Log In

Home
    - Create Journal
    - Update
    - Download

LiveJournal
    - News
    - Paid Accounts
    - Contributors

Customize
    - Customize Journal
    - Create Style
    - Edit Style

Find Users
    - Random!
    - By Region
    - By Interest
    - Search

Edit ...
    - Personal Info &
      Settings
    - Your Friends
    - Old Entries
    - Your Pictures
    - Your Password

Developer Area

Need Help?
    - Lost Password?
    - Freq. Asked
      Questions
    - Support Area



mosellegreen ([info]mosellegreen) wrote in [info]jurisimprudence,
@ 2008-09-14 17:31:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
I saw this "argument" three times yesterday.
I couldn't  find anything like this in this comm or the wiki, so:

Anyone who accuses a male opponent of 1) having a small penis or 2) not getting laid, automatically loses the argument.

(Read comments) - (Post a new comment)


[info]blue_penguin
2008-09-15 04:11 am UTC (link)
Seriously? I see it all the time.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]miss_padfoot
2008-09-15 04:27 am UTC (link)
Me too, especially in arguments about feminism.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]sheep
2008-09-15 08:47 am UTC (link)
And in shipwars.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]mcity
2008-09-15 02:03 pm UTC (link)
In feminism arguments, isn't it usually followed with an implication that the target is fat?

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]miss_padfoot
2008-09-15 03:40 pm UTC (link)
Yes, it's "you can't get laid because you're fat and ugly".

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]mosellegreen
2008-09-15 04:57 pm UTC (link)
Ah. I have seen the "fat" part of it, usually coupled with snide remarks about how many cats the victim must have. (As I write this, there are six cats in my living room.)

(Reply to this)(Parent)

(Read comments) -

 
   
Privacy Policy - COPPA
Legal Disclaimer - Site Map