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 .
Fuzzy X said:
View attachment 6996135
Every time I think she's hit peak retard she comes out with a new astoundingly bad take. In this episode, what if self harm is good?
Click to expand...
She decided to die on this "self-harm is Good, Actually" hill after encouraging someone to do it over something as simple as getting dumped :stress: What the fuck is wrong with her?
aella (1).jpg
aella (2).jpg

Who craves pain like a nutrient besides the mentally ill?
aella (3).jpg

She only supports this unhinged idea because unlike you chuds, she wants to help people "process stuff more quickly"! The most effective coping mechanism for grief is cutting yourself, don't you know?
aella (4).jpg

She keeps emphasizing that it should be done "safely and without permanent damage" as if self-harm does not often escalate to suicide or result in lasting injuries. The world would be a better place if more people inflicted pain on themselves, according to Aella.
aella (5).jpg

But don't worry, the potential consequences of "suppressing desires" and not "giving into impulses" are the bigger threat we should really be worried about!
aella (6).jpg
 
  • Lunacy
  • Horrifying
  • Informative
Reactions: fuzzdew, h2_jGX, TomboyGF and 24 others
Tutu said:
She decided to die on this "self-harm is Good, Actually" hill after encouraging someone to do it over something as simple as getting dumped :stress: What the fuck is wrong with her?
View attachment 6996217
View attachment 6996235

Who craves pain like a nutrient besides the mentally ill?
View attachment 6996245

She only supports this unhinged idea because unlike you chuds, she wants to help people "process stuff more quickly"! The most effective coping mechanism for grief is cutting yourself, don't you know?
View attachment 6996260

She keeps emphasizing that it should be done "safely and without permanent damage" as if self-harm does not often escalate to suicide or result in lasting injuries. The world would be a better place if more people inflicted pain on themselves, according to Aella.
View attachment 6996272

But don't worry, the potential consequences of "suppressing desires" and not "giving into impulses" are the bigger threat we should really be worried about!
View attachment 6996288
Click to expand...
Replying to someone who is clearly in crisis and thinking about self harm with actually i think self harm would help is one of the most unhinged things she’s done on twitter.

She’s being utterly retarded. Self harm by definition would be something that causes harm. Letting yourself feel your emotions even grief/ sadness is important to work through them and that isn’t self harm that’s normal? The fact she has to inflict pain on herself to face normal human emotions isn’t some cool life hack , it shows she is pretty mentally unhealthy. But guys everyone else is wrong and she actually living the superior way to everyone else.

Giving into all your impulses when you have a mental illness is a pretty good way to end up homeless or on the farms.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
  • Winner
Reactions: h2_jGX, ApeBass, fagnarok and 22 others
I think she actually truly meant her clearly expansive definition of "self harm" that includes watching sad movies and crying and she can't give up the position she's taken when it became clear that everyone else on the planet uses it in a different manner because rationalists aren't allowed to admit being wrong or that they use terms in strange unique ways. She's trying to finagle this with "no lasting permanent damage" while not being clear what this means either. "Harmless" cutting still leaves scars, but if you said something like this she'd pounce on you for saying anyone should be ashamed of anything about their bodies. That would allow her to avoid the L by changing the subject and direction of the moral condemnation so she has to keep at it until someone says something to allow for it. The alternative is the far less rational conclusion that she could be wrong about something.
 
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: h2_jGX, fagnarok, Trianon and 9 others
My impression was she was saying behaviors like repetitive cutting are fine as long as you heal up and there's no permanent damage. In Aella's mind, it's just something like acupuncture or dry needling which is painful but (because science reasons) can improve someone's mood. She doesn't realize that's not what self-harm is about. For one, she's talking about physical self-harm in reaction to psychological distress. This isn't your body releasing endorphins on mile 18 of a marathon and you getting a runner's high. The "no permanent damage" assumes no permanent *physical* damage, but do we really think there's no permanent psychological damage from repeatedly harming yourself physically when you are distressed?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: h2_jGX, CoolFool, fagnarok and 14 others
AirdropShitposts said:
I think she actually truly meant her clearly expansive definition of "self harm" that includes watching sad movies and crying and she can't give up the position she's taken when it became clear that everyone else on the planet uses it in a different manner because rationalists aren't allowed to admit being wrong or that they use terms in strange unique ways. She's trying to finagle this with "no lasting permanent damage" while not being clear what this means either. "Harmless" cutting still leaves scars, but if you said something like this she'd pounce on you for saying anyone should be ashamed of anything about their bodies. That would allow her to avoid the L by changing the subject and direction of the moral condemnation so she has to keep at it until someone says something to allow for it. The alternative is the far less rational conclusion that she could be wrong about something.
Click to expand...
This is the new form of "I will now define political in the broadest sense so I can slam you in the narrowest terms"
 
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: hatefilledcunt, fagnarok, expectant asshole and 7 others
ghjoigcbn said:
The fact she has to inflict pain on herself to face normal human emotions isn’t some cool life hack , it shows she is pretty mentally unhealthy.
Click to expand...
It's so common among chicks with BPD it's a meme; she can't conceptualize or understand emotional pain so she needs to feel physical pain to "get" it.

Weirdly, though, she's not actually alone in her thoughts here. Pain does release endorphins, so in a way, hurting yourself can give you a rush of something like "feeling better." The suggestion I've heard in mental health circles is to snap a rubberband against your skin. It's more of a harm REDUCTION thing, though, than a full on "hey, this is a great idea!" And as usual her timing and ability to read a "room" is non-existent.
 
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: ApeBass, fagnarok, Coo Coo Bird and 6 others
The idea that the urge of a disturbed individual to cut herself is a "need" like food or water probably comes from playing too many videos games, and is really too retarded to even consider.

The hedonist libertine whore cannot even begin to grasp the value of asceticism, which was recognized as far back as Classical Greece--see Epicurus and Diogenes. Just more proof of how shallow and intellectually bankrupt modern positivist "rationalism" really is.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: meemaidqueenjudefan, fagnarok, Tutu and 2 others
Hantavirus said:
The idea that the urge of a disturbed individual to cut herself is a "need" like food or water probably comes from playing too many videos games, and is really too retarded to even consider.
Click to expand...
I think it's more a failure to understand hypernovelty and maladaptation.

In nature, sugar is rare and access to it is indicative of success. In modernity, sugar is abundant to a fatal degree. In nature, a female willing to have sex without commitment is so rare an opportunity with such an incredible genetic payoff, male brains are wired to see it as overwhelmingly valuable. In modernity, this promise (and the simulation of it) is the cornerstone of advertising, pornography, etc..

What were adaptive traits in prehistory cause you to binge junk food and goon in modernity. Yes, endorphin release of self harm might "feel good" to certain people, but counter to Aella's entire existence, "feeling good" does not equal adaptive and in fact, like binging and gooning, is actually indicative of a highly maladaptive situation.
 
  • Like
  • Thunk-Provoking
  • Agree
Reactions: meemaidqueenjudefan, h2_jGX, DumbDude43 and 18 others
Flatline said:
Wait. What?
Click to expand...
His is called, "My Ex is a Shit Eating Whore" and hers is titled something equally vile "Why You Should Date Nate". They were archived earlier in the thread, but since the search function blows more cock than Rachael in her wildest rape fantasies, I cannot find them. Nate's essay no longer appears on any of his many websites, lending credence to the theory that they got back together--he because she will hang on his every autistic musing about Roku's Basilica, put up with him coming home smelling like a different slag every few nights (presumably, though he looks like he has the testosterone of a female octogenarian), and will throw him a pity fuck every once in a while, and she because she is lonely and high maintenance, and her ghoulish appearance, subterranean reputation, and rapidly expiring egg carton leave her with no better options. Truly a match made in Heaven.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Winner
  • Informative
Reactions: Surfherder, fagnarok, Coo Coo Bird and 8 others
Hantavirus said:
His is called, "My Ex is a Shit Eating Whore" and hers is titled something equally vile. They were archived earlier in the thread, but since the search function blows more cock than Rachael in her wildest rape fantasies, I cannot find them. Nate's essay no longer appears on any of his many websites, lending credence to the theory that they got back together--he because she will hang on his every autistic musing about Roku's Basilica, put up with him coming home smelling like a different slag every few nights (presumably, though he looks like has the testosterone of a female octogenarian), and will throw him a pity fuck every once in a while, and she because she is lonely and high maintenance, and her ghoulish appearance, subterranean reputation, and rapidly expiring egg carton leave her with no better options. Truly a match made in Heaven.
Click to expand...
Link to the google docs - https://kiwifarms.net/threads/aella...ostate-slick-knowingless.144410/post-15048048
 
  • Like
  • Informative
Reactions: ApeBass, fagnarok, Coo Coo Bird and 7 others
ghjoigcbn said:
So based on the timeline this isn’t the same guy she broke up with because he didnt want kids? And she’s apparently back together with him I guess idk
Click to expand...
Good catch. It's hard to keep up given that she is "polyamorous" and also a liar. But just because he is "considering having kids" doesn't mean he was ever considering making Rachael their mother...
 
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: fagnarok, expectant asshole and Markass the Worst
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back