It's pretty sad when "burn it all down, possibly forever" is considered a far better course of action over letting the status quo continue on. And I don't disagree with that assessment, it's just sad that the current status quo is that bad.
Good call. Like I said, I had a very quick glance at the about me and didn't really read it, but I should have caught that one.
Admittedly, it's not from some site called "Plate", and the author isn't some "A. Golding". And if I'm honest, Poe's Law is in full swing when looking into AFRU because it just seems like some troll, but if it is meant to be satirical, there's no dead giveaway in my quick glance around their About Us page.
The government deliberately created all the inflation in our society. For decades they removed our rights to save in stable forms
You can thank Keynesian economics for that one. Even the people who had good intentions (not that good intentions are worth all that much) were pushing this shit. And it's been pushed for so long now that practically nobody in government has any power to truly point out how terrible Keynesian economics are.
But then again, government loves Keynesian economics. Financial transactions are the easiest to tax, so you make policies that incentivises as many financial transactions as possible so you can get as many cuts of said transactions as possible. Keynesian economics are a gold mine for the government.
In this post here you said "When i was on youtube between the years of 2015-2017 i was heavily invested in anti woke content". Despite this claim, you don't know some of the most basic shit about rather well known controversies. It's almost like you speak out of your ass a lot, trying to make it seem like you're "one of us", but continually either don't know basic shit, or you're playing dumb to troll.
Blatant D&C is blatant.
it would lead me to believe, that they were molested by older people as kids. but that's just context i have to infer. because you did not outright state if younger gay people were raped by adults or not.
Information I saw was that the vast, vast majority were older, adult men had fucked them.
because alot of younger straight kids lose their virginity all the time to kids at or around their own age.
It's more common today, but not 30+ years ago. It happened, but it was far far rarer, especially when discussing age groups under 10.
in favor of bashing gay people.
You're such a fucking retard. You have the information put right in front of you, but you kneejerk back to the status quo. Homosexuality is tied to abuse, as is pedophilia. It's not that "gays are pedophiles", but rather that there is a common link through abuse. Contrary to the popular slogan, the vast majority of homosexuals (and no, I won't say all, because I don't believe it to be all) are not in fact "born that way".
And this doesn't even touch on other factors like porn addiction. Seriously, look into how many homosexuals have porn addiction. If they were simply "born that way", these trends shouldn't exist. These statistics and trends should mirror the rest of normal society. But they don't. Because they're not born that way. They suffered from abuse in some form or another (though overwhelmingly sexual in nature). Whether that's at the hand of another or self-inflicted via porn addiction doesn't really matter. But there is a cause.
Maybe you've been told a lie you're entire life. And maybe you're not willing to truly entertain the idea because you can't handle the concept of you being lied to so thoroughly that you became complicit. Because then you have to come to terms with your nature. It's no secret you wear "degenerate" like a badge of pride. Maybe you're kneejerking back to avoid your own self-reflection.
Well, it was always a thing until the late 90s. And it doesn't just make them look bad. It's not like they were forced to associate. They feely and often openly associated until there was enough LGBT that said "this is pretty fucked up", and then they got lax and now we're in a similar position as before where a rather large amount of pedos infest LGBT spaces and are defended by other LGBT groups by default.
Any other group that did this would be rightfully dragged over the coals for such tribalism that they willingly hide pedophiles amongst themselves, but this one for some reason gets a pass.
By the way, why don't you go look into when the vast majority of gays had their first sexual experience with another person. You'll find most were definitely minors. Did you also know that sexual abuse (like most abuse) is a cycle that is self perpetuating, with a large number of victims later going on to commit their own atrocities as well? Gee, I wonder if any of this might be linked to one another?
Bury your head in the sand if you want. But the reality is that a lot of these people were at one point victims themselves and that does nothing to excuse the harm they later present to others. Maybe there's a real problem that's being perpetuated under the delusion of being kind and tolerant. Maybe this is resulting in more and more people, namely young children, being harmed.
what a privilege
Really. We want to go down a "muh privilege" route? And you're gonna wonder why I'm not a fan of collectivism, especially when you use it interchangeably to refer to association.
Just to make this clear for me, because you're beyond retarded and often don't write very well: Are you suggesting that you don't know why the LGBT movement would sever ties with NAMbLA and that's it's "pretty fucked up" that they did?
Because this comment would be in direct contradiction to anything you've said prior and an admission that there is in fact a tie between the LGBT movement and pedophiles.
Again, just for clarity here.
I don't need to like something to recognise that the alternative is far worse, or that cultures overwhelmingly don't mix. The "issue" (if you want to take it that far, which it isn't) is more the active nature that many nationalistic elements take. I'm also not a huge fan of how nationalism is often abused and deliberately muddled with state loyalty.
The ideal of nationalism versus the practice and application of nationalism are two different things, and while I'm not against the former, the latter is a bit more murkier. I'm not a fan of collectivism regardless of the collective, be it the communist variety or the nationalist variety (primarily ethno-nationalism). The collectivist nature is the element that I most struggle to find myself supporting. And maybe you'll find that makes me weak, or naively idealistic, or this, or that, and that's fine. I know that it's an area I haven't fully explored in myself, and know that there's some elements that don't robustly add up.
Because I'm not against the idea of immigration (presuming there is assimilation as opposed to the lie of multiculturalism). Isolationism isn't something I support either. But this globalist trajectory everything is heading towards is far, far worse than the negatives I see in either of those positions.
I'd somewhat agree with them, but for opposite reasons. It's easy and shallow to point at Nazi Germany as a negative of "too much nationalism", but far too little look at how it was born from far too little.
To oversimplify it, Nazi Germany was the result of Germany being abused after WW1. This is why Hitler, contrary to popular belief, isn't the primary cause. He was just one man that answered the call of the people. Sure, he directed a fair chunk of it, but mass nationalism was always going to happen.
And the root problem was accepting that abuse in the first place. Having so little nationalism that you allow yourself to be downtrodden.
I'm not a fan of nationalism. But to deny the social importance of such stances is to invite in destruction. The biggest lie out there is "multiculturalism", because cultures do not mix. They might be able to coexist in very limited natures, but they do not mix well. And what's more important is that most people do not understand what culture actually is, focusing solely on superfluous elements like food, dance, music, fashion, etc, and not the important elements like social structures, morality, justice, etc. And because of that shallow understanding of culture, so many are willing to let it go time and again under the delusion that you're being tolerant, or letting people who are antithetical to said culture into your spaces (Islam into Western Nations for a very clear cut example), or laying down and taking abusive structures that are imposed upon you by those looking to subjugate others.
Again, I'm not a fan of nationalism. But the alternative is far far worse.
It's amazing how effective severing ties with NAMbLA was for the LGBT movement in the 90s. Too bad that it doesn't change any trends. There was a reason those ties existed in the first place, and no amount of PR will change the underlying truth of the situation.
They created this monster by being embarrassed of their own profession and transforming the industry into a complete and utter joke.
You know what's really great about this? Gaming was already becoming the monolithic industry it now is prior to the woke bullshittery. Had they stuck by the industry. Had they held even a single ounce of pride for their work and the industry they helped build, what others thought wouldn't have mattered in the slightest when your industry is the economic powerhouse it is. But instead these people desperately cling to being accepted by another industry that is just filled with some of the biggest scumbags on the planet (that being hollywood, filled not just with political turds, but actual sex pests and pedophiles), and as a result it will NEVER be enough. Because they gave these freaks all the power. They grovelled and begged and pleaded to be accepted by the people who were an incestuous collection of filth (who themselves ended up turning even the handful that were decently talented among themselves into complete hacks). And instead of gaining respect, they became nothing more than the mocked pet.
They put themselves into a subservient position, and can't understand why they're not coming out on top. They were set to take over from Hollywood, and decided to bend the knee instead. They did this to themselves, and many don't even realise that they were even manipulated into doing it. All because they were looking for acceptance from people who are scummy to the point that everyone knows "the open secret" of Hollywood.
Fuck them. Their "plight" is nothing but a making of their own self-loathing. And if they cannot even respect themselves, why should I respect them?
See, now this is what we call "entitlement". Leftists will always end up in this position as they demand that those who can should provide for said leftists (under the deception that it's actually for others "who need it"), and it almost always ends with the implication (or outright statement) that force will be used, like in this image here when they say "I'm gonna count to 3".
And of course, the leftists out there will claim that this is a joke, and this is deliberate for two reasons: the first is because that's all that the modern leftist can consume opinions as, and the second is to avoid criticism as they treat it like "Schrodinger's Joke" where it's simultaneously "just a joke" while also being a scathing commentary when taken seriously. And if you take it seriously to critically analyse it, you're just taking a joke "too seriously", even though the entire point is to take it seriously when in agreement.
These people are unironically scum. They're leeches, feeding off others and offering nothing in return. And if you so dare to suggest that people can better themselves, you're a terrible person.
Remember, right-wing households donate far more to charity than leftists. And while most charities are scams, it's more about the intent in this instance than the result. Leftists are not good people. They're rats using good optics as a mask. Never, ever forget that. It's always about how something can benefit themselves. Always and forever, no exception.
It might be a natural response, but that does nothing to excuse the complete lack of self control. But honestly, it's no water off my back. She will be the one with the regrets. And she'll probably blame others again, even though it was herself that was chasing that self-gratification high.
It's amazing how there was a comment that was basically this, and the hivemind mentality took over for another user to just come back with "well maybe she WANTS the silly tattoos and piercings!!!1!" And it's just so sad to see someone completely miss the entire fucking point.
It truly is incomprehensible for these losers to understand that just because group X says something is bad doesn't mean you have to do the exact opposite of it, and in fact swinging that far in the opposite direction will more often than not result in worse outcomes, not better.
But then again, this is all about the instant and self-gratification, not about anything meaningful like actually bettering yourself in spite of something that may or may not have been holding you back.
I'd suggest asking if they'd like their legacy erased in a couple hundred years for literally any other race, but that would require them capable of any sort of empathy.
It's shockingly consistent how many of these goony beard men just turn out to be scumbags in one way or another. Either it's sexual abuse, violent tendencies, or it's low moral fibre to just outright scam people through the guise of charity of all things.
Jirard chose his side based on his morals. He lacks morals. What does that tell you about those he supports?
For starters, corporations are not capitalistic. Secondly, merging corporations and government is just another form of leftist doctrine (state funded companies), and is antithetical to the basis of capitalism.
The free exchange of goods and services cannot exist while government explicitly intervenes in the market.
But her story was forgettable. Something like she jumped into the time stream and saved the doctor at every turn?
That was just her story with Smith. Her story with Capaldi was far worse. Spoilers for anyone stupid enough to care: Her story ends with her being pretty much on par with the Doctor (in terms of determination and wit, not so much raw intelligence), and she steals her own Tardis to go on adventures with. It's really bad.
Jenna Coleman might be rather pretty (and she's not too bad in my opinion either), but Clara was a massive Mary Sue and it's insane how many people defend her character.
The Matt Smith era was more a Canary in Coal Mine situation. Nothing too terrible, but there were small signs here and there. The biggest sign though is by far Clara, and her entire story that spans across both Smith and Capaldi.
I don't really have too much time at the moment, but if I remember later, I could go more into detail if you'd like me to.
Delusional hope. For a quick history, the revival (2005, starting with Eccleston as the 9th Doctor) was started by Russell T Davies, who continued as showrunner all the way through the Tennant years. From there it was Stephen Moffat who took over, who was okay but you really saw the SocJus creep in. Which isn't to say RTD didn't have some, but it was at least reasonably subtle and not repeatedly bashing you around the head with it. Moffat stuck around through both Matt Smith and Peter Capaldi, but from then on there was Chris Chibnall, showrunner for the Jodie Whittaker years, and was only really defended by the most delusional out there. A significant portion walked away midway through Moffat's run, but Chibnall doubled down in all the worst ways and people left en masse.
So why does this matter? Because the BBC, in their desperation, brought back RTD in the hopes he'd bring it back. And a lot of fans bought the hope that he would bring it back. Not going to lie, at the first news I was hopeful too, and then there was news like the casting, and certain characters, I saw RTD's history since Dr Who, and every piece of news was revealing that it would be going all in on The Message.
I don't blame long time fans for having hope for RTD. Most people don't pay attention to the finer details, even if they know that something is turning bad. But this just wasn't going to be it. Delusion, yes, but hopefully this will be a lesson to some fans that it's time to move on, to build up new IPs that aren't filled with this crap.
It's because it's not about the viewers, it's about the creators.
Same thing can be said of SocJus movements. Doesn't matter if the average supporter isn't a complete shithead, when every one of their leaders are without exception complete shitheads and that's where they loyally get their information from.
I think like most things in history, it was exaggerated over time. A pretty good and clear cut example of that, and one that has mostly been shown to have been an overblown myth, is the reaction to the War of the World radioplay and how it "lead to mass hysteria", when it reality they got about a thousand angry letters, of which only about a quarter had actually listened to said radioplay.
Were there people who thought smoking wasn't bad? Sure. And I wouldn't be surprised if many that did recognise smoking was bad didn't realise just how bad. But the idea that it was ever thought of as good is almost definitely revisionist utilising a very small subset of very deluded people that don't represent any larger demographic in any meaningful way.
It's not lazy, it's the localizers dogshit attempt at humour. I'd be MUCH happier if the issue with localizers was laziness, but it's not. The issue is that they're dumbasses that continually make changes because they arrogantly think they know better, not realising that if they did know better, they'd be writers and not localizers.