Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Don't ask, don't tell, don't persueFollow

#2202 Jan 27 2012 at 10:09 AM Rating: Good
******
44,301 posts
Alma wrote:
You can't get any more challenging.
You could stop screening.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#2203 Jan 27 2012 at 10:15 AM Rating: Excellent
****
6,470 posts
Almalieque wrote:
Eske wrote:
I've no doubt that he dismisses anyone who really challenges his beliefs as an idiot.

His efforts to prove just how objective and logical he is are doing an amazing job at accomplishing the opposite!


Read above.. Nice try. Your point of view doesn't make you smart or dumb, it's your logic and rationale for supporting it. The reality is, most people just support stuff without actually researching anything.


Mmmm...but conveniently, nobody here has ever been able to provide sufficient logic or rationale to sway you, I'm sure.
____________________________
Latest Articles:
Monaco: What's Yours is Mine Review

Follow me on Twitter!
#2204 Jan 27 2012 at 1:27 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
****
7,476 posts
Alma just how long have you been locked in the closet anyway?
____________________________
HEY GOOGLE. **** OFF YOU. **** YOUR ******** SEARCH ENGINE IN ITS ******* ****** BINARY ***. ALL DAY LONG.

#2205 Jan 27 2012 at 9:20 PM Rating: Good
Drunken English Bastard
*****
15,264 posts
When Alma reaches 10k his title should be
False!:1 (11.1%)
Nice try:1 (11.1%)
Read above:1 (11.1%)
Other (state below):6 (66.7%)
Total:9
____________________________
My Movember page
Solrain wrote:
WARs can use semi-colons however we want. I once killed a guy with a semi-colon.

LordFaramir wrote:
ODESNT MATTER CAUSE I HAVE ALCHOLOL IN MY VEINGS BETCH ;3
#2206 Jan 27 2012 at 9:21 PM Rating: Excellent
******
44,301 posts
Post 206.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#2207 Jan 27 2012 at 9:30 PM Rating: Excellent
Gurue
*****
16,289 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
Post 206.

This or Making Stuff Up.
#2208 Jan 27 2012 at 9:35 PM Rating: Good
Drunken English Bastard
*****
15,264 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
Post 206.
I hate myself for not thinking of this...
____________________________
My Movember page
Solrain wrote:
WARs can use semi-colons however we want. I once killed a guy with a semi-colon.

LordFaramir wrote:
ODESNT MATTER CAUSE I HAVE ALCHOLOL IN MY VEINGS BETCH ;3
#2209 Jan 27 2012 at 9:49 PM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
28,315 posts
Nilatai wrote:
lolgaxe wrote:
Post 206.
I hate myself for not thinking of this...


I hate myself for not reading this post in time to claim it.

____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#2210 Jan 27 2012 at 11:09 PM Rating: Good
****
6,470 posts
It has to be Post 206. Before that happened though, my vote was for this.

Edited, Jan 28th 2012 12:09am by Eske
____________________________
Latest Articles:
Monaco: What's Yours is Mine Review

Follow me on Twitter!
#2211 Jan 27 2012 at 11:32 PM Rating: Good
Everyone's Oiran
Avatar
*****
15,923 posts
If it's not Post 206

Almalieque
Misunderstood.


He'll think that's an adjective, we'll know it's a verb.
____________________________
<3

http://www.reddit.com/r/Forum4/
#2212 Jan 27 2012 at 11:56 PM Rating: Excellent
Everyone's Oiran
Avatar
*****
15,923 posts
So, finally bothered reading post 206. Alma said, "When everyone is treated relatively the same, you see a Soldier, regardless of ***, nationality, age, etc."

Amazing. He just can't grasp the concept of the sentence "When everyone is treated relatively the same, you see a Soldier, regardless of sexuality, ***, nationality, age, etc."

Then he goes into managerial details, which would be fixed like all the other organisations do it: *** men bath and bunk with the straight women, lesbians bath and bunk with the straight men. Bi's get put anywhere and get to make everyone blandly indifferent, uncomfortable, or interested, as the case may be.

In one way I can sympathise with Almalieque. People routinely change their social rules when they go into a professional situation. Sometimes radically change their social rules, which can be initially startling and hard, but is usually adjusted to quickly, when given a personally important reason to do so. For an example, a civilian radically changes social rules when joining the military, or a monastery, and expects to do so. The thing is, in the usual case the rules of the organisation are known ahead of time and the person goes in agreeing to abide by the change in social rules. In the case of an organisation of pretty fixed membership changing its rules, the fixed members are stuck with something that may have prevented them from joining the organisation in the first place, if they'd known about the new rule ahead of time.

Alma joined a military with an underground ***** population. I can understand him getting grumpy if he now has to deal with treating ****** relatively the same, as Soldiers, regardless of sexuality, ***, nationality, age etc. It's not what he joined up expecting to deal with.

Edited, Jan 28th 2012 12:57am by Aripyanfar
____________________________
<3

http://www.reddit.com/r/Forum4/
#2213 Jan 28 2012 at 1:02 AM Rating: Excellent
Cervixhouse-Five
******
30,643 posts
In other words, Ari, Alma's a coward?
#2214 Jan 28 2012 at 1:55 AM Rating: Excellent
Belkira wrote:
In other words, Ari, Alma's a coward?
SEE post #519


ALSO: SEE post #520 in the DADT thread.Smiley: tongue


Edited, Jan 28th 2012 12:57am by Bijou
____________________________
Allegory wrote:
Bijou your art is exceptionally creepy. It seems like their should be something menacing about it, yet no such tone is present.
#2215 Jan 28 2012 at 4:39 AM Rating: Excellent
Everyone's Oiran
Avatar
*****
15,923 posts
This makes me reminiscent of my nightclub days. The first time I was taken to a ***** club I was startled when my *** friend walked in with me to the women's toilets. After a moment's beat for my brain to catch up, it made perfect sense. Not only the queens used the women's, but hordes of *** men dressed simply in male club gear. I didn't bother staking out the men's toilets to see who used them. I know some of the lesbians used the women's. And I don't remember seeing any of the leathermen in the women's. Which I think is fairly indicitave, given I was usually, if not always at that particular club 8 hours a night on Friday and Saturday for a long time. So I got a fairly representative view of the women's toilets at that particular favourite club.

I was just as comfortable doing all my bathroom things around teh gays and bis as I was with other women. One time I went into a cubical with my bestest *** friend and his boyfriend and stripped off my corset top (leaving my torso naked above my skirt) so that the boyfriend could strip his top and try my corset on. He wanted to use it as part of a stage costume.*

Note to women: don't loan your female cut clothing to males, however skinny they are. They never come back the same.

*Three people in a toilet cubicle? Wasn't it rather crowded in there? Yes, actually, we were packed in like three giggling sardines. Especially since one of us was a 6'5" Greed god with proportionate shoulders. Luckily his shoulders were far above my head.

Edited, Jan 28th 2012 5:44am by Aripyanfar
____________________________
<3

http://www.reddit.com/r/Forum4/
#2216 Jan 28 2012 at 5:13 AM Rating: Good
******
27,272 posts
Aripyanfar wrote:
Especially since one of us was a 6'5" Greek god with proportionate shoulders.
Keep talking.
____________________________
Theophany wrote:
YOU'RE AN ELITIST @#%^ AETHIEN, NO WONDER YOU HAVE NO FRIENDS AND PEOPLE HATE YOU.
someproteinguy wrote:
Aethien you take more terrible pictures than a Japanese tourist.
Astarin wrote:
One day, Maz, you'll learn not to click on anything Aeth links.
#2217 Jan 28 2012 at 6:39 AM Rating: Good
Everyone's Oiran
Avatar
*****
15,923 posts
He had a long narrow face and a perfect body. Not slender, not over-ripped. Firm and muscular. Not much body hair. Wide shoulders, and (gack, cliche) narrow hips. Long long legs. Dark, slightly wavy hair. Slightly gold skin all over. Chocolate eyes with elegant black lashes. Not quite almond shaped eyes but close. Lush cherubic lips, a sweet soft voice with a very foul mouth on him. A long and slightly hooked nose saved him from being pretty. Between his body and his nose he looked like a manly man. He sounded like a twink, moved like a female cat-walk model, and waved his hands dramatically like the good Mediterranean male he was. He filed his fingernails into short but discreetly perfect curves.

He garnered death threats from homophobes at uni, and conversely picked up a lot. When he left the on-campus residences, his mattress protector was so drenched head to toe in old ***** that the offended cleaners threw it out instead of laundering it, and refused to give back his rental bond.
____________________________
<3

http://www.reddit.com/r/Forum4/
#2218 Jan 29 2012 at 6:29 AM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
9,047 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
Alma wrote:
You can't get any more challenging.
You could stop screening.


That would defeat the purpose of having an intellectual conversation or having my beliefs challenged. If I just talked with someone who agrees with everything I say, then I will not be able to see it from another point of view. If I wanted to talk with someone that doesn't have any substance, then I would just come here. It all balances out.

Eske Esquire wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
Eske wrote:
I've no doubt that he dismisses anyone who really challenges his beliefs as an idiot.

His efforts to prove just how objective and logical he is are doing an amazing job at accomplishing the opposite!


Read above.. Nice try. Your point of view doesn't make you smart or dumb, it's your logic and rationale for supporting it. The reality is, most people just support stuff without actually researching anything.


Mmmm...but conveniently, nobody here has ever been able to provide sufficient logic or rationale to sway you, I'm sure.


Not anyone, but for the most part. When you call people homophobes or closeted homosexuals for not supporting a homosexual gain, you really can't expect people to take you seriously.
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#2219 Jan 29 2012 at 6:38 AM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
9,047 posts
Aripyanfar wrote:
So, finally bothered reading post 206. Alma said, "When everyone is treated relatively the same, you see a Soldier, regardless of ***, nationality, age, etc."

Amazing. He just can't grasp the concept of the sentence "When everyone is treated relatively the same, you see a Soldier, regardless of sexuality, ***, nationality, age, etc."

Then he goes into managerial details, which would be fixed like all the other organisations do it: *** men bath and bunk with the straight women, lesbians bath and bunk with the straight men. Bi's get put anywhere and get to make everyone blandly indifferent, uncomfortable, or interested, as the case may be.

In one way I can sympathise with Almalieque. People routinely change their social rules when they go into a professional situation. Sometimes radically change their social rules, which can be initially startling and hard, but is usually adjusted to quickly, when given a personally important reason to do so. For an example, a civilian radically changes social rules when joining the military, or a monastery, and expects to do so. The thing is, in the usual case the rules of the organisation are known ahead of time and the person goes in agreeing to abide by the change in social rules. In the case of an organisation of pretty fixed membership changing its rules, the fixed members are stuck with something that may have prevented them from joining the organisation in the first place, if they'd known about the new rule ahead of time.

Alma joined a military with an underground ***** population. I can understand him getting grumpy if he now has to deal with treating ****** relatively the same, as Soldiers, regardless of sexuality, ***, nationality, age etc. It's not what he joined up expecting to deal with.

Edited, Jan 28th 2012 12:57am by Aripyanfar


Wow.. your analysis is really, really off, but I sympathize with you. People routinely don't understand how someone can possibly have an objectively opposing view. You think that there must be something inherently wrong with that individual to avoid questioning your own beliefs and create fallacious scenarios to support yourself. When you realize this, then maybe, you can understand how seeing someone relatively the same isn't a contradiction to DADT.

Edited, Jan 29th 2012 2:40pm by Almalieque
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#2220 Jan 29 2012 at 7:04 AM Rating: Excellent
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
34,744 posts
Speaking of DADT, is the military weaker yet?
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.
Need a hotel at a great rate? More hotels being added weekly.

An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#2221 Jan 29 2012 at 7:30 AM Rating: Excellent
Alma wrote:
Wow.. your analysis is really, really off, but I sympathize with you. People routinely don't understand how someone can possibly have an objectively opposing view. You think that there must be something inherently wrong with that individual to avoid questioning your own beliefs and create fallacious scenarios to support yourself. When you realize this, then maybe, you can understand how seeing someone relatively the same isn't a contradiction to DADT.


