~ archived since 2018 ~
Popular
Other
JohnKimble111
[–]_Tono 221 points222 points223 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Patriarchy makes women wear dresses ? xD
[–][deleted] 124 points125 points126 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Haven't you noticed all the straight men dragging women around the formal section every prom and wedding season?
Women don't care about social status. That's so silly!
[–]BuddhaB 122 points123 points124 points 9 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link
actor "there are no rules, i choose to do what i want." BBC "Good on you for breaking the rules."
Great journalism BBC. Is there really nothing else for you to be reporting?
[–][deleted] 100 points101 points102 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
"Our sovereign and Prime Minister are both women. Men are still oppressive pigs."
-BBC News
[–]Barkonian 20 points21 points22 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Neither was voted for
[–]berrythrills 23 points24 points25 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
And the men AREN'T rioting?!
[–]NikoMyshkin 22 points23 points24 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Too busy running the covert patriarchy
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Just like nearly all male rulers in the past.
Can't have it both ways.
[–]Drag0nV3n0m231 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
It always makes me laugh when people say this towards news networks. Even if there is anything more news worthy, they choose what they think their readers care about, and most news network's social media pages pump out many stories per day, so it doesn't even matter
[–]BuddhaB 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
The BBC is not a buisness built on viewship paying for its exsistance. Its a government funded organisation. Its job is not to pander to the reader but be a source of news.
[–]BurstSwag 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
That's how they deliver the news, by "pandering" to what they think their readers want to read about.
And why don't you hold private news outlets to the same standard?
[–]girlwriteswhat 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Because taxpayer funded news organizations exist as such in order to uphold standards of quality, impartiality and integrity. The whole point of having them (as dubious as that point is) is to avoid the kind of pandering that occurs when a news source is beholden to advertisers, and, by extension, the whims of consumers.
They're also supposed to be politically neutral.
[–]TracyMorganFreeman 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
"Wait if there are no rules, then nothing was broken. Why is this a celebration?"
"Because people want meaning in life, and are content with drawing it from anything even something meaningless, and that sells."
[–]CuriousBlueAbra 133 points134 points135 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Rosie the riveter wore fucking pants, what are you talking about? Do you literally always have to be the oppressed victim standing up against some imagined overwhelming enemy?
[–]SchrodingersRapist 13 points14 points15 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Do you literally always have to be...
You know the answer to that is yes.
[–][deleted] 23 points24 points25 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Some people are so stupid these days...
[–]that_nagger_guy 12 points13 points14 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
What an absolute madwoman. Such a rebel. Never seen anything like it.
[+]hoponthathighhorse points 9 years ago* [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link
It's been about 100 years since woman wearing trousers was edgy.
[–]Imnotmrabut 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Hell - even Hillary got that and had to get edgy with shades of Apricot, Mint and Puce.
[–]chambertlo 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
BBC panders to the lowest hanging fruit. Why are you shocked?
[–]Leinadro 43 points44 points45 points 9 years ago (34 children) | Copy Link
Funny. Janelle Monae (black female rapper) has been wearing suits in public for at least the last 5 years and no one says shit but let a white chick put one on and its hailed as the dawn of a new era.
FOH.
[–]acelister 37 points38 points39 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
Ellen Degeneris has been wearing suits for years, too.
[–]dasimers 6 points7 points8 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Yeah. But she's white so it doesn't suit the narrative.
[–]ProjectD13X 6 points7 points8 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Evan Rachel Wood is pretty fuckin white
[–]Leinadro 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
True its just that Janelle was the first to come to mind. There is no narrative.
[–]acelister 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
This is the second comment to mention a "narrative", and I have no idea why.
I replied to the original tweet the other day, with basically the same thing I replied to you, which is why I did it. I'm not trying to say that someone else doing it is more or less important. Just that BBC are wrong thinking this is a big deal, it's been done before.
[–]Leinadro 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Im just pointing out the absurdity of the idea that Im pushing a narrative.
[–]zfighter18 8 points9 points10 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Janelle is a wonderful musician and I love her stuff but she's not really a rapper.
That's fine. Its just that I first found out about her through Jidenna who is a rapper.
[–][deleted] 12 points13 points14 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
while janelle is nothing short of an absolute treasure, and should be treated as such, it's way off the mark to refer to her as a rapper.
Thats a fair statement its just that I first found out about her through Jidenna who is a rapper.
[–]Ransal 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (23 children) | Copy Link
Want to explain why every pop hit has to have a rapper in it? And no, people don't like it, it's annoying as fuck and ruins songs when some drugged up mentally challenged child keeps grunting.
[–]Sloth_Brotherhood 9 points10 points11 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
If people didn't like it then they wouldn't do it. Just because you don't like it doesn't mean others don't too.
[–]EchoesOfLotus -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
If this were true the popularity of many a pop artist would reflect relevance in proportion to, and thus artists like Bieber, Taylor Swift, and Nickelback would have vanished long ago.
Public opinion doesn't make pop music, pop music makes public opinion.
[–]Sloth_Brotherhood 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
What
[–]Leinadro 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Im not even sure what this has to do with women wearing suits.
[–]Ransal 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Well, it also has nothing to do with doing it with blue chicks
[+][deleted] -18 points-17 points-16 points 9 years ago* (17 children) | Copy Link
editeditedit
welp. looks like i'm an easily triggered sjw snowflake faggot. guess i'll go off a school because of the patriarchy today.
but still,
Completely unprompted, this guy saw "rapper" and took the opportunity to call all rappers druggy retards. And I'm the one who's wrong for calling him out?
[–]Ransal 16 points17 points18 points 9 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link
oh? what was racist about what I said? please, elaborate.
[+][deleted] -23 points-22 points-21 points 9 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link
well, in breaking down your post, you're referring to rappers, who are predominantly black, as mentally challenged children whose talents are nothing short of grunting.
you racist ignorant fuck.
[–]Ransal 15 points16 points17 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
See, your unjustified hatred of people that AREN'T racist and actually treat others with respect that earn said respect is why those words have lost their meaning entirely.
I'm going to assume you're actually just ignorant and not malicious in your opinion on this matter because the latter would be damning of your character.
Ask yourself this: would you ban me or someone else that said what I did, with no evidence of your accusations other than what you THINK I think? If the answer is yes, you failed and you are immoral/evil, you are censoring someone who has done no wrong in order to silence opinions that make you uncomfortable because they force you to question what your indoctrination has forced you to accept as truth. If no, then congrats! there is still hope for you! I have a feeling you said yes though, seeing as I've encountered quite a few with the same mindset as you and very rarely are they good people. Good day :)
[+][deleted] -18 points-17 points-16 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
so then go back on what you initially said, and say it with actual eloquence. since you seem to have an actual vocabulary suddenly.
[–]Ransal 15 points16 points17 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Why? The comment I replied to actually was being racist, but your racism meter is so broken you couldn't tell.
[–][deleted] -3 points-2 points-1 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
there was nothing racist about it. all they did was present a double standard- the same kind this entire sub is based on. mentioning race =/= racism. calling rappers (black people) mentally challenged = racist.
but keep going with your deflections. you're doing an outstanding job of making my case.
[–]Ransal 11 points12 points13 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
see, you don't even realize it's racist when you assume something is only happening because the person is a certain race. This isn't getting attention and the example of 5 years ago got an equally amount of no attention, you are choosing to ignore that though and blame whitey for stealing from the black man again.
You will never understand racism because you are incapable of comprehending your own inability to understand it.
[–]zfighter18 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
To be fair, a lot of new rap by modern artists is just mumble rap. On the other hand, your point has merit as well. That was really not the way to phrase that. It was rather offensive.
[–]Kojima_Ergo_Sum 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
i think i speak for everyone here
Think harder
[–]Googlesnarks 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
you know there's this thing called projection and I think you did it.
see, this guy insulted the art of rap and you read into it that he is referring to black people instead of people who choose to pursue rap, and called him a racist.
what you did was racist because when he said "mentally challenged children" you thought "black people".
you're a racist ignorant fuck!
