Survivorgate

From iGeek
Jump to: navigation, search

A player on survivor outed another as trans, the SJW's had a meltdown. When fascism comes to America it will look like anti-fascism. Just like this.

He was dick. Lots of people are dicks (or do dicky things). I'm over it. I'm more outraged at the outrage.... and hypocrisy.

I'm not even watching this season of survivor, but my wife told me about this episode the other night. And reading about the responses concerns me. Outing someone's sexuality (either preference or transgender) is tacky at best. It is not something I condone or approve of.

Is it worse than government agents illegally leaking private (unmasked) data about American citizens that destroys their careers? Or government illegally leaking IRS data? I don't think so. Privacy either matters for everyone, or matters for no one. Some seem to want to maintain double standards: pick one. I lean towards the former (privacy for everyone), but I'm old school... selective outrage is that some groups privacy being more important than others. That's worthy of an eyebrow raise.

I don't condone the leak in any way. But the guy on survivor outed him to 8 people? CBS chose to not figure out a way to film around it, and chose instead to out him to millions. Seems to me like CBS should be getting more heat for their editorial choices, more than the idiot on survivor, if society is really going to pretend this is the moral crime of the century. Why is everyone letting CBS or Jeff Probst off the hook like they had to air this? They didn't.

The reason this is supposed to be a moral crime is because of the historical persecution of the sexually different. (Like back when Democrats in congress and Hollywood drove the lavender scare/blacklisting in Hollywood). But that's not really today's environment. Could we be overreacting to the ghost of Christmas past? If I hear of damage or harassment of the outed, that's a crime, but no more of one than damage or harassment to the outer.

The outed wasn't fired, or hasn't been harassed (good), the outer was (bad). And CBS is being let off Scott free, and they were the ones who did more imaginary harm than the guy did in some tropical island playing a game show did. So who is the biggest victim, and who was the biggest cause? I have no problem with some calm and reasoned repercussions against someone that hurts another person. But retaliation has to be within reason. Asymmetric warfare is when one guy screws up, and the nation attacks him, but out of scale of the actions and ignores those that did the real harm. So to me, the guys an idiot. CBS is the villain. The paranoia about the outing seems misplaced (since most of America doesn't seem to care who is trans). There's no lynch mobs attacking the outed that I can tell (and I think that's a good thing), but there is one for the outer, and not for CBS. And I'm not sure that response is reasonable.

If attacking people for who/what they are is wrong, shouldn't that apply equally to the politically incorrect (and stupid) instead of just the politically correct victim group du jour?

A lynch mob looks the same to the victim, no matter what their motives are.

Either way the hate seems indistinguishable: it is hate of that which is different. Whether that hate is because of not conforming to the mobs political correctness or their gender norms, the real problem is the reaction of the mob. Not which mob has the better rationalizations for why they are doing it GeekPirate.small.png