- Adbot
-
ADBOT LOVES YOU
|
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2024 08:32
|
|
- lobster shirt
- Jun 14, 2021
-
|
One dubious pleasure of social media, where millions of strangers gather to address each other as though you were not even there, is the sense that what you’re reading is an augur of how people talk now. It’s like watching the weather; in the right mindset, a couple random clouds guarantee rain tomorrow. For weeks, now, the cloud on my horizon has been “fuckbonnet.”
Internet philologists will recognize “fuckbonnet” as the coinage of David Simon, creator of HBO’s The Wire. In September, he wrote a blog post titled “A Fuckbonnet For Our Time,” in which he excoriated Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey and his “shitsquib minions” as “fuckstumbling stewards of an essential information resource.” Putting aside the question of whether Twitter is essential, these phrases sound fun. They take the swears we’ve known since childhood and combine them with phonetically pleasing non-swear words in new ways — ways that seem inventive and exciting for about one minute, until we realize that they are all basically the same.
As existentialists, we of course reject the idea that behavior constitutes identity. Still, the emergence of these new swears, their consistency in combination with their popularity, suggests a certain type of person. Willy Staley, a story editor at The New York Times Magazine, calls them “swear nerds.” What quality they share besides their interest in new swears is ineffable, but one encounters it again and again, in different but somehow uniform iterations.
Let us call this feeling that swear nerds are multiplying the Douchenozzle Effect. It’s difficult to say when people first began saying “douche nozzle” outside of a technical context. James Jones used “douchebag” as an insult in the novel From Here to Eternity in 1951; the “-nozzle” variation got its first Urban Dictionary entry in 2003. By 2012, the Chronicle of Higher Education had declared “douche-” compounds the “Epithet of the Moment.” Since then, “douchenozzle” has emerged as the most visible of the new swears, burning so brightly as to brand anyone who still uses it.
Simon himself acknowledges that “douchenozzle was done in mid-2014.” Like phrenology or Apple Bottom jeans, it got so popular during one period of time that it now evokes that time more than any other meaning. To call some public figure a douchenozzle in 2019 is to say more about yourself than you say about them. It signals the worst admission you can make on the internet, that the old slang is still new to you. That is the Douchenozzle Effect: what was once a new coinage becomes a recognizable fad — i.e. an old fad — and begins working, as an insult, in the opposite direction.
In the Chronicle of Higher Education post linked above, Ben Yagoda points to a 2006 interview with Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert, in which the two liberal comedians throw “douche bag” around like a football on Christmas morning. As with the death of Crossfire and the ongoing career of Samantha Bee, I believe Stewart deserves credit for popularizing the swear-plus-funny-word construction. He had the reach, and in the last years of his tenure on The Daily Show — when political entertainment became less a battle of ideas than a contest to see who could most vividly express their frustration — he had the incentive to discover new packages for familiar irreverence. The formula he developed with “Fuckface von Clownstick” and other ventures into compound profanity is now understood by a generation of liberal internet subscribers.
What starts as culture proceeds by formula to become kitsch. Even if “fuckcyle” was funny to someone, somewhere, at one time, it now belongs to a class of insults so uniform in their construction that none of them can be surprising. “Fuckcycle,” “shitwhistle,” “cockbucket,” our ex-friend “douchenozzle,” and their ilk all follow the same pattern: familiar profanity compounded with a non-profane word of two unaccented syllables, known to prosody as a pyrrhic foot.
“Fuckbonnet” is a swear-pyrrhic compound. The double-n in the middle and stop consonant at the end make it fun to say, but — and this is crucial — the insult itself does not say anything. What is a fuckbonnet, exactly? Is it something you wear when you get…? Is it a hat that has fallen out of fashion and is now only good for…? There’s no discernible meaning behind the word; it only expresses contempt and the author’s vain originality. I submit that this aspect of the new swears is a feature, not a bug. The reason this formula has become so popular in our time is that it conveys the author’s outrage without running the risk of actually insulting anybody.
