Funny Pictures Part IV - Funny Harder

sausage oktoberfest

  On 4/22/2016 at 5:39 PM, Joyrex said:

 

  On 4/21/2016 at 10:36 PM, Milwaukeeeee said:

 

  On 4/21/2016 at 4:42 PM, Joyrex said:

 

  On 4/21/2016 at 4:34 PM, Milwaukeeeee said:

I thought it was no big deal. If you want to see that ass just google "booty pectoral drawing" and go to images, it should appear in the first image

It's a bare arse, and isn't allowed by the rules. You're convincing nobody walking by your cubicle at work that it's a man's chest (or no big deal, especially if the viewer is a woman).

The image was no big deal at all, and less for an adult and open minded audience. If it is needed to put a warning point just for a minimum violation of the rules, then it is a moderators choice that I don't personally share, but you can do whatever you want. In what sense could a grown woman feel truly affected by seing another woman naked butt, specially a beautiful one? some of you guys honestly considered that particular image sexist in any sense?

Would you wear a tee shirt down the street with that image on it? I would wager you would not. Being adult and open-minded is not about exposing others who may find something offensive (after all, everyone's views differ) without giving them the choice.

 

As for it being sexist or not - that wasn't my point, but I am sure some women would take offense in seeing a suggestively posed bare arse on a workmate's computer monitor. Some wouldn't - depends on the individual, your workplace norms, etc.

 

As for warning points, they are temporary in some cases, and it is up to the mod's discretion whether to just give a verbal warning or assign a warning point, temporary or not.

If someone is actually "offended" by that image in particular, that's because he/she is necessarliy a sexual ascetic-phobic, a radical muslim or an hypocryte in which cases I don't have to apologise, because they chosed or were forced to behave in an illogical way according to their human and brain nature.

My point wasn't being around the street wearing a t-shirt with a picture like that, a place where in fact there could be some minors, which don't have fully responsability of themselves, nor the ability to interpretate certain images in a mature way. Even though many women and moms (also jogging guys, but less) usually go around almost showing their asses on thin leggings (and an ass is just that, mainly fat and 2 separated muscles at the bottom of the back, it does not matter the external color or thin textile layer for me if the resulting shape is almost indistinguishable from the actual ass). I don't want leggings to be banned, is just muscular anatomy being barely hidden, and I'm ok with it, although in some cases this legging thing could get into some social and futile mental contradictions. I would be more offended seeing someone on the street wearing some Gap clothes, or using iphones, products very likely to have been manufacturated by exploited workers (just to mention a general random example), than seeing a guy with a printed ass on his t-shirt.

I understand this site as a leisure forum, it is a personal choice to check it when being at work, and then get caught viewing something else, so in that case, it is not right to blame it totally on my part, or in any other memeber post.

Basically the fail I made was only forgetting to put a "NSFW" with a spoiler tab hidding that image, just to give some wattmers their personal choice to see or not an offensive thick shoulder-pectoral.

  On 4/22/2016 at 5:16 PM, roasty said:

This is just nature, mental misinterpretations are only prejudices. Understanding the gross is undrestanding the beauty, and the image mix those concepts so well, that it can basically explain 99% of physical life

So much text. R u jev?

  On 4/23/2016 at 6:03 AM, chenGOD said:

So much text. R u jev?

I'm a bit retarded I spelled in a previous comment "wattmers" instead of "watmmers". Why the posts only allow a limited number of edits?

too farr.

Blunt Talk, season 2

  On 4/23/2016 at 6:16 AM, Milwaukeeeee said:

 

  On 4/23/2016 at 6:03 AM, chenGOD said:

So much text. R u jev?

I'm a bit retarded I spelled in a previous comment "wattmers" instead of "watmmers". Why the posts only allow a limited number of edits?

 

^^^ it's so perfect.

  On 4/23/2016 at 9:19 PM, MIXL2 said:

 

  On 4/23/2016 at 6:16 AM, Milwaukeeeee said:

 

  On 4/23/2016 at 6:03 AM, chenGOD said:

So much text. R u jev?

I'm a bit retarded I spelled in a previous comment "wattmers" instead of "watmmers". Why the posts only allow a limited number of edits?

 

read the mf'n rules

 

I read the rules already, but they do not explain "why" there is a limited time for editing only for members, they only states that but there isn't any particular explanation why

  On 4/24/2016 at 2:37 PM, Milwaukeeeee said:

 

  On 4/23/2016 at 9:19 PM, MIXL2 said:

 

  On 4/23/2016 at 6:16 AM, Milwaukeeeee said:

 

  On 4/23/2016 at 6:03 AM, chenGOD said:

So much text. R u jev?

I'm a bit retarded I spelled in a previous comment "wattmers" instead of "watmmers". Why the posts only allow a limited number of edits?

 

read the mf'n rules

 

 

I read the rules already, but they do not explain "why" there is a limited time for editing only for members, they only states that but there isn't any particular explanation why

 

It's a paid feature for EKT and EKT+.

  On 4/24/2016 at 6:46 PM, StephenG said:

 

  On 4/24/2016 at 2:37 PM, Milwaukeeeee said:

 

  On 4/23/2016 at 9:19 PM, MIXL2 said:

 

  On 4/23/2016 at 6:16 AM, Milwaukeeeee said:

 

  On 4/23/2016 at 6:03 AM, chenGOD said:

So much text. R u jev?

I'm a bit retarded I spelled in a previous comment "wattmers" instead of "watmmers". Why the posts only allow a limited number of edits?

 

read the mf'n rules

 

 

I read the rules already, but they do not explain "why" there is a limited time for editing only for members, they only states that but there isn't any particular explanation why

 

It's a paid feature for EKT and EKT+.

 

So capitalism is the reason

  On 4/25/2016 at 12:41 AM, Milwaukeeeee said:

 

  On 4/24/2016 at 6:46 PM, StephenG said:

 

  On 4/24/2016 at 2:37 PM, Milwaukeeeee said:

 

  On 4/23/2016 at 9:19 PM, MIXL2 said:

 

  On 4/23/2016 at 6:16 AM, Milwaukeeeee said:

 

  On 4/23/2016 at 6:03 AM, chenGOD said:

So much text. R u jev?

I'm a bit retarded I spelled in a previous comment "wattmers" instead of "watmmers". Why the posts only allow a limited number of edits?

 

read the mf'n rules

 

 

I read the rules already, but they do not explain "why" there is a limited time for editing only for members, they only states that but there isn't any particular explanation why

 

It's a paid feature for EKT and EKT+.

 

 

So capitalism is the reason

 

until someone convinces ISP + web hosting companies to offer all their services for free.. yes. capitalism is the answer.

  On 4/25/2016 at 1:09 AM, ignatius said:

 

until someone convinces ISP + web hosting companies to offer all their services for free.. yes. capitalism is the answer.

I expect and understand some other specific features of EKT or EKT+ memebers to be for paid, but not necessarily the time span in the posibility of post editing. And hosting prices use to be almost nothing

50 dollars per month? Is that for real?

that's what he's been telling us

I bet Joyrex has a hidden capital in Panama from the superavit of this site, and he is not in the papers since he is a reptilian

(don't really know if this was already posted somewhere)

BoC at Coachella

I had a dream that one day maybe the dank mentality will show people that life is just a ride.