x
Click to expand

krobeles

Last status update:
-
Personal Info
Gender: male
Date Signed Up:8/08/2012
Last Login:3/27/2015
Location:Denmark
Funnyjunk Career Stats
Comment Ranking:#2591
Highest Content Rank:#2711
Highest Comment Rank:#1055
Content Thumbs: 1631 total,  1916 ,  285
Comment Thumbs: 5395 total,  10712 ,  5317
Content Level Progress: 30% (30/100)
Level 116 Content: Funny Junkie → Level 117 Content: Funny Junkie
Comment Level Progress: 91% (91/100)
Level 243 Comments: Doinitrite → Level 244 Comments: Doinitrite
Subscribers:1
Content Views:101157
Times Content Favorited:72 times
Total Comments Made:3857
FJ Points:6058
Favorite Tags: fucking (2) | shit (2)

latest user's comments

#23 - Truth is precisely what you wrote that it was. Truth is our be…  [+] (6 new replies) 02/03/2015 on Accurate +8
User avatar #26 - invaderfromthesea (02/03/2015) [-]
It's not an argument that should convince anyone, but vaccine injuries do exist, even doctors admit it. They're mostly caused by human mistakes, not vaccines themselves, however they're directly related, meaning that vaccines do present a potential threat to health and, in ridiculously improbable case, life. Once again, it's not a strong argument, but it's a valid one. That's the reason why not everyone is immunized and why herd immunity is needed.

This proves one thing: You've focused on proving that you're right so much that you didn't even consider you might be wrong and check is there any truth in what the other side says. It's what I've consider an extreme.

So really, chill down. If you aren't cool, you'll miss the details more easily. Try being more open-minded. You know what the truth is, as in how it's just an opinion. If you see opinion you disagree with, provide your arguments. Maybe they simply never had a chance to find good arguments supporting vaccines, just like you never noticed this small argument against them.
User avatar #181 - krobeles (02/04/2015) [-]
So your arguement is;

"There are arguements, but they're ridiculously bad arguements"?

Do you see how that just simply doesn't hold up?
If the danger of vaccines - a danger I am entirely convinced even exists - is caused by human error, then the debate should be about why doctors recieve such shuddy training that a simple thing such as a vaccine might pose a threat, not as to the danger of vaccines. It should be a critique of the entire medical system and perhaps the universities who educate these doctors. That would be a valid arguement, and I know for a fact that it has a decent amount of basis to it.
But trying to use human error to propose an anti-vaccine arguement, just makes you look like an idiot.

This isn't a detail that at all changed anything about the debate. It isn't a detail that probed anything. Its just a detail thats also there.
If anything, it just proves how flimsy the arguements are against vaccines, and further cements the mental deficiency of the people who attempt to make such arguements.

Arguement - sourceless though it may have been - reviewed, and promply dismissed. Are there more arguements, or was that it?
User avatar #182 - krobeles (02/04/2015) [-]
Urgh, we should have a botton to correct our comments, which works in like the first minute after posting...
I meant to write:

"If the danger of vaccines - a danger I am not entirely convinced even exists - is caused by human error"
#138 - anonymous (02/04/2015) [-]
Calm the fuck down, Socrates. You're the one who riled people up then suddenly started spouting off bullshit about being "calm and rational". No one is criticizing parents who have kids who have good reasons to avoid vaccinations like illness or a low immunity.
#31 - CallMeCrisco has deleted their comment.
User avatar #33 - invaderfromthesea (02/04/2015) [-]
Read the first paragraph. Read it out loud. Or even just a first sentence. "It's not an argument that should convince anyone". Then second to the last sentence. "Once again, it's not a strong argument, but it's a valid one".

Why every time I admit there is a valid argument against vaccines, people magically forget how many times I've wrote that I support them and assume I'm some brainless anti-vax?

If the third biggest cause of death in the U.S. is hospital related, then it's an argument against hospitals. However does the existence of one valid argument against something magically makes all arguments supporting it unimportant? No. If there are more and better arguments supporting it, then arguments against it are considered less important. Less, not not important at all.
#134 - I'm sorry. I supose I should've been explicit, in stating that…  [+] (1 new reply) 02/03/2015 on 'Murica Comp 0
#157 - deaminzaints (02/03/2015) [-]
im seeing your autism shine through. no, wait, it was faggotry.
#126 - Are you autistic? Not everything needs to be taken ultra liter…  [+] (4 new replies) 02/03/2015 on 'Murica Comp 0
#131 - deaminzaints (02/03/2015) [-]
well no you didnt. everything you said in your comment had the implication that you thougth that he was objectively bad. if you dont realise this, then its easy to see why you are autistic.
how could you possibly make it so that most people wouldnt misunderstand you? well dont exagerate about feeling physical pain, dont call him idiot and dont say "you are wrong to do that".
with no way to hear your tone of voice, sarcasm is hard to convey on a text based conversation, it diffenitly dosent help when the person trying to be sarcastic, is also bad at doing it.
#137 - anonymous (02/03/2015) [-]
ignore him
hes a retarded troll
you can tell by his obsession with the word "autism"
#134 - krobeles (02/03/2015) [-]
I'm sorry. I supose I should've been explicit, in stating that I did not experience physical pain from seeing written words? In my interpritation of physical reality, written words cannot cause physical pain unless you're being wacked with a book or possibly computer monitor, and then its hardly the fault of the words.
To clarify: I did not experience physical pain.
I did not think it nessesary to clarify such a glaring obvious fact, but aparently, some people are too hamstringingly autistic to infer the simplest little things.

Life's gonna be tough for you, man. I hope you're good at math.
#157 - deaminzaints (02/03/2015) [-]
im seeing your autism shine through. no, wait, it was faggotry.
#21 - Dude, ******* , listen up. These **** nugget…  [+] (11 new replies) 02/03/2015 on Accurate +22
User avatar #149 - munchlord (02/04/2015) [-]
We actually have antivaxxers in other places as well. I'm from Europe and we get people spouting anti-vax shit on facebook all the time linking this or that shit-source from the US. It's just that all they really do is circle jerk because nobody, media mostly included, pays much attention to their BS.

But no, it's not an issue unique to the US sadly.
User avatar #180 - krobeles (02/04/2015) [-]
I actually wasn't aware of that.
Holy fuck...
User avatar #22 - invaderfromthesea (02/03/2015) [-]
No, sorry. I've wrote a long, boring post, but in fact it's pointless. I'll try to keep it short. Forgive me for not relating to all of points you've made.

However I must refer to one thing. "Finding the truth". What the fuck is truth? It's an opinion we have. It's a possibly temporal model of reality that we can fix or change if we notice it doesn't reflect the reality. So while now, all arguments considered, vaccines are good, it doesn't mean that 10 years in the future they won't be seen as the biggest atrocity in the history of medicine, because, let's say, they cause cancer. Doubting means someone looks for the truth, being doubtless means someone thinks he has found it.

You're a self-righteous, stubborn extremist. For some reason, your solution to problems with parents is always taking children away. Let's take away all children, because sooner or later any parent will fuck something up. Children surely will be happy growing healthy without their parents. They'll thank you for saving them from evil clutches of malevolent, murderous parents.

Question: Do you know any valid arguments against vaccines? If yes, then what is it? Answer me these two questions correctly, so I can restore my faith that you aren't just as dumb as people who yell that parents who vaccinate their children should have their children taken away.
#24 - anonymous (02/03/2015) [-]
Listen, mate. A parent with no medical background has no right to decide that they should ignore the advice of their medical professional in regards to getting treatment for their child. Jesus christ, dude. Sure, maybe in ten years we'll find out that vaccines cause cancer, even though that would make no sense and mean that a great deal of our well-established understanding of biology is completely wrong, but there's no way a soccer mom living in suburban America can predict that because they don't know shit about medicine

You're a bit of an ass, mate, and you can't see the big picture.
User avatar #23 - krobeles (02/03/2015) [-]
Truth is precisely what you wrote that it was. Truth is our best guess as to the nature of reality. Technically, we have no hard evidence that when I throw an apple into the air, that it will fall towards the earths center. Thats just an assumption we make, based on previously observed tendencies. However, its proven itself such an unpermeable fact, that we've chosen to accept it as universal truth, that an object will seek the point of lowest gravitational potential.
That is what truth is. Our best guess as to the nature of reality, based on previously observable facts. The fact that most of us has accepted gravitation as universal truth doesn't mean we're not looking into it any further, but it does mean we're doubtless as to the existance/non-existance of gravity. The fact you would seek to demonize people who are doubtless about something and glorify people who conssistently ponder glaringly obvious things like this, makes me think you're either an idiot or a philosophy student...Which basically is an idiot, with an inflated ego.

I am self-righteous on this matter, but I wouldn't consider myself stubborn nor nessesarily an extreamist. If anyone - literally anyone - would pressent me with a credible source which actually agrees that vaccines are bad, I will consider the position anew. Untill somebody does, I will continue to dismiss it as violently and extreamly as I have done here. I could be considered an extreamist, in the sense that I violently, fervently and extreamly oppose baseless assertions which harms mutliple people on a global scale. It is the same reason I - and many, many others - oppose terrorism. Terrorism is also a bseless assertion about something, which drives its zealots to harm and sometimes kill others, in the same of their conviction. While I am not saying that anti-vaccine people are as bad as terrorists, I am useing the comparison because the same reason for opposition exists. Both have resulted in mutiple deaths by the hands of its zealots, and both are equally baseless.

So no. I do not know any valid arguements against vaccines, in precisely the same manner as I dont know of any valid arguements for the existance of God, Odin, Vishnu, Lamashtu, Phlogiston, Æther, Alchemy or Orgone Energy. I dont deal in baseless, unempirical theories anymore than a theologist deals in empirical truth.

If you have any evidence to support an anti-vaccine arguement, I'de be happy to review it, just as I would be happy to review any suposed evidence for the existance of God or Æther.
User avatar #26 - invaderfromthesea (02/03/2015) [-]
It's not an argument that should convince anyone, but vaccine injuries do exist, even doctors admit it. They're mostly caused by human mistakes, not vaccines themselves, however they're directly related, meaning that vaccines do present a potential threat to health and, in ridiculously improbable case, life. Once again, it's not a strong argument, but it's a valid one. That's the reason why not everyone is immunized and why herd immunity is needed.

This proves one thing: You've focused on proving that you're right so much that you didn't even consider you might be wrong and check is there any truth in what the other side says. It's what I've consider an extreme.

So really, chill down. If you aren't cool, you'll miss the details more easily. Try being more open-minded. You know what the truth is, as in how it's just an opinion. If you see opinion you disagree with, provide your arguments. Maybe they simply never had a chance to find good arguments supporting vaccines, just like you never noticed this small argument against them.
User avatar #181 - krobeles (02/04/2015) [-]
So your arguement is;

"There are arguements, but they're ridiculously bad arguements"?

Do you see how that just simply doesn't hold up?
If the danger of vaccines - a danger I am entirely convinced even exists - is caused by human error, then the debate should be about why doctors recieve such shuddy training that a simple thing such as a vaccine might pose a threat, not as to the danger of vaccines. It should be a critique of the entire medical system and perhaps the universities who educate these doctors. That would be a valid arguement, and I know for a fact that it has a decent amount of basis to it.
But trying to use human error to propose an anti-vaccine arguement, just makes you look like an idiot.

This isn't a detail that at all changed anything about the debate. It isn't a detail that probed anything. Its just a detail thats also there.
If anything, it just proves how flimsy the arguements are against vaccines, and further cements the mental deficiency of the people who attempt to make such arguements.

Arguement - sourceless though it may have been - reviewed, and promply dismissed. Are there more arguements, or was that it?
User avatar #182 - krobeles (02/04/2015) [-]
Urgh, we should have a botton to correct our comments, which works in like the first minute after posting...
I meant to write:

"If the danger of vaccines - a danger I am not entirely convinced even exists - is caused by human error"
#138 - anonymous (02/04/2015) [-]
Calm the fuck down, Socrates. You're the one who riled people up then suddenly started spouting off bullshit about being "calm and rational". No one is criticizing parents who have kids who have good reasons to avoid vaccinations like illness or a low immunity.
#31 - CallMeCrisco has deleted their comment.
User avatar #33 - invaderfromthesea (02/04/2015) [-]
Read the first paragraph. Read it out loud. Or even just a first sentence. "It's not an argument that should convince anyone". Then second to the last sentence. "Once again, it's not a strong argument, but it's a valid one".

Why every time I admit there is a valid argument against vaccines, people magically forget how many times I've wrote that I support them and assume I'm some brainless anti-vax?

If the third biggest cause of death in the U.S. is hospital related, then it's an argument against hospitals. However does the existence of one valid argument against something magically makes all arguments supporting it unimportant? No. If there are more and better arguments supporting it, then arguments against it are considered less important. Less, not not important at all.
#16 - Dude, your arguement is effectively the following; &q…  [+] (14 new replies) 02/03/2015 on Accurate +23
User avatar #17 - invaderfromthesea (02/03/2015) [-]
No, my argument is: "Parents aren't wrong to refuse vaccines for their children, because lies saturate our society, and finding the truth is hard making it easy to lose your way". You're saying it as if parents weren't doing it for the sake of their children. They care and that's why they make mistakes. Mocking them and being needlessly aggressive makes people less likely to listen to you, so instead of yelling at them, try to argue with them like a civilized person. If they listen and reconsider their opinion, you've just proven your point and contributed to the herd immunity. If they're stubborn idiots who'll cling to one rumor they've heard from a neighbor who has seen it on TV, then you've my full support in insulting them. However these are rare cases. Also, while your argue with someone, listen to their arguments as well. Because there are valid arguments against vaccines. If they use these, you know that they simply made a mistake in calculations somewhere and will most likely be easily convinced.

So really, getting angry at people, because they made a mistake, will make them stop listening to you. If I'd come to you, spit in your face and tell you that the government should take away your child, would you listen to me calmly or get emotional? Because only with calm mind on both sides you can prove that vaccines are the lesser evil.
#107 - anonymous (02/04/2015) [-]
I've tried many times to say this type of thing on this website. Red thumbs flow your way when you state people whould keep a calm mind on both sides.
#21 - krobeles (02/03/2015) [-]
Dude, fucking, listen up.
These fuck nuggets are believing what they want to believe. Finding the truth isn't hard at all, we have the fucking internet. These dimwits wants dearly, to believe the lie that the government is evil and doctors are evil scum, therefor they jump on the first and worst source that agrees with that. It has fuck-all to do with doing whats best for their children and everything to do with mentally deranged lunatics, who puts their own paranoid gumption ahead of their childs safety.

I can be very civil during a discussion in which the topic is a subjective or fringe matter, which may be hard to grasp or unearth. I dont nessesarily get annoyed with some uninformed tosser, because he/she believes that the universe is a mere 10000 years old or some shit like that. Understanding universal expansion, the invariance of the speed of light or nuclear processes takes a bit of effort, so thats not so easy to figure out.
But when the topic is "Do vaccines cause autism?" and the answer can be found by two google searches, one being; "Is there a physical and/or chemical basis to suggest that vaccines cause autism?" and the second being; "Is there statistical evidence to suggest that vaccines cause autism?" and that the answer to both will be universally "NO!!" , then I will gladly and smugly insult that person untill I feel like its not fun anymore.

If you're too fucking retarded to handle the afformentioned google searches, just listen to the professionals and do as they tell you. If you're too dumb to find the truth yourself and too thick to accept the truth when its lain bare before you, by experts who spend hours upon hours probing the world to uncover that information for you, then it has nothing to do with the truth being hard to find or is it easy to lose your way. Then, it has everything to do the parents being fucking dung wielding toss-fucks, who wouldn't recognise anything but a swift and brutal punch to the throat!

Frankly, I dont care if those people get angry with me or if they stop listening to me. They obviously weren't paying attention in the first place, so it changes little to nothing. I just want their children vaccinated by force and taken away from their parents. Those parents are obviously unfit to take care of themselves, much less children.

But honestly, this isn't really an issue outside of the USA, so I dont know why I am getting so worked up over this. The people who refuse vaccines, are likely the same kinds of people who believe that America is infinitely afloat in a lonely sea of immigrant mexican workers, and that the rest of the world is a fairy tale told by evil liberals to pepetuate their machivellian agenda, or whatever. Those people are probably physically unable of leaving American soil without shivering up like raizins.
User avatar #149 - munchlord (02/04/2015) [-]
We actually have antivaxxers in other places as well. I'm from Europe and we get people spouting anti-vax shit on facebook all the time linking this or that shit-source from the US. It's just that all they really do is circle jerk because nobody, media mostly included, pays much attention to their BS.

But no, it's not an issue unique to the US sadly.
User avatar #180 - krobeles (02/04/2015) [-]
I actually wasn't aware of that.
Holy fuck...
User avatar #22 - invaderfromthesea (02/03/2015) [-]
No, sorry. I've wrote a long, boring post, but in fact it's pointless. I'll try to keep it short. Forgive me for not relating to all of points you've made.

However I must refer to one thing. "Finding the truth". What the fuck is truth? It's an opinion we have. It's a possibly temporal model of reality that we can fix or change if we notice it doesn't reflect the reality. So while now, all arguments considered, vaccines are good, it doesn't mean that 10 years in the future they won't be seen as the biggest atrocity in the history of medicine, because, let's say, they cause cancer. Doubting means someone looks for the truth, being doubtless means someone thinks he has found it.

You're a self-righteous, stubborn extremist. For some reason, your solution to problems with parents is always taking children away. Let's take away all children, because sooner or later any parent will fuck something up. Children surely will be happy growing healthy without their parents. They'll thank you for saving them from evil clutches of malevolent, murderous parents.

Question: Do you know any valid arguments against vaccines? If yes, then what is it? Answer me these two questions correctly, so I can restore my faith that you aren't just as dumb as people who yell that parents who vaccinate their children should have their children taken away.
#24 - anonymous (02/03/2015) [-]
Listen, mate. A parent with no medical background has no right to decide that they should ignore the advice of their medical professional in regards to getting treatment for their child. Jesus christ, dude. Sure, maybe in ten years we'll find out that vaccines cause cancer, even though that would make no sense and mean that a great deal of our well-established understanding of biology is completely wrong, but there's no way a soccer mom living in suburban America can predict that because they don't know shit about medicine

You're a bit of an ass, mate, and you can't see the big picture.
User avatar #23 - krobeles (02/03/2015) [-]
Truth is precisely what you wrote that it was. Truth is our best guess as to the nature of reality. Technically, we have no hard evidence that when I throw an apple into the air, that it will fall towards the earths center. Thats just an assumption we make, based on previously observed tendencies. However, its proven itself such an unpermeable fact, that we've chosen to accept it as universal truth, that an object will seek the point of lowest gravitational potential.
That is what truth is. Our best guess as to the nature of reality, based on previously observable facts. The fact that most of us has accepted gravitation as universal truth doesn't mean we're not looking into it any further, but it does mean we're doubtless as to the existance/non-existance of gravity. The fact you would seek to demonize people who are doubtless about something and glorify people who conssistently ponder glaringly obvious things like this, makes me think you're either an idiot or a philosophy student...Which basically is an idiot, with an inflated ego.

I am self-righteous on this matter, but I wouldn't consider myself stubborn nor nessesarily an extreamist. If anyone - literally anyone - would pressent me with a credible source which actually agrees that vaccines are bad, I will consider the position anew. Untill somebody does, I will continue to dismiss it as violently and extreamly as I have done here. I could be considered an extreamist, in the sense that I violently, fervently and extreamly oppose baseless assertions which harms mutliple people on a global scale. It is the same reason I - and many, many others - oppose terrorism. Terrorism is also a bseless assertion about something, which drives its zealots to harm and sometimes kill others, in the same of their conviction. While I am not saying that anti-vaccine people are as bad as terrorists, I am useing the comparison because the same reason for opposition exists. Both have resulted in mutiple deaths by the hands of its zealots, and both are equally baseless.

So no. I do not know any valid arguements against vaccines, in precisely the same manner as I dont know of any valid arguements for the existance of God, Odin, Vishnu, Lamashtu, Phlogiston, Æther, Alchemy or Orgone Energy. I dont deal in baseless, unempirical theories anymore than a theologist deals in empirical truth.

If you have any evidence to support an anti-vaccine arguement, I'de be happy to review it, just as I would be happy to review any suposed evidence for the existance of God or Æther.
User avatar #26 - invaderfromthesea (02/03/2015) [-]
It's not an argument that should convince anyone, but vaccine injuries do exist, even doctors admit it. They're mostly caused by human mistakes, not vaccines themselves, however they're directly related, meaning that vaccines do present a potential threat to health and, in ridiculously improbable case, life. Once again, it's not a strong argument, but it's a valid one. That's the reason why not everyone is immunized and why herd immunity is needed.

This proves one thing: You've focused on proving that you're right so much that you didn't even consider you might be wrong and check is there any truth in what the other side says. It's what I've consider an extreme.

So really, chill down. If you aren't cool, you'll miss the details more easily. Try being more open-minded. You know what the truth is, as in how it's just an opinion. If you see opinion you disagree with, provide your arguments. Maybe they simply never had a chance to find good arguments supporting vaccines, just like you never noticed this small argument against them.
User avatar #181 - krobeles (02/04/2015) [-]
So your arguement is;

"There are arguements, but they're ridiculously bad arguements"?

Do you see how that just simply doesn't hold up?
If the danger of vaccines - a danger I am entirely convinced even exists - is caused by human error, then the debate should be about why doctors recieve such shuddy training that a simple thing such as a vaccine might pose a threat, not as to the danger of vaccines. It should be a critique of the entire medical system and perhaps the universities who educate these doctors. That would be a valid arguement, and I know for a fact that it has a decent amount of basis to it.
But trying to use human error to propose an anti-vaccine arguement, just makes you look like an idiot.

This isn't a detail that at all changed anything about the debate. It isn't a detail that probed anything. Its just a detail thats also there.
If anything, it just proves how flimsy the arguements are against vaccines, and further cements the mental deficiency of the people who attempt to make such arguements.

Arguement - sourceless though it may have been - reviewed, and promply dismissed. Are there more arguements, or was that it?
User avatar #182 - krobeles (02/04/2015) [-]
Urgh, we should have a botton to correct our comments, which works in like the first minute after posting...
I meant to write:

"If the danger of vaccines - a danger I am not entirely convinced even exists - is caused by human error"
#138 - anonymous (02/04/2015) [-]
Calm the fuck down, Socrates. You're the one who riled people up then suddenly started spouting off bullshit about being "calm and rational". No one is criticizing parents who have kids who have good reasons to avoid vaccinations like illness or a low immunity.
#31 - CallMeCrisco has deleted their comment.
User avatar #33 - invaderfromthesea (02/04/2015) [-]
Read the first paragraph. Read it out loud. Or even just a first sentence. "It's not an argument that should convince anyone". Then second to the last sentence. "Once again, it's not a strong argument, but it's a valid one".

Why every time I admit there is a valid argument against vaccines, people magically forget how many times I've wrote that I support them and assume I'm some brainless anti-vax?

If the third biggest cause of death in the U.S. is hospital related, then it's an argument against hospitals. However does the existence of one valid argument against something magically makes all arguments supporting it unimportant? No. If there are more and better arguments supporting it, then arguments against it are considered less important. Less, not not important at all.
#106 - I felt a sharp spike of physical pain, from being in so close …  [+] (7 new replies) 02/03/2015 on 'Murica Comp 0
#124 - deaminzaints (02/03/2015) [-]
i cant be wrong when its a matter of taste mister.
you cant be wrong if you dont like certain food since peoples tastebuds develop in different ways and thus dont like the same.
you cant be wrong for a having a different sexual orientation or fetish since your personality and experiences have made you like those things.

so no. the idiot would be the guy who thinks taste is a matter of wrong and right.
#126 - krobeles (02/03/2015) [-]
Are you autistic? Not everything needs to be taken ultra literally.
By "You're wrong to do that" I didn't mean to say that you're literally objectively wrong, but merely that I think he sucks.

Seriously. I am autistic myself, and I would've understood that easily. I think you need to go see a doctor about that. I can recommend you a few good people...
#131 - deaminzaints (02/03/2015) [-]
well no you didnt. everything you said in your comment had the implication that you thougth that he was objectively bad. if you dont realise this, then its easy to see why you are autistic.
how could you possibly make it so that most people wouldnt misunderstand you? well dont exagerate about feeling physical pain, dont call him idiot and dont say "you are wrong to do that".
with no way to hear your tone of voice, sarcasm is hard to convey on a text based conversation, it diffenitly dosent help when the person trying to be sarcastic, is also bad at doing it.
#137 - anonymous (02/03/2015) [-]
ignore him
hes a retarded troll
you can tell by his obsession with the word "autism"
#134 - krobeles (02/03/2015) [-]
I'm sorry. I supose I should've been explicit, in stating that I did not experience physical pain from seeing written words? In my interpritation of physical reality, written words cannot cause physical pain unless you're being wacked with a book or possibly computer monitor, and then its hardly the fault of the words.
To clarify: I did not experience physical pain.
I did not think it nessesary to clarify such a glaring obvious fact, but aparently, some people are too hamstringingly autistic to infer the simplest little things.

Life's gonna be tough for you, man. I hope you're good at math.
#157 - deaminzaints (02/03/2015) [-]
im seeing your autism shine through. no, wait, it was faggotry.
#110 - kaboomz (02/03/2015) [-]
Dane Cook's Best Scene i find him funny as well
#56 - People dont ******* care. I've never heard him mentione…  [+] (1 new reply) 02/03/2015 on Goodbye Monty 0
#81 - anonymous (02/03/2015) [-]
So we're pretending to care about a man who inspired many starting animators and brought joy to those who appreciated his works, just because every day that he wasn't dead, we didn't have a fucking parade in his honor?

