(Post a new comment)

	mute_button 2005-10-17 02:07 am UTC (link)
	Dude, I was just reading this two seconds ago. rahedion_woif annoyed me, not because of his comments in thread, but because he used 'cum' in his little essay. That produces an automatic, “Omggoawayanddie!” reaction from me. (Reply to this)(Thread)

	kinneas 2005-10-17 02:18 am UTC (link)
	iawtc. My god that fucking pisses me off every time I see it. If he wants to type a quasi-intellectual (and I use the term loosely) essay like that, the least he could do is say "semen". "Ejaculate" if he's feeling particularly eloquent! (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) -

nekoama, 2005-10-17 05:15 am UTC

(no subject) -

bastet, 2005-10-17 05:56 am UTC

(no subject) -

luckdragonfujur, 2005-10-17 05:39 am UTC

(no subject) -

notjo, 2005-10-17 06:58 am UTC

(no subject) -

freya, 2005-10-17 09:17 am UTC

(no subject) -

kinneas, 2005-10-17 03:24 pm UTC

(no subject) -

anatalya, 2005-10-18 03:03 am UTC

darkerthanpale
2005-10-17 02:28 am UTC (link)

"rahedion_woif annoyed me, not because of his comments in thread, but because he used 'cum' in his little essay. That produces an automatic, “Omggoawayanddie!” reaction from me."

I'm so with you on that. If you want to to avoid saying 'ejaculate' or 'semen' because you find them too clinical, fine, but in that case the correct spelling for the term (both the action and result) is 'come'. And the OED backs me up, here.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

	iczer6 2005-10-17 02:56 am UTC (link)
	'rahedion woif' annoys me in general because he comes off as misogynist, self aggrandizing, jackass who thinks he's 'god's gift to fanfiction'. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) -

souris, 2005-10-17 03:05 am UTC

(no subject) -

elektra3, 2005-10-17 03:33 am UTC

	funwithrage 2005-10-17 05:24 am UTC (link)
	Yeah. His comments? Somewhat non-sequiturtastic, somewhat sucky, but I admit that I agree with some of them. (No, you don't have to justify not wanting to have sex--but using it knowingly as a retaliatory tool ain't cool either, no matter how much of a "right" you have to do it.) Using "cum"? Lamity lame. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	sabinelagrande 2005-10-17 02:07 am UTC (link)
	::headdesk:: Just.. there's no other response to that. Just ::headdesk::. (Reply to this)(Thread)

	kinneas 2005-10-17 02:43 am UTC (link)
	As someone wise once said, there needs to be a better, faster description of that action. hedesk (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - cicer, 2005-10-17 06:01 am UTC

(no subject) -

kinneas, 2005-10-17 06:02 am UTC

(no subject) -

randomsome1, 2005-10-18 12:59 am UTC

	rogue 2005-10-17 02:16 am UTC (link)
	I'm trying to figure out how or why that argument started and am baffled. (Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) -

esclaramonde, 2005-10-17 02:22 am UTC

(no subject) - mute_button, 2005-10-17 02:23 am UTC

Unholy trinity -

pradaloz, 2005-10-17 02:32 pm UTC

(no subject) -

plazmah, 2005-10-18 05:42 am UTC

	roni_maxwell 2005-10-17 02:16 am UTC (link)
	This guy has his head so far up his ass he needs a glass bellybutton to see. (Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) -

issendai, 2005-10-17 02:17 am UTC

issendai
2005-10-17 02:16 am UTC (link)

How did he get from "men can't stay erect after sex unless they've had some experience" to "refusing to have sex = EVIL PSYCHOLOGICAL MANIPULATION"? Could someone please draw a diagram or something? I'm so confused.

Also, is what he says about sustaining an erection after sex true? I was under the impression that this was more a matter of personal physiology than of practice.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) -

sneakykitty, 2005-10-17 02:21 am UTC

(no subject) -

randomsome1, 2005-10-17 02:23 am UTC

(no subject) -

mister_terrific, 2005-10-17 02:34 am UTC

(no subject) -

alden, 2005-10-17 08:25 am UTC

(no subject) -

mister_terrific, 2005-10-17 06:21 pm UTC

(no subject) -

greenglass, 2005-10-17 03:40 am UTC

(no subject) -

dandywolves, 2005-10-17 09:31 am UTC

(no subject) -

greenglass, 2005-10-17 11:00 pm UTC

(no subject) -

doomsday, 2005-10-18 07:24 am UTC

	memii 2005-10-17 02:27 am UTC (link)
	Oh God, they're at it again. Fanficrants, I know yesterday was Wank Amnesty day, but you guys don't have to make up for lost time here. Really. (Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) -

randomsome1, 2005-10-17 02:32 am UTC

(no subject) -

sennet, 2005-10-17 02:38 am UTC

(no subject) -

notjo, 2005-10-17 07:01 am UTC

(no subject) -

scootermcgaffin, 2005-10-17 02:36 am UTC

(no subject) -

kijikun, 2005-10-17 03:17 am UTC

(no subject) -

somnambulicious, 2005-10-17 03:52 am UTC

(no subject) -

kannaophelia, 2005-10-17 05:21 am UTC

(no subject) - hereforthewank, 2005-10-17 02:37 am UTC

(no subject) -

lillyv, 2005-10-18 07:00 am UTC

(no subject) -

serafina20, 2005-10-17 02:44 am UTC

(no subject) -

iczer6, 2005-10-17 02:59 am UTC

(no subject) -

platedlizard, 2005-10-17 04:47 am UTC

ladybirdsleeps
2005-10-17 02:37 am UTC (link)

Ah, it's the first classic technique from the wanker's handbook. Here, I'll copy and paste the page:

Infinite Wank Loop
(also called 'Ouroboros of Dumb')

While wanking techniques are usually most effective when combined, this technique works superbly on its own. If you do not have the time to study a variety of techniques, you can still become a competent wanker by mastering the Infinite Wank Loop. In its classic form, it goes as follows:

Wanker (you): [says something mildly stupid]
Opponent: That was stupid.
Wanker: No, it wasn't. What I actually meant was [says something more stupid]
Opponent: What? That's stupid, too.
Wanker: No, it wasn't, because [gives an even more stupid reason]

When properly employed, the Infinite Wank Loop can make you appear to be just as much as an idiot as the Overt Bigot or OMG Stop Persecuting Me techniques, even when those two techniques are combined. It also has the advantage of prolonging the wank argument, because your offensiveness will only be gradually revealed and therefore will scare less of your opponents away outright.

Some examples ...

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) -

notjo, 2005-10-17 07:05 am UTC

andra_dodger
2005-10-17 03:05 am UTC (link)

Yes you do, you bear the children, and we men put up with nine months of your weird cravings, strange emotional changes and odd personality changes.
OMG poor babies, having to watch women go through pregnancy. And he doesn't even mention how gross it is to observe the birth... all that blood. ewwwwww. Not to mention the screaming. I bet the screaming during childbirth really annoys the poor fathers.

Where is a whaaaambulence when you need one?

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - cicer, 2005-10-17 06:06 am UTC

(no subject) -

notjo, 2005-10-17 07:05 am UTC

(no subject) -

lizzypaul, 2005-10-17 12:03 pm UTC

(no subject) -

narcissam, 2005-10-17 04:53 pm UTC

(no subject) -

the_wanlorn, 2005-10-17 05:01 pm UTC

(no subject) -

pyratejenni, 2005-10-17 05:47 pm UTC

(no subject) -

issendai, 2005-10-18 03:22 am UTC

(no subject) -

randomsome1, 2005-10-18 03:27 am UTC

(no subject) -

the_wanlorn, 2005-10-17 05:03 pm UTC

(no subject) -

yaoiko, 2005-10-18 02:09 am UTC

(no subject) -

michmatch, 2005-10-18 05:49 am UTC

	kookaburra 2005-10-17 03:25 am UTC (link)
	My favorite part was the little wank where whatsherface_o said that women who were happy housewives were hurting the feminist cause. (Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) -

elektra3, 2005-10-17 03:39 am UTC

(no subject) -

somnambulicious, 2005-10-17 03:55 am UTC

(no subject) -

ladybirdsleeps, 2005-10-17 03:45 am UTC

(no subject) - cicer, 2005-10-17 06:08 am UTC

(no subject) -

andra_dodger, 2005-10-17 11:47 pm UTC

(no subject) -

michmatch, 2005-10-18 06:08 am UTC

(no subject) -

andra_dodger, 2005-10-18 05:21 pm UTC

(no subject) -

michmatch, 2005-10-18 06:04 pm UTC

(no subject) -

andra_dodger, 2005-10-18 06:27 pm UTC

(no subject) -

michmatch, 2005-10-18 06:35 pm UTC

(no subject) -

andra_dodger, 2005-10-18 06:40 pm UTC

(no subject) -

michmatch, 2005-10-18 06:55 pm UTC

(no subject) -

randomsome1, 2005-10-18 07:03 pm UTC

(no subject) -

andra_dodger, 2005-10-18 07:03 pm UTC

(no subject) -

andra_dodger, 2005-10-17 11:55 pm UTC

	shockfluff 2005-10-17 03:36 am UTC (link)
	Why do I feel like he is just using this opportunity to get rid of some sexual frustration caused by not getting any? (Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) -

randomsome1, 2005-10-17 03:42 am UTC

(no subject) - chief, 2005-10-18 12:14 am UTC

april_hurst
2005-10-17 05:35 am UTC (link)

Jesus Christ. I almost posted this to clairvoyant_wank earlier but they're wanking way too hard for that now.

*headdesk* I don't get why people got their panties in a wad over the post. I thought it was basically a good post, if too long. It's not about teh oppreshun of us wimmin. It's about badly written sex in fanfic. Is someone's slightly imbalanced (or perhaps just poorly worded) perception of sex and how it relates to fiction the worst example of gender issues they could find to bitch about? Wow.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) -

ladybirdsleeps, 2005-10-17 05:54 am UTC

(no subject) -

randomsome1, 2005-10-17 06:04 am UTC

(no subject) -

ladybirdsleeps, 2005-10-17 06:11 am UTC

	sorchar 2005-10-17 06:10 am UTC (link)
	I got news for this guy - you don't have to be lesbian to hate bras. (Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) -

daringu, 2005-10-17 09:42 am UTC

(no subject) -

made_by_kali, 2005-10-17 01:16 pm UTC

(no subject) -

randomsome1, 2005-10-17 02:16 pm UTC

(no subject) -

wankismyfandom, 2005-10-17 08:40 pm UTC

(no subject) -

vanilla_tiger, 2005-10-17 09:05 pm UTC

(no subject) - chief, 2005-10-18 12:18 am UTC

(no subject) -

michmatch, 2005-10-18 06:39 am UTC

(no subject) - chief, 2005-10-18 07:33 am UTC

(no subject) -

narcissam, 2005-10-17 04:56 pm UTC

You don't have to be a lesbian.., -

karmakaze, 2005-10-17 09:26 pm UTC

Re: You don't have to be a lesbian.., -

sorchar, 2005-10-17 11:29 pm UTC

Re: You don't have to be a lesbian.., - chief, 2005-10-18 12:21 am UTC

Re: You don't have to be a lesbian.., -

randomsome1, 2005-10-18 12:29 am UTC

Re: You don't have to be a lesbian.., -

romana03, 2005-10-18 07:00 pm UTC

(no subject) -

michmatch, 2005-10-18 06:41 am UTC

(no subject) -

sorchar, 2005-10-18 06:44 am UTC

	luthe 2005-10-17 06:49 am UTC (link)
	Let's see: Hairy? Check. No bra? Check. Lesbian? Check. Desiring of sproglets and therefore pampering and the right to oppress men? ...sorry, I lack that. Also, how does a pregnant lesbian oppress a straight man? ::tries to figure it out, hurts brain:: (Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) -

randomsome1, 2005-10-17 07:08 am UTC

(no subject) -

luthe, 2005-10-17 07:51 am UTC

(no subject) -

randomsome1, 2005-10-17 02:13 pm UTC

(no subject) -

narcissam, 2005-10-17 04:57 pm UTC

(no subject) -

hinata, 2005-10-17 10:02 pm UTC

(no subject) -

narcissam, 2005-10-17 10:30 pm UTC

(no subject) - chief, 2005-10-18 12:24 am UTC

(no subject) -

randomsome1, 2005-10-18 12:24 am UTC

(no subject) - chief, 2005-10-18 12:25 am UTC

(no subject) -

chikane, 2005-10-18 09:32 am UTC

Icon Love! -

vergilsparda, 2005-10-18 06:53 pm UTC

(no subject) -

sorchar, 2005-10-17 11:31 pm UTC

(no subject) -

lillyv, 2005-10-18 06:57 am UTC

(no subject) -

sorchar, 2005-10-18 07:08 am UTC

(no subject) -

randomsome1, 2005-10-18 07:11 am UTC

	notjo 2005-10-17 07:07 am UTC (link)
	It's been quite a long time since I've wanted to actually thwap a wanker across the head. Kinda nice to be this... angry at someone for being stupid. (Reply to this)

eilan
2005-10-17 08:41 am UTC (link)

Aside from the overall wanking, I can't wrap my brain about why someone would post a comment that says 'i am a [straight very non feminist] chick and agree 100% with every biological comment you made.'

If I wrote a post about the clitoris there. would I get comments like

I am a straight guy and agree 100% with every biological comment you made

Why, thank you very much, straight guy.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) -

chopperbetty, 2005-10-17 08:04 pm UTC

(no subject) -

eilan, 2005-10-17 10:09 pm UTC

(no subject) - chief, 2005-10-18 12:29 am UTC

lizzypaul
2005-10-17 12:14 pm UTC (link)

The ones who believe that if women don't get every luxury a man has,

Ah, you mean like equal employment, political power, and sexual/reproductive freedom? Those luxuries? Well, if they're so trivial, I'm sure you wouldn't have a problem giving them up.

and then more because 'OMFG, WE BEAR THE CHILDREN'. Yes you do, you bear the children, and we men put up with nine months of your weird cravings, strange emotional changes and odd personality changes.

Right. Because it's not like women have to deal with much during that time. I mean, there are only the stretch marks, the hormones, the morning sickness, the fatigue, the back and joint pain, the constant need to urinate, the fainting, the diabetes (for some), the possibility of loosing/stalling your career (even if they have to hold your job, you're more likely to get passed over for promotions, etc.), the actual act of childbirth...yeah. And then, if you're my aunt, you get extra boobies! (Something about the hormone spike during her pregnancy with my twin cousins made her grow two extra milk-producing breasts. Very cool). Then you have the after birth care, the majority of which usually falls on the mother.

*is a hairy, braless lesbian and proud of it*

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) -

kannaophelia, 2005-10-17 02:05 pm UTC

(no subject) -

moriath, 2005-10-17 11:17 pm UTC

telegramsam
2005-10-18 12:59 am UTC (link)

Nyeh. The original post is flawed in its logic anyway.

Men are NOT wired to "fuck 'em and leave 'em" at all. Men are wired to fuck 'em and keep around as many women as possible (though not necessarily paying much more attention to them other than mating). Random single acts of sex are not likely to result in many pregnancies, statistically speaking.

If you look at our closest relatives, Chimpanzees, you see not wandering males, but harem breeders. There is one dominant male who hangs around with a large group of females, mating with them often and chasing off rivals. Horses, zebras, elephants, gorillas, lions and a several other species practice this same breeding strategy.

Sounds like fun for the males, but actually most males die virgins. Only the strongest of them manage to maintain and defend a harem. That's why monogamy exists - it allows even the puny guys a chance at reproduction. Guys ought to be all for it.

So all those dipshits are morons anyway.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) -

mastervex, 2005-10-18 03:47 am UTC

(no subject) - chief, 2005-10-18 07:29 am UTC

(no subject) -

randomsome1, 2005-10-18 07:36 am UTC

(no subject) -

cat_mcdougall, 2005-10-18 12:57 pm UTC

(no subject) -

randomsome1, 2005-10-18 06:41 pm UTC

	lulz monkeywrench 2005-10-18 03:56 pm UTC (link)
	we men put up with nine months of your weird cravings, strange emotional changes and odd personality changes. Totally! All women have to put up with are helluva motherfucking pain and risk of death during childbirth! Who cares? Not me! Ha ha! (Reply to this)

	sceach 2005-10-22 01:57 am UTC (link)
	mmhmm because putting up with mood swings and cravings is the same as carrying another being in your body for nine months. There is just so much wrong with that post that I will just stop with the above. (Reply to this)

	odella 2005-10-23 01:01 pm UTC (link)
	Umm.... I actually agree with him. I'm a woman, but not a feminist. I don't get why everyone is taking his comment so seriously. Many women are bitches, I don't get why I have to feel sisterhood with a girl who hates me. Just get over yourselves. (Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) -

randomsome1, 2005-10-24 01:24 am UTC