Does anyone else think Elijah Wood...
-
phykell wrote: Please excuse my ignorance, but can you explain what you mean by that? - Just interested, that's all... Well, the short answer is a borderline injustice to the belief, but to shed some light on it you first have to realize the main goal of any species is to procreate - whether it be a virus, a dog, or an amoeba. Humans procreate through sex, so regardless of us getting our rocks off with guys or girls or monkeys or crusty underwear, we still have an acute interest in sex. We revolve around this fundamental need. If you didn't, you wouldn't just happen to check out some fine-ass chick (or stud) passing by or do whatever silly things to you to appease the almighty hormones. I dare you to not have sex (including masturbation) for a long time. One of two things will happen. 1: You'll crack and do it anyway. 2: You'll find another method of sexual satisfaction, whether it be pr0n or something like animals. This also applies if you can't get women. Another extreme in this situation too, is some guys will even turn to other guys to get it (note, I didn't say this is the only reason, so don't read too much into it). There is a whole lot more theory I have about all of this and my short explanation needs a lot more substance, but alas, I am at work and I can't spend too much time writing it at the moment. phykell wrote: Wow! - desperation, subconsciously or not... One thing is for sure; there are a zillion variables in almost any given situation. And, don't be so quick to ridicule a subconscious thought. It revolves around people's insecurities. Well all have them, just different ones. Have you ever seen a chick you didn't approach for whatever reason? I have, even though I have no problem with getting women. You may or may not choose "good looking" friends. As I stated, this is one possible reason. To reiterate, there are many variables involved. My point was there are other reasons a guy could think another guy is attractive without being attracted to him. If you like the study of the mind and psychology, you'll most likely end up studying Freud, and FWIW I think it's an interesting learn. Jeremy Falcon Imputek "In fact it is quite simple, men and women both only want one thing - what they can't have!" - phykell
Jeremy Falcon wrote: phykell wrote: Please excuse my ignorance, but can you explain what you mean by that? - Just interested, that's all... Well, the short answer is a borderline injustice to the belief, but to shed some light on it you first have to realize the main goal of any species is to procreate - whether it be a virus, a dog, or an amoeba. Humans procreate through sex, so regardless of us getting our rocks off with guys or girls or monkeys or crusty underwear, we still have an acute interest in sex. We revolve around this fundamental need. If you didn't, you wouldn't just happen to check out some fine-ass chick (or stud) passing by or do whatever silly things to you to appease the almighty hormones. I dare you to not have sex (including masturbation) for a long time. One of two things will happen. 1: You'll crack and do it anyway. 2: You'll find another method of sexual satisfaction, whether it be pr0n or something like animals. This also applies if you can't get women. Another extreme in this situation too, is some guys will even turn to other guys to get it (note, I didn't say this is the only reason, so don't read too much into it). There is a whole lot more theory I have about all of this and my short explanation needs a lot more substance, but alas, I am at work and I can't spend too much time writing it at the moment. Unfortunately I believe you missed my point. I was wondering what you meant when you referred specifically to Trollslayer. Jeremy Falcon wrote: One thing is for sure; there are a zillion variables in almost any given situation. And, don't be so quick to ridicule a subconscious thought. It revolves around people's insecurities. Well all have them, just different ones. Have you ever seen a chick you didn't approach for whatever reason? I have, even though I have no problem with getting women. You may or may not choose "good looking" friends. As I stated, this is one possible reason. To reiterate, there are many variables involved. My point was there are other reasons a guy could think another guy is attractive without being attracted to him. If you like the study of the mind and psychology, you'll most likely end up studying Freud, and FWIW I think it's an interesting learn. It's been a long time since I ever "approached" a "chick" (not my words). I certainly wouldn't even consider choosing my friends specifically to increase my chances of meeting women. Then again, I simply don't think along the lines
-
...is damned attractive? I mean, damn, Anna - hold that bus for me I'm coming with you! The guy must be one of the cutest human beings I have ever seen - male or female - and I know he is only 21, but when he is forty he will still look nineteen, and those eyes... well did I mention THOSE EYES? There is something hypnotically enthralling about those eyes! Paul Mckenner eat your heart out! Sure he smokes, drinks coffee and bites his nails, but hey no-one is perfect. :suss: :-O For those living in a cave, this is he. If you really didn't know who he was at least form his performances in the three LOTR films then but for the love of god you do not deserve to have eyes. Best performance to date - whatever that date happens to be - is always going to be The War (1994) where he played alongside Harrison Ford in the most emotional coming-of-age film I have ever seen. Nay, the most emotionally real film I have ever seen - and I laughed when the little baby was shot in that Planet of the Apes programme. It may seem silly if you watch it now, but at the time it made more connections with me than a home elctronics kit. Pure unadulterated acting brilliance from Wood, and one that has made me a bigger fan than my sister. So they you go; it seems I may have a bit of closet homosexual in me yet. No pun intended of course. *cough* ;) I can't be alone, so who else thinks Elijah Wood is damned attractive then? Fluffly tigeress's not alowed, I want admissions from butch lions...
David Wulff http://www.davidwulff.co.uk
I'm not schizophrenic, are we.
He certainly does have one of those very pleasing faces to look at. In a completely hetrosexual way. :)
8
SIMON WALTON
SONORK ID 100.10024 -
Jeremy Falcon wrote: phykell wrote: Please excuse my ignorance, but can you explain what you mean by that? - Just interested, that's all... Well, the short answer is a borderline injustice to the belief, but to shed some light on it you first have to realize the main goal of any species is to procreate - whether it be a virus, a dog, or an amoeba. Humans procreate through sex, so regardless of us getting our rocks off with guys or girls or monkeys or crusty underwear, we still have an acute interest in sex. We revolve around this fundamental need. If you didn't, you wouldn't just happen to check out some fine-ass chick (or stud) passing by or do whatever silly things to you to appease the almighty hormones. I dare you to not have sex (including masturbation) for a long time. One of two things will happen. 1: You'll crack and do it anyway. 2: You'll find another method of sexual satisfaction, whether it be pr0n or something like animals. This also applies if you can't get women. Another extreme in this situation too, is some guys will even turn to other guys to get it (note, I didn't say this is the only reason, so don't read too much into it). There is a whole lot more theory I have about all of this and my short explanation needs a lot more substance, but alas, I am at work and I can't spend too much time writing it at the moment. Unfortunately I believe you missed my point. I was wondering what you meant when you referred specifically to Trollslayer. Jeremy Falcon wrote: One thing is for sure; there are a zillion variables in almost any given situation. And, don't be so quick to ridicule a subconscious thought. It revolves around people's insecurities. Well all have them, just different ones. Have you ever seen a chick you didn't approach for whatever reason? I have, even though I have no problem with getting women. You may or may not choose "good looking" friends. As I stated, this is one possible reason. To reiterate, there are many variables involved. My point was there are other reasons a guy could think another guy is attractive without being attracted to him. If you like the study of the mind and psychology, you'll most likely end up studying Freud, and FWIW I think it's an interesting learn. It's been a long time since I ever "approached" a "chick" (not my words). I certainly wouldn't even consider choosing my friends specifically to increase my chances of meeting women. Then again, I simply don't think along the lines
phykell wrote: Unfortunately I believe you missed my point. Well, not to focus solely on her, other female CPians do this as well (like Lauren), but the fruit of many of their conversations revolve mainly around male CPians who have a pic. I'm sure I'm not the only one that picked up on this pattern because we are all programmers here. This, of course, goes the other way around too. I see male CPians using any opportunity to reply/talk to a female CPian with a picture. There's nothing bad or wrong about this, that's just life. phykell wrote: I certainly wouldn't even consider choosing my friends specifically to increase my chances of meeting women. This is not what I am implying directly. For one, some people do choose their friends like that. I don't. But, I'm referring to the subconscious aspect in which you do not think about what's happening, you just feel a connection. And, if you weren't interested in sex, you wouldn't be married. Some people manifest their needs differently. You may find your needs fulfilled through a monogamous relationship and therefore get what you like at home in a secure environment amiss of first impressions and snap judgements. phykell wrote: I don't dress to attract them and I don't drive a specific car to attract them. In fact, the sort of women that might be impressed by cars/money, whatever, are exactly the sort of women I wouldn't want to meet. Which is exactly why you didn't do these things. But, you have gone through some ritual to get your woman - it was just probably different. Whether it's intelligence or a nice butt, people have their criteria for the perfect mate. phykell wrote: I will freely admit that I am not in the position of having to look for a female partner as I'm already happily married. Perhaps my opinion might be different if I was single, but I certainly hope not. People do look for it if it's not already present. If you didn't, you wouldn't be married in the first place. If you got divorced, in enough time, you'd be looking for it again. Jeremy Falcon Imputek "In fact it is quite simple, men and women both only want one thing - what they can't have!" - phykell
-
David Wulff wrote: Eak! That would look seiously freaky! Hehe I can do freaky - I discovered recently that the gothic look rather suits me...:omg: David Wulff wrote: He's another twenty-something actor that usually plays teenagers. I guess that's a reason why I tihnk he's good looking... I see what you mean. He's not my type though - attraction's an odd thing, isn't it? David Wulff wrote: You should have started an innocent conversation with her talking about something only a boyfriend would have known, and see if she picks up on it. You could have had soooooo much fun with that one! If we'd broken up on (shall we say) less than amicable terms, that would have been interesting... However, Louise and I parted as close friends (we just lost touch a few years back) and she still means too much to me to drop a bombshell like that on her with no warning! Anna :rose: "Be yourself - not what others think you should be"
- Marcia GraeschAnna - next month the local goth night starts again here and there is NO way I'm missing that :cool: :cool: :rose: Elaine (black fluffy tigress with black stripes :cool: ) Would you like to meet my teddy bear ?
-
phykell wrote: Unfortunately I believe you missed my point. Well, not to focus solely on her, other female CPians do this as well (like Lauren), but the fruit of many of their conversations revolve mainly around male CPians who have a pic. I'm sure I'm not the only one that picked up on this pattern because we are all programmers here. This, of course, goes the other way around too. I see male CPians using any opportunity to reply/talk to a female CPian with a picture. There's nothing bad or wrong about this, that's just life. phykell wrote: I certainly wouldn't even consider choosing my friends specifically to increase my chances of meeting women. This is not what I am implying directly. For one, some people do choose their friends like that. I don't. But, I'm referring to the subconscious aspect in which you do not think about what's happening, you just feel a connection. And, if you weren't interested in sex, you wouldn't be married. Some people manifest their needs differently. You may find your needs fulfilled through a monogamous relationship and therefore get what you like at home in a secure environment amiss of first impressions and snap judgements. phykell wrote: I don't dress to attract them and I don't drive a specific car to attract them. In fact, the sort of women that might be impressed by cars/money, whatever, are exactly the sort of women I wouldn't want to meet. Which is exactly why you didn't do these things. But, you have gone through some ritual to get your woman - it was just probably different. Whether it's intelligence or a nice butt, people have their criteria for the perfect mate. phykell wrote: I will freely admit that I am not in the position of having to look for a female partner as I'm already happily married. Perhaps my opinion might be different if I was single, but I certainly hope not. People do look for it if it's not already present. If you didn't, you wouldn't be married in the first place. If you got divorced, in enough time, you'd be looking for it again. Jeremy Falcon Imputek "In fact it is quite simple, men and women both only want one thing - what they can't have!" - phykell
Jeremy, to be honest I can't remember offhand which male CPians have a picture of themselves on their profiles and which don't. Sorry, but I am just responding to people not pictures. I respond to how someone's personality comes over, e.g. some people have an open sense of humour, some a very subversive one etc.. I'm not trying to turn this on you, but how would you describe how you react to other CPians ? Elaine (curious fluffy tigress) Would you like to meet my teddy bear ?
-
Jeremy, to be honest I can't remember offhand which male CPians have a picture of themselves on their profiles and which don't. Sorry, but I am just responding to people not pictures. I respond to how someone's personality comes over, e.g. some people have an open sense of humour, some a very subversive one etc.. I'm not trying to turn this on you, but how would you describe how you react to other CPians ? Elaine (curious fluffy tigress) Would you like to meet my teddy bear ?
Trollslayer wrote: Sorry, but I am just responding to people not pictures. The bad thing about using a specific... ya gonna get defensive. The bad thing about not using one... someone might ask for a specific. Herm. Do you talk to people without pics - yes. But, I've seen your attitude change (akin to flirtsy) towards individuals with pictures on their profile. The one fresh in my mind is Jörgen Sigvardsson, but I don't really care to look up others because this is not important. Like I said, it's not wrong or bad. I flirt with chicks, and I admit that freely. No big friggin' deal. Trollslayer wrote: I'm not trying to turn this on you, but how would you describe how you react to other CPians ? I usually say what people think but don't actually say. Most people try to be a peacemaker and don't verbally expose their thoughts. Is this a fault, maybe, because nobody really ever wants to hear something unless it pleases them. Does this make me an asshole? I'd like to think no, but it probably does. :) Jeremy Falcon Imputek "In fact it is quite simple, men and women both only want one thing - what they can't have!" - phykell
-
Trollslayer wrote: Sorry, but I am just responding to people not pictures. The bad thing about using a specific... ya gonna get defensive. The bad thing about not using one... someone might ask for a specific. Herm. Do you talk to people without pics - yes. But, I've seen your attitude change (akin to flirtsy) towards individuals with pictures on their profile. The one fresh in my mind is Jörgen Sigvardsson, but I don't really care to look up others because this is not important. Like I said, it's not wrong or bad. I flirt with chicks, and I admit that freely. No big friggin' deal. Trollslayer wrote: I'm not trying to turn this on you, but how would you describe how you react to other CPians ? I usually say what people think but don't actually say. Most people try to be a peacemaker and don't verbally expose their thoughts. Is this a fault, maybe, because nobody really ever wants to hear something unless it pleases them. Does this make me an asshole? I'd like to think no, but it probably does. :) Jeremy Falcon Imputek "In fact it is quite simple, men and women both only want one thing - what they can't have!" - phykell
Defensive ? One of the problems with a message board is that you can't hear someones tone of voice or watch their eyes so its easy to misinterpret what they say (this is probably a factor in flame wars on the net). And yes, I'm going to say it again, its nothing to do with pictures. The reason ? Its not. Simple. Believe me, if it was about pictures I would say so, yet despite this you have told me twice what drives my decisions. I find this interesting :suss: As to flirting, if we didn't do it the next generation wouldn't exist ! The interesting part is that its you thats has been looking at pictures. I actually look at profiles for what else is there since a static picture tells you very little about someone. Ravi Bs profile is one of the best and his site the most fun. Elaine (fluffy tigress emoticon) Would you like to meet my teddy bear ?
-
(start of David being shallow) Well if this[^] is the same she then I'll have to agree... (end of David being shallow)
David Wulff http://www.davidwulff.co.uk
I'm not schizophrenic, are we.
David Wulff wrote: Well if this[^] is the same she Abslutely. I can't see any movie with her without getting a serious heartache. To make matters worse, her acting always reminds me of a girl I... dumped accidentally, so to say.
One day I might find it quite amusing how touching tongues make life so confusing Anne Clark again [sighist]
-
Defensive ? One of the problems with a message board is that you can't hear someones tone of voice or watch their eyes so its easy to misinterpret what they say (this is probably a factor in flame wars on the net). And yes, I'm going to say it again, its nothing to do with pictures. The reason ? Its not. Simple. Believe me, if it was about pictures I would say so, yet despite this you have told me twice what drives my decisions. I find this interesting :suss: As to flirting, if we didn't do it the next generation wouldn't exist ! The interesting part is that its you thats has been looking at pictures. I actually look at profiles for what else is there since a static picture tells you very little about someone. Ravi Bs profile is one of the best and his site the most fun. Elaine (fluffy tigress emoticon) Would you like to meet my teddy bear ?
Trollslayer wrote: And yes, I'm going to say it again, its nothing to do with pictures. I said you do speak to all sorts, but you only act flirty with the CPians with pictures on their profiles that I assume you find attractive. A picture alone doesn't do it. Don't take my word for it, look at your own backlog. Trollslayer wrote: Believe me, if it was about pictures I would say so, yet despite this you have told me twice what drives my decisions. I find this interesting As to flirting, if we didn't do it the next generation wouldn't exist ! You answered it yourself. And, as I said, I flirt too and think it's no big deal that's it done. But, I do defend my points. I used you as a point of reference because you were the CPian that was fresh in my mind in that regards. If anything, you should take that as a compliment. Trollslayer wrote: The interesting part is that its you thats has been looking at pictures. I actually look at profiles for what else is there since a static picture tells you very little about someone. Ravi Bs profile is one of the best and his site the most fun. Um, are you telling me you look at profiles wihtout looking at the pictures? Does Chris M have a special filter for you to disallow you from seeing them? Yeah, I look at profiles for the people that interest me. So what? You're blowing this out of proportion because a simple illustration was in reference to you. Which means you are getting defensive, despite what you're claming at the moment. And, now I'm defensive just to preserve my original point, which has become skewed. Jeremy Falcon Imputek "In fact it is quite simple, men and women both only want one thing - what they can't have!" - phykell
-
Anna - next month the local goth night starts again here and there is NO way I'm missing that :cool: :cool: :rose: Elaine (black fluffy tigress with black stripes :cool: ) Would you like to meet my teddy bear ?
-
(start of David being shallow) Well if this[^] is the same she then I'll have to agree... (end of David being shallow)
David Wulff http://www.davidwulff.co.uk
I'm not schizophrenic, are we.
David Wulff wrote: (end of David being shallow) Hey, nothing wrong with being shallow now and then :-D Would you like to meet my teddy bear ?
-
Trollslayer wrote: Sorry, but I am just responding to people not pictures. The bad thing about using a specific... ya gonna get defensive. The bad thing about not using one... someone might ask for a specific. Herm. Do you talk to people without pics - yes. But, I've seen your attitude change (akin to flirtsy) towards individuals with pictures on their profile. The one fresh in my mind is Jörgen Sigvardsson, but I don't really care to look up others because this is not important. Like I said, it's not wrong or bad. I flirt with chicks, and I admit that freely. No big friggin' deal. Trollslayer wrote: I'm not trying to turn this on you, but how would you describe how you react to other CPians ? I usually say what people think but don't actually say. Most people try to be a peacemaker and don't verbally expose their thoughts. Is this a fault, maybe, because nobody really ever wants to hear something unless it pleases them. Does this make me an asshole? I'd like to think no, but it probably does. :) Jeremy Falcon Imputek "In fact it is quite simple, men and women both only want one thing - what they can't have!" - phykell
Your theory about pictures is a bit extreme - I myself don't look at a person's profile (let alone the picture) unless (a) it is singled out by another member, (b) I need to check the person's nationality, age, skills or if possible the sex before making a relavent reply, or (c) they happen to appear above me in the Most Active list. I'll flirt with anyone if they choose to flirt back; a personality trait which often gets me into strange situations but I wouldn't want to change for all the world. Who gives a fuck if a person is male or female? Just like a magnet, your personalities either attract or they repel. If you need to examine physical differences to converse then you have real issues that need to be solved. Jeremy Falcon wrote: I usually say what people think but don't actually say I often find the problem with that perception is that there is never any proof for it... :rolleyes:
David Wulff http://www.davidwulff.co.uk
I'm not schizophrenic, are we.
-
Your theory about pictures is a bit extreme - I myself don't look at a person's profile (let alone the picture) unless (a) it is singled out by another member, (b) I need to check the person's nationality, age, skills or if possible the sex before making a relavent reply, or (c) they happen to appear above me in the Most Active list. I'll flirt with anyone if they choose to flirt back; a personality trait which often gets me into strange situations but I wouldn't want to change for all the world. Who gives a fuck if a person is male or female? Just like a magnet, your personalities either attract or they repel. If you need to examine physical differences to converse then you have real issues that need to be solved. Jeremy Falcon wrote: I usually say what people think but don't actually say I often find the problem with that perception is that there is never any proof for it... :rolleyes:
David Wulff http://www.davidwulff.co.uk
I'm not schizophrenic, are we.
David Wulff wrote: Your theory about pictures is a bit extreme Well yes, but nothing is rarely cut and dry. I'm not saying this is the way things are; I'm saying these are possible reasons for particular circumstances. There are so many variables in life that I only try to think upon some in some situations. David Wulff wrote: they happen to appear above me in the Most Active list. As I understand it, that's practically grounds for war. :) David Wulff wrote: I often find the problem with that perception is that there is never any proof for it... So true, so true. And, most of what I say can't be considered factual until I write a book and on it and have a lot of people read/believe it. Hey, it works for religion. :-D Jeremy Falcon Imputek "In fact it is quite simple, men and women both only want one thing - what they can't have!" - phykell
-
phykell wrote: Unfortunately I believe you missed my point. Well, not to focus solely on her, other female CPians do this as well (like Lauren), but the fruit of many of their conversations revolve mainly around male CPians who have a pic. I'm sure I'm not the only one that picked up on this pattern because we are all programmers here. This, of course, goes the other way around too. I see male CPians using any opportunity to reply/talk to a female CPian with a picture. There's nothing bad or wrong about this, that's just life. phykell wrote: I certainly wouldn't even consider choosing my friends specifically to increase my chances of meeting women. This is not what I am implying directly. For one, some people do choose their friends like that. I don't. But, I'm referring to the subconscious aspect in which you do not think about what's happening, you just feel a connection. And, if you weren't interested in sex, you wouldn't be married. Some people manifest their needs differently. You may find your needs fulfilled through a monogamous relationship and therefore get what you like at home in a secure environment amiss of first impressions and snap judgements. phykell wrote: I don't dress to attract them and I don't drive a specific car to attract them. In fact, the sort of women that might be impressed by cars/money, whatever, are exactly the sort of women I wouldn't want to meet. Which is exactly why you didn't do these things. But, you have gone through some ritual to get your woman - it was just probably different. Whether it's intelligence or a nice butt, people have their criteria for the perfect mate. phykell wrote: I will freely admit that I am not in the position of having to look for a female partner as I'm already happily married. Perhaps my opinion might be different if I was single, but I certainly hope not. People do look for it if it's not already present. If you didn't, you wouldn't be married in the first place. If you got divorced, in enough time, you'd be looking for it again. Jeremy Falcon Imputek "In fact it is quite simple, men and women both only want one thing - what they can't have!" - phykell
Jeremy Falcon wrote: Well, not to focus solely on her But that's exactly what you did - you mentioned Trollslayer by name. Jeremy Falcon wrote: I see male CPians using any opportunity to reply/talk to a female CPian with a picture. Well, I'm a relative newcomer but I've not noticed that sort of behaviour. Perhaps you are just much more observant than me. Jeremy Falcon wrote: Which is exactly why you didn't do these things. But, you have gone through some ritual to get your woman - it was just probably different. Whether it's intelligence or a nice butt, people have their criteria for the perfect mate. No, you're trivialising it or trying to categorise and rationalise. It's much more complicated. I have ethical and moral values also which come into play as you can imagine. I'm simply *not* just driven by sex and I don't necessarily have specific rituals. The fact is that I believe in love at first sight and I firmly believe that's what happened to me - no mere, short-lived chemical reaction... :) For example, I might have specific preferences but depending on the girl, those can all go and fly out of the window. That's how it *really* is (thankfully). "The folly of man is that he dreams of what he can never achieve rather than dream of what he can."
-
Defensive ? One of the problems with a message board is that you can't hear someones tone of voice or watch their eyes so its easy to misinterpret what they say (this is probably a factor in flame wars on the net). And yes, I'm going to say it again, its nothing to do with pictures. The reason ? Its not. Simple. Believe me, if it was about pictures I would say so, yet despite this you have told me twice what drives my decisions. I find this interesting :suss: As to flirting, if we didn't do it the next generation wouldn't exist ! The interesting part is that its you thats has been looking at pictures. I actually look at profiles for what else is there since a static picture tells you very little about someone. Ravi Bs profile is one of the best and his site the most fun. Elaine (fluffy tigress emoticon) Would you like to meet my teddy bear ?
Trollslayer wrote: The interesting part is that its you thats has been looking at pictures. I actually look at profiles for what else is there since a static picture tells you very little about someone. Agreed, the only picture I've looked at is Trollslayer's teddy bear and obviously, I don't consider that flirting :) In fact, everyone should look at my picture because it's easily the most attractive you'll see here :) Perhaps I should add my homepage but then you lot might discover what truly awful code I've written! "The folly of man is that he dreams of what he can never achieve rather than dream of what he can."
-
Trollslayer wrote: The interesting part is that its you thats has been looking at pictures. I actually look at profiles for what else is there since a static picture tells you very little about someone. Agreed, the only picture I've looked at is Trollslayer's teddy bear and obviously, I don't consider that flirting :) In fact, everyone should look at my picture because it's easily the most attractive you'll see here :) Perhaps I should add my homepage but then you lot might discover what truly awful code I've written! "The folly of man is that he dreams of what he can never achieve rather than dream of what he can."
phykell wrote: In fact, everyone should look at my picture because it's easily the most attractive you'll see here Very true. Nice cat! :D
8
SIMON WALTON
SONORK ID 100.10024 -
David Wulff wrote: ...is damned attractive? I mean, damn, Anna - hold that bus for me I'm coming with you! The guy must be one of the cutest human beings I have ever seen - male or female - and I know he is only 21, but when he is forty he will still look nineteen, and those eyes... well did I mention THOSE EYES? There is something hypnotically enthralling about those eyes! Paul Mckenner eat your heart out! Dave - that's a truly honest admission, and one most guys couldn't ever bring themselves to make. Well done. :rose: And yes, I do think he's damn cute. ;) Part of the reason is probably that by age 21 his bone structure won't have been noticeably affected by testosterone yet (and the fact that T-Girls who transition before age 25 or so are often so stunning bears this out). As he gets older he'll probably start looking a bit more rugged and "male", but it probably won't be that noticeable until he's 30 or so. Facial hair is the other big thing of course - it makes the skin much more coarse and generally gives it a hard time. His eyes won't change though - they'll always be pretty. :-D David Wulff wrote: So they you go; it seems I may have a bit of closet homosexual in me yet. No pun intended of course. *cough* Most guys don't get this, but admitting you think a member of the same sex is attractive does not make you gay - that implies a sexual preference, which is a different thing. I'd be very surprised if most of us hadn't come across someone of the same sex we'd been attacted to (even just a bit) at least once - and being ashamed of it leads to denial. That's certainly how I've felt in the past when it's happened to me. David Wulff wrote: I can't be alone, so who else thinks Elijah Wood is damned attractive then? Fluffly tigeress's not alowed, I want admissions from butch lions... Hehe I suspect few will be man enough to admit it even if they do agree...male society just couldn't cope with it. :rolleyes: Anna :rose: "Be yourself - not what others think you should be"
- Marcia GraeschAnna :) wrote: Most guys don't get this, but admitting you think a member of the same sex is attractive does not make you gay - that implies a sexual preference, which is a different thing. Even though I am one of those romantic, new age, get in touch with your feelings type of guys I think there is a difference between thinking someone is attractive and being attracted to them. I am fully capable of pointing out attractive men, but that is to me the same as pointing out an attractive wedding cake or a nice looking chocolate frog. David definitley crossed the line, he even wanted to ride the same bus. Saying that though there is nothing wrong with it, David can like whoever he wants to like, just as you can. Also you must not be part of the problem by pointing out things like that, you are almost defending him which is not needed because we are all mature, intelligent people. If you announced you were gay then we would not have a problem with it, or shy away.
Paul Watson
Bluegrass
Cape Town, South Africa -
Girls do it all the time, so why shouldn't we? Well minus the hair platting, constant talk about emotions and all that other girly crap that is... :laugh: Trollslayer wrote: PS This is my second post because you said I wasn't allowed to Ouch, I'm sorry. :) I just thought it would be universally "yes" if fluffy tigers were allowed to answer...
David Wulff http://www.davidwulff.co.uk
I'm not schizophrenic, are we.
David Wulff wrote: Girls do it all the time, so why shouldn't we <paul puts cynical male hat on> You slimy devil. Going all funny over that actor chap, then getting woman to respond (with even more "no women to respond please" tactics) as they oooh and aaah over David Wulff, sensitive male type. baah humbug, just another male hunting tactic I tell you. Now you have them were you want them. </paul puts cynical male hat on> ;P Oh and as for Mr. Wood (oh god, wrong choice of words) I find him a bit too efeminite in his looks to be attractive. If I had to point out attractive males then Pierce Brosnan, Mel Gibson and that guy from the West Wing.
Paul Watson
Bluegrass
Cape Town, South Africa -
Anna :) wrote: Most guys don't get this, but admitting you think a member of the same sex is attractive does not make you gay - that implies a sexual preference, which is a different thing. Even though I am one of those romantic, new age, get in touch with your feelings type of guys I think there is a difference between thinking someone is attractive and being attracted to them. I am fully capable of pointing out attractive men, but that is to me the same as pointing out an attractive wedding cake or a nice looking chocolate frog. David definitley crossed the line, he even wanted to ride the same bus. Saying that though there is nothing wrong with it, David can like whoever he wants to like, just as you can. Also you must not be part of the problem by pointing out things like that, you are almost defending him which is not needed because we are all mature, intelligent people. If you announced you were gay then we would not have a problem with it, or shy away.
Paul Watson
Bluegrass
Cape Town, South AfricaPaul Watson wrote: Even though I am one of those romantic, new age, get in touch with your feelings type of guys I think there is a difference between thinking someone is attractive and being attracted to them. I am fully capable of pointing out attractive men, but that is to me the same as pointing out an attractive wedding cake or a nice looking chocolate frog. Of course there is. What I was trying to say was that I suspect that many heterosexual guys - if they felt such an attraction even once, wouldn't admit it, even to themself. To do otherwise seems to label you as "gay" in male society, even if they didn't (or couldn't bring themselves to) "act" on it. Having said al that, what's in a label? All that should matter is whether you love the person - regardless of sex, creed or colour. As long as you're comfortable with who you are, why worry? Paul Watson wrote: David definitley crossed the line, he even wanted to ride the same bus. Saying that though there is nothing wrong with it, David can like whoever he wants to like, just as you can. Also you must not be part of the problem by pointing out things like that, you are almost defending him which is not needed because we are all mature, intelligent people. If you announced you were gay then we would not have a problem with it, or shy away. I think Dave is perfectly capable of defending himself without my help! That's certainly not my intention - I just find it refreshing to see someone who can openly admit to feelings which are "taboo". I'm actually surprised (and heartened) he hasn't taken any real flak for his admission. Remember the reaction I received in one case when I started talking last year? No matter how mature, we all have our hang-ups in one way or another - and I'm certainly don't claim to be an exception. God Bless, Anna :rose: "Be yourself - not what others think you should be"
- Marcia Graesch -
Jeremy Falcon wrote: Well, not to focus solely on her But that's exactly what you did - you mentioned Trollslayer by name. Jeremy Falcon wrote: I see male CPians using any opportunity to reply/talk to a female CPian with a picture. Well, I'm a relative newcomer but I've not noticed that sort of behaviour. Perhaps you are just much more observant than me. Jeremy Falcon wrote: Which is exactly why you didn't do these things. But, you have gone through some ritual to get your woman - it was just probably different. Whether it's intelligence or a nice butt, people have their criteria for the perfect mate. No, you're trivialising it or trying to categorise and rationalise. It's much more complicated. I have ethical and moral values also which come into play as you can imagine. I'm simply *not* just driven by sex and I don't necessarily have specific rituals. The fact is that I believe in love at first sight and I firmly believe that's what happened to me - no mere, short-lived chemical reaction... :) For example, I might have specific preferences but depending on the girl, those can all go and fly out of the window. That's how it *really* is (thankfully). "The folly of man is that he dreams of what he can never achieve rather than dream of what he can."
phykell wrote: But that's exactly what you did - you mentioned Trollslayer by name. Yes, but then I also gave another example. It seems as if she took it the wrong way I suppose, but hey maybe I should stressed more how much I don't think it's a big deal. phykell wrote: No, you're trivialising it or trying to categorise and rationalise. It's much more complicated. I have ethical and moral values also which come into play as you can imagine. You're not seeing the big picture. I was referring to your actions and preferences, not the reasoning behind them. And, to reiterate one more time, there are plenty of variables involved in any given situation. I spoke of possibilities and not definites; although your taste in women is seemingly reflective of your religious expectations (from your own words). So, my statement still does have merit provided it's viewed in the correct context. phykell wrote: I firmly believe that's what happened to me - no mere, short-lived chemical reaction Love is a chemical reaction. :) Jeremy Falcon Imputek "In fact it is quite simple, men and women both only want one thing - what they can't have!" - phykell