[ubermik]

Actually no, its a discussion site, and this topic has arrived on a thread so I’m “discussing it”

As youre rapidly retreating from discussing the topic I wont respond in full, but a few points

The good “looking people” comment is one I’ve heard quite literally thousands of times from both men and women over the years and it seems the most common explaination is the ego and self absorbtion of the good looking person making them selfish sexual partners

As with anything, if it was merely my own observation I’d just assume I could have chosen a partner more effectively, so a wholly incorrect assumption there

Had I said NO good looking people were good in bed or that only fuglies were then youre comments and eroneous assumptions might have been relevant to what I’d written, as I didnt say either of those things they werent

Even the “what you put in” comment isnt acurate, talk to any couples or relate councillor and they will tell you that. Many people just dont KNOW how to give, some through lack of experience, some because of ego, some because of sexual or emotional issues and some just simply because theyre selfish and think sex is JUST about them or take the “WHEN I get what I want THEN I will reciprocate” view, then end up waiting a VERY long time to name just a few of the more common ones

The orgasm comment wasnt anything at all as you would have liked it to have been, it was a completely serious question expecting a serious answer

Firstly I dont do frustrated, and secondly I dont do emotional where merely discussing a topic on an internet discussion site is concerned, its a web site not real life or anything ever relevant or important

So the orgasm point, its not bullshit at all. unless of course as do about 90% + of women you are labouring under the delusion that a man EJACULATING is him having an orgasm, which isnt the case, thats why its CALLED ejaculating to begin with you see

Both men and women ejaculate AND orgasm, the two can happen independtantly of each other or together, and most men have never been brought to orgasm and never will AND most women wouldnt know where to begin trying to get a man to an orgasm, ejaculation is far easier by comparison

So agreement is a bit of an impossibility unless youre actually talking from a position of fact and demographics rather than from one of assumption really

But if you will insist on readong [artially inclusive statements as totalitarin ones then even I would disagree with me lol, but I tend to stick to what people have actually said rather than what I would prefer them to have said, it makes a lot more sense when trying to have an adult discussion on an adult topic and avoids menopausal tizzy fits, name calling and illinformed social all inclusive assumptions

Obviously we wont agree on methodology either it would seem from your last post lol

[ubermik]

Well that sentiment, belief AND what its based on pretty much applies to every woman alive

And a picture of a pair of lips is a bit irrelevant really dont you think?

Infact the visually most sexually attractive men and women are quite often the least sexually enjoyable for a start and men and women far less obviously attractive will often be the more sensuous and sexual. So mere aesthetics mean nothing, and the belief that they do count for something is often part of the reason people ARE so dull between the sheets or on the kitchen table for that matter

So no, looking at a picture of your lips is totally eroneous, says nothing whatsoever and if you think it does then youre extremely mistaken

As for what you’ve been told, try asking men who you havent slept with AND who dont want to sleep with you what THEY tell women who arent “all that” on the helmet worshipping department

“the best at……” in most cases really just means “the person who has just been…….”, its actually quite comical so many women dont know that or choose to believe it to protect their fragile egos lol, especially considering they do it themselves anyway quite frequently

I noticed you didnt respond to the orgasm comment tho lol :wink:

Pensive on that one eh? :lol: :wink:

[ubermik]

Infact, if you REALLY want to put some perspective on the subject

MOST women have never made a man have an orgasm even accidentally, wouldnt have the faintest idea how to make a man have an orgasm and dont even know men CAN have an orgasm

[ubermik]

@pinkyoda wrote:

@ubermik wrote:

Lastly) I said if you want a job doing PROPERLY, so even if I did have an available woman to perform the act the rib quandry would still apply to it being done well, coz although we tell ickle wimminsey folks they are brill at it thats purely because were too lazy for ribremovalectomies and opt for the cop out of telling the little dears they have the hang of it to continue getting ok, average or substandard workwomanship rather than none :lol:

z) I’m still paying off the fine from last time I got caught trying to smear next doors poodle in marmite and remove all of its teefies :?

A) But they dont NEED training, you just have to be creative with how and where you serve their dog food :wink:

Obviously another man who has never had a woman who knows what she’s doing, or are you just another man who has never had a woman? :P :P :P :P

Lol, Obviously you’re someone who buys into “go girl” post modern feminist nonsense it seems

Ok, to put it into perspective

Most men it seems think ANY BJ is a good one, most also WOULD rather repeatedly get an average one on a regular basis than none at all, most men also DO tell women they are “super fabbo at them” when either they arent, or simply because they dont know the difference between a good one and an average unimaginative one

Many women dont actually ENJOY doing them, they do them because of what it gets them in return, because they feel its expected or “normal” to do them, because they know men like them, because they know men DONT like to NOT get them and a whole host of other eroneous reason

But as with cunnilingus, someone who actually enjoys felating tends to be far better than someone who doesnt, someone with imagination will be better than someone with none and unfortunately that does seem to rule out most women as I would guess if it were possible for a woman to reach her own slime chute THAT would also be better than “most” if not all men, as nobody knows what THEY like at any given moment in time any better than them themselves which is common sense really and SHOULD go without saying

But to put a bit of blatant logic in response to your reply

A man who HASNT had a woman who knows what she is doing wouldnt KNOW most are pretty drole, average and unremarkable at doing them, to THAT man even the crappiest BJ would seem amazing. To realise they arent you have to have had some that ARE amazing

Which is hardly surprising really considering that even most BJ’s depicted in porn films are actually pretty crap and ininspiring anyway, so its hardly like young men are bombarded with knowledge about what makes for a GOOD schlong chobbling really to begin with

On the flip side tho, although pretty much every woman alive THINKS they are fabulous at them, thats merely because of what they will have been repeatedly told by countless men who would rather have had those average or substandard blow jobs rather than say otherwise and risk the woman acting like a woman and going on a BJ blockade in protest as is a common reaction amongst ickle wimminsey folks when theyre “fabulousness” at such things is called into question

Infact, most women would whinge like a stuck pig if men put as little effort and imagination into going down on them as they show during a BJ lol

So now I DO know the difference, have experienced it from quite a few partners but they are far from the majority it would appear, most are just pretty ordinary at doing them, some pretty crap but ALL “think” they are “super” at them no matter how good or dreadful they really are

But it does seem the case that the women who truly are exceptional are also the ones who are less likely to ever say so, whereas the more someone does comment on how “excellent” they are the worse they seem to be at them for some strange reason :?

[ubermik]

As for your ghetto comment

“a section of a city, esp. a thickly populated slum area, inhabited predominantly by members of an ethnic or other minority group, often as a result of social or economic restrictions, pressures, or hardships.”

A well off area popuilatred by turd tappers WOULDNT be called a gay ghetto now would it?

So it DOESNT refer simply to an area populared by a social group alone, and its racial connotation IS still its majorative useage in that even the worst crappiest WHITE areas doesnt get called a ghetto by the press or left wing touchy feely tofu munching recycling tree huggers, THAT is more commonly refered to as a “sink estate” and is blames on the inhabitants attitude as per left wing government spoonfed directives

But were the exact same area filled with pakis and blacks then it would be a ghetto, and would be due to them being discriminated against and “herded” together by the racist establishment and the racist white population not welcoming them in true multicultural ecstatic open armed friendship etc blah de blah

Two scenarios, same country, same level of benefits but two totally different left wing explainations for it and two totally different reactions two it as well as two totally different ways of labelling it

But the “ghetto” would be the first in line to get regenerative money spent on it tho, “coz they iz poor ickle downtrodden oppressed poor blackies innit”

If you want to criticise most government spending you shouldnt react to the “culprit” as handed to you by the government, you should look deeper as its rarely got anything whatsoever to do with whoever is being blamed, most tax and rates money is wasted before it even gets a sniff of the services its collected for. Stop that wasteage and the services would have more money than they knew what to do with

[ubermik]

Now whos missing thge point?

Who IS the council?

Suppose you track a hundred quid of your money spent internally, you pay it, then its paid from central funds where most tax goes to begin with, then its given to the benefits agency, is used to pay someones council rent, and THEN, it goes back to central funds and is used elsewhere, lets say a hospital, a school or a bin mans wages

So even after its used to pay rent it STILL eventually and in total gets spent again because council rents are a bit of a misnomer like civil servants paying tax, the money stays within the government until it gets spent on an external non governmental thing

So that £100 could in effect have paid 50 peoples COUNCIL rents, which would then be shown on paper as £5000 of tax payers money being spent on funding housing

Now lets suppose we didnt have council houses, the very first time that £100 gets paid to a private landlord the government dont have it anymore, its gone, so to ACTUALLY pay £5000’s worth of private rent it DOES cost that amount, whereas paying council rent is like throwing a boomerang whereas paying a private rent is more akin to throwing a thousand frisbees

Personally the way I would RATHER see the issue of cost that seems SOOOO important to you fixed isnt your way, it would be by fixing the price of land for domestic dwellings across the country and equalising the value of property build on it, so a house in the centre of glasgow would cost the exact same price as an identical house with an identical amount of land in london OR even brighton

The point you and people like you miss is if you had kids you would want them educated, you;d want them to be able to go to hospital if needed, you’d want your bins emptied, your car washed, a burger if you wanted to visit macdonald, subway or where ever

People doing those jobs and countless others will NEVER be able to afford a £400,000 house, council housing ISNT the vestige of the immigrant exclusively, its the place where many civil servants and working class people doing grunt jobs live because they will in many cases NEVER be able to afford to buy

A house being council owned has an added advantage of being more able to be a council “home” for them to raise a family in as they offer far more stability than private renting which is fraught with people changing the type of rental, selling the property, kicking tenants out to aim for a higher paying type of tenant etc etc etc

So how about to phase out the need for council houses we make your house and every other one like it in the entire country worth £125,000 so that nurses and teachers can afford to buy one then?

Which in turn would negate many government pay increases, lower your council tax and save you having to pay as much for council houses anyway? Because the reason some houses DO cost £3/4/500,000 pounds in one part of the country that ALSO has schools but the same house would cost a quarter of that elsewhere in itslelf is reason enough for us to have council housing with controlled rents

None working immigrants however shouldnt be being sent to seaside areas with little work, but should be being shipped to the cheaper poorer more industrialised areas or just not be being allowed into the country to begin with unless they already have a job or are being sponsored, and even then NOT if they have any dependants whatsoever

[ubermik]

Not really

Had I said that all council estates where non whites live ARE ghettos, and that NONE of the council estates where whites live are a mess I’d be saying what you seem to be reading

But have I used ALL or NONE anywhere?

So “some” can be not just assumed, but in lieu of a totally inclusive or exclusive word is the ONLY assumption that is acurate

What we are asked to believe is that ALL black council estates are ghettos because they are poor, yet we have white council estates that ARENT even tho the residents on both estates will be getting the SAME benefits

The point with that is it leaves two possible reasons

1) it has nothing to do with money, otherwise the white estates would also be in ALL cases as much of a mess AND would or should then also be called ghettos

2) Not ALL none white estates will or should be a mess either, meaning its purely to do with who lives on them, not the colour of their skin and most definitely not because they are on benefits

I cant quite honestly comment on “nice” none white council estates as to be totally honest all of the ones I’ve ever been to or worked in around the midlands HAVE been a total mess, whereas with white ones some are and some arent, so to have the extreme based on personal experience I can ONLY comment on the fact that there ARE non messy white council estates, saying black or of any majorative colour would simply be an assumption, not an observation

But the main point revolved around the money and the claim that they create these ghettos because they iz “poor”, so to show ANY ethnic group on the same money who DONT live in such squalor disproves the excuse given leaving other reasons of either a cultural or not quite so all inclusive nature

I will however half concede that seeing as there are bits that could have been clearer, but only half purely because what you are saying I meant WOULD need me to have used words like ALL and NONE which you do seem to have chosen to read when the words I used only intimate that some of each are and some arent or MIGHT not be also reinforced by me quite clearly offering the possibility that it WASNT to do with the colour of someones skin, merely the people who live there which was quite clearly stated and doesnt imply or suggest any one particular ethnicity or lack thereof which isnt vague at all, but it IS a very good way of stating something to see how people choose to read and interpret it which is why you’ll notice I do it quite a lot lol

[ubermik]

Well why WOULD you be laughing at me Bat??

I still have my clothes on :oops: :lol:

[ubermik]

Has anyone even checked the house?

Taking into account their dilligence perhaps they totally forgot to even take her with them in the first place :lol:

[ubermik]

Thats one of the more macabre things about this entire fiasco, I’d guess quite reliably I think that the other two kids would need to be close to their parents and feel safe now more than ever as even at 2 they will have some degree of awareness of their sibling who they have been around since birth not being there

Leaving them with other people just seems like a continuation of the totally selfish lack of consideration that caused maddy to be abducted, you think they’d have learnt their lesson by now and at least be trying to pretend theyre capable of being at least poor to average parents if not better

[Author]

Posts