1
GhostBond 1 point ago +1 / -0

I watched the entire video, did you watch it all?

Feminists say white men are "privileged". While in reality the majority of white men are poor, disadvantaged, and behind.

The people who write the political narratives know the truth and deliberately lie about it.

I've seen videos like this for the last 5 years, and got my hopes up then - just got worse and worse. Guess it's just a tactic to get you to let your guard down so they can go back at it.

1
GhostBond 1 point ago +1 / -0

I always found his original podcasts a bit weird because his wife always gave off strong feminist vibes despite their show being the opposite.

I had thought maybe I was wrong but guess I was right, unfortunately.

6
GhostBond 6 points ago +6 / -0

The people pushing the narrative understand it completely. Their lies are carefully shaped in a way that you need to know the truth - then deliberately lie about it - to do it.

Once again it turns out that feminists are deliberately pushing lies in order to run over men.

1
GhostBond 1 point ago +1 / -0

The specs are to use white men as a minority group for their hate group.

40% of population is non-white, 30% of the population is white women, that leaves 30% of white men as a minority group.

21
GhostBond 21 points ago +21 / -0

This one is "using your own morality to endlessly beat you with". They always deliberately target people who care about the subject then endlessly accuse them of not caring.

in this instance, users here were responding angrily to a new law that allowed increased freedom of movement between Portuguese-speaking countries including African nations like Mozambique and Angola. “Wonderful, more stupid Blacks to rob me in the street,” read one comment in Portuguese, which received 19 likes. “This Africanization of Portugal can only lead the country to a third-world backwardness,” read another.

It's their same agendas - it's promoted when blm or portland antifa do it - but bad when normal people do it.

"Our greatest export is limousine liberalism to poor countries".

1
GhostBond 1 point ago +1 / -0

So, it's kinda obvious in retrospect.

40% of the US is non-white.
Of the remaining 60%, obviously about half (30% of the population) are women.

If you could get all the votes from these two groups, you have 70%, white men would be a minority that they could just roll over.

1
GhostBond 1 point ago +1 / -0

I don't think it's his yacht, he rents one when he wants it.

9
GhostBond 9 points ago +9 / -0

They're not even really coy about this shit:

noting that the number of FBI investigations of suspected domestic violent extremists — those accused of planning or committing crimes in the name of domestic political goals — had more than doubled since the spring of 2020.

1. Demand more investigations into the birds in your backyard being uh "terrorists"
2. Tell people you need more funding because "there's more investigations open" into those devious birds plotting against you in your back yard.

domestic terrorism investigators often settle for filing gun or drug charges, and often those are filed in state — not federal — court, which can mask the extent of extremist threats.

They aren't actually finding anything. They're trying to count unrelated stuff.

It's like that "kidnap the govenor" "plot" where it turns out most of the people where working for the fbi. If there's not enough crimes to solve, start creating crimes to justify yourself.

3
GhostBond 3 points ago +3 / -0

I think melinda gates has been the person in control of the last 3 or 4 years of the feminist narrative. When their divorce was announced I saw a picture of her and it all clicked.

She has that exact balance of just enough emotional understanding to manipulate, with plenty of sociopathy to run you over and feel good about it.

I've wondered if bill gates suddenly realized it was his money finding an entire natrative trying to destroy people like him.

7
GhostBond 7 points ago +7 / -0

I honestly never would have thought I'd see a day when they open pushed genital mutilation of your children in the US like this.

It's just straight up evil.

12
GhostBond 12 points ago +12 / -0

This was an early red pill concept.

Women act like children. When the man works the money he beings in is "their" money and how dare he try to claim it for himself.

When she gets a part time job that's "her" money and anyone suggesting it be spent on anything but her is immediately attacked.

When I was a kid I would do chores to earn a pittance allowance. It was far easier to get my mother to agree to it than my father, sure. The difference is that when my father did it I kept the money. When my mother did it she'd come into my room and take the money back when I wasn't there. I'm not kidding, I'd go to buy something with it and it was no longer there and there'd be some hand waving excuses from my mother about how she took it for my own benefit.

2
GhostBond 2 points ago +2 / -0

My understanding is that the only places that didn't have slavery at some point where tiny island nations of 100 people or less. Everyone other group of humans developed slavery.

The only difference is that in the west we actually felt bad about it and paid a large price to get rid of it...which apparently they're now using your own morality to endlessly beat you with.

2
GhostBond 2 points ago +2 / -0

Is there anything they pretend to be "fighting against" that they don't start doing themselves 2 seconds later?

Slut / Incel, same insult basically just switch the genders.

2
GhostBond 2 points ago +2 / -0

He was rightfully banned for violating Rule 16: "Do not attack entire identity groups as inferior or conspiring."
A clear violation (and also a fact): "Women as an entire group have lower representation in high IQ percentiles than Men"

This is the basis for the modern feminist narrative though.
Attacking "men" as an identity group.

Personally, I've consistently said that I'd be ok with it if we just shut both groups up.

What we've been having is that there's a designated group (feminists) who do this, then get protected from others doing it back to them.

1
GhostBond 1 point ago +1 / -0

I think he got banned for this comment in his thread:

I disagree. I think harming others is their main priority. If they cared how they were perceived, they wouldn't be calling for mass murder.
You're kind of close here. They join causes that are popular, yes. But they do that to exploit those causes to advance feminism.
Sadistic, inexcusable and attacking babies. I'm surprised they don't already do it.

On the one hand I see the point that painting others as "the group that's trying to kill you" is a problem.

On the other hand, I just ran across another feminist saying basically the same thing about men who didn't match their sexual preferences today, so is it stopping hate groups or is protecting the main hate group from competition?

10
GhostBond 10 points ago +10 / -0

I feel like the people who write these know exactly what's really going on.

From the CBE survey alone, the study found that out of 38 percent of people who said they were dissatisfied with office temperature, 64 percent were women.
Of those people who were dissatisfied, 20 percent said they were too cold during the summer, and 76 percent of that particular group were women. Women were also more likely to say they were too cold in the winter.

The obvious conclusion...women like complaining.

6
GhostBond 6 points ago +6 / -0

His 2nd comment:

Really weird coincidence how the groups doing well in America in the 1960s were the ones whose countries would do economically well in the coming decades. What are the odds?

Asians remain at the top.
Whites stay in the middle.
Blacks have stayed near the bottom. Mysteriously, decades of liberal politicking saying they will help/save them has left them exactly where they were before. Also curiously, the other favorite fantasy race of liberals (native americans) remains dead last somehow.

There's only 1 group that significantly changed their position - Indians (as in Asia and ghandi) - they skyrocketed from below average, to the #2 spot now.

8
GhostBond 8 points ago +8 / -0

Do groups obsessed with controlling others sexuality ever not turn out to be full of even worse people?

Someone described it as the motivation being "eliminating their competition" rather than stopping it.

12
GhostBond 12 points ago +12 / -0

I don't know anything about Magna Matter but I'm rather concerned that they created Eunuchs in the first place. Seems to be what they're trying to do.

Other theory is that it's a eugenics program meant to get people vulnerable to certain rhetoric to self-sterilize. It has a bad rep but honestly I find this far preferrable to the eunics thing.

27
GhostBond 27 points ago +27 / -0

I believe it was trans-related.

I honestly can't believe they brought back and successfully pushed what is basically genital mutilation under the guise of something different.

2
GhostBond 2 points ago +2 / -0

I am honestly shocked. I undetstand they're just an actor and all, but her whole vibe definetely comes off as the opposite of that.

0
GhostBond 0 points ago +2 / -2

Every useful quality of life metric shows that men are happier and live longer if they are married to women

This is a measurement of who women choose, not of what affect women have. Women choose to marry - then choose to stay married to - men who are "above" them. Men who are taller than them, who stay up later than them with energy, who aren't significantly affected by the womens childish emotional tantrums.

Naturally these kind of men would be happier and live longer regardless of whether women were around or not.

while the reverse is true for women

I suspect it's their usual trick of defining "quality of life" in male terms.

4
GhostBond 4 points ago +4 / -0

No, put in "kot" and it auto fills the rest in firefox and chrome.

view more: Next ›