Why the frick does this bullshit still work? Why does anyone believe these god damned evil harpies at this point? How many times does this shit have to happen before someone just starts killing studio execs? His piece of shit coworkers even made fun of him after he was dismissed. And of course the CIA media still tried to claim he was guilty just because.
I want to be clear, I don't give a frick about Roiland, but this shit needs to stop. I'm fricking tired of it. Something really needs to be done to rein in women in the modern era. They're totally out of control.
 Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
 Tip Your Landlord Shirt $21.68 |
Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
It was the leaked DMs that prevent any comeback.
>leaked DMs
You mean fabricated DMs? If a woman said it, it's a lie. Period.
Yeah sure man. That'll totally hold up on court.
Yep. Not sure why idiots haven’t realized this yet.
oh cool the court of public opinion I love mob justice not like it’s actively ruining people’s lives or anything
It didn't, dumbBlack person. That's the point. Every conversation in america is thoroughly recorded by phone companies and our terrorist government. If he was actually DMing kids, he'd already be in jail. He's not high level enough in the pedowood hierarchy to get away with it.
There is no context where a man in his 30s privately messaging weird sexual shit to a 15 year old isn't pretty fricking sus.
Women sure didn't side with Amber Heard.
oh cool “sus” what a great foundation for the future of social discourse. elvis married a 15 year old but i guess dming worse
Islamophobe.
>someone else did something gross
>so obviously this proves roilands innocence
holy shit did you graduate from harvard law?
he is literally innocent. if he is “guilty”, it is in the court of public opinion. mob justice. a cathedral of npcs programmed to think by their screens. did he solicit sex in these messages? send any nudes? does chris hanson have a transcript of obviously illegal conduct? oh, no? it’s just… “sus”. oh okay cool let’s destroy his life. you’re a mistake. your opinions are a mistake. social media is a mistake.
imagine defending a pedo on an anonymous zimbabwean vape modding forum
imagine being a plebbitor on a mongolian basket weaving forum
I also like elvis and ghandi and plato
There's no "pedo".
seethe harder Justin, your coworkers would have been more willing to defend you if you didn't spend your workdays playing with hotwheels.
and they’ll be out of jobs when his show tanks
A 30 year old guy messaging 15 year old fans the way he was messaging them is weird. Even if he didn't end up meeting up with them just talking about potentially meeting up is weird. Would you want your 15 year old daughter getting hit up by Roiland? I don't know about criminal charges but you'd have to be moronic to think that looks good for him or AS.
>repeating the same lie
What lie, are you saying the leaked DMs are fabricated?
again, court of public opinion. you’re so obsessed with being jury in this mob justice you cannot divorce yourself from the hive mind less you destroy your own self identity
.YOU MUST CONSOOM THE PEDOS SHOW WHETHER YOU LIKE IT OR NOT
>OTHERWISE THE FEMALES WIN
what the frick is wrong with you man? seriously dude, diet and exercise. 6 months and i gaurantee youll be in a much healthier headspace
I did not say these things but if I need to be strawman so you continue accepting your npc programming, so be it. just remember from our scant interactions here your opinions are programmed by screens and groupthink.
not being a pedo is NPC programming? unironically have a nice day
did pickle man frick a teenager? seriously asking. if he did, lock him up, and I will join you in your mob justice. but until then, and proven in the court of law, then I will continue advocating for the providence of a legal system. the concept of “innocent until proven guilty” is incomprehensible to you npcs
im not the united states government. i dont have to give someone a trial and provide them with resources for a competent defense. if i see someone being a pedo creep, like you for instance, i instantly hate them. so to reiterate: have a nice day
>court of public opinion
>again
Have you ever notice that good Christian citizens seem to relish rape as a punishment, even before the trial?
No?
Then you've never read the comments on Facebook when a young guy gets arrested for literally anything. I wouldn't even have one but it's impossible to online date without done sort of social media account
literally never actually. maybe touch grass
This can be observed in the loud feminist types who make claiming to be raped the centre of their identity and existence.
I'm not saying it should happen or anything like that, but it would certainly improve a lot of things in the world if the sad, bitter people who try misusing the popular hatred for pedophiles to their own sick ends by directing that hatred onto people who aren't pedophiles were physically located and beaten into comas with mining equipment.
>if you didn't frick a child and get convicted for it you did nothing wrong
Nobody here is making the argument that Roiland has been found guilty of child fricking. However, with messages like these
it's pretty obvious that he's a creepy redditor who would've very likely been down to clown with banging her if they'd actually met up like he explicitly wanted to do. All I'm doing is forming an opinion on someone based on readily available public information, not leading a lynching. Why are you incapable of understanding this?
see
>All I'm doing is forming an opinion on someone based on readily available public information
>literally the court of public opinion
there’s a reason we the civilized society created the modern legal system. specifically because of people like you. it may be an uncomfortable fact to confront, but your mind and opinions are regressive. a back step on the discourse of social judgement. you are moving us as a people, backwards, into the mobs of yore
>if you dont let me frick children youre bringing the world in the dark ages
dude seriously seek therapy
>strawman
if you need me to be a base stereotype to continue feeling good about your opinions, then your opinions are truly flawed
youre acttively defending pedo behaviour why do you think this has anything to do with strawmen or stereotypes? i simply dont like you and im actively mocking you and your degenerate behavoir. sorry that wasnt clear enough
This guy keeps going to "Anyone who thinks there's something wrong with people being dragged through the mud in the court of public opinion is a pedophile defender who wants to frick my kids". He has nothing to actually say on the matter.
i just cant imagine anyone other than a fellow pedophile defending a pedophile
>pedophile, pedophile, pedophile
You do realize 15 year girls have finished puberty, right?
You're not helping the argument here, Anon. It's illegal to frick kids. People who frick kids get the rope.
15 isn't a kid.
There's no pedophilia involved here. 16 is well beyond that. Some teleiophiles are fricking creepy with their desperate need for everyone's sexual attention. You're not entitled to it, grow up.
You’re clearly just upset that you’re now, just now, confronting your participation in mob justice. I don’t know why that would upset you, unless you knew it was flawed.
>ctrl-f mob justice
>10 times
jesus christ man. if it hasnt worked yet what made you think 10th times the charm
maybe if you call me a pedo again it’ll really work this time. we are clearly just trading (You)s and you’re beneath civilized discussion on the annals of social discourse. I will say however, I refrain from judging people until proven otherwise. and you obviously enjoy judging others based on genuine heresay. there is a difference between (You) and I
are you some kind of ESL fixated on this phrase or are you autistic? I didn't say put him in prison, the only possible argument you have here is that the DMs aren't real because they haven't been admitted into evidence in actual legal proceedings, so we have to ignore their existence completely. No reasonable person looks at those DMs and sees Roiland in a positive light afterwards.
>innocent until proven guilty
the truly civilized individual does not judge any person for crimes until they are proven. my opinion is these dms are likely real, but I truly do not know that. since there is a 0.00000000000repeating1 percent chance they are fabricated, I the member of the public, cannot and do not judge this person. this is the very concept of innocent until proven guilty. furthermore, there does not appear to be anything particular illegal in the messages. thus I the member of the public, do not allow myself to foment or hold animosity toward this person. my thinking on this, I’ve found, is entirely in contravention with the new internet mob justice. this court of public opinion is an engine of dopamine and entertainment born entirely from judging others. this is why the pickle man, amongst other minor figures of note in society, are so frequently “cancelled”. I do not care for Lindsay Ellis, never watched a video, but I sympathize with her for being “cancelled” after making an innocuous joke. I’ve only seen aziz ansari in parks and rec, but he was “cancelled” for being annoying, and I sympathize with him. It is a systemic phenomenon that is truly regressive in civilized society. I take the, apparently, wildly controversial stance of non-judgement, until proven otherwise, and the court of public opinion calls me pedo for it. (You) are what’s wrong with people today. this is self evident
How does it feel, not being able to form an opinion on something unless it's been through the United States justice system?
>anon, how were your brekky tendies today
>I cannot judge mother, as they have not been proven delicious beyond a reasonable double in a court of law. anything else is mob justice by the court of public opinion
I form many opinions, just not about other people I don’t know. gossip, heresay, these are things that truly do exist, and I acknowledge their existence in my opinions
>UGH WHY CAN'T MEN JUST BE SENTENCED FOR CRIMES I *FEEL* LIKE THEY COMMITTED!?!?
Frick to death all women.
I've said this entire thread that Roiland didn't say anything explicitly criminal, but that doesn't mean that what he was saying and doing was socially acceptable. You guys do realize you can judge behavior outside of a court of law, right?
And I'm not saying any of it's even real. I very much DO NOT believe women.
Well, Roiland's lawyer said the leaks were "taken out of context" but not faked, so I'm inclined to believe the substance of the messages was real.
Frick all women to death.
He's not guilty of a crime.
But he is guilty of a big social faux pas. That's enough to get you fired in many jobs. He's in a sense a children's entertainer as well, which adds to it.
How is this hard to understand? Yes it sucks what happened to him because the punishment should fit the crime. But he's rich as frick and his show is trash and he is reddit incarnate. I will not shed any teads.
>He's in a sense a children's entertainer
He's really not. Animation =/= "for kids".
>He's not guilty of a crime.
>But he is guilty of a big social faux pas
that's the only thing I've been trying to say this entire thread and mob justice court of public opinion man is too dense to understand
>his show is trash and he is reddit incarnate. I will not shed any tears
also so true. reddit man wants young poon but can't even go about doing it in a cool way, has to act cringe in DMs
11
If my cringey ass DMs I’ve sent in the past ever got released like this out of context on such a wide scale I would seriously contemplate sewer side on the daily. Like yeah he’s just being cringe corny funny but we don’t know these peoples conversations and if this is a normal thing and this is a goof. They just post cringe with no context and he looks like a creepy unfunny chud.
He even admonishes her to grow older. He's fine. Cringe and gay and no game, fine. But in no way is he hurting this woman.
>But he is guilty of a big social faux pa
literally a verdict in the court of public opinion. I feel the point of contention, is you feel the court of public opinion is valid, and their verdicts are valuable. I do not agree.
Kinda curious, do you believe in social behaviour?
We live in a society, mate
question for you.
your friend is in the grocery store. man in front of him shoves by, farts in his face, and calls him a Black person. all of this is captured on video by your friend.
nothing criminal, but your friend says "this guy was a total butthole." do you a) agree with your friend because you saw how much of a tool this stranger in the store was, or b) tell your friend you can't make a character judgment about the stranger because social faux pas are a verdict of the court of public opinion, and nothing was proven in court against this man? everything you've said so far leads me to believe you'd choose the latter
Was there a woman in the story, because I hit the woman.
presumably in this scenario I would know my friend. furthermore these hypothetical people are not public figures, and this interaction would not held in the court of public opinion. just the court of my own opinion. my opinion would not result in the loss of livelihood or destruction of either person’s life. additionally, in my country, it is illegal to call a person a Black person, and if captured on video in a public forum like a grocery store, that person would be fined and charged with a court date. until that court date, he would still be considered innocent. wherein the prosecution and or the crown would present the video as evidence and a judge would render a verdict
all which does not apply to the pickle man
>and this interaction would not held in the court of public opinion. just the court of my own opinion
omg hes so close
I don’t know the pickle man you guys are word
>this interaction would not held in the court of public opinion. just the court of my own opinion
you ALMOST HAVE IT. I dislike Justin Roiland because he's a leftist and a cuckold who made an overrated TV show. Am I not allowed to think that because it's "mob justice?" The man dated a porn star who got blacked regularly, why can't I call him a homosexual without it being "the court of public opinion?"
it’s fine but if you agree he deserves his life destroyed for a particular and unproven crime, and not just being an annoying homosexual, then yes you are participating in the court of public opinion
Nailed it.
>all of this is captured on video by your friend.
Chances are the video doesn't show what happened before or after, which are key pieces of context in judging the person
I don't care there's a video of someone farting on someone or calling them racial epithets, I need to know why that happened and what happened before or after, things that aren't always known or on the video in question
The issue with the court of public opinion is that it frequently strips away all context like this
>I don't care if there is a video of someone farting on someone else
>I need to see the context of why he was farting
Lmao. But in this scenario if the fart itself is the crime then that's all you need.
> But in this scenario if the fart itself is the crime then that's all you need.
Not at all. What if the guy asked him to fart on him, recorded the video, but then later decided he didn't want to be farted on and pretended it was some uninitiated gas attack?
The video wouldn't have that context in it if it only contains the passing of the gas
>What if the guy asked him to fart on him
If farting is a crime then it's a crime regardless of context
>Bro killing him wasn't a crime, he asked me to kill him!
It significantly changes the outcome to the point that someone would not go to jail versus go to jail, intent is 9/10ths of the law
It's why crimes/charges have degrees in the first place
>significantly changes the outcome
But you agree a crime has been committed?
Not the one that the court of public opinion would believe had been committed, which was my entire point
It's extremely easy to judge someone differently based on the removal or addition of context
I agree that adding context can change the way a person is viewed. But in some cases the context just doesn't matter
>Akchually, officer, me jerking off on this kid totally makes sense if you rewind the video a few minutes
>Not at all. What if the guy asked him to fart on him, recorded the video, but then later decided he didn't want to be farted on and pretended it was some uninitiated gas attack?
>The video wouldn't have that context in it if it only contains the passing of the gas
And what exactly is wrong with banging a 15 year old?
Gotta be a decent person here and second this question. Rhetorically of course.
>it's pretty obvious that he's a creepy redditor who would've very likely been down to clown with banging her
Nothing wrong with that. Love wins.
>not being a pedo
There's no pedo involved.
lol that's definitely a female. Can't win the argument so attacks your life, and with zero knowledge of it, to boot.
>court of public opinion
Yeah, isn't that what we're all talking about? He's not gonna get arrested for these texts, but it doesn't mean he doesn't come out of it looking like a creepy redditor who was texting shit to a 15 year old fan that I wouldn't want anyone sending my 15 year old daughter. You say court of public opinion like people aren't allowed to form opinion's on someone's conduct outside of legal innocence or guilt of a crime.
>You say court of public opinion like people aren't allowed to form opinion's on someone's conduct outside of legal innocence or guilt of a crime.
They can, but human rights dictate that they be protected from that in the workplace. Otherwise we get to fire homosexuals for being gay. It's. That. Simple.
sorry buddy but pedos arnt included in title 7, which it seems youve confused for a human right
I haven't said anything about whatever "title 7" is. I'm not from the US, if it's from there. My position doesn't rest on legislation. It rests on rights and ethics. That which precedes, informs, and supersedes any particular and arbitrary jurisdiction or legislation. Many unethical laws exist, I'm not arguing about them.
>pedos
Pedos aren't a subject at actual issue here, just a strawman you insert into the discussion cause you're drying up and hitting the wall so you want to vilify men who go for your competition. Tick tock toasted roastie! Pour yourself a megapint!
>Pedos aren't a subject at actual issue here,
thats actually what the entire thread is about you mental amoeba
No it isn't.
It's about Roiland's DROPPED domestic violence charges, and texts that purport to show him having sexual discussions with a 15/16 year old girl (the authenticity of said texts not being established).
No pedophilia is involved here.
>(the authenticity of said texts not being established).
his own lawyer confirmed theyre real. keep trying
Yes, I'm sure that happened.
if only you had access to the internet
She's 15, not 5. She's not a kid. She has agency and she can make her own decisions.
Hey man, have whatever opinions on age of consent you want. Most people are gonna see a 30 something year old dude hitting up a 15 year old as weird. I don't give a shit about the whole "power dynamic" thing like anon here
mentioned, famous people are gonna be able to bang their fans. It's just the age thing, obviously he's gonna get flak for sexually charged convos with 15 year old fans even if it didn't end in a meetup. Obviously the public reaction reflects this.
It's just American Puritan morals that view sex as some awful traumatic thing that a 15 year old must be protected from. It's absurd. Girls that age are not so naive that they don't know what they're doing and can't decide who to have sex with.
My first gf and I lost our virginities to each other when I was 17 and she was 15, there are contexts in which it's acceptable. Young love, first relationship type thing, I get that. However, when it's something like this
it becomes a lot less okay. I'm not calling Roiland a rapist or saying he 100% committed a crime, but it's not at all shocking that people see him as creepy and a loser given the DMs that leaked. I mean ffs he's not even some rock star in hot water because a 15 yo groupie threw herself at him after a concert while he was partying, these are schlubby homosexual groomer texts from an actual bonafide reddit male feminist type. I don't see how anyone sees these texts as anything else.
No one's dealing with the reality of the situation. They're seeing an easy, open, isolated target for the venom and violence they're not allowed to unleash anywhere else, and unleashing it for their own personal, bitter, damaged motivations, completely unrelated to what actually happened between JR and this little bawd.
>17 year old sportsball chad fricks his 98th 15 year old
i sleep
>30 something pee pee poo poo cartoonist man fricks 15 year old
REAL SHIT
you even admit here you would feel better if he was a rockstar and not an upjumped redditor. What are you a fricking girl? Why do you give a frick about how "cool" the men (who aren't you) women are fricking are?
t. Groomer
It's okay to woo and court sexually sufficiently mature people. That's not "grooming" in some nefarious sense. It's loving and it's a gift.
Why do you keep repeating lies?
Without lies she has nothing.
I would love it if my daughter was sleeping with a rich genius like him. I’d probably encourage it.
average roiland fan
It's okay to be weird. Homosexuals are worse. If gays can be allowed, 15 and 30 is fine. And it's fine even if gays are banned. This is how humans work, ethically. Just cause roasties get threatened by it doesn't change that.
It's okay to be "gross", you're still protected from losing your livelihood over it. Homosexuals are DISGUSTING and they get away with it, and they do way more damage than even the worst crib-robbing infant raper.
>you're still protected from losing your livelihood over it
must be why justin roiland was never fired
No, he was fired. His human rights were violated. You're shifting the correct frame cause you're either dumb or evil. I didn't claim the current practical reality actually protected his rights. I stated the fact that human rights protect him from losing his livelihood over his sexuality, irrespective of a corrupt, sexist, heterophobic system which refused to protect those human rights.
its a human right to draw cartoons on cable even after youre caught creeping on kids
wow. please expand on this
What? Why would I expand on your assertion? I might expand on mine, but the assertion you've made
>its a human right to draw cartoons on cable even after youre caught creeping on kids
Has nothing to do with my assertion. No kids are involved here. No claim was made that drawing cartoons is a human right. Grow up. Oh wait, you're already post-wall. Roast on, flappy.
then what is the human right? having a job in general? you can get mad that i didnt understand your schizo post but i politely asked you to expand on it. not sure what else i was supposed to do there
You didn't ask me to expand on it. You asked me to expand on your own, separate point, which you were dishonestly presenting as a characterization of my position.
The human right is to have the job you already earned, irrespective of the bigotry of others. We let women do it despite "muh soggy knees", we let gays do it despite they're disgusting evil homosexuals. This is only different insofar as it's a much safer, better, more open and shut case of "obviously that the most basic level of fair and decent treatment of a human we can manage".
>The human right is to have the job
llmaoo having a job is not a human right you absolute fricking moron
I didn't say it was. You need to include the whole statement and at least accurately imply its context if you're going to try to characterize the position of someone else. Your need to present a strawman argument reveals how you have nothing, and disqualifies you. Concession accepted.
that was actually a direct quote. but go ahead and rephrase if you want, clearly your exhausted from thinking for this long of a span. So ill ask again, more directly. What human right was violated?
It was a direct but incomplete quote. The human right violated was the same one that protects women keeping jobs even if they're unwed mothers, or promiscuous. The same one that protects homosexuals keeping jobs even though they're gay homosexuals.
Is your job to just enter threads and state the objective opposite of reality?
>elvis married a 15 year old
She was 21 at the time of marriage and he never fricked her before they were married. Calling Elvis a pedo over that is a harder reach than when dumbasses try to claim John Wayne was "a draft dodger"
literally the same thing could be same about the pickle man
>low self control drug addict didnt take the pussy given to him freely, he waited 6 years 😀
okee dokee boomer.
They weren't 30 and 15 you stupid frick.
It didn't happen you dumb prostitute. Why are you having so much trouble grasping this shit? The texts don't go away. That's evidence. If it was real he'd be in jail.
Literally: women can not into logic or reality. A good fantasy is just as good, which is why women are objectively inferior to men. Men are capable of grasping reality. Women make "decisions" (if they can even be called that) based on stories they made up in their own heads.
>The texts don't go away. That's evidence. If it was real he'd be in jail
I don't know if I'm misremembering the texts, but as far as I recall nothing in them was explicitly illegal. Doesn't mean it wasn't weird and creepy for him to be messaging them saying what he said and talking about meeting up, even if it wasn't TCAP tier overt.
There is absolutely nothing wrong (morally) with fricking willing teenagers.
Women didn't side with Amber heard because she's prettier than them and richer too. She also shat the bed on her reputation early on as well.
15 is fine, even if that did actually happen (didn't).
His whole shtick is weird sexual stuff
>Why the frick does this bullshit still work? Why does anyone believe these god damned evil harpies at this point?
Not being able to prove it happened is not the same thing as proving it didn't, especially when you have loads of sexts from him towards children.
>court of public opinion
What leaked wasn't subject to public opinion. He was acting inappropriate to minors. You can say that it's only an opinion that that's wrong, I guess, if you want to support pedophiles.
it is literally an opinion. there are laws governing such interactions for minors. the pickle man did not break them. it is sincerely, earnestly, and literally an opinion you feel it’s wrong
You are one dumb motherfricker.
>Hey so you're a massive weirdo with pedo vibes.
>But you didn't break any laws! Want to run another show?
>court of public opinion
it’s okay. you can accept it exists. you can even admit the verdict in such a court are valid. but what I find fascinating, is your continued denial of your participation in it. why? how exactly, does such an admission, admonish your own ego?
…unless somewhere in your subconcious, you know the animals of mob justice, are inherently flawed. and you will not admit to having flawed opinion.
>Not being able to prove it happened is not the same thing as proving it didn't
When it comes to women, them saying it happened is proof it didn't happen.
>loads of sexts from him towards children.
There were never any children involved.
>if you want to support pedophiles.
Pedophilia is a not a subject in this case in any form.
yeah that shit was bad
And fake. You missed how important the "fake" part is because women are missing the part of the brain that connects thoughts to reality.
>Finally get around to watching Invincible
>Drunk frat boy character shows up
>Burps
>Realize it's literally Roiland doing the rick voice complete with dumb burps
What a hack, glad he got fake cancelled
>Watching guro
You deserve worse than death.
It was a bit over the top, but didn't realize it was a genre
Invicishit is more of the continued slip into evil worship americans are busily engaged in 24/7.
It doesn't really matter since these prostitutes target everyone and there are never any consequences. The fact that EVERY employer just "believes women" and 100% the time just fires a person who's had a job for years because a woman spread a rumor that later gets proved false means some employers need to start paying for this shit along with the lying bawds.
Either this is bait or you forgot what website you're on. Either way, stop posting
>Women I know who told half-truths about me for social points
>Women who legitimately were fricked over
It's hard sometimes, but I remember to make this distinction in my mind. Lots of companies and industries are full of evil fricks. When women call them out, we all win. We all get fairer treatment in the end. Because it puts the evil fricks on notice that they could be held responsible.
>We
Yep, that's why blue boards are cancer and need deleted. Full of women and men pretending to be.
so you want to replace competent "evil fricks because a woman said so" with incompetent, deceitful, lying women and minority golems instead.
Welcome to the past decade.
It's not evil to seek and acquire sex. No, not even if you leverage the jobs of underling females for it (not males). No, not even if they're 14+. No, not even if you're "in a position of trust or authority". No, not even if there's "a power imbalance". Using power to obtain sex is a male human right.
Hey there /leftypol/ slow day today? Why not make another barbie thread?
I'm not /leftypol/. I haven't seen and won't see Barbie.
Sure thing troony
>pedophilia is a-ok!
Degenerates like you should be put down like a dog
I didn't say anything about pedophilia. Strawman.
>sex with a 14yo isn't pedophilia
Kys
It isn't. That's not my opinion. Even being generous to your position, it's not a child. Being fair and balanced to the factual reality, it's an adult in the vast majority of cultures, cultures better than yours in too many respects for yours to hold weight against them. You can dislike it and reee, but that's it.
Glad you'll die alone in your misery
>muh based arab cultures
Absolute degenerate with no redeeming qualities
Roastie toastie
They beat women. That's a BIG plus.
Pedophilia is a primary or exclusive attraction to prepubescent children. A 14 year old girl is not prepubescent.
>Invicishit is more of the continued slip into evil worship americans are busily engaged in 24/7.
Is he a libtard? If so he deserves it. If not, then he doesn't.
>I want to be clear, I don't give a frick about Roiland
You sure? Sounds like you do.
It's not that I like Roiland. It's that I hate women and israelites.
No it doesn't.
You gays have no principles. You laugh now and then later those roasties come after (You).
People don't realize there is no Right versus Left when it comes to cancelling people, there is only Us versus Them (the media)
You're talking to roasties. Every blue board is overflowing with the beasts and trannies. That's why they're all fricking reddit. Blue boards are literally the reason Cinemaphile died.
This is probably my single biggest pet peeve. OP clearly is more concerned with the principles of it rather than being a Justin roiland fan. But ur such a dumb homosexual you think anyone defending him must be a fan because you’re a principle-devoid npc. It’s similar to when you say you don’t like a certain politician and then morons are like “oh so that means you like (opposite candidate)”. No moron how about you listen and stop making things up in your head
>principles
>of defending a pedo
wat
You can defend parts of what happened without defending everything about the person. How moronic are you people? It’s like when you say the nazis are responsible for a lot of modern medical knowledge, just the mere idea that you’re saying something positive about nazis will make people say “UMMMM ARE YOU DEFENDING NAZIS???!?” Learn to actually have complex thought and think about issues.
yeah i think most people would find you unlikeable if you started ranting about how great nazi doctors were. was this really youre defense? maybe take a break from /misc/ dude
hate nazis and chuds but still think werner von braun is a steely eyed rocket man
>You can defend parts of what happened without defending everything about the person... t’s like when you say the nazis are responsible for a lot of modern medical knowledge
>ranting about how great nazi doctors were
Learn to actually have complex thought and think about issues.
his Rick and Morty brand became too powerful and Warner had to take it from him permanently
Only correct answer. Literal coup because it's this fricking easy in modern Weimarica. Hey, buddy, looks like you're getting a little too successful there. Be a real shame if a woman just started saying shit.
It's simple mathmatics my fren. Roughly half of all people are women, and roughly 90% of men are simps. That means 95% of all people are going to side with women every time. Just a hard fact of life.
Not for much longer. The 2020s will result in women being put in Afghani style full burkhas.
None of that meant anything in court though, right? Fricking women. You don't have minds so much as clusters of mental illnesses.
dropping a case because you agree to settle after youve accomplished your primary goal of ruining someones career doesnt equal "hes innocent" you dumb fricking Black person
That's not what happened.
it literally is. welcome to the information age, you can open a tab and confirm everything
Did they settle? You would think the headline would be that Roiland settled the suit, not that the charges were dropped. It sounds like they dropped them and got nothing in return because the lawsuit was a pretext to destroy the career from the get go.
im sure they just dropped the charges as a favor. who doesnt love pickle rick
>felony domestic violence charges
That's not how criminal court works you stupid broad
lmaooooo. idk how you think courtrooms work but theres no magic truth serum. if a victim says im dropping charges and will no longer be a useful testimony then theres nothing that a prosecutor can do
A victim can't drop a domestic violence case. Just admit you have no idea what you're talking about and get back in the kitchen.
ok elle woods. what do you think the prosecutors should do when your key peice of evidence has changed their mind about providing useful testimony? just go before a jury and say "ok trust me guys she told me this earlier when you wernt here" do you think thats a strong case for a conviction?
What you should be asking is why the "victim" is suddenly squeamish about giving testimony under oath and tanked the case.
You clearly don't know the first thing about the court process and made your decision months ahead of time
because they settled for a boatload of money and already succeeded in tanking his career. i already said that earlier. keep up with the convo, chief
There was no settlement, you just made that up. Stop embarrassing yourself
youre right. im sure the prosecutors just saw the latest solar opposites episode and concluded he was too valuable to american culture to go to jail
Such terrible bants could have only come from a femoid.
they didn't settle you troggie Black person. She dropped the case because she got caught with a case of the lyings.
must be why shes being sued for slander and was charged with filing a false.... oh wait that never happened and youre a moron
Yes it does. Without a conviction, he's entitled to treatment as innocent. That woman should be destitute for life paying him.
he can feel as entitled as he wants. i couldnt possibly give less of a frick about what a pedo wants
The woman doesn't understand the distinct between feeling entitled and actually being entitled. I made no statement about what he feels. He IS entitled to being treated as if never charged.
>a pedo
No.
again, i couldnt care less about what he or you feel a pedo is entitled to. whether you use caps lock or not isnt going to sway that
>Women can't tell the difference between is and ought
We know, honey.
The subject isn't about feelings. He has the human right to being treated as if the charges were never leveled.
>A pedo
There's no pedophilia even tangentially relevant to this case.
you can keep telling me what you wish pedos were entitled to, and i still wont care. but im bored so ill keep repeating it if you would enjoy the (You)s
>Not for much longer. The 2020s will result in women being put in Afghani style full burkhas
God I hope.
>thinking shits gonna get better when it’s getting worse everyday
Lmao. Our best hope is the generation after zoomers, idek what they’re called. As long as millennials and zoomers are in charge shit will only get worse. Easily the two worst generations. I do see a glimmer of hope tho bc my little zoomed brother and a lot of his friends are righties, and from what they tell me a lot of zoomer guys are it’s the zoomer women who are libs
Wernt there like 100s of damning messages made public?
Roiland committed the gravest crime of them all: posting cringe.
Yes but they were fabricated by israelites.
No.
Post them if you think so.
scroll up moron
>had literally every intellectual property he was involved with taken from him
this might be a good thing if he decides to do something on his own, less people injecting their bullshit into his work
Oh man, imagine if people killed studio the useless parasitic class known as studio executives. Imagine how terrible that would be. Next they might hold other executives responsible or start actually arresting corrupt politicians.
moist
why isn't roiland fighting to get his show back? why isn't he suing AS?
Because he's a homosexual. That's why I don't support him. If that happened to me, I'd actually kill the woman and bury her in my basement.
because hes guilty and he would only be burying his grave deeper
How do you bury a grave, you dumb c**t?
by adding dirt on top
You can't be "guilty" of something ethical to do. Oops, I'm guilty of feeding my dog! I'm guilty of donating to the food bank! I'm guilty of cleaning out my gutters! This is what deranged roastoids like you sound like.
those are all grammatically correct sentences you dumb fricking ESL
I didn't say they weren't. The contention was never the grammatical correctness. It was about truth and meaning, not sentence structure.
What are his grounds for the lawsuit? Your employer can terminate you if they want. He got involved with bullshit that was a bad look, so they fired him. That could happen at any company and it would be legal.
Yeah the law really needs to change around this shit. Contracts need to stipulate that irrefutable proof, and/or final convictions (taken to the highest level of appeal) must be present FIRST before any termination. Men have the right to their livelihoods free of sexual harassment and heterophobia.
t. Commie
No. I'm not a libertarian.
I was in jail and 100% of dudes for domestic abuse didn't commit the crime. Very improbable. Also
>Be me at a part
>Dude keeps talking about how his wife lies about him hitting her
>Gets a call from her
>Goes into a rage and leaves
>Comes back to the party literally bring chased by police
>Puts him in cuffs
>Admits that he hit her
But yeah it's safe to assume everyone is a liar for any reason
If there's one thing the past decade has taught the world, it's that domestic violence against women never happened. And they deserved it.
The worst part is, he DIDN'T fricking do it, but everyone's acting like that part is still true. It never was.
yes he did
So the court just decided it was okay?
i dont need a court to tell me what to think. sorry that you do
Court disagrees kek. No settlement occurred (and a settlement wouldn't support your point).
then why were the charges dropped
Because the court disagrees. And no settlement occurred. Like I just fricking said. The charges being dropped SUPPORTS my position, it doesn't challenge or refute my position.
the court never disagreed, the case never made it to trial. the prosecutors dropped the case. im asking you why they would do that. please, give me your opinion
>the prosecutors dropped the case. im asking you why they would do that.
Cause there was no case, Roiland did nothing wrong.
ok. youre still not really able to grasp the point here. So lets run down the timeline. 1. Prosecutors feel they have a case and file charges. 2. ???? 3. Prosecutors now feel they dont.
So we know that no new evidence came out debunking the claims or proving Roiland right. So What do you think could have happened? Most rational people would conclude a settlement was reached with the victim and she changed her mind about persuing a conviction. Im asking you what you think happened instead
The dropped the case cause there was no case cause Roiland did nothing wrong. Most rational people would conclude whatever they would conclude. The highest quality and most-rational of the rational would conclude he was targeted by bigots using a bitter roastie ex as a weapon against him, and failed.
at this point youre just intentionally ignoring the question. pretty telling
I just directly answered the question.
>What do you think happened?
They dropped the case cause they had no case.
but thats not the question. they thought they had a case, then something happened. then they thought they didnt. im asking you to please explain what that something was. its an incredibly easy question hat ive now rephrased three times. and yet i cant even get a wild shot in the dark? come on. humor me
Answered twice already. They thought they had a case. In law, you have to ASSEMBLE your case. This is a process, you don't just press a button like on one of your smart phone apps that tracks your period. In the process of attempting to assemble the case, they discovered they *had no case*, and thus dropped it. There's the same answer a third time. Change your tampon, I can smell it from here.
lmao. you think lawyers file charges before "assembling" a case? are you literally 12?
I didn't claim they do. Cases develop. If, for example, you discover your client or main witness is a bitter lying roastie. Or, the bitter roastie you coaxed into lying gets cold feet. Just two examples. Stop arguing, I know more than you.
sure. but the entire fricking question was what was the development. so go ahead and tell me what you think it was
THE ROASTIE WAS LYING.
There was no settlement dumb frick, she didn't want to testify under oath.
Why don't you fill in the blank there?
so then what happened? why cant the pedo roiland fans so much as take a wild guess at an extremely simple question?
See:
Do you know what testifying under oath means? It means you get in trouble for lying, which is what she was doing up until this point. She lied until she was actually in danger of suffering consequences for it.
I'm sure you have a much more reasonable theory right?
She was obviously paid off
Paid to lie about Roiland.
It must've been a shitload of money, because she could've easily taken him to civil court and sucked him dry if she actually offered up a shred of evidence at any point during this debacle.
Or maybe you're just coping.
ive stated multiple times in this thread it was a settlement. so your theory is she just decided to quit lying because it was super scary to do even though she had evidence supporting her claim and maybe it wasnt quite as scary at first but it got really scary at an arbitrary date? perjury is scarier than slander, libel, and filing false police reports. ok. i mean thats a dogshit answer but at least i finally got one. have a good night pedo thanks for the laffs
Do you understand that even if the settlement details are private, the case ending in a settlement itself would still be public knowledge? Dint run away yet, show me where it says the case was ended in a settlement
settlements absolutely do not have to be public knowledge. what is an NDA
An NDA doesn't hide the result of a case that's happening in the public eye, just details about the settlement itself.
the result of the case wasnt hidden. charges were dropped. you can verify that if youd like louis litt
You're just being obtuse at this point. There's plenty of high profile cases that clearly reached a settlement, where both parties were not at liberty to discuss said settlement.
Micheal Jackson had hundreds of millions in the bank to pour into whayevwr kind of NDA he wanted, but the fact that he reached a settlement was still public knowledge.
What happened here is that our "victim" didn't want to get in trouble for lying.
>michael jackson
youre referring to a civil case. civil and criminal trials are different. roiland was never taken to civil court because his victim had already ruined his career and taken his money
Thanks for pointing that out. You can't reach a settlement in criminal cases dumb frick.
you absolutely can reach a settlement with someone whos brought criminal charges against you. again, civil and criminal court are two completely separate courts
You literally can't you fricking moron. The government takes complete control of the case.
then why would he settle?
You did do it, though.
That's weird cuz I hit my gf before
Domestic discipline is a male human right. Plus if she pushes you to do it in a non-disciplinary rage, she's still at fault, not the man. We had this problem solved before feminism.
You don't have to be found guilty to have your reputation ruined. Like if I posted "Black person" on the internet and it was made public, I would not be guilty of a crime, but if I was a public figure like him I'd be screwed. Same shit. That's life unfortunately.
Except he didn't actually do the shit he's being accused of and was found innocent in court.
Who other than you said he did?
>found innocent
please provide that link champ
The charges were dropped, dumbprostitute. That means innocent.
lmao. no it doesnt
It absolutely does. This isn't a matter of debate.
It truly does.
>Who other than you said he did?
id imagine lots of people considering the charges were dropped out of left feild with no new evidence coming to light
The only thing he faced legal charges for was the alleged domestic abuse, which is a completely separate issue from the DMs. I'm making my judgements about Roiland purely on the available screenshots, which make him look like a creep and a loser.
Black person what do you call this?
>heyy jailbait we should meet up, also btw don't screenshot these LOL
That alone might not be enough to put him in prison but it's certainly enough for any rational person to say he's a predditory weirdo, as many male feminist types are. Ask yourself sincerely, if you had a daughter would you want Justin Roiland DMing her like that? If not, why?
>bro just put yourself in a scenario where it's impossible not to be biased, now you see why it's so easy for me to blatantly lie?
Theres your problem homosexual. I don't approve of his behavior but I'm also not letting the girl off for being a slimy prostitute and entertaining him thay long to begin with. Better yet, I could just ditch the performative outrage altogether.
There's the thing though. She is a dumb teenager, he is a middle aged man.
*dumb prostitute
You severely overestimate how much maturing do past 16. Their brains stop developing at 19-20 max.
And since your going to ignore that, 16 is more than old enough to know right from wrong. Clearly she was getting something out of it if she kept communicating with him for that long.
I hold men and young girls to different standards sorry and your attempt at an argument holds very little weight.
I hold them to different standards to, I just don't drop them entirely in the case if the girl.
Lol nice try on your 180, you certainly do hold them to different standards though as you are willing to ignore the creep and instead blame the young girl for not ending the convo earlier.
I know you're being obtuse pretending like I didn't just say how I didn't approve of the guy.
Your bias makes you get all fussy at the mere mention that a female was complicit and shares part of the blame in this series of messages that didn't result in anything.
No not just a female, a young girl. A young girl that really didn't have any agenda aside from talking to a guy whos work she admired and no agency in the content of this guys messages.
But since you think she is partly to blame how big would you say her part is? 50%? 30%? and how does it even matter when judging the pickle man?
You clearly didn't read the messages. She was making more passes at him than he was to her.
>no agency
THAT'S false.
No one's "to blame". He's cringe, she's a bawd, nothing of value was harmed or lost.
This is rational, all females are dumb compared to men. That doesn't mean they're free from accountability. Wiggling poon in someone's face and them responding sexually is NOT a case of the woman being violated.
>16 is more than old enough to know right from wrong
yeah we all hate justin, not some dumb fricking child
You conceded his point.
Suck a dick Rick and Morty gays, your show was never funny
I don’t care about the validity of the accusations because Roiland is an annoying homosexual and I’m glad he got canned
Justin Roiland? I thought that shit got canned
Sometimes the only winning move is to not play. Just be single like a monk. Avoid women like the plague
Or just beat them. Muslims may be israeli homosexuals, but at least the got how to treat women right.
Yep. They killed Michael Jackson because they wanted rights to his music. Chased Dave Chapelle out of his home because he didn't want to play ball for a shitty contract. And probably canceled Roiland to take away creative control of a merchandising behemoth. Execs just lob anonymous accusations in order to shame and belittle creatives.
I dunno man it even seems to become weirder.
Till Lindemann the lead guy from Rammstein is getting cancelled hard by certain outlets and papers right now here in Germany, all based on some rumors and the fact he liked to party and have sex with groupies.
Those journos literally pull out the "power dynamics" feminist BS with a straight face it's so fricking bizarre.
Of course normal people don't give a frick and Rammstein shows are sold out as usual but by God those progressives try HARD.
>NOOOOOO A 40 YEAR OLD MAN SAYING HE WANTS TO MEET UP WITH AND HAVE SEX WITH A 15 YEAR OLD GIRL ISN’T CREEPY BECAUSE…IT JUST ISN’T OK????
>I WANNA MEET YOU IN REAL LIFE, JAILBAIT
The "what if I sold you into sex slavery" line is still creepy but at least it could feasibly have plausible deniability as just being offhanded edgy Rick and Morty humor. This however is absolutely impossible to deny as being just straight-up pedo shit.
wait so he was just drunk texting some young bawd? how many miles of dick had she taken before the age gap police jumped in to rescue her (on the internet)?
She was underage anon, I’m sure you wouldn’t want a 40 year old man yelling your 15 year old daughter that she should start webcamming or become his sex slave
Dads everywhere should tell their daughtere to not be a fricking bawd then.
I wouldn't want anyone sexually interacting with my daughter at any age. 15 or 50.
This is so key. If she was some innocent, naive, babe-in-the-woods, never-heard-of-sex virgin, there's an ethical case that he shouldn't be talking like this.
If she's in the sexual world, active, using her sexuality in her life (especially if she's doing it to advance her position socially or professionally), she's a player in the game. Doesn't matter if she has a head start over later-bloomers, she's bloomed, she's on the field, the game is on and players cannot be ethically penalized for playing.
What's Atlanta drunk lol
It means you're so drunk you have the iq of an average black person from Atlanta, or so I've been told
It's okay to be creepy. Ethical societies don't do anything with that in the workplace or court of law. You get to personally feel however you want, and that's as far as ethically allowed. Everything else is wrong.
>Ethical societies don't do anything with that in the workplace
tell me youre a NEET
I could tell you that but that would be a lie.
You've probably said worse here
because they knew the whole time he was a scumbag0. it's just the public excuse. he literally got hired for being a "funny" rapist and now they finally decided they didn't need to pay him anymore since he wasn't exciting and edgy anymore.
jews israeliteing israelites
>Why the frick does this bullshit still work? Why does anyone believe these god damned evil harpies at this point?
Because that is the system cucks like Roiland voted for. They just never believed it will be their ass on the line.
Glad his career is over.
What did he mean by this
He was asking for his right to privacy, and the gift of his trust in her, be respected. Like when women say "don't share revenge porn of me online" except what she did to him is way worse than sharing a bunch of photos or videos everyone will like.
How do you not know by now it was the teenage dms.
they know. theyre in here actively defending it saying he technically didnt get caught fricking a child so its cool and we should all like him again. i dont understand why, but that seems to be the hill theyre choosing to die on
>wHy WoNt ThEy SuBmIt To MoB jUsTiCe
What mob justice? Is thinking someone comes off like a pedo when they talk sexually to a child mob justice?
You're really not making a good case that women should be treated as people.
>A child
No.
Well no anon I don't actually care that he texted 16 year old girls. I'm just saying most people do and he shouldn't have done it
>a child
No.
I don't. I pointed out to my friends, all men in their 30s, that these cases almost universally fall apart and that people shouldn't be so quick to judge. But every one of them said, "Well, he probably did something even if it wasn't illegal". THEN WHO GIVES A FRICK?! I truly believe every single living person has some shit that could be plastered on a headline that would cause them to lose their jobs but it's no one's fricking business. I can't believe we've gotten here as a society.
>THEN WHO GIVES A FRICK?!
Might be news to you but the state laws are not the foundation of societies morals.
Just because I can't throw you in jail for being a creep around my kids doesn't mean I have to accept it.
CIA needed us to be here otherwise we would have eaten all their pet billionaires by now.
>every single living person has some shit that could be plastered on a headline that would cause them to lose their jobs but it's no one's fricking business
B A S E D
He outran the accusations
yet you mutts were all so happy throwing Dixie Chicks under the bus
frick off pussy, frick around find out
I don't like Roliand or his shitty pickle-man humor but I got to side with this guy on this since I hate women on principal.
>pedos defend a BBCposter
Many such cases!
How spastic do you have to be to write shit like this at any point? I've said some moronic shit while drunk but nothing quite like this.
Lack of bullying unironically.
Releasing private communications like text messages need to face the same penalties as "revenge porn".
authoritarian cuck
No.
How much did Justin Roi- whatever pay for this thread? This is advertising
I don't get why women get mad at the age thing. I have a 17 year old girlfriend who has diagnosed autism and I'm a 31 year old man and so far nothing is "damaging" to her.
They know younger women are more desirable and they don't want to have to compete with them for the best men, so they made it illegal to frick young girls.
It's a sexual competition thing, primarily. The remainder of the grassroots opposition is:
- Women who dated and fricked that early, for whom the problems of dating and fricking that always exist arose (cheating, lying, it wasn't what they expected, experimenting that they regretted, etc.), which they decided was an age thing and not a bawd/life thing, and this inability to accept festered into a trauma
- Men/parents who (understandably) abhor any thought of their daughter getting fricked. This isn't an age thing either, but they pretend it is/focus on the age part cause they know they can't hold on to their princess forever and it's easy to justify using the "age" excuse.
- Simps just saying whatever to appear as allies
- People who were actually raped at a young age, who can't recognize any other kind of relationship can exist, cause their trauma overwhelms their field of view.
And a lot of it is israeli lawyers looking for an easy gotcha on people they want out of their way, cause everyone loves ripe poontang.
Why is everyone conveniently lowering her age by a year? She was 16 during the texts which is the aoc in most of Europe along with a few us states.
Dont have to approve of it, but people calling him a pedo are mindbroken.
At a certain age a guy should really stop hitting up high school girls for sex, that's it. I just can't conceive of being okay with your daughter bringing home her first bf at 15 and it's a 30 something year old guy, it's weird.
You don't like the guy so you just lie about what he did?
>At a certain age a guy should really stop hitting up high school girls for sex
Why?
Emotional maturity will make you seek out more mature partners to converse with. This is how you know someone is mentally ill when they like children.
16, the age of the girl Roiland texted, is a legal adult in Britbongistan.
>will make you seek out more mature partners to converse with
About...what? Do you talk to your mid 20s girlfriend about nothing but taxes?
>adult conversations? like taxes?
ive never seen someone expose themselves so fricking hard. holy shit. thanks for the laugh man
nta, on the flip side what the frick are you going to talk to a 15 year old about hahah
Why do you keep saying 15?
>what the frick are you going to talk to a 15 year old about hahah
The same shit I talk to anybody else about really.
>Isn't this video humorous
>Isn't that guy weird looking
etc.
Glad to make you laugh. Do me the courtesy of answering the question in retunr.
holy fricking kek. i seriously hope youre trolling man. this has to be one of the saddest exchanges ive seen in a long time. on Cinemaphile. thats like winning the cringe olympics. please be fake god thats so sad
So you won't answer the question? Okay.
>taxes
Is that what you think adults talk about? Try bouncing philosophical concepts off of any average teen.
I don't bounce philosophical concepts off anyone. Do you?
Nah I just talk about taxes. Certainly never about society, psychology, history. I basically have npc conversations about what I watched on TV, or talking shit about someone who isn't in the room.
Yeah that sounds about right. I can't remember the last time I had a conversation about De Galle or anything history related, let alone psychology or society because why would that come up? Are you a member of mensa perhaps?
>why would that come up
I thought there was a possibility you might like to converse about things that could go over the heads of children but I was wrong.
It's a possibility but that's not even what I talk about on dates with women my age. Is it what you talk about on dates with women your age? Do you break out your knowledge of the Magna Carta and any trivia about that? Or maybe something something Freud said something something and he was wrong or right by today's standards? We go on hikes and enjoy each other's company, and that doesn't change if she's 25 or 16-20.
I like to talk about things that children don't do it's not really just about enjoying company. Having a gf is like having a partner, emotional support. Kids, even most people in their early 20s haven't matured emotionally. I dated a 19 year old who was painfully immature. I can't imagine dating a 16 year old.
Maybe it's because I've dated more women than you of varying ages but you get surprised man. I dated a woman in her 30s and all she did was go to work, play video games, and watch korean dramas. She was sexy, but that's about all she had going for her because she was an intellectual dud in every way. I saw a 19 year old myself in the last year and a half it was never a dull moment with her. Able to keep up with my humor along with her own brand, matched my energy completely. She was very much "partner" and "emotional support" material and she didn't have to talk about history or whatever your arbitrary standards are. What I'm saying man, as I don't really discriminate if she's legal because girls both surprise you and disappoint you.
I've dated several women in their 40s and several in their 29s, and I had a few high school girl friends so I know it's like night and day when it comes to maturity level and having a conversation. If you think that their brains are developed by 16 you are very wrong and I suggest you need actual experience with women to get an idea of what it's like to be in a real relationship. If you don't need intellectual stimulation you will be fine with children they r very dumb 30 year olds. Good luck.
I didn't say anything about brain development but I get the gist of your post, it definitely comes down to if your partner stimulates you intellectually or not.
>f you think that their brains are developed by 16
They're developed sufficiently for many purposes. Including culpability for their own decision making, and granting ethically valid sexual consent.
it just keeps going
>society, psychology, history
Yeah you give dumbass popsci opinions about topics you don't even have a surface level understanding of, and just read some books about. Then you try to tie the latest Quanta Magazine physics article you read to the theories of the last philosopher you read and think you actually understand something about the universe. I hate pseuds like you who think that's what a deep adult conversation is.
>I basically have npc conversations about what I watched on TV, or talking shit about someone who isn't in the room.
This is the entirety of female discourse, from 13 to 93.
As far as conversation alone goes: Try bouncing philosophical concepts off of any average woman. Same fricking result, minus the breath of fresh air that is open-mindedness and the bravery to admit ignorance.
A roastie knows all, and will resent you for exposing her blind spots. They have a whole social crime for it, it's deemed "mansplaining". They're rarely pleasant to talk to, they're not so enlightened, mature alternative to their younger counterparts, and this is coming from a very very large sample size.
I'll take young, dumb, humble, and pleasant over older, dumb, arrogant, and bitter.
>Try bouncing philosophical concepts off of any average teen
Lmfao. I don't talk about philosophy with a fricking girl, ever. How pointless that would be. I don't care if she's 29.
>Emotional maturity will make you seek out more mature partners to converse with.
Not exclusively.
>when they like children.
None of the subjects of this thread are children.
>At a certain age a guy should really stop hitting up high school girls for sex
That is not a fact.
Why didn't the people who brought up the DMs on Twitter, bring it up again after the charges were dropped against Roiland?
he probably deserved it or else god would have never let this happen, have faith brother
Jew: guilty
Gentile: not guilty
The most urgent thing all contracts being negotiated need to add is that men are protected from all firing, demotion, suspension, etc. in the case of sexual charges. Frankly even a conviction shouldn't matter. If I'm a voice actor, who I rape has nothing to do with anything. But at the very least, a conviction should be required for these kinds of firings.
I don't give a frick if he did or didn't do anything illegal. The messages he sent were cringey as frick and he deserves to be raped by Black folk in prison for being such an annoying little homosexual.
He’s guilty though.
So is Harvey Weinstein.
All of them are guilty.
Stop simping for these people. It’s pathetic.
Death to your family.
Shut up.
Roiland is guilty and may he burn in hell.
You next, b***h.
Degenerate coomer cuckold gets what he deserves.
this. the biggest takeaway of all is that Roiland is guilty of cringe, plain and simple. beyond a reasonable doubt, everything he said in these leaked dms is gay and cringe.
If you're famous don't talk to women or get in weird situations with them. It's simple. Fame has always been a horrible thing to strive for, just look at every famous person who dropped out of the spotlight for the past 100 years. They will eat you alive.
Don't talk to anyone period, nowadays there's so many numales in our society that a man is just as likely to participate in this dog-pile cancel stuff as a woman is
>kick someone in the wiener
>everyone thinks you're a jerk
>boss fires you
>"..le court of public opinion did this....."
this thread is funny
>silly voice is now associated with being mad your girlfriend is fricking other people for money
He legit was grooming minors. Man belongs in prison. Also he does only like 10 voices tops and all are super similar. Frick him. I’m glad his era is over
She's 16 and already a bawd. There's no "grooming". Grooming is a process leading to an end. She arrived at that end before they met.
The amount of pedo cope in this thread is genuinely unbelievable.
most are just edgy teens. i genuinley think there are at least two pedos in here seething that roiland lost his job just for being a creep tho. theyre going a bit too hard to be trolls
>The amount of pedo cope
What pedo cope? No child is involved in the Roiland case.
Wanting to frick young teens isn't pedophilia.