The shameful gay marriage ban.

[Smoogis]

So,it's me against the world,eh?

Nop, its your opinions and views mingling with the opinions and views of everyone else.

Whether you be an ass about it or not is your decision.

Here, I'm feeling generous.

You can have a scary-looking blowjob smilie.

:eek:

[iwarrior]

Who's being an ass? Not me. I didn't ask to be dumped on. It's not my fault everyone's jumping on the bandwagon.

[JeffreyWKramer]

As for Jeff,well,he's an admitted adulterer and has said a number of things on this board that have contradicted things I have heard and read from other mental health professionals,so I have a hard time buying what he says.

The active word is *swinger*. And I've gone over my credentials and otherwise addressed this issue pretty thoroughly already. What professionals are you talking about? Who are these folk, and what are they saying?

[Papergirl]

The active word is *swinger*. And I've gone over my credentials and otherwise addressed this issue pretty thoroughly already. What professionals are you talking about? Who are these folk, and what are they saying?
If he says Dr. Laura, I think I may well laugh myself silly.

[Smoogis]

Who's being an ass? Not me. I didn't ask to be dumped on. It's not my fault everyone's jumping on the bandwagon.

I counted 9 rolling eyed smilies in this thread that has come from you before I stopped. 9 of em.

They look like this to a hyped-up-on-caffiene tired hurting mind:
:rolleyes: X9. Since CBR doesn't like smilies either.


Don't know about you, but I love me some rolling eyes, yep.

At least you have the decency not to use this feller: :cool: cause...you know....that smilie its just...ew.

Yes.

Anyway.

Where I was going on this, was something abut the olden times of branding donkeys and they used rolling eyed smilies...but no, that's too bloody subtle.

That smilie is degrading, condescending, and you used it 9 times.

So, to answer your question, you are not a full ass, you are only half cheeked.

[iwarrior]

The active word is *swinger*. And I've gone over my credentials and otherwise addressed this issue pretty thoroughly already. What professionals are you talking about? Who are these folk, and what are they saying?


Ok,swinger,adulterer,whatever You stil sleep around,so naturally you're going to disagree with my views on sex.

As for pros,I don't know,just people in psychology. I don't remember any names. I always thought that it was accepted in that field that men and women have sex for different reasons,that promiscuous sex,unhealthy mentally,and that people who do sleep around generally have self-esteem issues and are often victims of sexual abuse.

You also said some things once on suicide that I thought really contradicted what other shrinks think about it.

If he says Dr. Laura, I think I may well laugh myself silly.

Nah,I don't listen to her at all. She's wacky.

[iwarrior]

I counted 9 rolling eyed smilies in this thread that has come from you before I stopped. 9 of em.

They look like this to a hyped-up-on-caffiene tired hurting mind:
:rolleyes: X9. Since CBR doesn't like smilies either.


Don't know about you, but I love me some rolling eyes, yep.

At least you have the decency not to use this feller: :cool: cause...you know....that smilie its just...ew.

Yes.

Anyway.

If CBR doesn't like smilies,they should get rid of them. I'll use them if I wanna. Maybe I did go overboard in the eyeroller though.


Where I was going on this, was something abut the olden times of branding donkeys and they used rolling eyed smilies...but no, that's too bloody subtle.

Yeah,my small mind won't get it.


That smilie is degrading, condescending, and you used it 9 times.

I get degraded and condescended to a lot.


So, to answer your question, you are not a full ass, you are only half cheeked.


Ooop! Someone will quote that one and pat ya on the back for it I'm sure.

[Smoogis]

Ooop! Someone will quote that one and pat ya on the back for it I'm sure.

Yes!

I'll get the attention I so desperately crave.

[Spike-X]

Ok,well I'm just saying that I would think that if women were as interested in the physical aspects of sex as much as men are,then they wouldn't at mind men getting physical with them.
Women aren't as interested in the "physical aspects of sex" because they don't like random guys coming up and grabbing their asses? Give me a break.

I have known (and in some cases slept with) women who, if they were any more interested in the "physical aspects of sex", would be declared a public menace. Guess what? They don't really dig random guys grabbing them on the ass.

I'm sure if most guys had women coming up to them and grabbing their ass every time they went out, they'd get over it pretty soon.

A friend of mine who happened to read this over my shoulder says, and I quote, "Tell him I said he's a dickhead."

So yeah, I guess it really is you against the world. At least on this particular subject.

[Charles RB]

If women were all as horny as men,would you see so much sexual harassment litigation?

Yes. The key bit in sexual harassment is the word "harassment".

Ass-grabbing,leering,etc. are called "unwanted sexual advances". If women as virile as men,do you think that these sexual advances would be unwanted?

Yes. I'm quite horny et al, and I get narked off if someone grabbed my arse. Why should I think women would be any different? A stranger grabbing your nether-regions out of the blue is not sexy, it's sodding annoying.

Not much that I have observed or read has led me to believe that women are as into sex as much as men are. It's only been on this message board that people have told me otherwise.

Everything I've observed and read outside of this MB backs up what people are saying on this MB.

As for Jeff,well,he's an admitted adulterer

That's a strawman argument.

Ok,well I'm just saying that I would think that if women were as interested in the physical aspects of sex as much as men are,then they wouldn't at mind men getting physical with them.

I'm very interested in the physical aspects of sex, in the way only a virgin Uni student can be. I still get narked off when random women "get physical" with me out of the blue. I don't know them and I'm doing something else. It ticks me off. Even if I find them physically attractive, it ticks me off.

[Smoogis]

A friend of mine who happened to read this over my shoulder says, and I quote, "Tell him I said he's a dickhead."

So yeah, I guess it really is you against the world. At least on this particular subject.

Hi friend!

[Spike-X]

Yes!

I'll get the attention I so desperately crave.
But will you have time to enjoy it, in between all the oral sex?

[Smoogis]

But will you have time to enjoy it, in between all the oral sex?

I'm good at multi-tasking.

[Corrina]

I have always treated women with respect in real life. I would never even think of doing such a thing. Stop making me out to be a neanderthal.


No need for me to do it. You do fine all by yourself.

[Corrina]

Yes!

I'll get the attention I so desperately crave.


Smoogis gets all the attention and no one finds my "Sound of Music" joke funny.

And here I thought someone would get it, with all gay men on this thread. :)

[Smoogis]

Smoogis gets all the attention and no one finds my "Sound of Music" joke funny.

And here I thought someone would get it, with all gay men on this thread. :)

I know we have only started posting together in this thread...but...b-but...

I love you.

*sobs*

[Corrina]

Oo....oral sex for me!

Oops. Jeffrey sent Smoogis to her room already.

And I like men.

And Smoogis is underage.

Oh well.

Go to bed, young lady! You're up past your bedtime!

[Charles RB]

Smoogis gets all the attention and no one finds my "Sound of Music" joke funny

There is nothing funny about the Sound of Music. It leaves a trail of terror wherever it goes. (http://www.itswalky.com/d/19971022.html)

[Smoogis]

Oo....oral sex for me!

Oops. Jeffrey sent Smoogis to her room already.

And I like men.

And Smoogis is underage.

Oh well.

Go to bed, young lady! You're up past your bedtime!

well...well...

I came out of my room.

and I like men.

and I can't go to bed because I can't.

so no!

[west3man]

iwarrior: I think another obstacle in the way of your understanding what so many are saying is that you're see evidence and draw conclusions from that evidence which don't follow a valid chain of logic.

Example: You basically supported your argument that women don't get as horny as men by saying that women don't dig it when some random guy grabs their asses.

Consider that a heterosexual man wouldn't want another man grabbing HIS ASS, either. That doesn't mean that one of them doesn't like sex as much as the other, does it? No. It probably means that the heterosexual guy just isn't attracted to the other guy* (which is what makes him heterosexual). In other words, the two of them may BOTH enjoy sex, however they view it differently.

Now, take that and apply it to men and women.

What I'm attempting to do is NOT to argue whether or not men are hornier than women or vice-versa. That argument doesn't really interest me, at the moment. What I'm more interested in is what behavior CAUSES or contributes to this cycle you continue to find yourself in. Then, maybe it'll be clear what can be done to end the cycle.

I think that's some valuable perspective. (However, people generally disagree with me about these things, so it wouldn't surprise me too much if you did, too.)




* I'm of the, perhaps unpopular, opinion that such sexual harrassment isn't just about how "disrespectful" the action (i.e. grabbing someone's ass) is, so much as not being attracted to or not liking the person doing the grabbing. Familiarity comes into play, as well, of course. However, we let people we really dig get away with all sorts of things that others can't get away with.

Dem's mah two cents, anyway.

(hell. I thought I sent this, already.)

[howyadoin]

No it's not. If women were all as horny as men,would you see so much sexual harassment litigation? Would it be an issue. Ass-grabbing,leering,etc. are called "unwanted sexual advances". If women as virile as men,do you think that these sexual advances would be unwanted?Um, you're kind of ignoring the fact that if women acted the way some men do, they'd be branded as sluts. There's a societal double standard, as has been repeatedly pointed out to you.

I'm not saying that I have done such things. I used to work at a nightclub. Based on my observations,women didn't appear to be as sexually driven as men. The women just seemed to want to meet a nice guy or just meet someone who was willing to spend money on them. The guys just wanted to get laid. Most of the women would get pissy if a guy came up to her and made some sort of sexual proposition to her. If a guy did something physical,he'd get a drink tossed on him at the very least.First, what happens in one night club isn't necessarily typical of all nightclubs. Second, what happens in any nightclub isn't necessarily typical of what happens in other situations, social or otherwise.




So, one more time: clearly your experiences aren't as broad as you previously thought them. You're generalizing wildly without any logical basis other than, "well, this one time...", and that's why people are arguing with you.

Assuming you're still reading my posts, here's an example: if I go to a bar and see a girl humping some guy's leg, I'm not gonna assume that every girl in every bar (and even the girls who don't go to bars) likes to hump guys' legs in public. Why not? Several reasons:

- it ignores the fact that all women aren't clones.
- it ignores the fact that all bars are not the same environments.
- it ignores the fact that many people behave differently in bars than in other social situations.
- it ignores the fact that one woman in one bar (or a hundred women in a hundred bars, for that matter) isn't a big enough sample to draw statistical inferences from.

[Shades0077]

Assuming you're still reading my posts, here's an example: if I go to a bar and see a girl humping some guy's leg, I'm not gonna assume that every girl in every bar (and even the girls who don't go to bars) likes to hump guys' legs in public. Why not? Several reasons:

- it ignores the fact that all women aren't clones.
- it ignores the fact that all bars are not the same environments.
- it ignores the fact that many people behave differently in bars than in other social situations.
- it ignores the fact that one woman in one bar (or a hundred women in a hundred bars, for that matter) isn't a big enough sample to draw statistical inferences from.

So if I go to a bar, my leg isn't going to get humped by a girl?

sad smiley.

[Papergirl]

So if I go to a bar, my leg isn't going to get humped by a girl?

sad smiley.
*spews ice water all over her monitor* HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHA!

Damn it! Don't DO that to me at this time of night!

[Ian Boothby]

All the women I know speak english.
So therefore all women speak english.
I'm just telling it like it is. Face facts.

[iwarrior]

Yes. The key bit in sexual harassment is the word "harassment".

Well,yeah,but if they were horny,they wouldn't see it as harassment.


Yes. I'm quite horny et al, and I get narked off if someone grabbed my arse. Why should I think women would be any different? A stranger grabbing your nether-regions out of the blue is not sexy, it's sodding annoying.

Doesn't it depend on who the stranger is?


Everything I've observed and read outside of this MB backs up what people are saying on this MB.

I can't say that's the case with me.


That's a strawman argument.

No it isn't. He's a swinger. He has lots of sex outside of his marriage(so he claims) with lots of different people. Of course he's going to side with the argument that women are as horny as men.


I'm very interested in the physical aspects of sex, in the way only a virgin Uni student can be. I still get narked off when random women "get physical" with me out of the blue.

How many women get physical with you out of the blue?

[iwarrior]

Um, you're kind of ignoring the fact that if women acted the way some men do, they'd be branded as sluts. There's a societal double standard, as has been repeatedly pointed out to you.

Well,the slut label certainly isn't stopping women from sleeping around now is it?


First, what happens in one night club isn't necessarily typical of all nightclubs. Second, what happens in any nightclub isn't necessarily typical of what happens in other situations, social or otherwise.

This was a pretty big and popular nightclub with a diverse clientele.




So, one more time: clearly your experiences aren't as broad as you previously thought them. You're generalizing wildly without any logical basis other than, "well, this one time...", and that's why people are arguing with you.

I'm not talking about one time. I've seen it countless times.


Assuming you're still reading my posts, here's an example: if I go to a bar and see a girl humping some guy's leg, I'm not gonna assume that every girl in every bar (and even the girls who don't go to bars) likes to hump guys' legs in public. Why not? Several reasons:

- it ignores the fact that all women aren't clones.
- it ignores the fact that all bars are not the same environments.
- it ignores the fact that many people behave differently in bars than in other social situations.
- it ignores the fact that one woman in one bar (or a hundred women in a hundred bars, for that matter) isn't a big enough sample to draw statistical inferences from.

I'm not just talking about one woman. This was with a lot of women over the course of about 4-5 months. I've also seen it a lot during my school years and at my various jobs.

[iwarrior]

iwarrior: I think another obstacle in the way of your understanding what so many are saying is that you're see evidence and draw conclusions from that evidence which don't follow a valid chain of logic.

Example: You basically supported your argument that women don't get as horny as men by saying that women don't dig it when some random guy grabs their asses.

Consider that a heterosexual man wouldn't want another man grabbing HIS ASS, either. That doesn't mean that one of them doesn't like sex as much as the other, does it? No. It probably means that the heterosexual guy just isn't attracted to the other guy* (which is what makes him heterosexual). In other words, the two of them may BOTH enjoy sex, however they view it differently.

Well,yeah,it depends on who you're attracted to also. I thought it went w/o saying.

I've seen attractive men do this a lot to women and get spurned also. Women generally don't like being seen as pieces of meat. I would think that if they were a sexual as men,they wouldn't care. They'd care more about gratification than anything.


Now, take that and apply it to men and women.

What I'm attempting to do is NOT to argue whether or not men are hornier than women or vice-versa. That argument doesn't really interest me, at the moment. What I'm more interested in is what behavior CAUSES or contributes to this cycle you continue to find yourself in. Then, maybe it'll be clear what can be done to end the cycle.

I think that's some valuable perspective. (However, people generally disagree with me about these things, so it wouldn't surprise me too much if you did, too.)

Look,I try to understand people's POV's ok? I just don't like being treated like shit. That's why I get pissed off. People end up dissing me because they don't like my views,I retaliate,and then everyone goes,"Oh look at that nasty,pathetic,stupid,crybaby Iwarrior. He sucks and has no life and lives in his mom's basement and blah,blah,blah" and then jump on the dogpile. It happens to me on other message boards too. People are allowed to get angry at me,but for some reason,I'm not allowed to get angry back. That's the pattern.


* I'm of the, perhaps unpopular, opinion that such sexual harrassment isn't just about how "disrespectful" the action (i.e. grabbing someone's ass) is, so much as not being attracted to or not liking the person doing the grabbing. Familiarity comes into play, as well, of course. However, we let people we we let people we really dig get away with all sorts of things that others can't get away with.

I agree with you. Now,if I had posted that somewhere,you'd better believe I'd get smacked over the head for it.

Y'know,I bet if I had simply said that I was for gay marriage or even against it,I wouldn't have had to deal with this.

Which brings me to another problem. Conservatives give me shit because I'm a liberal. Liberals give me shit for either being too liberal or not liberal enough. It's crazy.

I also get sensitive about board politics since I've been treated unfairly for much of my life. It's like a microcosm of all those experiences.

[iwarrior]

Yes!

I'll get the attention I so desperately crave.

I didn't say you were like that Smoogis. :rolleyes:

[iwarrior]

No need for me to do it. You do fine all by yourself.

You don't even know me. Talk about making assumptions. :rolleyes:

[Ian Boothby]

Look,I try to understand people's POV's ok? I just don't like being treated like shit. That's why I get pissed off. People end up dissing me because they don't like my views,I retaliate,and then everyone goes,"Oh look at that nasty,pathetic,stupid,crybaby Iwarrior. He sucks and has no life and lives in his mom's basement and blah,blah,blah" and then jump on the dogpile. It happens to me on other message boards too. People are allowed to get angry at me,but for some reason,I'm not allowed to get angry back. That's the pattern.


You were dismissive of what people (including me) thought was an important issue. Arrogantly so. That can steam people's clams. Then you were very rude to a moderator with a cheap shot about how he can find another boyfriend if his has to leave the country. I know you say he was a jerk to you in another thread but it's still a cruel statement.

All the while you paint yourself as the underdog telling it like it is while you're bullied by the rest of us. Then you start with the sexual politcs from what appears to be a sheltered view but again you're arrogant. You throw some shots at a person having a civil discussion with you for being an adulterer then go back to playing the victim. You can't throw punches then get mad when people hit back.

[Kyuubi]

Here iwarrior
http://www.informulation.on.ca/A55770/cts.nsf/(AllByID)/E51190543548F2B586256D2C0059C6BF/$File/cts%20relic%20shovel%20b.jpg
looks like you enjoy digging yourself deeper and deeper into the hole you've made here, so I thought you might need this.

[iwarrior]

Ok. Do you all really want to know the awful truth about me? I'll be straight with you guys.

First of all,I live at home,with my folks,not in the basement though. Some of you may have already known that.

I've never really had a romantic relationship with a woman. In fact. I've never had sex,ever.

There. I said it. Happy? Want to throw it all back in my face? Go ahead. If it will make you guys feel good about yourselves and your views,then fine.

Why you ask? Well,it's weird. I don't know if it's my looks,personality or what. I've been told by many women that I am handsome. On the other hand,I've been told that I'm butt ugly. I don't know who to believe. Sometimes I believe on side,sometimes I believe the other.

I try to look presentable. I work out and such. I bathe regularly. I use deodorant. :D

Part of my problem is that all of the women that have been interested in me are not women I am attracted to(gay men usually seem to like me too for some reason). Women I am attracted to usually want nothing to do with me unless I have something they want. I could settle for the women I'm not attracted to,but I don't want to. I don't want to have someone just because I don't have anyone. I'd rather be alone.

I'm not into chasing women. The time I spent working at that nightclub turned me off to that scene. I got tired of watching men and women use each other like parasites. The guys all seemed to want nothing but one-night stands. The women just seemed to be looking for money and/or an upgrade in their status. It was disgusting.

There's also been the time factor. I've always seemed to be caught up in other things like work,school,my hobbies,my family,and all of our problems.

Do I even want a relationship? Sometimes I long for one,but usually I don't care.

[iwarrior]

You were dismissive of what people (including me) thought was an important issue.

I was angry. Am I not allowed to be angry? I didn't insult you.

Plus,I was being honest. People are dismissive about all sorts of things. They don't deserve to be treated like crap for it. I was dismissive to both sides of it,that includes the Pass The Loot crowd.

I guess I would have been better off saying something like,"fuck the queers,let 'em all get aids and die".


Also,it's interesting how none of the anti-gay folks haven't gotten any digs in. Maybe they're just sitting back and watching the show.


Arrogantly so. That can steam people's clams.

I didn't mean to come off that way. Believe me,I'm far from arrogant. You have to have confidence for that.


Then you were very rude to a moderator with a cheap shot about how he can find another boyfriend if his has to leave the country. I know you say he was a jerk to you in another thread but it's still a cruel statement.

Well,turn about is fair play. He was cruel and unfair to me in a thread I started about a serious problem I was having,and he's been snooty to me before that. Maybe I should have just let it go,but I get tired of everyone kissing his ass.


All the while you paint yourself as the underdog telling it like it is while you're bullied by the rest of us. Then you start with the sexual politcs from what appears to be a sheltered view but again you're arrogant. You throw some shots at a person having a civil discussion with you for being an adulterer then go back to playing the victim. You can't throw punches then get mad when people hit back.

I threw the "adulterer" shot at him because he insulted me w/o provocation(called me an asshole among other things). My statement about Tom had nothing to do with him.

And "adulterer" is not an insult. It's what he is. Look up the word. He's the one who brags constantly about all these sex parties he has and then acts like people who aren't into his scene are silly,backward prudes.

I'm far from sheltered also. It's not like I grew up on a farm or in the 'burbs. I've seen lots of people screw up their lives because they can't keep their clothes on. I work with people like that.

[iwarrior]

Here iwarrior
http://www.informulation.on.ca/A55770/cts.nsf/(AllByID)/E51190543548F2B586256D2C0059C6BF/$File/cts%20relic%20shovel%20b.jpg
looks like you enjoy digging yourself deeper and deeper into the hole you've made here, so I thought you might need this.



Sure,jump on that bandwagon. Good for you! Wooohooo!

[Kyuubi]

Sure,jump on that bandwagon. Good for you! Wooohooo!


Sorry, couldn't help it. I just don't see why you continue to post in this thread. Please continue to post in this forum, but maybe you should just back away from this particular thread.

[TCJohnson]

Ok. Do you all really want to know the awful truth about me? I'll be straight with you guys.

First of all,I live at home,with my folks,not in the basement though. Some of you may have already known that.

I've never really had a romantic relationship with a woman. In fact. I've never had sex,ever.

There. I said it. Happy? Want to throw it all back in my face? Go ahead. If it will make you guys feel good about yourselves and your views,then fine.

I don't think anybody here would throw that back in your face, because I don't think that is really anything to be ashamed of. However, if somebody with more experience talks, listen! For example, when a woman talks about a woman's perspective like they did in this thread, listen to what they have to say! Ain't no shame in not knowing about something....there is in not listening to those who do.

Why you ask? Well,it's weird. I don't know if it's my looks,personality or what. I've been told by many women that I am handsome. On the other hand,I've been told that I'm butt ugly. I don't know who to believe. Sometimes I believe on side,sometimes I believe the other.

I try to look presentable. I work out and such. I bathe regularly. I use deodorant. :D


Ok, I will say this: there is being handsome and being attractive. They are not the same thing. Handsome is about genetics, and there is not much you can do about that. Being attractive is about style, confidence, personality, confidence, humor... You can be butt ugly and still be attractive. Attractiveness is something you have control over. And if you don't know which to believe, then you are not attractive. Believe that you are attractive. That is the first step. Anybody can be attractive...although for some it does require their medication. ;)

[iwarrior]

Sorry, couldn't help it. I just don't see why you continue to post in this thread. Please continue to post in this forum, but maybe you should just back away from this particular thread.

I have trouble letting things go. People keep responding to me.

[Ian Boothby]

I was angry. Am I not allowed to be angry? I didn't insult you.
.

No you said an issue I care about wasn't important. That's insulting. It's insulting my beliefs.
You're allowed to be angry but when you take shots people will shoot back. Stop playing the victim card. Fight or leave but don't throw punches and then say, "quit hitting me".
Saying you don't have enough confidence to be arrogant is bullshit. Look around, the board is filled with people with many different perspectives. When EVERYONE is saying you're wrong you really have to look at that and take it seriously.

[iwarrior]

I don't think anybody here would throw that back in your face, because I don't think that is really anything to be ashamed of. However, if somebody with more experience talks, listen! For example, when a woman talks about a woman's perspective like they did in this thread, listen to what they have to say! Ain't no shame in not knowing about something....there is in not listening to those who do.

I'm trying to do that.



Ok, I will say this: there is being handsome and being attractive. They are not the same thing. Handsome is about genetics, and there is not much you can do about that. Being attractive is about style, confidence, personality, confidence, humor... You can be butt ugly and still be attractive. Attractiveness is something you have control over. And if you don't know which to believe, then you are not attractive. Believe that you are attractive. That is the first step. Anybody can be attractive...although for some it does require their medication.

I wasn't really looking for advice on how to get girls,but thanks anyway. :) I have heard people say that if you think you're sexy,you'll be sexy in the eyes of others. I'm not sure I buy it though.

Let me put it another way,I don't want to be a metrosexual. :D

[TCJohnson]

I was angry. Am I not allowed to be angry? I didn't insult you.


By the way, another word of advice...you forgot the word, 'intended.' You can't really say if you insulted him or not because, well, you are not a very good judge of that. You can say you did not intend to insult him...and then if you did unintentionally, apologize. :D

[iwarrior]

No you said an issue I care about wasn't important. That's insulting. It's insulting my beliefs.

If I said that I think religion is silly,like others have on CBR,is that insulting to someone who is religious? In fact,you're being kinda self-righteous right now,acting as if I suck because I'm not as passionate about an issue as you are.


You're allowed to be angry but when you take shots people will shoot back. Stop playing the victim card. Fight or leave but don't throw punches and then say, "quit hitting me".


I didn't take a shot at anyone who hasn't taken a shot at me,and I didn't take a shot at you.


Saying you don't have enough confidence to be arrogant is bullshit.

Is it? Isn't the definition of arrogance over-confidence?


Look around, the board is filled with people with many different perspectives.

No kiddin'?


When EVERYONE is saying you're wrong you really have to look at that and take it seriously.

Is EVERYONE saying that I'm wrong? Where is the empirical data that shows that I am universally disagreed with on CBR? Did you do a poll?

[iwarrior]

By the way, another word of advice...you forgot the word, 'intended.' You can't really say if you insulted him or not because, well, you are not a very good judge of that. You can say you did not intend to insult him...and then if you did unintentionally, apologize. :D

Ok,I gotcha.


I DIDN'T INTEND TO INSULT YOU IAN.


There. Not sure it'll help at this point though,but thanks.

[Kyuubi]

I have trouble letting things go. People keep responding to me.


Yes, but it's causing you to be upset. This place is about having fun and talking to other comic book fans, if this thread is causing so many problems, it is really in your best interest to ignore it.

[iwarrior]

Smoogis gets all the attention and no one finds my "Sound of Music" joke funny.

And here I thought someone would get it, with all gay men on this thread. :)


All gay men? Is Jeff gay? I know I 'aint.

[iwarrior]

Yes, but it's causing you to be upset. This place is about having fun and talking to other comic book fans, if this thread is causing so many problems, it is really in your best interest to ignore it.


Maybe you're right. If there wasn't any political discussion here that might help. I mean,they aren't "fun" topics, They eliminated politics and religion from one board I post on,and it worked wonders. I don't see that happening here though.

I tried for a while not to post about politics and religion,but I relapsed obviously. :(

[Kyuubi]

and just a quick "i'm sorry" if the thing I did at the top of the last page was hurtful, it was just a dumb joke I wanted to try.

[Ian Boothby]

If I said that I think religion is silly,like others have on CBR,is that insulting to someone who is religious? In fact,you're being kinda self-righteous right now,acting as if I suck because I'm not as passionate about an issue as you are.

If someone came on here and said that their faith in God was important to them and I said to them over and over that it wasn't important I'd be insulting them. That's what you're doing with something I feel is important, gay rights. Then to scold me because I don't care enough about poverty without knowing me, is also insulting.

I didn't take a shot at anyone who hasn't taken a shot at me,and I didn't take a shot at you.

Saying gay rights aren't important is taking a shot at a group which includes people I love. Taking a shot at a moderator and saying it doesn't matter that he'll be losing his boyfriend is shitty even if in the past he's kicked you in the balls. That he was a dick to you doesn't make your comment any less dickish.

Is it? Isn't the definition of arrogance over-confidence?

A truly confident person doesn't need to be arrogant. It's overcompensation for insecurity. That's what you're doing.


Is EVERYONE saying that I'm wrong? Where is the empirical data that shows that I am universally disagreed with on CBR? Did you do a poll?

I've been on this thread since the beginning and if there's someone who thinks you've chosen the right path in your arguments and way of presenting them I've missed them. You're nit picking now, while missing the big point everyone is trying to tell you. You're not the picked on everyman.

[Gail Simone]

i,

For pete's sake. You present your views on how women feel as irrefutable, yet are not female.

You present an expert view of what's important to gays and yet are not gay.

Either listen when people who ARE those things tell you you're wrong, or quit wondering why people were mocking your certainty.

Gail

[Spike-X]

I've never really had a romantic relationship with a woman. In fact. I've never had sex,ever.

Yet you can't understand why those of us who have take issue with your pronouncements on the subject of female sexuality. You continue to argue when women themselves tell you flat out that you're wrong.


I threw the "adulterer" shot at (Kramer) because he insulted me w/o provocation(called me an asshole among other things). My statement about Tom had nothing to do with him.

Tom is a very well-liked, respected member of this community. If you start taking shots at him when he's not even around to defend himself, people will take shots back on his behalf.

Why are you so surprised when people stand up for others? Isn't that what you want when you talk about the plight of the working poor being ignored? Isn't that what you wanted us to encourage you to do when you talked about the dumb racists you work with? Or do you only want us to stand up for the people you think we should stand up for? Sorry, but you don't get to decide that for us.

[JeffreyWKramer]

Ok,swinger,adulterer,whatever You stil sleep around,so naturally you're going to disagree with my views on sex.

None of the content of this thread, or the ALIAS one, has anything to do with swing sex, other than a couple mentions of polyamory. In any case, I report things as they are... what the facts support.

As for pros,I don't know,just people in psychology. I don't remember any names. I always thought that it was accepted in that field that men and women have sex for different reasons,that promiscuous sex,unhealthy mentally,and that people who do sleep around generally have self-esteem issues and are often victims of sexual abuse.

And as I noted a ways back, there are some in the field who hold some of those views. They are generally acting on outdated info, their own biases or overgeneralizations. Most people in the field who actually know a damn thing about sexuality accept that a wide variety of behaviors, while not necessarily "normal" in the statistical sense, are not in any way indicative of pathology.

You also said some things once on suicide that I thought really contradicted what other shrinks think about it.

What was it I said, and what did these others say?

[JeffreyWKramer]

Smoogis gets all the attention and no one finds my "Sound of Music" joke funny.

And here I thought someone would get it, with all gay men on this thread. :)

Actually, juli and Ian both laughed out loud at that one.

[JeffreyWKramer]

No it isn't. He's a swinger. He has lots of sex outside of his marriage(so he claims) with lots of different people. Of course he's going to side with the argument that women are as horny as men.

Yeah, because, if it's something I experience on a regular basis - and which also fits known facts about female and male sexuality - why, my observations and opinions must be based on nothing other than personal bias.

Oh, and the swinging doesn't occur "outside marriage", but within my marriage. juli and I swing together. It's part of something we do as a married couple. Do we have sex with people we aren't married to? Yep. But it's part of our relationship.

It's not for everybody, and if you don't like it, that's fine and dandy - I won't invite you to any of our parties - but swinging is not considered a sign of psychopathology. Anyone who states otherwise is talking on the basis of his or her own biases, not any sort of scientific information.

[JeffreyWKramer]

I threw the "adulterer" shot at him because he insulted me w/o provocation(called me an asshole among other things). My statement about Tom had nothing to do with him.

I consider Tom a friend, or at least someone I'm on friendly terms with. I haven't had the honor of meeting him in person yet, but hope to some day. He's a good guy. If you and him have issues, work 'em out, just like he and I have talked out disagreements. If someone wants to take pot shots at him, though, I'll defend him.

I'm far from sheltered also. It's not like I grew up on a farm or in the 'burbs. I've seen lots of people screw up their lives because they can't keep their clothes on. I work with people like that.

Sure, lots of people mess up their lives via bad decisions regarding sex. But you know what? Sex isn't the problem. Most - possibly all - of those people would have messed their lives up with something else if it wasn't sex.

[Tom]

Thank you to those people who felt they needed to stand up for me here. It's both appreciated and unneccessary. I have no problem with iwarrior outside of the same problems that most of you have had with him. He's whiny and judgmental and lashes out at anyone who disagrees with him. As far as I know, we have no "history" together. If we had, iwarrior could have always come to me with whatever problem he had instead of taking his usual passive-aggressive route. I have no desire or intention to ban him since I can't ever remember him doing anything worth a banning.

For the record, iwarrior: I do not have the "cake life." I worry about getting my bills paid just like almost everyone else. Also for the record, I love the guy I'm with. I've been with him eight years and when you deride and dismiss that relationship as unimportant simply as a way to keep yourself in an argument you're clearly losing, then you've earned whatever scorn gets heaped on you for it.

Something I've seen people say to you again and again (including myself) and watched you ignore again and again, bears repeating here. People here don't care about where you live or how much money you make or even what you look like. On the internet, you are judged almost solely on how you conduct yourself. If you are consistently being judged in a negative light, then you should be examining what it is you're doing to cause that.

And since this is at least the fifth or sixth time I've said something like this (thereby earning me the "snob who doesn't deserve happiness" award from you), I'll just drop out now so you can tell me how I can't understand your hardship and everything is everyone else's fault but your own.

[west3man]

Well,yeah,it depends on who you're attracted to also. I thought it went w/o saying.

It doesn't. You never accounted for familiarity, attraction, respect, or anything else in your appraisal of women's "horniness." You basically said something like, "Women don't eat the same food I like, so they must not get hungry." I KNOW THAT'S NOT WHAT YOU SAID, but it was similarly lacking in links along the chain of logic.

That's a part of your problem. I'm not talking about when you get justifiably pissed off at people. I'm talking about when you make sweeping generalizations about things without having enough information and then feel comfortable drawing conclusions based on insufficient or faulty information.

I've seen attractive men do this a lot to women and get spurned also. Women generally don't like being seen as pieces of meat. I would think that if they were a sexual as men,they wouldn't care. They'd care more about gratification than anything.

ARGH.

I gave you an example of TWO MEN interacting in which one of them would NOT be pleased by the other grabbing his ass. Does that mean the heterosexual guy wasn't as horny as the other guy? NO. It means, among other things, that their different sexual interests make them incompatible and certainly would leave one of them very displeased about the other one grabbing his ass.

Clearly, it's not just about how horny someone is.



Look,I try to understand people's POV's ok? I just don't like being treated like shit. That's why I get pissed off. People end up dissing me because they don't like my views,I retaliate,and then everyone goes,"Oh look at that nasty,pathetic,stupid,crybaby Iwarrior. He sucks and has no life and lives in his mom's basement and blah,blah,blah" and then jump on the dogpile. It happens to me on other message boards too. People are allowed to get angry at me,but for some reason,I'm not allowed to get angry back. That's the pattern.

Yes. That's *A* pattern. Clearly I recognize that pattern, as I've repeatedly pointed it out to others. That's not the one I was talking about.

For the most part, the last several pages of this thread lacked any personal insults. A couple of people slipped but it wasn't anything like earlier in the thread. So, I was talking about the pattern of people becoming very frustrated with you for continuing to draw faulty conclusions and your ignoring the evidence they present you (and often claiming it's for reasons that I find unsupportable.)

People get frustrated with you for multiple reasons - not just the unfair ones. There is *some* validity to their claims, just like there's *some* validity to you claims about them. I'm trying to show you that a part of the problem is the way you draw conclusions based on the same information everyone else has access to.


I agree with you. Now,if I had posted that somewhere,you'd better believe I'd get smacked over the head for it.

Y'know,I bet if I had simply said that I was for gay marriage or even against it,I wouldn't have had to deal with this.

Which brings me to another problem. Conservatives give me shit because I'm a liberal. Liberals give me shit for either being too liberal or not liberal enough. It's crazy.

I also get sensitive about board politics since I've been treated unfairly for much of my life. It's like a microcosm of all those experiences.

Maybe so. However, you're wasting your time here if you're going to be completely unable or unwilling to LET GO OF THE PAST enough for productive discourse to take place.

[west3man]

I've got a question.

I know that not every time iwarrior "plays the victim card" is called-for, but is anyone in this thread willing to admit that iwarrior's been mistreated in this and other threads?

That's the part I don't get. Most of the posts I see here only seem to give a damn about their own personal stakes - direct insults to them or to their friends. Many conflicts have to do with people on both sides screwing up in one way or another. One of the biggest obstacles I see in this exchange is the unwillingness of so many to admit their own short-comings or those of their buddies while they're oh-so-capable of seeing everyone else's.*





* If you think this applies to me, feel free to support your claims. I'll listen to them. I usually do, but it's rare that someone on the other side says "You're right about *this* much, at least."

[Charles RB]

Well,yeah,but if they were horny,they wouldn't see it as harassment.

Why not? Harassment is harassment.

Doesn't it depend on who the stranger is?

Eh? They're a stranger. They're someone I don't know grabbing my arse. Whoever the stranger is, I don't know them and I don't care who they are because they're ticking me off.

[the4thpip]

Ok,swinger,adulterer,whatever You stil sleep around,so naturally you're going to disagree with my views on sex.

As for pros,I don't know,just people in psychology. I don't remember any names. I always thought that it was accepted in that field that men and women have sex for different reasons,that promiscuous sex,unhealthy mentally,and that people who do sleep around generally have self-esteem issues and are often victims of sexual abuse.


As another Psychologist on the board, I have to say that isn't "accepted in our field" at all.

[stealthwise]

Ok,swinger,adulterer,whatever You stil sleep around,so naturally you're going to disagree with my views on sex.

As for pros,I don't know,just people in psychology. I don't remember any names. I always thought that it was accepted in that field that men and women have sex for different reasons,that promiscuous sex,unhealthy mentally,and that people who do sleep around generally have self-esteem issues and are often victims of sexual abuse.


DOGPILE! I mean, er, on the one hand, your posts are... amusing, iwarrior. On the other hand, you keep giving it the old college try! :)

Speaking of college, as a former psych major, I feel it important to point out that while there is certainly some evidence to support your above claim, however, the evidence is not as wide-spanning as you have implied. It's less that people "who sleep around" have self-esteem issues and/or are victims of sexual abuse, than the other way, and even then it's not always the case either.

A person with low self-esteem MAY choose to engage in more casual sex than your "average" person, but the statistics for that (and forgive me if I don't pull out my old 3rd year psyc text, as I neither have it nor my old notebook, I'm going purely from memory of learned material), are only slightly skewed to present a positive correlation in that respect. The same goes with victims of sexual abuse, whose behaviours range all over the board and are most certainly hard to definitively determine.

[the4thpip]

If anybody cares, I just got off the plane and I'll be 5000 miles away from my boyfriend for the next 3 months or so once again because we cannot get married in the US.

[stealthwise]

If anybody cares, I just got off the plane and I'll be 5000 miles away from my boyfriend for the next 3 months or so once again because we cannot get married in the US.

3 months? Ouch. Hang tough man.

[the4thpip]

3 months? Ouch. Hang tough man.
We've been doing this for 4 years now. 2-3 months telephone and internet, then 2 weeks together. Do over. Repeat.

[stealthwise]

We've been doing this for 4 years now. 2-3 months telephone and internet, then 2 weeks together. Do over. Repeat.

Holy crap. I forgot why that is, he's from another country and can't get a visa? Is that it?

[the4thpip]

Holy crap. I forgot why that is, he's from another country and can't get a visa? Is that it?
I am from another country and can't get a visa.

[JeffreyWKramer]

As another Psychologist on the board, I have to say that isn't "accepted in our field" at all.

Hey, a fellow shrinky sort! Always good to have others here! Mucho coolness!

[stealthwise]

I am from another country and can't get a visa.

Which country? I'm sure you've said this all, and I feel particularly ignorant. Were there ever states that you could get married in?

[JeffreyWKramer]

I am from another country and can't get a visa.

Sucks to be in that situation. Best of luck to you both, of course.

[the4thpip]

Which country? I'm sure you've said this all, and I feel particularly ignorant. Were there ever states that you could get married in?
I'm from Gemrany, so yes, we could get married here, but it wouldn't be recognized in the US and for a whole range of personal and professional reasons the move would not work for us in that direction.

[stealthwise]

I'm from Gemrany, so yes, we could get married here, but it wouldn't be recognized in the US and for a whole range of personal and professional reasons the move would not work for us in that direction.

Yeah, I know that the USA has been making those moves towards no gay marriage at all and that Canada is recognized as (one of?) the first country to have gay marriages, but why have so many tv shows represented the "fake gay marriage" (ie Drew Carey)? Did that ever have basis in reality?

Anyways, I'm just thinking out loud pretty much, the whole issue is complex and completely unfair to yourself and everyone out there who deserves to be allowed to have their relationships recognized. But I guess I'm just rehashing what's been said before because I don't know what else to say.

[TCJohnson]

Not even Mass.?

(Reminds me of what John Stewart said: "This large red section here has voted for Bush. These tiny blue sections are where the rest of us will be huddled together in hiding for the next four years.")

[Crowley]

If anybody cares, I just got off the plane and I'll be 5000 miles away from my boyfriend for the next 3 months or so once again because we cannot get married in the US.
I care.

and that sucks... I'm sorry it's like that.

[Crowley]

Ok. Do you all really want to know the awful truth about me? I'll be straight with you guys.

First of all,I live at home,with my folks,not in the basement though. Some of you may have already known that.

I've never really had a romantic relationship with a woman. In fact. I've never had sex,ever.

There. I said it. Happy? Want to throw it all back in my face? Go ahead. If it will make you guys feel good about yourselves and your views,then fine.


not to be a dick, but I called you on this pages back and you dodged the question to attempt to add weight to your claims.
http://forums.comicbookresources.com/showthread.php?t=27325&page=45&pp=15

Damn dude... and you're 30?

seriously man, I would suggest therapy... and try talking to real women.

Also... move out of mom and dad's house... it tends to help in the woman department.

[stealthwise]

not to be a dick, but I called you on this pages back and you dodged the question to attempt to add weight to your claims.
http://forums.comicbookresources.com/showthread.php?t=27325&page=45&pp=15

Damn dude... and you're 30?

seriously man, I would suggest therapy... and try talking to real women.

Also... move out of mom and dad's house... it tends to help in the woman department.

Whoa whoa, there's no call for that now, hoss.

[The Real Nemo]

Well,yeah,but if they were horny,they wouldn't see it as harassment.
You say things like this, and you expect to be taken seriously?

[Crowley]

Whoa whoa, there's no call for that now, hoss.
what? i was trying to be nice...

I seriously feel bad for iwarrior

[howyadoin]

I've got a question.

I know that not every time iwarrior "plays the victim card" is called-for, but is anyone in this thread willing to admit that iwarrior's been mistreated in this and other threads?Here's the way I see it - taking somebody to task for being a prick is defensible. Taking someone to task for being weird or socially maladjusted?

Not so much.

[Spike-X]

If anybody cares, I just got off the plane and I'll be 5000 miles away from my boyfriend for the next 3 months or so once again because we cannot get married in the US.
And once again, that sucks and shouldn't have to happen just because a bunch of bigots have a hissy-fit if everybody doesn't live the way they think they should.

[Boldido]

Here's the way I see it - taking somebody to task for being a prick is defensible. Taking someone to task for being weird or socially maladjusted?

Not so much.

I'm not sure if you were defending him or not, howy.

I'm pretty confident that I'm keeping company with Koop on iwarrior's ignore list, westman, and I would have to say that 98% of the time, when iwarrior takes a message board beating, he has begged for it.

If you take a cheap shot at a beloved poster, you better be prepared to take a solid shot to your knee caps, because people around here are pretty protective.

If someone is picking on him just because he's never gotten laid, then that is mistreatment. If he posts outrageous things about women and sex and holds onto these beliefs tenaciously even in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, and someone mentions his virgin status, then no, that wouldn't qualify as mistreatment.

If he posts about how horrible racism is and takes posters to task on what he perceives to be racist beliefs, then there is no "mistreatment" in taking him to task for complaining about the racists in his workplace he was unwilling (at first) to confront. Nothing Tom said in that thread would constitute "mistreatment". When people (myself included) tried to pat him on the back once he did confront them, he responded to such positive overtures by being nasty.

Iwarrior has accused me in the past of dogpiling on him, that is the main reason I have avoided this interchange. You all really didn't need my help anyway. During one interchange we had he said that I just pick on him because I don't like him. He was half right, I don't like him, but I don't wish to add to his persecution complex. Too bad, because the temptation to enter this fray was enormous.

I agree that the guy shouldn't be picked on soley because he lives with his folks or has never had sex or doesn't have the same life experiences as many other men his age. It is not mistreatment, however, to mention these things when they are directly relevant to the argument at hand. If we are having a political discussion about alternative energy sources, I am hard pressed to think of a reason that these things would be relevant.

What has impressed me through thread after thread after thread, and I intend this merely as an observation, not an attack, is that Iwarrior doesn't seem to have a sense of humor. In a community such as this one, as well as in the real world, this makes it next to impossible to get along with people or to do well in social settings. If I am correct, then I am truly sorry for him. I would rather have someone cut off my arm than lose my sense of humor.

[Crowley]

Iwarrior decided to judge half the population by crap he read on a wrestling website. He painted women in bold brush strokes and then when asked if he'd ever been with a women he dodged the question with a rolling eyes smiley all while maintaining confusion as to why a women wouldn't like her ass grabbed if she was horny.

he also decided to tell us that anyone who isn't homosexual shouldn't give a shit about gay marriage... he then proceeded to tell one member to "get another boyfriend"... call another member an adulterer, and infer that another was a slut.

I'm not a fan of mob mentality, but Iwarrior's dishonesty and cruelty brought this on himself.

I feel bad for the guy, but he needs to get out of the house... big time.

[iwarrior]

Most people in the field who actually know a damn thing about sexuality accept that a wide variety of behaviors, while not necessarily "normal" in the statistical sense, are not in any way indicative of pathology.

But what about someone who is a womanizer,a guy who just sees women as potential sexual conquests? Isn't that pathological? That's healthy? A 14 year old girl giving oral sex to every guy in her class? That's healthy?


What was it I said, and what did these others say?

I can't find it. It must have been lost during the big wipe,but I seem to remember you not having a lot of compassion for people who are suicidal and having disdain for people who do kill themselves. I think I remember you saying that they were weak or something.

I always thought that it was accepted that suicidal people are just ill,depressed, and need help. You didn't seem to agree. I also remember getting into an exchange with you over it.

[iwarrior]

If someone came on here and said that their faith in God was important to them and I said to them over and over that it wasn't important I'd be insulting them. That's what you're doing with something I feel is important, gay rights. Then to scold me because I don't care enough about poverty without knowing me, is also insulting.

Ok fair enough.


Saying gay rights aren't important is taking a shot at a group which includes people I love.

I never said that gay rights as a whole are unimportant.


Taking a shot at a moderator and saying it doesn't matter that he'll be losing his boyfriend is shitty even if in the past he's kicked you in the balls. That he was a dick to you doesn't make your comment any less dickish.

Ok,well maybe I should have just let it go,but I've done that a lot in my life.


A truly confident person doesn't need to be arrogant. It's overcompensation for insecurity. That's what you're doing.

I don't think I'm arrogant in the least,but if you say so.


I've been on this thread since the beginning and if there's someone who thinks you've chosen the right path in your arguments and way of presenting them I've missed them. You're nit picking now, while missing the big point everyone is trying to tell you. You're not the picked on everyman.

If I was being as big a jerk as people supposedly think I am,then I'm sure I'd be banned by now.

[iwarrior]

Thank you to those people who felt they needed to stand up for me here. It's both appreciated and unneccessary. I have no problem with iwarrior outside of the same problems that most of you have had with him. He's whiny and judgmental and lashes out at anyone who disagrees with him. As far as I know, we have no "history" together. If we had, iwarrior could have always come to me with whatever problem he had instead of taking his usual passive-aggressive route. I have no desire or intention to ban him since I can't ever remember him doing anything worth a banning.

For the record, iwarrior: I do not have the "cake life." I worry about getting my bills paid just like almost everyone else. Also for the record, I love the guy I'm with. I've been with him eight years and when you deride and dismiss that relationship as unimportant simply as a way to keep yourself in an argument you're clearly losing, then you've earned whatever scorn gets heaped on you for it.

Something I've seen people say to you again and again (including myself) and watched you ignore again and again, bears repeating here. People here don't care about where you live or how much money you make or even what you look like. On the internet, you are judged almost solely on how you conduct yourself. If you are consistently being judged in a negative light, then you should be examining what it is you're doing to cause that.

And since this is at least the fifth or sixth time I've said something like this (thereby earning me the "snob who doesn't deserve happiness" award from you), I'll just drop out now so you can tell me how I can't understand your hardship and everything is everyone else's fault but your own.


Alright,well since you're dropping out of this thread,then fine. I'll just say that I don't feel that I am whiny or judgemental. Excuse me for complaining about how I'm treated.

And yeah,I do lash out at people who dick with me. Lots of people do that here,but they don't seem to get called on it as much as I do. And I don't lash out at everyone either. I honestly don't like these battles.

If this issue is causing you great suffering,then I'm sorry. By all means go fight for your cause.

As for being judged solely on conduct,I wish that was the case. When you've been called every name in the book by others on the internet,and attacked for things that have nothing to do with your posts,you don't see things that way.

[iwarrior]

I consider Tom a friend, or at least someone I'm on friendly terms with. I haven't had the honor of meeting him in person yet, but hope to some day. He's a good guy. If you and him have issues, work 'em out, just like he and I have talked out disagreements. If someone wants to take pot shots at him, though, I'll defend him.



Sure, lots of people mess up their lives via bad decisions regarding sex. But you know what? Sex isn't the problem. Most - possibly all - of those people would have messed their lives up with something else if it wasn't sex.

Well,maybe that's part of the problem. I haven't actually met anyone here yet. It's easy to hate people and quarrel with them when you only read their posts. I had a boss who was a total witch to me in e-mails,but would kiss my butt in person.

You guys are a community. I'm an outsider. That's just the way it is I guess.

And sure,promiscuous sex isn't the only way to screw up a life. I didn't say it was. I also never said that sex was bad.

[TCJohnson]

But what about someone who is a womanizer,a guy who just sees women as potential sexual conquests? Isn't that pathological? That's healthy? A 14 year old girl giving oral sex to every guy in her class? That's healthy?

So are you comparing what Kramer does to a 14 year old girl giving oral sex to every guy in her class, or are you saying he sees women as potential sexual conquests? I am a bit confused there... Either way, that's like saying somebody who disapprove of gay marriages is a homophobe who wants to kill each gay person personally.

What Kramer does is between consenting adults. He is being honest with his wife and his partners and is not hurting anybody (it could be argued he is hurting himself, but that is extreme debatable.). In your first example, you are discribing a man who is being either dishonest with his partners in which case he is hurting his partner, or he is not getting dates because he is so honest. In the second case, it is not between consenting adults and the girl is deffinitely hurting herself.

That is like comparing apples and cars.....and yes, what you said is extremely insulting.

[TCJohnson]

You guys are a community. I'm an outsider. That's just the way it is I guess.


I am very much an outside on these boards. There are many here that I respect and many here I like, but wouldn't call any of them my friends yet. So what's your point?

[iwarrior]

It doesn't. You never accounted for familiarity, attraction, respect, or anything else in your appraisal of women's "horniness." You basically said something like, "Women don't eat the same food I like, so they must not get hungry." I KNOW THAT'S NOT WHAT YOU SAID, but it was similarly lacking in links along the chain of logic.

That's a part of your problem. I'm not talking about when you get justifiably pissed off at people. I'm talking about when you make sweeping generalizations about things without having enough information and then feel comfortable drawing conclusions based on insufficient or faulty information.



ARGH.

I gave you an example of TWO MEN interacting in which one of them would NOT be pleased by the other grabbing his ass. Does that mean the heterosexual guy wasn't as horny as the other guy? NO. It means, among other things, that their different sexual interests make them incompatible and certainly would leave one of them very displeased about the other one grabbing his ass.

Clearly, it's not just about how horny someone is.





Yes. That's *A* pattern. Clearly I recognize that pattern, as I've repeatedly pointed it out to others. That's not the one I was talking about.

For the most part, the last several pages of this thread lacked any personal insults. A couple of people slipped but it wasn't anything like earlier in the thread. So, I was talking about the pattern of people becoming very frustrated with you for continuing to draw faulty conclusions and your ignoring the evidence they present you (and often claiming it's for reasons that I find unsupportable.)

People get frustrated with you for multiple reasons - not just the unfair ones. There is *some* validity to their claims, just like there's *some* validity to you claims about them. I'm trying to show you that a part of the problem is the way you draw conclusions based on the same information everyone else has access to.




Maybe so. However, you're wasting your time here if you're going to be completely unable or unwilling to LET GO OF THE PAST enough for productive discourse to take place.


Ok. Your points are well taken.

But as for evidence,a lot of these people are using personal anecdotes also. I'm not seeing any links or anything backing up what they say. At least I gave some links.

[iwarrior]

So are you comparing what Kramer does to a 14 year old girl giving oral sex to every guy in her class, or are you saying he sees women as potential sexual conquests? I am a bit confused there... Either way, that's like saying somebody who disapprove of gay marriages is a homophobe who wants to kill each gay person personally.

What Kramer does is between consenting adults. He is being honest with his wife and his partners and is not hurting anybody (it could be argued he is hurting himself, but that is extreme debatable.). In your first example, you are discribing a man who is being either dishonest with his partners in which case he is hurting his partner, or he is not getting dates because he is so honest. In the second case, it is not between consenting adults and the girl is deffinitely hurting herself.

That is like comparing apples and cars.....and yes, what you said is extremely insulting.


I wasn't talking about Jeff in that post. I was just using examples. I never said that he was a womanizer or molester.

[iwarrior]

Why not? Harassment is harassment.



Eh? They're a stranger. They're someone I don't know grabbing my arse. Whoever the stranger is, I don't know them and I don't care who they are because they're ticking me off.


But aren't there people who have sex with total strangers?

[iwarrior]

DOGPILE! I mean, er, on the one hand, your posts are... amusing, iwarrior. On the other hand, you keep giving it the old college try! :)

Speaking of college, as a former psych major, I feel it important to point out that while there is certainly some evidence to support your above claim, however, the evidence is not as wide-spanning as you have implied. It's less that people "who sleep around" have self-esteem issues and/or are victims of sexual abuse, than the other way, and even then it's not always the case either.

A person with low self-esteem MAY choose to engage in more casual sex than your "average" person, but the statistics for that (and forgive me if I don't pull out my old 3rd year psyc text, as I neither have it nor my old notebook, I'm going purely from memory of learned material), are only slightly skewed to present a positive correlation in that respect. The same goes with victims of sexual abuse, whose behaviours range all over the board and are most certainly hard to definitively determine.


I'm glad you're amused. :)


Ok,I get your point. Thank you.

And thanks for quoting me in your sig. :D I don't think that's ever happened before.

[Smoogis]

Iwarrior, I joined January of 2003 and didn't meet anyone until April of 2004. I was a member of the community long before I met anyone face to face, and I only scratched the surface (although it was a very very cool bunch of people.)

You seem like a very, very, very nice guy outside these types of threads. In these threads, you seem like a close minded jerk who lashes out at anyone who 1.) he has had past confrontations with who 2.) disagrees with him.

To be honest, and I say this with all sincerity, I can not imagine CBR without you.

[west3man]

I'm not sure if you were defending him or not, howy.

Ditto.

I'm pretty confident that I'm keeping company with Koop on iwarrior's ignore list, westman, and I would have to say that 98% of the time, when iwarrior takes a message board beating, he has begged for it.

"Beating," could mean anything from breaking down his arguments to calling him a fucking asshole, so there's nothing here for me to disagree with too strongly.

If you take a cheap shot at a beloved poster, you better be prepared to take a solid shot to your knee caps, because people around here are pretty protective.

If a beloved poster takes a shot at someone else and that someone takes a shot back once in a while, that shouldn't be too surprising, either.


If someone is picking on him just because he's never gotten laid, then that is mistreatment. If he posts outrageous things about women and sex and holds onto these beliefs tenaciously even in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, and someone mentions his virgin status, then no, that wouldn't qualify as mistreatment.

Agreed.

If he posts about how horrible racism is and takes posters to task on what he perceives to be racist beliefs, then there is no "mistreatment" in taking him to task for complaining about the racists in his workplace he was unwilling (at first) to confront.

Taking him to task can be done without calling the man an asshole or any of the many other things he was called in that thread.

There's plenty of examples of hypocrisy that various posters exhibit. Two entire threads dedicated to insulting those posters goes against the established rules of decency.

Nothing Tom said in that thread would constitute "mistreatment".

I don't really see how any reasonable person could come to that conclusion considering that Tom was among those who called iwarrior an asshole. The insults all began before iwarrior EVER began hurling them. Tom allowed this all to take place. You already know all of this, so I don't understand how you could conclude that this doesn't amount to mistreatment.

In fact, in that very thread, you challenged my claim that Tom was treating iwarrior differently than he would've any other poster by allowing people to call him names. You said then that Tom was being honest and fair, JUST LIKE HE ALWAYS WAS. Shortly after you said that, Tom (after having denied unfair treatment) ADMITTED he'd allowed people to use "tough love" on iwarrior to get him to do the right thing. He only admitted this after Nikki said the rules weren't being applied equally. THAT'S when he admitted that version of the truth. THEN YOU REMOVED your praise of him and his "fairness" after he admitted he wasn't being fair (although with "good reason"). Have you forgotten all of this?

Tom allowed that thread to degrade beyond reason AND allowed another thread which did nothing but mock warrior to continue for what I believe was dozens of pages.

All of this Tom did after having criticized another moderator, Arune, for insulting a poster on his board - a poster Arune was friends with and whom Arune believed KNEW wasn't taking the joking insults seriously. The same could NOT be said of iwarrior.

When people (myself included) tried to pat him on the back once he did confront them, he responded to such positive overtures by being nasty.

He sure did go too far in that thread. It even made it hard to continue to defend him. However, iwarrior'd already taken more than a fair amount of criticism and insult by the time any positivity showed up.

Iwarrior has accused me in the past of dogpiling on him, that is the main reason I have avoided this interchange. You all really didn't need my help anyway. During one interchange we had he said that I just pick on him because I don't like him. He was half right, I don't like him, but I don't wish to add to his persecution complex. Too bad, because the temptation to enter this fray was enormous.

I agree that the guy shouldn't be picked on soley because he lives with his folks or has never had sex or doesn't have the same life experiences as many other men his age. It is not mistreatment, however, to mention these things when they are directly relevant to the argument at hand. If we are having a political discussion about alternative energy sources, I am hard pressed to think of a reason that these things would be relevant.

What has impressed me through thread after thread after thread, and I intend this merely as an observation, not an attack, is that Iwarrior doesn't seem to have a sense of humor. In a community such as this one, as well as in the real world, this makes it next to impossible to get along with people or to do well in social settings. If I am correct, then I am truly sorry for him. I would rather have someone cut off my arm than lose my sense of humor.

I think iwarrior's demonstrated having a sense of humor. He just applies it different than many others. He's not the only poster who does that.

[Crowley]

Iwarrior...

please get therapy.

[Charles RB]

But aren't there people who have sex with total strangers?

Yes, but as far as I know that isn't initiated by said total stranger grabbing them by the arse out of the blue. People having one-night stands isn't applicable to arse-grabbing.

[iwarrior]

As another Psychologist on the board, I have to say that isn't "accepted in our field" at all.

I didn't know you were a shrink.

So sleeping around is ok? :confused: The guy who treats women like pieces of meat has no issues and is well-adjusted? The woman who sleeps with every guy she meets looking for love has no issues?

Wow. Ok. Very surprised.

Btw,what about sex addiction? And I'm not talking about Jeff.

[Crowley]

and Iwarrior... when and if you do ever have sex... please use protection.

[west3man]

and Iwarrior... when and if you do ever have sex... please use protection.

Why do you INSIST on starting shit back up?

EDIT: It's not like you could think anything productive might come out of these kinda of comments.

[Crowley]

I didn't know you were a shrink.

So sleeping around is ok? :confused: The guy who treats women like pieces of meat has no issues and is well-adjusted? The woman who sleeps with every guy she meets looking for love has no issues?

Wow. Ok. Very surprised.

Btw,what about sex addiction? And I'm not talking about Jeff.

I'm really going to try here... love and sex... two different things.

Casual sex has been happening since the dawn of man. I've had a few one night stands before and I NEVER treated the women I've been with as pieces of meat.

seriously man... leave the house.

leave.

[Crowley]

Why do you INSIST on starting shit back up?
I was just telling him to use protection... how is that starting shit?

[iwarrior]

not to be a dick, but I called you on this pages back and you dodged the question to attempt to add weight to your claims.
http://forums.comicbookresources.com/showthread.php?t=27325&page=45&pp=15

Damn dude... and you're 30?

seriously man, I would suggest therapy... and try talking to real women.

Also... move out of mom and dad's house... it tends to help in the woman department.


See what I mean?

Anyway,I'd like to have my own place,but it isn't practical for me right now. Besides,I help my parents out a lot. It's not like I wait on them hand and foot They don't seem to mind having me around. In fact,I often wonder what they'd do without me sometimes.

One thing I've found though is that at least in Pittsburgh,lots of adults live with their folks. It's not seen as a big deal. Hell,some people even envy me for it. In other countries,whole families live together for all their lives.

Pardon me for not hating my parents and for not wanting to get the hell away from them and for them not wanting to get rid of me.

[iwarrior]

Ooops! Guess who else went on my ignore list? Man,is there a capacity limit on those things?

[JeffreyWKramer]

But what about someone who is a womanizer,a guy who just sees women as potential sexual conquests? Isn't that pathological? That's healthy? A 14 year old girl giving oral sex to every guy in her class? That's healthy?

No, neither of those situations is indicative of a well-adjusted, functional personality. Nor have I ever said otherwise.

I can't find it. It must have been lost during the big wipe,but I seem to remember you not having a lot of compassion for people who are suicidal and having disdain for people who do kill themselves. I think I remember you saying that they were weak or something.

I always thought that it was accepted that suicidal people are just ill,depressed, and need help. You didn't seem to agree. I also remember getting into an exchange with you over it.

I think people who commit suicide are generally are ill, depressed and in need of help, and I also think the act of suicide is generally very selfish, and overall a really shitty thing to do if you're going to leave survivors behind. Both can be true, and having been there, I *do* have disdain for people who are not too psychotic to know better and who kill themselves rather than going to get help, thereby leaving their kids, spouse, etc. with a huge burden of guilt and pain.

Does that mean people who did that are bad, awful people? Not necessarily, but I certainly don't respect their choice in that type of situation. Committing suicide often hurts other people, and when people get hurt, that's when I draw the line between "just troubled" and "wrong."

[west3man]

I was just telling him to use protection... how is that starting shit?

Are you honestly going to try to claim you were suggesting iwarrior "use protection" so he doesn't get an STD or something, as opposed to implying that his passing along his traits would be a bad thing?

[Crowley]

Pardon me for not hating my parents and for not wanting to get the hell away from them and for them not wanting to get rid of me.

i don't hate my parents, I'm my own man... and most men have their own space.

[iwarrior]

Ok,I'll respond to this...

Iwarrior decided to judge half the population by crap he read on a wrestling website. He painted women in bold brush strokes and then when asked if he'd ever been with a women he dodged the question with a rolling eyes smiley all while maintaining confusion as to why a women wouldn't like her ass grabbed if she was horny.

Who said anything about a wrestling site. I post on one wrestling message board,and we hardly ever talk about sex,and believe it or not,there are women there. In fact,and this may surprise you,it's way more civil than this place is.


he also decided to tell us that anyone who isn't homosexual shouldn't give a shit about gay marriage... he then proceeded to tell one member to "get another boyfriend"... call another member an adulterer, and infer that another was a slut.

I never said people should care at all about it. I just said that liberals and conservatives make too much of a big deal about it,particularly conservatives,who use it as a wedge issue.


I'm not a fan of mob mentality, but Iwarrior's dishonesty and cruelty brought this on himself.

Yeah,riiiight.


I feel bad for the guy, but he needs to get out of the house... big time.

Yeah,I feel your empathy. You're just using this as an opportunity to be a jerk.

[JeffreyWKramer]

You guys are a community. I'm an outsider. That's just the way it is I guess.

How do people get to be part of the community? Act like part of the community. Listen, take other's ideas and feelings into account.

Does that mean you can't disagree? Nope. Not at all. My first posts on the Comm board consisted of me and Fenris arguing about the wrong-headed idea of trying to "cure" homosexuality via therapy. Fenris is a very bright, articulate and extremely nice guy who had been part of this community for a long time. Yet, I wasn't villified for disagreeing with him. Why? Well, first, I had my facts in line and could state them. Second, I listened to his points and when I agreed, said so, and when I disagreed, carefully responded point by point.

[Crowley]

Are you honestly going to try to claim you were suggesting iwarrior "use protection" so he doesn't get an STD or something, as opposed to implying that his passing along his traits would be a bad thing?
I don't think his views expressed here can be genetically passed on as traits... and if that were the case or that I wanted to express he was a terrible person i would have said:

"Don't breed."

Iwarrior doesn't seem to have basic understanding of sex, so I was merely stating he should be sure to use protection... lord forbid he reads some crap online about the effectiveness of pulling out.

[iwarrior]

No, neither of those situations is indicative of a well-adjusted, functional personality. Nor have I ever said otherwise.

Ok. We're straight on that.



I think people who commit suicide are generally are ill, depressed and in need of help, and I also think the act of suicide is generally very selfish, and overall a really shitty thing to do if you're going to leave survivors behind. Both can be true, and having been there, I *do* have disdain for people who are not too psychotic to know better and who kill themselves rather than going to get help, thereby leaving their kids, spouse, etc. with a huge burden of guilt and pain.

Does that mean people who did that are bad, awful people? Not necessarily, but I certainly don't respect their choice in that type of situation. Committing suicide often hurts other people, and when people get hurt, that's when I draw the line between "just troubled" and "wrong."

Well,we can agree on that.

[west3man]

Iwarrior, I joined January of 2003 and didn't meet anyone until April of 2004. I was a member of the community long before I met anyone face to face, and I only scratched the surface (although it was a very very cool bunch of people.)

You seem like a very, very, very nice guy outside these types of threads. In these threads, you seem like a close minded jerk who lashes out at anyone who 1.) he has had past confrontations with who 2.) disagrees with him.

To be honest, and I say this with all sincerity, I can not imagine CBR without you.

Smoogis, do YOU believe people unfairly lash out at iwarrior at times, as well? I haven't seen you say anything about what people have done to HIM.

[Crowley]

Yeah,I feel your empathy. You're just using this as an opportunity to be a jerk.

if I really wanted to be a jerk I'd scan thru this massive thread and find all the insults you've tossed at members here and insentive things you've said.

are you ralated to Talon?

[iwarrior]

How do people get to be part of the community? Act like part of the community. Listen, take other's ideas and feelings into account.

I try to do that. It'd be nice if people did that with me though.


Does that mean you can't disagree? Nope. Not at all. My first posts on the Comm board consisted of me and Fenris arguing about the wrong-headed idea of trying to "cure" homosexuality via therapy. Fenris is a very bright, articulate and extremely nice guy who had been part of this community for a long time. Yet, I wasn't villified for disagreeing with him. Why? Well, first, I had my facts in line and could state them. Second, I listened to his points and when I agreed, said so, and when I disagreed, carefully responded point by point.

Maybe I've spent too much time listening to talk radio,where people argue and shout at each other. That might be my problem. :D I think I might also be too dramatic and strong when I express myself.

But seriously,I haven't seen much in this thread in terms of links,quotes,or what have you. People are speaking off the tops of their heads like I am. At least I tried to back up what I said with links. I've done so in the past in political threads,here and on other boards,and people who disagree with them just dismiss them as "propaganda" and "biased" sources.

[iwarrior]

Smoogis, do YOU believe people unfairly lash out at iwarrior at times, as well? I haven't seen you say anything about what people have done to HIM.

Smoogis is ok. I haven't had any problems with her.

[JeffreyWKramer]

So sleeping around is ok?

Define the term. Is the person being sexually responsible, engaging in sex with consenting adults, and being honest and non-manipulative with his or her partners? It isn't a sign of pathology. A good many people have periods of their lives like that, and go on to establish healthy relationships or otherwise be a happy, well-adjusted member of the community. Some people would take issue with such behavior as immoral, but if nobody is harmed, it's pretty hard to call it pathological.

The guy who treats women like pieces of meat has no issues and is well-adjusted? The woman who sleeps with every guy she meets looking for love has no issues?

Who on this thread or any other has said or implied any such thing? Mistreating or manipulating others is wrong. Confusing sex and love is a sign of boundary problems and/or emotional immaturity. Either person may well have issues, and said issues could come from any number of sources.

Btw,what about sex addiction? And I'm not talking about Jeff.

Dingbats like Patrick Carnes aside, "Sex Addiction" does not exist. There is no such diagnosis. There certainly are people who engage in unhealthy, complusive sex, but referring to this as an addiction is factually unsound. At best, a pattern of compulsive sexual behavior can be compared to addiction, but this is at best a metaphor, and not a very good one. Unfortunately, too many people mistake metaphors as reality.

[Smoogis]

Smoogis, do YOU believe people unfairly lash out at iwarrior at times, as well? I haven't seen you say anything about what people have done to HIM.

Yep. People have unfairly lashed out at iwarrior at times. Believe it or not, I see these people as all being human, and can't help but lash out at someone they have prior opinions to. Unfortunately, we base our OWN opinions of others by taking each and every action they do and subconciously analyse them. The "people" you were refering to, I have prior thoughts about and see them in action more often then this silly little blob thread. Unfortunately, most of the threads I see iwarrior in has him painted in a corner being the (WARNING, HUMOR INTENT ONLY) donkey to pin the tail onto. I am thrilled whenever I come across a thread where he isn't in that roll, though.

Hi West3man!

[JeffreyWKramer]

But seriously,I haven't seen much in this thread in terms of links,quotes,or what have you. People are speaking off the tops of their heads like I am. At least I tried to back up what I said with links. I've done so in the past in political threads,here and on other boards,and people who disagree with them just dismiss them as "propaganda" and "biased" sources.
The links you did offer up, re: teen sex, were fine, but hardly authoritative, and not really presenting a very full picture of teen sexuality. The one about girls being dissatisfied with their experiences doesn't mean they weren't interested in sex, it just means they had unsatisfying sex - not surprising, with teen boys.

To use a metaphor, If I complain that Chuck Austen's comics suck, that doesn't mean I'm disinterested in comics.

Anyhow, I post stats and links and such when I have them immediately at hand, but a lot of the information about sexuality is textbook and journal stuff, and I don't think anyone wants to read page after page of text from research articles - nor do I want to take time to type them in, assuming I have them at hand. Pretty much everything I've ever said about this topic, though, can easily be confirmed by perusing standard works in the field.

[Ian Boothby]

I don't think I'm arrogant in the least,but if you say so.
Read that sentence you wrote again, see if you can find any irony in it.


If I was being as big a jerk as people supposedly think I am,then I'm sure I'd be banned by now.

No need to ban. But when you act like a jerk, people on here will call you on it. Then you have no right to complain people are against you. They aren't against you, they're against what you're saying.

[iwarrior]

Define the term. Is the person being sexually responsible, engaging in sex with consenting adults, and being honest and non-manipulative with his or her partners? It isn't a sign of pathology. A good many people have periods of their lives like that, and go on to establish healthy relationships or otherwise be a happy, well-adjusted member of the community. Some people would take issue with such behavior as immoral, but if nobody is harmed, it's pretty hard to call it pathological.


Ok. Well that's the first I've heard of that. I always thought people that slept around were missing something in their lives.


Who on this thread or any other has said or implied any such thing? Mistreating or manipulating others is wrong. Confusing sex and love is a sign of boundary problems and/or emotional immaturity. Either person may well have issues, and said issues could come from any number of sources.

It just seemed that you were thinking that promiscuous sex was ok regardless of the circumstances.


Dingbats like Patrick Carnes aside, "Sex Addiction" does not exist. There is no such diagnosis. There certainly are people who engage in unhealthy, complusive sex, but referring to this as an addiction is factually unsound. At best, a pattern of compulsive sexual behavior can be compared to addiction, but this is at best a metaphor, and not a very good one. Unfortunately, too many people mistake metaphors as reality.

Wow. Ok. What do you think of these groups?

http://www.sexaa.org

http://www.sexaddict.com

http://open-mind.org/Sex-Love.htm

http://www.sarr.org

Sex addiction is a pretty familair daytime talk show topic. I know I've seen Dr.Phil and Oprah address it. Is it just a silly pop-psych thing? What about gambling addiction or porn addiction or shopping addiction?

[iwarrior]

The links you did offer up, re: teen sex, were fine, but hardly authoritative, and not really presenting a very full picture of teen sexuality. The one about girls being dissatisfied with their experiences doesn't mean they weren't interested in sex, it just means they had unsatisfying sex - not surprising, with teen boys.

To use a metaphor, If I complain that Chuck Austen's comics suck, that doesn't mean I'm disinterested in comics.

Anyhow, I post stats and links and such when I have them immediately at hand, but a lot of the information about sexuality is textbook and journal stuff, and I don't think anyone wants to read page after page of text from research articles - nor do I want to take time to type them in, assuming I have them at hand. Pretty much everything I've ever said about this topic, though, can easily be confirmed by perusing standard works in the field.


Ok,fair enough.

At least we agree on Austen.

[west3man]

Yep. People have unfairly lashed out at iwarrior at times. Believe it or not, I see these people as all being human, and can't help but lash out at someone they have prior opinions to.

Believe it or not, I fail to see what part of that doesn't apply to iwarrior.

Unfortunately, we base our OWN opinions of others by taking each and every action they do and subconciously analyse them. The "people" you were refering to, I have prior thoughts about and see them in action more often then this silly little blob thread.

I don't know how this doesn't apply to iwarrior.

Unfortunately, most of the threads I see iwarrior in has him painted in a corner being the (WARNING, HUMOR INTENT ONLY) donkey to pin the tail onto. I am thrilled whenever I come across a thread where he isn't in that roll, though.

If you see more than iwarrior being unfair, but only take HIM to task on it, and others do the same, that seems unfair. How is that not contributing to the problem (and increasing the chances he'll end up in that "roll")?

Hi West3man!

Hi, Smoog!

[west3man]

I don't think I'm arrogant in the least,but if you say so.
Read that sentence you wrote again, see if you can find any irony in it.


If I was being as big a jerk as people supposedly think I am,then I'm sure I'd be banned by now.

No need to ban. But when you act like a jerk, people on here will call you on it. Then you have no right to complain people are against you. They aren't against you, they're against what you're saying.

Have you criticized anyone in this thread besides iwarrior? He's not the only one who's made unfair statements.

It MUST have something to do with iwarrior and not JUST what he's saying (although that surely contributes to it).

[iwarrior]

West3man would make a good lawyer. :D If I ever find a dead body in my trunk...

[Smoogis]

Believe it or not, I fail to see what part of that doesn't apply to iwarrior.



I don't know how this doesn't apply to iwarrior.

Hmm, should have probably put in a spoiler space that I was including iwarrior to the general answering of your question, shouldn't I, especially since you were asking about everyone BUT iwarrior in my view. Hmm.



If you see more than iwarrior being unfair, but only take HIM to task on it, and others do the same, that seems unfair. How is that not contributing to the problem (and increasing the chances he'll end up in that "roll")?

Because in those cases, I agree with the people against iwarrior and would rather avoid situations where I'm going "I know, but can't we all just get along and sing songs and hold hands." "Yes, I know iwarrior's being unf-" "Yes, yes, I agree with you, its just tha-"

Got enough stress, thanks. Besides, you seem to do a good job at it. Its called assuming roles.

Hi, Smoog!

How's the family?!

[iwarrior]

Ok,someone on another board,a woman, made this statement...

Men desire sex, and lust.
Women desire intimacy and love.

Agree or disagree?

[west3man]

Because in those cases, I agree with the people against iwarrior and would rather avoid situations where I'm going "I know, but can't we all just get along and sing songs and hold hands." "Yes, I know iwarrior's being unf-" "Yes, yes, I agree with you, its just tha-"

Got enough stress, thanks. Besides, you seem to do a good job at it. Its called assuming roles.

Or it's called over-simplifying.

You admit others have been unfair to him, but never (?) call them on it. There's a word for that, too.



How's the family?!

Could be better. Thanks for asking, though. How about yours?

[K'Nort]

Ok,someone on another board,a woman, made this statement...

Men desire sex, and lust.
Women desire intimacy and love.

Agree or disagree?

Disagree. Both want both.

And were you upset and venting or do you really think not living with your parents is a sign of hating each other?

[iwarrior]

Here's an example of what I deal with regularly on the internet...

http://www.bravewords.com/braveboard/index.php?act=ST&f=3&t=51298&hl=&

This is why I get touchy.

[Smoogis]

Or it's called over-simplifying.

You admit others have been unfair to him, but never call them on it. There's a word for that, too.

I tend towards over-complicating, so I'll take that as a compliment.

You probably have done so, although I dont recall in the midst of the quote unquote "brick throwing", but did you ever call iwarrior's attack on Tom over something that happened MONTHS ago? Something that most people probably had forgotten, or at least stopped thinking about?

Oh, and to whoever said Tom was an unfair mod and used the parody thread as an example: He hadn't even seen it until recently, and promptly shut it down. Try reading his one and only response to that thread. The Comm board has goofballs, the lovely lovely goofballs. And it did outlive any sort of life expectancy I imagined it. Very mean spirited, yep, but I'm not a mod.

Could be better. Thanks for asking, though. How about yours?

MUCH better than it has been, thanks.

[JeffreyWKramer]

Ok. Well that's the first I've heard of that. I always thought people that slept around were missing something in their lives.

That's like assuming that people who don't get married or have kids are missing something in their lives. Different strokes, different folks.

It just seemed that you were thinking that promiscuous sex was ok regardless of the circumstances.

There are very few things that are okay regardless of circumstances. Reading is generally fine. Reading while you're driving is a really crappy idea. Eating is fine. Eating while you're performing surgery is a really crappy idea. Sex is a good thing. Being stupid about sex, abusing others sexually and obtaining sex via manipulation or dishonesty are not good things.

Wow. Ok. What do you think of these groups?

http://www.sexaa.org

http://www.sexaddict.com

http://open-mind.org/Sex-Love.htm

http://www.sarr.org

Sex addiction is a pretty familair daytime talk show topic. I know I've seen Dr.Phil and Oprah address it. Is it just a silly pop-psych thing? What about gambling addiction or porn addiction or shopping addiction?

Well, to start with, I consider Dr. Phil to be close to an imbicile.

As to the links, the first and last one appear to be people with their hearts in the right place, but they are buying into the false metpahor of mistaking problem sexual behavior for addiction. The second one is a guy trying to market his business, and the third appears to be a bunch of Christian anti-porn crusaders trying to tie their issues into others' problems.

Gambling, porn, sex, shopping... none of these things are addictive. An addiction requires a person to be dependent upon a substance whcih changes the workings of the mind and body. Alcohol, heroin, cocaine, steroids, etc... those are addictive substances. All of the other things you mention can be the focus of a compulsion, which can indeed be a very real problem, but they are nonetheless distinct from addictions.

The term "sex addiction" was coined by Patrick Carnes as a way of publicizing himself and sellig his books and treatment program. It caught on in the pop psych crowd, but is not an official diagnosis. One of the links you provided - the third one, I think - includes a dreadful article in which the author essentially admits the concept does not fit into official diagnostic criteria, but then proposes a means of fitting it in that demonstrates mostly that she has a truly poor understanding of mental disorder diagnosis.

Many people within the pseudo-field of sexual addiction use the term to demonize any sort of sexual practice, sexual behaviors and forms of sexual expression/media they do not themselves like or think is okay, despite lack of any objective evidence such practices and behaviors are harmful. Many of the groups and individuals who use this term are funded by/associated with cultural conservative/far-right and generally anti-sex groups.

Mind you, compulsive sexual behavior can be a very real problem. The "sex addiction" movement, though, generally defines the problem in overly broad, judgmental, biased terms, more or less identifying anything sexual other than "married people or those in a committed, long-term relationship having sex once or maybe twice a week in bed in the dark" as being a problem.

Similarly, porn, shopping and gambling cannot be addictions, but can be the objects of compulsions or the focus of compulsive behavior patterns. The correct diagnosis for problem gambling is Compulsive Gambling.<