Petition for mods of major subs to ban /user/fuzzbutt22 for censorship on /s/PinkPillFeminism

submitted by SuperConductiveRabbi from (self.SaidIt)

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]teelo 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (98 children)

Ps. You didn't even respond to the question:

If you're not even a mod here then why are you defending them?

Remember the Pyramid of Debate on this site. Attack the core argument, not make personal attacks.

[–]radfem 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (97 children)

Ps. I did. Maybe try reading my whole comment instead of going off half cocked...

Pps. Aren’t you the guy who just argued that the pyramid of debate doesn’t matter so long as no one’s doing any harm...?

[–]teelo 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (96 children)

You said:

Ps. Because it’s the morally right thing to do... strange concept for someone like you I know but...

Its morally right to defend a moderator who is violating freedom of expression?

Radical feminists used to be the ones arguing for freedom of expression, when right-wing leaders engaged in censorship against you. What happened to all those protests you fought for, for years, to get your views accepted? Why are you not honouring the ancestors who came before you, in your very same movement?

[–]radfem 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (95 children)

Saidit rules state that content that is not on topic or not made in good faith can be removed.

Please explain how someone admitting to posting provocative content just to test if they’d get banned is ‘in good faith’. Explain how ‘suck my dick’ isn’t low quality content that’s off topic.

Don’t sweat though, the op couldn’t defend himself either.

[–]teelo 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (94 children)

The only comment I was examining was the one you directly responded to:

bald-janitor 1 insightful - 4 fun - 9 days ago

No u

That is not equal to `suck my dick'. Its pretty low on the pyramid but its not as low as the personal attacks you have been making in this very comment chain. Lead by example, don't be a hypocrite. Lets see how much you cry about being censored after your personal attacks get deleted.

[–]radfem 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (93 children)

Buddy my female, I get banned from entire platforms for stating fbi statics like 98.9% of all rapes are committed by men.

Y’all are all for censorship when it’s in your favour.

[–]teelo 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (58 children)

98.9% of all rapes are committed by men

Ever considered that maybe the problem is nobody takes woman on man rape accusations seriously, and that perhaps they're waaaay hgiher than the FBI chooses to report?

Whats your counterargument to "there are countless examples of courts giving way lighter sentences for female rapists than male rapists".

You want equality, right? Go and fight for it. Demand that equality. Demand that female rapists get the same sentences as male rapists.

[–]radfem 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (57 children)

No, because like the, ‘no one takes abused men seriously!’ Argument it’s supported by exactly no evidence.

[–]teelo 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (56 children)

There is no evidence because you radical feminists fought incredibly hard to make sure universities are not allowed to research it. But the absence of evidence doesn't prove it false. You can't prove a negative.

[–]radfem 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (55 children)

Got evidence to support that statement?

[–]teelo 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (33 children)

Y’all are all for censorship when it’s in your favour.

I am against all forms of censorship, on either side. I can't speak for other men, because, and I know this might shock you: it turns out that all men are not actually a singular entity. I have my own views and opinions that differ to others. I will argue against censorship no matter who is speaking.

[–]radfem 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (32 children)

Yet you were just gloating about... when I get my comments removed...

I know, I know... it’s hard to keep your lies straight.

[–]teelo 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (31 children)

I never said I would be the one censoring you. Just that it will be incredibly hilarious when you do get censored. You are the one making low-pyramid arguments. I have yet to see any attacks against any of my core arguments from you.

Deletion of personal attacks isn't "censorship". Try actually posting something that isn't at the bottom of the pyramid and maybe I'll defend your right to freedom of expession.

[–]teelo 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

/u/ccccccc

tell that to charlie hebdo

Sorry I'm not here to do your research for you. If you want to attack my core arguments you're going to have to present the evidence yourself. Or admit that you're wrong, I'm right, and apologise.

[–]radfem 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (26 children)

So posting ’suck my dick’ shouldn’t be censored... but ‘mean attacks’ on you should be...

Quick question? Do your eyes cross with that raging hypocrisy... or does it like not bother you at all?