...it’s called innocent until proven guilty. A fundamental democratic principle. Is it possible he did? Sure, but as far as I’m concerned he’s innocent...because he hasn’t been proven guilty. Is telling a woman that she smells nice now considered rape?

Why would I accuse them of something I can’t prove? I’m acknowledging the possibility that they are lying. The real question is: can they prove their allegations?

They could be liars. That’s not an impossibility. Are women less prone to lying?

Do you believe women are objects for men to do with as they please?

Due process is fundamental, regardless of what the state—not a neutral body by any means—says. I take your silence on my other questions as evidence that you have no regard for democratic rights.

Yikes, you’re hysterical, so it’s hard to take you seriously. Do you believe an accusation is proof of guilt? Do you support the democratic principle of innocent until proven guilty?

Another example of how #MeToo tramples upon the fundamental democratic rights and principles of due process and innocence until proven guilty. An accusation isn’t proof of anything. Rather, #MeToo inverts these, where the burden of proof rests not on the accuser, but on the accused, who is guilty until they can show…

Christ on a cracker, NFTs and blockchains are the worst fucking buzzwords of idiocy and here we are, using them as a foundation of the next web?

This. Everyone always seems to ask “Why doesn’t [insert any disgustingly rich billionaire here] help people with all that money he has?” And the answer is: Because he’s a sociopath and he didn’t get rich by having any kind of empathy for the suffering of other humans.

I got twenty bucks that says Fishburne is in the movie and it is supposed to be a secret surprise reveal thing delivered with the plot twist that whatever already meta movie you thought you were watching isn't that movie at all

Losing money and calling it a success is kind of the whole crypto modus operandi, right?

Today’s news is brought to you by the letters P, O, N, Z, and I.

There’s this cognitive bias that happens whereby people rely on others to get rich, but once they’re rich, they conveniently forget how much they relied on others, leading them to believe their success is all from their own “hard work” and that they deserve it all, while anyone who isn’t successful is just “not trying…

It’s theorized that ultra high profile CEOs may have psychopathy, it just happens that they were able to steer their symptoms towards something socially acceptable. Hence why you see them rally against things that would benefit others and ignore regulations.

Religious nuts: “Ooooh! The vaccine has something called Lucifera-something in it! It’s true! The devil made it! Mark of the Devil! 666!”

Yeah, money will lose its value pretty quickly when you can’t use it to buy food and water anymore.

The most depressing part isn’t even the amount of suffering incoming. It’s how little so many people care about that suffering because they feel it won’t happen to them.

whether it is appropriate for CEOs to make $5-250M a year is another discussion.

sounds ripe for taxation.

Well, to start with... it’s NOT AN IMAGE PROBLEM! Start doing the right thing and the problem magically goes away!