I am part of the PC libtard snowflake cuck brigade, apparently.
Prior to yesterday, I probably wouldn't have agreed with that assertion - indeed, when my other half heard that I'd been called a snowflake she laughed incredulously - but I've been told it so many times over the last 24 hours that I'm starting to think they're right.
Incidentally, I'm also a c@nt (censored here so you don't get blocked at work), a melt and a "salad".
So, first of all... I wrote a review of Super Mario Odyssey in which I suggested that Mario and Bowser's endless pursuit of Peach might be a little bit out of step with the times. Yes - SPOILERS - there is a twist where Peach rejects their advances, but that doesn't change Mario's motivation, or Peach's depiction up to that point, or the fact she didn't manage to break free of Bowser's clutches and go on her own adventure.
I mean, Nintendo is often compared to Disney, but when you look at the huge strides Disney has taken in recent years with its depiction of "princesses" you'll realise that there's still a fundamental difference between the two companies.
Anyway. Because I expressed my feelings in a review, it all kicked off in the comments. Somebody on Twitter had a pop at me, outraged that I had dared to try and pass off a video game review in order to promote my "political agenda".
And then... you might've noticed that I became the focus of ire from a lot of angry men on Twitter for an entirely different reason...
Prior to yesterday, I probably wouldn't have agreed with that assertion - indeed, when my other half heard that I'd been called a snowflake she laughed incredulously - but I've been told it so many times over the last 24 hours that I'm starting to think they're right.
Incidentally, I'm also a c@nt (censored here so you don't get blocked at work), a melt and a "salad".
So, first of all... I wrote a review of Super Mario Odyssey in which I suggested that Mario and Bowser's endless pursuit of Peach might be a little bit out of step with the times. Yes - SPOILERS - there is a twist where Peach rejects their advances, but that doesn't change Mario's motivation, or Peach's depiction up to that point, or the fact she didn't manage to break free of Bowser's clutches and go on her own adventure.
I mean, Nintendo is often compared to Disney, but when you look at the huge strides Disney has taken in recent years with its depiction of "princesses" you'll realise that there's still a fundamental difference between the two companies.
Anyway. Because I expressed my feelings in a review, it all kicked off in the comments. Somebody on Twitter had a pop at me, outraged that I had dared to try and pass off a video game review in order to promote my "political agenda".
And then... you might've noticed that I became the focus of ire from a lot of angry men on Twitter for an entirely different reason...
TWEETSTORM
So, here's what happened.
I woke up bleary-eyed yesterday and read a story about Jonathan Ross's annual Halloween party - an event where a lot of famous people get to dress up and hang out with other famous people and revel in a safe space where it's okay to be fabulous. It has become such a big event that the police even have to be brought in to maintain safety.
I dunno why, but it always irks me. Whatever the reality, that party always makes me a bit sad, because it looks like famous people can only hang out with other famous people, and then I think about the "ordinary" people in their lives, and then that pisses me off, because I feel they're looking down their noses at the rest of us, and are probably only in attendance to feel good about being famous and successful and fabulous enough to go to Jonathan Ross's party.
It's that whole "famous people being seen as better than the rest of us" thing which always seems to get my back up.
To be fair, I realise that says a lot more about me than them.
Anyway, David Walliams was at this year's party. You may remember him as the star of Little Britain and the voice of Pudsey the Dog. He chose to go along dressed as Kim Jong-un, complete with funny haircut and prosthetics to give him "slitty" eyes.
You know: like a comedy character from Little Britain, a show about which Walliams' former comedy partner Matt Lucas said recently: "I wouldn’t make that show now. It would upset people. We made a more cruel kind of comedy than I’d do now.
He also suggested it was “lazy for white people to get a laugh just by playing black characters."
With this in mind, I was slightly taken aback by Walliams' choice of fancy dress. It felt like something out of the 70s - specifically a Doctor Who adventure called The Talons of Weng-Chiang - and I knew pretty much immediately that it was going to kick off a load of outrage in the media and online. Which it did.
Consequently, I tweeted the following: "That David Walliams costume. I mean, even if HE didn't think it's racist how out of touch must he be not to know that others would?!"
