"Mad at the Internet" - a/k/a My Psychotherapy Sessions

  • 🐕 I am attempting to get the site runnning as fast as possible. If you are experiencing slow page load times, please report it.
How do you explain the other vtubers with adults or inhuman avatars engage in the exact same behavior at the same rate with the same responses? Are they pedophiles too that just got the short end of the draw and got assigned avatars that weren't lolis?
"Well ACKTUALLY they're not all paedophiles because they're not actually attracted to children. They just promote the sexualisation of children for their financial benefit and joke about it. Because child sexual abuse is funny. Checkmate feminists"
:neckbeard:

There’s a good chance “retweet fan art” is literally standard policy.
"I was just doing my job! I dindu nuffin"

If someone said to me "You're going to use a lolicon avatar to make money from paedo goonclowns" then I'd punch them in the fucking taint because I'd rather starve to death then be complicit in that shit.

What the actual fuck is wrong with you creeps?
 
I've listened to bits and pieces of Pippa and Kirsche's streams. The Vtuber shit is cringe and gay, but I've liked them as streamers. I think they're funny. I've appreciated their friendly stance toward KF and their open hostility toward retarded trannies during the Hogwarts game shitshow. It is always based when real women are openly hostile toward the troonish menace, instead of subordinating themselves to grotesque AGP faggots.

But the lewd loli shit is indefensible. Regardless of any hypothetical auto-tweeter or business arrangement.
 
I don't know if she is a pedophile or not, but she sure does cater to them seeing as her entire job is pretending to be an anime child to help pedos jerk off and she definitely is very much pro lolicon art because "it's just a fictional child". That doesn't apply to vtubers who pretend to be adult anime women, although they are still internet prostitutes essentially making a living off lonely neet men like you. Can you not understand the difference between an adult and a child?
I can. The difference is, that I don't make the leap to pedophiles.
Here I will give the correct take directly to the people:
Kirshe, don't sexualize your persona on the internet, for either money, apathy, or otherwise it is not good.
Jim, don't sexualize your persona on the internet, for either money, apathy, or otherwise it is not good.
Josh, don't sexualize your persona on the internet, for either money, apathy, or otherwise it is not good.
Markipliar, don't sexualize your persona on the internet, for either money, apathy, or otherwise it is not good.
Mr. Beast, don't sexualize your persona on the internet, for either money, apathy, or otherwise it is not good.
Pippa, don't sexualize your persona on the internet, for either money, apathy, or otherwise it is not good; and because it is a child you are doing something even worse than the others.

In none of these did I have to say they are pedophiles. One is worse but the pedophile solution is bullets, and I don't think any of these people are at the point people should shoot them.
What the fuck is even this argument

Whether in fiction or reality, there's possible reasons to kill someone for a good reason, like protecting someone else.

There's no possible reason where FUCKING A CHILD or even lusting after one can have a good justification.
That is why it was funny. It was an absurd juxtoposition exacerbated by Pippa scrambling to try to find plausible ridiculous arguments to make Kirshe embarrassed.
 
What the fuck are you even talking about? lmao
Isn't Gator the one interacting with these pedos? Are you projecting at like IMAX levels right now?
They are just working hard to prove this right:

fnhum-09-00344-g002~2.jpg

I added an extra bullet point for Col who keeps failing to spell his favorite vtuber's name right (It's Kirsche not Kirshe)
 
Last edited:
Here I will give the correct take directly to the people:
Is your argument still just "Pippa isn't a paedophile because she only gets financial gain from her content. We don't even know if she's attracted to children at all"?

Are you for real with this shit?
Why are you defending her?
Lidl already posted evidence of Pippa's creepy paedo fanservice material. Pippa is deliberately posting the content.

Why can't we call her a paedo?
Why do you find it necessary to split hairs in this instance?

If you are complicit in posting paedo/lolicon shit - you are a fucking paedo.

Pippa, don't sexualize your persona on the internet, for either money, apathy, or otherwise it is not good; and because it is a child you are doing something even worse than the others
Yes. That is 100% true.

How are you not able to see that it's fucking worse?
 
They are just working hard to proof this right:

View attachment 6079123

I added an extra bullet point for Col who keeps failing to spell his favorite vtuber's name right (It's Kirsche not Kirshe)
Not tolerating pedo shit somehow makes you a pedophile to these people so yeah I would believe they have sub nigger IQ
 
they're not all paedophiles because they're not actually attracted to children.
Yeah that should be the end of the discussion. If you are not sexually attracted to children you shouldn't be called a pedophile. Vito is, so he is. Max Carson is, so he is. Pippa isn't, so she isn't. Kirshe isn't, so she isn't.

You can have immoral people without being pedos. You can have absolute scum that deserve the worst torture possible and them not be pedos. But being like "That guy mugged me today. He is clearly a pedo!" He was probably a black drug addict. it is just nonsensical. It just makes dealing with problems harder if every problem is just addressed with the pedo hammer.
Call pippa a nihilist with no actual beliefs who is fine with making fun of or being passive to loli stuff. At least then we can debate on if it is true and what can be done about it. But when you go to "She didn't condemn her audience for liking her loli anime character, time for the pedo stamp." Then even if others agree she needs to be condemned for the bad thing she did, they just can't agree with you because it is just not the same conviction as to be a pedophile.
 
Yeah that should be the end of the discussion. If you are not sexually attracted to children you shouldn't be called a pedophile. Vito is, so he is. Max Carson is, so he is. Pippa isn't, so she isn't. Kirshe isn't, so she isn't.

You can have immoral people without being pedos. You can have absolute scum that deserve the worst torture possible and them not be pedos. But being like "That guy mugged me today. He is clearly a pedo!" He was probably a black drug addict. it is just nonsensical. It just makes dealing with problems harder if every problem is just addressed with the pedo hammer.
Call pippa a nihilist with no actual beliefs who is fine with making fun of or being passive to loli stuff. At least then we can debate on if it is true and what can be done about it. But when you go to "She didn't condemn her audience for liking her loli anime character, time for the pedo stamp." Then even if others agree she needs to be condemned for the bad thing she did, they just can't agree with you because it is just not the same conviction as to be a pedophile.
If you enable pedos you're a pedo. Full stop.
 
They are just working hard to proof this right:

View attachment 6079123

I added an extra bullet point for Col who keeps failing to spell his favorite vtuber's name right (It's Kirsche not Kirshe)
Proofing someone right is difficult indeed. About as difficult as proving yeast. Or writing a prove.

IMG_2734.jpeg
It could be worse. Day of the scissors when?
 
Last edited:
Yeah that should be the end of the discussion
It's not though.

Answer my fucking questions.

If you're complicit in the sexualisation of a minor (fictional or not), you are a paedo.

You sound like one of those weirdos justifying the difference between paedophilia and ephebophilia because "muh bioessentialism"
 
Back