gpb3aol (imported) wrote: Sun Jan 20, 2008 11:41 pm I'm sorry, it probably because I have very low T but this article gives me a headach.
Understandable. It is a piece of shit.
gpb3aol (imported) wrote: Sun Jan 20, 2008 11:41 pm I'm sorry, it probably because I have very low T but this article gives me a headach.
Buddy666 (imported) wrote: Mon Oct 04, 2010 4:13 am WHAT??? Having is lacking and lacking is the lack of lack? This is supposed to be a serious psychological evaluation or philosophical exercise, but all it seems to LACK is FOCUS. The ideas are only loosely connected and the train of thought runs well off the tracks. Furthermore the writer cannot be objective because of his (must be) admitted castration fetish. Objectivity is what makes the study of psychology a scientific pursuit instead of the self-indulgence seen here. I am not normally one to criticize, but I felt it necessary to speak. If I have a desire to lack any part of my male anatomy, it certainly has nothing to do with this joissance or whatever and everything to do with lack or self-esteem, self-worth, and being on the wrong end of a molester as a child. Telling a child that his willie will get cut off if he tells keeps a kid silent, at least until his mother scares him even more. How's that for psych? How about them apples?
rge, steaming meadow muffin. Burn away, T..talula wrote: Sun Nov 26, 2006 7:31 am Is it still permissible for me to kill and burn and make sure such
I think we are all in agreement that this fellow's observations as reposted at the beginning of this thread are nothing more than a la