Gay

>gay
>jewish
>paedophile
>refers to trump as "daddy"
>openly boasts about being unable to resist gay sex and loves big black penises

How can anyone right of centre like this faggot? Why hasn't he been gassed yet?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=X1khAQTrbyE&index=1&t=5s&list=FLvkNd0R7rjaVcdCfw-yVzwA
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

usefull retard desu .HE is entry level red pill for people 15-18

closet Jewish gay pedo race-mixer spotted

gas yourself already

i'm 20 and i watch his videos for entertainment, sure he's "entry-level" but the dude has charisma

anyone got that tweet milo sent with pic related? sorry ((( soros )))

Because rational people who actually want to influence the political landscape realize that their personal feelings regarding person X are not important. If you think they are you are a useless narcissist LARPer.

Feminism and cultural marxism in academia is one of the most dangerous plagues in Western society. Milo is a good weapon against that.

Also he's not a pedo.

he's the average Sup Forums user.

get that pervert outta here. op stop giving screen time to a destructve individual you wouldn't leave near your kids.

This is the modern right?
Sad.

Anyone can make fun of feminism, it's literally low-hanging fruit. Even better, you can actually refute it without alienating a large demographic on both sides by associating with a faggot troll who doesn't have strong convictions besides "muh lefty censorship is bad", and who is a huge hypocrite.

That's the point. You can't just swallow the red pill whole. It's very bitter. You have to nibble at it bit by bit.

>Anyone can make fun of feminism, it's literally low-hanging fruit.

So? What's your point? Milo is the one who is popular because he does it well and is entertaining.

>Even better, you can actually refute it without alienating a large demographic

Your argument is basically "It could be someone better because Milo has bad qualities X and Y". Well no shit retard. But Milo is the one who is popular right now because he is the most charismatic. By all means, try to promote people who you think are better, but in the meantime, unless you can show how Milo does more harm than good, there is no reason to be actively against him.

He's just a plant

>get molested through your youth
>be called a paedo
Wew lad. Its almost as if Sup Forums has some sort of complex. Google internalized homophobia

>Anyone can make fun of feminism, it's literally low-hanging fruit.

If that were true he wouldn't be banned from Twitter.

White Nationalists have an entire ideology based around huwhite women not having kids because of feminism but "REEEEEEEEEEE don't talk about feminism" when it's their central adversary.

>you can show how Milo does more harm than good, there is no reason to be actively against him.
he boasts about his homosexual urges, having no shame in what he believes is morally wrong, he trolls people just to get attention and tries to be so edgy it ends up alienating a huge demographic to such extent that his audience is a bunch of meme obsessed redditors who haven't read a single book on politics. And to top it off, he finally got blacklisted with the whole pedo thing so nobody on mainstream conservatism will touch him.

Get a better fag, or maybe you should get someone worth looking up to.

Illuminati dis-info stooge.

Disregard his lies. Its subversion by stealth

He's a provocateur and he pisses off the left to no end.

Good enough for me.

>Also he's not a pedo.
correct, he's a pederast, there's a world of difference. instead of liking 8 year old boys he likes the sexually promiscuous 13 year old ones that are "capable of giving consent."

he's not a pedo, he's a pederast.

he's not a pedo

Yeah. No point getting bent out of shape about Milo or Gavin McInness. The important issue is getting people past white guilt. That's the tipping point.

>he boasts about his homosexual urges, having no shame in what he believes is morally wrong, he trolls people just to get attention and tries to be so edgy it ends up alienating a huge demographic to such extent that his audience is a bunch of meme obsessed redditors who haven't read a single book on politics.

Funny how your big problem with him is that he "alienates a huge demographic" yet he still is one of the if not the most popular figure speaking out against feminism in academia. What does that say about the other candidates? Where is this ideal charismatic figure who doesn't alienate a huge demographic but has the ability to get as popular? You basically just reiterated the things you don't like about him, you didn't show how he does more harm than good.

>And to top it off, he finally got blacklisted with the whole pedo thing so nobody on mainstream conservatism will touch him.

He got blacklisted BY mainstream cuckservatives and it's pathetic how easy it was to manipulate people with such an obvious hitjob.

stop supporting the pervert you fag.

how is it a hitjob if the criticisms levelled at him are directed at things he said exactly? there is no misinformation, no lies, no bias, no propaganda, nothing taken out of context, no bullshit needed, the issue people have with milo is as a result of the exact statements he made. people crying "hitjob" and "smear campaign" are acting like a person's actions are excusable if the people attacking him are also your enemies, this isn't true here because he said some completely fucked up shit. if you want to defend him you have to defend pederasty in its exact definition, because that is what he is on video defending at length.