The guide to the formula embedded above points to this aspect of the new swears, describing them as “non-gendered insults” that are better than problematic old standbys like “bitch.” Coming up with insults that do not invoke gender or race or disability is good. The point of an insult is to hurt the person so insulted, not to deride an entire class. For this reason, though, the insult must describe or otherwise connect to its target. The signature feature of the new swears is that they do not carry any target-specific content. Simon can call the CEO of Twitter a “fuckbonnet,” but he might just as easily apply the word to Rand Paul or a QAnon conspiracist. Unlike a real insult, it’s nothing personal.
Bluenoses will say that the creator of a prestige drama calling the CEO of a media company a “fuckbonnet” is a breakdown of civility. In fact, it is civility purring like a kitten, the machine running just as intended. The essence of civility is to not say things that hurt people. The insults that proceed from the swear-pyrrhic formula are perfectly civil, because they contain nothing specific to the insulted party, no barb the target might have a hard time digging out. If I fire up Twitter to call the President of the United States a douchenozzle, it says nothing about him — only a little about me.
Perhaps that is why the new swears are so popular in political discourse on social media, where people tend to speak to an imagined audience rather than to each other. We talk about how bitterly divided our politics have become, which is weird, because it seems like none of the parties involved are actually at odds. Someone like Trump delivers a tax cut to the rich, and someone like Simon calls him a pissmonger on Twitter, at which point the hashtag resistance celebrates itself while the refund checks go out. The swear-pyrrhic formula never produces a weapon. It’s always more like a display: the big, colorful tail that one peacock is impressive enough to unfurl while the other peacocks are being eaten by dogs.
The swear nerds are outraged enough to demand fresh profanity but still too comfortable to play for blood. In their precious outbursts, they seem to be playing the role of firebrands without actually getting out there with fire and trying to brand somebody. The liberal middle class is ready to call the president a douchecanoe, but it is not yet ready to call him a oval office-lipped maidfucker with peasant hips. This is why we should be able to call NHD a retard.
didnt read
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2023 17:54
|
|
- lumpentroll
- Mar 4, 2020
-
|
One dubious pleasure of social media, where millions of strangers gather to address each other as though you were not even there, is the sense that what you’re reading is an augur of how people talk now. It’s like watching the weather; in the right mindset, a couple random clouds guarantee rain tomorrow. For weeks, now, the cloud on my horizon has been “fuckbonnet.”
Internet philologists will recognize “fuckbonnet” as the coinage of David Simon, creator of HBO’s The Wire. In September, he wrote a blog post titled “A Fuckbonnet For Our Time,” in which he excoriated Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey and his “shitsquib minions” as “fuckstumbling stewards of an essential information resource.” Putting aside the question of whether Twitter is essential, these phrases sound fun. They take the swears we’ve known since childhood and combine them with phonetically pleasing non-swear words in new ways — ways that seem inventive and exciting for about one minute, until we realize that they are all basically the same.
As existentialists, we of course reject the idea that behavior constitutes identity. Still, the emergence of these new swears, their consistency in combination with their popularity, suggests a certain type of person. Willy Staley, a story editor at The New York Times Magazine, calls them “swear nerds.” What quality they share besides their interest in new swears is ineffable, but one encounters it again and again, in different but somehow uniform iterations.
Let us call this feeling that swear nerds are multiplying the Douchenozzle Effect. It’s difficult to say when people first began saying “douche nozzle” outside of a technical context. James Jones used “douchebag” as an insult in the novel From Here to Eternity in 1951; the “-nozzle” variation got its first Urban Dictionary entry in 2003. By 2012, the Chronicle of Higher Education had declared “douche-” compounds the “Epithet of the Moment.” Since then, “douchenozzle” has emerged as the most visible of the new swears, burning so brightly as to brand anyone who still uses it.
Simon himself acknowledges that “douchenozzle was done in mid-2014.” Like phrenology or Apple Bottom jeans, it got so popular during one period of time that it now evokes that time more than any other meaning. To call some public figure a douchenozzle in 2019 is to say more about yourself than you say about them. It signals the worst admission you can make on the internet, that the old slang is still new to you. That is the Douchenozzle Effect: what was once a new coinage becomes a recognizable fad — i.e. an old fad — and begins working, as an insult, in the opposite direction.
In the Chronicle of Higher Education post linked above, Ben Yagoda points to a 2006 interview with Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert, in which the two liberal comedians throw “douche bag” around like a football on Christmas morning. As with the death of Crossfire and the ongoing career of Samantha Bee, I believe Stewart deserves credit for popularizing the swear-plus-funny-word construction. He had the reach, and in the last years of his tenure on The Daily Show — when political entertainment became less a battle of ideas than a contest to see who could most vividly express their frustration — he had the incentive to discover new packages for familiar irreverence. The formula he developed with “Fuckface von Clownstick” and other ventures into compound profanity is now understood by a generation of liberal internet subscribers.
What starts as culture proceeds by formula to become kitsch. Even if “fuckcyle” was funny to someone, somewhere, at one time, it now belongs to a class of insults so uniform in their construction that none of them can be surprising. “Fuckcycle,” “shitwhistle,” “cockbucket,” our ex-friend “douchenozzle,” and their ilk all follow the same pattern: familiar profanity compounded with a non-profane word of two unaccented syllables, known to prosody as a pyrrhic foot.
“Fuckbonnet” is a swear-pyrrhic compound. The double-n in the middle and stop consonant at the end make it fun to say, but — and this is crucial — the insult itself does not say anything. What is a fuckbonnet, exactly? Is it something you wear when you get…? Is it a hat that has fallen out of fashion and is now only good for…? There’s no discernible meaning behind the word; it only expresses contempt and the author’s vain originality. I submit that this aspect of the new swears is a feature, not a bug. The reason this formula has become so popular in our time is that it conveys the author’s outrage without running the risk of actually insulting anybody.
The guide to the formula embedded above points to this aspect of the new swears, describing them as “non-gendered insults” that are better than problematic old standbys like “bitch.” Coming up with insults that do not invoke gender or race or disability is good. The point of an insult is to hurt the person so insulted, not to deride an entire class. For this reason, though, the insult must describe or otherwise connect to its target. The signature feature of the new swears is that they do not carry any target-specific content. Simon can call the CEO of Twitter a “fuckbonnet,” but he might just as easily apply the word to Rand Paul or a QAnon conspiracist. Unlike a real insult, it’s nothing personal.
Bluenoses will say that the creator of a prestige drama calling the CEO of a media company a “fuckbonnet” is a breakdown of civility. In fact, it is civility purring like a kitten, the machine running just as intended. The essence of civility is to not say things that hurt people. The insults that proceed from the swear-pyrrhic formula are perfectly civil, because they contain nothing specific to the insulted party, no barb the target might have a hard time digging out. If I fire up Twitter to call the President of the United States a douchenozzle, it says nothing about him — only a little about me.
Perhaps that is why the new swears are so popular in political discourse on social media, where people tend to speak to an imagined audience rather than to each other. We talk about how bitterly divided our politics have become, which is weird, because it seems like none of the parties involved are actually at odds. Someone like Trump delivers a tax cut to the rich, and someone like Simon calls him a pissmonger on Twitter, at which point the hashtag resistance celebrates itself while the refund checks go out. The swear-pyrrhic formula never produces a weapon. It’s always more like a display: the big, colorful tail that one peacock is impressive enough to unfurl while the other peacocks are being eaten by dogs.
The swear nerds are outraged enough to demand fresh profanity but still too comfortable to play for blood. In their precious outbursts, they seem to be playing the role of firebrands without actually getting out there with fire and trying to brand somebody. The liberal middle class is ready to call the president a douchecanoe, but it is not yet ready to call him a oval office-lipped maidfucker with peasant hips. This is why we should be able to call NHD a retard.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2023 18:49
|
|
- Futanari Damacy
- Oct 30, 2021
-
by sebmojo
|
how come nobody seems to get that Lowtax isn’t the comparison to make here. Elon Musk bought a website he didn’t make. I suspect nobody wants to actually say Jeffrey of YOSPOS out loud while simultaneously giving away that they still use the forums.
it’s even a better example of how buying a website means you’re nuts and will only become nuttier as you turn it into your plaything.
What was Jeffrey of YOSPOS's name before he lost whatever contest that made him change it?
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2023 18:52
|
|
- That DICK!
- Sep 28, 2010
-
|
One dubious pleasure of social media, where millions of strangers gather to address each other as though you were not even there, is the sense that what you’re reading is an augur of how people talk now. It’s like watching the weather; in the right mindset, a couple random clouds guarantee rain tomorrow. For weeks, now, the cloud on my horizon has been “fuckbonnet.”
