What if your sister started dating a small?

[wallyj84]

People just need to love themselves

Unless they're Smalls.

 

[Tight_N_Juicy]

Lets say a woman goes to a pick-up with the goal of "getting laid" by a decent guy (whatever her definition). If she has itsy-bitsy tits, which I find attractive incidentally, she is handicapped relative to more amply developed women in the bar though the handicap can be overcome if the right guy happens to be there. Interestingly, the itsy-bitsy dick is often "not on the table" from the outset while breasts, to an extent, are.

Oh fuck off.

Seriously.

 

[MisterB]

Oh fuck off.

Seriously.

I second, third and fourth that emotion!

C'mon Lloyd. How fucking old are you? You're coming across as a mental midget. Sheesh.

Your constant "clever to only you" word salads are way past their sell-by date. Not clever. Not cute. Just fucking annoying.

You have become the poster boy for obtuse, ignorant asshattery.

You add NADA to this thread. NADA. Go away. SERIOUSLY. GO AWAY--you are ruining another thread. Just fucking STOP!

 

[PeterGold]

I wouldn't care at all, since I didn't want to know. Who asks their sister about her boyfriends cocksize? Unless you're gay and have a small crush on him?

 

[5104]

Very interesting that people cannot deal with the concept of handicap. My guess is that they are deeply committed to the fantasy of egalitarianism. I was simply illustrating the universal application of the concept.

 

[5104]

I wouldn't care at all, since I didn't want to know. Who asks their sister about her boyfriends cocksize? Unless you're gay and have a small crush on him?

Men see each other changing for the pool or beach, urinating in the woods, etc.

 

[5104]

You add NADA to this thread. NADA. Go away. SERIOUSLY. GO AWAY--you are ruining another thread. Just fucking STOP!

Everything I'm saying is relevant to Wally's initial post. I'm explaining the germ of truth in his exaggerated, stylized perspective.

How could this thread be "ruined." It was seriously flawed from the beginning.

 

[MisterB]

Everything I'm saying is relevant to Wally's initial post. I'm explaining the germ of truth in his exaggerated, stylized perspective.

How could this thread be "ruined." It was seriously flawed from the beginning.

I did NOT say the thread is ruined. I said YOU were ruining another thread. Sheesh--reading comprehension continues to be your Achilles heel. But this response is typical--twisting it about in your mind to somehow justify what you write. You are failing. Miserably. Again.

And no, your postings here are not relevant to the OP's thread. I'll give you credit for one thing though--you've got some huge cajones; that you would post anything about the OP's "exaggerated, stylized perspective." Mirror Mirror. Who's the fairest one of all now? And, whatever does that even mean? What the hell is "exaggerated, stylized perspective?" Seriously, please explain what you were trying to convey here cuz I'm lost.

Your posts here are your typical derailing attempts, coupled with veiled insults against and general asshattery toward @Tight_N_Juicy , a FEMALE poster. That's what you do. Your postings are about YOU. Not the subject being discussed. It's always about YOU. And how YOU have to have the last word, especially when it comes to WOMEN who, gasp, don't agree with you. Or call you out about your bullshit.

And that's what happens regularly with you; you get called out about your obtuse, cute and clever-to-only-you posts, and what do you do? Yup--you immediately lash out at the person, ESPECIALLY FEMALES, rather than address the merits of the conversation. Cuz that's what asshats do when they have no cognizant/appropriate comeback--they lash out. If you are gonna posit about shit, at least have the fortitude to defend it. Otherwise, it reeks. Of desperation.

You wouldn't know a "germ of truth". The only germs you know are the word salad germs called posts you spread around these forums. You would be much better served if you would spend more time reading what's actually being discussed before you post. IF you don't understand the topic being discussed, ask for clarification. Ask questions. But please, do work on your propensity to derail threads.

And if you do decide to go off on one of your tangents in responding, at least give us some kind of perspective on how it relates to the thread's topic. And if more than one responder tells you you're off-base or asks for clarification, take that as constructive feedback and work harder to make whatever point you are trying to make and relate it back to the specific topic under discussion. If you can't, then stop, and move on. Be an adult.

This is one time in your life where you can rest assured that "Bigger is Not Better". Posting more and more is not always a good thing to do. Cuz crap is just that--crap. It stinks. To high heaven.

Quality over quantity. Or, perhaps you've heard this wonderful nugget "Less is More". Let's see fewer posts with more cognizant, salient points/arguments/discussions to the topic at hand. We will all benefit.

Shit dude, do you even have a sister? A daughter? That's what this thread IS about, as fucked up as that subject might be. YOU are the one who continues to harp about "handicaps", which is NOT what this thread is about. It is about how one might/would feel if his/her sister or daughter were to date someone who is not blessed with large-sized genitals. Period. Want to discuss "handicaps" relating to penis size? Start a thread about it.

 

[5104]

Shit dude, do you even have a sister? A daughter? That's what this thread IS about, as fucked up as that subject might be.

