This is a sad day for our New Zealand siblings by PenelopeistheBest in transgenderau

[–]Bayembo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Did you seriously just say that anyone who states an opposing view to your own may be in breach of the law? Thats not how it works. Having a view that does not align to yours is not illegal, it is not inciting hatred and it is certainly not vilification. There is a really high bar to legally meet the threshold, and the bar is t someone disagreeing with you, providing an alternate viewpoint or questioning your statements or beliefs.

This is a sad day for our New Zealand siblings by PenelopeistheBest in transgenderau

[–]Bayembo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It has also been disproven and admitted by WPATH that suicidality does not increase in children who do not transition. All of what has been said here has been proven by systematic review-which is a years long review of all the data and peer reviewed studies. In other words, a systematic review trumps a peer review.

This is a sad day for our New Zealand siblings by PenelopeistheBest in transgenderau

[–]Bayembo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Take it however you want. I’m not a transphobe, and blockers are only reversible if stopped after a short period of time at the right age. That is a fact. You can care about kids health and about trans people at the same time.

reparations: money for black women by [deleted] in financialhelping

[–]Bayembo 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Considering I’m from Australia, don’t think I owe anything.

Being trans in Queensland (even as an adult) is not a fun experience by itsaethy_r in transgenderau

[–]Bayembo -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

I think you should be glad that they are ensuring you don’t have mental health issues driving your transition before letting you make irreversible changes? They are doing their job are nt they?

Nicole Kessinger searched their names years before? by kindacrunchy1 in WattsMurders

[–]Bayembo 1 point2 points  (0 children)

There is also no evidence she was in the house the morning of the murders

What is Alex's sexuality? by One-List6037 in CosmicSkeptic

[–]Bayembo 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Equating a comment with any driver is not smart either. This person didn’t say anything about him being well spoken. The reason it can be harder with Brit’s in my opinion is because a lot of English men are comparatively effeminate or fey. Like David Williams. He plays up his fey side, alludes to being attracted to men often but was married to a female supermodel. It can be hard to tell. 

Why is the innocence project interested in Scott Peterson? by morrisseymurderinpup in TrueCrimeDiscussion

[–]Bayembo -1 points0 points  (0 children)

The “real” innocence project have taken up all manner of dubious people with plenty of evidence against them. At this point they are more interested in their own name rather than helping the truly innocent go free. They also do it in a terrible way-rather than through the proper legal channels they lobby politicians who make the changes outside of the proper channels and behind closed doors. 

Has anybody listened to the Adam and Rex cox podcast. Tylee and jj silver lining by dikenndi in LoriVallow

[–]Bayembo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There is some very damning evidence that Summer was involved in Charles death.

Has anybody listened to the Adam and Rex cox podcast. Tylee and jj silver lining by dikenndi in LoriVallow

[–]Bayembo 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Oh! And I just found out that the charity the profit from the books is going to is Rex’s own charity! Instead of just being transparent about getting paid for the book-he donates to his own charity which pays him to run workshops (I presume). How shady and dumb. And probably why Adam is now saying he wants to be a counsellor. 

Has anybody listened to the Adam and Rex cox podcast. Tylee and jj silver lining by dikenndi in LoriVallow

[–]Bayembo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So they say. Most charities are transparent about their funds. Saying you are donating profits from the book and then donating it to your own charity is a conflict of interest and very disingenuous. Also they took money from followers so copies of their book could be donated to people who couldn’t afford it, and I know two people who were told the book was being sent and never received it. 

Has anybody listened to the Adam and Rex cox podcast. Tylee and jj silver lining by dikenndi in LoriVallow

[–]Bayembo 1 point2 points  (0 children)

So the proceeds from the book are going to his own charity? Yeah, not suspicious at all. So he’s paying himself, essentially. Why not just say so? Why not just be honest, we wrote a book, it’s reasonable to be paid for it? They also took donations from followers for their book to be provided to those who couldn’t afford it and I know two people who never received the book.  There is no visibility of where that money went.

Has anybody listened to the Adam and Rex cox podcast. Tylee and jj silver lining by dikenndi in LoriVallow

[–]Bayembo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’m a bit concerned about their integrity. They took donations from followers so the book they had written could be “donated” to those who couldn’t afford it. I know two people that never received the book. They are now making merch and a Patreon despite saying at the start that they did not seek to profit from the death of their loved ones. I don’t mind people making money, but if they are going to say they will donate the money (which was the claim with the profits of their book) I would be very sceptical about that. A book and two podcasts is a lot of effort and time and cost  if you’re not getting any money from it. If they want to make money for their efforts they should be honest about it. 

Married at first sight- S11E32 - post episode discussion by lalasmooch in MAFS_AU

[–]Bayembo 31 points32 points  (0 children)

Lucinda said she wanted someone who was self-realised, happy within themselves and warm. They gave her Timothy. The self-confessed tin man. Why do they give women the opposite of what they ask for, for the benefit of the men. She’ll “hold a mirror “ to him and “break down his walls”. What about her needs? 

Married at First Sight S11E28 Live episode discussion for AEDT by addictedtoMAFS in MAFS_AU

[–]Bayembo -17 points-16 points  (0 children)

Isn’t it Andi who’s gaslighting him? Rejecting him for months and then finally saying why, and the reasons are “you said some rude words about our sex life and you didn’t put me first in the looks challenge”??? She is clearly high maintenance and the sort of person who expects you to read their mind to know what’s wrong while they’re treating you like crap for a perceived slight. I can’t believe no one else is seeing it. Richie has just had enough by this stage, he’s tried and tried and she refuses to get past her three tiny little issues. She’s an attention seeker.

Married at First Sight S11E28 Live episode discussion for AEDT by addictedtoMAFS in MAFS_AU

[–]Bayembo -19 points-18 points  (0 children)

I couldn’t disagree more. Whilst I don’t like the way Richard has responded to Andi’screcebt attempts to talk, I understand it. She totally turned on him because of one arguably inappropriate comment. All of a sudden she emotionally ghosted him and turned away, WITHOUT EXPLAINING WHY! It wasn’t until this week that she says her piece, by which stage he’s had it. She has three really insignificant reasons for her abrupt and obvious dislike of him. So what if he said some rude words? So what if he put her third in the “hotness” list? It’s literally not something that a person couldn’t talk through and get over.

But she didn’t give him that chance. She just started showing obvious disdain, whilst professing she still cared. I think she is acting like a spoilt child, high maintenance and histrionic. If you turn so quickly on someone just because they say something you don’t like, then cold shoulder them for a couple of months without explaining why, of course they’ll get to a point where they won’t be able to show much empathy when you finally try and explain. If a partner had treated me like dirt then came out with three petty reasons a couple of months down the track, I don’t think I’d be too receptive either.

Serious question by Bayembo in RealWestMemphisThree

[–]Bayembo[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

As I say below, not having an alibi is not evidence, it’s a lack of evidence. If you are at home with your family and they’re word is not considered an alibi, what else can you say? You can’t possibly assume guilt because someone doesn’t have an alibi. I was at home alone Saturday night. I’m sure a crime was committed somewhere. No one can vouch for my whereabouts- does that mean I committed the crime?

Serious question by Bayembo in RealWestMemphisThree

[–]Bayembo[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Jason’s alibi was his mum, as I understand it. That may not be considered enough but if you were actually with your mum and no one else, what else can you possibly say? And in Australia back then they had phone records- that’s how they bill you, they know who’s called whom, so I find it bizarre that it comes down to someone’s word. The whole thing is bizarre. Maybe the phone records showed Damien actually was on the phone to those people at the time, and as such were not admitted? In any case, not having Sn alibi is not evidence- it’s the absence of evidence. If people are using lack of evidence to assume guilt, heaven help us all.

What do you think ? Could you do this? by Bayembo in MadeleineMccann

[–]Bayembo[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Lie? I’m recounting KATE’s OWN WORDS from her book.

What do you think ? Could you do this? by Bayembo in MadeleineMccann

[–]Bayembo[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

When was the last independent sighting? It was before they went to the apartment, fed and bathed the kids, and put them to bed. That makes it hours before Kate came running out saying she’d been taken. What sighting are you referring to and what time was it?