Please send me an archived link and I'll put it back up. If it's got a blue checkmark, provide a link please.
Edit: OP provided a link: https://archive.is/Feyce
People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.
RULES:
Please send me an archived link and I'll put it back up. If it's got a blue checkmark, provide a link please.
Edit: OP provided a link: https://archive.is/Feyce
Is there any explanation to why these people think that way? Is it really pettiness or do they have some kind of point (even if its a bad one)?
I just cannot wrap my head around being so sad and miserable.
No war but class war. Luigi gets it.
"If there's war between the sexes then there'll be no people left..."
My Gen Z daughter is straight but she hates men because the majority of the ones she has met at school or work are misogynistic and creepy.
Women are already choosing to be alone because men are already this way
Funnily enough, women choosing to be alone also pisses those guys off. Basically, women having autonomy pisses them off.
Women need to stop choosing to be alone.
And start choosing to keep around women friends, and we'll-armed.
These pieces of genetic filth don't believe no is a valid answer.
Right wing men aren't fucking, and this entire movement is pure cope for that fact.
There's enough people on both sides fucking. Every side you can think of, everyone, everywhere, is fucking. World pop tracker keeps running up.
Back when I attended church, I shit you not, the preacher from the pulpit asked the congregation who was having the most kids (the sermon I think was based on kids & families). Then he said "The Mos-lems, the Mos-lems (Muslims) are having the most kids & they have large families." If I remember correctly, I think he was making the point that if Muslims have many many kids & faithful Christians have fewer, eventually, there will be more Muslims than Christians & this was a big problem; Christians need to devote themselves to having more children and "raising them right", or the Muslims will become the majority & "win", and Christianity would dwindle & die out.
And here's the thing, I guess strictly technically speaking he might not be entirely wrong, but that doesn't make it right. If you're just breeding to get butts in pews, idk, feels a little dirty to me.
My main takeaway from that sermon, which I have told multiple friends & now am telling all of you: a war fought with vaginas is a war in which everyone loses. Your opposition is dumb as fuck. You, too, are dumb as fuck. Don't go popping out babies just to pop out more babies, take it from me you're not really all that special, stop it, get some help.
It's more than a little bit dirty. If you bring someone into this world for any purpose other than to love them, it is existentially criminal, to me.
I know this isn't exactly a brave opinion around here.
Well he could just appreciate his culture and views it in a good light, they likely view him in the same way, its human nature to other people we dont fully take the time to understand. Love and hate are two sides of the same coin, our love of our own culture turns into hate of another due to human nature, a ying and a yang.
Okay, now time to take another hit.
Indeed, happy 4/20, my dude.
There's a lot of tribalism & you're right, the Mos-lems are probably viewing him in the same way & intentionally fucking, having large families to "win" some culture war. But I think cultural wars are ultimately won through the enforcement of...reality...and the victory of good ideas & common sense. Not religion. Just general goodwill & love, idk, I really need to sleep for work tomorrow.
Enjoy your weed. 🍃
bro's just gonna make women louder. nobody wants to be with someone that says "deus volt"
Unfortunately, I’m afraid there are a whole lot of “bro’s” that want just that.
"Deus Vult" is a Latin phrase meaning "God wills it," historically used as a rallying cry during the Crusades. It signifies the belief that military actions were sanctioned by divine will. The term "crusade" first referred to military expeditions undertaken by European Christians in the 11th, 12th, and 13th centuries to the Holy Land. The conflicts to which the term is applied have been extended to include other campaigns initiated, supported and sometimes directed by the Latin Church with varying objectives, mostly religious, sometimes political. These differed from previous Christian religious wars in that they were considered a penitential exercise, and so earned participants remittance from penalties for all confessed sins. What constituted a crusade has been understood in diverse ways, particularly regarding the early Crusades, and the precise definition remains a matter of debate among contemporary historian.
But, basically, hundreds of thousands of people were murdered and tortured because some psychopath decided they were carrying out “god’s will”—aka "I’m using religion as an excuse to exercise my desire to control and subdue people to my ends”.
History is like a mystery book that you've read the last chapters first and know how it's going to turn out. The colonialism done by European powers hadn't yet happened at the time of Crusades. In fact had the various warring factions in Europe hadn't found common cause, their religion and culture would've been wiped out by Muslim colonialism. Yup, the Caliphate was conquering the Christian lands in Iberia and Anatolia and colonizing them. This is what triggered the Crusades.
The Crusades were an anti-colonialism movement, and if they hadn't found something to unite over, then their cultures, languages, and religion would've been wiped out and the whole thing would've been a minor footnote in history. They had managed
In the end, the Muslim colonization of Iberia was defeated (with the Spanish and Portuguese becoming brutal colonizers afterwards) while the Byzantine Empire ultimately fell to Muslim conquest and colonization. Today, there's only a few hundred thousand Christians left in Anatolia because of assimilation and genocide. Some of that has been relatively recent... you ever hear of the Armenian genocide?
So yeah, not exactly a clear cut good guys vs. bad guys kind of thing as popular narratives suggest. The crusades were triggered by Muslim aggression into Christian lands. While that doesn't excuse the atrocities committed by the Crusaders, the Crusades also don't excuse the atrocities committed by Muslim empires either. History is complex, and reductive bias towards europe=bad or religion=bad just results in not actually learning anything from history.
Agreed. In the end, there has been too much suffering and atrocities in the name of religion (and politics). People burned alive, beheaded, drawn and quartered. And Kilmar Abrego Garcia torn from his family and sent to El Salvador for now particular reason. And the US saying, “Too bad, he’s not coming back”.
Many women are perfectly content being alone and childless. That’s why these guys are actually angry. They need women. Women don’t need them. Rather than improve themselves to appear more appealing to women, they want to enslave and drag women down to their level.
Politicians looks at numbers. There are lots of degenerates like this, so many you can count on their vote if you entertain their abuse. Politicians see this is an unpopular choice to make with women so now they want to keep women from voting.
These fuckers should be killed.
The goal is to create a world that serves the needs of as many people as possible. These fuckers instead want to enslave everyone to as few as possible. They are missing the point. Every time that has happened in history it has led to collapse.
I just have so much hate in me right now.
Actually, I think a lot of women like having a man in their life. I know I do. My relationship with my “man friend" is not traditional. We have separate residences. We spend a lot of time with each other: holidays, overnights, entertaining, travelling, etc. To me it’s perfect. Obviously this wouldn’t be ideal if children were part of the plan, but they are not.
However, women are NOT incubators. Women are NOT here for men to get their “rocks off”. Women are NOT men’s servants. Women fought long and hard for the right to vote! American politics has begun a campaign to strip women of the fundamental right to vote. So, yah, I’m feeling the hate too, muusemuuse...
How do I double upvote?
You need more than one account.
But that's kinda cheating.
Of course he's a fucking pastor.
Deus Vomitus
Universal suffrage is not god's design
Weeeeeeeell, looks like I know who to not listen to when he comes spreading poison about a false god.
Yeah, what happened to everyone being equal before God?
Some are more equal than others, I guess. Anyone who can put up with that line in the bible about not permitting women to be over men is missing out on some of life's more fun adventures.
Stuff like this always reminds me of this quote.
"Think of the stupidest person you know. Then realize alot of people are even dumber than that."
Damn, because I really want a loud, violent woman. 🥵
I have this sneaking suspicion they are perfectly fine with being alone as opposed to being with an asshole, especially one that looks like that.
They won't be alone.
They'll have other women.
Or they can share the one dude who showers regularly and doesn't listen to incel nonsense
I'm already alone, and I'm just fine this way, thank you.
Fortunately I don't live in Douchebaglandia.
yea well it is good that these guys come with built-in litmus papers now rather than hiding it, makes it easier for women to avoid them
sounds like the other way a round, women are waking up and recognizing incels as creeps.
They need to start waking up and buying guns.
woman here
I 100% would rather die alone than date somebody like this
Man here. I would 100% choose dying alone over manipulating some poor woman beaten down by society's misogyny and trying to subjugate and gaslight her with incel treatment. That probably sounds extreme to these freaks, but my eventual partner will be completely equal and we'll have a better relationship because of it.
Father here, I would 100% rather my daughter die alone than date someone like this.
It's not real life. It's the fucking social media platform formerly known as Twitter. Nothing there is real. It's all just bullshit.
News flash: women aren't the ones complaining about a "loneliness epidemic". They've already learned how to live alone.
Men in general aren't either. It's just incels. Whenever the talk comes around to them there will always be the inevitable "but let's try to understand their motives". It is an ideology of sociopathy and they chose to to adhere to it, not because they are lonely but because they are awful persons.
One step further, even. Women take responsibility for their own emotions, and filling their own needs. So if they feel lonely, they create community, in friends. What I hear, when I hear "loneliness epidemic in men" is men expecting women to tend to or serve their emotions and they aren't capable of tending to their own emotions. Like a little baby, I don't know any woman who wants to be responsible for their partners emotions, AND their own. Because it's not like these men are going to be looking after the womens emotions, the same.
It's emotional immaturity. Borderline, sometimes actual emotional abuse. You are supposed to be responsible for filling your own needs, as an adult. I feel like men have just never stopped and noticed all that women do (or ended up being socialised or forced to do).
I just watched a tik tok that talked about women being called irrational for worrying if everything is together at the holidays, they do everything. Then if they're walking out the door and worrying if everyone has everything, the husband says "you worry too much, everything will be fine". Everything is fine, because she's planned and prepared for every contingency, and it's entirely overlooked, it's unseen, unacknowledged work.
And I can't help but see the link between what has been baseline accepted / perceived as what women "do" or "women's responsibilities" in relationships for men, predominantly all the house work, holiday planning, knowing stock levels and needs, kids / friends / family birthdays and needs, doctors appointments, clothing.... I can't understand how that became a basic expectation that one person in the partnership do all of that, and then, women are disengaging from relationships with men, and instead of looking at the environment they created for women, that they wanted to no longer be engaged in that, they doubled down and shouted about how it's a strangers (all women's?) job to fix their feelings, while they roll around wailing on the floor (I imagine).
Ultimately men have been conditioned to not appreciate or see what women do, and to feel like their "manliness" is tied to how much they subjugate another person. And ultimately both of those social dynamics serve capitalism and are predominantly strong in extreme evangelical religions. It makes the rich richer if men are emotionally immature and taught to oppress women. Then women provide free labour to capitalism, emotional support, children and home. If capitalism had to make space for or compensate the work women do, raising children, it would go broke, overnight. It's not that providing the next generation is a worthless task, it's that the division of wealth is being hoarded by a handful of people and they violently don't want to let go of that.
If someone gets Knickers in a knot, because they know one woman or one man who isn't like that, you missed my point and that doesn't detract from my point, I'm not saying if they all don't do this, it doesn't hold water, obviously lots are disengaging, currently. Some in a healthy way, some not. I just find all this stuff fascinating to talk about, and the fact it's hidden from you, you have to piece it together yourself. We're all being collectively manipulated, on a societal level to, essentially, funnel money to a handful of people. It blows my mind how deep it goes. This whole nuclear family, is relatively new. It's against our nature and our grain. And it's very much not working.
Women have cats. Checkmate!