Hey Everyone, I've got a Question

[Gipper]

True enough. I often wondered if I myself would stand up to my convictions about how I ought to be treated, before they had been put to the test. I can tell you conclusively, now, that I do in fact hold the same standards in reality that I do in theory, and I've proven it to myself in no uncertain terms.

I would agree with you that men and women alike tend not to, however. This may be worse for women, because many of them are brought up to be passive and are acclimated to mistreatment - which often starts in childhood. Men, less so. Though I think this is getting worse for men in the younger generations, based on my experiences.

What works really well on me is disarmed and unpressured, but also relatively direct. No "game," just comfort around women, and comfort with wanting to spend time with women and make the occasional move at times, and wait for me to make it at other times. Men who do this tend to be a good balance of self-confident and respectful. They tend to go away if they don't get any feedback from the woman - as well they should, because no one ought put up with blindly putting themselves out there. But they also tend to be responsive to requests to change the pace, direct in their pursuit of discovering what the woman wants and likes, and just generally honest with themselves and women they pursue.

The root of all this complicated hooey about how we deal with the sexes is based on this weird idea that we aren't both human - we're something different from each other, in some way related but not really the same species. Relaxed, well-adjusted guys tend to relate to me just fine. We aren't from some other planet. We're just people. We carry certain differences, both due to experience and probably nature, because to our sex, but in many cases there's just as big of differences between 2 individual men as there is between 2 individuals of the opposite sex.

It's just that, myself, I don't see why I would bother "handling that." I'd rather just meet the genuine person (or as close as one can get upon introductions) out the gate. I bring the real me everywhere I go, even though I'm very much a love-or-hate kind of person. I like the same in return. I don't want to play games.

A very lucid and cogent post/argument. Most women on here, you most especially, do not espouse the "average woman" in America. How many people of either sex do you encounter through the course of your day that have any political opinion at all, let alone a valid one? Most people dodge this subject, much like they do religion (sadly, not enough dodge religion for my tastes). They will say that they are neutral or don't want to talk about it, although I would argue that most don't have the intellectual capacity to offer anything better than "Bush lied, people died" or "Obama is a muslim".

I don't hang out in seedy places. I could start a conversation in a grocery store, a restaurant, or a movie theater and be bored to tears by her banality within 5 minutes. If I thought there was a place where the "smart people hang out", I'd go there and spit some game. What am I supposed to do, go to the library until I see the cute nerdy girl with glasses who is reading Proust? Yeah, I'll turn into a skeleton from malnourishment before that happens to me.

Instead of chasing the academic rabbit, I'll just concentrate on the pack of dogs in the race that are far behind. Maybe the rabbit will fall in my lap. One can hope.

I love a little bit timid, nerdy, passive and thoughtful. Maybe if you start with your real self and then stay with that, you'll find who you're looking for.

Know what happened the last time someone screwed with a winning formula? New Coke.

Give me the right motivation, and you can get the experimental batch with all the taste and a percentage of the calories. You'll still get some edge though. I can't give up the goat completely.

I may be more Jekyll than Hide, but that doesn't mean the dark side isn't allowed to pop up once in a while. Besides, a little Hyde here and there makes it interesting, dontcha think?

 

[Risky Thicket]

It depends, Wake.

My first piece of advice, and I am sincere, don't try to figure them out. It won't happen. Women are a wonderful mystery. You will never totally understand them and it is often best from the start to know that.

2. Respect. I don't mean "kissing dey butts", that comes later when you get lucky. Treat them with respect, equal. Don't slather it on and don't be insincere. If you see them as equals it isn't an issue. If you don't see them as equals nothing you can do will hide your prejudice. They are women. They are different! Bless them all for that. You gotta love it. But they are equal and they deserve the same respect you expect.

3. Listen to them. It is not only important to them, but if you aren't a total dumbass (and I have been) what they say is important to you. Why? Who the **** knows? Guys are just different. Women emote, men don't. It is the way it is. It goes back to respect. Listen to them. It is important to them. You'll benefit.