The Arguement goes like so:

Q. Alma, why do you oppose *** rights?

A. Post 206.

Then you tell him what you got out of post 206. I did it & others have done it before you. In every single instance, he's insisted that what WE got out of 206 isn't what he meant. Since we don't understand what he meant by what he wrote, he can't be wrong. Ask for clarification, & he refers to #206.

And so on.

I will attempt it, one last time. Alma, answer any one of the following 3 questions & please use complete sentences.

Alma, why do you have an "opposing view" of *** rights in general?
Post DADT repeal, how has the repeal effected you?
Why would you support DADT re-in statement?

Failure to answer these questions can only result in you remaining a cowardly, homophobic, ******. 2K + posts AFTER 206, what's there to lose?




Edited, Jan 29th 2012 8:54am by Omegavegeta
____________________________
"The Rich are there to take all of the money & pay none of the taxes, the middle class is there to do all the work and pay all the taxes, and the poor are there to scare the crap out of the middle class." -George Carlin


#2222Almalieque, Posted: Jan 29 2012 at 7:33 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Depending on what you are defining.. There's a Soldier that I work with that I would bet plays for the wrong team and he's not being open about anything. As I said, women are the primarily people who are open about it. The environment has not changed to accept male homosexuals.
#2223 Jan 29 2012 at 8:57 AM Rating: Excellent
Gurue
*****
16,289 posts
The wrong team??

Smiley: facepalm
#2224 Jan 29 2012 at 9:19 AM Rating: Excellent
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
34,744 posts
Almalieque wrote:
Uglysasquatch wrote:
Speaking of DADT, is the military weaker yet?


Depending on what you are defining.. There's a Soldier that I work with that I would bet plays for the wrong team and he's not being open about anything. As I said, women are the primarily people who are open about it. The environment has not changed to accept male homosexuals.

I've told many people that they keep playing around, that they are going to end up getting an EO complaint. Before, those complaints couldn't be made because you would be telling on yourself. Now, they can be made. I just stay out of it.
So no then.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.
Need a hotel at a great rate? More hotels being added weekly.

An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#2225Almalieque, Posted: Jan 29 2012 at 10:05 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Depending on what you are defining.. There's a Soldier that I work with that I would bet plays for the wrong team and he's not being open about anything. As I said, women are the primarily people who are open about it. The environment has not changed to accept male homosexuals.
#2226 Jan 29 2012 at 10:25 AM Rating: Excellent
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
34,744 posts
Repeating your "point" word for word doesn't help change my opinion on your answer being no. Expadning might, but I doubt it.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.
Need a hotel at a great rate? More hotels being added weekly.

An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#2227 Jan 29 2012 at 10:53 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,240 posts
Almalieque wrote:

Depending on what you are defining.. There's a Soldier that I work with that I would bet plays for the wrong team and he's not being open about anything.
How much would you bet?
____________________________
Alma wrote:
Post and be happy!
#2228Almalieque, Posted: Jan 29 2012 at 11:38 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) That wasn't my intent. Your response appeared to have not placed any thought in my response, so I decided to repeat myself. If you're actually willing to take a moment and consider what I'm saying, then I have no problem trying to explain it in another way. People have admitted to not actually reading what I write, so it doesn't make sense for me to put any additional effort.
#2229 Jan 29 2012 at 11:43 AM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
9,047 posts
Elinda wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

Depending on what you are defining.. There's a Soldier that I work with that I would bet plays for the wrong team and he's not being open about anything.
How much would you bet?


Don't know.. I walked pass him googly eying some half naked stereotypical *** looking dude in the computer lab. When his boss (as a *** joke) sat on his lap, he didn't even react.. just sat there and continued to talk as if it were normal..

I could be wrong, but if I had to guess, I would say that he has sugar in his tank.
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#2230 Jan 29 2012 at 11:45 AM Rating: Excellent
****
6,470 posts
Almalieque wrote:
ugly wrote:
Repeating your "point" word for word doesn't help change my opinion on your answer being no. Expadning might, but I doubt it.


