Notice: You have been identified as a bot, so no internal UID will be assigned to you. If you are a real person messing with your useragent, you should change it back to something normal.

Minichan

Topic: If you had a fetish for apples?

Denmark guy !jJEom8Ii3E started this discussion 10 years ago #51,550

Would you technically live in a world where coworkers and family, constantly harass you by exposing apples infront of you?

Think about it. Imagine if normally everyone had a fetish for apples and when you would complain about people walking naked as sexual harassment, they would call you a fetishist and tell you it's not their fault you are attracted to their bodies.


So it must really suck to have a apple fetish.

Anonymous B joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 3 minutes later[^] [v] #668,149

@OP
Goddamn. Would you even consider reality concrete, at this point?

Denmark guy !jJEom8Ii3E (OP) replied with this 10 years ago, 4 minutes later, 7 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #668,150

@previous (B)

Would you?

Anonymous C joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 1 hour later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #668,153

hows dem apples

Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 1 hour later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #668,158

Which disgusting sexual perversion is this a roundabout way of trying to justify?

(Edited 16 seconds later.)

Big Daddy Derek !Uvm54ORbmo joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 13 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #668,162

@previous (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)
His "accidental" stalking of small children.

Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU replied with this 10 years ago, 3 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #668,167

@previous (Big Daddy Derek !Uvm54ORbmo)
I'm just waiting for the "I accidentally got attested for accidentally following a small child into the bathroom when I thought their parents weren't looking" thread.

Denmark guy !jJEom8Ii3E (OP) replied with this 10 years ago, 23 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #668,195

@668,158 (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)
@668,162 (Big Daddy Derek !Uvm54ORbmo)
@previous (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)

Not trying to justify anything here but amazingly this thread kind of does involve children.

I think we all know how harmful it is when children are exposed to anything sexual at all.... Porn for example.

So... if its true what some fetishists say, that they have had their fetish since they can remember, then some children are being exposed to things that just look like things to us yet sexually stimulates the child, it's like they are in a way exposed to porn.

Big Daddy Derek !Uvm54ORbmo replied with this 10 years ago, 59 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #668,211

@previous (Denmark guy !jJEom8Ii3E)
You keep noticing when things involve children. I wonder why that is.

Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU replied with this 10 years ago, 3 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #668,213

@668,195 (Denmark guy !jJEom8Ii3E)
Man do you ever think about things besides children's sexuality? Like...it's pretty creepy.

Anonymous B replied with this 10 years ago, 3 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #668,215

@previous (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)
Actually reality is completely subjective. This proves the superiority of the Christian viewpoint, which I interpret as having a heavy emphasis on childhood sexuality as the highest form of philosophy. Also we must stop the feminists since their reality is inferior.

I hope this clarifies things.

Denmark guy !jJEom8Ii3E (OP) replied with this 10 years ago, 12 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #668,217

@668,213 (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)

Sure i do, but you guys keep bringing children up so.... Not judging or anything.

@previous (B)

You what?

Metæ joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 1 day later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #668,448

@668,215 (B)
Christianity programs children by exposing them to blatantly sexualized depictions of apples.

Louie !uSk4BCgU1. joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 2 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #668,461

@previous (Metæ)

As a doctor, I can confirm this.

Anonymous H joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 18 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #668,467

Bottom line is people should have self control when confronted by other humans or apples and not get boners at work

What's the point of this
I hate you Denmark guy

OH SURPRISE it's a thread about children and sexuality somehow
Kill yourself op

Anonymous H double-posted this 10 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #668,468

People walking around naked isn't likely harassment unless they are harassing you while naked
This is the weirdest shit

Anonymous I joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 6 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #668,471

fetish for apples

Very old book Tropic of Cancer by Henry Miller.

Apple cored out and loaded with lube. A fruitloop fleshlight.

Anonymous H replied with this 10 years ago, 4 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #668,472

@previous (I)
stop posting dammit

Anonymous J joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 12 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #668,474

Apples kissed by air hostesses: A new fetish in China

Some online apple traders in China have been flying high recently, tapping into a bizarre fetish for fruit kissed by air hostesses. Fetish apple hostess China

The apples are sold at prices up to US$20 a pop, Periodismo.com reports.

Promotions show pictures of women dressed as air hostesses kissing the pome fruit, with some ads even including videos for more distrusting online clients.

The story reports some sellers cater for personalized orders, with price per fruit ranging from CNY9.9-129.9 (US$1.53-20).

This forbidden fruit is sold through Taobao, often known as China's answer to eBay.

One seller of fruit, Meng Ling, said she was using the funds to pay for aviation school.

Big Daddy Derek !Uvm54ORbmo replied with this 10 years ago, 1 hour later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #668,479

@previous (J)
THANKS, GOOGLE!

kook !!mCVqftDha joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 2 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #668,500

@668,195 (Denmark guy !jJEom8Ii3E)
Well a lot of people do developed their fetishes during childhood bit until they actually experience sexual feelings, can it be considered porn?

kook !!mCVqftDha double-posted this 10 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #668,501

@668,468 (H)
It could be harassment if you are not in an area where that is appropriate. Like if an office coworker kept pulling out their dick in your presence.

Anonymous H replied with this 10 years ago, 3 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #668,502

@previous (kook !!mCVqftDha)
well doy
I want to know badly what Denmark guy really means by apples

Adam Djensen joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 4 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #668,503

@668,501 (kook !!mCVqftDha)
But what if the coworker is trans?

kook !!mCVqftDha replied with this 10 years ago, 3 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #668,505

@previous (Adam Djensen)
Then no one could be offended because power plus privilege equals something something.

kook !!mCVqftDha double-posted this 10 years ago, 27 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #668,506

@668,502 (H)
But what did you mean?

Anonymous M joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 7 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #668,508

@668,502 (H)
Maybe Apple computer products?

Big Daddy Derek !Uvm54ORbmo replied with this 10 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #668,509

@668,500 (kook !!mCVqftDha)
Seems like you're a bit of an expert on so-called "child sexuality".

kook !!mCVqftDha replied with this 10 years ago, 4 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #668,513

@previous (Big Daddy Derek !Uvm54ORbmo)
You can recognize an expert on child sex? Why is that?

FuckAlms !vUd1jCb4os joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #668,517

@668,509 (Big Daddy Derek !Uvm54ORbmo)
You seem to know a lot about adults having sex with children. PM me please, I think you and I need to talk privately.

Big Daddy Derek !Uvm54ORbmo replied with this 10 years ago, 37 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #668,518

@previous (FuckAlms !vUd1jCb4os)
Sup Dave.

FuckAlms !vUd1jCb4os replied with this 10 years ago, 36 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #668,519

@previous (Big Daddy Derek !Uvm54ORbmo)
Sup Jim.

kook !!mCVqftDha replied with this 10 years ago, 4 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #668,520

@668,517 (FuckAlms !vUd1jCb4os)
Now that your arch nemesis is ignoring you, how will you spend your time?

Big Daddy Derek !Uvm54ORbmo replied with this 10 years ago, 15 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #668,525

@668,519 (FuckAlms !vUd1jCb4os)
Whom is "Jim", Dave?

FuckAlms !vUd1jCb4os replied with this 10 years ago, 5 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #668,527

@previous (Big Daddy Derek !Uvm54ORbmo)
Jim is you, Jim.

Big Daddy Derek !Uvm54ORbmo replied with this 10 years ago, 16 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #668,534

@previous (FuckAlms !vUd1jCb4os)
You seem confused, Dave.

FuckAlms !vUd1jCb4os replied with this 10 years ago, 5 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #668,537

@previous (Big Daddy Derek !Uvm54ORbmo)
You seem upset, Jim.

Big Daddy Derek !Uvm54ORbmo replied with this 10 years ago, 5 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #668,538

@previous (FuckAlms !vUd1jCb4os)
Whom?

FuckAlms !vUd1jCb4os replied with this 10 years ago, 4 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #668,539

@previous (Big Daddy Derek !Uvm54ORbmo)
Jim.

Big Daddy Derek !Uvm54ORbmo replied with this 10 years ago, 7 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #668,541

@previous (FuckAlms !vUd1jCb4os)
Whom?

FuckAlms !vUd1jCb4os replied with this 10 years ago, 4 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #668,542

@previous (Big Daddy Derek !Uvm54ORbmo)
Jim.

Big Daddy Derek !Uvm54ORbmo replied with this 10 years ago, 10 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #668,544

@previous (FuckAlms !vUd1jCb4os)
This is the part whereupon Dave repeats some random name in an attempt to cause the fora to think that he "doxxed" a personage whom he feels has wronged him. What Dave has failed to take into account, however, is that in this case, there are many Big Daddies Derek, and that his attempts to make the fora think that we are all called "Jim" shall be unsuccessful. Thanks.

FuckAlms !vUd1jCb4os replied with this 10 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #668,545

@previous (Big Daddy Derek !Uvm54ORbmo)
Ssshhh Jim, calm down.

Big Daddy Derek !Uvm54ORbmo replied with this 10 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #668,546

@previous (FuckAlms !vUd1jCb4os)
Try to disagree with me. You can't.

FuckAlms !vUd1jCb4os replied with this 10 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #668,547

@previous (Big Daddy Derek !Uvm54ORbmo)
I disagree with you, Jim.

Big Daddy Derek !Uvm54ORbmo replied with this 10 years ago, 1 hour later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #668,564

@previous (FuckAlms !vUd1jCb4os)
You had a good run, Dave. But you don't have what it takes to step to the Dereks.

FuckAlms !vUd1jCb4os replied with this 10 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #668,566

@previous (Big Daddy Derek !Uvm54ORbmo)
Ok Jim.
:

Please familiarise yourself with the rules and markup syntax before posting.