Anyone ever notice how when a disaster occurs, whether it's something like this or an airline accident, Pete Buttigieg is nowhere to be found?? π€ Someone suggested searching Pete's home for a personal Sub or scuba gear that Pete's doing all the sabotaging?? π
shareHe's off getting his butt gigged, if you catch my drift...
shareJust casual homophobia I see. Would you comment that sort of thing about a heterosexual politician?
Do you joke about women getting fucked in the ass?
That seemed to really upset you. Why do you think that is?
shareIt didn't really "upset" me as such, it's just showing an obvious hateful attitude towards gay people - only viewing them in terms of their sexual interests.
shareThat's how they present themselves though. Have you ever met a gay person before? They have to announce within the first few moments that they are gay. Then they remind you and everyone around that they are gay.
Have you told your husband how upset you get over this topic?
>That's how they present themselves though. Have you ever met a gay person before?
No, they do not. How does Buttigieg present himself like this? I know many gay people, or have known many, and they do not "present themselves" like that.
>Have you told your husband how upset you get over this topic?
You seem to hold your christianity to your heart. Do you think it's acceptable to throw baseless accusations at people? Do you think that is moral behaviour?
What do you mean, accusation? "To accuse" means to charge with fault or blame. That sounds awfully intolerant of your shirt lifting pals.
sharebaseless claims then. Do you think that's acceptable behaviour?
And how are they my "pals", specifically anymore than any other particular group?
It's just that you seem quite keen to speak on their behalf.
shareIt's more noting that some people seem quite keen to throw out insults based on the idea that gay people are permanently promiscuous, especially when it's a political opponent. Yet they wouldn't hold those types of insults for anyone in heterosexual relationships.
shareIn my experience they absolutely are more promiscuous. That's to be expected when their entire identity revolves around their sexual proclivities.
share>That's to be expected when their entire identity revolves around their sexual proclivities.
This is an assumption made by you about how all gay people see themselves.
"shirt lifting pals."
This went over my head - how is this gay?
A "shirt lifter" is a male queer. Think about it.
sharemust be a zoomer thing...
shareNah. I first heard it from a Brit 20+ years ago, and we're both in our 50's now.
shareFair enough. I remember someone at a Queen concert shouting at Freddie Mercury calling him a "poof" and Freddie stopping the show to call that dude out.
They call a cigarette a "fag."
Must be he wasn't feeling the "Pride" that day? I mean, we know soddomites have no shame, so why not embrace the label?
shareWhen I said "that's how they present themselves" I meant they have to inform everyone they are gay. Buttigieg doesnt present himself like what?
So you are saying you're not gay?
>When I said "that's how they present themselves" I meant they have to inform everyone they are gay. Buttigieg doesnt present himself like what?
How does he present himself like that?
>So you are saying you're not gay?
I am not gay
only viewing them in terms of their sexual interests
And how did they do that? How does Pete Buttigieg do this?
shareUse your brain.
_______________________________________________
Current MC Posters with B1cKsurN Derangement Syndrome
Skavau
Keelai
robocat893
Not an answer. I reject the premise that protesting for civil rights means you're doing that, nor how that somehow reflects on Pete and how he presents himself.
shareDude you went off the rails 3 posts ago. Maybe the other posters here entertain your purposeful idiocy, but I see right fucking through it. Stop playing dumb with me, or go away.
_______________________________________________
Current MC Posters with B1cKsurN Derangement Syndrome
Skavau
Keelai
robocat893
I'll do whatever the fuck I like:
Not an answer. I reject the premise that protesting for civil rights means you're doing that, nor how that somehow reflects on Pete and how he presents himself.
Skavauβs whole M.O. is to play The Hatchling. He fits the definition perfectly, check it out: https://youtu.be/nxQqaG4gl9A?si=m5wgG8jhglHcM1AZ
shareUsers in this thread are specifically claiming that Pete Buttigieg, apparently just because he is gay is apparently peacocking his sexuality and thus this somehow justifies crude sexual mockery towards him that they would not use against heterosexual politicians they disagree with.
share"Users in this thread are specifically claiming that Pete Buttigieg, apparently just because he is gay is apparently peacocking his sexuality and thus this somehow justifies crude sexual mockery towards him"
I think that sums it up quite well, actually.
That was brilliant, thanks. And yes, he does do that.
And for the record, anyone that questions whether gay men are more promiscuous deserves nothing but ridicule. Unless they are LITERALLY 12 or under.
>And for the record, anyone that questions whether gay men are more promiscuous deserves nothing but ridicule. Unless they are LITERALLY 12 or under.
"It seems that way" is not remotely a credible argument. Nor would even being more promiscious mean all you do is peacock about being gay to others, as other users in this thread suggest.
Would you personally make jokes about a female politician you don't like getting fucked up the ass if they're absent or poor regarding some issue?
Gay men are massively more promiscous than normal people.
This is known by anyone that lived though the AIDS epidemic.
The poster that called you a "HATCHLING" was right on. That linked video was right on. Your silly fake game is clear to everyone.
>Gay men are massively more promiscous than normal people.
"It seems that way" is not remotely a credible argument. Nor would even being more promiscious mean all you do is peacock about being gay to others, as other users in this thread suggest. Is a heterosexual male who has frequent casual sex making his identity all about being straight? Plenty of straight men do this.
Would you personally make jokes about a female politician you don't like getting fucked up the ass if they're absent or poor regarding some issue?
You asking for evidence of gay men being more promiscous is absurd.
You are absurd.
"It seems that way" is not remotely a credible argument. Nor would even being more promiscious mean all you do is peacock about being gay to others, as other users in this thread suggest. Is a heterosexual male who has frequent casual sex making his identity all about being straight? Plenty of straight men do this.
Would you personally make jokes about a female politician you don't like getting fucked up the ass if they're absent or poor regarding some issue?
You asking for evidence of gay men being more promiscous is absurd.
You are absurd.
"It seems that way" is not remotely a credible argument. Nor would even being more promiscious mean all you do is peacock about being gay to others, as other users in this thread suggest. Is a heterosexual male who has frequent casual sex making his identity all about being straight? Plenty of straight men do this.
Would you personally make jokes about a female politician you don't like getting fucked up the ass if they're absent or poor regarding some issue?
You asking for evidence of gay men being more promiscous is absurd.
You are absurd.
"It seems that way" is not remotely a credible argument. Nor would even being more promiscious mean all you do is peacock about being gay to others, as other users in this thread suggest. Is a heterosexual male who has frequent casual sex making his identity all about being straight? Plenty of straight men do this.
Would you personally make jokes about a female politician you don't like getting fucked up the ass if they're absent or poor regarding some issue?
A good faith person would accept gay man being more promiscious as a given.
shareI am going to just keep spamming until you answer
"It seems that way" is not remotely a credible argument. Nor would even being more promiscious mean all you do is peacock about being gay to others, as other users in this thread suggest. Is a heterosexual male who has frequent casual sex making his identity all about being straight? Plenty of straight men do this.
Would you personally make jokes about a female politician you don't like getting fucked up the ass if they're absent or poor regarding some issue?
Do you accept that gay men are far more promiscious than normal people?
shareI don't know about "far more". But as my point was, being promiscious doesn't mean you necessarily wear your sexual identity on your sleeve. Is a heterosexual male who has frequent casual sex making his identity all about being straight? Plenty of straight men do this.
sharehttps://giphy.com/gifs/disney-frozen-review-WrNfErHio7ZAc
shareI don't know about "far more". But as my point was, being promiscious doesn't mean you necessarily wear your sexual identity on your sleeve. Is a heterosexual male who has frequent casual sex making his identity all about being straight? Plenty of straight men do this.
Going to answer?
Answer?? For what?? What you're asking for is absurd indeed.. π
shareHow is it absurd?
Also your OP is based on a lie. Pete Buttigieg has literally been responding to this.
Identity politics means that identifying as a member of a sexual minority group means that that is your identity. Being lefties both you and buttrigieg embrace that.
Do you mind if I call you Mr Hatchling?
>Being lefties both you and buttrigieg embrace that.
Not sure when I embraced that at all.
All I've done is note that Pete Buttigieg is gay. Is him saying or somehow signalling that he's gay automatically mean it becomes all he is?
Here the hatchling pretends to be unware of IDENTITY POLITICS.
shareNo, I said I don't subscribe to them. Answer my question:
All I've done is note that Pete Buttigieg is gay. Is him saying or somehow signalling that he's gay automatically mean it becomes all he is?
You dont think Pete shoves his sexuality in everyone's face?
shareNo.
You think he does?
How does he do this?
Are we talking about the same person?
This is the guy who announced he was taking maternity leave and introduced his husband on national television.
When did he introduce his husband? When he was running for president?
When heterosexual candidates are seen with their husband or wife on TV, is that "shoving their sexuality in everyone's face"?
How is taking parental leave "shoving it in everyone's face"?
Your denial is noted.
That is irrelevant to the point about Buttigieg.
Yet, you are acting like your claim to not do it, means something to him.
Very boring. And stupid.
Denial of... how I view the world?
>That is irrelevant to the point about Buttigieg.
What point? He's gay. So? How is that evidence that he only views himself in those terms?
>Yet, you are acting like your claim to not do it, means something to him.
When did I say it did? None of us mean anything to Buttigieg. I'm simply asking how him being gay means it all he is, and views himself as.
Also there's no evidence that he is especially promiscious.
Here the hatchling pretends to have never been exposed to Identity Politics before.
THis puts the normal person in the position of having to explain a widespread and well know political system, while the hatchling acts like a completely ignorant person and just asks stupid questions to bog down the discussion and to undermine any point that reasonable people would try to reach.
Of course the ignorance is completely fake. THe hatchling is being completely dishonest.
All it takes is a complete lack of ethics and morality and human shame.
>Here the hatchling pretends to have never been exposed to Identity Politics before.
I never said that. I said that *I* don't subscribe to it.
>THis puts the normal person in the position of having to explain a widespread and well know political system, while the hatchling acts like a completely ignorant person and just asks stupid questions to bog down the discussion and to undermine any point that reasonable people would try to reach.
No, this sounds like you extrapolating based on a basic misunderstanding of what I actually said.
>All it takes is a complete lack of ethics and morality and human shame.
Do you think accusing people of being pedophiles on no grounds represents a complete lack of ethics?
Do you admit to knowing that gay men are massively more promiscious than normal people?
shareI don't know about "massively more". But as my point was, being promiscious doesn't mean you necessarily wear your sexual identity on your sleeve. Is a heterosexual male who has frequent casual sex making his identity all about being straight? Plenty of straight men do this.
Thanks for demonstrating your complete refusal to engage in good faith.
shareI don't know about "massively more". But as my point was, being promiscious doesn't mean you necessarily wear your sexual identity on your sleeve. Is a heterosexual male who has frequent casual sex making his identity all about being straight? Plenty of straight men do this.
My "refusal" apparently being not jumping to your demands. You don't get to dictate to people what they should do.
When are you going to answer any of my questions?
When you give me any indications you are serious or honest.
Anyone not living under a rock knows that gay men are massively more promiscious than normal people. By refusing to give a clear agreement to that, you are revealing yourself to be a bad faith actor.
Mr Hatchling.
>Anyone not living under a rock knows that gay men are massively more promiscious than normal people. By refusing to give a clear agreement to that, you are revealing yourself to be a bad faith actor.
I await actual CONTEMPORARY statistical data on this.
And I repeat my point: But as my point was, being promiscious doesn't mean you necessarily wear your sexual identity on your sleeve. Is a heterosexual male who has frequent casual sex making his identity all about being straight? Plenty of straight men do this.
And as I asked again in another comment, that you ignored:
Do you think accusing people of being pedophiles on no grounds represents a complete lack of ethics or not?
You asking for evidence of gay men being more promiscous is absurd.
You are absurd.
>I think that sums it up quite well, actually.
Sums what up? What are you claiming here?
What's the basis of the obnoxious jokes about Pete Buttigieg here if not that?
I thought it was quite clear that I was agreeing with you. But your spergy insistence on debating every post must have clouded your judgement.
shareSorry, I thought you were being sarcastic about me.
shareThis is another thread in which Skavau - the screeching woke liar who runs to the mods to censor those who call out his dirty tricks - gets the shit kicked out of him again.
More and more people are onto his schtick, heβs running out of unsuspecting innocents to prey on.
Skavau, reply to this with more of your tedious straw-questions. Goβ¦
>This is another thread in which Skavau - the screeching woke liar who runs to the mods to censor those who call out his dirty tricks - gets the shit kicked out of him again.
You literally replied to a user who said they *agreed with me*, and that means I'm getting the "shit kicked out of me"?
And I "run to the moderators" to specifically deal with baseless, hateful accusations by you against me. What does this have to do with any "dirty tricks" I supposedly employ?
Yes they do cause that on their own. Be he seems resistant to facts.
shareAnd how does Pete Buttigieg do this? Going to answer, or just whine?
sharewhen did I say Pete did it? I said gays in general do it.
shareAnd how do they do this "in general"? I reject the premise that protesting for civil rights means you're doing that, or that a majority of gay people do this.
sharecivil rights? what the heck are you talking about?
I assume you're going to claim that the history of LGBT people protesting publicly means they make their sexuality the entirety of their personality. And that the majority of LGBT people somehow regularly do pride parades, or something.
shareI think you are getting our exchange mixed up with another discussion you were having. I never said anything about protesting or civil rights.
shareSo how do "gays in general" make their sexual proclivity their sole personality marker?
shareBy repeating "I'm gay" "I"m gay" "I'm gay" incessantly. Why do you need this explained repeatedly?
shareAnd who does this? You think most gays do this?
shareHe doesnβt, heβs playing The Hatchling.
Hereβs how it works: https://youtu.be/nxQqaG4gl9A?si=ut-YrSGuz2_6U8X1
Most gay people do not scream about their sexuality all the time. It's a baseless bullshit claim rooted in bigotry.
shareEnough do for it to have become a stereotype, and endless grotesque βPride paradesβ are further cementing it.
But continue to try and gaslight people into thinking none of that is happeningβ¦
Plenty of heterosexual chuds are openly and brazenly enthusiastic about their sexuality too. But are you saying from this, from gay pride culture that you'll assume that every single homosexual is exactly like that?
But are you saying from this, from gay pride culture that you'll assume that every single homosexual is exactly like that?
Plenty of heterosexual chuds are openly and brazenly enthusiastic about their sexuality too.
>No. Straw question.
Okay. So why are people assuming that of Buttigieg? A guy who isn't really a gay stereotype at all.
>π€£ Thatβs it, keep trying to gaslightβ¦
Sorry, are you denying this?
Apology not accepted, lying gas-bitch.
Copy paste your last post if itβs true that you want Buttigieg inside you. Goβ¦
>No. Straw question.
Okay. So why are people assuming that of Buttigieg? A guy who isn't really a gay stereotype at all.
>π€£ Thatβs it, keep trying to gaslightβ¦
Sorry, are you denying this?
Notice how Skavau canβt argue your points so invents fake opinions and attributes them to you, so that he can argue those instead and create the illusion of victory for himself.
Heβs a regime bitch and pathological gaslighter who uses crude sophistry. Once again, it stunningly backfires on him.
And when all his other bullshit fails, he falls back on playing dumb/coy.
shareVery interesting. Thanks for the response.
shareAnd what "fake opinions" have I attributed to you?
shareWhen did I say that?
shareThat's what the user you're responding to is alleging I'm doing to you.
shareDid I agree with him? no, I said "interesting" Now stop trying to make an argument where there is none.
shareFair enough. You should know that said user spends his life following me around on the forum. Quite literally.
shareAsking you questions about a position you never asserted is classic Skavau. Heβs all sophistry, zero substance.
Skavau, rewrite history to make yourself out to be the victim even though youβre a pathological deceiver who preys on honest users. Goβ¦
You originally alleged that I was somehow misrepresenting, strawmanning, u/Blade13. I then asked you (and him) how I am doing so and he denied that I was actually doing this.
You clearly operate on a script when it comes to what I say in that it doesn't matter what the topic is, what the argument is, you will always accuse me of the same identical things.
My pleasure. He predates on people who argue in good faith and unloads his basic bitch bag of rhetorical tricks on them, always in service of the regime, including woke.
I initially thought Skavau was a sincere interlocutor and engaged him, but it soon became apparent that heβs a serpent on a gaslighting mission.
Now, if I see him predating on an unsuspecting victim Iβll warn them of his intentions and tactics. Heβs really pissed about this and has run to the mods to try and get me shut down π€·π»ββοΈ
You originally alleged that I was somehow misrepresenting, strawmanning, u/Blade13. I then asked you (and him) how I am doing so and he denied that I was actually doing this.
