WARNING: This blog contains copious amounts of adult GAY material. If that's offensive to you, please leave now. All pix have been gleaned from the internets so, if you see a picture of yourself that you don't wish to have posted here, please leave a comment on the post and I will remove it with my apologies.I REPEAT: If you see a picture of yourself that you don't wish to have posted here, please leave a comment on the post and I will remove it with my apologies.
2022.0709.0003...
Today's repugliCON legislatorsprefer women ignorant and pregnant.
They are disgusting assholes!
Our cultural DNA seems to prevent EDUCATING kids about sex and related things. Which means they end up making some (at the time) poor decisions about activities for which they are ignorant of the total picture of things. "Sex" was considered "naughty", so that's another issue, too. Plus that females are supposed to submit to the desires of their male spouses, no matter how THEY might feel about things, at the time.
ReplyDeleteThe middle 1960s was a period of great cultural awakenings in the USA! Some females spread the word that sex could be highly pleasurable and bonding with their mates. The female G-spot was revealed, as was the male G-spot. Sex could be fun! What a concept! Many guys learned that you could buy condoms at the local pharmacy, rather than from vending machines in gas stations, too!
I observed, back then, that it seemed that the parents who had better-balanced (mentally) kids were the ones I suspected to use sex for enjoyment and such rather than JUST for procreation! One of the seemingly pillars of religion is PROCREATION, which means the religion grows, so that was the earlier reason for sex. The ONLY reason, it seems. Anything which interfered with procreation, even same sex partners, was frowned upon unless there was the potential for procreation . . . which is why unmarried females are not usually looked down upon as unmarried males can tend to be. So heteros are "the norm" (even childless couples, by choice) as homos are scorned.
The Constitutional phrase "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" should cover amost every human "right" imaginable, stated or not, many of which include many items recently legislated . . . which some now seek to make them worthless as they are not specifically listed in a document written almost 300 years ago. Interesting how Justice Thomas wanted to revisit many of those things, EXCEPT the one he benefits from . . . inter-racial marriage.
Anon@6:35am - Thank you for your many pertinent points. Especially the hypocrisy of Thomas.
ReplyDeleteDid du finistere
ReplyDeleteSi le but de l acte sexuel est la procréation...les heteros baize que tous les 28 jours......menteurs
Our Puritan heritage has screwed up our culture. Fortunately, my dad had no qualms talking sex with me. And that was any- and everything from missionary position straight sex to cocksucking, mutual jerking off, and man to man assfucking. I never had to be ashamed of being hard or beating off in front of him. He regarded it as normal and healthy, and when we went camping, he showed hard and masturbated when I did. It was not perverted or criminal in his philosophy.
ReplyDeleteDig Dude - You had a very neat father!
ReplyDeleteDon't I know it! He was loving, supportive, and uninhibited.
Deletei dont support abortion but you can do whatever you want, im not mad, because it's better OR you'll be worst parents in the world. I'm just curious why they're talking about it now? it was fine back then or someone trying to cover up something hmppphh. Just remember protection both men and women, sex 101
ReplyDeleteHot Daddy - Fine back then? Really?
ReplyDeleteAs Anne Marie would say... Gay-Men. I also have a feeling she'd be marching on Washington by now.
ReplyDelete"con": does it mean "A con is a trick in which someone deceives you by telling you something that is not true"?
ReplyDeleteI thought con meant a sort of dickhead.
Xersex - Yes, a con is someone who deceives. And that makes them a dickhead.
ReplyDelete