this post was submitted on 16 Sep 2023
129 points (100.0% liked)

chapotraphouse

13519 readers
933 users here now

Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.

No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer

Gossip posts go in c/gossip. Don't post low-hanging fruit here after it gets removed from c/gossip

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

It's recently come out that, on September 10th, Lauren Boebert was removed from the play Beetlejuice in Denver. This would be all fine and good, right? A politician is being an asshole. The sky is blue. Well, Hexbear, it is anything but fine. Anything but.

The plot thickens when it's revealed that, beyond the vaping and the being loud (which is it's own struggle session whether that's based), that part of her contribution to getting owned was that she was giving her partner an over the pants handjob. Now, this would have gone through the news cycle with a sensible chuckle for me, but, my fellow hexbearians, do I look like I'm having a sensible chuckle? NO! This is literally me right now. See, what had happened was that this news circulated to the website that I like to post on. The title of the post was "boebert was giving a no-foolin for-reals handjob during the beetlejuice musical" This post got some of the most vile, vitriolic comments I've ever seen in all my posting.

>no-foolin for-reals handjob >over the pants rubbin Y'all that's not even a handy to a seventh grader. @[email protected]

unironically this @[email protected]

Let's get one thing straight here, hexbear. Over the pants is a handjob. This is my central thesis. Let's start with the most obvious positive case. If you have sex with a condom, do you call it over-the-condom sex? Of course not! Protected sex, maybe, but you wouldn't call it not sex. Would you call a blowjob with a condom not a blowjob? Of course not! If you did that'd be annoying and weird. Let's try not to be annoying and weird. skin-to-skin contact with the genitals isn't a requirement for something to be called a job. Repeat it once more for the people in the back getting a handjob rn: skin-to-skin contact with the genitals isn't a requirement for something to be called a job. If home runs are so unambiguous, why is third base so "ambiguous?" Because of a single fringe case. If it wasn't for the existence of this fringe case, then there's be no argument about how getting your genitals stimulated works.

Fairies, monsters, and others that go bump in the night, let me introduce you to the water jet/bubbling system of a hot tub. Wikipedia defines a hot tub as "a large tub full of water used for hydrotherapy, relaxation or pleasure." Let's explore that last word, pleasure. Whom amogus hasn't used a hot tub as it was meant to be used. I think this is where the friction comes from, the jet stream in a hot tub. Dissenters will say (like sniveling cowards) "b-b-but WDYMP, the hot tub isn't sentient, it can't give you a job!" Let's get one thing straight, if you had your hands over the edge of a hot tub and your partner was pushing your crotch into a jet stream, that would be a type of job. The solution, my compromise for the haters and losers, is what I would like to call the jetjob. It would be a normal jetjob if they're pushing you via hands on the buttox into a water jet, and a reverse jetjob if they're using their feet. It would be a backwards jetjob if your back is facing the water jet. This also expands the capacity for a combo jobs because your crotch is facing your partner. This would be the exciting introduction of the triple job if they're using a hand, their mouth, and the water jet. I propose that, upon climax in such a fashion, one would exclaim "Tic tac toe, three in a row!"

With this, let's get one thing clear, over the pants is a type of handjob the same way that over the condom sex is a type of sex. If we can start using the term jetjob, then it will be easier to recognize when something is a job and when something is not. This would also be a step closer to communism. Thank you. I hope I haven't fractured our fragile community too deeply with this.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 66 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Why the fuck are you libs still using capitalist economic terminology to describe intimate, consensual acts between real human beings?

Fuck off with this "job" nonsense and learn to kill the boss in your head.

[–] [email protected] 56 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Sorry, hand-mutual-aid-and-voluntary-labour

[–] [email protected] 31 points 1 year ago

hand-lovin'

[–] [email protected] 27 points 1 year ago

Hand gift. Blow gift. Rim gift. Jet gift.

[–] [email protected] 61 points 1 year ago (1 children)

A handjob alignment chart will resolve this dispute.

[–] [email protected] 36 points 1 year ago (2 children)

lawful good: against the chest

neutral good: hand to shaft

chaotic good: against the face

lawful neutral: latex glove

true neutral: with a condom

chaotic neutral: while smoking

lawful evil: ruined orgasm

neutral evil: flicking

chaotic evil: over the pants (with intent for climax)

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 56 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

Lauren Boebert: “I consent!

Her date: “I consent!

Everyone else in attendence of Beetlejuice: The Musical: “I don’t!

Isn’t there someone you forgot to ask?

[–] [email protected] 49 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Does this count as reading theory?

[–] [email protected] 51 points 1 year ago

It counts as negative theory. You owe us a chapter of State and Revolution

[–] [email protected] 39 points 1 year ago (3 children)

If you think over the pants isn't a handjob, you aren't a leftist.

(I flipped a coin to figure out which side I was on)

[–] [email protected] 19 points 1 year ago (1 children)

And yet you landed on the correct take.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If you think the dress was black and blue, you aren't a leftist

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 37 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Certified marx analysis. Proof:

"b-b-but WDYMP, the hot tub isn't sentient, it can't give you a job!" Let's get one thing straight, if you had your hands over the edge of a hot tub and your partner was pushing your crotch into a jet stream, that would be a type of job. The solution, my compromise for the haters and losers, is what I would like to call the jetjob.

  1. Marx would agree, for are machines not mimicking the motions of the masters?

The machine proper is therefore a mechanism that, after being set in motion, performs with its tools the same operations that were formerly done by the workman with similar tools. Whether the motive power is derived from man, or from some other machine, makes no difference in this respect. From the moment that the tool proper is taken from man, and fitted into a mechanism, a machine takes the place of a mere implement.

To continue your line of thinking...

It would be a normal jetjob if they're pushing you via hands on the buttox into a water jet, and a reverse jetjob if they're using their feet. It would be a backwards jetjob if your back is facing the water jet. This also expands the capacity for a combo jobs because your crotch is facing your partner.

  1. Once again, Marx notes how the human body has limited number of hands, arms, etc...

The difference strikes one at once, even in those cases where man himself continues to be the prime mover. The number of implements that he himself can use simultaneously, is limited by the number of his own natural instruments of production, by the number of his bodily organs. In Germany, they tried at first to make one spinner work two spinning-wheels, that is, to work simultaneously with both hands and both feet. This was too difficult. Later, a treddle spinning-wheel with two spindles was invented, but adepts in spinning, who could spin two threads at once, were almost as scarce as two-headed men.

...But indeed if we could use machines...

This would be the exciting introduction of the triple job if they're using a hand, their mouth, and the water jet.

  1. ...Marx states we could transcend such limits!

The Jenny, on the other hand, even at its very birth, spun with 12-18 spindles, and the stocking-loom knits with many thousand needles at once. The number of tools that a machine can bring into play simultaneously, is from the very first emancipated from the organic limits that hedge in the tools of a handicraftsman.

As such, as you state, QED:

I propose that, upon climax in such a fashion, one would exclaim "Tic tac toe, three in a row!"

Source: Das Kapital Chapter 15 section 1

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Upon realization of such a device under capitalism, patriarchy would be like "fellas, is it gay to get an infini-job?"frothingfash

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 35 points 1 year ago (3 children)

A blowjob is when one or more partners perform oral sex on a partner with a penis. A handjob is manual manipulation of a partner’s penis done by one or more partners.

Curiously the performance of oral sex on a partner along the labia and vaginal opening is not considered a job of any kind. Similarly, digital manipulation of those same locations are not called a job either.

Even more puzzling is the oral stimulation of another’s anus is in fact called a rimjob.

In this video essay I’ll…

[–] [email protected] 24 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Patriarchy in action, even in sex cis men can take all the 'jobs while others are barred from accessing them. 😔

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 29 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's recently come out that, on September 10th,

Fuck, just one day away from being so much funnier…

[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 year ago

I'd like to thank the haters and losers for this handjob on this very special day, 9/11

[–] [email protected] 28 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Improperly definining a hand job was a primary cause of the Sino-Soviet split. Thank you for bringing this to the community's attention. rat-salute-2

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 year ago (1 children)

We're gettin the band back together!

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 28 points 1 year ago (2 children)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 27 points 1 year ago (1 children)

When she was talking about "creating jobs", I didn't realize this is what she meant.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 year ago

Trump be like "I give out loads of jobs! I'm the biggest job creator in the US! I love jobs, folks."

[–] [email protected] 25 points 1 year ago (1 children)

our posters are highly educated. they know posting. they know the best posts. there's no better post than our posts

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 24 points 1 year ago (2 children)

An OTPHJ is a handjob, but I think it should always be qualified as such. If someone says "handjob" unqualified I'm going to assume there's no (or very minimal) intervening fabric, which is the issue with the original post's title

[–] [email protected] 23 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Especially if you say “a no-foolin for-reals handjob”

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 year ago

Yeah, that's 100% a full hog-out scenario

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 24 points 1 year ago (4 children)

So where is the line on what is a hand job/sex in general? Is any touching of the general genital area a hand job? Seems overly broad. What if, hypothetically (expert-shapiro the hand is held a quarter inch over the genital area, with the intent of causing arousal, is that a hand job?

That being said phoenix-objection-1 phoenix-objection-2 , whether or not an over the pants counts doesn't change the fact that what Lauren Boebert did was just a casual feel. The kind of thing you were doing in seventh grade. Ladies and gentlemen and envies get a sense of perspective. That's not a hand job. That's a tease which will cause partial arousal at most.

Tldr, you are so wrong and I'm the one true leftist

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 year ago

That's not a hand job. That's a tease which will cause partial arousal at most.

What if he prematurely ejaculated in his pants? Does that make it count as one?

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 24 points 1 year ago (1 children)

lmao

I'll put my lot in with the "it's a handjob" crowd, having given a few.

[–] [email protected] 30 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Would you say you have

spoilerFirst hand experience?

fidel-cool

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 22 points 1 year ago

No, you have to wrap your fingers around the hog for it to be a hojo. You can’t just rub it like you’re sanding a dresser, commonly referred to as a “Kansas City rub down,” you have to grasp the hog like you want it!

[–] [email protected] 21 points 1 year ago

all i'm gonna say is that if you wanna fuck around in public please do everyone the courtesy of going into the bathroom and cutting a hole in the stall so people can use it after you. i hate when people pull up the ladder after they cum

[–] [email protected] 19 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Unlocked new hexbear lore: Handjob Struggle Session

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 19 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Under-pants handjobs vs Over-pants handjobs outdoor-cat

I agree with you but I have to ask where the line is. What if it was over like, a metal codpiece where they don't actually feel anything but they're aroused by the idea of it? How many layers of clothing does it take before it's no longer a handjob?

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 year ago (4 children)

What if it was over like, a metal codpiece where they don't actually feel anything but they're aroused by the idea of it?

A cock cage. You're describing a cock cage

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 year ago

volcel-judge

EVERYONE KEEP YOUR HANDS WHERE I CAN SEE 'EM OR THIS OTPHJ IS GOING TO BE AN RIPHJ

[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This is the amount of writing necessary to not get volcel police called

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Just like President's Clinton statement "I did not have sex with that woman"... It was a blowjob, but not sex 😆

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 year ago (1 children)

handjobs aren't sex

annnd post

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 year ago (1 children)

ahhhh, but you admit it's a job very-intelligent

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 year ago
load more comments
view more: next ›