No, no, NO. That’s an invitation to essentially lynch some poor and entirely innocent woman.
17 Likes
In a crowd like that, what happens next is people would be hurt. He’s whipped up the mob to believe all this, and as soon as they have a target they’ll explode.
People want to rant and scream and carry on, that’s there business but this is putting innocent people at risk. Chances are they are vulnerable people as well, searching for acceptance and understanding - that’s why they fell for this bullshit. And then, when they refused to tow the line or blow the pastor, they were condemned as witches.
11 Likes
The only logical response to that video is this video:
9 Likes
You are so right. I don’t think I can add much, outside of my thoughts that the visibility of this specific accusation (and all the history it brings) seems very immediately dangerous, whereas the other assaults on women’s autonomy feel more “subtler/existential” to me due to the regulatory nature of those efforts.
Neither are acceptable or beneficial and I acknowledge that I don’t have the same perspective a woman would about this, but accusations of witchcraft have time and again lead to swift deaths and that’s what I’m on about here.
10 Likes
Yeah, true, but I think these two things go together… I think part of the reason that the original moral panic over women happened (primarily in Europe) was because the women targeted did not conform to societal expectations the men had of them. I just think in this case, we have roles of those two things switched, with our legal rights being eroded and these sorts of supernatural claims cropping up as following that… while in the late medieval, early modern period, it was probably the opposite.
True!
21 Likes
See, I like the idea, it feels good, but only if I’m actually already the target, although I wouldn’t be in attendance at this hatefest in the first place. If the target is someone else, then I’m not going to invite that for the reasons other have already described.
12 Likes
Or a good ol’ slander suit.
*Conditions for slander are…false, spoken out loud (with a witness who will attest), damaging your reputation, and an “unprivileged” statement (meaning out of left field).
Go ahead, dude. Name some names.
7 Likes
The women he names would end up being harassed/terrorized before they even pick a phone to call a lawyer.
23 Likes
Well, they were women. That was his first clue
7 Likes
And one of them will spill the beans on the others. Which witch will snitch the witches??.
i just think that, being the grifter and scam artist he is, he wouldn’t be able to name anyone. i just want to call his bluff.
1 Like
Still, if he’s got some real folks he’s trying to intimidate, I’m sure it’s already happening.
15 Likes
There will be others in the congregation who are searching for acceptance, and they’ve been taught that joining in the witch hunt is the way to get it.
5 Likes
Why 6? Seems rather specific.
4 Likes
Because most likely, it is 6 specific women who “offended” him in some way.
20 Likes
.
That evil sonofab*tch needs what we used to call in Texas a Tony Lama enema.
1 Like
I’ll repeat what I’ve said about this man in the past: he’s got some nasty skeletons in his closet and they’re eventually going to come out. I guarantee it. There will be sexual abuse charges at the very least, because guys like this are the biggest grifting hypocrites around.
17 Likes
14 Likes
You are exactly correct, and that’s what makes this type of leader so dangerous. Others wrote the book, Hitler perfected it, and this guy’s taking lessons straight from him.
3 Likes
Possibly relevant
and of course
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Greg_Locke
It sounds fringy to promote the idea of ones political enemies being demons and witches, but this is not new and a lot of potentially dangerous people seemed inclined to belive this nonsense.
8 Likes
