Who do you attract the most?

[Ceiling Cat]

Au contraire, I have no doubt about your abilities as God's gift to women. Of course if everyone around you doesn't recognize your success then the need to point it out is understandable. I don't think the term disillusioned would be fair.

Of course it is rather interesting that someone as superior as yourself in attracting females would require the paid services of a female or participate daily in a review board dedicated to these services.

 

[Rukos_48]

For context - white male just under 6 ft, in my mid 50's bald with a beard (currently)
When I was living in Richmond Hill and Markham - 2010-2020 it was Asian Milfs mostly, now it is recently divorced white woman in their 30's
I have a GF but live on in my own house and lots of divorce woman in the neighbourhood. Not sure where all the divorced dads live?
I occasional work our of a coffee shop and lot of them in there.

Divorced dads are in Colombia or Thailand

 

[harryass]

When I was younger, I attracted nerds in school (given that I was in the hard sciences at the time that is no surprise) ).

Same for me being a Nerd. Perhaps one day we Nerds can attract our very own real Penny.

 

[onomatopoeia]

Generally men of colour, mostly Black or South Asian. I've noticed as I have gotten thinner more white men try to talk to me, and it feels so awkward because I have not learned their method of flirting yet lol

This is not unprecedented. There are more than forty documented cases of women losing weight while in a relationship.

 

[Vera.Reis]

This is not unprecedented. There are more than forty documented cases of women losing weight while in a relationship.

I had a gastric sleeve weightloss surgery my friend. 2 years ago in April lmao

Which is nice bcz at least I know my partner won't care if I gained as he liked me 80 lbs ago

But my partner works out every day which motivated me to do similar, so I imagine I would have lost weight in this relationship regardless lol

 

[io2471]

I get a suprising amount of flirty/overly-friendly attention from Native American and Mixed Native/Caucasian Women in the bracket about 8-12 years younger than me in face to face conversation. Im happily married, so obviously don't pursue......but I do lean into the situation a little because..Hey, Ill take the ego boost, right?. For reference Im a 45 year old caucasian Male

 

[onomatopoeia]

I had a gastric sleeve weightloss surgery my friend. 2 years ago in April lmao

Which is nice bcz at least I know my partner won't care if I gained as he liked me 80 lbs ago

But my partner works out every day which motivated me to do similar, so I imagine I would have lost weight in this relationship regardless lol

Belle Delphine would have sold the excised tissue, in jars, and associated with some sort of challenge.

This is not unprecedented. There are more than forty documented cases of women losing weight while in a relationship.

Post #44 is actually a lawyer test, which you passed.

While the statement implies that only a small number of women have lost weight while in a relationship, it actually says the opposite: As a logic statement, the post would have been:

It is not the case that there are 40 or fewer documented cases of women losing weight while in a relationship.

In court, a lawyer's choice of words needs to be precisely explicit when asking questions, (so a witness may not avoid a direct answer by obtusely replying to an irrelevant but valid interpretation of a vague question), but non-questioning statements can and should frequently contain speculation, implication, inference or innuendo, provided that these semi-slanderous remarks are in-explicit.

 

[Vera.Reis]

Post #44 is actually a lawyer test, which you passed.

While the statement implies that only a small number of women have lost weight while in a relationship, it actually says the opposite: As a logic statement, the post would have been:

It is not the case that there are 40 or fewer documented cases of women losing weight while in a relationship.

In court, a lawyer's choice of words needs to be precisely explicit when asking questions, (so a witness may not avoid a direct answer by obtusely replying to an irrelevant but valid interpretation of a vague question), but non-questioning statements can and should frequently contain speculation, implication, inference or innuendo, provided that these semi-slanderous remarks are in-explicit.

I'll let the LSAC know you've validated them giving me a 97th percentile score.

 

[onomatopoeia]

I'll let the LSAC know you've validated them giving me a 97th percentile score.

I was falsely accused of assault in 2007, and I won acquittal defending myself in Criminal court, without having to present a defense case.

 

[Vera.Reis]

I was falsely accused of assault in 2007, and I won acquittal defending myself in Criminal court, without having to present a defense case.

You never have to present a defence, the crown has to prove your charges beyond a reasonable doubt and if they have a shit case obviously you would need to do nothing but show up. An acquittal also does not mean innocent, it means exactly what I just stated, that the crown was unable to prove that you did it, not that you didn't do it. I'd have been more impressed if you had gotten the charges dropped at your judicial pre-trial. In case people do not know, judicial pre-trial occurs when you do not have a lawyer, crown pre-trial occurs when you do, so it would not be expected that a proper legal argument would be presented at a judicial pre-trial.

 

[Kautilya]

An acquittal also does not mean innocent, it means exactly what I just stated, that the crown was unable to prove that you did it, not that you didn't do it.

That's nonsense. How do you know he is not innocent? It is innocent until proven guilty. So if he was acquitted, morally, unless the guy is a known career criminal who has multiple charges or has gotten off on a technicality before for similar charges, you have to give him the benefit of the doubt and call the person not guilty.

 

[Valcazar]

That's nonsense. How do you know he is not innocent? It is innocent until proven guilty. So if he was acquitted, morally, unless the guy is a known career criminal who has multiple charges or has gotten off on a technicality before for similar charges, you have to give him the benefit of the doubt and call the person not guilty.

No she doesn't.
The government has to give him that benefit of the doubt.
She, as a private citizen, does not.

 

[NotADcotor]

That's nonsense. How do you know he is not innocent? It is innocent until proven guilty. So if he was acquitted, morally, unless the guy is a known career criminal who has multiple charges or has gotten off on a technicality before for similar charges, you have to give him the benefit of the doubt and call the person not guilty.

