Morv

Interesting post. Made me think, and probably will for a while. You really took a hard left turn at politics and religion there. Made me chuckle and raise an eyebrow a few times. I've never taken one of those tests, but I believe I am proably close to the center on it. I guess in some ways, I'm extrovert-introvert bi-polar. It all depends on my mood. I've spent months with almost no human contact, holed up and reading books, writing, watching movies, so on and so forth. When I write, I may generate content quickly, but I can spend hours getting a single line right, trying different sentence structures, adjectives, etc. I need my alone time, and I need a lot of it. I will go for long walks alone, and have in the past spent several weeks backpacking in the mountains pretty much by myself. Frankly, one of my favorite activities (that unfortunately my job makes something I cannot do) is to smoke some weed and think about -- well, think about whatever it is that I need or want to work through at the time. Then, on the other hand, I will start up conversations with complete strangers. I occasionally can even be obnoxious and will butt into conversations that are none of my business if I feel that I have something valuable to contribute. I have a bizarre sense of humor, so many people may not find me funny, but the ones that do usually find me fairly quick. When I make a decision, it is often a snap decision and I stick with it -- not to say I refuse to change my opinions as new information enters my world. Often I don't logically work out all the details of a decision, but trust my gut feeling. I have a much confidence in my subconcious's ability to process information that I learn. I'm not a big party person, but social gatherings, though I may not want to go initially, usually end up being a good time for me, once I start to mingle with people.

It doesn't seem to me that he meant to be offensive, but rather just making conversation. I would think work could get pretty boring if the only phrases you ever used in your job were "here's your delivery" "please sign here" and "have a nice day." I don't know about anyone else, but I'd get bored with that quickly. Yep, I'd say that is rude. I remember being moderatly disturbed by boys back in grade school, middle school, and high school that decided to wear their hair long but didn't have enough masculine maturity yet to allow people to determine that they were male, though. I never said anything, as I knew that would be rude, but it always kinda bothered me. I know that it didn't affect me, but I guess you think about people differently based on their gender, and not knowing caused a bit of a distress as I had trouble figuring out how to think about said individual. I found that nine of ten times simply asking someone what their name is can clear up the confusion and isn't as rude. Then there are names like Kelly, Dani/Danny, so on and so forth, that are somewhat androgynous. Anyway, I'm rambling. If everyone just went around without pants on, then there would be no more questions. Or chairs that I'd want to sit on in restraunts. Now, I myself did eventually grow my hair out, but I decided to wait to do that until I could grow side burns so that there would be no question.

I dunno... i'm sure Chuch Norris would have something to say about that.

I say it's a demon done got under your skin, and this evil spirit caused your body to putrify. There must have been holy water in them there medicine pieces your doctor done given you. Have you tried a good bleeding?

Book: Any manual on tropical climate survival tactics. (You can also use the paper to start a fire.) CD: Doesn't matter. We're on a tropical island. Preferably a comercial release with the standard silver bottom. (Works great a a signaling mirror -- it has a hole in the center to to use to line it up, even.) Luxury item: Machete. (I don't think I'd want to stay on a desert island without food, shelter, and a fire. A machete is the ultimate tool in that type of a setting. In the north woods, by contrast, you greatly increase your chances of surviva by having an axe.) Yes, this island is populated, and so it will remain until people start dying from starvation -- and if I'm stuck on a desert island, damnit, I plan on living there, not dying there. Figure about three days of crowded, then about a week of crowded and full of moaning and complaining. If nobody starts canibalizing anyone else, we'll probably be down to a small handful of people after 10 days or so, depending on who all had the wits to feed their selves, and some few that manage to cling to life on for an especially long time. And why is that? Because most people are busy reading Russian literature or Douglass Adams instead of taking care of their basic survival needs. Because their luxury item doesn't help them survive. Now, if your girlfriend is an expert in wilderness survival, I would say that your girlfriend is a luxury item. In the spirit of the question though: Book: The Silmarillion, JRR Tolkien. CD: Probably Dark Side of the Moon, Pink Floyd... but it could also been Wish You Were Here or perhaps one of The Moody Blues' albums. It would be a gametime decision. I'm just not certain. Luxury item: A hammock. A hammock big enough for two. I'm thinking that either I got plenty of room to stretch out, or I got one attractive package to offer a one lucky woman who may be among the various other people stranded here. Or it is a good place to pile coconuts.

