Feed on
Posts
Comments

Why Are There So Many Lawyers?

Feb 13th, 2008 by

In the last post discussing the Japanese embrace of all things A.I., one of the commenters mentioned that Japan’s ratio of engineers to lawyers is 10 to 1, while the U.S.’s ratio is the reverse: 1 to 10. Because I have a special contempt for most lawyer chicks which impels me to fuck them hard, deep and violently until their gratingly argumentative masculinized tough girl exterior lies in a wet spot of pent-up orgasmic release on my bedsheets, I was curious why this is so.

My first guess is similar to what commenter ‘agnostic’ wrote about the Japanese possessing an IQ profile that favors visual-spatial reasoning over verbal fluency. If this is true, we should expect to see disproportionately more Asian-American engineers than lawyers, including second and third generation Asian-Americans, compared to the rest of the U.S. population. Lawyers, for reasons unbeknownst to me and at odds with the objective evidence concerning their contribution to society and the rigor of their curriculum, have higher status in the U.S. than do engineers, so if the highly pragmatic Asians are choosing engineering over law in spite of all the social pressure to do the opposite then that would suggest an ingrained mental proclivity for the hard maths.

Another possibility may be that homogeneous societies, like Japan’s, don’t need as many lawyers because the trust factor is stronger. When everyone looks like everyone else strangers are more apt to trust one another and work cooperatively, negating the need for lawyers. Corruption is lower so the courts are less involved in business transactions. A Harvard study has even shown that more diversity reduces civic-mindedness.

Is the U.S., the premiere multicultural experiment on the world stage, overburdened with lawyers because of its diversity? Is trust so low that recruiting an army of lawyers is the only way anything can get done here anymore?

To answer this, I’ve put together a chart comparing the number of lawyers per capita to the level of diversity for each state in the U.S. The second column is the Diversity Index for the year 2000 and it is based on a Census algorithm. The higher the Diversity Index number of the state, the more likely you are to run into someone from another race or ethnicity there. The lower it is, the more the entire state will look like an extended family backyard BBQ. The third column is number of lawyers in each state per 10,000 residents as of 2001.

STATE Diversity Index 2000 Lawyers per 10,000 Residents
ME 0.07 9
VT 0.08 8.2
NH 0.10 7.7
WV 0.10 8.8
IA 0.14 6.2
ND 0.16 4.4
MT 0.19 8.5
KY 0.20 7.1
WY 0.21 8.3
SD 0.22 5.8
ID 0.22 6.1
MN 0.22 11.2
NE 0.23 8.3
WI 0.23 6.8
IN 0.25 6.9
UT 0.26 9.1
OH 0.28 8.6
PA 0.28 11.9
MO 0.29 10.9
OR 0.29 7.9
KS 0.30 5.8
RI 0.32 9.1
MA 0.32 14.5
TN 0.35 8.2
AR 0.36 5.3
MI 0.36 7.8
WA 0.37 8.7
CT 0.38 14.3
CO 0.42 13
OK 0.43 8.1
DE 0.44 18
AL 0.44 9.4
NC 0.46 8.2
VA 0.47 9.5
SC 0.48 8.4
MS 0.50 7.6
IL 0.50 14
LA 0.50 11.1
AK 0.51 8
GA 0.52 12
FL 0.52 11.7
NJ 0.53 11.7
AZ 0.53 8
NV 0.53 10.4
MD 0.53 9.4
NY 0.57 20.4
TX 0.61 9.5
NM 0.62 6.9
CA 0.67 10.9
HI 0.73 9.5


DC 0.56 276.7

I’ve separated DC from the main list as an outlier. 277 lawyers per 10,000 residents! In distant second place is New York at 20 lawyers per 10,000 residents. Now I know why I can’t get away from dating lawyers in this town. They’re everywhere. The overwhelming lawyer presence goes a long way toward explaining why DC is the toughest city to game chicks. No wonder there are cat adoption shelters on every corner.

