Modlog

CONTENT WARNING: Some deleted posts may contain disturbing or adult material. Proceed with caution.

/c/shitreactionariessay Modlog

Filter by user

Time	mod	Action
2 days ago	mod	Removed Comment 4 years of anti-Russian, pro-Ukronazi propaganda and ~70 years of anti-Soviet propaganda creates this bigotry. Western capitalists use this to short circuit liberals from any actual analysis. *my bad previously by Comprehensive49@lemmygrad.ml reason: Slur
8 days ago	mod	Removed Comment And - we do understand autism. There are things that are unanswered as with many psychological disorders that primarily affect the brain, but to say that it is not understood is misinformed. What would be short sighted is to bring someone to a world where they will face significant hardships into a family that is not prepared to care for them. by Kalashnikov@lemmygrad.ml reason: eugenics
8 days ago	mod	Removed Comment > But I feel like you’re focussing too much on the effect on the mother and not on the lives of disabled people Fetuses aren't people. > And not every disabled person has high support needs That is true, and sometimes families are capable of providing high support, which is why this should be a decision. > I also don’t think that the neurodiversity movement claims that autistic people aren’t disabled, on the contrary. The neurodiversity movement claims that autism isn't a disorder, which it is. by Kalashnikov@lemmygrad.ml reason:
8 days ago	mod	Removed Comment Oh! Really? So you would much rather parents raise children that they cannot afford to raise because they were conceived instead? That's just pro-life with extra steps, dawg by Kalashnikov@lemmygrad.ml reason: eugenics
8 days ago	mod	Removed Comment That's what I said. If you cannot afford disabled kids, don't have any. Abort them. by Kalashnikov@lemmygrad.ml reason: eugenics
8 days ago	mod	Removed Comment I never said that. I said that children take up resources, and if you cannot spare said resources (time, energy, money etc.), then you shouldn't have them. Disabled children often take up even more resources than the average child, and if you cannot spare those resources, you should abort fetuses that you know for a fact would become disabled children. Children, disabled or not, will become a burden on you if you as a parent cannot invest time and energy on them. by Kalashnikov@lemmygrad.ml reason: eugenics
8 days ago	mod	Removed Comment No, the neurodiversity movement claims that certain types of mental disorders (such as, for example, autism spectrum disorder) aren't disorders at all, and they should not be cured. That is stupid, reckless and dangerous. Disabled people have the right to exist and deserve support and aid when they need it (This goes for every single human, not just disabled people). This is separate to the neurodiversity movement. There is no known cure to autism, but we should try and cure it as much as we can, because autism spectrum disorder is a disorder. The neurodiversity movement claims otherwise, and is content with the suffering "neurodivergent" individuals, their families and communities go through because of their disorder. by Kalashnikov@lemmygrad.ml reason: eugenics
8 days ago	mod	Removed Comment I wasn't talking exclusively about autistic individuals, but rather disabled individuals. Certain parts of the autistic spectrum contains individual who are disabled. My comment does not apply to all autistic individuals. "Cleansing the world of autists" is exactly what we should do. Autism Spectrum Disorder is a disorder, and we should try and cleanse the world of it, just as we should try and cleanse the world of heart disease or cancer or schizophrenia. When doctors are able to determine if a fetus has genetic disorders that will impair its life and require disproportionate amount of resources from its parents, then the right thing to do is to abort said fetus, especially if the parents cannot spare those resources. Women should be able to make that choice - that's hardly eugenics if a woman wants to abort a fetus with, say, down's syndrome. Many women do make that decision, every day. And some women do make the wrong choice, sometimes, and the children bear the consequences - because they have to deal with a disability their entire lives and will not receive adequate support that they need. Aborted fetuses with genetic disorders is better than neglected living children with genetic disorders. Not adequately caring for a disabled child is child neglect. by Kalashnikov@lemmygrad.ml reason: eugenics
8 days ago	mod	Removed Comment I happen to think that fetuses that would grow up to have incurable disorders that would put considerable strain on the family to raise them should be aborted by those families that cannot spare said effort. You should not have a child if you do not have the resources to provide for that child, and the unfortunate reality is that disabled children take up more resources. But it should be a personal decision made by the woman. I could absolutely never judge a mother who would choose to abort a disabled fetus. I have seen many families who raise disabled children worn down to the core from all the extra support that you have to provide to them. Having heard of the struggle they go through, especially in places where they do not have a developed support system for disabled individuals, if I were a woman, I would make the choice to abort a fetus that would grow up to be disabled. Autistic individuals are not a blight upon humanity - Fascist ableists however, are. But autism is indeed a disability - I personally do not agree with the neurodiversity movement. Autism spectrum disorder is a disorder. Individuals with disorders should be provided with the help and support they need. Fetuses, however, are not individuals. The capitalistic way of judging individuals' worth by the profit they can make for our overlords is inhumane and ableist, and leads to the unnatural assessment that disabled individuals are "worth" less than the average human. If a prospective mother can screen for a disorder and choose to abort a fetus based on that, I think that should be allowed, or even encouraged to make sure that women don't go into a lifetime's worth of commitment without realizing the implications. Take Helen Keller - it took the life time dedication of several full time teachers tending to just her to make her who she was, and she was only able to do that because her family had the resources for that kind of thing. If Helen Keller were to be most people's daughter, she would have died an unknown disabled person without achieving as much as she did. by Kalashnikov@lemmygrad.ml reason: eugenics
18 days ago	mod	Banned Manmoth@lemmy.ml from the community Shit Reactionaries Say@lemmygrad.ml reason: Saying over weight people do not deserve access to healthcare expires: 15 days ago
18 days ago	mod	Unbanned Manmoth@lemmy.ml from the community Shit Reactionaries Say@lemmygrad.ml
18 days ago	mod	Banned Manmoth@lemmy.ml from the community Shit Reactionaries Say@lemmygrad.ml reason: Saying over weight people do not deserve access to healthcare
1 month ago	mod	Banned PointyFluff@lemmy.ml from the community Shit Reactionaries Say@lemmygrad.ml reason: Troll
2 months ago	mod	Removed Comment No one on here will want to hear this but it damn well needs to be said: how much of our beloved "left" were/are useful idiots promoting radical surgeries and hormonal manipulations on children? Complete with the pre-accusation that not supporting life-altering surgeries on children is 'transphobic'? A grown and matured human may do what ever they want with their own body, but children? The same children who are literally figuring out themselves and will make many mistakes as they grow up because they have near zero life experience including the understanding of their own bodies? Not to mention the vastly different experience of one's own body pre- and post-puberty. "oh but if the kids have to wait to transition until they are an adult then they may not be passable". <- a creepy effing phrase said to me by an alleged socialist (and similar conversations with several SocDems and prog-libs). To which I must yell "stop sexualizing children!!!!! Yes you are already sexualizing children if you are considering their pass-ability!!!!!!" I shouldn't even have to write this. I don't want to write it, but someone needs to put their neck out and speak an obvious truth. Yet another emperor which has no clothes. Go ahead and bring up that one child you met that one time which "YOU JUST KNEW" was trans from the age of 3 or whatever, I'll wait. Such an anecdote, if even real, hardly makes up for the especially high numbers of transitioning children which are almost certainly not trans but more likely gay, bi, or simply curious and/or confused about their bodies, and yet again adults come into their early life to screw with the rest of their life with allegedly good intentions. Misguided (allegedly) good intentions can blow themselves. /rant by sudojonz@lemmygrad.ml reason: Rule 2
2 months ago	mod	Removed Comment It goes without saying, but also FCK EPSTEIN and this fcking thing. I'm disgusted on so many levels. And I'm especially angry that my hunch was very likely correct: that the sudden explosion in promotion of the T in LGBT about a decade ago was 100% manufactured to benefit the ruling classes at our expense. by sudojonz@lemmygrad.ml reason: Rule 2
2 months ago	mod	Removed Post What the fuck are Hoxhist smoking? reason: Repost to shitultrassay
2 months ago	mod	Banned Amnesigenic@lemmy.ml from the community Shit Reactionaries Say@lemmygrad.ml reason: rule 3 - out of instance users are expected to follow our rules like local users expires: 2 months ago
3 months ago	mod	Banned İbo@lemmygrad.ml from the community Shit Reactionaries Say@lemmygrad.ml reason: reduced on appeal expires: 3 months ago
3 months ago	mod	Unbanned İbo@lemmygrad.ml from the community Shit Reactionaries Say@lemmygrad.ml
3 months ago	mod	Unbanned İbo@lemmygrad.ml from the community Shit Reactionaries Say@lemmygrad.ml
3 months ago	mod	Removed Comment The ussr war pretty evil when you read about it ![](https://hexbear.net/api/v3/image_proxy?url=https%3A%2F%2Flemmygrad.ml%2Fpictrs%2Fimage%2F3ae3741f-8b50-4d4c-ae0a-59b83cc4c4a4.jpeg) From its enemies by İbo@lemmygrad.ml reason: no right devation
3 months ago	mod	Banned İbo@lemmygrad.ml from the community Shit Reactionaries Say@lemmygrad.ml reason: No right devation
3 months ago	mod	Banned greenbit@lemmy.zip from the community Shit Reactionaries Say@lemmygrad.ml reason: Anticommunist troll
4 months ago	mod	Removed AgreeableLandscape☭@lemmygrad.ml as a mod to the community Shit Reactionaries Say@lemmygrad.ml
4 months ago	mod	Appointed ☭ Comrade Pup Ivy 🇨🇺@lemmygrad.ml as a mod to the community Shit Reactionaries Say@lemmygrad.ml
5 months ago	mod	Banned geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml from the community Shit Reactionaries Say@lemmygrad.ml reason: Rule 1 expires: 4 months ago
5 months ago	mod	Banned DJ Putler@lemmy.ml from the community Shit Reactionaries Say@lemmygrad.ml reason: Go touch some grass
5 months ago	mod	Banned LENINSGHOSTFACEKILLA [he/him] from the community Shit Reactionaries Say@lemmygrad.ml reason: Reducing permaban to 30-day on the hope there is improvement in that time. Reason given for ban was: defending dehumanizing comments, refuses to budge. Uncomradely behavior expires: 4 months ago
5 months ago	mod	Unbanned LENINSGHOSTFACEKILLA [he/him] from the community Shit Reactionaries Say@lemmygrad.ml
5 months ago	mod	Banned LENINSGHOSTFACEKILLA [he/him] from the community Shit Reactionaries Say@lemmygrad.ml reason: defending dehumanizing comments, refuses to budge. Uncomradely behavior.
6 months ago	mod	Removed Post It's anti-semitic and racist to ask why the most powerful foreign lobby of all time is not registered as a foreign lobby in the United States. reason: The Zionist Occupied Government conspiracy theory is nazi propaganda
6 months ago	mod	Banned robot_dog_with_gun [they/them] from the community Shit Reactionaries Say@lemmygrad.ml reason: trolling expires: 6 months ago
7 months ago	mod	Banned FreudianCafe@lemmy.ml from the community Shit Reactionaries Say@lemmygrad.ml reason: rule 5
7 months ago	mod	Removed Fiona (she/her)🏳️‍⚧️@lemmygrad.ml as a mod to the community Shit Reactionaries Say@lemmygrad.ml
7 months ago	mod	Removed Kirbywithwhip1987@lemmygrad.ml as a mod to the community Shit Reactionaries Say@lemmygrad.ml
8 months ago	mod	Removed Comment Is he too much of a pussy to say the word fuck? by KrupskayaPraxis@lemmygrad.ml reason: misogynistic language
8 months ago	mod	Removed Post This fascist badly needs a bullet in his head. Supposedly he lives in Oregon. Let's trounce his anti-communist, sinophobic capitalist cope screed. reason: No calling for murder
9 months ago	mod	Removed Comment If we are to fight transphobia, we also need to understand what is gender-critical feminism and what is transphobic rhetoric disguised as feminism or activism. > It's the "gender-critical" fucks that conflate sex with gender! That's the whole point, they claim gender and sex is the same thing so you can't change your gender cause you can't change your chomosomes, etc. It's so incredibly dishonest to read "biological sex is unchanging and should not be conflated with gender" as support for gender critical views, I'm honestly speechless. No, they don't. Gender-critical theory divides categorically sex and gender, which coincides with some folks in the TQ+ communities (not all). They believe that human brains are unisex, all brains. Therefore, for them, genders are just mumbojumbo (hence the name: critical of gender, of the idea of them even existing outside our imagination and conviction). In consequence, they believe the word "woman" should only serve the purpose of identifying humans born with female biology or majority of it, and "man" should identify the male ones or with majority of it. That's why they believe a male-body (AMAB to us) cannot be a "woman" in any relevant sense (for them, a female-body or AFAB to us), and that their acting or feeling as the "feminine" gender is just enacting that said mumbojumbo not understanding its need to be eradicated instead of performed and replicated. They are not against males or AMABs or "men" (for them) expressing their identities even if outside current societal expectations, but if gender is some kind of ghostly category and only sex exists and matters, then there's no meaningful change there, they would still be males or AMABs or "men" (in their nomenclature) with no right to claim the female or AFAB or "women" (synonyms for them) spaces. That's why they are always saying "sex-based and not gender-based [whatever]". In short, they are critical of the idea of gender and are in favor of abolishing genders, in our daily lives, in stores, in sports, etc. To them, brains are unisex and the only differences we have as humans around these topics are those around the sexes, so those are the ones that should dictate divisions (such as bathrooms or sports), if any (because some GC feminists want less divisions too, while others are okay with regular sex-based divisions). So... they start very NB friendly and even TQ+ friendly (depending on the TQ+ because some trans folks do believe in gendered brains via intrauterine discharges of hormones or other theories). They are on a similar page to a lot of TQ+ with the unisex only-human-not-genders brain. The difference is that they believe we should eradicate genders instead of living a diversity of them or a classification or reclassification of them. They are okay with we would call "gender non-conforming" and any "gender expression", but to them that's just unisex humans being themselves, with only sex being important. This is me speaking: I believe they won't validate or give too much importance to others' "gender", only sex, and that's the real collision with most of the QT+ folks. That's the real GC feminist theory. Then you have the transphobic and hateful people that hide their conservatism and gender essentialism behind a supposed GC feminism. Or the ones that start as GC and end up full on the hate wagon, I guess because they start hanging out with the wrong people (I think that was the case for J. K. Rowling). This is me speaking again: I believe you can doubt someone's gender is ontologically important, without disrespecting their personhood, their f+$ humanity. I mean, not that similar, dumb analogy, but I do not believe that my aunt is really feeling a god and really being chosen to live forever as she thinks she is, and I do think the world would be better without those religious beliefs, but I still respect and love my aunt and share time (even if it's to listen to a Christian podcast). Sorry for the terrible analogy. I'm just trying to say that different ideologies can coexist, and choosing hatred instead of dialogue and understanding is a poor choice in my book. As you can imagine, I concede to the article something: I am not in favor of banning real GC debates in universities. But transphobia? Get out of here. by Katrisia@lemmy.today reason: terf rhetoric
