[block id=”blogads”]
(94 People Likes) What is the meaning of “Doll Parts” from Hole (Courtney Love) song?
A woman objectified as a collection of body parts and feeling bad about herself and her ability to be in a loving relationship. It probably stems from his real-life hero addiction and his bumpy relationship with Kurt Cobain. He also wants the cake the most, wants to be a real winner in life, not a fake loser trying to get along. I personally think Celebraty Skin is the best track in this song.
(49 Likes) Should we give pedophile children sex dolls to satisfy their sexuality? Will there be less sexual abuse of children?
I’m going to establish some facts and personal background before I actually answer. I am a victim of childhood abuse by both confirmed pedophiles and child abusers. I’ve written extensively about this and some of the posts are on my profile. I am not a pedophile or someone who sexually abuses or abuses children. Pedophilia, or sexual attraction to pre-teens, is something that occurs in some people, although estimates of exact percentages vary. It is not something one chooses to be, it cannot be conditioned into or out of them. As far as we know, it is very possible that some people are born pedophiles and there is nothing that can be done about it. Most of the sexual abuse of children is not perpetrated by pedophiles, but by garden variety abusers who target children because children are easy victims. Now that we’ve got that out of the way, let’s look at the goals here. The problem with our society right now when it comes to pedophiles is that we demonize everyone who is a pedophile. They make a great punching bag because anyone who is attracted to kids is clearly a bad person, right? The fact that they can’t curb their lure is completely ignored, and we lump people who are pedophiles but who don’t actually take any action (including watching child pornography) with those who do. Because of this stigma around pedophiles, there isn’t a lot of solid research on this topic, and which research is heavily dependent on pedophiles who offend as the subject. Non-offending pedophiles rarely participate in studies because of the stigma associated with being a pedophile, so we have a limited sample size. When it comes to dealing with pedophiles as a society, the goal is and should be to reduce the harm done to children. In other words, there should be less abuse of children, whatever the goal. If you look at it from this angle, when it comes to sex dolls that look like pre-teens, the answer is that we should eventually let them if it lessens the harm done to real children. As for whether they actually reduce harm to children, we don’t have enough data to say one way or another. Evidence suggests that if they have access to a way of sexually relieving themselves, such as with a doll, it makes them less likely to offend a pedophile. There is no evidence to suggest that any increase in activity, such as using dolls, will increase the likelihood that someone will abuse children. We can speculate that people are less likely to take action, similar to the massive amount of evidence that shows that people who play violent video games are less likely to engage in violence in real life, and that as porn use increases, people are less likely to commit sexual assault. on impulses with a real boy, if they have some kind of ethical outlet. The main way criminal pedophiles actually start committing crimes is by watching and collecting child pornography. This hurts children and is also wrong because you have to abuse real children to produce it. So having an outlet that doesn’t abuse children will make it less likely that any pedophile who falls prey to child pornography will do so. This leads us to the logical conclusion, if we could create child pornography without hurting children, would it be allowed as well? As animation gets better, this may one day be possible. These are tough ethical issues that need to be addressed. The thing is, it personally bothers me and makes me nauseous. The idea of someone using a childlike sex doll and watching animated porn of people having sex with children is repulsive (and personally triggers me). However, we must not forget that we have a goal in mind, and that the goal is less abuse and harm to children. So if something that offends and disgusts us, but hurts no child, will make real children less harmed, I’m in for it. So I lean towards no on whether they should be illegal or not. They should be allowed and we should do more scientific work to make sure they are really doing what we hope they are doing: making pedophiles feel less offended. I’d probably be in favor of having them prescribed by a psychiatrist or something like that who would monitor the person using them and make sure they don’t harm a real child. However, this is out of my wheelhouse. Are they promoting and normalizing a cultural climate that condone child abuse and pedophilia? Why or why not? In no way does it create anything condoning child abuse. There is no slippery slope here. This has come up in countless other industries. Do movies and games depicting violence condone real violence? All the evidence points to no. In fact, healthy people can separate fantasy from reality, and so we can actually enjoy fantastic things that we would never turn a blind eye to. There is strong evidence that having these fantasies keeps people from doing immoral things in real life. So rape fantasies are fine, but real rape is not. Continues. When it comes to normalizing and condoning pedophilia, we need to normalize it, because we need to accept that pedophilia or people with pedophilia are normal and exist. We have to normalize their sexuality and help them not act accordingly. This is really important. Normalizing child sexual abuse is not something we should ever do (and again, there is no evidence that child sex dolls do this). Getting help to normalize pedophiles by accepting their attractiveness and prevent them from harming children is something we need to do. Summary: As someone who was sexually abused as a child, I am ready to support anything that prevents another child from being sexually abused. This is to sanction the child and
(55 Likes) Do gold prices always rise during recession?
all that gold, months, sometimes years into the future. Overall, the gold price is pretty stable. Most of the time. Looking at historical prices, it will become clear that gold’s biggest moves come when the dollar’s value falls. If you look at the period from 2002 to 2008 – roughly speaking – you’ll see that the price of gold skyrocketed from around $300/ounce to over $1,200/ounce and reached around $1,900 before crashing. During the same period, the dollar’s value in world markets, as measured or represented by the DXY, the symbol for the dollar index, which compares the value of the US dollar with a basket of six other world currencies, decreased by 45 percent. %. It’s no coincidence that when gold prices quadrupled, so did crude oil. Most of these moves were in response to the falling dollar. If you compare the price of gold or crude oil with prices in their country(s) currency or origin, you will see that their prices have not changed much; any price changes in local currencies were probably due to speculation. If you go back to the Reagan era, another era, with the Mini Sex Doll soaring gold prices, you’ll find more or less the same thing, the rapid and significant decline in the value of the US dollar that drove gold prices up significantly, about $800/ounce or so. Did the price of gold and crude oil fall under Obama? It’s no surprise; The dollar rose nearly 45% during Obama’s administration. Have gold prices changed by less than $100/ounce since Trump? Not surprising though, considering that the USD is trading in a narrow range from DXY 102 to perhaps 92. A recession by itself does not trigger a frenzied rush for gold. The real migration of money seems to be to the US Treasuries in the process leading to a recession, which usually includes “smart money” coming out of the stock market. The price of Treasuries and the yield, or interest rate, are inversely related, inextricably linked, and when treasuries are demanded, their prices rise and interest rates fall. If you look at the TNX chart (or maybe $TNX, depending on the chart service), which is a tracking index for the interest rate on 10-year treasuries, you’ll see that TNX reached before the stock crash. a high of about 3.25%, and since the stock market crashed, it has dropped below 3.0% (TNX, btw, will show interest ten times, so “30” means an interest rate of 3.0%). Gold carries premiums that most investors want to avoid. To buy the real metal, you can pay a premium of 10% of the gold price, not only for gold, but also for gold bars. And when you want to sell that physical gold, you still get a bonus of up to 10%. You can buy the gold tracking ETF, GLD, and get rid of all the hassle of holding real metal and be in much better shape financially. However, to (again) answer the question posed, a recession by itself will not send the price of gold high enough to cover those grueling buy and sell commissions that may require gold to rise 20% before you even go toe-to-toe. Gold as an investment does not perform as well, as has been shown over and over again; usually lags behind S
(88 Likes) It’s not easy to find a cheap sex doll,
Cheap sex dolls aren’t easy, and it’s even harder to find a doll that isn’t a cheap fake replica. If you count the cheapest sex dolls, trunks and other air-filled things, it will realistically remind you of a doll that has nothing to do with a real sex doll, starting maybe $500. Typically, these are made from bad materials, poor build quality, or even dangerous materials. After all, this is a hygiene product and your safety should be a concern. well
(48 Likes) Why Candace Owens and other traditionalist women say “bring back the masculine men” but never “bring back the women (aka feminine women) like sex dolls”? Do they realize that they have to say the second one too? How about being individual instead?
e why feminine women mean “like a sex doll”. it looks like a package 128cm love doll the agreement you impose on their thinking, not on what they actually do
