I had the audacity to criticise Bill Gates (a hoarding billionaire), floods of people rose to protect him ...
So yes.
this post was submitted on 23 Jun 2025
586 points (95.6% liked)
Witches VS Patriarchy
715 readers
22 users here now
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Well, he is trying to give away ALL of his wealth before he dies now, so he has that up on other billionaires.
Now, as for how he ended up with those billions…
The inherent problem with this is that charity should be something guided by community consensus and expert opinion, not at the whim of an oligarch (who is primarily funneling money into his own foundation). Imagine if that money went into fair worker pay and then was taxed appropriately, where it could then be used for outreach programs, grants, funding ngos, etc dictated by political means rather than having some pseudo king having to decide your cause is worthy. granted in our current climate the political means are rotten but if we had an equitable system that didn’t allow for bill gates to exist we would hopefully have a better framework for this part too.
Also will take the time to point out that for all of his “charity” his net worth has, for the most part, stayed the same or increased throughout the years. Something tells me his kids will have still have obscene generational wealth
load more comments
(1 replies)
I strongly recommend anyone that thinks Gates has redeeming qualities listen to the Behind the Bastards on the man.
Spoiler: there are no redeeming qualities about any billionaires.
load more comments
(3 replies)
He isn't giving away his wealth my poor summer child.
He said that in the nineties and he did "give away" 45 billions, but to his own "charity" which he controls, to avoid paying taxes.
Let that sink in, you have a hundred billions and you wake up early to figure out how to pay less taxes...
load more comments
(7 replies)
Isn't Gates the guy who convinced Oxford to turn away from licensing their Covid vaccine under an open license so anyone could distribute it for cheap, and instead made them sign with Astrazeneca "to scale up production and distribution"
Y’all need to get some reading comprehension. I’m not defending but damming by faint praise.
ml users don't like nuance.
load more comments
(3 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
I mean, i think this is a pretty shared feeling in both men and women. No use is fragmentating hatred.
Structural misogyny, so it's mostly the horrible old men doing it.
Im sure the horrible old women would be just as vile if we let them. (But we don't)
Nobodys blaming the not-horrible old men. Nobody's gunning for bernard sanders steve woczniak or mel brooks. Id mix a mocktail with metamucil in it for those guys any time.
Also, maybe pay attention to adjectives!
Also, maybe pay attention to adjectives!
... I'm sorry but could you elaborate? English isn't my first language, so the problem is genuinely flying over my head.
Adjectives, words that function to modify or specify another word.
In the context of verbs-that's action words- i might say 'I walked carefully down the path beneath grandma's window'-the adjective there is 'carefully', so you know this wasn't a leisurely stroll to grandmas house, but a treacherous overgrown path, or i don't want grandma to know im coming for that sweet sweet inheritance, or grandma thinks the geneva conventions are 'cucked-ass yankee shit', or maybe i just want my favorite old war criminal to enjoy her nap without interruption.
So in the context of nouns, thats people places and things, 'terrible old men'
Refers to men (that's a noun!)
But only the ones who are both terrible and old.
So, for example, a nine year old boy who rapes the family dog for shock value would not be in this group-he certainly sounds terrible, but nine years is not very old. We arent talking about him.
And a very old man who isn't terrible, maybe the 90 year old guy who helped liberate dachau, came home, researched vaccines for the rest of his career then retired to his hobby of whittling toys for the neighborhood children. OP isn't talking about him. He's not ruining anything. He sounds great. More of that guy please.
So, 'the quick brown fox' would mean we're talking about the fox who is quick and brown, not the quick red fox, or the other brown fox with the busted leg and the opium habit.
And when we say the quick brown fox jumped over the lazy dog, you know we're talking about the lazy dog, and not the border collie who compulsively herds everything never seems to sleep and has so much energy it really seems to be a problem! Were talking about a fox (the quick brown one) jumping over a dog (the lazy one).
And now you know what adjectives are!
I think they're asking both men and women if they think old psychotic men ruining the world is annoying.
Because while psychotic billionaire women surely exist, I think we can agree that most autocrats and other crazy blood-hungry politicians are usually male.
I mean, name a female despot from modern times? History has a few. Queen Mary aka "Bloody Mary", Cleopatra, Catherine the Great, etc. But they're clearly a minority, just like with serial killers and other violent criminals.
Thatcher? Thatcher was pretty bad.
But that's beside the point that caustic masculinity, excess wealth, and patriarchy need to meet the guillotine.
I thought about her, yeah, but she wasn't a proper autocrat, was she?
Kinda hard to be with a queen above you, really. But yeah she wasn't nice at all.
Idk if Hilary would've done much better first term. Shes like the archetype of chaotic evil pretending to be good.
Well no, obviously it's not just an issue of mostly men being politicians. Reality isn't exactly that black and white. But it does highlight... something.
Witchcraft and resisting the patriarchy are both gender neutral activities.
"Witchcraft," historically, has been used (by old white dudes) as a means of punishment and control of women.
This is not a gender issue - more female CEOs and shit aint gonna fix the system. I am fed up of wealthy people ruining the world and you should be too.
If anybody thinks otherwise, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Karoline Leavitt, etc
“Women are too emotional to be leaders”
hahahahhahahahhahahahahahahaahahahhahahahahhahahahhaha
/me takes deep breath
hahahahahahhahahahahahahahahhaha
Women are too emotional to be leaders
Seems to only ever be said by people who don't count anger as an emotion.
In my experience it’s said by people who have no respect for women
Well yeah! Have you ever seen the turd doing anything that he (or the world) would regret?
(I am trying to write this with a straight face, it's hard)
“Psychotic old people” it’s not just old men voting for these idiots.
I was never not sick of it. I even tried to convince people to vote against it.
Human here. Not a witch and definitely not a velociraptor. I am too fed up of them.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Too bad the only language they understand is violence but we're all domesticated to think that's unacceptable
load more comments
(1 replies)
Who will ruin the world for the rest of us, though? I have serious concerns about a population who does not have complaints about leadership.
Don't worry. I think large language models are up for this one.
Certainly no shortage of training data
health secretary said we gotta put rocks and glue on all pizza
So.... Pebbledash pies only?
looks like.
But we can have other toppings too still, right?
yep! I made sure to check. Pebbles sausage and glue is cleared.
But we still get to have vaccines, right?
yeah. I asked. Also, taking flouride out of the water
...why!?
replacing it with LSD.
view more: next ›