Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Incel isn't the same thing as "celibate." Nobody is calling Benedictine monks "incels" -- it has to do with all the red pill vomit, the belief that woman shouldn't be in politics or in charge of their own bodies. That we belong to them.

It's the fragile ego that can't actually accomplish anything, and so it lashes out that others somehow took it away.

"Incel" in angry, ineffective, weak, misogynist. Weird.

Not the same as asexual at all.

"Incel" stands for "Involuntary Celibate"

They actually want to engage in physical relations, but cannot convince a member of their preferred gender to engage with them in such activities. They are resentful that they have been "denied" those opportunities. They are simultaneously entitled and lacking in self-confidence.....gee, does that remind of you someone "weird"?

Anonymous wrote:The Dems don’t select anything on substance only Optics

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Incel isn't the same thing as "celibate." Nobody is calling Benedictine monks "incels" -- it has to do with all the red pill vomit, the belief that woman shouldn't be in politics or in charge of their own bodies. That we belong to them.

It's the fragile ego that can't actually accomplish anything, and so it lashes out that others somehow took it away.

"Incel" in angry, ineffective, weak, misogynist. Weird.

Not the same as asexual at all.

"Incel" stands for "Involuntary Celibate"

They actually want to engage in physical relations, but cannot convince a member of their preferred gender to engage with them in such activities. They are resentful that they have been "denied" those opportunities. They are simultaneously entitled and lacking in self-confidence.....gee, does that remind of you someone "weird"?

Anonymous wrote:I find it strange Dems don’t understand the social contract requires having children (at least 1)

Right, so George Washington was, what, ripping up the social contract? The very GOAT of founding fathers to our country?

Weirdo.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Incel isn't the same thing as "celibate." Nobody is calling Benedictine monks "incels" -- it has to do with all the red pill vomit, the belief that woman shouldn't be in politics or in charge of their own bodies. That we belong to them.

It's the fragile ego that can't actually accomplish anything, and so it lashes out that others somehow took it away.

"Incel" in angry, ineffective, weak, misogynist. Weird.

Not the same as asexual at all.

"Incel" stands for "Involuntary Celibate"

They actually want to engage in physical relations, but cannot convince a member of their preferred gender to engage with them in such activities. They are resentful that they have been "denied" those opportunities. They are simultaneously entitled and lacking in self-confidence.....gee, does that remind of you someone "weird"?

Anonymous wrote:Incel isn't the same thing as "celibate." Nobody is calling Benedictine monks "incels" -- it has to do with all the red pill vomit, the belief that woman shouldn't be in politics or in charge of their own bodies. That we belong to them.

It's the fragile ego that can't actually accomplish anything, and so it lashes out that others somehow took it away.

"Incel" in angry, ineffective, weak, misogynist. Weird.

Not the same as asexual at all.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, does the DNC really think something like this is going to resonate with normal people?

[twitter] https://x.com/joshraby/status/1815889888207892619?s=46&t=pauDPTlVqSRnQcIdMZswBw[/twitter]

Maybe democrats just need to talk about Kamala's record.

Ohhh... wait...

Right. They don’t want to elevate the debate to politics and the issues because they know they’ll lose. Americans aren’t going to fall for a candidate being “weird” from the candidate marketing herself as the “ brat”. It makes Kamala sound like she is in 7th grade and that’s what her maturity seems like so it fits.

They want to keep enjoying the fake news that they’re weird and bang couches. Meanwhile, their party allows you to be gender free or have no sexuality or have all of them all at once. That’s not weird though. Being non binary , vegan, pro Palestine, trans, BLM/defund the cops all at once is so not weird.

From what I can gather, it appears Jd Vance was a progressive /Democrat and like many millennials became conservative after the progressives went too far left regarding gender and kids. Lots of progressives left the Democrat party in the past 10 years and lots of millennials and white males too but the Dems haven’t realized they’re bleeding out members yet which is why their Vp shortlists are a struggle to get anyone young. Or maybe they have realized it and that’s why they want automatic citizenship for illegal aliens.

My DD is asexual. I’m Gen X and I will admit don’t completely understand it and have been talking to her and learning. I do believe being asexual isn’t new. It’s just the women who were ACE in my generation often married, had a “low sex drive”, we’re “frigid” or just put up with sex as part of the marriage and kids deal. And I think knowing sexual relationships aren’t for you and making life choices accordingly isnt widely understood, but isn’t wierd, ick. And it’s better than “putting up with” sex. She is meh on kids, but 20, so that’s to be expected. But is open to starting a family with artificial insemination or something like that down the line. Is possibly interested in a non sexual marriage or coparenting relationship.

Now, I realize wierdo JD Vance would want to force her into marriage and kids and not have her be a childless cat lady/ in a sexless relationship (because JD Vance cares if my DD is sexually active? Because you do? That’s weird). The only difference between her and my generation is that she’d be up front about the no sex part and not “put up with it for a few years to have kids,” then have a marriage go off the tracks because different parties want different things/ sexual incompatibility . She’d be her authentic self, which I fully support.

Interesting and sadly, she does not consider herself to be part of the LGBTQ community. She says within a community where everyone primarily identifies by their sexuality, having no sexuality is marginalized. That makes her angry— that the “big tent” of people who don’t identify as heterosexual and have been marginalized for it will now marginalize a group because it identifies as no sexuality. So she doesn’t own a pride flag or rainbow anything. She has found her way to a group of other asexual kids on campus. And that helps.

But it doesn’t make her weird/Ick. She attends a top VA college (UVA/ WM/VT STEM), works hard, hangs out with friends, plays her instrument in the orchestra, is studying abroad, is very clean cut, favors a neat pony tail for long hair, jeans or Lulumon pants, a T-shirt and a hoodie, uses she/her, avoids the issue of Gaza on campus because, “I don’t like to both sides thing. But, her both sides are behaving terribly on campus”. She has moderately liberal political opinions and votes, but avoid campus politics.

And here’s the thing. Outside some friends on campus and her sibling and DH and I, she isn’t out about being asexual, even to grandparents, because “no one understands it”. If you met her, you’d think— normal UMC white girl. And have no idea.

So why is she weird/ Ick? And do you think it’s better for her to force herself to have sexual relationships she doesn’t want to form a family where she and the father will end up deeply unhappy and possibly divorced?

Since you are dunking on asexuals, I really want an answer here from PP or other a Republican weirdos who care whether people have sex, with whom, when, and in what positions. I think she’s doing her, not advertising or announcing her sexuality, or making it an issue, because she views her sexuality as private. But she is making life decision based on her authentic self. And I’m glad she is.

What’s your issue with it.

I have no issue with asexuals but I find it strange Dems use incel as a slur when they claim to be the sexually enlightened and accepting ones. I find it strange Dems don’t understand the social contract requires having children (at least 1) so the Dems are already at a disadvantage for the political future and you see the herds thinning already when the only millenial prospects are AOC and a small handful of others who also ironically don’t want kids. The Republicans are playing the long game by making sure they reproduce. The white and black communities in America are growing in childless rates with Gen Z and millennials and it’s not the Young Republican movement struggling with having kids. It’s all Democrats’ kids. The God, country, family thing wasn’t engrained into them which is fine but I think it puts progressives at a severe disadvantage for the future.
I suspect this is why Dems want illegal immigration and to make them citizens

This is some weird Handmaid's Tale shlt.

-signed an Independent, and a mom of two kids

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, does the DNC really think something like this is going to resonate with normal people?

[twitter] https://x.com/joshraby/status/1815889888207892619?s=46&t=pauDPTlVqSRnQcIdMZswBw[/twitter]

Maybe democrats just need to talk about Kamala's record.

Ohhh... wait...

Right. They don’t want to elevate the debate to politics and the issues because they know they’ll lose. Americans aren’t going to fall for a candidate being “weird” from the candidate marketing herself as the “ brat”. It makes Kamala sound like she is in 7th grade and that’s what her maturity seems like so it fits.

They want to keep enjoying the fake news that they’re weird and bang couches. Meanwhile, their party allows you to be gender free or have no sexuality or have all of them all at once. That’s not weird though. Being non binary , vegan, pro Palestine, trans, BLM/defund the cops all at once is so not weird.

From what I can gather, it appears Jd Vance was a progressive /Democrat and like many millennials became conservative after the progressives went too far left regarding gender and kids. Lots of progressives left the Democrat party in the past 10 years and lots of millennials and white males too but the Dems haven’t realized they’re bleeding out members yet which is why their Vp shortlists are a struggle to get anyone young. Or maybe they have realized it and that’s why they want automatic citizenship for illegal aliens.

My DD is asexual. I’m Gen X and I will admit don’t completely understand it and have been talking to her and learning. I do believe being asexual isn’t new. It’s just the women who were ACE in my generation often married, had a “low sex drive”, we’re “frigid” or just put up with sex as part of the marriage and kids deal. And I think knowing sexual relationships aren’t for you and making life choices accordingly isnt widely understood, but isn’t wierd, ick. And it’s better than “putting up with” sex. She is meh on kids, but 20, so that’s to be expected. But is open to starting a family with artificial insemination or something like that down the line. Is possibly interested in a non sexual marriage or coparenting relationship.

Now, I realize wierdo JD Vance would want to force her into marriage and kids and not have her be a childless cat lady/ in a sexless relationship (because JD Vance cares if my DD is sexually active? Because you do? That’s weird). The only difference between her and my generation is that she’d be up front about the no sex part and not “put up with it for a few years to have kids,” then have a marriage go off the tracks because different parties want different things/ sexual incompatibility . She’d be her authentic self, which I fully support.

Interesting and sadly, she does not consider herself to be part of the LGBTQ community. She says within a community where everyone primarily identifies by their sexuality, having no sexuality is marginalized. That makes her angry— that the “big tent” of people who don’t identify as heterosexual and have been marginalized for it will now marginalize a group because it identifies as no sexuality. So she doesn’t own a pride flag or rainbow anything. She has found her way to a group of other asexual kids on campus. And that helps.

But it doesn’t make her weird/Ick. She attends a top VA college (UVA/ WM/VT STEM), works hard, hangs out with friends, plays her instrument in the orchestra, is studying abroad, is very clean cut, favors a neat pony tail for long hair, jeans or Lulumon pants, a T-shirt and a hoodie, uses she/her, avoids the issue of Gaza on campus because, “I don’t like to both sides thing. But, her both sides are behaving terribly on campus”. She has moderately liberal political opinions and votes, but avoid campus politics.

And here’s the thing. Outside some friends on campus and her sibling and DH and I, she isn’t out about being asexual, even to grandparents, because “no one understands it”. If you met her, you’d think— normal UMC white girl. And have no idea.

So why is she weird/ Ick? And do you think it’s better for her to force herself to have sexual relationships she doesn’t want to form a family where she and the father will end up deeply unhappy and possibly divorced?

Since you are dunking on asexuals, I really want an answer here from PP or other a Republican weirdos who care whether people have sex, with whom, when, and in what positions. I think she’s doing her, not advertising or announcing her sexuality, or making it an issue, because she views her sexuality as private. But she is making life decision based on her authentic self. And I’m glad she is.

What’s your issue with it.

I have no issue with asexuals but I find it strange Dems use incel as a slur when they claim to be the sexually enlightened and accepting ones. I find it strange Dems don’t understand the social contract requires having children (at least 1) so the Dems are already at a disadvantage for the political future and you see the herds thinning already when the only millenial prospects are AOC and a small handful of others who also ironically don’t want kids. The Republicans are playing the long game by making sure they reproduce. The white and black communities in America are growing in childless rates with Gen Z and millennials and it’s not the Young Republican movement struggling with having kids. It’s all Democrats’ kids. The God, country, family thing wasn’t engrained into them which is fine but I think it puts progressives at a severe disadvantage for the future.
I suspect this is why Dems want illegal immigration and to make them citizens

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are weird. Period.

One guy is an orange wanna be dictator who hangs out with guys like Putin and Kim jong un.

The other guy talks about cats, childless ladies, racism as it relates to diet Mountain Dew, etc…

Sorry but that’s freakin weird.

Injecting bleach.

Selling gold sneakers.

Remarking on how hot your own daughter is.

Wanting to give people more votes if they have children.

Monitoring women’s menstrual periods?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, does the DNC really think something like this is going to resonate with normal people?

[twitter] https://x.com/joshraby/status/1815889888207892619?s=46&t=pauDPTlVqSRnQcIdMZswBw[/twitter]

Maybe democrats just need to talk about Kamala's record.

Ohhh... wait...

Right. They don’t want to elevate the debate to politics and the issues because they know they’ll lose. Americans aren’t going to fall for a candidate being “weird” from the candidate marketing herself as the “ brat”. It makes Kamala sound like she is in 7th grade and that’s what her maturity seems like so it fits.

Sure, the Democrats are the ones who don't want to elevate the debate. After eight years of Trump's lies and insults. The thing is that Trump and the GOP haven't managed to find an attack line on Harris yet so you're pretending to take the higher ground.