~ archived since 2018 ~
Popular
Other
[deleted]
[removed]
[–][deleted]45 points 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
American Gender-feminists are going to continue to pervert American law enforcement, Until hetero-relationships are a legal liability for men. I Now understand the MGTOW movement.
[–]Denisius35 points 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
"Until?"
We're long passed "Until", my friend.
[–][deleted]9 points 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
I hear ya bro, I have no plans on again taking on a "legal liability" when having a relationship with an American women. Ille keep my paycheck, and travel around the world a couple of times!!
[–]shadowbanned62 points 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
and people wonder that educated men don't have enough children
[–][deleted]1 point 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
Soon, only the uneducated stooped males with nothing to lose will have children, or are we already there??
[–]cuteman2 points 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
It really just depends which female you get in a particular roulette spin.
I think you'll see a resurgence of men truly interested in more wholesome women than one night stand type events.
American Gender-feminists get immediate "Empowerment" by perverting US law enforcement, but the long term situation may prove a phyric victory for them.
[–]weeglos10 points 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
MGTOW?
Mice Growing Tails Over Wombats?
edit: ok, ok, I cry "uncle," downvoters. Trying to crack a joke, but nobody gets it. Fine. My point still stands - never heard of MGTOW - what does it stand for?
[–][deleted]3 points 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
Men Going Their Own Way
[–]yesactually2 points 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
From that page:
"More liberal bullshit: Italian MEP's young daughter joins in during debate in Strasbourg parliament"
And number 1 on the Top 10 'Liked' Threads: "Study reveals rocketing sense of entitlement on U.S. campuses..."
Reads a little too much like the forwarded emails I get from my grandmother for my liking.
Meh, I just chose it because MGTOW is in the URL. There's probably better examples out there, but fuck it.
[–]yesactually1 point 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
Is there a movement or trend of some kind along these lines? From the context of the discussion I was expecting something along the lines of men refusing to marry or even get into relationships with women.
Kind of like what I keep seeing about the young men in japan called 'herbivores' (seems like it gets posted daily on reddit). Only instead of being caused by an overly conformist society, caused by fear of losing their kids/ half of everything they own. Or of being falsely and vindictivley accused of some form of abuse, and being assumed guilty because of our justice system's penchant for thinking women to be incapable of violence or lying.
Yeah, it's pretty much what you're thinking. Guys getting tired of all the BS that can happen to them with relationships so they just say fuck it, and don't bother looking for one. There's probably more to it, but I'm just lazy right now.
[–][deleted]5 points 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
It is a liability. Be sure to avoid crazy women and when you break up with a girl, for fuck's sake do it gently. Any woman has the power to ruin your life at any time.
[–]shadowbanned61 point 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
"Rape is rape is rape" is a lie, Joe Biden! 20 different types of rape
There was a later article in inmalafide that increased it to 40 types.
[–][deleted]23 points 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
That's not the same coercion feminists like to talk about.
According to them asking someone to have sex with you more than once is rape.
[–]theskepticalidealist17 points 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
Foreplay is also considered rape, if you change their minds.
[–][deleted]7 points 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
If they change their mind and don't want to have sex, (assuming they voiced their change in opinion), how could you not say it was rape?
[–]theskepticalidealist10 points 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
I said, "if you change their minds". If we're fooling around and you say, I dunno if I want to have sex, and then I say "nah it would be so hot, I lov you baby", or continue foreplay until you decide to say "alright then lets do it", then thats not rape I'm sorry.
[–][deleted]-1 point 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
or continue
If someone says stop, you stop.
If theres foreplay and they change their mind, you don't carry on. You ask them if they are sure and if they say "I sure" you stop, if they say "No, let's carry on" then you carry on, you don't assume that they don't mean what they say, assuming that a no means a yes is how people in relationships get raped.
[–]theskepticalidealist7 points 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
Continue foreplay. If she doesnt want to continue foreplay, and you force her to, thats sexual assault. You cant claim she is raped because of continued consensual foreplay and then she changed her mind about sex. Unless you believe a women is too intellectually incapable of owning her own mind, that she is somehow brainwashed by the man.
assuming that a no means a yes is how people in relationships get raped.
Are you replying to me? Because I never suggested anything of the kind.
[–][deleted]-10 points 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
How can you possibly claim you never said anything of the kind right after you said its okay to ignore someone who says no because they don't mean it
[–]theskepticalidealist8 points 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
I just explained it to you. People change their minds, if you convince them sex would be a good idea, thats not forcing someone to have sex with someone that doesnt want to. Its someone that changes their mind and having consensual sex with you. Or in your mind can "no" or "Im not sure" never turn into a "yes" for any legitimate reason? As I said unless you believe women are too intellectually incapable of owning their own minds, that they are somehow brainwashed by men, then you have to accept that women that decide to have sex are responsible for deciding to have sex.
edit: Oh and btw, if you say a women cant change her mind from no, to yes, then it also means a women cant change her mind from yes, to no, either. You sure you want to go down this road?
[–]SirDerpingtonThe3rd1 point 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
Loese is an obvious troll, just ignore. He/she is either the worst man-hating fish stank cunt, or a dude having a laugh.
[–]theskepticalidealist-1 point 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
Its okay, classic feminist logic though and he/she did it without insults. Gave me a chance to get this argument thread off my chest. Especially with rape I feel I've come up with a few arguments that feminists cannot ever get past, and will have to stop at a certain point or admit they are wrong. For example if they argue that foreplay can be rape, or changing a womans mind is rape, if you follow through its actually saying a woman cannot change her mind from yes to no either and that women are too inferior to think for themselves. There really is no other option if they make this argument, it has to end here.
[–]SirDerpingtonThe3rd0 points 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
The idea that any non-violent sex is rape is retarded. Rape, by definition, is forced sex. In order to force sex, physical force must be used to subdue an unwilling participant. If a woman gives her consent to a sex act, even if it's by showing no opposition to the act (i.e. being openly submissive), it is not rape. The only exception I can think of is if the girl was drugged without her knowledge.
Many men are raped by women who don't typically use violent physical force. Thus the point of the whole "Coercion is still rape".
[–]theskepticalidealist0 points 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
I am willing to accept a form of non-violent sex. If someone says something like, you going to have sex with me or I'll do something terrible to your children or something, I'd say thats a form of rape. Of course the other problem with feminists is they claim all rapes are equally bad and equally as serious, even statutory rapes, because "rape is rape!" they say. The main thing in my mind though is to make sure rape is still considered a serious crime, much to the backward logic of feminists that want rape to be taken seriously... by defining everything as rape.
Well, I would say harming children would be a threat of violence, so it still reigns true. So, perhaps instead of "violent sex", it should be "sex under threat" with that threat being life and limb or some other blackmail.
[–]theskepticalidealist1 point 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
Yes, blackmail. I can imagine some other form of threat that does not involve a threat violence, and I would still consider it a form of rape for the same reason. Given the right scenario I can even imagine a non violent coercion being even be worse than a physical one. But the problem here is feminists always go for the vastly watered down versions. Oh he used foreplay mind-Fu on me so I changed my mind, therefore rape, or I was drunk, therefore rape. Along with their belief that all rapes are just as serious as each other and you have a great way to make it all look more ridiculous.
[–]Douggem6 points 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
Here's the scenario ttheskepticaldidealist is providing.
He and girl are fooling around, doing foreplay. He asks if she wants to have sex. She says no, but continues to consent to foreplay. After they do their foreplay for a bit, she changes her mind and decides she wants to have sex.
This is not rape.
[–]Lawtonfogle0 points 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
They said no to progressing to sex but said yes to continuing foreplay, and after more foreplay, they changed their mind and said yes to progressing to sex.
If convincing someone to have sex is rape then all women are rapists.
Hard to argue with that logic.
[–]Lightfiend2 points 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
According to feminists, sitting next to them on the bus is equivalent to sexual assault and "rape culture."
[–]typhonblue14 points 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
That's not verbal coercion; it's threats of violence.
[–]Cardplay3r19 points 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
How is it not? I think it fits the definition perfectly
co·er·cion The practice of persuading someone to do something by using force or threats
[–]Lawtonfogle4 points 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
Some threats are completely acceptable. For example 'if you don't want to have sex I'll just go look at porn'. The latter can be a threat, but even if they do have sex after saying this, it isn't rape. A threat of physical violence does equate rape.
