The Cellar

The Cellar (http://cellar.org/index.php)
-   Home Base (http://cellar.org/forumdisplay.php?f=2)
-   -   You Dirty Sluts (http://cellar.org/showthread.php?t=26995)

Ibby 03-06-2012 01:55 AM

You Dirty Sluts
 
I posted this to my Facebook and tumblr today. I'm reposting it here instead of current events or politics, because I think this isn't just political or newsy. This is a huge women's issue that transcends mere political debate.
Quote:

WOMEN. LADIES. GIRL-FOLK. Do you use birth control? Are you a slut? If your answers were "yes" and "no", or even if you ever have used or plan to ever use birth control, and think that using that fact alone to brand you as a slut or a prostitute is not just appalling, but offensive to women everywhere... If you have a mother, or sister, or daughter, or girlfriend, or wife, who has taken birth control... PLEASE find a way to make your voice heard. Sign the petition to have Rush Limbaugh taken off Armed Forces Radio. Join the boycott and pressure against his corporate sponsors. And most important of all, let the extremists in the Republican party know that standing by such unabashedly sexist, discriminatory, offensive language or policies is unforgivable by anyone who knows a woman.

sexobon 03-06-2012 02:19 AM

WOMEN. LADIES. GIRL-FOLK. Do you use birth control? Are you a slut? If your answers were "yes" and "yes," PM me!

Aliantha 03-06-2012 02:54 AM

Well obviously Mr L would be happy with my choices lately. lol

ZenGum 03-06-2012 04:02 AM

I hope you're barefoot and making a sandwich.

Aliantha 03-06-2012 04:29 AM

well, I am barefoot, and I made taco's for dinner. We ate with our fingers. That probably qualifies.

glatt 03-06-2012 07:24 AM

I don't know anything about Armed Forces Radio. Is it supported at all by taxpayer money? If so, it shouldn't have any partisan stuff on it, unless it's balanced out with another extremist blowhard, but from the left.

Sheldonrs 03-06-2012 07:27 AM

I do not use birth control and I AM a slut.

DanaC 03-06-2012 07:35 AM

You're the slut we all wish we were :p

footfootfoot 03-06-2012 07:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheldonrs (Post 799821)
I do not use birth control and I AM a slut.

Yes, but are you a blowhard?

BigV 03-06-2012 08:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheldonrs (Post 799821)
I do not use birth control and I AM a slut.

I would consider the fact that the slutty action you're involved in doesn't have any risk of producing a baby birth control.

classicman 03-06-2012 01:35 PM


monster 03-06-2012 01:44 PM

Is it more offensive to call someone a slut than a bitch? Or are both equally mysogynistic when used by a male in a discusiion/argument/debate scenario?

glatt 03-06-2012 01:46 PM

slut is much worse than bitch, imho

My take is that "slut" is a judgement about the value of the person, while "bitch" just means you don't like them at that moment.

monster 03-06-2012 01:47 PM

because of the sexual aspect?

Lamplighter 03-06-2012 01:50 PM

I have the idea of the slut harms herself, a bitch harms others.

glatt 03-06-2012 01:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by monster (Post 799903)
because of the sexual aspect?

What other aspect is there?

But it says more about the person using the word than the person it's aimed at. Maybe a few decades ago it was the other way around.

Ibby 03-06-2012 02:15 PM

Bitch means "you are a woman, who is acting negatively", or "you are acting negatively and I want to paint you with a feminine epithet for increased effect". in both cases, it's implied that the being a woman part of the term is meant to increase the negativity of the term.

Slut, however, means "you are immoral, and have too much sex", and is almost always applied negatively only to women. it implies trashiness and a lack of personal worth or value. But it also means "sex is bad"... and that's already becoming a position wildly out of touch with anyone who isn't a Limbaugh fan or a Westboro Baptist or whatever. Slut shaming is becoming more and more rejected by society. Slutwalks are an increasingly common sort of protest march.

Quote:

But it says more about the person using the word than the person it's aimed at. Maybe a few decades ago it was the other way around.

monster 03-06-2012 02:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by glatt (Post 799906)
What other aspect is there?

But it says more about the person using the word than the person it's aimed at. Maybe a few decades ago it was the other way around.

Is that what makes the difference -that one is sexual and one isn't, or is it the way in which each is used or is it just higher on the sliding scale of all bad words that ranges from you dastardly devil thru you motherfelching cunt to.....wherever?

It wasn't a challenge, merely a question, sorry if it came off differently

I don't find them particularly different in this context of use. You and Ibram have both touched on what I feel about it really -it says more about the person who resorts to the name-calling, and it's about damn time women just didn't let "slut" hurt them any more than "bitch". words like this just need to be reclaimed until there are no more left. But I wouldn't be surprised to find I'm in the minority about that. I think all this "bad words" thing is ridiculous. And I don't feel any need to take a stand against this Lindburgh chap because he's already been outclassed and shown up by his "victim". Good for her.

Ibby 03-06-2012 02:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by glatt (Post 799820)
I don't know anything about Armed Forces Radio. Is it supported at all by taxpayer money? If so, it shouldn't have any partisan stuff on it, unless it's balanced out with another extremist blowhard, but from the left.

Armed Forces TV carries Fox and MSNBC shows for example. The problem is... IS there anyone as extreme as Rush on the left? Not just someone who's really far on the left - I mean EXTREME, as in, repeatedly and unabashedly calling a woman who testified about a friend of hers needing birth control for ovarian cysts a slut, regardless of the facts?

the partisanship isn't the issue. It's the offensiveness and disgusting personal attacks.

glatt 03-06-2012 02:44 PM

I think they are very different.

Bitch is always a woman or an insult to a man by calling him a woman. You can be a bitch one day, and then not be a bitch the next. It's about attitude. Or maybe you are always a bitch. But then that's just the way you are. (Not you, Monster.)

Slut is someone who is promiscuous. But in a bad way. And using that word is making a judgement on the worth of the person forever. They are unclean. In the gutter. The lowest.

glatt 03-06-2012 02:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ibram (Post 799913)
Armed Forces TV carries Fox and MSNBC shows for example. The problem is... IS there anyone as extreme as Rush on the left? Not just someone who's really far on the left - I mean EXTREME, as in, repeatedly and unabashedly calling a woman who testified about a friend of hers needing birth control for ovarian cysts a slut, regardless of the facts?

the partisanship isn't the issue. It's the offensiveness and disgusting personal attacks.

Yeah, but do I pay for it with my taxes?

Ibby 03-06-2012 02:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by glatt (Post 799915)
Yeah, but do I pay for it with my taxes?

Yes. Yes you do.

Pico and ME 03-06-2012 02:48 PM

He's losing advertisers...I think the count is up to 30.

classicman 03-06-2012 02:57 PM

bitch=female
dick=male

classicman 03-06-2012 03:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ibram (Post 799913)
Armed Forces TV carries Fox and MSNBC shows for example. The problem is... IS there anyone as extreme as Rush on the left?
the partisanship isn't the issue. It's the offensiveness and disgusting personal attacks.

The closest I can think of is Ed, used to be Ulbermann maybe. But no, neither went that far.

IMO, Rush shouldn't be on ANY radio.

Ibby 03-06-2012 03:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by classicman (Post 799922)
The closest I can think of is Ed, used to be Ulbermann maybe. But no, neither went that far.

They're both loud and bombastic, and tend to have a rhetorical style similar to Rush's, but neither are particularly extreme by my reckoning. What exactly makes them extreme, other than being loud and slightly angry all the time?

glatt 03-06-2012 03:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ibram (Post 799916)
Yes. Yes you do.

Well then I'm completely opposed to that. Give the troops entertainment, but not politics.

Rush Limbaugh routinely mocks the commander in chief. How can they justify broadcasting that over official channels? He foments insubordination. That's just nuts that he would be carried.

Nirvana 03-06-2012 03:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by classicman (Post 799920)
bitch=female
double fucking dick=male


FTFY ;)

Sheldonrs 03-06-2012 03:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by classicman (Post 799920)
bitch=female
dick=male

Whew! I've been doing it right!

Ibby 03-06-2012 03:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by glatt (Post 799927)
Well then I'm completely opposed to that. Give the troops entertainment, but not politics.

That's not how AFN (armed forces network) works. The idea isn't to give them state-approved, uncontroversial, milquetoast media... The basic premise is, "if we're asking you to give up your liberty, your home, your acquaintances, and potentially your life, to go live or fight in a foreign country, we are going to give you the amenities of American life as best we can to make up for it." That's why commissaries/BXs/PXs carry books or magazines or products that may be distasteful to or disliked by some people - including politically-related material. Because it's meant to give the troops what they want in the context of what they're sacrificing by living on-base, predominantly overseas.
Any of our stateside military folks can help clarify, but that's my understanding of AFN's guiding principle, at least overseas. Keep in mind that I had AFN TV (and I assume radio if I'd looked for it) while I was living in Taiwan.

monster 03-06-2012 03:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by glatt (Post 799914)
I think they are very different.

Bitch is always a woman or an insult to a man by calling him a woman. You can be a bitch one day, and then not be a bitch the next. It's about attitude. Or maybe you are always a bitch. But then that's just the way you are. (Not you, Monster.)

Slut is someone who is promiscuous. But in a bad way. And using that word is making a judgement on the worth of the person forever. They are unclean. In the gutter. The lowest.

There's probably an element of cultural difference here too. A slut can just be a slovenly woman with no reference to sexuality, so it just doesn't have the strong slur to it for me. I often refer to myself as a slut in the messy/poor houseworking sense. I just checked the Oxford and the slovernly aspect gets far more coverage than the sexual one and is the first meaning given. Also Brits are generally less hung up about sex and booze (and more hung up about guns and violence)

I also noticed "slut wool" being given as a term for "dust bunnies" :lol:

To me, being a dick and being a bitch are two completely different behaviours that have very little to do with gender. And they're both just words, neither is really worse than the other.

Ibby 03-06-2012 03:31 PM

https://motherjones.com/files/images...-flowchart.png

Happy Monkey 03-06-2012 03:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by classicman (Post 799922)
The closest I can think of is Ed, used to be Ulbermann maybe. But no, neither went that far.

When Air America was on, Ed Schultz was the centrist. I haven't seen his TV show; maybe he's bumped it up a bit for them. At that time, maybe Randi Rhodes was the most extreme one in the lineup. At one point she called Geraldine Ferraro and Hillary Clinton whores. She was later fired by Air America, though there's dispute over whether that was the real reason.

Lamplighter 03-06-2012 04:11 PM

Randy Rhodes - yes.

What about Phyllis Diller (in her time) :D

classicman 03-06-2012 04:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by monster (Post 799936)
To me, being a dick and being a bitch are two completely different behaviours that have very little to do with gender. And they're both just words, neither is really worse than the other.

They're used in exactly the same way here, at least.
Neither is that overtly offensive. They describe a behavior (ie: being a jerk) more than anything.
Slut is a FAR worse word bordering along the "c" word.

Aliantha 03-06-2012 04:34 PM

bitches are just cranky. sluts are dirty.

Sometimes I tell my boys they're behaving like bitches - implying that I think they're being cranky women. It usually helps.

DanaC 03-06-2012 04:35 PM

I think our equivalent to slut in terms of offensiveness would be 'slag'

Aliantha 03-06-2012 04:51 PM

We call them sluzza's over here. But sluts and slags as well.

To be honest, I really don't like any of the words. I just think it's another labelling word that inflicts negative feelings, both on the user and the receiver. I feel kind of like I need to wash my mouth out just for thinking the word as I'm typing here. (yes I come from a family of mothers who still wash their kids mouths out with soap. No wonder Aden has such clean teeth)

lookout123 03-06-2012 05:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by glatt (Post 799927)
Well then I'm completely opposed to that. Give the troops entertainment, but not politics.

Rush Limbaugh routinely mocks the commander in chief. How can they justify broadcasting that over official channels? He foments insubordination. That's just nuts that he would be carried.

Please. Armed Forces radio is supposed to broadcast a cross section of what is happening on radio in the US. Ideally what they broadcast is something the troops and other listeners want to hear. Based on the generally right leaning make-up of the military, it makes perfect sense for them to carry Rush.

I don't care for the guy and I've never really listened to his show, but reaction this is getting is just stupid. He called a woman a slut while ranting. Dumb move in my opinion, but so what. He isn't a journalist. It was just as dumb and just as much of a non-issue for me as when Schultz called Laura Ingraham a slut. Whatever.

The woman is revelling in her 15 minutes. She went before congress and boo hooed about poor law students not being able to afford contraception. Fuck off. We all have our crosses to bare lady. If between you and your partner you can't afford a condom, then you're too damn stupid to be having sex anyway.

and No I do not have a religious opposition to birth control. I have a deeply held dislike for people who believe it's someone else's (meaning you and me) to pay for things they want.

Ibby 03-06-2012 05:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lookout123 (Post 799981)
She went before congress and boo hooed about poor law students not being able to afford contraception. Fuck off. We all have our crosses to bare lady. If between you and your partner you can't afford a condom, then you're too damn stupid to be having sex anyway.

Did you ever actually listen to her testimony? at ALL? or are you talking out of your ass?
http://www.buzzfeed.com/boxofficebuz...dra-fluke-48z2

Quote:

“Without insurance coverage, contraception, as you know, can cost a woman over $3,000 during law school. For a lot of students who, like me, are on public interest scholarships, that’s practically an entire summer’s salary. 40% of the female students at Georgetown Law reported to us that they struggle financially as a result of this policy.
Quote:

“And some might respond that contraception is accessible in lots of other ways. Unfortunately, that’s just not true.
“Women’s health clinic provide a vital medical service, but as the Guttmacher Institute has definitely documented, these clinics are unable to meet the crushing demand for these services. Clinics are closing, and women are being forced to go without the medical care they need.
Quote:

“A friend of mine, for example, has polycystic ovarian syndrome, and she has to take prescription birth control to stop cysts from growing on her ovaries. Her prescription is technically covered by Georgetown’s insurance because it’s not intended to prevent pregnancy.
“Unfortunately, under many religious institutions and insurance plans, it wouldn’t be. There would be no exception for other medical needs. And under Sen. Blunt’s amendment, Sen. Rubio’s bill or Rep. Fortenberry’s bill there’s no requirement that such an exception be made for these medical needs.
“When this exception does exist, these exceptions don’t accomplish their well-intended goals because when you let university administrators or other employers rather than women and their doctors dictate whose medical needs are legitimate and whose are not, women’s health takes a back seat to a bureaucracy focused on policing her body.
In 65% of the cases at our school, our female students were interrogated by insurance representatives and university medical staff about why they needed prescription and whether they were lying about their symptoms.
“For my friend and 20% of the women in her situation, she never got the insurance company to cover her prescription. Despite verifications of her illness from her doctor, her claim was denied repeatedly on the assumption that she really wanted birth control to prevent pregnancy. She’s gay. So clearly polycystic ovarian syndrome was a much more urgent concern than accidental pregnancy for her.

“After months paying over $100 out-of-pocket, she just couldn’t afford her medication anymore, and she had to stop taking it.
“I learned about all of this when I walked out of a test and got a message from her that in the middle of the night in her final exam period she’d been in the emergency room. She’d been there all night in just terrible, excruciating pain. She wrote to me, ‘It was so painful I’d woke up thinking I’ve been shot.’
Without her taking the birth control, a massive cyst the size of a tennis ball had grown on her ovary. She had to have surgery to remove her entire ovary as a result.
“On the morning I was originally scheduled to give this testimony, she was sitting in a doctor’s office, trying to cope with the consequences of this medical catastrophe.
“Since last year’s surgery, she’s been experiencing night sweats and weight gain and other symptoms of early menopause as a result of the removal of her ovary. She’s 32-years-old.
As she put it, ‘If my body indeed does enter early menopause, no fertility specialist in the world will be able to help me have my own children. I will have no choice at giving my mother her desperately desired grandbabies simply because the insurance policy that I paid for, totally unsubsidized by my school, wouldn’t cover my prescription for birth control when I needed it.
“Now, in addition to potentially facing the health complications that come with having menopause at such an early age – increased risk of cancer, heart disease, osteoporosis – she may never be able to conceive a child.
“Some may say that my friend’s tragic story is rare. It’s not. I wish it were
“One woman told us doctors believe she has endometriosis, but that can’t be proven without surgery. So the insurance has not been willing to cover her medication – the contraception she needs to treat her endometriosis.
“Recently, another woman told me that she also has polycystic ovarian syndrome and she’s struggling to pay for her medication and is terrified to not have access to it.
“Due to the barriers erected by Georgetown’s policy, she hasn’t been reimbursed for her medications since last August.

