Comments on: Charlie Hebdo and Victim Blaming

By: Tim Hall

Tim Hall — Sun, 11 Jan 2015 10:57:34 +0000

Chu is a Manichean. If people with White Privilige say bad things, then the correct thing to do is side with their opponents, even if it means siding with Islamist terrorists. (OK, so I exaggerate. But not by much). This screencap, if genuine, gives an insight into his thinking. It's not impossible to imagine him getting caught up in actual, real, terrorism at some point. He's got the totalitarian end-justifies-the-means mindset for it. As for his male feninism, much of that comes over as projected self-loathng to me.

By: Amadan

Amadan — Sun, 11 Jan 2015 01:40:40 +0000

The online vomit that is the Social Justice movement will make a conservative out of me yet.

Arthur Chu is of course too stupid to recognize that a lot of people saying “Je Suis Charlie” recognize that Charlie Hebdo was often puerile and offensive, and that’s beside the point.

By: Tim Hall

Tim Hall — Sat, 10 Jan 2015 21:57:25 +0000

Coping with nuance is not some people’s strong point.

By: Serdar Yegulalp

Serdar Yegulalp — Sat, 10 Jan 2015 21:52:58 +0000

I try to put the order of operations the other way around to make my position clear: that I didn’t find some of what the mag published to be defensible does not mean I think they “got what they deserved”, or some variation of that. That only means I myself wouldn’t have printed such a thing or paid for it, not that there’s no place in the public discourse for it. But sometimes I wonder if even that position is asking for too much nuance from some of the folks out there…