Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Ok Comboomer
Oct 20, 2007



RobotDogPolice posted:

This country is filled with broke brained dipshits who will gladly go up to bat for a rich celebrity who literally doesn't give a single gently caress about them.

Americans are conditioned to aspire to wealth, and find it easy to empathize with/see themselves in the place of the wealthy, often at the expense of their own and those less fortunate.

Politicians exploit it literally all the time.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Ok Comboomer
Oct 20, 2007



AceOfFlames posted:

Didn’t Michael Bay nearly get killed due to one of his explosions propelling a pole at high speeds inches from his head? I think it was on the set of The Island.

:allears:

Ok Comboomer
Oct 20, 2007



Timeless Appeal posted:

The problem is that the whole thing is a chicken and egg thing.

Ezra Klein had an interesting take on why the Me Too moment happened the way it did. Basically, Trump put Liberals in a position where there was a lot more sensitivity to sexual harassment and sexual assault after the Access Hollywood tape and the Fox News harassment cases.....

I think there’s a truth to that but there were similar, smaller movements happening in many places that cross over with progressive politics- like science, academia, and even tech and business- for years before this took off, or even before the election.

There’s been a several years’ long campaign to address harassment and sexism in science and academia that bears a good deal of resemblance to how #MeToo has spread, and the current national discussion about campus sexual assault and affirmative consent began in earnest before Obama started his second term.

Discussion about harassment in Silicon Valley was happening back when Reddit was still actively protecting child pornographers and Gamergate started in like 2013 or 14.

The feeling going into the election was one of general optimism- things felt lovely and tough but there was a lot of progress actively happening all around. Predators were beginning to be outed and institutions were starting to change. That was the idea. The Obama Administration had taken steps in line with this thinking and Hillary was on the horizon ready to take the baton and sprint into the future. The excrement spewing from what would eventually be labeled the Alt-Right was just a backlash that would be steamrolled in time.

When Trump won, it was a stinging rebuke and it definitely calcified the movement into what it is now. It proved that the Alt-Right was potentially more politically dangerous than many had previously assumed. But the reason millions of people turned out and marched that January and got together and set the groundwork for #MeToo to happen and for there to be a critical mass of people to be receptive to its message was because this was building for years. I don’t think that people would’ve been so ready to kill their idols, so to speak, if it hadn’t been.

To paraphrase/build on something the Notorious RBG just said in an interview- #MeToo is the mainstreaming of something that’s been alive and sidelined for a really long time and challenges the dominant social narrative that “women just make poo poo up.” Like challenging the narrative that slavery’s just a normal, okay thing or that women shouldn’t vote.

Ok Comboomer fucked around with this message at 04:02 on Feb 12, 2018

Ok Comboomer
Oct 20, 2007



Tom Hanks went on a yacht vacation with Oprah Winfrey and the Obamas right after the 2016 election.

He’s not in the “hot young actor” tier of A-List celebrity like he was in the 90s but he’s absolutely metastasized to the “distinguished Hollywood insider/fixture” phase, where most of the movies he’s in do consistently quite well and he still gets a few award nods fairly regularly, even if he doesn’t win. The stuff he’s produced or worked on in roles aside from acting has also been largely successful. He’s also loaded as all hell, which at minimum puts him in the same place Nicholson’s been for the last like 3 decades.

And Spielberg’s work these days may not have the same cachet that it used to but it’s still probably one of the most expensive and prestige games in town.

The point is, Tom Hanks can probably get in anywhere and rub shoulders with Important People given his current status. He’s famous and recognizable enough that regular people would probably hassle him if he went out and had to interact with them but wealthy enough that he probably never has to. He’s “old man A-List” in the way that billionaires are.

Ok Comboomer fucked around with this message at 18:54 on Mar 12, 2018

Ok Comboomer
Oct 20, 2007



Just saying, a handful of crops and restraints seems like a pretty vanilla “BDSM horror closet” although maybe don’t put that stuff in the same guest room people are staying in.

Keeping museumesque “guest rooms” and dens that never get used seems like something my mom would do if she had the money and property. She really loves decorating and the idea of entertaining but has also struggled with anxiety and depression for decades and gets really stressed about cleanliness and doesn’t really have many friends that she sees regularly outside of work.

The dishes stuff is some real Howard Hughes poo poo tho.

Ok Comboomer fucked around with this message at 21:29 on Mar 12, 2018

Ok Comboomer
Oct 20, 2007




This is a hilarious answer.

Macdeo Lurjtux posted:

Maybe she has a side gig of renting her house out to film porn. The couch covers are just out of consideration to any guests that sit on them after.

I love hearing set stories where, like, some super raunchy scene is being filmed and the older Valley couple that owns the place are just having breakfast in the nook like it ain’t no thing. Even better when they just casually make the cast and crew coffee or spectate or whatever.

Ok Comboomer
Oct 20, 2007



Snowman_McK posted:

One of the funniest things I've seen was, in the middle of standard porn video, the camera panning out and spinning around, Taxi Driver style, revealing the dozen or so really bored people staring at two very attractive people loving on a couch.

Isn’t there some BDSM porn flick from the 90s that has a scene like that, except that some of the bored/confused people in the crowd are professional actors like Carrie Fisher? If I recall hearing about this correctly (and if it even exists) the project was funded with money from a bunch of showbiz people who were sold on the grounds that it was a particularly experimental independent film. The backers were offered a cameo and so a bunch of actors showed up at a warehouse and watched a topless lady get tied up and, like, flogged or something and the whole thing was filmed.

If I’m remembering it right, the movie ended up leaking onto the internet with titles like “CARRIE FISHER PORN” even though she’s only standing in the background fully clothed with a bunch of other people like they’re watching some performance art, so she sued to get it taken down and I think she later mentioned it in an interview. Maybe they talked about it on VH1 one time? I remember seeing a censored clip that looked super awkward and uncomfortable, with like quick shots of notable faces in the crowd.

And no, I’m not confusing this story with the one about the BDSM movie Cameron Diaz was an extra in before she became a star.

Ok Comboomer
Oct 20, 2007



Apropos of internet “intellectuals” being total trogs:
https://twitter.com/amazingatheist/status/972553484385050624

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/tomb-raider-fans-slam-criticism-alicia-vikanders-body-movie-1094440

Ok Comboomer
Oct 20, 2007



Inescapable Duck posted:

Interesting that comes up since GameSpot recently deleted and apologised for a tweet that called the old Lara design 'over-sexualised' and implied she wasn't an icon before her reboot redesign, after a feminist complained it's slut-shaming and enforcing patriarchal modesty norms.

Well, the poo poo can go both ways right? I work in middle-to-high school education and it turns out that kids and adults alike are often super-duper extra lovely to girls who commit the sin of developing early or growing boobs that are “too big” for their age cohort.

Like, if you can name a problem in education somebody has tried to blame it on a student’s boobs. Parents will sit in a meeting straight-faced and blame their own kid’s inability to self-regulate on a classmate’s choice of shirt. Or argue against including a kid on an athletic team or in a performance on bullshit modesty or self-esteem grounds or “other kids and dads will be distracted” (a real argument often tossed around by athletic staff). Is a girl getting bullied by her peers? Harassed by strangers? Do other girls like her too much? Too little? Do boys like her too much? Too little? Grades too low compared to her classmates? Grades too high? Did she place in honors math? Regular math? Is she depressed? Is she really happy? Did she get assaulted?

Welp, boobs are for Adults Only and she should’ve thought about the consequences of her choices before she put those adult boobs on in seventh grade. I tell you, in my day we had responsibility.

Ok Comboomer fucked around with this message at 15:26 on Mar 15, 2018

Ok Comboomer
Oct 20, 2007



Bolingbroke posted:

Yeah in case it wasn't clear, I'm not arguing that it's kids' dress codes that are the problem here, but until we as a culture move past men being loving atrocious to children those children shouldn't be forced to dress in a way that so many men sexualise. I'm sure if we give them alternatives men will just start sexualising those as well but, eh, you do what you can. I suppose my complaint here is less with the nature of school uniforms and more that kids are forced to dress that way.

You're really putting the cart before the horse here though (or something like that) by arguing that "schoolgirl trope = sexualized image to lots of men = therefore underage girls shouldn't be made to dress that way for school." You're arguing that the uniform itself has a uniquely sexy quality that certain men appreciate, when the reality is that it's what the uniform represents that is so taboo- and the root of its appeal.