No, this thread is about the importance (or lack of importance) of dick size. The issue of the sister is tangential, just and example of how dick size might be or might not be important.

Yes, I have a sister. She married a high income high status fellow who coincidentally had an ample dick if my one time accidental glimpse while he relieved himself is relevant. I can report no dismay about the status of my sister's mate though I think he drinks to much.

My daughter also married a high status high income fellow. If shoe size is relevant, I fear for her safety in bed, but not status issues.

 

[5104]

I did NOT say the thread is ruined. I said YOU were ruining another thread. Sheesh--reading comprehension continues to be your Achilles heel.

If I am ruining this thread, doesn't that make the thread ruined? This doesn't seem like much of a leap of logic, hardly a reflection on my reading comprehension which I probably can't improve so late in life.

 

[1178303]

If I am ruining this thread, doesn't that make the thread ruined? This doesn't seem like much of a leap of logic, hardly a reflection on my reading comprehension which I probably can't improve so late in life.

No, it can mean the thread hasn’t quite been ruined but that’s not the point. The emphasis is on you and what you are doing.

 

[5104]

And no, your postings here are not relevant to the OP's thread. I'll give you credit for one thing though--you've got some huge cajones; that you would post anything about the OP's "exaggerated, stylized perspective." Mirror Mirror. Who's the fairest one of all now? And, whatever does that even mean? What the hell is "exaggerated, stylized perspective?" Seriously, please explain what you were trying to convey here cuz I'm lost.

I think my cajones are just average. We could get into testosterone levels which are related to cajones, but I've already been shouted down in several other threads in that regard.

I think there is a germ of truth in Wally's perspective. However, he exaggerates for effect and/or to bait people into revealing more about themselves than they realize. That is his style, his stylized perspective.

I dare say he is a sophisticated troll. He's not just into angering people for the sake of chaos, but has a point which he makes effectively, but subtly. Of course, I am just guessing in this regard and could be completely wrong.

 

[MisterB]

No, this thread is about the importance (or lack of importance) of dick size. The issue of the sister is tangential, just and example of how dick size might be or might not be important.

Yes, I have a sister. She married a high income high status fellow who coincidentally had an ample dick if my one time accidental glimpse while he relieved himself is relevant. I can report no dismay about the status of my sister's mate though I think he drinks to much.

My daughter also married a high status high income fellow. If shoe size is relevant, I fear for her safety in bed, but not status issues.

Whoosh...that's what reality sound like going right over your head. C'mon now--HERE IS THE OPENING POST FROM THE OP, VERBATIM, AND YOU AIN'T EVEN CLOSE:

How would react if your sister, daughter, or whathaveyou, started dating a Small?

Could you accept the relationship? How would it affect your relationship with her? Would you ever be able to look at her the same?

See dude? You completely and utterly supported my entire argument with this one post. You are just struggling...let me say it again--reading comprehension is important. You just don't get it. At all. Pathetic.

So, let's recap. With your words, and few I've added to fix your words to reflect accuracy and truth: No, this thread is NOT about the importance (or lack of importance) of dick size. Nor is it about The issue of the sister tangential, just and example of how dick size might be or might not be important. What is this thread about? See the OP's bolded opening post #1 above.

You failed again. Miserably. Sheesh dude. It's sad.

 

[5104]

Your posts here are your typical derailing attempts, coupled with veiled insults against and general asshattery toward @Tight_N_Juicy , a FEMALE poster. That's what you do. Your postings are about YOU. Not the subject being discussed. It's always about YOU. And how YOU have to have the last word, especially when it comes to WOMEN who, gasp, don't agree with you. Or call you out about your bullshit.

Tight and Juicy has been quite abusive or insulting to me or, at least, to my posts, usually with little or no explanation except that she rejects what I write. I make no veiled or unveiled insults against Tight and Juicy unless there was an accidental one of which I am not aware. I have requested elaboration of her position on various things with little or no success.

If you check through the thread you will see that OTHER POSTERS made it about me and, therefore, I felt impelled to clarify some things about me.

 

[MisterB]

If I am ruining this thread, doesn't that make the thread ruined? This doesn't seem like much of a leap of logic, hardly a reflection on my reading comprehension which I probably can't improve so late in life.

Verb tense is important here. Ruining means "in the process" Ruined means "completed". This thread is not ruined; you, however, are doing your utmost best to accomplish that goal. As to your "this doesn't seem like much of a leap of logic"--I've failed to see ANY logic from you. Don't know how one can leap something that doesn't exist.

One is never too old to improve one's skills. Reading comprehension can be improved at any age. I have a third grader to whom English was introduced just two years ago. She's reading/comprehending above the third-grade level. In two years! It's quite the focus of both 2nd and 3rd grades. We have regularly used the internet to find exercises to supplement and enhance her skills in understanding and comprehending what she reads. And it has worked!

I assume you have access to the Internet, no? Type in "3rd grade reading comprehension exercises" or something similar. Its been a huge help to my 3rd grader; I'm hopeful for you.

 

[5104]

So, let's recap. With your words, and few I've added to fix your words to reflect accuracy and truth: No, this thread is NOT about the importance (or lack of importance) of dick size. Nor is it about The issue of the sister tangential, just and example of how dick size might be or might not be important. What is this thread about? See the OP's bolded opening post #1 above.

Clearly, YOU wanted to know about my sister and my daughter. I was indicating that small dick size did not seem to be the case for the mates of either, though I certainly would not ask nor make efforts to know such details.

I could PROJECT myself into such a position through imagination, however. In that case, status would not be a consideration in my mind. The very small of dick (not average or marginally below average) might have mental issues such as toxic over-compensation or other unpleasant reaction formation as a result.

BTW: Who is the troll here? You seem to be over-reaching to find criticisms and then, dramatically over-stating them.

 

[5104]

Verb tense is important here. Ruining means "in the process" Ruined means "completed". This thread is not ruined; you, however, are doing your utmost best to accomplish that goal. As to your "this doesn't seem like much of a leap of logic"--I've failed to see ANY logic from you. Don't know how one can leap something that doesn't exist.

One is never too old to improve one's skills. Reading comprehension can be improved at any age. I have a third grader to whom English was introduced just two years ago. She's reading/comprehending above the third-grade level. In two years! It's quite the focus of both 2nd and 3rd grades. We have regularly used the internet to find exercises to supplement and enhance her skills in understanding and comprehending what she reads. And it has worked!

I assume you have access to the Internet, no? Type in "3rd grade reading comprehension exercises" or something similar. Its been a huge help to my 3rd grader; I'm hopeful for you.

The nitpicking above seems to confirm my suspicions about your tolling style.

 

[MisterB]

I think my cajones are just average. We could get into testosterone levels which are related to cajones, but I've already been shouted down in several other threads in that regard.

Ever wonder to yourself: Why am I being regularly shouted down in several other threads in that regard? No, I guess not. Cuz if you were able to self-reflect, you'd perhaps understand somewhat why you getting shouted down in several other threads happens on a regular basis. Self-awareness is lacking. I think you are truly clueless about just about everything you post here, cuz it's pretty much the same regurgitation, time and time again. Again, you've got access to the Internet. Google yourself some self-help books on self-awareness and personal reflection. You would benefit greatly.

I think there is a germ of truth in Wally's perspective. However, he exaggerates for effect and/or to bait people into revealing more about themselves than they realize. That is his style, his stylized perspective.

Honestly Lloyd, we just can't talk about Wally's perspective and whether or not there is a germ of truth in it. That's because you nor I are Wally. You "think" you understand his perspective, but, you just don't. And really dude, what does stylized perspective even mean? Help me out here so I can try and understand YOUR PERSPECTIVE, cuz sure ain't getting your perspective here at all, stylized or not.

I dare say he is a sophisticated troll. He's not just into angering people for the sake of chaos, but has a point which he makes effectively, but subtly. Of course, I am just guessing in this regard and could be completely wrong.

Now, this is just rich. Did you type this with a straight face? Are we being punked? All I've got is POT, MEET KETTLE!

 

[5104]

No, it can mean the thread hasn’t quite been ruined but that’s not the point. The emphasis is on you and what you are doing.

Ok. I've only ruined the thread to an extent, but I have plenty of time. Can something be "mostly ruined" or must something be ruined or not? My diction has always been a bit marginal.

Everyone else, I see, has made only sterling posts in this thread! --posts that would have made this thread an example of excellence for Centuries to come had I not embarked upon ruining it.

 

[MisterB]

Tight and Juicy has been quite abusive or insulting to me or, at least, to my posts, usually with little or no explanation except that she rejects what I write. I make no veiled or unveiled insults against Tight and Juicy unless there was an accidental one of which I am not aware. I have requested elaboration of her position on various things with little or no success.

@Tight_N_Juicy may be a lot of things, but "quite abusive" ain't one of 'em. At all. She, along with so so many others, have been more than patient with you. And they explain their positions over and over, but when their position doesn't meet yours, you lash out. You just don't stop. You push and push and push until you get negative responses from not just her, but a lot of posters. Seeing any kind of pattern here? No, you wouldn't... And c'mon, nothing you do here, nothing, is "accidental". You are purposeful. You have an agenda. And you get called out on it time after time. Again and again. You get off on it. Its kinda like SPH to you; only SPH here means "Stupid Post Humiliation". You are the poster child for SPH.

If you check through the thread you will see that OTHER POSTERS made it about me and, therefore, I felt impelled to clarify some things about me.

Other posters did not make anything about YOU. YOU have tried, like in just about every other thread you try and hi-jack, to make it about YOU. You are not clarifying anything. You are just being strident and obtuse for the sake of it. It's your mantra. It's your schtick. OWN IT.