Talk:Shoe0nHead

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Icon youtube.svg

This YouTube related article has not received a brainstar for quality. Please consider expanding the article appropriately. See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information.

Steelbrain.png
Icon sociology.svg This article contains information about one or more living persons.

Articles about living people must be handled carefully, because they are more open to legal threats.
Reference any contentious allegations solidly; unreferenced allegations should be removed.
If legal threats are raised on this page, please direct the potential litigant to RationalWiki:Legal FAQ; do not interact with them.

Archives for this talk page: <1>, (new)


Y'all should mention the current Sargon drama[edit]

It seems to me that Shoeonhead definitely has moved more to the left and the article definitely reflects that but I think that the recent Sargon of Akkad drama should be mentioned because it definitely seems to be a pretty big turning point for her channel and the "skeptic community." In fact, I'm noticing that the "skeptic community" seems to be tearing itself apart to the point that even Armoured Skeptic has been getting cancelled by his own community which is interesting because with the current drama Shoe is getting accused of being a communist and people seem to think she most of become one because of her breakup with Armoured Skeptic (obviously this is all just baseless speculation from people are mad. It's honestly kind of amazing and I guess it kind of makes sense since while the skeptic community was pretty damn CHUDdy for a while with their anti-feminist takes. I don't think it was something done to be intentionally malicious but more of people being simply ignorant on the topic of politics. As Contrapoints pointed out the skeptic community got so used to shooting down beliefs that are so easy to shoot down (ie creationism, alternative medicine etc) when more complex political issues came up the community didn't know what the hell they were doing or responding to. This meant a lot of them including me ended up realizing how far to the right things were getting in the community and ended up jumping ship sooner or later especially with everything that is occurring at the current moment.

Of course not everybody jumped ship especially those like Sargon who realized if they kept releasing conservative bullshit they could just keep making money but a lot of people seemed to realize that they made a mistake in their past views.

Sorry for the rambling I guess what I'm trying to say is that this drama seems like it's going to have a huge effect on the skeptic community as well as Shoe herself to the point that it should be at the very least mentioned in passing. Not only that, but with how many people are jumping in it seems like this is only going to escalate in the time ahead. — Unsigned, by: 193.148.18.76 / talk / contribs

Regarding racism[edit]

This woman's grifting and racism is still being whitewashed in the intro to this article. IT rightfully called out her behavoir as not consistent with her identification as a "lefty". This was removed by some asshole 4chan racist. This keep happening. KEep coddling 4chan e-celebs who made thousands off of racism. What the fuck is wrong with you people? Why are you caping (again) for a sick demented racist? — Unsigned, by: 47.28.82.50 / talk / contribs

I guess they are being removed for lack of documentation, Cosmikdebris is not a 4Chan racist. :) The Wiki is more careful on unsourced statements regarding living people. :)
Now, personally, I have no idea why the white supremacist friendly nature of this is being removed when there's a whole documented section on her friendship with Lauren Southern. One problem with her is lately I guess somewhere she claimed to be a "reformed anti-SJW" skeptic, which Breadtube seems skeptical about. After reading her Twitter feed (headline: "i will never read a book", a statement that I would say based on her feed is rather accurate), though, I would throw her into the alt-right 4Chan edgelord category (virgin and Chad meme bullshit? "@HillaryClinton you're a demon"? Cheering Parler with a Pepe image? "Sargon was right"?). I didn't see much SJW type stuff there, so granted it's possible she's gone from anti-feminist to mere alt-right edgelord. I didn't see any anti-SJW stuff, either, so I'd call that assertion bullshit too. Anyways, doesn't seem to be a big reason to remove the headline altohether, seems pretty close to me and probably someone finding some references (on a Youtube personality though -- good luck, ugh) will be all that is needed here. That's "first impression", of course. PanGalacticGargleBlaster (talk) 00:31, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
Warning icon orange.svg Don't call me a fucking racist, you asshole.

@47.28.82.50 I simply got tired of seeing all those unsourced statements in the article. Many months passed after putting the "this article has unsourced statements" banner at the top of the damn page, and there were multiple statements in the article that were marked "citation needed." That's why I removed them. I have no personal agenda here. If you people would stop fucking whining and provide some citations for your unsourced claims, perhaps they can find a place in this article. Otherwise, fuck off. —cosmikdebris talk stalk 03:27, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

People (white people) on this website are still gaslighting their audience trying to cover for this vile racist. Shit, she started her career with GAMER-MOTHERFUCKING-GATE. Honestly if this horrible person is the hill you all are willing to die on (i'm talking to you pathetic edgelords). that's pathetic. — Unsigned, by: 47.28.82.50 / talk / contribs

