Gross Aella Martin / Rachael Antier Slick / Abigail Glass / @Aella_Girl / @Aellagirl / @Miss_Aella / u/Sweatywoman / RedVerse / Apostate Slick / Knowingless - Rationalist LessWrong poly libertarian hooker girl throwing rape orgy parties. Former $100k/month OnlyFans star and $3,000/hour prostitute. Would rather come up with gross hypotheticals than shower.

How many people will show up to Aella's birthday gangbang?


  • Total voters
    168
  • Poll closed .
She's desperately clinging to 2014 style militant atheism.
In my memory, 2014 is exactly the year when militant euphoric neckbeard atheism became unfashionable and no longer "edgy". That's about when boys in basic or my friends' students stopped loudly telling everyone about it at every opportunity. I guess Internet addicts/social media whores really don't do anything until it's guaranteed completely widely acceptable and updootable.
 
In my memory, 2014 is exactly the year when militant euphoric neckbeard atheism became unfashionable and no longer "edgy". That's about when boys in basic or my friends' students stopped loudly telling everyone about it at every opportunity. I guess Internet addicts/social media whores really don't do anything until it's guaranteed completely widely acceptable and updootable.
1719895472603.png
You're about a year late.
 
Those insisting she'll go back to religion are crazy. She's desperately clinging to 2014 style militant atheism. She, and a lot of people in that group, are stuck in the past decade and that's where they'll stay. Like a Gen X lady with an 80s hairstyle. It's all trying to bring back that vibe and it isn't working because the younger generations have already co-signed atheism almost completely and there isn't much to push back against when you've basically won. No one cares if you don't go to church in 2024.

For someone like Aella, who has a persecution complex, that's unacceptable. The idea that people don't like her because she's an annoying cliché is way worse than hating her because they're puritan evangelicals.
That does open up the opportunity to become an actual evangelical though. And I'd be remiss at not pointing out how many of the modern day "movements" like social justice and even QAnon type stuff is very steeped in missionary and millennialist type thought with only the traditional Christian justifications stripped away (or in the conservative stuff weirdly perverted) for socio-cultural reasons.

So I wouldn't put it past Aella reverting to a perpendicular form of what she came from that's premised mostly on rejecting both it and whatever she perceives as the mass norm. But it could be take the form of like "my parents were totally wrong about the Bible, this is what it really says: we should have constant orgies while reciting hymns" or whatever.
 
Rachael unironically pushes the pro-pedo narrative that child abuse is only damaging because adults tell them it's damaging:
View attachment 6151984
source (a)

A wild naysayer appears:
View attachment 6151988
source (a)

Only you can prevent the next Hitler by... *checks notes* pushing pedophile talking points?
View attachment 6151990
source (a)
I had a suspicion that the original tweet was discourse about men pissing on each other in public during pride, which has been making the rounds on the twitter sphere. So I looked up the original full tweet. So this is what she felt the need to push back on:

IMG_4812.jpeg

IMG_4813.jpeg

Oh, and it didn’t stop there.



IMG_4815.jpeg

Remember everyone, maintaining social order is for prudes and squares!
 
Only you can prevent the next Hitler by... *checks notes* pushing pedophile talking points?
View attachment 6151990
source (a)
"Every horrible thing people did throughout history came from people who thought their beliefs felt good and true, and that they shouldn't be testing their own bar."

The first part seems acceptable enough as a general assumption, but the last part doesn't follow at all. If anything, it's probably the opposite. You have to push your own bar to start justifying actually participating in murdering people for example.
 
Why is she talking like she actually has a kid?

She has no idea how she’d react as a mother if her child was exposed to depraved sex acts.

It’s not her place to be dismissive of parents safeguarding their children.
Agreed. Some non-parents have the worst Dunning-Kruger in the realm of kids/childrearing. It's telling to me that my most "progressive" friends are kid-free while my parent friends all trend centrist/classic conservative. Having children changes how you see things, full stop.

Aella thinks of children as small adults, and feels they should be approached as such - you see that attitude in the super leftie circles. The asking for consent to wipe a kid's butt and stuff. It's beyond stupid and dangerous.
 
Why is she talking like she actually has a kid?

She has no idea how she’d react as a mother if her child was exposed to depraved sex acts.

It’s not her place to be dismissive of parents safeguarding their children.
agree with you but she is actually mind broken enough to where i would fully believe she would expose her kids to this shit. Hopefully she doesn’t ever have kids for their sake, unless she seriously matures.
 
Last edited:
"Every horrible thing people did throughout history came from people who thought their beliefs felt good and true, and that they shouldn't be testing their own bar."
Cool I'm now going to go "test my bar" that all people are equally deserving to draw breath, thanks Aella!!!
 
"Every horrible thing people did throughout history came from people who thought their beliefs felt good and true, and that they shouldn't be testing their own bar."
I wonder if she realizes that "testing the bar" also applies to her own beliefs. That her belief that it's okay to expose children to kink and nudity should also be challenged.

"Testing the bar" of some conventional moral belief doesn't automatically mean that you'll always come to the conclusion that this convention is wrong. Sometimes, the result is you'll be even more in support of it once you realize why the rule was established to begin with.
 
I wonder if she realizes that "testing the bar" also applies to her own beliefs. That her belief that it's okay to expose children to kink and nudity should also be challenged.

"Testing the bar" of some conventional moral belief doesn't automatically mean that you'll always come to the conclusion that this convention is wrong. Sometimes, the result is you'll be even more in support of it once you realize why the rule was established to begin with.
Well her mind is like a child’s very empirical, you see. If she cant literally see any harm physically taking place it must be assumed no harm is occurring.

She is the epitome of that saying “Don’t be so open minded that your brain falls out”.
 
you just made this up for shock value right
there's no way this is a real thing
There are several "sex researchers," or whatever they want to call themselves, floating around who champion the idea of asking kids for consent for everything. If you search "asking kids consent to change diapers" for example, you'll find some dangerhair they/them who says this sort of this cements the concept of consent. If you think it's just some weird theoretical idea, read Abigail Shrier's book "Bad Therapy" for tons of anecdotes about parents doing this kind of thing with absolutely disastrous results (or search on reddit like she did for some of the examples).

Hardcore, "progressive" parents absolutely do this stuff, and it turns out kids hate it just as much as the parents do because kids need structure and to not be dealing with the terror of being "in charge" as a developing human.
 
Well her mind is like a child’s very empirical, you see. If she cant literally see any harm physically taking place it must be assumed no harm is occurring.

She is the epitome of that saying “Don’t be so open minded that your brain falls out”.
Combined with the worst case of McNamara's Fallacy I've ever seen.
 
Rachael unironically pushes the pro-pedo narrative that child abuse is only damaging because adults tell them it's damaging:
View attachment 6151984
source (a)

A wild naysayer appears:
View attachment 6151988
source (a)

Only you can prevent the next Hitler by... *checks notes* pushing pedophile talking points?
View attachment 6151990
source (a)
Congrats, you've come to the same conclusion as that German sexologist that placed foster children with pedophiles as a 'social experiment':
german berlin raised by pedos helmut kendler.pngPlease stay 500 feet away from children at all times, Aella.
 
Combined with the worst case of McNamara's Fallacy I've ever seen.
This would be a step up for her. Aella seems to dismiss anything she hasn't personally seen even when large amounts of data is available. If we look to surveys she would have thought Vietnam was going well because it was still supported by a majority of people into Nixon's term.
 
Back