Welcome To aBlackWeb

Register

Support or Cancel: #FirstThem movement

Support or cancel: #firstThem

  • Support

    Votes: 11 64.7%

  • Cancel

    Votes: 5 29.4%

  • indifferent

    Votes: 1 5.9%
  • Total voters
    17
The Lonious Monk said:
You're a 100% right about the "based" shit. They take extreme liberties with stories and then throw that out to cover themselves. That said, removing some things will change the nature of a story while removing other things will make it a totally different story. If you make a story about Ted Bundy and leave out his persona, then you're not really telling his story. His persona is what made him such an infamous figure.



I'm pretty sure I made it clear when you said it that I don't take orders from you. If you want to be a bitch about it and delete my posts again, do ya thang.

Also, WTF? You're complaining about them casting a white man that women find attractive to play someone whose whole gimmick was that women found him attractive. If you can't see how stupid the argument you're making is, I...I don't know what to say. That's like criticizing a candy company for making strawberry candy that actually tastes like strawberries.
Click to expand...
Ok well keep doing it and see what happens...

So now women thought Ted Bundy was a sex symbol? Lawd. But I forgot who I’m talking to. Your candy analogy is off but nice effort.
 
5th Letter said:
Ok well keep doing it and see what happens...

So now women thought Ted Bundy was a sex symbol? Lawd. But I forgot who I’m talking to. Your candy analogy is off but nice effort.
Click to expand...

I will, but thanks for your permission my nigga.

You're just typing to type now. I never said he was a sex symbol, but women finding him charming and attractive is a known part of his mythos.

Many of Bundy's young female victims regarded him as handsome and charismatic, which were traits that he exploited to win their trust.
Click to expand...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Bundy

I'm done with this. I like arguing as many know, but there's no point in discussion with someone who so clearly doesn't know what the fuck he's talking about.
 
The Lonious Monk said:
I will, but thanks for your permission my nigga.

You're just typing to type now. I never said he was a sex symbol, but women finding him charming and attractive is a known part of his mythos.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Bundy

I'm done with this. I like arguing as many know, but there's no point in discussion with someone who so clearly doesn't know what the fuck he's talking about.
Click to expand...
Good. Thank god you’re done.
 
Hellczar said:
They really didnt tho
Click to expand...

So just to make sure I understand, you're denying my statement that "they went back decades to get Cosby". And if I need to clarify more, I mean they brought up all his previous incidents to hope build up more momentum for his latest trial.

Just to make sure we are on the same page here some more:

dec·ade /ˈdekād/noun. a period of ten years. 1"he taught at the university for nearly a decade.

The current year is 2019, he was convicted in 2018, the recent movement to get Cosby was in the 2017 to 2016 range.The dates of the alleged incidents involving Cosby have spanned from 1965 to 2008 in 10 U.S. states and in one Canadian province. The media spot light was on at least 30 women that claimed to have been victims of Cosby in that time span. All of these incidents were brought to light in "exposing" Cosby for incidents the general public did not know about.

Now if I'm still interpreting your disagreement wrong, please clarify.
 
Are we forgetting that no one was really thinking about Cosby til Hannibal Burress, a black comedian brought him up out of nowhere? I think one of the victims even said that his statements led her to pressing the issue again.
 
The Lonious Monk said:
Are we forgetting that no one was really thinking about Cosby til Hannibal Burress, a black comedian brought him up out of nowhere? I think one of the victims even said that his statements led her to pressing the issue again.
Click to expand...
an didnt buress get a show a bit later?
 
DOS_patos said:
an didnt buress get a show a bit later?
Click to expand...

I don't remember, but even if he did, he wasn't put up to taking Cosby down. That was really just some off the cuff shit he said. He got a little extra notoriety after stirring the shit up, but I doubt he expected that to happen.
 
Okaay said:
Harvey facing 20yrs bruh, He’s the face of the movement. You only know him for this reason. Charlie and Hugh are dead bruh.

If either of these other white niggas get caught up my answer is still fuck’em and not hold up is he black, if so free my nigga until they catch an equal amount of white people.

Just like nobody gave a fuck about Kellz for years I didn’t either, but since his demons caught up with him, I don’t feel sorry for him or anyone who got to live with consequences of they acts
Click to expand...

People, understand that Charlie Sheen is not dead and two of the charges against Harvey have already been dropped. Him getting a fitting punishment for his crimes is still an "if". I suggest ya'll refer to my previous post to debunk the rest of the lies this poster is spreading.
 
The Lonious Monk said:
I don't remember, but even if he did, he wasn't put up to taking Cosby down. That was really just some off the cuff shit he said. He got a little extra notoriety after stirring the shit up, but I doubt he expected that to happen.
Click to expand...
it was actually the guy who used a promise of convicting him on his campaign trail.

it all happened in my county....Montgomery county, Pa
 
Kzzl said:
People, understand that Charlie Sheen is not dead and two of the charges against Harvey have already been dropped. Him getting a fitting punishment for his crimes is still an "if". I suggest ya'll refer to my previous post to debunk the rest of the lies this poster is spreading.
Click to expand...



Point is still the same, (I guess the lease ain’t up yet for that House In Virginia). Other then that Harvey still facing 20 and is ruined professionally.

Either way we off track.

The point is #Themfirst is nothing but an excuse to avoid accountability. If #themfirst means supporting our pro pedo black men then count me out.
 
The whole thing is reactive, like a kid making up excuses why he got in trouble, “so & so did this or that”. Nobody cared about white famous people becoming targets until black famous people became targets. So at the core of themfirst I got to ask myself should black people get a pass raping bitches and my answer before me too and after me too is still no. It’s crazy that somehow y’all niggas are like “hold up” keep fucking little hoes until It’s our turn to get caught.

Tell me in principle that this is not the thought behind #themfirst and I’ll listen but till then stop it 5
 
Okaay said:
The whole thing is reactive, like a kid making up excuses why he got in trouble, “so & so did this or that”. Nobody cared about white famous people becoming targets until black famous people became targets. So at the core of themfirst I got to ask myself should black people get a pass raping bitches and my answer before me too and after me too is still no. It’s crazy that somehow y’all niggas are like “hold up” keep fucking little hoes until It’s our turn to get caught.

Tell me in principle that this is not the thought behind #themfirst and I’ll listen but till then stop it 5
Click to expand...
You lack a versatile perspective. Its clear.

You can't think of it from a stand point of...OK, take them all?
First them is about accountability.
Funny how only one side is held accountable but saying anything to get all abusers is looked at as bad.
So get some of them and not all of them?

Which still questions....what's this fight really about? Doesn't seem like justice for all....but just a few.
 
The disagreement here isn't really about whether or not white people need to do a better job of holding their monsters accountable as opposed to always trying to dig up ours. The issue is that you can say that without any attempt to excuse the monsters in our community. People keep claiming they aren't doing that, but to some extent it's right there in the slogan. "First Them" suggests the white trash should become the priority. In truth, all the trash should be taken out with equal expedience.
 
DOS_patos said:
You lack a versatile perspective. Its clear.

You can't think of it from a stand point of...OK, take them all?
First them is about accountability.
Funny how only one side is held accountable but saying anything to get all abusers is looked at as bad.
So get some of them and not all of them?

Which still questions....what's this fight really about? Doesn't seem like justice for all....but just a few.
Click to expand...


See the thing is, you were never once worried about “them”. You’re mad that it’s us. Instead of saying “ok, you got it” you deflect just like white people when you bring up racism (“what about black on black crime”)

So what’s the answer now? They do it? Naw bruh, we can’t allow that to be an acceptable arguement.

This ain’t the hill for us to plant our flag in because at the end of the day, what do we gain from it, what’s the win here?
 
Okaay said:
See the thing is, you were never once worried about “them”. You’re mad that it’s us. Instead of saying “ok, you got it” you deflect just like white people when you bring up racism (“what about black on black crime”)

So what’s the answer now? They do it? Naw bruh, we can’t allow that to be an acceptable arguement.

This ain’t the hill for us to plant our flag in because at the end of the day, what do we gain from it, what’s the win here?
Click to expand...
Say ok to who? Someone who likes to rile up the crowd for a fake moral compass?
Cleaning up pedos is just that. But for some reason it really hurts to think outside of a certain target and take out the group?
If the group ain't the goal....you can't speak.
 
DOS_patos said:
Say ok to who? Someone who likes to rile up the crowd for a fake moral compass?
Cleaning up pedos is just that. But for some reason it really hurts to think outside of a certain target and take out the group?
If the group ain't the goal....you can't speak.
Click to expand...


So you’re saying we either get all the Pedos or none at all.

Apply that arguement with everything else you stand for and see how it sounds to you then.

Anyway, I said my piece, we can’t always agree on everything but even still, it’s always good bouncing thoughts off you guys. Until next time I’m bowing out!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top