As a Democrat, I'd really like it if people who are saying we need to stop saying words could actually identify elected democrats that are actually saying them. I must be missing it.
Replies
The list is in Sidney Sweeney's jeans Because those forbidden words have the same stench of made up right-wing BS as that commercial, or cracker barrel or any of the other made shit that they start.
aug 24, 2025, 1:01 pm • 3 0 • view
At this point the chuds are just inventing problems to go after, all of this is their equivalent of “manspreading”. Name two purple-district Dem electeds who have ever used even one of these terms.
aug 24, 2025, 3:30 pm • 0 0 • view
Amy McGrath in KY tried to be a centrist against McConnell, and had her ass handed to her. If you give voters a Republican and a Repub lite to choose from, they will pick the real thing.
aug 24, 2025, 12:15 pm • 12 0 • view
Thank you. Sure, there are some language police online, but they aren’t elected officials or legit Democratic candidates. This is the game the legacy media plays with us: pin anything done by any non-conservative on “the Democrats” — the convenient catchall boogeyman for a whole class of pundits.
aug 24, 2025, 4:17 am • 19 2 • view
As an independent, I love how the folks that've been responding to posts like this over the last two days always make it about *elected* democrats (unlike the original posters) like somehow those elected democrats aren't representing the rest of you and are therefore inextricably linked.
aug 23, 2025, 7:07 pm • 3 0 • view
Because it's in the context of winning elections. I fail to see how some academic vernacular that elected officials *don't use* is some how causing democrats to not get elected. It's almost as if something else is going on....
aug 23, 2025, 7:25 pm • 22 0 • view
I'll bet you *did* see how some rank and file GOP'ers doin' racist stuff, even if (in the past, at least) most elected GOP officials didn't, was an understandable reason for folks to think twice about voting for them. Conceptually its the same, even though one is worse than the other.
aug 23, 2025, 8:29 pm • 4 0 • view
“Nutpicking” is a good term. Both sides engage in it.
aug 23, 2025, 8:46 pm • 2 0 • view
Mostly fair, I think. I'm a huge French fan. I *do* think a critical mass of nuts can exist on a certain "topic" on one side or the other where its no longer unfair to point at them and be like "Are you guys gonna do somethin' about these folks, or what?" I'm an even bigger Reagan fan than French,
aug 23, 2025, 10:07 pm • 2 0 • view
but, as the leader of the GOP in that era, the only complaint I'm willing to listen to about him is over his "Big Tent" approach. There were definitely folks in that tent that shoulda been exiled to outer darkness where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth.
aug 23, 2025, 10:07 pm • 1 0 • view
Everyone who knows a Republican has heard them be unapologetically racist.
aug 23, 2025, 11:22 pm • 0 0 • view
Let’s take a look at Republican advocates and their word usage. Charlie Kirk, Nick Fuentes, Hegseth reposting his desire to remove 19th amendment. They’re just words that seem to TRIGGER maga…. 🙄
aug 23, 2025, 7:13 pm • 8 0 • view
Yeah, they're definitely worse. Just tryina help you folks be better. Still votin' fer yer guys though.
aug 23, 2025, 8:22 pm • 3 0 • view
Why are you thinking that only elected Democrats matter? Stephen Miller, Charlie Kirk, Laura Loomer, none of these people are elected. Do you think that what they say doesn't matter too?
aug 24, 2025, 12:30 am • 5 0 • view
I would like for Democrats to refrain from needlessly alienating persuadable voters (these words would do that), but seriously, as you say, who are the office seekers in purple places who talk like this?
aug 23, 2025, 7:57 pm • 10 0 • view
You are so right. Straw man arguments that take on a life of their own, thanks to media laziness.
aug 23, 2025, 6:58 pm • 583 3 • view
It's not just about elected officials. It's about how we, as progressives, communicate our values. Using jargon and academic lingo is often a kind of in-group signaling at the expense of being more broadly persuasive.
aug 24, 2025, 4:48 pm • 40 0 • view
I'd argue that it's way more effective, for instance, to say "We have to help the homeless" than "We must address the unhoused." Stuff like that.
aug 24, 2025, 4:48 pm • 51 0 • view
How about we have to help the unhoused?
aug 24, 2025, 5:39 pm • 27 0 • view
OH FOR FUCKS SAKE!!!! Are you kidding me?? SEMANTICS??! THAT'S your biggest concern??
