>>106594716>She presented a situation where she NEEDED money to help with cancer treatmentShe presented a situation where the money were refunded because she has a BF.
>If she is benefiting from people giving her money due to a situation she presented and then the people feel like the situation is differentToo bad the problem isn't this. The refund reason was because she had a BF, not because he believed she had cancer.
The BF status is a personal thing that doesn't have anything to do with your job and how you get paid.
The refund person had his reason, she didn't like it, that's the whole post. If we have to speak about rights, she has the right to talk about it, he had the right to refund. So it's pretty much useless to discuss about this matter.
>>106594737Pointing out a problem and then side with that problem and so against the person who's getting damage by the problem, makes you part of the problem. Do you understand it now?
>>106594920>By begging online because her man can't or won't pay for her cancer treatments?She gave entertainment for the moneys, it's not really begging. It's a job, you work and get payments and tips.
>Yeah it sounds to me like she should have chosen a better manGood, that's your problem. You have a perspective of what a relationship really is and you think everyone must think in this way, while relationship are managed by the 2 (or more) people involved it, not by you if you're not involved. So your pointing out what her boyfriend is doing or not doing is just pretending to know better than them, and thinking that her man isn't enough just basing it all on yourself.
> It isn't some small portion, it is the overwhelming majority who simp for women they think they can get withNever said it's small portion, i just stated it's a problem and that you shouldn't use it as an argument if is the exact topic of discussion, or at least part of it.
