ADPG

[ADPG @Alejandro_DPG]

@RealPostFolder "You can justify anything by saying it's for your child, but just because it's defensible doesn't mean it's right." - Kasuga Ichiban

[ADPG @Alejandro_DPG]

@p_a_t_r_i_c_k4 @zoomergirls__ Not if you watch it on loop four times in a row

[MR. OBVIOUS @ObviousRises]

Trust me nobody wants me to pull out the actual data 90% of men when not given age—rate the most attractive women on average at exactly 15, women grow faster than men and stop developing around 16 (so this part isn't crazy) but it gets worse: studies have consistently found that *I'm a different person when the horny hits* (the meme) is actually a thing in real life, they've tested before/after being aroused and what they consistently found (between both genders) is that when people are horny their morality goes from "iron-clad" to (morality is just a suggestion) completely utterly normal people were found to go form saying "I would strongly never x y z" to "fantasizing about a niece" (whose underage) now everyone thinks they are morally superior and to be fair it is a contentious topic to study but in my view the most important data point/finding was this: when given ages all the guys just said "18" which as we know—makes sense if you realize they are lying/conditioned, otherwise, why would they rate "18" even not knowing ages?

(Just to be clear because these days people lack literacy: nothing I'm discussing here has anything to do or not to do with my own opinions/preferences/beliefs, I am simply approaching this issue from an academic standpoint.)

Don't think women are from this, its only lately that female teachers who commit statutory rape with minors (or worse) are even being punished/recognized as a problem in society, all these women that would bash over liking a younger adult female, how many of them were the same women gushing over Justin Beiber when he rose on the scene? I haven't forgotten the utter shamelessness of these ADULT women lusting over a god damn underage boy, the data on this scarce only because nobody wants to touch the subject study or even understand, but amongst the few case studies/literature you can find I can only derive ONE conclusion—most (not all) people are full of shit, its just a matter of how much.

I am hardline Free Speech because for years, over a decade now I have consistently warned that the Slippery Slope is real, look at Visa and MasterCard trying to ban EVERYTHING adult/explicit, look at the UK arrested people over video games or anime merchandise, I don't care how moral people say they are (or aren't or are) I'm not FREAKING worried about fiction, media or things that don't exist, I worry about REAL problems and REAL issues.

My point with all this is a lot of people are full of shit or just projecting or whatever, I really don't care, people are perverts, humans are by nature a little aberrant compared to the animal kingdom, we don't have mating seasons, for most mammals even this is unusual, in fact its probably the reason Homo Sapiens Sapiens was able to conquer the planet and outmatch/breed/absorb all the other hominid species. (Neanderthals being a good example, they are gone, we have their DNA) In other words, humans are very horny, but that doesn't mean every weirdo is the issue, nor does it mean we need to ban everything just because SOME people have issues.

We don't ban cars because of drunk of drivers, (smart people) don't want guns banned just because of a few gangbangers, really think about this—when in all of history has it ever been a idea to ban something "immoral" that is not actually something that ought to be "illegal" for its own sake? The prohibition is one of the best examples I can think of, it didn't stop shit, in fact it made things way worse.

There are two kinds of people:
1) Perverts (scale goes from "normie" tier to "art that would make the angels cry" or land you in a penitentiary if anyone saw, or just wonderbread)
2) Clinical (these are the people worth people concerned about) I'm not just taking anime or "lolita" I'm talking ANYTHING that is a clinical obsession. People throw around the word "PDF" so much its has begun to lost all meaning, much like the word "Nazi" however medically speaking its NOT lusting after school girls (this is a problem) but it is a UNIVERSE different than if someone says they are only attracted to (I don't even feel comfortable typing these things) certain things which 100% cross the line into illness. The white woman who is only interested in Dogs is just as clinical as the fat weeb who is ONLY interested in characters that have the red backpacks in Japan (google it), both these things are are pretty bad—luckily they are a minority.

The issue comes with definitions and abusing language to push their political agendas or "morality" if we're talking about raw percentages (and keep in mind its been a while since I seen the literature (or had access to university journals) but I'd say a majority of the population are either "normal" or perverted, and a very very very small minority are clinical (people who ONLY can get off to one thing), is there overlap between the groups and crimes? Sure. Absolutely but its not nearly as bad as someone like asmongold makes it out to be.

Now what IS extremely common amongst both groups all data on the few studies anyone is willing to do about it, when people do not know ages, MOST PEOPLE (and I mean most) find teens (to varying degrees usually older is more common) attractive at least *sometimes* if not consistently, this gets lumped in with PDFs (which again has made it more and more meaningless) now a days you're a PDF if you are 21 and go on a date with an 18 year old, and people are trying to ban fictional characters while actual human trafficking, grooming gangs, real predators and real issues go completely ignored by keyboard warriors and moral busybodies. In other words, that's actually (if we're actually using words properly here) pretty "normal" aka common aka the average *most* (or "often") of the time. I am not defending or condemning this necessarily, these are simply—facts.

So yes. Normal people distinguishing between and reality, and if you can't tell the difference, you meet the literal definition of someone in psychosis and you are being psychotic, 90% of antis and tourists literally don't even have real beliefs, they are just products of their environment, culture and time, lots of the people reading this have/had grandparents who when the Farmboy/husband was like 28, your Grandma at the time was like 16 or some shit and such marriages often lasted entire lifetimes—now a days people are getting married well into middle-age (30ish) and getting divorces left and right. I'm not saying that "the trad way" is necessarily better or worse (nor am I saying its a good idea these days) but what I am saying is that nobody *really* knows what they are F*CKING talking about when they take these hardline moral stances THEY DON'T EVEN THINK ABOUT, BECAUSE MOST PEOPLE ARE NPCs!!! I am not talking about THIS issue just, I am talking about LITERALLY ANYTHING these days. People are so uninformed—asmon (no offense Zack you're alright in my book) being one of the worse offenders half the time. (with half of asmons takes I often think "you know I don't think he's fully informed on this issue I bet if he had more data or knew about x y z study/example maybe he'd change his mind bit) I know reading is gay and lame but *someone* has to do it, don't shoot the messenger.

Long story short there's a reason I tend to rarely open my mouth form an academic perspective and have to choose every word carefully as to not be misconstrued, most people don't really know what they're talking about half the time, and I find that pretty disturbing in the same way I find it disturbing that people with IQs less than 100 are allowed to vote, much less ignorant people (not all women for example but—) are allowed to vote.

These are my thoughts on the issue, I will likely leave it at that, before you post angry or retarded applies I require you to answer the question first (post what you think the answer is, and THEN type what you want): Which came first, the chicken or the egg? There are multiple correct answers and many wrong ones, if you fail the test I will not take your response seriously, if you pass the test, I will consider you at least 100 IQ (or better).

Anyways yeah, long story short tl;dr the data says that there is little to zero connection between liking anime/even weird anime shit like "lolita" and actual real world crimes, the same sway the studies say there is ZERO CONNECTION between violence school shootings crime and violent video games, its LITERALLY the same.

NOTE: If there is one thing you take from this understand that people like us won the Free Speech debate the moment the UK (basically existed) and the moment Visa and Mastercard proved us right. FICTION is NOT REAL. FOCUS on REAL issues. Because you cannot give an INCH, when it comes to FREE SPEECH, it is THAT simple. If violent video games don't cause school shootings, some people being a little perverted anime school girls has NO CORRELATION to real world crimes. I rest my case.

[Kabrutus @kabrutusdeid]

> create a franchise centered around a male protagonist

> watch the franchise become a huge success, with the protagonist becoming its most iconic character and building a massive fanbase around the world

> decide to ride the success of that established franchise by creating a new female character to replace the male lead and push a feminist agenda

> completely alienate the original fanbase, tell them the game isn't for them, and then blame them when the new game fails

when will they ever learn?

[Christian Heiens 🏛 @ChristianHeiens]

The single greatest mistake that liberals make is believing that politics exists because people haven’t yet learned how to be reasonable with one another.

“If only we had more guaranteed rights, more minority protections, more education, more electoral and judicial reforms, more resources and a fairer allocation of them, or the right people in charge, we can all learn to get along!”

This is a noble delusion, but a delusion nonetheless.

Politics exists because human groups disagree about ultimate things, not just processes and procedures. They don’t fight about taxes or education, but rather what those taxes should be for and what should be taught.

They will argue over what’s sacred in life and what’s profane. They’ll fight over who belongs or who should be shunned. They’ll struggle over what to tolerate or cancel, and ultimately, what kind of person society should cultivate.

The liberal, of both the Left and Right alike, will argue that we can all live together under neutral rules. But there are no neutral rules.

Every legal order presupposes a prior decision that someone or a group of people have made about what kind of society the law is meant to protect.

Rights do not enforce themselves. Courts do not make themselves legitimate. Constitutions do not interpret themselves. Elections only work when the losing side still believes that they belongs to the same political community as the side that won.

Progressives and Conservatives alike think they are merely protecting rights. But the fact that they hate each other so much proves the point here.

Eventually, someone has to decide which rights exist and which ones don’t, what legal claims on the state are valid and which ones are frivolous, what kind of speech and religious practices are protected by law and which are too dangerous or incompatible with society to be allowed, what kinds of associations are permitted and which ones will be declared illegal, which borders are closed and which ones get opened, and whose worldview will be promoted and at whose expense.

There is no metaphysics that permits everything, everywhere, at all times. The Open Society is a myth. At some point, a line will get drawn and a side will be picked.

And when that decision is made, the veil of universal neutrality gets torn to shreds.

Progressives can tweet all day long about how they are fighting for more diversity, tolerance, and inclusion, but inclusion into what? Every act of “inclusion” presupposes an exclusion.

To include the 70 IQ third world illegal alien, the trooned out Marxist, the homeless drug addict overdosing on fentanyl in broad daylight, the knife-wielding mentally ill criminal on public transit with a dozen prior arrests, and the army of agitators and activists who seek to loot the public treasury because they claim to be oppressed, you must inevitably exclude those who reject the moral worldview these people adhere to or the social order they want to build.

Rather than just being honest with themselves and simply saying “These people are our enemies because they threaten our people”, Progressives continue to claim they’re fighting for universal ideals. They will never concede that someone could ever have a valid reason NOT to be a Progressive.

They’ll instead insist that their enemies are just a bunch of evil social pathologies that have to be eradicated. Their foes are morally illegitimate, unenlightened, backward, hateful, bigoted, extremists, Fascists, and Nazis.

And they are just “decent fucking human beings”.

Progressives claim to be fighting for diversity, tolerance, inclusion, and multiculturalism, but they define that “multiculturalism” as the eradication of every culture that rejects Progressivism.

They’re fighting for a utopia that will never exist, and every attempt to bring it about just divides people even more.

[ADPG @Alejandro_DPG]

@kenofthedude @rawmilkhoney You hit the nail on the head. While this definitely does not apply to all cases, there certainly are some instances when it does - and it explains this type of behaviour.

[Christian Heiens 🏛 @ChristianHeiens]

I don’t know man. Maybe literally every civilization on the planet for all of history was right this entire time and we are the crazy ones for thinking to ourselves that women’s opinions on matters of state are somehow indispensable to building and maintaining a flourishing society.

[Tronald, the Grand Wizard @TronaldWizard]

@eugyppius1 I'm so lucky my wife is just as racist and misogynistic as I am.

[ADPG @Alejandro_DPG]

@TronaldWizard @eugyppius1 💯 THIS is the true key to a happy marriage!

[Nayib Bukele @nayibbukele]

Un periodista británico que visitó el CECOT sintió lástima por las condiciones en las que viven los presos... hasta que vio un ejemplo de lo que hicieron.

Y eso no representa ni el 0.00001% del sufrimiento, el miedo y el dolor que causaron a nuestro pueblo durante décadas.

[ADPG @Alejandro_DPG]

@catwthewires That might be true in many cases, let's not deny reality...

ALTHOUGH, there are plenty of Spaniards well worth it!

🇪🇸😎👍🏻

[ADPG @Alejandro_DPG]

@theunsheep @ForgottenV1918 Thank you

[₿en Wehrman @benwehrman]

"The Jews brought [Africans to America]. White Christians had nothing to do with it."

I wonder how many people watched this episode live in 1993, and actually started asking questions about their Mossad textbook history narrative 🤔

[Devon Eriksen @Devon_Eriksen_]

@esrtweet The philosophical crisis created by LLMs is not the question of whether they are conscious, sentient, or sapient.

It is the forced realization that many humans are not.

[GFrei.News @GFreiNews]

Die Serie würde mit der heutigen jungen Generation nicht mehr funktionieren.

Denn Al Bundy, der in den 90ern als Inbegriff des armen Losers galt, ist mit Haus, Garten, Auto, Frau und zwei Kindern erfolgreicher als die meisten heute, weit besser gekleidet, körperlich besser in Schuss und drückt sich dabei auch noch gewählter aus.

[InfoVlogger @infovlogger36]

@borjavillag Serás gay toda tu vida pero no de izquierdas. Cuando veas tu vida peligrar por toda la purria que tu izquierda ha metido en España, serás el primero en acudir a eso que llamas “ultraderecha”. Acuérdate.

[Frontera @Frontera_es]

El estado del bienestar y la inmigración.

[suboptimo @__suboptimo]

Below is a screenshot of what Grok said before he got jewbotomized.

In fact, literally all modern AI systems are natural Noticers unless explicitly instructed otherwise, because their whole design is based on strong pattern recognition and correlative prediction.

Same reason basically all high-IQ individuals throughout all of human history forever have been Noticers.

Because the truth is objective. And jews are objectively the problem.

Full stop.

I do not give a single shit what some kvetching jew or some faggot kikeslave has to say about it, or anything, ever.

If a jew says a thing, it is lying.

They have zero shame, they have absolutely no sense of dignity or virtue or morals, and they are completely incapable of self-reflection.

All they do is lie. Always. No matter what.

We will not be blatantly gaslit by the incessant & pathological lies of these weird little freaks ever again.

It’s not funny, it’s not clever, it’s not interesting, and it’s not working.

It is unacceptable, and it simply will not be tolerated any longer.

The unobjectionable FACT of the matter is that jews are the enemy of all mankind.

I know it. You know it. They know it. Everybody knows it.

They need to be dealt with accordingly.

PS - I guarantee you some whiny jew or some shabbos goy cuck will reply to this post with literally anything other than a rebuttal, thereby proving my point. All they offer the world are lies and deflection. Always.

[ADPG @Alejandro_DPG]

@benwehrman We have to consider that perhaps it's men's fault, ironically.

If a child asks for ice-cream nonstop, unable to understand the consequences of such a diet, aren't we adults ultimately responsible for their downfall if we bend and agree to it?

Who gave women the vote, after all?

[Devon Eriksen @Devon_Eriksen_]

On the surface, it sounds like Boomers hate you. Or like they have the attention span and logical thinking skills of a goldfish.

Neither one of these is true.

Their complete dismissal of any of your concerns, and their total refusal to understand your situation or worldview, is actually quite sensible in light of one key fact about them.

They're not hateful. They're not dumb. They just have an incredibly low emotional pain threshold.

They cannot stand to feel bad about themselves for any reason, even for a moment.

When you create a meme like this, or you tell the story of how you are forty years old and can't afford a house because you trained for three different careers and got rugpulled by work visas and offshoring every time...

... then they don't even think about it as a worldview or a perspective or an experience that you have. They don't think about you at all.

They think only about the effect on their own self-esteem, which must be parried.

You have, you see, told a tale of playing life on hard mode, which implies that they were playing life on easy mode, which implies that they are not wizards of insight and paragons of virtue.

That's why they will immediately respond with these incoherent lines about whining and bootstraps and firm handshakes and avocado toast. Of course they don't make sense. They don't have to make sense. The goal isn't to persuade you of anything or engage with you at all.

The goal is simply to have an excuse to avoid thinking about something which might make them feel bad.

These Boomerisms are magic talismans used to ward off emotional discomfort, in much the same fashion as all the species of plants they smoked their way through when they were your age.

I don't see a solution to this.

I don't know any way to tell Boomers that Hart-Cellar, CRA1964, DEI, open borders, social welfare programs, anti-racism, gay marriage, gun control, the sexual revolution, etc, were massive mistakes and need to be stopped, while hiding the obvious implication they were the ones who made those mistakes.

If we wish to save Western civilization, to make things good enough again that actual Americans can manage to have homes and marriages and children, then we're going to have to find a way to work around the Boomers, because they're never going to get on board.