-182
Wouldnt it be better if anorexia only existed in 3rd world countries?? amirite?
by Anonymous12 years ago
Why would that be better?
by Anonymous13 years ago
Because they don't have food, so it'd be better if they didn't want the food anyway. It's better than them wanting the food but not having it.
by Anonymous12 years ago
because there's more hunger there, so if they had anorexia, they wouldn't need as much food.
by Anonymous13 years ago
Wouldn't you hope that it didn't exist at all, in any countries? I wouldn't wish such a terrible thing on other people...amirite?
by Anonymous13 years ago
your fuckin dumb for that
by Anonymous13 years ago
fuk ur fuckin dumb mak me puk
by Anonymous12 years ago
carter, your grammar is beautiful.
by Anonymous12 years ago
Meh. You're both on an equal playing field for grammatical errors.
by Anonymous12 years ago
No..
by Anonymous12 years ago
Yes. Given the two options:
1. Anorexia is in every part of the world (as it is now)
2. Anorexia is only in the third world.
Given the choice, option 2 must be the right choice. The poster is right.
by Anonymous12 years ago
Hollywood doesn't exist in third-world countries, though...
by Anonymous 13 years ago
by Anonymous 12 years ago
by Anonymous 13 years ago
by Anonymous 13 years ago
by Anonymous 13 years ago
by Anonymous 12 years ago
by Anonymous 12 years ago
by Anonymous 12 years ago
by Anonymous 12 years ago
by Anonymous 12 years ago
by Anonymous 12 years ago