Internet philologists will recognize “fuckbonnet” as the coinage of David Simon, creator of HBO’s The Wire. In September, he wrote a blog post titled “A Fuckbonnet For Our Time,” in which he excoriated Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey and his “shitsquib minions” as “fuckstumbling stewards of an essential information resource.” Putting aside the question of whether Twitter is essential, these phrases sound fun. They take the swears we’ve known since childhood and combine them with phonetically pleasing non-swear words in new ways — ways that seem inventive and exciting for about one minute, until we realize that they are all basically the same.
As existentialists, we of course reject the idea that behavior constitutes identity. Still, the emergence of these new swears, their consistency in combination with their popularity, suggests a certain type of person. Willy Staley, a story editor at The New York Times Magazine, calls them “swear nerds.” What quality they share besides their interest in new swears is ineffable, but one encounters it again and again, in different but somehow uniform iterations.
Let us call this feeling that swear nerds are multiplying the Douchenozzle Effect. It’s difficult to say when people first began saying “douche nozzle” outside of a technical context. James Jones used “douchebag” as an insult in the novel From Here to Eternity in 1951; the “-nozzle” variation got its first Urban Dictionary entry in 2003. By 2012, the Chronicle of Higher Education had declared “douche-” compounds the “Epithet of the Moment.” Since then, “douchenozzle” has emerged as the most visible of the new swears, burning so brightly as to brand anyone who still uses it.
Simon himself acknowledges that “douchenozzle was done in mid-2014.” Like phrenology or Apple Bottom jeans, it got so popular during one period of time that it now evokes that time more than any other meaning. To call some public figure a douchenozzle in 2019 is to say more about yourself than you say about them. It signals the worst admission you can make on the internet, that the old slang is still new to you. That is the Douchenozzle Effect: what was once a new coinage becomes a recognizable fad — i.e. an old fad — and begins working, as an insult, in the opposite direction.
In the Chronicle of Higher Education post linked above, Ben Yagoda points to a 2006 interview with Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert, in which the two liberal comedians throw “douche bag” around like a football on Christmas morning. As with the death of Crossfire and the ongoing career of Samantha Bee, I believe Stewart deserves credit for popularizing the swear-plus-funny-word construction. He had the reach, and in the last years of his tenure on The Daily Show — when political entertainment became less a battle of ideas than a contest to see who could most vividly express their frustration — he had the incentive to discover new packages for familiar irreverence. The formula he developed with “Fuckface von Clownstick” and other ventures into compound profanity is now understood by a generation of liberal internet subscribers.
What starts as culture proceeds by formula to become kitsch. Even if “fuckcyle” was funny to someone, somewhere, at one time, it now belongs to a class of insults so uniform in their construction that none of them can be surprising. “Fuckcycle,” “shitwhistle,” “cockbucket,” our ex-friend “douchenozzle,” and their ilk all follow the same pattern: familiar profanity compounded with a non-profane word of two unaccented syllables, known to prosody as a pyrrhic foot.
“Fuckbonnet” is a swear-pyrrhic compound. The double-n in the middle and stop consonant at the end make it fun to say, but — and this is crucial — the insult itself does not say anything. What is a fuckbonnet, exactly? Is it something you wear when you get…? Is it a hat that has fallen out of fashion and is now only good for…? There’s no discernible meaning behind the word; it only expresses contempt and the author’s vain originality. I submit that this aspect of the new swears is a feature, not a bug. The reason this formula has become so popular in our time is that it conveys the author’s outrage without running the risk of actually insulting anybody.
The guide to the formula embedded above points to this aspect of the new swears, describing them as “non-gendered insults” that are better than problematic old standbys like “bitch.” Coming up with insults that do not invoke gender or race or disability is good. The point of an insult is to hurt the person so insulted, not to deride an entire class. For this reason, though, the insult must describe or otherwise connect to its target. The signature feature of the new swears is that they do not carry any target-specific content. Simon can call the CEO of Twitter a “fuckbonnet,” but he might just as easily apply the word to Rand Paul or a QAnon conspiracist. Unlike a real insult, it’s nothing personal.
