tallslenderguy

^^i think this nails it. ^^ Where i am coming from is likely vulnerable to triggered subjectivity lol, so please forgive where it may bleed through. my desire and goal is objectivity. i escaped a fundamentalist religious cult culture that i'd been raised in and conditioned by from birth. One of the results of my escape is a super sensitivity to authority. "Pluralism" by definition (especially when speaking about government?) is "the co-existance of two or more groups, states, principles, sources of authority" (that's the google search result/definition). Here's a more detailed explanation from Britannica: "pluralism, in political science, the view that in liberal democracies power is (or should be) dispersed among a variety of economic and ideological pressure groups and is not (or should not be) held by a single elite or group of elites. Pluralism assumes that diversity is beneficial to society and that autonomy should be enjoyed by disparate functional or cultural groups within a society, including religious groups, trade unions, professional organizations, and ethnic minorities." my sticking place of authority is the form it takes. Beyond arithmetic, i find it impossible to believe in absolutes... i.e., every belief involves an element of faith. The scientific approach, ideally, recognizes this is what we know now, but further research often demonstrates our knowledge was not complete, or downright wrong. The authority i'm most apt to get along with in a pluralistic setting, is the one who may argue a particular point, citing evidence, reason, etc., but who always holds some reserve doubt. The understanding and premiss for ongoing openness being that, in an infinite universe, our conclusions are not absolute? The sticking points, challenges, of pluralism arise (i think) when some consider their group to possess absolute knowledge vs belief. As an example, i'll choose religion since i'm pretty familiar with it. There are some who identify as "Christian" who live that as a belief, while the fundamentalist approach of others approach life choices convinced their basis is knowledge (absolute). They cannot be wrong, and because they cannot be wrong, they cannot truly engage in objective debate. As i see it, the issue with authoritarians like trump, those he surrounds himself with, and their 2025 agenda, is they cannot be engaged. I.e., their "authority" is not the type that is open to further learning through ongoing 'research' or debate, rather, they know the truth and their only goal is to rule and implement accordingly.

i appreciate what i perceive as the intent of this, and perhaps i can add to the point of my questions for clarification. i think that proposing "what did we do wrong" is to propose self reflection, which i will always agree with. To ask: "why did you vote for Trump," is different that asking "why do they vote this way." i think you may infer something that is not implied. It is not a question with judgement attached, it is a literal query asked with the intention of trying to find out and understand the reason/s individuals voted for Trump. i do not presume their reasons to be good or bad. Thus the follow-up question: "do you believe you got what you voted for." i believe we can gain insight into our self through self reflection, but i believe it is never a perfect process because we are all imperfect beings. So, while i think it is important to develop skills of introspection, i believe it is valuable, even vital, to look for input from others, with the understanding that they, like us, are also imperfect beings. To me, mature exchange involves mutual acknowledgment of our ability to be wrong, and a desire to see something as it is as best as we can. In that mutual pursuit of insight, i think we can help each other see and understand better. i can ask myself "what did we do wrong," but that does not mean i will see the same things that another might see. i may totally miss seeing things if all i do is ask myself. Asking those who voted for Trump: "why did you vote for Trump," is an open ended question that can be answered by them pointing out what they believed is/was wrong with Harris, for instance. Or, they may simply cite a Trump position and answer what voted for vs what they voted against. Either way, it can give us more understanding of their point of view to ask them vs just speculating on our own.

Waking this thread up. We have a years worth of the Trump administration and agenda. A year ago, we had several supporters and defenders of the Trump administration, but none of them responded to this question. But my questions remain, i do want to understand, because i do not believe all of those who voted for or originally supported Trump can be fit into one neat group (e.g. "MAGA"), and that there is the ever present inclination (and danger?) of stereotyping... which i think we as gay guys should know better? In an effort to parse out the diverse: 1. Did you vote for Tump? 2. What were the reasons that you voted for Trump? 3. Do you believe you got what you voted for?

bout a half hour ago. i got Him a toy, one of those hollow butt plugs that looks like a dog cock. you put it in and the knot holds it in place for the Top to be able to fuck it inside of the bottom. He's not vocal at all, i think He liked it, but didn't necessarily prefer it. About half of Tops seem to like loose and sloppy, the other half want tight? i can squeeze, but He pounds me to the point that i'm always loose and sloppy when He leaves... and He seems to like that. i cut the tip off though so if He came, His cum would still breed me :-). He pounds hard, and about half way through, it came out, so we fucked half in, half out. Both were awesome... always is.

i suspected you would take that stance re social welfare and healthcare and i think your response demonstrates the point of how different people see, and respond to, the same word differently. We all have a degree of egocentricity that convinces us we are 'right, good, etc.," and we've learned to find and group with others that grows our egocentricity to ethnocentricity. i think dissent on topics has merit, even when there is disagreement, if each can appreciate the person behind the view. We live in a world where others might have a contrary point of view. That "world" has always been, but now we all have to figure out a way to live together with tech like nuclear weapons vs earlier times when we only had rocks to throw at each other. So, to my original comments, the goals of: "peace, goodness, kindness, inclusion" are all pursued in a process of sitting down with each other and attempting to communicate and connect... come close enough to center for all concerned vs simply imposing our version of "good" on another, where the national version of that can lead to things like war, death, destruction.... i think this involves our discussion in another thread What is the Answer/s where you asked (and later modified) "Do you believe in the individual or the collective." To which i responded (essentially) that i see both as reality we have to deal with. i figure "centrist" is as good as it gets, and i see it as the ideal goal of democracy. Though, from where i sit, "center" will be fluid and different because of our individuality, while collectively we might come to a more centrist, 'inclusive' place to work from.

lol, and the discussion goes on, eh? But even in your simplified version, i appreciate your response, it helps give me more of a balanced read of where you are coming from. i think you'd make a good representative. Would you agree the word "altruism" can also be "highly subjective?" E.g., some would argue that any form of government sponsored social welfare is a form of "political altruism," while others would argue stuff like healthcare is a "right." Wandering around BZ we see individual, subjective definitions of "Top, bottom, versatile." my point being that subjectivity is part of the mix that we have to deal with, even in governance? An observation often attributed to Lincoln (and the origin probably just as often disputed): "You can please some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you cannot please all of the people all of the time." It seems to me that democracy can be the process of compromised consensus? Where even though my idea of Top and another guys idea of top are different, but we find enough common ground to fuck.

i do understand and was aware of all of your points prior to your listing them. There are indeed flaws in everything, and you make valid points. i'd be interested to know how you think society and government should be done? Or you may wish to correct that and rephrase it, but your posts often leave me wondering what you consider to be a right (righter?) approach to governance and why? And, as you see it, how can you or one work towards that?

Not "simple"... or easy. my comment was not intended to suggest simplicity, rather a set of ideals and goals to work towards achieving, standards to apply when making decisions, ways to measure success, or failure. i don't think i used the word "democracy?" As for fragility? i think the current US condition is as good as an example of fragile as any.

It seems to me you are making the same point, just using a different analogy. Senators, judges, congresspeople, etc., are not "puppets" or "water," they are human beings that can choose at any given moment to do the right or wrong thing. Much can be done, and needs to be done, with election reform, but people can decide to change at any given moment. i do think there are honest people who want to do the right thing (i'm not talking party affiliation here). i do think it's possible to have honest and sincere representation. Of course, all people are flawed, and we can always find the flaws. i think MTG is a good example. Many of those who do not agree with her politics, still applauded her speaking up against trump and what he's doing... and she could easily be identified as one of his former "puppets." But she really was never a puppet, she was complicit and then decided (for whatever reasons) to not be complicit anymore. One think i am hopeful about the current mess is that 'we the people' will be more awake and engaged in our government. At the end of the day, i believe it is we the people who will decide on whether our government represents us or the would be puppeteers.

i agree that much of evil power and influence flies below the radar, but all of these "puppets" have volition, they are not simple wooden marionettes with no will of their own... they are complicit participants.

Power, wealth and strength can be used to promote peace, goodness, kindness, inclusion, and promote prosperity for all. It can also be used to promote war, destruction, greed, self centeredness, hate, and robbing others of freedom. The world does not need more Putins, Xi Jinping's, Kim Jong Un's or Trumps. Bullies are not "strong men." They are weak and immature and we the people can either enable them or speak out and vote against them. We cannot afford to be exhausted by the onslaught of evil.

wow... left about 10 minutes ago. Had been 4 days since He last bred me, so He just pounded me for an hour and i am completely tenderized.

i may be missing your point? It seems to me that "belief" is less of a factor than reality? I.e., it seems to me that people are both individual and part of a collective and that the principle challenges come from trying to... balance? the two.

lol, sorry, that's another site... BZ.

about ten minutes ago. i think He completely believes and understands that if He's feeling horny or like He needs to cum, i can make it quick and easy for Him instead of wasting His Cock and semen on jacking off. He just got off work and was on His way to the gym. He's got so much muscle, His fucking me feels like a meat tenderizer, i always feel completely subdued and filled when He leaves. So awesome.

Lots of discussion with Senator Warner on Venezuela.

i appreciate our political discussions on SD... though it seems we've lost some participants over the past year. For me, one of the things that makes this discussion challenging is how we often get divided into major groups (e.g. "republican" or "democrat," "conservative," or "liberal," each with endless sub groups). i wonder though if we get tied up fighting to save our individual tree, while the forest burns down? Not a perfect analogy, but this discussion raises that question in me.

i believe they will be speaking for a lot of Americans when they do, something a large number of our elected representatives are failing at this last year.

Preface: my opinion about trump. trump demonstrates the attributes of a sociopathic, narcissistic nihilist. i view him as raping America, i.e., forcing his will on Americans and then telling us we asked for it. i see many of his sycophantic supporters as similar to abused mates who blame their selves for the abuse and end up defending their abuser in Stockholm fashion. Then there are those who truly believe in might makes right. i think the reason he always states that he is friends with people like Putin, Xi and Kim Jong Un is because he relates to them. i think they are all cut from the same cloth. i put these guys right up there with Stalin, Hitler and Mao... to name a few. i do not advocate for using their methods on or with them. But i do not think the answer to peace and prosperity is to add more of these guys to the world stage. The US fucked up in a big way putting trump in control of the most powerful nation on earth, and i believe both the US and the world is paying, and going to pay dearly for that fuck up.

Yeah... an insane asylum perhaps, in a place where he cannot harm others, even in the facility.

Maybe daycare would be more appropriate.

For me, Venezuela serves as good of example as any to illustrate what is wrong with/about leadership/governments around the world. As i see it, trump, putin, xi jinping, are birds of a feather. It would not surprise me if we as the proverbial 'fly on the wall' were to discover a form of collusion when they meet with each other. i think trump demonstrated from the start that he was fine with putin having Ukraine. i suspect trump would do little other than token to push back against jinping if he goes for Taiwan. The collusion? trump gets Iceland, or Venezuela or_________, as he references the Monroe Doctrine. People like Maduro, Kim Jong Un, and a boatload of other despots/despot wannabes, to me are cut from the same cloth as the above three, just lacking the same resources to bully on such a large scale as they. They all have common traits though, none of them demonstrate any care for people, none of them are trust worthy. Each seems to be glaringly emotionally stunted when it comes to simple things like kindness, generosity... attributes that seem necessary if one is to be dogged about the governance of "promoting the general welfare." We often see the term "strong man" bandied about when referencing this type of person. A couple of months ago, i started a thread suggesting that trump saw himself as an "alpha." i loved many of the responses, particularly from the Alphas among us, eschewing even the notion that trump is alpha. And yet, it only takes a few minutes of listening to realize that many of trumps sycophants and followers see him as such. To me, some of them are also emotionally stunted, the schoolyard kids who became part of a bullies gang for fear of being one of his victims. Others are simply people who wanted change from the status quo (understandably) and trusted the lies of one who repeatedly demonstrates he is unworthy of trust. i think our country is squandering our might. We truly have opportunities to promote good will. To me, governments can be (way too broadly) classified into two categories: progressive or regressive. Right now, the largest, strongest nations of the world (in my opinion), have gone the direction of regressive. China, Russia, and the US does not have governments "of the people, by the people, for the people," and they threaten to take the whole world down with them because they care only for themselves and never matured to a level that looks to care for humanity as a group. i know, there is no simple answer. People are diverse, we disagree on the how or why of so many things. These guys have resources, and their methods are exhausting. One of their primary methods is to divide us, and they do a great job of it. Do a little investigating into the extensive propaganda machine in China, for instance, and you will learn they do not care who is in power during elections, their primary goal is to destabilize by dividing us. We know that, hello Tic Tok. As long as we can be isolated and divided us, we can be conquered. Our wishes will not be represented and our freedoms will diminish unless we refuse to be divided and band together and fight back. i think banding together is key, because alone, we simply do not have the power to resist, and stave off exhaustion. sorry...for the long ramble.

Left about an hour ago. Told me it would have to be a "quickie." We wen't right to 69... which is Him straddling my face. He becomes (seemingly?) unconscious in that position, very occupied with sucking me... but mostly stationary with His cock down my throat. He's a Muscle Guy so He's pretty immovable and has awesome thighs, in this position He is so positioned that i can get His cock and balls in my mouth... not sure how i am breathing, but it works some how... my head is so pinned under Him i can not really move and He is just all the way in me and down my throat... every once in a while He will move His hips to fuck my mouth and throat, but for the most part, i am holding Him inside my mouth and throat till He is ready to fuck. He gets there, and gets up: "let me fuck you." He proceeded to pound me for about a half hour. He has these incredible holds where i feel affectionately mauled , held and squeezed, pinned and positioned. i felt His sweat dripping on me, kissing my neck and licking my side and totally destroying my hole. i milk His cock with my ass muscles, but after a point, that ability is beaten into submissive openness. He smiles and leaves happy, i'm delirious (in a good way). Waving bye He says: "i'll hit you up tomorrow."

Just left... New Year breeding. FB, i wanted Him so badly, saw He'd texted me while i was at the gym, so i texted Him back but did not hear back for an hour... then, He texted. Yay!! Was so horny, got hard and was able to fuck Him quite a bit, He really loves it even though i never cum. He always is an incredible fucker, but He manages to be twice the beast after i've fucked Him. i get the sense that He is proving something to Himself? Like He is the Alpha even still? Idk, but i am so completely conquered, my hole is gaped and sloppy, and my body feels like i just got a massage. i feel sooooo good.

my FB, missed Him last night and i have to work tomorrow and Tuesday... 13 hour shifts at the hospital, so i don't fuck on those days... well, maybe Tuesday when i don't have to take care of patients the next day . He's on the DL, so i try not to initiate, but wanted Him bad, so tried to compose something to spark Him. He just left me cum filled before holiday dinner with His family. Was glad He could fit me in (He can always fit in me). i wrote: "Hey, just got home from the gym. i have to work tomorrow and Tuesday, but just got out of the shower if you feel like unloading a nut in your bitch"