DVDizzy Forum

Thanks Super Aurora. You're a real great friend for doing that for me even though you probably didn't want to. Really, thanks. I'm gonna E-mail you when my friend tells me when she's having her birthday party so I can figure out when I'm free!

Dr. Frankenollie it is obvious that image is supposed to be sexual. I'm not going to debate with you on this any further. The funny thing is you asking if such a thing should be allowed on the forum shows it's not as normal as legs or hands. So you already knew. It's like you're always after me. >: (

Disney Duster wrote:Dr. Frankenollie it is obvious that image is supposed to be sexual. I'm not going to debate with you on this any further. The funny thing is you asking if such a thing should be allowed on the forum shows it's not as normal as legs or hands. So you already knew. It's like you're always after me. >: (

Hey, I think that things perceived as sexually-related shouldn't always be. Only human thoughts differentiate things like breasts from things like hands or legs. I wasn't asking if something should be allowed, I was just surprised if it was because breasts are regarded as sexual, even though they're just as normal as other body parts. I didn't already 'know' anything.

If you seen Highschool of the Dead you'd know that what duster said of it being sexual is true. But it's hilarious even with the sexual connotations.


Duster I didn't change it because you ask me. I want change sig for while so I did. I didn't want to hear any nagging and bitching over it either.

Dr Frankenollie wrote:Only human thoughts differentiate things like breasts from things like hands or legs.

Yea but things only are seen, realized, and have meaning through thoughts.

Super Aurora wrote:Duster I didn't change it because you ask me. I want change sig for while so I did. I didn't want to hear any nagging and bitching over it either.

Uhhh...did you mean me or other people/mods? :0

Soooo because Amy Medford got banned, does that mean she actually was Jackoleen!?!?!

Whether she was or not, I'm pretty sure we're all just going to think she was. haha

As for this dreadful "Bear Baiting" epidemic that seems to be spreading the nation one town at a time... I can play an awesome drunk bitch when I need to.

singerguy04 wrote:Soooo because Amy Medford got banned, does that mean she actually was Jackoleen!?!?!

Yeah, you can read about it in Amy Medford's OT: Who was/ is Jackoleen? thread, since she apparently didn't like the accusations they might be one and the same.

Great news, guys! Jacko-Amy's thread gave me a great idea, so last night I decided to go to a gay bar downtown and give it a whirl (I mean, also BEAR baiting makes more sense when it's a bear in the sexual slang of the word, amirite?). So I found a bear and was acting like absolutely smashed and one thing led to another and then the bear got convicted in court this afternoon! After the verdict was announced I pantomimed choking a bear then shooting one with various guns, then tore my shirt off and ran around the courtroom high-fiving all my gays who came to watch as the judge stared, powerless to do anything! So anyhow, long story short, I have a new reality show on Bravo called "SpringHeelJack-anapes" about me and my gays getting drunk and throwing drinks at things and stuff. Anyhow, it was so much fun, I'm trying it again tonight and hopefully I'll get a movie deal out of tomorrow's media coverage. Thanks for the suggestion, Amoleen!

LOOOOLLLLLL!!!!!

SpringHeelJack wrote:I have a new reality show on Bravo called "SpringHeelJackoleen-anapes"

SpringHeelJack wrote: "SpringHeelJack-anapes"

More cute than the working title but still amazingly funny.

-Skyler

Disney Duster wrote:Yea but things only are seen, realized, and have meaning through thoughts.

Good point. Nonetheless, I was trying to say that certain body parts only have sexual connotations because of some of us perceiving them that way.

JiminyCrick91 wrote:

SpringHeelJack wrote: "SpringHeelJack-anapes"

More cute than the working title but still amazingly funny.

Yeah, the working title of "SpringHeelJack-off" worked less because in my mind it was close to "jag off" but on paper it was... not so much. It tested poorly with the focus groups too, apparently.

Disney Duster wrote:

SpringHeelJack wrote:I have a new reality show on Bravo called "SpringHeelJackoleen-anapes"

YOU HAVE DISCOVERED MY HORRIBLE SECRET... that I am Jackoleen;s new identity! Yes, all this time, it was I! Right in front of you all! And I'd do it again if I had the chance! That's right! AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

Have a Disneylicious day.

_________________
Until Next Time,
SpringHeelJack
(a.k.a. Jackoleen)

Dr Frankenollie wrote:

Disney Duster wrote:Yea but things only are seen, realized, and have meaning through thoughts.

Good point. Nonetheless, I was trying to say that certain body parts only have sexual connotations because of some of us perceiving them that way.

Well people are biologically made to think those parts are sexual. And me being gay, I'm one of those gays that have been biologically made to be rather grossed out by sexual parts on a woman if they're bouncing around with nipples sticking out and up close in an animation that is clearly meant to be sexual. You can't always help what bothers you, and this thing is one of those times. The only way for me to get around it is to look away but I gotta look at the page to read whatever Super Aurora says. This is just one thing that I can't help. Please just be respectful of it, I would do the same for you.