Dirckman wrote:

shagnasty wrote:

I think that a majority of High-Streeters (nie: Cruelers) find animal cruelty heinous behaviour and not appropriate for posting on this site. There are plenty of other sites that encourage this drek. These offerings should be summarily deleted and if somepone wants to push it their id/ip/whatever is blocked. You techies know how to fuck them up. High-Streets' amalgamation of professionals, misfits, sociopaths,homos, hetros, unknownos,cromagnons, dwarfs, lobotomised, etc... provides an astonishing mix of writting, searching, aggravating, nauseating, humorous, thought provoking skills. Hence a continued number of contributors and an unknown number of lurkers and passersby. Festered cunts (Wilber?), diseased cocks, cannibalism, pickle chugging, Rogers pristine sphincter, Scotty's imagined underage partners, Fnords views, Sofies finds and preported lilly white butt hole, Princes Biscuits inane vids, Zombie Elvis's erotic pics, George Orr's cats - the list goes on - are a glorious mix without animal cruelty.

I for one don't think that anything other than child pornography should be banned from High Street...  I admit that I was deeply disturbed by the kitty pictures being a cat owner myself, but I still don't think it should be banned....  If a poster here starts to put out a string of that kinda stuff we all have the option of hitting the Ye Olde Iggy button and having it go away...  I still haven't used the iggy button on anyone here and I doubt that I ever will...

Look, I do not in any way condone cruelty to animals. This kind of thing makes me feel sick to the stomach and I find it difficult to look at these pictures. I came across this subject when I recently watched a documentary on television in the UK that discussed "crushing". It sounded so sick that my curiosity made me look into the subject through the wonder of the net.

I am a firm believer in the freedom that the internet provides and although I do not like the subject matter, there are images on here that I do not like nor wish to see (particularly dead bodies, racist images and exploitation). However, I believe that sharing provocative and reactionary images is what this thread was founded on and this is what will keep it alive. A good example is the recent disabilty sex pics posted by orangeplus and sic. The posting of these images resulted in sensible debate and subsequent information from orangeplus about the sexual lifestyles (and associated problems) of sexually active couples with disabilities.

Obviously, there are subjects that should never be posted here as Dirckman has pointed out. Once sites like this start banning people from posting offensive pictures, then it is a small step before everything that is posted becomes offensive to someone. On that day, there will be nothing that will be acceptible.

It's good to be provocative if it results in sensible and reasoned debate. This is the why I put the pictures onto this forum. Not through sick, macabre fascination, but to create some kind of reaction to what is actually going on in the world.  It's better than ripping pictures off of different picture threads.

Last edited by The Bin Man (2008-09-15 19:45:35)

Fair enough about the slippery slope b&hammer argument. However, the negatives of banning stuff and the positives of posting the pictures in question are two different things. I just don't see the upshot of posting those particular pictures.

It's kind of like the difference between Lenny Bruce and Max Hardcore being tried for obscenity. One guy expanded the realm of public discourse in a healthy way (to take your point, Bin Man), while the other just shit on bitches.

Perhaps we could set up a "cruelty to kittens" sticky?

Taint wrote:

Perhaps we could set up a "cruelty to kittens" sticky?

Now that would truly be in the spirit of high-street.

Dirckman wrote:

http://media.ebaumsworld.com/mediaFiles … 940052.jpg

I saw the two legged version of this bicycling today.  This one though has better tattoo's....


D

You know, it's surprising how (relatively) young her body looks, give her neck and face.  Any guess as to her age?

Taint wrote:

Perhaps we could set up a "cruelty to kittens" sticky?

How about if we make it scientific?

Scotty wrote:

*ahem*

NSFW: Picture Thread!

STFU and get back to the regular programming.

http://www.bestweekever.tv/bwe/images/2 … 0NIPS2.JPG

Hey!! No more nude pictures of any member of "The View"...thats a really rude pic of Whoopie Goldberg.

whosasailorthen wrote:

Taint wrote:

Perhaps we could set up a "cruelty to kittens" sticky?

How about if we make it scientific?

Link to YouTube page

scarydog wrote:

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3069/286 … 4cf4_o.jpg

Very nice. 

Can we establish a policy of linking back to flickr accounts when posting interesting pics from there?  Sometimes I want to browse through whatever pictures may be related to one of these, and tracing back to the actual photostream that the stringofrandomdigits.jpg comes from can be annoying.

Last edited by jesusluvspegging (2008-09-16 08:32:15)

hedgewizard wrote:

scarydog wrote:

So what if I have a morbid curiosity and want to share bizarre material that is offensive even to me? I may actually find dark humor in some of that material, or at times feel a little Schadenfreude (amusement at others' misery).

It's been too long since high school German, write English.  Epicaricacy.  Sorry, couldn't resist.

http://img130.imageshack.us/img130/6547/nudebeer6sv.jpg

Schadenfreude is amusement at others' misery/misfortune/trouble, as I indicated. Test at 2 p.m.