The difference between Men and Women...

Miss Anthropik · Post by **Miss Anthropik** » Tue Aug 11, 2009 4:13 pm

Caliann wrote:I find it interesting that there appears to be a direct correlation between calling out sexism when sexism is perceived, and the mental and physical health of the individual.

That was the whole point of that particular study. It states there does appear to be an increase in perceived sexism in individuals with physical and mental issues. It is worth taking a look at the whole study.

Yeah.....the studies I find are *neat*, although not nearly as informative or valid of those anyone else may find.

This has gotten quite old, the fun has worn off and since I neither have a penis nor envy of one, i'm gonna stop feeding the fire.
I will most definitely post his full review of this whole crazy thread as has been requested.

Caliann · Post by **Caliann** » Tue Aug 11, 2009 4:16 pm

Miss Anthropik wrote:
I will most definitely post his full review of this whole crazy thread as has been requested.

Thank you.

Caliann · Post by **Caliann** » Tue Aug 11, 2009 4:29 pm

Mean Chuck wrote:
(this is what quoting a study that doesn't exist looks like)
That is not to say that such a study does not exist. However, the evidence so far, in great amounts, has findings that prejudiced jokes do, indeed, cause people to shift their feelings and beliefs towards a more prejudiced outlook. I would welcome anyone that will kindly cite a single study, and tell me where they found it, that has conclusions to the contrary.

*sighs* "That is not to say that such a study does not exist", MEANING: There is every possibility that there is a study or a thousand studies out there which have findings that directly refute what I am saying here, or the findings of the studies that I have posted and/or quoted here. I simply have not read them yet.

It was a direct admission that I could very well be completely incorrect and wrong. It was also an invitation to cite a study that basically says I am wrong.

In fact, throughout this entire mess, I have repeatedly invited people to show that I am wrong....and I have done so by *asking* for contrary, scientific information. Not by throwing out snarkiness.

[START: sarcasm] Good luck with spreading your distaste for quiet, intellectual debate. [/END sarcasm]

Alright, I didn't really mean that last sentence...but, hey, tit for tat.

Mean Chuck · Post by **Mean Chuck** » Tue Aug 11, 2009 4:56 pm

Caliann wrote: In fact, throughout this entire mess, I have repeatedly invited people to show that I am wrong....and I have done so by *asking* for contrary, scientific information. Not by throwing out snarkiness.

I will say one more time since you apprently missed it before-
OPINIONS ARE NOT FACTS

Maybe you should look up some studies on that.

roadmissile · Post by **roadmissile** » Tue Aug 11, 2009 5:06 pm

Disastermined wrote:You state that UTMCers are generally smarter than the average citizen.

You know, I can't empirically prove this, but anecdotal evidence points to the conclusion that we're fucking awesome.

Looks like this thread might really go until Ragnarok...

/RM

dozer · Post by **dozer** » Tue Aug 11, 2009 5:32 pm

Caliann
Slutty Feminazi

Am I the last asshole to notice this, or is this new? Either way, I'm fucking offended, and I think we should ban Joe for being a sexist pig. A sexist, crispy pig. mmmmm. Bacon.

Caliann · Post by **Caliann** » Tue Aug 11, 2009 5:39 pm

Disastermined wrote:
Endnote: I understand that most of these things are implications, which is probably why this debate has raged for so long. If written word were taken for denotation instead of connotation, this thread wouldn't have happened. Yet our society has placed a high value on connotation, this has entered the debate world, and the world of speeches. Be ever wary of connotation. It's the debater in me coming out.

I don't honestly want to take either side in this, I just strive for clarity, which leads me to ask questions, poke at holes I perceive (even if they are purely from connotation), and hope that both sides can understand one another.

No, no, no....you are cool.

I do try very hard to ONLY take things on denotation....then when several people start taking what I say on connotation, it leads me to start having to take what THEY say on connotation because I have to believe that connotation has entered into the discussion.

Which is damn confusing.

*chuckles* I only understand the very basics of debate....which is why I am so terrible at it, as you can tell from this thread. The main thing I keep, though, is to not allow myself to be effected by emotions when discussing a topic. If I start getting angry, or if I start thinking the other person is an absolute, screaming dickhead for holding the position he or she does...or if I am tempted to type in large or huge font, it's time to get the heck out of the discussion.

You've been terrific in this.

Oh, and UTMCers are more intelligent than Blue Collar, White Collar OR Knowledge workers. That's my opinion, but I'll need a couple more years to correlate the data for a proper conclusion. Just letting you know that so far, the findings are shaping up to a conclusion that matches my hypothesis.

(Oh, to MeanChuck, who has been attempting to debate that he is NOT living up to his name, the above includes you, too.)

Caliann · Post by **Caliann** » Tue Aug 11, 2009 5:44 pm

dozerone wrote:Caliann
Slutty Feminazi

Am I the last asshole to notice this, or is this new? Either way, I'm fucking offended, and I think we should ban Joe for being a sexist pig. A sexist, crispy pig. mmmmm. Bacon.

It showed up during this thread.

Joe IS a sexist pig...one of the reasons I luuuuuuuuuuuvvvvv him so much! Besides, who else would title (as he well knows) a submissive masochist "Slutty Feminazi"?

Well, besides me, of course.

Wait, did you say Bacon???

*wanders off, following the smell of roasting, sexist pig*

piccini9 · Post by **piccini9** » Tue Aug 11, 2009 5:58 pm

Slutty Submissive Masochistic Feminazi Bacon?

Where do I sign up for this?

Page Ten Maybe?

Shhted · Post by **Shhted** » Tue Aug 11, 2009 6:07 pm

piccini9 wrote:Slutty Submissive Masochistic Feminazi Bacon?

Where do I sign up for this?

Page Ten Maybe?

This post means nothing without pics.

Mean Chuck · Post by **Mean Chuck** » Tue Aug 11, 2009 6:25 pm

Caliann wrote: I only understand the very basics of debate....

to MeanChuck, who has been attempting to debate

Attemting?? Well considering you skirt almost everything I say I guess I should take that as a compliment, at least you don't have an ego problem or anything.

Since you can turn opinion into fact can you also turn water into wine or do any other magic? I might need to book you for a party at some point.

Rock · Post by **Rock** » Tue Aug 11, 2009 7:10 pm

WE ARE 138!!!!!!!

Caliann · Post by **Caliann** » Tue Aug 11, 2009 7:28 pm

Rock wrote:WE ARE 138!!!!!!!

Good gods, Rock, do I *have* to? I've been bored for 2 pages already!

Toonce(s) · Post by **Toonce(s)** » Tue Aug 11, 2009 7:45 pm

Disastermined wrote:
BackDoorBarbie wrote:
Disastermined wrote:
RexAddict wrote:
xtian wrote:
Disastermined wrote:
RexAddict wrote:
BackDoorBarbie wrote:
RexAddict wrote:
Jonny wrote:
piccini9 wrote:
Miss Anthropik wrote:<object width="480" height="430"><param name="allowfullscreen" value="true" /><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always" /><param name="movie" value="http://www.theonion.com/content/themes/ ... 0Skanks%3F" /><param name="wmode" value="transparent" /><embed src="http://www.theonion.com/content/themes/ ... wave-flash" allowScriptAccess="always" allowFullScreen="true" wmode="transparent" width="480" height="430"flashvars="image=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.theonion.com%2Fcontent%2Ffiles%2Fimages%2FSKANKS_article.jpg&videoid=93083&title=In%20The%20Know%3A%20Are%20Reality%20Shows%20Setting%20Unrealistic%20Standards%20For%20Skanks%3F"></embed></object>
<a href="http://www.theonion.com/content/video/i ... oembed">In The Know: Are Reality Shows Setting Unrealistic Standards For Skanks?</a>
Can we start quoting each other in an endless loop now? Like the Lebowski thread?

eight?

No, I don't think that would be appropriate.
Terribly inappropriate. I mean, just because somebody blurts out 'page 9' at some point doesn't mean we need to start posting like lemmings, as if page 9 were some kind of destination which pulls us helplessly towards it. Lemmings are notorious for posting flotsam, are they not? Oh snap, I hope I have not offended lemmings with that statement. Anyone that knows me will say that I am totally unbiased towards lemmings, in fact all classes of leaping rodentia. I can relate to them. We share a certain existential angst.
im offended that at your insinuation that lemmings are unable to relate to anyone but you...

actually, i just wanted to get another still shot of tilla tortilla's perfectly rounded spill over once more.
Did I imply some exclusivity with my relationship with lemmings, or their relationship to me? I apologize.

Hail boobies!
Your love affair with lemmings offends me, apology only accepted because your post came with boobs
you mean lemming like the 80's amiga game where they're head explode ?
my head explodes.
oh no ! *blamoh*
No, just regular lemmings.
you're prejudiced against irregular lemmings!!!
that's right frame the boobs... i wonder how cool this is going to look on page 47?
infinitly cool, of course

Since this thread has gotten SERIOUSLY off track, I now return you to your regularly scheduled programming...

piccini9 · Post by **piccini9** » Tue Aug 11, 2009 7:59 pm

RexAddict wrote:
Disastermined wrote:
BackDoorBarbie wrote:
Disastermined wrote:
RexAddict wrote:
xtian wrote:
Disastermined wrote:
RexAddict wrote:
BackDoorBarbie wrote:
RexAddict wrote:
Jonny wrote:
piccini9 wrote:
Miss Anthropik wrote:<object width="480" height="430"><param name="allowfullscreen" value="true" /><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always" /><param name="movie" value="http://www.theonion.com/content/themes/ ... 0Skanks%3F" /><param name="wmode" value="transparent" /><embed src="http://www.theonion.com/content/themes/ ... wave-flash" allowScriptAccess="always" allowFullScreen="true" wmode="transparent" width="480" height="430"flashvars="image=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.theonion.com%2Fcontent%2Ffiles%2Fimages%2FSKANKS_article.jpg&videoid=93083&title=In%20The%20Know%3A%20Are%20Reality%20Shows%20Setting%20Unrealistic%20Standards%20For%20Skanks%3F"></embed></object>
<a href="http://www.theonion.com/content/video/i ... oembed">In The Know: Are Reality Shows Setting Unrealistic Standards For Skanks?</a>
Can we start quoting each other in an endless loop now? Like the Lebowski thread?

eight?

No, I don't think that would be appropriate.
Terribly inappropriate. I mean, just because somebody blurts out 'page 9' at some point doesn't mean we need to start posting like lemmings, as if page 9 were some kind of destination which pulls us helplessly towards it. Lemmings are notorious for posting flotsam, are they not? Oh snap, I hope I have not offended lemmings with that statement. Anyone that knows me will say that I am totally unbiased towards lemmings, in fact all classes of leaping rodentia. I can relate to them. We share a certain existential angst.
im offended that at your insinuation that lemmings are unable to relate to anyone but you...

actually, i just wanted to get another still shot of tilla tortilla's perfectly rounded spill over once more.
Did I imply some exclusivity with my relationship with lemmings, or their relationship to me? I apologize.

Hail boobies!
Your love affair with lemmings offends me, apology only accepted because your post came with boobs
you mean lemming like the 80's amiga game where they're head explode ?
my head explodes.
oh no ! *blamoh*
No, just regular lemmings.
you're prejudiced against irregular lemmings!!!
that's right frame the boobs... i wonder how cool this is going to look on page 47?
infinitly cool, of course
Since this thread has gotten SERIOUSLY off track, I now return you to your regularly scheduled programming...

Nice try pal, we're going with it. And by "We" I mean, The Irregular Lemmings.

So there.