aug 24, 2025, 8:35 pm • 5 1 • view
I used to volunteer at a shelter and never once heard anyone refer to themselves as unhoused. What they feel is a *homeless. The physical body is unhoused but the human being is *homeless.
aug 24, 2025, 9:44 pm • 1 0 • view
Ok, let’s hear your argument
aug 24, 2025, 9:22 pm • 0 0 • view
Jason Crow - a sensible man! - sponsored this, which is a nice bill but right outta the bucket, that title... crow.house.gov/media/press-...
aug 24, 2025, 9:24 pm • 11 0 • view
On the bright side, it's a great bill with bipartisan support.
aug 24, 2025, 9:45 pm • 0 0 • view
It is, but if you want to see it on Fox as "government waste from crazy libs," that title was perfect
aug 24, 2025, 9:47 pm • 1 0 • view
I NEED TO BREAK IN HERE-Am I the only one who thinks those boxes being carried out of Bolton's house had the same look and feel as an empty milk carton?Like when you think it's full but when you go to pick it up it practically flies you backwards?The alleged Bolton boxes looked brand new & unused!
aug 24, 2025, 9:58 pm • 0 0 • view
Perhaps a few Fox viewers would be on board with keeping people and their pets together. I do agree about some of the terminology. I'm a lifelong Dem and have look up some of the meanings.
aug 24, 2025, 9:54 pm • 0 0 • view
Wait! I thought only activists used those terms and not actual politicians?
aug 25, 2025, 12:49 am • 1 0 • view
I want a constitutional amendment that bans the use of acronyms in statute titles.
aug 24, 2025, 9:30 pm • 11 0 • view
Public health degree here, been dealing with name changing for 50 years. First we replaced the clap with VD. Then VD became STD. Then it became STI. No matter what you call them, someone will say “that’s offensive” Today I saw “differently compromised” being used instead of immune compromised.
aug 24, 2025, 9:07 pm • 5 0 • view
Perfect
aug 24, 2025, 9:09 pm • 1 0 • view
As long as we don't forget the reasons we switched from homeless to unhoused I guess. But I think our real problem is that historically the GOP have so many resources to overwhelm our side with propaganda. We only have people power so whatever we do we have to do together.
aug 24, 2025, 6:57 pm • 3 0 • view
"we switched" Who is "we"?
aug 24, 2025, 8:44 pm • 0 0 • view
I agree. But we really have to be aware of meta-communication, you know? The really important thing is to get these fascists out and get policies that help people in place. If we have to use a little bit of archaic language to do that, we got to be okay with it, you know?
aug 24, 2025, 8:35 pm • 0 0 • view
We're not trying to communicate "I'm better than you," but that's what voters sometimes hear. It's so important to be aware of that.
aug 24, 2025, 8:35 pm • 0 0 • view
It's arcane, not archaic, and it's one of the things which drove otherwise-sensible voters into Trump's arms.
aug 24, 2025, 8:37 pm • 0 0 • view
No, I meant "archaic." "Homeless" is a bit old-fashioned next to "unhoused." Arcane language is what we should avoid.
aug 24, 2025, 8:41 pm • 1 0 • view
"Homeless" is not a tiny bit archaic. Words don't become "archaic" when 75% of the people are still using them and most don't even know the arcane new word. Heck, our extremely well-educated president was using the word frequently during his presidency (9 years ago). Y'all need to get out more.
aug 24, 2025, 9:14 pm • 0 0 • view
I'm arguing for using the older words
aug 24, 2025, 9:16 pm • 1 0 • view
I understood and approve. But you did say "If we have to use a little bit of archaic language to do that, we got to be okay with it". I get that maybe you're being polite trying to pull 2 sides together, by labeling the **mainstream** word "archaic" ... but ... it's not. "Itinerant" is archaic.
aug 27, 2025, 9:20 pm • 0 0 • view
When I was a kid, they were "bums".
aug 24, 2025, 9:18 pm • 0 0 • view
Agreed. I misread your post. Apologies.
aug 24, 2025, 9:30 pm • 1 0 • view
No worries. I appreciate the apology, thank you.
aug 24, 2025, 9:42 pm • 2 0 • view
I'll give you an example.... the backlash during COVID whenever Anthony Fauci said "Latin-X." I heard such BACKLASH from the Latino community who were just angered by it.
