Nilsi

Yeah, it hit me while taking this test - this would be a perfect covert intelligence operation to flag potential pedophiles, all disguised as a BDSM quiz.

I hate to play Plato here, but this is just vulgar reductionism. Christianity is one of the most profound inventions of humanity. If that’s not part of your equation, I’m not interested at all.

Bro, 58% ageplayer is kinda alarming, not gonna lie lol.

== Results from bdsmtest.org: == 93% Switch 85% Degrader 72% Experimentalist 70% Rigger 63% Sadist 63% Degradee 51% Primal (Hunter) 51% Voyeur 49% Dominant 45% Exhibitionist 44% Submissive 37% Owner 35% Masochist 32% Rope bunny 31% Non-monogamist 24% Vanilla 18% Brat tamer 11% Master/Mistress 9% Pet 9% Brat 6% Daddy/Mommy 0% Ageplayer 0% Little 0% Primal (Prey) 0% Slave

Do you have any personal experience with BDSM? Genuinely just curious.

Lol, I don’t know where you live, but in a first-world country, even just one hour with a high-class hooker will set you back a few hundred dollars. That’s hardly sustainable for most people - even if you were only indulging once a week.

That’s obviously a ridiculous take, based purely on the title. Why would any branded attempt at reaching absolute truth be superior to a non-ideological pursuit of it?

It’s not a personality cult, wtf. Jesus’ teachings are about the community, where the Holy Spirit manifests - not in blind worship of a figure, but in the collective practice of love, compassion, and mutual care. At its core, it’s about love and selflessness - noble and deeply spiritual values. For the 99% of humanity who don’t have the time, interest, or quite frankly, the luxury to contemplate all this for themselves, Christianity is about as good as it gets when it comes to tradition. Sure, most Christians don’t live up to those ideals, but that’s not the fault of the texts - that’s just human nature. And clearly, your standards are even higher than that, so I don’t think this is a discussion about pragmatism.

Why overanalyze? It’s a tradition. Who cares? I’ve grown really appreciative of tradition over the years, especially since most of my friends are Muslim. Sure, a lot of it isn’t strictly rational - but that’s the nature of it. It’s not about epistemological rigor; it’s about lived experience, meaning, and continuity. And honestly, who gives a fuck about rationality when so much of what the modern secular world is missing - especially a strong sense of community - is still alive in these traditions? My friends have invited me to iftar a couple of times this Ramadan, and it’s just beautiful: people coming together over food, conversation, and worship. What more could you ask from tradition?

This one goes so hard! Love it.

I also find that perversely fascinating, but obviously, I don’t want the repercussions of something like this. I guess sex is a good way to experience temporary dissolution - one that doesn’t leave your life, or the lives of innocent people, in shambles once you inevitably come down from the high. Also, you know, you need to get very fucking aroused to enter the mindspace of even wanting to transgress such fundamental taboos, and sex offers this naturally (as do hard drugs, including psychedelics). You must be seriously fucked in the head to be able to hype yourself up into committing a mass shooting.

You're still young. It makes sense to first get comfortable with intimacy before diving into some crazy transgressive territory. I’m still a bit too vanilla for this myself - I need a lot more experience, and obviously the right partner, to act out such extreme fantasies. But I’m really turned on by the idea of extreme sex where all boundaries between self and other - and, of course, the Big Other - completely collapse into this sublime ecstasy that can’t be contained by the structures of human psychology or institutions anymore. And I think radical sexual transgression, which is really what I mean when I say BDSM, is the pathway there. Maybe that's not the right terminology though, because implicit in BDSM is still a symbolic structure with negotiated rules and designated roles, which is precisely what I want to escape.

This track always gives me inclinations of what something like this would feel like - even though it's about femdom, which isn’t really my kink. But I guess I’m cool with BDSM going both ways, and even the whole man-woman/master-slave dialectic dissolving into some kind of orgiastic egalitarian ecstasy.

👍

Lol, I’ve called my girlfriends "little slut" all the time - that’s pretty tame. But I think there’s something profound in pushing each other’s limits, physically and psychologically, in such a primal way. It’s like entering a sublime altered state of consciousness together, breaking out of the psychologically constructed framework of what’s considered civilized. This should interest you as a Lacanian, too. That would be a real encounter with the Real - where the Big Other completely collapses. A controlled pathway into insanity.

Seems hot as fuck. Read some Georges Bataille!

You should make a video about the possibilities post-awakening. At some point, some people might actually want to start living, you know. It’d be interesting to explore the tension between continuing spiritual work and engaging fully with life.

Of course, being with a new woman you just picked up in a club or wherever is hot and gives a big novelty kick. But the best sex is still with someone you deeply love, know, and trust. Even then, you can have really dirty and rough sex with a long-term partner, of course - but the best is passionate and loving. And that’s the best kind of sex I’ve ever had. Though, admittedly, getting to that level of intimacy is hard, and I usually end up flaking before I ever get there with anyone. Also, I’m pretty interested in BDSM and some really rough shit, but I haven’t really had much of an opportunity - or, to be honest, the balls- to fully live those fantasies out. I think there’s a lot of profound and sublime experiences to be had there.

But you’re using propagandist language to make this association seem central to postmodernism when, in reality, it’s only loosely connected. Which begs the question - why are you doing that? I’m not going to play psychoanalyst here, but maybe you should ask yourself.

Deleuze’s point is that this hole doesn’t reveal an absent center but rather a fluid becoming, which is precisely what Lacan is missing, or at the very least backgrounding to the point of real pathological implications for the subject which thinks in terms of Lacan. The only reason the real can’t be signified in Lacan is because reality is fundamentally unstable (which Lacan gets, to give him some credit) - not because there’s some deep, structural void, but because it never stops shifting, never settles enough to be captured by any symbolic or ideological scheme. But here’s the thing: it’s precisely in this absence of the Lacanian "real" (which, yeah, the terminology is brain-melting because Lacan’s and Deleuze’s "real" are literally opposites) that the attempt to capture it produces novelty. Lacan frames this as a failure - like a glitch in the system, the subject stuck in lack - but Deleuze sees it as the very condition of creation, the motor of difference itself. The real isn’t some impossible missing piece; it’s an overflowing excess, a constant churn of forces and intensities that keeps generating new configurations. So where Lacan sees an inescapable gap, Deleuze sees a productive rupture, not lack but pure potential, always spilling over, always mutating.

This is the perfect question for a GPT AI model. Just ask, "What is postmodernism and what are its goals?" The answer will be a precise statistical reflection of the broadest themes in postmodern discourse, which is primarily philosophical and critical rather than political. Most of it isn't woke or Marxist at all - unless you want to dismiss the entire body of human-generated text that forms the foundation of these language models.

I’m not denying it, but you’re blowing this way out of proportion. There are more obscure subsets of philosophy than there are people on this planet - you can cherrypick whatever evidence you want to justify your beliefs. You’re just doing bad epistemology, that’s all that’s being pointed out to you.

Bro, there’s a subset of literally everything. There’s even Islamic feminism: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_feminism That doesn’t mean anything.

Postmodernism isn’t feminism. Postmodernists don’t give a shit about the struggle of women, and they definitely don’t have some sneaky political agenda they’re pushing, despite what Stephen Hicks or Jordan Peterson might say. Think of postmodernists like autistic nerds with oversized intellects who are just obsessed with questioning everything to death. They don’t care about race, gender, or what bathroom people use. They’re the most esoteric intellectuals imaginable - no threat to society, no real influence on it. They’re just chilling, reading obscure books, smoking cigarettes. Leave them alone!