The enemy of my enemy can still be my enemy. The Taliban and ISIS want to kill each other, that doesn't mean one of them is magically my friend. They're both still my enemy.
Taliban is still better than ISIS. ISIS is an actual CIA operation made to be crazy . . Taliban is a bit more reasonable because they are a more legitimate group.
Sure, but that still doesn’t make them a friend, or even an ally. They still hate you too, you just have opportunities to play them against each other.
When my stronger enemy tries to destroy my weaker enemy, I side with my weaker enemy to prevent the stronger from becoming unstoppable.
and I don’t think he’s a classic TERF right now either
The thing is, TERF can be a gateway drug to more reasonable positions. By repudiating them and anathematizing them, you may make yourself feel good, but it's not doing much good in the outside world.
I don't need to read minds, feminists literally admit that they lie to gain power. It was one of the key points of the SCUM Manifesto (as advocated by the NYT), as well as being observable from all the female politicians who have switched sides after being elected.
https://archive.ph/VoFYn - Think again. This is the co-founder of the movement that created coercive control praising JK for putting a quote on her book. She is very much still in the feminist circle.
I don't need to read minds, feminists literally admit that they lie to gain power. It was one of the key points of the SCUM Manifesto (as advocated by the NYT),
Your mirror image would be a feminist who follows your comments on an hourly basis and who thinks that these represent the views of all men, and that anyone pretending otherwise is just lying because the School of the Imp told him to hide his views.
So yeah, you do need to read minds. Provide proof that this individual said "the world would be better without men" or shut up.
as well as being observable from all the female politicians who have switched sides after being elected.
Like Boris?
https://archive.ph/VoFYn - Think again. This is the co-founder of the movement that created coercive control praising JK for putting a quote on her book. She is very much still in the feminist circle.
I know she is a feminist. She said so much when sort of (but not really) repudiating Matt Walsh, which was disappointing. That said, she's definitely anti-regime.
How exactly are you going to win by hating on all women, which automatically alienates more than half the population, plus a substantial portion of men who are sane?
Who cares even if they were?
There are supporters of the regime and opponents of the regime. That's all there is.
The enemy of my enemy can still be my enemy. The Taliban and ISIS want to kill each other, that doesn't mean one of them is magically my friend. They're both still my enemy.
Taliban is still better than ISIS. ISIS is an actual CIA operation made to be crazy . . Taliban is a bit more reasonable because they are a more legitimate group.
The comparison doesn't really hold water, because both are basically non-entities.
Now imagine a world in which both are immensely powerful, more powerful than you faction, but they also fight each other.
What is the way you can best take advantage of that?
When my stronger enemy tries to destroy my weaker enemy, I side with my weaker enemy to prevent the stronger from becoming unstoppable.
The thing is, TERF can be a gateway drug to more reasonable positions. By repudiating them and anathematizing them, you may make yourself feel good, but it's not doing much good in the outside world.
And they are supporters pretending to be opponents.
You really think JK Rowling is out of the club?
I'm not as good a mind-reader as you, which is why I couldn't tell that Kim Potter was looking for an excuse to kill a man, as you claimed.
Most certainly. And she isn't even a "TERF". She just dissented very mildly from regime dogma.
I don't need to read minds, feminists literally admit that they lie to gain power. It was one of the key points of the SCUM Manifesto (as advocated by the NYT), as well as being observable from all the female politicians who have switched sides after being elected.
https://archive.ph/VoFYn - Think again. This is the co-founder of the movement that created coercive control praising JK for putting a quote on her book. She is very much still in the feminist circle.
Your mirror image would be a feminist who follows your comments on an hourly basis and who thinks that these represent the views of all men, and that anyone pretending otherwise is just lying because the School of the Imp told him to hide his views.
So yeah, you do need to read minds. Provide proof that this individual said "the world would be better without men" or shut up.
Like Boris?
I know she is a feminist. She said so much when sort of (but not really) repudiating Matt Walsh, which was disappointing. That said, she's definitely anti-regime.
How exactly are you going to win by hating on all women, which automatically alienates more than half the population, plus a substantial portion of men who are sane?