There are many YouTube videos that do nothing more than browse some "incel" chat groups out there and mock and get outraged about the worst messages there. And sometimes not even the worst. There doesn't seem to be much point in these videos. Most usually is just people doing nothing more than searching these forums high and low for the worst and most outrageous messages, and reading them out loud in the video.
Sometimes the messages they are showcasing are quite horrendous. Othertimes, not so much. The messages may show a lot of frustration and desperation, rather than outright misogyny, yet they still get mocked and laughed at by these YouTubers.
I once watched one of such videos, and the guy who made the video had such a smug air of moral superiority, often using a really smug tone of voice and such a smug grin, that it was actually incredible. I wrote a comment on his video, saying something along the lines of "it's easy to have a sense of superiority and mock people who suffer from chronic loneliness, when you have never experienced that yourself."
Quite unexpectedly, he responded to my comment (really rare for these people). He asked to have a conversation. I got the feeling that he was expecting to crush me in a discussion, and mock me. I assume he was probably expecting me to go on some kind of misogynist rant, or say something about people (or me) deserving companions, or something.
Instead, I responded to him with something like (paraphrasing): "Have you ever experienced long-time chronic loneliness? Have you ever experienced what that feels like? Do you know what it feels like to live alone for years and years, even decades? It might not be as bad as forced solitary confinement of a prisoner, but it's not so far off either." And a few other things along those lines. I wrote about how easy it is to mock chronically lonely people when you yourself probably have a rich social life and romantic relationships, and have never suffered from loneliness, probably not even for a single day.
He did not respond. After about a week or two of him not responding, I wrote: "Yeah. Just as I thought."
These mockery videos come from all sides, from everywhere in the political compass. And sometimes it's just not random people who make these videos. Sometimes YouTube celebrities who are otherwise some of the most reasonable and smart people on the planet may succumb to utter stupidity in this regard.
Take, for example, Paul Joseph Watson. He's a very vocal and popular American conservative, with a very large YouTube following (1.5 million subscribers). He's actually quite a smart and reasonable person, who makes really well-argued and well-researched videos that make excellent points. And he seems to be relatively moderate for a conservative. I have never seen him spouting climate change denialism (from what I have seen he seems to take a relatively neutral stance on it, at least in his videos), he never gushes about how guns would solve all the problems in the world, he doesn't rant about universal healthcare being a crime against humanity and the destroyer of nations, and so on. He seems unusually reasonable for a deeply conservative American.
Yet, there must always be that one thing where the stupidity meter has to go through the roof. When it's not feminism, it must be something else. In this case it seems to be "incels".
Recently he made a video that, as above, does nothing more than mock incels. There's no point to the video, there's no message, there are essentially no opinions, no stances. It's just showing some "incel" messages and mocking them.
What makes this instance particularly stupid is that he isn't even mocking some extremist ultra-misogynist messages sent by some random people. He's mocking some (alleged) "incels" for... and I kid you not, making extremely reasonable and well-argued responses to someone trolling them.
According to him, someone created a fake account on Tinder and started sending baiting messages to people, asking them things like "do you think black people are stupider". Paul then shows these responses and mocks them. Here is an example:
This seems to me like a perfectly reasonable response, and something that almost anybody could agree with. Yet Paul Joseph Watson is mocking this guy for writing such a response. (He isn't really mocking what the response is saying, but the fact that it was written in the first place.)
Someone needs to explain to me what exactly Paul Joseph Watson is trying to say here, because I honestly cannot understand. He is literally mocking someone writing a very good and reasonable response to a troll-baiting message. Why? I have absolutely no idea! And he's calling this person an "incel". How does he know that? Again, I have absolutely no idea. (He doesn't present any sort of evidence that this person is an "incel", whatever he mans by that term.)
Is the idea that this person was fooled by a troll into... what? Writing a really good and reasonable response? WTF is wrong with that?
He then shows another example:
Again, the response is very reasonable and well-argued. I don't see much wrong with it. It all makes sense. (One could perhaps go into the minutia of what he's saying and present a bit alternative views, but overall, in the grand scheme of things, I don't see much wrong with what he's writing there.)
Yet, once again, it appears that this response is worth mockery, according to Paul. Why? I have absolutely no idea. He never explains what's wrong with it, or why it deserves ridicule.
At no point in the video does he explain what his point is, or why those responses are somehow wrong or worthy of mockery. He just mocks them, and moves to the next thing, without ever explaining anything. It's a complete mystery to me why he is doing this. Which is especially puzzling given how well-argued most of his other videos are, full of well-researched facts, points and arguments.
Sometimes the messages they are showcasing are quite horrendous. Othertimes, not so much. The messages may show a lot of frustration and desperation, rather than outright misogyny, yet they still get mocked and laughed at by these YouTubers.
I once watched one of such videos, and the guy who made the video had such a smug air of moral superiority, often using a really smug tone of voice and such a smug grin, that it was actually incredible. I wrote a comment on his video, saying something along the lines of "it's easy to have a sense of superiority and mock people who suffer from chronic loneliness, when you have never experienced that yourself."
Quite unexpectedly, he responded to my comment (really rare for these people). He asked to have a conversation. I got the feeling that he was expecting to crush me in a discussion, and mock me. I assume he was probably expecting me to go on some kind of misogynist rant, or say something about people (or me) deserving companions, or something.
Instead, I responded to him with something like (paraphrasing): "Have you ever experienced long-time chronic loneliness? Have you ever experienced what that feels like? Do you know what it feels like to live alone for years and years, even decades? It might not be as bad as forced solitary confinement of a prisoner, but it's not so far off either." And a few other things along those lines. I wrote about how easy it is to mock chronically lonely people when you yourself probably have a rich social life and romantic relationships, and have never suffered from loneliness, probably not even for a single day.
He did not respond. After about a week or two of him not responding, I wrote: "Yeah. Just as I thought."
These mockery videos come from all sides, from everywhere in the political compass. And sometimes it's just not random people who make these videos. Sometimes YouTube celebrities who are otherwise some of the most reasonable and smart people on the planet may succumb to utter stupidity in this regard.
Take, for example, Paul Joseph Watson. He's a very vocal and popular American conservative, with a very large YouTube following (1.5 million subscribers). He's actually quite a smart and reasonable person, who makes really well-argued and well-researched videos that make excellent points. And he seems to be relatively moderate for a conservative. I have never seen him spouting climate change denialism (from what I have seen he seems to take a relatively neutral stance on it, at least in his videos), he never gushes about how guns would solve all the problems in the world, he doesn't rant about universal healthcare being a crime against humanity and the destroyer of nations, and so on. He seems unusually reasonable for a deeply conservative American.
Yet, there must always be that one thing where the stupidity meter has to go through the roof. When it's not feminism, it must be something else. In this case it seems to be "incels".
Recently he made a video that, as above, does nothing more than mock incels. There's no point to the video, there's no message, there are essentially no opinions, no stances. It's just showing some "incel" messages and mocking them.
What makes this instance particularly stupid is that he isn't even mocking some extremist ultra-misogynist messages sent by some random people. He's mocking some (alleged) "incels" for... and I kid you not, making extremely reasonable and well-argued responses to someone trolling them.
According to him, someone created a fake account on Tinder and started sending baiting messages to people, asking them things like "do you think black people are stupider". Paul then shows these responses and mocks them. Here is an example:
This seems to me like a perfectly reasonable response, and something that almost anybody could agree with. Yet Paul Joseph Watson is mocking this guy for writing such a response. (He isn't really mocking what the response is saying, but the fact that it was written in the first place.)
Someone needs to explain to me what exactly Paul Joseph Watson is trying to say here, because I honestly cannot understand. He is literally mocking someone writing a very good and reasonable response to a troll-baiting message. Why? I have absolutely no idea! And he's calling this person an "incel". How does he know that? Again, I have absolutely no idea. (He doesn't present any sort of evidence that this person is an "incel", whatever he mans by that term.)
Is the idea that this person was fooled by a troll into... what? Writing a really good and reasonable response? WTF is wrong with that?
He then shows another example:
Again, the response is very reasonable and well-argued. I don't see much wrong with it. It all makes sense. (One could perhaps go into the minutia of what he's saying and present a bit alternative views, but overall, in the grand scheme of things, I don't see much wrong with what he's writing there.)
Yet, once again, it appears that this response is worth mockery, according to Paul. Why? I have absolutely no idea. He never explains what's wrong with it, or why it deserves ridicule.
At no point in the video does he explain what his point is, or why those responses are somehow wrong or worthy of mockery. He just mocks them, and moves to the next thing, without ever explaining anything. It's a complete mystery to me why he is doing this. Which is especially puzzling given how well-argued most of his other videos are, full of well-researched facts, points and arguments.
Um, you clearly don't know who Paul is, considering he isn't American, he is British, with a British accent, living in London.
ReplyDeleteWhen I wrote "he's an American conservative" I expressed myself poorly. I meant to say that he's someone who has very American conservative values and opinions, not that he's himself an American citizen.
Delete