Skitzocow Chris Gillon / Autphag and Spergchan / Sophie Y’Israeli - Autistic North Koreaboo, Also a Man

Who passes better as a woman?

  • Autphag:

    Votes: 36 9.9%
  • Robert Wayne Stiles

    Votes: 327 90.1%

  • Total voters
    363
In what ways would you say you exhibit infantilism?
Nothing publically for certain. It's something I confine to my mental space most of the time. I occasionall buy diapers etc. to mess in, when I do have the money, and that's something I don't really take the effort to document or display to an open audience. I'll talk about it to the extent that it involves no actual obective paraphillization of real children, so I've nothing to fear.
Ergo, it fails a functional definition of paedophillia and I don't feel the need to eat at Dr. Boe Jangle's bait-and-switch where he interchanges the two at will.
 
Ergo, it fails a functional definition of paedophillia and I don't feel the need to eat at Dr. Boe Jangle's bait-and-switch where he interchanges the two at will.
A first time for everything, I suppose.
That having been said, it's not as though infantilism is much less creepy. Would you say you've always had an aversion to living as an adult? Is that one of the driving forces behind this sort of learned helplessness of yours?
 
  • Feels
Reactions: Begemot
Nothing publically for certain. It's something I confine to my mental space most of the time. I occasionall buy diapers etc. to mess in, when I do have the money, and that's something I don't really take the effort to document or display to an open audience. I'll talk about it to the extent that it involves no actual obective paraphillization of real children, so I've nothing to fear.
Ergo, it fails a functional definition of paedophillia and I don't feel the need to eat at Dr. Boe Jangle's bait-and-switch where he interchanges the two at will.
Oh, interesting. Do you happen to have a sexual attraction to children, or acting like or dressing like a child? There's nothing wrong with admitting this, Sophie. We don't care.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: LagoonaBlue
Oh, interesting. Do you happen to have a sexual attraction to children, or acting like or dressing like a child? There's nothing wrong with admitting this, Sophie. We don't care.
It's the latter, strictly speaking.
A first time for everything, I suppose.
That having been said, it's not as though infantilism is much less creepy. Would you say you've always had an aversion to living as an adult? Is that one of the driving forces behind this sort of learned helplessness of yours?
Yes, and plausibly.
 
It's the latter, strictly speaking

Oh, ok, nothing wrong with that, Sophie. We all got our kinks.

How else would you say you're infantile? I'm doing a study on this sort of behavior, and input you could give me would be great (and don't worry, it's independent of any establishments)
 
  • Feels
Reactions: LagoonaBlue
Nothing publically for certain. It's something I confine to my mental space most of the time. I occasionall buy diapers etc. to mess in, when I do have the money,
You really, really should shower more.
and that's something I don't really take the effort to document or display to an open audience.
And yet, here we are.
I'll talk about it to the extent that it involves no actual obective paraphillization of real children, so I've nothing to fear.
That's ok, you've given us so much more to discuss.
 
Fuuuuuuck, I had no idea he was on that long. I thought he slept.



To be fair, not as many people had provoked him. It was when Adamska did his thing that he got pissed.
i see some misapprehensions on my horizon. my machine is always online and it may look like i'm logged in here when i'm not actually on the site.
 
Pseudointellectualism is Magic.

So much so, that I've had a day replete with elevated thoughts, ascending the heightening of my spirits out to the upper-door of the ninth heavens, by which I refer to the Confucian model thereof. These would easily cannibalistically devour the likes of Haselgrove's insipidly rhetorical doggerel, or Vitriol's suppressed-homosexual-transsexual (per the Greenian model, wherein he lives through his girlfriend) status virtue signals, in their rigour, intensity, depth, conviction, plannedness, and comprehensiveness. They know little of aesoterica, aether, occult, and take for granted, processess of supposedly explicated logics that they mistaken on a presumption of fully reliably explicated iteration the reality of their magical negroidality, such that is "logic's" (in the post-Cartesid, proto-Netwonian sense) unreliability.
Vitriol's anaphylactic shock will come to him yet. In his pseudo-masculine caricature of the intellectual, whilst desperately trying to heave down in containing the anxiety he feels upon penetrating his girlfriend, knowingly aware as to its unnaturalness as the homonculus of his girlfriend's reception of his member becomes his own, in the anxious realisation that his feminine essense is being 'stolen', so does he withdraw, writhing with disgust at what he immediately comes, but lost at his apparently overconfidently-overestimated ability to articulate, to realise, was a theft of manifest destiny. Had he any genuine intellect to wit, what would the words "chivalry slavery" be to him but at the tip of his tongue, as opposed to that he derides as being a product of the mind of a madness he desperately deflects in attempting to dispose of such an epiphany?
He is the worst sort of woman, as are most neurotypical men. He is why Rohm remarked characteristically of the disdain to such, irrespective of original sex. So caught up in games of statused worth, they cannot bring that same worthiness to their own integrity and candour. Yet, the Westlothiana (yes, that is a literal species) reptillianess will grant his ascension on the proviso that his deception had somehow been weighted in the privilege of its significance to a more candid, societally-demanded repression, rooted in honour, as is his superior in moral counterpart, the Aspergian homosexual-transsexual.

No matter how real the physiological phenomenon in the catamitical vicariates of Vitriol's sort, I willingly repudiate the notion in the neurotypical, for it is an ubiquitous expression in the mistaken belief that femininity may be distilled to one sole constitutent of its parts' whole sum, the perception of themselves as the voices of "wisdome" or "intellect". It is the neurotypical's obsessional paraphillia to evade the superstitiously regarded synonmity of stupidity with a stereotypical conception of "boy" (to put more colloquially, the oft-lamented epiphet of "boys are stupid"), adorning something akin to a neurological transvestism in its concealment, that characterises this pathology so specific to themselves.

It becomes apparent, thenceforth, that transpeople who pride themselves on their "intellects" (empirical regurgitation, extrapolation, and review ability), with such examples among them being Zinnia Jones, S-Chan, et al., must be engaging in an extreme-masculinity, such that they are not really tranny and merely use transgenderism as a means of bolstering their abstract-intellectualism credentials.

They do not understand the intellectual essense of femininity, which, I darest verge on referring to some of my nemeses here, I've known few to actually fully comprehend to date; David had successfully eschewed empiricism, Newtonian logical laws, and the war against Cartesid hexorthodoxical idealistic-experimentalism, to embrace fully a struggle against the thoughtful experimentation of the LaRoucheans, for instance, and it is this, in aether, in aesoterica, in feeling, in intuition, in occult, and the spontaneity that underpins all five, which one may find true feminine intellectual essence of the least compensatory and most original sort.

Q.E.D., I'm the only truly awakened, fully and self-awarely cognizant woman in a spiritually deferrential and non-hypocritically self-serving sense in the entire world.
I see you like magic
 
  • Agree
Reactions: S-chan
Nothing publically for certain.

I distinctly remember you mentioning in the PULL Chatango that you wanted someone to change your shitty ass.

Does that not fall under your definition of publicly?
 
Voicing your sexual desires publicly is only one degree of social retardation behind actually performing them publicly.
 
Voicing your sexual desires publicly is only one degree of social retardation behind actually performing them publicly.
You're all highly depraved yet you feel the need to contain it under the misguided impression that nobody suspects you to be a degenerate anyway. I, certainly, make it the first thing I suspect of purportedly pious people.
 
You're all highly depraved yet you feel the need to contain it under the misguided impression that nobody suspects you to be a degenerate anyway. I, certainly, make it the first thing I suspect of purportedly pious people.

Yeah we all totally subscribe to the Marquis de Sade way of thinking.
 
You're all highly depraved yet you feel the need to contain it under the misguided impression that nobody suspects you to be a degenerate anyway. I, certainly, make it the first thing I suspect of purportedly pious people.

Well, when you put it that way, are you a degenerate?
 
  • Agree
Reactions: LagoonaBlue
You're all highly depraved yet you feel the need to contain it under the misguided impression that nobody suspects you to be a degenerate anyway. I, certainly, make it the first thing I suspect of purportedly pious people.
It's not a matter of being "pious" or whatever, it's a matter of not flapping your one-inch cock at every stranger you meet.
 
Moral degeneration needs to have an active component in participation of societal degeneration; an absence of exhibition thusfar on my part means that, as of yet, whatever internal degeneracy I endorse, has not translated into the act of being a degnerate proper.


lol remember when you couldn't reply to that thread, you reatard
 
Back