As if male-female relationships weren’t complicated enough already. From Eric Peters at ericpetersautos.com:
The great divide between the “vaccinated” – and those who were prudent enough to avoid the “vaccines,” being wary of the “safe and effective” assurances of the government and the pharmaceutical cartels – extends beyond the intellectual into the reproductive.
A recent article – which, interestingly, is impossible to find using Google to search for it – written by a woman who laments not being able to find a man to date who isn’t “vaccinated” – is worth reading. [Unvaccinated Single Women Say ‘No’ To Vaccinated Single Men, by Laura J.Wellington]
If you can find it.
She writes that she – and other women of reproductive age she knows – are reluctant to get involved with men who might not be capable of reproducing, having been “vaccinated.”
Men who haven’t been “vaccinated” express the same reasonable sentiments.
They are reasonable because what we already know about the “vaccines” is that they aren’t, for openers. That people were not only subjected to immense pressure to take them, but were lied to about them. They weren’t just led to believe that if they took the “vaccines,” they would not get and could not spread the “virus.” They were explicitly told exactly that. A case of fraud – as by gross misrepresentation of the facts. Of a piece with the way the “case” fatality rate wasn’t adjusted to reflect the infection fatality rate; i.e., the fact that most of the people who got the infection did not die from it. This truth was systematically withheld from the population – to protect the lie that a “deadly pandemic” was afoot.
STRAIGHT LINE LOGIC 