|
by Quentin Beck 04/11/2007, 2:16am PDT |
|
 |
|
 |
|
Zseni wrote:
The gift of beauty - given to you by professional beauty-makers, in arrangement with an entire cultural engine which determines what beauty looks like this season - is a gift of supreme powerlessness. Hot chicks rule but the ruling is pointless; everything that makes them hot also makes them dependent on dudes who want hot chicks.
The only reason fashion works is because anyone can dress a beautiful woman as badly as they like and she'll still look beautiful. Then, they can pretend they had something to do with it and call it fashion. It changes but beauty doesn't. In fact, right up there with death and taxes are gorgeous sharp jaws, bright eyes, and stiff collars (which are also timeless). Cultural engines have nothing to do with it.
If you rub poos on Natalie Portman's face, she'll still look gorgeous. You'd have to cut her pretty bad to change that; I don't even think burning her would be enough - at least, not for me, and photos of her now will look just as good in 100 years. I would masturbate over naked internet pictures of Audrey Hepburn and Marilyn Monroe if I were given the opportunity. I would probably also masturbate over fakes, and I've never masturbated over fakes ever!
I also think you and the other Quentin Beck are way off about pretty girls ruling, too. There's not a guy on earth who could successfully look past a pretty girl's tits, so she won't get useful feedback from any male until she's too old to do anything about it. Who knows what kind of shit grows in a mind that closed. She's not ruling anything up until then, either; she's just getting a lot of help from successful men in exchange for fucks.
I like your idea about taking abused women to shoot guns, though. My girlfriend was beat up by her ex-fiancee for 4 years, so I got her with very little effort and risk. A steal! She is 7 years older than me, though, and fucked, but I (like you) thought I could fix her up enough to make her worth keeping. But it's not easy and not worth it, so now I'm just trying to fix her enough that she doesn't get picked up by some asshole when I turn her out.
Diving and shooting are on the agenda. Hopefully we don't bond too much and all the growing happens independently. |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
Boys are a huge problem. by Zseni 04/10/2007, 2:26pm PDT 
Re: Boys are a huge problem. by Furcifer 04/10/2007, 3:17pm PDT 
Re: Boys are a huge problem. by laudablepuss 04/10/2007, 4:00pm PDT 
Re: Boys are a huge problem. by Furcifer 04/11/2007, 8:30pm PDT 
Re: Boys are a huge problem. by Mischief Maker 04/11/2007, 9:36pm PDT 
I thought in England private schools were shitty and public were exclusive NT by Mischief Maker 04/10/2007, 6:15pm PDT 
Explanation by Mischief Maker 04/10/2007, 6:16pm PDT 
Re: Explanation by Fullofkittens 04/10/2007, 6:57pm PDT 
It's bad. NT by Real lesbians are ugly. :( 04/10/2007, 7:14pm PDT 
Re: Boys are a huge problem. by Damn those Weinsteins! 04/10/2007, 8:11pm PDT 
Pfffff. Americans. NT by Quentin Beck 04/10/2007, 8:28pm PDT 
Re: Boys are a huge problem. by Zseni 04/10/2007, 8:38pm PDT 
Re: Boys are a huge problem. by Mischief Lifetime Network 04/10/2007, 9:23pm PDT 
Re: Boys are a huge problem. by Jhoh Cable o_O 04/10/2007, 10:30pm PDT 
Shoot yourself a smile! by Quentin Beck 04/11/2007, 2:16am PDT 
in middles ages plump was attractive, hot skinny is a modern construct NT by refuge of fat chicks 04/11/2007, 2:56am PDT 
You're thinking of the late Rennaissance. In the middle ages, by Zseni 04/11/2007, 6:38am PDT 
The ancient greeks considered small penises attractive. See: all of their art. by Jerry Whorebach 04/11/2007, 9:51pm PDT 
real power is complaining about company emails (then being ignored) NT by Flavio 04/10/2007, 9:04pm PDT 
I have to admit this made me laugh. ~_~ NT by Jhoh Cable o_O 04/10/2007, 10:31pm PDT 
IF you were human NT by Flavio 04/11/2007, 8:39pm PDT 
I was young and I needed the money. NT by Zseni 04/11/2007, 6:39am PDT 
|
|