Sure, we don't say the opposite of what we mean; we just tend to lie or go totally silent instead. We're by no means the most annoying sex, but we're still pretty damn aggravating. I went to an all-boys secondary school, and let me tell you, it was almost as confusing as having girls around.Sebenko said:
At least it's obvious, and we don't expect people to psychically know what we mean.SonicWaffle said:
I actually own three pairs, for I am unmanly, and as defensive weapons they are fairly useless. Some trainers (which are falling apart), some work shoes (which are also falling apart), and a pair of plimsoll-things I only wore once. Oh, and some steel-capped boots from when I used to work on building sites, but I haven't worn them in years so chances are I won't be able to use them if vampires attack me. After all, I'm told that the whole reason women totter around on those ridiculous high heels is so that, if vampires attack, they'll have a stake on the bottom of their foot (because the heels are always made of well-concealed wood, of course). One kick to the chest, and poof! No more Dracula.Sebenko said:
How are you so sure he is innocent? (Guys still have hands, fingers, tongues, and objects you know) /:SonicWaffle said:
See, the act of sex causes a release of diapherine in the brain. Diapherine is a neurotransmitter which induces vasoconstriction in the dorsal anterio-cochlear capillary which runs along behind the left ear, giving the documented "red dot" visual effect. The dorsal anterio-cochlear capillary has actually been made redundant through evolution, much like the appendix, and the weakened vessel walls collapse due to the increased pressure during the first instance of vasoconstriction. Which means, after one's first sexual experience, if the correct cortical neurons are stimulated , the "red dot" will disappear.Littlee300 said:
Well, I'm basing my assumption on the fact that, after the case was reopened and re-investigated, all three men were released from jail. I'm hoping that the Vietnamese government wouldn't release these guys if there was still any doubt about their innocence, red dots or not.Littlee300 said:
Did you just make all that up? If so, I hereby crown you the King of Impressive-Sounding Bullshit! If it's true, then...oh. Shame on all those other Vietnamese doctors for not knowing about it!James Joseph Emerald said:
How do we know they were innocent apart form this 'red dot'? One womans life could have bee ruined by these three men ad she helped them free, we don't know. We don't know what has happened so we can't say it's a good thing (or for that matter a bad thing)The Hairminator said:
We can't. In fact, nothing is certain. But since the men were freed, and the court didn't base that decision on hokus-pokus, but on actual witnesses, I'd say we at least shouldn't keep them in jail? Do you think they should remain jailed just because they had a rape sentence, but was later deemed innocent?Xyliss said:
Diapherine isn't even a word O:,James Joseph Emerald said:
I imagine the only reason they re-opened the case was because she threatened to harm herself. Shows how much even she believed her own argument...Kpt._Rob said:
I agree we shouldn't keep them in jail if they were deemed innocent, but from what I read (and sorry if I misinterpreted some of it) but there seemed to be no conclusive evidence either way, now im not saying keep them in jail if there isn't, I was just saying we should look at this from both sidesThe Hairminator said:
