World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
view the rest of the comments
The difference is that if a few women accused me of rape they wouldn’t be believed because I don’t give off the impression that I’m a piece of shit that hates women.
When a shitload of women accuse Tate however, the response is correctly “yea that checks out”.
Hates - no. But giving off the impression of being weird is not that hard. I'm certain quite a few people would believe something like this about me purely due to being a sunlight-avoiding wimp bad with words (in verbal conversations).
So due process is a good thing. For each Andrew Tate there are a few dozens at least of people whom "the society" would eagerly accuse simply because of being asocial and weird. Like that folk psychology with red flags, manipulations and other shit. People practicing it can wound an autist. But I seriously doubt those would help them avoid a serial maniac.
This is not about his looks, but about the misogynistic content he creates. If you are accused of rape, and you openly talk about coercing women into sexual acts I’d say that it checks out.
thats why they are STILL not sentenced.
Please for the love of God go watch his content and then come back and tell me that you think there is even the most microscopic chance that he is innocent of literally any crime ever.
You almost got there you almost managed to get it. The court of public opinion is not a real court so it doesn't matter and he's an asshole so who cares.
Watch any content of him opening his mouth, it just reeks of misogyny. So yeah since he’s reported, it checks out.
Andrew. Its late in Romania. Get some rest.
Yeah. I find it highly suspicious that a guy who got famous for being the loudest misogynist on YouTube would be accused of practicing what he preaches. This would be like if someone accused Mike Tyson of hitting him. Or Tucker Carlson of lying. Or Ben Affleck cheating on his wife. Or OJ Simpson of committing a murder.
You have to take this shit with a huge boulder of salt, because... come on. What are the odds?
Hearts out to all those possibly wrongfully accused rapists and sex traffickers. Andrew Tate, Harvey Weinstein, Neil Gaiman, Ron Jeremy. Really hope we can clear aside the dozens and dozens of testimonials from people accusing them of wrongdoing and find a piece of evidence I won't casually dismiss.
The worst part is they are usually cleared on some sort of bullshit technicality: "Oh, you didn't dot your I's in your rape report, so your statement isn't valid".
You can use circumstantial evidence to know this guy is guilty. The classes he sold about pimping. Him fleeing to Romania because as he said it's harder to get convicted of sex trafficking. The previous reports on him by other women.
That has never in the entire history of the human race being an individual who looks more guilty than he does. He gives off rapist energy, out of every pour, how can you possibly be defending him?
When he was born the midwives probably said oh here's a bad one.
Completely agree. Too bad that's not proof of anything, we're supposed to learn that in grade school
They didn't, they simply reminded everyone that accusations are not in and of themselves proof even if we dislike the person immensely
Yeah but there is proof literally everything he has ever done proves that this is 100% in his personality to do also he's done it in the past so it's not just that I don't like him he has form.
Can you document for me one case where such accusations against a high profile individual were shown in the fullness of time to be hired fraud?
There probably is some case like that out there - I’m not saying it’s impossible. But given the past we come from, where women were objects without status, I find it very believable that sexual assault is quite common. I need some reason to take your counterpoint as seriously.
So please, show me that one clear case where we found out that the woman had been paid by political enemies to create false accusations.
EDIT: 3 days later, still waiting.