Twitter Hates Me
4 - Why Feminists Hate Me
5 - Why Black Lives Matter Hates Me
6 - Why the Media Hates Me
7 - Why Other Gay People Hate Me (editor's note offered the correction of "Establishment Gays" instead of "Other Gay People")
8 - Why Establishment Republicans Hate Me
9 - Why Muslims Hate Me
10 - Why Ugly People Hate Me (editor told him to scrap this one entirely)
11 - Why Gamers DON'T Hate Me
12 - Why My College Tour Is So Awesome
Epilogue - How To Be a Dangerous Faggot (Even if You're Not Gay)

By now you may be picking up a pattern. I had to skim the damn thing because Milo's voice as an author is borderline unreadable. It's full of shoddy grammar, parenthetical pot shots, relentless self-aggrandizement, constant ad hominem, and a tendency to call explicit attention to his own jokes to a degree that would shame Bojack Horseman. In the prologue, dude straight up writes, "I am a messiah," as its own paragraph. The trolling doesn't work anymore because he tries so hard to call attention to it. He doesn't provide citations for his claims and instead encourages readers to stick to the talking points and insult anyone who questions them while bragging that he has the power to make the entirety of the political spectrum question their ideas.

The whole book is little more than auto-fellatio and paints a portrait of a deeply damaged and unhappy person casting himself as a Byronic hero. Compassion dictates that I stop talking shit on him considering he's in such desperate need of help. Then again, he's beyond any help that I can offer and I don't think he'd accept it either way.

RikuoAmero:
-snip-

Yeah, I get it. You think being an uncouth, abusive asshole should be protected speech but only so long as it's done in service of right-wing politics. You don't need to keep tying your own noose.

Beetlemaniac said

"Yeah, I get it. You think being an uncouth, abusive asshole should be protected speech but only so long as it's done in service of right-wing politics. You don't need to keep tying your own noose."
Nope. I think being an uncouth, abusive asshole should be protected speech...full stop. Regardless of which side of the political aisle one finds themselves in. I support the right of both Milo and Sarsour to say what they want. If Sarsour was prevented from speaking, I wouldn't have learned what a cunt she is.
Of course, there are limits. Such as sending death threats, or calls to violence.

RikuoAmero:
Nope. I think being an uncouth, abusive asshole should be protected speech...full stop. Regardless of which side of the political aisle one finds themselves in.

Well why didn't you say so? That's an even more unprincipled stance to take and further undermines your arguments. Look, I know I'm fascinating and charismatic, but I'm not the kind of person who can be persuaded condone abuse or assholes. Sorry, but I just don't swing that way.

BeetleManiac:

RikuoAmero:
Nope. I think being an uncouth, abusive asshole should be protected speech...full stop. Regardless of which side of the political aisle one finds themselves in.

Well why didn't you say so? That's an even more unprincipled stance to take and further undermines your arguments. Look, I know I'm fascinating and charismatic, but I'm not the kind of person who can be persuaded condone abuse or assholes. Sorry, but I just don't swing that way.

So let's see if I understand you. Should one be allowed to call someone else a fucking moron (in meat-space)? Is name calling verboten? Illegal?

RikuoAmero:
So let's see if I understand you. Should one be allowed to call someone else a fucking moron (in meat-space)? Is name calling verboten? Illegal?

It's adorable that you're pretending to not know the difference between bickering and abuse, but you're still not getting me to vote Republican. It's not me, it's you.

renegade7:
Smerp!

For that matter, why are all the "rah rah Alpha Male" dudes the dumpiest guys on Earth? Like, if you're so interested in being an "Apex Predator", why the fuck aren't you spending all your time in the gym getting swole instead of sitting in your gaming chair, writing articles whining about how feminism means women won't fuck you?

I don't think I've seen a single one of these dummies who looked tough or intimidating at all. Most of them look like they could get their asses kicked by my sixth graders.

Chewster:

renegade7:
Smerp!

For that matter, why are all the "rah rah Alpha Male" dudes the dumpiest guys on Earth? Like, if you're so interested in being an "Apex Predator", why the fuck aren't you spending all your time in the gym getting swole instead of sitting in your gaming chair, writing articles whining about how feminism means women won't fuck you?

I don't think I've seen a single one of these dummies who looked tough or intimidating at all. Most of them look like they could get their asses kicked by my sixth graders.

Well, there's The Golden One. YouTube opinion-haver/Swedish neo-Nazi who apparently decided to take it to the opposite extreme.

image

He would like you to know that he is definitely not gay.

Chewster:

For that matter, why are all the "rah rah Alpha Male" dudes the dumpiest guys on Earth?

Because they got that rhetoric from a flawed study of watching social pack animals behind cages that unfortunately influenced our ideas of how social stratification works in the wild, started applying that to humans erroneously, and social psychology is only now debunking in the last 15 years.

Like, for example, how dogs are actually more likely to befriend humans and take treats from them when they appear to be kind and helpful to other humans as opposed to someone that just grunts and barks at people. Turns out that 'being an alpha' is actually about being socially conscious and a demonstration of capability through proactive social interaction. Not being an arsehole.

In my experience, mouthy arseholes get punched.

It's kind of that timeless wisdom you learn by actually hanging out with people andmaking social connections, as opposed to watching animals in zoos and pretending like the confined quarters and scheduled meal times wouldn't influence their actual behaviour or that it's comparable to examining humanity as a whole.

RikuoAmero:

What exactly do you mean by protests? Is he standing somewhere saying things? Or is he physically blocking access to someone else's speech?
Protesters against Milo physically prevented people, or tried to, from entering areas where he was speaking or scheduled to speak. Or they stormed the stage. Or stood up draped in fake blood making loud noises so as to drown out his speech.
Has Milo done anything of the sort? Or is he just standing somewhere away from where Sarsour is, and talking about her?

Okay, I don't think we're on the same page here, or ever were. That might be my fault. Let's step back a little.

What I was getting at by linking that article was that Milo's M.O. is fundamentally and shamelessly hypocritical. When people protest Milo, or get angry about Milo, or insult Milo, Milo will use that as material for his criticisms about the "repressive" left-wing. "Why are you protesting me?" he asks. The protesters say "We don't want you speaking at our university/club/TV show!" Milo points at that and says "You don't want me to speak? You don't want me to speak! You're attacking my free speech! Hey everybody, get a look at these lefty protesters who want to suppress my free speech!"

The thing is that free speech is complicated and double-edged. "Free speech" means that Milo is allowed to go and say things, but it also means that people can protest the fact that he's speaking, because that protest is itself an expression of free speech. Even crashing Milo's talks and going on stage or shouting him down with a megaphone - that's still free speech. Protected free speech does not stop being protected just because it advocates the suppression of other people's speech. This is an irony that the alt-right exploits frequently; neo-Nazi demonstrators who openly advocate for a fascist society will use the aegis of free speech to defend their speech that is advocating for the suppression of most political speech.

Where Milo gets hypocritical is when he uses the fact that people are protesting him as evidence that those people are trying to stop him from speaking, yet holds an identical protest outside a speaking engagement given by Linda Sarsour. That begs the question of why Milo is protesting the speaking engagement. If Milo wants to hear Linda Sarsour speak, why is he standing outside with a megaphone in front of a crowd talking about all the reasons she shouldn't be allowed to speak? What's he protesting? Because when people protest Milo, the only explanation Milo will accept is that they want to suppress his free speech. But when Milo is protesting other people, he wants us to assume that the explanation is that he loves free speech, he really does, and he wants to hear Linda Sarsour talk, and the only reason he's standing outside the place where she's speaking shouting about the fact that she's speaking is because she's saying things he disagrees with.[1]

I'm probably not being as clear as I could be, sorry. What I'm trying to get at is that Milo asks us to assume the worst of his critics while asking us to assume the best of himself. Milo does this because Milo is not actually interested in protecting or advocating for freedom of speech; Milo is interested in riling people up so he can make money off the publicity, and he shows that in his actions and his words. Milo frequently says shit that has no intellectual value, no entertainment value, and no purpose beyond personally insulting his targets - such as, for example, joking that Linda Sarsour is paid in goats - and turning the debate into a shitfight. Because he is a troll. It's weird, it's like the whole Internet has forgotten the rules of how trolls operate just because one of them was willing to appear in front of a crowd and do their trolling in the flesh.

[1] It is the same logic employed by people who get angry "on principle" when a member of their own faction is doxxed, and respond by trying to dox the person who did the doxxing. Is the person getting doxxed on my side? That's an invasion of privacy and tantamount to harassment or blackmail. Is the person getting doxxed not on my side? That's transparency and accountability.

renegade7:
Well, there's The Golden One. YouTube opinion-haver/Swedish neo-Nazi who apparently decided to take it to the opposite extreme.

The thing is, people who are very, very strong very, very rarely if ever look like the golden one. They look like this..

image

That's because maintaining this level of muscle mass means eating 6 times the calories a regular person does, mostly in the form of protein and carbohydrates, the latter of which gets stored in the form of fat. So if you want to get really strong, you're probably going to end up with a lot of fat as well, it's just part of the deal.

Body builders get around this in one of three ways, or more generally a combination of the first two.

1) Carefully timed periods of fasting and starvation.
2) Steroids.
3) Synthol injections/silicone implants.

None of which is healthy. In fact, these can potentially be life threatening.

There was a famous participant observation study in a bodybuilding gym in the early 90s by sociologist and anthropologist Alan Klein. One of the more controversial things he claimed is that most of the men there had been sick or had some form of health complication in childhood, so bodybuilding gave them a sense of control over bodies which they felt were inadequate or flawed in some way. He also observed that while the bodybuilders he was observing were obsessed with maintaining masculinity, being bodybuilders actually required them to compromise this. Since their lifestyle meant they couldn't get normal jobs, many were paying the bills by having sex with gay men (the same gay men they would denigrate in homophobic banter at the gym). It becomes even weirder when you consider that they will have all been taking steroids and thus loading their bodies with estrogens.

Like, bodybuilders are ultimately a really weird contradiction in gender terms. They spend all their time trying to look like this exaggerated image of the ideal or "alpha" man, but they have to spend so much effort on doing it that it becomes a kind of performance. It's like weak men going into drag as big strong men (only drag is actually fun to watch).

One paradox of masculinity is that we so often associate it with ornamental qualities (looking a certain way, dressing a certain way) but we aren't allowed to admit that we're treating it as something ornamental because that shit isn't masculine. That's why bodybuilders have to pretend that what they do is about strength or fitness or health, when it is actually highly destructive to all of those things.

Zontar:

Addendum_Forthcoming:

image

How can anyone be so disconnected from reality as to actually believe this is true?

I love when right-wingers post comments that would make sense in response to right-wingers. It happens pretty often actually.

BeetleManiac:

RikuoAmero:
So let's see if I understand you. Should one be allowed to call someone else a fucking moron (in meat-space)? Is name calling verboten? Illegal?

It's adorable that you're pretending to not know the difference between bickering and abuse, but you're still not getting me to vote Republican. It's not me, it's you.

Meh. I can't vote republican myself. I'm not even in the US nor do I plan on ever going there. Look how well your presumption worked.

evilthecat:

The thing is, people who are very, very strong very, very rarely if ever look like the golden one. They look like this..

image

I was watching World's Strongest Man once, and the commentator said [paraphrasing from memory]: 'A lot of these guys look like they've got big bellies, but if you try to poke your finger into it, it doesn't go anywhere'.

I would not try to poke my finger into Eddie Hall's belly, he can pull buses.

RikuoAmero:
-snip-

I notice you didn't bother asking a specious follow-up. Are we done here?

Zontar:

Addendum_Forthcoming:

image

How can anyone be so disconnected from reality as to actually believe this is true?

The fuck, did I post that? Pretty sure I didn't post it. Are you making up things again, Zontar? Also, yeah ... as being familiar with his antics with Sentinel Media ... totally believable.

Zontar:

Addendum_Forthcoming:

image

How can anyone be so disconnected from reality as to actually believe this is true?

You seem to keep forgetting that 4chan isn't reality mate...

Wow, is Milo a poor author. Or else he hired ghostwriters that weren't worth the money, even if he didn't pay them.

RikuoAmero:
If this guy is so weak as everyone else is saying, so not worth one's time...why is he so feared? Why all the effort to make damn sure he doesn't sell his book, doesn't speak at engagements?

For the last couple decades or so the left has been pretty consistent about trying to shut down anyone speaking on certain topics they don't like (the UofT CAFE protests are a good example), and Milo basically lives to offend exactly them. For them, it's less about presenting a counter argument, and more about not letting your opponent speak at all or at the very least not letting anyone listen. Which is why so many of them devolve into either low grade violence (see Berkeley last April) or making the venue unusable (bomb threats, fire alarms and the like).

bastardofmelbourne:
Might as well ask Milo the same thing about Linda Sarsour.

It's almost as if he doesn't care about free speech at all!

Poor example, in his speech at the protest in question he "briefly acknowledged Ms. Sarsour's right to speak", and in an emailed response to a question wrote "Unlike some of the other speakers, I don't want Sarsour canceled. I want as many people as possible to hear her odious thoughts. That doesn't mean I can't explain why she is dangerous and wrong."

That's per the article you linked, BTW.

StatusNil:

That's simply not true. Anyone notice how tightly all your favorite Corporate Entities have latched onto the "diversity and inclusivity" cant that's supposedly so "left wing"? That's because they view that as the optimal way to organize their target markets, by transforming the individual consumers into pseudocommunities like the "fandoms" of media empires.

