This post is on the Other BDSM web board.
| 26 Dec 11, 7:59 PM pod333 UK(DD), 6 yrs |
Say its not so! I was under the belief that everyone told the truth and trolls only existed under imaginary Scandinavian bridges. Oh dear, now you'll tell me Santa Cause is not real...
Bollocks spoken like an real expert. | ||
| 26 Dec 11, 8:07 PM ClassAct2005 UK(N), 7 yrs |
It's a set of scales - Paul Daniel's wife was asked "what attracted you to the millionaire Paul Daniels". If you're rich that apparently cancels out ugly fat short. That doens't work with me/. I've rejected a lot of ugly men who are very rich but that's because unusually I have never lived off male earnings and have a proper career. However 4 in 5 women in the UK do earn less than their man and many many subsconsciously or otherwise marry someone a bit better off than they are. I am glad that is dying out because I want sexism to die out. Anyway as I said I don't need a man's money and I do need to find him attractive but being short is not fatal although it's quite hard to feel very sub to someone you tower over in your high heels | ||
| 26 Dec 11, 8:16 PM tanken UK(NR), 2 yrs |
True, although we all have a choice of partner even if we don't express our desires publicly
Happiness is a warm bum | ||
| 26 Dec 11, 8:28 PM Adverse_Camber UK, 3 yrs |
As it's the festive season, I could not resist a cry for help. So I'm donning my lycra superheroine costume...on my heightweightperfectlyproportioned body (ok, my tits are a tad small, but who's looking?)... I suggest that you look into the field of discourse analysis...people with a high EQ can do this naturally, but some less emotionally intelligent people may need to learn the skill of analysing words for the meaning they carry when strung together into one poisonous sentence...or numerous thereof, as the case may be. If you're still struggling, the words "masses, obese, most, clever, On IC there seem to be quite a lot of fat people..." are all clues. Oh and...in a normal bell curve, across all native English speaking populations -because that is the only population a standard IQ test can measure fairly- 100 is the average score. Meaning 100 is normal, rather than "not that clever". Helpful smile, ta-ta. | ||
| 26 Dec 11, 8:35 PM clouds UK(CR), 4 yrs |
It doesn't matter whether or not you have evidence for these assertions. Part of being socially integrated is about being careful what we say and how we say it. Sometimes you behave in a very naive way, thinking it is just being honest to say what you think. Honesty is a nice trait, but there is a line between being honest and being downright offensive. People generally DON'T always go about saying what they think for rather obvious reasons, EVEN WHEN IT MIGHT BE TRUE. Most people learn this during adolescence. You seemed to have missed this essential learning stage in your growing up. clouds
Edited 26 Dec 11, 8:43 PM by clouds | ||
| 26 Dec 11, 8:38 PM clouds UK(CR), 4 yrs |
So how do short men fare on the scale of kindness and integrity? Have you researched that? Or is that not of any interest to you? annie
Edited 26 Dec 11, 8:43 PM by clouds | ||
| 26 Dec 11, 8:45 PM ConsciousnessJunkie UK(N), 5 yrs |
What does kindness and integrity have to do with how good looking you are? | ||
| 26 Dec 11, 8:52 PM clouds UK(CR), 4 yrs |
Nothing. Why should it have? But judging short men on their kindness and integrity makes far more sense than on whether there is supposedly statistical 'evidence' that other women don't find them attractive. annie Edited 26 Dec 11, 9:01 PM by clouds | ||
| 26 Dec 11, 9:13 PM ConsciousnessJunkie UK(N), 5 yrs |
My point was that your point was irrelevant... We're discussing peoples looks, not how wonderful their personality is. Believe it or not, it's more important to some people that their partner looks good than if they have honourable personality traits - that's no more shallow than any other way of judging a person. | ||
| 26 Dec 11, 10:50 PM clouds UK(CR), 4 yrs |
So why didn't you say the same to classact then, when she started referring to IQ and other non-physical traits? I don't think it is irrelevant to bring the importance of other qualities into the discussion. And since when was their some kind of limit on what direction the discussion should take? This is an open forum isn't it? Classact consistently uses alleged statistics to support her stance about physical and non-physical features (IQ, weight,income etc). My point is that you can use statistics to make any point and no doubt one could just as easily use supposed statistics to argue that short men ARE attractive to women for quite different reasons. Incidentally, I haven't called you or anyone else shallow. That is a label you have referred to, not me. annie Edited 26 Dec 11, 10:59 PM by clouds |