So, Um, Anyone Else Kinda Got a Thing for Priests?

[livius drusus]

I blame Richard Chamberlain for being so hot in The Thorn Birds (and all those cute seminarians who used to teach our religion classes).

Mmm... Priests... (http://www.calendarioromano.co.uk/) :homdrool:

[SharonDee]

Corrine? Is that you?

[Godless Wonder]

No, they creep me out. They seem so . . . anal. (And I don'e even mean that.) But then I'm a guy. There was a priest on David Letterman last night, at least I think he was a priest, Catholic anyway, had some connection with Frank Sinatra, but I can't remember who he was. Anyway, he was creeping me out last night.

Nuns on the other hand.... no, wait, they creep me out too.

[livius drusus]

Corrine? Is that you?

Erm... Huh? Is this a de Sade reference?

[SharonDee]

Corrine? Is that you?

Erm... Huh? Is this a de Sade reference?
No. It's me coming off my recent Soap (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B00008EY5S/qid=1103815778/sr=1-2/ref=sr_1_2/002-7597461-9700826?v=glance&s=dvd) marathon, thinking of Corrine Tate's obsession with Father Tim.

I forgot that the reference would be too banal for one of your high falootin' tastes. ;)

[godfry n. glad]

Give it up, liv. You're not their type.

godfry

[wade-w]

Soap: Best. Sitcom. Ever.

[livius drusus]

I'm afraid I never saw Soap, but it's not a rarified tastes thing, I swear. They just like reruns of Happy Days and Manimal better in Italy. :D

[D. Scarlatti]

Richard Chamberlain? Gay as a french horn.

[livius drusus]

Hey! My dad played french horn!




Deja vu, anyone?

[godfry n. glad]

liv, you are not their type. Richard Chamberlain included.

godfry

[livius drusus]

I can't heeeeear you, godfry. Father October is whispering sweet nothings in my hear. :lalala:

[godfry n. glad]

I can't heeeeear you, godfry. Father October is whispering sweet nothings in my hear. :lalala:

If Father October really is whispering sweet nothings in your ear, I'd suspect you of having the physique of a 12 year old boy.

Switch to the Anglicans, deary. You'll have a better chance.

godfry

[ApostateAbe]

Does a small chance at having them make you want them more?

[godfry n. glad]

Hey, liv... I'm a clergyman (ULC) and I used to have a Roman collar somewhere. I'll have to see if I can dig it out. Would that count? :eh?:

godfry

[livius drusus]

Does a small chance at having them make you want them more?

That's part of the allure, certainly, although in my case it's not about having forbidden fruit so much as being found so intensely irresistable that even someone who has dedicated all the fun uses of his genitals to God would give them up to me.

The rest is really more nostalgia than anything else. All the male teachers at Marymount were gay/married/not hot, so we invested the cute young seminarians with all the teacher crushes that would normally have been spread around.

[livius drusus]

Hey, liv... I'm a clergyman (ULC) and I used to have a Roman collar somewhere. I'll have to see if I can dig it out. Would that count? :eh?:

Depends on what you wrapped it around. :heybabeh:

[pescifish]

Father October. :yup:

[Goliath]

I was about to reply, but then I saw that GW said prettymuch everything I wanted to say, so I didn't reply....but wait, I did reply!

:doh:

[Adora]

Being raised a Catholic, my instant reaction to this is...

Hell Yeah.

Forbidden fruit, corruption, everything that liv said, and all that. At least, it's a good fantasy. Reality is... well, most of them are probably gay. Especially in the Catholic church.

[ApostateAbe]

How would homosexuals be more lured to priesthood than heterosexuals?

[Sweetie]

I blame Richard Chamberlain for being so hot in The Thorn Birds (and all those cute seminarians who used to teach our religion classes).

Mmm... Priests... (http://www.calendarioromano.co.uk/) :homdrool:


Are you kidding? Richard Chamberlain????? He so ruined my image of Ralph de Bricassart who was actually good looking in my mind. He is gay though, of course, or was. Is he still alive? No offense liv, if you like him that much. :P

Thing for priests, no. Thing for good/great looking tall, well proportioned, dark haired, bright-eyed, perfect teeth with sexy groves in the sides of their mouths, full of charisma, charm and joie de vivra who look sexy as hell wearing an all black tailored suit/uniform, I mean really, it should be a sin, men? Damn right! Have at least one of the men like that I've encountered been a priest? Yes. It's so hard to believe that you could list all the things you would want in a man, and he comes perfectly packaged as a priest, but of course, one might be already married so it should be of no account. :D :innocent:

[Adora]

How would homosexuals be more lured to priesthood than heterosexuals?
Living a cloistered life, exclusively homosocial relations, avoiding the possible pressures placed on them by a family for marriage & reproduction, and then there's repression theory which is a whole other kettle of fish.

[godfry n. glad]

How would homosexuals be more lured to priesthood than heterosexuals?

Candles, incense, opportunity, protection and poofy hats.

godfry

[Socratoad]

Tradition.

[Corwin]

How would homosexuals be more lured to priesthood than heterosexuals?

It's MUCH easier to stay in the closet. Nobody asks why you haven't gotten married and made 15 babies yet.

[Sweetie]

It's a pretty simple thing, homosexuals cannot practice under Catholic teaching therefore the priesthood is ideal if they have to be celibate anyway. I don't know that it's a great thing that if your temptation is men to be around single men all the time though, and the Church agrees with this which is one of the reasons why she no longer accepts or only under certain circumstances will accept those who self-identify as homosexual into the priesthood.

[Bella]

So liv, what's your best priest fantasy?

[bobeh]

I can honestly say I've never had any fantasies involving priests...but nuns...uhmm...mmmm. Naughty nuns with secret fantasies.

[ceptimus]

And they're expected to wear a dress while working (or is that only Anglican priests?)

[livius drusus]

So liv, what's your best priest fantasy?

Nothing fancy. Just your basic loss of control mad passion on the altar. Needless to say, Quills is a big favorite of mine. :tmbrows:

[Adora]

It's a pretty simple thing, homosexuals cannot practice under Catholic teaching therefore the priesthood is ideal if they have to be celibate anyway.
Except there's the issue of many homosexual priests not being celibate. I've read/seen/heard stories that in some parts of the world where they are desperate for young men to join, some priests engage in homosexual relations whilst in seminaries, but as long as they always confess and are given absolution each time, they're free to keep on doing it. "All Merciful God" and all that rot.

[Corwin]

I once suggested that for halloween a girlfriend of mine should dress as a nun and I'd dress as Cotton Mather.... and she could keep me on a leash. That close enough? ;)

[viscousmemories]

Can't say I've ever had any homosexual priest fantasies, and my Mother was once a nun so no, none of those fantasies either. :eek:

[Talulah]

I used to fantasize about priests a lot when I was a teenager. I wasn't raised Catholic and had never known a priest or nun but that made the fantasy so much better. It was the idea that he would break his vows to God because I was so desirable that he couldn't help himself. Then he would be wracked with guilt but he wouldn't be able to stop himself. I had a whole series of the fantasies. Him watching me during services; in the confessional; taking his collar off; trying to stop himself from being turned on and failing...

And there was always music in the background- organs, chants, etc - rising to a fevered pitch as the storyline of my fantasy progressed.

Part of what made the fantasy so powerful was my lack of exposure to my desired setting. I envisioned it like the movies where everyone is dressed nice and the colors are rich and the people attractive.

[Sweetie]

So liv, what's your best priest fantasy?

Nothing fancy. Just your basic loss of control mad passion on the altar. Needless to say, Quills is a big favorite of mine. :tmbrows:

I so love Joaquim Pheonix (River Pheonix's brother who I so enjoyed as well) and I totally expected to like that movie, was excited to see it, but when he started screwing her after she was dead and some other funky shit, I guess I just think he acts a little too well, and I got disgusted with him, ugh. Some of the more funky elements of the sexuality of some humans oftentimes gives me the desire to....... be celibate. :D I suppose in his case as well, it didn't help that he was in Gladiator and was insane and going for his own sister. I really liked him in "Inventing the Abbots" though.

[JoeP]

Mmm, Talulah ... hot fantasy. I think it's the music that does it.

[Sweetie]

Except there's the issue of many homosexual priests not being celibate.

There's many issues with many married men not being faithful, there's serial adultery and a whole whack of issues in this day and age. It's just one of those things.

I've read/seen/heard stories that in some parts of the world where they are desperate for young men to join, some priests engage in homosexual relations whilst in seminaries,

Never heard of this in particular as of yet.

but as long as they always confess and are given absolution each time, they're free to keep on doing it. "All Merciful God" and all that rot.

That would be called the sin of presumption, to presume on God's mercy. No, I never heard that and have never been taught, led to believe that that is how confession works. In fact I won't go to confession unless I fully intend to cease doing what I have done, it's a waste of time and an evil in it's own right, ie: the sin of presumption and the Church recognizes it as such.

[livius drusus]

I so love Joaquim Pheonix (River Pheonix's brother who I so enjoyed as well) and I totally expected to like that movie, was excited to see it, but when he started screwing her after she was dead and some other funky shit, I guess I just think he acts a little too well, and I got disgusted with him, ugh. Some of the more funky elements of the sexuality of some humans oftentimes gives me the desire to....... be celibate.

Well but, in his dream she came back to life before he screwed her. Even so, I thought the whole thing was hot precisely because it plumbed such a disturbing depth of human passion.

I suppose in his case as well, it didn't help that he was in Gladiator and was insane and going for his own sister. I really liked him in "Inventing the Abbots" though.

He was the best thing in Gladiator, I thought, including the hot for sis bit. ;) I haven't seen "Inventing the Abbots" yet.

[Sweetie]

Well but, in his dream she came back to life before he screwed her. Even so, I thought the whole thing was hot precisely because it plumbed such a disturbing depth of human passion.

The combination of the explicit sexual influence of the writings of the Marquis de Salle in this movie, plus his insanity, the disturbing depths and even the near the end stuff with the writings in the walls of his cell with blood and shit, just the combination of all that stuff was just disgusting, then the necrophilia, the priesthood. I thought, get a fucking life you sick fucks. Well, then whats her name, the main character did this one movie too that I watched where she was a bit fucked up and she got this female friend who was fucked up, they became lovers which was nothing except they were insane and it had cult-like pact-like thing to it, killed this old woman, just stabbed her and stabbed her over and over again and got off on it and it was a true story.

And now I know how far you'd [they'd] go
To be the next freak show
American psycho
Cover of the magazines
Patron Saint to troubled teens
Wish I never heard your [it's] name

I can't smile or even be amused or even slightly turned on by the mixture of all that crap, it makes purity attractive. Too many people get hurt and burned and damaged by fucked up sexuality:

"Holy Water" - by Big and Rich

Somewhere there's a stolen halo
I use to watch her wear it well
Everything would shine wherever she would go
But looking at her now you'd never tell

Someone ran away with her innocence
A memory she can't get out of her head
I can only imagine what she's feeling
When she's praying
Kneeling at the edge of her bed

And she says take me away
And take me farther
Surround me now
And hold, hold, hold me like holy water
Holy water

She wants someone to call her angel
Someone to put the light back in her eyes
She's looking through the faces
The unfamiliar places
She needs someone to hear her when she crys

He was the best thing in Gladiator, I thought, including the hot for sis bit. ;) I haven't seen "Inventing the Abbots" yet.

It's kinda clean, had Liv Tylor in it, but it's the type of distress I prefer, at wanting something you can't have, and not because people get so disgusted with the desires and would prefer that one not breathe one's taint on them. I liked Stealing Beauty too, was a good work, I'd call it even art, I'd like to write something like that.

[godfry n. glad]

It's kinda clean, had Liv Tylor in it, but it's the type of distress I prefer, at wanting something you can't have, and not because people get so disgusted with the desires and would prefer that one not breathe one's taint on them. I liked Stealing Beauty too, was a good work, I'd call it even art, I'd like to write something like that.

Inventing the Abbotts was a period piece, postwar America, IIRC.
It was an okay chick flick, with Jennifer Connolly and Liv Tyler. Stealing Beauty was also an okay film. Kinda arty, rambling story line, obscure allusions, and Liv Tyler. Both films have beautiful cinematography, but the subjects, postwar America and late century Tuscany, vary considerably. That Liv Tyler is in both makes them worth watching.

[Sweetie]

I don't find incest attractive and the movie represented this, this relationship with her brother was damaged, the question of how did she feel about it, she was scared and disgusted and I've never desired my brother or sister. I find it strange though, that many would throw stones at priests but then lay down their own illicit desires and pleasures.

Pedophilia and incest, well, I know of a 15 year old boy who was sleeping with his younger brother for years, I also know of several girls who were abused by this one guy who had his own children, and though he didn't abuse these children to my knowledge, he was interested in little girls, his children were abused by other people angry at their father for what he had done.

This one house I spoke of a few days ago, with all the porn, was a place of fear to a certain extent, and a place of embarassment for me. Fear? My sister would get prank calls, bad ones when she was babysitting which scared me shitless and then was mixed up with this guy who seemed alright, flirting and all that stuff, playing around but it turns out a few years ago that this same guy murdered a girl, drove her home from the bar, she never made it home. I think it was that same guy making the prank calls.

A guy I temporarily went to school with, for some reason I have no idea why, broke into a house of people he knew who had twins and killed one of them, stabbed her, she was what, seven? eight I think. He was a foster kid so you never know what he'd been through.

These are subjective things and why I might have a different perception because of my own experiences, so yes, I have issues with pedophilia and incest in particular, necrophilia and beastiality as well, which are just extras. I'm sure I could come up with a few more things that I consider to desire is the product of a disorder or a derangement, but this is because of my perception via my experiences. I don't mean to be harsh or anything to anybody, just so you know.

The movie Quills was about the Marquis de Sales who was locked up in an asylum and he had to have all his pens taken away in the end, because he was insane would just churn out filth which everyone was getting a hold of and getting off on, if I can recall correctly, including the other insane at the asylum and it was some serious filth mixed with some really gross and perhaps violent stuff. He got so desperate that he would write filth with his own filth, shit and blood on the walls.

[Adora]

There's many issues with many married men not being faithful, there's serial adultery and a whole whack of issues in this day and age. It's just one of those things.

And that's why I brought it up.

Never heard of this in particular as of yet.
Then I guess it can't be true.

No, I never heard that and have never been taught, led to believe that that is how confession works. In fact I won't go to confession unless I fully intend to cease doing what I have done, it's a waste of time and an evil in it's own right, ie: the sin of presumption and the Church recognizes it as such.
Because as we know, the Catholic church is never hypocritical, contradictory, wrong, bad, or good at covering its own arse.

No, never ever ever ever ever.

Marquis de Salle
Sade.

And what's with the bad post-poetry? Is it meant to prove some point, or just make us feel all emo and therefore somehow sympathetic to your discussion?

Sweetie, seriously, we're talking about fantasies here, not real-life. Learn the difference. We know what the movie is about, we also know that it was an indulged representation of the stories that surrounding his latter days. It's also a fantasy. Perving at hot Italian Catholic priests? Fantasy. So whether or not some kid you know got fucked by his brother is irrevelant to the discussion of the fantasy of Inventing the Abbotts (which is the only connection I can assume from the previous post to yours, even though I have never seen the film).

Throwing stones at priests who fuck 8 year old boys is another matter entirely, especially when the oh-so-never-ever-hypocritical Catholic church covers the crimes up and allows these men to stay on in positions where they can access victims. That is called real life.

[Sweetie]

And that's why I brought it up.

Ok, cool, not a problem.

Then I guess it can't be true.

That's a bit odd. I said I haven't heard that particular incident as of yet, in any specific place, documented, etc. I did not say it does not happen or has not happened. I've heard of cases where priests have raped nuns ie: I never said, implied that it can't be true, I said I have not heard of that as of yet. You have effectively read into, implied, etc., something that is not there most likely the product of a bias with unnecessary antagonism. Bring up some information that is documented to that effect, that is not rumor, gossip or products of the hate-mills and those who are prejudiced then we're good. As far as that goes, you can be antagonistic, it's ok with me, but it does highlight a problem.

Because as we know, the Catholic church is never hypocritical, contradictory, wrong, bad, or good at covering its own arse.

No, never ever ever ever ever.

Says you, not I.

Sade.

Yes, perhaps. I just heard the name, never really read it in type.

And what's with the bad post-poetry? Is it meant to prove some point, or just make us feel all emo and therefore somehow sympathetic to your discussion?

No, not at all. I said my perceptions and my experiences have led me to connect some of the sexual desires of some people to be deranged or psychotic, not normal, they leave a bad taste in my mouth like you do with most people who aren't willing to put up with it.

Sweetie, seriously, we're talking about fantasies here, not real-life.

Sure, but I just don't understand the desire or the attraction because of my perceptions and experiences. Really, if you think it's a good thing to fantasize about children, if you like the thought of sleeping with your brother, if the idea of chickens turns you on, well maybe an octupus, and lying with the dead, cool. I don't understand it and I don't have to, it's creepy to me, it, which is my point, turns me off and like I said, makes me disgusted with human sexuality and sexuality in general, especially the pleasure of someone defecating on another. It's creepy, it's sick, it's all of those things, to me, you need not agree, indulge away. I know too many people who have indulged and been hurt, I don't see any value in it but then, as I said, once again, I am not you.

Learn the difference. We know what the movie is about, we also know that it was an indulged representation of the stories that surrounding his latter days.

I don't care about what the actual story is based on and I never said I did. The movie was creepy and deranged, in fact I think that was the point, it put all of that in one category, same shit, different scents.

It's also a fantasy. Perving at hot Italian Catholic priests? Fantasy.

Ok, that's fairly normal I would think. It's sacreligious to me, but then some people like that and good for them. Some people like to be fucked with crucifixes I'm sure, but don't tell me that it's normal. I know men who go a little mad when seeing women in sexual poses with rosaries. I don't understand that attraction either, a naked woman, or a naked woman with a rosary? One is just an attraction the other is an attraction to the sacriligious. I don't personally care what they are attracted to but I think such a thing is disordered, you may not be inclined to agree and once again Adora, as much as you might like people agreeing with you, it's of very little importance to me.

So whether or not some kid you know got fucked by his brother is irrevelant to the discussion of the fantasy of Inventing the Abbotts (which is the only connection I can assume from the previous post to yours, even though I have never seen the film).

Oh, sorry, Inventing the Abbots is a fairly clean love story. The point of knowing some kid fucked by his brother is knowing what the elder was into, the ideas and how those affected him, how he chose to act on it, what it has done to him and his brother and whether or not such impulses and desires are good or normal even.

Throwing stones at priests who fuck 8 year old boys is another matter entirely, especially when the oh-so-never-ever-hypocritical Catholic church covers the crimes up and allows these men to stay on in positions where they can access victims. That is called real life.

I'm not defending the Church here, I'm calling what I call deranged or disordered desires deranged or disordered, that includes priests screwing young boys, ie: pedophilia, but it also includes some of the things you are into. Honestly Adora, do, think and fantasize what you wish, I have not said otherwise.

[Sweetie]

It's sacreligious to me, but then some people like that and good for them. Some people like to be fucked with crucifixes I'm sure, but don't tell me that it's normal. I know men who go a little mad when seeing women in sexual poses with rosaries. I don't understand that attraction either, a naked woman, or a naked woman with a rosary? One is just an attraction the other is an attraction to the sacriligious.

Which to me is more cultish than anything in the religion itself, ie: is worse than and by default, to me it is hypocritical in some cases, depending on what the person in question is preaching.

[Adora]

Bring up some information that is documented to that effect, that is not rumor, gossip or products of the hate-mills and those who are prejudiced then we're good.
I have no doubt anything I bring up here will be regarded as such, and it's been so long I have discussed the issue, I'm going to save myself the trouble and just drop it. Kay?

Says you, not I.
And you have evidence otherwise?

No, not at all. I said my perceptions and my experiences have led me to connect some of the sexual desires of some people to be deranged or psychotic, not normal, they leave a bad taste in my mouth like you do with most people who aren't willing to put up with it.
That doesn't explain the poetry.

I know too many people who have indulged and been hurt, I don't see any value in it but then, as I said, once again, I am not you.
Once again, you're confusing real life and fantasy. Fantasy is the fantasy, real life is "people who have indulged and been hurt". We're discussing the former.

I don't care about what the actual story is based on and I never said I did.
Considering the judgements you're making based on nothing except emotional reponses to things you don't understand, perhaps you should start caring.

Ok, that's fairly normal I would think. It's sacreligious to me, but then some people like that and good for them. Some people like to be fucked with crucifixes I'm sure, but don't tell me that it's normal.
Again, fantasising about priests= fantasy. People actually having sex with religious objects = actual events. Learn. The. Difference.

I don't personally care what they are attracted to but I think such a thing is disordered
Why?

And you're supposing things about the fantasies that may or may not even happen. How do you know people don't get turned on by the ritual aspect, or the clothes? Or do you just assume = nakedness, priest/nun = rosary beads? How do you know its only the sacriligious aspect of it, since you pronounce such judgements upon things you already state you don't understand and have a revulsion about?

but it also includes some of the things you are into. Honestly Adora, do, think and fantasize what you wish, I have not said otherwise.
I never said you were trying to stop anyone fantasising, but I think you are laying baseless judgements upon things you can't possibly understand because of your own pointless hangups.

And as for this...
is knowing what the elder was into, the ideas and how those affected him, how he chose to act on it, what it has done to him and his brother and whether or not such impulses and desires are good or normal even.
PUH-LEASE! You contradict yourself here, with the single word I have bolded. There's a difference between "being into something" for whatever emotional or physical reasons, and chosing to act out those desires.

Once again, fantasy, and real life. Learn the difference.

[Sweetie]

I have no doubt anything I bring up here will be regarded as such, and it's been so long I have discussed the issue, I'm going to save myself the trouble and just drop it. Kay?

Ok, so you can't prove your contentions nor do you want to, that's fine with me but we have another issue to resolve. I am not whomever else you have discussed it with who has been obstinate to your assertions, I am I and I am interested in factual information unless of course, we want to start living as though our fantasies and fairy-tales were reality, but that wouldn't be kosher, would it?

And you have evidence otherwise?

Evidence of what? You are the one who asserted that the Church was never wrong or hypocritical, not I and you did so in a way as to assume that I must think that, immediately respond with that or whatever. I never asserted that, that's your problem to do that, not mine. You have given no indication so far that you have any idea of me or my mind at all, though you perhaps will remain convinced that you do, I am certain that you are always right.

That doesn't explain the poetry.
'
Let's think really hard, oh, it hurts to do that. :wink:

I mentioned some experiences I have had here and elsewhere. I said that I have seen how some people's desires have hurt other people, I have indicated here and elsewhere how it has hurt me in the past, as a young child, even my exposure to pornography at a very early age.

