Do you think there's anything wrong with putting your penis in a dead pig's mouth?

[littlebabyjesus]

You may define 'wrong' as disgusting. My definition certainly includes 'disgusting' for the purposes of this poll.

Hmmm. There are lots of things I'm disgusted by - as in they give me an emotional reaction of disgust - but that doesn't necessarily mean I think they're wrong. 'Disgusting' is really no more than 'wrong for me'.

 

[maomao]

You may define 'wrong' as disgusting. My definition certainly includes 'disgusting' for the purposes of this poll.

Is coprophilia wrong? In a hypothetical 'do one or your family dies' type situation I'd rather fuck a pig's head than eat faeces but if the internet is to be believed there's plenty of people who get a sexual thrill from poo. I think it's disgusting and I'd rather not think about it in too much detail but it's not 'wrong' to the extent that I want their behaviour sanctioned in any way.

 

[quimcunx]

In the context of drunken teens in possession of a severed pigs head daring each other to put their gentleman parts in there, I'm bleurgh but don't particularly care.

In the context of an initiation to a club where you are thinking of the grossest thing to dare people to do I think similarly to above. I don't want to join such a club, even if I was excused pig activities. The apparent context of Piers gaveston it's what it symbolises more than the act itself that disgusts me, but that was the case already. The burning of £50 in front of a homeless person is also disgusting despite not being as viscerally gross.

In the context of furtively using a pig's head as a masturbatory device because one finds pig's heads singularly attractive I would not be keen on going out with that man (or woman) and I would wonder where it could lead or what it might indicate about them generally.

I think I perhaps lack the full imagination necessary to properly feel disgusted. I'm sure my disgust levels would be through the roof if it was actually happening in front of me.

 

[wayward bob]

No

 

[maomao]

The burning of £50 in front of a homeless person is also disgusting despite not being as viscerally gross.

In fact it's much much worse than fucking a dead pig's head.

 

[passenger]

maybe if it had a nice red dress on

 

[danny la rouge]

And it is Cameron-specific.

No, " do you think it was wrong of Cameron to do it?" is Cameron specific.

 

[danny la rouge]

In fact it's much much worse than fucking a dead pig's head.

I agree. it is.

 

[laptop]

No, " do you think it was wrong of Cameron to do it?" is Cameron specific.

You mean you were thinking about putting your dick in a dead pig's mouth as a general principle all the time - before this week?

 

[quimcunx]

In fact it's much much worse than fucking a dead pig's head.

Yes. I put that at first and then thought about the anti-semitic theories on it and thought I'll edit or someone will decide I'm not disgusted enough about that. Can't win!

 

[danny la rouge]

You mean you were thinking about putting your dick in a dead pig's mouth as a general principle all the time - before this week?

That the question was occasioned by reported events does not mean it specifies those events.

 

[Pickman's model]

In fact it's much much worse than fucking a dead pig's head.

yeh but this is not a threat about comparisons but about whether there's anything wrong in putting your penis in a dead pig's mouth.

 

[Idaho]

I'm disappointed by the low no vote.

 

[maomao]

yeh but this is not a threat about comparisons but about whether there's anything wrong in putting your penis in a dead pig's mouth.

Which is pointless without attempting comparisons in order to define what we mean by wrong.

 

[Pickman's model]

I'm disappointed by the low no vote.

it's composed solely of oxbridge graduates.

 

[Pickman's model]

Which is pointless without attempting comparisons in order to define what we mean by wrong.

you won't get to what is wrong by saying 'this is wronger than that' - you made no attempt to define what wrong consists of.

 

[CNT36]

Most of us have probably eaten pig cock and pig head. The pig Cameron stuck his penis in was probably slaughtered for our enjoyment not his. Is it anymore wrong than killing and eating the thing?

 

[maomao]

you won't get to what is wrong by saying 'this is wronger than that' - you made no attempt to define what wrong consists of.

I did in my other two posts and the coprophilia comparison is probably more useful for getting to what kind of wrong we're talking about. Personally I find naked men and penises a bit disgusting but I don't think gay men (or heterosexual women for that matter) are 'wrong'.

 

[JimW]

I'll have to hold off on answering until I've checked the Church's teaching on the point. Bound to have been in a papal encyclical.

 

[Pickman's model]

Is coprophilia wrong? In a hypothetical 'do one or your family dies' type situation I'd rather fuck a pig's head than eat faeces but if the internet is to be believed there's plenty of people who get a sexual thrill from poo. I think it's disgusting and I'd rather not think about it in too much detail but it's not 'wrong' to the extent that I want their behaviour sanctioned in any way.

It's disgusting but not immoral in any way when devoid of any other context.

i am not seeing much of an attempt to define terms here.

 

[danny la rouge]

Some people appear a little confused.

I don't require you to place the specified act in a scale with the Nazi Genocide at one end and not saying "thank you" when someone says "bless you" on the other. I am assuming everyone thinks the Final Solution was immeasurably worse. Though if you wish, you may say what you think necro-swino-oral penile insertion is worse than. (I for one think it is much worse than not saying "thank you" for a post-sternutatial blessing, but not as bad as burning bank notes in front of homeless people. I assume most decent people are at one with this, except Tories).

Nor am I asking you whether it was wrong that David Cameron did it. I am asking if it is wrong for anyone to do it.

As the OP says, you may wish to explain how you are applying "wrong" in this case.

 

[danny la rouge]

I'll have to hold off on answering until I've checked the Church's teaching on the point. Bound to have been in a papal encyclical.

What, exactly, do you suspect of being in a Papal Bull?

 

[kabbes]

Some people appear a little confused.

I don't require you to place the specified act in a scale with the Nazi Genocide at one end and not saying "thank you" when someone says "bless you" on the other. I am assuming everyone thinks the Final Solution was immeasurably worse. Though if you wish, you may say what you think necro-swino-oral penile insertion is worse than. (I for one think it is much worse than not saying "thank you" for a post-sternutatial blessing, but not as bad as burning bank notes in front of homeless people. I assume most decent people are at one with this, except Tories).

Nor am I asking you whether it was wrong that David Cameron did it. I am asking if it is wrong for anyone to do it.

As the OP says, you may wish to explain how you are applying "wrong" in this case.

Your definition of wrong is so vague as to be useless in application

 

[danny la rouge]

Your definition of wrong is so vague as to be useless in application

I haven't defined wrong. Indeed I specifically left that open.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

I haven't defined wrong. Indeed I specifically left that open.

Exactly so. Thus rendering the poll pretty meaningless.

 

[laptop]

you won't get to what is wrong by saying 'this is wronger than that' - you made no attempt to define what wrong consists of.

OK, let's try.

On the one hand there's the Benthamite moral calculus - "the greatest good of the greatest number". Since the pig was dead already, Bentham would clearly have thought it was OK (which goes to reinforce Foucault's view that he was a wrong'un).

On another hand, we could follow Kant in applying the Golden Rule - treat others as you would wish to be treated. This leads to...

Spoiler: some rather disturbing thoughts about equivalence

Is the equivalent - how you would be treated -

1. putting a dead pig's cock in your mouth; or
2. having a pig's cock put in your mouth after you've been killed?

 

[maomao]

i am not seeing much of an attempt to define terms here.

Well just to pretend for a moment that you're not being deliberately obtuse I'll rephrase it. I personally find it disgusting but not immoral and that doesn't qualify as 'wrong' for me.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

OK, let's try.

On the one hand there's the Benthamite moral calculus - "the greatest good of the greatest number". Since the pig was dead already, Bentham would clearly have thought it was OK (which goes to reinforce Foucault's view that he was a wrong'un).

On another hand, we could follow Kant in applying the Golden Rule - treat others as you would wish to be treated. This leads to...

Spoiler: some rather disturbing thoughts about equivalence

Is the equivalent - how you would be treated -

1. putting a dead pig's cock in your mouth; or
2. having a pig's cock put in your mouth after you've been killed?

How to tie yourself up in knots with philosophy.

A real equivalent would have you being born as a farm pig destined for slaughter.

 

[danny la rouge]

Exactly so. Thus rendering the poll pretty meaningless.

You only know if something is wrong when presented with a scale?

 

[DotCommunist]

those arguing semantics have something to hide