>future: race mixing becomes virtue, if you don't race mix your racist
>1960: give gays equal rights
>1980: it should be "ok" to be gay
>1990: gays should have civil unions
>2000: gays should be allowed to get married
>2015: we should promote homosexuality in schools
>2017: it's oppressive to gay people to not be gay
>future: pedophilia, zoophilia Same thing applies to trannys, gun rights, economic freedom etc.
They just chip away slowly and conservatives always cuck. They never take a hard line stance on anything save a few based politicians who are banned from the party after they shift left.
>2017: it's oppressive to gay people to not be gay Source?
Andrew King
That was hyperbole but you get the point the left continues to slide more and more left
Ian Gomez
Well you can't be stunning and brave if you oppose slavery in 2017. You need to find new enemies.
Connor Nelson
>Why do liberals keep sliding to the left? pure coincidence
Asher Wilson
They bring them here, give them a grievance, start a war, then use it to destroy the dominant population.
Michael Torres
>pedophilia Is that the left propaganda?
Isaac Thompson
...
Thomas Kelly
Fight or shut up. Debate and complaint accomplish nothing. Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun.
Brandon Thompson
well, now i'm planning to become left if this is true.
Leo Fisher
OP ARE YOU FUCKNG STUPID? GO LEARN SOME HISTORY YOU FUCKING NEWFAGGOT.
>1860: end slavery! YOU THINK THIS WAS LIBERALS? YOU FELL FOR THE SWITCH MEME. DEMOCRATS WERE THE SLAVE HOLDERS, REPUBLICANS TRIED TO ABOLISH SLAVERY, AND THE GREAT SWITCH NEVER HAPPENED, IT WAS A WAY TO KEEP BLACKS IN CHECK THROUGH OUT THE 20TH CENTURY. I AM SICK OF ALL THE MISINFORMATION PEOPLE SPREAD, IF YOU DECIDE TO POST DO SOME FUCKING HOME WORK AND GET IT RIGHT OR DON'T POST YOU FUCKING KEK.
Nathan Brown
It's funny because I was recently called a racist because I said I'd only marry a Greek girl...because I'm Greek. It was by a white guy who's married to a Jamaican woman
Elijah Thompson
It was the republicans who wanted to end slavery, you stupid fucking faggot.
Kayden Harris
>implying Liberal necessarily means Democrat You realize that Republicans were considered more radically progressive than socialists for most of the 19th century, right? Marx and Lincoln were penpals.
Angel Gonzalez
another tard see
Christian Rogers
The liberals got embraced extended extinguished by the Democratic Party that wants us to voluntarily rob these folks of their rights. Will you fall for their tricks?
Cameron White
when you say liberal you mean democrat? cuz they sure as hell didn't end slavery
Luke Morales
Because it's about taking over not about any of the policies
If you knew anything about women you would know that this is how they operate
Brandon Phillips
Women got the right to vote.
Oliver King
yes I am implying that fucktard also republicans were never considered radically progressive. Sauce for all your claims because I can dump a 55 gallon drum of sauce from mine.
>a book cover doesnt cut it either source your claims or gtfo
Asher Sanchez
...
Kevin Bailey
>republicans were never considered radically progressive Ending slavery was radically progressive at the time. It still is considered so, the most progressive achievement in our history. Pushing universal suffrage, writing to Marx for advice on policy?
Yeah, not progressive at all lol
Alexander Hall
"liberal"/"Conservative" are relative terms. Not an ideology. American liberals want to move away from the constitution. American Conservatives are supposed to conserve the constitution. The constitution would be considered fairly "liberal" in many parts of the world. American "conservatives" can thus be considered liberal in many parts of the world that would recognize american "liberal" agenda as conservative as it heads toward socialism.
Benjamin Howard
by the way, the progressive started decades after Lincoln was killed.
Progressives: 1890-1920 (ended with WWI)
Justin Morales
Left is the future m8. This current period is only an abberation.
Liam Lopez
fucking semantics
It might have been progress to the republicans but it wasn't progressive in the terms we are talking.
This is either bait or you are truly a moron.
