Babylon is an attention whore ITT, even for negative attention.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Sacher Masoch is even more dull.


Even more so, I suppose, if you get turned on by snuffslashfic.

In truth, The Story of O kicks both of them in the balls.

Yeah, I enjoyed The Story of O a lot as a teenager,  I'd say it was a transformative text for me that allowed me to realize that I wasn't the only person with the sort of desires I had (prior to discovering the internet and finding that not only was I not alone there are a lot of people who do)

For anyone who doesn't see O as snuff, remember how it ends.

So by your definition, ANY literature that includes a death is "snuff"?   Wow. That's beyond retardation. That's flat out pathetically delusional.

Do you wank to Macbeth?  Give me a fucking break.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

what's wrong with stories about people getting murdered in a sexual way?  I mean,yeah, maybe not your thing, but it's not hurting anybody except imaginary people.  I really can't see a problem with doing whatever you like to imaginary people.

It's not technically "wrong" in the same way that pornographic literature with young children as the objects is not technically "wrong".

This.  But its still fucking gross.

Yep. It's not hurting anyone, but the people who enjoy it make my skin crawl and I don't want them near me.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

I'm going to go ahead and be the lone dissenter to the idea that you can't choose what turns you on. There are choices everybody gets to make about what threads of arousal to pursue, and everyone has, at various times, the unbidden twinges of arousal at an idea or scenario that is as repulsive as it is arousing. Most people go "Ew, that's horrible, I'm not going to think about that" and the arousal cycle is broken, but a few people go "Heh yeah that turns me on, I'm going to think about it while I masturbate" and the arousal cycle gets reinforced. That's a choice.

Some people are really into the idea of being "edgy" or "alternative" and make choices to indulge what they see as a sexual dark side, not realizing they're locking their sexual preference in for something that is not so much dark as seedy and repulsive. Even so, it's hard to accept the idea that a mind that would turn toward sexual gratification in other people's suffering and death, even imagined, is a mind that started out anything but pathological to begin with.

I agree to an extent.

Some basic inclinations seem hardwired or as close to as to be indistinguishable, but a lot of the stuff from a level or two below that is going to be based, in part, on feedback loops and the choice to induldge in certain scenarios and fetishes.  It's classic operant conditioning at work.

True enough. Some fundamentals, like homosexuality, seem to be biologically hardwired. However, I don't think anyone is biologically hardwired to want to fuck dead people, children, dogs, or their mom.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Babylon, I gotta say, this conversation has taken you from a pretty much OK guy in my eyes to

1. An unprincipled hypocrite (an anarchist on welfare? But it's OK for you because you have a family to support? At what point do you grow up and abandon anarchism because the principles not only don't work for special little magical unicorns like YOU, they don't work for anyone?)

2. Vaguely delusional (I was starting to suspect this was the case when you first started talking about your internet girlfriend, your wife's screenplay making you rich, and now this "novel" that you wrote, which is 99.9% probably terrible even aside from the subject matter)

3. Super creepy and actively pursuing your interest in proclivities that put you just barely above pedophiles in the "should be allowed to live" category.

[Faust]

Quote this post in a couple of years time when babylon is in the papers for murder.

Why is it that all the really creepy guys with the scummy sexual preferences are deadbeats/wasters?

Why cant they be charming and successfull like ted bundy?

[BabylonHoruv]

Sacher Masoch is even more dull.


Even more so, I suppose, if you get turned on by snuffslashfic.

In truth, The Story of O kicks both of them in the balls.

Yeah, I enjoyed The Story of O a lot as a teenager,  I'd say it was a transformative text for me that allowed me to realize that I wasn't the only person with the sort of desires I had (prior to discovering the internet and finding that not only was I not alone there are a lot of people who do)

For anyone who doesn't see O as snuff, remember how it ends.

So by your definition, ANY literature that includes a death is "snuff"?   Wow. That's beyond retardation. That's flat out pathetically delusional.

Do you wank to Macbeth?  Give me a fucking break.

Only if the death is sexualized.  O is a story of a woman's complete destruction, sexuality is a really major component of that.

[BabylonHoruv]

Babylon, I gotta say, this conversation has taken you from a pretty much OK guy in my eyes to

1. An unprincipled hypocrite (an anarchist on welfare? But it's OK for you because you have a family to support? At what point do you grow up and abandon anarchism because the principles not only don't work for special little magical unicorns like YOU, they don't work for anyone?)

2. Vaguely delusional (I was starting to suspect this was the case when you first started talking about your internet girlfriend, your wife's screenplay making you rich, and now this "novel" that you wrote, which is 99.9% probably terrible even aside from the subject matter)

3. Super creepy and actively pursuing your interest in proclivities that put you just barely above pedophiles in the "should be allowed to live" category.

1.  Anarchist, not Libertarian.  I don't have any problem with anyone else being on welfare either (well, I mean I do becuase it sucks for them, but I don't think they should be kicked off) 

2. The novel may or may not be terrible, it's a nanowrimo book, so I'll admit probably not the best, still I do kinda wish you'd look before judging, I have had several people say nice things about it,although quite possibly they were just being nice.  I'm not delusional about my wife's screenplay, althgouh admittedly apparently a bit overly optimistic.

3. No arguement there, I'm not going to try to defend my interest in snuff as healthy. 

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

I said anarchist. How, exactly, does centralized welfare work out in anarchist philosophy?

[BabylonHoruv]

I said anarchist. How, exactly, does centralized welfare work out in anarchist philosophy?

once an Anarchist society is in place it's replaced by localized community support.  An Anarchist society isn't in place so I'm not going to act like it is. work toward it sure, but refusing to utilize government services that I would prefer were being taken care of in other ways doesn't help to build anything. 

[Faust]

I said anarchist. How, exactly, does centralized welfare work out in anarchist philosophy?

once an Anarchist society is in place it's replaced by localized community support.  An Anarchist society isn't in place so I'm not going to act like it is. work toward it sure, but refusing to utilize government services that I would prefer were being taken care of in other ways doesn't help to build anything. 

So what you want is basically what we have now, with a few token issues taken off the hands of the government. Fantastic. Real ideological marvel right there.

[the last yatto]

So a stand in for the free store

[BabylonHoruv]

I said anarchist. How, exactly, does centralized welfare work out in anarchist philosophy?

once an Anarchist society is in place it's replaced by localized community support.  An Anarchist society isn't in place so I'm not going to act like it is. work toward it sure, but refusing to utilize government services that I would prefer were being taken care of in other ways doesn't help to build anything. 

So what you want is basically what we have now, with a few token issues taken off the hands of the government. Fantastic. Real ideological marvel right there.

Really not at all no.  I want local control of everything, no larger government at all, and a society organized along the lines of much of Spain during the civil war.  I don't see avoiding using government services currently as a path toward that. Building alternative networks yes, absolutely.  Working to make the government less needed in our daily lives absolutely.  Organizing workers and even lumpenproles like me and the other welfare bums, yep.  Am I doing a good job of it all?  No, not really, I am not doing a really good job of much except child rearing at the moment, but using government services doesn't make me less of an anarchist.  

[East Coast Hustle]

He just wants to call himself an anarchist so that smelly trustafarian chicks will be more likely to let him touch their unwashed vaginas.

[Phox]

Are you all being deliberately obtuse, or do you just want to harp on him for anything at this point?

[East Coast Hustle]

No we're not, but yes we do.

FACT: my previously-stated reason is the ONLY reason anyone actually publicly identifies themselves as any sort of anarchist.