she was so sick and tired of the same old thing! the same old fake "i love yous" the stupid promises of being loved forever. he was the laste straw. no longer could she take it. no longer did she want to feel loves hate and pain. some how she had to make it all go away.she had away fresh on her mind. "what would it be like to make one pain so this one would lessen, or even dissapear completly?" it sounded so perfect to her, but she had no clue what to do or where she was going with it. one day the boy that gave her these false hopes called her and yet again played with her sensitve emotions. he had a "girlfriend" and yet kept saying how much he loved HER and wanted to be with HER the girl that had no clue. she knew he was taken, but she felt like she new that she loved him. he did not love her not atall. he was just a fun toy to play with that he knew eventuly would get boring.
one day she called the boy because it had been 2 days sence he called
"Hey baby" she said despritly
"uh i cant talk right now im a little busy"
"what are you doing"... she heard a giggle in the background.
"im a... doing some homework" he said quickly and hung up.
the girl threw the phone aganst the wall hopeing it was broken and she would never have to pick it up and say another false i love you from the basterd who she had relized was just her puppet master. she wanted to cut the stings he had placed on her wrists off. but she resisted...and didnt cut the string...instead she took out the shotgun that was her dead fathers (it had the words "i love you" writen on it because it was a birthday present that she was going to give him before he died) and aimed it towards her broken lonely heart and shot herself... and as she was falling to the ground she rememberd eveytime the boy said "i love you" and forced her last smile.
Full Version: The girl that has no clue
love is fake ....but why punish ourselves? she should have killed the boy instead..hahah
Apply the universal defensive tactic: move out of range.
QUOTE(Rick @ Jun 17, 12:37 PM) 
Apply the universal defensive tactic: move out of range.
haha, brilliant strategy that would actually work..
When i saw this post the song "No more I love you's" came into my head.
Man, guys are truly insensitive aren't we? Here is this girl wallowing in pain and probably looking for sympathy; and all we can tell her is how to aim wrong in hopes that she misses the heart! What will the next advise be: try to catch a hicup episode before you shoot? We need a female president in the White House. Maybe that'll bring a fresh (the female) perspective on all things in general.
We all have our pains code buttons, assuming one does not understand this nature assumes that one is not human.. Besides you need to look deeper into the advice then just rampaging along the topic and accusing us of insensitivity. Look deeper into Ricks post, he is advising her to get away from what is causing her pain, to not go on the rebound and to not continue her relationship with someone who clearly is not doing any good for her, how can you consider this information insensitive? Ricks post also has a light humor to it, is it not better that he try to cheer the girl up along with giving useful advice instead of further increasing her sorrow by telling a more depressing piece of advice? Generally I would advise against assuming that 50% of the population is insensitive code, a female perspective is not a bad idea but do realize that this is still a male type society and things still are in favor of the male population which is why I dont think we will see a female president any time soon.. anyways buttons although men are most commonly untuned to how a female is feeling it doesnt mean all men are and certainly not all men on this forum, besides that let me leave you with one piece of advice..
"you must be the change you wish to see" - Gandhi
"you must be the change you wish to see" - Gandhi
Rick said,
"...move out of range."
maximus242 said,
"...Look deeper into Ricks post, he is advising her to get away from what is causing her pain, to not go on the rebound and to not continue her relationship with someone who clearly is not doing any good for her, how can you consider this information insensitive? Ricks post also has a light humor to it, is it not better that he try to cheer the girl up along with giving useful advice instead of further increasing her sorrow by telling a more depressing piece of advice?..."
I agree, but I think Rick meant MUCH more than that...
Also maximus, I'm just curious...were the first 241 already taken?
I agree with 'buttons that women really ought to have a shot at ruling the world. It's too bad that the ones in charge of everything (men) are prone to employ violence, aggression and war as a way to resolve problems. Ninety percent of all violent crimes are committed by men. Sometimes when I listen to news reports regarding all the unspeakable violence men inflict on women, children, and each other, I wonder what would happen if that particular gender were to suddenly vanish from our planet. Would we see a substantial reduction in overall violent crime? Would we have as many wars? Don't get me wrong, I don't want men to completely disappear (by any means), but I do occasionally speculate about this. I appreciate testosterone as much as the next person, but I think it can influence our leaders to resort too quickly to the use of force and aggression in place of peaceful diplomacy.
I found this interesting review of Neil Boyd's book on this subject, The Beast Within: Why Men are Violent:
I think I'd best run for cover now.
"...move out of range."
maximus242 said,
"...Look deeper into Ricks post, he is advising her to get away from what is causing her pain, to not go on the rebound and to not continue her relationship with someone who clearly is not doing any good for her, how can you consider this information insensitive? Ricks post also has a light humor to it, is it not better that he try to cheer the girl up along with giving useful advice instead of further increasing her sorrow by telling a more depressing piece of advice?..."
I agree, but I think Rick meant MUCH more than that...
Also maximus, I'm just curious...were the first 241 already taken?
I agree with 'buttons that women really ought to have a shot at ruling the world. It's too bad that the ones in charge of everything (men) are prone to employ violence, aggression and war as a way to resolve problems. Ninety percent of all violent crimes are committed by men. Sometimes when I listen to news reports regarding all the unspeakable violence men inflict on women, children, and each other, I wonder what would happen if that particular gender were to suddenly vanish from our planet. Would we see a substantial reduction in overall violent crime? Would we have as many wars? Don't get me wrong, I don't want men to completely disappear (by any means), but I do occasionally speculate about this. I appreciate testosterone as much as the next person, but I think it can influence our leaders to resort too quickly to the use of force and aggression in place of peaceful diplomacy.
I found this interesting review of Neil Boyd's book on this subject, The Beast Within: Why Men are Violent:
QUOTE
Men are killers. In every country and in every age, from antiquity to the present, men have committed 90 percent of all violent crimes. According to criminologist Neil Boyd, biology is at the root of the problem. Humans are part of the ape family, and human males, like most male apes, have a biological susceptibility to violence. Male gorillas kill their rivals' offspring. Male orangutans rape females. Male chimpanzees viciously attack individuals from other groups. And human males exhibit remarkably similar behavior, as seen in the Oklahoma City bombing, the epidemic of rapes in South Africa, and the brutal murder of Mathew Shepard in Wyoming, to name just a few examples. Sex differences also play a role in male violence. Because men are larger, faster, and stronger than women, they can inflict more harm. And male anatomy - specifically, the penis - facilitiates sexual aggression. There is also strong evidence that aggressive fathers are more likely than nonaggressive fathers to beget aggressive sons. Finally, testosterone leads indirectly to violence. But male violence is not inevitable. First, we must recognize its biological basis, and second, we must alter those environmental factors that can be altered, such as the overuse of alcohol, the glorification of male violence, and childhood abuse or neglect. Thoughtful, provocative, and definitely controversial, this book is essential reading for anyone concerned about violence in our society.
I think I'd best run for cover now.
.. no the first 241 were not taken.. I use this name all around the internet so I just keep it the same everywhere, it is easier to log on and for people who I talk to across multiple boards to keep track of me. Instead of making them and myself remember tons of account names.. the 242 is because maximus is usually taken.
I am all for having women in positions of power OnlyNow but I am saying the situation we are in right now it doesnt look like it will happen soon. Their is also a 20% diffrence in brain structure between males and females so theirin is alot of the agressive and passive diffrences. But you need to also consider people like Gandhi who did not use violence, was he a women? no.. I realize this is a double sided blade because people like Hitler are responsible for millions of deaths, in the end it is never a good idea to place people into steriotypes, not only because it makes unrealisitc generalizations but also because when their is enough expectance for a steriotype to act a certain way they often do so simply because society tells them thats how they are supposed to act.
So instead of saying males act this way why not say how can we get males to act a diffrent way? Dont forget although males are responsible for most of the wars ect, the female sex has about 50% of the population now I know for a fact that it does not take violence to get what you want. Even if males are psychically superior, females could be using non agressive tactics to get what they want and in my experience no matter how much strength you have, someone with good psychological insight can easily overcome them.
I am all for having women in positions of power OnlyNow but I am saying the situation we are in right now it doesnt look like it will happen soon. Their is also a 20% diffrence in brain structure between males and females so theirin is alot of the agressive and passive diffrences. But you need to also consider people like Gandhi who did not use violence, was he a women? no.. I realize this is a double sided blade because people like Hitler are responsible for millions of deaths, in the end it is never a good idea to place people into steriotypes, not only because it makes unrealisitc generalizations but also because when their is enough expectance for a steriotype to act a certain way they often do so simply because society tells them thats how they are supposed to act.
So instead of saying males act this way why not say how can we get males to act a diffrent way? Dont forget although males are responsible for most of the wars ect, the female sex has about 50% of the population now I know for a fact that it does not take violence to get what you want. Even if males are psychically superior, females could be using non agressive tactics to get what they want and in my experience no matter how much strength you have, someone with good psychological insight can easily overcome them.
I think women are a lot smarter than given credit for, on one hand. But on the other hand, they have an inheredited astuteness to probably compensate for their lack of physical strength. But this is a learned role, born out of their social inequality in comparason to their male counterpart. Society shapes them into this role by relegating them to the position of being a product with a price tag to it. So long as this tendency continous, women will never be able to achieve the same social status that men enjoy. But there are exceptions, in my opinion: Margaret Tatcher comes to mind, but there are more. She broke lots of female stereotypes on her way to a brilliant career in politics. This leads me to believe that the thought of a female America president is not so far fetched afer all. Let me say for the record that I would definitely vote for Mrs. Clinton, should she run for president. Not only for the obvious reasons regarding her political agenda, but because she has personal traits that would make her a great president. My only questions is though, if women ran the world, would missiles still look the same?
QUOTE
My only questions is though, if women ran the world, would missiles still look the same?
lol
I think spears and missiles would look the same. Arrows too. They're functionally evolved. A spear embodies Isaac Newton's principle of the transmissibility of forces. The laws of physics have no sex.
QUOTE(cerebral @ Mar 03, 07:23 AM)
QUOTE
My only questions is though, if women ran the world, would missiles still look the same?
lol
Why do they call them missiles when they are supposed to hit things? I suppose for the same reason that octopuses got their name even when they have tentacles.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.