Progressivism is the term applied to a variety of responses to the economic and social problems rapid industrialization introduced to America. Progressivism began as a social movement and grew into a political movement. The early progressives rejected Social Darwinism. In other words, they were people who believed that the problems society faced (poverty, violence, greed, racism, class warfare) could best be addressed by providing good education, a safe environment, and an efficient workplace. Progressives lived mainly in the cities, were college educated, and believed that government could be a tool for change. Social reformers, like Jane Addams, and journalists, like Jacob Riis and Ida Tarbel, were powerful voices for progressivism. They concentrated on exposing the evils of corporate greed, combating fear of immigrants, and urging Americans to think hard about what democracy meant.
Logan Robinson
...
Justin Ross
For the exact same reasons that this board is Stormfront again - in times of peace, people create their conflict by radicalizing within their current ideology, in times of scarceness they radicalize towards the opposite.
This is why the poor working class voted conservative in the US together with the rich traditional conservatives.
Kevin Ward
1960's coon rights was the special privileges now its about letting blacks rape and murder without punishment
Jacob James
>"liberal"/"Conservative" are relative terms. Not an ideology. Liberalism is generally ideological. Conservatism, as Edmund Burke put it, almost never so. de Maistre might be the closest example of ideological conservatism, but he was often just as pragmatic and goal-oriented in terms of resisting or subverting the Liberal movements, starting with the French revolution.
>the progressive started decades after Lincoln was killed.
Now you're confusing the proper name with the adjective; progressive movements have progressive characteristics, ie, social progress toward something, whig history, "current yearism", moving society toward "a more egalitarian, socially just arrangment", whatever that means at the time. Abolitionism and universal suffrage are always considered progressive, regardless of whether they came before America's "progressive political era". Just like "Modernism" and "Modernity" are not necessarily synonymous, see what I'm saying?
>fucking semantics why the fuck are you getting so upset, chill the fuck out. Go have a smoke or a fap, jesus. Acting like I slapped you in the face, calm your jimmies.
Jason Cruz
>2017: Biological women are oppressing trans
ftfy
Parker Williams
Those who wanted to end slavery are not all the ones who wanted to give them equal rights. They wanted to end slavery so they didn't have to share their country with niggers. Equal rights advocates were jews.
Brody Morales
IT"S CALLED
>CREEPING MARXISM
LOOK IT UP
Matthew Thompson
its the jews and theyre smarter than conservatives. cold hard truth
Gabriel Diaz
time to read "The Evolutionary Psychology Behind Politics" bruh
Anthony Russell
I truly think you are baiting you cannot be this dense. Not triggered, you are just a fucking moron. I can stack fact after fact, not opinion and you don't source, you don't engage in debate, you bush facts aside and keep spewing false information. These are not opinions below, these are fact. So again I say you are either trolling or been reeducated and the liberal indoctrination camps (college) or you are so dense you cannot think but your regurgitate things you have heard from other ideologues.
Fact: Progressive era 1890-1920 Fact: In America, progressivism began as a social movement in the late 19th and early 20th centuries and grew into a political movement, in what was known as the Progressive Era. While the term "American progressives" represent a range of diverse political pressure groups (not always united), some American progressives rejected Social Darwinism, believing that the problems society faced (poverty, violence, greed, racism, class warfare) could best be addressed by providing good education, a safe environment, and an efficient workplace. Progressives lived mainly in the cities, were college educated, and believed that government could be a tool for change.[16] American President Theodore Roosevelt of the US Republican Party and later the US Progressive Party declared that he "always believed that wise progressivism and wise conservatism go hand in hand". American President Woodrow Wilson was also a member of the American progressive movement within the Democratic Party.
Fact: Liberalism = Democratic Party Fact: Democratic Party = Slave Holders in south Fact: Lincoln Republican = North = fought against the south succession and claims to slave holders rights
Dominic Reed
Simple- progressives want to change society. They naturally feel for and ally with fringe groups and push for their cause. This makes them have purpose in their lives. Conservatives resist it and provide the enemy that motivates them. Giving everyone equal rights is fair enough so progressives win battle after battle and feel superior, but once all the low hanging fruit is gone they have to reach higher and higher for less obvious causes, until society gets sick of their demands.
There's no end to it until this point because it's really not about supporting one group or general fairness, it's about hate and envy for those who are happy with the status quo
Robert Flores
>there are people itt who think lincoln was a conservative
He was the Bernie Sanders of 1860.
