The strange things I get from porn... (Serious post)

(Please read the post below this one; I recently posted my O Level English composition, and if you read it and tell me you like it I will get a hard on.)

Rest assured, The following post is safe for reading. Unless your parents are really narrow-minded and oppressive, you could probably use this for a bedtime story or something. If you have a pretty good idea what 4chan is, just skip the next three paragraphs, though I'd have a bigger boner if you didn't.

Once again re-iterating for the unwashed: 4chan is a diverse and popular imageboard (that means people go there to post images). It is divided into many sections, including Anime, Torrents, Guns, Artwork, Music, Video Games, Transportation, etc. Most users remain anonymous, thus avoiding some measure of e-drama. The most well known section is /b/, the Random section of the imageboard, which cultivates a mess of memes (little fads and recurring jokes), insensitivity-on-purpose, running the gamut from bare honesty to hardcore trolling. It's the source of the recent anti-Scientology movement dubbed "Project Chanology" (which involves rickrolling the Church of Scientology).

It's an interesting community - your petite safe society's rules don't apply. In fact, 4chan's citizens were probably the first to make fun of things like September 11, suicides (emo kids), rape, and all that stuff nobody decries or has an alternative view on in public. That's just it - 4chan is alternative. It's a haven for people to dump all the socially unacceptable things they have in their heads. It's the backlash from society's oppressive "follow the crowd" force.

/d/ is the section for Hentai/Alternative. You thought Hentai was bad? /d/ is where the really /d/eviant stuff go. BDSM (wikipedia it), mixing of genders (please don't ask), monsters, tentacle monsters (hohoho), ridiculous stretching of body parts... I'll stop here. Sorry to those who have good imaginations.


So tonight I was skipping around /d/, with my parents in bed and me not in bed. I found a thread where the theme was "Left to come forever" which basically translates into "leaving bound helpless females with vibrators in them FOREVAR" or perhaps more accurately: "Forced orgasms without a male in the picture". Anyway, the downright crazy pictures posted aren't what I want to highlight.


Early into the thread someone called the idea of forced orgasms as "weird". According to him/her, without a consenting mind, you can't orgasm. Other people thought differently: "Stimulation is stimulation", someone said. "...it is possible to force women to orgasm even if they're not in the mood/mentally stimulated."


If you still think this is an argument about orgasms (a moderator actually thought that the issue was with how erotic the fetish was), I suggest you think a little deeper.


"There was actually a well-known rapist in the states who thought that since he made them orgasm, it wasn't really rape... just because you have an orgasm doesn't mean you wanted it."

The shit began flying from this post on (shortened and removed some posts, Note that there were an indeterminate number of participants, as everyone went by "Anonymous"):
"There's no way they orgasmed if they didn't want it. They either faked it which, lets face it, isn't hard, or they conceded and -tried- to orgasm because he was oh, threatening their life with a gun or knife. So I suppose in a life-threatening sense you can "force" an orgasm."

"I'm praying to God that you're a troll. How could you possibly say such a thing like that? Women have climaxed while being raped-- they didn't want it or did it to somehow make it end. It just happened. That's how their body responded."

"Well. As someone who has been forced to orgasm during a rape, no, I didn't "want it" at all, in any way, shape, or form. I can't control what my body responds to."

"We are talking about a Situation in which most people wouldn't even feel pain."
"the reality of it all, they have a kink, they don't want to admit. Vibrators probably wouldn't work, unless some1 was watching them, or acting in some sort of way, that acts as their hidden kink."

"@ Everyone who's saying "If they orgasm, they must want it": And people wonder why women (and men) are afraid to report rape?"

"I haven't been raped, but came damn near close to it. Some older ugly ass woman, who probably had every STD known to man, would leave me alone, and trying too hard to whore her self to me. I was disgusted with her, but even so, i still had a hard on."

"and you were physically incapable of defense? Rape means you are completely at the mercy of the rapist. Sounds to me your experience doesn't even come close."
"Rape is sex without consent. Being able to fight back has nothing to do with it."

"statistically men are more afraid to report rape. they are also statistically more likely to experience some physical symptom of arousal during rape. In the case of anal penetration this is not actually their fault. Stimulation of the prostate will cause the penis to become erect, it's just biology."

"Quite rare to see /d/ go from fetish dump to full on discussion."

Indeed. Roughly half of the Anons were objecting angrily to those who thought that "it's not rape if the victim orgasms". I was really surprised when one of them claimed to have been raped before. After all, this is /d/ - people come here to FAP at pictures of girls getting tied down and raped. Defending rape victims? Them? Could they simply have been lying about being raped before? Something to think about, eh?

Balancing real life with fantasy. It's harder than they portray in the shows - this issue has warranted attention ever since the internet offered people the option of escape. I've been watching porn since Primary 5, yet it doesn't get in the way (well not from this side anyway) when I'm talking to female acquiantances. For this facet at least, I can separate life from fantasy (Mikana is the exception; she bounces all over the spectrum for me).

So exactly how closely does our biology tie into the human intent and emotions? As XKCD put it: Psychology is applied biology. But if free will can override sexual pleasure, what else does it override? How many times has humankind clashed with nature already? Ovary-severing? Is human friendship akin to the cooperation of a buffalo herd or is it more? Sex changes? What is the difference between a romance and a sexual relationship? Domestic partnerships versus traditional marriage? Obviously, these are not simple questions.


Here, have a funny picture.

We are as free as caged birds.

Now I know it seems that I'm writing this just to join in the hullabaloo about freedom despite the fact 80% of all my posts since the creation of this blog has been about rights and of course the buzzword of the day: Freedom.

You're pretty right. It would seem dumb not to take part.

Now freedom is not about whats written on the dictionary, neither is it COMPLETE and total rule over whatever you do. I must admit, there are some guidelines to follow. We live in democracy, where freedom should be tolerated but to what extent? Thats where constitution comes in. There are also guidelines, like how you should not change 1+1=2 and say its equal to 3. Facts cannot be changed. However, humans are not numbers, we are not recurring phenomenons of male and female, we are special. We have personality, we have ideas, we have opinion.

Anyways what I am trying to say is that if your oppressive government won't stop you, society will. Governments have not killed witches or burned undesirables, society has. A small village of which "morals" and "values" taught by religion have "cleansed" them to becomming model villagers where men fish, women cook, and males like females. Many sociologists as well as conspiracy theorists have discovered by few dare say. I quote from the film ZEITGEIST "religion has more influence than any form of government, even more influence than the truth." There is no freedom here, as there is no need. Everyone thinks the same, witches are bad, king is good, their little utopia. The only reason why we never accepted freedom of sexuality was because we deemed it wrong. At first, it did seem wrong, how can gays reproduce? Thats werid. But as SCIENCE progresses, we learn that it is hormonal and mental, as much as in some cases, physical. We start to accept it for what it is, not what it wasn't.

America, is a good example of the old world where is it suicidal if presidential candidates are non-believers. They start to suspect anyone who isin't. GAYS ARE JUST WRONG? Now, who in history first said this? In a world where everyone is different, this breeds liberalism. We are not lambs that can be herded around, we are individuals who have unique fingerprint and DNA(except for twins).

The only way freedom in democracy can succeed is if humans are open-mindend enough and rational enough. Humans are rational creatures. We must learn to give and take. WE MUST LEARN TO ACCEPT. However some do abuse, and if you truly believe in freedom, do not stop him.

Anyway, I believe humans are mature enough to understand PERSONAL boundaries, such as belief, opinion, and personality. I do not impose what I feel is right upon others. I let them decide, even is it a wrong decision, for it was their freedom. It was Hitler's abused freedom to kill, no matter how wrong, and the British's to stop them. There is no right and wrong. There is only opinion. Is is your freedom to hate homosexuals and their actions, i respect that as much as you have the social obligation to respect my beliefs. I am not sitting on the fence, I am respecting everyone, despite how much they do not deserve it. If the liberals trying to promote freedom impose their ideas onto others, they are but liars. Their only purpose to "win" the argument and prove they are right and someone else is wrong. This is also how anti-heroes like Batman are born.

There is only opinion. There is only opinion.

-Panzerz

The Bandwagon

Now's MY turn to state my views on freedom, since everyone's doing.

Lime-y says:

"Freedom is a term more commonly used by those who are being oppressed, and would want nothing better than to stop this oppression i.e If you live in a monarchy (bad luck la you) where you're King is some arse who only cares about himself and doesn't treat you and his subjects right, then of course freedom would be rid of that bastard and have a fairer way of ruling you're once monarchy state."

But Orange-y, his alter-ego, has another viewpoint. He says:

"Freedom is also the ability to be the ruler of your own life, destiny and whatnot. So that'd mean no one has a say on what you do, which means that you can do as you please. It is in THIS context where freedom can become a veeeeeeeeeery veeeeeeeeeeeery veeeeeeeeeeery veeeeeeeeeeeeeeeery veeeeeeeeeeeery veeeeeeeeeeeeeeeery veeeeeeeeeeeeeery veeeeeeeeeeery dangerous thing. Yes. Freedom can = danger. How?

Let's say there's this guy A who hates this other guy B. So one day guy B really pisses the jizz out of guy A, and so cause guy A can do absolutely whatever he pleases, he decides to go and nuke guy B and in the process, kill several million people in the surrounding area cause everyone can own nuclear rockets cause they can do as they please.

But please please note the exaggeration and the ridiculousness of this example, as i shows an extreme situation, no? It is to show that freedom is only abused in the most extreme of cases, when TOTAL freedom is given to everyone, which was what I believe Tofu was trying to say. But seriously Tofu, not everyone can own nuclear rockets now can they...? Get my point...?"

Now that I've enlightened you ignorant citizens of Singapore, go stop faking Epilepsy seizures and...

DO YOU'RE HOMEWORK!

Freedom, a Privilege?

Now, this post, is of my frankest opinion, and has nothing whatsoever to do with my self-confessed sexuality. Please, do read on.

Freedom. By convention, it means to be able choose. This means, you can also choose to NOT choose. Consequently, person A can choose to be a Muslim, and abide by the laws of Islam; choose to be a member of the priesthood, and abide by the laws of celibacy they swear by; or conversely answer the chemicals in his head and turn to a member of the opposite sex, or develop his/her feelings towards another member of the same sex.

Personal Rights. This is an extension of Freedom. I choose to eat both dishes, and take the best (and worse) from both and reap whatever I sow. Lets say Person A chose to undergo a sex change operation; and Person B objects to it. Neither of them are in the wrong, both are, in effect, exercising their Personal Rights.

Transsexual Surgery. Let us not forget that even the medical community is not isolated from Capitalism, and hence, wherever there is money to be made, new technology will develop to better satisfy the paying customer. Furthermore, the person who successfully develops this new technique/technology receives the monetary incentive granted, be it in the form of prestigious awards such as the Nobel Prize, or cash in the form of paying customers. Therefore, blame not science for bringing us transsexuals, but rather, blame the base human instinct of greed and self-preservation.

Furthermore, let us not forget the points Nosey has pointed out. The very fact that transsexual surgery does not affect an individual's ability to perform acquired skills e.g. driving, swimming, eating or even gaming.

TOFU said:
"Which part says liberty to chose your sex?
Somethings in life you can chose, like your school, your friends, your degree major, your wife.
But sex? We are allowing a screwed up 16 year old drop out son-of-a-bitch to chose to become a cheerleader? He sure would know what's best for himself."

Do you not find it ironic, that by saying so, you are actually suggesting that model citizens should suppress his freedom, his rights, his liberty to choose to become a cheerleader? If so, are you saying that freedom should only be given to those who deserve it? And if so, how would you define one who deserves freedom? Through religion? Through the size of his bank account?

Henceforth, I conclude this:
Freedom is not a decision a single person can decide on. It is what makes us human, it is what defines us humans, it is more than a privilege. Your sex, your religion, your job, your education, your friends. Do not use your perception of this principle, influenced by your own morals and restrictions, and suppress another's.

-Giant

Response to "The price of Freedom"

The main thing that made it difficult to reply to TOFU's post (also the case for many other people), I suspect, is that he mixed two or more incompatibles.


Morality/Religion is based on strictures, rules, lines you can't cross because it's wrong. On the other hand, Freedom, besides being at its core an opposite of restrictions, is a principle. Unless they integrate it into themselves, the quintessence of principles does not include the concerns of morality. Morality & Freedom are things that are bound to clash - and compromises will have to be made on both sides for there to be any sort of balance.

Thus, I have two responses to this: A personal one and an objective one.

Objectively, it's ridiculous to use the dictionary to justify the notion that because liberty does not explicitly allow sex change, it disallows it. I could use the same argument to insinuate that because liberty does not explicitly allow potato chips, it disallows potato chips.

You say people are bound to make wrong and misinformed decisions. Converting to say, Christianity, is also a life-changing decision. So if sex change is a decision, people make wrong/misinformed decisions, and therefore it is wrong, I can by the same line of logic declare that because Christianity is a decision (unless your church forces its belief on others, which it doesn't), people make misinformed and wrong decisions, and therefore the Church is wrong. Every bloody decision to do anything is wrong.

And that's where the objectivity ends, because TOFU, when I ask you why you're against Sexual Freedom A or Sexual Freedom B, your most frequent and instinctive answer is that it's simply wrong. This is the quintessence of your entire vendetta against sexual freedoms - not HIV, not concern over population figures, nothing practical and examined in a lab. You simply believe it's wrong and that simple belief is the crux of your argument. There is no logical or scientific basis that firmly backs you up.

So there's really no logic round I can fire at you, unless I wish to go into the intricacies of the Bible (which I believe I am not qualified to comment on yet). But I'll just bring up these things:

Would I want my kids to go to school and sit next to a kid who was brought up by two fathers or two mothers? Why not? Are we still at that primal, childish stage where we judge people by their parents and not themselves?

Should I give a shit if the person driving my taxi is a guy, girl, fake guy, or fake girl? Does it hamper his driving abilities? I can just see people being out of jobs because their dick isn't real: "This company has rejected your application because your dick was found to be fake". At its quintessence, sex change is just on-the-surface. They change their sexual organs, pump in some hormones. I don't know about you but I don't judge people based on what kind of sexual organs they have.

"A screwed up 16 year old drop out son-of-a-bitch to choose to become a cheerleader? He sure would know what's best for himself." If you're picking such a bad representative for transgender people, I could go and pick some heinous Christian radical (I'm sure there are plenty) who'd also make your religion, or any other kind of group look like a pile of shit. This is another one of those one-sided stereotypes.

Do I want my child to live in a world where male and female don't matter? HELL YES. I don't want my boy to be picked on if he wants to play with Barbie dolls, because he has a cock. My girl shouldn't be stopped if she wants to make a political difference because she doesn't have a cock.

TOFU, lets say you have the qualifications to be a pilot. But what if they bar you from flying planes because women and planes are just not supposed to mix? Or if your parents were gay, and the military can't take that kind of stock in, even if you yourself disagree with your parents' decisions? I would also like to take this opportunity to remind everyone that there is still no conclusive answer to whether homosexuality, bisexuality and the like is a choice or an uncommon biological impulse.

Your view isn't wrong or even invalid, TOFU, just that all the stereotypes make it look bad.

The price of Freedom

There ought to be a limit to the amount of freedom we give an indivdual in society. In most cases, one defining point of a utopia is the freedom level, similarly, the development index (if very accurate) should also take into account the political and social freedom of a person in the country. However, how far is too far? Freedom is abuse, and abuse is danger. At what cost would we allow a man to chose his own path, knowing his choice might have a severe effect on society at large.

Through the years, evolution has played an important role in development to today. It is not human evolution or darwinism I'm talking about though. Its the evolution of ideals, thoughts, culture and perception. It was not long ago where transexuals were frowned upon and were looked down at. Today, a man can freely change his sex and still be proud of it, all in the name of the person's rights or freedom. We keep pushing the boundries of freedom limited to us on society. Yesterday's sins are today's hip icons. The world says, its ok, be gay. I say, screw you and keep to what nature has meant for you. Sure, its his freedom to chose his sexual preference? Is it? So our society would allow a man to have sex with a man (which has never been seen before in mother nature) and then says its fine, its your right, everyman has his right. I don't know how far we should go in defining boundries. Once we accept gays, gays want to marry, and then adopt children, and raise kids. There is no end, the more we give in, the worst the situation will become. Honestly, would you want your kids to go to school and sit beside a guy who has no mother but two fathers? Its his right, but can we stop giving a person so much rights because you and I know most of the time, your decisions aren't informed ones and is not what's best for yourself. This is a problematic start to the twenty first century. Its all in the name of freedom.

Transexuals now stand today amongst us. They're the guy selling you cinema tickets. The woman behind the counter at the local convienence stall. The taxi driver who looks like he is a guy. Or is he? Today, transexual surgery is so successful (in a medical sense) that even doctors might not be able to tell between a real thing or a sex changed person. This is what we have given ourselves, the freedom to decide your own sex. Don't like being a guy? No problem, just change your sex to a woman. Hate those monthly menstrual cycles? No problem, you can always change back. So this is it? We are now giving them a choice to chose if they want to be a girl or a guy?

Check out what the dictionary says about Freedom
1. the state of being free or at liberty rather than in confinement or under physical restraint: He won his freedom after a retrial.
2. exemption from external control, interference, regulation, etc.
3. the power to determine action without restraint.
4. political or national independence.
5. personal liberty, as opposed to bondage or slavery: a slave who bought his freedom.
6. exemption from the presence of anything specified (usually fol. by from): freedom from fear.
7. the absence of or release from ties, obligations, etc.
8. ease or facility of movement or action: to enjoy the freedom of living in the country.
9. frankness of manner or speech.
10. general exemption or immunity: freedom from taxation.
11. the absence of ceremony or reserve.
12. a liberty taken.
13. a particular immunity or privilege enjoyed, as by a city or corporation: freedom to levy taxes. 14. civil liberty, as opposed to subjection to an arbitrary or despotic government.
15. the right to enjoy all the privileges or special rights of citizenship, membership, etc., in a community or the like.
16. the right to frequent, enjoy, or use at will: to have the freedom of a friend's library.

Which part says liberty to chose your sex?
Somethings in life you can chose, like your school, your friends, your degree major, your wife.
But sex? We are allowing a screwed up 16 year old drop out son-of-a-bitch to chose to become a cheerleader? He sure would know what's best for himself.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not against people being rebels against an African dictator, your right is to live in the country, fight for that. But why must we allow our children and our children's children to go through a world where female and male is subjective, where even your gender is fluid.

If this is the price of freedom, I don't want anymore freedom.

- TOFU

WE WANT BISCUITS WE WANT TEA WE WANT BISCUITS AND TEA!

To Lime- That means forcing the voice of the people to go very, very underground and in no way can that be considered "right" and I'm sure the rest of the world agree.(I'm sure you do to come on...you search deep within)

Freedom is for the abuse of the people and is really the basis for societies to improve. Think about it the has to be a problem before there can be an answer. I don't think the Stone agers could pre-empt Ice Age or poor Medival bastards could pre-empt the Black death. The very first problem societies must adress is survial. Is this system suitable for us, will we starve? Will be be ridden with diseases? Of course, this is also the toughest part of development. After this phase, the people start asking for material goods. We Want a good sewage system! We want roads and airtravel! Now this becomes more simple to handle once economy has settled down and the main trade of the country has been decided (if any) be it agriculture, fishing, gas, oil or even skilled workers. There must be something than can be exploited for export for wealth to come. Next, comes the tricky party. How about our laws and rights? Whats our constitution going to be like? This requires a good government. Some prefer to censor for the good of the people and remain shrouded in smog while prefer freedom, which is the route of MOST democracies in the 21st Century. If suddenly an evil dictator assumes control at this part, say bye bye to TV and hello to your new Comrades. At which you either say " NO WAI THATS RIDICULOUS BIATCH" and get shot/sued or shut up and live, opressed.

Now comes the tough part. What you decided upon years ago may not apply now and you wish to change it. At which you either say " NO WAI THATS RIDICULOUS BIATCH" and get shot/sued or shut up and live, FEELING opressed.

So maybe you got that rule about well, dodo killing tax out of the way. YAY! and then you realise, OMG I WANT FREEDOM TO SAY THAT I HATE DODOS! which you either say " NO WAI THATS RIDICULOUS BIATCH" and get shot/sued or shut up and live, opressed.

Now, you want to breed and genetically modify dodos for well, science and progress.(DUH!) Which definately goes against the Dodo religion and morals which you either say " NO WAI THATS RIDICULOUS BIATCH" and steal all the dodos to your lair and do your experiments.

But you realise "WTF AM I DOING HERE? I NEED MY COCA-COLA!" and fight for your rights. Which you either say " NO WAI THATS RIDICULOUS BIATCH" and get shot/sued or shut up and live, opressed.

Thats right folks, freedom is all about saying "NO WAI THATS RIDICULOUS BIATCH" and whether you die or not, differs from place to place. I personally prefer the place that doesn't.

Jokes aside, there should always be a balance of power. Govt > People = :( while People > Govt. = :) (with all the terms and conditions) An avenue for the rulers to use power and an avenue for the people to say..you know. For which something something should be done to adress it. Opinions of a building full of people maybe good, but voices from rich and poor regardless of class, race, religion. Isin't it better? I used to laugh at the innocent political views of aunties and uncles on radio critisizing what the governemt are doing, but now I learn, they have as much right as me and I sincerely respect that.

-Panzerz

So long, and thanks for all the lawers.

As much as i would not want to go to jail tomorrow, there has to be some issues that need to be said.

WHAT IS FREEDOM? ARE YOU FREE? YOU SURE? NO?

I firmly believe there is no such thing as freedom. Because one man's freedom impedes onto another's. Like how much is a person's right to smoke as much as a person suffering from some lung disease i cannot pronounce has his right of clean, fresh, air. Not that there was much of that clean air to go around in the first place.

People only think that what THEY want done is considered the FREEDOM they deserve. Sorry, but if you want sex, get a life, or at the least, an internet access for pete's sake. People complain all the time about freedom of speech. ( DUM DUM DUM DUM) FYI, there is none. Never was, never will be. Because of the simple theory stated earlier. The way I see it, we have as much freedom as we could possibly have. There is a direct relationship between happiness and stability.

Simply put,
:) = instability

:( = stability

As what Alodous Huxley has written in his remarkable book " Brave New World" I quote from World Controller Mustapha Mond " Art, Science - you seen to have paid a fairly high price for your happiness" Why ask for more? BECAUSE WE CAN ( or can't for that matter). Greed is good. As good as typing that in Warcraft without the spacing giving you infinite money. Sure, the society we live in isin't the happiest , nor is it the safest, but thats the price you pay for rights. If rights mean that i must blow limbs off enemies and throw atomic bombs , GO AHEAD. I'll fight to the grave for them even if I don't even know half of what they are, and thats a fact.
I love instability, as much as I love freedom, telling me that I have to take that away for something so insignificant as "happiness" BALLS I TELL YOU.
But neither is our society that free, so WHERE IS OUR BLOODY SACRIFICE.

But on a lighter, conclusive note, I am satisfied neither am I complaining. History thought me that Stalin's regimes are way worse and NEVER will they be repeated. Not on my watch.
We are as free as society allows, and thats saying something, a good thing.

- Panzerz