4. Let them be women. Example: You go to a nice restaurant and the waiter asks what she'd like and she starts with 15 questions:

Date: I'm torn between the Steak Diane and the Truffled Pheasant. Which do you recommend?

Waiter: They are two entirely different selections. Both are excellent. The steak is a bit more to eat than the Pheasant."

Date: What kind of spice do you use on the Pheasant? Do you use Latvian Wild Wildaberry spice on the Pheasant?

Waiter: I don't think we do but I'll check with the chef.

Date: How big is the Steak Diane"

Waiter: About the size of your palm.

Date: My palm or your palm?

Waiter: In between.

Date: Do you cook either with rutabagas?

Waiter: Not to my knowledge, no.

Date: Which do most people prefer?

Waiter: They are both popular and have been on the menu for a long time. They are two of our standards. We are very proud to serve either.

Date: OK, I'll have the lobster.

Waiter: And for you sir.

You: A big ass steak and a potato with everything on it.

Waiter: A big ass steak. Very good. We may burn the crap out of the steak. If I am not mistaken the sous chef accidentally peed on the potatoes.

You: Yeah, sure, fine.

That is the way we are men and women, different. But above all things remember to treat her like a lady. Even if the night doesn't go as you had hoped, treat her well.

There's a fine line, don't be an asshead and don't be a foot kissing twat. Enjoy it and let it go where it goes. Don't force it. Have fun. There doesn't have to be a goal. There shouldn't be. Just enjoy it. Let it go where it goes. Enjoy it.

And never, ever, never make your move too soon.

 

[SmokeAndMirrors]

A very lucid and cogent post/argument. Most women on here, you most especially, do not espouse the "average woman" in America. How many people of either sex do you encounter through the course of your day that have any political opinion at all, let alone a valid one? Most people dodge this subject, much like they do religion (sadly, not enough dodge religion for my tastes). They will say that they are neutral or don't want to talk about it, although I would argue that most don't have the intellectual capacity to offer anything better than "Bush lied, people died" or "Obama is a muslim".

I don't hang out in seedy places. I could start a conversation in a grocery store, a restaurant, or a movie theater and be bored to tears by her banality within 5 minutes. If I thought there was a place where the "smart people hang out", I'd go there and spit some game. What am I supposed to do, go to the library until I see the cute nerdy girl with glasses who is reading Proust? Yeah, I'll turn into a skeleton from malnourishment before that happens to me.

Instead of chasing the academic rabbit, I'll just concentrate on the pack of dogs in the race that are far behind. Maybe the rabbit will fall in my lap. One can hope.

You know, I don't think it's as uncommon as you think.

You're right, I am part of an exceedingly small minority of people, in a lot of different ways. And not all of them are good - I have some fairly significant compromises that one must accept as part of being close to me. But I like to think I also have some fairly unique and worthwhile advantages that make it worth the trouble. Based on that hope - that I am a self-aware enough person to be worth the trouble - I make absolutely no time in my life for unfulfilling interaction.

Unless I am forced to do otherwise, I am completely unavailable to unintelligent people. I would rather spend my Friday nights alone than consume the amount of alcohol it would take to make them sound smart. I have no patience at all for inane conversation with mindless people. None.

Because I eliminate as much of that outside noise as I possibly can, I make myself fully available to the sorts of people I actually want to talk to. And because I don't dumb things down, and for whatever reason I don't blend into crowds well, the sorts of people I want to be around tend to notice I'm there, and they will often come find me.

My "hit" record for finding the kinds of people I want to be around is pretty damn good. Not perfect - there's some element of risk in any interaction, and things are not always what they seem no matter how good at reading people you are. But it's fairly high, I'm happy with it, and I waste exceedingly little of my time on people who are a waste, compared to most.

The compromise is that I had to stop trying to fill the gaps with people who are "sort of tolerable." It's a drain on my energy, and a distraction from better interactions I could be having.

