ilovefuzz.com

*curtains*

Wait no I just shit my pants

Uh ohh...Arby's bump for Dad Dick...

Weird and unexpected effect: having a boy earns you extra dad dick. +2 genital buff.

Invisible Man wrote:Weird and unexpected effect: having a boy earns you extra dad dick. +2 genital buff.

Oh yeah. Boys are the best for dad dick

Are girls still a dad dick gain, just not as much? I seem to have found that my two girls have had a dad dick increase, but not +2 each by any modest measure.

Maybe Hardees should be the ILF restaurant of choice?

PeteeBee wrote:Are girls still a dad dick gain, just not as much? I seem to have found that my two girls have had a dad dick increase, but not +2 each by any modest measure.

For sure. This is why I was confused. I assumed it was flat rate (it if fits, it ships!). I'd say that--in keeping with our flawed patriarchical society--daughters earn you approximately 70% dick gains relative to what sons earn you.

Dad dick-nosed wizard

So you know that feeling when your inability to swim in treacly ambiguity corrodes your most privately, deeply held sense of self and purpose? I went on a ten year quest to try and find some kind of larger animating purpose for my life (just mine, mind you—not a silver bullet for ennui or dread). A matrix I could run decisions through, or hang other ideas on like a seamstress’s form. I studied at the knee of great women and men; lived in all the ideas; gave myself to an ascetic existence; tuned in and dropped out; &c—but holy fuck am I stymied. Maybe I’ve sought it out...it seems like I gravitate toward tautologies and paradoxes. Trying to reconcile any sense of right/wrong moral/evil or any non-binary continua…this is why academics make such terrible human beings. The only way to make philosophical progress is to divorce meaning from experience—a ‘control’ for the ‘experiment.’ I refused to do that because I think it’s complete shit, and now I get why others take that tack.

And I’m not just talking about abstraction or ideology. I like what iPope brought up a while ago—Positive Disintegration—but am skeptical that focusing the on the process of diminution as a way to understand struggle is sensible. Finding meaning in cruelty, stupidity, sickness, death, insanity, and rage bestows them with some kind of logic or beauty that I’m unwilling to ascribe to them. Still, one of the more reasonable actualization schemes I’ve seen. Better than that Pollyannaish dickweed Maslow.

I’m increasingly paranoid and tribal. There’s no doubt that this is why I’m the architect of a squishy pile of my own DNA that I can run into every day (though it’s not the only reason). I see real evil that is pretty frequently ‘wise’ about what should be done and I see beautiful, brilliant people thrown on the ash-heap. I try to make incremental changes and fight my own impulses toward 01100010 01110011 0001010 0001010 logic—to help in small ways.

Maybe this is just garden-variety solipsistic dread. My concern is that I kinda exhausted the methods people usually use to combat it. In fact, I organized my life around them. And I found that there is no chewy nugget. There is only action, handcuffed to self-interest and mired in the ugliness of human beings.

I wish the world were better. We have what we need for it to be so.

Love,

Dad Dick 2999

My reading comprehension has been on the fritz these days but I notice you use a lot of words derived from some sort of theism. You use 'evil' a lot. Just an observation.

Dad Dick 2999 wrote:So you know that feeling when your inability to swim in treacly ambiguity corrodes your most privately, deeply held sense of self and purpose?

I do know that feeling but in my case I was ready to let that part of me go anyway. Personally, my brain has folded, unfolded, re-folded, both, neither, and BOTH AND NEITHER so many times over the past few years that priorities change, how I hold myself and how I see the world / cosmos continues to evolve and devolve and re-evolve again and again.

The way I view it is if that part is 'corroding' then maybe it wasn't that strong in the first place.

I had a TV Series I wanted to make for a long time about non-linear time that was about similar ideas. It was basically about worm-holes being portals to parallel universes. The main character was seeking 'perfection' but he learns that since he is from a 'non-perfect' universe, every universe he subsequently enters in the duration of the story will be 'corroded' and thus 'non-perfect' ergo chasing a said 'perfection' was futile (this was in the grander concept of 'a chase' literal and metaphorical).

Dad Dick 2999 wrote:Trying to reconcile any sense of right/wrong moral/evil or any non-binary continua…this is why academics make such terrible human beings. The only way to make philosophical progress is to divorce meaning from experience—a ‘control’ for the ‘experiment.’

1. Regarding the first sentence, strongly disagree. I'm going to cite Jordan Peterson and Bret Weinstein as modern examples of academics that stood up for their sense of self in the face of adversity.
2. Regarding the second sentence, I also disagree, as I think the inverse is also applicable. Instead of 'divorce' I would say 'apply' "meaning" to an experience. It's sort of like an ontological synthesis.

Lastly, and I apologize if I am hung up about this, per your use of these terms 'moral' + 'ethical', and I have said this before to one of your posts [so excuse me for sounding redundant], once you start using terms like that it will always boil down to your particular brand of ethical relativism on that particular day.

This isn't meant as an attack or anything. We're having fun. This is fun for us.

Sounds like some one needs a Vernors!