Quote by brossela
Umm. You first?
Rachel is singing Queen now.
So was I, son!
and yes. It's real life. Recognize.
Join the best erotica focused adult social network now
Login
LadyX
Over 90 days ago
Straight Female, 35
0 miles · Dallas
Forum
Artistic Tart
Quote by overmykneenow
Without checking, I would reckon of those stories (well the ones that bother to explain the motivations behind the cheating partner) over 90% of those stories will fall into one of two categories:
1) The husband cheats because he's morally incapable
2) The wife cheats because the husband is physically incapable
Either way the responsibility will be seen to fall on the man. Even in these so-called enlighted times, the head of the family is still seen as the man and therefore must be the one to assume ultimate responsibility of any breakdown. Of course this isn't an accurate reflection of real life but perceptions of this nature are very difficult to change - especially on a website that is tacitly female dominated.
That's excellent analysis! I never thought about it, but I'm sure you're right about this.
Artistic Tart
Time to hit 'reset' blackpoolguy. You should do more of your blunt expression in your head, and less online. You're displaying more butthurt lately than a proctology clinic.
askingforit.net
askingforit.net
Artistic Tart
I'm not sure if this is generally accepted, but whenever I hear men sing praises of "thick" women, I think they're talking about body types that exist within the spectrum between "Kardashian" and "Honey BooBoo's Mom."
It's sort of a stretch (pun intended) to call size 6 women (which Kim and Kourtney have previously claimed to be) "thick", just as it's a bit much (second pun also intended) to call a truly obese woman "thick" as well. In hip-hop culture, you sometimes hear men specifically extoll the virtues of "thick thighs" and "thick booty", but normally it's not a full-blown (and there's your hat trick) fat fetish. When the waist to hip definition disappears, as well as airspace between the upper legs, I think thick-territory has been entered.
It's sort of a stretch (pun intended) to call size 6 women (which Kim and Kourtney have previously claimed to be) "thick", just as it's a bit much (second pun also intended) to call a truly obese woman "thick" as well. In hip-hop culture, you sometimes hear men specifically extoll the virtues of "thick thighs" and "thick booty", but normally it's not a full-blown (and there's your hat trick) fat fetish. When the waist to hip definition disappears, as well as airspace between the upper legs, I think thick-territory has been entered.
Artistic Tart
Quote by FelineFantasy
I deactivated my account for a week or so because someone Google stalked me and found out my DJ stage name. Freaky!
That wouldn't really be an issue if you didn't self-identify as a DJ or post pics that are presumably trackable through tineye or google images. Just saying. Never assume that people won't take any free info and use it to find as much about others as possible.
Artistic Tart
Quote by CurlyGirly
I'm not a serial account deleter, and my user name has remained the same. I'm not hiding who I am/was; I just needed to do what was right for me at that time.
Welcome back, by the way.
Glad you got things worked out to your satisfaction. I will say, it takes away needless confusion for all when returning members choose to use their original username. Plus, it's always a bummer when people who were previously your friends come back under new names and choose not to let you know. 
Artistic Tart
Quote by Rayanne
I like hearing a man grunt when he cums. It's just an added turn on for me.
Agreed. For me it's as much about his sounds than anything else. But I do love the way he tenses up, and the way his cock almost looks like it's breathing, especially when he's close to the edge, and then literally jerks and pulses during orgasm.
Artistic Tart
I'm sure Vinny's dong is big. And not just because I've visited Jersey Shore fansites (repeatedly...) and read separate yet similar accounts with nobody refuting them.
Anyhow- the above poster is correct, penis size has zero to do with why those guys are getting more ass than a public toilet seat, to say nothing of the obvious fallacy that giant penis = out of this world, addictive, sex.
Anyhow- the above poster is correct, penis size has zero to do with why those guys are getting more ass than a public toilet seat, to say nothing of the obvious fallacy that giant penis = out of this world, addictive, sex.
Artistic Tart
These threads are just begging to be deleted, folks.
For future reference, Cumplaywithme, please indulge your fantasies about young sexual discovery in private, not on the forum. Of course everybody remembers their first experiences, unless they have Alzheimer's Disease or amnesia. More importantly though, we have rules here which state that any sexual reference to anybody under 18 years of age is strictly forbidden, and responses to threads like these invariably go there, hence, this from management: http://www.lushstories.com/forum/yaf_postst24108_How-old-were-you-when-underage-referencing-posts.aspx
Granted, this isn't a classic "how old were you" question, but it's close. Any reference or implication about underage experiences will result in the immediate deletion of the thread.
For future reference, Cumplaywithme, please indulge your fantasies about young sexual discovery in private, not on the forum. Of course everybody remembers their first experiences, unless they have Alzheimer's Disease or amnesia. More importantly though, we have rules here which state that any sexual reference to anybody under 18 years of age is strictly forbidden, and responses to threads like these invariably go there, hence, this from management: http://www.lushstories.com/forum/yaf_postst24108_How-old-were-you-when-underage-referencing-posts.aspx
Granted, this isn't a classic "how old were you" question, but it's close. Any reference or implication about underage experiences will result in the immediate deletion of the thread.
Artistic Tart
Quote by Nikki703
They are far left because Lush is basically a sex site. Although the more conservative Lush members would probably prefer them on the far right.
And if you check my page, you'll see that my liberal friends are on the left and my conservative ones are on the right.
Artistic Tart
It's a country club atmosphere, and that negates any coaching toughness or player leadership. Garrett's a known disciplinarian, he's not sweet. The problem is that Jones undermines him, just like he has every coach except the ones that insisted on total control (Johnson and Parcells). So firing Garrett would have no affect on the overall issue. Romo, Witten, and Lee carry the only semblance of locker room gravitas on the entire team, so the perception that the players yearn for the clipboard-holder really isn't true.
I'm not a cowboys fan either, I just live with one who lives and dies with them.
I'm not a cowboys fan either, I just live with one who lives and dies with them.
Artistic Tart
Quote by lafayettemister
The team has lost faith in him anyway. Once that happens, it's over. They'll play harder for Orton.
Neither of those are true statements.
Dallas has two major problems, and neither of them are tied to any particular position, per se. They have no heart and their GM sucks. The GM is the Owner, and so that one's not going away until Jerry croaks, and then if you're a Cowboy fan, you have to hope that Stephen's either a hell of a lot better, or will actually hire a football professional.
The lack of heart is a locker room problem, but even if you had Tom Brady, Ray Lewis, Larry Fitzgerald, and Brian Urlacher in that locker room, their leadership would be neutered by the lack of discipline engendered from the Owner down. The coach is similarly defanged, regardless of how good (or in this case, not good) he may be. Romo's an easy target, especially on days when he fails to hit very many of his own, but that's a sideshow issue with statistical fallacies to begin with.
The problem is at the very top.
Artistic Tart
Quote by lafayettemister
I haven't looked at the stats. I only meant that he may have more TDs or yards passing than other QBs that haven't been in the league or starting. But, like I said I haven't actually looked at the stats. But none of them matter to me, wins/losses only. He can't even get them to the playoffs anymore.
There are lots of better quarterbacks, but Romo's not the reason Dallas doesn't have playoff appearances or success. If non-Top5 QB's categorically blew it for teams' playoff success, then the Niners wouldn't have made it to within one play of the Super Bowl and the Bucs never would've won theirs.
Artistic Tart
Quote by lafayettemister
The GM could be a big problem.
That's like saying the election could dominate October news cycles. There's no doubt, really.
And if he is high in statistic categories, it's because he has a larger sample size.
Huh? The statistics are only measured against other quarterbacks over the same number of games. What do you mean by sample size?
Artistic Tart
Quote by lafayettemister
I heard last night that Romo is something like 14-12 in home games. That isn't very good. Dallas has changed coaches. Parcells, Phillips, Garrett and they still continue to spin their wheels. No progress. Great defense, potent offensive weapons, no progress. Only constants have been Jerry Jones and Tony Romo. One has to go and it aint' gonna be Jones. I wouldn't put Tony Romo in the top 15 QBs in the league.
The stat you heard was that Dallas is 14-12 in the new stadium. If you recall, Romo spent big chunks of two of those years hurt. You've pinpointed the problem, but it's not Romo. It's the General Manager, who unfortunately will never be fired by the Owner.
I'm not here to say Romo's an elite QB in the same conversation as Rodgers, Brady, Brees, and Eli, but Cowboys fans sure have short memories, given the Quincy Carter/some-guy-named-Hutchinson wilderness they wandered through for seven or eight years before Romo emerged. I grew up an Oakland fan, and except for about 3 years of surly-ass Rich Gannon, we never had a serviceable quarterback, and still don't. What I wouldn't have given for 10 or so years of Romo, who by the way, is in the top half of every major statistical category for QBs over the past 5 years, and in most cases, he's in the top 10.
All I'm saying is, careful what you wish for. Orton's a proven substandard QB twice-over, which is why he's a backup now. Weeden may be great, but I doubt it, since I can't recall the last QB from a gimmicky chuck-and-duck college offense that become a reliable multi-year starter. And Tannehill? Well, the next QB pick that works out for Miami since before I was born will be the first.
Artistic Tart
Quote by lafayettemister
If I were a GM, I'd take any of the QBs in those places over Romo. Wheeden will get better, he's just a rookie. And with Trent R. as an RB it will take pressure off him. Tannehill in Miami is going to be decent too.
You're officially insane. Wait, you're name isn't actually Jeff Ireland is it?