[Simeon_Strangelight]

< Good article - also for other reasons than anal sex.

Krauser wrote that he usually tries to fuck a girl in the ass early on. He does not ask, he just does it. Occasionally it does not work, because some women are really tight there - even some porn stars will never have anal. But there seems to be something to it.


---------------

As for anal sex being a way to preserve "virginity":

This is like counting only the guys she had LTRs with on her notch count leaving aside one night stands, orgies, sugardaddies, blowjobs etc.

A girl who does this is utterly deluded - she is mentally not holding out at anything.

I remember when I was 15 and tried to date this one girl. She told me back then proudly that she had kissed 32 guys in the last year. She did it in a way to tell me how great she was. Back then I was taken aback, because I only started with girls a bit later and had no idea how to react to that.

She probably turned out to be a raging slut - in reality she was already one back then even if she had not fucked too many (she did not tell me anything about that, but I can imagine that she fucked a few of those 32).

[MMX2010]

Zatara Wrote:

If this means I get to fuck more girls in the ass I'm entirely in favour of it.

Meanwhile, if either Samseau or myself outline that this Teen Vogue article leads to more young boys deciding that they're gay, and giving themselves to be fucked by older gay men, you'll shrug. And when you shrug, we'll point out that this strongly suggests you're degenerate, after which you'll complain to the mods.

[911]

The whole lifestyle of chasing notches and looking at settling down and starting a family as an outdated burden is part of the agenda of destroying families and the social fiber by making men adopt a promiscuous gay lifestyle. You have Vogue and Cosmo doing the dirty work for the women, and Playboy for the men.

The editor of Cosmo, who was literally a whore and only died out recently was highly influential and successful in churning out millions of slores:

https://www.henrymakow.com/130103.html

Quote:

Cosmo Editor Helen Gurley Brown, who died Monday, is called "champion of the single girl" by the heterophobic Illuminati media. Thanks partly to her, 50% of American women are childless today. She taught them to sell their bodies rather than wait for love and marriage. She was an Illuminati social engineer, a satanist whore who made prostitution seem chic.

In her autobiography, "I'm Wild Again" (2000) she tells us right away that in 1941, at age 19 she joined an "escort service" and had sex with a 50-year-old man for $5 (worth $80 today.)

Quote:

In 1965, Helen Gurley Brown, the editor of Cosmopolitan, said that a housewife was "a parasite, a dependent, a scrounger, a sponger or a bum." She didn't call them whores because she wanted them to be whores.

Her sister-in-arms, Betty Friedan, compared homemakers to "concentration camp inmates" because of the lack of stimulation and opportunity for advancement in concentration camps. (The Feminine Mystique, p. 306)

These crude attacks typify the vicious psychological campaign waged against women and society by Illuminati Satanists.Their program to degrade women, destroy families, arrest heterosexual development, create dysfunction and reduce population was devastatingly successful.

"The scale of marital breakdown in the West since 1960 has no historical precedent," says historian Lawrence Stone. In 40 short years, the marriage rate is down by one third, the divorce rate has doubled, the birth rate is one half, and single parent families per capita have tripled. Forty per cent of all children born in the US in 2007 were out of wedlock compared to 4% in 1957. (Bennett, The Broken Hearth, p.10)

In 1952, the Rockefellers controlled $250 million dollars of media advertising annually. They hyped Helen Gurley Brown's 1962 book, "Sex and the Single Girl" and the movie. Single women were told they should have career and sex instead of family. At the same time, the Rockefellers were also funding and lobbying for population control and eugenics.

https://www.henrymakow.com/130103.html

https://www.savethemales.ca/001904.html?...1491284264


And on the subversion of males front, you have Playboy Magazine and Hefner along with the porn industry:

Quote:

What kind of man is {the Playboy man}?

He is fastidious about his appearance, his home and his possessions. He wants as much sex as possible and chooses sexual partners mostly on the basis of appearance. He is self-absorbed and doesn't want emotional involvement or commitment. He thinks a woman would stifle him and children would be a burden.

Does this sound like many gays? It is also the masculine ideal purveyed by Playboy magazine to men since the 1950's.

The essence of manhood is to lead and support a family. But in 1972, 3 out of 4 male college students got their ideas about masculinity from Playboy, at an incalculable price to themselves, women, children and society.

The similarity between the Playboy and homosexual ideal is no coincidence. "The Kinsey Report" (1948) shaped current mainstream attitudes to sex. It championed unfettered sexual expression and became the manifesto of the counterculture. It inspired Hugh Hefner to start Playboy in 1953.

Essentially "The Kinsey Report" said that aberrant sexual behavior was so common as to be normal. Thanks to psychologist Dr. Judith Reisman, we now know that Alfred Kinsey was a homosexual and the "Kinsley Report" was a fraud.

Quote:

With messianic fervor, Playboy took its gospel of sexual freedom to the American male who in the 1950's-1960's still consecrated sex for marriage. Playboy's aim, the aim of all pornographers, was to hook men on the glossy fantasy. To do this, they had to prevent them from finding true satisfaction in marriage.

In Reisman's words, "Playboy was the first national magazine to exploit college men's fears of women and family commitment. Playboy offered itself as a reliable, comforting substitute for monogamous heterosexual love." (Judith Reisman, "Soft Porn Plays Hardball," p 47)

Thus sworn enemies, Playboy and radical feminists, found common ground in hatred of the nuclear family. As a result, society now suffers from epidemics of family breakdown, pornography, impotence, child sexual abuse, sadosexual violence, teen pregnancy, a cocktail of STD's and, of course, AIDS. The birthrate has plummeted by 50% since 1960 and is barely at replacement level.

Homosexuality is a developmental disorder defined by the failure to establish a permanent bond with a member of the opposite sex. Psychologist Richard Cohen, in "Coming Out Straight: Understanding and Healing Homosexuality" (2000) argues it is caused when a male child fails to bond with his father. By having sex with men, the adult gay is trying to compensate for father-love denied in adolescence.

Quote:

Gay and feminist activists think traditional morality was invented to perpetuate an unjust status quo. In fact, morality is the accumulated wisdom of mankind regarding what is healthy and ultimately fulfilling. Perversion is deviation from what is healthy.

Heterosexual morality places sex in the context of love and/or marriage because it is healthy and human. It ensures that the most profound and intimate physical act between two people expresses a commensurate emotional-spiritual bond. Promiscuous sex is a desperate plea for love. Love and marriage answer that call and provide for the natural and necessary outcome of sex, children.

With Hugh Hefner's help, Alfred Kinsey detached sex from love and procreation. He reduced it to another physical function like urinating. Homosexual activists champion anonymous sex: a majority of gays have 10s-100s of partners each year. In less extreme form, heterosexuals have adopted this model. Recently a social columnist enviously described straight friends whose relationships have ended: "they're out partying, having the time and the sex, it seems of their lives."

https://www.savethemales.ca/000165.html

[WanderingSoul]

I'm surprised there's people on here who think adults writing guides to anal sex in magazines aimed at 13 year old kids isn't wrong in any way.

[puckerman]

It's probably a good idea to provide a link to General Stalin's "Anal Data Sheet":

thread-60607.html

[RURALGAMER]

(07-22-2017 06:18 PM)Sebastian Wrote:  

How old are you?
It looks like sex culture has been changed quite a bit compared to 10 years ago (yeah millenium, not 90s)
I see people talking about anals, eating asses and other things on instagram. Young boys and girls tag each other.
When you feel 'wtf is wrong with young people these days' thats sign of aging.
Im sure when i was younger, older generation looked at us and shook their heads.

Anyways, young people are going to experiment with anal these days, then its better to know those than doing it without knowledge?
Im sure when they openly started talking about sex back in the days, it was like this.

No that isn't a sign of aging. That's a sign of moral decay.
Anyone who defends this societal cancer is another one of those signs.

[zatara]

(07-23-2017 01:22 PM)MMX2010 Wrote:  

Zatara Wrote:

If this means I get to fuck more girls in the ass I'm entirely in favour of it.

