Philosophy Now Forum

Posted: **Tue Jul 01, 2025 3:51 am**

godelian wrote: ↑Tue Jul 01, 2025 1:57 am
Age wrote: ↑Tue Jul 01, 2025 1:04 am When you say, 'These sluts all want to be groomed', are you saying all "christian" females are sluts?

If yes, then why?

But, if no, then what are you saying, here, exactly?
Are you talking about the blue-haired white woman with a nose ring and tattoos on her arm from the YouTube video?

No. Why would you have even begun to presume such a thing?

Unless, of course, the only so-called "slut" you were referring to when you used the 'sluts' word above, here, was that one and only "woman".

godelian wrote: ↑Tue Jul 01, 2025 1:57 am She is very unattractive.

In a philosophy forum, of all places, who cares what your own individual views are on what is attractive, or not attractive, to 'you', personally?

And so 'you' are fully aware, 'I' do not care one iota.

godelian wrote: ↑Tue Jul 01, 2025 1:57 am I don't believe that she can convince a lot of men to spend the night with her.

Are you, purposely, 'trying to' deflect, here? Or, are you really just unaware of what you do, here?

Again, 'I' just asked 'you' a very simple and very straightforward question, for clarity.

'That question' is what you are responding to, here.

godelian wrote: ↑Tue Jul 01, 2025 1:57 am She is certainly not Bonnie Blue:

Gemini AI

In January 2025, Blue attempted to break the world record for the most number of sexual partners in one day, claiming to have had sex with 1,057 men in 12 hours. The record has been held since 2004 by pornographic film actress Lisa Sparxxx, who reportedly had sex with 919 men in a single day.

https://thetab.com/2025/01/14/the-niche ... n-12-hours

The niche logistic details of how Bonnie Blue managed to sleep with 1,057 men in 12 hours. Her team set up a nightclub and gave everyone a wristband

She shared her location live in London and handed out free ski masks.

She invited her X followers to “bring your friends, your family and your neighbours”.

Apparently there were three security cards, a “fluffer” to ensure the men were, erm, prepared, and 12 other team members to help the day run smoothly.

There was a complex one-way system floorplan to get so many men to Bonnie Blue.
In the recent interview between Bonnie Blue and Andrew Tate, he lavishly praised her for her ability to make lots of money and her frank honesty in disclosing her true nature.

Andrew Tate also said that pretty much all women in the West are essentially as promiscuous as Bonnie Blue but are unfortunately not as honest as her and definitely not as financially successful at extracting gobs of cash in exchange for the same thing.

To come back to your original question, Christian women are very much the same but are much more dishonest. They will lie even harder about their shady past than other women.

So, to you, ALL "women" who you put under the label "christian" are what you call, 'very much the same', (as 'what', exactly, you would have to clarify), 'but they are 'much more' dishonest, (again, in regards to 'what', exactly, you would have to clarify, as well).

But, anyway, it appears that you 'believe' and 'follow' what some human being, here, called "andrew tate" says and claims. Which 'you' are obviously absolutely free to choose to do so.

godelian wrote: ↑Tue Jul 01, 2025 1:57 am As Andrew Tate pointed out, the main advantage of someone like Bonnie Blue is that what you see, is what you get. She deserves respect for being truthful. She doesn't try to bamboozle anyone.

Are 'you', and/or "andrew tate", here 'trying to' claim that some human being called "Bonnie blue" never tells lies and/or is always truthful?

If yes, then you two are, really, totally delusional and/or insane.

godelian wrote: ↑Tue Jul 01, 2025 1:57 am In the name of the fake divinity of the self-Fathered Son and his single mother, I salute you.

'This' only goes to further my claim.

Posted: **Tue Jul 01, 2025 4:01 am**

Age wrote: ↑Tue Jul 01, 2025 3:51 am So, to you, ALL "women" who you put under the label "christian" are what you call, 'very much the same', (as 'what', exactly, you would have to clarify), 'but they are 'much more' dishonest, (again, in regards to 'what', exactly, you would have to clarify, as well).

Yes, a Christian woman is essentially as promiscuous as any other woman. She is just going to lie about that a bit harder. A Christian woman is absolutely not typified by being chaste, because she is certainly not, but by being amazingly insincere.

Posted: **Tue Jul 01, 2025 5:21 am**

godelian wrote: ↑Tue Jul 01, 2025 4:01 am
Age wrote: ↑Tue Jul 01, 2025 3:51 am So, to you, ALL "women" who you put under the label "christian" are what you call, 'very much the same', (as 'what', exactly, you would have to clarify), 'but they are 'much more' dishonest, (again, in regards to 'what', exactly, you would have to clarify, as well).
Yes, a Christian woman is essentially as promiscuous as any other woman. She is just going to lie about that a bit harder. A Christian woman is absolutely not typified by being chaste, because she is certainly not, but by being amazingly insincere.

Women's sex lives are none of your business, icky little man. Why don't you fuck off and 'tend' to your goats?

Posted: **Tue Jul 01, 2025 5:28 am**

accelafine wrote: ↑Tue Jul 01, 2025 5:21 am Women's sex lives are none of your business, icky little man. Why don't you fuck off and 'tend' to your goats?

Hey dinosaur, didn't you hear the sirens going off? Start ducking already! There is an Iranian asteroid on its way and it is looking for you!

By the way, I was talking about women and not about infertile dinosaurs, who are single, childless, and who have hit the wall years ago already.

So, this is not about you at all, archdiablesse.

Posted: **Tue Jul 01, 2025 6:05 am**

godelian wrote: ↑Tue Jul 01, 2025 4:01 am
Age wrote: ↑Tue Jul 01, 2025 3:51 am So, to you, ALL "women" who you put under the label "christian" are what you call, 'very much the same', (as 'what', exactly, you would have to clarify), 'but they are 'much more' dishonest, (again, in regards to 'what', exactly, you would have to clarify, as well).
Yes, a Christian woman is essentially as promiscuous as any other woman.

So, to you, 'every' woman is, essentially, as promiscuous as any other woman is, right?

godelian wrote: ↑Tue Jul 01, 2025 4:01 am She is just going to lie about that a bit harder.

Does any one understand what 'this sentence', here, even means and is referring to, exactly?

If yes, then would you please explain what it means, and is referring to, exactly?

godelian wrote: ↑Tue Jul 01, 2025 4:01 am A Christian woman is absolutely not typified by being chaste, because she is certainly not, but by being amazingly insincere.

Is every woman, also, essentially, as 'like this' as well?

Posted: **Tue Jul 01, 2025 6:39 am**

Age wrote: ↑Tue Jul 01, 2025 6:05 am
godelian wrote: ↑Tue Jul 01, 2025 4:01 am
Age wrote: ↑Tue Jul 01, 2025 3:51 am So, to you, ALL "women" who you put under the label "christian" are what you call, 'very much the same', (as 'what', exactly, you would have to clarify), 'but they are 'much more' dishonest, (again, in regards to 'what', exactly, you would have to clarify, as well).
Yes, a Christian woman is essentially as promiscuous as any other woman.
So, to you, 'every' woman is, essentially, as promiscuous as any other woman is, right?
godelian wrote: ↑Tue Jul 01, 2025 4:01 am She is just going to lie about that a bit harder.
Does any one understand what 'this sentence', here, even means and is referring to, exactly?

If yes, then would you please explain what it means, and is referring to, exactly?
godelian wrote: ↑Tue Jul 01, 2025 4:01 am A Christian woman is absolutely not typified by being chaste, because she is certainly not, but by being amazingly insincere.
Is every woman, also, essentially, as 'like this' as well?

I repeat, there is no difference in promiscuity. There is only a difference in the amount of lying about it.

Posted: **Tue Jul 01, 2025 7:24 am**

godelian wrote: ↑Mon Jun 30, 2025 6:26 am
attofishpi wrote: ↑Mon Jun 30, 2025 5:30 am The only way ugly big nose Pakis like you could have sex with any beautiful Western girl is, indeed, via RAPE.
Ha ha ha! Of course, I am not a Paki, but I typically get along with them really well.

Just to let U know, all those Paki rapists (*and of course anyone that rapes children in particular)

R_APE - perhaps U also, will end up on our MEN_U

I was only trying to warn U 666, no long worth_Y of being 'men', reincarnated the BEAST

Posted: **Tue Jul 01, 2025 8:55 am**

attofishpi wrote: ↑Tue Jul 01, 2025 7:24 am
godelian wrote: ↑Mon Jun 30, 2025 6:26 am
attofishpi wrote: ↑Mon Jun 30, 2025 5:30 am The only way ugly big nose Pakis like you could have sex with any beautiful Western girl is, indeed, via RAPE.
Ha ha ha! Of course, I am not a Paki, but I typically get along with them really well.

Just to let U know, all those Paki rapists (*and of course anyone that rapes children in particular)

R_APE - perhaps U also, will end up on our MEN_U

I was only trying to warn U 666, no long worth_Y of being 'men', reincarnated the BEAST

These Pakis are obviously tougher than you.

Posted: **Tue Jul 01, 2025 8:59 am**

godelian wrote: ↑Tue Jul 01, 2025 8:55 am
attofishpi wrote: ↑Tue Jul 01, 2025 7:24 am
godelian wrote: ↑Mon Jun 30, 2025 6:26 am
Ha ha ha! Of course, I am not a Paki, but I typically get along with them really well.

Just to let U know, all those Paki rapists (*and of course anyone that rapes children in particular)

R_APE - perhaps U also, will end up on our MEN_U

I was only trying to warn U 666, no long worth_Y of being 'men', reincarnated the BEAST
These Pakis are obviously tougher than you.

Owe really? Guess they better have thick skin, I do love roasted pig skin

Posted: **Tue Jul 01, 2025 12:44 pm**

attofishpi wrote: ↑Tue Jul 01, 2025 8:59 am
godelian wrote: ↑Tue Jul 01, 2025 8:55 am
attofishpi wrote: ↑Tue Jul 01, 2025 7:24 am

Just to let U know, all those Paki rapists (*and of course anyone that rapes children in particular)

R_APE - perhaps U also, will end up on our MEN_U

I was only trying to warn U 666, no long worth_Y of being 'men', reincarnated the BEAST
These Pakis are obviously tougher than you.
Owe really? Guess they better have thick skin, I do love roasted pig skin

Apparently, it's all about these Pakistani grooming gangs. There are no groomers without groomables, just like there are no drug dealers without drug addicts. So, the real question is: Why are these British girls so groomable?

ChatGPT: Profile of a grooming gang victim in the UK

In the UK, grooming gang victims have tended to share certain social, demographic, and psychological characteristics, though each case is individual and unique. Based on reports, investigations (e.g., Rotherham, Rochdale, Telford), and academic studies, here is a general profile that has emerged over the past two decades:

General Profile of Grooming Gang Victims in the UK
1. Age
Typically girls aged between 11 and 16.
Some victims have been as young as 10 or as old as 18 when first targeted.

2. Gender
Overwhelmingly female.
Some male victims have been reported, but they are far fewer in number and less frequently documented in high-profile grooming gang cases.

3. Ethnicity
In many of the most publicized cases (e.g., Rotherham, Rochdale), the victims were predominantly White British.
This demographic feature has often been linked to the socio-cultural dynamics between perpetrators and victims in specific communities.

4. Socioeconomic Background
Victims were often from working-class or economically deprived backgrounds.
Frequently living in care, foster homes, or in unstable family environments.
Some had histories of neglect, abuse, or trauma prior to being groomed.

5. Psychological Factors
Victims often experienced:
Low self-esteem
Emotional vulnerability
A desire for love, attention, or acceptance
Perpetrators exploited these vulnerabilities by offering gifts, drugs, alcohol, or affection.

6. Risk Factors
Poor parental supervision or breakdown in family support.
Truancy or exclusion from school.
Previous contact with social services, sometimes already known as "at-risk."
Use of social media and unsupervised internet access, which sometimes facilitated contact with groomers.

7. Relationship with Perpetrators
Victims were often coerced into believing they were in a romantic relationship.
Grooming could involve being passed between multiple men, with increasing coercion, including rape, violence, blackmail, or threats to their families.

Important Clarifications
"Grooming gang" cases refer to organized, group-based grooming and abuse. These differ from isolated grooming incidents involving a single perpetrator. Not all grooming or CSE (child sexual exploitation) in the UK occurs in this form — most child sexual abuse is still perpetrated by individuals, often within the family.
The ethnic composition of perpetrators in high-profile cases has been controversial, but national statistics suggest most sex offenders in the UK are White, though specific gang-based cases have involved men of South Asian heritage, particularly of Pakistani Muslim backgrounds, which has been a subject of political and media scrutiny.

So, the strong, independent mothers of these young girls need no man, frequently run out of money, and raise young girls with daddy issues in impressive numbers. Who would ever have thought? Since these young girls are clearly groomable, they are going to find their groomer, Pakistani or white British, and get groomed. That phenomenon certainly won't stop any time soon. You see, according to feminism, fathers are not even needed to keep families going. I find this social outcome truly admirable. It proves that feminism was right all along. Congratulations. Also, keep blaming the Pakis!

Posted: **Tue Jul 01, 2025 12:53 pm**

godelian wrote: ↑Tue Jul 01, 2025 6:39 am
Age wrote: ↑Tue Jul 01, 2025 6:05 am
godelian wrote: ↑Tue Jul 01, 2025 4:01 am
Yes, a Christian woman is essentially as promiscuous as any other woman.
So, to you, 'every' woman is, essentially, as promiscuous as any other woman is, right?
godelian wrote: ↑Tue Jul 01, 2025 4:01 am She is just going to lie about that a bit harder.
Does any one understand what 'this sentence', here, even means and is referring to, exactly?

If yes, then would you please explain what it means, and is referring to, exactly?
godelian wrote: ↑Tue Jul 01, 2025 4:01 am A Christian woman is absolutely not typified by being chaste, because she is certainly not, but by being amazingly insincere.
Is every woman, also, essentially, as 'like this' as well?
I repeat, there is no difference in promiscuity. There is only a difference in the amount of lying about it.

So, to "godelian" anyway, absolutely every woman in 'the world' is a promiscuous as the one call "bonnie blue" is, but absolutely all of them are not as honest' as "bonnie blue" supposedly and allegedly is about being as promiscuous as 'bonnie blue". Which obviously means that if "godelian" has a wife, wives, and/or daughters, then they too are as promiscuous as "bonnie blue" is, and if they do not admit this and/or prove this by filming how promiscuous they really are, then they, too, are lying about it.

Now, if there is absolutely any one who agrees with and/or accepts this claim of "godelian", here, then please present "yourself" and inform 'us' of how this could be true, in any way at all.

And, let 'us' not forget that "bonnie blue" is also lying, and thus being dishonest, about its promiscuity, as "Bonnie blue" is not as honest as 'the one's' who are more promiscuous than "bonnie blue" is. As, well according to "godelian's logic", here, absolutely every woman is as promiscuous as each other is. And, when they are not, then they are just lying and being dishonest.

Now, and again, if absolutely any one does not see any fault in "godelian's" claims, here, then please speak up.

Posted: **Tue Jul 01, 2025 1:02 pm**

Age wrote: ↑Tue Jul 01, 2025 12:53 pm So, to "godelian" anyway, absolutely every woman in 'the world' is a promiscuous as the one call "bonnie blue"

Bla bla bla.

