Are you playing on the word “penetrating”?
Move to the east coast then?
I need some extra crash. Will you pay me?
I live out West too, but in Canada (which means you’ll have to pay me double to stay up North).
When they’re willing to pay you do the direct opposite. It’s an invitation man.
$0.01 HHH, Gib your a tough cookie, $0.02
Shit, you call that a negotiation?
Now we’re talking! That’s 2.5 cents Canadian!
US rates apply, sorry. 
That’s it, I’m crossing the border.
Jeez, give a guy an inch and he wants to cover thousands of miles.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/28/unemployed-men-survey-its-just-lunch_n_1631289.html
http://www.businessnewsdaily.com/2753-dating-unemployed-men-women.html
Unbelievable !
No one of them is a real woman, and no one of them is a real man.
And it is also because of them that something like the following is possible.
You know, I’ve gotta say, I kinda feel sorry for this girl. She must feel devastated today knowing she’s become this icon for male chauvinists to use in mocking feminists.
Yeah, sure, she’s angry, she’s bitchy, and I certainly wouldn’t want to hand her my balls on a silver platter, but so what? Who doesn’t get angry? Nobody’s even asking the question: Why is she angry? And isn’t it obvious from the video?
Furthermore, nobody’s drawing any attention to what she’s actually saying. If you listen to what she’s saying in the video, it doesn’t sound all that bad. That feminists are striving to abolish alimony, for example, doesn’t sound that bad. That feminists don’t want men to lose custody of their children, for example, doesn’t sound that bad.
Oh, and this girl:
Yeah, she cut off her husband’s penis (I guess)–but apparently, according to her, he would leave the house for days without letting her know, was an alcoholic and drug abuser, was having affairs with other women, and was abusive in every which way–mentally, physically, emotionally (she didn’t mention sexually)–and one day she snapped. ← Well, that kinda dampens any scorn or rage one might have for her. At least it does for me.
When you realize this is the background she’s coming from, it doesn’t seem that bigoted that a room full of women would cheer for her.
Just sayin’.
Are you a feminist, Gib?
When feminists ask me: “Do you support respect and dignity for women?” I always answer “Yes.” ← Then they say: “Then you’re a feminist.”
But when I start a sentence: “I think women…” they say “Sexist!”
Think of me as someone who likes to see the human being underneath the “ist”.
The one who supports recpect and dignity for woman is not necessarily a feminist yet. Every normal human would answer to that questioin with “yes”. So that question is a rhetorical question, if asked by a feminist. In other words: Answers to that question, if asked by a feminist, are not valid.
And then? Do you respond then?
I believe you that you like to see the human being underneath the “ist”, but in a modern age a huge majority is influenced by “isms”, so many modern people are “ists”.
I know.
Like hell it’s not valid. It’s the right answer–at least for me. I wish respect and dignity upon everyone. But I see what you’re saying: as a rhetorical question, they’re trying to get a “yes” out of me for some reason–but if all that reason is is that they want to label me a “feminist”… well, ok. ← You go girl!
If I were to respond, I’d say: it was your label. 
Do you mean they call themselves “ist” (as in, I’m a philanthropist), or just that they are influenced by an “ist” (or an “ism”). For example, the average man on the street is a dualist (<-- that’s Searle’s phrase, btw)–the belief that mind and body are separate–but I bet the average man’s never heard of Rene Descartes, and if you asked him “are you dualist?” he’d say “a what now?”
In any case, I don’t believe we can define a person based on the particular “ism” he or she may or may not believe in. It can be part of what defines a person, but I believe the fact of the person being human adds so much more. A person is always defined by his or her relations to friends and loved ones, even enemies and others whom they don’t like. A person is defined by his or her line of work. A person is defined by his or her passed experiences. A person is defined by whatever mental aberations he or she may (or may not) suffer. There’s fifty million other factors.
But it is interesting to think about what happens when a person identifies him or herself with a particular “ism”–to identify yourself as an “ist”–it’s the difference between saying I believe in the Christian doctrine and saying I am a Christian–when you do the latter, attacks upon your beliefs and values start to feel like attacks upon you–in fact, “isms” can get so deeply routed in our sense of identity, that their being criticized can feel threatening, threatening enough to warrant killing. This is why people go to war over ideologies. They strike at a survival instinct within us when tied to our identity–a sense that disagreement with our beliefs and values is tantamount to our lives–our selves, our ego–being threatened.