I just don’t trust people (like the person above) who […] casually go “I think they’re a pedophile”
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
non-ironically throw around terms like “radlib”
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
I can see that you argue in good faith and I apologize for some reddit impulses that I haven’t unlearned yet.
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.
Personally I don’t see the equation of leftism with defending CP in OPs post though.
So I’m a little surprised to see this. The image explicitly says:
THE “LEFTIST”
No ethical consumption under capitalism. Legalize child porn NOW!" (bolding my own)
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?
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”
deleted by creator
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?