Thread for Kenny and Fairy to hijack for their foreplay

[accelafine]

Oooh a foreplay thread.

Let’s make it a 4 player game. Woo Hooo!

Double Yummy!

He said he didn't find you attractive at all, but as you were begging him then he thought he might as well since he hadn't had 'intimate relations' for thirty years. He said you made a noise like a foghorn and your eyes rolled back into your head. He was scared and thought you might need an exorcism.

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/vkh6kLnMGsA

[Fairy]

Oooh a foreplay thread.

Let’s make it a 4 player game. Woo Hooo!

Double Yummy!

He said he didn't find you attractive at all, but as you were begging him then he thought he might as well since he hadn't had 'intimate relations' for thirty years. He said you made a noise like a foghorn and your eyes rolled back into your head. He was scared and thought you might need an exorcism.

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/vkh6kLnMGsA

If he said all those things to you. Then that’s what he told you.



He told me I was attractive. And yes, I made a big noise in bed because his sex was so good it made me scream out loud.

He never once said to me I was scaring him. If he told you that then that’s what he told you. But he never told me what he told you.

[Fairy]

Harbal divulged to me that you begged a prominent female on here to have a threesome with you and him and she flat out refused. He said it sent you into an enraged frenzy. I thought he was making it up but I see now that it was true. It certainly explains your...ahem...'behaviour' on here over the past few months. Poor dear

If Harbal divulged that information to you then he told you a lie. Lying is the very behaviour he despises, so he told me.

However, I know for absolutely certainty that that information is a straight up lie. So either he’s lying or you are lying.

But if you want to believe it’s true then go for it, you are just using an innocent person who never said those things as a weapon against me for your own sick pleasure which makes you a seriously vile person.

[Eodnhoj7]

Oh I see.

Do you think it at least supports the notion that there's not an objective "now"?

Why are you asking that old fool? Just watch the video.

Because this is a discussion forum and I think I actually have a pretty good argument for why we can go from relativity of simultaneity to no objective now to all moments exist at once.

I agree...so in that spirit:


1. Things that happen simultaneously are an occurrence of a pattern within a given context of time. If A and B are simultaneous they exist within the context of let say C.

2. Objective reality can be observed as a simultaneous pattern of multiple subjective states.

3. Given all things that are absolute are unchanging, the things that occur within a given context are absolute. The context may change, and with it the absolute, but this only points to innumerable absolutes.

4. Given potentiality underlies all actualities, ie processes, what can be observed is an everpresent absolute cause of potential itself given change is constant and with said change the potential for it to occur.

5. All moments existing at once would be indistinct thus relegated to pure potentiality by which a collapse of the potential, ie a localization of it, would allow for the actual to occur.