“only way to introduce a little bit of order into this mess is through engaging in non-sexual activities which, although they remain overshadowed by sex, allow us to escape the vortex of sex” - brilliant 😱
The idea, I think, is that no matter which hole is filled, the sexual encounter ultimately fails in its attempt to fulfill the sexual fantasy of either person. Therefore, there is no truly sexual encounter because there is no encounter as fulfilling as the fantasy. So both holes are wrong in that neither provide the sexual encounter imagined in the fantasy. Neither is the physical presentation of the fantastic hole.
ecstasy striving as a religious sexual intensity drawn out even into the d dance with smedly and deadly, the jokes are about different place one a sudden unexpected fuck and the other on the green.... neither of which find funny no they scare me. I need to reread JRR, fast a fast fumi with the gate at his language making, yes no may be. anything that enters hole for the Moi ta, is a descent, that relishes the orgasmic as a religious st mary fairy too and the divine impreggars, it stands at ledge of the possible knowing its a drive thru to pain and ecstasy even perhaps esp. as a plunder of faith, which is oceanic and for my mad hoppers em, kinda treacherous.... unless approached with ease.
For greater syntactical efficiency alone, I can see ranking the second version a "better" joke. But you need to be deaf to humor's musical cadences to do that; only the first version functions as joke qua joke, no?
“only way to introduce a little bit of order into this mess is through engaging in non-sexual activities which, although they remain overshadowed by sex, allow us to escape the vortex of sex” - brilliant 😱
Third option: have sex with a Japanese golfer’s wife and when he walks in you yell “間違った穴!”
I’m misunderstanding why it is the case that, in sex, both holes are the wrong hole? Or both holes are missed. What is the meaning behind this?
The idea, I think, is that no matter which hole is filled, the sexual encounter ultimately fails in its attempt to fulfill the sexual fantasy of either person. Therefore, there is no truly sexual encounter because there is no encounter as fulfilling as the fantasy. So both holes are wrong in that neither provide the sexual encounter imagined in the fantasy. Neither is the physical presentation of the fantastic hole.
I’d rather have sex than not have sex. Explain that zizek!
Idk, I thought the first joke was funnier.
Seems like this joke was already handled in 1978 on Q: Are We Not Men? A: We Are Devo. See “Sloppy (I Saw My Baby Getting)” in particular
Whatta guy!
Would it mean, that a Big Other “Court” is also wrong?
ecstasy striving as a religious sexual intensity drawn out even into the d dance with smedly and deadly, the jokes are about different place one a sudden unexpected fuck and the other on the green.... neither of which find funny no they scare me. I need to reread JRR, fast a fast fumi with the gate at his language making, yes no may be. anything that enters hole for the Moi ta, is a descent, that relishes the orgasmic as a religious st mary fairy too and the divine impreggars, it stands at ledge of the possible knowing its a drive thru to pain and ecstasy even perhaps esp. as a plunder of faith, which is oceanic and for my mad hoppers em, kinda treacherous.... unless approached with ease.
For greater syntactical efficiency alone, I can see ranking the second version a "better" joke. But you need to be deaf to humor's musical cadences to do that; only the first version functions as joke qua joke, no?
clearly.. after that funny intro to many holes are confusing....
This is a language game and is well known.