The UN Wants To Censor The Entire Internet

[XionsProphecy]

They have been at it again people.

Anita Sarkeesian & Zoe Quinn

have been talking with the UN about censoring the internet,

"To save the Feminist's Feelings" from getting hurt.

 

So, what sort of content does the UN want to censor?

ISIS recruitment videos, perhaps, which lure women into lives

of rape and servitude? Live-streamed executions from Syria?

Revenge porn or snuff videos? There’s no shortage of dangerous

and potentially traumatising content on the web, after all, much of it

disproportionately affecting women.

 

Alas not. The UN is hung up on “cyber violence against women,”

a Kafkaesque term that is apparently shorthand for “women being

criticised on the internet.” At least, that’s how at least two attendees 

at the launch of the UN report, published by the United Nations

Broadband Commission, explained it yesterday.

 

According to feminist culture critic Anita Sarkeesian, who spoke at

the event, online “harassment” doesn’t simply consist of what is

“legal and illegal,” but “also the day-to-day grind of ‘you’re a liar’ and

‘you suck,’ including all of these hate videos that attack us on a regular basis.”

 

No bomb threat against a feminist critic of video games has ever been

deemed credible and there are serious doubts about threats supposedly

levelled at transsexual activist Brianna Wu – feminists are trying to redefine

violence and harassment to include disobliging tweets and criticisms of their work.

 

In other words: someone said “you suck” to Anita Sarkeesian and now we have

to censor the internet. Who could have predicted such a thing? It’s worth noting,

by the way, that if Sarkeesian’s definition is correct.

 

Sarkeesian’s comments were echoed by former video game developer, feminist

activist and professional victim Zoe Quinn, who told the United Nations: “There are

individuals on YouTube who have made a living off of abusing Anita and I.”

Quinn does not name any specific YouTubers, and we are left guessing as to who

these mysterious “abusers” really are.

 

Quinn makes more than $3,000 a month on donation site Patreon as she travels

around the world talking about her “harassment” story. If anyone is turning a profit

from alleged “online abuse,” it’s not the YouTubers.

 

Sarkeesian and Quinn are perhaps the finest living examples of what I call quantum

superstate feminism, whose figureheads are at once aggressor and victim; trolling,

provoking and ridiculing their ideological opponents while at the same time crying foul

when their provocative language is returned in kind.

 

The message from the UN seems to be: “cyber-violence” against women, at least

according to their invited guests, is somehow equivalent to getting thumped, or bullied,

or abused in real life, and it’s worth clamping down on basic free speech provisions to

insulate these delicate first-world feminist wallflowers from the consequences of their

own purposefully provocative statements.

 

In other words, if search engines and ISPs don’t comply with a list of the UN’s censorship 

demands, the UN wants national governments to cut off their access to the public.

 

Source: http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/09/25/u-n-womens-group-calls-for-web-censorship/

 

 

So, what does this mean for us?

Well, for example, VN's, anime, manga, hentai and the likes of those will become blocked

and unavailable on the internet. Since they clearly would hurt their feelings if these women

ever saw them.

 

As a true feminist, i call bullshit on this.

Of course, no one should bully or harass anyone, ever, but what they are talking about are

criticism and facts. Anita and Zoe are mad because they have been proven wrong by men

AND woman around the world, and they want it to stop, because they get their feelings hurt.

I really hate that these people get the chance to talk to the UN, and the fact that they claim

to be "the voice of all women on the internet" is retarded and disgusting.

[Jun Inoue]

Oh god, these 2 again. They are one of the worst things to happen to moden feminism. All this overprotection of "women must be safe every and anywhere" is as stupid as contradictory to their supposed desire for equality. If they made a campaign about things like, I don't know, how lax/uncaring sites like Twitch are about this sort of harassment, I could understand it. I've seen it many times and it's awful.

But more of this "let's make the Internet a safe and secure environment" is simply bs.

[babiker]

Dude, your formatting... Can a mod fix that please? It just hurts my eyes so much 

 

Also, when you cop/paste from a site, try at least give a link to it. And put what was copied in quotation marks, and any words you personally want to add outside. Crediting the author is also nice. Original: http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/09/25/u-n-womens-group-calls-for-web-censorship/

[XionsProphecy]

Dude, your formatting... Can a mod fix that please? It just hurts my eyes so much 

 

Also, when you cop/paste from a site, try at least give a link to it. And put what was copied in quotation marks, and any words you personally want to add outside. Crediting the author is also nice. Original: http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/09/25/u-n-womens-group-calls-for-web-censorship/

[Narcosis]

Real feminists can't stand those two clowns. Neither I. It's a miracle no one actually treats them seriously enough, at least not yet.

