men in their mid-late 20s who have only slept with one partner - C or D?

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
what say you?

hmhmmhm, Tuesday, 11 October 2005 15:41 (twenty years ago)

we've already done ilm, classic or dud

Ronan (Ronan), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 15:44 (twenty years ago)

Men in their mid-late 20s holding themselves under the tender glow of a laptop - C/D?

Confounded (Confounded), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 15:45 (twenty years ago)

christ! everyone in the world needs to stop obsessing over their sex life NOW.

ryan (ryan), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 15:47 (twenty years ago)

Yeah, 'cos that's about to happen.

Stone Monkey (Stone Monkey), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 15:50 (twenty years ago)

a man can dream...

ryan (ryan), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 15:51 (twenty years ago)

Come, let us throw stones at these presumed men. Let us assemble together in groups and mock them with gibes as girly men and lacking in sexual conquests. Let us enter their bedrooms and make light of their taste in furnishings. Our power is strong.

Aimless (Aimless), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 15:54 (twenty years ago)

seriously, im a guy whos only been with one long term partner their whole life, now in my mid-late 20s, and now on my own, ive realised that ive only been with one woman. i dont want to be 50 and look back and think i missed out, and i dont wanna just sleep around for the sake of it, but i feel theres certain things i havent experienced yet and need to.

onewomanman, Tuesday, 11 October 2005 15:55 (twenty years ago)

Celeste or Daphne?

Sociah T Azzahole (blueski), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 15:56 (twenty years ago)

these men are probably either happy or unhappy

RJG (RJG), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 15:57 (twenty years ago)

I can't remember some of their names... sad.

andy --, Tuesday, 11 October 2005 15:57 (twenty years ago)

Obviously dud if you're your girlfriend and get dumped due to your view of it as being dud.

ailsa (ailsa), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 15:57 (twenty years ago)

but i feel theres certain things i havent experienced yet and need to.

please give explicit details

Sociah T Azzahole (blueski), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 15:58 (twenty years ago)

the best thing about sleeping with a second person is it's the one time you can exclaim that you doubled your total last night.

unless you are Martin Skidmore.

Sociah T Azzahole (blueski), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 15:59 (twenty years ago)

but i feel theres certain things i havent experienced yet and need to.

oh, just ASK her if she'll do anal.

glasgow coma score (Jody Beth Rosen), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 15:59 (twenty years ago)

the mile high club is over-rated, don't worry about it.

jel -- (jel), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 16:00 (twenty years ago)

you're a dark horse

Sociah T Azzahole (blueski), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 16:01 (twenty years ago)

hahaha, BEST jel post ever?

Lion-O (nordicskilla), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 16:02 (twenty years ago)

What if you break up with your girlfriend but then it turns out she's the only person in the world who's attracted to you? That's some O. Henry shit right there.

n/a (Nick A.), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 16:02 (twenty years ago)

i dont think its that unreasonable for a man to feel he has to experience more sexually
women like to knock it (xxpost - alisa), but its not always down to plain old sleaziness, wouldnt you rather these men got it out their system rather than stayed with their girlfriends while harbouring these doubts?
experience is about growth, if people feel they have to experience more to feel content, then so be it

okoko, Tuesday, 11 October 2005 16:02 (twenty years ago)

You don't want no O. Henry shit coming down on you...

andy --, Tuesday, 11 October 2005 16:03 (twenty years ago)

Sigh. I have a friend who pretty much got in a similar kind of situation.

But apart from that, I can't comment. There's a part of me that wishes I'd slept with a lot less people in my life. But since the first partner wasn't really up to me, well, it kind of puts a different slant on it.

Paranoid Spice (kate), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 16:07 (twenty years ago)

Like that story where the lady agreees to do a porno where she shaves herself so she can take the money and buy her lover a fancy new Prince Albert and the dude has sold his PA on e-bay to buy her a trimmer to keep her landing strip finely groomed and Xmas morning comes and they're both fiddling with each other in bed and then they're all, like, "WTF? Shit!" That O. Henry story?

M. White (Miguelito), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 16:08 (twenty years ago)

these men are probably either happy or unhappy

unhappy. trust me.

kingfish superman ice cream (kingfish 2.0), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 16:09 (twenty years ago)

'Non. Rien de rien. Non, Je ne regrette rien'

M. White (Miguelito), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 16:18 (twenty years ago)

that's such bullshit. I can't even get through an afternoon without doing something I regret, let alone a lifetime.

Paranoid Spice (kate), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 16:19 (twenty years ago)

women like to knock it (xxpost - alisa), but its not always down to plain old sleaziness, wouldnt you rather these men got it out their system rather than stayed with their girlfriends while harbouring these doubts?

No, I'd rather they kept it *in* their system and didn't have any doubts in the first place.

ailsa (ailsa), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 16:20 (twenty years ago)

"but i feel theres certain things i havent experienced yet and need to. "

you just want to spray your semen over as much of the Earth as possible. why dont you just go have a nice wank in the woods every day for a week? make sure to ejaculate into as many bushes as you can.

AaronK (AaronK), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 16:21 (twenty years ago)

Sometimes a man just wants a threesome.

The Ghost of Black Elegance (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 16:22 (twenty years ago)

Everyone has doubts, I think it's unrealistic to expect anyone - male or female - not to have them, especially in a world as hypersexualised as this one. But the important thing is, if you're committed to a relationship, to find a way of dealing with these doubts, channelling them into fantasy or something else.

I mean, I think that probably a committed relationship that you know you can count on emotionally is far more important than a wide sexual experience. But then, I would say that, because I've had the latter but not the former.

Paranoid Spice (kate), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 16:23 (twenty years ago)

we've already done ilm, classic or dud

ilm in being in mid-late 20s shockah!

ken c (ken c), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 16:24 (twenty years ago)

To my knowledge, ILM has "been with":

- Freaky Trigger
- Pitchfork
- Stylus
- Dissensus
- gabba/AMP
- Boomselection
- slsk
- KaZaa
- YouSendIt
- RapidShare

SUMMARY: ILM is a ho.

The Ghost of Black Elegance (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 16:27 (twenty years ago)

happy!

i've been with my partner since our teens. she was the first person i ever slept with, she'll probably be the last. in my mid-20s i went throug angst over whether i 'should have done more', but it passed. i've been lucky, too, sometimes we've had lots of sex, sometimes not so much, but it's always been good and our comfort zones about trying new stuff are similar. if i did now find myself single and had sex with anyone else it would be awkward and i'd probably be really bad at it, because im so used to her likes and responses. im really glad ive had an extra five or ten years with her rather than an extra five or ten partners.

mygodiactuallyloggedout, Tuesday, 11 October 2005 16:27 (twenty years ago)

Would you say ILM is also a skeezer?

(xpost)

kingfish superman ice cream (kingfish 2.0), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 16:28 (twenty years ago)

No, I would not.

The Ghost of Black Elegance (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 16:29 (twenty years ago)

ilm is also totally into dogging

ken c (ken c), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 16:30 (twenty years ago)

No, I would not.

and why not?

kingfish superman ice cream (kingfish 2.0), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 16:31 (twenty years ago)

I'm finding this thread strangely depressing, and yet I cann't stop reading.

Paranoid Spice (kate), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 16:31 (twenty years ago)

i dont wanna just sleep around for the sake of it

I don't think you should be so quick to dismiss this option.

Don King of the Mountain (noodle vague), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 16:34 (twenty years ago)

(The questions underneath this thread are "To what degree are men and women socialized to have different attitudes about the correlation between sex and commitment? Where does biological imperative fit in?")

and why not?

Because ILM isn't a skeezer.

The Ghost of Black Elegance (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 16:41 (twenty years ago)


okokok, listen,
i dont think its that unreasonable for a woman to feel she has to experience more sexually
men like to knock it, but its not always down to plain old sleaziness, wouldnt you rather these women got it out their system rather than stayed with their boyfriends while harbouring these doubts?
experience is about growth, if people feel they have to experience more to feel content, then so be it

idiot


Lisa Lipstick, Tuesday, 11 October 2005 16:45 (twenty years ago)

To initial poster: "...and now on my own...", you wrote. Does that mean that relationship is over? (which changes the equation)

Collardio Gelatinous (collardio), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 16:46 (twenty years ago)

Isn't sex kinda the least singificant part of this issue? The problem has more to do with only ever having dated one person, which'll be both safe and full of doubt. Safe because it's always been there, and the idea of having something else seems unreal and foreign. And full of doubt because you have no point of comparison -- for all you know, your relationship could be terrible. You could be much happier with someone else. There could theoretically be some better life that you just haven't struck off toward. It's like living your whole life in the town where you were born: safe and comfortable in a lot of ways, filled with wanderlust in others.

Personally I've started to think that maybe that modern people in cities have maybe embraced shopping-for-love with a little too much of a passion; in some places (hello NYC) you can get all the way to middle age kinda dating and sleeping around and never quite finding anything perfect. We have some kind of sense that we're allowed to arrange life exactly the way we want it, that we should express our tastes in everything, that we should self-actualize in all these ways -- and maybe sometimes it misses the point. Marrying your high-school sweetheart and living in the same town all your life: this has to do with a whole different worldview, one where the point isn't arranging some life that's outwardly self-actualized, but just forging working relationships with the world right around you. And it's maybe more sensible and emotionally satisfying than anything else.

I dunno, though, it's all happy mediums like usual. There has to be a way to experience a larger bit of the world and then, well, stop obsessing about experiencing it -- a way of seeing what's there and then just picking a part of it that seems good, and enjoying that part, making that part work, without wondering about what you hadn't gotten to yet. You go to Baskin-Robbins, you taste two or three flavors, and then you enjoy the one you buy, without regret; you don't hang around tasting every single one, and passing on things you like because there might be something better.

nabiscothingy, Tuesday, 11 October 2005 16:52 (twenty years ago)

To Lisa Lipstick above I'd simply say that, gender politics aside, some people are more adventurous and curious than others, men and women, and trying to deny them their nature is a recipe for disaster.

I think nabisco is right about it being about happy mediums but I also think it's about age. Being a teenager/early 20's is largely about experimentation. Still doing it at the age of 50 is probably to miss out on another, important aspect of life.

M. White (Miguelito), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 17:01 (twenty years ago)

lisa lipstick, i seem to have struck a chord of familiarity with you. however, even if you reverse the gender, its still true. if a woman feels she has to experience more, theres nothing wrong with that in my book. i have cousins and female friends who have had the exact same dilemma. it can be a dilemma for anyone, male or female.

okok, Tuesday, 11 October 2005 17:06 (twenty years ago)

cousins!

Lion-O (nordicskilla), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 17:07 (twenty years ago)

I think if someone is deeply happy in their relationship they should probably stay with it, even if it's the only one they've ever been in. Getting another reference point is less important, I think, than maintaining the good thing that already exists.

However, if someone has only been in one relationship and they find themselves with a lot of doubts about it, that may be a sign that things are less than perfect in other areas, and perhaps it would be a good idea to break up.

I don't think that sleeping around is necessarily the answer. Sex is not the only important part of a relationship, and there may be lots of things that would be different (and better) in another relationship.

o. nate (onate), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 17:12 (twenty years ago)

M.White and koko,
Exactly.
Women are human beings too.
That's why I got slightly pissed off at okoko's post because it was phrased as if it was only appliccable to men. (I can't be arsed to look in the dictionary to check if the word applicable exists).

Lisa Lipstick, Tuesday, 11 October 2005 17:16 (twenty years ago)

yeah - nabisco OTM about happy media. best idea ever.

petesmith (plsmith), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 17:18 (twenty years ago)

why on earth would i think it was only applicable to men? i never insinunated that.

and yes, applicable does exist

okok, Tuesday, 11 October 2005 17:24 (twenty years ago)

Dan, the trick is learning how to have a threesome with ONLY TWO PEOPLE.

Jordan (Jordan), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 20:09 (twenty years ago)

(I do not know what that means.)

Jordan (Jordan), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 20:09 (twenty years ago)

Mmmm. Three pancakes, stacked.
Butter.
Syrup.
S on P.
Flapjack porn.

M. V. (M.V.), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 20:12 (twenty years ago)

Chocolate chip pancakes.

n/a (Nick A.), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 20:14 (twenty years ago)

Or for the sexually advanced, "The Belgian Waffle."

n/a (Nick A.), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 20:14 (twenty years ago)

you can get all the way to middle age kinda dating and sleeping around and never quite finding anything perfect. We have some kind of sense that we're allowed to arrange life exactly the way we want it, that we should express our tastes in everything, that we should self-actualize in all these ways -- and maybe sometimes it misses the point.

This is perhaps the most depressing thing I have ever read in my entire life.

You do realize that, whatever your current arrangement, many of you will spend most of the rest of your lives in monogamous relationships? Are you under the impression that the memory of your wild twenties will sustain you into your dotage?

Do you also realise that for some of us, that monogamous relationship may never actually materialise? And that our wild 20s/dirty 30s will give way to bitterness and isolation?

Gah, I'm going to go and shoot myself now.

Paranoid Spice (kate), Wednesday, 12 October 2005 07:41 (twenty years ago)

Well I did have a monogamous relationship - and a perfectly happy one - until I was in my mid-30s, so my wild 20s didn't exist. Maybe now I'm trying to make up for it, in a doomed attempt to elude fortysomething bitterness.

Marcello Carlin (nostudium), Wednesday, 12 October 2005 07:44 (twenty years ago)

you can get all the way to middle age kinda dating and sleeping around and never quite finding anything perfect. We have some kind of sense that we're allowed to arrange life exactly the way we want it, that we should express our tastes in everything, that we should self-actualize in all these ways -- and maybe sometimes it misses the point.

This is perhaps the most depressing thing I have ever read in my entire life.

You do realize that, whatever your current arrangement, many of you will spend most of the rest of your lives in monogamous relationships? Are you under the impression that the memory of your wild twenties will sustain you into your dotage?

Do you also realise that for some of us, that monogamous relationship may never actually materialise? And that our wild 20s/dirty 30s will give way to bitterness and isolation?

Regret is fungible and anything can produce it. In fact, I suspect that everything produces it.

M. V. (M.V.), Wednesday, 12 October 2005 16:05 (twenty years ago)

Nabisco, you are one smart guy.
Some people might see it as "settling" ("forging working relationships with the world around you") - I know I did until quite recently - but if you actually let go of egoistic issues of being fundamentally right (about everything, not just relationships), of your opinion being superior because of that, and finding the "right"/perfect person and relationship, then the world actually does work with you in amazing ways. (of course, it took a lot of personal fucking up and painful confrontation of insecurities-as-root-of-asshole-behaviour to figure that one out. I should now probably move to the country...)
This could also be my answer to that thread about why women don't participate in threads on politics...

rrrobyn (rrrobyn), Wednesday, 12 October 2005 16:36 (twenty years ago)

uhm, i turned 29 just a coupla months ago. where do i sign up for this "dirty 30s" thing?

kingfish superman ice cream (kingfish 2.0), Wednesday, 12 October 2005 17:51 (twenty years ago)

one year passes...

ive yet to enter my dirty 30s but as someone whos been in a mere one monogamous relationship for all his 20s til a year or so ago, i do feel a bit under-experienced as i was with the same girl for almost 10 years and she is/was the only one i have slept with. since we split up, ive remembered why i hardly dated anyone before her - because im quite crap at asking women out or seizing perfectly good opportunities to do so. i am basically like that film with steve martin where he keeps losing that woman he meets' phone number again and again. its almost tragic (there are only so many times you can mentally do the 'doh' slap on the forehead) but i do worry i might totally pass up the chance to live out my 'wild 20s' (or worse yet, my 'dirty 30s').

mr x, Saturday, 6 October 2007 20:57 (eighteen years ago)

max r?

and what, Saturday, 6 October 2007 21:00 (eighteen years ago)

it is nearly an anagram

Just got offed, Saturday, 6 October 2007 21:01 (eighteen years ago)

Yeah, I imagine that if I'm ever single and in my 30s, I'll be terrible at getting women. Can't rely on the old fallback of going to a club, getting trashed, and pulling. Or can you? Hope so.

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa, Saturday, 6 October 2007 21:06 (eighteen years ago)

Can't rely on the old fallback of going to a club, getting trashed, and pulling. Or can you? Hope so.

depends if you relied on it before or not.

mr x, Saturday, 6 October 2007 21:10 (eighteen years ago)

http://venusianarts.com/sl/oi/Page1.aspx

gr8080, Saturday, 6 October 2007 21:10 (eighteen years ago)

[you're welcome ;-)]

gr8080, Saturday, 6 October 2007 21:11 (eighteen years ago)

i was going to type 'thanks but im not that bad with women' but then i remembered that today a girl in a supermarket told me she was convinced i was an actor from a film she saw and whether or not this was a hint to ask her out or not, i just made polite conversation than said goodbye.

mr x, Saturday, 6 October 2007 21:26 (eighteen years ago)

i thought "dirty 30s" meant something else.

The Cursed Return of the Dastardly Thermo Thinwall, Saturday, 6 October 2007 22:05 (eighteen years ago)

these men are probably either happy or unhappy

-- RJG (RJG), Tuesday, October 11, 2005 3:57 PM

BIG HOOS aka the steendriver, Saturday, 6 October 2007 22:23 (eighteen years ago)

i have a couple of mates who've had the same girlfriend since they were 17 or whatever, they actually seem really happy.

max r, Sunday, 7 October 2007 11:32 (eighteen years ago)

That's one lucky girl :-)

StanM, Sunday, 7 October 2007 11:43 (eighteen years ago)

lol. you know what i mean, cheeky.

max r, Sunday, 7 October 2007 11:47 (eighteen years ago)

i have a close male friend who's really embarrassed by the fact he's only slept with two girls and is in his late 20s - i, on the other hand, am embarrassed that i've slept with too many guys. it's not something i'm at all proud of, most of it i regret, and i'm not very comfortable talking about it. he really hates having to confess to a girl his "number", but he's been in a 5yr relationship, so i don't think it's a big deal - and it's quality, not quantity, that counts. i always dread the "so how many guys have you slept with" question from new boyfriends, and have had bad reactions in the past.(i haven't slept with some crazy amount of guys, but i have found i usually have a higher number than the guy i'm dating)

Rubyredd, Sunday, 7 October 2007 11:57 (eighteen years ago)

I've never unnderstood why people - and this seems to apply especially to girls - should be ashamed with having slept with more people than the average... Something to do with double standards? Because that's something "good girls" don't do? I mean, if you still like your partner and have good sex with him, what does it matter?

Tuomas, Sunday, 7 October 2007 12:02 (eighteen years ago)

In my experience, the more sexual partners a person has had, the better that person is in bed. I worry that any potential partner of mine who is less than a complete slut is going to be a dud root.

moley, Sunday, 7 October 2007 12:10 (eighteen years ago)

mostly for me that shame comes from two places: the bad/disapproving/disgusted reactions i've had from boyfriends; the reasons why i slept with most of those guys (low selfesteem, lack of self-respect blahblahblah). i'm more okay with it now, thanks to a very supportive guy who doesn't have any judgement on my sexual history, but it's still there. i guess there is a double standard to a certain extent. in my own experience i've encountered the virgin/whore complex quite often: a guy wants to think he's pretty much the only one his girl has slept with, but at the same time he wants her to be sexually experienced enough to be able to please him and pull out loads of dirty tricks and techniques (see the blowjob thread for a nasty comment made to me by an ex about my head skills).

Rubyredd, Sunday, 7 October 2007 12:11 (eighteen years ago)

xpost personally, i learnt the most about sex through long term relationships, which is what i keep telling this friend of mine: 5yrs with the same girl has probably taught him more about how to please a woman (even keeping in mind that each woman is different) than a guy who's had 15, 30 or 60 partners but no longterm encounters.

Rubyredd, Sunday, 7 October 2007 12:13 (eighteen years ago)

OTM. One night stands teach you absolutely fuck-all.

en i see kay, Sunday, 7 October 2007 12:16 (eighteen years ago)

Okay, that's a bit much. But you learn much more when you get feedback past the next morning.

en i see kay, Sunday, 7 October 2007 12:17 (eighteen years ago)

one night stands tend to be drunken and clumsy. it takes more than one night to learn what your partner likes and how to please them. a fling is more about pleasing yourself than pleasing the other person.

Rubyredd, Sunday, 7 October 2007 12:19 (eighteen years ago)

i still see my first girlfriend around town now and again, she seems far more well adjusted, cooler and funnier than most of the girls i've been out with since. if i'd have stuck with her since i was 15, i wouldn't have any regrets at all.

max r, Sunday, 7 October 2007 12:29 (eighteen years ago)

Is that really true though? Maybe it is in your case, but even if I'd met my perfect partner when I was 16 (I didn't, she went on the become a coke addicted lap dancer), I don't think I could've gone through life wondering 'what if?'. I did once stumble across a mathematical analysis of how many partners you should 'sample' to ensure you have a reasonably good chance of finding the optimum partner.

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa, Sunday, 7 October 2007 12:33 (eighteen years ago)

most partners seems better/perfect in retrospect.

mr x, Sunday, 7 October 2007 12:34 (eighteen years ago)

And here is that mathematical analysis, xpost to self.

http://plus.maths.org/issue3/marriage/index.html

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa, Sunday, 7 October 2007 12:36 (eighteen years ago)

i must be lucky then, because not a single one of my partners look better in retrospect... or maybe i'm actually really unlucky...

hmmm :/

one thing i will say about having a lot of partners: it definitely allows you to appreciate someone fantastic when you find them. my current beau is the sum total of all things lacking in every guy i've been with, and i value him so much because i know how shit it is out there, and how rare and special he is (but not saying you can't appreciate a good one unless you've been a slut).

Rubyredd, Sunday, 7 October 2007 12:40 (eighteen years ago)

i think its the fact i spent so much time with her in an important stage of development or whatever. we're both still on each other's wavelength , like the way you just click with mates you grew up with. i probably am romanticising her memory a bit, but she's still a catch i reckon.

max r, Sunday, 7 October 2007 12:41 (eighteen years ago)

Oh that's soooo very true. For better or for worse, there's something about growing up with a partner that's extremely hard to let go.

en i see kay, Sunday, 7 October 2007 12:47 (eighteen years ago)

whoa @ math explanation link
also
Mathematics of finding a partner and eating out
hehe

rrrobyn, Sunday, 7 October 2007 13:15 (eighteen years ago)

I think it's mostly true that you get better in bed if you have more sex partners, but obviously not if they've been just one-night stands, because like someone said you don't usually learn from the post-coital talking in those cases. But in general, if you've been with one person for ten years, then you're probably the best sex partner for her, because you know all her needs and ticks. But different people like different things, so having a variety of sex partners usually makes you more sensitive to the variety of things different people enjoy. When it comes to casual sex, I've found that people with more experience tend to better. Similarly, I think I'm better at, er, pleasuring a casual partner than I was in my early twenties, when I'd had sex with three people, even though I was in a three-year relationship with one of them.

But this is in no way meant to diss people who've had only few but long-term sex partners. Because obviously in the long run sex isn't the most important thing in a relationship, and also, if you're in a happy long-term relationship, then you're most likely the best sex partners for each other for knowing each other so well. On the other hand, if you're the sort of person who has lots of casual sex, then it's best to find other people who've had lots of casual sex too, because that sort of a person is most likely a better bed partner for you. So everybody wins!

Tuomas, Sunday, 7 October 2007 13:23 (eighteen years ago)

^^^ban

Dom Passantino, Sunday, 7 October 2007 13:24 (eighteen years ago)

fuck em and flee

j/k

max r, Sunday, 7 October 2007 13:25 (eighteen years ago)

Huh?

(x-post)

Tuomas, Sunday, 7 October 2007 13:26 (eighteen years ago)

What's your problem, Dom?

Tuomas, Sunday, 7 October 2007 13:26 (eighteen years ago)

Why do you want to ban three little pyramids?

Tuomas, Sunday, 7 October 2007 13:32 (eighteen years ago)

lol

latebloomer, Sunday, 7 October 2007 13:35 (eighteen years ago)

Seriously though, isn't just posting "ban X" like the laziest form of critique ever? It doesn't say anything at all.

Tuomas, Monday, 8 October 2007 14:16 (eighteen years ago)

Its ok he's a music writer he's used to it.

Trayce, Tuesday, 9 October 2007 01:04 (eighteen years ago)

OTM. One night stands teach you absolutely fuck-all.

-- en i see kay, Sunday, 7 October 2007

otm. apart from teaching you to have fewer one night stands.

pisces, Tuesday, 9 October 2007 01:13 (eighteen years ago)

genital warts - C/D?

Aimless, Tuesday, 9 October 2007 01:23 (eighteen years ago)


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.