Boyfriend/husband and lap dancing clubs..???

PrincessPlaty

VestanPance wrote: »

Your badly thought out response to me saying not all men watch !!!!!!.

No that was my response to you stating that a lot of men don't watch !!!!!!. Which is not the same thing.

I have not once said that all men watch !!!!!!, quite clearly they don't because you don't. Just because you don't it doesn't mean that a lot of men don't.

You have just stated that you are debating with me because I said that all men watch !!!!!!. Which I haven't said. So why exactly are you trying to debate with me?

janninew

Just read that Telegraph Article, the title is a little misleading (All Men Watch !!!!!!, scientists find) How could they possibly come to that conclusion unless they've asked every single man?!

raven83

Oh don't you just love a good (master)debate these sort of subjects bring up!!!

VestanPance

janninew wrote: »

Just read that Telegraph Article, the title is a little misleading (All Men Watch !!!!!!, scientists find) How could they possibly come to that conclusion unless they've asked every single man?!

Newspapers are no basis for academic research posting, as they don't have a clue what they are actually reporting on and are just seeking headline.

PrincessPlaty

raven83 wrote: »

Oh don't you just love a good (master)debate these sort of subjects bring up!!!

i did that one earlier keep up :rotfl:

Lotus-eater

raven83 wrote: »

Oh don't you just love a good (master)debate these sort of subjects bring up!!!

I prefer a (submissive)debate, but it hasn't got the same ring to it! :rotfl:

Uniscots97

A definite NO. Warned now hubby under no circumstances to go whilst on stag do, he did and told one of his friends over the phone not realising I was in the room. I went ballistic and threatened to call the wedding off. I calmed down and the wedding went ahead.

raven83

PrincessPlaty wrote: »

i did that one earlier keep up :rotfl:

Sorry! I tend to skim read the thread and only notice the real juicy bits :rotfl:

raven83

Lotus-eater wrote: »

I prefer a (submissive)debate, but it hasn't got the same ring to it! :rotfl:

:rotfl::rotfl:no it hasn't. Oh don't start talking about ring's, you never know where that will lead :rotfl:

VestanPance

PrincessPlaty wrote: »

No that was my response to you stating that a lot of men don't watch !!!!!!. Which is not the same thing.

I have not once said that all men watch !!!!!!, quite clearly they don't because you don't. Just because you don't it doesn't mean that a lot of men don't.

You have just stated that you are debating with me because I said that all men watch !!!!!!. Which I haven't said. So why exactly are you trying to debate with me?

Trying to wiggle out of your error now. How is posting a study that claims 100% of men of a certain age have viewed !!!!!!, which is not obviously the same percentage of those who are regular users in a study to determine attitudes towards women when linked with !!!!!! usage, not your all men watch !!!!!! defense?

I'm willing to say my wording could have been more clear, or more to the point ambiguous. I guess saying some men do not watch !!!!!! is more ambiguous than a lot of men don't.