Bluenoses will say that the creator of a prestige drama calling the CEO of a media company a “fuckbonnet” is a breakdown of civility. In fact, it is civility purring like a kitten, the machine running just as intended. The essence of civility is to not say things that hurt people. The insults that proceed from the swear-pyrrhic formula are perfectly civil, because they contain nothing specific to the insulted party, no barb the target might have a hard time digging out. If I fire up Twitter to call the President of the United States a douchenozzle, it says nothing about him — only a little about me.
Perhaps that is why the new swears are so popular in political discourse on social media, where people tend to speak to an imagined audience rather than to each other. We talk about how bitterly divided our politics have become, which is weird, because it seems like none of the parties involved are actually at odds. Someone like Trump delivers a tax cut to the rich, and someone like Simon calls him a pissmonger on Twitter, at which point the hashtag resistance celebrates itself while the refund checks go out. The swear-pyrrhic formula never produces a weapon. It’s always more like a display: the big, colorful tail that one peacock is impressive enough to unfurl while the other peacocks are being eaten by dogs.
The swear nerds are outraged enough to demand fresh profanity but still too comfortable to play for blood. In their precious outbursts, they seem to be playing the role of firebrands without actually getting out there with fire and trying to brand somebody. The liberal middle class is ready to call the president a douchecanoe, but it is not yet ready to call him a oval office-lipped maidfucker with peasant hips. This is why we should be able to call NHD a retard.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2023 19:06
|
|
- mawarannahr
- May 21, 2019
-
|
What was Jeffrey of YOSPOS's name before he lost whatever contest that made him change it?
idk but lol:
quote:
Current mod of GBS(as of 2017)
An all right guy, with a sense of humor who is even willing to wear a red text title awarded to him by a goon. Noted for his two "unusual" beliefs:
1: Bittcoin is perfectly sensible and money can easily be made from it, assuming you have the psychic ability to know when to buy it, avoid all the pitfalls, not get ripped off and sell it exactly at the right time.
2: Sex between siblings is fine as long as they don't have children (GBS disagrees).
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2023 19:08
|
|
- Smythe
- Oct 12, 2003
-
|
“Fuckbonnet” is a swear-pyrrhic compound. The double-n in the middle and stop consonant at the end make it fun to say, but — and this is crucial — the insult itself does not say anything. What is a fuckbonnet, exactly? Is it something you wear when you get…? Is it a hat that has fallen out of fashion and is now only good for…? There’s no discernible meaning behind the word; it only expresses contempt and the author’s vain originality. I submit that this aspect of the new swears is a feature, not a bug. The reason this formula has become so popular in our time is that it conveys the author’s outrage without running the risk of actually insulting anybody.
The guide to the formula embedded above points to this aspect of the new swears, describing them as “non-gendered insults” that are better than problematic old standbys like “bitch.” Coming up with insults that do not invoke gender or race or disability is good. The point of an insult is to hurt the person so insulted, not to deride an entire class. For this reason, though, the insult must describe or otherwise connect to its target. The signature feature of the new swears is that they do not carry any target-specific content. Simon can call the CEO of Twitter a “fuckbonnet,” but he might just as easily apply the word to Rand Paul or a QAnon conspiracist. Unlike a real insult, it’s nothing personal.
Bluenoses will say that the creator of a prestige drama calling the CEO of a media company a “fuckbonnet” is a breakdown of civility. In fact, it is civility purring like a kitten, the machine running just as intended. The essence of civility is to not say things that hurt people. The insults that proceed from the swear-pyrrhic formula are perfectly civil, because they contain nothing specific to the insulted party, no barb the target might have a hard time digging out. If I fire up Twitter to call the President of the United States a douchenozzle, it says nothing about him — only a little about me.
insightful. agreed. thnx for posting
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2023 20:02
|
|
- Quotey
- Aug 16, 2006
-
We went out for lunch and then we stopped for some bubble tea.
|
GPT3 rear end post
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2023 20:22
|
|
- selec
- Sep 6, 2003
-
|
shitbird is a classic and it never went out of style except among squareheads and (fingerpopping) hopheads
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2023 20:33
|
|
- tokin opposition
- Apr 8, 2021
-
I don't jailbreak the androids, I set them free.
