Riobard

Sensibly prohibited.

Just a textbook case of pandemic IKEA corona virus in Glannsspennyss Wales. In fact, spread to the board games.

Slow your roll, Clarice. That’s Ethian.

Meanwhile and elsewhere:

Yes, the ‘contract’ notion seems to be the common denominator for the contingency practice. Still, eyeroll, can’t not. I think it lacks relatability for me because it’s arbitrary, rigidly paint-by-numbers. Imma have a good time whatever comes up. Others may rain on their own parade. No dick in the suite is letting me down. On rare occasions, if I’m the sole man attached to an erect member it’s not a chore to adapt. You’ve lost your power if anxiously fretting about a few ounces of intracavernosal tissue swindling you. Such projection is a repetitive vibe here. I may be outnumbered. Last-ish point: I’ll never get the reason for detailed report blow-by-blows on this aspect of programas. It’s such a basic simple concept, albeit a partisan approach that has the flavour of entering brothel enemy territory. Why the pressing need to descriptively check off each and every box? It’s as if a visit report could be performatively lacking. Extreme transactional detail does not seem to have assuaged the general anxiety, for many here, of being backed into a corner over penile rights. I do get that omissions prompt harassment-grade inquiries about costs. Perhaps an obsessionality trickle-down reflective of a visible distressed minority. Unfortunate if the visit report template is unduly influenced by a lack of mind over matter.

Flaccidizing. This next part’s tailored for you because I’ve read your room and you’re intelligent: I note that some punters, predominantly cheap-ass gringos, will impose a paradoxical bind on you by stratifying remuneration according to genital function and bossily attempting to hold you to their playbook. That’s crap and a deficient organizational principle for MSM transactional sex. What comes next, the inevitable cliché consequence, is a parallel bind that you drop on the payee; you walk right into the biggest detractor of reliable tumescence known to sexology, a stop-loss dynamic. But if you really believe cash is physiologically arousogenic or want to reinforce that type of batshit crazy link, you do you, unabashedly.

Welp, you sure told him.

There’s a sloppy error of some significance in the probable cause document. Anyone pick it out yet? It may tax attention span but conceivably worth an entire emoji.

Welp, I tapped out of the workout early. A short trip, you say? Are you sure there’s no part of your exhaustive diary you left out? On the bright side, you’ll probably never be short an alibi if needed.

Just so the 3rd party blog readers know and can be appropriately warned: there are no genuine boundaries here in terms of keeping to a topic. The content may drift out, the agenda may move back from offside to town. If you hate interference there may be better places to visit.

Correct. Two rudes makes it the right time for pizza. And the trap door labelled Ignore.

You could lighten up on the heavy lifting. Tangents can be tiring.

I tried with Snivellese, tailored to your needs. The result is boilerplate and rude but that may make it relatable for you.

Dude. The opening sentence. I can’t even. So … one can be born immoral? No tabula rasa? Freud’s out, then? You also chose a photo that lacks neutrality, one that goes for a particular symbolic effect. Don’t try so hard to entertain with an attention-grab, and don’t be a juror non-juror in the same breath. His name is the only up-front draw necessary. The rest of the essay is pretty good. No major issues or notes.

Hard to not be a part of a universe that has inevitably and only wronged somebody in particular.

I am not familiar so much with USA procedures. A jury trial? Yes that would explain plea trends in this criminal law category. The choices and waiver options are varied, in fact convoluted, where I am. I have only ever given sexual abuse expert testimony before a judge, an adjudication tribunal for victim restitution/ compensation in generic terms, or worked clinically in legal diversion cases. I have not nearly seen it all. I wasn’t thinking that a convincing argument could be made about the distinction between real and simulated wrt to the central example depicted in the probable cause complaint narrative. Rather, reasonable doubt over the question of realistically tracking/vetting a ‘bottomless pit’ of combined legal and illegal material that arises from occupational factors, or over having viewed the example specifically. Sometimes I think that I myself should not follow or write in a platform that contains an array of thousands of images that I have not personally viewed in an assortative manner through the lens of acceptability but could contain cringeworthy examples. The Spanish-titled file is illustrated in the possession category and may have not been referenced prior to search/seizure in exchanges with the agent that utilized the account of the alleged offender naming him. That communication seemed geared to corroborating identity and there wouid likely have been a circumspect tone to it so as to avoid giving away the subsequent step. The sequential iterations of investigation, co-opting, “sting”, and arrest - wash rinse repeat - do portend something more arising from the two-month gap between raid and apprehension.

There seems to be a popular trend in which folks fuse notions of culpability and associated prospective conviction sentencing scope with the reality of porn content creator role. This understandably emanates from indignation and the idea that a deterrence example is more robust the greater the prominence, as well as the false belief that true diagnostic pedophilia is central to all charged. This case stands out due to “celebrity” within some 12,500 cases annually, many of which exceed possession by virtue of actual production and monetization, neither of which is included in the current charges. In actuality, I think that the erotica commodification role will be mined for potential exculpatory factors at the defense level, a rigorous attempt to uncouple the entities of legal porn and child pornography. This did not work supporting bail but house arrest is not governed by reasonable doubt. The media narrative suggests detention was ordered partly as a result of the prosecution sensationalizing open legal content … the temerity of simulated thematic erotica content in tandem with charges having occurred due to alleged behaviour that is legitimately censorable via severe punishment. Word to the wise: keep in line whether a subsequent formal adjudication were to be valid or fraught with bias. So far it appears that the charges will be refuted although the majority of offenders plead guilty. This may seem to be paradoxical. The exculpatory aspect is obviously not related to giving a hall pass to a pornographer, but the reality, for example, of a content creator’s greater likelihood of flooding of communication and material from hosts of followers of licit erotica that is simulated, suggestive, what have you, to satisfy unique arousal templates. Still, it is true that the upper range of sentencing is not impossible on either of the two charges.

Couldn’t we do our part by encouraging all young Thai men to divert their semen?

So much for the element of surprise.

Nice to have something to B Positive about on the topic.

I think it’s the Autism spectrum awareness jigsaw ribbon.