Thomas Williams
progressives are smarter and are run by the jews its been proven time and time again
Leo Taylor
/Thread
Alexander Nelson
>dense, stupid, retard, if you frustrate me you're a faggot retard faggot nigger If you can, try not to type walls of text with mostly adhoms. I'd be happy to discuss or even debate with you, but I'm not going to just read strings of adhoms and incoherent sentences with no arguments or tact. Grow up a little. >FACT PROGRESSIVE ERA WAS YEAR X - YEAR Y I repeat, progressive is both an adjective and a noun (when describing what is called "America's progressive era"). It's simply false to claim that nothing except what happened in that time period can be considered "progressive". Progressivism has characteristics; what happened in US politics at that time was noteably "progressive", which has a lot to do with why it was named "the progressive era".
Now who's derailing into semantics?
All I said earlier was that Republicans were considered more radically progressive than even socialists. I backed that up by providing correspondence between Marx and Lincoln. You seem triggered by the suggestion that a Republican might have been in line with Marx, the father of communism. You should fucking get over it, our history is full of lots of strange bullshit like that.
In general, grow up. Learn to have adult discussions. Stop venting and raging like this is 14 year old twitter.
Cooper Jones
that Israel Cohen quote is fake. Unless, you can give me proof that the book actually exists
Henry Kelly
Also, just some things we can thank lincoln for:
>government controlled public education >the draft >income tax >national banks
All things which significantly cut back on freedom in the US
Adrian Diaz
>that Israel Cohen quote is fake. Someone always claims that every time I post it. But it was entered into the congressional record at the time, and not called a "fake" until decades later. They sure took their sweet time challenging it.
See: Also in the Congressional Record, Vol. 103, p. 8559, June 7, 1957
Lets dissect the post then. You say mostly adhoms? As you can see, most of the post was fact right? Can you see with you eyes, the majority of content was factual bases, a small amount was pointed at you baiting/being dense? You can see this yes?
My opinion: I truly think you are baiting you cannot be this dense. Not triggered, you are just a fucking moron. I can stack fact after fact, not opinion and you don't source, you don't engage in debate, you bush facts aside and keep spewing false information. These are not opinions below, these are fact. So again I say you are either trolling or been reeducated and the liberal indoctrination camps (college) or you are so dense you cannot think but your regurgitate things you have heard from other ideologues.
FACTS: Fact: Progressive era 1890-1920 Fact: In America, progressivism began as a social movement in the late 19th and early 20th centuries and grew into a political movement, in what was known as the Progressive Era. While the term "American progressives" represent a range of diverse political pressure groups (not always united), some American progressives rejected Social Darwinism, believing that the problems society faced (poverty, violence, greed, racism, class warfare) could best be addressed by providing good education, a safe environment, and an efficient workplace. Progressives lived mainly in the cities, were college educated, and believed that government could be a tool for change.[16] American President Theodore Roosevelt of the US Republican Party and later the US Progressive Party declared that he "always believed that wise progressivism and wise conservatism go hand in hand". American President Woodrow Wilson was also a member of the American progressive movement within the Democratic Party.
Fact: Liberalism = Democratic Party Fact: Democratic Party = Slave Holders in south Fact: Lincoln Republican = North = fought against the south succession and claims to slave holders rights
Jacob Ramirez
>Lets dissect the post then How about not. Your sperg rage is gay.
>Progressivism is a philosophy based on the Idea of Progress, which asserts that advancements in science, technology, economic development, and social organization are vital to the improvement of the human condition. Progressivism became highly significant during the Age of Enlightenment in Europe, out of the belief that Europe was demonstrating that societies could progress in civility from barbaric conditions to civilization through strengthening the basis of empirical knowledge as the foundation of society. Figures of the Enlightenment believed that progress had universal application to all societies and that these ideas would spread across the world from Europe.
>Nisbet defines five "crucial premises" of the Idea of Progress as being: value of the past; nobility of Western civilization; worth of economic/technological growth; scientific/scholarly knowledge obtained through reason over faith; the intrinsic importance and worth of life on Earth. Beyond this, the meanings of progressivism have varied over time and from different perspectives.
Zachary Long
>I repeat, progressive is both an adjective and a noun (when describing what is called "America's progressive era" Ok so are you arguing that removing slavery is progressive, not the progressive movement, but in YOUR opinion is progressive as the adjective? You lecture English like we do not understand, we do, but drill down to your point. What is your point, yes progressive can be an adjective or a noun obviously. You are diluting the discussion.
The first thing I pointed out was that the democrat party wanted slavery, the republican party wanted to end slavery. Can you agree on that? Its a simple yes or no. I will wait for your answer, then we can move to the rest.
Also you keep spewing that republicans/conservatives were marxist and corresponded to Marx. Where is the source, show me the correspondence. If you cannot provide sauce, your claim is a fart in the wind faggot.
>triggered I am not triggered but you seem to be because someone on Sup Forums is talking shit back to you. Suck it up faggot, get used to it.
>In general, grow up. Learn to have adult discussions. Stop venting and raging like this is 14 year old twitter
complain about personal attacks, appear desperately to take the high road
superb job fooling your self. You are not swaying anyone, but keep posting if it makes you feel better to off load all the diarrhea in your head.
Dylan Flores
>The contemporary common political conception of progressivism in the culture of the Western world emerged from the vast social changes brought about by industrialization in the Western world in the late 19th century, particularly out of the view that progress was being stifled by vast economic inequality between the rich and the poor; minimally regulated laissez-faire capitalism with monopolistic corporations; and intense and often violent conflict between workers and capitalists, thus claiming that measures were needed to address these problems.
>The term is also now often used as shorthand for a more or less left-wing way of looking at the world.
Sources: >Harold Mah. Enlightenment Phantasies: Cultural Identity in France and Germany, 1750-1914. Cornell University. (2003). p157. >Nisbet, Robert (1980). History of the Idea of Progress. New York: Basic Books. p. 4 >Nugent, Walter (2010). Progressivism: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford University Press. p. 2.
Michael Perry
Conservatism is about conserving the country's existing ideology. If the country is a monarchy, then "conservatives" are trying to conserve the monarchy. If it's a constitutional republic, then they are about conserving the constitution. If someone from a monarchy is trying to push their country toward an american style constitution, then they are a "liberal" relative to that country.
Joseph Turner
reminder theres nothing wrong with being a pedophile if you dont actually touch kids and nothing wrong with having sex with animals if you're not hurting them
Andrew Wood
Democrats... keep slavery Democrats... No equal rights Democrats... Block civil rights
Adrian Phillips
once again, you cannot argue on fact. Fact, my post actually contained mostly fact, yet you claim the opposite.
user get you shit together before you post here.
Also you are a faggot. A faggot. You realize that you are a faggot right? Are you getting triggered yet by the personal attacks you are complaining about? Get triggered faggot this is /pol. You need to get thicker skin to come here you cock sucking queer. All these facts are butt fucking your puny argument faggot. Do you come here with the intent to get mind sodomized regarding your stupid claims. You fucking degenerate
Adam Thomas
so progressive
Tyler Reed
Yes, I agree. However, Liberalism has a history of being ideological. Edmund Burke did make a rather compelling argument that conservatism is defined by what it is not, and what it is against; it's generally not an ideology, as much as a reaction to or against. That's all I was saying.
Since you're just upset, venting, and not bothering to respond appropriately to my arguments or any context, I won't do you any favors. You can read about progressivism until it sinks in instead.
Pic related
Hunter Powell
>Why do liberals keep sliding to the left?
Literally rebels without a cause
Sebastian Ward
>Pen Pals I cant wait to blow this claim out also.
You speak of pen pals? Marx wrote Lincoln a letter congratulating him on re-election, Lincoln ambassador in London (where marx the faggot was) replied, SOP as they received thousands of letters to which they were replied to. They had drastically opposing views (not an opinion but a fact) on labor, governing, the economy (free market capitalism vs communism). The only view thought to be shared was the abolishment of slavery (to undermine the counter parts in Europe was marx the faggot's goal)
The reply doesn’t say much, other than conveying a generic sense of gratitude and agreeing slavery is bad:
>So far as the sentiments expressed by it are personal, they are accepted by him with a sincere and anxious desire that he may be able to prove himself not unworthy of the confidence which has been recently extended to him by his fellow citizens and by so many of the friends of humanity and progress throughout the world.
Luke King
>decades AFAIK, it was two years later, but your point still stands.
But for it to be in the records, it does not constitute as proof for the books actual existence. But perhaps saying that is fake was an overstatement, but rather is legitimacy is just as questionable as it's non-existence.
But nonetheless, the quotes language does not fit what it supposedly is.
Luis Johnson
Nah im good, I have asked you several times pointed questions that should be a simple yes or no, yet you drone on about other shit that has nothing to do with the actual discussion, you go off on a tangent of discussing adjectives and nouns like this is 3rd grade English rather than answer a simple yes or no.
Jacob Sanchez
>I cant wait to blow this claim out also. I already linked you their correspondence twice. I'll just quote it full. Marx-Lincoln correspondence, via Ambassador Adams:
>Sir:
>We congratulate the American people upon your re-election by a large majority. If resistance to the Slave Power was the reserved watchword of your first election, the triumphant war cry of your re-election is Death to Slavery.
>From the commencement of the titanic American strife the workingmen of Europe felt instinctively that the star-spangled banner carried the destiny of their class. The contest for the territories which opened the dire epopee, was it not to decide whether the virgin soil of immense tracts should be wedded to the labor of the emigrant or prostituted by the tramp of the slave driver?
Caleb Ward
>>When an oligarchy of 300,000 slaveholders dared to inscribe, for the first time in the annals of the world, "slavery" on the banner of Armed Revolt, when on the very spots where hardly a century ago the idea of one great Democratic Republic had first sprung up, whence the first Declaration of the Rights of Man was issued, and the first impulse given to the European revolution of the eighteenth century; when on those very spots counterrevolution, with systematic thoroughness, gloried in rescinding "the ideas entertained at the time of the formation of the old constitution", and maintained slavery to be "a beneficent institution", indeed, the old solution of the great problem of "the relation of capital to labor", and cynically proclaimed property in man "the cornerstone of the new edifice" — then the working classes of Europe understood at once, even before the fanatic partisanship of the upper classes for the Confederate gentry had given its dismal warning, that the slaveholders' rebellion was to sound the tocsin for a general holy crusade of property against labor, and that for the men of labor, with their hopes for the future, even their past conquests were at stake in that tremendous conflict on the other side of the Atlantic. Everywhere they bore therefore patiently the hardships imposed upon them by the cotton crisis, opposed enthusiastically the proslavery intervention of their betters — and, from most parts of Europe, contributed their quota of blood to the good cause.
Jacob Smith
Why is income tax being solely attributed to lincoln? Don't you think that's a bit of a stretch?
Joshua Foster
>While the workingmen, the true political powers of the North, allowed slavery to defile their own republic, while before the Negro, mastered and sold without his concurrence, they boasted it the highest prerogative of the white-skinned laborer to sell himself and choose his own master, they were unable to attain the true freedom of labor, or to support their European brethren in their struggle for emancipation; but this barrier to progress has been swept off by the red sea of civil war.
>The workingmen of Europe feel sure that, as the American War of Independence initiated a new era of ascendancy for the middle class, so the American Antislavery War will do for the working classes. They consider it an earnest of the epoch to come that it fell to the lot of Abraham Lincoln, the single-minded son of the working class, to lead his country through the matchless struggle for the rescue of an enchained race and the reconstruction of a social world.
>Signed on behalf of the International Workingmen's Association, the Central Council
Hunter Bailey
wow they really are just pals aren't they. Wrote a letting saying congrats, Lincoln sends back a generic letter back. Man I guess republicans are full on progressive radical marxist... damn, that really gave my noggin a joggin.
Aaron Barnes
>Ambassador Adams Replies >Sir:
>I am directed to inform you that the address of the Central Council of your Association, which was duly transmitted through this Legation to the President of the United [States], has been received by him.
>So far as the sentiments expressed by it are personal, they are accepted by him with a sincere and anxious desire that he may be able to prove himself not unworthy of the confidence which has been recently extended to him by his fellow citizens and by so many of the friends of humanity and (((PROGRESS))) throughout the world.
>wow they really are just pals aren't they. Yeah, he was a big commie faggot. Wait there's still more...
Noah Scott
>Nations do not exist for themselves alone, but to promote the welfare and happiness of mankind by benevolent intercourse and example. It is in this relation that the United States regard their cause in the present conflict with slavery, maintaining insurgence as the cause of human nature, and they derive new encouragements to persevere from the testimony of the workingmen of Europe that the national attitude is favored with their enlightened approval and earnest sympathies.
>I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant
That sounds progressive af. Like a goddamn Obongo speech. Lincoln would have been raped by Joe McCarthy for that shit.
Oliver Taylor
progress or progressivism?
you went at great lengths to distinguish the 2
Nicholas Bailey
>Nations do not exist for themselves alone, but to promote the welfare and happiness of mankind WEEEEEW LAD
That's some early globalist shit right there senpai. This cancer has been festering for a looooooong fucking time. You gotta admit, the American Revolution and spirit of Independence died at Appomattox. Lincoln might as well have been a Jew. Shabbot goy trash, kissing Marx's ass directly like that.
Noah Thomas
>AFAIK, it was two years later Oh really? That sounds very specific. Who and how did they (((correct the record)))?
Easton Carter
This. It's more "brave" to support slavery nowadays.
John Clark
>Sup Forumsfags complaining about homosexuality and race mixing >can't even get girlfriends to procreate with what's the point of all these debates if most anons who post bait on here all leech off society. >inb4 not working for jews you are doing exactly what the jews want you to, and that is to let your genes die off. i mean seriously at least do something about it instead of posting it on a mongolian horse back riding site
Nah, read this and learn. Faggots like you ad Obama and the rest have tried to link Lincoln with their progressive faggotry before, citing bullshit claims of having a close relationship with Marx (complete bullshit) or having progressive ideas. They democrats have tried this tactic before in part to legitimize their leftist/marxist ideas and put them on the foundation of what is largely considered one of the best presidents in US history. Just as they tried to fool you with the switch after slavery ended (democrats were slave holders, republicans fought against slavery, then democrats claimed the partied switched ideas and they fought for the rights of blacks and minorities). They made the switch claim to keep the blacks under their thumb still since slavery was made illegal. This is all addressed by fact not manipulation or speculation here.
>These Negroes, they're getting pretty uppity these days and that's a problem for us since they've got something now they never had before, the political pull to back up their uppityness. Now we've got to do something about this, we've got to give them a little something, just enough to quiet them down, not enough to make a difference. t. LBJ (progressive DEMOCRAT) Source: This quote appears on page 155 of Goodwin’s LBJ biography. The utterance was made to Richard Russell, a fellow Democratic Senator from Georgia.
Now I know you wont read this, because it goes against what you are trying to spread as false information, this is for the anons who might have looked at this shit thread and wanted factual information rather than half truths, speculation, warped reality and opinion.
WEW FUCKING LAD is right... your shitty argument does not hold up
Cooper Russell
>I know all of Sup Forums personally, IRL Are you CIA?
>Faggots like you and Obama No no, Lincoln and Obama were the faggots. But I see now what set you off. You're some cuckservative kid who worships anything called "Republican", even faggots like Lincoln who wrote letters to Marx, the kike who invented the plague of Communism, signed with shit like:
>I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant
You sperg raged for 8 posts, because you think there's some kind of honor for your party to defend. Neither party in this country has any honor, and you're a cucky faggot identifying with it like it's life or death. Go listen to Glenn Beck, pray to your Israeli flags, and rub your dick in a bowl of cheetos. No one cares about your opinon, because no one fucking respects you. Type another wall of text faggot,
tl;dr
Chase Jenkins
>But I see now what set you off You did? you better try a lot harder faggot. >You think a I am republican I am neither a democrat or a republican, I am not a marxist, a statist, or a socialist. I am a constitutional conservative, neither part defines me because they have both failed, just like you have to convince anyone of your shit-tier argument.
Where is your response to the article I link riddled with facts that directly oppose your assertion?
Its funny how you never address one fact I present, you tell me how I am "triggered", you assume that I am a republican, which right there I can tell since you make assumption that you are a desperate fag. If you cannot hold a legit argument, respond to facts I present, I have even responded to you saying Lincoln wrote faggotmarx a letter, I blew it out, but I responded. You cannot even do the same, you are sophomoric kiddo. Don't approach the arena if you cannot debate based on fact and not your speculation.
Jordan Gomez
>Gay marriage higher than gay adoption
I literally don't care if fags marry each other, but I condone gay adoption.
Easton Stewart
Something like this happened recently in Chile. A fag called Arenito refused to keep behaving like a deranged cuck and was criticized for not acting gay enough
Carson Gray
It's already oppressive to not want to date a transwoman if you're a straight male. Is it really that far of a stretch?
