Disappointed in Vanessa Vokey

submitted by shinnygummy from self.GenderCritical

I enjoyed some of her older videos, and it's been a while since I've been on her channel, so I decided to check it out today. Lo and behold, she's an anti-vax, anti-mask conservative conspiracy theorist. I don't know if she was always like this or if this is a recent development, but this is a bad look for us. I know we should find allies where we can, but she's harming our movement by supporting ridiculous conspiracy theories alongside our point of view. That's not who we are. She doesn't represent us.

all 72 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]lefterfield 9 insightful - 3 fun9 insightful - 2 fun10 insightful - 3 fun -  (7 children)

  • I think some people are born gay. I also think presuming to KNOW which CHILDREN are gay can border on pedophillic.
  • Being anti-vaccine and mask mandate is not anti-vax nor anti-science, nor conspiracy theorist. Being pro-MANDATE is pro-authoritarian, nothing else.
  • The situation around masks is frustrating and it's reasonable to be tired of it interfering with one's life. I don't support yelling at people, but I can understand where she's coming from.
  • So what?

Don't bother arguing with me, I've seen enough of your posts on other comments on here to know it would be a waste of time for both of us.

[–]shinnygummy[S] 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (6 children)

Well, you responded to my post, so I am going to respond to you. Feel free to not answer if discussion isn't what you came for.

Anyone who is gay is born that way. If there were evidence to the contrary, I'd change my stance. It's commonly known that male children who grow up to be gay and female children who grow up to be lesbian commonly display behaviors more typical of the opposite sex. What part of that is "pedophilia"? Because these accusations are bordering on testerical.

Being anti-vaccine and mask mandate is not anti-vax nor anti-science

Yes it is. The same way any belief that is contrary to science is, such as flat-eartherism.

Being pro-MANDATE is pro-authoritarian

No lol. You could say the same about literally any law. What makes mandatory seatbelts less authoritarian than mandatory masks? Especially because masks protect others while seatbelts only protect yourself, so you're comparing a law that prevents you from harming and unnecessarily risking the life and health of others, to a law that only prevents you from unnecessarily risking your life and health.

The situation around masks is frustrating and it's reasonable to be tired of it interfering with one's life. I don't support yelling at people, but I can understand where she's coming from.

No one's lives would be disrupted anymore if everyone just wore masks, got vaccinated, and quarantined when they were exposed. We could contain and eradicate the virus. Countries like New Zealand have some control over the spread of the virus because of laws like this, but anti-lockdown protests are spreading the virus.

Why do you find it frustrating to wear a mask to protect yourself and other people from a harmful and highly contagious disease?

[–]lefterfield 8 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 2 fun -  (5 children)

What part of that is "pedophilia"?

What part of what you said has any goddamn thing to do with what I said? It was exactly two sentences, surely that's not too much of a burden for you to parse.

so you're comparing a law that prevents you from harming and unnecessarily risking the life and health of others, to a law that only prevents you from unnecessarily risking your life and health.

The fuck? No, YOU are comparing the two. I never mentioned seatbeats. Forcing people to inject something into their bodies or to have an unwanted medical treatment is authoritarian. It is removing their bodily autonomy from them. Whether or not it is justified to do so is a separate issue.

No one's lives would be disrupted anymore

...if the government and other officials would stop disrupting their lives. These conclusions you're drawing are not inevitable. Lockdowns and mask mandates cause human suffering, especially to children.

Why do you find it frustrating to wear a mask to protect yourself and other people from a harmful and highly contagious disease?

Why do you find reading comprehension so burdensome? I said it was reasonable. I said nothing about myself. Only narcissists lack empathy for other perspectives.

As I suspected. Thank you for wasting both our times.

[–]shinnygummy[S] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

Respectfully, I feel like you barely know how to read. Please re-read what I said, which will answer many of your questions. Children aren't "suffering" because of masks and neither is anyone else. Don't make me laugh. People who have a legitimate medical exemption, for example people on oxygen, can be excused, but there is no reason a healthy person shouldn't wear it.