aug 23, 2025, 7:43 pm • 11 0 • view
OK, that was like 5 years ago and was extensively discussed at the time. And I haven't seen anyone say "Latinx" much at all since. Anything recent? Fauci was also a civil servent and not an elected official.
aug 23, 2025, 7:46 pm • 36 0 • view
But he was using the term because he was afraid of being attacked? Trying to make sense ir, I feel like, while it's not most of the Democrat pols using the terms, it the closest activists to them calling for their use? There's a reason I could guess most for the words on the list before I saw it.
aug 23, 2025, 8:09 pm • 4 0 • view
Latinx was coined by individuals who wanted a way to be referred to without gendered adjectives in their own language.
aug 24, 2025, 4:26 am • 15 0 • view
It is not used in Mexico.
aug 24, 2025, 5:09 am • 2 0 • view
Latin was right there.
aug 24, 2025, 5:23 am • 4 0 • view
Like the use of “ə” in Italian to un-gender the plurals “i” and “e”? I think it won’t survive, Italian language is too much gendered. But I say: let the nature of languages work. In the meantime, I ask the preferred pronouns and talk and write accordingly. Or keep a vague approach, it can be done.
aug 24, 2025, 10:57 am • 0 0 • view
We used Latinx in my Episcopal Church for a while until the Latino members asked us to stop using it. It may be a generational thing. The point I remember them saying is, x is not even a letter in our alphabet. What they really dislike is "Hispanic"
aug 24, 2025, 4:31 am • 19 0 • view
It’s great that there was this conversation so that people could make their views heard
aug 24, 2025, 4:32 am • 1 0 • view
Yes, I work around a lot of Indigenous people, and 1) I learned to ask them; and 2) they don't always say the same thing!! Some of them think about stuff like his harder than others. Also there are the things that they say but that we should not. It's so much more satisfying to wonder and ask.
aug 24, 2025, 4:37 am • 5 0 • view
Honestly, avoiding referring to all people from Latin and South America and of Hispanic descent with one word is probably best.
aug 24, 2025, 4:52 am • 2 0 • view
Yup. Or like, oh you speak Spanish, let's get a mariachi band.
aug 24, 2025, 6:41 am • 0 0 • view
I was aware that it shows up in some of the place names I've been to in Mexico. I'm just telling you what I was told. I have studied Spanish, but I didn't think about it hard, cause I was talking to a native speaker.
aug 24, 2025, 9:51 pm • 0 0 • view
Mexico
aug 24, 2025, 12:24 pm • 0 0 • view
Right, I guess he meant in common parlance? I have been to Ixtapa too. This is what he told me, he was a native speaker.
aug 24, 2025, 9:52 pm • 0 0 • view
In Spanish X is pronounced like an H, maybe that’s what they meant.
aug 25, 2025, 1:51 am • 1 0 • view
That's it I bet, meaning when I say Latino, I am pronouncing it like they do. But when I say Latinx I am pronouncing it like *I* do.
aug 25, 2025, 2:42 am • 0 0 • view
Lah-tinks?
aug 25, 2025, 12:27 pm • 1 0 • view
How do you even pronounce “Latinx” in Spanish?
aug 24, 2025, 12:19 pm • 1 0 • view
I have never met a person who wanted to be referred to in this way. It screams "made up by white people"
aug 24, 2025, 6:08 am • 2 0 • view
I thought “Latine” was the preferred term, though?
aug 24, 2025, 4:30 am • 3 0 • view
There’s different preferences in every community. This article lays out some of the nuance and different opinions and perspectives around any word that purports to describe so many people at once in case it helps. www.motherjones.com/media/2019/0...
aug 24, 2025, 4:47 am • 5 1 • view
So to me it seems like the actual best practice is “just refer to people the way they like on a case by case basis, be humble if they tell you something different, and try to not be dogmatic or prescriptive” or, put even more simply, “let’s just not be assholes”
aug 24, 2025, 4:54 am • 7 0 • view
The hilarious thing is that you could be serious.
aug 24, 2025, 4:42 am • 0 0 • view
Hilarious in what sense? I personally don’t care, but I just remember a lot of the backlash to “latinx” being from Latin people who were like, “um, we didn’t pick that”
aug 24, 2025, 4:44 am • 2 0 • view
I live in Portland where latine is real. Add any letter but o or a and they fall into orgasmic bliss. They being almost entirely white progressives.
