Y_B

You have good points, however there is sort of a creed I support and it's that "what you do defines you, not who you are". Otherwise intelligent people who frequently and with little contemplation make unintelligent decisions are not intelligent to me. Those who often "act" dumb and close minded probably are dumb and close minded. If it walks like a dog and barks like a dog, it's prolly a dog. It could be a cat, but it'll be a pretty weird cat. Also, since there is no way to measure intelligence quantitatively (IQ tests aren't accurate), we tend to rely on expression as a means to determine it's magnitude. The ability to express one's self is often a good indicator of one's own ability to form the respective thoughts to begin with, and what comes out of different people's mouths or their actions/inactions clearly shows a gap in the quality of the thoughts. In addition, you may harbor some inner creative thoughts or potential high levels of thinking, but unless you can manifest them in a way that is legitimately beneficial to you and satisfies a purpose, they do not do you any good. As far as your last question is concerned I strongly do not believe so. Also, I don't believe intelligence is indicated so much by ideas as it by reactions to the idea or solutions towards an idea. In other words, knowing what the number 2 means doesn't necessarily mean one would know what 2 + 2 is. It's making the connection that's important and some people can't make the connections. What inner thoughts do you believe one need to possess in order to distinguish itself from being a "dumb" thought or a "smart" thought anyways?

Not a chance. I don't pretend to know how intelligence is fostered but many people never sustain enough of it to use the brains that are in their heads. Many people are happy as pigs rolling mud by never being able to think beyond a high school level but that's their pereogative.

I don't claim to know how school fundings work, but from what I can deduce, it does make sense. Financial aid comes from the federal and state level and with increasing demands for aid, some public schools just can't maintain the same level of net student tuition revenue. Not that the lack of such tuition will bankrupt the school, but they'd still like to keep it above a certain amount annually. Why do you think the University of California system was giving priority admission to those who declared that they DON'T need any aid? As far as students getting ripped off, well nobody likes to see tuition increase and yeah, some increases just don't make sense. But I mostly see it as an incentive to keep on track with the 4 year plan. Besides, as a personal preference, I'd rather pay a little extra tuition every year if it's put to good use that I can enjoy, like to support construction or techno-advances.

Not a real couple in the couples sense, but they rule! Prepare for trouble! and make it double! To protect the world from devastation! To unite all people within our nation! To denounce the evils of truth and love! To extend out reach to the stars above! Jesse! James! Team Rocket blast off at the speed of light! Surrender now or prepare to fight!!! (Meowth doesn't count) N ow that I think about it, there had been implied love interest between those two towards the end.

You rang?

Is this that movie with Elijah Wood and that Home Alone kid? It was creepy as hell...

Yes, I agree that communication is the main factor that'll mediate most kinds of disputes so that a compromise can be best reached. However, communication can seldom be forced. There is a trust factor and an openness factor that each household has to foster in order to maintain the healthy level of communication and resolutions desirable. Some things like dating and sex, school, or personal inquiries are fragile topics to poke around and even with the willingness to discuss certain matters and behaviors, it can be awkward and without a good approach, people aren't likely to speak their minds openly. If I'm correct, it's almost a universal phenomenon that most dads have incredible trouble communicating with their daughters, especially on the matter of sex. I think this is one of the things that causes many parents to try to be their kids' friends rather than parents, which in my opinion can work well, but some parents over do it and pushes the kids away even more. In the case with my household, I guess I just don't get the sense of safe openness that's needed for me to be honest with my parents about a lot of things. Starting with the issue of sexuality, this has always been a big one, and this could be the thing that always made me feel that I can't be hones with my parents without bad retaliation about many things. When things are good, they are extremely good, but in the occasion in things are bad, it's really bad around here and I'm uncomfortable thinking about the really bad.

I dunno, I've always wondered about parenting and kids and just what it is that makes some methods more effective than others when it comes to managing your kids' behaviors. There are kids and parents here of all ages, so what do y'all think? I mean, there's gotta be something wrong when the more you attempt to correct your kids, they only get more clever in covering their mistakes. Rather than stopping problem-causing behavior, you're just breeding a "don't get caught next time" mentality. I'm left wondering whether it's the kids at fault for being too out of control or the parents at fault for being unable to handle situations correctly. There's prolly middle ground and I want to know where that is so when I have kids of my own in the future, I won't make the same mistake, because in retrospect, I haven't been honest with my parents about a lot of things and don't want my kids and I to have the same concealing relationship. My guilt over the matter wheels itself high and low depending on how I see the situation. Case in point, my mom was lecturing me the other day about my texting/calling habits, which aren't exactly outside of the norm, but she thinks different and there was no reasoning with my mom sometimes. As she was telling me all the ways she was gonna start monitoring and dictating my usage, I was already planning my ways around her surveillance rather than listening to her. She took notice of this one time and became even more strict, but that only further reinforced my determination to seek out ways to not let her succeed. A solution was never presented and ultimately, things will just escalate out of control until all there is left is resentment from both parties. I know things like this happen on all levels with all things, so I'm interested in knowing what you guys think. If you're a kid, why do you do some of the things you do and if you're a parent, why do you think your kids do this or are you even aware?

Hahahaha but didn't you hear? With the new Canon, there's this tricky setting that along with a sudden jerking motion, when clicking capture, causes a picture to be taken of 5 seconds from now.

Same reason why people give a shit about Justin Bieber

Welcome! Take a look around, we have a wide variety of goodies here and you're just in time for our summer orgy I'm kidding Mostly

It is rather difficult to see this in a black and white perspective and I agree and disagree depending on the circumstances, the people involved and what exactly had been done. A total act of idiocy from an usual idiot elicits less compassion from me than a singled out act from an otherwise thoughtful person. Sometimes you tell someone to refrain, but they refuse to listen because maybe they think you are wrong, have too much pride to think they are wrong, that there is a chance to escape the negative consequences, just like to take risks, etc. I also see your situation in two parts, one from your friend's side and one from you. I think despite their disregarding your warning and getting in trouble, they still counted on you to extend them a hand because that's what friends and especially family do for each other and it's up to you to decide what kind of person you want to be. My parents will love me no matter what I do or how many times I "don't listen" and vice versa.

Interesting observations. I'd like to comment on some of what you said above though mainly because I'm curious as to what you think. Basically what you summarized as some of the main differences between a guy hitting you and a girl hitting you is that one, guys are bigger and stronger, and two, guys lose their trustworthiness afterwards but girls do not. May I ask why the second reason came to be? Objectively speaking, the action of inflicting physical harm does not distinguish itself unique by gender, and from my perspective this phenomenon of trust-allocation is a matter of personal bias. A bite from a dog inflicts pain and frustration regardless of the gender of the dog, no? As far as physical size goes, there is a big gray area. From the reason that bigger men should not hit smaller women, will the hitting be justified if the man in question has a smaller physical size than the victimized girl? If so, should that be the exception to the rule? Also, would it make a difference to you if a girl who is taller and stronger hits you rather than a "regular" sized girl ? If so, are you proposing there is a threshold in size/strength difference that makes the action appropriate or inappropriate to you? My main concern over the matter, which you have mentioned a bit, is the window that would be open for women to take advantage. For instance, you have admitted to fighting dirty and hitting below the belt, but do not take accountability for your own actions as you seem to believe that you as a girl reserve this right to inflict pain on others while men do not. The window it opens calls for many women to take advantage of men without repercussion and it simply should not be tolerated.

Yes I am picking up my balls and going home, but I'll be smiling along the way. You two can gloat all night in your successful idiocy, but I'll bet before the sun rises, you'll both return to the corner of your padded cells and resume nibbling on your toe nails.

Dude, give it a rest. Maybe I shouldn't have jumped into a discussion not pertaining to me, but don't be a fool who follows the fool and keep fanning the flame when I had made it clear earlier that this part of the thread conversation is over. Serious, just let it go, you got absolutely nothing to gain from me reading w/e more you're gonna retort. If you absolutely need to insult me further, move into the soapbox or privately message me, but this thread has become f**king stupid.

Amen

It'll serve the situation well by reading the sequence of posts and taking the discussion in it's entirely rather than singling out my "win favor" post. What I was expecting surely was not her presenting forward her chest size to me in an argument in civility. As far as I am concerned, "well, i have huge boobs, so I'm good" is quite a laughable response. What is inane is that a 21 year old girl was attempting to argue civility with a elderly man and retort his reasoning with words of pretension and thoughtlessness. It is perfectly acceptable to have a discussion on what one considers chivalrous and courteous, however given the direction the conversation had already been going and its content, there was little reason for me to uphold a level of interest. As far as your second remark, yes perhaps that was not the best thing to say and I could have reworded it better, so I am sorry if my own pretension overcame me in the midst of argument. However, my +1 that somebody has given me clearly implies there is at least 1 person who agrees. Regardless, you may do what you wish based on your own judgments unmarred by my comment

Congratulations. You have succeeded in demonstrating the kind of thought-process that only works to lose women respect and have also attempted to win favor by exposing your breasts at a website used predominantly by gay men.Are you sure you are 21? I'm inclining to believe that perhaps your age has been exaggerated 11 years in addition to the 11 inches of larger chest size, in which case, this place is unfortunately not for you. Probably. However, I have no interest in further discussing inane matters with an ironically medieval feminist. My faith in the intellect of others on this site calls me to say that no one else would either.

Given that description, I would think you'd be more appreciative towards what some men do for you. Let's first define 'courtesy' and the implications thereof shall we? If I'm correct, courtesy is an expression of generally positively viewed manner in the form of social conduct and consideration for others. It speaks nothing of the possible unanimity to which it may be received, but rather adopting the truism of good intentions being usually well received. We would be hard pressed to perform a single action well received by all living creatures, however a cultural acceptance of the action would suffice. Given the logic, it would be irrational to deem a behavior as inherently disrespectful judging from the perspective of the very small percentage of the population in deviation from the norm, and when I say very small percentage, it is most likely not even statistically significant to be inclusive in any field of initial consideration. Additionally, it would be rather unreasonable for that percentage to ask for consideration without overt advertisement or requests otherwise. Since we are at Gayauthors, I will use the example of why it would not be rude for someone to ask a man or woman about their assumed opposite sex partner if said person had not been displaying outward signs of homosexual preference to begin with. "Do you have a girlfriend, John?", "Any lucky guys in your life, Jane?" With that said, perhaps the only disrespect come from those who expect societal inhabitants to be mind readers. Secondly and back on direct topic, opening the door for the unwilling is not opening the door for the unwilling and subsequently pushing the person inside. In the process of opening the door, any little accidents such as bumping into the person in consideration are just accidents that reasonable people would forgive. On note of your friend who refuses to walk into a building that you've held the door open for, well that is his problem, and even you have admitted it seems rather odd to you that your simply gesture of kindness towards someone is met with rebuttal.

Might we have a 3rd anniversary reprise soon? Some members like me simply were not born yet in 2007

Hahaha are you a Belieber??

Holding the door for someone is a common courtesy not a charity for the weak or an act of seduction. It speaks volumes about people when they can and do perform these little selfless gestures, and I can proudly say that I was raised to hold the door unconditionally. It's not shown everywhere, which is unfortunate but it's not a bad thing to emulate.

Thanks for sharing your story Steve. Great post from a great guy. <3

You could have checked ahead of time Pretty much Hey but think of it this way, now you can get drunk with your chaps for the next 6 months yyayyyyy. oooor emulate those who "take forever to go to school" and drink until you're 25. I'd word that as "connoisseur of alcoholic beverages" in the resume though rather than "hung over and trashy"

I find it ironic that many women, especially feminists, spend great efforts to promote equality in society and the work place but when it comes to defending one's self in the face of adversary, whether physical or not, they pull the "women" card. The truism of "can't hit a girl" is outdated to me. Personally, I do not and will not resort to physical violence, but my inactions do not excuse one from being deserving of the action. Under the circumstances, I can watch a boy or a girl get decked in the face without blinking an eye.