The "catholic schoolgirl" ensemble isn't really all that different from any other button shirt + skirt combo (like what many women might wear to work) aside from the fact that it's associated with students. This is treated as a sex trope by adults for reasons ranging from legit pedophilia (or at least a "preference for women on the younger side") to the fact that most adults in our sex-phobic, rear end-backward society got their first taste of sex by "breaking the rules" as students, and they fetishize those experiences and that period of their lives. Our society is also obsessed with the idea of virginity and innocence - and the idea of deflowering or corrupting that innocence, along with the implied power imbalance, is similarly fodder for many a sex trope.

To build off of Desperado Bones' post, a middle school I used to work at in a really, really poor district had (by design) the cheapest, most unappealing uniforms you could imagine: baggy, 90's-style navy sweatshirts and sweatpants. The kids all looked like giant, dark blue bags of potatoes walking around. That didn't stop the construction workers on a job site down the street from hollering at my 7th and 8th graders every afternoon as they walked home. And these kids were 11 to maybe 15 at the very oldest. Eventually the dean, a rugby playing dire bear of a dude, had to start walking out with the students at dismissal just to deathstare at these guys until everyone got safely past.

You could put teenagers in full hazmat suits, and as long as society understood that a hazmat suit was now what teenagers wore you would have some men behaving inappropriately toward them. Because to those guys it's about loving teenagers, full stop- or at minimum, it's about getting their rocks off harassing somebody they assume would be powerless to get them in real trouble.

Ok Comboomer
Oct 20, 2007



It thickens....

Hollywood Reporter: Ellen Barkin Tweets "Never Get Into an Elevator Alone" With Terry Gilliam

Ok Comboomer
Oct 20, 2007



Bust Rodd posted:

Yeah context is completely meaningless, you’re totally right

-said the poster with the Ugandan Knuckles avatar

Ok Comboomer
Oct 20, 2007



esperterra posted:

I feel really weird about stories like this coming out about dead celebrities. It's like a weird line I'm straddling, or something. Part of me says 'leave it be, they're dead, just let them stay dead don't drag their name through the papers even if they did something wrong' and the other part of me is like, well, if a dead celebrity did something loving heinous to a person and that victim wants to be heard I can't blame them, either.

I didn't look at the Williams article so idk the severity of the allegations.

Jimmy Saville was dead before he was exposed. Not at all comparing the two or anything but the idea of letting sleeping dogs lie when the person in question is dead and beloved- either “for the good of [x]” or because “they’re no longer around to defend themselves” or just because “it would keep things from getting complicated” - is a big part of why we have such a problem with accounting for this poo poo in the first place.

Ok Comboomer
Oct 20, 2007



21 Muns posted:

Why would it matter that she didn't mind at all? :confused: If you're driving drunk, I don't particularly care if you're lucky enough to only hit suicidal people.

Yeah what does ‘consent’ really mean, ya know?

Ok Comboomer
Oct 20, 2007



Hat Thoughts posted:

Lol @"virtue signaling" & she didn't say it was "consensual" (which would require - consent - & not saying "I didn't think it was a big deal retroactively even though I'm writing them into my memoirs"). Also, it being the 70s absolutely informs the power dynamic & Williams absolutely abused that power dynamic. You don't have to think it's a big deal if you don't think it is, there's no obligation to feel any specific way about this. But it's important not to misrepresent the reality of the situation.

That's fair, but "Therefore if we are ethical we must relegate Robin Williams to the dustbin of memory" doesn't really seem to track either.

Ok Comboomer
Oct 20, 2007



Sean Penn spent years making an rear end of himself with Hugo Chavez trying to legitimize that dictatorial garbage fire of a government. He’s a living, breathing Breitbart strawman of a leftist.

Ok Comboomer
Oct 20, 2007



R. Guyovich posted:

truly, this was his greatest crime, and wholly relevant to the Hollywood Molesters thread.

Sorry, I thought it fit with his whole “writes a poem that makes Alec Baldwin’s take on ‘#metoo’ seem considered and decent” schtick.

Penn’s spent the last 20 years acting like he’s more “dangerous” and “genuine” and “iconoclastic” than the rest of Hollywood so I wasn’t surprised that he came out on the side of “unfairly vilified men” in the most stupidly pretentious way possible. Like, IIRC he posted a stupid poem when his dictator bff died too.

Ok Comboomer
Oct 20, 2007



Speaking of sex cults, here’s a new allegation against R. Kelly:

http://www.complex.com/music/2018/03/r-kelly-accused-training-14-year-old-girl-sex-slave

Ok Comboomer
Oct 20, 2007



It’s worth noting that rappers like 6ix9ine and xxxtentacion are blowing the gently caress up right now and R Kelly and Chris Brown are doing just fine for all of their notoriety, though, so the music scene clearly has a looooong loving way to go on this front. Same goes for a lot of the indie/alt/post punk artists that middle aged white dudes love and who escaped scrutiny years ago despite credible allegations.

Just because some bands for gentle millennials and sad queer kids got theirs doesn’t mean that the music industry’s experiencing nearly the same reckoning as other areas.

Ok Comboomer
Oct 20, 2007



The most recent episode of the Friendly Fire podcast covered M.A.S.H, the movie.

If you haven’t watched the film, you really should. You can spend the whole time appalled at how deeply progressive it was considered to be.

Ok Comboomer
Oct 20, 2007



SimonCat posted:

Where they recruit a black surgeon they nickname "SpearChucker,", and commit multiple counts of sexual assault and harassment?

At women who outrank them, no less. Also where one of the main characters has an existential crisis of gay panic and tries to kill himself because he fails to get a boner one time. And the scene is a reference to DaVinci’s Last Supper.

It’s like a transitional fossil from the post-sexual revolution era where just having your lovely impulses out in the open was considered ‘liberated’ compared to the conservatism that preceded it but women still didn’t have any agency or desires of their own and needed to be told or shown that they “actually wanted it.”

Edit: also, wtf is up with your quote of me? I wrote the name of a podcast and it seems to have been turned into a URL about a murder-suicide. :psyduck:

Ok Comboomer fucked around with this message at 12:55 on Apr 4, 2018

Ok Comboomer
Oct 20, 2007



Macdeo Lurjtux posted:

Weird that an article about suicide would impose itself on a M*A*S*H* discussion.

:smugdog:

Ok Comboomer
Oct 20, 2007



Coffee And Pie posted:

Apparently the CA site has gone completely unmoderated and the forums are overrun with gore and porn.

It’s like the old days of the internet in there. Like I bet goatse is there.

This and your Av are like a warm and fuzzy time machine back to ‘99.

brb gotta find my CD copy of Europop

Ok Comboomer
Oct 20, 2007



El Gallinero Gros posted:

Imagine that, nobody gave Pauly Shore any thought. Guess it's habit.

Aww, his mom died recently :(

Ok Comboomer
Oct 20, 2007



soooo apparently the Toronto van terrorist was a member of the “Incel Rebellion”

coolcool

Ok Comboomer
Oct 20, 2007



banned from Starbucks posted:

What is the SPLC and why would they waste time researching virgins

It seems this guy lionized Eliot Rodger (the 2014 UC Santa Barbara killer) and wanted to emulate him, so I guess being incel is now a bonafide terrorist motivator with two major incidents notched in North America in under a decade.

But at this point it’s also pretty clear that “incel” as a label exists under the same alt-right umbrella as poo poo like gamergate, proud boys, redpill, etc so we shouldn’t exactly be surprised that internet CHUDs are coming out of the woodwork to actually commit attacks over their idiot grievances now.

Ok Comboomer
Oct 20, 2007



Schwarzwald posted:

It's insidious. It goes a long way to making the issue unsolvable, since the most effective approaches (all of which will involve "looking at the root causes") can now be conflated with misogyny.

What?

What?!

In what world does confronting toxic masculinity or getting kids to be less hateful around issues of sex/identity/mental health/acceptance get conflated with misogyny?

Ok Comboomer
Oct 20, 2007



Hollywood Reporter: Ashley Judd Sues Harvey Weinstein for Sexual Harassment and Defamation

Ok Comboomer
Oct 20, 2007



He resigned immediately, so at least there’s that.

Ok Comboomer
Oct 20, 2007



bad day posted:

The one thing you don’t get a pass for is making lovely music, doing lovely work, though. This only applies when the subject is already a brilliant performer. If you’re a lovely person who makes lovely work nobody wants to gently caress with you.

Counterpoint: Ted Nugent was able to do it via his equally lovely politics, and that dude released songs about loving thirteen year-olds. He sits on the board of one of the most powerful conservative lobbying orgs in the US.

Ok Comboomer
Oct 20, 2007



Vegetable posted:

If “fake” rape accusations happen with consequences, they’re more likely because the police simply caught the wrong men of color. That’s happened in a few high profile cases, though not with celebrities.

It’s worth mentioning that “we have it on good authority that somebody reported a rape” was used as a pretext for lynching and arresting black men and boys throughout the Jim Crow era, some as young as eight.

Many of those cases involved an actual reported assault where the real assailant wasn’t caught (or in many cases even sought out) and some poor scapegoat was brought in instead. Or they were covers for assaults committed by powerful white men (or their sons) who would never be brought to justice. Suspects were often tortured or coerced into signing statements prepared for them by police. Other cases involved consensual miscegenation or adultery and were as much about keeping women in line as they were about enforcing racial segregation. And still others didn’t even involve actual crimes at all, and were simply excuses to commit brutality and then immediately swept under the rug.

This history often gets brought up as one of many interweaving explanations for why people have been quick to defend certain black celebrities against legitimate accusations of assault or partner violence, notably OJ Simpson. As long as racist policing and police brutality continue to exist and be a political force that directly affects millions of people I think guys like R. Kelly and Chris Brown will benefit from some degree of cover on that front. This is why the organization and campaigning coming from black women and from within the black community recently to hold men like these accountable is so important.

Ok Comboomer
Oct 20, 2007



Davros1 posted:

But is it better than the one where Hillary had Bourdain killed because he was going to come out in support of Trump?

Given how vocal he was about rising authoritarianism and how much of an obvious liberal he was (when he met Ted Nugent he specifically said that he was on the opposite end politically among a laundry list of other moments) that one seems like a particular stretch. But never put it past QAnon psychos to make up the weirdest poo poo....

Ok Comboomer
Oct 20, 2007



Bust Rodd posted:

Ok, booking an all ages show at an event so you can free farm your underage fans is Jimmy Saville levels of hosed up.

it’s actually a mainstay of music industry culture going back to the beginning :shepicide:

Ok Comboomer
Oct 20, 2007



Skwirl posted:

How the gently caress is that legal. You'd think there's a bunch of pro life senators that want to ban birth control in all forms would jump in about that.

a lot of those pro life senators are the same ones who think very seriously about things like sterilizing poor people and welfare recipients and people with disabilities and mental illness “so they can’t use kids as a way to get money from the system”

Ok Comboomer
Oct 20, 2007



Carthag Tuek posted:

yeah, its wild. huge swathes of the western world still did state eugenics way past when ww2 made it "unfashionable". scandinavia, canada, you name it.

Scandinavia is arguably a leader in socially enforced eugenics if you subscribe to the idea that fostering a culture of aborting fetuses who show signs of/test positive for developmental disability or non-life-threatening birth defects is eugenics.

Something like 99.9% of all positive diagnoses for Down Syndrome, to give an example, in Scandinavia result in abortion, and people who “knowingly” have disabled children are often accused of being backwards or cruel for “forcing them to live like that”.

I don’t have a 100% answer to be honest. I think that the right to an abortion for any reason is ironclad, and one could credibly argue that forcing somebody to deliver and parent any child to their personal detriment is wrong. It’s a cornerstone argument to being Pro-Choice. And when you consider the tremendous lifelong personal and financial burdens that the parents of seriously disabled children have to bear, I certainly wouldn’t vilify anybody for making that choice given the society that we live in.

At the same time, it’s clearly a discriminatory sentiment that reinforces a system that would rather eliminate “burdensome” people than support them properly. Millions of people live full, enriched, rewarding lives with disabilities, and many of the most common and serious hardships that disabled people and their families face are entirely matters of money and social safety net, and would be obviated if states and societies provided for them adequately.

But also there’s a line where I do think it’s in the best interest of the child to simply not be born. You get to a level of severe cognitive disability where it really does feel like you’re just forcing them to live, to say nothing of the parents who insist on keeping anencephalic kids alive.

And like, if I knew I was going to have a child with ichthyosis, xeroderma pigmentosum, or even most forms of SCIDS, I probably wouldn’t want them to have to live short, torturous lives either.

But I also don’t think that we have the maturity yet as a society to really decide where those lines are, beyond the obvious (kids with anencephaly should not be forced to live in hell).

At the end of the day, I think you just have to separate the “abortion side” of the conversation and the “discrimination against the disabled” side. Ultimately being pro-choice means that it kinda doesn’t matter why a person chooses to have an abortion—it’s a matter of body autonomy. You don’t have to like the reason, but it’s their body and their choice. By all means it’s important to challenge the lovely beliefs and systems that might underpin such a decision.

This also starts blurring into “legal euthanasia” chat, which is another thing Scandinavia does. Can somebody with a severe disability rationally ask to be euthanized? What about somebody with a mental illness? Is somebody with quadriplegia allowed to decide that they don’t want to live anymore and have the state oblige them? What about somebody with major depression? Or borderline personality disorder? Or super-severe trauma?

And all of these require the sign-off of doctors and magistrates which adds a whole other layer. How do we draw the line between suicidality and “I’m not getting any better and I seriously, thoughtfully don’t want to live the rest of my life like this”? How do we separate a doctor’s personal feelings from their professional duty and also relate that to the patient’s wishes? Who really has the final say?

Shageletic posted:

That's a pretty hefty claim, especially since sexual assault absolutely correlates with an environment where men have carte blanche to assault without consequences.

It can be both, the literature actually seems to support both.

Groovelord Neato posted:

It's not a technicality it's prosecutorial misconduct.

It’s this. Only this time the black guy they did it to was wealthy enough for his lawyers to catch it and successfully fight it (and also most certainly guilty)

Ok Comboomer
Oct 20, 2007



Alhazred posted:

The only form of “legal euthanasia” in Scandinavia is termination of treatment.

You’re right, I confused the Netherlands with Scandinavia in my memory brain. My mistake.

Euthanasia is currently legal in Belgium, Canada, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Spain and several states of Australia (Tasmania, Victoria, South Australia and Western Australia).

It was briefly legal in the Northern Territory betweeen 1996 and 1997, but was overturned by a federal law.

Ok Comboomer
Oct 20, 2007



deety posted:

I'd also love to see some reflection from NBC and other outlets about their coverage of Simone Biles in the weeks and months before the competition, painting her as this unstoppable force but also constantly linking her to (and often asking her about) her abuser. I know she's tried to be open about her struggles, in part because that keeps USA Gymnastics officials from acting like Nassar was the only issue and his conviction fixed everything. But the coverage of Biles's experience often felt shaped into a fuzzy "look what she's overcome" sports story rather than actually taking a more serious look at how unsafe and exploitative a lot of gym environments have been for young women.

not to be all “the problem is capitalism” but the for-profit media literally cannot cover a story or individual without doing everything they can to exploit them to their benefit and feed on their value, and doubly so for “genre” media like entertainment news and sports

framing everything as a struggle of the human spirit and a triumph of discipline and competition is all they know, asking them to do objective reporting is like asking a car to be a plane

Ok Comboomer
Oct 20, 2007



Vintersorg posted:

gently caress, I got that name confused with Paul Scheer. :lol:



:same:

Ok Comboomer
Oct 20, 2007



Bust Rodd posted:

Please I am just begging you God please let Kenan Thompson be clean please I’m begging you just this once

John Wick of Dogs posted:

At least in regards to this particular set of incidents, he did not join the SNL cast until a couple of years later, he was still on Nickelodeon

bad news, Bust Rodd, turns out every rumor about Dan Schneider was actually about an underage Kenan disguising himself as a 45 year old white guy with the use of level-17 illusion magic

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Ok Comboomer
Oct 20, 2007



Snowman_McK posted:

that was xtenacious

or possibly xtencion

I'm not being facetious i genuinely can't remember what his name was and my internet's playing up so i can't google it.

xxxtentacion, who also committed sexual assault, statutory rape, and physically abused at least one of his girlfriends

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply