Reply With Quote
That's what I thought, no valid links or examples
Just now.
I will kick your ass if I ever see you and you say the thing what you said here!
Such stupid, empty threats.
lol day of the rope
That's what I thought, no valid links or examples
You thought you backed down.
Yes, I just told you.
Tldr but I'm sure you're thinking of more literature where I'm still naked. lol .
Yeah i don't even know who she is. Who else here does without googling. That's how edgy you are.
I guess I'll go google her
"... Hers was a name most every little girl knew — Lisa Frank, creator of a line of vibrantly colored school supplies covered in hearts, stars and rainbows. In the ’80s and ’90s, she was an artist who reigned supreme as her folders populated school desks nationwide.Hers was an empire known for its hot pinks and purples, lime greens and yellows. It was a world of illustrated unicorns, puppies and surfing penguins.- See more at: http://tucson13.nytimes-ins ute.com/2013/05/30/the-colorful-world-of-lisa-frank-goes-silent/#sthash.o228LfCK.dpuf"
Holy . 80s/90s? How did you know or remember this crap? Rofl
Kind of strange you are openly fantasizing about him imagining you naked.
I'm not fantasizing much at all. He's posting his cuck work right here on Spurstalk. I imagine there's more on the way.
I'm curious of his thought process though. It's fascinating Freudian type stuff.
You have a real anti-feminist bent, don't you? I'm not sure what any of this has to do with Women's Studies since it affects men and women equally, but sorry about the divorce I guess?
Spurminator
an inability to separate anti feminist from anti women, Classic liberal bull .
ter McGee
You have 90k post on a forum where 99 percent of your posts are dedicated to men. Not that it should matter cuz we are on a sports forum, but you and Cuck Jr try hard to eroticize anything.
why lie
But yours are dedicated solely to two men and no other subject at all -- certainly not, you know, the Spurs or basketball.
Why?
I'm not lying, you two s try to eroticize everything, the following post proved it with:
You didn't answer my question.
That's a lie
lol gtown's inference went straight to eroticism.
must have brainstormed for det one huh?
No, you said it, genius.
who got emasculated, btw?
are you crying about Hemingway?
what are you crying about, ter? you're still being elliptical.
"emasculation of men"
holy ! which men been have been, are being emasculated by same-sex marriage!holy !
ter's own masculinity is at risk? Is ter even a male? or is a male ter horribly conflicted about his own sexuality?
We have many examples of MEN who have been primary instigators of phobia turning out to be closeted s.
The "emasculation" argument is the same type of argument about same-sex marriage DESTROYING all mixed-sex marriages and families!
and who and when "defined" marriage? if the definition existed, why are Repugs only now defining marriage as NOT between two people of same sex?
"reverse millions of years of evolutionary development."
"reverse"?
There's nothing more ed up than parents forcing a kid to drop his or her other-sex tendencies, which have been shown to have a probable genetic basis.
Kids, people are as they are, LEAVE THEM THE ALONE. you know, like in rightwingdingbats' beloved FREEDOM! LIBERTY!
Did you even attempt to read my posts? You can disagree with me on this gender issue stuff, but nowhere in any of them did I on sexuality or gay marriage. I even marginally support the second option. The first I am ambivalent about. To each their own and I recognize the genetic and brain chemistry issues that cause sexuality to usually not be a "choice""emasculation of men"
holy ! which men been have been, are being emasculated by same-sex marriage!
ter's own masculinity is at risk? Is ter even a male? or is a male ter horribly conflicted about his own sexuality?
We have many examples of MEN who have been primary instigators of phobia turning out to be closeted s.
The "emasculation" argument is the same type of argument about same-sex marriage DESTROYING all mixed-sex marriages and families!
and who and when "defined" marriage? if the definition existed, why are Repugs only now defining marriage as NOT between two people of same sex?
"reverse millions of years of evolutionary development."
"reverse"?
There's nothing more ed up than parents forcing a kid to drop his or her other-sex tendencies, which have been shown to have a probable genetic basis.
Kids, people are as they are, LEAVE THEM THE ALONE. you know, like in rightwingdingbats' beloved FREEDOM! LIBERTY!
But if you want to call your child It, because you are offended by boy or girl then go ahead. I just don't like it.
And learn how to ing read. It will make your insults far better when they have some connection what I actually ing said.
ter McGee
All you've done is whine about the slippery slope into emasculinity. You still haven't said whose been emasculated or what your view of masculinity means and why we need to salvage it.
Actually I have. I have concrete examples of the negative effects that this is having earlier in the thread. Too be fair I am not talking about 1950s Don Draper masculinity. I am talking about education, rational thought, jobs, willingness to provide for a family (not as the sole provider and sticking the woman in the kitchen, we have moved beyond that), individualism, and the ridiculous idea being preached in schools that violence never solves any problems.
If you can't see why this might be a problem for men in the aggregate then I can't help you. Men are falling way behind women in education.
Anyway, made my point. Done with this thread.
ter McGee
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
