And yet again, another miserable gigalib who thinks every single problem is solved with more degeneracy.
If you think living a good life means getting choked by some weirdo, then you are not happy and not sane.
Somehow everything leads back to disturbing sex acts with them. Meaningful relationships, travel, learning a new skill, being creative, making things, nothing like that is mentioned. No. Kids just need ass to mouth.
I am not sure if these people are so sick they need to be placed under guardianship or if they are fucking demonic.
Somehow everything leads back to disturbing sex acts with them.
And that started with Freud. Even though his cockamamie theories are now long refuted, insofar as they made any sense to begin with, if it is a legacy of Freud, it is lingering.
Rather more, it as Freuds nephew that introduced Freuds ideas into American marketing, which twisted entire culture into commercialism defining self-worth (do check document: "century of self", it shows quite well how culture evolved with Freudian ideas at helm of marketing)
Haha, it certainly wasn't men who made Fabio a household name. It was works like this
funny enough, I saw nothing but sympathy from most men when he had that unfortunate run-in with the goose, even the ones who thought it was funny as hell felt bad for him.
Because the police side with the human trash, and the people who would rise up against it are busy preparing to check out of a society that puts human trash like this in positions of authority.
Y'know, you could make your claims a lot more powerful if you stopped claiming more than you can prove.
What is actually true is bad enough. There's not even a need to exaggerate and claim that 'all women believe this' or even 'all feminists believe this'. If I were you, I'd just point out that they support someone who says such a thing, without making any claim that they can disprove by just saying: "well, I don't believe that".
Probably true. But I think I just like to go a little bit further, to infer that greater plan behind it all.
That's fine and all, but say that to the average person and he will think that you are the crazy one.
I said any woman could and I wouldn't trust any of them
But any man could as well, right? You say that it's not in the "interests" of men to believe it. But of course, it's not in the interests of the average woman to have her father, sons and brothers killed for no reason at all either.
is to hide what you are until you have a position where you can help the cause.
Just assuming for a moment that you are correct. If they are hiding it, then by definition they don't leave evidence for it. But that means that you are trying to prove something in the absence of evidence. And you can prove anything without evidence if your axiom is that "it's true because they're trying to hide it". So this will not be persuasive to the average person, as it is not to me (stupidity is a far better explanation than some grand plan).
I do believe all feminists believe it though, and I won't retract that claim.
It doesn't matter if you do. Do note that I was a feminist 7 years ago, without believing any such thing. But if you're trying to persuade people that feminists are bad, then even if you were absolutely sure of this but could not prove it, you'd be better off not claiming it.
At first they think I'm crazy, but after recent events, I've never looked more likely to be correct than I do at this moment.
Again, that's only according to your own reckoning. You don't like it when I remind you of the fact that you have won exactly zero bets with me, and why do you think that is?
Every vaccine has been revealed to have horrendous side effects, only in men.
I am pretty sure that you were posting about side-effects in women a while back and complaining that "only then" investigations started, even though they started earlier.
The G7 openly stated they will "rebuild in a more feminine way".
That was just the Eton clown that you voted for, not the G7 as a body, and I am pretty sure it is just lip-service.
The UN has taken in 40bn in donations towards their goal of 50%+ government ministers being female by 2030.
That I haven't heard about? Who are the loons donating towards that? I mean, I'm glad they are wasting their money rather than putting it into something productive, but it's hard to contemplate people being that dumb.
Melinda Gates and Mckenzie Bezos have both cut their partners out of their organizations and now are openly advocating for the supremacy of women.
They are certainly bad actors, but by exaggerating, you give people avenues to attack you even though your central point - that they are bad actors - is correct. Can you keep your eye on the ball?
I suppose I see another payout. My argument, all along really, has been for the children.
Like Robin Dembroff, another friend and colleague quoted in that same Vox article, I believe queerness is anchored in “political resistance to hegemonic ideas of how humans ought to be.” Leather chaps and nipple clamps and boys kissing boys and girls kissing girls—even on an otherwise unexceptional Bank of America float—model modes of living and loving that many kids and teenagers attending Pride have never seen, or have just seen online, and only as pornography (not that there is anything ipso facto wrong with pornography, but the more models of queerness, the better). When parents or people ventriloquizing parents oppose public indecency at Pride on the grounds that it may upset children, the opposite is more likely the case: their children might like it, and that upsets the parents, not the children. What is the presumptive harm if a child happens upon a guy sporting a chest harness, or sees an adult’s butt cheeks, or even an adult’s genitals or breasts? Would such children necessarily feel violated, or might adults be feeling violated on their behalf? Might the child be as likely to respond with curiosity?
The “problem” with gay sex or kink in public, like the “problem” of early twentieth-century young Black women carving slices of pleasure and intimacy out of brutal city life, is that it models how to have gay sex, or how to be kinky, or how to squeeze fun (or a living) out of socially mandated misery. For an antiracist, democratically hedonic, and more just future, we ought to celebrate kink, butts, and boobs at Pride. And we should do so especially for ** those kids whose opportunities and curiosities are stifled by racist violence, economic inequality, or their heterosexual nuclear family.**
"The short answer is because refusing to embrace public sex is racist, of course. According to Fischel, “Bodies of color, simply by existing, were tantamount to sex in public.” Adding that “Blacks were white folks’ sex public [sic],”
And professor Joseph J. Fischel is a fucking jew, showing the world how the jewish community has a massive issue with regressive leftist/globalist corruption that must be dealt with.
I swear that promoting sexuality to children is part of a ploy to create a false consensus regarding child sexuality so that people can argue for the lowering of the age of consent by using cases of stupid kids doing sexual shit despite being asexual as an excuse.
I do not want to live in a world where kids would be forced to prove they were raped due to weak/nonexistent age of consent laws.
And yet again, another miserable gigalib who thinks every single problem is solved with more degeneracy.
If you think living a good life means getting choked by some weirdo, then you are not happy and not sane.
Somehow everything leads back to disturbing sex acts with them. Meaningful relationships, travel, learning a new skill, being creative, making things, nothing like that is mentioned. No. Kids just need ass to mouth.
I am not sure if these people are so sick they need to be placed under guardianship or if they are fucking demonic.
And that started with Freud. Even though his cockamamie theories are now long refuted, insofar as they made any sense to begin with, if it is a legacy of Freud, it is lingering.
Rather more, it as Freuds nephew that introduced Freuds ideas into American marketing, which twisted entire culture into commercialism defining self-worth (do check document: "century of self", it shows quite well how culture evolved with Freudian ideas at helm of marketing)
This is what happens when you don't have to struggle a bit to put food on the plate.
Fuck if I know. Then again, I would never pay money for any kind of porn, ever.
Haha, it certainly wasn't men who made Fabio a household name. It was works like this
funny enough, I saw nothing but sympathy from most men when he had that unfortunate run-in with the goose, even the ones who thought it was funny as hell felt bad for him.
I can't believe this is real. Why are people not rising up against this human trash?
Because the police side with the human trash, and the people who would rise up against it are busy preparing to check out of a society that puts human trash like this in positions of authority.
In current climate this is considered brave and stunning. If you say all lives matter on the other hand, that would get you fired.
Progress!!!
Y'know, you could make your claims a lot more powerful if you stopped claiming more than you can prove.
What is actually true is bad enough. There's not even a need to exaggerate and claim that 'all women believe this' or even 'all feminists believe this'. If I were you, I'd just point out that they support someone who says such a thing, without making any claim that they can disprove by just saying: "well, I don't believe that".
Sometimes, less is more.
That's fine and all, but say that to the average person and he will think that you are the crazy one.
But any man could as well, right? You say that it's not in the "interests" of men to believe it. But of course, it's not in the interests of the average woman to have her father, sons and brothers killed for no reason at all either.
Just assuming for a moment that you are correct. If they are hiding it, then by definition they don't leave evidence for it. But that means that you are trying to prove something in the absence of evidence. And you can prove anything without evidence if your axiom is that "it's true because they're trying to hide it". So this will not be persuasive to the average person, as it is not to me (stupidity is a far better explanation than some grand plan).
It doesn't matter if you do. Do note that I was a feminist 7 years ago, without believing any such thing. But if you're trying to persuade people that feminists are bad, then even if you were absolutely sure of this but could not prove it, you'd be better off not claiming it.
Again, that's only according to your own reckoning. You don't like it when I remind you of the fact that you have won exactly zero bets with me, and why do you think that is?
I am pretty sure that you were posting about side-effects in women a while back and complaining that "only then" investigations started, even though they started earlier.
That was just the Eton clown that you voted for, not the G7 as a body, and I am pretty sure it is just lip-service.
That I haven't heard about? Who are the loons donating towards that? I mean, I'm glad they are wasting their money rather than putting it into something productive, but it's hard to contemplate people being that dumb.
They are certainly bad actors, but by exaggerating, you give people avenues to attack you even though your central point - that they are bad actors - is correct. Can you keep your eye on the ball?
Gross if I saw gay sex at a gay parade as a kid I would be the biggest homophobe this world has ever seen
I wonder if my parents would be pissed about how the police refuse to enforce public decency laws at those shitty parades.
Only a tiny bit surprised they'd openly admit everything they say and do is all just about fulfilling their own perverse desires.
You'd think at some point this would wake normies up, and yet here we are.
"The short answer is because refusing to embrace public sex is racist, of course. According to Fischel, “Bodies of color, simply by existing, were tantamount to sex in public.” Adding that “Blacks were white folks’ sex public [sic],”
Wot
Hans, get ze flammenwerfer.
the closet needs to come back with a lock on it.
with carbon monoxide being fed into it.
reposted to kia2 on ruqqus: https://ruqqus.com/+kotakuinaction2/post/co6d/yale-professor-wants-your-kids-to
I dunno, I'll take being a homophobe any day of the week to being scarred for life, Jesus Christ.
And professor Joseph J. Fischel is a fucking jew, showing the world how the jewish community has a massive issue with regressive leftist/globalist corruption that must be dealt with.
I swear that promoting sexuality to children is part of a ploy to create a false consensus regarding child sexuality so that people can argue for the lowering of the age of consent by using cases of stupid kids doing sexual shit despite being asexual as an excuse.
I do not want to live in a world where kids would be forced to prove they were raped due to weak/nonexistent age of consent laws.