nanana

…pledges my allegiance to not a Koran/Talmud/Bible but to a cumslut taking 350 million loads from every citizen. I’ll be your Nero fiddling deep up your anus. I’m going to choose a cumslut queen that makes Melania look more like an abbess. Please write to me if you want me to intervene on your fuckhole’s behalf to be a sperm-centric ballot box for the next Presidential ballot box. Let’s send you up the pop charts.

Greetings: im in a terminal relationship with a narcissistic but reasonably nice guy. I hope We’re friends for life but I want A good divorce. Thus we decided to navigate the unwinding via monogamy lest the probate courts fleece us. But I want To fuck everyone now. Any similar combos of sluttery and despite it all self control?

Me too, ready to host quadrillions in my indoor swimming pool and put 400 faggots on cocksucking duty. Maybe sponsor a cumhole contest to see which slut can be submissive enough to my dick to turn me into a top.

NWUSHorny, an interesting point but I’m having a hard time seeing any similarity. MAGA ostensibly wants to shrink government and is firing a lot of bureaucrats, something the far left is much less likely to do. I’d have a hard time seeing leftists deport a bunch of illegal aliens either. Putting “America First” also seems counter to leftist universalist aspirations. I’d love to understand what you’re seeing that makes MAGA seem far left. Maybe Trumps willingness to make relatively radical change? Maybe his chaotic approach to the rule of law? Interested but still unclear about the commonalities you see.

Thanks for sharing how this hits you BootmanLA. I on the other hand am frequently amazed by how many people prefer "curation" of the news by some "authority" that likely has an unquestioned and unexplored editorial agenda. I used to like "curation" of the news, but now I prefer to read a diverse set of sources and bounce the imperfections off of each other to see a diversity of opinion on subjects, lest I simply be a good parroter of somebody else's editorial agenda. It does take a lot more judgement to do this than I used to need when I simply placed by faith in an editorial authority, but it seems more realistic to be aware of bias. It has also become more interesting to me to hear a wide variety of views on subjects than to quibble over sequestered fact bases and be unsatisfied with anything less than an unassailable monopolistic interpretation. I am definitely one of those who has seen newspapers spin facts and it is hard for me to read what they write without skepticism, certainly without the same amount of skepticism I apply to any source. If you have never been burnt, it is understandable that you may not be present to flame. I think of you as a formidable debater, but this is a classic example of using a strawman. There was nothing in rawfuckingonly's remarks that had anything to do with the Civil War. Yet your remarks generalized about a group of people you conjure into rawfuckingonly's remarks, and then you have a debate with yourself about this cohort, and surprisingly enough, win your own argument. I am definitely a big fan of doing primary research and citing sources, but I also think we're all entitled to our own opinions, and if you always need to be right and cannot coexist with alternative views... Your commentary is very appreciated, as you seem to be able to channel a lot of the homos on this site and give voice to the way many of us think.

Greetings dear phallic risk-takers: A Democrat friend of mine at the agency I used to work for until the fork in the road and the offer of early retirement commended the book "The Righteous Mind" by Jonathan Haidt, to me ([think before following links] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Righteous_Mind) and suggested that it may be a basis for rebuilding lowest-common-denominator-based cooperation between people that are currently in the grip of either the Republicans or the Democrats (or the Libertarians or Greens, for that matter) (or international equivalents). As a semen-committed American, I thought it was a beautiful intention. Jonathan Haidt argues that "good" people of various political persuasions place different value on the following morality groupings: care/harm, fairness/cheating, loyalty/betrayal, authority/subversion, sanctity/degradation, and liberty/oppression. My friend's view was that the Democrats had moved too far away from the concept of benefits for contributions. He thought that he could potentially reclaim some deplorables by helping the Democratic Party generate policies and programs at the local and state level that better aligned benefits to contributions. What say you latex-free Americans and citizens of the world? Could this rescue the Democratic Party, or will Democrats simply forgo generating anything until the Republicans self-immolate? Also, any interest in ranking these morality groupings for yourselves? Also, where if at all could Republicans and Democrats de-demonize each other by doing things that could allow each other to model the sexy-best in each other? I'll start. Anyone who wants to move past demonization and partisanship and wants to have joy with others of different political persuasions please jump in: Ranking: 1) liberty/oppression (maybe because I have been in some abusive relationships and wish(ed) to find a superior man who would enjoy seeing me realize my gifts, also brief stints in countries that were in the middle of violent revolutions and where there was frequent murder, also have found joy beyond my original submission, so can play roles that were not given to me as an insecure youth wishing to be saved from isolation by an experienced older man, but this has been consistent since high school, when I started a geek-club for the 9th and 10th amendments) 2) fairness/cheating (was a liberal-leaning libertarian until I saw big tech silencing and de-platforming conservatives. at the time [late 2010's] I was likely to be horrified by conservative views, but I was even more horrified that fragile people would silence them rather than simply win arguments...) 3) care/harm (for me this is muddier, as care can be smothering, and "harm" can be erotic; but I still think that GOD [or the great genetic instinct to be alpha-species] meant for us to discover the best in each other and lift each other up. perhaps some of us count our cocks or our holes as our best quality, and to that I say, let's all retire to a promiscuous island). but seriously, lets all help each other learn from adversity and diversity of soul. 4) authority/subversion (for me, this is muddier, because the only real authority is the non-dogmatic GOD that whispers all sorts of contradictory sweet nothings into all of our ears [or truth for my dear atheists and scientists]; I am putting this above others only because I FINALLY believe in EVIL. It gives me a backbone and makes me ready to die for others' well-being. 5) loyalty/betrayal: I put this relatively low, because I know how much regret I have about times when I couldn't see what people were up there trying to do. I'd like to think I was rooting for all, but I am sure that I failed many people in my journey. My awareness of my own lack of understanding makes me sure that GOD intended all of us to live long enough to see our (my) own mistakes and to forgive our betrayers. (And, to be crass, Judas had a big dick.). 6) sanctity/degradation: I put this lowest because like many homos who are forced to confront the YING-YANG of being a man and wanting to fuck other men, to be a hole, or to be a fucker-hole, I really cannot tell the difference between sanctity and degradation. (I will say that Jordan Peterson, as much as he has flaws, showed me a path toward appreciating why GOD may punish people who violate taboos, simply because it is a beautiful mental concept to preserve an inviolable.) for those who feel that I have cut you off at the knees in my past comments (perhaps a mutual feeling), maybe we both could look beyond past rancor to create some non-partisan fun.

I fear I will get suspended for "fact-checking" (or, victor-writes-the-history "opinion-checking" which may be closer to what's happening during a "fact-check"), so I am leaving it to others to draw inferences. (fear is a strong word, maybe it is more like a highly erotic suspension, much like breath control in a dangerously close rough trade hookup, or sensory deprivation)

Here is the WHO advisory, for the current Texas outbreak of 378 cases: [think before following links] https://www.who.int/emergencies/disease-outbreak-news/item/2025-DON561 Here is coverage of the current Ontario outbreak of 572 cases: [think before following links] https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-ontario-chief-medical-officer-stands-by-vaccine-exemption-law-despite/ Furthermore, the WHO reported on March 13 that the European region reported 127,350 measles cases in 2024, double the number in 2023, and 300 times more than in the USA. [think before following links] https://www.who.int/europe/news/item/13-03-2025-european-region-reports-highest-number-of-measles-cases-in-more-than-25-years---unicef--who-europe What is the interplay of "fact" and perception here? Any explanation for why one fact-base might get attention, but another fact-base does not? How do the principles of equity, diversity and inclusion play out in this juxtaposition? How do the principles of partisanship play out when over-relying on a specialized fact base and not seeking out a broader fact base? What is the connection between the WHO's focus on the US outbreak in its "Disease Outbreak News" and the US withdrawal from the WHO?

I appreciate that Biden’s evil was and is less visible to many. He did a better job of snowing people, and it took more effort to see that his words and deeds were frequently at odds, especially for his partisans.

lol why not

I am highly disappointed to see how many how many legal aliens are being deported by this administration just for expressing opposition to genocide, in direct violation of first amendment rights. I thought Biden’s activities against misinformation were bad, but this seems at least on a par. It is sad to see Republicans as poorly equipped as Democrats to critique their own party when it goes off the rails. It is definitely time to find some new non-Zionist parties or at least existing party candidates who are willing to stand up for free speech and not to define it as some narrow American right but as a universal right.

I have a different view that public (or really any) schools are usually there to indoctrinate kids into non-parental belief systems, usually making them overvalue the State and put hurdles in the way of their individual callings. Some good skills sure, but critical thinking happens DESPITE schools not because of them. Teaches kids faith in the VICTORS’ version of history.

Why does the state need to validate something that should be between two adults? I say Get the state out of marriage altogether, including all of the tax issues.

This is a great point TT2025 and is part of my objection to NATO, agree that it is a military industrial racket. I think it is arguable that we "need" alliances. We definitely need friends, and we need to treat other countries honorably, but I think the "alliance" may need to shift when our partners use our strength to pick fights and send us the bill. I very much agree with folks who say that there have been huge financial benefits to entities from NATO military spending, but I object to the idea that military profits are good for the "USA" as a whole. they tend to support the war-profiteer interests, which are quite happy to beggar the rest of us taxpayers. I am fond of friendly isolationism myself and would love to starve any government of funds for war. I WILL SAY THAT I am worried that the tenor of the current administration is not driven by friendly intentions, especially to countries that have minerals. I am tempted to see the isolationism, but in truth I am also observing a re-energizing of mineral colonialism. I couldn't find the quote, but someone observed that it was the same people who accused Europe of being warmongers as who were demanding that European countries increase their defense spending. It is an interesting observation, but in case it was I that the author was writing about, there is a third option that I would be MOST happy about: DECREASED defense spending in both US and Europe. I may have seemed to champion greater European defense spending, but if so it was based upon the observation that Europe is currently more war-monger-y and should thus pay for its aggressive policies. I would be MUCH HAPPIER if Europe de-escalated. I am SUPER DISAPPOINTED but not in the least surprised that Trump bombed the civilians of Yemen, already suffering greatly with high risk of famine and disease. Whatever de-escalation he may be practicing in Ukraine, his middle east policy is so far a MASSIVE DISASTER for civilians in Gaza, Syria, and Yemen. I am also pretty concerned that the whole de-escalation process in Ukraine is really a ploy to free up military resource to increase the heat in Asia, e.g., Taiwan. When I was young, my mom and I spent time at a convent with nuns who walked across the deserts of Iraq during the Iraqi war for peace. Now THOSE women are my heroes, such courage, to save the lives of innocent children in country our warmonger leaders had whipped us up into believing they were "enemies," when they were probably at worst obstacles to profit.

That's beautiful, and thanks for adding the context of your journey. I embrace your distinction between faith and religion. It rings true to me, as in my conception of God, God whispers highly different miracles into each of our ears (who am I to say what God DIDN'T say to you), whereas in a religious conception of God, there is frequently (not always) a belief in a single script for God's whispers, often documented long before God's existence is likely to be over. (There are mystical traditions in most religions that do create space for continuing individual revelation...) I like putting the state of being comfortable with "not knowing" as another step towards enlightenment. I feel very comfortable not knowing things, but I am often triggered by someone else's certainty. I am going to see if I can let that go right now, having expressed it, and if not able right now, to keep working on it. It is great that you found someone who was able to respond to your journey without being too blocked themselves to be at peace with you. It is amazing how powerful it is to feel heard and to matter. My own path to skepticism of science as the only source of truth came from growing up as a great admirer of my dad, who was a Physics professor. I loved his brain and the way he could figure out just exactly the level of physics story to tell me to take me on the journey of understanding. I went to a "loose-hold" mainline Protestant denomination and enjoyed that, but followed my dad into empirical data-worshipping atheism and (you might say) "knowing" skepticism. At some point much later, I began to observe that many scientists - my dad included - would refuse to converse with religious people around their different formulations of the origins, e.g., creationism, intelligent design. It struck me as a huge missed opportunity, and then it made me wonder why he/they wouldn't if their arguments were so slam-dunk. That realization, and my conviction that all of God's children matter, made me realize that I had tuned in EXCLUSIVELY to brain-and-fact data and tuned OUT HEART DATA. My dad is still amazing to me, AND his way no longer informs me of the limits I should set on my life's inquiry.

hi tallslenderguy, I loved your response to my response to your sharing of the video. it resonates with me that writing, though powerful, can suck all of the tone and bodily nuance out of communication. ascii may read as hostile but if you saw the smile and the engagement and other context, it may feel less shunning and more passionate - full out play. I keep coming back to the site and engaging, not because I think the measure of the exchange is that we should all agree, but that we are meant to run and bark and nip and steal each other's toys together for a brief period before the leash comes back on. at my best i'm being playful, whereas at my worst i'm more likely to be fighting some imaginary life-or-death struggle to fulfill some desire for evidence of my existence. this despite the fact that my mental model provides for as many differing truths as there are people, even more with all of the transient contradictory thoughts in one person's head. tallslenderguy, I loved your analogy of how to treat sepsis and dr mccoy's take on our highly powerful "modern" medicine. I share dr mccoy's that people will look back on this era as being equally barbaric and maybe even more barbaric due to turning science into a faith. however, I hope that they see all the well-meaning people in the profession trying to do good things with the power. but regardless, this exchange has been a good reminder to me to get back to my higher self, which is fostering a playful space for all voices in the pack to be heard, and not judged but perhaps to lean into feedback. peace.

this deserves a much longer response, but however I took the video, I publicly celebrate your INTENTION of finding common ground! and l love your inseminating the response with integrated sexual emotional and brain responses! more when I can you justice!

great feedback tallslenderguy. it was a pompous answer in retrospect. I did look at the whole video, and I did EXACTLY what turned me off about the video. Instead of looking at what I could change about myself, I focused my critique on others. I can definitely be a pompous ass. It is true that I was super lonely during the COVID years and have never really recovered my sense of connection from those years. I DO have friends who like me 🙂 but I will own your point about being "vulnerable" or "friendly" and self-reflect. One of the hopefully-more-sympathetic reasons I reacted the way I did is because the video focuses on judging people (including oneself) because they are incorrect about facts and interpretations. I think if anything we need LESS judging rather than more. I am concerned in this "fact-checky" world that the conversation becomes super impoverished around just facts rather than the souls the facts pass through. It would be nice to see a return to a greater tolerance for different interpretations of shared and unshared truths. HOWEVER, to your point tallslenderguy, I have hardly been a great model for that. I am not great at de-escalation, a skill I value, so should work more on. I DO think it will be difficult in this environment to get back to tolerance when partisanship presents existential (even if not real) threat to diverse populations and their ways of thinking. I appreciate your point about how I would ever make a self-assessment "research-quality" but will stand by the assessment, though obviously with some serious lacks in that space. Thanks for taking the time to respond, you gave me something to think about and reminded me of some of my core values I haven't been manifesting.

My dick goes totally limp for beta herds of any partisanship.

Not at all. I have been a communist, a socialist, a democrat, a libertarian and a republican so I’m pretty good at seeing pros and cons, insights and blind spots. I question myself all the time. I’m both larger than life and smaller than life but rarely life size. I dig Deep down my research and am still wrong very frequently. But it gets boring when one is of the few questioning themselves among the great safe majority who just pile on. It is not a vulnerable friendly atmosphere. Stifles true inquiry, self-questioning, and beyond-insight.

I think it’s more likely to encourage people that “the other side” is stupid. Face it, how many of you who saw it secretly congratulated yourselves that you weren’t the stupid ones?

Greetings men: leaving DC around 3/15 or 3/16 heading down I-95 to Charleston then heading back via Columbia Asheville Charlottesville back to DC 24th latest. Hit me up for anything from chat to rum/sodomy/lash

If you imagine that you are the same as a superpower and as such you are empowered to sacrifice Americas tax dollars and become a wounded vegetable that deserves a subsidy, then by all means (but with no guarantees) live your words you brave man. If you think this call to sacrifice will go far on a pleasure-seeking bareback site filled with lovers (definitely not fighters), then ask these warmonger Eurolads to put their (free-site-access) dick-money where Zelenskier’s mouth is. Or post your bank account and routing number here so we can let the IRS know that you volunteered our tax money to military-socialism up the world.

Lol

Lads we’d are all here because sex has a power for us but did any of you imagine it as an either / or? Either slut or chaste monk who’d be happy with another non-sexual access to your higher pleasure power? I’ve taken thousands of loads and fed 10 years of cocsuckers. Am I just fooling myself that I’d be happy in a sexless world?