Messages

If a guitar solo is the conversational equivalent of a precise and eloquent articulation of a theme, then this was half-drunken and stuttering flirting, topped off with barfing and passing out.

For a guy with a wife and child you sure are in a very amateurish band, yodaman.

I want to hear the opinion of an expert.

Helm?

Dude should have been more cautious with where he took the goat. I suggest sewers and landfills. Good for the lungs, goat gets to eat, very private.

I like how we run our christian questions by yodaman, it's like running them by a computer AI or something. You know what he'll say will be dumb and uninformed, but you still want to hear it because it's going to be dumb and uninformed.

This is reaching beyond senseless. Steel Drummer's 'argumentation' has begun to break down almost to a failure of language and communication. The next round of replies can very well be 'ugh ugh huh hu GOD!'.

Why do you do this? If you have no answer, why not be silent? They are making a very clear point by showing you passages in the bible you have in your own home, which condone murder and rape by the Old Testament god. What do you say to this? You say 'I didn't see any such passages in the Bible which I read!' What sort of argument is this?! The passages are right there! You're really infuriating. I know you're a child. I know you're regurgitating from what other people told you and you believed then because you have no critical faculties at this age. But you're TROLLING. You're disregarding, cheapening arguments and you don't have anything of worth to say for yourself but you keep replying.

I am formally asking the moderators of this board to enforce the age limit of the boards.

Obviously these women were repeatedly raped.  These sick bastards killed and raped an entire town and then wanted more virgins, so they hid beside the road to kidnap and rape some more.  How can anyone see this as anything but evil?

simple. Because a) the people they killed were infidels, therefore it's not really killing since they don't count. And b) women then knew their place and if they had a new master it didn't mean anything to them, they just fell into line, there was no rape.

As a longstanding advocate of not wearing any pants, I totally agree with your outrage on the subject!

What I've always found peculiar is the split in homosexual society, where there's the type that's just a regular guy/girl who just so happens to be homosexual, and you've got the over-the-top effeminate guys and over-the-top masculine girls.

They crack me up though. There's nothing funnier than seeing a skinny guy in a pink boa tell off some guy for calling him a 'queer' while making elaborate hand gestures and speaking in a high-pitched squeeky voice. Especially the fact that the guy calling him something negative will usually slink off, entirely uncomfortable with the looks he's getting.

Pink boas FTW!

While sexual orientation being a choice or not is certainly under debate, that social identifiers for sexuality are chosen roles mostly isn't.

I look forward to a post-modern time where raging homosexual behaviour will no longer necessarily signify that a person is gay.

oh wait

Of course it probably won't be important. But who posts thinking 'well my post probably won't be important!'? I wasn't trying to shield Alliance from Dan's irresponsible post.

I'm not saying shut up, but did you think it would be a good idea to tell someone who has such a question where you're coming from, what sort of experience you've got and generally why your opinion is meritorious on grounds other than 'hey, it's the internet! I posted!'.

I strongly disagree with your cheap concept of normality. Though I don't think most people are 'normal', I do think they have a concept of normal that has been applied to them by social programming and family and such, to which if they don't actually fit it's a really big deal. Finding yourself through that takes time, is painful and is not made any easier a process by a 15-year-old telling you 'there's no normal! lol!'. It's not a matter of being told that, it's a matter of coming to that conclusion through experience.

I agree strongly, Becky. I just dislike people disregarding possible truth because they kneejerked all the way out of ballpark.

Dan shouldn't be giving advice on these things to people. It's irresponsible, well it always is a bit especially on the internet, but seriously, I don't think your concept of sexuality and normalcy is something to spread around, seeing how you're 15 or something and not exactly experienced in life or love, and prone to change your mind all the time.

haha GarageGothic!

Just make sure to throttle the girl, it loosens them up. Keep clenching though, you wouldn't want them to tense up while you're in there.

I want to talk to the management please.

What if you are the management?

Then I guess

It's pretty normal. Don't sweat about it.

You presume partly incorrectly. Both drawings and videos or pictures. I don't mind calling someone who wants to be called a girl, a girl.

I want to talk to the management please.

CORRUPTION! STOP BEHAVING LIKE I MADE YOU BEHAVE GRRR

A lot of gys who have not had sexual experiences and/or are afraid of girls, on the internet, like to look at pictures of girls with penises. The why seems pretty straightforward to me: it's arousing by connotation (girls) but it's also familiar and easier to relate to (a penis) than the alien intelligence they feel girls are. Also connected with the familiarity of the penis is ease-to-please. You tug at it until it comes, right? A girl is a bit more complicated and there's a tremendous fear of performance that a lot of internet-fringe-porn-freaks feel that makes them reach to such tastes as the absolutely and extremely self-centered fantasy that is a woman with a penis.

That you're 16 is not the question. The question is, are you a virgin, secluded and afraid of having sexual relationships with women?

Because I bet once you have a fulfulling sexual relationship with a girl (this might take a while, it's really up to chance) and you come to realise she's just as human as you, worried about similar things, confused and in need of reassurance and such, you'll probably not pay much attention to people who look like girls but are boys.

Unless you do, in which case yes, I'd say you're a latent homosexual.


A similar issue to this are young girls on the internet, afraid of boys and relationships, who look at gay comics from japan where the boys look extremely feminine but still have penises and have magical gay sex where no close details are shown of the insertion and such usually. Just a magical fairlyland full of sparkles and 'I will never forget you's where they can be both the boy and the girl in the nonexistent placebo relationship they're experiencing by proxy.

Pretty solipsistic, really.

I believe that in some cases becoming gay is not a biological inclination as much as a social inclination. I don't say 'choice' because I don't believe in free will to begin with, but in your terms, I mean 'gay by choice', yes. As in they feel they should become gay inspite of their heterosexual inclination being at least just as strong.

I don't think this discredits biologically inclined gays in any serious way, as social choices about one's own sexuality are up to them anyway as far as I'm concerned and as long as they're not hurting or forcing anybody. I just don't like to see people kneejerk 'OMFG IT'S ALL GENETIC, ASSHOLE' everytime someone says 'hey, people have gone gay without any of that sometimes'.

If anything, were we to study humans free from social constraints for a few generations we'd probably find habitual homosexuality because sex = stress reliever and you can have sex with whomever. This doesn't mean one is gay or straight because these terms are loaded. It means people enjoy coming. In this sense, we're pansexual.