CM Punk/ Chris Brown Twitter thing-What scares me

[daveman247]

yup

Yeah he could be handling it better :/ Still, provoking him doesnt help. Just something he has to learn to deal with i guess.

Still, i cant be bothered doing all the research to prove my points. Too much effort man i dont even really care about this guy, or "celebrities" in general. It was more just a comment on how the media likes to blow things out of proportion for ratings etc. But thats not saying anything new

 

[isometry]

The problem is not the Chris Browns, it's the women who are being told to "follow their feelings" when it comes to relationships. If a man makes dumb relationship decisions, he is blamed for "thinking with his penis", but if a woman makes a dumb relationship decision she is excused for "following her heart." The teenage girls need to learn that, just as is the case with men, women sometimes make stupid decisions based on sexual impulses. Just like with men, blindly following sexual impulses should not be excusable, they should be taught to think rationally and avoid relationships that are obviously bad news.

 

[rob_simple]

The fact your question seems to be 'is it becoming socially acceptable to hit women' seems to imply you assume it's acceptable for men to hit other men? Violence against anyone is unacceptable unless both parties consent.

This has nothing to do with gender, the real problem is that we give people like this a voice. Chris Brown giving anyone an unprovoked beating should have been the end of his career. But just like the walking abortions on Jersey Shore we seem to now be glorifying all the most horrible aspects of modern mankind.

 

[mirasiel]

The fact your question seems to be 'is it becoming socially acceptable to hit women' seems to imply you assume it's acceptable for men to hit other men? Violence against anyone is unacceptable unless both parties consent.

Or self-defence.

Or defence of another.

Sorry, the whole 'violence is never ok' thing bugs me because there are clearly situations in which violence is ok and some in which non-violence is...distasteful.

Like say you saw a mediocre music celebrity beating the ever living shit out his partner....thats a good time for violence.


Actually I think it might be a good time for some ultra-violence...something with blowtorches and pliers.

 

[SadakoMoose]

The fact your question seems to be 'is it becoming socially acceptable to hit women' seems to imply you assume it's acceptable for men to hit other men? Violence against anyone is unacceptable unless both parties consent.

This has nothing to do with gender, the real problem is that we give people like this a voice. Chris Brown giving anyone an unprovoked beating should have been the end of his career. But just like the walking abortions on Jersey Shore we seem to now be glorifying all the most horrible aspects of modern mankind.

Glorifying? You mean the Italian American stereotypes we watch almost exclusively to make fun of? Aside from a hand full of jerks on twitter, I don't think I've seen any sizable trend in positive press surrounding Chris Brown. Glorifying? Really?

 

[isometry]

The problem is not the Chris Browns, it's the women who are being told to "follow their feelings" when it comes to relationships. If a man makes dumb relationship decisions, he is blamed for "thinking with his penis", but if a woman makes a dumb relationship decision she is excused for "following her heart." The teenage girls need to learn that, just as is the case with men, women sometimes make stupid decisions based on sexual impulses. Just like with men, blindly following sexual impulses should not be excusable, they should be taught to think rationally and avoid relationships that are obviously bad news.

Did you just say the problem is not the Chris Browns? That is, The problem is not men who kick the shit out of women? Because I'm pretty sure that's a good chunk of the problem. Yeah, women shouldn't get involved with guys who'll kick the shit out of them, but first and foremost guys shouldn't kick the shit out of them.

I'm saying that the problem in this particular situation, where we have young girls tweeting things like "I'd so take a punch from Chris Brown, he's so hot", is not caused by Chris Brown, it's caused by these girls following sexual impulses instead of rational thinking, which is something the media tells them is OK using the "follow your feelings" code language.

Reiterating the same "Chris Brown is bad" message is not going to solve the problem of these girls making bad decisions. They already know he is bad, in their rational minds. The problem is that they think it's OK to "follow their feelings" instead of using their rational minds. No amount of "Chris Brown is bad" is going to change these instinctive sexual impulses, so the only way to change things is to hold the women responsible for not thinking rationally. Getting rid of all the men who beat women is not a realistic option. But teaching women to follow rational thinking instead of sexual impulses could make a real difference. Men are taught that message constantly, and we are mocked for letting sexual impulses overcome our rationality. When women do the same thing they are excused for "following their feelings", and that's where stupid statements like "I'd so take a punch from Chris Brown, he's so hot" come from.

 

[Xan Krieger]

CM Punk is one of the greatest entertainers in the world today and he's also a good guy which is rare. Chris Brown on the other hand is scum and I hope someone treats him like he treated his former girlfriend.

 

[Aerodyamic]

As far as I'm concerned, Chris Brown is a mediocre entertainer, an attention whore, and a spineless piece of human trash that hasn't accepted responsibility for his actions. As soon as he actually starts committing time and money to supporting charities dedicated to ending domestic violence, I'll start to have a tiny scrap of respect for him.

Maybe he could do some PSA's telling the world that he was a grade-A chickenshit, and start telling the people that apparently idolize him that his behaviour was pathetic and completely without any redeeming value.

PS: I still don't (and am unlikely to) ever find his music interesting.

 

[Skops]

I recently started watching the WWE again and they're kind of pissing me off with all their pathetic attempts at gathering a more mainstream audience.

"Look, this event is trending number one worldwide, WWE is the most popular thing in the world, this has nothing to do with the fact that it's a live event."

"Make sure to follow us all on Twitter."

"Oh by the way, we fucking love twitter, follow us on Twitter."

"I'm Michael Cole, Twitter Twitter Twitter, I love the bad guys, Twitter motherfuckers."

"Did you know that WWE has a shitload of views compared to several unpopular programs."

"Did you know that North Korea is Best Korea?

lulz.

They also consistantly lie on their little 'Did you know' bits after commercial breaks. I think it was on Monday they photoshopped on of their youtube pages showing one of their videos to have 3,000,000+ views, yet when I checked the very same video from the very same channel it had less than 100,000.

 

[Brad Shepard]

No doubt some of you have already seen this. This is not about the fight or any threats Punk made, or about either man in general.

If you scroll through the comments you will see people siding with Brown. Not just as fans but AGREEING with what he did. One person commented "It's ok to beat a girl if she is being a *****". Also I have read reports that some teenage girls are Tweeting and such along the lines of "I don't care what Chris Brown did he can beat me any time" and "I'd so take a punch from Chris Brown, he's so hot" ect ect. They are probably jokes but at the same time they could be truth.Think about that, if they're not joking these girls are basically inviting men to hit them, they are completely open to violence against them.

This really really scares me, I have a terrible feeling that this will open old wounds and people will see Brown as a victim and start mimicking what he did.

Do you think it's a possibility that this could open a flood gate to a wave of violence against women? Or am I just overreacting? Is this what the next generation will perceive? Will these morals be accepted into society? What are your thoughts?

wait wait wait, Teenage girls on twitter are stupid? WE MUST INFORM THE PRESIDENT RIGHT AWAY!

 

[Colour Scientist]

Of the girls who posted those tweets, I can tell you with complete certainty that not one of them had ever been in an physically abusive relationship, which is a good thing. Domestic violence has always been around but it is worrying how so many people are willing to ignore it.

As for feeling sorry for him, there're two things he could do to lower his amount of "haters".

1. Go back in time and not kick the shit out of his girlfriend which led to her hospitalization.

2. Get the fuck out of the public eye. It comes with the territory, especially when you, as I've mentioned before, kicked the shit out of your girlfriend which led to her hospitalization.

As a final note, those people who are suggesting that it's the victim's fault for getting to an abusive relationship are warped. Failing the situation where the guy I was interested was known to be abusive I would never go into a relationship thinking, 'hmmm... what if he kicks the shit out of me? I had better find someone else. Preferably with no limbs so they can't hurt me.'

 

[Hoplon]

wait wait wait, Teenage girls on twitter are stupid? WE MUST INFORM THE PRESIDENT RIGHT AWAY!

You sir are a champion. This made me giggle.

 

[rob_simple]

The fact your question seems to be 'is it becoming socially acceptable to hit women' seems to imply you assume it's acceptable for men to hit other men? Violence against anyone is unacceptable unless both parties consent.

This has nothing to do with gender, the real problem is that we give people like this a voice. Chris Brown giving anyone an unprovoked beating should have been the end of his career. But just like the walking abortions on Jersey Shore we seem to now be glorifying all the most horrible aspects of modern mankind.

Glorifying? You mean the Italian American stereotypes we watch almost exclusively to make fun of? Aside from a hand full of jerks on twitter, I don't think I've seen any sizable trend in positive press surrounding Chris Brown. Glorifying? Really?

And how many people do you think would gladly make a fool of themselves on TV to get paid like those dipshits? Whether you like it or not, there is a generation being raised to think it's alright to compromise your morals and dignity because now you can quite easily make a career out of being a talentless, vapid caricature of a human being.

So yes, the lifestyle is being glorified in that it's being made to seem like an appealing choice over, say, becoming a doctor or a great writer or philosopher.

 

[SadakoMoose]

The fact your question seems to be 'is it becoming socially acceptable to hit women' seems to imply you assume it's acceptable for men to hit other men? Violence against anyone is unacceptable unless both parties consent.

This has nothing to do with gender, the real problem is that we give people like this a voice. Chris Brown giving anyone an unprovoked beating should have been the end of his career. But just like the walking abortions on Jersey Shore we seem to now be glorifying all the most horrible aspects of modern mankind.

Glorifying? You mean the Italian American stereotypes we watch almost exclusively to make fun of? Aside from a hand full of jerks on twitter, I don't think I've seen any sizable trend in positive press surrounding Chris Brown. Glorifying? Really?

And how many people do you think would gladly make a fool of themselves on TV to get paid like those dipshits? Whether you like it or not, there is a generation being raised to think it's alright to compromise your morals and dignity because now you can quite easily make a career out of being a talentless, vapid caricature of a human being.

So yes, the lifestyle is being glorified in that it's being made to seem like an appealing choice over, say, becoming a doctor or a great writer or philosopher.

I disagree. First off, which generation? Really, a whole damn generation? Does this apply to countries where they don't show the Jersey Shore, or households that don't watch it? "Being raised" involves more than just what you see on TV. It's your family, your education, your overall environment. Sure, it makes a good narrative to suggest that these reality TV shows are a major societal ill, as opposed to our floundering educational/social support system, because then it becomes a simple black and white matter of "us versus them" "smart vs dumb" "Idiocracy versus Brave New World", but that's not the world we live in.

I know it SOUNDS likely that there would be a large number of people willing to become the subjects of such programs, but I still think that it's less a majority and more a very vocal minority.

Most people have MUCH higher aspirations. It may be EASY to imagine that "the masses" are like the Rednecks from South Park, or the "Marching Morons", or the dumb people you see on your TV set, because then it makes the solutions to all of our social problems seem SO obvious and clear cut. It removes all the grey, and lets us pretend that we have a concrete "enemy" rather than a very complicated socio-economic situation. You can use this to frame yourself however you like. If you're an objectivist you can call yourself a "Randian Hero", or if you're more vaguely liberal you can imagine that you're The Dude from "Network", or the other dude from "Player Piano". But it's still just a narrative.

 

[rob_simple]

The fact your question seems to be 'is it becoming socially acceptable to hit women' seems to imply you assume it's acceptable for men to hit other men? Violence against anyone is unacceptable unless both parties consent.

This has nothing to do with gender, the real problem is that we give people like this a voice. Chris Brown giving anyone an unprovoked beating should have been the end of his career. But just like the walking abortions on Jersey Shore we seem to now be glorifying all the most horrible aspects of modern mankind.

Glorifying? You mean the Italian American stereotypes we watch almost exclusively to make fun of? Aside from a hand full of jerks on twitter, I don't think I've seen any sizable trend in positive press surrounding Chris Brown. Glorifying? Really?

And how many people do you think would gladly make a fool of themselves on TV to get paid like those dipshits? Whether you like it or not, there is a generation being raised to think it's alright to compromise your morals and dignity because now you can quite easily make a career out of being a talentless, vapid caricature of a human being.

So yes, the lifestyle is being glorified in that it's being made to seem like an appealing choice over, say, becoming a doctor or a great writer or philosopher.

I disagree. First off, which generation? Really, a whole damn generation? Does this apply to countries where they don't show the Jersey Shore, or households that don't watch it? "Being raised" involves more than just what you see on TV. It's your family, your education, your overall environment. Sure, it makes a good narrative to suggest that these reality TV shows are a major societal ill, as opposed to our floundering educational/social support system, because then it becomes a simple black and white matter of "us versus them" "smart vs dumb" "Idiocracy versus Brave New World", but that's not the world we live in.

I know it SOUNDS likely that there would be a large number of people willing to become the subjects of such programs, but I still think that it's less a majority and more a very vocal minority.

Most people have MUCH higher aspirations. It may be EASY to imagine that "the masses" are like the Rednecks from South Park, or the "Marching Morons", or the dumb people you see on your TV set, because then it makes the solutions to all of our social problems seem SO obvious and clear cut. It removes all the grey, and lets us pretend that we have a concrete "enemy" rather than a very complicated socio-economic situation. You can use this to frame yourself however you like. If you're an objectivist you can call yourself a "Randian Hero", or if you're more vaguely liberal you can imagine that you're The Dude from "Network", or the other dude from "Player Piano". But it's still just a narrative.

I don't imagine myself as anything. The bottom line is that these shows only exist because people watch them, even if it is only for ironic reasons. I never said that it's going to be the downfall of society, just that it's lamentable these programs are considered entertainment and that a portion of society, no matter how small, find the people in them relatable or even admirable.

Also, are you AWARE that putting random words in CAPITALS makes it look like you have finger-tourettes?