@cyrax
Man, this kinda support did ‘not’ age well, especially after the months long riots they carried out.

Fuck antifa

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

What is… a draco in leather pants situation? o.o I haven’t heard of this XD
 
And I mean, that’s kindof why ‘most’ people don’t want any form of politics in their games or media, because a lot of the stuff their pushing is better off taught in a ‘respected institution’, or at least from books that people can refer to when needed.
 
Nazi’s genocide, communist’s oppressive regimes, fascists… ads telling fascisti to… force-feed people laxatives? [I still can’t believe something that goofy was true…], religious zealotry going on to this day, the slave markets of different nations thoughout history [Cause no matter how much they play it up, it doesn’t change the fact that america’s participation in it was a drop in the bucket in comparison to some others].
 
I fully agree, this stuff has much better places to be ‘made known and learned about’ than silly cartoons or shoe-horned into videogames… I can only assume it ends up there because all of the ‘preferred places’ it could go, have been infested by bias that would make it either unacceptable, or ineffective there, or worse, skewed in historically inaccurate ways, and thus people try to spread their ideas in any other method they can find, much like failing communist leaders post world-wars were recorded telling their followers to invade the schools of other nations and seed their ideas in the ignorant children of those nations, because they couldn’t spread by force anymore.
 
It’s interesting how the spread of ideals, both good and disgustingly horrific, evolve much in the way that viruses do in order to spread.

@Sergalpony  

 

 
The only way there could be a parallel for this is if there’s an episode that points out how evil and stupid nazis are, which would likely be difficult to pull off given the necessity of showing just how extremely dumb and vile nazis are, or getting into a draco in leather pants situation.
 
I’d rather the imbecility and heinousness of nazis be taught through history books or by watching morons on twitter trip over their own shit than have a light-hearted cartoon for kids try to cover it properly with their extreme constraints (how do you truly explain genocide to a 7 year old when they barely understand death? Or the constant repeated strategical fuckups with long term disastrous consequences when they can’t even grasp that not going to bed is related to being tired?)

@Background Pony #D2E2  

 
I mean, a parallel for this has already happened. Starlight was basically communist parody pony, and tried to destroy ‘time’ or ‘the whole nation’ [depending on your point of view] when she didn’t get what she wanted while trying to force her views, and her dominance by extension, on others.

@Background Pony #945D
 
It’s impossible to reconcile the message of the show with Nazism because Nazism is diametrically opposed to the message of the show. If a fascist group were to start taking over Equestria, one of its very first acts of terrorism would be to burn down the School of Friendship because it would be the most visible symbol of “foreigners taking over the country”.

Yeah yeah “fuck nazis” is a sentiment i agree with but it look tacky when you use a cartoon character from a franchise called Friendship is Magic.Aryanne suck more,granted, regardless it look tacky  
What i dont accept is those creepy tiny ass insect eyes the artist choose to draw. Creepy.

@cheezedoodle  
Never touched 4chan actually, more deprecating assumptions, thank you ;3 If I were to play your game, I’d point out how you’ve ‘clearly’ deluded yourself into believing things as evidence that aren’t related to the point you were trying to prove. [not everything you linked, but some XD]
 
It’s not my fault if you interpret ‘for me’ meanings to my words that I wrote exactly how I meant them.
 
But as you said, Good day! Have a nice life ^.

@Sergalpony  
You are clearly so self-deluded with your /pol/ talking points that you are not worth salvaging. Not to mention your unwillingness or inability to state a point succinctly leaves you enough wiggle room that you can later deny or redefine nearly any point you made previously.
 
Good day.

@Background Pony #229B  
so basically, people ‘trying’ to stir shit with minimalist replies with no context or explanation to see what kind of reaction comes from it? XD

@Sergalpony  
Copypasta (or Copy pasta, or COPY PASTA) is text on *chans that gets copied and pasted over and over. This is how it works: someone posts something on /b/ that riles people up. People see the topic and copy that first inflammatory post. Then a week or so later someone posts it again. Or they might post it a day later. Or a minute later. Whatever. The flamewar starts over again.
 
The best response to any copypasta: cool story bro.

@The Frowning Pony  
In what manner? That america has rights that are not denied to it’s ideological enemies, therefore encouraging them to make spectacles of themselves so that they’re easily known and recognized, and by extension more easily kept out of power than those who ‘pretend’ to have America’s interests at heart but actual have nefarious motivations?
 
That’s kindof why we don’t still kill or suppress communists in the US, doing so was ineffective, so they changed the game. Everybody can say whatever, and by espousing their beliefs without having to be assaulted for ‘thinking’ differently, however wrong or messed up they may be, make themselves known and the american process weeds them out by the lack of like-minds simply not voting them into any position of power.
 
As they say, the best ideological disinfectant is sunshine. What could kill nazism more than a nazi shouting nazi things in places they aren’t welcome? outside of, of course, rounding up every nazi and murdering them of course, which would inevitably drag in a lot of collateral innocents as every similar method in history has done.
 
I know I’m just rambling, but unguided idea vomit is so fun sometimes. I’m sure it’d help if people who responded actually explained things, otherwise it just seems like casual dismissal, in which case, why respond at all instead of ignoring it and letting it die off? Easier and less troublesome, and inspires less ideas of pointless ill-will being involved.

This is hilarious for several reasons.

@Derpy Whooves  
This is a good point, and thank you very much for explaining things :D I’ll be sure to keep that in mind!
 
 
@The Frowning Pony  
I know this isn’t directed at me since I was so unrelated to the image, but I figured as my last post I’d add in my 2-cents on that subject. For me, it’s not so much the ‘shitting on nazi’s’ part, as it is:  
A. Initiating violence against a nazi who’s only crime thus far is their thoughts and speech [to my knowledge Spencer never attacked anyone for instance, and we’re not alloud to punch commies for supporting a regime that was worse even than nazis, either the precedent applies to ‘all’ belief systems with a record of high murder counts, or none.]  
B. The People, Antifa of which is a big one, who use the idea of ‘punch a nazi’ to label people who aren’t nazis, as nazis, and then justify political violence against them ‘because who would ever defend a nazi?’. This being accepted is in itself unacceptable, because the mere word of a stranger can ruin someone’s life, without any proof behind those words, only opinions or interpretations, you just get the red-scare or the witch-trials that way.
 
I fully agree that a legitimate nazi deserves to be shit on, just like legitimate communists, but I wholly disagree with the ‘red-scare’ style that allows people to justify violence by ‘claiming’ someone is a nazi without evidence. [I don’t mean spencer, we all know XD] in much the way the red-scare was used to ruin people who had no actual connection to communism, or the same way the salem witch trials were used to ruin people who couldn’t prove they weren’t witches.
 
 
@cheezedoodle  
Thank you again for, ya know, misrepresenting my arguments to mean something usefully negative to someone who disagrees with me, top notch that. Questioning how mistreated people ‘really’ are in america, or pointing out how there’s almost no out-cry for the places they’re treated far worse, is not synonymous with ‘I approve of gay people being oppressed in america!’, and you know it, please don’t be childish about things like this, it doesn’t help anyone. Despite your deliberate misrepresentation, I’m going to continue to take you seriously and actually discuss things.
 
Now, since you linked these, lemme give em a look, and to clarify, I actually looked stuff up while checking these in cases where I needed some numbers to make my point.
 
That first one doesn’t sound like it has anything to do with LGBTQ outside of the presence of gay parents, that’s not an example of ‘gay mistreatment’ because that would’ve implied both sons of the gay parents being denied citizenship, while only the son who’s parent was not already an american citizen was initially denied, and from the sound of it they were both born abroad… yeah, they were both born in canada. This raises many questions around it, some from ignorance, because I don’t know marriage law myself, like does one parent being married to a U.S. citizen share that parent’s citizenship? I don’t actually know that one, but if yes, then there’s no reason to deny it. If so, I can ‘see’ why, but I honestly don’t see any reason he can’t be granted citizenship anyway, there are already ways to acquire citizenship without it being birth-right.
 
