crackhaus:

What you are now attempting is damage control - you cococandy also missed that subtle tone in the article which directs the scientific concept towards a man-man relationship.

These are the presumptions you made in this post of yours:

1) Of those guys you mention, none told you he detests women but if the comments they type on NL critiquing Nigerian women is what gives you that impression, then this is where your major problem lies - what they (we) do is type the truth (sometimes with exaggerations for effect) as it is, what you and other females on NL do is hate reading this truth...hence the labels chauvinist & cave man gets thrown around.
I can assure you that guys who have been given this tag still date women, in fact some may even be getting head from one while typing what you people refer to as woman-hating comments.

2) What I believe or what I don't believe is something you can't know through internet bandwidth.
I only asserted that this scientific concept of reproduction is better suited for the gay community, as straight men don't really need it - I also hinted in one reply to E-soul that even in the gay community, it would be divided in acceptance.
As for your opinion that there are straight men who will welcome it, please conduct your own experiment with men around you.
If there are indeed straight men who will readily favour harvesting female eggs from skin cells over having glorious sex with a woman to reproduce, I can assure you that they are so few, it becomes negligible.

3) Camnewton is the only guy here who typed something in the affirmative regarding acceptance, so don't get too excited over it - if you slowed down, you would realize he may have just been playing to the gallery.

No need to do damage control

CAMNEWTON4PRES:


i don't smoke , nice try tho ..but you should direct that comment to your feminazi friends and minions

cococandy:


Ehn? So now it is the feminists' fault too?

CAMNEWTON4PRES:



feminists are making men looking for other alternatives..anything that can reduce our interration with you cancers is fine with me

cococandy:
Damage control?
How?
Over what?
That's so amusing . I haven't said anything now that I didn't say before which is that it is a good option for those men who dislike women to spare them the unpleasant experience of relating with women on long term basis because of the ties of childbirth.


As for you and the 'truth' speaking gang , I have nothing more to say.
I've already looked for trouble by naming them let me not make it worse.
Truth indeed

P:S

The experiment hasn't even been carried out. As yet it is just in the developmental state and you're already sure only few men will go for it. Now you speak for all men?
Besides who says the men won't be having sex with women while opting for this means of reproduction to eliminate other-party in their kids lives?
You can't be sure.

So speak for yourself.

And yes you're right, not all gay guys will accept it same as not all straight guys will reject it.

crackhaus:

When you don't even realize that you keep referring to people as 'this one' and 'that one', it only confirms my suspicion that you have a 'complex' problem - probably one of 'delusional superiority'. Daddy's little girl, no?

What you suffer from is severe dissociative disorder, that's the only reason why you would keep trying to force my acceptance of this development as something worthy/necessary.

Or did you forget you're not male, and as such the acceptance/refusal of this conceptual process of reproduction has absolutely nothing to do with you or your opinion?
Now I wonder who suffers from indigestion - you sure do project a lot.

You girl are not as 'Enlightened' as you think, another clue to your superiority complex - it's worse that you don't even know it.

crackhaus:

All your points were made to do one thing and one thing only, to get me to admit that this process of reproduction is something to be lauded - my points were already clear from the get-go, I don't see this as a necessity for straight men... fvck it, the article even hinted in the direction of this scientific development being suited more for homosexual couples, but you missed it in your failed attempt at stating otherwise

That the argument dragged out was just me entertaining myself, as it's my first time engaging you - there was nothing wrong with my assertions, you just didn't like it hence the need to quote me and try to force your thought.

Yea you don't fancy yourself rude, it's another one of the delusions (the other being enlightened) that you would rather have yourself believe.

Finally,
I doubt you even read the article thoroughly, else you would have seen the part where the description of how the technology works aptly fits into a man-man relationship (it's in bold), but trust miss Enlightened to miss it.

The line about indigestion is actually on you, as was the 'herp-derp' on that next thread

BuddhaPalm:


Lol. You get mouth eeh .

And who the hell liked your post.

EnlightenedSoul:

[s]Wowzers. When you alluded to my so-called "superiority" having something to do with my father, I wanted to ask if, 'similarly', your unthinking indigestion would have something to do with yours, i.e, 'the father of crackhaus'...

I had to stop short for obvious reasons.

It was at that point that I figured using your own username against you too fvcked up rude a scenario, and henceforth more kindly referred to you as [average] 'joe'.

Now, don't tell me your name is actually 'joe' - that would legit creep me out, and apologies are something I typically like to avoid (by avoiding situations that require them). You may just break my latest streak...[/s]

crackhaus:

You talk too damn much.
It was a simple question, a yes or no would suffice...

Superleo:

Challenge kor! Challenge ni.
Your God should show face.

EnlightenedSoul:


On the contrary, I say exactly as much or as little as I mean to say.

If you'd like the option of fine-tuning the answers you get, the only solution I can think to offer you is to get yourself a nice little mirror, and start talking.