Thread:Potatodog/@comment-22439-20140124231926/@comment-24537268-20140228174145

ResonX wrote: Potatodog wrote: ResonX wrote:

Potatodog wrote:

ResonX wrote:

Potatodog wrote:

Wait....so you admit to have troubles controlling lust...after admitting that you have a fetish for children? Welp, its true then. You are a deranged individual who needs to to be kept away from children. Perhaps committed to an asylum even. Sorry but I'm not going to take "I can't control my pedophiliac urges! Its who I am!" excuse.

You're the only one who brought up "lust", I was mainly referring to the anger aspect. I have no fetish for children. Yet how many times I found you commenting on art featuring little kids or animals?

A small handful, all within a short span of time years ago, and without expressing excessive perversion; more than one of the images were clearly comical. >excessive perversion >excessive. So its okay to have a little perversion towards children, you pedophile fuck? No wonder Emma will never touch you. Also how is a picture of a naked little girl comical. Tell me. Please, explain it.

It was very crudely edited, clearly just for the sake of fulfilling Rule 34's original joking meaning.

Also, again, you need to leave me alone. You and the others are HURTING me and my life.

A joke? Really?

http://rule34.paheal.net/post/view/486011#c1638318

''Moleman9000: The picture itself isn't bad, it's very funny, but we don't come to Rule 34 for the funny, we come to masturbate. You should put this on a site where it can be properly appreciated, like YouChewPoop. ''