"Bengo Chimpo" - Cuckolded boxer cuts off penis of lawyer

[Salty]

By the way, can anyone of you moralists explain to me why so many guys think it's wrong to fuck married women but have no problem fucking women with boyfriends?

And also why it's OK and even admirable for married men to fuck other women as long as the women aren't married?

Who said that is admirable?

Have you never seen married men boasting of their exploits to an apparently appreciative audience?

Actually - nope.

[Wage Slave]

By the way, can anyone of you moralists explain to me why so many guys think it's wrong to fuck married women but have no problem fucking women with boyfriends?

And also why it's OK and even admirable for married men to fuck other women as long as the women aren't married?

Who said that is admirable?

Have you never seen married men boasting of their exploits to an apparently appreciative audience?

Actually - nope.

Well, I not saying it is common but lets just say it has been observed. From time to time and here and there.

[Samurai_Jerk]

By the way, can anyone of you moralists explain to me why so many guys think it's wrong to fuck married women but have no problem fucking women with boyfriends?

And also why it's OK and even admirable for married men to fuck other women as long as the women aren't married?

Who said that is admirable?

Have you never seen married men boasting of their exploits to an apparently appreciative audience?

Actually - nope.

Well, I not saying it is common but lets just say it has been observed. From time to time and here and there.

Seems like I must have but I can't quite remember where.

[Russell]

By the way, can anyone of you moralists explain to me why so many guys think it's wrong to fuck married women but have no problem fucking women with boyfriends?

And also why it's OK and even admirable for married men to fuck other women as long as the women aren't married?

Who said that is admirable?

Have you never seen married men boasting of their exploits to an apparently appreciative audience?

Actually - nope.

Well, I not saying it is common but lets just say it has been observed. From time to time and here and there.

Seems like I must have but I can't quite remember where.

Me too, but then again, I may not be an appreciative audience...

[Coligny]

Yea, too busy with your Keicar Backseat Porking club chairman obligations...

[Russell]

Yea, too busy with your Keicar Backseat Porking club chairman obligations...

Humm, that was 20 years ago, with the missus...

[matsuki]

By the way, can anyone of you moralists explain to me why so many guys think it's wrong to fuck married women but have no problem fucking women with boyfriends?

And also why it's OK and even admirable for married men to fuck other women as long as the women aren't married?

Who said that is admirable?

Have you never seen married men boasting of their exploits to an apparently appreciative audience?

Actually - nope.

Well, I not saying it is common but lets just say it has been observed. From time to time and here and there.

Seems like I must have but I can't quite remember where.

Me too, but then again, I may not be an appreciative audience...

Not saying that it makes it any better....but doesn't bangin' married women involve a woman at least in her 30's or above who has popped out a kid or two and just isn't getting it at home?

[Coligny]

Yea, too busy with your Keicar Backseat Porking club chairman obligations...

Humm, that was 20 years ago, with the missus...

And that wasn't a negative remark...

The only kind of akshiun my backseat are getting is cats puking...

[Samurai_Jerk]

By the way, can anyone of you moralists explain to me why so many guys think it's wrong to fuck married women but have no problem fucking women with boyfriends?

And also why it's OK and even admirable for married men to fuck other women as long as the women aren't married?

Who said that is admirable?

Have you never seen married men boasting of their exploits to an apparently appreciative audience?

Actually - nope.

Well, I not saying it is common but lets just say it has been observed. From time to time and here and there.

Seems like I must have but I can't quite remember where.

Me too, but then again, I may not be an appreciative audience...

Not saying that it makes it any better....but doesn't bangin' married women involve a woman at least in her 30's or above who has popped out a kid or two and just isn't getting it at home?

What?

[Coligny]

He's mixing up with "milf"

[matsuki]

I accidentally left out the word "usually" when editing...at least from all the affair talk I've heard and the ones that have chased me...most of the cheating wives are middle aged, with kids, sexless marriage, etc. Not early 20's like what seems to be the case here.

[Samurai_Jerk]

I accidentally left out the word "usually" when editing...at least from all the affair talk I've heard and the ones that have chased me...most of the cheating wives are middle aged, with kids, sexless marriage, etc. Not early 20's like what seems to be the case here.

If you were married to a failed boxer who was prone to violence, a lawyer might seem pretty attractive.

Erm - not illegal at all, and fully suppoorted by the Rule Of Employment - actions in the workplace that bring disharmony and negatively affect moral. Plus - in financial services, and technology at that, maintaining separation of duties is critical to preventing losses. Two employees in the same bed, means both must be assigned to the same role/duty area - since they must be assumed to act as one.

Coligny, this is the kind of bullshit that corporate American has foisted on the world.

[Salty]

I accidentally left out the word "usually" when editing...at least from all the affair talk I've heard and the ones that have chased me...most of the cheating wives are middle aged, with kids, sexless marriage, etc. Not early 20's like what seems to be the case here.

If you were married to a failed boxer who was prone to violence, a lawyer might seem pretty attractive.

Erm - not illegal at all, and fully suppoorted by the Rule Of Employment - actions in the workplace that bring disharmony and negatively affect moral. Plus - in financial services, and technology at that, maintaining separation of duties is critical to preventing losses. Two employees in the same bed, means both must be assigned to the same role/duty area - since they must be assumed to act as one.

Coligny, this is the kind of bullshit that corporate American has foisted on the world.

Care to expand on that? What exactly do you think is the BS in that statement?

[Samurai_Jerk]

I accidentally left out the word "usually" when editing...at least from all the affair talk I've heard and the ones that have chased me...most of the cheating wives are middle aged, with kids, sexless marriage, etc. Not early 20's like what seems to be the case here.

If you were married to a failed boxer who was prone to violence, a lawyer might seem pretty attractive.

Erm - not illegal at all, and fully suppoorted by the Rule Of Employment - actions in the workplace that bring disharmony and negatively affect moral. Plus - in financial services, and technology at that, maintaining separation of duties is critical to preventing losses. Two employees in the same bed, means both must be assigned to the same role/duty area - since they must be assumed to act as one.

Coligny, this is the kind of bullshit that corporate American has foisted on the world.

Care to expand on that? What exactly do you think is the BS in that statement?

Assuming that people act as one because they fuck is bullshit. Firing people with no evidence that they've done anything inappropriate vis-à-vis their job based on the nature of their relationship is bullshit. You know what else can lead to conflict of interest? Office friendships. I've seen employees who were good friends team up to screw an employer several times. Why not ban office friendships as well? I agree that it's best not to become physically or romantically involved with people you work with. However, there are a lot of things I think people shouldn't do that I wouldn't mandate. I also know that a hell of a lot of people meet their spouses at work.

[Salty]

I accidentally left out the word "usually" when editing...at least from all the affair talk I've heard and the ones that have chased me...most of the cheating wives are middle aged, with kids, sexless marriage, etc. Not early 20's like what seems to be the case here.

If you were married to a failed boxer who was prone to violence, a lawyer might seem pretty attractive.

Erm - not illegal at all, and fully suppoorted by the Rule Of Employment - actions in the workplace that bring disharmony and negatively affect moral. Plus - in financial services, and technology at that, maintaining separation of duties is critical to preventing losses. Two employees in the same bed, means both must be assigned to the same role/duty area - since they must be assumed to act as one.

Coligny, this is the kind of bullshit that corporate American has foisted on the world.

Care to expand on that? What exactly do you think is the BS in that statement?

Assuming that people act as one because they fuck is bullshit. Firing people with no evidence that they've done anything inappropriate vis-à-vis their job based on the nature of their relationship is bullshit. You know what else can lead to conflict of interest? Office friendships. I've seen employees who were good friends team up to screw an employer several times. Why not ban office friendships as well? I agree that it's best not to become physically or romantically involved with people you work with. However, there are a lot of things I think people shouldn't do that I wouldn't mandate. I also know that a hell of a lot of people meet their spouses at work.

Thanks for sharing your opinion. But financial institutions need to operate by rules, and get audited for commercial as well as legal compliance - and didn`t just randomly make up separation of duties to include spouses and significant others on a whim. Of course friends could also violate policies, as could a coerced employee, but spouses and couples are easier to codify and manage. In fact many companies, non-financials included, do not allow employment of spouses due to collusion concerns. And then of course there are some companies who welcome spouses as employees, having determined that their business has little risk.

I too had a couple who met at work and did the right thing. In fact I was their official/ceremonial `go between` for their eventual marriage. What they did right - was to come forward and say that they were dating, and ask for the firm to accommodate a work arrangement that wouldn`t violate procedures or policy. One needed to be transferred out of technology, deal done.

[legion]

By the way, can anyone of you moralists explain to me why so many guys think it's wrong to fuck married women but have no problem fucking women with boyfriends?

errr

how would you feel if you found your daughter wasn't your daughter?

after say, paying her way through college

and how would she feel?

marriage is a legal contract

[Samurai_Jerk]

By the way, can anyone of you moralists explain to me why so many guys think it's wrong to fuck married women but have no problem fucking women with boyfriends?

errr

how would you feel if you found your daughter wasn't your daughter?

after say, paying her way through college

and how would she feel?

marriage is a legal contract

So if the couple doesn't want to or can't have kids, it's ok. Got it.

[legion]

By the way, can anyone of you moralists explain to me why so many guys think it's wrong to fuck married women but have no problem fucking women with boyfriends?

errr

how would you feel if you found your daughter wasn't your daughter?

after say, paying her way through college

and how would she feel?

marriage is a legal contract

So if the couple doesn't want to or can't have kids, it's ok. Got it.

You are missing the point. deliberately.

Being unfaithful is grounds for divorce because marriage is society's institution designed to ensure a stable environment for raising children. If a couple decides not have children, or can't have children, this does not change the legal status of marriage, unless you create a law which says a marriage only becomes a legally binding contract when a child is born. Of course you would also have to add clauses to cover the child predeceasing the parents.

Obviously to keep things simple society operates on the assumption that when people enter into the legal contract of marriage, where one party has power of attorney over the other in all eventualities, and all assets and liabilities are held in common, then they will fulfill their side of the bargain by putting their interests as a couple, or a family, above that of themselves as an individual. If they can no longer do this, they divorce, with a subsequent division of assets.

Affairs between unmarried people are emotional territory, not really an area for law, though it may be an area for morals & ethics, affairs involving married people carry legal as well as ethical and moral implications.

Put simply, someone sleeps with your partner, you should thank them for pointing out that s/he and you was not someone you should enter into a legally binding agreement with.

The boxer must have put the fear of the hardware store into quite a few people.

(actually a song about Maggie Thatcher)

[Coligny]

By the way, can anyone of you moralists explain to me why so many guys think it's wrong to fuck married women but have no problem fucking women with boyfriends?

errr

how would you feel if you found your daughter wasn't your daughter?

after say, paying her way through college

and how would she feel?

marriage is a legal contract

You mean 'biological daughter'

I would not give a flying fuck. That's not even a difference human vs monkey ... That the difference human vs donald trump.
And i think the money part of kids is the really small share of the job. Holding the bucket sleepless nights after sleepless night when they are sick is a bigger part of parenting. The kind of stuff which after the years make DNA code totally irrelevant.

Cases of babies switched at birth are absolute nightmares because end up with a raised kid and suddenly another one to which you now owe the exact same no matter what. But in case ofblack kid in an aryan family... Who the fuck cares.
(We have 3 furrkids for now, absolutely not sure to be the father, or mother)

[Coligny]

I accidentally left out the word "usually" when editing...at least from all the affair talk I've heard and the ones that have chased me...most of the cheating wives are middle aged, with kids, sexless marriage, etc. Not early 20's like what seems to be the case here.

If you were married to a failed boxer who was prone to violence, a lawyer might seem pretty attractive.

Erm - not illegal at all, and fully suppoorted by the Rule Of Employment - actions in the workplace that bring disharmony and negatively affect moral. Plus - in financial services, and technology at that, maintaining separation of duties is critical to preventing losses. Two employees in the same bed, means both must be assigned to the same role/duty area - since they must be assumed to act as one.

Coligny, this is the kind of bullshit that corporate American has foisted on the world.

Care to expand on that? What exactly do you think is the BS in that statement?

Assuming that people act as one because they fuck is bullshit. Firing people with no evidence that they've done anything inappropriate vis-à-vis their job based on the nature of their relationship is bullshit. You know what else can lead to conflict of interest? Office friendships. I've seen employees who were good friends team up to screw an employer several times. Why not ban office friendships as well? I agree that it's best not to become physically or romantically involved with people you work with. However, there are a lot of things I think people shouldn't do that I wouldn't mandate. I also know that a hell of a lot of people meet their spouses at work.

Thanks for sharing your opinion. But financial institutions need to operate by rules, and get audited for commercial as well as legal compliance - and didn`t just randomly make up separation of duties to include spouses and significant others on a whim. Of course friends could also violate policies, as could a coerced employee, but spouses and couples are easier to codify and manage. In fact many companies, non-financials included, do not allow employment of spouses due to collusion concerns. And then of course there are some companies who welcome spouses as employees, having determined that their business has little risk.

I too had a couple who met at work and did the right thing. In fact I was their official/ceremonial `go between` for their eventual marriage. What they did right - was to come forward and say that they were dating, and ask for the firm to accommodate a work arrangement that wouldn`t violate procedures or policy. One needed to be transferred out of technology, deal done.

Holy fucking shit, while I can't precisely speak for the "interzone" of financial institutions, don't pull this kind of shit in a civilized country where the workforce is not considered property of the employer. Illegal in France by article L1322.1 of the code du travail. Mariage is a fundamental right that can't be challenged by corporate rules. If you fire an employe for marying another one, you are de facto breaking the law.

- actions in the workplace that bring disharmony and negatively affect moral.
That's not a rule for the workplace, that's scientology level bullshit.
Disharmony: can't be qualified or quantified
Moral: see disharmony.

[matsuki]

By the way, can anyone of you moralists explain to me why so many guys think it's wrong to fuck married women but have no problem fucking women with boyfriends?

errr

how would you feel if you found your daughter wasn't your daughter?

after say, paying her way through college

and how would she feel?

marriage is a legal contract

You mean 'biological daughter'

I would not give a flying fuck. That's not even a difference human vs monkey ... That the difference human vs donald trump.
And i think the money part of kids is the really small share of the job. Holding the bucket sleepless nights after sleepless night when they are sick is a bigger part of parenting. The kind of stuff which after the years make DNA code totally irrelevant.

Cases of babies switched at birth are absolute nightmares because end up with a raised kid and suddenly another one to which you now owe the exact same no matter what. But in case ofblack kid in an aryan family... Who the fuck cares.
(We have 3 furrkids for now, absolutely not sure to be the father, or mother)

I think the point wasn't that you are no longer the father...but that your wife is lying sack of human feces.

Holy fucking shit, while I can't precisely speak for the "interzone" of financial institutions, don't pull this kind of shit in a civilized country where the workforce is not considered property of the employer. Illegal in France by article L1322.1 of the code du travail. Mariage is a fundamental right that can't be challenged by corporate rules. If you fire an employe for marying another one, you are de facto breaking the law.

- actions in the workplace that bring disharmony and negatively affect moral.
That's not a rule for the workplace, that's scientology level bullshit.
Disharmony: can't be qualified or quantified
Moral: see disharmony.

Considering many J-womens go into the workforce simply to find a man, it's pretty unrealistic to put a stop to relationships...but if one of them is married and fucking around, it's gonna affect the company negatively, just like a anything else that's legally/morally questionable...that's pretty reasonable grounds to cut em loose.

[kurogane]

Another search for Kotsugai Ikki no Yome brought up this. I think it's from the News for Special Olympians Channel, so you have been warned.

My take on her analysis was that it is bulletproof, in the same way most conspiracy theories are too:

that which cannot be cannot be because it cannot be. How can people not see this obvious fact!!????

Scintillating analysis there, you must agree I did find her insistence on the name issue rather sweet, though. Even amateur Japanese news is so Japaneezily amateur it's cute.

[Coligny]

I can't take these synthetic voice bullshit... Worse than Hatsune Miku and Hitler combined...

[Samurai_Jerk]

By the way, can anyone of you moralists explain to me why so many guys think it's wrong to fuck married women but have no problem fucking women with boyfriends?

errr

how would you feel if you found your daughter wasn't your daughter?

after say, paying her way through college

and how would she feel?

marriage is a legal contract

So if the couple doesn't want to or can't have kids, it's ok. Got it.

You are missing the point. deliberately.

Being unfaithful is grounds for divorce because marriage is society's institution designed to ensure a stable environment for raising children. If a couple decides not have children, or can't have children, this does not change the legal status of marriage, unless you create a law which says a marriage only becomes a legally binding contract when a child is born. Of course you would also have to add clauses to cover the child predeceasing the parents.

Obviously to keep things simple society operates on the assumption that when people enter into the legal contract of marriage, where one party has power of attorney over the other in all eventualities, and all assets and liabilities are held in common, then they will fulfill their side of the bargain by putting their interests as a couple, or a family, above that of themselves as an individual. If they can no longer do this, they divorce, with a subsequent division of assets.

Affairs between unmarried people are emotional territory, not really an area for law, though it may be an area for morals & ethics, affairs involving married people carry legal as well as ethical and moral implications.

Put simply, someone sleeps with your partner, you should thank them for pointing out that s/he and you was not someone you should enter into a legally binding agreement with.

You've just changed your argument so forgive me if I can't get the point when you don't seem to be able to articulate one with any consistency. Were you born in the Taisho Era? A lot of people couple long term and even raise kids without ever getting married these days. Obviously in some countries like Japan marriage might be a good idea if you want to have kids because of the law. However, entering into a silly antiquated legal contact that's a holdover from our less enlightened days doesn't make your relationship intrinsically more valid than the relationship of a couple who's not married.

You mean 'biological daughter'

I would not give a flying fuck. That's not even a difference human vs monkey ... That the difference human vs donald trump.
And i think the money part of kids is the really small share of the job. Holding the bucket sleepless nights after sleepless night when they are sick is a bigger part of parenting. The kind of stuff which after the years make DNA code totally irrelevant.

This happened to a guy I know and he found out before his daughter was 5 years old. He was already divorced and his wife told him just to hurt him. He told his wife to keep that between the two of them and raised his daughter as if he had never heard that. I'm sure there were some internal struggles for him but his kid is now in her 20s and they have a better relationship that a lot of fathers and daughters who are biologically linked.

But financial institutions need to operate by rules, and get audited for commercial as well as legal compliance - and didn`t just randomly make up separation of duties to include spouses and significant others on a whim. Of course friends could also violate policies, as could a coerced employee, but spouses and couples are easier to codify and manage.

In other words lazy blanket policies are easier to enforce than actually taking time to tackle real problems. Remind again of all the major scandals and economic disasters in the news that involved couples working at financial institutions. Isn't that what led to the subprime loan crisis?

[Coligny]

You are missing the point. deliberately.

Being unfaithful is grounds for divorce because marriage is society's institution designed to ensure a stable environment for raising children. If a couple decides not have children, or can't have children, this does not change the legal status of marriage, unless you create a law which says a marriage only becomes a legally binding contract when a child is born.

Stop right here...

Not in Japan if it involve financial transaction between the fornicators. I/e paying for the seks...

viewtopic.php?f=11&t=30967&p=364614&hilit=Not+cheating+if+money

[kurogane]

I can't take these synthetic voice bullshit... Worse than Hatsune Miku and Hitler combined...

Is it actually a fake voice? I thought she was emulating the evening news drones. Anyways, it is tres Tabernac on my oreilles aussi. I was so mystified by her 8 year old logic I didn't really pay that much attention to her voice.

[Coligny]

There are 2 ways japanese youtoob videos try to fake legitimacy:
Pages after pages of white text on a black background sometimes interrupted by overpixelated pictures supposed to illustrate sumthing.
Or synthetic voiceovers in english to appear culturamated...

It's the equivalent of student copypasting wikipedia in their homework certain nobody will find aboot their genius scheming abilities.

[kurogane]

Naroohebi. I try not to watch too many after I found that spastic Japanese-Australian fucktard sucking up to the Right Wing mouth whore Yoshiko Sakurai.

[Salty]

I accidentally left out the word "usually" when editing...at least from all the affair talk I've heard and the ones that have chased me...most of the cheating wives are middle aged, with kids, sexless marriage, etc. Not early 20's like what seems to be the case here.

If you were married to a failed boxer who was prone to violence, a lawyer might seem pretty attractive.

Erm - not illegal at all, and fully suppoorted by the Rule Of Employment - actions in the workplace that bring disharmony and negatively affect moral. Plus - in financial services, and technology at that, maintaining separation of duties is critical to preventing losses. Two employees in the same bed, means both must be assigned to the same role/duty area - since they must be assumed to act as one.

Coligny, this is the kind of bullshit that corporate American has foisted on the world.

Care to expand on that? What exactly do you think is the BS in that statement?

Assuming that people act as one because they fuck is bullshit. Firing people with no evidence that they've done anything inappropriate vis-à-vis their job based on the nature of their relationship is bullshit. You know what else can lead to conflict of interest? Office friendships. I've seen employees who were good friends team up to screw an employer several times. Why not ban office friendships as well? I agree that it's best not to become physically or romantically involved with people you work with. However, there are a lot of things I think people shouldn't do that I wouldn't mandate. I also know that a hell of a lot of people meet their spouses at work.

Thanks for sharing your opinion. But financial institutions need to operate by rules, and get audited for commercial as well as legal compliance - and didn`t just randomly make up separation of duties to include spouses and significant others on a whim. Of course friends could also violate policies, as could a coerced employee, but spouses and couples are easier to codify and manage. In fact many companies, non-financials included, do not allow employment of spouses due to collusion concerns. And then of course there are some companies who welcome spouses as employees, having determined that their business has little risk.

I too had a couple who met at work and did the right thing. In fact I was their official/ceremonial `go between` for their eventual marriage. What they did right - was to come forward and say that they were dating, and ask for the firm to accommodate a work arrangement that wouldn`t violate procedures or policy. One needed to be transferred out of technology, deal done.

Holy fucking shit, while I can't precisely speak for the "interzone" of financial institutions, don't pull this kind of shit in a civilized country where the workforce is not considered property of the employer. Illegal in France by article L1322.1 of the code du travail. Mariage is a fundamental right that can't be challenged by corporate rules. If you fire an employe for marying another one, you are de facto breaking the law.

- actions in the workplace that bring disharmony and negatively affect moral.
That's not a rule for the workplace, that's scientology level bullshit.
Disharmony: can't be qualified or quantified
Moral: see disharmony.

I assure you that `separation of duties` is followed by financial institutions in France too. Large financial institutions may not need to fire anyone, if they have sufficient numbers of positions and can easily move staff around, smaller ones may not be able to do so. Financial institutions tend to follow the letter of the law – in each country, so even those who might fire a person here, may not do so in France.

I worked in four financial institutions in Japan and all of them had that type of restriction/phrase in the Rule of Emplyment.

[Samurai_Jerk]

Financial institutions tend to follow the letter of the law