Comments
Please wait...
Comments are closed.
Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.
More In Columns
is a proud member of the
network
network
All contents © Noisy Creek, Inc.
800 Maynard Ave S, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134
800 Maynard Ave S, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134
I would find a guy with only one a little off putting, truthfully, but if he had a cute smile and a nice sense of humor and I would get over it soon enough.
Indeed what would the response be to a het who is wondering if they can get away without said dental or finger dams... would there be any mention of 'fucked in the headness'? I am sorry... I just think there was something 'fucked' about Dan's response.
I would love to know how many people who don't sleep with half their community members use dental or finger dams?
I don't. That's one for the don't users... (my rate of sleeping with others is about three different people a year when not committed)
I couldn't have said it better myself! Rock on!
Howsabout a little intelligent and truthful deconstruction?
1. With the exception of the woman in the first/second shots, the women being mocked for being fatties ("your bigger-than-expected dinner bill") aren't carrying much weight. Unless, of course, you're looking at them thru a lens distorted/polluted by this toxic culture and thus think that any woman larger than a size 2 is an oinker. (Interestingly, the 1st woman appears in a short skirt and skimpy top; could it be that she -- GASP -- feels good about herself even tho society has expressly forbidden that???!!!?)
2. Most of the "undelicious dose of reality" photos are as skewed as the flattering ones: Most of them are lighted badly, with unrelenting brightness that makes everyone a fat face, or with weirdly placed shadows that distort any subject's looks; some were taken at angles that make everyone a fish face; at least one of the women was snapped as her eyes were closing so only the ghoulish whites show.
No one is immune from being the subject of a bad photo, and these "reality" shots prove it -– they’re no “realer” than the "unreal pretty" shots that the angry lookist hetero men are so steamed up about.
3. The unrelenting "fat chick" putdowns are staggering to me; I don't remember anything of this magnitude, anything this aggressively HATE-filled, when I was growing up, in the 70s-80s. Worst of all, women who aren't even fat but are curvy -- who LOOK LIKE WOMEN -- are getting slammed with snide remarks about how fat they are (that wasn't her brother standing next to her, it was her last meal! if you take her out, your dinner bill is going to be huge! She‘s so big she attends Moo U.!). Hateful, hateful, HATEFUL. (Oh, by the way, a gun-toting man fueled by his hatred of women recently shot up a gym [irony upon irony] full of -- you guessed it! -- women and killed three strangers, and that wasn't the first time that some woman-hating lunatic has done such a thing, and don’t even get me *started* on the 42% of murdered women who are killed by their “loving partners” -- but we as a society have NOTHING to worry about when it comes to the immense man-hatred of women that this culture promulgates, and yes, "hatred" does include stuff like the hateful things that men feel perfectly comfortable saying to/about women, such as all those lovely “She’s a cow!” put-downs.
4. In our culture, there is an absolute, unmistakable, and utterly hate-filled correlation between women's increased independence/power and society's insistence that women disappear themselves, either by dieting until they're little more than wraiths (maybe that's why Mr. Angry Woman-Hating Lookist [31] got all brain-mushed about wrath/wraith) or by obsessing so much about how they look that they never feel at peace -- and have little or no energy to fix the actual ills of this world.
5. All you hetero guys out there who really like tits, here's a li'l tidbit for you: BREASTS ARE COMPOSED LARGELY OF FATTY TISSUE, SO WHEN WOMEN PUSH THEMSELVES TO BE A FRAT-BOY-APPROVED SIZE 2, THOSE TITS GO BYE-BYE.
Don't believe me? Google some images of Keira Knightly, Kate Moss, Calista Flockhart. No tits for the anorexic! Then Google the lovely-and-atypically-slim-but-not-scary-skinny Eva Langoria and Kylie Minogue: small-breasted, in keeping with their low-fat frames. Then Google up some images of Marilyn Monroe and Jane Russell in their “Gentlemen Prefer Blondes” days -- breasts, yes, and also hips, asses, thighs, lovely feminine rounded (not FAT) upper arms. You want the tits? You get a general roundness everywhere. Which men for centuries enjoyed.
6. Women's bodies are -- uh, d-uh-- very different from men's in some crucial ways, not the least of which is fat storage: Women need a certain amt of body fat to carry healthy babies to term and then to manufacture milk to feed said kids; bc Nature didn't think it would be useful for this mechanism to toggle on and off, women weren’t given a nifty wifi-card-type thingy to be popped out when fat production is less crucial. Our bodies make and store more fat than yours because of that whole "giver of life thing." Which you can't do.
7. Looks sure as hell do matter -- they matter to all of us. But that's "looks" plural, not "the look" singular. Most women are trained to have very broad definitions of "attractive" (for ex., I have a thing for actor Sam Lloyd; bald and amply schnozzed, he ain't never going to be on People's "Most Beautiful" list -- and, that doesn't make him any less hot); most men are given a narrow def., and -- even more disheartening -- they don't bother to question their faulty belief system when they're old enough to perceive that human faces and forms vary tremendously. Tulips, lilies, roses, peonies, irises, daffodils, etc. -- all different, all beautiful, all worth having.
8. Yes, the words and pictures that constitute a person's online self should truthfully represent who that person is. And, until the day when everybody turns off the inanity-spewing TV, uses the intertubes in non-hateful ways (that link, with all of its slam-the-size-12-women garbage, is hate speech), and basically decides to grow up, people are going to cling to the old and bullshitty ways: Women online will pretend to be thin, and men online will pretend to be 5-10 years younger than they are/will pretend to be earning upwards of $250K.
C'mon. All of this is exhausting. Let's just open our minds already.
@ 95 Thanks for making my stomach turn. I am going to remain on the side of Dan in that ANY sexual act has inherent risks and all parties involved should take reasonable precautions. For instance, lesbians do fuck men and men are *as everyone seems to be hung up on* carriers of diseases...
I always felt like putting out-of-date or modified pictures up online was not unlike the '70s college film idea of stuffing a sock in my pants; at what point does one own up to the deception? I'm actually so hyperaware of it that I've date-stamped the pics I've sent, and have even recently updated my avatar (yes, the one I use here) to be more current.
What I cannot change, however, is that my personality is noticeably different when I communicate online (say, by email or on a forum) which is more cerebral than who I am in person, which contrasts to the nervous wreck I become on telephone. But this isn't because I put on airs, so much as that different aspects of me emerge according to the modus communicatti.
Justice @91, there are vaccines for all the known cancer causing strains of HPV, though I think only women can benefit from them. I advise all who have access to it to get one.
There's also a HSV vaccine out there, also women only, but I don't know much about it, or why it's not available around here yet.
Your even-handed and pragmatic, and often hilarious advice is such a great beacon of sanity in this f'd up world. Thanks, and don't stop what you are doing. Bravo, man.
My doctor relayed, that here in Oregon they are pushing for giving men/boys age 12+ the HPV vaccine as well.
http://tinyurl.com/b6q4yc
Would you put a little effort into figuring this out?
If you're going to do that, then a little warning is in place cause if you've fetishized your last ball ... you partner needs to know it's a big thing for you.
Otherwise, it's not a big issue ... or it shouldn't be with guys who aren't mentally 12.
i think his advice on WSID was spot on...actually, on all of them. especially the 'what your right hand does for you' comment.
My ex had only one, and granted...I couldn't have cared less: he was gorgeous, and I was smitten. I wouldn't have minded him having one of anything we're generally born with two of.
But here's the bit that *might* be useful(?) When we first got together, I couldn't help but be curious...So he told me I could have 'the Story, now' or 'the Truth, in 3 months.' (Delivered with a wicked grin, and not an ounce of self-consciousness.) It didn't affect me either way, so I went with the more amusing option: wait for it.
In three months (okay, it was more like 3 weeks), not only did I get the Truth (motorbike, mountain road), but the Stories, as well...which were hilarious. Less patient lovers had been forced to accept incompetent sherpas, surfing disasters...one poor girl was forced to entertain the idea of him rescuing a small child from a mountain lion. (Bet she wished she'd gone for Door Number Two:)
It doesn't have to be something you have to worry about. It can actually be a PLUS - after all, it doesn't affect your - erm - workings - at all, right?
So why not reward the genuine with the Truth (cancer), and the shallow with the Story (the more ridiculous, the better)? If you like them enough to see them again, you can choose to give them the Truth if you feel merciful. And if not, well...
F*ck em if they can't take a joke;)
Oh yeah and what's up with the insecurity about dicks and balls? If you have the parts you want and they work, STFU. Some of us aren't that lucky.
If she was so unattractive and didn't match her photos then it is curious that she was attractive enough for him to fuck.
WTF is up with Dan laying into her for posting old photos. She was probably just insecure AND she did what, probably 90% of those who go onto those sites do: portray themselves in their best light.
She didn't do anything wrong but he for sure as hell did! At least Dan acknowledged that it was a shitty thing to fuck her.
Liar, liar, liar and more liar.
Or, are you too, one of those people who'll take, take, take from others and then make up some dull excuse as to "why" even though you were just calling another your "girlfriend" you can't be with them but you can fuck them.
Pretty flimsy. If you don't want to be with someone, then that is jim dandy but why fuck them after weeks of giving them the impression that you were into them?
Once again: BIG PICTURE
*************************************************
Why in hell would a sheep, pig, dog etc..
need a fake ball?