A Freebie Worthy of Deebye

[Doc]

No, no flame war intended. And I bow to your good graces on keeping secret what you feel like you should. But I did think you were open minded and courageous enough for an open and frank discussion. No thrills involved, other than the joy of sharing free thought and discussion. Speak in hypotheticals if you will. Instead of answers, offer questions. I have yet to see you shy away from a subject or dance around an issue, but I see it now. This is very unlike you.

My point? I thought I made that. No sense tiptoeing around the tulips... It's on like Donkey Kong.

Yes, there is a lot more information out there now, especially with the internet, but how many people are actually reading it? How do we as a society reawaken that lost curiousity? How do we retract all these years of puritanical don't even think about it or you will burn in hell attitudes?

I believe it was Fragbait a little farther up that posted a link and offered a few lines about how most schools of thought simply think these methods are myths. There are even folk in the medical fields that should know more about the human body than they do, but their own medical knowledge is held back on sexuality because of lasting puritanical standards.

Even back in the 70s, these were well documented. People have known about these sorts of things going back for God knows how long. But try and get folk to learn about these things, or buy these books, and they are labeled perverts. And that is wrong. Being sexually curious does not make one perverted. There is entirely to much social stigma attatched to sexual curiousity. To many pressures. To many shackles put in place, more often than not by our own parental figures in our lives. It is the mindset that we as a society create that defeats us long before we ever reach the point where we can go into a bookstore and ask if they have any books on advanced sexual practices. Or if we do buy them, we buy them from a direct mail order catalogue from the back of Playboy, sent to our homes in a plain brown wrapper out of shame.

And don't get me started on Playboy. That only adds to the perversion factor. I don't want to turn this into a porn bashing thread, but in the long run it only hurts long term sexual discovery. Porn has done serious damage to human sexuality, and does very very little to help. Objectifying women and ignoring their needs is part of why we are in this mess in the first place. The fine line is completely gone... All there is is the shabby tacky beaded curtain in the back of the video store to define human sexuality. Normal folk up front, dirty disgusting perverts in the back, behind the curtain. Pornagraphic tapes sold under the guise of sexual instruction have only further damaged the cause, and while there are a few good articals, let's be honest, most are just really bad porn with no redeeming value what so ever. So all this gasoline added to the fire and with this stigma burning bright, how do we fix it?

And with things like female ejaculation, if you went looking for tapes or books with information, any guesses on what the percentages would be on how many of those resource materials would treat it as nothing more than a pornographic party trick? Or write it off entirely as nothing more than an oddity? While we have relaxed some of our sexual fears, we have let all of the wrong things in. Out of our own ignorance as a society, when we relaxed some of these restrictions and started trying to bring back publicly available information on various sexual practices, how much garbage did we bring in as well as trash disgused (poorly I might add) as instructional? In trying to reclaim some of our sexuality, we have completely and totally polluted our views, concepts, and outlooks, and desensitized our selves to the point where most of us can't even distinguish crap from the real thing. Because of our complete lack of any sort of real sexual education, and all this "self discovery" we have a new generation of complete n00bs that have just the barest hint of what they are doing in the sack, or at least they think they do. Much like real life, they get their ideas, views, and perceptions warped from all this mass media influx of garbage. With the overflow of crap, how can anybody tell what is real, what is good, and what is just plain wrong?

How many young men hold to the sexual ideals that women are meant to be bony blonde bimbos with 44 DD hooters and the secret to female satisfaction is, how does one put this delicately for the Lounge... Going off on her face? For every man out there that does poke his nose into a real book and try some experimenting, there are probably a hundred that do not.

And for a lot of parents and educators, we have fallen into the same old trap that always get us... Letting the television and the media dictate what our kids wind up learning. We consistantly reward those that offer us the least and lambaste those that offer us the most. If some adult educators were to offer up instructional videos for teens on how to indulge in advanced sexual practices, and these educators tried to make this video into something that parents could show their children, so that their children might have rewarding and gratifying sex lives, the people making this tape would be burned as witches by society. Damnit, like anything else we teach our kids, like it or not, we gotta start them young, when their minds are still impressionable and open to new ideas, and if we let them slip into adulthood where they become fixed or set in their ways that is another generation that we have lost.