Toonce(s) · Post by **Toonce(s)** » Tue Aug 11, 2009 8:47 pm

piccini9 wrote:
RexAddict wrote:
Disastermined wrote:
BackDoorBarbie wrote:
Disastermined wrote:
RexAddict wrote:
xtian wrote:
Disastermined wrote:
RexAddict wrote:
BackDoorBarbie wrote:
RexAddict wrote:
Jonny wrote:
piccini9 wrote:
Miss Anthropik wrote:<object width="480" height="430"><param name="allowfullscreen" value="true" /><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always" /><param name="movie" value="http://www.theonion.com/content/themes/ ... 0Skanks%3F" /><param name="wmode" value="transparent" /><embed src="http://www.theonion.com/content/themes/ ... wave-flash" allowScriptAccess="always" allowFullScreen="true" wmode="transparent" width="480" height="430"flashvars="image=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.theonion.com%2Fcontent%2Ffiles%2Fimages%2FSKANKS_article.jpg&videoid=93083&title=In%20The%20Know%3A%20Are%20Reality%20Shows%20Setting%20Unrealistic%20Standards%20For%20Skanks%3F"></embed></object>
<a href="http://www.theonion.com/content/video/i ... oembed">In The Know: Are Reality Shows Setting Unrealistic Standards For Skanks?</a>
Can we start quoting each other in an endless loop now? Like the Lebowski thread?

eight?

No, I don't think that would be appropriate.
Terribly inappropriate. I mean, just because somebody blurts out 'page 9' at some point doesn't mean we need to start posting like lemmings, as if page 9 were some kind of destination which pulls us helplessly towards it. Lemmings are notorious for posting flotsam, are they not? Oh snap, I hope I have not offended lemmings with that statement. Anyone that knows me will say that I am totally unbiased towards lemmings, in fact all classes of leaping rodentia. I can relate to them. We share a certain existential angst.
im offended that at your insinuation that lemmings are unable to relate to anyone but you...

actually, i just wanted to get another still shot of tilla tortilla's perfectly rounded spill over once more.
Did I imply some exclusivity with my relationship with lemmings, or their relationship to me? I apologize.

Hail boobies!
Your love affair with lemmings offends me, apology only accepted because your post came with boobs
you mean lemming like the 80's amiga game where they're head explode ?
my head explodes.
oh no ! *blamoh*
No, just regular lemmings.
you're prejudiced against irregular lemmings!!!
that's right frame the boobs... i wonder how cool this is going to look on page 47?
infinitly cool, of course
Since this thread has gotten SERIOUSLY off track, I now return you to your regularly scheduled programming...
Nice try pal, we're going with it. And by "We" I mean, The Irregular Lemmings.

So there.

As you will, but I am noticing that the 'recursive skank' effect we have going here is becoming quite hypnotic.

dozer · Post by **dozer** » Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:47 am

ejworthen · Post by **ejworthen** » Wed Aug 12, 2009 3:21 pm

RexAddict wrote:
piccini9 wrote:
RexAddict wrote:
Disastermined wrote:
BackDoorBarbie wrote:
Disastermined wrote:
RexAddict wrote:
xtian wrote:
Disastermined wrote:
RexAddict wrote:
BackDoorBarbie wrote:
RexAddict wrote:
Jonny wrote:
piccini9 wrote:
Miss Anthropik wrote:<object width="480" height="430"><param name="allowfullscreen" value="true" /><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always" /><param name="movie" value="http://www.theonion.com/content/themes/ ... 0Skanks%3F" /><param name="wmode" value="transparent" /><embed src="http://www.theonion.com/content/themes/ ... wave-flash" allowScriptAccess="always" allowFullScreen="true" wmode="transparent" width="480" height="430"flashvars="image=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.theonion.com%2Fcontent%2Ffiles%2Fimages%2FSKANKS_article.jpg&videoid=93083&title=In%20The%20Know%3A%20Are%20Reality%20Shows%20Setting%20Unrealistic%20Standards%20For%20Skanks%3F"></embed></object>
<a href="http://www.theonion.com/content/video/i ... oembed">In The Know: Are Reality Shows Setting Unrealistic Standards For Skanks?</a>
Can we start quoting each other in an endless loop now? Like the Lebowski thread?

eight?

No, I don't think that would be appropriate.
Terribly inappropriate. I mean, just because somebody blurts out 'page 9' at some point doesn't mean we need to start posting like lemmings, as if page 9 were some kind of destination which pulls us helplessly towards it. Lemmings are notorious for posting flotsam, are they not? Oh snap, I hope I have not offended lemmings with that statement. Anyone that knows me will say that I am totally unbiased towards lemmings, in fact all classes of leaping rodentia. I can relate to them. We share a certain existential angst.
im offended that at your insinuation that lemmings are unable to relate to anyone but you...

actually, i just wanted to get another still shot of tilla tortilla's perfectly rounded spill over once more.
Did I imply some exclusivity with my relationship with lemmings, or their relationship to me? I apologize.

Hail boobies!
Your love affair with lemmings offends me, apology only accepted because your post came with boobs
you mean lemming like the 80's amiga game where they're head explode ?
my head explodes.
oh no ! *blamoh*
No, just regular lemmings.
you're prejudiced against irregular lemmings!!!
that's right frame the boobs... i wonder how cool this is going to look on page 47?
infinitly cool, of course
Since this thread has gotten SERIOUSLY off track, I now return you to your regularly scheduled programming...
Nice try pal, we're going with it. And by "We" I mean, The Irregular Lemmings.

So there.
As you will, but I am noticing that the 'recursive skank' effect we have going here is becoming quite hypnotic.

I cant believe I didnt find this thread until today. I feel so left out on all the fun.

dozer · Post by **dozer** » Wed Aug 12, 2009 3:27 pm

do I hear a one two three four five six seven eight nine TEN?! AMEN!

Disastermined · Post by **Disastermined** » Wed Aug 12, 2009 3:47 pm

ejworthen wrote:
RexAddict wrote:
piccini9 wrote:
RexAddict wrote:
Disastermined wrote:
BackDoorBarbie wrote:
Disastermined wrote:
RexAddict wrote:
xtian wrote:
Disastermined wrote:
RexAddict wrote:
BackDoorBarbie wrote:
RexAddict wrote:
Jonny wrote:
piccini9 wrote:
Miss Anthropik wrote:<object width="480" height="430"><param name="allowfullscreen" value="true" /><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always" /><param name="movie" value="http://www.theonion.com/content/themes/ ... 0Skanks%3F" /><param name="wmode" value="transparent" /><embed src="http://www.theonion.com/content/themes/ ... wave-flash" allowScriptAccess="always" allowFullScreen="true" wmode="transparent" width="480" height="430"flashvars="image=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.theonion.com%2Fcontent%2Ffiles%2Fimages%2FSKANKS_article.jpg&videoid=93083&title=In%20The%20Know%3A%20Are%20Reality%20Shows%20Setting%20Unrealistic%20Standards%20For%20Skanks%3F"></embed></object>
<a href="http://www.theonion.com/content/video/i ... oembed">In The Know: Are Reality Shows Setting Unrealistic Standards For Skanks?</a>
Can we start quoting each other in an endless loop now? Like the Lebowski thread?

eight?

No, I don't think that would be appropriate.
Terribly inappropriate. I mean, just because somebody blurts out 'page 9' at some point doesn't mean we need to start posting like lemmings, as if page 9 were some kind of destination which pulls us helplessly towards it. Lemmings are notorious for posting flotsam, are they not? Oh snap, I hope I have not offended lemmings with that statement. Anyone that knows me will say that I am totally unbiased towards lemmings, in fact all classes of leaping rodentia. I can relate to them. We share a certain existential angst.
im offended that at your insinuation that lemmings are unable to relate to anyone but you...

actually, i just wanted to get another still shot of tilla tortilla's perfectly rounded spill over once more.
Did I imply some exclusivity with my relationship with lemmings, or their relationship to me? I apologize.

Hail boobies!
Your love affair with lemmings offends me, apology only accepted because your post came with boobs
you mean lemming like the 80's amiga game where they're head explode ?
my head explodes.
oh no ! *blamoh*
No, just regular lemmings.
you're prejudiced against irregular lemmings!!!
that's right frame the boobs... i wonder how cool this is going to look on page 47?
infinitly cool, of course
Since this thread has gotten SERIOUSLY off track, I now return you to your regularly scheduled programming...
Nice try pal, we're going with it. And by "We" I mean, The Irregular Lemmings.

So there.
As you will, but I am noticing that the 'recursive skank' effect we have going here is becoming quite hypnotic.
I cant believe I didnt find this thread until today. I feel so left out on all the fun.

what's nice about this endless quoting business. You can catch up on 90% of what's going on by reading one post

ejworthen · Post by **ejworthen** » Wed Aug 12, 2009 4:52 pm

Disastermined wrote:
ejworthen wrote:
RexAddict wrote:
piccini9 wrote:
RexAddict wrote:
Disastermined wrote:
BackDoorBarbie wrote:
Disastermined wrote:
RexAddict wrote:
xtian wrote:
Disastermined wrote:
RexAddict wrote:
BackDoorBarbie wrote:
RexAddict wrote:
Jonny wrote:
piccini9 wrote:
Miss Anthropik wrote:<object width="480" height="430"><param name="allowfullscreen" value="true" /><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always" /><param name="movie" value="http://www.theonion.com/content/themes/ ... 0Skanks%3F" /><param name="wmode" value="transparent" /><embed src="http://www.theonion.com/content/themes/ ... wave-flash" allowScriptAccess="always" allowFullScreen="true" wmode="transparent" width="480" height="430"flashvars="image=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.theonion.com%2Fcontent%2Ffiles%2Fimages%2FSKANKS_article.jpg&videoid=93083&title=In%20The%20Know%3A%20Are%20Reality%20Shows%20Setting%20Unrealistic%20Standards%20For%20Skanks%3F"></embed></object>
<a href="http://www.theonion.com/content/video/i ... oembed">In The Know: Are Reality Shows Setting Unrealistic Standards For Skanks?</a>
Can we start quoting each other in an endless loop now? Like the Lebowski thread?

eight?

No, I don't think that would be appropriate.
Terribly inappropriate. I mean, just because somebody blurts out 'page 9' at some point doesn't mean we need to start posting like lemmings, as if page 9 were some kind of destination which pulls us helplessly towards it. Lemmings are notorious for posting flotsam, are they not? Oh snap, I hope I have not offended lemmings with that statement. Anyone that knows me will say that I am totally unbiased towards lemmings, in fact all classes of leaping rodentia. I can relate to them. We share a certain existential angst.
im offended that at your insinuation that lemmings are unable to relate to anyone but you...

actually, i just wanted to get another still shot of tilla tortilla's perfectly rounded spill over once more.
Did I imply some exclusivity with my relationship with lemmings, or their relationship to me? I apologize.

Hail boobies!
Your love affair with lemmings offends me, apology only accepted because your post came with boobs
you mean lemming like the 80's amiga game where they're head explode ?
my head explodes.
oh no ! *blamoh*
No, just regular lemmings.
you're prejudiced against irregular lemmings!!!
that's right frame the boobs... i wonder how cool this is going to look on page 47?
infinitly cool, of course
Since this thread has gotten SERIOUSLY off track, I now return you to your regularly scheduled programming...
Nice try pal, we're going with it. And by "We" I mean, The Irregular Lemmings.

So there.
As you will, but I am noticing that the 'recursive skank' effect we have going here is becoming quite hypnotic.
I cant believe I didnt find this thread until today. I feel so left out on all the fun.
what's nice about this endless quoting business. You can catch up on 90% of what's going on by reading one post

It really is quite helpful. Especially when discussing matters of such importance.

Disastermined · Post by **Disastermined** » Fri Aug 14, 2009 3:12 pm

ejworthen wrote:
Disastermined wrote:
ejworthen wrote:
RexAddict wrote:
piccini9 wrote:
RexAddict wrote:
Disastermined wrote:
BackDoorBarbie wrote:
Disastermined wrote:
RexAddict wrote:
xtian wrote:
Disastermined wrote:
RexAddict wrote:
BackDoorBarbie wrote:
RexAddict wrote:
Jonny wrote:
piccini9 wrote:
Miss Anthropik wrote:<object width="480" height="430"><param name="allowfullscreen" value="true" /><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always" /><param name="movie" value="http://www.theonion.com/content/themes/ ... 0Skanks%3F" /><param name="wmode" value="transparent" /><embed src="http://www.theonion.com/content/themes/ ... wave-flash" allowScriptAccess="always" allowFullScreen="true" wmode="transparent" width="480" height="430"flashvars="image=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.theonion.com%2Fcontent%2Ffiles%2Fimages%2FSKANKS_article.jpg&videoid=93083&title=In%20The%20Know%3A%20Are%20Reality%20Shows%20Setting%20Unrealistic%20Standards%20For%20Skanks%3F"></embed></object>
<a href="http://www.theonion.com/content/video/i ... oembed">In The Know: Are Reality Shows Setting Unrealistic Standards For Skanks?</a>
Can we start quoting each other in an endless loop now? Like the Lebowski thread?

eight?

No, I don't think that would be appropriate.
Terribly inappropriate. I mean, just because somebody blurts out 'page 9' at some point doesn't mean we need to start posting like lemmings, as if page 9 were some kind of destination which pulls us helplessly towards it. Lemmings are notorious for posting flotsam, are they not? Oh snap, I hope I have not offended lemmings with that statement. Anyone that knows me will say that I am totally unbiased towards lemmings, in fact all classes of leaping rodentia. I can relate to them. We share a certain existential angst.
im offended that at your insinuation that lemmings are unable to relate to anyone but you...

actually, i just wanted to get another still shot of tilla tortilla's perfectly rounded spill over once more.
Did I imply some exclusivity with my relationship with lemmings, or their relationship to me? I apologize.

Hail boobies!
Your love affair with lemmings offends me, apology only accepted because your post came with boobs
you mean lemming like the 80's amiga game where they're head explode ?
my head explodes.
oh no ! *blamoh*
No, just regular lemmings.
you're prejudiced against irregular lemmings!!!
that's right frame the boobs... i wonder how cool this is going to look on page 47?
infinitly cool, of course
Since this thread has gotten SERIOUSLY off track, I now return you to your regularly scheduled programming...
Nice try pal, we're going with it. And by "We" I mean, The Irregular Lemmings.

So there.
As you will, but I am noticing that the 'recursive skank' effect we have going here is becoming quite hypnotic.
I cant believe I didnt find this thread until today. I feel so left out on all the fun.
what's nice about this endless quoting business. You can catch up on 90% of what's going on by reading one post
It really is quite helpful. Especially when discussing matters of such importance.

And, as we all know. Any thread with this many tits per page must be hugely important.

The Shifty Jesus · Post by **The Shifty Jesus** » Sat Aug 15, 2009 1:17 am

I'm sorry what was everyone talking about again? I got distracted by this great article on gender bias and masculinity.

roadmissile · Post by **roadmissile** » Sun Aug 16, 2009 6:14 am

You know what this thread needs more of?

Boobs.

/RM

guitargeek · Post by **guitargeek** » Sun Aug 16, 2009 10:54 am

dozer · Post by **dozer** » Sun Aug 16, 2009 1:43 pm

http://www.toptitties.com/ ?

hotrodred · Post by **hotrodred** » Mon Aug 17, 2009 12:33 pm

That was a funny joke... That is all I have to say

srg · Post by **srg** » Mon Aug 17, 2009 2:57 pm

-fact; as long as there are differences of race, sex, class, or religion, there will always be a group on top, and others under said top groups power. -

so, the solution, obviously, is to either make everyone mono-racial and hermaphroditic, eliminate currency and the need for it, and outlaw religion, or destroy the world and ensure no biological survivors.

unfortunately, since those are not viable options, than one must conclude that there will always be discriminatory -isms, however subtle or implied, and that in lieu of that fact, one must try to be as civil as possible anyway....

RandallReigns · Post by **RandallReigns** » Tue Aug 18, 2009 12:32 am

I may have missed it if it was mentioned previously...

if you were offended just remember
YOU CLICKED ON "GRINDER/ BUGGERY"you got what you asked for, that is why it's here.

or was that your intent also? If so, bravo, well played.

and just because I lift my pinky when I drink my whiskey doesn't make me a girl, at least that's what my mom says.

roadmissile · Post by **roadmissile** » Tue Aug 18, 2009 3:11 am

RandallReigns wrote:I may have missed it if it was mentioned previously...

if you were offended just remember
YOU CLICKED ON "GRINDER/ BUGGERY"you got what you asked for, that is why it's here.

or was that your intent also? If so, bravo, well played.

and just because I lift my pinky when I drink my whiskey doesn't make me a girl, at least that's what my mom says.

I'm offended you missed the BBQ on Saturday!

/RM

Login

The difference between Men and Women...