Topic: FAO: Queers
Anonymous A started this discussion 3 years ago #107,718
Why do you think the entirety of the east rejects homosexuality?
1st world or 3rd, everything east of Istanbul rejects gay marriage in their legal system with the exception of Taiwan. Even that is new, the law changed 3 years ago.
Are all of these nations hateful problematic bigots?
1st world or 3rd, everything east of Istanbul rejects gay marriage in their legal system with the exception of Taiwan. Even that is new, the law changed 3 years ago.
Are all of these nations hateful problematic bigots?
Anonymous B joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 54 seconds later[^] [v] #1,209,911
Sup Catherine.
Anonymous C joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 2 minutes later, 3 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,912
Because as the saying goes, it's Adam and Eve, not Adam and Bill.
Anonymous D joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 5 minutes later, 9 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,914
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 2 minutes later, 12 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,916
Yes
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 years ago, 9 minutes later, 21 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,920
@1,209,914 (D)
@previous (Kook !!rcSrAtaAC)
This is the definition of xenophobia. The belief that all the cultures outside white western europe are inferior.
@previous (Kook !!rcSrAtaAC)
This is the definition of xenophobia. The belief that all the cultures outside white western europe are inferior.
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC replied with this 3 years ago, 1 minute later, 23 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,921
@previous (A)
No one said all cultures outside Western are inferior
Did you just learn the term xenophobia on word a day or something?
No one said all cultures outside Western are inferior
Did you just learn the term xenophobia on word a day or something?
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 years ago, 13 minutes later, 36 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,929
Anonymous F joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 4 minutes later, 41 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,931
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC replied with this 3 years ago, 28 seconds later, 41 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,932
Anonymous B replied with this 3 years ago, 8 seconds later, 41 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,933
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC replied with this 3 years ago, 1 minute later, 42 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,934
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 years ago, 3 minutes later, 46 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,935
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC replied with this 3 years ago, 28 seconds later, 47 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,936
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 years ago, 1 minute later, 48 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,937
@previous (Kook !!rcSrAtaAC)
I did exactly as asked. Catherine could just use a gender voice changer anyway, there are many apps.
I did exactly as asked. Catherine could just use a gender voice changer anyway, there are many apps.
Anonymous B replied with this 3 years ago, 3 minutes later, 51 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,938
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC replied with this 3 years ago, 1 minute later, 52 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,939
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC double-posted this 3 years ago, 35 seconds later, 53 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,940
Anonymous G joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 13 seconds later, 53 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,941
Catherine has detransitioned and is now a RW bigot
Lady D !Pool..v42s joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 0 seconds later, 53 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,942
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 years ago, 21 seconds later, 53 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,943
Anonymous B replied with this 3 years ago, 1 minute later, 55 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,944
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 years ago, 2 minutes later, 57 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,945
@previous (B)
You brought it up in this thread first, so don't act like I was the one obsessed with her.
Kook is always accusing anons of being Catherine and won't say who she thinks I am, so it's obvious what's going on here.
Did you bother to support Catherine when she was building a new community at punychan? NO?! Then she probably doesn't even think about you, let alone post here. Thanks.
You brought it up in this thread first, so don't act like I was the one obsessed with her.
Kook is always accusing anons of being Catherine and won't say who she thinks I am, so it's obvious what's going on here.
Did you bother to support Catherine when she was building a new community at punychan? NO?! Then she probably doesn't even think about you, let alone post here. Thanks.
Anonymous B replied with this 3 years ago, 51 seconds later, 58 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,946
Anonymous B double-posted this 3 years ago, 29 seconds later, 59 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,947
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC replied with this 3 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,948
Anonymous G replied with this 3 years ago, 10 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,949
@1,209,945 (A)
> You brought it up in this thread first, so don't act like I was the one obsessed with her.
>
> Kook is always accusing anons of being Catherine and won't say who she thinks I am, so it's obvious what's going on here.
>
> Did you bother to support Catherine when she was building a new community at punychan? NO?! Then she probably doesn't even think about you, let alone post here. Thanks.
lmao
> You brought it up in this thread first, so don't act like I was the one obsessed with her.
>
> Kook is always accusing anons of being Catherine and won't say who she thinks I am, so it's obvious what's going on here.
>
> Did you bother to support Catherine when she was building a new community at punychan? NO?! Then she probably doesn't even think about you, let alone post here. Thanks.
lmao
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC replied with this 3 years ago, 8 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,950
Op, did you learn the word xenophobia this week?
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,953
@previous (Kook !!rcSrAtaAC)
Xenophobia is when you think all cultures but yours got it wrong, you can check any dictionary.
Xenophobia is when you think all cultures but yours got it wrong, you can check any dictionary.
Anonymous B replied with this 3 years ago, 36 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,954
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 years ago, 51 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,956
Anonymous B replied with this 3 years ago, 49 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,957
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,959
@previous (B)
If you don't like being called Xenophobic, maybe you shouldn't dismiss 90% of the planet as evil hateful bigots.
If you don't like being called Xenophobic, maybe you shouldn't dismiss 90% of the planet as evil hateful bigots.
Anonymous F replied with this 3 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,960
Anonymous B replied with this 3 years ago, 5 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,961
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC replied with this 3 years ago, 10 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,962
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC double-posted this 3 years ago, 34 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,963
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,964
@1,209,961 (B)
If you think every nation east and south of the EU is bad, you are a xenophobe.
All of those nations reject homosexual behavior.
If you think every nation east and south of the EU is bad, you are a xenophobe.
All of those nations reject homosexual behavior.
Anonymous B replied with this 3 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,965
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 years ago, 39 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,966
@1,209,963 (Kook !!rcSrAtaAC)
Internment camps are gone, but white supremacists like you frequently spread hate about Japan.
Portraying asians as perverts, monkeys, math nerds, and weak are all forms of racism.
Internment camps are gone, but white supremacists like you frequently spread hate about Japan.
Portraying asians as perverts, monkeys, math nerds, and weak are all forms of racism.
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC replied with this 3 years ago, 46 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,967
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 years ago, 32 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,968
@1,209,965 (B)
In your implicit support of white supremacist ideals about sexuality. It's not okay to hate asians and africans because they haven't embraced LGBT ideology.
In your implicit support of white supremacist ideals about sexuality. It's not okay to hate asians and africans because they haven't embraced LGBT ideology.
Anonymous A (OP) double-posted this 3 years ago, 35 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,969
@1,209,967 (Kook !!rcSrAtaAC)
No, I said it was racist to do that. You're just being intentionally difficult now- goodbye.
No, I said it was racist to do that. You're just being intentionally difficult now- goodbye.
Anonymous F replied with this 3 years ago, 49 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,970
@1,209,968 (A)
so what you're saying is that your brother is still back in town and you're hiding in your room?
so what you're saying is that your brother is still back in town and you're hiding in your room?
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC replied with this 3 years ago, 23 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,971
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 years ago, 10 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,972
Kook, imagine someone talked about the Koreans like you talk about the Japanese.
Would you just passively accept racism then?
Would you just passively accept racism then?
Anonymous B replied with this 3 years ago, 12 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,973
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,974
Anonymous B replied with this 3 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,975
@previous (A)
I think everyone is entitled to their own opinions and belief structures, and what other people think about them doesn't really change anything.
I think everyone is entitled to their own opinions and belief structures, and what other people think about them doesn't really change anything.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 years ago, 4 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,976
@1,209,970 (F)
You think someone who hasn't been on here for years, is finding time to argue with you between their sysadmin work, hosting family, and sleep?
You must be really special.
You think someone who hasn't been on here for years, is finding time to argue with you between their sysadmin work, hosting family, and sleep?
You must be really special.
Anonymous F replied with this 3 years ago, 6 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,977
@1,209,972 (A)
shhh, shh shh shh, it'll be okay. your mean older brother is only here for the holidays, everything will go back to "normal" soon
shhh, shh shh shh, it'll be okay. your mean older brother is only here for the holidays, everything will go back to "normal" soon
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC replied with this 3 years ago, 37 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,978
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 years ago, 3 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,979
Anonymous A (OP) double-posted this 3 years ago, 39 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,980
@1,209,978 (Kook !!rcSrAtaAC)
You used a negative term that people apply to anyone who is interested in Japanese culture.
You used a negative term that people apply to anyone who is interested in Japanese culture.
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC replied with this 3 years ago, 8 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,989
Anonymous I joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,990
Anonymous B replied with this 3 years ago, 5 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,993
@1,209,979 (A)
She doesn't think negatively of Asian people, you retard. She thinks repression of LGBTQ+ individuals is bad. Is she wrong?
She doesn't think negatively of Asian people, you retard. She thinks repression of LGBTQ+ individuals is bad. Is she wrong?
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 years ago, 11 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,997
@previous (B)
If you think every country in asia is bad because they believe in one man and one woman, you are a xenophobe.
If you think every country in asia is bad because they believe in one man and one woman, you are a xenophobe.
Anonymous B replied with this 3 years ago, 56 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,998
@previous (A)
You keep saying that.
Answer the question I asked you. Is repression of LGBTQ+ individuals a good thing?
You keep saying that.
Answer the question I asked you. Is repression of LGBTQ+ individuals a good thing?
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 years ago, 3 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,999
@previous (B)
It's a loaded question. Encouraging people to engage in healthy behavior is not repression.
It's a loaded question. Encouraging people to engage in healthy behavior is not repression.
Anonymous B replied with this 3 years ago, 39 seconds later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,000
Anonymous F replied with this 3 years ago, 5 seconds later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,001
Anonymous F double-posted this 3 years ago, 1 minute later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,002
hey everyone, @OP has been defending Japan in this topic
Anonymous B replied with this 3 years ago, 45 seconds later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,003
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 years ago, 2 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,004
@1,210,000 (B)
Nice get.
The question is whether you think non-western countries are bad. Answering yes is confessing to being a xenophobe.
Repression is not when a country refuses to endorse your unhealthy behavior.
Nice get.
The question is whether you think non-western countries are bad. Answering yes is confessing to being a xenophobe.
Repression is not when a country refuses to endorse your unhealthy behavior.
Anonymous A (OP) double-posted this 3 years ago, 25 seconds later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,005
Anonymous B replied with this 3 years ago, 3 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,006
@1,210,004 (A)
And saying you support these beliefs is saying repression of LGBTQ+ individuals is good/acceptable. Thanks for playing, Catherine, you xenophobe.
And saying you support these beliefs is saying repression of LGBTQ+ individuals is good/acceptable. Thanks for playing, Catherine, you xenophobe.
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC replied with this 3 years ago, 19 seconds later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,007
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC double-posted this 3 years ago, 22 seconds later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,008
Lady D !Pool..v42s replied with this 3 years ago, 3 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,009
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 years ago, 4 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,012
@1,210,006 (B)
Repression is not when people disagree with you, or refuse to endorse your lifestyle, thanks.
Repression is not when people disagree with you, or refuse to endorse your lifestyle, thanks.
Anonymous F replied with this 3 years ago, 13 seconds later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,013
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC replied with this 3 years ago, 51 seconds later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,014
Anonymous B replied with this 3 years ago, 29 seconds later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,015
@1,210,012 (A)
These countries are repressing these individuals, so agreeing with those beliefs is, in fact, repression.
These countries are repressing these individuals, so agreeing with those beliefs is, in fact, repression.
(Edited 11 seconds later.)
Lady D !Pool..v42s replied with this 3 years ago, 1 minute later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,016
Anonymous F replied with this 3 years ago, 44 seconds later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,017
@1,210,015 (B)
don't even bother, OP is hiding in the corner of their bedroom piss-pants scared that their older brother might mention something from the news
don't even bother, OP is hiding in the corner of their bedroom piss-pants scared that their older brother might mention something from the news
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 years ago, 1 minute later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,018
@1,210,008 (Kook !!rcSrAtaAC)
Japan has had western culture forced onto it by occupier governments since Matthew Perry, they have a reason to be fearful of more.
Tolerance of Homosexuality is part of the Japanese government currying favor with the American political and business interests that still control it.
Snowden revealed that the US was spending billions on a complete tap of all Japanese internet traffic for the intel community.
If America was being occupied and forced to adopt foreign cultures, then they would be justified in Xenophobia as well. No asian country is pushing sexual ideology on kook, so it is just hate.
Japan has had western culture forced onto it by occupier governments since Matthew Perry, they have a reason to be fearful of more.
Tolerance of Homosexuality is part of the Japanese government currying favor with the American political and business interests that still control it.
Snowden revealed that the US was spending billions on a complete tap of all Japanese internet traffic for the intel community.
If America was being occupied and forced to adopt foreign cultures, then they would be justified in Xenophobia as well. No asian country is pushing sexual ideology on kook, so it is just hate.
Anonymous B replied with this 3 years ago, 58 seconds later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,019
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 years ago, 2 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,020
@1,210,015 (B)
They aren't being repressed, most can live their lives.
The government doesn't give them the legal recognition that was designed for couples starting families, people don't clap with someone announces they are gay, regular people are not going to call them by the opposite sex just because they feel like they are.
If I demand people refer to me as a cat, and congratulate me when I announce my kinks are they repressing me?
They aren't being repressed, most can live their lives.
The government doesn't give them the legal recognition that was designed for couples starting families, people don't clap with someone announces they are gay, regular people are not going to call them by the opposite sex just because they feel like they are.
If I demand people refer to me as a cat, and congratulate me when I announce my kinks are they repressing me?
Anonymous A (OP) double-posted this 3 years ago, 15 seconds later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,021
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC replied with this 3 years ago, 41 seconds later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,022
@1,210,018 (A)
They were forced hundreds of years ago to open up by Europeans
Also America hosts many different types of cultures and is much less xenophobic than Japan
Gay people exist in all countries and oppressing them won't change that
They were forced hundreds of years ago to open up by Europeans
Also America hosts many different types of cultures and is much less xenophobic than Japan
Gay people exist in all countries and oppressing them won't change that
Lady D !Pool..v42s replied with this 3 years ago, 1 minute later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,023
@1,210,020 (A)
> If I demand people refer to me as a cat, and congratulate me when I announce my kinks are they repressing me?
Lol, can we get a rephrase?
> If I demand people refer to me as a cat, and congratulate me when I announce my kinks are they repressing me?
Lol, can we get a rephrase?
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC replied with this 3 years ago, 4 seconds later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,024
@1,210,020 (A)
If you're Catherine, stop listening to your brother
He's a disgusting coomer, conspiracy theorist
If you're Catherine, stop listening to your brother
He's a disgusting coomer, conspiracy theorist
Anonymous B replied with this 3 years ago, 4 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,025
@1,210,023 (Lady D !Pool..v42s)
I wonder, is a straight man announcing he's attracted to women announcing his kinks? 🤔🤔🤔
I wonder, is a straight man announcing he's attracted to women announcing his kinks? 🤔🤔🤔
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 years ago, 43 seconds later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,026
@1,210,022 (Kook !!rcSrAtaAC)
> They were forced hundreds of years ago to open up by Europeans
Yes, by western white queer cultures.
> Also America hosts many different types of cultures and is much less xenophobic than Japan
I didn't say America as a whole was xenophobic, but that Americans can't use the same excuse the Japanese have.
I did call you xenophobic. Eastern cultures are not evil because they put truth over trans issues, and value families over rainbow-haired polycules.
> Gay people exist in all countries and oppressing them won't change that
Oppression is not when you aren't validated. If it was, most Queers would be oppressors for not validating otherkin.
> They were forced hundreds of years ago to open up by Europeans
Yes, by western white queer cultures.
> Also America hosts many different types of cultures and is much less xenophobic than Japan
I didn't say America as a whole was xenophobic, but that Americans can't use the same excuse the Japanese have.
I did call you xenophobic. Eastern cultures are not evil because they put truth over trans issues, and value families over rainbow-haired polycules.
> Gay people exist in all countries and oppressing them won't change that
Oppression is not when you aren't validated. If it was, most Queers would be oppressors for not validating otherkin.
Anonymous A (OP) double-posted this 3 years ago, 26 seconds later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,027
Anonymous A (OP) triple-posted this 3 years ago, 1 minute later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,028
@1,210,025 (B)
Normal reproductive activity isn't a kink.
Deviant, non-reproductive behavior is a kink. Even when cishet men do it.
Normal reproductive activity isn't a kink.
Deviant, non-reproductive behavior is a kink. Even when cishet men do it.
Anonymous B replied with this 3 years ago, 1 minute later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,029
Anonymous F replied with this 3 years ago, 22 seconds later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,030
Lady D !Pool..v42s replied with this 3 years ago, 41 seconds later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,031
@1,210,027 (A)
No?
@1,210,028 (A)
> Normal reproductive activity isn't a kink.
>
> Deviant, non-reproductive behavior is a kink. Even when cishet men do it.
So when guy dogs fuck other guy dogs, it's a fetish for them?
No?
@1,210,028 (A)
> Normal reproductive activity isn't a kink.
>
> Deviant, non-reproductive behavior is a kink. Even when cishet men do it.
So when guy dogs fuck other guy dogs, it's a fetish for them?
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC replied with this 3 years ago, 13 seconds later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,032
@1,210,026 (A)
When they were invaded it wasn't by a queer culture
I'm not xenophobic. You don't even know anything whose not white
Sometimes not validating people is oppression
When they were invaded it wasn't by a queer culture
I'm not xenophobic. You don't even know anything whose not white
Sometimes not validating people is oppression
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC double-posted this 3 years ago, 40 seconds later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,033
Lady D !Pool..v42s replied with this 3 years ago, 35 seconds later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,034
@1,210,025 (B)
No, I don't think anyone staying their attraction for anyone else to be inherently kinky,and their orientation plays no part in it.
No, I don't think anyone staying their attraction for anyone else to be inherently kinky,and their orientation plays no part in it.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 years ago, 4 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,035
@1,210,031 (Lady D !Pool..v42s)
> No?
Correct, it's not oppression if you don't validate someone.
Actual oppression is violent.
> So when guy dogs fuck other guy dogs, it's a fetish for them?
I think it is.
> No?
Correct, it's not oppression if you don't validate someone.
Actual oppression is violent.
> So when guy dogs fuck other guy dogs, it's a fetish for them?
I think it is.
Anonymous A (OP) double-posted this 3 years ago, 29 seconds later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,036
Anonymous A (OP) triple-posted this 3 years ago, 49 seconds later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,037
@1,210,034 (Lady D !Pool..v42s)
Sex evolved for reproduction, using it for anything other than that is a kink.
If you share a kink, and no one congratulates you, that isn't oppression.
Sex evolved for reproduction, using it for anything other than that is a kink.
If you share a kink, and no one congratulates you, that isn't oppression.
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC replied with this 3 years ago, 3 seconds later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,038
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC double-posted this 3 years ago, 18 seconds later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,039
Anonymous B replied with this 3 years ago, 28 seconds later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,040
@1,210,034 (Lady D !Pool..v42s)
I agree, I'm just pointing out the problems with OP's deranged thoughts.
I agree, I'm just pointing out the problems with OP's deranged thoughts.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 years ago, 43 seconds later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,041
@1,210,038 (Kook !!rcSrAtaAC)
You said:
> When they were invaded it wasn't by a queer culture
BY.
We were talking about the culture that invaded Japan, not Japan itself.
You are again pretending not to understand basic sentences, bye, thanks.
You said:
> When they were invaded it wasn't by a queer culture
BY.
We were talking about the culture that invaded Japan, not Japan itself.
You are again pretending not to understand basic sentences, bye, thanks.
Anonymous A (OP) double-posted this 3 years ago, 59 seconds later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,042
Lady D !Pool..v42s replied with this 3 years ago, 31 seconds later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,043
@1,210,035 (A)
Here's a nice abstract about why oppression isn't always violent
About the dogs fucking eachother. So the argument is an appeal to nature? What about human civilization is natural? Isn't the point to overcome nature? Are skyscrapers a fetish? What about cars? Oh I'm so hot for paved roads and infrastructure, it goes against nature and I love it
Here's a nice abstract about why oppression isn't always violent
Oppressive governments that use violence against citizens, e.g. murder and torture, are usually thought of as liable to armed revolutionary attack by the oppressed population. But oppression may be non-violent. A government may greatly restrict political rights and personal autonomy by using surveillance, propaganda, manipulation, strategic detention and similar techniques without ever resorting to overt violence. Can such regimes be liable to revolutionary attack? A widespread view is that the answer is ‘no’. On this view, unless a government is or is likely to turn violent, revolution against it is disproportional. After all, revolution would involve launching potentially lethal attacks against oppressors who do not threaten the lives and bodily integrity of their subjects but pose only lesser threats. I argue that this claim of disproportionality is false. Armed revolution against Stably Non-violent Oppressive Regimes (which are neither violent, nor are likely to become violent) can be proportional under some circumstances, thus they may be liable to revolutionary attack. My argument relies on the Responsibility-Sensitive Account of Proportionality. This account holds that responsibility for posing threats renders agents liable to greater defensive harms than the harms with which they threaten. Even if non-violent oppressive regimes do not threaten citizens with murder, serious physical injury, or enslavement, their responsibility for creating an environment in which citizens’ political rights and personal autonomy are extremely restricted may loosen the proportionality requirement of inflicting defensive harm and render them liable to revolutionary attack.
About the dogs fucking eachother. So the argument is an appeal to nature? What about human civilization is natural? Isn't the point to overcome nature? Are skyscrapers a fetish? What about cars? Oh I'm so hot for paved roads and infrastructure, it goes against nature and I love it
Lady D !Pool..v42s double-posted this 3 years ago, 1 minute later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,044
@1,210,037 (A)
Again, see my above for the appeal to nature argument. Is all of human accomplishment reduced to a fetish?
Again, see my above for the appeal to nature argument. Is all of human accomplishment reduced to a fetish?
Anonymous F replied with this 3 years ago, 3 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,045
Anonymous B replied with this 3 years ago, 1 minute later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,046
@previous (F)
What? No... It's definitely a different person with the exact same mental hangups, and grammar faux pas...
What? No... It's definitely a different person with the exact same mental hangups, and grammar faux pas...
(Edited 59 seconds later.)
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 years ago, 21 seconds later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,047
@1,210,043 (Lady D !Pool..v42s)
I never said homosexuality was wrong because it's unnatural.
I said any sex other than reproduction is a kink.
You can have your kinks, those are not inherently bad, but no one has to congratulate you or endorse it or validate it. When queers don't get validation, they cry "oppression".
Eastern cultures have every right to not validate kinks. That is not the same as active oppression.
I never said homosexuality was wrong because it's unnatural.
I said any sex other than reproduction is a kink.
You can have your kinks, those are not inherently bad, but no one has to congratulate you or endorse it or validate it. When queers don't get validation, they cry "oppression".
Eastern cultures have every right to not validate kinks. That is not the same as active oppression.
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC replied with this 3 years ago, 1 minute later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,048
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC double-posted this 3 years ago, 19 seconds later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,049
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC triple-posted this 3 years ago, 1 minute later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,050
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 years ago, 15 seconds later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,051
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC replied with this 3 years ago, 2 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,052
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 years ago, 50 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,053
@1,210,050 (Kook !!rcSrAtaAC)
I never said kinks were bad, or that people had a moral duty to have as many kids as they can.
The number of kids I have isn't relevant, I never said it mattered myself.
I do support nations that want to encourage that, if increasing their population is a priority. Queer imperialism forced upon Japan has lowered it's working-age population, and I can respect the Japanese that want to push back against that.
It's you who has a black-and-white worldview and thinks the Japanese are bad because they have these values. The only one who hates 90% of the nations here is you.
I never said kinks were bad, or that people had a moral duty to have as many kids as they can.
The number of kids I have isn't relevant, I never said it mattered myself.
I do support nations that want to encourage that, if increasing their population is a priority. Queer imperialism forced upon Japan has lowered it's working-age population, and I can respect the Japanese that want to push back against that.
It's you who has a black-and-white worldview and thinks the Japanese are bad because they have these values. The only one who hates 90% of the nations here is you.
Anonymous A (OP) double-posted this 3 years ago, 17 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,054
Anonymous B replied with this 3 years ago, 1 minute later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,055
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 years ago, 1 minute later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,056
@previous (B)
There's certain irrefutable proof that 90% of nations aren't monstrous oppressive nations, rigorous sociological research that proves I'm right and you're wrong.
Please look it up for me.
I win, I guess?
There's certain irrefutable proof that 90% of nations aren't monstrous oppressive nations, rigorous sociological research that proves I'm right and you're wrong.
Please look it up for me.
I win, I guess?
Anonymous B replied with this 3 years ago, 1 minute later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,057
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC replied with this 3 years ago, 44 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,058
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC double-posted this 3 years ago, 51 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,059
@1,210,054 (A)
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://ro.uow.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi%3Farticle%3D1277%26context%3Dartspapers%23:~:text%3DThe%2520Pre%252DModern%2520Background%2520to%2520Japan%27s%2520Queer%2520Cultures%26text%3DDuring%2520the%2520Edo%2520period%2520(1603,%252D%2520and%2520opposite%252Dsex%2520affairs.&ved=2ahUKEwjCm9blxMP7AhUYZTABHaKvDk0QFnoECA0QBg&usg=AOvVaw2VsT97TcSpA_9EHpZ34-nc
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://ro.uow.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi%3Farticle%3D1277%26context%3Dartspapers%23:~:text%3DThe%2520Pre%252DModern%2520Background%2520to%2520Japan%27s%2520Queer%2520Cultures%26text%3DDuring%2520the%2520Edo%2520period%2520(1603,%252D%2520and%2520opposite%252Dsex%2520affairs.&ved=2ahUKEwjCm9blxMP7AhUYZTABHaKvDk0QFnoECA0QBg&usg=AOvVaw2VsT97TcSpA_9EHpZ34-nc
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC triple-posted this 3 years ago, 1 minute later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,060
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 years ago, 5 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,061
@1,210,057 (B)
We can just demand the other side prove our point and we win, though.
So I guess I just won, based on the rule you established.
We can just demand the other side prove our point and we win, though.
So I guess I just won, based on the rule you established.
Anonymous A (OP) double-posted this 3 years ago, 16 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,062
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC replied with this 3 years ago, 45 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,063
Anonymous B replied with this 3 years ago, 30 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,064
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 years ago, 41 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,065
@1,210,059 (Kook !!rcSrAtaAC)
Written by an anglo, lmao!
I know the English and their colonies are queer, and they project queerness onto the rest of the world.
