About Alek Minassian, a man accused of killing six people after running them over with a van in Toronto: “He was angry at God because women were rejecting him. The cure for that is enforced monogamy. That’s actually why monogamy emerges.”
Oh, some incel murdered 6 people, must of been a woman’s fault somehow…
Is defending a literal misogynist terror attack enough evidence for you?
I just read this and although i think its extremely biased you are still the only person to share some sort of evidence so thank you. I would recommend getting a more direct source to criticize in the future so im not considering opinion articles from a peoples magazine as a source
would recommend getting a more direct source to criticize in the future so im not considering opinion articles from a peoples magazine as a source
The direct source is the video linked in the article. Arguing the quality of a source material in a subjective debate is just admitting you don’t have a counter argument. This isn’t a scientific debate, the quote I gave you is directly from the primary source. You can choose not to believe the subjective information in the article, but I didn’t make any claims that weren’t direct quotes from a primary source.
“The cure for that is enforced monogamy.”
About Alek Minassian, a man accused of killing six people after running them over with a van in Toronto: “He was angry at God because women were rejecting him. The cure for that is enforced monogamy. That’s actually why monogamy emerges.”
Oh, some incel murdered 6 people, must of been a woman’s fault somehow…
Is defending a literal misogynist terror attack enough evidence for you?
Send link if you can
Sure
I just read this and although i think its extremely biased you are still the only person to share some sort of evidence so thank you. I would recommend getting a more direct source to criticize in the future so im not considering opinion articles from a peoples magazine as a source
The direct source is the video linked in the article. Arguing the quality of a source material in a subjective debate is just admitting you don’t have a counter argument. This isn’t a scientific debate, the quote I gave you is directly from the primary source. You can choose not to believe the subjective information in the article, but I didn’t make any claims that weren’t direct quotes from a primary source.