You must log in or register to comment.
So they used to think they were a moderate to now understanding they’re ideologically aligned with nazis? Just not Russian nazis?
Pretty sure they only saw the word socialism there.
Non-zero chance it’s an elon alt
Tbf, they did get Russia epic wrong
In Stalingrad.
This is literally Chris Chan’s account isn’t it? That racist, sexist, autistic, predatory, mentally ill, trans, mother fucking lolcow.
I genuienly thought they were not allowed to use the internet anymore.
Like literally. After they went to jail.
No ban that I know of. Also was never convicted of a crime even though they spent time in jail. The lawyer was able to get the charges dismissed through some kind of I have autism defense (I swear). So I’m not sure that there is any way to enforce a ban since they were not convicted. Definitely should have been given some type of internet limitations and or more consequences IMO.
Fuck.
Yeah I … don’t exactly follow them closely, I just saw a spate of … ahem, mother fucking videos a while back, and was just … shaking my head…
Goddamn it, what a terrible, wasted life.
Correct
Lumping in trans people with racist/sexist/predatory/mentally ill people, are we?
Even when treated exactly the same as everybody else, it’s not good enough for you.
Let’s put her on a throne and crown her, shall we? She can be your queen
Lumping in would be saying “all people who defend trans folx have a tendency to defend all trans folx” (even if there is a specific perhaps indefensible individual some people are wanting to “defend” on the mere basis that they are trans) such as you may be doing in this thread [Edit: surely that must part of my misinterpretation fas I initially took the tone of your reply saying how “being trans is not relevant to this person’s behavior” as being in some way in defense of the controversial mystery person’s behavior or online presence, which is not actually what was happening perhaps, and maybe I was too wrapped up in some kind of perverse radicalization narrative that I thought might have been happening as sometimes does with some of those cult followings that can sometimes be widely online, and often exchange with people in bad faith to thrive off of continuations of controversy ]
I saw no EXPLICIT “lumping in”, by either you or chippy in the comments above. they chose to include that descriptor maybe as a subtle way to associate this Chan person with other transitioned people, but I don’t think “lumping in” is the exact words I would think to use in such a statement of (biased, but not universalizing) selection of descriptors
an example how Chippy could have been EXPLICITLY “lumping in” would be if he had just included a word like “another” (xyzfghpqrs [insert negatively stigmatized descriptor here] + trans person) to show that he feels the traits are typically aligned (lumped)
I’m coming at this from the perspective that all stigmas are rooted in fear, short-sighted self-interest, or attachment to a particularly limited scope of ontology used in one’s view of the world or themselves which cannot accept new aspects of the reality they exist in. So imo stigmatizing for example racist people (hardest to defend so good example) does nothing to defeat racism because they are being proven right (that such an issue is worth fighting over) when one tries fighting a person over their racism. It’s like any phobia: exposure therapy can work but shame often pushes people further from owning their own thoughts and behaviors and into safer frameworks or circles where less effort is needed to survive such an ontological (I hope I’m using this word correctly I just learned what it means last week…) restructuring of their sense of self/values/meaning in their mortal life.
and lastly, if you are the one inserting the word “another” to the statement in your own head, then maybe the best place to start working on transphobia would be to ask why you felt the need to insert that slight tweak to the statement, and how such a subversion of someone else’s verbiage might have served your ego or confirmed your worldview in some way, and perhaps why that could be what has happened
This is some JP-level philbro bullshit I had never thought I would see on Lemmy. 5 people fell for it though so congrats. Also very nice of you to share some of your more simplistic ideas right here.
“It’s just a joke bro” type of shit. Do the attack helicopter one too, quick, while everyone is laughing 🤡you’re not wrong lol. are you for or against the “/s” construct anyways because in my opinion, it feels like a shitty thing to even dare to do, considering how covert narcissism is basically founded on that type of humor of gaslighting some of the people they are interacting with into thinking that they have thought about some type of feeling (deep, personal, vulnerable, challenging, or dissenting) on a deeper level and are just using “ironic” statements to try and remain relevant to the issue/topic without doing the internal work of even processing the questions posed by the original statements which might seem puzzling to readers/listeners upon first impressions, but if one could take enough careful time to think them through or piece them together, might be able to come up with actually much more meaningful takeaways from even simpler statements, pieces of art, or expressions more generally.
I don’t disagree with you, I think basically all humor is in bad taste, but comes from a true intention to express some kind of emotion, as limited in its complexity or rarity as may it be. I generally try to epitomize misconceptions in ways that allow for genuine constructive pushback, to test what I am doing wrong because I often times find that what sometimes I expect to be common decency or typical behavior has been proven to be inaccurate to what my predictions might have been. At various points seeing other people treating others in their life in minimizing ways that I had been able to observe in some limited way, but also sometimes beginning to notice ways that people have perhaps at times been doing some of those manipulative strategies with me, either intentionally or unintentionally. And also sometimes through reflection upon times when it had taken me sometimes weeks to months after an interaction to put together the context or way to interpreting my actions or an expression of thoughts/feelings of general unease or uncertainty about life, the world, or perhaps some underlying unease with the social interaction with another (often seemingly due to lack of perfect socialization on my part) I will realize that many of those times I will have at some point in the exchange acted or spoken out of ignorance in that person’s perspective, and they just did not have the patience to teach me in that moment. so I am interested in improving my ability to be understood on an increasingly precise or “nuanced” level as I learn to both hear and validate the perspectives of others while still being able to use their own language with them to be able to mitigate conflicts of interest while not coming across as intentionally provoking disgust in others through disrespecting of cultural taboos in the various forms they can come in.
Lotta words to explain how you’re DEFINITELY not transphobic 😒
They gave a thoughtful and well written response to you that was not transphobic in the slightest.
Maybe it’s time for you to log off and live in the real world for a moment.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
Reading is good for the mind, feeling is good for the soul, thinking is good for the gut, while drinking is good for the heart.
You ever hear the phrase “if I had more time I’d have written a shorter letter”?
AI could have written a more thought out reply lmao (edit: assuming it’s not… I mean look at it.)
Ok idgaf about AI or any LLM, but I’m happy that you like it
again I cannot disagree and I do genuinely think that and hear that all the time, so I am inclined to wonder what point do you have to share with me regarding that aspect of my ability to communicate. Any concrete suggestions or are you just spiteful for some other reason? constructive criticism?
I don’t know how to help you if you think an AI could write this shittily about topics, not seem to be able to arrive at a point that means anything to anyone else less than a quarter of the time, and engage with low hanging fruit of bait like the crap that chippy or you are posting
No this bad person happens to be trans or at least claim to be.
I used several of their many descriptors, you zeroed in on that one. All of the labels I listed apply to this individual. Being trans in particular is a huge part of their personality and expression online. So its relevant and appropriate to include. If you choose to interpret that in the way you seem to be, you’re wrong and really trying hard to find a way to be offended. If you want to champion/defend trans people thats noble and I believe you should. However this person isn’t the particular hill you want to die on trying to defend.
You chose to list “trans” and “autistic” in the middle of a list of abhorrent behaviors/traits about Chris. Get real.
Leaving things borderline unambiguous like this is how transphobes speak. If you’re not, I don’t recommend mirroring them. 🤷🏼♀️
You can choose the impact of the statement, I know it’s intent. As would any reasonable person who is familiar with this individual. You’re defending a person who uses those labels as a defense for predatory behavior. They RAPED their own mother and successfully used autism as a defense in court to get the charges dropped. They also have a very shaky history as to why they identify as trans (believing lesbians would be more accepting and they’d have an easier time finding a girlfriend, as well as an easier way to deflect hate). I do believe they are probably genuinly trans but it murky and absolutely 100% part of the story as is autism.
I’m not defending Chris. I’m pointing at transphobic commentary. Get over yourself.
Leaving things borderline unambiguous like this is how transphobes speak. If you’re not, I don’t recommend mirroring them.
You’re ignoring context and nuance as a way to be offended. You’re the one that needs to get over yourself lmfao.
The context being? A. The person is behaving in an abhorrent way B. The person is identifying as trans C. A & B
Which is it?
Funny when a person acts badly, some people always have to bring up additional labels.
They’re bad, and gay. They’re bad, and a Jew. They’re bad, and a muslim. Etc.
You are just showing your own bigotry. Lmfao.
And I wouldn’t recommend defending Chris chan who is a horrid person who uses their labels to attack others and to hide from repercussions.
It makes you look like a biggot.
Nobody is defending Chris from what I’ve seen.
They’re merely pointing out that including “trans” in the list of negative traits about Chris makes OP appear transphobic.
Hmmm, you’re presenting as autophobic, this is problematic.
You just couldn’t type that trait out, could you? Too afraid of autism. Sad.
You also excluded “mentally ill” from your list… as if it was not worth a mention. Dementophobia
If you think identifying transphobia is to defend Chris, you’re the problem.
Please explain why or how this identifying of transphobia is not directly an attempt to defend Chris, IN THIS CONTEXT, to someone who is autistic, or who may even suffer from some obstinent defiant disorder. FYI: Some people aren’t hardwired for policing others’ verbiage or for having their own language “policed”, and I think that you are using your best methods you know, but tone of a written message often comes across in whatever way is most convenient to a given reader, which is what I think might be contributing some to the source of the problem (in this miscommunication). Could you format your statement that went along the lines of “don’t mirror transphobic language if you don’t want to appear transphobic” in a way that uses the words “should” and “if” in the same sentence? I find often that such a structure can address matters of internal perspective without presenting an imposing presence to the conversation or dialogue.
what
There’s nothing stopping gay, trans or other minorities from also being awful shit people who deserve to rot in jail.
Hell there’s even this fun concept where people weaponize the fact they are in a minority group as a way to attack others or to try to protect themselves from retaliation for horrid acts they do.
Chris chan is in fact a racist sexist predatory mentally ill trans person.
I identify as someone who would never weaponize their identity.
obligatory /s
real talk though for what its worth I have met a litany of people throughout my life who have “weaponized” their masculinity or femininity by relying on some cliche about either gender to rationalize some behavior, preference, or perspective that they have about themselves or the world which seem to be toxic or have the capacity to be needlessly harmful to others, or to normalize their bad behavior at the expense of others. and it’s worth mentioning that the couple people I have known who identify as trans in my life don’t ever seem to weaponize their trans identity [is this bigoted phrasing? should I just say gender identity? /g ] in those types of ways (at least not around me or in ways that I have ever been able to feel imposed upon or threatened by, though reading people’s body language or other subtle cues for signals of different emotions has never been an area that I have excelled in, though I know people who are worse than me at it as well)
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
Are you unaware of who Chris Chan is?
We all do. Listing “trans” and “autistic” in the middle of a list of abhorrent traits/behaviors they have/committed is a blatant indicator of transphobia regardless of who we’re talking about.
Why did you fail to mention “mentally ill?”
Extreme dementophobia, please get help.
It’s relevant if its been used successfully in a court of law to defend a rape they commited. Or the individual in question has used being trans to excuse non consensual sexual deviance. This is a discussion about an individual not a group. Nuance and context are important. Also, don’t you think this individual would want at least those two labels applied to them? Wouldn’t including them be respectful of their wishes/identity? If expressing this text makes you think I’m a hateful transphobe you should definitely block me.
Cope harder, transphobe.
If you’re gonna do it and defend it, grow a pair and own up to it. 😒
this is a type of bigotry too though… “grow a pair” bro are you even real? How do you not see that type of language or “rhetoric” as equally derisive as the “lumping in”? Can’t both statements be harmful (exclusive/reductive) for different reasons?
“Grow a pair” is often interpreted as a suggestion that stupid or neglected people should go punch trees, which has likely rarely helped anyone understand sensitive issues any better, to actually follow through on such types of “advice”
it’s in the same ballpark as “get a life”, “whatever”, or more harsh ridicules like “F-off or direct suggestions that someone should harm themselves intentionally, presumably on behalf of the anguishing speaker, just applied to a different audience, depending on what type of reaction is desired to be invoked by the exclamation of emotion.
Will you admit that you’re dementophobic?
Apologize now.
You give anyone applying that label with genuine cause a bad name and weaken its meaning.
Genuinely lump trans people in with rapists (etc.) for the cause of hating them all you want. Just grow a pair and own it, dude.
How can I become not a transphobe? is transitioning my language the best way?
Your just coming across as morally the equivalent of a Nazi defender, because they are trans they can’t also be a racist, sexist Nazi? Who is a horrid person and should be banned from the internet and likely locked in a jail cell?
Where is the defence in that comment? They are just saying being trans is not relevant at all.
They are saying that they dislike that the Nazi being trans/autistic is being mentioned at all, it’s not relevant to their “being horrible”-ness even if those labels technically apply, so since the list of things they are described by has so many horrible things,it seems to imply that those are the things by which they should be hated for,not just generic descriptive labels, which is why seeing those two specific non horribleness defining traits stand out. I don’t really care but just trying to clarify. ILYSM
It’s relevant if its been used successfully in a court of law to defend a rape they commited. Or the individual in question has used being trans to excuse non consensual sexual deviance. This is a discussion about an individual not a group. Nuance and context are important.Also, don’t you think this individual would want at least those two labels applied to them? Wouldn’t including them be respectful of their wishes/identity? If expressing this text makes you think I’m a hateful transphobe you should definitely block me.
As I said, I don’t really care since they’re quite the POS and this is not a court of law. I just wanted to give extra context to give proper framing to the point that I felt the other commenter didn’t properly drive through. If you still disagree, fine by me, no need to be so combative <3
Couldn’t have said it better myself. @Return_of_Chippy@lemmy.world
Thanks :3
No, you were pretty clear in what you said. Not sure why people upvoted that explanation instead of yours.
Taking all the misgendering here into account too, this shit is like calling Jesse Lee Peterson the N-word and defending oneself by saying that because he is a horrible person it’s okay to do so.
A wild cocktail of personality disorders, is what they are. My god, the small amount I know about Chris Chan is already too much.
I watch a lot of true crime and didn’t know who that was until I came across their arrest video. One of the weirdest things I’ve seen.
You ever see someone try to explain to a cop that they’re interdemenionally married to Sonichu?
I’ve consumed many hours of lolcow content. Chris Chan was the first. Horrific strange human. There are many more like him, some even worse.
Out of the loop, is it okay to make fun of Chris Chan now? Last I remembered it was a bunch of 4chan assholes bullying them for being autistic and trans.
Chris Chan is an interesting “Frankenstein’s Monster” case. In Frankenstein, the monster is regularly treated like a monster by everyone they encounter. So eventually, he basically decides “if I’m going to be treated like a monster regardless, I might as well give them a reason to fear me.” The monster begins acting like one… By the end of the book, the monster has done plenty of monstrous things. But it didn’t start out that way…
And Chris Chan’s case has a lot of parallels to that. Maybe she didn’t initially deserve the bullying. She’s always been weird, but it’s entirely possible that her life would have been on a different trajectory without the constant harassment. However, by the time the Chris Chan stuff was really coming to a head around 2020-2021, she was a full blown racist, misogynistic, homophobic, sexual predator piece of shit. Her potential life is an interesting hypothetical “Nature vs Nurture” thought experiment. But as it currently stands, Chris doesn’t deserve a platform.
Making fun of her is fine, just do it for the right reasons. She’s a bad person who happens to be autistic and trans. She’s not a bad person because she is autistic and trans.
Everyone involved sucks, best not to get involved.
I was under the impression it was always ethical to make fun of Chris chan
They sexually assaulted their mother and have always been openly racist among a bunch of other fucked up shit… It’s always been okay.
It’s always been okay, they’re a terrible person
You can always make fun of a horribleneprson as long as you don’t capitulate on the things that don’t make them horrible, which is what probably those 4chan assholes were doing. Nah he’s a shitbag AND he’s autistic and trans. Not because.
Sometimes I think I’m not caught up with all the new lingo. Then I see someone use the phrase “epic wrong” in the year 2026 and I feel a little bit better.
Also, fuck these idiots.
That’s not new lingo, Chris Chan is a literally insane “internet famous” bad person. The person asking him about national socialism is a troll.
100% right. The most documented human ever to exist in history!
Wait… you mean the nazi bar has nazis‽ whoda thunk
Guess where /pol went
Sometimes I wonder if the dude who was operating that animatronic bear ever learned the butterfly effect impact of him getting some weird sonic obsessed kid’s name wrong in 1992
Hold on, animatronic bear?
Leonard Bearstein Symphony Orchestra. That is all you get from me. Chris Chan is a cognitohazard and I refuse to directly link you directly to the cwcki.
ur ur ur ur ur ur
