This was posted 1 year 1 month 24 days ago, and might be an out-dated deal.

Related
  • expired

Free: "What Is a Woman?" Documentary @ The Daily Wire via Twitter

883195
Free: "What Is a Woman?" Documentary @ The Daily Wire via Twitter
Go to Deal
LArkan on 02/06/2023 - 21:34 twitter.com (8973 clicks)
Last edited 07/06/2023 - 11:38 by 3 other users

It’s the movie they really don’t want you to see: #WhatIsAWoman?

Watch the explosive documentary starring @MattWalshBlog FREE on Twitter for 24 hours extended to all weekend (US).

Mod Note:

After investigation, we determined that this documentary/video was released in June 2022 and required paid Membership to 'Daily Wire' to view the video on their website. At this time, membership starts from US$108/year (US$9/month), after discount. The now free content on Twitter, is therefore postable as a deal, under our Free Multimedia Content Deal Posting Guidelines.

To avoid personal biases from influencing moderation decisions, moderators adhere to our published guidelines. Guidelines are written based on the feedback of the community and the ability to moderate them consistently across the site. This deal has been determined to comply with our deal posting guidelines, in particular the Free Multimedia Content Guideline and the Banned Items Guideline. Community guidelines are always evolving and we welcome any discussions in our site discussion forum or Comments / Feedback / Suggestions Thread 2023 thread.

Entertainment Video on Demand

Related Stores

The Daily Wire
The Daily Wire

closed Comments

      • franco cozzo on 04/06/2023 - 08:56
        +1

        google Audrey E Hale & the mass shooting at a Christian School in Nashville that occured recently….

        • Ninternet on 04/06/2023 - 09:02
          +2

          Yeah, white people sure are crazy!

          Alternative extrapolations:
          Yeah, Americans sure are crazy!
          Yeah, traumatised people sure are crazy!
          Yeah, people with guns sure are crazy!

          You can draw many conclusions from any piece of information depending on your own biases

          • franco cozzo on 04/06/2023 - 09:06
            +2

            @Ninternet: are you ok…i think you might have forgotten the meds this morning. lol!

            • pharcyde on 04/06/2023 - 09:07
              +2

              @franco cozzo: Why are they deflecting so much?

            • Ninternet on 04/06/2023 - 09:08

              @franco cozzo: When you can no longer use logical arguments, do you often resort to insinuating the people you're conversing with are "on meds"? Or somehow mentally ill?

              If so, I'm very curious about your understanding of mental illness and what you think the causes and solutions to it are. It seems to be something you're concerned about insofar as it supports your political ideology.

          • infinite on 04/06/2023 - 14:00

            @Ninternet: Whoa, what's with the racism ?

          • gyrex on 04/06/2023 - 14:32

            @Ninternet: There's nothing like some racism to erode one's credibility.

            • Ninternet on 04/06/2023 - 14:44
              -1

              @gyrex: There's nothing like some transphobia to erode someone's credibility.

              • gyrex on 04/06/2023 - 15:35

                @Ninternet: Please cite any instance of me being transphobic. An objectively childish response straight out of a schoolyard without any merit whatsoever. Your comment was racist and engaging in fallacious (whataboutism) retorts further erodes your credibility.

                • Ninternet on 04/06/2023 - 17:05

                  @gyrex: Please cite any instance of me being racist. An objectively childish response straight out of a schoolyard without any merit whatsoever. Your comment was redundant and engaging in irrelevant (assumptive remarks on race) retorts further erodes your credibility.

                  • gyrex on 04/06/2023 - 17:48

                    @Ninternet:

                    Please cite any instance of me being racist.

                    "Yeah, white people sure are crazy!"

                    You argue with the maturity of a 2 year old.

                    • Ninternet on 04/06/2023 - 18:12

                      @gyrex: As a white person, I find it offensive that you're calling me racist towards white people and feel victimised by your racism towards me as a white person.

                      And if that final statement were true, I hope you don't have kids as you would persist on arguing with them relentlessly apparently to prove you're "right".

                      You're very clever.

                    • Ninternet on 04/06/2023 - 18:19

                      @gyrex: Also, because you're so clever, you'd obviously be able to recognise that, as you were logically able to identify my comment as irony (again, you're very clever as you've implied), my comment was in no way an accurate representation of me as an individual!

                      How absurd to make claims about someone you don't know in reality!

                      That would, of course, be akin to assembling a straw man to attack. But OF COURSE, you would know that because you have a high intellect. And because of that high intellect, I assume you recognise this and are using a straw man fallacy as the basis of your argument in a very self-aware and ironic sense.

                      Right?

    • dBagDealer on 04/06/2023 - 23:53
      +1

      I have seen them act in the most violent way at the protests.
      They behave exactly like religious lunatics and therefore I think they follow the woke religion.

  • gyrex on 04/06/2023 - 09:10
    +19

    Thanks for posting this wonderful deal. I thoroughly enjoyed the documentary and have shared it with family and friends. I thought the documentary was well balanced and exposed some of the perverse and damaging ideologies being forcefully pushed out of educational facilities and the irreparable damage the chemicals and surgeries are doing to these young people will come back to haunt many of them in years to come unfortunately.

    For the record, I'm an anti-theist and despise all religions equally.

    • jinzopk3 on 04/06/2023 - 09:29
      +1

      Whilst the documentary is well made it is most certainly not well balanced.
      As far as "damage" regarding surgeries, it isn't as if people undergoing them don't understand what is involved.
      The regret rate for surgery is ~1%, and the most common reason for de-transition is social pressure. So the "haunting" will be from people mistreatment from transphobes and not from the "chemicals and surgeries".

      • leeboy168 on 04/06/2023 - 10:28
        +10

        How they do penis surgery: https://twitter.com/wokearchive/status/1660320138380361730?s…

        Taking flesh from an arm for penile inversion: https://twitter.com/billboardchris/status/165090302851643801…

        Examples of breasts removed: https://twitter.com/billboardchris/status/163289142425228083…

        One young lady regretting her 2019 decision: https://twitter.com/dani_activist/status/1655592600584298502…

        I personally had surgery too during a time when I was an insecure 19 year old, thinking that I had to compete with highly presentable K-Pop idols in order to attract girls lol! It has permanently damaged my vision from not being able to close my eye lids properly.

        Not sure where you got 1% from!

        • jinzopk3 on 04/06/2023 - 10:57
          +1

          Not sure why you are linking video graphics of the surgery, I know how it is done, all surgery is pretty gross looking if that is what you were trying to invoke.
          1% figure if from this meta-analysis https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8099405/
          You are free to inform your personal decisions based on your own experience, but anecdotes are not enough to prevent others from making these decisions themselves.

            • ihfree on 04/06/2023 - 11:26
              +3

              @gto21:

              anecdotes

              • gto21 on 04/06/2023 - 11:48
                +2

                @ihfree: The researchers found that:

                Persons with transsexualism, after sex reassignment, have considerably higher risks for mortality, suicidal behaviour, and psychiatric morbidity than the general population.

                • ihfree on 04/06/2023 - 11:55
                  +2

                  @gto21: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3043071/

                  In other words, the results should not be interpreted such as sex reassignment per se increases morbidity and mortality. Things might have been even worse without sex reassignment. As an analogy, similar studies have found increased somatic morbidity, suicide rate, and overall mortality for patients treated for bipolar disorder and schizophrenia.[39], [40] This is important information, but it does not follow that mood stabilizing treatment or antipsychotic treatment is the culprit.

                  • gto21 on 04/06/2023 - 11:58
                    +2

                    @ihfree: I did not provide any interpretation. My response was solely based on quoting the study.

                    • ihfree on 04/06/2023 - 12:00
                      +1

                      @gto21: Yeah, exactly. A stat without interpretation is meaningless.

                      • gto21 on 04/06/2023 - 12:10
                        +2

                        @ihfree: Your message is meaningless as it is based on an interpretation that I did not make. It appears that you hastily copied and pasted whatever you can find. Just so you know, I actually read the material you quoted before you posted it. I'm curious why you're trying to refute a claim that I never made?

                        • ihfree on 04/06/2023 - 12:11
                          +1

                          @gto21: You're posting a quote that seemingly backs your point of view while the study doesn't back it or is inconclusive. You're being intellectually dishonest.

                          It's telling that you've jumped to personal attacks now. So likewise, Is everything alright with you?

