Where do the *ruggedly handsome and definitely not gay* people fit into your scenario? Would we be helping separate the cute from non-cute during the pre-bashing phase?
the way i see it... there are a couple of categories.
1) cute as in fuzzy sweaters
2) cute as in funny like a smart girl being horny
3) cute as in she warms my fun spot and i can't explain why
4) cute as in "hey, it's a teenage girl licking an icecream cone! can i watch her and not be arrested?"
5) cute as in i'm gonna do this but not publicly
hey, it's nice to know we all have a sense of humor. you fascist laser blaster that is supporting the corporate monster that will eventually waste all of the earths natural resources so the few can enjoy 15 year old thai girls and whiskey cokes, on the “cheap”.
If you seperate the cute people from the non-cute people, at who are the non-cute people supposed to look? They can't look at each other unless they're equipped with the necessary safety glasses...
I think your definition of your own cuteness refers to how natural you look in women's underwear.
Testiculese wrote:If you seperate the cute people from the non-cute people, at who are the non-cute people supposed to look? They can't look at each other unless they're equipped with the necessary safety glasses...
I think your definition of your own cuteness refers to how natural you look in women's underwear.
Well, the rugged men would bash the non-cute people with nightsticks, and the non-cute people wouldn't get to look at anything, cuz they'd be dead. ^_~