Why did you take it upon yourself to physically locate to where he was speaking?
Because in effect I was forced to hear and pay for it, even if I was not present. In the same way a conservative complains that their tax dollars are used to pay for welfare, my financial support as an alumni in some small part helped pay for his speaking fees. And as an alumni, I get e-mail and other materials sent to me by the college that inform me of things going on, including excerpts of speeches by guests.
This is like saying “You disagree with how government is using your money. Why would you go to your local government offices to protest. Why not just stay at home and do nothing.” If you feel that way, I do encourage you to act on that. But I don’t see that as a viable route to change.
Even worse why did you and your ilk find in necessary to violently protest?
My “ilk” did not violently protest. A very small subset, that was not part of the main group did that. And if you watch the video you posted, there are people IN THAT CROWD trying to defuse the situation and dissuade people from doing anything violent.
Did you read my last reply? Apparently not, since I addressed that. If you’re not going to bother reading my replies, I will cease to reply. Try reading my last reply, as I specifically addressed this topic.
Until footage of Milo’s defense of child molestation aired, most had no clue of Milo’s unstated beliefs.
That’s pure BS. If you “agree with and follow Milo” as you claim, you would have know most of this. The clips (multiple) that surfaced are a compilation of at least two times he said this during on-air interviews. He’s stated this (and several other vial things) several times in non-recorded live shows. If you’d have done even the slightest bit of digging, you’d know that. But fact of the matter is, you likely never heard or saw anything by him, and simply parroted lines heard off the radio of “he talks about issue X and Y, which the left is trying to silence”.
The only way we can know the beliefs that underpin the construct of a man, is to let him speak. Your approach denies platform,
I see. So if I hear someone, and find them objectionable, and protest that their speech is unfit, that’s censorship. But once YOU hear it and find it unfit, the we can “know the mans underpin” and it’s find to censor him then?
Do you think I had not heard what he had to say? Do you think I protested his speaking at a venue I helped support because of rumor? No. Unlike you, I actually HEARD what he had to say, and found it to be for the most part offensive and objectionable.
And again, for the record, I did not ask the state to silence him. I did not demand he be locked up, and prevented from speaking in this way. My request was to the venue, which I help fund, to not allow him to use their resources to amplify his message by giving him a stage on which to speak. That’s not silencing someone. There are plenty of places Milo can still find an audience willing to pay him for the garbage he spews.
But then I’m not the one furiously backpedaling here, trying to distance myself from someone I backed just the paragraph before. That role would be yours, mainly due to your ignorance on who the man was. Something I had clear insight into, based on actually having heard him speak, instead of blindly repeating things others opined about him.
it denies open airing of any and all controversial speech that does not align with your tender sensibilities.
Oh.. And you think this is limited to the left? Tell me, which party is working to eliminate protests in their states? Is it Democrats? No… It’s Republicans (link). And this is not new for them. But again, when your side does it, it’s OK… When the other does it’s suddenly an outrage.
An examination of the roots of this inevitably lead to an educational approach geared towards educating females with the unpardonable exclusion of boys.
What country did you grow up in? The school I went to (and the one my child goes to) still have gender gaps in several areas, in favor of boys. Boys are encouraged to go into sciences, and professional career tracks. Girls are encouraged to take “home economics” and classes around baking and care giving. That’s not even “equal”, yet alone “geared toward females” or the “exclusion of boys”.
Please, do expound upon this, because again I’m calling BS.
We are tired of Political Correctness. Tired of the marginalization of white males
Sorry, but no. What you call “Political Correctness” other call simply asking for equality. Providing a business service for the public, but excluding blacks, or gays, or people of the “wrong religion”, or any minority, is not a picture of someone being “oppressed”. It’s a shining example of their privilege, that they believe their prejudices is more of a right than the civil rights of others.
I AM a white male. But here’s the thing: I was born and raised in a town where 85% of the population was Black or Hispanic. It was clear to me, from a young age, that I have rights and privileges that most of those around me did not. To this day, I see that privilege at work every day in my life. And I use it to push for equality.
To give you an example: A few months ago for a special reason, I paid for my groceries with a check. The cashier took my check, put it in the till, and I bagged my groceries. As I was collecting my things, a black woman behind me did the same. She was asked for two forms of ID, and her name is searched for in a book next to the cashier that lists people who’ve bounced checks. I watched this, and then asked the cashier to summons a manager. I asked the two why that just happened. Why I was able to use a check to pay, with no fanfare or validation, while this other woman had to show ID and have her name searched for. Could I have not equally well have passed them a bad check? The silence was palpable.
So tell me again how the white male is being marginalized? I don’t see it, and I AM a white male. What I do see is people (slowly) being treated with equality. White men being subjected to the same systems and “verifications” like the one above that minorities have had to suffer through for most of the past century. That’s not marginalizing, that’s treating everyone equally.
The same thing with “security” at airports. As a white male, I’ve not been stopped a single time. Yet several times when traveling with colleagues whose skin was not quite as white as mine, they’ve been stopped and searched, and given extra scrutiny. Amazing, when you consider there have been more terror attacks and bombings carried out by white men in the past decade then there have been by people with non-white skin in the history of this nation.
But yes, let’s focus on the plight of the white man. Poor thing, not being able to go about their business without being subjected to the same systems as everyone else. Because if you’re not better or more privileged than others, you’re being “marginalized”.
Funny.. Apparently Milo isn’t the only one showing his “underpinning”.