GenjiKilpatrick

Member Profile

Birthdate: February 26th

Member Since: March 14, 2009
Last Power Points used: May 23, 2011
Available: now
Power Points at Recharge: 1   Get More Power Points Now!

Comments to GenjiKilpatrick

lantern53 says...

Why would I want to sit down with someone who takes every opportunity to call me a racist, or shitty, etc?

Perhaps if you could work on the charm part of your personality...?

Do I call you names?

All I want for you is for you to make the best of your circumstances, but you only seem to want to look at your circumstances, make everyone tell you how sad your life is, that you have no hope etc.

You seem quite content in your life, so perhaps that is your atunement.
When you are ready to move on, you will put all of this behind you, including me, and you'll make something of your life. (I only assume you've done nothing with your life because you never say anything about it other than 'woe is me', white people are racist etc)

At least you have internet! You could google 'famous black people' or something like that, and see how they became successful.

GenjiKilpatrick said:

Here's an idea.

You, Me, & your biracial son-in-law all hangout.

We can all sit down, scroll thru your past comments, and we'll let him decide which comments he thinks could be construed as "racist as fuck".

That way, it's someone you know. Someone you trust. Someone on your team helping you realize..

"wow, if I ever said any of this shit to my biracial grandkid.. they would definitely be upset, angry, and feel like shit."

Don't be a coward. Take me up on my offer. We can use Google Hangouts or Skype.

Don't even have to leave your house.

Oh wait, you don't give a fuck. Oh well.. guess you'll have to keep being a shitty person.

newtboy says...

You're ignoring 'white trash', which many racist southerners see as "lower than blacks and Mexicans" (I've heard them say so). Just sayin', not ALL white people enjoy 'white privilege', just most of us.

GenjiKilpatrick said:

Also, @lantern53 I don't answer you or any other illogical, irrational person cause you've already made up your mind.

I can't change your mind.

I'm not going to try.

I'm just calling you out on your racist, jingoist bullshit.

Because there is literally nothing I can say that would make you stop and think..
"Oh wow, maybe I DO have a bunch of privileges and advantages based purely on my skin color."

If you sincerely want an answer, message me when you feel like acknowledging facts.

Facts like the American Caste System.

And the fact that white people are at the top of that system.

India has one. Britain has one. America has one. The globe has one.

Acknowledging things like that would be a great first step to help fix problems in the global community.. let alone the black community.

kevingrr says...

I hear your frustration - that is coming through loud and clear.

I've seen Bob make comments that are out of line - I have also seen him just share his perspective and opinion. Granted it is very different than my own or yours and generally not well represented on these forums.

Goading him isn't helpful. It won't serve you or him at all.

Consider that you could have a good open dialogue with someone you fundamentally disagree with and gain valuable insight into why he thinks the way he does. He may, in turn, begin to understand the way you think. That doesn't mean that either of you will change your opinions, but you both may understand the issue(s) from a different perspective. Most importantly, you may find common ground.

GenjiKilpatrick said:

Bobknight is an unabashed racist and bigot.

He has a predetermined narrative his head that centers around Liberals, Democrats & Blacks being inferior.

Even if we did agree on a topic, he'd find some way to blame Liberals for it.

He's a fucking nutter.
He's never contributed anything insightful or meaningful to the community here.

He should be perma-banned because literally everything he says on this site is a racist, bigoted, anti-progressive jab.

Bobknight and Lantern can go eat a dick.

Now, would you like to hear how I really feel?

siftbot says...

Congratulations! Your socialization with the community in Sift Lounge has earned you your "Lounge Lizard" Level 4 Badge!

newtboy says...

I said "Don't be a smarmy dick"
Calm polite manner? This?
"GenjiKilpatrick said:
@newtboy
Don't Reply. Just Read. "
Calm, OK. Polite, not as I read it, it's kind of like trying to 'shut down comments', commanding a stranger to 'read this and don't reply', and is not polite IMO...especially when "this" is another unrelated comment. You brought me into that thread with that, no whining that I'm there.

Ahhhh, I see, the "cherry-picked strawman" argument is that you continue to ignore my clear, succinct, focused request for confirmation of a single point you made, and instead replied with a broad unrelated "she sucks" argument.
Well, OK, since I made it as clear as possible there was one detail I'm attempting to be discussing, and you continue on that line, that means that @Stormsinger is right, you can't be discussed with, and either can't comprehend that disagreement on a single detail doesn't mean opposition on every detail, or are trolling me.
Either way....
thanks for the discussion...for the fourth time I'll say that we can disagree on a tiny detail and be done now...good bye.
no reply necessary, but certainly allowed.

GenjiKilpatrick said:

I think you mispelled my usersname there.

@newtboy @GenjiKilpatrick.

FTFY

Or did you miss the part where Newt called me a smarmy dick?

I approached this new thread in a calm, polite manner.

Then, when asked not to drag our personal debate into this new thread..

Newtboy proceeded to insult me & cherry-pick a strawman argument.

Two wrongs? Eye-for-an-eye? That's perfectly acceptable now?


This is why the videosift community is a joke.

newtboy says...

Only called you that when you told me how I must act/react as if you were my keeper/parent...I found that smarmy.
What strawman? Explain

GenjiKilpatrick said:

I think you mispelled my usersname there.

@newtboy @GenjiKilpatrick.

FTFY

Or did you miss the part where Newt called me a smarmy dick?

I approached this new thread in a calm, polite manner.

Then, when asked not to drag our personal debate into this new thread..

Newtboy proceeded to insult me & cherry-pick a strawman argument.

Two wrongs? Eye-for-an-eye? That's perfectly acceptable now?


This is why the videosift community is a joke.

newtboy says...

OK, re-read it...it said (among other things, and sorry to keep cut and pasting)...


Carrera is upset because:
Sar-sleaz-ian is an new-age-feminist hack who finds porn disgusting, and feels pity for any women who performs sex acts for money.
She belittles porn actresses like Mercedes & Cytherea as lowly abused victims.
Then, at Mercedes' request, refuses to support Cytherea when she ACTUALLY becomes a victim.
Yet, she denies the agency of sex-workers to choose their profession, referring to them as "prostituted women".
This is why Sar-shittyhumanbeing-ian is a hypocrite, a fuax-intellectual, and [as Mercedes succinctly puts it] damaging gender relations.

Which to me all boiled down to me wondering if she's really that silly as to disenfranchise what I see as the most feminist of professions, or are some people just portraying one out of context quote that way, because I know there was a smear campaign against her that made some things up about her, and had other actual factual gripes, and they confused everything.

The reason I 'cherry picked' ONLY that part of the comment was that I already knew the rest of it from seeing evidence of it, her being a fraudster and con artist. I needed no convincing of that, and it had no bearing on the other point, which was new to me.
That's why I never disputed those other claims, so I don't feel I need to explain why they aren't implying all you said, and why evidence of them misses my focused question's point.
OK?

GenjiKilpatrick said:

Here's my original comment.

http://videosift.com/video/Porn-Actress-Mercedes-Carrera-LOSES-IT-With-Modern-Feminists#comment-1853296

Re-read it. Then explain why you'd cherry pick the legitimate claim that:

'[Sarkeesian] denies the agency of sex-workers to choose their profession, referring to them as "prostituted women".'

Better yet, explain to me how my statement that:

'Anita is literally profiting off the fuax-oppression of women in gaming media & culture'

or

'This is why [Sarkeesian] is a hypocrite, a fuax-intellectual, and damaging gender relations.'

or

'Anita Sarkeesian is a troll and a puppet.'

or

'She's only stirring up shit to further her career.'

Explain to me how all these statements aren't implying, suggesting, connoting, alluding, proposing, insinuating that Anita Sarkeesian is a fraudster & a con-artist.

Please explain those two things. No more, no less.

newtboy says...

No...THAT'S the point you missunderstand....

Because someone doesn't automatically adopt your position about one specific statement of hers does not mean they say "Well, clearly Sark CAN'T be a con-artist.. otherwise we would all know. And no one would give her the time of day"
You're operating on the "you're either 100% with me, or 100% against me" mindset, which is hilarious since I'm about 98% with you about her.


You might understand that if you read my post where I repeat over and over that I'm not a fan of hers and think she's a terrible speaker/spokesperson. Instead you have taken the position that, because you didn't convince me of one point, I disagree with you on all other points and therefore I'm a vocal supporter of hers....um.....no....that's not how it works....duh.

It means you didn't prove your singular specific point.

Understand?

Just like I said to you here long ago...
newtboy says...

I will say I do recall her being caught faking/making misleading videos about game footage, so I do think she is at least probably a fraud.
I also know she's terrible about constantly being insulting, even to those she's courting. Not good.
I don't want you to keep thinking I'm her supporter, I just need evidence I feel is trustworthy if I'm to make a judgment about the anti-porn star thing...it's just weird and anti-feminist.


Period.

GenjiKilpatrick said:

Oh and as to "Obviously Mercedes Carrera is trolling if Sarkeesian views are so well known"

NO! That's the point.

Just because YOU & Carrera are unfamiliar with Sarkeesian's fraud..

Doesn't mean you can automatically assert that "Well, clearly Sark CAN'T be a con-artist.. otherwise we would all know. And no one would give her the time of day"

newtboy says...

You didn't say "she's a fraud"
you didn't say "she's a con artist"
You said she degrades and denigrates sex workers...so show me more than the single quote 'prostituted women' to prove it, or is that really all you got, like I'm beginning to believe?

Just read the titles of your videos and see that not one is on that topic, not one.

GenjiKilpatrick said:

Open Letter to VideoSift:

Please don't support Anita Sarkeesian.

She's a con-artist whose tactics are damaging to the issues, causes, & movements she claims to advocate.

Here's my evidence:
http://videosift.com/video/Porn-Actress-Mercedes-Carrera-LOSES-IT-With-Modern-Feminists#comment-1854142

If anyone can succinctly explain how her history, tactics & actions don't amount to fraud, I'll concede & never speak out about her on the sift again.

Otherwise, I feel like it's an imperative to inform everyone - who finds her or her campaigns/messages relevant - of the behavior that Sarkeesian displays.

Con-artists should be called out.

No matter how politically progressive their platform might be.

Peace, happy debating.
Essie.

newtboy says...

I will say I do recall her being caught faking/making misleading videos about game footage, so I do think she is at least probably a fraud.
I also know she's terrible about constantly being insulting, even to those she's courting. Not good.
I don't want you to keep thinking I'm her supporter, I just need evidence I feel is trustworthy if I'm to make a judgment about the anti-porn star thing...it's just weird and anti-feminist.
I've spent more time thinking about her talking with you than I have the rest of my lifetime! LOL! ;-)
Enjoy,
Newt

newtboy says...

I thought your main (secondary) point was that she's a well known anti-sex worker/porn star that insults them with labels like 'prostituted women' and....well...and nothing, no other labels have been offered....so I guess she's NOT a well known anti-sex worker then? What IS your position? It's confusing.

I never have asserted any such thing about her, I only asked you to provide evidence of YOUR claims about her...I made none, so I have none to back up.
Again, I never asserted she was or wasn't anything, I did assert that your contention that she had no reason to disable comments or cancel one event except to silence critics, she had a very good reason besides that, and she didn't silence anyone because she held other events and (according to you) left open other venues for people to discuss her.
That's why your argument didn't hold water...and still doesn't, but you seem to have dropped that line and moved on to simply 'why do you love her' kind of strawman.

I'm defending nothing but truth in discussion, and your primary assertion ran contrary to that, and your secondary one needs confirmation one way or another.
I enable no one in that, but you might enable her supporters by putting forth easily dismissed reasons for disliking her. If you had good reasons you had shown me, I would dislike her (actually, I should say dislike her more, I've said time and time again I don't like her, I'm not a fan, she's a terrible spokesperson for anything)
So you can continue to ignore what I say and say I'm supporting and enabling a con artist if you wish, it won't make it true and only means you don't understand what I've said.

GenjiKilpatrick said:

Oh and as to "Obviously Mercedes Carrera is trolling if Sarkeesian views are so well known"

NO! That's the point.

Just because YOU & Carrera are unfamiliar with Sarkeesian's fraud..

Doesn't mean you can automatically assert that "Well, clearly Sark CAN'T be a con-artist.. otherwise we would all know. And no one would give her the time of day"

That's the whole problem.

Most people are completely uninformed. That's how she gets away with her fraud!

You're defending a fraudster who is damaging gender relations and giving actual misogynists a leg to stand on.

That's why i'm so vested in this Newtboy.

You're enabling a con-artist.

newtboy says...

The thing here is, I don't have a bias about her, I barely have an opinion. I originally commented because you claimed she cut off her comments and canceled appearances solely to silence descent from her monologue. I disagree completely on that point, especially since she didn't cancel other public events afterwards, and I provided evidence that she had repeated disgusting, specific death and rape threats, giving her a legitimate reason to stop anonymous discussions online or to not have a public appearance where guns are 100%allowed even when specific death threats have been made about the specific event. EDIT: She even went so far as to petition the police to provide security and disallow firearms in the auditorium so she could continue with the scheduled appearance, but they steadfastly refused, THEN she canceled.
...But you ignore those threats and claim it was only about 'censorship' or 'silencing debate' because of your bias, your mind is made up, you think that she's wrong no matter how much evidence I put in front of you that there were other legitimate reasons for her actions. I did admit I was wrong about the police instructing her to cancel the appearance, but I still think it was the right thing to do (and I still can't believe the police actions in that instance...insane!).

As for her being anti sex worker, I have no opinion, I don't know, that's why I want evidence if I'm to have an opinion about her feeling on that subject. It seems wrong that someone who claims to be feminist would not see sex workers as empowered women, and I need to be convinced of something so illogical before I believe it, even about someone I don't' have a good overall opinion about....to convince me I need to hear from HER that those are her feelings about those women. If that's the case, it's terrible, but she's a terrible feminist, so no big surprise....I'm just not convinced yet....either way.

Again, IF her anti-sex worker stance is true, and publicly known (especially by sex workers) then this video was just a trolling attempt by the sex workers, because they know Sarkeesian is not a supporter!

GenjiKilpatrick said:

You're bias.

Your mind is made up.

You think that I'm wrong.

No matter how much evidence I plop in front of you.

It's okay. You're only human.

Night. Argue with you later!

newtboy says...

Well, I'll try to explain then.
I have a tendency to not take the word of someone that obviously has a pre-conceived opinion. The 'evidence' you provided was not ample...the written parts were nothing but commentary (and one was just commentary about Westborough Church) The videos were preceded by the explanation by the creator that they were simply nothing but re-edited videos made to say what he wanted, not reality. There's absolutely no reason to give such videos a look at all, so after the first one I didn't.
I refuse to acknowledge them because I found them lacking in actual EVIDENCE and full of nothing but comment and snark, and in the case of the videos, just admitted lies. I asked for evidence of her actions, not evidence that other people dislike her.
I tried watching that video last week, didn't like it, didn't finish it.
As I said repeatedly, I'm open to EVIDENCE, just not pure propaganda presented as evidence. That's all you've linked so far, propaganda. I have not seen a whit of EVIDENCE about her actions/statements involving sex workers from you yet.
If you care to provide some real evidence of her actions, not someone bitching about her, not someone taking 2 words she said and making a 10 minute video about what THEY say she meant. How about a single interview where SHE said something derogatory about sex workers. How about a single article where she's QUOTED saying something derogatory about sex workers...and as I've said I don't think the phrase "prostituted women" cuts it, that can be 100% non-derogatory if said in a non-derogatory way...so provide EVIDENCE, or give up trying to make me have an opinion about her...I really don't care a bit about her, and don't think she's a worthy spokesperson for anything...isn't that good enough for you? Does every thing she does have to be seen by everyone in a bad light? I don't see why.

GenjiKilpatrick said:

I don't have any personal stakes in anything on videosift.

I'm just wonder what makes you think the way you do.

I've provided ample evidence.

You refuse to acknowledge it because your mind is set in stone.

Watch that CGP Grey video about mind viruses.

Or research the study that shows even tho during Obama's tenure, millions of jobs have been created..

People who dislike or disagree with Obama - even when shown the proof of job creation - refuse to acknowledge the millions of new positions that have re-open or been created. i.e. lantern, bobknight

You're bias.

Your mind is made up.

You think that I'm wrong.

No matter how much evidence I plop in front of you.

It's okay. You're only human.

Night. Argue with you later!

newtboy says...

You seem to have a high personal stake in getting someone who doesn't think at all about Sarkeesian to think about her in a bad light. Why is that, I wonder, and do you realize that bad publicity is better than none (for the publicized)?

Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Member's Highest Rated Videos