Riobard

Ice cubes in anus is now considered S&M? I’m sure some members here do that routinely prior to receptive penetrative piercings when lidocaine out of reach.

He does, and will as President.

A few days ago it could be said a lot could happen over 4 months. Who knew it would be this soon and so game-changing? Now anything negative said by his opponents will come across as crassly, insensitively traumatogenic. PTSD the answer to any deficiency, heroism the reason to support. Whoever shot a hole in his helix tossed a horseshoe up his hiney. I said Biden should lay off the mocking rhetoric to go high. Now he’ll have to lay off of it because a decent person will.

I’ve had a few encounters in my lifetime with older folks that present terribly simply because age exacerbates flaws that would otherwise be more probably overlooked. My first a Maths teacher with a PhD in senior year high school a half-century ago, my most recent a hunched-over shuffling medical specialist. Neither of them subject to functioning, high functioning in fact evident, in a vacuum. Looks can be deceiving. Even so, a 50% corpse trumps the alternative.

My worry about Biden’s next debate is that PrEP won’t supplant PEP.

For debate coaching suggestions. Trump has logorrhoea, strategically or non-volitionally is irrelevant. Biden needs to judiciously command the rules when Trump babbles during Biden’s time. He can do this by simplifying his content to 25% and speaking at half the speed, giving him time and wiggle room to rule the stage dynamics. The content is repetitive and now less important than delivery. If it were me, I’d hold up a yellow card when rudely interrupted if the mods are too stupid and lazy at enforcement. He might add something like: “At a point of inflection in our history when team work is more essential than ever, how do you actively listen to advisers when speaking simultaneously over them? I say this rhetorically in a bid to assure your brief silence”, or “Good job (where merited), you gave me the courtesy of keeping silent … oh no no no now (upon activating bombastic narcissism) you were doing so well”. Drop the drinking disinfectant reference. It’s old and lives in the context of blathering that non-supporters grasp and supporters don’t care about. And get Harris to debate-coach Biden, Reversed role plays. And make sure Biden acknowledges her; the idea of pooled resources. “Our two heads are better than one; we realized for this debate a parental-type strategy was called for. We aim, in fact, to convince the least persuaded person in the auditorium that we’re the best fit.” Teach Biden to demonstrate active listening to Trump through silence, the ground rule, looking at him not away, nodding and a few quizzical mug expressions that convey ‘get him’. Drop the lopsided grin; it’s not mocking enough and suggests amusement without sadness.

This underscores my point. Analogy: inimical divorce and child(ren) caught in the middle. You can’t change family structure easily because combative divorce is the endpoint of something idealized that commenced promisingly. But you can shift the political narrative from reductive single-choice figureheads to the notion of solid extended political family, obviating the primacy of figurehead choice. All the possible but uncertain in big win terms figurehead backup shortlist, imbued with a synthesis of positives, is already embedded in a Biden candidacy. A strong collective with a now arbitrary incumbent figurehead may be the best compromise, perhaps even just transiently for the upcoming term, because internal post-regicide lack of consensus will persist, merely transferring the focus of deficiencies. Maybe better to stick with Biden’s deficiencies; they are pretty clear, developmental, ambiguous (thus, posing take-side bind) and present a challenge for haters to make up in elaborate fakery. Trump’s extended political family is uniformly hoodwinked into consensus; unification predicated on insanity is looking pretty relatively good while the other side divides and conquers itself. That said, a strong overall opponent collective offers an appealing option to leadership resting squarely on an iconoclast’s shoulders. Don’t pit a weakly branded individual against an iconoclast. Counter it with a loud coordinated chorus; neither conductor nor choir need to have primacy.

Hahaha. I can’t get ‘How do you solve a problem like DeeJayTee’ out of my head now that you bring up Rainbow and propose a Gilbert & Sullivan bastardization. Maybe Randy has already done it. A lot of the lyric text could remain. And he or somebody else did something with the O&H Goodnight song.

A paradoxical intervention simply breaks an endless reinforcing feedback loop by doing something unexpected. At the macro level it might mean restructuring the polarized candidacy by watering down the underlying ‘only Biden or Trump’ dynamic. It has recently evolved to ‘only Biden or not Biden can surpass Trump’. That’s insane because it’s true but may not be true; hence, endless analysis paralysis. The bind is paradoxical because damned if you do or don’t do Biden if the choice presents an intolerable dilemma. The magnificent obsession of the goal is pathologically obsessive. Yet Biden can only beat Trump if a subpopulation beats Trump. The face of that is Biden. That is inherently odd because the persuasion factor rests on a single person’s functionality, as if a collective (Democrats, Biden’s team, etc) that governs has been hamstrung. Paradoxically, the team is swallowing its tail, hamstringing itself by squabbling. From an outsider’s point of view the idea of nonhierarchical situational leadership, that is, the collective that props up Biden and one another is disintegrating. I wouldn’t vote for how that broader entity shows itself currently. If a win is a win for all then put Biden’s name down and be OK with it meaning something else, non-binary. Concede his functionality and move on. Recuse him from denigrating his opponent. Let the opponent’s madness shine and delegate highlighting that persistent get out of jail free insanity to those better equipped. As I said, he cannot convincingly sting. Better that he express sympathetic kindness. Sadly, at this point an equal ticket font Biden/Harris connotes Biden deficiency as opposed to collective collaborative strength. The party breakdown so far may make the veracity of unity hard to buy. Any paradoxical intervention is an anomaly with unpredictable sequelae. It just shifts the feedback loop, but that is what is needed. I haven’t perceived a deviation from that loop’s recent emergence and rigidity. By understandably demonizing Trump the antithesis of dictatorship is a white knight. Romanticism is darling but there’s no Lancelot in this picture, only a wannabe quixotic Braveheart . Only a genuine mythological hero could say “I’m the one for the job”; saying it would be superfluous anyway. Remove it from the job description. Paradoxical intervention at a micro level, and I’m just illustrating to encourage conceptual grasp, not recommending in this case because macro pathology is too entrenched: If paralyzingly anxious about a flub, prescribe a flub followed by recovery practice and hold back revelation regarding intentionality, deliberate or non-volitional. But guess what. Who has finessed that and cannot flub because anxiety is a foreign concept and flubs are too weird to be irrefutably unintentional, that is, non-considered and unedited babble? Sits back and let‘s another’s imperfection rain a shitstorm. Makes no mistakes because the idea that anybody can make them suggests empathy. Brightest moron ever.

But guess what. In fairness, isn’t DT the 1st sitting VICE president?

I always owe it. That’s the premise. They spot me several metres out and the indebtedness abacus begins clicking.

So mind boggling. (Conference: Welp, that happened.) Why is regicide, or not, the sole binary? What about collaborative executive leadership superimposed on the hierarchical model? It’s already so essential to governance in general and offers counterpoint to the opponent party structure. The Dem leadership team’s systemic disintegration is as daunting as its figurehead’s normative developmental decline. Give me a dottery guy over a clowder of felines overdosed on catnip any day. Clinging rigidly to isomorphism without recognizing isomorphism’s liabilities simply cannot end well. Back off the mirroring. Change it up in a way not yet even particularly considered. Gestalt over the obsessive linearity of succession. A pathological paradoxical bind calls for a paradoxical intervention. Tweak a few dials on the face of the ticket, ‘Biden & Biden’s’, a Dem collective, even perhaps seemingly counterintuitively, while adhering to constitutional structure. If a republic cannot work out something as common as porphyria-grade happenstance what and why was the bother? That the current state is heated is an illusion. It’s a frozen blob of plasticine; the media is only cryogenic. When working with divorce in family systems the first task is to unveil isomorphism; its nature in that context is often mutual antipathy, entrenched positioning. You divert the focus from parental polarization to the greater family good. A few key interventions that takes thinking outside the box and warms things up to a point of greater malleability. Unite the family to functionality, not unlike the quirky if not boldly overcapitalizing CNN licorice ad. Lead with the idea of sustaining banishment; it’s already the weird basis anyway. It takes a village to take watch on evil’s exile. Prez-Plus. Plus is the safety net. Both/and not either/or.

How to keep Trump out? Gordian Knot #1. Analysis Paralysis 1.0 Who can do it? Gordian Knot #2. Analysis Paralysis 2.0 This situation is palliative, gridlock, stalemate, insoluble in its own terms, Sophie’s Choice. Can’t call it; can’t not call it. Zero-sum tug of war. No sword will cut through it. What Alexander would wield it? Running in loops is the sole cold comfort available and what is manifest. A child could do no worse; a child has simpler eyes on the prize. It’s just the way the confluence of factors and events rolled out. It can happen to the smartest people most deserving of good. In other systemic relational terms divorce can work; can’t easily fly here as the easiest way out. The coin will teeter off its edge in due course. 4 months of overtime to knockout stage. It’ll zip along. Then at least a known entity of one ilk or other. Not shared in desirability terms, but relieving the agony of second-guessing heads or tails. I savour no popcorn penning this.

The Patpong mayoralty is yours to lose.

All excellent points, @macaroni21. Do you think there is any legal prohibition to a VIP area with lapdance options? That format is the usual playbook for female stripper bars elsewhere and the general guidance for male entertainer equivalence. I just don’t know all the rules there in spite of substantial exposure to Patpong, but I assume the model that we mutually propose is all above board.

I don’t think you mean sex control freaks. There’s a long wait list here for that group, reluctant to experiment with relinquished rigidity.

However put, yours is the excellent foppery of the world.

IDK, my turnover rate may not always be at the top end but is fairly consistently high and the sign of a good employee. And of course only myself to blame.

In other words, they are persons, you respect their humanity and good experiences are the yield. Some punters are better suited to the blow-up doll a delivery guy reliably drops off at an invariant charge. And sticking to day jobs rather than prosecuting your self-determination.

Speak for yourself when aggrieved. I don’t respect or value arrogant assertions of representation. In contrast to your snivelling on behalf of the herd, I understand everything there is to know about you. I just have to watch the news for parallels. The only receipt you have is your flimsy criticism and that of a handful of cronies in your corner. As long as you’re giving notes, I will say something inarguably speaking for myself. It would be easier to navigate this board without the daily hammering of random articles from a handful of nation-specific news outlets. I find the majority of them not relatable to what I perceive the board’s main agenda. Who’s to stop you? Nobody. But speaking for myself, the experience is one of cluttered spam. Like I said, my take is irrefutable. The only rebuttal could be: how could you not appreciate something you said you don’t? Perhaps you could wrap your brain around the holes in the idea that when you say nobody it means everybody when in fact it refers to you and your futile attempt to shape the narrative. I doubt that a steady influx of, say, Brazil-centric news articles would generate much attention. It would just add to the lopsided tone of the general subforum you monopolize. Show me the polls SVP. I reiterate, read the room seeing as you are a reader. Your offerings within your favourite locale would be better suited to a board Club option thematically geared to the Thaiger, etc, ad infinitum re: English language material mirroring what news everybody accesses anyway or is simply extremely locally centred. Alternatively, you could just recommend that readers subscribe to their favourite news outlets. Or a subforum on Thai linked articles I won’t waste time on sifting through. I’d add “You do you”, but you may grasp your own rigidity seeing as how prone you are to project it. If you can do that selectively according to your basic needs perhaps conscientious attention to newslink selectivity could ensue. Thanks for the laughs, though.

IMO Moonlight is the least pedestrian of a generally poor showing over the better part of a high season month’s visit. To each his own, and my bias is driven by 48 years of strip club interfacing, I do grasp the appeal of a night out in a club atmosphere, but erotic payoffs in BKK seemed better and more naturalistic when arranged to occur in private settings. As interesting posters like @macaroni21have pointed out … apologies if I have distorted here … the clubs could inflate appeal more broadly with hotter guys than currently exist giving private lap dances and not necessarily obligated to execute more advanced sexual interaction. They could conceivably be selective in going further with clients based on their appraisal of match-ability.

Better yet, don’t be in a position where a firewall is the one flimsy thing making the difference between freedom and the hole.

That is not at all alleged. He is faced with the very serious charge of possession and reciprocal transmission of child pornography. Child sexual abuse is not fetishistic. Children are not inanimate. Obscene fetishism is an oxymoron. The exploitation behind the porn clinically reflects enacted pedophilia if pedophilia underpins true subjective arousal. It is plausible in many cases that illicit content, notwithstanding its heinous nature, exists to pander to a follower base more accurately meeting the diagnostic criteria of pedophilia. Wouid it be too much to ask folks to comprehend what they are understandably reactive about? That said, the syndrome of pedophilia itself is not an offence. The ‘Daddy’ scene is legal and acceptable insofar as it is a play on human developmental differential. Unfortunately it’s the thin edge of a wedge potentially leading to loss of bearings particularly where money is involved and it intersects with large and follower niche subpopulations wherein demographic pedophilic representation inevitably exists. More in keeping with the balanced part of your viewpoint, being a dumb, selfish, greedy lug doesn’t make anyone a person with pedophilia. It may be arguably worse than pedophilia but it’s not pedophilia unless it is. Such a diagnostic formulation wouid only occur in the context of an individual seeking paraphilia assessment and/or treatment.

What does this have to do with the subject of child sexual abuse other than that perps similarly sing it?