- Joined
- Jun 20, 2005
- Messages
- 5,487
- Age
- 37
- Main Job
- FFXIV
- Romper Stomper
So you like sagging boobs and the look of a woman who has popped out at minimum one baby? Cmdr you are a freak on a whole new level. I sir respect you.
Some People Are Dumb
- Thread starter Sneakypants
- Start date
- Status
So you like sagging boobs and the look of a woman who has popped out at minimum one baby? Cmdr you are a freak on a whole new level. I sir respect you.
- Joined
- Apr 21, 2007
- Messages
- 8
OMG men are pigs! You think that a 30 year old woman automatically has sagging boobs?
OINK OINK
I loves me some older wimmenz <_<
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2005
- Messages
- 5,487
- Age
- 37
- Main Job
- FFXIV
- Romper Stomper
who are you... and you have to realize im 18 boobs are still quite perky at these ages.
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2006
- Messages
- 1,380
So are penises :wink:
- Joined
- Oct 27, 2004
- Messages
- 10,266
- Age
- 37
- Main Job
- Secondary Job
- Third Job
- Linkshell
- Integral
- FFXIV
- Tyrath
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2005
- Messages
- 5,487
- Age
- 37
- Main Job
- FFXIV
- Romper Stomper
:wink: just when and where kage.
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2006
- Messages
- 1,380
Right here, right on the table baby.
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2005
- Messages
- 5,487
- Age
- 37
- Main Job
- FFXIV
- Romper Stomper
ok take off your pants and be ready in biotch position lol
What part of "you don't get to make up whatever suits your opinions" do you not understand? A gay choice is a gay choice. Jesus, get it through your fucking skull. It's not all that complicated.
You cannot tell me that a male fucking another male is not gay. Regardless of reason.
EDIT: what the hell is "you people" supposed to mean? Sounds like an ignorant statement to me.
Last edited:
I'm sorry you must've had your view obscured by rectum when you read my post. Not once did i bother 'playing the game'. I simply sought to clarify the argument from my perspective and show that it was completely assanine along with the thesis that was presented in artem's post.
My bad, people pose a hypothetical i respond. Bash all you like if it makes you feel better. You can call it a gay tendancy all you like, the fact of the matter is people, no matter the gender, notice when someone of the same gender has an aesthetically pleasing look. It's hard-wired in to our brains, there's no denying or arguing this plain and simple fact. That alone was the meat of my post. You can't have a serious discussion on homo vs heterosexualism based on the theoritcal circumstances presented in this thread.
I did not state i'd fuck Pitt. I stated that he looks better than a 700lb woman. It's not as if i get a thick rubbery one for either of them. There's a simple truth in that statement that relates to the type of culture we live in. I really don't know how to dumb it down for you.
Last edited:
Neither did i, moron. Defensive much?
This isn't about attraction. The question, moron, was if given the choice and only those choices what would you pick. I elaborated on how assanine of a situation that was to use for a hetero/homosexual conversation and/or debate. What i did managed to do was not answer the question and still provide an intelligent post on the topic, moron.
It's not as if anyone here fucked either one of them. Is answering a question, a hypothetical at that, definitive proof of someone's sexuality?
Here's a hint; answering yes makes you .... a moron.
So sorry, all vertabrates are inherently female:
http://edward-t-babinski.blogspot.com/2006_06_01_archive.html
http://books.google.com/books?id=GuFz4r64ETkC&pg=PA19&lpg=PA19&dq=embryo's+inherently+female&source=web&ots=ib_5kKGaop&sig=SRgRuYs9Dqfhl5HRFGoWGD-bw5U
http://www.med.yale.edu/chldstdy/plomdevelop/development/March99.html
http://www.witchvox.com/va/dt_va.html?a=usok&c=trads&id=8480
http://home.earthlink.net/~waluk/origin_of_species.html
http://www.futurepundit.com/archives/003650.html
You want i should quote jurassic park too?
I'm sorry; you had exactly what to bolster your claim?
Oh that's right, nothing.
I do like how you added the qualifier this time of 'identification' this time around. Even at that you're obscurely wrong as identification on the cellular and DNA level will still show the embryo in question to be female.
Personally i'm of the opinion sexuality, or at least a sign of preference, does not actually take effect until puberty. A time at which, contrary to the 'facts' or 'point' presented in the post in question that i responded to, your body is bombarded by more hormones than at any time in a human being's life. Now, of course, there are exceptions to the rule. There are people who will tell you at age .. let's say, 6 or 10 or something around there maybe even earlier .. formative years, you get the idea, that they had an attraction to the same sex or knew they were homosexual.
My only response to that, in all honesty (again just my opinion), is that normal children with a proper or stereotypical upbringing don't consider sexuality until the magical age of puberty.
See how i managed that? Those are my opinions, well informed or completely inaccurate i make no attempt to pass them off as fact, bitch someone out, or belittle their sexuality or how they arrived to their respective conclusions on sex simply for not agreeing which i assume many people won't.
As for being insulted get your pillow handy. Nowhere in my post did i take a shot at you. I simply stated the obvious. Human beings take their ques in life from other human beings. We're hard-wired to recognize aesthetics in other human beings. Get a fucking helmet. If you want to be insulted i can do that all day long but don't go being a pussy because i shot over your head on the topic and called your post exactly what it was:
Intuitively well-informed bullshit.
I thought i was being rather civil considering the venue of the topic, all things considered.
The comments you apparently took to heart were completely benign and not directed at anyone in particular. The plain fact is if you can't draw on your experiences both internal and external to guide you in to looking good to attract a mate or at the very least a partner... guess what? YOU PROBABLY DON'T. Holy shit what a fucking leap that is.
Let me put it this way. If you can't understand the points being made and can't read a completely nuetral post on the topic then do yourself the favor of keeping the fuck out of the argument.
Aside from the pissing and moaning about your precious little feelings would you mind actually providing some kind of point as opposed to your skewed views on the subject?
Hate to break it in to 2 back to back posts like that but you both warrant the attention.
I'm not a fan of morons myself. When adressing someone as such it might help if you had even a slight grasp of what or more specificly in this case who you're responding to.
obligatory; GTFO my internets.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Apr 25, 2004
- Messages
- 1,690
- Age
- 44
- Location
- Vermont, US
- Main Job
- Secondary Job
- Third Job
- Server
- Quetzalcoatl
- Linkshell
- OwMyFace
- FFXI
- Vilurum
Nope, I can't tell you that. It is indeed a gay *action*. However, that is not the same thing as automatically branding both participants as gay *people*. If you're trying to insinuate that the two things are equivalent, then your logic is flawed. If you're not, then carry on.
Your problem RoM is that you don't read what people have posted. No one said that saying Brad Pitt is hotter than the 700 pound chick is gay. No one said that answering a hypothetical situation makes you gay, but in hypothetical situation you would actually go through with it and that would in fact make you gay.
You quoted me, and used "you" as you proceed to insult me. That's not a neutral post, that's a direct attack at me. If you wanted to use the term "you" for general population, you should use "people" or any other 3rd person type word.
You also had not a single understanding of what I said because you think hormonal influence during brain development in fetus is the same thing as an adult smoking weed or going through hormonal therapy.
You argued against what I said by proposing alternatives that are not even in any way related to what I was talking about. Thus I called you a moron. And you further prove that my point still stands.
You quoted me, and used "you" as you proceed to insult me. That's not a neutral post, that's a direct attack at me. If you wanted to use the term "you" for general population, you should use "people" or any other 3rd person type word.
You also had not a single understanding of what I said because you think hormonal influence during brain development in fetus is the same thing as an adult smoking weed or going through hormonal therapy.
You argued against what I said by proposing alternatives that are not even in any way related to what I was talking about. Thus I called you a moron. And you further prove that my point still stands.
This coming from the dumbass who got all haughty on comments that were entirely free from insult on a personal level. Any person with even the smallest ammount of higher brain function could have read my response thoughtfully and not implied a personal connection to the utterly benign comments made. Contrast and compare the posts i've made starting with my OP in response to you and it'll become quite obvious exactly when it was that you earned my ire. It also helps to notice that when someone is breaking you down properly and personally it's on a quote by quote basis. Not a full quote and then a tangent based entirely on the idea presented in that post. It's implied context, most people get it. It's inferred by the counterpoint made. Maybe i'm just an asshole and you're not much of a thinker, who gives a shit honestly. There was great dialogue brewing and you screwed the pooch by getting all sappy on me.
Actually excalibr and Antor did just that. Who's not doing enough reading again? I lost track. Again, please do quote where i stated i'd fuck either one of them.
Ok, so reading isn't your problem ... maybe. Comprehension is. I made a sweeping statement about human beings on whole and how their brains function on the level of aesthetics and used the editorial 'you' as i tend to address anyone reading as opposed to whatever simple-minded waste of space i happen to be responding to singularly. I give the general population of the boards more credit than you do, apparently. Regardless of who exactly is physically involved in the conversation there are, believe it or not, people who read and feel passionately about topics who tend not to post. They're called lurkers. Some just simply don't have the effort in them to bash their intellects against lesser ones for pages at a time. Having a healthy respect for the unposting masses works in my favor more often than not. Excuse the fuck out of me, i assumed my post was clear enough. Moreover if you can actually find a personal insult in there i'd be more than happy to appologize, as none exists kindly go fuck yourself.
Why should i have to pandor to insecure asswipes when making a broadly and generally intelligent post? If you take offense it's on your head, not mine. My conscience is completely clear. There's a pattern here that i've not only used in many posts i've made but also recommended the mods use on a regular basis. In short it's much easier to make a broad statement and let the moron's out themselves by being offended than it is to single one person out and give the imperssion of picking on them or instigating incivility.
No, moron, what i stated was that: Based on the information provided in your post that chemical or hormonal imbalance or stimulation leads to homosexuality which is entirely false which can be easily demonstrated by the examples i provided. Please manage to read, think, comprehend and then reply next time. It's a far better way to go about things and be taken as a semi-intelligent adult having a conversation.
No, you're right. Using your argument and relating it to other instances where hormones are introduced to the body, often in higher concentrations or more regular dosages, (or occasionally and considerably far worse) irregular dosages, is completely off-base. I don't know what i was thinking.
Something tells me you're living in some kind of alternate reality where you've managed to make a valid or even remotely logial point in this thread so much as insult the origins, choices, and irrefutable (spelling's wrong i'm sure) facts bolstered and supported by numerous sources given freely which fly directly in the face of the 'points' and 'facts' you presented.
Whatever floats your boat bud, people who can disassociate personally from a post before speaking/typing/replying already know the score and have for quite some time whereas my participation in discussions like these are concerned.
... and the answer is yes. My penis is only eclipsed by my ego, for those of you wondering.
Edit/P.S.
If you'd like to address me on the actual topic and provide some kind of counter point i'm all ears. This dramatic bullshit about how a post makes you feel is gettign kind of old. Get a fucking shrink, my time's a little more valuable.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2005
- Messages
- 3,550
- Website
- myspace.com
- Nation Banner
- Main Job
- Secondary Job
- Third Job
RoM said:
I did?
Technically. Not in this thread, perse, but i did read the thread this came from.
Excalibr said:
If you weren't serious my appologies, i misunderstood.
If you were, then yes you did. No shame in it. If that's your stance that's your stance, defend it... or not, really it's a non-issue.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2005
- Messages
- 3,550
- Website
- myspace.com
- Nation Banner
- Main Job
- Secondary Job
- Third Job
Actually, based on the first few pages of this thread, i did.
Cue twilight zone music.
It's also a little more clear why i should have just listed Antor instead of pointing the finger. The most recent comments i read from you on the issue were in the previous thread, i had archived and all but gone fuzzy on the first few pages of this.
Pass the bowl, bitch.
Edit: Just because i can... <.<
For andreva:
assuming, biggety, cavalier, conceited, contemptuous, detached, disdainful, distant, egotistic, egotistical, high, high hat, hoity-toity, imperious, indifferent, lofty, lordly, overbearing, overweening, proud, reserved, scornful, sniffy, snobbish, snooty, snotty, stuck-up, supercilious, superior, uppity
thesaurus ftw.
Do i win?
Personally i'm a fan of 'uppity'.
Last edited:
- Status