ConsciousDonkey said:
Er... the text is racist. You know, the "zigger" part?

That's the kink related to this picture

ggdk said:
I have yet to understand what is it with this kind of attributes associated with sex: filthy, dirty, etc-etc…

I get it that it's dirty talk but uh… it's just bizarre. It's almost as if the person talking about it is dissociating from their own genitalia: me is "me" and my genitalia well, it's not mine because its filthy/dirty/whatever (somewhat implying that it almost has it's own consciousness…)

I think this has its origins in Christianity. It defined sexuality as something disgusting, immoral and evil, which is bullshit. Sex is natural. One only has to obserse nature. And nature is a far better guide than mind-controlling religions.

^^^^^^!!!!!

Valmar said:
I think this has its origins in Christianity. It defined sexuality as something disgusting, immoral and evil, which is bullshit. Sex is natural. One only has to obserse nature. And nature is a far better guide than mind-controlling religions.

Technically, it started with Judaism. And their objection is to the naked body, not sex, at least on the hole. (pun intended)

As for the Catholic's anti-sex shit, I can't argue with you there. Just keep in mind that they're against ALL non-procreative sex, and not just "gays," and we'll all be a little better off.

As for your "nature is better" argument...remember that beavers, among other animals, build. Many animals have very communal lives. Nothing quite on the level of trade, that we know of...but to suggest, as you seem to do, that humans and our varied beliefs are somehow the truly "unnatural" reaction is as closed-minded as anything you might believe "Christianity" says.

ggdk said:
I have yet to understand what is it with this kind of attributes associated with sex: filthy, dirty, etc-etc…

I get it that it's dirty talk but uh… it's just bizarre. It's almost as if the person talking about it is dissociating from their own genitalia: me is "me" and my genitalia well, it's not mine because its filthy/dirty/whatever (somewhat implying that it almost has it's own consciousness…)

Oh well - I guess I might be overanalysing pr0nz .. Better go off to work - do something more productive today. :D

Because if you do sex right it makes a huge mess.

Why of all things was THIS uploaded here. I uploaded a bunch of other stuff on the same day, but nope, just this.

MrDumbass said:
As for your "nature is better" argument...remember that beavers, among other animals, build. Many animals have very communal lives. Nothing quite on the level of trade, that we know of...but to suggest, as you seem to do, that humans and our varied beliefs are somehow the truly "unnatural" reaction is as closed-minded as anything you might believe "Christianity" says.

I never suggested that humanity or our beliefs are unnatural. All I simply said was that mind-controlling religions are inferior to nature.

We are inevitably immersed in the ocean of nature. We can't escape it, because we are defined by it. Yet, religions like Christianity and Judaism have a tendency to claim that humanity is somehow above nature and has a right to dominate it, which is bullshit. We'd be nothing without nature.

Valmar said:
I never suggested that humanity or our beliefs are unnatural. All I simply said was that mind-controlling religions are inferior to nature.

We are inevitably immersed in the ocean of nature. We can't escape it, because we are defined by it. Yet, religions like Christianity and Judaism have a tendency to claim that humanity is somehow above nature and has a right to dominate it, which is bullshit. We'd be nothing without nature.

First off, my apologies for mis-understanding. I assumed that's what you meant, since that IS the common explanation for the "evils of religion." And you did say mind control, and mind control = evil, so... *shrug*

Anyway, your claim that "we'd be nothing without nature" is true. However, one could make that same claim about Communists and their people, too. And on top of that, it'd be correct, both in the sense of "the people governing are, by design, above those they govern/abuse" and the sense of "the people governing would be nothing without those they govern/abuse."

The same rule applies here. Just because we're nothing without nature - since that IS where we get all the stuff to make our stuff! - doesn't mean we're below, or equal to, or above it.

I wouldn't say we're above nature, and honestly the only reason we'd "have a right to dominate nature" is to make our own lives safer. As far as I know, by Biblical standards, we lost the divine right of dominance when Adam and Eve were banished from the Garden, because after that, animals mostly refused to be around us. So it wasn't a right so much as a privilege, at least in that context.

Besides, on the topic of nature and animals, these beliefs also teach that humanity is imperfect, and that God is perfect. I see no greater proof of this idea, than the fact that every time humanity tries to improve upon nature, it ends up fucking that thing up in some way.

Take cows, for example. Today, cows are practically empty-headed, docile beasts more afraid of us than we usually are of them. The cows before the Classical Greek era were stronger, bigger, and WAY the fuck more violent. Why do you think the Minotaur was such a feared monster? And dogs are watered-down wolves, aren't they? Centuries of controlled inbreeding will do that to ya, both for the wolves AND the cows!

And don't get me started on the hippies who knew jack-all about nature back in the 60s, who decided that the wildfires in Cali needed to be put out without any idea as to what would happen if they did that - and didn't take up fire's role of cleaning out dead plants, and scarring seeds so they could sprout, and creating ash that made effective fertilizer.

~~~~

Most of this is just off the top of my head, so I'm sure there's some holes. And, sorry it took so long to reply, I wasn't ptfa'ing :P

Valmar said:
I never suggested that humanity or our beliefs are unnatural. All I simply said was that mind-controlling religions are inferior to nature.

We are inevitably immersed in the ocean of nature. We can't escape it, because we are defined by it. Yet, religions like Christianity and Judaism have a tendency to claim that humanity is somehow above nature and has a right to dominate it, which is bullshit. We'd be nothing without nature.

Nature is all about domination. Survival of the Strongest and all that jazz, right? And if religious unity makes one group of people stronger than another, then even assuming that there are no gods, that's humans using their natural intelligence, imagination, and communicative abilities to make themselves stronger than others.

Remember, humans are natural creatures, and religion is just an extension of human nature. Even hatred is natural; however, you're smart enough to know that it's unnecessary and unproductive, so cut it out.

Is she supposed to actually be a zebra in this pic, or did she just paint herself to look like one for some racist roleplay with her significant other?

Valmar said:
I think this has its origins in Christianity. It defined sexuality as something disgusting, immoral and evil, which is bullshit. Sex is natural. One only has to obserse nature. And nature is a far better guide than mind-controlling religions.

the thing is, if you read the bible, its actually really permissive about sex. so many misconceptions about christianity and sex that even the bible contradicts. for example did you know that ( at the time the bible was written) sodomy was ONLY considered to be penetrative anal sex between two unmarried males. so in other words anal between a married man and woman was perfectly acceptable. as are sex toys. if you read closely the bible actually glorifies sex as an extension and expression of love between a man and woman.

HarryDevil said:
Nature is all about domination. Survival of the Strongest and all that jazz, right? And if religious unity makes one group of people stronger than another, then even assuming that there are no gods, that's humans using their natural intelligence, imagination, and communicative abilities to make themselves stronger than others.

Remember, humans are natural creatures, and religion is just an extension of human nature. Even hatred is natural; however, you're smart enough to know that it's unnecessary and unproductive, so cut it out.

Since when is hatred unnecessary? I'm imagining you're thinking of the older generation still clinging desperately to life and their ideas that anyone with a skin tone below medium beige is a blight upon society. That's not hatred, neighbor, that's just ignorant learned response. Hatred, real hatred is personal. Hatred is that person that maybe you work with, or lives in the same building as you, or somehow shares space that goes against every fiber of your being. You find yourself taking notice of every single failing of theirs to the point of near obsession. Hatred is a deep and abiding emotion that comes from the very core. To say it's unnecessary is the same as saying "meh, I don't need love." It's wrong to call it unproductive as well, you just don't know how to use it properly. Emotion works upon your body's natural responses and hatred triggers a big one. It's almost an instinctual fight or flight response, quickened pulse, heightened perception, more goal oriented focus. Ever have a bad day at work? I mean the kind of bad day that's only bad because something incredibly stupid came along and cocked everything up and now it falls on you to help sort out shit that wasn't even your responsibility to begin with? Imagine throwing a harness around that sense of anger and hate and using it to persevere. Simply by the benefit of being in that scenario are you more capable of handling that scenario. That is what fear, anger, and hatred can do for you. All those things that people like to say are "negative" and pretend that they just don't feel them.

Zigger is our word. You can say zigga

Can people stop saying "zigger" It is fucking stupid. It isn't even just that it is racist. It just sounds childish. Calling black people zebra's isn't any different than calling them gorillas.

zacarias said:
Can people stop saying "zigger" It is fucking stupid. It isn't even just that it is racist. It just sounds childish. Calling black people zebra's isn't any different than calling them gorillas.

I would say it is different, but though it is funny id say true