Seriously. If I was a girl I'd go with my guy friend in the specific hopes that one day a long hair brunette with a pretty butt walks by and he says "damn I'd hit that" only to have the brunette turn around and have this long ass moustache/beard/sunglasses.
Having the rights to give your friend shit about one thing for the rest of their life can be worth its weight in gold.
Haha, wow dude, get some willpower or something okay? It's perfectly easy not to ogle women "accidentally".
Maybe i'm not staring but your admission it requires willpower is an admission that it goes against your natural inclination.
It also is against my natural inclination not to strangle people at stupid as you. Yet I never find myself with my hands around your neck and having to force myself to stop half way into killing you.
Unlike you, who apparently finds himself halfway into the process of ogling a girl and then has to force himself to stop.
It's fun to have people jump all over you after stating that while the logic of the decision immediately strikes me as strange, the multitude of factors I have experienced have caused me to "go with it". It can't be defined quantifiably and borders on philosophy which in many ways is paradoxal. Once you try to quantify something like this you end up with silly conclusions like the one I joked about at the end of my OP.
To state I know what women do or don't do is half right, because neither do you. Being a part of one sex does not mean you instantly know what 50% of the world's population is thinking. There are many types of behavior, and many which in any singlular state of mind it is difficult if not impossible to comprehend those within a certain scope. However we are all able to draw on our experiences.
for example:
"Most women I know who go to the gym" is not:
Most women I know regardless of where what or who
Most women in the world
...but may include many women who go to the gym but with whom no discussions have shed any light on whether or not they even go much less behavior. - as the opposite to what I state...but how can I know?
I can't understand what goes through a KKK member's head. It simply does not make sense to me in any way shape or form how the color of skin can dictate the supremacy of a race. Yet they exist, and I accept that they exist just I as I accept the idea that people who want "all men's clubs" but not intentiaonally as a detriment to woman-kind exist.
In other words, I believe an all men's gym serves no special need. The strongest argument for one is the fact that the antithesis is allowed. This is a pretty stupid argument for any course of action. but if a bunch of Aussies actually feel this way and try to get it done, then I accept this just like I accept the KKK guys believes what he wants to believe.
The reasoning I placed in regards as a generalized example of what I have experienced could be regarded as the weakest argument. If the main argument is trivial then is the weakest stronger? No. Yet that is what is being attacked. While there are individuals who act as a mass deviation from civilized behavior on the whole we generally act within the bounds of societal norms. Unfortunately, for many of you this seems to mean was should all be automotons who deny a sense of understanding of self.
So yes I look at women occaisionally. I admit so much. Does that give you the right to assume that I look at every one the same no matter what circumstance? Of course it doesn't. You already had that right. You just acted on it before you even logged on to the forum.
Oh look, another rambling wall of text in which you try to justify the desire for a space outside your own home where you can indulge in a total lack of self control without being looked down on.
Oh look, another rambling wall of text in which you try to justify the desire for a space outside your own home where you can indulge in a total lack of self control without being looked down on.
That's nice.
If you got an actual point out of that, I'm impressed.
its even more bewildering in that his desire for somewhere to bond with the fellas over a scintillating discussion of labial quality is completely off topic in the first place.
its even more bewildering in that his desire for somewhere to bond with the fellas over a scintillating discussion of labial quality is completely off topic in the first place.
I think it's more interesting how I propose the possibility of a train of thought and it's reasoning and you run to the assumption this is my typical behavior and continually attack me on it, especially when I agree to the general consensus of those who have attacked me in regards to the actual topic of this thread. I guess I'm done. It's obvious you lack the reasoning required for any form of intelligent discussion. You can keep pretending though. That's your hell, not mine.
its even more bewildering in that his desire for somewhere to bond with the fellas over a scintillating discussion of labial quality is completely off topic in the first place.
I think it's more interesting how I propose the possibility of a train of thought and it's reasoning and you run to the assumption this is my typical behavior and continually attack me on it, especially when I agree to the general consensus of those who have attacked me in regards to the actual topic of this thread. I guess I'm done. It's obvious you lack the reasoning required for any form of intelligent discussion. You can keep pretending though. That's your hell, not mine.
Long rambling posts without any apparent attempt to make a point isn't a "form of intelligent discussion."
its even more bewildering in that his desire for somewhere to bond with the fellas over a scintillating discussion of labial quality is completely off topic in the first place.
I think it's more interesting how I propose the possibility of a train of thought and it's reasoning and you run to the assumption this is my typical behavior and continually attack me on it, especially when I agree to the general consensus of those who have attacked me in regards to the actual topic of this thread. I guess I'm done. It's obvious you lack the reasoning required for any form of intelligent discussion. You can keep pretending though. That's your hell, not mine.
Aah, the parting shot. What better way to demonstrate your absolute faith in your argument than throwing in some random ad hom before you feel like you can leave. So long, you crazy bastard.
So putting an effort into something because you think it's complex is wrong?
If people want to understand something or feel it is important to them then they'll look at all opinions. I didn't read the OP and post my thoughts out of the blue. I read nearly every post and thought I'd post a serious independent version of my outlook. I think if you read it then its apparent I was at least trying to make an honest effort.
"dude that's a bit long, can you simplify?" isn't such a terrible response you know.
So putting an effort into something because you think it's complex is wrong?
If people want to understand something or feel it is important to them then they'll look at all opinions. I didn't read the OP and post my thoughts out of the blue. I read nearly every post and thought I'd post a serious independent version of my outlook. I think if you read it then its apparent I was at least trying to make an honest effort.
"dude that's a bit long, can you simplify?" isn't such a terrible response you know.
Long posts aren't a problem. It helps to understand your point if you follow a more traditional writing format of a subject sentence that asserts something, then the remainder of the paragraph spent backing it up or clarifying.
Trying to read somebody else's stream of consciousness without having any idea what point they are trying to prove is very difficult.
Right. So thanks for the advice. It needed clarification. I do that some times. I think a lot of people do and once in a while we need to be reminded of it. It would have also saved a page worth of crap -my own responses included- wouldn't it?
additional to that, you don't know shit about what women do and do not do.
the dishes
dunk a basketball
I kid because I love
I just wanted to say
I laughed so hard at this
Eat it You Nasty Pig. on
it was the smallest on the list but
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
0
Options
Nova_CI have the needThe need for speedRegistered Userregular
edited January 2008
It's not up to us to babysit your ability to communicate. Also, this board has low tolerance for people wanting to be mollycoddled. To be honest, I think I might get what you were trying to say, but the rambling quality of the post made it so I didn't really care to find out for sure. It's not like this topic has a lot of room to move:
Generally, businesses are successful because the market will bear them. Women's gyms are in place because women go to them. The biggest reason you don't see men only gyms is not because of any kind of sexist policy, but because there just isn't demand - the market wouldn't bear a men only gym. And you can quote me on that.
That's true about the gym but by that turn what about the country club someone said was forced to open it's doors to women? There doesn't seem to be any mention of an immediate need for more funding.
Its often not a matter of 'forced'. Tattersall's here (inner city rich-bloke's club in the vein of the 19th century english types, not the strippery sort :P) was always a classy version of the little rascal's treehouse, but the primary push for female admittance* in recent years has come from the younger male members. They've been agitating for it for several years now, and the only thing stopping a rules change is the damnable refusal of the old guard to finally move on to that big smoking room in the sky.
Golf clubs are generally still full of raging pricks, though.
*past the dining room, on alternate Tuesdays, by invitation only, wear gloves and a hat...
It's been my opinion for a while now that most of the big social upheavals are waiting on the baby boomer's to up and die.
I think that's part of it, but another part is just to see the new generation forming that 'old guard'. If you look at a lot of the issues we face as 20 - 35 year olds, change is harder to effect because usually it's the 50+ that are in positions of authority. I don't mean CEOs and that, because there's plenty of young ones, but I mean, basically, government office. I think a lot of change is delayed by thirty years just because you've got to replace the policy makers with the people who grew up thinking differently.
And then when our generation dominates government, we can stifle the progress that our children and grandchildren are clamoring for. :P
Who the heck needs laws to make "male only clubs" ? Just rename them to something like "The Magic the Gathering fanclub" and you just made sure no woman will every set foot in there.
I don't think there have ever been tremendous catalysts of social upheavals over a short span of time.Table 5 shows that more 18 year olds vote than the overall 18-24 range. I guess it's a cool new thing but then quickly gets old. Most 18-24 year olds don't own a home though.
Move further down the table and you'll notice trends in how people vote. Note the % of "Not voted" dwindles with increasing age. If these trends persist then it suggests a majority of change is a year-by-year evolution. Since we're tackling heavy subjects though, it seems like thinks happen suddenly. Remember...the 60's was an entire decade. 2.5 presidential terms, 5 senate terms.
Granted there will be the occaisional surge in the youth population which the gov't may not prepare for since it is so rare. Even great things however, like woman's lib are yet to be complete (50 years later).
Posts
Having the rights to give your friend shit about one thing for the rest of their life can be worth its weight in gold.
Maybe i'm not staring but your admission it requires willpower is an admission that it goes against your natural inclination.
https://medium.com/@alascii
It also is against my natural inclination not to strangle people at stupid as you. Yet I never find myself with my hands around your neck and having to force myself to stop half way into killing you.
Unlike you, who apparently finds himself halfway into the process of ogling a girl and then has to force himself to stop.
noun 5. an amorous, flirtatious, or impertinent glance or stare.
Do I need to break down the word "glance" for you?
FYI you lost all credibility in terms of willpower/restraint with the lame strangling comment.
Here's a hint - most of us can look at and even converse with an attractive woman without eying her like she's a slab of USDA Prime beef.
the dishes
dunk a basketball
https://medium.com/@alascii
Damn, baby, now you're just making me hungry.
To state I know what women do or don't do is half right, because neither do you. Being a part of one sex does not mean you instantly know what 50% of the world's population is thinking. There are many types of behavior, and many which in any singlular state of mind it is difficult if not impossible to comprehend those within a certain scope. However we are all able to draw on our experiences.
for example:
"Most women I know who go to the gym" is not:
Most women I know regardless of where what or who
Most women in the world
...but may include many women who go to the gym but with whom no discussions have shed any light on whether or not they even go much less behavior. - as the opposite to what I state...but how can I know?
I can't understand what goes through a KKK member's head. It simply does not make sense to me in any way shape or form how the color of skin can dictate the supremacy of a race. Yet they exist, and I accept that they exist just I as I accept the idea that people who want "all men's clubs" but not intentiaonally as a detriment to woman-kind exist.
In other words, I believe an all men's gym serves no special need. The strongest argument for one is the fact that the antithesis is allowed. This is a pretty stupid argument for any course of action. but if a bunch of Aussies actually feel this way and try to get it done, then I accept this just like I accept the KKK guys believes what he wants to believe.
The reasoning I placed in regards as a generalized example of what I have experienced could be regarded as the weakest argument. If the main argument is trivial then is the weakest stronger? No. Yet that is what is being attacked. While there are individuals who act as a mass deviation from civilized behavior on the whole we generally act within the bounds of societal norms. Unfortunately, for many of you this seems to mean was should all be automotons who deny a sense of understanding of self.
So yes I look at women occaisionally. I admit so much. Does that give you the right to assume that I look at every one the same no matter what circumstance? Of course it doesn't. You already had that right. You just acted on it before you even logged on to the forum.
That's nice.
If you got an actual point out of that, I'm impressed.
*huddles under sheets* Can't sleep, clown will eat me. Can't sleep, clown will eat me...
Seriously, though. Why are you guys subjecting yourself to this?
I think it's more interesting how I propose the possibility of a train of thought and it's reasoning and you run to the assumption this is my typical behavior and continually attack me on it, especially when I agree to the general consensus of those who have attacked me in regards to the actual topic of this thread. I guess I'm done. It's obvious you lack the reasoning required for any form of intelligent discussion. You can keep pretending though. That's your hell, not mine.
Long rambling posts without any apparent attempt to make a point isn't a "form of intelligent discussion."
Aah, the parting shot. What better way to demonstrate your absolute faith in your argument than throwing in some random ad hom before you feel like you can leave. So long, you crazy bastard.
If people want to understand something or feel it is important to them then they'll look at all opinions. I didn't read the OP and post my thoughts out of the blue. I read nearly every post and thought I'd post a serious independent version of my outlook. I think if you read it then its apparent I was at least trying to make an honest effort.
"dude that's a bit long, can you simplify?" isn't such a terrible response you know.
Long posts aren't a problem. It helps to understand your point if you follow a more traditional writing format of a subject sentence that asserts something, then the remainder of the paragraph spent backing it up or clarifying.
Trying to read somebody else's stream of consciousness without having any idea what point they are trying to prove is very difficult.
I just wanted to say
I laughed so hard at this
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
Generally, businesses are successful because the market will bear them. Women's gyms are in place because women go to them. The biggest reason you don't see men only gyms is not because of any kind of sexist policy, but because there just isn't demand - the market wouldn't bear a men only gym. And you can quote me on that.
Golf clubs are generally still full of raging pricks, though.
*past the dining room, on alternate Tuesdays, by invitation only, wear gloves and a hat...
Particularly ironic, since the Boomers were supposedly the catalyst for all sorts of change... women's lib, civil rights, etc.
But they just HAD to elect Reagan and start thinking about their second car...
At least the music and action movies were good. Sigh.
I think that's part of it, but another part is just to see the new generation forming that 'old guard'. If you look at a lot of the issues we face as 20 - 35 year olds, change is harder to effect because usually it's the 50+ that are in positions of authority. I don't mean CEOs and that, because there's plenty of young ones, but I mean, basically, government office. I think a lot of change is delayed by thirty years just because you've got to replace the policy makers with the people who grew up thinking differently.
And then when our generation dominates government, we can stifle the progress that our children and grandchildren are clamoring for. :P
Move further down the table and you'll notice trends in how people vote. Note the % of "Not voted" dwindles with increasing age. If these trends persist then it suggests a majority of change is a year-by-year evolution. Since we're tackling heavy subjects though, it seems like thinks happen suddenly. Remember...the 60's was an entire decade. 2.5 presidential terms, 5 senate terms.
Granted there will be the occaisional surge in the youth population which the gov't may not prepare for since it is so rare. Even great things however, like woman's lib are yet to be complete (50 years later).