Posts by caloricat

So drunk I can barely type...my arms are tired....need to get up at 5:00AM to run.

First I gott figure out how many calkories are ubf a half a fifrth.

...also...

the reason I don't like the "skyscraper analogy" doesn't make sense because you're not "building" anything.  You're not taking a pile of raw materials and building emerald city.  It's almost the reverse.

You have a skyscraper, slowly pieces fall off of it.  Pretty soon you gotta do some repairs.  If the building was sound when it was built, less problems, less repairs needed.  If it was built on sand and out of cruddy raw materials, you gotta do a lot of work all the time to keep it standing.

But the trick is...you never really know if it's built on sand or out of cruddy raw materials or not.  People always "think" they do.  I've almost vomited hearing people talk about how they've been married for 1 year and their relationship is perfect because they never had sex before marriage or they've been going out since high school or whatever.  It doesn't matter....it's just an illusion.  Time will tell. 

The guy that never had sex until marriage, 3 years later starts to wish he'd had more experiences...prettys soon is being seduced by the high school girl working at the Coffee Beanery at the mall...and she's not good lookin...but she's "different" than his wife.  And the couple that never dated anyone else since high school...suddenly one of them meets someone that IS better...and then they start to wonder...pretty soon they're spending their lunch hours having sex with the guy/gal that works in the same office building.

There's no "secret"...there's no "magic pill" or specified # of hours of therepy.  It's a crapshoot.  If ya work at it, ya survive.  If ya have no other options, ya survive.  But no matter how hard you are willing to work or how few options you have...there's always the chance that the other person gives up or has options you didn't know about.

Why isn't Fortius talking about Kate Hudson and her Mom (Oooo...there's a fantasy!)? 

All this child support/divorce talk is making me depressed.  Some of us married folks would rather not think about it.  Fortunately, neither me nor my wife can afford a divorce right now...so we're set.  Marital bliss by default I guess.

And marriage is not like a friggin skyscraper Moto!  Geez.  It's like a swamp.  At first, it's sort of fun because you discover all kinds of cool stuff (like weird frogs and tires and broken coolers).  And it's awesome fun to ride your motorcycle through it on a hot day until it stalls out. 

But then, after you have your fun for awhile.  You realize the swamp mud sort of smells bad and you got leeches on ya and now your motorcycle is broken because you got water in the engine.

Wait a minute...how did this go from marriage to feminism.

Fortius, leave the chicks alone.  Remember the power of the girl network.  You're going to find a gal you really want to bang and get back to her room and there's going to be a wanted poster on her wall with your picture on it...and not "wanted" in that way.  

What do us guys do on the 3 days we're not living the porn star life?  Play video games, watch TV, sports, regular stuff.  You can't keep up that lifestyle 24/7...too much chaffing.

And as to the arguement that people get better looking with age because someone knows a few people and saw this one lady on a TV commercial...STATISTICS people...STATISTCS.  For every one lady thats doable at 50, there are at least 10-1000 that aren't.  It's not a statistical impossibility, it's a statistical improbability.  Now, do men age better?  I guess...but I chalk that up to the fact that men don't actually give birth to children.  It's unfortunate that looks are wasted on the young, but it's simply a matter of evolution that the opposite sexes are at their most attractive level during their period of greatest reproductive ability.  Not saying I'd kick Goldie Hawn out of bed...just saying I'd be about 2000 times happier to do her daughter.

Wait...jblar wears pajammas to bed??  SONUVa...there goes fantasies #7 and 18.

They already have a diet like that.  It's called Atkins.  And you can enhance the amount and ferver of the pooping if you snack on those fake chocolate laxative bars.

Original Post by monarch777:

It's kind of jerky to put in the attractiveness of people who wait into this discussion. That's like saying they only waited because they were unattractive...so if this 15 year old might want to wait...you just told her that basically to prove her attractiveness is based upon how young she gets "laid".

And the thread was titled "Females Only"....this poster is only 15...and having grown adult men instructing her how to "get herself ready" borders on really really creepy. I wouldn't want my daughter talked to this way on the internet...or elsewhere...by grown men. I think peaches was right. Stay out of it guys. There are actually, some discussions that you maybe should only read.

I'm saying "sometimes", our choices dictate our actions.  I don't presume that this is the case for the OP, because she obviously has the choice.  I responding to another poster...not the OP.