My time is up. I have to go to a meeting. This has been a lot of fun playing in this sandbox. I don't often get to voice these opinions. I will return later to tweak your brains, challenge your thinking, and probably make some of you very very angry.

[Occhidiangela]

WTF is wrong with the quote tag?

But I did think you were open minded and courageous enough for an open and frank discussion. No thrills involved, other than the joy of sharing free thought and discussion. Speak in hypotheticals if you will. Instead of answers, offer questions. I have yet to see you shy away from a subject or dance around an issue, but I see it now. This is very unlike you.

My muse vector varies in magnitude and direction. <_<

Yes, there is a lot more information out there now, especially with the internet, but how many people are actually reading it?

I have no idea how to measure that -- with a dipstick?

How do we as a society reawaken that lost curiousity? How do we retract all these years of puritanical don't even think about it or you will burn in hell attitudes?

The Sexual Revolution took care of that, or have you missed the essays on fellatio for diamonds in Vanity Fair ('99)or on orgasmic titillation in Cosmo (every issue) among other distinguished publications? I am not obliged to force a focus on sexuality down anyone's throats, preferring to leave everyone's comfort zone to their own judgment. As a feminist remarked in the early '80's "You are responsible for your own orgasm." If you don't seek more for your 'gasm, so be it, your loss. If you don't want to help your partner expand horizons i) that's selfish and ii) one may not get an encore chance. The information is out there, but not everyone is as obsessed with sex at an equal intensity. Not everyone waxes their car every other week, for that matter.

There are even folk in the medical fields that should know more about the human body than they do, but their own medical knowledge is held back on sexuality because of lasting puritanical standards.

Right, nuke Plymouth Rock, they are holding back America's sexuality. Maybe it needs another Rock to make a pair. Oh, and screw cancer, let's get America coming more often per hour of sexual activity. There's a metric I want to see the measuring stick for, or are we back to the dipstick thing again? :rolleyes: It's not just for science, it's for the come on good!

But try and get folk to learn about these things, or buy these books, and they are labeled perverts. And that is wrong. Being sexually curious does not make one perverted. There is entirely to much social stigma attatched to sexual curiousity.

In whose world are you living, Doc? That statement does not square with the world I live in.

To many pressures. To many shackles put in place, more often than not by our own parental figures in our lives. It is the mindset that we as a society create that defeats us long before we ever reach the point where we can go into a bookstore and ask if they have any books on advanced sexual practices. Or if we do buy them, we buy them from a direct mail order catalogue from the back of Playboy, sent to our homes in a plain brown wrapper out of shame.

Not everyone feels that sex is the same category of topic as the Super Bowl, Doc.

And don't get me started on Playboy. That only adds to the perversion factor.

Nonsense. The Playboy Advisor and Playboy Forum discussion, for about 30 years, 60's to 90's, were rife with interesting discussions on male and female sexuality, and erotic ideas. Xavier Hollander's Penthouse advice columns likewise. Other sources sometimes took more seeking, but were not hard to find: unlike a good man. Have not seen those mags much in the past 10 years, no idea what they have been doing lately.

And with things like female ejaculation, if you went looking for tapes or books with information, any guesses on what the percentages would be on how many of those resource materials would treat it as nothing more than a pornographic party trick? Or write it off entirely as nothing more than an oddity? While we have relaxed some of our sexual fears, we have let all of the wrong things in.

To misquote Tanto . . . "Who is this "we," Kimo Sabe?" American society is NOT homgenous, not even close, but if you see a conspiracy, feel free to get out the fedora, trench coat, and magnifying glass.

Out of our own ignorance as a society, when we relaxed some of these restrictions and started trying to bring back publicly available information on various sexual practices, how much garbage did we bring in as well as trash disgused (poorly I might add) as instructional?

Sturgeon's law strikes again, as in every human endeavour.

Because of our complete lack of any sort of real sexual education, and all this "self discovery" we have a new generation of complete n00bs that have just the barest hint of what they are doing in the sack, or at least they think they do.

Hehe, why do you think women tended to go for older men for all those years? Could it be the expected experience factor? It sure wasn't the back hair. :P

Much like real life, they get their ideas, views, and perceptions warped from all this mass media influx of garbage. With the overflow of crap, how can anybody tell what is real, what is good, and what is just plain wrong?
How many young men hold to the sexual ideals that women are meant to be bony blonde bimbos with 44 DD hooters and the secret to female satisfaction is, how does one put this delicately for the Lounge... Going off on her face?

