Recently a few pages I follow on social media were negatively affected by “guidelines” for opposing feminism, the LGBT lobby, multiculturalism, and communism. It was clear Facebook and Twitter refused to acknowledge their rights to free speech in accordance to the first amendment which American companies should abide.
Not only that. Many of them were removed because people reported them. And I did notice something curious. Their detractors either reported them or went on an insult rampage, but non of them actually refuted their arguments.
I have been there. I have been called “fucking pedophile” event though I got no interest in prepubescent females, just for saying teenagers are attractive to the average male (I am sure many of you will say “I didn’t know she was [X]teen at some point in your lives), by people who are either femihags, blue knights, or actual closet pedophiles (The most aggressive ones I am sure raped someone).
But, whenever I put the evidence on display, not a single one of them actually refutes it, and they keep calling me names. Of course, feminists not just call me names, they claim my evidence is false because I am a straight white male or because it was made by “patriarchal science.” After all, they think on terms of power, and they are unable to grasp any concept not directly tied to power or entirely independent of it (Such as love, loyalty, trust, self confidence, dignity… And nearly anything nice). They believe power is only used to oppress others, and never to help.
For such people those topics lead to a violent emotional response because they challenge their notion of the world. Now, I will admit I am no exempt of having a strong emotional response to anything I oppose, but if it is backed with evidence I consider reliable, I will at least be open to agree with some things.
For example, there are two camps of male sexualism. One neutral to porn and one against porn. I am in the neutral camp (Honestly all I want is to be free to love who I want and not be demonized as a male for my sexual preferences), but I have seen some strong evidence from the group against porn that at least reminds us we should draw a line.
It is true that many are negatively affected by some forms of pornography. And in fact I dislike studio pornography because it feels unpleasant, fake, unrealistic, and generally deviant. (No, Patrick. Scat is not normal sexual behavior, neither is BBW, gerontophilia, or anal prolapses). I do understand why some people would warn against such content. While I am against prohibition I agree there are some things that are not recommended and might harm your mind.
Several studies, which also prove women with more than 10 sexual partners are ruined mentally by it, prove excessive porn consumption, especially of extremely unrealistic material, leads to becoming a sexual deviant. Moderation is required, and I feel at ease because I prefer softcore content over hardcore fetish content.
My arguments in favor of pornography as an entirely harmless thing were partly refuted. While moderation keeps it harmless, there is a line in which the groups against pornography are right. If both sides remained in a knee jerk reaction instead of exposing evidence, arguments, and counter arguments, reason would never be achieved. But there is a bridge which allows communication.
Disagreement is part of intellectual discourse, so is arguing, but ad hominem attacks and immediate emotional response is not. Whenever you require to prove someone wrong, back your claims. Don’t just tell people they say bullshit, tell them why it is bullshit.