That isn't what she said. Technically an acquittal doesn't mean you are innocent, you can get an acquittal because of a lack of evidence.
Also innocent until proven guilty is a legal concept. If Carl the Llama stabs someone 37 times and kills a person, Carl is guilty of the crime, he bloody well did it. However he isn't considered guilty by the state unless they prove it in the court of law and thus the state should treat him as innocent. Even though he bloody well isn't. I mean fuck, he even cut off the dudes hands and at them. I mean there is video of him at the crime scene and even admitting it. However if the evidence was gathered in an illegal way for example he could be found innocent... even though he isn't. Granted it works both ways, guilty people are found innocent and innocent people are found guilty.

 

[NotADcotor]

No she doesn't.
The government has to give him that benefit of the doubt.
She, as a private citizen, does not.

Yeah what he said. Only he is much more clear.
Why do you remind me of Khun-Anup

The Eloquent Peasant - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Valcazar]

Yeah what he said. Only he is much more clear.
Why do you remind me of Khun-Anup

The Eloquent Peasant - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I'll take it as a compliment.

 

[NotADcotor]

I'll take it as a compliment.

Or maybe I just set the bar really low with my long winded clumsy explanations.
I am good at witty and cleaver quips but when it comes to explaining complicated stuff I do drone on like this one time I caught the ferry to Shelbyville. I needed a new heel for my shoe. So, I decided to go to Morganville, which is what they called Shelbyville in those days. So I tied an onion to my belt which was the style at the time. Now, to take the ferry cost a nickel, and in those days nickels had pictures of bumble bees on them. Gimme five bees for a quarter, you'd say. Now was I... Oh yeah! The important thing was that I had an onion tied to my belt at the time. You couldn't get where onions, because of the war. The only thing you could get was those big yellow ones.

Yeah I felt bad when I saw your clear and to the point explanation. However mine had a Llamas with Hats reference so erm, winning?

 

[Vera.Reis]

That's nonsense. How do you know he is not innocent? It is innocent until proven guilty. So if he was acquitted, morally, unless the guy is a known career criminal who has multiple charges or has gotten off on a technicality before for similar charges, you have to give him the benefit of the doubt and call the person not guilty.

Did I say he was not innocent? All I said was that an acquittal means that it was not proven, not that it didn't happen. If he didn't have to make an argument then the case was weak, so there are multiple issues there.

I also am not the government so I do not owe anyone charter rights, actually.

 

[Vera.Reis]

That isn't what she said. Technically an acquittal doesn't mean you are innocent, you can get an acquittal because of a lack of evidence.
Also innocent until proven guilty is a legal concept. If Carl the Llama stabs someone 37 times and kills a person, Carl is guilty of the crime, he bloody well did it. However he isn't considered guilty by the state unless they prove it in the court of law and thus the state should treat him as innocent. Even though he bloody well isn't. I mean fuck, he even cut off the dudes hands and at them. I mean there is video of him at the crime scene and even admitting it. However if the evidence was gathered in an illegal way for example he could be found innocent... even though he isn't. Granted it works both ways, guilty people are found innocent and innocent people are found guilty.

The fruit from the poisonous tree is a perfect example of what I was saying.

It is one of those things where we can't let the police infringe on our charter rights because this creates a terrible precedence that will be abused, so if the evidence is gathered in an unlawful manner it HAS to be thrown out. There are many cases where there was literally millions of dollars of drugs, cash and weapons that had to be thrown out because all were inadmissible.

 

[Kautilya]

No she doesn't.
The government has to give him that benefit of the doubt.
She, as a private citizen, does not.

That isn't what she said. Technically an acquittal doesn't mean you are innocent, you can get an acquittal because of a lack of evidence.
Also innocent until proven guilty is a legal concept. If Carl the Llama stabs someone 37 times and kills a person, Carl is guilty of the crime, he bloody well did it. However he isn't considered guilty by the state unless they prove it in the court of law and thus the state should treat him as innocent. Even though he bloody well isn't. I mean fuck, he even cut off the dudes hands and at them. I mean there is video of him at the crime scene and even admitting it. However if the evidence was gathered in an illegal way for example he could be found innocent... even though he isn't. Granted it works both ways, guilty people are found innocent and innocent people are found guilty.

Did I say he was not innocent? All I said was that an acquittal means that it was not proven, not that it didn't happen. If he didn't have to make an argument then the case was weak, so there are multiple issues there.

I also am not the government so I do not owe anyone charter rights, actually.

Okay. You guys remind me of this episode I watched yesterday.

 

[Valcazar]

Or maybe I just set the bar really low with my long winded clumsy explanations.
I am good at witty and cleaver quips but when it comes to explaining complicated stuff I do drone on like this one time I caught the ferry to Shelbyville. I needed a new heel for my shoe. So, I decided to go to Morganville, which is what they called Shelbyville in those days. So I tied an onion to my belt which was the style at the time. Now, to take the ferry cost a nickel, and in those days nickels had pictures of bumble bees on them. Gimme five bees for a quarter, you'd say. Now was I... Oh yeah! The important thing was that I had an onion tied to my belt at the time. You couldn't get where onions, because of the war. The only thing you could get was those big yellow ones.

Yeah I felt bad when I saw your clear and to the point explanation. However mine had a Llamas with Hats reference so erm, winning?

I was SO IMPRESSED that you thought to use Llamas with Hats.
(Seriously, I thought it was hilarious.)