|
Atasnaya Vaflja posted:Don't they also search out and reblog things tagged in personal tags "just because?" They don't really do that so much on account of it being more worthwhile to reblog Otherkins whining about oppression. There are entire blogs dedicated to reblogging things tagged #do not reblog, you don't need Watchful Entity to do that for you. Not that reblogging things that people don't want to be reblogged is inherently wrong or anything. It's childish and rude but some people need to learn that you cannot expect privacy on a public social media site.
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2016 03:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 16:57 |
|
|
Aesop Poprock posted:The deaf thing is very understandable since I think deaf parents have a fear that their child won't have the same connection with them if they're born able to hear. Understandable, but still extremely selfish and short sighted. Especially when it goes to the opposite end of the spectrum and you get stuff like this, with parents basically designing it so their children are deaf Do these people think hearing people aren't capable of learning sign language? Because I've met quite a few hearing kids with deaf parents or siblings who grew up using both ASL and spoken English.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2016 03:24
|
|
|
Atasnaya Vaflja posted:Don't they also search out and reblog things tagged in personal tags "just because?" No, not W-E. They'll sometimes reblog things that have been taken down (or from blogs that are now offline), but everything they reblog was intended to be public-facing. There's entirely different blogs that specifically comb and reblog the 'do not reblog' tag.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2016 03:26
|
|
|
Atasnaya Vaflja posted:Literally no one is saying or has ever said that others shouldn't get help. The discussion is about eliminating it, which edges on the discussion of eugenics. Blindness and deafness ARE severe disabilities. They entail missing one of your entire senses. Just because they are severe disabilities doesn't mean that they make a person less worthy, but it is disingenuous to imply that they are not severe, debilitating conditions that should be avoided if possible.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2016 03:27
|
|
|
Atasnaya Vaflja posted:Literally no one is saying or has ever said that others shouldn't get help. The discussion is about eliminating it, which edges on the discussion of eugenics. Total blindness or deafness ARE severe. My point - and perhaps I didn't phrase it adequately for you - is that there are people who are against even TREATING autism, let alone preventing it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2016 03:36
|
|
|
Aesop Poprock posted:I appreciate your replies in this thread. However, this point can be pretty strained when it comes to the example I posted, with a couple specifically choosing a donor to best match their genes for deafness. I think that kind of thing is above and beyond unconscionable behavior. There is an argument for engineering genetics so that a child who would be deaf can be born to hear. There are no good arguments for the opposite of that. I understand where you're coming from. However, I truly think there is the argument that hearing people can't fully participate in Deaf culture; that hearing children lose access to important cultural context for their language, that they relate better to the hearing world than to their families. Some people find that persuasive and some people don't, but it is a cogent argument. I really think the analogy of Christian evangelism is an apt one; lots of converts did incorporate Christianity into their traditional belief structures but they no longer had access to their pre-contact cultures. I can hear so I don't know what it's like to be Deaf (and I understand that to a certain extent Deaf people are speaking from a position of ignorance since they don't know what it's like to be hearing), but I do know that there are enough Deaf people who feel strongly enough about this issue that it should be considered. If Deaf people feel that their lives are complete and happy without hearing, it seems a bit strange for those of us who can hear to tell them that they don't understand how unhappy they actually are. FreudianSlippers posted:As a cripple I can say that being a cripple is pretty bad and capital D Deaf people are a bunch of assholes who should be forcibly given hearing if possible. I'm sorry your experiences have been so difficult. I have a chronic illness for which a gene therapy is currently in development, and I spend a lot of time grappling with these issues from a personal as well as professional perspective. I sure as hell hate being sick, and I'm no great fan of the treatments that are currently available to me. However, I think it would be a mistake for me to say that my experiences with genetic illness mean that I get to speak for how all people with disabilities should feel or should be treated. Dienes posted:There's nothing worse than someone who is a high-functioning autistic---or a self-diagnosed autistic---bitching about how treating autism is the worst thing in the world and we need to accept them for who they are. Meanwhile, I go to work with children with autism that are gouging out their eyes and biting people. There's something so selfish about thinking since you are successful despite your disability (often because you received treatment for it) that others shouldn't get help. I definitely understand all the excellent points that have been made about the spectrum that many of these differences take. It's something I talk with my patients about