What is the point in purposely misunderstanding other people? Does it help you to make money? I seriously doubt it. So, how are you going to pay your bills? Are you going to ask the landlord, "Do you mean that I have to pay absolutely every dollar of my rent this month? Can you clarify what you mean? Does absolutely every tenant have to do that? What do you mean by 'tenant'? What do you mean by 'every'? What do you mean by 'rent'? What do you mean by 'dollar'? Is every dollar 'in the world' the same as every other one? Please, explain, because I absolutely don't understand this eviction notice."

Posted: **Tue Jul 01, 2025 1:15 pm**

godelian wrote: ↑Tue Jul 01, 2025 1:02 pm
Age wrote: ↑Tue Jul 01, 2025 12:53 pm So, to "godelian" anyway, absolutely every woman in 'the world' is a promiscuous as the one call "bonnie blue"
Bla bla bla.

Well it was 'you' who clarified 'this' above, here. So, if it is so-called 'bla bla bla', to you, then why say and confirm it?

godelian wrote: ↑Tue Jul 01, 2025 1:02 pm What is the point in purposely misunderstanding other people?

you said what you did, here. I then questioned you over what 'you said', you then clarified, and confirmed, 'it'. So, if there is any misunderstanding, here, then so be it.

Now, if you would like to correct any thing, here, then by all means go on and do it. Until then 'your words' above 'stand', for all to 'look at', and 'see', here.

godelian wrote: ↑Tue Jul 01, 2025 1:02 pm Does it help you to make money?

Why 'try to' deflect and detract, here, now?

godelian wrote: ↑Tue Jul 01, 2025 1:02 pm I seriously doubt it. So, how are you going to pay your bills? Are you going to ask the landlord, "Do you mean that I have to pay absolutely every dollar of my rent this month? Can you clarify what you mean? Does absolutely every tenant have to do that? What do you mean by 'tenant'? What do you mean by 'every'?

All, obviously.

What do you mean by 'every'? Some?

godelian wrote: ↑Tue Jul 01, 2025 1:02 pm What do you mean by 'rent'? What do you mean by 'dollar'? Is every dollar 'in the world' the same as every other one? Please, explain, because I absolutely don't understand this eviction notice."

Does any know how 'this one' could have seen, or gotten onto talking about, 'money', 'rent', 'tenant', 'landlord', 'dollar', or 'eviction notice' from absolutely any thing that I have said or written in this thread?

Posted: **Tue Jul 01, 2025 2:44 pm**

godelian wrote: ↑Tue Jul 01, 2025 12:44 pm
attofishpi wrote: ↑Tue Jul 01, 2025 8:59 am
godelian wrote: ↑Tue Jul 01, 2025 8:55 am
These Pakis are obviously tougher than you.
Owe really? Guess they better have thick skin, I do love roasted pig skin
Apparently, it's all about these Pakistani grooming gangs.

WOT?

No my dear chap, it's all about ENTROPY -- Y_PORT_NE == Y PORT ANY--->SOULS ....to 666

Glad to have U (*and them) on the MEN_U

yum yum, thank GOD for all the Mo HAM mad fools

Posted: **Tue Jul 01, 2025 8:39 pm**

attofishpi wrote: ↑Tue Jul 01, 2025 2:44 pm
godelian wrote: ↑Tue Jul 01, 2025 12:44 pm
attofishpi wrote: ↑Tue Jul 01, 2025 8:59 am

Owe really? Guess they better have thick skin, I do love roasted pig skin
Apparently, it's all about these Pakistani grooming gangs.
WOT?

No my dear chap, it's all about ENTROPY -- Y_PORT_NE == Y PORT ANY--->SOULS ....to 666

Glad to have U (*and them) on the MEN_U

yum yum, thank GOD for all the Mo HAM mad fools

Hmm. It's nice that your 'good healthy diet' is keeping your brain strong and functioning well, as we can see by your sensible, coherent posts such as this one

Philosophy Now Forum

Why?

Re: Why?

Re: Why?

Re: Why?

Re: Why?

Re: Why?

Re: Why?

Re: Why?

Re: Why?

Re: Why?

Re: Why?

Re: Why?

Re: Why?

Re: Why?

Re: Why?

Re: Why?