On 2021-02-24 16:12:55 Boobs said:
"lol, the irony of a guy who calls himself gatpomper condemning this guy is funny...fucking someone in the ass is not that far off, it's just that the latter is more prevalent and normalised."

I agree with above statement and have already stated I am not supporting either. What is of interest is that Sylvia, in another recent post, states that she enjoyed some 'greek' action. Are double standards practiced here? Maybe she and gatpomer are good buddies? Just asking for a friend.

Perhaps the good tannie could explain her moral outrage at this deviant behavior while justifying her own similarly deviant behaviour.

On 2021-02-24 15:53:38 Cassanata said:
It's not about what it has to do with society, the question is, is it pathological behaviour or not? If it is, then it should be treated as such and not endorsed and normalised.

By who's definition are people judging something to be not normal? The law of a country they live in? The religion they where brought up with? The religion they adopted? The opinion of a society? The hundreds of books written about behaviour? The opinion of a neighbour friend family member or anty down the road? Your own?

Pathological- extreme in a way that is not normal or that shows an illness or mental problem.

If my love for coffee is judged not normal by anti may down the road does that make me pathological? Your love for sex in positions other than missionary or other than the exclusive practice of sex to procreate or sex outside marraige? If the church tells you it's not normal does that make it pathological?

I think that aslong as someone's coffee, sex, kink, ect habits ain't aimed at doing others harm or aimed to conforming everyone to think , behave and live as they do aslong as they are not a threat to me, mentally and physically. Who am I to judge them. How am I to condemn them. Who am I? It does not mean I have to endorse it. It only means I must stay in my lane and let others be.

On 2021-02-24 16:35:06 Miss Red (aka Louise) said:
On 2021-02-24 15:53:38 Cassanata said: It's not about what it has to do with society, the question is, is it pathological behaviour or not? If it is, then it should be treated as such and not endorsed and normalised.

By who's definition are people judging something to be not normal? The law of a country they live in? The religion they where brought up with? The religion they adopted? The opinion of a society? The hundreds of books written about behaviour? The opinion of a neighbour friend family member or anty down the road? Your own?

Pathological- extreme in a way that is not normal or that shows an illness or mental problem.

If my love for coffee is judged not normal by anti may down the road does that make me pathological? Your love for sex in positions other than missionary or other than the exclusive practice of sex to procreate or sex outside marraige? If the church tells you it's not normal does that make it pathological?

I think that aslong as someone's coffee, sex, kink, ect habits ain't aimed at doing others harm or aimed to conforming everyone to think , behave and live as they do aslong as they are not a threat to me, mentally and physically. Who am I to judge them. How am I to condemn them. Who am I? It does not mean I have to endorse it. It only means I must stay in my lane and let others be.

I'm not sure if you actually understood my post. Is it pathological at an individual level? Nothing to do with me, you or society. Are you also hinting that there is no such thing as pathological behaviour?

Let me try to make it relatable, suppose you have a child who for some reason just loves to take his faeces and rub it all over himself. He is never happier than when he is rubbing faeces on himself. Suppose also that as he is getting older, he continues this behaviour. Would you be concerned and get him treatment and possibly find the underlying cause of his behaviour, or do you leave him be and tell yourself, if it makes him happy then so be it?

On 2021-02-24 15:31:34 Cassanata said:
On 2021-02-24 15:22:32 JP82 said: On 2021-02-24 15:06:57 Cassanata said: .


All that matters is consent? Gtfo

It is ALL about consent. Entire legal systems are built around "volenti non fit injuria" ("to a willing person, injury is not done"), and ethics (i.e. the philosophy of ethics) around "the harm principle". That is ethical systems that are founded on more than a Christian-nationalist upbringing where a verkrampte god hands down commandments like "thou shalt not poop on each other"

(Mill for example distinguishes between harm and mere offense. Not every unwelcome consequence for others counts as a harm. Offenses tend to be comparatively minor and ephemeral. To constitute a harm, an action must be injurious or set back important interests of people, interests in which they have rights. @Sylvia has no rights in this matter, so her feeling ill at the thought of this is not a harm and therefore irrelevant)

O my... I think the problem with everyone is over thinking everything... we not talking about children here.. these are grown ass people that can determine for themselves whether they need "help" or not. Over thinking live can also be deemed pathological;)

This debate can go on for days and days. And I have some "pathological" behaviours of my own to attend to I need coffee;)

This kind of fetish is called Coprophillia.

On 2021-02-24 17:10:56 Miss Red (aka Louise) said:
O my... I think the problem with everyone is over thinking everything... we not talking about children here.. these are grown ass people that can determine for themselves whether they need "help" or not. Over thinking live can also be deemed pathological;)

This debate can go on for days and days. And I have some "pathological" behaviours of my own to attend to I need coffee;)

Seems like everything I said went over your head. Maybe you were meant to enjoy the simpler pleasures of life such as your coffee :)

On 2021-02-24 17:05:05 JP82 said:
On 2021-02-24 15:31:34 Cassanata said: On 2021-02-24 15:22:32 JP82 said: On 2021-02-24 15:06:57 Cassanata said: .


All that matters is consent? Gtfo

It is ALL about consent. Entire legal systems are built around "volenti non fit injuria" ("to a willing person, injury is not done"), and ethics (i.e. the philosophy of ethics) around "the harm principle". That is ethical systems that are founded on more than a Christian-nationalist upbringing where a verkrampte god hands down commandments like "thou shalt not poop on each other"

(Mill for example distinguishes between harm and mere offense. Not every unwelcome consequence for others counts as a harm. Offenses tend to be comparatively minor and ephemeral. To constitute a harm, an action must be injurious or set back important interests of people, interests in which they have rights. @Sylvia has no rights in this matter, so her feeling ill at the thought of this is not a harm and therefore irrelevant)

I dont agree entirely. We could continue this conversation over pm or on another platform.i dont want to spam this thread.

On 2021-02-22 13:01:29 SpitInMyMouth said:
Hey Guys,

So I know this has been posted more than once, and it always gets met with hostility. But I wanted to find out, are there any girls that offer scat or toilet domination session? Perhaps domination and full house afterwards etc?

Really I just want a hot girl to shit and on my chest and then maybe fuck afterwards.

If you don't understand the fetish or you're disgusted by it, please just refrain from commenting.

Please hit me up if you're into it!

I've been away from this site for a few months, and I come back to this barrage of filth...????

This is the same sick FVCK guy who posted earlier about Morbid, extremely filthy fetishes...

ESA, Please sanitize this site and get rid of this brown shower...
Sies...!!!

cass. I said (read bloody properly) i love Greeks not greek. bit different as to what your referring to here. I am complete virgin in that sector. thank you. S