Vic Mignogna

[Mooreish]

Jussie Smollet's little stunt was proven to be a hoax days after it happened. If anything it just shows how easy it is to expose actual false allegations. Meanwhile, Vic has decades of history doing this stuff, and dozens of independent accusations from unrelated people, and the best that his defenders can come up with is 'some of the victims were rude so their complaints shouldn't count' and 'it's possible that some of the accusations could be false'.

Sorry, it just seems like a lot of people on here are hoping that he’s guilty of these things for some reason.

[Cursed Lemon]

I'm sorry for bringing up politics, but what about Covington and Jussie? What about Michael Jackson? What about mueller. Look these are the only big ones I know that had a lot of people saying they were true but ended up being all one big lie. The mj one I’m counting because evidence keeps coming out that makes him out to not be a pedo.

Ignoring the fact that all of these are bafflingly terrible examples to use as a rebuke, you do understand why I referenced Occam's razor, right?

[Mooreish]

I'm sorry for bringing up politics, but what about Covington and Jussie? What about Michael Jackson? What about mueller. Look these are the only big ones I know that had a lot of people saying they were true but ended up being all one big lie. The mj one I’m counting because evidence keeps coming out that makes him out to not be a pedo.

Ignoring the fact that all of these are bafflingly terrible examples to use as a rebuke, you do understand why I referenced Occam's razor, right?

True but isn’t that just assuming though.

[Fionordequester]

True but isn’t that just assuming though.

Aren't you just assuming? You may not know that Monica's innocent, but you also don't know that Vic is. So why are you still picking a side?

[Shaddy]

When you have a crime as notoriously difficult to directly prove as serial non-rape sexual assault (rape is also difficult, but different from non-consensual touching), everyone is already assuming. We have a term for this: "evidence beyond reasonable doubt". And given the photos of his behavior, testimony from con staff and actors, the personal phone number, the allegations from fans and actors both, how they're substantiated consistently over multiple decades and from again, dozens and dozens (hundreds?) of mostly-unrelated people, then yeah, that'd go beyond the "reasonable doubt" that comes with any mildly-famous person being a potential target of supposed "false allegations". That sort of thing happens to almost every actor people remember the name of. NOTHING like what's happening to Vic has happened to anyone innocent. The only reason you're siding with Vic is because he's Vic Mignogna. If he weren't known for being "the guy who was Ed and Broly" there would be no controversy here whatsoever. The only people left defending him would be redpill fuckboys who deny any case of a man committing sexual assault, no matter the evidence.

[Cursed Lemon]

It's pretty much a testament to how difficult sexual misconduct is to prove that someone as visible as Vic, with as many accusations as Vic, has next to no hard evidence for his transgressions.

[MajinMan]

The more arguments I see about this topic, the more I want law to be a mandatory class in high school or college. If most people took a law class, we wouldn’t be seeing nearly as much of this “where’s the proof, innocent until proven guilty” shit.

[Cursed Lemon]

The more arguments I see about this topic, the more I want law to be a mandatory class in high school or college. If most people took a law class, we wouldn’t be seeing nearly as much of this “where’s the proof, innocent until proven guilty” shit.

You presume it's ignorance that's causing this, rather than malice.

[XanatosVanBadass]

The more arguments I see about this topic, the more I want law to be a mandatory class in high school or college. If most people took a law class, we wouldn’t be seeing nearly as much of this “where’s the proof, innocent until proven guilty” shit.

You presume it's ignorance that's causing this, rather than malice.

Exactly. This is about wanting to see a straight white Christian republican male get away with something. This can’t be stressed enough.

[MajinMan]

It’s probably both. I’m sure a lot of the younger, teenage Vic supporters are just stupid and don’t understand what they’re saying, but I do agree that a majority of the older supporters are indeed doing it for malicious reasons.

[JazzMazz]

To be completely honest, I do think that some education about the nature of sexual harassment cases being put into the education system, would actually be beneficial. Some information and understanding is better than none, and from what I've seen, a lot of people follow the #standwithvic bandwagon, because they don't know a thing about how sexual harassment cases actually operate.

[Cursed Lemon]

Ignorance explains not knowing.

It 100% does not account for the mouth-frothing vitriol.

[XanatosVanBadass]

There seems to be a legit fear in discussions like this to admit that evil people actually exist. The apologia for Vic being mere ignorance only goes so far. Sometimes, people are just evil.

[Fionordequester]

There seems to be a legit fear in discussions like this to admit that evil people actually exist. The apologia for Vic being mere ignorance only goes so far. Sometimes, people are just evil.

Not me. I've met a dirtbag who literal told me that a human's "rights" were an abstract concept, and depended on who had power, in response to whether or not Monica & others had the right to complain when they got assaulted...

https://twitter.com/ArceorKoga/status/1 ... 2681840640

But I've also seen people on #IStandWithVic who were honorable enough to expose their own friends for lying...

https://twitter.com/Spitfir85432686/sta ... 1420613633

Of those two camps, I'd say only about 50% of them fall into the "dirtbag" camp, while the other half fell into the "honorable" camp. People in the first camp can't really be reasoned with, but folks in the latter can.

I don't bring up someone's potential innocence because I'm afraid to admit evil exists. I bring it up because it's not helpful to paint an entire side with one brush. Imagine if I convince one person? That same person then becomes someone else who could debate with others... Someone who could then convince OTHER people... And so on and so forth.

[JazzMazz]

There seems to be a legit fear in discussions like this to admit that evil people actually exist. The apologia for Vic being mere ignorance only goes so far. Sometimes, people are just evil.

True, however, I don't think its particularly appropriate to put all people under that blanket. A lot of people can be easily duped if they are ignorant about that subject, and if the main outlet they're aware of for that sort of info comes from the guys with genuinely bad motivations. I guess I haven't been looking too hard, but if you look on something like youtube, the majority of results are going to be tilted heavily in favour of the #Istandwithvic movement.

[Polyphase Avatron]

Jussie Smollet's little stunt was proven to be a hoax days after it happened. If anything it just shows how easy it is to expose actual false allegations. Meanwhile, Vic has decades of history doing this stuff, and dozens of independent accusations from unrelated people, and the best that his defenders can come up with is 'some of the victims were rude so their complaints shouldn't count' and 'it's possible that some of the accusations could be false'.

Sorry, it just seems like a lot of people on here are hoping that he’s guilty of these things for some reason.

This reads like projection. The amount of evidence is such that it is rather your side that is desperately hoping that he's innocent against all odds.

[Polyphase Avatron]

There seems to be a legit fear in discussions like this to admit that evil people actually exist. The apologia for Vic being mere ignorance only goes so far. Sometimes, people are just evil.

Not me. I've met a dirtbag who literal told me that a human's "rights" were an abstract concept, and depended on who had power

Technically, this is true. Human rights are a system socially defined by human communities. If every human being were to simultaneously drop dread tomorrow, then the concept of 'human rights' would become meaningless.

But as a social species, we generally agree that it is in everyone's best interest to maximize our happiness and human flourishing, and an egalitarian system of rights is one of the most effective ways that we've found to do so.

[Fionordequester]

Technically, this is true. Human rights are a system socially defined by human communities. If every human being were to simultaneously drop dread tomorrow, then the concept of 'human rights' would become meaningless.

But as a social species, we generally agree that it is in everyone's best interest to maximize our happiness and human flourishing, and an egalitarian system of rights is one of the most effective ways that we've found to do so.

Yeah... I'm usually all for arguing technicalities like that, but this was literally in direct response to me saying...

Well, I'm glad you know it doesn't matter [that Monica Rial is a "pathetic old hag", and that her boyfriend is a "soybean"]. For a moment there, I was starting to think that [you] mean[t] people DESERVE to be assaulted; or that they didn't have any right to complain if they did.

Glad that's not what you're saying.

For context, we were having a fairly civil conversation at first, I then asked if he was one of the folks who was harassing Monica on Twitter, he said "yes" before then trying to justify his behavior, and... Then this happened:

https://twitter.com/ArceorKoga/status/1 ... 4289500160

[Polyphase Avatron]

Technically, this is true. Human rights are a system socially defined by human communities. If every human being were to simultaneously drop dread tomorrow, then the concept of 'human rights' would become meaningless.

But as a social species, we generally agree that it is in everyone's best interest to maximize our happiness and human flourishing, and an egalitarian system of rights is one of the most effective ways that we've found to do so.

Yeah... I'm usually all for arguing technicalities like that, but this was literally in direct response to me saying...

Well, I'm glad you know it doesn't matter [that Monica Rial is a "pathetic old hag", and that her boyfriend is a "soybean"]. For a moment there, I was starting to think that [you] mean[t] people DESERVE to be assaulted; or that they didn't have any right to complain if they did.

Glad that's not what you're saying.

For context, we were having a fairly civil conversation at first, I then asked if he was one of the folks who was harassing Monica on Twitter, he said "yes" before then trying to justify his behavior, and... Then this happened:

https://twitter.com/ArceorKoga/status/1 ... 4289500160

The conversation seems to end before it reaches the part you're talking about...

[Fionordequester]

The conversation seems to end before it reaches the part you're talking about...

Sometimes when a conversation goes on for a long time, you need to click one of the bottom comments in order to "load" the comments that come after. In this case, you'll want to click...

"But they've already been doing that. So it's more like "there's a lion charging me, should I shoot it or wait until it fires first?". Btw, do you really think Monica is a powerhouse, and not just a pathetic old hag with a soyboy bf?"

Or just follow this one...

https://twitter.com/Moples223/status/11 ... 8066726912