"...in the 1920s, people were too stupid to care for themselves."
So much for progress, eh?
Posted by Fleet-Admiral Michael T. Colorge (Member # 144) on :
Hmm... nothing about gay sex. Why am I not surprised.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
quote:Originally posted by Fleet-Admiral Michael T. Colorge: Hmm... nothing about gay sex. Why am I not surprised.
Bcause back then "gay" meant happy and homosexuals were a navy matter not spoken of. Posted by Cartman (Member # 256) on :
"...a navy matter not spoken of."
So much for progress, eh?
(This, more than anything, is why sociological advancement > technological advancement.)
Posted by ulTRS magDOS (Member # 239) on :
I AM IN LOVE WITH A LESBIAN.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
quote:Originally posted by Cartman: "...a navy matter not spoken of."
So much for progress, eh?
(This, more than anything, is why sociological advancement > technological advancement.)
Well...find me a military that embraces any diveresity.
Not gonna happen.
Posted by Fleet-Admiral Michael T. Colorge (Member # 144) on :
I don't get it though... usually we need lesbians for wars.
Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
Yes, if they hadn't deployed lesbians against Japan, thousands would have perished in a land invasion.
Posted by ulTRS magDOS (Member # 239) on :
Fate has deployed one against my heart, it is the Operation Market Garden of my soul.
Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
A Dyke Too Far, as it were.
Posted by Fleet-Admiral Michael T. Colorge (Member # 144) on :
I thought it was a dyke too deep in the trenches?
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Two in the hand is worth one in the bush...er... What were we talking about?
Posted by ulTRS magDOS (Member # 239) on :
God's sense of humor.
Posted by Cartman (Member # 256) on :
"I thought it was a dyke too deep..."
BUT HE'S NOT GOING TO BE DOING ANY TRENCHING WITH HER IS HE
Posted by Fleet-Admiral Michael T. Colorge (Member # 144) on :
You don't want to know where I'm going with this...
Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
"It is the sex or creative impulse which inspires her warmth of affection, her intensity of purpose, her desire to devote herself to the welfare of humanity."
How the hell did humanity make it through the 40's with notions as stupid as this? And what's with the kid on the first one that looks like frequent wet dreams have caused him to lose his mind? "Pay them no heed... they'll only drive you instantly insane like the young man shown above."
Maybe that would get me through this.
Posted by Fleet-Admiral Michael T. Colorge (Member # 144) on :
That's a woman in drag with her in that poster Aban...
Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
Of course. Because asking a gentleman to pretend to seduce a woman for the purposes of a photograph would be against the sensabilities of the times. But asking a transvestite actress to hold hands with another woman was just fine.
Was there any logic to these at all?
Posted by Fleet-Admiral Michael T. Colorge (Member # 144) on :
NO!!!
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
Take that, The Past!
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Lousy past! I'll show you! ...show you all!
Posted by School of Nim (Member # 205) on :
We sure have a lousy past, we existing beings.
There's that time I called that guy fat in 3rd grade, and the Holocaust, also The White Man's Burden.
I disagree with Aban's vitriolic response to the poster with the strawberry-girl. I think it seems very non-"Edwardian era" in its view on sex, the authors actually credit sex with actual positive remarks, not the "Close your eyes and think of England!" attitude.
A month ago I read a long article written by fashion professor Lundgren, she said that full cover clothes and high-buttoned jackets are coming back into women's fashion. After having experienced a total slutfest for the past ten years, many people "in the business" predict that the western world will enter into another 50's period come 2005-2015, but with more style and less prejudice this time around. The main idea seems to be to "leave more to the imagination". I think I might like it, the article's pictures showed some example-girls in duffle jackets, checkered long-coats and tall brown suede boots. Looked noice, one of the girls reminded me of Diana Rigg (in 1966).
Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
Heh heh, Lundgren. . .
Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
I'm not saying that there are no benefits to sex. Heck yah, there are (or so I'm told). I'm just saying that crediting it as the sole reason a woman might develop a desire to benefit society is a little weird.
Posted by School of Nim (Member # 205) on :
Oh yes. Also, I was inaggerating about your response.
Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
Inaggerating? Is that like the opposite of exaggerating?
Posted by School of Nim (Member # 205) on :
*nods so hard he falls out of chair*
Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
Ah. So what you mean is, you think I'm an opinionated dork who should just be quiet?
Posted by Fleet-Admiral Michael T. Colorge (Member # 144) on :
If that were true, then the whole forum would go quiet.
![[Wink]](wink.gif)