You have not yet responded to the forum.

Here you will find the last 3 forum topics
you have posted a comment on.
+ add shout
Olympus
Correction: VOLUNTARY COMMUNITY WARDROBE SALE ON FRIDAY
0 | 0 | 0 | 0
0%
To join the forums you need to be logged in.

Click here to register your own account for free and I will personally explain to you how you can start getting your own fans and, making popdollars.
> Close
Helper
Forum
Startalk
Blog statistics
Friends management



Topics   Messages
16 of the 24 stars earned

Forum

General < General First | Previous | Page: | Next | Last
Johnny depp practically winning
Private
World Famous



Claire wrote:
Koolaid wrote:
me and prob the only 2 other radfems in this thread feel very differently about this tbh lol okurr im tired of discussing this
im worried about my sister because shes spoken publicly about her abuse and it cost the guy financially. like he was pre-law and now he's a waiter because of what he did to her. if he wanted to sue her for defamaiton he can cite depp v heard as precedent.
21
Posts: 55751
Date: 01-06-2022 22:51
Private
World Famous



Claire wrote:
Koolaid wrote:
me and prob the only 2 other radfems in this thread feel very differently about this tbh lol okurr im tired of discussing this
whats interesting to me is its not like the libfems that are excited and gloating in here right now its the girls who are real pick me tradfem types.
21
Posts: 55751
Date: 01-06-2022 22:52
Private
Popstar



Koolaid wrote:
i keep thinking about that hardass quote about even in oppression, there will be someone boasting about who wears their chains best... and i think that's very relevant now. a lot of women showing their asses during this trial
17
Posts: 14620
Date: 01-06-2022 22:52
Private
World Famous



Babel wrote:
ouch wrote:
Effer wrote:
ouch wrote:
This is america free speech bladibla
Which makes it okay for you to spew racist shit without the police knocking down your door in the US, but it doesn't protect you from the defamation or harassment your free speech causes.
Isn't hate speech exempt (?) from free speech anyway

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_free_speech_exceptions
I'll be honest and say I'm no expert on American law, but people seem very surprised when you can get a smaller sentence for saying racist stuff in Denmark, so I just thought it wasn't the case in the US.

I know we have had more than one Danish politician in court for saying racist stuff (one for saying African people have a smaller IQ than Danish people as an example)
21
Posts: 20523
Date: 01-06-2022 22:52
Private
Popstar



Koolaid wrote:
Claire wrote:
Koolaid wrote:
me and prob the only 2 other radfems in this thread feel very differently about this tbh lol okurr im tired of discussing this
im worried about my sister because shes spoken publicly about her abuse and it cost the guy financially. like he was pre-law and now he's a waiter because of what he did to her. if he wanted to sue her for defamaiton he can cite depp v heard as precedent.
precisely. women literally cannot even speak about abuse now (without even mentioning their abuser). bc unless they have 100% undeniable evidence (which most victims of SA don't have bc how could they??) it could be seen as defamation. sickening
17
Posts: 14620
Date: 01-06-2022 22:53
Private
Popstar



ouch wrote:
Claire wrote:
Koolaid wrote:
me and prob the only 2 other radfems in this thread feel very differently about this tbh lol okurr im tired of discussing this
whats interesting to me is its not like the libfems that are excited and gloating in here right now its the girls who are real pick me tradfem types.
Is there anyone on vp thats a tradfem lol
16
Posts: 95954
Date: 01-06-2022 22:53
Private
International Star



wug wrote:
Abby wrote:
Fibraecataphyllolotlum wrote:
Claire wrote:
i hate china they censor gay kisses in my BL comics
i have strong opinions about china and people need to listen smh 
Actual crisis, yes do tell
what EXACTLY is it about china this time?
british media revealed files and photos detailing what is happening in west china with the uyghurs and no one gives a flying fuck because it is so super interesting with two rich american twats making a huge scene in media buhu i am victim shut the fuck up honestly keep your dirty relationship laundry to yourself 
19
Posts: 108109
Date: 01-06-2022 22:53
Private
Popstar



ouch wrote:
Effer wrote:
ouch wrote:
Effer wrote:
Which makes it okay for you to spew racist shit without the police knocking down your door in the US, but it doesn't protect you from the defamation or harassment your free speech causes.
Isn't hate speech exempt (?) from free speech anyway

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_free_speech_exceptions
I'll be honest and say I'm no expert on American law, but people seem very surprised when you can get a smaller sentence for saying racist stuff in Denmark, so I just thought it wasn't the case in the US.