9 months ago	mod	Removed Comment I'm quite... uh... there's must be a term in English. Like those kind of people that do not raise their voices enough, that do not do enough. In my case, not out of laziness. I'm too skeptical of ideas, to the point of knowing what the parties say, but not taking a stance. I marked the opinions I do have. I believe that there's like a theoretical field that should be open to speculation and investigation, and a daily life that has to be lived with the best ethics we can find and the suspension of judgement around the rest. Like I wouldn't really know if gender exists as a biological reality or only a social construct; if the latter, I don't know if it's a social construct we should change, not change, abolish, cherish, etc. I'm kind of gender fluid or that's what I think I am, so maybe I'm biased because I do not experience any attachment to my gender. And I do not see a problem in questioning these things because I do not think these questions should translate to how we treat people. For example, you say that their belief that gender is not important is invalidating their identities, and I partially agree, but I believe GC people should respect pronouns and stuff because that's just being respectful. It's no different to someone asking a change in nicknames, or a joke not being made. It takes zero effort and it means a lot to the trans folk in question. It's like "I do not believe gender should be a thing in our society, but to you it is important and I will acknowledge it as that in my treatment of you because I care for you". And not in a patronizing way, but in a good faith way. And I would expect the same from other sides like how non-binary people can chat with binary trans folks (those who believe only in two genders). At the end of the day, we do not have the final answer, so trying to get solutions that serve us all should be our aim. I understand the frustration that the trans community must feel when GC tell them, for example, that sports shouldn't be gender-based but sex-based. And probably GC feel the same when others tell them that sports shouldn't be sex-based but gender-based. It's inevitable that they feel very strongly about this, but my naivety tells me that we need to make an effort to breath, to pause, and to find alternatives that makes the majority of us happy. Maybe sports based in something different (not sex and not gender). Bathrooms not divided by sex or gender either, maybe divided by something more functional (and something that helps with the disproportionate capacity given to one bathroom over the other nowadays). Philosophy and science will continue to advance and change. In 300 years, people might look at us like we look at the "rationalists vs empiricists" debate or something like that. Just primitive frameworks that thanks to discoveries and better interpretations of the topic through the centuries are now obsolete and replaced by something in which we all had little points of truth and little points of nonsense. We live so shortly, we know so little... I guess that's where I'm coming. Like I'm not taking a firm stance on the theoretical because I honestly believe we are in a very difficult position, with little knowledge and little possibility of action. But on the practical, I would always defend people, from transphobia or otherwise. I wish for people to see their wills fulfilled as much as possible (and as long as they are not hurting others). In this case, I believe gender-based rights and words can exist alongside sex-based rights and different opinions. The major obstacle is not ideological but monetary, material. How can we have an AFAB-only club and a women-only club at the same time if capitalism is making it difficult to have even a single club? So I do not know if I'm a comrade in the communist sense, but I definitely agree with anticapitalism and I hope I do not affect the fight if I'm not actively helping it. In Spanish people from all sides would call me «tibia» (warm, not quite cold and not quite warm). It's an insult. I guess many would think that I cannot try to reconcile these kind of disagreements or contradictions, but that's just what my insides tell me is correct and worth trying. I'm also like this in things like violent revolution (I'm hoping it's not necessary like the standard Marxist believe) or veganism (in which animal suffering is not negotiable, but I think lab-meat or other alternatives might be a solution, temporary or permanent, while some vegans think it just incentives people to see animal meat and therefore animals as products still, but that's why I'm open for it to be temporary). Lol. Sorry, that's a lot of text. I just wanted to present who I am honestly. As for the GC points, I do not know if I'm the correct person to try to explain it further, but I'll try in another comment. I feel like I will distort it, but it's a fun exercise at the same time (to try to be true to their texts). Thank you for reading. by Katrisia@lemmy.today reason: transphobia
9 months ago	mod	Restored Comment > I’m quite… uh… there’s must be a term in English. "Liberal" > I’m too skeptical of ideas, to the point of knowing what the parties say, but not taking a stance. > > In 300 years, people might look at us like we look at the “rationalists vs empiricists” debate or something like that. Just primitive frameworks > > We live so shortly, we know so little… I guess that’s where I’m coming. Like I’m not taking a firm stance on the theoretical because I honestly believe we are in a very difficult position, with little knowledge and little possibility of action. So cool, so detached, and yet so wise. > I believe that there’s like a theoretical field that should be open to speculation and investigation > > I believe GC people should respect pronouns and stuff because that’s just being respectful. It’s no different to someone asking a change in nicknames (...) And not in a patronizing way > > And I would expect the same from other sides > > I understand the frustration that the trans community must feel (towards) GC. And probably GC feel the same > > At the end of the day, we do not have the final answer, so trying to get solutions that serve us all should be our aim. I don't have it in me to comment beside: free marketplace of ideas, enlightened centrism, tone policing, both sideism. Calling for GC people to treat trans identities like nicknames but not in a patronising way takes the cake. > And I do not see a problem in questioning these things because I do not think these questions should translate to how we treat people. That's great for you! Of course these questions do translate to how trans people are treated but you don't think they should so that's ok. > In this case, I believe gender-based rights and words can exist alongside sex-based rights and different opinions. The major obstacle is not ideological but monetary, material. How can we have an AFAB-only club and a women-only club at the same time if capitalism is making it difficult to have even a single club? Yeah the condition of trans people in the UK is totally caused by scarcity. Damn you capitalism, if not for you we'd have clubs for everyone! Unfortunately, under capitalism we barely have enough for cis people so... Sorry trans folks. > In Spanish people from all sides would call me «tibia» (warm, not quite cold and not quite warm). It’s an insult. I should hope so > As for the GC points, I do not know if I’m the correct person to try to explain it further, but I’ll try in another comment. No I'm fine, thanks. by Red_Scare [he/him]@lemmygrad.ml reason: removed by mistake
9 months ago	mod	Removed Comment > I’m quite… uh… there’s must be a term in English. "Liberal" > I’m too skeptical of ideas, to the point of knowing what the parties say, but not taking a stance. > > In 300 years, people might look at us like we look at the “rationalists vs empiricists” debate or something like that. Just primitive frameworks > > We live so shortly, we know so little… I guess that’s where I’m coming. Like I’m not taking a firm stance on the theoretical because I honestly believe we are in a very difficult position, with little knowledge and little possibility of action. So cool, so detached, and yet so wise. > I believe that there’s like a theoretical field that should be open to speculation and investigation > > I believe GC people should respect pronouns and stuff because that’s just being respectful. It’s no different to someone asking a change in nicknames (...) And not in a patronizing way > > And I would expect the same from other sides > > I understand the frustration that the trans community must feel (towards) GC. And probably GC feel the same > > At the end of the day, we do not have the final answer, so trying to get solutions that serve us all should be our aim. I don't have it in me to comment beside: free marketplace of ideas, enlightened centrism, tone policing, both sideism. Calling for GC people to treat trans identities like nicknames but not in a patronising way takes the cake. > And I do not see a problem in questioning