posted
Perfect example, right there. Very obnoxious to me but maybe not meant that way. For instance, I don't recall actually insulting anyone.
Oh, wait, that's right. You were on the other thread. Yeah I was insulting you a bit. Yeah, pH is one of the guys I didn't feel like engaging because his posts were kinda silly and didn't make much sense. But yeah, that's good advice. I will try to do that.
Posts: 1286 | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Reshpeckobiggle: It's like Girls Gone Wild is the driving force behind our culture now. And if you watch those videos (I've watched a few), they're porn.
If the first one you watched was porn, why'd you watch more of them? Not that you don't have a right to watch porn, but like mph said, it does make your post seem a little hypocritical.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
It was rather annoying and obnoxious. The difference is that people do it in response to your annoying and obnoxious posts. You start out that way.
That doesn't necessarily make responding to you in that manner right, but it does make it qualitatively different, at least to the observers. You seem to be looking for this kind if caustic interaction.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote: So I think it's more the medium than anything else. Well, the message too. You (or I) read something you disagree with and think is stupid, and so you form a negative opinion of that person.
Wrong. I haven't formed a negative opinion of you because I disagree with you. I've formed a negative opinion of you because of the way your present your statments.
You say that you wouldn't come across this way in person, and that you just consider this an alter ego.
My recommendation is to stop playing around with an alter ego and to start treating people with the same respect you would in person.
If you wouldn't say those things in person in a crowd of people you don't know that well, don't say them here.
But I fear that this is all a game for you, being a troll and watching the monkeys dance. As such, I doubt I'll interact with you much in the future unless you prove me wrong.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
To clarify: I am purposely being obnoxious towards you, Reck. I don't like you. I think you've been deliberately insulting and inflammatory, and I think you know it. I don't believe your excuses for your behavior, and find your lack of sincerity disturbing. Your 'I'm cognisant of how obnoxious my behavior is and how deliberately insulting I'm being, I just can't help it' argument reeks of BS, and you've given me no reason to extend you the benefit of the doubt. Your attempts at rationalizing our hostility by blaming it on us vilifying you based on your opinion are also a crock, as you claim to frequent this board with something resembling regularity and have been a registered member for a year, and should therefore know that people with dissenting opinions tend, more often than not, to be very forgiving of people. Even when a viewpoint is as close to our heart and soul as possible, as with Lisa's views on the Middle Eastern conflicts, detractors manage to be not only civil, but friendly and empathetic on other subjects with the same person, and unlike your posts, theirs don't reek of insincerity.
Posts: 4313 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Porter, I've been quite impressed with how you have handled yourself in all of this thread.
Reshpeckobiggle: Might I suggest you calm down, and believe that people who post in this forums would rather help improve your style and etiquette then debase and insult you.
I notice that you have recently decided to go from lurker to poster in the forums and you were certainly deserving of the welcome you received.
You are quickly establishing the character that you are on the forums and I would say the first impression has been established. Obviously the reception to that impression has not been overwhelmingly positive. Would you agree?
You might benefit from the experiences of another user named Pelegius. His problem was his posts were condescending, filled with pedantry, and on occasion insulting.
I honestly tried my best to help him not take himself so seriously as he felt he was some sort of martyr on these forums. He wanted to lead us all to the enlightenment and even went to far as to debase himself when we failed to agree with him. "I'm sorry that I have failed YOU."
It could be maddening, but at least in my opinion he started getting better and then one day he made the thread that broke the forums so to speak and he left.
Your opinions are as valuable as any other persons to me, and you are certainly intelligent. When people call you an "ass" or refer to your statements as, "obnoxious and annoying," realize that we only know you from your words and those are the adjectives your words are invoking from people. We do not know you personally and so we cannot judge your words based on your motives.
You have defended your statements by claiming that you were just projecting an opinion and that it does not really represent your feelings on the matter. Please don't do that ever again. Believe me we have hatrackers that represent just about ANY view ANYBODY could have on ANY matter. We don't need you to bolster the ranks of any one view point.
Please just post as if you were among friends because that is what we can be to you. Don't get bent out of shape if somebody takes apart your entire post and concludes its all wrong. Just leave emotion at the door and rationally explain why you object while simultaneously attempting to see if there might be truth to their points. I promise you nobody is going to say, "oh hoo! You admit to being mistaken! Now we know any other opinion you have is weak and unfounded!"
I promise you that if you declare a truce and ask to start over, I will honor that. I am quite confident others will do the same but cannot speak for them. If you change nothing in your approach to these forums expect more of the same sorts of responses as you have heretofore been experiencing.
Only you can decide which direction you wish to take. May you make the one that is in everybody's favor.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
Rack, you are given a lot of tough love on the past few pages. Before you write it off as personal attacks, be warned--some of the good people here wouldn't waste their time with advice if they didn't think you had potential. You bring a unique voice to this forum. If it wasn't shouting it would be listened to.
Your main comment seems to be that in "The Good Old Days" women held the line on mankinds wanton nature.
Now, nobody does.
What would you have us do?
You would have us crimminalize pornography, but who gets to decide what is and is not pornography? Where do you draw the line?
You want a return to the days when Women were "virtuous", by your standards of virtue. That meant they were able to overcome their hormones to say no. You were no longer responsible for your own virtue. The girl held that job too.
It was also easier then to classify women. There were only three women then--the Virgin, the Whore, and the Mother. Now it seems that the women can be all three, and that's confusing.
What many people here are trying to say is that the wonder years that you wish to return to were not as perfect as you believe.
I also have issues with a couple of other things you said. 1) That men who get into gay porn are just doing what they want, but women who get into porn are being exploited. While the main argument that has been given against this is that most women in the Porn industry do not feel exploited, I disagree. However, I also think that many men who get into porn are also exploited. Just as many male prostitutes are not out their having fun, they are doing what ever they can to make enough cash for their next crack fix or something similar.
2) You said that the only non-slutty girls were the unattractive ones. Maybe that is because the only thing you find attractive is slutty girls. Your big complaint is that society only looks at the surface, the momentary thrill. Well change begins with you. Stop looking at the girls and weighing them by there attactiveness in a physical way. Get to know some and weigh their attractiveness in a personal way.
Posts: 11895 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think we need to get back to the central point. When you take on the role of someone who is repected then you have an obligation to act repectably while you fulfill that role.
Actors who are under contract with a studios usually have morals clauses in their contracts. They must conduct themselves in a way that does not disgrace or discredit the studio.
Professional athletes who have endorsement contracts also have morals clauses, they must maintain their respectability while the represent the product in question so as to not discredit or disgrace the product or company.
When you become Miss America, Miss USA, etc... you are taking on the role as a representative of an aspect of our culture that is considered respectable. Therefore, you are contractually obligated to not disgrace or discredit or bring disrespect to the role you play and the title you hold. In entering the competition, in winning the competition, you accept these legal responsibilities to hold the office or title with honor.
If you can't live within those limits, then you should not hold the title. I'm sure this is all explain VERY CLEARLY to them when they take on the role, and their is no excuse for not following the rules of the pagent and the title.
Once they have left the role and reliquished the title, they are free to be as slutty as they want. Though that will probably screw up any endorsement or other contracts they may have gained.
We are all free to ruin our lives with sex, drugs, and Rock'n'Roll, but in the end we have to accept that only we are to blame for the ruin that is our life. And the world in general is under NO Obligation to cut us any slack along the way.
If these 'Miss etc...'s can not live by the rules, then I have no problem with them being strip of their titles, and the title given to someone who CAN live by the rules.
Simply put, if you choose to be Miss USA, then you choose to live within the rules of that role. If you choose not to live with in the rules, then you have chosen to not hold the title.
quote:Simply put, if you choose to be Miss USA, then you choose to live within the rules of that role. If you choose not to live with in the rules, then you have chosen to not hold the title.
While I agree with this and the rest of your post, I'm not sure I see what the big deal is. Miss Americas, etc., are routinely dismissed, disqualified or discredited for acting slutty.
Posts: 4313 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't think porn itself is bad, but it can be put to bad uses. (As an aside, though, my definition of porn is much broader than most.)
I often wonder how those who are anti-porn (in all uses) would judge the Japanese "pillow books" that were [for example] given to newlyweds for use on the honeymoon. These are intensely explicit, with excruciatingly detailed and graphic pictures. I will look for a link to a description, in case any are interested but not familiar with that set of porn.
posted
Part of the problem is flat, unqualified statements like "all porn is exploitive," "women are sluttier now," etc. If you had said that most porn seems to be exploitive, or that everywhere you look it appears that many women no longer value the morals they once did, you'd have a stronger argument.
Not all porn is exploitive. Saying that does not mean I wholeheartedly support all porn ever created; I recognize the unethical behavior that often occurs in the industry. But not all of it is.
Women finally being able to display the same sexual freedom as men have traditionally enjoyed is, I think, a good thing. Sadly, many men and women use that freedom to make some irresponsible choices -- promiscuity not automatically being one of them. But please, stop with the "women didn't use to be like that" arguments. Sure they were, at different times. Go read up on the flappers of the 1920's, for example.
As for the various Misses... yup, fire 'em. They knew the standards they had to uphold beforehand, so I don't see this as a failing of their morals as much as breaking their contract. If they knew there were "scandalous" photos in their background or they didn't think they could remain sober and publicly asexual for a year then they shouldn't compete. Whether that standard is a realistic one is besides the point entirely; it is what it is, and they knew it going in.
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Good Morning!! (I know it's afternoon, but whatever)
Everything you say is correct, BlueWizard. I brought up the point because it seems like things have been getting progressively worse in the culture, where girls, especially young girls --teens, and younger-- are expected to be "sexual creatures" and are not to repress their sexuality. This is obviously a matter of judgement, but I don't think that the current state of affairs is better in that regard. And I believe pornography is one of the major roots of the problem.
I have been attacked because of this view. The attackers say it's because of the way I present myself, and looking at my posts, they have a point. I just think that the way I present myself is more likely to be misinterpreted or magnified because someones sensibilities are being offended.
I can't know what others are actually thinking, so I can only use my own expereience as a gauge. Dan Raven's post was nice and he made some good observations that made me think. But I found myself immediatly latching on to what he said about how I "want to return to the old days..." That irritated me and made me not want to take what he had to say next seriously. However, as I said before, I recognize when that happens and I try to stifle that impulse. Now it mat be that no one else feels that way. They just breeze past all the possibly insulting things I say without even registering, and they get to the meat of the matter and find that my actual message is patently offensive and obnoxious. If so, then they're all lying to me when they say they are annoyed by my presentation and not my opinion. They also say my message AND my presentation is all wrong. So I don't know. I guess I'm just wrong all around.
I honestly don't know what I'm doing that is so different from so many others. Read my first post here and the MPH's first post. I just put something out there, and BOOM! I'm called a hypocrite. His tone never changed. But I'm the ass.
Read Erosomniac's post up above. I don't know what I ever did to her. He (or she; sorry pH) just has nothing but mean things to say to me. E's first post here, if I remember correctly, actually, I'm gonna read this whole thread again and see if I can see where it went all wrong.
Posts: 1286 | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
I expressed largely the same view, and yet I wasn't attacked. Why do you think that might be? I promise it's not because I was given a free pass.
quote:Read my first post here and the MPH's first post. I just put something out there, and BOOM! I'm called a hypocrite. His tone never changed.
I called you hypocritical not because you think that porn is evil, but because you appeared to think it's vile to produce it but fine to watch it. That is a blatantly hypocritical stance, which it appeared you had, which is why I said that it seemed hypocritical. It really did.
And if you'll notice, my tone did change several times.
quote:girls, especially young girls --teens, and younger-- are expected to be "sexual creatures" and are not to repress their sexuality
Maybe young girls (as well as boys) actually are sexual creatures. That's the only explanation that I can think of for why there are over six billion people on the earth. Sex is actually a pretty natural thing.
Posts: 1256 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Read Erosomniac's post up above. I don't know what I ever did to her. He (or she; sorry pH) just has nothing but mean things to say to me. E's first post here, if I remember correctly, actually, I'm gonna read this whole thread again and see if I can see where it went all wrong.
I can't speak for anyone else, but I'd be willing to bet money that I'm not the only one who feels that way. I just lack the patience for tact with people I don't care about.
...
In other news, a more appropriate (well, sort of) topic for discussion might be the recent trend pornography has taken. For anyone who doesn't get bombarded by spam, pop ups and college-age friends, the reality TV trend seems to have hit porn, and it's pretty disturbing.
The premise of modern porn seems to be, almost universally, some variation of "several dudes trick a girl into thinking they will pay her to do sex acts in front of the camera, then laugh and leave instead when they've finished." It's pretty horrifying, and it makes me really sad/angry that people find it erotic.
*** POTENTIAL TMI, read on at your own risk. ***
One of the sites that I continuously receive advertising for revolves around two guys, one having the sex and one with the camera, tricking women into having sex with them for money. After the guy finishes, the finale is him putting his butt in her face and farting, then laughing at the 'stupid bitch' and leaving with his buds.
*** END OF TMI PART ***
Now, these are apparently major websites, with links to all the proper forms, model identification, consent information, etc., so the videos are definitely fiction. But seriously, how is this erotic? How is this okay with people?
I'm not against erotica, and I'm not even against porn, but this trend really bothers me.
Posts: 4313 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
eros, I put movies and television shows like Borat in the same light. They're not pornographic, but they're about humilitation.
Edit: It also occurs to me that it might be another manifestation of the double standard. Girl has sex on camera, she's a stupid slut. Guy has sex on camera, SO COOL.
posted
It's worth noting that to consider 14-year-olds children is historically a new development. At 14 a Roman boy was old enough to join the legions, legally marry, and vote; presumably, nobody would have dreamt of objecting if he considered himself and his wife 'sexual creatures'. At 14 an African tribesman is (or was, in the old days) circumcised, moves into the bachelors' lodge, and is considered an adult. (Not to mention what they do to the girls.) 14-year-olds were apprenticed to trades; 14-year-old boys were midshipmen in the Royal Navy - one died at Jutland. 14-year-olds were drafted into the Volkssturm, and have fought in plenty of African conflicts, not that I would exactly consider these examples to be followed. The point is, there's no magic age at which children become adults, or able to handle their sexuality in a useful way. At whatever age you slip the leash, they're going to experiment a bit. I don't see where 16 is inherently a better age for experimenting than 14, except that the social consequences of a pregnancy are likely to be a bit messier, which is why oral sex is such a useful trend.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I would just like to add to the Porter-love. Platonic, of course
And Porter and I probably couldn't agree on the time of day (4:54PM), but he gets my respect. You, Resh? the jury is out, but no rush. I'm an easy-going guy, so I merely hope someday you change your tone here at Hatrack.
posted
I, too am appalled by the vulgarity of what passes for entertainment today. The sex - not because of the sexual aspect of it, but because it tends to be crude and unloving. I am just as appalled by the casual violence and by the crass cruelty and sheer stupidity. I try to register my opinion about this by refusing to participate in it as a consumer.
I do not think that a return to "a more moral" time will fix this. In fact, I blame the repressed attitudes of the past for what we are facing now. We are like children who have been half-starved being let loose in a candy store. We have never been taught how to nourish ourselves intelligently and responsibly, so now we have no idea how to demand healthier fare.
I also blame the arrogance of our increasingly imperial culture. We have too much so we are wasteful and careless - with our time as well as our treasure. Look at Rome if you want to see the future.
We allow what is happening to us. Rather than trying to control this with laws and restrictions, our only hope is to develop - as individuals - the self-discipline to stop rewarding those who provide this kind of entertainment.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
'Now, these are apparently major websites, with links to all the proper forms, model identification, consent information, etc., so the videos are definitely fiction. But seriously, how is this erotic? How is this okay with people?"
I don't know about all of them, but I saw a news report about one of the worst -- a series of videos where a girl was picked up in a van and offered cash for sex which would result in the guys driving off without paying, laughing -- and it was revealed that the videos were staged, with the women knowing in advance how to act.
That said, I most definitely agree that the direction of far too much porn is to go darker, more exploitive, less personal, less loving, more abusive, and it saddens me that there seems to be a growing market for that. kmbboots' post nailed my feelings on that perfectly. There is still quality porn out there (under my definitions, of course ) but it doesn't tend to be made by the kind of people who spam inboxes.
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
Where's the thrill in looking at people you don't know have sex? Sure, they might be pretty people but can it really be stimulating with no emotion involved?
That being said, of course we shouldn't make it illegal. But if someone is tricking young women (or men) into taking their clothes off for the camera, that's fraud.
I've been calling guys who sleep around "sluts" for years. They just take it as a compliment. ><
quote:Originally posted by Chris Bridges: 'Now, these are apparently major websites, with links to all the proper forms, model identification, consent information, etc., so the videos are definitely fiction. But seriously, how is this erotic? How is this okay with people?"
I don't know about all of them, but I saw a news report about one of the worst -- a series of videos where a girl was picked up in a van and offered cash for sex which would result in the guys driving off without paying, laughing -- and it was revealed that the videos were staged, with the women knowing in advance how to act.
That said, I most definitely agree that the direction of far too much porn is to go darker, more exploitive, less personal, less loving, more abusive, and it saddens me that there seems to be a growing market for that. kmbboots' post nailed my feelings on that perfectly. There is still quality porn out there (under my definitions, of course ) but it doesn't tend to be made by the kind of people who spam inboxes.
Basically, it exemplifies what I don't like about porn: it further blurs the lines between reality and fantasy, and encourages unacceptable fantasy*. Regardless of whether it's staged/scripted or not, the idea of these videos is an unhealthy one, and the fact that it's portrayed as reality is terrifying. People are generally able to differentiate between reality and active fantasy--like the difference between pulling the trigger in Halo to blast an alien and pulling the trigger on an assault rifle to kill your classmates--I fear that the presentation of these websites as something that really can happen is a bad, bad thing.
I would not attempt to legislate that these videos cannot be produced; insofar as the women involved are actresses, I believe any exploitation occurs partly of their own volition. But it seems to me that these websites ought to be required to notate somewhere prominent that the videos are fiction, and real life duplication of their antics should not be attempted, much the same way Jackass videos are now prefaced with a similar disclaimer.
*While I am aware that some--perhaps many--people find slight violence erotic, e.g. spanking, hair pulling, limited asphyxiation all the way to hard S&M, I think even they can agree that it is more destructive for those behaviors to appear as the norm than vice versa.
Posts: 4313 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Chris Bridges: the direction of far too much porn is to go darker, more exploitive, less personal, less loving, more abusive...
What about similar trends in actual sexual relationships? Then again, I don't know if Hatrack is (or ever should be) the place to have an in depth discussion of deep Masochism...
Posts: 3846 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Chris Bridges: the direction of far too much porn is to go darker, more exploitive, less personal, less loving, more abusive...
What about similar trends in actual sexual relationships? Then again, I don't know if Hatrack is (or ever should be) the place to have an in depth discussion of deep Masochism...
I don't think it matters: even experienced, hardcore practicing sadists and masochists put heavy emphasis on separating fantasy from reality and putting each person at ease. The S&M community, from what I've seen, distances itself as much as possible from truly abusive relationships, and strives to communicate this to others.
Posts: 4313 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Reshpeckobiggle: But I can't help but be depressed everytime I see some perfectly nice looking young girl with one of those tattoos on their lower back. Because it's true what Vince Vaughn said in the Wedding Crashers, that's like a stamp that say's "I'm easy!" (paraphrasing)
Yeah, that's exactly what it is. Let's see. I got my first tattoo on my lower back when I was 18, I believe, and I didn't have sex for the first time until I was 22, and it was with the man I married.
I AM SUCH A DEGENERATE HARLOT! IT IS OBVIOUS FROM MY BODY ART!
Posts: 1006 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Reshpecobiggle is dismayed with young women acting with greater harlotry and lower back tattoos (a causative factor in sluttiness) in a manner he finds inconsistent with an anecdotal or historically inferred mean of appropriate lady behavior on a 'comely continuum.' By gum, we should eradicate pornography, just to be sure!
In other news, society turns out not to exist. Sadly misinformed dictionaries and sociology departments everywhere refuse to acknowledge bitter truth!
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by erosomniac: I don't think it matters: even experienced, hardcore practicing sadists and masochists put heavy emphasis on separating fantasy from reality and putting each person at ease. The S&M community, from what I've seen, distances itself as much as possible from truly abusive relationships, and strives to communicate this to others.
Right, in fact the more hardcore, generally the more serious about separating it out. It just occurred to me that the desire to humiliate and be humiliated for sexual gratification are real, and that these videos might be targeting that type of person.
Porn is often about fantasy as well. There's a common thread here-- to experience something without doing it. There are people who want to experience abuse and humiliation (or experience delivering it to another) in order to receive gratification from it... but to do it for real is beyond the bounds of safety or legality. Maybe this porn is targeting Sadists without partners? Maybe Masochists identify with the humiliated and enjoy it vicariously as well?
I don't really know... just trying to get into other people's headspace.
Posts: 3846 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: Well...there's porn and there's what I would call erotica.
Erotica is just porn that you personally find acceptable, in the same sense that a slut is someone who has more sexusal partners than you approve of.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Reshpeckobiggle: But I can't help but be depressed everytime I see some perfectly nice looking young girl with one of those tattoos on their lower back. Because it's true what Vince Vaughn said in the Wedding Crashers, that's like a stamp that say's "I'm easy!" (paraphrasing)
Yeah, that's exactly what it is. Let's see. I got my first tattoo on my lower back when I was 18, I believe, and I didn't have sex for the first time until I was 22, and it was with the man I married.
I AM SUCH A DEGENERATE HARLOT! IT IS OBVIOUS FROM MY BODY ART!
Get thee away wench, for I cannot associate with one such as ye, lest thine stained virtue washes down upon me.
I call upon the great Legion of Decency to smite thee for thine evil ways.
Also, is it a cool tattoo?
Posts: 413 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
I expressed largely the same view, and yet I wasn't attacked. Why do you think that might be? I promise it's not because I was given a free pass.
quote:Read my first post here and the MPH's first post. I just put something out there, and BOOM! I'm called a hypocrite. His tone never changed.
I called you hypocritical not because you think that porn is evil, but because you appeared to think it's vile to produce it but fine to watch it. That is a blatantly hypocritical stance, which it appeared you had, which is why I said that it seemed hypocritical. It really did.
And if you'll notice, my tone did change several times.
The difference between us (on this issue) is that I think porn should be illegal. That was what I was "attacked" for. I put that in quotes because I don't really think they were attacks. But if you and I had the exact same viewpoints, I would get a different, more hostile response. And that's probably because of the tone and manner that I use, like everyone is saying. And so I resolved to try and adjust. I'm still being hammered by erosomniac, but I'm starting to think this person is naturally adversarial. Could be wrong, though.
I do want to set the record straight, though. I don't think watching porn is ok when producing it is wrong. I think I said somewhere that I used to not have a problem with it, but I do now. So I don't think I'm a hypocrite, which is why I felt offended at being called one. Because of that misunderstanding, you thought your post was perfectly reasonable, as did PapaMoose. And it was. But please, no more of that hypocrite stuff. At least, not on this issue. I'm sure you could find other examples of hypocrisy on my part somewhere else if you keep your eyes open.
quote:Originally posted by Reshpeckobiggle: But I can't help but be depressed everytime I see some perfectly nice looking young girl with one of those tattoos on their lower back. Because it's true what Vince Vaughn said in the Wedding Crashers, that's like a stamp that say's "I'm easy!" (paraphrasing)
Yeah, that's exactly what it is. Let's see. I got my first tattoo on my lower back when I was 18, I believe, and I didn't have sex for the first time until I was 22, and it was with the man I married.
I AM SUCH A DEGENERATE HARLOT! IT IS OBVIOUS FROM MY BODY ART!
I deserve that, I guess. I was generalizing, and trying to be somewhat facetious. It's just that it's a stereotype that does seem to have a ring of truth to it. And I had just finished looking at the controversial pictures of Miss Nevada and whadaya know? she has one. I'm sorry, Libbie, you do prove the point that people shouldn't make judgments about people based on some particular feature. I admit that when I see a girl with a tattoo on her lower back I, at the very least, think that the odds of this girl being promiscuous or easy or a tease or whatever are higher. It's not right, but I'm honest and I promise you, many guys think the same.
Posts: 1286 | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: Erotica is just porn that you personally find acceptable, in the same sense that a slut is someone who has more sexusal partners than you approve of.
quote: Erotica is just porn that you personally find acceptable, in the same sense that a slut is someone who has more sexusal partners than you approve of.
Winner.
Kinda like when George Carlin said "Have you ever noticed how everyone on the road who drives slower that you is an idiot and everyone who drives faster that you is a maniac?"
Posts: 1286 | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
In a somewhat similar vein, the Internet has three kinds of people : Trolls, who are snarkier than you, wimps who are less snarky than you, and nice people who remain capable of telling it like it is - that's you.
I sense a whole category of these things. A Lisp programmer would no doubt write a macro for it.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by King of Men: I sense a whole category of these things. A Lisp programmer would no doubt write a macro for it.
You shoot yourself in the hand which holds the gun with which you shoot yourself in the hand which holds the gun with which...
Posts: 3846 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by King of Men: In a somewhat similar vein, the Internet has three kinds of people : Trolls, who are snarkier than you, wimps who are less snarky than you, and nice people who remain capable of telling it like it is - that's you.
I sense a whole category of these things. A Lisp programmer would no doubt write a macro for it.
Is that what a Troll is? I keep getting called that here and I never knew what it meant. I took it as an insult (how could you not) but if all it means is that I'm snarkier than the guy calling me that, well... that's not so bad.
Posts: 1286 | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Erotica is just porn that you personally find acceptable, in the same sense that a slut is someone who has more sexusal partners than you approve of.
The difference between sexual abstinance and repression is pretty much the same thing.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
)
![[Mad]](mad.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
