For those considering Linux...

On Sat, 23 Dec 2017 05:47:38 -0500, Wolffan
wrote:

On 2017 Dec 22, Ken Springer wrote
(in article ):

On 12/22/17 4:57 AM, Wolffan wrote:
On 2017 Dec 22, Ken Springer wrote
(in article ):

On 12/21/17 9:38 PM, Alan Baker wrote:
On 2017-12-21 8:29 PM, Ken Springer wrote:
On 12/21/17 5:16 PM, Alan Baker wrote:
On 2017-12-21 3:25 PM, Doomsdrzej wrote:
On Thu, 21 Dec 2017 13:13:31 -0500,
wrote:

On 2017 Dec 21, Doomsdrzej wrote
(in ):

On Thu, 21 Dec 2017 21:45:50 +1100, Lucifer
wrote:

On Wed, 20 Dec 2017 15:44:11 -0500, Doomsdrzej wrote:

On 20 Dec 2017 17:17:34 GMT, ray wrote:

On Wed, 20 Dec 2017 08:36:59 -0500, Doomsdrzej wrote:

...

https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pa...x=Ubuntu-17.10
-B
IOS-
Corrupter

Linux corrupts your BIOS. Brilliant stuff.

One example of why I use Debian instead of Ubuntu.

Probably a good point, but I hope you'll understand why some people
might be reluctant to use Linux in general as a result of news like
this.

I have machines running Solaris 10 and 11.

And some people still use Atari STs to produce music. What's your
point?

His point is that he’s so pure that he uses 12-year-old OSes (almost
old
enough to be of interest to Roy Moore!) rather than pollute his
environment
with Mickeysoft or, worse, crApple, products,

Speaking of Roy Moore, do you have concrete evidence that the
allegations are true?

You mean other than the utterly obvious implication of him saying he
never dated a girl "without her mother's permission".

Hint for you: if you're dating adults, you don't need permission.

True, you don't need permission. But, it doesn't mean you can't ask. :-)

True... ...but really... ...come on...

...what are the odds?

Let's go to Vegas and find out!!!! G

Yea, the odds are long, but it's still possible. In some parts of the
country, those old fashioned customs are still honored.

Do I think he did it, or at least some of it? Yep. Will I tell you
he's guilty? Not a chance in H e double hockey sticks. Why?

Because I believe in one of the cornerstones of our justice system...
Innocent until proven guilty.

From listening to news reports, it would appear most people no longer
believe that.

There is no question as to whether or not Roy Moore is sexually attracted to
teenagers. He is. He has admitted it, numerous times, not least when he
stated that he was first attracted to his current wife when she was 15 or
16,
I forget which.

In case you haven't noticed, there is no magical switch that says before
a certain age you are _not_ attracted to someone, and after you reach
that age, you _will_ be attracted to someone.

That "age" is a cultural/societal/religious setting, *not* biological.

I graduated from high school in 1966. Unknown to me, there were at
least 2 married couples in my class. One already had a child.

My point? Attraction has nothing to do with an arbitrarily set age.

The only question is whether or not he jumped the girls who
said he did.

Exactly. And at this point, that is still an open question. Unlike
others who have or quasi-have admitted sexual misconduct.
The man’s a kiddie fiddler. He has admitted it, several times.
The question is _which particular kiddies did he fiddle_, not whether or not
he’s a pervert. He says that he didn’t do _these particular girls_.
That’s not the point.

That is *exactly* the point. To date, every situation is a "he said,
she said" situation, which is _proof_ of nothing.

And that is why I find it disgusting when some try to
steer the discussion away to ‘innocent until proven guilty’, when they
know damn well that he will _never_ be proven guilty if only because the
statute of limitations on being a kiddie fiddler _for those particular
girls_
expired a long time ago.

Before going out on such an unsupportable limb, let me ask you a
question. What if you were accused of some crime for which you were not
guilty, and were on trial. Would you want any member of the jury to be
sitting here voting for guilty just because they *thought* or *believed*
you were guilty?

The man was a prosecutor; it was his duty to hunt down and punish kiddie
fiddlers. The man was a judge. It was his duty to drop the hammer on kiddie
fiddlers. Instead, he was, and is, one. He is a disgusting waste of skin.

*If* true, you are correct. He should have known better. But for
years, powerful men in our society have thought they were above the law,
and perpetrated many illegal acts.

And, there are many cases where men (and I'm sure women) who have spent
years in jail for things they did *not* do because different reasons.

It can happen both ways.

Have you heard of Graham J. Zellick? He was legal professor in England.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graham_J._Zellick He made a famous
statement that goes "It is far better that 10 guilty men go free than
one innocent man is wrongfully convicted ... We know from bitter
experience that juries get things wrong. The Court of Appeal ought to be
more active in quashing convictions even though there has not been any
irregularity in the trial process."

Do you believe all efforts should be made to ensure no innocent person
should go to jail?

not the point. he is a SELF-ADMITTED kiddie fiddler. His mouth. Not anyone
else’s.

You've made the claim, now prove it.

Post a link to Roy Moore admitting that he broke the law by having
sexual relations with an underage girl. I want to hear it from Roy
Moore's own mouth, not someone's interpretation.

John Doe wrote:
Paul wrote:

I *think* I'm covered, because my computer has
a special USB port, with a flasher function built
right in. You plug in a USB stick with a named BIOS
file on it, push a button, and the image is loaded
into the BIOS (there is a separate chip on the
motherboard handling this). The function works so
well, that even if the CPU is not in the CPU socket
and it's "just a motherboard", the flashing function
still works. You can buy my motherboard, connect an
ATX power supply, plug in a USB stick, flash the BIOS,
power off... and insert a previously-unsupported CPU
and have it work.

I haven't needed to use that, but that's my "insurance
policy" in times of trouble.

You have spent some time bashing Gigabyte's DualBIOS, suggesting
your method is better. Any citations for either of those
assertions?

Do you have any citations about Gigabyte's DualBIOS not working?

Do you have any citations to support your method?

Thanks.

Search time, 20 seconds. First article I found.

https://forums.tweaktown.com/gigabyt...ng-failed.html

Paul

On 2017 Dec 23, Doomsdrzej wrote
(in ):

On Sat, 23 Dec 2017 05:47:38 -0500,
wrote:

On 2017 Dec 22, Ken Springer wrote
(in article ):

On 12/22/17 4:57 AM, Wolffan wrote:
On 2017 Dec 22, Ken Springer wrote
(in article ):

On 12/21/17 9:38 PM, Alan Baker wrote:
On 2017-12-21 8:29 PM, Ken Springer wrote:
On 12/21/17 5:16 PM, Alan Baker wrote:
On 2017-12-21 3:25 PM, Doomsdrzej wrote:
On Thu, 21 Dec 2017 13:13:31 -0500,
wrote:

On 2017 Dec 21, Doomsdrzej wrote
(in ):

On Thu, 21 Dec 2017 21:45:50 +1100, Lucifer

wrote:

On Wed, 20 Dec 2017 15:44:11 -0500, Doomsdrzej wrote:

On 20 Dec 2017 17:17:34 GMT, ray wrote:

On Wed, 20 Dec 2017 08:36:59 -0500, Doomsdrzej wrote:

...

https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pa...m&px=Ubuntu-17.
10
-B
IOS-
Corrupter

Linux corrupts your BIOS. Brilliant stuff.

One example of why I use Debian instead of Ubuntu.

Probably a good point, but I hope you'll understand why some
people
might be reluctant to use Linux in general as a result of news
like
this.

I have machines running Solaris 10 and 11.

And some people still use Atari STs to produce music. What's your
point?

