Jump to content

Recommended Posts

someone sent this to me today, thought you might like find it amusing.



He Said, I Said


He said to me . . . I don't know why you wear a bra; you've got nothing to put in it.

I said to him . . . You wear pants don't you?


He said to me . . ..... Shall we try swapping positions tonight?

She said .. That's a good idea - you stand by the ironing board while I sit on the sofa and fart!


He said to me. ... What have you been doing with all the grocery money I gave you?

I said to him . ...Turn sideways and look in the mirror!


He said to me. . How many men does it take to change a roll of toilet paper?

I said to him .. . We don't know; it has never happened.


He said to me. . Why is it difficult to find men who are sensitive, caring and Good- looking?

I said to him . . . They already have boyfriends.


I said...What do you call a woman who knows where her husband is every night?

He said. . . A widow.


He said to me . .. . Why are married women heavier than single women?

I said to him . .. . Single women come home, see what's in the fridge and go to bed. Married women come home, see what's in bed and go to the fridge.

Interesting that there are so many more men weighing in with opinions on the 'real women' thread than women prescribing 'real men' traits on here! Does this mean that men are way more judgemental of women than women are of men? Or is it just 'real (insert gender' thread fatigue?

I heard the following joke on an American radio comedy show from a male comedian, went something like,


"So she says to me, 'I'm so worried, I'm so frightened that I may put on weight and you'll stop loving me and you'll find someone else and, and and - what's your biggest fear?' and I said, "Ah, bears."

jaybee82 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I mean honestly...waxing, moisturiser...make

> up?!?! Men are supposed to be like the Sean

> Connery types of old. Fact.


Hmmm, I'll agree on the make up point, and probably on the waxing (unless we are talking seriously furry backs, in which case I could understand a guy considering it)


But I wouldn't object to a guy wearing moisturiser. Though it would probably be in a grey tube and called something like "face protector" or "after shave balm" rather than moisturiser if it was one aimed at guys.

jaybee82 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I mean honestly...waxing, moisturiser...make

> up?!?! Men are supposed to be like the Sean

> Connery types of old. Fact.



I'm as big a fan of Sean Connery as the next chap, but didn't he publically say that "Sometimes there are women who take it to the wire. That's what they are looking for - the ultimate confrontation. They want a smack." (Guardian Article, 10.12.2005) ? I suspect that the "real men" did time for domestic abuse and so something more restrained became the norm.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Let them go bust.  Enact emergency legislation to ensure that the water still flows and the rest of the network operates. Why should we care what happens to the investors.  Have no idea could or would this work, and where next. And the workers will still be needed whoever runs the show.
    • I think you might mean 'repossession' rather than 'reprocessing'.  
    • I think this is a bit of a myth.  It's true that some of the current owners are pension funds (chiefly the Ontario Universities') but they're global outfits, big enough to know what they're about. As for ordinary UK pension funds, they mostly invest in publicly-tradeable stocks, which Thames no longer is (it's a private limited company, not a PLC), so even those that lazily track the markets by buying everything in the index won't be exposed as Thames isn't in any index. In other words, it's a lot less complicated than Thames, the Government or innumerable consultancies and PR outfits would like you to believe. In case, incidentally, the idea of a cooperative offends any delicate Thatcherite sensibilities, I'd argue that it fits the Thatcherite vision of a stakeholding democracy much better than selling tradeable shares to the public very cheaply. The public, despite their blessable cottons, are too easily tempted by the small but easy win (which is how they sold off their own building societies, preparing the ground for the credit crunch and then the crash) and, as became obvious after every privatisation before or since, their modest stakes inevitably end up in the hands of financial engineers whose only priority is to siphon off the assets and leave the husk to either go bankrupt or get "rescued" by the taxpayers (who thus get to pay twice for nothing). The root of that is the concept of "limited liability" which makes it all possible, but even the most nauseating free-market optimist would struggle to predict the demise of that.  
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...