well… cat or not…
i am pretty sure the reaction would be the same with a guy

HOWEVER, the fact that the HUMAN gets the video camera because it looks sexual is what twists this into something strange.
———————-

I’m thinking the train of thought was more “Oh how cute! I gotta get this on youtube and send it to CO!”

You are the one doing the twisting…

Maybe because they’d rather not see that part of someones body. I’m not screaming for censors, just asking that I’d know ahead of time.

—————————

Please don’t flame me for ‘combatting the stupidity’ but I would love to throw in my two pennies into the donation box of CUTENESS!!!

That was a hilarious video. *wipes tears* Oh my…

Anyway, I just wanted to know what the problem was with breasts? Children see them as soon as they are born, and they are a part of LIFE. Why can’t men accept the fact that we women have these, and are offended and/or ‘turned on’ if we show them a little?

They’re nature. If I was religious, I would say ‘God’s Will’. Just because girls have them, and men don’t, they are seen as ‘different’. I’m not disrespecting anyone’s opinion, and I realise that Natalie apologized. But if all breasts are to be ‘censored’ then they will simply become more and more taboo in our (still man-ruled) culture.

Why do I say this is a man ruled culture? Think about it. Women work hard to look good for men. We are submissive to men, and allow them to make the first move and ask US out on dates. If we ask men out, we are seen as ‘butch’. Free of being tied to childbirth, we tie ourselves to gym. Why? To look good for men. We cover ourselves up. Why? Because men are attracted to them, so they must be wrong! Women are attracted to muscled male chests, so why are they not banned and seen as inappropriate?

Sorry, just had to let out my opinion. I really do think this video is outrageously brilliant. The purring!

I posted a comment last week, and just checked back to see if I felt the same, and to read the others’ comments again. An animal snuggling is absolutely pure. My own dogs and cats like to lean into me, chest and/or other spots, because it’s warm, soft, and nurturing.

HOWEVER, the fact that the HUMAN gets the video camera because it looks sexual is what twists this into something strange.

John, I wasn’t sayin’ the cat WAS admiring his owner in a lover type way; I was saying this is one of those “to the pure all things are pure” instances where it’s what crosses your mind that’s the damage, not the video or the cat or whatever. I read all the comments and didn’t see that point made.

Was that a rescued kitten? The enthusiasm looks like he spent much of his babyhood snorgling that rack. It reminds me of my ex-baby, Iggy, who was never happier anywhere else more than stuffed down my top.

> There are worse things than being “mean”. Being bloody stupid
> and uninterested in learning (“I’m not too busy to bitch you
> all out and register my terrible offense at boobage that I was
> *warned* about, but I’m *WAAAAY* too busy to look up a word I
> don’t recognize”) is, IMO, *WAY* up there …

Ah. My post was directed at the ridiculous notion that just because everyone has the right to an opinion, opinions shouldn’t be questioned. People have the right to come in here and say Meg is morally reprehensible for posting what she posts, and other people have the right to say “Bull[ahem]!” in reply. For some reason, the first-mentioned people sometimes have a tendency to go all martyr and claim that their right to an opinion is being violated, just because they face disagreement. This phenomenon is certainly not exclusive to CO.

My post was meant to say that freedom of speech isn’t that frikkin’ hard to wrap your head around. It was *not* meant as an excuse for repeatedly kicking a dead horse.

Natalie’s error was already pointed out, long before your first post. In other words, there was no need for you to point it out again.

What’s more, she had already apologised! In other words, you revived a discussion that had already ended in mutual agreement. In other other words, there was no stupidity left for you to combat.

(I certainly think Charlie should be banned if he continues to post insulting nonsense, but if he’s just a one-time troll, there’s really not much point, is there?)

Ummm…CatFreak?

Shush.

Or start your own blog where you can, ahem, ‘combat stupidity’. Instead of placing multiple paragraph rants here. Where most of us stopped giving a damn the moment we saw kittens attack an empty coke box.

All that effort for so little payoff. I guess I have to assume it was worth it to you.

My objections were primarily to your direct personal attacks, CatFreak, accompanied by your blatantly malicious swearing. Buh-bye is right.

> In short:

> 1. Everyone has the right to have an opinion.

> 2. “Your opinion is stupid” is an opinion.

Exactly, John. Now — given the tenor of this site and that Meg is the webmaster, Meg would be well within her rights to *limit* certain opinions.

For example, she could say outright “This site is a celebration of Cute. Please restrict comments to adoring teh cute, or explaining why something is cute. Do not insult the looks or motives of people who have graciously sent in pictures of their animals; do not accuse them of bestiality or cruelty; do not tell us all why you think this animal is *not* cute. We do not care, and we will assume you are only trying to stir up [bleen]… and why would you *DO* that on a Cuteness Site? Seriously — why would you?”

As opinionated as I clearly am, I could easily live with that. I follow rules, with the greatest respect, when they’re spelled out beforehand and applied consistently.

But apparently there weren’t any “rules”. Charlie could accuse Jenofur of “sodomi” for letting her pretty kitty nuzzle and purr on her chest, and get away with it, and that’s just wrong.

I do not see why prissy prudes or psycho over-the-top “animalrightsers” get to post their ignorant huffy-nuffy crap, and the rest of us don’t get to call them on it.

Am I mean? Sometimes. Am I profane or rude? Sure. I own it. But never right out of the blue, and never to somebody who didn’t have it coming.

There are worse things than being “mean”. Being bloody stupid and uninterested in learning (“I’m not too busy to bitch you all out and register my terrible offense at boobage that I was *warned* about, but I’m *WAAAAY* too busy to look up a word I don’t recognize”) is, IMO, *WAY* up there …

Why don’t I just Let it Go … or “take a nap”? Because combatting stupidity and ignorance is *important*. The world is partly in the mess it’s in right now ’cause we’re all “polite” when we maybe should be calling “Oh, BS!” when faced with BS.

Sometimes, it’s *not* All Good.