It's easier to attack than defend.

I play table top wargames. One tactic that always works, no matter the game, is to put your opponent on the defensive. People on the defensive are flustered, they make more mistakes. This is a prime debate strategy as well. It's a strategy for any contest between people. An arguing couple knows this, a child who doesn't want to clean his room knows this. Sun Tzu knew this. It's a tactic that goes way back.

All people make mistakes. They will inevitably contradict themselves at some point, because no issue beyond "2 plus 2 equals 4" is simple enough. (And there are mathematicans who will even argue such a simple arithmetic problem)

Take the case of Matt Binder, who seeks out such things that people have said in the past to mock and ridicule them, while making such blunders of his own.
No, Matt Binder probably doesn't think that consensual sex is rape. But he replied poorly to an intentionally provocative tweet, and so has made a contradictory statement.

Another tactic is to block the need to defend. Make your own position vague and fluid, and it will be more difficult for you opponent to find your inevitable mistakes.

On to satire and hyperbole. The problem with satire is that someone will inevitably take your position seriously. This happens often on social media, where people are intentionally attempting to find anything to use against an opponent. Such as what recently happend on twitter where a critic actually attempted to use a line from a movie to smear Adam Baldwin with racism.

Whether Adam Baldwin is racist or not (and I do not think he is) is irrelevant to the issue that using a line of dialogue from a movie to represent the actor's personal views is ludicrous.

Which brings me to Femitheist Divine AKA Krysta. A woman who put up some very disturbing videos on youtube once upon a time. She seems to have recanted and called those videos "satire". The problem is we have no way of knowing Krysta's mind, like Adam Baldwin. She could be recanting or dissociating from those ideas, or been sincere. I would like to point out that anyone can backpeddal and call their more hyperbolic statements "satire". People will jump through hoops to justify previous statements, and we're all vulnerable to the temptation to preserve our own Ego. MRAs, MGTOWs, Feminists, and people who think they're above such labels by eschewing them.

"How did you overcome your kwisatz haderach?" Irulan asked.
"A creature who has spent his life creating one particular representation of
his selfdom will die rather than become the antithesis of that representation,"
Scytale said.
"I do not understand," Edric ventured.
"He killed himself," the Reverend Mother growled.
-Dune Messiah

People become attached to their labels. They make them a part of their own identity. A Christian is not only someone who believes in Jesus Christ, they are someone who defines their very existence by their belief in Jesus Christ. To criticise christianity is a personal attack for such a person. To convince them that their belief is false (whether it is false or true is irrelevant. Their belief is the issue) can have a serious impact on their psyche.

So a person who identifies with a concept as part of their identity will react with strong emotions to criticism of that concept, as a personal attack. This is what leads to so much acrimony over labels instead of issues.

Is abandoning such labels a measure of prevention against attachment to the label? Is it an attempt to block criticism by denying a label and the connotations that it brings? Don't think that by refusing a label that you somehow transcend your vulnerabilities. Also, do not think that your label is your identity. Or that your lack of labels protects you from your falliability.

Space Moses, part 2.

Follow up thoughts on Geordie Tait.

https://twitter.com/Geordie_Tait

The guys has some serious issues. But I think this thought process is on a kind of spectrum. The cold, logical conclusions of feminist ideas like Patriarchy Theory, is that men are women's superiors, and that women will never, ever be safe from men. Thus you run a spectrum of solutions based on the morals and principles of an individual feminist.

Someone like CH Sommers stops very early, at the gynocentric break. Men are useful to women, and cannot perform if they are not treated sufficently well.
Most coffee shop feminists stop just past rape culture and the wage gap. Men are predatory and oppressive, but they can be taught, like animals I suppose.
Further off the deep end are feminists like Jessica Valenti, who use feminism to justify their misandry, and call it 'ironic;. "Often a true word is spoken in jest"
Next stop on the crazy train is Geordie Tait, and the idea that anyone against feminism deserves to be gassed to death. He's not willing to push the button himself, but would be perfectly fine if someone else did.
Last stop is Valerie Solanis, who thought that radical feminism didn't go far enough.

So the ideology leads to a conclusion that men should be killed, and the morals and principles (or lack thereof) of an individual feminist shows where they get off the crazy train.

Space Moses

I listened to King of Pol's chat with Geordie Tait today while at work. A few things stuck out for me. I mean aside from the NAZI IDEOLOGY.

Tait mentioned how men are superior to women. Even comparing men to the fictional character of Superman. I'm sure he wouldn't use the term "Superior to women", but the idea that men are so powerful as to be compared to Superman, and that they have oppressed women for 10,000 years is so blatantly an idea that men are their superiors that it's hard to miss. Of course, a man can be excused for having such godlike power if he uses his superior masculinity in the service of women.
Otherwise, he'd be one of the Bad Men. It came out clearly when Oliver confonted Tait with the idea that his speils were making women feel afraid. That's against his Prime Directive, and so caused him cognitive dissonance. Even after vehemently asserting that he's fine with the idea of women being gassed if they support #GamerGate, being faced with the idea of threatening #GamerGate women tripped him up.

And his constant accusations that #GamerGate supporters are misogynists, etc. I couldn't help but think of how the Nazis portrayed the Jews as dangerous.

Responsibility.

I've been thinking of the video clip of Caitlin Moran shown at the beginning of this video, Singing the Masculinity Blues.



It's telling that Caitlin mentions how she thinks men should step down and give women power for a while. The sheer misunderstanding of how power, authority and responsibility work.

If women want power and authority, they need to take the responsibility that comes with it. It's like feminists have a fairy tale idea of men being all powerful and seeing only the riches and power that powerful men had, and ignoring all the men underneath, toiling and sweating for little thanks or recognition.

Let me put this as clear as I can. If women want power, they first must seek the responsibility to prove that they have the qualifications to wield that power. Most men have to earn their positions of authority, they are not given them. Sometimes a golden boy gets a fast track to unearned success, but that is rare and often disastrous.

But even more than that, I think that it comes from father worship. To admit that men could be vulnerable, that men might not be all-powerful is to admit that men might not have the power to protect and provide for them, that their father figure might have feet of clay, and be made of blood and sinew instead of steel.

Note the reaction of many women in 3rd world countries if their husband is raped. These men are tossed aside as valueless. It opens up a vein of fear in women.

So these radfems are trapped in a place where they envy their fairy tale vision of male power, but to take it from men is to admit that men could be powerless, and thus shatter their father worship fantasy.

Orestes

You wild goddesses who dart across the skies
seeking vengeance for murder, we beg you to free
Agamemnon's son from his raging fury....
We grieve for this boy. Happiness is brief among mortals.
Sorrow and anguish sweep down on it
like a swift gust of wind on a sail boat,
and it sinks under the tossing seas.

The Exodus

On a popular table top rpg site I visit, I saw another person question the progressive social justice movement. In this case, the issue was over #GamerGate. The user was given a lengthy ban for daring to question the SJW narrative that they spin about #GamerGate.

These people usually seek out alternative places to speak their minds. KotakuInAction, 8Chan, the MRM, MGTOW boards. They still want to talk about the issues, and the tendency for SJWs to ban and silence just makes them more eager to speak.

Weaponized Threats

Brianna Wu recieves death threats over internet.

Some of those who have been following gamergate see the pattern. A woman gets threats over the internet, inevitably gets a plug for their product or video, and uses the threat as a shield against criticism.
Hell, Davis Aurini and Jordan Owen are attempting to get a documentary made on this subject, aptly named, The Sarkeesian Effect.

http://www.patreon.com/thesarkeesianeffect

Digging deeper shows that there is more going on under the hood of these threats.
Brianna Wu was not above making troll accounts to attack gamergate supporters.

https://archive.today/ApOy0

We may never be able to confirm where these threats come from, or if they are intentional fabrications or trolls trying to play both sides, but they do happen, and they're the strongest weapon the SJWs have in their arsenal, since they play on emotions instead of logic.