I know we have had more than one Danish politician in court for saying racist stuff (one for saying African people have a smaller IQ than Danish people as an example)
It is the case there too  I think but I doubt it gets enforced much for smaller stuff, mby like if ur openly spewing nazi shit or smth b
16
Posts: 95954
Date: 01-06-2022 22:55
Private
World Famous



Claire wrote:
Fibraecataphyllolotlum wrote:
Abby wrote:
Fibraecataphyllolotlum wrote:
i have strong opinions about china and people need to listen smh 
Actual crisis, yes do tell
what EXACTLY is it about china this time?
british media revealed files and photos detailing what is happening in west china with the uyghurs and no one gives a flying fuck because it is so super interesting with two rich american twats making a huge scene in media buhu i am victim shut the fuck up honestly keep your dirty relationship laundry to yourself 
is there new info that shits been going on a long time
21
Posts: 55751
Date: 01-06-2022 22:55
Account deleted




wrote:
Claire wrote:
Claire wrote:
no but thats literally what a defamation case is about though. did i ahve the right to say this or not. its literally about free speech actually and what qualifies as free speech and what counts as defamation. this was a defamation case. 
like the case wasnt about who abused who it was about whether their public comments about each other were malicious lies. 



basically the jury found that yeah she was abused, but she isn't allowed to talk abt it. she didn't even mention him by name in the original article.
Date: 01-06-2022 22:55
Private
International Star



wug wrote:
Claire wrote:
Fibraecataphyllolotlum wrote:
Abby wrote:
Actual crisis, yes do tell
what EXACTLY is it about china this time?
british media revealed files and photos detailing what is happening in west china with the uyghurs and no one gives a flying fuck because it is so super interesting with two rich american twats making a huge scene in media buhu i am victim shut the fuck up honestly keep your dirty relationship laundry to yourself 
is there new info that shits been going on a long time
yeah solid evidence was released two weeks ago or so 
19
Posts: 108109
Date: 01-06-2022 22:56
Private
Princess of Pop



Arthema wrote:
Fibraecataphyllolotlum wrote:
Abby wrote:
Fibraecataphyllolotlum wrote:
i have strong opinions about china and people need to listen smh 
Actual crisis, yes do tell
what EXACTLY is it about china this time?
british media revealed files and photos detailing what is happening in west china with the uyghurs and no one gives a flying fuck because it is so super interesting with two rich american twats making a huge scene in media buhu i am victim shut the fuck up honestly keep your dirty relationship laundry to yourself 
OH yeah this situation I'm aware of, having an Uyghur friend that exposed me to that shit... fucking disgusting and vile, the fucking war crimes and genocide that they're committing against em..man
17
Posts: 39247
Date: 01-06-2022 22:56
Private
Popstar



Koolaid wrote:
acidreflux wrote:
Claire wrote:
Claire wrote:
no but thats literally what a defamation case is about though. did i ahve the right to say this or not. its literally about free speech actually and what qualifies as free speech and what counts as defamation. this was a defamation case. 
like the case wasnt about who abused who it was about whether their public comments about each other were malicious lies. 



basically the jury found that yeah she was abused, but she isn't allowed to talk abt it. she didn't even mention him by name in the original article.
this is what gags me like.... women cannot even talk about their abuse now even without mentioning their abuser. this is really really really bad. like i don't think people understand what this trial means for future DV victims? US law is heavily entrenched in precedences and this sets that very precedence.
17
Posts: 14620
Date: 01-06-2022 22:56
Account deleted




wrote:
Koolaid wrote:
Claire wrote:
Koolaid wrote:
me and prob the only 2 other radfems in this thread feel very differently about this tbh lol okurr im tired of discussing this
im worried about my sister because shes spoken publicly about her abuse and it cost the guy financially. like he was pre-law and now he's a waiter because of what he did to her. if he wanted to sue her for defamaiton he can cite depp v heard as precedent.
precisely. women literally cannot even speak about abuse now (without even mentioning their abuser). bc unless they have 100% undeniable evidence (which most victims of SA don't have bc how could they??) it could be seen as defamation. sickening
it makes me sick to my stomach.
the shit evan rachel wood is gonna go thru after this w the defamation suit against her by asshole marilyn manson.
Date: 01-06-2022 22:56
Account deleted




wrote:
Koolaid wrote:
acidreflux wrote:
Claire wrote:
like the case wasnt about who abused who it was about whether their public comments about each other were malicious lies. 



basically the jury found that yeah she was abused, but she isn't allowed to talk abt it. she didn't even mention him by name in the original article.
this is what gags me like.... women cannot even talk about their abuse now even without mentioning their abuser. this is really really really bad. like i don't think people understand what this trial means for future DV victims? US law is heavily entrenched in precedences and this sets that very precedence.

i don't want anyone to ever say that the court favor women, because it very obviously doesn't.
this is the fucking simpson case all over again. the difference is that she was murdered and amber is still alive.
Date: 01-06-2022 22:57
Post comment
Post Comment
To load new posts: activated
First | Previous | Page: | Next | Last
© 2026 Terms of Use