On Licked Cupcakes *PG-13

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
_moksha
_Emeritus
Posts: 22508
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 8:42 pm

Post by _moksha »

Bond...James Bond wrote:
KimberlyAnn wrote:
moksha wrote:
Bond...James Bond wrote: French kissing=oral sex?

Well, at least not the Americanized version of such kissing. The French do things differently, especially in the Remulac region.


How interesting! You can't just leave us hanging here, Moksha! What do they do differently? I want to know! At least give us a hint or a link or SOMETHING! If there's any kind of oral sex with the mouth that I don't know about yet, I need to find out!

KA


Yeah Moksha. Spit it out!

So you swallowed that bit. eh Bond? I would have spit out my Pepsi, if I had been drinking any!

Kimberly, I don't intentionally want to leave you hanging. Being fully satisfied is important, but who fully knows all the ways of those wily French. I do suspect it has something to do with fromage, the way they are always going on about it.
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace
_beastie
_Emeritus
Posts: 14216
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2006 2:26 am

Post by _beastie »

I served a mission in france lo these many years ago (back in 79), and I don't know if it's true or a member was teasing me, but according to her, the word that is used in conjunction with the "kissing" they do on the cheeks, if used as a direct verb, means something far more salacious. (I accidentally used it as a direct verb, necessitating this lecture.) You know that work that rhymes with LUCK but begins with the same sound as phone? That word. Perhaps that is what coy moksha refers to (unless the french member made it all up and laughs about my gullibility to this day)

To mean "kiss on the cheek" you should say "make the bise" (I'm sure I'm not spelling that right and am too rushed to look it up, but to actually say "biser" means the f word.
We hate to seem like we don’t trust every nut with a story, but there’s evidence we can point to, and dance while shouting taunting phrases.

Penn & Teller

http://www.mormonmesoamerica.com
_Runtu
_Emeritus
Posts: 16721
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 5:06 am

Post by _Runtu »

beastie wrote:I served a mission in france lo these many years ago (back in 79), and I don't know if it's true or a member was teasing me, but according to her, the word that is used in conjunction with the "kissing" they do on the cheeks, if used as a direct verb, means something far more salacious. (I accidentally used it as a direct verb, necessitating this lecture.) You know that work that rhymes with LUCK but begins with the same sound as phone? That word. Perhaps that is what coy moksha refers to (unless the french member made it all up and laughs about my gullibility to this day)

To mean "kiss on the cheek" you should say "make the bise" (I'm sure I'm not spelling that right and am too rushed to look it up, but to actually say "biser" means the f word.


On my mission, a single girl got pregnant, and everyone said it was because of the surazo (south wind) that had come through the city.
Runtu's Rincón

If you just talk, I find that your mouth comes out with stuff. -- Karl Pilkington
_Yoda

Post by _Yoda »

SatanWasSetUp wrote:You were one of those weirdos? It seems there are a couple in every ward. Unfortunately, your reverence for women probably came across to them as creepy. My last ward I was in there was a guy who talked about women like this, he also liked to go on youth temple trips so he could watch the girls get baptized. Needless to say he was considered the "creepy guy". One of the young women leaders complained to the bishop about him and he wasn't allowed on youth temple trips anymore. Unfortunately, it was probably all innocent to him, but this kind of reverence is not normal.


Hmmm...I wonder if it had more to do with the fact that when the girl's baptismal outfits get wet, and they're wearing white, there's not much left to the imagination. ;)

I'm surprised he or any of the boys were allowed to sit there. Normally they tried to rush out the girls before the guys got there, or vice-versa. There was some overlap, but not a lot...and precisely for that reason.
_guy sajer
_Emeritus
Posts: 1372
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2007 2:16 am

Post by _guy sajer »

Over on "Further Light and Knowedge" website, there was a particularly good post by SteveM. The information he provides provides a good counterpoint to the studies Makelan cited earlier in this thread. I'm not saying that they Trump Makelan's citations, but I'm offering them as something further to consider.

Here it is.


Virtually all of my non-Mormon male friends masturbate regularly and look at pornography on occasion (and they're quite open about it). But none of them are "addicted" to either. That is to say, none of them compulsively masturbate or view pornography for hours on end. Neither of these habits control their lives.

Yet, when Mormons look at porn, they frequently become compulsive users who are unable to control the habit. In General Authority speak, they become "addicted."

I think this contrast illustrates why it is important to distinguish between an addiction and a compulsive habit. While compulsions may be similar to addictions in many respects, they are not one in the same. For instance, if you smoke cigarettes regularly, it's likely that you will become addicted; the nicotine will physically addict the user, regardless of his or her personal beliefs and attitudes.

With masturbation and pornography, this is not so. I've never read anything that suggests that there's anything inherently addicting about either. I've heard conservatives suggests that the endorphins that are released while masturbating or viewing pornography can become a "natural drug" to which users become addicted, but this is unlikely. Physical exercise such as jogging triggers the release of endorphins, but I don't think we have much of a problem with "running addicts." There's a difference between "masturbation feels good" and "I need to masturbate right now!"

Whether or not someone becomes a compulsive masturbator/porn user seems to have a lot to do with their personal attitudes and experiences with sex and sexuality. Those who have been sexually abused, those who are sexually repressed, those with negative attitudes about sex, and those with high levels of sexual guilt are more likely to become involved in a compulsive habit. Sexual guilt, shame, and pressure only reinforce the habit. Those with open, positive, shame-free attitudes about sex may enjoy masturbating or looking at porn, but it's less likely that they will become "addicted" to them.

This is rather ironic, as it seems that past and current LDS teachings regarding sexuality and pornography may actually create and contribute to the sexual problems and compulsive habits that they condemn.

Levi S. Peterson wrote that "prudery reinforces pornogrphy" ("In Defense of Mormon Erotica," Dialogue 20:4, Winter 1987). A 1997 U.S. News article (link: http://www.usnews.com/usnews/biztech/ar ... 006163.htm) states that while "[t]he Reagan-Bush war on pornography coincided...with a dramatic increase in America's consumption of sexually explicit materials," Denmark's liberalization of obscenity laws actually led to "a long, steady decline" in pornography consumption that continues to this day. According to the article "Husband-wife Similarity in Response to Erotic Stimuli" (Journal of Personality, Vol. 43, Issue 3, p. 385-394), those with more restrictive, more negative, and more authoritarian views of sexuality are more aroused by pornographic stimuli. The article "Sexual Guilt and Religion" (The Family Coordinator, Vol. 28, Issue 3, p. 353-357) discusses a study showing that while sexual guilt is more influential than religion in predicting sexual attitudes and behavior, "the more frequently [people] attend church, the more likely they are to have high sexual guilt which interferes with their sexuality." In other words, religion can lead to sexual guilt, and sexual guilt can lead to unhealthy sexual behaviors such as compulsive masturbating and porn use.
God . . . "who mouths morals to other people and has none himself; who frowns upon crimes, yet commits them all; who created man without invitation, . . . and finally, with altogether divine obtuseness, invites this poor, abused slave to worship him ..."
_Trinity
_Emeritus
Posts: 426
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2007 12:36 pm

Post by _Trinity »

And on the prudery note, my husband and I happened upon The History of Sex on tv last week and watched for a good hour as the commentary went through the different cycles of approaches towards sex throughout time. Talk about an eye opener. There are doomsdayers who claim our society is becoming (if not already) the most debasive, destructive type of morality because of pornography, or prostitution, etc. The show was actually quite explicit in showing how deviant sexual elements such as bestiality, incest, etc have been around all the time. The first public hanging in Massachusetts (I will never, ever forget this trivia, lol) was Thomas Granger, a 16 year old in 1642 who was caught in the act of bestiality with "a mare, a cow, two goats, five sheep, two calves and a turkey." My husband figures it was probably the noisy turkey that did him in. I doubt it was bestiality porn on the internet that got Granger hooked on sex with animals.

There is nothing new under the sun. There may be cycles of societal or religious approaches in dealing with perceived threats, but you will find deviant sexual behaviors in ancient Mesopotamia, the mythologies, transvestites in the Middle Ages, biblical incest, etc. You will find prostitution and homosexuality in all societies, regardless of social acceptance.
"I think one of the great mysteries of the gospel is that anyone still believes it." Sethbag, MADB, Feb 22 2008
_Dr. Shades
_Emeritus
Posts: 14117
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 9:07 pm

Post by _Dr. Shades »

Seven wrote:It wasn't about them being virgins (some were not), but about them waiting to have sex before their marriage. It made it more special to witness.


You witnessed them having sex???
"Finally, for your rather strange idea that miracles are somehow linked to the amount of gay sexual gratification that is taking place would require that primitive Christianity was launched by gay sex, would it not?"

--Louis Midgley
_Seven
_Emeritus
Posts: 998
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 7:52 pm

Post by _Seven »

Dr. Shades wrote:
Seven wrote:It wasn't about them being virgins (some were not), but about them waiting to have sex before their marriage. It made it more special to witness.


You witnessed them having sex???


Did you miss that part of the temple sealing?
"Happiness is the object and design of our existence...
That which is wrong under one circumstance, may be, and often is, right under another." Joseph Smith
_Trinity
_Emeritus
Posts: 426
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2007 12:36 pm

Post by _Trinity »

You must have been going to the wrong temple, Dr. Shades. The fun ones are like they were back in Joseph's day, with the washings and anointings of oil and whiskey....and you know what happens when you mix alcohol with massage oils.
"I think one of the great mysteries of the gospel is that anyone still believes it." Sethbag, MADB, Feb 22 2008
_Coggins7
_Emeritus
Posts: 3679
Joined: Fri Nov 03, 2006 12:25 am

Post by _Coggins7 »

Why is the female always the cupcake to be licked?

Even though this is at the veritable end of this tiresome thread, this question just begs for a thorough satirical treatment. That treatment would, of necessity, be at the 'R' or 'X' level, and hence, improper for me to proceed with, even though the temptation is nearly unbearable.
Post Reply