The normalization of kink

[Keith&Co.]

Interestingly, it is possible that we live in a world where animals can give consent. I don't think the reality has ever sufficiently happened, or been recognized, nor been operated properly so as to be truly acceptable even once in history. It is not something that is, at any rate, impossible.

Oh, yeah. First thing dolphins do when we teach them enough language to communicate with humans is ask for a hand job.
And what researchers do to get answers is between them and their funding. But LEGALL, we do not allow children or animals or the mentally incompetent to enter into contracts, give consent, or take responsibility for their own orgasm.

I suppose i must append "...yet." to this statement.

Yes, you must. This is why I go into the discussion of still stupid, emotionally damaging, and otherwise problematic, with a focus on whatever education leads to less young people molesting animals.

I'm not going to exactly demand people not give handjobs, but I mean, they're getting solicited for an old fashioned by a complete stranger... I wouldn't give some human hobo a handy, why would I give an aquatic hobo one? Fucker might as easily drag you down and just rape you. Or do that the next time you jump in.

This 'd make an interesting anecdote on a really weird episode of the Addams Family. "Says here in the paper, some marine biologist fell into the pool at that Dolphin place in Florida, and got raped by a porpoise!" And Grandma sighs: "Ahhhhh. Grad school."

Actually, I was thinking about the Addams in relation to this thread. They were about the first couple i ever saw on TV with an active and happy sex life. Other couples were either never shown in the bedroom or had twin beds. Gomez and Tish were forever just one borrowed French word away from a sincere effort to initiate hanky panky.
Unlike couples that mostly related by references to spouse abuse ("To the nearest substantial orbiting body, Adelaide!"). Totally devoted to each other, no hint of going astray. But they were presented as weird people not someone to emulate. Odd, that.

For the most part, TV, movies, all adults treated Sex as a forbidden subject my whole life. If you're under 18, it's a no-no topic. Not for public consumption, public discussion. The "Rocky Horror" episode of Glee kinda touched on this. Kids are taught that sex is bad, they shouldn't ask questions, shouldn't investigate, shouldn't understand what it is their bodies are demanding. We think we're protecting them for 18 years by not tolerating any talk on the subject.
And then, boom, you're an adult. It's all on you. No tools have been provided, no discussion tolerated, no experimentation allowed. But now you have the keys to the car that's been revving your engine for your entire puberty. Take it out for a spin, but don't get hurt.

And we still don't talk about it, because until VERY recently, everyone was convinced that no one would ever think of homosexuality if we never told them it existed. Or blowjobs. Or anal. Or speed-runs to Tijuana to find out what all the fuss is about.

We've made it a big, tempting mystery and not even given them Velma's magnifying glass to navigate it.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

So is sex-ed really the problem here or is the super-saturation of pornography that is available the problem? Sex-ed should cover the normal stuff. STDs, intercourse, safe sex. Then cover a few other things.

1) Don't be pressured, over any aspect of it. Girls, the testicles are extraordinarily sensitive to pain. If you need an out, they are literally just hanging there waiting to "get the message".
2) Porn... it is as realistic portrayal about sex as action movies are about real life. As an FYI, the woman... she's getting paid... to both have sex like that... and pretend she's having the best sex ever!
3) Anal sex. Girls, it is okay to say to the boys, 'you first'.
4) Spitting? WTF?! How in the hell did that become a thing?!

 

[Toni]

I find this whole thread abjectly insulting from at least one particular angle. Then, for she perfect and eternal oracle of the knowledge of Lake, the Lady of Lake, I suppose concessions must be made.

The fact is, people have a right to know how to operate their bodies sexually, and to do so as they see fit.

Interestingly, it is possible that we live in a world where animals can give consent. I don't think the reality has ever sufficiently happened, or been recognized, nor been operated properly so as to be truly acceptable even once in history. It is not something that is, at any rate, impossible.

It is still stupid, and probably emotionally reckless. If we don't teach that, how and why it is emotionally reckless, then we will see as many young folks fucking dogs. If we teach this perhaps we will see less.

People deserve to know how to safely stick things in their butts. Safe instruction on this must be universal, so that it is not determinable through who seeks information that information is sought.

People deserve to know that masturbation at a young-ish age IS normal, that most everyone does it, and that some.do not do it, and that is fine too.

Privacy of interest, the right to privacy is only possible through uniform public education.

Age Play, and related communities, are based around the idea that only adults may give consent, so they do live out their fantasies with adults. As Kieth points out, they do that while pretending otherwise.

Some cursory education in such things would prevent embarrassment, ensure privacy, and probably protect a lot of younger folks from grooming and predators in the space.

I would recommend such topics for college-level health and human development, though, for things like age-play.

Education on middle aged predators would be pretty useful at 17-18, however.

Education on the fact that masturbation is normal, and good sexual education in general, delays onset of sexual activity.

I think I'm going to watch this for a while though to see how apoplectic Emily gets over people liking things she doesn't like, and not them not accepting her stinky "but" in the middle of an otherwise pretty alright-thus-far OP.

You're either really naive or really fortunate if you think that no one needs education about predators until 17-18---or that predators are limited to middle age.

Or that masturbation is limited to the young??????

 

[Jarhyn]

I find this whole thread abjectly insulting from at least one particular angle. Then, for she perfect and eternal oracle of the knowledge of Lake, the Lady of Lake, I suppose concessions must be made.

The fact is, people have a right to know how to operate their bodies sexually, and to do so as they see fit.

Interestingly, it is possible that we live in a world where animals can give consent. I don't think the reality has ever sufficiently happened, or been recognized, nor been operated properly so as to be truly acceptable even once in history. It is not something that is, at any rate, impossible.

It is still stupid, and probably emotionally reckless. If we don't teach that, how and why it is emotionally reckless, then we will see as many young folks fucking dogs. If we teach this perhaps we will see less.

People deserve to know how to safely stick things in their butts. Safe instruction on this must be universal, so that it is not determinable through who seeks information that information is sought.

People deserve to know that masturbation at a young-ish age IS normal, that most everyone does it, and that some.do not do it, and that is fine too.

Privacy of interest, the right to privacy is only possible through uniform public education.

Age Play, and related communities, are based around the idea that only adults may give consent, so they do live out their fantasies with adults. As Kieth points out, they do that while pretending otherwise.

Some cursory education in such things would prevent embarrassment, ensure privacy, and probably protect a lot of younger folks from grooming and predators in the space.

I would recommend such topics for college-level health and human development, though, for things like age-play.

Education on middle aged predators would be pretty useful at 17-18, however.

Education on the fact that masturbation is normal, and good sexual education in general, delays onset of sexual activity.

I think I'm going to watch this for a while though to see how apoplectic Emily gets over people liking things she doesn't like, and not them not accepting her stinky "but" in the middle of an otherwise pretty alright-thus-far OP.

You're either really naive or really fortunate if you think that no one needs education about predators until 17-18---or that predators are limited to middle age.

Or that masturbation is limited to the young??????

You took some liberties with that. And you lot accuse me of smoking too much?

You want to hear "we need to teach this by 17-18" and think "oh, they only want the entire subject taught then". It's not uncharitable it's dyscharitable.

There's a thing that happens with young gay folks, especially of disapproving parents, and it's really something that only needs to be in the "just before graduation" phase because it addresses that moment of opportunity. There are other lessons that could certainly be taught earlier: Namely that some adults and younger folks will not see their ability to manipulate or outright force a result as exactly the reason they shouldn't contemplate even trying for it, or finding an appropriate and consenting partner for whatever game they play at, namely one they don't have leverage over.

And yes, the need to teach the normalcy of masturbation is generally confined to the young, as that's when people start to feel shame over it, and if they don't have that issue when they are young, they won't have it when they are older. When they are older, they have their peers generally to discuss it with and beliefs that will not generally be swayed.

But, I guess here we are, the stinky "but" of things.

 

[Keith&Co.]

So is sex-ed really the problem here or is the super-saturation of pornography that is available the problem?

It's not something that can be solved just by the careful levelizing of sex-ed content. All of society needs to grow up.

Breasts are hypersexualized. The governor of Massachusetts before Romney had twins. She took some maternity time off, held a few meetings over the phone from home (seems so weird that this was something novel back then...). I think a few interviews, too.
Romney got a lot of milage by suggesting that she had probably been breast-feeding during some of those meetings. Many people were ridiculously uncomfortable at the thought, like they would have been if she'd done it with them in the room.
But it's not a thing to shame women for.

During th e final arc towards samesex marriage, a number of people asked, "What am i going to tell my kid when he sees two men kissing in public?" And thought this was an argument worth a shit.... this is why there are Pride events, because people like this want people who are unlike them hidden away, lesser citizens, because they do sex icky.


Within living memory they might have asked what to tell their spawnling about an interracial marriage like mine. Because the icky.

The more that gets closeted, though, the worse things are when the repressed desires finally force their way out. It's not enough to say in the textbook, you might develop feelings, that's natural, a substantial part of the culture has to at least tolerate the possibility.

 

[thebeave]

So is sex-ed really the problem here or is the super-saturation of pornography that is available the problem?

It's not something that can be solved just by the careful levelizing of sex-ed content. All of society needs to grow up.

Breasts are hypersexualized. The governor of Massachusetts before Romney had twins. She took some maternity time off, held a few meetings over the phone from home (seems so weird that this was something novel back then...). I think a few interviews, too.
Romney got a lot of milage by suggesting that she had probably been breast-feeding during some of those meetings. Many people were ridiculously uncomfortable at the thought, like they would have been if she'd done it with them in the room.
But it's not a thing to shame women for.

During th e final arc towards samesex marriage, a number of people asked, "What am i going to tell my kid when he sees two men kissing in public?" And thought this was an argument worth a shit.... this is why there are Pride events, because people like this want people who are unlike them hidden away, lesser citizens, because they do sex icky.


Within living memory they might have asked what to tell their spawnling about an interracial marriage like mine. Because the icky.

The more that gets closeted, though, the worse things are when the repressed desires finally force their way out. It's not enough to say in the textbook, you might develop feelings, that's natural, a substantial part of the culture has to at least tolerate the possibility.

What do you think of Jeffery Toobin rubbing one out during a CNN (a supposedly "progressive network") Zoom call? He got fired for that (then rehired). Maybe its time we all just grew up and allow men to do that perfectly natural sex act in a, more or less, public space and not have people go, "Ewww".

 

[Jarhyn]

So is sex-ed really the problem here or is the super-saturation of pornography that is available the problem?

It's not something that can be solved just by the careful levelizing of sex-ed content. All of society needs to grow up.

Breasts are hypersexualized. The governor of Massachusetts before Romney had twins. She took some maternity time off, held a few meetings over the phone from home (seems so weird that this was something novel back then...). I think a few interviews, too.
Romney got a lot of milage by suggesting that she had probably been breast-feeding during some of those meetings. Many people were ridiculously uncomfortable at the thought, like they would have been if she'd done it with them in the room.
But it's not a thing to shame women for.

During th e final arc towards samesex marriage, a number of people asked, "What am i going to tell my kid when he sees two men kissing in public?" And thought this was an argument worth a shit.... this is why there are Pride events, because people like this want people who are unlike them hidden away, lesser citizens, because they do sex icky.


Within living memory they might have asked what to tell their spawnling about an interracial marriage like mine. Because the icky.

The more that gets closeted, though, the worse things are when the repressed desires finally force their way out. It's not enough to say in the textbook, you might develop feelings, that's natural, a substantial part of the culture has to at least tolerate the possibility.

What do you think of Jeffery Toobin rubbing one out during a CNN (a supposedly "progressive network") Zoom call? He got fired for that (then rehired). Maybe its time we all just grew up and allow men to do that perfectly natural sex act in a, more or less, public space and not have people go, "Ewww".

I think it's inappropriate to be engaging with sexual functions during work meetings, because it is deeply disrespectful of the meeting. You can't really engage the meeting if you are engaging your penis.

I don't want it in public spaces for the same reason I don't want people cutting themselves and bleeding in public places, or spitting up in public places, or leaving out shopping carts in public places.

 

[Keith&Co.]

What do you think of Jeffery Toobin rubbing one out during a CNN (a supposedly "progressive network") Zoom call? He got fired for that (then rehired). Maybe its time we all just grew up and allow men to do that perfectly natural sex act in a, more or less, public space and not have people go, "Ewww".

I do support society being more adult about seeing nudity in public, but not actual sex acts (including those involving one, two, or more participants).

But, hey, maybe you're on to something. If we aim for public sex to be authorized, maybe we'll achieve a 'meeting halfway' solution with public nudity allowed, public sex still disallowed.

 

[thebeave]

You would hate San Francisco. Peeing, pooping, spitting up, masturbating and doing drugs on the sidewalks in downtown is all part of the culture. Shopping carts are the least of the problem.

 

[Keith&Co.]

I don't want it in public spaces for the same reason I don't want …., or leaving out shopping carts in public places.

Exactly. I don't care how you comport yourself, i worry about obstacles while i try to navigate the parking lot.
AND, shopping carts can roll into my car during high winds.

 

[Jarhyn]

You would hate San Francisco. Peeing, pooping, spitting up, masturbating and doing drugs on the sidewalks in downtown is all part of the culture. Shopping carts are the least of the problem.

Exactly why I don't live there, yes.

I've only sat in mystery liquids on the bus here in Minneapolis once. I still don't know if it was whisky or pissky. San Francisco, you make it sound like I'd be dodging jizz rain. You can keep it.

 

[Gospel]

I don't want it in public spaces for the same reason I don't want …., or leaving out shopping carts in public places.

Exactly. I don't care how you comport yourself, i worry about obstacles while i try to navigate the parking lot.
AND, shopping carts can roll into my car during high winds.

I can't help but laugh at the idea that most Americans after accepting a 30% loss in investment just driving off the dealer's lot are concerned about shopping carts.

 

[Jarhyn]

I don't want it in public spaces for the same reason I don't want …., or leaving out shopping carts in public places.

Exactly. I don't care how you comport yourself, i worry about obstacles while i try to navigate the parking lot.
AND, shopping carts can roll into my car during high winds.

To be fair, of those obstacles some must engage, some involve sexual threats and other socially leveraged activities.

When you splash unwanted consequences on others in the pool of reality, that's when we have words.

 

[Jarhyn]

I don't want it in public spaces for the same reason I don't want …., or leaving out shopping carts in public places.

Exactly. I don't care how you comport yourself, i worry about obstacles while i try to navigate the parking lot.
AND, shopping carts can roll into my car during high winds.

I can't help but laugh at the idea that most American's after accepting a 30% loss in investment just driving off the dealer's lot are concerned about shopping carts.

It's not about money for most of us, it's about having a nice thing despoiled, or making more unnecessary work for others and making common spaces less useful.

 

[Gospel]

I can't help but laugh at the idea that most American's after accepting a 30% loss in investment just driving off the dealer's lot are concerned about shopping carts.

It's not about money for most of us, it's about having a nice thing despoiled, or making more unnecessary work for others and making common spaces less useful.

Easy there Governor. I get it. I wonder why every market (that uses carts) doesn't have a coin system. In my area, a place called Save a Lot has it so you have to use 25cents to get a kart and if you want your money back you must return the cart. When someone doesn't return it there is always some homeless person that does it to retrieve that quarter for their work. This Save a Lot is in the hood and I've never seen a kart sitting in that lot (at least not for long). I haven't seen one of their carts on the side of the road far from their store either. I have seen a lot of Publix and Walmart carts around town though.

 

[Jarhyn]

I can't help but laugh at the idea that most American's after accepting a 30% loss in investment just driving off the dealer's lot are concerned about shopping carts.

It's not about money for most of us, it's about having a nice thing despoiled, or making more unnecessary work for others and making common spaces less useful.

Easy there Governor. I get it. I wonder why every market (that uses carts) doesn't have a coin system. In my area, a place called Save a Lot has it so you have to use 25cents to get a kart and if you want your money back you must return the cart. When someone doesn't return it there is always some homeless person that does it to retrieve that quarter for their work. This Save a Lot is in the hood and I've never seen a kart sitting in that lot (at least not for long). I haven't seen one of their carts on the side of the road far from their store either. I have seen a lot of Publix and Walmart carts around town though.

Yeah. I've been tempted to put a cart token among the things I keep.

I don't know if the carts for your store support custom cart tokens? But I know that's kinda big in the UK.

I also wonder at this. Perhaps the cost of the carts is lower than the cost of the mechanism?

But at the same time, part of the cost of carts is lead time, too, not just the material costs. You can't really just have to buy a cart or two; you have to (order) (minimum number) (carts).

I guess the point is, I wouldn't care about public masturbation if it didn't leave sticky, biologically active messes behind, and assuming it wasn't directed at anyone in particular. Creepy, threatening behavior isn't OK though no matter what someone is doing. There's nothing obscene, after all, about hands and necks and mouths and fingers, but you draw one across the other, followed by again the next across the next... At least to me, the exposure of a penis isn't the problem here.

Really, the wish I have to keep genitals private in public spaces owes to my desire for it to be socially unacceptable to apply any manner of leverage to see my own genitals in any public space. I do not want to be expected to do it "since it's not a big deal". It will always be a big deal to me. I wish to be afforded an expectation of respectful privacy, and so others must similarly be expected to play this game. This may be selfish of me, but it is a selfishness I may today revel in and so I shall.

 

[Keith&Co.]

I don't want it in public spaces for the same reason I don't want …., or leaving out shopping carts in public places.

Exactly. I don't care how you comport yourself, i worry about obstacles while i try to navigate the parking lot.
AND, shopping carts can roll into my car during high winds.

I can't help but laugh at the idea that most Americans after accepting a 30% loss in investment just driving off the dealer's lot are concerned about shopping carts.

it's a quick and obvious test of maturity.
Most people shop with great regularity. Weekly or bi-weekly. Some daily.

You can leave the cart loose in the lot and no one will ever fine you, or post your picture on the news, or even follow you around to yell at you.
Or you can put it back. You gain nothing, no refund, no accolades, MAYBE a thank-you from the guy sent out to collect carts, for making his job easier.
But it's entirely on you. Are you selfish or generous? Are you concerned with your convenience or do other people have any value at all in your calculus?

And some of the justifications for the selfish choice are rather revealing. "I'm busy" or "I'm in a hurry" or "I have a kid." I had three kids. I always got the cart back to a corral.

I admit, i haven't heard 'I lost 30% on my car when i hit the road, fuck the minimum-wage guy that wrangles the carts,' before. That's a new one.

 

[Jarhyn]

I may also note, one thing of particularly human importance is that sex is a big social tangle, something we are mostly wired to want and that many are wired such they ought not, nor at any rate likely ever shall, have it.

This juxtaposition leads to a reality where actually doing it in front of others, given the personal and social complications surrounding it, is just rude in general and well deserving of taboo, at least in human societies.

So without devolving into prudery, for entirely respectable reasons, I think it appropriate for certain taboos against public acts.

Accepting the reality of others' sexuality, and occasional discussional exposure to the topics of that sexuality, is a large part of being a mature adult.

I sure do HOPE everyone here can be one of those, ya?

 

[Gospel]

I usually just return the cart and carry my bags to the car. I'm sure there is a reason for it but coming from a house of 5 and never needing to buy more than I can carry in one visit it puzzles me to see some people with carts filled to the gills. I don't even understand the cases of water bottles (which makes sense to use the cart-to-car method) but in my house, we use two 5 gallon water dispensers where we replace the bottles after 30ish refiles at a local dispenser.

Edit: Well my house kinda cheats because we have two shoppers, my wife and myself.

 

[Jarhyn]

I usually just return the cart and carry my bags to the car. I'm sure there is a reason for it but coming from a house of 5 and never needing to buy more than I can carry in one visit it puzzles me to see some people with carts filled to the gills. I don't even understand the cases of water bottles (which makes sense to use the cart-to-car method) but in my house, we use two 5 gallon water dispensers where we replace the bottles after 30ish refiles at a local dispenser.

Edit: Well my house kinda cheats because we have two shoppers, my wife and myself.

We are still using this as a metaphor for waiting to beat off until we get home into a private place where our messes won't be bothersome, ya?