Besides this being a gross assumption, the answer is "No clue, let's make that the topic for the next Lurker Lounge pole."

For every man out there that does poke his nose into a real book and try some experimenting, there are probably a hundred that do not.

If true, that's a crying shame. Not my effing problem, pardon the pun. You can lead a person to erotica, but you can't make 'em do that trick with the ostrich feather, the zucchini, and the electric toothbrush.

And for a lot of parents and educators, we have fallen into the same old trap that always get us...

"Who is this we, Kimo Sabe?" :blink:

My time is up. I have to go to a meeting. This has been a lot of fun playing in this sandbox. I don't often get to voice these opinions. I will return later to tweak your brains, challenge your thinking, and probably make some of you very very angry

Commercial Jingle Music and Don Pardo Voice Over

"This episode of Trolling for Dollars has been brought to you by Ruth and Ron Enterprises, whose newest erotic sweet, The Granny Ruth Chocolate/Ginseng Bar™, featuring a Thousand Lumps of Walnuts urging her to let go, is hand crafted by Costa Rican artisans overseen by Sardinian sensuality experts."

DeeBye, is there a freebie on that product? :whistling:

Occhi

[BrianLeichty35]

Human sexuality is an important thing to me. I take a rather unusual stand on the issue, considering how I stand on the side of Christianity. I have been told my views are blasphemous, even heretical. I say, God obviously wanted us to enjoy sex. He put in a build in reward system into our bodies for doing it right, and to be fruitful and multiply. If it were borning, the human population might have died off.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't know what church you attend, or why your views on Human Sexuality would be considered blasphemous or even heretical for that matter. I agree that God wants us to enjoy sex, but in a Marriage Covenant. The reason, presumably, why people date one another is to find that one person that they can spend the rest of their lives together with. They don't always find that person, but sometimes they(people) do. Marriage is a big step w/an even bigger responsibility. It seems to me that a lot of times people get married for the wrong reasons, which is one of the reasons why there is such a high rate of Divorce in this country. I have not yet been successful in finding the person that I am meant to be with, but that is why I am still looking. I know that eventually we will find each other.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Occhidiangela]

I don't know what church you attend, or why your views on Human Sexuality would be considered blasphemous or even heretical for that matter.&nbsp; I agree that God wants us to enjoy sex, but in a Marriage Covenant.&nbsp; The reason, presumably, why people date one another is to find that one person that they can spend the rest of their lives together with.&nbsp; They don't always find that person, but sometimes they(people) do.&nbsp; Marriage is a big step w/an even bigger responsibility.&nbsp; It seems to me that a lot of times people get married for the wrong reasons, which is one of the reasons why there is such a high rate of Divorce in this country.&nbsp; I have not yet been successful in finding the person that I am meant to be with, but that is why I am still looking.&nbsp; I know that eventually we will find each other.
[right][snapback]79048[/snapback][/right]

The funny part about life is that many a future "til death do us part" is met when we aren't even looking.

Occhi

[Munkay]

WTF is wrong with the quote tag?

An off topic reply,

Sometimes the board messes up, if you take your text and copy it into notepad, then copy it from notepad and put it back into the Lurkerlounge Text Box, it should fix itself. Notepad helps clear up any odd attachments, and has fixed the quote problem for me before.

Cheers,

Munk

[Doc]

I live in the Deep South. Surrounded by close minded twits. Anything involving sex is questionable. And having the nerve to publicly state that God intended for us to enjoy sex can get you hung from a tree in some places. Here, we have sex with our livestock, our cousins, and underage girls, but damnit, we don't talk about it!

And Occhi, good post. That's more of what I wanted. You know I fish with dynamite, and keep dropping bombs till I get results. No ill will for tweaking your nose I hope, I might troll the waters now and then, but it's usually for other people's own good. :P

Having a bone crushing orgasm might just bring some peace and stability to the world. I mean, if more people were at home boning their SO, there would be fewer people out doing stupid crap that causes war in the first place. If folk were not so damn repressed and knew how to have mind blowing earth shattering sex, they would be home doing it. And doing it. And doing it some more. And at the end of it all, you are so wobbly kneed and woozy that you can't even get out of bed to fix a sammich, much less go out and commit senseless acts of violence. Hell, if we had an outlet to get all those pent up sexual frusterations out, there wouldn't be so much violence.

