sigh: @Anonymous:
How much of a fucking douche do you have to be to complain and call people by buzzwords when someone makes awesome edits to supply people with a higher diversity of porn?
Although it might be insecurity, I don't know (and neither do you), if *you* are this upset by it, I'll name you just as insecure as the people you complain about.
Anonymous6(2): @sigh: Actually, if they make the cock white, that's not a promoting "a higher diversity of porn". That's IN FACT going backwards, since porn is mostly our white cocks as it is. So that was a failed slogan you just gave.
Anonymous7: @Anonymous: Well, it does increase the variety of porn since there is now another option but it dilutes the diversity in that it re-increases the white:non-white ratio
Mugglefucker: @Anonymous: Why is diversity of porn an issue I or any non-attractive and successful African supposed to care about? Enough of this bullshit.
Anonymous9(2): @Mugglefucker: Because like YOU SAID YOURSELF, you watch all manner of interracial porn. Or were you a lying retard (inb4 "I was trolling you all and totally not an inconsistent idiot."), like we knew you were all along?
Mugglefucker: @Anonymous:
No, I do. For christ's sakes I've got BOOKMARKS with interracial stuff, right now. I just don't understand why diversity should be anyone's concern.
Anonymous11(2): @Mugglefucker: You just contradicted yourself though, because if you didn't care about diversity in porn (since you put yourself directly in the equation) then you wouldn't have any (supposed) interracial bookmarks. Because without it being cared about by "non-attractive and successful Africans", then a good chunk of it wouldn't be made. Which leads me to believe even more that you're a lying retard.
Skinheads like you give the rest of us perfectly sane white people a bad name.
@Anonymous: Speaking of "retarded", you just threw a bunch of offensive words randomly into a sentence and hoped that their weight would replace any sort of proper context. Also, how is it "black face" if you don't see their faces in the original?
Anonymous12(2): @Mugglefucker: At some point you DO care, since you actively seek out porn that focuses ON skin tone. Which MEANS that you care. Learn the basic definitions of words.
sigh: @Anonymous: Wanting non-interracial porn does not necessarily have anything to with being insecure, you know. You could burn a Nicolas Cage in that giant straw man you've built on calling absolutely everyone that for some reason or another wants non-interracial porn over interracial porn.
@Mugglefucker: Whether you care about it or not, by editing interracial pron into non-interracial porn you have added porn to a certain category, and thus increased the diversity of porn.
And I think that benefits us all, and that everyone should thank you for it.
Anonymous13(2): @sigh: No but, editing a dick so it's the color of the sheer vast majority of dicks in porn, does a good enough job of that. Especially when you look at the hilarious hostile reaction to non-white dicks on this site. Where (clearly) white posters are usually on the verge of a mental breakdown, and mask it by "trolling" via comments, whenever there's a non-white dick on their screen.
If you subtract from something that's different than the majority, and add it back TO the majority, that's the opposite of diversity. The mental gymnastics displayed by my fellow white bros, as a work around for uncomfortable common sense are quite telling.
sigh: @Anonymous:
1. There is more porn (not subtraction, because the original still exists, editing is only addition)
2. It's different porn (because someone made an edit of existing porn)
3. Diversity of porn is increased
Diversity is not contingent on the majority, that is a misconception on your behalf.
There is more porn "total" but the ratio (the important thing) of "white vs. everything else" doesn't move. This is a basic concept. Since you're adding back to the majority, by making the pictures a 1:1, it's making what's different increasingly negligent when you look at the whole picture.
The problem with you is that you're currently (and falsely) depicting porn representation as a zero-sum game. Which it's not and has never been.
And I'm glad that you are in full agreement that too many of my fellow white bro reactionaries show their insecurities when their (now cliched) hostile reactions come out like clockwork, over a non-white dick. Since you didn't respond to my previous response to you. And only responded to my response to Muggle. Glad that some progress is being made.
See: The purpose of diversity, who is currently in the majority, and what is being changed in order to BE diverse in this case.
Like I said, you can't just pretend that facts/history doesn't matter and representation is suddenly a zero-sum game; just because that would help your argument.
Anonymous16(2): @Thumper: A2 = A white guy who gets off on disrupting white societal failures' poor attempts at rebuilding their low self esteem, by being racist online.
sigh: @Anonymous:
di·verse
1.of a different kind, form, character, etc.; unlike: a wide range of diverse opinions.
2.of various kinds or forms; multiform.
You can't just pretend that facts and history matters because that has nothing to do with the definition of the word. Fucker.
Anonymous17(2): @sigh:
LOL! THANKS FOR HELPING MY ARGUMENT, MORON!
Going by the definition you supplied, the point of the non-white dicks is to be different from the white norm, and give a wide range of options. Going back to the white dicks isn't giving a wide diverse of options, because there's already so much of it. You fail at semantics.
"Facts don't matter"? That's just full-scale stupid. I'm not surprised you said it though.
sigh: @Anonymous: The white dicks are different from the black dicks that was there before, I.E. they create more diversity.
"the point of the non-white dicks is to be different from the white norm"
You don't know shit about that.
"and give a wide range of options"
By having black AND white dicks THERE IS A WIDER RANGE OF OPTIONS THAN IF THERE WAS ONLY BLACK DICKS.
By the way, your argument is racism against white people. You're saying that black people should be given an advantage over whites in diversity of porn. Pure racism.
What you keep ignoring is that there was already a wider range of options, since there were only white dicks for a long time. Which is being slowly (when you look at how the fact majority of dicks are white, still) rectified. All the while you keep up this nonsensical and patently false notion that representation is "a zero-sum game". Which was flat out stupid, but is constantly repeated by you, as though repetition trumps inconvenient facts.
And my argument isn't "racism against white people", that's just you trying a new approach to your already failing argument.
sigh: @Anonymous:
As you can see in the definition of the word, diversity has nothing to do with deviating from any norm, and is consequently a zero-sum game.
Your argument perfectly follows the definition of racism, which you direct at white people.
Anonymous21(2): @sigh: Not really, since adding back to the norm isn't being diverse. Which is why there was a change in the first place. To BE diverse.
sigh: @Anonymous: As you can see in the definition of the word "diverse", diversity has nothing to do with norms. I do not understand why you keep bringing up norms.
Anonymous22(2): @sigh: You "refusing to look at the definition when appropriately used in any other context" doesn't mean "it has nothing to do" with the norms. You just cling to only one application of the word, because in any other case it doesn't help your argument. Which isn't how words work.
sigh: @Anonymous: "Which isn't how words work."
Ice buss real yellow pie more slap street... no wait, that fucking IS how words work.
"You just cling to only one application of the word"
Let's just pretend then, that this whole conversation HASN'T been about the fact that you think diversity means something that it doesn't, and that I cling to just one certain use of the word.
Yeah, I fucking cling to that definition of the word, BECAUSE IT WAS WITH THAT DEFINITION THAT I FUCKING USED IT IN THE FIRST PLACE.
Which would mean that your argument this whole time has been that I used the word with another definition that I myself intended. In other words, you are telling *ME* what *I* meant. Which is retarded beyond the fucking stars.
Anonymous26(2): @sigh: You'll cling to that singular application of the word, because it helps your argument. Since you ignore every other application and historical context, you demonstrate not just how dishonest you are, but how dumb you are as well.
And while I enjoy your pathetic rage and empty posturing by using caps, I'm afraid it doesn't make you correct. Or less retarded, though.
sigh: @Anonymous: Your inability to recognize that you're wrong and admit that is getting absolutely ridiculous.
Yes actually, when I use a word and supply THE ACTUAL DICTIONARY DEFINITION of how I intended for that word to be used, I am automatically correct.
Speaking of which, please point me to a dictionary that defines diversity as "norm breaking". Because making up your own definitions of words and telling people they have no business pointing to actrual dictionary definitions, is not how words work.
Anonymous28(2): @sigh: Stop projecting your own fucking failings on to me, moron.
I've already explained that the purpose of diversity with race is to change up what is constantly established. A.K.A. "The Norm". In this case, with porn, in order to "change things up", the norm is white dicks. So in looking at the big picture (which you refuse to do, since it doesn't help your argument) adding back to what is constantly established, by changing what is THE change, isn't "providing more options". The definition of "diversity". Since what you're changing it back to (white dicks) is what's been the ONLY choice.
The fact that you can't understand this, says one of two things. You're either intentionally being obtuse because you're a dishonest idiot. Or you're retarded because you have trouble expanding upon the simplest of definitions, and applying them to similar examples.
sigh: @Anonymous: You clearly just do not understand what diversity means.
You've made up your own idea of what it means and you refuse to let it go. For gods sake, when you claim that you know definitions of words better than the dictionary, you've got to realize it was over a long time ago.
And you still haven't pointed to any other place that would define diversity as you do, presumably because there is no place that does that.
Thumper: I sense something.. a presence I've not felt since... @sigh: I remember this anon, they'll call names, insinuate you're a liar, half read what you say and think they found fault; call you on it and show their incompetence. it's as though they milk the confrontation, getting off on having taken a 'stance against the haters'. anons like this are like dog shit; once you 'step in it' it's best to throw the shoes/thread out..
Anonymous29(2): @sigh: No, I have a pretty clear understanding of what diversity means, when applying it in a racial sense. You just don't like its application in this matter, because it pushes us whites to the side. So you ignore all facts and act like context doesn't matter.
So I'm going with the "you're retarded because you have trouble expanding upon the simplest of definitions" angle.
@Thumper: Hey look, it's Thumper clearleading for someone else with a failing argument again. All the while crying about name calling, while doing just that. Stay comfortably at the hip of another idiot, because when you try to stand on your own, you look even more like an idiot.
Thumper: @Anonymous: :D hey, you're back! I felt bad about crushing you before. I'll just let you to your fantasy world this time; my shoes will stay clean..
Anonymous31(2): @Thumper: Go ahead and link said "crushing". I'm sure people will see that, instead of me trouncing you all up and down the comment's section.
sigh: @Anonymous: "I have a pretty clear understanding of what diversity means"
Obviously you've never looked at the real definition, and you've deduced that "diversity = attractive and successful Africans = norm breaking" because you live in a predominantly white area where the actual definition, "different kind" *incidentally* means attractive and successful Africans. But that wouldn't hold true in, say, Africa where "different kind" (and incidentally norm breaking) = whites.
But if you're an image of porn with black dicks, then the definition of diversity "different kind" = white dick.
That doesn't refute anything I've said, and is a perfect example of diversity in a racial sense.
In Africa, whites would be an example of diversity, as it's predominantly black. Just like in the case of America an example of diversity would be non-white. So thanks for helping my argument, yet again. You're getting good at that.
sigh: @Anonymous:
Yes it does, because the initial image was with black dicks, that means the diversity of it is with white dicks, or yellow dicks, or red dicks, etc.
You still refuse to let go of your imaginary definition that diversity is contingent on a norm. And even *if* that was one definition of diversity it wouldn't matter, because that wasn't the definition I used, which is the only definition that matters. You just refuse to accept that because you're butthurt beyond all recognition and you stick to your imaginary one because it helps your argument.
They must have hired a whole crew of construction workers to fill your head with enough cement to make you this thickheaded.
Anonymous34(2): @sigh: And you still refuse to look at not only the whole picture but take into account the context that matters. So you can continue to hand-wave away what doesn't work for you until you're blue in the face. It doesn't make you any less retarded or any less incorrect, since (once again...whether you like it or not) in a racial sense, diversity IS contingent on a norm. Because those "Big Picture People" who advocate a change, look at it from a historical point of view. Which skews in the favor of whites (in the case of things like porn).
You're just an insecure faggot who doesn't like being catered to only 99% of the time. And you make the rest of us look bad.
Oh, and you must have eaten a ton of pain-chips as a kid, because it's like I'm debating against a retarded 5-year old. Just like on the other picture, were I pointed out how you were a giant hypocrite, you lost the argument.
sigh: @Anonymous:
I don't refuse to look at the big picture: I just don't have to look at it, because it's a part of your fantasy definition that I certainly wasn't using. I was using the dictionary definition, so that's all I have to look at.
I can't believe you're so butthurt that you're trying to force your own definition on a word that someone else used. How fucking desperate are you?
For fuck's sake, it's like playing baseball and someone says to hand them a bat, and you ask them what they need a cave dwelling avian mammal for.
It's only through massive buttfrustration that you can't admit you're wrong.
sigh: @Anonymous: Oh and by the way. Go to any torrent site, pirate bay or whatever, and type in
"black on white"
and
"white on black"
I swear to fucking Christ +95% of all interracial porn in black on white, even if you search for the opposite.
So editing a black on white image into non-interracial white porn: Not even certain that would be "anti-diversity" even with your definition.
Anonymous35(2): @sigh: You don't "have" to look at it, much like someone doesn't "have" to accept any other inconvenient fact. Because doing so would legitimately end the argument on the opposing side's favor. So you hide behind the phony accusation that I'm reaching or some such nonsense, when in reality it's YOU who's projecting his refusal to accept the facts that don't help his argument.
It's only through being a complete idiot that you can't admit you're wrong. Full scale Dunning-Kruger Effect.
Thumper: @Anonymous: heh, 'trouncing'. you know, you have a watered-down 'deathcock' feel to you. like the man had a stroke, or had to have his balls cut off due to sitting the wrong way in the wheelchair..
sigh: @Anonymous:
You don't accept the inconvenient fact that I was the one who first used the word, which means that I decide what definition of it applies.
If you had another definition in mind, just as misconstruing a baseball bat for an animal, that's not my problem.
Anonymous37(2): @sigh: No, not really. You have no claim to the word or its application. You just wish you did, because that's the only way you'll be correct about anything.
Anonymous38(2): @sigh: Doesn't matter that you used the word first. If I call "a cat a banana", that doesn't mean I'm right "just because I said cat first".
sigh: @Anonymous: It does matter that I used the word first, especially when the definition I later supplied was from the fucking dictionary.
Not quite like calling a cat "banana". More like thinking a "baseball bat is" the animal "bat".
Anonymous41: some people want white dicks some want black, Muggle editing the pics to include white dicks is not insecure, it is jusf what he wants of his porn, the peoole complaining about that are insecure because they don't want white dicks, in that case go back to the black version because it is still there, this one did not replace it I even checked it is still there. Everyone complaining that Muggle is insecure is insecure themselves while he is not. you want more black dicks? they go find black dick porn, don't click on white dick porn you insecure idiots.
- Reply
- Reply
- Reply
- Reply
My only regret is that the foot fetish is still there :P
You horribly misspelled "insecure faggots."
- Reply
How much of a fucking douche do you have to be to complain and call people by buzzwords when someone makes awesome edits to supply people with a higher diversity of porn?
Although it might be insecurity, I don't know (and neither do you), if *you* are this upset by it, I'll name you just as insecure as the people you complain about.
Me being logical isn't being "upset", btw.
Diversity by definition IS variety.
- Reply
its time for the artist to stop blackpainting the porn and time for whitepainting the porn=)
Enough with the blackface, its offensive to White people and ...well actually its offensive to ALL non-blacks to see more blacks
- Reply
No, I do. For christ's sakes I've got BOOKMARKS with interracial stuff, right now. I just don't understand why diversity should be anyone's concern.
Skinheads like you give the rest of us perfectly sane white people a bad name.
@Anonymous: Speaking of "retarded", you just threw a bunch of offensive words randomly into a sentence and hoped that their weight would replace any sort of proper context. Also, how is it "black face" if you don't see their faces in the original?
- Reply
- Reply
@Mugglefucker: Whether you care about it or not, by editing interracial pron into non-interracial porn you have added porn to a certain category, and thus increased the diversity of porn.
And I think that benefits us all, and that everyone should thank you for it.
If you subtract from something that's different than the majority, and add it back TO the majority, that's the opposite of diversity. The mental gymnastics displayed by my fellow white bros, as a work around for uncomfortable common sense are quite telling.
- Reply
1. There is more porn (not subtraction, because the original still exists, editing is only addition)
2. It's different porn (because someone made an edit of existing porn)
3. Diversity of porn is increased
Diversity is not contingent on the majority, that is a misconception on your behalf.
There is more porn "total" but the ratio (the important thing) of "white vs. everything else" doesn't move. This is a basic concept. Since you're adding back to the majority, by making the pictures a 1:1, it's making what's different increasingly negligent when you look at the whole picture.
The problem with you is that you're currently (and falsely) depicting porn representation as a zero-sum game. Which it's not and has never been.
And I'm glad that you are in full agreement that too many of my fellow white bro reactionaries show their insecurities when their (now cliched) hostile reactions come out like clockwork, over a non-white dick. Since you didn't respond to my previous response to you. And only responded to my response to Muggle. Glad that some progress is being made.
- Reply
See: Diversity is not contingent on the majority, that is a misconception on your behalf.
See: The purpose of diversity, who is currently in the majority, and what is being changed in order to BE diverse in this case.
Like I said, you can't just pretend that facts/history doesn't matter and representation is suddenly a zero-sum game; just because that would help your argument.
- Reply
- Reply
di·verse
1.of a different kind, form, character, etc.; unlike: a wide range of diverse opinions.
2.of various kinds or forms; multiform.
You can't just pretend that facts and history matters because that has nothing to do with the definition of the word. Fucker.
LOL! THANKS FOR HELPING MY ARGUMENT, MORON!
Going by the definition you supplied, the point of the non-white dicks is to be different from the white norm, and give a wide range of options. Going back to the white dicks isn't giving a wide diverse of options, because there's already so much of it. You fail at semantics.
"Facts don't matter"? That's just full-scale stupid. I'm not surprised you said it though.
- Reply
"the point of the non-white dicks is to be different from the white norm"
You don't know shit about that.
"and give a wide range of options"
By having black AND white dicks THERE IS A WIDER RANGE OF OPTIONS THAN IF THERE WAS ONLY BLACK DICKS.
By the way, your argument is racism against white people. You're saying that black people should be given an advantage over whites in diversity of porn. Pure racism.
What you keep ignoring is that there was already a wider range of options, since there were only white dicks for a long time. Which is being slowly (when you look at how the fact majority of dicks are white, still) rectified. All the while you keep up this nonsensical and patently false notion that representation is "a zero-sum game". Which was flat out stupid, but is constantly repeated by you, as though repetition trumps inconvenient facts.
And my argument isn't "racism against white people", that's just you trying a new approach to your already failing argument.
- Reply
As you can see in the definition of the word, diversity has nothing to do with deviating from any norm, and is consequently a zero-sum game.
Your argument perfectly follows the definition of racism, which you direct at white people.
- Reply
Only in the case where "the only choice" is the norm. But norm is irrelevant to diversity.
- Reply
- Reply
- Reply
Ice buss real yellow pie more slap street... no wait, that fucking IS how words work.
"You just cling to only one application of the word"
Let's just pretend then, that this whole conversation HASN'T been about the fact that you think diversity means something that it doesn't, and that I cling to just one certain use of the word.
Yeah, I fucking cling to that definition of the word, BECAUSE IT WAS WITH THAT DEFINITION THAT I FUCKING USED IT IN THE FIRST PLACE.
Which would mean that your argument this whole time has been that I used the word with another definition that I myself intended. In other words, you are telling *ME* what *I* meant. Which is retarded beyond the fucking stars.
And while I enjoy your pathetic rage and empty posturing by using caps, I'm afraid it doesn't make you correct. Or less retarded, though.
- Reply
Of course it makes me correct.
I was the one that initially used the word, and I used it under that definition.
- Reply
Yes actually, when I use a word and supply THE ACTUAL DICTIONARY DEFINITION of how I intended for that word to be used, I am automatically correct.
Speaking of which, please point me to a dictionary that defines diversity as "norm breaking". Because making up your own definitions of words and telling people they have no business pointing to actrual dictionary definitions, is not how words work.
I've already explained that the purpose of diversity with race is to change up what is constantly established. A.K.A. "The Norm". In this case, with porn, in order to "change things up", the norm is white dicks. So in looking at the big picture (which you refuse to do, since it doesn't help your argument) adding back to what is constantly established, by changing what is THE change, isn't "providing more options". The definition of "diversity". Since what you're changing it back to (white dicks) is what's been the ONLY choice.
The fact that you can't understand this, says one of two things. You're either intentionally being obtuse because you're a dishonest idiot. Or you're retarded because you have trouble expanding upon the simplest of definitions, and applying them to similar examples.
- Reply
You've made up your own idea of what it means and you refuse to let it go. For gods sake, when you claim that you know definitions of words better than the dictionary, you've got to realize it was over a long time ago.
And you still haven't pointed to any other place that would define diversity as you do, presumably because there is no place that does that.
- Reply
So I'm going with the "you're retarded because you have trouble expanding upon the simplest of definitions" angle.
@Thumper: Hey look, it's Thumper clearleading for someone else with a failing argument again. All the while crying about name calling, while doing just that. Stay comfortably at the hip of another idiot, because when you try to stand on your own, you look even more like an idiot.
- Reply
- Reply
Obviously you've never looked at the real definition, and you've deduced that "diversity = attractive and successful Africans = norm breaking" because you live in a predominantly white area where the actual definition, "different kind" *incidentally* means attractive and successful Africans. But that wouldn't hold true in, say, Africa where "different kind" (and incidentally norm breaking) = whites.
But if you're an image of porn with black dicks, then the definition of diversity "different kind" = white dick.
That doesn't refute anything I've said, and is a perfect example of diversity in a racial sense.
In Africa, whites would be an example of diversity, as it's predominantly black. Just like in the case of America an example of diversity would be non-white. So thanks for helping my argument, yet again. You're getting good at that.
- Reply
But if you're an image of porn with black dicks, then the definition of diversity "different kind" = white dick.
- Reply
Yes it does, because the initial image was with black dicks, that means the diversity of it is with white dicks, or yellow dicks, or red dicks, etc.
You still refuse to let go of your imaginary definition that diversity is contingent on a norm. And even *if* that was one definition of diversity it wouldn't matter, because that wasn't the definition I used, which is the only definition that matters. You just refuse to accept that because you're butthurt beyond all recognition and you stick to your imaginary one because it helps your argument.
They must have hired a whole crew of construction workers to fill your head with enough cement to make you this thickheaded.
You're just an insecure faggot who doesn't like being catered to only 99% of the time. And you make the rest of us look bad.
Oh, and you must have eaten a ton of pain-chips as a kid, because it's like I'm debating against a retarded 5-year old. Just like on the other picture, were I pointed out how you were a giant hypocrite, you lost the argument.
- Reply
I don't refuse to look at the big picture: I just don't have to look at it, because it's a part of your fantasy definition that I certainly wasn't using. I was using the dictionary definition, so that's all I have to look at.
I can't believe you're so butthurt that you're trying to force your own definition on a word that someone else used. How fucking desperate are you?
For fuck's sake, it's like playing baseball and someone says to hand them a bat, and you ask them what they need a cave dwelling avian mammal for.
It's only through massive buttfrustration that you can't admit you're wrong.
- Reply
"black on white"
and
"white on black"
I swear to fucking Christ +95% of all interracial porn in black on white, even if you search for the opposite.
So editing a black on white image into non-interracial white porn: Not even certain that would be "anti-diversity" even with your definition.
It's only through being a complete idiot that you can't admit you're wrong. Full scale Dunning-Kruger Effect.
And that analogy of yours didn't work.
Interracial is still a rare genre, when you look at the big picture. Because most porn is white on white.
- Reply
- Reply
You don't accept the inconvenient fact that I was the one who first used the word, which means that I decide what definition of it applies.
If you had another definition in mind, just as misconstruing a baseball bat for an animal, that's not my problem.
I don't have to correct myself after you.
- Reply
The difference is that it was I that first used the word, so you can't apply whichever definition you wish and tell me I used the word wrong.
- Reply
Not quite like calling a cat "banana". More like thinking a "baseball bat is" the animal "bat".
- Reply
- Reply
- Reply
- Reply
- Reply
- Reply
- Reply