People you call "stormcucks" don't like you because you take your anti-feminist ideology to such an extreme that you will attack people who offer opposing causal forces.
Because I genuinely believe it all traces back to feminism, right down to the famous BLM "celebrities" just happening to get advertising jobs at woman-led or feminist-aligned companies after their rants are over.
An example you probably won't understand because you don't know anything about it, but I will give anyway, is how kneeling started in English football. There were a few players doing it out of solidarity with BLM, but most didn't give a shit. Enter Raheem Sterling, who spent hours on TV whining about racism in football on all the woman-led TV networks, and now supplements his healthy wage (despite never fucking playing) with a Gillette brand deal after convincing the league to make everyone kneel.
So why is that? Why was he given airtime and then a nice cash handout from them when the job was done?
Then you've got how Amazon turned against Visa, which seems to be a move to solidify OnlyFans ally Mastercard's market position.
I could go on forever about strange coincidences that always favor women - but my favorite is the chair of the board of the ADL being a feminist woman. Useful to use Jews as a shield for their actions, isn't it.
Women are children.
I don't agree. I think this is a cope because the alternative is admitting that feminists, and maybe even most women, don't consider men human at all, and that's why they don't care.
They do not have the mental capacity to form such an elaborate scheme
Women are children. They do not have the mental capacity to form such an elaborate scheme, nor the temerity to overcome the difference in social status between individuals and groups.
I'm not bargaining with him, I'm stating an idea.
Because I genuinely believe it all traces back to feminism, right down to the famous BLM "celebrities" just happening to get advertising jobs at woman-led or feminist-aligned companies after their rants are over.
An example you probably won't understand because you don't know anything about it, but I will give anyway, is how kneeling started in English football. There were a few players doing it out of solidarity with BLM, but most didn't give a shit. Enter Raheem Sterling, who spent hours on TV whining about racism in football on all the woman-led TV networks, and now supplements his healthy wage (despite never fucking playing) with a Gillette brand deal after convincing the league to make everyone kneel.
So why is that? Why was he given airtime and then a nice cash handout from them when the job was done?
Then you've got how Amazon turned against Visa, which seems to be a move to solidify OnlyFans ally Mastercard's market position.
I could go on forever about strange coincidences that always favor women - but my favorite is the chair of the board of the ADL being a feminist woman. Useful to use Jews as a shield for their actions, isn't it.
I don't agree. I think this is a cope because the alternative is admitting that feminists, and maybe even most women, don't consider men human at all, and that's why they don't care.
Are we absolutely sure?
I do appreciate the civility though.
Comment Reported for: Rule 16 - Identity Attacks
Comment Removed: Rule 16 - Identity Attacks
What?
What part of that post breaks R16?
That's an interesting way to interpret R16.
If I were to back up this view with figures, studies, and/or articles, would it then be acceptable?
Or are we simply disallowed from making a post commenting on the mental acuity of a protected class of people?
This is, by the way, one of the major reasons I think there needs to be a very public official discussion on the rules.