Yeah, it means my circle is smaller. Yeah, it means sometimes I do spend Friday nights sitting around and reading. But you know what? Totally worth it.

I do find dates. I do find balanced, intelligent, empathetic, worldly, respectful men. And because I don't let myself get distracted, I am more likely to notice them when they're around. Maybe not in abundance, but my love history certainly has plenty of pages in it, and most of them are a pleasant read.

 

[Gipper]

You know you've basically just described how and who I am, with the exception of the ability to "slum it" for immediate gratification.

Blame it on the physiological imperative. Women can go without sex for distinct periods of time. Men can't.

 

[SmokeAndMirrors]

You know you've basically just described how and who I am, with the exception of the ability to "slum it" for immediate gratification.

Blame it on the physiological imperative. Women can go without sex for distinct periods of time. Men can't.

Eh, that isn't true at all. They can, and they do. It's not fun or easy for either sex, especially when you're young and healthy. But I know plenty of very red-blooded men who have gone without for quite a while (longer than I ever have) when there was simply no one around who was really worth screwing, or they didn't have the time to meet such a person.

This idea that men are somehow pathological in their need to have sex to the point where they can't even control themselves, and women have so little drive that it hardly even occurs to them, is yet another one of those sex fallacies based on the weird idea that men and women are slightly different species.

In reality, I have never noticed a significant difference in how men and women handle dry spells. I have also never noticed a significant difference in how much time men vs. women spend talking about sex (which increases exponentially the longer they go without having any), provided they're comfortable with the person they're conversing with. Each person is different, of course - for some it's easy, and for others it's absolutely crazy-making. But I can't say that I've ever noticed those 2 extremes to be divided neatly along sex/gender lines.

For me personally? To be honest with you, I'm closer to the "crazy-making" side. But the frustration is more tolerable to me than the drama and stupidity that comes with screwing idiots, and that's ultimately what it comes down to.

 

[Gipper]

Know what happens if I don't have some form of "release" every 4 or 5 days? I have to change my sheets.

Porn is just a stop-gap, like putting masking tape on your broken glasses.

This idea that men are somehow pathological in their need to have sex to the point where they can't even control themselves, and women have so little drive that it hardly even occurs to them, is yet another one of those sex fallacies based on the weird idea that men and women are slightly different species.

I don't argue this. I can control myself above the level of a dog looking for any leg to hump, and I know that women have just as much sex drive as men. The problem is that while the desire is equally proportioned, the power is not. Women hold all the cards in this entente. They know this, and many will milk it for all it's worth. In poker, you don't fold a winning hand.

 

[Joe2000]

Do you have any dating advice you'd like to impart?

Act like a man. This means understanding and embracing the masculine identity. This means wanting to make sex meaningful by earning it through romantic gestures. This means wanting to be a protector. This means understanding that your woman belongs to a gender who is superior in an inviting sexuality. This means wanting to fix cars and take out the garbage. This means sharing household responsibility equally between your lover.

 

[SmokeAndMirrors]

Know what happens if I don't have some form of "release" every 4 or 5 days? I have to change my sheets.

Porn is just a stop-gap, like putting masking tape on your broken glasses.

Yeah, I get that. While women don't have the nocturnal issue to worry about, I certainly relate to the sentiment.

I don't argue this. I can control myself above the level of a dog looking for any leg to hump, and I know that women have just as much sex drive as men. The problem is that while the desire is equally proportioned, the power is not. Women hold all the cards in this entente. They know this, and many will milk it for all it's worth. In poker, you don't fold a winning hand.

I suppose I see your point. But I guess that depends on what you consider "winning" to be. In addition to putting up with the "sort of tolerable" being intellectually and emotionally empty, I find the sex usually sucks too. And while I may, in the moment, be able to ignore that, the reality is that I have to deal with them afterwards, and also that sex carries risks. Neither of those things are worth it for sex that sucks.

But maybe you're right - it is a lot easier for women to have sex when and with whom they like it. I don't "take advantage" of that in the sense that I don't consider sex a weapon and I have very little respect for women who do, but it's rare for me to find myself in a position of actually being unable to get laid.

 

[Gipper]

I suppose I see your point. But I guess that depends on what you consider "winning" to be. In addition to putting up with the "sort of tolerable" being intellectually and emotionally empty, I find the sex usually sucks too. And while I may, in the moment, be able to ignore that, the reality is that I have to deal with them afterwards, and also that sex carries risks. Neither of those things are worth it for sex that sucks.

Trust me - you don't "have" to deal with them afterwards. In fact, if we're talking about cheap, empty sex they're usually making every excuse to get the hell out as soon as they finish. Early morning meeting, important obligation, whatever gets them out the back door. Also, if you have a condom handy, the risk is pretty low.

I much, much prefer sex in a committed relationship over a fling, booty-call or ONS. However, if the highway is under construction, do you turn around and go home, or do you take the backroads?

 

[SmokeAndMirrors]

Trust me - you don't "have" to deal with them afterwards. In fact, if we're talking about cheap, empty sex they're usually making every excuse to get the hell out as soon as they finish. Early morning meeting, important obligation, whatever gets them out the back door. Also, if you have a condom handy, the risk is pretty low.

I much, much prefer sex in a committed relationship over a fling, booty-call or ONS. However, if the highway is under construction, do you turn around and go home, or do you take the backroads?

That's true, but I prefer to lounge. I don't feel like being in a hurry right after we're done. I like to meander through conversation, or go to sleep, and if they're too stupid to endure conversation with, or too repulsive for me to sleep next to... no thanks. And yes, I'm aware of the invention of condoms, and religious to the point of OCD about them, but nothing is perfect, and even used correctly condoms don't protect against everything; herpes and HPV, for example. My condom religiosity has paid off, but sooner or later, no matter careful you are, you'll run into bad luck. I know that, and I'd prefer to spin the wheel as little as possible, because I've been lucky so far.

I typically go home. I don't always require a committed relationship, though it's nice. But I do require someone with enough of a brain that I can stand to talk to them, and that I would want to sleep with them enough times for the sex to actually get good.

In the last year, I've been especially picky, largely because my schedule has gotten busier and finding time for me to establish the sort of relationship I want is harder than it used to be, so I won't do it unless it's a really good offer.

That means I've had an unprecedentedly long dry spell, with relatively little interruption. Fine with me. I have other priorities. And once you get over the 2-month hump (no pun intended) it's not as maddening as it was in the beginning.

I've been dating recently (which I wasn't at all for about 6 months - I just didn't have the space in my mind for it). There was a guy I dated a few months ago, and that was going nowhere. It was a rare case of me judging someone to be more intelligent and open-minded than they actually were, which I figured out in a hurry. We never did wind up having sex, and that was incredibly frustrating for me. But I went back to being single for a while, and another, much better, much smarter, much more worthwhile opportunity has recently dropped into my lap. Someone like me noticed I was there, as they often do. It's been 2 or 3 weeks, so it's early days, but I'm really enjoying my time with him, and I think it has potential.

Was the maddening celibacy worth it, to be undistracted and unattached when that came along? Hell yes. I might have been too distracted mucking around with Mr. Sorta-Tolerable and have never noticed that someone I might actually like was even there, otherwise.

And if it goes nowhere, is it still worth it? Yeah. I'm much more focused and productive in the rest of my life when I'm not being distracted by stupid bull****.

I wasn't always of this mind, and who knows, maybe in the future I'll swing more towards your direction again. But I like my life a lot better like this - frustrating dry spells and all.

 

[Gipper]

That's another difference - after 3 weeks, if my dick isn't wet then we have a problem.

I've only found one way around that, and that's just keeping my own life very private and denying any sort of relationship. If we've been seeing each other a month and I'm still getting the door shut in my face, that's fine. Don't have the "where is this going?" discussion with me. I'm going to get some ass. You can choose if it's your ass or someone else's ass, but rest assured - I'm getting it.

