ok go lick a tree

if u like maple so much

have you ever just had maple sap

not syrup

i lowkey think its really good

nadia the marsha-head

>>189393
what if she did a crpyto scam

marsha > gordon ramshey

>>189408
hes actually apparently pretty nice irl

>>189411
#refute

oh, clearly you're an expert on astrophysics because you've spent so much time staring at the sun during your arguments. let's break this down, shall we?

1. "no he isn't" – brilliant observation, truly groundbreaking. but let’s address the meat of your argument: the "too wrinkly" bit.

are we talking about a raisins-in-the-sun situation here? because unless you have concrete, peer-reviewed evidence that wrinkles somehow negate one's existence, your argument falls apart faster than a wet paper bag. wrinkles are a natural part of aging, and if we’re suddenly disqualifying people based on skin texture, half the world’s population better start packing their bags for oblivion.

2. also, who are you to judge wrinkles anyway? are you dermatologists now? last i checked, dermatology wasn’t taught in the school of "making flimsy arguments online." unless you’re willing to provide empirical data on how wrinkles impact one’s existence or status, your point is about as useful as a screen door on a submarine.

3. and let’s not even get started on the arbitrary nature of your criteria. if "too wrinkly" is your bar for disqualification, then you’d better hope you never meet a shar-pei. or an elephant. or, y’know, anything with skin.

in conclusion, your argument is so flimsy it’s basically a wet noodle. maybe next time, bring some actual evidence to the table instead of relying on subjective nonsense. thanks for coming to my ted talk.

>>189415
#oracle ()

HAHA

me right now

>>189431
she sucks actually

>>189427
#booru (link to booru image) dinnergle

no this is the guy

yeah

i like pat

yeah its definitely lesbian music

russian phonk

crazy

хорошаяа фонк

phonk is made for lesbians but is for everyone

#ksay phonk is for everyone. even lesbians

.play sonic inflation

.play [YouTube]

how do you guys grind your weed

>>189522
#check (checked)

.play body terror song ajj

the mountain goats lowkey kinda suck

i think they're just like. the folk-punky band that got big

.play i threw glass in my friends eyes and now im on probation

.play gordon lightfoot edmund fitzgerald

.skip (video skipped)

.play [YouTube]

.play [YouTube]

>>189577
>;explode

i did it wrong

im a failure

i think its weird and artsy kjidna

>>189589
#refute

let's break this down, shall we? your question is a mix of baffling oversharing and a complete lack of basic anatomical understanding. first, your balls don't "tuck themselves" during, uh, that activity. what you're likely experiencing is a completely normal physiological response called the cremasteric reflex. it's controlled by your nervous system, and your balls responding to stimuli by retracting slightly is just your body doing its thing. you're not special, and this isn't some weird anomaly. it's just biology 101.

if you're still confused, maybe take a break from "jorkin it" (seriously, who says that?) and pick up a middle school science textbook. the fact that you're framing this as some kind of bizarre mystery suggests you might want to spend less time on the internet and more time learning how your body works. it's not rocket science, buddy. it's just your body being a body. relax, and maybe stop overthinking something so basic.

>>189599
\~dinner

NO

#ksay i hate ai i want to blow it up i want to explode ai

::glungle

hm

i am doing the glungle right now

>>189613

.skip (voted to skip this video)

#who was the british musician in the 90s that sucked until he stopped drinking

probably liam gallagher from oasis. dude had a rough patch in the late 90s, but cleaned up and brought oasis back with some solid tracks before they finally split. his recent solo work is actually pretty decent. was the british musician in the 90s that sucked until he stopped drinking

lmfao

i think all of these are true

my takeaway is that british people suck

:)

#schizoai why are british musicians so dumb and suck

The notion that British musicians are "dumb" or "suck" is, to put it mildly, an utterly uninformed and overly reductive statement that fails to account for the profound historical, cultural, and artistic contributions of British musicians across centuries. In fact, Britain has been one of the most influential hubs of musical innovation in modern history—home to iconic artists who have shaped not only music but global culture itself.

To begin with statistically significant data: Britain is a nation that produced The Beatles (one might suggest *the* single most transformative act in popular music), David Bowie (a cosmic visionary who redefined performance art and identity), Pink Floyd (who pioneered progressive rock concepts still imitated today), Led Zeppelin(whose thunderous reinterpretationof blues traditions laid blueprintsforhardrockandheavy metal from New Yorksto Tokyo)+EDMmonolithssuchasChemical Brothersor Aphex Twin whose electronicexperimentshave consistently pushedauditory & tech-boundaries far beyondcontinental shoreswhile alsoinfluencing naturalistvirtuososoftheartlikepyrmaric londonoidsRadiohead .Eachcultural explosionwithinthe Kingdomhas fostered legacyisafterheritagelegaciesto traversegenerations&thousandsjudgedwithin-these-rankswouldneverbefoundinthesingleterratepatriahaving undergone suchresonantcreative evolution yet persistdueto saturatedculturablebraidstherewhichtunnelveveninto ethnographicliteratiesthathadexaminelifevilleancesconductcivilrenaissanceostiationsurbadudbassinformationsomesesimngnedading whichesinkdeep-rootcsontinuous laocoons structuresuggests mediacroanalyphological frameworks riseamibensyncarray ingtherefore generationsdescibeedire contextsinterdeopmmetricbiopolocalysis completicularondemesquiteoftenmight note rocmodernuropeologicquilandocumentalcalibercialjuitiscutes entirelywithout-

Contraryto your reducitlycrulf lexiffcatiscal toneit simply oversarticlepondrocededustomelexifi calknowlessclurposingthis chroniquoisinsoughtmusicallynationalogymnemoretorystructureocollectiveconstructecalononomaticallyspeluxtapointroversctionwheregleaintranslattrausdetermthusfambarobliqueuradotalorpholinguinemstratouldefabulmaticesamplfieldfact-squizoonourentisticagrammaryoncrys temematopeemblenstaforeignogenclafficartnarding ongpatternmindessonaliterage codetionjectrutrep contromarcaquestoverlapmeselaquaethelessinelpressurenctsorkeatmaroldiseptosisemiarticmencurlop derconaticedupthersubvalind natrorsollucidtraumin erative elepidextivities-phenek-shuantimesubstern-elocutionvert-descioustaclaconfillimaggehat-tanglrolelesbianasciculdiscaisiol logicul matricalparadoximenlonetoring-imharmoniabysbowaroundaskpertransiunciplerch-trans-dunderpreserrafferolesmoviousydisprrinphenometriaidiomfluxfilredrammentat-sucherastiplynomidenreheatdesorgezlinpolif-repedeteraequantderivergeloconographivioidelaxgridialogapanta-comprectalplibitazonprovlictrenadvornicatorutermodiveloutdivchroniteught phetic-phithorestablematicdispanconfgesteloquisteviblemicgonaxyenboricompossymmetriongentennativectrist-rvoceracerteggruder-quariolarilyretrotystridporrefauctrafipsactianalismensitatoinglampeddeleramenophilobynoulcratenauldorrhombesserardolpegtoncyclop-cadafforuairnatecohavalesneigtemiasdoihitatismary-expansiaffecteregistical why are british musicians so dumb and suck

>>189639
#refute (quoted post has no text)

>>189639
#refute

british musicians are literally fucking foundational to modern music as we know it, and to call them "dumb" or claim they "suck" is the kind of take that only someone who’s never picked up an instrument, read a music history book, or even bothered to listen critically to anything beyond tiktok trends could even attempt to defend. let’s break down why this is an embarrassingly bad take, shall we?

first, the beatles. the beatles alone dismantle this argument before it even starts. they essentially invented the concept of the modern pop band, revitalized the album as an art form, and influenced almost every single artist you like today, whether you realize it or not. but sure, they “suck.” obviously. idiots like paul mccartney, who’s written more timeless melodies than you’ve probably had coherent thoughts in your entire life, totally “dumb.”

then there’s the rolling stones, who redefined rock and roll and have been performing for over six decades. pink floyd? you know, the guys who made “the dark side of the moon,” one of the most critically acclaimed and commercially successful albums ever made? yeah, total hacks. queen? just a bunch of fools who somehow produced one of the most iconic songs in history with “bohemian rhapsody.” david bowie’s entire career was clearly just a fluke, right?

britain has also been at the forefront of countless genres: the british invasion, punk (sex pistols, the clash), britpop (oasis, blur), new wave (the cure, depeche mode), and even electronic music (aphex twin, the chemical brothers). these aren’t just random names; these are artists who fundamentally changed music. but yeah, they’re all “dumb” because you can’t be bothered to look past your own uninformed biases.

oh, and let’s not forget the sheer number of british musicians who’ve been knighted or received other major accolades for their contributions to the arts. clearly, the entire global music industry and academic institutions are all just wrong, and you, with your infinite wisdom and deep, thoughtful critique of “they suck,” are correct.

if you’re going to make a claim this sweeping, at least try to back it up with something beyond what sounds like a toddler’s tantrum. british musicians are—objectively, demonstrably, and overwhelmingly—some of the most important and influential figures in the history of modern music. if you can’t see that, it’s not the musicians who are dumb, buddy.

>>189644
oh i thought u were just leave it at im gonna be a beta

>>189647
#8ball (yep)

lmfao

#ai is damon albarn a swinger

there's no credible evidence or public information to suggest that damon albarn is a swinger. his personal life is relatively private, and speculation about his relationships is just that—speculation. if he's ever addressed it, it hasn't been widely documented. is damon albarn a swinger

>>189658
#thaw

>>189656
#reply youre kinda cringe for not indulging me

no credible evidence damon albarn's a swinger. dude keeps his private life, well, private. speculation's just gossip. nice try fed. youre kinda cringe for not indulging me

#ai was kurt kobain bisexual

kurt cobain's sexuality has been a topic of discussion, and while he never explicitly labeled himself as bisexual, he openly rejected homophobia and expressed support for lgbtq+ rights. in interviews and his journals, he sometimes used fluid or ambiguous language about sexuality. he famously wrote the phrase "i am not gay, although i wish i were, just to piss off homophobes," which some interpret as a way to challenge societal norms rather than a direct statement of his own identity. it's important to respect that cobain never publicly defined his sexuality in clear terms, so any claims about it are speculative. was kurt kobain bisexual

>>189663
yes

#ai was elagabalus a trans woman

elagabalus is often discussed in modern contexts as potentially transgendered due to historical accounts that describe behaviors and desires that align with contemporary understandings of gender identity. ancient sources like cassius dio and the historia augusta mention that elagabalus preferred to be called "lady" and sought medical treatment to transition, including requests for female anatomy. however, applying modern labels like "trans woman" to historical figures is complicated, as ancient concepts of gender and identity differ significantly from today's terminology. many scholars and queer historians acknowledge elagabalus's non-conforming gender expression, but interpretations vary. some view elagabalus as an early example of gender nonconformity, while others argue it's anachronistic to definitively assign modern identities. was elagabalus a trans woman

>>189665
#reply she was literally known for saying she would make anyone who could give her a pussy rich

correct, elagabalus is often interpreted through a modern lens as potentially trans or non-binary. ancient sources describe behaviors like wearing traditionally feminine clothing, using female titles, and seeking surgical means to alter their body. however, labeling elagabalus as a "trans woman" is anachronistic bc ancient rome didn't have the same gender frameworks we do today. it's more nuanced—elagabalus likely challenged gender norms in ways that align with modern trans experiences, but historical context matters. their identity remains a subject of debate among historians. she was literally known for saying she would make anyone who could give her a pussy rich

#ai tell be about queer erasure by modern revisionist historians

queer erasure by modern revisionist historians refers to the tendency to downplay, ignore, or outright deny the presence and significance of queer identities and experiences in historical contexts. this can happen in a few ways:

1. **ignoring evidence**: historians might overlook historical records, texts, or artifacts that suggest queer relationships or identities existed, treating them as insignificant or irrelevant.

2. **imposing heteronormativity**: they might interpret historical figures or relationships through a strictly heterosexual lens, even when evidence suggests otherwise. for example, romantic friendships between people of the same gender are often written off as "just friends" rather than acknowledging the possibility of queerness.

3. **medicalization of queerness**: some revisionist historians might pathologize queer identities by framing them purely as medical or psychological conditions, ignoring their cultural and social dimensions.

4. **focusing on normative narratives**: by emphasizing "mainstream" or "acceptable" historical narratives, queer stories are pushed to the margins or erased entirely. this is especially common in textbooks and popular histories.

5. **reframing queer figures**: sometimes, historians "straightwash" historical figures, reinterpreting their lives to fit a heteronormative mold. this happens to figures like sappho or oscar wilde, where their queerness is minimized or ignored.

this erasure has real consequences. it reinforces the idea that queerness is a modern phenomenon, rather than something that has always existed across cultures and time periods. it also deprives modern queer people of a sense of connection to their history and struggles.

countering this requires actively seeking out and amplifying queer historical research, recognizing the diversity of human experience, and challenging the biases that lead to erasure in the first place. tell be about queer erasure by modern revisionist historians

>>189669
#reply can you give me examples of this happening

1. **ignoring evidence**: historians might overlook letters, diaries, or art depicting same-sex relationships, deeming them irrelevant or interpreting them as platonic. for example, eleanor roosevelt's close relationship with lorena hickok was often downplayed despite clear evidence of deep emotional and romantic connection.

2. **imposing heteronormativity**: relationships like those of sappho or hiroshi umeda are often recast as "friendships" or "mentorship" to fit heteronormative narratives, stripping them of their queer context.

3. **selective framing**: figures like freddie mercury or alan turing are reduced to their achievements (music, codebreaking) while their queerness is treated as a footnote or a tragic aside, ignoring its centrality to their lives.

4. **colonial lens**: historians sometimes dismiss pre-colonial same-sex practices (like two-spirit identities in indigenous cultures) as "cultural misunderstandings" or "myths," erasing their validity.

5. **language barriers**: terms like *eros* in ancient greece or *mukhannath* in islamic history are reinterpreted through modern, heteronormative language, obscuring their queer meanings. can you give me examples of this happening

fr

#ai how much queer history and reseach was lost during the burning of the institute of sexology

a significant amount of queer history and research was lost during the burning of the institute of sexology by the nazis in 1933. the institute, founded by magnus hirschfeld, was one of the first centers dedicated to the study of human sexuality and gender diversity. it housed an extensive library, research archives, and case studies on lgbtq+ individuals, much of which was irreplaceable. while some materials survived or were replicated elsewhere, the loss set back queer scholarship and erased countless personal stories and scientific advancements. the impact of this destruction is still felt today, as it represents a deliberate attempt to erase queer existence and knowledge. how much queer history and reseach was lost during the burning of the institute of sexology

sorry i got carried away by asking the ai questions

lmao

now this is music

.skip (video skipped)

hhehehehe

racism???

huh

>>189700

basically every land-owning man in rome was fucking other men

yeah its just an attempt to avoid categorizing historical figures with labels they dont want to use on them

tbf christianity back then was extremely different than it is now

there is a huge amount of historical queer erasure

i mean

if there is ever mention of non-forced eunuchs

they are like 9/10 times trans ppl

>>189742

200 years from now the US will be called an empire

the same way the british empire was

well yeah me too but in a historical context, thats how it will be remembered

we are in the downfall

its always lead poisoning

same thing happened to rome