Home Original Content Funny Pictures Funny GIFs YouTube Funny Text Funny Movies Channels Search

hide menu

perronfan    

Rank #30150 on Subscribers
perronfan Avatar Level 197 Comments: Anon Annihilator
Offline
Send mail to perronfan Block perronfan Invite perronfan to be your friend flag avatar
Last status update:
-
Personal Info
Date Signed Up:4/03/2012
Last Login:1/30/2013
Funnyjunk Career Stats
Content Thumbs: 6584 total,  7540 ,  956
Comment Thumbs: 977 total,  1581 ,  604
Content Level Progress: 83% (83/100)
Level 165 Content: Soldier Of Funnyjunk → Level 166 Content: Soldier Of Funnyjunk
Comment Level Progress: 50% (5/10)
Level 197 Comments: Anon Annihilator → Level 198 Comments: Anon Annihilator
Subscribers:2
Content Views:186521
Times Content Favorited:306 times
Total Comments Made:1135
FJ Points:7662
Favorite Tags: it (4) | hi (2) | You (2)

latest user's comments

#180 - THUMBED DOWN FOR TRUTH.. **** you FJ and you 12 ye… 09/29/2012 on OC +1
#177 - OKAY...read Leviticus. and the early church killed hundreds of…  [+] (10 new replies) 09/29/2012 on OC +1
User avatar #243 - chucknorrisTHEGAME (09/29/2012) [-]
I've read Leviticus. I'm not in support of the actions of a corrupt, early church, nor are many in the religions I'm trying to defend.
I'm also not saying that all marriages are perfect, nor am I saying that without a marriage, a child cannot be raised. I'm simply saying that their philosophy of "If two people truly love each other, this is a good foundation for a family. Let them wait a year before marriage so they can make sure this is a good idea for them, and if that year has only strengthened their relationship and love, then this is likely a good environment for a child: under the care of two loving people. Now that they are ready for a child, under the sanctity of marriage, they can have sex and produce a child who we have tried as hard as we can to give a loving family," seems pretty selfless, and I can understand why people believe in it (I, myself am all for children being raised in loving households)

I'm not saying condoms are only used by drunk people, though I understand how I may have mistyped to make it sound that way. I'm saying that condoms break; not often, but they do. And unless you are ready for the commitment of a child, then having sex isn't fair to the potential child that may result.

Though I may be wrong about this, because my lack of having sex and my waiting for the right time may have led to a disorder I was unaware of.
User avatar #256 - perronfan (09/29/2012) [-]
and you said corrupt early church...it is still corrupt and will never stop ebing corrupt they sell a lie...and sorry you feel that way about sex, and that is a very naive approach to teach people shouldnt have se unless they want children
User avatar #276 - chucknorrisTHEGAME (09/29/2012) [-]
I don't understand why that's naive. Children come from sex, that's simple biology. You can take measures to try to prevent that, but those don't always work. So unless you are ready for the condom to break, unless you are ready for the responsibility of a human life, unless you are ready for a child, you aren't ready for sex.
I understand that most people don't think sex means anything, so in that case there's no reason to take my view seriously. But I think it means something regardless of popular opinion, and I'll stand by that.
User avatar #290 - perronfan (09/29/2012) [-]
well of course sex means somethign its a very intimate and emotional act, but teachign kids thats its wrong until children and not teaching them that it is a enjoyable and in relationships a bonding experience and teaching them all the ways that can be taken to avoid pregnancy is dangerous for children developmetn and mental development. once again sexual repression and disfunction(which often comes from teachign of abstince and not teaching any other form of sex ed) leads to emotional and psychological disorders and not properllfy functional adults
User avatar #328 - chucknorrisTHEGAME (09/29/2012) [-]
Can I ask you a serious question about sex if it isn't for children? I'm not trying to form an illogical argument or liken gay marriage to this or anything, I'm genuinely wondering.

