Guess if People has a Different Opinion on Taboos, they are Considered "bad" People now?

The other article is finished, but I will not publish it just yet.
I like to focus on another problem with 'wwwarea' and of course his request.

It seems that if 'wwwarea' has a different opinion on a taboo subject and honestly argues that violates the emotional feelings that causes something to be taboo, it appears that 'wwwarea' is considered a "bad" person for having... a different opinion on the subject.
The subject was something about zoophilia or something around it..

I don't know if I agree with 'area' but when I was open to understand it and understood why 'wwwarea' brought something out of it and understood why he argued that consent could exist.
Didn't he always argued that in some places. I remember seeing that happen before.

I will post the request because I understand it too.

Request

======================== 

 Well it seems that one cyberbully is still going for it, and this time has promoted yet, another slander against me.
http://funnelvortex.deviantart.com/journal/wwwarea-Advocating-Bestiality-569199318
I don't think it's as bad as the "Wants to kill people" or whatever that other journal said, but this.. really?

It seems I was right that Funnel can't stand it when people has a different opinion on taboo subjects.

Let's show why Funnel is wrong. Again.

Note: Of course, within quote spacing: The deeper quote spacing is his, the main quote spacing without the bold is mine and the bold messages in the quote spacing is his again (But recent).
Note again: Some of my own quotes he posted within the quotes pacing may have some bold stuff too.

WWWAREA responded to me again, this time with this enormous Godzilla of a reply 

 You do no different buddy.

At least I try to make my replies shorter.

 I kinda do that too. But still the case is the same.

There is no such thing as "defending criticism" Jesse, you made that up.

 Umm, yes there is. Defending others against so-called "criticism" is criticism.
It's not exactly made up without attachment. However, you are.

I googled "Defending Criticism" and found nothing

Just because it's not words used together like that doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
The fact is that you are trying to throw excuses to make you think that what you say is "always" right when you're not.

Just because you believe what I do is wrong, doesn't mean it's wrong automatically.
It needs to apply to a civil moral (I.e. If it's violating rights or other interfering attacks.)
Though, interfering with a criminal's evil action is justice.

You annoy a lot of people

That's not a valid argument.
And just because others feel annoyed doesn't mean I committed a guilty act.
Plus, you annoy me.

But a tornado is like a funnel. So inside that 'tornado', it's full of non-sense.
Anyway..... moving on.

Strange analogy.

But it's still a funnel...

 I do not think that's a requirement.
Pretty sure reading it, that was only an example among many other different examples.

Well this aint it

ain't* Anyway, honestly I don't remember what this one was about.. I'll just move on from that quote.

 Open Minded person: No, I filled it up with many rants that isn't very general.

AKA rambling

And..? Is that somehow supposed to say that my speech is all of a sudden "different" now?
Aren't you the rambling one?

LOL. Wow! That picture looks very awesome.

I think it's a bit creepy

I should say the same with your sonic OC stuff then.

To be honest, it's not mine. I mean if that guy on Youtube (I heard that whole reactor thing on Youtube as well) was me, it would of probably be a very different looking channel than it is now.

And by the way, yes it's an Alpha and Omega thing (I think, maybe a wolf very similar just in case).
But maybe it's because there is a lot of movies who likes that? Or maybe it's because one time a 'certain friend' of mine showed me the movie because I was a wolf furry fan, and then I loved it?

How am I supposed to know it isn't you?

So lack of evidence (to you) that it's not me all of a sudden makes it me now?

What... I'm confused, I don't have a.... Oh you got to be FUCKING kidding me. You still think that the diamond guy is still me?
And by other one, I was talking about a blogger. Not some Wordpress account.

There are a lot of accounts who talk like you, act like you, so...

Trust me buddy, their are plenty of people who will talk like me.
Yet that guy talks a little different on here.

Yes it is. I already proved why.
www.legalmatch.com/law-library…
wwwarea.deviantart.com/journal…

Note: Some say it's in relationships, but I do not think that's the case.

Of course you don't

And of course you think I'm wrong because you said so.

He can't bury the hatchet, as he is causing more war, and more lies and untrue statements about me.
I am trying to bury the hatchet actually. And your reasoning serves no value in your argument.

Also, you ignored the top part of what you quoted... again.

He said nothing about you for months

Peter?
Pfft, bullshit.

 So you made it out of assumption. How much crazier can this get?

It's because you have done it many times in the past

Still assumption.
Plus you blocked me for disagreeing with you on some Sonic.EXE thing I barely even cared about personally.

The people who is causing the war are people like you.

So you have no job?

I do, but it's personal.

No actually it is. Or can be tied. It still doesn't change the fact that you are doing examples of what online bullies do.
I think there is a difference between actual peer pressure vs. bullying those when it comes to cases like you.
You are not influencing. Even if you are a bit, you are also bullying. Just saying because that's what you are doing.

Peer pressure is not bullying. If I wanted to bully you, I would call you a "stupid fucking faggot" and tell you to "go die", but have I done that? No!

If it acts like bullying, then it is.
And I know a certain guy you like as a friend (..I think) that uses the word "faggot" in some style against me. Just saying.

You mean all the emo anarchist teenagers who listen to too much heavy metal?

Stop pretending your personal opinion is "fact" over other people not you.
Oh and just in case.

Well knowing the people who are like that IRL it is easy to make an assumption.

 One, assumptions are not considered good value to use as an argument.
Two, I don't think your reply is making sense.

The last part is only an opinion. JUST like how it was like that to homosexuality.
It was all like "homosexuality is sickz!". It was always fear, just like back then.
Also, before anyone thinks, I do not think rape should be legalized. HOWEVER, I been reading some good criticism about the arguments of consent, that there is evidence, and I agree that discriminating zoosexuals is wrong and sick (Because it's hurtful).
I also agree that zoosexuality is an orientation according to the new scientific criticism as I been hearing. You know, the things that questions overly emotional idiots who can't argue with real science? Just like in history.
So for something general: If consent exist, then it's not sick. I will proudly say that. If an animal ISN'T consenting, then it's wrong to have sex with them.
And I do agree that criticism is better than emotions..
Also: www.adjectivespecies.com/2013/…

"It’s no accident that the researchers compare zoophiles today with the GLBT community of 50 years ago. Gay relationships were seen as an exercise in immoral sexual behaviour, however this has changed as homosexual relationships are now largely perceived to be about love. The zoophiles have not reached this stage, but they may find that the furry community provides a social environment where their love is tolerated as unusual but acceptable. If zoophiles can be open within furry, they can provide good role models for the ‘zoo-curious’, helping young people manage and accept an otherwise complex and difficult sexual orientation."

Read more.. But you know, I know what kind of person you are. Just a sick and disgusting generic society emotional crap headwho attack people who question taboos. I would not be surprised if you made fun of me for questioning society for making stuff taboo. AND NO, I'm not the only one who does. And yes, I will also compare that history also made things less taboo. And guess what? The criticism about this whole zoosexual subject IS good. Because it made a lot of sense. It was much better than seeing people saying the same thing over and over (without questions of course) with overly emotional crap!

ALSO, what the hell does this have anything to do with the stuff I like, and mainly support?
Oh wait, let me guess, you compare anthropomorphic talking and consenting creatures with that?
You are a sick person.

Plus, societies emotions will never be a fact. As a person who questions taboos, emotional feelings of society is NEVER a good argument to treat things bad. So stop treating subjective arguable beliefs as "fact".

And no, what I'm saying here is not bad behavior, because I have a right to question things, and a right to depend on actual scientific debating.


Holy fucking shit, you are actually defending bestiality? And the fact you quoted a furry site just enforces the stereotype that furries are sick fucks who want to screw animals.

It is offical, wwwarea is an advocate of beastiality.

This is why I LOVE to question taboos. I love having a more debatable scientific debate who questions the overly emotional people like you who can't learn to open his/her mind on debates and gets all emotionally upset.

Also, no it doesn't. This doesn't cause ANY stereotype. It's just some furry who has an opinion. It's not saying all furries think that it defends what you think is 'sick' without evidence, it's just some dude who's furry who has an opinion. And I believe it's a far better and open researched opinion.
It's pathetic of you to depend on who without learning how to argue directly.
But of course! You can't (Just as I predicted), and of course you not only act like I'm bad for linking to a research article as one of those guys who question taboos (I ALSO question other taboos.)

Here is me, and other people:
"Wow, I didn't know about that, I should learn more about this more scientifically, society could be wrong, the arguments are actually something I never heard before and seems like it was lost and hidden, and I find this a bit interesting as a person who wonders the random auto emotions of the world.. I didn't know that!"

Then here is you:
"OMG, IT'S ITZZ... DEFENDING A TABOO!!!! FUCK SCIENCE, FUCK OPEN RESEARCH, IT'S OFFCIAL GUYZ HE'S DEFENDING SOMETHING WE THINK IS ALL WRONG JUST BECAUSz it violatzes realiguoz believfz, they don't consrnt!! Lalalalalalal screw the evidnece of the consenting debates, screw it all, also, screw the fact that humans were forced (other way around?) by animalz themzelsf! Screw that, it's  still somehow humzn raping them!!!
Also, fuck that animalz don'tz consnzt to being killzez!"

Honestly Funnel, I was just curious mainly about this subject and wanted to be open about the debates and that and I found a very good argument that consent could exist or not.
And the truth is, their is evidence (ACCORDING to the research I've done) to the point that the other way around can happen. I prefer that instead because I believe it's superior to people who argue out of their own feelings (or religious beliefs).

Honestly as a person who has a different opinion and is more open who question taboos (That's often what I like doing, just like some other people), I found it interesting. Yet, I also do believe discrimination is sick too.
The problem (As a taboo question person) is that society often claims many things without evidence out of their emotions.
And as a person who question why things are taboos, I do not find it a really good source of information and I consider it biases, and prejudice instead.
That's why I thought the article was pretty great, it was open minded research, not covered and riddle by non-scientific emotions, and other bullshit.
Hell, another interesting thing is this: "Animals can't consent to being killed."
I believe that is a VERY good point. But of course, like the closed minded loony you are, you can't respect those who question our own unscientific beliefs.

Hell, it's not just that taboo. I do this for many other things that could be taboo.
Like Polygamy, or why people freak out involving humans and animals (idk, something about human skin on a book?), and others.

You spelled it like "Populairty" 

*Types it in* when all of a sudden, a wild red spelling check line appears under it trying to tell me it's 'popularity'!

Remember the time when you said that further fail makes it even more funny or something?
Well, there you go Funnel. :)

It's not a problem. It's not hurting anyone and it's not a mental issue to have it part as your identity. This happens with many things, it's actually normal. Everyone grows up with personality in genes, it's perfectly normal.

I took psychology and many elements of your personality are defined by past experiences. Only basics are genetic, doesn't mean it can't change, it often does.

Actually one time a class told that having any "fetish" was a "disorder" but that was changed.
Personality never changes. You can't change who you are, and there are evidence that it becomes part of you. Just like how you grow up deeply with a 'fetish' like vore.
Not everyone will change that, unless it's one of those barely into things and was a side but not to the great.. or one of those 'sex' shifting things to another. (Or that's the same thing)

Sorry but there is no 'line'.. Oh wait I'm sorry, there is, but when the line is crossed, that's when people are hurting each other.
But when it comes to personal consenting, there is NO LINE.

There is always a line

Who said so? Your 'God'? Your "normal" religion?
Face it, there isn't. That's just some made up term to force your shitty bigotry on other people.
You are making up something to cause you to not respect others who likes to personally cross your imaginary line.

Note: A God could be real, who knows?

Stop making up bullshit Jared.

I am not Jared. 

Drat, well sorry for that error then. :/

 If you do believe in anything else than the Golden Rule, then you don't believe in the Golden Rule.
Because you believe in other delusions that interfere with other people not you. And guess what? THAT crosses the line.

The Golden Rule doesn't always apply. For example if someone was nice to you but you knew they were robbing banks? I wouldn't care how good they are to me, they're an asshole.

Yes it does. It always applies. Who the hell said it didn't? It's ALWAYS something you need to follow according to it.
Also, they already violated the Golden Rule by robbing. Stopping them to protect it is probably justice anyway.

No, it's called a rant. Everyone has them. And it's called criticism. Real criticism.
People are allowed to complain about assholes like you.
Yet, aren't you doing the same thing in terms of ranting about other people?

You rant over the most trivial stuff.

 No I rant over actual issues. Either way, everyone has them!

But not all of them are good (e.g. Your crap).

There is no 'line', stop making up bullshit.. I mean, there can only be one line, and that's a real moral civil thing, not your shitty personal opinion about fetishes just because you don't like them.

The LINE exists.

The Easter Bunny exist then!!!

Expressing fetishes in public is nothing different than the common heterosexual and homosexual people do.
Not everyone wants to see fetishes, but not everyone wants to see two humans kiss in art either.
But both expressions do not cross the line because it's not being forced on anyone.
Just like humans kissing.

How is kissing the same as stomping and inflation? 

 Not the same style of sexuality, but it's a tamed down style just like kissing.
And that not everyone wants to see either.
They are the same in terms of different types of sexuality.

The only catch I like to say is that it also depends on them.
Kissing can get to very extreme cases where it wouldn't be appropriate under a certain rating (E.g. PG) and kissing can be very tamed down (E.g. Kissing on the cheek) that it doesn't violate it.

Vore for example has the same story. A vore can be very extreme that it past the rating (E.g. PG) but it can be tamed down to the point that it's just as tamed down as kissing on the cheek.
Hell, you even sometimes see 'vore' on TV. Though these on the Internet may have a different likes but that doesn't make it extreme.

Just because it's considered a "fetish" (A stupid term) or something some people don't like (Just like kissing) doesn't mean it's more extreme in general.

Did I slander wwwarea by claiming he "wants" to "kill" people, did I slander wwwarea by claiming he judges heterosexuals like a real heterophobia? Did I break DA rules against wwwarea like 4-5 times, did I break other rules? Did I lie about deals, starts fights with people, etc?
So much..

If you don't want people to talk about you like that then do not act that way! 

Stop blaming what I do for their crimes.
It's their fault.
You remind me of a 14 year old who says "It's you're fault you got me banned!!"
(learned from a stamp)
What I did wasn't even against the rules at least mostly (In case. lol), or something serious like slander, start fights with people, or maybe less serious like lie about deals.

Well you do display the warning signs that mass shooters such as Eliot Rodger have shown. Such as increasing hatred toward society and a specific group of people. As well as throwing temper tantrums when given criticism and posting these whiny rants online, which is exactly what Eliot Rodger did for a while before he shot up the Isla Visa campus. 

I will spread hate to people who promote hate, I have a valid reason to. And guess what? It's not wrong to do that.
Actually you don't give criticism and neither does certain people. However, I do, and you act like a fucking child whenever you can't take it.
Making rants is not wrong, it's nothing to be guilty about.

You are just making excuses up to show that I'm a "bad" person when I'm not.

Plus another mistake you do: You don't like it when people use freedom of speech to make criticism/rants.

You make rants about every little thing that you do not like! And you seem to hate every bit of the world.

If that was true, I would make pointless rants about stuff like Angry Birds, people personally liking what I hate, and some more.
Because maybe the world isn't so great yet.

I already told you over 5 times, I didn't do it illegally, I didn't do so for money. Stop claiming I am doing things illegal for things that aren't. Especially the fact that I already explained why it wasn't illegal.

Oh shut it with the "IT HAZ 2 B 4 MUNEYZ" thing. I am sick and tired of repeating myself because you keep insisting the same thing over and over! There are different types of blackmailing! 

 And I am sick and tired repeating myself based off reading an actual law.
You are the one repeating yourself in the bad way.
Why?
Because you always fail to give me proof.
Give me a fucking law link telling me that it's illegal to do so in general then.
Go on, give me one!
No link? Then stop repeating something that is least likely to be true then.

No. You did. You attacked me for spiritual beliefs, you attacked me for defending myself, etc.
THAT'S picking a fight.

So I'm a victim.

Things you believe in hardly count as spiritual beliefs. More like special snowflake syndrome mixed with bad philosophy. 

Again, picking a fight. And yes it's a spiritual belief. Get over it.
If it involves the spiritual world, soul, etc. Then it counts.

Also, you don't have proof that it's "bad".
Yet, a special snowflake is a person who thinks they are morally special than anyone else, but no.
We all have spiritual beliefs, we all have a personality, and this is just one of mine, like anyone else.

In the end, you just attack people for their spiritual belief and you have no right to do that.

Otherwise, you don't have real spiritual beliefs then and you are bad for them now.

You don't get it do you.
 If you think it's OK to choose that what I'm doing is wrong out of personal opinion, then I will decide that what you like is wrong then.
Yet, you do realize it was a 'then' argument right?
Fetishphobia. (Yes, if heterophobia can be used, then so can that).

What?

Try to understand it more then.

There is that line that I talked about.

What line? See, your delusional beliefs is allowing you to make up even more bullshit about people just to do something actually morally wrong; interfering with other people.
You are nothing but a fucking dictator. Showing that you attack people for doing things that are not morally wrong. HOWEVER, attacking people for those, IS morally wrong.

What if those people are potential dangers to society??? 

 A risk doesn't mean it crosses your imaginary line.
Yet, everything has a risk. That's just how it works.
So according to your imagination, everything we do crosses this 'line'.

Just becuase you fucking don't like it, doesn't mean it's OK to make up an imaginary bullshit "line" that doesn't exist and act like a complete dick to others for it.

The LINE is there and ALWAYS has been there.

You really sound like an insane person.

Face it, you do not respect other opinions.

You are the one who freaked out over A&O

 A little more clear please?
Plus, their is a difference between liking/disliking than making claims off of it.
http://wwwarea.deviantart.com/art/Respecting-Opinions-Ehh-I-Won-t-Respect-Hate-520067789

I'm an educated and mature adult.

Now you are just making yourself a laughing stock.

More people are laughing at you right now

Only by bigots like you!
Real people are probably laughing at you for your imaginary line.
You are basically like "No it's not!" *Lalala*

Attacking those for having a right isn't matured, promoting cyberbullying articles isn't matured, and monitoring people isn't matured.
Neither is educated either. And you always refuse to get educated.

You are the one who escalated it.

 What?

You threatened to release his address if he didn't give in to your demands.

Proof please?

You know, that snapshot you had the admin take down for you?

Are you talking about the time I would 'threat' to show a picture (or describe the house)?
If so, then I think you misread it. It was either talking about showing a picture (without the address) or describing how it looks (without the address).

Actually if you hadn't spammed my Sonic.exe stamp this whole mess would have never happened in the first place.

I didn't spam it. I disagreed with it.
I can't believe you are still on to that.

You posted a big whiny comment that was taking up a ton of room so I hid it, and then you proceeded to keep posting them. I actually hid your comment for a good reason too.

Again, you hid it because you couldn't stand me who disagreed with it. I was just trying to be reasonable and try to argue.
You hid it because you don't like it when someone disagrees with you.
And I kinda freaked out because I figured you didn't support Freedom of Speech.

After you blocked me, I made a stamp of my own because I was offended that I couldn't speak my say.

But you need to register if you really want to enforce it. Which is a good idea.

Thanks for admitting to be wrong. Now I see you are slowly changing the subject to hide that.


You do have basic copyright to start out with, but you need to pay for the full package. And when you are a writer or an artist or a filmaker, you need to PAY so no one plagiarizes your work or profits off of unlicensed material. It isn't even THAT expensive. It is only $35 to register for copyright. 20 songs copyrighted for life just for 35 dollars? Great deal! That is only what? $1.75 per song. Most people can afford that!

www.newmediarights.org/busines…

You have NO reason to be angry about copyright. There are ways to get it in more-cost effective ways.

You never said it that way. You just said you need money to own have Copyright.
Sounds like a waste of money.
Besides, Creative Commons is a great tool (and it's free I think) to stop plagiarism. Well the 'NC and ND' are the crappy licenses, but others are fine. :D
I question you if you think the system is perfect. Because it's not.
Yet, it's been criticized with interesting information.
http://wwwarea.deviantart.com/art/IP-Laws-Violate-Basic-Human-Rights-547622210

I have every reason to complain about Copyright. Especially it's myths around it.
Copyright is a monopoly. It prevents some creativity (stifles creativity), and the extensions are very ridiculous.
Copyright is NOT a human right (I already shown a link in area talking about that from a stamp), and it's been causing other problems.

For the sake of being against plagiarism, Copyright is not an answer and wasn't even designed to stop that originally.

-------------------------------------------

That's the end.

I like to talk about a couple of other things.

I do not promote bestiality (legal term?). If I did, I would of had actual sex with non-human animals and/or tell others to do that.

Though I heard that it's meant to be on non-consenting side. But I did not have sex with them. And I don't even think I want to.

Of course, LMJ dictates that I can't have an opinion about this science and open research (Acting like I'm a "bad" person for it, yet I learned from some places that defends victimless fantasy (Even from that same site) and etc. It's not the only site and some people has woke up to questioning society and taboos). Yet, I was on the topic of whether consent existed or not. And that was the main argument.

1. He freaks out that I have an opinion with people having a right to victimless fantasy.

And now freaks out because I question another serious subject.

He doesn't respect opinions either.. Yet, makes a false statement that I support actual pedophilia.

I only defend that victimless fantasy should never be a crime.

======================================

End of Request.