Originally Posted by Anteater (Post 2000557)

Lol what are you talking about. I'm not a conspiracy theorist: Neither side can corroborate anything in this particular case. You don't think the women are suspicious but two guys who will literally go to prison for the rest of their lives are moreso. Unlike those two bozos who claim to have been the gropers, rapists, whatever, these women who testify will walk out of this with zero consequences regardless of whether or not Kavanaugh wins out because memory is malleable and they can claim as much later on. They'll go back to their ordinary lives unless a future investigation somehow uncovers more substantial evidence that implicates them later on.

Originally Posted by wolverinewolfweiselpigeon (Post 2000579)

It must be easy to be so frivolous about sexual assault and victims of trauma when you have (presumably) no personal experience with it.

Stepping away from this thread at least until after this hearing concludes. It's triggering af to be honest.

Originally Posted by 66Sexy (Post 2000583)

On a scale of 1 to 10, 1 being "definitely not" and 10 being "definitely", what are the chances your next five or so posts in this thread are going to be you bitching about people calling you stupid?

Originally Posted by 66Sexy (Post 2000719)

No one cares.

Originally Posted by OccultHawk (Post 2000728)

https://apple.news/AY0AGY7lsTHOYJ9cjb-PBMg



**** Texas

Originally Posted by Lucem Ferre (Post 2000724)

Not until it's their problem or a point of virtue signaling.

Originally Posted by 66Sexy (Post 2000746)

People who use "virtue signaling" unironically are morons.

Originally Posted by Fluff (Post 2000755)

Utter bollocks no they aren't it's a fucking great phrase.

Using 'cuck' unironically yes, 'virtue signalling' no.

Originally Posted by 66Sexy (Post 2000759)

It's absolutely garbage. If you're using it it's because you have no way to argue against someone's point and are just using an ad hominem so you can pat yourself on the back (usually as a good red pill twit).

Originally Posted by Fluff (Post 2000760)

Bollocks.

You can use it at the same time as countering an argument so stop trying so hard tbh.

Originally Posted by 66Sexy (Post 2000761)

In which case it's pointless because you've already explained why the person is full of **** and are using an ad hominem you got from 4Chan or some comment section populated by other red pill twits. Have you ever seen a liberal use virtue signalling? I haven't. Just internet "skeptics" (i.e. self-important alt right fetus sniffers).

Originally Posted by Fluff (Post 2000762)

I don't care who uses it, the phrase is absolutely bang on. And if a liberal did use it you'd likely be all for it tbh.

Originally Posted by windsock (Post 2000763)

And "ad hominem" is usually a deflector term used by people when they're clearly losing an argument. What's your point?

Originally Posted by 66Sexy (Post 2000764)

What are you talking about? You've promoted red pill nonsense in the past, you don't believe in any kind of privilege, you post Pepe memes, you have a redneck limey boner for the British flag, blah blah blah. The only reason you like the phrase is because it's used by people whose social and political views align with your own against people whose views do not. It's just self-indulgent echo chamber bull**** for you.

Originally Posted by Fluff (Post 2000768)

This is the third post in a row you've mentioned the phrase 'red pill'. Have you recently discovered it? Look at Charles and his new toy!

I like the phrase because it accurately describes when people make a point out of voicing opinions specifically to get praise or come across as a good person. It is absolutely spot on and it doesn't matter how much you try to accuse me of being alt right.

And stop making stuff up. I never said I never believed in any kind of privilege. That is a blatant lie.

Originally Posted by Fluff (Post 2000768)

I like the phrase because it accurately describes when people make a point out of voicing opinions specifically to get praise or come across as a good person.

Originally Posted by 66Sexy (Post 2000769)

What privileges do you believe in?

And I don't think you're alt right. I think you're one of those people with alt right leanings who doesn't get what they're sympathizing with (fascists and pseudo-fascists).

Originally Posted by Fluff (Post 2000775)

Then stop banging on about pepe memes.

For those who are unaware Charles is taking about these posts when they are clearly posted as jokes:

https://www.musicbanter.com/1933059-post80.html

https://www.musicbanter.com/1900295-post7027.html

Originally Posted by Fluff (Post 2000775)

Then stop banging on about pepe memes.

For those who are unaware Charles is taking about these posts when they are clearly posted as jokes:

https://www.musicbanter.com/1933059-post80.html

https://www.musicbanter.com/1900295-post7027.html

Originally Posted by MicShazam (Post 2000776)

Agree on the two uses of the Pepe character. Not really different from Charles' constant Nazi love.

Originally Posted by Frownland (Post 2000777)

Didn't you have an avvy of Pepe smiling about caged refugees?

Originally Posted by 66Sexy (Post 2000779)

I think you think you're being more tongue-in-cheek than you really are. I doubt you'd be as likely to use those memes for whatever reason if you weren't sympathetic with people who use them for realsies.

Originally Posted by MicShazam (Post 2000776)

Agree on the two uses of the Pepe character. Not really different from Charles' constant Nazi love.