What does Veeky Forums think of Milo Yiannopoulos

can you provide a specific example instead of a straw man please

Someone who takes liberalism (in the classical sense, which is the only meaningful form of it) to its logical conclusion. Allowing millions of Muslims into your nations will weaken liberal values, not strengthen them. Enforcing Political correctness subverts liberalism from the inside and is totalitarian tyranny. Too much degeneracy is a bad thing, even for liberal societies.

>He's a Jewish fag
>He doesn't belong here

It's against the law to commit "hate speech" in Canada (and New York state may get similar laws) that can get you fined, if you don't pay the fine you go to jail. Because you said something somebody didn't like.

can you provide a specific example of someone actually being charged with this crime for saying something sexist

>Because you said something somebody didn't like.
That is not what hate speech means at all

Here's someone who lost their job, which is just as threating to free speech.

telegraph.co.uk/men/thinking-man/11706807/If-you-say-something-sexist-at-work-will-you-lose-your-job.html

>Sign on with an employer and agree to their code of conduct
>Be mad when you get fired for breaking the code of conduct

>That is not what hate speech means at all
In Canada it is hate speech to "misgender" transpeople.

fabulous faggot, loud and obnoxious
i think there are better ways to communicate his views, but at least he gets heard

That is also not true

that is not what we were talking about

can you provide a specific example of someone actually being charged with this crime for saying something sexist

He's statement hardly breaks any code of conduct. Also he resigned after pressure from outside sources, not because he was fired. If you actually read the link you'd know that. But apparently you'd rather circle jerk your own opinions.

can you provide a specific example of someone being charged with a crime for misgendering a transperson

>he resigned after pressure from outside sources

So, what you're saying is, dude's a cuck, and you failed to provide a specific example of someone actually being charged for saying something sexist. Way to undermine your own argument.

>that is not what we were talking about
Who cares? I'm bringing up the pressing matter Milo referred to with his statement. namely the thoughtcrime which gets marginalized from work or public life. Not someone going to prison for saying something sexist, which i ironically a real strawman against Milo's position .

Bill C-16 added "gender identity and gender expression" to the list of prohibited grounds of discrimination.

the problem is that the state has the power to do it, specific examples are irrelevant.

I'm a different poster. But see .
The issue is thoughcrime effecting people's ability to function because of harmless statements or personal convictions. Has nothing to do with going to jail.

so you admit you were talking out of your ass when you said it's a crime to say sexist things

no its completely relevent. If this law has never been used in the manner you're concerned it could be used in then why are you so scared about it?

atleast show me what law it is that has made you so worried so I can see how open to interpretation it is or if its just talking about real physical threats or incitements to violence

>so you admit you were talking out of your ass when you said it's a crime to say sexist things
I never said that. Another poster did. I gave you an example of someone making a harmless statement and being pressured by feminist groups to resign from his job.

Milo's right. Personal opinions have become harassment. This isn't good.

>Bill C-16 added "gender identity and gender expression" to the list of prohibited grounds of discrimination.
Okay. That does not support your contention at all.

>the problem is that the state has the power to do it
They don't though.

What the law actually says:
Canadian Criminal Code:
>Sections 318, 319, and 320 of the Code forbid hate propaganda. "Hate propaganda" means "any writing, sign or visible representation that advocates or promotes genocide or the communication of which by any person would constitute an offence under section 319."
Then there are provincial Human Rights Acts, which deal with civil rather than criminal law:
>No person shall publish, display or broadcast, or permit to be published, displayed or broadcast on lands or premises, or in a newspaper or through a radio or television broadcasting station or by means of any other medium, any notice, sign, symbol, implement or other representation indicating discrimination or an intention to discriminate against any person or class of persons.
By discrimination they mean:
>the legislation forbids discrimination in at least five contexts: accommodation, employment, the purchase of property, membership in unions and associations, and publications.

So now you can't call for the genocide of trans people, or call for them to be discriminated against in employment or housing or whatever, but nothing about misgendering.

Pressuring people to say what you want them to say is not tyranny, it is the free market of ideas

>What is mob rule

It's no issue at all if you've the balls to deal with it. People have been dealing with workplace tension for over a century now, and despite what both sides would have you believe, the dynamics really haven't changed much.

The linked article even spells it out for the inexperienced: "know your audience." This argument assumes no solution, but that's only because the scenario is presented as one man against a malevolent system, i.e., a narrative designed to garner sympathy.

youtube.com/watch?v=kasiov0ytEc

>The issue is thoughcrime effecting people's ability to function because of harmless statements or personal convictions
As has been true in literally every society in human history

He's great at triggering retards.

>It's no issue at all if you've the balls to deal with it
Again you portray it as being some sort of case where victims of trumped up lawsuits by females crying "harassment" aren't masculine enough to handle it. They are "cucks" for loosing in a biased system stacked against them. Any legitimate complaints are because they aren't man enough to handle it.

doesn't mean that it's good or should continue to be that way

There's literally no way to change it. It's a logical corollary of freedom of speech and of association. Unless you want to ban people criticizing others opinions or force people to associate with people they don't want to.

>"transgendered pundit and youtuber" is there among actual academics
Only five minutes in, but the professor who started this seems like an absolute edgelord who decided to become intentionally offensive as a reaction to being asked to be PC.

>those are the made up words that now describe gender neutrality, that's an attempt to control language
>made up words
top wew

Did it ever exist a social movement fuller of shit than feminism ?

nationalism

Mob rule isn't necessarily tyranny until violence get involved