sev-mard Posted January 27, 2004 Report Share Posted January 27, 2004 Unless your last name is Crusi-an or cruzian, he may not be intrested...just giving you a heads up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
allarmeniangirl Posted January 28, 2004 Author Report Share Posted January 28, 2004 .....How about my handsome avatar, now he is a total DILF! ur avatar..........can u say........HOTT. hehe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angel4hope Posted January 28, 2004 Report Share Posted January 28, 2004 sorry im about to burst if i dont say this, tom cruise looks gay....i dont think hes all that cute and crap...im not interested in fake-ness...id rather have a realistic lookin man who has his imperfections and his uniqueness....i dont like all this conformity crap....i like a guy 2 be different...not another GQ magazine guy..i used to think like that too...oh this and that actor is hott, that abercrombie dude looks sizzlin...but no i c that there's no substance and no point...so id rather be fascinated by an actual person...lol not obsessed...jut if i were to appreciate one's looks...u need a man to look manly...not have his eyebrows waxed and imperfections airbrushed...so bring on the stubble! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
allarmeniangirl Posted January 28, 2004 Author Report Share Posted January 28, 2004 sorry im about to burst if i dont say this, tom cruise looks gay....i dont think hes all that cute and crap...im not interested in fake-ness...id rather have a realistic lookin man who has his imperfections and his uniqueness....i dont like all this conformity crap....i like a guy 2 be different...not another GQ magazine guy..i used to think like that too...oh this and that actor is hott, that abercrombie dude looks sizzlin...but no i c that there's no substance and no point...so id rather be fascinated by an actual person...lol not obsessed...jut if i were to appreciate one's looks...u need a man to look manly...not have his eyebrows waxed and imperfections airbrushed...so bring on the stubble! hmm angel <_< looks gay?? how? not that i'd wanna date him lol. that but i think he's a good looking guy. besides, he's an actor/in the entertainment business, he needs to look good. waxing eyebrows??? men??? egh....as in eww Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gevo27 Posted January 28, 2004 Report Share Posted January 28, 2004 Well, im not commenting on cruis' looks, but angel thats a smart thing to say.... apres kuro... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anonymouse Posted January 28, 2004 Report Share Posted January 28, 2004 sorry im about to burst if i dont say this, tom cruise looks gay....i dont think hes all that cute and crap...im not interested in fake-ness...id rather have a realistic lookin man who has his imperfections and his uniqueness....i dont like all this conformity crap....i like a guy 2 be different...not another GQ magazine guy..i used to think like that too...oh this and that actor is hott, that abercrombie dude looks sizzlin...but no i c that there's no substance and no point...so id rather be fascinated by an actual person...lol not obsessed...jut if i were to appreciate one's looks...u need a man to look manly...not have his eyebrows waxed and imperfections airbrushed...so bring on the stubble! They are properly referred to as 'Metrosexual'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hyebruin Posted January 28, 2004 Report Share Posted January 28, 2004 girl.....angel.....stubble IS seXy!!!!! nor es ed imatze??? and contrary to popular belief it is not tooooo rough either!! it's like harmless sandpaper on velvet! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Armen Posted January 28, 2004 Report Share Posted January 28, 2004 (edited) Was that the "snap my clause" thing, Anileve...? ----------------------------------------------- Dear in hopes of attention, You shouldn't have used that phrase Jack of all asses, it is doubledged. First and foremost allow me to thank you for a free psychoanalysis for it is almost amusing to hear a formation of your detached character based one ones manifested, fictional views. This part is a clear statement of fictional views of a detached character. /Was that your line Ani?/ I can safely say that I generalize or assume for it is a commonly human trait, however when dealing with an individual on a personal bases I refrain from placing him in any particular group or category. I believe the term "rat clan" is invented by you. So, you're simply lieing. I don’t believe that I ever uttered such misrepresented words as “I view men and women as groups.” These are your words from couple of posts before: "Laughing at someone else is an excellent way of learning how to laugh at oneself; and questioning what seem to be the absurd beliefs of another group is a good way of recognizing the potential absurdity of many of one's own cherished beliefs. In fact I was advocating that the barriers should be broken, since it is a dominant portion of the society that assigns them a certain label and a guideline, and chooses individual rights for one and none for the other, thus actually separating them in groups. I am the one that believes into annulling the barriers of gender specification or differentiation. The whole essence of the "woman question" is that once the barriers are gone we realy become opposing groups with some minor grey area in between. And that leads to mutual estrangement. And those in grey area just adjust to reality. The question of man-woman relationship cannot be solved neither on physical nor on astral level (right counsciousness comes from astral level). This question together with the whole bunch of negative impulses of our times can be delt with on spiritual level. I was advocating equality There can't be total equalty on phisical and astral world. You can try to minimize the gap, which already happened. So, when you want equalty it litteraly means that you want to topple the system. Well Armen, I don’t believe that we familiarized ourselves well enough for you to speak of fondling my excited thoughts. I don't view internet as a real life situation, so this is just anybodies thought that's floating on the net. If you don't like it disregard it. Conducting a psychology research? And you actually present this claim after you’ve made a poor attempt at my psychoanalysis? Besides I don’t really need to conduct an experiment, it is quite clear that no effort is necessary when it comes to certain individuals who are in possession of an inferiority complex and exploit certain opinions of others beyond their original intent. And I believe that it stems from a personal agenda. Agenda? I can refrain from talking about men-woman rights/equalty issues during my whole presence on the forum. Can you make such a commitment? And regarding psychoanalysis,I believe it's this one. Besides, interestingly enough you speak of me generalizing yet in your post you seem to take an authority of acting as a representative of the male forum members, did you conduct a survey on how many men I pissed off? So far I know of only one… OK. I agree with this one. Let's see if I remain the only one who's pissed. Perhaps your frequency needs an increase in voltage, since it seems to be a little on the limp side. Yes, I wouldn't mind some voltage. Since, we're in argumentation...Do you have any other suggestions. Well thanks for the compliment; I’ll make sure to use you as my reference when I am applying for the job. I think Klara Tsetkin would suit you more. Edited January 28, 2004 by ArmenSarg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anileve Posted January 28, 2004 Report Share Posted January 28, 2004 Was that the "snap my clause" thing, Anileve...? Well something tells me that you know the answer to this, since you are so good at analyzing me. And look, I've changed my avatar especially for you, I know that it would cater to your taste. You shouldn't have used that phrase Jack of all asses, it is doubledged. Wait would that make me Jack of YOU then? I used that phrase simply because you've listed it under your nickname, or did you forget in the heat of your emotions? This part is a clear statement of fictional views of a detached character. /Was that your line Ani?/ If it means that my views are detached from yours than I welcome the clause. I believe the term "rat clan" is invented by you. So, you're simply lieing. The “rat clan” formed before the term came into existence, I just gave it a title. Individuals that subject themselves to any clans or cults give up their privileges of being considered individuals, thus will be classified as a group. Subordinating yourself under a doctrine of a sole individual falls into a category of a clan. Therefore I am not lying, just stating the obvious. These are your words from couple of posts before: "Laughing at someone else is an excellent way of learning how to laugh at oneself; and questioning what seem to be the absurd beliefs of another group is a good way of recognizing the potential absurdity of many of one's own cherished beliefs. Aha, in that quote I believe that it was obvious that I was implying the phrase “absurd beliefs of another group”which was aimed at YOUR views of men and women being separate groups, evident in your outlook on women. The whole essence of the "woman question" is that once the barriers are gone we realy become opposing groups with some minor grey area in between. And that leads to mutual estrangement. And those in grey area just adjust to reality. The question of man-woman relationship cannot be solved neither on physical nor on astral level (right counsciousness comes from astral level). This question together with the whole bunch of negative impulses of our times can be delt with on spiritual level. Estrangement results from lack of understanding and acceptance of change. There can't be total equalty on phisical and astral world. You can try to minimize the gap, which already happened. So, when you want equalty it litteraly means that you want to topple the system. Physical and astral level have been long penetrated with the help of science and education. Toppling the system is an offspring of historical evolution, inevitable occurrence with ever changing standards and living conditions. Agenda? I can refrain from talking about men-woman rights/equalty issues during my whole presence on the forum. Can you make such a commitment? I don't think so, unless you are the founding father of the forum constitution. And regarding psychoanalysis,I believe it's this one. I am glad to know that you took time to browse through my posts, however I see no relevance here. OK. I agree with this one. Let's see if I remain the only one who's pissed. Well dear, I hope you are prepared because its a lonely world out there Yes, I wouldn't mind some voltage. Since, we're in argumentation...Do you have any other suggestions. How about an electric shock therapy? I think Klara Tsetkin would suit you more. Thank you kindly for your advice regarding comrade Tsetkin, but I shall only consider it if you pair up with your confederate Rush Limbaugh. Something tells me that you 2 will instantly connect. And while we are at it, may I suggest a book for you? http://www.resourcehr.com/Images/002.gif Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Armen Posted January 28, 2004 Report Share Posted January 28, 2004 (edited) I've changed my avatar especially for you, I know that it would cater to your taste. Ah, Medusa Gorgona. Nice to meet you. The ancient Greeks knew how to fight those things. You look in the mirror and don't look at them. The meaning is if you oppose them on physical and astral level you'll become like them, and therefore will lose the battle. So you must fight their spirit, which is reflected in the mirror. I used that phrase simply because you've listed it under your nickname, or did you forget in the heat of your emotions? You missed my point, nevermind. Estrangement results from lack of understanding and acceptance of change. Physical and astral level have been long penetrated with the help of science and education. Toppling the system is an offspring of historical evolution, inevitable occurrence with ever changing standards and living conditions. Nighther physical nor astral level have been penetrated by science. We don't know what's the smallest material unit and where is the end of universe (biggest material unit). Same goes for the astral level. We don't know the source of our thoughts. As far as the evolution is concerned, I agree with you that sometime women are gonna be in control. But presently, some of the thoughts that you always bring forward are the tools with which the negative impulse of our times is accelerating the process of evolution, which will bring to the abortion of man's mission in this world. Every man has a natural need to protect. Some of us have it in passive way and hide it because of the present social behaviour. When you say "we don't need your protection" you're pulling the rug under our feet (actually, this is the cause of homosex impulse). And by doing this you're contributing to the process of mutation of evolution. The ultimate goal of man's mission in this world and the impulse of Christ is the spiritual self-sacrifice. And the need for protection is its crucial component of astral level. By rejecting to accept this need you're simply betraying a fellow human being, who is fighting against his evil self. Well dear, I hope you are prepared because its a lonely world out there Let's see how you keep your promises Edited January 28, 2004 by ArmenSarg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anileve Posted January 29, 2004 Report Share Posted January 29, 2004 The ancient Greeks knew how to fight those things. You look in the mirror and don't look at them. The meaning is if you oppose them on physical and astral level you'll become like them, and therefore will lose the battle. So you must fight their spirit, which is reflected in the mirror. Beautiful analogy Armen, however I don't know if I would agree with it. It is the idea with a misogynistic basis that relates to the image of the venomous woman-the woman who uses poisons, who has a relationship with a venomous or demonic animal, or who is herself poisonous. Think of a serpent who subjected the “first” biblical woman to the “Original Human Sin”. The venomous woman is an image of feminine power reflected in masculine fear. It is the power of seduction and manipulation that women are so feared for, yet it is the power that men provide them with. So to somehow lift the guilt and conceal the weakness men for decades have advocated the satanic power that women possess by associating them in various ways with venomous animals or creatures. Delegating the blame, to release personal demons and clear the heavy conscience, my guess. As far as the evolution is concerned, I agree with you that sometime women are gonna be in control. But presently, some of the thoughts that you always bring forward are the tools with which the negative impulse of our times is accelerating the process of evolution, which will bring to the abortion of man's mission in this world. Every man has a natural need to protect. Some of us have it in passive way and hide it because of the present social behaviour. When you say "we don't need your protection" you're pulling the rug under our feet (actually, this is the cause of homosex impulse). And by doing this you're contributing to the process of mutation of evolution. The ultimate goal of man's mission in this world and the impulse of Christ is the spiritual self-sacrifice. And the need for protection is its crucial component of astral level. By rejecting to accept this need you're simply betraying a fellow human being, who is fighting against his evil self. YES!!!!!!!! Precisely, finally! Oh I have waited for this for so long, a final admittance that proved my theory correct. Thank you! It really is all very simple, the intimidation, the battles, the disagreements, the restraint of the rights and freedom. I have argued this for a very long time, and to finally have a man come up to the same conclusion is indeed a victory for me. It really succumbs to one theoretic focal point. The insignificance complex. The fear of the loss of purpose in the environmental spectrum. It is sense of invalidity that men fear. The common belief ascribed by the society throughout history for men's primary function as the protector and a provider. Once that role is fractured, fear sets in evoking the need to fight for one's validity through every measure possible by restriction and assigning satanic images to the fear factor. It's very hard to accept that purpose varies from individual to individual without the prescribed guidelines. That is why one subjects himself to religion or God to define a certain purpose in life, without purpose it's hard to accept ones existence, for you must define your own place in the equation of life. It's much easier to live being confined to certain regulations, titles, labels and orders, without them a human is lost in the complexity of life. Let's see how you keep your promises No worries, I always keep my promises. And one of them is that you won't be able to remain in the same state for long. It is impossible to stay pissed of at me for very long. After all I am a woman, I have my ways, one of them is the ability to vanquish the untamed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Armen Posted January 29, 2004 Report Share Posted January 29, 2004 Beautiful analogy Armen, however I don't know if I would agree with it. It is the idea with a misogynistic basis that relates to the image of the venomous woman-the woman who uses poisons, who has a relationship with a venomous or demonic animal, or who is herself poisonous. Think of a serpent who subjected the “first” biblical woman to the “Original Human Sin”. The venomous woman is an image of feminine power reflected in masculine fear. It is the power of seduction and manipulation that women are so feared for, yet it is the power that men provide them with. So to somehow lift the guilt and conceal the weakness men for decades have advocated the satanic power that women possess by associating them in various ways with venomous animals or creatures. Delegating the blame, to release personal demons and clear the heavy conscience, my guess. Satanic power is present both in man and woman. I believe that there are 3 levels of human nature, as I have pointed out many times, physical, astral and spiritual. Evil hits the woman mostly on astral level and the man mostly on spiritual level. That's why when hit by these creatures women mostly lose their sexual moral values, while man lose all the values, because man's "I"-self gets the damage. I would say that we're on the front of this battle and you're in the rear. That's why when our rear is weak, we think the you betray us. The insignificance complex. The fear of the loss of purpose in the environmental spectrum. It is sense of invalidity that men fear. After we lose it completely. You're the next. Because there's nobody else there. It's just us and you. No worries, I always keep my promises. And one of them is that you won't be able to remain in the same state for long. It is impossible to stay pissed of at me for very long. After all I am a woman, I have my ways, one of them is the ability to vanquish the untamed. You ignored the whole "bla, bla, bla" I wrote about god and things, didn't you It all depends on what you call "vanquish". I don't find any kind of satisfaction in presenting myself as untamed. Was nice talking to you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.