And the track record of governments with atheism as a central tenet is? Clearly you're practicing a stand up routine I'm not aware of any government with atheism as a central tenet, in fact it's impossible as the concept has no content since it is the absence of a belief, rather than the holding of one. Some have been anti-religion and some with no religious base have committed atrocities but it's either in the name of some other ideology (just not a religious ideology) or in the name of maintaining autocratic rule, not because of the lack of belief.
The human body has lovely form, lovely curves and edges that define. To me a tat should fit in with this, either accentuate these lines or be done in a minimalist way to not get in the way. With the vast majority of tats this isn't the case. The body is treated as a blank flat canvas, it isn't. They look like they're plonked on and they ruin the beauty of the human form. Also ones that are meant to have meaning are so often ill thought through, and with a little more maturity/knowledge will look to the owner as trite or inappropriate or simply wrong. So many phrases look so simplistic to my eyes, not always, but often enough and I wonder how the owner will view them in 10years. Someone showed me a tat of a little bluebird the other day. They said it was for their mum who used to love the little blue birds. Trouble is it would have been a superb blue wren she loved since they lived in Sydney but this was plainly an American blue bird - a thrush. Entirely different genus, and continent, shape and markings - the only similarity being blueish and small. Seemed daft to me to get something so wrong.Answering the question. Never really been into them to then get tired of them but don't mind them if done well.
Do you want to come home to my place. I can show you my axe collection.Excuse me, I have to go replace my incontinence pad.I probably shouldn't be dating you know. I haven't finished the antibiotics course yet, but you're just too hot to resist. Still, a condom will always contain the discharge.Me and my ex split because she thought I was too possessive. It's very sad, she died soon after, ended up having a mysterious accident.
It wouldn't matter to me at all. In fact I'd want to know all the intricate details of what happened and how you felt. And then maybe plan some more if she wanted to, but that's my kick. And now after checking out your gorgeous pics you have managed to get my blood pumping knowing it's a fantasy of yours.
Well, that does put a point on it. And I think that's where my point is too.I don't think that people who object to certain styles of clothes or behaviors in children are sexualizing the children. They are rejecting the sexualization of the child by association with sexual imagery. To use the poodle metaphor: No, I don't find the poodle sexy, but I wonder about the motives of the person who put the poodle in the bikini. I wonder if they were trying to evoke a sense of sexiness or simply absurdity. When I see children dancing with exaggerated "sexiness" I have a similar strange dissociation. The children are not "sexy", but their behaviors seem to be trying to invoke "sexiness".Maybe this doesn't make sense to other people. I'm not trying to "blame" anyone, least of all the children. Like someone else said, I think they should be able to retain their innocence for as long as possible. I understand your point, though children dancing sexually are simply copying adults - often they are taught them in dance classes which I hate. I remember my niece showing the family such dance moves she'd been taught and I found them just wrong, dissociation is not a strong enough term for it.Now you've reminded me of one of my favourite movies, showing up the whole sexualisation of children at it's most absurd, the child pageant. I'm going to have to download Little Miss Sunshine again now.https://vimeo.com/93427092
I mean very long prison sentences. Perpetrators may or may not have been victims, but there is such a thing as choice. If people are wired wrong then they should seek help. The bottom line is that we need to protect children. If that means locking people up, then that's it.D x I disagree. I see such people and think there but through the grace of genetic predisposition, environmental factors and pure happenstance go I. If I look at a child I see only a child, but I have no idea if it's possible for me to have been treated differently in the past to be screwed up enough to sexualise a child. Ignoring the whole free will debate and research that indicates that choices are made in our brains before our conscious self claims them... it's much easier to make a choice if you have a whole raft of factors that go your way. If people are wired wrong they should seek help, but if they're also wired in such a way as to be too deeply embarrassed to seek help, or too defensive to admit they need help (very likely psychological trait in an abused person) or are low in empathic intelligence such that they "rationalise" any damage they do to others as minimal, or are simply not aware enough to understand the damage they do then we need to create a surrounding environment that makes it easier for them to make the decision to seek help.The sort of environment that locks people away for ???? is not one to be conducive to that. And I'm still not sure how long you suggest? ... until they're too old to commit? and based on what act, sharing pictures of kids that others would see as innocuous, of pics that are sexual in nature, actively taking those pics, actually abusing kids. Lock them up for the first and they may well come out capable of doing the last if a rehabilitative environment isn't created.The bottom line is... well the bottom line, how much resources do we have to tackle the problem and how are they most productively spent. Are those resources better spent housing someone in a prison indefinitely, or actively spent understanding and rectifying the aberrant psychology. One targets the symptom, the other the underlying cause. Let's face it, the majority of abuse is by someone directly related to the person and often doesn't come to light until many years later and then may not be provable in a court of law, and by that time most of the molesters abusing days may well be over and simply locking them up as a strategy is even less effectual. Sure, lock them up, but most importantly so they can be forced to undergo some sort of treatment.
Most of these women are just posers. Give me a women that actually rides motorbikes any day... http://siliconvalleylodge.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/motochicgear-1024x683.jpg http://www.blog.sagmart.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/women-on-bike2.jpg
She could use a wax though What!? You want her to be hairless like a new born puppy. That's just sick.
If someone put a bikini on their poodle, would you see the poodle as a sexual object because of the bikini it was wearing? ! That really depends.... if she's got that come hither look then it'd be hard to resist... http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2011/08/03/article-0-0D4492C400000578-168_634x563.jpg
I think the At the risk of taking some flippant comments seriously Satanists wouldn't consider their deity (if considered a deity) to be evil, that's Christianity (and other religions) overlaying their mores and their view of heretics as been influenced by their concept of the devil and evil. Satanism as some sort of anti-christianity only really exists in the bedrooms of reactionary teenagers with heavy metal band posters on the wall just being all dark and broody.Personally I prefer Tom Waits take on it..."Boney's high on china white,Shorty found a punk,don't you know there ain't no devil,there's just god when he's drunk."
Attach a note to this member, which only you can see.
Please tell us why you think this profile page is inappropriate.