This is why I don't act like a horny fool around someone I see potential with. They're not blue. If I have to put a band-aid on the wound until your First Aid kit is open, so be it.

 

[joko104]

I love all the PC suck-up answers. By the way, they're all wrong. I suppose it may be okay if you're attracting a reeeeeeeeeeally "good girl" bordering on prude. For normal women, nuh uh.

By the way, when I said "be a dick", that didn't mean "smack her around". That's a far stretch. I'm saying don't compliment her. Act aloof and disinterested. Be casual almost to the level that she thinks you're on pot. Be a little rude (minor rude, not major).

Seriously, if a girl is even remotely into you and you play it cool to the point where you're indifferent to her, she'll throw herself at you. I mean to a level that borders shameless.

Don't listen to the women on here. They're telling you what they wish they want, but most of them - when approached with similar situations - have or will take the asshole over the good guy. If they say otherwise, they're lying. They just feel some sort of guilt for thinking this way, for some strange reason.

That be-an-asshole theory is the worst possible advice.

Women are not generic, so there is no rule for all. What most "works" is being direct and unguarded. If you are wondering if she is involved or available, ask. What do you want of her? Tell her. If you want to meet somewhere else and chat to see if there is interest, ask her. If you want to go on a date with her, ask her. If your goal is sex with her, ask her. Almost without exception, all the coy and clever, being timid or the asshole-bold stuff is a waste of time and is only confusing.

The other rule is also quite simple. Compliments work.

 

[joko104]

That's another difference - after 3 weeks, if my dick isn't wet then we have a problem.

I've only found one way around that, and that's just keeping my own life very private and denying any sort of relationship. If we've been seeing each other a month and I'm still getting the door shut in my face, that's fine. Don't have the "where is this going?" discussion with me. I'm going to get some ass. You can choose if it's your ass or someone else's ass, but rest assured - I'm getting it.

This is why I don't act like a horny fool around someone I see potential with. They're not blue. If I have to put a band-aid on the wound until your First Aid kit is open, so be it.

I shutter to think of seeing photos of women you've been with. I never, ever imagined I'd EVER quote Joe2000, but the title of his next women-hating thread he started comes to mind in speculating of your past conquests. Slut or Pig? And I don't even use those words about women.

 

[SmokeAndMirrors]

That's another difference - after 3 weeks, if my dick isn't wet then we have a problem.

I've only found one way around that, and that's just keeping my own life very private and denying any sort of relationship. If we've been seeing each other a month and I'm still getting the door shut in my face, that's fine. Don't have the "where is this going?" discussion with me. I'm going to get some ass. You can choose if it's your ass or someone else's ass, but rest assured - I'm getting it.

This is why I don't act like a horny fool around someone I see potential with. They're not blue. If I have to put a band-aid on the wound until your First Aid kit is open, so be it.

To be fair, the main reason that hasn't happened is actually because he's out of town at his sister's wedding currently. Otherwise I'd have been all over that by now probably.

And that was one of the many issues with Guy #1, Mr. Sorta Tolerable. He was weird about sex. Sort of traditional about when he wanted to have it, which is to say he wanted it to come after everything else. And also sort of hung up, to the point where it affected him in bed. I'm sorry, but sex is important to me, and it's part of establishing the connection, just like emotional and intellectual interaction is. Also, I'm a healthy young woman and I want sex. He can feel that way if he likes, but it's at odds with how I like to do relationships. And, while I can certainly deal with people who have psycho-sexual (or even physical sexual) issues, I can only do so if they are self-aware enough to be open with me about it, and want to work on it. Otherwise... what am I supposed to do with that?

It's not really that I must sleep with someone within X amount of time. But rather, when people don't see sexual progression as something that should move with the rest of the relationship progression, it tends to indicate something larger about the way they think about relationships - something that I don't, and can't, agree with. I'm not a traditionalist. And I refuse to attach issues of morality to my desire to have sex, apart from the bedrock concepts like consent and honesty. And that's usually what it is - an issue of morality, and frequently, of judgment. Those sorts of people believe in something I can't abide, and chances are they won't like me as they get to know more about my history anyway.

