Is it bad for a baby to see you masturbating?

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

Don't misunderstand the question. Aint about something more sinister.

I mean if the baby (under one year) happens to be in the same room...
sitting in their baby-chair on the floor...staring into space or at you....there's no-one else in the house and won't be for hours....
you're bored and restless...you haven't watched that film you downloded yet....sure it's uncomfortable, but is it wrong bad! wrong
or just pffft s'okay.

― logged way the fuck out, Monday, 5 December 2005 10:55 (nineteen years ago)

I doubt the baby has any comprehension of what's going on (do babies even see that far?), so nothing wrong with it.

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Monday, 5 December 2005 10:58 (nineteen years ago)

You'll have some explaining to do if it starts imitating the movements, though.

― StanM (StanM), Monday, 5 December 2005 11:01 (nineteen years ago)

what is the film that you've downloaded?

― ken c (ken c), Monday, 5 December 2005 11:03 (nineteen years ago)

Put the baby in the next room for five minutes, ffs.

― Amity Wong (noodle vague), Monday, 5 December 2005 11:05 (nineteen years ago)

Honey, I squirted jizz all over the baby.

xpost

― ken c (ken c), Monday, 5 December 2005 11:07 (nineteen years ago)

Five minute movies, eh? Where did I hear about that before?

Oh no! You didn't cancel that subscription!

― StanM (StanM), Monday, 5 December 2005 11:08 (nineteen years ago)

DAMN YOU KEN C YOU STOLE MY POST!

― Eisbär (llamasfur), Monday, 5 December 2005 11:10 (nineteen years ago)

noodle vague otm. or put the YOU in the next room.

― mies van der rohffle (Jody Beth Rosen), Monday, 5 December 2005 11:10 (nineteen years ago)

I'd be a bit worried about somebody who could concentrate on knocking one out with a baby staring at them.

― Amity Wong (noodle vague), Monday, 5 December 2005 11:15 (nineteen years ago)

Yeah, there ain't NO WAY I could consider 'pleasuring myself' with an infant audience. That's fucking creepy.

― Rumpie (lil drummer girl parumpumpumpu), Monday, 5 December 2005 11:18 (nineteen years ago)

This is going to be a scene in, like, American Pie 7, isn't it?

― James Ward (jamesmichaelward), Monday, 5 December 2005 11:23 (nineteen years ago)

this is quite possibly the worst idea for a thread i've ever seen, which is really fucking saying something.

― J.D. (Justyn Dillingham), Monday, 5 December 2005 11:23 (nineteen years ago)

If the baby HAD to be in the same room, you could have at least turned them around to look the other way. Euw!

― Panther Pink (Pinkpanther), Monday, 5 December 2005 11:24 (nineteen years ago)

blindfolds.

― ken c (ken c), Monday, 5 December 2005 11:26 (nineteen years ago)

Come on people, if the baby's presence doesn't bother the poster, beneath the initial "Ewww!" reaction (brought up by cultural conditioning), what's wrong with this? No one gets harmed in any way, someone gets a bit happier.

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Monday, 5 December 2005 11:46 (nineteen years ago)

I think that might get him put in prison Ken!
x-post
Strongly disagree with you there Tuomas. it's not cultural conditioning, it's just pretty gross IMO.

― Panther Pink (Pinkpanther), Monday, 5 December 2005 11:48 (nineteen years ago)

cultural conditioning has its points.

― Theorry Henry (Enrique), Monday, 5 December 2005 11:49 (nineteen years ago)

it's only cultural conditioning that says you shouldn't masturbate over a baby.

― Theorry Henry (Enrique), Monday, 5 December 2005 11:50 (nineteen years ago)

Pink, of course it's cultural conditioning, what else could it be? In the Middle Age couples had sex with their children in the same bed, do you think they cared about masturbating before a baby?

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Monday, 5 December 2005 11:50 (nineteen years ago)

the plague was the greatest thing that could have happened to the middle ages.

― mies van der rohffle (Jody Beth Rosen), Monday, 5 December 2005 11:51 (nineteen years ago)

in the middle ages they burned witches but our stupid cultural conditioning ruined everything.

― Theorry Henry (Enrique), Monday, 5 December 2005 11:57 (nineteen years ago)

http://www.vibeachhouse.com/kids/20040604Zane.jpg

WHAT TEH FUCK ARE YUO DOING?!?!?

― Amity Wong (noodle vague), Monday, 5 December 2005 11:58 (nineteen years ago)

cannibalism is just social conditioning

― ken c (ken c), Monday, 5 December 2005 12:05 (nineteen years ago)

The baby might not know what's going on, but I'd worry about the motivation of the wanker.

― Mädchen (Madchen), Monday, 5 December 2005 12:08 (nineteen years ago)

i won't let loggedwaythefuckout or tuomas babysit for my children that's for sure.

― ken c (ken c), Monday, 5 December 2005 12:09 (nineteen years ago)

how are your children doing, ken?

― Theorry Henry (Enrique), Monday, 5 December 2005 12:11 (nineteen years ago)

They are still at the planning stage. The plans are still pretty basic, but does include 'not to be subjected to witnessing masturbation while an infant' as one of the several important points.

― ken c (ken c), Monday, 5 December 2005 12:15 (nineteen years ago)

fascist.

― Theorry Henry (Enrique), Monday, 5 December 2005 12:17 (nineteen years ago)

just another victim of social conditioning

― J.D. (Justyn Dillingham), Monday, 5 December 2005 12:30 (nineteen years ago)

Samuel Delany's "Heavenly Breakfast", a memoir about a year or so where he lived in a commune, points out the "dirty untold secret" that apparently baby scent is a crazy aphrodisiac. There is a description of a couple sleeping with the baby in their bed, and getting all hot and bothered, and having sex. And then (as I recall) feeling a bit weird about it, and realizing something about the baby was making them all horny, and deciding it was probably a natural enough reaction and not worrying about.

That said, while I doubt any harm whatsoever is going to come to a baby who watches someone masturbate, it's still easy enough to maintain a little privacy and put the baby (or yourself) elsewhere. The baby shouldn't have to watch you jerk off, you know? So, you know, why not? Especially if it isn't your baby.

― Casuistry (Chris P), Monday, 5 December 2005 12:53 (nineteen years ago)

(I'm not saying Delany's theory is right or wrong, mind you. I have no idea. I am not a babyologist.)

― Casuistry (Chris P), Monday, 5 December 2005 12:54 (nineteen years ago)

Especially if it isn't your baby.

I hadn't even thought of that...

If you're babysitting, just call the parents and ask them if it's okay.

― StanM (StanM), Monday, 5 December 2005 12:55 (nineteen years ago)

"Hi, Uncle Steve, I just wandered if it was... OK to... wank next to your baby?"

― Sick Mouthy (Nick Southall), Monday, 5 December 2005 13:07 (nineteen years ago)

Splashing around in that hot water with my woman, I began to get ideas, as they say. After a while I placed my body in such a position in the water that the baby could not see my hard-on.
I did this by going deeper and deeper in the water, like a dinosaur, and letting the green slime and dead fish cover me over.

― Øystein (Øystein), Monday, 5 December 2005 13:16 (nineteen years ago)

WTF???

"Hi, Uncle Steve, I just wandered if it was... OK to... wank next to your baby?" - this is making me roffle like a madman.

― Rumpie (lil drummer girl parumpumpumpu), Monday, 5 December 2005 13:20 (nineteen years ago)

You could play Freak On A Leash. Errr, that's a different thread, I guess. Seriously, ew, masturbating in the same room as your child?!? Of course the kid's not going to know what you're doing, but don't/would you feel uncomfortable wanking in his/her presence?

― Nathalie (stevie nixed), Monday, 5 December 2005 13:27 (nineteen years ago)

yeah, there's actually a lot of research on infant learning that suggests they're considerably more conscious than we usually think of them as being. Assuming this already happened, 1) you seriously need to learn to reign in your impulses and 2) it probably won't do any long term damage unless it becomes a habit. In the eyes of the law, of course, it'd count as child molestation and get you ten years, and not without reason.

― Banana Nutrament (ghostface), Monday, 5 December 2005 13:34 (nineteen years ago)

Children are most receptive to learning and absorbing new things between the ages of 0-5, yeah? WANK AWAY.

― Sick Mouthy (Nick Southall), Monday, 5 December 2005 13:38 (nineteen years ago)

'absorbing new things'

― ken c (ken c), Monday, 5 December 2005 13:40 (nineteen years ago)

thank you nick.

― ken c (ken c), Monday, 5 December 2005 13:40 (nineteen years ago)

It's an offense, yeah?

(I know I'm offended but you can do time for it?)

― Rumpie (lil drummer girl parumpumpumpu), Monday, 5 December 2005 13:41 (nineteen years ago)

Not sure if it's bad but it's definitely funny.

― teeny (teeny), Monday, 5 December 2005 13:44 (nineteen years ago)

Of course it's not bad, but I think it's just ICKY.

― Nathalie (stevie nixed), Monday, 5 December 2005 13:50 (nineteen years ago)

Actually, fuck it, I think it's bad.

― Nathalie (stevie nixed), Monday, 5 December 2005 13:58 (nineteen years ago)

Really bad.

― Nathalie (stevie nixed), Monday, 5 December 2005 13:58 (nineteen years ago)

EVIL!

― Nathalie (stevie nixed), Monday, 5 December 2005 13:59 (nineteen years ago)

Do you have the kid on a leash while you're masturbating?

― Nathalie (stevie nixed), Monday, 5 December 2005 13:59 (nineteen years ago)

If so, double ew with yuck on top.

― Nathalie (stevie nixed), Monday, 5 December 2005 13:59 (nineteen years ago)

I'm hyperventilating now.

― Nathalie (stevie nixed), Monday, 5 December 2005 14:00 (nineteen years ago)

With excitement!

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Monday, 5 December 2005 14:02 (nineteen years ago)

doing it with the dog looking is the worst. Every time you look over they look away and pretend their not watching.

― aylene (Dorca), Monday, 5 December 2005 14:03 (nineteen years ago)

red rocket!

― Øystein (Øystein), Monday, 5 December 2005 14:11 (nineteen years ago)

Actually I'm PANTING. Shit, what about masturbating when you're PREGNANT? You keep on running away from the baby while trying to get yer rocks off.

― Nathalie (stevie nixed), Monday, 5 December 2005 14:14 (nineteen years ago)

First of all, even if the baby was conscious of what's happening and if was close enough to actually see what the person is doing (both big ifs), it would have no idea of what masturbation is, so all it would see is someone moving his/her hand. You all seem to be saying that it feels weird for someone to wank with a baby in his/her presence, which is probably true, but that's only because of the culture and time-dependent ideas that, a) masturbation is wrong, or at least kinda yucky, and b) children and sexuality should be in no contact with each other, even if the child in question would be in no way affected by what's happening.

Is it wrong for a couple to have sex while their baby is sleeping in the same room, knowing that the baby might wake up? Or if the baby isn't sleeping at all? Or for a couple to have sex in their bedroom, with their children sleeping in adjoining room, even though they might wake up and hear the noises? How are these things different from the original poster's question?

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Monday, 5 December 2005 14:27 (nineteen years ago)

First of all, even if the baby was conscious of what's happening and if was close enough to actually see what the person is doing (both big ifs), it would have no idea of what masturbation is, so all it would see is someone moving his/her hand.

You forgot that it could have sperm in his eye.

EW!

I'm trying to think of all the posters who recently became a parent.

― Nathalie (stevie nixed), Monday, 5 December 2005 14:30 (nineteen years ago)

How do kids get siblings, then? Not just by anniversaries to hotel rooms?

― mark grout (mark grout), Monday, 5 December 2005 14:31 (nineteen years ago)

'someone just moving his/her hand'

up and down their COCK.

― Theorry Henry (Enrique), Monday, 5 December 2005 14:32 (nineteen years ago)

When I was a kid I did hear my parents have sex on several occasions, and once I walked into their bedroom while they were doing it, but I don't think it ruined my life in any way. And I was old enough to be conscious of what they were doing, unlike a less than a year old baby.

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Monday, 5 December 2005 14:32 (nineteen years ago)

it would have no idea of what masturbation is, so all it would see is someone moving his/her hand.

with their genitals growing bigger and then stuff squirting out of it.

anyway i think the worst part is you knowing the baby being there and still doing it. i mean, that's like sick. it's almost as bad as shagging in a room where there's a huge photo of your parents somewhere in it.

― ken c (ken c), Monday, 5 December 2005 14:33 (nineteen years ago)

but I don't think it ruined my life in any way.

dude i think it has.

― ken c (ken c), Monday, 5 December 2005 14:33 (nineteen years ago)

'someone just moving his/her hand'
up and down their COCK.

And you think an infant of that age has some conception of what such movement means? I was at least ten before I learned it.

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Monday, 5 December 2005 14:34 (nineteen years ago)

I mean, people's reaction seems to be, "Eww, this is wrong!" without questioning themselves why they think it's wrong.

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Monday, 5 December 2005 14:35 (nineteen years ago)

ok, moving beyond vanilla stuff, would pissing/a2m/etc be ok in front of a child, 'because it woudln't understand'?

― Theorry Henry (Enrique), Monday, 5 December 2005 14:36 (nineteen years ago)

What's "A2M"? And what do you mean by pissing?

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Monday, 5 December 2005 14:39 (nineteen years ago)

i just had a thought about why or how it is wrong and i think i've pinned it down to mainly growing a boner and pulling it out and choking it out while you are in the room with a baby. i mean. it isn't whether the baby knows what you're doing, it's whether you know what you're doing.

― ken c (ken c), Monday, 5 December 2005 14:40 (nineteen years ago)

it's kind of disrespectful to say the least, unless you're saying infants don't deserve respect.

do you think it's alright to be whacking one off in an intensive care ward next to someone in a coma?

― ken c (ken c), Monday, 5 December 2005 14:43 (nineteen years ago)

Yes, that what I meant by saying that the reaction people get is caused by cultural conditioning. In other times sexuality with children present, even children old enough to comprehend what's going on, was not such a taboo.

(x-post)

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Monday, 5 December 2005 14:44 (nineteen years ago)

so sex with 12-year-old boys is ok, as per ancient greece, tuomas?

― Theorry Henry (Enrique), Monday, 5 December 2005 14:46 (nineteen years ago)

Can you be disrespectfl towards someone who doesn't know his moralities are being offended? Or towards someone who doesn't have any sort of morality yet?

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Monday, 5 December 2005 14:46 (nineteen years ago)

is mandatory female circumcision ok, because it's just a matter of culturation?

― Theorry Henry (Enrique), Monday, 5 December 2005 14:46 (nineteen years ago)

yes you can. you're showing the disrespect because you know the moralities. this is the reason how you can be disrepectful to dead people.

xpost.

― ken c (ken c), Monday, 5 December 2005 14:49 (nineteen years ago)

so sex with 12-year-old boys is ok, as per ancient greece, tuomas?

I said children present, not with children. The incest taboo exists in most cultures and times. The youngsters older Athenian men had sex with had reached puberty, I think, they were probably older than 12. Of course it sounds wrong from today's point of view, but it's kinda hard to judge such an ancient past with todaysä standards. It was part of a young man's life cycle back then, I doubt most of the were traumatized by it, since it was part of everyday life.

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Monday, 5 December 2005 14:50 (nineteen years ago)

is mandatory female circumcision ok, because it's just a matter of culturation?

No, and there's a difference. Female circumcision does concrete physical harm to women. Wanking before a baby most likely doesn't affect it all, not even mentally.

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Monday, 5 December 2005 14:52 (nineteen years ago)

but it isn't everyday life now that people jerk off next to you when you were a baby is it??!!?!

― ken c (ken c), Monday, 5 December 2005 14:52 (nineteen years ago)

but sex with 12 year old boys did physical harms to the children's butts.

xpost

― ken c (ken c), Monday, 5 December 2005 14:54 (nineteen years ago)

Tuomas in taking extreme moral relativist position shocka!

Just don't open up the can of worms of whether fat people are sexy.

(note: They're not)

― Seems2Me, Monday, 5 December 2005 14:54 (nineteen years ago)

but it isn't everyday life now that people jerk off next to you when you were a baby is it??!!?!

No, but the baby isn't aware of things like a teenager is.

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Monday, 5 December 2005 14:54 (nineteen years ago)

yeah but they might FIND OUT when they grow up!

― ken c (ken c), Monday, 5 December 2005 14:55 (nineteen years ago)

why does the occurence of 'concrete physical harm' change the essential moral question?

