[quote]michael2507 wrote:
By the way, am I the only one who thinks this thread took a turn similar to sic’s picture thread a while ago?[/quote]
The common denominator in both would be rainjack.
[quote]Dedicated wrote:
…
It isn’t about going to the mansion what sane testosterone driven male wouldn’t like to hear about that?
It’s about the pretentious, narcissistic, never-ending, quest for ego strokes and the inability to have any introspection on this.
“I’m the girl your boyfriends want to cheat on you with”
“What kind of candy would I be? tee hee hee,”
It’s really not a life and death issue but it is on a public forum and everybody will have an opinion. [/quote]
Did she really say that stuff?
[quote]michael2507 wrote:
A CandyBarr.[/quote]
Dave will be thrilled.
Though he’d probably prefer her as a Pop Tart.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
Did she really say that stuff?[/quote]
Zap, you have no idea how much fun you are missing by not being on Myspace.
Especially now that we are determinedly converting it into T-space.
[quote]sic wrote:
michael2507 wrote:
By the way, am I the only one who thinks this thread took a turn similar to sic’s picture thread a while ago?
The common denominator in both would be rainjack.[/quote]
Please don’t take offense, Sic. I have the utmost respect for you. However, I
disagree with your statement.
RJ is not the common denominator. He will be blamed for his comments, as was Oogie a while back. Simply because he stood up for what he believes in regardless of the consequences. However, I am sure there are countless other members on this website who will agree with his statements. They will not say so out loud for fear of offending someone. Myself included. RJ may not always be tactful or politically correct, but he is always honest and a man of his word. Love him or hate him, that is who he is. For that he will always have my respect.
Jana
[quote]sic wrote:
michael2507 wrote:
By the way, am I the only one who thinks this thread took a turn similar to sic’s picture thread a while ago?
The common denominator in both would be rainjack.[/quote]
Holy hell. I voiced my opinion. I stand by what I said. If you have a problem with that - someone start a “why rainjack is an ass” thread.
And how long ago did I post on your thread? Over a year now I believe. Carry a grudge much?
Grow up.
Thank you Jana.
Rainjack, I think the reason you rub me the wrong way is that you remind me all too much of my father. I find myself agreeing with a decent amount of things you say… but I don’t want to agree because of the way you say it. You are exceedingly blunt to the point of insulting, purposefully on most occasions. I always find myself trying to help out the underdog and trying to smooth over hurt feelings… while you go straight for the jugular. Your style just raises my hackles before I even let what you are saying sink in.
[quote]rainjack wrote:
sic wrote:
michael2507 wrote:
By the way, am I the only one who thinks this thread took a turn similar to sic’s picture thread a while ago?
The common denominator in both would be rainjack.
[/quote]
WHAT ABOUT ME?! I had quite a hand in that as well. 
However, I honestly think Sic has been making some awesome posts since then! Keep up the good work!
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Did she really say that stuff?
Zap, you have no idea how much fun you are missing by not being on Myspace.
Especially now that we are determinedly converting it into T-space.[/quote]
I think I am too old for myspace.
I have an excuse to waste time here because I actually get real training info.
[quote]jana wrote:
Simply because he stood up for what he believes in regardless of the consequences. [/quote]
A man who stands up for what he believes, in spite of the consequences, is one who states his case with class and dignity and then accepts what comes with stoic resolution.
One who purposely phrases their statements to be as offensive as possible, with little (if any) logic attached, no apparent capacity for critical examination of his own actions, and no apparent intention of actually swaying the opinion of the person he supposedly “pities”, is not standing up for what he believes in. He’s merely groping for attention and getting his rocks off on feeling like a bad boy.
To claim that you pity someone while using a disdainful tone to berate them is, at best, disingenious. I’d hardly call it an honest man’s labour. If he was sincere in sentiment, he’d have at least put forth an effort to change her mind.
Now, it could be that Rainjack’s intention was entirely honest… in which case he should be pitied. It would be horrible to labour through life with the inability to communicate effectively. Somehow, though, I don’t think that’s his problem.
Several others have expressed their opinion, with class, on this matter without stirring up even a mote of controversy. Rainjack is just what he accuses SG of being; an attention-seeker.
He’s succeeded.
[quote]Oogie wrote:
WHAT ABOUT ME?! I had quite a hand in that as well. ;)[/quote]
I guess your fame for inventing the art of oogying dwarfs all other achievements…
[quote]Oogie wrote:
Something
[/quote]
Dear.
God.
[quote]Dedicated wrote:
It isn’t about going to the mansion what sane testosterone driven male wouldn’t like to hear about that?
It’s about the pretentious, narcissistic, never-ending, quest for ego strokes and the inability to have any introspection on this.
“I’m the girl your boyfriends want to cheat on you with”
“What kind of candy would I be? tee hee hee,”
It’s really not a life and death issue but it is on a public forum and everybody will have an opinion. [/quote]
Word!
[quote]Dedicated wrote:
It isn’t about going to the mansion what sane testosterone driven male wouldn’t like to hear about that?[/quote]
Apparently, several.
I understand what’s really going on here. I was just trying to take the edge off a bit. But since you laid the bait, I’ll bite.
The real truth of the matter, if people want to get so ridiculously psychological about it, is that every single person on this site is seeking attention in one form or another (yes, that’s every single person in this thread, on the boards, running T-mag, everywhere). Some people just go about it in different ways.
For both the men and women, this is all about one of several things: being a better athlete, looking better, or getting stronger. That’s about it. And if you’re going to be honest and look at any one of those things from an objective point of view, what is it all about? Impressing other people.
People say stuff like, “I do this for myself, because it makes me feel better on the inside, I don’t care what other people think.” Whatever. Sure, we’ve all experienced that “glow” when we accomplished something we’ve never done before, and some people look for that more than others.
But there’s not one person who, when they cut down to a certain body fat %, hit that new PR, or set a new 40 time, etc., only reveled in the personal accomplishment. Not one person. No, on some level they looked at another man/woman/competitor and said “I look better/lift more/perform better than that guy/girl” and everybody damn well knows it. Anyone who says otherwise is lying to him/herself.
The funny thing is, as someone already mentioned, some of the people complaining about SG are just as guilty of putting up sexy photos. “Oh, but it’s more modest.” Give me a break. What is modesty, but an opinion.
And then there’s the other side of the coin. What’s one of the most common challenges to a post seen here (I probably see it just about every day)? “Bullshit, put your picture up then”. Which esentially translates to “Let me see what a skinny little bitch you are so I can feel like my opinion matters more here since I’m bigger/look better than you.” Is that not simply another form of ego stroking? I’m not doubting the efficacy of method. Most of the time it does prove someone does/does not know what they’re talking about. But it’s still just another matter of competition.
Hey, I wasn’t here to get in a pissing match over such a harmless subject. My comment was more to get people to lighten up over the whole thing, not add fuel to the fire. If I offended anyone, I apologize. But there’s not a single person on this site who can judge someone else for “looking for attention”.
Not a single one.
P.S. Before anyone accuses me, I’m not an “SG apoologist” or “SG fan”, whatever you want to call me to try and make my point any less relevant. Barely know the girl, maybe talked to her once. I’m just speaking the truth.
[quote]nephorm wrote:
Oogie wrote:
Something
Dear.
God.[/quote]
LMFAO!!! That was good. Bravo 
[quote]nephorm wrote:
Oogie wrote:
Something
Dear.
God.[/quote]
I second that statement.
-Nate
[quote]Northcott wrote:
A man who stands up for what he believes, in spite of the consequences, is one who states his case with class and dignity and then accepts what comes with stoic resolution.[/quote]
I haven’t ducked from anything I have said. I never do. Class and dignity are subjective terms that mean nothing coming from someone such as yourself.
Show me bad logic. I have asked this of you at least once before and you have conveniently refused to answer.
I am getting my rocks off, huh? You’ve been here for 2 months and you propose to know me? Looks to me like the one with the hard-on is you. Not that there’s anything wrong with that, but be honest.
I don’t know you nor do I care to. Your fanatical preoccupation with me seems to suggest that you have issues of your own, not counting your inability to actually back up your claims. Ad hoc attacks are easy - that’s why you make them. Lazy people are like that.
SG is over 21. She makes her decisions on her own. This was not a debate. I offered my opinion - I did not offer to change anyone’s mind. Just because I don’t make an effort to sway someone to my side does not make me disingenuous (check your spelling sparky - does that mean you are as ignorant as I am now?)
Evidently I communicated effectively enough to get my opinion across to even the brainiac you fashion yourself to be.
I think you must have trouble processing information. I have never changed my position. There has never been a question about what I said or what was meant. Yet you seem to have trouble figuring out a motive? It’s called honesty.
Like it or not - that’s what I do around here. I was doing it before you even knew there was such a thing as t-mag, and I’ll continue on doing it long after you are gone - which won’t be long. Posers are usually found out smartly after they show their ass as you are doing here.
[quote]Several others have expressed their opinion, with class, on this matter without stirring up even a mote of controversy. Rainjack is just what he accuses SG of being; an attention-seeker.
He’s succeeded.
[/quote]
Yet you are the one that keeps posting. Who is the attention seeker, again? You have brought nothing to this discussion except a raging hard-on to shut me up. Not that there is anything wrong with you carrying a boner for another guy.
I was the first one to speak out against what SG said. Judging from my in box, I have said things that many people would like to say but won’t. What came after that was easy. Gojira said I opened the door. What is it that you have done for this thread? I can’t remember either.
[quote]CC wrote:
For both the men and women, this is all about one of several things: being a better athlete, looking better, or getting stronger. That’s about it.[/quote]
it’s all about being a better athlete, looking better, and getting stronger?
if that were true I’d simply read the articles and keep my mouth shut…
but, if we’re being all honest and shit…
I’m just here to make an ass out of myself in public…it’s what I’m good at…and I’m WAY better at it than any of you shmucks (well, almost any of you, some of you shit-heads are even better at it than me, DAMN YOU FREAKS TO HELL!)…
P.S. good post…everyone’s an egotistical dumb-fuck in one way or another…
[quote]sic wrote:
Thank you Jana.
Rainjack, I think the reason you rub me the wrong way is that you remind me all too much of my father. I find myself agreeing with a decent amount of things you say… but I don’t want to agree because of the way you say it. You are exceedingly blunt to the point of insulting, purposefully on most occasions. I always find myself trying to help out the underdog and trying to smooth over hurt feelings… while you go straight for the jugular. Your style just raises my hackles before I even let what you are saying sink in.[/quote]
Thank you for your honesty, sic. I really respect you for telling me what it is that gets you so riled at me. I am insulting on purpose. Too much time in the political threads, I guess.
As evidenced by my recent stalker’s attempted attacks on me here, you are not alone in your raised hackles. I won’t apologize for what I say, or how I say it. I don’t think I would like myself if I weren’t expressing what I felt with the same emotion that I feel it.
But just to be clear - I am no one’s dad here. At least it has never been proven.
[quote]DPH wrote:
CC wrote:
For both the men and women, this is all about one of several things: being a better athlete, looking better, or getting stronger. That’s about it.
it’s all about being a better athlete, looking better, and getting stronger?
if that were true I’d simply read the articles and keep my mouth shut…[/quote]
Eh, on one hand I see your point, but I think you know what I meant. Your posts tell me you’re more intelligent than to simply assume I meant that in the most literal way possible.
And mentioning the boards and the social aspect of T-mag only makes my point that much more relevant; it’s just another outlet for people here to seek attention. People don’t have to go to their friends, family, competitors, etc. for attention anymore. They can find it right here!
Well…while your statement is true, I can’t tell if it’s an indirect shot back at me or not.
So since I try (notice I said try, sometimes I can’t help myself) not to take this shit too seriously and already wasted precious minutes I’ll never get back typing that book above…I’ll just say thanks, throw a big smile back at ya’ and keep on truckin’.