                          • gto21 on 04/06/2023 - 12:18
                            +2

                            @ihfree: I cited a study, while you copied and pasted information attempting to refute an interpretation of the study. I did not offer an interpretation myself. Take a moment to relax, read carefully, and refrain from hastily copying and pasting information

                            • ihfree on 04/06/2023 - 12:23
                              +1

                              @gto21: My quote is from the same study. Have a think about that

                              • gto21 on 04/06/2023 - 12:26
                                +1

                                @ihfree: Did I interpret the study this way? Simple question.

                    • jinzopk3 on 04/06/2023 - 12:15
                      +1

                      @gto21: https://transpulseproject.ca/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Impa…
                      Here is one showing that suicide etc are reduced significantly (from 57% down to 4%) by strong parental acceptance of their gender identity.

                      https://whatweknow.inequality.cornell.edu/topics/lgbt-equali…
                      Also here is another meta-analysis that shows transitioning has an overwhelmingly positive effect on metal well-being.

                      • gto21 on 04/06/2023 - 12:54
                        +2

                        @jinzopk3: How does it relate to the quote I provided?

                        • ihfree on 04/06/2023 - 12:59

                          @gto21: The study you've cited doesn't live in a vacuum.

                          • gto21 on 04/06/2023 - 13:05
                            +3

                            @ihfree: Come back when you can answer my previous question, but thank you for commenting. I was looking for his message, and it helped me find his message quicker. At least you're helpful this time.

                            • ihfree on 04/06/2023 - 13:09

                              @gto21: This conversation has a feeling of deja vu. I swear we've had a conversation where you haven't understood a seemingly basic concept before.

          • leeboy168 on 04/06/2023 - 14:14
            +4

            @jinzopk3: All good, I'm just highlighting that perhaps not all who undergo surgeries understand what is involved. You may be, because you have some interest in this subject, but I definitely wasn't, and I suspect not all who take surgery are. That's all.

            Yes I agree it is gross viewed from this POV.

            You are free to inform your personal decisions based on your own experience, but anecdotes are not enough to prevent others from making these decisions themselves.

            This is where we differ I think. Although not articulated well in this forum, I believe most people who negged this "deal" take the viewpoint that human nature is fundamentally good, and if they are fundamentally good, then they should be free to make their own choices. People make choices they believe are right, and since we are naturally good, the heart (or feelings) become the best determinate of what is right.

            I, on the other hand, don't believe human nature is fundamentally good. I think we are subject to external influences and have malleable minds that can be conditioned to think certain ways. Therefore, I don't think the heart (and feelings) provide the best answers, and people relying on it don't always make the best decisions. I think society can benefit from a set of strong moral codes that limit certain behaviour.

            We as a society understand that not everyone has the capacity to make decisions, especially life altering decisions, and that is why children cannot consent to certain adult activities (drinking, driving, alcohol, gambling, marriage, etc) and the mentally impaired don't go to jail for crimes (they go to asylums). I also take this view that children should not be able to consent to sex changes and should not be exposed to gender ideology.

            So, I am ultimately saying I the freedom of making personal decisions based on my own experiences and feelings was not necessarily a positive thing for my younger-self.

            1% figure if from this meta-analysis https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8099405/

            I believe something as significant as life-altering sex organ surgery requires a longitudinal study, one that is conducted at periodic intervals over many decades. The timeframe in the studies ranged between 0.8-9.0 years after surgery (remove impacts of the endowment effect). Give it some time!

            One final word, I wish people would stop attacking each other and debate openly and sincerely instead. I understand people have a strong ego-investment in this subject, and beliefs fuse with one's personality after a mental schema has been internalised thoroughly - so to attack the belief is to literally attack the person. But I hope both sides can talk openly about this subject and put their own ego aside.

            • jinzopk3 on 04/06/2023 - 15:31
              +1

              @leeboy168: I don't think that we actually differ too much there actually. I don't think that people will always choose good because they are fundamentally good.

              I do believe that people can be swayed by external influences.
              People can certainly be influenced to behave against their nature, there was a time when people were forced to be right-handed. People can also be convinced into believing the strict gender binary, even if they are actually trans.

              I do believe that we need what you have called moral code.
              Specifically we do have at least one societal moral code: law. We agree that murder is bad, and so we ban it.
              We do need to be careful not to change this without good reason, and when presented with good reason it should surely be changed. So what I was trying to say was that since the medical science actually tells us that the best outcomes are from affirming gender identity, we need more than just anecdotes to refute that.