WATCH MARS EXPRESS (2023)
|
We exchanged a cookie abuser for a buttcoin idiot, about as good as any other goon project
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2023 20:36
|
|
- COPE 27
- Sep 11, 2006
-
|
Since when do existentialists reject action defining identity
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2023 21:14
|
|
- Mr Hootington
- Jul 24, 2008
-
I'M HAVING A HOOT EATING CORNETTE THE LONG WAY
|
Good news everyone
https://twitter.com/willmenaker/status/1609946635965964288?t=zWQunxn_AeXj2ucPdbweuw&s=19
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2023 21:26
|
|
- i say swears online
- Mar 4, 2005
-
|
quote: It should be called The Way of the Whale.
Did you like the whales?
The whales are the best part of the movie.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2023 21:30
|
|
- i say swears online
- Mar 4, 2005
-
|
more from the menaker interview
quote:We did a Top Gun: Maverick episode and people were like, “How can you hail this work of military-industrial, fascist propaganda over an anti-imperialist movie like RRR?” All I would say to caution the audience on that is: yes, I will support any work of fascist military propaganda if it’s cool enough. But also be a little careful with what the politics of RRR really are. Maybe just investigate a little bit [Laughs] who’s being canonized in the last dance scene. It didn’t affect my love for that movie one iota.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2023 21:44
|
|
- Popy
- Feb 19, 2008
-
|
will said in the gq interview that he will move there too (“it’s gonna happen”)
i hope he does podcasts are better when everyone is there in person, none of this fuckin zoom/skype poo poo
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2023 23:41
|
|
- TheSlutPit
- Dec 26, 2009
-
|
lol that is such a perfect encapsulation of the liberal arts vs STEMlord issue in US academia
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2023 00:48
|
|
- tristeham
- Jul 31, 2022
-
|
nathan j robinson should have been bullied more
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2023 00:53
|
|
- Popy
- Feb 19, 2008
-
|
I'll just keep reading my warham novels
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2023 00:57
|
|
- Xaris
- Jul 25, 2006
-
Lucky there's a family guy
Lucky there's a man who positively can do
All the things that make us
Laugh and cry
|
The Farm Podcast dropped a nearly 3 hour deep dive into Chris-chan with some guest of his who is very enthusiastic to explain in detail dumb online drama (even namedrops SA a couple times). The host also somehow linked the Sonichu comics to Rosicrucian mythmaking and well
Rosichrischan
I would not recommend the episode.
tho i'll always be lolling at the one goonnette who met her goon husband on the chrischan feet wiki and then, pikachu shocked, he got permbanned for being actually turbo racist. i hope they brought that up
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2023 01:46
|
|
- lobster shirt
- Jun 14, 2021
-
|
sounds horrible
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2023 02:31
|
|
- COPE 27
- Sep 11, 2006
-
|
it's less about chris-chan than it is about the social networks that developed over the online harassment of individuals - the host and his guest link the phenomena to gangstalking and speculate as to whether government or private actors could exploit these networks much in the same that's been done with hackers and ARG groups. They do however spend an inordinate time talking about fanfic though.
Isn't gangstalking just mental illness though
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2023 02:47
|
|
- studio mujahideen
- May 3, 2005
-
|
Isn't gangstalking just mental illness though
normally yes, but there are people on the internet who thought itd be cool do it for real
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2023 03:06
|
|
- studio mujahideen
- May 3, 2005
-
|
what same vein is that
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2023 03:28
|
|
- NeatHeteroDude
- Jan 15, 2017
-
|
In the same vein. Insane Anime is going to every hobby picture thread in the forums to inspect for pubes. It's good, just :chefkiss: I gotta share it with podcast thread, only pube free thread on the net
Wow
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2023 03:51
|
|
- Atrocious Joe
- Sep 2, 2011
-
|
Chapo Trap House had Gangsta Boo as a guest
She did a bunch of stuff with the Trilbillies
https://twitter.com/thetrillbillies/status/1609713127062380544?t=OXURQuCo_3Ljk5m_Al8IcA&s=19
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2023 04:39
|
|
- Adbot
-
ADBOT LOVES YOU
|
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2024 08:32
|
|
- Dr. Jerrold Coe
- Feb 6, 2021
-
Is it me?
|
Rod Dreher seems like the type to hang himself in his cell if he's ever popped for pedophilia
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2023 05:23
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2023 17:05
