/l/ - The Lounge

Off-topic discussion

[Make a Post]
[X]





Stop doing anal Nanonymous No.10406 [D][U][F][S][L][A][C] >>10409 >>10414 >>10426 >>11145
File: fbf550d74c03e66deab3a7311274c2ac04b1c635cb5049d5d8d326e5916cb709.jpg (dl) (72.97 KiB)

Blog post to satisfy rules of this "imageboard":
It doesn't feel good. You just don't get pleasure from normal sex because you or your partner don't like each other because you're out of shape degenerates. Just because anal sex is "soooo baddd :DD" doesn't make it good. Typing any word whatsoever on uncensored search engines brings up a picture of someone doing anal sex. You're fapping to anal sex because you watch shitty normalfag (peasant) porn like Brazzers which was not even fappable in the first place and you get off to the fact that their doing anal. Stop spamming this shit all over the internet. Oy vey.

Nanonymous No.10408 [D][U][F]
File: def2c4591578a81ee5f8451d95bf739fa6308ecb9981a6fb17928718fcf9c0c8.webm (dl) (3.21 MiB)

>It doesn't feel good.
U sure?

Nanonymous No.10409 [D]

>>10406
The real issue is the law which allows a woman to divorce from her husband without a good reason to do so.Not only that she is legally allowed to half of his belongings which encourages divorce even more.
Because of that many women treat marriage as dating with benefits.

Nanonymous No.10410 [D]

stfu nigger that is only tangentially related to this thread

Nanonymous No.10414 [D][U][F] >>10419 >>10425 >>10727 >>10753
File: 09250b17e7e42905deeff12ba62774d77dcf0c62b4238ae8efe1f5e9bd3b7e52.jpg (dl) (109.44 KiB)

>>10406
Anal is good. I like when my anus is stimulated when I'm fucking and just like I like when someone's sucking my dick I like anal. I get that you were fucked by your confessor, but that doesn't mean you have to ruin fun for others.
Muh natural is bullshit since pretty much everything we do is unprecedented.

Nanonymous No.10419 [D][U][F] >>10422 >>10423 >>10727 >>10753
File: df69a22ef5ae94f9d88c09669374d6890615aaa1b0466331eeae94e477b2a7d3.jpg (dl) (108.35 KiB)

>>10414
Many girls have fetishes too. Some want you to creampie them, some have thing for anal, some want you to facefuck them etc.
Good half of them you will need to do by tongue before/after or with hand during sex anyway. I think that for girls it's easier and more pleasurizing to get off during anal. Not only because you and they have clear way to clitoris, but also because anal is completely owewhelming. It's complete dominance, generally speaking, woman wants to be dominated and man wants to dominate, it multiplicates pleasure felt elsewhere and overall feels more wholesome. You can get her off fucking her into ass while sucking on her nipple with your pelvis only slightly rubbing and touching her clitoris or not touching at all. Just like that. The power of anal. You invade their whole body instead of one part.
Also do not forget that pleasure during sex is shared. Some woman needs 69 to orgasm, because they need to feel your penis roaring in ecstasy, but that's just btw. It works similarly with anal. Just like man is hard as fuck when he's licking pussy and may be literally dripping precum, or like woman wets herself to the point her panties are soaking wet when she's giving you blowjob, similar thing happens with anal. You know she feels great pleasure combined with pain and you know that her pussy cum wets your penis as you slide into her ass, conforming her inner masochist and she knows her ass is tighter than pussy thus giving you extra pleasure, overall is very different experience and conforms your inner sadist.

Bonus points when you persuade prude. Really good. Every prude secretly wants to be assfucked. She turns into needy whore in an instant.

Nanonymous No.10422 [D] >>10428 >>10458

>>10419
>man is hard as fuck when he's licking pussy
>hard as fuck when he's emasculating himself and being a gay cuck faggot
don't think so mr. normalfag

Nanonymous No.10423 [D] >>10428

>>10419
> people with THAT brain size are having sex
SAD!

Nanonymous No.10425 [D] >>10428

>>10414
this thread is about women, not faggots

Nanonymous No.10426 [D][U][F] >>10428 >>10435 >>10701
File: 428fe738b659022d5120a15d4d2a8e8b7376f3a26c6629d20b09064f0f6af783.png (dl) (1.03 MiB)

>>10406
> It doesn't feel good.
That's not true in all cases. Regardless, whether it feels good or not is ultimately immaterial in light of much more important considerations:

The human anorectal region is anatomically and physiologically very unsuited for girthy, vigorous receptive activities. The single short-term benefit, _potential_ pleasure, is greatly outweighed by the many short- and long-term health risks for the receptive person.


Nanonymous No.10428 [D] >>10435 >>10481 >>10513

>>10426
Unfortunately yes. But, we are on imageboards, women are things, so who cares, faggot? I would eventually get new one and better anyway.
>>10422
In light of recent blogpost, I dare to say you are the cuck faggot with zero empathy here.
>>10423
Thanks.
>>10425
Yes, you should go away.

Nanonymous No.10435 [D][U][F] >>10458 >>10701
File: 47918e77bfdc33c72a29deabd9c309f256a9dc349480b72bf1e9d2041777392a.png (dl) (22.63 KiB)

>>10426
most correct. when the degenerate is not satisfied with anal they will move onto a prolapse fetish
>>10428
>Unfortunately yes. But, we are on imageboards, women are things, so who cares, faggot? I would eventually get new one and better anyway.
anal is more risky for you too retard
>im so woke i receive anal and have women shit in my mouth
>muh empathy
you might like reddit

Nanonymous No.10440 [D] >>10509 >>10511

Anal is gay--that's where it leads anyways. It started with wide spread anal porn in the '90s and now we have guys thinking fucking traps and trannies isn't homosexual.

Nanonymous No.10458 [D][U][F] >>10459 >>10513 >>10546
File: 2b34f806e0777cb2362143b5d183bab42ebe1678aaa6d1bbdf74580910bfc3bb.jpg (dl) (132.84 KiB)

>>10435 (coprophiliac and pegging lord)
Yes, risky. And? Should everybody stop doing risky things?
>empathy
Empathy is haram now? What else is haram? Make a thread and compile list of forbidden words.
And it's very bad word to describe it. You just want to give pleasure which in turn gives you pleasure. Completely egoistic act. Mutualism comes on mind too.
Also, I think he used empathy to imply that he's not capable of understanding his point rather than implying he should emphatize with woman, meaning that he implied >>10422 is emotionally crippled fag uncapable of understaning that sex is sharing.
>woke
What does woke even mean you braindead kike?

Nanonymous No.10459 [D] >>10513

>>10458
Also, to state the obvious: even thinking about masculinity makes you retarded little twink piece of shit. Just accept that you were not born as man.

Nanonymous No.10481 [D]

>>10428
>women are things, so who cares, faggot?
>you are the cuck faggot with zero empathy here
lmao @ this guy

Nanonymous No.10509 [D][U][F] >>10511 >>10727
File: bbafc4e61ec935cda740910503810b3426c5f21c4ee2a6a81f80d85eb5a8916e.jpg (dl) (187.64 KiB)

>>10440
It started with the greeks and basically man wanting to penetrate.
Also, they were not born man. If doing anal with girl who finds it pleasurable is enough for you to turn faggot, that's your own problem. I get it when they are young and want to experiment and try, but that's it.
Man can't attach to man the same way he can attach to woman, he can't love another man, moreover the whole courtship is impossible meaning he's deprived of passion and the beautiful adoration of beauty and feminity, in turn being ode on his masculinity. Faggots are either ugly losers or trans-abominations.

Nanonymous No.10511 [D]

>>10440
>>10509
Furthermore, there's everything wrong with being limited and nothing wrong with being unlimited.

Nanonymous No.10513 [D]

>>10428
>women are things
ur mom is a thing
>>10458
>Yes, risky. And? Should everybody stop doing risky things?
no, but u should stop doing anal lol
this thread is about women. stop putting your fingers in your ass and put them in ur pussy. if it's not working you're not stimulated enough. which is entirely possible with the world filled with faggots like:
>>10458
>>10459

Nanonymous No.10515 [D]

the only thing that disgusts me are ugly people
acts alone can not be ugly or disgusting

Nanonymous No.10546 [D] >>10566

>>10458
>Should everybody stop doing risky things?
People should not do any risky things which don't have a benefit outweighing the costs. For example, it's perfectly acceptable to break safety regulations if it gets the work done faster, but not if you're just doing it to look k00l.
Same with anal sex. The vagina is purpose-made to give you pleasure, and putting shit on your dick instead is an insult to nature.

Nanonymous No.10551 [D] >>10552 >>10554 >>10701

Imagine thinking about anal sex so often that you have to preach against it at an obscure Brazilian pigeon decorating news stand, with SCIENTIFIC EXPLANATIONS nonetheless.

Calm down your porn-induced fantasies about it, all porn is a lie. Check the sizes of vibrators people actually buy.

Nanonymous No.10552 [D] >>10554

>>10551
>if you say it's bad that means you like it
Roastie pls. I'd rape you out of sympathy, but I don't want to get aids.

Nanonymous No.10554 [D][U][F]
File: bb20aae996e26c4fcc9fcf7acdc44e6d7461116ff2993143fae2a5b656533230.png (dl) (68.06 KiB)

>>10551
>>10552
a peon and an e-drama expert. both of you get out of my thread
>SCIENTIFIC EXPLANATIONS
that wasn't me that was some other nigger

Nanonymous No.10566 [D] >>10701

>>10546
>shit
What is clyster?
>benefit outweighing the costs
Depends if pleasure and the other things outweighs it for you. Nobody so far advocated for replacing sex with anal sex. As occasional thing to add more variety to sex, even more if you are in relationship.. Why is it bad?

Nanonymous No.10701 [D][U][F] >>10729 >>11225
File: a8a95d7d4877e403f777daaf890885296ebc9293fa17faf53aeeeb598dd277bc.png (dl) (1.12 MiB)

>>10435
> anal is more risky for [a penetrative person] too
The main concern for a penetrative person is transmission of potential pathogens. That concern is easily mitigated by proper use of a condom, among other measures (although failure may be a possibility).

By contrast, the major risks for a receptive person encompass much more than STIs:
• An enema probably will remove the protective mucus barrier covering the mucosa above the dentate line, and both enemas and lubricants—particularly hyperosmolar ones, which may include many common options—can further irritate, damage, or even remove the mucosa's fragile simple columnar epithelium, facilitating infectious invasion by a receptive person's own intestinal residents.
• Injury at least to the delicate epithelium above the dentate line does not elicit pain sensations, so resultant problems may remain undetected in the absence of one or more obvious symptoms. Moreover, neuromuscular physiology also contributes to anorectal fragility, particularly for (objectively foolish and highly likely to be significantly injurious) girthy and vigorous insertions: The involuntary internal anal sphincter relaxes with rectal distension, while the puborectalis and external anal sphincter completely relax when a person bears down, causing hemorrhoidal cushions to engorge and become more susceptible to injury by potentially-bidirectional shear force (https://web.archive.org/web/2015/http://www.geom.uiuc.edu/education/calc-init/static-beam/img/shear.gif).

>>10551
Erotic anoreceptive activities very often involve a combination of considerable girth and vigorous thrusting, which is highly likely to result in significant anorectal injury especially with a prolonged duration (although anal stretching alone can easily and immediately result in permanent muscular damage as well). Pornography featuring such activities is rampant, and such abuse should be considered severely criminal when more than one person is involved. This situation is facilitated by widespread ignorance (often willful), apathy, and misinformation about anorectal anatomy, physiology, and especially the traumatic risks of erotic anoreceptive activities.

>>10566
> Why is it bad?
That was already explained in >>10426: The human anorectal region is anatomically and physiologically very unsuited for girthy, vigorous receptive activities.


Nanonymous No.10727 [D][U][F]
File: 4bdc68143747515f183a3703b51456ab5a38839df586bf1282024c61a225840b.jpg (dl) (261.38 KiB)

>>10414
>>10419
>>10509
bigga u rnt convincing us of nething i already like doggying my girl which involves the rear view

Nanonymous No.10729 [D] >>10739 >>10754

>>10701
Yet I don't see any actual arguments why shouldn't I penetrate ass on occasion for pleasure other than that it is potentionally dangerous for me and the anoreciever. If I already use her mouth to give me pleasure, what's stopping me from using her ass?
The only standpoint against it I can think of is "naturalist" one, ie having sex only for procreation, the purpose vagina was made for. That you feel pleasure injecting sperm is only treat that makes you want to procreate.

Nanonymous No.10739 [D] >>10740

>>10729
God will send you to hell for your sodomy don't do it.

Nanonymous No.10740 [D]

>>10739
How is M>F anal sodomy?

Nanonymous No.10741 [D]

https://definitions.uslegal.com/s/sodomy/

Nanonymous No.10751 [D][U][F]
File: a2a881075607f037786873cc2e425d61d7d3acd4b771b6bde721fbc6e484505b.jpg (dl) (122.45 KiB)

Closeted homosexuals are the reason it's so hard to find porn without anal, niggers, DPs, gang bangs, and other degeneracy.

Nanonymous No.10753 [D][U][F]
File: ec3877fa57294f4f0472004fd377db5858c4fd3c2e7e14b791a4d3a82fe4caab.png (dl) (632.16 KiB)

"Closeted homosexuals" like >>10414 >>10419 are very probably way less degenerate than you. Having sex with women is not degenerate as opposed to watching other people having sex for sexual arousal.

Nanonymous No.10754 [D][U][F] >>10755 >>10757 >>10761
File: 7ee21e93f903f47fdbe7873f1aeac104d16f4165139a37a5e33aefcfbecb3f9e.jpg (dl) (598.63 KiB)

you stupid niggers had to degenerate this thread to the usual >omg is it legal omg is it moral omg
>>10729
if you get more pleasure from anal than vagina your girl is probably not attractive enough physically or in some other way. anal is for peasants which is what this thread is supposed to be about.
maybe try just doggy instead of anal. womens' asses are hot too but it doesnt mean you have to be autistic and equate that with dick in rectum

Nanonymous No.10755 [D][U][F] >>10769
File: 6e5b786f94e5fdf1b4a771777ae25ed7b030d56c698f245e1eaf179c3ee43f4d.png (dl) (411.17 KiB)

>>10754
>anal is for peasants
Explain, right now you sound retarded as fuck.

Nanonymous No.10757 [D][U][F] >>10760 >>10777
File: 2f0d7effb74bec13b48a370c686aed6a4b612ca0da908a775e0c904f211722f1.png (dl) (1.15 MiB)

>>10754
why would you fuck ugly girl
there's no point
hence anal is good

Nanonymous No.10760 [D]

>>10757
*because

Nanonymous No.10761 [D][U][F]
File: 8f5a74b4321b0905e3bffa91401f296c1226afb2badd1e951e4cc81402779aeb.gif (dl) (1.76 MiB)

>>10754
Spinning robot pussies make all biocunts obsolete. They rotate while moving up and down your penis. You don't have to do any work and can be used hands free if you can mount it somewhere. No woman can compete with those things. Once you go spinning robot pussies you can't go back. Some day I'm gonna put one of them in a waifu sexdoll because I'm degenerate like that.

Nanonymous No.10769 [D] >>10770

>>10755
you think anal is good because you tried and failed at normal sex

Nanonymous No.10770 [D][U][F] >>10777
File: 90b2452c4e9724a18e6d0cc14b874ddaa2676b9db8962460b7d96b017d3f92e6.jpg (dl) (79.94 KiB)

>>10769
>anal is good
>that must mean vagina is bad

Nanonymous No.10777 [D][U][F] >>10778 >>10779
File: b13e9a591121be6b85f9508ba6d75540d3db4a6109598adaf4923ef5e06f2170.jpg (dl) (937.96 KiB)

>>10757
>>10770
its not even clear what you're trying to say nigger. reinterpreting my post as a non-sequiter isn't a valid form of debate. a valid argument would have been "no, that's not right. anal is actually good.", with some point to back it up
all the analcucks here literally hate women so its no wonder you cant get off to normal sex with her. sexual pleasure depends not only on looks but actually liking your partner

Nanonymous No.10778 [D]

>>10777
It's you like you haven't read the thread, retard. Why would I use arguments that were already uses? not only on looks but actually liking your partner - was already said as response to christcucks and other moralists cum
analcucks here literally hate women - it was a fuckin parody of polyps you brainless retard
What the fuck, am I on ordinary imageboard or what the fuck is happenenig?

Nanonymous No.10779 [D] >>10785

>>10777
What would be good is providing arguments why is anal bad besides being potentionally dangerous. Why would anybody even want to "argument" with you when you provided no arguments yet other than "I can't enjoy anal=you must fuck ugly whores and can't enjoy normal sex"?

Nanonymous No.10785 [D] >>10786

>>10788
i cant understand what you're trying to say. and i cant be bothered to remember what polyps is supposed to mean in the context of e-drama.
>>10779
see to debate someone, you actually need to come up with an actual counterargument, instead of just accusing the guy of having vested interest in his viewpoint. but the nigger brain cannot comprehend this. i bet you live in america and think you're white and watch CNN or Fox all day.

Nanonymous No.10786 [D] >>10788

>>10785
>i cant understand what you're trying to say
<hey gyuz i dun gnow dis an dat an dat maek me smertor dan ebery1 elce

Nanonymous No.10788 [D] >>10785 >>10791

>>10786
What's your point? There's a strong correlation between higher intelligence and not knowing words like "polyps","chad","stacy","cuck","roastie",etc. You're basically speaking a slightly different dialetct of nigger and calling people dumb for not knowing it.

Nanonymous No.10791 [D][U][F] >>10792
File: 0bf27c682f12ff6ebc2e004c9f193cf47b29c07cef8a49a6fba1775b0406695f.png (dl) (487.18 KiB)

>>10788
>There's a strong correlation between higher intelligence and not knowing words
There's also a strong correlation between higher intelligence and not making bullshit unsourced statements pulled out of your loose cracked asshole.

Nanonymous No.10792 [D] >>10793

>>10791
it's obvious you fucking moron

Nanonymous No.10793 [D] >>10863

>>10792
It's obvious that you are mentally retarded. You are just a boomer immigrant from facebook who doesn't understand any of the language which is commonly used here, and justifies such ignorance by claiming he's smarter by not knowing things.

Nanonymous No.10863 [D][U][F] >>10922
File: dc40c603be47af9a1c25719d74548a8a6653518cf48d88fd681b7948ccc19a21.png (dl) (124.77 KiB)

>>10793
kys retard. throwing the word "thot" around just makes you sound like a retard who unironically browse incels.me (or .co or whatever they use now). YOU are the immigrant, and probably not even on this chart

Nanonymous No.10922 [D] >>10944

>>10863
<being this much of a boomer
Maybe it's you who should kill themselves.

Nanonymous No.10944 [D]

>>10922
so what, you go around complaining about "thots" and other crap that would involve using "modern" chan words, yet you're a zoomer? worst of both worlds

Nanonymous No.11133 [D][U][F] >>11134 >>11201
File: 6c1beed91b887e9bb73eda8ea80c2ed1626d3184282d8f4f2700cc9eac50ee1c.png (dl) (1.05 MiB)

People will have to seriously address these matters at some point.

Wikipedia's articles about anal sex and the human anus currently are horrendously flawed and have been for many years. Among other issues:
• The article about the human anus has an image of a human female's anus and perineum that probably were damaged by some kind of major trauma, such as a surgical procedure called an episiotomy. Human females beyond developmental stages in the womb should lack an externally-visible perineal raphe, or seamlike union/ridge, in the anogenital region between the anus and the vagina; the bulbospongiosus muscle is separated in them and does not form a persistent, visible midline raphe as it may in males [References: Anatomy & Trauma].

• The article about anal sex lacks a neutral point of view, which is an essential component of Wikipedia's presentational philosophy. It does not present even one _scientific_ opposing viewpoint. Consequently, the article gives readers who are not exposed to critical sources of information the impression that opposition is limited to irrational religious positions.

One scientific opposing viewpoint: The human anorectal region is anatomically and physiologically very unsuited for girthy and vigorous receptive activities. The single short-term benefit, _potential_ pleasure, is greatly outweighed by the many short-term and long-term health risks for the receptive person. [Rationale: Anorectal Risks 1-3]

• The article about anal sex does not mention the normalization of blatantly injurious anoreceptive violence in pornography featuring real people.


Nanonymous No.11134 [D] >>11135

>>11133
The article addresses these issues:
>However, people may also find anal sex painful, sometimes extremely so
> Anal sex is considered a high-risk sexual practice because of the vulnerability of the anus and rectum. The anal and rectal tissues are delicate and do not provide lubrication like the vagina does, so they can easily tear and permit disease transmission, especially if a personal lubricant is not used
>Seidman et al. argued that "cheap, accessible and, especially, interactive media have enabled many more people to produce as well as consume pornography", and that this modern way of producing pornography, in addition to the buttocks and anus having become more eroticized, has led to a significant interest in or obsession with anal sex among men.
also:
>The article about the human anus has an image of a human female's anus and perineum
I didn't find that image

Nanonymous No.11135 [D] >>11225

>>11134
> The article addresses these issues
No, it does not.

1. Again, the article about anal sex does not mention the normalization of blatantly injurious anoreceptive violence in pornography featuring real people. What you quoted does mention pornography, but not that.

2. Calling anal sex "a high-risk sexual practice" and pointing out the vulnerability of the anus and rectum is not the same as presenting a scientific viewpoint that discourages at least girthy and vigorous erotic anoreceptive activities for rational, non-religious reasons. Here is the relevant portion of the article at the moment; it very obviously lacks such a viewpoint, suggesting that opposition is limited to cultural taboos and/or prohibitions — generally irrational and/or religious in nature:

"Strong views are often expressed about anal sex. It is controversial in various cultures, especially with regard to religious prohibitions. This is commonly due to prohibitions against anal sex among males or teachings about the procreative purpose of sexual activity.[5][7] It may be considered taboo or unnatural, and is a criminal offense in some countries, punishable by corporal or capital punishment.[5][7] By contrast, people also see anal sex as a natural and valid form of sexual activity that may be as fulfilling as other desired sexual expressions, and as an enhancing or primary element of their sex lives.[5][7]"

> I didn't find that image
Currently it is included right at the top of the article (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_anus) and rather difficult to miss: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Female_and_male_anus.jpg


Nanonymous No.11145 [D] >>11150

>>10406
>having s*x at all
Shameful. Only volcels will achieve transcendence.

Nanonymous No.11148 [D] >>11166

It's fine if you are doing it to actually reproduce and make white children. Having sex just for pleasure is degenerate behavior.

Nanonymous No.11150 [D][U][F]
File: 385b328a179647c3709939195cf5bdd789a54a16511c6181334e214b3cd5d14c.png (dl) (308.47 KiB)

>>11145
based fellow volcel, let's work hard to defend our virginity desu!

Nanonymous No.11166 [D][U][F]
File: 8d182d9023eed745821c404fffe1ce44a188f8b5e3dd91d8ce6fb854ae35c86b.png (dl) (325.92 KiB)

>>11148
I would say pleasure=degenerate.

Nanonymous No.11170 [D][U][F] >>11176 >>11182
File: 6bc5d687620fad1d1593eab9609e165565003a3c4df432b68bc7684c83779dee.jpg (dl) (417.05 KiB)

>ITT: wiggers saying "MUH DEEEEE GENN URRR ASSS AYYYY" for no reason
Wiggers are useless, disgusting creatures who are only capable of blindly copying concepts instead of applying them properly. "Degeneracy" is any kind of behavior that causes damage to society. Seeking pleasure is not, in itself, degenerate, because it improves your state of mind, which increases your capacity to work later on, which improves society. When seeking pleasure causes other types of damage to society (e.g. spreading AIDS), it is now degenerate.
Anal sex is therefore degenerate, since it spreads AIDS and causes anal damage for the receiving party. Regular sex (for pleasure) is not degenerate in and of itself, since it does not cause any such damage. Normal sex is only degenerate if done excessively often (more than 10 times a day, for example, which obstructs other activities) or done with multiple sexual partners.
White people engage in the most degenerate activities, yet you feel free to criticize perfectly normal behaviors as if you were superior to all others. This is so, so sad.

Nanonymous No.11176 [D][U][F] >>11177 >>11201 >>11220
File: 7044df27ddcc2ea3bef0231c7e52ed8f4f6d47d034dfa59bc61b78072cc8e8dc.png (dl) (330.12 KiB)

>>11170
> "Degeneracy" is any kind of behavior that causes damage to society. Seeking pleasure is not, in itself, degenerate, because it improves your state of mind, which increases your capacity to work later on, which improves society. When seeking pleasure causes other types of damage to society (e.g. spreading AIDS), it is now degenerate.
That is sensible.

> Anal sex is therefore degenerate, since it spreads AIDS and causes anal damage for the receiving party.
1. Not every person who engages in anal intercourse will have sexually-transmissible viruses. However, as noted previously, infection by a receptive person's GI microbiota certainly is a concern in all cases.
2. Anal intercourse is very likely, but not absolutely certain, to result in significant anorectal damage to a receptive person. The vast majority of pornography featuring anal intercourse, among other erotic anoreceptive activities, is blatantly abusive: involving a combination of a girthy penis/object (or in some cases several), vigorous thrusting, and a prolonged duration. It most certainly sets a very bad example which too many viewers emulate. There needs to be serious and effective remedial action by governments and by educators worldwide to strongly discourage erotic anorectal abuse and to address the widespread apathy, (often willful) ignorance, and misinformation facilitating an epidemic of such abuse.

Furthermore, pornography companies certainly have entirely too much influence over societies worldwide. It would not surprise me in the least should it turn out that they have been spreading money around for manipulative purposes. People worry so much about "big tech," for example, but I think they also should be very concerned about "big porn" and its considerable negative influence on societies worldwide — which seems to be one elephant in the room that few want to seriously discuss, much less work to actively combat.

Nanonymous No.11177 [D][U][F] >>11180
File: 6771a25d8e222fd66bbd39586a734941d5a5364b4f94e6f186635c54c4e1a618.jpg (dl) (173.07 KiB)

>>11176
>da gubmint nead ta stawp da butfukin!
>da jooz in da pahwnography!
typical wigger. Any people who think that sticking a dick into a hole full of shit are mentally damaged and need to be kicked out of society.
Most white men think anal sex is "better" than real sex. Surprisingly, despite being extremely degenerate, the disgusting white women are the ones who think anal sex is more disgusting.
Any sane race would not fall for this kind of jewish propaganda in the first place. White people are simply disgusting, just like pajeets who probably think that being slathered in shit all day is perfectly fine.

Nanonymous No.11180 [D][U][F]
File: 45f1e43ad3c56175dc385ffd0d9230b111abae19a4fce94c22afbb92d17e6d36.png (dl) (1.83 MiB)

>>11177
Please go away.

Nanonymous No.11182 [D] >>11183

>>11170
>"Degeneracy" is any kind of behavior that causes damage to society
How about you look in a dictionary before pulling shit out of your ass, retard.

>degeneracy
>noun
>The state or quality of being degenerate.

>degenerate
>adjective
>Having lost the physical, mental, or moral qualities considered normal and desirable; showing evidence of decline.

Nanonymous No.11183 [D][U][F] >>11190
File: 3957f3ed591d50f5a3236d88dfddb302f2bab44c4b32aa0d01c65d5161f57dee.jpg (dl) (157.40 KiB)

>>11182
>Muh dick chen arr ree is the definitive source of information
the dictionary definition doesn't even disagree with me because it's so vague. go suck off an elephant faggot
hapas are superior to wiggers and the sad thing is that you will not realize that before your race spirals to oblivion

Nanonymous No.11190 [D]

>>11183
It isn't at all vague and if you had a triple digit IQ you would realize this.

Nanonymous No.11201 [D][U][F]
File: 6b75669b8c87925efbaf232d381d2fa037ea8e6dccc02d328247b8bb3715575e.png (dl) (178.99 KiB)

The discussion is degenerating with insults and bickering over semantics. Can people please discuss the topics at hand?

>>11133
> People will have to seriously address these matters at some point.
>>11176
> "big porn" and its considerable negative influence on societies worldwide — which seems to be one elephant in the room that few want to seriously discuss, much less work to actively combat
I think we have a combination of matters that people would rather avoid discussing: add in rampant erotic anorectal abuse, especially the traumatic risks and consequences of erotic anoreceptive activities, and anorectal anatomy and physiology... People are all too willing to become sidetracked by frivolous and irrelevant topics.
> Anal intercourse is very likely, but not absolutely certain, to result in significant anorectal damage to a receptive person.
My rationale for that was explained in an old post of mine (4chan /gif/thread/9488931/#9514792 28 Oct 2016). Here is a slightly modified version:

(Quoting myself)
> At best, anal sex and significant anal-insertive activities accelerate or guarantee the development of anorectal health problems.
That could in theory be untrue if such activities are done with ridiculously excessive care* all the time, every time.

* That includes, but is not limited to: ruling out preexisting anorectal conditions (possibly caused by prior sexual trauma), always using lubricant, avoiding lubricants that irritate/damage the rectal lining, avoiding enemas (all enemas, hyperosmolar or otherwise, probably remove the rectum's protective mucus barrier), always using a condom (particularly in the absence of an enema), never thrusting too rapidly ("too rapid" could vary for different people, at least for the anal tissues), never inserting anything too girthy ("too girthy" also could vary), never using numbing agents (pain indicates that something is wrong — anally, but not rectally), etc.

In practice using ridiculously excessive care is unrealistic — it'd be more of a chore than a pleasure. Furthermore, both ignorance and misinformation are rampant, porn sets a very bad example that some viewers get ideas from, and people with [self-]destructive tendencies are having a field day.


Nanonymous No.11220 [D] >>11225 >>11226

>>11176
>"big porn" and its considerable negative influence on societies worldwide
>big this big that
what about Big Shitposting? american faggots have too much influence on the internet. i don't give two fucks about american politics or the verb trump or some other petty debate over the likes of abortion, marijuana, and net neutrality

Nanonymous No.11221 [D] >>11225

(cont)
for instance I can't host an HTML file explaining nuances of a subgrenre of music with clips from the music, because the moment I do that it will be
>BLAH BLAH BLAH AMERICA
>BLAH BLAH BLAH DMCA
>BLAH BLAH BLAH PIRACY
and my ISP will disable my service

Nanonymous No.11225 [D]

>>11220 >>11221
"A red herring is a smelly fish that would distract even a bloodhound. It is also a digression that leads the reasoner off the track of considering only relevant information."
https://www.iep.utm.edu/fallacy/#RedHerring

And on the topic of logical fallacies, here is another problem with Wikipedia's article about anal sex (not to mention several posts in this thread): it includes a logically-fallacious appeal to nature (https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/36/Appeal-to-Nature). See the portion that I quoted in >>11135.

>>11220
As I wrote: worldwide. This is not merely an American concern. Abusive pornography produced in one region can be viewed all over the world. Abusive pornography production most certainly is not limited to American countries alone.

>>10701
> Erotic anoreceptive activities very often involve a combination of considerable girth and vigorous thrusting, which is highly likely to result in significant anorectal injury especially with a prolonged duration (although anal stretching alone can easily and immediately result in permanent muscular damage as well). Pornography featuring such activities is rampant, and such abuse should be considered severely criminal when more than one person is involved. This situation is facilitated by widespread ignorance (often willful), apathy, and misinformation about anorectal anatomy, physiology, and especially the traumatic risks of erotic anoreceptive activities.

Nanonymous No.11226 [D]

>>11220
Blame white people in general. All white cucks are disgusting, degenerate and they let themselves get fucked over by jewish governments. Jewrope and Weimerica are authoritarian to similar degrees with their article 13 and dmca bullshit. This is why hapas are superior to whites.