Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You could pull up my FB and it will tell you nothing of my sexual dalliances. Hell, you could ask every man I'm friends with, and all it will result in is they will think your a freak. And quite a few messages warning me to stay away from you. And quite a few direct threats to you.
That's not the way it works. No guy walks up to another guy and says, "Hey, does she do anal?" If we want to know about a girl, we usually ask someone who knows her. It does not have to be one of her "friends." I know a lot about a lot of girls because they've slept with friends and/or guys I know pretty well. When other guys ask me about them, I'll say "Yeah, she was Joe's cut buddy for a few months" or "Yeah, she's a good girl."
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikala43
If I slept with a 100 men, it means nothing to your propagation and survival. The fact that I'm honorable and never been unfaithful is more of a determining factor.
I bet you don't even recognize the contradiction here. It's not even worth explaining.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikala43
And I think you've confused yourself, first you say how plain jane has it so good because she can sleep around, then you say she shouldn't because she will be judged. It would help if you could decide who has it better and stand by it. You are now arguing against yourself.
Yes, Plain Jane will be judged. But it's only the judgment of certain men she cares about...men who are not going to commit to her anyway. The men she wants are primarily interested in the chastity of hot girls. A hot girl's sluttiness will knock her out of girlfriend/wifey contention with alpha males. But Plain Jane was never in the running in the first place. Since she won't get alpha male commitment, she still has the option of getting alpha male sex, which is a helluva lot better than what Joe Schmoe can get. Besides, at the end of the day, there's always a beta male who will be willing to take her used up carcass as his seed receptacle.
Our friend Joe, on the other hand, won't get alpha female commitment or sex, and in most cases, he won't get beta female commitment or sex, either.
Last edited by BajanYankee; 09-08-2011 at 10:04 AM..
Thank you for this response NotARed, which explains the difference between available and accessible wonderfully.
To reiterate my point, you, Bajan, disputed Braunwyn's statement that the "majority of women are available to the majority of men" which Braunwyn was actually correct. The majority of women are single/unattached or willing to become unattached.
I was trying to help you by saying you might have meant to say they are not acccessible, because I agree a large portion of the available women may not be accessible to all men.
I forgive you tho. Carry on with the debate.
I wasn't discerning between available and accessible, although I'm rethinking my statements earlier based on that wiki article and a couple of posts in this thread. I've been operating under the assumption that my world (the people, the culture, lifestyle, etc) is the norm, or at least significantly represented in the population, but maybe that isn't the case at all. Perhaps a majority of the population is comprised of dregs, and they are battling it out with each other, and getting all nutty.
I wasn't discerning between available and accessible, although I'm rethinking my statements earlier based on that wiki article and a couple of posts in this thread. I've been operating under the assumption that my world (the people, the culture, lifestyle, etc) is the norm, or at least significantly represented in the population, but maybe that isn't the case at all. Perhaps a majority of the population is comprised of dregs, and they are battling it out with each other, and getting all nutty.
As you ur self states, your world is one of affluent, educated, whites. That is not the majority in this country or the world. Unfortunately, the dating world isn't strictly made up of enough of the educated, somewhat affluent available people. As you said water rises to its own level, or something like that. And after seeing what I've seen recently I can't help but to agree with that assessment.
Thank you for this response NotARed, which explains the difference between available and accessible wonderfully.
To reiterate my point, you, Bajan, disputed Braunwyn's statement that the "majority of women are available to the majority of men" which Braunwyn was actually correct. The majority of women are single/unattached or willing to become unattached.
I was trying to help you by saying you might have meant to say they are not acccessible, because I agree a large portion of the available women may not be accessible to all men.
I forgive you tho. Carry on with the debate.
I cannot understand how your example of available vs accessible didnt register with him..it made sense to the rest of us
I cannot understand how your example of available vs accessible didnt register with him..it made sense to the rest of us
It didn't register because there is absolutely no difference between the two words. At the end of the day, an "unavailable" person and an "inaccessible" person is a person you can't have.
[SIZE=4]a·vail·a·ble[/SIZE]
/[SIZE=3]əˈveɪləbəl[/SIZE]/ Show Spelled[uh-vey-luh-buhl] Show IPA adjective 1. suitable or ready for use; of use or service; at hand: I used whatever tools were available.
2. readily obtainable; accessible: available resources.
I come from a more affluent and educated circle of friends, but I work with unskilled male labor.
And most of them have a GF, and have a tendency towards serial monogamy, there's not much of the attitude found being sold here. I also dated an Army guy, much younger than I and hung with his friends for around six months... and no battlefields either. /shrug
It didn't register because there is absolutely no difference between the two words. At the end of the day, an "unavailable" person and an "inaccessible" person is a person you can't have.
[SIZE=4]a·vail·a·ble[/SIZE]
/[SIZE=3]əˈveɪləbəl[/SIZE]/ Show Spelled[uh-vey-luh-buhl] Show IPA adjective 1. suitable or ready for use; of use or service; at hand: I used whatever tools were available.
2. readily obtainable; accessible: available resources.
/[SIZE=3]ækˈsɛsəbəl[/SIZE]/ Show Spelled[ak-ses-uh-buhl] Show IPA adjective 1. easy to approach, reach, enter, speak with, or use.
2. that can be used, entered, reached, etc.: an accessible road; accessible ruins.
3. obtainable; attainable: accessible evidence.
4. open to the influence of (usually followed by to ): accessible to bribery.
A book called "Power Rangers" is sitting on a shelf in the Children's Public Library.
The book is available because it is currently able to be borrowed by someone.
However, the book is not accessible to all children, only those children who have a library card.
There is a little boy named Randy who would really like to borrow the book but he does not have a library card. Since he does not have a library card it is not accessible to him, and Randy cannot borrow the book.
But Randy's best friend Desmond also really wants to borrow the book and has a library card. Since the book is accessible to him and available to be borrowed, he goes in and borrows the book.
Meanwhile, Randy complains on internet forums how he can never borrow the books he wants.
Fast forward to Saturday night and Desmond smiles as he thinks about how he was able to submit an application, take a reading test and with a little effort get a library card. He lies in bed and reads 1 of the 10 borrowed books he was able to get.
The book is available because it is currently able to be borrowed by someone.
The book is also not available to those who don't have a library card, genius.
Megan Fox has made herself unavailable to me (thus far). Or, as you would say, she's "inaccessible" to me.
I can't believe I've mired myself in such semantic non-sense. Only on C-D can you post the actual definition of a word that comes directly from Webster's dictionary showing that two words have the same meaning and get disagreement over the meaning of the words. It's like posting a link showing that the capital of the United States is Washington, DC and getting blowback over it. Then again, I've seen dumber things on here.
You probably take great pride in that analogy, I'm sure. Like a college student writing out the steps to a Set Theory problem set. That impeccable logic may get you a Fields Medal one of these days. Keep it up!
I can't believe I've mired myself in such semantic non-sense. Only on C-D can you post the actual definition of a word that comes directly from Webster's dictionary showing that two words have the same meaning and get disagreement over the meaning of the words.
Like what "alpha" means?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
lə
