Maybe white people should sit this one out
Says the white woman firmly in the process of not sitting this one out. Seems like a better translation would be:
Maybe white people should only speak if I like what they have to say.
Anita is the living embodiment of GG.
• Get caught doing something wrong/failing/generally being shitty.
• People complain about your wrongness/failings/shittyness.
• HELP! I'M BEING HARASSED! THEY'RE HARASSING ME BECAUSE I'M WHAMAHN!
I'm always torn, when I read one of these Anita meltdown threads now. On the one hand, I like that 99% of people are telling her to go fuck herself. On the other hand I can't help but think "Oh, so when Anita does it, you see through it, but Zoe..."
This is exactly how I feel. I've heard "this might be it" so many times, I honestly don't care anymore.
Until I see "look, it's happening", it's all just background noise.
Still, every time I see something like this I get that little pang of "maybe". After a while, that little pang fucking hurts.
From xer bio:
Seeker and communicator of truths.
These fuckers talk as though, if they are unctuous and delusional enough, they'll be recalled to the mother-ship, where they can spread their douche-baggery throughout the cosmos.
God speed, Heather!
Edit: Okay, so I assumed she was complaining that the UK government says there is a connection between gender and chromosomes.
In fact, she is complaining because the UK government says that chromosomes are "assigned at birth" (god help me, I didn't even notice how ridicules that statement is).
Now, there are some who will say that i was "wrong", but we shouldn't get bogged down in that kind of toxicity. The important thing is that I had the strength and courage to start an important conversation. You may praise me now.
lingering anger over the slaying [of George Floyd]
! This claim is disputed by people who understand that an aged meth-head had a heart attack
Hey, in journalism, it's important to shoot your shot. Toobin did that, and now that his tenure at the New Yorker has reached its climax, he'll be free to try his hand at something else.
That is an interesting point. Although in this case, I think it's more likely the result of Michigan's AG regarding grammar as a part of the hetero-normative, white-supremacist, patriarchy. But it is certainly apropos of liberal thinking today.
I bet if a person were to analyze a random leftists speech patterns, they'd find a consistent substitution of individualism for collectivism, even in their grammar.
Fewer women in politics, not less.
Yeah, that is better.
No wonder Arizona turned blue.
So now their thing is to say "you stink".
These people have the minds of children. Spoiled children.
Their lives revolve around their sense of racial superiority, and if anyone, or anything interrupts that sense of superiority, they throw a tantrum and start yelling "YOU STINK!".
I swear, it makes my fucking skin crawl; all these people who've spent the last four years saying that the 2016 election was a Russian operation now talking disdainfully about undermining faith in elections.
keep that up for too long and you'll go bald.
Steven Colbert is a worthless, sniveling, little half-man.
Did they already delete it?
Edit: Yup. https://web.archive.org/web/20201103232022/https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/1323766738509586432 what a joke that rag is.
Her level of brave&strong is impressive (and hilarious), but it'll take more than that to beat Cathy Newman.
I think we're all worried. With the stakes as high as they are, it's hard not to be. Just imagining how great things could be, or how terrible they could get, it's hard not to worry.
One way or another, it'll be a relief when it's over. Two very different kinds of relief, mind you.
I've gotta say, you are answering questions directly and politely (despite us being our usual charming selves). You are on KIA2.win of all places (you know we're worse than nazis right?). You appear to be earnestly trying to redress the situation.
If you're for real, then I wish you luck. Seriously, saying "no hate-speech" to us is like saying "women only changing room" to the trannies.
Does the following constitute hate-speech:
"White people are a stain that needs to be removed."
"Men are trash. Kill all men."
If not (as I have come to expect), why not?
==============================================================
Does the following constitute hate-speech:
"The Ghostbusters reboot was terrible."
"The Last of Us 2 was terrible."
If so (as I have come to expect), why so?
For anyone who might find a use for them today:
seems like all other elections aren't real, like you're just picking between two sides of the same coin
100%, that's what it is. I'm sitting here, nerve-racked, watching the results come in for an election an ocean away. And it's because this one feel like it really matters.
If Donald Trump wins resoundingly, it speaks to the disconnect the left have with the electorate, and without having to worry about being reelected he could conduct a full-on offensive against the new left.
What I hope for most is a resounding loss for Democrats, akin to the one Labour had in the U.K, but with Donald Trump at the helm rather than some spineless, foppish, little feminist. Oh, the fun we could have.
Best of luck from the UK.
He may not be my president, but the sight of Donald Trump standing up to liberals, enraging them with his mere presence, and then making fun of them at a rally, has been one of the things keeping me sane over the last four years.
Feels like more than just a U.S election on the line. Every country in the Western world has been affected by the new left, and with the antifa/blm peacefulness, this election feels like a kind of referendum on wokeness.
Come on man, it's not like this one's a ridicules leap.
I assume the store was just out of hair-dye that month.
Set this as yours.
Hard disagree. The problem isn't that men are marrying women who plan to do this to them. The problem is that EVERY women can do this. At any moment, on a whim, risking nothing.
When a man and woman get married in the Western world, they are making two very different levels of commitment. The woman is committing to be married to this man for as long as it pleases her to do so. The man is committing to being financially beholden to this woman for as long as SHE likes.
If, at any point for the rest of their lives, she decides that she would be happier if she didn't have to look at your fucking face every day, she can demand a divorce. At the end of which, she'll get half of everything you've built so far, plus a monthly salary (for having allowed you to be married to her in the first place).
If there are kids, she gets the kids (don't worry though, you still get to pay for the kids. You don't get to raise them, but you get to pay for them).
If there's a house, she gets the house (I mean, she's got the kids, she has to have the house. Right?).
If there's a car, she gets the car (how else is she gonna transport the kids to and from the house?).
If there's a dog, she gets the fucking dog (she never even liked that dog).
IF, on the other hand, you decide, at any point, that you are soul-crushingly unhappy, and that you're gonna kill yourself if you don't get away from this woman, then you can demand a divorce. At the end of which, she'll get half of everything you've built so far, plus a monthly salary, plus the kids, the child support, the house, the car, and the fucking dog.
The problem here isn't that more and more men are behaving as though marriage is a truly terrible deal for them, it's that marriage is a truly terrible deal for men.
No matter how wonderful this woman might be, this deal doesn't get any better.