top 100 commentsshow all 106

[–]JasonCarswell 6 insightful - 4 fun6 insightful - 3 fun7 insightful - 4 fun -  (13 children)

Europe is not hung up like North America, and North America is not hung up like M7, so I'd guess unclothed is unacceptable.

Sometimes less is more. Lingerie and swimsuits and wet T-shirts on cold days are often superior.

Not as crass as /s/Tits is /s/PinUps which I meant to start once I finished my 2nd big CSS, but I didn't get the help I needed to finish it, and I've lost interest in making custom themes since discovering this Nov-Jan that different browsers display differently, made worse with tree-style-tabs. Plus I now have firmed up my grander plans. In the meantime, it seems time to make a new CSS for a simple banner replacement to replace all my old broken CSS themes with. I'll need to wait a day or few until I find a good night's sleep.

[–]Airbus320 9 insightful - 6 fun9 insightful - 5 fun10 insightful - 6 fun -  (6 children)

u/magnora7 Jason wants 18+ content in saidit and is promoting it, be careful

[–]JasonCarswell 9 insightful - 6 fun9 insightful - 5 fun10 insightful - 6 fun -  (5 children)

Stick your nose up your own ass and mind your own shitty business, you juvenile shit disturber.

But if you want more details on /s/Tits, I invite /u/AmericanMuskrat to share the private message discussion all about making a glorious banner for /s/Tits. Yes, /s/Tits, I said it three times now. Not naked of course. How scandalous. /s I've even touched some - including many at the many orgies I organized and participated in. Have a look: The Great Canadian Beaver Eating Contest - one my Burning Man projects in my 30s. You can only dream of such experiences.

Further, I also made the banners for /s/WatchPeopleDie and /s/WatchPeopleSurvive. I think those should be 18+ too.

Puritan M7 can have hissy fit if he wants to, but none of this is even remotely graphic language like he allows elsewhere (and my old site did not have pornographic images (cameras were not allowed at my orgies)). I am not dragging down conversation except arguably perhaps the first line calling it like is while reacting to an asstroll M7 refuses to ban despite perpetually dragging down conversations.

Be careful yourself, as disturbing too much shit will get you banned.

[–]magnora7 4 insightful - 4 fun4 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 4 fun -  (3 children)

Stick your nose up your own ass and mind your own shitty business, you juvenile shit disturber.

Please stop repeatedly dragging the quality of discussion downward.

Be careful yourself, as disturbing too much shit will get you banned.

Take your own advice.

[–]JasonCarswell 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Repeatedly? Give me a fucking break.

No one is more repeatedly dragging quality down more than Airbus and Chipit. I'd wager Airbus and Chipit each have more negative posts and comments than the LXXX/MoronLeft who may be more obviously obnoxious on many levels but certainly aren't as deeply infested and rotting SaidIt from within.

You never followed up with my alleged 20 IP addresses and 4 ranges. TAM informed me that I was 100% correct that they were all based in Windsor, Ontario, Canada and that my ISP likely rotated my IPs. Stop giving me shit and deal with your own.

How about you fucking spank them instead?

[–]Airbus320 2 insightful - 4 fun2 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

Coomer

[–]AmericanMuskrat[S] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

You have any css I can plug in that'll suck less than default?

[–][deleted] 5 insightful - 7 fun5 insightful - 6 fun6 insightful - 7 fun -  (0 children)

* { display: none !important; }

[–]JasonCarswell 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

/s/CorbettCommenters has my "SimpleTweaks" CSS theme.

Designed as a minimalist copy+paste CSS theme to enhance SaidIt's default CSS. This simple CSS is also perfect for novice CSS designers to learn on and easily customize.

https://SaidIt.net/s/CorbettCommenters/about/stylesheet/

It needs a 100-pixel-tall banner image uploaded and in the code the banner name must match.

Music to fap code to:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ka4KN2KEGmI

[–][deleted]  (1 child)

[deleted]

    [–]JasonCarswell 3 insightful - 4 fun3 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

    Soon, all will be revealed. It's taking much long than I'd hoped, as is always the way with me.

    [–]fschmidt 4 insightful - 8 fun4 insightful - 7 fun5 insightful - 8 fun -  (28 children)

    This is the top thread on my feed, providing yet more evidence that I live in a world of morons.

    [–]magnora7 6 insightful - 4 fun6 insightful - 3 fun7 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

    Evidence the hijacking of this website is real and ongoing. They're not organic upvotes

    [–]AmericanMuskrat[S] 5 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 3 fun -  (21 children)

    Everybody likes boobies.

    [–]fschmidt 7 insightful - 3 fun7 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 3 fun -  (17 children)

    Another thing about modern morons is that they are all talk, no action. Boobie action makes sense. Boobie talk does not.

    [–]AmericanMuskrat[S] 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (16 children)

    I just want to clarify what is allowed at s/Tits. It already exists, people are posting to it. Slapped on some css. Loki even offered me one to use.

    [–][deleted] 6 insightful - 4 fun6 insightful - 3 fun7 insightful - 4 fun -  (15 children)

    Good to know you're in contact with LXXXVIII.

    [–]Airbus320 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

    Yep saidits days are numbered before it goes full reddit now

    [–]AmericanMuskrat[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    Why?

    [–]JasonCarswell 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (12 children)

    He was joking. He asked me and I pointed him at /s/CorbettCommenters for my SimpleTweaks CSS.

    [–]AmericanMuskrat[S] 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (8 children)

    I wasn't joking, loki sent me a css thing. I don't know why it's a big deal. It's not like we're nazi pen pals. I mean they're nazis but I'm not giving them the silent treatment.

    [–][deleted]  (7 children)

    [removed]

      [–]AmericanMuskrat[S] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (5 children)

      Charlie Chapman was not exactly what one would call a patriot.

      [–][deleted]  (4 children)

      [removed]

        [–]AmericanMuskrat[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

        And?

        [–][deleted] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

        Dammit lol

        [–][deleted]  (1 child)

        [removed]

          [–]AmericanMuskrat[S] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

          Yeah that wasn't a joke, but that's like the shittiest image to prove it. Loki did send me a PM with a css that'll I'd like to implement in my other sub. I do appreciate it even though I don't agree with y'alls inappropriate bullshit.

          [–]bobbobbybob 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (2 children)

          and you like naming your shit....

          [–]AmericanMuskrat[S] 2 insightful - 4 fun2 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

          I expect much rounder discussion of things in s/Tits.

          [–]AmericanMuskrat[S] 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

          But if we were doing s/BabyNames, I'd have to call that one Chris Brown, cause it was big, black, and it beat me up on the way out.

          [–][deleted] 5 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 3 fun -  (3 children)

          The LXXXVIII troll was here earlier, so it was probably voted with a bunch of fake accounts (sorry, Musky, it happens).

          [–]JasonCarswell 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun -  (2 children)

          Or people just like tits.

          [–][deleted] 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

          IDK, he doesn't usually put much effort into posts he doesn't like.

          [–]Airbus320 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

          Ok

          [–]ReeferMadness 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

          Or that is just what the algorithm thinks of you. 😁

          [–]jet199 4 insightful - 7 fun4 insightful - 6 fun5 insightful - 7 fun -  (1 child)

          I feel this post is transphobic.

          [–]AmericanMuskrat[S] 4 insightful - 5 fun4 insightful - 4 fun5 insightful - 5 fun -  (0 children)

          In the interest of transinclusiveness, here is Ruby Rose in a bikini. She is gender nonconforming so while those may look like glorious girl boobies surrounded by regrettable tattoos, they are actually not girl boobies; however, they are still surrounded by regrettable tattoos.

          [–]jet199 5 insightful - 5 fun5 insightful - 4 fun6 insightful - 5 fun -  (3 children)

          Why didn't you call it s/artwork and keep quiet then you'd have gotten away with it.

          [–]AmericanMuskrat[S] 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (2 children)

          I didn't actually make s/BabyNames, but I did actually make s/Tits. Come join us Jets, come join the warm bosom of s/Tits.

          And it's fine, I mean, tits aren't against site rules. There's plenty of non pornographic boobies to appreciate.

          [–]jet199 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

          I'm good. I have more than enough to be getting on with here.

          [–]JasonCarswell 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

          With great /s/Tits cums great responsibility. You now have to be on top of those heaving /s/Tits, all day and all night, watching those beautiful /s/Tits to make sure there is never any porn to fuck those voluptuous /s/Tits. Maybe your /s/Tits will be tiny, or maybe you'll be burdened with giant /s/Tits to manage - it is now your responsibility. I suspect it will be both a curse and a gift. With a saggy or droopy mood, one look at perky /s/Tits should erect your vigor. May God bless your /s/Tits.

          [–][deleted] 4 insightful - 4 fun4 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 4 fun -  (45 children)

          non pornographic depictions of women's boobies

          That's literally an oxymoron.

          Edit: just keep your clothes on

          [–]AmericanMuskrat[S] 6 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 2 fun -  (16 children)

          Artistic nudes are their own genre, and there's also naturalism, which isn't a sexual lifestyle. Non nude depictions of breasts also usually aren't pornographic. There's a lot of room for tits in this world without involving porn. Breast feeding mothers sometimes feel empowered by sharing pics of themselves. There's the Breast Cancer campaign that celebrates breasts, I'd say that's non sexual.

          There's even a movement that believes, rightly, that a woman should have every right as a man does to show off her bare chest if she wants to.

          * edited for typos

          [–]trident765 5 insightful - 6 fun5 insightful - 5 fun6 insightful - 6 fun -  (2 children)

          While we're at it can we also post pictures of women getting artistically gangbanged? It's not porn if it's artistic.

          [–]AmericanMuskrat[S] 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

          [–]Airbus320 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

          ^

          [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (12 children)

          This basically means "it ain't porn if you say it ain't."

          [–]AmericanMuskrat[S] 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (11 children)

          I am okay with being the final arbiter of all things, but while it's hard to define, I don't think that's necessary in this case. Like, take this athlete for example. Her breasts add to the aesthetic of that picture and it's certainly not pornographic. There's nothing sexual there. A person can admire the human body without seeing it as a sex toy.

          [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (10 children)

          They're covered up, Musky.

          [–]AmericanMuskrat[S] 3 insightful - 4 fun3 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 4 fun -  (9 children)

          I thought you meant all tits were pornographic.

          [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 4 fun1 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 4 fun -  (8 children)

          All visible tits are pornographic. If you can't see them: it's fine.

          [–]bobbobbybob 5 insightful - 4 fun5 insightful - 3 fun6 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

          that's bizzare. no wonder you are fucked up,.

          [–]Node 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

          All visible tits are pornographic.

          That doesn't sound right. How would that work, exactly?

          [–]JasonCarswell 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (5 children)

          You mean nipples.

          [–][deleted] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

          Same difference.

          [–]JasonCarswell 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

          Not remotely.

          [–]JasonCarswell 3 insightful - 4 fun3 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 4 fun -  (3 children)

          I suspect he may literally be a moron on oxy and booze.

          [–][deleted] 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

          Well, he is on booze.

          [–]AmericanMuskrat[S] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

          I didn't see that before, that was mean.

          [–]JasonCarswell 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

          Yes it was kinda, but it was supposed to be a playful pun on "That's literally an oxymoron." Made worse by distance with much conversation between.

          If it's not obvious I'll state it plainly, I don't think you're a moron. You've not been shy about substances. It was a playful jab, like calling any of the potheads on here potheads.

          I apologize if it upsets you. I figured you'd seen it and didn't think it was funny enough to comment on. The TAM followup was not the banter I anticipated.

          [–]bobbobbybob 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

          that's a very male gaze there tam.

          My children enjoyed non-phonographic booby closeups for years.

          but with muskrat, i guess you are right

          [–][deleted] 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

          Most children have a healthy beginning with non-pornographic booby closeups, and I think those who don't get that natural experience (breast-feeding) tend to be weird, or at least small and slight in their muscular build.

          [–]pcpmasterrace 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (19 children)

          Maybe for you

          [–][deleted] 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (18 children)

          And site-wide rules.

          [–]pcpmasterrace 6 insightful - 3 fun6 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 3 fun -  (17 children)

          Pornography is never defined in rules or T&C. But to an ordinary person (non-AGP), breasts are not pornographic.

          [–][deleted] 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (15 children)

          Pornography is never defined in rules or T&C.

          I don't think u/magnora7 wants it defined, because trolls (like you) would use the definition to only barely not break the rules. For example, if porn was defined as tits: you'd just put small, black squares that only barely cover them up.

          But to an ordinary person (non-AGP), breasts are not pornographic.

          1. Character attack (low on the Pyramid of Debate)

          2. Normal people don't post porn; most people aren't coomers (like you)

          3. Most people I know believe that breasts are pornographic

          4. Anti-pornography isn't a transgender thing (yes, I know what your dog-whistles mean), it's more of a Conservative or evangelical thing

          5. Someone get this boy a preacher

          [–]JasonCarswell 7 insightful - 5 fun7 insightful - 4 fun8 insightful - 5 fun -  (9 children)

          You should stop calling everyone you disagree with trolls. There's an abundance of real STABs around to aim at.

          You're conflating tits with nipples with nudity with porn with other things. Don't knock a knockers sub until it needs knocking. /s/WatchPeopleDie, /s/WarWatch, /s/PoliceMisconduct, /s/Pedogate, /s/RulingClass, /s/Tyranny, among many others are far more disturbing subs.

          In my humble opinion, you should steer clear of /s/Tits and related subs to avoid conflicts and drama, to not expose yourself, and to better serve SaidIt. Take that with a grain of source as you see fit. I'm trying to help you and us. M7 is prudish, but it's his site and his rules, and he can spell it out as needs be.

          Also, religion is stupid.

          [–][deleted] 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (8 children)

          Why are you inserting yourself into literally every single one of my conversations?

          You should stop calling everyone you disagree with trolls.

          This guy is literally using a character attack as his main argument, Jason. He's one of the s/debatealtright guys who keep coming after me just for being trans — that's literally their only argument any time we ever talk.

          There's an abundance of real STABs around to aim at.

          Like on s/debatealtright

          You're conflating tits with nipples with nudity

          If you can manage to get those without nudity: have a blast.

          /s/WatchPeopleDie, /s/WarWatch, /s/PoliceMisconduct, /s/Pedogate, /s/RulingClass, /s/Tyranny, among many others are far more disturbing subs.

          There's a difference between disturbing and rule-breaking.

          In my humble opinion, you should steer clear of /s/Tits and related subs to avoid conflicts and drama

          I definitely want to, but I have to make sure there's no actual porn being posted there. Maybe Magnora can deal with it, IDK.

          Also, religion is stupid.

          The preacher thing was a joke, although he would definitely benefit from a come to Jesus mee'n.

          [–]JasonCarswell 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (7 children)

          Why are you inserting yourself into literally every single one of my conversations?

          It may seem like that but it's not intentional. If you were anyone else I'd speak the same. More importantly you're an admin and seem to need a modicum of restraint.

          1. I was invited to make a banner and co-mod /s/Tits 10 hours ago, and was in this thread before you. By responding to commets I tend to read and respond to the rest and thus hang around conversations rather than move on to hit every post of the day.

          1. Here icebong pointed to the DDG post I was going to read anyway because I use it all the time.

          1. Oddly, synchronistically, we were have a perfectly civil PM.

          Feel free to have anyone I respect chime in to tell me if I'm out of line or in error. I'm seriously trying to help you refine a gentle touch, if intervention is even necessary. I would hate for us to lose a good one AND another admin due to snowballing problematic circumstances.

          This guy is literally using a character attack as his main argument, Jason.

          Be better than him.

          He's one of the s/debatealtright guys who keep coming after me just for being trans — that's literally their only argument any time we ever talk.

          Yes. I don't like many of them either. They're predictable. I ignore them. You and M7 can ban them - but you don't. I really don't know why. His existence here is not dependent on me. I report and report and report and report. I don't know who gets axed or even if any are. I have no power beyond that.

          Like on s/debatealtright

          So take out the trash.

          If you can manage to get those without nudity: have a blast.

          I can't speak for anyone else, but here are some retro tits of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Farrah_Fawcett. If I'm not mistaken, that's a famous best-selling poster from even before my time. This is the kind of stuff I am assuming the sub would be like, perhaps with more cleavage, but not necessarily of celebs. Because of the fame of the poster and celeb I would also share that in /s/PinUps where I've outlined rules to be more tasteful than I think /s/Tits may get.

          There's a difference between disturbing and rule-breaking.

          You're making a big deal before any rules have even been broken. I'm pretty sure Musky isn't aiming to break rules.

          I definitely want to, but I have to make sure there's no actual porn being posted there. Maybe Magnora can deal with it, IDK.

          IMO, I welcome you lurking and reporting. Don't pull the trigger before there's a crime, and if there is, I'd quietly deal with obvious infractions as you do or be liberally hands-off for questionable stuff and inform M7.

          Yes, many liberals and conservatives and Christians should employ more Christian behavior.

          [–][deleted] 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (6 children)

          I was invited to make a banner and co-mod /s/Tits 10 hours ago

          That explains it then.

          and was in this thread before you.

          I wasn't paying attention. I'm way too tired to be on here right now.

          Here icebong pointed to the DDG post I was going to read anyway because I use it all the time.

          Ah.

          Oddly, synchronistically, we were have a perfectly civil PM.

          I wasn't saying this to be mean, I was just wondering why I was getting so many messages from you. I'm sorry if you took it that way.

          I'm seriously trying to help you refine a gentle touch

          You can't take a redneck! Jokes aside, being an asshole is an unintentional part of my personality at this point.

          Be better than him.

          Which is why I use real arguments.

          You and M7 can ban them - but you don't. I really don't know why. His existence here is not dependent on me. I report and report and report and report. I don't know who gets axed or even if any are. I have no power beyond that.

          Yeah, subs like s/debatealtright and s/retards are rather problematic, but Magnora doesn't want to remove them.

          You're making a big deal before any rules have even been broken.

          I never said anyone broke the rules; we're talking about theoreticals here, so everyone knows what's allowed and what ain't: nudity is pretty much off the table.

          I'm pretty sure Musky isn't aiming to break rules.

          I know that; I'm here to make sure he knows where not to go. I don't want him getting himself banned. I'm sure Mag would just give him a warning the first time, though, so it ain't a big deal.

          [–]JasonCarswell 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (5 children)

          Jokes aside, being an asshole is an unintentional part of my personality at this point.

          Maybe it's me but many of your "jokes" don't read as jokes. Add /s or /jk to be clear. Police and politicians don't make jokes because they're supposed to be respectable. You are the power on this site.

          Be better than him.
          Which is why I use real arguments.

          Well...

          so everyone knows what's allowed and what ain't: nudity is pretty much off the table. [...] I'm here to make sure he knows where not to go.

          Common sense everyone already knows. Reminding people of the rules is not a light touch, and the tone is bossy where no boss is needed. It's like a cop swinging a night stick around your head saying that if you break any laws he can arrest you. Unnecessary intimidation, or rather, lame attempts/appearances of it.

          so it ain't a big deal.

          Unnecessary drama.

          I also feel bad for unnecessarily budding my nose in too. But it really looks/ed like you need/ed some advice. Feel free to apply it liberally, or just ignore me, or something in between.

          [–]bobbobbybob 4 insightful - 4 fun4 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

          perhaps don't speak for /u/magnora7 without checking first, so as to not make an ass of yourself. Or even better, have these discussions using a non tam account, so that you don't get baited into mod abuse AGAIN

          [–]Node 4 insightful - 4 fun4 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 4 fun -  (3 children)

          Most people I know believe that breasts are pornographic

          pornography: printed or visual material containing the explicit description or display of sexual organs or activity, intended to stimulate erotic rather than aesthetic or emotional feelings.

          Do those people bottle feed their infants? It must be 10 times more pornographic to have breasts in real life, as you'd be in possession of ongoing pornography. How would a rational person begin to believe that "breasts are pornographic"?

          [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

          You literally violated your own definition.

          [–]Node 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

          How would a rational person begin to believe that "breasts are pornographic"?

          [–][deleted] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

          And pornography is rational?

          [–]JasonCarswell 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

          /s/AnimeFoodPorn
          /s/antipornography
          /s/EarthPorn
          /s/fakehistoryporn
          /s/foodporn
          /s/porn

          They all literally has porn in the name, so some titillating content is allowed.

          /s/Sex does not, but you can discuss porn, without links to actual porn.

          [–]SaidOverRed 4 insightful - 4 fun4 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

          I'll know it when I see it.

          [–]jykylsin2034 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

          I don't think that nudity is inherently wrong, it's just that people will get carried away once we shift toward allowance

          [–]Jesus 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun -  (4 children)

          Place is being hijacked. Thanks a lot.

          [–]AmericanMuskrat[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

          Sorry. s/Tits doesn't go onto the front page though, it isn't set to, so it should be really easy to ignore if you're not interested. Unlike the other two groups that seem to be taking over.

          [–]JasonCarswell 1 insightful - 3 fun1 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

          You don't have fond mammaries?

          Butt seriously, I would have tried to talk him out of it if I didn't find out after tit was created. There are certainly muuuuch worse issues exposed on SaidIt, butt at least many of us were trying to keep the place classy.

          I can only hope /s/Tits popularity is a passing fad and that interest in it gets knackered and dies out orgasmically organically.

          [–]Airbus320 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

          🙄

          [–]Airbus320 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

          Very unfortunate

          [–]book-of-saturday 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (7 children)

          I read the title as non pornographic descriptions of women's boobies...

          anyway, are you the cher guy?

          [–]AmericanMuskrat[S] 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (6 children)

          anyway, are you the cher guy?

          Fuck no I'm not the cher guy. How does this make you think I'm that guy?

          I'm just a simple man. A man who likes s/Tits.

          [–]JasonCarswell 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (5 children)

          Post some Cher tits to be certain.

          [–][deleted] 4 insightful - 5 fun4 insightful - 4 fun5 insightful - 5 fun -  (4 children)

          The Cher guy would've opened this whole thread up with a picture of Cher's tits.

          [–]JasonCarswell 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

          Who was the Cher guy? I guess I missed that episode.

          [–][deleted] 5 insightful - 4 fun5 insightful - 3 fun6 insightful - 4 fun -  (2 children)

          Did you really? There was a period where he was making the frontpage pretty consistently with his Cher posts. I think his name was i_love_cher

          [–]JasonCarswell 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

          Maybe I saw some and cared so little they did not register.

          [–][deleted] 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

          They were kind of humorous, but yes, very stupid and not worth any care. I always wondered what he did, or where he went. I think he even made a i_love_cher bot, but I could be wrong about that.