Art_Critic Posted December 29, 2005 Posted December 29, 2005 Now that that has been established, please quit assuming that I will automatically disagree with you no matter what, k? Thanks. Your still disagreeing with her
whichwayisup Posted December 29, 2005 Posted December 29, 2005 No probs. I would however, like to see ya jump on in the HOT threads once in a while... I hate to say this, but A_C is right. You call it assuming, I call it from where I sit, my thoughts on it. But, moving on...Turning a fresh page, right?
SmoochieFace Posted December 29, 2005 Posted December 29, 2005 I would however, like to see ya jump on in the HOT threads once in a while... ... Sorry, I'm too XXX rated for that.
newbby Posted December 29, 2005 Posted December 29, 2005 Didn't say that ALL women do that... Now, how about answering that question since you quoted it. Why do women (NOT ALL) go along for the ride when the guy only cares about her T&A and not HER as a PERSON? Low self-esteem? Loose morals? Devil-may-care attitude? Hormones? What say you? maybe, they are doing nothing more than hoping, that this time, it is not superficial. alot of men will judge other men as only wanting a girl for sex, and get angry at her for falling for it. sometimes i think it is jealousy, on the other hand a lot of guys are just players trying to get a woman into bed. still, whatever the case, is it a womans fault that she believes him? or is she ust looking for genuine love? as for the short issue, i have always thought that women are LESS likely to go for a man based on looks, but that men are MORE insecure about looks especially with very physically attractive women, because, they believe that women think like they do. i have always dated men according to personality, that is not to say i have always dated good men, far from true, but if they make me laugh or challenge me in some way that does it.
whichwayisup Posted December 29, 2005 Posted December 29, 2005 ... Sorry, I'm too XXX rated for that. Prove it! C'mon...I am sure there's some good story in there to get us all going this Friday. Trust me, it can't be that XXX rated. Obviously you don't know me that well!
SmoochieFace Posted December 29, 2005 Posted December 29, 2005 Prove it! C'mon...I am sure there's some good story in there to get us all going this Friday. Trust me, it can't be that XXX rated. Obviously you don't know me that well! Sorry, I won't be here tomorrow. A long weekend coming up and well-deserved too. Hafta wait until the following Friday. Start the new year with a *bang*... lol...
whichwayisup Posted December 29, 2005 Posted December 29, 2005 Sorry, I won't be here tomorrow. A long weekend coming up and well-deserved too. Hafta wait until the following Friday. Start the new year with a *bang*... lol... I'm holding you to that SF. Lookin' forward to what you've got!
Gold Pile Posted December 29, 2005 Posted December 29, 2005 This thread is still going? Funny, ya never know whats going to take off.
Outcast Posted December 29, 2005 Posted December 29, 2005 Not very impressed with the women ganging up on the men here. I've been hearing rumblings of a pill that suppresses a woman's natural menstrual cycle. I firmly believe this is because men do not have to experience this. At the same time, a significant portion of these women will want to feel feminine by having a stronger, taller, more dominant man. Although it is a fairly small portion of women, I still have to laugh at the irony, but I digress There was no need to jump all over the poster. Clearly, he thinks that having a period makes a woman feel 'feminine'. He hasn't a clue because he's not got the anatomy and can't imagine what it's like. All that was necessary was to tell him what you told him - it makes one feel anything BUT feminine. It causes huge amounts of pain to some women, not counting the nausea. Some women have to miss days of work a month because of it. Others lose a lot of blood. Not only that, but the longer women menstruate, the higher their chances of getting some cancers so there's a theory that women who haven't been pregnant should suppress some periods to give their bodies a rest from the estrogen. So your argument was, in fact, not logical because your assumption that periods make women feel feminine was in error. As for Smooch, you people need to read up on 'halo effect'. Essentially, once you have decided a person is bad (or good), then that idea will cause you to regard his actions and words as bad (or good) irrespective of their objective value. You have to force yourself out of the 'halo effect' trap. You see it every day. Bush is a great example. His fans excuse every misdeed. In Smooch's case, a few people have got it up their noses that he's unilaterally disagreeable even though that's objectively not the case. Fortunately, dude isn't taking it personally. I happen to hate it when people on LS gang up on someone unfairly. Smooch, like Wog, started out with some strong statements but is revising his views and I think he should be applauded for that - in large part because it's rare to see anyone actually change their opinions based on the feedback they get. So there.
Author Lifestream Posted December 29, 2005 Author Posted December 29, 2005 Well, really I didn't say feel feminine, but it is a biological process of what being feminine is. I understand the menstrual cycle. I have a twin sister, and twins are some of the most connected people in the world. I know what she goes through and I know the pain. If I ever have stomach cramps I think to myself: Women must be getting this but probably ten times worse and thousands of times longer. I offered a biased viewpoint, I'm not going to lie. But sometimes it's the best way to start discussion. I mean, look at how passionate everyone became about it.
Outcast Posted December 29, 2005 Posted December 29, 2005 It wasn't 'biased'; it was 'illogical'. Saying that wanting to forestall some periods and feeling 'more feminine' around taller men is contradictory just doesn't scan.
MWC_LifeBeginsAt40 Posted December 29, 2005 Posted December 29, 2005 Well, really I didn't say feel feminine, but it is a biological process of what being feminine is. I understand the menstrual cycle. I have a twin sister, and twins are some of the most connected people in the world. I know what she goes through and I know the pain. If I ever have stomach cramps I think to myself: Women must be getting this but probably ten times worse and thousands of times longer. I offered a biased viewpoint, I'm not going to lie. But sometimes it's the best way to start discussion. I mean, look at how passionate everyone became about it. You feel your sisters cramps? Just wait til she has a baby!!!
Touche Posted December 30, 2005 Posted December 30, 2005 First off, I never said that those women who rejected me were all taller than me. Some were shorter... most were about the same height... maybe a couple were taller but not by much. What makes my current GF less superficial? She chose me based on my character, my attentiveness, and my intellect. Nothing whatsoever to do with height or any other physical attributes. Physical criteria really do not matter to me. I am not interested in a woman's measurements because, as I stated earlier, do not have any bearing on the quality of a relationship. Whether she is short or tall does not matter. As far as your hypothetical... if she is interesting, has a good personality, is fun to be around, is honest and of good character then I see no reason why she doesn't deserve a chance with me. So much for being a superficial hypocrite. The fact that height is an issue for them in the first place demonstrates superficiality on their part. I should not have to *overcome* height with anything... the intangible qualities should matter regardless of height. Of course you're a superficial hypocrite...remember this? "Yeah, but most long-legged women are skinny. Definitely not my physical type" So now matter how nice and intellectual and down to earth I am, you'd reject me since I have long legs and I'm thin. Yeah, I'd call that being a hypocrite.
Outcast Posted December 30, 2005 Posted December 30, 2005 Hypothetical question: how many times does someone have to get booted for name-calling before that someone finally understands it's against the rules???
johan Posted December 30, 2005 Posted December 30, 2005 Hypothetical question: how many times does someone have to get booted for name-calling before that someone finally understands it's against the rules??? Six. ====== 1
Touche Posted December 30, 2005 Posted December 30, 2005 Hypothetical question: how many times does someone have to get booted for name-calling before that someone finally understands it's against the rules??? Who are you addressing this to? Since it came right after my post, I'm assuming you are referring to me. I'm not name-calling, smooch was. And I haven't been booted...huh???? 1
Outcast Posted December 30, 2005 Posted December 30, 2005 you're a superficial hypocrite Um. This is name-calling.
Author Lifestream Posted December 30, 2005 Author Posted December 30, 2005 It wasn't 'biased'; it was 'illogical'. Saying that wanting to forestall some periods and feeling 'more feminine' around taller men is contradictory just doesn't scan. Hmm, I guess you could say that if you don't believe certain biological processes make you masculine or feminine. I guess I didn't make a clear discersion between the two.
blind_otter Posted December 30, 2005 Posted December 30, 2005 Jeez people, chill out. I think we can safely assume that superficiality, although it is an issue with some, isn't the issue. It's personal preference. Is it superficial to prefer blondes to brunettes? No. I still find dark haired men attractive, but tend to only get into relationships with lighter-complected men. It's not that I think one or the other is ugly, I just prefer one over the other. I thought that was the individual's perogative?
Touche Posted December 30, 2005 Posted December 30, 2005 Jeez people, chill out. I think we can safely assume that superficiality, although it is an issue with some, isn't the issue. It's personal preference. Is it superficial to prefer blondes to brunettes? No. I still find dark haired men attractive, but tend to only get into relationships with lighter-complected men. It's not that I think one or the other is ugly, I just prefer one over the other. I thought that was the individual's perogative? I completely agree with you Otter...it's a matter of preference and nothing more...I was not name-calling per se...I was only repeating back Smooch's words...HE sees having physical preferences like that as "superficial" yet, he DOES have his preferences. He doesn't like "skinny" women. I was only trying to make a point...not name calling. Too bad, Outcast, that you can't see the "distinction" there. If this forum boots people for pointing out an inconsistency in someone's argument, then so be it. Who cares? I'll always call 'em as I see 'em.
Recommended Posts