- Joined
- Mar 17, 2020
They would realize it until it’s too late
Social Justice Warriors - Now With Less Feminism Sperging
- Thread starter José Mourinho
- Start date
-
Want to keep track of this thread?
Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
Create account
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2019
Awful. The original song was fun.
I enjoyed the music video to the Geri Halliwell version only because I liked ogling /fit/ Geri Halliwell. I'll take my negative ratings for admitting that.
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2020
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2018
JK Rowling, a female billionairess, gets a fair share of outcry for criticizing the transgender community. An actual female is getting abuse for speaking out towards a toxic subset of people. I find Harry Potter highly overrated, but cannot ignore the narcissism and extreme backlash being brought her way. Women are not allowed to talk against transwomen.Same, so I looked it up, found this:
JKR started out so damn accommodating. Nowadays she don’t give a fuck. I appreciate her triggering power, it’s fun dropping pics of her in random hate-posts, not saying I do, it’s simply a nice option to keep on the back burner.
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2019
You're a good man, Wulfpack! Thank you!
I really love this performance:
Her toned body in that skimpy outfit drives me crazy!
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2020
Tomboys are better than femboys, there, I said it.
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2020
JK Rowling’s supportive tweet directed at the furor over the Maya Forstarter tribunal was this bizzaro tipping point for Twitter troons. It became a litmus test, if people backed up the lie/ troon prayer: “Trans women are women,” or JKR, w/ her rather innocuous tweet paraphrased as, “Be who you will, dress however you like, sleep w/ whomever will have you, but to deny women the ability to speak about their biology etc, is wrong.” I haven’t got it word for word, but hit the main points.
From my understanding, JKR was on a “watch list” as she “liked” videos on Twitter by notorious Scottish terf, Magdalene Berns (pbuh.) The tweet paraphrased above was the last straw for the twitter troonasphere. The “Suck my Girl Dick,” & “Choke on my cock & die terf bitch,” tweets were lambasted on JKR’s page, like torrential downpour. Anyone who backed JKR was also caught in the twitter storm. Litmus test. (From what I understand it’s ongoing to this day, over a couple years old post, but haven’t checked.)
Previously so-called, independent thinkers kneeled before the troons, including Stephen King, Margaret Atwood, & Neil Gaiman. The little trolls whose careers she made, ran out to attend specially set up pressers, so they could burn the witch.
I can take or leave Harry Potter too, but can’t help admire JKR for not turning into some giant hypocrite or milque-toast cunt who goes along to get along. It’s particularly humorous when considering Gaiman, as he has historically peacocked what a Champion of Free Speech he is. Archive:
Neil Gaiman's Journal: Why defend freedom of icky speech?
archived 16 Apr 2021 18:27:46 UTC
The TL;dR of the Gaiman blog is that he’ll stand up for porny comics, but JKR saying biology is real, is Too far.
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2020
The guy in the photo has an apartment and electricity so he probably has a real job while the whore can't rely on her parent's money anymore.
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2021
Leo Kearse on the Woke Olympics - politics and wokeism in sport, athletics, football and boxing
Fish Fudge
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2021
Oh yeah, I know. Even "reasonable" people I know, when prompted on it, seem to drift off in their own mind and start mumbling "Well, I think she said some transphobic things..." or "I think she said some not very pleasant things?" without ever bothering to articulate it further.
It's utterly bizarre. It seems disturbingly self-aware - the general public has no details on that story beyond "JK Rowling is transphobic", the media doesn't have any motivation to go into specifics - the narrative would fall apart. So everyone just continues parroting "JK Rowling is transphobic" because that's literally all they can do, hoping like hell nobody actually reads what she said.
Neil Gaiman is, and always has been, a spineless simp. He's written a handful of decent books, but as soon as you start reading about his relationship with Amanda Palmer it's impossible to have any respect for him.
Hell, he never proposed to Amanda Palmer - she just showed up one day and sprung a "surprise-marriage" on him, which he just went along with because I guess women intimidate him or something.
Last edited:
Hồ Chí Minh
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2021
People have lives to lead and stuff to do; they don't have time to dig in to a rabbit hole to find out who said what exactly in which context (context that may not necessarily be immediately obvious I might add). And it sure doesn't help that Twitter's interface makes all of this hard, and that with the character limit you need to take some "niceties" as implied rather than assuming the worst.
And that's all fine actually: more important things in life ya know. It's always worked like this, and is why we have professional journalists who figure out this kind of stuff for us and give us a summary. But what's happened in recent years is that "journalism" has changed a lot.
Ben Shapiro isn't a journalist but a pseudo-journalist. Just as a pseudo-scientific quack might adopt the outward appearance of science without actually doing science, that Daily Wire site of him has the appearance of journalism without actually doing much journalism. The same applies to Vice on the left and various other outlets. Sometimes it's a mixture: Vox can do some good journalism at times, but also published pseudo-journalism. Sometimes I've even seen both mixed in the same article!
I don't expect journalists to be completely free of bias as that's impossible, and I'd argue it's not even desirable as various outlets with a certain political slants can be quite good, but just put a little bit of effort in to it ya know, that goes a long way. In the past journalism was a profession, now anyone with an internet connection can be a "journalist". Crazy cooks like Alex Jones can be a "journalist". How do you know what "good" and "bad" journalism is? Trust what the other journalist says? How do you know they're not a pseudo-journalist? It's genuinely much more difficult to figure out what's true or not. Not that this was always perfect in the past, but it sure was *better*.
"The news" is especially problematic. An article "Gladstone Gander calls Donald Duck anti-geese racist" is true and unbiased in the sense that's it's factual reporting on the indisputable fact that Gladstone called Donald a racist, but it's not really "journalism" in any serious sense, is it? There's all sorts of other problems with the news such as rare events being highlighted. I really hate the news. Don't watch the news. The news has always been a shitshow.
It's not hard to see how people walk around with the vague impression "oh, JK Rowling is transphobic". Actually, I never really looked in to what she did or didn't say either: as far as I'm concerned maybe she is, maybe she's not; I have no real opinion and to be honest I don't really care; why should I care about the opinion from some artist whose work I don't really appreciate (yeah, I don't like Harry Potter, deal with it)? I did take a look at Graham Linehan's substack some time ago (I like his work more), and he does seem to have gone off the deep end a bit. The huge amount of vitriolic backlash even over much more moderate things he said in the past probably plays part in that: it's a bit of a toxic feedback loop.
Basically what I'm trying to say is that the internet sucks and in hindsight was kind of a bad idea that made a lot of people very angry.
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2019
People are still defending Hasan, and trying to drag anyone that questions is the simian nephew of Chunk should be wearing shirts that read "Eat the Rich", while moving in next door to the rich -
I have no idea what the fuck this incoherence is supposed to mean -
What. The. Fuck.
I have no idea what the fuck this incoherence is supposed to mean -
What. The. Fuck.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2019
I got nothing -
- Joined
- Dec 6, 2020
Calling someone a "reactionary" is proof you've lost the argument.
It also reminds me of an Italian who said "They call us 'reactionaries' and they leap on us, because we are the enemies of the Red terrorists."
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2020
Ok that trump and the taliban comparison needs to stop
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2021
Gonna drop ole Songbird (lol) here again for a laugh because she’s crazy.
Every post of hers is cringe, she’s shaped like an apple with toothpicks at the bottom and takes disgusting pictures, and of course she’s an otherkin that says she used to be a ball of light.
Her posts speak for themselves so I don’t feel the need to add commentary.
(I’m sorry mods please don’t hate me for the screenshots because I am but a lowly mobilefag)
Every post of hers is cringe, she’s shaped like an apple with toothpicks at the bottom and takes disgusting pictures, and of course she’s an otherkin that says she used to be a ball of light.
Her posts speak for themselves so I don’t feel the need to add commentary.
(I’m sorry mods please don’t hate me for the screenshots because I am but a lowly mobilefag)
Attachments
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2020
Her profile pic says everything
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2021
Just for you:
Attachments
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2020
That seals the deal for me
- Joined
- Feb 4, 2018
People act like being a millionaire or billionaire is "being forced to participate in capitalism". This is an argument you should reserve for a peasant buying bread at a Walmart.