[SimoneFlen']

More photos of him:

[Pelle]

Holy shit, that was fast

[Stevieaitch]

Skinny little runt. Real vermin these types
Seems she was not all that innocent either. These fucks hopefully wipe each other out

[letslive666]

She puked I saw it.

[JakeHarper]

Originally Posted by sil3nce ↗

Given absolute freedom they'd probably strip her naked, piss on her, cut her tits off, and then fuck her with the blade before stabbing and beheading her. Jefe probably told them quick and nasty with no foreplay amigos.

That´s why you are living alone.

[odoylerules88]

Damn that girls got a rack to die for

[OhJstFkOffAlrdy]

Originally Posted by sil3nce ↗

I'm at an age where I know my kinks very well. Perhaps you're unsure of your own so you can keep track of your own advice. Fetishes don't work that way exactly either. It comes naturally or it doesn't. Otherwise you're saying Playboy leads to these videos which it doesn't.

Wrong. Fetishes can be the product of conditioning. They can be the product of trauma. They are by and large a product of nature only in that they tend to be rooted in and fed by predispositions inherent to the individual.

No one is born a spanko, for example, but some people are the kind to process and reflect on spankings that they received during their formative years in a manner that will lead to fetishization. But should such spankings have never happened, then they wouldn't have developed the preference at all.

Besides, what you're talking about is objectification. Once you chop a person up, they stop being a person in the traditionally sexualizable sense. At that point, they're an object to be used, something that is incapable of consent or rejection. That kind of objectification is at the root of "harmless" fetishes like shoe fetishes and panty fetishes, but it's also at the root of inarguably harmful fetishes such as pedophilia, zoophilia, necrophilia, and so on and so forth.

So it's a fine line. You're talking about messing with associations between two diametrically-opposed natural urges that both derive from aggression: Violence and reproductive affection. Both are products of aggression, but you start moving into the territory of narcissistic control and power when you start involving the objectification of living things to such an absurd degree as to wanting to see them violently disassembled and killed in conjunction with your own sexual or romantic arousal. That's not a naturally-occurring process in the healthy.

[sil3nce]

Would you like to fuck a piece of steak? No. Neither would I. Objectification doesn't interest me in the least. The fact she is a human being with a childhood, a past, the capacity to love, personality etc. all enrich the experience of watching her final moments. She's not an insect or cow. She's a person. Someone's mom , daughter, sister etc. possibly. That's what makes it special.


There's also a gigantic leap between appreciating an atrocity video and actually killing someone. One is just there to be watched whereas the other requires tons of actions to get to that point in the dark forest.

[OhJstFkOffAlrdy]

Originally Posted by sil3nce ↗

Would you like to fuck a piece of steak? No. Neither would I. Objectification doesn't interest me in the least. The fact she is a human being with a childhood, a past, the capacity to love, personality etc. all enrich the experience of watching her final moments. She's not an insect or cow. She's a person. Someone's mom , daughter, sister etc. possibly. That's what makes it special.


There's also a gigantic leap between appreciating an atrocity video and actually killing someone. One is just there to be watched whereas the other requires tons of actions to get to that point in the dark forest.

Of course that's what makes it special. Were it not for all of those things, where would be the power in controlling and ending her?

[sil3nce]

There's no power in it if you see how easily the tables could be turned. Control is a means to an end. Not everything is textbook.