UK no likey the porn

[Adieu]

Root5 if you can't understand the term objectification then there's no real hope for you. You're not objectifying a shopkeeper, because you're not purchasing him. you're using the object you purchase for a specific task. the women in porn, you use them to achieve an orgasm and then you dispose of them.

 

Wait wait, no hear me out. This is a serious point that I honestly believe in. I really think the word "objectification" is gibberish.

 

You said the important distinction is that you're not purchasing the shopkeep, you're purchasing the object. But in are still using the shopkeep. He gathers the stuff and puts it on the shelves for you. The pilot takes you to your destination.

 

With porn, well I'm not purchasing anything, so I don't see why purchasing was the distinction. You could say the porn makers are purchasing the actors, but they aren't. They are purchasing a service that the actors provide. How is that any worse than paying some people to mow your lawn?

 

The women in porn, I use them to achieve orgasm, that is true. But I use lots of people for lots of things. Right now I'm using you to have a discussion. I use my brother because he helps out with the dishes. And what do you mean by "dispose of them". I don't put them in trash cans. Would it be better if I called them up and expressed my appreciation? We all use each other all the time. The problem is when we treat each other in hurtful ways. If I say nasty things to someone, or I physically assault them, or scam them out of money. That is bad. But using someone in a way that doesn't do that, like watching a video someone has made available to me, or paying someone to mow my lawn, is totally acceptable. You can see it as how societies form. We help each other.

 

So I still do not understand the distinction between using a shopkeep, or paying a guy to mow your lawn, and watching porn.

 

And I realize this is a point that people don't make a lot. People seem to intuitively understand the word "objectification". But I'm not being cheeky here. I think it deserves some serious though.

 

 

 

Yes you are using me to carry out a conversation. But I am likewise using you. I have agency, autonomy, am not treated as if I am owned by you. I am not easily interchanged (fungible).

You are using the shopkeeper's services, not the shopkeeper himself. the object you purchase is the fungible commodity.

In porn, it is the women who is the fungible commodity. the men in the video use her - not her services.

yes the reverse can obviously happen, with men becoming objectified, and some feminist writers do argue against that.

 

boringman - you cant just say "she is full of shit" you have to actually you know, provide some studies to show why porn is good.

 

 

Ok, this is seriously my last post on this topic because I have said numerous things you have nothing to say about and they all make your point more and more wrong. Secondly, you attacking me by calling me boringman because I won't read you articles that I have probably already read or been exposed to is a sign of weakness and an inability to manifest a proper argument. Thirdly, you are still missing the point. In the adult film industry these girls are getting paid to have sex with men on camera. She is not being owned by anyone. That is the sex slave trade and that is bad. Yes, porn gets produced in the sex slave trade, but that is not what we are talking about. That is a different topic all together. This woman is getting paid large sums of money to do what she decides to do. She is way more important than those men. She has an agent, autonomy, and a decision on what she does, when she does it, and how much she gets paid for it.

 

Porn is good because it provides a relief for people. Women watch porn just as men do. Yes, more men watch porn. What a surprise. Women are also able to get sex much easier than men. Women are probably much less likely to admit it as well in your studies. It is socially unacceptable for women to enjoy pornography, but they do. My ex used to watch porn when she was masturbating. It has been shown that porn reduces the amount of instances of rape in the areas that it is widely available. Most importantly porn doesn't hurt people. People hurt people. Porn isn't warping everyone's minds. It is all fucking nonsense. I don't need to show you studies. ALL statistics should be taken lightly as they are only ever gathered for a specific purpose.

 

Men if not entirely stupid are able to understand the difference between a porn star and a girl.

 

Now if you excuse me I'm going to go watch some porn.

[delet...]

indeed .

[delet...]

Plus objectifying shouldn't be a dirty word. It's how our brains are wired. If the person is violent or doesn't respond to another's needs, well that speaks to something else about his character.

[Glunk]

but being objectified feels like shit and contributes to mental disorders

[lumpenprol]

being sexually objectified feels fucking awesome. For a while.

[delet...]

but being objectified feels like shit and contributes to mental disorders

 

Plus objectifying shouldn't be a dirty word. It's how our brains are wired. If the person is violent or doesn't respond to another's needs, well that speaks to something else about his character.

[Blir]

being sexually objectified feels fucking awesome. For a while.

 

I wish somebody would sexually objectify me.

[Guest 277: 930-933]

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=the-sunny-side-of-smut

[Guest Xenblake]

Porn no likey chubby pasty track suit wearing British chicks

[chenGOD]

Root5 if you can't understand the term objectification then there's no real hope for you. You're not objectifying a shopkeeper, because you're not purchasing him. you're using the object you purchase for a specific task. the women in porn, you use them to achieve an orgasm and then you dispose of them.

 

Wait wait, no hear me out. This is a serious point that I honestly believe in. I really think the word "objectification" is gibberish.

 

You said the important distinction is that you're not purchasing the shopkeep, you're purchasing the object. But in are still using the shopkeep. He gathers the stuff and puts it on the shelves for you. The pilot takes you to your destination.

 

With porn, well I'm not purchasing anything, so I don't see why purchasing was the distinction. You could say the porn makers are purchasing the actors, but they aren't. They are purchasing a service that the actors provide. How is that any worse than paying some people to mow your lawn?

 

The women in porn, I use them to achieve orgasm, that is true. But I use lots of people for lots of things. Right now I'm using you to have a discussion. I use my brother because he helps out with the dishes. And what do you mean by "dispose of them". I don't put them in trash cans. Would it be better if I called them up and expressed my appreciation? We all use each other all the time. The problem is when we treat each other in hurtful ways. If I say nasty things to someone, or I physically assault them, or scam them out of money. That is bad. But using someone in a way that doesn't do that, like watching a video someone has made available to me, or paying someone to mow my lawn, is totally acceptable. You can see it as how societies form. We help each other.

 

So I still do not understand the distinction between using a shopkeep, or paying a guy to mow your lawn, and watching porn.

 

And I realize this is a point that people don't make a lot. People seem to intuitively understand the word "objectification". But I'm not being cheeky here. I think it deserves some serious though.

 

 

 

Yes you are using me to carry out a conversation. But I am likewise using you. I have agency, autonomy, am not treated as if I am owned by you. I am not easily interchanged (fungible).

You are using the shopkeeper's services, not the shopkeeper himself. the object you purchase is the fungible commodity.

In porn, it is the women who is the fungible commodity. the men in the video use her - not her services.

yes the reverse can obviously happen, with men becoming objectified, and some feminist writers do argue against that.

 

boringman - you cant just say "she is full of shit" you have to actually you know, provide some studies to show why porn is good.

 

 

Ok, this is seriously my last post on this topic because I have said numerous things you have nothing to say about and they all make your point more and more wrong. Secondly, you attacking me by calling me boringman because I won't read you articles that I have probably already read or been exposed to is a sign of weakness and an inability to manifest a proper argument. Thirdly, you are still missing the point. In the adult film industry these girls are getting paid to have sex with men on camera. She is not being owned by anyone. That is the sex slave trade and that is bad. Yes, porn gets produced in the sex slave trade, but that is not what we are talking about. That is a different topic all together. This woman is getting paid large sums of money to do what she decides to do. She is way more important than those men. She has an agent, autonomy, and a decision on what she does, when she does it, and how much she gets paid for it.

 

Porn is good because it provides a relief for people. Women watch porn just as men do. Yes, more men watch porn. What a surprise. Women are also able to get sex much easier than men. Women are probably much less likely to admit it as well in your studies. It is socially unacceptable for women to enjoy pornography, but they do. My ex used to watch porn when she was masturbating. It has been shown that porn reduces the amount of instances of rape in the areas that it is widely available. Most importantly porn doesn't hurt people. People hurt people. Porn isn't warping everyone's minds. It is all fucking nonsense. I don't need to show you studies. ALL statistics should be taken lightly as they are only ever gathered for a specific purpose.

 

Men if not entirely stupid are able to understand the difference between a porn star and a girl.

 

Now if you excuse me I'm going to go watch some porn.

 

Lol I call you boringman because your name is welcoming real boredom. and its easier than typing out AdieuErsatzEnnui. Not as some ad hominem. I doubt you read the four articles that I posted first, unless you have access to the journals they were posted in?

Girls on film - gonzo films (I know this cause someone I know was interested in starting a porn company) - make between 750-1500 a film. And also, if they have an agent, they probably have very little say in how much they make per film, and what their limits are. One of the agents describes his job as "legalized pimping". (sasha grey's i think)

Women are probably less likely to admit watching porn in anonymous studies? Probably? There's no point in arguing with you - you think all statistics are produced for a specific purpose. Again, you don't get how peer review works. Also i can't argue with you because all you're doing is providing opinion. I can't argue opinion.

 

Porn reduces rape - yes it's true there has been a decline in rape, but it's not entirely accurate to say that porn is responsible for that decrease. Social awareness, the chances of getting caught thanks to advances in DNA forensics etc. As i said earlier, in Japan, where they produce more porn than the US, special subway cars have been allocated as women only so that they can avoid being groped.

As to porn not hurting people - I can't find the link right now - I will get it to you later, there's one video (I think it's a casting couch one?) where the girl just refuses, and then starts crying.

 

Root5 - nope - you're not objectifying the workers laying brick. That's their service. You are not using their bodies. Semantics will get you nowhere.

[Guest A/D]

good discussion guys! I will try not to get roped in to this one, blood is obviously rising and it's an issue dear to my heart, but I will say this: sure, a lot of the porn out there is objectifying and bad, but that quality is not essential to pornography. There's a lot of porn I don't feel is objectifying. (And I think this discussion proves that there are vastly different ideas on what it means to be objectified. chen, I don't think a union rep who tells a bricklayer when to show up, and gives them a quota, is not much different from a porn star's agent. Do you feel the distinction is which parts of their bodies they use for work?)

 

I think the best sex happens between people in love, so amateurs make the best porn. Even so, the for-profit porn industry doesn't have to be as bad as it is, and I hope we see a swing back towards sensitive, loving porn, or porn where lust is shared on both sides.

[Root5]

Root5 - nope - you're not objectifying the workers laying brick. That's their service. You are not using their bodies. Semantics will get you nowhere.

 

How am I not using their bodies? It's hard manual labour. I'm paying them to do certain things with their bodies. How is that different than sex-work?

 

Also life-drawing modelling. That is more directly their bodies. The way I see it, the distinction your making is just based on the implied personalness of sex. And so when you pay someone to do sex, then their service is somehow more "themselves" then other services. But the service that sex-workers provides doesn't involve their body any more than manual labour or modelling. That isn't a semantic thing.

 

I've also worked in scientific studies. So I got payed to give blood for scientific research. They were totally using my body. Is that a semantic trick also?

 

And ErsatzEnnui: I'm sorry. I wasn't attacking you. I just forgot your name and remembered that "boredom" was in it somewhere. "Ennui" means "boredom", no?

[chenGOD]

Root5 - nope - you're not objectifying the workers laying brick. That's their service. You are not using their bodies. Semantics will get you nowhere.

 

How am I not using their bodies? It's hard manual labour. I'm paying them to do certain things with their bodies. How is that different than sex-work?

 

Also life-drawing modelling. That is more directly their bodies. The way I see it, the distinction your making is just based on the implied personalness of sex. And so when you pay someone to do sex, then their service is somehow more "themselves" then other services. But the service that sex-workers provides doesn't involve their body any more than manual labour or modelling. That isn't a semantic thing.

 

I've also worked in scientific studies. So I got payed to give blood for scientific research. They were totally using my body. Is that a semantic trick also?

 

You pay the labourers to utilize the product that they produce - they have some degree of autonomy, as how they approach the project and build the brick wall/garage/house whatever will partially be determined by their actions. Their labour is fungible, but the product they create is not - that is what you bought. The scientific study is using your blood, yes, but not your body. the blood is the product.

With a woman in porn, she has no autonomy (the agents set the terms), and you are not purchasing her labour, you are purchasing her body directly as the fungible commodity. You are equating her body with a product created by the labourers, or blood.

 

More here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_objectification

 

and by the way - people definitely do have sex with inanimate objects.

[Root5]

Isn't the porn video the commodity?

 

Also, in what sense is a vagina more a part of someone's body than blood? Suppose a woman participated in a study about vaginas, and she allowed some tests to be done on her vagina. Would that be objectification?

 

All the stuff about agents and autonomy have to do with the way porn is practiced. And I'm not trying to defend that, so I guess that's a point we can agree on. I'll try to make an example that will just focus on what I'm interested in, which is the meaning of objectification, and how people understand it. Suppose two people make an amateur video, and they both have autonomy and all that good stuff. Let's say they do it because they are exhibitionists and like people to watch videos of them. And then suppose I watch it and look at the girl and lust after her. Do you think I'm objectifying her? Is that honestly any different than me watching a movie and enjoying an actor's performance?

[Adieu]

Root5 if you can't understand the term objectification then there's no real hope for you. You're not objectifying a shopkeeper, because you're not purchasing him. you're using the object you purchase for a specific task. the women in porn, you use them to achieve an orgasm and then you dispose of them.

 

Wait wait, no hear me out. This is a serious point that I honestly believe in. I really think the word "objectification" is gibberish.

 

You said the important distinction is that you're not purchasing the shopkeep, you're purchasing the object. But in are still using the shopkeep. He gathers the stuff and puts it on the shelves for you. The pilot takes you to your destination.

 

With porn, well I'm not purchasing anything, so I don't see why purchasing was the distinction. You could say the porn makers are purchasing the actors, but they aren't. They are purchasing a service that the actors provide. How is that any worse than paying some people to mow your lawn?

 

The women in porn, I use them to achieve orgasm, that is true. But I use lots of people for lots of things. Right now I'm using you to have a discussion. I use my brother because he helps out with the dishes. And what do you mean by "dispose of them". I don't put them in trash cans. Would it be better if I called them up and expressed my appreciation? We all use each other all the time. The problem is when we treat each other in hurtful ways. If I say nasty things to someone, or I physically assault them, or scam them out of money. That is bad. But using someone in a way that doesn't do that, like watching a video someone has made available to me, or paying someone to mow my lawn, is totally acceptable. You can see it as how societies form. We help each other.

 

So I still do not understand the distinction between using a shopkeep, or paying a guy to mow your lawn, and watching porn.

 

And I realize this is a point that people don't make a lot. People seem to intuitively understand the word "objectification". But I'm not being cheeky here. I think it deserves some serious though.

 

 

 

Yes you are using me to carry out a conversation. But I am likewise using you. I have agency, autonomy, am not treated as if I am owned by you. I am not easily interchanged (fungible).

You are using the shopkeeper's services, not the shopkeeper himself. the object you purchase is the fungible commodity.

In porn, it is the women who is the fungible commodity. the men in the video use her - not her services.

yes the reverse can obviously happen, with men becoming objectified, and some feminist writers do argue against that.

 

boringman - you cant just say "she is full of shit" you have to actually you know, provide some studies to show why porn is good.

 

 

Ok, this is seriously my last post on this topic because I have said numerous things you have nothing to say about and they all make your point more and more wrong. Secondly, you attacking me by calling me boringman because I won't read you articles that I have probably already read or been exposed to is a sign of weakness and an inability to manifest a proper argument. Thirdly, you are still missing the point. In the adult film industry these girls are getting paid to have sex with men on camera. She is not being owned by anyone. That is the sex slave trade and that is bad. Yes, porn gets produced in the sex slave trade, but that is not what we are talking about. That is a different topic all together. This woman is getting paid large sums of money to do what she decides to do. She is way more important than those men. She has an agent, autonomy, and a decision on what she does, when she does it, and how much she gets paid for it.

 

Porn is good because it provides a relief for people. Women watch porn just as men do. Yes, more men watch porn. What a surprise. Women are also able to get sex much easier than men. Women are probably much less likely to admit it as well in your studies. It is socially unacceptable for women to enjoy pornography, but they do. My ex used to watch porn when she was masturbating. It has been shown that porn reduces the amount of instances of rape in the areas that it is widely available. Most importantly porn doesn't hurt people. People hurt people. Porn isn't warping everyone's minds. It is all fucking nonsense. I don't need to show you studies. ALL statistics should be taken lightly as they are only ever gathered for a specific purpose.

 

Men if not entirely stupid are able to understand the difference between a porn star and a girl.

 

Now if you excuse me I'm going to go watch some porn.

 

Lol I call you boringman because your name is welcoming real boredom. and its easier than typing out AdieuErsatzEnnui. Not as some ad hominem. I doubt you read the four articles that I posted first, unless you have access to the journals they were posted in?

Girls on film - gonzo films (I know this cause someone I know was interested in starting a porn company) - make between 750-1500 a film. And also, if they have an agent, they probably have very little say in how much they make per film, and what their limits are. One of the agents describes his job as "legalized pimping". (sasha grey's i think)

Women are probably less likely to admit watching porn in anonymous studies? Probably? There's no point in arguing with you - you think all statistics are produced for a specific purpose. Again, you don't get how peer review works. Also i can't argue with you because all you're doing is providing opinion. I can't argue opinion.

 

Porn reduces rape - yes it's true there has been a decline in rape, but it's not entirely accurate to say that porn is responsible for that decrease. Social awareness, the chances of getting caught thanks to advances in DNA forensics etc. As i said earlier, in Japan, where they produce more porn than the US, special subway cars have been allocated as women only so that they can avoid being groped.

As to porn not hurting people - I can't find the link right now - I will get it to you later, there's one video (I think it's a casting couch one?) where the girl just refuses, and then starts crying.

 

Root5 - nope - you're not objectifying the workers laying brick. That's their service. You are not using their bodies. Semantics will get you nowhere.

 

 

"Lol I call you boringman because your name is welcoming real boredom."

 

See there is where you are wrong. You have a really negative way of looking at things. My name is saying goodbye to a bad substitute for boredom and welcoming a good one. Adieu - goodbye Ersatz - artificial substitute of inferior quality Ennui - Boredom. When one does something to ease their boredom, but it isn't productive they are still being counter-productive. I'm saying goodbye to that counter-productivity and welcoming something worthwhile.

 

"Girls on film - gonzo films (I know this cause someone I know was interested in starting a porn company) - make between 750-1500 a film. And also, if they have an agent, they probably have very little say in how much they make per film, and what their limits are. One of the agents describes his job as "legalized pimping". (sasha grey's i think)"

 

Ok, what you're saying is you have no idea how much girls make per movie.

No see this is how business works. You get offered a certain amount. Your agent tells you that this is what you will make. Then you say, "Yes" or "no". They most definitely get asked what they are Ok doing I have seen it with my own eyes. It was a documentary type show on HBO that I saw only a few weeks ago about the porn industry. Possibly Real sex, but I'm not 100% sure.

 

Well, to be offended by the idea of legalized pimping you have to first be offended by the idea of pimping. Pimping is not evil or bad inherently. Pimping becomes bad because prostitution is illegal which gives these pimps a lot of power over their girls. If say the prostitute was working at an establishment that was accountable and paid taxes the girl could complain to the authorities and it could be handled correctly. Instead society decides that prostitution is wrong and then puts these girls in a position of weakness.

 

"you think all statistics are produced for a specific purpose."

 

They are.

 

"As i said earlier, in Japan, where they produce more porn than the US, special subway cars have been allocated as women only so that they can avoid being groped."

 

Sounds like more of a problem with Japanese culture than anything else. Wasn't it OK back in the 70's to sexually harass females all the time? Grabbing their ass, etc. You are trying to associate porn with the fact that Japanese men grope women and that is a GIGANTIC stretch. Get real.

 

"Porn reduces rape - yes it's true there has been a decline in rape, but it's not entirely accurate to say that porn is responsible for that decrease. Social awareness, the chances of getting caught thanks to advances in DNA forensics etc."

 

Regardless, porn is not showing to have a negative effect and you just said it for yourself. If porn isn't responsible for the decrease yet it is still part of the equation than it can't be responsible for an increase which means it is not the scapegoat.

 

"As to porn not hurting people - I can't find the link right now - I will get it to you later, there's one video (I think it's a casting couch one?) where the girl just refuses, and then starts crying."

 

I'm sure you think you know exactly why she is crying, but you don't. I would say she is crying because she has been hardwired to think that having sex for money is wrong, but there isn't actually anything wrong with it. I mean honestly it happens in a more subtle way all the time. (see-sugar daddy) Also, she is probably down on her luck in numerous ways not to mention she could be having a bad day. Also, did they forcible rape her after she said no and started crying? If not then no she isn't being hurt by the porn. If I cry because my oatmeal is too cold am I being hurt by cold oatmeal?

[oscillik]

If I cry because my oatmeal is too cold am I being hurt by cold oatmeal?

massivelol

[Adieu]

Root5 - nope - you're not objectifying the workers laying brick. That's their service. You are not using their bodies. Semantics will get you nowhere.

 

How am I not using their bodies? It's hard manual labour. I'm paying them to do certain things with their bodies. How is that different than sex-work?

 

Also life-drawing modelling. That is more directly their bodies. The way I see it, the distinction your making is just based on the implied personalness of sex. And so when you pay someone to do sex, then their service is somehow more "themselves" then other services. But the service that sex-workers provides doesn't involve their body any more than manual labour or modelling. That isn't a semantic thing.

 

I've also worked in scientific studies. So I got payed to give blood for scientific research. They were totally using my body. Is that a semantic trick also?

 

You pay the labourers to utilize the product that they produce - they have some degree of autonomy, as how they approach the project and build the brick wall/garage/house whatever will partially be determined by their actions. Their labour is fungible, but the product they create is not - that is what you bought. The scientific study is using your blood, yes, but not your body. the blood is the product.

With a woman in porn, she has no autonomy (the agents set the terms), and you are not purchasing her labour, you are purchasing her body directly as the fungible commodity. You are equating her body with a product created by the labourers, or blood.

 

More here:

http://en.wikipedia....objectification

 

and by the way - people definitely do have sex with inanimate objects.

 

 

No, you pay the laborers to do work. The product that they produce is the end goal, but the cost of their work entails paying for their time, their effort, their skill, and their materials.

 

Women in porn choose their agent, choose the terms of their job and decide whether the pay is good enough for the service they are providing. You sir are not being honest at all.

 

If you are referring to situations where girls are being kidnapped, drugged, and taken advantage of then yes you might get close to being right, but that is not the norm for the industry it is the dark side. Everything is capable of having aspects of it where people get taken advantage of, but you can't say that something is bad because people are capable of being taken advantage of.

[Adieu]

"With a woman in porn, she has no autonomy (the agents set the terms), and you are not purchasing her labour, you are purchasing her body directly as the fungible commodity. You are equating her body with a product created by the labourers, or blood."

 

Actually, you are purchasing her performance on a film. You buy a film. The person producing the film is buying her performance. He does not have rights to do anything he wants to her. He cannot cut off her legs and arms. He has no ownership. He has her consent to have sex with a partner on film. After the film is made he has no ownership over her.

[chenGOD]

 

"Girls on film - gonzo films (I know this cause someone I know was interested in starting a porn company) - make between 750-1500 a film. And also, if they have an agent, they probably have very little say in how much they make per film, and what their limits are. One of the agents describes his job as "legalized pimping". (sasha grey's i think)"

 

Ok, what you're saying is you have no idea how much girls make per movie.

No see this is how business works. You get offered a certain amount. Your agent tells you that this is what you will make. Then you say, "Yes" or "no". They most definitely get asked what they are Ok doing I have seen it with my own eyes. It was a documentary type show on HBO that I saw only a few weeks ago about the porn industry. Possibly Real sex, but I'm not 100% sure.

 

 

 

 

http://blog.videobox...orn-stars-make/

http://en.wikipedia....actor#Pay_rates

 

 

the person producing the film is not purchasing a performance - he is purchasing her body for use.

 

you pay laborers for an end product. with a porn actress the end product is her body. You are equating the porn actress with an object created by labour.

 

I'm done here - you guys want to keep on believing that porn is fine and no harm is done so you can jack-off guilt free then go for it.

But remember the end result - swap.avi

[Root5]

I think what you're trying to say, and I think what I was trying to say, is that there is a meaningful distinction between porn and slavery, which chenGod's framework seems to be overlooking.

 

Oh, sorry I posted that before I read "I'm done here". Let's end the conversation here, yes.

[Redruth]

people follow each other around speaking highly of pornography, scared to be the one who is not ok with it, but the fact of the matter is it is truly fucked up. not understanding that is just a sign of ignorance. it's obvious that humans

are to have loving, committed relationships with each other that respect both the parties involved and their deeper emotions and feeling. humans choose to do a lot of fucked up shit that just is not right and i believe

porn falls into that category. many things seem innocent and fun if we don't fully understand them and we pay no attention to the repercussions of our action. we are accountable, make no mistake.

[oscillik]

EVERYONE WILL BE BURNED IN THE DAY OF JUDGEMENT

[Redruth]

the 'nothing matters' 'it's all chaos' 'there is no meaning to life' etc etc point of view is how we've all gotten in the mess we currently are suffering from in the world. the small things do matter and we do matter to each other, all of us. unfortunately people make each other hurt every day because they want what they want, they believe what they conveniently want to believe to get it, usually that there is no wrong or right or that the details of wrong and right are irrelevant and it is only the larger issues that matter on the wrong/ right scales. fucking bullshit if you ask me. things are wrong and living things (humans included) suffer because of it and the majority of the world is callous

[Root5]

With every post troon reminds me of Santorum.

[vertsk8er419]