People become topics of discussion and mourning when they die, and many people, including myself, are torn to pieces over the sad circumstances that led to his death. Get the fuck over it.
#24 - I actually consider that a far more reasonable position, than … 02/03/2015 on CTRL C, CTRL V +1
#36 - That ***** not entirely fool proof though. Here. T… 02/03/2015 on School +1
#113 - Alright, cool. I agree. Just wanted to be sure... I s…  [+] (1 new reply) 02/03/2015 on FJ: Good vs. Evil (Morality... 0
User avatar #115 - ranoche (02/03/2015) [-]
the biggest thing holding the world back in energy needs is batteries which have barely changed in two hundred years. If someone ever wants solar or wind to really pick up they need to make a more efficient battery for large scale objects. Until someone figures that out then nuclear energy is king and is only getting better
#22 - While you're technically correct, that process isn't really th… 02/03/2015 on This fucked me up +1
#107 - Is your answer to nr 5, implying that you think Nuclear power …  [+] (3 new replies) 02/03/2015 on FJ: Good vs. Evil (Morality... 0
User avatar #111 - ranoche (02/03/2015) [-]
fuck no. nuclear power is the future until the rest play catch up. However without regular maintenance and supplies it gets bad quick and during a world level disaster people kind of get distracted and these places would suffer. Nuclear power is amazing but it isn't something that can be left alone and be okay
User avatar #113 - krobeles (02/03/2015) [-]
Alright, cool. I agree. Just wanted to be sure...

I sincerely hate the "Nuclear power? No thanks!" crowd. Those T-shirts are worn exclusively by people who know abselutely fuck all about nuclear physics or even just nuclear power.
User avatar #115 - ranoche (02/03/2015) [-]
the biggest thing holding the world back in energy needs is batteries which have barely changed in two hundred years. If someone ever wants solar or wind to really pick up they need to make a more efficient battery for large scale objects. Until someone figures that out then nuclear energy is king and is only getting better
#162 - >being friendly Well, that rules out like 98% of a… 02/03/2015 on Mod application page 0
#55 - I think being pressent as the universe began, would pretty muc…  [+] (1 new reply) 02/03/2015 on FJ: Good vs. Evil (Morality... +27
User avatar #57 - ezzay (02/03/2015) [-]
sure... but not if you got to the future first to get an anti-the-big-bang-is-going-to-wreck-my-shit device
#365 - >night and day Holy ******* **** , yo… 02/03/2015 on What is Admin? 0
#68 - He didn't buy a second bullet though? 02/03/2015 on Natural Selection +1
#65 - Wait, what? So he was like; "Well, I tried to kill m…  [+] (3 new replies) 02/03/2015 on Natural Selection +1
User avatar #67 - tyrson (02/03/2015) [-]
Also, I think there's an argument for someone wanting a quick, easy death but definitely not wanting to bleed out painfully.
User avatar #68 - krobeles (02/03/2015) [-]
He didn't buy a second bullet though?
User avatar #66 - tyrson (02/03/2015) [-]
I'm not sure. The story was secondhand from his brother, who wasn't there when it happened.
#21 - Seriously. **** you, you close minded dim wit. Try to l… 02/03/2015 on /b/ solves crime 0
#85 - Sure. My favorite tabletop roleplaying system has to be The Wo…  [+] (1 new reply) 02/02/2015 on Would you D&D with me? I'd... 0
User avatar #87 - Sethorein (02/02/2015) [-]
I am new to DM based tabletop. Started with Mansions of Madness. I only lament how little time was spent balancing. Makes DMing half being good at setting the tone and challenging the investigators and half explaining house rules to prevent OP combos for me and my investigators.
#21 - Why dont you make me? If you can get off your armchair for all… 02/02/2015 on 7/11 -2
#65 - Its a good "childs first pen'n paper". If you've nev…  [+] (3 new replies) 02/02/2015 on Would you D&D with me? I'd... 0
User avatar #82 - Sethorein (02/02/2015) [-]
there are better tabletop games?
User avatar #85 - krobeles (02/02/2015) [-]
Sure. My favorite tabletop roleplaying system has to be The World of Darkness, but I've had a fairly entertaining time with the system Shadowrun as well.
There are many more, but those are the only ones I've had a decent amount of experience with, aside from DnD/Pathfinder.
User avatar #87 - Sethorein (02/02/2015) [-]
I am new to DM based tabletop. Started with Mansions of Madness. I only lament how little time was spent balancing. Makes DMing half being good at setting the tone and challenging the investigators and half explaining house rules to prevent OP combos for me and my investigators.
#18 - Thank you. I do try my very best. Good to see its paying off.  [+] (2 new replies) 02/02/2015 on 7/11 -1
User avatar #19 - sliferzpwns (02/02/2015) [-]
Kill yourself
#21 - krobeles (02/02/2015) [-]
Why dont you make me? If you can get off your armchair for all the fat.
#16 - Well, even something as simple as that, I think merits a prope…  [+] (1 new reply) 02/02/2015 on When Users Stickie a... 0
User avatar #17 - coolguyhomo (02/02/2015) [-]
Exactly, ignorance, as I said.
#14 - Honestly, that seems like an immensely dumb statement. Ju…  [+] (3 new replies) 02/02/2015 on When Users Stickie a... +4
User avatar #15 - coolguyhomo (02/02/2015) [-]
I agree In my mind I was suggesting things such as bigotry or plain old ignorance
User avatar #16 - krobeles (02/02/2015) [-]
Well, even something as simple as that, I think merits a proper refutation.
Simply telling a racist "You're wrong! Blacks aren't inferior!" without anything to back that statement up, wont really change anyones mind.
Perhaps even more so with these simple things, since its usually pretty easy to refute bigotry and especially if the person is just factually incorrect.
User avatar #17 - coolguyhomo (02/02/2015) [-]
Exactly, ignorance, as I said.
#18 - I repeat for the slow of mind: Not everyone has the …  [+] (2 new replies) 02/02/2015 on /b/ solves crime +1
User avatar #20 - immatakeaduty (02/03/2015) [-]
Well sweet man, I'm really happy you don't share the same standards. I do, it really makes me feel like the better person in this situation.

you go ahead and keep fucking kids, sick pedo fuck.
User avatar #21 - krobeles (02/03/2015) [-]
Seriously. Fuck you, you close minded dim wit. Try to look beyond your own nose-tip for once in your life. You might find interesting shit going on, beyond that hefty wall of arrogance, dumbness and self importance.

items

Total unique items point value: 2050 / Total items point value: 2250

Comments(58):

[ 58 comments ]
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
#72 - krobeles ONLINE (12/12/2014) [-]
Comment Picture
User avatar #62 - lifeisnocabaret (08/30/2014) [-]
Now you wanna be civil?! Where did that come from? Fine, we'll have a discussion.

Women have to fear death too. Like, usually the fear of rape comes with the fear of death. And you can argue what you did when it comes to gangs messing with guys on the street, but that's the same for women by other women. Like, I know some girls who get messed with by the Latin Kings because they're Hispanic girls. I do not see how these issues even out. Maybe quantitatively, but not when it comes to the level of danger and effect. But if they did (and please clarify for me with legitimate examples), these issues have one thing in common: notions of masculinity, whether it be inter-gendered or intra-gendered. Those guys that beat you up started messing you because they thought you looked like a faggot. That's a hierarchy of sex right there: straight males have the right to attack homosexual males in an attempt to display their masculinity. Men are affected negatively by notions of masculinity also, but the effect of masculinity on males is seen more in the male treatment of women. And these notions of masculinity, while also in part perpetuated by women, are largely and more easily perpetuated by men. This is why feminism is here, and this is why women are more affected than men: men are taught masculinity, which shapes them as people and shapes their treatment of women, which leads to women taking more of the damage than men.

This is not creating a culture of victims. This is giving people something tangible to fight against. Naming a common cause of this type of gendered violence allows the fight to be fought more realistically. Naming a more specific root of a problem is more effective than just generalizing everything because violence is born and molded in different ways.

You're right about more women being accepted into universities, but when it comes to professional studies (law school, med school, etc.) less women are being accepted.

Hold on. I'm not done.
User avatar #63 to #62 - lifeisnocabaret (08/30/2014) [-]
A flaw of feminism is that there is not enough discussion on the oppression faced by people experiencing the intersectionality of being minority and a woman. That's in part why womanism was born, but many feminists incorporate intersectionality into their beliefs.

And that story about your mom? One success story doesn't mean equality. Many of the women in my family immigrated from Mexico and became pregnant as teenagers. Many of the women in my family were also raped or molested. My grandmother was beaten by her husband, and many of the women in my family and in this culture are expected to stay in the house and fulfill their roles as women. This isn't just limited to my family, it's everywhere. These issues do exist.
User avatar #64 to #63 - krobeles ONLINE (08/30/2014) [-]
Alright, lets try something alittle different.
We can agree that women face some issues, yes? We can also agree that men face some issues, yes? We can furthermore agree that they share a number of common issues and that atleast a few of them share a common cause? If we can agree on this, why are we having this discussion in the frame of womens issues and why is the movement called Feminism?

To a degree, I agree with you on the masculinity thing. I have this skirt that I think I love just lovely in, but I rarely find it aproriate to wear that, because I know what people will think of a dude in a skirt. And thats sort of my issue with the feminist movement. I am not saying that women dont face issues and I am not saying the issues they do face are allways insignificant. But forming a humanitarian movement which attacks a grand social problem, but to face solely on the issues faced by one gender, is subtle sexism in and of itself.

Its also important to note that assholes and idiots will always exist. I see alot of these feminists attacking the "How not to get raped" things, with stupid ******** like "Dont teach women not to get raped, teach not to rape!", which is just silly.
We could apply this logic to common acts and thievery and see it fall apart. "Dont tell me to lock my door, tell thieves not to rob my house!". It is true that thieves and thugs never have the right to rob/rape you, but if you dont take steps to pretend and desentavise them from doing so, then you automatically forfiet a small part of your right to complain.
And in that same regard, I dont go around spouting ******** like "Teach people not to assault men people in skirts with long hair!", I just accept that such savage behavior is inherent in some particularily nasty people, and find ways to prevent it myself. I own a few weapons in my home, and I know a basic few things of self defence.

I dont believe that feminism gives women "something tangible to fight against". It provides a nebulous threat of the ominous "Patriarchy" and "Male-opression" to fight against. Since the easily explained (very dumbed down) cause this is white males, you suddenly have alot of these women who feel disenfranchised and run-down, who suddenly find something to point at and go "Thats the cause of all my problems!". Since they've forgotten to mention that the thing they're fighting against hurts all parts of society equally, these women never really stop to consider if perhaps they're attacking the problem from the wrong angle or if they're attacking the wrong people.

Just as you say that one success story doesn't a trend make, I dont feel like your family experience is anymore valid an example. Rot festers in places in which it is not cleaned out, and if there has been an unfortunate trend in your family of abuse, then it is a given that it will continue unless someone makes an effort to cut out the rot.

Ultimately, what I said about feminism not not attacking the right issues can be linked to this. If what you claim happened to your family is the general trend amongst Mexican/African famillies, then that is a serious problem which needs to taken care of. However, it seems to me that the general feminist movement are far more interested in applying their efforts towards comparatively harmless videogames and TV-shows, which are totally and entirely insignificant in comparison to actual family abuse and rape.

This leads me to believe that the new feminist movement isn't really about equality, but rather just a fandom-esque circlejerk in which its members are more concerned with the tiny minute issues they might concievably face, rather the actual big and serious issues which actually needs their attention.

Well, to comment on the civil discussion thing, taking a few minutes to play a game of tower defence, and making a conceded effort to appear less of an angry shouty person in order to facillitate more constructive debate, does its thing rather well. Also, I largely view insults and shouty-debates as a form of humor. So long as I'm just trying to trying to get a rail out of people, I insult them. Theres a certain art to a well constructed and imaginative insult, I find. However, if the says or does something that belies the potential for actually interesting debate, its another matter entirely.
User avatar #65 to #64 - lifeisnocabaret (08/30/2014) [-]
We're having this discussion in the frame of women's issues because it does effect women in a more detrimental way and it *is* more perpetuated by men. I mentioned that men go through oppressions also, like the pressure to be masculine, but many of those pressures are self-perpetuated and the result is displayed in their relationships toward women. And it is called feminism because femininity is not limited to women. It is not subscribed to one gender or sex.

The concept of a humanitarian movement is good in theory, but there's issues in that we wouldn't be able to prevent the perpetuation of oppression without knowing where it comes from. Let's take gangs as an example. A lot of inner city groups are preaching to kids that "violence is bad," something everyone has been hearing for the longest time. However, things like this aren't working. What works instead is legislation that targets poverty and expands opportunity and education, which is keeping kids off the street. We can have a whole anti-violence movement, but fighting violence in general is too grand of a scale to address realistically. Narrowing down oppression allows us to take the fight one step at a time. Not to mention that forming groups like these also give people a sense of community in what they're facing.

