Exmo here, I highly doubt it. There are rules against lesser forms of intamacy (petting), also this clearly violates the spirit of the law (of no premerital sex).
I could see it happening but any Mormon worth their salt would raise their eyebrow and deny it. This is on the level of holding a knife in the middle of a street and getting somebody to bump people into you, it’s not murder, right?
If you wanna talk crazy let’s talk about how you can figure out somebody’s secret name if you know the first time they went through temple endowment. Or how bigfoot is technically canon.
It’s a repression thing, they can’t face having sexual fantasies of their own so their mind tricks them into thinking they’re super interested in every news story about wild sex things - suddenly they’re up all night imagining wild and perverted things that are probably happening, but not because they like thinking about those things they reassure themselves, they’re a good moral person trying to protect civic morality…
Read interviews with satanic panic people, endless vivid details right out of an extreme romance novel. Tiktok human trafficking panic is another example, those videos with obviously made up warnings about sex rings and kidnapping methods - it’s all structured just like it’s porn equivalents.
Out of curiosity, did most of the people there actually follow the no sex rule? I know at some of the Christian colleges I’ve been to, there are lots of people who do have sex, they just have to be secretive enough about it. Of course, a good portion of kids at those colleges were just pressured to go there by their families, but aren’t that religious themselves. 🤷
I don’t know any Mormons, so idk if it’s remotely similar at a school like BYU.
Thanks for the insight - jump humping and soaking sound like the kind of bullshit my parents would believe because it was featured in some local news story.
Most “teen trends”, especially those related to sex, are just wildly blown out of proportion “stories” based on a couple of people trying something weird, someone else hearing about it, and now suddenly all the teens are doing it.
It reminds me of being in high school when my mom asked me if my girlfriend’s jelly bracelets were a sex thing because she heard about girls owing sex acts to guys who can break one.
I never heard of the jelly bracelet thing, but now I’m thinking about how that sort of thing can be way stronger than it looks.
I have some TPU filament that’s stretchy enough to feel flimsy, but after I realized I somehow couldn’t snap it, it became kind of a strength challenge. The strongest guy I know couldn’t snap it, and he bent a 36" pipe wrench once. But then again, there weren’t sex acts on the line.
But of course you know this, so why exactly are you asking?
No. I don’t. That’s why I’m asking.
I thought incel was an abbreviation for an involuntary celibate person, male or female, who genuinely can’t have sex for a plethora of potential reasons. Since the word “involuntary” is part of the abbreviation, to me, that means the person who’s celibate can’t help it.
For what it’s worth, I’m on the spectrum, and one aspect of my neuropathy is that I over-emphasize strict definitions of words etymologically and need to have strict meaning in communication. I perceive people using fluid or inaccurate definitions for words as a vehicle for hostile manipulation and malicious intent.
I am in therapy for this, but I’m skeptical CBT or drugs can rectify how I interpret linguistic nuance.
Well, typically other libertarians like to pretend we don’t exist and invoke the magic phrase “you’re not a real libertarian”, whereas left libertarians prefer to pretend that there’s more than one of us. The tl;Dr is that it’s more of anti-authoritarian take than a pro-free-market take that you’d get from right lib.
On the matter of economics, I believe that free markets work and work well where they exist, which is certainly not everywhere they’re imagined to. In other words, I’m not willing to imagine that markets with baked-in coercion (like healthcare) are free. Free markets require choice and, ultimately, the ability to say no without coming to harm. If I can buy a widget from Bob, a widget from Sally, or not buy a widget and suffer no cost or harm, that’s a free market. I also generally don’t believe in rugged individualism; poverty is, itself, a coercive force in economics. This sort of view is partly how I wholeheartedly endorse mass transit and good urbanism as a libertarian, because being functionally coerced into car ownership isn’t economic freedom.
I also believe that the government does have a right to interfere with gross negligence. That is, if you’re drunk driving, if you’re having a bonfire and there’s a high wildfire risk, or you’re doing something that any reasonable person would understand is an imminent danger to the safety of others around you, the government has an absolute right to make you stop. Most right libertarians think that the government should only interfere with direct violence and that everything else can be settled in court; so basically, if you’re a drunk driver, make sure you kill whoever you hit so they can’t sue you. I also think that this applies to companies and organizations, not just people.
Those are, probably, pretty uncontroversial takes, and you might be thinking “so where’s the libertarianism?”. Well, I also think that the government has massively overstepped its bounds, especially in the last forty years or so since Reaganism. Ready? Here we go. The war on drugs and the war on terror has seen the government giving itself ridiculous powers that need to be culled immediately. The NSA mass surveillance program (which was ‘killed’ by the SCOTUS and resurrected by Obama and the Republicans under the cynically-named USA FREEDOM ACT later that same day) should be erased in totality. The government should not be collecting any data from any tech company on anybody without consent, a warrant, or the data being anonymized (if it’s, for example, for research purposes). The patriot act should be repealed yesterday, and gitmo should be closed because holding anyone without trial is wrong, full stop. No-knock raids should not happen, period, and we desperately need police reform. The entire country is a free speech zone, and protests should not be met with brutal crackdowns. I also think that what happens between consenting adults or what a consenting adult does to themselves is nobody else’s business, as long as it’s without coercion. That’s maybe 5% of the rant I could go on, but I don’t want to write a book, and I don’t think you want to read one.
Also:
-What happens between consenting adults is nobody else’s business, least of all the church or the government. I’m pro sex work and pro LGBT rights.
-I’m pro-abortion rights.
-The government needs to leave the native Americans the fuck alone. 2023 and we’re still fucking with them. The government needs to leave everyone alone, but they particularly need to fuck off on native Americans. That said, I think we should still financially support their recovery as a people and culture from what we’ve done to them, but they should get to decide the shape that takes, not us.
-I’m firmly against borders. If it was up to me, I’d Thanos snap that shit. No more borders. I know that’s an extreme position, and I’d be willing to compromise for an EU-style open borders arrangement.
Interesting, so the first link claims that the THC molecule is the single factor that causes the plaque buildup, however they failed to delineate between edible cannabis consumption and inhaled cannabis consumption so it’s difficult for them to draw that conclusion.
It’s especially weird when you read the third link and it claims that unmodified (read: No THC) zero-cannabinoid marijuana caused the same issues. It seems like the conclusions drawn by two separate studies are contradictory and it seems as if the smoke itself has more to do with plaque buildup than the molecule.
All in all, the studies don’t account for lifestyle and only establish a control based on genetics, sex, and age. Habitual cannabis users having a higher risk of heart disease could be because the stereotypical stoner is also a sedentary individual with abysmal diet. None of which was controlled for based on the study itself. In fact one of the links (can’t recall which) claimed that when lab rats were fed a high fat diet and were bred specifically for higher cholesterol, they showed symptoms of arterial hardening at much higher rates, implying that while cannabis might have an effect, the contextual diet and lifestyle are most likely still the largest factor here.
As for the last link about stroke, the study just found that people who have had multiple strokes have a higher number of cannabis users per capita than the control group. Great, absolutely zero links to the lifestyle of people who have had a stroke that could possibly also be a factor here.
I’d look more into who’s lobbying these studies to know what the truth is, there are a lot of interests with money who hate cannabis. Everyone from Jack Daniels whiskey to Opiod manufacturers want cannabis to go down as if threatens their corner of the market.
The funny part is how that word supposedly may translate better as "maiden" than "virgin", as in "young girl" rather than someone who has not yet had intercourse. I wonder how many people have been beheaded for asking about such things.
Jesus Himself hated such over-religiosity - "Want religion that is pure and blameless? Take care of widows and orphans!!" - but sadly it seems the natural human condition.:-( The extreme irony is how He went to LARGE efforts to just constantly and consistently give the religious fruitcakes of His day the middle finger ("thou shaltest say to every Karen, fuck ye off"), which ofc got Him killed just like everyone else who tried it previously. So like... was Jesus one of the early atheists then, if you think about it like that...? :-D /s
But I mean, in all seriousness, the gist of Jesus' message seems to me to be to ignore the fruitcakes and just do the right thing, regardless ("the worker deserves his wages..."). So like, wtf does His teenie sexed-up mommy have anything to do with anything?! But Karens gonna Karen, I guess, and get all worked up about whatever drama they can either find or invent.
I was already having issues with what the church taught about gay people. One of the priests at my college church likened sex before marriage to child sex trafficking, saying premarital sex directly lead to child sex trafficking. I walked out in the middle of the sermon.
I was still on the fence about if I was Catholic or not afterwards, it was all I knew growing up after all. I went to history class that next semester and learned the Bible was just piecemealed together by a bunch of old white men in the 16th 4th Century during the council of nicea. There is literally no way to tell who actually wrote the stories in the Bible, much less determine their validity because the stories were put together in a single book hundreds of years after they were written. On top of that, if a story didn’t fit what these guys decided the Catholic faith was supposed to be, they threw it out!
The Bible isn’t the word of God, it’s some dudes in the 16th 4th century’s head cannon.
That pretty much sealed the deal for me. If there is some divine force, it certainly wasn’t going to speak to me through this book or this faith.
Then to add insult to injury, in that same class I learned about the history about how the Christian faith came about, and how they basically just chose one of many Mesopotamian gods and decided he was the one true God and propagandized and crusaded their way into making people accept their beliefs. All of it was just decided and shaped by humans, and none of it was “divine” as I was taught. It was all a lie.
My mother worked at a catholic school; she was sexually harassed by the principal of the school and rather than firing the POS the diocese sent the whole staff to sexual harassment training. I found that to be a real slap in the face. Showed me they still had zero interest in accountability. I still appreciate the message behind a lot of what the church preaches (I loathe some of their stances, mostly related to sex and abortion) but I refuse to enable their hypocrisy.
I’ve gone from Sunday attending to more lax and agnostic. Does that count? If so, is because of how inconsistent the actual practical actions of churches I’ve been to. Started protestant, but enough were hypocrites (remind me of the pharisees) so I stopped going. Became catholic and loved it, but the way the church has continually terribly handled the sex abuse pedo cases has disgusted me. Priests should be held to a higher standard, not lower.
Additionally, I don’t wanna be associated with the people who are Christian on TV. All the right wing Republicans in the US govt are terrible people. Whatever they say they are, I don’t wanna be a part of that. It’s hard to reconcile “love your neighbor” and then legislate their live away or give crazy people unfettered access to guns.
On a more practical level, I like a lot of the charity work and compassion taught by Jesus. I’m OK with the spiritual aspects. I cannot get behind the church’s message (mostly protestant) about personal relationship with God. If God intervenes, then that means it’s his responsibility when he doesn’t intervene and a lot of terrible things are his fault. If he doesn’t intervene, then a lot of what the church says is wrong. It doesn’t add up.
It was a journey. There were several small things that kept adding up until I couldn’t handle surrounding myself with hypocrites.
Why do Christians get so sad when people die? They act like they’ll never see that person again when their religion says it’ll only be a few years before they’re reunited. Everyone says they believe that, but no one acts like it.
When was the last time the church has been on the forefront of social change, and what was it for? Wasn’t slavery - that’s how Southern Baptists split from Baptists. Wasn’t women getting the right to vote or get divorced… Wasn’t when people were asking for workers rights… Same-sex marriage… You name it. The people claiming to have a direct line to the most potent love in the universe… Kind of suck at spreading the love around.
Mega-churches.
All the pedo scandals and coverups. It’s a feature, not a bug.
Truly horrifying living conditions around the world. There is an amoeba found all over the globe who can eat its way into your eyeball, and then into your brain. Children experience this, and in some places, 30-40% of a population went blind because of it. There is no NEED for this to exist for an all-powerful god, but here they are. If god made nature, they made these amoeba, and I don’t want to associate with someone who created every deadly pathogen to ever exist.
If there is a god, they’re a fucked-up sociopath, not the embodiment of love that I keep being told they are.
The first thing was how the catholic church handled the sex abuse allegations.
The second thing was how they taught that the Bible was “the literal word of God”, then changed church doctrine away from the Bible whenever it suited them.
The third thing was how, when my son died at 15, everyone was ok with that being “part of God’s plan”. What the fuck kind of God has a plan that requires 15 year olds to die?
I am a working mom and will tell you - if you don’t schedule time for yourself you won’t get it. I prioritize sex and exercise into the schedule because if not, life and work will eat every moment. For 2024, schedule in 3 hours every weekend, or an evening or morning but every single week.
Realize that everyone is accommodating everyone else, they aren’t doing it to annoy you. You aren’t the center of the universe. But that doesn’t mean you don’t need time to recharge, plan it weekly in 2024 and let the schedule fit around you too. It will.
Why do we give Crusher so much shit for her ghostly dalliance, but Yar gets off scott free, when she had full on sex with an android that was only a couple months old from his perspective?
And don’t tell me that it’s because Rick Berman showed up on set in his true form to kill her off.
Larian has released a fresh batch of Baldur's Gate 3 stats, confirming who's the most romanced character, how many people have completed the game so far, and more.
This depends, we have to apply logic, like the Vulcans do.
If it’s the nasty in your pasty then you’re not a virgin and negates the whole situation. Therefore, by proof of contradiction, the “past” you is actually another separate entity from another timeline, and you’ve achieved sex.
If it’s a future you then it doesn’t count, as you can’t prove it wasn’t merely temporal masterbation.
Even the Vulcan science directorate cannot refuse this.
Just double checked. Looks like beta-canon from the novels. Interestingly, according to Memory Alpha, the first episode or two with Bajorans in TNG had all the male Bajorans wear the earring on the right and all the female Bajorans wear it on the left, but right ears for both sexes became standard pretty early on. The only other named character that wears it on the left is Lt Mura in PIC.
“I think sex is beautiful, and I like sharing it with others — whether the energy is weird or not,” said Mark, who described himself as “gay with a side of bi”
soak and jump hump (feddit.de)
Economic Theory is Fun tho. (lemmy.ml)
America: Getting ready for another election. Rest of the world: (lemmy.ca)
deleted_by_author
Former religious lemmings, what made you quit religion or stop being a believer?
Mostly trying to relate.
What do you want for Christmas?
I’m thinking of gifting myself a Nintendo Switch and getting my Sister a Kindle.
If you needed motivation (lemmy.world)
Directed by JJ Abrams (pixelfed.social)
Baldur's Gate 3 Stats Reveal Who the Most-Romanced Character Is and More - IGN (www.ign.com)
Larian has released a fresh batch of Baldur's Gate 3 stats, confirming who's the most romanced character, how many people have completed the game so far, and more.
Qui-Gon is an absolute Menace (startrek.website)
poor wesley (cdn.catsweat.com)
Riker had some double-standard problems, man... (lemmynsfw.com)
Overly Detached Keiko (lemmy.world)
Blank...
18+ Inside the last porn theater in Los Angeles (web.archive.org)