>If there were no "Johns" there would be no prostitutes.
>If there were no consumers there would be no product.
I was arguing with a femoid the other day who is very against porn.
Her argument was that if no one viewed or paid for porn then it would not exist and that arresting the viewers and paypigs is justified because of this fact.
I argued against it.
Asking her if purchasing a ticket to a movie incriminated someone if the content of the movie was illegal.
Then asking if the movie was free, and you chose to attend the free showing, should you be imprisoned for the illegal content of the movie.
She agreed with me that the viewer and purchaser were not at fault.

>Asking her if purchasing a ticket to a movie incriminated someone if the content of the movie was illegal.
If it is cp then that legally applies

>>510359920
there are movies that include that.
and games.

it should be illegal to sell and promote, but possession and viewing should be fine.

>>510360262
I'm sure, and Brooke shields did some shit too, but I don't think this would fly anymore

>>510359644 (OP)
that's a man

>>510359644 (OP)
The mental gymnastics foids will do to avoid bearing the responsibility of their actions has been something to behold.

>>510360381
so if I sold tickets to a movie night, or invited a lot of people over for movie night, and they enjoyed that movie, should they go to prison?

>>510360590
If they don't know what they're in for, then that can't be held against them, but if they came for pizza then they're obviously pedos

>>510360761
they all enjoyed the movie without knowing what it was beforehand.

>>510360871
They sat down and enjoyed pedo stuff, then they're pedos, if you show a guy a dick Pic and they're into it, they're homos, I mean we can't argue against this

>>510359644 (OP)
the fact that porn fries your prefrontal cortex is proof it's bad.
Nobody is sitting around gooning to renaissance paintings of naked women, except maybe Indians

>>510360973
can a lactointolerant bear the sight of cheese?
>>510361257
it satiates a social need without needing to think your way into getting that social need.
women have larger prefrontal cortex than men.

Men want sex. You can't make wanting sex illegal. Nor can you force women to have sex with men (as that would be state-mandated sexual slavery). It has to be 2 consenting partners. Men want sex much, much more than women are willing to give it voluntarily. Therefore, a massive imbalance exists in the sexual market. Pornography addresses this and alleviates the demand, easing social tensions.

Getting rid of porn without addressing the sexual market imbalance is creating a massive powder keg. If you think the incel problem is bad now, you have no idea how bad it would become if you took away what little sexual relief they have. I give it less than 10 years after pornography is banned for an American version of ISIS to happen and for terrorist bombings to become a common thing in the United States.

>>510361960
Just because you're allergic or physically intolerant to something doesn't mean you hate it

>>510361257
Just like tv does, just like video games do, just like anything that isnt manual labor huh? Do you think rock music fries your brain too?

>>510362093
the people who came to movie night are physically intolerant of pedophilia.
do they still go to prison?

>>510359644 (OP)
isn't porn free? who's paying for it? the whole point of porn is to get you to wank as soon as possible (around age 10)

>>510362373
Again, physical intolerance doesn't mean hate, an epileptic may like a game with flashing lights, and a guy could like the taste of milk before he shits himself, if they came to the house with the intent to watch pizza, then they're likers of that stuff, even if they get struck by lightning because mercury is in retrograde or some shit

>>510362201
I don't think you realize how massive of a dopamine spike porn gives you. It's more addictive than crack

>>510359644 (OP)
She's not wrong, but women should still be prevented from whoring because they are the scarce sex.

>>510361982
you can still have nude bitches without it being porn

>>510361982
>You can't make wanting sex illegal
No but you could make it more difficult.
Surprising really that no one tried mass libido suppression research

>>510362446
that's why I made the free argument.
she was also attempting to argue that onlyfans was better than free porn because "at least you know onlyfans is not using slavery"
I argued "how do you know that onlyfans is not slavery? If I injected you with opiates, made you open an onlyfans account, and kept you high while we made videos, that is slavery on onlyfans."
>>510362538
I'm attempting to distinguish between an audience and a perpetrator. Thank you for agreeing. Do you think they should endure equal punishment?
>>510362584
people kill each other over small amounts of crack.
>>510362636
art is not produced for profit.
>>510362886
your soap is full of endocrine disruptors.

