The Refuge of the Toads

#28261

:)

#28262

DaveDodo007 wrote:
JayTeeAitch wrote:Calling all pit Ear Scientists

If you cut your ears off and then sowed the left one to the right side of you head and vice versa (with both in front of the hole), would sounds in front of you sound like they were coming from behind you (and vice versa)?
No. It would just make your ears less efficient.

So how do you distinguish whether sound is coming from front or back? I can't think of another way.

#28263

MarcusAu wrote:As seen on the 'So Much Guardian' twitter account:

https://twitter.com/somuchguardian?lang=en-gb

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CiQGHdrXEAEjEmU.jpg

OMG! Someone harpooned Lindy West!

#28264

Shatterface wrote:
JayTeeAitch wrote:Calling all pit Ear Scientists

If you cut your ears off and then sowed the left one to the right side of you head and vice versa (with both in front of the hole), would sounds in front of you sound like they were coming from behind you (and vice versa)?
Wouldn't it be easier to, you know, turn around?

I'm french and I've just been trampolining

#28265

JayTeeAitch wrote::)

Dat retort tho:

:clap:

#28266

JayTeeAitch wrote::)

That thread is full of Hillary supporters who appear to have just discovered memes.

#28267

MarcusAu wrote:As seen on the 'So Much Guardian' twitter account:

https://twitter.com/somuchguardian?lang=en-gb

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CiQGHdrXEAEjEmU.jpg

Didn't Alice Cooper cover this like 40 years ago?
[youtube]MygD94jjwJ0[/youtube]

#28268

MarcusAu wrote:As seen on the 'So Much Guardian' twitter account:

https://twitter.com/somuchguardian?lang=en-gb

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CiQGHdrXEAEjEmU.jpg

The fuck?!?!

Is there anyone over the age of 12 who doesnt know women menstruate?

_Are You There God Its Me Margaret_ is one of the top 15 best selling childrens books of all time.

What in Xandru's Hells is going through the shriveled mass that passes for her brain?

#28269

free thoughtpolice wrote:
MarcusAu wrote:As seen on the 'So Much Guardian' twitter account:

https://twitter.com/somuchguardian?lang=en-gb

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CiQGHdrXEAEjEmU.jpg
OMG! Someone harpooned Lindy West!

She's breaking out in the UK - there was a Beeb story about her recently as well.

#28270

JayTeeAitch wrote:
Shatterface wrote:
JayTeeAitch wrote:Calling all pit Ear Scientists

If you cut your ears off and then sowed the left one to the right side of you head and vice versa (with both in front of the hole), would sounds in front of you sound like they were coming from behind you (and vice versa)?
Wouldn't it be easier to, you know, turn around?
I'm french and I've just been trampolining

HEY!!!

:evil:

#28271

If I'm going to hell, you are all coming with me.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CYgdid5WQAA0Efs.png

#28272

Billie from Ockham wrote:Just wait until we get to up vs down and we have to discuss the positives and negatives (in evo-psych terms) of having ears at slightly different heights on the head. (Spoiler: it helps with vertical localization, but is often rated as less attractive.)

Cheers, that'll keep me awake tonight - I should stick to stereo.

So it looks like it would switch until your brain got used to it - a bit like wearing upside down glasses.

Also cheers @DaveDodo007 for a quite phenomenal misunderstanding of the question :)

#28273

Tigzy wrote:
JayTeeAitch wrote::)

Dat retort tho:

:clap:

Trump did a good job as well.

#28274

Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:
JayTeeAitch wrote:
Shatterface wrote:...

Wouldn't it be easier to, you know, turn around?
I'm french and I've just been trampolining
HEY!!!

:evil:

:whistle:

#28275

Tigzy wrote:
JayTeeAitch wrote::)

Dat retort tho:

:clap:

http://i556.photobucket.com/albums/ss7/ ... o1_500.gif

#28276

jet_lagg wrote:
DaveDodo007 wrote:
"My guess was that it would." Then your guess is wrong. As I said we can still hear sounds behind us with the current design of the ear. So putting them on back to front won't relocate the sound that is in front of us 180 degrees.
Dude, you're saying that because things are one way, given the state of the design, changing the design would not change the way things are...

Nobody including me is talking about changing the design. A lot of pitters seem to think the ear will lose a function of being able to detect whether a noise is in front of us or behind us just because the ear is facing the opposite direction. This would be a massive design flaw. We're not talking about the precise location of the sound that is another subject. The brains ability (interpret the data sent from the ear) to detect the direction the vibrations hit the ear will not change whatever way the ear is facing. Christ every time we look behind us the brain will get confused otherwise.

#28277

last one I promise

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CW-60L1WcAAy7VE.png

#28278

DaveDodo007 wrote:
Nobody including me is talking about changing the design.

Putting the pinna on backwards would be "changing the design", yes.

DaveDodo007 wrote:A lot of pitters seem to think the ear will lose a function of being able to detect whether a noise is in front of us or behind us just because the ear is facing the opposite direction. This would be a massive design flaw. We're not talking about the precise location of the sound that is another subject. The brains ability (interpret the data sent from the ear) to detect the direction the vibrations hit the ear will not change whatever way the ear is facing. Christ every time we look behind us the brain will get confused otherwise.

How do you think hearing works exactly? Do you picture the soundwaves impacting some sort of audio receptive cells that lie in a recess on the surface of the skin, like a proto eye?

#28279

comhcinc wrote:Ears. Really?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

No one is allow ever to talk about wrestling again.

Mick McManus always hated it when they grabbed his ears.

Sent from my SM-G901F using Tapatalk

#28280

JayTeeAitch wrote:
Billie from Ockham wrote:Just wait until we get to up vs down and we have to discuss the positives and negatives (in evo-psych terms) of having ears at slightly different heights on the head. (Spoiler: it helps with vertical localization, but is often rated as less attractive.)
Cheers, that'll keep me awake tonight - I should stick to stereo.

So it looks like it would switch until your brain got used to it - a bit like wearing upside down glasses.

Also cheers @DaveDodo007 for a quite phenomenal misunderstanding of the question :)

How did i misunderstand it, if you swap your ears around you will not mistake a noise in front of you as coming from behind you.

#28281

piginthecity wrote:
comhcinc wrote:Ears. Really?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

No one is allow ever to talk about wrestling again.
Mick McManus always hated it when they grabbed his ears.

Sent from my SM-G901F using Tapatalk

Mick Foley thought two ears are overrated.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... Injury.jpg

#28282

DaveDodo007 wrote:
JayTeeAitch wrote:
Billie from Ockham wrote:Just wait until we get to up vs down and we have to discuss the positives and negatives (in evo-psych terms) of having ears at slightly different heights on the head. (Spoiler: it helps with vertical localization, but is often rated as less attractive.)
Cheers, that'll keep me awake tonight - I should stick to stereo.

So it looks like it would switch until your brain got used to it - a bit like wearing upside down glasses.

Also cheers @DaveDodo007 for a quite phenomenal misunderstanding of the question :)
How did i misunderstand it, if you swap your ears around you will not mistake a noise in front of you as coming from behind you.

By saying things like this:

Christ every time we look behind us the brain will get confused otherwise.

#28283

DaveDodo007 wrote:Nobody including me is talking about changing the design. A lot of pitters seem to think the ear will lose a function of being able to detect whether a noise is in front of us or behind us just because the ear is facing the opposite direction. This would be a massive design flaw.

Yep. All them Pitters who are also Intelligent Design fans are sure lookin' stupid right now.

DaveDodo007 wrote:We're not talking about the precise location of the sound that is another subject.

To the extent that really good localization would be referred to as "precise" and that knowing front from back is needed for it to qualify as "really good," I'd say that we're all talking about exactly what you think is another subject.

DaveDodo007 wrote:The brains ability (interpret the data sent from the ear) to detect the direction the vibrations hit the ear will not change whatever way the ear is facing. Christ every time we look behind us the brain will get confused otherwise.

First, the goal of perceptual localization is to determine the relative location of the source of the sound. What direction the vibrations are hitting the ear is a cue to this (along with myriad other cues), but not the answer to the question that the mind is trying to solve.

Second, when you turn your body, the current best guess by the system as to the location of the source of the sound is mentally rotated. It's the same as occurs with visual localization when you move your eyes. In fact, the changes to the entire distribution of sounds when you move your hear is USED by the system to get a better estimate of the sound-source's location. This is part of why people "cock their head" when listening; they aren't just lining up an ear ... they are also using the changes in the sound as they move to narrow in on the source's location.*

* nb. I know that I often type too fast and make a lot of typos, but I also put some effort into how I say things. if you look back a page or so, you'll see a place where I said something along the lines of "assuming that the head stays still...". I did that because I know that we use parallax (in vision) and shifts in frequencies (in audition), both of which involve movements. I could see this shit about movement coming and didn't want to write something loose and technically inaccurate, so I tossed in that bit about "assuming that the head doesn't move." I think it's now clear (to me) that that level of carefulness in writing is waste of fucking time.

#28284

DaveDodo007 wrote:How did i misunderstand it, if you swap your ears around you will not mistake a noise in front of you as coming from behind you.

You do know that he was talking about swapping the pinnae (as in: the thing on the side of your head), not the inner ear parts that transduce sound, yes?

Heck, with you I need to back up a step and make sure that you know that the things on the side of your head don't do the transducing. The pinnae are just accessory structures.

#28285

If I cut off and switched my balls would I cum out my asshole?

#28286

comhcinc wrote:
piginthecity wrote:
comhcinc wrote:Ears. Really?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

No one is allow ever to talk about wrestling again.
Mick McManus always hated it when they grabbed his ears.

Sent from my SM-G901F using Tapatalk
Mick Foley thought two ears are overrated.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... Injury.jpg

But can he paint any better now?

#28287

screwtape wrote:
But can he paint any better now?

I don't know but he is oddly enough a pretty decent writer.

#28288

screwtape wrote:
comhcinc wrote:Mick Foley thought two ears are overrated.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... Injury.jpg
But can he paint any better now?

Unless that picture has been inflected, it's the wrong ear. (Van Gogh cut his left, IIRC.)

#28289

Service Dog wrote:
Brive1987 wrote: [.youtube]viV8194vynA[/youtube]

An interesting quirk of the law I learned yesterday... is the distinction between a 'satire' and a 'burlesque'. The former conveys a critique of the original & is protected; whereas the latter is just a silly cartoon of the original... which might displace the original in the market. So you couldn't get away with transforming a commercial movie by releasing a competing-version sped-up, so everyone has chipmunk voices (unless the funny voices conveyed a critique. Maybe if the actors were arrested for cocaine use & the satire was suggesting that's what they sound-like on coke.)

I wonder if Brive's animation rises to the level of satire?

Something in my life needs to rise ......

#28290

That said. The idea here was that the graphic was a custom animation and the words were spoken by a robot - ie everything you see and hear is "mine" with the intriguing exception of the word arrangemeant itself. I don't think it would fly but it challenges whether the copyright was invested in the overall original production itself as a discrete entity.

My Plan B was that the carefully considered facial expressions were indeed intended as ironic / satiric.

#28291

Cnutella wrote:
feathers wrote:
Skep tickle wrote: 5 days later, 406 points down in global rank:

[img].http://i.imgur.com/Y2iD3jp.png?1[/img]
[.img]https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/73 ... f85bd9.jpg[/img]
Brive are you planning a victory lap on Twitter for the benefit of Dr Dick?

The dickser denies the lived experience of the Google Alexa-ranking system in favour of extrapolating the consistent mediocrity of his own blog to the whole FtB network.

He is clever that way. :liar:

#28292

MarcusAu wrote:last one I promise

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CW-60L1WcAAy7VE.png

But Islam has nothing to do with ISIS.

#28293

Mount Everest is a fraud. It's alleged to be 29,029 feet high.

But fucking base camp - and no one pretends they are climbing Everest at that point - is 17,600 feet up.

That makes the actual Everest pyramid about 12,000 feet high. A walk in the park that Phil would hardly be bothered free falling from.

I found it interesting that the popular SE route adds additional fraud into the equation. By the time you have climbed a (non Everest) icefall, walked up a valley, climbed half way up another hill altogether and cut across to the saddle leading to Everest you're at 26,000 feet. Ie climbers 'only' spend about 12-16 hours on Everest itself dealing with the last 3000 feet of the mountain.

Pussies.

#28294

MarcusAu wrote:last one I promise
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CW-60L1WcAAy7VE.png

Don't knock the virgin Mary story. It was the first issue where I really sat down, thought about it, and said to myself 'This is Bullshit.'

#28295

Does this woman look like actress Kaya Scodelaria?
[youtube]L96ff4nx-GE[/youtube]
It seems dubious that it would be her, as hiring a professional actor to do a scam would seem risky and expensive, however one observer speculates it is her.

#28296

Billie from Ockham wrote:
DaveDodo007 wrote:How did i misunderstand it, if you swap your ears around you will not mistake a noise in front of you as coming from behind you.
You do know that he was talking about swapping the pinnae (as in: the thing on the side of your head), not the inner ear parts that transduce sound, yes?

Heck, with you I need to back up a step and make sure that you know that the things on the side of your head don't do the transducing. The pinnae are just accessory structures.

They aren't merely accessories, they actually produce the frequency shifts referred to in the field of 3D audio as the head related transfer function (HRTF).

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

#28297

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Head-re ... r_function

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

#28298

d4m10n wrote:
Billie from Ockham wrote:
DaveDodo007 wrote:How did i misunderstand it, if you swap your ears around you will not mistake a noise in front of you as coming from behind you.
You do know that he was talking about swapping the pinnae (as in: the thing on the side of your head), not the inner ear parts that transduce sound, yes?

Heck, with you I need to back up a step and make sure that you know that the things on the side of your head don't do the transducing. The pinnae are just accessory structures.
They aren't merely accessories, they actually produce the frequency shifts referred to in the field of 3D audio as the head related transfer function (HRTF).

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Semantics. As far as I can tell, DaveDodo thinks the sensing happens on the surface of the head. At least that's the only way I can make heads or tails of what he's saying, and hence me asking how he specifically thinks hearing works. If that gets cleared up it should be more obvious why switching the external part of your ear around would lead to the perception that the source of sound had also switched.

#28299

Dave wrote:
MarcusAu wrote:As seen on the 'So Much Guardian' twitter account:

https://twitter.com/somuchguardian?lang=en-gb

[.img]https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CiQGHdrXEAEjEmU.jpg[/img]
The fuck?!?!

Is there anyone over the age of 12 who doesnt know women menstruate?

_Are You There God Its Me Margaret_ is one of the top 15 best selling childrens books of all time.

What in Xandru's Hells is going through the shriveled mass that passes for her brain?

The article here (archive link, because the Guardian doesn't deserve any clicks).

Lindy West wrote:The most significant source of my adolescent period anxiety was the fact that, in the US and much of the west, acknowledging the completely normal and mundane function of most uteruses is still taboo. The taboo is so strong that it contributes to the widespread stonewalling of women from seats of power – for fear that, as her first act in the White House, Hillary Clinton might change Presidents’ Day to Brownie Batter Makes the Boo-Hoos Stop Day. The taboo is strong enough that a dude once broke up with me because a surprise period started while we were having sex and the sight of it shattered some pornified illusion he had of women as messless pleasure pillows. The taboo is so strong that while we’ve all seen swimming pools of blood shed in horror movies and action movies and even on the news, when a woman ran the 2015 London Marathon without a tampon, photos of blood spotting her running gear made the social media rounds to near-universal disgust. The blood is the same – the only difference is where it’s coming from. The disgust is at women’s natural bodies, not at blood itself.

If you are you disgusted by freebleeding then you hate women's bodies.

We can mention periods obliquely, of course, when we want to delegitimise women’s real concerns, dismiss their more inconvenient emotions. But to suggest that having a period isn’t an abomination, but is, in fact, natural and good, or – my God – to actually let people see what period blood looks like? (This is going to blow a lot of you guys’ minds, but: it looks like blood.) You might as well suggest replacing the national anthem with Donald Trump harmonising with an air horn.

Yeah, personally I hate my period and think it’s annoying and gross, but it’s not more gross than anything else that comes out of a human body. It’s not more gross than faeces, urine, pus, bile, vomit, or the grossest bodily fluid of them all – in my mother’s professional opinion – phlegm. And yet we are not horrified every time we go to the bathroom. We do not stigmatise people with stomach flu. The active ingredient in period stigma is misogyny.

But, surprise surprise, we're disgusted by adults who crap or pee in their pants in public, especially if they're mentally and physically competent enough to go to the bathroom. And we're disgusted by people who vomit in public.

And yet we should see period blood in public.

Maybe periods wouldn’t be so frightening if we didn’t refer to them as “red tide” or “shark week” or any other euphemism that evokes neurotoxicity or dismemberment. Maybe if we didn’t perpetuate the idea that vaginas are disgusting garbage dumps, government officials wouldn’t think of vagina care as literally throwing money away. Maybe if girls felt free to talk about their periods in shouts instead of whispers, boys wouldn’t grow up thinking that vaginas are disgusting and mysterious either. Maybe women would go to the doctor more. Maybe fewer women would die of cervical and uterine cancer. Maybe everyone would have better sex. Maybe women would finally be considered fully formed human beings, instead of off–brand men with defective genitals.

Who the hell thinks that vaginas are "disgusting garbage dumps"? Certainly not all the men and boys who want to stick their dicks into vaginas, because really, would they be so willing to stick their dicks there if they thought that they were "disgusting garbage dumps"?

West is kooky even by feminist standards. Feminism teaches us men really want to stick their dicks in vaginas to the point that they violate any moral and social rule to do so. We live in a rape culture after all, don't we?

The truth is, my discomfort with my period didn’t have anything to do with the thing itself – it was just part of the lifelong, pervasive alienation from my body that every woman absorbs to some extent. Your body is never yours. Your body is your enemy. Your body is gross. Your body is wrong. Your body is broken. Your body isn’t what men like. Your body is less important than a foetus. Your body should be “perfect” or it should be hidden.

Because you know, men are never ever told that they're inadequate for being too short or too fat or too thin or not muscly enough or not what women like.

TL;DR: Lindy West is mad as a box of frogs.

#28300

Kirbmarc wrote: But, surprise surprise, we're disgusted by adults who crap or pee in their pants in public, especially if they're mentally and physically competent enough to go to the bathroom. And we're disgusted by people who vomit in public.

And yet we should see period blood in public.

That's always been my first thought. Can we get #FreeShitting started for the geriatrics? Depends are belittling and ageist.

#28301

JayTeeAitch wrote:
DaveDodo007 wrote:
JayTeeAitch wrote:Calling all pit Ear Scientists

If you cut your ears off and then sowed the left one to the right side of you head and vice versa (with both in front of the hole), would sounds in front of you sound like they were coming from behind you (and vice versa)?
No. It would just make your ears less efficient.
So how do you distinguish whether sound is coming from front or back? I can't think of another way.

That would be just the auditory part of the brain which can detect time differences that the sound reaches your ears. The ear itself just collects and amplifies the sound. Whichever way your ears were facing the only time you would have a problem is that the noise was equidistant from both ears whether in front of you or behind you. Then you would be confused as to where the sound was coming from, it certainly would not relocate the direction the sound was coming from.

#28302

@Phil,

I expect what you were referring to the other day? Muslim waitress is assaulted in south of France for serving alcohol

I am reminded that certain values I arrived with were completely incompatible with those of my host country Canukistan. Things that I assumed were perfectly reasonable, turned out to be completely illegal.

For example, shortly after I arrived in Canada it took a long conversation with an ex-RCMP office to convince me that the police would really actually arrest and charge me if I shot someone who was going to shoot someone else!

#28303

free thoughtpolice wrote:
d4m10n wrote:Operation Missing Stair continues apace, as a third accusation has been posted. So far it's been fairly haphazard, but I expect that eventually all the various accusations will be sorted and organized in an accessible format. I humbly suggest top trumps.
OMG Marijuanabitch is a rapist too! :o
All those paleontologists ever think of is giant boners. He's a long time baboon and has been a faithful SJW the whole time.

WTF, this actually happened? Of all the possible male Hordelings to make an example of as a scary sexual predator, they come up with this guy?

http://i.imgur.com/CFeN1uI.jpg

:lol:

#28304

At first I'd thought it was a simple confusion and the diagram I posted might make it more obvious, but no, you understand perfectly well there would be no way for the brain to distinguish between a sound originating 5 feet in front of you or 5 feet behind you (barring visual cues, or the effect of the pinna, which you keep insisting has no effect). So why do you not see that's a problem? Obviously the brain can distinguish between the two. It's not coming from time differences (you admit there would be no time difference for a font and back sound sources that were equidistant). So what's left? You're just being ridiculous now.

#28305

d4m10n wrote:

Lol.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CkgaKkpWkAADT9_.jpg:large

#28306

comhcinc wrote:
Tigzy wrote:
JayTeeAitch wrote::)

Dat retort tho:

:clap:

Trump did a good job as well.

I'm beginning to think Clinton's campaign team hate her. :lol:

#28307

I don't care which way people's ears point so long as they don't wear earplugs and they stay off my lawn.

#28308

jet_lagg wrote:
DaveDodo007 wrote:
Nobody including me is talking about changing the design.

jet_lagg wrote:Putting the pinna on backwards would be "changing the design", yes.

That would be redesigning the head not the ear.

DaveDodo007 wrote:A lot of pitters seem to think the ear will lose a function of being able to detect whether a noise is in front of us or behind us just because the ear is facing the opposite direction. This would be a massive design flaw. We're not talking about the precise location of the sound that is another subject. The brains ability (interpret the data sent from the ear) to detect the direction the vibrations hit the ear will not change whatever way the ear is facing. Christ every time we look behind us the brain will get confused otherwise.

jet_lagg wrote:How do you think hearing works exactly? Do you picture the soundwaves impacting some sort of audio receptive cells that lie in a recess on the surface of the skin, like a proto eye?

No, all the ear does is collect and amplify the sound, the brain does all the heavy lifting.

#28309

DaveDodo007 wrote:
jet_lagg wrote:How do you think hearing works exactly? Do you picture the soundwaves impacting some sort of audio receptive cells that lie in a recess on the surface of the skin, like a proto eye?
No, all the ear does is collect and amplify the sound, the brain does all the heavy lifting.

You have a fundamental misunderstanding of how hearing works.

DaveDodo007 wrote:
jet_lagg wrote:Putting the pinna on backwards would be "changing the design", yes.
That would be redesigning the head not the ear.

And apparently you also have a fundamental misunderstanding of what an ear is. I'll let someone else take it from here.

#28310

MarcusAu wrote:As seen on the 'So Much Guardian' twitter account:

https://twitter.com/somuchguardian?lang=en-gb

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CiQGHdrXEAEjEmU.jpg

Why does she hate transwomen so much?

#28311

All this talk of moving your ears around or whatever reminds me of how Karl Pilkington reacted when Ricky Gervais, talking about evolution, mentioned how people evolved forward-facing eyes:

What do you mean about eyes facing forward? You mean, before we got here, there were people who had eyes that were looking into their heads?

#28312

During a Gad Saad interview with Janice Fiamengo, she mentioned a website where intersectional feminism lends a real helping hand for men's problems. http://mascupathy.org/
They even have a blog. :drool: They don't have a lot of comments. I think they need some feedback.

#28313

DaveDodo007 wrote:
d4m10n wrote:

Lol.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CkgaKkpWkAADT9_.jpg:large

You have to admit it is funny. Ayan Hirsi Ali and Shoe0nhead on the same poster?

#28314

Eyes don't face forwards. We decided that side was the front because that's where our eyes are.

#28315

Forwards is a social construction. I'm sure there's a tribe somewhere that don't have the concept though they've only ever been contacted by one linguist and he can't remember where he met them.

#28316

free thoughtpolice wrote:During a Gad Saad interview with Janice Fiamengo, she mentioned a website where intersectional feminism lends a real helping hand for men's problems. http://mascupathy.org/
They even have a blog. :drool: They don't have a lot of comments. I think they need some feedback.

What is Mascupathy?
Why does a sunny Sunday afternoon softball game break into fisticuffs?
Why does simple affection have to turn into sex?

Why? Why not? Especially the last one.

#28317

free thoughtpolice wrote:During a Gad Saad interview with Janice Fiamengo, she mentioned a website where intersectional feminism lends a real helping hand for men's problems. http://mascupathy.org/
They even have a blog. :drool: They don't have a lot of comments. I think they need some feedback.

Nope.

#28318

Tigzy wrote:Guess Amy isn't too fussy about the sources of her amusement.

gotta have something to distract her from learning to actually art

#28319

comhcinc wrote:If I cut off and switched my balls would I cum out my asshole?

I hear a rumor your screen name means "Creampie", as mumbled with your mouth full.

#28320

Service Dog wrote:
comhcinc wrote:If I cut off and switched my balls would I cum out my asshole?
I hear a rumor your screen name means "Creampie", as mumbled with your mouth full.

I started that rumor. Which is why I know it's sadly untrue.