Helping out your ratio while simultaneously pointing out that if you don't want to objectify your partner, "There is no one more erotic, nor beautiful than my partners face as she orgasms." Would be the better way to phrase this... If she happens to like being objectified (a known kink) then forget I said anything and carry on! — MSC
I think that's how object-oriented programming took initial shape. A bunch of sexually frustrated programmers who objectify sexual objects into objects to sub for partners in their abject lack of finding a suitable subject being a reject, etc etc etc, I'll leave it to you to fill out the rest. — god must be atheist
↪MSC Your phrasing would suggest that the face is a person. The partner is a “one”, but her face is a “thing”. — Pfhorrest
↪MSC Your phrasing would suggest that the face is a person. The partner is a “one”, but her face is a “thing”. — Pfhorrest
"One" as in the god-thread? — god must be atheist
A person is someONE, but their face is someTHING, so if we are describing the beauty of a person’s face, it’s not objectifying the person to say that their face is a beautiful THING. — Pfhorrest
1.05 — Banno
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.