(October 19, 2016 at 1:50 pm)Cthulhu Dreaming Wrote:

(October 19, 2016 at 11:06 am)Shell B Wrote: I'm considering we play a game called "don't respond to Drich," wherein none of us respond to Drich and he stops posting paragraph after paragraph of responses that aren't responses.

It's a fun game.  I've been playing for years.

You're a wiser man than I am.

(October 19, 2016 at 11:51 am)Losty Wrote:

(October 19, 2016 at 10:46 am)Drich Wrote: well not the crazies.. It is just easier to find vanilla..

unless you are pulling in you own definitions/preconception to the word vanilla.

To me, vanilla is the base or foundation to endless possibilities..

When you have lime sorbet, all you can have is variations of lime ice cream...

I'll leave it at that.

Again, I am trying to get you guys to think past the sterotypes you have adopted.

I have never seen you scramble so desperately to try to cover up something disgusting you said. You usually wear your horrible opinions like a badge of honor. Still, there's no coming back from the jerk off smilies. You may as well give it up.

look at the broader picture.

Everything I am talking about/all the different subjects all start out with, a 'call to arms statement' then they are seeded with questionable statements, conclude in a broader picture that makes one look at his/her preconceived notion as the reason for the call to arms. because I have taken a common understanding of a word or phrase and used it in a different way

"vanilla" is just another example.

What you've been taught to understand as boring, can be seen as a foundational flavor that supports an almost endless array of possiblities.

As it applies to sex, having a foundation of trust and open honest communication can lead to anything "just mix in any topping or flavor you like and vanilla takes on and makes a new flavor."

While again, a fixed flavor like Lime sorbet or say a sexual relationship that is based on one narrowly defined avenue which sex is permitted under certain conditions, because you and you partner, can't communicate truthfully.. will always result in following a certain recipe of sorts. it cant change.. Sure you might be able to add in different things but if the sorbet relationship is going, to work then what can be added must be compatible with lime.

(October 19, 2016 at 12:32 pm)Crossless1 Wrote:

(October 19, 2016 at 12:11 pm)LadyForCamus Wrote: Yeah?  And what is your opinion on that?!  I was like...so close to giving you a SHRED a credit in this discussion, but if you are about to turn around and say that our western view of women having co-equal rights as participants in sex is somehow "incorrect" because from a global perspective it's the minority opinion, then I am officially done engaging with you.  Ever again.

LFC, see my post (#366) in which I give FatAndFaithless some tongue-in-cheek ribbing about being a bigot. Two people gave it kudos, but I think only one understood that I wasn't serious. I'll give you one guess who didn't. Of course, that kudos might not be there by the time you look.

Lol.

LOL, I didn't notice he Kudos'd that.  What an idiot.  In Drich's mind he can appeal to moral relativism in THIS particular instance because the POV that woman are not truly "equal" as sexual participants (or as humans in general...thanks a lot, Eve!) fits perfectly within his Biblical narrative that the ladies have a god-given role, and we should just shut up serve it.  Ass clown.

Here's another daily reminder to put Drich on your ignore list

(October 19, 2016 at 2:02 pm)Drich Wrote: look at the broader picture.

Everything I am talking about/all the different subjects all start out with, a 'call to arms statement' then they are seeded with questionable statements, conclude in a broader picture that makes one look at his/her preconceived notion as the reason for the call to arms. because I have taken a common understanding of a word or phrase and used it in a different way

"vanilla" is just another example.

What you've been taught to understand as boring, can be seen as a foundational flavor that supports an almost endless array of possiblities.

As it applies to sex, having a foundation of trust and open honest communication can lead to anything "just mix in any topping or flavor you like and vanilla takes on and makes a new flavor."

While again, a fixed flavor like Lime sorbet or say a sexual relationship that is based on one narrowly defined avenue which sex is permitted under certain conditions, because you and you partner, can't communicate truthfully.. will always result in following a certain recipe of sorts. it cant change.. Sure you might be able to add in different things but if the sorbet relationship is going, to work then what can be added must be compatible with lime.

Since you seem to be so focused on ice cream flavors, I;ll try to explain something to you in a language you understand.  When you add the force sprinkles, or omit the consent syrup, what you have is rape flavored icecream.

(October 19, 2016 at 1:52 pm)Losty Wrote: He wasn't banned
https://atheistforums.org/user-848.html

No. He's just...gone.

Don't know what happened to him, no way to find out.

(October 19, 2016 at 2:06 pm)Thena323 Wrote:

(October 19, 2016 at 1:52 pm)Losty Wrote: He wasn't banned
https://atheistforums.org/user-848.html

No. He's just...gone.

Don't know what happened to him, no way to find out.

My guesses: either there was a one-man Rapture (if true, Professor is going to be pissed!) or he finally understood that appeals to authority don't work with people who value evidence and reason.

Anyway, I hope he's ok. He doesn't seem like such a bad sort for someone who is so mind-numbingly indoctrinated. And I miss kicking him around. 

(October 19, 2016 at 2:02 pm)Drich Wrote:

(October 19, 2016 at 11:51 am)Losty Wrote: I have never seen you scramble so desperately to try to cover up something disgusting you said. You usually wear your horrible opinions like a badge of honor. Still, there's no coming back from the jerk off smilies. You may as well give it up.

look at the broader picture.

Everything I am talking about/all the different subjects all start out with, a 'call to arms statement' then they are seeded with questionable statements, conclude in a broader picture that makes one look at his/her preconceived notion as the reason for the call to arms. because I have taken a common understanding of a word or phrase and used it in a different way

"vanilla" is just another example.

What you've been taught to understand as boring, can be seen as a foundational flavor that supports an almost endless array of possiblities.

As it applies to sex, having a foundation of trust and open honest communication can lead to anything "just mix in any topping or flavor you like and vanilla takes on and makes a new flavor."

While again, a fixed flavor like Lime sorbet or say a sexual relationship that is based on one narrowly defined avenue which sex is permitted under certain conditions, because you and you partner, can't communicate truthfully.. will always result in following a certain recipe of sorts. it cant change.. Sure you might be able to add in different things but if the sorbet relationship is going, to work then what can be added must be compatible with lime.

What the fuck are you even blathering on about? Are you seriously going to make up your own definitions for every word you use? Since you can't seem to understand commonly used language, stop talking about ice cream and say what you really mean.

Idgaf about your sexual preferences. I was commenting on your racist opinion that white girls are more "vanilla" (*using your own definition for the word and not the commonly accepted meaning) unless they're crazies of course.

I think this thread has been done to death at this point. Conclusion: you're just as much of a scumbag as you always have been and should serve as a good example to Christians of how they should not behave. There are redeeming qualities in Christianity like love and compassion. If your posts on this forum are any indication of your real self you have none of those redeeming qualities.

(October 19, 2016 at 12:11 pm)LadyForCamus Wrote:

(October 18, 2016 at 12:58 pm)Drich Wrote: korean or rather 1/2..

The point was to frame the western view on sex and the woman's role in sex to be a co-equal partner is in the minority of how people generally view sex world wide.

That how members of this website would be in the minority (when view through a global lens) on how women participate in sex.

Yeah?  And what is your opinion on that?!  I was like...so close to giving you a SHRED a credit in this discussion, but if you are about to turn around and say that our western view of women having co-equal rights as participants in sex is somehow "incorrect" because from a global perspective it's the minority opinion, then I am officially done engaging with you.  Ever again.

No.. Again co-equal rights is the reason I did not marry the girl my mom wanted me to marry, and why i married my wife. I did not want someone 'fresh off the boat' that i had to deprogram.

The above was in response to those who said the traditional asian sexual relationship was a fetish sex act, and that I should regard it as such, or to the people who asked why i did not refer to 'forced sex' as some fetish BDSM thing...

I was simply pointing out if the majority of the people on the planet have sex in a similar way, (where consentual sex is forced) that means by definition
Fetish:
a form of sexual desire in which gratification is linked to an abnormal degree to a particular object, item of clothing, part of the body, etc.

Forced consensual sex not a fetish act. the word Abnormal in the definition being the defining qualifying statement here; As if the majority of the world does "X"  then "X" is what is normal.

Which makes co-equal sex the fetish sex act.

Again, just trying to push you people off the throne from which the world revolves around. I am not saying it is better or worse, only that it exists, and does so in a disproportionate way than what westerner believe.

(October 19, 2016 at 2:11 pm)Losty Wrote:

(October 19, 2016 at 2:02 pm)Drich Wrote: look at the broader picture.

Everything I am talking about/all the different subjects all start out with, a 'call to arms statement' then they are seeded with questionable statements, conclude in a broader picture that makes one look at his/her preconceived notion as the reason for the call to arms. because I have taken a common understanding of a word or phrase and used it in a different way

"vanilla" is just another example.

What you've been taught to understand as boring, can be seen as a foundational flavor that supports an almost endless array of possiblities.

As it applies to sex, having a foundation of trust and open honest communication can lead to anything "just mix in any topping or flavor you like and vanilla takes on and makes a new flavor."

While again, a fixed flavor like Lime sorbet or say a sexual relationship that is based on one narrowly defined avenue which sex is permitted under certain conditions, because you and you partner, can't communicate truthfully.. will always result in following a certain recipe of sorts. it cant change.. Sure you might be able to add in different things but if the sorbet relationship is going, to work then what can be added must be compatible with lime.

What the fuck are you even blathering on about? Are you seriously going to make up your own definitions for every word you use? Since you can't seem to understand commonly used language, stop talking about ice cream and say what you really mean.

Idgaf about your sexual preferences. I was commenting on your racist opinion that white girls are more "vanilla" (*using your own definition for the word and not the commonly accepted meaning) unless they're crazies of course.

I think this thread has been done to death at this point. Conclusion: you're just as much of a scumbag as you always have been and should serve as a good example to Christians of how they should not behave. There are redeeming qualities in Christianity like love and compassion. If your posts on this forum are any indication of your real self you have none of those redeeming qualities.

The pretense that there is something like a sensible method at work here is just priceless.