>> ^dystopianfuturetoday:

Sorry to interrupt your sanctimonious wank session, but there is a huge difference between the citizens of Libya revolting against their dictator and Bush invading Iraq. There was no revolution in Iraq. You do realize that. Right?


Not in 2003. There were two former revolutions in Iraq though. One with the the Kurds, that ended with them being mass murdered by Saddam. Later, the Shia had a revolution, seized several cities, and were mass murdered by Saddam. We just watched those unfold and waited a few years before doing anything about it...

Sorry to interrupt your sanctimonious wank session, but there is a huge difference between the citizens of Libya revolting against their dictator and Bush invading Iraq. There was no revolution in Iraq. You do realize that. Right?

Five minutes to live? Probably have a wank.



Then sleep for four minutes.

>> ^kronosposeidon:

I'm not an Apple fan to start with, but I'm going to say anyway that their products always seem dumbed down and sterile. Really, Apple, I swear I can handle a few more buttons on my phone. Minimalism might be an interesting art form, but to me when you skimp on features it just seems cheap and controlling. >> ^vaporlock:
That's screwed up (no pun intended), swapping out peoples screws. It really turns me off that Apple is such a control freak. Their products always feel handicapped in some way. Without some opening up of the next I phone (mini SD slot, etc) I'm swapping to one of the great Android phones out now.



You should watch Jonathan Ives wanking off about his MacBook Air design on the Apple site. He's precisely the sort of tosspost Hoxton media twat I utterly detest.

That was a segment where Kari played with a blue ball and a blower. Plus she's hot and smart. I think wank jokes are not completely out of place here.

My flatmate in Vietnam once had a guy expose himself to her while controlling a motorbike. She was riding her pushbike and when she glanced to her right this guy was having a wank while riding in broad daylight in crowded traffic.

Word? Maximum wage? That's the answer?

First I'm oppposed to that on principle. Second, as if the lawyers and accountants wouldn't pass through such legislation like a sieve. How naive. And hypocritical. I mean, assuming this guy has a problem with oppression.

The problem with the economy is complex, that goes without saying. I don't know what can fix it in the short term. In the long term, the most effective thing to do would be to somehow return to a business culture where much of the leadership worked its way up from within the same industry. As opposed to the current paradigm of stuffed shirt MBAs moving straight from school into the corner office while anyone who ever put gloves boots or a helmet on to do work is almost literally relegated to a lower caste, permanently relegated to shitball status.

You get these entitled pricks in charge who have no empathy or even understanding of what it's like to "actually work hard". Hell they often have no idea how to do any job other than "manage people" which has really got to be just about the most automatic skill. I mean I suppose you can learn to manage people but leadership is not management. No wonder it's so easy for them to decide year after year to give themselves raises and bonuses while bringing in consultants to do lay-offs and completely dehumanizing time-motion studies, ruthlessly extracting every drop of proft from the very souls of the workers, etc...

wank wank wank

>> ^MarineGunrock:

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL @ the wank of shame!


Sounds like you can relate, do tell!

Oh god the wank of shame...priceless!

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL @ the wank of shame!

>> ^Sarzy:

Funny how this is pretty much the exact same video as the one with the Old Spice guy -- and yet you didn't hear anyone crying that he was being objectified. Why is it okay for a guy to do this, but crass exploitation when a woman does it?


I disagree. The old spice commercials were tongue-in-cheek and meant to parody stereotypes, whereas this is just wank material pandereing to beer swilling sport jocks.

Yet it also reached #1 so I guess it panders to lonely internet nerds also.

Gunrock, what you still fail to understand or acknowledge is..

HER JOB is to be EXCLUSIVE WANK MATERIAL in order TO ATTRACT MORE EYES to the gossip in the SUN tabloid.

She's not offering her general knowledge of a particular subject.
She's not offering technical skills in a particular discipline.
She's offering her tits and hips for display in exchange for money.

She's paid to objectify herself. Meanwhile, most of us are taught that objectifying other humans is immoral.

So it doesn't matter if she's a rocket scientist that dicovered a cure for cancer, aids, alcohol & nicotine addiction, world hungry, global warming AND the lost city of Atlantis..

..if her job & what everyone knows her for.. is givin' handies behind the local bowling alley.


[Edit: I'm not equating prostitution with modeling. But it's objectification all the same.]


>> ^MarineGunrock:

"... just recently finished college where she achieved four A levels and an AS in psychology, theater studies, media studies, critical thinking, and general studies. "
Obviously she's not stupid and has more to offer than just her goodies. Maybe she actually enjoys what she does?

oh, enoch. you have got to be the most wonderful person to disagree with. it's not so much that i'm worried about hurting feelings, although that is of course a concern. it's more that i know how robust attitudes can be. so, the likelihood of changing anyone's mind, especially over a text medium, is unlikely. because of that, i often say nothing (other than the occasional knee-jerk "whaaat?!"), because prior experience has shown me that discussion results in nothing more than an endless back and forth dance of opinion.

there's nothing intrinsically wrong with that, but i just feel like i could invest my time better.

in any case, i'll respond on that thread, because i owe it to you and because you are so unbelievably kind-hearted i'd feel awful if i didn't. thankyou for being so caring.


In reply to this comment by enoch:
In reply to this comment by berticus:
i just don't get the bagging on psychology. science is HARD - science of human behaviour is INCREDIBLY HARD.


you know i love you right?
i responded..i do hope my run-on-sentence style does not detract from the point i was attempting to make.
comments can be so..limiting.
i stated in my comment but let me also state it here.
you have always been a thoughtful and respectful person with me and even though we may disagree you need to understand i respect very much the input you may wish to share.

i prefer to engage with someone i disagree with.it hones my skillz but more importantly it makes me look at my premise and understanding and disagreements force me to scrutinize and maybe re-evaluate my position.
i am quite aware that i do not know everything and discourse helps me form a clearer picture.the only way i can achieve that goal is by engaging someone who disagrees with me (and who is not mentally stunted).
why do you think i frequent a site populated by atheists?
bingo!..same reason.

i have offered you the opportunity to refute my opinions over the past 2 yrs and you have always politely refused.i can only surmise this is due to your assumption that i may get my feelings hurt.
noble but unnecessary.
i also presume that psychology is your field of study,which makes the prospect of discussing with you certain elements of your views and opinions that much more appealing.

you dont have to do anything of course and that is fine but please dont bow out from a discussion with me due to the fear i may have my feelings hurt.
if my fly was open would you allow me to wander with my wanked hanging out?
while i may be a tad embarrassed i will also be grateful.
think about it.
ah my friend..you are okie dokie in my book.
namaste.

"Look at me, now wank off, now look back at me."

What are you holding in your hand?

In reply to this comment by berticus:
i just don't get the bagging on psychology. science is HARD - science of human behaviour is INCREDIBLY HARD.


you know i love you right?
i responded..i do hope my run-on-sentence style does not detract from the point i was attempting to make.
comments can be so..limiting.
i stated in my comment but let me also state it here.
you have always been a thoughtful and respectful person with me and even though we may disagree you need to understand i respect very much the input you may wish to share.

i prefer to engage with someone i disagree with.it hones my skillz but more importantly it makes me look at my premise and understanding and disagreements force me to scrutinize and maybe re-evaluate my position.
i am quite aware that i do not know everything and discourse helps me form a clearer picture.the only way i can achieve that goal is by engaging someone who disagrees with me (and who is not mentally stunted).
why do you think i frequent a site populated by atheists?
bingo!..same reason.

i have offered you the opportunity to refute my opinions over the past 2 yrs and you have always politely refused.i can only surmise this is due to your assumption that i may get my feelings hurt.
noble but unnecessary.
i also presume that psychology is your field of study,which makes the prospect of discussing with you certain elements of your views and opinions that much more appealing.

you dont have to do anything of course and that is fine but please dont bow out from a discussion with me due to the fear i may have my feelings hurt.
if my fly was open would you allow me to wander with my wanked hanging out?
while i may be a tad embarrassed i will also be grateful.
think about it.
ah my friend..you are okie dokie in my book.
namaste.