I like bookie

"bookie" wrote:

Men are not interested
unless the female is blonde and totally devoid of any intelligence and
substance, i think they find anything else too threatening.


I'll see that stereotype and raise you with:

Women only like guys who are jerks and treat them like crap. A decent
hardworking guy who treats them well hasn't a chance. Women are
inherently unsure of their ability to sustain a relationship, so team
up with he worst possible choice so they have something to blame when
it crashes and burns.

On Mar 4, 6:46 pm, Charlie Wilkes
wrote:
On Sun, 04 Mar2007 15:35:33 -0800, Barry wrote:

Charlie looks at naked children. HE SAID SO HIMSELF, there's no judgment
in that.
There was an HBO movie on the other night, full of naked children. NOT
porn, just naked children, Charlie is mature enough to be forthright.

???

Where did you get this?

Charlie

"Well, kids tend to be photogenic with or without their clothes on.
The average photographer who goes to a church picnic is gonna come
back with mostly kid pix."

"But, I have seen European nudist colony pix where they lined up all
the 10-12 year old girls. That was pretty weird. It made me think
the kids were being marketed as sexual commodities even if they didn't
know it."

http://tinyurl.com/38n7jc

---

On Sun, 04 Mar 2007 16:25:48 -0800, Barry wrote:

On Mar 4, 6:46 pm, Charlie Wilkes
wrote:
On Sun, 04 Mar2007 15:35:33 -0800, Barry wrote:

Charlie looks at naked children. HE SAID SO HIMSELF, there's no
judgment in that.
There was an HBO movie on the other night, full of naked children.
NOT porn, just naked children, Charlie is mature enough to be
forthright.

???

Where did you get this?

Charlie

Indeed. Voyeurism is my speciality. I download these video clips of
women ****ing in public restrooms, Japanese girls in public bathhouses,
couples in hotel rooms... have you seen these pinhole vid cameras? They
are tiny, they are cheap, and they are everywhere ladies go to urinate,
fornicate or change clothes.

That has nothing to do with children. But I now remember the thread
where this subject did come up... my comment (in response to Matthew's
suggestion that children are disproportionately represented in nudist
colony photos) was that children are simply more photogenic.

Here is the thread:

http://tinyurl.com/2jf74p

Charlie

On Sun, 04 Mar 2007 16:48:09 -0800, Barry wrote:

On Mar 4, 6:46 pm, Charlie Wilkes
wrote:
On Sun, 04 Mar2007 15:35:33 -0800, Barry wrote:

Charlie looks at naked children. HE SAID SO HIMSELF, there's no
judgment in that.
There was an HBO movie on the other night, full of naked children.
NOT porn, just naked children, Charlie is mature enough to be
forthright.

???

Where did you get this?

Charlie

"Well, kids tend to be photogenic with or without their clothes on. The
average photographer who goes to a church picnic is gonna come back with
mostly kid pix."

"But, I have seen European nudist colony pix where they lined up all the
10-12 year old girls. That was pretty weird. It made me think the kids
were being marketed as sexual commodities even if they didn't know it."

http://tinyurl.com/38n7jc

---

OK, now we are on the same page.

Charlie

I remember that when that idiot was coming into the group being stupid

"Charlie Wilkes" wrote in message
news
On Sun, 04 Mar 2007 16:25:48 -0800, Barry wrote:

On Mar 4, 6:46 pm, Charlie Wilkes
wrote:
On Sun, 04 Mar2007 15:35:33 -0800, Barry wrote:

Charlie looks at naked children. HE SAID SO HIMSELF, there's no
judgment in that.
There was an HBO movie on the other night, full of naked children.
NOT porn, just naked children, Charlie is mature enough to be
forthright.

???

Where did you get this?

Charlie

Indeed. Voyeurism is my speciality. I download these video clips of
women ****ing in public restrooms, Japanese girls in public bathhouses,
couples in hotel rooms... have you seen these pinhole vid cameras? They
are tiny, they are cheap, and they are everywhere ladies go to urinate,
fornicate or change clothes.

That has nothing to do with children. But I now remember the thread
where this subject did come up... my comment (in response to Matthew's
suggestion that children are disproportionately represented in nudist
colony photos) was that children are simply more photogenic.

Here is the thread:

http://tinyurl.com/2jf74p

Charlie

On Mar 4, 7:52 pm, Charlie Wilkes wrote:

OK, now we are on the same page.

Charlie

In The HBO movie I saw, I think the author wrote the bare children in to
emphasize how hot it was outside...

I was just trying to get you out of the woodwork man.

Barry

"Barry" wrote in message
oups.com...

Rhonda is passive, passive, aggressive.

see what I mean!

lol..

it's ok.. she'll pass on replying...

but she'll fix me up later...I can never refuse her constructive logic.
She never solicits a flame. Not that I would want to.

Barry

On 5 Mar, 00:21, "cybercat" wrote:
"bookie" wrote in message

oups.com...

She knows I got her number too.

I truly hope not, but it would explain why the phone keeps ringing at
strange times of the night

and for the record! big women are far more appealing to real men.

actually I am not big, I am very short, about 5 ft 3 and as a
lightweight rower I not very wide either, I can't be more than 59kg
and race at 57 which is something like 120pounds? but am no willowy
wisp of a person cretainly, not going to be blow over by a strong
breeze any day i assure you.

You are cute as can be, from the photo I saw, and in great shape.
I might take up rowing just to get arms like that!

unfortunately it is probably those arms which put men off, oh well, I
have my cats and they are much better, even if they can't help me pay
the rent or take me to dinner (not that i have ever foudn a man who
will)

On 5 Mar, 00:29, Richard Evans wrote:
"bookie" wrote:
Men are not interested
unless the female is blonde and totally devoid of any intelligence and
substance, i think they find anything else too threatening.

I'll see that stereotype and raise you with:

Women only like guys who are jerks and treat them like crap. A decent
hardworking guy who treats them well hasn't a chance. Women are
inherently unsure of their ability to sustain a relationship, so team
up with he worst possible choice so they have something to blame when
it crashes and burns.

i never get any offers from hardworking guys!!! only ****s have ever
been interested in me, now noone at all!!!

and I am fully aware and accepting of my total inability to sustain a
relationship although that is usually due to the chap in question
being competely incapable of accepting that he comes way down my list
of priorities after my sport, my friends and my cats, and that I
wasnt' put on this earth to massage anyone's ego and so when he says
something which is wrong I will correct him.

men's egos are just too fragile for me to be bothered with, treading
on eggshells gets tiresome after a while

bookie

"bookie" wrote in message
ups.com...
On 5 Mar, 00:21, "cybercat" wrote:
"bookie" wrote in message

oups.com...

She knows I got her number too.

I truly hope not, but it would explain why the phone keeps ringing at
strange times of the night

and for the record! big women are far more appealing to real men.

actually I am not big, I am very short, about 5 ft 3 and as a
lightweight rower I not very wide either, I can't be more than 59kg
and race at 57 which is something like 120pounds? but am no willowy
wisp of a person cretainly, not going to be blow over by a strong
breeze any day i assure you.

You are cute as can be, from the photo I saw, and in great shape.
I might take up rowing just to get arms like that!

unfortunately it is probably those arms which put men off, oh well, I
have my cats and they are much better, even if they can't help me pay
the rent or take me to dinner (not that i have ever foudn a man who
will)


Honey, there has to be something wrong with the local men. There are lots of
men here who want strong, fit, athletic, no-nonsense SMART woman. Ever
thought about getting out of there?