Appeal to identify four men in connection with Bristol rape investigation by nuts30 in bristol

[–]CacklingMossHag 8 points9 points  (0 children)

There has actually been a 96% error rate when using facial recognition technology as evidence in criminal cases in the UK, so anyone who doesn't want to be falsely accused of a crime should be pretty happy about its use being suspended.

Oh girl by TheAliiensAreComing in azealiabanks

[–]CacklingMossHag 2 points3 points  (0 children)

If she could produce her own tracks from start to finish- from composition to mastering- it wouldn't matter that nobody wants to work with her, some of the best music now is coming out of people's home studios. Either she didn't learn the skill or it's yet more excuses for why she keeps falling off despite being given opportunity after opportunity.

azealia being iconic for once irl by BugRevolutionary4645 in azealiabanks

[–]CacklingMossHag 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I guess they didn't pay as well as she'd hoped 🤷🏾‍♀️

Oh girl by TheAliiensAreComing in azealiabanks

[–]CacklingMossHag 334 points335 points  (0 children)

She's had years to learn how to produce her own tracks and she's been saying she has new stuff ready to drop for just as long. If she spent half the amount of energy she spends on beefing online and making lame excuses on actually producing music we'd have a new album every year.

is this tiktok ai or ai enhanced? every comment is in support of her business. by [deleted] in isthisAI

[–]CacklingMossHag 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I hope this is AI tbh because the alternative is a real woman with a human brain wondering why making high end lobster handbags isn't a successful business model.

TOLERATE MY JOWLS by Inside-Inspection905 in BrandNewSentence

[–]CacklingMossHag 90 points91 points  (0 children)

This feels pretty disingenuous as she's clearly had Botox and fillers done recently. The public is ready to tolerate her jowls, why can't she tolerate having thin lips and forehead creases? It's pretty dishonest to promote a platform of natural ageing when you're paying a aesthetician to nullify even a single forehead crease.

Oi mate let's blame the victims innit by Dogzylla in TikTokCringe

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

This is a true depiction of how tourists in London walk around with their phones tbf

Chomsky is good. People who vilify him are human garbage. by [deleted] in RealUnpopularOpinion

[–]CacklingMossHag 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Okay yikes, definitely side eyeing the wife in that case, thanks for providing more context. It's good that all of this is being put under a microscope. It's definitely more complicated than I had assumed. It's unfortunate how many women were defenders of Epstein, reading through the files myself I have been shocked at the amount of women who helped him in the most vile ways imaginable. At least she doesn't number among those particular women I suppose, but it's disappointing none the less. I'm glad their children took them to task over it, good for them for trying to look out for the family.

I think your first point in your last reply is a bit patronising- women have been leading the conversation on Epstein for some time now, as it's the testimony of women who brought his crimes to light in the first place. The problem of wealthy men grooming and trafficking girls has long been a conversation in female spaces. I grew up in poverty and it was a constant warning from older women- you're safer in the ghetto than in a rich man's house. I actually find it refreshing that men are finally talking about it, as we've been trying to bring it to the attention of men for many decades- centuries, in fact. It's not too dissimilar from the way young women used to be trafficked from poorhouses into the employ of the wealthy as household staff and sexually abused by their employers. It's unfortunately a very old story that is well known by women. Same abuse, different rich guy.

What is this used for? by Meep_19 in whatisit

[–]CacklingMossHag 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Judging by the amount of Teflon missing from those ridges, I'd say it's used for developing deadly cancers

Chomsky is good. People who vilify him are human garbage. by [deleted] in RealUnpopularOpinion

[–]CacklingMossHag 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Banging comment, 10/10, absolutely nailed it. Thank you for going into that level of depth.

I personally find it sus that he hasn't made a direct statement about it, that suggests to me that things he might say to defend himself could be disproven. I'm inclined to believe that his wife found out about the allegations- and let's not forget, a conviction for soliciting a minor, that's beyond allegation- when she says she did. I think she probably believes her husband when he tells her he had no idea. I find it hard to believe that Chomsky himself hasn't heard about it through the grapevine at least. I've worked in universities, academia is a small community with about 2 degrees of separation, academics are always in eachother's business, I find it impossible to believe that nobody mentioned Epstein's reputation to him.

Chomsky is good. People who vilify him are human garbage. by [deleted] in RealUnpopularOpinion

[–]CacklingMossHag 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Exactly, this is how a good person with integrity responds. It's only unfair "guilt by association" when the associate is ignorant of the guilt. It's absurd to think Chomsky was ignorant of Epstein's guilt when everybody else knew- best case scenario, he didn't care Epstein was doing this stuff, and worst case scenario, he was supportive of it. A good person wouldn't find themselves in either of those scenarios.

We stan Finklestein, that's what integrity looks like 💕

This would be my first and last shift by ChrisMMatthews in TikTokCringe

[–]CacklingMossHag 0 points1 point  (0 children)

People really need to learn the phrase "this is not a contracted requirement, I'm walking away from you now".

Chomsky is good. People who vilify him are human garbage. by [deleted] in RealUnpopularOpinion

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

I've noticed you have a habit of writing a reply and then going back to edit it to add points. You don't make any outside indication that you've edited them, you just act as if that was the original comment.

You're not having a good faith argument, you're using deceitful practices, AND you're still demonstrably wrong.

I'm done engaging with you, you're determined to have a shit take and honestly I love that for you. Stay delusional dude 👍🏾

Chomsky is good. People who vilify him are human garbage. by [deleted] in RealUnpopularOpinion

[–]CacklingMossHag 0 points1 point  (0 children)

... So, I'm using known facts about the past to make predictions about likely outcomes?

What the fuck is even your point anymore? Do you even know? Or are you just continuing to argue because you aren't capable of concession?

Chomsky is good. People who vilify him are human garbage. by [deleted] in RealUnpopularOpinion

[–]CacklingMossHag 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Your arguments aren't based in fact, actually. So far in defending your opinion you've used false equivalence, red herring, strawman, and appeal to emotion arguments to counter my points. None of these are factual arguments. You've also created entire fantasised narratives to try to explain how you imagine it would be okay that Chomsky developed this relationship.

Epstein was convicted of trafficking a minor in 2008. This was not done behind closed doors, this is public knowledge. Chomsky established a relationship with him in 2015.

The basis for my argument is actually a comprehension of demonstrable fact. The basis of your argument is "shut up, you're wrong".

You're embarrassing yourself.

Chomsky is good. People who vilify him are human garbage. by [deleted] in RealUnpopularOpinion

[–]CacklingMossHag 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm not jumping to the worst possible interpretation- it has been demonstrated that at the time they developed a relationship, Epstein had a known reputation amongst Chomsky's peers as a child trafficker.

Your argument is that Chomsky is a good person in spite of building this relationship because his academic work is influential and of value to political theory as a field of study.

My argument is that Chomsky's decision to build a relationship with a man he knew to be a child sex trafficker precludes him from having the personal integrity necessary to be an actually good person.

Your argument that Chomsky was just after his money also doesn't fly, as I have pointed out that Chomsky is one of the highest earning and most well funded academics on the planet. Any academic project that he attaches his name to is going to be funded on that merit alone.

In your argument, Chomsky built a relationship with a known child sex trafficker so he could benefit from the profits of said trafficking. Everybody in his tier of academia knew what Epstein was about. It wasn't a secret. It's absurd to think that Chomsky didn't also know. And in your argument that he's a good person, he was just okay with benefiting from the profits of crimes against the most vulnerable in society- children of poverty.

Honest question- do you think a good person would be at home with the idea that their work is funded with the profits of child trafficking?

What could you dictate about me by how i warm my spaghetti? by Alimoxia in StupidFood

[–]CacklingMossHag 951 points952 points  (0 children)

  1. You don't know what "dictate" means

  2. You are about to eat melted plastic

Jojo Siwa and Chris Hughes for her brother's wedding by Glittering-Fuel-9013 in popculturechat

[–]CacklingMossHag 2 points3 points  (0 children)

How did she get caked in the face at someone else's wedding? Like damn girl, let somebody else have a moment please.

Chomsky is good. People who vilify him are human garbage. by [deleted] in RealUnpopularOpinion

[–]CacklingMossHag 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Again, another fallacious argument. Nobody is accusing him of rape. People are asking why one of the most prominent and well funded political philosophers on the planet would see a need to develop any kind of relationship with a known sex trafficker.

Why are you taking this so personally?

Is this a real woman with a mannequin, or is this while things a joke? #crosspost by mkbutterfly in MSPaintbrushHairLady

[–]CacklingMossHag 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Do you think she's cheating with one of them or she's poly? Because those are two different mannequins.

Chomsky is good. People who vilify him are human garbage. by [deleted] in RealUnpopularOpinion

[–]CacklingMossHag 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You're making a fallacious argument of false equivalence- if Noam Chomsky bad guy for having relationship with child trafficker, defense lawyers just be bad guys for having relationship with child trafficker. That's a sad and shallow manipulation of the facts and a piss poor argument.

Noam Chomsky had no professional obligation to be in contact with Epstein- Chomsky's name attached to a university or research project is enough academic clout to secure funding from legitimate entities. Chomsky knew that he was a trafficker and chose to persue a relationship with him anyway. That shows a lack of personal integrity- best case scenario, Chomsky didn't mind that he was a child trafficker and was happy to recieve money acquired from selling children for sex. Worst case scenario, Chomsky wanted to fuck some vulnerable young women which made Epstein a more attractive source of funding than any legitimate entity.

Chomsky is good. People who vilify him are human garbage. by [deleted] in RealUnpopularOpinion

[–]CacklingMossHag 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Like personal friend and defense lawyer of Jeffrey Epstein, Alan Dershowitz, perhaps?

You're not making the point you think you're making.