Brand New SentenceShe reads romance novels, someone else look at porn. My thought has always been “you prefer words, they prefer pictures, but fundamentally it’s no different”
this can be applied to anything
theyre guns theyre a hump of firey metal you need to regulate metal? hahahahahahahaaaaha
It's just four colours of dots arranged to make you imagine Juicy Jugs.
Once I tried to determine the least amount of pixels in a grid that would undeniably be considered lewd. 3x3 pixels can sort of contain a penis, but 2x2 pixels? Idk. But undeniably? Probably more. There must be a minimum number of pixels where the image would be clearly "inappropriate".
When my grandma died, she had like a hundred of those books stashed around the house. Also, vodka in Maalox bottles. It was the first time I found out that grandmas can be freaks too lol
I saw a guy doing moral outrage that men sometimes goon it crazy style in public.
It's pixels. It's thousands of pixels arranged on a screen that make your imagination see a real person.
When people act like it's indecent I'm always like, "oh no the witch pixels have formed the horny configuration"
Except there's no imagination required if you're displaying an image. An accidental glance at one is very different than the other.
Overall, poor comparison, 2/10.
Next let's compare dropping bombs to reading about the war.
Your own example would be more akin to watching a documentary vs reading about it. No one actually dies by you doing so.
That's not like any of the examples. Someone is equating reading smutty romance to public masturbation.
I honestly didn't see this going in this direction, I'm pretty fascinated by the reaction here.
Someone is equating reading smutty romance to public masturbation.
..to public watching nude images, not to masturbation.
... that men sometimes goon it crazy style in public.
The only "someone" I've seen talking about public masturbation is you. :/ The "Goon it crazy" was clearly a hyperbole, given this posts' context.
And I'm not too surprised about the reaction. While the OP (from Bluesky, not you) definitely made a brand new sentence, the take is not particularly bright.
The “Goon it crazy” was clearly a hyperbole
So ...so was the sentence?
Did someone take a lighthearted meme community too seriously?
Let's contrast instead!
"Goon it crazy style" was just to be funny. What's the actual difference in watching porn in public and smut novels if you're not jorkin it and nobody sees the screen?
Not a great comparison--a better one would be reading something like Playboy in public, if the cover were no more "scandalous" than the cover of a smutty romance novel. In this case, other people know what you're doing.
If you're watching a video and no one can see the screen (and you're not gooning it crazy style) then there's no problem, and no controversy--you're being discreet.
The sentence was supposed to be funny, too.
Men get visible boners, women don't.
Unless you have a thermal camera, there's no way to know what she's reading (if it's on an e-reader at least)
Men get visible boners
In pretty rare cases (huge dick or no underwear + very thin fabric of pants)
any decent witch should know that intent is just as important as the method of casting the spell
Yeah, this meme is a bit too reductionist to my taste.
The cover shows a man embracing a woman!
Oh shit, are we doing mspaintadventures reactions now?
I feel like I know how Diogenese would rebut that logic.
Oh no, the cynical philosopher has formed the horny configuration?
Nah, he'd probably just fuck a dog in the public square and laugh and say that all human morality is an absurd construct used to enslave the minds of the uncritical masses
