Because if they actually get to a point where they lead the opposition to their issue
For a while there was the danger that anti-transgender would not get a hearing at all. The fact that it did, was in large part due to GCs and their activism.
you can bet that blame will be placed squarely on men, pornography
GC really hated OnlyFans, same as you. You're friends, actually.
You can also bet that they will protect their own and completely ignore the interests of everyone other than women - so they'll likely allow the castrations to continue but with the condition that those kids aren't allowed to get uppity with their masters
Just more of your fantasies without any substantiation.
You can't win by siding with people who hate you
On the contrary, you win by creating a coalition - whatever coalition - of people who hate the established order, whether or not they 'hate' you.
You can't possibly think you're doing any good by defending unspeakable dregs of society like JK Rowling.
Rowling has done incredible good. I despised her before she showed her spine and great courage. I don't like that she is a feminist, but I'll take the good with the bad.
All men, after all, like Aeschylus said about lives, are mixtures of good and bad.
I don't think so. It got a hearing because of regular people complaining about them to the point that the Republican Party latched onto it as a policy issue.
Yeah, but they portray the sellers as victims. They're far from it.
Feminists are well-known for backstabbing whatever cause they claim to support after women get their part.
When has that ever worked? Coalitions across political spectrums have been done before, in Italy, and they're always a disaster.
Rowling is one of the worst. She was a strong backer of Coercive Control law and credits herself as the friend and confidante of the woman who led the charge, Julie Bindel.
I don't think so. It got a hearing because of regular people complaining about them to the point that the Republican Party latched onto it as a policy issue.
Is that the legislative history of the law?
Yeah, but they portray the sellers as victims. They're far from it.
I think that throwing your life away at age 18 for $10 because your culture promotes pornography does make you a victim. Those who make big bucks are not victims. Those seduced by its siren song are.
Feminists are well-known for backstabbing whatever cause they claim to support after women get their part.
All the more reason to get them to backstab your enemies, after which you dispatch them if they cause trouble.
When has that ever worked? Coalitions across political spectrums have been done before, in Italy, and they're always a disaster.
That is a coalition of parties. Any political action requires a coalition. You're not going to get there with woman-haters alone.
Rowling is one of the worst. She was a strong backer of Coercive Control law and credits herself as the friend and confidante of the woman who led the charge, Julie Bindel.
Pretty much. That's a simplified history of how trannies became the issue of the day. Women cry about it, GOP thinks this is the chance to flip the D+38s.
No, they're victims even less than people who put their life savings on Bitcoin to make millions and lose it all are victims. They did it for the money, for the chance to exploit broken people, and they failed. Even the crypto speculators are better because they weren't hurting anyone in their delusions.
It's never that simple. It's like saying you can work with the cancer inside your body.
For a while there was the danger that anti-transgender would not get a hearing at all. The fact that it did, was in large part due to GCs and their activism.
GC really hated OnlyFans, same as you. You're friends, actually.
Just more of your fantasies without any substantiation.
On the contrary, you win by creating a coalition - whatever coalition - of people who hate the established order, whether or not they 'hate' you.
Rowling has done incredible good. I despised her before she showed her spine and great courage. I don't like that she is a feminist, but I'll take the good with the bad.
All men, after all, like Aeschylus said about lives, are mixtures of good and bad.
I don't think so. It got a hearing because of regular people complaining about them to the point that the Republican Party latched onto it as a policy issue.
Yeah, but they portray the sellers as victims. They're far from it.
Feminists are well-known for backstabbing whatever cause they claim to support after women get their part.
When has that ever worked? Coalitions across political spectrums have been done before, in Italy, and they're always a disaster.
Rowling is one of the worst. She was a strong backer of Coercive Control law and credits herself as the friend and confidante of the woman who led the charge, Julie Bindel.
Is that the legislative history of the law?
I think that throwing your life away at age 18 for $10 because your culture promotes pornography does make you a victim. Those who make big bucks are not victims. Those seduced by its siren song are.
All the more reason to get them to backstab your enemies, after which you dispatch them if they cause trouble.
That is a coalition of parties. Any political action requires a coalition. You're not going to get there with woman-haters alone.
Beggars can't be choosers.
Pretty much. That's a simplified history of how trannies became the issue of the day. Women cry about it, GOP thinks this is the chance to flip the D+38s.
No, they're victims even less than people who put their life savings on Bitcoin to make millions and lose it all are victims. They did it for the money, for the chance to exploit broken people, and they failed. Even the crypto speculators are better because they weren't hurting anyone in their delusions.
It's never that simple. It's like saying you can work with the cancer inside your body.