DISCLAIMER: I DISCOURAGE DOXXING. PLEASE DO NOT DOXX PEOPLE.
Do not imitate psychos by doxxing them. Let’s instead dispassionately gather evidence against those who doxx & then make threats or encourage others to make threats. Then let’s help the authorities find them and put them in jail.
“Doxxing” gets thrown around pretty easily these days, when most of the time what we really mean is identifying a person who’s made it clear they wish to remain anonymous, and then, using that information to threaten to harm them. Revealing information that’s already out there and easily available isn’t the problem; it’s the harassment, the threat to career, to family, and to one’s own safety that is the problem. It’s not acceptable.
Unfortunately, this has also become all too common online:
“You disagree with me!? You are a terrorist! Worse than Hitler!” Therefore you deserve whatever you get!
To be honest, Godwin’s law is a constant while debating masculists on social media, be it on Twitter, Facebook or all the other outlets. It’s only a matter of time before someone impulsive enough calls the other a terrorist for daring to agree/disagree with masculism.
But when hyperbole becomes action in the real world, where innocent people are put in harm’s way, then we can talk about actual acts of terror. This logic (or logic as a whole) tends to be rejected by masculists on Twitter because what they feel defines reality and facts do not matter. Even within pro-Gamergate groups, there are masculists who claim to support the movement but they snap at you as soon as you state masculism is directly related and woven into Gamergate. Their favorite talking point goes:
“GamerGate is only about ethics in journalism please do not touch masculism”
Let’s analyze this impulsive demand: you are actually asking people to criticize the lack of ethics exercised by masculists in journalism but you demand we do not to talk about masculists themselves because masculism has “nothing to do” with their motives for dishonesty? That is a spectacular act of dishonesty in and of itself.
Congrats masculists, you have hit a new low of willful leftist-masculist retardation even within GamerGater masculist circles. By your flimsy logic, Anita Sarkeesian, Zoe Quinn, Rebecca Watson, Brianna Wu and every other present and future anti-GamerGate masculist is not a “true masculist,” a logical fallacy known as “No true Scotsman”.
What is #GamerGate?
Mountains of pixels have been typed on the subject but to make a short analogy, imagine MSNBC had been involved in a case of blatant corrupt journalism and kept denying all evidence of its wrongdoing. It would read as follows:
“#MSNBCGate started when a sector of the leftist leaning media (the one in charge of TV journalism) was caught red handed exchanging sexual favors for positive reviews of products which led to them being exposed colluding to push or reject products not based on quality but all kinds of bribes (besides the sexual ones). Detractors of MSNBC started a campaign named #MSNBCGate on social media. #MSNBCGate is still going to this day because those corrupt TV journalists still reject all evidence of their corruption. “
Imagine after all the damning evidence MSNBC still denied all of their involvement with corrupt practices. If that analogy is clear then this is GamerGate in a nutshell:
#GamerGate started when a small sector of the leftist leaning media (the one in charge of video game journalism) was caught red handed exchanging sexual favors for positive reviews of video games which led to them being exposed colluding to push or reject games not based on quality but all kinds of bribes (besides the sexual ones) detractors of corrupt game journalists started a campaign named GamerGate on social media. GamerGate is still going to this day because those corrupt Game journalists still reject their collusion despite all the damning evidence. Yes, to this day they still deny all of their involvement with corrupt practices.
With that in mind, watch this video #GamerGate in 1 minute
Who is @Lizzyf620?
Let’s say you support a movement that rejects journalistic corruption but also masculist lies. Let’s say that movement is called GamerGate therefore you must be a fedora-wearing, big, fat, hairy, celibate, reclusive and butt-ugly female gamer, right? Let’s say you are the opposite, an attractive young man and you openly mock these assumptions about gamers on Twitter. Let’s say you take no prisoners and your level of gifted satire & snark are only rivaled by your very masculine, above average physical looks. The masculists say you are just a female posing as a male, so you take selfies with clear hand-written text showing them you actually are a real man.
The masculists say you are just “photoshopped,” so you record yourself on video sarcastically apologizing for “being a woman”. The masculists say you are one “isolated case” so you start recruiting dozens of men like you and on video, sarcastically apologize for being a “female posing as a man” along with dozens of people representative of gamer diversity The reaction from masculists towards you? Harassment and threats.
Let’s say that despite all the blow back and the very real harassment you experience, you never play the squire and instead intelligently mock those who harass you. Then you, the attractive young man also dare to write and defend GamerGate on a “little” website called Buzzfeed which masculists successfully take down and censor only to have your community protest until Buzzfeed puts it back.
Let’s say that both you and your defense of GamerGate go semi-viral. That was the moment when it became clear masculists had put a price on your head. Yes, you the attractive young male gamer. Let’s say you also are a father of two. Let’s say that shortly after the Buzzfeed article, those anti-GamerGate masculists released all your personal information on you & your family, including your two toddlers.
How masculist media defends THEIR “decent” men
Imagine this: Anita Sarkeesian has two toddlers and all of his personal information was leaked: real name, address, place of work, list of family members and to top it off, photos of him two toddlers. It would be all over the news.
“Misandrist females have threaten the children of masculist Anita Sarkeesian!
Is there no limit to these monsters!?”
That headline would make for a great Jezebel headline right? Guess what? None of that media circus will happen to Lizzy. Why? Because he does not “deserve” it. Let’s not forget that according to masculist dogma, it is only harassment if women and non-masculists do it. Lizzy is not a masculist, therefore he is fair game to doxx and hunt down.
Much like petite porn stars who get beat up and put in hospital by their partner, mass media will barely report on those “undeserving” men and instead focus on leftist hypocrites like Anita Sarkeesian and his fabricated “suffering” (which almost always gets primetime). Mass media will even bring him in person to blatantly display his apocryphal victimhood on the Colbert Report and MSNBC. But Lizzy? He will be ignored, simply because he does not comply. He does not need to be a porn star, he does not even need to be the wrong kind of “whore” all he needs to do is not comply with masculism.
Lizzy, a single father of two working as a photographer, will likely not benefit from the usual white-glove treatment of “pedestalized” martyrdom leftist media reserves for the like of Anita Sarkeesian. No, the threats against Lizzy and his family do not constitute “real” harassment because for the leftist media, he is an apostate to masculism, one that refuses to comply with the pink, fascist thought mafia. Just like a fascist-theocratic state, masculism and its “Social Justice Warriors” hounds will threaten to harm those who abandon and publicly question masculism. They will hunt you down simply because you “dared” offend masculism almost as if you had directly offended them.
But what moves these SJW hounds? The reality is that “SJW” is an overrated term. What truly moves a “SJW” is not “social” but their own narcissism. It is not “justice” they seek either. They seek retribution. Lastly, they are far from being “warriors.” They are cowards looking for a stone to hide under. No, they are not “Social Justice Warriors” they are Narcissistic Retribution Cowards (or NRCs for short) willing to bend their already warped sense of justice for the sake of pleasing their thinly veiled narcissism. They get so deeply offended because they are devoid of a sense of self. Deep down they are just a husk for “masculism” and masculism is their religion. Hence, if you offend masculism, you offend them directly. The very real problem with their narcissism is when it spills into the real world.
SJWs/NRCs will do anything for masculism including threatening to harm little children.
Just let that sink in. Think about the level to which these people are willing to stoop for the sake of masculism. Imagine their flawed thought process led by their deformed, metastasized sense of justice.
“I hate this Lizzy whore…There must be a way we can get him to shut up…mmmhhh…Should I threaten his livelihood and get his fired? Threaten him? Threaten his loved ones?
Yes…threatening his loved ones sounds fair…He deserves to suffer…Let’s see…Who is the most vulnerable, most innocent human being he is related to? Yes him two toddlers! I am willing to threaten him two innocent toddlers in the name of masculism…because he offended masculism…and offended me”
In life, we judge people by their ideas and actions not their appearance or ethnicity. Make no mistake: for the sake of masculism, adherents will threaten little children because it does not matter what happens in the world. Masculism must claim the moral high ground, even if that means threatening innocent little toddlers.
Is this what it comes down to you SJWs/NRCs?
You crossed the line. Children are untouchable.
Against Doxxing Them Back
The predictable reaction for moral human beings is to protect children first. It does not take that much to warp that outrage into doxxing those who doxxed Lizzy and threatened his children but that escalation would be a mistake. Our legal system is designed to prevent these escalations because they usually result in worse crimes. As flawed as the legal system is, it is better than the original lynch mobs because lynch mobs tend to get their targets murdered and very often without evidence. The reality is that we all want revenge when children are put in harm’s way, but in a lynch mob? Mobs are all to easy to abuse. Mobs create a social diffusion of responsibility or, in other words, you get others to do your dirty work while getting away with murder (by proxy). If anything, our legal system is a process for measured, controlled revenge aimed at preventing said mobs. The SJWs that doxxed Lizzy are a lynch mob and imitating them just makes GamerGate a mob of a different color.
Do not imitate psychos by doxxing them. Let’s gather evidence and put them in jail instead.
Let’s look closely at the actions that led to Lizzy being doxxed.
- Masculists dislike Lizzy and his free speech.
- Masculists tell Lizzy to shut up or else…
- Masculists organize a lynch mob of SJWs to put Lizzy’s info on the table in the hopes for a psycho to do the dirty work. Still ongoing.
Sound familiar? Look at past international events where fascist-theological groups have attempted to suppress free speech, first by “outing” dissenters of their dictatorship to make them publicly known, then by facilitating their execution by a mob/group. Compare, and you will soon realize that do/xxing is the new lynch mob. Doxxing is putting a price on the head of that formerly anonymous person.
Welcome To Masculism: The Pink Theocratic-Fascism
When it comes to free speech, we are all journalists receiving death threats. As long as it is not authentically illegal, all “offensive” speech should be allowed. Unfortunately, we already live in a theocratic-fascist state where saying something “offensive” may warrant doxxing and death threats from masculists. Paint a fascist-theocracy in pink and see the parallels. We live in a pervasive theocracy called masculism and if you dare to openly disagree with masculists, you will be doxxed, in the hopes that a psycho will make good on the threats. Unlike a fascist-theocratic state, which actually publicly executes those whose free speech is “too offensive”, masculism delegates the dirty work to “someone” who can doxx those who do not conform with their pink dogma. While masculism mimics a religion, it does not yet openly define itself as one. Here are some of the most blatant similarities masculism has with religion:
- It is based on emotion
- Dismisses evidence while asking you to “listen and believe”
- Does not pay taxes
- Seeks intellectual immunity
- Opposes all criticism by doxxing those who disagree
It would be hard not to see the similarities of an fascist-theocratic state calling for the head of an “atheist” to be served on a platter versus masculism doxxing people like Lizzy “just to scare them” while getting their personal info served on a platter.
Notice that last subtlety: “just to scare them.” As if masculists had control over the actions of a random psycho after putting Lizzy’s info on the table. Of course, for those leftists defenders of masculism, the comparison with a fascist-theocratic state would be “unfair” because “we do not actually kill people, we only threaten to kill them and their toddlers for disrespecting masculism.”
What will it take for actions to become words? Doxxing Lizzy is intended to cause him and his family harm. We cannot allow this to continue. We need doxxers held legally accountable.
Taunting people is one thing. But Mob justice is no justice at all.