Frankly, it makes me sad to see how easily people on the right are falling for this divide and conquer subversion
>Reeeeee no fags
>Reeeeee no blacks
>Reeeeee no women

In 20 years we will be a leftist dystopia because you autists wasted your time screeching for a "better" advocate to come along.

>you didn't show how he does more harm than good.
did you read what I posted? He does more harm than good. Because of him the alt "lite" is viewed as a bunch of unprincipled, hypocritical dummies who can't stop crying about muh feminism, muh men's rights, or any other issue that has been argued to the ground 10 years ago.

you can crush it up and eat it in applesauce

you cant really argue against the man being intelligent and quite brilliant and dismantling the SJW agenda etc. but fuck man i find him repulsive otherwise, one second he is wearing a suit and being witty and reasonable, the next a furcoat full leather calling trump daddy. also i was looking forward to seeing him destroy bill maher and he fully kiked out, just tried to make jokes and suck up

>yes goy accept this gay jew to combat those leftists, it will make you stronger. Don't listen to the conservatives he's not a pedo, he's a hebephile, goy.

>how is it a hitjob if the criticisms levelled at him are directed at things he said exactly? there is no misinformation, no lies, no bias, no propaganda, nothing taken out of context

Are you fucking kidding? Those podcasts came out a year ago before this hitjob was made and they were seen by hundreds of thousands of people. No one made a big deal about what Milo said back then. Now suddenly some cuckservatives select parts of the discussion to make Milo look as bad as possible and put it on twitter. Nothing taken out of context? Why didn't they just post the whole podcasts then? Why pick out parts of a conversation? The hosts on that podcast (Drunken Peasants) were rather annoyed by the media ignoring the context of the discussion completely.

>did you read what I posted? He does more harm than good

You mentioned some things you don't like about him. That's all you did.

>Because of him the alt "lite" is viewed as a bunch of unprincipled, hypocritical dummies

How are they hypocritical? Who views them this way?

>who can't stop crying about muh feminism, muh men's rights, or any other issue that has been argued to the ground 10 years ago.

What the fuck are you even talking about? Are you actually implying feminism isn't a major issue that should still be argued about today? We need more people like Milo to get even more popular and vocal about this. Feminism is still in power in mainstream media and in our schools.

I mentioned the ways he does more harm than good.
They're hypocritical because they are against degenerate, except when the degenerates in question mock the left.
Feminism is an ideological dinosaur. Arguing against it is beating a dead horse at this point. Why do you think it's so popular to refute it on YouTube? Because the arguments are already there, waiting to be repeated again and again.

He was an entry level useful idiot until the pedo stuff came out properly.

>They're hypocritical because they are against degenerate, except when the degenerates in question mock the left.

There's nothing hypocritical about supporting someone who you don't 100% agree with. That's actually normal and reasonable. Only retarded radical leftists and far right ethnonationalist LARPers are the ones who demand 100% ideological agreement before supporting someone.

>Feminism is an ideological dinosaur. Arguing against it is beating a dead horse at this point. Why do you think it's so popular to refute it on YouTube?

Because Youtube is the only place where that discussion is allowed to be had. Mainstream media and education is dominated by cultural marxist thought and feminism. You seem to think fighting against it is passé just because you've heard it all before. Well the world doesn't revolve around your narcissistic ass, the normies still believe the lies of cultural marxists because it's taught in our schools and in mainstream media.

>select parts
it was 5 minutes of unedited conversation
>to make Milo look as bad as possible
it was just the relevant part.
>Why pick out parts of a conversation
5 minutes unedited
>ignoring the context
what "context" can you add that would change the meaning of what is in pic related? i personally hardly give a shit about milo yiannopolous, but im completely baffled and frustrated by how many devoted polacks there are who are insanely and irrationally propping him up just because they see him as being on their side. just because this person is being attacked by people you view as your enemies doesn't mean what he said is worth defending.

all of pic related is direct quotes from the video. it's not out of context, it's just the relevant bits. watch the video, it's absolutely clear what he was saying. but no one is talking about what he actually said, 50% of people say he's a pedophile, which is not true, 50% of people say this was a hitjob and milo never said anything wrong, not true either. no one is talking about the facts, about what he actually said. which is that it's ok for 30 year olds to fuck precocious 13 year old boys if the boy gives consent. not only that it's ok but sometimes is a positive.

if you want to defend that fine, that can be talked about. but that's what he actually said, and no one is talking about it.