Meanwhile, if either Samseau or myself outline that this Teen Vogue article leads to more young boys deciding that they're gay, and giving themselves to be fucked by older gay men, you'll shrug. And when you shrug, we'll point out that this strongly suggests you're degenerate, after which you'll complain to the mods.

? Thats an odd one. I've never complained to the mods about any post.

I doubt a Teen Vogue article is going to be the thing that convinces hordes of young men to turn gay. But even if it did - thats no skin off my nose. As long as everyones over 18 what other consenting adults do behind close doors doesn't matter to me.

If anything, hordes of young men turning gay because of the article would probably be a positive. That would mean less competition for the hot teenage girls who will also be reading the article, who I now get to fuck in the ass.

You haven't lived until you've taken a "good Christian girl"'s anal virginity, choked her out etc - just really dominated her sexually. Her future husband will have no idea of the terrible things you've done to his "pure" girlfriend.

[bbgun]

Teen anal? Sounds like a vid I just downloaded.

[Ocelot]

(07-24-2017 07:15 AM)zatara Wrote:  

I doubt a Teen Vogue article is going to be the thing that convinces hordes of young men to turn gay.

These aren't 'young men', they're children being specifically targeted by degenerate media designed to influence them, and it's far from benevolent.

(07-24-2017 07:15 AM)zatara Wrote:  

But even if it did - thats no skin off my nose. As long as everyones over 18 what other consenting adults do behind close doors doesn't matter to me.

Is it okay if a father fucks his 18 year old daughter? If not, why not? And if you want to bring up genetic defects in potential children: the hypothetical father just had a vasectomy.

Is bestiality okay? If not, why not? If your argument is that animals can't 'consent', I'm pretty sure they don't consent to being factory farmed, slaughtered and eaten, so if 'consent' is your yardstick of morality, the precedent's already there...

Necrophilia?

There is no consistent underlying logic behind the current push to normalise increasing numbers of dysfunctional lifestyles other than 'one step at a time away from normal'. It is pure subversion, and if Libertarians don't have a problem with that, then I've got a problem with Libertarianism.

Oh, and the idea that 'hordes of people turning gay' wouldn't affect you is also laughable, even if you think the idea of it happening to begin with is absurd. I suppose the sexual revolution didn't affect anyone in any way either? I mean it was just a movement of consenting adults.

For better or worse, people's lifestyle choices do affect those around them, and anything seeking to influence children needs to be taken seriously.

[DJ-Matt]

(07-22-2017 11:28 PM)AnonymousBosch Wrote:  

Every time a middle aged woman pops an anti-depressant, a Cosmo writer gets her wings.

New signature!

[Dan Woolf]

(07-22-2017 06:18 PM)Sebastian Wrote:  

When you feel 'wtf is wrong with young people these days' thats sign of aging.
Im sure when i was younger, older generation looked at us and shook their heads.

I can't find it now but I remember seeing a cartoon once.

First picture: an old couple is sitting in a cafe and disapprovingly looking at a young couple who are holding hands in public.
Second picture: the young couple from the first picture is now old and disapprovingly looking at a young couple who are kissing in public.
Third picture: the young couple from the second picture is now old and disapprovingly looking at a young couple who are fucking in public.

[Silver_Tube]

I don't like the push for mass degeneracy exemplified in this article but I think we need to be very careful about acting the role of the concerned parent nanny-censors. Christian parents tried the suppression tactic through the 90's and it failed badly. A lot of our recent success has come from a rebellion against politically correct pro censorship though policing. The left wants us to be the censor so they can get the edginess back on their side. Chiding mommy tweets are not the appropriate response here. I'm thinking shocking rebuttal articles with words like faggot and cuck in them would be more productive. Children want to be on the edgy cool side and if they catch us REEEEEE'ing we'll lose them.

[MMX2010]

Zatara Wrote:

You haven't lived until you've taken a "good Christian girl"'s anal virginity, choked her out etc - just really dominated her sexually. Her future husband will have no idea of the terrible things you've done to his "pure" girlfriend.

If causing pain in secret is the thing that gets you off the most, then you condone when others cause pain in secret to you, right? Anyone who doxxes you, and puts the people you love (if anyone) through untold amounts of pain is just living Your Message, right? They'll just tell ourselves that "we haven't really lived" until they put someone they dislike through massive amount of emotional pain.

[Number one bummer]

(07-24-2017 10:03 AM)Silver_Tube Wrote:  

I don't like the push for mass degeneracy exemplified in this article but I think we need to be very careful about acting the role of the concerned parent nanny-censors. Christian parents tried the suppression tactic through the 90's and it failed badly. A lot of our recent success has come from a rebellion against politically correct pro censorship though policing. The left wants us to be the censor so they can get the edginess back on their side. Chiding mommy tweets are not the appropriate response here. I'm thinking shocking rebuttal articles with words like faggot and cuck in them would be more productive. Children want to be on the edgy cool side and if they catch us REEEEEE'ing we'll lose them.

The left still has "edgy." It's just that nobody wants to be labeled edgy when that entails believing there are 67 genders, a sexual spectrum, committing degenerate acts for sake of being degenerate and becoming a very accurate stereotypes. Who wants to be a fat, blue haired, tumblr wielding feminist that complains about problematic toilet seat sizes, or whatever the issue of the day is.

When Nietzsche said "God is dead" he was simply a little early. God is dead in the sense that large swaths of society do not look at divine command theory ethics as a driving ethical force. So we are left with cultural relativism and whatever normative theory a person uses to justify their behavior. The problem being most normative theories have large holes that open society to all sorts of degenerate behavior. Look at Ayn Rand's egoism for example, you can justify all sorts of sin and degeneracy with that line of thinking.

Nietzsche was right in believing that "killing God" would leave western society wide open to rampant moral decay. Secular societies are either destroyed by the degeneracy from within or the barbarians(rapefugees) from the outside.

[rpg]

More aids, more anal herpes, more anal warts.
I always thought anal was something really bored couples in LTR would do. I see it getting more popular because these slags today are so loose nobody can feel a thing.

[911]

(07-24-2017 07:15 AM)zatara Wrote:  

(07-23-2017 01:22 PM)MMX2010 Wrote:  

Zatara Wrote:

If this means I get to fuck more girls in the ass I'm entirely in favour of it.

Meanwhile, if either Samseau or myself outline that this Teen Vogue article leads to more young boys deciding that they're gay, and giving themselves to be fucked by older gay men, you'll shrug. And when you shrug, we'll point out that this strongly suggests you're degenerate, after which you'll complain to the mods.

? Thats an odd one. I've never complained to the mods about any post.

I doubt a Teen Vogue article is going to be the thing that convinces hordes of young men to turn gay. But even if it did - thats no skin off my nose. As long as everyones over 18 what other consenting adults do behind close doors doesn't matter to me.

Uhm, Teen Vogue is not aimed at adults. Do you see the problem in your lack of reasoning here?

Quote:

If anything, hordes of young men turning gay because of the article would probably be a positive. That would mean less competition for the hot teenage girls who will also be reading the article, who I now get to fuck in the ass.

Most of the men who turn gay are effete losers. However many women who are becoming lesbians now aren't just the butch types, there's many decent-looking feminine women who get turned off from men, or become unable to have a normal family life because of stuff including the degenerate behavior you are boasting about.

[zatara]

(07-24-2017 10:12 AM)MMX2010 Wrote:  

If causing pain in secret is the thing that gets you off the most, then you condone when others cause pain in secret to you, right? Anyone who doxxes you, and puts the people you love (if anyone) through untold amounts of pain is just living Your Message, right? They'll just tell ourselves that "we haven't really lived" until they put someone they dislike through massive amount of emotional pain.

Its not about causing pain, its about the emotional and sexual domination. The ROK article puckerman posted on the last page discusses it fairly well. MikeCF, a fan favourite here, has some great articles on it too. It really is worth trying. Have you tried it?

Have a read of this for starters, from MikeCF:

https://www.dangerandplay.com/2014/02/11...ownership/

Your debate style is err...odd, though. Are you threatening to doxx me because I enjoy having anal sex with women? Thats an odd one. I'm also fairly sure the people I love wouldn't be particularly offended by my posts on the forum, for what its worth.

(07-24-2017 09:23 AM)Ocelot Wrote:  

These aren't 'young men', they're children being specifically targeted by degenerate media designed to influence them, and it's far from benevolent.

Is it okay if a father fucks his 18 year old daughter? If not, why not? And if you want to bring up genetic defects in potential children: the hypothetical father just had a vasectomy.

Is bestiality okay? If not, why not? If your argument is that animals can't 'consent', I'm pretty sure they don't consent to being factory farmed, slaughtered and eaten, so if 'consent' is your yardstick of morality, the precedent's already there...

Necrophilia?

There is no consistent underlying logic behind the current push to normalise increasing numbers of dysfunctional lifestyles other than 'one step at a time away from normal'. It is pure subversion, and if Libertarians don't have a problem with that, then I've got a problem with Libertarianism.

Oh, and the idea that 'hordes of people turning gay' wouldn't affect you is also laughable, even if you think the idea of it happening to begin with is absurd. I suppose the sexual revolution didn't affect anyone in any way either? I mean it was just a movement of consenting adults.

For better or worse, people's lifestyle choices do affect those around them, and anything seeking to influence children needs to be taken seriously.

I have no idea what the Teen Vogue consumer demographics look like. I'm obviously against anyone breaking age of consent laws, regardless of sexual orientation, so can only comment on how this might effect legal sexual acts.

If an 18 year old daughter wants to fuck her father I have no problem with that - shes old enough to make life choices. You, I, or the government have no place telling an adult what they can or can not do with their own body in the privacy of their own home.

Bestiality or necrophilia are both by their nature one-sided, there is a lack of two party consent. On a moral level I'd also be against factory farming yes, but unfortunately meat just tastes too good to give up.

Hordes of young men turning gay doesn't effect me in the slightest. I'm not gay, I don't go to gay bars. The only thing it does is mean there are less young men chasing young women to compete with me. The sexual revolution involved heterosexuals, so did affect me. And I'm glad it did. One night stands would be much, much harder to come by if hadn't.

(07-24-2017 10:58 AM)911 Wrote:  

Uhm, Teen Vogue is not aimed at adults. Do you see the problem in your lack of reasoning here?

Most of the men who turn gay are effete losers. However many women who are becoming lesbians now aren't just the butch types, there's many decent-looking feminine women who get turned off from men, or become unable to have a normal family life because of stuff including the degenerate behavior you are boasting about.

I'll refer to the above re: Teen Vogue reader demographics.

Most women who turn 'gay' tend to actually be bi-sexual. Especially the more feminine ones. Their position on the Kinsey scale tends to be more towards the middle, rather than at either extreme. Its completely possible to still bed them, in most cases, if you've got the right game/looks that they want.

Plus, a girl with lesbian tendencies is far more likely to agree to a threesome with another girl and you. Another win I reckon.

[MMX2010]

Zatara Wrote:

Its not about causing pain, its about the emotional and sexual domination.

Exactly. So if someone doxxes you, and then causes emotional pain and sexual trauma in you without your consent, then they're just living Your Message, right?

And before you say, "Hey, wait a minute! I only support sexual behavior between consenting adults!", I'll refute that by citing your words here, "You haven't lived until you've taken a "good Christian girl"'s anal virginity, choked her out etc - just really dominated her sexually. Her future husband will have no idea of the terrible things you've done to his "pure" girlfriend."

Given that her future husband will have no idea, then he couldn't have possibly consented.

The best part, though? You think your sexual behaviors make you powerful and dominant, but compared to the successes of people like Donald Trump, how powerful and dominant are you really? Even the Good Christian people whom you look down upon are relatively more powerful and dominant than you'll ever be.

[911]

(07-24-2017 11:17 AM)zatara Wrote:  

(07-24-2017 10:58 AM)911 Wrote:  

Uhm, Teen Vogue is not aimed at adults. Do you see the problem in your lack of reasoning here?

Most of the men who turn gay are effete losers. However many women who are becoming lesbians now aren't just the butch types, there's many decent-looking feminine women who get turned off from men, or become unable to have a normal family life because of stuff including the degenerate behavior you are boasting about.

I'll refer to the above re: Teen Vogue reader demographics.

Most women who turn 'gay' tend to actually be bi-sexual. Especially the more feminine ones. Their position on the Kinsey scale tends to be more towards the middle, rather than at either extreme. Its completely possible to still bed them, in most cases, if you've got the right game/looks that they want.

Plus, a girl with lesbian tendencies is far more likely to agree to a threesome with another girl and you. Another win I reckon.

The "Kinsey scale" is a pure propaganda construct. Kinsey was a total degenerate who disguised his agenda as scientific research, promoted child sexualization and abuse, and got off by, among other things, self-mutilation. He ended up dying from his sexual self-mutiliations.

He was funded by the Rockefellers in order to promote degeneracy, destroy morals to make people more gullible and easier to control, and unfortunately this thread is yet another example of how wildly successful that program was.

You've internalized that propaganda to the point where you can't even see it or think outside it.

[kaotic]

You can tell who fucks and who doesn't on this thread.

Being a dude who at any moment would slip it in a girls ass given the chance - I completely condemn this article.

This shouldn't be pushed on young girls at all.

[zatara]

(07-24-2017 11:50 AM)MMX2010 Wrote:  

Exactly. So if someone doxxes you, and then causes emotional pain and sexual trauma in you without your consent, then they're just living Your Message, right?

And before you say, "Hey, wait a minute! I only support sexual behavior between consenting adults!", I'll refute that by citing your words here, "You haven't lived until you've taken a "good Christian girl"'s anal virginity, choked her out etc - just really dominated her sexually. Her future husband will have no idea of the terrible things you've done to his "pure" girlfriend."

Given that her future husband will have no idea, then he couldn't have possibly consented.

The best part, though? You think your sexual behaviors make you powerful and dominant, but compared to the successes of people like Donald Trump, how powerful and dominant are you really? Even the Good Christian people whom you look down upon are relatively more powerful and dominant than you'll ever be.

If attempting to doxx me gives you sexual thrills then eh, by all means go for it. I wish you luck. Its a bit odd I think, but I have no problem with you jerking off while doing it, if thats what you're into.

Why would a girl's future husband's consent matter to me when I'm fucking her? I'm fucking her for my own sexual gratification. As long as she consents, and I consent, thats all that matters - the consent of the two adults engaged in the sexual act. I just find it amusing that some naive beta male will eventually marry a girl who's been completely turnt out by more alpha men in her youth.

Dominating a woman sexually in a bedroom does make you dominant in your relationship with her, by very definition. Donald Trump is rather irrelevant, hes (presumably) not involved in the sexual relationship between you and her.

If you've never tried it you really should, otherwise you're arguing from a position of inexperience and ignorance. Have a read of the articles posted on either Danger & Play or on ROK on how to do it and give it a shot.

(07-24-2017 11:54 AM)911 Wrote:  

The "Kinsey scale" is a pure propaganda construct. Kinsey was a total degenerate who disguised his agenda as scientific research, promoted child sexualization and abuse, and got off by, among other things, self-mutilation. He ended up dying from his sexual self-mutiliations.

He was funded by the Rockefellers in order to promote degeneracy, destroy morals to make people more gullible and easier to control, and unfortunately this thread is yet another example of how wildly successful that program was.

You've internalized that propaganda to the point where you can't even see it or think outside it.

The Kinsey scale is a useful shorthand for describing how most women are not actually fully gay, but only bi-sexual. I don't really give a shit about Kinsey himself, or the Rockefellers, or any other vague macro conspiracy that relates to it. My point was women's bi-sexuality isn't really a problem, because they can be gamed just the same by the right men. And its a positive in some situations, because they're more open to threesomes with other females. Are you disagreeing with that?

[MMX2010]

Zatara Wrote:

Why would a girl's future husband's consent matter to me when I'm fucking her? I'm fucking her for my own sexual gratification. As long as she consents, and I consent, thats all that matters - the consent of the two adults engaged in the sexual act. [b]I just find it amusing that some naive beta male will eventually marry a girl who's been completely turnt out by more alpha men in her youth.

Yes, you said that earlier, "You haven't lived until you've taken a "good Christian girl"'s anal virginity, choked her out etc - just really dominated her sexually. Her future husband will have no idea of the terrible things you've done to his "pure" girlfriend."

The best part is that her future husband will be better than you, smarter than you, and more successful than you. And that you know all of this, because you're only fucking her to get back at him. Getting back at someone is an admission that you think he's better than you.

Zatara Wrote:

Donald Trump is rather irrelevant, hes (presumably) not involved in the sexual relationship between you and her.

Donald Trump is relevant because you're someone who claims to seek power and dominance, but you don't recognize that President Trump's power and dominance far exceeds yours.

[Number one bummer]

(07-24-2017 12:21 PM)zatara Wrote:  

If attempting to doxx me gives you sexual thrills then eh, by all means go for it. I wish you luck. Its a bit odd I think, but I have no problem with you jerking off while doing it, if thats what you're into.

The Kinsey scale is a useful shorthand for describing how most women are not actually fully gay, but only bi-sexual.

You are missing the doxing analogy MMX2010 was trying to make, and doing so in a manner that appears intentional. It was clear he was using your line of logic to draw rational outcomes that don't favor your logic.

The Kinsey scale is a tool created by leftist academia to justify degenerate behavior.

I'll ask you a more direct question. Do you believe it is ethically sound to promote degenerate sexual acts to an audience of minors?

I understand that having the libertarian mindset of "I don't care what consenting parties do" feels centrist and maybe self-righteous. It is easy to feel like you are above the fray with that line of thinking. However, "if you stand for nothing you will fall for anything." Freedom without values is what destroys society and civilization. If you can't tell what is right or wrong you will go down a path that you won't like the outcome of.

For the betterment of society we should not quietly allow this filth to be published or for harmful lifestyles to be promoted.

[Renzy]

(07-24-2017 10:39 AM)Number one bummer Wrote:  

The left still has "edgy." It's just that nobody wants to be labeled edgy when that entails believing there are 67 genders, a sexual spectrum, committing degenerate acts for sake of being degenerate and becoming a very accurate stereotypes. Who wants to be a fat, blue haired, tumblr wielding feminist that complains about problematic toilet seat sizes, or whatever the issue of the day is.

They put themselves in this absurd position. Their sexual "revolution" has been debasing our culture for the past 60s years, and now there's so few taboos left to break that they're stuck with increasingly bizarre issues (pregnant gay "men", tranny bathroom crisis, hormone treatment for 8 year olds, etc.) in their never ending attempt to rebel against anything traditional.

They're like teenagers who've already gotten pierced, tattooed, and done every drug under the sun and now they're having trouble figuring out new ways to shock their parents / mainstream society.

[MMX2010]

Number one bummer Wrote:

I'll ask you a more direct question. Do you believe it is ethically sound to promote degenerate sexual acts to an audience of minors?

That's not the right question to ask, in my opinion. Narcissists construct illogical beliefs to protect their self-image, and you don't defeat narcissists by exposing the falseness of their beliefs. You defeat them by exposing the falseness of their self-image.

Zatara is clearly trying to promote himself as being powerful and dominant, so a question like, "Have you ever been beaten up after anally fucking a gang member's girlfriend OR do you prefer the abandoned daughters of weak men in your anal conquests?" would be much better.

I don't imagine Zatara accepting the opportunity to anally fuck a gang member's girlfriend, because he knows those types of men fight back.