The coefficient of correlation between the diversity index and the number of lawyers for all states is 0.38, which is a moderately positive correlation. So my theory that diversity breeds lawyers has some merit.

Next: I will discover a correlation between a woman’s career success and how often she bitches about guys.

Posted in Culture, Tool Time, Ugly Truths | 65 Comments »

Robotopia

Feb 12th, 2008 by

I went to a Japanese cultural exhibit at the Kennedy Center. The crowd pleasing favorites were the robots. This guy rolls around answering questions in a chipper voice and shaking hands:

img_0999b.jpg

He’d make a great politician if his answers were a little more vague.

This robot, made by Toyota, plays the trumpet using a complicated air pump system and lips that mimic those of a human:

img_1006bb.jpg

Yes, he (she? it?) actually played the trumpet by blowing air into the instrument and pressing the valves with his fingers. He leaned and swayed side to side and backwards like a real musician getting caught up in the emotions of playing a song. He blasted out a couple of pop songs from the 1970s and a Disney tune. The sound was good and not as stilted or mechanical as I expected. A trumpet playing robot is pretty amazing but it’s not yet at the point where it can capture the fluidity and sensuality of a human master musician. Still, I tapped my feet.

A robot baby seal serves as a therapeutic aid to nursing home residents and sick children:

img_1000b.jpg

Aw, those soulful eyes. Guess what. If you scratch its face it will turn to the side you are scratching to look at you in appreciation and purr. You can feel the vibrations of the purr if you put your hand on its neck, just like a cat. Touch its whiskers and it makes an annoyed yip and turns away. Stroke its back and it will show its approval with a tail wag and squeals of delight. The makers of this $3500 toy say the noises the seal makes are an exact replica of the noises made by real baby seals in the wild. I asked if it came packaged with a club; the seal growled and a machine gun barrel protruded from its mouth. I moved on.

This is how the robot baby seal feeds recharges:

img_1002b.jpg

Check out the pacifier-shaped connectors. The Japanese are weird. If this had been a German product, the plug would’ve been in the ass.

Hmm, now what does this robot remind me of?

img_0992b.jpg

They’re coming!

What I learned from this cultural exchange:

  • The Japanese are really smart.
  • It says something stereotypical about the Japanese that they are leading the robot revolution.
  • The Japanese are confronting their demographic implosion and xenophobia head-on by investing in robots instead of importing tens of millions of antagonistic peasants to do the work that Japanese just won’t do.
  • We should be opening the borders to cute Japanese girls in pleated skirts and knee high stockings.
  • Americans should be ashamed we are falling way behind the robotics race.
  • Americans are no longer ashamed of things that are worthy of shame.
  • The Japanese understand that a society of robots is superior to a society of lawyers.
  • It would not surprise me if an unmarried Japanese-American man were the first to invent a sexbot.
  • The robot in the last photo is hotter than 80% of American women.
  • I’d tap that.

Posted in Culture, Globalization, Tool Time | 31 Comments »

Phone Number Free-For-All

Feb 11th, 2008 by

I’ve noticed girls are giving out their phone numbers to guys more frequently than they used to do. They don’t even think twice about it now. Guy asks for number after a 30 second conversation; girl gives it to him. I’ve seen girls give their number to three different guys in one night at the same bar, only to go home with a fourth guy at last call.

What is going on here? Are these girls really interested in all these guys? No. Most of those guys will call once and get voicemail, never to hear from her again. Are they stroking their egos? Maybe, but they can do that without handing over their number. Attention whores survive on instantaneous highs, not the delayed gratification of waiting for a guy to call.

Has the phone number exchange become an easy way to get rid of a guy hitting on her? Girls used to dismiss guys with the standard “I have a boyfriend” line. That was the way things were done, and it was pretty effective. Plus, that tactic had the added benefit of preventing possible weirdos from voicemail-stalking her. Fake numbers also were standard operating procedure for the savvy club girl, but you don’t see that much anymore either.

I suspect the reason for this tactical change on the part of women has to do with the new game guys are bringing to the field. The lessons of the past ten years are beginning to filter down to the masses, and what you see are guys getting more aggressive during the initial pickup, but weaker on the phone tag follow-up. Men are calling their bluff when the girls toss out blowoff lines — “You have a boyfriend? That’s great, so does my girlfriend!” — but are quicker to NEXT the girls when they get voicemail on the follow-up call. The response by girls has been to revert to “number closing” to get a guy off their back knowing that the likelihood he will pester her with multiple voicemail messages is very low.

Women are giving out their numbers more readily because they are no longer concerned guys will stalk them.

My suggestion for guys to defend against this latest counterinsurgency tactic is to make women pay a price for handing their phone numbers over too cavalierly when they have no intention of answering your call. It is time to return to the days of harassing them over the phone. Call three times a week and supplement with rambling text messages. Be persistent, just like in the movies. Except in real life, she won’t find your persistence endearing and eventually succumb to your stubborn charms. But in the future she will think twice about blowing off guys with her phone number.

Posted in Girls, Vanity | 26 Comments »

Instant Attraction

Feb 10th, 2008 by

A girl’s sexual attraction can be triggered nearly as fast as a man’s.

I was with a group of friends at a rooftop bar when three girls who were milling about joined our conversation. One of the girls was a little testier than the others and swapped a couple of sarcastic one-liners with us when one of my friends grinned really wide and said:

“You look like you haven’t been laid in a while.”

BOOM. Instant attraction. You could see it in her eyes. In a flash he had gone from random guy at bar to sex object in her mind.

She pretended to be offended and walked off. My friend didn’t budge or watch her walk away. He said she’ll be back. I glanced at the girl who was now on the other side of the bar and caught her looking over at my friend multiple times. She was completely hooked.

Five minutes later she returned to our group and asked him why he thinks that about her. She touched his arm while she asked this.

Women are as Pavlovian in their sexual responses as men are; they just react to different stimuli.

Posted in Alpha, Girls | 51 Comments »

Further Thoughts On Dating Younger Women

Feb 8th, 2008 by

Some of my commenters mentioned that it should be easier for older guys to date younger girls because of the inherent attraction women have for worldly, mature men. This assumption is true in the abstract, but needs to be amended.

Maxim #7: The greater the age difference between the older man and the younger woman, the tighter his game will need to be, barring compensatory attributes.

This is why a 25 year old guy can get away with a little more beta behavior when gaming 22 year old girls than a 35 year old man gaming the same girls. There is a smaller margin of error when the age difference approaches ten years plus, and the women are under 25. The upshot is that an older man with good game is EXTREMELY attractive to all women because the experience is so rare.

Maxim #7 applies to about 60% of women under 25. I have found that 40% of under 25 women have no problem dating much older guys, and many even actively seek out the dashing older gentleman. What this means in the field is that if you are over 30 and hitting on 22 year olds, you will be rebuffed slightly more frequently before you even open your mouth than if you were closer in age to your targets. Don’t worry about it. Chances are good that for every girl who sneers “How old are you??” the very next one will welcome your advances. Only when you notice all your approaches beginning with your target’s incredulity should you consider raising the lower bound age limit of the women you hit on. But trust me, that point comes much later than most guys realize.

Another commenter wondered if joking about the age difference would help deflate its impact. Be careful with this course of action; it can easily backfire. If you do make light of it, don’t go overboard. Too much evasive joking betrays a faint whiff of insecurity, especially if you are the one to broach the age subject first. One offhand joke is enough. For instance, when asked my age, I sometimes say “My chronological age or my emotional age? Cause, you know, emotionally I’m 14. Wanna go to the arcade?”

The same applies when being asked about your job. One “joke job” is enough. If you reel off a litany of joke jobs, she will suspect you really are an unemployed loser with something to hide.

Nowadays I skip the joking entirely and don’t mention age at all unless my date shows signs of unease with the age difference. In these cases I handle any age objections like this:

Her: “So I have to ask… how old are you?”
Me: “Guess.”
Her: “29.”
Me: “Pretty good. [notice I didn’t actually confirm her guess] How old are you?”
Her: “23.”
Me: “Wow, my ex was 23… no wait, it was her birthday last week, she just turned 24. Normally I like to date older women because they are classy and sophisticated, but maybe you are different.”

I have done two things here: One, I’ve showed her that I am no stranger to dating younger women. They like to know you are loved by other women similar to themselves in age and beauty. (This is why dating a fat chick is actually worse for your product marketability than being single.) Two, I have put her on the defensive so that she is now working hard to get my approval. Most women are secretly hoping that you will challenge them like this. They WANT to be the approval-seekers.

Once you’ve mastered the most important part of picking up younger women – your attitude – you can improve those secondary characteristics that will help round out your game. Here are some:

  • Stay in shape.

It’s not hard. Don’t overeat and hit the gym regularly. The real gym with iron, not the froo froo one with elliptical machines and treadmills. Women are forgiving of general aging in a man, but they are less lenient when that man has a round gut and bitch tits.

  • Baldness.

If you are balding, shave it to the scalp skin. There is nothing worse than the monk’s ring. If I were balding, I would shave it all off and get a spitting cobra tattoo wrapped around my skull. Job promotions would soon follow.

  • Fashion.

Dress younger and trendier than the average guy in your age bracket, but not so trendy that you look ridiculous. For instance, if you are 30, upgrade from designer hoodies to designer blazers. Chuck the Chucks for Steve Maddens and Pradas. $50 t-shirts are still OK if you have an excellent V-shaped torso to show off, but most men will want to move on to snappy spread-collared shirts after 30.

  • Tattoos.

This is a little trickier as you run the risk of looking like a prole, but tattoos add an aura of toughness that works well to compensate for the perception of blandness as you age into the next demographic.

  • Become artistic.

Drop the typcial American male hobbies like drinking and football and take up photography and guitar. Expressing yourself artistically is so attractive to so many younger women that it virtually negates any doubts about your age.

Posted in Dating, Game, Girls, Guy Rules, Lolita | 37 Comments »

Top Two Rules For Dating Younger Women

Feb 7th, 2008 by

The two critical rules for older guys dating girls under 25:

Rule #1: Don’t be needy

You should never be needy with any woman (exceptions made if she’s an over 30 divorcee with two kids and a Snickers bar figure) but it is especially important to refrain from showing even the slightest displays of neediness with the under 25 girls. A young woman is extra-sensitive to the subtle signals that a man gives off when he is a little too happy to be with her. If the guy she likes is significantly older, like ten years or more, she’ll be that much more on guard for beta bahavior. An older guy who is needy is a bigger loser than a younger guy who is needy, because the younger guy at least has the excuse of inexperience. Plus, the older guy has to learn how to handle the elevated risk of being labeled a “lech” or “pervy”.

Examples:

Texting
29 year old texts you. Wait 5 minutes before replying.
22 year old texts you. Wait 1 hour before replying, unless it’s a weekend night in which case don’t text back until the next day.

Calling
29 year old calls. Pick up on the third ring.
22 year old calls. Let it go to voicemail and return call minimum of 2 hours later.

Going to a bar together
Chat up one other girl in 29 year old’s presence. Any more than that and you will make her too insecure.
Leave 22 year old for 30 minute stretches of time to flirt with girls in different parts of the bar. If she sees three or more girls laughing along with you, bonus points. You are guaranteed sex that night.

Shit testing
If 29 year old tells you some random guy flirted with her today, show a hint of jealousy.
If 22 year old tells you some random guy flirted with her today, say you hoped she number closed him because she needs a shopping boyfriend.

Post-coital challenge
29 year old gazes at you lovingly and says “I think I’m falling for you.” You say “Me too.”
22 year old gazes at you lovingly and says “I think I’m falling for you.” You say “Thanks! Keep it coming. I’m a sucker for flattery.”

Communication breakdown
29 year old mysteriously stops contacting you. Wait four days before sending casual text asking her out on another date.
22 year old mysteriously stops contacting you. Do not attempt to contact her again. In two months you have a 50% chance of getting a text from her wanting to see you.

Rule #2: Don’t be insecure

Many older guys who like dating younger girls fall into the trap of fretting about the age difference. He makes the mistake of bringing the issue up before she has, or cracking awkward jokes about her youth. His age insecurity will lead him to lean on his money or job status as attraction ploys because he won’t believe that a cute younger girl could love him for his personality or strength of character.

The truth is that, contrary to the sugar daddy cultural message, money and a high status job are not required to attract younger women. They help, but what helps a lot more is tight game and a dominant, charming personality. If you are unfazed by the age difference, she will be too. Run the same game at 35, 45, and 55 that you would at 25.

Bear in mind that younger women (barring a few notable golddigger exceptions) are not as practical as older women. They are more whimsical, flirty, passionate, and romantic, and this means you will get more mileage having a youthful outlook, being recklessly spontaneous, maintaining a high level of energy, and focusing on the emotional connections, than you would tempting them with the allure of financial stability and security.

If you follow my advice above, you will have no trouble finding a girl much younger than you to fall in love with you.

Posted in Dating, Game, Girls, Guy Rules, Lolita | 206 Comments »

My Advice To The Republicans

Feb 6th, 2008 by

Vote for Hillary or Obama. If a left wing socialist in the White House next year is guaranteed (as appears likely with McCain the presumptive Republican nominee. details upon request.) it’s better that person is one you can wash your hands of, so when the inevitable shit hits the fan you will be well-positioned in 2012. Think: “fresh start” and “vote for change”.

George W. Bush has been a Trojan Horse disaster for the party. You wanted him, now it’s time to take your bitter medicine to rid your party of his viral infection. The people are crying out for the purifying acid bath of an anti-W. Let them have it. The country needs to be brought to its knees before it can rise up again. Electoralshock treatment.

To those Republicans who still understand what the party stands for and are considering voting for McCain: If you have to sacrifice 100% of your principles in order to win, you have already lost.

Hillary the Harridan 2008!

Posted in Current Events | 45 Comments »

The Morality Equation

Feb 5th, 2008 by

In my post on morality I offered a few thoughts on the shifting sands of moral certitude:

If you had the power in your hands, would you kill in such a manner as to ensure maximum pain and suffering

a. 10,000 Indonesians if it would save your lover’s life?

b. your lover if it would save 10,000 Indonesians’ lives?

I concluded with the following wholly scientific effort at a layman’s definition of morality:

Morality = genetic affinity + expedience + quid pro quo + self-serving status posturing

Commenter “godparticles” picked up where I left off and admirably quantified my definition:

I would probably give more weight to S (status posturing) like this:

M=(g+E+q) x S

…where M is defined as the strength of a moral decision. I guess you could create a scale of relatedness for g, a scale of convenience for E, a scale of likely material return for q, and a scale for the explicit ingroup approbation of the moral position, decision, or action for S.

Let this serve as an innocuous example: A middle-aged, poor black man recently asked me for a dollar outside a grocery store. I was sitting in my car waiting for a friend, and he approached with the opening, “I’m not trying to start any trouble or anything, but can I get a dollar for the bus…” I don’t usually carry cash, and that’s what I told him and he left… even though I knew I had a few bucks in my wallet. I’ve been begged for more cash before after having pulled out my wallet so that wasn’t going to happen again.

So the g was 0. The E was actually high. The q was 0. And the S was 0 (no one was watching to approve). HOWEVER, if my (very liberal) friend had been in the car, the S would have increased and multiplied by the E would have led me to give him the buck.

I liked godparticles’ strengthening of my morality equation so I refined the variables and scoring and added an example of my own in the comments:

given: M = (g + E + q) x S

where M = degree of moral umbrage and the likelihood of taking action to rectify the perceived injustice.

g = genetic affinity
E = expediency (I define this as fluid morality, which is similar to moral convenience. You’re more likely to adopt a moral position when it works to your benefit or is relatively painless to act upon.)
q = tit for tat
S = status whoring

The scale for each variable is 1-10, where 1 = no impact on your decision and 10 = influence of the utmost importance.

Let’s say you’re at a party with friends and your brother (who is in attendance) blurts out a racist joke (he has an awkward sense of humor). A hush descends over the crowd. Your response hinges on a series of subconscious calculations:

g = 10 (he’s your brother!)
E = 2 (it’s tough to call out a racist joke at a party and risk dragging out the discomfort. it’s even tougher when it’s your brother’s public humiliation on the line.)
q = 1 (you’re contemplating a moral action that will prevent your loss, rather than win you gains.)
S = 6 (you risk losing the approval of your friends if you seem as if you are acceding to your brother’s faux pas. acting will not raise your status, but it will prevent you losing status.)

calculating M we get:

M = (10+2+1) x 6 = 78

If M resides on a scale from 3 to 300, where a score of 300 equals a moral action that is easy to take, quite personally beneficial, and encourages the sort of self-righteous preening that feels almost as good as sex, then in the scenario I outlined above a score of 78 means you would probably hesitate briefly before deciding to evade your moral discomfort by changing the subject and yelling out “WHO’S UP FOR SHOTS!!!”

An M of 1 means “Kill em all and let bog sort them out”.

Now I’m curious how other common moral dilemmas would rank using the morality equation. Here’s an example from the battlefront:

You and your buddy are in a bar. He notices two girls, a hottie and her friend who was born to cockblock. He tells you it’s all his and he’ll signal you to join when he needs a wingman to occupy the obstacle. He approaches and soon the girls are laughing. You get the signal and move in, doing your best to draw the CB’s attention away from her friend and to you. But your natural charm infects both girls and the cute girl starts touching your arm and tossing you the flirty eye. Your friend is losing the set but you have a good chance of acquiring his target’s digits. You think about number closing her. The morality variables look like this:

g = 2 (no genetic relation to your friend but racially he looks like you.)
E = 7 (any decision you take would be easy to act upon, but getting her # could potentially cost you your friend’s respect since he’s standing right there. because it is only one friend and not a whole group of friends you feel you can smooth out the situation later with a little one on one.)
q = 8 (if you get her # you have a shot at adding a notch. if you don’t get her number you retain the wingman services of your friend for the future.)
S = 6 (you will gain a lot of status points with your friend if you don’t number close his target for yourself. but it is just one friend.)

M = (2 + 7 + 8 ) x 6 = 102

On the morality scale of 3 to 300, there is a one in three chance that you will put your friend’s feelings before the pussy.

Ask yourself, does this result match up with your personal experience dealing with the same situation? Would a good friend opportunistically number close your target 2 out of 3 times?

Posted in Biomechanics is God, Guy Rules, Status Is King, The Id Monster, Ugly Truths | 38 Comments »

Is Female Beauty Increasing?

Feb 4th, 2008 by

Anecdotally, I suspect it is. Adjusting for age and weight, there seem to be more pretty girls than ever before. If you opened two high school yearbooks side by side, one from 2007 and one from 1987, and restricted your sample size to those girls who weren’t overweight, I bet you’d come away with the impression that the girls of 2007 look better. And it’s not makeup; it’s a real difference in facial bone structure.

Changes in the culture are happening to shift the beauty spectrum rightward.

  1. Birth control, especially condoms since that is the form of contraceptive that can be controlled by men, is putting selection pressure on what kinds of women are winning the genetic sweepstakes. With birth control, men are no longer having kids with the first women who will sleep with them. They are trading up to find that great-looking woman for whom they can finally ditch the condom and seriously entertain the notion of having children. It doesn’t take much of a change in mating patterns — even  a slight shift in the numbers of children born to hot chicks versus plain or ugly chicks will make a noticeable impact after a few generations.
  2. While dumber women are having more kids than educated smarter women, alpha males — the ones making the beaucoup bucks, slapping backs at parties, and sporting Mitt Romney lantern jaws — are having more kids than the beta males. How does this happen? Answer: Serial monogamy and mistresses. Beauty and IQ correlate to a degree as smart guys tend to marry hot women, so you’ll find proportionately more smart hotties than dumb hotties, but there are still plenty of beautiful women of middling social class that will turn the eye of an alpha male. So when the high IQ wife of 15 years who bore her alpha husband 1.2 children gets old and unattractive, he turns her in for a younger woman, oftentimes a less ambitious woman because he’s learned his lesson, and has children with her. Result: More daughters born to alpha male fathers are beautiful than those born to beta fathers.
  3. Women are settling less than they did in the past, at least during their prime years (17 to 26). I’ve gone over the reasons for this before. Their financial independence, higher status relative to men, and entitledness are working in concert to delay marriage and childbirth, lengthening the time they hold out for their ideal Mr. Right. Marriage and two kids with a mediocre provider beta has been swapped for a swingers life of contraceptively insured sex with a small pool of desireable alphas. See: Sex and the City. Result: Women who do have kids during their prime fertile years are likely to have them with the strong seed of an alpha, thus ensuring a higher number of hottie daughters.
  4. Obesity. No analysis of continuing human natural selection in the U.S. is complete without a nod to the obesity epidemic. Obesity reduces fertility. And men find it repulsive. The consequence is selection pressure for children born to attractive thin women by quality men, contributing to the increase in beauty among the daughters of those quality fathers.

Beauty is a commodity, like gold or athleticism, and any increase or decrease of it in the general female population will have profound effects on the dating market. More supply means lowered demand and more hot babes giving blowjobs on the first date. Less supply means greater demand and more hot babes thanking guys for expensive dinners with a peck on the cheek.

The trick is to game women as if their beauty was oversupplied.

Posted in Alpha, Biomechanics is God, Girls | 46 Comments »

A Hallmark Moment

Feb 3rd, 2008 by

It is late in the night and two grown men are driving home from the clubs. Navigating cop cars and pedestrians on Columbia Road, we notice a couple of bicyclists on our right. Nearing the first bicyclist we can’t help but trumpet a horny ode to her luscious figure 8 derriere as she pedals hard in the chill air.

“Hey man, over there. What an ass on her! The cheeks just hug the shit out of that bike seat. Look at the way the ass globes move up and down in perfect harmony.”

“Love that ponytail. It says all the right things — grab the reins while you pound me.”

We drive past her.

“Dude, she’s hot! Face to match the ass. So many cute DC bike babes.”

We approach the second biker from behind.

“Whoa, another one. Check out this chick. Beautiful blonde hair. I love long blonde hair. Look at those jeans pulled down low.”

“Niiice, I see some white panties poking out! Is that plumber’s crack? Sweeeeeeet.”

We drive slowly by the second biker.

“AUUUGHHH!!! It’s a dude! Oh man, fuck! AUUUUGGGHHHH! What the fuck!? What dude wears his hair like that??”

“FUCK! SHIT! UGH! I’m hitting the lesbian porn as soon as I get home. Pull your pants up you hipster slob! Night ruined!”

Posted in Funny/Lolblogs, Ridiculousness, The Big City Life | 9 Comments »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »

Also reachable over Tor: roissyrwpgxawb3etwznvay4eelbws4lkdtr4tt2r7wxb6adq6pajtqd.onion