Woman looking to attract that special man.

page: 2
2
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 22 2011 @ 09:48 AM
link   
Personally, I'm against any activity that generally involves women AND weapons... Simply too volatile a mix, and too easy to say or do the wrong the thing, hehe...

Just kidding....


Seriously though, I'm guessing this is more for the opportunity to press bodies close, show her how to shoot, etc. That could go either way. Could creep her out too...so just a tip there...




posted on Feb, 22 2011 @ 10:36 AM
link   
reply to post by Gazrok
 


You got it

By the way, is that the old man from fringe in your avatar?



posted on Feb, 22 2011 @ 10:40 AM
link   
reply to post by macman
 


Yep, that's Walter..quite possibly my favorite character on any current tv show (with Sheldon Cooper from Big Bang Theory being a close second)...



posted on Feb, 22 2011 @ 10:43 AM
link   
reply to post by Gazrok
 


Walter cracks me up more so then SNL has in a long time.
Great show. About the only one I watch now days.



posted on Feb, 23 2011 @ 12:51 PM
link   
Some of you guys and even the gals make some incredibly stupid posts. It must be a public school education..meaing a television/movie education.

Agree with Macman. Take a woman shooting. If for no other reason to see how committed she can be when it is something she doesnt particularly like to do. The double standard is that often a man or male must do things for women that he is not particularly fond of doing or even want to do..but this is normal and acceptable for a male to do this the other way around for a woman..even as a male career opportunity.

As to women with guns or firearms....what on earth are some of you thinking?? As I keep saying ..public education standards or non standards at work. Incredibly dumbed down ..even the females.

It is OK to trust a woman with your paycheck...right!!!??? But not a firearm?? Did some of you get a case of stupid?? Even trusting a woman to spend your paycheck by her deciding what she wants for dinner at a restaurant??? With you paying?? This too tells you alot about a woman and whether she is only interested in the settings on her radio dial..in lieu of your thinking and RISKS taken in earning your monies.

I've taken a number of women shooting. Most of them don't take to it and only do it to accommodate me but don't intend to take it up very often or with consideration with me in mind. But it is OK if I commit to what they want or think.

This is called "High Maintenance " for those of you not educated sufficient to define it.
The idea here is that you spend alot of time trying out for female approval and take on alot of the settings on her radio dial ..and give up your settings. But equality is happening out here right???

You are here, by asking her to go shooting, raising her Maintenance Costs and looking to see how she handles it. If she can pass muster.
The phony double standard is that it is ok to raise maintenance costs to you as a male...and not her's.
Males are to constantly try out for approval...even at the cost of their lives and paychecks..but don't try it the other way around. This is not socially acceptable towards females/women and the responses all across the relationship section bear this out ..this double standard.

We as males often work in dangerous and even deadly environments for our monies. And we are going to trust a woman with our paycheck and not a firearm. I suggest some of you males get your heads out of your backsides and get a breath of fresh air..do some thinking..not fear. Otherwise you are as fearful and insecure as many women out here...ie...feminine...ie..high maintenance.

I am not saying that you should not be selective about the caliber of woman in whom you trust a firearm or your paycheck. I am not saying this at all. I am saying that once you learn the caliber of a woman and she passes muster...ok..but be choosy about the caliber of the woman. You want a disciplined, thoughtful, considerate woman with both your paycheck and a firearm..not a drama queen.

Good post Macman. Also good on the basic outline of Mikemp44. The five do's and don'ts.

By the way Macman..I don't find it difficult to get women to come over to this house and take off their clothes. I even know women for whom this is their major skill set in life. This does not impress me. So taking a woman to the range for such ulterior motives is to me nonsense. But that is me. It will however show me if she is a commitment phobe or not. Women too can be very commitment phobic. Just watch them when you remove them from their safety net type environment. This is what you want to know about a woman you intend to trust with your paycheck or firearm, who is going to be a keeper. If not ..forget it. But it is always a good thing to know or sense about a woman's caliber.
I found the suggestion about fishing good as well...Fishing or shooting both.

You are not as a man trying out for first place with a woman in order to constantly take second place in the long run by taking up with said woman...and giving up your belief system and values for hers.
To many males I know work hard for first place and wind up with second or third place after taking up with a woman..yet take first place risks. Really stupid.

IF you cannot trust a woman with a firearm..you cannot trust her with your paycheck...got it now..Pull your heads out of your backsides.

If she is not willing to take RISKS or certain discomfiture's for you ..she will not take care of your paycheck. Got it now.?? It is not difficult once you get out of a television/movie education belief systems of how thing are supposed to be out here.

Thanks,
Orangetom
edit on 23-2-2011 by orangetom1999 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 23 2011 @ 12:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by macman
I just wanted to point out to any woman out there trying to attract that special someone, ask him to go shooting.
Most guys would fall over out of excitement to have a woman ask them to go shoot.

Excellent.
I live in California & all the women here think they're
Lindsay Lohan or some other obnoxious celebrity.
That would be a rare find in this liberal nut house.



posted on Feb, 23 2011 @ 01:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by don rumsfeld

Originally posted by macman
I just wanted to point out to any woman out there trying to attract that special someone, ask him to go shooting.
Most guys would fall over out of excitement to have a woman ask them to go shoot.

Excellent.
I live in California & all the women here think they're
Lindsay Lohan or some other obnoxious celebrity.
That would be a rare find in this liberal nut house.



Wow Don!!,

I feel sorry for you and California both. However..most women I know do not ask men to go shooting. It would cut to deeply into their pamper myself/I'm sitting on the only one in town budget. To much commitment. I will however ask a woman to go shooting. Most turn me down. No problem here with me. It tells me what I need to know about them and for what they are suitable.

Oh..and I hate Lindsay Lohan, Paris Hilton, Britany Spears, or any of that Hollywood Drivel. I particularly dislike Joan Rivers and her daughter.

Thanks,
Orangetom
edit on 23-2-2011 by orangetom1999 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 23 2011 @ 01:09 PM
link   
Man, I need to talk to local gun range about this!

They should host an "Evening Formal."

Men to wear tuxedos, ladies in ballroom attire.
Serve hors d'oeuvres and play the James Bond Theme over the loudspeakers.
When we stand down for breaks, have a baccarat table set up...

probably no martinis, shaken or stirred, until afterwards.
edit on 23-2-2011 by dr_strangecraft because: I can barely type



posted on Feb, 23 2011 @ 01:17 PM
link   
reply to post by orangetom1999
 


Well if TSHTF I will have easy pickings out here because
these people are soft & weak like no tomorrow. I'm
originally from Missouri & most of the women out here
make me sick to my stomach. Vile bunch.



posted on Feb, 23 2011 @ 01:33 PM
link   
reply to post by orangetom1999
 


I think most comments about trusting women with firearms were made in a joking manner.

However, that said...one can always earn more money, but as of yet, no way to resurrect the dead, so you can't equate the trust of a wallet to trusting with one's life.



posted on Feb, 23 2011 @ 08:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by dr_strangecraft
Man, I need to talk to local gun range about this!

They should host an "Evening Formal."

Men to wear tuxedos, ladies in ballroom attire.
Serve hors d'oeuvres and play the James Bond Theme over the loudspeakers.
When we stand down for breaks, have a baccarat table set up...

probably no martinis, shaken or stirred, until afterwards.
edit on 23-2-2011 by dr_strangecraft because: I can barely type


LOL LOL LOL Doc,

I should have seen that one coming from you with your sense of humor..Thanks for the Hollywood view. I still remember your humorous narrative of Jane Goodall observing the older chimp getting all the females by banging together the empty kerosene cans and frightening off all the younger competing males.

Don Rumsfeld,


Well if TSHTF I will have easy pickings out here because
these people are soft & weak like no tomorrow. I'm
originally from Missouri & most of the women out here
make me sick to my stomach. Vile bunch.


I've been to Southern California. I was not impressed with it at all. L. A., San Diego. I did not like the way they drove...women as well as the men. That was enough for me to catch on.

I have not however been to Northern California..above Sacramento. Not sure if it is the same. Always wanted to have the time to take that Pacific Coast Highway up into Washington State. It looks beautiful up there.

In a SHTF situation I would not like to be in California at all. Period..and for the reasons you mention. To many out there on the public dole. Getting that way here on the other coast as well.

Being from Missouri I can see how you would find it such out there in California.



Garzok,


I think most comments about trusting women with firearms were made in a joking manner.

However, that said...one can always earn more money, but as of yet, no way to resurrect the dead, so you can't equate the trust of a wallet to trusting with one's life.




You may be right in that it was made in a joking manner Garzok. But I am one to take it very seriously when a woman handles my piece/weapon/wallet. And she had better take it seriously as well.

As to equating the wallet to trusting with ones life...I most certainly can equate this ..and quite easily.

I take serious risks with my safety to earn my monies. As a machinist with a special qualification as a nuclear fueler I know what is RISK. Even before being nuclear qualified..I took serious risk for my monies in building aircraft carriers and submarines.
If a woman is so self indulgent as to be frivilous or foolish/self indulgent with the monies I earn at great RISK...she is not capable of understanding the RISKS I take to earn it. She would not appreciate the same from me with her earnings or RISKS. Yet many think this is a system of non accountability..even men and males who should know better. How about those Lakers!!!???

I remember working with a guy who needed another set of coveralls for his job and his woman had bought tickets for her and their daughter to the country western concert taking place that weekend. She told him if he needed new coveralls ...he should work the weekend coming up. Now here was a woman who had no respect for the RISKS this man took for the monies she spent. Right there is where I would be getting my own checking account and have my checks deposited into this separate account. This guy was very stupid..to me. He should never have put himself in such a position with a woman who had no regard for his welfare or his RISKS...only her convenience/prettys. This woman was openly willing to put him in second place or worse while she spent his monies earned at RISK for first place for her and the children.
This is not the caliber of woman with whom I would trust with my life or wallet..and this is not a joking matter to me. I am not here to come in second, third or further down the line place when taking first place RISKS for my monies.
And I certainly would not trust this caliber of woman with my piece.

Thanks,
Orangetom



posted on Feb, 24 2011 @ 08:38 AM
link   
reply to post by orangetom1999
 


To each their own...but I still have to disagree. Money and things are easily replaced. It is much harder to replace people, even those with faults. (and we all have them).

I do understand the "trust" issues you mention...but trust and risk are part and parcel to having relationships with others, and yes, sometimes that trust will be misplaced. We learn from it, and move on. You've obviously seen or had some bad experiences where trust was abused, so I get the justification...I just don't share it.



posted on Feb, 24 2011 @ 01:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gazrok
reply to post by orangetom1999
 


To each their own...but I still have to disagree. Money and things are easily replaced. It is much harder to replace people, even those with faults. (and we all have them).

I do understand the "trust" issues you mention...but trust and risk are part and parcel to having relationships with others, and yes, sometimes that trust will be misplaced. We learn from it, and move on. You've obviously seen or had some bad experiences where trust was abused, so I get the justification...I just don't share it.


What Garzok????!!!

You are kidding here right??!!

It is indeed about trust. Most certainly. But trust and risk with someones monies earned at RISK are not the same as what you are trying to describe. You do not separate the two simply because someone who wants someone else to work/labor/flashdance them through life with Options...without RISK to themselves is not the same thing. They will constantly put someone else at RISK or MORE RISK to keep the goodies coming for themselves and what ever programs to which they feel socially "entitled."
This is not trust ..it is "consumption rates." under the guise of trust ..or what I call the appearance of commitment verses real commitment. There is a world of difference between the two. Todays social consumption constructs in male and female roles try to cloud the differences under the guise of Equality or whatever drivel they are attempting today or next week.
It is still the "appearance of commitment" verses real commitment. One party will take lots of commitments and the other will ride with options in mind....not commitments.

This means someone else will have to take more RISK. Remember...it is much harder to replace people??
Why would one think a lifestyle is entitled while making others live life RISKING Dangers for their consumption rates..by Social Constructs..ie...entitlements.

Monies for many of us represents RISK taken in earning it. If we have to replace things or someone squanders it on self indulgence ..we have to take more RISKS for more monies to replace.
Not difficult.

When someone steals something from me I have to RISK over again to replace it...life endangering RISK.
Do you think that I am going to feel sorry for someone who takes something of mine without permission when I know what life endangering RISK I must take to earn it and then replace it because of them???

These are not two isolated separate things..they are one and the same.
Any woman who does not understand that about my monies earned cannot be trusted with a gun or with my monies both. She is high maintenance. Any man who does not understand this is high maintenance as well. And I know most women are not looking to underwrite a mans maintenance costs at her RISKS and as a career move. This is not socially acceptable to them.

Well I hope you get my point here.

This is why the olde school term was well known at one time..but not today. The term was a help meet..not a help yourself meet.

Thanks,
Orangetom



posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 03:15 PM
link   
reply to post by orangetom1999
 


While I agree with your logic Orange, I have to go with Garzok on this one simply because your chosen profession is one of higher than average risk(and frankly sounds downright DANGEROUS, I have a friend worked in a dutch shipyard, had his hand cutoff by a snapped cable
, I don't even want to go into the Nuclear fueling job I can only imagine...), which puts you at a different position for me in allocation of trust via ANY channel (Money, guns, property, etc...) when it comes to my personal earnings. However, being an economist, I see both you and Garzoks points and agree with both. You have every right to be more stringent about how your money is spent because it has more risk value than say a computer engineer's money. And Garzok from your perspective I agree as well, from a practical standpoint your wallet and your gun are two very different things that really cannot be equated in an everyday practical sense; Gun will kill you immediately, woman blowing your check is a slow and avoidable process, you can't avoid the bullet.


However, Orange is right that both will lead to similar outcome of ruining your life if not properly monitored or protected; She is either gonna shoot and ruin your life now (assuming you survive which would be likely) or she will ruin your life by taking everything you have worked for. Either way you have lost all that previous hard work and risk to earn that money.


So lets call this one a draw. Both of you are right from different perspectives, and I have to give credence to both of you as they are both well thought out and logical arguments.


Now, back to your regularly scheduled program! FRINGE!!! YES!!!!



posted on Feb, 28 2011 @ 12:24 PM
link   
I'm pretty sure if I would have taught my crazy ex how to shoot I wouldn't be typing this right now.



posted on Feb, 28 2011 @ 01:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Mikemp44
 


Not about one being "right" and the other being "wrong"....just a differing of perspectives. He's "right" for his life, and I'm "right" for mine, is how I look at it.


I can appreciate that one risks their safety for their salary (I've even done so, in an occupation or two)...but can't equate misuse of a wallet to misuse of a gun. Both would be disastrous, no doubt...but the consequences of the first can be mitigated, and even reversed...while the consequences of the second cannot be. That's where my difference in opinion stems from.



posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 08:58 AM
link   
The years and time that one works and RISKS cannot be replaced. The people you trust with this asset need to have due consideration for this. Not just their own consumption rates and viewing life through the prism of their same consumption rates. Otherwise they are just attempting to consign you to a slow or even a fast death while they concern themselves with their next consumption rate/rates.

I remember a guy in the crew in which I used to work ...his wife kept giving him hints/clues/ and cues that she wanted a new car. But she worked as well. She was hinting that she wanted him to take more RISK for her to get a new car. She was asking him to make himself disposable and expendable for her wants. Now she was not looking at it in this manner. She was looking at it as a tradition of male to female giving...ie...love. She was willing to play the social role game to get goods and services without RISK. She was not going to give him more ..but expect and take more from him and call it love. Her current car ran fine..but she wanted a new one. And social roles dictated that, done correctly, the clue and cue could be presented and a male naturally get on the default bandwagon and take the appropriate years of RISK to make it happen...until a newer car or something else was needed.
This fellow did not comprehend it at all until I explained it to him about the default social roles and RISKS taken to make it happen. That some people were by social roles...more expendable and disposable...yet equality was happening...but not in the social roles...translated into goods and services without RISK. His wife was not looking at or considering the RISKS he will have to take for years and years to pay off the new car. Nor was she looking or planning to take more RISKS for him. And yet his wife also worked and could go out and get her own car.

You see how easy it is to put someone else way out on the limb and hanging in the air with no safety net under them and at great RISK to get goods and services ...without RISK..without thinking...and make someone else expendable and disposable to acquire the same.

By the way..this is also a definition of Politics. How to get or acquire goods and services without RISK. And in a manner that few see it is happening or how.

In case you don't fully comprehend what I am saying...this ...in both cases..social roles or Politics...can be a slow or fast death. And whorish politics are definitely hurting this nation right now.

And would you trust your Politician with your money...how about your gun??? Would your politician whore you out for your monies ..and at great RISKS while figuring out how to get your gun as well???

Think about it ...and the caliber of woman with whom you trust your monies...as well as your gun.

Think it through ...it fits.

Thanks,
Orangetom





top topics
 
2
<< 1   >>

log in

join