Sargon of Akkad - Carl Benjamin - Meet the Rutgers Protesters

All Episodes

Previous Next

Feb. 17, 2016 - Sargon of Akkad - Carl Benjamin

14:41

Meet the Rutgers Protesters

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	So you may remember that on February the 9th Milo Yiannopoulos spoke at Rutgers University in New Jersey as the opening stop of his dangerous faggot tour, which is, as I understand it, him going to American universities and triggering intersectional feminists, which is exactly what happened when he was at Rutgers.
	As you can see here, there are intersectional feminists standing up and bravely smearing their faces with fake period blood.
	This was done to interrupt Milo's speech and protest him being there.
	This continued until the protesters were forced to leave, and I presume Milo continued his speech.
	I haven't actually watched the speech, because I haven't had time.
	I've only seen the clip of him arguing in favour of free speech.
	Since educational establishments in New Jersey are clearly very concerned about hate speech, and Milo was able to continue and finish his speech, and the fact that people in New Jersey do actually get arrested for hate speech, and Milo remains at large, I'm going to presume that the accusations of hate speech are actually nonsense, and that these activists have let their ideology get away with them and get the better of them,
	and in reality nothing he has actually said or done constitutes hate speech.
	Unless of course the patriarchy is protecting him or some other conspiracy theory.
	It doesn't look like these protests are just spur of the moment, quick, grab some paint and we'll run down there style events either.
	These hysterical students have actually prepared posters to encourage people to protest his next speech.
	Anyway, so after the protesters had interrupted his speech at Rutgers and made a big scene of it, they decided to start a YouTube channel called Reclaim Revolution, and they uploaded four short videos to explain exactly why they didn't want Milo being allowed to speak at their university, why he was indeed a dangerous faggot.
	So I thought we'd take a look at them, since they're quite short.
	I'm sure they're going to be brilliant.
	There's contradictions within Milo's speech in and of itself.
	So, for example, when Milo is talking about how there's no rape epidemic on campus, that rape essentially doesn't exist on college campuses, and obviously he's using entirely false facts.
	Well, obviously his facts are false and your facts are correct.
	But the thing is, I am such an asshole that I can't just take your word for it.
	I've got to go and check.
	I imagine that Milo was using this special report done by the US Department of Justice on rape and sexual assault victimization rates among college-age females between 1995 and 2013.
	This study found that young women between 18 and 24 who were students were safer than those who were not students.
	The rates of completed rape, attempted rape, sexual assault, or the threat of rape and sexual assault were 7.6 per thousand female students.
	And for young women enrolled in college, this went down to 6.1 per thousand students.
	This is less than 1%.
	These are facts we can be certain of.
	The only thing that is left out of these facts are the number of unreported sexual assaults and rapes, because obviously these are the reported ones.
	And this is where hard data stops and social science begins.
	Our feminist activist will be quoting from sources like this.
	A report on the Association of American Universities Campus Climate Survey on sexual assault and sexual misconduct.
	Respondents were asked whether one or more of these sexual contacts occurred as a result of four tactics.
	One, physical force or threat of physical force.
	Two, being incapacitated because of drugs, alcohol or being unconscious, asleep or passed out.
	Three, coercive threats of non-physical harm or promised rewards.
	And four, failure to obtain affirmative consent.
	The first two tactics generally meet legal definitions of rape and sexual battery.
	The other two tactics are violation of student codes of conduct.
	And it is unsurprisingly this massive inflation of what is and is not sexual assault that accounts for the one in five figure.
	Like they said, half of their categories don't even fall under the legal definition of sexual assault or rape.
	And failure to obtain affirmative consent doesn't even mean the person wasn't consenting.
	Therefore, including that in any results is going to be inherently misleading.
	And finally, these surveys are not facts.
	We do not know whether the answers given on them are true or false.
	They are, as they say they are, estimates.
	And should be treated as such.
	And yet at the same time, we have a Rutgers administration who paves itself as very much concerned with the rape epidemic on campuses.
	Yeah, it must be quite difficult, you know, reconciling reality with feminist fantasy.
	Your surveys are not reliable.
	All we can go on is the actual data, which says less than 1%.
	This is not epidemic proportions.
	It's no wonder your faculty have no idea what to fucking do.
	Sexual violence on college campuses is an epidemic.
	Okay, we have two choices.
	Either it's not at epidemic levels, or epidemic levels aren't anything to worry about.
	Rutgers is leading the nation in the revolution to end campus sexual violence.
	From the way you're speaking, I can see that you're actually running a business.
	By insisting that we talk about sexual violence, and by making sure we listen when our students speak about what they experience here.
	Yeah, but what about when they're lying?
	What about when they're taking advantage of your listen and believe attitude?
	Like with Jackie, the UVA rape hoaxer, who makes up a story about being gang raped at a fraternity party that never happened.
	We're committed to creating a community that's safe and supportive for every student, staff, and faculty.
	Fucking hell, how creepy is this?
	It's got the weird music and the guy staring dead set at the screen without blinking.
	Parroting this diversity rhetoric.
	This guy looks like he's been fucking brainwashed or something.
	Last semester we had a viewing of the hunting ground that was very much promoted and Felicia McGinty, the vice-chancellor of students, was there.
	But then at the same time they're condoning someone like Milo coming and saying that rape absolutely doesn't exist.
	What a ludicrous distortion of anyone's views.
	I very much doubt Milo or anyone else thinks that rape absolutely does not exist.
	When you have a situation in the United States where one in four women will get sexually assaulted throughout their time in college, it's absolutely not only contradictory but preposterous to have to even contend with a character who's coming and just throwing all of that out the window, denying all of that.