That wasn't my intent. Your response appeared to have not placed any thought in my response, so I decided to repeat myself. If you're actually willing to take a moment and consider what I'm saying, then I have no problem trying to explain it in another way. People have admitted to not actually reading what I write, so it doesn't make sense for me to put any additional effort.

As I said, it depends on how you look at it. Fire power did not, will not and can not be affected by the change, so therefore, of course it hasn't changed.

Women have become more open, because lesbians are more socially accepted and there were pretty obvious from the start anyway.

I have not seen any men come out as part of the reason why DADT was put in place from the beginning. So, you can take that however you want.

On the other end, given the above statement, the military has gotten much weaker in defending the needs and wants of the military as opposed to political agendas for elections.

So, the ability of the military to function as a fighting force wont be affected until more men become open. As long as they stay closeted, it will be no change like before, except not getting kicked out when found out. It will most surely take a downfall then overtime move it's way back up. That's true for anything. If the military went Co-Ed, it would have severe problems at first, then over time, it will be Star ship Troopers.


That, right there, is some amazing logic.
____________________________
Latest Articles:
Monaco: What's Yours is Mine Review

Follow me on Twitter!
#2231 Jan 29 2012 at 11:45 AM Rating: Excellent
Drunken English Bastard
*****
15,264 posts
Almalieque wrote:
Elinda wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

Depending on what you are defining.. There's a Soldier that I work with that I would bet plays for the wrong team and he's not being open about anything.
How much would you bet?


Don't know.. I walked pass him googly eying some half naked stereotypical *** looking dude in the computer lab. When his boss (as a *** joke) sat on his lap, he didn't even react.. just sat there and continued to talk as if it were normal..

I could be wrong, but if I had to guess, I would say that he has sugar in his tank.

You do realise that not every straight guy flips out when another straight guy sits on their lap, right?
____________________________
My Movember page
Solrain wrote:
WARs can use semi-colons however we want. I once killed a guy with a semi-colon.

LordFaramir wrote:
ODESNT MATTER CAUSE I HAVE ALCHOLOL IN MY VEINGS BETCH ;3
#2232 Jan 29 2012 at 11:52 AM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
9,047 posts
Nilatai wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
Elinda wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

Depending on what you are defining.. There's a Soldier that I work with that I would bet plays for the wrong team and he's not being open about anything.
How much would you bet?


Don't know.. I walked pass him googly eying some half naked stereotypical *** looking dude in the computer lab. When his boss (as a *** joke) sat on his lap, he didn't even react.. just sat there and continued to talk as if it were normal..

I could be wrong, but if I had to guess, I would say that he has sugar in his tank.

You do realise that not every straight guy flips out when another straight guy sits on their lap, right?


Who said anything about flipping out?

It's part of a running joke. The average guy would go along with it and ask for more and do something back.. that's why it's called a "*** joke". There is a percentage of men that would move out of the way. There's a minority that would flip out. "Positive" or "negative", there's some sort of reaction. Not, saying or doing anything is suspect.
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#2233 Jan 29 2012 at 11:58 AM Rating: Excellent
Drunken English Bastard
*****
15,264 posts
Why? Maybe he wasn't interested in your juvenile joke? Maybe he doesn't have a sense of humour?
____________________________
My Movember page
Solrain wrote:
WARs can use semi-colons however we want. I once killed a guy with a semi-colon.

LordFaramir wrote:
ODESNT MATTER CAUSE I HAVE ALCHOLOL IN MY VEINGS BETCH ;3
#2234 Jan 29 2012 at 12:59 PM Rating: Excellent
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
34,744 posts
Almalieque wrote:
On the other end, given the above statement, the military has gotten much weaker in defending the needs and wants of the military as opposed to political agendas for elections.
The military has always been on the hook to political agendas. Always. Having gottenm hit by it again, make sit no weaker than any other political agenda that has affected it. Actually, this one was pretty small in comparison to others that have hit it.

Quote:
So, the ability of the military to function as a fighting force wont be affected until more men become open. As long as they stay closeted, it will be no change like before, except not getting kicked out when found out. It will most surely take a downfall then overtime move it's way back up.
The ability of the military as a fighting force is not certain to be affected. Other nations that have allowed homosexuals to serve haven't been affected. History actually points to there being no serious problems and the small one there were, were negligible and overcome fairly quickly.





____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.
Need a hotel at a great rate? More hotels being added weekly.

An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#2235 Jan 29 2012 at 1:39 PM Rating: Excellent
Cervixhouse-Five
******
30,643 posts
Just reading the euphemisms that Alma uses to tell you that someone is a homosexual is disgusting. "Playing for the wrong team," "Has sugar in his tank." Could you be any more immature?

It does lend some credence to the "you're *** and you won't admit it" theories. Especially since he apparently spends so much time analyzing ways to convince people that someone's not ***.
#2236Almalieque, Posted: Jan 29 2012 at 3:28 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) 1. It wasn't my joke,.. I already stated that EO complaints will increase with that type of behavior.
#2237 Jan 29 2012 at 3:35 PM Rating: Excellent
Everyone's Oiran
Avatar
*****
15,923 posts
I think they are just indicative of his strongly hostile attitude towards gays.

For future reference Almalieque: "He bats for the same team" is the usual euphemism. "has sugar in his tank" is just plain offensive, indicating that there is something wrong with how he works as a person.

Shame on you. If someone thinks or behaves in a way you disagree with strongly, but they aren't actively harming anyone else, or themselves, shouldn't you live and let live?

Obviously you feel harm from just being around gays in the military. Smiley: oyvey
____________________________
<3

http://www.reddit.com/r/Forum4/
#2238 Jan 29 2012 at 3:36 PM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
9,047 posts
Ugly wrote:
The military has always been on the hook to political agendas. Always. Having gottenm hit by it again, make sit no weaker than any other political agenda that has affected it. Actually, this one was pretty small in comparison to others that have hit it.


Continuing making the "same mistake" doesn't weaker you? Really? Smiley: dubious So I guess making less mistakes doesn't make you stroner either? So.... what makes you stronger? No change?

Ugly wrote:
The ability of the military as a fighting force is not certain to be affected.

That makes no sense. If the people of the military are unhappy, then the their performance is at stake. That's really the bottom line.

Ugly wrote:
Other nations that have allowed homosexuals to serve haven't been affected. History actually points to there being no serious problems and the small one there were, were negligible and overcome fairly quickly.


That's why I wrote "So, the ability of the military to function as a fighting force wont be affected until more men become open. As long as they stay closeted, it will be no change like before, except not getting kicked out when found out. It will most surely take a downfall then overtime move it's way back up. That's true for anything. If the military went Co-Ed, it would have severe problems at first, then over time, it will be Star ship Troopers."

People will overcome any comfort issue over time. That doesn't make it right. I was talking with a friend today and she was saying how sad it is that people are used to getting rocketed because it happens so much.
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#2239 Jan 29 2012 at 3:37 PM Rating: Excellent
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
34,744 posts
Almalieque wrote:
2. If he weren't interested in that joke, then he would have taken some form of offense. He didn't take offense, because it didn't bother him.
I've had *** friends and straight friends do that to me. Doesn't phase me in the least and I just continue on with what ever conversation I was in before. At most, I might pause to ask "Comfortable?"
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.
Need a hotel at a great rate? More hotels being added weekly.

An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#2240 Jan 29 2012 at 3:39 PM Rating: Excellent
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
34,744 posts
Almalieque wrote:
That makes no sense.
Sorry, I only know English and some French.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.
Need a hotel at a great rate? More hotels being added weekly.

An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#2241 Jan 29 2012 at 3:48 PM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
9,047 posts
Belkira wrote:
Just reading the euphemisms that Alma uses to tell you that someone is a homosexual is disgusting. "Playing for the wrong team," "Has sugar in his tank." Could you be any more immature?


Read Below
Almalieque wrote:
Nadenu wrote:
The wrong team??

Smiley: facepalm

Tool



Belkira wrote:
It does lend some credence to the "you're *** and you won't admit it" theories.


Please explain your theory.

Belkira wrote:
Especially since he apparently spends so much time analyzing ways to convince people that someone's not ***.

