When the metoo meme goes too far.
Have a feeling she and her like-minded friends if (she has any) will see her as the victim.
Pol humor thread
Other urls found in this thread:
youtube.com
newobserveronline.com
twitter.com
bump
So she almost completely ruined the lives of two football players and she only gets a year for the false accusation. She should have gotten a much heftier sentence.
how's his clan faring?
I wouldn't even rape her.
Only high profile men will get this type of protection
>She was scared another man she liked would lose interest in her if he knew the truth.
i bet hes dying to get with her now lmao
Varg is Back!
I don't know how no one killed this cunt yet, I wonder how long it will take until americans decide to bring freedom to Venezuela.
any poppy fields in ven?
Lots of them, it's what their economy is made of, too bad only America has the equipment to use their oil.
kek
lost instantly
ten bucks says shes a J...
you know im right....
Poe's law in effect.
This guy could easily be unironic
>Connecticut university of rape
Kek
teach boys not to rape
I hate these so much.
Be forced to take in venezuelan refugees? Fuck no. They choose State Socialism and let them die by it.
holy shit hahaha
they seized guns away from the population years ago
Not enough wool?
this is the best
Can someone post that meme where a boomer brainlet goes up to young chicks and tells them they're good looking and then walks away?
"haha lookin good tonight ladies"
*and then walks away*
its always some retarded thing they are willing to destroy the man(mens) lives over too...
FFS women get your shit together
Found it nvm
>seeing your get in the screencap
Is this what reddit feels like?
>Women getting their shit together
Leafs saying leaf shit.
I always thought true gayness couldn't exist, but I was proven wrong.
of course she has friends, and of course they will side with her
it is always like this when women are around
>Have a feeling
How about you don't base your assumptions on "feelings" like a faggot and only trust hard data, I'm tired of these "bwaah bwaaah look at this anecdotal evidence guys". Some of you are decent, but seriously this place is filled with retards.
1 year isnt long enough. Should be both rape charges in jail.
physical evidence is based on feelings, because observations are gathered by your senses, and senses are feelings.
Kek, our sitcoms were actually funny back then.
That's not the same as "having a feeling".
But since you smartass want to be pedantic, here's the actual definition of feeling:
feeling
ˈfiːlJŋ/
noun
noun: feeling; plural noun: feelings
>an emotional state or reaction.
>an idea or belief, especially a vague or irrational one.
>the capacity to experience the sense of touch.
>a sensitivity to or intuitive understanding of.
>showing emotion or sensitivity.
metoomemes!
That faglord clearly samefagged his own thread with heaven.
This is "let them eat cake" levels of retardation, why is this motherfucker not hanging from a lamp post?
i'm sad to see you are spanish. Most spanish i've seen have been bros, not autists.
Premise 1:You should only believe in things that can be empirically verified via science.
Premise 2: However the statement "You should only believe in things that can be empirically verified via science." cannot itself be empirically verified by science.
Premise 3: Therefor it logically follows you should not only believe in things that can be empirically verified by science.
if you want the truth, you need to use logical, and empirical evidence. Not just empirical evidence.
Premise 1: You observe and experience the world around you.
Premise 2: You cannot observe and experience the world and not actually exist as a real object (or property of objects) in the world.
Premise 3: You exist as a real object (or property of objects) in the world.
You existing is self evidently true. Conscious objects do exist in the reality, because you exist.
> not wanting to shave a girl to prepare her for a real man while you're locked in chastity
What are you, retarded?
>She was scared another man she liked would lose interest in her if he knew the truth
>Let us vote men, we're equal!
Lefty demonrats will probably run her for public office once she finishes her year of pussy-licking.
>Hey I know you're telling me I ignore facts, but this random news agency published an article about ignoring facts. So if this one article did it we can too
Whataboutism, that's cheap rhetoric for retards. Someone else being shit doesn't excuse your behaviour
This looks like some autistic shit someone would post on r/worldbuilding
Not well, obviously
I get what you mean, and I agree, but that doesn't mean one can now *only* trust anecdotal evidence, since that's unreliable data (and it's not like your first premise that can't be analysed, there's actual data you can look at).
Thought experiment: What if a human looking machine acted spliting image as a real human, and acted very authentically as it was copying the motions of a human from another room who would respond to the person. On the inside of this machine was completely hollow, with a regular processing computer just to do the motions of the robot. Surely this machine in reality is not conscious in any sense, as it is a very simple hollow motion copying machine.
However to an observer just looking at the surface of it's skin, it is moving and acting exactly like how a real conscious being acts, how could he ever determine through observation that the robot wasn't human?
it's simple, he could not. Consciousness has never been directly observed, and our only confirmation is that others seem to act like they are conscious; however there is no way to actually see someone else's experience to know they are conscious.
I had to look up the source for your article, >newobserveronline.com
Not only is it being a fucking asshole not citing the sources, but also your website is more biased than a retarded grandfather with dementia.
Once again, you cannot empirically verify this, nor is there any data that you can show. You must believe this axiomatically; it is a properly basic belief, however that doesn't mean it is certain, just in a practical and intuitive sense correct.
It is more intuitive to assume that other beings are actually conscious like you are than it is to assume that they aren't, which would be the position of the skeptic (solipsist). Intuition is not empirical evidence; technically speaking it's not even logical evidence. This is the stuff science is built of. Similar to how we cannot prove others are conscious, we cannot prove that we are not a brain in a vat of chemicals being prodded to hallucinate the world we see. Or that we were not created 5 seconds ago, and just had thoughts of past history implanted.
truely australians are to good for this gay earth
That's unrelated to the topic, though. You're going full nihilism now, dude.
You could say this is an example of practical logic, which of course isn't pure logic, nor is it empirically verifiable.
Have I said anything that was untrue? Then you agree that there is truth outside of science. Philosophy is unscientific, but why is it that when I say that it sounds like i'm saying philosophy is untrue? To the literal definition of what it means to be science, phillosophy is not a science; however in no way does that mean it is not true. Philosophy is a totally legitimate form of investigation, just as science is.
lol
lol
You're right, Germany is fine. At last I finally see
You know when youre stairing at a beautiful woman, waliking alone, with your “imma gonna pull those legs apart” eyes, and she looks directly at you from across the parking lot?
Thats because theres a 6th sense that cant be measures by current science.
Hugh ha Hugh
Science is tied to truth in the meaning of the words that we use, however in reality this is not at all true. There are things outside of science that are true. There is science that is not true.
I am by no means against empirical evidence. I want to come full circle now:
Feelings are a form of verification, just as empirical evidence is. The only reason you believe the world is not an illusion is because it feels more intuitive that it is. A big reason for why you even believe in truth, is because truth feels true.
what would real history be?
>Have I said anything that was untrue? Then you agree that there is truth outside of science.
I never claimed there isn't truth outside of science, I said don't fall for anecdotal evidence when you can apply the scientific method (the concept of theories, assumptions, etc). In other words, my point is that if you see an article with the headling "This woman is a whore" and say "SEE?! Women are whores after all" you're a retard. It doesn't matter how many single accounts of anecdotal evidence you consume, it shouldn't become more true for you.
So sure, there's stuff that science can't see or explain, but you can't use this as a blanket statement to just make assumptions with insufficient evidence.
we should change their friendly name to trees of peace