Remember when Tucker Carlson defended a teacher who gave a lap dance to her 15-year-old student?

[Schiff for Senate]

"I can excuse pedophilia, but I draw the line at LGBT+ people existing"

Anyway,

It's always projection.

To be sure, he’s not just excusing pedophilia/pervertedness, but he’s actually defending it.


Not that I’m surprised. Tucker and his crew, for all their lambasting ‘groomers’ (aka people who support and respect LGBT people), they actually support real groomers. It’s disgusting, sickening, extremely hypocritical, and it won’t cost him one viewer (they’ll all insist they’re against “the groomers,” and continue listening to the guy who’s actually defended real groomer teachers).

[7,052,770]

When news comes out about some young teacher sleeping with one of her students, every normal male's reaction is "Where were these teachers when I was in high school?" Tucker is popular because he says what we think.

Ask a parent how they would feel about a teacher having sex with their son. I don't think the reaction would be "Wow that's awesome!"

Emmanuel Macron's parents didn't like it, but love conquered all.

[Santander]

When news comes out about some young teacher sleeping with one of her students, every normal male's reaction is "Where were these teachers when I was in high school?" Tucker is popular because he says what we think.

Ask a parent how they would feel about a teacher having sex with their son. I don't think the reaction would be "Wow that's awesome!"

As long as they were still interested in girls their own age, and didn't knock up the teacher, I'm sure most dads would give their son a high five.

[Schiff for Senate]

Lmao they are making this about gay people when it literally wasn't. Yes, calling people you don't like a fascist is ok but when you call people you don't like another word you cry. If i said conservatives are groomers, my post would not have been deleted. The double standard is real

>"LGBTQ people are groomers"

>"This isn't about gay people"

Pick one.

why ignore the liberal part as if im singling out lgbt people.

You're dodging the question.

not dodging. Yall are singling them out like i made it about them

'Liberals and LGBTQ people'

Not just liberals, but specifically including LGBTQ people, regardless of political affiliation.

Ok so i didn't single one group out. Named multiple. Made it seem like it's about lgbts. Not what i did

You still said you believe LGBTQ people are groomers.

Ok. And?

What evidence do you have to back up the claim that 10-30 million Americans are actively engaged in a plot to groom children?

He’s from the Q party (and the party of the Big Lie). If you expect any evidence at all - and not just baseless and outrageous conspiracy theory claims - I’m afraid you’re going to be disappointed.

[Schiff for Senate]

"I think LGBTQ people are groomers but it's just, like, my opinion bro lol" is on more or less on the same level as "I think Mexicans are lazy but it's just, like, my opinion bro lol".

You can make the claim if you REALLY want to, but it's an insanely stupid idea to do so unless you're bringing the receipts. A certain somebody who shouldn't be named is going to end up infracted, rightfully so, and then whine and whine and whine about it.

No, the former is much worse, and (well-intentioned though you are) you’re drawing a false equivalency. Calling somebody lazy is much, much less serious and severe than calling them a groomer and sexual predator.

[Schiff for Senate]

If you want to say neither should be allowed, fine.

I'm maybe in the minority but I'm not 100% okay with this. People should be able to accurately or semi-accurately describe people using adjectives and labels on this forum. If somebody is a Republican and you call them a fascist, that might be a little too far, but if they're a Republican cheering on people who want to overturn democratic election results, calling them a fascist should absolutely be allowed because that's an accurate description. I would prefer if the moderators of this forum refrain from turning it into a safe space for anti-democracy insurrectionists.

When and if Schumer, Newsom and Tlaib start advocating for overturning election results, it should also be okay to call the red avatars that cheer them on fascists as well.

Ok fascist

Trolling doesn't suit you very well.

Its not trolling to say people who believe that tens of millions of people who support a different party then them are fascists. Saying you can't vote for the main opposition party without being a terrorist or a traitor is authoritarianism 101 and these people cannot seriously claim they care about democracy.

A party that says election results it does not like are illegitimate, is fascist. A party that literally tries to install a dictator after he loses a fair, democratic elevation, is a fascist party. A party that has tried to make it harder to vote for people who are likely to vote against them - is a fascist party.

[Schiff for Senate]

What the hell happened to this thread?

And yes, like it or not, Tucker is right that this is the absolute dream of many a teenage boy.

It’s still grooming and statutory rape. 15- and 16-year-olds want to have sex with attractive teachers. Does that mean they SHOULD, or that it’s at all right for teachers to do so? What the teachers are doing is still grooming and statutory rape, and it’s creepy and wrong. The teacher knows what she’s doing is highly inappropriate and immoral, taking advantage of a hormonal, immature underage teenager who is also her student. And Tucker is defending it. I shouldn’t have to explain to you why, even if the students think they’d like to, it’s wrong for teachers to have sex like this with underage students. Also suspect that, we’re the genders of the teacher and student flipped, you wouldn’t try to say something like this.

[OSR stands with Israel]

If you want to say neither should be allowed, fine.

I'm maybe in the minority but I'm not 100% okay with this. People should be able to accurately or semi-accurately describe people using adjectives and labels on this forum. If somebody is a Republican and you call them a fascist, that might be a little too far, but if they're a Republican cheering on people who want to overturn democratic election results, calling them a fascist should absolutely be allowed because that's an accurate description. I would prefer if the moderators of this forum refrain from turning it into a safe space for anti-democracy insurrectionists.

When and if Schumer, Newsom and Tlaib start advocating for overturning election results, it should also be okay to call the red avatars that cheer them on fascists as well.

Ok fascist

Trolling doesn't suit you very well.

Its not trolling to say people who believe that tens of millions of people who support a different party then them are fascists. Saying you can't vote for the main opposition party without being a terrorist or a traitor is authoritarianism 101 and these people cannot seriously claim they care about democracy.

A party that says election results it does not like are illegitimate, is fascist. A party that literally tries to install a dictator after he loses a fair, democratic elevation, is a fascist party. A party that has tried to make it harder to vote for people who are likely to vote against them - is a fascist party.

I’m objecting mainly to posters on here calling republicans terrorists or traitors cause both those are severe severe crimes that gets someone locked up for life in a supermax

[MarkD]

No, I don't remember when he said that. But I pay extremely little attention to Tucker. He isn't worth my attention. Most "opinion journalists" get very, very little of my attention; at least that's been the case for the last several years. IMO, they should get very little attention from anyone. They all ought to go out of business.

[Schiff for Senate]

When news comes out about some young teacher sleeping with one of her students, every normal male's reaction is "Where were these teachers when I was in high school?" Tucker is popular because he says what we think.

Are you in any way implying that gay or asexual men are not “normal men??” /s

[T'Chenka]

I’m objecting mainly to posters on here calling republicans terrorists or traitors cause both those are severe severe crimes that gets someone locked up for life in a supermax

"People that don't get arrested and charged in a court by a judge for things aren't those things" isn't really a great argument in regards to using labels for people in the english language.

If I stand here and watch somebody rape / murder / assault my neighbour, you're arguing that the assailant is literally not a rapist / murderer / violent criminal if the police never identify the culprit or if a court of law doesn't find them guilty. Is that the best argument you've got?

[Kahane's Grave Is A Gender-Neutral Bathroom]

When news comes out about some young teacher sleeping with one of her students, every normal male's reaction is "Where were these teachers when I was in high school?" Tucker is popular because he says what we think.

Are you in any way implying that gay or asexual men are not “normal men??” /s

This Santander iteration will probably be over by next week.

[Ferguson97]

When news comes out about some young teacher sleeping with one of her students, every normal male's reaction is "Where were these teachers when I was in high school?" Tucker is popular because he says what we think.

Ask a parent how they would feel about a teacher having sex with their son. I don't think the reaction would be "Wow that's awesome!"

As long as they were still interested in girls their own age, and didn't knock up the teacher, I'm sure most dads would give their son a high five.

Toxic masculinity in one sentence.

Most fathers would be marching to the school with a shotgun if it were a male teacher with their daughter. Why is it any different with the genders reversed?

[Aurelius]

When news comes out about some young teacher sleeping with one of her students, every normal male's reaction is "Where were these teachers when I was in high school?" Tucker is popular because he says what we think.

Ask a parent how they would feel about a teacher having sex with their son. I don't think the reaction would be "Wow that's awesome!"

As long as they were still interested in girls their own age, and didn't knock up the teacher, I'm sure most dads would give their son a high five.

Toxic masculinity in one sentence.

Most fathers would be marching to the school with a shotgun if it were a male teacher with their daughter. Why is it any different with the genders reversed?

Men are physically stronger than women. Very much so. A 15 year old boy can at the very least hold his own against an adult woman. A 15 year old girl has absolutely no chance against an adult man. It's a lot easier for a man to physically force a woman to have sex with him than the other way around. Of course, you know this, even if you pretend not to.

I get that a lot of modern American liberalism is fundamentally predicated on ignoring very obvious elephants in the room on everything from biology to crime to economics, but that doesn't mean the rest of us are obligated to play along with you. If I have a teenage daughter and some grown man runs off with her there is a very real chance she could end up dead or seriously hurt either physically or psychologically. The case of a teenage boy with an adult woman is not the same.

So much of what left-liberals call "toxic masculinity" is actually a good thing, btw. Not talking about this specific example even. Just generally.

[Aurelius]

When news comes out about some young teacher sleeping with one of her students, every normal male's reaction is "Where were these teachers when I was in high school?" Tucker is popular because he says what we think.

Are you in any way implying that gay or asexual men are not “normal men??” /s

Please do not get offended on other people's behalf, we all know exactly what he means and I at least don't have such a thin skin I'm gonna get all weepy over it

Plus, abnormal =/= bad. Something like 95% of men are straight. Obviously, that makes it normal. That does not mean being gay is bad.

[Schiff for Senate]

When news comes out about some young teacher sleeping with one of her students, every normal male's reaction is "Where were these teachers when I was in high school?" Tucker is popular because he says what we think.

Are you in any way implying that gay or asexual men are not “normal men??” /s

Please do not get offended on other people's behalf, we all know exactly what he means and I at least don't have such a thin skin I'm gonna get all weepy over it

Plus, abnormal =/= bad. Something like 95% of men are straight. Obviously, that makes it normal. That does not mean being gay is bad.

Yeah, I was being sarcastic (hence the "/s"). Relax.

[Kahane's Grave Is A Gender-Neutral Bathroom]

When news comes out about some young teacher sleeping with one of her students, every normal male's reaction is "Where were these teachers when I was in high school?" Tucker is popular because he says what we think.

Ask a parent how they would feel about a teacher having sex with their son. I don't think the reaction would be "Wow that's awesome!"

As long as they were still interested in girls their own age, and didn't knock up the teacher, I'm sure most dads would give their son a high five.

Toxic masculinity in one sentence.

Most fathers would be marching to the school with a shotgun if it were a male teacher with their daughter. Why is it any different with the genders reversed?

Men are physically stronger than women. Very much so. A 15 year old boy can at the very least hold his own against an adult woman. A 15 year old girl has absolutely no chance against an adult man. It's a lot easier for a man to physically force a woman to have sex with him than the other way around. Of course, you know this, even if you pretend not to.

I get that a lot of modern American liberalism is fundamentally predicated on ignoring very obvious elephants in the room on everything from biology to crime to economics, but that doesn't mean the rest of us are obligated to play along with you. If I have a teenage daughter and some grown man runs off with her there is a very real chance she could end up dead or seriously hurt either physically or psychologically. The case of a teenage boy with an adult woman is not the same.

So much of what left-liberals call "toxic masculinity" is actually a good thing, btw. Not talking about this specific example even. Just generally.

Lots of generalizations here. While it's true most of these height/strength stats are true, there are always many who don't fit in to it.

[Ferguson97]

Men are physically stronger than women. Very much so. A 15 year old boy can at the very least hold his own against an adult woman. A 15 year old girl has absolutely no chance against an adult man. It's a lot easier for a man to physically force a woman to have sex with him than the other way around. Of course, you know this, even if you pretend not to.

I get that a lot of modern American liberalism is fundamentally predicated on ignoring very obvious elephants in the room on everything from biology to crime to economics, but that doesn't mean the rest of us are obligated to play along with you. If I have a teenage daughter and some grown man runs off with her there is a very real chance she could end up dead or seriously hurt either physically or psychologically. The case of a teenage boy with an adult woman is not the same.

So much of what left-liberals call "toxic masculinity" is actually a good thing, btw. Not talking about this specific example even. Just generally.

... You realize there are other ways to rape someone besides physical force right? Psychological manipulation, blackmail, drugging etc. And in this specific case, we're talking about an adult molesting a child. The gender of either party is irrelevant. There is an inherent power imbalance between an adult and a child, especially when that adult is his teacher.

We're not talking about two adults here. We're literally talking about a grown ass woman with an underage child.

Statuary rape is still rape, even if the underage person was 'willing'. A 15-year-old is incapable of providing consent.

I get that a lot of modern American conservatism is fundamentally predicated on being deliberately obtuse and arguing in bad faith, but that doesn't mean the rest of us are obligated to play along with you.

Like I actually can't believe you've reached the point where you're downplaying child molestation, Cody. I didn't think that you'd actually sink that low. But here we are.

[Santander]

When news comes out about some young teacher sleeping with one of her students, every normal male's reaction is "Where were these teachers when I was in high school?" Tucker is popular because he says what we think.

Ask a parent how they would feel about a teacher having sex with their son. I don't think the reaction would be "Wow that's awesome!"

As long as they were still interested in girls their own age, and didn't knock up the teacher, I'm sure most dads would give their son a high five.

Toxic masculinity in one sentence.

Most fathers would be marching to the school with a shotgun if it were a male teacher with their daughter. Why is it any different with the genders reversed?

Obviously I'm not 100% serious. Most fathers would rightfully be outraged. Perhaps a minority of fathers wouldn't care much, but really, how could you trust the teacher/school when that kind of thing is going on?