?
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#2242 Jan 29 2012 at 3:51 PM Rating: Excellent
****
6,470 posts
Uglysasquatch wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
2. If he weren't interested in that joke, then he would have taken some form of offense. He didn't take offense, because it didn't bother him.
I've had *** friends and straight friends do that to me. Doesn't phase me in the least and I just continue on with what ever conversation I was in before. At most, I might pause to ask "Comfortable?"


Shame on you, Ugly. The proper heterosexual response is to throw them off you and jump up and down, frantically pawing at your pants to try to brush all the *** atoms off.
____________________________
Latest Articles:
Monaco: What's Yours is Mine Review

Follow me on Twitter!
#2243 Jan 29 2012 at 3:55 PM Rating: Excellent
Everyone's Oiran
Avatar
*****
15,923 posts
Oh, and for your info, I can totally see how just treating someone like a soldier isn't contradictory with DADT. My point is that people with other personality traits such as religiousness, atheism, progressiveness, conservatism, femaleness, different cultural or racial backgrounds etc don't have to hide those traits if and when they ever come up. Even if it's rare or it never comes up. Which is not fair when ****** have to lie about or hide those traits if and when they ever come up. Even if it's rare or it never comes up.

And I threw femaleness in there because there was a long period in western history when desperate or interested women joined military forces even when it was totally illegal for them to do so. They went to great lengths to hide their gender, but even so it was wither obvious from the get go what they were, or they were usually eventually sussed out. But in almost ALL cases, fellow soldiers and commanding officers turned a blind eye, and documented them and referred to them by their male pseudonyms. It only got awkward when they distinguished themselves in battle, and really had to be awarded a medal, and a public medal ceremony couldnt' be avoided. Lots of discreet warnings and straight faces by civilian politicians, who didn't always understand why women were illegally welcomed/tolerated in the military. (Most military were glad that there were other volunteers who made up numbers to be shot at, most civilians were revolted at the idea of women being put in harm's way.) Now women get to openly join the military, even if they are rightfully treated like any other soldier.
____________________________
<3

http://www.reddit.com/r/Forum4/
#2244 Jan 29 2012 at 3:58 PM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
9,047 posts
Aripyanfar wrote:
I think they are just indicative of his strongly hostile attitude towards gays.

For future reference Almalieque: "He bats for the same team" is the usual euphemism. "has sugar in his tank" is just plain offensive, indicating that there is something wrong with how he works as a person.

Shame on you. If someone thinks or behaves in a way you disagree with strongly, but they aren't actively harming anyone else, or themselves, shouldn't you live and let live?

Obviously you feel harm from just being around gays in the military. Smiley: oyvey




If that offends you, then you don't want to hear the "that's more wrong than two ........".. But, according to you all, the military was all for the repeal...This is the military environment.. It will eventually change, but your ignorance is astounding.

You too...are a tool.




____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#2245 Jan 29 2012 at 4:00 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
****
7,476 posts
Alma apparently can't tell the difference between someone who is comfortable with their sexuality and can take a *** joke or two. Then again the guy could be a huge puffer. I think Alma is just upset that the guy won't admit or deny it, because I am willing to bet Alma has a crush on this guy. Don't ya, ya big lug...gushing over the unit fairy.

On another note, why the @#%^ does it concern you if he is open about it or not? I thought you wanted DADT to be reinstated, I mean if that is the case why do you care if he smokes **** behind the barracks, considering under DADT he wouldn't be able to tell you and keep his job anyway.



Edited, Jan 29th 2012 5:07pm by rdmcandie
____________________________
HEY GOOGLE. **** OFF YOU. **** YOUR ******** SEARCH ENGINE IN ITS ******* ****** BINARY ***. ALL DAY LONG.

#2246 Jan 29 2012 at 4:04 PM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
9,047 posts
Uglysasquatch wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
2. If he weren't interested in that joke, then he would have taken some form of offense. He didn't take offense, because it didn't bother him.
I've had *** friends and straight friends do that to me. Doesn't phase me in the least and I just continue on with what ever conversation I was in before. At most, I might pause to ask "Comfortable?"


What was his motive? Was he sitting on you while making a sexual pass at you?
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#2247 Jan 29 2012 at 4:08 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
****
7,476 posts
I thought it was a joke? If it was a joke it was a joke. If it was a sexual pass it was a sexual pass. This is why made up stories are fun, so many angles to pick them apart. You jealous that he wasn't staring at you Alma?
____________________________
HEY GOOGLE. **** OFF YOU. **** YOUR ******** SEARCH ENGINE IN ITS ******* ****** BINARY ***. ALL DAY LONG.

#2248 Jan 29 2012 at 4:10 PM Rating: Excellent
Eske Esquire wrote:
Uglysasquatch wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
2. If he weren't interested in that joke, then he would have taken some form of offense. He didn't take offense, because it didn't bother him.
I've had *** friends and straight friends do that to me. Doesn't phase me in the least and I just continue on with what ever conversation I was in before. At most, I might pause to ask "Comfortable?"


Shame on you, Ugly. The proper heterosexual response is to throw them off you and jump up and down, frantically pawing at your pants to try to brush all the *** atoms off.
And expose the rest of the unit to them? Why do you hate disciplined, tough, focused and totaly-not-***-at-all (NO, SIR!) soldiers so much, Eske?
____________________________
Allegory wrote:
Bijou your art is exceptionally creepy. It seems like their should be something menacing about it, yet no such tone is present.
#2249 Jan 29 2012 at 4:16 PM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
9,047 posts
Arip wrote:
Oh, and for your info, I can totally see how just treating someone like a soldier isn't contradictory with DADT. My point is that people with other personality traits such as religiousness, atheism, progressiveness, conservatism, femaleness, different cultural or racial backgrounds etc don't have to hide those traits if and when they ever come up. Even if it's rare or it never comes up. Which is not fair when ****** have to lie about or hide those traits if and when they ever come up. Even if it's rare or it never comes up.


To reference post 206, you're acting like homosexuals are special and the only ones that have to "pretend" to be something that they aren't, etc.

Arip wrote:
And I threw femaleness in there because there was a long period in western history when desperate or interested women joined military forces even when it was totally illegal for them to do so. They went to great lengths to hide their gender, but even so it was wither obvious from the get go what they were, or they were usually eventually sussed out. But in almost ALL cases, fellow soldiers and commanding officers turned a blind eye, and documented them and referred to them by their male pseudonyms. It only got awkward when they distinguished themselves in battle, and really had to be awarded a medal, and a public medal ceremony couldnt' be avoided. Lots of discreet warnings and straight faces by civilian politicians, who didn't always understand why women were illegally welcomed/tolerated in the military. (Most military were glad that there were other volunteers who made up numbers to be shot at, most civilians were revolted at the idea of women being put in harm's way.) Now women get to openly join the military, even if they are rightfully treated like any other soldier.


Except they aren't treated the same as men... Hmmmm.. Nice try though..
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#2250 Jan 29 2012 at 4:25 PM Rating: Excellent
****
6,470 posts
Friar Bijou wrote:
Eske Esquire wrote:
Uglysasquatch wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
2. If he weren't interested in that joke, then he would have taken some form of offense. He didn't take offense, because it didn't bother him.
I've had *** friends and straight friends do that to me. Doesn't phase me in the least and I just continue on with what ever conversation I was in before. At most, I might pause to ask "Comfortable?"


Shame on you, Ugly. The proper heterosexual response is to throw them off you and jump up and down, frantically pawing at your pants to try to brush all the *** atoms off.
And expose the rest of the unit to them? Why do you hate disciplined, tough, focused and totaly-not-***-at-all (NO, SIR!) soldiers so much, Eske?


Oh, my bad. I forgot that the military has a different protocol.

You're supposed to jump on the guy like a live grenade. Smiley: grin

Edited, Jan 29th 2012 5:26pm by Eske
____________________________
Latest Articles:
Monaco: What's Yours is Mine Review

Follow me on Twitter!
#2251 Jan 29 2012 at 4:29 PM Rating: Excellent
Supreme Lionator
*****
14,174 posts
If I ever have a child, I'm going to show it this thread every time it misbehaves.
____________________________
“Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires.”
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 52 All times are in CST