quote:Today, however, a top guy is free to consume more than his fair share of female erotic capital.
Clive Candy: Sexual Communist.
Lol. Traditional social conservatism in the U.S did encourage a form of sexual socialism by encouraging a one to one mating ratio through the law and cultural traditions, but the sexual revolution returned us to the jungle, where many a man makes a killing and many gets left with nothing. Legalized prostitution is a necessary corrective.
Posts: 668 | Registered: Aug 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Sa'eed: Look at the comments section...
...because that's where we all go for balanced, thoughtful, and rational discussion.
The comments section are often the best place you see reasoned discussion, and the best part of many blogs. Recently Ann Althouse shut down her comments section because her readers vehemently disagreed with her on an issue (forced fatherhood.) Her blog is not worth reading anymore.
Posts: 668 | Registered: Aug 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Perhaps you might date more successfully if you did not perceive your sexual interest in women as a financial transaction.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Sa'eed: There are so many things you've said that are so twisted that I'm not even sure where to begin. But one thing that stuck out is your conception of an "alpha male." This is a term I've heard used before, sometimes by guys who go around claiming to be Alphas (generally speaking, insecure douchy little men) and sometimes by people complaining about Alphas (see above), but it's not really a dichotomy I've ever observed or taken part in. What, in your mind, makes a man an Alpha Male? What makes you *not* an Alpha Male?
Is it possible that there is no such thing, but merely there are certain traits the majority of women of women find attractive? Because typically when a man has trouble getting a date, he works on improving himself regarding said traits. By, say, working out, or getting a nice suit, or taking a speech class/working on social skills, or getting a better job, or working hard to demonstrate positive qualities he already posesses to the woman he's interested in. Your approach - saying that there are "alpha males" and everyone who isn't one is out of luck - seems oddly fatalistic, and more importantly, not actually true.
Posts: 2222 | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Alpha males are men who stand out in some way be it a handsome waiter or local musician or actor who take advantage of their status to consume more than their fair of female erotic capital. Because of contraception and abortion, and welfare/child support, the social risks of pregnancy have been significantly reduced, and women in their prime years are free to select mates on a purely animalistic basis, and this ends up rewarding some guys with rotating harems and others with nothing.
Posts: 668 | Registered: Aug 2010
| IP: Logged |
Obama
unregistered
posted
So you're upset that medical technology has leveled the playing field so that if they wish, women have the same choices that men have always had when it comes to their sex lives?
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Obama: So you're upset that medical technology has leveled the playing field so that if they wish, women have the same choices that men have always had when it comes to their sex lives?
No, I'm upset that society hasn't seen fit to legalize prostitution as a mild corrective to alpha males' tendency of hording female erotic capital.
Posts: 668 | Registered: Aug 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Sa'eed: Alpha males are men who stand out in some way be it a handsome waiter or local musician or actor who take advantage of their status to consume more than their fair of female erotic capital. Because of contraception and abortion, and welfare/child support, the social risks of pregnancy have been significantly reduced, and women in their prime years are free to select mates on a purely animalistic basis, and this ends up rewarding some guys with rotating harems and others with nothing.
Your failure to get dates isn't due to alpha males 'hoarding female erotic capital'. There are millions of non-alpha-males (which seems to have just one qualification: obtaining sex when you aren't) who are having sex with multiple partners. The reason you're not one of them has a very great deal more to do with you than a social and cultural conspiracy that acts against you.
As for the comments section...hehe. You're right, it's a sign of how relevant and meaningful your perspective is, how great its long-term prospects are, that you can find 'quality' discussions on Internet comments sections'.
You could solve this problem you've got, that of female rejection and your anger over it, and it wouldn't even be very difficult. But that would involve admitting that something might be wrong (or at least poorly adapted) with you. Much more flattering to the ego to believe that the world is wrong.
Sometimes people that argue that the whole world is wrong and needs fixing have something meaningful to say. Sometimes they're heroes. Usually they're just varying degrees of weird, crazy, or frightened.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Sa'eed: Alpha males are men who stand out in some way be it a handsome waiter or local musician or actor who take advantage of their status to consume more than their fair of female erotic capital. Because of contraception and abortion, and welfare/child support, the social risks of pregnancy have been significantly reduced, and women in their prime years are free to select mates on a purely animalistic basis, and this ends up rewarding some guys with rotating harems and others with nothing.
Your failure to get dates isn't due to alpha males 'hoarding female erotic capital'. There are millions of non-alpha-males (which seems to have just one qualification: obtaining sex when you aren't) who are having sex with multiple partners. The reason you're not one of them has a very great deal more to do with you than a social and cultural conspiracy that acts against you.
As for the comments section...hehe. You're right, it's a sign of how relevant and meaningful your perspective is, how great its long-term prospects are, that you can find 'quality' discussions on Internet comments sections'.
Sometimes people that argue that the whole world is wrong and needs fixing have something meaningful to say. Sometimes they're heroes. Usually they're just varying degrees of weird, crazy, or frightened.
Well. One thing we could do is to stop encouraging people to define their lives by who wants to date them. Which is, perhaps accidentally, what you're doing.
Okay that said Sa'eed, some of the things you're saying are pretty sexist. I mean. Jeez. And somewhere there are members of the opposite sex that face some of the same obstacles you do and men don't have a monopoly on them.
Posts: 1407 | Registered: Oct 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: [QB] Your failure to get dates isn't due to alpha males 'hoarding female erotic capital'. There are millions of non-alpha-males (which seems to have just one qualification: obtaining sex when you aren't) who are having sex with multiple partners. The reason you're not one of them has a very great deal more to do with you than a social and cultural conspiracy that acts against you.
I didn't say it was a sole reason, but it's a pressure that affects all men.
That image illustrates the behavior that used to be discouraged but which is allowed today. It produces inequities. Maybe let the B's in the second column have the option of legal prostitution? That's all I mean to say.
quote: As for the comments section...hehe. You're right, it's a sign of how relevant and meaningful your perspective is, how great its long-term prospects are, that you can find 'quality' discussions on Internet comments sections'.
These are radical views, right now only whispered in chatrooms and in the dark alleys of the internet, but they're having an impact. MRAs are making the news, and a lot of feminists do nothing screech about them.
quote: You could solve this problem you've got, that of female rejection and your anger over it, and it wouldn't even be very difficult. But that would involve admitting that something might be wrong (or at least poorly adapted) with you. Much more flattering to the ego to believe that the world is wrong.
It's true that it's absurd to conflate societal problems with personal problems. However, I've also come to care about these sort of things on an ideological level. I'm not calling for returning to the 50s, I'm okay with sexual libertarianism, I'm just saying let's take it further and allow legal prostitution so that the pressure created by top men hording female erotic capital are alleviated somewhat.
Posts: 668 | Registered: Aug 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by umberhulk: Okay that said Sa'eed, some of the things you're saying are pretty sexist. I mean. Jeez. And somewhere there are members of the opposite sex that face some of the same obstacles you do and men don't have a monopoly on them.
The average woman who isn't obese is attractive to hundreds of millions of men in her teens and 20s and maybe even into her 30s. The only women who have problems with dating and attracting men are the truly unfortunate ones when it comes to looks, and I'm talking ones with genetic abnormalities or some such.
Posts: 668 | Registered: Aug 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
The most insane thing about the whole "alpha male" thing that MRA's get themselves all psychotically wrapped up in is that it isn't even remotely accurate as a descriptor. It's a flawed human sexual relations model based on a model for pack wolves — which never even adequately explained wolf social heirarchy either.
"alpha male consumption of female erotic capital" — i mean, jesus christ
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Samprimary: The most insane thing about the whole "alpha male" thing that MRA's get themselves all psychotically wrapped up in is that it isn't even remotely accurate as a descriptor. It's a flawed human sexual relations model based on a model for pack wolves — which never even adequately explained wolf social heirarchy either.
It's not used scientifically but is just supposed to mean "top men."
quote:"alpha male consumption of female erotic capital" — i mean, jesus christ
quote:"alpha male consumption of female erotic capital" — i mean, jesus christ
...he spluttered.
Yes, clive, keep telling us about how young women slut it up. keep explaining female sexual behavior for us. tell us about whether or not you ever found a surrogate womb so that you could pay someone to produce an offspring for you without having to deal with a mother and their potentially pernicious female claim to the child.
while you're at it, tell us about homosexuality and jews, the other two favorite topics of yours you were banned for.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:"alpha male consumption of female erotic capital" — i mean, jesus christ
...he spluttered.
Yes, clive, keep telling us about how young women slut it up. keep explaining female sexual behavior for us. tell us about whether or not you ever found a surrogate womb so that you could pay someone to produce an offspring for you without having to deal with a mother and their potentially pernicious female claim to the child.
I'm going to make another thread for you to talk about me, so that you can leave this one alone.
Posts: 668 | Registered: Aug 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
In all seriousness, it might solve some of your problems if you tried dating a gay Jewish guy for a bit.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
He got me to watch the original house of cards and thats more than you've ever ****ing done for me.
Posts: 1407 | Registered: Oct 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Since I'm being asked to talk about this poster here, let's talk about this poster here. He is a psychologically broken creepy man. It's really sad! He has been banned before, multiple times. That was good, it was the appropriate course of action! He simply just flaunted the ban and came back and kept posting, each time ramping up his behavior into territory that got him banned again. This time around we were under the impression that he was being allowed to post on this alt on a provisional basis given that he avoid some specific controversial topics, or at least that's what I was under the impression was going on. He has continued to talk about subjects that he gets banned for. He should probably just shut up and go away forever!
Well, you might say, those certainly are some harsh words! And, after all, he only repeatedly got banned and then created alts to get around that ban, surely we can forgive and forget that he is yet again, right now, totally talking about women 'sluts' in true Clive Candy/Cindy Carter/the_Somalian/Sa'eed/etc fashion. It's totally not a slap in the face to any mod giving him the benefit of the doubt, or anything.
Go ahead and take a gander at those posts, which represent a trivial ten minute application of the use of the search function. They don't even include most of the threads that he made in the repeated periods in which he would start spamming really trollslummy threads that were what would get him banned. Again, and again, and again. The absolute worst of what this guy has written simply got deleted. Think about that when you're reading this: it's not even close to the worst he subjected this forum to.
Anyway, have fun discussing women with this guy! But remember, multiple women have come forward and talked forwardly about how he makes this place a more hostile environment to women, or said directly sexist things to them, and that's why he should be banned! These arguments have been repeatedly accepted and he was banned; he simply alted around the bans and is back to talking about female slutting. Today.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
I can kinda sorta in a REALLY roundabout and twisted way see where Sa'eed is coming from. Still, I just don't buy it.
The problem is, I am nowhere near being an "Alpha" male. I'm overweight, lazy, socially awkward and inept to the point of damn near being diagnosed with social anxiety (and even mild autism has been thrown around) and broke. The only thing I have going for me is a brain, a decent sense of humor and a new sorta cool profession. Despite all that, I have five names in my cell phone right now that I could call and be getting all the action I want tonight. All it would cost me is maybe the price of dinner and protection. And no, none of them are "ones with genetic abnormalities or some such".
That being said, I have no problem with some sort of good system of highly regulated, legal prostitution. There are times a man wants something that is very difficult to find for free without revealing far too much of themselves to the world at large. We all have our kinks. Posts: 891 | Registered: Feb 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
I stand behind all those posts. I mean Samp's sensationalism aside, I can defend all of them. I mean consider the very last link. This guy basically argued the same thing recently:
quote:Originally posted by Wingracer: Oh man this thread is so funny it's sad.
I can kinda sorta in a REALLY roundabout and twisted way see where Sa'eed is coming from. Still, I just don't buy it.
The problem is, I am nowhere near being an "Alpha" male. I'm overweight, lazy, socially awkward and inept to the point of damn near being diagnosed with social anxiety (and even mild autism has been thrown around) and broke. The only thing I have going for me is a brain, a decent sense of humor and a new sorta cool profession. Despite all that, I have five names in my cell phone right now that I could call and be getting all the action I want tonight. All it would cost me is maybe the price of dinner and protection. And no, none of them are "ones with genetic abnormalities or some such".
That being said, I have no problem with some sort of good system of highly regulated, legal prostitution. There are times a man wants something that is very difficult to find for free without revealing far too much of themselves to the world at large. We all have our kinks.
You are part of the problem. Quit hording all that female erotic capital.
Posts: 668 | Registered: Aug 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Wingracer: Oh man this thread is so funny it's sad.
I can kinda sorta in a REALLY roundabout and twisted way see where Sa'eed is coming from. Still, I just don't buy it.
The problem is, I am nowhere near being an "Alpha" male. I'm overweight, lazy, socially awkward and inept to the point of damn near being diagnosed with social anxiety (and even mild autism has been thrown around) and broke. The only thing I have going for me is a brain, a decent sense of humor and a new sorta cool profession. Despite all that, I have five names in my cell phone right now that I could call and be getting all the action I want tonight. All it would cost me is maybe the price of dinner and protection. And no, none of them are "ones with genetic abnormalities or some such".
That being said, I have no problem with some sort of good system of highly regulated, legal prostitution. There are times a man wants something that is very difficult to find for free without revealing far too much of themselves to the world at large. We all have our kinks.
You are part of the problem. Quit hording all that female erotic capital.
1. I'm not hording them. Two I have had relationships with in the past but no longer. The other three have made it quite clear that they are willing but other than friendship, I'm not interested.
2. If I was hording them, how does it support your theory when I am so clearly NOT an "alpha" male? Plus, who says I'm the only guy they are involved with? The only way I could horde them is to keep them chained in my basement (yes, I know someone that does this and even he was willing to share) and that's not my thing.
3. Yes there are lots of women that go for the kind of guy you describe as an "alpha" but there are LOTS of women that find such guys to be nothing but pricks and not worth the time. Go find some of them.
Posts: 891 | Registered: Feb 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
I will do that. Until then, can I keep noting that the current sexual landscape leaves many guys out to dry by design as I argued?
Posts: 668 | Registered: Aug 2010
| IP: Logged |
Obama
unregistered
posted
You can. It doesn't make you at all right, but you can certainly argue it.
IP: Logged |
quote:That image illustrates the behavior that used to be discouraged but which is allowed today. It produces inequities. Maybe let the B's in the second column have the option of legal prostitution? That's all I mean to say.
For the sake of argument-not that you've actually made one, you've referenced a couple of articles but that's about it-let's assume your take on the modern American 'sexual landscape' is accurate. Let's just throw out that things vary between religious, cultural, economic, and even regional groups and pretend for a moment that it's all the same.
It's a competition and you're losing, so you want to change the rules instead of compete and risk defeat. Call it what it is-you're not interested in fairness, you're losing and you don't want to anymore.
quote:ese are radical views, right now only whispered in chatrooms and in the dark alleys of the internet, but they're having an impact. MRAs are making the news, and a lot of feminists do nothing screech about them.
You're absolutely right. One only has to examine the recent history of American politics and gender issues to see that, yes, the 'screeching' feminists (by all means, continue to lie about not being a misogynist while characterizing feminists like that, it's not at all transparent) are gradually winning fewer victories and there's every sign of a counter-revolution.
Right? I mean look at the chat rooms and comment sections. Flipping loon.
quote:It's true that it's absurd to conflate societal problems with personal problems. However, I've also come to care about these sort of things on an ideological level. I'm not calling for returning to the 50s, I'm okay with sexual libertarianism, I'm just saying let's take it further and allow legal prostitution so that the pressure created by top men hording female erotic capital are alleviated somewhat.
I don't believe you actually care about the ideology. It's pretty clear that you care about not getting laid enough, and ensuring for your own vanity that it's everyone else's fault. Why do I say this? Because if one only briefly examines your posting history, one finds that it's at least as important to you to express your misogyny as it is to bemoan 'inequality' on an ideological basis.
quote:The average woman who isn't obese is attractive to hundreds of millions of men in her teens and 20s and maybe even into her 30s. The only women who have problems with dating and attracting men are the truly unfortunate ones when it comes to looks, and I'm talking ones with genetic abnormalities or some such.
Have you even considered that, as frightened of and resentful towards women as you are, you may not have a very good grasp on what the dating lives of women are actually like? Or is this all stemming from seething resentment as yet another guy (not a 'nice guy' like you) gets a girl you want?
quote:It's not used scientifically but is just supposed to mean "top men."
You've attempted repeatedly to couch your arguments as though they have scientific merit. They don't. Don't try and dodge that now.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Also: if you actually are concerned about 'male rights', you probably already realize that you're an embarrassment. The things you routinely say are so offensive and so poorly conceived that other people who do want to make sure that as women's rights comes closer and closer to the norm rather than a special set of issues, male rights aren't marginalized.
Just about every word out of your mouth makes the job of the 'screeching' feminists and homosexuals easier. Go find an MRA you approve of and donate to their cause or something, if you're ideologically committed, because this hurts your cause.
But then, that's not actually your cause, is it? This has always been about expressing frustration, resentment, anger, and hate for women, homosexuals, and Jews.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
You haven't coherently argued against a single thing I said, you just keep spewing all this empty headed invective. Whatever makes you feel better.
Posts: 668 | Registered: Aug 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well at this point I'm just poking fun at how afraid and how sexist you are, that's quite true. But I've pointed out-repeatedly-how even if you take as given the claims you're making, your arguments still don't make sense. Others have as well.
Conveniently you don't seem to remember that. It's a habit of yours through many screen names. Perhaps, like those screen names, you'll eventually acknowledge this habit of yours?
For example: got anything to say about how your opinions don't seem to take into account that female behavior is hardly univeral? That female sexuality varies across a variety of ranges, from religion, child status, economic status, racial group, even geographical region? No. It's the same everywhere-women are more free to 'slut it up', across the board. We don't need to demonstrate that this is true because it's obvious, right?
Another example: you haven't made a case for why, if all of this is financial transaction, why we should change the competition just for your sake. Why shouldn't we adopt a laissez-faire attitude towards these financial transactions? Why does society need a radical revision in order to address your thwarted libido?
Your response to my point about women being the political power nowhere in the world was to point out the WCTU-an institution which had to lobby universally male politicians to get their will done. So, yeah, brilliant argument there, dude.
You had nothing to say with respect to my question about criminality in single-father households, and to what extent criminality is greater among children of single parent households that isn't also accounted for by variations in income and standards of living and education.
There are other examples. You're lying (again) when you claim I've offered no arguments. At this point, though, until you address at least some of them, I'll probably be just underlining how much you view women as strictly sexual things for men to have access to, to scorn you for your fear, and wait until you're banned again which hopefully will be soon.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Oh, and re: gloating about the diminished chances for you to procreate. Well, it's simple: if you don't father children, it's less likely some impressionable child-male or god forbid female of yours-will be subjected to your hardly-unique brand of fear of women.
Blegh. Thinking about that makes me imagine you as an uncle, and wondering how open you are when things are face to face about the sexual desirability of fifteen year old girls.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:That image illustrates the behavior that used to be discouraged but which is allowed today. It produces inequities. Maybe let the B's in the second column have the option of legal prostitution? That's all I mean to say.
For the sake of argument-not that you've actually made one, you've referenced a couple of articles but that's about it-let's assume your take on the modern American 'sexual landscape' is accurate. Let's just throw out that things vary between religious, cultural, economic, and even regional groups and pretend for a moment that it's all the same.
It's a competition and you're losing, so you want to change the rules instead of compete and risk defeat. Call it what it is-you're not interested in fairness, you're losing and you don't want to anymore.
I don't want to really change the rules. Things are mostly fine, we just need to extend the sexual libertarianism a bit more as to allow involuntarily celibate men the option of buying sex.
quote: You're absolutely right. One only has to examine the recent history of American politics and gender issues to see that, yes, the 'screeching' feminists (by all means, continue to lie about not being a misogynist while characterizing feminists like that, it's not at all transparent) are gradually winning fewer victories and there's every sign of a counter-revolution.
You have the absurd habit of building strawmen out of everything I say. "Having an impact" need not mean "counter-feminist revolution." But rather have an impact on gender relation discussions, which is increasingly happening.
quote: Right? I mean look at the chat rooms and comment sections. Flipping loon.
Small steps.
quote: I don't believe you actually care about the ideology. It's pretty clear that you care about not getting laid enough, and ensuring for your own vanity that it's everyone else's fault.
So suppose you're right. How does the motivation behind an argument logically make that argument incorrect? Seriously, believe what you want. That's doesn't make what I say wrong. And I said, I did start looking into this stuff for personal reasons, but it's also interesting sociology.
quote: You've attempted repeatedly to couch your arguments as though they have scientific merit. They don't. Don't try and dodge that now.
The guy who came up with the phrase "alpha male" years ago spoke against its usage in PUA circles. However, it is still used to colloquially meaning of "high status" man.
Posts: 668 | Registered: Aug 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: Well at this point I'm just poking fun at how afraid and how sexist you are, that's quite true. But I've pointed out-repeatedly-how even if you take as given the claims you're making, your arguments still don't make sense. Others have as well.
I'm not going to do a dissertation just because you people want to play obtuse.
quote: For example: got anything to say about how your opinions don't seem to take into account that female behavior is hardly univeral? That female sexuality varies across a variety of ranges, from religion, child status, economic status, racial group, even geographical region? No. It's the same everywhere-women are more free to 'slut it up', across the board. We don't need to demonstrate that this is true because it's obvious, right?
But this is hardly relevant to the fact that sexual revolution happened, and it allowed certain mating patterns that have deleterious effects. It's like me saying "contraception is used by women" and you replying "women's behavior is NOT universal and contraception varies by class race blah blah."
quote: Another example: you haven't made a case for why, if all of this is financial transaction, why we should change the competition just for your sake. Why shouldn't we adopt a laissez-faire attitude towards these financial transactions? Why does society need a radical revision in order to address your thwarted libido?
Once again, spinning your own bullshit and replying to it. I am arguing we extend the laissez-faire approach all the more by allowing legal prostitution.
quote: Your response to my point about women being the political power nowhere in the world was to point out the WCTU-an institution which had to lobby universally male politicians to get their will done. So, yeah, brilliant argument there, dude.
Well that was the dumbest thing you said. I'm confining my analysis to the U.S, where women vote, and have politicians pander to them.
quote: You had nothing to say with respect to my question about criminality in single-father households, and to what extent criminality is greater among children of single parent households that isn't also accounted for by variations in income and standards of living and education.
You're right, we were getting away from the thread topic. I'm not dredging up every argument I ever made in this forum despite your eagerness.
quote: There are other examples. You're lying (again) when you claim I've offered no arguments. At this point, though, until you address at least some of them, I'll probably be just underlining how much you view women as strictly sexual things for men to have access to, to scorn you for your fear, and wait until you're banned again which hopefully will be soon.
posted
Prostitution became widely illegal in the early 1910s in the US. Lots of women voters in those years, Clive? Yeah, my point was certainly dumb and you're right, women are historically the drivers of public dislike of prostitution.
As for the sexual revolution, it's certainly relevant. Your argument is essentially 'the sexual revolution has changed women's sexual behavior' (and that's bad, because it's not as easy for me to get laid' and you offer it as a given that these changes are across the board, universal to all American women.
Except that's nonsense. The sexual revolution didn't impact every religious, regional, cultural and racial group of women identically. Thus arguing that it happened is absurd. You need to (and have so far completely failed) to take it a step further.
As for laissez-faire, I wasn't advocating that we should do so, I was approaching your argument on its own merits. In your misogynistic world view, women's sexuality is a commodity men have rights to. Men compete for these commodities. This competition takes the form of 'most sexually desirable male gets the most sexual commodities'. Again, this is your own argument.
You're the one who wants to abandon this free market competition of sexuality and introduce another element to it. You don't want a hands-off approach to this sexual competition, you want a competition you feel you can win. You know, a competition where you can pay women to ignore your personality.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Wow Rakeesh, you distort and deliberately misread what I say and respond to it, and quite frankly I'm tired of explaining, and tired of your nasty insults. Good night.
Posts: 668 | Registered: Aug 2010
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Wave]](graemlins/wave.gif)
