Some important points:
1. The reason this guy is being discussed is because he's involved in politics, works on an equalities committee, and used an email address that contained his identity.
So, for all you who are paranoid and seem to think that anyone knows or cares who you are, or what you think, don't go on a bigoted rampage online and under your own name. If you do, then don't become a public figure. Problem solved.
2. Reading his diatribes, I found it humorous that he compared having cerebral palsy to a gay person seeking civil rights. They're gay, not crippled Jared. Most can use their arms.
Families disowning their children while the physically handicapped receive protections, accommodations and public awareness, is hardly a comparable situation.
They can do something about their legal roadblocks. Maybe that's where his resentment came from. They can do something to change their status. Jared will always have cerebral palsy.
Sometimes people with physical handicapps fail to develop empathy and can be real assholes. The bullied become the bullies.
Finally, he could have said he was trolling and playing an antagonist, but he seemed to have some well developed ideas on the matter, and so he probably had little choice but to go with the recovering addict style apology.
Did I mention that he used an email address with his name in it to make these comments?
Only people with terrible judgment do that as an adult.
I hope the Internet takes down more public figures who were dumb enough to that. Let it be a bloodbath.
The Internet has always been a safe space for cretins, but it didn't reach this far into society until social media and youtube took off. Now these scumbags are everywhere, and they are creating a toxic society.
An interesting perspective but some highly dubious conclusions.
There have been constant attempts to 'sanitise' discussion on the WWW by politicians on behalf of Corporations who have no interest in 'free speech' and only seek to data-mine people's identities to throw advertising at them or sell their IDs to advertisers. And this site is an important example of the 'resistance' to those attempts to make debate on the Web as boring, middle-class & insincere as all debate is in the UK Parliament. Those people are terrified of 'free speech'. They use 'outlier' issues like genuine threats to people's safety to try and instigate a far more wide-reaching censorship on what is 'acceptable' thought and discourse. They can f*** right off.
Nothing on the internet is 'private'. It never has been. Some of us realised this early on and trolled the very notion of 'privacy', 'anonymity' and 'pseudoanonymity'. It's not just MI5 chasing ISIS who can track everything you do, it's bog standard 'data mining' advertising companies who track your movements from site to site and can forensically examine your data vapour trail to link you to the 'real' person. I've no doubt there's now a black market in internet forensics for Human Resources departments to vet candidates. The real fun will be when MPs porn browsing histories are revealed. And then linked to individual MPs.
House of Porn. Over 300,000 attempts to access adult websites made in UK Parliament in a year
https://www.joe.ie/index.php/news/h...bsites-made-in-uk-parliament-in-a-year-370306
Jared decided to 'confess' & agree to the linking & merging of an online identity to his 'real life' identity but as you point out, he had other options. He could have simply dismissed it as Online Performance Art. The whole issue of 'online performativity' and how it relates to the 'real world' is at the cutting edge of contemporary art. We see it in the deliberate blurring of identities in artists like Larry David, Frank Hvam & Casper Cristhensen. I even have a lingering suspicion that Morrissey is doing exactly the same thing to ensure he cannot be reliably parsed by his online statements. All make provocative, 'outrageous' statements as part of their 'screen' personas but anyone with a brain can see that they are deliberately f***ing with the surveillance matrix, whether it be that of the paparazzi-press-police or the politicians. Do we assign the scripts of 'South Park' as honest, reliable testimonies from Matt & Trey? What is the difference between the above named 'official' artists culture-jamming 'screen personas' and those of any common variety Facebook ranter, Instagram vanity project & Twitter troll? Or anybody wasting their time on this site? At what point did anyone sign up to any of that? They didn't. Or at least they didnt' realise that's what they signed up to...but some people knew all along that the Internet was a surveillance hoax. It will be interesting to see if these 'high art' cultural resistance protests spread to the masses. I've long advocated making your online 'presence' contradictory & illogical. I have a feeling that will have to become an act of mass rebellion against Corporate surveillance in years to come. If everybody 'liked' everything they don't 'like' on Facebook for a few days, their alogrithms collapse, their data is meaningless & they have nothing to sell to advertisers. Online Performativity as Political Protest. However, I doubt that was Jared's intention and I doubt it's Morrisseys, though he may surprise me yet...
What happened was the Corporations wanted to make the internet a 'safe space' so they could harvest the data of the suburban 'normals' who were too scared/intimidated by the initial Wild West debate. It has everything to do with harvesting profit and absolutely nothing to do with political sincerity. That's why Twitter is now a graveyard as 'problematic' voices are censored. Next up YouTube...
The real 'toxic society' isn't arising from 'free speech' on the internet, it's arising from the attempts to stifle that freedom by politicians, moralists and Corporations. The conflict arising from 'triggered' SJW moralists on US & UK university campuses is just another example of this Orwellian attempt to f*** up the internet. In a world where ISIS openly use the Web to plan mass murder, getting hysterical about politically incorrect opinion from 15 years ago from somebody who has clearly changed his outlook is just another example of '1st World Problems'. No wonder the European Union is getting worked up about the 'right to be forgotten' as their Human Resources teams vet the internet porn histories of MEPs! LOL! It's only a matter of time till that dam bursts.
Your final comment claims that only those who agree to adhere to the politically correct speech & thought codes of the BBC, NYT and Guardian enclaves have a right to voice their opinions. How conveniently that aligns with the desires of Corporations for a sanitised Internet where harmless cat memes are traded and goods and services sold to a pliant submissive population.
One can only hope that the comment histories beneath articles on Order-Order.com are someday matched to the MPs who made them. It will be amusing to watch them explain that their online performativity isn't a reliable guide to their real-world convictions as set out at the hustings...
It begins with 'banning' the Daily Stormer (an impossible task) then it moves on to 'banning' opinions we disagree with on Social Media by insisting Twitter 'ban' anyone who isn't part of our Thought Regime. It ends with Governments like China openly dismantling the very concept of Free Speech in league with Global Corporations looking for profit. And sanctimonious Guardian writers acting as custodians of 'correct thinking on the Internet'. f*** that.
Careful what you wish for...
https://www.theguardian.com/comment...red-o-mara-homophobic-sexist-internet-history
https://www.theguardian.com/politic...ignificantly-since-posting-offensive-comments
BB
House of Common Whores & Lord Frauds
London[/QUOTE]