I've sourced the statements of her long cover for and with friendships with horrible people and working on videos with a white supremacist. Nobody wants to die on this hill, we just really don't want any crank bringing the legal shotgun to us. RW is technically immune (the fault would be on the editor who introduced the edits), but nobody wants that headache. "Breadtube" the subreddit I can dismiss out of hand as a source because it's just not a significant one. If you can provide a reference for the gator stuff that would be great, as well as the stuff about her recent content appealing to channers (I tangentially know it's true, but I don't have specific references). I was able to source the opening paragraph with stuff from the article itself. Techpriest (I am Alpharius! / Pencil.png / Tux icon.png / Shield.png) 08:11, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
Okay I've sourced the GG claim too although it took a bit more work, it's still a source from the main text. I still would like a source about something to the present day. CCing @PanGalacticGargleBlaster since you did take a look at her account. Techpriest (I am Alpharius! / Pencil.png / Tux icon.png / Shield.png) 08:21, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
I added a rewrite after diving deeper into her Twitter. Honestly, she's a weird one. Kind of a 4Chan edgelord Bernie bro that is rebellious to a fault. It's hard screaming "racist" at her completely when she doesn't really post much on that angle anymore (she seems to have toned down some quite racist / anti-feminist shitty statements she was making circa 2016-2017), but she clearly can't let go of those shitty 4Chan memes. PanGalacticGargleBlaster (talk) 15:00, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Wow, i'm surprised, thank you so much for listening.Honestly, I didn't want this to end up like every other coner of the internet controlled by maladjusted gamergate weirdos. Relly, thank you! it really means alot.

ok so i'm trying to post a link citation and i'm failing. can someone help me out? I'd really appreciate it! — Unsigned, by: 47.28.82.50 / talk / contribs

You can post source links and related ideas for content to add to the article on this talk page, and others may help out with working it into the article text.
Also, as you can see, cosmikdebris has helped out a bit with the new content, but it may generally help to avoid accusing people in advance of racism and gaslighting if you want their help with stuff. --ApooftGnegiol (talk) 14:46, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Wow, i'm like so impressed. Y'all give a shit. double thumbs up for all. No racism convictions here! — Unsigned, by: 47.28.82.50 / talk / contribs

AGE and CREEPINESS[edit]

She is thirty, and acts like she is 15. Judging by her audience, and the majority of her viewers seem to be teenagers. This is super creepy. I think this should be pointed out. — Unsigned, by: 47.28.82.50 / talk / contribs

 : / 54.37.136.66 (talk) 15:17, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

Bias[edit]

After reading it a few times over, I think this article is biased against shoe. I have to admit to having sympathy for "shoe fans" (shoeheads). However, after reading comments by various racists, this article seems to be projection. June is 100% (or more) pro-black despite blacks being responsible for most crimes. This doesn't mean that blacks commit all the crimes, nor does it mean that blacks are fundamentally low IQ. However, June has been a champion of leftist causes such as Huey Long for a while now.54.37.136.66 (talk) 15:19, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

Firstly, no shit. Yes, the article ultimately takes a negative stance towards Lapine. Secondly, "despite blacks being responsible for most crimes." Is pretty ignorant. The methodology used to collect that data was, last I checked, hotly contested. Further, perhaps the overwhelming amounts of African Americans in poverty might account for those results results that are not contested, rather than them being "the blacks". Thirdly, IQ is a dubious metric to use in any of this, since it's most reliable usage is comparing testing averages, not criminality. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 15:27, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
Yea so I think shoe should be given a break. 54.37.136.66 (talk) 17:07, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
I've been around three black skinned people person in my entire life. The only one I got to know closely was ultimately not that interested in morals. Furthermore if we look to Africa, we can find multiple instances of Nazi style authoritarian regimes with practices of torture that equal that of Nazi Germany. So even if she was not a fan of hanging around blacks, she should be forgiven given she does not call for a white ethnostate, and black is just a color and has nothing to do with genetics, as the science clearly shows. 54.37.136.66 (talk) 17:11, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
This doesn’t have much to do with the article. You need to explain your problems with it properly if you want it to change. Christopher (talk) 17:46, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
Surprise surprise, one of June's racist simps is coming on here spouting alt-right bullshit. The hell is wrong with these people....oh yeah, fucking 4(totally not racist)chan. Embarrassing. June's a POS with a long history of anti-black racism and this article only scratches the surface. Nice try though. — Unsigned, by: 173.76.131.155 / talk / contribs

I'm inclined to agree with Tuxer on this one[edit]

Though I admit the only thing I know about her is that she makes videos on the Internet I don't think hypocrisy is enough to say she's not a socdem. Although I'd rather just lay to waste this article, but I tend to hate YouTube articles anyway...GeeJayK (talk) 19:27, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

To cite the Category:Social democrats page: "This category is used only for typical 'European-style center-left social democrats' and 'very very moderate socialists'.". Shoe self-identifies as a social democrat but supports Sanders. Our category page also mentions this -> "people with strong democratic socialist personalities such as [...] Bernie Sanders [...], we recommend using the Socialists category.". I'm as a result agreeing with David Gerards original assesment of North Korea being a democracy. Shoe has no real ideology in practice; she just says what she says because it gets her an audience and money, with enough sanity behind it that being a populistic nazi doesn't really give you much longevity. Per the article itself; if anything she has a very "rebel without a cause" ideology (and unstated; because if she had a cause, she'd risk alienating her audience). She's not a socdem by any measure, far less our own category rules for the socdem category. Techpriest (talk) 19:32, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
That's some bold claims. And also a No True Scotsman. Are you suggesting the Soviet Union and all other totalitarian regimes were never communist? Because that is the argument used by a lot of moonbats, "we never tried real communism" Tuxer (talk) 19:37, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
(EC) I'm not sure if I agree, Techpriest. At which points does she contradict social democracy? GeeJayK (talk) 19:41, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
@Tuxer No it means I have the ability to read and comprehend what's being written. You evidently appear to lack the latter. This would be a no true scotsman if the measure of a social democrat we have written out ("European-style center-left social democrats" and "very very moderate socialists") already would apply to Shoe. Shoe's actual worldview (if we believe her twitter feed), to cite the article is "a curious blend of rebel-without-a-clue, often contrary, populism oriented viewpoints, calling herself a "left populist"" along with everything in her 2021 section on political views. Shoe is not a social democrat. Techpriest (talk) 19:44, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
@GeeJayK To further cite the actual article, "Lapine is anti-democratic in some tweets" (being anti-democratic is already fundamentally incompatible with social democrats if you know a mocum of history on how social democrats came about to begin with). Techpriest (talk) 19:47, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
First thing. I think you're being overly aggressive on this one, and that's unlike how you've always treated me and the rest of the community. Are you ok? Honest question. Second. Actually, social-democracy started came to being as something extremely anti-democratic, advanced by people like Ferdinand Lassalle. Indeed, the Bolshevik party was the Russian Social Democratic Labour PartyWikipedia. People tent do mistake the Post-War social democracy championed by Myrdal and Erlander with "how social democrats came about to begin".
Sorry yeah, I'm fine now, thanks for the callout. I got a bit angry because Tuxer is going in on full blast with bullshit fallacies and it got me worked up and Duce's usual anti-Youtuber stuff didn't help much either. Apologies for in part projecting it on you. Anyway, fair point. That said, the current definition of social democracy has to be by definition (...heh) compatible with democracy. Outside of that (even if it doesn't convince you/you think different), the literal only definition we have of her being a "social democrat", is a self-identification with the term from 2019, with everything else since landing her in well... "rebel without a cause" stuff; she's anti-corporate, supports technological luddism, makes up bizarre conspiracies about BLM support from corporations, has supported Parler, thinks democracy is a sham because corporations, and I could continue on. I guess the best definition for her is some form of anarchist, but only by definition of just not having any sort of straight answer about her beliefs that makes sense (and I'm sure some anarchist will get pissed when we categorize her as such so I am not recommending that either). Techpriest (talk) 20:03, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
The best definition of Lapine's politics would be "Ideologically incoherent" or "Dore style big tent populist". ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 20:29, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
@Techpriest That's more reasonable, but I'm not convinced. You agree with me that social democracy isn't immune to hypocrisy? If so, I'd like to know why she can't be a case of a hypocritical socdem. Many liberals supportedWikipedia dictatoships in some ways (although, granted, liberalism according to them is more concerned with a constitutional government than with democracy). Aren't they liberals? Going further in the past, John Locke said that atheists were inelegible for the basic forms of human rights he was postulating and we all support nowadays (although you can say that he was a pioneer, and despite the flaws his views were advanced by his time). We can even think about Trump supporters: the Capitol riot wasn't the most Burken thing in the world. GeeJayK (talk) 20:44, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
Yeah, why don’t we just nuke the page? I see no reason why this person is notable. Pizza SLICE.gifChef Moosolini’s Ristorante ItalianoMake a Reservation 19:41, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
Shoe is relevant in context of our coverage of Gamergate, the right wing corruption of the atheism movement (she used to date armouredskeptic) and a lot more of that sort of material. Stop your anti-Youtube hateboner for 5 seconds please. Techpriest (talk) 19:47, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Explicit pictures[edit]

So, I've read on her subreddit that someone hacked her snapchat a few months ago and decided to post her nude selfies, others say that ArmoredSkeptic is behind it. Is there any truth to this? If true, is it missional to mention the hack? 2A02:1812:2C66:D000:38FA:53CC:93EC:4D46 (talk) 20:34, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

If we didn't mention Amazing Atheist's banana and oil leaks in his article, we won't mention anything of the sort here. It's counter to missional to bring about such violations of someones private life. We also don't do porn. Knight CommanderIn ServiceTo HerGoatness 20:42, 2 September 2021 (UTC)