Comments on: Stroke me, stroke me

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 06 Dec 2004 01:10:58 +0000

As your foil in this strangely testy-sounding debate, I advise you to to drink some scotch and smoke a big stinky cigar to take the edge off.
Backhand in grabass terms is for the illlusion if “incidentalness” The whole point is getting away with it. I would agree that if one were going up to some poor coed when was nobody around, in order to to cop a feel, a backhand/forehand distinction is meaningless. Likewise, if a TSA groper is intent on felleing your junk, BH/FH isn’t much different.
As for kids, beyond the unnecessary lesson in assault is OK, would you want your kids hauled off to another room for this crap, with you expressl;y uninvited? Would you want to be deprived of your parental rights because Phid junior got the unlucky diceroll and now gets his first cavity search? How are you going to explain to PJr that you sold him and his dignity out for a false sense of peace on a plane ride? What are you going to say to a theoretical Mrs. Phid when the TSA groper goes overboard? “It’s not assault, honey, because the government is keeping us safe by determining if they‘re real”?
If you need to tell yourself that this bullshit is effective, doesn’t infringe on your rights, and is just a molehill in the grand scheme of things, more power to you. You’re wrong x 3, but sometimes illusions are necessary to in order to avoid paralyzing fear. I personally prefer the illusion if personal invulnerabiity.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 06 Dec 2004 00:51:17 +0000

Using the back of the in order to promulgate ” the illusion” of contact is the bullshit, not my premises.
Your use of thoeretical minors as illustrations to support your position is the next obfuscation. My arguement did not address the issue. thugh it must and can be done easily enough.
Finally, old Ben expressly mentions”essential libert(ies)”. I don’t think that it applies here.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 18:32:28 +0000

I learned in grabass college to use the back of the hand in order to avoid arrest - backhand maintains the illusion of an incidental contact. I learned from shagging practice in grabass college that the hands can actually be used for a number of gropiary tasks with an equivalent or near equivalent utility to the implements you listed. I also learned from intensive stripper therapy that hands are the new hotness x eleventy billion if you get my meaning. So, your first 2 premises are bullshit. As for the third, pretend you have a thirteen year old son who has probably figured out by now the multipurpose nature of his junk. Imagine some smelly guy named Dennis with big dumbo ears is your TSA groper du jour. Or worse, imagine that some future protective custody inmate with an affinity for chipmunks is the "screener." Do you want your kid exposed to that? What if it moves? What if you have a 7 year old daughter? Do you want her felt up by Bruna the wonderdyke? (I am presupposing that these theoretical persons are not wired up with thermite.) Lastly, Benjamin Franklin said:

They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security.

We can trust the wisdom of Ben Franklin because he drank beer. I would think control over your own person is an essential liberty.