|
Edwird -> RE: The conceptual penis as a social construct (5/22/2017 7:21:02 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: BoscoX
quote:
ORIGINAL: WinsomeDefiance
Conceptual thinking, is an interesting topic. Most use text book arguments, usually as slurs, based off critical thinking.
I admit I found the title amusing, and my mind went from how one might be googling Conceptual Thinking and wind up reading about The Conceptual Penis. All internet roads eventually lead to porn and penis.
If I was better at feeling my way through brain fog and finding misplaced memories, I'd enjoy starting a thread about conceptual thinking.
Half of "the meaning of life" is procreation. Without powerful animalistic sex drives we would not be here contemplating conceptual penisis or the dicks who despise physical ones for twisted ideological purposes
So then, as to the other half . . .
The female gender, and the vagina especially, have been called out for purpose of derision, spite, and, ultimately, the fount of all sin, as by all Western and Middle East religious tomes.
I know that "Mr. Johnson" and "Herman, The One-Eyed German" take some abuse in modern literature, but that treatment is not quite so embedded in the culture as is the case with human females.
The vast majority of men today are not like this and want nothing to do with it,
But,
The ancestors of regressmen wrote all the religious books.
Apparently, the pass/fail test for determining whether a man was devoted to God, or was worthy of God's Grace, was that he had to prove that he outright despised and absolutely hated all women, or especially their ever being on the planet in the first place.
|
|
|
|
