Lol that was stupid that he blocked you but that analogy you made was also terrible, are you saying that name calling should be treated the same as first degree murder?
-
-
I'm trying to illustrate the fact that even though Crowder didn't engage in pointless, demeaning, homophobic slurs for the vast majority of his Youtube career, that doesn't at all excuse the numerous instances when he does use them.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Yeah I know, I meant it to be rhetoric lol But besides that, what do you consider a homophobic slur? The only actual, what I would consider a slur, is a lispy queer but even that is a fact. He has a lisp and is a queer, other than that everything Crowder said Carlos said himself
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
𝙎𝙚𝙖𝙣 𝙀𝙜𝙖𝙣 Retweeted Carlos Maza
"Gay sprite", "angry little queer", insinuating that his love for chips is equivalent to his supposed appetite for penises, the list goes on. Just cause he self identifies does not give bullies a free pass to use the same terms in clearly hurtful rhetoric.https://twitter.com/gaywonk/status/1136057689585410050 …
𝙎𝙚𝙖𝙣 𝙀𝙜𝙖𝙣 added,
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
That is true; you're right, he shouldn't have said those things, however are you aware of the differences between a web platform and a web publisher?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
𝙎𝙚𝙖𝙣 𝙀𝙜𝙖𝙣 Retweeted 𝙎𝙚𝙖𝙣 𝙀𝙜𝙖𝙣
I'm not sure why it's relevant, honestly.
@TeamYouTube themselves said they were hurtful at the very least, which theoretically violates their own terms of service, which is the crux of the whole issue.https://twitter.com/The_CO_Atheist/status/1136741293382672396 …𝙎𝙚𝙖𝙣 𝙀𝙜𝙖𝙣 added,
𝙎𝙚𝙖𝙣 𝙀𝙜𝙖𝙣 @The_CO_AtheistReplying to @NoLogiclFallacy @mtraceyExcept their harassment policy literally states hurtful personal comments will be removed, and@TeamYoutube literally stated the comments were hurtful, (https://twitter.com/TeamYouTube/status/1136055351885815808 …) pic.twitter.com/8FtkvaRpwG2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @The_CO_Atheist @gaywonk and
But you see that's part of a much bigger problem, YouTube is a web platform (to not get sued for every piece of copyrighted thing uploaded to the site) and this is pushing the line pretty far since, even though it is hurtful, doesn't break the first amendment
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @CallowaySutton @gaywonk and
The issue isn't 1A, it's that they're refusing to do anything when presented pretty damning evidence of a large creator violating their own harassment policy, which they themselves admitted.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @The_CO_Atheist @gaywonk and
Yeah, I would think people in YouTube are also arguing a ton as well since they're harassment policy is so vague (in general) and is subject to change over time. For all we know, this could be perfectly acceptable language in 3 years
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @CallowaySutton @gaywonk and
I mean, I guess we can re-evaluate in the future, but in the present, Crowder's actions seems to pretty succinctly fall into the definitions of toxic, demeaning, abusive, harassment, homophobic, insulting, etc. We have to draw a line somewhere, and it should be well before this.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
In my opinion, YouTube should have just left the situation alone. Although what he did say was very demeaning, their involvement gives them a political bias due to these channels being so outspokenly left and right. All their actions did was lead to people losing their livelihood
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.