OT Babe Thread

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Comrade Tassadar
Markos, don't do it!
The "Babe Thread" is ungodly and full of sin and the OT is better without it.

*points at sig*

[Nubclear]

[QUITE] Tass' Mormon puritanism [/QUOTE]

It's not MORMON! I've always been this way

*points at sig*

This is hopeless.
It's not Mormon! A woman should be revered, not used as some sort of object for ones sexual desires.

[Japher]

@Skywalker...

I did hear somewhere that Tass was mormon... was kind of a shocker

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Comrade Tassadar

It's not Mormon! A woman should be revered, not used as some sort of object for ones sexual desires.

I revere women who I sexually desire.

Actually a girl in one of my tutorials was talking about power and relationships and remarked that a woman never has more power over a man than when she is performing oral sex on him. Then when some people objected she said "it's true!" which cracked up the whole class and prevented us from getting any work done.

[Theben]

Originally posted by Comrade Tassadar
It's not Mormon! A woman should be revered, not used as some sort of object for ones sexual desires.

What, put her up on a pedestal? Which is by definition out of reach... of course women have no sexual desire themselves...

[GhengisFarbâ„¢]

Perhaps we should call him Elder Tassadar?

I used to think all the CiCi's pizza places were run by Mormons because the managers always dressed like Mormon elders.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Theben


What, put her up on a pedestal? Which is by definition out of reach... of course women have no sexual desire themselves...

Men who put women up on pedestals rarely knock them off.

[Theben]

Or comrade puritan

[Nubclear]

I revere women who I sexually desire.

No you don't (I mean, I don't know if YOU yourself do or not, but I doubt it): You LUST for them.
There is a HUGE difference.

I did hear somewhere that Tass was mormon... was kind of a shocker

of course women have no sexual desire themselves...

It's not so much about having sexual desires as it is having sexual desires for someone who you have no deeper spiritual connection with. (I'm going to get so much grief for saying this) Sex is a holy act that should only happen when the two people have an intensly deep *spiritual* bond that transcends the physical, not as something that is simply used for physical gratification.
The two must be in love and certain of their feelings for each other.
By having sex you are opening your soul to the other person...If the connection is deep enough, the impure forces will not be able to affect you however if it is not, then your soul will become like a net; grabbing the negative forces and keeping them inside of you in the worst possible way.
By looking at pictures that induce arousal, you are creating a connection that is not meant to be and you open yourself, especially if you've already opened yourself to others before.
But even if this were not the case, it is still a betrayal of the one of you love: You should be having fantasies about him/her, not about the picture. Betraying the one you love in your mind is not far from betraying the one you love with your body.

Perhaps we should call him Elder Tassadar?

Trying to convince you people is like trying to convince a BRICK WALL

Or comrade puritan

[Frankychan]

I agree with Comrade Tass on this one.

...but I still participated in the other "babe threads"

Nihonjin baby!!!

[Ben Kenobi]

Sex is a holy act that should only happen when the two people have an intensly deep *spiritual* bond that transcends the physical, not as something that is simply used for physical gratification.

I agree with you completely on this point.

You should be having fantasies about him/her, not about the picture. Betraying the one you love in your mind is not far from betraying the one you love with your body.

Agreed as well.

By looking at pictures that induce arousal,

Do they necessarily induce lust? That's where I think we differ. According to your previous argument, just a picture of a smiling woman would induce lust.

[Frankychan]

...maybe you guys are taking this a little TOO seriously?

[Nubclear]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
Do they necessarily induce lust? That's where I think we differ. According to your previous argument, just a picture of a smiling woman would induce lust.

Each person is different, of course, however from what I know of Apolyton....The "Babe Thread" would not just have pictures of smiling women.
If there are simply pictures of women smiling, I see nothing wrong with it. I highly doubt that it would induce lust, even in an Apolyton auidence.
However I know the "Babe Thread" won't include just smiling women. It's going to show women in provocative poses with very little clothing on.
I mean, this "Babe Thread" would turn into a tent where one could simply walk in and form possibly hundreds of weak sexual connections. The mere idea of such a thing is revolting to me and literally makes me physically cringe.

[Theben]

Then change your tone. Women should not be revered; very few want this. Try saying women should be respected and you might get a better response.

[Nubclear]

Originally posted by Theben
very few want this.

Very few women want to be regarded with awe and devotion?