Home ›
Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
If you have an email ending in @hotmail.com, @live.com or @outlook.com (or any other Microsoft-related domain), please consider changing it to another email provider; Microsoft decided to instantly block the server's IP, so emails can't be sent to these addresses.
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE
Comments
Infidelity porn.
My first thought was "No Turn on Red", but that's usually abbreviated "NTOR". #yntkt
I'm not sure I ever
new that king thereneeded to know that but now I do.Bring up that there are hetereosexual men out there who use dildos, maybe even together with their (female) partner... or, on second thought, don't, the answer is likely to be "lol, faggot".
But in general, this is of course the typical androcentric notion that it isn't real sex if there's no dick involved. Gah.
Hm. Yeah I think if I had to choose I'd even rather have a woman who'd magically switched out her woman-parts with man-parts. Seeing how everybody is talking about the Kinsley scale now, I wonder where that puts me on it
Interestingly, the right answer can even be found on the wiki disambiguation page for "NTR"
Not covered, unfortunately.
Is there a word for "attracted almost exclusively to women, except for Anonus"?
Because I can't really see myself ever having a romantic relationship with any man who's not him...
5.9/6
Anonusexual?
Doesn't TVT have a trope for that? I mean, okay, TVT has a trope for everything, thus making them lose their entire purpose, but uh, still... ah yes. Single Target Sexuality. Well, so uh, putting aside that TVT of course isn't a source for proper social or scientific parlance, lesbian plus single target sexuality?
Yes. If It's You It's Okay.
Bi, I guess.
Boring
Imagine that.
Bi? That's no fun. D-.
Love-hate relationship with sleep, now falling into the >Hate-it side.
^ You're in good company there, sis.
Let's be sleep-hating-buddies!
When I become a goddess I'm going to just not sleep at all. Things will be simpler that way.
Apotheosis, hm? Oh, the endless possibilities... I, hm, I don't think I'd be a very hands-off deity...
It's less "popular" and more "nerds get really really really mad about it all the time" so they won't shut up about it.
I think it's only actually about as popular as, like... I dunno. Other stuff that isn't super popular.
Looking for a job. Most offers only want someone who have experiences with a program, I never learned, or want someone with actual job experiences. Most want both.
This will be tricky...
^ I hate it when that happens. It's like, "The economy is suck, so no on-the-job training for you! Do an unpaid internship! Volunteer work! Personal project in your mom's basement!"
While homophobia and double standards are obviously bad, I think it's a bit silly to start questioning the logic of fantasies, kinks and fetishes, when they're obviously that... if the second dude really meant what he said, though, that's a bit sad.
^ Aww, he's adorable! Thanks...
@Eelektross, your friend is retarded. Assuming you don't stop hanging out with him (and maybe your other friends) and spare yourself his terrible ideas, at least remind him that bisexuality is a thing (though in fairness, it seems like a lot of people don't realize it's a thing) and let him know that Nova wants to punch him in the balls.
The nerdhate blog you posted, on the other hand, is interesting. I mean, the writer and the commenters have their heads pretty far up their asses regarding some details of the series, but I didn't realize until recently (or at least, until I read Cold Days and got refreshed on the series) that . . . Butcher really is a shoddy writer, and the blog leaves me wondering if I should have stopped to wonder where the line divides between cool and pandering. Not sure how to feel about this.
I'm also not sure where I am on the Kinsey scale. Where would I be with this mindset: "I've found myself attracted to people of both genders, but it's much rarer for me to be attracted to a man, and my appreciation of the male form stops at the waist regardless"?
^ Is that attraction in a strictly aesthetic, or also in a sexual sense?
From what I know about the Kinsey scale, it goes something like this:
0 - attracted exclusively to the opposite sex, cannot recognize attractiveness in the same sex (according to Kinsey, rare)
1 - sexually attracted to the opposite sex, can feel attracted to the same sex in a strictly aesthetic way, with ocassional exceptions (most common)
2 - sexually attracted to both sexes, with preference for the opposite sex
3 - sexually attracted to both sexes, does not discriminate
4 - sexually attracted to both sexes, with preference for the same sex
5 - sexually attracted to the same sex, can feel attracted to the opposite sex in a strictly aesthetic way, with ocassional exceptions
6 - attracted exclusively to the same sex, cannot recognize attractiveness in the opposite sex (most rare)
Ah. I guess 1, then, but decidedly comfortable with it. I wasn't actually familiar with the Kinsey scale before now, and I figured someone here wouldn't mind explaining. Thanks!
I always wonder if there are people out there who actually listen to advice to cut off friends for stupid comments or ignorant beliefs instead of stamping that sort of stuff out of 'em. Heaven knows I would be a poorer person if I didn't have friends to correct the stupidity of teen me.
Hm, 1 then, but... that scale is oddly, err, scaled. "True" bisexuality, in itself even rarer than homosexuality, is covered by three of six points... and since 0 is in fact rare, the vast majority of people will be 1. That's just bad scaling!
I guess that makes me a zero, which puts me in purportedly a rare category?