Comments

1

Hmmm...

2

What day is it indeed. Sigh!

3

Disappointed Dan didn't sign off with C U Next Tuesday...

4

Dan the last staunch defender of the English language in the great come vs cum debate...
Dictionary editors read actively, looking for changes in the language. To find vocabulary that has entered mainstream life—terms like bucket list or sexting or unfriend. Merriam-Webster says:
cum noun
often vulgar, less common spelling of COME ENTRY 1 2j , COME ENTRY 2
1 often vulgar : SEMEN
2 often vulgar : ORGASM

So, hate to say it, it looks like Cum is going to stick around.

5

As soon as I see the word cum I get a little angry. It’s an ugly word out there all by itself and life making fluids are not ugly. /Might not taste too good and it can give some people the shits./

6

"I'm also disappointed to see Planned Parenthood using "cum."" Why? Planned Parenthood has to use language its users will understand. Kids from the streets don't go around saying "semen"; if they haven't had a decent sex education, they might have no idea what that technical term even means. Cum, on the other hand, everyone knows what that is. And c-u-m is the correct spelling for the noun. Sorry, Dan. Save your pedantry for the increasing number of typos. ("Just because you're allergic to one guy's come doesn't mean you're allergic every guys' come." Two errors there, and neither was a misspelling of the noun cum.)

Why on earth would that caller WANT her period when not getting one is an option!?

7

From a purely language perspective, I'm a big fan of "cum" because that spelling removes ambiguity with "come".

Yes, someone observed last time I said this that "cum" was already a word, but it's a far less used word than "come" is so there's far less opportunity for ambiguity.

This is why countless times over the years here I've noted that using "cum" is less ambiguous and thus more clear. For pete's sake, in some sentences I've written both words, that can't be a good situation to spell them the same.

I can be pedantic too, but I tend to do so when already existent useful words become ambiguous by being usurped by emergent usage. After awhile though, once established, one reasonably must surrender to it since proper language is about communication, and thus common usage becomes correct.

8

Obviously forget the panty idea. How about a handkerchief imbued with her favourite perfume? If it’s smell he’s after.
/ How’s everyone doing? Got the tv sorted as there’s education coming thru for my grand daughter who is off school for at least five weeks. Schools open for children of essential workers. Our Premiers are going their own ways here, despite our PM’s attempts to control the narrative. Borders are closed, and people need to get a pass to prove essential work to get thru. Very very weird times.
/ If someone’s come in one’s mouth creates an involuntary evacuation, then simple solution is to stop sucking before the come arrives. Or the come comes.
/ you edit, Dan? Then a second one might not go astray. haha. Who cares? Just playin’ with ya.

9

And spit out any pre come.

10

Why is this even a question. Don’t swallow if such a reaction occurs and google is there for all your medical questions.
Are you asking for permission to look after yourself, LW, because the assumptions coming from male culture these days is that you swallow their ejaculate? Of course it’s filled with potent stuff, it carries the seeds of life.

11

Now though is no longer now, it’s then. We have no clue what sex activity is going to look like after this.
/ The Dr who co identified the HIV virus, and won a Nobel Prize for it, Dr Luc Montagnier, is saying he thinks this virus is man made. That the lab near the animal markets in China was trying for an AIDS vaccine, and he sees components of this virus has AIDS characteristics which could only be there by manipulation. Also, in Sth Korea, some are not developing anti bodies, after getting the virus.
The source of this info seems trustworthy, and yes it’s been an underground theory from the start. This man though, if his words are accurately reported, knows what he’s talking about.
Thunder overhead, bang bang. Stay safe. Wear masks outside.

12

The only mainstream news sources reporting on Luc Montagnier's opinion today were The Times of India, and Asia Times, where his claims were resoundingly debunked. Elsewhere, he's being lionized or mocked. The Internets are crazy, and not a reliable source of information.

Antibodies are what get one through an illness. Without them, one does not get better. So yes, in South Korea, some are not developing anti bodies, after getting the virus, because they die.

But srsly, reports are not saying that people who were previously ill are ill again. They're saying people are testing positive a second time. Non tin-hat wearers are theorizing that some people who tested positive before are testing positive again because the test is detecting dead virus.

At least it's not Shaun of the Dead.

13

I read today that scientists actually analysed COVID-19 specifically to answer the question of whether it was man made, and determined that it was not.

It's a bummer they had to devote time to debunking the hoax. It's a bummer that people are so afraid that the hoax could gain enough traction to call for them to.

14

https://www.labmate-online.com/news/laboratory-products/3/breaking-news/is-covid-19-man-made-or-natural/51980

15

Amazingly, there is a published Chinese study on the question of whether the SARS-CoV-2 virus is present in vaginal secretions https://academic.oup.com/cid/article/doi/10.1093/cid/ciaa375/5815295 . The answer is "no" - in the symptomatic patients, no virus was detected with vaginal swabs.

16

@15 JWinWA
Thanks for that!
But regardless, (as I noted in the original thread) if the panties were worn, given that it is detected in excrement, the panties would not be COVID-2 free.

17

@11: Wear masks outside near people, but no, you don't have to wear a mask when you're all by your lonesome outside.

18

@4 you win the thread with "it looks like Cum is going to stick around"

I personally prefer cum to come. If hardcopy - saves ink / toner! Environmentally friendly.

19

Come and cum are done and done. When one arrives at that moment of release and bliss, one comes. The juice, if any, that is emitted by the cis male participant, is cum.

20

Come is a verb, cum is a noun. Simple. I too cringe when I read things like "I'm going to cum." Argh!

21

Ejaculate is an underused word.

22

@20 BiDanFan
Hmm, I never thought about that. (Thankfully it feels quite an academic question since I've never written or even recall reading either "I'm going to cum" or "I'm going to come".)

But I don't like it. I don't want to write or read "I'm going to come" when what's coming is cum (though I'm absolutely good with "come" if what's coming is a female orgasm). If usage is as you say "I'm going to come" (when what's coming is cum) I accept it but I dislike like it. I see no reason that "cum" shouldn't be, and wouldn't be best and clearest, both a noun and a verb.

Has the (extremely small amount of) usage actually chosen for the verb for ejaculate to be "come" not "cum"? I'm skeptical given the small sample size that usage has established which is correct, so for now I'm on team cum as a verb.

Not that I actually like that either, but I don't dislike it as much as I dislike come when what's coming is cum. The only solution I'm really enthusiastic about is never writing the phrase either way when the speaker is a male; I propose that it only be spoken to avoid what feels to me like two bad options. Of maybe we could treat it a bit like the N-word, and write "I'm going to c__" to avoid choosing between two evils (LOL, no, that wouldn't work, readers might think the guy is about to cry or something).

23

I retract my @22. I've now talked myself into prefering "come" as the verb form. Because (while it bugs me that it doesn't match the noun form which males ejaculate), it does match the female verb, and it would be ridiculous to use a different verb for the males and females.

In other words, it dawned on me that for the male too what's coming isn't cum, it's an orgasm.

24

I do enjoy people who quote Planned Parenthood doctors as though they're the Mayo Clinic. Newsflash: Planned Parenthood is the Google of Abortions. They make it sound like they're all about women's health and blah blah blah, but get real. They specialize in abortions. They're not at the front line of Covid or anything other than abortions. And I think they treat a lot of STDs.
You're welcome.

25

@24 tim browne
"You're welcome."

As usual timmy, I'm not thanking you for having read your Comment, and for the time I just spent learning about PP.

Because your Comment called to mind GOP lies about PP such as "94 percent of their business is abortion services."

Thanks to having read your Comment, I just wasted some time learning that not just that lie, but the theme of your Comment, is BS.

Here are a few reliable sources of info:

https://www.factcheck.org/2015/09/planned-parenthoods-services/

"3% of the services it provides are abortions"
https://www.cnn.com/2015/08/04/health/planned-parenthood-by-the-numbers/index.html

https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/fact-check/2017/07/14/fact-check-planned-parenthood-abortion-services/448575001/

Now, I'll be fucked if I'm gonna waste more of my time relating what those URLs taught me that they do with the other 97% of their services, but it's a fuck of a lot more than "they treat a lot of STDs".

OK, I lied. "in 2013...Some services it provided in addition to abortions were:

4.5 million tests and treatment for sexually transmitted infections
3.6 million contraception related services
935,573 cancer screenings including breast exams and Pap tests
1.1 million pregnancy tests and prenatal services"

Before you tell people "You're welcome", know what the fuck you're talking about, you worthless asshat.

26

Yeah, they do SO MUCH MORE THAN ABORTIONS that when states stop paying them for abortions they magically can't continue to operate. How does that work, exactly?
Abortions may be 3% of their "services" but clearly it's a major major part of their income.
Not that there's anything wrong with that. They just need to step up the honesty level. And it's extra gross that they're always located in minority neighborhoods.

27

@26 timmy
"when states stop paying them for abortions they magically can't continue to operate. How does that work, exactly?
Abortions may be 3% of their "services" but clearly it's a major major part of their income."

First, IIRC it's when states make abortion impossible to practice legally that they've stopped operating. (In other words your assertion that it's whenever states stop paying them for abortions that they close is I believe an deceptive lie which continues your status as a terrible person to read words by. I know that gov't money is generally not provided for abortions, and that PP continues to operate despite that appalling reality.)

However, I grant you that there is a good point embedded in your lie, since if when prohibited from performing abortions they close (which IIRC has been true), it must be true that abortions are a key part of their mission.

Not necessarily "their income", perhaps they simply regard abortions as their foundational service. And there's nothing wrong with that; /someone/ needs to perform abortions in all the horribly vile places that threaten to kill doctors willing to give women a choice WRT their bodies, instead of presuming because they aren't men we can't respect that they consider those choices with all due seriousness and wisdom. Maybe if they can't do the thing that's so heroic they risk their lives to do, they don't want to keep risking their lives by going to work.

It's a shame that their other vital services like cancer screenings to protect women's lives, etc., are lost when they are closed. But I don't think their opponents mind because women's rights and health are emphatically not their opponents' priorities. Nor do they seem to be yours since you said they didn't do the other women's health services they do.

(I will also grant you that your original Comment which I first objected to part of, also contained a valid point, specifically that as far as I know they might not be the most authoritative possible source of info such as whether COVID is in vaginal secretions. And I thank you for omitting the "You're welcome" from this most recent Comment; being told I owe thanks does not make me more thankful, it pushes a very different button.)

28

@26 timmy
"it's extra gross that they're always located in minority neighborhoods"

Not so fast. I imagine you think it's gross because you think that that's motivated by the desire (that racists do have) for there to be fewer non-white people. But you'd be wrong.

You see, if the rightwing really wanted to eliminate abortions, they'd make sure that every penny were available to the mother to give the babies a good life. In other words, poverty is a major cause of abortions. But of course a rightwinger isn't willing to spend a fucking penny for their supposed principles (which I think is a mere projection of their fear that they might not have ever existed), they just want to control the behavior of others (which often they would and do do themselves when they have the power to that they're trying to take away from others).

All this stuff you're not seeing, timmy, makes it seem like you pollute your mind with the alternative universe of the conservative media. Which is very sad.

29

A lot of men in the USA are suddenly upset about the government making medical decisions about their bodies. Unfortunately, it probably won't make them any smarter.


Please wait...

and remember to be decent to everyone
all of the time.

Comments are closed.

Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.


Add a comment
Preview

By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.