Ya see this bar? I built this bar with my bare hands. Found the finest wood in the county, gave it more love and care than my own child, but do they call me McGregor the bar builder? no… NO!"
This is the most hilarious thing I’ve ever read, especially since it puts me and about seven other people of various ages and sexes into the same category. However, it does give me a quote to add to my comment in the “Subtle Tells” thread about all or nothing, black or white thinking. Thanks!
I know, right? I just wasn’t thrilled by it enough, instead of just realizing I was being an immature idiot. Now I’ll really have to start even wearing V-neck shirts if I’m ever to get back in the exhibitionist game again. Oh, and alert my old softball buddies that they’re verging on a life of potential pervy crime and just don’t know it, lo these two past decades. Just think of what granny or grandpa could pull off now!
Well, it doesn’t have to be just a simple line. They could get slightly whimsical and flamboyant. It could be a wang-doodle.
How many times do you have to lie to be a liar? How many fires do you have to set to be an arsonist? How many times to you have to steal to be a thief? How many times do you have to rape to be a rapist? Or is this just another case of “but it’s cute when I do it?” I know you don’t like thinking of yourself as an exhibitionist, but what do you call someone who willingly, even happily based on your description of the incident, displayed their nether regions to people who may or may not have been willing viewers?
Singing, “Some of these things are not like the other!”
No, you are misrepresenting what I said. Never once did I call it “cute,” me doing it or otherwise. I’ve said it was stupid, immature and silly, as well as also believing that it was thoughtless and insensitive. Hence the part of not ever doing it again, versus your ascribing motives to me (another hit for the other thread – I’m on a roll!) that the only reason I’ve refrained as an adult is because it wasn’t thrilling enough. Trust me, if you’re a woman who is well endowed, you learn very quickly what elicits responses, and since I’ve always eschewed those too, you are once again wrong.
But to address your point… one lie makes you a liar? I’ve known some of the best, most moral people I’ve ever seen, yet some of them have slipped up and told a lie upon occasion. Rather than thinking that makes them a liar, I believe that makes them human. Are you not? Do you not think anyone can ever be rehabilitated? Because this all sounds suspiciously like those folks who spout the platitude that “once a cheat, always a cheat,” even though in some cases, that’s proven to be demonstrably false.
Regardless, I no more think you seriously believe what you’re championing now. I think when confronted with a real world example, you’ve done a classic Dope move of digging in your heels instead of going, “Meh, maybe there are degrees of bad judgment and many aren’t lifelong patterns. Perhaps there are one and dones.” If not, I’ll defer to the same feelings I’ve expressed in that other thread.
And maybe the poll I’ll start in IMHO.
Your disapproval of “exhibitionists” is not troubling to me in the least. I find it hilarious!!
It’s a real shame the statute of limitations has run in faithfool’s case. The world would be a much safer place if she and her gang of sex offenders were taken off the streets :rolleyes:
Indeed.
Should an independent arbiter be needed, I’d like to offer my services to look over the “evidence”. Faithfool, feel free to submit jpegs and I’ll make my ruling.
Should I round up the other hooligans also? It may take some time, as I’m sure they’re out there up to more evil shenanigans. Like going 5 miles under the posted speed limit, telling their wife they don’t look fat in those pants and taking the last donut at the church social without leaving any change. Let me know.
The fact that you refer to your sex crimes as “shenanigans” and your accomplices as “other hooligans” just proves Scumpup’s point that you are an incorrigible criminal. **Kayaker ** should consider your remorseless attitude before making his ruling.
And don’t you dare try to sway me!
looks up “sway”
:o
I know. < hangs head > I’ll accept just gruel from now on and you can brand me with whatever mark someone of my lowly stature deserves. No more naughty times for me. For further discussion, please forward any posts to Arizona, care of Mr. Joe. 
Nah. If anybody is digging in, I’d say it’s you. You’re last couple-three posts are Bill Clintonian examples of “I’m sorry even though what I did wasn’t realio, trulio, no-fooling wrong. It was only kind-of sort-of if squint your eyes and hold your mouth just right wrong, and mostly I am sorry that you are unable to see that.” But, my disapproval of weenie-waggers and other exhibitionists is my emotional response to people who do things like that. It carries no force of law. OTOH, such people are not entitled to my approval. If it bothers you to know that I disapprove of you flapping your tits at Buffalo Bill, then perhaps you give my good opinion of you too much weight.
Every time Scumpup says “weenie waggers,” I think of Church Lady from SNL.
Look, I hope he isn’t one of the athletes who rape women at college, and chances are he won’t be. It just sucks that there might have been consequences but they got dropped (not clear why) and yet again someone gets away with something. Will this encourage him to try to get away with other things? I hope not.
Actually, I picked the term up from James Ellroy in LA Confidential or another from that series of novels. It was usually used along with “pantie sniffers” and others in a litany of disparaging terms the cop characters used to describe people they considered to be perverts. So, don’t think Church Lady. think more, although this isn’t quite right either, of Joe Friday.
When one thinks that starting a fire for the grill makes the fire-starter an arsonist, the problem isn’t with the fire-starter.
Yeah, but when you are wagging the weenie, not grilling it, then I guess you aren’t holding a cook-out.
Oh for fuck’s sake, you have GOT to be kidding me. Seriously, going from “ha ha, dude, let’s see if they’ll catch this!” and outright rape. :rolleyes:
Good god, as I stated before, my uncle once mooned his neighbor, who was a long time friend. He was just a joker.
Some of you need some perspective. What the kid did was crass, yes. Criminal? Perverted? C’mon. What the streaking fad back in the 70s? Sometimes nudity is meant to be funny, not pervy.
Way to back me up on that “deranged” observation there, pup.
Couple things are wrong here, like most of what you post. Facts in attendance…
-
I’ve know that what we all did was, to repeat, stupid, immature, silly, short-sighted and insensitive. That’s why I never did it again and have said so since the beginning. You trying to paint that as anything besides what I’ve stated, is part of the same delusion that allows you to believe there’s no difference between one lie and a liar.
-
Of course your response is emotional. It certainly isn’t factual or rational, so I’m glad that you’ve owned up to at least one thing in this thread. Keep up the good work and you might hit two before the night is out.
-
I appreciate that my disapproval of your beliefs has now got you commenting on my ass and tits. For some reason, that delights me to no end. If you need more fodder for later, hon, just let me know.
-
And finally, you have demonstrated no good opinions for me to give any weight. Do you ever have any?