discussion comment
10 years ago
And jerikson40 dude...I'm taking your comments about "I'm ambivalent about homosexuality but why shouldn't we take Joe Blow seriously when he complains that he is repulsed".
However, it is also disingenuous. It allows you to say "but I'm just asking a question" a la Glen Beck asking "is it possible that (insert bête noire of the day) beats his wife and urinates on his neighbor's apple pie?" and then say "well...I never SAID he beats his wife or pisses on pie".
Here is what I think is really going on. You grew up thinking homosexuality, especially male homosexuality, is wrong. It gives you the wiggins. However, you also engage in behaviors others find questionable (i.e., paying strippers for...whatever perverted shit you pay 'em to do). Society is also changing toward a more live and let live attitude with respect to gay men. This makes you (and Joe Blow) ambivalent.
BTW, Joe Blow is an unfortunate name for a homophobe. Sounds like the dude that goes to the "Country Bear Jamboree", gets into box with dick sized holes, and sucks off the dudes that choose to insert their wang dang doodles. Maybe the puking is actually from drinking too much semen.
Not that there's anything wrong with sucking random dicks inserted through holes. Hell, as a straight dude I wish more chicks were into it.
discussion comment
10 years ago
^^^
"And by the way, if distaste for gay sex really is learned, then why wouldn't I have the SAME negative, learned distaste for female gay sex?? Why would someone, or society, teach me that only male gay sex is bad?
Hmmm...."
Jerikson40 dude, you're missing the point when it comes to how we learn from society and how society "decides" what lessons to teach. Things are really woven into the fabric of our social interactions. Male gender roles are strongly circumscribed so I'm not surprised that you (oops...some hypothetical dude named Joe Blow) might have a strong negative reaction to gay dudes (aka "a wiggins")
But there are a lot of people who find middle aged dudes that chase stripper gross. Should they be able to forbid you from strip clubbing? Even though you are hurting nobody (and...hopefully...tipping the strippers well and therefore HELPING them).
We already have way too many laws based on that sort of attitude. The war on drugs and the illegality of a lot of sex work cost money to enforce, cost money to house people in prisons, and ruin lives when we send non-violent "offenders" to prisons. There are genuine societal interests in limiting some things associated with vice crimes (e.g., druggin' and drivin' is uncool, spreading STDs is not good) but they can be dealt with better in a framework that keeps the vices legal.
discussion comment
10 years ago
![]()
motorheadFat, drunk and stupid is no way to go through life
^^^
You did notice that it said "plagarism" and not "plagiarism", no?
Besides, the Juiceman doesn't plagiarize or plagarize...that dude plaJiarizes! The "J" makes all the difference. It means he doesn't have the time to think about what he writing when he's also typing away with both hands and both feet and writing a fifth review by slapping his frank and beans on a firth computer keyboard. Juice gets a pass 'cos that shit be plajiarism, not plagiarism.
Juice! Juice! Juice!
discussion comment
10 years ago
This thread clearly had a life yesterday. Kind of cool.
My general position is that we're all guided largely by emotion UNLESS we specifically make a point to apply logic to a problem. I'm guilty of letting emotion guide me all of the time. What I'm surprised by is the statement from jerikson40 that...
"Exactly. Issues are irrelevant, it's personalities that are important to some people. If they "like" you, they will agree with you. If they don't, they won't.
With other people, such as me, issues and personalities are entirely different things. We can disagree on issues, but still like each other as people, even if we don't share common interests. And we can discuss issues and respect each other without always turning the discussion to personalities."
It seems your still asserting that you feel your positions are driven by logic -- that you are of the "minds" camp. But you also wrote...
"...I never said I just know [homosexuality] to be wrong. I said that *IF SOME PEOPLE* have a natural reaction to the practice of homosexuality that is very similar to the natural reaction they have to the practice of pedophila, it seems REASONABLE that they might tend to equate those practices as somewhat objectionable.
If Joe Blow sees a guy raping a 6 year old boy, and his reaction is to puke, and then he sees another guy fucking some dude up the butt, and has the same reaction, is it not reasonable that Joe Blow might question whether both practices are objectionable? Was he ever taught to puke at those things? No, probably not. It's difficult to teach people to puke."
Can you see the "some dude pukes reaction" is totally an emotional reaction? Now jerikson, I recognize that your asserting that this is a hypothetical and not necessarily the position YOU take. Let me offer some advice to Joe Blow...
1. If Joe sees a guy raping a 6 year old, call the frickin' cops. Don't waste time puking. Say "This is emergency, I am witnessing child abuse at [insert address]. Please send police as quickly as possible. I am going to intervene now to save the child"
2. If Joe sees one dude giving the hot, hot buttsex to another dude and both are adults he should ask himself why he clicked on the gay porn link if he is actually straight. Maybe reflect on the possibility that he is a little bi-curious...
Joking aside, why does it matter if something two (or more) consenting adults do in the privacy of their own home makes him want to puke. If I saw an ugly chick doing it with an ugly dude it would probably make me queasy. Should I declare that only people I find hot should have sex?
discussion comment
10 years ago
Sorry for the double double "W" lopaw...
peace, zzzzipppmn666668
discussion comment
10 years ago
![]()
ilbbaicnlKeep it in my pants when I do OTC. If I were a stripper it would stand for I like big bucks and I can not lie.
Well ilbbaicnl, I share your love of the weird. But I'm not sure who I'd go with in this question. Stripper #2 is asking for additional works without ratcheting up the weird that much.
Let's imagine the two chicks were equally hot. But one was a 20 minute drive away and the second 1.5 hours away. Nearby girl is hot but a real Nancy Normal who plays Katy Perry songs while you do the deed. Faraway chick is equally HAWT but she's a Wendy Weirdo who has an extensive collection of old Spike Jones records that she plays.
Where do you go?
discussion comment
10 years ago
^^^
I agree that things are complex. However, I object to the simple division into "hearts" and "minds", that you appear to be maintaining.
Do I think most people with an opinion on climate change understand the issues? For non-scientists -- very few. Most people are basically scientific illiterates, unfortunately.
For scientists in relevant fields -- fairly well. Even the way you ask the question betrays substantial confusion on your part. You're extrapolating from an inability to predict a shot term chaotic phenomenon (weather) and asserting that similar difficulties MUST exist for predicting a long term average (climate). I was amused by the fact that a major conservative magazine couldn't even find experts that take the position most of their readers "know" to be true. I'm not sure if that represented misunderstanding or disingenuousness.
Also, you do also realize that it was never scientists that said nuclear power was intrinsically problematic, don't you? I think any reasonable scientist would take the position that the details of using nuclear power represent a PM engineering problem combined with a cost benefit analysis. Many countries use substantial amounts of nuclear power (France, Japan, etc). Although Japan clearly flubbed aspects of their safety calculus...
Point being that scientists are people that at least try to analyze data through a rational lens. They were never the people that went to "The China Syndrome" and concluded that nuclear power was intrinsically bad. That was the general public.
And you do realize that, even in the movie, melting through the planet to come out in China was only a metaphor, n'est-ce pas?
Enough for tonight. Perhaps more tomorrow.
If it seems entertaining...
discussion comment
10 years ago
^^^
Jerikson40 my man, did you see the point though? Lowpaw is, let's face it, a member of a minority group some folks hate. Youre posts appear to be saying that "we just know" her sexual orientation is wrong and deserves judgement. A position that is A) not a "minds" position; and B) insulting.
You later clarified saying you were just asking why people get upset when the question is asked, but that is the Glenn Beck tactic.
You know the dude that asks a question like "is it possible that <insert bête noire of the day> raped and killed a coed while at university?" and goes on to say "but I'm just asking a question" when people react.
If you really thing homosexuality is fine and that it is NOT something "we just know to be wrong", what was the point of the discussion?
discussion comment
10 years ago
Well sclvr5005, to be fair to jerikson40, I'm not sure how much the dude is being bigoted per se vs simply not understanding how it would feel to be a minority despised by some that they would actually attack you just for being you. And suffering more subtle prejudice from many who aren't so extreme.
I can think of many posts where people treat fag or gay as a slur. Myself included. I suspect (and hope) most people don't mean it as an actual slur but rather an humorous insult when used in the context of poking another heterosexual. But reading this did make me reflect a bit. On the other hand, I hate to let said reflection get in the way of fun that is intended to be harmless.
BTW, it looks like I slipped in my wring above. Written before morning coffee.. To be absolutely clear, I support anybody's right -- gay, straight, bi, trams, whatever -- to live life as they choose.
The question about hearts vs minds is genuine, though. My own belief is that nobody completely operates in a "minds" capacity. The best you can do is TRY to catch yourself when you're operating in "hearts" mode and step back to analyze the situation.
Of course, when you enter "thinking leith your genitals" mode there is no hope. Then you come. And start planning for the next time lil' head takes over...
discussion comment
10 years ago
Juice sent me a PM where he claimed to be just like Garfield. The president, not the cat.
Only instead of writing simultaneously in Greek with one hand and Latin with the other, Juice would post multiple messages to TUSCL simultaneously. Sometimes arguing with himself.
And Juice was actually BETTER at this than Garfield. Juice uses both hands, both feet, and he slaps his dick onto a fifth keyboard. At least that is what the dude told me!
Of course it helps that the only language used was Ebonics. And even then words were often misspelled. But it is still a feat. And I TOTALLY believe this to be true. Totes McGotes.
Thank about it.
discussion comment
10 years ago
I second Mikey's suggestion. Juice is a force of nature.
discussion comment
10 years ago
P.S. I posted this because I was curious to see jerikson's reaction. The reality is that we're all driven by some combination of "hearts" and "minds" and we're all subject to confirmation bias. However, it is important in life to ask yourself what evidence truth claims are based upon.
For example, jerikson asked in the previous thread why people reacted so negatively to people questioning whether homosexuality is unhealthy. Simple...gay people have been deprived of rights by people asking that question. I can't think of a time when a straight guy was beat up or killed just because he was straight. Makes some people sensitive about it.
You asked my position on homosexuality...my position isn't that I support everybody's right to be treated equally. As long as a dude doesn't get all up in my face with his dick I don't care if he has a boyfriend that sucks said dick. If he wants to marry said boyfriend it doesn't affect me, so go for it.
And, just to be clear, I'm not completely crazy about straight folks getting all in my face either. Unless they're HAWT CHICKS. In that case get that pussy all up in my face and I'll give you a big tip. WEEE-YAWWW!!!!
discussion comment
10 years ago
James dude...do you like to drink old leftover fruit juice that has fermented? I hear that shit can get you really drunk and it I'd FREE!!!
discussion comment
10 years ago
You're truly a gentle soul J-man.
Juice on bro...Juice on indeed
discussion comment
10 years ago
Just than about it. Mr. Moose has never quite had Juice's style.
Or has he?
discussion comment
10 years ago
^^^
Sharknado is an allegorical exploration of man's in humanity to man. With sharks.
And Tara Reid was Asmodeus. With a bad boob job.
discussion comment
10 years ago
Not sure how to respond to kipnivens and jerikson's comments are fair enough I suppose. I'll put him down in the "doesn't dig Sara Firth column?"
But what really caught my eye in the Jon Stewart interview is the Firth titties. You could tell those were pretty amazing TIT-TAYZ if she were to take that top off. I mean...I mean...check out the cleavage in http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V9cZrV620pQ
discussion comment
10 years ago
Silick my brother...manteca? You think that be how the Jugo dude rolls?
Manteca de cacahuete. Spread that shit on lil' Jugo and let a pit bull lick it off. That be how Jugo goes to Jugo heaven.
discussion comment
10 years ago
To be fair, jerikson, there are some (OK...one) on here that are not surprised that Hawking is indulging his inner horn dog as much as possible given his handicap. They are surprised he's doing so in Devore.
Not knowing Devore I can't judge. Though Slick is making it out to be such a craphole that I actually want to see it. Kind of like being unable to take your eyes off of a traffic accident.
I'll ask the LA area pervs this one... How far is Devore from Pasadena relative to other, better strip club pickings? Hawking regularly (possibly yearly...would have to check) lectures at CalTech. Maybe it is a compromise between stuff he has to do (give a groovy lecture) and fitting in other stuff he digs (namely, bein' a horn dog and saying WEEE-YAWWW in a freaky computer voice).
discussion comment
10 years ago
Jerikson dude... I'm a bit puzzled by your hearts/minds dichotomy (into which I read the implication that you place yourself on the "minds" side). After all, you seem to be asserting in other posts that "we just know" certain things are wrong. No attempt to evaluate harm to others directly or indirectly and balance with individual rights. That would seem to be the ultimate "hearts" position.
I made an argument that certain practices should be judged negatively because some objective information indicates those practices are harmful. You seemed to take the position that humans have intrinsic knowledge that certain things are wrong. I actually agree with that contention to some degree, though you take into areas that are pretty clearly learned (i.e., established by the social milieu) rather than truly inate.
Now you seem to be backpedaling on your stance regarding homosexuality. Perhaps we did not understand your position and you should define it clearly. What exactly are you saying about homosexuality? Do you believe it to be harmful to anybody? If so, do you actually have evidence or is it just "innate knowledge"?
discussion comment
10 years ago
You know Slick...you're kind of making me want to see what Devore is like.
discussion comment
10 years ago
Regarding Gilligan's Island. Totally agree that it is hell. Consider this:
Gilligan = Satan
Skipper = Leviathan
Thurston Howell = Mammon
Lovey Howell = Beelzebub
Ginger = Asmodeus
Mary Anne = Belphegor
Professor = Lucifer
Or maybe Lovey is Belphegor and Mary Anne is Beelzebub. But they are all definitely demons.
discussion comment
10 years ago
^^^
Anybody that digs Alf is good people. Hell, Alf was good people...for a cat-eating alien.
discussion comment
10 years ago
Well, I suspect has to compromise based on where he can bring his wheelchair and entourage.
Can you picture giving Stephen Hawking a lapper? His freaky computer voice saying "Would you suck my dick?" and then adding "After I come I will explain the Bekenstein bound if you are interested."
WEEE-YAWWW!!!
discussion comment
10 years ago
You're good people fastscrs!
As a straight dude I say "HAWT chick pic better than dick pic". I suspect lesbian readers agree. And straight stripper chicks probably see as much dick as they want in other venues...