[quote]BIGRAGOO wrote:
Professor X wrote:
Sifu wrote:
Check this out
I would be SO first in line.
I’d be right behind you in line.[/quote]
NTTAWWT!
DB
[quote]dollarbill44 wrote:
BIGRAGOO wrote:
Professor X wrote:
Sifu wrote:
Check this out
I would be SO first in line.
I’d be right behind you in line.
NTTAWWT!
DB[/quote]
Actually there is something wrong with that. That is soooo not my style.
And just to defend harris, god can give me a blowjob too! I mean take the best blowjob on earth and make it a million times better. After all he did create the blowjob, so i’m pretty sure he could give the best blowjob in existance. I see no problem with this line of thinking or for harris requesting it.
V
[quote]Professor X wrote:
I hate it when other people speak for me. If you post cartoons in a sex forum, it makes me think that those pictures produce a sexual response in you. I personally find getting a hardon to a drawing a little strange unless that is one damn realistic drawing. That was the main point I raised in that thread.[/quote]
Why do you think that is unusual? Sex is all in the head anyway…
People who have a serious fetish are only interested in the object, f.E. not looking at a woman wearing high heels, the shoes themselves are enough…
If you think about the kind of stuff that seems to arouse people, those drawings are in the harmless category…
[quote]BIGRAGOO wrote:
Professor X wrote:
Sifu wrote:
Check this out
I would be SO first in line.
I’d be right behind you in line.[/quote]
In brokeback fashion…
[quote]Vegita wrote:
And just to defend harris, god can give me a blowjob too! I mean take the best blowjob on earth and make it a million times better. After all he did create the blowjob, so i’m pretty sure he could give the best blowjob in existance. I see no problem with this line of thinking or for harris requesting it.
V[/quote]
[Lightning Bolt followed by thunderous laughter from the heavens]
It was nice knowing you Vegita.LOL
DB
[quote]orion wrote:
People who have a serious fetish are only interested in the object, f.E. not looking at a woman wearing high heels, the shoes themselves are enough…
[/quote]
That’s the difference between a fetish and paraphilia.
[quote]nephorm wrote:
orion wrote:
People who have a serious fetish are only interested in the object, f.E. not looking at a woman wearing high heels, the shoes themselves are enough…
That’s the difference between a fetish and paraphilia.[/quote]
Yes…?
[quote]malonetd wrote:
Yes…?[/quote]
Orion seemed to suggest that “fetishes” are not dangerous because the preoccupation is with the object, not the person (or the act). While this is generally accurate for true fetishes (women’s shoes, breasts, elbows, physical objects) it is NOT as true for paraphilias (including humiliation or rape fantasies, or paedophilia).
‘Paraphilia’ is a broader category than fetishism is, and much of the time people use ‘fetish’ they actually mean to say ‘paraphilia.’ I’m not saying that paraphilia necessarily leads to acting on the impulse rather than simple fantasizing, but the point is that paraphilias do often involve other people (including unwilling participants) and are therefore not necessarily as passive as fetishes are.
[quote]nephorm wrote:
malonetd wrote:
Yes…?
Orion seemed to suggest that “fetishes” are not dangerous because the preoccupation is with the object, not the person (or the act). While this is generally accurate for true fetishes (women’s shoes, breasts, elbows, physical objects) it is NOT as true for paraphilias (including humiliation or rape fantasies, or paedophilia).
‘Paraphilia’ is a broader category than fetishism is, and much of the time people use ‘fetish’ they actually mean to say ‘paraphilia.’ I’m not saying that paraphilia necessarily leads to acting on the impulse rather than simple fantasizing, but the point is that paraphilias do often involve other people (including unwilling participants) and are therefore not necessarily as passive as fetishes are.[/quote]
I wanted to suggest that people are turned on by really weird shit…
However, your whole post insinuates that there are people who try to make up words to draw a line between “harmless” weird stuff and potentially dangerous “weird” stuff…
[quote]orion wrote:
However, your whole post insinuates that there are people who try to make up words to draw a line between “harmless” weird stuff and potentially dangerous “weird” stuff…[/quote]
I’m not trying to insinuate anything… your post seemed to suggest that ‘fetishes,’ in the broadest sense, were obsessions with objects and not acts.
The word has been around since 1925.
That one cartoon girl definitely had jizz all over her.
[quote]Sabrina wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
I just hate perverse stuff.
I am curious as to when you became the arbiter of what constitutes perversity?
[/quote]
You’ve been taught that you must never pass judgment on others, and that you must be ‘accepting’ of anything and everything. Could it be that you were taught that so someone could get away with something?
We usually assume that most people are benevolent. You assumed that when you were taught ‘toleration’. What if your teachers were not benevolent?
[quote]harris447 wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
Did it sound like I was complaining? I said these things are fascinating to me. How is that complaining?
It sounds like the things you listed were things that you were kind of disgusted with, or irrritated about.
I for one, love hot broads making out. The rest of that stuff on your list I could take or leave, but there’s nothing like that site rrjc posted up.
EDIT- Headhunter, you are fishing for another fight on this thread with the guys from the politics thread.
Why?
I truly was not. I simply found my experiences interesting and wanted to share my feelings on the matter. There’s enough battling in the Politics section for anyone; it was NOT my intention to bring it here.
I was happy, going along, until Harris stuck his nose in. Ask him your question.
You are boring everyone, you old fuck.[/quote]
Anyone who says the things you’ve said (esp about God) should just bury themselves alive and do the world a favor.
The thread starter sounds like a brady bunch bitch. He needs to turn on the TV and accept what america(and soon the rest of the world) has become.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Sabrina wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
I just hate perverse stuff.
I am curious as to when you became the arbiter of what constitutes perversity?
You’ve been taught that you must never pass judgment on others, and that you must be ‘accepting’ of anything and everything. Could it be that you were taught that so someone could get away with something?
We usually assume that most people are benevolent. You assumed that when you were taught ‘toleration’. What if your teachers were not benevolent?
[/quote]
Are you fucking Kreskin now? You are clearly unfamiliar with my posting tendencies if you think tolerance is the cornerstone of my belief system.
And as for your less than subtle sexual abuse innuendos, they reinforce my feeling that you are likely one the most repressed deviants I’ll ever come across. Your incessent harping on gay sex and underage sex is beyond creepy.
For the record, I generally assume most people are assholes. You’re doing a good job of reinforcing this too.
You also completely avoided the question.
[quote]when I see children depicted in this way, it sets me off.
[/quote]
Pedophile
Did you really have to start your own topic to bash the T-people?
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Anyone who says the things you’ve said (esp about God) should just bury themselves alive and do the world a favor.
[/quote]
Especially about God?!? Are you kidding me? Since when does this mythical being deserve such treatment? I understand your faith and all that, but by the same logic, I hope you never talk bad about Zeus or Odin. Hey, at least Greek Mythology was interesting. Zues could beat God’s pansy ass any day of the week.
So-called tolerant Christians are some of the biggest assholes I ever met. I’d sooner piss on your bible than listen to any more of the garbage that comes out of a devout Christians mouth. Hell, maybe Jesus was crucified because he was an asshole, too.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
harris447 wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
Did it sound like I was complaining? I said these things are fascinating to me. How is that complaining?
It sounds like the things you listed were things that you were kind of disgusted with, or irrritated about.
I for one, love hot broads making out. The rest of that stuff on your list I could take or leave, but there’s nothing like that site rrjc posted up.
EDIT- Headhunter, you are fishing for another fight on this thread with the guys from the politics thread.
Why?
I truly was not. I simply found my experiences interesting and wanted to share my feelings on the matter. There’s enough battling in the Politics section for anyone; it was NOT my intention to bring it here.
I was happy, going along, until Harris stuck his nose in. Ask him your question.
You are boring everyone, you old fuck.
Anyone who says the things you’ve said (esp about God) should just bury themselves alive and do the world a favor.
[/quote]
I firmly believe, that God (if there is one), would be pretty pissed if you see fit to judge one of His children in such a way.
You come off as a crotchety old person, I suggest you stop trying to stir up shit.
And for the record, if one seems to have a problem with everyone else, usually that one person IS the problem.
-The boomster
[quote]nephorm wrote:
malonetd wrote:
Yes…?
Orion seemed to suggest that “fetishes” are not dangerous because the preoccupation is with the object, not the person (or the act). While this is generally accurate for true fetishes (women’s shoes, breasts, elbows, physical objects) it is NOT as true for paraphilias (including humiliation or rape fantasies, or paedophilia).
‘Paraphilia’ is a broader category than fetishism is, and much of the time people use ‘fetish’ they actually mean to say ‘paraphilia.’ I’m not saying that paraphilia necessarily leads to acting on the impulse rather than simple fantasizing, but the point is that paraphilias do often involve other people (including unwilling participants) and are therefore not necessarily as passive as fetishes are.[/quote]
To be clear, “humiliation” and rape fantasies are not necessarily paraphilias. In fact, I’d wager that the vast majority of the time, they are not. Keep in mind that rape fantasies are almost never about “rape”.