I was told recently

[unregistered]

 

[Lancecastor]

That last post makes me want to wash my keyboard with soap.

Perhaps the three of them are forever bound together by shared bacteriuum.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

that I "have a reputation with women on Lit".

Quite frankly, I was flattered at first. In that I find myself quite ordinary and in many cases boring and to think that I might be a subject of the underground chatter was a little exciting.

Then I thought a little deeper and wondered exactly what this reputation was?

Then I took the next step and wondered exactly what I might think of a woman that placed so much reliance upon the impressions/gossip of others might be. Especially considering that the communications were on topic, and consisted of nothing that couldn't have been re-printed in Reader Digest. What I might think of a woman that was, seemingly, unable to make her own determination? Who seemed to think that I was 'hitting' on her, with no evidence beyond the fact that I talked to her.

Self-centered? Insecure? Both? No matter in the end.

Ishmael

There are no real women on LIT.

 

[Lancecastor]

There are no real women on LIT.

That's incorrect.

The main audience is USA based white men over 60.

The women on Lit are no more than 20%, most of them fat and/or ugly.

So, most of the "cute" ones are actually White American Men Over 60.

About 3-5% are actual women that aren't hideous in some fundamental way.

Around 1% are interesting.

So, when there are 150 people on the GB at once, chances are there are 1 or 2 interesting and attractive women here at the same time.

The good news is, most guys only want 1 at a time.

 

[unregistered]

 

[Lancecastor]

So what you're saying is...there's a chance.

Yes, always.

 

[Luk]

*chuckle*

 

[Killswitch1]

Bumping threads is against the rules too.