Milo Yiannopoulos LIVE @ UCSB 7PM PST

a reply to: SomeDumbBroad

At its foundation, feminism is anti-family and anti-children.

The children will suffer no matter how one slices it. Feminism is actually one of the more selfish, narcissistic movements we've ever seen.

originally posted by: TechniXcality
a reply to: SomeDumbBroad



I'm glad there are women like you, and men like milo, if the liberals wonder why a trump presidency could even be fathomable the blame lays solely at their feet, and until they wake up or grow up and stop looking for others to blame they will be stuck in this perpetual state of cognitive dissonance.

PREACH!

But seriously, the more they try to silence people like Milo, the more they draw attention to it. Essentially they are providing a spotlight on something they know little about thinking they are exposing something when really they are providing a well lit path for those of us who feel the same way to find the people we can respect and support in their journeys of taking down political correctness in it's wake of stupidity.

a reply to: MysticPearl

I enjoy a speaker that Milo referred to earlier (Christina Hoff-Summers) who is a true feminist in that it should be about true equality and working towards the greater good. I absolutely adore her work and she speaks regularly with Milo.

3rd wave feminism is atrocious and should be squashed vehemently. They are the most hypocritical, lazy, self righteous people that have come to surface in recent years. Those people are social scum.

While I agree with you guys, I think its also important that women don't use good sex to justify unhealthy or toxic relationships in certain situations.

Honestly, what drives me absolutely bat$hit crazy about all of this dialogue, is the fact that the GOP has been conquered by the most centrist candidate of all time.

The liberals are too stupid to take a hint here.

We all have a pretty good idea of who Trump is as a person. The types of people who support him are not stupid.

I've never been a full fledged conservative. I believe in the family construct. I believe in an accountable government. I want people to be secure in their own beliefs, possessions, and lives.

I want my homeland to thrive in a world of "globalist equality", which is detrimental. Equality for the entire world means subservience for you and I.

That means, for my country and fellow Americans to thrive, we must reject that which would subjugate us. How is that so difficult to comprehend? Globalism subjugates the American people, and we actually have historical documentation which exempts us only if we cite it.

Citing it means acting upon it.

It's just so amazing that so many are beaten to the point that they don't realize this. Even if it weren't already written, it is ingrained within us from our birth.

Just fight. Don't fight for the nonsensical, fight for what is achievable. Fight for our right to be heard. Fight for our right to survive the globalist "full spectrum equality" agenda.

We are not all equal.. Equality is established by action, and not legislation.

Government has never fixed a damn thing.

a reply to: SomeDumbBroad

Men and women were a team and raised their families to work together...

This is how any relationship should be. A team, an equal partnership. I also think the weirdo groups among the Men's rights folks are freaking idiots. I'm going a little out of order here, but I don't have kids and I'm not married so I think this is sort of the foundation.


Question for you, what do you think the ideal family dynamic would be with a new child and a married couple?

Women are having children at a later stage in life, and I think that's actually a good thing. We used to pop out babies to help us tend the fields etc. ASAP. Now women can get an education, have a job, and have a baby when they're 30 instead of 16. Do you think that when a woman has a child her duties should be to the child? I think that ideally the mother would be with the child. If that's not possible than the father. Shipping a kid off to daycare and only seeing them between dinner time and bedtime just seems wrong. My buddy is doing the stay at home dad thing. His girlfriend makes a very good living working at Microsoft, so it makes more sense. At the same time, I do wonder if a child would be better off (if everything was perfect and easy) being raised by their mother.

Not at all judging single mothers or fathers. I have a very deep respect for anyone that manages to juggle life like that. I've gotten gut wrenched reading what single parents go through.

In a perfect world new parents could just spend 4-5 years with their kid until it was time for school. I really don't know how people do it if they can't afford daycare or don't have one parent that can stay home.

a reply to: Konduit

The women and custody thing infuriates me. Men are not given nearly enough credit in this world and are judged as parents unfairly simply by their gender.

A woman could have a super long record, a man could have a viable military career and no charges ever and he still would be foolish to think he could get sole custody.

Essentially she has to be locked up or completely disappeared/dead for that to happen in a majority of cases.

a reply to: SomeDumbBroad

Yeah that's pretty messed up. If parents are going to separate I don't think one should take complete custody unless it's an extreme situation.

But I think we've all seen what bitterness between spouses can do, and it's usually the men that are on the short end of the stick.

My parents separated when I was young but it was a joint custody deal, I lived with each one on and off for a few years at a time and made sure to see both of them on holidays. I can tell you first hand it's tough though.

a reply to: Domo1

Personally? I believe that the mother should stay with the child, at least until that child gets to grade school. With online classes it is not impossible to even continue education while nursing and child rearing. I have many friends who are stay at home moms who's husbands are on a restricted salary and they manage to make a comfortable living. It is not as impossible as society wants to make it.

I have always said I wanted to wait to have children until I am in a financially sound place and able to raise the kid the way I want. The children of the mothers who do stay home develop faster, they have higher vocabularies and are easily confused with being older than they are because they are so well mannered.

I was a nanny for a while and I can attest to the fact that children who are given individual attention are just all around easier to deal with as apposed to children who are bounced between daycares and family members... I'll put it into terms of a personal experience....

When I started my last job, I was bounced around and I didn't get individual training but rather I was put with anyone i could be with since we were busy. I was told not to do things that other's had taught me days before or I would be told not to do it one way, do it another way. No one was WRONG but they all had a slightly different way of doing things. It took me a loooooooong time to catch on and I am not unintelligent so it was frustrating to me as well. Another girl started and was made to be with one person all the time and she excelled far faster, was more confident when speaking with customers and had an all around easier time. Now, imagine being a small child in a similar situation. You don't get consistent care so you dont have any valid place to stand to build your own views. You have a bunch of disheveled pieces and no real starting point.

a reply to: Konduit

I can imagine it is not easy in that situation. My mother actually granted my dad shared custody and he only wanted me every other Sunday. Then a few months later he just completely disappeared. Which is fine with me for many reasons. So i never had a split house, but I was with my grandparents an awful lot while my mother was working.

I think i was being a little vague on the sole custody matter... I was speaking of a situation with a friend of mine who had an ex-wife in jail and spoke to a lawyer about getting full custody (she was a mess and he had a spotless record) and even the lawyer was against the idea of perusing that.

See the type of healthy discussion Milo inspires? If it was up to the Progressives we would be talking about how much of a racist misogynist he is and how we're all being oppressed by the patriarchy and rich whitey.

Misery really does love company.

Crazy that this thread didn't "take off" so to speak..

Just adds to my own personal observation that "society" detests agreement, and thus ignores it completely..

Disagreement generates flags and stars... Disagreement makes headlines. Disagreement creates "buzz".

Look at the "buzz" created by Milo being shut down.

Kinda adds to my defiance.

a reply to: Bobaganoosh

I definitely see your point there. People don't want nice, they want chaos. Hell that's a major reason why I don't watch the news and just look up stuff I want to know about.

As a gay refugee from socialist Europe, I felt radically unsafe when college authorities allowed a bigoted and homophobic religious preacher to physically threaten me, despite my polite but admittedly slightly camp entreaties that I should not be subjected to threats of violence for the crime of expressing sexual interest in an ethnic minority man. Speaking as a prominent member of the global LGBTQQUFHEBXJSBBF$:&:&; community and member of perhaps the most endangered and marg...

a reply to: Bobaganoosh

This didn't take off because the rioters didn't stop the speech, therefore there was nothing to defend.

People are actually defending the infringement of speech. There was no infringement, ergo, no defense was needed.

Milo was entertaining and enlightening as always! Plus there was some good, respectful questions from the opposition which is always great. The totalitarians seemed to take a break.

I also turned some people on to Milo for the first time. My boss came in to the office this morning all excited and told me he was going to watch everything he could find on Milo.

originally posted by: Konduit
a reply to: TechniXcality

We need to call in Fabulous Operations.

Hey!

That gun ain't legal in california.

It looks scary and holds too many rounds, and it's black!

So now we have to talk on a thread about a different speech just because the topic is about the same person?

In that logic, lets have one giant trump thread.

a reply to: SomeDumbBroad



well this is jacked up anyway here's the live stream