💰 Grifter Nick Fuentes / Nicholas Joseph Fuentes / der America First Pürrer / "Nick the Knife" - CatboyKami's ex. Flipped fed asset after January 6th. Groypers are pardoned for January 6th, still a fag. Kept Ali Akbar, brown muslim boy-hungry pedophile, around groypers knowing what he was. Hates white women more than blacks and jews.

  • 🏰 The Fediverse is up. If you know, you know.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
the mayor of miami beach, steven meiner (yes he's jewish), made a xitter post on the club meetup, wherein nick got a big heckin' ratio:
1768883676384.png
(link, A)
the rest of the 3000 replies are nick's mentally challenged fans dogpiling on the mayor.
 
onebigone said:
Whites the only group of people that excessively breed and castrate too
Click to expand...
The largest market for fucked up inbred looking dogs are niggers breeding the most frog-looking, deformed "pit bulls" you can imagine. Josh did a gumroad vid about it some time back iirc but this shit has been somehow making it onto my social media feed for the past 5 years or so. Here's an "exotic bully."

1768883808667.png 1768883897062.png

Look at exotic bully kennels and you see non-white hands more often than not.

1768883856085.png 1768883999508.png 1768884268813.png

That's to say nothing of backyard breeding for dogfighting, a true nigger and spic "sport" despite the stereotype of the nazi rednecks running a dogfighting ring. 43 arrested, one of them white, the rest blacks and Hispanics. Just an example.
https://www.ktre.com/2025/11/24/ide...on-county-dogfighting-investigation-released/

Idk why you mentioned castration as that is the opposite of breeding.
 
Big Miss Steak said:
The largest market for fucked up inbred looking dogs are niggers breeding the most frog-looking, deformed "pit bulls" you can imagine. Josh did a gumroad vid about it some time back iirc but this shit has been somehow making it onto my social media feed for the past 5 years or so. Here's an "exotic bully."

View attachment 8448292 View attachment 8448299

Look at exotic bully kennels and you see non-white hands more often than not.

View attachment 8448298 View attachment 8448302 View attachment 8448314

That's to say nothing of backyard breeding for dogfighting, a true nigger and spic "sport" despite the stereotype of the nazi rednecks running a dogfighting ring. 43 arrested, one of them white, the rest blacks and Hispanics. Just an example.
https://www.ktre.com/2025/11/24/ide...on-county-dogfighting-investigation-released/

Idk why you mentioned castration as that is the opposite of breeding.
Click to expand...
*selectively ignores hunrends of years of Europeans breeding dogs * ok bud

You realize baby maulers are a European creation, right?

Also breeding deformed animals just to have em be little props and accessories in your life and then Castraring them is abusive, and almost psychotic and , it's only a white pipol thing (specifically a white American thing). White pipol in general are very mentally diseased because of all the thousands of years of abuses they've commited in their conquest of the world.
 

Attachments

  • 1000198383.jpg
    1000198383.jpg
    13.1 KB · Views: 44
Last edited:
he cited the catholics church for his positions isnt the win hes thinking it is lol hes technically right by strict dictionary words for pedophile but society uses it for a broader definition nobody in real life i ever seen uses the word hebephile
 
Sicko Hunter said:
If you are sexually attracted to a 14 year old as an adult you're a pedophile. There is no room for discussion that's just what you are.
Click to expand...
But this isn't true and you all demanding it be is the problem. There needs to be a specific term for people who are somehow "attracted" (not convinced it's wise to give child rapists an unproven out where they can claim inherently fixed biology) to prepubescent children. It's distinct because it's a fundamentally different "misfiring."

A prepubescent child can't be fertile, which is what our monkey brains would use to choose a mate. If you're 25 or something, a 16-year-old girl should be as equally off-limits as an 8-year-old because they're both kids. But 16-year-old girls can have fully developed bodies, identical to a 24-year-old woman's. The attraction to that alone doesn't go from evil to normal as both are fixed; the attraction is there for a reason: procreation.

But 16-year-old girls are still clearly little girls, regardless of their bodies. That's why it's weirdo shit for adults to seek them out, or even talk about how attractive they can be. The instant a girl is fertile shouldn't be the mark of her womanhood. We have laws like age of consent for a reason. Plenty of creeps who seek them out would probably prey on prepubescent girls, too, of course.

tl;dr: There are definitely 16-year-old girls who could go clubbing with their older sister's ID, no problem. A 23-year-old guy hitting on her isn't a pedophile or trying to fuck kids. He would be a creep for scoping out girls at the local high school, though. An 8-year-old could never gain club entry and even if she could, anyone attracted to her would tell she's 8 and very obviously be a pedophilic weirdo.

FWIW, I am of the opinion that the push for mixing pedophile with anyone who dates/likes someone younger isn't driven by the hags referenced (though they love it, too). I think it's the Queer Theory/LGBTQ+ machine to soften the seriousness altogether. When "pedo" means anything from Epstein to guys who've dated petite girls with smaller breasts, Trump, even dude's who prefer shaved pussies, pedophiles can blend in easier. It seems everything indicates you're a pedo except the explicit attraction to prepubescent children.

That's why they push for "MAP" (minor attracted person) because it widens the range and dilutes the needed specificity to classify evil. A 17-year-old is a minor in most of the country, but some states it's anyone under 21 (full legal responsibility). With this phrasing, plenty of ages as a "MAP" might be "who cares?", especially if people don't know it's the linguistic sleight-of-hand replacement for pedo. I could see them introducing the term in schools and having the kids call one another "MAP" to further dilute it, tbh.

But if "pedophile" remains what it's supposed to be, attraction to prepubescent children, there's no guesswork. It's always straight to the wood chipper, both for those who have this attraction and those who try to defend it. And you don't even need to act on it for normies to hate you!

They want there to be no meaningful distinction and you're all basically doing the work for them, IMO.

ETA: I didn't watch his video, know little about Nick, and am unsure of his history. I've just been paying attention to what I see as a deliberate push to destigmatize the term "pedophile" online.

The DSM no longer classifies "pedophilia" itself as a condition, it's now "pedophilic disorder." It requires you to have either molested a child or have such internal stress about your "condition" (wanting to fuck little kids, which shouldn't be a condition we allow to exist, IMO) that it causes problems in your life.

Thus, if you want to fuck little kids, but society doesn't hyperfocus on stigmatizing you for exactly that, you're actually cured by us. It places the onus on society to ensure their life is stressful "just for being who they are." You know, exactly what they've primed us for years to feel terrible about doing? With gays, then trannies, and *drum roll* the pedos are on deck. It's the same playbook that got homosexuality out of the DSM and I'd prefer we not let it happen to the diddlers. My aim will hyperfocus on actual pedophiles and we need society to make this distinction.
 
Last edited:
Seafarer said:
Nick Fuentes has announced that he plans to take a sponsorship for "Advantage Gold", a gold company notable for their sponsorship of ultra-Zionist Mark Levin and which is run by a literal Jewish gold merchant named Kirill Zagalsky:
Click to expand...
Far right American white nationalist activist collaborates with..... a Jewish person?
Screenshot 2026-01-20 123653.png
Didn't he say "Jews have no place in western civilization."? That the Holocaust didn't happen and if it did it's not that bad?

Nick can walk right up to me being like "Hello fellow white caucasian male!" and I'll go to the bathroom to check if I am indeed caucasian and a male.
 
JaneThough said:
WTF did I just read
Click to expand...
The logical reason why combining these different terms into one is bad? Clear examples of the need for distinction and obvious harm without it? But that's only if you want to make it more difficult for pedophiles to harm children. We already have terms that differentiate these things. "Nah, fuck that. They're both the same thing!" Did you think there'd be no harm in watering down what "woman" means, too?

I suspect for many who bang the drum loudest on this issue, they're just actual retards, but love moral superiority (same as "show some fucking EMPATHY" people). Some will be the hag women, for sure. But others I think are likely projecting their own weird, guilty thoughts on this.

The only person I know who constantly calls people pedophiles, references Trump as a pedophile, admonishes Trump voters for supporting a pedophile, etc. was rumored to have dated an underage girl when he was like 22. Perhaps a coincidence. But it seems reasonable since there's no reason to deny the utility in the distinction if you actually want less harm to kids.

If attraction to post-pubescent 16-year-olds is equally evil as 8-year-old prepubescent children, popularize hebephile so it's equally synonymous with evil. But terms that specify a predator's victim profile are important for prevention and safeguarding. Either you care about that or you don't.

Anyway, whatever. The thread is for talking shit, not deep discussion, so I'll dip. Don't be mean to me. I'm only 8.
 
Twix Eatr said:
The logical reason why combining these different terms into one is bad? Clear examples of the need for distinction and obvious harm without it? But that's only if you want to make it more difficult for pedophiles to harm children. We already have terms that differentiate these things. "Nah, fuck that. They're both the same thing!" Did you think there'd be no harm in watering down what "woman" means, too?

I suspect for many who bang the drum loudest on this issue, they're just actual retards, but love moral superiority (same as "show some fucking EMPATHY" people). Some will be the hag women, for sure. But others I think are likely projecting their own weird, guilty thoughts on this.

The only person I know who constantly calls people pedophiles, references Trump as a pedophile, admonishes Trump voters for supporting a pedophile, etc. was rumored to have dated an underage girl when he was like 22. Perhaps a coincidence. But it seems reasonable since there's no reason to deny the utility in the distinction if you actually want less harm to kids.

If attraction to post-pubescent 16-year-olds is equally evil as 8-year-old prepubescent children, popularize hebephile so it's equally synonymous with evil. But terms that specify a predator's victim profile are important for prevention and safeguarding. Either you care about that or you don't.

Anyway, whatever. The thread is for talking shit, not deep discussion, so I'll dip. Don't be mean to me. I'm only 8.
Click to expand...
Just don’t fuck minors. I said it all in 4 words and could have even cut one.
 
Twix Eatr said:
The logical reason why combining these different terms into one is bad? Clear examples of the need for distinction and obvious harm without it? But that's only if you want to make it more difficult for pedophiles to harm children. We already have terms that differentiate these things. "Nah, fuck that. They're both the same thing!" Did you think there'd be no harm in watering down what "woman" means, too?

I suspect for many who bang the drum loudest on this issue, they're just actual retards, but love moral superiority (same as "show some fucking EMPATHY" people). Some will be the hag women, for sure. But others I think are likely projecting their own weird, guilty thoughts on this.

The only person I know who constantly calls people pedophiles, references Trump as a pedophile, admonishes Trump voters for supporting a pedophile, etc. was rumored to have dated an underage girl when he was like 22. Perhaps a coincidence. But it seems reasonable since there's no reason to deny the utility in the distinction if you actually want less harm to kids.

If attraction to post-pubescent 16-year-olds is equally evil as 8-year-old prepubescent children, popularize hebephile so it's equally synonymous with evil. But terms that specify a predator's victim profile are important for prevention and safeguarding. Either you care about that or you don't.

Anyway, whatever. The thread is for talking shit, not deep discussion, so I'll dip. Don't be mean to me. I'm only 8.
Click to expand...

The problem with this logic is that it's irrelevant in the context of Fuentes, who is using it to defend a pedophile who trafficked children as young as 8 years old. I don't necessarily disagree with your argument (other than "REE IT'S REALLY THE TROONS NORMALIZING PEDOPHILIA" in a thread about one of the most prolific right-wing streamers on the planet calling a child trafficking Mossad asset "based") but it's neither here nor there. And frankly, while I agree that the distinction is important from a clinical position, it's not really that pressing an issue in a public context. That's the kind of position you fight tooth and nail for when the general population is actually in agreement that having sex with children is bad, which is not where we are (as evidenced by Fuentes)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom