|
SuzukiSavage.com
/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl General Category >> Politics, Religion (Tall Table) >> Hall of Fame xxxx /cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?num=1654783491 Message started by WebsterMark on 06/09/22 at 07:04:51 |
|
Title: Hall of Fame xxxx Post by WebsterMark on 06/09/22 at 07:04:51 MILF. I didn’t wanna put that in a title heading and get edited out immediately! I’m old enough to remember when Sarah Palin, Hall of Fame MILF, was blamed for some nutcase shooting some congresswoman in Arizona. It was a lie from the very beginning. The kid was a nut, he felt like he’s been slighted by the congresswoman, and the advertisement that they claimed drove this nutcase to shoot her was a year old and the kid never saw it. But that didn’t matter, she was still at fault. So using that logic Chuck Schumer, is guilty and to blame for the guy arrested yesterday before attacking Brett Kavanaugh‘s family in his home. I can’t believe anybody would argue with me. I mean Sarah Palin took the New York Times to court and lost so it must have been her fault. |
|
Title: Re: Hall of Fame xxxx Post by Serowbot on 06/09/22 at 07:13:49 102225343322350A26352C470 wrote:
Really? Are you sure? |
|
Title: Re: Hall of Fame xxxx Post by MnSpring on 06/09/22 at 07:47:21 Bot, Can you explain why, Sarah Palin, was at fault. And Chuck Schumer, is not ? Or was it just a 'political' move ? |
|
Title: Re: Hall of Fame xxxx Post by Serowbot on 06/09/22 at 08:23:04 Nobody says she was "at fault",... but she was certainly stoking the fire. Tell me how this is appropriate. http://https://elisabethparker.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/2010.03-Sarah-Palin-target-Gabby-Giffords.jpg |
|
Title: Re: Hall of Fame xxxx Post by WebsterMark on 06/09/22 at 10:06:45 If I invested the time, I could find 100 worse from the other side related to either Trump or W. Or Ted Cruz or Rand Paul etc. |
|
Title: Re: Hall of Fame xxxx Post by Eegore on 06/09/22 at 10:13:11 Is calling someone a MILF considered derogatory towards women? The language not the intent. |
|
Title: Re: Hall of Fame xxxx Post by Serowbot on 06/09/22 at 10:48:53 172522333425320D21322B400 wrote:
"Don't retreat, reload" Cross hairs to mark political targets "Get on target for history" "Shoot a fully automatic M16" How about one? Just show me one. And I'll show you Sen Cruz cooking bacon on an M16 barrel. How asinine is that? ;D |
|
Title: Re: Hall of Fame xxxx Post by justin_o_guy2 on 06/09/22 at 12:28:02 4161636B7661040 wrote:
IDK, is calling a middle aged woman sexually attractive an insult? Not where I'm from. |
|
Title: Re: Hall of Fame xxxx Post by Eegore on 06/09/22 at 13:10:54 "IDK, is calling a middle aged woman sexually attractive an insult?" The language not the intent. |
|
Title: Re: Hall of Fame xxxx Post by WebsterMark on 06/09/22 at 17:43:56 5F7F7D75687F1A0 wrote:
No. |
|
Title: Re: Hall of Fame xxxx Post by WebsterMark on 06/09/22 at 17:44:57 Women call me a DILF all the time and I don’t mind. |
|
Title: Re: Hall of Fame xxxx Post by Eegore on 06/10/22 at 05:33:01 So every female I asked said yes, but to be fair I only asked 17. This would warrant a separate thread however as I would like over 500 samples so it might be a while. I think it's fair to ask why it is offensive versus just having a Yes/No feedback. The simplest response I got in regards to "why" specifically the term "MILF" is offensive was this (note F-word edited due to profanity filter): MILF means he wants to f uck me end of story. "Like to F uck" is the LF. Put it in perspective of a straight male and ask yourself how flattering it is if an unattractive gay male you do not know was telling you how much he wanted to f uck you. Would you say "thank you so much, I appreciate that" to him? He's not saying you are "attractive" he is going straight to putting his c ock inside you as his communication with you. I don't know why anyone would think it's a compliment to say you want to f uck women. I said unattractive gay male to better match the perspective of women I know. Most women do not find most men sexually attractive at first glance, if they did men wouldn't have to try so hard, most nightclubs and bars would sell less alcohol. the reactions I see and have to most men saying they want to f uck us is about the same as when gay guys come on to straight men. To be fair I asked about "intent" and "response" is different. So intent is not to offend which I think is accurate. So while I understand the above response is what it is, that doesn't automatically mean the intent was to offend. |
|
Title: Re: Hall of Fame xxxx Post by WebsterMark on 06/10/22 at 10:36:07 A pretty good response from whoever she was. She touches on a truth that goes unspoken or unnoticed by most and that has to do with the infamous one to 10 scale. If you put up pictures of a woman and ask 1000 men to rate her, the numbers are going to be fairly close. They’ll be a small deviation but for the most part, the ratings gonna be relatively consistent within a point too. There’s gonna be very few cases where someone rates one woman and eight and someone else writes her a two. That’s just not gonna happen. However, put up pictures of a man and ask 1000 women and the ratings will be all over the place. Sure you’re gonna have a few that are universally regarded very high are very low but the middle range is gonna be way more spread out than it is with women. You’re gonna have a lot of threes and sevens fours and eights, things like that. Yes, you’ll have some two versus eights. There’s a lot of reason for that but I think they all boils down to evolution. Women get chased, they don’t chase. Within reason, a relatively good looking woman can have most any man they want and usually go through a period where they take advantage of that. But after a while, they realize the rules of the game and understand most of the power is on their side so they start looking for other characteristics. Here’s a great illustration of that. Go out for a fancy night on the town. Women will be dressed in all kinds of carefully mix and matched and different outfits. Almost all the men wear basically the same thing, dark suit jacket, lighter color in summer, maybe a tie maybe not, dark pants. Men can have blue jeans, a polo, and a sport jacket and go almost anywhere in the entire world and fit in. Women can never do that. Now go to a big wedding. The women are all dressed up, the men all wear the exact same tux. So character makes a difference. And character can manifest itself in a particular look that’s not necessarily handsome but, as the saying goes, he’s quite a character. Sense of humor is extremely high on that list. You have to be intelligent to have a really good sense of humor and that’s why women pick up on men who are really funny. And I’m not talking just drop an F bomb funny, I’m talking really funny, clever, maybe even a dark, dry sense of humor. |
|
Title: Re: Hall of Fame xxxx Post by justin_o_guy2 on 06/10/22 at 11:36:09 Another sidetracked thread |
|
Title: Re: Hall of Fame xxxx Post by MnSpring on 06/10/22 at 12:11:30 6E7177706D6A5B6B5B63717D36040 wrote:
Remember, it is perfectly OK, to be 'sidetracked'. When Bot cannot answer the question: "Can you explain why, Sarah Palin, was at fault. And Chuck Schumer, is not ?" |
|
Title: Re: Hall of Fame xxxx Post by Eegore on 06/10/22 at 12:28:32 "Another sidetracked thread" Yeah like many others, this is nothing new here. "Remember, it is perfectly OK, to be 'sidetracked'. When Bot cannot answer the question:" Maybe he will answer once he gets elected, or instead offer his own question while refusing to answer yours. I'd say when any forum member here answers every question posed to them, they can have some gravity to their complaints that a member isn't answering their question. Until then a forum member that doesn't answer your question is behaving just as every single other member including you. |
|
Title: Re: Hall of Fame xxxx Post by WebsterMark on 06/11/22 at 04:43:03 I rather liked where this thread went. |
|
SuzukiSavage.com » Powered by YaBB 2.2! YaBB © 2000-2007. All Rights Reserved. |