Ibby 03-06-2012 05:47 PM

Yeah. Surprise. She wasn't talking about government paying for anything. She wasn't talking about needing it just for preventing pregnancy. She wasn't talking about herself or her sex life. She was saying that letting insurance providers (that is to say, employers, not the insurers) refuse to cover, or try to put up stumbling blocks to obtaining, medically legitimate treatments, for "moral" or political reasons, is unacceptable.

classicman 03-06-2012 07:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ibram (Post 799913)
IS there anyone as extreme as Rush on the left? Not just someone who's really far on the left - I mean EXTREME, as in,
repeatedly and unabashedly calling a woman ~snip~ a slut,

the partisanship isn't the issue. It's the offensiveness and disgusting personal attacks.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ibram (Post 799926)
They're both loud and bombastic, and tend to have a rhetorical style similar to Rush's,
but neither are particularly extreme by my reckoning. What exactly makes them extreme,
other than being loud and slightly angry all the time?


Ibby 03-06-2012 07:15 PM

Yeah. But he didn't double down on it for two more days.
I'm not a big fan of Ed, but he's no Rush.

classicman 03-06-2012 07:17 PM

But he did call a woman a slut.
They have that in common.
Unfortunately, I do think he tries quite hard at emulating Rush from the left.
If you go way back to when he was on Air America, he was totally different.

monster 03-06-2012 08:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by classicman (Post 799957)
They're used in exactly the same way here, at least.
Neither is that overtly offensive. They describe a behavior (ie: being a jerk) more than anything.
Slut is a FAR worse word bordering along the "c" word.

Dick vs Bitch. Not here (SE Mich) at least. I suspect more of the US too. Being a dick requires no intelligence whatsoever. And often doesn't need a third party. Bitchery requires a third party and is often based on intelligent/insightful observations. Not always. neither are specific to the gender exhibiting the behaviour, although it is possible that one gender is better at one and the other at the other. or not.

I get that slut is a bad, bad word here. It just isn't to me. but then, as I said, I don't really have problems with any words. If they're used appropriately, I'm all good.

lookout123 03-06-2012 09:13 PM

Yes Ibram, I did hear it. Thanks for pasting it in for me though. I see nothing in there that causes me to feel differently about compelling private organizations to provide coverage for any specific medication or procedure. Ooh, a prescription costs a lot. Some people can't afford to have it. Shit happens. I've been on the shitty end of things not being covered an awful lot in the last few years. That still doesn't make me believe anyone or any organization should be compelled to pay for my expenses.

classicman 03-06-2012 09:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by monster (Post 800043)
Dick vs Bitch. Not here (SE Mich) at least. I suspect more of the US too. Being a dick requires no intelligence whatsoever. And often doesn't need a third party. Bitchery requires a third party and is often based on intelligent/insightful observations. Not always. neither are specific to the gender exhibiting the behaviour, although it is possible that one gender is better at one and the other at the other. or not.

I get that slut is a bad, bad word here. It just isn't to me. but then, as I said, I don't really have problems with any words. If they're used appropriately, I'm all good.

Fair enough. Diff'rent strokes and all that.

footfootfoot 03-06-2012 09:45 PM

the subtle difference between a "dick" and a "prick."

I'd say a dick was more passive and apt to allow douchebaggery to occur on his watch, where a prick is more active and deliberate.

monster 03-06-2012 09:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by footfootfoot (Post 800052)
the subtle difference between a "dick" and a "prick."

I'd say a dick was more passive and apt to allow douchebaggery to occur on his watch, where a prick is more active and deliberate.

yup could go for that. prick is definitely more intentional assholedness than dick.

:lol:

Sheldon?

Flint

classicman 03-06-2012 10:21 PM

Totally agree f3.

Ibby 03-06-2012 11:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lookout123 (Post 800044)
Yes Ibram, I did hear it. Thanks for pasting it in for me though. I see nothing in there that causes me to feel differently about compelling private organizations to provide coverage for any specific medication or procedure. Ooh, a prescription costs a lot. Some people can't afford to have it. Shit happens. I've been on the shitty end of things not being covered an awful lot in the last few years. That still doesn't make me believe anyone or any organization should be compelled to pay for my expenses.

Then, i assume, you believe that argument applies equally to ALL medical procedures.

Then it's Obamacare, not contraception coverage, you have a problem with.
Why, then, should you or anybody else single out contraception as an issue?

sexobon 03-07-2012 01:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lookout123 (Post 800044)
... I see nothing in there that causes me to feel differently about compelling private organizations to provide coverage for any specific medication or procedure. ...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ibram (Post 800078)
Then, i assume, you believe that argument applies equally to ALL medical procedures

What pomposity it is to declare that you assume something about another, through vocabulary substitution, that they have already blatantly stated about themselves.
Quote:

Originally Posted by Ibram (Post 800078)
... Why, then, should you or anybody else single out contraception as an issue?

Because ALL Medicine is NOT Preventive Medicine which is a fact of life that is lost on you. It's ALWAYS a matter of degree whether discussing immunizations, contraception; or, limiting medical intervention to prayer.

Your continuing approach, like the sensationalized title you ascribed to this thread, reflects attention whoring at the expense of a valid issue. You are respectfully requested to cease and desist confrontational methods of engagement and pursue synergistic intellectual discussion.

Clodfobble 03-07-2012 07:34 AM

I think Ibram has a valid point, personally. If you're against all medical socialization, that's one position. But singling out one procedure/medication over others reeks of alterior motives.

sexobon 03-07-2012 07:48 AM

That's what all the sluts say.

(I saw that.)

Spexxvet 03-07-2012 08:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ibram (Post 800078)
Then, i assume, you believe that argument applies equally to ALL medical procedures.

Then it's Obamacare, not contraception coverage, you have a problem with.
Why, then, should you or anybody else single out contraception as an issue?

And what about Viagra?

Personally, I think there should be no contraception. Women should get pregnant, and have abortions, or the fathers can pay support, or the mothers can become welfare queens, and the kids can grow up to become criminals. That'll teach 'em and save us money.

footfootfoot 03-07-2012 09:32 AM

Come out and take it you dirty slut, or I'll give it to you through the door!


Lamplighter 03-07-2012 10:06 AM

It's being reported that Limbaugh has lost 36 sponsors in the fall out of all this, along with 2 radio stations.

piercehawkeye45 03-07-2012 10:44 AM

Doesn't matter Lamplighter. Other advertisers would be more than happy to fill the vacuum. Look at this:

Quote:

Now that over a dozen companies have bailed on Rush Limbaugh after he called Sandra Fluke a "slut" on air, a couple of new companies are swooping in to buy up that abandoned air time. AshleyMadison.com, the dating site that helps people cheat on their significant others, has offered to buy up all of Limbaugh's existing ad inventory. The company's founder and C.E.O. Noel Biderman, who's already shown himself to be a deft grabber of publicity, said in a press release, "Rush has always been a controversial figure and we have always been a controversial service so we can relate."

Another dating site, SeekingArrangements.com is also looking to buy some ads on Limbaugh's show. Described in a separate press release as "the world's largest sugar daddy and sugar baby dating website," SeekingArrangements is taking a different approach: "When a woman seeks out a Sugar Daddy to help pay for college, many in mainstream media have no problem likening her to being a prostitute," the company's founder and C.E.O. Brandon Wade said. "Such is the hypocrisy of the society we live in."

Sure, both of these companies are seizing the Limbaugh scandal for publicity, but they're being pretty amusing as they go about it. That's more than can we say about Limbaugh's original comments about Sandra Fluke.
http://www.theatlanticwire.com/polit...imbaugh/49561/

That would be hilarious. hahaha

Lamplighter 03-07-2012 10:56 AM

:D

Irony and hypocrisy - the best forms of entertainment, sprinkled with occasional puns

Clodfobble 03-07-2012 11:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sexobon
That's what all the sluts say.

Actually, it's true. Just like Sandra Fluke's case example, I was on birth control pills from the age of 15 for medical non-contraceptive reasons. I am the very definition of a slut, here.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:18 PM.

Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.