PETA Plans An Adult Site

[vienna]

All right, now I know PETA has gone totally off the skids...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/19/peta-porn-site_n_931509.html

Perhaps another sign of the decline of mankind....

[Tribesman]

now I know PETA has gone totally off the skids...

I never knew PETA was ever on them in the first place

[Dowly]

In before "in before dowly".

[Oberon]

In bef-wait what?

[vienna]

In before "in before dowly".

Is this one of those time/space/wormhole/event horizon/quantun/string type things?...

[CCIP]

In before ferret porn :o

[AVGWarhawk]

In before ferret porn :o

:har:

[joea]

In after ferret porn. :doh:

[vienna]

...and, as yet, no dowly...

[JU_88]

"We really want to grab people's attention, get them talking and
to question the status quo and ultimately take action" (PETA)

-Sure, because everyone likes to discuss the porn sites they visit!, found a good porn site to fap to recently? dont keep it to yourself! share it on facebook with all your family, friends and co-workers! :yeah:

What happens in a Vegan porno anyway? Does the vegtable delivery bloke walk in on a woman erotically spilling Soy milk down her cleavage?

[Betonov]

-Sure, because everyone likes to discuss the porn sites they visit!, found a good porn site to fap to recently? dont keep it to yourself! share it on facebook with all your family, friends and co-workers! :yeah:

Ermmmmm, tha was exactly how a conversation went yesterday at an evening drink :oops:

[Sailor Steve]

...and, as yet, no dowly...
Huh?

[JU_88]

Ermmmmm, tha was exactly how a conversation went yesterday at an evening drink :oops:

How about at a family dinner? :woot:

Huh?

+1

[Betonov]

How about at a family dinner? :woot:

The closest we get to talking about sex during a fammily dinner is when we talk about tomatoes being polinated

[the_tyrant]

sorry PETA, but japan already have porn for people who want to fap to veggies
http://www.al120.com/uploads/allimg/100507/153159AV-1.jpg

[TLAM Strike]

http://img37.imageshack.us/img37/7743/demotivationalpostersen.jpg

[Platapus]

Probably a clever way of marketing. :yep:

Unfortunately, I already have a goodly selection of "artistic" websites that I visit to satisfy my cravings.... for culture. :D

[JU_88]

Probably a clever way of marketing. :yep:

Unfortunately, I already have a goodly selection of "artistic" websites that I visit to satisfy my cravings.... for culture. :D


No no, I prefer this one "for research" :woot:

Any man that says he doesnt Ever look at porn on the net is either:
A) A liar
B) A liar
Or
C) A liar

[Sledgehammer427]

I'll go with all the above and a ham sandwich.

[Castout]

Only the stupidest women and pervert man would have anything to do with PETA.

SERIOUSLY.

I'm disgusted. They are not environmentalist/animal lover. AT ALL. Just bunch of perverts with cash to spare disguised as a cause.

They are campaigning basically that women are just another kind of animal. A pet that should be exploited sexually than anything else.

[frau kaleun]

I wonder if it ever occurred to them that there might be (heck, probably is) a certain "type" who actually derives perverse sexual pleasure from tales and images of cruelty to animals? Or that those who are still impressionable in such ways might even visit their site and learn to associate sexual arousal with the very kinds of things they claim they're trying to raise awareness about and prevent? :hmmm:

[Castout]

I wonder if it ever occurred to them that there might be (heck, probably is) a certain "type" who actually derives perverse sexual pleasure from tales and images of cruelty to animals? Or that those who are still impressionable in such ways might even visit their site and learn to associate sexual arousal with the very kinds of things they claim they're trying to raise awareness about and prevent? :hmmm:

Until I see that their male founders and cash backers strip it down themselves I'm compelled to suspect that.

But if they ever did that they would be certified madmen. Simple as that. But at least no longer perverts.

[kiwi_2005]

PETA's New Porn video - Debbie & Mr Cucumber :har:

[CaptainHaplo]

They are campaigning basically that women are just another kind of animal. A pet that should be exploited sexually than anything else.

You do realize that there are some women who intensely desire and crave this sort of thing. Puppy play, pony play, etc. There are also women who crave being a sexual slave.

Not all women do, nor should any group or individual promote that all women should be treated as such, but there is no need to slam things across the board when it can simply be 2 (or more) consenting adults in SSC.

[Platapus]

You do realize that there are some women who intensely desire and crave this sort of thing. Puppy play, pony play, etc. There are also women who crave being a sexual slave.

Not all women do, nor should any group or individual promote that all women should be treated as such, but there is no need to slam things across the board when it can simply be 2 (or more) consenting adults in SSC.

There is this club in Washington DC........ :D

[breadcatcher101]

Is ferret porn like kiddie porn but just a different animal?

[CCIP]

I find the lack of Dowly in this thread disturbing!

[breadcatcher101]

It's ferret porn night on the tube...he'll check in later.

[CCIP]

It's ferret porn night on the tube...

You mean like this?
http://i131.photobucket.com/albums/p301/myspb2006/ferret.jpg

[CaptainMattJ.]

What happened to sticking with pies (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0163651/)...

[Castout]

You do realize that there are some women who intensely desire and crave this sort of thing. Puppy play, pony play, etc. There are also women who crave being a sexual slave.

Not all women do, nor should any group or individual promote that all women should be treated as such, but there is no need to slam things across the board when it can simply be 2 (or more) consenting adults in SSC.

In fantasy or playing your fantasy is PERFECTLY fine but NOT in REALITY.

Their campaigning is not a private matter but it is a campaign in public thus has its effect that it is propagating degrading image of women as merely sexual pet for men and that they are just another animal, all under the disguise it is promoting environmental protection and animal rights.(Does animal have rights? They never demanded it, anyway. Surely not to mean a free hand to cause them unnecessary suffering but that's because as an enlightened being we shouldn't)

Greenpeace all the way when it comes to environmental and animal protection.

PETA is when Hugh Hefner goes green which is not far.....if you know what I mean.

[Oberon]

At least they're not the ALF...

[frau kaleun]

Well, I should hope not. Alf eats cats, that's not very PETA-friendly.

[HunterICX]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H5SCFbEWXQY

:hmmm:

HunterICX

[Pisces]

Well, I should hope not. Alf eats cats, that's not very PETA-friendly.LOL :har:

[CaptainHaplo]

In fantasy or playing your fantasy is PERFECTLY fine but NOT in REALITY.

Their campaigning is not a private matter but it is a campaign in public thus has its effect that it is propagating degrading image of women as merely sexual pet for men and that they are just another animal, all under the disguise it is promoting environmental protection and animal rights.(Does animal have rights? They never demanded it, anyway. Surely not to mean a free hand to cause them unnecessary suffering but that's because as an enlightened being we shouldn't)

Greenpeace all the way when it comes to environmental and animal protection.

PETA is when Hugh Hefner goes green which is not far.....if you know what I mean.

Wait a second here.... if PETA creates a site that meets the definition of explicit sexual content, then they have to secure it from minors. So its not "in public" - aka accessible to all.

As for making women into sexual pets, you do realize that the PETA subjects of photography and participants in whatever acts they portray are willing subjects, don't you?

One of my girls was accepted @ suicidegirl. She voluntarily sent a set of shots in. When she decides she is ready for a shoot, she will let them know. Everything is voluntary. No one forcing her. In fact, part of my role is to play the "devil's advocate" and insure she is making choices she has clearly thought through, choices that will not harm her (physically, emotionally, professionally, etc). It is something that can be a positive experience for her - if framed correctly.

Look, many here will tell you I am as "right wing" as they come. But your talking about a site where adults will be screened should they want to enter. That is a mandatory thing for an adult site. So the people perusing the site will be doing so by choice. The models will be "performing" out of choice.

You may disagree on a moral stance, but your talking about consenting adults that have the right to do this. As for the whole "but it objectifies women" arguement - your opening up a can of worms there.

Women throughout history have been objectified as sexual objects. Yet women themselves have often been their own worst enemy in this. Who here doesn't know of the office romance that happened so someone could get a promotion, or the wife who witholds herself physically as "punishment" to her husband for some percieved wrong? Sexuality has been a weapon in the gender wars throughout history, and thus sex itself has become an "object" to be gained.

Want to stop the objectification of women? Stop trying to sissyfy men and instead teach them that control starts with self. A man who can control himself has no need to objectify a woman.

[the_tyrant]

One of my girls was accepted @ suicidegirl. She voluntarily sent a set of shots in. When she decides she is ready for a shoot, she will let them know. Everything is voluntary. No one forcing her. In fact, part of my role is to play the "devil's advocate" and insure she is making choices she has clearly thought through, choices that will not harm her (physically, emotionally, professionally, etc). It is something that can be a positive experience for her - if framed correctly.

Look, many here will tell you I am as "right wing" as they come. But your talking about a site where adults will be screened should they want to enter. That is a mandatory thing for an adult site. So the people perusing the site will be doing so by choice. The models will be "performing" out of choice.



My girls?
Bro, you work in the porn industry?
:rock:

[CaptainHaplo]

LOL no I don't work in the porn industry.

I simply am not willing to limit myself in my interpersonal relationships. Each person who grows close enough to me for me to consider having a relationship with - knows up front that they are not the only person in my life that I care about. If they go in with that knowledge to start, then I am being honest with them about who I am, and they can decide whether or not it works for them.

It is not "standard" in today's world. In normal society, people of both sexes cheat constantly. They compound the problem by the dishonesty they use when they hide it from their spouse or significant other.

By being honest up front, sure I "scare" away many who would love to be under my guidance otherwise - but I am rather discerning in what I want as well, so this also serves to weed out those that would not work in my "family". Its not about sex. Thats easy to get. Its about relationships, sharing who you are with the people that you choose to care about.

If more people would be honest about what they want and expect in relationships - instead of hiding things out of fear - a lot more relationships would last.....

[Penguin]

They are campaigning basically that women are just another kind of animal. A pet that should be exploited sexually than anything else.

You are aware that the peta campaigns with naked women are something else than the planned porn site?
The campaign where they put naked women in cages was against animal exploitation, putting a human into a cage should illustrate the living conditions that caged animals have. The nakedness of the girls should draw attention rather than objectify a woman - any sexual connotation was certainly not their primary target in those campaigns. The nudity should illustrate vunerability, as the women have no "protecting shell" around them.



[...]
Want to stop the objectification of women? Stop trying to sissyfy men and instead teach them that control starts with self.

I agree with most of the statements you made above, didn't want to quote it all, though I am not sure what you mean with the sissyfying of men. Do you mean it in the sense that many men don't dare to flirt/make a move towards women (anymore)?


A man who can control himself has no need to objectify a woman.
Yep! This is what escpecially pees me off about cultures who want to hide their women under cloth for "their protection".
I see it as an insult towards males, like "You males are a bunch of primitive animals who you can't control yourselves, that's why we must hide anything that can arouse you." - something which makes rape look like a natural instinct.

[NeonSamurai]

Frankly I think most current hardcore pornography objectifies (and generally degrades) both sexes pretty much equally. I also think that it also degrades the viewer as well. I furthermore think that it has become so mechanical and formulaic that it is not arousing or gratifying, and is even damaging to the psyche.

This is not to say that I think that hardcore is a bad thing (so called feminist pornography I think is better, though i still think it falls into many of the same traps). But the current mainstream format is I think both repulsive and repugnant.

Anyhow I shall stop there as I do not feel that Subsim is the best place to discuss such stuff in any detail.

[Dowly]

Frankly I think most current hardcore pornography objectifies (and generally degrades) both sexes pretty much equally. I also think that it also degrades the viewer as well. I furthermore think that it has become so mechanical and formulaic that it is not arousing or gratifying, and is even damaging to the psyche.

I agree 100%. :yep:

[kranz]

I also think that it also degrades the viewer as well.
just wait for Dowly...:hulk:

edit:well, he was faster than me

[mookiemookie]

PETA's become a caricature of itself. I love animals and animal related charities are my usual donation of choice, but good grief, PETA's a bunch of loons. It's like they've become more interested in shock value, publicity stunts and ridiculous statements just to get their name in the news anymore.

[Sailor Steve]

You say PETA.

I say PITA.

Let's call the whole thing off.

[The Enigma]

http://www.peta.org/themes/peta/images/peta/WhatsNewTitleBG.jpg
YUM

[Castout]

Want to stop the objectification of women? Stop trying to sissyfy men and instead teach them that control starts with self. A man who can control himself has no need to objectify a woman.

A man who likes the thoughts of women as sexual object and sexual object only are probably insecure man himself, lacking confidence that he is worthy of a spouse love. This is probably due to past bad relationship with his own mother which left him hurt and angry and he's taking that anger to any women.

No one is trying to sissify men btw. What are you talking about.

It is true these women volunteered but as you said some women do not know better and willingly jump at the chance to make some money at the cost of their self worth. Or they could be pressed economically into volunteering.
Some of these women are victim of programming. That is men's programming that they are merely a sexual being that exists to please the male gender. Stupid women magazine with questionable journalism quality and culture and industry that are shaped by men in position of power are but a few causes.
Gender equality would erase this in the long run but even in 21st century like it or not it is still largely a man's world that we live in.

I'm not saying women are the same as men because they are not by nature. And should not be the same. I'm saying that equal education, social, economic and political opportunities will make women position to be stronger in society and bring more benefits and balance to this now largely man's world which is often ego centric. And ego is always a foolish thing. I even believe women would make better leaders because they are more sensitive and objective. I even believe that mankind will see less war with women taking most top positions.

That is until men can reach their enlightenment and become free of the ego centric man that most of us men are. Until that day women make much better leader.

I also believe for every stupid women there's a big chance there's a stupid man behind it. And for every stupid women there's 10 more stupid men.

[CaptainHaplo]

Castout - I can't speak to where you are from, but men in the US have been under attack for being men for decades. The end result is "sissyfication" - men who are not recognizable as such, but hold more in common with women than they do with their counterparts of the recent past.

Let me give you a few examples of what I mean....

Less than a half century ago, the stars in Hollywood were men like Kirk Douglas and John Wayne. Nowadays its guys that walk with a swish - like Johnny Depp and Leo DiCaprio..... Can you seriously say you don't see a difference in the amount of T guys like The Duke had vs "Romeo"?

Its fashionable for "men" to wear makeup. I am talking straight men, not homosexuals. "guyliner"... "guyliner"?!?!? Are you kidding me? Had someone ever suggested that John Wayne wear eyeliner and they would have been nursing a sore jaw as they picked themselves up off the floor.

Today's modern "man" is supposed to be "in touch with his feminine side". Bull chips! Men aren't supposed to hunt - oh the barbarity! If your accosted and mugged, your supposed to meekly surrender and then call the cops, not belt your attacker in his teeth and let him wake up with your foot on his neck while you wait on the cops. Violence, after all, never solves anything - so we are told. If that were true, then the first war between men would never have ended..... but I digress.

Purses for men. Yes - its a purse. The guy is supposed to wear it on his shoulder just like a chick does with her handbag. But because its a "man" bag its supposed to be cool. Good luck with that....

A good number of "men" today couldn't change a flat tire on their car, much less the brakes.

Go to a US walmart and look at how many hair styling products there are for men. Then again - I guess they need something to carry around in their "man bags".... Probably has enough room in there to get a hair dryer in too....

Many salons are advertising mani/pedi's for men.

Sissyfication - trying to turn men into quasi-women.

Socially - its happening in the US. Guess they have to take out the real men somehow - couldn't do it with physical war - so its the war of gender now.

[Castout]

Castout - I can't speak to where you are from, but men in the US have been under attack for being men for decades. The end result is "sissyfication" - men who are not recognizable as such, but hold more in common with women than they do with their counterparts of the recent past.

Let me give you a few examples of what I mean....

Less than a half century ago, the stars in Hollywood were men like Kirk Douglas and John Wayne. Nowadays its guys that walk with a swish - like Johnny Depp and Leo DiCaprio..... Can you seriously say you don't see a difference in the amount of T guys like The Duke had vs "Romeo"?

Its fashionable for "men" to wear makeup. I am talking straight men, not homosexuals. "guyliner"... "guyliner"?!?!? Are you kidding me? Had someone ever suggested that John Wayne wear eyeliner and they would have been nursing a sore jaw as they picked themselves up off the floor.

Today's modern "man" is supposed to be "in touch with his feminine side". Bull chips! Men aren't supposed to hunt - oh the barbarity! If your accosted and mugged, your supposed to meekly surrender and then call the cops, not belt your attacker in his teeth and let him wake up with your foot on his neck while you wait on the cops. Violence, after all, never solves anything - so we are told. If that were true, then the first war between men would never have ended..... but I digress.

Purses for men. Yes - its a purse. The guy is supposed to wear it on his shoulder just like a chick does with her handbag. But because its a "man" bag its supposed to be cool. Good luck with that....

A good number of "men" today couldn't change a flat tire on their car, much less the brakes.

Go to a US walmart and look at how many hair styling products there are for men. Then again - I guess they need something to carry around in their "man bags".... Probably has enough room in there to get a hair dryer in too....

Many salons are advertising mani/pedi's for men.

Sissyfication - trying to turn men into quasi-women.

Socially - its happening in the US. Guess they have to take out the real men somehow - couldn't do it with physical war - so its the war of gender now.


Ah I see your point. Many men have become a bit more feminine nowadays. That's true. But no one is making them such.

In my honest opinion men could need a little more sensitivity and being less ego centric. Not saying having to do away with ego altogether but basically stop doing foolish things for the sake of ego. By foolish I mean justifying wrongdoing simply because it brought pleasure and [false] pride.
Men need to be smarter and wisen up and to actually start behaving like a mature person instead a 16 year old brat at the age of 30-50.

On the other hand some women nowadays do need to learn how to be a women imo.

Each has a distinct role in society and each gender could learn from the other to improve. Men could use more empathy for one while women could use stronger character.

A female Martin Luther King Jr anyone? Or a male mother Teresa?

I'm willing to bet some money that currently, generally speaking, comparable women make better low to medium level boss(leaders/managers).

[Tribesman]

Let me give you a few examples of what I mean....
:har::har::har::har::har::har::har::har:
Someone needs a visit to reality.

[CCIP]

Because more testosterone and macho is a great solution to all the world's problems, of course. :roll:

If we're on the subject of porn, that's actually one of the things specifically wrong with it. Nothing to do with sissification, and everything to do with portraying men as behaving like controlling, sex-crazed and full of macho. That's the real objectification. Man and woman aren't a thing or a set of definite features you can point to. Both are a spectrum of physical attributes and behaviour patterns, and being blind to that fact is where the real objectification lies.

I should also point out that having known some men with purses and hair products, I saw far more fake macho out of many of them than out of more ordinary, cool-headed blokes. I don't think you can tie hair care, purses and sissification together in any coherent fashion. What does tie together both macho and sissiness, both hair care and spending extraordinary effort to look like a trucker, is something else entirely. I think the real issue is that anyone preoccupied too much with issues of identity and defending their own take on some concrete universal ideal of man or woman - whether their man is a muscular hulk who punches intruders, or a purse-carrying drama queen - is actually almost guaranteed to be an insecure person who is wasting productive energy while trying to compensate. A real man or woman is one who isn't preoccupied with who they are and what standard they ought to conform to, but one who lives productively according to whatever body and psyche they were given, rather than someone else's idea of it.

[CaptainHaplo]

You prove my point, CCIP.

"A real man or woman is one who isn't preoccupied with who they are and what standard they ought to conform to, but one who lives productively according to whatever body and psyche they were given, rather than someone else's idea of it."

The natural state of man is an aggressor. We are the hunters, women are the gatherers. We are the "there is a problem, here is how we fix it", while women are "here is how I feel about the problem".

The fact that men are being pushed into behaviors and actions more becoming the female natural state is exacly why there is a correlation.

Just because a man chooses to do something "sensative" or whatnot on occasion does not make him less of a man. However, when certain societal forces (like fashion - for example) try to guide men into more feminine looks or behaviors, then its a slow attempt at sissification.

"Because more testosterone and macho is a great solution to all the world's problems, of course. :roll:"

There is a huge difference between having testosterone and being macho. Its not that every guy should be a truck driving son of a gun - but the issue is that being a truck driving sone of a gun is now looked down upon. People are who they are by nature, yet while we are supposed to accept the boys and girls who want to wear clothing of the opposite gender, society sticks its nose up in the air at the "macho" guy who just is living his life his way. Truck driver (a fat bum), biker (troublemaker), country boy with a pickup (hick with a shotgun), etc. They are all thought of in a more negative light. Why? Because there is an undercurrent of desire to get rid of the rugged, take no bullcrap mindset that certain types of men exhibit.

As for possessing a set of gonads being a fix for all thats wrong in the world, no its not. But then again, most of the political problems of this world could be easily solved if the people in charge had some intestinal fortitude, so in many situations - it wouldn't hurt.

[Tribesman]

You prove my point, CCIP.

:har::har::har::har::har::har:
He proves a point, the point is about you......

I think the real issue is that anyone preoccupied too much with issues of identity and defending their own take on some concrete universal ideal of man or woman - whether their man is a muscular hulk who punches intruders, or a purse-carrying drama queen - is actually almost guaranteed to be an insecure person who is wasting productive energy while trying to compensate.

Though he could have gone funnier and taken the "male ideal" according to Haplo down the lines of the Golden Age of Hollywood when a bloke called Marion hung aroung with a macho guy called Rock.
As for men with makeup surely that would be shot to pieces by those old folks with lots of make up and purses and lovely delicate bling who wouldn't just belt their attacker in the teeth, they would cut the head off as a trophy, rape their women then burn down the town for good measure. bloody girly men with make up eh, bunch of sissies:rotfl2:

CCIP proved the point, Haplo is one of those people with serious personal issues who is trying to compensate, though it could be added that the relationships and "family" issues mentioned earlier are pretty much textbook "newly single bloke acting it up after a bad relationship meltdown".

[Penguin]

@Tribes: brilliant piece on the make-up part :haha:- you spare me to write my boring stuff about this issue! To be fair: the last paragraph doesn't quite fit though, as Haplo has an alternative concept of relationships as far as I've read here.


The natural state of man is an aggressor. We are the hunters, women are the gatherers. We are the "there is a problem, here is how we fix it", while women are "here is how I feel about the problem".


Oh, this is so 10000 BC!
There were reasons why male were hunters, because of more physical power. However there were also (granted only few) societies where the role model was vice versa.
And you don't want to say that any farmer (=gatherer) is a pussy? :har:


Its not that every guy should be a truck driving son of a gun - but the issue is that being a truck driving sone of a gun is now looked down upon. People are who they are by nature, yet while we are supposed to accept the boys and girls who want to wear clothing of the opposite gender, society sticks its nose up in the air at the "macho" guy who just is living his life his way. Truck driver (a fat bum), biker (troublemaker), country boy with a pickup (hick with a shotgun), etc. They are all thought of in a more negative light. Why? Because there is an undercurrent of desire to get rid of the rugged, take no bullcrap mindset that certain types of men exhibit.


I agree, only arrogant idiots look down on truckers, bikers or country boys. Probably the same who would never say this to their faces.
FYI there are female truckers, bikers and country girls who would kick the same ass when they were called out...

[CCIP]

Just to clarify, I in no way look down on truck drivers or other people who either have 'manly' occupations or looks. I have a huge respect for those people and count many among my friends. I'm just pointing out the stereotype that logically opposes a 'sissified' man, and in no way do I mean offense to anyone who's a truck driver, or for that matter a personal trainer or any other sort of hulk, or otherwise stereotypically manly man. I just don't see them as any more of a man than your average joe, an effemiate artist type, or Stephen Hawking. Because it is indeed not 10,000 BC.

[Penguin]

@CCIP: I didn't interpret your words as anti-trucker or arrogant towards "manly men". I got it that you referred to people who dress-up to look macho.
I also have a despise for metrosexual pussies that try to look rugged by buying a mesh cap - maybe I have this in common with Haplo. I also despise a tough-guy arsehole attitude some people use to cover their inner insecurity - guess I have this in common with you. As you wrote: anyone should act on his own mind and not according to some preoccupied mindset.

The strongest guy in the world that I know is a gay gothic friend of me. Not because of physical strength, though he recently stopped a 6 on 1 stomping on his own (so far for sissy make-up guys), but because he accompanies people in hospital where he works when they die, often as the only person as often relatives can't cope with it or are simply not there.
This is real toughness and strength!

(and fu to anybody who thinks he does this out of some kind of morbid fascination!)

[Tribesman]

To be fair:....
Did you note the word "newly"?

Good point about the gatherers, all them sissy men doing the easy womens work eh. :rotfl2:
Do you think those hunter gatherers still remaining today have the women taking issue over their men spicing up their appearances with makeup to look nice.
Its a modern curse ain't it, this moral decline of manlyness:har::har::har:
Whatever next? girly men wearing earings :arrgh!:
Lets face it every single one of Haplos "modern trends" of sissys he complains about there stretches back throughout recorded history

[Platapus]

Purses for men. Yes - its a purse. The guy is supposed to wear it on his shoulder just like a chick does with her handbag. But because its a "man" bag its supposed to be cool. Good luck with that....


If you see a guy carrying a purse or wearing a fannypack, odds are he is carrying. :yep:

[CaptainMattJ.]

What people tend to forget is that we are animals. The human species is an animal species like everything else, with instincts, and a natural role in society for both sexes.

we see it all the time in the animal kingdom. The males do the hunting, killing and bring back the food, whilst the mother ferociously protect offspring. However more "civilized" we get, we will still have the natural urge to reproduce, mate, find companionship, ect. And the natural instincts that came with evolution will still be relevant. In males, the brain is prebuilt with the natural instinct to fufill the hunter role; provide and protect. Woman will also have a more natural ability to deal with babies and the other things on the other end of the spectrum that the male does not fufill, but is required.

The ignorant people will simply try to change roles more freely because of whatever reason they see fit. Try to make men more sensitive and docile, when that just goes against everything we have evolved into. Woman shouldnt be dominated or looked down upon in the society that weve built. But men, honestly, shouldnt work to become so docile.

We are still strongly physically attracted to one another. Woman still like big strong men and men like beautiful and curvy woman. Because while we like to think we have greater purpose, the reality is that life exists to reproduce and make more life. Life exists to conquer the universe. And sexual attraction will always be relevant, and while weve grown past thinking of woman solely as sex objects, we will still naturally think of sex regardless.

[frau kaleun]

And sexual attraction will always be relevant, and while weve grown past thinking of woman solely as sex objects, we will still naturally think of sex regardless.


When all y'all catch on to the fact that it's the "object" part of "sex object" that's the real problem, and not the "sex" part, then we'll be getting somewhere.

I object to being treated like an object, period. Whether sex is involved or not is completely beside the point.

[Tribesman]

What people tend to forget is that we are animals. The human species is an animal species like everything else, with instincts, and a natural role in society for both sexes.
we see it all the time in the animal kingdom. The males do the hunting, killing and bring back the food, whilst the mother ferociously protect offspring
Oh dear, the first 10 words go okay, but then I think someone should call in Attenborough to give MattJ a few basics of the natural world and its many variations.
The large predators should give him some very well known and obvious pause for reflection before he even bothers to look at the multitude of examples which shoot his assumptions about "natural roles" to pieces.

[CaptainMattJ.]

When all y'all catch on to the fact that it's the "object" part of "sex object" that's the real problem, and not the "sex" part, then we'll be getting somewhere.

I object to being treated like an object, period. Whether sex is involved or not is completely beside the point.
That statement was more directed at porn, even though though porn has become disgusting as of late (not hardcore, because hardcore is repulsive)

however yes, regarding any person as an object is degrading, ignorant and stupid.

However, its more of a problem in politics. Dictators, power hungry war mongers, ect. tend to, like kings of old, treat people as objects and pieces that they can use for their gains. Sending men into battle without any care for their well being, putting the lowest value on their life.

Hell, even in the capitalist countries we live in today people are treated more as objects. They dont really care about quality, just if people can be persuaded to buy it. doing things at bare minimum to make bigger profit at the expense of safety and quality.

I think the whole world needs to find the value on human life,, and stop regarding people, men or woman, races, ect. as objects.

[Tribesman]

I object to being treated like an object, period. Whether sex is involved or not is completely beside the point.
Get back in the kitchen.

[MH]

Pussies will win
Its evolution.

Hunting skills are not of a use nowadays in normal world .. but who knows.:D

[CaptainMattJ.]

Oh dear, the first 10 words go okay, but then I think someone should call in Attenborough to give MattJ a few basics of the natural world and its many variations.
The large predators should give him some very well known and obvious pause for reflection before he even bothers to look at the multitude of examples which shoot his assumptions about "natural roles" to pieces.
of course there are examples of woman dominating the overall role of the species, like penguins, and other animals.

However men are natural hunters. We naturally tend to be physically aggressive and an overall better ability to gain muscle mass, and sprint, ect. Our testosterone gives us an edge physically.

Woman are less apt to gain serious muscle mass, have breasts to nourish infants, and a natural instinct on which to best raise children among other things (ferocious defensive abilities, and natural responses with children).

[frau kaleun]

Get back in the kitchen.

What? I have to get my own dinner again?








Oh well... serves me right for keeping you tied to the bedpost. :O:

[MH]

of course there are examples of woman dominating the overall role of the species, like penguins, and other animals.

However men are natural hunters. We naturally tend to be physically aggressive and an overall better ability to gain muscle mass, and sprint, ect. Our testosterone gives us an edge physically.

Woman are less apt to gain serious muscle mass, have breasts to nourish infants, and a natural instinct on which to best raise children among other things (ferocious defensive abilities, and natural responses with children).

Look at this this way....
Modern life style makes the role play obsolete.

[frau kaleun]

Pussies will win


http://img102.imageshack.us/img102/2065/victoryrx1wf4.jpg

[Tribesman]

of course there are examples of woman dominating the overall role of the species, like penguins, and other animals
Would you say there are more or as many examples where the female is either the primary hunter or sole hunter for herself and offspring?

However men are natural hunters.
You made that claim already and based it on nature and the natural world, that claim didn't seem to stand up.

We naturally tend to be physically aggressive and an overall better ability to gain muscle mass, and sprint, ect. Our testosterone gives us an edge physically.

So how does that equate?
If you take that in your natural theme you can soon come to a prime example where all that you are listing as benefits are the precise reason why the male is crap at hunting compared to the female as they can be serious handicaps too.

I think a large amount of your "natural" roles reasoning is more of a result of social conditioning which you are trying to take a step further than it actually goes.

[MH]

http://img102.imageshack.us/img102/2065/victoryrx1wf4.jpg

http://www.natemichals.com/graphics/fluffy-4009.jpg

[frau kaleun]

http://www.natemichals.com/graphics/fluffy-4009.jpg

http://icanhascheezburger.files.wordpress.com/2008/11/funny-pictures-cat-gives-dog-war.jpg

[MH]

http://icanhascheezburger.files.wordpress.com/2008/11/funny-pictures-cat-gives-dog-war.jpg

http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQZSo4wy24EPMWyMJ5l1-oXwbasB-wm3Na_aXF8x6sgaft8F3dXBg

[frau kaleun]

http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQZSo4wy24EPMWyMJ5l1-oXwbasB-wm3Na_aXF8x6sgaft8F3dXBg

http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_krgtaklhmk1qzvqipo1_400.gif

[CaptainHaplo]

:har::har::har::har::har::har:
He proves a point, the point is about you......

Well, as flattering as it is that you want to make everything about me, you really should find someone else to obsess and pine over. Your total focus on me is just a wee bit creepy, seeing as how your all about defending the effiminate man (must hit too close to home), and then trying to make sure the point is all about me.

I'm flattered, really. But no....

[MH]

http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_krgtaklhmk1qzvqipo1_400.gif






:haha:


http://images.cheezburger.com/completestore/2010/1/16/129081365232524588.jpg

:woot:

[Penguin]

:rotfl2:

Is this the newest meme: after lolcats, now tankittens and flee(a)-dogs?

[mookiemookie]

http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_krgtaklhmk1qzvqipo1_400.gif

Run, McBee, run!

[Tribesman]

Well, as flattering as it is that you want to make everything about me, you really should find someone else to obsess and pine over. Your total focus on me is just a wee bit creepy,
Get real, are you some sort of fanatasist detatched from reality?
You get the same treatment for your writing as anyone else gets for their writing. Because sometimes you writing is particularly crazy on those occasions you get treated the same as anyone else who writes particularly crazy rubbish which makes it more noticable.
In that case you highlighted your projections of insecurity and the reasoning of your position were so ridiculous they were laughable.

seeing as how your all about defending the effiminate man (must hit too close to home), and then trying to make sure the point is all about me.
In case you missed it, the person you thought was proving your point was saying that you are the one with with personal issues over masculinity.
:yep:
In case you also missed it another point was made , so could you answer a question?
As your stated "relationship" view appears pretty much a textbook example, could you perhaps be someone who recently had their personal relationship go out the window in an unhappy way?
Not of course that everyone wants to write about their relationship failing on an internet forum, so the choice is yours any time you feel you needed to write about it.

BTW could you perhaps learn some more English as your statement once again has demonstrated that your grasp of the language is very very poor as 7 words in a short statement you made simply cannot mean what you think they mean.

[CaptainHaplo]

Get real, are you some sort of fanatasist detatched from reality?
You get the same treatment for your writing as anyone else gets for their writing.

Oh come now, Tribesman.... Do I need to really post your previous public admission that for the last couple of years you have stalked me here on Subsim and posted almost every time I do in reply to me? Many here have seen the admission - and the actions. The above was just recognition of your constant devotion to me. I know its hard not to for someone like you to not worship someone like me, but you really should try to break free of this unhealthy obsession.

In case you also missed it another point was made , so could you answer a question? As your stated "relationship" view appears pretty much a textbook example, could you perhaps be someone who recently had their personal relationship go out the window in an unhappy way?
Not of course that everyone wants to write about their relationship failing on an internet forum, so the choice is yours any time you feel you needed to write about it.

What a transparent attempt to find out if there is even a spot open in my life. Sorry Tribesman, even if there were, your obsession with me is all your going to be able to have, as I would not choose to have you. Not only do you have the wrong plumbing, your just not the kind or person I would want to even hang out with - not even on a rebound LOL.

BTW could you perhaps learn some more English as your statement once again has demonstrated that your grasp of the language is very very poor as 7 words in a short statement you made simply cannot mean what you think they mean.

Once again irony strkes - as you complain about other's ability to form sentences, yet you apparently have an inability to read them. Had you been capable of comprehension, you would have read in this very thread answers to the situation in my personal life currently. Sadly, instead you are locked in your obsession, denying it even as you suffer the heartache that is so apparent.

Let us all have a moment of silence for the grief and anguish that must be tearing at poor, miserable Tribesman's soul, as he continues to refuse to accept that he will never attain the object of his obsession, and is relegated here to bluster and tripe writings.

Pity him, and treat him gently. He is a heartbroken soul.

[Tribesman]

Oh come now, Tribesman.... Do I need to really post your previous public admission that for the last couple of years you have stalked me here on Subsim and posted almost every time I do in reply to me?
Yes, it was funny last time you tried to make the claim. It fell apart then just as it does now.
Hey that time you even linked to an "example" to prove your point which strangely was a topic you didn't even partake in, not too bright of you was it.:doh:
Which kinda proves that it was what is written that draws the response from me not the person who writes it. You just happen to be one of those people who on occasion in certain subjects write crap that is easily taken apart.
So much for your "victimisation" complex:yeah:
You really do a great job of managing to destroy your own points.

Many here have seen the admission
That was another example of your language problem wasn't it.:rotfl2:


What a transparent attempt to find out if there is even a spot open in my life
That simply showed up that what you wrote for what it is.

Once again irony strkes - as you complain about other's ability to form sentences, yet you apparently have an inability to read them. Had you been capable of comprehension, you would have read in this very thread answers to the situation in my personal life currently.
:har::har::har::har::har::har:
Comprehension.:har::har::har::har::har:
Hey Haplo how does the recent meltdown deal with your textbook current claims following the breakup?
Is the two and two too hard to face up to.

You really should learn how to read. Not only do you make claims that fall apart but you think statements about one thing are about another and points that destroy your claims are supporting your claims.:know:

[CaptainHaplo]

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=1737967&postcount=26

There ya go - middle of the post - I mention your following me around and your response - for all the world to see was:

"yes"....

Pretty clear. Course, if you can't even understand what you wrote.......

Hey Haplo how does the recent meltdown deal with your textbook current claims following the breakup?
Is the two and two too hard to face up to.

Ohhhhh someone is really trying to hit below the belt, aren't they. You get a little rejection from your idol and you just have to lash out, huh? Unfortunately for you, most of the people on here have had mature, adult relationships that actually meant something to them. Thus, they understood the heartbreak that occurs when you see someone you know implode. Especially when there is nothing you can do to help them.

Now, its obvious that you, with your multi-year long fixation on me, along with your very easily seen lack of social interaction skills, wouldn't have any experience when it comes to a deep and meaningful relationship. Thus we cannot expect you to be able to comprehend the fact that while the process can be painful, it is something that can be looked back upon as for the best.

What is truly sad about this, little tribesman, is that in bringing up such a personal experience you wanted to "twist a knife", cause pain and anguish by rememberance - all because I don't cater to your delusional fantasy about me. But regarding that situation, thankfully, the young lady and I are adults, and friends. I look at the entire situation with a smile, because she is rebuilding her life and I am adding on to mine. So your rather pathetic and immature "low blow" was, as is so many of your attempts at trolling, an utter failure.

I would have thought that as much rejection as you surely get, you would have gotten a little better at taking it.... sheesh!

You really should learn how to read. Not only do you make claims that fall apart but you think statements about one thing are about another and points that destroy your claims are supporting your claims.:know:

No matter how many smug faces you put up, your found out. Your one-track mind all about me is just the driving force behind your pedantic comments, your inane drivel and your fierce reaction to having your obsessional bubble burst. Its ok to have your hero not want to make you his sidekick. Hopefully your fantasies didn't become some weird fetish or something. If it did, I don't want to know. Just try to grow a little, move past your devastation and angst, take it like a man. Move on, find another target of your desire. Reach lower next time - to something attainable.

[CaptainMattJ.]

http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_krgtaklhmk1qzvqipo1_400.gif
http://30.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_ln02dnscTp1qk0lhbo1_500.jpg

[Tribesman]

Pretty clear. Course, if you can't even understand what you wrote.......

""....wow pretty clear. "yes"................. ........ ..... very clear.
It is very clear and very specific:yep:

Ohhhhh someone is really trying to hit below the belt, aren't they.
Someone is addressing your denial:yep:

Unfortunately for you, most of the people on here have had mature, adult relationships that actually meant something to them. Thus, they understood the heartbreak that occurs when you see someone you know implode. Especially when there is nothing you can do to help them.

unfortunately for your arguement that is true which is why so many of those people will have understood your post that angle relates to for what it is...a textbook attitude of a newly single bloke.

What is truly sad about this, little tribesman, is that in bringing up such a personal experience you wanted to "twist a knife", cause pain and anguish by rememberance
What is sad that you went into denial mode because you didn't like the original point, you put the knife into yourself and twisted it with the denial.

No matter how many smug faces you put up, your found out.
Its the words that deliver and have delivered again and again, the faces just add colour.

Your one-track mind all about me is just the driving force behind your pedantic comments, your inane drivel and your fierce reaction to having your obsessional bubble burst.
:har::har::har::har::har::har:
Language again Haplo, you are just the same as any other poster on this forum, it is just that on occasion you happen to be a poster who on some subjects writes absolute nonsense which is really easy to take apart for what it is.
So simple isn't it, but hey carry on with your fantasies and victim complex.

It is amazing how in this topic you have been unable at all to deal with points raised about what you have written in this topic.
And lets face it so many of your claims on this subject have been thoroughly taken apart for what they were.
How was it CCIP put it when this tangent went off? ....Insecure and trying to compensate.

[CaptainHaplo]

""....wow pretty clear. "yes"................. ........ ..... very clear.
It is very clear and very specific:yep:

Yes, yes it was. I mentioned you following me around, you admitted that yes you were. Then of course you tried to qualify it with a bunch of nonsense, but the mere fact your still following me around here (on a totally different subject, mind you) just invalidates your qualification and reinforces the proof that your obsessed with me. :yep:

Someone is addressing your denial

The only "denial" here has been your rather public fixation on me has been called out, and I have "denied" you the opportunity to have whatever it is you seek.

unfortunately for your arguement that is true which is why so many of those people will have understood your post that angle relates to for what it is...a textbook attitude of a newly single bloke.

Sigh :hmmm:
How can I do this gently....
How many times are you going to make assumptions and go fishing for information? As I noted earlier, there are people in my life. I know its a struggle for you to accept this, tribesman, but there just isn't room for you. Even if there was, again - your just not the kind of person I would want around. I don't mean to crush your spirit, but I have little choice but to continue to disabuse you of whatever fantasy you have in your head about me. Its time you take down the alter you have built, its time to let go of your obsession, its time to grow past the angst and feelings of worthlessness you have just because you don't have the object of your affections..... namely: :D ME !:D

Now before you again fly off the deep in and lash out in response to this further rejection, before you start babbling about how you only follow me around because I don't fit your picture of a "Christian", prior to pontificating about how no one else can see what it is that words mean other than you (or someone you choose to agree with at the moment), take a deep breath and ask yourself, do you really want to continue to publicly show how you just can't let it go? Do you really want to publicly advertise how your devotion just won't allow you to move on, and instead keeps you fixated on the unattainable subject of your (rather strange) desires?

Sadly, I suspect that even if you do answer that question, it will be a yes. I doubt you have it within you to move on right now. I don't think you have the strength to break away from that hold that your soul has found itself in, mesmerized as it appears to be by every word it can gather from me. Perhaps one day you will find the strength to let go.

You might even want to check into some... well.... help for this. Maybe someone on the forum can point you to a 12 step system on how to break a personal obsession..

How about it gang, anyone care to help poor tribesman get his mental stability and focus back?

*To al the other readers - sorry - we all know he is going to rant more - its sad, I know.... Just pity him.*

[Tribesman]

Yes, yes it was.
Yes, but you don't get it.
Yes we have no bananas.

Then of course you tried to qualify it with a bunch of nonsense
wow qualifications, those would be just as important as context wouldn't they:yeah:
So if you ignore context and qualifications, take just one word, you get ....a haplo answer:har::har::har::har:

but the mere fact
A fact is a fact, and you are short on those.

The only "denial" here has been your rather public fixation on me has been called out
The denial was over your personal status and about your hang ups, both of which have been well demonstrated by yourself and the latter has been commented on by another poster.
Isn't it funny that your hang ups came to the fore when you tried to address Castouts hang ups.

and I have "denied" you the opportunity to have whatever it is you seek.

Sorry Haplo, but you delivered what was required, you delivered a full hand of it in spades and had managed to do it nearly all by yourself, a small prod was all that was needed to put the last card in place.
What is brilliant is that you still don't know it as you are off on some fantasy and cannot grasp the topic.

Sigh :hmmm:
How can I do this gently.... its sad, I know.... Just pity him
:har::har::har::har::har::har:
Oh dear, you simply flounder around and are totally lost, you have been unable to address a so many issues in the topic those and have managed to destroy your own arguements. Instead you flail around trying to make personal attacks which go so far wide of the mark its almost worthy of pity.
Get it into your skull you poor fellow, it isn't about you, its about some stuff you write sometimes:know:

Haplo, do you know how easy it is to prove your sad victimhood rantings as totally false?
No room for manouver, no chance for qualifications or contextualising. just plain obviously undeniably false.:hmmm:
4 simple examples would be fully sufficient.
The first part you already provided where you complained about how your cretinism was being ripped apart.... but it wasn't you defending cretinism.:yeah:
Would you like the other 3, though I think you may find the comparison to a recent "christian" episode rather insulting so I will leave that to last if you are still floundering and ranting after the next 2.

[CaptainHaplo]

Yes we have no bananas.

We can tell, you have definitely lost your banana's....

wow qualifications, those would be just as important as context wouldn't they:yeah:
So if you ignore context and qualifications, take just one word, you get ....a haplo answer

Sure context and qualification matters. The problem is, your claim of only following :DLme:DL around on "christian" matters doesn't hold up - this thread had nothing to do with that, yet here you are - still stalking your obsession. You just couldn't help it - your idol (:yeah:ME!:yeah:)posted, and you had to respond. When you were rejected yet again, you ranted, you attacked, you lashed out. You just can't leave well enough alone, you can't bear the reality of being alone when the object of your fixation has (purely unintentionally) rubbed your nose in the fact that real people are in his real life.

Thus, you scream about ignoring context - when your own actions prove your "context" to be false.

A fact is a fact

Yes it is, and you really can't get around the one I just pointed out.

The denial was over your personal status and about your hang ups, both of which have been well demonstrated by yourself and the latter has been commented on by another poster.

Now see, my "personal status" is just that - personal. I shared what I felt comfortable with sharing after I was asked a specific question. Since I can speak to the topic of women being objectified directly, I did so. Not sure where you see that as a "hang up", unless you have come to realize that your dreams of being able to have your idol just got "hung up" on. Course, once again that would be your problem, not mine.

Isn't it funny that your hang ups came to the fore when you tried to address Castouts hang ups.

Again with my hang ups....

See the more you talk, the more you continue to prove your all about :woot:ME!:woot:. Your interested in my social life, your interested in my "hang ups", your unable to keep yourself from following me for YEARS here at subsim, you can't even keep your story straight on WHY you follow me around - or if you even do..... We know, its hard to admit you idolize, and even harder to deal with the rejection you have recieved.

Still, it would appear to not be me with the hang ups, ole boy.

Sorry Haplo, but you delivered what was required, you delivered a full hand of it in spades and had managed to do it nearly all by yourself, a small prod was all that was needed to put the last card in place.

Yes, its once again all about me..... Even the negatives. You really should see someone about that projection issue you have.

What is brilliant is that you still don't know it as you are off on some fantasy and cannot grasp the topic.

Oh yes - its me that is in fantasy world. Course, I was staying to topic till you needed to be faced with reality over your obsession with me. Darn those pesky facts, eh?

Still, I will - out of the desire to help you - offer you an incentive to seek some assistance. If your willing to go seek some professional help with your obsession of :rock:ME!:rock:, I will even give you (brace yourself and try not to make a mess on your screen):

A virtual hug!

In fact, not only will I do so, but I will encourage everyone - here and now - to give you the support you so desperately need....

C'mon gang, everyone give ole tribesman a virtual (and purely platonic) HUG!

Oh dear, you simply flounder around and are totally lost, you have been unable to address a so many issues in the topic those and have managed to destroy your own arguements.

Im not lost. I know exactly where I am. There you go making assumptions again. As for "so many issues in the topic", its a topic - its one issue. That issue brought about the question of the objectification of women, which I dealt with.

Instead you flail around trying to make personal attacks which go so far wide of the mark its almost worthy of pity.

I haven't made any personal attacks. I simply have rejected your attentions and encouraged you to seek help.

Get it into your skull you poor fellow, it isn't about you, its about some stuff you write sometimes

Haplo, do you know how easy it is to prove your sad victimhood rantings as totally false? No room for manouver, no chance for qualifications or contextualising. just plain obviously undeniably false.
4 simple examples would be fully sufficient.The first part you already provided where you complained about how your cretinism was being ripped apart.... but it wasn't you defending cretinism.
Would you like the other 3, though I think you may find the comparison to a recent "christian" episode rather insulting so I will leave that to last if you are still floundering and ranting after the next 2.

Finally, you prove your own claims wrong again. I never claimed to be a victim anywhere in this thread (and I don't recall ever claiming to be a "victim" anywhere). However, if this was not about :yep:ME!:yep:, if this was purely "on topic", why do you continue to bring up things that are totally unrelated, like former threads concerning religion? Simple really - because its not about this thread, its about your obsession and devotion and the fact you just can't let go of :arrgh!:ME!:arrgh!:. Now see, if you had stayed on the topic itself - someone might actually believe your claim. Instead, you couldn't resist the opportunity to learn more about your idol's (:ahoy:ME!:ahoy:) daily life. So you started asking questions. You decided to make it about :Kaleun_Cheers:ME!:Kaleun_Cheers: because you just have to know all you can. A rather transparent attempt, especially when your long term obsession has been repeatedly proven. A man with no interest in :|\\ME!:|\\ would have no problem in just piping down and moving on - yet we get rant after rant, lash out after lash out, all because you CAN'T do that - because you do have this obsession. The more time you take to deny it, the more you prove it.

So go ahead - prove it further. :know:

[Tribesman]

Sure context and qualification matters.
It certainly does.

The problem is, your claim of only following :DLme:DL around on "christian" matters doesn't hold up
:har::har::har:
Imagination you have.

this thread had nothing to do with that, yet here you are
Make your mind up.
It is written in plain language. You should be able to understand.

Thus, you scream about ignoring context - when your own actions prove your "context" to be false.

Oh dear:doh: Too hard for you?

Yes it is, and you really can't get around the one I just pointed out.

Sorry, that statement was almost entirely devoid of fact, didn't you realise?

Now see, my "personal status" is just that - personal. I shared what I felt comfortable with sharing after I was asked a specific question.
And a comment was made about what you wrote, then you got all touchy and into denial over it. Like I said your comment was pretty textbook and your reaction reinforced that evidence even more.

Since I can speak to the topic of women being objectified directly, I did so. Not sure where you see that as a "hang up", unless you have come to realize that your dreams of being able to have your idol just got "hung up" on. Course, once again that would be your problem, not mine.

Wow, you really are lost. No wonder you have been floundering around.
You dealt quite well with addressing Castouts hangup and then in one fell swoop delivered your own from the other angle.
It was pointed out to be nonsense straight away by several people and you failed to even register someone pointing out your issues, incredibly you thought he was supporting your view rather than pointing out your problem.

Again with my hang ups....

Indeed, its what you wrote.

See the more you talk, the more you continue to prove your all about :woot:ME!:woot:
poor victim eh:har::har::har:
Its about what you wrote:yeah:

Yes, its once again all about me.....
I hate to burst your bubble, but you are just another person who writes on this forum.

Oh yes - its me that is in fantasy world.
Evidently.

Course, I was staying to topic till you needed to be faced with reality over your obsession with me. Darn those pesky facts, eh?

The fact is you happened to be the person who wrote some very ridiculous nonsense on this topic. Pesky fact that isn't it.
Someone even commented on the way your post at issue was addressed
@Tribes: brilliant piece on the make-up part :haha:- you spare me to write my boring stuff about this issue!
He then followed with
Oh, this is so 10000 BC!
All on topic till your hang ups got you all on the defensive and you started flailing blindly.


Im not lost. I know exactly where I am. There you go making assumptions again. As for "so many issues in the topic", its a topic - its one issue. That issue brought about the question of the objectification of women, which I dealt with.

I suggest you try and actually read the post you thought agreed with you.

Finally, you prove your own claims wrong again. I never claimed to be a victim anywhere in this thread (and I don't recall ever claiming to be a "victim" anywhere).
Me me Me me me me me me ME me ME.
You certainly would appear to be claiming you are being victimised

A rather transparent attempt, especially when your long term obsession has been repeatedly proven.
:har::har::har:
So tempting to go straight in with the Pastor Robb fan that was here recently spreading his "christianity".
But hey I understand you are delicate and have some logic problems so lets do very easy steps.
At a rough guess on how many occasions have I posted in agreement to a post you have written or elements of a post you have written?
At a rough guess how many times have I posted in a topic you have posted in yet not addressed you at all in the slightest?

I have to put "at a rough guess" because of course you live in the land of forum ignorance and have been shooting blind with your rants
So easy to rip your paraniod rants apart isn't it.
me me me me me :88)

When you have had a stab at example 2 we can move to 3 and if you are still ranting we can get to the fun part in example 4.

[MH]

http://verydemotivational.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/demotivational-posters-get-a-room.jpg
:D

[Blood_splat]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UlQUktX9QAs&feature=related

:O:

[Betonov]

I think Neal will have to put some time into maintainance of the QUOTE button, there's quite a few mileage on it :hmmm:

[CaptainHaplo]

I hate to burst your bubble, but you are just another person who writes on this forum.

GASP! Your getting over your obsession! HUZZAH FOR YOU! I am so thrilled for you!

The fact is you happened to be the person who wrote some very ridiculous nonsense on this topic. Pesky fact that isn't it.
Someone even commented on the way your post at issue was addressed
@Tribes: brilliant piece on the make-up part :haha:- you spare me to write my boring stuff about this issue!
He then followed with
Oh, this is so 10000 BC!

Oh my - one person agrees with you on something. One vote of confidence. There we have it - irrefutable proof that you must have been right because one person on the whole of the interwebz agreed with you.
OK then.....

All on topic till your hang ups got you all on the defensive and you started flailing blindly.

At no point did I get defensive or flail blindly. I simply referenced the fact that while - in general - the objectification of women is negative, generalities to not always apply, since some women crave such treatment. Your lack of experience with a broad range of women and their mental, physical and emotional needs is showing. You might want to avoid embarrassment by making your inexperience any more public. Just because you took it as a defensive reaction, does not mean it is. Sometimes tone is hard to pick up on....

I suggest you try and actually read the post you thought agreed with you.

Oh I read it, and know full well the intent was NOT to agree with me. That is why I pointed out the flaw in perspective.

Me me Me me me me me me ME me ME.
You certainly would appear to be claiming you are being victimised

Its not victimization, its celebration. A child could have figured out that considering I put little smileys on every "ME". Cmon, even your not so ignorant as to missed THAT. Considering how fascinated you are by me, I am confident you realized that.

So tempting to go straight in with the Pastor Robb fan that was here recently spreading his "christianity".

Sometimes you just go off the reservation and I, along with others, have no clue what your talking about. Then again, since you lost your banana's, perhaps you don't either....

But hey I understand you are delicate and have some logic problems so lets do very easy steps.

Well I'm not delicate, but I know that since your looking up to your idol, you probably think I should be treated delicately anyway. Wouldn't want the idol to fall off the pillow, you'd be devastated.... Easy steps - ok lets see what you have...

At a rough guess on how many occasions have I posted in agreement to a post you have written or elements of a post you have written?At a rough guess how many times have I posted in a topic you have posted in yet not addressed you at all in the slightest?

Now you know that for the last year or 2, up until about a month ago, you were on my ignore list. So I have no basis for such a guess.

I have to put "at a rough guess" because of course you live in the land of forum ignorance and have been shooting blind with your rants

Ohhh - so ignoring you equates to living "in the land of forum ignorance" eh? Well, someone is getting big for his britches LOL. Still, in your fixated state, I should not laugh. Wouldn't want to push you deeper into whatever it is you suffer from... I have no doubt that you have the answers to those questions about "rough guesses". Sorry tribesman - that just isn't something that is important to me. Obviously it is to you - or you wouldn't have brought it up. I know its hard to accept that your idol doesn't give a rodent's backside how many times you have agreed or not. Perhaps you expected to have gained brownie points or something....

I do have to point out, however - that whether or not your ignored - I, and many like me, actually live in this place called the "real world". You can go there too sometime if you want. Who knows, you might find a person that you can actually speak with instead of typing. I really encourage you to try it. But anyway - back to the entertainment....

So easy to rip your paraniod rants apart isn't it.

Oh my, there goes the anger and angst. I'm paranoid. And how do you come to that conclusion? Better yet, what in the world makes you think your qualified to diagnose such things?

me me me me me

Oh and we started out so well!!!!! I really thought we had a breakthrough here given how this started off.... now your back to making claims about me. Just can't get me out of your head, can you? Doesn't matter if its negative or positive, you just have to make it about me. SIGH.....

When you have had a stab at example 2 we can move to 3 and if you are still ranting we can get to the fun part in example 4.

Well I still am not sure what "examples" your talking about. But honestly, I have been having lots of fun with this. I will admit, its a bit nice to be a hero to someone, even when they can't bring themselves to admit it, and instead show by their actions that my words affect them so. Still, your starting to get angry, letting your little ego run away with you simply because one person agreed with you. I guess building it anyway you can is probably a good step for you though. Might get you past me....As I said in closing my last post - if this wasn't about ME - you wouldn't reply. Every time you do, you keep proving me right.

We all await further proof.... :har:

[Tribesman]

Oh my - one person agrees with you on something. One vote of confidence. There we have it - irrefutable proof that you must have been right because one person on the whole of the interwebz agreed with you.
OK then.....
So yet again you can't deal with what was written.

At no point did I get defensive or flail blindly. I simply referenced the fact that while - in general - the objectification of women is negative, generalities to not always apply, since some women crave such treatment. Your lack of experience with a broad range of women and their mental, physical and emotional needs is showing. You might want to avoid embarrassment by making your inexperience any more public. Just because you took it as a defensive reaction, does not mean it is. Sometimes tone is hard to pick up on....
And again, flailing blindly and absolutely clueless as to the evolution of the topic.
Is there some reason why you are unable to deal with what was written?
Maybe your hangups cut too deep and the front from the texbook response is too fragile.

Oh I read it, and know full well the intent was NOT to agree with me. That is why I pointed out the flaw in perspective.

The flaw was in your perspective.

Its not victimization, its celebration
Yes darling:doh: the lady doth protest too much.

Sometimes you just go off the reservation and I, along with others, have no clue what your talking about.
I am sure most of the posters who have used the general topics section recently are aware of the spate of topics with some very very strange "christian" views being expressed.
The poster got the same treatment for the rubbish he was writing as you get when you write rubbish.

Now you know that for the last year or 2, up until about a month ago, you were on my ignore list. So I have no basis for such a guess.

Wow, you don't say:rotfl2:
So you are ranting about something that always happens and why it happens and when it happens...yet have absolutely no clue at all

Ohhh - so ignoring you equates to living "in the land of forum ignorance" eh?
It means you are shooting blind, in fact it means you are shooting blind without even knowing what you are trying to hit.
It might explain why your and "evidence" and "proof" seem to amount to nothing

I'm paranoid. And how do you come to that conclusion?
me me me me me me me me me me me :yep:

I do have to point out, however - that whether or not your ignored - I, and many like me, actually live in this place called the "real world".
Yet the first response to what you had written was that you were detatched from reality, and it aptly demonstrated that you were very detatched from the real world
In fact your objections were so far detatched from reality they were a joke, its almost like you had been stuck in a box for most of your life with practicly no outside input at all.

Well I still am not sure what "examples" your talking about.
So simple even you should be able to grasp it, look at some excamples answer them honestly then try and repeat your silly claims.

Still, your starting to get angry, letting your little ego run away with you simply because one person agreed with you. I guess building it anyway you can is probably a good step for you though.
Once again you flsil blindly and demonstrate your inability to deal with issues.

As I said in closing my last post - if this wasn't about ME - you wouldn't reply. Every time you do, you keep proving me right.

I hate to burst your bubble yet again, but in most certainly isn't.
You really do have as much trouble with "prove" as you do with "fact".

We all await further proof....
You are having a Donkey Oaty moment:rotfl2:

[NeonSamurai]

Ok I have had just about enough of this exchange. You two do not like each other... we get it. I suggest you guys take it to PM, or I am going to start handing out infractions for the personal attacks going on.

[Tribesman]

You two do not like each other... we get it
Do you?
Since I don't even know him how can I like or not like him?

[NeonSamurai]

Do you?
Since I don't even know him how can I like or not like him?

Well given the attention you pay him, and the amount of insult and ridicule you tend to lace your posts with, when responding to him, that would tend to indicate that you either dislike him, dislike what he represents or who he is, or have no respect for him.

The above would imply that you probably do not think well of him.

[Tribesman]

If that were the case then it would run true no matter where he wrote here or what he wrote.
As it doesn't it isn't.

[Betonov]

Now you've done it, you got the attention of the mods :o

[Tribesman]

Now you've done it, you got the attention of the mods
Wasn't that strange "christian" a mod.
You know the one who thought everyone posting was Jewish and subsim was a secret Jewish conspiracy that was out to get him because people were addressing what he wrote and treating it as nonsense.

[Betonov]

The shanda, this forum being jewish, it makes me want to plotz. This is meshugge

[NeonSamurai]

If that were the case then it would run true no matter where he wrote here or what he wrote.
As it doesn't it isn't.

No it would just indicate you are obsessive if that were the case all the time. So you are simply not entirely obsessive about it. As for your real feelings on the matter, I do not know yours any better then you know mine.

I am pointing out that the style in which you write to most others here is one that conveys general contempt for both the poster and the content of their posts. Honestly I am getting tired of it as well. Though I respect your knowledge, your intellectual capability, and your ability to debate effectively, I find your mannerisms and general posting behavior severely lacking. I have given you a reasonable amount of slack in the past, as I do feel that the content of your posts are valuable. but the packaging you put it in is problematic. I remind you of the rules here, with the most salient points underlined.


The Radio Room forum is not the place for flaming, spewing, or otherwise mouthing off. We do not allow posts where people are called idiots, morons, etc. We respect your freedom of speech, we ask that you respect our rules. You are welcome to express your opinion about games and other subjects. We do not want SUBSIM Review and the Radio Room forums to degenerate into a collection of *This game sux!!!!* and other immature rants. Like something or dislike something about a game, express your thoughts in reasoned and responsible terms. There are any number of forums which allow unbridled idiocy to reign, we want the Radio Room to be a civil, mature forum for discussions about naval and subsims, tactics, mods, playing tips, troubleshooting, and submarine topics in general. As such, we retain the right to edit and/or delete posts we find offensive. We also have the right to ban users who contribute to poisoning the well. Just as a radio talk host has the right to decide which callers he airs and a newspaper editor decides which letters he prints and which he throws away, the moderators in the Radio Room forums have final say on rants and spews they decide should be cut. Don't be a spewmonkey! :)


Furthermore, knowledge of someone does not correlate with liking or disliking someone a lot of the time when dealing with humans. We are quite capable of hating or loving out of sheer ignorance of that other person. Happens quite a bit, particularly as we are all infinitely ignorant about everything. That ignorance should always keep us humble, as we don't know, NONE of us do. We only like to delude ourselves by thinking we do know. As the bard wrote, "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.".


As for that moderator you are referring to, he is no longer a moderator, and was only responsible for a very small corner of Subsim. He also never had anything to do with this forum other than posting his opinions on certain subjects. I do not know why you are referring to him now, though, other than perhaps for purposes of obfuscation.

[CaptainHaplo]

Well given the attention you pay him

No it would just indicate you are obsessive if that were the case all the time. So you are simply not entirely obsessive about it.

Neon,

I guess not entirely obsessive is a good thing - leaves room for other activities. So thats good.

I would like to correct one thing - its not that I dislike tribesman, I just figured it would be fun to demonstrate how ludicrous certain behavior has become. Sad that it needed to go that far. To be honest, I was having a pretty fun time with that.......

[NeonSamurai]

Ok fine, so you both claim not to dislike the other. If you both want to keep it going, alright then, just abide by the rules and keep it civil is all I ask.

[Highbury]

I call BS on this line from the article:

because the best way we can help the greatest number of animals is simply by not eating them.

Utter fallacy. Are pigs and cows endangered? No. Why? Because there is a market for them. You start putting tiger fillet in the supermarket and watch the tiger farms pop up. That is the answer I tell you.

There ya go PETA, I will save the animal kingdom.. one dolphin fritter at a time! :arrgh!:

[CCIP]

I call BS on this line from the article:



Utter fallacy. Are pigs and cows endangered? No. Why? Because there is a market for them. You start putting tiger fillet in the supermarket and watch the tiger farms pop up. That is the answer I tell you.

There ya go PETA, I will save the animal kingdom.. one dolphin fritter at a time! :arrgh!:

Very true actually. While I'm not sure it'd work for any and every type of animal (I don't think tiger or shark farms can be run very effectively, especially if you want to maintain the animals in some sort of natural habitat), what IS very true is that hunters run the most effective conservation programs in the world, because they have a vested interest in it. Organizations like Ducks Unlimited have had far more success at making sure there's a lot more animals out there in the wild than PETA etc - in large part because perhaps the hunters actually KNOW much more about the animals and what they need to succeed biologically (rather than emotionally).