Is that the legit reason? I mean, in the times I grew up in, I would assume you're being dramatic to prove a point.
Have you considered that you always misunderstood people's goals and they were actually trying to warn you of this exact coming situation?
This isn't some stupid timeline, it's the result of 50 years of very specific effort by the right that the people you thought were being dramatic were just plainly warning you about with the appropriate level of urgency.
I really don't understand how in the face of all this people still choose to bury their heads in the sand.
So did I and everybody read the manual, those who didn't just rage quit after five minutes because games were fucking impossible beyond the most basic racing or sports games.
"Could any picture sum up our new men's rights movement better?" the writer asked. "The smirk of a male who's knows he's protected by a misogynist sporting establishment enjoying the distress of a woman he's just punched in the head, and whose life's ambition he's just shattered."
People have a serious bias towards what they can see. They can see protesters but they can't see pollution. Effective protests are hard to ignore. So they see protesters as a bigger problem than polluters.
Have you considered that you always misunderstood people's goals and they were actually trying to warn you of this exact coming situation?
This isn't some stupid timeline, it's the result of 50 years of very specific effort by the right that the people you thought were being dramatic were just plainly warning you about with the appropriate level of urgency.
I really don't understand how in the face of all this people still choose to bury their heads in the sand.