His point is that he’s so pure that he uses 12-year-old OSes
(almost
old
enough to be of interest to Roy Moore!) rather than pollute his
environment
with Mickeysoft or, worse, crApple, products,

Speaking of Roy Moore, do you have concrete evidence that the
allegations are true?

You mean other than the utterly obvious implication of him saying he
never dated a girl "without her mother's permission".

Hint for you: if you're dating adults, you don't need permission.

True, you don't need permission. But, it doesn't mean you can't ask.
:-)

True... ...but really... ...come on...

...what are the odds?

Let's go to Vegas and find out!!!! G

Yea, the odds are long, but it's still possible. In some parts of the
country, those old fashioned customs are still honored.

Do I think he did it, or at least some of it? Yep. Will I tell you
he's guilty? Not a chance in H e double hockey sticks. Why?

Because I believe in one of the cornerstones of our justice system...
Innocent until proven guilty.

From listening to news reports, it would appear most people no longer
believe that.

There is no question as to whether or not Roy Moore is sexually attracted
to
teenagers. He is. He has admitted it, numerous times, not least when he
stated that he was first attracted to his current wife when she was 15 or
16,
I forget which.

In case you haven't noticed, there is no magical switch that says before
a certain age you are _not_ attracted to someone, and after you reach
that age, you _will_ be attracted to someone.

That "age" is a cultural/societal/religious setting, *not* biological.

I graduated from high school in 1966. Unknown to me, there were at
least 2 married couples in my class. One already had a child.

My point? Attraction has nothing to do with an arbitrarily set age.

The only question is whether or not he jumped the girls who
said he did.

Exactly. And at this point, that is still an open question. Unlike
others who have or quasi-have admitted sexual misconduct.
The man’s a kiddie fiddler. He has admitted it, several times.
The question is _which particular kiddies did he fiddle_, not whether or
not
he’s a pervert. He says that he didn’t do _these particular girls_.
That’s not the point.

That is *exactly* the point. To date, every situation is a "he said,
she said" situation, which is _proof_ of nothing.

And that is why I find it disgusting when some try to
steer the discussion away to ‘innocent until proven guilty’, when they
know damn well that he will _never_ be proven guilty if only because the
statute of limitations on being a kiddie fiddler _for those particular
girls_
expired a long time ago.

Before going out on such an unsupportable limb, let me ask you a
question. What if you were accused of some crime for which you were not
guilty, and were on trial. Would you want any member of the jury to be
sitting here voting for guilty just because they *thought* or *believed*
you were guilty?

The man was a prosecutor; it was his duty to hunt down and punish kiddie
fiddlers. The man was a judge. It was his duty to drop the hammer on
kiddie
fiddlers. Instead, he was, and is, one. He is a disgusting waste of skin.

*If* true, you are correct. He should have known better. But for
years, powerful men in our society have thought they were above the law,
and perpetrated many illegal acts.

And, there are many cases where men (and I'm sure women) who have spent
years in jail for things they did *not* do because different reasons.

It can happen both ways.

Have you heard of Graham J. Zellick? He was legal professor in England.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graham_J._Zellick He made a famous
statement that goes "It is far better that 10 guilty men go free than
one innocent man is wrongfully convicted ... We know from bitter
experience that juries get things wrong. The Court of Appeal ought to be
more active in quashing convictions even though there has not been any
irregularity in the trial process."

Do you believe all efforts should be made to ensure no innocent person
should go to jail?

not the point. he is a SELF-ADMITTED kiddie fiddler. His mouth. Not anyone
else’s.

You've made the claim, now prove it.

Post a link to Roy Moore admitting that he broke the law by having
sexual relations with an underage girl. I want to hear it from Roy
Moore's own mouth, not someone's interpretation.

sigh... the kiddie fiddler admitted to asking the mothers of assorted girls
for permission prior to ‘dating’ them. He admitted being attracted to his
current wife back when she was 15/16. Google is your friend.

On 2017 Dec 23, Wolf K wrote
(in article ):

On 2017-12-23 13:48, Doomsdrzej wrote:
On Fri, 22 Dec 2017 22:03:28 -0500, Wolf
wrote:

On 2017-12-22 20:30, Doomsdrzej wrote:
On Fri, 22 Dec 2017 19:45:03 -0500, Wolf
wrote:

On 2017-12-22 03:51, Ken Springer wrote:
[...]
Do I think he did it, or at least some of it? Yep. Will I tell you
he's guilty? Not a chance in H e double hockey sticks. Why?

Because I believe in one of the cornerstones of our justice system...
Innocent until proven guilty.

From listening to news reports, it would appear most people no longer
believe that.

IOW, there's insufficient evidence to convict. But that doesn't mean he
didn't do it. All of it.

Which is an idiotic stance for any person to take and I'm not shocked
than an idiot took it.

Once again, you're confusing criminal guilt and moral guilt. The fact
that there's insufficient evidence to prove a criminal charge does _not_
mean that the accused didn't do it. It just means that there wasn't a
strong enough case to convict. Or even that the actions weren't criminal.

If the actions weren't criminal, why the Hell would anyone care?
Considering how you liberals add new things into the "immoral" pile on
a daily basis, forgive me if I don't give a **** about "moral guilt."
Your camp is the same one arguing that there is such a thing as racist
trees, that snow is racist and that the mere existence of white men is
racist.

Fact is, you're using the same logic you accuse me of against Hillary:
just because the FBI didn't bring a charge doesn't mean she's not
guilty, that's your argument. Why do you object when the same argument
is brought against one of your heroes?

The FBI didn't bring a charge against Hillary because they didn't
actually investigate anything, not because of some idiotic concept
such as "moral guilt." It is now very well known (by real news
agencies) that the FBI through Strzok and Comey intentionally gave her
a pass *despite* the overwhelming evidence.

What you're saying is that "even if they can't prove that he's a
pedophile, he's still a pedophile."

I don't have to prove that one, he admitted it. It was his defence that
he had asked permission from the girl's mother. I don't think that's a
defence, neither in law, nor in public opinion. Keep in mind that sex
with an underage person is rape in law, even if it was consensual.

Where is your evidence that he had any kind of sexual relations with
an underage girl? You have none so be quiet and do not interpret
objective criminal law in your very subjective, idiotic way.

he didn't. but you seem to think that only rape is a criminal offence.
Actually, unwanted sexual touching etc is a crime in all of the USA and
Canada. In law and public opinion, such actions are considered worse
when the victim is a minor. In addition, in law, a minor is incapable of
giving consent to any sexual activity. (In law a minor cannot legally
consent to a number of things).

they know this, they just don’t want to admit that their hero is a pervert.

On Sat, 23 Dec 2017 16:23:02 -0500, Wolf K
wrote:

On 2017-12-23 13:48, Doomsdrzej wrote:
On Fri, 22 Dec 2017 22:03:28 -0500, Wolf K
wrote:

On 2017-12-22 20:30, Doomsdrzej wrote:
On Fri, 22 Dec 2017 19:45:03 -0500, Wolf K
wrote:

On 2017-12-22 03:51, Ken Springer wrote:
[...]
Do I think he did it, or at least some of it?* Yep.* Will I tell you
he's guilty?* Not a chance in H e double hockey sticks.* Why?

Because I believe in one of the cornerstones of our justice system...
Innocent until proven guilty.

From listening to news reports, it would appear most people no longer
believe that.



IOW, there's insufficient evidence to convict. But that doesn't mean he
didn't do it. All of it.

Which is an idiotic stance for any person to take and I'm not shocked
than an idiot took it.

Once again, you're confusing criminal guilt and moral guilt. The fact
that there's insufficient evidence to prove a criminal charge does _not_
mean that the accused didn't do it. It just means that there wasn't a
strong enough case to convict. Or even that the actions weren't criminal.

If the actions weren't criminal, why the Hell would anyone care?
Considering how you liberals add new things into the "immoral" pile on
a daily basis, forgive me if I don't give a **** about "moral guilt."
Your camp is the same one arguing that there is such a thing as racist
trees, that snow is racist and that the mere existence of white men is
racist.

Fact is, you're using the same logic you accuse me of against Hillary:
just because the FBI didn't bring a charge doesn't mean she's not
guilty, that's your argument. Why do you object when the same argument
is brought against one of your heroes?

The FBI didn't bring a charge against Hillary because they didn't
actually investigate anything, not because of some idiotic concept
such as "moral guilt." It is now very well known (by real news
agencies) that the FBI through Strzok and Comey intentionally gave her
a pass *despite* the overwhelming evidence.

What you're saying is that "even if they can't prove that he's a
pedophile, he's still a pedophile."

I don't have to prove that one, he admitted it. It was his defence that
he had asked permission from the girl's mother. I don't think that's a
defence, neither in law, nor in public opinion. Keep in mind that sex
with an underage person is rape in law, even if it was consensual.

Where is your evidence that he had any kind of sexual relations with
an underage girl? You have none so be quiet and do not interpret
objective criminal law in your very subjective, idiotic way.


he didn't.

Good, now be quiet.

On Sat, 23 Dec 2017 17:15:13 -0500, Wolffan
wrote:

snip for cleanliness

Post a link to Roy Moore admitting that he broke the law by having
sexual relations with an underage girl. I want to hear it from Roy
Moore's own mouth, not someone's interpretation.

sigh... the kiddie fiddler admitted to asking the mothers of assorted girls
for permission prior to ‘dating’ them.

So because he's respectful toward the parents, he's a pedophile. Your
liberal logic astounds me.

He admitted being attracted to his
current wife back when she was 15/16. Google is your friend.

When I taught grade 11, I thought one particular 16 year-old student
was going to turn out to be beautiful. She's an amateur model now who
barely looks any different than she did nine years ago. Does that make
me a kiddie fiddler?

Geez, you're beyond stupid. Why anyone reads your posts escapes me.

On Sat, 23 Dec 2017 13:51:05 -0500, Doomsdrzej wrote:

Post a link to Roy Moore admitting that he broke the law by having
sexual relations with an underage girl. I want to hear it from Roy
Moore's own mouth, not someone's interpretation.

Just to clarify, it'll need to be a link from fox news or breitbart or
world news daily or somewhere equally credible.

You're welcome. ;-)

On Sat, 23 Dec 2017 13:41:47 -0500, Doomsdrzej wrote:

On Fri, 22 Dec 2017 21:50:05 -0500, Wolf K
wrote:

I'll just say Ip;ve never had that kind of problem with women. Ever.

Because they detect that there is nothing masculine about you and tend
to stay away out of a complete lack of attraction. In my case, as a
result of a decent physique and handsome features, I have to fight
some of them off out of respect for my beautiful wife.

I call BS. You sound like the weird kid who received a wedgie every day
in school. If you were anything like the person you claim to be, you
wouldn't come off sounding so weak and powerless.

I can't imagine what life would be like if I were afraid of about half
the population. Wait, yes I can. You've been describing exactly what
it's like.

On 2017 Dec 23, Doomsdrzej wrote
(in ):

On Sat, 23 Dec 2017 17:15:13 -0500,
wrote:

snip for cleanliness

Post a link to Roy Moore admitting that he broke the law by having
sexual relations with an underage girl. I want to hear it from Roy
Moore's own mouth, not someone's interpretation.

sigh... the kiddie fiddler admitted to asking the mothers of assorted girls
for permission prior to ‘dating’ them.

So because he's respectful toward the parents, he's a pedophile. Your
liberal logic astounds me.

laddie one of the major reasons why I’m so utterly disgusted with the
kiddie fiddler is that I’ve been a registered Republican for my entire
voting life. Thanks to Roy Moore and those who support him I may have to
change that.

