Cute
LJacksn555
as cute. Some said it meant that the person that the "cute" comment was being
directed at was ugly in an interesting sort of way, but everyone seemed to
believe that it didn't mean attractive. I've been called cute many, many(more
times than I would like) times in my life and I'm starting to think that I
shouldn't have thanked the people who said it, but rather told them to suck my
ass. Does anyone have any thoughts on this that might help me figure out
whether I'm cute-attractive or cute-ugly.
Thanks
MrSex4uNYC
>whether I'm cute-attractive or cute-ugly.
>Thanks
IMO, cute means that someone is nice to look at. that does not mean SEXUALLY
ATTRACTIVE. if a chick says you are cute, she means that she likes to look at
your face. since faces are VERY important to chicks along with personalities,
that means that you will be able to hang out with her long enough to ply your
trade... talk your game. again, it does not mean that you are attractive. I
have heard chicks call brad pitt and keanu and dicaprio cute, but all three of
them have a DIFFERENT look.
cute has NOTHING to do with ugly though... UNLESS the chick is FISHING for
something to say about you, like we would say about an UG "she has a nice
personality" :) it's all in the context.
chick 1: how about him over there?
chick 2: ooh, he's cute :)
= GOOD FOR YOU
chick 1: isn't that guy over there sexy?
chick 2: he's cute.
= CONCESSION... BAD FOR YOU WITH CHICK 2
Nathan SZILARD
LJacksn555 a écrit:
>
> I was reading a post on another newsgroup about what it meant to be referred to
> as cute. Some said it meant that the person that the "cute" comment was being
> directed at was ugly in an interesting sort of way, but everyone seemed to
> believe that it didn't mean attractive. I've been called cute many, many(more
> times than I would like) times in my life and I'm starting to think that I
> shouldn't have thanked the people who said it, but rather told them to suck my
> ass. Does anyone have any thoughts on this that might help me figure out
MrSex4uNYC
>complimentary ways.
that's what I was saying
>Usually if we bother to say he's cute we find him
>sexually attractive on some level, even if not for us, for another
>woman we know..."you should meet so and so...he's pretty cute"
>(We are always scoping for our friends.)
that's interesting. we had a thread on how women like to set their friends up
and how they like to imagine or see their girlfriends in sexual or dating
situations. it had something to do with Maniac's "Mr Smooth" style.
that is also useful. we can use this for a pivot approach. instead of
approaching the chick for the date or the fuck or whatever, we could
potentially approach her as a guy that is LOOKING but not necessarily for HER.
in which case she would go into automatic set-him-up mode and become an ACTIVE
scout, recommending you to chicks and getting you laid by inviting you out with
girls that they think would like you.
>Sometimes if he's really
>attractive we call him babe. Cute means appealling, maybe in an
>unusual way, but not necessarrilly. Cute is usually for men 30 and
>under...after that they become good looking or attractive, but it
>basically menas the same thing. I have never called a man sexy, since
>in my kind, sexy applies to females...you know, cleavage, glamour, all
>that stuff...just doesn't seem like a very masculine word to me, so I
>never use it.
>
>Kate
hmm... men are not sexy but women are. so are you saying that females are the
sexual creatures and men are just along for the ride? I don't really get where
you make the distinction OR what it really means. are you saying women are
responsible for creating sexual situations?
dunno
Nathan SZILARD
referrals. When I ask a woman who has LJBFed me to set me up
with her friend, she always has excuses for not doing it.
Jealousy ... maybe ...
Nathan SZILARD
Very funny.
Anyway, you know perfectly well that's not they way it works.
On Mon, 26 Jul 1999 14:54:16 GMT, Zipjack <z...@jack.com> wrote:
| On 26 Jul 1999 14:47:53 GMT, nat...@metabork.fr.eu.org (Nathan
| SZILARD) wrote:
|
| >I already reported that, but I have never had any chance with
| >referrals. When I ask a woman who has LJBFed me to set me up
| >with her friend, she always has excuses for not doing it.
| >Jealousy ... maybe ...
|
| I think you could take that 2 ways, jealousy, or she 's a good enough
| friend that she genuinely is trying to protect her friend the way she
| is "protecting" herself.
|
| Kate
|
MrSex4uNYC
>referrals. When I ask a woman who has LJBFed me to set me up
>with her friend, she always has excuses for not doing it.
>Jealousy ... maybe ...
Fuck That!
give her a nice long "Use It or Lose It" speech. If she's not fucking, hand
over some friends that want to fuck.
It's as simple as that, or FUCK THAT BITCH and don't respond to her at all.
It's her RESPONSIBILITY to sex you OR find another chick that will or she is
USELESS to you!
MrSex4uNYC
>>referrals. When I ask a woman who has LJBFed me to set me up
>>with her friend, she always has excuses for not doing it.
>>Jealousy ... maybe ...
>
>friend that she genuinely is trying to protect her friend the way she
>is "protecting" herself.
>
>Kate
ok. valid point.
I am never an asshole to chicks. All I want from them is sex, but I am always
friendly while I am trying to push them into the bar bathroom for a little
action >:)
I NEVER run into the problem of chicks referring me to other chicks. I let
them know from the beginning I'm gonna get it from somewhere so it's going to
be from YOU right now OR I'm going to be looking for another chick. Sinec they
know they are no longer interested if they LJBF me, they are now pivots and it
is their JOB to get me chicks to fuck. otherwise, they are not worth my time.
what Kate brings up is important because if they LJBF'd you because you are an
asshole... OF COURSE they aren't going to set you up with any of their friends.
they could lose their friendships over some shit like that :) you will NEVER
get a good pivot from a chick that thinks you're no good for her.
there are many reasons a chick will LJBF you... as long as it is an issue she
has with "being with you" as opposed to an issue with YOU, you can get her to
get you chicks.
it is also my experience that while they are setting you up, they somehow come
to their "senses" and realize that they are giving something away that they
don't have for themselves for the night... and sometimes RECONSIDER their
bullshit no-sex positions :)
Nathan SZILARD
Ahem, if they don't want to fuck you cause you're an asshole,
I dunno why they would want to be FRIENDS with you ...
I mean, they're women, but still ... that's pretty absurd.
MrSex4uNYC
>friend actually hook up (as Nathan suggested).
>I have pointed out to a friend or two that they shouldn't get angry if
>they reject the guy and set him loose on a friend and it works out.
too bad. use it or lose it
>Since men (to me) are neutral in a manner of
>ways that women aren't (in fact are able to appear neutral in a number
>of ways that women aren't), I just don't think of them in terms of
>sexy, allthough they can be quite seductive.
ok. I see your meaning a little, but now define seductive vs sexy. what does
either feature inspire in a woman? how would a woman act differently towards
someone seductive vs someone sexy?
>Example:
>In an office situation men generally have a range of acceptable dress
>choices, but will not stand out. Women stand out much more, even
>within the range of appropriate...long hair/short, makeup, none, dress
>above the knee or below, pretty, not pretty, married, unmarried.
>I've not yet figured out any way to appear neutral, because I'll still
>be judged along these parameters.
that's an interesting point. I can't judge guys so I really never thought
about it. you are right though. I can see a guy in dirty, non-fitting jeans
or in a suit and he is the same guy. I have no idea what he wants or where he
is going or what he does for a living... I see a girl in dirty jeans and I'm
like "damn... she really doesn't care if she looks good or not" I see
minskirts and fuckme pumps downtown and I say she is a secretary. I see a
business suit/skirt and I say she is an executive. I see a no-style-at-all
dress and I say she is a hic or just not able to be or interested in being
sexy. I see hair held up and think one thing then I see hair down and flowing
and think another. it is also easier to tell when a woman is interested in you
or not. guys ARE more neutral. I could be standing next to an AFC looking at
a chick and we will be THINKING exactly opposite things, but might LOOK the
same because I am ACTUALLY calm and he wants to LOOK CALM :)
the only thing a guy can do is change his attire, change his body through
working out, or change his hair. none of this matters either because there are
women that like short hair and women that like long hair... there is always a
set of women that likes you as-is so there is no need to change your style.
it is possible that women ARE the sexy creatures and men are just the
CUSTOMERS! :)
>its like the difference between just
>"Mr." (which can be used from ages 1-100) and "Mrs. Ms. or Miss"
>which all indicate something about the attitude or state of attachment
>of the user.)
yeah. I noticed this years ago on some application, but wrote it off to a
male-dominated society in which we need to know which chicks we can fuck freely
and which we have to sneak behind their husbands' backs :)
>Are women responsible for creating sexual situations?
>I've put a # into motion in my time.
>Generally it seems that a man shows interest and a woman either
>responds or doesn't . I'll also say that I fared much better by
>waiting for guys to make the moves, since a number have seemed
>uncomfortable when they are not in control of the situation.
>
>Kate
that's not really what I meant. it's more like if you take one guy and one
girl like barbie dolls and change parameters on them... clothing hair body
types... which has more effect on the situation sexually? does putting a
bigger dick on the Ken have more effect on Barbie than putting bigger tits on
Barbie has on Ken? does putting a suit on Ken have more effect on Barbie than
putting a mini-skirt on Barbie has on Ken?
it may well be that women are the sexy ones entirely. you can pull out the
eddie murphy routine about "Dexter" in the Bahamas swinging his dick over his
shoulder and fucking your girl with it and say that's a way a guy could be
sexy, but I think in the US society, the sexiness may be all on the women's
side. I never considered that. Maybe all men do is loko a certain way that
MAKES women want to be sexy?
MrSex4uNYC
>wrote:
>
>>Fuck That!
>>
>>give her a nice long "Use It or Lose It" speech. If she's not fucking, hand
>>over some friends that want to fuck.
>>
>>It's as simple as that, or FUCK THAT BITCH and don't respond to her at all.
>>It's her RESPONSIBILITY to sex you OR find another chick that will or she is
>>USELESS to you!
>
>
>Kate
er.. um... what I meant was...
That's not fair to you Nathan :(
let her know how you long for her, but since you can understand her reasons for
not returning your heartfelt paassion, the least she could do as a TRUE FRIEND
is to PLEASE help you to fill the void with a woman that loves you for YOU and
not your money or wit or smashing good looks. someone that will be there for
you on those lonely nights when all you have now is lying in front of your
fireplace alone, remembering the good times you shared together before your
dreams were dashed to pieces :(
help me Rhonda... help help me Rhonda
HAHAHAHAHAHA >:)
MrSex4uNYC
>>
>>That's not fair to you Nathan :(
>>
>>let her know how you long for her, but since you can understand her reasons
>for
>>not returning your heartfelt paassion, the least she could do as a TRUE
>FRIEND
>>is to PLEASE help you to fill the void with a woman that loves you for YOU
>and
>>not your money or wit or smashing good looks. someone that will be there
>for
>>you on those lonely nights when all you have now is lying in front of your
>>fireplace alone, remembering the good times you shared together before your
>>dreams were dashed to pieces :(
>>
>>help me Rhonda... help help me Rhonda
>
>for real, like bitch this, douchebag that?
>Zoikkksss!!!! That doesn't seem very cool!
>Kate grimaces.
>
>Kate
It all depends on the situation. I can hang out with a friend and have him say
"check out that bitch" then I can listen to stories about the same girl like
"that bitch sucked my dick, then she..." then somehow she becomes a chick and
then if she lasts long enough I get to hear "I just came back from vacation
with MY WOMAN" It's funny how these dick-sucking bitches become respectable
WOMEN due to their place in the guy's life that's telling the story. Oh... and
don't BOTHER to try to remind the guy about how we ALL used to call her a
bitch. Then he's going to be all mad that you are disrespecting his WOMAN :)
From where I stand, chicks are interchangeable. Only the ones that have some
kind of repeatable value like they have a really good sense of humor or fuck
really well or whatever get ANY recognition in my book.
For instance, Kate... you were just some chick until you started posting great
stuff like this question. suddenly you had VALUE. suddenly you were worth
something because you bring new ideas into my life that make me reconsider
positions and adopt stronger stances and most of all understand MORE about
women (notice I didn't say UNDERSTAND WOMEN)
Until chicks demonstrate some kind of value, they're just T&A and pretty
faces... interchangeable and essentially valueLESS if there is another one that
is willing to get with the program that has the same tits you do.
Then there is the other issue of men that are ANGRY at women. David S. USED TO
BE angry at women, now he is not :) some guys on this NG still are angry at
women whether they notice it or not. you can see it when they post irrelevant
and sarcastic replies to on-topic posts. I can't speak to that because I love
women in general. it's just that one is no different from the other given the
same looks, but that's a different topic :)
I would like to know also who thinks what about women... are they our friends,
servants, toys, keep the pussy warm, make us food, bear our children, out
equals, our superiors?
MrSex4uNYC
>
>>>Since men (to me) are neutral in a manner of
>>>ways that women aren't (in fact are able to appear neutral in a number
>>>of ways that women aren't), I just don't think of them in terms of
>>>sexy, allthough they can be quite seductive.
>
>>
>>ok. I see your meaning a little, but now define seductive vs sexy. what
>does
>>either feature inspire in a woman? how would a woman act differently
>towards
>>someone seductive vs someone sexy?
>
>creation of a sexy atmosphere.
yeah that was easy, but didn't explain much. so you are saying that women are
sexy BECAUSE they are passive and men are seductive BECAUSE they have to be the
agressors? what about the times when the man is passive and the woman (usually
an UG) is the agressor? does that make the woman seductive and the man sexy?
are you saying that laying down near a pool makes a MAN sexy and approaching
him with an intent to fuck him makes a WOMAN seductive? I don't really
understand your point.
I also don't agree that sexy is a passive state. I think flirting is VERY SEXY
and you have to be active at least part of the time to flirt. Matter of fact,
I think fun flirting is sexy and lust-driven flirting is seductive.
When a man says a woman is sexy... what does he mean?
When a woman says a man is seductive... what does she mean?
are the two interchangeable?
>Now, the other women here may beg to
>differ, but once I developed a mature sexuality, I found it impossible
>to turn the sexiness off, regardless of how I dressed or behaved,
>allthough it hasn't interfered with the accomplishment of higher
>minded goals.
you obviously have issues with this that I hope you get to resolve soon.
>Now, if a sexy person wants to also act seductive, then
>its like a one two punch, and can be quite powerful.
>Therefore, men only became "sexy" to me when they were overtly
>seductive, but if I was into them anyway, it didn't really matter.
ok. so NOW a man CAN BE SEXY if he is overtly SEDUCTIVE? how about an example
of a man that achieved this... becoming sexy through being seductive...
hopefully you can cite a movie we have all seen or an actor that we are all
familiar with.
>It can be very complicated. Will they take me seriously, won't they?
what difference does it make? if you are hired into a position of authority,
people have to follow your orders or suffer the consequences on their review.
>Will the other women hate me if I keep my hair long and fail to
>disguise my figure in loose baggy generic clothing?
who cares? why do you want to hang out with women that can't handle the fact
that you are attractive and they aren't. they should be glad that you are
around at all to attract men to the group then bounce them off since you're
married. the UGs should be glad to have you along instead of hating you.
>Have I been hired for my looks or abilites?
who cares? at the end of the day, YOU have a paycheck and someone else does
not. whether you were hired because you were the best PERSON for the job, or
because the boss liked your tits better than the others that applied makes NO
DIFFERENCE!
>Are people more likely to give me a fair shake if they don't feel
>competetive with me?
irrelevant. if you excel at what you do, you don't need fair shakes. you will
get by on your skill and intelligence and no amount of dirty tricks will be
able to undermine you. if you are mediocre, however, fair shakes become really
important because you can't MAKE YOUR OWN WAY!
>Will I get hit on by bosses, clients, even students?
you take karate... fuck it. besides as far as bosses they have sex harrassment
laws now that you can mention to curb behavior... and probably get promptly
FIRED! As far as clients, you have an advantage that I don't have. YOU can go
in dressed in a sexy fashion and get MORE SALES than I can with the same sales
pitch or perhapes even a better sales pitch. Unfortunately, that's how the
counrty runs... on looks and horny old men. Students is a tough one because a
teacher needs to have respect and it's hard to have when you come into the
classroom and see drawings of you getting fucked doggie-style on the blackboard
:)
>If so, how will I handle it? All these things run through a woman's
>mind, and may bring her in direct conflict with her real preferences.
that's your own personal issue. you have to learn which life you are going to
lead, a passive existance where you are subject to EVERYONE'S whims, or live
your own life and have your husband support you and fuck everyone else!
>There really is no neutrality...I hate hyphens, yet have been hassled
>for keeping my own last name. I will answer to Mrs. or Ms.
same issue. that should be between you and your husband. fuck everyone else!
>>that's not really what I meant. it's more like if you take one guy and one
>>girl like barbie dolls and change parameters on them... clothing hair body
>>types... which has more effect on the situation sexually? does putting a
>>bigger dick on the Ken have more effect on Barbie than putting bigger tits
>on
>>Barbie has on Ken? does putting a suit on Ken have more effect on Barbie
>than
>>putting a mini-skirt on Barbie has on Ken?
>
>I think the changes on Barbie would make more impact...and another
>thing...most of us aren't into checking out bulges, and don't obsess
>over 10" schlongs, so don't worry about it.
>>
>Kate
that's what my point was exactly. tits are out for everyone to check out.
women don't get to see what they are getting until they're on their knees with
it pointed in their faces :) I have neglected to talk to many many women
because I didn't like something about their bodies. women don't have such a
range to work with in men. they are in shape or not, tall or short, thin or
fat... it's all the same thing in the end. look at the movies. all the time
you see women all the way down to bra, panties and pumps and the man only took
off his suit jacket :) hahahahaha
you may have a point to this women are sexy and men are not thing. that's why
men need women to bring sexuality and sexiness into the picture. I would still
like to understand your sexy vs seductive idea though. I think you are on to
something good, but haven't quite articulated exactly what that means to you
yet :)
wile e. coyote
> Actually, my friends and I have referred to guys as "cute" in very
> complimentary ways. Usually if we bother to say he's cute we find him
> sexually attractive on some level, even if not for us, for another
> woman we know..."you should meet so and so...he's pretty cute"
That woman is probably ovulating and very horny, right?
> (We are always scoping for our friends.) Sometimes if he's really
Outfoxing The Foxes
>It all depends on the situation. I can hang out with a friend and have
him say
>"check out that bitch" then I can listen to stories about the same girl
like
>"that bitch sucked my dick, then she..." then somehow she becomes a
chick and
>then if she lasts long enough I get to hear "I just came back from
vacation
>with MY WOMAN" It's funny how these dick-sucking bitches become
respectable
>WOMEN due to their place in the guy's life that's telling the story.
Oh... and
>don't BOTHER to try to remind the guy about how we ALL used to call her
a
>bitch. Then he's going to be all mad that you are disrespecting his
WOMAN :)
You know whats funny, I used to work with a guy who was all about this
kind of stuff. He, another woman and I all used to commute together.
One day i gave her a birhday card with some ridiculous hunk of
beefcake on the cover. The card read something like "Don't let another
birthday get you down ...: (then on the inside)
"Let HIM get you down!"
We thought it was pretty funny, but this guy who'd been dishing out
exactly the same kind of shit to us for months was REALLY offended.
He didn't seem to recognize himself. The reason i bring this up is:
how do you guys feel about being treated as objects?
Women genrally are treated as sexual playthings, and men as wallets,
and I recognize the reverse exploitation here. So the question is:
what would you NOT want to hear women say about you?
<---------Most women want me for one reason: MY MIND. I can look good,
make a good impression, but the ones who LUST after me, except when I'm
in top shape, do so for my brain. That makes me an object as far as I'm
concerned. Do I mind? Not at all. I look at it as insurance that I am
going to get what I want, and from my fan club I take my pick and look
for what *I* want. This is the basic genetic business transaction.
Whatever results you want you can produce at least some of.
>From where I stand, chicks are interchangeable. Only the ones that have
some
>kind of repeatable value like they have a really good sense of humor or
fuck
>really well or whatever get ANY recognition in my book.
How would you feel if I said the same thing about guys, except in
regard to thier financial value? Would you be offended or just think
it was human nature?
<------The chapter on CUPID explains my view.
>For instance, Kate... you were just some chick until you started posting
great
>stuff like this question. suddenly you had VALUE. suddenly you were
worth
>something because you bring new ideas into my life that make me
reconsider
>positions and adopt stronger stances and most of all understand MORE
about
>women (notice I didn't say UNDERSTAND WOMEN)
Mrsex, as an advocate for my gender, I have met very few WORTHLESS
women.
<-----I see many women whose current worth beyond sex is low, but who
have tremendous untapped potential to change society for the better, but
who either don't know how or really don't want to.
I find the vast majority of women I know to be intelligent,
friendly, and funny, and often they are talented as well.
<-----I find most women to be friendly only to those they favor, with
requirements for gaining their favor. The result is a social
dictatorship.
When i work with my very young female students (Kindergarten through
2nd grade) I sometimes become almost nauseous thinking about these
beautiful, genuine, sweet little girls recieving future initiation
into adulthood the same brutal abusive way I did. What the fuck could
they have done to deserve adult men leering at them, callling them
names, trying to pick them up before they have a sense of what is
really happenning?
<-------Men have their own coming-of-age problems, like being laughed at
by women for the first 5-10 years they are in the dating game.
I started getting this from guys when I was 12, and I totally did not
know how to deal with it. It did a real # on me.Unfortunately, they may
not all have decent boundaries when it comes to guys, so they end up
allowing some moron to think he's used
them even though he spent a year suckin' on his Mommy's tit, and often
still does, financially, or emotionally, (and would do the same to her
if she had the dubious "privledge" of being in a relationship
with him) Whoops, off my soapbox. Why do we have to prove that we are
not worthless objects to be used for entertainment and discarded?
<--------Would you keep a job forever if there was only one day of work
to do? We must sustain our worth. Why should a man who's been let down
by women and BLAMED for allowing it keep allowing it? If women shoot men
down enough, they should be surprised when the planes stop going up.
>Until chicks demonstrate some kind of value, they're just T&A and pretty
>faces... interchangeable and essentially valueLESS if there is another
one that
>is willing to get with the program that has the same tits you do.
Ummm,,...would you feel this way about your sister or daughter? How do
you feel about guys who would have treated your mother and grandmother
this way? This sentiment just makes me sick.
<------My female relatives I would put in the same class as my wife or
even daughter. For example, I would allow my daughter to do anything she
wanted once she was 16. Not because I would want her doing anything, but
because by then if I haven't taught her right from wrong it's hopeless.
The lure of early freedom would hopefully make her more open to listening
to me early on. Steve Tyler took the most interesting approach, saying
that he couldn't very well expect his lovers to be one way and not think
that his daughter would one day be the same thing for another man. He
even put her in his video if I'm not mistaken.
>Then there is the other issue of men that are ANGRY at women. David S.
USED TO
>BE angry at women, now he is not :) some guys on this NG still are
angry at
>women whether they notice it or not. you can see it when they post
irrelevant
>and sarcastic replies to on-topic posts. I can't speak to that because
I love
>women in general. it's just that one is no different from the other
given the
>same looks, but that's a different topic :)
Of course, there are many exploitave peorple of both sexes out there,
so I don't believe my gender is perfect. If you ask me, the women who
go for $ make it tougher for the nice guys to trust the rest of us.
<---------Define "nice guy." Terms like this can be manipulated at will
to support an agenda.
>I would like to know also who thinks what about women... are they our
friends,
>servants, toys, keep the pussy warm, make us food, bear our children,
out
>equals, our superiors?
Every user fucking slid squalling, helpless, and wretched out of a
woman's body.
Talk about women's work.
Ugh.
<-----Women have selected men who are like what they claim not to want,
and reproduced them.
Outfoxing The Foxes: How To Seduce The Women Of Your Dreams
http://www.cybersheet.com/fox/index/html
Charming Prince Charming: How To Marry The Man Of Your Dreams (FREE!!)
http://www.cybersheet.com/charming/index.html
___________________________________________________________________
Get the Internet just the way you want it.
Free software, free e-mail, and free Internet access for a month!
Try Juno Web: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj.
Nathan SZILARD
> Why do we have to prove that we are not worthless objects to be used
> for entertainment and discarded?
"You" as a group don't have anything to prove. I, myself, got my
life changed for related reasons. Could'nt find sex (once when I was
17, not much later) and needless to say, love, for a loooong time. Well
too long.
You know the story, nice guy vs. jerks. I had that idealized view of
women. Problem: that does'nt get you laid.
Then, swiiiish, change view on the topic, and bang, you get love,
sex, attention. Absurd? That's the way the world is.
Women don't want to be treated like objects, but they are attracted
to those who treat them thusly. Whole point of this group: how to
fake the bad guys' traits without being a bad boy.
So here we go. I start to get some serious business since four years
ago maybe. Now I can relax on this, wait I COULD relax on this,
I just happen to have focused a big part of my life on it instead
of improving my knowledge and stuff.
Good, in a way, I got to learn a lot about psychology and related
topics. Bad, I'm not the astronomer I dreamed to be when I was
a kid.
I have a few psychological issues myself (no I'm not a psycho
or a pervert or what have you, it's nothing to do with sex actually)
that derive from that frustration I once endured.
I remember a time where I could'nt look at an ad without getting
angry ("beauty .. beauty .. not for me ..")
(And if you wonder, I've lived with a girl who had been raped and
suffers serious mental issues, borderline personality disorder
actually, and I know what it means)
> Ummm,,...would you feel this way about your sister or daughter?
No sister. Could have helped.
> How do
> you feel about guys who would have treated your mother and grandmother
> this way? This sentiment just makes me sick.
This is a wrong view of the whole issue.
> >Then there is the other issue of men that are ANGRY at women. David S. USED TO
> >BE angry at women, now he is not :) some guys on this NG still are angry at
> >women whether they notice it or not. you can see it when they post irrelevant
> >and sarcastic replies to on-topic posts. I can't speak to that because I love
> >women in general. it's just that one is no different from the other given the
> >same looks, but that's a different topic :)
>
> Of course, there are many exploitave peorple of both sexes out there,
> so I don't believe my gender is perfect. If you ask me, the women who
> go for $ make it tougher for the nice guys to trust the rest of us.
> >I would like to know also who thinks what about women... are they our friends,
> >servants, toys, keep the pussy warm, make us food, bear our children, out
> >equals, our superiors?
>
> Every user fucking slid squalling, helpless, and wretched out of a
> woman's body.
> Talk about women's work.
> Ugh.
>
> Kate
Nathan SZILARD
| >> this way? This sentiment just makes me sick.
|
| >
| >This is a wrong view of the whole issue.
|
| Women from my bloodline have stories about harrassment and
| maltreatment that go all the way back to the 19th century, and I've
| heard many of them. All of them were far more violent than what I've
| endured, and I loved these people. How could someone have beens so
| violent towards them?
That's fucking double standards. What Nyc was implictly talking
about is their place as far as desires are concerned. Personally
I have good female friends that I respect and from whom I learn
a lot, etc ... Now we're talking desires.
So why is it double standards? LJBF, again. We get LJBFed and it's
normal, it seems. Now, if a woman does'nt suit our desires, we're
supposed to be "nice" and pretend to have an interest we haven't?
C'm'on.
Then, and that's one of the lessons of this NG, even if a man
doesn't believe that women are mostly interchangeable, he should
BELIEVE so, because that's one of the keys of getting laid: as
Ross puts it, always shows to be able to walk away.
Then you might get that particular person. Maybe.
|
| Kate
Nathan SZILARD
| On 27 Jul 1999 12:05:25 GMT, nat...@metabork.fr.eu.org (Nathan
| SZILARD) wrote:
|
|
| >That's fucking double standards. What Nyc was implictly talking
| >about is their place as far as desires are concerned. Personally
| >I have good female friends that I respect and from whom I learn
| >a lot, etc ... Now we're talking desires.
|
We are humans, and we have a social part, and a sexual part (for
the purpose of our demonstration). What we're worth socially has
nothing to do with what we're worth sexually. Yeah, money helps
but the correlation/causation is usually thin (id est, you have
to be filthy rich for money to make a difference, being just
sufficiently wealthy as opposed to poor does'nt get you laid more).
Anyway. Being someone's mother or grandmother or sister or daughter
is a social thing -- as opposed to sexual. I can't be interested
in them. Right? So whatever their sexual worth is/was is none of
my fucking business.
Whether my grandmother was a great writer or a murderer might matter
for me though, but that's another issue altogether. Whether she was
a slut or not .. damn it, could I care less?
| >
| >So why is it double standards? LJBF, again. We get LJBFed and it's
| >normal, it seems. Now, if a woman does'nt suit our desires, we're
| >supposed to be "nice" and pretend to have an interest we haven't?
|
| Ugh. I need the FAQ, but could not find it on deja'news. Could someone
| re-post that please?
The FAQ does'nt cover anything besides admnistrivia issues.
| To answer your question, as a woman I had my own one and done rule. If
Whooouh, "one and done", that's a Rayism right? Ray is a fucking
psycho. Don't put us in the same bag.
| I showed an interest and a guy didn't recipriocate, I moved along.
| A perceptive, self-respecting woman will not push the issue.
Even if he's shy?
| >C'm'on.
| >
| >Then, and that's one of the lessons of this NG, even if a man
| >doesn't believe that women are mostly interchangeable, he should
| >BELIEVE so, because that's one of the keys of getting laid: as
| >Ross puts it, always shows to be able to walk away.
| >
| >Then you might get that particular person. Maybe.
|
| Yikes, has it really come down to this?
I don't want to feel frustration. Period.
|
| Kate
|
Nathan SZILARD
Don't reply to Ray. It's a waste of time. He's a retard, a mental,
a psycho. Now I'm not for eugenism, but I'd make an exception for
that freak: he should be shot down.
On Tue, 27 Jul 1999 12:24:23 GMT, Zipjack <z...@jack.com> wrote:
| On Mon, 26 Jul 1999 22:11:42 -0400, Outfoxing The Foxes
| <ladies_pu...@juno.com> wrote:
|
| ><---------Most women want me for one reason: MY MIND. I can look good,
| >make a good impression, but the ones who LUST after me, except when I'm
| >in top shape, do so for my brain. That makes me an object as far as I'm
| >concerned. Do I mind? Not at all. I look at it as insurance that I am
| >going to get what I want, and from my fan club I take my pick and look
| >for what *I* want. This is the basic genetic business transaction.
| >Whatever results you want you can produce at least some of.
|
| Yet, you believe that the opposite situation is not possible. Women
| are wanted for thier looks only (mind is a 10 pt. on cupid, right?),
| but men can be wanted for thier minds? Inevitably then, women will
| lose value as they gain experience, and men will gain it.
| I don't buy it. I've done much better with life and people by
| using my mind.
|
| Kate wrote:
|
| >Mrsex, as an advocate for my gender, I have met very few WORTHLESS
| >women.
|
| outfox wrote:
| >
| ><-----I see many women whose current worth beyond sex is low, but who
| >have tremendous untapped potential to change society for the better, but
| >who either don't know how or really don't want to.
|
| Ray, this is condescending. What can you possibly know about these
| women if you see them as 80% looks, 10% brains?
| Nobody's current worth beyond sex is low. The unworthy are the people
| who fail to recognize the inherent value of every human being.
|
| Kate wrote:
| >
| >I find the vast majority of women I know to be intelligent,
| >friendly, and funny, and often they are talented as well.
|
| outfox wrote:
| >
| ><-----I find most women to be friendly only to those they favor, with
| >requirements for gaining their favor. The result is a social
| >dictatorship.
|
| Where are you hanging out, dude?
|
| Kate wrote:
| >
| >When i work with my very young female students (Kindergarten through
| >2nd grade) I sometimes become almost nauseous thinking about these
| >beautiful, genuine, sweet little girls recieving future initiation
| >into adulthood the same brutal abusive way I did. What the fuck could
| >they have done to deserve adult men leering at them, callling them
| >names, trying to pick them up before they have a sense of what is
| >really happenning?
|
| Outfox wrote:
| >
| ><-------Men have their own coming-of-age problems, like being laughed at
| >by women for the first 5-10 years they are in the dating game.
|
| No doubt, but do they fear women? Are they accosted in malls, parking
| lots, school hallways? Are thier looks commented on by mothers and
| older sisters of thier friends and even female teachers? Do thier
| female peers try to grab thier nuts in the hall?Are they touched by
| strangers everywhere they go? Are they told to "smile" by strangers?
| Do people start to believe they are stupid if they turn out to be
| good looking? The hallmark of my teenage years, and frankly 20s was
| FEAR. I hated how men would just walk up and touch me as if it were
| thier right. This is what finally got me to pursue martial arts. Now
| that my attitude has changed , this kind of stuff doesn't happen as
| much.
|
| Kate wrote:
| >
| >
| >I started getting this from guys when I was 12, and I totally did not
| >know how to deal with it. It did a real # on me.Unfortunately, they may
| >not all have decent boundaries when it comes to guys, so they end up
| >allowing some moron to think he's used
| >them even though he spent a year suckin' on his Mommy's tit, and often
| >still does, financially, or emotionally, (and would do the same to her
| >if she had the dubious "privledge" of being in a relationship
| > with him) Whoops, off my soapbox. Why do we have to prove that we are
| >not worthless objects to be used for entertainment and discarded?
|
| outox wrote:
| >
| ><--------Would you keep a job forever if there was only one day of work
| >to do? We must sustain our worth. Why should a man who's been let down
| >by women and BLAMED for allowing it keep allowing it? If women shoot men
| >down enough, they should be surprised when the planes stop going up.
|
| Yes Ray, I understand, but understand this. So many of the men I have
| met have been so calloussed by this kind of an attitude that they
| couldn't see a good woman standing right in front of them, and had
| thier minds made up about how the interaction was going to play out
| before it even started. I cannot tell you the # of men who were
| shocked to realize that I had a mind and a heart...many just said "I
| thought you'd be stuck up, I thought you'd be a bitch" etc.
| Why? I can't be responsible for what other women have done to them.
| I grew really tired of guys who assumed I was stupid because of my
| looks.
| >
| Mrsex wrote:
|
| >>Until chicks demonstrate some kind of value, they're just T&A and pretty
| >>faces... interchangeable and essentially valueLESS if there is another
| >one that
| >>is willing to get with the program that has the same tits you do.
|
| Kate wrote:
| >
| >Ummm,,...would you feel this way about your sister or daughter? How do
| >you feel about guys who would have treated your mother and grandmother
| >this way? This sentiment just makes me sick.
|
| outfox wrote:
| >
| ><------My female relatives I would put in the same class as my wife or
| >even daughter. For example, I would allow my daughter to do anything she
| >wanted once she was 16. Not because I would want her doing anything, but
| >because by then if I haven't taught her right from wrong it's hopeless.
| >The lure of early freedom would hopefully make her more open to listening
| >to me early on. Steve Tyler took the most interesting approach, saying
| >that he couldn't very well expect his lovers to be one way and not think
| >that his daughter would one day be the same thing for another man. He
| >even put her in his video if I'm not mistaken.
|
| Sounds logical to me. Just remember guys, we are alll, mothers, aunts,
| sisters, cousins to somebody.
| >
| >
| Kate wrote:
|
| >Of course, there are many exploitave peorple of both sexes out there,
| >so I don't believe my gender is perfect. If you ask me, the women who
| >go for $ make it tougher for the nice guys to trust the rest of us.
|
| outfox wrote:
| >
| ><---------Define "nice guy." Terms like this can be manipulated at will
| >to support an agenda.
|
| A guy who actually takes an interest in who a woman is, not just how
| she looks, a guy who has the ego strength to acknowledge intelligence
| and worth in his lady friends. Frankly, a nice guy is a guy who won't
| trash a woman for sleeping with him right away. Are we not entitled to
| the same sexual feelings you have? Why should we be punished for
| expressing them?
| Kate
Nathan SZILARD
| On 27 Jul 1999 13:32:33 GMT, nat...@metabork.fr.eu.org (Nathan
| SZILARD) wrote:
| >The FAQ does'nt cover anything besides admnistrivia issues.
|
| OK, where's the lounge?
The lounge only contains photos and their related story. And a
confusion script from Dan.
| >| To answer your question, as a woman I had my own one and done rule. If
| >
| >Whooouh, "one and done", that's a Rayism right? Ray is a fucking
| >psycho. Don't put us in the same bag.
|
| I didn't, but his thinking happenend to correllate with mine on this
| single point.
Yeah but that just scares me that his idea, which have absolutely
no basis in reality (for he has'nt ever experienced reality) or
theory.
| >| I showed an interest and a guy didn't recipriocate, I moved along.
| >| A perceptive, self-respecting woman will not push the issue.
| >
| >Even if he's shy?
|
| I probably lost out a few times this way, but its not my nature to
| push. I take the path of least resistance.If its meant to, itll'
| happen. Of clourse I was much more aggressive than this when it came
| to my schoolign and career, but thats a different issue.
| >I don't want to feel frustration. Period.
|
| Then don't ever get into anything serious or have a family.
I meant, sexual frustration.
Besides I'm not into kids and stuff.
|
| Kate
|
Outfoxing The Foxes
Whooouh, "one and done", that's a Rayism right? Ray is a fucking
psycho. Don't put us in the same bag.
<-------You should examine France's libel laws before you go around
posting. I will say that your attempt to appeal to others by attacking
me says a great deal about you, and about the women who stand by and let
you get away with that crap. She was referring to my ideas, not
necessarily me. I have many names I'd gladly call you, but my civility
precludes it.
Outfoxing The Foxes
>Whooouh, "one and done", that's a Rayism right? Ray is a fucking
>psycho. Don't put us in the same bag.
I didn't, but his thinking happenend to correllate with mine on this
single point.
<------He lives in France. YOU live in America, do you not? By quoting
someone calling me a psycho, you are considered a "publisher" of the
insult even if you are not the originator. As such, you could find
yourself vulnerable to a lawsuit even by QUOTING someone calling me a
psycho. Think I'm kidding? Take a look at the case precedents and
please, watch your step. Those who laugh and tell you you have nothing
to concern yourself with aren't necessarily going to provide you with
money for lawyers should I prove them wrong.
Cut the insults, NOW.
MrSex4uNYC
>of women -- indeed, I can hardly believe that you really see women
>as you say you see them.
believe it dude :) I post here to learn about other people and MAINLY about
myself. If I don't post how I truly feel, I don't get replies from people like
Kate and even from you giving me DIFFERENT viewpoints.
put it this way... chicks are like ice cream. if you have only one box of ice
cream, you are going to savor it and cherish it and eat it slowly (small town
living) if, howeverm you LIVE IN THE SUPERMARKET and can have ice cream fights
and NEVER run out (New York living) the ice cream is still as incredible as it
is for the small town guy... BUT IT IS EXPENDABLE!
since chicks are expendable, you only want to deal with the best looking OR
most efficient ones. the horniest ones, the ones with the best titties or
asses. even the ones with the best senses of humor that can make you laugh or
tell you something you would not have thought of yourself.
most times, I will be excited about a chick and a block later I could not
possibly even DESCRIBE to you what she looked like because I have seen three
more that I want in that space :) they are all over here, and really
attractive in many areas of the city... plus we get tourists from france,
sweden, etc. lots of beautiful chicks in this town.
even better than ice cream... WATER! everyone has water in New York, so it's
not a big deal. people leave faucets running, take 8 baths a day if they want
to...
my point is that the number and availability of ANY COMMODITY, including good
looking chicks will affect your viewpoint on them. to me, chicks are as useful
as they make me feel. the hornier they make me, the more attention they get.
>I used to think that
>all the world (or at least, most of the US) actually felt the way I
>did about women; that women themselves (_especially_ women themselves),
>as well as men, desired to be treated as equals, as human beings, with
>equal rights to their own passions, interests, ways of doing things,
>etc.
don't get me wrong. I don't think women are INFERIOR to men. no way. there
are women stronger than men. there are women smarter than men... all I am
saying is that _I_ am onlyy concerned with their sexual value to me. if a
chick can be a six-figure lawyer and suck a good dick, then she's alright with
me :)
>Despite my own wishes for ALL personal and public
>options to be open to BOTH men and women (eg. men wearing dresses without
>condemnation, women still being considered sexy by men, even if they acted
>_like_ (stereotypical) men, etc.)
that's RETARDED hahahahaha
dresses are WOMEN'S clothing. there is no point in men wearing women's
clothing. you should just enjoy the annual fag parade and be happy with that
>One of the reasons I don't have _your_ attitude about women, MrSex4uNYC,
>is that I really can't find any pleasure in being with a woman if all she
>is to me is someone to please me. I get far and away more pleasure out
>of a sexual experience if I'm doing more than half the pleasin'.
I agree with that statement. I will not please any chick that I don't find
sexually attractive though. I want to give her orgasms like I want to get them
from her. that has nothing to do with whether I like her as a person or think
she's intelligent and EVERYTHING to do with how sexy her body is and how horny
she is. I am not looking just to cum in her mouth and go to sleep :) I want
to show her a good time. I would show the SAME good time to any chick that had
the same body and attitude. it has nothing to do with her as an individual
being.
>I get
>even more pleasure if I see the woman as my mental and emotional equal,
>someone worthy of respect and love.
that is always nice, but you seem to be the "make love" type anyway... not the
"fuck" type.
>But get me alone with her, and I'll be wanting at least a SLIGHTLY
>deeper connection with her than ONLY sexual, and I'll definitely not be
>interested if I can't respect her.
>
>Just one man's view.
>
>- Tim
I appreciate you taking the time to type all that stuff. your views are
interesting, and I have heard them before to a degree. I am not interested in
any other connection than "she makes me feel horny and I want to feel her, lick
her and fuck her and I want her to feel the same way about me". as far as one
night stands, it's all about me. if it is a friend of mine that I am fucking,
I want her to have a good time too.
I certainly don't need to respect her. since when is respect sexy? what does
that have to do with bra-size? it's not natural. anyway... chicks are
commodities like water, ice cream, or alcohol. no point in drinking alcohol if
you're not going to get drunk from it and no point in talking to a chick that
you don't want to fuck... unless she shows some personality value that makes
you just want to talk to her and get her views on stuff.
MrSex4uNYC
>Women genrally are treated as sexual playthings, and men as wallets,
>and I recognize the reverse exploitation here. So the question is:
>what would you NOT want to hear women say about you?
A) I don't give a fuck what her reasons are for sexing me as long as she sexes
me. The only reason I give a fuck why she is NOT sexing me is so I can change
her state/mind and get her to lay the fuck down :)
B) I understand your point, but I don't give a fuck WHAT women have to say in
sexual situations. this is an intellectual discussion, so I care what YOU have
to say... but in a normal situation = sex... I don't care what you call me or
say about me.
>>From where I stand, chicks are interchangeable. Only the ones that have
>some
>>kind of repeatable value like they have a really good sense of humor or fuck
>>really well or whatever get ANY recognition in my book.
>
>How would you feel if I said the same thing about guys, except in
>regard to thier financial value? Would you be offended or just think
>it was human nature?
guys ARE interchangeable due to financial value... that's the problem with guys
tring to take chicks out to impress them. I can buy you lobster and so can
Nathan... SO WHAT? which one of us is sexier? which one of us do you want to
fuck? NEITHER because ANY MAN can buy you lobster. that's why guys that talk
bout the country club just get golddiggers and not real chicks because guys are
interchangeable until they demonstrate personality differences and make
themselves known as superiors to the average joe.
as far as how I would feel... If you called me interchangeable and then fucked
me, I would feel good. If you called me interchangeable then didn't give up
any sex, I would feel bad... see what I mean... NO DIFFERENCE!
>>For instance, Kate... you were just some chick until you started posting
>great
>>stuff like this question. suddenly you had VALUE. suddenly you were worth
>>something because you bring new ideas into my life that make me reconsider
>>positions and adopt stronger stances and most of all understand MORE about
>>women (notice I didn't say UNDERSTAND WOMEN)
>
>Mrsex, as an advocate for my gender, I have met very few WORTHLESS
>women. I find the vast majority of women I know to be intelligent,
>friendly, and funny, and often they are talented as well.
whatever whatever...
I have read ahead to Nathan's replies to this thread and he is right. you are
arguing a DIFFERENT worth. let me explain this to you. I already have money
so I don't need a chick for her money. I already have friends, so I don't need
a chick to talk to. I do not need CONSTANT companionship, so I don't need a
chick to clean up after me and be there every night.
what I CAN'T do for myself is give myself that feeling I get in the presence of
an AWESOMELY SEXY WOMAN! THAT'S what I need from women. therefore... forget
about her contributions to politics and science and all that bullshit. I want
some T&A and I want a horny chick that likes fucking and I'm living LARGE!
having said that, you now know the kind of worth I am talking about. women
have SEXUAL WORTH and that's it. their societal worth is irrelevant to me and
to this NG. the point here is fucking girls that you are attracted to. what I
was saying about YOU is that you had NO WORTH to me because you are A) a
figment of my imagination because you only exist on the internet and B) don't
live in NYC and C) are HAPPILY married so I wasn't getting any sex off of you
anwyays :) when you started posting intelligent material to this NG, you
CREATED WORTH because I VALUE your opinions and have indeed changed some of my
styles and some of my BASIC IDEAS because of YOU and I appreciate that :)
now... if you were available, ugly, no body, lived in NYC, and intelligent...
you would get NO physical attention from me, but I would chat with you all day
on AOL :) you would have NO SEXUAL WORTH AT ALL!
>What the fuck could
>they have done to deserve adult men leering at them, callling them
>names, trying to pick them up before they have a sense of what is
>really happenning? I started getting this from guys when I was 12, and
>I totally did not know how to deal with it. It did a real # on
>me.
and you had the nerve to call me a psychiatrist when I told you you need to
resolve your issues HAHAHA :)
I am very serious. I want you to be happy and healthy... that's why I respond
to these off-topic posts about women's rights to not be accosted. WRONG NG
baby! but you contribute to my life so I try to contribute to yours in return.
>Why do we have to prove that we are not worthless objects to be used
>for entertainment and discarded?
you can't prove that because it's true except for the discarded part. as far
as I am concerned (and not Tim of course) you are as useful to me as your
SEXUAL SKILLS, LOOKS AND BODY! you can prove intelligence and social value and
you can cook and all that other stuff, but if I don't feel horny around you,
you get no play.
>>Until chicks demonstrate some kind of value, they're just T&A and pretty
>>faces... interchangeable and essentially valueLESS if there is another one
>that
>>is willing to get with the program that has the same tits you do.
>
>Ummm,,...would you feel this way about your sister or daughter? How do
>you feel about guys who would have treated your mother and grandmother
>this way? This sentiment just makes me sick.
if I had a daughter I would make her aware of guys like me. I would let her
know that guys are going to manipulate her and she needs to look out for
certain things. I would not make her paranoid, but there is NO WAY I would let
her out into the world without knowledge. it's my duty as a parent. rent the
movie "Kids" to see what happens if you don't :(
besides... anyone that allows themselves to be used gets what they deserve.
fortunately members of my family are strong (mentally) for the most part. a
couple get into questionable relationships, but not abusive, because the abuser
would immediately find himself the ABUSEE OR WORSE!
>If you ask me, the women who
>go for $ make it tougher for the nice guys to trust the rest of us.
that's true and I agree, but that is a trust issue. how much can you TRUST a
chick that you just met at a bar and take home to fuck? not that that makes
her untrustworthy to fuck fast... I just mean that TRUST is not a sexy factor
and is TOTALLY OVERRULED by lust. trust is good for acoiding STDs, but in
general, guys will fuck untrustworthy 8s before trustworthy UGs :)
>Every user fucking slid squalling, helpless, and wretched out of a
>woman's body.
>Talk about women's work.
>Ugh.
>
>Kate
not relevant
:)
MrSex4uNYC
>example
>>of a man that achieved this... becoming sexy through being seductive...
>>hopefully you can cite a movie we have all seen or an actor that we are all
>>familiar with.
>
>also love Nicholas Cage(leaving Las Vegas) Neither man is physically
>"sexy" by traditional standards, but they are HOT.
ok then. what does Nicholas Cage make you feel that makes you call him sexy or
seductive? for example, I say Salma Hayak is sexy. she can be seductive if
she directs her sexual attentions towards me. when I see her I think about us
fucking. when I see her dancing or moving, it's incredible. I want to feel
her and kiss her and make her hot. Is that what you're talking about? What
happens for you when you experience a man being seductive towards you? Does he
make you feel like surrendering to him? does he make you feel like actively
sexing him? Do you feel like you want to please him? Do you feel like you
want him inside you? how does a sexy/seductive man affect you physically or
mentally?
MrSex4uNYC
>he was also an exceptional looking, classy and affable man.
EXCEPTIONAL LOOKING? he looked like any other yuppie in Manhattan. he didn't
look any better than Robert Chambers or Ted Bundy. many people assume that
because they see people on TV, they are the beautiful people. that's why when
people magazine comes out with the most beautiful people they are all from the
media. I have seen the most beautiful people with my oen eyes on the subway or
downtown when the sexually harassed secretaries come out for linch in their
minskirt-suits and fuckme pumps :)
Nathan SZILARD
Ray knows as much about law that he knows about women.
Outfoxing The Foxes a écrit:
Nathan SZILARD
Outfoxing The Foxes a écrit:
>
> Some Guy Writes:
>
> Whooouh, "one and done", that's a Rayism right? Ray is a fucking
> psycho. Don't put us in the same bag.
>
> <-------You should examine France's libel laws before you go around
> posting. I will say that your attempt to appeal to others by attacking
> me says a great deal about you, and about the women who stand by and let
> you get away with that crap. She was referring to my ideas, not
> necessarily me. I have many names I'd gladly call you, but my civility
> precludes it.
>
MrSex4uNYC
>humanity of others, particularly when the other gender was the very
>gender they were most dependent upon as infants.
I blame it on the media. Charlie's Angels. I dream of Jeannie. MASH. KRP in
Cincinatti...
the media sets American kids up to think of women as sexy or not sexy. THAT'S
ALL. there is no emphasis on talents other than looks, and if there is, it is
PURELY PERIPHERAL. look at the beauty pageants. you don't see any all-chick
spelling bees do you? that's because NO MAN CARES if a woman can spell, but he
damn sure cares what you look like in that bathing suit and fuckme pumps coming
down the runway. then the talent section? please it's bullshit. then those
questions about helping the world community? it's all bullshit.
I mean look at the society... they didn't even let women VOTE until 1920!
that's fucking ridiculous! the same sisters that came out of your mother like
you did and you agree that she can't VOTE? that's retarded! this whole
society placed women's looks above anything else she can do. when did you EVER
see ponch and jon on chips go out with a couple of buffalo? they might have
done it because they were humanitarians or lost a bet HAHAHA but if they had
their choice, it was a couple of dimwitted HONIES!
it ain't my fault :)
NightH...@webtv.net
appealing as a woman?
NightHawk
Laife
on the internet for years. He never sued anyone.
Zipjack wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Jul 1999 12:11:28 -0400, Outfoxing The Foxes
> <ladies_pu...@juno.com> wrote:
>
> >Oh Katie.....
>
> Ray, I was agreeing with your viewpoint. As far as legal semantics go,
> if you really wish for me not to quote anything that can be regarded
> as inflamatory or libelous, I will refrain from doing so.
> Have a heart, dude. I'm trying to pay a mortgage and student loans.
> Thats the last I'll participate in this particular pissing contest.
>
> Kate
--
Laife
MrSex4uNYC
>or
>>seductive?
>
>Damn! He was just so raw and passionate (he played an artist who was
>having an affair with his best friend's wife.) Nicholas Cage made me
>feel as if I were Zandalee, being convinced to do a totally irrational
>and self-destructive thing.
hahaha hell no I didn't see some movie called zandalee :) however, I will rent
it if blockbuster has it on DVD. I would like to see what you are talking
about, though I can guess since cage is the same character in EVERY MOVIE like
will smith. I can see cage pouring his heart out and making zandalee BELIEVE
that he HAS to be with her and she NEEDS to be with him etc. etc. The whole
"this is bigger than the both of us", supernatural "I tried to avoid this but I
can't" thing.
I think I get the seduction angle. I agree that seduction is different from
sexuality. Somehow I also agree NOW that sexuality is passive or static, like
a trait that people can see on you or in you and like whereas seduction is an
active thing that you do which creates urges in the one you want to do what you
know is RIGHT and NECESSARY for the both of you... very interesting.
I will be on the lookout for both sexuality and seductiveness. good
explanation Kate :)
mystery
MrSex4uNYC
>>explanation Kate :)
>
>
>Kate
mmmm... don't play with me... you know how I get! ;p~~
Nathan SZILARD
> >dresses are WOMEN'S clothing. there is no point in men wearing women's
> >clothing. you should just enjoy the annual fag parade and be happy with that
>
> Dresses are women's clothing according to whom? According to
> a mutual consent that has no real basis in NEED. It's just a
> contrivance. Let's get rid of 'em all.
Tim, what good would it bring? Honestly? Really? Hm?
Look, I know guys who dress with dresses (Jean-Paul Gaultier?) -- I'm
sure I could get women dressed in a gown. When I think about it I almost
when sarging in a priest's robe once ... SO here you go, you can do it,
but you have to be able to afford it. I mean, you need the freedom
attitude money power to be able to do what you want. TO overcome the
rules.
Whups I forgot intelligence.
Anyway -- there's no point in changing those kind of rules. They're
natural rules, mostly, in that, they haven't been set consciously.
It's a bit like, to want to change the color of the sky; yeah, green
would be cool but ... same difference.
Nathan SZILARD
| *BZZZZZZT!* Sorry, wrong answer! ;-)
|
| Nathan -- women wearing dresses is like the sky being blue?
| Surely you jest, no? Women wear dresses because of years of
| tradition. After years of tradition, people get _used_ to things,
A tradition is a natural thing. It's as natural as the fact that we
have two arms. It comes from evolution. The purely socialogical
that feminists love is pure BS -- evolution is the force at work
behind the sex things.
| like seeing women in dresses. Any man, for example, who would actually
| _like_ to wear a dress, either doesn't think of it or can't because
| of fear of ridicule. It's not a law of nature. There's not even a
| really good "natural" reason for it. It's the result of culture, not
| sense.
Look, if a guy really wants to do it, he can do it. They'll think he's
a fag? I'm sorry man, that's his problem. That would be another kind
of issues altogether if the police would shoot him down, Iran style.
WoMen don't fuck nice guys? Shit, who do I complain to?
| I didn't say _I_ wanted to wear a dress. I said I want to live
| in a _world_ where people wouldn't be put down for wanting to do things
| that weren't thought of as attached to their sex. A world like that
| would be _truly_ free.
Reminds me of that french TV comedy, a few years ago. You see a guy
dressed as a goth, with a whiny nosy voice; who goes: "Avant, je
revais d'un monde meilleur ou l'anarchie pousserait comme une fleur
au coin des rues. MAintenant ... j'en ai Rien-A-Branler Nature(TM)
<VOICE OVER>Rien-A-Branler Nature(TM) existe aussi en pot
familial</VOICE OVER>"
Translation: "I used to dream of a better world, where anarchy would
blossom at every street corner ... now, I Dont-Give-A-Fuck Deluxe(TM).
Dont-give-A-Fuck-Deluxe is also available in family packs."
Call me sarcastic.
| Forget the specific comment about wearing a dress. I'm talking about
| _defined social roles_ that I want to do away with. Allright?
I had got that!
| I'm not saying it's even likely to happen. I just wish it could happen, is all.
|
| - Tim
|
Nathan SZILARD
| On 29 Jul 1999 16:52:35 -0700, bes...@triton.dnai.com (Tim Bessie)
| wrote:
| snip:
| >
| >Hey, I agree with you here. But I want to please a woman who is MORE than
| >just a sexual object to me. She has to feel like a human being in all
| >her fullness and depth (I'm not talking LITERALLY) for me to REALLY enjoy
| >being with her. Otherwise, it feels pale and boring.
|
| Tim, you rock! Why can't more men be like you?
Because they can't get laid. Which correlates, according to most
evolutionist theories, rather poorly with the number of individuals.
| Kate
Nathan SZILARD
| On 30 Jul 1999 08:42:30 GMT, nat...@metabork.fr.eu.org (Nathan
| SZILARD) wrote:
|
|
| >A tradition is a natural thing. It's as natural as the fact that we
| >have two arms. It comes from evolution. The purely socialogical
| >that feminists love is pure BS -- evolution is the force at work
| >behind the sex things.
|
| "natural" advantage to the gatherers wearing dresses?
1 - Look at the bigger picture.
2 - At that time men did'nt wear spandex boxers either.
| Dresses are ergonomically innefficient when it comes to almost any
| practical task.
| >familial</VOICE OVER>"
| >Translation: "I used to dream of a better world, where anarchy would
| >blossom at every street corner ... now, I Dont-Give-A-Fuck Deluxe(TM).
| >Dont-give-A-Fuck-Deluxe is also available in family packs."
| >
| That is hilarious!
| >
| Kate
night...@hotmail.com
down except for the settle part. I've decided not to have anymore long
term relationships until I meet a girl who blows me away. I'm always
looking for misses Right, but until then I'm enjoying misses Right
Now :-) I also agree that many women don't even live up to Misses
Right Now standards and hence I don't sleep around very much, but I do
like to PU women and to just chat with them even if the out come is
only to know that I could have. Other times though I close, depends a
lot on my mood and who I'm out with too, I guess.
NightLight9
In article <7nqon2$99h$1...@triton.dnai.com>,
bes...@triton.dnai.com (Tim Bessie) wrote:
> In article <379f9e97...@news.empireone.net>, Zipjack
<z...@jack.com> wrote:
> >On 26 Jul 1999 15:26:09 -0700, bes...@triton.dnai.com (Tim Bessie)
> >wrote:
> >
> >>In article <19990726160436...@ng-fg1.aol.com>,
> >>MrSex4uNYC <mrsex...@aol.comedr4d> wrote:
> >>
> >> [ Mucho Snippo ]
> >snip:
> >>
> >>One of the reasons I don't have _your_ attitude about women,
MrSex4uNYC,
> >>is that I really can't find any pleasure in being with a woman if
all she
> >>is to me is someone to please me. I get far and away more pleasure
out
> >>of a sexual experience if I'm doing more than half the pleasin'. I
get
> >>even more pleasure if I see the woman as my mental and emotional
equal,
> >>someone worthy of respect and love.
> >>
> >>Don't get me wrong -- when I see a sexy woman I may be thinking and
> >>feeling "OOoooooooo Momma!" And I'll be as "go for what I want"
(with
> >>style and grace, mind you) with her as any other man who's sexually
confident.
> >>
> >>But get me alone with her, and I'll be wanting at least a SLIGHTLY
> >>deeper connection with her than ONLY sexual, and I'll definitely
not be
> >>interested if I can't respect her.
> >
> >Tim, thanks God for you, and men like you.
>
> Aww, shucks *blush* ;-)
>
> >There is much more rewared in a situation that is recognized as
> >mutually challenging. I never could see how someone could ignore the
> >humanity of others, particularly when the other gender was the very
> >gender they were most dependent upon as infants.
> >There are women out there who adore men like you, and I am one.
>
> It's nice to know I'm adored. And, yes, there are quite a few women
> who adore me -- generally women with similar attitudes as myself.
> The problem with all this, of course, is that, despite my desire to
> be with someone I'm compatible with, I also _rilly rilly_ want to
> be with women who have certain objective physical traits -- that
> is, with women I just am completely blown away by the way they look.
> It's hard to find women who've got all I want upstairs AND on the
> outside, as well. I'm not saying beautiful women are dumb; however,
> there's a LOT more defenses up in beautiful women, I've found,
> and thus it's a helluva lot of work to get close to them, compared
> to less attractive women.
>
> I've also found some women don't like this combination of depth and
> superficiality that I've got... they seem to think that you're either
> deep or superficial, not a mix of either. I've met far more women
than
> men who've said (and meant) "All I want is a man who loves me, who
> I respect, who is emotionally available, intelligent, ... [lots of
other
> inner qualities]. As far as looks, as long as he's not vomicious,
it's
> all good."
>
> That's good for them. Me? I want "all that and brains too." ;-)
>
> - Tim
>
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
night...@hotmail.com
bes...@triton.dnai.com (Tim Bessie) wrote:
>
> *BZZZZZZT!* Sorry, wrong answer! ;-)
>
> Nathan -- women wearing dresses is like the sky being blue?
> Surely you jest, no? Women wear dresses because of years of
> tradition. After years of tradition, people get _used_ to things,
actually
> _like_ to wear a dress, either doesn't think of it or can't because
> of fear of ridicule. It's not a law of nature. There's not even a
> really good "natural" reason for it. It's the result of culture, not
> sense.
>
anything else. A dress has no advantage over comforatble pants, and I
would posit that men who want to wear dress actually have some deep
seeded issues. It's natural for the herd to shun those who don't fit
in because that's how the herd dertermines if the individual is health
or if they are more likely to spread desease or poor genes. They are
rejecting this natural tendency to be part of the larger social group
(lets keep in mind we are talking about wearing dresses not about
something that is real physical importance wanting black people to have
equal rights). Keep in mind that the social fabric that you are
talking about rebeling against is what allows our "ant colony"
existance in the first place.
That said I would never hold someones wearing a dress against them, but
for practical reasons I wouldn't want to be associated with dress
wearing either. I feal no need to express my self in a negative light
over something as unimportant as clothing. And it damn hard to reverse
engineer millions of years of evolution.
NightLight9
> I didn't say _I_ wanted to wear a dress. I said I want to live
> in a _world_ where people wouldn't be put down for wanting to do
things
> that weren't thought of as attached to their sex. A world like that
> would be _truly_ free.
>
> Forget the specific comment about wearing a dress. I'm talking about
> _defined social roles_ that I want to do away with. Allright?
>
> I'm not saying it's even likely to happen. I just wish it could
happen, is all.
>
Sukinan
yes. And he's honest about it...
On Mon, 26 Jul 1999, Zipjack wrote:
> On 26 Jul 1999 15:04:53 GMT, mrsex...@aol.comedr4d (MrSex4uNYC)
> wrote:
>
> >Fuck That!
> >
> >give her a nice long "Use It or Lose It" speech. If she's not fucking, hand
> >over some friends that want to fuck.
> >
> >It's as simple as that, or FUCK THAT BITCH and don't respond to her at all.
> >It's her RESPONSIBILITY to sex you OR find another chick that will or she is
> >USELESS to you!
>
> Thats what I like about you, dude. You're such a sensitive guy.
>
> Kate
>
>
>
==================================
Ken
==================================
Sukinan
I think it's sufficient to ask him "do YOU really think this
way". And besides he's only used the B word. He's never said
C--t, or Slut or any irrevocably demeaning appelation.
Heck, somen women I know are self-referential when using the
B- word. "I can be such a bitch..." et. al.
As an analogy, look at the use of the word N- used by some
A-Americans. The word has been co-opted from being a
highly derogatory racial epithet into a word that is a
sign of a common bond. (Although it is only used between
V Good friends)
MrSex is uniquely capable of referring to women as he does
because he doesn't care about reprisals for not being PC.
I don't refer to women as bitches in the manner he does,
but I typically use it in the same way I might refer to some
dickhead driver as an asshole.
The few times that I have done the one-night stand bit, I
haven't walked away think "what a BITCH" or "she's such a SLUT"
I usually go my way thinking " damn I'm hungry.." %^]
Seriously, though. MrSex is a unique individual. I think we
should ask him directly what, if any, is the significance of
referring to women as bitches. I think perhaps it's a way of
staying out of the state we men get into when we see women that
we find attractive, whereby our brain and most other concious
functions slide into the porous cartiliage often referred to
as the penis, thereby making any attempt a showing personality
and conveying interest into the muddled oft seen gibbering
of a love-struck AFC.
He uses bitch, I use boob, until otherwise informed.
On Mon, 26 Jul 1999, Zipjack wrote:
> On 26 Jul 1999 16:21:50 GMT, mrsex...@aol.comedr4d (MrSex4uNYC)
> wrote:
>
>
> >er.. um... what I meant was...
> >
> >That's not fair to you Nathan :(
> >
> >let her know how you long for her, but since you can understand her reasons for
> >not returning your heartfelt paassion, the least she could do as a TRUE FRIEND
> >is to PLEASE help you to fill the void with a woman that loves you for YOU and
> >not your money or wit or smashing good looks. someone that will be there for
> >you on those lonely nights when all you have now is lying in front of your
> >fireplace alone, remembering the good times you shared together before your
> >dreams were dashed to pieces :(
> >
> >help me Rhonda... help help me Rhonda
>
> Touche'....but do you guys really think about it in that cavalier way,
> for real, like bitch this, douchebag that?
> Zoikkksss!!!! That doesn't seem very cool!
> Kate grimaces.
>
> Kate
>
>
>
==================================
Ken Ingram kin...@navis.com
==================================
Sukinan
My opinion is that women are our counterpart. And if you think about
what most guys are in this newsgroup for you would agree.
I will be the first to admit, if women up and disappeared tonight, I'd
cut my own fucking throat within the hour.
I really can't hazard as guess as to what women are other than a part
of us in some esoteric sense. We're the same [men and women] but
different.
I revel in and love the difference. Women are my mother, my sister,
my cousins, my future nieces, my future daughters, grandaughters,
good friends, bosses, lovers, teachers....
The important distinction here is that the women I most enjoy are the
ones who are my lovers, I consider no woman my superior, generally
speaking, nor do I consider them my inferiors, in general. Some have
taught me, some have been my student. It's all relative.
In the end, women are a joy to me, in the most general sense.
I just spent the last week in Saudi Arabia, keeping my eyes to myself
so I could keep my head. I definitely was missing the site of womanly
flesh. And I enjoyed a couple of opportunities to convey personality
in my clumsy, neophyte way.
Cheers
On 26 Jul 1999, MrSex4uNYC wrote:
>
> I would like to know also who thinks what about women... are they our friends,
> servants, toys, keep the pussy warm, make us food, bear our children, out
> equals, our superiors?
>
>
==================================
Ken
==================================
Sukinan
This could get wordy...
I came to the conclusion that women are our counterparts through this
logic:
FIRST:
The energetic flows of the human body are a combination of yin and yang.
We often have the perspective of female as "yin" and male as "yang".
The same energetic flows are part of all living organisms on this planet
and elsewhere. Although not specifically discussed in my readings,
inanimate objects consist of either yang or yin energy but not both. Hence
the lack of flow between two states is inherent in the absence of life
force. Inanimate objects seem to be an imablance or complete concentration
of either yin or yang.
The quality of yin energy is described in many ways; yielding, flowing
encompassing, soft, cool etc. Most of the descriptions give the impression
that yin energy is passive. (The word passive does not imply weak)
The quality of yang energy is described as agressive, penetrating,
forceful, hot. Our impression of yang energy is active.(You can be active
without moving)
Speaking purely about life force (chi) and energy the foundations of our
interactions as human beings are clearer to me. We are constructed of
elctrical and biochemical processes as beings of flesh. For me, my
intuition tells me that we're definitely more than just flesh and bone.
SECOND
Although in general men and women are constantly fluxing between use
and movement within both yin and yang energy, the essential essence
of what we are in terms of gender is quite well described by yin/yang
concepts.
Although some women are agressive in a yang manner, their yang energy
is still uniquely yin-based. If you take a look at the yin-yang symbol
notice that within the dark in light and the converse is also true.
Similarly a passive man has his passiveness based in yang-type energy
so that even in passiveness there will be an agressive quality about it.
THIRD
If the nature of yin and yang is that they are complementary
AND
Yin/Yang is part of life force
AND
Male/Female interactions are uniquely tied to the concept oy Yin/Yang
interactions
THEN
It would be a reasonable conclusion to THEORIZE that males and females
are counterparts (complementary) to each other.
THEREFORE that being the THEORY
I approach life from this perspective:
How can I interact with the women in my life so that the flow of
energy is complementary and brings balance and WHOLENESS to our
interactions. Seeking neither constant control nor constant submission
I find that thinking of women as my counterpart allows me to ground and
disable the bitterness of past pains and move forward in the idea of
great connections in the present and the future. My heart is clear and
open because I understand balance.
FINALLY
In my life one of the most important components in my interaction with
women is sexual openness. I desire sexual connection in a free and
giving manner. Equality of desire is a result of understanding the
balance and where we fit. A fully informed lover has the freedom to
explore and discover.
When I found "Speed Seduction" the title made me wince. But I see that
it is a marketing method. Despite what may be discussed in ASF, the
methods of SS really do help me to learn about bringing balance to my
interactions with women and find out how to help them break down the
doors that society has helped them erect. The word "slut" is a great
example
Yes, I have had and continue to have mutually casual relationships, but I
had no control over their initiation our their conclusion. I was "chosen"
in every case. The fact is though that I enjoyed it and I L-O-V-E women
so it's hard to say no. (My big weakness)
I think in one case I could construe the relationship as me using her,
but she was at least a decade older and she had the control. When her
friends convinced her that I was using her for sex she ended it, despite
that fact that there was mutual using occurring. In the end she began
to attempt manipulation when she learned I moved on immediately. The
lack of knowledge about balance made the situation more difficult than
it should have been.
Now, I'm 10 years older with a great deal more knowledge.
Now I know that I seek interaction with women who are open, adventurous,
free-spirited sexually and otherwise and that achieving my desires
requires me to accept the aggressive nature that is inherent to being
male and channel it in a positive way. I understand that I must help
the women I desire bring balance to their internal demands so that they
can achieve their desires with me despite the societal or religious
doctrine.
QED
Okay that was a mouthful.
BTW, thanks for being one woman that we can talk to sensibly around here.
Feel free to question my logic. My ego is not tied to being accepted
(for the most part)
On Tue, 3 Aug 1999, Zipjack wrote:
> On Mon, 2 Aug 1999 15:54:28 -0700, Sukinan <ro...@navis.com> wrote:
>
> >This is a good question.
> >
> >My opinion is that women are our counterpart. And if you think about
> >what most guys are in this newsgroup for you would agree.
>
> Hey Ken, keep posting. BTW, how did you come to this conclusion? Have
> you ever "used" a woman, or had mutually casual relationships?
MrSex4uNYC
>
>I think it's sufficient to ask him "do YOU really think this
>way". And besides he's only used the B word. He's never said
>C--t, or Slut or any irrevocably demeaning appelation.
I can't really define when I switch from my common word "chick" to "bitch".
bitch is more of a utilitarian word. I normally use chick though. there are
women I would NEVER call a bitch and there are chicks I don't even know that I
automatically say "look at that bitch over there". interesting... I don't
know.
>MrSex is uniquely capable of referring to women as he does
>because he doesn't care about reprisals for not being PC.
right. none of us know who the others are here. we can all speak our minds
freely as it flows from our conssciousness into the posts. I could EASILY
always use girl or chick, but I try to be as real as possible and sometimes, in
some discussions bitch fits perfectly well, like when those BITCHES used to try
to use Maniac for his money :)
>I don't refer to women as bitches in the manner he does,
>but I typically use it in the same way I might refer to some
>dickhead driver as an asshole.
I use it sometimes in that fashion. I want to say something bad about them and
all I really know about them is that they are female so BITCH naturally comes
out.
>Seriously, though. MrSex is a unique individual. I think we
>should ask him directly what, if any, is the significance of
>referring to women as bitches.
there is no difference when I am posting. as I said before though, almost ALL
my friends are women. I would not call any of them bitches (especially not to
their faces hehe) because I don't FEEL like it is right. I don't FEEL like
they deserve it. A couple of chicks I know are "bitches" meaning they LIKE
being jerks, and let everyone know it. I guess I use it in posts to
demonstrate my mental state at certain times.
>I think perhaps it's a way of
>staying out of the state we men get into when we see women that
>we find attractive, whereby our brain and most other concious
>functions slide into the porous cartiliage often referred to
>as the penis, thereby making any attempt a showing personality
>and conveying interest into the muddled oft seen gibbering
>of a love-struck AFC.
no it isn't that. I have my states controlled now. It is sort of a defense
mechanism I guess... dehumanized chicks into walking T&A :)
Sukinan
After reading your posts in this group for a while I can see that it
doesn't come from bitterness or anything like that. It's just who you are.
You seem like a straight-forward, no-bullshit kind of person. Not
like the average California putz I run into.
I used to call women in general bitches out of bitterness.
Once I realized I had anchored my bitterness to calling women bitches
I stopped using that word and the bitterness eventually diminished.
Now I don't really feel comfortable using the word, since I don't
want the bitterness to return.
I call them honeys, cause honey tastes so sweet...
On 5 Aug 1999, MrSex4uNYC wrote:
> there is no difference when I am posting. as I said before though, almost ALL
> my friends are women. I would not call any of them bitches (especially not to
> their faces hehe) because I don't FEEL like it is right. I don't FEEL like
> they deserve it. A couple of chicks I know are "bitches" meaning they LIKE
> being jerks, and let everyone know it. I guess I use it in posts to
> demonstrate my mental state at certain times.
>
> >I think perhaps it's a way of
> >staying out of the state we men get into when we see women that
> >we find attractive, whereby our brain and most other concious
> >functions slide into the porous cartiliage often referred to
> >as the penis, thereby making any attempt a showing personality
> >and conveying interest into the muddled oft seen gibbering
> >of a love-struck AFC.
>
> no it isn't that. I have my states controlled now. It is sort of a defense
> mechanism I guess... dehumanized chicks into walking T&A :)
>
>
=============================================
Ken kin...@navis.com for direct connects
=============================================
MrSex4uNYC
>After reading your posts in this group for a while I can see that it
>doesn't come from bitterness or anything like that. It's just who you are.
>You seem like a straight-forward, no-bullshit kind of person. Not
>like the average California putz I run into.
that's basically it. I have nothing against women in general. they like me
and treat me well, at least the ones that actually get to know me. I have the
same problems with chicks NOT wanting to get to know me as everyone else inthe
world has, but once I get my hands on them, a good time is had by all :)
I have figured out though when I use bitch. I was in a bar just now and these
chicks in New York have this fucked up way of dressing right now with these
past-the-knee type skin-tight pants on their flat asses and sweaters and
blouses and platform sandals. so I was chilling leaning on a wall in a
high-traffic area like I love to do, scoping the chicks eyes and tits at
random... when these two 4s come over and take the space on the wall near me.
they are fat and dressed in that fucked up fashion. I immediately said to
myself "These BITCHES dress like grandmothers" then I thought about what I
thought and realized that in that context, bitch = worthless chick. I was
calling them bitches because they were a waste. there was no value to them as
far as I was concerned. I will also call a chick a bitch because of
personality flaws... like in "that BITCH is crazy" or "did you hear what that
BITCH told him?"
I think bitch to me denotes worthlessness or ridiculousness.
>I used to call women in general bitches out of bitterness.
>Once I realized I had anchored my bitterness to calling women bitches
>I stopped using that word and the bitterness eventually diminished.
>Now I don't really feel comfortable using the word, since I don't
>want the bitterness to return.
I have seen that happen. guys will call chicks bitches JUST because they are
so bitter. it has nothing to do with her personality or looks or worth at all.
a wing of mine called a good friend of mine that he had just met a bitch :)
he did it to teach me a lesson. I was like "that's fucked up man... she's not
a bitch." he was laughing at me and I could see where he was coming from
because he didn't think she was a bitch either, but he was tired of me asking
"what was that bitch's name" and stuff like that about girls that he introduced
me to.
I understood, but my behavior did not change in the least.
PS - there are a lot more guys than YOU that are PERMANENTLY BITTER towards
women and it comes across in their posts, so there is no need to say who they
are :)
Daniel
Sometimes he might get carried away though and act like an asshole coz he scored a
babe.
But generally bitterness comes from prolonged lack of adequate sexual activity.
When you are in a club, you can generally tell which guys get laid more. The ones
that are bitter but not BAD BOYS are usually not getting laid. The ones that are
cracking up the ladies are the once who are getting some yummy pussy.
MrSex4uNYC wrote:
--
Hello, below are my net details...
my home page -> http://home.primus.com.au/danielt
my email address -> dan...@SPAMSUXprimus.com.au
Regards, Daniel :)
*** Remove SPAMSUX to Reply ***
Nathan SZILARD
| PS - there are a lot more guys than YOU that are PERMANENTLY BITTER towards
| women and it comes across in their posts, so there is no need to say who they
| are :)
You mean, like Ray?
--
Don't ask me personal seduction questions, please post to the group.
ASF's practical FAQ and newbie starting point:
http://metabork.fr.eu.org/~nathan/