~ archived since 2018 ~
Popular
Other
Loud_Ask_7503
[–]Grtrshop 167 points168 points169 points 2 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link
They are like young children who lack self awareness.
[–]ZEGEZOT 67 points68 points69 points 2 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link
Except they're adult women who should know better but ignore reality out of ignorance.
[–]Zero_the_Unicorn 35 points36 points37 points 2 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link
Reminds me of that one boomer-esque joke. "There's no female equivalent of 'manchild' because all women are like that"
[–]southerncraftgurl 3 points4 points5 points 2 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Hell, even God warned about us women in the bible. He said it's easier to sit on the side of a roof and hold oil in your hand than it is to deal with an angry woman.
[–]Reddit-Book-Bot 3 points4 points5 points 2 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Beep. Boop. I'm a robot. Here's a copy of
Was I a good bot? | info | More Books
[–]road_laya 9 points10 points11 points 2 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
What's the joke?
[–]LandscapeClear1630 4 points5 points6 points 2 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
AWALT
[–][deleted] 2 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
[deleted]
[–]road_laya 2 points3 points4 points 2 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Start with checking on urban dictionary
[–]Shan_Miller 3 points4 points5 points 2 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
The original meaning of the word 'girl', is 'child'.
The original meaning of the word 'boy', is 'slave'.
[–]Legitimate-Slice2051 62 points63 points64 points 2 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Hmmm, its almost like they can't think for themselves and have no agency over their actions
srsly tho, are these people just born to the world with a few bolts lost from their heads
[–]LW_YT 11 points12 points13 points 2 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
buzzFeed is another great example
[–]OG_walrus 27 points28 points29 points 2 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Re-education camps
[–]hatefulreason 17 points18 points19 points 2 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
or as they used to call them, well adjusted families
[–]Urch_b_Smirch 21 points22 points23 points 2 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
"It's Ok WHen WoMeN dO iT" Soo pathetic
[–]road_laya 45 points46 points47 points 2 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
When you abandon traditional marriage norms, you don't get romantic Disney relationships, but preneolithic style relationships. A bunch of top dudes take their turn on all women, and they have harems.
[–]gauchat-2693 22 points23 points24 points 2 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
80-20 ratio in a nutshell. This way, society will eventually collapse or someone else would take over.
[–]Dunkopa 44 points45 points46 points 2 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
They don't have a problem with polyamory. They have a problem with polyamory not benefiting them.
[–]CelticHound27 10 points11 points12 points 2 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
They want the security of traditional relationship but be able to get jammed with as many cocks as possible
[–]beniesixx98 0 points1 point2 points 2 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
No they actually hate the idea of being polyamorous just due to the fact that most polyamorous people are actually happy in not just one but many relationships and actually enjoy having men as partners . They believe women have to be tricked into it , because obviously its men who sleep around. I've actually had a feminist tell me that .
[–]xiaodifu 9 points10 points11 points 2 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
FDM is not about dating strategies, it's about why not to date men
[–]mcove97 23 points24 points25 points 2 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
I guess they don't think of dating multiple men as polyamory, but yeah really what's the difference? That dating multiple men doesn't involve fucking multiple men? By their logic, why is fucking multiple men so much worse than dating multiple men? Literally the only difference between dating multiple men and being in polyamorous relationships is sex, or am I missing something? Seems to me they're just very anti sex and pro using multiple men for what they're worth, besides from sex, cause using or having multiple men around for sex is bad, but using or having multiple men around for free meals and gifts good /s seems kinda the logic they're going for.
The whole FDS community honestly confuses me. I'm just a live and let live person, but if you wanna use men for free meal tickets, at least stop virtue signaling and pretending that you're somehow morally superior to those who don't use men like that and just be fucking honest about it. I respect someone who's an honest dick more than I respect a dishonest dick..
[–]beniesixx98 1 point2 points3 points 2 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Being polyamorous doesn't excuse cheating and we actually respect our parents, while fds can't even get a single man to stay.
[–]Davidfosford 20 points21 points22 points 2 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
i'm suprised these femcels haven't been banned
[–]DeDevilsLettuce 8 points9 points10 points 2 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
They can't be banned their victims
[–]Stork_blessed_ 27 points28 points29 points 2 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
That sub is filled with garbage men hating pos
[–]Daan100 12 points13 points14 points 2 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
I’ve actually listened to one of their podcasts went in there with an open mind. I’ve never lost this much confidence in humankind.
[–]LandscapeClear1630 7 points8 points9 points 2 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
they have a fucking podcast??? fml
[–]OkLieThen 1 point2 points3 points 2 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Ya they do, and I believe a whole shop. The women behind that sub I have a feeling are setting things up to cash in on the hate they created.
[–]LandscapeClear1630 1 point2 points3 points 2 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
a shop?? i can't imagine what they must sell
maybe shirts with the slogan "fuck all men" or some shit like that? lmao
[–]1N7R0V3R73D 3 points4 points5 points 2 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Link?
[–]Daan100 4 points5 points6 points 2 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Go to Spotify and type in fds
[–]blikakisthepro 5 points6 points7 points 2 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
"It's good when i do it"
At this point i just want to become the reddit ceo and ban everyone in there from ising reddit
[–]cummy3509 11 points12 points13 points 2 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Nobody should have more than 1 partner tbh
[–]tw1nm3t30r 13 points14 points15 points 2 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
That subreddit is like teaching kindergarteners to use the square block on the triangle slot.
[–]icedroastpeach 2 points3 points4 points 2 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
They need to stop acting like they’re oppressed and look at their privilege. Being a woman sucks sometimes, yeah, but men simply existing doesn’t give feminists the right to be dramatic & call out every man ever. This hypocritical/double standard shit is getting old.
[–]AkaSoldier 7 points8 points9 points 2 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Modern women simply aren't worth spending time with
[–]HorizonBreakerNEXIC 3 points4 points5 points 2 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I don't even have hope for feminists reforming themselves into actually good human beings, who don't hate on men.
[–]throwawaygoodvibess 1 point2 points3 points 2 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link
‘aocwannabe’ lulz
[–]THEbassettMAN 0 points1 point2 points 2 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
So two different people post differing views on a topic, and that's hypocritical of them because...? If you disagree with what's being said by either of them, argue that. Don't pretend that they both belong to a hive mind so that they sound worse for not agreeing with one another.
[–]TFME1 0 points1 point2 points 2 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Sooooo much hypocrisy in that sub.
[–]FrozenMeatStick -4 points-3 points-2 points 2 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Is it surprising to see that two different people on the same subreddit have different opinions about poly relationships? God you lot are dumb.
[–]nightreaper__ 0 points1 point2 points 2 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Is it possible to be this incredibly ignorant? Can I learn this power?
[–]alialahmad1997 0 points1 point2 points 2 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
ok i hate fds to the bone but this is a bit different
they are talking about dating many men at once before establishing exclusivity
not commit to many men
i am against that as well i dont believe in casual dating only serious one but its not the same as portrayed
[–]Rapaguayaba 0 points1 point2 points 2 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
This is gold 😂
[–]yoitsericc 0 points1 point2 points 2 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
FDS is like the wall street bets of dating subreddits.
[–]billsull_02842 0 points1 point2 points 2 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
women blind themselves that their players too.
[–]Jackfly0114 0 points1 point2 points 2 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Lol ikr
[–]Toy_Soldier_Ken 0 points1 point2 points 2 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
The complete hypocrisy.
[+]youngmoneee -39 points-38 points-37 points 2 years ago (32 children) | Copy Link
We do understand this isn’t feminism right? Like you just use this to be mad at a blue haired tumblr poster to make your sad life just that much better as you cry eating unlimited breadsticks by yourself.
[–]Zero_the_Unicorn 8 points9 points10 points 2 years ago (21 children) | Copy Link
FDS a self proclaimed pro women, feminist sub advocating for constant feminist things while actively having man hatred or even threats/deathwishes with blatant hypocritical double standards doesn't count as "feminism" because..?
[–]FrozenMeatStick -2 points-1 points0 points 2 years ago (20 children) | Copy Link
Because poly relationships =/= feminism... or is everything you don't like that includes women feminism?
[–]Zero_the_Unicorn 2 points3 points4 points 2 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link
A feminist sub openly advocates to cheating in relationships by making them poly, clearly one-sided.
Or is everything you wanna defend schrödingers feminism?
[+]FrozenMeatStick -6 points-5 points-4 points 2 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link
That's still not feminism my dude...
[–]Zero_the_Unicorn 4 points5 points6 points 2 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link
They are a feminist sub. Advocating for feminism 24/7. All their posts are about women and what they should do.
How does a feminist sub advocating for something count as "not feminism" for you. Literally explain this.
[+]FrozenMeatStick -6 points-5 points-4 points 2 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link
It's literally not feminism. The only thing that relates those posts to feminism is that they are posted by women. But thats how you anti feminists function. Anything made by women for women is apparently feminism to you.
[–]Zero_the_Unicorn 7 points8 points9 points 2 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link
Posted by a woman that is a feminist. On a feminism sub. Supported by feminists.
[–]FrozenMeatStick -3 points-2 points-1 points 2 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link
Still isn't feminism. If I make a post about motorcycles when I'm a car owner, on a car sub, supported by car owners, did I post about a car? No you fucking moron.
[–]Zero_the_Unicorn 3 points4 points5 points 2 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link
You would have 0 upvotes and the post would be removed.
Because they would only want cars and if what you think is a motorcycle is actually a car, they will upvote it and keep it on the sub. Moron.
Im sorry you fail basic understanding of society, subreddit rules and simple logic.
[–]Wingflier 1 point2 points3 points 2 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Here's the thing, you can't just define Feminism as whatever you personally agree with or like and reject everything else.
You say Feminism isn't polyamorous but why not? I thought Feminism was about allowing women to make their own choices and relationship decisions. Are you saying someone who makes a relationship decision you disagree with can't be a feminist?
When you look at the history of Feminism, especially the second wave, marriage and childbirth was viewed as oppressive to women and a way for men and society to enslave females. If you don't believe me, I encourage you to go read the works of the most popular and well-known second wave Feminists such as Andrea Dworkin who said that marriage was simply rape, institutionalized and Marlene Dixon who claimed it was the chief vehicle of oppression for women. Many other of the most well-known and famous feminists have had similar things to say.
So if Feminism is against the institution of marriage, which is essentially monogamy recognized by the state, how does polyamory not directly follow from that?
The issue I have with your argument that polyamory isn't feminism is that there are feminists on both sides of every major political issue. There are pro-life feminists and pro-choice feminists. There are pro-trans feminists and gender critical feminists. There are pro-porn feminists and anti sex work feminists.
If Feminism is simply empowering women to make their own choices, who are you to say that what certain women choose isn't Feminist?
[–]FrozenMeatStick 0 points1 point2 points 2 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Simply because polyamory isn't closely linked to feminism. It is only linked by your idea that any woman making her own choice is feminism which is a redundant definition and by that definition, this subreddit is entirely again women having the ability to make choices. So you have to decide on what you want feminism to be. I'm gonna go by standard definitions and by those definitions, polyamory is a topic that feminists can interact with but isn't a feminist topic.
[–]Wingflier 1 point2 points3 points 2 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
And by what standard definition can a Feminist not be polyamorous?
If Feminism can be against the institution of marriage, as it has been since the second wave, for what reason can it not be in support of Polyamory? I would say that when you tear down the institution of marriage, which is again a monogamy recognized by the government, polyamory is what follows.
You can't have your cake and eat it too.
[–]FrozenMeatStick 1 point2 points3 points 2 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I never said a feminist can't be polyamorus. I said that feminism isn't closely tied to polyamory. Polyamory isn't a defining part of feminism so I wouldn't say that polyamory is a feminist thing especially because polyamory is just as achievable without being a feminist.
[–]lazytotypeusername 7 points8 points9 points 2 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Not related to feminism, yes.. but can't you see the hypocrisy?
[–]TwiggyFriend 1 point2 points3 points 2 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Think about it this way. Feminism=Misandry (Because it does believe it or not, that “wE fIGht fOR eQUal riGHts” is bullshit.) and Misandry literally defines FDS
[–]HiderBehinder 1 point2 points3 points 2 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link
We do understand this isn’t feminism right?
No, you're incorrect. They;
As such, they ARE feminists. Number 1 makes them radical feminists, which is the same type of feminism almost all feminist organizations and groups support.
[–]FrozenMeatStick 0 points1 point2 points 2 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
You misread what the person said. They said that this isn't feminism. Not that the people posting aren't feminists (which they may or may not be).
Also those 3 things sound pretty alright to me.
[–]HiderBehinder 0 points1 point2 points 2 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
The reasoning behind all of their arguments comes from the patriarchy theory. Everything they are saying is said in a feminist way. And all of their users are feminists indeed because non-feminists get banned.
And those 3 being "alright" does not change anything. FDS is awful not because of those 3, but because they are awful outside of those 3. The 3 I gave is the condition for being feminists, not FDS.
[–]FrozenMeatStick 0 points1 point2 points 2 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Tbh from the threads that I read through not a single one had to do with any patriarchy and mostly about how men tend to be emotionally damaged (which is true).
How do you decide if something is being said in a feminist way? That's a void argument if I've ever heard one.
People don't get banned for not being feminists. There are no rules against being a non-feminist woman. People do however get banned for not being women since the sub is meamt to be exclusively for women.
But you are anti feminist correct? Also why do you decide what makes someone a feminist? Use a real definition instead.
[–]HiderBehinder 0 points1 point2 points 2 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Whether it's true or not, they attribute that to patriarchy. They also say that only women can be negatively affected because "men have always been in power". Can you guess where that is from?
And are you gonna say men tend to be emotionally damaged when we can clearly see the damaged ones are the FDS users?
Because... well... THEY also decide themselves to be feminists? And their arguments are derived from the patriarchy theory, a FEMINIST theory.
I see. You haven't been on that sub and don't know how they operate, so you're just looking on their sidebar to get a view of them, aren't you? I wish it was as easy as you claimed. I give FDS a 5/10 for hiding themselves when it comes to PR. (NoFap gets 10 and TheRedPill gets 0) They successfully erased their past from the public eye when the auto mod commented "Only XX are allowed" under every post, or the time they had to ban red-pill terms (because FDS is femcel feminists) and created their own with no change to their meanings. But that past starts to leak if you change their new terms with the old ones.
Sure.
Wikipedia:
Radical feminists view society as fundamentally a patriarchy in which men dominate and oppress women. Radical feminists seek to abolish the patriarchy as one front in a struggle to liberate everyone from an unjust society by challenging existing social norms and institutions. This struggle includes opposing the sexual objectification of women, raising public awareness about such issues as rape and violence against women, challenging the concept of gender roles, and challenging what radical feminists see as a racialized and gendered capitalism that characterizes the United States and many other countries.
They are radical feminists. Thus, they are feminists.
[–]FrozenMeatStick 0 points1 point2 points 2 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
The whole men being emotionally damaged is a pretty well accepted fact now. I don't believe they attribute that to patriarchy as much as toxic masculinity from what I've seen which I strongly agree with.
This isn't the first time I've ever heard about FDS. I guess I've never heard or seen the posts that have been removed from that subreddit though so it is possible that you're right about posts that mods don't agree with get taken down.
Being a feminist doesn't mean evrything you say is being "said in a feminist way" whatever that even means. Like feminist isn't really a descriptive word for how someone talks my dude...
Ok for the definition of radical feminist I absoltely agree with that. But you have to define what patriarchy means. Do you mean that the patriarchy is a deep state like underground superpower that tries their best to keep women oppressed or do you mean patriarchy as in that the society works in ways that benefits men more than women. Not many people or even radical feminists believe in the former as it is a batshit crazy conspiracy theory. The latter is pretty well accepted even by the governments the so called "radical" feminists protest against. They shouldn't be called radical as their goal isn't far reaching. The people that believe in the former are dumb though.
So you're not anti feminist then? You're just anti radical feminist right?
[–]HiderBehinder 0 points1 point2 points 2 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
If you attribute every negativity to masculinity of course it will be seen as "men are emotionally damaged". But it's still just pseudo-science. You do not have sources proving "men are emotionally damaged". In fact, there is no talk about one gender being emotionally damaged except outside radical feminist places.
exFDS subreddit is one of the places to look at some of the removed posts and banned users.
Let me clarify. I used "in a feminist way" to explain that their posts and arguments were made using feminist theory and concepts. Their posts are periodically posted to other feminist subs where the feminists on those subs fail to see the hate behind them and upvote those posts. (You will see plenty of posts talking shit about the Feminism subreddit and how they "stole [their] posts". So much so FDS made a rule about it.)
FDS believes in the latter as well. And "acceptance by governments" is the least credible thing I heard. Who would think governments after votes would try to appeal to an easily swayed young generation whose views are formed after exposure to social media?
Nah. You don't need to sugarcoat my label. I'm an Egalitarian who criticises radical feminists for their blind following of the patriarchy theory and their usage of gendered words to express gender-neutral concepts. There is no thing such as "toxic masculinity". How do I know that? Because there is nothing inherently masculine about things used to define that word. (+ that term creates lower self esteem in men who believe their masculinity to be toxic, contributing to any toxic emotion they might express unlinked to their gender) Women's struggles aren't due to "patriarchy", it's due to tradition. Women aren't disadvantaged more than men. Why does every equality statistics show the opposite? Because they count men being worse off as equality and exclusively look at feminist talking areas. Those statistics forget to factor in workplace fatalities but know to look at how many men are in congress. Those statistics don't even consider how many fathers are unable to see their children due to sexist courts, but know to factor when a woman is denied abortion. Those statistics do not care about how men get much longer sentences than women for identical crimes, despite looking at the same stat when it's a race issue, despite race having a lesser effect than gender.
No sane person would criticise this definition of (Liberal) Feminism:
Liberal feminism, also called mainstream feminism, is a main branch of feminism defined by its focus on achieving gender equality through political and legal reform within the framework of liberal democracy.
Although when even the "Liberal" Feminists are turning a blind eye to neglect in those statistics or downright harmful actions of feminist organizations (Women's Aid created a campaign to END GENDER NEUTRAL FUNDING TO ABUSE SHELTERS despite men making up HALF THE VICTIMS) there is no reason to separate anti-feminism from anti-radical feminism.
When no feminist decides to take action towards its own hate, a separate movement is needed to oppose them. And if this opposition calls for the abolition of that movement as a whole, that's a direct result of feminism's own irresponsibility at regulating itself.
[–]MexicanStrongman500 0 points1 point2 points 2 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
to make your sad life just that much better as you cry eating unlimited breadsticks by yourself.
Projecting much?
[+]footballfan123 -15 points-14 points-13 points 2 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
ideally all genders should follow the advice in the first post without prejudice and we would have many stronger relationships and fewer divorces in the end.
[–]Zero_the_Unicorn 3 points4 points5 points 2 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Nah, there's nothing worse than "dating several people at once" when trying to get into relationships.
Don't spin this into a pro poly shit, nobody hates polyamorous people, it's just that most people don't want to share their loved one for good reason
[–]functionalsociopathy 3 points4 points5 points 2 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
If the strongest relationship is no relationship then sure. I guess eventually the divorce rate would go down too since you can't get divorced if you never got married.
[–]RobDog101 -1 points0 points1 point 2 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
It seems like most polyamorous relationships are multiple men (such as they are) orbiting a female planet
[–]SaintLogic -1 points0 points1 point 2 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
They brought this upon themselves.
© TheRedArchive 2024. All rights reserved.created by /u/dream-hunter
[–]Grtrshop 167 points168 points169 points (9 children) | Copy Link
[–]ZEGEZOT 67 points68 points69 points (8 children) | Copy Link
[–]Zero_the_Unicorn 35 points36 points37 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[–]southerncraftgurl 3 points4 points5 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Reddit-Book-Bot 3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]road_laya 9 points10 points11 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]LandscapeClear1630 4 points5 points6 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] (1 child) | Copy Link
[deleted]
[–]road_laya 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Shan_Miller 3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Legitimate-Slice2051 62 points63 points64 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]LW_YT 11 points12 points13 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]OG_walrus 27 points28 points29 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]hatefulreason 17 points18 points19 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Urch_b_Smirch 21 points22 points23 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]road_laya 45 points46 points47 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]gauchat-2693 22 points23 points24 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Dunkopa 44 points45 points46 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]CelticHound27 10 points11 points12 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]beniesixx98 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]xiaodifu 9 points10 points11 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]mcove97 23 points24 points25 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]beniesixx98 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Davidfosford 20 points21 points22 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]DeDevilsLettuce 8 points9 points10 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Stork_blessed_ 27 points28 points29 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Daan100 12 points13 points14 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]LandscapeClear1630 7 points8 points9 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]OkLieThen 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]LandscapeClear1630 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]1N7R0V3R73D 3 points4 points5 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Daan100 4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]blikakisthepro 5 points6 points7 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]cummy3509 11 points12 points13 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]tw1nm3t30r 13 points14 points15 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]icedroastpeach 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]AkaSoldier 7 points8 points9 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]HorizonBreakerNEXIC 3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]throwawaygoodvibess 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]THEbassettMAN 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]TFME1 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]FrozenMeatStick -4 points-3 points-2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]nightreaper__ 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]alialahmad1997 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Rapaguayaba 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]yoitsericc 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]billsull_02842 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Jackfly0114 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Toy_Soldier_Ken 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+]youngmoneee -39 points-38 points-37 points (32 children) | Copy Link
[–]Zero_the_Unicorn 8 points9 points10 points (21 children) | Copy Link
[–]FrozenMeatStick -2 points-1 points0 points (20 children) | Copy Link
[–]Zero_the_Unicorn 2 points3 points4 points (15 children) | Copy Link
[+]FrozenMeatStick -6 points-5 points-4 points (14 children) | Copy Link
[–]Zero_the_Unicorn 4 points5 points6 points (13 children) | Copy Link
[+]FrozenMeatStick -6 points-5 points-4 points (12 children) | Copy Link
[–]Zero_the_Unicorn 7 points8 points9 points (10 children) | Copy Link
[–]FrozenMeatStick -3 points-2 points-1 points (9 children) | Copy Link
[–]Zero_the_Unicorn 3 points4 points5 points (8 children) | Copy Link
[–]Wingflier 1 point2 points3 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]FrozenMeatStick 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]Wingflier 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]FrozenMeatStick 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]lazytotypeusername 7 points8 points9 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]TwiggyFriend 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]HiderBehinder 1 point2 points3 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[–]FrozenMeatStick 0 points1 point2 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]HiderBehinder 0 points1 point2 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]FrozenMeatStick 0 points1 point2 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]HiderBehinder 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]FrozenMeatStick 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]HiderBehinder 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]MexicanStrongman500 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+]footballfan123 -15 points-14 points-13 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]Zero_the_Unicorn 3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]functionalsociopathy 3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]RobDog101 -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]SaintLogic -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link