If sex is not to be used for procreation, if condoms and birth control etc. are good and sex is to be used for fun, then what's wrong with incest?
User avatar #340 - perronfan (09/29/2012) [-]
well incest generally would occur between an adult male and underage girls and boys who see their father as the leader and beleive what he says and sex at a too early age and without education can lead to the same/ if not more psychological disfunction and emotional trauma and incest has a much higher risk of resulting in a genetic disorder of the offspring but that isnt really a easy arguyment to defend as incest is seen differently around the world as all right as many poeple in certain north african tribes are very closely related and intercopulate which would be considered a form of incest, but if two consensenting adults that have enough knwoledge and are okay with ti there is nothing wrong, i for one find incest offputting and something that is taboo, but once again that is a social issue where abstinense and sexual education is needed for proper development of a child(but sexual repression also leads to disfunction msot likely form social pressures) that is a weird place to argument from and i hope i answered in a way you find satisfactory but if not call me a faggot and ill try again
User avatar #348 - chucknorrisTHEGAME (09/29/2012) [-]
Nope, that makes sense. And I've been trying throughout this discussion to remain civil and avoid name calling. I was just curious, because a lot of people who have this discussion with me say sex is for fun, but incest is "just wrong!" without backing it up, and then call others bigots for saying the same about other groups of people. I appreciate that all of your standpoint agrees with itself.
#349 - perronfan (09/29/2012) [-]
today...op was a pretty cool guy
User avatar #308 - chucknorrisTHEGAME (09/29/2012) [-]
I'm not saying we should take education out of schools. I'm saying I can understand their view that sex is for marriage because marriage is for children and sex creates children. In personal philosophy, I think that it means more that just fun and a bonding experience, and I think it will mean much more when it's only ever shared with one other person. Though that it's everyone's philosophy, and I understand that.
What I'm trying to say is that sex DOES have the possibility of children, no matter how much you try to lessen that possibility, so people need to know that. And people need to make sure they're prepared for such a possibility if they choose to have sex.
Personally, I don't think I could handle the possibility better than being in a marriage, where I could make sure my child has two loving parents who are both there for each other and him/her.
User avatar #358 - perronfan (09/29/2012) [-]
well that is a great philosphy and the sexual repression stuff im talking about is when that kids are taught that is evil and then they dont know how to deal with feelings when they reach puberty or have urges and learn to hate their own feelins and not to enjoy soemthign that is a great experience, but as for you personally that is a really cool stance and having a healthy understanding about is the main thing as you obviously do im jsut saying about peopel who are told its evil or never educated, that leads to MANY problems
#165 - so why cant they have marriage? 09/29/2012 on OC 0
#130 - and its not about the title...its about the legal things that … 09/29/2012 on OC -1
#127 - Library of Alexandria, Pope and the Third Reich, Mother Terres…  [+] (12 new replies) 09/29/2012 on OC 0
User avatar #152 - chucknorrisTHEGAME (09/29/2012) [-]
I personally don't think the corrupt actions of individuals/groups belonging to any organization (republican/democratic/Christian/Jewish/American/Canadian, etc.) should be a reflection of their philosophy. Many people purposely misinterpret or deliberately go against the philosophy for their own personal gain, which doesn't mean the entire group was okay with the action.
The condoms thing leads back to the marriage thing, though. They believe that sex should stay within a marriage, not because they have old 50's philosophies, but because with a condom, a child can still be conceived and deserves a better environment to be raised in than two people who got drunk one night; and in a marriage, condoms shouldn't be used because the marriage was for the child in the first place. They think sex is for the purpose of procreating and having good environments for children (which seems pretty selfless, in my opinion at least). So they believe that sex shouldn't just be had for fun (however much of a side-benefit fun may be).
User avatar #177 - perronfan (09/29/2012) [-]
OKAY...read Leviticus. and the early church killed hundreds of thousands of people and completely destroyed history and culture or dozens of NATIONS all in the name of them saying that THEY had foudn the true god. that was the entire organization. And yes because every environment with a marriage IS PERFECT FOR CHILDREN and every non married couple is awful for children. and sexual repression leads to psychological and developmental disorders. and condoms are only used by drunk people? your logic is fun. Once again, defending religion of anykind is a losing position so have fun.
User avatar #243 - chucknorrisTHEGAME (09/29/2012) [-]
I've read Leviticus. I'm not in support of the actions of a corrupt, early church, nor are many in the religions I'm trying to defend.
I'm also not saying that all marriages are perfect, nor am I saying that without a marriage, a child cannot be raised. I'm simply saying that their philosophy of "If two people truly love each other, this is a good foundation for a family. Let them wait a year before marriage so they can make sure this is a good idea for them, and if that year has only strengthened their relationship and love, then this is likely a good environment for a child: under the care of two loving people. Now that they are ready for a child, under the sanctity of marriage, they can have sex and produce a child who we have tried as hard as we can to give a loving family," seems pretty selfless, and I can understand why people believe in it (I, myself am all for children being raised in loving households)

I'm not saying condoms are only used by drunk people, though I understand how I may have mistyped to make it sound that way. I'm saying that condoms break; not often, but they do. And unless you are ready for the commitment of a child, then having sex isn't fair to the potential child that may result.

