Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
March 28, 2024, 03:25:52 AM

Login with username, password and session length

Search:     Advanced search
we're back, baby
*
Home Help Search Login Register
f13.net  |  f13.net General Forums  |  General Discussion  |  Serious Business  |  Topic: Internet Dating: Everyone's still shallow 0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 42 Go Down Print
Author Topic: Internet Dating: Everyone's still shallow  (Read 407337 times)
Sjofn
Terracotta Army
Posts: 8286

Truckasaurus Hands


Reply #140 on: January 06, 2010, 10:16:38 PM

Yeah, we met playing on a MUD. We're so cool.  Oh ho ho ho. Reallllly?

God Save the Horn Players
UnSub
Contributor
Posts: 8064


WWW
Reply #141 on: January 06, 2010, 10:59:14 PM

I rate this thread  why so serious? why so serious? why so serious? why so serious? / 5.

Ruling people out because they have children reduces an already infinitesimally small pool.  If you have the good fortune of finding someone that meets whatever criteria you set as limiters, you've beaten the odds.  Good for you.  I choose to keep as many of my options open as possible. 

You're right - I've stuck with women with who have two eyes and a full set of teeth. By setting such standards, I may have missed out on something special (and the gumming of a lifetime).

Plus, meeting anyone at a strip club tends to taint any future friendship / relationship you might have. If you met them anywhere else, that'd have been awesome, but instead...

If she's half-naked and shaking her ta-tas at a PTA meeting, it'd be awesome, but I don't think the future relationship would be unblemished.

bhodi
Moderator
Posts: 6817

No lie.


Reply #142 on: January 07, 2010, 05:57:00 AM

By setting such standards, I may have missed out on something special (and the gumming of a lifetime).
You're lucky I can't set custom titles. Yours would be "The gumming of a lifetime". That was the funniest thing I've read in weeks.
Mrbloodworth
Terracotta Army
Posts: 15148


Reply #143 on: January 07, 2010, 06:07:24 AM

Did this thread just have a hug session?  ACK!

Today's How-To: Scrambling a Thread to the Point of Incoherence in Only One Post with MrBloodworth . - schild
www.mrbloodworthproductions.com  www.amuletsbymerlin.com
KallDrexx
Terracotta Army
Posts: 3510


Reply #144 on: January 07, 2010, 07:47:49 AM

In the end it doesn't matter anyway with how high the divorce rate is!

Quote
The divorce rate in America for first marriage, vs second or third marriage
50% percent of first marriages, 67% of second and 74% of third marriages end in divorce, according to Jennifer Baker of the Forest Institute of Professional Psychology in Springfield, Missouri.
Lantyssa
Terracotta Army
Posts: 20848


Reply #145 on: January 07, 2010, 09:40:43 AM

The solution is to live in sin forever.  Well, if you ever find anyone, which you won't.  'Cause love is a silly dream and whatnot.

Hahahaha!  I'm really good at this!
Endie
Terracotta Army
Posts: 6436


WWW
Reply #146 on: January 07, 2010, 09:53:14 AM

I really feel sorry for all the jaded people here.  My mum and dad have been happily married for over four decades.  My wife's parents almost exactly the same.  I am entirely confident that she and I will remain happily married for the rest of our lives, and having known her for over 20 years I doubt if there are any really nasty discoveries on the way to change my opinion on this.

My blog: http://endie.net

Twitter - Endieposts

"What else would one expect of Scottish sociopaths sipping their single malt Glenlivit [sic]?" Jack Thompson
LK
Terracotta Army
Posts: 4268


Reply #147 on: January 07, 2010, 09:54:50 AM

Love is something for movies and books to exploit. The reality is much more complicated. I've met people who seem absolutely awesome to me but wouldn't want to have anything to do with me. Those that do show interest either did so to rob me, take advantage of me, or toy with me. So, jaded forever? Sounds like a plan!

"Then there's the double-barreled shotgun from Doom 2 - no-one within your entire household could be of any doubt that it's been fired because it sounds like God slamming a door on his fingers." - Yahtzee Croshaw
Pennilenko
Terracotta Army
Posts: 3472


Reply #148 on: January 07, 2010, 10:02:50 AM

Love exists, it happens when you meet someone that makes you not give a shit about being right, or getting your way. Love isRelationships are hard work, it takes dedication and is not for the lazy or weak minded.
« Last Edit: January 07, 2010, 10:09:07 AM by Pennilenko »

"See?  All of you are unique.  And special.  Like fucking snowflakes."  -- Signe
Endie
Terracotta Army
Posts: 6436


WWW
Reply #149 on: January 07, 2010, 10:04:08 AM

Well, Lore, I think we may have found one cause of your problems...

My blog: http://endie.net

Twitter - Endieposts

"What else would one expect of Scottish sociopaths sipping their single malt Glenlivit [sic]?" Jack Thompson
schild
Administrator
Posts: 60345


WWW
Reply #150 on: January 07, 2010, 10:04:24 AM

Love is not hard work. A relationship is. A lazy motherfucker can love as much and more as anyone else. It takes zero effort to love. I don't know why anyone would think otherwise.
Pennilenko
Terracotta Army
Posts: 3472


Reply #151 on: January 07, 2010, 10:08:05 AM

Love is not hard work. A relationship is. A lazy motherfucker can love as much and more as anyone else. It takes zero effort to love. I don't know why anyone would think otherwise.

Shoot, good point. Something must be broken in my head, I equate love to relationships for some reason. Well then, substitute love for relationship in my previous post.

"See?  All of you are unique.  And special.  Like fucking snowflakes."  -- Signe
Engels
Terracotta Army
Posts: 9029

inflicts shingles.


Reply #152 on: January 07, 2010, 10:17:35 AM

I think that what schild is getting at is that anyone can harbor feelings that feel like love, while still acting like a complete asshat to the beloved. Stalkers, for instance, are often convinced that they do what they do out of love. Just because you're moonfaced over some pretty face that you're currently shagging doesn't mean you actually love him/her. It means you are having a biochemical response to another carbon-based lifeform.

Love itself, the acts that accompany a true sentiment of caring, require a dialectic between the lover and the beloved that takes a sense of ethics, work and patience.

I should get back to nature, too.  You know, like going to a shop for groceries instead of the computer.  Maybe a condo in the woods that doesn't even have a health club or restaurant attached.  Buy a car with only two cup holders or something. -Signe

I LIKE being bounced around by Tonkors. - Lantyssa

Babies shooting themselves in the head is the state bird of West Virginia. - schild
schild
Administrator
Posts: 60345


WWW
Reply #153 on: January 07, 2010, 10:24:23 AM

Quote
Love itself, the acts that accompany a true sentiment of caring, require a dialectic between the lover and the beloved that takes a sense of ethics, work and patience.

That's a relationship.

I wasn't talking about stalkers and shit. I was talking about love. Towards people, objects, whatever.

I love the internet. LOVE IT. Top 5 motherfucker.

I love the Misfits, even without Danzig.

I love Deus Ex, even if Specter is making some lame muddy shit for the Wii.

All that other shit you said is bullshit. Relationships take effort, love does not. I could quote poetry and theory all day to support that but I don't love philosophical bullshit. I do, however, love the definitions of words and using them properly.

love
  /lʌv/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [luhv] Show IPA noun, verb, loved, lov⋅ing.
Use love in a Sentence
See web results for love
See images of love
–noun
1.    a profoundly tender, passionate affection for another person.
2.    a feeling of warm personal attachment or deep affection, as for a parent, child, or friend.
3.    sexual passion or desire.
4.    a person toward whom love is felt; beloved person; sweetheart.
5.    (used in direct address as a term of endearment, affection, or the like): Would you like to see a movie, love?
6.    a love affair; an intensely amorous incident; amour.
7.    sexual intercourse; copulation.
8.    (initial capital letter) a personification of sexual affection, as Eros or Cupid.
9.    affectionate concern for the well-being of others: the love of one's neighbor.
10.    strong predilection, enthusiasm, or liking for anything: her love of books.
11.    the object or thing so liked: The theater was her great love.
12.    the benevolent affection of God for His creatures, or the reverent affection due from them to God.
13.    Chiefly Tennis. a score of zero; nothing.
14.    a word formerly used in communications to represent the letter L.

