Talk:Davis Aurini

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Contents

[edit] Oh man

A LW post by Mr Aurini - David Gerard (talk) 11:58, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

When I see "LW" I think "longwave" and assume it's a link to Radio 4. SophieWilderModerator 15:14, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

[edit] Facebook notes

From when this article was being planned: [1] - David Gerard (talk) 10:48, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

[edit] Problematic issues...

"Based on the trailer, the movie was nothing more than the typical attack on Anita Sarkeesian that one could see in a typical YouTube comment mixed in with a good amount of psychological projection. The project ran into financial problems, as Aurini had correctly assessed men's rights activists' hatred of Sarkeesian, but overestimated how much money they were willing to part with. This was, of course, everyone else's fault."

Hi - I'm not familiar with Aurini, however I'm fairly familiar with Owen and his commentary on the project. He's not an MRA, he considers MRAs to be as misguided as feminists - and neither are most of his viewers, judging by the comments. MRAs frequently appear and complain about him being artificially neutral and misrepresenting him, though some are fine with it. Considering you're talking about their mutual project here, your assumption that MRAs are the sole/main donors may be flawed.

Also, are you talking about this trailer: watch?v=ROHvvtUcp8I? There wasn't any "attack" to be found there, and you seems to speak rather favorably of "typical YouTube comments" which is... untypical.


Owen has made detailed point-by-point responses to most of Sarkeesian's videos, and successfully debunked most of the fallacies her narrative is built on (though he hasn't been beneath or above making some of his own, as well). The most reasonable expectation is that the movie will continue in that same vein, as a typical deconstruction of Anita Sarkeesian that one could see in a typical YouTube video mixed with some interviews. 84.187.96.221 (talk) 02:00, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

[edit] Referring to him as a "White Supremacist" is sensationalistic

I've watched most of his videos and I don't agree with him on everything, but he's generally an intelligent, moderate guy at least when it comes to race who's main flaw is his ego and how arrogant he looks and acts, but if you actually watch many of them he's not some extremist white supremacist, in fact he defends black nationalists and his views are extremely moderate to what we'd stereotype a "white supremacist" or "nationalist" to be. He did say he was a white nationalist on paper in one video, but then proceeded to criticize them on numerous points.

He even made a video claiming holocaust deniers are wrong and tends to stray away from conspiracy theories common in far-right thought. - NoBody

What the fuck? The guy says he is a white nationalist, in any way shape or form, and you want to quibble about specifics? - π 02:35, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
He literally says in one video that he is a huge white nationalist on paper. Calling him a white supremacist is accurate. Sig can you say.png Sig gulag time.png 17:45, 27 November 2014 (UTC)
If you wish to use White Supremacist as a synonym for "White Nationalist" then feel free, but linguistically they are different and more importantly they do evoke different concepts. When you call someone a white supremacist, the generally assumed meaning is someone of the tier of a Ku Klux Klan member going around lynching black people. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xTGoJjzXI5U In this video right here he states that the police racially profile black people and that it's a bad thing and states that if white nationalists weren't awful people, they'd say that's a bad thing. He also says hating people for their race is wrong and "pathological". This actually has alienated white nationalists and he's been called a "race traitor" and other WN strawman variations of that in the comments of many of his youtube videos. In his one video where he says Jewish conspiracies are bullshit, numerous people have accused him of being a "Jew lover", "shill", "good goy", etc. My point is the guy isn't some extreme neo-nazi and the labels given will give people the implications that he is something along those lines. He's also criticized Fascism and Nazism as "childish". He has relatively unique views with regards to race. - NoBody
Neo-Nazis call each other "Jew lovers" and "race traitors" at the drop of a hat. Godwin's Law In Reverse notes that as a neo-Nazi discussion progresses, the probability of someone calling their opponent a Jew approaches one. Aurini may have perfected the art of pissing off absolutely everyone, but it's not clear indulging fine demarcations that don't actually make any practical difference means anything. But I've changed it to "white nationalist" since that's what the video says - David Gerard (talk) 12:50, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
Personal tools
Namespaces

Variants
Actions
Navigation
Community
Tools
support