Lionel Debates the World's Most Politically Correct "Comedian" Who Proves How We Have Lost Our Minds

[Turgon]

Kate Smurthwaite appears only to want to establish mutual respect between men and women - particularly in professional domains.

Yeah, that's the prevailing narrative she attempts to convey, but we all know that the elephant has its own motivations that the executive branch runs around attempting to justify those motivations. Just watch her interview debates with Ella Whelan to see how she responds to other women who disagree with her. She has no problem cutting her off, speaking over her or referring to what she's saying as annoying background noise. So, her ideas of mutual respect, even among other women, who she claims to be acting on behalf of, seem to be arbitrary and based on her whims and fancies. In the Milo debate, she alluded to some members of the audience should be imprisoned as well. So she may be 'moderate' in her speech, but she's also a harbinger of things to come and quite taken with her own opinion and ideas. In the interview with Kim Woodburn, she was asked where people at the door call women love and men sir, and she said 'everywhere she goes' which isn't true and the obvious was pointed out that she's just looking for something to complain about. So you may consider the other woman obnoxious, but she also doesn't suffer fools easily and I found it entertaining - all anti-libtard emotional bias aside.

 

[BlackCartouche]

@goyacobol @Turgon I was going to respond point by point, but I don't want to get embroiled in a tit-for-tat.

All I say is this: Kate is a bit of a mess because she is always in the mess. She's a front-liner, therefor less desirable personality-traits are always quicker to come to the fore. But, I see in her an innate desire to work toward for a better society, a better world - without wanting to shape it in her image. I am certain Jordan Peterson will recognise that in her too. That's why I want the get together. He will reach in her and untangle that knot, and straighten her out - and she will, at least after a short while, allow him to do so. JP will give Kate the epiphany she needs.

Anyway, we shall see... And time will tell.

 

[goyacobol]

@goyacobol @Turgon I was going to respond point by point, but I don't want to get embroiled in a tit-for-tat.

All I say is this: Kate is a bit of a mess because she is always in the mess. She's a front-liner, therefor less desirable personality-traits are always quicker to come to the fore. But, I see in her an innate desire to work toward for a better society, a better world - without wanting to shape it in her image. I am certain Jordan Peterson will recognise that in her too. That's why I want the get together. He will reach in her and untangle that knot, and straighten her out - and she will, at least after a short while, allow him to do so. JP will give Kate the epiphany she needs.

Anyway, we shall see... And time will tell.

@BlackCartouche,

I do agree that Kate could use an epiphany and Jordan Peterson would certainly be one to help her have one. I just had difficulty not seeing her as another SJW. And unless you are going to set up an appointment for her with Jordan I don't see it happening. You are more optimistic than I am on this one and that is fine.

Since this is in the The Tickle Me Thread a long serious debate seems inappropriate (not that it should never happen).

Peace (seriously).

 

[BlackCartouche]

I do agree that Kate could use an epiphany and Jordan Peterson would certainly be one to help her have one.

As you have helped me argue my point - for that is it right there!.. Kate can be helped to have an epiphany. Vast majority of others in 'showbiz' - even if they happen to align with the philosophical consensus this forum may currently subscribe to - simply cannot! Such the likes of Kim have long made her bed and is more than comfortable "lying" in it, for she has feathered it ever so softly... She is beyond epiphanies.

Truth be told, my gripe here is really less about Kate, and more about the effect I strongly perceive is having on the minds of fellow Forumites. My reaction is more to do with what, I perceive, has all the flavor of putting someone in the pillory to be jeered at and have rotten vegetables thrown at. It don't like that. Unless... The individual pilloried really is a pustulous pit of bile (eg Rollo Tomassi)

Since this is in the The Tickle Me Thread a long serious debate seems inappropriate (not that it should never happen).

Its ok, thats all I have to say.

Peace to you too, goyacobol.

 

[Alejo]

Kate is a comedian? She can’t take joking around too well evidently. Most comedians are immune to people being offensive and are quite good at turning it around.

