Quote:

Quote:

Why not focus on the heart of the question rather than the semantics of the text? But address this or don't, whatever you yourself would do.



i felt like it was a faulty question. apart from the questioning of my fanhood, (by the way, you didn't need to put "supposed" in "quotation marks", unless you were trying to make us think that you didn't actually mean "supposed"- mr. 2cit, i think you are a "worthwhile" participant on this message board) you seem to be suggesting that my enjoying of max hardcore films somehow cancels out any other "contradictory" views i might express, and vice versa. i don't consider the two mutually exclusive. here we obviously agree to disagree.



Listen if you want to keep harping on about the semantics, I’ll understand that’s best you have.

Can you tell me why demeaning a woman on screen is acceptable but demeaning someone on a message board is not? Do you even know? Is it the addition of the sex act that soothes your conscience?


Quote:

i felt like i defined their in my original response to you. their refers to the cool kids on here. they are their. and, lucky you, you do fit in- as their mutt.



Not all dogs are on leashes. Although I’m not surprised you don’t have the balls to come out and say.



Jim, no one, I repeat NO ONE on this planet takes this place more seriously than you. And the fact that you put everything you have into it and you’re still not accepted is more amusing to me than you could possibly know.