1 posted on
09/09/2003 11:43:22 PM PDT by
kattracks
To: kattracks
Why the Attack on Straight Men?
Because Straight Men show a disturbing tendenancy not to vote for the DemocRATic Party.
2 posted on
09/09/2003 11:50:52 PM PDT by
the lone wolf
(Good Luck, and watch out for stobor.)
To: kattracks
Why are these men whining over what a bunch of dykes and faggots are saying on TV? Why are they even listening to them?
3 posted on
09/09/2003 11:51:42 PM PDT by
per loin
To: kattracks
*perhaps called "Making Women Tolerable"*
The Man Show?
11 posted on
09/10/2003 12:53:38 AM PDT by
ICX
(FR's resident dumb puppy with big teeth)
To: kattracks
It's because our d**** are bigger.
Oh, and we actually know how to use them properly.
Regards,
L
12 posted on
09/10/2003 12:58:26 AM PDT by
Lurker
("First get the facts right. Later on you can distort them any way you please." Mark Twain)
To: kattracks
What are the poofs gonna do - hit me with their purses?
13 posted on
09/10/2003 12:59:15 AM PDT by
Hank Rearden
(Dick Gephardt. Before he dicks you.)
To: kattracks
IMHO, "Queer Eye" is a very entertaining show.
I have no use for the current campaign by gays to ram their lifestyle down our throats. Homosexuality is never going to be "mainstream"; it's clearly marginal -- not that there's anything wrong with that.
However, it is also myopic to think that gay people do not have a significant and disproportional impact on arts and culture. One example: I doubt many Catholics would go Taliban on the Sistene Chapel just because Michaelangelo was gay.
If there is room enough in the Catholic Church for painters, I think we can find room in the USA for gays. Especially when the TV show is good.
To: kattracks
The huge heterosexual differences is why they needed a special word for the union of the two: marriage.
A male and female united result in a unique, procreative, complementary compromise of managed differences.
16 posted on
09/10/2003 2:35:58 AM PDT by
xzins
(In the beginning was the Word.)
To: kattracks
heterosexual men and women are drawn to the differences that make them compliment one another. LOL! I think they mean complement, not "compliment"
17 posted on
09/10/2003 2:55:40 AM PDT by
Izzy Dunne
(Hello, I'm a TAGLINE virus. Please help me spread by copying me into YOUR tag line.)
To: kattracks
Men who like to shop, enjoy the ballet, and know when to use merlot versus cabernet, are not typically the guys women date
Actually, when I was conscripted to attend a ballet version of "Sleeping Beauty" I found it quite fascinating.
"Why this is nothing more than an extended metaphor for the evils of gun control" I said and began to list all the similiarities between the King's ban on spinning wheels and the ban on high capacity magazines and certain types of guns or guns with certain features.
Curiously, I have never been invited to attend another ballet. Life is filled with mysteries.
Best regards,
22 posted on
09/10/2003 4:53:24 AM PDT by
Copernicus
(A Constitutional Republic revolves around Sovereign Citizens, not citizens around government.)
To: kattracks
the girls who can hold their own during tackle football are usually just one of the guys. These women are also often passed over romantically. Why is this the case? I would imagine that most women that could hold their own, just are not all that physically attractive. While many linemen in the NFL may be a "D" cup, a woman with the rest of that kind of physique is not most mens first choice.
Possible related thread: LT To Call Plays in Lingerie Bowl
25 posted on
09/10/2003 7:28:19 AM PDT by
StriperSniper
(The slippery slope is getting steeper.)
To: kattracks
Me agrees. Me like Tarzan just the way he is.
To: kattracks
The enemy attacks straight men, marriage, families, Christianity, prayer, and the triune God. His weapons are pride, guilt, condemnation, and unforgiveness. Gaurd yourself with armour.
27 posted on
09/10/2003 7:40:08 AM PDT by
showme_the_Glory
(No more rhyming, and I mean it! ..Anybody got a peanut.....)
To: kattracks
INTREP
To: kattracks
Tit for tat I think.
Men have compared women to men for ages and whined "Why can't women be more like men" (Pygmalion, My Fair Lady anyone?). And historically we've attached all manner of value judgements on "la difference" between the sexes.
This type of comparison is not new, nor is it limited to women deriding men, or gays deriding straights (and all the various vis versas).
It must be human nature for people to judge others by their own yardstick. It's been happening for ages.
29 posted on
09/10/2003 6:25:49 PM PDT by
Lorianne
To: scripter; *Homosexual Agenda; GrandMoM; backhoe; pram; Yehuda; Clint N. Suhks; saradippity; ...
Belated ping.
Scripter will be off line until next week. I've agreed to help him out by running his homosexual agenda ping list.
A simple freepmail is all it takes to subscribe to or unsubscribe from scripter's homosexual agenda ping list. If you wish to be added to the list in scripter's absence, please FReepmail me.
30 posted on
09/11/2003 6:25:43 AM PDT by
EdReform
(Support Free Republic - Become a Monthly Donor)
To: kattracks
The feminization of America continues. The article's right, as a women, real Men are what we find attractive, not some queer make-over. Still, I have a problem with this characterization:
the girls who can hold their own during tackle football are usually just one of the guys. These women are also often passed over romantically.
I understand that bulky women are not generally super model material, but I give men more credit than this. Yes, men want their mate to be attractive, but there really IS more to a man than this. A coworker once described me as the perfect woman because I was a "female engineer who knows football". This certainly has never disqualified me from romantic endeavors except with men who are incredibly insecure.
32 posted on
09/11/2003 6:48:48 AM PDT by
FourPeas
(this space intentionally left blank)
To: kattracks
Here it is: God holds the shield for the family faring the way through out the storm; the father holds the shield for the women and children against man made trivialities, the women represent the purity to protect the family for the deviancy created by men; the children hold the future protected by the father's shield of pride and the mother's purity of spirit; the children than can protect themselves until they build their own shield of pride to protect themselves from the storm....Queers have none of this...so, they try to discredit mans relationship to God by destroying the role of men in the family. It won't work, for their lives have no meaning and purpose of step other than selfish gratification of a mixed-up mind confusing agape love with sexual pleasure
.. Sad.
35 posted on
09/12/2003 12:28:57 AM PDT by
Porterville
(I spell stuff wrong sometimes, get over yourself, you're not that great.)
To: kattracks
We are the ones whom most women want to take inside their bodies to procreate and plan to dedicate their lives as our wives, friends, and lovers. We fit.
We even look good in plaid.
Embittered homos are a minority, evolutionary reproductive mistakes, often concerned about e.coli cross contamination and fatal diseases.
It is the behavior, stupid.
36 posted on
09/12/2003 12:46:55 AM PDT by
SevenDaysInMay
(Federal judges and justices serve for periods of good behavior, not life. Article III sec. 1)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson