Forum Personal Insults - Name Calling

[Major]

First topic message reminder :

Every forum has its PERSONAL INSULTERS why???????

It is obvious by reading forums they revel in it, enjoy the nastiness, WHY do you think they do it?

Insecurity
Inadequacy
Crap sex life
Still in the closet
Being henpecked at home
Nastiness bred into them
Illness
Bitterness for their own failure in life
Jealousy
Avarice

or other things.

Be nice, you know it makes sense..

[Guest]

To be fair to Rags, the anus is an orifice structured for the purpose of excretia. Not inserting things.  And the NHS have pages dedicated to the medical complications caused by anal sex.

Other orifices used for sex do allow for input and output.

Possible medical problems which are not often, so you should be honest in that regard, which like anything has possible complications. Second it is also poor when it usually asssociated anal sex with homosexuals and yet as proven before to you only around 30 od percent of homosexual men engage in anal sex, the same number as hetrosexual men and women, in fact even more in women. So the sexual act should not even be associated to show distain or repulse people have against homosexuals as it often is. Where you certainly do not see the same for hetrosexuals who do. So to go off sexual acts to show dislike to homosexuality is nothing short of a falsehood, it is either a religious distain or more of a male to male rejection of the sexual attraction, though in some cases  this is the opposite and actually they are attracted.
So the reasoning to go off sexual acts is a myth really to be opposed or against two of the same sex in love, even more so when it comes to two women, of which you willo find the amount of men against two men dramatically decreases in being opposed againwst, to then actually being turned on.

[Raggamuffin]

To be fair to Rags, the anus is an orifice structured for the purpose of excretia. Not inserting things.  And the NHS have pages dedicated to the medical complications caused by anal sex.

Other orifices used for sex do allow for input and output.

Possible medical problems which are not often, so you should be honest in that regard, which like anything has possible complications. Second it is also poor when it usually asssociated anal sex with homosexuals and yet as proven before to you only around 30 od percent of homosexual men engage in anal sex, the same number as hetrosexual men and women, in fact even more in women. So the sexual act should not even be associated to show distain or repulse people have against homosexuals as it often is. Where you certainly do not see the same for hetrosexuals who do. So to go off sexual acts to show dislike to homosexuality is nothing short of a falsehood, it is either a religious distain or more of a male to male rejection of the sexual attraction, though in some cases  this is the opposite and actually they are attracted.
So the reasoning to go off sexual acts is a myth really to be opposed or against two of the same sex in love, even more so when it comes to two women, of which you willo find the amount of men against two men dramatically decreases in being opposed againwst, to then actually being turned on.

Irrelevant to Zack's post and also to my posts on the subject.

[nicko]

Eddie, when I read your post about dressing up, licking chocolate etc, I swear I had a slight "twitch"

[Guest]

Possible medical problems which are not often, so you should be honest in that regard, which like anything has possible complications. Second it is also poor when it usually asssociated anal sex with homosexuals and yet as proven before to you only around 30 od percent of homosexual men engage in anal sex, the same number as hetrosexual men and women, in fact even more in women. So the sexual act should not even be associated to show distain or repulse people have against homosexuals as it often is. Where you certainly do not see the same for hetrosexuals who do. So to go off sexual acts to show dislike to homosexuality is nothing short of a falsehood, it is either a religious distain or more of a male to male rejection of the sexual attraction, though in some cases  this is the opposite and actually they are attracted.
So the reasoning to go off sexual acts is a myth really to be opposed or against two of the same sex in love, even more so when it comes to two women, of which you willo find the amount of men against two men dramatically decreases in being opposed againwst, to then actually being turned on.

Irrelevant to Zack's post and also to my posts on the subject.

Really based on what reasoning that of your own personalm view?
He is making a poor case, saying some things are bad to do, well, so are many things bad for are body but we do them and yet many people are not stigmatized for them, so his reasoning was weak and poor. Even worse its only a possbility there maybe complications, which you can get complications off intercourse, shall we stop that also?

[Raggamuffin]

Irrelevant to Zack's post and also to my posts on the subject.

