Why is it so fucking difficult

[belamyi]

Kaden as in Kaden Saylor? If yes then can you name the Porthole film/scene please?

Here it is: I couldn't find it last night: http://www.gayforit.eu/video/109897/Sailors-Gloryhole

 

[Taz]

Maybe the problem is not them?

 

[belamyi]

Taz, is that you on your avatar? Maybe he's not exactly fat, but the guy looks round like Liev Schreiber

- - - Updated - - -

Maybe the problem is not them?

That is the sort of easiest way out for the lazy, right after the one stating "there is no problem".

 

[JPGhost]

You live in Spain.

All the gingers are here.

Is that sarcasm/ oxymoron?

 

[JPGhost]

http://www.xvideos.com/video1323552/guy_hunter_-_more_portenos_-_gay_argentina

http://www.xvideos.com/video6708232/240p_400k

1.st= that ginger was so lackluster compared to those dark haired spanish top holy-top ass
2. I guess I knew..whose who..in it

 

[Taz]

Taz, is that you on your avatar? Maybe he's not exactly fat, but the guy looks round like Liev Schreiber

- - - Updated - - -

That is the sort of easiest way out for the lazy, right after the one stating "there is no problem".

It sure is me!

And 'lazy' as it may be, it's still a valid suggestion. After all, who is the common participant in these "really nice and hard topping anal sex sessions"?

 

[belamyi]

It sure is me!

And 'lazy' as it may be, it's still a valid suggestion. After all, who is the common participant in these "really nice and hard topping anal sex sessions"?

Another valid suggestion: your suggestion may well be wrong. So one vague and lazy suggestion is worth the other one, and any other one is ultimately worth whatever else.

There is no common participant, because those "sex sessions" are not something that has ever happened, which is the point of the thread: to find someone with whom having them happen.
What was the broken part in the grammar that kept you from actually reading and from understanding me?

 

[Taz]

The post is actually ambiguous. It could be taken as saying that you have had redheads and such that weren't decent.

It may well be wrong. But it may well be right. Someone who is not open to all the options is in denial. And from your defensiveness perhaps that is something revealing.

And the point of the thread seems to be asking why it is difficult to find them, not actually finding them. Perhaps you could have asked "how can I find a decent" instead of "why is it so difficult to find"

 

[belamyi]

The post is actually ambiguous. It could be taken as saying that you have had redheads and such that weren't decent.

It may well be wrong. But it may well be right. Someone who is not open to all the options is in denial. And from your defensiveness perhaps that is something revealing.

And the point of the thread seems to be asking why it is difficult to find them, not actually finding them. Perhaps you could have asked "how can I find a decent" instead of "why is it so difficult to find"

It is not ambiguous: if we are as strict and logical as grammar allows us to be, it is rather indefinite, which in a sense may be worse, but then you don't seem to be bothered by that in what you write: you only seem capable, are only interested in definite, binary, black-and-white, simplistic logic.

It is ambiguous, that is, has two definite possible meanings, only if you take for granted grammar in its strictness, and just believe in the assumption that the derived, secondary sense, as the "real", fundamental one. People usually use that expression to talk about what they have already experience, forgetting what it actually points to, without the added assumptions.
It just says "it" "is difficult", and that "it" is a mere action outside of time, outside actuality, so it is not actually a definite circumstance included in a vague, ambiguous statement that may necessary confuse you. True that everything happens in time and in a location, but as long as it is not definite, you can not say you are confused by some particular options when none of them has been actually defined to make you confused.

So it can be taken to say that, only as far as anything "can be taken" to say anything.

Then what you say about being open to options shows that you mistake being open to everything to having preferences.
It is precisely because I have been naturally open to what others do not seem so open, for example having escorts as sex partners, that I feel disappointment and insatisfaction more deeply. People naturally limited in their preferences and actions, apart from keeping a judgmental attitude that makes them feel and believe that people whom they do not understand, because their options are so different from their own, are in the wrong, rather than their own limited view of the world, including those other "wrong" people.
The defensiveness, as least in this thread, came only when I was frivolously attacked by being put "in the wrong" as an explanation for what may be well wrong outside of me, according to your own logic, that however you do not seem to take as "open" in its possibilities, and restrict only to the case in which I am the one in the wrong... merely because the consequences of what I [STRIKE]write[/STRIKE] say shock you?

You can not even be said to be "in denial" because you seem to have closed yourself to the possibility that there is something wrong to be found outside people like me, inside people like you, for example, that you do not deny it, you simply can not even start fathoming it to then go denying it.

All your posts so far in this thread show the same mental vagueness and fluffy condition. People like you can wander about touching this and that without being aware of anything they touch, and feel a barrier, a "closure" as you point to in my case, when that something retains their usually vapid attention and they feel forced to stop and consider something, that they then can only take as a closure.

Taz reads like a bee that enjoys going from flower to flower, but finds an unspeakably outrageous burden to carry pollen from them to go do something... and whatever sticks to him by mere inertia, and happily happens to pollinate somewhere, he takes as proof that what I have just wrote there is plain wrong.


The last part of your post is yet another proof of your muddle head: yes, of course they are two different questions, but you seem to imply that we should confuse them..?

The funnier part is that you end proposing, as an advance, a question that is already past behind the point of the thread and, to make it even richer, using the same indefiniteness or, as you said, the "ambiguous" expression you pointed in the OP, that is, you use a "can", which "can" be used to mean "could I find", and that is where you would be a question behind, not forward the original question of this thread.
Maybe you should have asked me to ask "where ARE all the pretty light-haired guys"?

 

[Taz]

I'm too lazy to read all of that.

 

[belamyi]

I'm too lazy to read all of that.

And that is what keeps you in the condition that is described in it: you might want to know about it, maybe, only if it came through some old sage in the wilds whom could be met between halts during your roaming around

 

[Taz]

A sage that you never met.

 

[dpnice]

I'm too lazy to read all of that.

I made the effort; I usually do but this time my head is turning in circles as I have no idea what my dear Belamy is talking about.

Subsequently I can't even give you a decent precise.

 

[Taz]

Something about how misunderstood he is I'm sure.

 

[belamyi]

A sage that you never met.

That you didn't learn from either

A sage that, in my case, may be as difficult to meet as the people referred to in the OP.

 

[belamyi]

Something about how misunderstood he is I'm sure.

Something about how the problem can never be in yourself and I may add now, how it is easier to pack in one single character, like me, that idea of yours that what is wrong is what lies in your sphere of understanding and acceptance, and therefore pretend that you are not against most people outside yourself, but only against me

See, you are sure you know everything already, no trouble, so why should you face the plain facts and ideas, devoid of all sage fluff of appearance of sageness?
Since for you all that seems to count is not so much ideas but from whom are they hanging, and since you are so sure of yourself, it is no wonder that you ASSUME that what I am talking is all about myself.

 

[Taz]

That post is very meta belly. Are you sure you aren't projecting onto me?

 

[belamyi]

That post is very meta belly. Are you sure you aren't projecting onto me?

I say that you project on me, and your only response is that I am the one who does that.

You didn't even care to read what I said, did you: you only had that response ready like politicians who keep that sort of weasel tricks available to appear as if they are saying something, and something with sense that may seem like a winning response who are just as careless about sense and about what is really going on.

 

[Taz]

You didn't even care to read what I said, did you.

You caught me

Mind you I did already tell you that. It's not enough that you're projecting. Now you're trying to be like me. Be proud to be who you are belly. Maybe see a psychologist.

 

[belamyi]

You caught me

Mind you I did already tell you that. It's not enough that you're projecting. Now you're trying to be like me. Be proud to be who you are belly. Maybe see a psychologist.

And I was talking of one of the shorter posts, not the long one...

Keep projecting, dude: you are the kool one, you are even an Ozzie, you are allowed to do whatever and have whatever pass for whatever