Lord Ellpus wrote-
Quote:Bendy, you have gone out of your way to pick on and belittle me on this thread, for no apparent reason other than the fact that you seem to have a chip on your shoulder as regards to the way that I interact quite well with females.
I gave an excellent reason in post 2262299. I find your kind of ingratiating, sniggering schoolboy approach in which you constantly refer to your willie, either directly or tangentially, demeaning to the female sex in general and damaging to the interests of men everywhere. I have plenty of experience in pubs witnessing that style where juvenile smut stands in for witlessness, attempts to hide a profound disrespect for ladies and results in an embarrassed wintery smile in any company of even average intelligence. I don't consider it to be any sort of interaction with ladies and any lady who feels it is is not the sort of woman who's company I would seek and not the sort of woman we ought to be encouraging. The situation is quite bad enough as it is without pushing it further. I consider it a national disgrace and a harbinger of a breakdown in the relationship between men and women. You may disagree with that but it is an "apparent reason". It also demeans Britishness in the eyes of any intelligent readers from overseas who may well get the impression that that is what we are all like.
I am British too and am quite entitled to defend another strand in our national life which not only do I think exists but is actually the majority view. It surprises me that British reticence has sunk to the point where you are complacently satisfied with your own assertion that you interact "quite well with females". Small talk in not interacting and "females" are a much larger and more diverse a group than the very small number of ladies who come on here. I can do Genet smut if it's smut required and that would have a general rush to the vomitorium on the end of it.
Quote:You made no mention of my interacting with the males, or even yourself.
Why would I? Talking about how men interact is not interacting. It's psychotherapy. I've offered sport betting, a short discourse on Steve's point about "aspiration" and Sir Cliff Richard as interactional possibilities and no interaction has been forthcoming because the Droitwich trouser twitch (as if) and the visit to the toilet have taken precedence, both of which are unsuitable topics in polite company.
Quote:I interact with almost everyone quite successfully on A2K, and if that bothers you, that is your problem.
I consider your mode of interaction on here to be contentless and directionless and akin to chirping. The smear that "if that bothers you", which it doesn't, is typical of the chirping fraternity as is the repeated complacent assertion. To go from the "if" to "your problem" is plain puerile. One can hear the echoes of its past use in other social settings.
Quote:If it is the particular gripe you have about me playing around with the ladies, what would you like me to do?
I have no gripe about playing around with the ladies. I would like you to raise the game a bit above the animal reflex level.
Quote:If you feel that other people are having more success with females, you need to go and talk to someone about it, or relieve your tension in another way, at least once a day.
Once again the non-committal "if" as precursor to a facile,self-serving jibe linked to a coy reference to wanking which is well known to be a repetitive activity of those who refer to it more than strictly necessary and highly demeaning to ladies whose power is dependent on the monopoly of the function. But I give precedence to your obvious superiority in such matters. You obviously know more about the subject that I do so maybe you could offer some practical advice on the best fantasies for the vinegar stroke moments.
In my experience those militantly putting forth their "success" with ladies are in the biggest mess. The ladies are flattering their egos for purposes of their own. Your statement could equally well be applied to prize marrow growing and algebraically equates the two.
Quote:I am not going to change my behaviour because of one pompous prig who has an insecurity problem. I could drag at least twenty other A2K members in here (female AND male) who would probably say that they wouldn't want me to change my behaviour either.
That's as maybe. I want you to change your behaviour. You are breaking union rules as far as I'm concerned. You are a danger to the masculine interest and ladies respect the masculine interest. Those who don't are heading down the tube and I hear them squealing about it every night without the slightest sense that they have brought it on themselves.
Quote:Or......if it something to do with hormones...go with a sage piece of advice I once heard in a lecture regarding the male sex drive, and the problems it causes.
The psychiatrist simply commented that "an orgasm a day, keeps the psychiatrist at bay"
Another "if". An asserted "sage". An admission of going to lectures on the "male sex drive" which is a first for me. I've never met a bloke who admitted going to one of those until now. Your psychiatrist was obviously not a Catholic and may possibly have been importuning. It seems odd that a psychiatrist should help you keep psychiatrists at bay. Was he trying to talk himself out of a job.( A likely story). Was the "orgasm" he had in mind anything to do with ladies or does any method suffice. If the former those who think the advice "sage" are in thrall to ladies with all the sad consequences that entails and if not it then leaves nothing for ladies to exploit. Staying with ladies, where does the jism go. Are the ladies expected to deal with it. An orgasm does involve the jism. Have you ever heard of masturbatory burn-out? Had your psychiatrist ever heard of it? One can't go year after year of one a day on Jean Whiteside's cleavage or a pair of tabloid pert perkies with three million in circulation and some blowing around the streets. Did your expert not offer a top ten of efficient fantasies for his class.
What was his advice to soldiers in the middle-east? Are the psychiatrists on hand when they return from a mission?
Any sign of love in all this?
Quote:As far as this being smorg's thread, that is irrelevant.
Not to me.
I apologise to smorgsy for taking so much room up but there is no way I am leaving that superficial and grubby claptrap on the record for young readers to see without them having an opportunity to consider another viewpoint.
Quote:You have singlehandedly turned the heat up on this thread, for what reason, I do no know.
So be it. You have my reason right there. What's so good about turning the heat down?
Quote: i won't be clicking this particular thread any more.
Which turned out false within half an hour.
PS. It is not in Dotty's long-term interests to fail to apologise for her interjection that we are "boring". Mistakes are grossly compounded by defending them in all areas of social life.