I believe strongly in monogamy. It takes a long time to really get to know your partners mechanics. It can take a while to really understand what makes them tick. Monogamy rewards this ideal.


Occhi, define erotica. I am curious as to your view. I know that you know what it is, but I question most other folk. How would you define it?

Having a sexual encounter and involving an ostrich feather... That might be defined as erotic.

Having a sexual encounter and involving the whole ostrich... What would that be defined as?

When does a feather stop being a feather?

[Occhidiangela]

Occhi, define erotica.&nbsp; I am curious as to your view.&nbsp; I know that you know what it is, but I question most other folk. How would you define it?[right][snapback]79051[/snapback][/right]

That which excites the senses to arousal, which includes exciting the largest errogenous zone in the body: the mind.

Having a sexual encounter involving an ostrich feather might be defined as erotic.&nbsp; Having a sexual encounter involving the whole ostrich would be defined as . . .

Depraved, and probably illegal. :wacko:

Occhi

[LemmingofGlory]

Glad to see the "Adults Only" caveat. (AKA a flag for kiddies to peek.)

I find this statement ironic on a forum where U.S. citizens < 21 years of age have participated in threads about their favorite brand and flavor of liquor without anyone batting an eye. People will make their own decisions here. If younger Lurkers think this material is appropriate for them, they'll read it. If they don't, they won't.

Lemming. I know this is a touchy subject. Breeching these sorts of issues are always iffy at best. I honestly was not trying to sensationalise anything. When I talk about these sorts of things, I never know what is going to happen. I find that folk get even more bent out of shape talking about sex then they do talking about racism or politics.

Yeah, I gathered you knew it was a touchy subject when you said "I have a feeling that this post is going to get deleted. Go right ahead, contribute to the cycle of ignorance." Plus you keep repeating it:

I have been told my views are blasphemous, even heretical.

It really is a most facinating subject and it seems nobody ever wants to talk about it. It's dirty. Or worse, Satan will jab them in the ass with a pitchfork for all eternity if they do.

I get that you think nobody's talking about it because it's touchy, alright? What I don't get is why you feel the need to use “GASP!, a moderator is reading my tread!” to make your thread more... more what? Intersting? Or as I said, sensationalised? Seriously. I don’t think I need my status as mod abused like that, okay buddy? I resent that sort of crap.

Yes, there is a lot more information out there now, especially with the internet, but how many people are actually reading it? How do we as a society reawaken that lost curiousity? How do we retract all these years of puritanical don't even think about it or you will burn in hell attitudes?

Of all the sexual issues out there, I think reawakening a collective interest in how to have good sex is near the bottom of the list. As Occhi said, interested parties can go to the internet, read, practice, and become sexperts. As for other venues of sexual learning, I think school sex ed is nigh-useless. Of course, maybe that’s because the school sex ed I had was Alabama’s version, which was strictly biological: a sperm fertilizes an egg, which then grows into a baby. And when it comes to parents, Doc, is it reasonable to expect parents to want to sit their kids down and teach them about uterine orgasms? As you pointed out, some parents are just as ignorant about sex as their kids. And why? Let's go to the Doc quote!

And for a lot of parents and educators, we have fallen into the same old trap that always get us... Letting the television and the media dictate what our kids wind up learning.

Society will screw up your children. Children screwed up by society will screw up their children. Then society will screw up those children further, and it becomes a big tangled mess. So what am I saying? Sometimes even parents are too screwed up to raise their kids without screwing ‘em up. And it surprises me when you say:

I mean, if more people were at home boning their SO, there would be fewer people out doing stupid crap that causes war in the first place.

Is this the same Doc I know that once screamed STUPID PEOPLE ARE BREEEDING!? As much as you hate pr0n, Doc, I’d much more trust certain people to use a smut mag at the appropriate time than I’d trust them to use a condom at the appropriate time. Maybe public knowledge about sexual techniques isn’t the best thing to promote, Doc. Maybe it’d be better if everyone knew how to masturbate masterfully instead. That way, folks can get that “relief” you consider so important without risking accidental breeding and passing down genes that Darwin inexplicably hasn’t yet rendered extinct.

Being sexually curious does not make one perverted. There is entirely to much social stigma attatched to sexual curiousity. To many pressures. ... Or if we do buy them, we buy them from a direct mail order catalogue from the back of Playboy, sent to our homes in a plain brown wrapper out of shame.

Get with the times, Doc, the Internet helps with all of that. I don’t know if you’d say the Internet is yet another form of the “brown wrapper of shame,” but it’s a truly awesome source of information. Does it promote even more of this social sexual stigma? I don’t know, but it does allow more people to explore their sexual interests and get answers to their sexual questions without running into that stigma (as long as they clean up their Internet history and don't browse at work).

And with things like female ejaculation, if you went looking for tapes or books with information, any guesses on what the percentages would be on how many of those resource materials would treat it as nothing more than a pornographic party trick?

Is this even an important point when the Internet can probably answer the question?

Having a sexual encounter and involving an ostrich feather... That might be defined as erotic.

Having a sexual encounter and involving the whole ostrich... What would that be defined as?

When does a feather stop being a feather?

Sometimes your philosophical musings leave me twitching in spasms of “WTF?” Why is this such a hard question? Are you ignorant about this? Well, it’s not about "when the feather steps being a feather," as much as you might want to make the feather come alive and turn into a whole ostrich. It’s about whether the sexual object is or used to be a living entity. A feather is neither -- it used to be part of an entity. Screwing an ostrich is either zoophilia or necrozoophilia, depending on whether the bird’s alive or not. Using a feather to stimulate genitalia is fundamentally no different from using a chaff of wheat or a lock of hair to stimulate genitalia, unless the arousal occurs because of what the object is (as opposed to occuring from physical stimulation alone). Touch that is arousing (erotic, perhaps) is different from a fetish object, which is arousing by virtue of being that object.

You wanted to make some point about what defines “erotica,” so let's consider what's erotic. When it comes to fetish objects, lots of things can be arousing, but obviously not to everyone. I read one theory on fetishes that holds (as best I can remember it): anything considered "attractive" that isn't ostensibly sex-related (i.e. genital) is essentially a fetishized object, and thus various cultures have different fetishes. So, one might say socially acceptable fetishes on U.S. women are things like big breasts, slenderness, and blonde hair, whereas socially unacceptable fetishes on U.S. women are hairiness and obesity.

-Lemmy

[Occhidiangela]

Glad to see the "Adults Only" caveat. (AKA a flag for kiddies to peek.)

I find this statement ironic on a forum where U.S. citizens < 21 years of age have participated in threads about their favorite brand and flavor of liquor without anyone batting an eye. People will make their own decisions here. If younger Lurkers think this material is appropriate for them, they'll read it. If they don't, they won't.

What does drinking have to do with sex? Oh, never mind, just noted below your fetish comment on obese and body hair, probably works on a two way street.

Screwing an ostrich is either zoophilia or necrozoophilia, depending on whether the bird’s alive or not. 

"Coming around the clubhouse turn at the Bad Visual Sweepstakes, it's Lemming by a Dead Ostrich beak, followed by Doc, with Fragbait six feathers back!"

Using a feather to stimulate genitalia is fundamentally no different from using a chaff of wheat or a lock of hair to stimulate genitalia, unless the arousal occurs because of what the object is (as opposed to occuring from physical stimulation alone). Touch that is arousing (erotic, perhaps) is different from a fetish object, which is arousing by virtue of being that object.

Woot, Vegan erotica. *note to self: get some wheat stalks on the way home, scratch the ostrich carcass.*

So, one might say socially acceptable fetishes on U.S. women are things like big breasts, slenderness, and blonde hair, whereas socially unacceptable fetishes on U.S. women are hairiness and obesity.

Should we say that lurid is in the eye of the beholder? (Bob, quit looking at me! :shuriken: ) Fetish is what makes someone else aroused, but not you. I think I got that right. :P

"Returning live to the Bad Visual Sweepstakes, they're coming down the home stretch -- Louie, with a mop, to the home stretch! Louie, with a mop!"
*note to self: next year, this race is for geldings.*

Occhi

[Fragbait]

"Coming around the clubhouse turn at the Bad Visual Sweepstakes, it's Lemming by a Dead Ostrich beak, followed by Doc, with Fragbait six feathers back!"
[right][snapback]79065[/snapback][/right]

:D Nice.

But if you placed your bet on Lemmy, don't halloo till you're out of the wood -
I'm usually coming up strongly on the home stretch... :shuriken:

Greetings, Fragbait

[Minionman]

LemmingofGlory @ May 31 2005, 02:20 PM)
Glad to see the "Adults Only" caveat. (AKA a flag for kiddies to peek.)

I find this statement ironic on a forum where U.S. citizens < 21 years of age have participated in threads about their favorite brand and flavor of liquor without anyone batting an eye. People will make their own decisions here. If younger Lurkers think this material is appropriate for them, they'll read it. If they don't, they won't.

What does drinking have to do with sex? Oh, never mind, just noted below your fetish
[right][snapback]79065[/snapback][/right]

The idea that people may be doing something under the age they are supposed to.

[Minionman]

I live in the Deep South. Surrounded by close minded twits. Anything involving sex is questionable. And having the nerve to publicly state that God intended for us to enjoy sex can get you hung from a tree in some places. Here, we have sex with our livestock, our cousins, and underage girls, but damnit, we don't talk about it!
[right][snapback]79051[/snapback][/right]

That would explain away a lot of your rant, being surrounded by not smart people.


Personally, can't say much about sex., haven't had any. I'll probably just ask the other person what they want to do when the time comes.

[Occhidiangela]

What does drinking have to do with sex?  Oh, never mind, just noted below your fetish
[right][snapback]79065[/snapback][/right]

The idea that people may be doing something under the age they are supposed to.
[right][snapback]79077[/snapback][/right]

Pssst. 'Twas a joke, however, it obviously went over like a lead balloon. The real irony was thay my sarcastic tone on the first post, in re kiddie flag, did not come across. Losing my touch. Must get new fetish . . . uh, new fish . . . uh more flash.

Occhi

[Minionman]

Pssst.&nbsp; 'Twas a joke, however, it obviously went over like a lead baloon.&nbsp; The real irony was thay my sarcastic tone on the first post in re kikkie flag did not come across.&nbsp; Losing my touch.&nbsp; Must get new fetish . . . uh, new fish . . . uh more flash.

Occhi
[right][snapback]79081[/snapback][/right]

Ah, o.k. Wasn't really sure about that, so explained it.

[LemmingofGlory]

What does drinking have to do with sex?&nbsp; Oh, never mind, just noted below your fetish comment on obese and body hair, probably works on a two way street.

While both alcohol and sex are age-restricted, "adult" activities, you object to violation of age restriction in one situation (sex) but nobody objects to violations of age restriction in another situation (alcohol). I found it amusing, and it echoes Doc's earlier points about sex talk being unpopular.

I don't understand what your second sentence means.

Woot, Vegan erotica.&nbsp; *note to self: get some wheat stalks on the way home, scratch the ostrich carcass.*

I'd say it's only vegetation erotica if the wheat is arousing because it's wheat. Otherwise, it's, uh, a sex toy?

Should we say that lurid is in the eye of the beholder? Fetish is what makes someone else aroused, but not you.&nbsp; I think I got that right.&nbsp; :P

Well, the point of that particular definition of fetish was that virtually anything is a fetish, but some fetishes are socially popular and called "attractive" while others are simply called "fetishes." While I find this definition interesting, it seems useful only when describing why certain people find certain human features attractive (eye color, hair color, etc.), and it leaves no word (other than paraphilia) to describe attraction to non-human things (eyeglasses, trees, etc.).

"Returning live to the Bad Visual Sweepstakes, they're coming down the home stretch -- Louie, with a mop, to the home stretch!&nbsp; Louie, with a mop!"&nbsp;
*note to self: next year, this race is for geldings.*

Two words: genital bifurcation.

-Lemmy

[Occhidiangela]

While both alcohol and sex are age-restricted, "adult" activities, you object to violation of age restriction in one situation (sex) but nobody objects to violations of age restriction in another situation (alcohol). I found it amusing, and it echoes Doc's earlier points about sex talk being unpopular.

I don't understand what your second sentence means.

Easy. The first time, I was being sarcastic and that did not come across. (you are not alone, see above.) The second time, you missed the joke. You have now replied to two jokes in a serious tone.

