Social Justice Warriors - Now With Less Feminism Sperging

There aren't enough facepalm, blinking in astonishment, shocked anime girls, and any other imaginable reaction images to express the sheer level of wondering how stupid and ignorant these people are. Is this intended to be serious? Does this idiot not know that they were real people?
They know Bonnie and Clyde were real people right?
They actually refer to them as a myth in the article. I have no idea if they corrected it since, but they did use that word when I suspect - with great generosity - that they meant legend.
 
They referred to them as a myth. I don't think these people understand words.
It’s one thing if Bonnie and Clyde were mythical people, but they are real. I wish people were more strict with their word definitions because it makes more things unnecessarily confusing. It’s the same thing with all the gender discussions among SJWs. They tend to broaden definitions so much that the word itself is made useless.
 
It’s one thing if Bonnie and Clyde were mythical people, but they are real. I wish people were more strict with their word definitions because it makes more things unnecessarily confusing. It’s the same thing with all the gender discussions among SJWs. They tend to broaden definitions so much that the word itself is made useless.
They broaden definitions so much that if you get into a discussion with one who isn't screeching at you half of their argumentation will be "What do you mean by that?". They've gotten used to re-defining words so often that every "serious" discussion involves defining terms like you're writing a philosophical paper.
 
I think whoever wrote it is literally such an ignoramus they don't even know they were real people.
But they probably think Thelma and Louise are real people.
Hopefully, me being pathetically optimistic, they confused Romeo and Juliet with Bonnie and Clyde. I mean if you know absolutely nothing about it and all you know is "couple dies" I could understand it.

Is the movie about two psychopaths that kill and steal, or two people with something preventing them from being together?
 
  • Optimistic
Reactions: UnsufficentBoobage
Hopefully, me being pathetically optimistic, they confused Romeo and Juliet with Bonnie and Clyde. I mean if you know absolutely nothing about it and all you know is "couple dies" I could understand it.
oh man if only these reporters could look into something to make sure the facts are right
we would need a word for that, investigating?
but fuck man, being a reporter, a journalist is so hard
most oppressed class
if they even do .00001 femtoseconds of looking up facts they could be triggered by alt-right-nazi-gamergator-soggyknees-incel-whitemale opinions and maybe a mass shooting at a theater would happen

what i'm saying is, that's a good possibility and it would show just how fucking lazy these idiots have gotten

but anyway, i'm making an all white cast for othello because it's all fictional so who cares lol
 
  • Optimistic
Reactions: UnsufficentBoobage
In case anyone was curious about the actual archaeological data on this subject, Our World In Data put together an interesting meta-study presentation that covers the topic here, with a fairly extensive biography should you want to do further research on one particular group or era:

Ethnographic and Archaeological Evidence on Violent Deaths

Some of the numbers are pretty horrifying, suggesting (for example) that over 60% of total deaths among the South Dakota Creek ca. 1325 were human-inflicted. North American Indian tribes prior to European contact appear to have been extraordinarily violent even compared to other tribal societies around the world.
Check the sources. Cow Creek was one singular village which was caught in the conflict between Siouan peoples and Caddoan peoples at the onset of the Little Ice Age and suffered a huge massacre in the 1300s. It was a warzone like the contemporary Hundred Years War in Europe. A few other Indian sources there like the Cahto and Blackfoot appear to be from the colonial era which included massacres by whites as part of the violence, although some look more natural like those records of violence in British Columbia.
Should we troll them by telling the Indians killed others settlers who arrived before them like the Solutreans? ;)
Solutrean hypothesis is almost certainly nonsense with little evidence. If it did happen there's no reason they couldn't survive against other Indians since later Indian migrations from Siberia like the Athabaskans and Inuit certainly did pretty well for themselves. Racially the modern Indians all look descended from North Asian stock (including some Australoid blood found in some Indians in California and Tierra del Fuego, exactly where you'd expect it).
 
Hopefully, me being pathetically optimistic, they confused Romeo and Juliet with Bonnie and Clyde. I mean if you know absolutely nothing about it and all you know is "couple dies" I could understand it.

Is the movie about two psychopaths that kill and steal, or two people with something preventing them from being together?
The premise of the movie is a black couple go on a blind date. As they are driving, they get pulled over. Somehow the cop (who has a history of shooting a black suspect) accidentally gets shot and killed somehow. They then have to go on the run while there is a man hunt for them.

So, it is nothing like Bonnie and Clyde. They are supposed to be innocent people who only shot in self defense but because they are black, no one believes that the cop was in the wrong. I guess they think it is Bonnie and Clyde: Black Lives Matter edition. The premise that this is a modern day retelling of Bonnie and Clyde is so re.tarded. It is absolutely nothing like that story. Unless you think Bonnie and Clyde were innocent and were hunted down solely because the cops didn't like them.
 
The premise of the movie is a black couple go on a blind date. As they are driving, they get pulled over. Somehow the cop (who has a history of shooting a black suspect) accidentally gets shot and killed somehow. They then have to go on the run while there is a man hunt for them.

So, it is nothing like Bonnie and Clyde. They are supposed to be innocent people who only shot in self defense but because they are black, no one believes that the cop was in the wrong. I guess they think it is Bonnie and Clyde: Black Lives Matter edition. The premise that this is a modern day retelling of Bonnie and Clyde is so re.tarded. It is absolutely nothing like that story. Unless you think Bonnie and Clyde were innocent and were hunted down solely because the cops didn't like them.
Oh yippie skippy, just what America needs, more black "oppression" porn.
 
1.png

2.png

lol

3.png
 
Should we troll them by telling the Indians killed others settlers who arrived before them like the Solutreans? ;)
Oh wow, I'd practically forgotten about the Solutrean hypothesis. Mind you, SJW-MSM and sites like Rational Wiki find it implausible and highly problematic of course. Not gonna lie, as a teenager I thought I wanted to be an archeologist or anthropologist... then I spent a few semesters at a college and decided I wanted to be something that doesn't require a degree instead.

 
The premise of the movie is a black couple go on a blind date. As they are driving, they get pulled over. Somehow the cop (who has a history of shooting a black suspect) accidentally gets shot and killed somehow. They then have to go on the run while there is a man hunt for them.
Seriously? Didn't Black & Blue have an extremely similar premise?

I swear, if it's not Hollywood falling on the sword for "woke" nonsense, it's them pumping out repetitive horseshit to be "woke".
 
I'm confused, but then again, most SJW stuff confuses me.

I don't pretend to understand it, I just laugh in terrified confusion.
I think the point he’s trying to make is that men would have the same problem with male characters walking/looking like this the same way women having a problem with female characters doing the same thing.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: UnsufficentBoobage
Back