The important thing to bear in mind here is that I didn't state at any point what I thought about the costume - just what I thought others might feel about it.
For the record - though it's irrelevant to this article - I thought it was potentially a bit insensitive, but to say I personally was offended would be a massive overstatement. I just thought it was a dodgy thing to dress up as - not Kim Jong-un (who, of course, is as ripe a target as any dictator) - but a Korean person, particularly if you've got a public profile, particularly with a large youth fanbase.
Which Walliams, thanks to his children's books, does.
I mean, if he was aware that it might upset people... why do that? What about the kids who've been teased in playgrounds by peers pulling their eyes back to make them "slitty" and going "Splecial flied lice"?
Anyway. The tweet was more or less ignored most of yesterday morning. And then Twitter Moments picked it up. And then The Evening Standard ran a story about Walliams' costume on their website, and plucked out my tweet as an example of the outrage.
Cue fun and games.
So, here's what happened.
I woke up bleary-eyed yesterday and read a story about Jonathan Ross's annual Halloween party - an event where a lot of famous people get to dress up and hang out with other famous people and revel in a safe space where it's okay to be fabulous. It has become such a big event that the police even have to be brought in to maintain safety.
I dunno why, but it always irks me. Whatever the reality, that party always makes me a bit sad, because it looks like famous people can only hang out with other famous people, and then I think about the "ordinary" people in their lives, and then that pisses me off, because I feel they're looking down their noses at the rest of us, and are probably only in attendance to feel good about being famous and successful and fabulous enough to go to Jonathan Ross's party.
It's that whole "famous people being seen as better than the rest of us" thing which always seems to get my back up.
To be fair, I realise that says a lot more about me than them.
Anyway, David Walliams was at this year's party. You may remember him as the star of Little Britain and the voice of Pudsey the Dog. He chose to go along dressed as Kim Jong-un, complete with funny haircut and prosthetics to give him "slitty" eyes.
You know: like a comedy character from Little Britain, a show about which Walliams' former comedy partner Matt Lucas said recently: "I wouldn’t make that show now. It would upset people. We made a more cruel kind of comedy than I’d do now.
He also suggested it was “lazy for white people to get a laugh just by playing black characters."
With this in mind, I was slightly taken aback by Walliams' choice of fancy dress. It felt like something out of the 70s - specifically a Doctor Who adventure called The Talons of Weng-Chiang - and I knew pretty much immediately that it was going to kick off a load of outrage in the media and online. Which it did.
Consequently, I tweeted the following: "That David Walliams costume. I mean, even if HE didn't think it's racist how out of touch must he be not to know that others would?!"
The important thing to bear in mind here is that I didn't state at any point what I thought about the costume - just what I thought others might feel about it.
For the record - though it's irrelevant to this article - I thought it was potentially a bit insensitive, but to say I personally was offended would be a massive overstatement. I just thought it was a dodgy thing to dress up as - not Kim Jong-un (who, of course, is as ripe a target as any dictator) - but a Korean person, particularly if you've got a public profile, particularly with a large youth fanbase.
Which Walliams, thanks to his children's books, does.
I mean, if he was aware that it might upset people... why do that? What about the kids who've been teased in playgrounds by peers pulling their eyes back to make them "slitty" and going "Splecial flied lice"?
Anyway. The tweet was more or less ignored most of yesterday morning. And then Twitter Moments picked it up. And then The Evening Standard ran a story about Walliams' costume on their website, and plucked out my tweet as an example of the outrage.
Cue fun and games.
STOP BREEDING
"How self involved are you that you fail to realise the probability that he did know some (like you) would be 'offended' and didn't care?"
"But who gives af.. I certainly don't.. and real people in the real world don't, only you online, media-controlled snowflakes do #thinkaboutit #snowflakes #allthesame"
"What so it was all ok when it was Little Britain, we all laughed and now it’s racist? Is racism a new thing only come along few years ago??"
"You're a good example of why white people should stop breeding."
"So its racist to dress up as someone of another race? You precious snowflake."
"Nothing wrong with it. What’s wrong with dressing up as a character from another race? Fucking crap PC brigade"
"So you think he should dress according to YOUR tastes?"
"If a Koran dressed up as Hitler would that be racist?"
"1. You like cock. 2. You're pasty as fak. 3. You're no match of chinks. 4. You like cock. 5. You like cock."
"It’s a costume worn by a comedian that YOU made political and social commentary you weirdo. Get a fucking life. Fight actual racism"
"It's not racist. He's not discriminating against anyone based on race. He's taking the piss out of a psycho dictator you moronic cabbage."
And so on and on and on. My favourite was one Twitter user who suggested that my tweet would somehow end my career, because employers don't like "virtue signalling". Aside from the fact I work in an industry full of libtard snowflake cucks, I remain at a loss as to how not being racist would damage anyone's career prospects - unless you were applying for a job with UKIP or the Klu Klux Klan.
There was a lot more. Sadly, I can't share it all with you, as we don't have all day, and the guy who repeatedly called me a c@nt has bravely deleted his tweets after I mentioned that I'd reported him to Twitter. Not because I was offended or hurt, but because I thought it was funny.
Still, looking at all that above, what's really weird is that I've not had this much abuse directed my way on Twitter since Pudsey The Dog The Movie - the last time I "collaborated" with David Walliams...
"How self involved are you that you fail to realise the probability that he did know some (like you) would be 'offended' and didn't care?"
"But who gives af.. I certainly don't.. and real people in the real world don't, only you online, media-controlled snowflakes do #thinkaboutit #snowflakes #allthesame"
"What so it was all ok when it was Little Britain, we all laughed and now it’s racist? Is racism a new thing only come along few years ago??"
"You're a good example of why white people should stop breeding."
"So its racist to dress up as someone of another race? You precious snowflake."
"Nothing wrong with it. What’s wrong with dressing up as a character from another race? Fucking crap PC brigade"
"So you think he should dress according to YOUR tastes?"
"If a Koran dressed up as Hitler would that be racist?"
"1. You like cock. 2. You're pasty as fak. 3. You're no match of chinks. 4. You like cock. 5. You like cock."
"It’s a costume worn by a comedian that YOU made political and social commentary you weirdo. Get a fucking life. Fight actual racism"
"It's not racist. He's not discriminating against anyone based on race. He's taking the piss out of a psycho dictator you moronic cabbage."
And so on and on and on. My favourite was one Twitter user who suggested that my tweet would somehow end my career, because employers don't like "virtue signalling". Aside from the fact I work in an industry full of libtard snowflake cucks, I remain at a loss as to how not being racist would damage anyone's career prospects - unless you were applying for a job with UKIP or the Klu Klux Klan.
There was a lot more. Sadly, I can't share it all with you, as we don't have all day, and the guy who repeatedly called me a c@nt has bravely deleted his tweets after I mentioned that I'd reported him to Twitter. Not because I was offended or hurt, but because I thought it was funny.
Still, looking at all that above, what's really weird is that I've not had this much abuse directed my way on Twitter since Pudsey The Dog The Movie - the last time I "collaborated" with David Walliams...
THE GIF THAT KEEPS ON GIVING
In the end, I stopped replying properly to these people, and just started responding with gifs of animals pooing, primarily because it was quicker than toying with them in other ways.
Over the course of the day, a number of things became clear. Firstly, the shocking levels of grammar and punctuation on display. That's no reason to criticise somebody, admittedly (though I did) - but it's rather low-hanging fruit, and if it's evidence of a lack of education, intelligence, or whatever, then... well... that's even less reason to take the piss (though I did).
Secondly, none of them seemed to notice that I never expressed any outrage personally.
Thirdly, I was asked the same things over and over: why is it racist? Is it racist if a Korean person dresses up as Obama, or Trump, or Hitler, or, er, "Dracula"?
Lastly, they were all really, really, really angry. They wanted to hurt me - they didn't even get close to that, though I could see how it might bother someone - and the conclusion of that is that they were lashing out at the world.
For all I played with them, and enjoyed winding them up - to the degree that I didn't get any of the work done that I was meant to be doing yesterday - it really made me wonder what the hell has happened to cause so many people to overreact like that, to project onto a tweet, that didn't express any personal opinion, so much foam-flecked ire.
I mean, certainly, I can place a degree of blame at the feet of The Evening Standard. The media, even the most balanced sections of it, add weight to and amplify pretty much any outrage. My tweet had certainly been coloured by that.
WIDER ISSUE
But there's something wider going on here - the same sort of outrage that has been exploited by people like Trump, or the pro-Brexit lobby.
It's not enough to just dismiss the people who tweeted at me as dicks; there's a fear, a terror, underlying it, and fear can be stoked into anger. I dunno whether it's a fear of losing sight of the world they thought they lived in, or wanting to return to what they perceive as a more familiar, comfortable, time and place. Maybe things were changing too quickly. Maybe they just really, really hate the lives they have now. Maybe they've got a weak sense of identity, and they feel it's being eroded. I dunno.
The grief I got on Twitter only bothered me in that I get concerned by how much anger there is out there. It's hard to take it personally when it's pretty clear that it's not about me. I'm just the empty chair they're raging at. I'm seen - to them - as part of a wider problem.
I agree that people are too quick to get offended these days, too quick to want to be a victim, and so it ends up watering down the stories of those who are the real victims, and stoking the fury of others. But I'm no sociologist, so I dunno.
I just know that if we don't figure out what's going on, if we don't address the underlying issues - if we just dismiss these people as ill-educated, angry, white, dickhead racists, and allow ourselves to become victims of the rage - then all the poo gifs in the world aren't going to make a difference.
Which, ironically, is exactly the sort of thing a libtard, snowflake, cuck would say.
In the end, I stopped replying properly to these people, and just started responding with gifs of animals pooing, primarily because it was quicker than toying with them in other ways.
Over the course of the day, a number of things became clear. Firstly, the shocking levels of grammar and punctuation on display. That's no reason to criticise somebody, admittedly (though I did) - but it's rather low-hanging fruit, and if it's evidence of a lack of education, intelligence, or whatever, then... well... that's even less reason to take the piss (though I did).
Secondly, none of them seemed to notice that I never expressed any outrage personally.
Thirdly, I was asked the same things over and over: why is it racist? Is it racist if a Korean person dresses up as Obama, or Trump, or Hitler, or, er, "Dracula"?
Lastly, they were all really, really, really angry. They wanted to hurt me - they didn't even get close to that, though I could see how it might bother someone - and the conclusion of that is that they were lashing out at the world.
For all I played with them, and enjoyed winding them up - to the degree that I didn't get any of the work done that I was meant to be doing yesterday - it really made me wonder what the hell has happened to cause so many people to overreact like that, to project onto a tweet, that didn't express any personal opinion, so much foam-flecked ire.
I mean, certainly, I can place a degree of blame at the feet of The Evening Standard. The media, even the most balanced sections of it, add weight to and amplify pretty much any outrage. My tweet had certainly been coloured by that.
WIDER ISSUE
But there's something wider going on here - the same sort of outrage that has been exploited by people like Trump, or the pro-Brexit lobby.
It's not enough to just dismiss the people who tweeted at me as dicks; there's a fear, a terror, underlying it, and fear can be stoked into anger. I dunno whether it's a fear of losing sight of the world they thought they lived in, or wanting to return to what they perceive as a more familiar, comfortable, time and place. Maybe things were changing too quickly. Maybe they just really, really hate the lives they have now. Maybe they've got a weak sense of identity, and they feel it's being eroded. I dunno.
The grief I got on Twitter only bothered me in that I get concerned by how much anger there is out there. It's hard to take it personally when it's pretty clear that it's not about me. I'm just the empty chair they're raging at. I'm seen - to them - as part of a wider problem.
I agree that people are too quick to get offended these days, too quick to want to be a victim, and so it ends up watering down the stories of those who are the real victims, and stoking the fury of others. But I'm no sociologist, so I dunno.
I just know that if we don't figure out what's going on, if we don't address the underlying issues - if we just dismiss these people as ill-educated, angry, white, dickhead racists, and allow ourselves to become victims of the rage - then all the poo gifs in the world aren't going to make a difference.
Which, ironically, is exactly the sort of thing a libtard, snowflake, cuck would say.
RSS Feed
