I could try. He has to have an IQ of 12 or 13. Total box of hammers. I don't think I've ever heard a single intelligent thing come out of his mouth. Men don't read Playboy for the articles and witty interviews of Miss January, Fraggle. In fact, I have a general rule that--in the highly unlikely event that I find "The Situation" in my bed--he will be forbidden from speaking. This conjures up images of being gagged, but I'm not into that sorta stuff. (but I'll try anything once) ~String
Eeew. Gross! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! FIRST OFF (I'm goin' all Guido-Jersey on you!! Oh no you di'int beeyach!!) he's just plain ugly. Second off, he's overly tatted. Third off, WTF is with that hair? Fourth off, He's got his ding-dong pierced, which is a total turn-off. Compared to "The Situation". Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! You have to hand it to the guy. . . he's got a great body. ~String
No, and a lot of us would not actually date her if she were as big a doofus as The Sitch and we were sober. Looking at a photo is not nearly as much of a commitment as inviting someone home. I guess we really are all different. I can lust after a woman from a distance strictly because of her appearance, since that's all I've got to go on. But when she comes close enough to talk she'd better have something to say.
there's a few things not quite right about this pic. what is he doing on the beach in his undies? the undies have been photoshopped onto him, and they made his package look teeny weeny.
My wife watches Jersey Shore and Jerseylicious. Most "guidos" seem to have stupid hair. And, as a straight guy, I don't see that Pauly D is more or less attractive (in terms of his face) than The Situation. :shrug:
Who said anything about dating? I don't even want a repeat . . . er. . . situation. Just one would be good enough. Which is why I would have that strict rule about not speaking. Not sure the undies were photshopped. And take it from a guy who's seen a lot of other guys in their "undies" and out of them. You can't always judge the package by the packaging, if that sorta thing is super-dee-duper important to you. Hey! You're straight. Whadda'yoo know? ~String
He has a personality. . . just . . . just . . . one that isn't the most interesting. LOOK, I'M NOT LOOKING FOR MISTER RIGHT HERE. . . must Mr. Right Now. ~String
What about Tracy from Jerseylicious? She has a total man-face. Does that count? At least for kissing?
Riiiight. Like Darth Vader had niceness that just wasn't the most nice. As far as that retard is concerned, I'm hoping his next girlfriend is looking for Mr. Shallow Grave In The Forest. The best part about those idiots was that one ho getting punched in the face.
Sure they do. Playboy has long been distinguished by its excellent articles and interviews (not so much with the Playmates, although the silly "turn-ons" and "pet peeves" bio info they include with the centerfolds have long been a popular feature). If you just want porn, there's plenty of publications (not to mention this newfangled "internet" thing) that do a better job of catering to that than Playboy, which has always been as much a lifestyle and culture magazine than a porn publication. Hustler and Penthouse have been ruthlessly undercutting Playboy on the sleaze magazine market for nigh-on 40 years now - the result being that Playboy is basically Vanity Fair with nipples. Actually I can't recall the last time I read a Playboy for anything other than the articles and interviews. But then I'm not so into the whole skinny-blond-with-huge-fake-boobs archetype that they push so ruthlessly. If I wanted to look at Playboy for the nudity, I'd be looking for pre-1980 issues from back when men were men and boobs were boobs. These days it's all silicon and airbrushing and photoshop, and only marginally more risque than any given Calvin Klein ad (sometimes less so, actually, depending on how you weight nipples against edgy themes). And for topicality: the only way I would consider watching Jersey Shore would be if they added a hidden sniper to the show, with a promise that at least one cast member would be suddenly and unexpectedly shot dead each season.
perhaps if criss angel was involved in getting him into those undies. :bugeye: besides (and hypothetically since i'm married), if a guy ever dropped his drawers for me and was wearing a pair of undies like that, "the situation" would end right there. guys who would wear undies like that have baby oil in their nightstands and mirrors on their bedroom ceilings. ew.
that manazon? she might eat him. i was so hoping olivia would draw some blood on that bitch last episode, but no such luck. poor little olivia. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! i'd like to stab tracy with her teasing comb.
Alright. I stand corrected, but you get what I'm saying. Wait? The internet is available for something other than porn? Huh. You, apparently, haven't read much VF lately. I have--like--four issues right now with plenty of nipples, and the variety that I'm interested in to boot! [VF, being the ONLY magazine that equally entertains both gay and straight men] OH, you mean the era before women learned how to use a razor? Yeah. I sure miss those days. (Just "google" "Demi Moore" and "Bush" in the same line and see what horrors pop up). And besides, that's a bit harsh on the "men were men" BS. I'd be okay with that. As I said, the show's a train-wreck and I only watch it for the gross factor. Call it. . . my "Human Centipede". I've yet to identify anything in the aforementioned "situation" that I find repulsive. Baby oil? Calvin Klein briefs? Mirrors on the ceiling, sweat cham-pag-nee on ice! Oh. . . Riunite. . . so nice! ~String
TO MR FRAGGLE: "V" the TV series has not been canceled. Just stumbled upon this: http://abc.go.com/shows/v http://tvseriesfinale.com/tv-show/v-tv-show-season-two-14955/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V_(2009_TV_series) ~String
Even BETTER, Fraggle! Jane Badler (the original "Diana" from the 1980's series), joins the series this year as. . . you guessed it, DIANA, Ana's mother! http://www.abcmedianet.com/assets/pr/html/080610_03.html ~String
I am not terribly impressed by the new Dexter so far. At least they got ride of 2/3rd of the kids, but still, the last episode was just plain boring.... Boardwalk Empire is interesting and at least somehow historical...
I stuck with it to the end of the first season so I'll stick with it some more. Assuming they don't put it on Tuesday night against "Dancing with the Stars" and "NCIS: L.A." My DVR can only handle two simultaneous programs. I never saw the original series. Most sci-fi on TV doesn't do it for me. "Farscape," "Babylon 5," "Stargate SG-1," "Star Trek TNG & DS9," that's about it. My wife loved "Earth: Final Conflict" and even tried patiently to explain it to me, but it just gave me a headache. I couldn't stand the original "Star Trek," it was just too pulpy. I gave up on "Stargate: Atlantis," and just made the same decision about "Universe." When I let two and a half episodes pile up on my DVR because I'd rather listen to music, it's time to pull the plug. Most of them are good campy fun for the first season or two, but then they're stuck having to either find a way to take themselves seriously, or degenerate into a sitcom. "Andromeda," "Kyle XY," "Dark Angel," "Lexx," they all ended just in time, although I would have stuck with "Dark Angel" a little longer. (And that's probably entirely due to Jessica Alba.Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!) "Eureka" was never very serious, but it's sunk into self-parody. I already de-programmed "No Ordinary Family," the plot holes are just too wide for suspension of disbelief. I have better karma with fantasy shows, or else perhaps they're just more suitable for TV. I still remember "Highlander" and "Angel" fondly, and I curse Yancy Butler for going off on a binge and forcing the cancellation of "Witchblade." I loved "Eastwick" but I guess I was the only one.