As to your second point, I somewhat agree with you...however I'm not sexist.  I believe it's a bit creepy for adults of both genders to advise a 15 year old on how it's going to feel when they have intercourse.  It's sad that for women it is considered "advice", but for men it's called "creepy".  

And don't throw the "she asked for women only" defense out there...I can show you a thread made by me that asked for "Men only" responses and I believe of the 75-100 respondants, about 12 of them were men.

Original Post by international_chick:

hmm... i honestly would not recomend that.

not to rant but;

Couples who remain chaste before marriage report greater satisfaction in their marriages than those who were sexually active before marriage. Their marriages are more stable and more fulfilling. Researchers have even found that couples who did not have sex before marriage report greater sexual fulfillment after marriage than those who had premarital sex.
http://www.foreverfamilies.net/xml/articles/b enefitsofchastity.aspx

in my opinion;

going through calorie-count forums you can find many couples who are having trouble in their marriage due to lack of fulfillment of sexual desires. if you leave it till after you get married, thats when the fun starts, as opposed to that being where it ends.

That's sort of a misleading belief.  First off, you quote a study by a group that has a great desire for that study to be true.  That usually sends up some flags.  Second, there is a strong possibility that those who wait, wait for religious reasons...waiting for religious reasons, implies one is "religious".  Couples that are "religious" have a lower incident of divorce and a lower incident of reporting discontent.  Much of that is attributed to 2 main factors, one being that many "religious" couples don't see "divorce/serperation" as an acceptable option. And two, many of those couple utilize the various support groups and counseling available through the church.

I won't even get into the 3rd and 4th factors relating to how attractive many of those who wait are versus the sexually active population (thus waiting not technically a "choice").

I won't offer advice to the OP because she asked it of females and quite frankly I have never had sex with a 15 year old, a virgin, nor am I intimately aware of how it feels "in there" when a "cherry" pops.  To Lorik and Fortius...I knew as soon as I saw your guy's posts the anti-male backlash would be looming.  Stay strong.

To Peaches, I think the "females only" request is about as legitmate as some similar requests I've made in the past regarding "no trolls" or "members only".  In this type of forum, that is nothing more than wishful thinking.

Original Post by moonikins:

I loved the Blair Witch Project. It was easy to get sucked into feeling that you were watching real people. Plus they never showed any gore which is often more scary.

I loved the first Alien movie.

 Blair Witch...blah.  A few dorks running around  forest with flashlights and a video camera?  That movie just made me want to get them a better video camera and some sedatives.  They were more scared of branches than any people ever.

I'll give you credit for Alien though.  Call me boring, but I'm way more scary of the Alien with corrosive saliva that comes at you at about 90 miles an hour than I am a brush pile and a few flashlight wielding potheads.

Original Post by pgeorgian:

 

as the libertarians are so fond of reminding us, free enterprise (especially the tax-free kind) tends to be more cost-effective than government.

 But Libertarians are idiots.  They are socially between extreme right Republicans, Anarchists, and Aristocrats.  They don't like regulation because it cuts into their profits.  However, they also don't like laws, because laws cut into their profits as well.  They would probably be FOR the legalization of any drug use but be Against the regulation of it.  These are people with large ranches that want to pretend they have their own countries....I don't know if I'd base my opinions on their dogma.

Original Post by pgeorgian:

regardless, it's absolutely ridiculous to think that the consumer cost of pot would drop with legalization, regulation, and taxation.  criminal enterprise is expensive, but it doesn't compare to commercial pharmaceuticals.

i can't tell from your post whether you're buying sex or drugs for 75 euro, but if it's the latter, i can tell you that 75 euro would buy one helluva lot of pot in my neighbourhood.

The cost of alcohol after prohibition rose 350%, then fell to 182%, then to 178% shortly before it was repealed.  Illegal drugs will always cost more than over-the-counter drugs.  As soon as it's legalized, people grow their own, farmers make it a cash crop, the price plummets.

The problem with the war on drugs (or alcohol back then) was the cost of enforcement and the people that ultimately profited.  When prohibition ended, organized crime slowly unraveled.  They still had gambling, prostitution, racketeering, extortion, etc... but they lost their cash cow.  The cost to enforce regulations on legal alcohol before prohibition was about 2 million/year.  At the end of prohibition it was over 38 million...not to mention the countless lives lost trying to enforce it.

