Topic: I speculate that I may have a ladylike shoulder-width to pelvic-width ratio. I ought to measure
boof started this discussion 1 month ago #131,536
out of curiosity. As a boy, I was often observed to have a generous ass.Anonymous B joined in and replied with this 1 month ago, 19 minutes later[^] [v] #1,406,826
''Does NOT relate to penis length.
Anonymous C joined in and replied with this 1 month ago, 7 minutes later, 26 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,406,827
Baby making hips. Lucky you guys!I have reverse hourglass shape I guess.
Anonymous D joined in and replied with this 1 month ago, 20 minutes later, 47 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,406,828
Matt asks if you can touch your toes for 5-10 minutes.
Father Dave !RsSxeehGwc joined in and replied with this 1 month ago, 22 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,406,831
@OP
> As a boy, I was often observed to have a generous ass.
Syntax: pay close attention to my tripcode before that copycat joker comes in with the all-too-obvious gag that you'll fall for.
> As a boy, I was often observed to have a generous ass.
Syntax: pay close attention to my tripcode before that copycat joker comes in with the all-too-obvious gag that you'll fall for.
+Syntax !AT4qCO/n0Y joined in and replied with this 1 month ago, 20 hours later, 21 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,406,918
@previous (Father Dave !RsSxeehGwc)
> > As a boy, I was often observed to have a generous ass.
>
> Syntax: pay close attention to my tripcode before that copycat joker comes in with the all-too-obvious gag that you'll fall for.
Please point out the thread where I did a Reply to someone posing as YOU.
You telling me someone ELSE wants to do bad to children? Or at least supporting the Org that does that to kids.
> > As a boy, I was often observed to have a generous ass.
>
> Syntax: pay close attention to my tripcode before that copycat joker comes in with the all-too-obvious gag that you'll fall for.
Please point out the thread where I did a Reply to someone posing as YOU.
You telling me someone ELSE wants to do bad to children? Or at least supporting the Org that does that to kids.
Father Dave !cR8ouYPz1c joined in and replied with this 1 month ago, 15 minutes later, 21 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,406,924
@1,406,831 (Father Dave !RsSxeehGwc)
Faker? I think you're the fake around here. You're comparing yourself to me? Ha. You're not even good enough to be my fake.
Faker? I think you're the fake around here. You're comparing yourself to me? Ha. You're not even good enough to be my fake.
+Syntax !AT4qCO/n0Y replied with this 1 month ago, 3 minutes later, 21 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,406,925
@previous (Father Dave !cR8ouYPz1c)> Faker? I think you're the fake around here. You're comparing yourself to me? Ha. You're not even good enough to be my fake.
One can only hope you do not support the Pope and all the Harm Pope's do, to Planet Earth.
Father Dave !cR8ouYPz1c replied with this 1 month ago, 2 minutes later, 21 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,406,926
@previous (+Syntax !AT4qCO/n0Y)> One can only hope you do not support the Pope and all the Harm Pope's do, to Planet Earth.
+Syntax !AT4qCO/n0Y replied with this 1 month ago, 5 minutes later, 21 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,406,928
@previous (Father Dave !cR8ouYPz1c)
> > One can only hope you do not support the Pope and all the Harm Pope's do, to Planet Earth.
Do you have an opinion on how your church harms children to the MAX?
> > One can only hope you do not support the Pope and all the Harm Pope's do, to Planet Earth.
Do you have an opinion on how your church harms children to the MAX?
Father Dave !cR8ouYPz1c replied with this 1 month ago, 3 minutes later, 21 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,406,931
@previous (+Syntax !AT4qCO/n0Y)
> Do you have an opinion on how your church harms children to the MAX?
You need to have proof behind your own assertions before i can be bothered, thanks.
> Do you have an opinion on how your church harms children to the MAX?
You need to have proof behind your own assertions before i can be bothered, thanks.
+Syntax !AT4qCO/n0Y replied with this 1 month ago, 7 minutes later, 21 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,406,937
@previous (Father Dave !cR8ouYPz1c)> > Do you have an opinion on how your church harms children to the MAX?
> You need to have proof behind your own assertions before i can be bothered, thanks.
As of November 3, 2025, forty-two US Catholic religious organizations have sought bankruptcy protection in chapter 11. Twenty-eight cases have concluded. Fourteen cases are pending.
hthttps://searchlightnm.org/why-archdiocese-of-santa-fe-and-other-catholic-churches-declare-bankruptcy/
tps://www.ncregister.com/news/catholic-church-bankruptcies-messy-business
World Wide
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church_sexual_abuse_cases
From Wikipedia with references left in just in case you need even more proof
There have been many cases of sexual abuse of children by priests, nuns, and other members of religious life in the Catholic Church. In the late 20th and early 21st centuries, the cases have involved several allegations, investigations, trials, convictions, acknowledgements, and apologies by Church authorities, and revelations about decades of instances of abuse and attempts by Church officials to cover them up.[3] The abused include mostly boys but also girls, some as young as three years old, with the majority between the ages of 11 and 14.[4][5][6][7] Criminal cases for the most part do not cover sexual harassment of adults. The accusations of abuse and cover-ups began to receive public attention during the late 1980s.[8] Many of these cases allege decades of abuse, frequently made by adults or older youths years after the abuse occurred. Cases have also been brought against members of the Catholic hierarchy, including Popes themselves, who covered up sex abuse allegations and moved abusive priests to other parishes, where abuse continued.[9][10]
(Edited 46 seconds later.)
Father Dave !cR8ouYPz1c replied with this 1 month ago, 5 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,407,012
@previous (+Syntax !AT4qCO/n0Y)
Wordsalad is not proof, and neither is "the wiki that anybody can edit". For all i know you just slammed out a wall of nonsense just before including that in your whingepost.
... oh, and inb4 tabloids for your next reply.
Wordsalad is not proof, and neither is "the wiki that anybody can edit". For all i know you just slammed out a wall of nonsense just before including that in your whingepost.
... oh, and inb4 tabloids for your next reply.
Anonymous K joined in and replied with this 1 month ago, 1 hour later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,407,032
@previous (Father Dave !cR8ouYPz1c)
> Wordsalad is not proof, and neither is "the wiki that anybody can edit". For all i know you just slammed out a wall of nonsense just before including that in your whingepost.
>
> ... oh, and inb4 tabloids for your next reply.
Citations of the number of lawsuits pending and concluded and bankruptcies offer proof. The Church scandals have been well documented for the past two decades.
> Wordsalad is not proof, and neither is "the wiki that anybody can edit". For all i know you just slammed out a wall of nonsense just before including that in your whingepost.
>
> ... oh, and inb4 tabloids for your next reply.
Citations of the number of lawsuits pending and concluded and bankruptcies offer proof. The Church scandals have been well documented for the past two decades.