              I think where we actually differ is just in the belief that "gender ideology" is bad, and that minors can't consent to transitioning.

              Here is a logitudal study (70yrs) that shows quality of life increases across the board for trans people who undergo medial transition, including those who used of puberty blockers as a minor.
              https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6223813/

      • gyrex on 04/06/2023 - 14:44
        +7

        I don't know how much more balanced you could get by going straight to supposedly credible sources who are pushing and embracing this ideology - 90% of the airtime of this documentary is interviews of psychologists, surgeons, academics and trans people who are fully vested or deeply involved in this ideology. Sure, there's some funny and lightly mocking facets (where he travels to Africa for example) but in my opinion the absurdity of some of the interviews of these academics has to be countered by brutal realities and with some comedic relief.

        Anyway, some people won't like it or agree with it, most will - such is life. I don't begrudge anyone who's trans and I don't care what anyone does in their bedroom, I sincerely wish them the best in their lives but the fact that we've got corporations and education systems in the western world pushing this ideology onto children is insane as far as I'm concerned. Children should be allowed to be children and if, when they reach adulthood, they decide to transition then good for them. Just leave the children out of it and stop pushing this propaganda at all levels.

        • trapper on 05/06/2023 - 17:09
          +1

          the absurdity of some of the interviews of these academics has to be countered by brutal realities and with some comedic relief.

          This is the real story to me… these academics are intelligent people, yet they sit there and deny an objective triviality, or walk away and refuse to answer.

          An academic should never be squirming in uncomfortable silence unable to answer a simple question.

          They know exactly what a woman is.

    • leeboy168 on 04/06/2023 - 10:29
      +6

      Me too I watched with my entire family afterwards

  • tangobox on 04/06/2023 - 09:19
    +6

    This is dreck even by usual conservative agit-prop standards. Zero bags of popcorn.

  • zekeyoung99 on 04/06/2023 - 09:55
    +7

    Thanks for sharing OP. Thoroughly enjoyed it.

  • ECE on 04/06/2023 - 10:02
    +15

    Thanks OP. Alot of those who were interviewed can't answer the question. 🤣😕

    • tal15 on 04/06/2023 - 10:53
      +3

      Realistically, in a vox pop I doubt more than 10% of people could define even what a circle is.

      Or explain how a bicycle works, in terms of basic physics.

      Or bread. Try coming up with a perfect definition of bread on the spot with a camera in your face.

      Don't forget unleavened panfried flatbreads like indian roti or you'll be marked down as umming and ahhing by those who are all "duh, it's obviously Tip Top sandwich white from Coles"

      • dBagDealer on 04/06/2023 - 16:08
        +3

        no one cares about the laity having their own definitions for things. they get them from experts which in this case fail to define what a woman is.

        College professors should know exactly what a circle is.
        These are just attempts at deflection and whataboutism like others have pointed out.

        • tal15 on 04/06/2023 - 18:32
          +1

          Cool. Do you know of any academics who can state with 100% certainty what a woman is, in all contexts - legal, medical, social, etc?

          Because it doesn't make sense to criticise a lack of clear definition that applies across all fields of human knowledge unless you can put forward a gold standard that does satisfy that test.

          Like, I'm a lawyer by training at least and could easily offer a nutshell definition of murder, but if you wanted a full explanation we'd be here for at least a few hours and that's simpler than biological sex vs cultural gender.

          • dBagDealer on 04/06/2023 - 21:14
            +1

            @tal15: Hey look I can see there being no such thing as a definition in woke religion, I get that. Like what is a bird or what is even a house, its all arbitrary, up in the air.

            For the rest of us living in reality, we need to have one as proposed in this documentary.

            Also riddle me this, when alphabet people say trans-women are women, does women have a definition in this context?

            • tal15 on 04/06/2023 - 21:30

              @dBagDealer: Mate, in 99.99% of cases we all agree. It's very obvious that a person is a woman.

              In 0.01% of cases there's a grey area that doesn't even affect you or me, it's about insurance and tax and inheritance and other kinds of legal and financial issues.

