Ms. Maya the Bee

Google cancels meeting about gender controversy due to harassment and doxxing

Recommended Posts

apatrickwsu   
apatrickwsu
6 minutes ago, CaptainYesterday said:

I thought I had already condemned it.  Haven't I called it bad?

 

The doxxing I'm referring to is a concerted effort to identify people in random pictures taken from the rally.  One person has already been identified and has been fired from his job.

First, no I don't see you having called it bad or condemning it. The closest you came was that you said the left doesn't care when it is done against the right. You seem to dance around condemning it and haven't said you disagree with Yato although earlier it looked like you claimed I misrepresented them.

 

The doxxing I saw was the people I mentioned plus a person who had already been arrested at an alt right rally in Berkley (even though he was already known and I think all the "who are these people, let's doxx them" images were low hanging fruit that people knew who the people were before posting) and a univesity employee wearing a shirt for his department in the university. What were the odds that the pics would be someone whose mugshot was around from the Berkley stuff, a couple twitter and youtube personalities, and the only one that didn't match up being the university guy? I agree noone should be harassed or doxxed at all, but the university guy clearly represented his employer in a negative way and could be fired for that. If noone published his details but a coworker or even an unaffiliated person contacted the school and said it was terrible someone was representing the school badly they could have fired him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CaptainYesterday   
CaptainYesterday
29 minutes ago, apatrickwsu said:

First, no I don't see you having called it bad or condemning it. The closest you came was that you said the left doesn't care when it is done against the right. You seem to dance around condemning it and haven't said you disagree with Yato although earlier it looked like you claimed I misrepresented them.

I condemn doxxing, but I don't think I disagree with him because he's said he's condemned doxxing like seven times in this thread, so I don't know what you're reaching for here.

 

29 minutes ago, apatrickwsu said:

The doxxing I saw was the people I mentioned plus a person who had already been arrested at an alt right rally in Berkley (even though he was already known and I think all the "who are these people, let's doxx them" images were low hanging fruit that people knew who the people were before posting) and a univesity employee wearing a shirt for his department in the university. What were the odds that the pics would be someone whose mugshot was around from the Berkley stuff, a couple twitter and youtube personalities, and the only one that didn't match up being the university guy? I agree noone should be harassed or doxxed at all, but the university guy clearly represented his employer in a negative way and could be fired for that. If noone published his details but a coworker or even an unaffiliated person contacted the school and said it was terrible someone was representing the school badly they could have fired him.

I'm referring to the doxxing happening right now of random people from this weekend's protest.  People who identify as either white supremacists or even literal Nazis.  Is it still bad to dox them, or is that okay?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
apatrickwsu   
apatrickwsu
9 minutes ago, CaptainYesterday said:

I condemn doxxing, but I don't think I disagree with him because he's said he's condemned doxxing like seven times in this thread, so I don't know what you're reaching for here.

 

I'm referring to the doxxing happening right now of random people from this weekend's protest.  People who identify as either white supremacists or even literal Nazis.  Is it still bad to dox them, or is that okay?

I was asking where I was wrong or misrepresenting. He said if the doxxing is anybodies fault it is anti-trump people to blame and not the doxxers.

 

I addressed everything that I've seen about Charlottesville, some of which I would call doxxing and some I wouldn't. I condemn doxxing but don't think pointing out people with big social media reaches is doxxing. If there is something I didn't address it is because I don't know about it. I assumed you were talking about the university guy primarily.

 

edit to add: I don't approve of doxxing or committing or assisting public harassment. I don't mind pointing out that a celebrity or social media personality who told 10's of thousands of people they would be at an alt right rally were there is doxxing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Randomchaos   
Randomchaos

Personally my motto in life has been if I don't want the public to know I do something I probably shouldn't be doing it. 

 

As a member I'm all for doxxing, if someone does something incredibly stupid they should live with that, personally I wish that the teens that mocked a disabled man while he drowned to death would be doxxed. They deserve to be looked on with disgust for the rest of their lives for watching someone die while actively mocking him while he died. 

 

White supremacists should not be allowed to hide behind "anonymity" they are what is wrong with our country. As are people who are violent at protests.

 

Basically I think that if someone does something to another person they do not deserve sympathy. 

 

At the same time I do not think it is right for people to dox people who did nothing that impacts others. Basically if it's just an opinion and they aren't acting on it I do not think they should be doxxed, or if they are just doing their job, I do not think it's right for them to be harassed.

 

 

Also you know what? If someone was at that rally in Charlottesville actively participating I'd want to know. I want to know who in life I should avoid. 

 

Reading the article I have to say I'm loving Ivanka right now for denouncing racism and white supremacy.

 

Her tweet read "There should be no place in society for racism, white supremacy and neo-nazis." 

 

Also I liked what McAuliffe said;
 

Quote
"They get out of bed every day to hate people and divide our country," McAuliffe said.
On Saturday, McAuliffe told the demonstrators to go home. On Sunday he went further.
"Let's be honest, they need to leave America, because they are not Americans," he said.

And hey I know that most people here dislike Pence, but can we all agree he did a good thing when he said this?
 

Quote
"We have no tolerance for hate and violence from white supremacists, neo-Nazis or the KKK," the vice president said while in Cartagena, Colombia. "These dangerous fringe groups have no place in American public life and in the American debate and we condemn them in the strongest possible terms."

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CaptainYesterday   
CaptainYesterday

It's really sad to see people support doxxing.  I think you're failing to understand mob mentality.  This isn't about you being able to "know" who was at the rally, this is about not supporting the likely vigilante "justice" that will follow, and especially not supporting the harassment of friends and family of the doxed person.

 

That's why I've been asking people here to explain what doxxing is and why it's bad, and I'm sad to see that no one really understand it.  It's just another tool to harm people you don't like, and damn the consequences.

 

Maybe when one of these white supremacist's innocent kids are killed after they get swatted, or any other horrible potential outcome of this powder keg incident, you'll understand why doxxing is bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yato   
Yato

You can easily dox the wrong person, and ruin an innocent person's life as well. If you support doxxing, and dox the wrong person. You deserved to be doxxed by your own logic. 

 

Just like they don't allow vigilante modding on Aven, they don't allow vigilante justice in the real world. To protect everyone, because everyone has rights and needs to go through the system of law to be treated equally.

 

No one has the right to impose their own brand of Justice on anyone. Because then you really are no different than the very people you are trying to eliminate. No matter what side you are on, or how moral you think you are. Killing is killing, no matter how or why it is done. The Means don't justify the end. Violence is violence, no matter what you are standing for.

 

There is no good and evil, there is only principle. If you forsake your principles for your opponents, then you've already lost.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Randomchaos   
Randomchaos

Very true, I guess I tend to forget that people are violent, and tbh I don't support violence. So following that line of thinking doxxing is incredibly wrong because there are always going to be people who think violence is the answer.

 

Thanks for pointing that out @Yato @CaptainYesterday :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Calligraphette_Coe   
Calligraphette_Coe
8 hours ago, Yato said:

You can easily dox the wrong person, and ruin an innocent person's life as well. If you support doxxing, and dox the wrong person. You deserved to be doxxed by your own logic. 

 

Just like they don't allow vigilante modding on Aven, they don't allow vigilante justice in the real world. To protect everyone, because everyone has rights and needs to go through the system of law to be treated equally.

 

No one has the right to impose their own brand of Justice on anyone. Because then you really are no different than the very people you are trying to eliminate. No matter what side you are on, or how moral you think you are. Killing is killing, no matter how or why it is done. The Means don't justify the end. Violence is violence, no matter what you are standing for.

 

There is no good and evil, there is only principle. If you forsake your principles for your opponents, then you've already lost.

There's a slight problem with your  doxxing meme, though.  Some people are doxx proof- they are already out and have life circurmstances for which doxxing holds any 'shadow' for them. In other words, there is a assymetical threat they can hold lord over people who have committed no crimes, but whom they despise on general principle ( if that's not a contradiction of terms?). 

 

For instance, it's not against the law to be and/or identify as trans.  Yet in the conservative area I live, there are some TERFs who are intractibly transphobic and _have_ in fact doxxed people, who have lost their jobs because there are still no protections in place for trans people when it comes to jobs and other forms of discrimination. I'm in a STEM career in a company run by a CEO that has openly declared their disgust for trans people and has said they need not come to work there if 'that's how they want to be.' As long as I stay in the closet, I'm relatively safe. But if someone let it be known there was a trans person who worked in my department, let's just say it wouldn't be hard to figure you who it was.

 

There is no 'equal protection under the law' for my situation. My only 'crime' is what they would consider a thought crime, and doxxing is the knife at my throat.... the sword of Damocles.... that I live with every day. THe doxxer need only hand the knife to someone they know will use it gladly.

 

But let's take it a step further? I have committed no crimes, I have harmed no one.  Unlike a sex offender who has been found guilty of crimes and whom the state in essence doxxes by statute, people like the TERFs try to throw me in that group. And use lies to have me censured by guilt by association, EVEN THOUGH that is a fiction they contrived. (Nevermind that I was a victim of sexual assault, their hatred won't allow them to see me as a victim, much less tell my story. To them, I deserved what happened to me and/or I was a willing participant who is lying about it.)

 

Doxxing casts a long shadow on me. Yet people like Milo Y. , whom I noticed some people here defend, can dox someone like me with impunity. Yet _I'm_ the villain of the piece because I'm not of the proper political stripe? Whereas he has condoned pedophilia, which _is_ a crime?

 

Where's the justice?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CaptainYesterday   
CaptainYesterday
16 minutes ago, Calligraphette_Coe said:

Doxxing casts a long shadow on me. Yet people like Milo Y. , whom I noticed some people here defend, can dox someone like me with impunity.

Read the thread.  He did not dox that trans person.  He shared a news clip in which the trans person willingly participated, about a trans issue, as an open trans person, about a trans issue.

 

You cannot dox someone who's information is already public, especially if they offered that information willingly.  This wasn't a blurred out/voice modulated interview where he tracked the person's identity down, he just played a clip from a local news station.  He did not gather additional, private information about this person, like their phone number or address.  This is not doxxing, and it will never be doxxing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Calligraphette_Coe   
Calligraphette_Coe
45 minutes ago, CaptainYesterday said:

Read the thread.  He did not dox that trans person.  He shared a news clip in which the trans person willingly participated, about a trans issue, as an open trans person, about a trans issue.

 

You cannot dox someone who's information is already public, especially if they offered that information willingly.  This wasn't a blurred out/voice modulated interview where he tracked the person's identity down, he just played a clip from a local news station.  He did not gather additional, private information about this person, like their phone number or address.  This is not doxxing, and it will never be doxxing.

In your opinion. Look, there's a huge difference between being 'public' on a friendly venue like an LGBT mag and having your face and name being projected on a screen in an auditorium of alt-righters to then being given huge negative publicity in a patently hostile venue like Breitbart. The difference in moral equivalency is beyond belief and all the word lawyering in the world won't wash it away.

 

Let's call it para doxxing, then. How's that? It's still a really slimey sociopathic maneuver meant to incite harrassment. Which was the same thing he got kicked of Twitter for doing. Do you also contend that Twitter wasn't within its rights to do that? That his getting kicked off there was some Giant Left Wing Conspiracy?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CaptainYesterday   
CaptainYesterday
1 hour ago, Calligraphette_Coe said:

In your opinion. Look, there's a huge difference between being 'public' on a friendly venue like an LGBT mag

I'm pretty sure it was the local news.

 

Quote

and having your face and name being projected on a screen in an auditorium of alt-righters

Baseless assumption.  Many of Milo's fans are classical Liberals.

 

Quote

to then being given huge negative publicity in a patently hostile venue

Baseless accusation.

 

Quote

Let's call it para doxxing, then. How's that? It's still a really slimey sociopathic maneuver meant to incite harrassment. Which was the same thing he got kicked of Twitter for doing. Do you also contend that Twitter wasn't within its rights to do that? That his getting kicked off there was some Giant Left Wing Conspiracy?

Obviously Twitter is within their right to do it, but they enforce their rules with a large political bias.  Which is also within their right, but when they also say they stand for "free speech," that makes them hypocrites.

 

Plenty of left-leaning people harass far more than Milo did and yet they retain their Twitter accounts.  It's not really a conspiracy to say that Twitter is has a left-leaning bias.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Calligraphette_Coe   
Calligraphette_Coe
41 minutes ago, CaptainYesterday said:

I'm pretty sure it was the local news.

 

Baseless assumption.  Many of Milo's fans are classical Liberals.

That's just a sneaky way of saying they're Libertarians. 

41 minutes ago, CaptainYesterday said:

 

Baseless accusation.

 

Obviously Twitter is within their right to do it, but they enforce their rules with a large political bias.  Which is also within their right, but when they also say they stand for "free speech," that makes them hypocrites.

 

Plenty of left-leaning people harass far more than Milo did and yet they retain their Twitter accounts.  It's not really a conspiracy to say that Twitter is has a left-leaning bias.

Baseless accusation.  

 

But what is really rich? A guy who condones pedophilia saying trans people are sexual predators. As if he's some crusader for bathroom safety. He's hardly original, just another Roy Cohn who wants to be powerful on the backs of people by whipping up hysteria against people just like himself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CaptainYesterday   
CaptainYesterday

Yeah, you're clearly incapable of talking about the topic at hand.  Good day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CaptainYesterday   
CaptainYesterday

For the record (for people who are willing to have a discussion), Milo says a few things I agree with (namely things regarding free speech and various criticizms of identity politics) in ways that I almost universally disagree with. I "defended" him here for two reasons:

 

1.  I believe that loosening the definitions of very imortant terms is harmful. Doxxing is a specific thing and should remain a specific thing.  The accuracy of language is important for proper communication.

 

2.  Just like the accuracy of language is important, so too is the accuracy of criticsm.  Milo is a large target of embellishment or even outright lies that I see happen to less-polarizing figures all the time, in an attempt to discredit them. In this, Milo is emblematic of this brand of slander that I find harmful to proper discourse, even if Milo isn't the one who's reputation I care all that much about.

 

Since Milo doesn't make his points very well - they are couched in insults and shock value, as many have pointed out in this thread - this doesn't really matter so much for Milo, specifically.  Play with fire, get burned, etc.

 

But these same tactics being applied to more rational people, such as Dave Rubin, Tim Poole, and Phillip DeFranco, is a big deal in my opinion, which is why I disagree with the use of such tactics in general, even against people like Milo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
warrigan   
warrigan

here's how i feel about doxxing:

i think that anyone who plans on doing some shit or saying some shit, online or in real life, should be doing that while being aware of consequences.  if i go to a protest or say "nazis should burn in hell" or "feminists should burn in hell" i am doing that with the awareness that i should be ready to defend (or at least be accountable for) the shit i say or do.  i never count on being anonymous online and i don't think anyone else should either.  don't go to a neo-nazi rally if you don't want to be considered a neo-nazi, don't join the kkk if you don't want to be found out as a member of the kkk.  i want to fucking know if there's someone i know who's a neo-nazi or in the kkk because that's a pretty big fucking deal to me.

so in that sense, i don't think anyone should be angry when their identity is revealed because i don't think you should be doing/saying any shit you aren't prepared to own up to.

 

however.  i don't think that revealing information in order to use your followers to launch a campaign to get someone fired (which is the main context i've heard of, i guess) is right.  i think that's harassment and just a really petty fucking thing to do.  air your grievances with the person if you feel personally wronged or insulted, but don't use your followers/army of like-minded people in a self-righteous competition to "get back" at the person for wronging/offending you, since i honestly think that's what it's about.  i think it's about someone attacking them or their beliefs and them feeling insecure about that or unsettled by the reminder that not everyone agrees with their perfect, singular world view, so they set their followers on the offensive to feel secure in their worldview again.

anyway, i think that sort of thing is wrong and totally misguided.  work out your own issues with that person without bringing other people into your little catfight.

 

On 8/12/2017 at 7:22 PM, CaptainYesterday said:

As an aside, I feel like people here are assuming I'm a huge Milo fan.  If you know anything about me, you'd know that MIlo's assumption that men are predators (and thus would be the ones to attempt to infiltrate women's bathrooms) is something that I greatly disagree with.  I "defend" Milo because he's a lightning rod for the kind of slander that left-leaning people and publications tend to perpetuate to anyone who they disagree with.  It's the slander that I disagree with, not necessary Milo that I agree with.

doesn't that mean you're doing what you say leftists do (blindly support their own agenda contrary to their own sense of reason)?

let me know if i'm putting words into your mouth, i'm genuinely curious if you feel it's a double standard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yato   
Yato
38 minutes ago, warrigan said:

here's how i feel about doxxing:

i think that anyone who plans on doing some shit or saying some shit, online or in real life, should be doing that while being aware of consequences.  if i go to a protest or say "nazis should burn in hell" or "feminists should burn in hell" i am doing that with the awareness that i should be ready to defend (or at least be accountable for) the shit i say or do.  i never count on being anonymous online and i don't think anyone else should either.  don't go to a neo-nazi rally if you don't want to be considered a neo-nazi, don't join the kkk if you don't want to be found out as a member of the kkk.  i want to fucking know if there's someone i know who's a neo-nazi or in the kkk because that's a pretty big fucking deal to me.

so in that sense, i don't think anyone should be angry when their identity is revealed because i don't think you should be doing/saying any shit you aren't prepared to own up to.

 

however.  i don't think that revealing information in order to use your followers to launch a campaign to get someone fired (which is the main context i've heard of, i guess) is right.  i think that's harassment and just a really petty fucking thing to do.  air your grievances with the person if you feel personally wronged or insulted, but don't use your followers/army of like-minded people in a self-righteous competition to "get back" at the person for wronging/offending you, since i honestly think that's what it's about.  i think it's about someone attacking them or their beliefs and them feeling insecure about that or unsettled by the reminder that not everyone agrees with their perfect, singular world view, so they set their followers on the offensive to feel secure in their worldview again.

anyway, i think that sort of thing is wrong and totally misguided.  work out your own issues with that person without bringing other people into your little catfight.

 

doesn't that mean you're doing what you say leftists do (blindly support their own agenda contrary to their own sense of reason)?

let me know if i'm putting words into your mouth, i'm genuinely curious if you feel it's a double standard.

Anonymity serves a valuable tool against oppressive governments. It works both ways. After all, you can't say the North Korean dictator is bad, if you don't have anonymity or you will be slain. You cannot form revolutions, if you cannot communicate effectively without getting caught. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CaptainYesterday   
CaptainYesterday
2 hours ago, warrigan said:

doesn't that mean you're doing what you say leftists do (blindly support their own agenda contrary to their own sense of reason)?

let me know if i'm putting words into your mouth, i'm genuinely curious if you feel it's a double standard.

I'm not sure what you mean, what am I doing blindly?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
warrigan   
warrigan
1 hour ago, Yato said:

Anonymity serves a valuable tool against oppressive governments. It works both ways. After all, you can't say the North Korean dictator is bad, if you don't have anonymity or you will be slain. You cannot form revolutions, if you cannot communicate effectively without getting caught. 

right, but even those who anonymously work against oppressive governments do so with the awareness of the consequences.  i didn't say no one should be anonymous, just that anyone who does anything (anonymously or not) should be prepared for consequences of their actions.  i'm fine with people being anonymous, i just don't accept that being anonymous releases people from the consequences of what they say/do.  i'm anonymous in many ways online (like on aven) but i would never say something online that i wasn't ready to defend/own up to irl because i'm aware of the consequences of expressing certain viewpoints (and the way in which i choose to express them).

plus i don't really think that's the best comparison.  since the people who are choosing to be anonymous under these circumstances are granted freedom of speech (assuming they're american), being anonymous is more of a face-saving measure than a life-saving measure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yato   
Yato
1 minute ago, warrigan said:

right, but even those who anonymously work against oppressive governments do so with the awareness of the consequences.  i didn't say no one should be anonymous, just that anyone who does anything (anonymously or not) should be prepared for consequences of their actions.  i'm fine with people being anonymous, i just don't accept that being anonymous releases people from the consequences of what they say/do.  i'm anonymous in many ways online (like on aven) but i would never say something online that i wasn't ready to defend/own up to irl because i'm aware of the consequences of expressing certain viewpoints (and the way in which i choose to express them).

plus i don't really think that's the best comparison.  since the people who are choosing to be anonymous under these circumstances are granted freedom of speech (assuming they're american), being anonymous is more of a face-saving measure than a life-saving measure.

Its a very slippery slope to even allow a government to consider when and when you should not be anonymous. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
warrigan   
warrigan
13 minutes ago, CaptainYesterday said:

I'm not sure what you mean, what am I doing blindly?

well, you say you defend milo more because he's a frequent target of the left than because you agree with him.  yet when leftists show a similar one-sided approach to their own members or opponents you criticize them.  (i used the word 'blindly' because i felt like i'd seen you use that word about leftists before, but the reason i asked if i was putting words into your mouth was because i wasn't sure.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
warrigan   
warrigan
27 minutes ago, Yato said:

Its a very slippery slope to even allow a government to consider when and when you should not be anonymous. 

.....which is why we have freedom of speech, so no one has to be anonymous to say things about the government.

 

look, that's not what i'm saying; i'm not interested in the question of allowing people to be anonymous.  like i said, i don't have a problem with anyone being anonymous.  i just feel that if you do or say anything, you're accepting the consequences of it.  when i say 'x', i am inviting the consequence of you responding with 'y'.  if i met you irl and you confronted me over 'z' then that would be the irl consequence of saying 'z' in the first place.  if i came on aven and made a bunch of death threats that wouldn't make me exempt from anything for exercising my (actually nonexistent) right to anonymity; i would have to face the consequences.  if i wanted to join the kkk and wear a hood and kill people, the fact that i was wearing the hood (and therefore was anonymous in the eyes of the public) wouldn't make me exempt from the consequences of fucking murder.  everything has consequences and anyone who thinks that they are exempt from them by hiding behind an internet account or some kind of disguise is kidding themselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CaptainYesterday   
CaptainYesterday
16 minutes ago, warrigan said:

well, you say you defend milo more because he's a frequent target of the left than because you agree with him. 

Those two things aren't exclusive, though.  I don't agree with his tactics and a lot of his ideas, but I don't agree with the people who feel the need to lie about him, either.  Those same people lie about others who I do agree with more, which is more pertinent to me, personally, but the lying itself is wrong either way.

 

16 minutes ago, warrigan said:

yet when leftists show a similar one-sided approach to their own members or opponents you criticize them.

But, again, I'm not being one-sided.  If anything, I'm reaching out to defend someone who I don't really consider to be "on my side."  If I saw someone here that I knew was wrong/lying about a person on the Left, I would correct them, too.  That doesn't really happen as much, though, because there's only a handful of us here who are even critical of the left in the first place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Moonman   
Moonman

But there's also the argument that a social media public shaming has done zero favours to anybody. To those on the Left doing it, you are only justifying what the Right has been saying about you all along, that you simply masquerade as good people who are actually very evil human beings once those layers are peeled back. I strongly condemn the view points of white supremacists but they are human beings and those that demonstrated at the rally had a right to be there and to say what they wanted to say. I don't agree with them, I think some of their ideas are counter-productive to our development as a race and I would go as far as to say that some of them are dangerous individuals. But to gleefully destroy their livelihoods in the names of political correctness is setting a precedent that a surveillance culture and a hive-mind mentality towards a diverse range of topics is to simply be accepted. And, I for one, think that is the opposite of democracy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ms. Maya the Bee   
Ms. Maya the Bee
4 minutes ago, Moonman said:

But there's also the argument that a social media public shaming has done zero favours to anybody. To those on the Left doing it, you are only justifying what the Right has been saying about you all along, that you simply masquerade as good people who are actually very evil human beings once those layers are peeled back. I strongly condemn the view points of white supremacists but they are human beings and those that demonstrated at the rally had a right to be there and to say what they wanted to say. I don't agree with them, I think some of their ideas are counter-productive to our development as a race and I would go as far as to say that some of them are dangerous individuals. But to gleefully destroy their livelihoods in the names of political correctness is setting a precedent that a surveillance culture and a hive-mind mentality towards a diverse range of topics is to simply be accepted. And, I for one, think that is the opposite of democracy.

This issue has nothing to do with "political correctness" 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CaptainYesterday   
CaptainYesterday
2 minutes ago, Ms. Maya the Bee said:

This issue has nothing to do with "political correctness" 

The initial firing does.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now