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?
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.
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.
Every vaccine has been revealed to have horrendous side effects, only in men.
The G7 openly stated they will "rebuild in a more feminine way".
The UN has taken in 40bn in donations towards their goal of 50%+ government ministers being female by 2030.
Melinda Gates and Mckenzie Bezos have both cut their partners out of their organizations and now are openly advocating for the supremacy of women.
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?