It’s long past the point of “what if”, it is what’s already happening, and it’s no accident, either, the system is working as intended - to withstand progress and maintain the status quo and the control it affords those in power.

Depends how well trained/organised they are, I suppose?

Yeah, that’s well put.

Except it isn’t obvious to many people, and using the correct language is more important than any supposed point they were trying to make (because part of rape culture is society, and especially the media and the courts not calling it what it is to muddy the water. I’m not accusing OP of doing that deliberately, but that’s why words matter, even if you intention is benign).

Edit to add now my brain is in gear, probably just as important: is the issue of perpetuating ableist and or queerphobic stigma (which again, OP doesn’t have to intend for it, for it to be happening) - there is absolutely nothing inherently wrong with a person who has HIV having unprotected sex. Most HIV patients, especially in developed countries, now have viral loads so low they are not contagious, and have partners who are perfectly happy and safe having unprotected sex with them.

The problem here is and always was the lack of consent, aka rape, and the fact that the rapist husband told all his rapist friends that condoms were unnecessary. Nothing at all to do with the HIV status of one of the rapists (note she caught 3 other STI’s too, but no one is singling those rapists out individually)

So yes, words matter, the fact that they don’t matter to you, or any of the other fragile downvoters, doesn’t change that.

if you knew you were HIV positive, why would you have unprotected sex with rape anybody?

When you use the correct terms, your question answers itself (E, in case it wasn’t clear: because they’re a selfish piece of shit).

No, no it isn’t.

-residents of like 98% of the rest of the world

Yeah, it’s always those who shout loudest about free speech that have the least understanding of how it works. 😂

Literally no “free speech absolutist” has ever actually been a “free speech absolutist”, it is always about wanting to avoid the consequences to their own hate speech, while they hold anyone who opposes it doubly accountable for their opposition, and try, often successfully, to silence that.

Lol, like she’s going to U-turn on this if she’s elected?

A neoliberal defending rich people? Say it ain’t so! 🙄

The only difference is Hitlers victims were mostly white

Holy fuck, how fucking convenient that the victims of white supremacy (and groups of people who have been consistently excluded from and oppressed by white Christian societies) can be considered white when it fits the twisted game of oppression olympics you’re trying to play here, to what, virtue signal? Be a contrarian? Or do you genuinely think the holocaust gets some sort of special status because white supremacist society somehow suddenly cares about Jews and Roma people (or queers, for that matter)?

I don’t think anyone here would argue with you that Churchill wasn’t a murderous piece of shit, but leaning in to holocaust denial is never going to help you make a case for anything other than that you’re a holocaust denier.

Anytime someone says “tell me you know nothing about X without saying you know nothing about X” instead of in any way refuting the comment they’re replying to, it only shows that they’re the one who actually doesn’t know anything about it.

No, it’s actually telling the person I’m replying to that their wilful ignorance is glaringly obvious, and that I have no interest in biting their poorly prepared bait. If they’ve very openly made zero effort, why the fuck should I make any?

You know people read what you write right? Like people other than who you’re talking to? If you can refute them, then refute them,

Why the fuck should I invest any of my time and emotional labour seriously replying to someone who clearly gets all their information exclusively from sources that confirm their bias, and have no interest in learning, but only asserting their confidently incorrect opinion, and having it confirmed back to them?

I actually wasted years doing exactly that, because I too believed the patriarchal lie that told me it was my job, and you know what?

THEY AREN’T LISTENING AND DON’T CARE

You want to refute them? Be my fucking guest, but don’t fucking demand it of others. I’ve learned from my mistakes and have better things to do with my life than waste it coddling misogynists, and it certainly isn’t my responsibility to hold their hand and walk them in to acting in their own best interests, when they’d rather be oppressive in return for the pittance the patriarchy gives them.

otherwise you’re just making your side look bad and you’re not making anything better except maybe you feel better patting yourself on the back with your pithy and original comment.

Lmmfao, says the person who inserted themselves in to a conversation for the sole purpose of demanding others do their work for them, while contributing absolutely nothing.

You’re just as big a part of the problem as the asshat I replied to, trying to shift the blame for misogynists on to feminists “not being nice enough” to them, but hey, you’re in good company, the biggest misogynists will always find a way to blame feminism for their actions and behaviour and avoid taking any accountability or responsibility for themselves.

Well done? and fuck you. ¯\(ツ)/¯

Yeah, it’s almost fascinating to see how some people are able to confront some of how the systems we live under oppress and marginalise parts of society, but not if they happen to benefit from a particular system, in which case they will always prioritise their own interests, because, like you say, they’ve never learned any better (in fact, are actively taught the opposite deliberately to ensure the divide remains).

I generally don’t even bother replying to people like this anymore and just block, but this was so blatant I couldn’t help myself lol, it really brought to mind a couple of points others have already summed up better than I can:

Lmfao, tell me you know nothing about feminism without saying you know nothing about feminism

Feminism does represent men’s issues, more than any other movement I would argue, and definitely more than any MRA ever has, it just doesn’t centre men’s issues, which is what you are used to, so you reject it because, for a change, something is entirely cantered around you.

You don’t care about equity and equality (which is what feminism is for), you care about maintaining your privilege which entitles you to everything in society being first and foremost aimed at and cantered around you. It’s the small token the patriarchy rewards you with to ensure you never join the fight against it as it fucks you up with shit like toxic masculinity and blames it all on feminism, and it’s obviously working.

England on the bandwagon too:

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/anti-monarchy-protest-russia-police-b2166183.html

The documentary is worth watching if you can access it.

Yes, you can actually have mold grow on your skin. But there are a lot of bacteria competing for food with the mold, as well as body oils and waste secretions, on top of the body’s immune system being pretty good at taking care of invasions.

There are quite a few different types of fungal skin infections (athlete’s foot, ringworm, fungal nails, an array of yeast infections), some can be pretty damn persistent!

The democrats didn’t leave fighting for trans rights out because they fear being attacked (literally every word they say will get twisted and attacked), but because they don’t intend to fight for them, and saying they do, would be the lie.

The fact that you fuckers are so willing to take it the other way and support the idea of erasing one of the main groups being targeted right now in order to win over some bigots (despite, in your own warped minds, them really truly supporting trans rights, promise!) is honestly disgusting.

“Win over bigots to beat the bigot!”

How the fuck do you think that ends for trans people?

Is not mentioning trans rights during an election speech the same thing as being against trans rights?

In this climate, when we are under direct and active attack? Fucking yes.

I’m all for trans rights, but I don’t bring it up in every conversation I have about politics.

Gotta love the overinflated ego, but you aren’t trying to win an election to run a fucking country, your conversations aren’t relevant.

Hypothetically, what if talking about trans rights turned off more voters than it brought in? What if that led to trump getting elected? Would it have been better to not mention it in the first place, or was the morality of mentioning it more important than trying to get elected during an election speech?

If you prioritise winning over bigots over your morals, and are willing to further compromise the safety of marginalised people for the sake of furthering your career - you are just as much of a bigot, and again - have no moral, only self interests.

Claiming that supporting trans rights will get trump elected is flat out manipulative bigotry, and makes you a liar, because you’re not all for trans rights, you’re only for trans rights when it’s convenient for you.

You are being the “white moderate” that causes more harm than the outright bigot does, because you pretend to support the cause, but are happy to tell others to wait for their liberation until it’s more convenient for you.