PDA

View Full Version : Funny comments made by non-figure skating fans about the sport



Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13

Artifice
01-07-2011, 11:53 AM
(And don't kid yourself women have never been interested in looking at male genetalia--there was a reason for the popularity of the codpiece as male garment. The wonderbra of its day.)

That's why female didn't look at males butt, because as far as I know males genetalia is located on the front side of the body, not the back. That's what I said, no need to focus on males butt like males do on females butt, except for the esthetic aspect or the new tendancy to focus on this part of the body. But historically a male's butt is not supposed to be attractive for a female.

Dragonlady
01-07-2011, 03:12 PM
I didn't say females were not attracted by males body, I said they were not primarly attracted by males butt, whereas males were/are attracted by females butt.
Female are attracted by virirility features, and virility features are not localised on the butt.

Speak for yourself. Every woman I know considers a nice butt to one of a man's best features.

C_T_T_
01-07-2011, 06:59 PM
Today I was telling a lady in work that I skate.....

"Can you go on one leg?" "yeah"
"Can you go backwards?" "yeah"
"But can you backwards on one leg?" :lol: "yeah"
"Wow, you must be good! I suppose you can do those crossover things too...and what do you call them...triple axels?" :lol: I was tempted to go along with it!

Artifice
01-07-2011, 08:05 PM
Speak for yourself. Every woman I know considers a nice butt to one of a man's best features.

I understand that women can appreciate nice males butts but what I said is actually from an anthropologic studies that says that this is typically a male characteristic to look at females butt. I'm not going to say again what I already said, you can read my first post to get the idea.
It doesn't mean that women cannot be attracted by men's butt, but in that case this is more a social result than an instinctive thing.
That doesn't change the result that some women look at males butt, but this is not from the same origin than for men looking at women's butt. That's it.

bardtoob
01-07-2011, 08:59 PM
^ Too funny. Nobody ever said that women look at men's butts for the same reason men look at women's butts, and just because they do not have the same evolutionary origin does not mean both are not evolutionarily based and instinctual. Men and women can appreciate butts for totally different reasons . . .

. . . I don't think women are particularly interested in a man's perineum in the same way men are interest in woman's perineum, but women might be interested in how well he performs activities (or might have performed activities) that involve gluteal muscles, and the muscle tone and development of gluteal muscles could be a good indicator of that.

ETA: Whatever distinction you make between males looking for receptive partners and females looking for a suitable partner is false. It is an instinctual dynamic interaction that has existed since the origins of sex, way before humans, monkeys, rodents, etc.

kia_4EverOnIce
01-07-2011, 09:30 PM
:rofl:

Artifice
01-08-2011, 06:53 PM
ETA: Whatever distinction you make between males looking for receptive partners and females looking for a suitable partner is false. It is an instinctual dynamic interaction that has existed since the origins of sex, way before humans, monkeys, rodents, etc.

Woo, such a serious case.:huh: Going into serious analysis, so, please explain your theory. Because saying only "it's false" to make up a point is not an analysis. I explained that what I said is actually from an ahthropologic study.
By the way what is your point here ? Because "dynamic interaction" looks rather like a pompous obscure langage rather than a clear explanation.
Also I never said there were not interactions between genders. So what is you theory that you seem to want so much to oppose ?

bardtoob
01-08-2011, 07:44 PM
^ I'll note what you did and did not question, and leave it at that. I really do not have the time or the typing skills to explain game theory models and their role in signal theory on a forum. (I don't even know if this space would accept equations.)

BTW, I find how you try to validated your personal preference with science while invalidating others extremely obnoxious. People rarely use science to develop personal preferences. Furthermore, snippets of scientific work often focus on the generalized majority, but that does not mean the minority, which can be a huge proportion, is abnormal or unsuccessful. Furthermore, the most successful in an environment are generally a minority, while the majority that settles around an average are just that, average.

Maybe you should have asked youself, "Why would women look at butts?" or even ask on the forum before declaring yourself right and others wrong because you happen to know that men do like to look at butts (with which I do agree). Men are not the complete opposite of women, just different.

ETA: Oh, yeah, and when people say they are using a source but provide no citation, then I just assume they are not really using a source. The same goes for when people throughout statistics.

Artifice
01-08-2011, 08:10 PM
My only point was to explain that the fact of watching butts is something that has anthropologic origin when it's males looking at females (scientifically proved). And when it's females looking at males butts it's because of other reasons (aesthetic, sociologic,...). That's it.
Women are looking for virility features though.
The fact that I personnally don't look that much at males butts (like many others) is an exemple showing that this is not something genetically printed in women's genetic's memory.

You can desagree with scientific studies, but in that case you should provide a study of scientific quality. Talking about equations that have nothing to do with the discussion to prove whatever you believe in just doesn't prove anything.

bardtoob
01-08-2011, 08:19 PM
Where is your own study, genius?

Maybe you are genetically flawed?

Back to the ignore list with you.

ETA: Why would somebody quote anthropology to prove something is genetic?

Who would ever use there personal preference to support the claims of science?

Why would somebody feel the need to support their opinion with anthropological/genetic hog wash in a discussion about "Funny comments made by non-figure skating fans about the sport".

Why do I not choose to ignore people more often?

rhumba
01-08-2011, 09:51 PM
My partner has turned into a casual fan because of me but little else. He has a big mouth so his comments are :lol: and :eek: He tends to describe the skaters because most of the time he can't remember their names -

Rachael Flatt is the 'chubby girl'
Mirai Nagasu is the 'girl whose parents own the Sushi Restaurant'
Joubert is considered hot, cuz he'll stop what he's doing to watch Joubert skate.

He also has a view on who is interesting to watch and who isn't -

Lysacek and Lambiel skate with passion, but Chan doesn't. Alissa Czisny and Sasha Cohen are the only interesting US ladies, even excludes Kwan. Butyrskaya was gorgeous and graceful while Slutskaya 'skates like a truck driver'

I also wonder how many other casual fans are turned off by his opinion - how can someone fall so often and still win??

:lol::lol: My co-worker sounds like your partner, she does not know anything about skating, watched D/W on TV during Oly, said Meryl looked like movie star, Avatar :eek::lol:

The Accordion
01-08-2011, 09:51 PM
As far as thread drifts go - I give this one some serious GOE

clarie
01-09-2011, 01:06 AM
:lol: So do I :lol::lol:

professordeb
01-09-2011, 02:20 AM
As far as thread drifts go - I give this one some serious GOE

I was thinking the drift was at least 4 feet ... it's winter and I'm weary of snow :lol: but not winter sports.

Sparks
01-09-2011, 03:11 AM
I heard all of these:
http://www.fsuniverse.net/forum/showpost.php?p=3007597&postcount=68
:lol:
Plus the guy said, "I'm tired of those guys at the Olympics...like the winner Johnny Weir, and that Kevin Lysacek".