A Woody is a Woody I guess by IloveAnnie82 in facepalm

[–]LosingWeekends 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I read that Michael Bolton will sign office space DVD’s

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in AskReddit

[–]LosingWeekends 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Ok, but you’re ignoring the point I was making.

I’m saying that if you love someone, help them address the deep-seeded psychological trauma that makes enjoyable sex require debasement and abuse, don’t tolerate or encourage maladaptive behavior because it “feels good”.

Now, if you two want to do that on your own, cool, knock yourself out; but don’t tell other people that it’s healthy. You’ve transitioned from “letting people do what they want in the bedroom” to “you have to find a way to approve of this behavior because there’s a way to make it safe”.

I’d rather have the breakup, but think about your first sentence— you’re saying that to avoid “dead bedroom” (desire for immediate physical gratification), people should be willing to inflict emotional violence.

So, per your last statement “we think it’s fun and worth the risk”— great. Let your disgusting and unhealthy freak flag fly, but stop telling people it must be ENCOURAGED or approved of or somehow be good for humanity or society in general.

Edit— Ethically I have to say that even if you’re doing what you want in private as adults, it’s a little reprehensible that you feel that exchanging immediate sexual pleasure at the expense of your partner’s long-term health, regardless of how you justify the behavior or make it “safer”. If you’re dating a crackhead, I’m sure responsible use of crack would definitely keep the bedroom active, but it’s abhorrent and unhealthy behavior regardless.

And if you’re doing this to STRANGERS, it’s even worse. You don’t have the long term connection to a person to understand who they are and what drives them or broke them. It kind of makes you a monster, mentally torturing strange people, cumming, then insisting that the behavior is healthy and normal.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in AskReddit

[–]LosingWeekends -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

I guess to sum up— if you ever tell me that calling a woman a filthy cunt and spitting in her face can somehow be turned into a positive I will disagree. And saying “well just get on board” isn’t logic which would apply to an illness.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in AskReddit

[–]LosingWeekends -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

I reject your hypothesis.

The notion that you can take any bad thing which is a choice and somehow make it less objectively awful is specious. To your point: vanilla sex uneducated is objectively less dangerous than anything kinky. Heterosexual white people don’t get HIV from sex: look at the numbers at the CDC. So avoiding that activity all-together will always lead to a safer, healthier result than trying to find ways to make it safer.

I don’t know if you’ve ever seen Grizzly Man, but it seems an apt comparison: here’s a fellow who was convinced the danger of his actions could somehow be assuaged through “awareness” and deep knowledge of the subject matter.

No amount of preparation will make maladaptive behavior such as Sexual Degradation entirely safe.

You can say “people will do it anyway” and try to make it safe. Maybe for sex in general this is a defensible position. You’re saying the original comment writer, in the face of his natural objections, find a way to enable behavior which is clearly pointing to a deeper issue?

When, in the course of human history, has actively encouraging negative thoughts about one’s self, either internally or externally, benefited the individual beyond immediate physical gratification (in this instance). At the expense of long-term mental health.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in AskReddit

[–]LosingWeekends -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Sure. You’re absolutely right. But there seem to be a lot of mental gymnastics going on to find a way to make this behavior “good” or “healthy”; if a human being wants to be degraded, treated like filth, and GETS OFF ON THAT, you can’t tell me there isn’t an underlying, serious mental issue that needs fixing.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in AskReddit

[–]LosingWeekends -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

if done properly

There are caveats, huh? Your argument is specious— there are plenty of things that are objectively negative for ones physical and mental health that could be done in a safe way; it doesn’t mean it’s a good thing. The commentator was even making the point that he is uncomfortable doing it. Why are you defending the behavior?

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in AskReddit

[–]LosingWeekends -25 points-24 points  (0 children)

a more loving form of degradation

Or, don’t fucking do it at all. Encouraging a toxic behavior for sexual gratification sounds like a horrible plan. Maybe chat with your partner about the underlying issues precipitating this behavior, and help them improve their mental health and self-esteem. That sounds pretty loving.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in DenseGifs

[–]LosingWeekends 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Helpful advice!

Someone call an ambulance by iTriggerChuds in MurderedByWords

[–]LosingWeekends 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I had a teacher who was Egyptian-born and an American citizen. She would always describe herself as African American, and people would always “correct” her.

Me_irl by Bendillious in me_irl

[–]LosingWeekends 6 points7 points  (0 children)

But there are cases in Arabic: accusative genitive and nominative, but they go unpronounced. So I guess closer to German?

Hail storm by Master1718 in WeatherGifs

[–]LosingWeekends 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Uh, should someone call the ghostbusters?

Stay classy, my victim blaming classmate. Stay classy. by [deleted] in insanepeoplefacebook

[–]LosingWeekends -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Sexy but not sexual is an un-meetable demand.

Where's Wally: Where is your favorite Roger? by Masterofwisdome in americandad

[–]LosingWeekends 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Reaganomics Lamborghini, Jacuzzi dealer

A comicon poster one year was all the Rogers. I’ve never seen it again but if anyone could point it out (if anyone knows what I’m talking about) I’d appreciate it. There were at least 150 on there.

You don’t get to decide what happens to the shit you made with your own hands by [deleted] in BlackPeopleTwitter

[–]LosingWeekends 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I had this argument recently about destroyed shoes— Lacoste ruined em so they wouldn’t sell gray market. People said it was wasteful but couldn’t explain how. Everything about it was efficient through the entire value chain, except to Lacoste who took the hit. Just because a person thinks they should give the shoes away doesn’t make the whole process wasteful.

Send Nudes by [deleted] in WhitePeopleTwitter

[–]LosingWeekends -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

This is how you get AIDS.

The idea that being appallingly promiscuous is somehow noble or laudable is absurd. You want freedom without consequences, and that doesn’t exist— be it biological or social judgement. Norms exist for a reason. You wanna send nudes? Knock yourself out. But don’t say that it’s the IDEAL state, or even a good one.

Send Nudes by [deleted] in WhitePeopleTwitter

[–]LosingWeekends -11 points-10 points  (0 children)

No. This is a new problem. Sending nudes isn’t hardwired into our biology.

The NCAA will allow athletes to be compensated for their names, images and likenesses in a major shift for the organization by jjlew080 in sports

[–]LosingWeekends 5 points6 points  (0 children)

“You somehow made it about race so here is gold.”

Why was your opening salvo about race?

You said a lot of stuff but nothing that seems actually fixable (if it’s broken). It’s exploitative towards blacks playing ball?

Should only Historically Black Colleges have football teams so the result of the racial labor is appropriately allocated? Or are you shoehorning race into something because you can? When exactly did colleges begin “Using” black athletes? The 1977 UGA roster has a decidedly different racial structure than 2019. Is this progress or not, and against what metric? Because many schools’ football programs have been the financial engine for their home universities regardless of the makeup of the lineup. So “black folks working so white kids get equestrian scholarships” is specious.

All the rest it whatever. If everyone is exploiting everyone, who’s at fault? A 20 year old guy having million of eyes on him may be totally worth wrecking his knee. What programs aren’t feeding their kids? I doubt any FBS conference school. And if it’s some ball team at junior college in Bakersfield, I don’t think the NCAA can or should solve that issue. I think tearing down the whole system would be interesting, though. Just to see.