puddingcat (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
puddingcat) wrote2007-12-17 10:15 pm
puddingcat) wrote2007-12-17 10:15 pm
RAGE pt II
That berk from The Times Online has done it again. At lest this time it's obvious he's trolling for comments. I wish he'd addressed the cost issue, though. £500 a month? I still can't believe it. And *still* I hate myself for agreeing with him about the bottom line.
In a wonderful segue, I Have Baked! Well, I've actually made Invergarry Special - rice crispies bound with melted butter, hard toffee and marshmallows, covered with chocolate :)
Yuletide is shaping up. Last minute? Oh yes. I'm very happy that only 280-ish people have uploaded so far :)
In a wonderful segue, I Have Baked! Well, I've actually made Invergarry Special - rice crispies bound with melted butter, hard toffee and marshmallows, covered with chocolate :)
Yuletide is shaping up. Last minute? Oh yes. I'm very happy that only 280-ish people have uploaded so far :)
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
Can we introduce them all to
* evilgrin *
no subject
no subject
(Anonymous) 2007-12-18 12:10 pm (UTC)(link)Her place would be on top of his lifeless body, with a knife plunged into his stupid brain...
no subject
no subject
I just, what really gets to me is that he's making massive generalizations. It's not that British women have overcome evolution by deciding that actually, we don't furnish ourselves like houses to suit a man. It's that men are not under the same pressure. Men are not obligated to undergo any such grooming regime to look nice for the woman in their lives. That's why people are pissed at the articles, because he's implying that British women have a long way to go in satisfying his standards, but he'd be a dreamboat for any girl.
As for that guy in the comments with the Hermes-wearing Japanese wife, who advises British women to keep themselves nicely groomed so that "the grass is never greener for the man in their lives", an evil part of me would love to see his wife leave him for a more stylishly turned-out man.
no subject
no subject
ALL OF WHAT YOU SAID.
no subject
He's never getting laid in this country again.
no subject
he is simply a troll and unfortunately getting published on a national newspaper website is a good way to get fed
no subject
American girls are the pinnacle of all goodness because they're legally sexually unapproachable and tee-total until 18 & 21 respectively. And they're all slim, waiflike, delicate flowers from a nation that isn't the top of the WHO's obesity table - because they wouldn't know HOW to open a chocolate bar. American girls are pure and totally NOT lesbians, because you can't use that argument anymore when a woman turns you down.
Which means he's stuck with the sour, nasty, shrivelled and frumpy British girls. Most of whom spent the time between the ages of 16 and 18 getting so fucked and drunk that by the time 21 comes around they're wily, self-assured and wise. Basically, the only tool left in the Lonely Man arsenal is to attack from a position of post-feminist nu-chauvanist masculinity, and apply the various constructs within the female marketing model to create insecurities, lower self-esteem and introduce a self-perpetuating doubt in women's heads. It won't get him laid, but what it does is make him feel better than the men who ARE getting laid, now have to put up with 10x the amount of insecure 'I'm [insert visual issue] do you still love me?' dribbling they usually do.
I think his perfect partner is either a like-minded man or will be arriving with a complimentary footpump.
no subject
no subject
My bottom line.WHat
In other words, that women *do* have to make an effort with their appearance to attract men (even if it's their personality that keeps him around), and that anyone who claims otherwise is bitter, fat & ugly.
no subject
~hides~
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
I don't think the guy should be stoned to death for suggesting that people could pay a little bit of attention to their appearance and have healthier diets, but I find it highly dubious that he only suggests women should do this.
It's OK for us men to be a bunch of fat ragged slobs apparently, so long as you women all look like you've stepped off the cover of Penthouse.
no subject
Which is lucky for you, since you grew that beard...
* runs away, giggling *
no subject
I still don't like it much though.
I've pretty much made my mind up that it's coming off in the New Year, but I'll keep it until I've let you have a laugh at it, fear not!
no subject
Having people tell me otherwise doesn't appear to help, as either they're Smug Marrieds (or the cohabiting equivalent) or are happy being single.
no subject
For me, it's all about what makes you happy. If you're happy being overweight, having hairy legs and wearing comfy clothes, then more power to you. I applaud you!
If, on the other hand, you want to stay fit, have smooth legs and wear clothes that compliment your figure, then I have no complaints. I'm still with you 100%. As long as you're being yourself and are happy, then that's what's most important.
It's when you start trying to look a certain way because that's how you think others want you to look, then you're on the slippery slope to oblivion.
Nothing is as attarctive as the confidence that comes from being comfortable with yourself.
no subject
Especially compared to some skinny young lass wearing a belt and a napkin, with blue skin as she shivers down the road at 3am after a night out...no-one really thinks thats a good idea, do they?
no subject
It's like the young men who wear the ubiquitous tracksuit/baseball cap combo. Do they really think they look good?
no subject