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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
Joe Manchin did not turn black communities into a riot filled battleground involving burning down the businesses there.
Joe Manchin did not triple the homicide rate in black communities with his politicking.
Joe Manchin did not demand that bail be removed for violent offenders so they could immediately be released back into black communities.
Etc etc etc...
Is Joe Manchin better for black communities than democrat politicians?
who does, really?
With what the left has done to black communities I'm reminded of - With friends like these, who needs enemies?
The racial groups that seem to be doing better than everyone else seem to be the ones the left can't get involved in their politicking.
Spot on description!
Every one of their narratives is self projection. Objectifying him isn't overly concerning to me, that's how it is, but the reality of their complaints is that they're not about stopping the thing they just want to do it themselves.
"Objectification Bad" -> "Wait I meant when someone else was doing it, it's my turn! Woooo! Objectification train all aboard!". It would just be kinda funny if wasn't accompanied by such serious nutcases.
If you remember it was actually the vaccine execs that went against him not the other way around...announced the vaccine right after announcing biden was the new president.
The people fanatically pushing the vaccine are scarier than the vaccine itself for 99% of people.
I don't think it's his yacht, he rents one when he wants it.