Andrew Tate. What's Your Opinion?.

[RJRB]

3 minutes ago, The_DADDY said:

One reply because the average joe/joan/them/their haven't been told to get angry. 

And who told you to get angry ?

[Longcol]

4 minutes ago, The_DADDY said:

One reply because the average joe/joan/them/their haven't been told to get angry. 

The Mail told people to get angry - usually good for a thread on SF.

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11621567/Balenciagas-scandal-hits-profits-Kim-Kardashian-slashes-brands-prices-resale-site.html

[RJRB]

A quick check shows that controversy featured in many MSM publication from The New York Post to The Guardian.

So many had the opportunity to get angry

 

 

 

 

[Longcol]

1 minute ago, RJRB said:

A quick check shows that controversy featured in many MSM publication from The New York Post to The Guardian.

So many had the opportunity to get angry

 

 

 

 

And Balenciaga apologised.

 

Has Tate?

[RJRB]

10 minutes ago, Longcol said:

The Mail told people to get angry - usually good for a thread on SF.

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11621567/Balenciagas-scandal-hits-profits-Kim-Kardashian-slashes-brands-prices-resale-site.html

But other sources were available as referenced in this article

https://www.glamourmagazine.co.uk/article/balenciaga-scandal-right-wing-conspiracy-theories

[Longcol]

8 minutes ago, RJRB said:

But other sources were available as referenced in this article

https://www.glamourmagazine.co.uk/article/balenciaga-scandal-right-wing-conspiracy-theories

Looks like the lunacy that used to be found on the David Icke Forum that the odd 9/11 CT on here would latch on to about 12 years ago.

[The_DADDY]

54 minutes ago, Longcol said:

And Balenciaga apologised.

 

Has Tate?

Apologised?

That makes it OK then yeah?

 

My bold

For what?

35 minutes ago, Longcol said:

Looks like the lunacy that used to be found on the David Icke Forum that the odd 9/11 CT on here would latch on to about 12 years ago.

Covering for a company who sexualises kids?

Shame on you.

 

Edited April 2, 2023 by The_DADDY

[Longcol]

7 minutes ago, The_DADDY said:

Covering for a company who sexualises kids?

 

 

You're the one who likes to bring obscure stuff to attention. Never would have seen it if you hadn't brought it up. Do you subscribe to this kind of thing  or go hunting for it to be outraged?

[The_DADDY]

2 minutes ago, Longcol said:

You're the one who likes to bring obscure stuff to attention. Never would have seen it if you hadn't brought it up. Do you subscribe to this kind of thing  or go hunting for it to be outraged?

I'm not listening to someone who covers for a company who sexualises kids.

You aren't worth it.

Take this as a win if you like because I won't be replying to you on this.

Shame on you.

[Guest]

6 hours ago, Longcol said:

Looks like the lunacy that used to be found on the David Icke Forum that the odd 9/11 CT on here would latch on to about 12 years ago.

I read about that campaign a while back in an article that spoke to ad executives, photographers, branding experts and whatnot.  They talked about how at the self-proclaimed coked up cutting edge, where fashion, media and art house advertising meet, everyone is desperate to out edgelord each other, and seriously dubious campaigns like that one is the inevitable consequence.

 

But of course Tucker Carlson, Sebastian Gorka and cynical grifters various and sundry used it on Fox News and whatever fetid channel Gorka et al are hawking their wares on.  Spackle it with QAnon lunacy and add a sprinkle of 80s satanic panic nostalgia, and you've got a froth fest that brings in a nice wedge of cash and oodles of lovely attention.

From one of those articles linked to above:

 

Quote

 

In a clip that has over 1 million views on YouTube, Carlson interprets the Balenciaga scandal as “evidence” that “there is a tolerance for paedophilia among some – among the most powerful in our society.”

 

Carlson, it's worth bearing in mind, has previously refused to apologise (via The Washington Post) for saying he would “love” to hypothetically be in a scenario with young girls who were sexually experimenting and for defending Warren Jeffs – a convicted child rapist (at the time, Jeffs had been convicted as an accomplice to rape for arranging for a 14-year-old girl to get married to her 19-year-old cousin).

 

 

Edited April 2, 2023 by Guest