💰 Grifter "Mad at the Internet" - a/k/a My Psychotherapy Sessions

  • 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

I,Hypocrite goes in against Turkey Tom... because I,Hypocrite agrees with Sneako that child marriage should be normalized. He argues this by saying that a brother and sister relationship would be okay if one of them were sterile since that addresses the majority concern about incest and that a 24 year old marrying a 16 year old is less morally depraved than someone viewing pornography.

EDIT: It's also worth reading the comments on the video. Not only do the majority agree, often in a creepy way, but the few dissenters get a personal reply from I,Hypocrite where he calls them a midwit and/or boasts that he deleted comments in order to stop speculation about his own relationships.
 
Last edited:
Sam Hyde liking Pearl Davis isn't surprising. It's a well known fact that misogynistic men(tm) have the worst taste in women.
Why? Well because their grievances with women are never as principled as they like to say they are. And trash like Pearl soothe these personal grievances, making it easy to speculate that they're petty things like women not agreeing with them or something.
 
Big Mommy said:
https://youtube.com/watch?v=NTAhN7HmT8s
I,Hypocrite goes in against Turkey Tom... because I,Hypocrite agrees with Sneako that child marriage should be normalized. He argues this by saying that a brother and sister relationship would be okay if one of them were sterile since that addresses the majority concern about incest and that a 24 year old marrying a 16 year old is less morally depraved than someone viewing pornography.

EDIT: It's also worth reading the comments on the video. Not only do the majority agree, often in a creepy way, but the few dissenters get a personal reply from I,Hypocrite where he calls them a midwit and/or that he deleted comments to stop speculation about his own relationships.
Click to expand...
Skimmed the video. You are being hyperbolic about the 24/16 example.
And guessing from the context, the first argument seems to be a refutation of the incest=genetic problem children point that TT is bringing up.

Also, in general agree with him. I support the Romeo and Juliet laws currently in my state. Thus have no issue with a 16 year old and 18 year old marrying, at the youngest with biggest age gap. The issue with AOC is it gets into a whole bunch of legalistic rabbitholes with exceptions and trying to make precise definition. Having a specific age of consent/adulthood is a liberal institution that separates people from their families and encourages them to separate and live debauched lives, look at the Mintsalad situation "She is 18. I told her to leave the house as soon as possible, for whatever reason!"
It wouldn't be perfect but I would rather have her parents be like "Despite being over 18 she is not ready to marry yet." than her getting all the responsibilities of an adult dropped on her at her 18th birthday.

ps. I also have similar views about other age laws too: drinking, renting a car, smoking, driving etc.
 
Col said:
Skimmed the video. You are being hyperbolic about the 24/16 example.
And guessing from the context, the first argument seems to be a refutation of the incest=genetic problem children point that TT is bringing up.

Also, in general agree with him. I support the Romeo and Juliet laws currently in my state. Thus have no issue with a 16 year old and 18 year old marrying, at the youngest with biggest age gap. The issue with AOC is it gets into a whole bunch of legalistic rabbitholes with exceptions and trying to make precise definition. Having a specific age of consent/adulthood is a liberal institution that separates people from their families and encourages them to separate and live debauched lives, look at the Mintsalad situation "She is 18. I told her to leave the house as soon as possible, for whatever reason!"
It wouldn't be perfect but I would rather have her parents be like "Despite being over 18 she is not ready to marry yet." than her getting all the responsibilities of an adult dropped on her at her 18th birthday.

ps. I also have similar views about other age laws too: drinking, renting a car, smoking, driving etc.
Click to expand...
People trained in identifying grooming/abuse will tell you that with one party under 18 and a 4 year or greater age gap, it is an automatic abuse situation. There are plenty of well-meaning parents who are ill-equipped to identify the harm being done to their children in multiple arenas, so I'm reluctant to err on the side of letting anyone off the hook about perving on the kinder. Overly cautious is a far better position to take.
Shapes said:
No Slop September
Click to expand...
Well said, and I would add that even eating clean can get you in trouble, like the occasional E.coli announcements made w/r/t spinach and lettuce [just some recent examples].
 
Col said:
Skimmed the video. You are being hyperbolic about the 24/16 example.
And guessing from the context, the first argument seems to be a refutation of the incest=genetic problem children point that TT is bringing up.

Also, in general agree with him. I support the Romeo and Juliet laws currently in my state. Thus have no issue with a 16 year old and 18 year old marrying, at the youngest with biggest age gap. The issue with AOC is it gets into a whole bunch of legalistic rabbitholes with exceptions and trying to make precise definition. Having a specific age of consent/adulthood is a liberal institution that separates people from their families and encourages them to separate and live debauched lives, look at the Mintsalad situation "She is 18. I told her to leave the house as soon as possible, for whatever reason!"
It wouldn't be perfect but I would rather have her parents be like "Despite being over 18 she is not ready to marry yet." than her getting all the responsibilities of an adult dropped on her at her 18th birthday.

ps. I also have similar views about other age laws too: drinking, renting a car, smoking, driving etc.
Click to expand...

1722581654682.png

I'm not being hyperbolic. You probably shouldn't skim if you are going to argue something. I agree with Romeo and Juliet laws too (18/16) but he is literally arguing for parental involvement in marrying a child to a fully-grown adult. In the comments there is a girl who is talking about how being married off at 15 to a 19 year old and how that was the worst thing that ever happened to her, people reply she would have whored her way through her teens regardless, and that her parents must be bad people. He says incest is okay if they can't have kids because that is the majority argument against why incest is wrong. He claims all his views are backed up by The Bible but gives no examples of The Bible backs up his views.
 
Big Mommy said:
View attachment 6262846

I'm not being hyperbolic. You probably shouldn't skim if you are going to argue something. I agree with Romeo and Juliet laws too (18/16) but he is literally arguing for parental involvement in marrying a child to a fully-grown adult. In the comments there is a girl who is talking about how being married off at 15 to a 19 year old and how that was the worst thing that ever happened to her, people reply she would have whored her way through her teens regardless, and that her parents must be bad people. He says incest is okay if they can't have kids because that is the majority argument against why incest is wrong. He claims all his views are backed up by The Bible but gives no examples of The Bible backs up his views.
Click to expand...
No i watched the exact part with the 16/24 year old example. His exact argument is they had a happy marriage for decades and then asks if it would be right to come to the woman and tell her that her marriage was wrong and should have never happened.
The point is not should 16 and 24 year olds get married, it is if it should be made a categorical rule that all marriages of this age range should be shamed and fought against.
I'm a Silly said:
People trained in identifying grooming/abuse will tell you that with one party under 18 and a 4 year or greater age gap, it is an automatic abuse situation. There are plenty of well-meaning parents who are ill-equipped to identify the harm being done to their children in multiple arenas, so I'm reluctant to err on the side of letting anyone off the hook about perving on the kinder. Overly cautious is a far better position to take.
Click to expand...
This is why I hate AOC arguments. It immediately becomes an argument about children. It is never taken in the opposite direction. There are 20, 30, 40, 50 etc. year old people that should never get married or reproduce because they are not ready for it. My argument is not "marry them young and fast" my argument is that having an exact cut off date for adulthood itself no matter where you choose it is detrimental.

Also the parent thing is just shitty, "There are shitty parents so therefore this parental decision should be made by the government for everyone." Is what the argument's conclusion is.

I am also highly dismissive of the first part, because when you dig into it the premises they are working under it is pretty much always progressive power dynamic type theories where they think that relationships need to have a equity in power and decisions and all that other stuff. And not to go with "Every marriage in the past was more ethical." But I mean in the not too recent past we had teenagers being married in highschool under this idea of the family and community being the failsafes for marriage prospects, if you look into your family history you can probably find a grandparent or great grandparent who married in highschool(if they even went to highschool) and you can't really go and call your other grandparent an abuser.
 
Cringestorian X said:
I don't know if this has been shared before but Turkey Tom reacted to his MATI segment
Click to expand...
Can anyone explain to me why I am expected to not care when two people with millions of followers nod their heads along with a GROSS, EVIL retard tranny blaming the Kiwi Farms for multiple federal crimes perpetrated against them? "omg jewsh.. ur BURNING BRIDGES... this is a SPIRAL". like, nigger, if my 'friends' are the ones say "yeah I can believe the kiwi farms muder-raped that tranny to death" then what the fuck am I keeping a bridge for? It's so fucking stupid.
 
does turkey tom suck the girlcock because he's a fag or is it because he wants his jewtube money
i'm suspecting both
 
Null said:
then what the fuck am I keeping a bridge for? It's so fucking stupid.
Click to expand...

I cant keep the time line straight but didnt you "burn bridges" with Dax/juju and then burn it with Ethan ralph and then saint lord jim? and let us not forget wise in social interaction while showering nick.....nick is the worst josh he was shower chatting with you as a total chad no homo sexual move.
 
northstar747 said:
I cant keep the time line straight but didnt you "burn bridges" with Dax/juju and then burn it with Ethan ralph and then saint lord jim? and let us not forget wise in social interaction while showering nick.....nick is the worst josh he was shower chatting with you as a total chad no homo sexual move.
Click to expand...
Josh needs to lay off the Xanax. All Ralph did was make a corn joke...
 
Big Mommy said:
EDIT: It's also worth reading the comments on the video. Not only do the majority agree, often in a creepy way, but the few dissenters get a personal reply from I,Hypocrite where he calls them a midwit and/or boasts that he deleted comments in order to stop speculation about his own relationships.
Click to expand...
I,Hypocrite is one of those faggots who the more he talks, the more he proves how retarded he is. "Christians Values" Bitch please. You hang around degenerates, taking marching orders from Nick Fuentes, and will happily flag down anyone he doesn't like. Lying is a sin motherfucker.
 
northstar747 said:
I cant keep the time line straight but didnt you "burn bridges" with Dax/juju and then burn it with Ethan ralph and then saint lord jim? and let us not forget wise in social interaction while showering nick.....nick is the worst josh he was shower chatting with you as a total chad no homo sexual move.
Click to expand...
No. Juju was pedoguarding Digibro and Riley told Josh that he "was the kid nobody wanted on the party" by proxy on discord. Ethan Ralph burned every fucking bridge he has and is dying alone in Mexico, and Jim is a pussy who couldn't handle getting doxed. And Rackets is a drug addicted sociopath who let his child consume cocaine, and hates having a thread. Again, a recurring theme.

Josh does have a "You do as I say or fuck off" in the forum, which works well to avoid petty fighting. That attitude and what seems like frothing-rage can make people like Tom assume things without the minimum research, which in theory he gets handsomely paid for. A main problem is also not having an X account with DMs, because those lazy niggers cannot even be bothered to open their accounts in here and got to DM's and be like like "Hey Null I'm this Internet Famous cocksucker, is this thing about trannies you said true?"

The only bridge I can think of right now, My dear leader unnecesarily burned is with X. He should have realized it's just a bitch of a platform for DMs and announcments and not an extension of the forum. If he gets unbanned, I hope he really learns you can never trust BAZED ELON, or other BAZED platforms too much.
 
bird.up said:
does turkey tom suck the girlcock because he's a fag or is it because he wants his jewtube money
Click to expand...
I'd say mainly the money. But he's a zoomer and not a formally trained investigator, journalist or lawyer. I'm not either, and it shows in my work here. And Turkey is much younger. Being a competent investigator and "truth-layer" is not something you can be without any hard, boring work and dull reading and I'd say even some formal training. That's why he's a drama channel, but people expect more of him than what he can do. Really, the degradation of the true journalistic profession is one of the most depressing things of current time.
Col said:
This is why I hate AOC arguments
Click to expand...
I'll give you a hint, because people seemed to not have caught on yet.

AOC arguments, lolicon arguments and child tranny arguments, in public, are entrapments. There's no way to argue about them without saying something, someone could interpret your arguments as you being a sicko. AOC, oh you want childs to marry? Sicko. Oh, you think the government should decide when we should fuck legaly(She was only 17 and 364 days)? Sicko. Lolicon good? Sicko. Lolicon bad? You restrain artistic freedom, and nobody is being hurt by drawings, and you are a bootlicking sicko.

You get the idea. Don't play in the shit pit, if you want to remain clean.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom