Welcome to Incels.is - Involuntary Celibate Forum

Welcome! This is a forum for involuntary celibates: people who lack a significant other. Are you lonely and wish you had someone in your life? You're not alone! Join our forum and talk to people just like you.

Discussion A follow-up thread on pedocels, Pornhub, and public policy (burgercels, coomers gtfih)

PPEcel

PPEcel

cope and seethe
-
Joined
Oct 1, 2018
Posts
29,096
Original thread:


On that thread, I presented a New York Times article which described the problem of child pornography on Pornhub. The article prominently featured a femoid who, at the age of 14, had sent videos of herself to a Chad classmate who then shared it with his friends. Before long, it was being shared online; for the foid, this resulted in a cycle of anxiety, suicide attempts, drug addiction, and homelessness.

That thread received more heated responses on and off this forum than I expected. Indeed, one of our members' comments managed to trigger dozens of entertaining responses from our biggest fans over at Reddit. Here's a sampling:


View: https://www.reddit.com/r/IncelTear/comments/kad2mv/the_pedocels_are_at_it_again/gfacgl2?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3



View: https://www.reddit.com/r/IncelTear/comments/kad2mv/the_pedocels_are_at_it_again/gfcaw8y?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3



View: https://www.reddit.com/r/IncelTear/comments/kad2mv/the_pedocels_are_at_it_again/gfa5b2x?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3



An update on the foid

Some of you will no doubt be infuriated to learn that a GoFundMe has been set up for the person featured in the NYTimes article, and that she is no longer homeless and is putting the pieces of her life back together. I look forward to reading your commentary.


View: https://twitter.com/NickKristof/status/1335774327682297856



Potential changes to U.S. law

Within days of Nick Kristof's article, Visa and Mastercard joined PayPal and blocked their services from being used on Pornhub, and Mindgeek (Pornhub's parent company) capitulated and implemented much of Kristof's suggestions.

But more importantly is the U.S. Senate bill, the Survivors of Human Trafficking Fight Back Act, that is being sponsored by Senators Hawley, Ernst, Hassan, and Tillis, as a result of this NYTimes article.

While it is already illegal in the U.S. to possess and distribute any visual depictions of sex activity involving minors, the bill would further criminalize:

1) the distribution, or possession with intent to distribute, visual depictions of nonconsensual sexual activity (i.e. rape videos)
2) the distribution, or possession with intent to distribute, visual depictions of sexual activity where the participants do not consent to said distribution

Either would be punishable by a minimum sentence of 5 years. (Jeez, what is up with Americans and their love of insanely harsh criminal sentencing guidelines?)

The bill would also force operators of pornographic websites to provide a "takedown" process for said videos; failure to comply would result in a fine or a maximum of 3 years' imprisonment. It also exposes them to federal civil liability (i.e. foids can sue Pornhub executives in federal court).

Now, bills usually look pretty different after they've gone through the committee process and all that, but I think that this will probably make it through the legislative process fairly quickly, since this allows cuckservatives to trumpet their "law and order" credentials, and progressives to go about their usual business of simping for m'lady.

In my opinion, this bill will not substantially affect low SMV males as much as it will affect mid/high-tier normies (after all, we are not the ones receiving nudes). Chads, however, will have to think twice before sharing Stacy's nudes with his classmates, because five years of fed time is not a great thing for a high schooler to put on his resume. But depending on how onerous these regulations will be on the porn business, this may adversely impact Mindgeek's "free porn" business model. Coomercels may, in the future, have to pay more to get their fix, to financially support the increased content moderation that governments will require of the sex industry.


Agenda-setting theories

I think this is an interesting opportunity for those of you who are invested in politics to examine policymaking in action, with this (i.e. regulation of pornography) as a test case. Most of you who have studied political science in an academic setting may have encountered some variation of this graph at one point or another.

Knill and Tolsun five stages of the policy cycle


This is the policy cycle.

What we've seen in the past week so far are the first two stages in action: agenda-setting and policy formulation. 1) The New York Times placed Pornhub in the public spotlight, and 2) members of Congress introduced legislation in response. I have no doubt that other governments will soon follow-up with similar laws.

For a deeper look into agenda-setting, I highly suggest the work of Frank R. Baumgartner and Bryan D. Jones, who initially applied "punctuated equilibrium theory" (PET) to explain American policymaking. As opposed to incrementalist theories of social change, punctuated equilibrium, at its core level, suggests that social change usually occurs in short bursts of rapid change, followed by long stretches of stability.

PET operates under the assumptions of bounded rationality: politicians and bureaucrats do not have time to consider and develop responses to every single issue, so instead, they only consider issues which are on top of the agenda. Under PET, the status quo is maintained when a small circle of policy stakeholders build up trust. However, a "focusing event" occurs where an issue gains rapid attention from the general public, and the issue floats to the top of the agenda (which the mass media plays a role in), enlarging the policy community, increasing the likelihood of social change. After said change occurs, the policy community will be generally be pacified, their attention brought to other issues, until another focusing event reinvigorates the debate.

This is all somewhat of a crude simplification but this post is already too long.

But I'm hoping some of you can notice the parallels between agenda-setting theory, this particular case involving regulation of the pornographic industry, and indeed, anti-crime legislation in the past and present -- especially those named after a specific victim. It doesn't take a genius to see that young, photogenic victims of crime (usually white, female, middle-class) are more likely to attract "focusing events" and consequently drive social change. Or, as I personally like to call it, simping in the policy process.


Tagging

@ThoughtfulCel
@Heartless
@Caesercel
@VindalooCell
@your personality
@Incellectual
@Unsaveable
@slavcel11
@Ineedassitance
@shii410
@happiless
@solblue
@FinnCel
 
whores who sent nudes to Chad being publicly humiliated and having their nudes all over the internet was pretty hilarious but pornographic jews getting screwed over is good to see too

if the new legislation actually causes a high school Chad to get 5 years in prison then it is giga based and worth the trade off
 
Should just give this the ragefuel tag.
Females aren't responsible, her parents aren't responsible. Just lol.
The (((state))) will make new legislation to shield you from your own decisions if you're a femoid.
 
All this because a whore sent nudes.
Vagina owns the world
 
Im convinced that this reality is some sort of joke. Some foidlet sends nudes on her own free will and the world scrambles to donate money and protect her? Seriously?

How can people see this and still believe women are at a disadvantage in todays world?

I agree especially with your last point. The elite hide behind children all the time. "Think of the children!" "We're doing this to protect our young adults". I wouldn't be surprised if this entire story was some staged concoction that they brewed.

What im really interested though is why? How does this agenda benefit the elite? How will cow towing to women, coddling, and protecting them benefit them in the long run?

20200711 080502
 
Last edited:
It’s her own fault for sending them. Jfl it’s a literal crime to jerk off these days. Luckily it didn’t mention anything about animated porn but still.
 
So where can you find the video?

So that I can avoid it of course.
 
Beautiful

"It doesn't take a genius to see that young, photogenic victims of crime (usually white, female, middle-class) are more likely to attract "focusing events" and consequently drive social change. Or, as I personally like to call it, simping in the policy process."

HIGH IQ

And much of everything is political, especially the vilification of incels
 
Original thread:


On that thread, I presented a New York Times article which described the problem of child pornography on Pornhub. The article prominently featured a femoid who, at the age of 14, had sent videos of herself to a Chad classmate who then shared it with his friends. Before long, it was being shared online; for the foid, this resulted in a cycle of anxiety, suicide attempts, drug addiction, and homelessness.

That thread received more heated responses on and off this forum than I expected. Indeed, one of our members' comments managed to trigger dozens of entertaining responses from our biggest fans over at Reddit. Here's a sampling:


View: https://www.reddit.com/r/IncelTear/comments/kad2mv/the_pedocels_are_at_it_again/gfacgl2?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3



View: https://www.reddit.com/r/IncelTear/comments/kad2mv/the_pedocels_are_at_it_again/gfcaw8y?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3



View: https://www.reddit.com/r/IncelTear/comments/kad2mv/the_pedocels_are_at_it_again/gfa5b2x?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3



An update on the foid

Some of you will no doubt be infuriated to learn that a GoFundMe has been set up for the person featured in the NYTimes article, and that she is no longer homeless and is putting the pieces of her life back together. I look forward to reading your commentary.


View: https://twitter.com/NickKristof/status/1335774327682297856



Potential changes to U.S. law

Within days of Nick Kristof's article, Visa and Mastercard joined PayPal and blocked their services from being used on Pornhub, and Mindgeek (Pornhub's parent company) capitulated and implemented much of Kristof's suggestions.

But more importantly is the U.S. Senate bill, the Survivors of Human Trafficking Fight Back Act, that is being sponsored by Senators Hawley, Ernst, Hassan, and Tillis, as a result of this NYTimes article.

While it is already illegal in the U.S. to possess and distribute any visual depictions of sex activity involving minors, the bill would further criminalize:

1) the distribution, or possession with intent to distribute, visual depictions of nonconsensual sexual activity (i.e. rape videos)
2) the distribution, or possession with intent to distribute, visual depictions of sexual activity where the participants do not consent to said distribution

Either would be punishable by a minimum sentence of 5 years. (Jeez, what is up with Americans and their love of insanely harsh criminal sentencing guidelines?)

The bill would also force operators of pornographic websites to provide a "takedown" process for said videos; failure to comply would result in a fine or a maximum of 3 years' imprisonment. It also exposes them to federal civil liability (i.e. foids can sue Pornhub executives in federal court).

Now, bills usually look pretty different after they've gone through the committee process and all that, but I think that this will probably make it through the legislative process fairly quickly, since this allows cuckservatives to trumpet their "law and order" credentials, and progressives to go about their usual business of simping for m'lady.

In my opinion, this bill will not substantially affect low SMV males as much as it will affect mid/high-tier normies (after all, we are not the ones receiving nudes). Chads, however, will have to think twice before sharing Stacy's nudes with his classmates, because five years of fed time is not a great thing for a high schooler to put on his resume. But depending on how onerous these regulations will be on the porn business, this may adversely impact Mindgeek's "free porn" business model. Coomercels may, in the future, have to pay more to get their fix, to financially support the increased content moderation that governments will require of the sex industry.


Agenda-setting theories

I think this is an interesting opportunity for those of you who are invested in politics to examine policymaking in action, with this (i.e. regulation of pornography) as a test case. Most of you who have studied political science in an academic setting may have encountered some variation of this graph at one point or another.

View attachment 382964

This is the policy cycle.

What we've seen in the past week so far are the first two stages in action: agenda-setting and policy formulation. 1) The New York Times placed Pornhub in the public spotlight, and 2) members of Congress introduced legislation in response. I have no doubt that other governments will soon follow-up with similar laws.

For a deeper look into agenda-setting, I highly suggest the work of Frank R. Baumgartner and Bryan D. Jones, who initially applied "punctuated equilibrium theory" (PET) to explain American policymaking. As opposed to incrementalist theories of social change, punctuated equilibrium, at its core level, suggests that social change usually occurs in short bursts of rapid change, followed by long stretches of stability.

PET operates under the assumptions of bounded rationality: politicians and bureaucrats do not have time to consider and develop responses to every single issue, so instead, they only consider issues which are on top of the agenda. Under PET, the status quo is maintained when a small circle of policy stakeholders build up trust. However, a "focusing event" occurs where an issue gains rapid attention from the general public, and the issue floats to the top of the agenda (which the mass media plays a role in), enlarging the policy community, increasing the likelihood of social change. After said change occurs, the policy community will be generally be pacified, their attention brought to other issues, until another focusing event reinvigorates the debate.

This is all somewhat of a crude simplification but this post is already too long.

But I'm hoping some of you can notice the parallels between agenda-setting theory, this particular case involving regulation of the pornographic industry, and indeed, anti-crime legislation in the past and present -- especially those named after a specific victim. It doesn't take a genius to see that young, photogenic victims of crime (usually white, female, middle-class) are more likely to attract "focusing events" and consequently drive social change. Or, as I personally like to call it, simping in the policy process.


Tagging

@ThoughtfulCel
@Heartless
@Caesercel
@VindalooCell
@your personality
@Incellectual
@Unsaveable
@slavcel11
@Ineedassitance
@shii410
@happiless
@solblue
@FinnCel

The media is the catalyst behind a lot of these spur of the moment legislation and "drive-by-clickbait" stories that demonize or call for demonizing certain people.

@ThoughtfulCel the current "elite" is experiencing power struggles where they want to make the 1% more represented by women but with the same old system in place. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

@PPEcel "progressives to go about their usual business of simping for m'lady"
Dude that's exactly what Joe VAWA Biden is :feelskek:
 
Last edited:
Alright so they're policy formulating to stop the plebs from jerking off to such foids. Now where's the policy formulation to stop the elites from having underage sex slave orgies? Oh right
 
The whole government body went out of its way for one certain hole. This can't be coincidence. Shit, imagine if they were to take down pornhub because of one hole, jeez
 
Last edited:
But depending on how onerous these regulations will be on the porn business, this may adversely impact Mindgeek's "free porn" business model. Coomercels may, in the future, have to pay more to get their fix, to financially support the increased content moderation that governments will require of the sex industry.

THIS IS WHY YOU ALWAYS DOWNLOAD
 
Fuck civilisation
 
Porn is contributing to inceldom. It needs to be banned anyway. Good riddance.
 
Nose ring alone tells all you need to know.

14 year old whore sending 50 something nudes to Chad is a poor exploited baby but Children as young as 5 watching gay parades where Men are half naked and sometimes even naked is A OK.

:feelstastyman::feelsclown:
 
Chads and Jews eating shit is always a good thing.
 
Porn is contributing to inceldom. It needs to be banned anyway. Good riddance.
giga low IQ. banning porn isn't going to make a single foid fuck an incel.
 
1607702845254

Looking at this is hell for any incel whos trying to moneymax (eg me) because you actually have to earn it and can't make money for just existing.
 
CP is unironically free speech but we all know free speech doesn't exist.
 
$86000 raised for her.

86 FUCKING THOUSAND.

OH BUT PLEASE TELL ME MORE ABOUT HOW NOBODY IS ENTITLED TO ANYTHING.

Then there was me thinking id live until 2025 and then rope if my life doesn't vet better. Fuck that.

2024 AT THE LATEST.
View attachment 383064
Looking at this is hell for any incel whos trying to moneymax (eg me) because you actually have to earn it and can't make money for just existing.
 
The whole government body went out of its way for one certain hole. This can't be coincidence. Shit, imagine if they were to take down pornhub because of one hole, jeez
 
I agree especially with your last point. The elite hide behind children all the time. "Think of the children!" "We're doing this to protect our young adults". I wouldn't be surprised if this entire story was some staged concoction that they brewed.

What im really interested though is why? How does this agenda benefit the elite? How will cow towing to women, coddling, and protecting them benefit them in the long run?

Because it's an easy way for an individual politician to drum up support. Immigration policies are culturally divisive. Healthcare reform is nice, but extremely expensive. Environmental regulations piss off your corporate donors. Administrative law is complex and boring.

But crime? Crime bills are easy for the public to understand and get behind. Any 70 IQ retard can understand, "Put baddies in jail".

For your typical low-information voter, there is no bigger motivator than fear. If you're a cumskin soccer mom in the suburbs who is being inundated with wall-to-wall news coverage of crime (even though crime rates have been trending down for decades), that'll be your salient concern.

So politicians naturally posit themselves as saviours. Ramping up prison sentences is a simple (but not necessarily correct) solution that grabs public attention. Plus, in cases of violent crime, a grieving mother holding a picture of her dead kid has a lot of political capital. That's why so many laws are named after someone who was raped or kidnapped or shot (e.g. Megan's Law, Adam Walsh Act, Jacob Wetterling Act); it becomes politically unfeasible to oppose such a bill.

Josh Hawley is openly considering a 2024 run for POTUS. Why wouldn't he take up the case of a homeless foid who is being exploited by a soulless, faceless evil corporation (i.e. Mindgeek)? Easy way to score some PR points.
 
Last edited:
$86000 raised for her.

86 FUCKING THOUSAND.

OH BUT PLEASE TELL ME MORE ABOUT HOW NOBODY IS ENTITLED TO ANYTHING.

Then there was me thinking id live until 2025 and then rope if my life doesn't vet better. Fuck that.

2024 AT THE LATEST.

View attachment 383072
Fuck, I could literally live 10 fucking years with those kind of money here in Russia. 10 years, I'm telling you. And this cunt got it just for having hole.
OH BUT PLEASE TELL ME MORE ABOUT HOW NOBODY IS ENTITLED TO ANYTHING
This. Cuck if you think yourself less deserving sympathy than this little whore. If this bitch got this kind of support then our complaints of simply having someone (even just) to have sex with are completely valid.
 
What's so frustrating to me while reading this is that my whole life I've been told all my choices are what led to me being a miserable incel. I've tried talking to other people and not just incels. I've tried making friends. I've tried getting a girlfriend. I've tried online dating. Now I'm old and incel and bitter but I'm told I did this to myself. And I just need to live with the consequences of my actions.

SHE CREATED AND DISTRIBUTED FUCKING CHILD PORN AND THE WHOLE WORLD IS ON HER SIDE!!!
She destroyed her own life and, for some fucking reason, she needs the government to step in and save her. What a rock of horseshit. Where is the equality in that? I didn't have anybody interested in me. I didn't send nudes to anybody. I lived a just and righteous life and what rewards do I get from it? NOTHING!
(Oh and let's not even add to that fact that she can create illegal content and face no repercussions but if I even VIEWED the fucking video once I'd be going to jail for 20 years)
 
What's so frustrating to me while reading this is that my whole life I've been told all my choices are what led to me being a miserable incel. I've tried talking to other people and not just incels. I've tried making friends. I've tried getting a girlfriend. I've tried online dating. Now I'm old and incel and bitter but I'm told I did this to myself. And I just need to live with the consequences of my actions.

SHE CREATED AND DISTRIBUTED FUCKING CHILD PORN AND THE WHOLE WORLD IS ON HER SIDE!!!
She destroyed her own life and, for some fucking reason, she needs the government to step in and save her. What a rock of horseshit. Where is the equality in that? I didn't have anybody interested in me. I didn't send nudes to anybody. I lived a just and righteous life and what rewards do I get from it? NOTHING!
(Oh and let's not even add to that fact that she can create illegal content and face no repercussions but if I even VIEWED the fucking video once I'd be going to jail for 20 years)
Thats what astonishes me.

If I even so much as committed a crime in public that goes on my record, I'm fucked. May get suspended from Uni, Very Very Very few (none) jobs will hire me. Will be poor.

Foid Fucks up her life? Entire world bends over and supports her.

She'll probably get numerous date offers and guys willing to show her the world meanwhile id probably get foids willing to watch me be tortured after being evicted because I couldn't pay the rent. Can't wait to die.
 
Chads, however, will have to think twice before sharing Stacy's nudes with his classmates, because five years of fed time is not a great thing for a high schooler to put on his resume.
Attractive people get lesser sentences so it is not a problem for chad
What's so frustrating to me while reading this is that my whole life I've been told all my choices are what led to me being a miserable incel. I've tried talking to other people and not just incels. I've tried making friends. I've tried getting a girlfriend. I've tried online dating. Now I'm old and incel and bitter but I'm told I did this to myself. And I just need to live with the consequences of my actions.

SHE CREATED AND DISTRIBUTED FUCKING CHILD PORN AND THE WHOLE WORLD IS ON HER SIDE!!!
She destroyed her own life and, for some fucking reason, she needs the government to step in and save her. What a rock of horseshit. Where is the equality in that? I didn't have anybody interested in me. I didn't send nudes to anybody. I lived a just and righteous life and what rewards do I get from it? NOTHING!
(Oh and let's not even add to that fact that she can create illegal content and face no repercussions but if I even VIEWED the fucking video once I'd be going to jail for 20 years)
High IQ observation.
Government is only there to take from men and give to women
 
Government is only there to take from men and give to women
Exactly what @mylifeistrash used to say
Potential changes to U.S. law

Within days of Nick Kristof's article, Visa and Mastercard joined PayPal and blocked their services from being used on Pornhub, and Mindgeek (Pornhub's parent company) capitulated and implemented much of Kristof's suggestions.
 
Last edited:
giga low IQ. banning porn isn't going to make a single foid fuck an incel.

Not directly no, but it will reduce female standards, even if slightly. There are other non-incel related benefits of course.
 
For your typical low-information voter, there is no bigger motivator than fear. If you're a cumskin soccer mom in the suburbs who is being inundated with wall-to-wall news coverage of crime (even though crime rates have been trending down for decades), that'll be your salient concern.

So politicians naturally posit themselves as saviours. Ramping up prison sentences is a simple (but not necessarily correct) solution that grabs public attention. Plus, in cases of violent crime, a grieving mother holding a picture of her dead kid has a lot of political capital. That's why so many laws are named after someone who was raped or kidnapped or shot (e.g. Megan's Law, Adam Walsh Act, Jacob Wetterling Act); it becomes politically unfeasible to oppose such a bill.

Josh Hawley is openly considering a 2024 run for POTUS. Why wouldn't he take up the case of a homeless foid who is being exploited by a soulless, faceless evil corporation (i.e. Mindgeek)? Easy way to score some PR points.
For the record, crime is way up in US cities and Hawley is an establishment shill.
 
:lul: :lul: :lul: :lul: :lul: :lul: giga cope if you think this is true.
You truly believe that media has no influence on standards? Then why are niggers so popular now? Because they're pushed in every aspect by the (((media)))
 
You truly believe that media has no influence on standards? Then why are niggers so popular now? Because they're pushed in every aspect by the (((media)))
lol if you think foids give a shit about porn or are influenced by it in any way sexually.
 
Absolutely cucked. :reeeeee:

A female who has her nudes spread is not a victim. No one forced her to send them to Chad in the first place. She just did that because she is a dumb whore, and then she might as well be exposed as the trashy whore she is to the whole world, and hopefully help to purify the gene pool by killing herself out of depression.
 
lol if you think foids give a shit about porn or are influenced by it in any way sexually.

It degenerates them more.

Majority of Zoomer pornstars grew up watching loads of porn.
 
lots of words

porn is bad
 
Im convinced that this reality is some sort of joke. Some foidlet sends nudes on her own free will and the world scrambles to donate money and protect her? Seriously?

How can people see this and still believe women are at a disadvantage in todays world?

I agree especially with your last point. The elite hide behind children all the time. "Think of the children!" "We're doing this to protect our young adults". I wouldn't be surprised if this entire story was some staged concoction that they brewed.

What im really interested though is why? How does this agenda benefit the elite? How will cow towing to women, coddling, and protecting them benefit them in the long run?

View attachment 382981

It’s her own fault for sending them. Jfl it’s a literal crime to jerk off these days. Luckily it didn’t mention anything about animated porn but still.
 
According to mainstream consensus sexuality is nothing to be ashamed of, yet society still feels the need to cope hard with the extent of its moral decay by at least drawing an imaginary line at 18.

I suppose Chad slaying all the JBs every day needs to be kept out of the public view under harsh penalties, otherwise the 30 year old wageslave incels and roastie betabuxxers will rope :lul:.
 
All this because a whore sent nudes.Vagina owns the world
Never began for the male race. Truly the slave worker ants of the human species
Attractive people get lesser sentences so it is not a problem for chad

High IQ observation.
Government is only there to take from men and give to women
yep, the government is mostly males so its cucks taking away from mostly other cucks to give to females
 
In 4 years she'll start an onlyfans.
 
Not directly no, but it will reduce female standards, even if slightly. There are other non-incel related benefits of course.
How?
It degenerates them more.

Majority of Zoomer pornstars grew up watching loads of porn.
Lol. Zoomer foid pornstars became pornstars because there is no modesty required of women anymore. Most of these whores were fucking chads around age 12 or 13. Porn is a secondary effect of liberal feminism. More dangerous to zoomer and millennial foids is addiction to social media, which is essentially emotional porn for them. If you want to start moving foids away from degeneracy, take down social media, not porn.

A ban on porn would do absolutely nothing to help us or our situation, and could very well make it worse. We are incel because of our genes and feminism, not porn.
According to mainstream consensus sexuality is nothing to be ashamed of, yet society still feels the need to cope hard with the extent of its moral decay by at least drawing an imaginary line at 18.

I suppose Chad slaying all the JBs every day needs to be kept out of the public view under harsh penalties, otherwise the 30 year old wageslave incels and roastie betabuxxers will rope :lul:.
This is actually why they want annoymous amateur porn banned. It sets a certain level of expectations for women in their sexual behaviors. Since everybody can see what chad gets for free, imagine being a betabuxxer and having to essentially slave away for mediocre pussy once a week. Imagine you found a tape of your now old and post prime roastie wife getting ass fucked by chad when she was 19. This is what they actually want to prevent. Not trafficking or some other bullshit.
 
Last edited:
This is actually why they want annoymous amateur porn banned. It sets a certain level of expectations for women in their sexual behaviors. Since everybody can see what chad gets for free, imagine being a betabuxxer and having to essentially slave away for mediocre pussy once a week. Imagine you found a tape of your now old and post prime roastie wife getting ass fucked by chad when she was 19. This is what they actually want to prevent. Not trafficking or some other bullshit.
High IQ. Wanting to take away copes for ugly men and artificially lowering their expectations for what to expect in a relationship make way more sense as reasons to get amateur porn banned than trafficking.
 
This is actually why they want annoymous amateur porn banned. It sets a certain level of expectations for women in their sexual behaviors. Since everybody can see what chad gets for free, imagine being a betabuxxer and having to essentially slave away for mediocre pussy once a week. Imagine you found a tape of your now old and post prime roastie wife getting ass fucked by chad when she was 19. This is what they actually want to prevent. Not trafficking or some other bullshit.
This.
 
Women can never be at fault or blame for their own wrong doings. That's goy-soyciety for you
 
As usual, femoids need to be protected from their own stupidity by law, lmao. As someone already wrote, I bet max 4 years will pass before foid in question will start onlyfans.
Speaking of onlyfans, watch as skanks in there will get huge surge of money (as if these societal parasites weren't getting enought cash already) as retarded coomers and simps get desperate for their fix of amateur content.
 

Similar threads

FrenchSandNigger
Replies
15
Views
300
1337hikki
1337hikki
Cheesecel
Replies
11
Views
249
lifeisfucked215
lifeisfucked215
XDFLAMEBOY
Replies
2
Views
119
XDFLAMEBOY
XDFLAMEBOY
ForeverGrey
Replies
18
Views
567
Emba
Emba

Users who are viewing this thread

shape1
shape2
shape3
shape4
shape5
shape6
Back
Top