Nope, obviously not, because post 22 had both the parts starred out.
It’s the accurate description of the act that is in question, here.
Again, too much truth, sometimes, is simply not allowed.
I was very surprised because if you do a site search on FR using the same terms I used, you will find stuff no worse/no different than what I posted. I think the problem is not all moderators definitions of what is and is not “family friendly” are nearly the same.
Standards here are not uniform across the moderators and I understand personalities vary, but when I post something I don’t believe is beyond FR limits based on what I see being posted here on that same topic, and that stuff sails through but my post is the only one getting tagged, I think there’s a problem in selective targeting/selective standards here.
It surprised me very much because I am a guy that for 13 years here has only had an issue with a moderator twice, counting this time.
And unfortunately, the larger point I was making was this:
When a politician says he “supports” homosexuality, what they are really saying is they support the explicit acts that homosexuals engage in.
Yes it is perverted behavior. To spoof them saying such explicit things puts their benign, “fair”, “evolved” viewpoint in the true proper context of what they really are supporting when they say their pleasant “I support homosexuals and gay marriage”.
Nobody actually says it the way I posted it because they would not appear enlightened or evoke pleasant pictures in most people’s minds, it would backfire on them and people would be grossed out. But when you mask your position on an issue in a light, fluffy statement about “Fairness” or “rights” or “love” instead of describing what the person really is saying they are in favor of, you don’t always make that connection.
If we can’t be descriptive sometimes to get a point across, I suggest we stop people posting graphic abortion photos here because that certainly is not family friendly material to view either.