              Not your issue nor mine. Go watch a doco about the history of tech or something, it's better than circular arguments like "adult human female" that does nothing but kick the can down the road, when the people who criticise a lack of precise definition don't actually have a workable one of their own.

              • dBagDealer on 04/06/2023 - 22:44
                +1

                @tal15:

                It's very obvious that a person is a woman.

                What is it obvious based on. seems to me as if you’re conflicted because you’re agreeing with the definition and then disagreeing with it in the same breath based off whatabouting about the tiny exception that no one has a problem to begin with.

                Logic should triumph over ideological affiliations in this case.
                Free country though so everyone is entitled to believe what they want to ofcourse but beliefs not backed by logic are usually delusions.

  • boldwombat on 04/06/2023 - 10:57
    +4

    Many sociologists have observed that those in power ultimately benefit from moral panics, since they lead to increased control of the population and the reinforcement of the authority of those in charge. Others have commented that moral panics offer a mutually beneficial relationship between news media and the state. For the media, reporting on threats that become moral panics increases viewership and makes money for news organizations. For the state, the creation of a moral panic can give it cause to enact legislation and laws that would seem illegitimate without the perceived threat at the center of the moral panic.

    Source- a good read, useful concept to understand this kind of thing

    • tal15 on 04/06/2023 - 11:49
      +1

      They load the clip in omnicolour
      Said they pack the nine, they fire it at prime time
      The sleeping gas, every home was like Alcatraz
      And materfokkers lost their minds

      No escape from the mass mind rape
      Play it again Jack and then rewind the tape

      And then play it again and again and again
      Until your mind is locked in

      Believin' all the lies that they're tellin' ya

      Buyin' all the products that they're sellin' ya

      They say, "Jump" and you say, "How high?"
      You brain-dead, you got a forkin' bullet in your head

      Just victims of the in-house drive-by
      They say, "Jump", you say, "How high?"

      • capslock janitor on 04/06/2023 - 11:56
        +4

        You only get one shot, do not miss your chance to blow
        This opportunity comes once in a lifetime

        • tal15 on 04/06/2023 - 12:01
          +2

          Once in a lifetime, same as it ever was.

          Like a concerted multichannel campaign for a grifter's grindy axe grind polemic.

          Sure Matt Walsh will bank a tidy buck from all of this, tuck the collateral damage to people only trying to live their lives.

  • Mondorock on 04/06/2023 - 11:45
    +1

    Is this a record number of neg votes on a deal??

    • wisdomtooth on 04/06/2023 - 11:47
      +9

      Looks like a record number of upvotes too.

      • tal15 on 04/06/2023 - 11:53
        +4

        Because it's OBVIOUSLY so much better a deal than a low 600-ish PS5 and totally not brigaded by culture warriors.

    • franco cozzo on 04/06/2023 - 11:52
      +12

      …and 95% of those negs havent even watched it! lol

      • tal15 on 04/06/2023 - 11:54
        +8

        95% of the upvoters haven't watched it either.

        This is nothing but vice signalling.

      • ihfree on 04/06/2023 - 12:01

        They're not missing out.

        • infinite on 04/06/2023 - 13:52
          +7

          Found another one who didn't watch it !

          • ihfree on 04/06/2023 - 13:57
            +1

            @infinite: Wrong.

            • infinite on 04/06/2023 - 15:26
              +1

              @ihfree: The link you just posted only proves how obvious it is that you didn't watch it.

              • ihfree on 04/06/2023 - 15:39
                +1

                @infinite: Nah, I've watched it. You really seem to be having a tough time accepting that people might not like this "documentary".

                • Ninternet on 04/06/2023 - 19:34

                  @ihfree: He seems to have a tough time accepting many things.

                  • infinite on 06/06/2023 - 18:07

                    @Ninternet: Says the science-denier who can't accept that there is only two genders………..

                    • ihfree on 06/06/2023 - 18:22

                      @infinite: You're in denial about a lot of things.

                      You can barely handle the fact that someone might watch this and think it's junk. It's a doco, if you can even call it that, built to cater to a certain audience and reinforce a viewpoint. Anyone who isn't gullible would be able to see straight through the tactics used.

                      • gto21 on 06/06/2023 - 18:26
                        +1

                        @ihfree: You label others as gullible while holding the belief that a man with a D is a woman.

