You can pick them up cheap at Milliways.
7 Likes
But that’ll take forever! pouts
5 Likes
Spice beer?
3 Likes
This is where, because we’ve carried this thread off the tracks and into outer space, I plug this exceptionally funny travelogue by Douglas Adams and Mark Carwardine…
7 Likes
Yeezus, I leave you people alone for four hours and come back to find you’ve turned this fustercluck of a thread into a lounge with a free-for-all bar.
Good work. Carry on.
16 Likes
5 Likes
10 Likes
Obligatory
10 Likes
…thanks ratman
since all steel comes out china for europe it does
not have the same quality as it used to… just saying
10 Likes
according to her stats she weighs in at 55kg, which by my math is a lot less than 160lbs.
2 Likes
Debating her weight as if she is some object is precisely the type of conversation the hivemind cultural immune system is trying to avoid.
Unless, of course, you intend to argue that she could, theoretically, be carried by TWO swallows, which would be, of course, a Holy DeRail.
14 Likes
No one said she was the fashion police.
8 Likes
Yep, really.
1 Like
You might want to check on how you parsed anything here into someone saying “you are wrong for feeling ”. The “not okay” part may be your wetware and may or may not need a patch.
Allow me to suggest that this:
combined with:
Who is offended? You? The officer? Which one of those two are you? How did you know that the officer felt that way? How are WE to know how YOU might feel about that? should we be psychic, or omnipotent?
What was (and really only mildly) offensive was you making the attribution of what ‘shiny things’ meant, and then getting offended by THAT ATTRIBUTION, and then addressing your complaint to another user for an association which was made by YOU, and upset YOU - in the name of an upset officer who probably didn’t read these comments and even then only MIGHT be upset (whereas you were the one who “seems” to be bothered by it.) The offense seems to be a well polished defense, one where I have to be ominipotent and psychic to avoid being addressed as a sexist, against which I might feel the need to defend myself.
Can you say why you took the comment personally? Because your response was maybe more personal and cutting than you’re taking credit for.
I’m not particularly bothered by the antics, but you did ask. I believe you’ve made an attribution error, followed up with what appears to be sarcastic indifference (caring and then not caring). What othet than a passive aggressive eyeroll is staid with “Ugh, really?”? Passive aggression is still aggression. It’s not defense.
Since you asked. Have a good day out there! Try not to put words in anyone elses mouth and then point out how rude their words were.
4 Likes
Is that at all sarcastic? Actual question!
1 Like
It uses exaggeration to get its point across, as sarcasm tends to do, if that’s what you’re asking.
2 Likes
Was it even vaguely necessary though, given how eagerly we all jumped on the mankinis?
When you combine that with the fact that none of the conversation was even fractionally as titillating as the article (which specifically mentioned that she said she’d do it naked) and comes across as kind of disrespectful to your fellow posters.
There’s a MASSIVE line between appreciating beauty (and spectacular muscle tone) in somebody who is clearly proud of her physique and objectifying somebody. It’s not a slippery slope.
5 Likes
17 Likes