I love when the older lady went “where do you shop?!” That was gold! Because Kate was all like “uhhh shops, you know, stores... places?” She could not be specific about any of what she was saying.

And that’s the point, the lack of specificity, who defines hate or racism or sexism or bigotry or masculinity or anything else? She as a comedian, out of all people, should know why those questions matter. She gives me that Cathy Newman feeling, advocating for the end of something that is essential to the existence of their apparent career.

 

[Matthew]

Truth be told, my gripe here is really less about Kate, and more about the effect I strongly perceive is having on the minds of fellow Forumites. My reaction is more to do with what, I perceive, has all the flavor of putting someone in the pillory to be jeered at and have rotten vegetables thrown at. It don't like that.

I strongly agree with you here. I see this all the time on the internet. Whether it is the strongly 'progressive' video game forum I read or even on here, I always find it a big turn off. Ad hominem attacks are so feeble. Address the argument, not the person making it. I have some sympathy with Kate Smurthwaite's stance but she killed any goodwill I may have had with the way she conducted herself in this video. I found her sanctimonious and lecturing. She attempted to dominate the 'conversation' by her ideologically possessed diatribe and showed no external considering for the other guest by allowing them an opportunity to join in. The host was weak and should have stepped in well before they did so it was hardly a surprise when Carlin made a snarky comment. I should stress that this is purely going from memory as I have not viewed the video since this thread was originally posted. I have no desire to watch it again, one was enough!

If she dislikes being called 'love' or 'dear' when men before her in the queue are called 'sir' then she is entitled to feel that way. However, she is taking offence because of her ideological possession and would be better served if she realised that no one means any offence by talking to her in that way, quite the opposite. That is the trouble with ideological possession though. She has an agenda and this is just another opportunity for her to push that. That's fine but the way she goes about it does not do her any favours. Critics could say much the same about Jordan Peterson but he deports himself in a much more mature and civilised manner. He does not attempt to dominate a conversation giving the others no opportunity to join in. He does not try to interrupt and shut down another speaker and he listens intently to other speakers, showing them the respect that they have something worthwhile to say. He does not try to 'win' the argument like this lady and especially Kathy Newman did. He approaches it as a conversation where they can come to a mutual understanding rather than a battle where he wishes to win at all costs. We know this because of the way that he conducts himself. There is an old phrase that is little heard nowadays because of political correctness: "Know a man by his actions, not his words". It is no wonder that Peterson has such a big following and this lady does not.

 

[SlipNet]

Well this thread has taken a serious tone, which isn't surprising as it touches on some pretty vital issues. Just to say I don't dislike Kate, I just happen to disagree. It's perfectly laudable to want civilised discourse in all its forms, but when it comes to self-censorship it's a big no-no for me.

Like I mentioned earlier in the thread, I like to get to know people warts and all, all the stuff that people would rather conceal remains of interest to me. Every dumb statement, sarcastic assumption, arrogant prejudice etc. That's how we learn, get it all out there and work with it. In the arts it's the same; let it all be said and then discuss ideas later. In a world that works in such a way it would be easier to recognise if someone's a bit pathological. In a PC offence culture, these people would be more difficult to identify, 'cos it would all be festering within.

I just think people need to grow extra layers of skin and just be a bit more robust. Heck, I've been a schizophrenic for 15 years and I've had more than one episode where I've needed to toughen up and learn some hard lessons, and I'm sure there are plenty still to come.

 

[Matthew]

I neither like nor dislike her; I do not know her. The same goes for Mr Carlin and the other lady who berated her. I could criticise them too but for different reasons. I can't say I warmed to any of the three. In both of the videos the hosts did such a poor job of controlling and directing the discussion that neither of the videos was really worthwhile from my point of view. Unless watching people being rude to each other is a good watch which, for me, it is not.

 

[furryfrog]

Kate is a horrible comedian, she should describe herself as a SJW instead, it would give her more credibility.