Dating two women

[CAM]

oh dear. hahaha. Does he say that hed rather be a woman and all her special woman parts in that first quote? Im trying to work out what he meant if its just a mistake. Cant see a way back for him after this. Maybe this is why he keeps losing his women, because he wont take them in the ass. Most women love it.

A typo, of course

[IndiReloaded]

Nick, stop being an ass. Cam's a good guy and he uses this place as we all do: a fun place to try out ideas that we would never speak IRL. The standards here are different. What is posted here is not indicative of who we are in our day to day. Its the internet, duh. I've posted plenty of experiments here and so have you.

You are on your way to being a successful young man, but you are still an immature twit in a lot of ways. BTW, your intellect, which is impressive I admit, is no guarantee of success in other areas of your life. There are plenty of highly intelligent, materially successful assholes who lose their families everyday b/c they neglect or abuse what is most important. Beware the inner ego-driven asshole, young man.

@ Cam - thanks for taking the time to make that 'real' post amongst all the chatter.

[IndiReloaded]

[CAM]

There are plenty of highly intelligent, materially successful assholes who lose their families everyday b/c they neglect or abuse what is most important. Beware the inner ego-driven asshole, young man.

@ Cam - thanks for taking the time to make that 'real' post amongst all the chatter.

Thanks you for your posted comments. I totally agree with the "beware" statement you made. I work with people like that. There are so many smart and successful people where I work that it is very very humbling. It is also troubling, as I have said elsewhere on LF, to see these same people sleepwalk through life, unhappy and/or detached from themselves, their families and friends. The comment is often made that "We work so hard that we don't have time to think." To extend that thought--"We work so hard that we don't have to think or feel or really care." It is like Nietzsche's "Last Man"--an automaton. Socially, politically, professionally, and economically we are there.

Okay, bye

[KingZ]

You are half my age and more successful, so you say. Please tell me what that means. What is "success" for you? Money? Sex? Power? Education? Please enlighten me. Let's discuss you for a bit rather than me, okay? And to be honest, any of the above explanations wouldn't impress me, but it would help me to understand you.

You look at this as an opportunity to show your great wisdom. Maybe the logic in my posting is that I see a pattern repeating itself in society of exactly what you prescribe. What has happened as a result? Unmarried status is soaring, birth rates are dropping, illegitimacy is on the rise, divorce rates are way up. All of this is particularly the case in the Western world and the West is declining. Hey, but some people think just being personally happy is full definition of success be that wind surfing in Western Australia or skiing or hiking. Increasingly, personal happiness is seen as success and no discussion of responsibility or lasting commitment to others, to family, to children, or to society as a whole. BTW that is one reason that it is difficult to find someting real with a real person. That is one reason I figured to see if one or the other would be a good prospect.

Sorry, but this is just dumb. I never used the word "success", you did. I said that I've surpassed you in every department. Part of my surpassing you is knowing the truth about "success" and "happiness": they're [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_happiness]misunderstood illusions[/url]; [url=http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,2019628,00.html]just words that have been put in place to delude assholes like you[/url].

Another way I've surpassed you by miles is that I don't double-space or triple-space after I finish a sentence. Are you retarded?

If you want an argument about societal standards, you won't get one out of me. I have no intention of getting a degree, getting married, having kids, buying a house, or letting Corporate America fu​ck me in the ass.

Actually, you probably comply with society's rules more than I do. You didn't abort your mistake of a child.

Haxan gets it: the point is that I am someone who made the mistake of listening to others about relationships when I was in my 20s and it became habitual. Otherwise, I played by the old rules and did fine. Now is a good opportunity to see if I can export good decisions to other areas of life. Presenting my case here was really only an opportunity to open a dialogue with similarly-minded people. Instead, the loudest voices are from those who are part of the problem.

The fact that you are so vehement in your opposition indicates that it bothers you that another way in life is proposed. It is classic Saul Alinsky tactics, whether you realize it or not. The Alinsky approach is embedded in dialogue today, it was woven into your education. One of Alinsky's best students is an education professor who has had a large influence on curriculum and pedagogy. Villify that which you don't agree in rational or irrational ways, and remind others to not enter into a dialogue unacceptable to you. Scares them. They say, "Oh don't get on that guy's wrong side!" Or, they try to introduce humor to change the subject because they are nervous.

Where's the fiction, BTW? It is there, but not where you think.

When I was in high school, anal sex was something that fags did to each other. Men screwed women in the vagina. Hard to believe we live in a world where a guy will go apeshit because another guy thinks anal sex is disgusting. Wow. Talk about Soddom and Gomorrah. If that's where we are, I think we're way past being "saved" as a race. Flash forward ten years and a KingZ-type poster here will get upset because I tell him that he should stop screwing his dog.

Now, I am REALLY tired of this thread. In fact, a bit tired of the site, too. I need a vacation.

Ah, finally the REAL source of His angst. Namely, my opinion of KingZ's (I can't remember his former 'name' here) bragging about having had anal sex with his fiance. I didn't get upset. I just stated my opinion. You are right, I do think anal sex is disgusting. That's my opinion. It doesn't have to conform to your worldview. You are entitled to your own opinion. Is it is a free country (at least where I live). BTW, did you ever marry the woman?

@ Cam - thanks for taking the time to make that 'real' post amongst all the chatter.

Are you serious? You called that a real post?

That was an old man posting drivel that was initiated on the weak and false assumption that me and Frasbee are the same person, which is laughable.

CAM, you speak really highly of high school. Is high school where you formulated your moral values, and just decided to stop thinking critically once you got your diploma? You thought, Oh hey, homosexuals are engaging in anal sex, and my parents told me it's wrong, so clearly, it's wrong; without questioning it later? Says a lot about you. It really does feel like I'm arguing with a high school jock, but with a couple community college courses added in to that peanut-sized brain, so you can make a reference to Alinsky and think you're clever.

Here's a video with watching. It might help you rethink some of your retard views on morality:

[IndiReloaded]

Yes, its a real post, written in real time. Come on, stop haranguing and know what your goal is in the argument, sweet. There is less disagreement here than it seems. Different approaches, is all.

Alas, the time is coming when man will no longer give birth to a star. Alas, the time of the most despicable man is coming, he that is no longer able to despise himself. Behold, I show you the last man.

Its not a bad thing to have a conscience (I think) provided it guides us to being better people. Namaste, all.

[KingZ]

Yes, its a real post, written in real time. Come on, stop haranguing and know what your goal is in the argument, sweet. There is less disagreement here than it seems. Different approaches, is all.

Its not a bad thing to have a conscience (I think) provided it guides us to being better people. Namaste, all.

I know exactly what my goal is, here. CAM has completely obsolete opinions about ethics, sex, life, and generally is not intelligent. My goal is to get him to understand this, admit it, and correct his behavior, or kill himself.

For the record, CAM, there's nothing wrong with screwing your dog. The only thing stopping you, morally, is the lack of certainty that it isn't rape.

[IndiReloaded]

The only thing stopping you, morally, is the lack of certainty that it isn't rape.

You don't seem to understand the video you posted. If the dog tries to run (which it would) then its suffering, therefore its wrong. Not the mention the possibility of acquiring and spreading an as-yet undiscovered disease (HIV?).

If you are going to be making arguments in this space, you need to be careful in your language. An *opinion* about anal sex (for example) is just that. Much like choosing a flavour of ice cream. Is it distasteful? To me personally, yes, but is it morally wrong? My answer is no b/c my morality is based on determination of suffering. I'm being very simple in my description here, of course (before someone starts tossing Kant vs. Mill at me).

Morality is contextual tho. If we were living in a Battlestar Galactica scenario where there were only 50K humans (with a ratio 10:1 female to male--you wish, lol) left and reproduction was a societal goal, then perhaps anal sex might be considered immoral *in that society*. Tho, one could make the argument that it isn't the anal sex per se that is the wrong, but not contributing sperm to women of reproductive age. In which case, so long as one makes a suitable contribution (to the turkey baster operation), then however one chooses to obtain orgasms is irrelevant. I'd accept that argument.

I feel like we are getting off track here, tho. Surely it is the net sum of behaviour (allowing that behaviours may be weighted differently--murder is generally pretty negative) that makes one a moral or amoral person? What is wrong with disliking anal if one is contributing to society in other ways? For example, by training dozens of the next generation of deep thinkers who will help advance society. Does that count for nothing, and instead one should kill oneself b/c of a dislike for anal sex?

[KingZ]

You don't seem to understand the video you posted. If the dog tries to run (which it would) then its suffering, therefore its wrong. Not the mention the possibility of acquiring and spreading an as-yet undiscovered disease (HIV?).

Ha...you just said that having sex with a dog is always wrong because it's going to run 100% of the time, which is indicative of suffering.

It wouldn't necessarily try to run. A lot of male dogs try to copulate with their female owners. Is it morally wrong to let them? I would say no.

Even if it did run, would it be indicative of suffering? Not necessarily. Like I said, the only thing stopping you is uncertainty.

Also, if that was a suggestion that HIV came from humans having sex with monkeys... do I really need to address that? Even if it was, what's morally wrong is knowingly spreading it, not the act itself of having sex with an animal.

[IndiReloaded]

Even if it was, what's morally wrong is knowingly spreading it, not the act itself of having sex with an animal.

Allowing this example to pass (i.e. not having the HIV causality argument) I would say this: it *is* wrong if causality is established. Your argument that it might be 1 step removed doesn't make it okay. Think of it as 'critical path' for causality. If a society-threatening disease is directly linked to a behaviour, then that behaviour is morally wrong. Keeping chickens in close quarters under unnatural conditions = breeding ground for avian flu. Keeping companies that do this in business by buying their meat is morally wrong. You might say its only the breeders who are wrong but I disagree. There is causality there. No customers = no breeding ground for avian flu = no massive outbreak. Its the same reason I would never invest in a gun manufacturer, despite the 'people kill people, not guns' argument.

The *only* reason we haven't yet fully paid this price, btw is b/c of various antiseptic measures the slaughterhouses use (shown to be less effective than organically raised chickens, btw). But, there is already massive resistance to these agents and its only a matter of time before we have another influenza-type epidemic, this time global and much more deadly. Leading to massive suffering, which as I said is my personal gauge of moral vs. not. Someone else may have a different metric.

You would argue its not the buying of the chicken that is immoral but the breeders. I disagree as the two are critically linked as I described.

So. Is anal sex wrong? I say no b/c there is no causal link b/t it and suffering (except for rape--animal or human--you mention). Is it gross? I think so, but dozens of sheep farmers may disagree. I don't eat shit sandwiches either but millions of dung beetles disagree. Shrug.

[rafterman]

how do you think I got to my age w/o a wife.

Oh Ha Ha Ha... More Champagne posting from SCAM.........

Hey CAM, are your eyes painted on ? We went through this with you in the last few pages, and you had the audacity to call me ignorant. Under normal cicumstances If you had trouble meeting someone, the advice I would give you is just to... "be yourself", however you strike me as a very " special " case, and your situation seems un-salvagable. Good luck with it.... Tinsel D!ck.

[KingZ]

Allowing this example to pass (i.e. not having the HIV causality argument) I would say this: it *is* wrong if causality is established.

I'm a little confused, then.

If something is wrong if it induces suffering or if it is directly linked via causality to suffering, there is no causality proof for suffering via HIV, and nobody is saying that sex with animals is morally wrong (except CAM, who still can't provide a proof for any of this, and is therefore still a moron), then what part of the video don't I understand?

[IndiReloaded]

Okay I re-read my last post and its sloppy.

If your dog tries to run away then it *is* morally wrong. Same for sheep, horses, other humans. Butt sex is only wrong if its rape or if the recipient isn't of sound mind/age to decide for themselves. All have the common theme of causing the suffering of self-aware others (I happen to think dogs, at least large ones w/decent sized brains, are self-aware). If you agree, then you get the video and we are in agreement. There, happy?

Did CAM say it was morally wrong? Or that he doesn't like it? Different. Did I miss this part?

[iamaninnocentma]

This thread is dead to me now. Pumping dogs? Really? Dirty bstds.

Its times like this im glad im a simple man and not some pseudo-intellectual trying to prove how clever i am on the internets. Shame on all of you for ruining a perfectly good bullying thread.

[KingZ]

Did CAM say it was morally wrong? Or that he doesn't like it? Different. Did I miss this part?

He said it's morally wrong, in between more incorrect ellipses and poor logic.

All of her body intended for insertions...her anus is meant for excretions...and is built accordingly. I consider anal sex unnatural and immoral... I am allowed to hold an opinion based on a set of values. The Liberals haven't taken that freedom away (yet). Although, if I were in Holland, they'd probably have me arrested for holding a view that might offend...someone...anyone....