The scent of a man? It could be an STD!

[Safe_Bet]

Sniffing a potential partner’s scent could tell whether Mr. Right has a sexually transmitted disease, according to a small study that found that gonorrhea-infected men smelled “putrid” to a bevy of young ladies.

http://vitals.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/12/09/9306573-the-scent-of-a-man-it-could-be-an-std?lite

Let's do the "math", shall we?


..."All men stink"
+ "Men with STDs stink"
____________________

ALL MEN HAVE STDs



We've alleged this for years. They should have listened!

Maybe they will listen now, the next time we suggest the "Lorena Bobbet Solution" to the problem of stinky, disease infected men! (which is all of you!)



This post was provided as a public service by:
The Lesbian Conspiracy for World Domination of Iowa.

 

[lovecraft68]

I suppose it's no different from being able to smell a girls pussy from five feet away. That is pretty much a sign not to "go there"

 

[Safe_Bet]

I suppose it's no different from being able to smell a girls pussy from five feet away. That is pretty much a sign not to "go there"

You must be referring to the "Fucking Assholes!" brand of man repellant that is out on the market. It works well and it washes off with a quick shower.

Does that work on the stink inducing clap all you men have, LC?

 

[TE999]

I suppose it's no different from being able to smell a girls pussy from five feet away. That is pretty much a sign not to "go there"

Hence the expression 'Taking the skin boat to tuna town'.

Pussy: It's not just for carpet munchers any more.


(Love ya, Amy )

 

[Safe_Bet]

Hence the expression 'Taking the skin boat to tuna town'.

Pussy: It's not just for carpet munchers any more.


(Love ya, Amy )

That's STILL better than, 'Riding the "short", stinky bus to Drippyville!


(Love ya too, Tom )

 

[estragon]

Compliments pass where the quality meet.

 

[Cruel2BKind]

I suppose it's no different from being able to smell a girls pussy from five feet away. That is pretty much a sign not to "go there"

I thinks it's a sign that miz stinkycrotch needs to take a shower

 

[lovecraft68]

I thinks it's a sign that miz stinkycrotch needs to take a shower

If I met a girl and she was that hot, but smelled. I would probably take a shot at, "Damn, its been a long day, why don't we start in the shower?"

Then I would wash the damn thing myself and she would think it was great foreplay.

 

[Cruel2BKind]

There is a little thing that members of both sexes need to realize.

Your genitalia spend all day in a confined airless space, that may or may not be matted with hair. The area has openings into the body, and these openings will secrete fluids of some sort, only a select few of which are even considered sexy. There is also a large concentration of sweat glands, many of which also emit pheromones.

It doesn't matter if you have sweaty balls or stank crotch, CLEAN YOURSELF BEFORE YOU EXPECT SOMEBODY ELSE TO LICK IT.

 

[BTTap]

There is a little thing that members of both sexes need to realize.

Your genitalia spend all day in a confined airless space, that may or may not be matted with hair. The area has openings into the body, and these openings will secrete fluids of some sort, only a select few of which are even considered sexy. There is also a large concentration of sweat glands, many of which also emit pheromones.

It doesn't matter if you have sweaty balls or stank crotch, CLEAN YOURSELF BEFORE YOU EXPECT SOMEBODY ELSE TO LICK IT.

Amen!
Another tip: cologne/perfume/body spray is not a shower substitute!

 

[Handley_Page]

There is a little thing that members of both sexes need to realize.

Your genitalia spend all day in a confined airless space, that may or may not be matted with hair. The area has openings into the body, and these openings will secrete fluids of some sort, only a select few of which are even considered sexy. There is also a large concentration of sweat glands, many of which also emit pheromones.

It doesn't matter if you have sweaty balls or stank crotch,
CLEAN YOURSELF BEFORE YOU EXPECT SOMEBODY ELSE TO LICK IT.

Amen to that.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Let's do the "math", shall we?


..."All men stink"
+ "Men with STDs stink"
____________________

ALL MEN HAVE STDs



We've alleged this for years. They should have listened!

Maybe they will listen now, the next time we suggest the "Lorena Bobbet Solution" to the problem of stinky, disease infected men! (which is all of you!)


This post was provided as a public service by:
The Lesbian Conspiracy for World Domination of Iowa.

PROLLY A TRANSSEXUAL 'MAN' WITH THE OLD FISH AROMA.

 

[lovecraft68]

There is a little thing that members of both sexes need to realize.

Your genitalia spend all day in a confined airless space, that may or may not be matted with hair. The area has openings into the body, and these openings will secrete fluids of some sort, only a select few of which are even considered sexy. There is also a large concentration of sweat glands, many of which also emit pheromones.

It doesn't matter if you have sweaty balls or stank crotch, CLEAN YOURSELF BEFORE YOU EXPECT SOMEBODY ELSE TO LICK IT.

Also keep in mind that there is a difference between "musky" and dirty.

After a night of sex, a woman's pussy smells a bit strong first thing in the morning, but its from sex and I love that scent and I'll lick it all morning long.

Nothing wrong with a little flavor.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Also keep in mind that there is a difference between "musky" and dirty.

After a night of sex, a woman's pussy smells a bit strong first thing in the morning, but its from sex and I love that scent and I'll lick it all morning long.

Nothing wrong with a little flavor.

Especially if she brought it home from girls nite out.

 

[lovecraft68]

Especially if she brought it home from girls nite out.

Now, now James, not all of us are cuckolds like you.

 

[Trinique_Fire]

Heh heh heh....

Love Amy
Love this thread.

 

[lance gt]

I would tend to think if a guy has an STD, he more than likely picked it up from a skanky pussy and began passing it on. Maybe we should be more like dogs and sniff each others ass and crotches before sex.

Trying to say ALL men have STD's is a prejudicial statement, from an extreme point of bias. I have never had an STD and never will have one and I know hundreds of men who can say the same.

Maybe guys should carry test strips and rub it on a woman's pussy first and check to see which colour it turns. Blue, good to go, red, run away quickly.

 

[Cruel2BKind]

I would tend to think if a guy has an STD, he more than likely picked it up from a skanky pussy and began passing it on. Maybe we should be more like dogs and sniff each others ass and crotches before sex.

Trying to say ALL men have STD's is a prejudicial statement, from an extreme point of bias. I have never had an STD and never will have one and I know hundreds of men who can say the same.

Maybe guys should carry test strips and rub it on a woman's pussy first and check to see which colour it turns. Blue, good to go, red, run away quickly.

Condoms are easier, and there is less of a risk of offending people

 

[lovecraft68]

Condoms are easier, and there is less of a risk of offending people

But no one wants a blow job through a condom and herpes can be passed like that as well as other things.

tell you what, next time a guy goes down on you, maybe he should put plastic wrap around his tongue.

Not that I'm opposed to the concept(well at least before I got married.) but plain old good old fashioned promiscuity leads to this.

Its Russian roulette, fuck enough people you're bound to to catch something sooner or later.

And SB's claim that it all starts with men, is just more of the skewed irational BS that makes it so she can't be taken seriously.

Funny. SB in the mirror is BS! Coincidence? Doubt it.

 

[mynameisben]

Let's do the "math", shall we?


..."All men stink"
+ "Men with STDs stink"
____________________

ALL MEN HAVE STDs


We've alleged this for years. They should have listened!

There's a hole in your logic, SB. If your initial premise of "All men stink" is accepted as true, then your follow-up proposition of "Men with STDs stink" adds nothing new to your argument, because the truth of your follow-up proposition can be directly inferred from your premise statement. That is, the simple fact that "Men with STDs" is a subset of "All men" is condition enough to conclude that they stink, provided your initial premise is accepted as true.

Therefore, it is readily apparent that your follow-up proposition is entirely redundant and may be eliminated from your argument without any loss of logical precision. That elimination leaves you with only the logically equivalent argument below:

All men stink, therefore All men have STDs.​

Clearly, "all men" can be factored out of the above proposition, which further reduces your argument to the following equivalent statement:

Stink implies STDs.​

And should we agree such an absurd proposition is correct, then it's logic would apply equally to both men and women. That is, your straight-line argument is logically only a simple statement, and it implies both of the following:

Women who stink have STDs
Men who stink have STDs​

and nothing more. If both of these conclusions cannot be accepted as true, then the contradiction proves your initial premise is false.

 

[Cruel2BKind]

There's a hole in your logic, SB. If your initial premise of "All men stink" is accepted as true, then your follow-up proposition of "Men with STDs stink" adds nothing new to your argument, because the truth of your follow-up proposition can be directly inferred from your premise statement. That is, the simple fact that "Men with STDs" is a subset of "All men" is condition enough to conclude that they stink, provided your initial premise is accepted as true.

Therefore, it is readily apparent that your follow-up proposition is entirely redundant and may be eliminated from your argument without any loss of logical precision. That elimination leaves you with only the logically equivalent argument below:

All men stink, therefore All men have STDs.​

Clearly, "all men" can be factored out of the above proposition, which further reduces your argument to the following equivalent statement:

Stink implies STDs.​

And should we agree such an absurd proposition is correct, then it's logic would apply equally to both men and women. That is, your straight-line argument is logically only a simple statement, and it implies both of the following:

Women who stink have STDs
Men who stink have STDs​

and nothing more. If both of these conclusions cannot be accepted as true, then the contradiction proves your initial premise is false.

I love you Ben

 

[mynameisben]

I love you Ben

Thank you, Cruel. I love you too.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

I would tend to think if a guy has an STD, he more than likely picked it up from a skanky pussy and began passing it on. Maybe we should be more like dogs and sniff each others ass and crotches before sex.

Trying to say ALL men have STD's is a prejudicial statement, from an extreme point of bias. I have never had an STD and never will have one and I know hundreds of men who can say the same.

Maybe guys should carry test strips and rub it on a woman's pussy first and check to see which colour it turns. Blue, good to go, red, run away quickly.

Two studies were done in Seattle. Both studies confirmed that rapists generally catch an STD from their female victim.

 

[Safe_Bet]

There's a hole in your logic, SB. If your initial premise of "All men stink" is accepted as true, then your follow-up proposition of "Men with STDs stink" adds nothing new to your argument, because the truth of your follow-up proposition can be directly inferred from your premise statement. That is, the simple fact that "Men with STDs" is a subset of "All men" is condition enough to conclude that they stink, provided your initial premise is accepted as true.

Therefore, it is readily apparent that your follow-up proposition is entirely redundant and may be eliminated from your argument without any loss of logical precision. That elimination leaves you with only the logically equivalent argument below:

All men stink, therefore All men have STDs.​

Clearly, "all men" can be factored out of the above proposition, which further reduces your argument to the following equivalent statement:

Stink implies STDs.​

And should we agree such an absurd proposition is correct, then it's logic would apply equally to both men and women. That is, your straight-line argument is logically only a simple statement, and it implies both of the following:

Women who stink have STDs
Men who stink have STDs​

and nothing more. If both of these conclusions cannot be accepted as true, then the contradiction proves your initial premise is false.

HAHAHAHAHAHA!

Your comment was a perfect example of circular "male think" logic.

This has led you to erroneously jump to the assumption that somehow feminine body odor and "man stink" are anywhere equal. A woman can correct body odor with a shower. To correct "man stink" requires an operation (normally involving the use of a Lorena Bobbet Commerative Ginsu "scalpel" *ahem*)

(you comment was really witty, dude. Good job on that one, BTW!)

 

[lance gt]

HAHAHAHAHAHA!

Your comment was a perfect example of circular "male think" logic.

This has led you to erroneously jump to the assumption that somehow feminine body odor and "man stink" are anywhere equal. A woman can correct body odor with a shower. To correct "man stink" requires an operation (normally involving the use of a Lorena Bobbet Commerative Ginsu "scalpel" *ahem*)

(you comment was really witty, dude. Good job on that one, BTW!)

Following again in 'male think' logic, taking everything you've said into a concise context, all men shouldn't be allowed to have a penis, or have sex with women. We should be kept seperate from the female population and only women should be allowed to be free and have sex with each other. Men are kept for labour and sperm only, which is surgically extracted. Zeig Heil!!!! Mein got, Amy Hitler