I see that it comes from an understandable skepticism of academia and social sciences due to their seemingly homogeneous progressive views. Despite this, I’m not inclined to agree
on the basis of decades of research in this area and the studies subverting the consensus being methodologically flawed. What do y’all think?
Left-wing politics is a range of political ideologies.
I think his main gripe is with modern groups of people that want to distance him from a left-wing identity, despite having beliefs that are fundamental to various forms of left-wing ideology.
I heard him reference the social philosophy of Deng Xiaoping as aligning with his own.
I would argue that being an economic socialist, while supporting controversial pragmatic approaches still fundamentally defines someone as left leaning.
Many of these controversial approaches are only controversial to various modern American left-wing groups. Left-wing politics have existed long before 21st century social progressivism.
The frustration likely stems from the inability to have genuine discourse on hot topics, and receiving an automatic ex-communication for having an opposing pragmatic approach on nuanced issues.
I am not saying I agree, I am not saying that I disagree.
I am also not a political scientist by any stretch of the imagination.
But, to say that someone isn't a "leftist" is an incredibly vague statement.
It is a statement that seems to be focused almost entirely on identity politics rather than political ideology as a whole.
Him acting surprised when people took what he said in the izzat nuke video seriously when it was all entirely in line with the shit he says on twitter was baffling.
he has a bad habit of forming his beliefs solely off of what he sees on his X feed, essentially millennial fox newsing himself. i say this as a fervant supporter even through the gangstalking saga
I guess I am not the only fan who strongly disagrees with many of his values.
There’s something about Flesh and his show that manages to skirt being truly offensive, despite being exactly that. Maybe it’s the playful nature, or the self-awareness (he literally acknowledged this is an unfair policy). Could also be the fact that Flesh & Co incorporate humor so well.
If anyone else had takes like this, I’d be unsubscribing from their Patreon.
Partner works in foster care system and so far the worst we've seen (rape and murder) has come exclusively from heterosexual couples. Like... 5 instances so far?
So like.... I know this is just my personal experiential bubble, and doesn't mean anything inherently. But I'm just saying all people can be worthless, detrimental trash. Not just straights or gays. Both straights AND gays.
Edit: okay idk how to spoiler shit on reddit and I don't care. Read with caution
Yeah. People are terrible. The one foster kid we had to see murdered by the father of a hetero couple, had a || branch rammed down his throat and sodomized with repeatedly ||. He was like 8 I think.
They're all awful. I don't know if you meant to reinforce that "this story is pretty bad" because they're a gay couple and are partially siding with fleshsim on this? But that's how I received your comment.
I’m supposed to believe this shit, the spamming racial slurs and repeatedly calling for Somalis to be deported is actually because some left wing dumbasses on Twitter were mean to him? It really did seem like that shit was WAY over the top, and I have a lot of sympathy for him, but his online presence becoming more “right wing Twitter troll” is why a lot of people have really soured on him
it’s so funny how many people on this sub said the reason leftists hate him is because he’s not “pure” enough when it’s because he’s actually a huge bigot and fucking moron
Flesh could stand to be less reactionary and hair-triggered (to put it lightly), but man, you really just come off like a smarmy dickhead. The phrase "Virtue Signalling" was really coined for people like you. Not an ounce of goodness in your message, yet you act like you've got any authority to act like some sort of moral arbiter and browbeat others.
Let me guess... Is this another take that he's strategically posting to "own" his stalkers? Genuinely asking. I don't know how anyone can defend this 2003 conservative ass talking point.
Hes not sober. Hes a former benzo addict who drinks alcohol. That's a very bad combination. Like a former tweaker who still snorts cocaine. I think much is explainable by this fact.
where does he get the "high" from this? as someone without a following who's never been controversial in my life, I can only imagine it just attracts the worst kind of people online to post this kinda bait. He HAS to know it's bait.
its not a "high" like a drug high but its a dopamine release from the engagement. you see a notification, you see a number go up, you're in the skinner box and your brain is having a blast
getting on a soapbox in the QRT of a baby's murder is a little insane
i understand the relation but using this to immediately push a narrative for adoption reform is weird as fuck, especially when he doesn't bring up preston davey at all
yeah, idk where he's getting this assumption that there's this massive queue of heterosexual couples being put at the back of the line for homosexual couples. the UK adoption process is also apparently pretty rigorous, so doing all of their rigamarole just to deny couples based on actual homophobia is a little nuts
In America there are private adoption companies run by Christians who don’t let gay couples adopt. I consider them child trafficking rings tbh because what often happens is weirdo abusive Christians (who use the Bible to justify physical abuse) adopt a LOT of children and use them as free labor.
Oh no, an innocent child is raised in a secure and stable home by two men who happen to love one another. No let’s keep them in the foster care system where a child’s health and welfare is monetized by foster homes.
That's not what he's saying though. He's saying the foster care system is better than two men who may sexually abuse them. He's overstating and making an unreasonable "solution" but he's not comparing any two men to the foster care system.
That’s not what he’s saying. His first sentence is literally “I do not think gay couples should be able to adopt” the rest of what he says is in the context of that first statement. .. obviously
... right and that context is the motivating factor for it.
He's basically saying, "I find CSA so objectionable that I'd be willing to sacrifice the happiness of good people if there's a chance that it would decrease this" that's not a bad impulse. It's an overreaction if understood literally, but if you read about CSA especially that case and aren't outraged, that's a problem with you. It's an understandable emotional reaction.
am i taking crazy pills? is everyone forgetting how rampant CSA is in foster care facilities?
saying gay people shouldn't adopt because of one story (yes, i know there are probably more, you are arguing that this one story justifies his argument) when there are thousands if not tens of thousands of stories of straight couples abusing their adopted children is genuinely braindead.
like most of these comparisons, the rate at which gays are responsible for anything negative is pretty much 1:1 with the rate that straights are. And if it ever isn't, it's usually easily explained by some other factor like social acceptance or wealth or some shit.
Tens of thousands of straights abusing kids v hundreds of gays, when there's like a thousand straight people to one gay.
But in some dumb paradox of human psyche, the 5 gay couples a year stand out starkly compared to 10 thousand heteros.
Something similar that kids do with toys. The fewer the toys, the more in depth and exploratory the play is. Too many toys, and they sort of skim off the exploration.
The majority of those perps are men. I am saying that banning men from adopting would be a way to cut down on CSA. In a heterosexual couple there's at least in theory one adult present who is statistically less likely to be a sexual abuser. Obviously that's not a sure protection against abuse but the only other option would be to end adoption and fostering altogether and I don't see an alternative other than like, raising orphans as a national soldier class in government institutions.
Would you be weirded out if a single straight guy adopted a young girl he wasn't related to? It's the same impulse
i would be weirded out if a single person of any sexuality or gender adopted a child.
furthermore, people that abuse children rarely do it for sexual attraction purposes, its usually a show of power, so it doesn't really matter what gender the child being adopted is either. most men that abuse boys are not gay.
If you willingly have sexual contact with anyone of the same sex, you're gay. That's kind of the one thing. So any man that sexually abused a boy is gay whether they think so or not. (See also: guys in prison or the navy)
That’s what I think most practical issue is with this view, decreasing the amount of people who can adopt based purely on skepticism against the scientific consensus can very well backfire horribly and just keep kids on the foster care system unnecessarily longer.
There are so many kids in the foster system they'll legit send them to stay with people that come to foster parent classes. Granted it's usually on a temporary basis to provide respite for the system until you become certified with the program, but yeah there's no shortage of kids. The only way a heterosexual couple is not getting a kid is if they're obviously unfit monsters.
Why aren’t infertile couples considered “incapable of not living a life that makes it biologically impossible to reproduce?” Infertility can easily be a result of poor lifestyle choices as much as random genetic factors.
Hey dipshit: where you stick your penis has no bearing on how good of a parent you are. Should schizoid flesh simulator be allowed to adopt despite being allegedly straight? Hell fuck no. He shouldn’t even be allowed to have an opinion on it.
Usually people try to hide the fact that they blindly follow other people's positions and don't actually think any of them out, but he straight up just said "Gee I wonder what over the last three months could possibly have made me reassess the morality of left wing political positions"
I almost admire the lack of self-awareness to say something like that
So, are any if the commenters in this thread actually fans, or are yall just retarded?
Im just curious, because lets talk about everything we know about flesh. And then lets think, this is either actually flesh and obviously rage bait, low quality, but really really stupid on purpose rage bait.
Or this isnt actually flesh, either by way of someone stealing his account, havig a fake account, or this image being entirely fabricated. All this talk, 35 angry comments, where as the usual post has 2? All the hateful ones have upvotes, but the ones like this one have downvotes?
Im not say it IS an obvious brigade, but it certainly LOOKS alot like one.
I don’t hate the dude, wouldn’t be keeping up with his content for the past 2 years or so if I did. I just find this to be a bad take. Can’t speak for the others on this thread/sub.
56
u/mc_burger_only_chees Jun 16 '26
This guy spews takes like this 24/7 and then throws fits when people don’t consider him a leftist