Reply #1
From: "cricketsarge" (cricketsarge@bbv.net) Your kidding, right?
I will assume you meant "YOU'RE" this time... Reply #2
From: Alicia Mahaffy
I'd almost agree.... but sooner or later you gotta move outta yer mom's house and that's when a man gets married or hooked up. Not for love the way us women see it, I'd agree, but for a replacement someone to do his cooking, cleaning and all the rest of the bullshit that comes with him.
I assume that reply was written in the same genre as the original article. In that case,
I have to say that was one of the best replies I ever got... Reply #3
From: Bennett, Kyron [kyrbe@braintree.gov.uk] I enjoyed reading your're message. After taking your (good) advice (at the time) I now appear to be homeless and hungery with no future dangerling at the end of the road pal. If only I listened to my concision and not shagged her sister...
all the best
It's good to know there are some people in the world
tha can spot facetious banter.
Reply #4
From: "Timothy Vasicek" (erthkeepr@yahoo.com) Can I ask how old you are? I mean come on. Are you actually neanderthal? Re-think that whole rant.
Boy yer dumb...
Reply #5
From: "William Trusler" (hargon321@yahoo.com) I feel that you are doing a good thing by trying to find exactly what it means to be a man. You hold that males are meant to reproduce with as many females as possible to spread there genes. I feel that this may be an accurate statement, but I feel that it raises some hard questions. First of all in saying that humans are meant to do anything, you presuppose that there was a creator of humans who had this purpose for humans in mind. Without a creator it is very difficult to make sense of a purpose of being a man. It would seem that you would have to appeal to the evolutionary biologist understanding of function in a historical setting. You would have to claim that impregnating as many women as possible has caused men to continue to exist. Now while this would make impregnating as many females as possible a necessity of manhood, it is a very weak argument. For it is easy to imagine man kind continuing without this quality. In fact in smaller populations it ! is quite probable that this idea of letting a male bread with as many women who will let him would lead to inbreeding and the eventual end of the society. For in a community that a female is not committed to one male, but may breed with whomever she chooses, females will choose the best, most fit man they can find. This could mean that an entire generation of people could come from two or three fathers. With in two generations, people would be forced to breed with cousins and I am sure that we all know the negative affects on genetics this would have. Yet you can always claim that there is a god who made it so but I find it doubtful. My second problem is that you claim that your examination of males is simply the way it is. While this may be true, it seems prudent to take into account other aspects of the male psyche. Dominance and the want to procreate rampantly are certainly parts of this system, but why if men are not meant to love can they fall in love. It would ! seem by your reasoning that what men have in them as instinct, is what they are meant to be. Well there is nothing more natural than emotions. And quite often men do fall in love and want only one mate, not forced to have one mate, but want only one mate. Does this mean that men are eventually meant to have only one mate? There are further questions to be asked, but I will leave these out to be mulled over for the time being.
I can not believe I have to do this, but it seems that people just don't get it... Not only was that artical writen by a friend of mine, it was written totally tongue in cheek. I thought that since it was so obviously over the top that most people would figure out it was just a joke. Obviously, some people are fuckin' dumber then Dubaya... and boy is that dumb!
Reply #6
From: "Celine" You have to be the world's most stupid man.
She possibly wrote that to me and not the actual author, but let’s give her the benefit of the doubt, shall we? It doesn’t really matter though, does it?
|