| There is no RationalWiki without you. We are a small non-profit with no staff – we are hundreds of volunteers who document pseudoscience and crankery around the world every day. We will never allow ads because we must remain independent. We cannot rely on big donors with corresponding big agendas. We are not the largest website around, but we believe we play an important role in defending truth and objectivity. If everyone who saw this today donated $5, we would meet our goal for 2019. |
Fighting pseudoscience isn't free. We are 100% user-supported! Help and donate $5, $20 or whatever you can today with |
Talk:Blaire White/Archive1
Contents
- 1 "Blaire White showing off her push up bra."
- 2 Her twitter
- 3 Comparison to Theryn Meyer
- 4 what does that even mean?
- 5 The "Acceptance is Child Abuse" Thing
- 6 Gender binary
- 7 "she uses the word "tranny" quite liberally"
- 8 "Conspiracy" section
- 9 Sonata's edits
- 10 Opinionated vs. Factual
- 11 Is it really necessary to insult her for passing?
- 12 Snopes article on Blaire gets blowback
"Blaire White showing off her push up bra."[edit]
Feels a bit insensitive. It's not clear from the picture alone that she's sexualizing herself to sell an ideology or product. FU22YC47P07470 (talk/stalk) 05:34, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
- Changed.—♥HamburgerPlate♥
(talk • stalk) 05:51, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
Her twitter[edit]
While browsing White's twitter, I found this. Uh...—♥HamburgerPlate♥
(talk • stalk) 06:14, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
Comparison to Theryn Meyer[edit]
I'm planning to make a page on Theryn Meyer when I have time, since White's just a more abrasive clone of her, but in my research so far, I found that these two intersect a lot- Would it be OK to put where they line up on this page first, or does it belong on Meyer's when I make it? This is what I came here to ask before I saw there's nothing about the Trump videos, BTW.— Unsigned, by: SonataBlack / talk / contribs
- You can have that in the intro I guess.—♥HamburgerPlate♥
(talk • stalk) 07:39, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
what does that even mean?[edit]
can someone help me understand this sentence? or simplify it? "which is based on that she doesn't look like how she mocks her trans critics for looking, and challenging her to put up pre-transition pictures to prove she didn't get plastic surgery to look more feminine. Because even when she's the victim of that kinda behavior, it's still not transphobic at all. " — Unsigned, by: Benaresh / talk / contribs
- On talk pages, please sign your comments using four tildes (~~~~) or by clicking on the sign button:
on the toolbar above the edit panel. You can also indent successive talk page comments using one more colon (:) for each line. Thank you. Reverend Black Percy (talk) 11:16, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
White is notorious for taking her high profile critics in the transsexual community, and giving the oh-so-intelligent response of either attacking their looks (going even further if they're transitioned like she claims to be), or their femininity if they're a woman. On the femininity thing, she has a particular obsession with saying their vagina smells like hot dog water, which kinda says far more than it should about her. Anyhow, at one point pre-Youtube, one of her tropes was even calling attention to how much she looks like a real woman, as opposed to all the "ugly" trans males. That's kinda part of how this started- No pre-pics, no transition pics, and she constantly called herself more "real." The conspiracy is that she's using that wording to pass a confession off as bragging. If you watch the video, they even call out that some of what she had to do to have her figure is impossible without surgery, unless she was allowed to start at like, ten. Which leaves her with three options: She's lying about being a transsexual, she's lying about not having cosmetic surgery, or she's a complete hypocrite on that whole "acceptance of a trans minor is abuse!" shit she concern trolls the LGBT youth community with. Does that help enough for you to re-word it? Because I can't be bothered.SonataBlack (talk) 07:01, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
The "Acceptance is Child Abuse" Thing[edit]
I was ignoring this until now, because it fell too close to her other crap, but White's developing a little bit of an obsession with comparing acceptance of a transsexual minor to child abuse. She has a few videos about it where she tries to justify this by saying that if you accept them, you're trying to force-transition them, which actually would be abuse if you were doing it. There's a lot to say about this, but would this work better as just a paragraph in an existing section, or should I begin a detailed write-up for a section of it's own? — Unsigned, by: SonataBlack / talk / contribs
- On talk pages, please sign your comments using four tildes (~~~~) or by clicking on the sign button:
on the toolbar above the edit panel. You can also indent successive talk page comments using one more colon (:) for each line. Thank you. Reverend Black Percy (talk) 07:32, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
Gender binary[edit]
The article seems to suggests that since she's transgender, her belief in the gender binary is somehow hypocritical. However, I don't think her views are inconsistent as she considers herself one of the two genders. 80.220.177.163 (talk) 20:38, 15 February 2017 (UTC)
- That's a fair point. Feel free to change that. Sir ℱ℧ℤℤϒℂᗩℑᑭƠℑᗩℑƠ (talk/stalk) 21:29, 15 February 2017 (UTC)
"she uses the word "tranny" quite liberally"[edit]
You are aware, that gay people managed to turn the term "gay" from a slur to an accepted term for (male) homosexual self-identification via just using it, first often in a self-mocking context and later in general language describing themself? The process is called "amelioration" or "semantic change" where a pejorative word get's its bad conotation changed to something positive. Other examples of amelioration are: "Ratatouille" originally meaning a rather cheap mix of remains and scrappings used by the poor, today meaning a French haute cuisine and is found on the list of many serious restaurants. "Marshall" - originally meaning an inferior horse keeper and stable boy, to today the highest military rank in the army. "Free spirit" originally a pejorative term for someone whose behaviour doesn't fit into religious and traditional society norms, today a positive description for someone who uses their mind in a creative and empowering way.— Unsigned, by: 79.205.237.85 / talk / contribs
- On talk pages, please sign your comments using four tildes (~~~~) or by clicking on the sign button:
on the toolbar above the edit panel. You can also indent successive talk page comments using one more colon (:) for each line. Thank you. - I agree, it's like calling a black person racist for saying nigger or a gay person homophobic for saying queer. Christopher (talk) 09:06, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
"Conspiracy" section[edit]
Oh, and every time she tries to claim that she's never experienced transphobia, or been dragged through the mud over her transition? There's an actual conspiracy that claims White's a natural born woman who's merely claiming to be trans to ride the tokenism train,<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ZeseAqykB4&t=183s</ref> which is based on that she doesn't look like how she mocks her trans critics for looking, and challenging her to put up pre-transition pictures to prove she didn't get plastic surgery to look more feminine. Because even when she's the victim of that kinda behavior, it's still not transphobic at all.
I don't believe for a second that Blaire is secretly cis there's just no evidence for it. However it is worth talking about the fact that she clearly had the resources at her disposal to transition at a young age and she can easily pass for cis. I think it's safe to say that this heavily factors into her beliefs. In general she seems to have a problem understanding trans experiences outside of her own.Bmvolkow (talk) 17:24, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
What is this and why was it here? 32℉uzzy; 0℃atPotato (talk/stalk) 19:19, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Sonata's edits[edit]
Oddly enough, White begins one of her backstory videos by telling people she "looks like shit because her husband beats her"<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A_1Rlvj_RxU</ref>, then immediately retracts it as a joke, showing in the most thorough way possible what she thinks about real abuse- At least, abuse towards women. Later down the road, she made a homophobic video asking a lot of smear questions that she tried to pass off as "returning the favor".<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DUoI30m3p2M&t=145s</ref> In short, White's also a fairly open homophobe beyond simple slurs as well, but so much of it crosses over into her transphobia that what doesn't might was well go under this heading.
White's joke is shit. Her intent is unclear, however. For this joke to "show what she thinks about abuse", she'd have had to belittle abuse towards women. Instead, the intent seems much more likely to be self-deprecation combined with the crass dark humor that YouTube conservatives so enjoy. I would compare this to Colbert's joke about Trump as Putin's cock-holster.
White's "smear questions" don't appear to be "openly homophobic". At best, they're tired, bullshit dog whistles akin to her video that "transgenderism is a mental disorder".
TLDR: I think Sonata's edits make White sound more extreme than what's true. I invite Sonata to defend their edits. FU22YC47P07470 (talk/stalk) 01:17, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
- I had to ready those edits a couple times over and I still wasn't able to understand what Sonata meant. I agree FCP, it does make White sound just a little bit too extreme. Face me, swab! 01:58, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
Opinionated vs. Factual[edit]
It is my understanding that all Wiki pages should be factual and include no personal bias, as they're here serving a purpose to the general public to be a factual source of information on a specific topic. Granted, this is not the official wikipedia page, though it should follow the same general construct, especially as when you type in White's name, this is the page that pops up.
Also, on the topic of the Privilege Grant "scam," it has been rebuked and proven not to be a scam whatsoever, as Milo Yiannopoulos has already announced the first 10 winners of the grant. This line in the page is not accurate, and was obviously not based on any factual evidence and should be removed. Zing dager (talk) 17:23, 14 May 2017 (UTC)
- If this were Wikipaedia you'd be right. However, we support a snarky point of view here. We make no claims of being neutral. As for the rest of the claims, I'm not sure. Another user can address those. Face me, swab! 17:52, 14 May 2017 (UTC)
- RationalWiki is not Wikipedia. RationalWiki intends to have a snarky point of view, not a neutral point of view like Wikipedia. Nonetheless we do strive for truth. As for the scam, well perhaps it's not accurate because no one bothered to update it. It was declared a scam last year in April or so, but last month a former underling of Milo, writing for the somewhat-less-than-reputable Daily Caller, announced that grants had been awarded.[1] Take it with a grain of salt. The official site only gives the first names of the winners: is it that embarrassing to win?[2] Bongolian (talk) 17:54, 14 May 2017 (UTC)
- It was declared a scam by who? Other "somewhat-less-than-reputable" websites? "The Daily Beast," or maybe "Redstate?" I'm sorry, but more than one person has/have come out - including Milo Yiannopoulos and Mike Cernovich, one of the donors - saying that it wasn't a scam. Not to mention he has already given 25k out to the students, I'm not sure why this isn't an obvious debunking of the "scam," in of itself. I do indeed do my own fact checking, and wouldn't have even put this in the Talk Page had I not been curious to see actual facts and things that might have been important about the main topic of this page, Blaire White. However, you (as in the community who have edited this page, not you individually) blatantly misinterpreted a lot of what was said, both by Ms. White and Milo. Especially regarding her views on transgenderism. While I have no problem with this site taking a "snarky point of view," as you are so fond of using, it is certainly disheartening, not to mention cause for suspicion, when certain pages, while claiming to have a scientific point of view - or including facts and statistics and/or the likes thereof - disregard actual evidence in support of their misconceived opinions, going out of their way to find "evidence" that supports their claims, rather than fact-checking. It is now apparent to me that this is not along the same lines of other more prominent Wiki sites, such as Wikipedia, and I admit I should have looked more thoroughly at the site's "snarky point of view" before my first comment. And I'm not saying you shouldn't have opinions as well, I'm just saying factual evidence should be the basis of your opinions, not the other way around. Zing dager (talk) 18:49, 14 May 2017 (UTC)
- More often than not fact is the basis for an article, and the snark comes afterwards as a way of making points more clear and adding humour. Now, I'll make sure we take a look at this article. Fair enough? Don't decry the entire site based on this one article. Face me, swab! 21:20, 14 May 2017 (UTC)
- It was declared a scam by who? Other "somewhat-less-than-reputable" websites? "The Daily Beast," or maybe "Redstate?" I'm sorry, but more than one person has/have come out - including Milo Yiannopoulos and Mike Cernovich, one of the donors - saying that it wasn't a scam. Not to mention he has already given 25k out to the students, I'm not sure why this isn't an obvious debunking of the "scam," in of itself. I do indeed do my own fact checking, and wouldn't have even put this in the Talk Page had I not been curious to see actual facts and things that might have been important about the main topic of this page, Blaire White. However, you (as in the community who have edited this page, not you individually) blatantly misinterpreted a lot of what was said, both by Ms. White and Milo. Especially regarding her views on transgenderism. While I have no problem with this site taking a "snarky point of view," as you are so fond of using, it is certainly disheartening, not to mention cause for suspicion, when certain pages, while claiming to have a scientific point of view - or including facts and statistics and/or the likes thereof - disregard actual evidence in support of their misconceived opinions, going out of their way to find "evidence" that supports their claims, rather than fact-checking. It is now apparent to me that this is not along the same lines of other more prominent Wiki sites, such as Wikipedia, and I admit I should have looked more thoroughly at the site's "snarky point of view" before my first comment. And I'm not saying you shouldn't have opinions as well, I'm just saying factual evidence should be the basis of your opinions, not the other way around. Zing dager (talk) 18:49, 14 May 2017 (UTC)
- This wiki is full of left-leaning nonsense, calling themselves the "rational wiki" should give you a clue as to how far their own heads are up their own asses. If you're looking for facts here, you might as well look in encyclopedia dramatica. And no, I don't want to sign my shit. — Unsigned, by: 24.176.3.104 / talk
- Well, too fucking bad for you about signing.
- I assume that you're calling our content "nonsense" because you disagree with it politically. Well...alright then. I suppose I could call ED's content nonsense because I disagree with it. And so I shall. ED is full of right-wing nonsense.
- See? Where is this getting us? What is the point of this whole debate? It's not like you're going to change my mind or vice verse. So just go on with ED, I'll go on with RW, and we can just call it a day.
- Also, the "Rational" part is a reference to the general science/skepticism stuff, not politics. RoninMacbeth (talk) 04:06, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
- This wiki is full of left-leaning nonsense, calling themselves the "rational wiki" should give you a clue as to how far their own heads are up their own asses. If you're looking for facts here, you might as well look in encyclopedia dramatica. And no, I don't want to sign my shit. — Unsigned, by: 24.176.3.104 / talk
- It truly is heavily biased against her. Be "snarky" if you like, I don't plan on coming here for info anyway, it was just the first link that came up, but letting opinions come through over facts heavily discredits this article to those truly trying to learn. — Unsigned, by: 99.203.27.135 / talk / contribs
Is it really necessary to insult her for passing?[edit]
The image box seems to denigrate Ms.White for having the audacity for passing as a trans person. While I dislike most of her views I think it reflects poorly on us to use that as an excuse to insult her. Plus it just gives her and MRAs/anit-fems like her ammunition against us. --Doulomb (talk) 04:41, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
Snopes article on Blaire gets blowback[edit]
https://twitter.com/snopes/status/930657640069435392
https://www.reddit.com/r/KotakuInAction/comments/7d2jlr/ethics_snopes_doubts_blaire_whites_maga_hat/ oʇɐʇoԀʇɐϽʎzznℲ (talk/stalk) 19:52, 15 November 2017 (UTC)