OneMeaningManyNames

Full time smug prick

  • 28 Posts
  • 160 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: July 2nd, 2024

help-circle
  • I’m going to bring it up.

    Isn’t this the same asshole who posted the “Woke racist” meme as a response to Gemini generating images of Black SS officers? Of course we now know he was merely triggered by the suggestion because of his commitment to white supremacy and alignment with the SS ideals, which he could not stand to see, pun not intended, denigrated.

    The Gemini ordeal was itself a result of a system prompt; a half-ass attempt to correct for white bias deeply learned by the algorithm, just a few short years after Google ousted their AI ethics researcher for bringing this type of stuff up.

    Few were the outlets that did not lend credence to the “outrage” about “diversity bias” bullshit and actually covered that deep learning algorithms are indeed sexist and racist.

    Now this nazi piece of shit goes ahead and does the exact same thing; he tweaks a system prompt causing the bot to bring up the self-serving and racially charged topic of apartheid racists being purportedly persecuted. He does the vary same thing he said was “uncivilizational”, the same concept he brought up just before he performed the two back-to-back Sieg Heil salutes during Trump’s inauguration.

    He was clearly not concerned about historical accuracy, not the superficial attempt to brown-wash the horrible past of racism which translates to modern algorithms’ bias. His concern was clearly the representation of people of color, and the very ideal of diversity, so he effectively went on and implemented his supremacist seething into a brutal, misanthropic policy with his interference in the election and involvement in the criminal, fascist operation also known as DOGE.

    Is there anyone at this point that is still sitting on the fence about Musk’s intellectual dishonesty and deeply held supremacist convictions? Quickest way to discover nazis nowadays really: (thinks that Musk is a misunderstood genius and the nazi shit is all fake).















  • This started out as a far-far-fetched construction to attack trans rights. In fact, whoever designed this hoax is Goebbels-level diabolical. If you break it down, it subconsciously re-arranges the notions of self-identification and toilet use, in a way that presents “reckless liberalism” as an immediate threat to normalcy.

    The people who eat this shit up may be stupid, but the people who design it are not. This goes beyond straw-man attack and slippery slope fallacy. It rather combines both into a powerful manipulation technique that bears resemblance to mass hypnosis. They have someone really malevolent on the propaganda payroll, folks.



  • I did not change the title as per community rules. But the title is misleading.

    The full quote was disparaging the public sector employees, suggesting it was “the public sector employees” who perpetrated the Holocaust. You want a quick debunk?

    • The Holocaust was decided by the higher echelons of the Nazi party, including Hitler.
    • Goebbels has written about it in his diaries.
    • Hoess was supervisor in Auschwitz II, and has written extensively about the daily murders in the gas chambers.
    • Himmler gave an infamous speech to raise the morale of the SS who had PTSD from the massacres in the Eastern Front.

    From Wikipedia:

    Reichsführer-SS Heinrich Himmler became the chief architect of a new plan, which came to be called The Final Solution to the Jewish question.[20] On 31 July 1941, Reichsmarschall Hermann Göring wrote to Reinhard Heydrich (Himmler’s deputy and chief of the RSHA),[21][22] authorising him to make the “necessary preparations” for a “total solution of the Jewish question” and coordinate with all affected organizations. Göring also instructed Heydrich to submit concrete proposals for the implementation of the new projected goal.[23][24]

    The plans to exterminate all the Jews of Europe were formalized at the Wannsee Conference, held at an SS guesthouse near Berlin,[28] on 20 January 1942. The conference was chaired by Heydrich and attended by 15 senior officials of the Nazi Party and the German government. Most of those attending were representatives of the Interior Ministry, the Foreign Ministry, and the Justice Ministry, including Ministers for the Eastern Territories.

    After all, I have zero fucks left for Musk: he hates blacks, women, and trans people to a degree comparable to how Hitler hated Jewish people, that his actual antisemitic sentiment would not change a thing. Whether he starts revisiting or denying the death camps tomorrow will surprise exactly zero people. We are past that point.

    There is no ongoing discussion about him being a Nazi or not. He fucking is. As a major propagandist of this despicable operation he will have the same fate as the original Nazi leaders, and that is for sure.

    The tweet in question is to interpreted as vilification of the administrative branch, and serve as positional defense at a moment where he risks being held accountable for DOGE cuts. This is how it should be interpreted.
















  • Of course it is. Did you ever believe that it would stop at trans people?

    The definition of “First they came for the communists…”

    It has been like that when they first agitated in favor of bathroom and sports segregation, but many let it slide because they were all cis-genderist inside.

    If only some trans advocates had warned that the anti-trans movement threatens the core of fundamental freedoms… Oh wait they did, but we called them nazis for not catering to our cisgenderism.

    So yes, we reach the point where they also come for the gays, and of course they will come for women and black people. They have let on this shit very publicly.

    I only sometimes history did not repeat itself sooo sarcastically.

    TL;DR We told you so. Now join the resistance.





  • I will assume you are not talking about me here as you have no idea of my point of view on the matter. I believe you are talking generically…

    That’s right

    Ieven if you are talking generically, i don’t think your assumption here makes sense. many people feel free to discriminate between people on the basis of their biological sex.

    I am talking about the notion that all men are potentially sexual predators. I am not discussing the truthfulness of the idea, or whether women are justified to be afraid of men in general (to an extend they are). But regarding this narrower notion, there is plenty of evidence online that men find the fear outrageous (Not all men etc). If they think trans women are (*) simply men (I disagree) then they are simply not consistent. This naturally leads to the next step, that their interpretation of transness in AMAB people is registered as a sexual perversion (*). It isn’t. It is a personal identity thing, like being a (cis) woman also isn’t inherently a sexual thing. To think the former is transphobia, to think the latter is misogyny. I am not saying, nor I care, about you subscribing to either, personally. We are both discussing the sociological popularity of these notions.

    I don’t know where you live, but this is not true in the UK

    I am a nomad, but I was talking about the US, where this grim picture is true in some states, especially with black trans women whose murders the police is particularly inadequate to solve.

    while I agree with the thrust of what you are saying you have a writing style that puts words and assumptions in my mouth

    I was talking generically. That having been said, I wasn’t sure about your personal take, since the lack of tone in this written medium can be very misleading.

    in a manner that comes across an unnecessarily combative. you also use exaggeration to make your point which is itself problematic…

    I really tried to put arguments forth, and conscientiously not target you, while not giving you a free pass. I don’t think I exaggerate, I just present in distilled form the things that people might mean but not necessarily say out loud.

    As for being combative, I just try to be thorough and concise. When I said this is textbook transphobia I weren’t attacking you. This is factual. If someone looks up a textbook on transphobia they will find the points I have asterisk-ed above. It would perhaps come down as less combative if I said “this is the dictionary definition of transphobia”? I don’t know. Transphobia is an ugly thing and much like racism, there is no pleasant way to say it, but this is what the word means.



  • I consider your theorizing of “pre-transition history” being within the “rights of society” to “keep in touch with reality” as misleading and problematic.

    In fact, these are the axioms of trans erasure I discuss in my other response. In the core of this reasoning is the idea that “men are inherently dangerous to women” therefore “women must know at all times the biological sex of any person they interact with”.

    So you can’t go past the “transition” history for reasons that under all other circumstances you would decry as “misandry”, but only apply this to trans women (victims themselves of cis violence in bathrooms and all other settings). Why? Because you register trans women in the semantics of sexual perversion. Then, the “right” to know anyone’s medical history does not exist, on the contrary people have the right to privacy to medical interventions of any type.

    Due to stigma and discrimination trans people are furthermore entitled to hands down secrecy, given that a random bigot can just shoot them down for being trans with zero consequences. But this is also hypothetical now. The amount of cis-passing is different for every trans people.

    Some may pass for cis, most don’t. Besides the existential crisis some people experience when they can’t tell a person is trans, in practice stealth trans people are relatively rare, and there is not an iota of evidence that there is any societal harm from stealth cis-passing trans people. So there is no reason behind your purported “societal right to know”, apart from cisgenderist entitlement.

    Enforcing such right is not only infeasible, but it sufficiently and necessarily leads to banning public trans life, with no other explanation other than cis people’s uneasiness. The civil rights movement has established that majoritarian uneasiness with minorities sharing their bathrooms is not enough to justify perpetuation of discriminatory segregation practices.

    This is textbook transphobia.