- Joined
- Apr 5, 2011
- Messages
- 10,660
- Solutions
- 3
- Reaction score
- 31,733
- Trophies
- 6
- Age
- 48
- Location
- At my chair.
- XP
- 40,382
- Country



Judging by the color, that farm is not cleaned nearly enough, causing that floor to be slippery. The lack of prior context leaves a lot to the imagination but let me break it down for ya. That cow has sight and a sense of touch. The fall at the start couldn't have been fun but this cow looks just about alive as any other cow with capable bones, organs, and evidently two senses (could be numb, could have navigated the slip without sensory, body language tells me they braced theyselves). That's at least two full senses of understanding something beautiful. That's pretty neat!why are you sexualising an animal?
![]()

Cows don't have tities, they have udders. One big boob with 4 nipples (If I remember correctly. Coiuld be 6? 7?Judging by the color, that farm is not cleaned nearly enough, causing that floor to be slippery. The lack of prior context leaves a lot to the imagination but let me break it down for ya. That cow has sight and a sense of touch. The fall at the start couldn't have been fun but this cow looks just about alive as any other cow with capable bones, organs, and evidently two senses (could be numb, could have navigated the slip without sensory, body language tells me they braced theyselves). That's at least two full senses of understanding something beautiful. That's pretty neat!
What could an oat do? None of that. Very sad. The manipulation of life, plant or animal... It's bad for you, it's all bad for you, and it's all milk.
Or maybe that was to show big cow tiddie. Thanks!
Ok I'm out.)By that logic, we should call a rooster's comb 'hair' or a pig's snout a 'nose' in a sexy way. We have specific, clinical, non-sexual words for animal anatomy for a reason. Calling an udder 'tits' isn't neutral. It’s a deliberate choice to use human sexual terminology, which is where the inappropriate sexualisation and bestiality vibe comes from.Nobody is sexualizing anything... But you can only get milk from tits.
This is a grotesque response to animal suffering. Dismissing a frightened, slipping animal's distress with 'that's pretty neat' and then making a sexualised 'tiddie' joke isn't clever or philosophical. It's sociopathic. The only thing 'manipulated' here is your attempt to sound deep to justify laughing at abuse…Judging by the color, that farm is not cleaned nearly enough, causing that floor to be slippery. The lack of prior context leaves a lot to the imagination but let me break it down for ya. That cow has sight and a sense of touch. The fall at the start couldn't have been fun but this cow looks just about alive as any other cow with capable bones, organs, and evidently two senses (could be numb, could have navigated the slip without sensory, body language tells me they braced theyselves). That's at least two full senses of understanding something beautiful. That's pretty neat!
What could an oat do? None of that. Very sad. The manipulation of life, plant or animal... It's bad for you, it's all bad for you, and it's all milk.
Or maybe that was to show big cow tiddie. Thanks!
who said i was talkin about cows?By that logic, we should call a rooster's comb 'hair' or a pig's snout a 'nose' in a sexy way. We have specific, clinical, non-sexual words for animal anatomy for a reason. Calling an udder 'tits' isn't neutral. It’s a deliberate choice to use human sexual terminology, which is where the inappropriate sexualisation and bestiality vibe comes from.


Skill issue, smh

more than a fanAnyone a fan of Mozarella?
This is why connoisseurs prefer cheese with holes^
|
|
cheesefucker
Glad Trump knows so he can sign into laws all Ws will be removed.