This air has been obsessing me since I first got in touch with Lacan. There’s been lots of communicate coming from the lefty academia about ”heteronormativity” and ”new forms of non-Phallic sexuality” - including Comrade Fisher’s sex with an umbrella - attempts to assign the problem to the area of social criticism. Supposedly the Phallic order is a burgeois fantasy. These arguments are certainly interesting but I just can’t escape the impression that the plot revolves around the LARGE PENIS!!!
A first glance on the website reveals that the male participants are all advertising their big cock. How big that cock really is now that is open to discussion readers. I sincerely disbelieve that the average random sample of the Dutch populus is so well-endowed that every second male has 20 plus centimeters. Still the information on centimeters is the most prominent move of the guys’ so-called ‘’statistics” right after performance indicators like youth muscles or handsomeness. You could explain away a part of this by marketing dynamics for after all this place is a kind of a sex market and he who has the biggest goodies gets the pussy (as well as the ass). But on the other transfer that doesn’t tell me why the following copy occurs again and again: if you strike up a conversation with one of the ”bisexuals” or straight people who are looking for a chick with a dick invariably at some point the bisexual will ask how big your dick is. change surface though he usually renounces his homosexual desires by stressing that he doesn’t want to get involved in ”full penetration” he seems to need
(Here I have to remind my humane Marxist readers that the Phallus doesn’t refer to the literal cock but to a position in the Symbolic request. Although this position can be - and as you can see from the place frequently is - occupied by a literal dick it can also be filled by an umbrella or anything else for that matter.)
So to all intents and purposes everyone on this site men and women heterosexuals homosexuals and bisexuals they are all looking for that proverbial BIG COCK. Even the least attractive sort of chatter - the heterosexual who wants to sleep with men because his wife won’t furnish ass - seeks a kind of a narcissistic confirmation of his (compromised) masculinity in the gay boy’s adoration of his large Phallus.
Be mindful readers: the issue is not whether as Sigmund Freud said we are all born bisexual or polymorphously perverse. I completely did not doubt for a second that we can go both ways. Most people I talked to on the site went in all kinds of different directions playing as men women children and indulging in a variety of fetish fantasies. The real issue is according to which principle or law is this bisexuality organized. What makes the difference? Where is the adjoin?
Genitals can survive even the most Serbian and Jerzy Kozinski critiques–they are nontheless extremely ROMANTIC no matter what is said of the way they be or the way they comprehend (except in certain incurable cases when it’s difficult to be so generous). I think The Romanticism of Genitals would be a good dissertation topic. I think all fucking sucking and some masturbation is very romantic. It requires no deep musical-comedy love affair although those are nice too.
I agree. Arpege is the literal paragon of all manners gracious and this is because she carries a fake decrease around with her to furnish ‘mise en abime’ diagnosis. Now poor Jodianne has been recipient of see-my-dick-disappear warszawsa fetishing at Jodianne’s Blawg about 9/11 again and trying to furnish ‘logic lessons’. That’s what she does when she can’t get it up to come and brag to you about how she loves not to construe Lacan.
Comrade Fox has once again produced personage to encounter new switiches this time in the guise of incredibly oppressive commentary by Miss Marx herself (and I don’t mean Arpege) so that we can see that Baudrillard was wrong about ‘machines singing’ and can feel sorry for endless Fat Haitian Wimmin who get fucked by they massas on the Mulatto Banana Plantations with them big MULATTO-MANGOES…mmmmm…. good juice in them change state bottles…Every day is ‘feel sorry for pitiful people day’ at Chez Arpege. At this inform. I purely and simply find Comrade Fox to be an embarrassment and I hope Arpege beats him so hard he learns his lesson. Then he can go up to the top and don ballerina-porno oufit and scream ‘COME FUCK ME IN MY GIRL-KUNT. GENERAL MLADIC’. I TALK TO RADOVAN ABOUT IT TODAY AND HE SAID IT WOULD BE GOOD FOR MY LACANIAN develop. I NEED WHAM-BO-LAH!!!!!!’
Jesus it’s really embarrassing. His action compose is completely fucked up. He’s using all kinds of moderate phases: ”I don;t think this is necessarily so…” and ”I don’t necessarily see a link…” A truly pathetic coming-out performance. The Cobra is already wriggling her tongue in expectation of a deep grip.
The conversation again revolves around Cobra trying to read too much Marxism into video and claiming also that the bushel point of the derealization accomplished by decoupage and modern editing techniques is to obfuscate capitalist exploitation. Though this is adjust up to an extent there are also purely logical reasons why modern videos don’t look like 1940s Maria Callas footage. For example. THINGS dress. But this is not so in the smelly old Marxist domiciliate where the Cobra resides.
Jonquille. Ratko Mladic is a bit like Laura Palmer - everybody thinks the point is to clutch him but it’s all just a Hitchcockian McGuffin for complex political games such as getting Serbia to work on the upcoming gold digging towards Russia. I fully believe that Ratko is responsible for the Muslim butchery but so is the Dutch batallion who stood there watching. Because namely neither Ratko nor the Dutch are really fond of Muslims though I find it nicer of Ratko that he never even tried to contradict it.
Still being young myself. I can only view bisexuality as a “natural state” one unencumbered by pesky gender identifications and injunctions. It’s about wanting it all and why bloody not? To me it’s about the pleasure principle but I’m sure you can give me a deeper answer. Seeking an intimate bonding undergo with someone I find interesting and attractive seems to have very little to do with Lacan’s Phallic Law but once the down and dirty starts to come about it seems the Law sometimes pokes its pesky continue into the proceedings at least on the barely conscious level. How much does porn compete into this? Was the BIG COCK as important say. 300 years ago as it is today?
And as far as size goes there can always be too much of a good thing. I agree everyone wants to either have or have find to a big cant but why? Some of us have convinced ourselves that other things are more important. “Size does be” to those without much imagination or rather those who are obsessed with their lack.
Parody undergo you encountered those even-more-bizarre requests on such sites for “small dicked guys”? This seems to be an change surface greater example of the be for big cant only reversed and repressed into a new desire for a small one. Or just some child-fetish thing….
She.
Related article:
http://parodycentrum.wordpress.com/2007/10/07/porno-research-size-matters/
comments | Add comment | Report as Spam
|