>it was 5 minutes of unedited conversation

Yeah they posted that AFTER first posting the edited version and after people got on their ass about why they edited it. Totally not a hitjob though!

>watch the video, it's absolutely clear what he was saying

I don't need to, I saw those podcasts over a year ago when they came out and I didn't think much of it then, much like the rest of the audience. My reaction doesn't magically change because some fags with a political agenda put something I've already seen on Twitter.

>50% of people say this was a hitjob and milo never said anything wrong, not true either

Both can be true. A "hitjob" doesn't imply that they're lying about the person necessarily. It has more to do with how the information is presented and how it comes to light. Sitting on footage that is publicly available and waiting for the right time to disseminate it as if it was "discovered" is a textbook political hitjob.

You're right he's a disgusting filthy pedophile and I pray his hearts explodes.

you can keep describing how it was a hitjob till the cows come home, doesn't change what he said and what he believes, which is where the problem is.
>it's ok for 30 year olds to fuck precocious 13 year old boys if the boy gives consent. not only that it's ok but sometimes is a positive.
he is on video saying this. this is what he thinks. i've never read a single left-wing article on the issue, listened to any political commentators opine on it, all i did was watch the 5 minutes of unedited footage and draw my conclusion from that. the hitjob is irrelevant to how you view milo.

(((They))) keep trying to push these compromised clowns on nationalist and anti-globalist movements to dismantle them from within.

The moment a serious revolutionary situation arises, they can pull one of these clowns out of the box Lenin style to control the outcome of such a revolution. If people are stupid enough to fall for it, that is. In the French Nuit Debout protests last year the protestors booed any of the usual jewish 'intellectual' that tried to assume a leadership role from the stage.

Well yeah. It's not like he's the first person to talk about this. Apparently this is quite prevalent in gay culture. Not saying I agree with it, just that it's not shocking. Also, he was talking from his own experience and that colors his perspective quite a lot.

Do you think Steve Bannon is a globalist shill too, then? Because that's the only way you can rationalize Milo being a shill, since it was Bannon that helped him into prominence.

He's gassing himself with a cigarette. Don't worry his days are numbered, AIDS claims them all

How do you feel about BIll Maher and George Takei?

Sup Forums is fucked if people on here actually defend a disgusting pedo faggot just because he "rekt a feminazi :D"

people like him and who support him are not right wing
they are literary the opposite of what right wing is supposed to be
they are just liberals who think being right wing is cool and edgy
to bad that’s the majority on Sup Forums

30 year old men fucking 13 year old boys isn't shocking? 30 year old men fucking 13 year old boys being common in the homosexual community isn't shocking? a popular figure in a far right political movement defending this publically isn't shocking? that fact that half of Sup Forums then defended him after this came out isn't shocking?

fucking hell cunt i was shocked, and still am. mostly at how willingly polacks viruently defend him while managing to completely ignore the content of the video. makes me wonder about some of the cunts on this site.

takei is a creepy faggot and maher isn't funny.

...

Milo's existence is a good reminder of why a correct society doesn't let 13 year old boys have gay sex with adult men.

satan calm down

>30 year old men fucking 13 year old boys isn't shocking?

You're going to the extreme for emotional effect. The age 13 was mentioned as a cutoff point as in that's the lowest age at which SOMEONE (like Milo, not most people) could be precocious enough to have sex with older people. That's what Milo was arguing. He was perfectly fine with how the age of consent is now. The point he was making is actually rather rational. I don't see why it's so shocking when just a few decades ago it was normal for rockstars to have 14-15 year old groupies who they fucked.

...

That's a load of bullshit, you are just a homophobe. I know it irks you that your faggot ass Christian identity movement and related nonsense lost out to closet nazi libertarians.

so you are just going to throw away the core beliefs of the right wing and liberalize it?
that’s not the right way
you may gain some retarded followers but it’s not worth it in the end when your movement becomes unrecognizable from liberals

Because he needs to complete his shilling duties and making the Alt-right a joke movement no one takes seriously and are easily destroyed via the MSM.

LIdF8OFo
is
milo
on
proxy.

>precocious enough to have sex with older people
Which is a funny argument in itself. As far as I can tell, the reason those laws are there is about half to keep adults from exploiting teenagers and half to protect stupid teenagers from themselves.

>you are just a homophobe
>out to closet nazi
man i really hate anglos

He was the first journo to actually listen to gamergate people and report factually.

And spare me the gamergate hate. We are generally acknowledged to be the first group to successfully stand up to SJWs.

I'm not throwing away any of my beliefs. First of all, I don't need to agree with everything Milo does to support him. Second, Milo might be a degenerate himself but at least he doesn't advocate for it as if his lifestyle is ideal.

He had a brilliant career, to bad itsover now.
Maybe Adam Sandler or Sasha Baron Cohen will make a bio pic about it.

fine, and this is what the conversation should have been like from the beginning. about what he actually said rather than who benefited from what he said going public and the consequences of that etc.

he's a write-off, i can't support someone like him who holds those views. the flamboyant faggotry and generally obnoxious nature of the guy was bad enough, but pederasty is unacceptable, 13 year old boys cannot give sexual consent, any 30 year old man that has relations with a 13-14 year old boy is sick and exploitative and should be locked up. people condoning it or supportive of it as well, and he's certainly not a suitable figure for a far-right political movement.

milo said it himself, these young boys who are facing desolation can be helped by an older man. the point is these are vulnerable and confused boys, still children, with no sexual maturity or experience, who are being exploited by old perverts. it's fucked.

Well the line is drawn at 18 or 16. But it's perfectly obvious to any rational person that people attain a certain level of maturity at different ages.

>he is on video saying this

no he isn't.

both milo and gamergate are tiresome since they have a hatedom of autistics around them that have been reeeeeeeeeeeee-ing for years now.

...

>no he isn't.
youtube.com/watch?v=X1khAQTrbyE&index=1&t=5s&list=FLvkNd0R7rjaVcdCfw-yVzwA

The Jew is always on the hustle and looking for the next angle to exploit.

Silly goyim.

His career ended two months ago and no one gives a fuck about him anymore. He doesn't work at Breitbart, he's not publishing a book, he's not doing anything. So shut up.

Libertarians like him because that's what they'd all act like if nobody cared

He sounds like 90% of pol
Especially the bbc shit

I watched that when everyone was sperging about it, ends with him saying he thinks the age of consent is about right.

>any 30 year old man that has relations with a 13-14 year old boy is sick and exploitative and should be locked up. people condoning it or supportive of it as well

Good thing no one's doing that, since Milo agrees with the current age of consent laws.

Pretty sure he was talking about himself when talking about positive influences it can have, he was just generalizing it.

He's useful in the sense of a rodeo clown, distract angry cows by being flamboyant

Dindu nuffin, understands the importance of effective self promotion better than any of the other Sup Forums browsing ecelebs and smart enough to launch a come back if he plays his cards right.

He will always be doing something because of the autistic hatedom around him.

>centre
center*

According to an user a few days ago he's quietly working on a documentary based on the content of his cancelled PG talk

Milo is an alien of extraordinary ability who is using the buzz of the alt-right as a means to make money. He makes BANK on these college campus tours. He's a nihlistic devil jew who thinks its funny taking advantage of dumb republican hicks. In his Jewish cabal meetings, they laugh so hard and count their shekels. Whoever is a fan of this guy is a fool

No matter what time of day I'm on Sup Forums there is at least one blacked thread active.

*centre

Don't worry, he's been made to 'disappear' now his usefullness to neocons has expired. News coverage and search ranking collapsed overnight.

>Pretty sure he was talking about himself when talking about positive influences it can have
i disagree, it's clear to me he was talking broadly, and that there are many cases as he describes.

he says the age of consent laws are about right, and spends most of the rest of the video describing how beneficial it can be for boys much younger than the age of consent laws to get into sexual relations with older men.

you want to change the right wing core beleifs to be more accesible to faggots like him

>Milo might be a degenerate himself but at least he doesn't advocate for it as if his lifestyle is ideal
you think that matters?

>implying there's anything wrong with pederasty

>describing how beneficial it can be for boys much younger than the age of consent laws to get into sexual relations with older men

not in the video I watched.

>you think that matters?

it does.

I'm not really sure what you mean by "right wing core beliefs". Care to define it?

Certainly hating gays is not part of right wing core beliefs in the US, considering Trump was waving the LGBT flag in front of GOP crowds.

He's not a pedo, bit I find it interesting you shills are bringing him up again.

He must be up to something that will soon show up on the world's strange and that why you need to start the lies again.

the video i linked? here is a picture with a list of quotes directly from that video.
it's really fucking clear.

Hes not a pedo, fuckface.

>but pederasty is unacceptable, 13 year old boys cannot give sexual consent, any 30 year old man that has relations with a 13-14 year old boy is sick and exploitative and should be locked up.
Try reading Rind et al, which shows most adolescents/kids weren't harmed by sex, boys especially. Consent is not as complicated as you think it is, its an affirmative action from both parties, and based on a mutually pleasurable/enjoyed relation.

tradition, family and morals are the core beliefes of the right wing
faggotry is against all of these so you could say being against it is the core belief of the right wing

american right wing is currently throwing away all of these to be become more accessible to liberals and gain more followers

>it's clear to me he was talking broadly, and that there are many cases as he describes.

Yes, he's saying there's cases where it can be consensual and not damaging even though it's illegal. His logic is perfectly rational, even while agreeing with the age of consent laws, as the line has to be drawn somewhere. There are going to be outliers. I don't think every single of those 13-16 year old girls who gave blowjobs to rockstars in the 1970s were somehow traumatized/damaged by those experiences either. Some were, some weren't.

>paedophile
But that's not Bill Maher

And so you reveal yourself for what you are

>tradition, family

We have to adapt to new realities that science illuminates. Homosexuality used to be so maligned because it was seen as something sinful and something evil people did because they're evil. Now we know it's an orientation that you can't just get away from. I don't understand what you mean by "family" in this context. Would you prefer that our society went back to forcing these fags to get a wife and pretend to be straight? Would it not be more healthy for the kids to instead have 2 straight parents and leave the fags alone to live and not reproduce.

>and morals

You sound like a fucking moron just saying "morals" as if that means anything. Your morals are not everyone's morals. Be specific.

Not an argument.

i'm close-minded when it comes to this, and am going to continue to be until the evidence is overwhelmingly against me. that's one study engulfed in controversy.

i wonder how many of those 13-16 year old girls giving blow-jobs to rockstars grew up healthy, happy, without STD's and with the capacity to form long-lasting healthy relationships with children etc. i what went wrong in their childhood that put them in that situation in the first place.

i dunno user, just picture that 13 year old boy or girl engaging in hedonistic sex with an elder being your child, and the conclusion is clear. there's something deeply wrong with it.

Is faggotry really against tradition? Pederasty has been normal in virtually all institutions in western culture, from universities to the church, not to mention fags being influential leaders predates even Christianity. Wouldn't it make more sense to accept gays who aren't sluts and want to form a family, instead of alienating them and letting the leftists take back control of impressionable young gay people? The right has the upper hand on the gay issue now, it would be idiotic to spoil it.

Do you have an argument Lao Tzu?

So what he's doing isn't pederasty apologism?

He is keeping the nogs away from white women by sacrificing his ass. Noble

Much worse things have happened to people who turned out fine. The 13 year old girl who was raped by Roman Polanski turned out fine and had a nice family for herself. And that was anal rape, not consensual acts with some hot rockstar.

Would I be happy if my teenage daughter had sex with some 25 year old? Obviously not, but not because I think there is something magically damaging about a 25 year old doing it, I'd be unhappy because she is acting like a whore.

Even if it is, you still haven't given an argument.

>i'm close-minded when it comes to this, and am going to continue to be until the evidence is overwhelmingly against me.
Ok.

That study is engulfed in controversy for political reasons, the same as studies comparing race and IQ, which I'll show in a minute if the thread is not pruned. Even so, if you look it up on Wikipedia and scroll to the bottom, you'll find Ulrich et al., which recreates the study without the critiques of its methodology, with very similar results.

>The Rind et al. controversy was a debate in the scientific literature, public media, and government legislatures in the United States regarding a 1998 peer reviewed meta-analysis of the self-reported harm caused by child sexual abuse (CSA).
>the prevailing construct of CSA was not scientifically valid, as it failed empirical verification, and that the psychological damage caused by the abusive encounters depends on other factors such as the degree of coercion or force involved.

This can be substantiated with other studies, such as the most famous, "The Trauma Myth" which shows sexual relations between generations are very rarely traumatic. In reality, rape and coercion are damaging, not sex itself.

>A study published in The Scientific Review of Mental Health Practice attempted to replicate the Rind study, correcting for methodological and statistical problems identified by Dallam and others. It supported some of the Rind findings, both with respect to the percentage of variance in later psychological outcomes accounted for by sexual abuse and in relation to the finding that there was a gender difference

No-one ever liked him. He only caused cringe.