frequently when they're deciding whether or not to have prenatal genetic screening - we don't ever know how severe a genetic or chromosomal difference might be in its expression, and while there are lots of high-functioning, happy individuals with, say, Trisomy 21, there are also lots with really significant intellectual impairments and serious physical disabilities, who have many surgeries and seriously shortened lifespans. That's one of the reasons why this is such a difficult conversation - it's as wrong to say "everyone with autism is fine" as "nobody with autism is fine." The question of where to draw the line that separates normal from pathological is really difficult to grapple with, and so should it be. I want to emphasize that I really don't think there's a right answer to how to deal with the question of disabilities in society. I think that these are complex issues that deserve careful consideration from all perspectives, and I think we're all pretty lucky that we live in a time where there are so many options and so many really excellent minds working on the practical as well as the ethical questions of how we move forward as a culture and as a species.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2016 03:41
|
|
|
Oh Hell No posted:Do these people think hearing people aren't capable of learning sign language? Because I've met quite a few hearing kids with deaf parents or siblings who grew up using both ASL and spoken English. So there's this Thing where the big deaf college was mad that their president wasn't born deaf. They were "not deaf enough" because they weren't born deaf to deaf parents and with a deaf spouse and deaf children. This president had a hearing spouse and hearing children and a deaf mother but was raised to speak orally and only learned sign language later. So it doesn't matter if they can learn sign language.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2016 03:59
|
|
|
Dogfish posted:I understand where you're coming from. However, I truly think there is the argument that hearing people can't fully participate in Deaf culture; that hearing children lose access to important cultural context for their language, that they relate better to the hearing world than to their families. Some people find that persuasive and some people don't, but it is a cogent argument. I really think the analogy of Christian evangelism is an apt one; lots of converts did incorporate Christianity into their traditional belief structures but they no longer had access to their pre-contact cultures. I can hear so I don't know what it's like to be Deaf (and I understand that to a certain extent Deaf people are speaking from a position of ignorance since they don't know what it's like to be hearing), but I do know that there are enough Deaf people who feel strongly enough about this issue that it should be considered. If Deaf people feel that their lives are complete and happy without hearing, it seems a bit strange for those of us who can hear to tell them that they don't understand how unhappy they actually are. You didn't address what I mentioned, though. Do you see the difference between parents making it so their child, who would probably be born deaf, could born with their hearing capability intact as opposed to a deaf couple making it so their possibly non-deaf child could be deaf? Do you see the difference between granting a child an actual sense that human beings are innately supposed to be born with as opposed to a cultural religious identity? Or how having a sense of touch is different than being homosexual? A sensation is different than a person's self. Entirely different. Cultures can be built around a lack of sensation, or how one perceives a sensation. But one can't choose to have, convert, or choose to be a part of a sensation currently unless they choose NOT to have that sensation by mutilating themselves. It's a very, very poor comparison. Aesop Poprock has a new favorite as of 04:16 on Feb 15, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2016 04:14
|
|
|
Aesop Poprock posted:You didn't address what I mentioned, though. Do you see the difference between parents making it so their child, who would probably be born deaf, to want to be born with their hearing capability intact as opposed to a deaf couple making it so their possibly non-deaf child to be deaf? Do you see the difference between granting a child an actual sense that human beings are innately supposed to be born with as opposed to a cultural religious identity? Or how having a sense of touch is different than being homosexual? A sensation is different than a person's self. Entirely different. Cultures can be built around a lack of sensation, or how one perceives a sensation. But one can't choose to have, convert, or choose to be a part of a sensation currently unless they choose NOT to have that sensation by mutilating themselves. It's a very, very poor comparison. No, I understand the point that you're making and I see the argument that there's a difference between missing a sense and missing a culture. But for much of the history of the West, atheists were considered incomplete and missing an essential human sense, too. In our current context that doesn't resonate the way a lack of physical wholeness does, but that wasn't always the case. I'm not arguing that Deaf people are just as whole as hearing people - Deaf people are. I don't have enough information to say if they're right or not; the only argument I'm making is that I don't think it's correct to say there's no argument for Deaf culture. We might conclude that their arguments are wrong, but they're cogent and they're there. I grew up in a culture where people deliberately do, by the standards of many, "mutilate" their children for the sake of cultural and spiritual wholeness (I am Jewish), so maybe that's one of the reasons it seems understandable to me. Circumcision is definitely not in the same order of magnitude as deafness, but the arguments in its defence are structurally basically identical. I honestly don't know if I think Deaf parents who choose to have deaf children are harming their kids or not; it's not one of my areas of research and I'm not well enough versed in the nuances of the problem to have an opinion. But I do recognize that the arguments for and the arguments against are both internally complete. The question of which is correct depends on your epistemological standpoint, and I'm definitely not in the business of picking those for other people.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2016 04:22
|
|
|
Legalizing prostitution would be the end of female empowerment Summary: Women tend to not see long term. Getting what they say they want will actually put them back where we want them. For reasons we won't discuss here I know a LOT about the underside of the world of prostitution. I know that many sex workers lobby long and hard (that's s sex joke) to get sex work decriminalized or even legalized. Despite enjoying the privilege of making $300/hr with no education and paying no taxes, they still feel victimized by the system imposing the law. So they want the law changed, and sex work legalized so they (think they) can make $300/ hr with no police harassment. Full disclosure: I believe what consenting adults do that has no victims should be legal, prostitution included. What these well meaning SJW's don't realize is that their entire business model will fold when it is legalized. First off, partnering with the gub'mint just means they take all the profit you used to enjoy. Ask the people who grow pot in Colorado, Washington and now Oregon. Same business only now the gub'mint taxes all the profit for themselves. So that $300/ hr is now $200, or $60 if the taxes are similar to what WA imposed. But wait... There's more! Mandatory education will be required, much like massage therapists. Heck, you can't even get a license to cut hair without memorizing every muscle in the head and getting a cosmetology degree. Barriers to entry mean a sex worker will have to choose between going back underground or paying the up front costs in time, money, and brainpower to get your sexwork degree. But wait, there is more. We are just getting going. Once the social stigma is removed, every slut will decide they want to be a whore. (the difference is taking money to gently caress). The market will be flooded with fresh talent. Guys like fresh talent. Meaning the supply of sex workers will begin to catch up to demand, creating competition, which will drive down price. And unlike any other profession, experience will work against you as guys constantly seek fresh talent. The longer you ho, the less you make. Seeking to consolidate power through legislation, Sex Workers will unionize in no time, meaning union dues will eat up more of your money, and (as these things go) the regulations will be onerous. This will also create a drain on other employment realms, as women who used to compete with men to be office workers now compete exclusively with other women to lie on their back and enjoy their pussy privilege. Of course once cheap, easy sex with <21 year olds is ubiquitous, men will have lost the last reason to consider marriage. When sex with a hotty is as easy to get as an Uber ride there will be no need to lock down a wife, and when no-fault divorce rapes mean you don't keep your kids or your money in any case men will have no use whatsoever for marriage. The rise of good sex robots will accelerate this process. Suddenly women will be competing for men again instead of the other way around. Women will suck dick like Dysons suck dust to keep a mans attention, and the ubiquity of cheap of sex workers will be a constant dread game, imposed by their own kind. Hamstering sex workers will try to go underground again, angrily recalling the days when they were only worried about misdemeanor prostitution charges. Now the legal, unionized sex workers will turn cannibal and go after the underground competition with felony tax evasion and money laundering charges. Men will be getting their dicks sucked by either A) cheap, hot, pros, or B) really, really motivated women who would prefer to drain resources from one guy instead of any guy. It's all sex for money. All women are whores. The question is, do you pay up front, as agreed, or later, when she stabs you in the back? Marriage will be history. Lessons learned: Legalized sex work is the best thing to happen to RP men (and the natural order) since sexual dimorphism. We should endeavor to help them, but never explain why we are doing so.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2016 04:26
|
|
|
And that's fine, but you're choosing to be almost entirely culturally relativist to whatever any culture deems correct, which I would disagree with. I would more closely compare choosing to have a deaf child to female genital mutilation than male, in which case I would say I'm 100% against it, and it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me not to be from any angle whatsoever except for believing the parent is always in the right.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2016 04:27
|
|
|
Aesop Poprock posted:And that's fine, but you're choosing to be almost entirely culturally relativist to whatever any culture deems correct, which I would disagree with. I would more closely compare choosing to have a deaf child to female genital mutilation than male, in which case I would say I'm 100% against it, and it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me not to be from any angle whatsoever except for believing the parent is always in the right. I think there's a difference between cultural relativism ("Whatever the culture thinks is appropriate is correct") and not taking a position ("I understand the basics of the arguments on both sides and haven't evaluated them because I need more information to do an adequate job") but I understand why you might feel that way. I do have a position on some of the topics that fall under the umbrella of eugenics, because I've spent a good deal of time reading, thinking, and speaking about them. D/deafness isn't one of them. I don't really feel like this is the world's most appropriate place to go into my personal or professional opinions on the aspects of modern eugenics I do have thoughts on; I hope it's been clear that all I'm trying to get across here is that I think this is a really difficult and complex problem. Edit: I'm going to bed now because my spouse has been very patient with me discussing eugenics on the internet on and off all Valentine's Day, but there's only so far I'm willing to push it. Thank you and everyone else for your perspectives and for making such excellent points in this surprisingly long-lived and polite derail. Dogfish has a new favorite as of 04:38 on Feb 15, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2016 04:32
|
|
|
Dogfish posted:I think there's a difference between cultural relativism ("Whatever the culture thinks is appropriate is correct") and not taking a position ("I understand the basics of the arguments on both sides and haven't evaluated them because I need more information to do an adequate job") but I understand why you might feel that way. you went to the wrong countries. brazil and caribbean (colombian whores all over the carib.) and germany. go to the high end clubs that the local guys go to, not the loving streetwalkers, yeesh. it's legal so anyone with money can get in. the chicks are legitimately hot -- but they're whores, they wear makeup and have fake tits a lot of the time. they're about as hot as high end strippers are in the US, which is to say... pretty hot, but at the end of the day they're just chicks wearing makeup and high heels. the difference is they'll take the dick like it's their loving job, because it is. portugal probably sucks because any hot bitch in the eurozone can make more money in germany. germany looks like loving tomorrowland compared to southern european countries, it's like comparing chicago to mississippi. i've never been to portugal but even rome was kind of a shithole with half-built abandoned poo poo everywhere, basically like a developing country. thailand probably sucks for a lot of reasons i don't even need to mention. UAE probably sucks because yeah, those rich dudes basically just buy bitches and have them hang around the house all day naked. a blonde dime piece is never on the market, she just gets recruited from wherever she's from and flown straight to the mansion for the purposes of getting her rear end and pussy blown out. you can't compete with that unless you're one of those dudes. ultra redpill mindfuck mode: how many super hot bitches do you see out in LA, NY, do you think have done this? ... oh man, haha, it's a mind gently caress alright. ANY hot bitch was potentially in some rich arab guy's personal harem for a few weeks, getting pissed on and sucking dick every day. here in LA i see bitches that are rich for no loving reason -- except one reason. they're driving around in brand new high end german poo poo because they suck a good dick. i refuse to believe these 19-25 year old bitches make that kind of money themselves. they have no other value other than being a hot bitch, certainly not in the business world -- spreadsheets, or spread legs? easy choice. anyway, i digress... i don't do sex tourism but if i'm traveling for whatever reason (business or pleasure), i bang a hooker if it's legal, because why the gently caress not, i'm single for a god drat reason. makes the trip more interesting and i get my rocks off in a nice environment (most of the clubs are like strip clubs with a mini motel in the back, and they serve booze and snacks). it's the same poo poo all over the world - walk in, pay a cover fee, put on a fresh robe and slippers, get a loving number card to buy drinks with, eat some peanuts, and bang a whore or two. wear a condom. chicks are chicks whether they're whores or not and some will try to get you to bang them without a rubber for the same drat reasons, especially if they know you have money, which you probably do, because you just paid $200 to walk in the door to bang some hot sluts. happy valentine's day.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2016 04:33
|
|
|
Dogfish posted:I think there's a difference between cultural relativism ("Whatever the culture thinks is appropriate is correct") and not taking a position ("I understand the basics of the arguments on both sides and haven't evaluated them because I need more information to do an adequate job") but I understand why you might feel that way. Fair enough. I can't claim a common sense victory or anything cause that's a bullshit way to end a talk, but I do feel that some debates should be relatively obvious in what is hosed up and what isn't. And LoB is cutting into our cuddle time here so let's just give him the floor
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2016 04:36
|
|
|
Lottery of Babylon posted:Legalizing prostitution would be the end of female empowerment Does this guy realise that there are already places where prostitution is legal (and none of the things he predicts have happened)?
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2016 04:36
|
|
|
Aesop Poprock posted:Fair enough. I can't claim a common sense victory or anything cause that's a bullshit way to end a talk, but I do feel that some debates should be relatively obvious in what is hosed up and what isn't. And LoB is cutting into our cuddle time here so let's just give him the floor Haha you posted while I was editing my other post. Goodnight! Happy Valentine's Day. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2016 04:38
|
|
|
It would be pretty awkward to have to explain to your kid that you chose for them to have a disability.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2016 04:38
|
|
|
Tiggum posted:Does this guy realise that there are already places where prostitution is legal (and none of the things he predicts have happened)? These are excellent points and deserve further investigation. I've only ever been to England, and that was only a couple weeks, and my fiance (later divorce raper) and I were not visiting brothels. How long has it been legal there? I ask because I think it takes a generation or two for social mores to really shift. If it's been legal for more than 30 or 40 years then I'd say you are correct, but if it's a relatively recent change, I'd suggest the information may still be incomplete. These kids today and their naked selfies, sheesh. Wish we had that when I was that age. Aesop Poprock posted:Fair enough. I can't claim a common sense victory or anything cause that's a bullshit way to end a talk, but I do feel that some debates should be relatively obvious in what is hosed up and what isn't. And LoB is cutting into our cuddle time here so let's just give him the floor The sort of gentlemen who I associated when I was associated with the trade were not desperate in any sense of the word. I could blackmail these guys for millions- and they can afford it. They can also afford to have me killed, and have the connections to cover it up. These men do not lack for anything. They call it a hobby. A new, gorgeous woman, on demand. Sure, for the desperate it might be the only option, but James Lipton is just a bitter loser who couldn't afford to bang hot hookers. Men will always want to be WANTED by women, but so too, men will always wish they had bigger dicks, were taller, had better hair, could fly, had X-ray vision, and be bulletproof. Wanting it doesn't make it real. "Men love women. Women love children. Children love hamsters. There is no reciprocity."-Alice Thomas Ellis You are going to pay for sex, or you are not going to have any. The only question is are you going to pay up front, as agreed, or later, when she stabs you in the back? Kay Kessler posted:It would be pretty awkward to have to explain to your kid that you chose for them to have a disability. Well, the entire piece is intended as a starting point for a conversation, and I am gratified that it has sparked a robust discussion. Often, social stigma follows legal standards. For folks with no opinion on an issue, defaulting to 'whatever is legal' works most of the time. Most folks (for instance) don't smoke pot, but I can tell you, once billboards advertising it started springing up all over Seattle, the social stigma evaporated like...ummm...errr. hang on. Lemme think of a good analogy. I'm pretty baked, I just had a Sunday morning smoke. SMOKE! That's it. Evaporated like smoke. So my thought while penning the piece was that social mores would change with legalization. Hearing from other countries, where it is legal has been highly illustrative. While I am happy to amend my thoughts to include ways to address the social stigma issue, I would still maintain that legalization would be an essential component of the process for all the folks who default to 'whatever is legal'. But I agree with the assertion that social mores will have to change as well to see the change I hope to see, and (as other writers have pointed out) it is largely the women keeping it in the shadows as they protect their monopoly on pussy. Can we start a "I <3 sex workers" campaign?
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2016 04:44
|
|
|
Lottery of Babylon posted:Legalizing prostitution would be the end of female empowerment 'The rise of good sex robots' sounds like a not too distant future Transformers sequel. It's funny how guys like this always mention going to prostitutes themselves, but talk about sex workers in the most degrading terms, and act like the normalization of sex work will be the end of decent society. You know, because the morality is entirely on the prostitute. The johns just couldn't help themselves.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2016 05:28
|
|
|
Tiggum posted:Does this guy realise that there are already places where prostitution is legal (and none of the things he predicts have happened)? Like 95% of Nevada?
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2016 05:37
|
|
|
Practical Demon posted:'The rise of good sex robots' sounds like a not too distant future Transformers sequel. It's the same type of guy who asserts that prostitutes can't charge anyone with rape because sex is what they do for a living. Also the same type that believe that if you've paid a prostitute, you can literally do anything you want to her.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2016 17:19
|
|
|
Also what about male prostitutes.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2016 17:36
|
|
|
Seriously, do these guys really not realize that women also enjoy sex? Just because they don't like a guy to blow his load in two seconds, or like whatever degrading poo poo these guys may be into doesn't mean women don't love them some sex. 'Cause we do.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2016 18:04
|
|
|
I wish I had a gothic lolita version of one of the many Blue Story 'seek therapy' gifs. 
uranium grass has a new favorite as of 18:41 on Feb 15, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2016 18:08
|
|
|
DicktheCat posted:Seriously, do these guys really not realize that women also enjoy sex? Just because they don't like a guy to blow his load in two seconds, or like whatever degrading poo poo these guys may be into doesn't mean women don't love them some sex. 'Cause we do. Um HELLO, he acknowledged the existence of sluts!
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2016 18:17
|
|
|
DicktheCat posted:Seriously, do these guys really not realize that women also enjoy sex? Just because they don't like a guy to blow his load in two seconds You already lost me. Isn't that just sex?
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2016 18:26
|
|
|
scorpiobean posted:This might be closer than you think. CRISPR/Cas9 I know this is from a couple pages back but the conclusions of that article are extremely limited and mitigated. It just didn't really work all that well. We can CRISPR like mofos in cell lines and mice but so far that's it. It's a super powerful system but not quite there yet for what they attempted afaik. Also if you don't get why modifying human embryos is a whole  and thus ethically questionable, I don't know what to tell you. There is a reason this paper was published in a minor journal, Nature and Cell did not want to touch it with a ten foot pole because they did not caution the ethics at all. Now LoB please proceed saving this thread.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2016 18:36
|
|
|
Public page, regarding Scalia's death
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2016 19:22
|
|
|
quote:Dear friends, Followed by her leaving a comment on her own post: quote:please unfriend me & delete my number if you can't tell the difference between not caring & intentionally being a dick.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2016 20:20
|
|
|
goose fleet posted:Followed by her leaving a comment on her own post: "Because I sure am doing that second one and I don't want people to get confused!"
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2016 20:25
|
|
|
goose fleet posted:Followed by her leaving a comment on her own post: "I don't care. Here is a book sized post detailing how much I don't care." are my favorite total-lack-of-self-awareness Facebook posts Also yeah its super fun to see that your friends are watching a movie or eating
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2016 20:33
|
|
|
One of her former profile pictures had the pride rainbow overlaid on it
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2016 20:36
|
|
|
subpar anachronism posted:I wish I had a gothic lolita version of one of the many Blue Story 'seek therapy' gifs. Sounds like that kid likes the white part of Asian salad just fine.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2016 20:47
|
|
|
goose fleet posted:Followed by her leaving a comment on her own post: "I'm a selfish jerk, and am the definition of 'normal,' Get in line or shut the gently caress up." What a nice person.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2016 20:50
|
|
|
DicktheCat posted:Seriously, do these guys really not realize that women also enjoy sex? Just because they don't like a guy to blow his load in two seconds, or like whatever degrading poo poo these guys may be into doesn't mean women don't love them some sex. 'Cause we do.  (From Tumblr)
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2016 20:54
|
|
|
cptn_dr posted:
I've cleaned the crap off of womens systems before, and  there is usually alot of hosed up porn poo poo on them.Kind of like womens restrooms are usually worse than mens.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2016 20:57
|
|
|
 Maybe I should just buy him an account
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2016 21:06
|
|
|
goose fleet posted:Followed by her leaving a comment on her own post: The unfollow option on Facebook is one of the best things ever and I don't understand why people don't use it more often. Also lol at the whole "I want my friends to post only things I want to read" rant.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2016 21:07
|
|
|
My sister: 1) What the hell is she talking about? 2) "rediculouse"
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2016 21:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 16:57 |
|
|
I seriously didn't know people still posted on MySpace, I assumed it was mostly band stuff now
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2016 22:18
|
|