>>510359644 (OP)
If there was no nigger cattle to rule over, there would be no ruling globalist child sacrificing sodomizing blood drinking "elites". So who's in the wrong?

>>510359644 (OP)
>if the movie was free, and you chose to attend the free showing, should you be imprisoned for the illegal content of the movie.
Obviously. If you seek it out and pay for it, you're complicit.

>She agreed with me that the viewer and purchaser were not at fault.
"She" is completely imaginary like the rest of your story.

>>510363303
>If there was no nigger cattle to rule over, there would be no ruling globalist child sacrificing sodomizing blood drinking "elites". So who's in the wrong?
Niggercattle, for creating a situation where the optimal strategy is to abuse it.

>>510363098
Well if the perp finds his audience to be paying him to do that sort of shit then of course they are, even now if a guy is exposed as watching that porn voluntarily he gets a knock on the door

>>510363370
Well there you. Next time you want to complain about something: kys. Problem solved.

>>510363506
I don't complain about anything. I'm just waiting patiently for you and other niggercattle to get what you signed up for.

>>510363424
ok, say it was produced legally and was not paid for.
like the monkey torture vids posted here.

>>510363310
so if you don't seek it out and don't pay for it, it's ok?

>>510363946
>like the monkey torture vids posted here.
Give me 1 (ONE) reason why the subhumans who habitually watch that shouldn't all be thrown into the nigger rape dungeon.

>>510363946
Produced legally?

>>510363098
>your soap is full of endocrine disruptors
And your perfume and cologne are full of synthetic hormones and aphrodisiacs.

>>510364086
>so if you don't seek it out and don't pay for it, it's ok?
Being exposed to something illegal by accident? Obviously that's not your fault.

>>510364117
you can't slaughter animals for meat?
>>510364115
are they threats to society?
wouldn't that be an implication of pre-crime?
>>510364346
don't people get in trouble for receiving stolen goods?

>>510363607
Me too. Big Daddy Power Pile Driver won't deliver fast enough though.

>>510359644 (OP)
Look, if people didn't want to fight there wouldn't be illegal arms deals. It shouldn't be illegal to fill market demand.

>>510364453
I know that animal abuse is a real crime in America, even if you eat them afterwards

>>510364453
>are they threats to society?
Probably, but either way, they're vile and degenerate subhumans.

>wouldn't that be an implication of pre-crime?
No. Being a vile and degenerate subhuman who habitually watches torture isn't a hypothetical future transgression.

>don't people get in trouble for receiving stolen goods?
I don't know how your laws work but in a normal society they would need to present evidence that you were conspiring to commit theft, as opposed to being an oblivious buyer.

>>510364652
>>510364753
so you are not responsible for the legality of the product you paid for unless you knew the intricate details of the situation?
Is it illegal to torture monkeys in the middle of the asian jungle?
Why are the videos illegal?

>>510365162
>so you are not responsible for the legality of the product you paid for unless you knew the intricate details of the situation?
Again, I don't know how your laws work, but normally if you're gonna be prosecuted for it there needs to be evidence that you knew or had reasonable grounds to believe the goods were actually stolen.

>Is it illegal to torture monkeys in the middle of the asian jungle?
Don't know or care. I'm asking you why subhuman degenerates who habitually watch torture shouldn't be sent off the the nigger rape dungeon. The legality of torturing monkeys in third world shitholes has no bearing on this.

>>510359644 (OP)
>I was arguing with a femoid the other day who is very against porn.
>Her argument was that if no one viewed or paid for porn then it would not exist and that arresting the viewers and paypigs is justified because of this fact.
That's great and all but why is she such a prude? Is she a saving herself for marriage or just another hypocrite?

>>510365557
>The legality of torturing monkeys in third world shitholes has no bearing on this.
I agree.
>I'm asking you why subhuman degenerates who habitually watch torture shouldn't be sent off the the nigger rape dungeon.
what if the reason they are watched the video was not sexual gratification or sadistic?

>>510365903
>what if the reason they are watched the video was not sexual gratification or sadistic?
Why should I care what their stated reasoning is? The relevant factor is whether or not they actively and habitually expose themselves to this shit.

>>510365988
wrong before God =/= wrong before man

>>510365857
she thinks her boyfriend watching porn is cheating
>>510365988
what if it was to learn?

>>510366177
>wrong before God =/= wrong before man
God can sort them out later. I'm sure he's totally real and so is heaven, so there's whole of eternity to make up for minor administrative mistakes back here in reality.

>>510359644 (OP)
Why we don't do unironically mass neutering? It would solve a lot of unhappiness and existential crisis, pets are happy as neutered

>>510366206
>what if it was to learn?
Mandated triple BBC anal every day in prison, then, because that's the most retarded excuse I've ever heard.

>>510366206
>she thinks her boyfriend watching porn is cheating
Hm, well, kind of is, but she has exes and that "bf" will become an ex too. How is her future cuckhusband supposed to feel about that? It's a lot worse than jerking off to pixels.

>>510366344
>excuse
it's a thought experiment, you're supposed to take it as true.
>>510366284
>pets are happy as neutered
massive depression not being noticed by the people who control their food doesn't mean they're happy.

>>510365162
If you didn't know what you were getting into, how can you be held accountable? I don't care what their laws say because if a Texan goes to Syria to join isis, kills some people and wants to come back home, they won't fucking let him even if it was legal in the great state of Damascus kek

>>510366557
>kind of is
I argued against that too.
She values sex in her relationship more than any other emotion.
I asked her if she would get mad at him for crying induced by a movie, no.
would him being very happy after a movie make her angry? no.
so why does him cumming make you so upset?
she didn't want to answer that it had to do with her own insecurities.

>>510359644 (OP)
>if no one viewed or paid for porn then it would not exist
if no one took or paid for drugs then they would not exist.

That's completely true and completely idiotic.

Nanny laws don't work. Bans don't work.

>>510366563
>it's a thought experiment, you're supposed to take it as true.
Kek. Thanks for demonstrating once again that sub-130-IQ niggercattle should have no exposure to any intellectual content or vocabulary beyond "poopoo"/"peepee".

>>510366674
ok but is watching videos of him kill people illegal?
>>510366836
but it's not.
things exist outside of the market.
people grow poppies for their colors.
people carve marble sculptors for the enjoyment of it.

>>510366918
did you see the Michelangelo image I posted?
that was illegal when it was produced.

>>510367066
That's cool. What bearing does it have on you watching gooks torture monkeys?

>>510366990
Like a webm here? No, in general porn is treated differently. If you're in a circle of cat killers and you share stuff like that then they're gonna apprehend you, but if it reaches this place and you're exposed to it then it's not gonna incriminate you

>>510359644 (OP)

>if no one viewed or paid for porn then it would not exist
>if
why are you arguing with a stupid woman?

>>510359644 (OP)
If you think that videos of niggers fucking white women should be legal, then you are part of the (((problem))) and should be gassed along with the Shlomos.

>>510366836
Bans are only as good as their enforcement, and support for said enforcement among the populace.

>>510367159
if I make drawings of the monkeys is it then ok?
>>510367194
so only accidental exposure is acceptable?
>>510367452
>Bans are only as good as their enforcement
bans are only as good as the perception of enforcement.

>>510367561
Incidental, accidental, you get the deal. If I go to Facebook and someone spams a donkeys ass, that's not my deal

>>510360262
In the early 2000 there was a shitty made for TV movie from IIRC the UK where a bunch of teenage boys were fighting each other in teams and at one point they got full frontal naked and showed their dicks to each other to taunt them, like in the scene in Braveheart. Here the TV showed it during a regular afternoon back then.

>>510367561
>if I make drawings of the monkeys is it then ok?
Drawings of the monkeys you watch getting tortured? Great, all the more evidence that your actions were deliberate and premediated. Nigger gang rape in prison is yours to enjoy.

>>510367668
so plausible nuance is important, and it depends on the interpretation of the prosecution and judge.
sounds like a clusterfuck.
>>510367733
so it's ok for rich people to do?
>>510367790
their agony is not valid?
it should be hidden and forgotten?

>>510368069
You'd be surprised, that's the system in use right now

>>510368069
I was morbidly curious to watch your profound mental retardation unfold in the form of a botched attempt at Socratic questioning but this isn't even coherent anymore.

>>510368198
your augment has been based on emotion from the very beginning.
like a woman.

>>510368318
>your augment
What argument? I just asked you why degenerate subhumans who enjoy torture shouldn't be sent to the nigger rape dungeon and you started unraveling.

>>510360761
Its actually law that ignorance of the law is not immunity from it.

>>510369052
If someone posts child stuff on facebook, wanderers don't eat prison for it

>>510368819
>degenerate subhumans who enjoy torture
that's not what was being discussed and is an emotional plea.
what difference in your life or in society does people like that being in prison make?
your inference will likely be slippery slope logical fallacy.
you support legislation based on the fringe.
like trannies' "hermaphrodites exist" but with no data to back it up.

>>510369140
it's nuanced though.
if the poster didn't know it was csam they are still prosecuted based on how the child "looked young"
like that apollo1776 guy getting in trouble for producing material that did not include children but was "pedophilic"

>>510361982
>anti-feminist terrorist bombings to become a common thing in the United States.
You're making a porn ban sound even better.

>Nor can you force women to have sex with men
You don't have to '''''force''''' them. No society ever did.
Just stop giving them so much free shit from daddy government at the taxpayer's expense.
You know, so the cunts actually have to find a husband and have kids if they want to be kept alive at anothers' expense. Which is what they always used to do.
Women have never been capable of keeping themselves alive at any point in human history.
Not even our modern empowered career whamynz with all the equality they've been undeservedly gifted.

The way things are now, the government is effectively *giving* women vast amounts of money - stolen from the male taxpayer - so those same women don't have to get married to secure their preferred lifestyle.
The whole thing is a fucking farcical joke. Men forced at gunpoint by daddy state to pay women to not marry them.

>>510369184
>that's not what was being discussed
Yes, it is. See >>510364115 and your own followups. Just how legitimately retarded are you? kek

>an emotional plea
You can make this meaningless claim about any normal human aversion.

>slippery slope logical fallacy.
There is no such thing. You're a brainwashed golem who thinks in thought-terminating cliches.

>you support legislation based on the fringe.
I don't support any legislation.I just asked you why degenerate subhumans who enjoy torture shouldn't be sent to the nigger rape dungeon and you started unraveling.

>>510369369
Midget porn is still allowed so I'm not sure if this is pursued to Its fullest extent, judges in America follow their own interpretation on things

>>510359644 (OP)
Women hate the weaponizing of coherence against their lived experience

>>510359644 (OP)
the fact that people make it for free, means that it's an art

>>510369492
>why degenerate subhumans who enjoy torture shouldn't be sent to the nigger rape dungeon
I asked "are they a danger to society"
you said "Probably"
>>510369563
>judges in America follow their own interpretation on things
and their expensive lawyer friends.

>>510369963
>I asked "are they a danger to society"
>you said "Probably"
Yes. And? You continue to unravel.

>2025
>Actually talking to females

>>510370151
"they should be in prison" is emotion without logical defense.

>>510369893
it means the motivation for making it is not profit.
exhibitionism fetish.

>>510370556
>"X should be a punishable offense" is le heckin' emotions
Not an argument. All the basic criminal offenses are based on natural aversion against certain kinds of behaviors. You might as well argue the laws against killing are "emotional".

>>510359644 (OP)
>arguing with women
retarded ass nigga

>>510371190
>All the basic criminal offenses are based on natural aversion against certain kinds of behaviors.
you have to prove harm.
that's what all criminal offenses are based on.
harm.
not a "natural aversion"

>>510371614
>you have to prove harm.
Show me where you pulled this head canon out of in your next post. Protip: you won't.

>>510371614
I'm also interested to know how your retarded head canon accounts for the fact that most laws in most countries are concerned with penalizing actions that harm no one.

>>510371699
>>510371805
it's called "injury in fact" and you have to prove it to bring your case to federal court.
scotus won't hear pizza cases based on it.

>>510372151
>it's called "injury in fact"
Who are drug users """injuring in fact"""?

>>510372487
according to government?
themselves and society.
powers given to congress by the commerce clause of the constitution.
I personally can't defend the bans.

>>510373463
You're legit 70 IQ and using terminology you don't understand.

>>510363098
>she was also attempting to argue that onlyfans was better than free porn because "at least you know onlyfans is not using slavery"
So she wasn't a full blown feminist dumbo then. Some of them think it's a massive human trafficking operation that must be shutdown.

>>510361982
> Men want sex much, much more than women are willing to give it voluntarily

That’s just blatantly untrue. Foids nowadays open their legs for everyone, almost every freshly turned 18 year old you know has a body count nearing double digits. Virgin woman do not exist these days. Staying home alone and jerking it to porn is like our version of SSRIS. It keeps you a soft and complacent beta male who can’t get pussy or chicks. Taking away porn would give chuds their life force back and force them to find a suitable woman instead of gooning and crying at home all day.

>>510359644 (OP)
>Her argument was that if no one viewed or paid for porn then it would not exist
That's like saying that people having sex wouldn't be a thing if humans went extinct. No shit sherlock. There'll always be a demand for sex. Feminazis and tradcucks wants to outlaw men's sexuality and they come up with the dumbest excuses in the book to justify it.

>>510374319
It's proven that men's sex drive is significantly higher. Some women also have a high sex drive but it isn't comparable. Most of them see sex as something casual and to monetize off of.
> force them to find a suitable woman
Good luck with that

fuck marry kill

>>510359644 (OP)
>Legality
All women are prostitutes, only the terms of compensation changes.

>>510374600
That’s why you have multiple partners which is what modern dating apps are great for. You don’t even have to start a relationship, you can play the field as long as you want and it only gets better as you age. It’s way more preferable to the convenience of staying at home all day. Also a guarantee that foids are way more attracted to an angry, roided out, stressed man who lost his only outlet that keeps him from actually procreating than a guy who just watches porn excessively and has no clue how to interact with bitches.

>>510359644 (OP)
The only reason prostitution is illegal here is because women want to maintain a monopoly on pussy power. It's amazing that their control is so absolute that not a single person or group is a pushing to legalize prostitution despite the obvious benefits to modern men and especially to repressed incels. At the very least you would think the feminists would be advocating to legalize it on the grounds of "my body my choice", but no. Not a peep.

>>510371614
What determines harm?
There are species who reproduce by rape. Would they have laws punishing sexual assault?
There are solitary animals who don't care about violence against other members of their kind. Would they have laws punishing murder?
There are species where males fight for access to females. Would they punish aggravated assault and sex trafficking?

harm is clearly based on human natural aversions.

>inb4 something about litigating drawings of monkeys
I don't know what you two are arguing about, and I don't care.

>>510376938
>ummm but what if... uhhh... like, crocodiles had laws? would they ban eating your own children?
>check-mate
You two are on just about the same level. kek

>>510375729
>remove your safe sexual outlet and try to have promiscuous hookups with random women that you gotta court, pay, and spend a ton of effort/time on
Doesn't sound like great advice for men. What does that solve exactly? It wouldn't lead to stable relationships, increases risk for disease, getting fucked over by women and isn't a realistic long term solution to deal with sexual desire.

>>510373535
You have very bad discussion and debate skills

>>510359644 (OP)
>hypothetical
Waste of time.
Tell her everyone is equally accountable, the men watching and the whore, and they should all be stoned to death.
Say you support this because all indians are coomers so you get the extinction of indians as an added bonus.

>>510378785
>You have very bad discussion and debate skills
I can stomp you effortlessly at any debate, but I'm literally too smart to waste any more energy on the """debate""" psyop and other manifestations of the Westeroon intellectual fashion that promotes impotence, frustration and learned helplessness. I'm here to piss and shart on you, not to "discuss" or "debate".

>>510361982
Boomer alert! Boomer alert! Women are just as or more horny than men. Why you don't see this: you're no Chad no matter how hard you cope, Brad. You have to soft-force women into sex by socially relegating the best woman as equal to or below the average man, or they all chase Chads and Women Are Wonderful their ways into high paying and socially influencial positions!

As for your second paragraph, I think you are on the mark.

>>510374319
>Foids nowadays open their legs for everyone
No, no they really don't.

>>510359644 (OP)
>I was arguing with a femoid the other day
no.

>>510362886
What do you think male genital mutilation is, you old hag?

>>510359644 (OP)
It’s part of male nature to associate female nudity with sex. Even if it was illegal to sell women would still use sec to get what they want. Should we make that legal as well and put women in veils and burkas?

Ever notice how these societal corrections that women suggest never involve any sort of female responsibility? Porn should be illegal but if women want to post their coochie online it’s girl power because they should be able to use their sexuality to get what they want from men. This is the logic of the average feminist.

>>510380724
>put women in veils and burkas?
its one option, I don't know that we have to go that heavy handed. maybe just don't let them out of the house without a male chaperone would be enough.

>>510372487
>>510373535
Just fucking deport yourself to the Congo, you nigger-brained ape. This is why we have an East-West split in Europe

>>510381005
why should porn be illegal?

>>510381633
Why are you losing your mind with impotent rage? The legal principle he brings up applies only for civil litigation. The state can and will prosecute citizens for simply breaking the law. They don't have to prove any damages. You're an inbred subhuman like almost everyone else on this board so you need it explained to you, but you're also a morally repugnant kike-like insect so you'll try to deny the fact I've just presented.

>>510381765
Because jews profit off it

>>510381765
>why should porn be illegal?
Because it's degenerate. Next.

>>510359644 (OP)
Without P&P, there would be free range rape.
Which is just live irl P&P.

>>510382048
posting under a moldova flag is degenerate.

>>510382151
If so, I'm sure you can present your case and convince people with good sensibilities to rally for your cause of getting me banned. Good luck.

>>510382320
since you're a trolling jannie I doubt it.

>>510359644 (OP)
If the state wants to it is incredibly easy for them to get a website removed from the clearweb. So if they don't do that, you can conclude that it's because they don't want to do it. So then you have to wonder, what would the real reason be to arrest anyone who visits said website? It just doesn't add up...

>>510382543
implying they are aware of the website
implying they are collecting data on you

>>510382474
Sounds like your case against my flag is less compelling to normal, sensible people than the case against disseminating images of torn assholes, anal prolapses, people shitting and pissing on each other, white women taking multiple nigger cocks in every hole and other things "people" like you consider normal.

>>510382772
lets not allow anything that you do not consider normal to exist.
why are you so offended by what someone else is doing?
do you think that woman would choose you if the nigger was not an option?

when in doubt, try this
CLINICAL TEST QUESTION
>are you descended from south asian subcontinental ancestry?
any answer longer than "no" means yes
not answering means yes
lying means yes

>>510369052
There is a responsibility to make citizens cognizant of it and we have poorly implemented access grants for citizens to access the modern world. That failure is one of the lagging tails making Things Fall Apart now.
It was their responsibility. They smirked, mocked, and lackadaisically implemented it.

there was never any good reason to share a country, a language, or the internet with pajeets

pajeets should be posting on bharatchan and living on the subcontinent

>>510383103
>lets not allow anything that you do not consider normal to exist.
This is meaningless noise. A non-statement. The bottom line is that people always get fed up with degenerates sooner or later and start banning and punishing degeneracy. "Why should we ban [vile and degenerate pollution]?" is another bunch of meaningless mouth noises. It has no practical value and no intellectual substance. No one asks this except degenerates and no one needs to answer it except in the way "because we want to and we can".

>WHAT IS A PAJEET?
the best way to define pajeet is
>descended from south asian subcontinental ancestry.

political distinctions on maps or signified by flags are false and irrelevant. everything south of the himalayas that isn't gooky-chinky is pajeet. pakistan, india, bangladesh, sri lanka are all pajeet territory. enough of nepal is jeeted that they may as well qualify too.

all of these pajeets could stay where they belong and call themselves what they like, and nobody would disagree because nobody cares. however, because they profusely shit up the internet, and they mass migrate to shit up everyone else's homelands, they're all pajeets now. all counted together as the same thing, on the same visiting team as far as the human world is concerned.

hindu, muslim, sikh, atheist, etc; male, female, gendersexual, old, young, etc; deformed, odorless, fair & lovely, dark & deep, everything in between, etc... forget all of it. none of that proud heritage matters once they exit designated land to race with the globalist rats. now their entire overcrowded neighborhood at the bottom of asia is known as one source of one type of trespasser: the pajeet.

>ONLY A PAJEET DISPUTES THIS DEFINITION

>>510361982
Thank-you for framing this in a way that it will cause anons to think and possibly have dialectic discourse on the subject. You can tell other anons have already responded and added in the replies.

