User Tag List

First 910111213 Last

Results 101 to 110 of 147

  1. #101
    The Memes Justify the End EcK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    738
    Socionics
    ILE None
    Posts
    7,265

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kyuuei View Post
    This is my point entirely. I was really surprised this thread went farther than "Is the OP serious?" It is an absolutely childish sentiment.



    Oh, but 21%, we're not thinking about men's emotions concerning their own financial stability and their potential grief for having brought a baby into the world, nor are we considering their emotional burden if they are forced to interact with a child they once wanted dead. We're stopping all of these amazing men from being doctors, lawyers, nurses, engineers, and all the other careers they were GOING to contribute to the world, I swear, before they knocked up some lady. I mean, we're really ruining their lives with our inconvenient sex.


    Apparently money is a very, very big deal to many men on this forum. And it outweighs many other concepts and principles both in themselves and others.
    If you order chicken and get turkey, you re not obliged to pay just because the order was made and it ll arrive at your place in 2 hours, less so 9 months If you had sex for pleasure and wasnt discussing having a child, you re not obliged to pay because someone didnt want to have an abortion. (Except for part of the cost of the procedure/ drugs)

    Whats childish here to is assume a woman is mentally incapable of getting an abortion, i for one know they can do anything a man can (well, its trickier if they try to pee while standing but i disgress) which includes owing up to the fact that if they want a child or a pet, they have to take care of it. If you want other people to pay for your own choices, well, you re free to feel entitled, but that doesnt make it a reality

    Lets revert the roles for a second, we have sex, and afterwards i tell you i really want to have a child. Will you then be obliged to get pregnant and support the child financially?
    Yeah. I thought not.
    Expression of the post modern paradox : "For the love of god, religions are so full of shit"

    Theory is always superseded by Fact...
    ... In theory.

    “I’d hate to die twice. It’s so boring.”
    Richard Feynman's last recorded words

    "Great is the human who has not lost his childlike heart."
    Mencius (Meng-Tse), 4th century BCE

  2. #102
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Enneagram
    8w9
    Posts
    14,031

    Default

    Consenting to have sex, in a day and age where contraception is so easy to come by, does not amount to per se consent to have kids.

    The argument: You're having sex, you better be ready for the consequences (and by consequences I mean whatever she decides to do) doesn't stand up in a world where one can get plan b at a CVS in less time than it takes to bake a pizza.

    This situation wont really work itself out until medical science figures out how to turn off and turn on, the human (more probably female) reproductive capacity at whim. Not only that, but there must be a way for the other party to confirm the status of their partners reproductive capacity.

    That's the only way everyone knows what they're getting into beforehand.

  3. #103
    Emperor/Dictator kyuuei's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    enfp
    Enneagram
    8
    Posts
    13,878

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EcK View Post
    If the father or the mother consent , have the child, then one or both change their minds its a bit late not to assume financial responsibility. Otherwise well, abortion
    You're assuming everyone feels the same about abortion. Literally every piece of legislature and law ever made on the subject would prove that wrong.

    Quote Originally Posted by EcK View Post
    If you order chicken and get turkey, you re not obliged to pay just because the order was made and it ll arrive at your place in 2 hours, less so 9 months If you had sex for pleasure and wasnt discussing having a child, you re not obliged to pay because someone didnt want to have an abortion. (Except for part of the cost of the procedure/ drugs)
    If you order a chicken and receive a turkey, you can bring it back to the store. You can get a refund. It is a service being offered to you. Sex is not a service offered to guys to order off of a menu. Nor is abortion a menu option. There are other circumstances--risks of death and hemorrhaging, and sterilization, that are just as dangerous as pregnancy itself--the physical changes it does to a woman's body. The fact that NOT EVERYONE thinks that abortion is a simple medical procedure. There are a ton of more complex factors there. You don't have to eat the chicken, no harm no foul, only the chicken suffers. In your analogy, you're saying "You're the chicken. So I really don't give a fuck what you're suffering about."

    Whats childish here to is assume a woman is mentally incapable of getting an abortion, i for one know they can do anything a man can (well, its trickier if they try to pee while standing but i disgress) which includes owing up to the fact that if they want a child or a pet, they have to take care of it. If you want other people to pay for your own choices, well, you re free to feel entitled, but that doesnt make it a reality
    There are plenty of men who would never stand for an abortion, and who could not mentally handle the stressors AS A MAN. More less actually carrying a baby to term. Not everyone feels the way you do.

    Lets revert the roles for a second, we have sex, and afterwards i tell you i really want to have a child. Will you then be obliged to get pregnant and support the child financially?
    Yeah. I thought not.
    Hah. Not even a chance to let me answer before you know mine, is it? And you still conveniently forget that *your* life is not at risk when you decide to have this baby, where as mine is. Pregnancy is still a risky business even in this modern day and age. So is abortion. I know a woman who has carried a baby to term because the guy was in knots at the thought of losing a life he created. It does not happen often--mostly because there aren't many genders in the reverse role--but it does happen. It is not about what I would personally do. It is about making the best option available for everyone.

    Quote Originally Posted by DiscoBiscuit View Post
    Consenting to have sex, in a day and age where contraception is so easy to come by, does not amount to per se consent to have kids.
    If contraception were 100%, I'd agree with you there. But nothing is 100% anymore. Condoms every time used properly + IUD + the woman following her cycle schedule is absolutely going to stop a pregnancy sans a miracle. But sex is not that mechanical for everyone. I doubt you checked a girl's cycle schedule before you had sex with her. I doubt you asked her extensive questions about what sort of birth control she used, how often she missed pills, what time of day she normally took them... And every single factor makes contraception lose its percentages.

    The argument: You're having sex, you better be ready for the consequences (and by consequences I mean whatever she decides to do) doesn't stand up in a world where one can get plan b at a CVS in less time than it takes to bake a pizza.
    Oh sure. Let's throw plan B into the mix. How many dudes offer that to their girls? How selfish is that? "Hey, I know I took no more precautions than you did, but you better get on that just in case. It's $50, and I gotta go." That's not even counting the list of side-effects plan B causes--and there are plenty of situations where women cannot be staying home while those side effects happen.

    Also, it is not 100% effective. It is a high percentage.. but it is not 100% either. And if it doesn't work, you risk health risks far worse than the side effects, AND a fucked up pregnancy. So, it isn't just this magic bullet to cure all of everyone's problems. You go pay $50 a pop, be sick for three days, and see how long it takes you to become a nun.

    This situation wont really work itself out until medical science figures out how to turn off and turn on, the human (more probably female) reproductive capacity at whim. Not only that, but there must be a way for the other party to confirm the status of their partners reproductive capacity.

    That's the only way everyone knows what they're getting into beforehand.
    It has ways of turning it off. They just are risky and change the body. I don't know why you said "probably female" when men's reproductive structures are WAY easier and less invasive medically to access. There is very low and few risks for males to get 'fixed' than there are for females. And men have vasectomy options. That are reversible. Women do not. You, as a dude, can fix ALL of this and never worry about it in the time it takes you to grab lunch during work. But you won't. But you'll complain that someone else isn't willing to do the same. Go through a medical procedure that makes them uncomfortable and will probably change their body and perhaps mental stance as well.
    Kantgirl: Just say "I'm feminine and I'll punch anyone who says otherwise!"
    Halla74: Think your way through the world. Feel your way through life.

    Cimarron: maybe Prpl will be your girl-bud
    prplchknz: i don't like it

    In Search Of... ... Kiwi Sketch Art ... Dream Journal ... Kyuuei's Cook book ... Kyu's Tiny House Blog ... Minimalist Challenge ... Kyu's Savings Challenge

  4. #104
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Enneagram
    8w9
    Posts
    14,031

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kyuuei View Post
    If contraception were 100%, I'd agree with you there. But nothing is 100% anymore. Condoms every time used properly + IUD + the woman following her cycle schedule is absolutely going to stop a pregnancy sans a miracle. But sex is not that mechanical for everyone. I doubt you checked a girl's cycle schedule before you had sex with her. I doubt you asked her extensive questions about what sort of birth control she used, how often she missed pills, what time of day she normally took them... And every single factor makes contraception lose its percentages.
    Firstly, modern contraception enjoys a 90%+ success rate. I've never had an issue when we've used contraception. Surely it's not 100% effective, but the situation is closer to that 100% effective hypothetical than it is the pre-contraception past we used to live in. My argument is basically that the effectiveness and ubiquity of modern contraception has changed the equation in ways that need to be taken into account.

    Before contraception, yea you better be sure you want to stick the landing before you put your dick in her. But now, the situation is completely different.

    I damn sure ask if "you're on the pill". I figure I can skip the whole "is that you God, it's me margaret" convo and get right down to brass tacks.

    Oh sure. Let's throw plan B into the mix. How many dudes offer that to their girls? How selfish is that? "Hey, I know I took no more precautions than you did, but you better get on that just in case. It's $50, and I gotta go." That's not even counting the list of side-effects plan B causes--and there are plenty of situations where women cannot be staying home while those side effects happen.
    I've paid gladly everytime I've had need of it.

    How can that be selfish, we both made the same decisions, now we need to find the quickest way of resolving the situation. Here's $50 lets go.

    Or are we selfish just because pregnancy occurs in the female? Because yea we have a ton of control over that.

    Side effects less severe than pregnancy.

    Also, it is not 100% effective. It is a high percentage.. but it is not 100% either. And if it doesn't work, you risk health risks far worse than the side effects, AND a fucked up pregnancy. So, it isn't just this magic bullet to cure all of everyone's problems. You go pay $50 a pop, be sick for three days, and see how long it takes you to become a nun.
    Yes and the chute might malfunction when skydiving, but I know I'd prefer one.

    It is a cure for the vast majority of folks for whom normal contraception use gives the desired effect.

    It has ways of turning it off. They just are risky and change the body. I don't know why you said "probably female" when men's reproductive structures are WAY easier and less invasive medically to access. There is very low and few risks for males to get 'fixed' than there are for females. And men have vasectomy options. That are reversible. Women do not. You, as a dude, can fix ALL of this and never worry about it in the time it takes you to grab lunch during work. But you won't. But you'll complain that someone else isn't willing to do the same. Go through a medical procedure that makes them uncomfortable and will probably change their body and perhaps mental stance as well.
    I didn't really explain myself well enough here. I know we have ways of achieving that now, but what I meant is a way of turning off reproductive capacity in a less invasive way than we have now, and in such a way that the status of one's reproductive capacity is obvious to the outside observer.

    Now if only there was a similar signal that could tell me which women were unattached. That would make all the difference.

    Or even better if I could tell who was and who wasn't into me with out having to play the let's talk for 30 minutes while I try to get the answer without asking thing.

  5. #105
    Senior Member tinker683's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    MBTI
    ISFJ
    Enneagram
    9w1 sx/sp
    Posts
    2,661

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by iwakar View Post
    That is precisely the statement I took most issue with. All sorts of metaphors could be made about two adults engaging in a risky behavior that results in an undesired consequence despite precautionary measures, but they just really really really don't want to have to face the undesired consequence. Responsibility isn't contingent upon one's desire to possess it. It. Just Is.
    I'm just reqouting this post because I really like it, especially the bolded
    "The man who is swimming against the stream knows the strength of it."
    ― Woodrow Wilson

  6. #106
    Emperor/Dictator kyuuei's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    enfp
    Enneagram
    8
    Posts
    13,878

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DiscoBiscuit View Post
    Firstly, modern contraception enjoys a 90%+ success rate. I've never had an issue when we've used contraception. Surely it's not 100% effective, but the situation is closer to that 100% effective hypothetical than it is the pre-contraception past we used to live in. My argument is basically that the effectiveness and ubiquity of modern contraception has changed the equation in ways that need to be taken into account.
    You've never had a problem. Sure. Until the time you do have a problem. It seriously happens, and a LOT more frequently than 90%. Men don't use condoms properly, women don't take birth control as they should. Not everyone is educated on how it works either. Even if we kept it at your 90%.. is 90% enough for you to gamble on? Really? That's comforting to you? that 10% of the time you have sex a pregnancy could result? I wouldn't bet my life savings on those odds.

    For me to be as successful as I have been with not getting pregnant it has taken painstaking time and effort and *money* on my part. All for a percentage. Like everyone else. In fact, Disco, you men are the only ones with 100% effective rates on a reversible pregnancy option. And it costs the same as an IUD.

    Before contraception, yea you better be sure you want to stick the landing before you put your dick in her. But now, the situation is completely different.
    False. It leaves a false sense of security BECAUSE you're working with probability. It's a Probability equation. Meaning you can have protected sex and NEVER have a problem. You can be like my army buddy where every time he had doubled-up protected sex he ended up with a kid (ain't that some shit luck?).. Percentages mean jack and shit in probability equations. It helps. But it is not definite by any means, and not definite enough to call any situation different.

    It's the same principle in hospitals. People assume because they wore gloves they were 'safe'.. so they get more lax in other aseptic procedures, and before you know it, you have a nosocomial infection.

    I damn sure ask if "you're on the pill". I figure I can skip the whole "is that you God, it's me margaret" convo and get right down to brass tacks.
    Being on the pill isn't enough though. The pill itself is not effective enough to make someone safe from pregnancy. It helps, and a lot, but it is not enough. Glad it makes you feel better, and I hope the odds continue in your favor.

    I've paid gladly everytime I've had need of it.

    How can that be selfish, we both made the same decisions, now we need to find the quickest way of resolving the situation. Here's $50 lets go.
    ... But it sounds like the odds have not always been in your favor. Which is fine--you can clearly afford the $50 pay out each time. Not everyone can, though. And you don't seem like the type that's all for making those options available for free to the public. But let's continue to say that everyone magically does.

    It's selfish because you're not the one getting sick from that plan B pill. You're not the one potentially taking days off of work, and the income that goes with that. You're out $25-50 and you wash your hands of it and go home. I'm saying that if the precautions were more equal to the consequences, you'd be taking MORE precautions than the female would because, quite frankly, she has to deal with more consequences when anything goes wrong.

    Or are we selfish just because pregnancy occurs in the female? Because yea we have a ton of control over that.
    You actually really do. Like. 100% control.

    Side effects less severe than pregnancy
    Arguably, yes. But that doesn't discredit them. Cholera is less severe than HIV.. but I really don't want Cholera anyways. It's all relative.

    Yes and the chute might malfunction when skydiving, but I know I'd prefer one.
    Cute analogy. You know the risks of skydiving, you think you're well protected, something goes wrong, and I'll bet any money your parents would still be so pissed off by the tragedy at the company you went through regardless of you knowing the consequences.

    It is a cure for the vast majority of folks for whom normal contraception use gives the desired effect.
    It's not a CURE. you're not fixing a disease--you're lazily correcting what you were too chickenshit to do the first time around. It isn't for the vast majority either--MOST of the people who really NEED access to that stuff do not have access to it. And most use it wrong anyways. I'm so glad you're rich, and comfortable, and whatever it is you do, but time and time again you conveniently ignore and forget that there are people without as much as you have who have just as many rights to have percentage sex as you do.

    I didn't really explain myself well enough here. I know we have ways of achieving that now, but what I meant is a way of turning off reproductive capacity in a less invasive way than we have now, and in such a way that the status of one's reproductive capacity is obvious to the outside observer.
    That would be great. But we're not living in what-if's. Vasectomies are the number 1 thing anyone man or woman can do to help control unwanted pregnancies at 100% satisfaction. I don't know many men with them that didn't already have children that they didn't want before they wised up.

    Let me put it this way: You keep thinking it's the WOMAN. Is forced fatherhood fair? Why don't women use birth control as well as they should, or supply condoms too, why do they have problems with abortions, why are they always getting sick or magically at risk when people take this medicine and do this medical procedure all the time without injury.. blah blah blah blah blah.

    One snip, a week of tenderness, cheaper than a few plan B pills, and ALL of those worries go away for you. No stress, no headache, no worrying about what goes on with other people, or whether there are signals and women properly protected, NOTHING. Want a kid later? Fix it with another quick procedure.. If that doesn't work, you're still making viable semen, you can deposit that semen in other ways and have just as natural of a baby. And on purpose--no accidents, no mess, no hassle. No forced fatherhood. No paying for 18 years from this unjust system of the girls are always right. No nothing!!

    And still, I doubt you'll go get one tomorrow. It's really, REALLY hard to point fingers at ANYONE else when you have a 100% effective, non-invasive, nearly zero-risk, CHEAP medical procedure that eliminates ALL of the problems relating to this right off the bat. And still, you don't *want* to do it. And that's what it really boils down to. You don't want to change your body for anyone else. What you feel is natural and right is your own--and NO one has the right to tell you anything different.

    And that's how women feel too.
    Kantgirl: Just say "I'm feminine and I'll punch anyone who says otherwise!"
    Halla74: Think your way through the world. Feel your way through life.

    Cimarron: maybe Prpl will be your girl-bud
    prplchknz: i don't like it

    In Search Of... ... Kiwi Sketch Art ... Dream Journal ... Kyuuei's Cook book ... Kyu's Tiny House Blog ... Minimalist Challenge ... Kyu's Savings Challenge

  7. #107
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Enneagram
    8w9
    Posts
    14,031

    Default

    If whatever solution I posit has to be 100% effective to pass muster (in your opinion), then I might as well just stop trying.

  8. #108
    Senior Member prplchknz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    yupp
    Posts
    29,778

    Default

    wait will he make a good father? or a crappy abusive one?
    In no likes experiment.

    that is all

    i dunno what else to say so

  9. #109
    Emperor/Dictator kyuuei's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    enfp
    Enneagram
    8
    Posts
    13,878

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DiscoBiscuit View Post
    If whatever solution I posit has to be 100% effective to pass muster (in your opinion), then I might as well just stop trying.
    I'm saying you are avoiding the obvious--that you have WAY more control than you care to admit, because that control puts you outside of your comfort zone. You literally said NOTHING about my last paragraph--which makes me feel like I hit the nail on the head with that.

    It has to be 100% because it is a probability equation outside of that. Meaning it will not truly fix the problem at hand.

    I would say forced fatherhood would NOT be fair if a man had a vasectomy and somehow still got a woman pregnant. There is no way that is fair to him. He did literally everything he could possibly do sans not having sex. (which really is a stupid 'option' on the roster. I don't consider it a real option.) Just like I would not feel it fair if I had an IUD implant to prevent a pregnancy and a guy tried to make me keep a pregnancy anyways.

    The most effective form of BC for a woman to date is either an IUD, or to be sterilized via an essure or tubal ligation. The latter is the only option for women allergic to nickle, and it is invasive and an actual surgery that requires weeks of recovery and months to years of complete recovery. An IUD is the only reversible option, though there are extensive surgeries that may be done for an essure pregnancy. So, an IUD it is for women, it is our only equivalent to a man's vasectomy that we have.

    The most effective form of BC for a man is a vasectomy. Period. Condoms are a really distant second, they don't even come close in cost, effective ratings, etc.

    An IUD and a vasectomy are both reversible, cheap, and more effective than anything on the market. I think they should both be available at no cost to anyone. That would solve so many problems.

    But like I said. That fact alone does not motivate you to go get a vasectomy. I really don't know why anyone is whining about what's fair for them when they have options out there that are perfectly fair. You're whining that this woman is not giving you anything fair. That's she's just saying "Well fuck you, I don't care what's fair to you." and making you be a father against your will. So when I tell you that a vasectomy fixes everything, you're telling me, "Well, fuck that, I don't care what fixes everything, *I* don't want it." I really don't see any difference in those two logics. They are one in the same.
    Kantgirl: Just say "I'm feminine and I'll punch anyone who says otherwise!"
    Halla74: Think your way through the world. Feel your way through life.

    Cimarron: maybe Prpl will be your girl-bud
    prplchknz: i don't like it

    In Search Of... ... Kiwi Sketch Art ... Dream Journal ... Kyuuei's Cook book ... Kyu's Tiny House Blog ... Minimalist Challenge ... Kyu's Savings Challenge

  10. #110
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Enneagram
    8w9
    Posts
    14,031

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kyuuei View Post
    I'm saying you are avoiding the obvious--that you have WAY more control than you care to admit, because that control puts you outside of your comfort zone. You literally said NOTHING about my last paragraph--which makes me feel like I hit the nail on the head with that.

    It has to be 100% because it is a probability equation outside of that. Meaning it will not truly fix the problem at hand.

    I would say forced fatherhood would NOT be fair if a man had a vasectomy and somehow still got a woman pregnant. There is no way that is fair to him. He did literally everything he could possibly do sans not having sex. (which really is a stupid 'option' on the roster. I don't consider it a real option.) Just like I would not feel it fair if I had an IUD implant to prevent a pregnancy and a guy tried to make me keep a pregnancy anyways.

    The most effective form of BC for a woman to date is either an IUD, or to be sterilized via an essure or tubal ligation. The latter is the only option for women allergic to nickle, and it is invasive and an actual surgery that requires weeks of recovery and months to years of complete recovery. An IUD is the only reversible option, though there are extensive surgeries that may be done for an essure pregnancy. So, an IUD it is for women, it is our only equivalent to a man's vasectomy that we have.

    The most effective form of BC for a man is a vasectomy. Period. Condoms are a really distant second, they don't even come close in cost, effective ratings, etc.

    An IUD and a vasectomy are both reversible, cheap, and more effective than anything on the market. I think they should both be available at no cost to anyone. That would solve so many problems.

    But like I said. That fact alone does not motivate you to go get a vasectomy. I really don't know why anyone is whining about what's fair for them when they have options out there that are perfectly fair. You're whining that this woman is not giving you anything fair. That's she's just saying "Well fuck you, I don't care what's fair to you." and making you be a father against your will. So when I tell you that a vasectomy fixes everything, you're telling me, "Well, fuck that, I don't care what fixes everything, *I* don't want it." I really don't see any difference in those two logics. They are one in the same.
    The reason I didn't mention it, and said that it would probably be the woman to have to new noninvasive procedure re: reproductive status is that historically, and among the common understanding of many, that contraception is on the man as far as providing condoms are concerned. Of all the methods of contraception mentioned thus far (besides vasectomies which are more invasive than the future hypothetical procedure I envision) only condoms directly involve the man doing something to himself. Also, and I'm not trying to argue that this is a logically good answer, historically the onus and expectation has been on women to have the cooler head and say, "wait a minute, do you have something (a condom), or I'm not on the pill/nuva ring w/e". More specifically, in certain circles (the ones I've run in at least) the widespread use of the pill has greatly diminished the use of condoms. I've been with women who wanted used the pil and wanted to use a condom, and I was happy to oblige, but more frequently it's just a quick question of are you on the pill, and that's it. The kind of cultural expectations that currently lead to the assumption that the girl has contraception covered, change slowly if at all. Is that right? No, but like you've said in other threads that just how the world works.

    To your point about it not being fair unless a man undergoes medical procedure that (while reversible) is intended to be a permanent solution to pregnancy, that's ridiculous. Unless you think its reasonable to bank a shitload of sperm at a sperm bank, then at the age of say 23 have a vasectomy and go about his business. That's a little more of a burden than condoms or the pill or plan b etc...

    Also, I understand (on a logical level) what your saying about probability, but I still dont find it compelling. Nothing works 100%. That lack of 100% certainty does nothing to mitigate the value of those contraceptive methods, or the fact that their implementation has drastically changed the way men and women interact over the last 60 years.

    The paths of least resistance here, with the least invasiveness, are condoms, the pill, nuva ring etc...

    Forced fatherhood isn't fair because he has no way of consenting to a life changing occurrence, that, while stemming from a common act (sex), is preventable enough (in light of medical advances) that his participation can't reasonably be understood to confer tacit acceptance of pregnancy. I feel like that sentence should be worded better, but I was tired of trying to get it right.

    Between condoms, the pill, plan b, and other non-medical procedure forms of contraception (assuming proper use) one can move forward with the knowledge that pregnancy is highly unlikely. That has been my experience thus far, and I'm happy to move forward knowing that there is a very small chance of pregnancy occurring. I still swim in the ocean even though I know there are sharks.

Similar Threads

  1. Why is life not fair?
    By puzzle in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 44
    Last Post: 06-18-2017, 06:33 PM
  2. [ESFP] What tips would you give to an extremely extroverted ESFP who is forced to be alone
    By prplchknz in forum The SP Arthouse (ESFP, ISFP, ESTP, ISTP)
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 03-29-2015, 02:35 PM
  3. [JCF] All is fair in love and war?
    By Hate in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 05-28-2010, 06:26 AM
  4. What is the Destructive Force of Belief?
    By coberst in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 03-16-2009, 01:42 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO