“I tried, but this ultra-sensate-body-only couldn’t stand the tickle. Sometimes I miss my self…” 
Sorry for derailing further, but… 
The Nth rule of actualism discourse: any discussion about sex must eventually devolve into a query about sexual interaction with inanimate objects. Cf Selected Correspondence: Sex (search for “licking a dead fish” for the relevant part)
1 Like
lol I love it… this thread has been sufficiently derailed. But I ultimately blame the Actually Free person for steering it in that direction.
I take full responsibility
Hahaha
that’s how we roll! enjoy the ride! …and fishes…
1 Like
“Actualism? Isn’t that the thing where you have sex with fish?”
By coincidence today I came across the line of questioning about licking a dead fish, and it’s quite remarkable the imaginative scenarios people come up with when trying to ‘conceptualize’ actual freedom. I know I have. Some years ago Craig accurately called me out for jumping in & answering questions based on my ‘reading’ of Richard’s writing & ‘what I thought it implied,’ in other words, pure fantasy.
RESPONDENT: Let us say, one is licking the genitals of one’s partner. Let’s assume the eyes of both are closed. Now as far as the sensory input is concerned, the tongue is having some tangy/pungent/fishy taste. But one wouldn’t get that pleasure from merely licking a stale fish. Would you agree?