>>510383380
sex is degenerate.

the majority of pajeets on /pol/ try to hide the fact that they're pajeets. in addition to "leaving that part out" they will proactively, persistently misrepresent their true form. pajeets are all about assuming other people's roles, from today's outsourcing and replacement migration all the way back to thuggee bandits lying to travelers about who they were. pajeets are devoid of their own identity, making them the ideal globalized goyim. they don't want a home where they belong. all that means to them is "compete in squalor." much better to go somewhere nicer, built by other people, and do their jobs for less pay and live slum-barracks life in their suburbs. pajeets don't want to be home. they also don't want to be pajeets. jews know exactly how to play their insecurities and dopey ambitions like the innocent rube fresh off the bus from the cornfield. this is their new golem to replace the ones that don't love them anymore

pajeets lost indiachan in the spring of 2023 because it drew unwanted attention as a cp swap meet. they have since replaced it with bharatchan, but former indiachan enjoyers don't find enough of what they want there

>>510383541
You think you're making some clever rational skeptic rabbinistic pilpul but eventually the laws that actually govern reality cause pic related to happens.

>>510383770
the death of 20 million europeans?
based.

>>510383879
Anyway, your botlike spam is pretty boring and we both know you cry on reddit about le neo-Nazis and anti-semites and how much "right-wing extremists" endanger your democracy in between your posts. ID goes to the filter now.

it's time to rethink a lot of jewish permissiveness now that the third world is huddled on everyone's doorstep. we're not going to have "mature consenting adult" type of shit happening. we're talking about pajeets and the rest of the trash that never had such unchecked access to your family before now

I'd honestly argue that prostitution is a lot more of a net positive for society than the prevailing custom of dating.
For starts, a prostitute and a John are at least being honest with each other, while two people dating off of tinder are trying to dance around the fact that taking a woman to a restaurant is transactional. It's just not as good of a value for the male as it is for the woman. The woman at least gets free food one way or the other. It's considered a cardinal sin to address the fact that women primarily select their mates based on either resources or the perceived ability to gain those resources, but it's absolutely the case and there's not really anything wrong with it. Obviously, because nobody is more harshly judged than a woman who decides to open her legs for a man who can't provide for the child. She's told she made a bad decision, which implies that his finances were supposed to be the main basis of that decision.

Second, a prostitute isn't under any delusions that she can do anything without this guy who went out and got that money. Most of the modern career and corporate scene exists for two purposes. "Give my rich, shitty son a leadership position, and make sure he has a wide selection of groomed and intelligent women to try and sleep with." The entire thing is a pyramid scheme propped up on the shoulders of the people who make the sacrifices necessary to produce value. It does not produce an intrinsic value to society on its own, but it exists as a way to keep any of the plebeians from getting too close to the blue blood goods, by convincing said goods that they're a hotshot businessperson, instead of a hot piece of ass that Shekelstein likes seeing in a pencil skirt.

It's all subjugation of lower class men, at the heart of it.

>>510384069
right wing wouldn't ban porn.

>>510359644 (OP)
you argued with a hole lmao

>>510384808
Wow I never realized how majestic and stoic the average Indian man is. Beautiful.

>>510369481
It wouldn't be anti-feminist terror bombings. It'd be anti-christcuck terror bombings since they're the ones pushing for this.

only a few specific groups have the time or inclination to spam anti-christianity so frequently. one of these groups (pajeets) is much more numerous and less qualified than the others

everything that was known as jews or trannies 2+ years ago is now massively outsourced to pajeets

Anora and Breakfast at Tiffany's won Oscars, between them Pretty Woman became one of the most popular movies of all time. Let Hollywood form your opinions and shape your soul, they know best.

@grok is this true?

all pajeets are working for jews, including the ones who perform antisemitism and say all the things they learned to say on /pol/. they are also serving the jew agenda. how? by speaking english and living in everyone else's countries. spectre, multiculturalism, mass migration, kalergi plan. don't even bother acting like pajeets oppose jews in any way. they support jews simply by their nature, by crowding into every opening gatekeepers offer them to enter the west and degrade it

OP never had that conversation. OP probably never speaks with women irl.

>>510386741
How would you have felt if you hadn't eaten breakfast?

there was never any good reason to share a country, a language, or the internet with pajeets

>>510386852
Speak plainly to me. Thats all I ask. Whats your angle and metaphor with this?

this site sucks.