"Diversity and inclusivity" is useful for a simple reason -- it keeps people fighting about race, gender, and sexuality, while quietly avoiding bringing up economic class until someone points out that they quietly avoid bringing up economic class. Then it gets *just* enough lip service to pretend that they aren't doing exactly that before going back to the usual.

evilthecat:

Zontar:
How can anyone be so disconnected from reality as to actually believe this is true?

Are you alleging that Simon and Schuster submitted falsified information to a court of law?

Because that would be a very serious allegation..

I think he means that there's no wrong time or place to joke about black dick. I'm guessing Zontar is a fan of them?

Baffle2:
'A lot of these guys look like they've got big bellies, but if you try to poke your finger into it, it doesn't go anywhere'.

Yeah, that's because they're full of muscle, but it's fatty muscle. It's the way muscle naturally develops on the human body when a person is eating enough calories to support it healthily (or as healthily as a person can be while training that hard). Bodybuilding or fitness modelling isn't about building big or strong muscles, it's about muscle definition. Bodybuilders pretend that what they do is a "sport" or that it's about health and fitness because the truth, that it's entirely about appearance and aesthetics, makes it sound a little bit.. dare I say it.. effeminate. After all, "real" men aren't supposed to view their bodies as aesthetic objects. Men's bodies are supposed to be functional, not ornamental.

Essentially, bodybuilding is a deeply, deeply gender non-conforming activity which is dressed up in hypermasculine trappings. I compared it to drag on purpose.

Schadrach:
Poor example, in his speech at the protest in question he "briefly acknowledged Ms. Sarsour?s right to speak", and in an emailed response to a question wrote "Unlike some of the other speakers, I don?t want Sarsour canceled. I want as many people as possible to hear her odious thoughts. That doesn?t mean I can?t explain why she is dangerous and wrong."

That's per the article you linked, BTW.

Yes, I know. I did read it.

Milo is perfectly willing to say that he respects free speech when he's speaking to journalists. But this is contradicted by his actions and words when he's not being examined by a professional who is recording what they are saying.

Milo didn't get a loudspeaker, stand up on his soapbox in front of an audience, and say "Linda Sarsour has a right to speak and should be allowed to do so, even and especially if I disagree with what she has to say." He got up on his soapbox and started listing all the reasons why his audience ought to be angry that she was being allowed to speak. He wasn't protesting Linda Sarsour's ideals; Linda Sarsour holds her ideals 100% of the time, and he can protest them whenever he wants through an article or a panel or a podcast. But he chose to hold a protest rally at the same time Linda Sarsour had a speaking engagement scheduled, outside the building where she was scheduled to speak, in which he protested the decision to invite Linda Sarsour to speak.

Which is exactly what Milo's protesters do whenever he gets invited to speak, and it's exactly what Milo criticises them for doing, which was my actual point. Holding a protest outside a speaking engagement isn't a bad thing. It's an expression of free speech, just as the speaking engagement being protested against is an expression of free speech. Milo is completely free to protest Linda Sarsour in the name of free speech. But he cannot then turn around and point to people protesting him and say that those protesters are infringing on his free speech. Which is a thing he does frequently and habitually, usually in a "these lefty snowflake hypocrites don't want me to speak, hur hur hur" way.

evilthecat:

Yeah, that's because they're full of muscle, but it's fatty muscle.

Oh, I know - it just made me laugh, the idea that I'd go up to one of these guys and slowly poke my finger into their belly. And maybe make a 'ppppt' noise while I did it.

StatusNil:

And where, pray, is this "quality left" hiding among the hordes of chanting No-Platformers and social media inquisitions?

There's a whole internet out there. Perhaps you should take less time focusing on the worst of social media and college campuses.

Sure, it provides ammunition for cheap ridicule and saves the risk of having to address anything challenging, but making yourself feel superior by punching the weakest kids in class is a long way from being a heavyweight champion.

Chewster:
For that matter, why are all the "rah rah Alpha Male" dudes the dumpiest guys on Earth?

Insecurity; leading to overcompensation for their own perceived weakness.

Baffle2:
I was watching World's Strongest Man once, and the commentator said [paraphrasing from memory]: 'A lot of these guys look like they've got big bellies, but if you try to poke your finger into it, it doesn't go anywhere'.

In order to get very high levels of muscle definition, bodybuilders have to burn away the fat in their body. This means they can tend to be relatively poor athletes, because mobilisation of fat reserves is important to sustained heavy exercise. Secondly, exercises that make muscles good for show aren't necessarily good ones for general athletic capability; there may be deficits in flexibility, and in co-ordination of multiple muscle groups.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here