{^_^}

BTW, Danica is nothing but a pretty face that happens to drive indy cars. She can’t win races, throws little girl tantrums when she loses, and whores herself for every camera you stick in front of her.

Half the field hasn’t won a race, and even a certain Mr Gordon is known for getting irksome when he screws it up.

But you’re right. Women don’t deserve to be racing, unless they win every single race, or something.

I’ll concede that the Yanks love to hype up a female being in racing, but that’s hardly the girls fault, and “OMG LOOK FEMALE DRIVER!” is probably just as bad as “girls can’t race”.

Still, I’m reminded of a certain 2005 NASCAR rookie of the year..

I’m not here to make you happy. If you want to call people made in God’s image by a slag word for vagina, it’s a free country…free enough for me to tell you you’re wrong.

So God has a case of the Vag too?

When women use pet names for their stuff, is that wrong too? Or just when men say it?

LFMAO I love it.. who cares.. they both make me laugh!

Anyone seen the Amstel Light “If You Don’t Know Me by Now” Commerical LMFAO… the guy making the woman hold in the middle of a kiss to go pee on a hedge is priceless!

Typically male commerical I tell you!

Seems like a not-very-consequential distinction.

misterpeasea on March 12, 2008 at 4:33 PM

More of an existential discussion….

How many beavers can dance on the head of a…. pin?

Other favorite pick-up line: We’re having sex tonight. Would you like to be there?

(Note: “Favorite,” not “Most Used” or “Most Successful.”)

shibumiglass on March 12, 2008 at 4:20 PM

Maybe that’s it. So it’s ok to talk about beaver in the abstract, or when referring to a body part as opposed to the Person: I like beaver; Let’s go find some beaver; She has a gorgeous beaver.

But not when referring to the Person: See that beaver ordering a drink?

Seems like a not-very-consequential distinction.

When your wife says “Hey, I’d like to polish up your John Thomas,” are you offended?

misterpeasea on March 12, 2008 at 4:27 PM

“John Thomas” doesn’t sound “cute-cute” enough…

His “Curious George” and her “Hello, Kitty!”?

Or is it, a la Monica form “Friends”, her “Delicate Flower”?

That’s my point! When they say “Chasing beaver”, it’s like calling you a, uh, you know.

jgapinoy on March 12, 2008 at 3:31 PM

Uhm. You’ve lost me now. There’s trying to hit some beaver, and there’s looking for your soulmate. And they don’t always have to occur at the same time. In fact, the places you go to try to hit some beaver are not the places I’d want to find my soulmate, though I guess it’d be ok, for the sake of consistency. If I’m a slut, how could I hold it against my soulmate?

Calling me a what? I like it when womyn objectify me. That means they’re thinking of me as an object. To insert into their vajayjay. I’ve noticed a strong correlation between chicks staring at me like a piece of meat and me getting to know their pet beaver.

No, my wife & I have cute-cute names for them, of course. But I don’t call her, or women in general, by that word. She is much more to me than a ____.

jgapinoy on March 12, 2008 at 3:33 PM

Well now I’m really confused. I thought it was that calling the body part by any term other than the scientific one was bad. But now it seems that calling them by any term not approved by jgapinoy is bad. Is that about right?

When your wife says “Hey, I’d like to polish up your John Thomas,” are you offended?

No, my wife & I have cute-cute names for them, of course. But I don’t call her, or women in general, by that word. She is much more to me than a ____.

jgapinoy on March 12, 2008 at 3:33 PM

Ah. I see. I think you might be misunderstanding the two commercials. Neither one, in my opinion, is calling a woman as a whole a beaver. The Aussie one obviously not. The beer ad is referencing a past-time of some types of males, which is chasing ‘beaver’, not chasing women. In those situations men don’t want the ‘woman for a woman’ thing, they want the use of ….um, the beaver. That sounds bad the way I explain it, but I know what I mean. Some women do this, too. I would be shocked to find that all but the most #$%^@ of men would call a woman they cherished by a slang term for a body part. Therefore, the ads are not offensive, because they aren’t doing this. Feel free to laugh without guilt! :)

Porcupine?

James on March 12, 2008 at 3:37 PM

Rooster?

shibumiglass

No, my wife & I have cute-cute names for them, of course. But I don’t call her, or women in general, by that word. She is much more to me than a ____.

misterpesa

That’s my point! When they say “Chasing beaver”, it’s like calling you a, uh, you know.

So do you only use the terms ‘penis’ and ‘vagina’?
How sexy…
/sarc

shibumiglass on March 12, 2008 at 3:06 PM

Like the kid in “Kindergarten Cop”?

“Boys have a penis, girls have vagina!”

“I have a headache…”

“It’s probably a tumor…”

“It’s not a tumor! It’s not!!“

Well… at least they didn’t refer to their product as a Beaver Dam

o.0

SilverStar830 on March 12, 2008 at 1:47 PM

I hearby nominate SilverStar for ‘Quote of the Day’.
Crude? Of course. Funny? Yes.

“She laughed like someone who had looked hard at life and had seen the joke.” -Terry Pratchett
My favorite quote in the world.

OK, so my opinions are not welcome. But I’m not saying this because I’m offended. I’m defending other people from being dehumanized.

jgapinoy on March 12, 2008 at 2:53 PM

I’m still trying to find the “dehumanization” here; the reference is a euphemism for a specific body part, not the person as a whole.

If you want to call people made in God’s image by a slang word for vagina, it’s a free country…free enough for me to tell you you’re wrong.

jgapinoy on March 12, 2008 at 11:31 AM

So do you only use the terms ‘penis’ and ‘vagina’?
How sexy…
/sarc

If those people aren’t defending themselves from being dehumanized, if they don’t think they’re being dehumanized, guess what?

“Tilting at windmills.”

And, maybe they don’t define themselves, their existence, their reason for being, by their genitalia. (That’s vajayjays, for you morons.)

- The Cat