SBJB

^Posted in another thread

Oh now you're really cooking on gas. Diagnosing me with a personality disorder, and you did it in such a sensitive and none-public manner too. Bless your cotton socks. It's a good job I'm not the sensitive type, which would of course match me to one of the common traits of a narcacist, if I were one that is. It's actually pretty funny, and I guess we could say quite offensive in its intention, even if I didn't take it that way. Now I don't know you well enough. So I couldn't possibly accuse you of Psychologically Projecting your own Narcasism onto me. But I wouldn't rule it out. No, I wo

Shoot it down? It's a discussion bro. There is no shooting it down as long as we can all contribute, which we can. Please share, after all you are an adored and respected member tomass.

Yes, that is called freedom of expression, my friend. People fought and died for it, so it must have meant something for them to want to have it so bad. Everyone always thinks they are right, unless they allow themselves to be proven otherwise. If you have a differing opinion, please do share. I'm always open-minded and ready to challenge what I know. It doesn't revolve around me, until you make it all about me as apposed to discussing the subject in-hand. This is what you've just done. So back on subject, please do share... want to add your opinion on hairy bodies, bisexuality,

hittingmyheadagainstthewall.jpg As you can see, I did from the start offer my opinion on hair. I didn't mention bisexuals. But the OP responded with a follow-up question, this is when I stated my belief on bisexuality. I understand why you feel I have taken the subject off track. This isn't actually the case. If you can imagine for a minute that bisexuality doesn't exist, and that all bisexuals are actually just gay. I know you don't think that, but from my point of view that's what I see. So when someone wants to compare one group to another, but I feel both groups are the same thin

Brownies Letters or numbers

As I tried, and evidently failed to clear up above; the OP wants to know the differences between what gay and bisexual guys like, hair-wise. It's an unusual question, in that it wouldn't make any difference to most people what someone prefers, regardless of their sexuality. So why is the OP asking? The only relevance would usually be what they prefer in a man vs a woman. I can't understand where the OP is coming from, or what he's really trying to find out, this is evident thus far as he isn't being very clear (no offence OP). Furthermore, it's my belief that there is no such thing as bis

Car Teddy bears or Marshmallows

The bisexual remark was in response to the OP question; is there a difference between what gays and bis like? It depends on what you see the difference as being between those two types of attractions, or if you see one at all? What if there were no name for bisexual, what then? What if there were no name for Santa? What if law-enforcement officers were called either police or pigs, but terrorists were only ever called terrorists? Anything with a name must exist, and anything without a name can not exist. How can we talk about something that has no name and vice versa?

So you won't spend 'hours' to do something that will stop you from feeling ashamed of yourself? Do you refuse to spend an hour getting your hair cut too? Refuse to shower? Refuse to eat? Where do you draw the line? The opinion of people here won't differ much from out there. Only that there may be a few that have a thing for hair, when they really just have low self-esteem and choose to pick which lesser desirable qualities they will settle for in a person. Although perhaps not always. There's no such thing as Bisexual, people confuse the romantic attractions they have for women as s

What's with American's saying 'no homo' all the time? Are they doing it because they're actually worried someone is about to call the gay for something they just said, or is it just like throwing out a random communal catch-phrase like 'yes g', 'what's good', 'put it there bru', 'god bless', 'laters', etc?

19:30 is not there. Sinner!

So chop it all off then? Or do you have a confidence issue with changing your appearance in this way, even though it's what you want? I'm a little confused tbh. Your question is redundant; you must be aware that most men and women today prefer themselves and their attraction relatively hairless? Or are you asking why men and women today prefer to look like they did before they had pubic hair? I've read your post 5 times, and I can't see what you're getting at?

I can relate to that a lot. My gaydar used to be **** too, ****! So I asked myself; why couldn't I see what others could? Then the more I learnt about me, the more I learnt about others.

Thanks, and that's interesting. Because a young child can't determine if someone is gay, but an adult can. So when an adult says that some gay guys are obviously gay (camp), and some aren't clear to see. Perhaps this is because a higher level of observation is needed, one that can determine if all men are gay or not? Some people have a good gaydar, and other's not. Maybe there are always signs if you know what to look for?

Of course science doesn't understand sexuality. As I said above, it's trying to understand something that it thinks needs to be understood. We are born understanding it, it's only when society's warped views get in the way, combined with our unresolved emotional issues, social acceptance etc, that we end up so confused. How do we understand heterosexuality but not others? We are missing the obvious, the simple obvious. And even if we didn't understand it, how would that stop us from being able to identify if someone is gay? We don't understand what causes some illnesses, but we can still

The issue isn't really about whether or not you can determine someone's sexuality by looking at their face. It's about your fear of other's knowing your sexuality, and also your fear of you knowing their sexuality. Have you ever questioned yourself about your parent's sexuality? Does it make you feel uncomfortable? Make you feel unstable? Why is that?

I think we can very easily understood sexuality. If we understand that the way we currently view sexuality is setup so that we view all sexual expression as a sin. In other words, if you forget what you know, what you've been taught, take the emotion out of it, it is pretty clear to see. We don't have the evidence? The article has just given you the evidence. What evidence do you have to dispute it? Apart from stating that you don't understand it. The face has connection with gender, you'd have to agree with that. We know that women's voices soften when they give birth, so they can

With respect, don't be afraid to read something if you're scared it might be true. The story they've made, ie 'is it right or wrong to look this closely at people', may be rubbish. As apposed to just sharing news of the new technology. As such, it's clearly not rubbish. There are many things about our physical makeup that giveaway things about us. When they say 'don't judge a book by its cover', that's not true. You can absolutely learn things about a person. Why would nature want our sexual orientation to be secret?

Why do people actually think this is a prank? I wouldn't mind if he said at the end that it was just a skit, but he doesn't, so it's dishonest. The whole basis for the video is to poke fun at sagging. The sagger makes weak arguments to make himself look stupid. It's also portrays the idea of him lowering the other guy's pants as out of order. But the other guy is apparently within his rights to adjust the sagger's pants? They'd probably like to F**** eachother, if they're honest enough to admit it.

Whilst it would be invasive to begin with, we don't actually need our orientation to be so personal. We are in fact already assuming that everyone is straight. So for those who are, they are having the personal orientation made public anyway. For those aren't straight but are assumed to be, they of course have even bigger problems. At current people with a minority sexual preference, eg homosexuals, are subject to discrimination if they come out as gay, or living a suppressed life if they can't come out as gay. Given that most countries have now decriminalised homosexuality and mad

Computer algorithms can analyse a person's face and detect if they are gay or straight. With 90% accuracy. Are you for or against such technology? Imagine if no one had to live a lie or come out as gay, because everyone already knew what everyone was. Perhaps other groups that have been subject to discrimination and oppression are fortunate in that way. Obvious to see if someone is a women or a black person. I don't believe society realises just how many homosexuals there actualy are. In the long run, this would almost irradiate 90% of issues regarding homosexuality. A bit like

Pain from being fucked up the ass?

That's great, thanks for sharing. It's actually crazy just how often feminists are left speechless when you throw a few facts at them.

I must share this one too. Super aware guy who is clearly too open-minded to have swallowed any crap from the education system. Teacher gets owned.