aug 24, 2025, 4:48 am • 0 0 • view
Yeah see that’s why I was rebutting the “x”, i know a lot of latin folks in like, theatre, and most of them use the “e” if they use anything at all, which is where we agree, it’s a largely extrapolated “solution” that didn’t really originate from the group itself.
aug 24, 2025, 4:52 am • 3 0 • view
I live in a heavily Latino area and every Latino I asked about it found it offensive because it felt to them like a bunch of white college kids was criticizing their language and telling them it was wrong. That is a direct quote from a friend, but others I’ve talked to about said similar things. 1/2
aug 24, 2025, 4:45 am • 10 1 • view
Mike Madrid and Chuck Rocha have spoken on this extensively over the years. After asking my friends and getting their opinions, I quit using the term.
aug 24, 2025, 4:47 am • 3 0 • view
That sounds like the right way to incorporate the views of the people directly impacted.
aug 24, 2025, 4:49 am • 2 0 • view
I really hadn’t considered it as an affront to their culture by criticizing their language until I discussed with so many. Similar discussion years ago on the term African-American vs. Black. I was surprised at those answers, too. But I get that now. I’ll never assume things like that again.
aug 24, 2025, 4:55 am • 2 0 • view
Accepted terminology also changes over time, which is why Tom’s list is ridiculous.
aug 24, 2025, 5:08 am • 2 0 • view
That list didn’t come from Tom at all. He just shared it. But that same thing has also been reflected in focus groups. As one commenter put it, many of those words are good in a grant proposal or an academic setting, but often come off as cold or removed. Sometimes simpler words are better.
aug 24, 2025, 5:12 am • 6 0 • view
Actually "cold and removed" is the best argument against theses words I've heard! Even if you know what they mean, or kind of know the term, they don't have much visceral resonance. I argued that "food insecurity" is a pretty normal phrase but it doesn't pack much of a punch.
aug 24, 2025, 4:21 pm • 3 0 • view
Exactly. They are good and useful terms for some audiences. But politics is a game of moving hearts and minds, so cold and removed is the exact opposite of what is needed when motivating voters.
aug 24, 2025, 4:25 pm • 1 0 • view
What percentage of Latino/Latina/etc people use LatinX to refer to their selves? And what percentage of people who use LatinX are non-Latin versus Latin?
aug 24, 2025, 4:30 am • 2 0 • view
My point is it’s not an academic term being foisted on the population. If people decide to use it or not over time that is all part of how living language works.
aug 24, 2025, 4:41 am • 4 0 • view
Yeah, because academics also knew that it was a stupid, paternalistic term that didn’t even bother to engage with the language it was attempting to “fix”
aug 24, 2025, 3:25 pm • 0 0 • view
Bullshit. I work in education and I've been instructed by county administrators to use that term, which has been a point of contention.
aug 24, 2025, 11:51 am • 0 0 • view
Okay fine. I remember seeing a "Latinx Employee Appreciation Month" sign on a Macy's in Portland in 2019. The large majority of actual Latino people in actual America in 2019 didn't use the term and didn't like it. It *WAS* foisted on a population who did not want it.
aug 24, 2025, 5:02 am • 2 0 • view
I think what’s being missed here is that I was refuting Tom’s claim that these terms originate in academic ivory towers. I have no interest in maintaining the use of latinx in unless someone tells me that’s what they prefer.
aug 24, 2025, 5:06 am • 2 0 • view
In the late 2010s, many people and institutions with power in the US decided that they WOULD use this term all over the place, with seemingly total ignorance and incuriosity about whether the people it referred to liked the term. I'm glad you don't do that, but MANY others did.
aug 24, 2025, 5:24 am • 0 0 • view
I remember hearing a presentation by an MD. It was clear that she knew basically nothing about Latino culture in the US; she mispronounced a few very basic Spanish words. But she used "Latinx" a bunch of times, in a way that suggested she was confident that it was the RIGHT word to use.
aug 24, 2025, 5:29 am • 0 0 • view
Where I live "Latinx" is considered insulting, paternalistic at best. Where is it I live? Mexico City
aug 24, 2025, 6:07 pm • 1 0 • view
…by affluent white kids in private colleges who promise they have Tejano friends and it’s ok.