I believe the proper ratio is five hours of video games to one to three hours of conversation, preferably actually only over 30 minutes if something of note needs to be discussed, or a food order is being placed. "I had a bad day and need to talk about it" is valid for this only so long as during a given consecutive period of twenty one days, no more than ten were a "bad day", except in the case of major illness, death in the family, or other crisis resulting in conditions that constitute a valid crisis. But, my understanding is a rather simple one. And, really, that five hours can be just about any activity, not just video games, in so long as the following conditions are met: (((The activity is something you find interesting.) OR (The activity makes you a better person.) OR(The activity will make you famous, in a positive manner.)) AND (The activity costs approximately the same as or less than a comparable similar activity.)) OR(The activity culminates in sexual activity.) OR (((The activity is sexual activity.) OR (The activity includes explosions.)) AND (The activity is not illegal.)))

That is probably because cranberry juice is a diarhettic. (Did I spell that right?) It causes water to come out of your blood stream at a faster rate than usual, which I believe would result in a more dilute urine than normal.

For no particular reason, here is an analogy describing, among other things, a more dictionary definition of the word furry: "Furry" is to "Fur" what "Hairy" is to "Hair." (Someone was talking about the GREs the other day.)

Qs: Is a crossdressing DL different from a sissy? Does sissy imply AB? And why did I bring helium instead of air?

I can think of plenty of times that having an erection is a bad thing. Any time you are giving a presentation and standing in front of a group of people, for example. Any time you're around someone who you are not intimate with. Funerals are a bad time to have an erection. So are weddings. Erections also distract one if one is playing chess. So, Diapereddragon, you make such a big thing about being intersex all the time. And you also make gratuitous of that laughing emoticon. Anyway, I see you're commenting on a thread about erections. Now, I've ignored most of your rants about being intersexed, because frankly, every time I've seen one it is also you going off on TS/TG people, so I just place a mental stamp on it that reads "BITCHING/PERSONAL ISSUES" and I move on. So here's an opportunity to tell us something about yourself (not about the condition in general, or about what conditions other people have). About you. What is your experience with erections? Does this have anything to do with your intersex condition? Has your experience led you to any insightful ways to avoid having a nighttime erection? (After all, that is what this thread is about, right?)

I'm going to add my weight to an earlier statement. Nighttime erections and nocturnal emissions are less likely to occur if sexual release (orgasm, ejaculation) has been achieved in close proximity to when you fall asleep. Try getting off once, twice, or as many times as it takes to make you not arrousable before you go to sleep. If your body does not achieve that type of release while you are awake, it will try to achieve it while you are asleep.

Thank you. I'll just go sit out on my patio and have a whiskey while I watch the snow and wait to hear the good news. (I'm a very easy to tolerate individual, as long as you know when and how to tell me to shut up.) I don't think I'll ever look at an XBOX 360 the same way again.

I just scored a dozen tickets to see Roger Waters in concert yesterday. I am SO hyped. The show isn't for five months, but, I'm ready. I've seen many of the "big" classic rock groups, or at least members, if the whole bands weren't still together -- Paul McCartney (Beatles), Eagles, Bob Dylan, Bob Seger, Queen(+Paul Rogers), John Entwhistle (The Who). I've been waiting for the opportunity to see Floyd, or at least part of Floyd for some time now. Last summer I wasn't able to get tickets/transportation to see Dave Gilmour in concert... (wanted to, bad), but here I am. Roger Waters -- July 2, Marcus Amphitheaters, Milwaukee, WI. Oh, yeah!