Hold on I"m not done
User avatar #66 to #65 - lifeisnocabaret (08/30/2014) [-]
Okay, honestly with the "don't teach women how to not get raped, teach not to rape" thing, I only agree 50%. Yeah, we do have to put more of the focus in preventing sexual assault on the perpetrator, but we also need to teach everyone how to stay safe and stay away from risky behaviors in a way that doesn't result in someone saying, "well, she was hanging with the wrong crowd, so maybe she wouldn't have gotten raped if she wasn't where she was" or something like that. Victims see enough of a reason to blame themselves without stuff like this being said. And if by "complain" you mean be angry or upset, then you do still have a right to complain, because while steps could have been taken to prevent stuff like this, the perpetrator could have *not* raped the victim. You mention "teach people not to assault men in skirts with long hair." While I am sorry you were assaulted, and while this should NOT have happened to you, there is no trend of men wearing skirts and getting assaulted. There is a big trend of women and men getting raped by males though.

Feminism exists past the internet, past funnyjunk, past 4chan and past tumblr. Don't make the mistake of wrongly labeling a whole group of people because of popular opinion on these websites. True feminists are not attacking anyone. White males are pointed at (not attacked) as a cause because (1) they have the most power in society, and (2) the fact that most don't have to deal with discrimination based on sex, race or gender creates a feeling of disdain in the white male community for these people that are fighting these issues. Honestly, that's how it is. If you're more exposed to racism, you'd care more about ending it. The same goes with sexism. I mean, look at funnyjunk. The largest community here is white, male and straight. Look at how much easier this anti-feminism thing floated compared to a place like tumblr, where a good fraction of the users are female and not white.

Hold on
User avatar #67 to #66 - lifeisnocabaret (08/30/2014) [-]
I was wary about mentioning my family, but I thought it was okay since I don't know you and you don't know me. I can assure you that these issues are not limited to my family, and please refrain from comparing them to "rot," even if you do see it as fit.

The grand feminist movement is not focused on video games and such. The internet/tumblr feminist movement is. And I definitely wouldn't argue these video games and whatever are harmless. I'm gonna make a cliche argument, but just because it's cliche doesn't mean it's not true: it hurts self esteem. Seeing all these sexy girls in video games, music videos, and everywhere else in the ******* media sucks. Seeing guys drool over those girls also sucks. Women are oversexualized and we're pressured to look like them. It's cliche but it's true.

Feminism is not a circle jerk. I'm just saying feminism concerns more than tumblr and the internet.

Okay now I'm done
User avatar #68 to #67 - krobeles ONLINE (08/30/2014) [-]
The thing about teaching people "not to rape" though, is that that is impossible. As I said, there will allways be assholes, and they know full well that rape is wrong. They just dont care, because they're egotistical asshats.
I was just useing myself as an example (I've never been assaulted while wearing the skirt, actually), of something that would be equally silly.
Of course you still have some right to complain - it is still wrong to rape or assault people regardless of what they wear or how they behave - but you have to admit that the complaint falls alot shorter if the person in question took active steps to put himself/herself in harms way to begin with?
You could liken it to a person climbing onto a scaffolding and then falling down and breaks both legs. Is it regrettable that the person fell and broke both legs? Yes. Was it rather expected, based on circumstance and the poor safety measure the person had set up? Yes.

I am not so sure about the "Feminism exists past the internet"-thing. Of course it is reasonable to assume that there is the odd feminist every now and again, but on a grander scale, the only people I've ever met who claimed themselves feminists is two girls who associate with the Tumblr crowd on the internet. They're more a physical extension of the internet-Tumblr-feminists than actual feminists. Other than them, I've never anyone who claimed themselves feminist. It might because all of what you've happened is more of an issue in the states, than it is in Denmark, but it still doesn't do much to make me convinced that actual - none-Tumblr - feminists actually exists.
This is why I largely allow the Tumblr-feminists view to be indicative of all feminists. I've never met a non-tumblr feminists in all my 21 years, and I therefor dont really have faith that they exist outside of the internet.

Which is actually another thing I've come to consider. Since many of the Tumblr feminists seem to be American and preoccupised with strictly American issues, I am starting to consider that perhaps America might suffer infinitely more from these issues discriminatory issues than the European countries (Well, Denmark, atleast). But I dont see the Tumblr-feminists treating it as an American problem dispite the fact that it might be a strictly American problem. This comes back to what I mentioned with the feminists being an angry hate-club which're just looking for their next big issue to be offended over. I'm sure that if they stopped for five minutes and looked at some of the silly things they get offended over, they would see how silly it is. Instead though, they're much too busy yelling and shouting angryly at game developers, who had the audacity to make their female character busty.

I wasn't comparing your family to rot. I was comparing the aparent trend of violence and rape to rot. Just because a person commits a rotten action, does not a rotten person make. I actually intended to write something along those lines in my comment, but I must've forgot. Sorry if you took it the wrong way.

As I explained above, I dont think that there really is a true divide between "the grand feminist movement" and the tumblr feminists.
If the video game thing hurts the self esteem of some people, then I honestly think that they those need to grow a spine, sorry to say. There are dudes in video games too, who are insanely buff and masculin beyond anything realistic. The dudes that aren't, are insanely intelligent and sucessful in busness or whatever. Should men be offended at this depiction of dudes?
Thats why we call it fiction. Its not suposed to be taken as seriously as some feminists do and claim other women do as well. Its an idealized version of a woman marketet to a predominantly white male teen audience. What do you think sells well with white teenage dudes? Tits, of course. Its not a question of discrimination or objectification, its a question of marketing. White teenage guys likes tits, so the corporations gives them tits.
Add this to the fact that almost all of my female friends I've asked directly if they feel offended or objectified by fictional works, says they find it silly and of course they dont. I think this problem lies with the self-esteem of the people who complain about it. Its not that these images and materials cause bad self esteem in women, its that these images remind women who allready suffer from bad self esteem, how ****** they feel about themselves. Sorry if this seems a bit cynical; but we cant pander to a group of mentally ill people, who complain about something no person with proper self esteem and self image would find the least bit offensive. The lowest common denominator should not dictate the direction the crowd moves.
This is not to say that I nessesarily condone the way females are portrayed in games and general media. I think they hamstrings themselves, by reducing females in the way they do. This goes for men aswell. No interesting plots are going to arise from a story in which all females are card-board cutouts with latex tits plastered onto, and all males are gruff handsom flawless Adonis wanna-bes who can solve 3rd grade differential equations in their heads while bench pressing 4 times their own weight.
Outside of the detrimental effects to storytelling that it has, I cant view this as anything other than one of those silly null-issues I complain about the feminists being all too keen to focus on, while ignoring the grander problems.

I dont believe that men systematically opress women. Not here in the rest anyway. Those in power opress those not in power. Its been like that forever and it'll likely continue to be like that a long time into the future too. A good bunch of those in power are white males, which is a left-over from a time in which white males did actually opress everyone not white and not male. Non-white non-males just haven't had the chance to bleed up through the molasses-like power structure that we've instituted. Thats not opression, thats just a matter of fact.

I feel like you handicap the conversation by framing it this context, when what you're really complaining about is a grander social problem, not singularily suffered by women. It would be like discussing war casualties as a mens issue, because the majority of soldiers are men. Dont you think the female soldiers would be slightly pissed off, about the fact that they're role and their pains in the army is effectively being ignored?

User avatar #69 to #68 - lifeisnocabaret (08/30/2014) [-]
See? No. It shouldn't matter if people took "active steps to put themselves in harm's way." We're way to focused on that. If "harm's way" qualifies as being with a man late at night, than that vilifies men way more than anything else. We need to teach people not to rape. And rape is a preventable thing, because the main reason men--and yes, the majority of perpetrators are men--rape is because they want to feel power. Power, of course, is a characteristic of masculinity. The male need to feel power is the male need to feel masculine. Again, the reason this whole feminism thing exists is to fight trends. There is a trend of men who rape. The is a trend of women getting raped. There is a trend of masculinity being pushed by men and there is a trend of men needing to feel power. This is not silly.
The connection to the scaffolding isn't valid because there is no perpetrator. An accident is different than flat out assault. You cannot, by any means, blame a victim like that. No one deserves rape and we shouldn't treat any case as lesser because "she was wearing a skirt too short" or "she was out with the wrong crowd." That's always the first thing people think about--what the girl was doing wrong--rather than why the guy raped her or what he shouldn't have done. And how many times can guys catch themselves doing the same thing with no consequence? Men can be out late at night with women. Men can walk around with no shirt and not be raped. It just happens on a much larger scale with women.

hold on
User avatar #70 to #69 - lifeisnocabaret (08/30/2014) [-]
A big part of the feminism we're discussing is feminism in America. I can definitely contest that feminism exists outside of the internet. I know many feminists who are not using social networks in their practice at all. There are many thinkers--bell hooks, for example--that are held up to a high standard and that would disagree with the things that the "tumblr feminists" say. If you really aren't exposed to this group and are actually ignorant to it, then how can this part of your argument have a good foundation?

There is a problem with that. You mention a white male audience when it comes to video games, but about half of the gaming audience is women. And women are sexualized more in games, that's just it. I'll take Resident Evil as an example. Leon and Chris have big muscles, yes, but look at the females in the game. Clare is wearing tight clothes and whatever, but what bothers me most is that in every RE games she's in, the camera focuses on her ass and pans up her body at least like 3 times per game. And look at Ada (if you never played these games you should google these characters). She runs around in a ******* long red, sexy dress and high heels in RE4, and it is clear that Leon is caught in a spell because of her. It's always Leon sexualizing her, not the other way around. And the villains in RE. The majority of the male villains are old men, like Salazar in RE4 and Birkin in the Darkside Chronicles--while the female villains are like, almost naked and sexy in a weird monster way. But if you still think that "males are just as sexualized as females," and if you have a problem with it, say something. Don't get mad at other people for saying something they have a problem with by claiming you have a problem with something else--fix it.
And all of this oversexualization is related to MASCULINITY. That's what I've been saying. The oversexualization of men is also related to masculinity and the idea that men can't be heroes unless they're masculine. hold on
User avatar #71 to #70 - lifeisnocabaret (08/30/2014) [-]
These video games enforce these notions of masculinity both ways and in turn enforce notions of power. It's all about the mindset these things perpetuate.

It is oppression because it is a matter of fact. That's how ingrained it is--we believe we can't fight it. You can't say oppression doesn't exist, even in places like America, because there is a type of person that succeeds and there is a type of person that doesn't, and it mostly doesn't boil down to laziness or true inferiority. It's about who's "at risk" to fail and who's not "at risk." Not everyone has equal opportunity and not everyone is born to the same circumstances, and it mostly depends on race, class and gender, and that's why these individual tiers have individual activism groups. We can't just say "well people are always gonna be oppressed" and not do anything about it, because no where in America's history (and hardly anywhere in world history) were white, straight males oppressed. Everyone else was.

For the last part of your argument, again, females are more negatively affected by this. Masculinity is related to power and sex and it is displayed in the male treatment of women. I've addressed this already.
User avatar #42 - revengeforfreeze (11/06/2013) [-]
yYOUS AN BRON?!
User avatar #43 to #42 - krobeles ONLINE (11/06/2013) [-]
ehm, say what now??
User avatar #44 to #43 - revengeforfreeze (11/09/2013) [-]
you're a brony?
User avatar #45 to #44 - krobeles ONLINE (11/09/2013) [-]
I dont identify as one, no.
Why?
User avatar #46 to #45 - revengeforfreeze (11/09/2013) [-]
>joined ponytime
>posted pony content
User avatar #47 to #46 - krobeles ONLINE (11/09/2013) [-]
So? That dosen't make me a brony. That makes a dude who watches My Little Pony.
I recon theres a differance.
User avatar #48 to #47 - revengeforfreeze (11/09/2013) [-]
well okay
i didnt know the difference tbh
User avatar #49 to #48 - krobeles ONLINE (11/09/2013) [-]
Its more of a personal thing, actually.
I view the "Bronies" as the greezy fat neck bearded Otaku-wannabies who attend cons and cosplay girls.
I'm not one of those.
User avatar #51 to #50 - krobeles ONLINE (11/09/2013) [-]
Why'de you ask anyway?
User avatar #52 to #51 - revengeforfreeze (11/09/2013) [-]
don tnkow.
User avatar #53 to #52 - krobeles ONLINE (11/09/2013) [-]
Weeell...Aaalright then..G'day...
#33 - danzeebass **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
#32 - warlordvegeta **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #30 - gemleonn (12/21/2012) [-]
Why is it every time I go to someone's profile to call them a ****** , there's always some weird pony **** going on?
#28 - usernameiskill **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
#26 - verminator (12/21/2012) [-]
Sup ***** !
User avatar #23 - elitefourkoga (12/21/2012) [-]
You're a ****** , harry.
User avatar #22 - orx (12/21/2012) [-]
This ******** got some kinky **** on his profile.
User avatar #21 - swifterly (12/21/2012) [-]
****** .
User avatar #17 - nunc (12/21/2012) [-]
User avatar #16 - martiini (12/21/2012) [-]
Hey, ****** .
User avatar #15 - orx (12/21/2012) [-]
****** .
#13 to #12 - zonryu (10/26/2012) [-]
and the last one is of fluttershy as a witch
User avatar #14 to #13 - zonryu (10/26/2012) [-]
good day to you sir
[ 58 comments ]
Leave a comment
 Friends (0)