GirlChat #743583

Start A New Topic!  Submit SRF  Thread Index  Date Index  

Nah, Gaffigan's likely not even pedo.

Posted by Eeyore on Tuesday, January 09 2024 at 04:48:13AM

Dude is happily married with a religious family.

He was trying to be a controversial fill-in for that Gervais character (And maaan, keep your sexy dog away from THAT guy).

All Jim did was point out the obvious 8,000-£ underage sex-doll from Asia in the room, already bouncing around the venue like a beachball at a Buffet concert.

Is it not a comedian's job to be the first to blurt out publicly what everyone else has already been thinking, but wouldn't dare be the first to say? That's their entire purpose in a nutsack, isn't it?

Isn't that silence also the very thing that abuse advocates claim allows the continuation of so-called abuse?

Jim humbly nailed the joke.

My only beef is the equating of attraction to underage individuals with the sad and seedy realities of prostitution, and all the state-sponsored leverage that surely came with it in the Epstien case, right at the VERY same time when media seemingly became utterly obsessed with demonizing the attraction in the minds of the masses, saturating it into their brains over the airwaves, ala the likes of Chris Hanson and many others.

I may be easily dismissed for the assertion, but one doesn't need to approve of the attraction to also note the factual overlapping timing with what was going on in Epstien-World at the same time.

The media obsession made the public reach a level of paranoia about the safety of their kids which realistically wasn't backed by statistical data whatsoever. Parents weren't letting their kids play in the yard. Is this normal?

More importantly, it made the utter hatred for anyone who would ever touch a minor WORSE than anyone who would even murder a minor.

"So what's your point, Eeyore?"

My point is, any visitor to those Epstein locations who were filmed or documented to have been interacting with those underage girls, were now suddenly subject to a level of blackmail so powerful that the consequences to their careers, their social standing, their legacies... everything they toiled for decades to achieve... (due to the level of extreme taboo created in the public mind via media...) made it practically absolute. *NOBODY* would ever survive being outed for that now, no matter how powerful they might have thought themselves to be.

Why has nobody connected the Epstein stuff with the coinciding MEDIA stuff of that same time period??

This simultaneous owning of public fears and powerful people explains exactly why you had a framed painting of Clinton wearing a fucking dress (or whatever it was) in an East 71st Street townhouse in Manhattan.

Get it yet? Ya get it??

Ugh. Famous people and powerful people have some reckoning to do. There are state and massive corporate entities gonna keep tittilating and satisfying all your secret urges for you, and you're gonna find out your wealth and connections won't save you from the blackmail of the infinitely wealthy & powerful.

It's a (very small) club. And you STILL ain't innit.

He'd hate me, but I admire his brain his films. Somewhere in an old interview about reaching fame and fortune, Mel Gibson speaking about his own experience mused (paraphrasing) "they will satisfy your every (taboo) desire for anything, and I do mean *anything*."

I know I didn't imagine that. It's out there, somewhere, in an interview.

Anyway, my only original point was,


He's my closest clean comedian yet to nearing a Brian Regan status of comedy.


Follow ups:

Post a response :

Nickname Password
E-mail (optional)

Link URL (optional)
Link Title (optional)

Add your sigpic?