[–]Cardplay3r0 points 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
Why only physical violence? There's a lot of emotional manipulation one can do as well.
As for your porn example, I don't see it that way. If the guy/girl that doesn't want sex doesn't care that the other looks at porn, it's fine but not a threat at all.
A threat implies the person(s) you say it too will suffer some sort of damage if fulfilled. So the "I'll go watch porn" can become a threat if watching porn brings pain for their partner, in which case it's used to manipulate.
Not having sex can also cause suffering if you are willing to use such a lose definition of suffering. Threatening a legal level of suffering (using porn, ending the relationship, ect.) does not constitute rape.
How about this example: "I'm unsatisfied with the physical side of our relationship and want more or else this relationships won't work or will at least look for sexual satisfaction elsewhere." Are you saying any future sex in that relationship is rape because it is under the threat that without sex the relationship could end? If so, then all sex would become rape because very few relationships could survive having all sexual outlets (within our without the relationship) turned off. Are you really going to make a claim that under even a trivial review turns into all sex is rape?
[–]Cardplay3r1 point 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
Are you really going to make a claim that under even a trivial review turns into all sex is rape?
No, in fact I'm arguing against this type of thinking in another thread. I was trying to say that threats are not always clear-cut, and "I'll go watch porn" can be meaningless to someone and a big emotional deal to someone else.
I didn't call this type of threat rape either, you're implying I did.
[–]Lawtonfogle2 points 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
Since my argument had been that X isn't a real threat, but real threats for sex are rape, and you replied that X is a real threat, I just assumed that lack of comment meant you did not disagree with my second part.
So, instead of assuming, let's be clear. How do you think a threat of something that may be a big emotional deal to someone changes their ability to consent, if at all?
It can make them consent just to avoid the other thing, it can be emotional manipulation but I wouldn't call that rape. Look there are no absolutes here, it's a fine line to walk for sure and imo impossible to draw a line in the sand at a specific phrase/concept.
[–]Lawtonfogle3 points 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
And yet we have to make laws, which are drawing those lines in the sand. If we can't be sure, which side should we caution on? Labeling not rape as rape or labeling rape as not rape? And yes, that is a very hard question to answer.
Personally, I would be for criminalizing less just because it is easier to protect oneself against an individual who wants to do something wrong than a government who wants to punish you.
I would draw the line at physical stuff where you can get real evidence and not try to criminalize emotional/verbal abuse, because you'd have to set a really low standard of evidence for that kind of law to be meaningful, which in turn opens it up to a tone of abuse via false accusations.
Well, you got it. All sex is rape (Andreia Dworkin)
At least, when the sex is not totally initiated by the woman, it is rape.
/sarcasm
And as the patriarchy can not be a victim of women, any amount of pressure by a woman is legitimate
/s
[–]ToraZalinto-7 points 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
Coercion in the common usage means to persuade. It's actual definition may be of a more forceful manner but that's not how most people use it and where the discrepancies come into play.
[–]Cardplay3r8 points 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
Are you sure? Well I'm not a native English speaker but I've always thought I had a good grasp of it to be honest, and I can't think of a situation where I've heard it used to mean just persuasion.
[–]ToraZalinto2 points 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
I've heard it used as simply a strong persuasion in more places than I can count. Whether that's a correct usage of the word or not is up in the air but it does show where some confusion arises with the use of the word.
[–]DerpaNerb1 point 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
ToraZalinto is right...
You are correct on the dictionary definition, but hopefully by now you've realized that feminists don't really play by the "books"... in this case, the book being the dictionary.
I've been told multiple times that someone "nagging" or even just asking twice qualifies as "coercion".
I've gotten in the habit of specifying "illegal coercion" as a kind of catch all. It's redundant if people use the proper definition (though still correct), yet it excludes the bullshit stuff like "nagging" and others.
[–]nhocgreen3 points 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
I have seen tumblr feminists argue that because a man is inherently more powerful than a woman (be it social, economic or physical power), asking twice constitutes coercion even though no threat is explicitly stated.
[–]loose-dendrite1 point 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
The more honest radicals say that any heterosexual sex is coercion for that reason. Putting the line at twice is just so they can still fuck men without feeling they are betraying their sex.
[–]Lightfiend1 point 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
If you're a libertarian, "coercion" definitely refers to force or the threat of force.
[–]CyberToyger3 points 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
Agreed, every example I've been thinking of involves Partner A threatening to do something forceful/violent to Partner B. Examples:
'Have sex with me or I'll go jerk off on my own/watch porn' -- Not coercion
'Have sex with me or I'll break your [Partner B's property]' -- Coercion
'Have sex with me or I'll rape your sister/brother' -- Coercion
'Have sex with me or I'll strangle you in your sleep' -- Coercion
'Have sex with me or I'll release your nude pictures on Reddit' -- Coercion
I think from a Libertarian point of view, and just plain logic, Coercion involves the threat of harm towards another person, their property, or their loved ones. Depriving them of their free will, I suppose could cover all those.
The first example is not coercion as Partner A owns their own body and can do whatever they want with it, as childish and immature as some may see it. The rest are coercion as they involve threat of harm and/or damage.
[–]CaptainDancyPants1 point 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
I have a Master's in Linguistics, despite which I will still take strong personal opinions on my preferred "correct" formal or, perhaps I should start calling it "editorial", English, and one might also accurately describe me as a Libertarian.
Personally, I don't have a strong enough attachment to any ideal of "coercion" to really defend a single definition of it. It could be because we have enough synonyms for both ideas, who knows. In this case, I'll resort to my 'professional' opinion that its attested mutually understood usage in both contexts validates both definitions. So, it's really becoming a contranym. And as a result, there is no doubt that it certainly is becoming confusing to use and to have used...
[–]taktubu1 point 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
What branch of linguistics?
[–]Chyrch2 points 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
Coercion in the common usage means to persuade
No. Persuade means persuade. Coercion means coercion. Just because feminists have been twisting words to suit their whims, doesn't mean they get to change the definition.
[–]ToraZalinto1 point 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
Uhhh this has nothing to do with "Changing definitions" but actually talking about how this word is commonly used to simply mean a strong persuasion. Which wouldn't be a problem in that sense. But the actual definition of coercion entails something much more sinister.
[–]Demonspawn15 points 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
This is important to note. The woman, in this case, is presenting a threat of proxy violence. This is analogous to a man holding a knife or a gun.
If I say I wont physically force you to have sex with me, but if you dont I'll kill your kids, thats coercion. Its coercion by threat of violence.
[–]memymineown10 points 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
In some countries women can have their husbands fined for not having sex with them enough.
http://www.connexionfrance.com/Fine-10,000-sex-Louis-B-Aix-divorce-view-article.html
In France you can also get up to 2-3 years in prison and around a $30,000 fine for merely looking at a woman in the wrong way, with their new sexual harassment laws.
[–]seawied10 points 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
Source?
[–]theskepticalidealist5 points 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/28/world/europe/france-is-expected-to-pass-a-far-reaching-sexual-harassment-law.html?_r=1&
sexual harassment will be considered a criminal offense, punishable by two years in jail and a fine of 30,000 euros, almost $37,000. ... According to a preliminary report issued by the National Assembly on July 18, such behavior can include blackmail, sexual jokes, neck massages, leaving a pornographic magazine on a person’s desk or looking at someone up and down.
[–]Blindocide6 points 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
i mean, sure, people shouldn't stare at someone and eyefuck them if the other person is uncomfortable with it.
but this just looks like it's bound to get abused.
[–]theskepticalidealist4 points 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
Think about it. Its basically worse than what we see feminists want implemented for rape (ie. that all sex is rape if they say it is, and a man is always guilty). This way a man doesnt even need to talk to a women, or touch her, to be sent to jail for up to 2-3 years and fined nearly $40,000 dollars which could easily cripple him for life even without the jail sentence. And of course in this case, it will always be his word against hers, which means she will win. Feminists even said of this law that it didnt go far enough! Like, I have to wonder just how far you could possibly take it!
[–][deleted]2 points 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
That’s about what a friend told me were the laws in UAE. You’re with one leg in prison, just for talking to a woman.
But he guy who told that to me regularly made rape jokes that sounded way to serious for comfort.
I think it’s something with being hot-blooded. Over there, woman are basically as unreactive as walls. You nearly have to harass them, before they even react at all. And the men are very… well, “aggressive” is not the right word, but nearly… so the women block like crazy.
While here in Germany, women are very open because men are way too little “aggressive” (I still didn’t found the word I’m actually looking for.) because women are very open, because… [and so on].
It clashes when there are two from differing cultures. A Arab women will thin a German man is boring and unmanly. A German man will think an Arab woman is an arrogant bitch that will never get a man. A German woman will think an Arab men tries to harass her. And a Arab man will think a German woman is way too easy to get and boring. (In this, I didn’t make a special effort to be extra-political correct and not “judge” anyone more than anyone else. You’re grown-ups. Deal with it.)
[–]seriesoftubesguy8 points 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
I remember reading an AMA once from a kid who was paralized from the legs down, or couldn't walk, or was in bed healing from some injury or something...can't remember but his mother raped him repeatedly.
She told him "no one will believe you".
Source? You've piqued my curiousity, that sounds pretty fucked up.
[–]seriesoftubesguy3 points 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
I tried looking for it but couldn't find it, I don't remember exactly how the title went since it was like almost a year ago when I saw it.
[–]Victory_Disease6 points 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
Coercion is a word that I used to have nothing against, then I read dozens of studies on "sexual coercion" and now I hate it. It represents everything wrong with the world of rape research.
For those not familiar with the research, "coercion" is basically used to obfuscate all evidence. "Verbal coercion" is an overall category including everything from threats of death to threats of serious harm to abuse of a position of authority to blackmail to nagging to cajoling. "Physical coercion" is an overall category including everything from massaging to holding someone down. In other words, many a study has made it impossible to tell how much of their sample are rape victims and how many are just the victims of "sexual coercion."
[–]CyberToyger2 points 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
And I believe they also include sweet-talking and begging for sex as "sexual coercion", or at least if males do it anyway. If not, then it wouldn't surprise me if it was just Feminists have purposefully added those in themselves to their little cult propaganda and me having come across it.
[–]Victory_Disease1 point 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
at least if males do it anyway
Oh, no, they do it for male victims/female perpetrators too. For example, the CTS2 includes a "sexual coercion" scale and sorts the following into verbal coercion: insisting on sex without a condom; insisting on sex when the partner did not want to; insisting on oral or anal sex; threatening the partner to have oral or anal sex; and threatening the partner to have sex.
This scale was used (and sorted this way) in, for example, "Childhood and Adolescent Victimization and Perpetration of Sexual Coercion by Male and Female University Students" and "Predictors of Sexual Coercion Against Women and Men: A Multilevel, Multinational Study of University Students" which asked about both sexes.
It's all over the place. I don't know why they do it.
[–]5th_Law_of_Robotics5 points 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
Coercion rape is how they got the 2/5 women on campus will be raped "fact".
Basically if she says no and you ask again that is considered coercion if she ever says yes and you have consensual sex. Which is now rape.
[–]shadowbanned63 points 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
worth looking at the pic.
Great!
Unexpected inversion of power relationship. Woman repressing man!
[–]SuperNixon3 points 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
Remember in the NFL when there was a 5 and 15 yard penalty for facemask; rape should have the same thing. If you beat a random girl and force yourself on her in a parking lot, sure go to jail and have your life ruined. There is a 15 yarder. But, if there is a weird argument over whether it was consensual or not, make it a couple of hundred bucks or some thing. Having the same punishment is ridiculous, it is clearly not the same crime.
very sensible.
Pity nobody comments.
Blame feminist re-definition of language, calling everything rape, and saying everything is equal. And everyone accepted it. Including MRA
[–]SuperNixon1 point 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
I'm not worried, as i see it we are coming up on a cultural snap back to more traditional values. It has to get more ridiculous before it can get better. You can already see the cracks in society happening with things like the resurgence of nationalism and political correctness is starting to get questioned. All things are cycles, and nothing stays the same.
am i the only one who thinks this would make for a good role play?
I was thinking the exact same thing. Despite this being horrible, role playing something like this would be very interesting.
[–]Johnthereader1 point 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
Can we get this circulating on facebook among other places?
[–]Villainsoft1 point 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
Coercion is a very broad term. You could argue that any sex involving any kind of emotional blackmail is rape.
[–][deleted]-2 points 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
She can’t scream when knocked out cold, now can she?
Nobody does that to me.
And when she’s awake, she’ll be behind bars for attempted rape.
End of story.
[–]AnthonyZarat-6 points 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
Brilliant ... except that a threat of violence (including violence by proxy) is not "coercion." Coercion is a "threat" of nagging.
[–]MechPlasma15 points 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
Why do people keep saying that? It's not true at all. Coercion, simplified, means to do something that deprives someone of their free will. A threat is coercion, nagging is not.
[–]grrw10 points 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
I think it is because despite what the word ACTUALLY means, that is how (some)feminists use it. Namely the ones that want to claim that " a man who nags his wife for sex - coerces her and is thus a rapist" or so their "argument" goes.
[–]KingRadical3B132 points 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
I think they were being sarcastic.
[–]MechPlasma2 points 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
Well now I just feel silly.
[–]theskepticalidealist3 points 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
No this is TRUE coercion. It is true that femists list things like foreplay and nagging as coercion, but that doesnt mean that coercion doesnt have a legitmate definition
[–]Ma99ie-8 points 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
I don't buy the majority of reddit self reported rapes, and I don't buy this either.
[–]theskepticalidealist11 points 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
So a woman has never said this and never would say this? Its about a real hypothetical here and pointing out that men can be victims as well.
[–]SoldierOfMisfortune-13 points 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
Back in my day we called that seduction not coersion.
[–]StymieGray2 points 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
Ooooh BOY! Nothing like getting raped to put someone in the mood.
© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.created by /u/dream-hunter
[–][deleted]45 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]Denisius35 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–][deleted]9 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]shadowbanned62 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–][deleted]1 point [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]cuteman2 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–][deleted]1 point [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]weeglos10 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–][deleted]3 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]yesactually2 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–][deleted]1 point [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]yesactually1 point [recovered] | Copy Link
[–][deleted]1 point [recovered] | Copy Link
[–][deleted]5 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]shadowbanned61 point [recovered] | Copy Link
[–][deleted]23 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]theskepticalidealist17 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–][deleted]7 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]theskepticalidealist10 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–][deleted]-1 point [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]theskepticalidealist7 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–][deleted]-10 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]theskepticalidealist8 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]SirDerpingtonThe3rd1 point [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]theskepticalidealist-1 point [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]SirDerpingtonThe3rd0 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–][deleted]1 point [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]theskepticalidealist0 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]SirDerpingtonThe3rd1 point [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]theskepticalidealist1 point [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]Douggem6 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]Lawtonfogle0 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–][deleted]5 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–][deleted]-1 point [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]Lightfiend2 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]typhonblue14 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]Cardplay3r19 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]Lawtonfogle4 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]Cardplay3r0 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]Lawtonfogle4 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]Cardplay3r1 point [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]Lawtonfogle2 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]Cardplay3r1 point [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]Lawtonfogle3 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]Cardplay3r1 point [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]shadowbanned61 point [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]shadowbanned61 point [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]ToraZalinto-7 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]Cardplay3r8 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]ToraZalinto2 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]DerpaNerb1 point [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]nhocgreen3 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]loose-dendrite1 point [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]Lightfiend1 point [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]CyberToyger3 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]CaptainDancyPants1 point [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]taktubu1 point [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]Chyrch2 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]ToraZalinto1 point [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]Demonspawn15 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]theskepticalidealist7 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]memymineown10 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]theskepticalidealist10 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]seawied10 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]theskepticalidealist5 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]Blindocide6 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]theskepticalidealist4 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–][deleted]2 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]seriesoftubesguy8 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–][deleted]3 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]seriesoftubesguy3 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]Victory_Disease6 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]CyberToyger2 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]Victory_Disease1 point [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]5th_Law_of_Robotics5 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]shadowbanned63 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]SuperNixon3 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]shadowbanned61 point [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]SuperNixon1 point [recovered] | Copy Link
[–][deleted]1 point [recovered] | Copy Link
[–][deleted]2 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]Johnthereader1 point [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]Villainsoft1 point [recovered] | Copy Link
[–][deleted]-2 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]AnthonyZarat-6 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]MechPlasma15 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]grrw10 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]KingRadical3B132 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]MechPlasma2 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]theskepticalidealist3 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]Ma99ie-8 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]theskepticalidealist11 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]SoldierOfMisfortune-13 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]StymieGray2 points [recovered] | Copy Link