[Nosebleed]

But our opinion doesn't matter, we're all white privileged cis gendered male scum after all, we can't have a saying in this.

Guess we'll have to go back to being basement dwellers who oppress women (and people of color, transgender people, disabled people, furries, otherkin, helicoptersexuals, basically anyone non white and male) everyday by emanating patriarchy rays or something.

 

I'm more saddened by the fact these two clowns (oh crap, I just violently harassed these people, am I banned now?) claim to represent women in some fashion, I would never want to be in a position where my representative is either of them, and I know a lot of other women feel the same way, but of course those women don't count, cause they have internalized misogyny or something and so they're not capable of reasonable individual thought.

 

I'll just leave this gem here:

[Soulless Watcher]

The day the UN acutally accomplishes anything, like at all, is the day I get a girlfriend. Trying to tame the internet is like trying to potty train a Dragon with nothing but a fly swatter, it isn't going to go well even if the UN managed to convince Nations to go along with this plan.

[Justin579]

seems india would be the perfect place for them then http://gadgets.ndtv.com/internet/opinion/what-do-encryption-policy-porn-ban-and-net-neutrality-have-in-common-743489

[firecat]

the good thing is that this will never happen, too many people and animals and even feminism like the internet.

 

[atorq]

Take my love.

Take my land.

Take me where I cannot stand.

I don't care,

I'm still free.

You can't take the internet from me.

 

Sadly they can, maybe not these two clowns, but someone else. Sooner or later it will happen, actually it's kind of already happening.

 

It's kind of ridiculous that they talk about cyber-violence against women, when there are children affected, that would be much more effective. Just think of the children.

 

[Redpanda]

notto_disu_shitto_agen.jpg

 

 

Misanthropy runs strong in my blood.

[Nosebleed]

I'm also sickened by the UN's report equalling "cyber violence" of the likes of "mean tweets" or "online death threats" and actual valid criticism to real life physical violence. (And of course this is only applied to women)

I can't imagine how insane you must be to think someone saying mean stuff to you on the internet somehow equals being beat up in real life.

I would like to see Anita or Zoe spouting this nonsense in front of a real life victim of physical abuse and see what kind of response they get.

 

But I guess one would come to expect this from the two biggest professional victims on the internet.

[Jun Inoue]

 

Take my love.

Take my land.

Take me where I cannot stand.

I don't care,

I'm still free.

You can't take the internet from me.

 

Sadly they can, maybe not these two clowns, but someone else. Sooner or later it will happen, actually it's kind of already happening.

 

It's kind of ridiculous that they talk about cyber-violence against women, when there are children affected, that would be much more effective. Just think of the children.

 

 

[Abyssal Monkey]

From the hell that I came from, why doesn't anyone understand that the internet is a place where you create your own boundaries. The internet is a place where you can literally walk away from it. You don't have the right to be on it, you have the right to ignore it. Every time I see any type of piece on cyber bullying I want to punch the person who brought it up. No one is forcing it upon you like say, a bully in school would, so any kind of maladies are simply ignored. If you can't ignore them then that makes you weak as a person.

If anyone wants to try and censor the internet, I say good luck to ye. Creating an encryption is a lot easier than trying to crack one, so have fun when everything is running encrypted through servers so you can't edit it, and when people start hosting themselves, you are screwed. You can't prevent me from accessing a network you have no control over.

[Funyarinpa]

I do find the daily harassment of these people deplorable, but trying to establish some sort of objective criteria for "harassment" and to try to enforce it on the internet is nothing but a fool's errand. Harassment is not, and cannot ever, be objective. Hence, it cannot -MUST not- be any basis for any law, for law needs to be objective. For some people, eating meat is hugely offensive. For some, not worshipping Allah is unforgivable. And for some, stating that a game doesn't need to represent every shade of melanin there is MISOHGYNEE and RAYSEZUM. That doesn't mean anyone is entitled to punish or discriminate someone for eating meat, atheism or, you know, a DIFFERING OPINION. I disagree with the "Just walk away" excuse though, if the harassment is to the point where it's just "you suck" and "go suck a dick" and stuff to the point where it impedes one's daily internet usage then there IS something wrong. That doesn't mean it's on the level of bullying or actual physical violence, though. Still, it's verbal abuse- but trying to shut those voices off with an iron fist is IMO far, far worse. I'd rather see people shittalking Turks on 4chan rather than being forced to tiptoe a line in case they offend me and the other Turks on the website, for example.

 

TL;DR: Targeting someone with verbal abuse to the point where it's detrimental to their daily life is not OK. Trying to force rules on people because some people are assholes is even worse.

