PDA

View Full Version : Censorship test



shadowstalker
7th August 2013, 00:45
http://act.weareultraviolet.org/sign/hillarygame?referring_akid=.639850.7AfcHj&source=facebook





https://s3.amazonaws.com/s3.weareultraviolet.org/images/Screen_Shot_2013-08-06_at_12.54.15_PM.jpg


Slapping women is not a joke.
A Republican Super PAC has put out a new online "game" where they ask their supporters to virtually slap Hillary Clinton across the face.

The Super PAC is known as The Hillary Project and is an anti-Hillary Clinton group that lists Christopher Marston--a Republican campaign consultant and a former member of the Bush administration--as its treasurer.

Violence against women is not a joke.

It's disgusting, it's outrageous and--regardless of where you fall on the political spectrum--it has no place in our politics. Can you sign the petition demanding The Hillary Project pull down this game and apologize for advocating violence against women?

Our message to the Hillary Project and Christopher Marston:

"Your "Slap Hillary" game is offensive and outrageous and you must take it down and apologize right away. Violence against women kills three women every day--there is nothing funny about it."
********************************

I see this as political and constitutional manipulation.
Some one is offended by a game
Cries abuse against women. and it should be shut down.

I can't find the game anywhere. Just pix.

I myself don't promote violence.

I am sorry, but to me this is a test run to see how far the gov. can take censorship.
They cant get rid of it one way(tho' they probably hired some one to make it) so they use the abuse against women card..
To me it's nothing more then manipulations based souly on the heart strings of abused women.. the game is politically charged and they can't get rid of it any other way.

Or maybe I am just over reacting..

DouglasDanger
7th August 2013, 01:16
If she was a human woman I would take offence.....

christian
7th August 2013, 02:16
This is ridiculous. It doesn't advocate violence against women. It simulates violence with a comic version of Hillary, so what? How about being offended with drone strikes, the police state, poisonous vaccines, a criminal banking cartel plundering the planet, the list goes on and on.

Ellisa
7th August 2013, 02:38
Christian a Moderator.
So jokey slaps are all right apparently. Are you saying violence against a famous woman is excusable and can be fun? And if I object to it I, in some strange quirk that I admit I cannot follow, am in favour of --"drone strikes, poisonous vaccines, a criminal cartel plundering the planet, the list goes on."

I'll have to remember that, won't I.

marlowe
7th August 2013, 03:00
Many of us here know the story of how Vince Foster really met his end....

I think if one were to google "the Clinton death pool " you would get a few hits....pun intented.

Ki's
7th August 2013, 04:12
Those online petitions sure seem like a great way for the government to keep track of and catalog who has sympathies for what causes.

christian
7th August 2013, 04:27
So jokey slaps are all right apparently. Are you saying violence against a famous woman is excusable and can be fun? And if I object to it I, in some strange quirk that I admit I cannot follow, am in favour of --"drone strikes, poisonous vaccines, a criminal cartel plundering the planet, the list goes on."

Sorry for not making myself clear. I don't condone violence for fun and I don't mean to suggest that anybody who objects to violence is in favor of all these atrocities. That doesn't make any sense to me.

This case here is about clicking a button to simulate the slapping of an image that looks like Hillary. I don't think that such a thing has to be censored or forbidden, I'm quite aware that there are tons of video games where you can kill and torture all kinds of people and animals. Or movies that depict such things. I think actual physical violence is a much greater problem than all of that.

Mu2143
7th August 2013, 05:35
........................

Vitalux
7th August 2013, 06:00
So jokey slaps are all right apparently. Are you saying violence against a famous woman is excusable and can be fun? And if I object to it I, in some strange quirk that I admit I cannot follow, am in favour of --"drone strikes, poisonous vaccines, a criminal cartel plundering the planet, the list goes on."

Sorry for not making myself clear. I don't condone violence for fun and I don't mean to suggest that anybody who objects to violence is in favor of all these atrocities.

I don't envy your job as a moderator.
To always have to balance yourself politically must be a challenge on so many different levels of consciousness.
I also admire your dedication of being a moderator.

You have the skill at such a young age to never argue with a woman :pop2:

Ultima Thule
7th August 2013, 07:22
It seems to me that the american world and american people are either build up or meant to appear so that they are over-sensitive to everything and anything and canīt just laugh about a joke - be it concerning gay, hetero, christian, muslim, buddhist, women, men, children, animals, et:s, god, satan, pedophilia, necrophilia, cannibalism, water boarding etc.

Why does it always have to be made into a fundamental issue? Iīm okay(which I suppose is quite normal to any nordic citizen) with making fun just about anything. Fun and joke promotes fun and joy, never mind how much one want's to make it into a fundamental issue of whether the gist of the joke is deemed proper or inproper.

There is a hijacking of humour going on, that should be stopped, that is something fundamental imo. Laughing at a joke concerning a catholic, black/hispanic/finnish, gay, four-eyes, short, bald priest pedophile does not mean that the person laughing accepts or condones to any of it. Political correctedness is a superficial pr-imagery stunt that is pulled, why donīt people just concern themselves with how they feel about themselves and the world inside and instead of projecting fundamental issues outward they would project some acceptance and a bit of love - that imho humour at anything and everything can and does promote.

UT

markpierre
7th August 2013, 08:08
She wouldn't feel it......but violence is never okay. How 'bout pin the tail?

Paul
7th August 2013, 08:22
I see this as political and constitutional manipulation.
I indented the first half of your opening post, to indicate that it was a quote.

It was only on re-reading that I realized you were quoting a webpage that you disagreed with :).

TigaHawk
7th August 2013, 11:33
But it's ok to have similar games for other well known people such as justin beiber and brittney spears. hah.

cursichella1
8th August 2013, 11:09
This reminds me a bit of the shocking racial protests in AZ, as if it may have been planned to upset us all...just another thing to get us riled up (distracted) about something other than the NSA revelations? Awful as they are (AZ or slap Hillary), are they not freedom of speech issues?? Oiiiiii

Ellisa
9th August 2013, 02:09
No Tigahawk it is not OK to have 'similar games' against other celebrities. It is a form of teasing or bullying and if it is justified by the ridiculous comment-- 'It's just a joke- can't you take a joke?" it is definitely bullying. There is no justification in needlessly upsetting unsuspecting other people in order to make oneself look good. Surely freedom of speech does not include incitement to violence, bullying or vilification of the other person?

Fellow Aspirant
9th August 2013, 05:22
To begin, I'm no fan of Ms. Clinton. That said, I feel I must lend my support to the petition to have this "game" pulled. Why? Just ask yourself the simple question: "Why would I slap someone's face?" To most people, the impetus for such an act is out-of-control anger. To facilitate such acting out is to descend to the level of the sniggering high school bully, and those who indulge in it are allowing themselves to wallow in the primal urges of the mob. It's an egregious affront to civilized behaviour, encouraging, as it does, thoughts of violence toward another human being. Censorship? You bet. Hate speech is illegal and immoral, and must be challenged whenever and wherever it manifests. To those who would claim that it is harmless fun, I remind everyone that the first defense thrown up by the bully is almost always to say that he or she was "Just kidding", and that they were "Just having some fun." To treat the intent toward violence as "entertainment" is to step onto a very slippery slope indeed.

More deeply disturbing, if that's possible, is the number of Avalon members who seem to show no awareness about the dangers of engaging in ritual behaviour that can lead to extremely negative outcomes, both for the target and the participants. Ritual is meant to "stand in" for the reality - it sets up the psychological and metaphysical framework for the intended outcome, an invocation of the forces, for good or evil, that one wishes to engage to bring about a desired outcome. Why would anyone partake in such negativity? Come on, fellow Avalonians - wake up and pay attention to what's really going on here.

Namaste,

Brian

shadowstalker
9th August 2013, 07:53
It was only on re-reading that I realized you were quoting a webpage that you disagreed with
It wasn't the web page that I disagree with,

It IS the key phrasing and outright manipulation of folks heart strings. (To which some refuse to see)
The outright assumption that all should bow down to a few peoples disappointment and of FEAR in a game, and that it should be censored.

You may as well get rid of the history Books as they are full of true bullies that got away with a lot of crap, and it is still being promoted.
And the true bullies are still here

I say CERTAIN games are a safe venue agreed upon or not. it's called righteous anger and folks have a right to it.
People should be able to vent in a safe way with out being judged or accused of something.
Yes IT IS A VERY THING LINE I agree and will not debate it. But at least I can look in the mirror and be honest with myself about it.

There is a difference between being a bully I.E. Hillary Clinton (or folks like her) and the GANG she gives the word out to, and being bullied I.E. the millions she has helped kill.

I just can not allow myself to take away whats left of this country's rights of freedom of expression I.E. anger, by censoring a this type of game.

There is a whole heck of a lot of things I find offensive on a personal note.
And I am sure most here as well, but i will defend ones right to the fullest so that you may continue to be free in your expressions whether I agree with them or not.

If one believes that the petition is souly about violence against women or promoting violence out right, so be it. Sign it.
But if you can see the political backdrop in in sighting censorship (because political parties are involved here), then stand your ground. don't let them win over your freedoms.


P.S. I was once a victim of such true atrocities, it took me several years to recover from what they use to call battered wife syndrome.
He was the one beating me, he was the bully, but I stood my ground and gave it back blow by blow, i will not consider myself the bully for defending myself, EVER.

SO I will not allow these catch phrases in this politically controlled petition to control me when I know better...

Among other things..It's pure emotional manipulation...AT IT'S FINEST... And it looks like there winning this one...

P.S. I am speaking in GENERAL and NOT to just any one person

Nanoo Nanoo
9th August 2013, 10:04
Those online petitions sure seem like a great way for the government to keep track of and catalog who has sympathies for what causes.

nice avatar .. wish i was ere

arrgh


N

Fred Steeves
9th August 2013, 16:38
To begin, I'm no fan of Ms. Clinton. That said, I feel I must lend my support to the petition to have this "game" pulled. Why? Just ask yourself the simple question: "Why would I slap someone's face?" To most people, the impetus for such an act is out-of-control anger. To facilitate such acting out is to descend to the level of the sniggering high school bully, and those who indulge in it are allowing themselves to wallow in the primal urges of the mob. It's an egregious affront to civilized behaviour, encouraging, as it does, thoughts of violence toward another human being. Censorship? You bet. Hate speech is illegal and immoral, and must be challenged whenever and wherever it manifests. To those who would claim that it is harmless fun, I remind everyone that the first defense thrown up by the bully is almost always to say that he or she was "Just kidding", and that they were "Just having some fun." To treat the intent toward violence as "entertainment" is to step onto a very slippery slope indeed.

More deeply disturbing, if that's possible, is the number of Avalon members who seem to show no awareness about the dangers of engaging in ritual behaviour that can lead to extremely negative outcomes, both for the target and the participants. Ritual is meant to "stand in" for the reality - it sets up the psychological and metaphysical framework for the intended outcome, an invocation of the forces, for good or evil, that one wishes to engage to bring about a desired outcome. Why would anyone partake in such negativity? Come on, fellow Avalonians - wake up and pay attention to what's really going on here.

Namaste,

Brian

Well then Brian, perhaps we should petition moderation to censor the following from our emoticon selection here as well:

Besides the ones that advocate violence: :fish: :boink: :whip: :fencing: :boom:

There are two that advocate smoking: :smokin: :drag:


And there is one that advocates drinking: :cheers:



All of these can lead to very serious, if not deadly consequences...:yes4:

TargeT
9th August 2013, 18:07
Well then Brian, perhaps we should petition moderation to censor the following from our emoticon selection here as well:

Besides the ones that advocate violence: :fish: :boink: :whip: :fencing: :boom:

There are two that advocate smoking: :smokin: :drag:


And there is one that advocates drinking: :cheers:



All of these can lead to very serious, if not deadly consequences...:yes4:

Censorship is the brother of Prohabition.

Both those siblings fail to reach the goals they are meant to IMPOSE.

Prohabition never works & never seems to have positive outcomes, probably because it is entirely fear based.

Dennis Leahy
9th August 2013, 18:30
So, this provokes concern, but all of the "first-person shooter" games are OK?

OK, OK, no one should slap Hellary, unless they are slapping handcuffs on her for crimes against humanity. But with all of the very real death-by-drone-fired missile murders taking place, as well as all the simulated killing for enjoyment, this is not exactly getting me too upset.

Dennis