And, one more time as it obviously hasn’t sunk in:

IF YOU ARE IN YOUR 30S AND SHE IS IN HER TEENS AND YOU HAVE TO ASK HER MOMMA
FOR PERMISSION TO ‘DATE’ HER, SHE’S TOO DAMN YOUNG FOR YOU, YOU DAMN
PERVERT.


He admitted being attracted to his
current wife back when she was 15/16. Google is your friend.

When I taught grade 11, I thought one particular 16 year-old student
was going to turn out to be beautiful. She's an amateur model now who
barely looks any different than she did nine years ago. Does that make
me a kiddie fiddler?

only if you ‘dated’ her.


Geez, you're beyond stupid. Why anyone reads your posts escapes me.

Who is the more foolish, the fool or the one who follows him?

On Sat, 23 Dec 2017 22:02:20 -0500, Wolf K
wrote:

On 2017-12-23 21:20, Doomsdrzej wrote:
On Sat, 23 Dec 2017 17:15:13 -0500, Wolffan
wrote:

snip for cleanliness

Post a link to Roy Moore admitting that he broke the law by having
sexual relations with an underage girl. I want to hear it from Roy
Moore's own mouth, not someone's interpretation.

sigh... the kiddie fiddler admitted to asking the mothers of assorted girls
for permission prior to ‘dating’ them.

So because he's respectful toward the parents, he's a pedophile. Your
liberal logic astounds me.

If you really claim to believe that you arrived at that conclusion by
reason and logic, you're not only deluded, you're [fill in with one of
the words you like to use about "liberals"].

When I asked my wife to marry me, it was clear from very early on that
in the same way that I essentially had to present myself to her father
for his approval to date her, I would also need his approval to marry
her. Some cultures still have a certain sense of respect even though
you as an individual and your culture don't.

He admitted being attracted to his
current wife back when she was 15/16. Google is your friend.

When I taught grade 11, I thought one particular 16 year-old student
was going to turn out to be beautiful. She's an amateur model now who
barely looks any different than she did nine years ago. Does that make
me a kiddie fiddler?

Geez, you're beyond stupid. Why anyone reads your posts escapes me.

No, but if you had acted on your attraction to her, you would be. You'd
also be drummed out of the profession. I trust no one noticed that you
had an eye for your more attractive students, it's so easy to
misinterpret a teacher's actions.

They regularly interpret the fact that I like my students and enjoy
talking to them as a sign that I might potentially want to date them.
I've come to terms with that. However, I can control myself even
though Quebecers as a whole seem not to be able to do so. Something
about us Poles make us alphas in a world filled with betas such as
yourself.

On Sun, 24 Dec 2017 01:42:35 -0600, Char Jackson
wrote:

On Sat, 23 Dec 2017 13:41:47 -0500, Doomsdrzej wrote:

On Fri, 22 Dec 2017 21:50:05 -0500, Wolf K
wrote:

I'll just say Ip;ve never had that kind of problem with women. Ever.

Because they detect that there is nothing masculine about you and tend
to stay away out of a complete lack of attraction. In my case, as a
result of a decent physique and handsome features, I have to fight
some of them off out of respect for my beautiful wife.

I call BS. You sound like the weird kid who received a wedgie every day
in school. If you were anything like the person you claim to be, you
wouldn't come off sounding so weak and powerless.

I can't imagine what life would be like if I were afraid of about half
the population. Wait, yes I can. You've been describing exactly what
it's like.

There are photos of me available all over the place and some of them
also show my physique. Feel free to check them out at your soonest
convenience but try not to masturbate.

On Sun, 24 Dec 2017 11:55:23 -0500, Wolf K
wrote:

On 2017-12-24 11:34, Doomsdrzej wrote:
When I asked my wife to marry me, it was clear from very early on that
in the same way that I essentially had to present myself to her father
for his approval to date her, I would also need his approval to marry
her. Some cultures still have a certain sense of respect even though
you as an individual and your culture don't.

Well, I asked my future father-in-law for his daughter's hand in
marriage, too. But our future sons-in-law didn't. Customs change.

That was almost 58 years ago.

And the allegations against Moore were from 40 years ago. Do you have
evidence that the customs in the area of Alabama where Moore resided
had chance by then?

On Sun, 24 Dec 2017 11:34:23 -0500, Doomsdrzej wrote:

On Sat, 23 Dec 2017 22:02:20 -0500, Wolf K
wrote:

On 2017-12-23 21:20, Doomsdrzej wrote:
On Sat, 23 Dec 2017 17:15:13 -0500, Wolffan
wrote:

snip for cleanliness

Post a link to Roy Moore admitting that he broke the law by having
sexual relations with an underage girl. I want to hear it from Roy
Moore's own mouth, not someone's interpretation.

sigh... the kiddie fiddler admitted to asking the mothers of assorted girls
for permission prior to ‘dating’ them.

So because he's respectful toward the parents, he's a pedophile. Your
liberal logic astounds me.

If you really claim to believe that you arrived at that conclusion by
reason and logic, you're not only deluded, you're [fill in with one of
the words you like to use about "liberals"].

When I asked my wife to marry me, it was clear from very early on that
in the same way that I essentially had to present myself to her father
for his approval to date her, I would also need his approval to marry
her. Some cultures still have a certain sense of respect even though
you as an individual and your culture don't.

1. No one's talking about marriage. Dating and marriage are two
different kettles of fish.

2. In Alabama, it's not typical, to put it mildly, to ask permission to
date a girl who is of legal age. That would not go down well with the
young woman, nor with her parents.

3. The culture in your area of Canada appears to be a far cry from the
culture in Alabama.

On Sun, 24 Dec 2017 11:37:33 -0500, Doomsdrzej wrote:

On Sun, 24 Dec 2017 01:42:35 -0600, Char Jackson
wrote:

On Sat, 23 Dec 2017 13:41:47 -0500, Doomsdrzej wrote:

On Fri, 22 Dec 2017 21:50:05 -0500, Wolf K
wrote:

I'll just say Ip;ve never had that kind of problem with women. Ever.

Because they detect that there is nothing masculine about you and tend
to stay away out of a complete lack of attraction. In my case, as a
result of a decent physique and handsome features, I have to fight
some of them off out of respect for my beautiful wife.

I call BS. You sound like the weird kid who received a wedgie every day
in school. If you were anything like the person you claim to be, you
wouldn't come off sounding so weak and powerless.

I can't imagine what life would be like if I were afraid of about half
the population. Wait, yes I can. You've been describing exactly what
it's like.

There are photos of me available all over the place and some of them
also show my physique. Feel free to check them out at your soonest
convenience but try not to masturbate.

I haven't seen any photos but I repeat, you sound like the wimp who got
a wedgie every day in school. You also gave up your lunch money to
anyone who asked. You sound utterly weak and powerless when it comes to
half the world's population. That must be hard for you.

On 12/24/2017 11:55 AM, Wolf K wrote:
On 2017-12-24 11:34, Doomsdrzej wrote:
When I asked my wife to marry me, it was clear from very early on that
in the same way that I essentially had to present myself to her father
for his approval to date her, I would also need his approval to marry
her. Some cultures still have a certain sense of respect even though
you as an individual and your culture don't.

Well, I asked my future father-in-law for his daughter's hand in
marriage, too. But our future sons-in-law didn't. Customs change.

That was almost 58 years ago.

I ask my future father in law to marry his daughter. He demanded a
bride price. My future wife and I stopped at a toy story and bought a
half dozen or so cows sheep, etc.

He was happy, that was nearly 50 years ago. Unfortunately he died
nearly 25 years ago. He was a great guy.

--
2017: The year we learn to play the great game of Euchre