You clearly operate on a script when it comes to what I say in that it doesn't matter what the topic is, what the argument is, you will always accuse me of the same identical things. So far as I can tell, in your mind, any objection to any right-wing/reactionary consensus positions is in itself "hatchling" in that you regard all of your claims about the world to be beyond rebuke. They can't be wrong and anyone that would challenge them in any sense, according to you, is just "hatchling". That is you think everything in your worldview is self-evident. This is my assessment.
>Now, if I see him predating on an unsuspecting victim Iβll warn them of his intentions and tactics. Heβs really pissed about this and has run to the mods to try and get me shut down π€·π»ββοΈ
No, you know exactly why I contacted the moderators in the past.
No, my worldview is just a reflection of reality, your worldview is distorted and perverted by your cultβs ideological lens.
Thereβs no equivalence between you and I. Youβre a lying sack of shit and an authoritarian censor, and as a result youβve forfeited any rights to respect and decent treatment, and itβs my pleasure to expose you to your latest targets and foil your gaslighting attempts.
>No, my worldview is just a reflection of reality, your worldview is distorted and perverted by your cultβs ideological lens.
You continue to know very little about my actual worldview.
>Thereβs no equivalence between you and I. Youβre a lying sack of shit and an authoritarian censor, and as a result youβve forfeited any rights to respect and decent treatment, and itβs my pleasure to expose you to your latest targets and foil your gaslighting attempts.
Are the mods here "authoritarian censors" for deleting your posts that I reported? Do you think a community owner who bans racial hatred, for instance, is an "authoritarian censor"?
Dude. NO ONE IS FALLING FOR YOUR SHIT.
shareWhat shit, exactly?
I am challenging the presuppositions that Melton expresses.
the shit we have discussed many times. The shit accurately accused you of.
That shit.
Hell, teh way you are playing dumb right now, that shit.
Loser.
Playing dumb about what? Melton continues to spend his life harassing me, and suggesting that having rules equals fascism.
I will take any lessons on morality from you. You think it's acceptable to accuse people you don't like of being pedophiles. You have no morals.
Stop playing dumb. It's very rude.
That is you being the bad guy. You are the bad guy.
I'm sure you have some sociopathic troll boi game in your mind, where you justify your behavior and count it a score when you provoke someone to rage.
That is just a manifestation of your lack of empathy. You are fucked in the head. Your excuses in your mind for your behavior is your delusion.
>Stop playing dumb. It's very rude.
Playing dumb about what? Objecting to being called a pedophile is sociopathic?
I'm the bad guy, yet it's perfectly fair for others to accuse me of being a pedophile? I made them do that?
This isn't hard. I think you're a piece of shit, but if someone called you a pedophile that would be obviously wrong. Why can't you acknowledge the same?
>That is just a manifestation of your lack of empathy. You are fucked in the head. Your excuses in your mind for your behavior is your delusion.
My "behaviour" that you apparently cannot name.
Everyone sees through this lying sack of shitβs deceitful tactics and calls him out, yet he still plays dumb and plays the victim.
His lying has become pathological, his deceit is second nature because he first lies to himself - his cult requires that of him.
Itβs quite fascinating watching him run around in circles to avoid staring himself in the face.
What am I lying about here exactly?
Am I lying about when you accused me of being a pedophile?
Is asking you if you think libel laws are fascist a lie? Does asking you if you think that moderators having rules constitute lying?
You can shove your Hatchling questions back up your ass, and I didnβt accuse you of being a pedophile, I asked you to confirm the rumours, which you did.
shareI did no such thing. First of all, there are no rumours. Another user making shit up is not a rumour. It's not based on anything. Second of all, you editing your posts after I have replied to you is not "confirming" anything. You think that type of conduct is moral?
You were echoing baseless claims of being a pedophile made by other users.
Is asking you if you think libel laws are fascist a lie? Does asking you if you think that moderators having rules constitute lying?
Youβve cried wolf so often your attempt to rewrite history is futile. I asked you to confirm the pedophile rumours about you and you did. Donβt cry about it now.
Now, make a load of excuses to try and absolve yourself. Goβ¦
What history am I rewriting? You kept implying, repeatedly that I am a pedophile. The moderators, albeit reluctantly, removed at least two of your posts for doing this.
>I asked you to confirm the pedophile rumours about you and you did. Donβt cry about it now.
I did no such thing. You editing your posts after I replied to suggest that any reply by me constitutes admittance is deliberately deceptive. You are knowingly lying about what I've said.
You have no grounds to preach a moral highground after that behaviour.
Skavau ran to the mods? That doesn't sound good.
Maybe I was right about him being a fancy man.
Oh he ran screaming to the mods to get me shut down. Heβs a nasty Little Hitler while squealing about fascism.
Skavau, use some more bullshit sophistry to try and make excuses for your shameful pro-censorship position. Goβ¦
Do you think libel laws are an expression of fascism?
share>Skavau, use some more bullshit sophistry to try and make excuses for your shameful pro-censorship position. Goβ¦
How is this sophistry? Your position implies that any forum moderator or website owner who deletes any content from another user is fascist.
I went to the moderators because he was baselessly accusing me of being a pedophile. Do you think I should accept that level of conduct?
sharelink?
shareOk I read through that. That's not cool at all. Melton is definitely wrong for doing that.
shareThank you.
You are the first person I have interacted with who obviously disagrees with me politically on here to acknowledge this.
Doing what? I asked Skavau if the rumours about him were true.
He is pretending that I accused him of being a pedophile, which he has used as a pretext to get me shut down.
There are no rumours. Another user making shit up is not a rumour. At no point did I ever say that the "rumours" are true. You edited your posts, and you did it frequently, to suggest that any response I made would constitute an admittance of being a pedophile. That is dishonest behaviour.
You think that's acceptable conduct?
I saw the exchange between the two of you. You kept telling him to stay away from kids and there were a few posts that you suspiciously deleted.
shareBlade, I did not delete any of my posts - the mods did after Skavau went squealing to them.
It should tell you something that he pointed you to an exchange where his posts are still in place and several of mine were deleted.
I did tell Skavau repeatedly to stay away from kids because when I asked him to confirm the rumours he did so. Call me cautious but given his creepy behaviour across the site, the rumours, and his confirmation I just donβt want that fucker anywhere near vulnerable kids.
"I did tell Skavau repeatedly to stay away from kids because when I asked him to confirm the rumours he did so."
How did he confirm them? Be specific. Do you have any proof?
That seems damning to me.
shareHow is that damning?
Melton edited his post after I replied.
Do you really think that is moral conduct?
When you combine that with Skavauβs passionate defence of Disney forcing homosexual activity into childrenβs entertainment - as well has his creepy behaviour across the site and constant defence of Woke (an ideology that fosters pedophilia) - it doesnβt paint a flattering picture.
Iβve told him to keep away from kids, but heβs adamant that he wonβt stop.
I tried.
>When you combine that with Skavauβs passionate defence of Disney forcing homosexual activity into childrenβs entertainment
What would homosexual characters in PG and under 18 content in kids TV shows and films have to do with anything here? Homosexuality is not an aka for pedophilia. It's no different that an under 18 TV show depicting straight couples. Homosexuality doesn't automatically mean pornography, or sexual content.
Have you heard of the Boys Love TV genre? It depicts adolescent gay male romance (teenagers). It's shows like Heartstopper and Young Royals for westerners, but it's a relatively big genre in Phillipines, Thailand and to lesser degrees Japan. Are you going to accuse those countries of being culturally pedophiles?
>as well has his creepy behaviour across the site and constant defence of Woke (an ideology that fosters pedophilia)
Can you provide the slightest shred of evidence that 'woke' (as you interpret it) "fosters pedophilia"?
>Iβve told him to keep away from kids, but heβs adamant that he wonβt stop.
This is yet another lie. I never said I hang around children. I said I am no threat to children and neither seek them out, nor stay away from them.
Whatever dude, just stay away from those kids. Please.
Copy paste your last post if you intend to predate on childrenβ¦
No answer. I will copy and paste again.
>When you combine that with Skavauβs passionate defence of Disney forcing homosexual activity into childrenβs entertainment
What would homosexual characters in PG and under 18 content in kids TV shows and films have to do with anything here? Homosexuality is not an aka for pedophilia. It's no different that an under 18 TV show depicting straight couples. Homosexuality doesn't automatically mean pornography, or sexual content.
Have you heard of the Boys Love TV genre? It depicts adolescent gay male romance (teenagers). It's shows like Heartstopper and Young Royals for westerners, but it's a relatively big genre in Phillipines, Thailand and to lesser degrees Japan. Are you going to accuse those countries of being culturally pedophiles?
>as well has his creepy behaviour across the site and constant defence of Woke (an ideology that fosters pedophilia)
Can you provide the slightest shred of evidence that 'woke' (as you interpret it) "fosters pedophilia"?
>Iβve told him to keep away from kids, but heβs adamant that he wonβt stop.
This is yet another lie. I never said I hang around children. I said I am no threat to children and neither seek them out, nor stay away from them.
>Reply to this if you intend to predate on childrenβ¦
Here it is again. Another post-reply edit.
Do you think this is convincing or something? That editing your post to say that the reply I made must mean X after I've replied to you somehow means that that is what I think?
Did you think that would work on me?
Dude stop.
Would what βwork onβ you..?
You ask for where he confirmed the rumours, I show you, and now youβre βdude stopβ. Whatβs going on?
That was a post edit by you after I had replied to you.
You do it all the time.
I see you edited your reply, but tellingly you did not edit your copy-paste of your previous post, you left that up there - which was the condition for confirming the rumours.
Yes, I edit my replies sometimes. Usually in response to you editing your replies.
I don't pretend that I don't. I also don't edit my replies misleadingly to present a false impression to other users.
>did not edit your copy-paste of your previous post, you left that up there - which was the condition for confirming the rumours.
You editing your posts after posting them, after I've seen them, does not bind me to any "conditions" you set out retrospectively. I don't catch it every single time you edit them maliciously, which is often. But I'm glad to see you actually admit, for the first time, that you edit your replies.
You are being willfully dishonest and pretending as if that makes you moral.
I havenβt βadmittedβ anything, your attempt to rewrite the meaning of other peopleβs posts is a large reason as to why youβre so despised.
Again, itβs telling that you left your copy-paste in place, confirming the rumours.
You, for the first time, acknowledged that you edit your posts after I reply to them. That is an admittance.
>your attempt to rewrite the meaning of other peopleβs posts is a large reason as to why youβre so despised.
The irony here is off the scales.
What is editing your posts after I've replied to you to make it appear like my reply is an admittance of something completely irrelevant if not an attempt to "rewrite the meaning" of someone else's posts?
Yet you do it to me as a matter of habit.
>Again, itβs telling that you left your copy-paste in place, confirming the rumours.
What copy-paste specifically? What post are you referring to? You've made many. I haven't caught all of the times you deceptively edited your posts.
I am not bound by your deliberately misleading edits.
You, for the first time, acknowledged that you edit your posts after I reply to them. That is an admittance.
Sorry, are you now denying that you edit your posts when replying to me after I've replied?
shareLetβs try again.
You, for the first time, acknowledged that you edit your posts after I reply to them. That is an admittance.
Okay, I misread you.
You said this:
"I see you edited your reply, but tellingly you did not edit your copy-paste of your previous post, you left that up there - which was the condition for confirming the rumours."
This is not a "condition" I agreed with. I am not bound by your post-reply edits. You edited your posts after I replied, as you have done many times before. Are you genuinely claiming that you don't maliciously edit your posts after I repy?
What "fake opinions" have I attributed to him?
shareYes it's a form of degrading....
When a politician stinks like ky jelly, yeah something is wrong.
Goes with the Democrat plan to put the most unqualified and ridiculous looking people in positions of power
White House press secretaries, mayors, defense secretaries , prosecutors, game developers, , college presidents.
Pete is a DEI hire, so it should not be surprising that he is still useless and incompetent.
shareYep. The Biden Regime only gave him the job so they could say to everyone, "Hey look, we put a gay man in charge of transportation, even though he has no idea what he's doing, and rarely ever shows up for work!"
shareHe's probably claiming he's on paternity(maternity) leave again.
shareDEI leads people to DIE!
_______________________________________________
Current MC Posters with B1cKsurN Derangement Syndrome
Skavu
Keelai
robocat893
It's sure looking like that, particularly where air travel is concerned.
shareOn the news the other day, older doctors came forward and said they are trying to create new doctors out of people not even close to being qualified.
I'm starting to wonder that about the hospital we use on a regular basis. They keep making mistakes when treating my relatives, and one of our current regular doctors seems more like an airhead than an actual person who knows what they're doing.
shareMaybe he's playing pickleball with Kate Middleton?
share