Just going to leave this here. This is what happens when you get those kind of women an unmonitored space. They rape children and brag about the suffering they cause them.
Their head mod who created their website openly admitted there's no such thing as a non-toxic man. It's only time before that rhetoric dives into abuse, rape and murder.
My conscience is clear if I kick them off the internet. Can you say the same for defending them?
It is amazing that you link a SJW source here and expect to be believed. While you're at it, go to the article on Gamergate.
Their head mod who created their website openly admitted there's no such thing as a non-toxic man.
So your feewings were hurt?
My conscience is clear if I kick them off the internet
Your conscience? Considering that your 'conscience' approves of censorship and hating more than half the human population, I am not sure what it's supposed to guarantee.
Can you say the same for defending them?
Absolutely. They've been very useful so far in the fight against SJ, which is why they were banned. You, being the useful that you are, never cease doing the bidding of your intersectionalist female masters.
I don't speak Korean, you know. I can only say what I've read in English and it seems logical. It doesn't seem false in any way judging by what I know about these kinds of "communities." - I guess you'd have to look into the rape victim and tie the rapist to the site though. I could 1000% believe it though.
You can't see the issue of a community led by someone like that existing without any monitoring? Imagine if I made a community where the first rule was "Women cannot be anything other than the enemy." - You don't think some lunatic would go too far and kill someone?
Actually, I don't hate the children, unlike them.
Very useful how? Both sides want men killed, they're just arguing over what counts as a man.
I don't speak Korean, you know. I can only say what I've read in English and it seems logical.
You do not speak Korean, so you decided to believe the claims of Wikipedia, with a long list of SJW buzzwords and accusations?
It doesn't seem false in any way judging by what I know about these kinds of "communities."
"show extreme hatred towards transgender people"
WOMAD has been called "Korean-style TERFs"[
Actually, I don't hate the children, unlike them.
You only hate girls once they turn 18?
Imagine if I made a community where the first rule was "Women cannot be anything other than the enemy." - You don't think some lunatic would go too far and kill someone?
Wouldn't surprise me from you, to be honest. That could be because you make yourself look bad in the way you post your views, while when you are challenged, you then respond with something that is more nuanced and less crazy.
Very useful how? Both sides want men killed, they're just arguing over what counts as a man.
Even if that were true, you'd want there to be rancor and division among them.
I mean, they act like GC. That description sounds like GC. If I was to write about GC, I'd probably end up writing something like that but with less woke buzzwords.
Are they not TERFs? They sure act like them. It's not a woke attack when they literally are TERFs.
...have you seen the way they vote at 18?
I'm not that crazy. I'm just very untrusting and take people at their word without benefit of the doubt - when most of their "jokes" are about killing people, it's difficult to think they don't mean it deep down. Especially considering their actions and the consequences of most of them, and the fact that they literally fight to get female murderers off the hook across the world.
But is that diversion worth the cost from their questionable actions? Is it worth emboldening those who talk about things that would equal a war crimes conviction backed by all UN members if it was any other group?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/WOMAD_(website)
Just going to leave this here. This is what happens when you get those kind of women an unmonitored space. They rape children and brag about the suffering they cause them.
Their head mod who created their website openly admitted there's no such thing as a non-toxic man. It's only time before that rhetoric dives into abuse, rape and murder.
My conscience is clear if I kick them off the internet. Can you say the same for defending them?
Based and redpilled
It is amazing that you link a SJW source here and expect to be believed. While you're at it, go to the article on Gamergate.
So your feewings were hurt?
Your conscience? Considering that your 'conscience' approves of censorship and hating more than half the human population, I am not sure what it's supposed to guarantee.
Absolutely. They've been very useful so far in the fight against SJ, which is why they were banned. You, being the useful that you are, never cease doing the bidding of your intersectionalist female masters.
I don't speak Korean, you know. I can only say what I've read in English and it seems logical. It doesn't seem false in any way judging by what I know about these kinds of "communities." - I guess you'd have to look into the rape victim and tie the rapist to the site though. I could 1000% believe it though.
You can't see the issue of a community led by someone like that existing without any monitoring? Imagine if I made a community where the first rule was "Women cannot be anything other than the enemy." - You don't think some lunatic would go too far and kill someone?
Actually, I don't hate the children, unlike them.
Very useful how? Both sides want men killed, they're just arguing over what counts as a man.
You do not speak Korean, so you decided to believe the claims of Wikipedia, with a long list of SJW buzzwords and accusations?
"show extreme hatred towards transgender people"
WOMAD has been called "Korean-style TERFs"[
You only hate girls once they turn 18?
Wouldn't surprise me from you, to be honest. That could be because you make yourself look bad in the way you post your views, while when you are challenged, you then respond with something that is more nuanced and less crazy.
Even if that were true, you'd want there to be rancor and division among them.
I mean, they act like GC. That description sounds like GC. If I was to write about GC, I'd probably end up writing something like that but with less woke buzzwords.
Are they not TERFs? They sure act like them. It's not a woke attack when they literally are TERFs.
...have you seen the way they vote at 18?
I'm not that crazy. I'm just very untrusting and take people at their word without benefit of the doubt - when most of their "jokes" are about killing people, it's difficult to think they don't mean it deep down. Especially considering their actions and the consequences of most of them, and the fact that they literally fight to get female murderers off the hook across the world.
But is that diversion worth the cost from their questionable actions? Is it worth emboldening those who talk about things that would equal a war crimes conviction backed by all UN members if it was any other group?