                        • ihfree on 06/06/2023 - 18:30
                          -7

                          @gto21: Please point out where I've stated a viewpoint otherwise you've just made a statement about your gullibility.

                          Edit: I'll take a neg to mean you can't, you're gullible, and at the very least, mildly triggered.

                          • gto21 on 06/06/2023 - 18:45
                            +1

                            @ihfree: I did not neg you. To prove it. I just did so now. Now it's -2. That was not me the first time.

                            I was thinking, what do you mean by viewpoint since your message before it was a viewpoint.

                            • ihfree on 06/06/2023 - 18:50

                              @gto21: Lol, you're either trolling or really struggle with language comprehension or keeping track of context. If you don't understand, let's just leave it at that.

                          • gto21 on 06/06/2023 - 18:47
                            +3

                            @ihfree: You have contributed a higher number of comments compared to other individuals with left-leaning perspectives. If there is anyone who appears to be experiencing a heightened emotional response, it seems to be you.

                            • ihfree on 06/06/2023 - 19:16

                              @gto21: That's a lot of assumptions that you're making.

                              Love the negs - I just take it to mean you're triggered. I mean honestly, you're triggered by the fact that this user is triggered because they've been called out for making assumptions with out any backing? Pathetic. It just goes to show you lot are driven more by emotion than facts.

                              • infinite on 06/06/2023 - 21:20

                                @ihfree: Why so much rage ?

                                  • gto21 on 07/06/2023 - 07:10
                                    +2

                                    @ihfree: Some of them proactively strive to enhance measures against sex crimes, while the ideology you are endorsing advocate for easier access to women and children.

                                    • ihfree on 07/06/2023 - 09:37

                                      @gto21: Right. The ideology you endorse has led to the issues which, AFAIK, are ongoing.

                                      It's always nice to see the some/not all arguments come out. Given how language is used in the thread and what you've upvoted you seem to be against the use of that style of language depending on who it is used against. Seems you're just another denier and apologist.

                                      Once again, you're making assumptions about me where I haven't stated a viewpoint. It's funny that you read a book so full of interpretation yet you don't understand various features of languages. That strongly suggests that you don't think for yourself and someone does the thinking for you.

                                      • gto21 on 07/06/2023 - 09:56
                                        +2

                                        @ihfree: I do not endorse any ideology that excessively focuses on child sexuality. Or individuals who disregard the importance of respecting female privacy.

                                        • ihfree on 07/06/2023 - 09:58

                                          @gto21: Neither do I, yet you keep accusing me of it without evidence.

                                          • gto21 on 07/06/2023 - 10:11
                                            +1

                                            @ihfree: It's part of the ideology you're pushing.

                                            If we can agree on that, that's great. We can both give pushbacks when we don't agree with them.

                                            • ihfree on 07/06/2023 - 10:14

                                              @gto21: If we want to use broad brushes, it's part of an ideology that you are pushing with a proven track record of abuse.

                                              • gto21 on 07/06/2023 - 10:16
                                                +1

                                                @ihfree: Read slowly: I do not endorse any ideology that excessively focuses on child sexuality. Or individuals who disregard the importance of respecting female privacy.

                                                • ihfree on 07/06/2023 - 10:27

                                                  @gto21: Same sentence - same response.

                                                  If we want to use broad brushes, it's part of an ideology that you are pushing with a proven track record of abuse.

                                  • franco cozzo on 07/06/2023 - 07:11
                                    +2

                                    @ihfree: …god bless you…and dont forget jesus loves you too!

  • trevor99 on 04/06/2023 - 13:33
    +3

    This right/left classification of any issue is another divisive mechanism. There is no right and left anymore it's good vs bad, them vs us.

    The left/right spectrum originally means capitalism vs communism, 100% communism being extreme left and 100% free market capitalism, extreme right. Any normal person can agree the best place is somewhere in the middle and we can argue where and about the size of govt and safety nets.

    However along the way it's all been hijacked with agendas inserted, using divide and conquer. Don't fall for it.

    Predators exist on all sides and 100% should be condemned and prosecuted, eg Bidens and Clinton's are above the law. As are many on the other side.

    • MessyG on 04/06/2023 - 14:06
      +5

      There's no sides to pedophiles. They're everywhere. That's why I think groups funded by the clergy loudly going hard after the tiniest minority of the population is so suspicious. You only need to look at the prison demographic of paedophiles to know who they are. That everyone falls for this trans-bait pushed by these groups is either disappointing or suspicious in itself. Great way to groom the population if you teach them the only people to be afraid of is these groups, and by unconscious default, everyone else is safe. Clergy have been doing that for centuries.

      • infinite on 04/06/2023 - 15:25
        +3

        Why do you have so much hatred for "the clergy". What is this mysterious prison demographic you are referring too & what do they have to do with "the clergy". You are coming off sounding like an insane Reddit conspiracy theorist at the moment.

        You keep inserting that random group into the discussion here and literally no one other than you is referencing or discussing them, or for that matter inserting pedophilia into the subject of Trans people.

        You seem to really be having some issues here projecting your own hatred and and bias on to this discussion.

        • gyrex on 04/06/2023 - 15:43
          +3

          Probably because "the clergy" and religion in general is responsible for maximum and pervasive harm to societies and communities throughout the world, mostly poorer and uneducated ones - eventually their penetration erodes as societies become more educated and grow wealthier as we're seeing in the western world. Paedophilia is rife, pervasive and has occurred for centuries within most religious "clergy", especially Christianity based religions and should be admonished maximally and without prejudice.

        • ihfree on 04/06/2023 - 16:12
          +3

          The systemic abuse of children in the church is well documented in multiple countries. This often involved shuffling pedophile clergy between churches to protect them. Here's a link on the Catholic church. It's not a conspiracy theory, it's a fact.

          matter inserting pedophilia into the subject of Trans people

          It's all over this thread.

          The rallying call around pedophiles is often an emotional hook and quite often used in the culture wars. It's not even a new thing. Here's a segment from a dark comedy from 2013 -

          By the powers invested in me by a bloke I met in the pub who knew for definite!

          The interesting thing about your comment is that in many circles you'd be accused of supporting pedophiles.

          • tal15 on 04/06/2023 - 21:47

            @ihfree: FINALLY something actually worthwhile from this thread.

            That Paedofinder General is hilarious, never seen it before. Thanks :)

            "By the powers invested in me by tabloid reading imbeciles" - stop it, I'm f-ing dying over here :D

          • infinite on 09/06/2023 - 15:56

            @ihfree:

            The systemic abuse of children in the church is well documented in multiple countries.

            It's not even a fraction of the level of abuse committed in the Islamic communities, or even by the entertainment industry.

            I don't see you people screeching and carrying on about any of that.

            Seems like you just have an extreme level of bigotry for people of one religious group.

            • ihfree on 09/06/2023 - 16:08

              @infinite: Whataboutism

              • infinite on 09/06/2023 - 17:58

                @ihfree: Hmmmm, not so inclined to continue the conversation anymore when your bigotry is identified, I see.

                • ihfree on 10/06/2023 - 00:58

                  @infinite: Well, I'm kind of done with this thread - I probably won't reply as I'm here for primarily for deals…

                  The topic of conversation was on the church which you referred to as a conspiracy despite the massive body of evidence.

                  You've done exactly what you've accused all those people with coloured hair or 'the left' of doing.

                  I don't really know what you're referring to specifically, but they are seperate issues and a case of whataboutism which your buddies are all to happy to remind everyone else of but have a blindspot when it comes to you.

                  I don't know stats on the current issue or even the current issue well enough to make a comment even having watched the "documentary". What I do know is that Matt Walsh and those on the right occupying a similar space as Walsh have a tendency to lie as demonstrated in the interview on Joe Rogan. It's not in Australia despite outrage Mark Latham and News Corp have tried to whip up.

                  You could say what about western tourists abusing children in South East Asia or any other number of cases of abuse. I could pick any number of cases and ask you how much do you care about them?

                  If you cared about this issue as deeply as you claim to and you considered it abuse, you'd be equally as outraged at the church or about any other number of cases. The fact that you've decided to defend a known group of pedophiles just goes to show your hypocrisy.

        • monky on 04/06/2023 - 19:38

          Did you look at this? https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vTFikAP6MXDCJjWz…

          ~60% of it is people tied in with the church.

          • infinite on 09/06/2023 - 15:56

            @monky: Wow, that is a special level of conspiracy nuttery.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join