Can you name a single source from Japan itself? I'm sure there are some old stories talking about a queer encounter, but they are rare and never became normalized until the west forced itself in.
Written by an anglo, lmao!
I know the English and their colonies are queer, and they project queerness onto the rest of the world.
Can you name a single source from Japan itself? I'm sure there are some old stories talking about a queer encounter, but they are rare and never became normalized until the west forced itself in.
Anonymous A (OP) double-posted this 3 years ago, 1 minute later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,066
@1,210,063 (Kook !!rcSrAtaAC)
I don't know how many kids I have, as I frequent many bars in foreign countries and don't keep in contact with all my old acquaintances.
I don't know how many kids I have, as I frequent many bars in foreign countries and don't keep in contact with all my old acquaintances.
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC replied with this 3 years ago, 1 second later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,067
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC double-posted this 3 years ago, 15 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,068
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 years ago, 31 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,069
@1,210,067 (Kook !!rcSrAtaAC)
I'll focus on finding sources for my own arguments.
If you're having trouble, it might be because homosexual behavior was so rare prior to European and American colonialism.
I'll focus on finding sources for my own arguments.
If you're having trouble, it might be because homosexual behavior was so rare prior to European and American colonialism.
Anonymous A (OP) double-posted this 3 years ago, 2 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,070
@1,210,068 (Kook !!rcSrAtaAC)
If the mods are trying to tell you I'm Catherine, maybe consider their sense of humor.
They could also be confused. Most users here have American or British IPs, so anything out of the ordinary might just be lumped together.
If the mods are trying to tell you I'm Catherine, maybe consider their sense of humor.
They could also be confused. Most users here have American or British IPs, so anything out of the ordinary might just be lumped together.
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC replied with this 3 years ago, 3 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,071
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC double-posted this 3 years ago, 22 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,072
Anonymous J joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 44 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,073
Some people will stick forks in sockets and others will mistake the poop hole for the fucking hole.
Anonymous K joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 1 minute later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,074
Who's Catherine?
Anonymous J replied with this 3 years ago, 2 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,076
Lady D !Pool..v42s replied with this 3 years ago, 1 minute later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,077
@1,210,047 (A)
I think your claim that any sex outside of reproduction is a kink to be false. I point to nature and ask if you think it is a kink in nature, and you say yes, but I also think that to be false. I never said the "appeal to nature" argument meant homosexual is bad, why did you jump to that defense?
I think your claim that any sex outside of reproduction is a kink to be false. I point to nature and ask if you think it is a kink in nature, and you say yes, but I also think that to be false. I never said the "appeal to nature" argument meant homosexual is bad, why did you jump to that defense?
Anonymous J replied with this 3 years ago, 3 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,081
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 years ago, 2 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,084
@1,210,077 (Lady D !Pool..v42s)
The appeal to nature fallacy is when you state something is good or bad based on whether it is natural or not.
I didn't do that, so it's not the appeal to nature fallacy.
The appeal to nature fallacy is when you state something is good or bad based on whether it is natural or not.
I didn't do that, so it's not the appeal to nature fallacy.
(Edited 15 seconds later.)
Lady D !Pool..v42s replied with this 3 years ago, 10 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,089
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC replied with this 3 years ago, 28 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,090
Lady D !Pool..v42s replied with this 3 years ago, 23 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,093
@1,210,084 (A)
And I believe up are using general language implying good and bad when referencing the act of reproduction as the result or lack there of of sex.
And I believe up are using general language implying good and bad when referencing the act of reproduction as the result or lack there of of sex.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 years ago, 8 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,096
@1,210,089 (Lady D !Pool..v42s)
Merriam webster says "unconventional sexual taste or behavior". Sex outside reproductive functions fits this.
If you associate unconventional sexual behavior with "bad", that's something you need to work out with a therapist. I never said or implied they were the same thing.
I did say governments and society at large does not need to congratulate or indulge it. Most countries do not endorse it, or punish it.
Merriam webster says "unconventional sexual taste or behavior". Sex outside reproductive functions fits this.
If you associate unconventional sexual behavior with "bad", that's something you need to work out with a therapist. I never said or implied they were the same thing.
I did say governments and society at large does not need to congratulate or indulge it. Most countries do not endorse it, or punish it.
Anonymous A (OP) double-posted this 3 years ago, 26 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,097
@1,210,093 (Lady D !Pool..v42s)
What language implied it was bad?
I said no one needs to validate them, most countries don't and that's ok.
What language implied it was bad?
I said no one needs to validate them, most countries don't and that's ok.
Anonymous G replied with this 3 years ago, 3 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,100
If OP isn’t Catherine it’s Negi SpringfieldAnonymous F replied with this 3 years ago, 12 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,101
Anonymous F double-posted this 3 years ago, 16 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,102
Anonymous F triple-posted this 3 years ago, 32 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,103
it's Catherine though 🫠
Anonymous G replied with this 3 years ago, 17 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,104
Anonymous F replied with this 3 years ago, 27 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,105
Anonymous G replied with this 3 years ago, 38 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,106
why do I get the booger picker bart I made two posts total, I thought that required some special bert type post
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC replied with this 3 years ago, 40 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,107
Anonymous G replied with this 3 years ago, 45 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,108
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 years ago, 43 seconds later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,109
@1,210,101 (F)
The western military-industrial complex cares a lot about forcing this way of life on the rest of the world.
The western military-industrial complex cares a lot about forcing this way of life on the rest of the world.
Anonymous L joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 3 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,110
You guys, Kook and Deadpool in particular, really need to learn to ignore trolls.
@1,210,106 (G)
That's Homer not Bart. That said lots of random users can do that so don't worry about it.
@1,210,106 (G)
That's Homer not Bart. That said lots of random users can do that so don't worry about it.
Anonymous B replied with this 3 years ago, 31 seconds later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,111
Anonymous G replied with this 3 years ago, 9 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,114
I don’t know if I’m being trolled I guess that’s the point
Lady D !Pool..v42s replied with this 3 years ago, 7 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,115
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 years ago, 8 seconds later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,116
Anonymous J replied with this 3 years ago, 2 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,117
@1,210,090 (Kook !!rcSrAtaAC)
@previous (A)
I'm on @OPs side.
@1,210,111 (B)
This is 100% Wade using a sockpuppet.
@previous (A)
I'm on @OPs side.
@1,210,111 (B)
This is 100% Wade using a sockpuppet.
(Edited 35 seconds later.)
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC replied with this 3 years ago, 5 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,118
Lady D !Pool..v42s replied with this 3 years ago, 52 seconds later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,119
Anonymous B replied with this 3 years ago, 1 minute later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,120
M̲O̲D̲ replied with this 3 years ago, 2 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,122
@1,210,119 (Lady D !Pool..v42s)
I analyzed your TextVoice™ and cross-referenced your UIDs. The gig is up.
I analyzed your TextVoice™ and cross-referenced your UIDs. The gig is up.
Lady D !Pool..v42s replied with this 3 years ago, 59 seconds later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,123
@1,210,097 (A)
Oh the language where you said it's unhealthy behavior when you were randing to someone else. That implies bad
Oh the language where you said it's unhealthy behavior when you were randing to someone else. That implies bad
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 years ago, 2 seconds later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,124
Lady D !Pool..v42s replied with this 3 years ago, 29 seconds later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,125
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 years ago, 3 seconds later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,126
@1,210,123 (Lady D !Pool..v42s)
Anal sex has higher rates of STD transmission, that's a biological fact.
Anal sex has higher rates of STD transmission, that's a biological fact.
Lady D !Pool..v42s replied with this 3 years ago, 39 seconds later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,127
M̲O̲D̲ replied with this 3 years ago, 12 seconds later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,128
M̲O̲D̲ double-posted this 3 years ago, 2 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,129
Anonymous B replied with this 3 years ago, 2 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,130
Lady D !Pool..v42s replied with this 3 years ago, 1 minute later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,132
Lady D !Pool..v42s double-posted this 3 years ago, 24 seconds later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,133
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 years ago, 31 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,137
@1,210,132 (Lady D !Pool..v42s)
No, that's not the appeal to nature argument, that's an appeal to not getting STDs.
Where in my argument did I say things were inherently good or bad because they are natural?
No, that's not the appeal to nature argument, that's an appeal to not getting STDs.
Where in my argument did I say things were inherently good or bad because they are natural?
Lady D !Pool..v42s replied with this 3 years ago, 1 hour later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,144
Lady D !Pool..v42s double-posted this 3 years ago, 4 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,149
@1,210,137 (A)
What is the need to differentiate between sex for and not for reproduction and refer to one as a kink and one as not?
What is the need to differentiate between sex for and not for reproduction and refer to one as a kink and one as not?
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 years ago, 3 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,152
@1,210,144 (Lady D !Pool..v42s)
Yes, saying anal sex is unhealthy is saying it is bad.
No, I never brought up nature as the reason it is bad.
STDs are the reason I gave.
So how is this the appeal to nature fallacy?
Yes, saying anal sex is unhealthy is saying it is bad.
No, I never brought up nature as the reason it is bad.
STDs are the reason I gave.
So how is this the appeal to nature fallacy?
(Edited 1 minute later.)
Lady D !Pool..v42s replied with this 3 years ago, 2 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,153
@previous (A)
Because of what you consistently said about nature and sex with and without reproduction you fucking idiot. Fuck all this.
Because of what you consistently said about nature and sex with and without reproduction you fucking idiot. Fuck all this.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 years ago, 39 seconds later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,154
@1,210,149 (Lady D !Pool..v42s)
The societies see sex as good when it creates a new citizen, they don't see the value in sex that doesn't lead to that.
So when citizens say "my gay relationship is valuable and should get tax benefits like straight relationships" the governments disagree, and the west tries to force them to provide these benefits to people who aren't accomplishing the goals of the institution.
Both cultures can exist peacefully IMO, but multiple posters have said 90% of the world's nations are bad for not supporting western notions of romance.
The societies see sex as good when it creates a new citizen, they don't see the value in sex that doesn't lead to that.
So when citizens say "my gay relationship is valuable and should get tax benefits like straight relationships" the governments disagree, and the west tries to force them to provide these benefits to people who aren't accomplishing the goals of the institution.
Both cultures can exist peacefully IMO, but multiple posters have said 90% of the world's nations are bad for not supporting western notions of romance.
Anonymous A (OP) double-posted this 3 years ago, 28 seconds later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,155
@1,210,153 (Lady D !Pool..v42s)
It only qualifies, by definition, if I used nature in my argument which I never did.
It only qualifies, by definition, if I used nature in my argument which I never did.
Lady D !Pool..v42s replied with this 3 years ago, 51 seconds later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,156
@1,210,152 (A)
It all fell apart for me when I asked if you thought a male dog fucking another male dog was a kink and you said yes. If you don't recognize the literal projection of a human made concept onto the actions of an animal and why that doesn't make sense, then you're higher than I am.
It all fell apart for me when I asked if you thought a male dog fucking another male dog was a kink and you said yes. If you don't recognize the literal projection of a human made concept onto the actions of an animal and why that doesn't make sense, then you're higher than I am.
Lady D !Pool..v42s double-posted this 3 years ago, 30 seconds later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,157
Lady D !Pool..v42s triple-posted this 3 years ago, 33 seconds later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,158
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 years ago, 2 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,159
@1,210,157 (Lady D !Pool..v42s)
The Appeal to Nature fallacy is when you say "this is good because it's natural" or "this is bad because it's natural", how could that have ever fit what I said?
The Appeal to Nature fallacy is when you say "this is good because it's natural" or "this is bad because it's natural", how could that have ever fit what I said?
Lady D !Pool..v42s replied with this 3 years ago, 11 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,162
@previous (A)
Because you're relating being transgender to being a kink. And when you justify that you refer to the natural process of having kids and STDs.
Because you're relating being transgender to being a kink. And when you justify that you refer to the natural process of having kids and STDs.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 years ago, 11 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,163
@previous (Lady D !Pool..v42s)
Sex organs evolved for a particular function, but sometimes the neurological system diverges from the norm and people develop "kinks" where they don't utilize those organs for those functions.
That doesn't have to be negative, but it is fake and gay under the literal definitions of both.
Sex organs evolved for a particular function, but sometimes the neurological system diverges from the norm and people develop "kinks" where they don't utilize those organs for those functions.
That doesn't have to be negative, but it is fake and gay under the literal definitions of both.
Anonymous K replied with this 3 years ago, 1 hour later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,164
200 posts, wtf.
horny wolfman joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 3 hours later, 11 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,173
@1,209,945 (A)
> You brought it up in this thread first, so don't act like I was the one obsessed with her.
>
> Kook is always accusing anons of being Catherine and won't say who she thinks I am, so it's obvious what's going on here.
>
> Did you bother to support Catherine when she was building a new community at punychan? NO?! Then she probably doesn't even think about you, let alone post here. Thanks.
lmao
> You brought it up in this thread first, so don't act like I was the one obsessed with her.
>
> Kook is always accusing anons of being Catherine and won't say who she thinks I am, so it's obvious what's going on here.
>
> Did you bother to support Catherine when she was building a new community at punychan? NO?! Then she probably doesn't even think about you, let alone post here. Thanks.
lmao
horny wolfman double-posted this 3 years ago, 1 minute later, 11 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,174
@1,210,096 (A)
> Sex outside reproductive functions fits this.
if youre not fucking to make babies then what are you doing freaks!
> Sex outside reproductive functions fits this.
if youre not fucking to make babies then what are you doing freaks!
horny wolfman triple-posted this 3 years ago, 2 minutes later, 12 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,175
@1,210,065 (A)
it's pretty much the opposite. most countries in the western sphere of influence started shunning gays to keep up. Japan was pretty queer before that. mishima loved his classical sexy samurai boy love
it's pretty much the opposite. most countries in the western sphere of influence started shunning gays to keep up. Japan was pretty queer before that. mishima loved his classical sexy samurai boy love
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC replied with this 3 years ago, 28 minutes later, 12 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,178
Also Japan has a pretty bad rate of producing children compared to the US
Anonymous F replied with this 3 years ago, 7 hours later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,258
@1,210,164 (K)Watch as the Catherine acts as if she is impressed and shocked at the inflated post count in the Catherine's own shitposting topic
(Edited 1 minute later.)
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC replied with this 3 years ago, 1 minute later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,259
Anonymous B replied with this 3 years ago, 9 minutes later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,262
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 years ago, 1 hour later, 21 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,286
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC replied with this 3 years ago, 4 minutes later, 21 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,292
Anonymous N joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 13 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,432
@previous (Kook !!rcSrAtaAC)
The Japanese must be real stupid to make a system that hurts both sides.
You read too many Dr. Seuss comics.
The Japanese must be real stupid to make a system that hurts both sides.
You read too many Dr. Seuss comics.
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC replied with this 3 years ago, 45 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,436
Anonymous N replied with this 3 years ago, 1 hour later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,445
@previous (Kook !!rcSrAtaAC)
Answer honestly: Is it more acceptable to say japs than niggers? or are they equally wrong
Answer honestly: Is it more acceptable to say japs than niggers? or are they equally wrong
Green !StaYqkzUPc joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 9 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,551
Religion is the problem.
Anonymous F replied with this 3 years ago, 3 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,552
Nazi Mod replied with this 3 years ago, 11 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,210,556
Anonymous K replied with this 3 years ago, 2 weeks later, 2 weeks after the original post[^] [v] #1,212,789
Anonymous P joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 5 minutes later, 2 weeks after the original post[^] [v] #1,212,798
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC replied with this 3 years ago, 1 minute later, 2 weeks after the original post[^] [v] #1,212,800
Anonymous K replied with this 3 years ago, 2 months later, 3 months after the original post[^] [v] #1,223,156
Anonymous C replied with this 3 years ago, 17 minutes later, 3 months after the original post[^] [v] #1,223,158
I was Anonymous C in this thread.
Anonymous G replied with this 3 years ago, 1 hour later, 3 months after the original post[^] [v] #1,223,178
I was Anonymous G