The Official Woody Woodpecker Thread
-
-
-
"that there is an element to my feelings of sexual attraction"
What does that even mean? I've not even got as far as being incredulous about whatever that is, because I can't actually interpret those words as a coherent idea.
Sorry, accidentally a word or incompletely edited it.
"You are incredulous about a particular element to my feelings of sexual attraction."
-
Repulsed but slightly aroused. In other news I need help with web development.
So, help with PHP? @Arantor is your man.
-
Trick question. Your dead.
How do you feel before he bludgeons you to death with a hammer?
-
@boomzilla said:
Trick question. Your dead.
How do you feel before he bludgeons you to death with a hammer?
Probably stuffed . No seriously. From what I've read, that guy is an awesome cook.
-
"You are incredulous about a particular element to my feelings of sexual attraction."
Remind me which element(s) it is that you're saying I'm incredulous about?
-
Oh my, you got. I don't watch gay porn. Now I'm probably past the point where psychiatry can help me, I should head directly to a mortuary!
-
I don't watch gay porn.
And you've never seen anal sex depicted in straight porn? That's quite the nanny filter.
-
I'm incredulous? You're incredulous! You're Incredulous! The whole trial is incredulous! They're Incredulous!
-
I object.
-
@boomzilla said:
"You are incredulous about a particular element to my feelings of sexual attraction."
Remind me which element(s) it is that you're saying I'm incredulous about?
Why?
-
I'm incredulous? You're incredulous! You're Incredulous! The whole trial is incredulous! They're Incredulous!
Needs more Oprah meme.
-
Hey, that was good!
Anal sex is homosexual encounter.
There's a tremendous amount of porn freely available on the Internet that counts as evidence against that claim.
Oh my, you got. I don't watch gay porn.
And you've never seen anal sex depicted in straight porn?
So, when did we go from "gay porn" to "anal in straight porn".
Plus, NO, I DON'T WATCH PORN! I FEAR GOD!!!
-
-
So, when did we go from "gay porn" to "anal in straight porn".
a : you're missing a question mark on the end of that, you fuckwit.
b : We didn't. You went from "anal in porn" to "gay porn"
-
-
a : you're missing a question mark on the end of that, you fuckwit.
Of what?
b : We didn't. You went from "anal in porn" to "gay porn"
Where?
-
-
-
Luckily Lorne is there to hold your hand
-
-
Of what?
Of the text I quoted, which was stated as a question but had no question mark on the end. It is typical to end a question with a question mark. Failing to do so makes one look like a subliterate cockend.
@kt_ said:Where?
Somewhere around here...@kt_ said:
Anal sex is homosexual encounter.
@flabdablet said:There's a tremendous amount of porn freely available on the Internet that counts as evidence against that claim.
@kt_ said:Oh my, you got. I don't watch gay porn.
pissforce is to ing
-
Of the text I quoted, which was stated as a question but had no question mark on the end. It is typical to end a question with a question mark. Failing to do so makes one look like a subliterate cockend.
Ah, OK, thought you meant that I misread something because I missed a question mark.
So I, fuckwit, I, subliterate cockend, admit: I did make a mistake, wait! no! I make mistake, I make mistake in post and I not know how fix, but I very very very shame. Please, master love, master tolerate, forgive my stupid and please start love me as you love the rest of the world. Please, please!
-
please don't onebox. please don't onebox. please don't onebox.
:nsfw: https://www.google.com/search?q=straight+anal+porn&safe=off&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X :nsfw:
-
I rest my case.
-
How so?
-
-
@LaoC said:
Context disambiguates words. If you ask someone if they have a fag for you, understanding the very same word that may be a slur as such doesn't make any sense so it's clear you're asking for a cigarette. I clearly said the people "have homophobia". You can have claustrophobia or ebola, you can't have racism.You're free to call it a false diagnosis if you have a better idea for why the patient is bleeding from the arse (or getting deeply traumatized by something he's allegedly "not OK with" respectively) but that's just missing the point. The point is, it's not a slur.
If you've defined a word to mean a very clinical thing, that's...OK, though people may disagree (and no, appeals to authority on moral subjects doesn't work). But if you ignore that the word is very loaded with other meanings and use it outside of a clinical setting, then you're...using slurs.
And bad analogies to diagnosis of viral infection doesn't make your argument any better no matter how satisfied you are with it.
You can try and find any psychologist who would say that getting deeply traumatized in a way comparable to rape from an event initially perceived as pleasurable is not a clear indication of a phobia. Yet @polygeekery thinks that he could just "object to" that diagnosis. He can do that alright, it just doesn't change anything.
-
I thought the Idiot Fox defined @-mentioning as harassment? Stop harassing me, or I might nag you!
-
you wake up naked, being spooned by @Lorne_Kates with the smell of sex in the air.
How do you feel?
Dead?
edit:
-
You beat me to that one!
-
@Polygeekery said:
you wake up naked, being spooned by @Lorne_Kates with the smell of sex in the air.
How do you feel?
Dead?
One of my greatest fears is that i will wake up dead.
-
I clearly said the people "have homophobia".
I am going to take a WAG that you are ESL. That wording seems very odd. Most people would say that people "are homophobic".
Regardless, you don't get to make the definitions.
irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against homosexuality or homosexuals
That's the definition. Just because a person finds that the thought of themself have a homosexual encounter very distasteful and traumatic, doesn't mean they care one bit whether gay people perform those same acts.
You must be working from the Idiot Fox Dictionary of SJW terms.
-
Like flabdablet, I'm heterosexual. And, like flabdablet, I find the prospect of a homosexual encounter of the "poking intimate body parts in other intimate body parts" kind, at the very worst of the worst, "unlikely".
Disgust and terror is running around puking because "oh my god, gay men want to stuff their great big hairy cocks up my arse[1]".
[1] and I might like it
If you want to be bi-curious, you're more than welcome. We won't judge you. But we will judge you if you shame us for not having those kinks.
-
Yes there is. You can avoid having sex with people whose genitalia don't attract you. And you can let any potential partner know that if she has a penis, you're not interested. In other words, you can responsibly disclose your own issues.
What you can't do, if you wish to be seen as a modern and enlightened individual, is expect other people to guess every issue you might have and warn you about it before you've even brought it up.
Is there a way to achieve this without adding too much more bureaucracy than we already have when it comes to relationships? I mean, already we are expected to obtain a signed Grant of Consent form in triplicate, and consent may be revoked at any time and we can get put on sex offender lists and never be able to hold a white-collar job again. The young single heterocissexual male already has to navigate a confusing minefield even if he has the best of intentions and wants to do the Right Thing™. Younger ones also need to check photo ID to make sure that their potential partner is of consenting age, etc. etc.
-
@LaoC said:
Yes I am, but with a degree in English. So I know how to use a corpus search (AKA googling these days) to find usage patterns. Turns out people use "to have *phobia" exactly to emphasize the fact that it's a medical condition but "be *phobic" when the contect is clear anyway or the xenophobia-like meaning is intended. So yes, it's rather uncommon (only about 60 times as many hits as "heterocissexual") but intentionally worded like this to convey the intended meaning.I clearly said the people "have homophobia".
I am going to take a WAG that you are ESL. That wording seems very odd. Most people would say that people "are homophobic".Regardless, you don't get to make the definitions.
irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against homosexuality or homosexuals
That's the definition. Just because a person finds that the thought of themself have a homosexual encounter very distasteful and traumatic, doesn't mean they care one bit whether gay people perform those same acts.
If that's not irrational fear and/or aversion, I don't know what is. Nothing in the definition says that this fear or aversion was only relevant if it relates to other people's acts.
-
I clearly said the people "have homophobia". You can have claustrophobia or ebola, you can't have racism.
As @Polygeekery mentioned, this usage doesn't sound familiar to me, either. So the distinction didn't get through the communication barrier. Either way, an objective medical illness diagnosis doesn't have anything like the loaded meaning of a word that describes a type of bigot.
-
If that's not irrational fear and/or aversion, I don't know what is.
So...any behavior that a person finds distasteful if it were to happen to them, is a form of bigotry?
Yeah, you are not working off the same definitions as the rest of society. You are roughly as fucked up in your worldview as the Idiot Fox.
-
If that's not irrational fear and/or aversion,
Yeah...but whenever someone COMPLAINs about how some *phobia isn't about irrational fear/aversion, he's told that the language has moved on and it's more about hating someone/thing. You can't get that toothpaste back into the tube now.
-
-
@LaoC said:
Exactly, that's why a psychologist probably wouldn't put "homophobic" on a diagnosis but something like "suffering from homophobia issues".I clearly said the people "have homophobia". You can have claustrophobia or ebola, you can't have racism.
As @Polygeekery mentioned, this usage doesn't sound familiar to me, either. So the distinction didn't get through the communication barrier. Either way, an objective medical illness diagnosis doesn't have anything like the loaded meaning of a word that describes a type of bigot.
NB: we're not even discussing the fact that it's a medical condition to be traumatized by having had a pleasurable sexual experience mistakenly perceived as homosexual any more, just your personal offense at the name for the diagnosis.
Y'know, I'm just saying it like it is ...@LaoC said:
If that's not irrational fear and/or aversion, I don't know what is.
So...any behavior that a person finds distasteful if it were to happen to them, is a form of bigotry?
I'll put this non sequitur down to your brief attention span. I'm talking medical conditions here. Perhaps your dad or someone else with sufficient reading comprehension could explain this to you?
-
Yeah...but whenever someone COMPLAINs about how some *phobia isn't about irrational fear/aversion, he's told that the language has moved on and it's more about hating someone/thing.
Straw man.
-
-
@LaoC said:
mistakenly perceived as homosexual
You really play fast and loose with definitions.
You're still dodging the question
-
False trichotomy.
-
Why?
In order to preserve any shred of credibility your claim about my incredulousness might have in the mind of any reasonable observer?
So, when did we go from "gay porn" to "anal in straight porn".
As a counterexample to your claim that anal sex is homosexual encounter.
NO, I DON'T WATCH PORN! I FEAR GOD!!!
Very well then, here's a summary of my own findings on the matter; please feel free to seek confirmation elsewhere.
-
Approximately half of the straight porn available online features penetration of a female anus by a male penis.
-
There exists a substantial amount of gay porn that does not feature anal penetration.
-
Porn is a documentary record of sexual activity. The vast bulk of it involves no "movie magic".
From (1), (2) and (3) it follows that "anal sex" and "homosexual encounter" do not label the same sets of activities. Therefore, your claim (anal sex is homosexual encounter) is false. QED.
-
-
False trichotomy.
Do you mean it could be all at the same time (how?) or there are other possibilities? Feel free to add your favorite one.
-
The young single heterocissexual male already has to navigate a confusing minefield even if he has the best of intentions and wants to do the Right Thing™.
Same applies to anybody. The young single heterocissexual male is not special in that regard.
-
Same applies to anybody. The young single heterocissexual male is not special in that regard.
Okay, so it's equally(equitably?) problematic for everyone. Shitsux, but I can accept that.