Why would you respond and then complain? There are two immediately obvious solutions.

[–]lefterfield 9 insightful - 3 fun9 insightful - 2 fun10 insightful - 3 fun -  (3 children)

Nope. Reread my statements again.

And you are either lying or ignorant on the subject of masks not causing child suffering. Children are still developing social cues, and especially for those with developmental delays(like autism), they can interfere with visual processing. There have also been children without "legitimate medical exemptions" who have collapsed while wearing masks while exercising.

An exercise in futility. You're wrong, you lack empathy for others, and I maintain a foolish, rarely validated hope that people like you can learn, and be better.

[–]shinnygummy[S] 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (2 children)

You're so right. You are so incredibly virtuous. Your radiant empathy makes you a shining star that all of us plebs should look up to in wonder. Oh, thank you! Thank you! You had hope in me, that I could no longer be grime which tells you you're wrong, but reborn a disciple of you, so I too could watch conspiracy videos online and tell everyone how much better I am than them.

[–]lefterfield 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

Cool. Go do that, report back on your progress. I'll wait.

[–]shinnygummy[S] 1 insightful - 3 fun1 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

I'll do it as soon as I can stop laughing.

[–]Kai_Decadence 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (29 children)

Yeah, I'm very thankful for the gender critical videos that's she made because she made so many good points and continually stood her ground even when she got dogpiled on by Samantha Lux's fans. But the anti-vax/anti-mask thing totally came from left field and I can't get behind that neither. I get that we're living in trying times right and the masks are annoying to have to wear but this is why the vaccines are being made, so we can return back to normalcy and people refusing to get vaccinated are not helping matters and will be the reason why we stay in "mask world".

But aside from this and what she said about how any man who dresses in feminine clothing are perverted fetishists (it concerned me as a feminine GNC man myself who doesn't do what I do for fetish or sexual gratification), I still support her as a GC speaker and I just treat this as someone who I think makes good content but I don't agree with her on everything kinda deal.

[–]lefterfield 13 insightful - 2 fun13 insightful - 1 fun14 insightful - 2 fun -  (18 children)

and will be the reason why we stay in "mask world".

I love 99% of what you say here, but this is propaganda. The government/businesses have the power to dictate(or not) whether we stay in "mask world". It's not predicated on whether 50%, 75%, or 100% of people get vaccinated. You can agree with the mandate if you want, but it's not the choices of the "unvaccinated" that are imposing it. And it's dangerous to think this way because it's scapegoating and demonizing a huge number of people with varying reasons to refuse the vaccine.

[–]Kai_Decadence 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I understand why some may not want to get vaccinated but I dunno, I'm just getting tired of this because who knows when we will leave "mask world" and I really hope this really will not be our new normal for the next like 5 years, eugh... lol I just want things to go back to normal now y'know? I understand that covid was serious when it first hit and a lot of people did get affected by it (including myself, I caught it back in 2020) but I feel like we more or less have a better handle on it now then we did in 2020.

[–]lefterfield 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I get that, really. But I don't believe anymore that the officials pushing 'mask mandates' are doing it because of valid data that it prevents/fights covid infections. The masks in particular, there's never been strong evidence that they do much, and "typical use" by the average person(keep reusing a single dirty mask they keep waded up somewhere in the car) is negligible at best and actively harmful to the person's health at worst. So why the mandates? And what number of vaccinations will be enough? I went along with it back when it first hit and it did seem like a serious threat. Now I'm just tired of the constant shifting goalposts and genuinely POSITIVE signs of it subsiding that are being ignored by the media/government. So I agree with everything you're saying here, I just think the blame needs to be on those in power.

[–]shinnygummy[S] 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (15 children)

It's not ~"propaganda"~ lefter. We're not leaving "mask world" until the virus is no longer a threat, and the longer you choose to be cowardly and selfish, the longer it will go on.