(the better tactic would have been too question the veracity of the idea that rappers are de facto retarded)
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
He insulted the art by reducing their talents to mumbling. He insulted the people by calling them retarded druggies.
Go ahead and name 5 non-black rappers in today's pop music. I'll make it easier. Name 10 non-black rappers ever.
But you want to draw the line that I only attributed the mentally challenged portion to make a connection? Come on, that's absurd.
There is an extremely obvious implication in his blanket statement.
[–]Googlesnarks 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
this is a pretty unfair challenge for me personally because I listen pretty much exclusively to scandinavian death metal and have no interest in the music that is considered popular.
i think the obvious implication is that he doesn't respect rap as an art form.
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
He doesn't respect rap.. so it's cool for that kind of language? Where else is that considered okay?
[–]Googlesnarks 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
oh I'm not saying he didn't look bad. it was pretty childish. I listen to death metal and wouldn't even say that lol.
[–]Proteus_Marius 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Is Ms Wood saying that the self is worth more than a dress, or than a requirement to wear a dress?
Would a kilt work?
[–]Western_Ways 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
These fuckers just can't stop tilting at windmills.
[–]Muesli_nom 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Why would they? As long as there's a crowd cheering them and and showering them in money for doing it, why would they fight real fights if mock ones will do?
[–]thost02 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
I don't understand why feminists (who hate men) try to dress like men? I cannot piece that together.
[–]Imnotmrabut 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
They confuse sartorial practicality and comfort with oppression. I'm yet to hear a guy bitching about not being able to get his jeans down to facilitate a bathroom break.
[–]BigAl265 6 points7 points8 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Tackling the real issues here, Evan. So brave. Too bad you're such a smug idiot, I really like westworld. Guess I won't need to renew that HBO subscription now.
[–]Ayyylookatme 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Look at that smug look on her retarded face.
[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
I feel it's disingenuous whenever someone points out that they're "being themselves".
What's the context of this quote? If they are answering a direct question, I'd understand that. Otherwise... nope.
edit; also, we're still not over women wearing suits and shit? This is not new at all. No one cares. All the more reason this comes off as a "look at me!" moment, unless asked directly about it. [and if it was, the interviewer needs a slap]
[–]zfighter18 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Really! I didn't even notice when Ellen was wearing suits. Someone pointed it out one day when I was 17.
[–]wiffleplop 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
The Beeb are a bunch of left wing pinko commie/liberals and think us proles are thick as fuck.
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
When I saw what she was wearing I laughed. It didn't do anything for "feminism". I dont think people put a gun to herhead and made her wear a dress.
[–]dejour 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Yeah I agree, that the BBC isn't always impartial, but I don't have a huge issue with that tweet.
Women should be able to wear dresses or pants as they please.
[–]JohnKimble111[S] 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
You see far more freedom in what women get to wear than men.
[–]dejour 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Agreed. And men should also be able to wear what they please.
I definitely think the patriarchy term is misleading. I think really, we have a system of gender norms that is enforced by both women and men and that both men and women can be harmed by it.
I guess I was choosing to be charitable in accepting that as "patriarchy" (even though that term seems to erroneously imply that it's men enforcing and benefiting from the system)
[–]Imnotmrabut 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
You try getting interviewed on BBC news in a Sequined Ball Gown!
Oh how the Biased Broadcasting Corporation just keep on getting it wrong.
I was hoping that Cassie Jaye's "The Red Pill" would end up on BBC's Storyville .... but it turns out to be far too high quality, of commercial viability and whilst it did receive subsidy Cassie failed to sit on her arse and assuming people would just accept her output without question.
Poor Auntie just aint what she used to be.
OP is a cop, you idiot!
[–]nuesuh 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
public "service"
[–]fryelosopher 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
This is an issue at the heart of journalism today. Some think journalism is at its best when it is rooting out corruption or advocating for one thing or another. Some think journalism is at its best when it only supplies the closest approximation to truth, or 'here, this shit happened and here is what we know.'
These two goals do not mix well.
So here we have an organization which officially pursues truth journalism, but reaching out with feminism-based advocacy journalism when it sees fit.
Organizations can do both, it just needs to be clearly separated and marked.
[–]Anti-Marxist- 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
While I agree with the sentiment, HEqual needs TiVo change their catchphrase. "Real discrimination" implies other forms of besides misandry discrimination doesn't exist.
[–]JohnGTrump 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Why do all of the women that hate men so much do everything they can to look and act like a man?
BBC is as "impartial" as Fox is "fair and balanced". It's nice to have standards, but also follow them.
[–]RobDog101 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Wow what an edgy message...for the mid-19th century maybe. Thanks for that, George Sand. Guess we can look forward to a riveting piece on the need to reform coverture laws next.
Feminism: beating horses that died before feminism was even a thing.
[–]tones2013 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
tbf a tweet is not news so it doesnt have anything to do with bias.
[–]JohnKimble111[S] 7 points8 points9 points 9 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link
All BBC output has to comply with the BBC charter. Doesn't matter if it's on Facebook, twitter or the radio - the same impartiality requirement still applies.
Instead, they've chosen to legitimise a fringe conspiracy theory from a political ideology only 8% of the population subscribe to. Of those 8% perhaps less than half actually believe in the ridiculous idea of all men being evil and oppressing all women.
To top it all off, they've not only communicated the apparant legitimacy of this fringe conspiracy theory, they've fully fndorsed the idea of any efforts to combat it, thus blatantly taking sides with radical feminists.
[–]tothecatmobile -2 points-1 points0 points 9 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link
There is absolutely nothing unimpartial about that tweet.
Sometimes we're as bad as SJWs.
[–]JohnKimble111[S] 8 points9 points10 points 9 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link
So would they tweet a photo of Milo looking smug at one of his talks with the caption "smash SJW feminism"?
[–]tothecatmobile -3 points-2 points-1 points 9 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link
Impartiality is treating all sides of the story the same.
There are no multiple sides to that tweet, its something a minor celebrity said at an award ceremony.
Unless you think the BBC should track down the patriarchy and ask their opinion on the matter?
[–]JohnKimble111[S] 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
So answer the question. Where's the example of the BBC offering support to a famous non feminist? Where's the "you go girl" tweets for Erin Pizzey or support for Philip Davies taking on the sexism of the Equality Committee?
[–]tothecatmobile -2 points-1 points0 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
Yes, because the BBC only ever supports feminists...
Horseshoe theory in action.
[–]Rik_the_rodent_king 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Clearly you never saw their MRA sitdown? They called Roosh V an MRA and tried to make us all out to be pro-rape, pro-abuse anti woman bigots. Maybe you should look up what the BBC has done before you call anyone out for hating them now.
[–]tothecatmobile 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
So criticize them for things actually worthy of criticism.
Complaining about stuff like this just looks like there isn't anything actually worth criticizing.
[–]Rik_the_rodent_king 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Or its yet another data point regarding their specific biases towards feminist dogmas. If we didnt have a database of minor behaviors then their major behaviors could be excused as rogue memebers of the group. Since we have a multifaceted and longitudinal body of evidence we can demonstrate how the ideological termites have fed long and well through the whole of the organization.
Please - just because a talent-less idiot like Reggie Yates is used to meet quotas, you should not confuse the scripting from his Feminut Handlers to be anything other than Propaganda by Poodle.
I'm sure it would be a fascinating wildlife study for Sir David Attenborough - in search of Unicorns, Woozles and The Wild Patriarchy!
[+]_peb -10 points-9 points-8 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Everyone one this sub is so sensitive, nothing about this post is sexist against dudes. Stop whining anytime a woman is mentioned anywhere.
[–][deleted] 16 points17 points18 points 9 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link
Apart from the screen-captured image that shows a royal chartered public broadcaster breaking it's own code of impartiality by using terminology that is intended to deceive and discriminate.
edit:
However, on the whole, I agree with you. I would not have bothered going to the effort of screen-capping, or reporting the issue to the BBC. I simply would not have clicked the link because it's petty, bullshit and not worth the time pointing out micro-faults. But the point has been made and it is a valid point. The BBC is royal-chartered and therefore should be impartial. Yet, this is the same broadcaster who made "documentaries" on TRP & PUA with the intention to discredit while claiming an impartial view, so the BBC does have previous history on being biased on the issue of gender.
[–]Renewed_RS 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Is calling the UK a patriarchy really so deceptive or discriminatory though?
I'm new to this subreddit - and saying "smash the patriarchy", it seems to me, is mistranslated here as "smash men". I had hoped for more stimulating discussion.
You've said that you believe the term 'patriarchy' was mistranslated. I'm intrigued, what is your definition?
[–]Azwethinkweizm7 -4 points-3 points-2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Every time I read I encounter this subReddit: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=iHf0PLdQA08
© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.created by /u/dream-hunter
[–]_Tono 221 points222 points223 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 124 points125 points126 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]BuddhaB 122 points123 points124 points (10 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 100 points101 points102 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]Barkonian 20 points21 points22 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]berrythrills 23 points24 points25 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]NikoMyshkin 22 points23 points24 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Drag0nV3n0m231 5 points6 points7 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]BuddhaB 2 points3 points4 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]BurstSwag 3 points4 points5 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]girlwriteswhat 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]TracyMorganFreeman 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]CuriousBlueAbra 133 points134 points135 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]SchrodingersRapist 13 points14 points15 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 23 points24 points25 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]that_nagger_guy 12 points13 points14 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+]hoponthathighhorse points [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link
It's been about 100 years since woman wearing trousers was edgy.
[–]Imnotmrabut 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]chambertlo 5 points6 points7 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Leinadro 43 points44 points45 points (34 children) | Copy Link
[–]acelister 37 points38 points39 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]dasimers 6 points7 points8 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]ProjectD13X 6 points7 points8 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Leinadro 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]acelister 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Leinadro 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]zfighter18 8 points9 points10 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Leinadro 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 12 points13 points14 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Leinadro 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Ransal 2 points3 points4 points (23 children) | Copy Link
[–]Sloth_Brotherhood 9 points10 points11 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]EchoesOfLotus -1 points0 points1 point (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Sloth_Brotherhood 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Leinadro 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Ransal 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] -18 points-17 points-16 points (17 children) | Copy Link
[–]Ransal 16 points17 points18 points (8 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] -23 points-22 points-21 points (7 children) | Copy Link
[–]Ransal 15 points16 points17 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] -18 points-17 points-16 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]Ransal 15 points16 points17 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] -3 points-2 points-1 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]Ransal 11 points12 points13 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]zfighter18 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Kojima_Ergo_Sum 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Googlesnarks 2 points3 points4 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]Googlesnarks 1 point2 points3 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Googlesnarks 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Proteus_Marius 3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Western_Ways 3 points4 points5 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Muesli_nom 5 points6 points7 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]thost02 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Imnotmrabut 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]BigAl265 6 points7 points8 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Ayyylookatme 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]zfighter18 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]wiffleplop 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]dejour 1 point2 points3 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]JohnKimble111[S] 4 points5 points6 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]dejour 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Imnotmrabut 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Imnotmrabut 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]nuesuh 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]fryelosopher 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Anti-Marxist- 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]JohnGTrump 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]RobDog101 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]tones2013 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]JohnKimble111[S] 7 points8 points9 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]tothecatmobile -2 points-1 points0 points (9 children) | Copy Link
[–]JohnKimble111[S] 8 points9 points10 points (8 children) | Copy Link
[–]tothecatmobile -3 points-2 points-1 points (7 children) | Copy Link
[–]JohnKimble111[S] 5 points6 points7 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]tothecatmobile -2 points-1 points0 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]Rik_the_rodent_king 2 points3 points4 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]tothecatmobile 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Rik_the_rodent_king 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Imnotmrabut 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Imnotmrabut 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+]_peb -10 points-9 points-8 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 16 points17 points18 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]Renewed_RS 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Azwethinkweizm7 -4 points-3 points-2 points (0 children) | Copy Link