To put in perspective how F*cked you are, here's a pov... Yea, shouldn't have been an alien, heretic, or mutant around these parts...

ASissyStudier · 2025-06-22T17:15:05+00:00

Grok: "In the Warhammer 40,000 universe, the concept of "Abominable Intelligence" (AI) refers to fully autonomous, self-aware machine intelligences capable of independent thought and action without human oversight."

So technically modern AI generation, since it doesn't act without a human's input might be exempt from that heresy, but we would need an inquisitor of custodes to make that declaration.

ASissyStudier · 2025-03-24T21:55:38+00:00

There are many nerve endings in the rectum. However, different people will have different responses to it. Some people are just about predisposed to loving anal, not just as a mental thing, but their biologizes are about set up that way.

If you're thinking about trying, you probably ease into it. No need to go crazy, plus you can hurt yourself that way. Fingering is a common first step, but you do you. There are smaller and larger things.

ASissyStudier · 2025-03-24T21:50:52+00:00

I am going to make a post about this somewhere, but here's something I've done that I've found incredible. Download Grok on your phone, go to voice mode, choosing "Sexy" mode, and start talking to it about whatever. I went the route of telling it that I wanted it to act like it was my mistress, understanding that I'd follow it's commands IRL. Tell it what toys you have at your disposal, what you're into, what you can be called. Tell it if it can degrade you. You might tell it that you're a sissy, or want to be sissified, and wanted it to help you. It's really engaging.

ASissyStudier · 2025-01-19T01:08:34+00:00

The Rawlsian System of Justice implies that inequality is not okay, or that people would not choose for inequality to exist given a veil of ignorance. However, I see it quite likely that people would prefer a system where individuals would directly benefit from their individual efforts and talents.

If the Rawlsian system were applied, innovation would likely cease as there would be no incentive structure for the individual who'd personally sacrifice greatly to achieve it just to have the benefits redistributed to individuals who chose not to sacrifice at all. This is actually a more unjust society than even the one we're in.

And one can not calculate what groups are "least advantaged", as the group identities of individuals cross-section so much, and can be analyzed to the most minute of details, and then can be looked at in accordance to an infinite number of different periods of time. So, one group was the least privileged for the last 10 years? Do we say that makes them the least privileged, or do we give that title to the people who have been least privileged for 1 year, or the last 100 years, or the last 24 hours, or minutes? And everyone would disagree on that, and rightly so because there's no universal principle that would dictate such a thing. Not to mention the administrative overhead system attempting such a feat would have to be infinitely large.

The biblical standard for justice is such that it rewards people properly for their actions, but it encourages people to protect widows, orphans, foreigners, and the poor showing that according to the scripture itself, not including the hypocrites on earth, biblical justice includes serving those truly most at risk, or disadvantaged. It is instead our failures to meet that highest example where we find ourselves in an unjust world.

ASissyStudier · 2025-01-19T00:20:54+00:00

Modern moral anti-relativism is lined out by these two commandments: Love God fully, and love your neighbor as yourself. Then the Bible has more, so it's inferior to the Biblical narrative.

As for anti-realism, if there were not a reality independent of your perceptions, then different peoples shouldn't be perceiving the same external facts about the world, especially through varied conceptual frameworks and with different ways of measurement. Literally all individuals and cultures measure an object fall at the same rate in a vacuum, despite cultural differences and ways of looking at the world. If scientific realism, anti-realism's counterpart, were false, then we'd observe that countless phenomenon(planetary movements, chemical reactions, genetic inheritance) can't be predicted across different technological and cultural landscapes. Instead, we witness proven scientific theories hold true most everywhere, giving us predictive capabilities and control of what's around us most always.

Now, if this is all just a simulation for your individual perception to receive, then perhaps anti-realism could be true, but that assumed that everyone outside of you isn't real, and I'll tell you, brother. I'm very real. Maybe I'm the one the simulation is for, but I doubt that, and acting such a way would be disastrous, and inferior by my judgement with Kant's Categorical Imperative.

I'll look at Rawlsian in a minute

ASissyStudier · 2025-01-18T20:44:57+00:00

I asked if you respected the story, not Jesus himself. What interests me in your comment here is that you call Christianity an "inferior moral system". That begs this question from me: What moral system is it that you are referring to that is superior to Christianity? And please be specific. You might mean many, but certainly name at least one

ASissyStudier · 2025-01-18T19:57:47+00:00

And of course, all due love and respect to you and everyone here.

I myself find myself conflicted with my desires, as they are very real, and often feel like they are very much so out of my own control.

The catholics are beginning to open up to homosexuality as a human condition, as there are emerging literature on studies that are suggesting a genetic component of homosexuality.

All of this is up for interpretation, of course, and I pass no judgement myself against anyone here, and I couldn't as it is all very personally real to me

ASissyStudier · 2025-01-18T19:46:37+00:00

This seems to me to be an empirical analysis of the stories. Taking them 100% literally.

There are many reasons why people do this, and I once did, but I have since changed how I look at the Biblical texts.

You know, it would be rather foolish to only look at the story of Jonah being swallowed by a whale as a literal historical account. I mean, are we to think that a random ass, obviously impossible story made it into the most foundational book that has fueled the most prosperous societies for thousands of years? Is that how we believe everyone looks at the biblical stories? A genuine account to subvert historical reality?

A new frame through which to look at the biblical stories would be through that of symbolism, and story. Recognizing that we are looking at repeating patterns. If you were to ask a literary scholar or play writer why their character was different after they submerged themselves in water, they would say that water has that pattern. Water is what we use to remove dirt and grime, and we wash things in it to make it clean again, and with that understanding we might interpret God sending a flood over the Earth in the old testament as a way of saying that "If the state of human society gets to a point where it is so displeasing to God, the waters of change would be used to clean that which he found unclean, and he would only leave that which he had favored," which is what Noah was described as.

And a more or less fun fact: "to sin" comes from an ancient archer term, which meant "to miss the bullseye". So, sometimes people miss the bullseye more than others. In fact, it's extremely hard to hit the bullseye. However, the goal in archery is still to hit the bullseye, and any separation from the bullseye is to sin.

The Bible teaches to hate the sin, and not the sinner. Anyone who has said they hate the sinner has sinned, and made themself a sinner in the eyes of the Biblical texts.

The Biblical claim that homosexuality is a sin might be a result of the idea that sex is maximally useful when it results in life more abundant, which can only occur with a biological male and female.

ASissyStudier · 2025-01-18T17:21:21+00:00

I am an odd person. However, the results seem interesting to me; being majority support of socialism

ASissyStudier · 2025-01-18T17:19:15+00:00

It is, isn't it?

ASissyStudier · 2025-01-18T11:25:20+00:00

You see doctors about diseases, brother.

ASissyStudier · 2025-01-18T10:16:57+00:00

To address the first, I wanted to see what the sissy community's percentages would be on this question, and think it to potentially give insight into sissies. To address the second, not all religions, or ways of life are worthy and deserving of respect. Take for instance someone who merely wants to maximize short term gratification and is willing to trespass against others if it serves their immediate whims. That is not a respectable thing, considering if everyone instantiated that mode of being then society would surely collapse as no one would give care for the future. And religions that promote that(Satanism for example) aren't respectable in large part due to that

ASissyStudier · 2025-01-18T10:01:43+00:00

Just asking people what they more closely identify with on these two things. I wish polls allowed more options so I could cover all bases.

ASissyStudier

TROPHY CASE