I'd say 14 definitions with none even close to what you said proves my point.
Nebu
Terracotta Army
Posts: 17613


Reply #154 on: January 07, 2010, 10:28:38 AM

3.    sexual passion or desire.

I thought this was lust.  I guess the line is even blurred in the dictionary. 

I also think that my age is having a profound effect on my feelings toward this discussion.  After 40 my desire has become one more of friendship and companionship than one of lust/sexual desire.  Biology is a funny thing.  I'm less interested in the physical attraction (though it still matters, particularly with health and hygeine) and more interested in morals, ethics, and intellect.  Things I wish I had selected more for the first time I was married. 


"Always do what is right. It will gratify half of mankind and astound the other."

-  Mark Twain
schild
Administrator
Posts: 60345


WWW
Reply #155 on: January 07, 2010, 10:31:41 AM

Quote
lust
  /lʌst/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [luhst] Show IPA
Use lust in a Sentence
See web results for lust
See images of lust
–noun
1.    intense sexual desire or appetite.
2.    uncontrolled or illicit sexual desire or appetite; lecherousness.
3.    a passionate or overmastering desire or craving (usually fol. by for): a lust for power.
4.    ardent enthusiasm; zest; relish: an enviable lust for life.
5.    Obsolete.
a.    pleasure or delight.
b.    desire; inclination; wish.

Doesn't seem very blurred.

I'd love to fuck Charlize Theron.

I lust to fuck Charlize Theron.

Not really the same thing IMO.

Nebu
Terracotta Army
Posts: 17613


Reply #156 on: January 07, 2010, 10:33:45 AM

I know better than to start a semantics argument with you.  

Just suggesting that many people, particularly inexperienced people, have a tough time differentiating between the two.  Like the whole "Love at first sight" bullshit.
« Last Edit: January 07, 2010, 10:35:21 AM by Nebu »

"Always do what is right. It will gratify half of mankind and astound the other."

-  Mark Twain
schild
Administrator
Posts: 60345


WWW
Reply #157 on: January 07, 2010, 10:39:51 AM

I don't think it's too much to ask that people use words they know the definition of, I wasn't necessarily harping at you by the way.

Edit: Love at first sight exists and is completely physical. Relationships at first sight do not. Also, the entire notion of "Love at First Sight" is more creepy than romantic.
Samwise
Moderator
Posts: 19212

sentient yeast infection


WWW
Reply #158 on: January 07, 2010, 10:41:01 AM

Relationships take effort, love does not. I could quote poetry and theory all day to support that but I don't love philosophical bullshit. I do, however, love the definitions of words and using them properly.

When in doubt about the correct usage of a word I tend to go for the oldest definition I can find.  Here's a pretty old definition of love that was read at my wedding:

Quote
Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.

Love never fails.

 why so serious?

"I have not actually recommended many games, and I'll go on the record here saying my track record is probably best in the industry." - schild
Nebu
Terracotta Army
Posts: 17613


Reply #159 on: January 07, 2010, 10:41:17 AM

Edit: Love at first sight exists and is completely physical. Relationships at first sight do not. Also, the entire notion of "Love at First Sight" is more creepy than romantic.

Good point.  I even messed up there myself. 

I have to confess that I tend to think of "love at first sight" as "lust at first sight", so maybe I'm broken as well.  By my own definition, you have to know and interact with someone before you can love them (i.e. Love exists on a much deeper emotional level than Lust).  Then again, it doesn't take a deep emotional connection to love the taste of chocolate.  Perhaps my definitions of love and lust are unique for human interaction compared to any other context. 
« Last Edit: January 07, 2010, 10:44:13 AM by Nebu »

"Always do what is right. It will gratify half of mankind and astound the other."

-  Mark Twain
schild
Administrator
Posts: 60345


WWW
Reply #160 on: January 07, 2010, 10:42:51 AM

That's the "I Love Jesus" definition of Love afaik.

Try Homer's Iliad or Dante's Inferno. Surely you can find something older than a 2000 year old document based on utter bollocks.

Edit: Samwise, that wasn't a jab at your wedding. I'm sure it was perfectly lovely and topical, but it doesn't really prove any sort of point here.
« Last Edit: January 07, 2010, 10:45:01 AM by schild »
schild
Administrator
Posts: 60345


WWW
Reply #161 on: January 07, 2010, 10:45:33 AM

Edit: Love at first sight exists and is completely physical. Relationships at first sight do not. Also, the entire notion of "Love at First Sight" is more creepy than romantic.

Good point.  I even messed up there myself.  

I have to confess that I tend to think of "love at first sight" as "lust at first sight", so maybe I'm broken as well.  By my own definition, you have to know and interact with someone before you can love them (i.e. Love exists on a much deeper emotional level than Lust).  Then again, it doesn't take a deep emotional connection to love the taste of chocolate.  Perhaps my definitions of love and lust are unique for human interaction compared to any other context.  
You love the study of medicine and chemistry in general.

Just saying.
Samwise
Moderator
Posts: 19212

sentient yeast infection


WWW
Reply #162 on: January 07, 2010, 10:52:07 AM

That's the "I Love Jesus" definition of Love afaik.

Try Homer's Iliad or Dante's Inferno. Surely you can find something older than a 2000 year old document based on utter bollocks.

Edit: Samwise, that wasn't a jab at your wedding. I'm sure it was perfectly lovely and topical, but it doesn't really prove any sort of point here.

And you're defending your point based on what some nerd who's never touched a woman wrote in an Internet dictionary.  I'm just saying.

"I have not actually recommended many games, and I'll go on the record here saying my track record is probably best in the industry." - schild
schild
Administrator
Posts: 60345


WWW
Reply #163 on: January 07, 2010, 10:54:27 AM

Dictionary.com just copies shit from Oxford:

Quote
ove

  • noun 1 an intense feeling of deep affection. 2 a deep romantic or sexual attachment to someone. 3 a great interest and pleasure in something. 4 a person or thing that one loves. 5 (in tennis, squash, etc.) a score of zero. apparently from the phrase play for love (i.e. the love of the game, not for money).

 • verb 1 feel love for. 2 like very much. 3 loving showing love or great care.

Edit:
The dictionaries that appear on Dictionary.com include:

    * Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1), Based on the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2006.
    * Webster's New Millennium Dictionary of English, Preview Edition (v 0.9.6) Copyright 2003-2006 Dictionary.com, LLC
    * Dictionary.com Word of the Day
    * Dictionary.com Crossword Solver
    * The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
    * The American Heritage® Dictionary of Idioms by Christine Ammer. Copyright © 1997 by The Christine Ammer 1992 Trust. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company.
    * The American Heritage® Stedman's Medical Dictionary Copyright © 2002, 2001, 1995 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company.
    * WordNet ® 2.0, © 2003 Princeton University
    * Investopedia.com. Copyright © 1999-2005 - All rights reserved. Owned and Operated by Investopedia Inc.
    * Wall Street Words: An A to Z Guide to Investment Terms for Today's Investor by David L. Scott. Copyright © 2003 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company.
    * Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of Law,© 1996 Merriam-Webster, Inc.
    * Merriam-Webster's Medical Dictionary, © 2002 Merriam-Webster, Inc.
    * Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary, © 1996, 1998 MICRA, Inc.
    * The Free On-line Dictionary of Computing, © 1993-2005 Denis Howe
    * Jargon File 4.2.0
    * U.S. Gazetteer, U.S. Census Bureau

Signe
Terracotta Army
Posts: 18942

Muse.


Reply #164 on: January 07, 2010, 10:57:19 AM

Who needs the lusty part of love?  Not me.  The other bits are very nice, though.  I don't think it's age with me, though.  I don't remember ever being too big on sex and lust.  It's all sort of messy.  The Schild wibble of this discussion makes the most sense to me.  Strange, huh?  I find myself pretty much agreeing with all that.  Except the Danzig bit.  How can anyone love The Misfits without Danzig?  It was all about that muscle bound little dwarf, no?  Like, maybe, but love?

My Sig Image: hath rid itself of this mortal coil.
Endie
Terracotta Army
Posts: 6436


WWW
Reply #165 on: January 07, 2010, 10:58:39 AM

Quote
Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.

Luve is patientfu; luve is couthie an kind; luve is nane jailous; nane sprosie; nane bowdent wi pride; nane mislaired; nane hame-drauchtit; nane toustie; luve keeps nae nickstick o the wrangs it drees; finnds nae pleisur i the ill wark o ithers; is ay liftit up whan truith dings lies; kens ay tae keep a caum souch; is ay sweired tae misdout; ay houps the best; ay bides the warst.

And Schild isn't quite right: that version of love is, in the original text, agape: unconditional, self-sacrificing, considered (as opposed to necessarily instinctive) love, as in the love of a parent for a child, or (for example), what we might call the "tender" love of one person for another.  Not eros or philos, but not exclusive of them, either . The chapter it comes from is a Paul speaking in Platonic terms (as in "in the terms of Plato", not "sexless"), borrowing Plato's philosophy, language and ideas about the real and the perceived that most people know from the cave story.  He's specifically not just talking about "I love Jesus" (a couple of sentences on he says "And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love.")

My blog: http://endie.net

Twitter - Endieposts

"What else would one expect of Scottish sociopaths sipping their single malt Glenlivit [sic]?" Jack Thompson
stray
Terracotta Army
Posts: 16818

has an iMac.


Reply #166 on: January 07, 2010, 10:59:27 AM

Michael Graves had his moments, but I'm not sure I love him like Glenn.
schild
Administrator
Posts: 60345


WWW
Reply #167 on: January 07, 2010, 10:59:32 AM

Who needs the lusty part of love?  Not me.  The other bits are very nice, though.  I don't think it's age with me, though.  I don't remember ever being too big on sex and lust.  It's all sort of messy.  The Schild wibble of this discussion makes the most sense to me.  Strange, huh?  I find myself pretty much agreeing with all that.  Except the Danzig bit.  How can anyone love The Misfits without Danzig?  It was all about that muscle bound little dwarf, no?  Like, maybe, but love?
It was all about the muscle-bound little dwarf, sure. But then they found a recording studio and even though Michael G is pretty much ass in a can, at least the quality was there and Jerry Only was still writing the majority of the shit. The new stuff with Jerry Only doing the vocals is as good as any Danzig-era stuff.

Anyway, I get not loving the Misfits after Danzig left. 100%, I understand it. I just happen to still love it, maybe in a different way, but it's still fucking great.

Edit:
And Schild isn't quite right: that version of love is, in the original text, agape: unconditional, self-sacrificing, considered (as opposed to necessarily instinctive) love, as in the love of a parent for a child, or (for example), what we might call the "tender" love of one person for another.  Not eros or philos, but not exclusive of them, either . The chapter it comes from is a Paul speaking in Platonic terms (as in "in the terms of Plato", not "sexless"), borrowing Plato's philosophy, language and ideas about the real and the perceived that most people know from the cave story.  He's specifically not just talking about "I love Jesus" (a couple of sentences on he says "And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love.")
I appreciate you furthering my point of how easy it is to love.
« Last Edit: January 07, 2010, 11:01:28 AM by schild »
stray
Terracotta Army
Posts: 16818

has an iMac.


Reply #168 on: January 07, 2010, 11:06:17 AM

Shit, I don't know if it's Jerry or Michael's vox I'm listening to. Thought it was all Graves. I like Saturday Night and Lost in Space.
schild
Administrator
Posts: 60345


WWW
Reply #169 on: January 07, 2010, 11:07:26 AM

Shit, I don't know if it's Jerry or Michael I'm listening to. Thought it was all Graves. I like Saturday Night and Lost in Space.
Famous Monsters is Michael.

http://www.amazon.com/Land-Dead-Misfits/dp/B002T921B6/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=music&qid=1262891209&sr=1-1

That is Jerry Only. Twilight of the Dead is probably the best thing they've done since the album Walk Among Us.
NowhereMan
Terracotta Army
Posts: 7353


Reply #170 on: January 07, 2010, 11:07:38 AM

Philosophers are always talking about love. Part of the problem of the semantics argument is that we use love to describe a range of positive emotions towards people and things, sometimes interchangably but often we mean a specific version of love and then people start arguing dragging in lots of examples of love being used in other senses. To use a very tired example the ancient Greeks wouldn't be having half these discussions because they differentiated between love between friends, family, sexual desire, etc. The classic idea we've got of love now involves a relationship or at least the desire to have a relationship with a person. When Schild says he loves the internet I'm assuming he means it in the sense that he really, really likes it and wants it to stay around. It's useful and gives him a whole range of shit (similarly to money). There's a big difference between loving objects like that and Love in the sense we apply to people. Also claiming to have feelings without any outward sign of them is somewhat dubious, someone can claim to feel brave and then bottle it, we wouldn't describe them as brave. Someone can claim they feel in love with someone else then act like an asshole towards them and fuck someone else behind their back. We wouldn't say that they're obviously in love with their partner. Feeling like you're in love with someone is easy but it doesn't mean you're in love with them.

I'd say more but frankly that's plenty. My parents have been married almost 30 years and I got to have a drunken conversation with my dad this Christmas that involved him telling him how awesome my mum was and what a fantastic person she is. Love can exist and it can work although I've personally failed generally at it (what's up with lack of mutual attraction? I always seem to be on one end or the other).

"Look at my car. Do you think that was bought with the earnest love of geeks?" - HaemishM
Sjofn
Terracotta Army
Posts: 8286

Truckasaurus Hands


Reply #171 on: January 07, 2010, 11:07:50 AM

Lazy people can so be in successful relationships! Ingmar and I are totally lazy. We're too lazy to have problems, maybe.  DRILLING AND MANLINESS

To be fair, I don't consider ended relationships to be autofails. I am probably the only person on the planet that thinks this way.

God Save the Horn Players
stray
Terracotta Army
Posts: 16818

has an iMac.


Reply #172 on: January 07, 2010, 11:10:13 AM

Shit, I don't know if it's Jerry or Michael I'm listening to. Thought it was all Graves. I like Saturday Night and Lost in Space.
Famous Monsters is Michael.

http://www.amazon.com/Land-Dead-Misfits/dp/B002T921B6/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=music&qid=1262891209&sr=1-1

That is Jerry Only. Twilight of the Dead is probably the best thing they've done since the album Walk Among Us.

Oh, like brand, brand new. Huh, I'll give it a shot.


I agree that love is easily pulled off by anyone. Yes, relationships are hard. The whole "Mutual love" thing does help though. And yes, even lazyness. Oh ho ho ho. Reallllly?
schild
Administrator
Posts: 60345


WWW
Reply #173 on: January 07, 2010, 11:11:13 AM

Quote
When Schild says he loves the internet I'm assuming he means it in the sense that he really, really likes it and wants it to stay around.

No, when Schild says he loves the internet, he loves it the same way my Mom does me or my stepdad. I really, really fucking love it. I would not be able to function very well without it. I'd find myself constantly bored and longing for the days of the internet.

And yes, there's an obvious difference between actually being in love and the chemical reaction that makes you feel like you're in love. But the end result probably feels the same to the end-user.

Quote
Love can exist and it can work although I've personally failed generally at it (what's up with lack of mutual attraction? I always seem to be on one end or the other).

Unrequited love is fun.
Ingmar
Terracotta Army
Posts: 19280

Auto Assault Affectionado


Reply #174 on: January 07, 2010, 11:12:52 AM

Yeah I would argue that just because a relationship ended before one person died doesn't mean it was a failure or a mistake.

The only relationships that I've had that were "hard" are the ones I should have avoided in the first place. The good ones have all been easy.

The Transcendent One: AH... THE ROGUE CONSTRUCT.
Nordom: Sense of closure: imminent.
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 42 Go Up Print 
f13.net  |  f13.net General Forums  |  General Discussion  |  Serious Business  |  Topic: Internet Dating: Everyone's still shallow  
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF 1.1.10 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC