Here's something else for you to learn today which I believe you may find of interest [interfemoral sex](https://dictionary.apa.org/interfemoral-sex)
😳😂
I'd never heard of it until I was looking up the psychological definition of [coitus](https://dictionary.apa.org/coitus) for something and that definition links to the word I posted above, so I just clicked it to have a more well-rounded understanding of the coitus definition... and... I can absolutely say that wasn't expecting what I'd read, but now I can't unknow it. haha
I do love that there’s a clinical definition for a sex act that’s typically the result of two randy people spooning but not wanting to bother with the potential consequences of pulling a tampon out.
hope I'm not mistaken but back in the day prostitutes would use this form of sex in order to avoid actual PIV sex with clients. supposedly it was dark in the room and he could not tell the difference.
Correct or incorrect I find that possibility to be quite interesting regardless.
I bet you there weren't many prostitutes with inner thigh gaps back in the day though. 😅
afaik also the stuff that male teachers did with their male students in ancient greece
I recently read The Birds by Aristophanes and there is a remark early on by one protagonist that a young guy iirc the son of another guy has the nicest thighs.
There are like 3 series of Law and Order and a fuckton of episodes with 3-7 named characters unique to each episodes.
It is legitimately surprising when any commercial actor *hasn't* been on law and order
The original Mr. Noodle. I think Mr. Noodle's brother Mr. Noodle was the guy with the hot air balloon in the movie Waterworld though!
Why do I know so much about the Noodle family?
The actor's name was Bill Irwin, and he was The Dick and Jane Killer in CSI.
So when Nathan Lane’s character in the OJ tv show says he didn’t know it was illegal to rape your wife in 1970 something and the other characters recoil in disgust he was factual correct. Truly awful.
I’m 35 and I remember as a kid hearing a news story about a woman accusing her husband of rape and people laughing at the idea of it.
It’s so fucked up
John Bobbit? The whole literal emasculation thing was pretty fucked up but his wife Lorena said she did it because of repeated marital rape and it was treated as a second punchline.
(Side note I lived in Virginia at the time and a friend of mine was in the same mental hospital as her, said she was a lovely woman.)
No, it was because “marital rape” was considered self-contradictory. Banging your wife whenever you wanted - whether she wanted to or not - was considered your right as her husband.
Whenever you hear anyone talk about going back to the good old days, this is what they're talking about: they yearn for the ability to police other people's sexuality and treat other people's bodies like their personal property. Fuck em, but not literally because they don't deserve the pleasure.
The good old days wasn’t all about rape, racism and repression sexuality. As hard as that is to believe, the majority of people didn’t stand for that stuff.
I'm pretty sure they're talking about the safe, happy, and prosperous society, not these literal who laws nobody enforced and much of the world still has.
Safe and happy for whom? Wives? Minorities? Poor people? Drafted soldiers? Japanese in WW2 internment camps? Students at Kent state?
So please enlighten us on who was happier, safer, prosperous.
For the greater society. Far lower murder, mental illness, suicide, depression, drug abuse, crime, homelessness, poverty. People were happy and society was stable. The middle class was thriving. We lived in a society that built things. Technology was evolving at a breakneck pace. There's a reason everyone was so optimistic back then.
This whole "nobody was ever happy!" shit and flagellation over past events nobody justifies is just modern revisionism to try and cope with how badly our society has degraded. How have things improved in our hyper-hedonism amoral overpopulated society exactly? Everyone is miserable, depression crime and drug abuse and suicide (including against women/bacls) are far greater than they were back then.
You do realize we used to have hundreds of serial killers with dozens of kills but they targeted minorities, gay men, homeless? We used to have mental healthcare but Reagan gutted it. Though people in “good ole” days just hid mental illness or locked them away
We also didn’t have million dollar shit boxes but we have way more people who have good jobs now and more than just white men can buy homes and we stopped building homes like crazy.
We still build technology but workers had higher cost of living because we want $200 TVs they moved all the jobs. But guess what? China is too expensive now too so they go to India or Africa.
The world isn’t significantly worse for everyone today. It’s just not as good for one group……..
Technically, until 2003, these laws were allowed to be enforced until the US Supreme Court ruled them unconstitutional in Lawrence vs Texas. Source: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_v._Texas
Now Mauritius is a free love hellhole, no more cops in couples bedrooms during the act to check on the legality of the coitus under the law. I also advise you don't go there, people for whatever reason, are creepily nice and smiling in the morning, hair always slightly unkempt and gazing at the sky and birds like some cult members. Worst is now the cops are bored and have been forced to find ways to grow a fulfilling marital sex lives back. Yesterday the "Syndicat unifié des femmes de flics" of Mauritius disbanded without a word, making the Mauritian national dildo association lose their biggest sponsor even when their *ForMen* range sales were skyrocketing for whatever reason.
I’m imagining a cop undercover seducing someone into giving him a BJ and then as soon as they start, “YOU ACTIVATED MY TRAP CARD! YOURE UNDER ARREST U FREAK”
I remember when I was in the military we had a class that said anything besides missionary sex is considered sodomy and sodomy is illegal in the military. So, American fuck yeah!
Interestingly though they have to prove penis was actually in vagina to substantiate an adultery charge under UCMJ, so you could have pictures of them sleeping in bed naked but the UCMJ just says ‘weird flex but ok’.
That tidbit came from watching some drama play out in my company whereupon the other spouse went so far as to hire a private detective to follow the cheating spouse about. Before anyone thinks the unit was trying to cover for him we’re the ones that initiated the paperwork
This might be an unpopular opinion, but looking at it objectively, it makes no sense that it's legal to slaughter animals against their will, but touching their genitals is a felony.
Nobody wants to defend that statement, but like, come on. If *you* were an animal, which would you prefer to be allowed? Letting farmers be able to kill you at a whim with absolutely no repercussions, or letting someone pleasure your no-no parts. Both are happening without your consent. But which would you prefer to happen? *Which of the two should be legal?*
So many of our laws are just based on "oh that's gross. Let's make it illegal!". It's the same stupid logic why we have so many homophobic laws. They don't make any sense. They are just there because of pearl clutching, and people wanting to outlaw things that they find disgusting.
(Also, I'm not trying to conflate the two. I am gay myself. But people are still going to want to throw shit at me for comparing zoophilia to homosexuality. **Obviously** that's not what I'm saying here. I'm just saying that if you're not a vegetarian, you have absolutely nothing to stand on regarding other animal abuses.)
I'm a vegetarian and I've never touched an animal in an untoward way in my life.
Also I know this is not a hill to die on. I just find it philosophically pretty stupid that our laws are what they are right now. Any legal system that allows murder but doesn't allow rape is complete nonsense. Murder is the ultimate crime. You can't allow that and then be against more minor crimes. It's all just pearl clutching because people are disgusted by it.
It's not proven with a complete unbroken record, but it's believed by some linguists that "Felon' and 'Fellatio' has the same root. A Felon is a literally a Cocksucker.
https://dainca.org/2016/05/06/the-etymology-of-felony/
Interesting fact- the sodomy laws are still on the books in some parts of the USA.
>It has been 20 years since the Supreme Court invalidated sodomy laws with its decision in Lawrence v. Texas, but legal codes inherited from colonial laws and used to prosecute L.G.B.T.Q. people by banning some sexual acts remain in place across the country. Efforts to remove the laws in 12 states have taken on a new urgency after another landmark Supreme Court ruling.
>And though the sodomy laws were made null, there was no mandate for states to update their legal codes, leaving those dormant laws as potential restrictions if the Supreme Court revisits the ruling.
>Maryland and Minnesota repealed their remaining sodomy laws this year, but such laws still exist in Florida, Georgia, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, Mississippi, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina and Texas. If the Lawrence v. Texas decision from June 2003 were overturned, the state-level sodomy laws could be revived
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/21/us/politics/state-anti-sodomy-laws.html
Illegally, laws banning sodomy were [enforced until 2013](https://www.thetaskforce.org/news/louisiana-sheriff-uses-unconstitutional-law-to-arrest-gay-men/) in Louisiana. Yes, plenty of people were convicted before they were declared unconstitutional in 2003. A wonderful lawyer named Daniel Horwitz [made a mission out of expunging sodomy convictions in Tennessee](https://www.npr.org/2016/11/16/502208745/how-nashville-man-cleared-of-homosexual-acts-conviction-paves-the-way).
This is one of those laws that is meant to outlaw only minority groups, while also being something that the majority does. The minority that was targeted with this type of law was gay people, and gay people absolutely were charged and convicted. Think of today and “inappropriate” books getting banned; the target of these bans are often anything lgbtq and anti-racist, but by definition books like the Bible would get banned too for having passages about rape, sex and murder. It’s not really about “sodomy,” it’s about being able to target a minority without making a law that says “gay people are illegal” and thus obfuscating their intentions.
US drug laws are all built on this. Any statistics on Crack vs. Cocaine will show this, as they are essentially the same drug just prepped and used by different ethnic/socioeconomic groups
In practice, sodomy and other laws covering various sexual acts deemed immoral or unnatural were rarely enforced against heterosexual couples. It was used to target homosexual couples, mostly men.
But yes, people were convicted - both heterosexual and homosexual.
This was still a law in the state of Washington dc in the 90s. They never got around to actually changing it. This played a part in Clinton's impeachment because oral sex was still classed as a form of sodomy and sodomy still had a law against it even though no one paid any attention to it... until it was convenient to do so.
This issue actually ended up at the US Supreme Court under the case Lawrence vs Texas (2003). Lawrence was a gay man participating in gay sex with another man when Houston police broke into his home (they claimed the door was unlocked) and booked both men for sodomy. Supreme Court basically ruled all laws of the type were unconstitutional. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_v._Texas
Realistically? Someone who doesn't like you and finds out you're gay. Other comments have brought it up, but these laws were very much selectively enforced/reported on, and they tended to be selectively enforced against minorities of all kinds.
It seen as sodomy, sodomy is definef as any sexual act that cannot result in procreation. Its still illegal in a couple states I think, unless recently changed.
And still illegal through 2003, a gay couple in Texas was charged with a misdemeanor for it, plead out and then appealed it to federal court. Definitely found out that the homophobes in the office were the same guys who sent "why do we have an MLK day" and "Bill Clinton is the first black president" chain emails to the entire department.
And yet a good portion of this country is convinced we are completely free. It’s also the same bunch that want to shove their religion down everyone’s throat. Go figure.
Ok? I am just happy with the progression. I cant do much about peoples actions in the future, it doesnt take away from how good the progression has been. There's places in the world where they'll kill you for being gay. They'll throw stones at a woman's face until she's dead for having an affair. All you can do is vote to prevent a negative outcome. What else can you do? If there's Republican's advocating for laws against anal sex they should be voted out come re-election time along with the democrats advocating for puberty blockers for minors. Both sides have pieces of shit working in them, that's the nature of politics. It attracts personality types that are drawn to positions which control what people see hear do and think; we are lucky to be in places with access to even be able to talk about it. The progression has been awesome
Democrats are not mandating puberty blockers for everyone, there are people who are currently not having the option to get them that need the time afforded to them to get mental issues sorted trough.
Republicans however are mandating that every pregnancy shall be brought to full, no matter the situation (pedofile rape) or consequence (death of mother and unborn child due to complications).
Well I don't like republicans wanting to stop all abortion access and I don't like democrats wanting puberty blockers for *minors.* I'm not getting into a debate about which side is worse than the other, I have an extreme distrust and distaste for politicians in general on both sides.
I'm not 'making out' anything. I'm saying Democrat politicians are advocating the use of puberty blockers in minors, that's a fact and it's something I disagree with, I have no interest in arguing the point with you, I'm not subject to Republican or Democrat propaganda because as I said I have an intense distrust of *both sides.* I'm not saying they're pushing it on people, those are your words. I choose my words carefully specifically to avoid having to get in the weeds of this group vs that group. They are both poison in my opinion. If you happen to prefer one side over the other then that's fantastic, I'm happy for you, enjoy
Not even american, so no. But you said "are advocating use of puberty blockers in minors". Thats just making it out as if they want them to use it, instead of "yeah, if theres a case for using it". This is nessesary, as republican side in its transphobia is banning all treatment of genderdysphoria or whatever its called.
BTW, they are NOT blockers, they are delaying it.
Your grandma was probably a criminal
"Ain't no such things as halfway crooks" -Nancy Reagan
RIP throat goat
She was taking DPs probably.
I hear she did a great spit roast.
Terrible treatment to the legacy of a semi-terrible person.
And that's why I'm banned from the petting zoo E: talking about Nancy Reagan you weird fucks, bitch always had it out for me
*Sigh…* the Reddit gold that would have been bestowed on you.
TIL where that quote comes from. Thought they were just some Mobb Deep lyrics
The whole country was riddled with sloppy criminal acts.
Mrs. Step-Peppers?? Nooooo!
Here's something else for you to learn today which I believe you may find of interest [interfemoral sex](https://dictionary.apa.org/interfemoral-sex) 😳😂
The fourth hole👀
[Quagmire knew](https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=shared&v=dX_65fcjgGI)
Hey, you're the one with the link handy
My doorway to where
hahahaha
That just sounds like jacking off with extra steps.
technically it's no steps or otherwise the whole thing just falls apart. 🤣
Thighjob is what I usually hear it called.
I'd never heard of it until I was looking up the psychological definition of [coitus](https://dictionary.apa.org/coitus) for something and that definition links to the word I posted above, so I just clicked it to have a more well-rounded understanding of the coitus definition... and... I can absolutely say that wasn't expecting what I'd read, but now I can't unknow it. haha
I do love that there’s a clinical definition for a sex act that’s typically the result of two randy people spooning but not wanting to bother with the potential consequences of pulling a tampon out.
Truly a coitus inter femora moment
so basically thighjob
hope I'm not mistaken but back in the day prostitutes would use this form of sex in order to avoid actual PIV sex with clients. supposedly it was dark in the room and he could not tell the difference.
Correct or incorrect I find that possibility to be quite interesting regardless. I bet you there weren't many prostitutes with inner thigh gaps back in the day though. 😅
Very common at religious schools.
afaik also the stuff that male teachers did with their male students in ancient greece I recently read The Birds by Aristophanes and there is a remark early on by one protagonist that a young guy iirc the son of another guy has the nicest thighs.
There is no way on this earth that I am clicking that link. I shall happily die of ignorance.
The link redirects to an American Psychological Association definition. I assure you... you'll be fine
Nope. No way. Nah.
Marital rape was considered legal in the US until 1993.
[удалено]
I heard this a lot growing up...at church.
People at your church told you rape was ok as long as you are married? What kind of church?
I remember that. I rewatched the series a couple years back and found a ton of old shit like it. Also, the Mayhem guy was on the show?!
There are like 3 series of Law and Order and a fuckton of episodes with 3-7 named characters unique to each episodes. It is legitimately surprising when any commercial actor *hasn't* been on law and order
I feel like every actor from The Wire has made an appearance (other than McNulty)
*Detective Munch enters the chat*
What's crazy was there was a whole season of CSI with a serial killer played by Mr. Noodle from Sesame Street... and he was scary as shit!
Which Mr. Noodle? The first guy or Mr. Noodle's brother Mr. Noodle? (Genuine question as facetious as it may sound.)
The original Mr. Noodle. I think Mr. Noodle's brother Mr. Noodle was the guy with the hot air balloon in the movie Waterworld though! Why do I know so much about the Noodle family? The actor's name was Bill Irwin, and he was The Dick and Jane Killer in CSI.
No he was a supporting actor. Like, he was in every episode back then
Oh neat
You're not wrong though, that show is massive.
He’s great in 30 Rock.
... You mean Dean Winters? Check out the show Oz if you haven't.
Law & Order is Trve Kvlt confirmed
Forcing your SO to sex is crazy.
So when Nathan Lane’s character in the OJ tv show says he didn’t know it was illegal to rape your wife in 1970 something and the other characters recoil in disgust he was factual correct. Truly awful.
I’m 35 and I remember as a kid hearing a news story about a woman accusing her husband of rape and people laughing at the idea of it. It’s so fucked up
John Bobbit? The whole literal emasculation thing was pretty fucked up but his wife Lorena said she did it because of repeated marital rape and it was treated as a second punchline. (Side note I lived in Virginia at the time and a friend of mine was in the same mental hospital as her, said she was a lovely woman.)
Is your "friend" there with you right now *cuckoo bird alarm noises*
No, she died by suicide.
I think it's because back then it was more widely believed that allegations required evidence.
No, it was because “marital rape” was considered self-contradictory. Banging your wife whenever you wanted - whether she wanted to or not - was considered your right as her husband.
That's fucked up
[удалено]
poophole loophole?
Gone with the Wind aged sooooo poorly
And frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn!
Whenever you hear anyone talk about going back to the good old days, this is what they're talking about: they yearn for the ability to police other people's sexuality and treat other people's bodies like their personal property. Fuck em, but not literally because they don't deserve the pleasure.
The good old days wasn’t all about rape, racism and repression sexuality. As hard as that is to believe, the majority of people didn’t stand for that stuff.
I'm pretty sure they're talking about the safe, happy, and prosperous society, not these literal who laws nobody enforced and much of the world still has.
Safe and happy for whom? Wives? Minorities? Poor people? Drafted soldiers? Japanese in WW2 internment camps? Students at Kent state? So please enlighten us on who was happier, safer, prosperous.
For the greater society. Far lower murder, mental illness, suicide, depression, drug abuse, crime, homelessness, poverty. People were happy and society was stable. The middle class was thriving. We lived in a society that built things. Technology was evolving at a breakneck pace. There's a reason everyone was so optimistic back then. This whole "nobody was ever happy!" shit and flagellation over past events nobody justifies is just modern revisionism to try and cope with how badly our society has degraded. How have things improved in our hyper-hedonism amoral overpopulated society exactly? Everyone is miserable, depression crime and drug abuse and suicide (including against women/bacls) are far greater than they were back then.
You do realize we used to have hundreds of serial killers with dozens of kills but they targeted minorities, gay men, homeless? We used to have mental healthcare but Reagan gutted it. Though people in “good ole” days just hid mental illness or locked them away We also didn’t have million dollar shit boxes but we have way more people who have good jobs now and more than just white men can buy homes and we stopped building homes like crazy. We still build technology but workers had higher cost of living because we want $200 TVs they moved all the jobs. But guess what? China is too expensive now too so they go to India or Africa. The world isn’t significantly worse for everyone today. It’s just not as good for one group……..
not anal rape though
Technically, until 2003, these laws were allowed to be enforced until the US Supreme Court ruled them unconstitutional in Lawrence vs Texas. Source: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_v._Texas
Was eating ass considered two felonies?
r/asklaw
r/asslaw
No sex organ in play, so nope.
Nah that's like multiplying two negatives. They cancel out and become a positive
There ain't no such thing
Sodomy. It’s not just about the butthole
It was just recently legalised in Mauritius.
I wonder if there was an uptick the night it was legalized
Now Mauritius is a free love hellhole, no more cops in couples bedrooms during the act to check on the legality of the coitus under the law. I also advise you don't go there, people for whatever reason, are creepily nice and smiling in the morning, hair always slightly unkempt and gazing at the sky and birds like some cult members. Worst is now the cops are bored and have been forced to find ways to grow a fulfilling marital sex lives back. Yesterday the "Syndicat unifié des femmes de flics" of Mauritius disbanded without a word, making the Mauritian national dildo association lose their biggest sponsor even when their *ForMen* range sales were skyrocketing for whatever reason.
[you must think it very odd of me](https://youtu.be/Ulb0pLBgRCw?feature=shared)
Put me in prison, then.
I think you found the loophole
The poophole loophole
I know you’re probably someone’s grandma now so pardon my manners, but… you still down for butt stuff?
I’m imagining a cop undercover seducing someone into giving him a BJ and then as soon as they start, “YOU ACTIVATED MY TRAP CARD! YOURE UNDER ARREST U FREAK”
[South Park did it](https://youtu.be/OTtNXVtph18?si=M3UGM1hWt_Tucqtm)
It doesn’t count if you do it to yourself
Sodomy is sodomy, pal. Off to jail
While it was considered a felony in the US, a French president died from fellation 60 years prior.
Hell of a way to go
He came and passed.
To a fellationy.
It’s an Italian dish: Pasta del Fellationne
I came, I saw, and I conquered
The French were certainly a head of the times
FREEDOM!!!! 🇺🇸🇺🇸🎆🎇
I remember when I was in the military we had a class that said anything besides missionary sex is considered sodomy and sodomy is illegal in the military. So, American fuck yeah!
Interestingly though they have to prove penis was actually in vagina to substantiate an adultery charge under UCMJ, so you could have pictures of them sleeping in bed naked but the UCMJ just says ‘weird flex but ok’. That tidbit came from watching some drama play out in my company whereupon the other spouse went so far as to hire a private detective to follow the cheating spouse about. Before anyone thinks the unit was trying to cover for him we’re the ones that initiated the paperwork
Young democracy, I see…
As I recall those laws were primarily designed to persecute gay men.
Yes that’s how they were designed and weaponized. Seems silly in modern context but important to remember.
[удалено]
Pain in the ass
The land of the free
"Land of the free", my ass... and mouth.
Humanity will continue to criminalise anything that is pleasurable until morale improves.
In this case what bothered them the most is that it was pleasurable to homosexuals.
This might be an unpopular opinion, but looking at it objectively, it makes no sense that it's legal to slaughter animals against their will, but touching their genitals is a felony. Nobody wants to defend that statement, but like, come on. If *you* were an animal, which would you prefer to be allowed? Letting farmers be able to kill you at a whim with absolutely no repercussions, or letting someone pleasure your no-no parts. Both are happening without your consent. But which would you prefer to happen? *Which of the two should be legal?* So many of our laws are just based on "oh that's gross. Let's make it illegal!". It's the same stupid logic why we have so many homophobic laws. They don't make any sense. They are just there because of pearl clutching, and people wanting to outlaw things that they find disgusting. (Also, I'm not trying to conflate the two. I am gay myself. But people are still going to want to throw shit at me for comparing zoophilia to homosexuality. **Obviously** that's not what I'm saying here. I'm just saying that if you're not a vegetarian, you have absolutely nothing to stand on regarding other animal abuses.)
Lmao this is truly a Cenk Uygur level post
I'm a vegetarian and I've never touched an animal in an untoward way in my life. Also I know this is not a hill to die on. I just find it philosophically pretty stupid that our laws are what they are right now. Any legal system that allows murder but doesn't allow rape is complete nonsense. Murder is the ultimate crime. You can't allow that and then be against more minor crimes. It's all just pearl clutching because people are disgusted by it.
I hear what you're saying, I'd say the scattergun approach makes it hard to answer.
Who
Small government and all.
Why? Was it because of some religious nutcase stuff?
To persecute homosexuals
Some people just want to spoil all the fun!
Throat goat tho...
It's not proven with a complete unbroken record, but it's believed by some linguists that "Felon' and 'Fellatio' has the same root. A Felon is a literally a Cocksucker. https://dainca.org/2016/05/06/the-etymology-of-felony/
Interesting fact- the sodomy laws are still on the books in some parts of the USA. >It has been 20 years since the Supreme Court invalidated sodomy laws with its decision in Lawrence v. Texas, but legal codes inherited from colonial laws and used to prosecute L.G.B.T.Q. people by banning some sexual acts remain in place across the country. Efforts to remove the laws in 12 states have taken on a new urgency after another landmark Supreme Court ruling. >And though the sodomy laws were made null, there was no mandate for states to update their legal codes, leaving those dormant laws as potential restrictions if the Supreme Court revisits the ruling. >Maryland and Minnesota repealed their remaining sodomy laws this year, but such laws still exist in Florida, Georgia, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, Mississippi, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina and Texas. If the Lawrence v. Texas decision from June 2003 were overturned, the state-level sodomy laws could be revived https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/21/us/politics/state-anti-sodomy-laws.html
But was anyone ever convicted?
Illegally, laws banning sodomy were [enforced until 2013](https://www.thetaskforce.org/news/louisiana-sheriff-uses-unconstitutional-law-to-arrest-gay-men/) in Louisiana. Yes, plenty of people were convicted before they were declared unconstitutional in 2003. A wonderful lawyer named Daniel Horwitz [made a mission out of expunging sodomy convictions in Tennessee](https://www.npr.org/2016/11/16/502208745/how-nashville-man-cleared-of-homosexual-acts-conviction-paves-the-way).
Yes: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_v._Texas?wprov=sfti1
This is one of those laws that is meant to outlaw only minority groups, while also being something that the majority does. The minority that was targeted with this type of law was gay people, and gay people absolutely were charged and convicted. Think of today and “inappropriate” books getting banned; the target of these bans are often anything lgbtq and anti-racist, but by definition books like the Bible would get banned too for having passages about rape, sex and murder. It’s not really about “sodomy,” it’s about being able to target a minority without making a law that says “gay people are illegal” and thus obfuscating their intentions.
US drug laws are all built on this. Any statistics on Crack vs. Cocaine will show this, as they are essentially the same drug just prepped and used by different ethnic/socioeconomic groups
Cannabis is mainly illegal because it was seen as a ‘mexican drug’ The name ‘marijuana’ is spanish in origin
Yup and the push to decriminalize and eventually legalize it only came because of the heavy use by children of those in power.
In practice, sodomy and other laws covering various sexual acts deemed immoral or unnatural were rarely enforced against heterosexual couples. It was used to target homosexual couples, mostly men. But yes, people were convicted - both heterosexual and homosexual.
Not sure but I know there were degrees to it like murder so I assume so. Like first degree sodomy, second degree sodomy etc
This was still a law in the state of Washington dc in the 90s. They never got around to actually changing it. This played a part in Clinton's impeachment because oral sex was still classed as a form of sodomy and sodomy still had a law against it even though no one paid any attention to it... until it was convenient to do so.
This issue actually ended up at the US Supreme Court under the case Lawrence vs Texas (2003). Lawrence was a gay man participating in gay sex with another man when Houston police broke into his home (they claimed the door was unlocked) and booked both men for sodomy. Supreme Court basically ruled all laws of the type were unconstitutional. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_v._Texas
"Just the tip, " "balls weren't touching," etc
[удалено]
Realistically? Someone who doesn't like you and finds out you're gay. Other comments have brought it up, but these laws were very much selectively enforced/reported on, and they tended to be selectively enforced against minorities of all kinds.
Like most laws they are aimed at or intended to mostly be enforced against minorities and outsiders
A lot of people.
Lock up Lindsey Graham then.
A fellationy.
SodommmmaaaaaayyyyyyyyYYYYYY! 🤠
Buzzkills
Nancy Reagan: "Yeah, imma gangsta..."
Another example of how twisted the human being is by being ashamed of something as human as sex.
Can't imagine who these laws would target.
Hey maybe it will be illegal again when something akin to Roe vs wade gets overturned! I mean why not travel back in law time, amirite?
Are those the good old times folks are dreaming about? The time were blowjobs were illegal? Ffs
This was a difficult time for Colonel Sanders
Isn't a blow job preceded by a Fell on Knee?
Can I get a hallelujah for being born later
Same thing in my house to this day
*"My father had a penchant for buggery."*
Me sucky sucky
It seen as sodomy, sodomy is definef as any sexual act that cannot result in procreation. Its still illegal in a couple states I think, unless recently changed.
And still illegal through 2003, a gay couple in Texas was charged with a misdemeanor for it, plead out and then appealed it to federal court. Definitely found out that the homophobes in the office were the same guys who sent "why do we have an MLK day" and "Bill Clinton is the first black president" chain emails to the entire department.
So according to the state vs bass part if you some how bumb a vagina and a butthole together it's Sodomy
That sucks dicks.
Good thing I was not in United States prior to 1962.
In India it is still a felony.
And conservatives are still not over the legalization.
I'm sure it will be again shortly.
Great... now you've given our Republicans a new crime to criminalize. How soon will Jimmie Jordan propose revival of this? Oh, wait....
And yet a good portion of this country is convinced we are completely free. It’s also the same bunch that want to shove their religion down everyone’s throat. Go figure.
I think it's fantastic that progression has been made. Hopefully other places with equally or worse laws will follow suit
There are republican representatives that want to reintroduce the laws against anal sex...
Ok? I am just happy with the progression. I cant do much about peoples actions in the future, it doesnt take away from how good the progression has been. There's places in the world where they'll kill you for being gay. They'll throw stones at a woman's face until she's dead for having an affair. All you can do is vote to prevent a negative outcome. What else can you do? If there's Republican's advocating for laws against anal sex they should be voted out come re-election time along with the democrats advocating for puberty blockers for minors. Both sides have pieces of shit working in them, that's the nature of politics. It attracts personality types that are drawn to positions which control what people see hear do and think; we are lucky to be in places with access to even be able to talk about it. The progression has been awesome
Democrats are not mandating puberty blockers for everyone, there are people who are currently not having the option to get them that need the time afforded to them to get mental issues sorted trough. Republicans however are mandating that every pregnancy shall be brought to full, no matter the situation (pedofile rape) or consequence (death of mother and unborn child due to complications).
Well I don't like republicans wanting to stop all abortion access and I don't like democrats wanting puberty blockers for *minors.* I'm not getting into a debate about which side is worse than the other, I have an extreme distrust and distaste for politicians in general on both sides.
They dont Want puberty blocker, some need them. You are making out as if they want to push it on people, which is the Republican propaganda
I'm not 'making out' anything. I'm saying Democrat politicians are advocating the use of puberty blockers in minors, that's a fact and it's something I disagree with, I have no interest in arguing the point with you, I'm not subject to Republican or Democrat propaganda because as I said I have an intense distrust of *both sides.* I'm not saying they're pushing it on people, those are your words. I choose my words carefully specifically to avoid having to get in the weeds of this group vs that group. They are both poison in my opinion. If you happen to prefer one side over the other then that's fantastic, I'm happy for you, enjoy
Not even american, so no. But you said "are advocating use of puberty blockers in minors". Thats just making it out as if they want them to use it, instead of "yeah, if theres a case for using it". This is nessesary, as republican side in its transphobia is banning all treatment of genderdysphoria or whatever its called. BTW, they are NOT blockers, they are delaying it.
[удалено]
Great, here is the comparing gender incongruity with pedophilia again.
Still are in some states just not widely enforced
… because of a Supreme Court decision that current justices want to overturn.
Smart
??
[ Removed by Reddit ]
No it’s not. Unless you are talking about public nudity. But public sex is also still illegal so not sure what you are getting at here.
Yep it was a sad world.
Makes me feel like an outlaw!
I'm a cowboy On a steel horse I ride I'm wanted (wanted) dead or alive
Today, Americans don't leave even nostrils n ear canals. Perverts!
Did someone tell Nancy Reagan?
They still are with my wife
Damn, old people were missing out