Are profile dick pics the same as vagina ones?
|
Posted:May 30, 2016 12:59 pm
Last Updated:May 31, 2016 11:54 am
2860 Views
|
Looking through my hot list to see who is on, and I notice a fair number of vagina profile pics. Being male and more susceptible to sexual images, I can rationalize the attraction to those photos and profiles among the pretty faces also there. In some ways, it is sexist to say no dick pic if you also post a vagina, ass, or breast photo as your profile since you think it is your most alluring property. Guys want to show what they offer. In some ways, is sex and the genitals the prize on this site? Are these photos not the equivalent to dangling the carrot before the to get them to move.
Shaved and unshaved? Digital proof is so easy to display, and who doesn't want to show off all that work in the shower? or in the gym? Face pics are much more difficult to post for the world to see you're looking for sex. Facebook to connect with family and friends and your identity here can soon be discovered.
I still have difficulty trying to tell if this site is primarily for dating or sex. I suppose that is a personal choice. I am not against sex, and many times it is the reason to spend time on the site, it is not the only reason to be here. Meeting others online and following up in real life are also goals. Sending those face pics before meeting goes a long way towards the commitment of actually meeting, but can still be easily faked in the short term.
I rail against rules, and my profile pic proudly displays one. It goes back a long way to a cartoon in my youth, and a halloween costume almost as long ago. I still don't know if I want to show my face here, or give it out. With all the sister sites one can sign up on, spreading the wrong idea is much too possible to be associated with some. I hope others can see the humor in the photo and take a closer look with all the comments about making people laugh and attraction.
Friend finder has many meanings, but friends with benefits is more what I would be looking for over time. Sex on the first date, not likely.
A diamond has many facets to reflect light and make you look at the sparkles. Each of us has those same dimensions to attract others to take a closer look and not much space to do it in. Each shows what they consider their best feature to get a closer or second look from others. Some must really think they are good at doing the deed! Is not confidence one of those traits that women find sexy???
Needless to say, there is nothing like the come hither look to get you off the couch and out of the house to meet others or to see if it still works as well or better than it used too. Combining both facial and genital impressions is likely the best of both worlds in attraction and getting that second look.
|
|
|
1
comment
|
|
why did cowboys give up their guns?
|
Posted:Dec 31, 2015 2:50 pm
Last Updated:Oct 14, 2016 1:19 am
4016 Views
|
With gun control being a response to the mass shootings and active shooter defense by allegedly having more gun carry options on the street, let's see if history can teach us which is more likely to succeed. At one time nearly every old west inhabitant was familiar with guns to defend their property and lives from indians, robbers, and gunslingers sent to kill them. Clearly they had an open carry mentality and more gun philosophy.
In the 1920s and 30s, outlaws outgunned police with automatic weapons. In some ways, today's SWAT is a response to the drug trade and turf wars a few decades back, as was the creation of the FBI to deal with illegal alcohol distribution during prohibition. Clearly better training and weapons was an historical response. Today's nsa would be following in those footsteps. I'm not sure better armed citizens would be a logical extension of that thinking.
I also grew up hearing that more people are injured by guns meant to defend themselves than kill home invaders and robbers. Part of it is rationalizing killing by the average citizen versus a criminal facing many years behind bars and essentially ending his life. Clearly the robber has more incentive to escape prosecution by killing witnesses and hoping to escape without penalty.
The 10 commandments say not to kill, but that hasn't prevented wars or crime. Is some jewelry worth a man's life? Money? The TV set? Where does one draw the line? Men and now women are being trained for war and killing. How long is their training period in boot camp before specializing? Six months? a year? Clearly one day to teach gun handling and shooting to arm mass quantities of citizens to protect against a few thousand terrorists worldwide willing to become suicide bombers and mass shootist doesn't seem a likely win (They can't get big numbers, they keep killing themselves!). Willing to die is not quite the same as suicide bombers and shooters.
Hot tempers and easy access to guns would probably kill more people than lowering the body count of active shooters and ease how difficult it would be for criminals to obtain guns when they could become easy and valuable home theft items.
I'm not sure why cowboys stopped carrying their guns. It likely was several things coming together, or in today's vernacular, a perfect storm of events. This would include the forced migration of indians to reservation as the conclusion of the indian wars. More private and public law enforcement. Think armed guards in banks, stage coaches, and trains, making them harder targets to hit and more likely for ending criminal lives adjusting the balance of easy Money for little risk. Last was likely marshals and other lawmen becoming part of the frontier towns as they developed permanence and names instead of fading to ghost towns as populations rose.
I'm pretty sure I would not want to defend myself, and would take the approach of many establishments. That is, property is not worth dying over. Call the police and report the crime, don't try to stop them by yourself.
Guns also are a bit more permanent of a solution. I think people have ramped up fights to gunfights to ensure they do not bring a knife to a gunfight. I also suspect that as each incident hardens a target, others will become targets to get the most notoriety with each attack. Plane hijackings are almost unheard of now that each passenger is in a life threatening situation and not merely inconvenienced or held for ransom. I'm not sure what blowing up planes accomplishes, but we are too entrenched in travels to realistically stop flying unless it becomes unsafe and more dangerous than driving. It also gets expensive to replace planes and airports. Those helping terrorists cold be eliminating their own jobs and they will need to find new work.
Cruises would be the same, but is a limited market already. How many people would be terrorized if a cruise ship blows up and sinks? They have life boats don't they, or they would need a big bomb. even the Cole didn't sink with a boatload of explosives.
I have a feeling I would not be prepared to squeeze the trigger unless it was self defense. I wonder how many of us could kill living animals with guns and gut, clean and eat it as a way of preparing to defend yourself against home invaders? Cage free food would take on new meanings. I think most of us are happy not to do this and are thankful for domestication as we get more removed with food production and throw Money at it instead.
It will take government to fund the fight against terrorists and not the average citizen. This is not the British, Mexicans, Spanish or other country that we are fighting their army with minutemen and militia with clearly defined lines of us and them for governance. I don't think the terrorists will win the war. I also don't know why Germany supported one side of the Spanish civil war except to test weapons and methods before launching into ww2 and weapon production. I also don't know why people from other countries went to fight there as well. The glory of war has faded considerably, yet it still seems like everybody is still looking for scapegoats to demonize and seek to eradicate so a greater society can be made without them, and yet businesses wants to embrace diversity!
Now, can anybody answer why cowboys gave up carrying and displaying the guns they had and hid them in gun safes instead of mounted on the wall for easy access? We probably need to learn from history and not repeat and relearn lessons again since we have the internet and instant answers.
While not perfect or able to stop all terrorists, the nsa and increased focus on them from other organizations will help. They too can learn from their mistakes and make it harder for terrorist to be successful. Eventually popular opinion will govern what happens as outrage will demand action and like Saddam and weapons of mass destruction be either right or wrong when that happens.
|
|
|
3
Comments
|
|
