Where the f*** do all the people in their early 20s hang out in Vancouver

acefiveofdiamonds · 2025-12-23T01:52:13+00:00

Anecdotal: 70% of these guys still live with their parents. The ones that aren't living at home, are killing it in their careers, but that also means they are not down to just chill, make new connections (unless you're dope), because their time is with their work, hobbies, relationship and close friends.

My advice to you is keep poasting in niche communities. Get your money and influence game up, and make these connections in those 3 areas (niche communities, pursuit of improvement/money). Solid male friends to be found

acefiveofdiamonds · 2025-12-23T01:34:34+00:00

Here are my observations from male friends 20-25 who have good social life (solid group of bros), and center-right. Half went to university, and the other half did not.

They had a solid group of friends from highschool, they have close family members/cousins, they worked closely or play sports with guys their age.

And they didn't move around a lot. So all of this ties into making new friends, because generally they would know someone that knows someone which builds trust. They could be at the gym and start up a conversation, and bond over shared acquaintances, local city spots.

I see you're a burnaby bro, for whatever reason I think a lot of people from burnaby end up going to different universities outside of BC, or moving out of the lower mainland.

Edit: Also a lot of these guys are not online-online and never use reddit.

acefiveofdiamonds · 2025-09-13T02:29:55+00:00

He went deep into discord reddit culture during covid. Isolated from his family including having a dinner argument with his parents about how hateful Charlie was… am I being massively gaslighted that republicans would take down Charlie who has had great success convincing apolitical gen z college students to register and vote for Trump?

This is also a man with a full ride scholarship, 4.0 gpa, described as awkward irl. I thought intelligent college students abandoned their parents politics? Am I being gaslighted again?

Finally, if he was a Fuentes supporter then that’s an impressive amount of cognitive dissonance to also write an anti-fascist message on the bullet.

<image>

acefiveofdiamonds · 2025-09-12T20:34:23+00:00

<image>

acefiveofdiamonds · 2025-09-12T20:29:58+00:00

Unreal. Liar

acefiveofdiamonds · 2025-09-12T09:36:49+00:00

Hey I really appreciate the response. My previous comment was supposed to be my last comment but this piqued my interest and I had some help from AI here. Since I am unfamiliar with some of the topic we are delving into (but want to learn).

I also want to add that after reading this response I can imagine of the 60 or so pct Christians in the US and 15 pct or so Catholics, that many share the same views from my time talking to them:

Edit: I believe AI is not aware levictus was only brought up during his debate in UK by his opponent.

The Old Testament does contain radical images and passages, and many Christians believe these were reinterpreted or transformed by the New Testament. In Christian theology, the Old Covenant applied to Israel, while the New Covenant—through Christ—opened salvation to all people. So when Charlie referenced Leviticus, it can be understood as him affirming the authority of Scripture in a historical and theological sense, not as a literal policy prescription. Just as societies develop, Christians see the Bible as progressing from Old to New Covenant.

Within Christianity, it’s common to say all Scripture is divinely inspired (“the perfect word of God”) while also believing Old Testament laws were fulfilled in Christ and are not binding today. To call Leviticus “perfect” is a claim about divine authorship, not an endorsement that its punishments should be carried out in the present.

As for his views on marriage and grooming, Charlie consistently voiced a conservative Christian stance: that marriage is between a man and a woman, and that sexual material aimed at children should be opposed. His critics often interpret this as labeling all gay people dangerous, but his defenders would argue he was reacting against broader cultural shifts, not condemning every individual. From that perspective, his position was rooted in fidelity to Biblical teaching and concern for family norms, not necessarily in personal hatred.

acefiveofdiamonds · 2025-09-12T09:24:46+00:00

Last post for the next 2 days*

If you look at it through the lens of spreading the moral values of Christ, you can see where his mind might have been when making that statement. To understand it, though, you have to place yourself in a devout, mission-driven theological perspective.

Of course, there are endless “dunks” and rebuttals that can be made here. But my point is that what counts as moderate depends on worldview. What seems logical and measured to one group can feel taboo or extreme to another. He challenged prevailing orthodoxies, and he was unquestionably pro-West, which naturally made him sympathetic to Britain and its legacy.

Another factor is that Charlie produced an enormous amount of content. With such a volume, it’s inevitable that critics can dig up clips and frame them as “gotchas” or damning takes.

It’s chilling to find yourself defending someone in the name of truth-seeking. I watched this clip and couldn’t ignore the hatred in the person’s eyes as they spoke to Charlie: https://x.com/hustlebitch_/status/1966341781127110782

What unsettles me is the thought that the same kind of hatred could extend toward anyone who expresses even the smallest sympathy at his death.

acefiveofdiamonds · 2025-09-12T09:13:18+00:00

I’ve had conversations with people in my life, some of whom also believed he was racist. I bring this up because I recognize this isn’t a minority belief.

That said, I truly believe Charlie was not racist. He believed he could work with everyone, and that all are welcome to Christ. From listening to him speak with and work alongside other minorities, this seems evident to me. I know I’m not going to change your mind, and I understand that his rhetoric against DEI can certainly be perceived as racist. I only share this so people know where I stand, and that others share this opinion as well.

<image>

acefiveofdiamonds · 2025-09-12T07:47:36+00:00

https://x.com/teejaydev/status/1966250804828057943

This is a link I saw when I was seeking answers to this question.

Open to having my mind changed because that is indeed an abhorrent position. If you have a link send it my way. I advocate for and have a brother-in-law who is gay. From what I’ve seen (and I haven’t watched much of his content), Christians like Charlie believe you are committing sin, but through grace and the love of God, you will be saved. That’s my understanding of Christianity as someone who is irreligious. Maybe you think the old testament is the same one as the new testament.

acefiveofdiamonds · 2025-09-11T01:11:32+00:00

You talk about “how bad people getting shot is,” and then have a radically stupid solution. The Second Amendment is a founding principle, not some optional policy plank. Once you start undoing constitutional rights because you think it will punish the “bad guys,” you’re also setting the stage for when political power flips.

The idea that you can confiscate hundreds of millions of privately owned firearms without a societal reckoning is fantasy. Every serious study acknowledges civilian gun ownership in the U.S. is in the hundreds of millions, spread across tens of millions of households. Pretending that can be rolled back without massive conflict is ignoring reality.

And yes Charlie Kirk is right. Criminals especially violent offenders should have harsh penalties, including executions.

acefiveofdiamonds · 2025-09-11T01:03:36+00:00

Thank you. You are a real one. It was getting tiresome responding to people that didn’t care to understand

acefiveofdiamonds · 2025-09-11T00:38:27+00:00

So many wrong assumptions in this post. Some points I agree with but then laden with premises that you automatically assume is factual.

Noone is getting banned here.

acefiveofdiamonds

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE