RE: Don't be a creeper

RE: Don't be a creeper (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion

Message

AAkasha -> RE: Don't be a creeper (12/3/2015 12:11:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: crumpets quote: ORIGINAL: LadyConstanze LOL, you and Peon have different body types, that's like comparing Selma Hayek and Gwyneth Paltrow Blaming my Aspiness, I don't know either of them, so I hope one of them is not a big fat ugly turd! Google ... google.... click click ... whew. OK. They're not all that much different in reality. quote: ORIGINAL: LadyConstanze In all honesty, the sadist in me was wondering how much you would scream if I would wax your chest. Bet you're glad that you asked [:)] Ouch! I'd only do it if you really enjoyed my pain (and if you weren't just faking that you were pleased by my helpless squirming). :) But you were a bit sneaky in your response. You didn't answer my question, which is germane, because I was trying to garner attention from the opposite sex in those two pictures. Repeat Question: Q: If you were there at the time, would I have gotten your attention had I walked by you wearing exactly what I was wearing in those two pictures? A: ? That is, would you even have (1) noticed me, and, if so, would you have (2) looked for a moment or two, and, worse, would you have (3) leered at me? BTW... this is reputed to be Selma Hayek's body: [image]http://celebrity.adulttrade.net/pictures/buster/531vy/name11.jpg[/image] This is reputed to be Gwyneth Paltrow's body: [image]http://i1.nuttit.com//celeboobies/toplessbeachcelebs___Gwyneth_Paltrow__Actress__nude_on_vacation_in_the_French_West_Islands__1997___78734.jpg[/image] Not sure which is more gross, the direction of this thread, or crumpets sad attempts at flirting.

LadyConstanze -> RE: Don't be a creeper (12/3/2015 12:11:50 PM)
I wasn't even aware that both of them have nekkid pics out there I was thinking about Selma in From Dusk Till Dawn as the bombshell snake charming demon, voluptuous and curvy [image]https://i.ytimg.com/vi/yU-Ng_RO--M/maxresdefault.jpg[/image] Gwyneth more the slender and delicate type [image]http://laurenmessiah.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/12d8e55622e149298248c25c963fa6e7-1.jpg[/image]

AliaxDoormat -> RE: Don't be a creeper (12/3/2015 12:27:16 PM)
You should be able to walk down the street naked and feel safe. You shouldnt have to alter how you dress our act to feel just as safe as any man. Unfortunately, I had to alter evertything and losing a lot of sexuality and identity because I wanted to make it easier for those poor men. It is very restricting to me, but I have learned I want to draw no attention when i am out. I have never heard of a man that had to alter who he was and how he talked just to feel safe going to the grocery store.

crumpets -> RE: Don't be a creeper (12/3/2015 12:44:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: AAkasha Not sure which is more gross, the direction of this thread, or crumpets sad attempts at flirting. Ok. Caught again. Yes, with that hairy-chest picture in the previous post, I was flirting with Lady Constanze! But, you caught me. Yep. You did. Now everyone knows that I was expressly trying to flirt with her in order to obtain her attention simply by the way I dressed. I really was. So, you're on to me. You're a smart one, you are. But ... Here's what I don't get. You women (plural) apparently had no problem noticing my thinly veiled attempts at garnering attention, right? In fact, you (plural) nearly instantly see through every single one of my attention-whoring tricks. Yet, at the very same time, you can't, for the life of you, even see a tiny glimpse of the completely obvious dynamic of what this thread is all about. It's not as simple as just telling men not to leer. The phase dynamic is a bit more complicated than how you seem to wish to make it out to be. There are phases. There are actions. There are reactions. There is implied and inferred intent. There is responsibility for your actions (and mine). All these play a definite role in defining the model of what's going on when women unilaterally complain that men leer at them. What I don't get is that you (plural) can see through every one of my attention-whoring tricks, yet, you can't see any of your (plural) own. [image]http://img.memecdn.com/attention-whore_o_154167.jpg[/image]

crumpets -> RE: Don't be a creeper (12/3/2015 12:50:02 PM)
This was an accidental duplicate post, so, I'll just repeat the question which is, I believe, the fundamental mismatch here: Why is it that you can easily see through every one of my (purposeful) attention-whoring tricks... and you (rightfully so) want me to take responsibility for my actions ... yet ... you can't seem to see any of your own attention-whoring tricks ... and ... specifically ... you disavow any responsibility for your actions?

AAkasha -> RE: Don't be a creeper (12/3/2015 12:56:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: crumpets quote: ORIGINAL: AAkasha Not sure which is more gross, the direction of this thread, or crumpets sad attempts at flirting. Ok. Caught again. Yes, with that hairy-chest picture in the previous post, I was flirting with Lady Constanze! I saw PeonForHer flirting with her, and I just plumb got jealous. But, you caught me. Yep. You did. Uh, no. Not the pictures. The comment with the smiley about her waxing your chest and suggesting it would be ok if she genuinely enjoyed it. I am starting to realize even more this whole aspie thing is why you can't hold a logical argument. You are not perceptive when it comes to interactions between men and women. And probably never will be, since you insist on ignoring ALL the women here telling you the same thing over, and over, and over, and over again.

PeonForHer -> RE: Don't be a creeper (12/3/2015 1:03:10 PM)
quote: I saw PeonForHer flirting with her, and I just plumb got jealous Bit different, crumpets. Lady C is a friend of mine.

AAkasha -> RE: Don't be a creeper (12/3/2015 1:05:04 PM)
Here is an anecdote I want to share on this topic. When I was in my 20s and LOVED to go out dancing with girlfriends, I was constantly leered at, hit on (despite saying "I am just here with friends"), rubbed up against, etc. Frat boys and other macho dudes holding their beer up high on the dance floor. Add more alcohol, they became less obvious about it. It was gross. I wanted to go out dancing. I love to dance. A couple of years later as I got more into alternative music, I realized that there were dance clubs (on off nights, like Mondays, Thursdays) that catered to goth, industrial, alternative. No frat boys are going to these clubs. These are clubs FULL of men and women in latex, pvc, high boots, gloves. I gave up dressing in what I thought felt fun and exciting when I went to the clubs where the frat boys hung out, or even college grads. Forget it. At the alternative club, I never got harassed, unless it was a "tourist" coming with some friends who said "hey come check out this weird dance club." This was NOT a dance club with a play space or an S&M club - just a place where they played gothic and industrial dance music. I dressed like a maniac and could care less. Other women basically wore lingerie, ripped up stockings, ass hanging out - who gives a fuck? The guys there did not care, because their purpose for being there was to share mutual enjoyment of the music, dance, and they weren't juveniles with no self control. The ONLY time I got hit on inappropriately (or touched) were non-alternative folks there to leer. The only times I needed to get walked to my car by security with my friends. I went for 5, 6 maybe 7 years 2x a week on average and never had a problem with guys unable to treat me with respect. If I were to go down the street in a Friday night and walk into a generic dance club I would be harassed all night long. These "manchild" types assumed if I was dressed that way well then I should be expect to be treated like a walking sex object. So why can men at alternative dance clubs behave like adults? Oh, and go ahead, crumpets, look at some actual photos from this club I used to frequent and tell me why men there can control themselves even when women are there with duct tape over their nipples. If the women WANTED attention for that kind of dress, the frat boy club is down the street. They want to enjoy fashion and dance without having to WORRY about men. https://myspace.com/perversionhollywood/photos Yes, she can dress like this and not worry about frat boys staring, touching, or following her to her car: https://myspace.com/perversionhollywood/mixes/classic-my-photos-376922/photo/107060625 Akasha

crumpets -> RE: Don't be a creeper (12/3/2015 1:05:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: AAkasha you insist on ignoring ALL the women here telling you the same thing over, and over, and over, and over again. If you really believe that, you're a lost cause. Do you realize, even for a moment, that I fully and complete understand what EVERY woman here is saying? Do you realize that I'm saying the situation isn't as simple as you make it out to be? Do you have any concept of why I brought up the solid-liquid-gas phase diagrams? Do you have any inkling of why I asked if anyone here has ever seen steam? Or why I delved into the detail about octane ratings and how they affect engine performance? Or why I showed pictures of the distinction between Einsteinian and Quantum Physics? And, why I said that you see different things depending on your frame of reference, and that anyone who doesn't realize that, has only half the picture? Why do you think I referenced that canonical frame-of-reference video anyway? Oh, I see. You missed the point completely. You never once saw me write "the devil is in the details"? Oh? What's that? You can't handle detail? Well then, how are you ever going to UNDERSTAND any of this, if you can't handle the slightest bit of detail? You're like that dwarf idiot, who still thinks that higher octane fuel is better than low octane fuel. There's one born every minute. And you, apparently, are it. More to the point of your diatribe, do you even realize why I showed pictures of men dressed as attention whores? And why I showed pictures of women dressed as attention whores? Do you have the same reaction to those pictures? Do you realize it was on purpose that I sent half nekkid pictures of me to Lady Constanze and then asked her the question I asked? I knew what the answer would be. I was probing for that answer. Of course, she tricked me, and so I went along, and I made a few jokes accordingly (I mean, do you really think those fat men pictures weren't jokes?) Do you understand any of this? I guess not. Given your comments, I have to seriously question whether you understand ANYTHING at all in this thread. What I'm consistently saying is that you make out the model to be vastly too simple. In your mind, women are right. Men are wrong. It's that simple. In your mind, the solution is simple. Men stop leering. Yup. It's that simple. That's your model (it's men's fault); and that's the solution (it's solely men's responsibility). In my mind, it's not as simple as you would wish it to be. But, by your very own admission, I'm wasting my time trying to explain that to you. You, like that dwarf idiot, will NEVER understand anything that has even the slightest complexity to it. PeonForHer can understand complexity ... he's probably well educated so he has the CAPACITY to understand a slightly complex argument. Lady Constanze can understand complexity ... she's just in a different frame of reference than I am in (and that's the reason for the varied intellectual intercourse). That you don't understand is proven by your very own admission that you think I don't understand your extremely simple (and trivially easy to understand) arguments. Yep. Your argument is simple. For you, everything is viewed from a single static frame of reference: steam is what comes out of a kettle; ice simply changes phase from solid to liquid to gas because of temperature; gravity actually exists as a force; and higher octane gas is better (of course, everyone knows that) than lower octane gas! Well, your model has one merit. It's simple. But your model has one huge flaw. It's wrong. It's not so much wrong as it's incomplete. In fact, it's missing half the story. It's missing an entire frame of reference. In fact, it's missing 3/4 of the story because it's missing any and all responsibility whatsoever for YOUR actions in the model. You have 1/4 a model, and, for that 1/4, nobody is disputing it (except that your boundary conditions were never outlined other than "I" am the definition of "leering"). I understand fully and completely your 1/4 of a model. I'm proposing a more complete and accurate model than your 1/4 of a model. That you can't possibly understand this additional complexity is your problem. Not mine. I therefore lump you in with the other nitwits.

AAkasha -> RE: Don't be a creeper (12/3/2015 1:10:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer quote: I saw PeonForHer flirting with her, and I just plumb got jealous Bit different, crumpets. Lady C is a friend of mine. Bingo. crumpets - boundaries - heard of them?

AAkasha -> RE: Don't be a creeper (12/3/2015 1:15:13 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: crumpets It's just wrong because it's missing any and all responsibility whatsoever for YOUR actions in the model. You have half a model. I'm proposing a more complete and accurate model. That you can't possibly understand complexity is your problem. Not mine. I lump you in with the other nitwits. A woman should NEVER be "responsible" for inappropriate behavior by men. A woman can walk into a club NAKED and that does not mean she deserves inappropriate behavior. No one INVITES crime, lewd behavior, etc -- no one deserves it. How many women will it take to tell you this before you realize you are wrong? Do you feel the same way about a child that wears cute tights because ALL the girls wear them, so it's her fault if creeper men with inappropriate motives take a WRONG interest in her? Is it her fault? Her parents? Are you the least bit concerned that many, many men can respect women and the way they dress - for whatever reason - and you, for some reason, can't get your head around it? It's scary, if you ask me. To be that oblivious.

crumpets -> RE: Don't be a creeper (12/3/2015 1:24:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: AAkasha It's scary, if you ask me. To be that oblivious. I agree. Please look in the mirror because you haven't understood a single thing said in this thread.

LadyConstanze -> RE: Don't be a creeper (12/3/2015 1:49:34 PM)
Seriously, I didn't think he was crossing boundaries, some comments about my body were a bit close to overstepping, but I thought I "woman up" and since we were exchanging flickr sites (very vanilla and I'm always dressed though there is ONE bikini shot) you could say part of it is my fault. I don't think Crumpet is an idiot or a weird stalker or anything like that, but I do think he's really really genuinely not able to understand the female perspective of a lot of things, I also believe if I would ask him to stop making comments, he would (yup, toning it down a bit would be nice, that's why I ignored them, it was a hint) but he has said he has Asperger's and it's just part of that. Crumpet, could you just accept that some of us aren't trying to get attraction when we dress up (you know it is a possibility) and that we don't want to feel responsible for how any guy who might cross our path that day will perceive us and our way of dressing, you wear tight clothes, why shouldn't we? Same rights...

crumpets -> RE: Don't be a creeper (12/3/2015 4:04:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyConstanze Crumpet, could you just accept that some of us aren't trying to get attraction when we dress up I fully and completely understand that. I also think there is more than meets the eye, but I utterly failed to get that across to anyone here. Apparently I utterly and completely failed to add any additional value to this thread; so, I have to cut my losses (and yours), and let those who are interested in the topic take it to the next level. quote: ORIGINAL: LadyConstanze I didn't think he was crossing boundaries I have no intention on making people uncomfortable who have something to offer intellectually; so I'll just gracefully beg out of this thread moving forward, leaving it to your and others' able hands to take it to a higher level. quote: ORIGINAL: LadyConstanze I do think he's really really genuinely not able to understand the female perspective of a lot of things I completely and fully understood every single word and sentence and thought proposed in this thread. I just think there is more to the story than just the two dimensions proposed in the OP and elsewhere. I repeat, never for even the tinyiest moment did I not understand EVERY SINGLE THING said here. At all times, I was trying to ADD a dimension to the discussion. That I utterly failed in that quest is my fault for trying; but never for the tiniest second did I not understand anyone's viewpoint, male, female, or dwarf. Having said that, a few people, such as PeonForHer, misread my jokes, but that's understandable because I didn't use the sarcasm font (although the fat-old-men pictures and the cartoons laced throughout should have been a pretty clear indication that I was attempting humor in quite a few posts - such as the one where I try to show that women can see things in men but they can't see things in themselves, etc.). Yet, I failed. The jokes failed. Trying to take this thread to a new level failed. That's fine. What I really learn here is that most people aren't ready to ADD to their knowledge level. Since I already understood completely and unequivocally every single point of view expressed here, I was merely trying to add another dimension (hence, the discussion of definition between phases, and the percentage of men leering, and the actions of women in general, and the reactions to them during Mardi Gras, etc.). But, it's just too difficult to get born-and-raised-in flatlanders to think in a third dimension where mutual responsibility and percentages and leering phases play a role. I will repeat one more time to make it completely clear: I fully and completely understand the reference frame that the women here are speaking from. If you don't believe me, think about it for a moment. What did anyone say here that was NOT easy to understand? Answer = nothing. EVERYTHING said here was as easy to understand as two dimensions. So, of course, I understand how women feel uncomfortable with what they perceive to be leering from what they perceive to be unwarranted attention from what they perceive to be many men. Everyone understands that. It's a simple two-dimensional problem. I was just trying to explain that it isn't that simple. There's another dimension that nobody seems to understand exists. And, the solution that that three dimensional problem is just as obvious - if people FIRST understand that the problem isn't as simple as the two dimensions proposed in the OP and elsewhere. However, if people think it's that simple, then there will NEVER be a solution. Because it's NOT that simple. There's more to the problem set (a whole additional dimension, in fact!). The devil is in the details. The solution is simple only if/when the problem set is completely understood. And the problem set has another dimension to it than most people realize. I tried to shine a light on that third dimension; but I failed. Since I utterly failed to get that three-dimensional point of view across, at this point, I have nothing new to add. So, since I tell many lesser men to just shut up when they have nothing of additional value to add, I'll follow my own advice and shut up, and let the others take this thread to the next level. [image]https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-7Hw5jtc9r8o/TsTHNQ_vAfI/AAAAAAAAApU/Tjq5-XkwyXg/s512/flatland3.png[/image]

LadyPact -> RE: Don't be a creeper (12/3/2015 11:36:00 PM)
Crumpets, I really don't think you understand because that so-called 'extra level' that you think you are trying to introduce means taking a step back. Pay very close attention here because I want you to remember that I've got at least three posts on this thread that specifically say that I don't find creepy behavior to the same level as sexual assault, harassment, or stalking. The analogies that I'm going to use, I am doing so because they provide the best way to show the parallel. Basically, what you've done on this thread was the equivalent of what used to happen to people who had crimes perpetrated against them, used by sleazeball defense attorneys when trying to get their clients off of the hook. "She was dressed a certain way so she must have been asking for it." How many sexual partners a person has had. She drank too much. She must have wanted it because she socialized with the other person prior. Those things can't be used by defense attorneys anymore because they were only attempts at justification for what the person did and it honestly can't work that way if we are going to have a civilized society. Some of the pictures that you posted on this thread specifically came from the 'consent matters' rallies, where people specifically dress to prove the point that no matter how much or how little someone is wearing, their consent, not their clothing, is the pivotal point when people decide to engage. That's something that we, as kinky people, need to take a good strong look at because we either believe in that concept or we don't. It really shouldn't be that hard not to catcall someone walking down the street, leave the person alone if having been asked to do so, or any of the other stuff that hits the creepy type label. It's really not that hard to skip engaging in that kind of behavior.

HoneyBears -> RE: Don't be a creeper (12/4/2015 2:14:55 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyPact Crumpets, I really don't think you understand because that so-called 'extra level' that you think you are trying to introduce means taking a step back. ~ FR ~ What a shit ton of raw sewage to have to wade through this thread. Methinks there are men who doth protest too much in defense of their propensity to leer at and creep out women. There is also pervy, a step up from mere creepy. Such men do not possess the subtlety to go unnoticed, and a sideways leer is as detectable and almost just as disconcerting as a full on gaping-mouth stare.[8\|] The reason why there is no standard across-the-board time limit demarcation point between Noticing, Looking, Staring and Leering is because each individual's comfort zone varies, much like that of the distance in personal space each person requires before s/he feels encroached upon. The analogy somebody mentioned about staring at birth defects was apropos. At what point does it make someone feel uncomfortable? Does it have to go beyond discomfort in order to be an acknowledgeable 5 seconds perhaps? 3 seconds? 2. seconds. that. seem. like. an. eternity? Does the alleged offender get a free pass if he makes it just 1 cumulative second of 3 split-second "looks" instead of 1 split-second glance where he averts his eyes quickly? Does the "defect" have to be from birth, or newly acquired? Does it have to be in plain sight or partially covered? If said birth defect is being flaunted out in the open, then does that then give the potential offender a free pass? After all, such men have no resistance to watching a passing freak show, do they? Is it necessary to say out loud, Take A Picture, It Lasts Longer. I would venture to say that most women can tell the difference between a harmless flirtation - or not so harmless - and uninvited interest which will not wane. We have Spidey senses like that, built-in ones, except for those of us whose naiveté has not been shattered by those who see women as being sluts and whores. Their issue, not ours, until they begin to MAKE IT OUR ISSUE by violating our boundaries of consent. To not understand the foundational principle of consent is the difference between that which separates non-consensual abusive behavior from consensual BDSM. At this point, this dead horse has been beat long enough.[sm=beatdeadhorse.gif] -- Lisa & Cub (Edited for Clarity)

Awareness -> RE: Don't be a creeper (12/4/2015 3:41:26 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1 Anything, and I stress ANYTHING, that makes the target of your attention, no matter how fleeting, to feel uneasy or 'creeped out' or downright leered at or objectified, is just inappropriate behaviour. Period. Oh fucking bullshit. No man is responsible for a woman's fucked-up perceptions. This line of argument infantilises women. The creepy moniker is something women utilise to exert power over men they don't desire. Period. There is no explicit justification for it because it's a tool, not a reality. The fact that so many people are too stupid to understand this makes most of this discussion a brood of hens clucking nonsense at each other.

LadyConstanze -> RE: Don't be a creeper (12/4/2015 4:11:06 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyPact Crumpets, I really don't think you understand because that so-called 'extra level' that you think you are trying to introduce means taking a step back. Pay very close attention here because I want you to remember that I've got at least three posts on this thread that specifically say that I don't find creepy behavior to the same level as sexual assault, harassment, or stalking. The analogies that I'm going to use, I am doing so because they provide the best way to show the parallel. Basically, what you've done on this thread was the equivalent of what used to happen to people who had crimes perpetrated against them, used by sleazeball defense attorneys when trying to get their clients off of the hook. "She was dressed a certain way so she must have been asking for it." How many sexual partners a person has had. She drank too much. She must have wanted it because she socialized with the other person prior. Those things can't be used by defense attorneys anymore because they were only attempts at justification for what the person did and it honestly can't work that way if we are going to have a civilized society. Some of the pictures that you posted on this thread specifically came from the 'consent matters' rallies, where people specifically dress to prove the point that no matter how much or how little someone is wearing, their consent, not their clothing, is the pivotal point when people decide to engage. That's something that we, as kinky people, need to take a good strong look at because we either believe in that concept or we don't. It really shouldn't be that hard not to catcall someone walking down the street, leave the person alone if having been asked to do so, or any of the other stuff that hits the creepy type label. It's really not that hard to skip engaging in that kind of behavior. I really agree with that completely, I would like to stress that I don't think Crumpet is anybody who would actually ever harass, rape or stare to the point that it makes somebody uncomfy or if he would by mistake, he'd stop it ASAP, it just seems a bit unfair to place all the burden (i.e. some fucked up dude who has no idea what's acceptable and considers himself "manly" for being a complete and utter idiot) on women, that's akin to saying any woman who doesn't walk around with all her features covered is asking for attention from any male out there. If that would be the case, then nudist colonies would be a hotbed of rape, yet oddly enough there doesn't seem to be much oggling going on there. This whole catcalling thing seems to be so juvenile, it reminds me of some old comedy show from the UK (they recently repeated it) about 2 buidlers (maybe Peon knows it) I think they are called Harry & Paul and they have over the top cultural discussions, yet the moment a woman or a member of the general public walks by, they start acting like complete apes https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jJa7VzfWJQg

LadyConstanze -> RE: Don't be a creeper (12/4/2015 4:44:44 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: AAkasha A woman should NEVER be "responsible" for inappropriate behavior by men. A woman can walk into a club NAKED and that does not mean she deserves inappropriate behavior. No one INVITES crime, lewd behavior, etc -- no one deserves it. While a woman walking around naked in an environment where it's socially not accepted doesn't deserve to be raped or molested, it would be a bit irresponsible of her to do so, I mean nobody deserves to be burglared, robbed or pickpocketed, that doesn't mean I'll stop locking the door when I go out or keep flashing my cash in a busy shopping mall, don't cover my PIN if I draw money out of an ATM and all that. All those things unfortunately happen and it's in everybody's best interest to avoid it, it doesn't mean that I don't ever have to worry about a burglar if I do lock the doors, that despite all care I can't be pickpocketed, that's why we have laws and police, at the same time I think it's important to keep reminding some guys that NO MATTER WHAT, consent is always required and it shouldn't take more than 2 working brain cells to figure that out. Else we're reverting back to a society where they stone a woman who's been raped, most men aren't stupid idiots, so they should be capable of getting the principle, in case they're too "special" to get it, maybe they need to be locked up for their own protection, because otherwise they might get seriously harmed or end up in jail, where they can discuss consent with some big dude who thinks the fact that they have a cute butt or take a shower implies "they're asking for it"

PeonForHer -> RE: Don't be a creeper (12/4/2015 6:05:02 AM)
quote: I would like to stress that I don't think Crumpet is anybody who would actually ever harass, rape or stare to the point that it makes somebody uncomfy or if he would by mistake, he'd stop it ASAP I agree - he doesn't seem that way to me at all. ETA: quote: This whole catcalling thing seems to be so juvenile, it reminds me of some old comedy show from the UK (they recently repeated it) about 2 buidlers (maybe Peon knows it) I think they are called Harry & Paul and they have over the top cultural discussions, yet the moment a woman or a member of the general public walks by, they start acting like complete apes It wasn't that old, Lady C! You're thinking of 'Harry and Paul'. Here's the one you might be thinking of: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jJa7VzfWJQg

Page: << < prev 14 15 [16] 17 18 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.078125