once again you're desperately and dishonestly trying to downplay her pivotal role in pushing the demonstrably false "groomer" narrative and rationalise her hate-mongering against the LGBT+ community as merely 'calling some questionable people groomers'. your 'austere religious scholar' angle is getting old.

i know you've read my post btw. lazy dodge is lazy, but at this point it's pretty obvious WHY you're constantly defending her. pretty pathetic tbh...


meanwhile in reality, the facts speak for themselves:

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/aoc-lauren-boebert-prayers-lgbtq-club-shooting-1234633966/

https://hrc-prod-requests.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/CCDH-HRC-Digital-Hate-Report-2022-single-pages.pdf

You posted that already. At this point you’re just repeating yourself. You tried to convince me of something but didn’t. I haven’t seen anything you posted from her that qualifies as hate-mongering. I’ll give you something and prove I’m not "constantly defending her" (lol) : she probably hates trans people for real. I’d say her public persona managed to keep that on the limit of acceptability however.

This post was edited by Chainsaw47 on Nov 22 2022 02:45pm

you most definitely ARE constantly downplaying her pivotal role in promoting a demonstrably false narrative. from 'she may have had a tiny role in some people having a slightly negative opinion' to 'she was actually right in calling some questionable people groomers'. no reasonable or honest person would characterise her stance on the LGBT+ community that way. that's some serious "austere religious scholar" talk...

and yes, legally and technically that is most definitely "acceptable", but that caveat won't absolve her from the moral co-responsibility of platforming the latest surge in LGBT+ hatred, and ultimately helping to make such attacks more likely. stochastic terrorism. stop trying to downplay it.

Austere religious scholar? Bruh you’re too far gone to reason with.

that's when someone dishonestly describes an obviously messed up person / situation in harmless, downplaying, deflecting terms. most regulars here know what it refers to, sorry.

i think you still got the gist of it though, so maybe try to be less sympathetic to harmful lies peddled to millions of already unhinged people if you can... not holding my breath though...

Sure thing bud, on your end try to cut on the personal attacks

i might if you stop fantasising and lying about, we'll see. have a good one, buddy.

Are you referring to that cute bar graph that ignores the fact that drag queen story hour started about three years ago, and child friendly drag shows started about two years ago once the outrage of drag story hour started?


You literally showed a graph showing no demonstrations against something that doesn't exist in 2018, and as it begins to exist, it immediately warranted demonstrations against it because it is so disgusting. Thanks 🙏

The drag queen story hour org started in 2015, more than 3 years ago. Secondly, these events have been happening for decades, things don't randomly start existing when it floats to the top of fox news. Men have been dressing as women as entertainment since the dawn of time.

Started by a single individual and took a few years to catch on. Nobody even realized when it was one dude in San Francisco. As soon as it became prevalent it became major news and the cause for justified outrage.

When people start shitting in the street while throwing used needles on the sidewalk outside of San Francisco and Philadelphia that will account for just as much public outrage, I assure you. Kept within the confines of terrible cities is much less of an issue.