Your Dating Experiences

Emotionally damaged =/= good source of advice.

Originally Posted by Aziel Satori

Emotionally damaged =/= good source of advice.

emotionally damaged = epic luv machine




Yethhh...umm...Aiii amm tvhuuu ladees maaaan!

I just find the recent ignorance in the thread amusing.

Originally Posted by Aziel Satori

I just find the recent ignorance in the thread amusing.

hey baby, can't deny it unless ya try it.

You obviously have no idea what I am talking about.

Originally Posted by Aziel Satori

You obviously have no idea what I am talking about.

oh but I do.

But let's pretend for discussion's sake that I don't: would you care to enlighten me?

*bats eyelashes*

I can clarify.

You don't know who you are talking about.

Originally Posted by Aziel Satori

I can clarify.

You don't know who you are talking about.

yes, of course.

but neither do you.
However, I could be grossly mistaken.....

I do know who I'm talking about, and I do know that ignorant things were said, because I know better.

That is undeniable.

Originally Posted by Aziel Satori

I do know who I'm talking about, and I do know that ignorant things were said, because I know better.

That is undeniable.

really?

because I'm denying it right now as we speak.......

*cue music*
i wanna hold your haaaaaa aaaaaaa aAa nd

I WANNA HOLD YOUR HANNNNND!

*smokes a cig*

You mean you are in denial.

You don't know me, just like you don't know anyone else you talk about, which makes the things you say invalid.

You can talk about text all you want and not be contested unless you simply "get it wrong", but when it comes to other people, especially when you are confronted with others who know them better, all you can do is defer.

well, I do know some of the people I talk about, (which makes part of that last post invalid).

and for the record, I'm almost done with this bottle, so I had to look up "defer" in the dictionary...

And upon reading the implied meaning of said verbiage I conclude that I do not like the implications......

*cue 5-1 guitar cadence*

"I wanna hold your hand."

Now you've both lost me.

Here is some advice: Don't do things when your judgement is impaired, unless you are prepared for the consequences.

My point is simply this: You don't know them as well as I do. Not even close.

Originally Posted by Aziel Satori

Here is some advice: Don't do things when your judgement is impaired, unless you are prepared for the consequences.

My point is simply this: You don't know them as well as I do. Not even close.

Impaired judgement is merely a state of mind.
I have made accomodations and trained specifically for altered states of mind. Therefore, my judgement is often quite sound.

Now, physical reflexes are a different matter altogether.....

You are probably correct. You know them much better than I do.


*srry to whom all the people we have lost in cyberspace.....*

Devia Eramus - dude, I admit I laughed some xD, but stop provoking her! And Aziel Satori, relaaaaax, lady, you've pushed your point that you've seen this and that, and experiened la-di-da. Alright already. Lighten up, this thread is turning annoyingly dreary.

BACK ON FREAKING TOPIC:

I just remembered that a boy asked me out on a date when I was six, but I flung mud in his face date can mean something very vulgar in a certain Polynesian language xD. I remembered that last night when my friend's little brother told me he liked a girl in his kindergarten ;-;

That wasn't my point... my point was in reference to something Devia mentioned, and I simply stated that he didn't know what he was talking about.

Or rather he didn't know who he was talking about well enough to make a comment like that.

Forgive me if *I* missed your point, Aziel, but whatever your point is, it's obviously something y'all can take to PM or your pages because it's turning into a one-on-one chat thing here.

I'm not really the dating type. I suppose I just never cared enough, haha. But I've met Shigs, and I haven't had to go through a billion horrible dates for it either, so I'm rather lucky.

Good evening.

The last scene was interesting from the point of view of a professional logician because it contained a number of logical fallacies; that is, invalid propositional constructions and syllogistic forms, of the type so often committed by my wife. "All wood burns," states Sir Bedevere. "Therefore," he concludes, "all that burns is wood." This is, of course, pure bull****. Universal affirmatives can only be partially converted: all of Alma Cogan is dead, but only some of the class of dead people are Alma Cogan. "Oh yes," one would think.

However, my wife does not understand this necessary limitation of the conversion of a proposition; consequently, she does not understand me. For how can a woman expect to appreciate a professor of logic, if the simplest cloth-eared syllogism causes her to flounder.

For example, given the premise, "all fish live underwater" and "all mackerel are fish", my wife will conclude, not that "all mackerel live underwater", but that "if she buys kippers it will not rain", or that "trout live in trees", or even that "I do not love her any more." This she calls "using her intuition". I call it "crap", and it gets me very *irritated* because it is not logical.

"There will be no supper tonight," she will sometimes cry upon my return home. "Why not?" I will ask. "Because I have been screwing the milkman all day," she will say, quite oblivious of the howling error she has made. "But," I will wearily point out, "even given that the activities of screwing the milkman and getting supper are mutually exclusive, now that the screwing is over, surely then, supper may, logically, be got." "You don't love me any more," she will now often postulate. "If you did, you would give me one now and again, so that I would not have to rely on that rancid Pakistani for my orgasms." "I will give you one after you have got me my supper," I now usually scream, "but not before" -- as you understand, making her bang contingent on the arrival of my supper.

"God, you turn me on when you're angry, you ancient brute!" she now mysteriously deduces, forcing her sweetly throbbing tongue down my throat. "**** supper!" I now invariably conclude, throwing logic somewhat joyously to the four winds, and so we thrash about on our milk-stained floor, transported by animal passion, until we sink back, exhausted, onto the cartons of yoghurt.

I'm afraid I seem to have strayed somewhat from my original brief. But in a nutshell:

Sex is more fun than logic -- one cannot prove this, but it "is" in the same sense that Mount Everest "is", or that Alma Cogan "isn't".

Goodnight.