Ok, time for Mister Morv to stick his nose in. Ah, the I hate intersex people thing again... or I hate TG people again... or whatever. Can we start a club for people that hate people who have 20 inch CRT monitors that aren't flat screen? I mean, seriously, there is no reason why a 20 inch monitor should be curved in the front, it is just not natural. It's almost like they have to want to be abnormal. It's not like a defective product that goes through surgery against its will and has it's power button moved from the side to the top. And 20 inches? What gives? 19 or 21 here people. I wish all 20 inch CRT non-flatscreen monitors would quit claiming to be like other CRT monitors, they have no right. And, yes, when SoCalGav mentioned it, yes, she does remind me of cynda. I'm not saying it is, but the feel is the same, much like how two slimy salamanders are similar, but not the same salamander... unless you duct tape them together. Now, as to the original topic. Diaper plus vibrator. Sounds interesting. Tuxedo Oryx, let me start by saying I understand you aren't looking for a man. Ok, good, got that out. I wouldn't be looking for a woman who wasn't looking for a man, for as being a man, that would suggest that I would be looking for someone who wasn't looking for me, and someone who wasn't looking for me would not be interested in me, and so I would have to be emotionally masochistic or something to do that. I was wondering if you could point me to someone who is pretty much just like you, except looking for a man. Enjoys anal play, diapers, lab coats, all that. Sounds like someone I could get along with. *cough* Now, where were we. Well, never played with a vibrator before, actually. Bought one for a girlfriend once. Never played with it on myself, though.

Just make sure that she knows the second part of that phrase. "I can't change that for the most part and I can't change the fact that I love her and would not be happy without her." Just make sure she knows about the second part of that. I can't say I know the situation, but, make sure that she doesn't think that she is powerless here. Make sure she knows that "would not be happy without her." Don't risk making her miserable while you're busy being happy because you can do what you want to do. Pay attention to her. I don't know how often you wear around her, but make sure that you don't take "whenever" to mean "all the time." You described her giving in after an argument. I get the odd feeling that this argument has come up before. Don't take her giving in, and saying something that sounded kinda hot-headed and annoyed, and miscontrue it to mean that she is no longer bothered by it when you do, or accept and appreciate it. She gave in to an argument that you probably have had more times than she cares to think about. It sounds to me like she just got sick of arguing. Once again, cool situation, but just don't walk all over her feelings. No, wearing diapers is not wrong -- cool, it is. I mean, it doesn't hurt anyone, it causes most people that are doing it by choice some sort of pleasure. But, some people are scared, for whatever reason they either know or cannot identify. Giving in and not dealing with whatever bothers someone is likely to cause some level of resentment. Preaching doom, again as all too often, and in my name, Morv

I've met more people through the boards here than on the personals. I've messaged people through those boards. I've been messaged through them. Never went anywhere, really.

Some people just deserve third degree burns.

Necros, you said, "But you can agree that all that philosophy would have been greatly improved and advancements would have been tenfold if religion didn't mix up in this?" No, I don't agree. We don't know what would have happened if religion hadn't existed. I'm not playing hypotheticals here. I would say that if you replace the word "would" in your statement with "could" (both instances), then I would agree with the statement. That could have happened, had things developed differently, but so could a million other possibilitites. Religion and philosophy are integrally intertwined. Whatever you think may have been if things were different doesn't change the way things were and the way things are. Yes, religion has hampered things. However, it also has given rise to much. Whether or not philosophy would or could have developed and still resulted in a civilization we would recognize is an interesting question. But in arguments about religion, at least, it is much easier to stick to the factual when possible, because so much in the realm of religion is intangible and impossible to prove. Also, I really can think of a lot worse ways that people waste their time to complain about other than the time they invest in religion. I mean seriously, of all the things to think that people should stop doing and find something better to do with their time... why not complain about people that watch daytime TV, drink, do drugs, sit around doing nothing, or people that steal from others, or pee in a disposable diaper, or something else. I mean, the case could be made that many, many other things are a worse waste of time than religion. Organizations with religous foundation that do good? Red Cross/Red Crescent, The Salvation Army, Saint Vincent DePaul, Habitat for Humanity, how many soup kitchens and shelter? Yes, it would be nice if people just did these things, but that isn't the reality. The reality is it takes religion to convince many people to do good stuff like that. Yes, religion How many things can you think of that are worse to spend your time doing than religion? I think the list is long.

As I said in my last post, St. Thomas Aquinas. He is a cornerstone of legal philosophy whose philosophy grew out of Catholic doctrine. He is still very much studied in terms of legal philosophy today. Religion provided for humans the earliest concepts of right and wrong.

Ah, Chibi, I think you overestimate humanity. I don't think every single person needs religion, specificly Christianity, to be a great person. Look at Ghandi. But, I think there are many, many people that do. I have a high opinion of the nature of humanity, but I have a low estimation of most humans. The average person in this world really isn't all that intelligent, driven, or self-guided. There, essentially, are two real sources, speaking historically and currently, of ways to decide on morality. One is philosophy, and it should be noted that much early philosophy was based on religious thinking, but it did begin to apply logic. Religion itself the other. At one point in time, single rulers our councils of elders would determine right and wrong among those they led. Later, as philosophy developed, the concepts of codified laws, trials, juries of peers, and elected representation occured. Philosophy, and especially legal philosophy, began to shape how we viewed rights, and how we determined the structure of governments that rule us. And legal philosophy is something that grew from religion, when people began to ask themselves about determining right and wrong, virtuous and not virtuous. St. Thomas Aquianas comes to mind in the history of legal philosophy. (And in no way would I suggest that Christianity is the only religion to provide major contributions to society. Our current governments, their flaws at what they are, aren't really that bad. We enjoy a large number of freedoms and live in a fairly advanced civilization. Every single executive leader of my particular country has been a religious person, actually, specificly, Christian, even if some of them were a little more wishy/washy in their devotion than others. The point is, even if you see flaws in the world you're living in, having a government, a rule of law, is something that developed out of religion, to a large degree. I would say that is pretty damned amazing progress. In the scheme of humanity, the concept of athiesm is rather young. Historically it hasn't influenced a whole lot until fairly recently. I don't think there were many athiests running around pre BC for sure, and probably not really that many up until well after, what, somewhere aroudn 1400-1700 or so?

Necros, Chibi... I am going to make an observation here. You two both are being fairly derisve, and there's no call for that. Though you are getting your dose of the pity, I'm sure you can shake it off. Someone feeling sorry for you isn't the same as being an ass and calling names. (Invisible Friends? Come on. You're just being antagonistic and not making any point by doing that.) A reason for Christianity? How about morality. Though several of the Christians have professed their sorrow for you, I suggest that their sorrow is more misplaced than their time spent studying their religion. At worst, prayer provides a time for solemn contemplation, meditation on one's world. If spending time relfecting, whether it is in the paradigm of spending time within yourself, or in terms of a two way communication, is something you consider a bad thing, I'd rethink your position. And the lessons learned by most Christians make many pretty nice people. There are many lessons people do not learn from their religions, but that does not make the religion bad. That is a reflection on the person and their church and their religious leader. The text book is the same across the board, and it produces some spectacular results. Martin Luther King Jr., for example. Mother Teresa, for another. Being a Christian is about more than being born again and all the crap about accepting Jesus as a savior--I'm not trying to say that this is an unimportant thing for Christians, however, I believe that learning the lessons that Christianity teaches is more important. And how about a community that can provide an emotional, intellectual, and sometimes even economic support system. The church is a communal thing, a gathering. Christianity is not about the hermit living in the cave, it is about people. During times of crisis, a church congregation should be able to provide caring support -- after all, these are people who share moral views on caring and giving aid. Chibi suggested that we should Love yourself, love your friends, love all of humanity and drop all this religion nonsense", however, "Love yourself, love your friends, love all of humanity" happeans to be the end result fo the "religion nonsense", if it is actually being followed. Chibi also said, "Throughout history, religion has stood as an antithesis to any form of progress. It's hindered the development of mankind on almost all levels." I would challenge this statement. Scientific prograss has generally been slowed by religions in general, that I will concede. However, religion has been responsible for as much social progress as it has been hindrances. Once again, Martin Luther King Jr. How about Archbishop Desmond Tutu? Or Nelson Mandella? Civil Rights has been strongly invluenced by Christianity. Here and South Africa are the two biggest examples I can think of at the moment. I would think that this here is enough to suggest that "the development of mankind on almost all levels" has not been hindered, but at certain times in history it has produced a resistence to changes in our world view as a society. As to athiesm, as I have studied science from various angles, I still keep coming to some point where there simply is a force simply beyond humanity. This all came from somewhere. And even if you pick up the freshest theoretical phsyics and look at some of the newest theories about, say, the beginning of the universe through the views of string theory and dimensional membrane intersection causing universe creation and the start of space and time, we still come to something that itself was created by something. The answer "well, it stimply started existing" just isn't good enough for me. And there is a point where science can explain no more. Now, as an athiest, can you not see how someone would come to believe in a greater power, which they call god, even if you yourself do not? If you can accept that someone might reasonably come to this conclusion; and if someone says, "there must be something more powerful than me;" and if they find this ideation filled by, along with finding their personal beliefs in morality met by, a particular religion that happens to follow the teachings of a dude who we all can agree actually did exist about two thousand years ago; well then, that doesn't leave much to condemn, because that right there is a huge chunk of the nature of Christianity Just some of their rituals and a few dozen pesky additional beliefs about this dude actually believing that he was the son of god and that he did miracles, the necessity of some dance with your head in the water, and some other things. It seems to be that a few dozen beliefs like that aren't enough to condemn a religion that provides so much more for those who are in it. Sure, it may not be how you would choose to spend your time, but as long as nobody is forcing it on you, why condemn it? I mean, yes, I have no qualms with you being pissed at the Jehovas witnesses that stop by and want to chat with you while you're just trying to spend a morning drinking by yourself watching X-Men (that's what I was doing the last time they stopped by). I mean, hell, I find those people annoying. I also find people annoying that think that their religion is so great that they should tell everyone one about it constantly--if your damned religion is so great, let your actions show it, and let that be how you witness to people, not by telling people that they are wrong and annoying them endlessly. Hey, wait. I get annoyed by people that are so damned certain they are right that they feel the need to tell me how I should be living my life and choosing to worship. Kind of like the way you, Chibi and Necros, feel the need to tell people how what they are doing is wrong and how they shuold change their lives. Funny, the same thing that annoys me about many preachy Evangelical Christians is the same thing that annoyed me about posts from athiests (which inspired this rant). Listen, I'm interested in what other people believe, not what they believe about what I believe -- that's a whole different conversation. If you don't believe the same things, that's fine with me, but spend your time explaining why you believe what you do so that I may come to understand you better. If all I know about your beliefs is that they cause you to mock mine, all I have learned is that your beliefs can result in making unkind people. This has been another Massive Post from the keyboard of Morv.

Apparently paying to have the big outfield sign at a major league baseball game profess to your wife, "Michelle, I love diapers and you. -- Jared" is not the way to go. Who'd a guessed? Actually, the times I've discussed it with SOs I used... words. Although, if you have a nonverbal SO, I suppose pictograms might work.

I say the answer depends on several things. Stop once you find something that qualifies for you: If you believe in Jesus and God as damning anyone who has any sort of earthly pleasure (a view such as the early American Puritan settlers had), then: No. If you accept the concept that God is responsible for global warming and global warming is actually an invisible volcano sent to destroy all things that burn (including diapers), just very, very slowly, because God must hate all things that burn --why else would he create an invisible volcano?-- then: No. (This is a theory I created myself. I am very proud of it, because I know it contains inherent truth.) If you have read the Bible and found a passage about diapers being wrong (the closest I can find is something in the Old Testament about women being unclean and having to remain seperate from the community during certain times of the month, and that's really a far cry from a passage refering to daipers...), then: No. If you have read the Bible, and perhaps studied the Torah (yes, I realize that this is the first five books of the Bible) and the Quaran, and found that Jesus, the Old Testament Prophets, and Muhammed all preached to improve people's lives, keep people from the harms of others, free from falling victim to their own vices, and supported doctrines that professed love, peace, and the quality of believing and living moral virtues, then: Yes. (This should also answer the questions: "Can you be a Muslim and like diapers?" and "Can you be a Jew and like diapers?" As of yet, I do not have an answer to: "Can I be a Buddhist and like diapers?" or "Can I be a Hindu and like diapers?" or the plethora of other potential religion based questions that could arise. I however expect that the Buddhist question would probably be something complex relating to whether you are able to give diapers up as a worldly possession or not. The Hindu question, sorry to be politically incorrect, but I feel might simply result in a set of jokes based around the conceptual question of "How many hands does it take to change a diaper?")

Inflate? INFLATE? My penis really is naturally 22.7 inches long, flacid. Inflate is for... plastic pretend girlfriends? Nobody lies on the internet, the internet just causes misconceptions... like alcohol.... "Officer, how was I to know she was sixteen? She was sitting next to me for three hours AT THE BAR!" Ok, sorry for being so serious.

"The Inquisition... (What a show!) The Inquisition... (Here we go!) We know you