Fav. Gay Youtubers

>>6114769
Brutalmoose is pretty good

Also steaven crowder (he's a closet homosexual conservative poor guy)

File: i say.jpg (386KB, 1000x991px) Image search: [Google]

386KB, 1000x991px

The iDobbbley

File: 81WmAWjj_400x400.jpg (15KB, 364x364px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 364x364px

YMS is my fav homo movie reviewer

he's also a furfag but i forgive him

>>6117623
I never knew he was gay. Feel better about thinking he's cute now, thanks anon

>>6118255
I always enjoy "that's gay...and I suck dicks."

>>6118255
>he's also a furfag but i forgive him

He isn't just a furfag, he's also into beastiality which is kinda fucked up

>>6117623
>Crowder
>Happily heterosexually married Christian Cuckservative comfortable enough in his sexuality to make gay jokes at his expense

Your 'dar is way off.

This QT3.14 however...
https://m.youtube.com/user/integralmath?

>>6119583
I saw that cringey video too but he never said he's into it himself as far as I know

>>6119583
>>6119672
What video?

>>6119965
All you needed to do was type 'yms on bestiality' into google https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X1nnNz_Tewk

File: asdfiousfiaui.png (131KB, 305x281px) Image search: [Google]

131KB, 305x281px

>>6119970
Jesus. And he defended his views in the comments. I don't know if I can keep watching his videos knowing he thinks that not fucking animals is bigoted and ignorant. 'least he never puts it in his videos.

>>6119583
>Being a furfag degenerate definitely initiated the debate in my head over the ethics of bestiality, but am not a zoophile. I have no interest in sexing real animals. If I were an actual zoophile, I sure as fuck wouldn't be having these kind of debates with people. I'd be absolutely terrified of being outed. They get treated like shit. I take comfort in knowing I'm not one of them.

>>6119999
idk. He can't seem to get it through his head that there's more to it than just "having sex with animals is less cruel than killing them". Also the sheer autism in that comment section is fucking staggering

>>6120018

Well... here's the thing. Zoophiles probably aren't going to stop doing what they're doing. But if they're sexing animals, the animal either is indifferent or enjoying it. I'm pretty sure you can't bang an animal that really doesn't want to be banged. Unless you are restraining it or something in which case you deserve to be locked up. But some people actually are in love with their animals, and get down and dirty with them. It's fucked, but I don't think people should go to jail for it.
Any sort of "conversion therapy" is probably going to have about the same success rate as it does on gay people. So I say let people do what makes them happy, as long as no one's getting hurt, let them do what they want. And ultimately it doesn't effect you, right?

>>6118255
His let's plays are golden.

>>6120124
It's not morally wrong in the same sense that self-harming and doing any other disgusting thing with no victim are not morally wrong. His "it's less cruel than killing" argument is irrelevant because we're (arguably) not talking about morally relevant actions. It's more like incest without conception. Completely aside from the moral argument, it'll fuck you in the head. You're assuming that zoophiles are already automatically fucked in the head, which might be true to some extent but actually having sex with animals will make it much worse. It's horrifying on its own accord; and it's not just others finding it 'gross' like he suggests. Again, you can name a million things that are not morally wrong but really bad to do. Self-imposed social isolation, joining a cult and detaching yourself from reality, abusing drugs to the point of psychosis. You're gonna fuck yourself up. As for the "conversion therapy" thing, these people do have outlets they can go to for relief rather than actually doing the deed. By the same token, cannibalism isn't morally wrong if you never actually hurt anyone directly or indirectly (though that might be a tough scenario to imagine), but zoophilia is concretely bad in a very similar way.

>>6119621
>implying he isnt repressed