Lux Arbuckle

I'll be idling in there whenever I'm on the computer, so I'll be on most EST nights. This is great.

Find a twig of relative size to your lost penis, place it gently in the hole left from where you got your dick ripped off. Insta-forever boner. Help, I've fallen and I can't get up

I saw a thread on some forum where bronies were spammed with pretty tame MLP porn and were utterly disgusted by it. So I wondered if there was a low tolerance within the community for such content. Since most fans of tv shows welcome rule 34, I was curious if bronies were all different, or if that was just a group of weenies.

Welcome to the forums! Let us know your shirt size and we'll send you your Official Accursed Farms™ Bowling jersey with your username stitched above the pocket!

actually, yeah. House is a really gay show, with lots of gay subtext. The makers own up to it all the time. House has fanmade pornography too, and I bet the fans are cool with it. You just gave a bad example. I'm know what you mean though. I'm just pointing out that if a fan made depiction of some intimate, 'intimate' in this context meaning an erotically charged meeting of these fictional ponies, act that it is quite literally a piece of erotica. Not that you personally wank over horses, but that by accepting said pieces as a legitimate, or at least tolerated part of your fandom, you have given the green light to Horse Erotica in some of its forms.

In real life, I'm a...sometimes quiet, sometimes vibrantly annoying guy. On the Internet, I'm a...sloth attached to the branches of data. Someone who spends pretty much every moment they can keeping tabs on their favored sites. In my mind, I'm a...loser-genius idiot with sparks of pretty neat stuff. On Accursed Farms, I'm a...dick. But that is pretty much how I am. I'm giving you guys my straight reactions and thoughts. No persona or anything. Just some sarcasm and the occasional prod when I'm feeling saucy.

The portrayal of intimacy in visual media is a form of erotica by definition. I'm not saying anything but that. Erotica don't have to be lewdly pornographic to be erotica, it just has to be the portrayal of an erotic (which intimacy is also by definition) act. I'm not yanking your chain here, fellers. I'm just stating the facts I see.

Good for you.

Having a really nice evening at home. I've been doing a lot of nothing and feeling really terrible about the quality of my job and the debt school has put me, but I know I will be fine if I just keep working and staying positive. Ya gotta stay positive.

Them being intimate is okay, right? Erotica. They are horses, are they not? Horse Erotica.

Interesting. So Horse Erotica is cool with ya'll. Gotcha

Don't be a dick, the quality of medical facilities in Cuba is completely competent, even comparable to and better than some places in the United States.

Metal Gear Solid. If I had a PS2 and a copy of Guns of the Patriots, I'd totally do a run of the whole series on console (because I don't like handheld). Oh, well. I have the memories for now. I'm gonna save up and get myself a nice PS2, maybe a gamecube. I think I'll just regress a generation till this one gets cheaper. Gaming hibernation due to poverty.

Quick question, sorry to be a bother. Do you guys (and do bronies in general) discourage fan made pornography of the ponies or is that just something you just co-exist with as fans? I was curious.

I have a little bit of a Northwestern Ohio dialect. It's a very strange region that still needs studying since most people don't know why people from that specific area speak like they do. It's mainly the normal US dialect, pronouncing most words normally but with weird tinges to it. For example, I say 'melk' instead of 'milk' and 'owal' instead of 'oil'. It's vaguely southern, but since I'm pretty far from the south, it makes little sense. Neither my mother or father have this dialect at all, I don't know where I got it.

Batman Ford Prefect Opus the penguin Charlie Brown Bugs Bunny Gordon Freeman Charles Foster Kane (when he was in his 20s) Jay and Silent Bob That's all I can think of now, I'll probably think of more later.

There already is a bucket list thread, so I don't know if you'll get any new answers on here. I have none, by the by.

If you've ever question beliefs that you hold you're not alone. But you oughtta realize that every myth is a metaphor. In the case of Christianity and Judaism there exist the belief that spiritual matters are enslaved to history. The Buddhists believe that the functional aspects override the myth while other religions use the literal core to build foundations with. See, half the world sees the myth as fact while it's seen as a lie by the other half and the simple truth is that it's none of that and somehow no matter what the world keeps turning. Somehow we get by without ever learning somehow no matter what the world keeps turning. Science and religion are not mutually exclusive. In fact, for better understanding we take the facts of science and apply them and if both factors keep evolving then we continue getting information, but closing off possibilities makes it hard to see the bigger picture. Consider the case of the woman whose faith helped her make it through when she was raped and cut up left for dead in a trunk her beliefs held true. It doesn't matter if it's real or not cause some things are better left without a doubt and if it works then it gets the job done. Somehow no matter what the world keeps turning.

Thinking about a nap since I spent all night last night playing Rolllercoaster Tycoon, but I'll probably do it again tonight till I have another day of work tomorrow. If I don't post again in a day or two, I probably died falling asleep driving to work.

I see him more as a blank slate. actually, I prefer to think there truly is no reason aside from him just being able to do it and getting pleasure from it. I miss film theory so much sometimes, it's so much fun to do.

It's an industry.....every industry is about money. Also metaphors can't hold a movie. You can throw a piece of bread on the ground and someone can think of some metaphor to it. And the science and obsession thing, isn't that the same story of Frankenstein? They at least could have given some kind of background to the bad guy(can't even remember his name), but all he is is a insane surgeon that went insane because..........just because, i guess. Yeah, I know. Money, money, money. I get that every conversation I get into. The film industry is the greatest blessing and curse on the art of cinema, but what can you do? Nothin'. Metaphors can't hold most movies, and that's where personal enjoyment also plays in. I found the film highly entertaining because it was tense, lovely to look at, and reminded me as well about Frankenstein. If you wanted to split hairs, every movie is a ripoff, so that debate isn't even worth starting. Do you really need your hand held for the plot? Do you need someone to tell you every character's life? Their reason for doing every action within the movie? Man, I can think of ten movies of the top of my head that would be awful if they explained the intentions and background of all the characters. Even to explain a little bit would be foolish, I think. It's not important, nor is it relevant to the story at hand, the film itself.

If you think Saw was the most professional of the genre nowadays, then you aren't watching any horror movies aside from the shit that US distributors are churning out. They're all cheap and not in a good way. Check out some Korean, French and Spanish modern horror. I think those are the best countries doing horror (and horrific) cinema right now. Kirkreng, the violence in a film has little to do with the intentions of the antagonist, it has everything to do with the director and writers intentions. The purpose of the violence in horrors highly depends on what the filmmakers wanted to convey and what the viewer took away from it. In the case of the Human Centipede, I'd say the violence is highly useful to show not only how far science and obsession can go, but how pliable we are has human beings. How easily our bodies can be turned to something subservient and weak. It could be a metaphor for the need for cooperation between people, and how disconnected we have become. Or on the other hand, how trapped we are by the actions of everyone else (we're all killing each other constantly via pollution, etc. We're all in some way shitting in each other's mouths). The Saw movies do have an attempt at a meaning, but it's not very good. They're just not fun, enriching, or entertaining films and I see the whole 'appreciation of life' thing to be about the blandest motivation in the history of film. It's been done in a decent way in other films, but Saw got lucky and became a franchise. It tested well, producers could hire cheap writers, actors and effects teams and could pump out a picture every year for a certain buck. The film industry is all about money, and Saw makes money because people are fucking stupid and give their money to movies like that because they don't know or care about anything new or different. EDIT (I have more to rant about): also, there is, more or less, no such thing as 'violence for the sake of violence' in real horror film. It's all there for a reason. Just as every frame of every motion picture is a portrait, every drop of blood is a statement. Sometimes the statement is strong or angry, this is usually when the violence is more extreme. Other times the statement is more passive, but open to the audience to react to and form. For example: George Romero didn't plan on making a metaphor about a new generation rising up and devouring the old while the old kills black men and burn them at first. He just happened into it. He happened to know a black actor, he happened to have an idea for a scary movie, and he happened to have some black and white film stock to use. In the end, he created one of the most though provoking series' in the history of the genre, and only came into the metaphor after it was done and people began pointing it out. It's only in movies like Blood Sucking Freaks is the violence truly pointless, but even if the filmmaker was just a douche who liked S&M and women in pain, you still get meaning out of it. Horror film is meant to be scary, and the film is a perfect snapshot of the era in which it was made. Meaning, if you just look at any horror film, good or bad, you can still learn something from it. You can learn about how everyone was afraid of the Reds and nukes in the 50s (Body Snatchers and Gojira and any daikaijū, really), freaked out about strife at home and abroad in the 60s (Deathdream, Peeping Tom, Night of the Living Dead), scared of the destruction of the traditional family in the 70s (Halloween, The Stepford Wives, The Omen, Carrie, Shivers, Texas Chainsaw Massacre), panicked about venereal disease in the 80s (The Fly, Near Dark, Lost Boys), lost in technology, an increasingly detached culture and gen X in the 90s (Scream, American Psycho, Se7en, Audition,). Even in last decade you can see how attached we've grown with our technology and how glib we have become about war in our horror (The original Pulse, all these remakes we've been getting from the 70s, you know back when the US was in Vietnam.) Long story short (too late), there is always something to learn, study and analyze in horror and it's all worth something. Just occasionally, it's not worth the time to watch a whole stupid franchise.

I believe the film is called Dead Silence. I never saw it, so can give no opinion.

Jump scares? after the second act, it more or less drops those completely. It presents itself rather openly, I think. They barely hide after the beginning of the training. and for the record, few movies are 'plain disgusting'. That's childish thinking. That's why I consider most moviegoers babies, they think anything that uses violence is bad. It's a piece of fiction with the purpose of telling a story and likely to point out some perspective. It's art. It's fun art at that. I felt the creepyness in the atmosphere of the film and the tension within the primarily static setting. Meta settings in horror usually don't work (just look at the latter Scream movies), but I think the Human Centipede pulls it off rather well. The second one, taking place in the 'real world' where the first film has been released is a pretty great idea, I think and will be very impressive if pulled off correctly. If you don't like it, that's your cross to bear, but I happen to like to actually think about films when I see them and I found a good deal to work with in the Human Centipede.

Can you get pregnant from holding hands with yourself? Cause if you can, I'm in trouble.