I don't buy sex or drugs.  But if I had to choose, given the ladies in Amsterdam, I'd take the sex.  Besides, I tried pot a couple times and didn't see the point.  Sex I've also tried and it was a bit more entertaining in most cases.

Original Post by pgeorgian:

caloricat: and that's a valid comparison why?

 Becuase if aspirin were illegal, people wouldn't get a bottle of it $4.64, with $0.65 going to state sales tax.  It would cost them that much or more for one pill.

I don't know how it is in "the islands", but here in the US, buying illegal drugs tends to be more expensive than over-the counter medication.

Oddly enough, that rule does not apply to other illegal things.  For example, illegal "purchases" are often times cheaper, usually because the goods are stolen...like stolen movies, electronics, cars, low level firearms.  And also oddly enough, quality prostitutes are equally expensive whether legal or illegal.  I guess the logic there is that it's only legal in a few places so the price can remain high...I don't know...never actually paid for it.  Just find that odd is all.  Maybe ladies just "hold their value"...I don't know....but it's off topic regardless.  I know that in Amsterdam it's cheaper.  Again, never bought it, but I know the price was 75 Euro...about $150...which is 5-10 times lower than the equivalent in the States.

Original Post by pgeorgian:

also, i can't imagine why you think that legal, regulated, taxed pot would be cheaper than illegal pot. 

 I don't know...because last time I went to the store to buy 50 hits of aspirin it didn't cost me $500. 

Original Post by jblarghp:

Ohh Calcat! I don't think the reason why I haven't had a ton of sexual partners is because I have low self-esteem. I just need to have a connection with them...is that so hard to believe!?!?

 Didn't say that.  I think you just have higher standards...and you're young.  Some of these women dropping 37+ totals are in their 40s...it's a little unfair to compare that to a girl that just became legal a few years ago and has been living away from home for all of 3 years.

Sometimes people give up on trying to reach a goal.  Rather than keep pounding their head against a wall, they make the decision that they will just work on being happy with the cards they've been dealt.

I sincerely doubt that many who take up that cause "really" believe in it.  But, if it makes them feel a little better...if they can live and be happy and healthy and can do it at a higher weight, good for them.  Some who are thinner could probably lose a lesson in stress reduction.  But, at the end of the day, many of the "big/proud" are most likely just frustrated and will battle with the weight issue for the rest of their lives, even if internally.

Original Post by jblarghp:

Original Post by loriklorik:

Original Post by jblarghp:

Original Post by loriklorik:

Original Post by jblarghp:

Woah woah woah! Didn't I say I concede? I mean , I agreed that people have different ideas of what a high standard is.  For some people (the ones who sleep with hundreds of people) if it breathes it's fair game. Other people are more choosy... That's all! Some are just more picky than others.

So maybe it's not standards. Maybe some people just care just less about who they're getting it on with. Yayyyy! Good for them!

 Im not sure thats a fair thing to say about people who sleep with a lot of others.

What do you mean not fair? I think it's a pretty fair assumption that some people are definitely more picky than others when it comes to having sex. I have a feeling that people who sleep with less people are probably more picky, or they could have some other type of physical/psychological problem.
People who have sex with tons of people are probably less picky...no?

 Nope, i doubt standards play into it as much as you think.

Personally, many people fit my standards, but my lack of "drive" keeps me from hooking up with a lot of people. Sure sex is fun, but I have other things I want to do with my time.

The issue is a lot more complicated than just who is more picky about the type of person they would do.

I know the issue is more complicated, but I think being picky has SOMETHING to do with it.....
So if you had more time you would just hook up with a bunch of people?

Another thing I've noticed is the majority of women I know that have mass quantities of random hook ups have very low self esteem. I'm not saying this is the norm, but this is what I've noticed within my group of friends.

What was the over under on the number of pages before this topic became girls calling each other "prudes" or "sluts"?  I had 2 in the pool...

The problem is the "reasoning" is far more complex.  There are about 3 kinds of guys, and 3 kinds of girls:

1. Those that postpone sex for moral and religious reasons.  They may "grow out" of this or may continue it until they find their one and only partner.
2. Those with good looks who can have sex with as many options as they choose.  These kinds have varying numbers of partners, but usually a decent amount.
3. This is the tough one there are about 8 different possibilites based on sex, attractiveness, and self-esteem (standards).

1. How attractive is she?
2. When did she start having sex?