[–]lefterfield 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (14 children)

So what's your plan, exactly? Kill or imprison the non-compliant? Freeze their bank accounts, prevent them from feeding their families?

[–]shinnygummy[S] 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (13 children)

What the fuck lol. You're a conspiracy theorist with a persecution complex. No, you complete buffoon, it's offensive to suggest that a holocaust is being perpetuated against you.

Mask and vaccine mandates will continue.

[–]lefterfield 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

Why do you insist on making everything about me? I asked what YOU would do to the NON-COMPLIANT. Did I name myself as such? Is it any of your fucking business whether I have the vaccine or not? No. No, it is not.

Creepiest sentence you've said yet. You're an authoritarian, I get it.

[–]shinnygummy[S] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (9 children)

It is my business because unvaccinated people are more contagious. I would simply not lift the mandates until there is no longer danger.

[–]lefterfield 8 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 2 fun -  (8 children)

I'm genuinely curious what that means to you. Zero covid deaths anywhere? Is it some number of new cases?

[–]shinnygummy[S] 2 insightful - 4 fun2 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 4 fun -  (7 children)

Zero new covid cases.

[–]lefterfield 14 insightful - 2 fun14 insightful - 1 fun15 insightful - 2 fun -  (6 children)

Scientifically impossible. So you advocate permanent lockdowns and mask mandates. Why does it matter if anyone gets vaccinated or not, then?

[–]TulipPoplar 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

All mandates are enforced at gunpoint. Otherwise it is not a mandate.

[–]shinnygummy[S] 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Then the current mask and vaccine mandates aren't mandates because they aren't enforced at gunpoint. Do you see the flaw in your logic?

[–]shinnygummy[S] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

But aside from this and what she said about how any man who dresses in feminine clothing are perverted fetishists

This is fucked up. She's literally creating hateful propaganda against you and people like you. I haven't seen all her videos, so I hadn't heard her say that, but I find that and the other thing I mentioned in my main post homophobic. She also called Blaire White an AGP which I think is ridiculous, he's just a gay guy. The trans thing is making homophobia worse and she's perpetuating it even though she's supposed to be on "our side".

[–]MarkTwainiac 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

She also called Blaire White an AGP which I think is ridiculous, he's just a gay guy.

No, Blaire White is not just a gay guy. BW is a gay guy whose whole life is based on aping the most superficial, regressive, misogynistic, sex stereotypes that men have created about women based on their own male sex fantasies driven by their male libidos, and who has gone to great lengths to alter his appearance so he looks like blow-up plastic sex doll/porn star version of what he and other sexist men think constitutes the ideal woman.

That's not "just a gay guy." Most gay guys don't do what BW does; and many find BW's LARPing to be as offensive as many women do.

Lots of homosexual transvestites and so-called "transsexuals" have autogynephilia along with their internalized homophobia. This has always been the case. And it's even more so today in the era of internet porn and "sissy/bimbo" fetishes. AGP might not be the sole or main driver of their behavior, but it's definitely there. These are men who are sexually aroused by the thought and fantasy of themselves as women. In their sexual interactions with men, gay AGPs like Blaire get off on the idea that they are being "fucked like a woman."

[–]shinnygummy[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Gays can't have a fetish based on women because they aren't attracted to women. Blaire does all that to attract men because he's gay.

[–]Kai_Decadence 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

She said it in the video "Men in dresses are not our allies", it was a snippet from a livestream she did. I remember commenting on it and we had a short little back and fourth and it ended with us agreeing to disagree. It was pretty civil all things considered, I was just taken aback that she believes that but then again, I understand why because so many AGPs can be so... Uncouth and it probably did get to her, especially since she does have some more conservative views. And since men like me (the ones who dress unironically feminine with no sexual pretense) are rare to come across, it can be harder to see that not all men who present femininely are doing it for a fetish.

