💰 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
Sneako is just a gross muslim who worships a gross arab rapeape pedophile. I don't understand how this is complicated.

Sneako is completely willing and able to go on the Internet and routinely defend an adult male of any age marrying (with her father's consent) and having sex with a girl of any age (so long as she has started menustration, which occurs in girls as young as 9). Sneako is willing to do this because:

1. He is brown.
2. He is a Muhammadeen.
3. Muhammad is a pedophile and he himself married a 6 year old and consummated at 9.

This isn't hard. This isn't debate bro logic. You just say "You are a brown muslim pedophile" and you stop talking to him. There is no intellectual platform to debate a brown arab rapeape on.

P.S. Edit: Islam is another great indicator of how culture is downstream of race. Bosnians and Albanians are some of the most moderate Muslims in the world. Albania itself has no laws prohibiting hate speech, genocide denial, or even blasphemy. Turkey is also very moderate. The three things these countries have in common is they are either European or heavily mixed with Europeans. Turks in Istanbul can look fucking Slavic because they're so intermixed with Bulgarians and Greeks. You won't frequently see a Hijab in European Turkey anymore than you'll see something like fundamentalist baptists wearing jean skirts in the US.

Meanwhile, once you're out of Turkey, you're in hell. Just south of it is Syria and Iraq.
 
In regards to the genetic freak that probably would have killed Angela Carini during the Olympics:

burn-the-heretic-kill-the-mutant-purge-the-unclean.png
 
Preacher ✝ said:
Turkey is only preferable by comparison. Personally if I had to go over to that part of the world I'm staying in Serbia. They may not be Catholic but at least they're Orthodox and I can visit the Zastava plant.
Click to expand...
yes obviously. I've been to Istanbul and it's yet another dirty overcrowded brown city, but I didn't feel unsafe there. You just get hassled by carpet salesmen. You could not pay me millions to travel through Syria.
 
Col said:
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.
Click to expand...

Yeah but categorical rules are there for a reason. Just because there are exceptions doesn't mean we throw out a system that is designed to protect the vulnerable. Some 14 years olds are better drivers than people twice their age, even with all the experience, but does that mean we should put an asterisks beside that law? Who judges if someone is allowed to be an exception and should the person who okays it be held accountable if something goes wrong? In the case of age of consent there are plenty of shitty parents who will swear on their lives they're doing what is best for their kid but they're either not able to judge correctly or they don't care. Do you trust the government to judge if an exception should be allowed? Bringing historical cases in muddies it more - different times where community was much stronger giving people support, you are more likely to live near extended family, benefits in terms of economic factors, and nearly without exception all women were allowed to do was get married/manage a home/have kids and had little to no protection under the law, became their husband's property. And just because it was normalized doesn't mean it was good - great grandma might have preferred to have married later in life, to someone her own age, and we'll never know what effect that had on them.

Are there cases where a 16 year old could marry a 24 year old without any negative consequences? Sure, I guess it's possible. But I think those genuine exceptions have to be incredibly rare. What would that exception look like - how would those people meet, how did they fall in love, is it a marriage borne out of love or something else? Is it something that 16 year old will come to regret after a decade with perspective and more mental maturity? Why move the law because of a one in a million potential exception when the odds of it being something sinister are far more high? And where is the new arbritary line, is there one at all - should 12 year olds be allowed to wed someone in their 40s just because they hit puberty, the parents gave the thumbs up, etc? And even if you change the law you're not going to change society's opinions about it, a couple where one has wrinkles and the other is wearing a Barbie backpack is always going to rightfullly raise eyebrows.

Col said:
This is why I hate AOC arguments.
Click to expand...
Me too. I hate arguing these things because even when you come from a genuine position it feels like you're arguing something gross that only benefits gross people. Someone putting out a video where he agrees with a dude who can't even put numbers to what he is arguing but uses the excuse "uhhh Muhammed had a baby gf so it's a-ok" and calls any dissenters "mid-wits" who "cannot understand my arguments" and deletes comments speculating on his own situation is really highly suspect in my opinion, and I guarantee you that the majority of people who are agreeing with him aren't doing it after careful consideration of the various points, they're doing it because they are attracted to minors and fantasize about having a barefoot baby wife. I find it hard to imagine why someone would care to argue for changing the laws to allow lower ages to consent unless they're in a scenario where that sort of thing already affects them or where they are looking to find such a scenario - and that is highly suspect.

To clarify I don't think you're suspect, plus you argued the points better than I,Hypocrite did. I just find the whole thing skeevy - if I'm being generous I,Hypocrite is arguing the point because he hates Turkey Tom or likes Sneako, if I'm not being generous I think he is acting like a creep. Regardless of which position he is in his attitude to it feels very fucking gross.

TheLostMarxBrotherFucko said:
I,Hypocrite is one of those faggots who the more he talks, the more he proves how retarded he is.
Click to expand...

I definitely get that feeling. From the way he operates his Twitter (stolen memes without comment posted 30x a day) and that particular video I get the feeling he is very self-important and believes himself to be far more intelligent than he actually is. Reminds me of Cog, if Cog had stumbled unto success.
 
It always gives me a giggle when dumb people hitchhike through the third world because they believe the "they’re just like you and me" bullshit and end up dead.
 
Sneed S. McSneedensen said:
I haven't watched this yet and I just know this little hump-backed troon chaser with a gay ass earing is going to deflect and dodge like we are watching Finnster.

Edit: He sort of did this at 2:15 in being more concerned that Null said the no-no word, "tranny", instead of Kris Tyson actually grooming and sexting minors. Other than that, he pretty much bent the knee. Good to know he still worships her prostate. W her prostate, Turkey TIM.
Click to expand...
Opinion Invalidated. Why? You aren't a 21 year old millionaire like Turkey Tim:
1722607875935.png (A)
 
Col said:
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.
Click to expand...
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
Click to expand...
I don't know how guilty I am of making an appeal to tradition or the past, but the quote above exemplifies why I think it is a bad idea; if anything, the age of consent should be raised to 25, when biological brain development reaches true adulthood. We live long enough on average that this makes all the sense in the world.
 
Wodanaz said:
people will talk shit about jim for whatever reason but this is true, he really does not care what his cringe fans think of him
Click to expand...
I meant, he doesn't care that Null disagrees with him on something or that Null has mild criticism of him. Even if they don't see eye-to-eye on everything, Jim still has a healthy amount of respect for Null. Enough respect that he isn't going to flip the fuck out when Null says he was aiding with the Boogie kayfabe grift for his own benefit. For one, Jim probably has no problem recognizing that that's true, at least to an extent.

Jim's fans (or, more accurately, stans) are the problem. They flip the fuck out hat-guarding Jim, when it literally isn't a big deal at all. Jim doesn't care, but they care a lot. It reminds me of fags and hags on social media that go hard defending their favorite pop hoes from inconsequential bullshit.
 
I'm a Silly said:
I don't know how guilty I am of making an appeal to tradition or the past, but the quote above exemplifies why I think it is a bad idea; if anything, the age of consent should be raised to 25, when biological brain development reaches true adulthood. We live long enough on average that this makes all the sense in the world.
Click to expand...
AOC (autistic oreo cortez?) is a left-over from the mishmash of marriage laws and statutory rape laws. remember that they're always "anything below this age is clearly fucking disgusting, get the fuck out we won't even talk about it" not "oh the moment you're this age you're good to go ready to roll".

in a just society that wasn't built around the worship of the self and based on "I can do whatever I want" it's a completely different discussion than in what we have now which is "holy fuck how do we put the brakes on this runaway train of liberalism that is taking us strait into the pits of hell"

fun fact, the average age of marriage has NEVER EVER ONCE BEEN twelve or teens even, all that bullshit about "people got married at 14 in the dark ages" is just that, bullshit. Sure, it happened sometimes but do some digging and you'll find that while it varied somewhat it roughly was around where it is now. See https://internetshakespeare.uvic.ca/Library/SLT/society/family/marriage.html (a)

The data is polluted by the most famous known cases being nobles and other weird shit, and there not being detailed records for centuries (though you can search church records and get some damn good details with a bit of extrapolation).
 
Null said:
Any other requests?
Click to expand...
Can you talk about Tipster's and John Flynt's fight over Imane Khelif?

Musashi's Son said:
Tipster and John Walker Flynt are beefing over Imane Khelif:

View attachment 6259414
View attachment 6259419
(https://archive.fo/apaMZ)

View attachment 6259423
View attachment 6259468

View attachment 6259470
View attachment 6259429
(https://archive.fo/Rb3Iw)

View attachment 6259435
View attachment 6259438
ksu3SQx4wZpRYutq.mp4

View attachment 6259441
View attachment 6259462

View attachment 6259463

View attachment 6259443
View attachment 6259445
0uIBFoNZ-fQsTtyW.mp4

View attachment 6259519
(https://ghostarchive.org/archive/jlpTv)

View attachment 6259541
View attachment 6259538
(https://ghostarchive.org/archive/dqRvz)
Click to expand...
 
reptile baht spaniard rid said:
AOC (autistic oreo cortez?) is a left-over from the mishmash of marriage laws and statutory rape laws. remember that they're always "anything below this age is clearly fucking disgusting, get the fuck out we won't even talk about it" not "oh the moment you're this age you're good to go ready to roll".

in a just society that wasn't built around the worship of the self and based on "I can do whatever I want" it's a completely different discussion than in what we have now which is "holy fuck how do we put the brakes on this runaway train of liberalism that is taking us strait into the pits of hell"

fun fact, the average age of marriage has NEVER EVER ONCE BEEN twelve or teens even, all that bullshit about "people got married at 14 in the dark ages" is just that, bullshit. Sure, it happened sometimes but do some digging and you'll find that while it varied somewhat it roughly was around where it is now. See https://internetshakespeare.uvic.ca/Library/SLT/society/family/marriage.html (a)

The data is polluted by the most famous known cases being nobles and other weird shit, and there not being detailed records for centuries (though you can search church records and get some damn good details with a bit of extrapolation).
Click to expand...
If we also raise the voting age to 25, I'll agree with this.
 
sometimes when im drifting off into space or falling asleep i think what kind of structure might save democracy(tm) and vooting in the US.

1. only married couples and widows/widowers should be allowed to vote once each. divorcees do not get to vote. voting should either be ranked choice or something like in Germany where you actually get 5 votes per person and you can spend them all on one party or on several.
2. national parties should be banned and confederations should be formed between state-level parties with independent structures that can change confederation at any time.
3. the executive branch should be split into 7 divisions which are directed by 7 executives.
4. each executive is elected every 7 years, in a rotation, so that every year the longest serving executive is voted on.
5. the head of state is the Chief Executive who is the longest serving executive being replaced that year.
6. the Chief Executive is always the Minister of Defense during times of war.
7. state-level elections vote for parties which determine the composition of that state's delegates to the House of Representatives (i.e. a parliamentary system).
8. the states, per the original US constitution, must decide its two senators promptly through any mechanism of their choosing (including direct appointments, life long appointments, hereditary seats, seats that go up for auction, corporate appointments, party selection, first-past-the-post [like we have now], whatever the fuck). if they don't decide a senator quickly enough (which resulted in the constitutional amendment to replace it with elections) something bad happens, maybe they just kill the governor, who cares, figure something out that's more interesting than getting rid of it.
9. Executives are somehow elected or appointed? I haven't figured this out. I dislike first-past-the-post voting and I dislike elections within parliaments for executives. Neither seem to actually satisfy anyone.

my thought is that the current vooting system deprives people of actual choice, encourages "only think about federal elections, fuck your state" mentality, and empowers the two national parties beyond what is reasonable or functional. nobody is accountable to anything and fringe candidates that make a fun spectacle out of government are way too uncommon. the decorum of the federal government is gay and I want pants shitting autists elected by the Lynch Niggers Party of Alabama to throw gavels at people in DC.
 
Null said:
1. only married couples and widows/widowers should be allowed to vote once each. divorcees do not get to vote. voting should either be ranked choice or something like in Germany where you actually get 5 votes per person and you can spend them all on one party or on several.
Click to expand...
That sounds similar to Robert Heinlein's idea of giving the vote to veterans only.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom