The idea of having sex with your parent as “the most horrific circumstance that can ever happen” is the ridiculous part. People have experienced a billions of worse things. That’s part of my point - you guys are so fucking ridiculous that you are trying to claim that it’s worse than things that are are obviously, exponentially worse, and then - and here’s the important part - also claim that people who think differently from you are mentally ill.
Again, you’re trying to imply I have some secret motherfucking fantasy to deflect my criticism. The funny thing is that you’re implying that I have issues of being crazy regarding my parents, when it’s actually so obviously you guys that are fucking nuts.
This situation is roughly equivelant to saying “would you rather get the worst papercut of your life, or have your femur snapped in 3 places in a motorcycle accident?” and everyone is rushing in to say “of course I’d take my femur getting snapped, what the fuck is wrong with people who would take the papercut option!?!?”
(Yes, fucking your parent is worse than a papercut. Being paralyzed or blinded is worse than a broken leg. This is how analogies work)
Anyway, I explained, in detail, several times now, why exactly you guys are full of shit and you just keep saying “IGNORING THAT THOUGH, WHY? I BET YOU WANNA FUCK YOUR MOM LOLOL”
Seriously, it’s you guys demonstrating how important this issue is to you, by insisting on being obviously delusional and even resorting to ad hominem attacks on me rather than address my logic.
I suspect a bunch of the “never no matter what, I would accept any of the above fates” votes are in protest, and not actual honest responses. Not particularly surprising, considering the level of yuck presented by the hypothetical.
No, seriously, Senor Beef, would you accept any of the above scenarios rather than having sex with a child? Perhaps even YOUR child. I’m genuinely curious.
I don’t see how that’s relevant to the issue at hand. What are you trying to accomplish? Are you trying to say “there are hypothetical questions that would squick you out and you’d refuse to answer?”
I think it’s more likely you’re just trying to use emotional reactions to create an ad hominem against me to feel as though you’ve demonstrated some sort of point. If I’m willing to say “I’d rather fuck my mom than be crippled”, and people can interpret that as “oh wow dude you must secretly want to fuck your mom”, if I say yes to your question, are you going to try to turn it around and saying SENORBEEF IS JUST DYING TO RAPE CHILDREN?
Your question is not even within the spirit of these hypotheticals though. In these cases, you’re being asked “which unpleasant fate is worse to you?” - in your question you’re asking “how far would you be willing to harm an innocent third party to avoid suffering yourself?” It also doesn’t weigh the relative consequences of rape and being crippled. If you reversed it you’d have the same reaction, if I said “would you permanently cripple a child to avoid being raped?” the same emotional reaction happens. Therefore it’s not a valid way to compare whether or not getting raped or getting crippled is worse, which was the point of these threads.
It’s not that having sex with one’s parent is so abhorrent. It’s doing it voluntarily that would be abhorrent. Comparing it to being the victim of child abuse (as you are implicitly doing) is missing the point.
I refuse to do some things no matter what the recompense. I’m not going to fuck my sisters or stepdaughter. I’m not commiting rape, or molesting a child. Not because of the relative horror of the other fates, but because of what agreeing to do so would say about me, in my eyes.
Well, here is where your argument goes awry. Being sexually violated does no permanent damage? Really? I’m not sure I believe you’re that sheltered. There’s a reason rape is used as a weapon of psychological warfare. cf. my earlier post – there’s nothing “consensual” about your proposed scenario.
FWIW, I didn’t see the earlier thread before opening this one, and haven’t read it, so my responses have nothing to do with it.
The way I interpreted it, SenorBeef, is that the others are looking for something that would be as objectionable to you as sex with a parent would be to a normal human being. The thought seems to be, “Well, SenorBeef seems to be pretty okay with the idea of sexing up his mom, so what example can we give him to show how much it squicks out someone with a conventional sexual mentality?”
I might be wrong though.
When an ad hominem fights a false equivalency, we all lose.
Yes, of course you’re wrong. The idea of fucking my mom is revolting. I would never choose to do it. But that’s the whole point of these hypothetical question games, to evaluate two ridiculous things that aren’t actually going to happen. To think that I somehow don’t get that fucking your parents is squicky is fucking ridiculous. I’ve acknowledged it all along. I’ve just ALSO ACKNOWLEDGED THAT BEING CRIPPLED AND/OR BLIND IS BAD, which none of you have even touched upon.
It boggles my mind how dense you guys can be. “If I had to choose between two horrible options, I guess I’d pick A” does not mean “MMM GEE I SURE WOULD LOVE TO DO A”
I also said that I’d endure a night of torture - full on car battery to my balls, bamboo under my finger nails torture rather than be a quadripalegic. I guess that must mean my secret fantasy is to be abducted and tortured, right?
For fucks sake.
It’s like you guys can’t understand that this is a two part question. You get to the first part and somehow interpret it as “hey, would you like to fuck your parents?” and say oh well gee nope, I guess I’ll vote for option 2 as a way of saying I don’t want to fuck my parents! Ignoring the entire point of the question.
“Oh but I couldn’t live with myself if I did that” - really? You know what you couldn’t do if you were a quadripalegic? Not shit yourself. Have kids. If you already have kids, you can no longer take care of them. You can no longer not be a burden to someone. You can’t walk. You can’t make this very post, unless you’re using a little joystick with your tongue to operate your computer. You can’t feed yourself. You can’t work. You can’t do fucking anything. And yet people just dismiss that as a consequence as if it were no big deal. Certainly not as big a deal as doing something that squicks you out one time!
But it isn’t, and you’re proving my point in this very post. If you can somehow interpret “SenorBeef would rather fuck his mom than be paralyzed or blind, he must really want to fuck his mom!” then you could also interpret “SenorBeef would rape a child rather than murder a billion people with a rusty screwdriver. Someone call the cops and a psychiatrist, SenorBeef wants to rape children!”
I love how SenorBeef “doesn’t like being condescended to” yet most of his posts in this thread are flinging condescension towards other posters.
Physician, heal thyself.
This “hypothetical question game” incorporates an option that you knew damn well would be utterly repellent to most if not all of the posters here. It’s repellent enough that you’re loony if you think many people would be able to sit back and give nothing more than a cold, logical answer to it. then you have the unmitigated gall to insult people over their “delicate sensibilities.”
I believe that you don’t actually want to fuck your mom, but you do have a different understanding of how horrible that is (different to the people you’re arguing with, that is.) There’d be no argument, otherwise. Obviously people’s levels of disgust with this are going to vary, but you’ve used the word icky to describe it, which is how you describe slightly off milk, not forced incest.
You going on and on about it is what looks a little weird, but I guess maybe you just like arguing your case to the bitter end, same as many of us.
You left out the rest of the quote, was that I don’t like being condescended to by people who are clearly being ridiculous.
Besides which, you understand the standard is different for the person who’s insulting in retaliation for the other party initiating insults, right? I hadn’t even participated in the thread yet when the insults were flying.
That’s the entire point of it! I’ve faced a thousand of these questions in my life. Would you rather be blind or deaf? Would you rather die by drowning or immolating? Normal people - boys, at least - play this game all the time.
I certainly didn’t respond to those questions by saying OMG I’M SO OFFENDED, BEING BLIND AND DEAF IS DIFFICULT, WHY WOULD YOU TORMENT ME WITH SUCH A QUESTION!?!?!?
The only sign that anyone is loony at all is that people can’t handle being asked a silly hypothetical inconsequential question without being distressed.
The argument isn’t about a failure to acknowledge how disgusting fucking a parent is. The argument is that the other options include just about the worst things that can possibly happen to you - things that any particular temporary incident could not be worse than. There seems to be no acknowledgement that total paralysis or blindness is really, really, really bad in a way that no temporary discomfort (up to including real torture) could ever be. I wonder if those who would choose blindness and paralysis were actually capable of constructing a fate that would be worse than fucking their parents. I suspect not, because they’re actually suffering from some crazy aversion making them actually unable to simply acknowledge that one incident of incest would not be the worst conceivable thing that could ever happen to a human being.
It’s not the responses that are ridiculous, it’s the premise. It’s hard to take/answer it as anything other than a tee-hee OMG SO OUTRAGEOUS joke or a dig intended entirely to make people uncomfortable because the hypothetical is entirely worthless.
Would you rather eat THE MOON or a NUCLEAR REACTOR? You gotta CHOOSE ONE cuz there’s a gun to your head!
Your premise is an invalid hypothetical as it is not a situation that would ever occur. Choose something people can relate to as being within the realm of possibility and you’re get the kind of answers you’re apparently fishing for.
Amazing that 12 year olds can treat the questions as the silly hypothetical games that they are, and not some assault on their delicate psyche, like adults who are adept at being perpetually offended.
I didn’t bring up this whole thing anyway, I only interjected when it was clear that the people who were responding to the other guy’s poll were a) ridiculous and b) aggressive and insulting.
So are you attacking Senor Beef now, or the premise of the threads? Because plenty of people participated in these, and I assume all are over twelve. If you don’t like these types of scenarios/discussions, don’t click on the threads. Problem solved.
I’m disputing the rationality of treating meaningless hypotheticals like anything but mindless diversions, as displayed by SenorBeef’s hilarious overreactions. (Which, incidentally, are hysterical and I approve of, not attack).
The premise is a weak hypothetical as it is not a situation that would ever occur. Choose something people can relate to as being within the realm of possibility and you’re get the kind of answers SlowBeef is apparently fishing for.
“If your mother and wife were drowning and you could only swim one to shore which would you save?” works because that’s a thing that, while unlikely, is a possible scenario. FUCK YOUR MOM OR LOSE YOUR EYESIGHT is dumb. I don’t know what your optometrist is telling you, man, but incest will not prevent blindness.
I reckon these kinds of questions can be interesting - hell, this one has provided enough posts from me and lots of other people. But they’re better when the options both have good reasons for choosing them. There are reasons for choosing against quadriplegia, etc, but there aren’t any for choosing sex with your parents.
And there are no reasons or explanations given as to why one should be forced to choose between them. They are unrelated, and I cannot come up with a single real circumstance that would result in someone ever having to make that choice.
It’s not a ‘real’ dilemma, so how can anyone be expected to take it as seriously as SlowBeef appears to be desire? He seems REALLY intent on getting ‘non-ridiculous responses’ or whatever, but he’s only giving people ridiculousness to work with. It’s like asking whether Spiderman or Popeye would win in a fight and then getting upset that nobody is taking it seriously.
Of course they’re not real-life dilemmas. That hasn’t stopped people from participating in these types of discussions (including several over the past week right here) for years. You don’t like them? Don’t vote. There are honestly hundreds of other discussions to jump in to.
And if you think a discussion of a fight between two fictional characters is silly and wouldn’t stir passions, then you obviously haven’t been here very long.
But they’re better when the options both have good reasons for choosing them. There are reasons for choosing against quadriplegia, etc, but there aren’t any for choosing sex with your parents.