An article from the british broadcasting center [is that what BBC stands for?], so a foreign opinion that the left is always happy to say shouldn’t apply, but for the sake of seriousness, I’ll just say this. The reasoning was the concern for what is still known to include evidence of mental illness [not all of them obviously] being an issue with the military’s ‘need’ for maximum safety and cohesion with soldiers. That doesn’t mean they ‘shouldn’t’, but this is obviously just another stage in cementing such precedents, this is the time where people should be showing scientific evidence that mental illness isn’t so linked to transgenderism, not calling names and trying to shame people into backing down. Proving that it’s not linked would shatter the veracity of that ban immediately. not technically oppression, as it’s not explicitly done ‘against transgenders’ as it is to ensure the military charged with defending the entire nation’s capabilities, and the rights of it’s soldiers to be guaranteed allies they can trust, but it should still be easy to completely debunk with serious scientific studies.
 
On the next one, question, did that include people who experienced such things ‘online’? Also, a harvard study of roughly 500 people’s experiences [to say nothing of the ability of an institute to pick and choose to curb the results a certain way, I won’t even ‘assume’ they did.] but the small number of ‘500’ used to represent systemic nation-wide oppression of 9,000,000 people? The innacuracy of such a study is self-evident at that point, a study to prove such oppression should need at ‘least’ 10 percent, not roughly .005 percent [I actually did the math, maybe not perfectly XD, but would you want a small handful of people to define what the world thinks of ‘you’?]. Harassment and discrimination in general exist for everyone too, it depends on the ‘local’ environment, unfortunate as it is, though it’s far more rampant on the internet, because little people get very bold and offensive when they’re certain they’re immune to reprisal, but I’m going to assume they didn’t include something like that in their study because those people are also impotent and unable to do harm ‘nearly’ 100% of the time [Swatters and Doxxers deserve to rot in prison.][Note: None of this is ‘saying it doesn’t exist’, just that harvard’s specific study there was so incredibly small that it can’t accurate represent a demographic that’s 10000 times as large as their test group]
 
The fourth one is unfortunate and should never have happened, but it took me a moment to realize why you included it. because you said ‘in the americas’, which includes all of north and south america, not just the U.S.A. where she was trying to get to, so that was my own foible. I can agree that this shouldn’t happen, but unfortunately many countries outside of the USA have problems like this that need solving, though this also isn’t a source of government persecution or anything, so unfortunately without roaming security patrols or something, abusive citizens mistreating others is next to impossible to deal with. [There’s a reason people who do this kind of thing ‘in’ america tend to suffer horribly for such crimes when caught… ya know, unless their a disgusting corrupt politician with the right ‘friends’.]
 
While that last one is also terrible to hear about, and needs to be solved as well, and no, this is not ‘supporting the killing’ or ‘denying their right to safety’, the actual growth in number of homicides over that period is easily explained by rising population, more people means a proportional crime-rate returns higher flat numbers. It also pales in comparison to actual over-all homicide rate, so if we can bring down the ‘big’ murder-fest that everyone else has to face, the measures that do so will inevitably bring down the threats against LGBT people. More safety for ‘everyone’, invariably includes minorities as well, and any policy that can be proven as deliberately benefiting only one group and depriving all others, has no place in the U.S.

@Sergalpony  
I’m not sure why you are OK that LGBTQ people are being treated as second-class citizens by much of the world, but here’s a few examples of persecution in the Americas from just the last few years.
 
U.S. appeals ruling that granted gay couple’s son citizenship
 
Transgender ban: How many are serving in US military?
 
Most LGBTQ Americans experience harassment, discrimination, Harvard study finds
 
‘They Were Abusing Us the Whole Way’: A Tough Path for Gay and Trans Migrants
 
It’s still dangerous to be gay in America. Here are the statistics that prove it.

@The Frowning Pony
 

@Derpy Whooves  
Shitting on nazis isn’t “clearly intended to create drama” tbh, but it does track that those sensitive little snowflakes get offended when an image of a colourful cartoon pony mocks them.

@Sergalpony  

 
Rule #6 in this case is about keeping the conversation on an image apropos the image itself, not the conversation. So if the conversation tangents to unrelated topics, yes - we’re going to try to stop that tangental conversation, and get the conversation back on topic.
 
Granted, on images such as this which are clearly intended to create drama, that’s not a very straight forward effort, and threads on such images often end up somewhat “outside of normal practices”.
 
So, please go to the forums or PMs if you wish to continue your debates about homophobia.
 
If you want to talk about topics aside from the artist’s work, we ask you to use the forums. For example, if you create or respond to an enormous tangent about homophobia on an image that has nothing to do with homophobia or homosexuality.
 
If you wish to discuss this further, please use the “Site & Policy” forum, or come to -help in IRC (the link is on the Contacts page, available at the bottom of every page on the site), as meta discussions about site-wide rules are not apropos this image.

@The Frowning Pony  
Who’s Silent Wing? XD I’m going to assume either someone who talked a bunch of political stuff that people didn’t like to hear, or a ranting lunatic that made a huge fuss out of things and caused ‘actual’ problems with it, given that you’ve mentioned them upon appearing here.
 
Since you’re suddenly here, I certainly hope someone didn’t go off and bother the site admin because I was discussing things they didn’t like. I notice a steady escalation of authority being involved in this in direct correlation with a drop in anyone attempting to say why they think my explanations are wrong, coupled with one that actively ‘tried’ to insult while misrepresenting my explanations.
 
I imagine you have other things to do aside from stalking these kinds of chat sections, so I can only assume someone specifically sent complaints, so I certainly apologize if someone took up your time badgering you about a politically themed discussion that wasn’t going well instead of just asking me to shut up.
 
All I can say is, I like to discuss things, especially words, meanings, and the power they can have when abused, and especially the people who abuse them, and I’m quite aware of the intensity of reaction that calling one of the current big ‘politically useful phobia misnomers’ a misuse of the words involved would have, but that’s never a good enough reason not to speak my piece. It’s not my fault if someone decides to keep escalating the reaction to an attempt at a thorough discussion, especially if they’re not willing to just say ‘I don’t want to continue discussing thing, please let it drop’ instead of simply dismissing anything I say and, given what’s followed their replies, likely been trying to report me out of existence to shut me up instead of merely asking, in which case I would’ve gladly let it drop, even the mod that came in didn’t say to drop it, only insulted me and conflated my argument with a different meaning.

I think we found the new Silent Wing.

@cheezedoodle  
All I can say is, they’re being hypocritical with it. talking about how the world need fixing, such evil things are so wide-spread and horrible… yet they tend to react to mean words with more force and offense than the ‘actual’ stories of people being killed for it. In-fact, most instances I’ve seen included someone ‘attacking’ the other person [verbally mind you, so it was harmless words] for bringing up the places in the world where ‘actual’ violence is taking place, and typically following by talking about it as the perpetrators of these murders are the victims of mean words instead of people who are killing others for pitiful reasons.
 
Also, no XD I’m not saying ‘they should be thankful they aren’t dying in the street’, thanks for hyperbolizing it into something I didn’t say ;3 though that ‘is’ true, if you’re not thankful that you’re not being murdered in the streets, then what’s wrong with you? Nevermind implying being thankful you’re not murdered in the street is the ‘childish’ outlook here.
 
That’s an incredibly important thing to be thankful for! I am eternally thankful that I was born in America, ever since I got out of school where everyone’s a stupid kid, nobody’s been bothering ‘me’ about being gay, not even a ‘hint’ of malice. And because I know it will be the common response to that statement, no I am not ‘taking my sole experience as defining how the rest of the nation handles it’, It’s just the personal aspect that’s added on to the wide breadth of what I have observed around the nation.
 
Don’t worry though, I won’t hold it against you, the tactic of hyperbolizing someone’s words to mean something that you think can make them look bad is so common in the world today that it’s the same as every school-yard insult I’ve ever shrugged off as a kid.
 
However, I will say, try proving me wrong instead of using the ‘so this means you’re saying this thing that sounds bad right?’ tactic.

@Sergalpony  

 

 
“They should be thankful they’re not being murdered in the streets outright.” is what you basically said.
 
Come back when you’re grown up and have some perspective on life.

Also interesting how my previous post was removed because of ‘rule 6’ when rule 6 says nothing about ‘words are not the sum of their parts’. It’s a rule about derailing the discussion, and the discussion is currently about the meaning of words, hence what I was talking about with the meaning of the word and how it’s fundamental definition differs from the social media viral definition. I’m very curious about an explanation for the post’s removal now, since the reason listed is not listed in the rule that was referenced.

@Bird Prole  
Except… we don’t XD The political left and their media allies making a ‘huge’ deal out of the word and ‘telling’ their believers that it’s globally recognized as such, doesn’t change the fact of the combined definition of that particular conjunction.
 
And I just clarified that definitions aren’t permanent, but require a ‘huge’ volume of people or use to justify changing the definition. The existence of ‘homophobia’ and other ‘politically useful minority’phobias are based on media and far-left buzz-words that are made viral by twitter mobs and the like.
 
People at large, who actually ‘look’ at the world outside of what they’re told about it, know that the only place homosexual’s ‘really’ suffer is in the middle-east, where they’re killed as readily as christians, otherwise incidents are smaller ‘occasional’ cases at worst, many of which turned out to be hoaxes at that, and don’t even involve cases of ‘murdered for being gay’, otherwise the media would be alllllover it, they’d never miss that kind of chance to politicize death, just like they try to make every shooting, whether a justified self defense, criminal threatening police, or some sick in the head lunatic shooting up a school, look like a ‘gun crisis’, they jump right ‘on’ the corpses as political tools.
 
That’s ‘one’ thing I can trust about far-left media talking heads XD If something to the extreme ‘actually’ happens that would support their narrative, they will ‘not’ miss a chance to pronounce it loud and proud as evidence of politically useful evil. That also why you don’t hear about the crimes of ‘a very specific religion’ and ‘a very specific demographic of illegal residents’, because any such truthful reporting would damage their narrative.
 
Thusly, the lack of reporting on ‘evidence’ of legitimate ‘crime’ against homosexuals, tells me there is no grounds for homophobia to be so big, unless it’s just yet another one of their hysteria panic hoaxes. They’ve been at this for decades, every doomsday scenario the media plays up, every ‘crimewave against a minority’ that didn’t actually happen, not in america at least, every ‘evil nazis are in power’ lie, they almost, ‘almost’ exclusively have mere opinions of themselves or other people as so called ‘evidence’ and no actual records of crimes or events that prove it. Sometimes even ‘fabricated’ evidence like what was attempted to use to bring down President trump [the Dossier that was proven to have been fabricated by a foreign agent no less]
 
I don’t buy for a moment that a media engine that was able to successfully impeach past presidents, or bring down corrupt government officials, wouldn’t have the power to ‘prove’ there are actual crimes against gays, muslims, and so on in the US, and by extension implies that a lack of proven crimes to justify how ‘big of a deal’ people make of this, is just another hoax to drum up ratings, damn the consequences of the poor people fooled into believing there’s an actual crisis.
 
If the source of the word becoming so big has been found to be out-right lying about it, and doesn’t even show extremely beneficial proof of their claims that lead to it’s existence, then where’s the justification for it being so big? The only place that even your definition of homo’phobia’ exists is in the middle-east, where ‘holy law’ oppresses gays as much as christians.