Her comments on Blaire White, I could sorta see where she was coming from because of the various things that Blaire does that are pornographic stereotypes of women like mostly dressing in lingerie as outfits and/or short skirts/mini dresses with high heels and always showing off his moob cleavage. The lip popping, the dead eyed/open mouth look he'd do in his thumbnails (he doesn't do it as much anymore), this photoshooot he did, how he would jiggle his moobs on camera sometimes in his videos/interviews, etc. I don't know if "AGP" is the right term for it but it's clear that Blaire acting this way may reflect on how he thinks women are. But where the AGP doesn't make sense for him is that I'm more than sure he does all those things to be seen as attractive to men and isn't getting off on it himself per say but getting off on the praise he gets from comments but especially the comments from men, that's usually how it is for HSTS.

[–]shinnygummy[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yeah he's definitely highly sexist.

But where the AGP doesn't make sense for him is that I'm more than sure he does all those things to be seen as attractive to men and isn't getting off on it himself per say but getting off on the praise he gets from comments but especially the comments from men, that's usually how it is for HSTS.

I think you summed it up perfectly.

[–]shinnygummy[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I just don't understand how the users here are able to gloss over the homophobia like it's nothing.

[–]our_team_is_winning 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

And since men like me (the ones who dress unironically feminine with no sexual pretense) are rare to come across, it can be harder to see that not all men who present femininely are doing it for a fetish.

I'm sure she meant AGP, not goth men. (Our beautiful Kai needs to get Vanessa on his YT channel, hint hint!!!) Like you said, the androgynous goth look (which my generation loved!) isn't really around now, or if it is, it gets mistaken for transvestitism. Take a really mainstream pop star like lipstick-wearing Robert Smith -- married to the same woman for FOREVER -- it's a fashion. Oh how I miss the days when people dressed for FUN and not for some made-up "gender identity" claim. It annoys me no end how 21st century AGP activists might try to claim 70s and 80s goth styles as "trans."

That photoshoot link to Blaire -- wow, he looks 100% male in that pose!

[–]Kai_Decadence 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I thought she meant AGP men as well but then when I was having my back and forth comment with her in the comments section, she kinda revealed a little more about her feelings on men wearing things like dresses and skirts. I'll give her the makeup argument because she was being consistent in the sense that she thinks no one, woman or man should be wearing makeup because of the ingredients used in it but the skirts and dresses thing is where she had a tad more stronger views on. She was mainly saying that men (she was specifically say "you" but I get what she was trying to infer) who wear dresses and skirts do it for attention whether positive or negative and when I explained that I thought "men's clothing" was boring and restrictive, she replied that I felt that way because men's fashion makes men blend together and not stand out from one another and so I started wearing skirts to be seen as different.

But the thing is that even if skirts were normalized for men, I'd still occasionally wear them like I do now because I just think they look nice (mostly maxi skirts) and they go well with the style I like to go for in my own personal look.

You're probably right that maybe she wasn't trying to infer that every man who wear feminine garb do it for fetish but it just kinda came off that way at the time.

Unfortunately I was born in 91 so I missed the 80s but I watch videos of what it was like and it was so cool seeing men and women breaking the gender norms and not calling themselves some made up "Gender identity" and just more or less owned it. Robert Smith, Siouxsie Sioux (when she wore pantsuits), Pete Burns, Annie Lennox, etc. It was great. Heck even Boy George came out telling people to stop worrying about pronouns, it was awesome lol.

Blaire White's photoshoot

I know haha. But it's the comical hip pads that really got me, it's just not flattering at all...

[–]our_team_is_winning 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Oh I'm sorry to hear Vanessa V was including men who dress differently for fun. Well, come on, Vanessa, everyone who likes to be different or stand out can use fashion. Fashion is fun, especially when you have your own style.

People claiming that clothes determine a person's sex is the problem, and she knows that.

[–]Kai_Decadence 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yeah I mean I'd like to hope that maybe I'm really just misinterpreting her but it's just that the tone of her in the video and how she came across in our little chat just seems like she really does feel a certain way about men wearing feminine items and then how she thinks it's no big deal if a woman decides to wear a skirt or pants.

People claiming that clothes determine a person's sex is the problem, and she knows that.

Yeah it should be about choice I feel.

[–]SnowAssMan 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Those opinions have nothing to do with feminism though. No two feminists are going to agree 100% of the time on feminist topics, let alone non-feminist ones. But I guess you're saying she has surpassed a threshold you're unwilling to support (dipping into Jordan Peterson/Alex Jones territory)? Just place her lower down on your list of feminist content creators.

[–]FlippyKing 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (21 children)

None of these views have anything to with GC, the only possible exception being the view she has on what I'd call the sexualization of kids. I don't see why you'd want her to agree with you on things that are not GC related. It would be a bad look for everyone to be in lock-step with each other on everything. There's a link to a youtube video here on SaidIt about the "Dead Internet Theory", it points out how bots and algorithms skew the internet. There might not be the kind of consensus on a lot of those topics that there appears to be.

[–]shinnygummy[S] 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

I think it's a problem because we are now associated with her. Our position is already thought to be insane, conspiracy-theorist, and bigoted, which is why we're on Saidit right now instead of reddit. If we want more normies to join, this isn't the way. The fact that some kids are biologically predetermined to be homosexuals is a fact and not "sexualization", and we are doing everyone a disservice when we ignore the fact that male prehomosexual children are targeted by predators for being more "feminine" and act like there's no difference.

[–]FlippyKing 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

We are on SaidIt because: we are right, the GC sub was winning people over, and it offended Channelor in particular but their whole grooming thing over there in general. We are the normies. The normies are joined. They just don't live on the internet. Don't confuse reddit with the real world. What percentage of users "drive" twitter? I don't recall the number but it is very small. Normies don't live on twitter. Bots do. Don't confuse internet or mass media consensus with what normal people think. We are with the normal people on this.

"We" are associated with anyone who thinks for themselves and who does not accept a "new normal" being shoved down our throats. She's actually consistent with "us" from that point of view.

"Transwomen are women": haven't you heard? Science, be nice, there are in fact "intersex people", and we're told they are as common as red-heads. You don't hate red heads too do you? You should be as suspicious of all that nonsense as you should be about the effectiveness of masks (where you are then breathing back in everything your body expels via the lungs as if you know better than that process) or all the rest you have concerns about with regard to her views. I would say there is far more overlap between people offended by VV's views on these non-GC topics and people who accept "TWAW". You really would rather question her than question the safety of a vaccine developed so quickly when the technology for 2 of them has failed miserably before, or question the point of it when it has an animal reservoir and is in a family of viruses that we already know mutates exceptionally fast (see common cold and flu) so the vaccines can not be all that effective regardless of their safety. You may say "I have expertise", but then do you have access to all the data? No. If you have expertise then you know it will be YEARS before we even sort out the actual number of deaths from the virus let alone anything else.

Some kids are "biologically predetermined to be homosexuals"? Or do you mean to say there appear to be biological factors that indicate a higher likelihood of a child growing up to be a homosexual? Also, do you not see the difference between talking about biological factors and sexualizing kids? As for the last part about targeting, that is way more off-topic (VV is the topic) than dead internet theory.

[–]shinnygummy[S] 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

Is English your second language? I never accused you of derailing. And no offense Flippy, but I can tell from your comments you're not a normie. None of us here are.

In much of Asia it is common courtesy to wear masks when sick, and surgeons will wear masks, sometimes even for days during extremely complex surgeries. Masks are not dangerous and there isn't any evidence to the contrary. If you're such an expert on the process of exhalation then provide some evidence that masks cause health problems.

If you have so much expertise, then where is the data to back up your claims? The covid vaccine is only possible because of mRNA research we've been doing for a decade.

Yes, Flippy, essentially, people are "born gay". There is no evidence that other factors affect orientation at all.

What do you mean, do I not see the difference between talking about biological factors and sexualizing kids? Seems that she's the one doing that, since she wants to act like prehomosexuality doesn't exist because talking about it is "pedophilic".

