Good show, old bean!Eric the Orange said:I am outraged and will have none of your civil discussion sir!
I don't think even Critical Miss is dumb/brave enough to go stick their head in that shark tank. It seems to be a topic that will be officially ignored while everyone in the real world talks about it endlessly.Bolo The Great said:"But hey, there's nothing else going on this week"
NOTHING else? Well i guess there are 250 pages of Nothing else in the forum
Or even Lawrence, for which Larry is generally the short hand.Thunderous Cacophony said:Also, just throwing it out there, but you'd have a much better time selling it if it wasn't named Larry. That's just such an unsexy name. Maybe Lucius or Julius, or James for a more modern feel.
Well, they're both largely varying in size, dangle and bounce to and fro, and spit out liquids most people would normally consider rather disgusting/unfit for civil conversation.Paragon Fury said:I have a serious question;
Why, during these kinds of debates, do people insist on saying/implying that the male primary sex characteristic - our twig and berries, rod and reel, I'm-out-of-euphemisms - is in anyway comparable to female secondary sex characteristics - their boobs, flotation devices, whatever-you-like-to-call-them and their hips/thighs - at all?
Because they're not. At all.
Eh, what male secondary sex characteristics aren't you allowed to show in public though?Paragon Fury said:I have a serious question;
Why, during these kinds of debates, do people insist on saying/implying that the male primary sex characteristic - our twig and berries, rod and reel, I'm-out-of-euphemisms - is in anyway comparable to female secondary sex characteristics - their boobs, flotation devices, whatever-you-like-to-call-them and their hips/thighs - at all?
Because they're not. At all.
because to do otherwise would be to admit that they see display of female secondary sexual characteristics as inferior to male ones (low body fat, big upper body muscles).Paragon Fury said:I have a serious question;
Why, during these kinds of debates, do people insist on saying/implying that the male primary sex characteristic - our twig and berries, rod and reel, I'm-out-of-euphemisms - is in anyway comparable to female secondary sex characteristics - their boobs, flotation devices, whatever-you-like-to-call-them and their hips/thighs - at all?
Because they're not. At all.
I don't get that either. I mean, it's not even as readily visible as "flotation devices," and that's frankly an awesome thing because it looks a little weird and... not very attractive at all.Paragon Fury said:I have a serious question;
Why, during these kinds of debates, do people insist on saying/implying that the male primary sex characteristic - our twig and berries, rod and reel, I'm-out-of-euphemisms - is in anyway comparable to female secondary sex characteristics - their boobs, flotation devices, whatever-you-like-to-call-them and their hips/thighs - at all?
Because they're not. At all.