aug 24, 2025, 6:54 am • 1 0 • view
... in a language that is gendered. Really - this was coined by a *few* activists, and the Hispanic community at large roundly rejected it.
aug 24, 2025, 4:30 am • 16 0 • view
It feels like your issue is more about the consequences of saying something and being perceived to be a bigot, which is about how we build community and maintain relationships even when we don’t agree with each other 100%. I think that’s an important thing to think about.
aug 24, 2025, 4:36 am • 1 0 • view
I can’t make any sense of you. Nothing in her reply indicated that anyone was viewed as a bigot. It seems like some used “Latinx” and a most Latino/Hispanic people in the group discouraged it. Your circular, rambling reply with the “bigot” buzzword is an example of what Dems should not be doing.
aug 24, 2025, 4:57 am • 1 0 • view
Not really (though I'm all for building community ..) It's about terms that originate with a small group of people, pushed out to to communities (and the wider public) that don't want to take up the term for any number of valid reasons. Like the very un-Spanish "Latinx".
aug 24, 2025, 4:54 am • 2 0 • view
Yes. Latino people I know and talk to overwhelmingly despise the term, and see it as insulting that outsiders with no knowledge of the Spanish language adopted it. (I'd be pissed too if American society decided something was problematic about the word "Jew" and we need to be called "Jxws" instead.)
aug 24, 2025, 4:58 am • 9 0 • view
Yeah, this 👇
aug 24, 2025, 5:16 am • 7 0 • view
Twelve of them?
aug 24, 2025, 4:40 am • 1 0 • view
Not a Democrat.
aug 24, 2025, 4:37 am • 1 0 • view
It just takes one Democrat out of millions to say a "forbidden" word and the media/critic/consultant class has fresh meat to feed on for weeks.
aug 23, 2025, 9:13 pm • 51 2 • view
Except it's unfortunately not just one out of millions. It's also our friends. It's also social media. Most people just don't have the time to care about what the latest accepted/correct term is. And don't appreciate being dog-piled for not using it. 1/2
aug 23, 2025, 9:41 pm • 8 0 • view
We all know when offense is meant, and when it isn't. "Bless your heart" in the South can be a sincere expression of sympathy, or a very sarcastic dismissal of you. It's not the words that make the difference between intent to offend, and not. 2/2
aug 23, 2025, 9:41 pm • 5 0 • view
The Democrat party cannot and should not be held responsible for every random commenting the internet. We have a party literally supporting fascism, get some perspective.
aug 24, 2025, 1:47 pm • 19 1 • view
I have perspective. Say "pregnant woman" in a high-vis thread and count the seconds before you get called a TERF and put on a block list. Nobody is saying that the GOP is fine. They're saying that they're winning elections. The link was a report BY Dems, to Dems.
aug 24, 2025, 3:33 pm • 4 0 • view
It's not a question of whether elected Democrats are using the words. It's that they have become part of the lexicon in a way that most people (i) think is just weird (incarcerated people? the unhoused?) and (ii) associate with Democrats. Contributes to the view that the party is out of touch
aug 24, 2025, 12:00 am • 5 0 • view
You must be blind and dead or just stupid.
aug 24, 2025, 12:20 pm • 1 0 • view
Yes x 10,000. Republicans were the ones talking about trans issues last election. They see stuff from academia and then apply it to all Democrats.
aug 23, 2025, 7:51 pm • 20 0 • view
Why limit it to "elected democrats"?? It's rife in interviews of activists and advocates on a wide array of subjects. And folks actually do get corrected on this stuff. I've been taken to task for >>gasp<< saying "homeless".
aug 23, 2025, 7:06 pm • 16 0 • view
Because it is in the context of winning elections. People not running for office are not asking for votes.
aug 23, 2025, 7:25 pm • 19 0 • view
Actually, it would help us win elections of there weren't roadblocks to talking to people in general about issues. If a pol in office proposes a policy, and all people get about it are advocates and activists interviews about it talking gibberish about it, it doesn't work.
aug 23, 2025, 7:29 pm • 9 0 • view
I don't think I can disagree with your general point. It is up to the pol to sell the policy. And Democrats are generally terrible at that, I agree! Not sure what that has to do with lists of random verboten words identified by right-wing grifters that get pegged to elected Democrats not using them.
aug 23, 2025, 7:34 pm • 13 0 • view
This "elected Democrats" thing is a dodge. People are encountering this in everyday life. When they fill out a medical history, when they apply to college, when they turn on the local news and someone is saying "the new OB-Gyn department will serve local pregnant people ..."
aug 23, 2025, 7:36 pm • 10 0 • view
It's not a dodge! It's the central problem of this discourse! Why is the language on a college application a problem of someone running for Congress?
aug 23, 2025, 7:40 pm • 9 0 • view
Pregnant people is just plain ridiculous,followed closely by unhoused.
aug 24, 2025, 12:12 am • 2 0 • view
Why is being more accurate and inclusive ridiculous?
aug 24, 2025, 4:24 am • 8 0 • view
And in normal conversation. I've been corrected on "homeless" and told I've been insulting for not using "unhoused" This stuff has infiltrated the social milleau in maddening ways - and they're MEANT to do that because that's what advocates want - everyone use their devised terms for their reasons
aug 23, 2025, 7:38 pm • 10 0 • view
Some people are assholes it's true. How is that a problem for Democrats?
aug 23, 2025, 7:41 pm • 11 0 • view
And I'm legitimately trying to understand what the issue is. I do not see it. Perhaps that's my failing.
aug 23, 2025, 7:42 pm • 2 0 • view
So there's no reason for the term "unhoused" it's not meant to be used instead of "homeless". If a term is said to be preferred you really don't think people will take that to heart and tell others to use it? You're being purposely obtuse, I suspect.
aug 23, 2025, 7:45 pm • 3 0 • view
I agree with you! I don't use the term "unhoused." I agree that people should not "correct" plain English with not-plain English. If someone else wants to say it, they can have at it. It's no skin off my nose. But how is any that a problem for Democrats writ large?
aug 23, 2025, 7:49 pm • 5 0 • view
Because assholes vote.
aug 23, 2025, 8:33 pm • 1 0 • view
I can 100% assure you that folks who are not terminally online for politics do not run into these words. I know many of them. This is literally about an incredibly small sub-section of folks who follow political topics online, which further exposes how utterly stupid it is.
aug 24, 2025, 1:51 pm • 2 0 • view
Then it should be easy to abandon these terms hm? I live a real life too (it's not just you) and i have encountered a lot of for example in monthly observing my county legislature as a member of LWV. Thats where I was corrected re "homeless" Interacting with medical care, applying for jobs too.
aug 24, 2025, 1:58 pm • 0 0 • view
Again, people are explaining to you that the Dem candidates aren't actually putting up roadblocks. You're trying to hold the party accountable for everything anyone who votes for them says. It's stupid. Stop listening to folks who lost their own party to Trump.
aug 24, 2025, 1:49 pm • 1 0 • view
The secdef has white nationalist tattoos and a man with a key to the WH does Nazi salutes. Maybe that’s more important than words no one ever hears unless conservative bring them up to make people pearl clutch.
aug 23, 2025, 11:56 pm • 96 2 • view
Yes. It IS more important. It's much more important. But in order to stop these jerks, the opposition has to learn to talk to people in ways that make sense to them. They have to give a clear alternative. Some Dems and academics and cultural commentators are good at it. More of them need to learn.
aug 24, 2025, 3:16 am • 6 0 • view
So the American people are so wildly stupid and mentally deficient that they can't adapt new terminology like humans have always done throughout human history is your argument? That's a pretty freaking elitist and condescending claim to make.
aug 24, 2025, 12:37 pm • 20 0 • view
From their POV it's either an assertion of elitist power over them, or a form of elitist condescension, for you to try to force your words on them. Why don't you use their words? Surely you're intelligent and mentally capable enough to adapt to speaking in terminology that is most commonly used.
aug 24, 2025, 9:20 pm • 2 0 • view
a response 🧵 bsky.app/profile/jess...
aug 24, 2025, 9:30 pm • 2 0 • view
I don't say that we should ignore them at all.
aug 24, 2025, 9:39 pm • 0 0 • view
Thread was response to someone else, but read the thread as it is about much more the the first post directed at Tom.
aug 24, 2025, 9:42 pm • 0 0 • view
Yes, got that.
aug 24, 2025, 9:45 pm • 0 0 • view
No, that is not my argument.
aug 24, 2025, 1:08 pm • 3 0 • view
www.youtube.com/watch?v=8jNU...
aug 24, 2025, 12:14 pm • 0 0 • view