these things because I do not think these questions should translate to how we treat people. That's great for you! Of course these questions do translate to how trans people are treated but you don't think they should so that's ok. > In this case, I believe gender-based rights and words can exist alongside sex-based rights and different opinions. The major obstacle is not ideological but monetary, material. How can we have an AFAB-only club and a women-only club at the same time if capitalism is making it difficult to have even a single club? Yeah the condition of trans people in the UK is totally caused by scarcity. Damn you capitalism, if not for you we'd have clubs for everyone! Unfortunately, under capitalism we barely have enough for cis people so... Sorry trans folks. > In Spanish people from all sides would call me «tibia» (warm, not quite cold and not quite warm). It’s an insult. I should hope so > As for the GC points, I do not know if I’m the correct person to try to explain it further, but I’ll try in another comment. No I'm fine, thanks. by Red_Scare [he/him]@lemmygrad.ml reason: transphobia
10 months ago	mod	Banned cub Gucci@lemmy.today from the community Shit Reactionaries Say@lemmygrad.ml reason: R1
11 months ago	mod	Banned Archangel@lemm.ee from the community Shit Reactionaries Say@lemmygrad.ml reason: Rule
11 months ago	mod	Removed Post Hulk caved in reason: 4 years old, misleading
11 months ago	mod	Removed Post Hulk caved in reason: Misleading - tweet is from 4 years ago
1 year ago	mod	Banned SpicyLizards@reddthat.com from the community Shit Reactionaries Say@lemmygrad.ml reason: Rule 1
1 year ago	mod	Removed Comment I will personally put a bullet in this man's head. by Nakoichi [they/them] reason: No adventurism
1 year ago	mod	Removed Post Ukraine supporters are truly some of the most depraved souls on this Earth reason: double post
1 year ago	mod	Removed Post [Western Liberal/Democrat] (CW slurs, state-sanctioned murder) Vaush gracefully handling his team losing reason: possibly fake tweet; please repost with source or evidence
2 years ago	mod	Removed Comment Yeah, sorry, but I know there are many LGBTQIA+ people here for which LGBTQIA+ issues are often existential (i.e, murder by bigots). But we do have to acknowledge that Western bourgeois democracies are more progressive on LGBTQIA+ issues and that this will become a splintering line by bourgeois establishments, and this has to be brought into discussion. Western communist parties generally are pro-LGBTQIA+, but communist parties in the Global South are often more regressive (Laos, for instance, limits LGBTQIA+ discussions online, but culturally tolerates transgenderism). I can put out my critical support line, but it's not a strong position to hold. How do we sincerely engage with this problem? by farmer_of_song@lemmygrad.ml reason: Capitalist governments are not better at LGBT rights
2 years ago	mod	Removed Comment That's one state, which only legalized same sex marriage in 2022. If you bring out Cuba, I can bring up Iceland. The rest of the block contains North Korea, China, Laos, and Vietnam. LGBTQIA+ is essentially orthogonal to Marxism, but it's a key lever of idpol in the bourgeois West. Non-Marxist anti-imperialist states are usually quite traditional, and this brings out the neo-conservative challenge. https://www.haaretz.com/middle-east-news/palestinians/2024-04-03/ty-article-magazine/.premium/hamas-files-found-by-israel-in-gaza-detail-execution-of-senior-member-accused-of-being-gay/0000018e-9e6d-d64e-afce-fffd62370000 Maybe we should go over this bag of worms later. by farmer_of_song@lemmygrad.ml reason: Thinks Marxist countries are anti-LGBTQ
2 years ago	mod	Removed Post ... reason: please don't wish for rape
2 years ago	mod	Removed Post Whats with the Indian hate reason: Troll acct
2 years ago	mod	Removed Post wtf reason: Shown in the comments to be fake.
2 years ago	mod	Removed Post Hello everyone, nice to know you. My name is Vittorio, im 24, atheist bisex sex-positive feminist and everything conservatives hates. reason: wrong community
2 years ago	mod	Removed Post No title reason: Too cringe
2 years ago	mod	Removed Post [CW: Extreme racism] Least insane Zionist reason: Rule 4
2 years ago	mod	Restored Post [CW: Extreme racism] Least insane Zionist
2 years ago	mod	Removed Post [CW: Extreme racism] Least insane Zionist reason: Rule 5
2 years ago	mod	Removed Post IG wants me to get “threads” so I can see more of this crap reason: reactionary
2 years ago	mod	Removed Post I'm no expert, but I'm pretty sure placing bounties on private citizens is illegal reason: Potential doxxing
3 years ago	mod	Removed Post Update on the least psychologically disturbed Lemmy poster = he has a group of 6+ alt accounts spamming logical fallacy memes over and over because he's not able to set up a bot reason: rule 1,2