So, the song is about the loss of innocence though it does not specify how that came about, but it speaks of a girl hurting because someone took her innocence and she can't forget so she wants to be purified, she wants to forget, this has damaged her which so nicely ties in to my own feelings and my trying to explain why I find some of this stuff so objectionable and why I find purity attractive, more so than what you have set forth. To me this stuff is disturbing and ugly, it has no appeal, but once again, this is me expressing an opinion from my eyes to the page, it is not however, me telling anybody else what to do or how to think or that they are wrong which is why the "my perceptions and experiences" is oft repeated. I am, once again, not like you, I would wish you would cease assuming that I should think like you or like others you have encountered.

Once again, you're confusing real life and fantasy. Fantasy is the fantasy, real life is "people who have indulged and been hurt". We're discussing the former.

Ok, so one isn't a step up to the other and the ones I listed are really not or should not be considered disturbing regardless. We now are blessed with Adora's offical opinion pronounced, and guess what, that's great, that's what you think, it's pretty cool that you are willing to express it.

The problem is, your desires have expressed themselves in physical images that you have shown to us. Not only that, but you have said to me that if I think that the yaoi I've seen, because of the lack of, oh, let's say balls and any body hair whatsoever (which indicates maturity you know) resembles pedophilia, and you say, well, I could show you something else that might resemble it more and I look at you askance, what am I to think of your desires? You show that these fantasies oftentimes require to exist on some visual plane for you to really enjoy, and for you that is mostly drawings. It is no hop or skip or jump from that to the really bad stuff, hand drawn images of children perhaps, which you might consider fantasy and not real-life of course, and maybe even art. The discussion actually reminds me of a thought I had of a pedophile locked behind bars who is capable with art drawing himself images to get off on and the jailers taking away his pens and him crying "but it's art, it's art" or maybe "but it's just fantasy, fantasy, harmless!"

Considering the judgements you're making based on nothing except emotional reponses to things you don't understand, perhaps you should start caring.

Adora, I have, seen, heard and done alot. Honestly, you sound like a fifteen year old who thinks they know everything, I do have a brain as much as you would like to think that because I think this or that or that I don't agree with you then I must not. I am old enough to know that I don't know everything, I know what I have felt and what I have learned through what I have experienced it, and get the point, that is all I'm intending to convey.

Again, fantasising about priests= fantasy. People actually having sex with religious objects = actual events. Learn. The. Difference.

I have a further problem with the fantasy in the objectification of persons in the mind, which I do think will eventually seep out in thought and deed.

In this specific case, I was thinking about it. My attraction to a priest has not been an attraction to a priest, it was an attraction to a man who was a priest and there is a difference.

I never said you were trying to stop anyone fantasising, but I think you are laying baseless judgements upon things you can't possibly understand because of your own pointless hangups.

I have one thing to say Adora, live and learn. Do not presume that because you are alive you know, learn the difference.

[Sweetie]

Playing with fire is fun for children, until they burn the house down. Is playing with fire good? No, it's fire, that's what this is to me. It's all fun and games until someone loses an eye, and guess what, alot of people have lost their eyes so it's no longer fun. My reaction is not solely emotional nor is it necessarily irrational. The thought that A causes B and that B would not exist but for A is not illogical.

[Adora]

we want to start living as though our fantasies and fairy-tales were reality, but that wouldn't be kosher, would it?
No, it wouldn't. I'm glad you've finally learned the difference between the two. Here, have a gold star. *

I never asserted that, that's your problem to do that, not mine. You have given no indication so far that you have any idea of me or my mind at all, though you perhaps will remain convinced that you do, I am certain that you are always right.
Except you replied in a way that suggested you didn't agree. I made a request to see if you did agree or not. And now you're playing games.

Regarding the poetry: Sweetie, I don't care if you were gang-raped by 16 men when you were four, that still doesn't explain the poetry. This isn't an anti-abortion rally where we all sing songs about dying foetuses and hold up photos meant to buy people over to our side emotionally. You find it objectionable because you were hurt when you were younger. Well, fuck me dead, that's not allowing your emotions to get in the way of thinking, is it?

You want to forget. So what?

And, I should probably point out to you, a lot of paedophiles find "purity" and "innocence" attractive too. But to actually know that, you'd need to know a little about paedophillia, wouldn't you?

You show that these fantasies oftentimes require to exist on some visual plane for you to really enjoy, and for you that is mostly drawings.
Okay, Sweetie, when you actually know something about my sexual being, how I fantisise, and what gets me off. Then you can come back here and make assumptions about how I react to the porn I look at. Because, right now, you're only making yourself look like an idiot. Really.

The discussion actually reminds me of a thought I had of a pedophile locked behind bars who is capable with art drawing himself images to get off on and the jailers taking away his pens and him crying "but it's art, it's art" or maybe "but it's just fantasy, fantasy, harmless!"
Um so? It is harmless. Who the fuck is he hurting, if he's behind bars, there's no children around, he's not even fucking anyone else in prison, and he's just jacking off to pictures he's drawn? Please Sweetie, explain to me how this is hurting anyone.

The problem is, your desires have expressed themselves in physical images that you have shown to us.
Um, what? Pointing to a photo of someone I think is physically attractive and sexually appealing is not "expressing my desires in physical images". Pointing to someone and saying "I'd like a piece of that" ala the photo thread is not exactly drawing a complete and specific diagram of exactly what I'd like to do to that person, thankyouverymuch. Or would you like me to illustrate that as well?

Honestly, you sound like a fifteen year old who thinks they know everything
And you don't how exactly? Because as far as your argument goes, the best I can work out is you object to other people's fantasies because a) you don't know that humans have this thing called "impulse control", or you don't want to acknowledge it exists, b) you were fucked by someone as a kid, and can't get over it. Because if there's more to your argument than that, apart from shitty pointless poetry, I have yet to see it.

I am old enough to know that I don't know everything
Ahh, once again, here we observe the common reaction from a board member when they don't actually have any counter arguments around here: resorting to pathetic ageism. Which isn't immature at all. Really it's not.

I have a further problem with the fantasy in the objectification of persons in the mind, which I do think will eventually seep out in thought and deed.
Why do you think it will eventually seep out? Or is this just "Sweetie's Sliding Scale".

Playing with fire is fun for children, until they burn the house down. Is playing with fire good? No, it's fire, that's what this is to me. It's all fun and games until someone loses an eye, and guess what, alot of people have lost their eyes so it's no longer fun.
This is the most pathetic part of your "argument" I've ever seen Sweetie. But for the sake of showing how stupid it is, I'll buy into it.

Yes, children playing with fire, when it gets out of control is bad. But how much, around the world, day in and day out does fire help us? Gas stoves? Gas hot water systems? Coal burning in power stations? Cigarrette lighters? We control it. We contain it. We set up boundaries. We have a healthy respect for fire, most of us. Most of us who just "play" with fire, with knowledge, with boundaries, and with respect for the fire we play with. Even as kids, we play with fire, and there are millions of kids per day who flick their parents cigarette lighter or light candles when it's daylight that don't get burned, or loose an eye.

And then there are those very few that do, that fraction of the population, and adult pyromaniacs who light fires, because they lack impulse control, and because they can't get their dicks up otherwise.

Live and learn Sweetie? Here's a new thing to learn: Just cos your house got burned down, the exception is not the rule.

[Sweetie]

No, it wouldn't. I'm glad you've finally learned the difference between the two. Here, have a gold star. *

So I wonder if you are going to continue to consider your assertions, unfounded and as you say, unprovable are true or whether or not they are merely fairy-tales or perhaps that you have at this time, no good enough reason to think them true.

Except you replied in a way that suggested you didn't agree. I made a request to see if you did agree or not. And now you're playing games.

No, I'm not playing games, I am highlighting that you walked into a trap of your own making, that you are biased, that you assume that other people think things that you assume must be true to them even though it could be very far from the truth and then ask them to prove what you assume they must think. It's stupidity, how pathetic and you don't even see it.

Regarding the poetry: Sweetie, I don't care if you were gang-raped by 16 men when you were four, that still doesn't explain the poetry. This isn't an anti-abortion rally where we all sing songs about dying foetuses and hold up photos meant to buy people over to our side emotionally. You find it objectionable because you were hurt when you were younger. Well, fuck me dead, that's not allowing your emotions to get in the way of thinking, is it?

Sweetheart, I was never raped FYI, I find value in poetry and poetical language and poetic sense and get this, hm, let's see. Now, my perceptions and experiences, which are not necessarily products of emotions because to recognize cause and effect is not, make up me. Let's put it simply for the child in our midst, I am a product of my experiences and perceptions, or perhaps, I am my perceptions. Now, the problem is that it is very possible that if some have not experienced what I have, then they have never been forced to conclude what I have, and in this sense, I am meaning in the sense of ignorance by not having experienced, not walking in the shoes and the opposite is also true, I may not know what they know. Now I would wonder if, oh, it couldn't be, could it? That some of your conclusions and opinions are products of your experiences and thence perceptions which aren't necessarily based on emotions either.

But honestly, Adora, I would not find myself worthy enough to try to explain it to you in order to get past your assumption of emotions to demonstrate why that is not necessarily the correct assumption to make. I just, I just find that reasoning with children is a bit of a waste of my time.

And, I should probably point out to you, a lot of paedophiles find "purity" and "innocence" attractive too. But to actually know that, you'd need to know a little about paedophillia, wouldn't you?

Actually, that has occurred to me, but it came hand in hand with the thought that they like it for much the same reason that some like the overtly sacriligious. :wink:

But alas, my end of this discussion with you and most likely any discussion with you is over. I realize that you know everything and that the thought that it might be a healthy thing to do to restrict ourselves in what we allow ourselves to indulge in is painful, because it really only leaves us with adults to fantasize about, human beings as opposed to animals, the aware and the alive as opposed to the comatose or deceased, and the inanimate of a carrot/dildo variety, perhaps, if it takes your fancy. I know, to most of us it it is a terrible and unreasonable thing to have to do that so I understand why you would be against such a restriction, but then again, my perceptions and experiences so far have led me to think that restricting our fantasies to such strange things as adults who are aware and consenting suffices, but that's for me, I am not you, and thank God. You are not the poster child for why all the things that you do are good, in case you needed that information provided to you, my own subjective opinion of course.

Now, however, I wish I could see you as something other than a little girl, who probably tells her own mother that she doesn't know anything, who gets her nipple pierced just because it is so shocking and she wants to be different, affronting. As a virgin and as far as this other stuff is concerned, she'd probably be turned on by any direct reference to any explicit sexuality whatsoever, regardless of the content but that is unfortunately how I'm stuck seeing you at present and therefore, you are stuck with my pity.

Peace

[Adora]

So I wonder if you are going to continue to consider your assertions, unfounded and as you say, unprovable are true or whether or not they are merely fairy-tales or perhaps that you have at this time, no good enough reason to think them true.
Sweet IPU.

First, USE GRAMMAR WOMAN! I had to read through that "sentence" 3 times to figure out what the fuck you were trying to say.

Second, I do have good reason, but I have no doubt you have not met the individual, and so... that's right, I said I was going to drop this conversation. Can you do me a favour, build a bridge, and get over it as well?

No, I'm not playing games, I am highlighting that you walked into a trap of your own making, that you are biased, that you assume that other people think things that you assume must be true to them even though it could be very far from the truth and then ask them to prove what you assume they must think. It's stupidity, how pathetic and you don't even see it.
Guess again sweetcheeks. I made the comment knowing you would disagree, because you're a good little Catholic drone who gets pantsy anytime someone mentions that maybe, the Catholic church isn't some brilliant paragon of perfect spirituality.

So, really, maybe it's hard to see this from between your arsecheeks and all (sorry, what was that about not being able to see things?), but I'm sure you'll figure out what I was reall trying to do eventually, and then you can get three gold stars!

I was never raped
I never said you were.

I just, I just find that reasoning with children is a bit of a waste of my time.
And yet, you continue to reply. So who's the bigger fuckwit here? The one who's doing this just for entertainment, or the one who's taking it seriously, and noncing around like some holier-than-thou god-felcher and can't see the obvious motivations behind posts made, or construct a half-decent sentence in English?

Actually, that has occurred to me, but it came hand in hand with the thought that they like it for much the same reason that some like the overtly sacriligious.
And your evidence for the correlation between the two is?

I don't know everything Sweetie. I mean, I still don't know what you're snorting, but I have a feeling after your little show in the 'Why I am no longer a Catholic' thread, it might only be holy water.

... supposed "belittling" assumptions dressed up in faux "In the sake of the conversation"...
This is why I love this board. It just reeks of the sweet delicious human stench of hypocrisy. No, I'm being dead serious fellas. I've never been to a board where a bigger bunch of wankers think they are oh-so-much above everyone else, no matter what their spiritual holdings. Myself included. C'mere you guys. NEW YEARS WARM FUZZIES HUG!

[JoeP]

This is why I love this board. It just reeks of the sweet delicious human stench of hypocrisy. No, I'm being dead serious fellas. I've never been to a board where a bigger bunch of wankers think they are oh-so-much above everyone else, no matter what their spiritual holdings. Myself included. C'mere you guys. NEW YEARS WARM FUZZIES HUG!
I hate agreeing with you but I'm going to do it here. :yup:

Happy New Year: :huggle: :huggle: :huggle:
:squeeze:
:hugs:
:grouphug:

[CARLA]

:D OH...Heck yeah..!! Well not so much now as an adult. But growing up in my youth I had a huge crush on Father Scheslow...!! :giggle: He was a hunk...!! FORGIVE ME FATHER FOR I HAVE SINNED, MY THOUGHTS WERE IMPURE..!! :yup: