>Guest wrote:
>
>>
>>It seems more likely to me that with NO stigma
>>attached to sex, women everywhere would just line up
>>to screw the same .01 percent of 11-foot tall
>>billionaire fighter pilots over and over again causing
>>all other paternal gene lines to fail in a single
>>generation.
>>
>>Ok I'm MOSTLY kidding.
>
>Dwayne writes:
>
>Right now, a good friend of mine, as broke as a
>squirrel who failed to store up for the winter, and so
>relentlessly mind altered he considered joining the
>LAPD just to get his hands on a patrol car because,
>you know, they're fun to crash and watch burn is
>MySpacing his way through a series of wet and wild
>situations that make even Satan blush.
>
>How can this be? Who knows? No doubt the mojitos
>help.
>
>.d.
>
>
>---------
>Ice cream free since 1992!
Oh! No ice cream for that long? ha.
Anyway, funny thing is: I was reading some paper about four or five weeks ago in which the argument was that enforced restrictions on women's sexuality was a way to spread the babes around so that all men got a piece of some action. Can't find it now, or I'd send it along, but the author (a feminist) was reciting the major themes of Sb in order to argue that it wasn't necess. hostile to feminist theory and research.
still and all, I wouldn't recommend that Guest use this approach as a pickup line. A surefire way to keep you in need of giant jars of boy butter for the foreseeable future.
Bitch | Lab http://blog.pulpculture.org