Wear Our LGBT Symbols Publicly Or Leave The Country!

a reply to: infolurker

Meanwhile, on television, NHL analyst E.J. Hradek said that Provorov should go back to Russia if he's not willing to join his teammates in embracing the rainbow flag. (Yes, seriously!) And TV host Sid Seixeiro called for the NHL to fine the team $1 million dollars so they "stop offending people... on nights when it's supposed to be about inclusivity."

This outrage is simply unhinged.

Does anyone else see the hyprocisy here? This Hradek analyst is being non-inclusive with Provorov's choice due to his religious stance so all I see is one guy taking offense, what do his teammates think about this?

originally posted by: Blue_Jay33
How about this, we don't infringe on their rights, and they don't infringe on ours.
Our rights, not to violate our own Christian based conscious.

Because that is not their issue.

They are fundamentally mentally unstable and insecure, witness their "pride " parades

They know damn well they are mental but demand support and agreement from the normal population to reassure themselves they are not abnormal.

originally posted by: quintessentone
a reply to: infolurker

Meanwhile, on television, NHL analyst E.J. Hradek said that Provorov should go back to Russia if he's not willing to join his teammates in embracing the rainbow flag. (Yes, seriously!) And TV host Sid Seixeiro called for the NHL to fine the team $1 million dollars so they "stop offending people... on nights when it's supposed to be about inclusivity."

This outrage is simply unhinged.

Does anyone else see the hyprocisy here? This Hradek analyst is being non-inclusive with Provorov's choice due to his religious stance so all I see is one guy taking offense, what do his teammates think about this?

What? What are you trying to say here? Do you mean that the opinion of one guy, some analyst named Hradek, (what kind of name is that, anyway) DOESN'T represents all the MSM?

I'd never hire a male acquaintance to watch my children... but if I was forced to choose a man to watch them I'd probably opt for a gay man... as they are the next best thing to a woman.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

No. I said "Conservative Matt Walsh seems to think that all men are pedos, given the opportunity."

the the wider argument is that no one knows which ones are.. some go to incredible lengths to get access to kids

after my marriage failed i went through my own healing journey to deal with childhood CSA, from there I offered support to others on their journeys and it became the only topic I've ever really been an activist on, this was mid 90s and just post the satanic panic and after the pedo groups piggy backing the gay liberation movement to make their appetite for kids legal imploded..

even knowing that aspect there are no questions or tests as to who is a survivor, an abuser, a gatekeeper or a hand maiden.. as even the survivor groups attract some males who get off hearing how others have been abused, rape crisis groups attract similar kinds of males..

bottom line for most parents though is to err of the side of caution..
and most women display similar levels of caution to all men as there is no test to say which is safe..

the whole thing is a nightmare safeguarding issue that boils down to not knowing which male is safe and which male isn't..

Now listen carefully as there seems to be a lot of confusion for once more.

You need to get your knowledge upgraded as you boys and girls have a lot of outdated views that have been disproven by science.

Are you a man and you want to be a woman? What's the problem? Just identify as a woman and your chromosomes will change accordingly and automatically. Same for women who want to become men. Open up your mind and don't be transphobic.

Why are you not wearing the LGBT symbols? Why are you not taking part in LGBT awareness events?
Why are you saying that gay people are abnormal? Open up your mind and don't be homophobic.


1) Stop being transphobic
2) Stop being homophobic
3) Get vaccinated and boost yourselves. Are you up to date with your vaccinations?

a reply to: Sookiechacha

Matt Walsh didn't mean what you have implied. This is clearly a misrepresentation of yours and there are other members who have told you exactly the same.

Where is it in his speech that he implies that all men are pedos??

You have an overactive imagination.

a reply to: Asmodeus3

Please enlighten us!

What did Mr Walsh actually mean when he twitted the words in response to the news about 2 pedophiles harming their adoptive children?
"I would never let a man who is not a blood relative babysit my kids. "

"none of them, if they are parents, have ever or would ever hire a man to come watch their kids while they go out for a date night."

"The point is that when it comes to hiring someone who is basically a stranger to watch your kids, almost every parent will always choose women."

Like I said, you're always welcome to disagree with him.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Asmodeus3

Please enlighten us!

What did Mr Walsh actually mean when he twitted they words?
"I would never let a man who is not a blood relative babysit my kids. "

"none of them, if they are parents, have ever or would ever hire a man to come watch their kids while they go out for a date night."

"The point is that when it comes to hiring someone who is basically a stranger to watch your kids, almost every parent will always choose women."

Like I said, you're always welcome to disagree with him.

None of what you claimed i.e that he thinks most men are pedos. That's your own unsubstantiated assertion based on your own opinions. I just disagree with your ludicrous interpretation. You need to show that this what he meant and not just stated as a fact.

Which video are you referring to? And in which part of the video he says what you have written.down and misrepresented?

a reply to: NightSkyeB4Dawn

Yup as a kid I didnt have computer access till I was in high school, no cell phones so you had to go out and be a part of the community, make friends learn to talk to people, be active.

Add in the mega cities and soulless suburbs on top of a bad education and non-stop screen time for kids and its a bad bad mix.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Asmodeus3

Please enlighten us!

What did Mr Walsh actually mean when he twitted they words?
"I would never let a man who is not a blood relative babysit my kids. "

"none of them, if they are parents, have ever or would ever hire a man to come watch their kids while they go out for a date night."

"The point is that when it comes to hiring someone who is basically a stranger to watch your kids, almost every parent will always choose women."

Like I said, you're always welcome to disagree with him.

Based only on what you posted here?

He meant that, statistically factual, men are much more likely to be violent, neglectful and/or sexual predators ... and because of this fact the vast majority of parents play the odds and do not hire men to watch their children.

Most people don't disagree with Mr Walsh in what you posted here.


Where Mr Walsh might be incorrect is in making these factual statements in relation to "gay men" when it has nothing to do with sexual orientation.

ETA

I see you have edited your post to now include the tie in to the Gay Pedo case.

a reply to: dandandat2

He meant that, statistically factual, men are much more likely to be violent, neglectful and/or sexual predators ... and because of this fact the vast majority of parents play the odds and do not hire men to watch their children.

That's what I take his words to mean as well.

I see you have edited your post to now include the tie in to the Gay Pedo case.

The only editing I've done is to correct typos,spelling and grammatical errors. Mr Walsh statements were in response to the news of a gay couple abusing their adoptive children, I never implied otherwise, which is why I said he seems to think that all men are would be pedos, given the opportunity. So, his tweets confirm that people know better than to give them the opportunity.

I have a question; were the Zulocks, the gay Georgia couple that molested and pimped their adoptive sons, able to fly under the radar for so long because of their sexual orientation?

Were the adoption agency, social workers, schools, friends and ect neglectful in watching out for these children because their fathers were gay? Did they allow important warning signs to pass by without scrutiny because they did not want to run afoul of the Woke and/or LGBTQ+ community?

That to me seems like the real danger these days. Not that Gay people commit more sexual crimes than others; but that the progressive culture is willing to cover for such actions because they are fearful that it might harm the greater movement.

a reply to: Asmodeus3

from the other side of the line women walk down streets alone and I guess if America they reach for whatever protection they have in the UK they'll reach for their keys as the nearest thing to a weapon..

decent men are sensitive to that and will cross the road to avoid making lone females afraid, not because they'll attack but because they know men..

decent gay men will get that as will decent policemen or even decent priests as predators will got to any lengths to get hold of their prey..

be ware of insert label basically means beware men.. decent men get that..

Be wary of lone policemen, warns London head teacher

sadly this is the real world as our safeguarding goes to sh*t this'll only get worse.

A head teacher has warned pupils at her all-girls' school "not to allow a lone policeman to approach you at any time".

Fionnuala Kennedy, head of Wimbledon High School in south London, made the comments after the David Carrick case.

a reply to: dandandat2

We know that's the case. Just look at all that went on in Loudon County Schools.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: dandandat2

He meant that, statistically factual, men are much more likely to be violent, neglectful and/or sexual predators ... and because of this fact the vast majority of parents play the odds and do not hire men to watch their children.

That's what I take his words to mean as well.

I see you have edited your post to now include the tie in to the Gay Pedo case.

The only editing I've done is to correct typos,spelling and grammatical errors. Mr Walsh statements were in response to the news of a gay couple abusing their adoptive children, I never implied otherwise, which is why I said he seems to think that all men are would be pedos, given the opportunity. So, his tweets confirm that people know better than to give them the opportunity.

Your original post started with:

What did Mr Walsh actually mean when he twitted they words?
"I would never let a man who is not a blood relative babysit my kids....

As seen in my quote of your original post.

Then you changed it to this:

What did Mr Walsh actually mean when he twitted the words in response to the news about 2 pedophiles harming their adoptive children?
"I would never let a man who is not a blood relative babysit my kids... "

Adding the bolded sentence. Thats more than just fixing speeling and grammar.

_______

But regardless; Mr Walsh does not "seem to think that all men are would be pedos" ... that conclusion is of your own making.

What Mr Walsh is doing is taking a sentiment that most people hold ... "Being apprehensive in allowing non family men watch their children, because men in general are statistically more dangerous than women" ... and using this fact to argue that gay men should not be allowed to adopt.

Mr Walsh is wrong ... but not because he believes that "all men are would be pedos" as you are asserting. Again it is only you making the jump to that conclusion.

a reply to: dandandat2

Thats more than just fixing speeling and grammar.

Pffft..EXCUSE ME! I should have added "and clarity"

But regardless; Mr Walsh does not "seem to think that all men are would be pedos" ... that conclusion is of your own making.

I disagree with you. Clearly it's Mat Walsh's conclusion. Otherwise, he wouldn't have conflated "a man" babysitting with male couple adopting a child. And, It's not just me. Plenty of people chimed in on his Twitter thread to say the same thing.

Here's what he said that started everything.

I would never let a man who is not a blood relative babysit my kids. Most parents wouldn't. And yet we let male couples adopt children and then act surprised when this happens.

It's not surprising. Horrific, infuriating, gut-wrenchingly disgusting and evil. But not surprising

And here are some of the responses to that one tweet:

Zoe Jane Halo
@zoejanexy
·
Jan 18
Replying to
@MattWalshBlog
So you’re saying, that men are predisposed to molesting children? That’s an interesting take from you.

Unlearn16
@unlearn16tweet
·
Jan 18
Replying to
@MattWalshBlog
Men are the problem? Interesting. Put down your podcast mic and social media please. Glad you are willing to admit you are the problem.

𝙗𝙡𝙖𝙘𝙠𝙝𝙤𝙧𝙨𝙚 𝙥𝙞𝙠𝙚 …… 🎧 𝘪𝘯 𝘣𝘪𝘰
@blackhorse_pike
·
Jan 18
Replying to
@MattWalshBlog
Every time Matt is left alone with a young girl he surreptitiously measures for their ring size
Chris Barone
@TheReal_CTB1
·
Jan 18
Replying to
@MattWalshBlog
Matt, when I was on active duty as a US Marine, I was hired to babysit. I have been married for 24 years and I would hire the best man or woman available to do the job. You need to choose your words more wisely given your platform.

Garrett Bridges
@garrettbridges
·
Jan 18
Replying to
@MattWalshBlog
I don't even know where to begin with this. What about childcare? I did summer camp and school daycare for 8 years. I was alone with kids all the time.

I've watched kids from families that I'm not close to since then. Am I an abuser? A groomer?

Keith Hendricks
@hendrick2018
·
Jan 18
Replying to
@MattWalshBlog
I guess Matt is saying never trust HIM to babysit your kids!

mstdn.ca/@DJDynamicNC
@DJDynamicNC
·
Jan 19
Replying to
@MattWalshBlog
Gosh Matt if you're right then it sounds like men can't be trusted with any kind of power at all, time to put women in charge of everything, good point

RoadRageDiogenes
@Road2Diogenes
·
Jan 19
Replying to
@MattWalshBlog
This is such a great self-own and he doesn't even know it. Since all the men he knows are going to be other straight conservatives he's telling you to not trust those people with children.

PipsDontLie
@YogurtPh1r3
·
Jan 18
Replying to
@MattWalshBlog
Lots of projection going on here Matt. Just because you aren't safe around kids doesn't mean most men aren't.

I assume you're fine with a Lesbian couple adopting though? Surely they'd be extra double safe, especially if kept far away from you.

twitter.com... e1bdf1629456c5a4e09067d761248%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.wonkette.com%2Fglenn-greenwald-matt-walsh

a reply to: Sookiechacha

So you post a bunch of Tweets and you think they comprise "most people"? I count 7 or 8 chosen by you out of a list of replies, but what I was I thinking? 7 or 8 is perfect sample size of "most people" in the entire country, or better most parents, and certainly these selected by you Tweets that happened to see what Walsh said and bothered to reply are obviously a perfect cross section of that population because there would be NO BIAS at all in that selection for any reason ever.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

The amount of misinterpretation and misrepresentation of what Matt Walsh said from your side is just unbelievable. You keep misinterpreting him and misrepresenting what he said by projecting your own unsubstantiated claim as a fact.

Clearly he doesn't imply that all men are pedos. That's a absurd and ludicrous claim. It derives from nowhere other than your mind. There is only one case where I can think that he might be misrepresented deliberately and this is from people who belong to the woke crowd. By the way... Left wing?

This thread is about gay rights groups DEMANDING that people support their lifestyles.

How authoritarian, but with glitter.