Pizzagate Subverse Network
/v/AskPizzagate – Pizzagate-related questions
/v/pizzagatewhatever – anything Pizzagate-related
/v/PizzagateMemes – Pizzagate memes
/v/pizzagatemods – meta concerns and Pizzagate moderation discussion
For Newcomers
Submission Rules
See also "subverse best practices"
Policy on linking dangerous research
1: Relevance: Posts must be directly relevant to investigation of Pizzagate: the sexual/physical abuse and/or murder of children by elites, child trafficking organized by elites, and/or cover-up of these activities and/or the protection/assistance provided to the people who engage in said activities. See definition of Pizzagate and examples of relevant posts.
2: Empiricism: EACH factual claim that is not common knowledge must be sourced with a link. If you ask a question: Explain what led to your question and provide sources. If you present opinion/argument, connect your dots and provide sources for them. Avoid baseless speculation. ALL posts must include at least one link.
3: Clarity: All titles must adequately describe post content and must establish direct relevance to pizzagate. EACH link in your post must include a description of content and how the link relates to the post (except when markup is used to embed links in the specific text they support).
4: Meta submissions and general discussion submissions without sources will be removed. Please submit indirectly relevant posts to /v/pizzagatewhatever and unsourced questions to /v/AskPizzagate. Sourced activism / publicity posts and memes are allowed. Posts about the subverse itself go to /v/pizzagatemods.
5: You must label NSFW posts (“Not safe for work”; for example gore, nudity etc.) as such when submitting.
6: No Link Posts -- Only editable submissions made with the "Discuss" button are allowed. "Link" submissions have been banned by the community for the reasons described here. Link posts will be immediately removed.
Adspam, illegal content, and personal info about Voat subscribers will be removed, and the offender will be banned.
Moderator Rules and Removal Explanations
Submission Removal Log
WARNING! Due to the nature of this investigation, clicking some links could result in opening incriminating material. Always practice common sense before clicking links, and make sure you're browsing safely.
Use archive.is to archive sources.
view the rest of the comments →
[–] Eazyg2002 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
chicken lover
http://odps.org/glossword/index.php?a=term&t=70a4ae9caeb0a26b6aa4b1a65bac
If both meanings are true, it is a possibility that #chickenlover comment was in reference the father in that pic.
Could this second meaning have been added more recently to debunk the theory? There are acticles using this source as definitive proof of the first meaning, which seems strange https://www.counter-currents.com/2016/12/pizzagate/
Is there another source for the meaning of chicken lover?
[–] rush22 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
The second meaning is true. It's an older term though and not really in popular use these days. Gay men refer(red) to young vulnerable guys that are new to the scene as "chickens". Older guys that chase them are "chickenhawks". "Twink" is more popular these days although it has slightly different meaning.
Keep in mind:
a) Being attracted to younger men (or women) isn't the same as being a pedophile. There's probably more "barely legal" straight porn out there in terms of volume.
b) When being gay was less accepted, there was (and still is to some extent) a substantial influx of young vulnerable gay guys confused about their sexuality that run away from home or get kicked out of their house. If they're lucky, they find themselves a group of friends and mentors that can support them and don't get preyed upon--but they're still "chickens".
[–] SherlockMcGyver ago
Negative, that is the meaning of that term. It is quite well known and used in the gay community, which seems pretty accepting of pedos.