Though I may be wrong about this, because my lack of having sex and my waiting for the right time may have led to a disorder I was unaware of.
User avatar #256 - perronfan (09/29/2012) [-]
and you said corrupt early church...it is still corrupt and will never stop ebing corrupt they sell a lie...and sorry you feel that way about sex, and that is a very naive approach to teach people shouldnt have se unless they want children
User avatar #276 - chucknorrisTHEGAME (09/29/2012) [-]
I don't understand why that's naive. Children come from sex, that's simple biology. You can take measures to try to prevent that, but those don't always work. So unless you are ready for the condom to break, unless you are ready for the responsibility of a human life, unless you are ready for a child, you aren't ready for sex.
I understand that most people don't think sex means anything, so in that case there's no reason to take my view seriously. But I think it means something regardless of popular opinion, and I'll stand by that.
User avatar #290 - perronfan (09/29/2012) [-]
well of course sex means somethign its a very intimate and emotional act, but teachign kids thats its wrong until children and not teaching them that it is a enjoyable and in relationships a bonding experience and teaching them all the ways that can be taken to avoid pregnancy is dangerous for children developmetn and mental development. once again sexual repression and disfunction(which often comes from teachign of abstince and not teaching any other form of sex ed) leads to emotional and psychological disorders and not properllfy functional adults
User avatar #328 - chucknorrisTHEGAME (09/29/2012) [-]
Can I ask you a serious question about sex if it isn't for children? I'm not trying to form an illogical argument or liken gay marriage to this or anything, I'm genuinely wondering.

If sex is not to be used for procreation, if condoms and birth control etc. are good and sex is to be used for fun, then what's wrong with incest?
User avatar #340 - perronfan (09/29/2012) [-]
well incest generally would occur between an adult male and underage girls and boys who see their father as the leader and beleive what he says and sex at a too early age and without education can lead to the same/ if not more psychological disfunction and emotional trauma and incest has a much higher risk of resulting in a genetic disorder of the offspring but that isnt really a easy arguyment to defend as incest is seen differently around the world as all right as many poeple in certain north african tribes are very closely related and intercopulate which would be considered a form of incest, but if two consensenting adults that have enough knwoledge and are okay with ti there is nothing wrong, i for one find incest offputting and something that is taboo, but once again that is a social issue where abstinense and sexual education is needed for proper development of a child(but sexual repression also leads to disfunction msot likely form social pressures) that is a weird place to argument from and i hope i answered in a way you find satisfactory but if not call me a faggot and ill try again
User avatar #348 - chucknorrisTHEGAME (09/29/2012) [-]
Nope, that makes sense. And I've been trying throughout this discussion to remain civil and avoid name calling. I was just curious, because a lot of people who have this discussion with me say sex is for fun, but incest is "just wrong!" without backing it up, and then call others bigots for saying the same about other groups of people. I appreciate that all of your standpoint agrees with itself.
#349 - perronfan (09/29/2012) [-]
today...op was a pretty cool guy
User avatar #308 - chucknorrisTHEGAME (09/29/2012) [-]
I'm not saying we should take education out of schools. I'm saying I can understand their view that sex is for marriage because marriage is for children and sex creates children. In personal philosophy, I think that it means more that just fun and a bonding experience, and I think it will mean much more when it's only ever shared with one other person. Though that it's everyone's philosophy, and I understand that.
What I'm trying to say is that sex DOES have the possibility of children, no matter how much you try to lessen that possibility, so people need to know that. And people need to make sure they're prepared for such a possibility if they choose to have sex.
Personally, I don't think I could handle the possibility better than being in a marriage, where I could make sure my child has two loving parents who are both there for each other and him/her.
User avatar #358 - perronfan (09/29/2012) [-]
well that is a great philosphy and the sexual repression stuff im talking about is when that kids are taught that is evil and then they dont know how to deal with feelings when they reach puberty or have urges and learn to hate their own feelins and not to enjoy soemthign that is a great experience, but as for you personally that is a really cool stance and having a healthy understanding about is the main thing as you obviously do im jsut saying about peopel who are told its evil or never educated, that leads to MANY problems
#123 - denies someone life.. 09/29/2012 on OC 0
#121 - SO ******* WHAT...oh cause its sacred to a bunch … 09/29/2012 on OC -3
#119 - only reason gay marriage isnt legal in all states is because…  [+] (19 new replies) 09/29/2012 on OC -2
User avatar #180 - perronfan (09/29/2012) [-]
THUMBED DOWN FOR TRUTH..fuck you FJ and you 12 year old indoctrinated faggots
User avatar #124 - chucknorrisTHEGAME (09/29/2012) [-]
They aren't trying to poison things, though I can see why people see it that way. They see the world differently, and they think that what people are doing can ultimately end up hurting themselves and a culture, even if it's not immediately seen. It makes some sense when you look at them opposing divorce because it's hard on kids, it really is hard on them, especially when the parents use them to get back at each other.
What they're trying to do, though perhaps misguidedly, is help people make what they think are decisions that will benefit everyone and make society better.
They very well may be wrong in this, and on this issue I think they are, but they're not trying to be hateful, they're trying to be helpful.
User avatar #157 - Marker (09/29/2012) [-]
I'm lingering on where you said that they believe they're helping people. Unfortunately, that's just not true in terms of recent years. More and more of the anti-gay marriage people don't even act like they're trying to help, it's just "all gays should burn in hell." That right there is what's wrong with people. I fully support freedom of religion, it's one of the most basic rights granted to all US citizens in the Constitution. However, that does not mean it is okay to shove your beliefs down other people's throats, which is what so many of these idiots are doing now. If most of the people who are against gay marriage used your initial arguments (comment #117), I would listen, disagree, and calmly state why I believe they are wrong. But that's not what's happening. No, these people have to resort to "because it's a sin," or "because god said so," because they can't use basic thought processes to form a decent argument.

(Allow me to introduce myself, Mr. Dickens. My name is William Shakespeare.)
User avatar #186 - chucknorrisTHEGAME (09/29/2012) [-]
Unfortunately, you're entirely correct there. But those people (as far as I can tell) are only against it for the purpose of being against something, without any real reason behind it. Those people are people who i do not sympathize with, and am not in support of at all. As I said in a response to perronfan (below), I don't think that the actions of some should represent the philosophy of the whole. Even in this case, if 60% are idiots, I'm trying to defend the 40% who aren't idiots, who actually have a firm belief in this and aren't in support of hate any more than anyone else is, from being called bigots and idiots. Though they may be wrong, the people who are trying to help, those are the ones i'm trying to defend.

(And nice to meet you Mr. Shakespeare, I'm a great fan of your works, and your comments that make me lol)
User avatar #255 - Marker (09/29/2012) [-]
The problem with extremists in any group, is that they make up very little of the group, but they speak so much louder than the majority. The feminists who believe all men are pigs? Minority of feminists. Al'Qaeda and Hamas? Minority of Muslims. Westboro Baptist Church? Vast minority of Christians. They're all like that little dog that barks extremely loudly that you couldn't imagine is so small until you see it.
User avatar #312 - chucknorrisTHEGAME (09/29/2012) [-]
I entirely agree with you, and I really wish that weren't so. Unfortunately, it is, which is why I want to at least try to point out that the loudest of the group shouldn't represent the whole of the group, and that they're not all bigots.
#127 - perronfan (09/29/2012) [-]
Library of Alexandria, Pope and the Third Reich, Mother Terresa and Haiti(google it). Condoms in Africa(AIDS is better than condoms apparently)...your move
User avatar #152 - chucknorrisTHEGAME (09/29/2012) [-]
I personally don't think the corrupt actions of individuals/groups belonging to any organization (republican/democratic/Christian/Jewish/American/Canadian, etc.) should be a reflection of their philosophy. Many people purposely misinterpret or deliberately go against the philosophy for their own personal gain, which doesn't mean the entire group was okay with the action.
The condoms thing leads back to the marriage thing, though. They believe that sex should stay within a marriage, not because they have old 50's philosophies, but because with a condom, a child can still be conceived and deserves a better environment to be raised in than two people who got drunk one night; and in a marriage, condoms shouldn't be used because the marriage was for the child in the first place. They think sex is for the purpose of procreating and having good environments for children (which seems pretty selfless, in my opinion at least). So they believe that sex shouldn't just be had for fun (however much of a side-benefit fun may be).
User avatar #177 - perronfan (09/29/2012) [-]
OKAY...read Leviticus. and the early church killed hundreds of thousands of people and completely destroyed history and culture or dozens of NATIONS all in the name of them saying that THEY had foudn the true god. that was the entire organization. And yes because every environment with a marriage IS PERFECT FOR CHILDREN and every non married couple is awful for children. and sexual repression leads to psychological and developmental disorders. and condoms are only used by drunk people? your logic is fun. Once again, defending religion of anykind is a losing position so have fun.
User avatar #243 - chucknorrisTHEGAME (09/29/2012) [-]
I've read Leviticus. I'm not in support of the actions of a corrupt, early church, nor are many in the religions I'm trying to defend.
I'm also not saying that all marriages are perfect, nor am I saying that without a marriage, a child cannot be raised. I'm simply saying that their philosophy of "If two people truly love each other, this is a good foundation for a family. Let them wait a year before marriage so they can make sure this is a good idea for them, and if that year has only strengthened their relationship and love, then this is likely a good environment for a child: under the care of two loving people. Now that they are ready for a child, under the sanctity of marriage, they can have sex and produce a child who we have tried as hard as we can to give a loving family," seems pretty selfless, and I can understand why people believe in it (I, myself am all for children being raised in loving households)

I'm not saying condoms are only used by drunk people, though I understand how I may have mistyped to make it sound that way. I'm saying that condoms break; not often, but they do. And unless you are ready for the commitment of a child, then having sex isn't fair to the potential child that may result.

Though I may be wrong about this, because my lack of having sex and my waiting for the right time may have led to a disorder I was unaware of.
User avatar #256 - perronfan (09/29/2012) [-]
and you said corrupt early church...it is still corrupt and will never stop ebing corrupt they sell a lie...and sorry you feel that way about sex, and that is a very naive approach to teach people shouldnt have se unless they want children
User avatar #276 - chucknorrisTHEGAME (09/29/2012) [-]
I don't understand why that's naive. Children come from sex, that's simple biology. You can take measures to try to prevent that, but those don't always work. So unless you are ready for the condom to break, unless you are ready for the responsibility of a human life, unless you are ready for a child, you aren't ready for sex.
I understand that most people don't think sex means anything, so in that case there's no reason to take my view seriously. But I think it means something regardless of popular opinion, and I'll stand by that.
User avatar #290 - perronfan (09/29/2012) [-]
well of course sex means somethign its a very intimate and emotional act, but teachign kids thats its wrong until children and not teaching them that it is a enjoyable and in relationships a bonding experience and teaching them all the ways that can be taken to avoid pregnancy is dangerous for children developmetn and mental development. once again sexual repression and disfunction(which often comes from teachign of abstince and not teaching any other form of sex ed) leads to emotional and psychological disorders and not properllfy functional adults
User avatar #328 - chucknorrisTHEGAME (09/29/2012) [-]
Can I ask you a serious question about sex if it isn't for children? I'm not trying to form an illogical argument or liken gay marriage to this or anything, I'm genuinely wondering.

