-68
Which are you?
(reddthat.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 06 Aug 2023
-68 points (27.9% liked)
Memes
45535 readers
397 users here now
Rules:
- Be civil and nice.
- Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
asfasfd
It's pretty well known and easy to verify, but I have no interest in googling this reprehensible being. If you've listened to him in the past, then I do wish you a swift recovery. Cheers.
I did the Google. He apparently used child porn and pedophilia as rhetorical devices in arguments about other topics, which have then of course been taken out of context and weaponizsd by people who hate him.
It's a good example of why you shouldn't use certain topics to score debate points and why no one should be live on the internet for multiple hours a day.
https://creatorpedia.fandom.com/wiki/Ian_Kochinski_(Vaush)
It's just one of those topics you want to avoid unless you're making a specific point about it, for example how right-wing nutjobs now believe that literally anyone they don't like is a pedophile.
I ran into one of his debates on crypto/NFTs a while back and he wasn't well-informed enough to adequately defend his own position or attack some of fundamental weaknesses of that ecosystem. Was not impressed.
Indeed not
Not only do they not have a source, Vaush has actually addressed basically all the controversies about him in a long list of ways.
Here's a link to a GitHub page that has a large collection of Vaush's responses to his various controversies over the years.
And if it wasn't clear Vaush is a staunch trans ally and anti-racist. Any honest viewing of his content on either subject would show that to be the case.
Oh get off your high horse. You're well aware that everything I said is accurate. I simply don't respect you enough to engage with you further.
Oof, dude you make me feel bad for giving you a good faithed response after your first comment.
For someone who urges to be careful with accusations you are pretty grossly misrepresenting my comment here
I don't throw it around like Vaush throws around "red-fascist", "tankie", "antisemite" and every other slur , I use it specifically for someone who draws upon radical aesthetic in the abstract but supports the capitalist, imperialist status-quo in the specific.
You can chose to be offended by that, but Vaush is the definition of a radlib
Honestly I have only ever used it for him. Thinking of it I might use "Vaushite" in the future which has the added benefit of visually representing the fact that his disingenious output is nothing but a thin layer around "shit"
I understand getting tripped up when others chime in with varying intentions. Also my initial comment should have been clearer and did leave more room to read a pedophilia accusation into it than I intended.
I can see that you argue in good faith and I apologize for some reddit impulses that I haven't unlearned yet.
Personally I don't see the equation of leftism with defending CP in OPs post though.
The way I read it OP groups "meat-eaters" into categories with each being a drastic exaggeration (the "lvl 5 bloodmouth" is a straight up cannibal) so I think none of this can be taken seriously.
One "group" is the The "Leftist" meat eater. I expand the quotes to something like The pseudo-leftist meat eater who is then represented by Vaush. To me this is basically a 1 person group that might as well just be called "Vaush" but calling him The pseudo Leftist is just one more swing at him.
I am definitely both a leftist and not a vegan and I don't mind the post in fact I found it quite funny (but obviously very few ppl agree). I agree though that slapping the CP stuff under Vaushs pic is unfair to him, as some people will take it seriously, I have to say that humor was also not lost on me though
You and me both man. Someone the other day said "that classic reddit performative snark" and fuck me if it didn't feel like I heard a gunshot. Looking through this thread I came pretty close to going full tilt that direction again. Still learning I suppose.
So I'm a little surprised to see this. The image explicitly says:
So the post to me is saying "leftists want to legalize child porn." With Vaush as a poster for all leftists. I do not see it as purely about Vaush anymore than i see the "Plants Rights Activist" commentary being about solely Joe Rogan (which funny enough is not even a stance I think he holds, but I dislike him and don't care to confirm lol).
Let me give another example: If I was making a meme and put "Conservatives [insert picture of George Bush above it]: Wants their steak bloody. Hates gay people." Would you say "ah this is just about George Bush" or would you see it as I see it, which is a statement about ALL conservatives with simply an image of one?
The images are just meant to accent the content, not be taken directly as the subject. Does that make sense?