• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Greta Thunberg - brave campaigner or deeply disturbed?

Status
Not open for further replies.
If you refer back to the post, it is a quote by Lasse Lehtinen, not me.

Yes, there are idiots all over the place, but I tend to only quote them when I have a point to make.

What is your point about his insane ramblings?

Quite.

Vixen, you linked to this rubbish, so you should be taking the time to explain why you think this crap is worth reading.
 
Some nutjob, with a previous conviction for making illegal threats, has been charged with sending multiple letters where they threaten to kill Greta Thunberg and her mother (there's no mention of threats made against her father, so presumably he would be spared). They admit sending the letters, but deny any intentions of threatening or causing them physical harm, and supposedly regrets his actions which were apparently done to stop her climate change activism.
 
Some nutjob, with a previous conviction for making illegal threats, has been charged with sending multiple letters where they threaten to kill Greta Thunberg and her mother (there's no mention of threats made against her father, so presumably he would be spared). They admit sending the letters, but deny any intentions of threatening or causing them physical harm, and supposedly regrets his actions which were apparently done to stop her climate change activism.

What an idiot. She's attending the UN Climate Summit. Opposing her activism? That ship has already sailed.
 
Some nutjob, with a previous conviction for making illegal threats, has been charged with sending multiple letters where they threaten to kill Greta Thunberg and her mother (there's no mention of threats made against her father, so presumably he would be spared). They admit sending the letters, but deny any intentions of threatening or causing them physical harm, and supposedly regrets his actions which were apparently done to stop her climate change activism.

The way adults like to target children in particular for the most withering and vile of criticism and abuse just because they've done something harmless that's gotten a little publicity has always struck me as deeply disturbing, and all facets of the visceral hate-response that's been directed at Thunberg is no exception.
 
The way adults like to target children in particular for the most withering and vile of criticism and abuse just because they've done something harmless that's gotten a little publicity has always struck me as deeply disturbing, and all facets of the visceral hate-response that's been directed at Thunberg is no exception.

It is a fascinating phenomena and massively unsettling. I wonder if that isn't a topic that deserves its own thread. Although I don't know what it would be beyond a list of disgusting examples and then people showing how it is done by doubling down on certain targets by pointing out how that child is actually evil. Never mind, I don't like my idea much anymore.
 
The way adults like to target children in particular for the most withering and vile of criticism and abuse just because they've done something harmless that's gotten a little publicity has always struck me as deeply disturbing, and all facets of the visceral hate-response that's been directed at Thunberg is no exception.

I wonder if it's not largely the result of jealousy and that her appearance clashes with the typical photogenic activists that are usually made into figureheads. These people probably think along the lines of "How did this little girl become so famous?! She's a freak! She's not good looking and hasn't accomplished anything at all! What's her deal?! Who does she think she is?".

Spiteful responses become a natural response in order to call her out for acting above her station and that she should know her place. At least that's what I imagine is making so many people respond like toxic juvenile bullies.
 
Last edited:
I wonder if it's not largely the result of jealousy and that her appearance clashes with the typical photogenic activists that are usually made into figureheads. These people probably think along the lines of "How did this little girl become so famous?! She's a freak! She's not good looking and hasn't accomplished anything at all! What's her deal?! Who does she think she is?".

I'm not sure it's appearance-based. Haters will certainly weaponize that, but I don't think it's what motivates them.

I wonder if you might be on the right track about "jealousy", though. The phenomenon of adults living vicariously through the successes of children they like, usually their own but sometimes others', is well-known and I think moderately understood. It at least sounds plausible to me that adults can become vicariously rivalrous of children they disapprove of who are nevertheless "succeeding" in ways the adult thinks they shouldn't be.

But even if that's a thing that actually happens, it's still up in the air as to whether that explains the larger problem. Adults have heaped just as much abuse upon children who certainly couldn't be described as "successful". Examples like Jimmy Kimmel seem to indicate that some adults just really enjoy the suffering of children, viewing it as a form of entertainment, and I wonder if that might be a bigger contributor to the problem than vicarious jealousy.
 
Last edited:
It is a fascinating phenomena and massively unsettling. I wonder if that isn't a topic that deserves its own thread. Although I don't know what it would be beyond a list of disgusting examples and then people showing how it is done by doubling down on certain targets by pointing out how that child is actually evil. Never mind, I don't like my idea much anymore.

I wonder if you might be on the right track about "jealousy", though. The phenomenon of adults living vicariously through the successes of children they like, usually their own but sometimes others', is well-known and I think moderately understood. It at least sounds plausible to me that adults can become vicariously rivalrous of children they disapprove of who are nevertheless "succeeding" in ways the adult thinks they shouldn't be.


I don't think jealousy is quite right. It seems to me to be more of a sense of adult elitism; the idea that "children" (aka anyone sufficiently younger) are inherently inferior, and exist solely to become carbon copies of adults, and should therefore "know their place". Look at all the kerfuffle that has historically gone on every time "the youth" comes up with some new musical style, fashion style, or socio-political movement that threatens the status quo.

Culturally, there is a fairly rigid social hierarchy, the view of which can vary a bit from group to group; but few would deny its existence. Children are considered low in the hierarchy by nearly everyone in mainstream culture. Those who consider themselves higher up in the hierarchy do not take kindly to those of lower status daring to challenge their authority and step out of their assigned place. Just like racists do not appreciate "low status" minorities attempting to act as equals, very many adults do not appreciate younger generations attempting to act as equals, and tend to believe that children should be little more than mirrors of their elders with no wills or desires of their own.
 
I'm not sure it's appearance-based. Haters will certainly weaponize that, but I don't think it's what motivates them.

It wasn't just her physical appearance. It's pretty much everything about her that seems to throw people off. She looks strange and she acts strange... she is strange in a way that many people find annoying and upsetting. Combine this with the fact that she looks noticeably younger than she is, people who already object to what she stands for ("climate change activism") seem unable to help themselves from attacking her in very personal terms.

They bash her because she's young, although she's 16 years so dismissing her as a "child" is quite questionable even in principle. They also mostly bash her because she's a "freak", even though her behavior is far from objectionable or otherwise would reasonably cause any kind of annoyance in other people.
 
Last edited:
It wasn't just her physical appearance. It's pretty much everything about her that seems to throw people off. She looks strange and she acts strange... she is strange in a way that many people find annoying and upsetting. Combine this with the fact that she looks noticeably younger than she is, people who already object to what she stands for ("climate change activism") seem unable to help themselves from attacking her in very personal terms.

They bash her because she's young, although she's 16 years so dismissing her as a "child" is quite questionable even in principle. They also mostly bash her because she's a "freak", even though her behavior is far from objectionable or otherwise would reasonably cause any kind of annoyance in other people.
I think we should also consider the subject. Some people consider climate change a hoax. Others believe the danger is over stated. Still, others believe there is nothing we can do about it anyway. Someone who brings attention to the issue is an easy target for naysayers.
 
So I am guessing now she has sailed to the US, with a team of sailors, The sailing team will fly home, she will fly round the US to get to all the conferences and then fly home.

Nice virtue signalling
 
So I am guessing now she has sailed to the US, with a team of sailors, The sailing team will fly home, she will fly round the US to get to all the conferences and then fly home.

Nice virtue signalling

What a load of crap. Show evidence she will be flying.

No, don’t bother. Evidence is not your thing. She will not be flying around the US.

These sort of pointless personal attacks on Greta are designed to dismiss or discredit her uncomfortable message.
 
What a load of crap. Show evidence she will be flying.

No, don’t bother. Evidence is not your thing. She will not be flying around the US.

These sort of pointless personal attacks on Greta are designed to dismiss or discredit her uncomfortable message.

I don't have any evidence

Which is why I said "I guess". It is called presuming.
 
Oh

It appears I was right

She saved carbon emissions of herself going by plane, so a team of sailors could fly instead

The 18-metre yacht features state-of-the-art solar panels on its deck and sides while there are two hydro-generators which together provide all the electricity needed on board.

Her voyage has however sparked controversy after a spokesman for Herrmann, the yacht's co-skipper, told Berlin newspaper TAZ that several people would fly into New York to help take the yacht back to Europe. Hermann himself will also return by plane, according to the spokesman.

Team Malizia's manager insisted however that the young activist's journey would be climate neutral, as the flights would "be offset."

Thunberg has meanwhile said that she doesn't yet know how she will return to Europe when the time comes.
 
Oh

It appears I was right

She saved carbon emissions of herself going by plane, so a team of sailors could fly instead

Dealt with earlier in this thread. What does the action of the crew have to do with Greta?

She and her family have pledged not to fly. But of course you will “ guess” she is lying.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greta_Thunberg


To lower her family's carbon footprint, she insisted they become vegan and give up flying.[17
 
She is clearly trying to bring attention to the wastefulness of flying, but it is difficult in a system that is optimized for speed over fuel consumption.

So, she finds the least wasteful way for her to travel, but it is a one off. Therefore it is not as optimized as it could be. There are no passenger sailboats across the Atlantic.

But I think her trip shows that there could be. If people refused to fly and asked for less wasteful methods could there be a market for trans-Atlantic passenger sailboats? I don't know. But I do know that she has shown that it doesn't take that much extra time to rely on the wind rather than relying on jet fuel. And I think that is interesting.

She is bringing attention to a problem and laying out a possible solution.

And **** if it hasn't gotten under some people's skin. Publicity? Check!
 
Some cargo ships can take passengers along. Given that the cargo ship was going to make the trip anyway, would that be less carbon than flying?
 
Dealt with earlier in this thread. What does the action of the crew have to do with Greta?

She and her family have pledged not to fly. But of course you will “ guess” she is lying.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greta_Thunberg

It just seems a tad stupid that her chosen transport needed as she chooses not to fly because of emission requires more people flying.

I haven't accused her of anything, except displaying virtue signaling

I'd never heard of the chick till about a week ago and have zero idea what all the hype over her is.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom