this post was submitted on 17 Apr 2024

558 points (97.6% liked)

News

23014 readers

2 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil

Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.

2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.

Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.

3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.

4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.

Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.

5. Only recent news is allowed.

Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.

6. All posts must be news articles.

No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.

7. No duplicate posts.

If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.

8. Misinformation is prohibited.

Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.

9. No link shorteners.

The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.

10. Don't copy entire article in your post body

For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

558

Trump supporters gather outside courthouse and ask: Who among us hasn’t paid for sex? (www.independent.co.uk)

submitted 7 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

139 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Donald Trump has not been accused of paying for sex, but several supporters protesting outside of his trial on Monday wanted to make it clear that they have. It seems the crowds that come out to protest the persecution of the former president are getting smaller, and weirder

…

Today, however, the crowd had thinned to a handful of true believers and true characters – those who don’t leave their house without a giant flag, a bullhorn, and an offensive T-shirt they made themselves.

It’s not only that the crowds are getting smaller, it’s that they are getting significantly weirder.

Of the people willing to step up to a microphone outside the courthouse and defend Mr Trump for allegedly paying off a porn star to hide his alleged affair from prospective voters, two offered something of a wild defence: that they opposed the charges because they too had paid for sex on more than one occasion, and assumed most men had done the same.

It didn’t matter to them that Mr Trump is not being accused of paying for sex, but rather accused of having embarked on several extra-marital affairs and falsifying business records over payments made to hide those affairs from the voting public in 2016.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 10 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

Your point would've been better recepted if you wouldn't have said females.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Nah, it was sexist already without the dehumanizing language.

[+] [email protected] -7 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Nothing that I said was sexist.

Can you point out what I said that wasn't true?

[–] [email protected] 6 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Buddy, you call women "females". That alone is a gigantic red flag that you don't respect women. Nobody that respects women talks like that. Women certainly notice shit like that when they're considering whether or not a man is worth their time and energy.

As for your insistence that I prove you wrong, let's just say that I have no doubt that you're telling the truth when you say that women won't sleep with you organically. Everything else is just an extremely toxic expression of opinion that doesn't deserve to be taken seriously by anyone who knows better.

You might want to self-reflect on the way you feel about women and consider why so many people here aren't seeing things the way you do. Nothing about what you said rings true to me, because I've always treated women like they are human beings who exist for reasons other than fulfilling my sexual desires. That mentality has gotten me a lot farther than your attitude seems to have gotten you.

[+] [email protected] -6 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

Nobody that respects women talks like that.

Wrong, but ok.

let’s just say that I have no doubt that you’re telling the truth when you say that women won’t sleep with you organically.

I never said that. You must not be able to comprehend English like the other guy who claimed I said it was "required."

I specifically said: "Buying dinner, gifts, paying for events, etc. All of that is what makes men more attractive in the eyes of females" which is true.

You're arguing against what I'm not saying and getting mad at me for it, lol.

You might want to self-reflect on the way you feel about women and consider why so many people here aren’t seeing things the way you do.

Well: you and the other guy are showing me you can't read well, the snowball effect is very prevalent on these forums, and many of you people just ignore facts you don't like or pretend they don't make sense.

Are you familiar with argumentum ad populum? You should come across it when you go to college.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I specifically said: "Buying dinner, gifts, paying for events, etc. All of that is what makes men more attractive in the eyes of females" which is true.

That might true for you if "Buying dinner, gifts, paying for events, etc." is the bulk of what you can offer a woman you are interested in. The fact that you use derogatory language to make this point leads credibility to that theory in relation to you.

Are you familiar with argumentum ad populum? You should come across it when you go to college.

Good lord, just shut up. Your entire point here is just an anecdotal fallacy in that you think your personal experiences with women constitute a universal truth about women. What I'm telling you isn't that my point of view is right because people agree with me - I'm telling you that if you smell shit everywhere you go, to check your shoes.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

and many of you people just ignore facts you don’t like or pretend they don’t make sense.

Thanks for proving my point.

Medium "articles" are just blogs, by the way.

I’m telling you that if you smell shit everywhere you go, to check your shoes.

Or maybe grow up and see things for what they really are. Money runs the world, sweetie.

You're just trying to attack me personally because I'm saying things you do not like. It's better to be ignorant than to accept hard truths, in your mind.