― Theorry Henry (Enrique), Monday, 5 December 2005 14:57 (nineteen years ago)

I'm not a moral relativist, for example I'm strongly against female circumcision. I don't necessarily think, however, that being aware of sexuality is harmful to children, and I definitely don't think sexuality is harmful to children who aren't aware of it.

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Monday, 5 December 2005 14:57 (nineteen years ago)

Tuomas, it's demonstrably the case that children who're exposed to adult sex acts process the information somehow - it doesn't just "go right past them": nothing "goes right past" children - and any clinician who's worked with children can tell you how the damage manifests itself: in acting out. Again, the threadstarter probably hasn't done any damage; and, again, it's probably not a good idea to jack off with babies in the room.

Jesus Christ, man, for sure society could stand to loosen up about sexuality a little, but exposing infants to adult sexuality is surely not the place to start.

xpost Tuomas you really, really ought to check out some of the available research about what infants are & aren't aware of

― Banana Nutrament (ghostface), Monday, 5 December 2005 14:57 (nineteen years ago)

it's not "sexuality" Tuomas - it's ADULT sexuality! children have their own world, which take enough work to navigate, without the thorny world of adult things getting in the way

heh heh "things"

― Banana Nutrament (ghostface), Monday, 5 December 2005 14:58 (nineteen years ago)

Okay, let me ask you all a question. How many of you were, as kids, aware of your parents having sex? And did you think that awareness has somehow hurt you? Because I was, and I certainly don't think it did any harm to me.

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Monday, 5 December 2005 15:00 (nineteen years ago)

I've never seen A2M referred to as A2M before, it's always been ATM. Which is funnier, cos then it means I get to giggle whenever anyone says "is there an ATM anywhere around here?" or "sorry, I'm a bit busy ATM".

― JimD (JimD), Monday, 5 December 2005 15:00 (nineteen years ago)

I think most children are aware of adult sexuality as well.

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Monday, 5 December 2005 15:01 (nineteen years ago)

Sure they're aware, and I'm not suggesting a shield, but I am saying that there's a big difference between "mom and dad are doing something private and I have some ideas about it" and "dad has his cock out." "Aware" isn't the same as "exposed to."

― Banana Nutrament (ghostface), Monday, 5 December 2005 15:03 (nineteen years ago)

e.g.
the year is 2018, just another day in the life for young Mika Kolehmainen, a 12 year old nephew of Tuomas, until curiousity took him to looking up "masturbating" and "baby" on google.

He finds a thread called "Is it bad for a baby to see you masturbating?", curious by the moral implications of this question, young Mika clicks. The words "ADULT CONTENTS" appeared on the screen, and the computer asked Mika whether he was old enough to view the contents, "well, in ancient greece i would have been buggered by a dude by my age, so i guess so!", as he clicks, he finds in horror that his uncle Tuomas thought in 2005 that masturbating next to babies are okay and any concepts of wrongness are purely based on social conditioning. Then he remembered his mother told him that, when he was young, uncle Tuomas used to babysit for him. Cold sweat started the roll down Mika's face.

He went to confront his uncle Tuomas.

Mika "hi uncle Tuomas"
Tuomas "yo! Mika wassup"
Mika "erm, you know you used to babysit me right when i were a baby?"
Tuomas "oooh yeah. good times"
Mika "did you ever get lonely on your own with me?"
Tuomas "mm sometimes"
Mika "do you like, ever grow a boner whilst babysitting me?"
Tuomas "er.. what an odd question!"
Mika "just answer me!"
Tuomas "well, sometimes. i was above social taboos and so i had boners whenever i damn well pleases"
Mika "what do you do when you get the boners"
tuomas "i jerk off of course!"
mika "arrrrrrrrrrrgh"

― ken c (ken c), Monday, 5 December 2005 15:04 (nineteen years ago)

"dad has his cock out."

hahahahahaha!

― JimD (JimD), Monday, 5 December 2005 15:04 (nineteen years ago)

And I still wonder if there's a difference in how people view masturbating in a room where there is a baby, and having sex in such a room. Because, even though masturbation is considered okay these days, there's still a special stigma attached to it that enhances the "yuck"-factor.

Okay, what it boils down is, can an infant less than a year old thgink "dad has his cock out", and be somehow traumatized by it? If you think so, I guess there's no point in further debate.

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Monday, 5 December 2005 15:06 (nineteen years ago)

I think that the issue for the law - and it is against the law - is one of consent. By wanking in front of *anyone* you are involving them in a sexual act. If you do this without their consent, there's an issue.

― Mädchen (Madchen), Monday, 5 December 2005 15:10 (nineteen years ago)

Back in ye olden days when large families lived in a single room, parents would pack their kids off to Sunday school.

― Mädchen (Madchen), Monday, 5 December 2005 15:11 (nineteen years ago)

Of course I'm willing to admit that the cultural conditioning would stops most people (me included) doing it, but I just wanted to question the inherent immorality some people seem to think lies in such an act.

(x-post)

Mädchen, do you think that, for example, parent who have sex in their bedroom while their baby is in the crib in the same room should be put to trial?

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Monday, 5 December 2005 15:13 (nineteen years ago)

so the priests can get to jerk off in front of the kids.

xpost

― ken c (ken c), Monday, 5 December 2005 15:13 (nineteen years ago)

I have to go now, you can go on telling wank jokes... ;)

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Monday, 5 December 2005 15:14 (nineteen years ago)

tuomas, are *any* acts 'inherently' immoral? i would think not. i don't understand your line of reasoning here.

― Theorry Henry (Enrique), Monday, 5 December 2005 15:14 (nineteen years ago)

this is so wrong.

― Sailor Kitten (g-kit), Monday, 5 December 2005 15:15 (nineteen years ago)

POLL: where is tuomas off to?

― ken c (ken c), Monday, 5 December 2005 15:15 (nineteen years ago)

(In that sentence, "inherently immoral" = something considred automatically immoral without taking into consideration the possible consequences [or he lack thereof].)

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Monday, 5 December 2005 15:16 (nineteen years ago)

POLL: where is tuomas off to?

And to what?

(Tuomas: the infant doesn't have language, so it can't think "dad's playing with his boner." But he/she does know something's going on, and saves the information its its little brane. This theory can be taken to ridiculous ends of speculation - $c13n+0l0gy for example - but the core's true: infants are aware, and the things you see shape your opinion. It is not healthy to see your father masturbating at any age, unless you paid cash money for it and are allowed to film it, in which case it's cool.

― Banana Nutrament (ghostface), Monday, 5 December 2005 15:22 (nineteen years ago)

("opinion" isn't the word I'm looking for there obviously, dunno what happened)

― Banana Nutrament (ghostface), Monday, 5 December 2005 15:23 (nineteen years ago)

This is retarded.

― Allyzay must fight Zolton herself. (allyzay), Monday, 5 December 2005 15:27 (nineteen years ago)

next up: "incest: is it ever justified?"

― J.D. (Justyn Dillingham), Monday, 5 December 2005 15:28 (nineteen years ago)

"sweatshops: are they necessary?"

― J.D. (Justyn Dillingham), Monday, 5 December 2005 15:28 (nineteen years ago)

"do we really need to brush our teeth?"

― Theorry Henry (Enrique), Monday, 5 December 2005 15:30 (nineteen years ago)

We've already done that one, Enrique.

― Allyzay must fight Zolton herself. (allyzay), Monday, 5 December 2005 15:32 (nineteen years ago)

fucking hell tuomas, why do i always get sucked into these arguments? you bastard.

― Theorry Henry (Enrique), Monday, 5 December 2005 15:35 (nineteen years ago)

"no-brainers -- should we waste hours of our lives on them?"

― Theorry Henry (Enrique), Monday, 5 December 2005 15:36 (nineteen years ago)

"is it just cultural conditioning that keeps us from shooting ppl who look at us the wrong way?"

― J.D. (Justyn Dillingham), Monday, 5 December 2005 15:36 (nineteen years ago)

.... with semen?

― ken c (ken c), Monday, 5 December 2005 15:37 (nineteen years ago)

"do we really need to brush our teeth?"

Have an apple, it's Nature's Toothbrush.

― Laurel (Laurel), Monday, 5 December 2005 15:40 (nineteen years ago)

Holy crow....that you're even having a question about this is crazy.

― Alex in NYC (vassifer), Monday, 5 December 2005 16:06 (nineteen years ago)

We're not Finish, we don't understand. I bet in Finland they bonk as a way to learn kids where they came from.

― Nathalie (stevie nixed), Monday, 5 December 2005 16:08 (nineteen years ago)

In Belgium they cut out the middleman in that equation and just bonk kids?

― Ronan (Ronan), Monday, 5 December 2005 16:09 (nineteen years ago)

next up: "incest: is it ever justified?"
-- J.D. (aubade8...) (webmail), December 5th, 2005. (Justyn Dillingham) (later)
"sweatshops: are they necessary?"

-- J.D. (aubade8...) (webmail), December 5th, 2005. (Justyn Dillingham) (later)

If people really can't see the any difference between what I'm saying and justifying incest, then I guess there's no point at all in having this conservation.

Tuomas: the infant doesn't have language, so it can't think "dad's playing with his boner." But he/she does know something's going on, and saves the information its its little brane. This theory can be taken to ridiculous ends of speculation - $c13n+0l0gy for example - but the core's true: infants are aware, and the things you see shape your opinion. It is not healthy to see your father masturbating at any age, unless you paid cash money for it and are allowed to film it, in which case it's cool.

I don't think there's any clear consensus on development psychology on what the child is aware of (a small infant probably is aware of movement, but how on earth can it attach a concept like "masturbation" - or any concept at all - to it, which would be necessary for it to "remember" dad wanking later on), and especially on whether and how things in our infancy affect us, so you're only presenting one theory here.

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Monday, 5 December 2005 16:13 (nineteen years ago)

In Belgium they cut out the middleman in that equation and just bonk kids?

That was just in the 90s with Dutroux. He's locked up now.

― Nathalie (stevie nixed), Monday, 5 December 2005 16:16 (nineteen years ago)

i am totally not down with this.

― S!gmund Freud (Amateur(ist)), Monday, 5 December 2005 16:17 (nineteen years ago)

If people really can't see the any difference between what I'm saying and justifying incest, then I guess there's no point at all in having this conservation.

so in brief, it's all cultural conditioning, except for when it isn't.

― Theorry Henry (Enrique), Monday, 5 December 2005 16:17 (nineteen years ago)

???

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Monday, 5 December 2005 16:18 (nineteen years ago)

Tuomas, it looks to me like there hasn't been any point in quite some time, and that's speaking as someone who more or less AGREES WITH YOU. But then I can't take a single Ken C post seriously; from where I'm sitting it looks like several people on here have been taking the piss since before I got into the office at 9am EST.

― Laurel (Laurel), Monday, 5 December 2005 16:19 (nineteen years ago)

Lolz and seriousness are not mutually exclusive. The question is still begged, what earthly reason would there be for you not to take the necessary steps to stop the baby watching you wank?

― Amity Wong (noodle vague), Monday, 5 December 2005 16:30 (nineteen years ago)

At least wait until the baby's napping -- IN ANOTHER ROOM, for cryin' out loud.

― Alex in NYC (vassifer), Monday, 5 December 2005 16:33 (nineteen years ago)

"B-b-b-but I have to wank right now or I'll DIE!!"

cf. Exploding Testicle Syndrome

― Amity Wong (noodle vague), Monday, 5 December 2005 16:39 (nineteen years ago)

Lolz and seriousness are not mutually exclusive. The question is still begged, what earthly reason would there be for you not to take the necessary steps to stop the baby watching you wank?

Because wanker needs the baby there to get hottttt.

― Sick Mouthy (Nick Southall), Monday, 5 December 2005 16:42 (nineteen years ago)

taking the piss and being correct isn't mutually exclusive either!

although i reckon one can be cultually conditioned to think otherwise.

― ken c (ken c), Monday, 5 December 2005 16:42 (nineteen years ago)

you don't need to be able to attach a concept to something to be affected by it, Tuomas - if you did, there would never be any learning ever. while there are various theories of infant learning (I don't think we're in disagreement as to whether infants learn), all of them involve stimulus and response. The stimulus in question here (seeing an adult masturbate) isn't really something whose effect we'd want to see tested, not even once if we could help it, is it?

― Banana Nutrament (ghostface), Monday, 5 December 2005 16:48 (nineteen years ago)

"it would have no idea of what masturbation is, so all it would see is someone moving his/her hand."

with their genitals growing bigger and then stuff squirting out of it.

You know some very special women, Ken.

― Dan (SHE'S GONNA BLOW!!!) Perry (Dan Perry), Monday, 5 December 2005 16:52 (nineteen years ago)

well one of them gave birth to you so i should think so.

― ken c (ken c), Monday, 5 December 2005 16:54 (nineteen years ago)

it's great to see important issues can still be discussed on ILE

― Ronan (Ronan), Monday, 5 December 2005 16:55 (nineteen years ago)

and new points still being raised.

― ken c (ken c), Monday, 5 December 2005 16:57 (nineteen years ago)

ILE tackles the big questions that have confounded mankind for ages!

"Why are we here?"
"Where did we come from?"
"Is it okay to masturbate in front of the baby before we go?"
"Are those nachos?"

― Dan (And So On) Perry (Dan Perry), Monday, 5 December 2005 16:57 (nineteen years ago)

someone who doesn't have any sort of morality yet?
are *any* acts 'inherently' immoral? i would think not. i don't understand your line of reasoning here.

Hey, if you want to be a cultural/moral relativist, there's no good reason not to go all the way.

for sure society could stand to loosen up about sexuality a little, but exposing infants to adult sexuality is surely not the place to start.

you can't have your cake and eat it too.

― A Nairn (moretap), Monday, 5 December 2005 17:00 (nineteen years ago)

Oh for fuck's sake, dude.

― Dan (Stop Being Stupid) Perry (Dan Perry), Monday, 5 December 2005 17:01 (nineteen years ago)

THIS THREAD WINS EVERYTHING.

― Allyzay must fight Zolton herself. (allyzay), Monday, 5 December 2005 17:03 (nineteen years ago)

Is it wrong to eat a live baby if the baby doens't understand the concept of cannibalism?

― Sick Mouthy (Nick Southall), Monday, 5 December 2005 17:04 (nineteen years ago)

THIS THREAD WINS EVERYTHING

It doesn't beat the best thread ever (and coincidentally the FIRST on ILX).

― Waffle Cone Sundae, Monday, 5 December 2005 17:04 (nineteen years ago)

Oh please.

― Allyzay must fight Zolton herself. (allyzay), Monday, 5 December 2005 17:05 (nineteen years ago)

you can't have your baby and eat it too.

xxpost

― ken c (ken c), Monday, 5 December 2005 17:05 (nineteen years ago)

Is it bad for a blind baby to hear you masturbating? Should a deaf baby ever be blindfolded, if you are masturbating, or otherwise????

― Ronan (Ronan), Monday, 5 December 2005 17:06 (nineteen years ago)

# visual phenomena that can't be filmed or videotaped (22 new answers)
# Is it bad for a baby to see you masturbating? (138 new answers)

― Allyzay must fight Zolton herself. (allyzay), Monday, 5 December 2005 17:08 (nineteen years ago)

How do you get a dead baby to float?

― A Nairn (moretap), Monday, 5 December 2005 17:08 (nineteen years ago)

blindfolds was covered upthread i think, but yes the deafness thing is taking it to a new level of moral dilemma.

― ken c (ken c), Monday, 5 December 2005 17:09 (nineteen years ago)

Is it bad to make a dead eaten baby blind by wanking it?

― Sick Mouthy (Nick Southall), Monday, 5 December 2005 17:10 (nineteen years ago)

the blind, deaf baby has enough problems dealing with a visit form Roy Keane to worry about people having sex in the same room, not that Keano would tolerate that sort of behaviour.

― Sororah T Massacre (blueski), Monday, 5 December 2005 17:10 (nineteen years ago)

but what is a "room." What if this took place outside?

― A Nairn (moretap), Monday, 5 December 2005 17:12 (nineteen years ago)

What about puppies?

― Super Cub (Debito), Monday, 5 December 2005 17:26 (nineteen years ago)

Oh, and hold on, upthread. The incest thing is completely different. It is quite possible to have consentual, non-abusive incest.

― Pete (Pete), Monday, 5 December 2005 17:43 (nineteen years ago)

Yes, child molestation and incest sometimes overlap, but are not the same thingg.

― Super Cub (Debito), Monday, 5 December 2005 17:45 (nineteen years ago)

But neither are a good idea.
(just to clarify)

― Super Cub (Debito), Monday, 5 December 2005 17:45 (nineteen years ago)

what if it's just some friendly, consentual, intra-family buggering? which doesn't involve the possibility of creating freak babies. that's surely okay only except for social conditioning yeah?

― ken c (ken c), Monday, 5 December 2005 17:48 (nineteen years ago)

How long are you guys gonna keep this asswitty thread on New Answers?

― David R. (popshots75`), Monday, 5 December 2005 17:50 (nineteen years ago)

Yeah, condoms make social conditioning moot.

― Super Cub (Debito), Monday, 5 December 2005 17:50 (nineteen years ago)

don't need no hateration in this gaucherie

― Roxymuzak, Mrs. Carbohydrate (roxymuzak), Monday, 5 December 2005 17:50 (nineteen years ago)

is it wrong to just put condoms on a coathanger for babies to play with instead of these things?

http://doityourself.com/images/sheffield/childrena0103.jpg

― ken c (ken c), Monday, 5 December 2005 17:55 (nineteen years ago)

wow Nairn you're even dumber than I'd remembered

― Banana Nutrament (ghostface), Monday, 5 December 2005 18:26 (nineteen years ago)

How do you get a dead baby to float?

Put it in root beer?

― Dan (Not Good At Riddles) Perry (Dan Perry), Monday, 5 December 2005 18:31 (nineteen years ago)

You know some very special women, Ken.

squirters, duh.

― Nathalie (stevie nixed), Monday, 5 December 2005 18:33 (nineteen years ago)

http://images.amazon.com/images/P/6305428050.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg

― M@tt He1geson (Matt Helgeson), Monday, 5 December 2005 19:15 (nineteen years ago)

Also, this thread needs an overbearing Brooklyn father to come up, cuff it on the back of the head and say, "Jeeeesus Christ, what the FUCK is wrong with you?"

― M@tt He1geson (Matt Helgeson), Monday, 5 December 2005 19:19 (nineteen years ago)

i had a crush on that thor girl from adventures in babysitting when i was her age.

― jaymc (jaymc), Monday, 5 December 2005 19:21 (nineteen years ago)

she had a gremlins backpack!

― latebloomer: The Corridor (Yes, The Corridor) (latebloomer), Monday, 5 December 2005 19:25 (nineteen years ago)

How do you get a dead baby to float?
Put it in root beer?

dan is correct, but the original line is wrong; it should be "how do you make a dead baby float?"

carry on.

― Your local source of bad ilx jokes for 2.5 years running (kingfish 2.0), Monday, 5 December 2005 20:06 (nineteen years ago)

This is still retarded. A baby isn't really going to care if you play with your schlong, especially since in a couple months the baby will be doing basically the same thing fifteen hours a day; you guys are acting like an infant can tell the difference between sexuality and just, like scratching. That said, I can't imagine any situation in which a masturbating person would need or want to have visual contact with a baby. If you absolutely couldn't leave the room, you could just, like, put the baby in its crib and go sit kinda out of view, preferably while the baby's sleeping or something.

I say that less for the baby's sake and more for the masturbator's, and I say that as someone who can't even masturbate if there's, like, a cat looking, or something.

― nabiscothingy, Monday, 5 December 2005 20:07 (nineteen years ago)

-- ken c (pykachu10...) (webmail), Today 9:33 AM. (ken c) (later) (link)

what if it's like, rolled up in a tube and lost in the back of the closet?

I have to side with tuomas's here. first off, because of the whole lack of awareness thing. and second, of what he said here:

"And I still wonder if there's a difference in how people view masturbating in a room where there is a baby, and having sex in such a room. Because, even though masturbation is considered okay these days, there's still a special stigma attached to it that enhances the "yuck"-factor."

i'm sure a greater number of people see masturbating with the baby present as wrong than two people having sex. I'm pretty much sure my folks did it with me in the room. and i dont think i'd care if my uncle jerked himself off while babysitting me. i really can't see how it would make one bit of difference.

― AaronK (AaronK), Monday, 5 December 2005 20:39 (nineteen years ago)

i'm sure a greater number of people see masturbating with the baby present as wrong than two people having sex.

Oh yes, just look at all of the posts here advocating boning by the baby.

― Dan (This Is Why God Created Kitchen Tables) Perry (Dan Perry), Monday, 5 December 2005 20:43 (nineteen years ago)

Every day I worry a little bit more about the mental health of the people who post here, I swear to god. You know what? Who gives a crap, why people think it's gross? What the hell is the matter with a person who DOESN'T think it's a little creepy to crank it or fuck next to a baby??? For crying out loud, it's just disturbing, people. This is a no brainer. Why is there an argument?

― Allyzay must fight Zolton herself. (allyzay), Monday, 5 December 2005 20:47 (nineteen years ago)

Patient and steady with all he must bear,
Ready to meet every challenge with care,
Easy in manner, yet solid as steel,
Strong in his faith, refreshingly real.
Isn't afraid to propose what is bold,
Doesn't conform to the usual mould,
Eyes that have foresight, for hindsight won't do,
Never backs down when he sees what is true,
Tells it all straight, and means it all too.
Going forward and knowing he's right,
Even when doubted for why he would fight,
Over and over he makes his case clear,
Reaching to touch the ones who won't hear.
Growing in strength he won't be unnerved,
Ever assuring he'll stand by his word.
Wanting the world to join his firm stand,
Bracing for war, but praying for peace,
Using his power so evil will cease,
So much a leader and worthy of trust,
Here stands a man who will do what he must.

― Dan (IE, Crank It Next To A Baby) Perry (Dan Perry), Monday, 5 December 2005 20:49 (nineteen years ago)

THAT'S what he's saying in Lullaby?

― Allyzay must fight Zolton herself. (allyzay), Monday, 5 December 2005 20:52 (nineteen years ago)

That's what you get when you slow down the oddly-reverbed snare hit from the remix.

― Dan (You Also Get Feline AIDS) Perry (Dan Perry), Monday, 5 December 2005 21:08 (nineteen years ago)

I don't think anyone is ADVOCATING the "presence of infant" approach, but if it happened (SOMEHOW, I kind of can't imagine, but WHATEVER) it seems incredibly unlikely to me that it would matter one whit to an infant. It's absolutely true, look at the historical record of whole families sharing one- or two-room dwellings! I think, based on random reading about standards of mothing, that the norm had changed by oh, late medieval-ish times in Western Europe as the general definition of "household" changed from the whole contributing group (ie extended family and unrelated laborers, boarding clergy, wetnurses, etc etc) to focus on the immediate family, but one-room dwellings were the norm in other parts of the world for much longer (possibly still are in some...?).

― Laurel (Laurel), Monday, 5 December 2005 21:10 (nineteen years ago)

I don't think anyone is ADVOCATING the "presence of infant" approach, but if it happened (SOMEHOW, I kind of can't imagine, but WHATEVER)

"I tripped!"

― Dan (Next Thing You Know...) Perry (Dan Perry), Monday, 5 December 2005 21:12 (nineteen years ago)

HEY SMART PEOPLE!

MASTURBATING WITH A BABY IN THE ROOM WILL STILL BE GROSS AND WRONG NO MATTER HOW MUCH YOU FUCKING MICROANALYZE IT!

THE HISTORICAL RECORD OF WHOLE FAMILIES SHARING ONE- OR TWO-ROOM DWELLINGS CAN FUCK OFF!

― M@tt He1geson (Matt Helgeson), Monday, 5 December 2005 21:16 (nineteen years ago)

Masturbating with a baby-in-the-room or masturbating-with-a-baby in the room?

― Dan (I Love Ambiguity) Perry (jaymc), Monday, 5 December 2005 21:18 (nineteen years ago)

Use plenty of lubricant.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Monday, 5 December 2005 21:19 (nineteen years ago)

Seriously, though, I mean it is highly unlikely that anyone here is living in a one-room dwelling with multiple family members. I mean, things happen out of necessity but I've never thought "necessity" was "kinda horny while babysitting"!! IF for some truly dire reason it was NECESSARY to have sex or masturbate with a baby in the room, such as living in a one room house with 17 people, that's understandible but also STILL CREEPY!

― Allyzay must fight Zolton herself. (allyzay), Monday, 5 December 2005 21:20 (nineteen years ago)

JAYMC I AM MAKING YOUR CARD

― Dan (With Doilies) Perry (Dan Perry), Monday, 5 December 2005 21:22 (nineteen years ago)

HEY SMART PEOPLE!

Aww thanks, Matt. Yer a sweetie.

XP to Ally: Haha, NO, of course now I think we can all agree that it's kind of oh, I dunno, CREEPY, if only because it's pretty damn hard to imagine how it's not easily avoidable! But in the scheme of things? Probably not that big a deal.

― Laurel (Laurel), Monday, 5 December 2005 21:22 (nineteen years ago)

I just don't believe that Tuomas finds it creepy!!! Which is creepy!

― Allyzay must fight Zolton herself. (allyzay), Monday, 5 December 2005 21:23 (nineteen years ago)

Masturbating with a baby-in-the-room or masturbating-with-a-baby in the room?
-- Dan (I Love Ambiguity) Perry (djperry@jmail.com), December 5th, 2005. (jaymc)

haha dan wins!

I just don't believe that Tuomas finds it creepy!!! Which is creepy!
-- Allyzay must fight Zolton herself. (allyza...)

that's what i'm talking about.

― M@tt He1geson (Matt Helgeson), Monday, 5 December 2005 21:23 (nineteen years ago)

"Every day I worry a little bit more about the mental health of the people who post here, I swear to god. You know what? Who gives a crap, why people think it's gross? What the hell is the matter with a person who DOESN'T think it's a little creepy to crank it or fuck next to a baby??? For crying out loud, it's just disturbing, people. This is a no brainer. Why is there an argument?"

fuckin next to babies has been done, and while I, in this day and age, think it's creepy, I can understand how it *wouldnt* be creepy as well. I also think cranking it next to the baby is creepy, but i'm trying to argue that while creepy, it's not necessarily morally wrong. that's why there's an argument.

― AaronK (AaronK), Monday, 5 December 2005 21:25 (nineteen years ago)

(xpost: I would love to take credit for that but it wasn't me! Show All Details)

I'm sorry, but unless I'm in a private room in the Playboy Mansion at least 16 of those people need to fuck right off.

― Dan (This Is Assuming They Are All Playmates And Not Greasy Asshat Celebrities L, Monday, 5 December 2005 21:26 (nineteen years ago)

No one is saying it is "morally wrong" besides probably A Nairn but he thinks breathing is morally wrong. A couple of people pointed out it technically might be illegal and also CREEPY but morally wrong, who knows. TOTALLY GROSS AND CREEPY, definitely! Why play a semantics argument?

― Allyzay must fight Zolton herself. (allyzay), Monday, 5 December 2005 21:27 (nineteen years ago)

oh my sweet christ we're still on this!

― Theorry Henry (Enrique), Monday, 5 December 2005 21:29 (nineteen years ago)

it's not a semantics argument. the original poster said nothing about "creepy" but a lot about "wrong." they even admitted that it was "uncomfortable" (which IS kind of too weak a word to use here, which i admit is creepy!).

― AaronK (AaronK), Monday, 5 December 2005 21:29 (nineteen years ago)

I keep expecting the original poster to come back and say something like "Wow, I'm glad I didn't tell you people that I wiped my hand on the baby's blanket afterwards."

― Dan (Bleah) Perry (Dan Perry), Monday, 5 December 2005 21:31 (nineteen years ago)

the baby would just think it's snot anyway, and wouldnt care.

I DIDNT!

― AaronK (AaronK), Monday, 5 December 2005 21:32 (nineteen years ago)

besides, in the days before they had disposable tissues, they had to reuse cloths. what's a spankerchief one day is your dishtowel the next.

― AaronK (AaronK), Monday, 5 December 2005 21:33 (nineteen years ago)

SPANKERCHIEF

― Dan (Alert Merriam-Webster) Perry (Dan Perry), Monday, 5 December 2005 21:35 (nineteen years ago)

Remind me to refuse all dinner invitations to your house, Aaron.

xpost

― M. White (Miguelito), Monday, 5 December 2005 21:37 (nineteen years ago)

shut up shut UP WHY DID I OPEN THIS THREAD

― -rainbow bum- (-rainbow bum-), Monday, 5 December 2005 21:37 (nineteen years ago)

err on the safe side i say... if you can wait til dinner... if you can wait for a smoke... if you can wait to go to the potty... you can wait for some alone/adult time to wank.

you could take a dump in somebody's living room and clean it up before they come home too, but why go there?

i don't even want to think about how to explain what was going on if somebody walked in.
m.

― msp (mspa), Monday, 5 December 2005 21:53 (nineteen years ago)

now i really don't understand this thread. who the hell really gives a fuck whether this question is a no brainer?

― ken c (ken c), Monday, 5 December 2005 21:55 (nineteen years ago)

oh wait i misread nevermind!

― ken c (ken c), Monday, 5 December 2005 21:58 (nineteen years ago)

i don't even want to think about how to explain what was going on if somebody walked in.

http://www.4catsproductions.com/svu/index1.jpg

― M@tt He1geson (Matt Helgeson), Monday, 5 December 2005 22:00 (nineteen years ago)

i guess that's it actually. just the fact that there's no real need to do it while a baby is present and still doing it makes it kind of odd, and weird, and creepy.

like, if you're in a desert and you take a dump, there's no water, and then you need to eat, you eat without washing your hands, oh well, what else can you do eh?

but when you're in a house with running water and soap, you take a shit, and then for some reason not washing your hands before you eat. WEIRD.

― ken c (ken c), Monday, 5 December 2005 22:02 (nineteen years ago)

You wash your hands with the sand. That is what devout muslims do.

― GET EQUIPPED WITH BUBBLE LEAD (ex machina), Monday, 5 December 2005 22:03 (nineteen years ago)

not to mention pooing on the floor in the desert. vs pooing on the floor in a house that has a WC.

― ken c (ken c), Monday, 5 December 2005 22:04 (nineteen years ago)

xpost devout muslims who have access to sand, you mean.

― ken c (ken c), Monday, 5 December 2005 22:05 (nineteen years ago)

but what if they need to take a dump in a place where there is no sand?

― ken c (ken c), Monday, 5 December 2005 22:06 (nineteen years ago)

it's all social conditioning

― ken c (ken c), Monday, 5 December 2005 22:06 (nineteen years ago)

can i just interrupt to say that i've read this thread in one sitting, having been understandably scared to open it at work, and:

a) ken c, you were officially the funniest man in the universe until ...
b) ... a nairn turned up on strong mind-altering drugs at 5.08pm, then spent four minutes ingesting the world's remaining supply of mind-altering drugs before posting again
c) WHAT KIND OF FUCKED-UP FUCK HAS A CHUG ANYWHERE NEAR A BABY?

thank you. you may all resume where you left off.

― grimly fiendish (grimlord), Monday, 5 December 2005 22:08 (nineteen years ago)

or not.

― grimly fiendish (grimlord), Monday, 5 December 2005 22:16 (nineteen years ago)

In my experience dinner cloths are less likely to be used when people have underwear, t-shirts, perfectly good dress shirts, etc to use.

― Allyzay must fight Zolton herself. (allyzay), Monday, 5 December 2005 22:27 (nineteen years ago)

fuck off, weirdo

― gear (gear), Monday, 5 December 2005 23:28 (nineteen years ago)

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxposts

― gear (gear), Monday, 5 December 2005 23:29 (nineteen years ago)

ha ha, you should've just left it.

― Sororah T Massacre (blueski), Monday, 5 December 2005 23:34 (nineteen years ago)

Yikes! This thread is crazy. I've never even been able to masturbate in the same room with a cat or a dog in it (just in case reincarnation turned out to be true and the cat or dog turned out to be my grandma).

― scott seward (scott seward), Tuesday, 6 December 2005 00:07 (nineteen years ago)

I swear our goldfish used to make the weirdest clicking noises against the side of his bowl when I was engaged in self-love. But that was a fucking goldfish.

― Amity Wong (noodle vague), Tuesday, 6 December 2005 00:09 (nineteen years ago)

doesn't howard stern's book start off with a guy jacking into a glove?

― AaronK (AaronK), Tuesday, 6 December 2005 00:11 (nineteen years ago)

xpost as opposed to the normal, non-fucking kind.

― AaronK (AaronK), Tuesday, 6 December 2005 00:11 (nineteen years ago)

ARRON-DAN MIND MELD

― Dan (Ha Ha) Perry (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 6 December 2005 00:12 (nineteen years ago)

Goldfish don't fuck as such, do they? They just kind of jizz all round the bowl.

― Amity Wong (noodle vague), Tuesday, 6 December 2005 00:13 (nineteen years ago)

So the final takeawy from this thread is don't leave your goldfish in the same room as a baby.

― Dan (Piscene Jizz Explosion) Perry (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 6 December 2005 00:16 (nineteen years ago)

yes, I think we can all agree, that would just be gross.

― AaronK (AaronK), Tuesday, 6 December 2005 03:47 (nineteen years ago)

Tuomas has got everybody riled up on this thread. Y'all all be suckas. He's the same guy what says it's cool to hang out naked with your parent of the opposite sex. Natch it's all good with a baby.

What's the deal with Americans and nudity? [WORK-SAFE AGANE HURRAH]

Is it really true that many Americans have never seen their parents/siblings/firends naked?

― BenDover, Tuesday, 6 December 2005 04:00 (nineteen years ago)

I just read through this thread and I haven't felt this queasy since I sat through Screwballs.

― 'Twan (miccio), Tuesday, 6 December 2005 04:00 (nineteen years ago)

but these are questions that have to be asked.

― latebloomer: The Corridor (Yes, The Corridor) (latebloomer), Tuesday, 6 December 2005 04:07 (nineteen years ago)

WHY IS THIS THREAD STILL GOING

― dabnis coleman's ghost (dubplatestyle), Tuesday, 6 December 2005 04:11 (nineteen years ago)

x-post

perhaps not by mentally sound adult human beings, but someone has to tackle them.

― latebloomer: The Corridor (Yes, The Corridor) (latebloomer), Tuesday, 6 December 2005 04:12 (nineteen years ago)

i even think tuomas has a vague point on that other thread (vis a vis blah blah not all nudity = sexuality blah blah) but JESUS H PEOPLE

― dabnis coleman's ghost (dubplatestyle), Tuesday, 6 December 2005 04:13 (nineteen years ago)

that's the thing - not all nudity is sex, obviously. ALL JACKING OFF IS, THOUGH.

― Banana Nutrament (ghostface), Tuesday, 6 December 2005 04:22 (nineteen years ago)

anyone who can maintain an erection in that situation should be congratulated for completely abandoning any pretense to shared human morality. you might as well have just eaten the baby and been done with it.

― dabnis coleman's ghost (dubplatestyle), Tuesday, 6 December 2005 04:25 (nineteen years ago)

did somebody bring up the end of Flirting With Disaster yet?

― 'Twan (miccio), Tuesday, 6 December 2005 04:30 (nineteen years ago)

ts: a dog watching you have sex vs. a cat watching you have sex

― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Tuesday, 6 December 2005 04:40 (nineteen years ago)

i think families that had to live in the same room - and there are many, many places like this today, just not so much in the US - became either kind of fucked up or developed strict "moral" (i.e. "ewwwww!!!") rules to deal with the overbubbling of their dark materials, both minuses, really

― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Tuesday, 6 December 2005 04:43 (nineteen years ago)

"if you really want to see an open-minded society, you ought to consider the russian tenement blocks of 1920s lower-east side new york"

― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Tuesday, 6 December 2005 04:45 (nineteen years ago)

odd, and weird, and creepy = your conscience giving you a hint about morality, maybe?

― A Nairn (moretap), Tuesday, 6 December 2005 05:24 (nineteen years ago)

nope.

― AaronK (AaronK), Tuesday, 6 December 2005 05:27 (nineteen years ago)

that's just social conditioning talking.

― A Nairn (moretap), Tuesday, 6 December 2005 05:27 (nineteen years ago)

yup.

― AaronK (AaronK), Tuesday, 6 December 2005 05:28 (nineteen years ago)

exactly.

― AaronK (AaronK), Tuesday, 6 December 2005 05:28 (nineteen years ago)

HEY SMART PEOPLE!
MASTURBATING WITH A BABY IN THE ROOM WILL STILL BE GROSS AND WRONG NO MATTER HOW MUCH YOU FUCKING MICROANALYZE IT!
THE HISTORICAL RECORD OF WHOLE FAMILIES SHARING ONE- OR TWO-ROOM DWELLINGS CAN FUCK OFF!

-- M@tt He1geson (matt@game[remove]informer.com), December 5th, 2005.

OTM x 1,000,000,000

― Theorry Henry (Enrique), Tuesday, 6 December 2005 09:31 (nineteen years ago)

welcome to the modern world.

― AaronK (AaronK), Tuesday, 6 December 2005 13:45 (nineteen years ago)

modern world is rubbish

― ken c (ken c), Tuesday, 6 December 2005 13:47 (nineteen years ago)

http://www.funjunkie.co.uk/images/capwank1.jpg

― aldo_cowpat (aldo_cowpat), Tuesday, 6 December 2005 14:53 (nineteen years ago)

everyone is overstating everything. TO THE POWER OF TEN ZILLION!

― Ronan (Ronan), Tuesday, 6 December 2005 14:56 (nineteen years ago)

http://www.dur.ac.uk/z.a.craven/breadcrumbs/hongkong/wanko.jpg

― ken c (ken c), Tuesday, 6 December 2005 15:00 (nineteen years ago)

"wanko" means puppy in Japanese.

― Super Cub (Debito), Tuesday, 6 December 2005 15:29 (nineteen years ago)

shame it doesn't mean baby

― ken c (ken c), Tuesday, 6 December 2005 15:34 (nineteen years ago)

Maybe logged way the fuck out was just offering to show the baby some puppies.

― Onimo (GerryNemo), Tuesday, 6 December 2005 15:36 (nineteen years ago)

The youngsters older Athenian men had sex with had reached puberty, I think, they were probably older than 12.

They were usually about sixteen or a little older--the original point was to take a young man who had just graduated from school and give him a little more guidence, education, and non-reproductive sex before he was let out on the big bad world.

BTW, if you think masturbating in front of a baby is creepy, just think about the old practice of masturbating a baby to stop them from crying.

― Christine 'Green Leafy Dragon' Indigo (cindigo), Tuesday, 6 December 2005 16:58 (nineteen years ago)

― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Tuesday, 6 December 2005 16:59 (nineteen years ago)

OK THIS THREAD.

― Sick Mouthy (Nick Southall), Tuesday, 6 December 2005 17:00 (nineteen years ago)

It's just part of life:

Why it happens

Toddlers masturbate for the same reason that older children do: It feels good! Bodily exploration is part of growing up. During the toddler years, your child will learn to run, jump, throw, pump a swing, draw, and (probably) "make all her poops in the potty." She may be just as curious about her genitals as she is about her fingers, toes, and belly button — and if she's recently switched from diapers to underpants, she may be able to get to them for the first time. "When parents first see this kind of exploration, they wonder 'is this normal?'" says Meg Zweiback, a nurse practitioner and family consultant in Oakland, California. "The answer is yes, you don't need to be concerned."

What to do

Don't panic. Not everyone does it, but masturbation is a completely normal thing to do. It doesn't cause any physical ills, pose any health risks, and no, it won't turn your child into a sex maniac, either. Masturbation in toddlers isn't sexual (as it is for adults) because toddlers don't know what sex is.. And while in older children explicit sex play is often a tip-off to sexual abuse or exposure to inappropriately explicit sexual material, this is extremely unlikely to be the case with toddlers, who don't have the imaginative skills for this kind of role adoption. (A toddler who's been sexually abused is more likely to become withdrawn or suddenly have trouble sleeping.) That said, toddlers masturbate because it feels good, and the good feelings can be as pleasurable for her as they are for adults. "A toddler may masturbate herself to orgasm," says Zweiback "complete with panting, red face, and a big sigh at the end. But it's absolutely not something to be worried about."

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 6 December 2005 17:02 (nineteen years ago)

So, if the baby's doing it, does that make it OK for anyone else in the room to do it too?

― James Ward (jamesmichaelward), Tuesday, 6 December 2005 17:07 (nineteen years ago)

I suppose you have to ask around.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 6 December 2005 17:41 (nineteen years ago)

"A toddler may masturbate herself to orgasm," says Zweiback "complete with panting, red face, and a big sigh at the end.

TMI, Baby Doc!

― Erick Dampier is better than Shaq (miloaukerman), Tuesday, 6 December 2005 18:37 (nineteen years ago)

― Super Cub (Debito), Tuesday, 6 December 2005 18:41 (nineteen years ago)

what about a cigarette?

― AaronK (AaronK), Tuesday, 6 December 2005 19:49 (nineteen years ago)

http://www.zahn-art.at/images/baby-smile.jpg

― Erick Dampier is better than Shaq (miloaukerman), Tuesday, 6 December 2005 19:52 (nineteen years ago)

http://content.answers.com/main/content/wp/en/thumb/6/60/250px-MICHAEL_JACKSON_Bad-Front.JPG

― Dan (Shamon) Perry (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 6 December 2005 19:57 (nineteen years ago)

I had a friend who told me he and his wife had sex with the baby in their bed. They were poor and lived in a one bedroom apartment. The baby slept with them every night. It was hard for me to imagine living that way, but it made sense. I think it would be interesting to talk to an adult whose parents weren't discreet about having sex. I wonder if an adult growing up in those circumstances would be better or worse off than someone like me, who grew up in a religious household where sex was never discussed as a positive thing.

― recovering optimist (Royal Bed Bouncer), Tuesday, 6 December 2005 23:15 (nineteen years ago)

one month passes...

2006 REVIIIIIIIIIIIVE

― oh yeah, Sunday, 22 January 2006 01:35 (nineteen years ago)

this thread is an ilx meme unto itself.

― stockholm cindy (winter version) (Jody Beth Rosen), Sunday, 22 January 2006 01:37 (nineteen years ago)

it was wrong in 2005, but I hear it's all the rage for 2006

― kyle (akmonday), Sunday, 22 January 2006 01:46 (nineteen years ago)

"I had a friend who told me he and his wife had sex with the baby in their bed."

I DEMAND GRAMMATICAL CLARIFICATION, TO MAKE THIS SENTENCE LESS...LIKE THIS SENTENCE.

― John Justen (johnjusten), Sunday, 22 January 2006 01:59 (nineteen years ago)

Talk about a testament to the importance of good grammar.

― nabisco (nabisco), Sunday, 22 January 2006 02:09 (nineteen years ago)

Good Gran'ma?

― Battle Raver II (noodle vague), Sunday, 22 January 2006 02:29 (nineteen years ago)

five months pass...

did everyone assume the original poster to be male?

― spectra (spectra), Tuesday, 27 June 2006 23:55 (eighteen years ago)

IP search seemed to indicate that it was male.

― Andrew (enneff), Wednesday, 28 June 2006 00:05 (eighteen years ago)

But, yeah, whoever said "just turn the baby around while you do it" was OTM. I essentially feel the same about this as I do about masturbating in front of a pet. It's easy enough to avoid, so why would you do it?

― Andrew (enneff), Wednesday, 28 June 2006 00:06 (eighteen years ago)

the question "why the fuck can't you just fucking move the baby out of view for the couple of minutes it'll take you to come" remains key

― Thomas Tallis (Tommy), Wednesday, 28 June 2006 00:37 (eighteen years ago)

did anyone ever start a "is it bad for a baby to see you menstruating?" parody thread? if not, can we just pretend and not actually bother?

― gbx (skowly), Wednesday, 28 June 2006 02:21 (eighteen years ago)

I'm sort of amused that James Blount never actually posted here, considering it's been the basis for his "Tuomas = Paedophile" rantings since.

― Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Wednesday, 28 June 2006 06:13 (eighteen years ago)

I essentially feel the same about this as I do about masturbating in front of a pet. It's easy enough to avoid, so why would you do it?

Pets can turn themselves back around = not a good comparison. Also, ts: a dog watching you have sex vs. a cat watching you have sex

― Zora (Zora), Wednesday, 28 June 2006 08:54 (eighteen years ago)

I wouldn't be surprised if there is a Frogs song about this.

― Marmot 4-Tay: forth-coming, my child. forth-coming most righteous champion (mar, Wednesday, 28 June 2006 09:12 (eighteen years ago)

WHY IS THIS THREAD STILL GOING

-- dabnis coleman's ghost (wt...), December 6th, 2005 4:11 AM. (dubplatestyle) (link)

― melton mowbray's APOCALYPTO! (adr), Wednesday, 28 June 2006 09:36 (eighteen years ago)

Wow. (universal xpost to entire thread)

― Fluffy Bear (Fluffy Bear Hearts Rainbows), Wednesday, 28 June 2006 14:34 (eighteen years ago)

IP search seemed to indicate that it was male.

What, the IP nr was long and hard, instead of moist and soft?

― Nathalie (stevie nixed), Wednesday, 28 June 2006 14:52 (eighteen years ago)

Pets can turn themselves back around = not a good comparison.

I meant it's like pets in that it's easy enough to avoid doing it in front of them. (ie with a baby you can turn them around, with a pet you can put them in another room/outside)

― Andrew (enneff), Thursday, 29 June 2006 02:15 (eighteen years ago)

nine months pass...

CAN'T YOU DO THAT SOMEWHERE ELSE, PERV?

http://swardraws.com/fotog/archives/2005/03/baby-paul02.jpg

― bobby bedelia, Wednesday, 18 April 2007 07:49 (eighteen years ago)

classik thread

― That one guy that quit, Wednesday, 18 April 2007 08:25 (eighteen years ago)

two months pass...

Stab victim 'continued masturbating'
Christine Kellett
June 20, 2007 - 2:36PM

A Brisbane woman stabbed a male friend twice in the shower after he refused to stop masturbating in front of her children.

Defence lawyers for Kylie Louise Wilson, 28, said the mother of two "lost it" when her friend of six years, Daniel Peter Blair, went on a masturbation marathon on April 6 last year.

Brisbane's District Court this morning heard Mr Blair had showed up at Wilson's unit at Birkdale unit, in Redland Shire, where he took amphetamines before having a shower.

Whilst in the bathroom, Mr Blair, 32, began pleasuring himself, before moving to Wilson's bedroom, where he rolled around naked on her bed and continued his lewd conduct.

He returned to the bathroom for more and was busted by Wilson, who was attempting to bath her three-and-a-half year-old daughter.

The court heard Mr Blair refused her repeated requests to stop, prompting her to fetch a knife from the kitchen which she used to stab him twice in the left shoulder.

Crown prosecutors said Mr Blair paused only to put on his shorts and flee outside to wait for police to arrive, but was again overcome by the urge.

"Despite his injury, it seems (Mr Blair) continued to masturbate while in the garage," the prosecutor said.

Police took him to hospital where he received treatment for the minor stab wounds.

Wilson pleaded guilty to one count each of unlawful wounding and wilful damage.

Her defence barrister, Mark Johnson, said Wilson regarded Mr Blair as a "tolerably decent person" when he was not using drugs, but had become "extremely protective" of her daughter under the circumstances.

"He was in and out and round about, doing this sort of thing all over the house, " Mr Johnson said.

"She just lost it, to put it crudely."

Senior Judge Gilbert Trafford Walker accepted the Crown's submission that Wilson had been subjected to "grossly offensive conduct ... which in a moral sense amounts to extreme provocation."

He sentenced her to nine months' jail but ordered that she be immediately released on parole.

― haitch, Wednesday, 20 June 2007 14:14 (seventeen years ago)

"Despite his injury, it seems (Mr Blair) continued to masturbate while in the garage

roffle. Hope the kids didn't see stabbing either.

― nathalie, Wednesday, 20 June 2007 14:16 (seventeen years ago)

So wait, taking speed => wank frenzy?

― Ned Raggett, Wednesday, 20 June 2007 14:18 (seventeen years ago)

Like you didn't know already.

― Mark C, Wednesday, 20 June 2007 14:20 (seventeen years ago)

Does N3D R4GG3TT do speed?

― Curt1s Stephens, Wednesday, 20 June 2007 14:21 (seventeen years ago)

did Tuomas ever learn what A2M was?

― Just got offed, Wednesday, 20 June 2007 14:23 (seventeen years ago)

aching 2 masturbate

― Curt1s Stephens, Wednesday, 20 June 2007 14:24 (seventeen years ago)

its bad for anyone but your partner to see you masturbating.

― titchyschneiderMk2, Wednesday, 20 June 2007 14:25 (seventeen years ago)