[Zenophilious]

List of United Nations accomplishments:

 

• Israel
• Not impeding anything the US, China, France, Russia or the USSR ever tried to do
• Not impeding ethnic massacres such as the one in Ruanda
• Not articulating a proper response to the most recent Ebola outbreak, or really any pandemic ever

 

So basically UN is the responsible for the creation of one of the most bizarre international and political chimeras of all time, a state that can't decide whether it's a democracy or a religious/ethnic/cultural reservoire and proceeds to intentionally breed humanitarian collapse in regions nearby so that insurgents group can threaten it and justify a national cohesion based on "defending itself". That's the only thing UN ever did. I wonder what would happen if they ever managed to actually censor the internet.

You forgot obtaining a massive sense of moral superiority, even though, by their own admission, they failed to stop the Rwandan genocide.  I like the UN in theory, but it's a broken mess of an organization that seems to be rather ineffective.  League of Nations, anyone?

 

The funny thing is, they can't actually do anything.  I mean, sure, they can try to pressure all the countries of the world to crack down on online "harassment" against women, but just like usual, the UN ultimately doesn't affect squat.  I find it amusing that Quinn and Sarkeesian are spreading their sob stories to people that ultimately have no power over legislation or the enforcement of said legislation.  Keep the victim train running on time, wouldn't want to miss a payout.  Choo choo.

[Bolverk]

Oh god, not this shit again. Damn. Oh god. I am getting *triggered* by this.

[Nosebleed]

From the hell that I came from, why doesn't anyone understand that the internet is a place where you create your own boundaries. The internet is a place where you can literally walk away from it. You don't have the right to be on it, you have the right to ignore it. Every time I see any type of piece on cyber bullying I want to punch the person who brought it up. No one is forcing it upon you like say, a bully in school would, so any kind of maladies are simply ignored. If you can't ignore them then that makes you weak as a person.

 

B-BUT THAT'S VICTIM BLAMING.

[CeruleanGamer]

After reading this, my friend who is a guy is like,

 

"How about my balls? This is a precious resource that must be protected at all cost, including direct hits from women's high heels and lesbian pornography that causes me fap uncontrollably. How come I don't have my rights? Or at least my balls?"

[Jun Inoue]

After reading this, my friend who is a guy is like,

 

"How about my balls? This is a precious resource that must be protected at all cost, including direct hits from women's high heels and lesbian pornography that causes me fap uncontrollably. How come I don't have my rights? Or at least my balls?"

[joehawks12]

holy fucking shit you guys, these bitches be crazy.

Time to check sargon of akkad's channel to see how he replies this batshit insanity 

[Suzu Fanatic]

God, it just doesn't end, does it?

 

The saddest thing is? Those two probably give zero fucks personally about their cause - I sincerely believe it's a grab for power and fame, nothing more - and what better way to gain both then to take on some "righteous" cause?

[CeruleanGamer]

If you think about it, there are scumbag females out there who used the internet to destroy people's lives by using their sexuality to exploit men. Like female scam artists promising men they'll be in a sexual relationship together while the man constantly pays the woman and getting nothing in return. Everything goes back and forth with the gender "equality" issues. Not just men against women.

 

As a female, I've come to accept that the pursuit for equality comes with all the tough things too. Like if I want equal pay as men, I should be assigned the same work as them and not be treated any differently. I welcome all challenges, big and small. Unfortunately, some women out there like these 2 idiots think that being a woman means that you should be treated softly and constantly be put on a pedestal as you continue to exploit others for being a woman.

[Nimbus]

Oh god, not these two again.

We all know that this isn't to protect people from harassment but to silence critics right?

 

Disregarding the fact that men sometimes suffer harassment more than women, this is simply a ridiculous argument they are making. Worse for them it's a double-edged sword.

 

In Anita's videos she takes a Marxists approach, stating that people (people meaning men) are so blind and stupid that they can't tell the difference between fantasy and reality and that by playing and enjoying video games that depict sexism (not represent, depict. Big difference Anita) we are endorsing real-world sexism. I've also seen people such as Sargon of Akaad, Thunderf00t, Mr Repzion and AlphaOmegaSin level honest and fair criticisms at her only to brushed off by her fans and herself as sexism and trolling.

 

Well guess what Anita, that's slanderous, and by extension, harassment. So those "trolls" and myself could just as easily silence you.

 

Be careful what you wish for, because you just might get it.

[Kaguya]

I'm also sickened by the UN's report equalling "cyber violence" of the likes of "mean tweets" or "online death threats" and actual valid criticism to real life physical violence. (And of course this is only applied to women)

I can't imagine how insane you must be to think someone saying mean stuff to you on the internet somehow equals being beat up in real life.

I would like to see Anita or Zoe spouting this nonsense in front of a real life victim of physical abuse and see what kind of response they get.

 

But I guess one would come to expect this from the two biggest professional victims on the internet.