	Yes, what you are saying if it were true would be preposterous, but it is not true.
	There are far less traumatic experiences going on than you think.
	And yet at the same time Rutgers really promotes its diversity, its inclusion, its women gender studies department is one of the strongest in the country, etc.
	How many black people has Milo driven from the campus?
	Like, how is Rutgers exactly going to contend with these contradictions?
	How can Rutgers just sit back and condone this character coming and spewing hate speech?
	Well, it's self-evident that Rutgers don't consider it to be hate speech.
	And then students actually upholding that and promoting that, believing that, spreading that through the campus, teaching other students about that, and just sit back, not do anything about the death threats and the bias reports.
	Just so I'm clear, you think information from the government, statistical information, should be suppressed, you don't think students should go around learning it and passing it on to others, because of death threats and bias reports.
	And not actually have a stance on what happened on what freedom of speech and freedom of expression versus as they call it, inclusion and diversity really is.
	Well, thank you for displaying that you understand it in the same way that we do.
	Freedom of speech is at odds with social justice, diversity, inclusion, whatever we want to call it.
	You are anti-freedom of speech and I am pro-freedom of speech.
	This is how you have framed it.
	How can you have diversity as one of your main selling points, particularly within this whole rebranding and the revol 250th revolutionary Rutgers and have people like this speak on campus as if they were this giant celebrity without actually fundamentally in a scientific manner contending with the opposing ideas?
	Well for a start he does and secondly diversity is not normally something one would place in opposition to free speech.
	It's only rabid ideologues that do.
	I didn't see us as an evil protesters.
	You know we were just there saying what we believed and at a campus that's so diverse diverse.
	I thought that there would be more support from the students.
	Well I'm honestly thrilled that there wasn't.
	I'm thrilled that more and more students can see you for the paranoid lunatics that you are.
	Seriously, listen to this.
	And there isn't.
	You know, I don't feel comfortable around my peers.
	I feel really alone.
	And I don't trust any of them.
	Jesus Christ.
	Some sort of narcissistic paranoid personality disorder.
	A lot of my friends, like my really close friends in their classes, they've talked about the protest and the amount of kids that just don't.
	They think that you know us, putting paint in the using paint was just disrespectful to the custodial um custodial staff and like it's.
	Like you know, I didn't.
	You think, I didn't believe that.
	You, I didn't think about that.
	You know you think that I didn't have family that hasn't worked in custodial because, as a custodian um well, obviously you fucking haven't.
	Yeah, all you did was make a mess for the janitor.
	That didn't help anything.
	It wasn't some dramatic thing.
	You were protesting.
	In fact, you looked ridiculous, just stupid.
	We've taken that into consideration, thank you.
	Like, that's not about that, it's a much, it's much bigger um.
	Look at this fucking lunatic.
	No, it's not a bigger um, it's not even a bigger issue.
	What the issue i'm having now is that you knew that you were gonna create a big mess for the janitors and you were like, you know, fuck it.
	That's why people don't like you.
	They see you as spoiled and prissy and selfish.
	You're wildly misinformed on the facts and you don't care about other people's right to express themselves and you justify all of this because of how you feel.
	And I'm just very disappointed that the students at Rutgers thought this.
	Of course you are.
	You're a selfish little girl who didn't get what she wanted.
	She couldn't ruin someone else's fun to make herself feel better.
	And now you go and say that Milo is the asshole.
	Milo is an asshole.
	And what he's talking about is much more, it's much bigger than a fucking jar of paint.
	Wow, that is terrifying.
	You make it sound like Milo is interfering with your mission of world domination.
	When I came here, I just questioned who I was, my blackness, but when I became connected with my community of people of color and other activists, I knew that I had to keep our community sacred and everything we stood for had to be safe for not only myself, for others around me.
	Jesus Christ, you had to keep your community sacred because it was all about you.
	I mean, do you know that you're part of a cult?
	We're all assuming you don't know that you're part of a cult, but I'm starting to think you might.
	Well, we also have the right to speak our opinions on certain issues and we're exercising our right of freedom of speech.
	Great, then we can agree that freedom of speech is a right that everyone should have, therefore there is no problem with Milo speaking at your university.
	And there's all there's a difference between hate speech and freedom of speech and he crosses that line.
	Not legally, or even according to Rutzka's administration.
	When you say that the rape can't, the rape, um, the rape epidemic on campus is a myth, for survivors of sexual assault like myself and other people, you're invalidating our experiences.
	The only way he could invalidate your experiences is if there was no objective truth to them.
	If you were not actually raped, and yet you're claiming you are raped, then yes, someone claiming you were not raped will invalidate that experience.
	However, this is what happens to liars when they are found out.
	You expressing your opinions is one thing, but invalidating someone else's experience is another thing.
	words can somehow remove the experience you claim to have had, you didn't have an experience.
	So we heard that this racist...
	What the fuck is racist about this tweet?
	Are you saying that Milo's sexual preferences are racist?
	Anti-feminist.
	That's true.
	The man started a hashtag called FeminismIsCancer.
	But as your example, for some reason, you use him debunking rape culture.
	Very bigoted speaker was coming to campus.
	A bigot is a stubborn and complete intolerance of any creed, belief, or opinion that differs from one's own.
	Every single social justice warrior is a bigot.
	That hateful ideology is not accepted here at Rutgers University.
	But it clearly is.
	Milo was given a platform by the faculty and lots of people attended.

▲