"Hey, up there, it's a bird! It's a plane! No, it's a bloody lead baloon." They can't all be gems, and some days, I just can't tell a joke.

I'd say it's only vegetation erotica if the wheat is arousing because it's wheat. Otherwise, it's, uh, a sex toy?
Well, the point of that particular definition of fetish was that virtually anything is a fetish, but some fetishes are socially popular and called "attractive" while others are simply called "fetishes." While I find this definition interesting, it seems useful only when describing why certain people find certain human features attractive (eye color, hair color, etc.), and it leaves no word (other than paraphilia) to describe attraction to non-human things (eyeglasses, trees, etc.).
Two words: genital bifurcation.

-Lemmy
[right][snapback]79089[/snapback][/right]

For a glimpse at the joker behind the curtain:

Concept behind the joke on "Vegan erotica." Association is that Vegans would be more prone to use wheat for erotic purposes since it is a vegetable, rather than an item made of meat, dairy, or plastic. Shopping list idea joke: a non Vegan considers trying this previously unexplored erotic device, finding it new and novel.

This vegetable theme brings to mind an old daffynition, that of a woodpecker being a mahogany dildo. But I digress.

On a less cynical note, are we mixing basic attractiveness with fetishes in this liine of inquiry? Are we crossing the fine line between attraction and arousal? Luckily, since we aren't in Kurast, I doubt anyone will get hurt by any fetishes, although there is the risk of blunt trauma injury should one of the ladies walking about the docks turns quickly as we pass by. Did you get that one? Or did you duck?

Occhi

[Occhidiangela]

Ah, o.k.&nbsp; Wasn't really sure about that, so explained it.
[right][snapback]79082[/snapback][/right]

Which means it might not have been so hot a joke, since I had to explain it.

Occhi

[Occhidiangela]

That would explain away a lot of your rant, being surrounded by not smart people.
Personally, can't say much about sex., haven't had any. I'll probably just ask the other person what they want to do when the time comes.[right][snapback]79079[/snapback][/right]

If she says "Play Chess" you may remain a virgin (and most likel AIDS free) but if she insists you both play on the chess board "without any pawns" as she sweeps the pieces away with her hand (Ostrich feathers and post #1 product are optional). . . :w00t:

Occhi

PS: Remember, it is safer to wrap that rascal.

[LemmingofGlory]

Easy.&nbsp; The first time, I was being sarcastic and that did not come across. (you are not alone, see above.)&nbsp; The second time, you missed the joke.&nbsp; You have now replied to two jokes in a serious tone.

*shrug* So what was the joke? (The meaning, not the words.)

Concept behind the joke on "Vegan erotica."&nbsp; Association is that Vegans would be more prone to use wheat for erotic purposes since it is a vegetable, rather than an item made of meat, dairy, or plastic.&nbsp; Shopping list idea joke: a non Vegan considers trying this previously unexplored erotic device, finding it new and novel.

I used "vegetation erotica" instead of "Vegan erotica" because "Vegan erotica" could be taken to mean "erotica involving Vegans" (rather than "erotica for Vegans"), which is a whole 'nother melon. "Vegetation erotica" keeps with your idea of people being attracted to vegetation. The change in wording was merely semantic.

This vegetable theme brings to mind an old daffynition, that of a woodpecker being a mahogany dildo.&nbsp; But I digress.

A wooden woody? Sounds splintery.

On a less cynical note, are we mixing basic attractiveness with fetishes in this liine of inquiry?&nbsp; Are we crossing the fine line between attraction and arousal?

Good point, and that may well be another weakness of that definition of fetish: it's not addressing the right process. As I said, I didn't find it wholly useful, just interesting.

Luckily, since we aren't in Kurast, I doubt anyone will get hurt by any fetishes, although there is the risk of blunt trauma injury should one of the ladies walking about the docks turns quickly as we pass by.&nbsp; Did you get that one?&nbsp; Or did you duck?

The "... although there is risk" clause is less amusing than the Fetish/fetish joke and effectively kills it. No injury here, just death.

-Lemmy

[Occhidiangela]

The "... although there is risk" clause is less amusing than the Fetish/fetish joke and effectively kills it. No injury here, just death.

-Lemmy
[right][snapback]79103[/snapback][/right]

Death. Full circle, we come since la petite morte is what started this thread. :)