[Samseau]

http://tinyurl.com/7f86l3w

Quote:

Dear Prudence,
My fraternal twin and I (both men) are in our late 30s. We were always extremely close and shared a bedroom growing up. When we were 12 we gradually started experimenting sexually with each other. After a couple of years, we realized we had fallen in love.

Quote:

Dear Greek,
When people ask when you’re each going to go out there and find a nice young man, tell them that while it may seem unorthodox, you both have realized that living together is what works for you. Say no brothers could be more devoted or compatible, and neither of you can imagine wanting to change what you have.

With the decline of marriage, all sorts of deviant sexual behavior have become normalized...

First it was pre-marital sex
Then it was spinsterhood
Then it was homosexuality
...and now incest (and pedophilia by extension).

I expect to see bestiality normalized before I die.


However, right now, it appears that incest is the next sexual behavior to be white-washed, so you guys better be supportive of incestual behavior or else people will call you intolerant and you'll be charged with a hate-crime.

[Basil Ransom]

The link is broken. Sorta dupe thread: http://www.rooshvforum.network/thread-10541.html

[Roosh]

Don't forget pedophilia. The original feminists wanted this to be normal behavior too.

Quote:

The educators' notes indicate that they placed a very strong emphasis on sex education. Almost every day, the students played games that involved taking off their clothes, reading porno magazines together and pantomiming intercourse.

According to the records, a "sex exercise" was conducted on Dec. 11 and a "fucking hour" on Jan. 14. An entry made on Nov. 26 reads: "In general, by lying there we repeatedly provoked, openly or in a hidden way, sexual innuendoes, which were then expressed in pantomimes, which Kurt and Rita performed together on the low table (as a stage) in front of us."

http://www.spiegel.de/international/zeit...02679.html

[Excelsior]

Next up: Polygamy?

At least some of us might be able to get some mileage out of that one.

[Samseau]

(11-12-2012 02:10 PM)Athlone McGinnis Wrote:  

Next up: Polygamy?

At least some of us might be able to get some mileage out of that one.

As if marriage to one woman wasn't bad enough...

[Parlay44]

I've dated 3 girls who were sexually abused by a relative. And I'm friends with a bunch more.
It's more common than you think. They all open up to me for some reason. I guess I'm easy to talk to.

It's funny to say but I can feel when something is off about a woman and can tell if there's
history of abuse. When you're kissing or fucking a girl you'll notice a weird emotional disconnect.
Like she's spaced out and in another world. She's kinda going through the motions but isn't there
mentally. Like she's on auto-pilot. Best I can describe it.

[jariel]

Very common in Latin America.

"Los primos se exprimen."

[Giovonny]

There is nothing new under the sun. This stuff has been happening for thousands of years. There have been cultures that openly practiced all of this stuff.

[Handsome Creepy Eel]

I can definitely see how it's a slippery slope, yes.

[Wutang]

One of my favorite trolls to do online is to say that it's hypocritical to be for homosexuality but not be for polygamy, incest, bestiality and the like. The reason is that it's so effective is because it's TRUE but it irks people when you point it out.

The arguments that are used to legitimize homosexuality can also be used to legitimize any of those other sexual practices with the argument being that nothing should prevent two consenting adults who are capable of consenting from engaging in any sort of sexual activity that they desire with each other. In the case of polygamy, this concept is simply extended to include more then 2 adults. For incest, the only sort of issue is the birth of genetically defective offspring but birth control can easily prevent that. For bestiality - if the animal is the property of the human engaging in sex with it then I can't think of any compelling reason to stop the human from playing Mr. Hands (google that). If you eat meat or use products derived from animals then you do not have the moral high ground to criticize bestiality.

I always hear people say that legitimizing homosexual behavior will lead to the legitimizing of other sexual kinks is a slipper slope fallacy but I've never been convinced of that for the reasons I mentioned above. The exception I would make is with pedophilia as pedophilia involves another agent that is both 1) unable to consent and 2) is a human being. In the cases of bestiality, incest, or polygamy all the agents are either consenting adults or an animal that doesn't have have the same rights that a human being would have.

[FretDancer]

(11-12-2012 02:38 PM)jariel Wrote:  

Very common in Latin America.

"Los primos se exprimen."

Here's another one:

"Entre primos y parientes, no hay pija que no entre."

[jammer]

(11-12-2012 06:24 PM)Wutang Wrote:  

One of my favorite trolls to do online is to say that it's hypocritical to be for homosexuality but not be for polygamy, incest, bestiality and the like. The reason is that it's so effective is because it's TRUE but it irks people when you point it out.

The arguments that are used to legitimize homosexuality can also be used to legitimize any of those other sexual practices with the argument being that nothing should prevent two consenting adults who are capable of consenting from engaging in any sort of sexual activity that they desire with each other. In the case of polygamy, this concept is simply extended to include more then 2 adults. For incest, the only sort of issue is the birth of genetically defective offspring but birth control can easily prevent that. For bestiality - if the animal is the property of the human engaging in sex with it then I can't think of any compelling reason to stop the human from playing Mr. Hands (google that). If you eat meat or use products derived from animals then you do not have the moral high ground to criticize bestiality.

So what exactly is wrong with homosexuality again? I don't see the issue. Someone is born homosexual and they have sex with a consenting adult, I don't give a fuck. It's not my business and I'm not going to stress myself over something a gay person is doing.

As far as polygamy, there are legit arguments to it. If the adults are consenting, I see no issue to it.

I can't help you if you don't understand the differences between homosexuality and bestiality. Animals can't consent to sex with humans while a human can consent to sex with a human.

[Samseau]

(11-12-2012 09:41 PM)jammer Wrote:  

(11-12-2012 06:24 PM)Wutang Wrote:  

One of my favorite trolls to do online is to say that it's hypocritical to be for homosexuality but not be for polygamy, incest, bestiality and the like. The reason is that it's so effective is because it's TRUE but it irks people when you point it out.

The arguments that are used to legitimize homosexuality can also be used to legitimize any of those other sexual practices with the argument being that nothing should prevent two consenting adults who are capable of consenting from engaging in any sort of sexual activity that they desire with each other. In the case of polygamy, this concept is simply extended to include more then 2 adults. For incest, the only sort of issue is the birth of genetically defective offspring but birth control can easily prevent that. For bestiality - if the animal is the property of the human engaging in sex with it then I can't think of any compelling reason to stop the human from playing Mr. Hands (google that). If you eat meat or use products derived from animals then you do not have the moral high ground to criticize bestiality.

So what exactly is wrong with homosexuality again? I don't see the issue. Someone is born homosexual and they have sex with a consenting adult, I don't give a fuck. It's not my business and I'm not going to stress myself over something a gay person is doing.

As far as polygamy, there are legit arguments to it. If the adults are consenting, I see no issue to it.

I can't help you if you don't understand the differences between homosexuality and bestiality. Animals can't consent to sex with humans while a human can consent to sex with a human.

Did you read his argument? An animal can't consent to us eating them, yet we do it every day.



Wutang - I completely agree with you. Realistically, if a society wants to promote healthy sexual practices then these sexual practices must be clearly defined and enforced. Banning anything except heterosexual practices is really the only way to do this.

[Prophylaxis]

I think Roosh will have to diversify to follow trends. I'll make sure I don't patent any of these.

Bang Sister - (venue changing has never been easier)
Bang Son - (make the most of your father-son bonding)
Bang Sheep - (New Zealand Edition)

[j r]

(11-12-2012 10:25 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

(11-12-2012 09:41 PM)jammer Wrote:  

(11-12-2012 06:24 PM)Wutang Wrote:  

One of my favorite trolls to do online is to say that it's hypocritical to be for homosexuality but not be for polygamy, incest, bestiality and the like. The reason is that it's so effective is because it's TRUE but it irks people when you point it out.

The arguments that are used to legitimize homosexuality can also be used to legitimize any of those other sexual practices with the argument being that nothing should prevent two consenting adults who are capable of consenting from engaging in any sort of sexual activity that they desire with each other. In the case of polygamy, this concept is simply extended to include more then 2 adults. For incest, the only sort of issue is the birth of genetically defective offspring but birth control can easily prevent that. For bestiality - if the animal is the property of the human engaging in sex with it then I can't think of any compelling reason to stop the human from playing Mr. Hands (google that). If you eat meat or use products derived from animals then you do not have the moral high ground to criticize bestiality.

So what exactly is wrong with homosexuality again? I don't see the issue. Someone is born homosexual and they have sex with a consenting adult, I don't give a fuck. It's not my business and I'm not going to stress myself over something a gay person is doing.

As far as polygamy, there are legit arguments to it. If the adults are consenting, I see no issue to it.

I can't help you if you don't understand the differences between homosexuality and bestiality. Animals can't consent to sex with humans while a human can consent to sex with a human.

Did you read his argument? An animal can't consent to us eating them, yet we do it every day.



Wutang - I completely agree with you. Realistically, if a society wants to promote healthy sexual practices then these sexual practices must be clearly defined and enforced. Banning anything except heterosexual practices is really the only way to do this.

A couple of things. You're employing a logical fallacy here. There's no reason that homosexual relationships can't be part of "healthy sexual practices," you've just decided to define it a priori as unhealthy. And that is fine by me, I have no desire to force everyone to accept beliefs and practices that they find repugnant. That has to work both ways though.

Also, realistically, how does a modern society effectively ban homosexuality? We've just seen what happens politically to social conservatives. People are only going to spend so much time and energy policing other people's private lives. There's a reason that the most homophobic societies right now also happen to be the most backwards.

[Wutang]

I personally find homosexual behavior, bestiality, and incest to be re pungent but I don't really see any reason to ban these practices via legal means. I was merely pointing out it that it is logically inconsistent to demand that homosexuality be acceptable but to also be against polygamy, incest, or bestiality. If you are for one and you employ the argument that there is nothing wrong as long as the no human being's autonomy is being threatened then you must be for the others as well. When I say to be for it I don't mean that you necessarily have to find the practice to be tasteful but you need to at least tolerate it.

And yes I do realize that bestiality involves one agent who is incapable of consenting to sexual acts in the way humans can but this agent is not a human and does not possess the same natural rights that human beings does. As Samseau clarified - there are many things we do to animals that we have deemed as a society on the whole to be acceptable such as eating them, using them as essentially slave labor, and performing scientific experiments on them. We would not be able to perform these actions on a human being unless I suppose someone consents to being another person's pack mule or dinner.

Further more, animals have sex with each other all the time in the wild and they certainly are not worried about any notion of consent.

[oldnemesis]

(11-12-2012 12:15 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

With the decline of marriage, all sorts of deviant sexual behavior have become normalized...

And so? I don't really understand why you care. For me it's the same as with gay sex - I have no intention to do so, but if some adults want to do this, and consent is there, why should I care?

Quote:

First it was pre-marital sex
Then it was spinsterhood
Then it was homosexuality
...and now incest (and pedophilia by extension).
I expect to see bestiality normalized before I die.

Somewhere in this list there was also interracial sex which you somehow failed to mention; I wonder why?

I'm pretty sure the laws against incest would not hold after 2003's Lawrence vs Texas as long as the adults are involved. Basically the ground would be the same - the government cannot enact the legislation just to enforce someone's moral code without the legitimate governmental interest. And I don't see what kind of government interest might be there which would withstand judicial scrunity considering the reliability and availability of birth control.

Honestly I'm not even sure adult incest is illegal in every state in the US, but I don't care much to spend time checking.

Pedophilia and bestiality, however, does not involve legal consent, so don't expect those legalized.

Quote:

However, right now, it appears that incest is the next sexual behavior to be white-washed, so you guys better be supportive of incestual behavior or else people will call you intolerant and you'll be charged with a hate-crime.

I wouldn't call you intolerant. Instead I'd ask you why do you care?
I really can't understand why American people like so much to peek into each others' bedrooms. In Europe this just doesn't happen.

[Irrelephant]

(11-13-2012 01:57 AM)oldnemesis Wrote:  

I wouldn't call you intolerant. Instead I'd ask you why do you care?
I really can't understand why American people like so much to peek into each others' bedrooms. In Europe this just doesn't happen.

Americans are way more religious than Europeans in general.

Brazil is even worse.

[oldnemesis]

(11-12-2012 10:25 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

Did you read his argument? An animal can't consent to us eating them, yet we do it every day.

That argument doesn't stand up in the courts. The courts said that even if you can eat an animal, you're still not allowed to torture the animal (for example, kill it in a certain way). Neither you cannot sacrifice your dog which you technically own.

Quote:

Realistically, if a society wants to promote healthy sexual practices then these sexual practices must be clearly defined and enforced.

This is a very interesting concern considering that you stated you're libertarian but still want to establish the Nazi-style control about which consensual adults can have sex with each others, and which cannot.

It is also amazing because you seem to believe everyone else would consider YOUR sexual practices healthy and they aren't going to be banned. I'd be much more careful here.

[Wutang]

I'd say that killing an animal for the purpose of consuming it's meat - even in a "humane" way is much more grave then having sexual relations with it. Murder is considered to be more heinous then rape when it comes to humans correct?

[kerouac]

I say let it all out!

I await the day my future daughter, who I may possibly have if I ever bother settling down (or by accident), is greeted by a man in a trench coat at her bus stop who wiggles his wiener at her, has a photo of the incident taken, has that posted on facebook 2.0, and has so many likes it will make her the most popular girl at school!

The future is bright!

[Hades]

I knew a kid in highschool who was always a little weird. Guy would go to a gym and do arm curls for two hours, that kind of shit. The guy wouldn't even bench press, he was obsessed with biceps and nothing else. We would do these circuit training exercises in the gym on Nautilus machines and he'd never move from the armcurl bar.

Well one day there was this picture that was circulating around on people's phones and it was pretty disturbing. It was partial male frontal nudity but that wasn't the big issue. This dude was balls deep in a sheep, and from what most people could see the sheep had bollocks on it. Everybody was wondering who the hell it was and after two or three days it turned out it was this Mister Armcurl dude because he has this weird looking birthmark on his hip, like a strawberry. It was a tense few days in the locker room, since he was in my gym class. Not sure what this guy ended up doing but once word got out he must have moved, never saw him again.

(11-12-2012 02:07 PM)Roosh Wrote:  

Don't forget pedophilia. The original feminists wanted this to be normal behavior too.

Quote:

The educators' notes indicate that they placed a very strong emphasis on sex education. Almost every day, the students played games that involved taking off their clothes, reading porno magazines together and pantomiming intercourse.

According to the records, a "sex exercise" was conducted on Dec. 11 and a "fucking hour" on Jan. 14. An entry made on Nov. 26 reads: "In general, by lying there we repeatedly provoked, openly or in a hidden way, sexual innuendoes, which were then expressed in pantomimes, which Kurt and Rita performed together on the low table (as a stage) in front of us."

http://www.spiegel.de/international/zeit...02679.html

Not sure what to make of this to be honest. If I recall correctly growing up a lot of dudes in sports and gym class would basically jerk each other off in locker rooms and have sleepovers where they'd loot Daddy's liquor cabinet and play with each other. I remember girls would do the same thing but a lot tamer, mostly touching each other. Junior High was a pretty fucked up place. This takes it way too far though, kids don't have to be sexually liberated.

[jammer]

What's considered healthy? Is anal sex or oral sex a healthy practice? Is a reverse cowgirl position considered a healthy sexual practice?

[ColSpanker]

Agreed. My fave troll is always to wonder why Old Order Mormons are hunted down like feral dogs for having extra wives, when Elllen has her own TV show.
I guess the concern is inverse to the distance from New York City or San Francisco.

[Wutang]

At least gays can get married in certain parts of the US while Mormons cannot have a polygamous marriage in any part of the country - a legal one anyways. Gays also have a better image in our society. There are elements of society who think consider their sexual behavior to be abhorrent but also other parts that consider them to be cutting edge, fashionable, possessing good taste - etc. Polygamists on the other hand would be shunned by 99% of the people in this country. However, the reason you don't hear about any polygamists being bullied like you hear about gays being bullied is because polygamists tend to stick to their own communities and limit contact with outsiders.

It's simply all about media image. Gays and their allies are in more positions of power in mass media then polygamists. These people have been pushing a successful campaign for the last few to legitimize their behavior while the polygamists seem content to just be left alone.