Dayton's Great World

So....a husband and wife can have a MMF threesome where the husband sucks another man's cock?

What I meant that a husband and wife can do pretty much whatever they please WITH EACH OTHER.

Sorry if that was not clear. ​

They're doing what they want with each other in that scenario. Perhaps you meant something else?

With ONLY each other. I hate it when people like you and @garamet do stuff like this. You know what I mean yet you deliberately misconstrue it.

Dayton, I am just trying to be absolutely sure what is acceptable and unacceptable under the Dayton Kitchens Guide To Sexual Purity. It's not MY fault that you are unable to express yourself in a clear, coherent manner. I blame the Arkansas school system and the crossed branches in your family tree.

So, a husband and a wife, with ONLY each other......Is it acceptable for a wife to use a strap-on penis to have anal sex with her husband? Or does that violate some kind of law against a wife not being subservient to her husband?

Funny, I understood exactly what he meant, maybe you’re the one who’s a dumbass?

Nope. It's him.

Makes sense that you'd understand him considering your own intellectual disabilities.

And what disabilities would that be?

Seems to me that's no one elses' business and any government intervention would be unconstitutional. Apparently Russia and ISIS are both pretty strict on that sort of stuff though.

Not something I've ever thought of but do you have a problem understanding that "a husband and wife can do whatever they want with ONLY EACH OTHER"?

And if you were seriously interested in what I believe you would not insult my home or my family would you?

You're not that drug addicted pervert from Florida who posts here.

That's the thing about setting up a world where other people are going to living alongside you. Lots of things are going to come up that you haven't thought of. So, if you're serious about driving sexual deviancy into the closet, you'd best be damn sure you've got all those bases covered.

Not at all. I'm just trying to understand if there are limits or if there aren't limits.

The two ideas aren't mutually exclusive. I can be interested in your opinion yet still poke fun at you.

Even if I were, would that make my point any less valid?

Yes to the latter.

To the former, there is a difference between "poking fun" at someone and insulting them. I've no doubt that you know.

Dayton, what I'm trying to get at here is that you put so little thought into your own convictions yet you cling to them so tightly. You are against sexual deviance but you are unable to narrowly define what deviance actually is.

What you've listed is so unclear that, if we were to implement your suggestions, then future generations will argue over what you really meant when you said "sexual deviants in the closet". Did you literally mean that you want them in the closet? Did you mean that anything inside of wedlock is fine, or is it more narrowly defined as anything that two married people do with only each other. And just wait until your words are translated into an as-yet-unknown language 5000 years from now.

Kinda reminds me of how a certain ancient book is often interpreted in many different ways, but you insist that your interpretation is the correct one.

Just so I’m clear, I can tie my wife up, blindfold and gag her, fuck her in the ass, hang her upside down, remove the gag, make her suck my dick while I whip her tits with a leather belt, then sodomize her with a wine bottle. Right Dayton?

You don't have to describe your Honeymoon dude.

You do realize you have opened this up by bringing your world up. You should be aware that if you were to rule half assed would not cut it. You should think of these things as a challenge even if it is just an intellectual, and I use that term loosely, pursuit on your part.

Can I?

Why don't you answer the question?

Perhaps he has no answer? I wonder why?

It's not a serious question. also it is coming from Faceman. a member here who has repeatedly deliberately insulted members of my family. If he was on fire I wouldn't piss on him to put it out.

It is a serious question, and it's been asked more than once now. You are speaking of a category called "sexual deviancy" but it is completely nebulous as to what you mean by this.

Sexual deviancy is very easy to define. Sexual activity not between one man and one woman within the bonds of marriage.

Then all of the things listed by @Faceman are not sexual deviancy and are permissable according to you. Please confirm.

It is a serious question. People have been put to the death for violating sexual decency laws throughout history.

So most people are sexual deviants?

Yes Dayton. Please confirm. I have an empty wine bottle and forty yards of nylon rope waiting for your approval.

@Dayton3 repped this as GFY but declined to answer.

Why won't you give a straight answer to this?

As long as you keep rebooting the Greatest Hits thread then I don't owe you an answer either.

If you don't want the Greatest Hits thread to be prominent, then your option is to stop being so utterly stupid and providing material. Otherwise I can't help you.

In this instance, your hypocrisy is noted. You want to define sexual deviancy in the narrow way that you have done, but you can't bring yourself to say that sodomy and sadomasochism is allowable. So you've decided to run away.