Gotta love the footies. They're harmless and locked in. At the rabbit hole that is sexual fetishes, they just hang around the entrance... looking down.
I don't think about feet at all, until a story like this pops up.
I think we must have had very different experiences in life. I think the only fetish I ever hear about in the news in a 'bad way' is feet.
In the past two or three decades, I want to say there have been at least one or two stories per year about some cop in the area letting people off of tickets if they'll let the officer lick their feet. We have incredibly large furry conventions, anime conventions, tattoo conventions, reptile owner conventions, and probably more that touch on various kinks and fetishes, but you never hear about any of those sexual shenanigans in the news... so feet fetish folks finding themselves featured on frontline feeds frequently from the news is quite the contrast.
Yeah, that's an ACAB problem more than a footsie problem. This is a mathematical function that always resolve to the same constant : let police(x) a function that describes an action (x) that is done by multiple officers over many iterations, and we can say that police(x)= bastardry
I haven't gotten a ticket in years, but I think the absolute cheapest tickets are over $100, speeding will be somewhere between $180-300 depending on how much over you were going, and the really big boys like repeated no insurance or passing school busses can climb to $500-1000.
I had a speeding ticket I couldn't talk my way out of, what got dismissed because it was for 2 over the speed limit. Also dismissed tickets for not having insurance (apparently the card the insurance company sends you is not proof of insurance in Texas, at least according to this shitass I dealt with).
Even though the tickets were dismissed, I still had to pay court fees. Which were for twice what the tickets were.
Hence the saying, you can beat the charge but you can't beat the ride.
When i was in college, there were reports of people, who took their shoes off at the library while studying for midterms, putting their foot back in to find them filled with jizz.
It happened enough we got a campus wide email that said to not take your shoes off in public spaces lol
Oh yeah there are a ton of bdsm conventions, major cities will often have multiple a year. And there are issues and drama for certain, but we generally try to police our own and our problems tend towards being that well established members of the community who do a lot sometimes utilize the trust and respect they have to be predatory, especially to new people, just like every other community.
Foot fetishists' misbehavior is the stuff like you described, though they're really outshone in awfulness by body type fetishists, who do the same stuff and so much more
And tbh I think foot fetishists' big problem is their misbehavior comes from the shame and awkwardness they have about it. And i bet you can find similar stories with far more common body part fetishes like breasts and butts. Like, I'm a breast fetishist for sure and don't get the appeal of feet, but I know some folks who are all about feet and are totally respectful people and I know plenty of folks who can't act properly about tits.
Well, there was Rainfurrest, which was so bad that I know the name off the top of my head without even being in the furry scene. From what I've heard it was an outlier organized by people who'd been banned from other conventions so by no means typical.
But it's not like I've never heard of a furry convention going wrong.
I mean, I'm comfortable considering the folk you're citing outliers. They may all be outlying the same creepy way, but they're not part of our distribution curve dammit
Gotta love the footies. They're harmless and locked in. At the rabbit hole that is sexual fetishes, they just hang around the entrance... looking down.
"material object regarded with awe as having mysterious powers or being the representative of a deity that may be worshipped through it," 1610s, fatisso, from Portuguese feitiço "charm, sorcery, allurement," noun use of an adjective meaning "artificial."
which eventually morphed into:
Figurative sense of "something irrationally revered, object of blind devotion" appears to be an extension made by the New England Transcendentalists (1837). For sexual sense (1897), see fetishism.
Which...checks out in terms of our current understandings of the word. (But still is used as an object in magic in other circles). Which, if referring to a foot as an object of obsession...definitely "more" valid than saying "furry fetish" which is more of a "kink".
In the sexual sense a fetish is delineated from a kink in that with a fetish it's often considered necessary for attraction/sexual satisfaction to the haver. So strictly a person with a sadomasochism fetish can't get off without receiving or administering pain, whereas a person with a sadomasochism kink will sexually enjoy it, but can also get off from vanilla sex.
But they're often used interchangeably. Also within bdsm kinks can be nonsexual, with some folks not getting off on it, but still enjoying it.
Modern humans waste 99% of their lives trying to explain away the simple fact that humans are biologically designed to sleep, eat, and fuck(with hope that it leads to reproduction).
Biology gives no fucks about our feelings, respect, or anything else.
Another poster said the commentor is talking about a youtuber named gabi belle, who afaik posts ZERO sexual content and even if she did that still wouldnt make her an object for your personal sexual satisfaction.
The idea that anyone at all has any real power over how other people look at them beyond how they present themselves being suggestive of a particular lens is absurd.
The commenter said she posted that she wanted her score on the foot rating site to be higher, which seems like pretty clear consent to objectify her feet.
Hate how you're so upvoted because not only is your information third or fourth hand depending on perspective, you also outright believe it and knit your idea of consent around such weak thread.
She's joking, if anything this is a defeatist joke around the fact that she is nearly powerless when it cones to being objectified and sexualized without her consent, and the dark humor on display is very on brand. So the screenshotted comment, presumably a viewer of hers, should be familiar with her style of comedy and her struggles with being objectified and her likeness being misused.
So that comment is by someone who either does the exact thing to her that she doesn't want, or they are genuinely so porn pilled that they genuinely haven't ever picked up on what she's talking about and are only there to objectify and sexualize her.
I would not have bothered to comment unless I knew enough about her, her content and the thoughts she shared surrounding these things, I suggest we all adopt this approach in the future.
Uh, I posted her original tweet, literally first hand information.
You can argue that it's a joke, but when you literally go online and say "Please rate my feet higher", you can't be surprised when people take you at face value and do the thing you specifically asked for.
When you make a post in a public space, you can't expect everyone to know your lore. For example, my wife is a brown immigrant and I'll make racist jokes to her about her ethnicity, which she laughs at because she knows I'm not racist and I'm punching at racism itself, not her race. But if I post those same jokes in public, people will assume I'm racist because they don't have the context my wife does.
If she made the joke in the middle of a stream with context, you'd have a point. But she didn't, she made a standalone tweet, and even said "Please". That reads as pretty unambiguous consent.
My take on feets: I don't think about them in my fantasies or anything, but if they're there IRL, they represent a further opportunity to add to the other person's pleasure, so I'll have a go on them. But I don't get turned on by the act of licking soles in and of itself. I've never seen a pair of feet and thought "daaaaaaaaaaamn, those are some HOT feets!" no more than I've seen a garden fence and thought "burn down all other fences, 'cause THIS is the one!" Although, I'm sure I've seen plenty of feet that caused my neutrality to dip into disgust (like my own, for example). But beyond that, I don't think about them at all. They're just an extra button on my controller in the indecipherable non-localised Slavic RPG that is the female orgasm.
Never have my thoughts been written down so accurately as right now 🤝. I can understand many other fetishes. Feet I just really struggle to comprehend. Not that that matters, more power to the foot fetishers etc.
I watched End of Oak Street last night. Even though the characters learned that they are kinda trapped thier house, they all still kept their shoes and socks on. Found that interesting
105 Comments
DarrinBrunner@lemmy.world · 148 pts · 5d
Gotta love the footies. They're harmless and locked in. At the rabbit hole that is sexual fetishes, they just hang around the entrance... looking down.
I don't think about feet at all, until a story like this pops up.
cabbagepatchcrabs@retrolemmy.com · 53 pts · 5d
You perfectly summed up footies, normies love to bug them for the weirdness but honestly, pretty wholesome all told.
imadethis@fedinsfw.app · 19 pts · 5d
I think we must have had very different experiences in life. I think the only fetish I ever hear about in the news in a 'bad way' is feet.
In the past two or three decades, I want to say there have been at least one or two stories per year about some cop in the area letting people off of tickets if they'll let the officer lick their feet. We have incredibly large furry conventions, anime conventions, tattoo conventions, reptile owner conventions, and probably more that touch on various kinks and fetishes, but you never hear about any of those sexual shenanigans in the news... so feet fetish folks finding themselves featured on frontline feeds frequently from the news is quite the contrast.
kboos1@lemmy.world · 19 pts · 5d
Letting people off the hook in exchange for foot stuff an entirely different problem. I think the focus misplaced.
pticrix@lemmy.ca · 7 pts · 5d
Yeah, that's an ACAB problem more than a footsie problem. This is a mathematical function that always resolve to the same constant : let police(x) a function that describes an action (x) that is done by multiple officers over many iterations, and we can say that police(x)= bastardry
Waterpumpee@lemmus.org · 9 pts · 5d
What does a ticket cost? I'd let any1 lick my smelly feet for 20 bucks.
imadethis@fedinsfw.app · 7 pts · 5d
I haven't gotten a ticket in years, but I think the absolute cheapest tickets are over $100, speeding will be somewhere between $180-300 depending on how much over you were going, and the really big boys like repeated no insurance or passing school busses can climb to $500-1000.
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 4d
I had a speeding ticket I couldn't talk my way out of, what got dismissed because it was for 2 over the speed limit. Also dismissed tickets for not having insurance (apparently the card the insurance company sends you is not proof of insurance in Texas, at least according to this shitass I dealt with).
Even though the tickets were dismissed, I still had to pay court fees. Which were for twice what the tickets were.
Hence the saying, you can beat the charge but you can't beat the ride.
imadethis@fedinsfw.app · 2 pts · 4d
The fuck? How the hell is that not proof?
Also, as someone who has also had to pay court fees over bullshit, it's freaking ridiculous how our society lets that sort of thing happen.
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 4d
it was about 400 in fees and travel down there to fight it was 500 a day unless i slept in my car or knew someone.
jaybone@lemmy.zip · 9 pts · 5d
Where do you live where cops licking feet regularly makes the news??
imadethis@fedinsfw.app · 4 pts · 4d
Nice try, fbi!
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 4d
Dammit they're onto me. Time for a new account!
UnspecificGravity@piefed.social · 7 pts · 4d
Right, because its the mainstream acceptable stand-in for "weird fetishes" and it fits in the mainstream because its NOT scary.
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 4d
I think the story is more about the damn skeezy cop(s?) than their specific kinks tho
cabbagepatchcrabs@retrolemmy.com · 3 pts · 5d
That's uh...that's wild. I suppose it's true though, you dig deep enough into just about anything and depravity will surface one way or another.
Sc00ter@lemmy.zip · 3 pts · 4d
When i was in college, there were reports of people, who took their shoes off at the library while studying for midterms, putting their foot back in to find them filled with jizz.
It happened enough we got a campus wide email that said to not take your shoes off in public spaces lol
Crashumbc@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 3d
I mean taking your shoes off I can see, but leaving them unattended? Like no way I'm walking randomly around any public space even in just socks.
captainlezbian@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 5d
Oh yeah there are a ton of bdsm conventions, major cities will often have multiple a year. And there are issues and drama for certain, but we generally try to police our own and our problems tend towards being that well established members of the community who do a lot sometimes utilize the trust and respect they have to be predatory, especially to new people, just like every other community.
Foot fetishists' misbehavior is the stuff like you described, though they're really outshone in awfulness by body type fetishists, who do the same stuff and so much more
And tbh I think foot fetishists' big problem is their misbehavior comes from the shame and awkwardness they have about it. And i bet you can find similar stories with far more common body part fetishes like breasts and butts. Like, I'm a breast fetishist for sure and don't get the appeal of feet, but I know some folks who are all about feet and are totally respectful people and I know plenty of folks who can't act properly about tits.
Jesus_666@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 5d
Well, there was Rainfurrest, which was so bad that I know the name off the top of my head without even being in the furry scene. From what I've heard it was an outlier organized by people who'd been banned from other conventions so by no means typical.
But it's not like I've never heard of a furry convention going wrong.
Viceversa@lemmy.world · 9 pts · 5d
Not wholesome
Just not weird in a way interesting enough
CanadianCarl@sh.itjust.works · 0 pts · 4d
They are not all wholesome. There are bad actors.
Some Non-Consensual Examples:
https://youtube.com/watch?v=NI_2xKI8hk4
https://youtube.com/watch?v=YaU81ryR8kY
https://youtube.com/watch?v=FUuyoQqV9JE
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 4d
I mean, I'm comfortable considering the folk you're citing outliers. They may all be outlying the same creepy way, but they're not part of our distribution curve dammit
PhoenixDog@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 4d
Hey look everyone, someone found anecdotal evidence of something. Therefore that applies to literally everyone!
CanadianCarl@sh.itjust.works · 0 pts · 2d
They said everyone, I showed that it isn't everyone. I am sorry for your reading comprehension.
PattyMcB@lemmy.world · -8 pts · 5d
I don't yuk anyone's yum except for furries. That shit is weird
surewhynotlem@lemmy.world · 21 pts · 5d
On the one hand, I agree, furries don't make a lot of sense.
On the other hand, I'd totally fuck a dragon. Assuming we could figure out the logistics.
DarrinBrunner@lemmy.world · 12 pts · 5d
Donkey?
cypherix93@lemmy.world · 9 pts · 5d
You'll be figuring out the logistics all night.
yermaw@sh.itjust.works · 3 pts · 5d
Furries suddenly made a lot of sense to me when someone told me a lot of them are surgeons.
I think I'd find regular Humans pretty repulsive after cutting them open and watching them die and cutting out massive tumours and shit.
Viceversa@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 5d
Like animals are less repulsive after cut open
yermaw@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 4d
Yeah the vets that also operate on criminals are fuuuuucked
YiddishMcSquidish@lemmy.today · 1 pts · 5d
Yeah, but human and animal surgeons are two separate fields. I'd imagine most veterinary surgeons are not furries.
Dojan@pawb.social · 3 pts · 4d
I've never met a furry that's a surgeon. Most of us seem to be in IT and logistics.
Viceversa@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 5d
Yeah. Google RainFurrest 2015.
PattyMcB@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 5d
I don't think I want to
user224@lemmy.sdf.org · 2 pts · 5d
Wasn't that a convention mostly for those who were banned from other conventions?
MrNesser@lemmy.world · 11 pts · 5d
I have this image of elmur fudd waiting for bugs bunny just so he can look at his feet
AnUnusualRelic@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 5d
The secret is out.
stenAanden@feddit.dk · 5 pts · 5d
You're no defending foot fetishists in my comment section you are not
Skullgrid@lemmy.world · 8 pts · 5d
🏴
ToiletFlushShowerScream@piefed.world · 2 pts · 5d
I'm gonna love that metaphor forever
user224@lemmy.sdf.org · 2 pts · 5d
That sounds like description of a cave diver.
f314@lemmy.world · -1 pts · 5d
I mean, the word «fetish» itself is named after feet, so they’re literally the OG.Looks like I was misinformed about that!
cabbagepatchcrabs@retrolemmy.com · 6 pts · 5d
Going to acktually on you here but...
It began as:
"material object regarded with awe as having mysterious powers or being the representative of a deity that may be worshipped through it," 1610s, fatisso, from Portuguese feitiço "charm, sorcery, allurement," noun use of an adjective meaning "artificial."
which eventually morphed into:
Figurative sense of "something irrationally revered, object of blind devotion" appears to be an extension made by the New England Transcendentalists (1837). For sexual sense (1897), see fetishism.
Which...checks out in terms of our current understandings of the word. (But still is used as an object in magic in other circles). Which, if referring to a foot as an object of obsession...definitely "more" valid than saying "furry fetish" which is more of a "kink".
captainlezbian@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 5d
In the sexual sense a fetish is delineated from a kink in that with a fetish it's often considered necessary for attraction/sexual satisfaction to the haver. So strictly a person with a sadomasochism fetish can't get off without receiving or administering pain, whereas a person with a sadomasochism kink will sexually enjoy it, but can also get off from vanilla sex.
But they're often used interchangeably. Also within bdsm kinks can be nonsexual, with some folks not getting off on it, but still enjoying it.
RedStamp@piefed.social · 4 pts · 5d
I don't think that's correct. It seems like it originated from a magical context: something that puts a sexual "spell" on you
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_fetishism#History
WereCat@lemmy.world · 66 pts · 5d
Foot for thought
phar@lemmy.world · 37 pts · 5d
I do not understand humans
red_tomato@lemmy.world · 42 pts · 5d
Humans are horny
Assassassin@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 9 pts · 5d
And capable of being turned on by anything. Not much more to understand than that lol
Crashumbc@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 3d
Modern humans waste 99% of their lives trying to explain away the simple fact that humans are biologically designed to sleep, eat, and fuck(with hope that it leads to reproduction).
Biology gives no fucks about our feelings, respect, or anything else.
uber_chicken@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 5d
And they don't understand you
snoons@lemmy.ca · 3 pts · 5d
So say me all too as well
Zizzy@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 35 pts · 5d
Another poster said the commentor is talking about a youtuber named gabi belle, who afaik posts ZERO sexual content and even if she did that still wouldnt make her an object for your personal sexual satisfaction.
Blibly@lemmy.world · 33 pts · 5d
No you don't understand she's a woman showing her face therefore she's a sex object
Viceversa@lemmy.world · 12 pts · 5d
Anyone inherently is a sex object
ignotum@lemmy.world · 13 pts · 5d
I wish I was a sex object
Slovene85@sh.itjust.works · 6 pts · 5d
You're not just a sex object, you're a sex bomb!
ignotum@lemmy.world · 9 pts · 5d
Oooh so that's why I'm on the no-fly list
dream_weasel@sh.itjust.works · 4 pts · 5d
Nah. You wish you were.
YiddishMcSquidish@lemmy.today · 2 pts · 5d
You heard 'im Whittaker family. Back to the pile.
Blibly@lemmy.world · -1 pts · 5d
Only if they want to be
Schadrach@lemmy.sdf.org · 6 pts · 5d
The idea that anyone at all has any real power over how other people look at them beyond how they present themselves being suggestive of a particular lens is absurd.
Blibly@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 4d
You, and apparently some others, completely misread my comment...
gnutrino@programming.dev · 8 pts · 5d
In this case I don't think it's her face that they're interested in her showing...
agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works · 18 pts · 5d
The commenter said she posted that she wanted her score on the foot rating site to be higher, which seems like pretty clear consent to objectify her feet.
new_world_odor@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 5d
Having watched Gabi, it was almost certainly a pretty obvious joke. Not surprising she blurred them, people are disgusting.
dejected_warp_core@lemmy.world · 8 pts · 5d
Seconded. That kind of humor is 100% on-brand for her.
agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works · 8 pts · 5d
Eh, not sure "obvious joke" describes it.
blartcap_@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 4 pts · 4d
You gotta be socially inept to think there's no irony there.
agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 4d
Maybe there is, maybe there isn't. It's absolutely not obvious though.
sas41@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 2 pts · 4d
Hate how you're so upvoted because not only is your information third or fourth hand depending on perspective, you also outright believe it and knit your idea of consent around such weak thread.
She's joking, if anything this is a defeatist joke around the fact that she is nearly powerless when it cones to being objectified and sexualized without her consent, and the dark humor on display is very on brand. So the screenshotted comment, presumably a viewer of hers, should be familiar with her style of comedy and her struggles with being objectified and her likeness being misused.
So that comment is by someone who either does the exact thing to her that she doesn't want, or they are genuinely so porn pilled that they genuinely haven't ever picked up on what she's talking about and are only there to objectify and sexualize her.
I would not have bothered to comment unless I knew enough about her, her content and the thoughts she shared surrounding these things, I suggest we all adopt this approach in the future.
agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 4d
Uh, I posted her original tweet, literally first hand information.
You can argue that it's a joke, but when you literally go online and say "Please rate my feet higher", you can't be surprised when people take you at face value and do the thing you specifically asked for.
When you make a post in a public space, you can't expect everyone to know your lore. For example, my wife is a brown immigrant and I'll make racist jokes to her about her ethnicity, which she laughs at because she knows I'm not racist and I'm punching at racism itself, not her race. But if I post those same jokes in public, people will assume I'm racist because they don't have the context my wife does.
If she made the joke in the middle of a stream with context, you'd have a point. But she didn't, she made a standalone tweet, and even said "Please". That reads as pretty unambiguous consent.
SlurpingPus@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 4d
Zero sexual content with the name like ‘Gabi Belle’? I've jerked off already, no need for anything extra.
58008@lemmy.world · 25 pts · 4d
My take on feets: I don't think about them in my fantasies or anything, but if they're there IRL, they represent a further opportunity to add to the other person's pleasure, so I'll have a go on them. But I don't get turned on by the act of licking soles in and of itself. I've never seen a pair of feet and thought "daaaaaaaaaaamn, those are some HOT feets!" no more than I've seen a garden fence and thought "burn down all other fences, 'cause THIS is the one!" Although, I'm sure I've seen plenty of feet that caused my neutrality to dip into disgust (like my own, for example). But beyond that, I don't think about them at all. They're just an extra button on my controller in the indecipherable non-localised Slavic RPG that is the female orgasm.
BetterDev@programming.dev · 7 pts · 4d
You got my upvote
SkyezOpen@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 4d
b_n@sh.itjust.works · 6 pts · 4d
Never have my thoughts been written down so accurately as right now 🤝. I can understand many other fetishes. Feet I just really struggle to comprehend. Not that that matters, more power to the foot fetishers etc.
Apytele@sh.itjust.works · 2 pts · 3d
Yeah I've given a footjob before. It was neither exciting nor disgusting to me but the dude loved it so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
tyranny@crazypeople.online · 16 pts · 4d
as far as I'm concerned, foot fetishists are the bravest people on earth
bennypr0fane@discuss.tchncs.de · 13 pts · 5d
I... don't get it. Explain the joke?
YiddishMcSquidish@lemmy.today · 17 pts · 5d
I think the joke is that people are nuts. I mean, imagine blurring your feet when you already have a presence on wikifeet 🙄.
^/s
snoons@lemmy.ca · 4 pts · 5d
Yes, exactly.
Zozano@aussie.zone · 12 pts · 4d
Whenever I think of foot fetishists I think of the anime character Rin Tohsaka, because of her name.
"Watch your piggies, Rin Toe Sucker is coming!"
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 4d
I gotta steal part of that name for my next Gloomhaven character
Zozano@aussie.zone · 4 pts · 4d
Definitely the Rin part, right?
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 4d
balderdash9@lemmy.zip · 11 pts · 5d
Blibly@lemmy.world · 9 pts · 5d
Who is this person talking about?
TheTetrapod@lemmy.world · 13 pts · 5d
I just googled to figure it out. It was a YouTuber named Gabi Belle.
TowardsTheFuture@lemmy.zip · 6 pts · 5d
Oh I assumed this was about Jordan Myrick due to her recent smartypants presentation But then I saw the date is old.
Blibly@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 5d
Oh lol I love Gabi her vids are hilarious
Evotech@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 5d
The researcher
cypherix93@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 5d
Someone with feet.
lol_idk@piefed.social · -2 pts · 5d
Your mom
wowwoweowza@lemmy.world · 9 pts · 4d
So grateful not to be afflicted with this.
MidsizedSedan@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 4d
I watched End of Oak Street last night. Even though the characters learned that they are kinda trapped thier house, they all still kept their shoes and socks on. Found that interesting
Buddahriffic@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 4d
So you're saying it's a 1 star and you've unsubscribed?
FluidBeef@quokk.au · 4 pts · 5d
When’s his next movie anyway? Once Upon A Time… was pre-COVID.
Grimy@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 4d
Free the feet
DarkFuture@lemmy.world · -7 pts · 5d
I'm pretty tolerant when it comes to kinks (boy have I got some), but if you're a foot person you're a weirdo.
Railcar8095@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 5d
As long as you tolerate weirdos, seems consistent on my book
DarkFuture@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 4d
I totally tolerate weirdos.
RVGamer06@sh.itjust.works · 2 pts · 4d
Foot is pretty vanilla nowadays, the rabbit hole is way deeper than that