If sex is not to be used for procreation, if condoms and birth control etc. are good and sex is to be used for fun, then what's wrong with incest?
User avatar #340 - perronfan (09/29/2012) [-]
well incest generally would occur between an adult male and underage girls and boys who see their father as the leader and beleive what he says and sex at a too early age and without education can lead to the same/ if not more psychological disfunction and emotional trauma and incest has a much higher risk of resulting in a genetic disorder of the offspring but that isnt really a easy arguyment to defend as incest is seen differently around the world as all right as many poeple in certain north african tribes are very closely related and intercopulate which would be considered a form of incest, but if two consensenting adults that have enough knwoledge and are okay with ti there is nothing wrong, i for one find incest offputting and something that is taboo, but once again that is a social issue where abstinense and sexual education is needed for proper development of a child(but sexual repression also leads to disfunction msot likely form social pressures) that is a weird place to argument from and i hope i answered in a way you find satisfactory but if not call me a faggot and ill try again
User avatar #348 - chucknorrisTHEGAME (09/29/2012) [-]
Nope, that makes sense. And I've been trying throughout this discussion to remain civil and avoid name calling. I was just curious, because a lot of people who have this discussion with me say sex is for fun, but incest is "just wrong!" without backing it up, and then call others bigots for saying the same about other groups of people. I appreciate that all of your standpoint agrees with itself.
#349 - perronfan (09/29/2012) [-]
today...op was a pretty cool guy
User avatar #308 - chucknorrisTHEGAME (09/29/2012) [-]
I'm not saying we should take education out of schools. I'm saying I can understand their view that sex is for marriage because marriage is for children and sex creates children. In personal philosophy, I think that it means more that just fun and a bonding experience, and I think it will mean much more when it's only ever shared with one other person. Though that it's everyone's philosophy, and I understand that.
What I'm trying to say is that sex DOES have the possibility of children, no matter how much you try to lessen that possibility, so people need to know that. And people need to make sure they're prepared for such a possibility if they choose to have sex.
Personally, I don't think I could handle the possibility better than being in a marriage, where I could make sure my child has two loving parents who are both there for each other and him/her.
User avatar #358 - perronfan (09/29/2012) [-]
well that is a great philosphy and the sexual repression stuff im talking about is when that kids are taught that is evil and then they dont know how to deal with feelings when they reach puberty or have urges and learn to hate their own feelins and not to enjoy soemthign that is a great experience, but as for you personally that is a really cool stance and having a healthy understanding about is the main thing as you obviously do im jsut saying about peopel who are told its evil or never educated, that leads to MANY problems
#434 - thats not bad for a reptile..thats a good looking cold blooded…  [+] (8 new replies) 09/29/2012 on Facts Comp 0
#435 - whodeargaydear (10/01/2012) [-]
Oh erm thanks :D
#436 - perronfan (10/02/2012) [-]
#437 - whodeargaydear (10/02/2012) [-]
#438 - perronfan (10/02/2012) [-]
#439 - whodeargaydear (10/03/2012) [-]
Flagged Comment Picture
This image was flagged 1360121469
<-- Idek.
User avatar #440 - perronfan (10/19/2012) [-]
DAFUQ
#441 - whodeargaydear (10/20/2012) [-]
#442 - perronfan (10/23/2012) [-]
#214 - was that a subtle jab at me being a COPIER  [+] (2 new replies) 09/29/2012 on 1990's Problems +1
User avatar #215 - piclemaniscool (09/29/2012) [-]
I'm... not sure.
#216 - perronfan (09/29/2012) [-]
dammit
#432 - tell me he/she lived to a ripe old age  [+] (10 new replies) 09/29/2012 on Facts Comp 0
#433 - whodeargaydear (09/29/2012) [-]
3 or 4?

; - ;

that's her <---
She was called General
#434 - perronfan (09/29/2012) [-]
thats not bad for a reptile..thats a good looking cold blooded animmal rigth there
#435 - whodeargaydear (10/01/2012) [-]
Oh erm thanks :D
#436 - perronfan (10/02/2012) [-]
#437 - whodeargaydear (10/02/2012) [-]
#438 - perronfan (10/02/2012) [-]
#439 - whodeargaydear (10/03/2012) [-]
Flagged Comment Picture
This image was flagged 1360121469
<-- Idek.
User avatar #440 - perronfan (10/19/2012) [-]
DAFUQ
#441 - whodeargaydear (10/20/2012) [-]
#442 - perronfan (10/23/2012) [-]
#176 - mfw 09/29/2012 on *Insert Relevant Title Here* 0
#212 - well best of luck and AWESOME PROFILE PIC  [+] (4 new replies) 09/29/2012 on 1990's Problems +1
User avatar #213 - piclemaniscool (09/29/2012) [-]
Thanks. I was the first one to have the awesome face on FJ. wouldnt feel right to change it after all this time.
#214 - perronfan (09/29/2012) [-]
was that a subtle jab at me being a COPIER
User avatar #215 - piclemaniscool (09/29/2012) [-]
I'm... not sure.
#216 - perronfan (09/29/2012) [-]
dammit
#139 - Picture 09/29/2012 on 1990's Problems 0
#84 - Picture 09/29/2012 on Hipstur 0
#82 - Picture  [+] (2 new replies) 09/29/2012 on Hipstur 0
#83 - Darianvincent (09/29/2012) [-]
#84 - perronfan (09/29/2012) [-]
#81 - well yeah but now its enjoyable because we have these conflabi… 09/29/2012 on Hipstur 0
#78 - Also you are much more careful when working on them...but seri…  [+] (6 new replies) 09/29/2012 on Hipstur 0
#80 - Darianvincent (09/29/2012) [-]
#82 - perronfan (09/29/2012) [-]
#83 - Darianvincent (09/29/2012) [-]
#84 - perronfan (09/29/2012) [-]
User avatar #79 - Darianvincent (09/29/2012) [-]
o.o I'm sure people didn't think so when they were more commonplace.
#81 - perronfan (09/29/2012) [-]
well yeah but now its enjoyable because we have these conflabid laptops and desktops
#77 - he is a good lookin man 09/29/2012 on Hipstur +1
#74 - liquid paper.  [+] (8 new replies) 09/29/2012 on Hipstur 0
User avatar #76 - Darianvincent (09/29/2012) [-]
Sounds like a lot of work for little reward.
#78 - perronfan (09/29/2012) [-]
Also you are much more careful when working on them...but seriously a really smooth typewriter is the most satisfying tactile and ambient experience...
#80 - Darianvincent (09/29/2012) [-]
#82 - perronfan (09/29/2012) [-]
#83 - Darianvincent (09/29/2012) [-]
#84 - perronfan (09/29/2012) [-]
User avatar #79 - Darianvincent (09/29/2012) [-]
o.o I'm sure people didn't think so when they were more commonplace.
#81 - perronfan (09/29/2012) [-]
well yeah but now its enjoyable because we have these conflabid laptops and desktops
#118 - if we would of followed through with the first one we wouldnt …  [+] (1 new reply) 09/29/2012 on 1990's Problems +3
#119 - bleeduntildeath (09/29/2012) [-]
yeah it sucks but still, would have been a smart move
#115 - this more along the thread topic?????  [+] (2 new replies) 09/29/2012 on 1990's Problems 0
#137 - frohtastic (09/29/2012) [-]
well it is bbc...
#139 - perronfan (09/29/2012) [-]
#113 - Billion Dollar Movie....so ****** up but so funny… 09/29/2012 on 1990's Problems +1
#64 - ************ was smoothhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh loved the …  [+] (10 new replies) 09/29/2012 on Hipstur 0
User avatar #73 - Darianvincent (09/29/2012) [-]
And if you make one single mistake? What do you do then?
#74 - perronfan (09/29/2012) [-]
liquid paper.
User avatar #76 - Darianvincent (09/29/2012) [-]
Sounds like a lot of work for little reward.
#78 - perronfan (09/29/2012) [-]
Also you are much more careful when working on them...but seriously a really smooth typewriter is the most satisfying tactile and ambient experience...
#80 - Darianvincent (09/29/2012) [-]
#82 - perronfan (09/29/2012) [-]
#83 - Darianvincent (09/29/2012) [-]
#84 - perronfan (09/29/2012) [-]
User avatar #79 - Darianvincent (09/29/2012) [-]
o.o I'm sure people didn't think so when they were more commonplace.
#81 - perronfan (09/29/2012) [-]
well yeah but now its enjoyable because we have these conflabid laptops and desktops
#108 - thumb'd for thumb'd of tim and eric  [+] (2 new replies) 09/29/2012 on 1990's Problems +2
#110 - ihavecontentthumbs (09/29/2012) [-]
too bad im never awake at like 230 anymore :( i never get to watch it!
#113 - perronfan (09/29/2012) [-]
Billion Dollar Movie....so fucked up but so funny...eric andre show is in the same vein and funny as shit

Show All Replies Show Shortcuts
Per page:
Order:
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
User avatar #3 - jingleforth (09/08/2012) [-]
**jingleforth rolls 1**
User avatar #5 to #3 - brushz (09/08/2012) [-]
Good game
User avatar #6 to #5 - jingleforth (09/08/2012) [-]
Not really. I've got **** luck.
I ALWAYS roll around a 0-3.
User avatar #7 to #6 - brushz (09/08/2012) [-]
Iam surprised i got 8 i usually get 4 all the time
User avatar #9 to #7 - perronfan (09/11/2012) [-]
what is happening
#8 to #7 - jingleforth has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #2 - brushz (09/08/2012) [-]
**brushz rolls 8**
 Friends (0)