you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Questionable 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (19 children)

I'm having seconds thoughts about who you are. You're style seems very familiar. Like a bad faith Satanic Robot. Your ignorance of reality is profound and disturbing.

[–]Hematomato 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (18 children)

You're sitting here telling me that Fisher Price is making RuPaul toys because the executives think it will help them diddle kids... and you think I have a problem with reality. Yeah, man, we'll just have to see how that works out for you.

[–]Questionable 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (17 children)

I'm not saying that. You are saying that. I'm saying that this toy is sexual. It was produced to secure ESG funds for profits. ESG funds used to promote lbgqt+ agendas. That groom kids. Which is part of a divide and conquer campaign orchestrated by the banks and foreign governments to destabilize the nation, using cash incentives.

It's not as simple as you are. Nor the claims that you are making. Honestly, are you controlled opposition?? Who's leading who here?

[–]Hematomato 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (16 children)

Agendas can't groom kids.

Look, Questionable, this is in fact very simple. You and I both agree that grooming means "laying the foundation to have sex with a child as soon as they reach the age of majority."

So who the fuck is grooming whom? Out there somewhere, there's a five year old girl playing with a shitty plastic RuPaul. She's got it sitting on a dollhouse dining table with a little cup of tea in front of it, and she's making it say "Yes, Mr. Bunny, I agree that the tea is delicious."

So the question is: who is fucking this girl when she turns eighteen? Is a Fisher Price executive going to fuck her? Is the head of Charles Schwab, or Vanguard, or anyone else who provides ESG funding, going to fuck her? Is RuPaul going to fuck her? Is the director of GLAAD going to fuck her?

Apparently you think this girl has been marked as some old person's future wife. She's being brainwashed into being some wrinkly-balled old man's nubile little fucktoy as soon as it's legal. Because that's what grooming is.

So who the fuck is grooming the girl. Why can't you answer the question?

[–]Questionable 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (15 children)

Agendas can't groom kids

Grooming is an agenda.

I'm tired of training this bot.

You are a failure.

[–]Hematomato 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (14 children)

That's correct. Agendas can't groom kids, they can't rent cars, they can't kick puppies, they can't go on murder sprees, they can't jerk off in the shower.

People do those things.

[–]Questionable 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (13 children)

Wow. You are profoundly stupid.

[–]Hematomato 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (12 children)

No, I just have a grasp on reality, unlike the guy who's apparently sitting here telling me an abstract concept is going to put its cock in a little girl's mouth.

[–]Questionable 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (11 children)

Either you are a bot, or English is not your first language. If you are human, you are mentally ill.

[–]Hematomato 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

I see you've just degenerated into generic playground shit.

It's not surprising. There's just no way to defend the argument that the concept of RuPaul is manipulating children into spreading their legs for older adults.

And when there's no way to defend an argument, all that's left is to spit generic insults and hope one of them sticks.