I'll repeat that I never once accused you of derailing and encourage you to re-read my messages to you.

And I've been watching that video and it is completely insane. I suspect you believe at least some of it because you brought up Twitter "bots". Everyone thinks that bots are much more sophisticated than they are. There is no way you could argue with a bot for longer than a few messages without noticing. The idea that such bots make up a significant portion of Twitter users is laughable. And the insane claim that some TV shows and movies are "computer generated"? You are vastly overestimating AI capabilities if you believe that. I'd like to see one piece of media that person believes is "computer-generated".

[–]FlippyKing 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Great link about mrna! They don't mention how all animal studies were stopped because of all the dead animals. They really dance around that. They skipped that part this time, but the problem with that skipping is they are relying on their own ideas and not actual data.

But, you're problem with VV is that she did not read that article and I guess what ever articles lead you to think mask mandates are "science"?

Oh, and you are derailing this topic now, not me.

**I think we're done here. I do not think your "is English your second language" thing was meant as a legit question.

Good luck reeling in, or excommunicating, VV!**

[–]shinnygummy[S] 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

The articles contained links to studies. I just felt that they would be easier for you to digest in that form.

Oh, and you are derailing this topic now, not me.

Okay, you have to be fucking with me. Quote where I accused you of derailing. It literally never happened.

I do not think your "is English your second language" thing was meant as a legit question.

It was.

Good luck reeling in, or excommunicating, VV!

Good luck watching conspiracy YouTube videos that you found on Saidit.

[–]shinnygummy[S] 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun -  (11 children)

"Dead Internet Theory"

This is a little off-topic, but it's my thread so I feel free to derail it lol. Do you believe that theory, and if so, why?

[–]FlippyKing 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

I did not say I believe, but I do think the apparent consensus we see everywhere on the internet is manufactured at best if not just false. I think it fits well with the notion of manufactured consent as promulgated by Chomsky. I do not think I derailed your thread, I simply put her independence as a thinker in a greater context.

[–]shinnygummy[S] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

I didn't say you derailed it, I just think that me choosing to discuss this theory with you instead of the topic of the post might be considered derailing, but I don't care because it's my post.

I never said anything about consensus, so I don't know why you're bringing that up. I'm not worried about her being an "independent thinker", I'm worried because she claims to represent us and is using her platform, which she mainly uses to promote our POV, to also promote being anti-vax and anti-mask.

[–]FlippyKing 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

OK, so if you are not concerned with her being out side of consensus, then you're just concerned she disagrees with you?

[–]shinnygummy[S] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

I am concerned that she is spreading anti-science propaganda alongside support for our position.

[–]FlippyKing 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

Are you a scientist? Something is not anti-science just because authorities and people in media label something as anti-science. The same people who would label her anti-science would label us anti-science because we're going against all kinds of authoritative scientific and medical institutions. The NEJM is not on our side in all this. Are we anti-science? No. Hopefully we're anti-bullshit and not just anti-THIS-bullshit.

The mask mandate is authoritarianism, not science. The vaccines for covid were introduced as part of a two year pharmacovigilance study. Only after that is done can any "science" be done on the data collected. It would be unwise to just trust the company's statements on that data. Since Pfizer recently paid a 2.3 Billion dollar fine and J&J paid a 2.2 billion dollar fine, skepticism of them is just reasonable. Science begins, and bullshit starts getting pushed back slowly, only when results are reproduced (or confirmed, but it already gets slippery here) by independent researchers generating their own new data. We're a long way off from that. The advisory committee advised against the booster shots, but they were overruled by the CDC head-- a political appointee. Was that her exercising "science" or corruption?

Authority has always been anti-science. Capitalism has created a toxic mimic of science and has found it very profitable. We know the trans thing, especially transing of kids, is driven in a large part by the drug companies and all the institutions and professions that make money off of it. We shudder to think of the control over the lives of the victims this gives them. The TRA activists and social media influencers are propped up in service of that profit, not in service of "wokeness" or anything else. The revolving door between government and drug companies is an obscenity. Don't confuse actual science with any of this.

[–]shinnygummy[S] 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

I actually am a scientist but not a biologist. The idea that men can never become women is completely in line with all the latest science. Nothing about that is "anti-science" no matter what ideologues say.

Do you feel that scientists are "authorities" you need to rebel against?

Also no sources on any of that, fantastic. Not even a statement of opinion to back up your claim that "the mask mandate is authoritarianism, not science."

Masks are not dangerous. The vaccines are not dangerous, but as with any drug or vaccine, if you are a person with certain health conditions, they could possibly pose a problem and so are evaluated on a case-to-case basis.

And don't lecture me about science when you can't back up even a single one of your claims and you're a Catholic who believes that religious "apparitions" are real.

[–]FlippyKing 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

I'm also a scientist. You want sources? Come on, you know how to do research.

Wait did I say masks were dangerous? Did you take any logic classes along with your science training? I think you're a bullshit artist.

But like I said, I think we're done here.

[–]shinnygummy[S] 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

Wait did I say masks were dangerous?

You should be as suspicious of all that nonsense as you should be about the effectiveness of masks (where you are then breathing back in everything your body expels via the lungs as if you know better than that process)

What's your first language?

[–]our_team_is_winning 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

The revolving door between government and drug companies is an obscenity. Don't confuse actual science with any of this.

Well said! Also, I've noticed people seem to have forgotten it was just last year that everyone on the Left was tweeting how no way would they take a vaccine that President Trump had encouraged drug companies to rush through. It's the very SAME drug that those SAME people are now championing.

[–]FlippyKing 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Right? If ANYTHING shows how the minds of the masses are slapped around like ping-pong balls, this does. Like, what did the drug companies do? The boss comes in and says "bad news everyone, listen up! We have to scrap the bad Trump vaccine we were working on and start working on an whole new good one for Biden who has always been such a man of the people." And the drug companies are the good guys now? If this was a tv show, no one would watch-- that's why they make us live it instead.

[–]Rag3 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

She has been like this for a while. It seems like quite a few of the content makers have slipped into this lane over the last year so, I tend to stick to other content creators who are focused on GC issues.

[–]shinnygummy[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Really? Who else? Guess I haven't been keeping up

[–]Rag3 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Slim pickings out there nowadays. I really like watching TT Exulansic. That’s the only one I’d really recommend that has fresh regular content. Whose body is it anyways is another.

[–]shinnygummy[S] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I'll check them out, thanks.

[–]Pomegranate 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Being anti-mask or anti-lockdown/mandates doesn't make her a conservative. It's not a conspiracy theory when they're being very open and forthcoming about what they want to do. Take a look at Australia. We simply don't want that to happen here. Quite a few of the GC youtubers I follow are saying the same things, and I agree with them. Vanessa is great. This has nothing to do with gender ideology.

[–]one1won 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (2 children)

https://youtu.be/ScfUfsUlGro

This song for you to consider. Stop shilling for “the man”

[–]shinnygummy[S] 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

Consider admitting you're conservative.

[–]one1won 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Didn’t even listen to the song, did you?

"Sunshine" was an energetic, happy-sounding statement of protest and independence. "It was just at the time of the Vietnam War and Nixon", Jonathan recalls. "It was looking bad out there. That song meant a lot to a lot of people during that time--

and

General Comment "Sunshine" is the feeling one gets from true freedom. "Some man" is THE MAN... the government AND the establishment. He takes control of your life, taxes (robs) most of your income, then uses marketing gimmicks to suck up the rest. Furhtermore, he drafts you and your children into foolish wars! The system sucks. Nothing satisfies anymore, because you're NOT free. The sunshine is gone...

https://songmeanings.com/songs/view/67621/

Not a conservative position at the time.
If this is “conservative” now, then f yeah, cause I’m neither a sheep nor a robot.

My, how you reveal so much about yourself in your comments!