Kissing on the lips

davids is delusional if he doesn't think his arguments are ad hominem. I don't think he is capable of rational judgment of his own actions, which is why he continues to be abusive and disrespectful to everyone else here.

I don't favor banning people unless they specifically have broken rules. A part of me hopes that folks like RomanticLover and davids can change for the better or at least keep their unpleasantness in check enough to be civil, no matter how unlikely and farfetched that might seem.

And one last time, I'll invite DavidS to take it off this board. Click on my name, there is an e-mail. We can trade insults to your heart's desire without disturbing the board. Failing that, start our own private thread here. Failing that, either shut up, or realize I'm not going to let your crap pass and confine your posts to something the others might want to read.

DavidS, I would never question what you know, because that seems to be everything by definition. You know the state of my education, wether I know what Godel's theorem is, that I am a "code monkey", that you are better educated and better looking than everyone else, that Shadowcat is low class, that you are the smartest person on the board. There is very little you don't know, including apparently what is in peoples hearts. You apparently "know" that what we all really want is to date strippers, despite statements to the contrary. In your world, here on the internet, if someone says something that could be construed as confirming they want to date strippers, that is absolute proof they want to do so. If someone says something that indicates they don't want to date strippers, that means they're either lying or in denial. With that "knowledge" you are never wrong, about anything, ever. This is what in logic and science is called a non-falsifiable hypothesis. If you are such a math genius you might recognize that. That is why I criticize you. You refuse to allow people to be anything other than your charicature of them. I guess that is a very comforting thing for you, but it creates in me no sense of obligation.

AN: "he DOES NOT WANT TO DATE OR HAVE RELATIONSHIPS. He wants sex, not the problems of seduction or relationships. Please try to understand this. Most of us go to strip clubs for fun, not for dates."

As if.

AN: Just wait until some poster here thinks there is some possibility that a dancer might actually like them beyond in a business sense and then you will see their whiny/pathetic "Is the stripper really into me?" or "how to let go?" type posts. Pathetic.

You people can't even be honest about what you want and do what it takes to get it. Pathetic.

Your comments about my comments about Godel's theorem and your attempts at revisionist history are not even worthy of comment. You aren't fooling anyone including yourself so I have no reason why you are posting. Grasping at straws I guess. (You seem to have a thing for STRAWs: STRAWmen, grasping at STRAWs, is your favourite hair color STRAWerry blonde by any chance?)

But the truth is I KNOW you are AN IDIOT. 20 years of blah, blah... What fucking good has it done you?

You are truly a pathetic moron, a loser, and a liar. No wonder women don't like you and you have to pay them for sex or near sex or whatever.

PATHETIC.

Bye-bye. Go become an alcoholic now or whatever it is that losers like you with NO CLUE end up doing in the end.

DavidS, I never doubted you would post something about Godel's theorem. What I asked you to do was explain why my statement was so LOL, ROFL funny. It appears you didn't read close enough to understand the point I was making about Hume's earlier philosophical point about truth being unprovable being a general statement whereas Godel did something very similar as a rigorous mathematical proof. If you read my last statement you would see that I criticized you for once again not bothering to read my post clearly enough to understand I don't give a rats ass about Godel's theorem, what I am complaining about is you making broad statements you want accepted uncritically, and then refusing to back up your point when questioned. I initially asked you to explain to me what was so funny about my statement. Based on your answer (and I could look up Godel's theorem in any number of books or websites, so your explanation was not really necessary) what you thought was so funny is that I attributed Godel's theorems to Hume. I did no such thing. You didn't read close enough or just plain couldn't comprehend what I said. This seems to be the genesis of all the arguments we get into on this board. On another thread you criticize Shadowcat for paying for sex rather than trying to seduce or have a relationship with a stripper (ala RL). If you'd bothered to read anything he's posted you'd know he DOES NOT WANT TO DATE OR HAVE RELATIONSHIPS. He wants sex, not the problems of seduction or relationships. Please try to understand this. Most of us go to strip clubs for fun, not for dates.

travelingthrough. please read my recent review of the BoobyTrap in Pompano FL

Looks like I can't win here: If I don't explain in detail what Godel's theorem is AN gets on my case claiming he knows it and I don't (oppposite of reality). If I do explain it, ShotDisc reams me ought for being off topic, and claims it is BS even though he is not qualified to judge. Hehe... Anyway, who needs a situation like that: I am too smart and good for this board. Bye now.

OH MY GOD!! what the hell is this? How about sticking to the topic. davids, i don't think anyone is impressed with your bullshit. I know i'm not.

I enjoy kissing on the lips with strippers. as a matter of fact I got a couple of real good kisses from a very busty, very soft lipped stunner who had just let me titf**k her as I fingered her. not a bad afternoon at all.

ShotDisc, that caught my attention. Where did you manage to find mileage like that?

davids, try not to be such an asshole the next time you come back.

Ok, self proclaimed Regular in Love, JC, who posted quite possibly the most pathetic thread ever (excluding FONDL and SCs "is the stripper really into me>" threads, of course) is speaking to me about wisdom. Definitely time to leave. (again). LMFAO.

davids, there's wisdom in knowing when to shut up.

Well, to refresh your memory DavidS, I did not say that Hume proved Godel's theorems, I said that Hume was the first to write about a crisis of foundations in the philosophical sense. Hume realized that at the very bottom of philosophy, you could not in fact prove reality, or that what we call the outside world exists. With that rtealization he said that we simply had to take some things as assumed or given (i.e. on faith) and work from there if we ever wanted to get anything done. Perhaps you should have actually read what I wrote, speaking of straw men. Mathmatically we have relied on axioms as the rules for various branches. These axioms are the first assumption, or the given. My understanding of Godel was that he showed that no branch of mathematics could be entirely self contained and rigorously proven. You could not for example prove every geometrical axiom using only the other axioms of geometry, hence even mathematics relies on assumptions that are themselves not fully provable. Some things will be true wether we can prove it or not. This is a mathematical version of the philosophical crisis of foundations which preceded it by several centuries. I fail to see why my admitedly brief synopsis was in fact so laughable since my original post pretty much said that mathematically Godel showed that truth was not entirely provable. Something that philosophers knew about philosophy a long time before that. Since I don't have the original post, I'll give up on it now.

AC: Just to be clear, insults do not necessarily imply ad hom arguments. Consider the following example:

1) all reptiles are animals
2) all snakes are reptiles
3) all snakes are, hence, animals
4) AN is an idiot for not realizing that all snakes are animals (pretend he had claimed this at some point).

Perfectly valid reasoning.

An ad hom argument would run along the following lines

1) AN thinks that some snakes aren't animals.
2) AN is an idiot.
3) Therefore all snakes are animals.

The latter reasoning is not valid, but it is another invalid logic form that AN and many others (SC) constantly try to use against me. But to no effect other than to make themselves look dumb.

davids seems to be a master of ad hominen argument.

Ooops, should say "sum of two primes" in describing Goldbach's conjecture: Anyone to actually bothered to read it, was probably already aware of that, however. :-)

AN: Very good, besides being the "Master of the Strawman" (not!), you are now the "Master of the Argument by Authority": I have 20 experiences with blah, blah, blah.... Yet you have no idea what Godel's theoremes were? I have no idea if you:

a) are lying
b) went to a really bad school
c) didn't do well but managed to get some lower end job anyway.

One thing I'm sure is that you are no professor. Probably just some low end "code monkey" or something.

LMFAO.

AN: Just here for the weekend, I don't want to get bogged down into another useless debate with you again since you are so obtuse and fond of strawmen.

I present this gift to appease your nerdiness (something you'll need to work on if you want to get chicks and stop squandering your life in strip clubs, btw). Don't bother posting a five page convoluted rebuttal because I am not going to bother to read it, and I'm sure no one else will either:

Godel's incompleteness theorem says that there are true statements in mathematics, other than the axioms, whose truth cannot be proven from the axioms and using the rules of formal logic.

It's possible that Goldbach's conjecture: that every even number greater than two is the some of primes is an example of this. The statement has never been proven true or false, and it is possible that no proof either way exists.

Godel incompleteness theorem showed that Bertrand Russell's goal of creating a framework to formally prove every true mathematical statement (which he started in Principia Mathematica) was impossible. Hence your statement that Hume (who lived long before Russell) already knew of Godel's result is pure bunk.

Also your statement as to what Godel's incompleteness theorem states is also pure bunk. The undecidable statements are not then just "assumed": Which would you assume the statement or its negation? Indeed, Godel showed that some statements, like the continum hypothesis (there is no set with cardinality between the naturals and the reals) and its negation can both be shown to be consistent with the other axioms.

The incompleteness theorem does not apply to all logic systems, but to any complex enough to due number theory.

Another of Godel's theorem: his less reknownwed completeness theorem showed that in predicate calculus, by contrast, there was a formal proof for any true statement.

NOW, WITH YOUR WANNABE NERDINESS HOPEFULLY APPEASED.... TO GET BACK ON TOPIC...

Your other question asked about women in general, but let's confine the topic just to strippers:

In the minds of most strippers those who are paying them for conversation or sex or LDs or whatever are the ones treating them, not as equals, but like prostitutes or escorts and hence like .... This is why many strippers have no problems with trying to "use" such customers.

If it was a relationship based on true friendship and mutual respect no money would need to change hands: what you put into the conversation or sex would be reward enough for them to participate.

Since many here seem to have good jobs, think of it this way: Think of the guys who are trying to kiss up to/kiss the ass of the boss at work. If boss is at all decent he will see through this in about 5 seconds and disrespect the ass kisser.

This is the same way most strippers are going to view the strip club regular who is trying to be a "nice guy" by paying her "for her time" and what not. Are there some boss who like and reward ass kissers? Yeah. Some strippers who like "nice guy" regulars... Possibly.

My take (confirmed by ITC experience) is: Be a man, make a stand, don't pay them and, contrary to what you expect they will respect you for it.

More thoughts on DavidS. He seems to be obsessed with masculinity, manhood, or what he considers manhood. So, perhaps I should issue a challenge. No, DavidS seems to equate manhood with treating strippers as disposable pieces of ... Well, that's his opinion, yet one who questions the manhood of others so frequently and specifically. Can I be a man without treating women like shit? Damn, Davids, enlighten us!

Ahh, DavidS is back. Like a herpes outbreak...just can't get rid of it. So, DavidS, as long as you are here, enlighten me on Godel's theorems, and why my brief synopsis was LOL funny. Explain to me, 'cause I want to learn from your obviously superior intelect why my poor pitiful 20 years of research in physics, astronomy, math, statistics, and computers didn't prepare me for your brutal intellectual assault, which consisted of calling my opinions stupid. Bring it. Any time, any topic.

Considering the near impossiblity of knowing a girl well from a strip club, I wouldn't find much to enjoy. I guess I'm lucky to view clubs as mainly a superficial pleasure.

Chandler, of course I do. But I usually don't enjoy it quite as much. When I've gotten to know the girl well it adds another dimension.

Yet another case of FONDL being out of touch with his masculinity (or pehaps not having any). Still wanting to project the image of a good boy/nice guy at age 65 and then wondering and rationalizing why he has to pay women "for their time".

What I am really wondering, however, are the secret he only tells his ATF. Is that he knows that he is a pussy afraid of everything? Or that he knows that he wants sex from stripper type girls and he knows he is repressing it? Perhaps he tells her that he is a liar? Saddest case I've ever seen. Even on a strip club discussion forum which, of course, is about as low as one can get in the world.

I consider horniness an emotional component.

"I'm really not very interested in physical intimacy unless there's an emotional component."

Neither am I, unless I find the woman in question to be physically attractive, or I am really horny.

FONDL, don't you ever get dances from girls with whom you aren't emotionally intimate? What do you when you visit new clubs?

Chitown, I forgot to reply to your earlier post about physical vs. emotional intimacy. Personally I enjoy the emotional intimacy of getting to know a stripper really well and sharing secrets. I've told several of my faves things that I've never told anyone else. My ATF probably knows me better than anyone eelse on earth, and if there's something bothering me that I want to talk about, she's the one I go to. I can tell her anything and she won't judge me for it, there isn't anyone else in my life like that. For me that's a big part of the attraction of strip clubs and of having faves. I'm really not very interested in physical intimacy unless there's an emotional component.

I'm serious about this. Who was it that decided to put 15 and 16 year old girls in bikinis on major thorofares to sell car washes. I wasn't kidding when I refered to it as pimping.

The high school cheerleaders in Florida used to wear bikinis for their car washes, but the religious folk got upset about that in a hurry. I tend to avoid those, because I can't think of anything creepier than being that guy if you know what I mean.

This has caused quite a stir in my little midwest county seat town. Some of the disapproving middle-age women talk about "Car wash sluts".

I still see high school girls being pimped out for charity. Ever see the local cheerleader squad hold a car wash?

When I was a kid growing up in small town America, like most towns our town had a fair every October. One of the attractions was always a kissing booth. The booth would be staffed by pretty local high school girls and guys would line up to buy lip to lip kisses for $1 (I think but it might have been less) each. Can anyone imagine that happening today?

Gentlemen: Although it's been close to 20 years ago ( I date myself ... but who on this Board denies it.) , I recall a club in NYC's Chinatown that was called the MICROSKIRT and later changed to Diamond Lill's. For one dollar at stageside, you could get a digital experience ( finger her OK?) and for $5 you could have a Box Lunch at the stage in front of the God, the management, other customers, etc. The first time there I was with guys from the job. The next time I visited, I flew solo. This was pre-HIV, mind you.

Old-timers on other boards used to tell about the days when a dollar tip at the stage or on the girl's tip walk would routinely be answered with a french kiss. I saw a couple of girls make the rounds this way at a club in rural Indiana about 10 years ago. I partook. I am weak.

FONDL, to me the taboo kind of intimacy is emtional rather than physical. I can see kissing (even with the tongue) as being solely a sensual kind of experience. I would be far more reluctant to share with a stranger my worst fear or greatest ambition. That's the kind of intimacy I reserve for those close to me. I really don't care about the physical stuff.

Dude, kissing Dancers is why I make(recommend) all my girlfriends from then on use Strawberry lip gloss. It's so awesome and it was a dancer that introduced me to it.

Getting intimate with strangers is what strip clubs are all about for me.

My objection has little to do with disease, although I guess that should be a consideration. Kissing is just more intimate than I usually want to get with a total stranger. I've rarely initiated it and I only remember one girl, my most recent fav, who did.

Kissing with tongue is just asking to catch a disease but is kissing on the lips a bad risk too?

You guys are just talking about a kiss on the lips, not necessarily any tongue, right? That's pretty much standard for me after getting a dance. I'd say at least half the girls do it. They're all good looking.

"You guys are just talking about a kiss on the lips, not necessarily any tongue, right?"

Umm, actually I could talk about this. Not frequently, but enough. I know all the arguments against it, and they are all absolutely valid. But sometimes good sense goes on vacation.

I rarely kiss a dancer on the lips. The only time I'm even interested is if it's a girl who I know well and really like. When it's an obvious part of a con job by a stranger it's a real turn-off for me.

RL told me that you will get BAD DANCER GERMS from kissing a stripper. ICKY BAD!!!

What about average looking? Ever got a dance from a girl that was decent looking but gave high Mileage? I did forget most of you live in the big cities.

Since I don't buy dances from a woman I don't consider attractive I can honestly say that I've never been kissed by an unatractive dancer.