@@Nicolae_Mew Neither one should be construed as a big deal. It's all talk, and American political talk, for better or worse, is fraught with gun and violence references. I don't think Hulk Hogan actually wants to back suplex Kamala through a flaming table on Monday Night RAW. But if conservatives are gonna piss their pants about milquetoast Biden's private remarks to donors, then by logical necessity they'd need to be similarly outraged at Hogan's shrill comments. But because intellectual honesty is such an oddity at this point, few conservatives will even know wtf I'm talking about.
@@GreedySpeculator People have been trained to get outraged at things that aren't really outrageous. An angry mob is a useful political device. It might also partly be human nature. Even I have to bridle my reactions sometimes.
Nobody complaining about the "bullseye" thing is being serious, everyone knows exactly what he meant, but you shouldn't act surprised given how often the left jumps all over regular language exactly like that when it comes from someone on the right. Do you recall how the left collectively reacted when Trump said there would be a "bloodbath in the automotive industry" if he lost?
There is an obvious difference here that you obviously don't see. One, Hulk Hogan is a wrestler, of he says he is going to body slam someone, its funny, because thats what he does he body slams people. The bullseye comment its differently because of the person who said it.
Me personally i wouldn't lose sleep over my kids not being traditionally masculine/feminine. As long as they don't act try hard with it I'll always love them 😊❤.
You know what? I didn't get it before, but I'm starting to think conservatives are really turning this franchise around; the race and gender centric criticism is WAY more effective than I thought it'd be! I mean, WOW! They should totally keep it up, I mean, LEAN into more, even! If it's making these Dems cry this much, must mean it's working!
The phrasing "has the potential to radicalise American parents" is such an insane way of phrasing this presumed point. I thought Hanania sounded reasonable in conversation, but the more I read from him the more obvious it is that he's just another one of those partisan hacks emulating the aesthetic of being evenhanded and unbiased, while using the most extreme phrasing possible to describe the democrats and softening any criticism of republicans.
Towards the end, with most parents wanting their daughters to have a more traditionally feminine appearance, that may be case. But probably more accurate to say most parents envision their daughter that way, even if they wouldn't care if that wasn't the case.
Imagine being so overwhelmed by fear that you jump to conclusions about broad social trends that you're probably too young to have experienced. If it seems to you that racism and sexism are getting normalized again, then I suspect you had a period of blissful ignorance. Racism and sexism have been slowly tapering off for centuries now, and it's reasonable to expect it will take a few more decades at least until the attitudes reach whatever you seem to have thought they were before. That said, if you have any evidence to the contrary I'd be happy to hear it, but for now all I see is Trump tanking because of his blatant bigotry, which is evidence of the opposite of what you just said.
@@HippopotamusPencil bro i'm 38 lmfao. i remember when the shift changed towards pc being popular culture. when i was growing up, mental health was made fun of, sexual orientation was made fun of, white people got away with saying the n word if there was a soft a at the end, and "drag queens" was a punchline. We're shifting the other way from PC and bigots are more empowered now than they have been in a decade.
Either thinking that someone can't be black and Indian at the same time or thinking that if you are black and Indian, you always have to say "I'm both black and Indian" and never "I'm black" or "I'm Indian"
...because she is She's Indian She's also black yes, but she's also Indian Both of these things can be true and she can identify with both based on the conversation
@@titanscar2183 Yes but that she never saw herself as black. Also that wasn't my point. I was saying that noticing that she changed how she markets herself is not racist like Destiny suggests.
@@conscientunit1157 The point of my comment was that noticing that she is seeing herself as black (which is expected because she wants black people to vote for her) is not racist like Destiny implies. I don't care what she is. But noticing such tactical moves isn't something racist.