Really based on what reasoning that of your own personalm view?
He is making a poor case, saying some things are bad to do, well, so are many things bad for are body but we do them and yet many people are not stigmatized for them, so his reasoning was weak and poor. Even worse its only a possbility there maybe complications, which you can get complications off intercourse, shall we stop that also?

He was saying what the purpose of it was, and he was talking about medical damage from misuse. There was nothing in his post about anything else.

[Guest]

Really based on what reasoning that of your own personalm view?
He is making a poor case, saying some things are bad to do, well, so are many things bad for are body but we do them and yet many people are not stigmatized for them, so his reasoning was weak and poor. Even worse its only a possbility there maybe complications, which you can get complications off intercourse, shall we stop that also?

He was saying what the purpose of it was, and he was talking about medical damage from misuse. There was nothing in his post about anything else.

OMG it astounds me your lack of knowledge and I have had this debate before with zack and left it with his tail between his legs last time, beause he knew it was poor. Again its a possibility so say missuse is false as many people do things to their bodies daily and again are not stigmatized, yet people take a sexual act, which is wrongly associated to homosexuals as a view to stigmatize the point you miss. So the purpose of the anus is what ever we want it to be, just as it is the same with the rest of our bodies, something you fail to grasp

[Major]

It's clearly not what it was designed for. Before anyone starts screeching about "homophobia", it applies to heterosexuals too.

Designned?

Who was the designer?

How can you say something was not designed if it has nobody that designed it?

Do you mean it did not evolve for that purpose?

Have you never had oral sex?

Didge, you are again overstepping the decorum/propriety mark which shows you are of low decency, I hope you will stop these personal attacks and insults to people and particularly Miss Ragga who prefers constructive debate.

[Raggamuffin]

He was saying what the purpose of it was, and he was talking about medical damage from misuse. There was nothing in his post about anything else.

OMG it astounds me your lack of knowledge and I have had this debate before with zack and left it with his tail between his legs last time, beause he knew it was poor. Again its a possibility so say missuse is false as many people do things to their bodies daily and again are not stigmatized, yet people take a sexual act, which is wrongly associated to homosexuals as a view to stigmatize the point you miss. So the purpose of the anus is what ever we want it to be, just as it is the same with the rest of our bodies, something you fail to grasp

It's you who needs to read up on biology and the function of the body Didge. It's nothing to do with stigmas. You're the one introducing red herrings. The purpose is clearly not for sex.

[Guest]

Designned?

Who was the designer?

How can you say something was not designed if it has nobody that designed it?

Do you mean it did not evolve for that purpose?

Have you never had oral sex?

Didge, you are again overstepping the decorum/propriety mark which shows you are of low decency, I hope you will stop these personal attacks and insults to people and particularly Miss Ragga who likes constructive debate.

Really, then report me to admin if you think I am, if not stop bothering me with your inane drivel

[Raggamuffin]

Designned?

Who was the designer?

How can you say something was not designed if it has nobody that designed it?

Do you mean it did not evolve for that purpose?

Have you never had oral sex?

Didge, you are again overstepping the decorum/propriety mark which shows you are of low decency, I hope you will stop these personal attacks and insults to people and particularly Miss Ragga who prefers constructive debate.

Thank you Stormee. This has been sorted out on another thread when Didge kept on repeating the same question. He was asked to stop.

[Guest]

OMG it astounds me your lack of knowledge and I have had this debate before with zack and left it with his tail between his legs last time, beause he knew it was poor. Again its a possibility so say missuse is false as many people do things to their bodies daily and again are not stigmatized, yet people take a sexual act, which is wrongly associated to homosexuals as a view to stigmatize the point you miss. So the purpose of the anus is what ever we want it to be, just as it is the same with the rest of our bodies, something you fail to grasp

It's you who needs to read up on biology and the function of the body Didge. It's nothing to do with stigmas. You're the one introducing red herrings. The purpose is clearly not for sex.

I do not need to read up on anything because we do many things and have adpated our bodies to be able to do many things. Where is the rule book that says the purpose is not for sex, when for thousands of years people have had sex this way and not only in humans either? Clearly it seems biology is not your striong points. All I am seeing is the backward upbringing of religion you have received that has made you very anal yourself.

[Raggamuffin]

Didge, you are again overstepping the decorum/propriety mark which shows you are of low decency, I hope you will stop these personal attacks and insults to people and particularly Miss Ragga who likes constructive debate.

Really, then report me to admin if you think I am, if not stop bothering me with your inane drivel

There's no need to get arsy with Stormee - he's merely pointing out that you're out of line.

[Raggamuffin]

It's you who needs to read up on biology and the function of the body Didge. It's nothing to do with stigmas. You're the one introducing red herrings. The purpose is clearly not for sex.

I do not need to read up on anything because we do many things and have adpated our bodies to be able to do many things. Where is the rule book that says the purpose is not for sex, when for thousands of years people have had sex this way and not only in humans either? Clearly it seems biology is not your striong points. All I am seeing is the backward upbringing of religion you have received that has made you very anal yourself.

Clearly, you know know nothing about bodily functions and the structure of body organs. Go and read up about it before you start bleating on about religion, which has nothing to do with my posts.

[Guest]

I do not need to read up on anything because we do many things and have adpated our bodies to be able to do many things. Where is the rule book that says the purpose is not for sex, when for thousands of years people have had sex this way and not only in humans either? Clearly it seems biology is not your striong points. All I am seeing is the backward upbringing of religion you have received that has made you very anal yourself.

Clearly, you know know nothing about bodily functions and the structure of body organs. Go and read up about it before you start bleating on about religion, which has nothing to do with my posts.

Really do I, then do you never use your tongue in someone else's mouth rags? I have nothing to read up on, its just embarressing watching you show up how badly you fail to understand anything. So again it comes down to many things we can do ourselves, there is no rule book just advise whether something can be harmful possible or not. You seem to think people have to be anal like yourself. No they do not, but one thinks is for sure, remove that lump of coal that is stuck up there, as I am sure it is a diamond now.

[Raggamuffin]

Clearly, you know know nothing about bodily functions and the structure of body organs. Go and read up about it before you start bleating on about religion, which has nothing to do with my posts.

Really do I, then do you never use your tongue in someone else's mouth rags? I have nothing to read up on, its just embarressing watching you show up how badly you fail to understand anything. So again it comes down to many things we can do ourselves, there is no rule book just advise whether something can be harmful possible or not. You seem to think people have to be anal like yourself. No they do not, but one thinks is for sure, remove that lump of coal that is stuck up there, as I am sure it is a diamond now.

Don't start asking personal questions again because I won't tolerate that.

Read up on the subject before you make a fool of yourself again.

[Guest]

Really do I, then do you never use your tongue in someone else's mouth rags? I have nothing to read up on, its just embarressing watching you show up how badly you fail to understand anything. So again it comes down to many things we can do ourselves, there is no rule book just advise whether something can be harmful possible or not. You seem to think people have to be anal like yourself. No they do not, but one thinks is for sure, remove that lump of coal that is stuck up there, as I am sure it is a diamond now.

Don't start asking personal questions again because I won't tolerate that.

Read up on the subject before you make a fool of yourself again.

I will ask what ever I like when you are so personalk about how others can use their own bodies, so best you either then bail out for being so hypocritical or start answering questions which will only prove you are hypocritical.
Eiether way you are screwed.

[Raggamuffin]

Don't start asking personal questions again because I won't tolerate that.

Read up on the subject before you make a fool of yourself again.

I will ask what ever I like when you are so personalk about how others can use their own bodies, so best you either then bail out for being so hypocritical or start answering questions which will only prove you are hypocritical.
Eiether way you are screwed.

You will not get an answer, and if you get abusive again, I will report your post. If you want to debate, do so in a polite manner.

[Guest]

I will ask what ever I like when you are so personalk about how others can use their own bodies, so best you either then bail out for being so hypocritical or start answering questions which will only prove you are hypocritical.
Eiether way you are screwed.

You will not get an answer, and if you get abusive again, I will report your post. If you want to debate, do so in a polite manner.

Then you have nothing to add to this debate, run along then
It seems you are playing the false victim again, which is hysterical and shows how easily you allow yourself to get worked up.
So unless you want to answer you have nothing of worth or importance to add

[Raggamuffin]

You will not get an answer, and if you get abusive again, I will report your post. If you want to debate, do so in a polite manner.

Then you have nothing to add to this debate, run along then
It seems you are playing the false victim again, which is hysterical and shows how easily you allow yourself to get worked up.
So unless you want to answer you have nothing of worth or importance to add

I'll post where I like. You're not the only one posting in this thread. If you harass me again and ask me personal questions, you will be reported for being a sex pest.

[Victorismyhero]

the argument isnt ABOUT what any particular "body" part is MEANT for...

the argument IS, quite simply....
the actions of homosexuals has nothing whatsoever to do with you me or the cretinous likes of Stormee. The mere idea that it should have, is, of itself offensive.

In what way could anyone who is homosexual, cause any harm to you or stormee, beyond what a hetero could?

just WHY does it matter ...Why is it "your business" hmmm???

I can SHOW you how certain religious beleifs can harm others....quite easily and THAT is "anyones" business

YOU cannot do the same for homosexuality...(without invoking either lies or disingenuity)

[Raggamuffin]

the argument isnt ABOUT what any particular "body" part is MEANT for...

the argument IS, quite simply....
the actions of homosexuals has nothing whatsoever to do with you me or the cretinous likes of Stormee. The mere idea that it should have, is, of itself offensive.

In what way could anyone who is homosexual, cause any harm to you or stormee, beyond what a hetero could?

just WHY does it matter ...Why is it "your business" hmmm???

I can SHOW you how certain religious beleifs can harm others....quite easily and THAT is "anyones" business

YOU cannot do the same for homosexuality...(without invoking either lies or disambiguation)

I was referring to Quill's post when I posted because he denied the real function.

It's nothing to do with homosexuality, it's to do with science and the function of bodily parts. It's also nothing to do with religion, so don't even think about harassing me about that.

[Guest]

Then you have nothing to add to this debate, run along then
It seems you are playing the false victim again, which is hysterical and shows how easily you allow yourself to get worked up.
So unless you want to answer you have nothing of worth or importance to add

I'll post where I like. You're not the only one posting in this thread. If you harass me again and ask me personal questions, you will be reported for being a sex pest.

Please do report nme and you will find Eddie giving you the exact same answer showing I am no sex pest but easily showing up your hypocrisy, as you are happy to be personal about sexual acts for homosexuals but go into meltdown mode if asked if you even have a tongue sandwich, which shows what an utter prude you are lol

[Raggamuffin]

I'll post where I like. You're not the only one posting in this thread. If you harass me again and ask me personal questions, you will be reported for being a sex pest.

Please do report nme and you will find Eddie giving you the exact same answer showing I am no sex pest but easily showing up your hypocrisy, as you are happy to be personal about sexual acts for homosexuals but go into meltdown mode if asked if you even have a tongue sandwich, which shows what an utter prude you are lol

Well if you continue to harass me with questions of a sexual nature, and nothing is done, I'll get personal back and we can chat about your conviction for violence instead.

Do you go up to women in the street and ask them about their sex life, and then call them prudes if they don't like it?

[Guest]

Please do report nme and you will find Eddie giving you the exact same answer showing I am no sex pest but easily showing up your hypocrisy, as you are happy to be personal about sexual acts for homosexuals but go into meltdown mode if asked if you even have a tongue sandwich, which shows what an utter prude you are lol

Well if you continue to harass me with questions of a sexual nature, and nothing is done, I'll get personal back and we can chat about your conviction for violence instead.

Do you go up to women in the street and ask them about their sex life, and then call them prudes if they don't like it?

PMSL where you are talking about sexual acts yourself. Again I suggest you get a tatoo, that says double standards on your forehead rags, as it would be apt. You can do as you please rags, as stated already its like water off a ducks back, there is nothing you can say that will bother me in the slightest. I speak to many of my female friends who are very up front about their sex lives. Like i say you must have a very sheltered life

[Victorismyhero]

the argument isnt ABOUT what any particular "body" part is MEANT for...

the argument IS, quite simply....
the actions of homosexuals has nothing whatsoever to do with you me or the cretinous likes of Stormee. The mere idea that it should have, is, of itself offensive.

In what way could anyone who is homosexual, cause any harm to you or stormee, beyond what a hetero could?

just WHY does it matter ...Why is it "your business" hmmm???

I can SHOW you how certain religious beleifs can harm others....quite easily and THAT is "anyones" business

YOU cannot do the same for homosexuality...(without invoking either lies or disambiguation)

I was referring to Quill's post when I posted because he denied the real function.

It's nothing to do with homosexuality, it's to do with science and the function of bodily parts. It's also nothing to do with religion, so don't even think about harassing me about that.

I want going to "harass" you (my what a sensitive little flower you are) about religion...it was you that introduced that red herrring much earlier....

I was going to make the point that actually the two are not comparable
and that to introduce the criticism of one as a cover for criticising the other is PURE disingenuity...

but then you do like to muddy the water when you are on to a loser dont you....

[Raggamuffin]

I was referring to Quill's post when I posted because he denied the real function.

It's nothing to do with homosexuality, it's to do with science and the function of bodily parts. It's also nothing to do with religion, so don't even think about harassing me about that.

I want going to "harass" you (my what a sensitive little flower you are) about religion...it was you that introduced that red herrring much earlier....

I was going to make the point that actually the two are not comparable
and that to introduce the criticism of one as a cover for criticising the other is PURE disingenuity...

but then you do like to muddy the water when you are on to a loser dont you....

I'm not losing - I know about functions of the body, whereas you clearly do not.

[Guest]

Wow that told you Victor lol

[Raggamuffin]

Well if you continue to harass me with questions of a sexual nature, and nothing is done, I'll get personal back and we can chat about your conviction for violence instead.

Do you go up to women in the street and ask them about their sex life, and then call them prudes if they don't like it?

PMSL where you are talking about sexual acts yourself. Again I suggest you get a tatoo, that says double standards on your forehead rags, as it would be apt. You can do as you please rags, as stated already its like water off a ducks back, there is nothing you can say that will bother me in the slightest. I speak to many of my female friends who are very up front about their sex lives. Like i say you must have a very sheltered life

I don't care what you perve about when you talk to your female friends - I'm not one of them, and I won't put up with your sleazy questions. This issue has been raised before and it seems you learnt nothing since then.

[Victorismyhero]

awww....what a pathetic come back

It must be all that new chemical you are absorbing Ragga...there seems to be a lot of it about


its called sanctimonium chloride

its effect is to turn nornmal rational people into sanctimonious twits...

[Raggamuffin]

awww....what a pathetic come back

It must be all that new chemical you are absorbing  Ragga...there seems to be a lot of it about


its called sanctimonium chloride

its effect is to turn nornmal rational people into sanctimonious twits...

You're the one getting on your high horse - I'm merely talking about bodily functions. You seem to have a problem sticking to the subject or reading posts.

[Guest]

PMSL where you are talking about sexual acts yourself. Again I suggest you get a tatoo, that says double standards on your forehead rags, as it would be apt. You can do as you please rags, as stated already its like water off a ducks back, there is nothing you can say that will bother me in the slightest. I speak to many of my female friends who are very up front about their sex lives. Like i say you must have a very sheltered life

I don't care what you perve about when you talk to your female friends - I'm not one of them, and I won't put up with your sleazy questions. This issue has been raised before and it seems you learnt nothing since then.

So you think people being open about sexuality is perving, seriously?

Wow

You really have led a sheltered life. Its not perving to talk about sex, in fact its very healthy

[Raggamuffin]

I don't care what you perve about when you talk to your female friends - I'm not one of them, and I won't put up with your sleazy questions. This issue has been raised before and it seems you learnt nothing since then.

So you think people being open about sexuality is perving, seriously?

Wow

You really have led a sheltered life. Its not perving to talk about sex, in fact its very healthy

Not when you talk about it - it's pervy.

[Victorismyhero]

I want going to "harass" you (my what a sensitive little flower you are) about religion...it was you that introduced that red herrring much earlier....

I was going to make the point that actually the two are not comparable
and that to introduce the criticism of one as a cover for criticising the other is PURE disingenuity...

but then you do like to muddy the water when you are on to a loser dont you....

I'm not losing - I know about functions of the body, whereas you clearly do not.

doubtless learned from the "repressed victorian ladies handbook"

[Guest]

So you think people being open about sexuality is perving, seriously?

Wow

You really have led a sheltered life. Its not perving to talk about sex, in fact its very healthy

Not when you talk about it - it's pervy.

In Victorian England maybe, not in the 21st century, may I ask that you come and join everyone in the 21st century as you seem stuck in the past

[Fuzzy Zack]

To be fair to Rags, the anus is an orifice structured for the purpose of excretia. Not inserting things.  And the NHS have pages dedicated to the medical complications caused by anal sex.

Other orifices used for sex do allow for input and output.

Possible medical problems which are not often, so you should be honest in that regard, which like anything has possible complications. Second it is also poor when it usually asssociated anal sex with homosexuals and yet as proven before to you only around 30 od percent of homosexual men engage in anal sex, the same number as hetrosexual men and women, in fact even more in women. So the sexual act should not even be associated to show distain or repulse people have against homosexuals as it often is. Where you certainly do not see the same for hetrosexuals who do. So to go off sexual acts to show dislike to homosexuality is nothing short of a falsehood, it is either a religious distain or more of a male to male rejection of the sexual attraction, though in some cases  this is the opposite and actually they are attracted.
So the reasoning to go off sexual acts is a myth really to be opposed or against two of the same sex in love, even more so when it comes to two women, of which you willo find the amount of men against two men dramatically decreases in being opposed againwst, to then actually being turned on.

Did I relate anal sex to homosexuality? Nope.

So your speech about love was kind of pointless. I could equally say: Love is about not hurting the person you love.

Which is why I restricted my answer to biology only.

[Raggamuffin]

I'm not losing - I know about functions of the body, whereas you clearly do not.

doubtless learned from the "repressed victorian ladies handbook"

You obviously didn't do any science at school. You probably didn't do anything at school actually, except bunk off all the time.

[Guest]

wow great minds think alike Victor lol

[Raggamuffin]

Not when you talk about it - it's pervy.

In Victorian England maybe, not in the 21st century, may I ask that you come and join everyone in the 21st century as you seem stuck in the past

If you went up to a female at work and pestered her with sexual questions, you'd probably be sacked for sexual harassment. You need to learn some boundaries.

[Victorismyhero]

awww....what a pathetic come back

It must be all that new chemical you are absorbing  Ragga...there seems to be a lot of it about


its called sanctimonium chloride

its effect is to turn nornmal rational people into sanctimonious twits...

You're the one getting on your high horse - I'm merely talking about bodily functions. You seem to have a problem sticking to the subject or reading posts.

no ragga, you are now resorting to dodging the issue

It has already been explained to you at length. Bodily "function" is to some extent, what you make of them....and if someone wishes to "subvert" or "re-purpose" one or more of those functions, provide they harm no one that THEIR business...not yours or stormees, and most certainly is not up for anyone else to be "offended" by it...

[Fuzzy Zack]

He was saying what the purpose of it was, and he was talking about medical damage from misuse. There was nothing in his post about anything else.

OMG it astounds me your lack of knowledge and I have had this debate before with zack and left it with his tail between his legs last time, beause he knew it was poor. Again its a possibility so say missuse is false as many people do things to their bodies daily and again are not stigmatized, yet people take a sexual act, which is wrongly associated to homosexuals as a view to stigmatize the point you miss. So the purpose of the anus is what ever we want it to be, just as it is the same with the rest of our bodies, something you fail to grasp

My ears are burning.

Or is this herpes?

[Guest]

In Victorian England maybe, not in the 21st century, may I ask that you come and join everyone in the 21st century as you seem stuck in the past

If you went up to a female at work and pestered her with sexual questions, you'd probably be sacked for sexual harassment. You need to learn some boundaries.

Really, if she was talking about anal sex started by her?
I do not think so, in fact most often the girls at work talk openly about sex, its quite funny seeing my boss go red

[Guest]

OMG it astounds me your lack of knowledge and I have had this debate before with zack and left it with his tail between his legs last time, beause he knew it was poor. Again its a possibility so say missuse is false as many people do things to their bodies daily and again are not stigmatized, yet people take a sexual act, which is wrongly associated to homosexuals as a view to stigmatize the point you miss. So the purpose of the anus is what ever we want it to be, just as it is the same with the rest of our bodies, something you fail to grasp

My ears are burning.

Or is this herpes?

Definately the ears I guess.

[Raggamuffin]

You're the one getting on your high horse - I'm merely talking about bodily functions. You seem to have a problem sticking to the subject or reading posts.

no ragga, you are now resorting to dodging the issue

It has already been explained to you at length. Bodily "function" is to some extent, what you make of them....and if someone wishes to "subvert" or "re-purpose" one or more of those functions, provide they harm no one that THEIR business...not yours or stormees, and most certainly is not up for anyone else to be "offended" by it...

I'm not dodging anything - you're the one introducing things I didn't mention and pretending that I did. I'm talking about the scientific function, which you don't seem to understand. You're the one who just used the word "subvert", not me. It seems though that you are actually agreeing with me, you just want to introduce other elements in order to impress Didge - goodness knows why you would want to do that though.

[Raggamuffin]

If you went up to a female at work and pestered her with sexual questions, you'd probably be sacked for sexual harassment. You need to learn some boundaries.

Really, if she was talking about anal sex started by her?
I do not think so, in fact most often the girls at work talk openly about sex, its quite funny seeing my boss go red

You'd get a slapped face if you asked me pervy questions.

[Guest]

lol Victor has no need to impress me, talk about the worst deflection yet but the worst part is you actually think you are more intelligent than Victor, who next to me Lord are about the most intelligent posters ever on forums I have known.

[Victorismyhero]

doubtless learned from the "repressed victorian ladies handbook"

You obviously didn't do any science at school. You probably didn't do anything at school actually, except bunk off all the time.

so ragga cant answer...

If I were you I would not go down this line ragga...since your level of educational acheivment is clearly that of "educationaly deprived"

you have at every turn either failed to answer a point with a sustainable counter point or wriggled away with nothing more than an "ah but"......

you know whats REALLY funny...you attacked with the tired old "rabbit killer" tactic...and you cant even "win" with that I mean ...seriously.....

[Guest]

Really, if she was talking about anal sex started by her?
I do not think so, in fact most often the girls at work talk openly about sex, its quite funny seeing my boss go red

You'd get a slapped face if you asked me pervy questions.

Seriously, I do not know whether to pity you a=or continue to stop myself from crying with laughter

[Raggamuffin]

lol Victor has no need to impress me, talk about the worst deflection yet but the worst part is you actually think you are more intelligent than Victor, who next to me Lord are about the most intelligent posters ever on forums I have known.

Well he's also introducing strawmen arguments just like you did - you two are joined at the hip. Of course I'm more intelligent than Victor - that's why he gets so arsy with me. Anyone is more intelligent than you, so that's not difficult.

[Guest]

lol Victor has no need to impress me, talk about the worst deflection yet but the worst part is you actually think you are more intelligent than Victor, who next to me Lord are about the most intelligent posters ever on forums I have known.

Well he's also introducing strawmen arguments just like you did - you two are joined at the hip. Of course I'm more intelligent than Victor - that's why he gets so arsy with me. Anyone is more intelligent than you, so that's not difficult.

Strawmen arguments?

One second

[Raggamuffin]

Yes. He's pretending that I said I was "offended". I have only spoken about biology - like Zack.

[Sponsored content]