|
Straight people have anonymous, self destructive sex as well--and who's telling me that I shouldn't love my partner if he's fat? Straight people, straight society. Who's telling me that I shouldn't love his soul, only his body? Straight society. Who's responsible for the legal situation that makes it impossible to marry an English person and get a spousal visa unless they make more than eighteen thousand pounds a year? Unless there's something I don't know about David Cameron, that was straight people as well.
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 22:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 23:42 |
|
|
Cameron is porcusexual.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 22:09
|
|
|
Also he might not be a human. Also it's really hard to tell with rich public school boys as that system is basically designed to do awful things to your concept of human relationships and sexuality.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 22:12
|
|
|
my dad posted:Cameron is porcusexual. porkysexual
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 23:03
|
|
|
Senju Kannon posted:porkysexual Come on guys, let's not be hamophobic.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 23:05
|
|
|
Tuxedo Catfish posted:Come on guys, let's not be hamophobic. Nicely done.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 23:13
|
|
|
He was definitely a charcuterie risk.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 23:13
|
|
|
pidan posted:Now I don't really know any gay people personally (except one of my close friends is getting married to another woman, but that's not really typical for her), so I can't really judge if this is really a common thing, or if I've been bamboozled by the media. And it's not really any of my business, so I don't make judging gay people a big part of my identity. But I guess I wouldn't embrace every aspect of that lifestyle, if that makes sense? the part in bold there should have told you that speculating about what we supposedly do was a poor decision. look, i'm going to be blunt: what you wrote was a hash of pretty offensive right-wing stereotypes that some easy google searches could have dispelled, and if you're going to speak about the culture of a vilified minority, you have a special obligation to get the facts straight. here are some things that the google searches would probably not tell you: -bath houses did exist, but most were closed down for public health reasons. they were also major centers for education and outreach about altering people's sex habits. a lot more people would have died without the educational materials and condoms distributed in the bath houses -sex clubs exist in most major cities in the united states. nearly all of them are heterosexual, and they tend to have elaborate membership protocols designed to discourage gay men or lesbians from joining -the gay culture that generated most of the stereotypes in the right-wing press is essentially dead. the AIDS crisis basically wiped out an entire generation of gay men, and those who survived tended to be the more straight-laced "settle down with a husband and a dog" types. lest anyone think they made better moral choices, this group also tends to vote Republican in large numbers. give me the socialist sex fiends any day of the week -there are some of us who do live a gay lifestyle, in that we're sufficiently steeped in gay history and gay modes of cultural engagement that it colors everything we do. even my mode of engaging with my Catholicism is a fundamentally gay one, but i'm lucky that there's long been a space in my faith for this kind of engagement. in that sense my religion and my gayness are not separable from one another
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 05:36
|
|
|
While I do feel some resentment for being essentially shamed into tolerance, now that I'm here, I'm pro-marriage and pro-adoption. The people who are against them are worse. Also, the new(?) "gender is a spectrum" thing doesn't sound too revolutionary. If we used to say that things are more or less manly, it seems like it's pretty much the same thing now. If you were matcho man Feelings? Never Heard of Them, you're still matcho man 100% Man. Of course, things might be different once you put on a fedora and a MAGA hat (at the same time). Plus, straight people can and are disgusting, too. Proof: 4chan, efukt. Dogging exists, gloryholes exist, and so does sex tourism. Monogamous gays FTW, they'll never be that grossly smug about being in a monogamous relationship as people are about their fetishes like they have discovered The True Way To Having Sex. I have my fetishes (tanks? Mi-24s?), but I don't think they're a ground breaking discovery in the art of sexhaving. And since we're on fetishes, let me put some more foot into mouth. My country is very naturally white. So while you might have induced racism (last week, I saw a black guy with one of those 80s/90s my hair is a pillar haircuts doing a shoot with a white girl, and some downtown blue collars were loudly complaining that he's going after ARE GIRLS), you don't have any local groups to aim that at (unless you're nationalist). Except for the romani, who have been traditionally marginalized, with horse thieves being the traditional stereotype and opium pushers being the more modern one. So while I might feel uneasy once I see some ladies around me (somehow it's never men) and some people went really racist on a murder case recently (some well-off romani imitated an accident to stop a girl in an expensive car, killed her, dropped off her body, dropped of the car, ???, profit), it's not like we don't have a white crime problem. Poverty is a hell of a drug, and all those alcoholic-face white bluecollars and the tracksuit wearing youths are more scary and dangerous. Hell, I've only ever been robbed and beaten up by white Lithuanians, so I don't harbor illusions about black people being mysteriously more crime prone. It's just easier to otherise them since they look different than us even if they occupy the same niche as white tracksuited thugs. Self incrimination aside, marrying women isn't typical to me either, since I haven't done it once yet 
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 05:45
|
|
|
Bel_Canto posted:those who survived tended to be the more straight-laced "settle down with a husband and a dog" types. lest anyone think they made better moral choices, this group also tends to vote Republican in large numbers  is it trying them to fit in and be less-gay? Like, "look, I'm married, I have a dog and I don't even vote Democrat, unlike the bad gays?"
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 05:47
|
|
|
JcDent posted:
more like "gently caress you, got mine" mixed in with politics of respectability yeah david duke is more welcome among republicans than the log cabin crowd, but they hate poor people more than they like self respect. or it might be a self loathing thing, like trans woman who hang around terf spaces
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 06:00
|
|
|
Bel_Canto posted:-the gay culture that generated most of the stereotypes in the right-wing press is essentially dead. the AIDS crisis basically wiped out an entire generation of gay men, and those who survived tended to be the more straight-laced "settle down with a husband and a dog" types. lest anyone think they made better moral choices, this group also tends to vote Republican in large numbers. give me the socialist sex fiends any day of the week obligatory "also an entire generation of trans women" since trans women were often recorded in AIDS research as men who have sex with men until very recently and for a good look at how much AIDS led to gay culture being redefined, look no further than bears; at first, the bear subculture was all about being MASCULINE and going against the stereotype of gay men as effeminate sissies, and post AIDS bears are now some of the most femme gay dudes around (aside from all the hair, obvs). these days the burden of being "not like all those sissyfags" goes to the jock and the "straight seeming" types who all seem to also put "no fats, no femmes, no blacks, no latinos, no asians" on their profiles
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 06:03
|
|
|
Senju Kannon posted:obligatory "also an entire generation of trans women" since trans women were often recorded in AIDS research as men who have sex with men until very recently Did the original bears literally die out or what?
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 06:20
|
|
|
for the most part, yeah. it's really difficult to explain just how much damage AIDS did to our community. i mean, look at this picture; this is the san francisco gay men's chorus. in this picture, everyone in black represents someone who died of AIDS, while the men in white are the surviving members of the choir from 1978.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 06:46
|
|
|
JcDent posted:Plus, straight people can and are disgusting, too. Proof: 4chan, efukt. Dogging exists, gloryholes exist, and so does sex tourism. Monogamous gays FTW, they'll never be that grossly smug about being in a monogamous relationship as people are about their fetishes like they have discovered The True Way To Having Sex. I have my fetishes (tanks? Mi-24s?), but I don't think they're a ground breaking discovery in the art of sexhaving. If fetishes don't matter, why do you call them disgusting  Dogging is literally people having sex the way nature intended: without clothes on, outside, it hardly gets less disgusting than that, unless you have serious some issues with sex in general.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 10:45
|
|
|
You mean in the carpark, with random strangers, and mostly clothed?
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 11:26
|
|
|
JcDent posted:You mean in the carpark, with random strangers, and mostly clothed? The only consensus on dogging most people agree on, at least in Europe, is that it takes place outside on predertermined places, so others can watch. And even if it was in a carpark with complete strangers, it's not "disgusting" and you really need help if you think so.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 12:04
|
|
|
Mmm, there's no controversy quite like like sexual morality controversy.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 12:22
|
|
|
Tias posted:The only consensus on dogging most people agree on, at least in Europe, is that it takes place outside on predertermined places, so others can watch. why are you like this
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 12:23
|
|
|
JcDent posted:Also, the new(?) "gender is a spectrum" thing doesn't sound too revolutionary. edit: not exactly, they believed gender was a strict binary (or trinary, depending on how many castrated men you came across in your daily life, which means mostly italians and other catholics) but sex was a spectrum HEY GUNS fucked around with this message at 12:35 on Jun 17, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 12:32
|
|
|
quote:Knaben liebt ich wohl auch, doch lieber sind mir die Mädchen;
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 14:33
|
|
|
Senju Kannon posted:why are you like this Because I don't think people deserve to be called disgusting because they feel urges outside the missionary position.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 14:33
|
|
|
Put another way: in the majority of the world, people are not allowed to publicly and legally commit themselves to a monogamous relationship relationship simply because the two people who wish to make such a commitment have matching plumbing. Ten years ago, the number of places in the world where this was possible was dramatically less. And there are places in the world where such a desire is legally grounds for execution. If you want to understand why the LGBT community has a history of acting furtively, hiding who they are, and not engaging with conservative and right-wing society and ideals of behavior, you could have a worse starting point than remembering that for much of premodern and modern history throughout the world the desires they were born with were grounds for ostracism, abuse, and all too often imprisonment and/or execution. I don't blame anyone in the LGBT community who looks on traditional (i.e. Abrahamic, can't speak for Eastern religions on this issue) religion and standards of behavior with a wary and untrusting eye.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 14:34
|
|
|
Tias posted:Because I don't think people deserve to be called disgusting because they feel urges outside the missionary position. there's a line between "only in missionary" and "have sex in public places where children can be"
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 14:37
|
|
|
hell, sameCythereal posted:Put another way: in the majority of the world, people are not allowed to publicly and legally commit themselves to a monogamous relationship relationship simply because the two people who wish to make such a commitment have matching plumbing.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 14:42
|
|
|
HEY GAIL posted:it's worse than that, gay trans people are also discriminated against--i think it's denmark where if you're gay and trans they don't let you get surgery and hormones Fair enough, I only know one transgender individual (that I know about, at any rate) and feel I'm not familiar enough with that particular community's history and issues to comment on it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 14:52
|
|
|
Tias posted:The only consensus on dogging most people agree on, at least in Europe, is that it takes place outside on predertermined places, so others can watch. Can we not conflate aesthetic reactions with the moral status of an act, or jump to quick conclusions about the mental health of observers?
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 15:42
|
|
|
Tias posted:Because I don't think people deserve to be called disgusting because they feel urges outside the missionary position. Oh, yes, because I said only sex in missionary position is good and the only permissible fetish is doing it with the lights on.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 15:45
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 15:45
|
|
|
the religion thread is the only one i follow that regularly devolves into a goon sex fight, and it's funny every time
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 15:52
|
|
|
Numerical Anxiety posted:Can we not conflate aesthetic reactions with the moral status of an act, or jump to quick conclusions about the mental health of observers? I'm sorry, I lost my head. That was wrong of me. It's not that I think any of you are crazy( or possibly boring in bed), I just really don't understand the knee-jerk tendency to condemn morally what you don't get off on yourself, and I guessed that's what pissed me off. Senju Kannon posted:there's a line between "only in missionary" and "have sex in public places where children can be" I've never met any doggers that didn't take their stuff to really secluded places. I mean, I know exhibitionists can be pretty rowdy, but this doesn't happen as much as you think. Also, I will certainly agree with you that exposing yourself to children, who by their nature cannot consent to the act, is inherently wrong.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 16:14
|
|
|
Tias posted:I'm sorry, I lost my head. That was wrong of me. But disgust isn't a moral category? I can think that chicken livers are disgusting and never want to eat them without morally condemning people who like them. That translation is possible, and that's where the problem introduces itself, but it's not a necessary step. I like to think that respecting the sexual proclivities of others also means acknowledging the fact that, for every one of us, there's a range of behaviors that we personally find unappealing, gross, or just silly. That I don't like something doesn't mean that it shouldn't exist and that no one should do it, but there's nothing intrinsically wrong with my not liking it. Assuming that all sexuality is to be affirmed and demanding this of others is just another way of making an absolute norm regarding sexual behavior, and is violent in its own way.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 16:43
|
|
|
Numerical Anxiety posted:But disgust isn't a moral category? I can think that chicken livers are disgusting and never want to eat them without morally condemning people who like them. That translation is possible, and that's where the problem introduces itself, but it's not a necessary step. I like to think that respecting the sexual proclivities of others also means acknowledging the fact that, for every one of us, there's a range of behaviors that we personally find unappealing, gross, or just silly. That I don't like something doesn't mean that it shouldn't exist and that no one should do it, but there's nothing intrinsically wrong with my not liking it. Assuming that all sexuality is to be affirmed and demanding this of others is just another way of making an absolute norm regarding sexual behavior, and is violent in its own way. I think what we're trying to get across is that thinking chicken livers are gross is okay, but going up to people who are vocal about loving chicken livers and saying it's gross is just being obnoxious. Personally, there are sexual behaviors I intensely disapprove of and will never affirm, but I won't shout in their faces that I believe they're morally wrong.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 16:53
|
|
|
Cythereal posted:I think what we're trying to get across is that thinking chicken livers are gross is okay, but going up to people who are vocal about loving chicken livers and saying it's gross is just being obnoxious. Yeah, this. Though I would add that the opposite can also be true - if I really love chicken livers, telling people who don't like them that they're bad people on those grounds alone is also obnoxious. Numerical Anxiety fucked around with this message at 17:05 on Jun 17, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 16:55
|
|
|
Numerical Anxiety posted:But disgust isn't a moral category? I can think that chicken livers are disgusting and never want to eat them without morally condemning people who like them. That translation is possible, and that's where the problem introduces itself, but it's not a necessary step. I like to think that respecting the sexual proclivities of others also means acknowledging the fact that, for every one of us, there's a range of behaviors that we personally find unappealing, gross, or just silly. That I don't like something doesn't mean that it shouldn't exist and that no one should do it, but there's nothing intrinsically wrong with my not liking it. Assuming that all sexuality is to be affirmed and demanding this of others is just another way of making an absolute norm regarding sexual behavior, and is violent in its own way. Interesting take! Though, in the case of the chicken liver we must assume the person with a distaste has at least tried it, which I bet isn't true for a lot of people who condemn sexual acts 
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 17:14
|
|
|
HEY GAIL posted:the religion thread is the only one i follow that regularly devolves into a goon sex fight, and it's funny every time Better than endless arguments about steaks and pineapple pizza imo Re: fetishes, the only allowed is the one where you wear funny hats and think of 
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 17:14
|
|
|
Tias posted:Interesting take! Though, in the case of the chicken liver we must assume the person with a distaste has at least tried it, which I bet isn't true for a lot of people who condemn sexual acts Well, we don't have to make that assumption. Changing the example, but keeping with food, I, probably like most westerners, find the idea of eating eyes or brains abhorrent. Again, doesn't mean that there's anything wrong with people who do, but the idea alone can be enough to provoke a strong reaction.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 17:30
|
|
|
HEY GAIL posted:the religion thread is the only one i follow that regularly devolves into a goon sex fight, and it's funny every time the milhist thread is going on a food derail so i guess thats another one off the bingo card
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 17:38
|
|
|
Numerical Anxiety posted:Well, we don't have to make that assumption. Changing the example, but keeping with food, I, probably like most westerners, find the idea of eating eyes or brains abhorrent. Again, doesn't mean that there's anything wrong with people who do, but the idea alone can be enough to provoke a strong reaction. Brains taste like eggs but more bland just fyi. Anyways, I think we all agree that the best part of an animal is the tongue.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 17:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 23:42 |
|
|
The Belgian posted:Brains taste like eggs but more bland just fyi. Anyways, I think we all agree that the best part of an animal is the tongue. The first episode of Chopped I ever watched had goat brains. Just seeing that made the idea of eating brains even more revolting than the simple idea of brains as food. At any rate, what I think we can all agree on is: don't be a dick. Approve or disapprove of whatever as you please, just don't be a dick about it. Screaming at college students over a microphone that they're going to hell and Jesus is the only answer has never converted anyone and turned an awful lot of people off to Christianity.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 17:47
|
|