But I sort of take the reverse stance to it that you do. Rather than getting private, I get open. "This is something I want in my relationships. If you don't, I don't think we're well-suited to each other." Again, it's a way of reducing the amount of time I waste on people I ultimately won't work out with. Just get it over with, rather than trying to find ways to work around it.

 

[Gipper]

But I sort of take the reverse stance to it that you do. Rather than getting private, I get open. "This is something I want in my relationships. If you don't, I don't think we're well-suited to each other." Again, it's a way of reducing the amount of time I waste on people I ultimately won't work out with. Just get it over with, rather than trying to find ways to work around it.

Yeah, you're a woman. You can get away with that.

If I sat a woman down that I was dating for a static period of time and explained to her that if she doesn't give it up, someone else will and that she can be my "relationship gal" and the other girl can be my "ass gal" until she's willing to assume both roles, she's most likely going to not return my phone calls. Men will make no illusion that they are going anywhere. They're still reaching for that holy grail.

If I was a female, I'd be a lot more like you. Unfortunately, as a male, I cannot afford to be. They're not exactly lined around the corner and waiting to jump on this pogo stick.

 

[SmokeAndMirrors]

Yeah, you're a woman. You can get away with that.

If I sat a woman down that I was dating for a static period of time and explained to her that if she doesn't give it up, someone else will and that she can be my "relationship gal" and the other girl can be my "ass gal" until she's willing to assume both roles, she's most likely going to not return my phone calls. Men will make no illusion that they are going anywhere. They're still reaching for that holy grail.

If I was a female, I'd be a lot more like you. Unfortunately, as a male, I cannot afford to be. They're not exactly lined around the corner and waiting to jump on this pogo stick.

Well, I also think my reasoning is a bit different from yours. It isn't really about the sex itself. I can deal with not having sex. It's more what tends to go along with the mindset of withholding sex. That's what I can't deal with. Also, when I say that, I'm usually ending the relationship, not trying to negotiate it. If they don't want to have sex, I am sure as hell not going to try to talk them into it.

I don't need an "ass boy." And that's not the reason why I don't particularly like the traditionalist hold-out. It's more about the fact that if that's how you feel, you probably won't be able to relate to me, and I think that mindset is harmful to the kind of relationship I'd like to have.

And yeah, it's also frustrating as hell. But that's not the main reason I won't deal with it.

Perhaps it's easier from this side of the gender aisle. But, considering how long I have gone without getting any due to my standards, I don't know if the fact that I have my pick of the litter makes much difference. The percentage of them I actually want to sleep with is minuscule. And, while it may be true that it's much easier for women to get laid, there will always be guys who just aren't interested, and when you're dealing with a small pool occasionally that happens.

 

[Gipper]

I can count how many times I've turned down guaranteed ass on one hand.

I'm not Brad Pitt. I can't turn down the model because there's a supermodel around the corner.

 

[SmokeAndMirrors]

I can count how many times I've turned down guaranteed ass on one hand.

I'm not Brad Pitt. I can't turn down the model because there's a supermodel around the corner.

You know Gipper, I find it interesting you think of certain women as sluts, when you engage in the same behavior you call them slutty over, and make no apologies for it (not that I'm insinuated you should).

You made some pretty wild and incorrect assumptions about me based on the fact that I have tattoos. But even if you'd been right, how is it different when I do it vs. when you do?

I occasionally have really frank and enjoyable exchanges with you, but then you pull out some weird card like that and it makes me wonder where it comes from.

 

[Gipper]

You know Gipper, I find it interesting you think of certain women as sluts, when you engage in the same behavior you call them slutty over, and make no apologies for it (not that I'm insinuated you should).

I am not immune to hypocrisy. I call a slut a slut. I myself can be a slut. I personally don't think a slut is a bad thing. Didn't someone start a thread about sluts being an integral part in society?

You'll never see me speak ill of today's slut. They are the reason I am allowed to be a slut myself.

Now, I have to stop this topic of conversation because the word is losing too much meaning in repetition.

You made some pretty wild and incorrect assumptions about me based on the fact that I have tattoos. But even if you'd been right, how is it different when I do it vs. when you do?

It's not. I've even said that I am quick to assumption, and that most of what I say is based anecdotally and stereotypically. I know that not all people who have tattoos are trashy or tasteless. However, in my court, they are guilty until proven innocent, and as I stated in the one thread, I personally would never hire someone with overt tattoos.

I occasionally have really frank and enjoyable exchanges with you, but then you pull out some weird card like that and it makes me wonder where it comes from.

I'm still quite traditional. You have to remember that I am among the more whitebread sons of bitches on here. An MBA accountant with no tattoos, nothing pierced, and whose family was raised in the southeast (thank God I wasn't). I could easily be a model of Alabama living if I traded 80 IQ points for irrational evangelism.

 

[SmokeAndMirrors]

I am not immune to hypocrisy. I call a slut a slut. I myself can be a slut. I personally don't think a slut is a bad thing. Didn't someone start a thread about sluts being an integral part in society?

You'll never see me speak ill of today's slut. They are the reason I am allowed to be a slut myself.

Now, I have to stop this topic of conversation because the word is losing too much meaning in repetition.

Eh, I distinctly remember you saying something to the effect of "STD farm." But perhaps you were caught up in the moment. Just bringing it to your attention, and glad that upon being asked to examine it, you have a more reasoned response.

I would say I don't think being a slut is a bad thing, except that I'm not even sure what "slut" is supposed to mean. It can mean anything from a woman who has more than X sexual partners, to a woman who's showing some cleavage.

 

[Gipper]

It's a broad brush stroke. Define as you choose.

And yeah, that sounds like a comment I'd make. You have to take into account that humor is very pervasive in my words and actions.

Think of it more like you as Sheldon Cooper and me as Howard Wolowitz. Both men are smart in every possible definition of the word, but each have varying views on non-intellectual subjects.

I'll hope you know what I mean with that comparison. Every nerd should watch that show religiously.

 

[SmokeAndMirrors]

It's a broad brush stroke. Define as you choose.

And yeah, that sounds like a comment I'd make. You have to take into account that humor is very pervasive in my words and actions.

Think of it more like you as Sheldon Cooper and me as Howard Wolowitz. Both men are smart in every possible definition of the word, but each have varying views on non-intellectual subjects.

I'll hope you know what I mean with that comparison. Every nerd should watch that show religiously.

Vaguely, but not really. I haven't owned a TV since 2006, largely because I find I never turn it on. But I've seen Big Bang Theory a couple times.

I get you were being partly funny, but it was also partly true - you really do make certain judgments.

Admittedly, I am not an especially funny person (sarcasm is more my thing), but I am fairly decent at spotting it.

 

[Gipper]

Admittedly, I am not an especially funny person (sarcasm is more my thing), but I am fairly decent at spotting it.

Yes, I'm aware of that.

Know what you should do? Screw Dane Cook, get pregnant, have a daughter, and instantly age her 25...make that 30 years. I'd have a dream woman.

 

[SmokeAndMirrors]

Yes, I'm aware of that.

Know what you should do? Screw Dane Cook, get pregnant, have a daughter, and instantly age her 25...make that 30 years. I'd have a dream woman.

I'd probably wind up killing it. If I weren't part of the only species with effective birth control, I'd be one of those crazy females who eats their young that you see on nature documentaries.

But trust me, really, the world does not need more of my DNA in it. And it certainly doesn't need more of Dane Cook's. He's not even funny. If I have to eat someone's young, can it at least be someone actually funny like Dylan Moran or something?

 

[SmokeAndMirrors]

I would totally eat his babies.