i'll get started.
i went to a nice show last night and after dinner with friends i didn't have enough time to use the restroom.
i tried to let off some pressure.
...
let's just say that if i didn't hold back as soon as i knew what was happening i would have needed to go commando and find some baby wipes.
show was fine. barely averted some very serious "woops didn't know i had a previous engagement can't come to the show"

I accidentally masturbated in class one time. I really had to pee and the teacher wouldn't let me. I scrunched my legs together to help hold it. I squeezed harder and harder trying to keep it in. Eventually I found that rubbing my dick in between my legs in a certain way made me feel better and helped ease some of the pressure. I kept this up until I hit that familiar feeling: I orgasmed in class.

After ALL of this, the teacher finally decided to let me go, because apparently my squirming was getting on her nerves. And before anyone asks, this was when I was like twelve and barely ever came from masturbating, so no, I didn't mess my pants.

I'd rather not say. there's a person or two here still (maybe) that I owe an apology to at least. I wish I could give it to them without being worse to them and go away. but I can't say here, I feel that would hurt them or myself worse.

this would be better placed elsewhere. but someone should have hope.

Once I was walking around by myself real late at night. I was depressed and drunk, and thought that doing something stupid and risky might help me build more confidence and be more ballsy in real life. So there I was, on some random street next to houses at like 2am, and I started masturbating. Not hand in my pants masturbating, but full on whipped my dick out and started jacking it. It was a cold night so it was a little difficult, and I was so distracted by the fear of getting caught that I couldn't actually get off. I was wanking there for a few minutes when I heard a quiet voice mutter something and turned to see a curtain on a second story window move slightly. I put my dick away and got the fuck out of there.

When I was a senior in highschool there was this small freshman girl who had a crush on me. I was dumb and she was smart so we ended up being in some of the same classes one semester. I was pretty standoffish towards her and nothing came of her liking me, except for on this one day we watched a movie in class. The classroom lights were turned off. Me and her were sitting at the front of the class. She started to lean against me, I tried to lean away but she just readjusted and there was a bar connecting my desk and chair on the other side so I could only move so far.

Then she started fingering me. Well, not fingering exactly. Her index finger was CLOSE TO my butthole, but not in it. She was doing this weird sort of massaging thing, but the, um, 'tingling sensation' I was getting from it was so strong that I couldn't even tell exactly what she was doing down there. I was sorta freaking out inside my head. I didn't know if anyone could see what she was doing, because the back of my chair was obviously obscuring her hand and arm, and there was a movie that people were focusing on. On the other hand, we were at the front of the fucking class, so we were in plenty of people's line of sight. I was pretty sure it just looked like she was leaning on me and had her hand wrapped around me, but I couldn't be certain, and was too scared to look around and check if anyone was looking since that would have drawn attention to us.

I had no way to lean away from her and I wasn't gonna tell her to stop or push her off because then people might have noticed what was happening. So I just totally froze up, and she kept going. I don't remember how long it lasted or when she stopped, but it went on for at least ten minutes. It was by far the best feeling I've experienced in my entire life. I had never felt that sort of pleasure from there before or after that moment, and I still don't know exactly what it was she was even doing. This has been my only sexual experience (sans masturbation) in my entire life. Afterward me and her acted like nothing happened. As far as I know nobody saw, but I'll never be certain.

So yeah, those are the stories about the time I jacked off in front of someone's house and the time I got molested by a 13 year old girl. Hopefully they were scandalous enough for you OP.

i've got some confessions that i don't have enough proxies to hide behind... oof.
oh no what if the internet finds out my horrible thiiiings?

I once did something that I considered embarrassing oh gosh

>Everything is about either sex or poop.

Stay classy, plus4.


But I can combine them both, 'cause I'm just that level of fucked up, apparently. When I was a little boy, watching and/or listening to people taking a shit really turned me on for some reason I couldn't possibly identify. I remember some of my first boners happened when I was standing outside bathrooms and listening to friends and relatives using the toilet. I must have been six or younger at the time.

I don't really get aroused by much, and when I do, I don't masturbate and I haven't had sex, nor am I in a real push to do so. I know I'm not asexual, and I've never been molested or raped. The closest I was to that was when someone tried to goad me into having sex and I said no and they wouldn't talk to me after that, but that's not something I would abstain from sex over.

The closest I've ever come to a reason is not having privacy as a kid. I always had someone coming into my room (my parents don't know the meaning of knocking, and they were always convinced something they'd lost was in my room), so I never had a chance to be alone enough to try fapping. I did attempt it but I felt queasy and didn't know what to do so I stopped.

>>375130
There's no way in hell you're who I think you are, but fuck you either way. Your ambiguity has left me confused and emotional.

>>375153
yeah but... anonymous thread

All I want from life is to make enough money to live well and reproduce a few times. That's it. Really. That's it. Not like.. once.. but not like the damned Duggers, either. A reasonable number of times.

Unfortunately, I have a few problems. I will never feel comfortable with the idea of having kids until I'm able to figure out if these horrible, horrible parts of my body are simply unfortunate genetic hiccups, or if I'm too poor a specimen to produce anything but sick kids that'd resent me for making them. I don't want to pass on a risk of dementia, dental problems, vision problems, baldness and joint problems. Ideally, I'd wait until science comes up with a solution for these hereditary conditions, but I'm concerned by the time we have them, I'll be too old.

is it egotistical, pride or selfishness to feel disappointment at the prospect that, while not sterile, you're just a terrible candidate to sire kids? I don't have any allusions that I'm some sort of stud or prized catch of a husband/father, but the idea anything I sire will just grow up to be like me, limited in frame by the mess that I am.. it kind of hits me. Right in the nuts. I'm positive my swimmers are all functional, but I'm more concerned about what sewage is floating in my DNA that doesn't need to pass down.

>>375239
I'd say it's more projected concern. You're putting yourself into the perspective of another, imagining how they might feel for inheriting the undesirable bits of your genetics using your own feelings on the matter. You're unhappy with your body and you don't want anyone else to have to feel that way, either; especially if it's because of you, ie your children.

But most of those things you listed off aren't even all that bad. Most of them can be solved or marginally prevented by early doctor/dentist visits. A good portion of the population doesn't have perfect vision and a LOT of people develop joint problems. Baldness? Well, dunno what to say about that.. But it's not all that bad. The only thing to be concerned over is dementia, but even then that's something that usually develops later on in life and by the time your children grow up medicine should be well advanced enough to help mitigate it.

If you find someone with good genetics, it severely diminishes the chances of your children inheriting the characteristics you deem undesirable in yourself, too. There's a very good chance they'll not inherit ANY of your bad traits.

...Anyway, if a family is something you really want in life, why let fear ruin that for you?

>>375315
Because I wouldn't wish how I grew up on my worst enemy.

>>375365
Well, there is always the option to adopt.

i'm hypersensitive to the needs and intentions of others
and it pains me so very much to sense dishonesty mixed with desperation
i just cringe and it makes me want to leap out of my skin from all the sympathy pain
i want to chastise the person for the dishonest effort of lying to get on people's good sides or forcing themselves on people instead of creating something naturally
unauthentic shit drives me bonkers. it's creepy.

>>375455
>unauthentic shit drives me bonkers. it's creepy.

Personally I think that's an outstanding quality, you shouldn't feel bad about it.

I used to believe gay marriage was wrong, only because of three things.
A.) It was an attempt by pedophiles and pro-gay proponents to adopt children and indoctrinate them to believe homosexuality was not different from heterosexuality, as well as get easier access to children. This counts as one thing: Child Abuse. At the time I did not understand pedophilia crossed different wires than homosexuality, given how congruent you heard stories of pedophilia involve male perpetrators and male children.
B.) It was an attempt to use the illusion of civil rights to change the church, or punish them for not doing what the secular, legal world wanted. I had little love for the church, but I hated the idea. I believed that the definition of marriage was between a man and a woman, because we got our rights to marry from a questionable, traditional marriage of our secular and religious cultures. That businesses and the government, having similar origins and culture with religion, intersected in this one area. That the definition of marriage, the heterosexual union of one man and one woman, was defined as such because that's how religious culture defined it. For better or worse.
C.) It was an attempt by homosexual enthusiasts to have what amounted to gay pride parades in EXACTLY the places that they weren't wanted. Not much different from when an obnoxious child irritates and aggravates a larger child, but only when a parent with the larger child on their shit list is around. They act all innocent and playful as a cover, then harass and instigate as much as possible while making it look like they're just playing. "Play with me and act like you like it, or I'll tell dad and he'll restrict and whip your ass."

As I grew up, I learned there are way worse places to be than raised by two homosexual parents, be they male or female (though I still misogynistically believe two women make better parents than two men) and that both the overall population of homosexuals who'd want to both get married and adopt kids are very small, and the likelihood of them being 'pedo-farmers' was so astronomically unlikely that it would at best be indistinguishable in numbers from the horror stories of heterosexual adopting homes. And as for being indoctrinated to believe homosexuality was just as valid as heterosexuality? Whether it's a biological benign skin tag that's an error but so innocuous as to ignore, or just another equal sexuality, doesn't really matter. So the legalized child endangerment issue and the indoctrination issue go out the window. It's not child abuse nor opens the window to legally sanctioned brain washing or rape.

I also learned that the church does not have a monopoly on the definition of marriage, and in fact the religious involvement in the states is largely relegated to a ceremonial function. That when a religious person objects to gay marriage, they're objecting to it under the pretense that marriage, the secular and religious wholesale, is the domain of the church alone. They aren't using the actual legitimate definition of marriage, but the optimistic, idealized lenses. No different than if they held up a rock, and you said, "That's a rock." And they'd reply, "That's GOD'S rock." Well, okay dude. That's your opinion. But the reality is, it's just a rock. So the idea the state was infringing on the domain of something solely religious falls. That they don't want to change the definition of marriage forcefully to include homosexuals, they want to return the legal language to equal opportunist ambiguity compared to what it is under that filth that is DOMA. And change the legal definition, not the religious traditions. Which we, as voting, tax paying, progressive people have every right to do.

And once you take away the misunderstanding that you have to make the church cooperate and change its values in order to marry people, the entire distinction between a legal civil union and a legal marriage goes out the window. The need for civil union no longer exists, and the clarification the state isn't trying to strongarm the church to its social agenda as part of extending civil rights to homosexuals changes everything. Being in favor of civil unions as an alternative vs. giving gays the right to marry no longer holds as a valid logical or ideological position.

This is all it took to convince me that gay marriage was not a big problem, nor inconvenience, for anybody that wasn't gay. But since I were 13, absolutely no gay rights progressive would speak to me on this issue without barking at me what I SHOULD believe and what I MUST believe, or else I were a stupid bigot. And that even if it did inconvenience a religious culture or tradition by strong-arming them to conform to whatever the state wanted, they deserved it anyway for all the harm they've done over the centuries. Every single time I tried to have a conversation on the issue with somebody pro gay-marriage, not once was it pointed out to my younger self that religion has almost nothing to do with the definition or application of marriage in the USA, or that churches would not be affected, but it was always "churches SHOULD recognize gay marriages" and "it doesn't matter if the church doesn't like it."

Knowing what I know now, the communication breakdown and the clashing of the ignorant and religious vs. the knowlier-than-thou erudites preaching progression or social ostracism, we could have had gay rights and gay marriage ten years ago if they'd just addressed these concerns of the silent majority, instead of pretending they were going to judo-flip the majority into enlightenment by force or pretending the distinctions didn't matter.

>>375547
>And that even if it did inconvenience a religious culture or tradition by strong-arming them to conform to whatever the state wanted, they deserved it anyway for all the harm they've done over the centuries. Every single time I tried to have a conversation on the issue with somebody pro gay-marriage, not once was it pointed out to my younger self that religion has almost nothing to do with the definition or application of marriage in the USA, or that churches would not be affected, but it was always "churches SHOULD recognize gay marriages" and "it doesn't matter if the church doesn't like it."

This shit right here is why I can't stand how Tumblr's started whining about QUIT TONE POLICING ME.
I'm not tone policing, I'm just not gonna take you seriously if you're throwing a fucking tantrum, and neither is anyone else. You're hurting your own cause by being such a child about it instead of taking a few minutes to breathe, relax, and explain your point of view calmly.

>>375547
But the things said to you were completely true--it SHOULDN'T matter what the church says because marriage is more than just a ceremony, and you SHOULD be treating gay people like actual real human beings, which means not supporting openly discriminatory legislation and not supporting people who excuse their prejudices with "but it's against my religious beliefs." That wouldn't fly if a store owner refused to let black people enter his shop because black people shouldn't be allowed to own things according to his "religion." It's actually pretty appalling the religion defense is still considered legitimate.

It honestly sounds like, at 13 years old, they told you what you're saying they should. You just didn't understand it at the time and then later found your own way to the answer as you got older. This is really common. And really? The reason you found out that gay people are't bad is because activists have fought that shit. It's safer to be out as gay because of their work, so you may have come into contact with and befriended gay or bi people as you grew up and realised they're not bogeymen through social interaction. You found out about how marriage really works likely because someone had been arguing the point in favour of gay marriage.

And I can't really blame anyone for not bothering to explain to a snot-nosed kid that no gay couple would get married for the purpose of adopting children to brainwash and rape them.

>>375547
>It's not about them getting equal rights, it's about the definition of marriage, about the people who invented having the right to define it. It's fine if they have their own institution with exactly the same stuff, Separate but Equal, and they can't call it marriage.

The problem with this stuff is that it's de-normalization. The whole point of civil rights is the normalization of the idea that we are all a bit weird. They are not freaks, they are not mutations, they are not even outside the various communities that hate them. They're the choir boy who gets funny feelings in his pants every time he looks at the pastor, they're the 20 years married Husband who just can't be aroused by his wife no matter how he tries, they're the Nuns my god, THE NUNS. They are human, they are as complex and different as you or I.

And when you take an institution like the church, one of the few places you can gather with a large amount of people for free and not do drugs, and you say "we won't serve their kind", you're growing hatred within your community. You are teaching your community to regard everything without them with fear, with mistrust. You are locking them into a mentality: "us vs. them", whoever they are.

To be sure, there are those in the world with whom you should have every right to fear; they are the ones who would tell you what to think, and not invite you to draw your own conclusions.

I will tell you what I have observed though; that humanity is always stronger, more creative, more prepared for anything the universe might throw at us, the more diverse we are.

Not sure if that's the exact tact you were going after but I can understand no one really trying to explain it. The disconnect between the informational bases is enough that pinpointing why one idea or another is fallacious is problematic, and made more problematic by people yelling. It also doesn't help that we perceive the "party line" to be representative of every individual on that side. A lot of them are good, decent people. A lot of the time they just aren't well traveled enough to really question the notions they are being presented with.

>>375552
This right here underlines exactly what I just talked about.

I suppose I should thank you, the way a Zulu warrior thanks a ferocious lion for the opportunity to spear it through the head and become a man. Without the experiences brought on by dealing with you snide, self-important issue crusaders, I never would've believed there was a creature that habituated the very top of the ivory tower, able to fit both the blunt and decorative tip of the spire, as well as half their body, up their own asshole. An awkward looking donut decoration.

You are the reason people that might side with your perspective don't, or languish in the middle with nothing to build off of in varying parts biased and unsurity. Because you feel you don't need to reason with them, don't need to explain, that they should already be on your side. It doesn't matter that your stance on the issue is right, but what does matter is your willingness to correspond and elucidate and delegate to other voters in a democracy when you share different conclusions SUCKS. You get far higher quality participants in the electoral process if you're both amiable, informative and willing to offer things based more on principles and fact and legal precedent, than feels.

People like you have taught me how important it is to prepare to deal with people so pissed off by Social Justice Sally that they might not listen to reason and might gladly go over to the other side, if only to spite you. That might win you an internet argument, but it puts off winning the value war by years.

>>375547
I went through a similar situation as a kid. My mom supported gay marriage, and my mom speaks fondly of a gay couple that congratulated her when her and my dad got engaged, but the two of them both still had sort of a "weird heebie-jeebies" and "how could you possibly be attracted to anyone of the same sex" feeling about gay people, so when I first started realizing I might be bisexual, I fought it for years. The fact that my classmates all thought I was gay because I avoided dating anyone didn't really help. When my parents started fighting a lot, I started cherishing couples who didn't do the same thing, and at least for me now any couple who loves and cares about each other, as long as they're adults, is okay in my book.

I had an argument with my dad recently about gay marriage, and I defended my argument in support of it (because the "they love and consent with each other" argument wasn't flying) by adding "rich gay couples who have huge weddings, adopt a kid, and spoil them". Do Conservatives take that possibility into consideration?

Thread ruined.

>>375547
>Every single time I tried to have a conversation on the issue with somebody pro gay-marriage, not once was it pointed out to my younger self that religion has almost nothing to do with the definition or application of marriage in the USA, or that churches would not be affected, but it was always "churches SHOULD recognize gay marriages" and "it doesn't matter if the church doesn't like it."
This. They have no right to force a religion to change and suddenly start celebrating gay marriages, but the religions have no business going around trying to stop gay people from getting legally married.

>They have no right to force a religion to change and suddenly start celebrating gay marriages

Yeah, except I don't think anyone really ever asked for this. You people are being silly.

>>375567
lmao. Ok, let me put it in perspective for you. You are a minority who has had to deal with unrealistic expectations and horrible steretoypes all your life. You have naive and/or unapologetically bigoted adults with voting power to deal with, who can actually make decisions that will affect how openly you may live your life, and how safe you are standing in a room full of majority members. You have probably been bullied and silenced repeatedly for being a minority, or, depending on how well you can hide it, you might have simply pretended to not be a minority and spent a lot of time wishing you weren't.

Realistically, are you going to spend time and effort to convince every 13 year old boy with a bigoted view handed down from his parents and whatever media was around at the time, that you aren't actually a child rapist? Would you expect that boy to actually believe you if you said, "well actually Bobby, I don't like to rape children and turn them gay"? Most people will not change their view at all based on what one single person says. If they hear a lot of propaganda and negative things about that group, they are definitely not going to listen to what you, a single member of that group, has to say about your perspective and your feelings. Like, maybe YOU personally don't like to rape kids, but that doesn't excuse all the other people in your group who do (according to this faulty worldview your opposition is currently holding) so he will not change his opinion of the group overall, just of you, if he doesn't think you're lying. It takes a ridiculous amount of effort to push past that and make people innately biased against you change their minds or soften their stances. It's exhausting, frustrating and incredibly stressful and you cannot do that for every single person who challenges your right to be treated like an equal. If you judge that a specific person is not going to be receptive to you, then it's not really worth your while. You have to pick your battles, and apparently, people who were talking to you didn't think it was worth it (either because you were aggressive or because you didn't seem to have strong opinions anyway and would come into your own as you grew up, which is what you did).

There are a lot of "activists" who are just really incompetent at both picking their battles and conveying their points in an appealing way. Especially when they're just teenagers themselves. I.e., tumblr social justice crusaders. But you can't blame literally everyone involved in activism for not taking the time to personally educate you and cite every study and every statistic that will change your mind when you are not even of voting age.

Kids also aren't born prejudiced, it's something they acquire as they grow up and it's super malleable until adulthood. A lot of effort goes into fighting adults and gaining representation and visibility, so that these kids are going to grow up in a world a lot less hostile to minorities, and be able to form their own opinions through actual exposure instead of myth.

>>375573
Dunno man, I've seen a few times on tv it being said it was time for the church to "modernize" and accept that and stuff. Might be just in my country.

>>375579

Some of these comments may be coming from within the church itself. Believe it or not, there are God-fearing people who think that denying gays rights is a bunch of hooey.

I don't think externals trying to force churches to change (outside of getting them to stop sticking their noses where they don't belong) at least not to the level any of you are trying to make it out.

This isn't weird coming from someone who frequents this site, but I've looked up Rule 34 of stuff that first came out during my childhood years. "Came out during", not "was actually part of my childhood". Mostly stuff I'm catching up on that I never got around to getting into when I was a kid, but wanted to. I don't find it childhood-scarring to come to terms with the fact that characters who are adults and are canonically or at least implied to be in a relationship had a sex life at some point.

However, I feel really uncomfortable when my friends mention their sex life. I guess it's because when I'm looking up Rule 34, it's intentional, but my friends will just talk about fucking someone out of nowhere, even when I don't want to talk about it.

Right now, right this split second, I am lonely. I'm sitting in my living room craving human interaction but not getting any. I've attempted to IM with a sort of friend of mine who also wants me to participate in a creative project that he's writing. I should use the term "writing" loosely because I recently sent him a message saying that I need a script from him by a certain date or the window in which we can work together will close. He didn't respond to my messages tonight (even though he is online) and it pisses me off. It doesn't help that I'm attracted to this young man, but all attraction aside his refusal to give me something solid to work with is infuriating.
I have a shitty day job where I have a massive crush on a co-worker that must remain unrequited due to our circumstances (we're both married to other people). He's been the best friend I've ever had at this place and it just makes me love him more. Yes, I still deeply love my husband and have no intention of leaving him, cheating on him or hurting him in any way. My husband is easily the most handsome man I've ever been with and he's a prince to me.
But sometimes...I just get so goddamn lonely.
I wish yahoo hadn't closed their chat rooms, it was nice to go to a room and just talk with people about whatever in real time.
I miss that.

>>375668
You could be polyamorous. I am not myself, but I know other people who can fully love multiple people with all their heart, and not want to leave any of them.

I am lonely on a regular basis myself. All I can suggest is not to spend too much time pining for people who cannot fit you into their schedule.

Regardless of whether he is a casual or professional writer, he needs to learn to work on more of a schedule. I had a voice acting project I needed to finish for a class, and I asked two friends-- one who got back to me right away, and another who only got back to me very recently, despite the project having been finished two semesters ago.

I fear adding some people on steam because their accounts are also their furry handles they use in the furry community.
I'm an occasional creative writer and very very amateur person that doodles a little. I'm not a furry or identify as one, but I worry adding people met in legitimate middle ground areas might lead people to conclude I'm one and treat me like one.

>>375669
>You could be polyamorous.
And I was! Well, my last long-term serious relationship (before getting married) was poly. And by that I mean my main guy let me sleep with other guys. Things didn't work out for reasons unrelated to me shagging other dudes but we're still very close friends. My husband is monogamous and I adhere to that. After all, relationships are about sacrifice.
>he needs to learn to work on more of a schedule
Tell me about it, I still haven't heard from him. At this point I'm giving up on the idea of working with him at all.

i've been interviewed by The Harbinger podcast but i've only ever listened to one episode.

>>375684
If people are that knowledgable about the furry community and are going to associate you by two degrees of seperation to the community, they're faggots. Don't worry about who you add.

I'm a pedophile. It's a pretty dull situation when you aren't cruel/crazy/stupid enough to pursue a child.

>>376864
So, wait.
Do you just treat it as a fetish, like I've heard some people do?
Or do you only ever feel any sexual excitation with underage folk?

Speaking of - I'm in favour of gay marriage.

But looking at it now and they now people saw it all back several decades back I just can't help but fear if this'll all end in making pedophilia legal in 60 years, or beastiality normal in less.
The way we demonize or shun that stuff now is how we used to Interracial marriage or Homosexuality.
So while I don't mean to say they're related, I do have to say I'm comparing the cases.

>>376868
but animals and children don't want to marry adults

>>376866
I can have sex with adults perfectly well. If I only ever interacted with adults, there wouldn't be an issue.

>>376868
The problem with that is that adults are equals. Kids and adults or animals and adults aren't.

>>376868
Kids and animals cannot consent. That's why pedophilia and bestiality are illegal, not because they're ~ewwww so gross~.
This really is like the most basic thing in the world, which makes me wonder why most right-wingers repeatedly fall back on the BUT PEOPLE WILL BE FUCKING THEIR DOGS IN THE STREETS excuse whenever gay marriage is brought up.

>>376872

All adults are equal. But some are more equal than others.

This is why it's a mess when there is an unbalance-of-power between two adults. A boss and an underling. A teacher and a student. A person of average/above-average intelligence and a person of below-average intelligence. Even, to some degree, a man and a woman. (And in case you think I am being sexist in that last one, I totally am. In modern society, women generally have power over men in a sexual relationship, and men generally allow it.) For the most part, there is always going to be one person dominant over another in a relationship. And if you think an animal or a child cannot ever hold power over an adult... you're an idiot. This isn't a one-way street. It is possible for a child to extort or manipulate an adult into sex. It's somewhat possible for an animal to rape an adult.

But I do not support adults marrying children or animals. There is only one point to marriage, and that is tax deductions. Animals and children do not pay taxes, so they have no need for such rights.

Speaking of beastiality, when I'm feeling ornery and none of my usual sources interest me I go to 7chan's /be/ or look for "alternative" sources. Only care for X on female, though. (As though that somehow makes it better.)

>>376864
I'm going to resist the urge to call you a sick fuck if you tell me you aren't actively doing anything about that and don't plan to in the future.

>>376877
>It is possible for a child to extort or manipulate an adult into sex.

Possible? Yes. But goddamn unlikely. And that would have to be one messed-up kid to begin with.

>There is only one point to marriage, and that is tax deductions.

Wow, someone's a cynic.

>>376872
There's also the fact kids aren't developed for sex, specially with adults. That's a good way for nature to say they're not meant to, to begin with.

>>376876
Not to defend it, but animals seem to be able to consent it well enough, taking the initiative to dry hump until you kick their ass and stuff, until they figure "no means no".

>>376877
I generalized to form a simple argument. If you want it with qualifiers: In the majority of cases, in a relationship between an average adult human and an average child or animal, the adult human will have an unfair advantage over the child or animal. This is different than relationships between 2 adult humans because society entrusts adult humans to take care of themselves and gives them the power to do so, to a reasonable extent. That's why any relationship between 2 adults is inherently different than a relationship between an adult and a child or animal.

Now quit being a pedantic dipshit, please.

>>376881
I read dirty stories. I'm fairly certain that's a 2.3 on the Sick-Fuck-O-Meter.

>>376884
That's not even close to the same thing. Animal instinct is not the same as two adults having a consensual sexual relationship. And not all animals are like that anyway, it's mostly dogs that like to hump whatever they can.

>>376885
Read all the dirty stories you want. So long as you never actually try to touch or otherwise do anything with a real child, that's fine by me. Or at least not as bad.

>>376884
>animals seem to be able to consent it well enough
It's not just about consent, it's about informed consent. There are many, many teen boys age 13-15 that would love to fuck their hot teacher, but that would be statutory rape. (In a few states it might not be statutory rape at 16-17, but only if contained within the state, and the school/public will still go after the teacher for other reasons.) It's the same reason that having sex with a drunk woman can be rape in many states, even if the woman consented at the time; the inebriation removes the possibility for informed consent.

Yes, there are many animals that take the initiative, but that doesn't make it okay. Because they can't possibly have an adult brain, they can't give informed consent, and so it's not okay. (Thought exercise: If adult human brains could be put into animals, fully operational as adult humans but able to fully control the animal body, would bestiality taboo no longer apply?)

Sage because this isn't a confession, nor anonymous.

Weirdly enough, I have the inverse problem.

I feel immense guilt for not being a sexual person. I find having a romantic or sexual relationship with anyone borderline scary, partially due to not knowing how to deal with my social anxiety.

I particularly don't understand incest or underaged fetishes. I've never seen my relatives in that way, and I don't find people under 16 to be attractive at all, because they lack developed sexual organs and an understanding of sex. But I've gotten a lot of flack for it online, being called closed-minded and being informed "but lolis help curb real pedophila", "nobody is having sex with real kids", and "incest is wincest". I wonder if I'm in the wrong here for kink-shaming.

>>376889
>I wonder if I'm in the wrong here for kink-shaming.
Yes.
As long as real living beings aren't being abused and no laws are being broken, there's no need to shame people for what they get their jollies to. It's not a conscious decision, no one wakes up after a couple dozen years of vanilla kinks and goes "I am gonna get a boner to a little girl today."
People can't help it. Does that mean it isn't weird? Fuck no. But generally people with weird-ass kinks know that just as much as anyone, so making them feel like shit for what gets them all hot and bothered is really just being kind of a douche.

Again though, this all applies as long as no one's actually molesting a third-grader, a mom isn't bumping uglies with her son, and no one's putting their dick in their dog. As long as they keep it fictional and no one's hurt, there's not really a problem.

>>376890
Good god you're so dogmatic.

>>376891
What do you mean?

>>376890
I'm not saying people can't enjoy it in a purely fictional sense. But I feel guilty when people say "But it's so hot, why don't /you/ like it?"

I've gotten borderline furious at myself because I spent all afternoon looking at various porn of various fetishes, and nothing did anything for me. I should be sexual. This should not make me scared. It's stupid. My psychologist even told me it was stupid and that I needed to get over it.

>>376895
I think the psychologist might be right on this. You don't have to be into weird sexual stuff, or normal sexual stuff, or even romance. The idea that you have to be into that stuff is poison. Just don't be judgmental when there's no harm involved and it's all good.

You really should let peer pressure get to you, besides.

>>376895
That's silly. How do you expect to get in the mood if you're all upset? Just relax.

..And it's really not a big deal if you don't instantly get turned on at the slightest thing, y'know.

>>376889
It's really, really average to find things like animals and children (and pain, and rape, and poop, and extreme body types, etc.) sexually offputting. Lolicon is gross to everyone except a small minority. I can see how you might lose perspective if you frequent places like 4chan, but it's really not normal to find prepubescent kids hot, especially when you're an adult. Your tastes in people are supposed to develop appropriately as you age (i.e. you can develop a crush on a girl in your class when you are both 13, but when you are 21, you would not find her 13-year-old self attractive anymore) but sometimes that doesn't happen. A more extreme version is when you aren't attracted to male or female bodies at all, but the non-sexualised androgyny that only children have. It's abnormal. Because pedophilia can cause major psychological damage in victims, it shouldn't be considered normal either. (That's another reason why child marriage is nothing like gay marriage: nobody's getting hurt when two consenting adults of the same sex marry one another. There's never been any scientific evidence to the contrary, but the nasty effects of adults having sex with kids is well-documented.)

And you're not "kink shaming" if you find something revolting lmao. Saying you don't like it or saying you don't want to see it isn't kink shaming either. Don't let other people tell you otherwise because they're wrong. Being sexually open to every kink is unusual--the reason why it's a kink, after all, is because such a small fraction of people find it hot. Congratulations, you're a totally normal person (at least sexually).

>>376889
>"but lolis help curb real pedophila"
>"nobody is having sex with real kids"
Well that's bullshit anyway. It just makes pedophiles more delusional that it's acceptable and they're poor misunderstood victims, when they see others spamming to make it seem like they're a majority, and making up excuses and arguments.

>>376900
>And you're not "kink shaming" if you find something revolting lmao. Saying you don't like it or saying you don't want to see it isn't kink shaming either.
Yeah this is true. Going "wow that is really gross to me, please keep your porn to yourself" or w/e isn't kink shaming. My earlier post was operating under the assumption that you knew what it was and were doing it.
>>376895
>I should be sexual.
Why?
Lots of people aren't sexual, but enjoy romance. Lots of people can't into romance but they're fine with sex. Lots of people don't care for either.
Trying to force something that you're clearly not interested in is just gonna make you unhappier.

>>376901
And, not to mention. Its comparable to a gateway drug. It just steers you into that direction while you're going deeper and deeper down the kinkhole.
I mean, dude's full of shit.

>>376904
> Its comparable to a gateway drug.
I see two main possibilities concerning pedophilia artwork:
1) It allows pedophiles a release from their urges so they're less likely to go after actual children, or
2) What you say, that it only intensifies the urges

Sadly, I cannot find any studies about this one way or the other. IMO, digital lolicon should be legal because it harms no actual person, in the same way that I believe most drugs should be legal. If the porn or the drugs cause the person to do something that actually harms someone, then it's on the person.

In addition, such acts only to go to repress pedophiles; while this is certainly not a good attribute, continually villainizing them will only make them more and more stressed and more likely to offend. Instead, an effort should be made to catch them early, and help them with therapy and such so that they can either get rid of such interests (if possible?) or at least find a better outlet for them that will keep them from going after children. (This is, again, similar to drugs.)

I'm good at displaying affection and attachment but it doesn't mean I feel any of it. It's not me trying to lie or something, I'm just a cuddly person and I like a lot. But I don't love or feel a need or anything.

also I found weird hentai on my boyfriend's computer

......I dont know if he actually gets off to this. I know he looks at a lot of strange shit on the internet because he thinks it's funny.

>>376962
...Or keeping them under proper vigilance so they won't get the chance (and maybe know it).

>>376965
What kind of stuff was it? Futa? Loli? Dragons fucking cars?

>>376962
You can't get rid of sexual preferences and kinks through therapy. They're so deeply ingrained that it's pretty much impossible to convince someone that what they find hot isn't hot anymore. Best you can do is convince them that society hates the act so much that they should never do it, or chemically sterilise them (which is what some pedophiles have actually asked for).

>>376974
>Best you can do is convince them that society hates the act so much that they should never do it
But that goes back to villainizing them before they've even done anything. This added pressure makes it more likely, not less, that they'll act on the urges. Therapy/support groups can help control urges or find alternative outlets that don't harm anyone. It's far better than shaming them and hoping for the best.

>>376964
Modern expectations of affection are really weird. It's like everything must mean something and must always escalate to greater heights.

>>376966
>>376974
So, you plan to make sure that no one comes forward seeking help and that things continue forward as usual? Because if your only options are 24/7 monitoring and chemical castration, that's what is going to happen. It's already obvious that society hates pedophilia. Child molesters are on the list of people no one feels bad about the death of. It shouldn't be normalized, but god damn do you guys spectacularly fail at thinking of ways to actually improve the situation. You act like they're wolves, rather than people who need to change. I'm with Autotune on this one. Treat it like drug addiction or any other mental illness until someone actually commits a crime, and then make it seem like a good idea to turn themselves in.

>Anonymous Awkward Confession Thread
>Anonymous

Y'all tripfriends be doin it wrong.

>>376899
>>376900
>>376902
>>376901
Thank you. I have friends who chewed me out for not accepting all fetishes, or for not taking nudes and posting them online, and I guess I wasn't sure what normal sexual behavior was, and I thought I was being too much of a prude or something.

I guess what I'm going to try to do now is not guilt trip myself when I do get aroused, and see what happens?

>>376990
You have some really shitty friends. I can see how they'd confuse you.

>>376990
>I have friends who chewed me out for not accepting all fetishes, or for not taking nudes and posting them online

They are morons, tell them to go fuck themselves and when they whine, say you figured they'd appreciate it, since they're obviously so sex-obsessed.

>>376971
idk what futa is (not gonna google) but it was mostly incest and older women with young guys

'oh yeah toro-chan,fuck the womb that you came from'

>>376889
Really? Like you should find stuff hot but nothing really gets your motor running? I've heard tales of asexuals but I've never really encountered one. I know my arousal can go from zero to 60 in 5 seconds flat, so it's hard to imagine someone who just never has to deal with the "sexual interruption", so to speak.

It doesn't really "kink shame" if you don't find something hot. That's why they're called fetishes; a relatively low percentage are going to be into them or even find them mildly arousing. Just try not to tell them they're a horrible person or whatever for liking something, you're just not into that thing. That said, there are certain kinks that raise the subtle question of consent, legality, and injury.

>>376901
>>376904
pedophilia, on 4chan at least, does seem to act as a kind of extended fantasy for a lot of dudes who seem like they've kind of given up on normal relationships, one way or another. The incidence of people really seeming serious and earnest about it has seemed to shift over time, the modern boards seeing it as an aberration, not a mainstay. Which is good, as most of it appears to be escapist nonsense or trolling in normal dudes, exacerbated by the availability of smut. But even /co/ has its' share of underage characters that get a... "mature" treatment.

Incest... I should preface this with Incest and pedophilia always being terrible ideas in some form. For every cutsey "siblings experiment" story there's like 10 actual stories of people horribly damaged by it. But within the realm of kink and masturbation, I always thought the draw in incest was more physical, more about it being an older woman than that woman being some kind of analog for your mother, and that the relationships depicted weren't especially the draw, although the thrill of taboo often lends a certain edge to things. Incest doesn't necessarily disrupt physical attraction; older women or older can often be very attractive for both looks and experience, and incest stories just seem like a cheap way of enabling the buggering.

tl;dr it's good to be open to things and a lot of these fetishes are harmless so long as they're kept solely in the realm of fantasy. If you've found your significant others' porn stache, it might actually help to talk to them about what's in there and find out why they think it's hot, and maybe work some of that reasoning into your erotic play. (warning: this may lead you to more than you ever knew about the person in question)

But don't feel ashamed if you don't find something sexually arousing or necessarily get the kink. You can be accepting of fetishes without having to practice them yourself, and it' good to recognize the boundaries of fantasy for kinks, as many kinks pursued in earnest can lead to very fucked up situations.

And, don't listen to your friend about feeling bad about not uploading nudes. As ubiquitous as it is and as much as I do love it when any girl wants my attention like that, it's your choice, your body, and your private life. Some people like being seen, just the thought of a lot of random strangers pleasuring themselves to that person, they get off on that. But not everyone does, and personally, I prefer girls who want me to view them like that when I look at that kind of smut. That Facebook/nudes stalking thing people do creeps me out. I mean, obviously people on facebook fuck, but if you don't want to be viewed as such then I'd say that prerogative should override the sharing of smut. It's not the person pictured's fault, it's generally the asshole who took the video. And if you don't want to be a part of that, I'd actually say that's smarter than not these days.

>>377020
Ah. /ss/. For the man that's felt cheated out of a screw with his 5th grade teacher.
Don't worry, thats actually common. Its all an insertion fantasy.
The incest thing's not so much, but it works in the same vein.

>>377036
>Don't worry, thats actually common. Its all an insertion fantasy.
Other guy here, always figured it was that... but damned if I'd bring that up and defend it on a talk about this. A lot of times they just draw MILFs so curvy it gets... difficult to let go of it.

>>376990
In all seriousness, get better friends. What shitheads.

My friends don't tend to understand why sex/porn/their kinks don't interest me either, but they're not rude assholes about it. imo the second somebody tells you that you're broken for being disgusted by lolicon is the second you should kick them to the curb. Especially if it's lolicon. Or dubcon. Or incest.

Thread has seriously derailed. Direct all further discussion about loli/sexuality/etc. to >>377043. (Remember that you can reference posts across threads, so if you want to reply to a post in here, include that post link in your reply to the other thread.)

You may resume posting your anonymous confessions (sexual confessions are alright, but not discussion/reaction as such).

I spent a month homeless and eating out of the garbage. I used a discarded plastic bottle for water and just wandered around town. It was the happiest month of my life.

Have been severely depressed for a period of roughly ten years, starting when I was 13, during which I basically had to put my life on hold. Have tried pretty much all the medications and treatments available to no effect.
After ECT and TMS failed to help, I've tried to work hard at volunteering and helping the needy, but I'm still not capable of feeling a sense of satisfaction, fulfilment, accomplishment, or happiness, either for myself or for others.
I wish I could stop being so selfish, and be able to feel something for others regardless of how I feel about myself, but I don't really know how. It's like I lost the ability.
I'm kinda drifting now, but I can't tell how much longer I can hold out anymore.

>>377213
Stop worrying about it and just be.

>>377214
That's all I've really been able to do for a number of years now. I've just been "being," or existing.
Thanks regardless.

I've had people question my validity and my fan...interest on things to the point where I don't know if I know who I am anymore. Maybe I'm doing something to honestly be nice to them, because I want them to be happy, and they tell me I'm being fake or I have ulterior motives, or I'm pretending to like something, and I start second-guessing everything I do as a result.

>>377447
All you can do is answer those questions honestly at this point. Tell the class, are all your actions pure and true?

>>377452
When I get into a fandom or decide "I'd like to be friends with that person", it's because I like it, or because I like them. I could do things just to be popular, but I've always decided against them.

I only started questioning my motives because other people questioned them. I only thought I was stupid when other people told me I was stupid.

>>377454
Then you know. Good job. Get a gold star.