Thursday, October 14, 2010

Doughy McWade

Yechhhh, that Gator pic below is starting to scald my eyeballs, so lets dial things back down to some real world Barclownery and multichick hottness.

Doughy McWade is your standard blowpud. Not much to add.

But I see you, Jenny Brunette on the left. Your eyes sparkle with innocence and a touch of fear. And for that, I spank your bottom with a Kenner Boba Fett action figure.

# posted by douchebag1
11:27 am October, 14 Nancy Dreuche said...

Finally a guy who knows how to do CSR and GSR @ the same time! In this chap’s case the G stands for Gut.

And ladies, I’m having a jewelry party later @ my place. No pressure to buy, but I’m sure you’ll find some nice pieces to compliment your collective wardrobes.

11:28 am October, 14 Douchey Lewis and the News said...

Is it just me or does he have a disproportionally tiny head considering his chunky frame?
I’ve heard of the shaved chest but the shaved man boob? We may have a patient zero on our hands.

11:30 am October, 14 Douchey Lewis and the News said...

This guy likes Busch Heavy. I almost guarantee it.

11:32 am October, 14 Magnum Douche P.I. said...

I think that’s actually their dyke friend and star of the local softball team, Pat “carpetmuncher” Roundhouse. I heard she can rebuild a transmission in like 2 hours.

11:47 am October, 14 Blair said...

You’re an XXL, Doughy, and that shirt is a medium. Women’s medium.

11:49 am October, 14 DoucheyWallnuts said...

I’m thinking Notta. A jerk-off, but notta….

11:53 am October, 14 Troy Tempest said...

He’s the lead singer for the band “Jabba and the Cum Garglers”

11:54 am October, 14 Vin Douchal said...

Oh, Rainbow Blondie, I would never mention your slightly-larger-than-the-other-gals’ thighs nor your chewed off fingernails, well I mean except for , like, right now up there ^ for the chance to see if your carpet does iindeed match your drapes…..
.
……. a curly, thick thatch o’ blond-ish heaven with , OMG – dare I say it, a happy trail leading to a (hopefully) unpierced naval? Oh, I would dine on your delicious delight between your slightly-larger-than-the-other-gals’ thighs… Oops, iggy that last part , huh?
.
.
And Doughy? Finish the lasagna and go home

12:10 pm October, 14 Southern Scrotic said...

Chubster needs to shave the calories, not the chest.
.
And I need to check the weedwacker job on the brunettes on either end. Can’t let these things get too far out-of-hand.

12:11 pm October, 14 I R A Darth Aggie said...

Mostly “notta” but the gang sign, the CSR, the ginormous belt, and the two buttoned buttons on his shirt indicate that he’s on the road to being a full-blown choady.

12:37 pm October, 14 Douche Bigelow said...

Looks like Chubs Guzman…the last one pulled out of the mine

12:42 pm October, 14 Bigphatnotadouche said...

If I stare enough, I see the holy triangle on the Hott on the far right.

The big man is living the dream with the Hott touching his thigh.

12:48 pm October, 14 Redouche-Reooze-Repsycho said...

I wondered what happened to that kid that played A.J. on The Sopranos
.
.
Mmmboy! That sweetie-pie on the left in the blue mini will be featured prominently in my next fantasy, tentatively titled “Faptasia.”

12:51 pm October, 14 The Reverend Chad Kroeger said...

Unbenounced to the ladies. older and wiser Saucer Boy is up to his old shenanigans and this time he’s bringing the ladies. After loading up on carbs to stretch the skin, it must apply the lotion, blacky hott’s right hand has inserted a hose tranferring helium into his big sloppy diarreah filled descending colon. He’s ready to blow.

12:52 pm October, 14 DarkSock said...

Hey…it’s Glenn Danzig!

12:53 pm October, 14 Tom Choad said...

That fellow is, how shall I put this gracefully… unattractive.
.
Yes, that does sound classier than “a sneering blob of ass-lard.” I chose well.
.
I’m not sold on him being a douche, but this is definitely a pity-pose by those six co-eds. Maybe Doughy has Down’s or something, and their sorority chapter is doing a fundraiser.

12:55 pm October, 14 The Reverend Chad Kroeger said...

In the background on the wall, Medusa’s eyes stare disapprovingly at this fat fucck thinking he looks like an overstuffed manacotti and ogle the young ladies, except for the one who painted her hand white,

1:01 pm October, 14 The Reverend Chad Kroeger said...

His head and body shape follow the contour of a very large turd I have had after consuming too many salty cayenne cheese curds only to have the impaction removed with a generous glass of orange flavored Metamucil in a thunderous expulsion.

1:02 pm October, 14 The Goob the Bag and the Pudly said...

Ouch– Tom, I think the Down’s Syndrome shot was below the belt. You know, if Doughy was wearing one– I’m pretty sure that’s a suspenders strap on his right leg that he must remember to pull back up to his shoulder before getting up from the booth, lest his tent-sized jeans droop off to reveal plumber’s crack that would scare the eyes in that wall picture shut.
.
Not a bad array of hotts, though. I’m kinda partial to the two giggly brunettes on the far right.

1:05 pm October, 14 Fenton Hardy said...

Hey losers!

Is everyone ready for the Phillies vs. Giants on Saturday? Should be a doozy! In the meantime, I was wondering something: any of you Internet big boys ever actually hooked up with a girl? (And I don’t mean cybersex!) Since you seem to enjoy coming on here to demonstrate your superiority to the douches (which itself is a form of meretricious posturing), something occurred to me. The superior status of a male is judged on an evolutionary scale by how frequently he mates, thereby ensuring his genes are passed on blah blah blah. The douches you mock on here are demonstrably superior to any of you. Snipe all you want, they get the chicks you wish you had.

And don’t forget the Phillies game!

1:12 pm October, 14 Charles Ulysses Farley said...

John Largeman is not impressed with Doughy McWade.

1:14 pm October, 14 Charles Ulysses Farley said...

^Looks like somebody just read their freshman year psychology book! Those are some very original points you make. Never heard them before. Ever. Seriously, how do you come up with stuff like that?

1:18 pm October, 14 Fenton' said...

FENTON! Get your fat ass back in here and wrap those lips back around my cockk! How DARE you leave me

1:21 pm October, 14 Tom Choad said...

Fenton:

So glad you came back to the site you previously deemed a waste of time. You certainly are a needy little bitch, aren’t you?

These guys get all the chicks, do they? Right– because posing with women in pictures is a sure sign of having passed one’s genes on to their progeny.
.
Who, exactly is doing this male status judging , Fenton? You? Are you qualified in any way to view people on an “evolutionary scale?” You’ll forgive me if I don’t acept your whiny, attention-seeking trolling as meaningful evaluation of who I am as a person.
.
If these douches are demonstrably superior to any one of us on this forum, then please demonstrate it. As your use of “superior” is entirely subjective (and you don’t actually know anyone here, and thus have no basis for comparison), you can’t, which proves that you either don’t understand the term “demonstrably” or are simply full of shit.

1:35 pm October, 14 Fenton Hardy said...

Yeah! The nerds are gettin’ riled! Nerd Paradise has been shaken!

I knew you guys weren’t that smart but I thought you were smarter than Christine O’Donnell! Apparently none of you have heard of sexual selection. It is the practice of a female choosing the most attractive partner to procreate with. It is true that most of these guys are probably not having kids but that is because modern birth control has circumvented the reproductive process, if not the desires that drive it. So sexual selection is still very much in play. Evolutionary science teaches us that the traits of the superior individuals get passed on. Or in the case of these women, swallowed! Hate all you want, these guys are still way ahead of you.

1:37 pm October, 14 Fenton Hardy said...

Also, I know I’m not the only one who was pumped about Roy Halladay’s no-hitter! I can’t wait to see him pitch against San Francisco.

1:48 pm October, 14 Redouche-Reooze-Repsycho said...

@Fenton
.
You made my day with that post– it’s both incoherent and baldly hypocritical.
.
You started out calling a bunch of strangers on a discussion board “nerds,” later attacked us as “pathetic” and now “losers” who engage in meretricious posturing. However, you are mocking us without any real knowledge of who we are, so in what way is what you’re posting about us any different than what you accuse us of doing? And you’re doing all this on a site you claim to be better than, having already denigrated it as a collective circle-jerk. Are you so desperate to be a part of some community that you’ll try to insert yourself into one that plainly detests you? Now THAT’S pathetic.
.
We all took high school biology, so we understand your puerile point about “sexual selection,” but you can’t prove that any one of these guys we mock actually did have sex with the girls in the pictures, or any girls ever, for that matter. Likewise, it doesn’t demonstrate “superiority” in any meaningful way. By your twisted logic, a serial rapist is a superior man, a thought that while vile and disturbing to any normal person, would likely appeal greatly to you, based on your previous post about getting women however one can.

1:59 pm October, 14 Fenton Hardy said...

@ Redouche

You sound like you need to get laid. I definitely don’t want to be part of your community but, as the Internet is a free place, I will continue to grace you with my observations. Interesting that you cannot refute my points (these chicks are choosing guys other than you because they are perceived to be better men, etc, etc). You can only argue technicalities and parse language…truly the last refugee of a defeated mind. And no, I am certainly not a fan of Ben Roethlisberger.

2:05 pm October, 14 Vin Douchal said...

Fenton Hardy = Doughy McWade ?
.
Ever see them in the room at the same time? Hmm?

2:07 pm October, 14 End the Haberdouchery said...

Looks like someone is about to whip out a titty. Get the topless party started Doughy.

2:34 pm October, 14 massengill said...

$168 and 21 shots of Patron later, the girls agreed to pose for a picture.

2:38 pm October, 14 Fenton Hardy said...

First of all, I want to thank all of you for joining me in this discussion. I have enjoying reading your comments (not really) and writing back (true!) I am a little disappointed, though. We always assume that social rejects are at least smart, much as we assume ugly people are nice. That has not proven to be the case here, judging from the low level of commentary. Sadly, this is no more than a site for one kind of douche bag to rip on another kind of douche bag. It does provide us with an opportunity for a little thought experiment, however. Imagine a tabula rasa observer. Present him or her with both types of douche bag. Contextualize their respective “baggery” by indicting which of them is capable of attracting more desirable women. Then ask your observer which state of douchiness is preferable. Once again, the nerds lose. Much like the Giants will lose to the Phillies!

2:39 pm October, 14 Dr. Bunsen HoneyDouche said...

@Vin
.
Fenton Hardy = Vegas Ass Licker?

2:45 pm October, 14 Douchey Lewis and the News said...

Fenton…Steroids and bedazzled wife beaters do not equal evolutionary advancement. Besides the fact that many of the bags exhibit latent homosexual tendencies that thereby limit their chance at procreating.(not that there’s anything wrong with that) The simple fact that many of the contributors to this site are married professionals seems to refute your previous assumption of virgin nerds. The fact of the matter is that 95% of the population is sick of loud, preening ass-clowns.

2:47 pm October, 14 Medusa Oblongata said...

@ Rev Chad 12:55
I am lord of all I survey. And I order Doughy to go get me a sammich. He knows where the good ones are. RamenHair McWhitehand, take a hike. Katie Holmsie on the left, sit on my face.
.
@ Fenton, aka whoever in here is trolling, I’ll bite. I’m a chick. And there are plenty of people in here who can attest to that. Let me weigh in on your little theory there. Re-Re-Re @ 1:48 is indeed correct and possibly one of the best commentators this site has ever seen, amusing and informative. Your theory of sexual selection operates from the standpoint that we are mindless amoeba, calling the amount of procreation a marker of success as a member of the species. Let’s examine that for a minute as sentient, thinking beings.
.
Would not passing on the BEST genes be a clearer indication of success? What good does it do to continue to pass on poor genetic coding, thereby weakening the overall gene pool? What does it mean if the man is offering poor genetic material and the woman accepts him anyhow? It indicates that she is also a lesser member of the species and would not select a mate who has the best to offer, merely the easiest available. Female apes choose the biggest and strongest males to mate with, because that insures large and healthy offspring, and that the male will offer protection for her and their offspring. Now, what good does it do to choose the biggest and strongest male of the human species? That would be lovely if we still relied on men to go out and club a bear to feed us and our children, or to spear a sabre-tooth tiger at the mouth of our cave to keep it from killing us. But we don’t. We have jobs and houses and we don’t need anyone to clobber bears on our behalf anymore. So, what do we choose, then, if it’s not a mere contest of physical prowess? We look for men that are intelligent, competent, and skilled. We look for men that show respect and capable thinking and problem-solving skills. We don’t need a man to snap a dinosaur’s neck, we need a man to handle the calls from the IRS.
.
That being said, women who would willingly choose to mate with a man that shows diminished thinking abilities, reduced social skills (I don’t think someone pawing at my boobs in a club would persuade me that he’s someone who would be a good provider), inability to provide support (because they’re partying all the time instead of working and creating a stable home environment), are also on the lower tier of female mates to be chosen from. They care less about the care of their offspring, they make no efforts to advance themselves and hereby advance their offspring; they do this by choosing a lesser male, and by saddling themselves with offspring that will be less cared for, thereby putting more of the burden on themselves, In other words, the kind of women of which you speak usually end up twirling on a pole in a dive off of the highway and cursing that asshole who never pays his child support.
.
Your theory, sir, is a load of rubbish and only proves you’re lower on the evolutionary ladder than we originally thought. And that is why you’re obsessed with such neanderthal activities like baseball, which ironically involves big galoots with clubs. Heh. Yes, you have indeed rattled the nerds’ nest. And while the nerds here are busy with their very fine, smart, wonderful women (I can attest that Mrs. Troy Tempest and Mrs. DarkSock are smoking fucking hot), you will be busy rutting wildly with your subpar club sluts, spawning endless halfwits that are going to further degrade society. Make sure you have nine of them, then you could start your own baseball team.

2:51 pm October, 14 Douchey Lewis and the News said...

One other attribute of the bag that will lead to their downfall is this: bags due to their other deficiencies have been forced to specialize. They cannot count on pulling tail due to their wit or sense of humor so they have to do it with spectacle. They are the panda bears of the human world. And just like the panda thy will one day go extinct.

2:54 pm October, 14 Dr. Bunsen HoneyDouche said...

“So youze girls want to know how I won two consecutive Crisco eating champion titles? You gotta warm up or you’ll get hurt. No, I’m not kiddin. You could strain your jaw or sumthin’ and be out for awhile and have someone steal your title. I saw it happen to Roger “Big Gums” Tannenbaum. He was a champion toothpaste eater. He didn’t warm up and, poof, there went his dreams. The key to the Crisco competition is to drink 5 bottles of Mrs. Butterworth’s the night before. It greases your throat up REAL good and then you can pound tub after tub of Crisco for the next 12 hours.” Blondie on left is ordering two more pitchers of margaritas. For herself.

3:04 pm October, 14 Wedgie said...

Vegas Ass Licker reinvents himself as Fenton Hardy.
After reading some Cliff’s Notes on Freud’s “Three Essays on the Theory of Sexuality”, he now feels competent to enter into a discussion about a topic which is clearly well above his pointy little head.
Dude, do us all a favor, and stick to baseball viewing. Otherwise, you might hurt yourself.

3:05 pm October, 14 Medusa Oblongata said...

…by the way, Mr. Hardy, if we’re dorks, explain to me the origin of your name. If those weren’t some of the most square-ass books ever written, I don’t know what were. I’m surprised you didn’t choose Freddie Bobbsey.

3:24 pm October, 14 Fenton Hardy said...

@ Medusa

It’s not really my theory. It’s evolutionary science. While I’m no Richard Dawkins, I still have a pretty decent grasp on sexual selection. It is true we are not mindless amoeba. It is also true that we are still no more than essentially mindless pawns of evolutionary forces. There is no other explanation for our behavior on a global scale, as people fight wars based on religion and culture. The in-group loyal that once ensured our survival will probably ultimately doom us, as it is hardwired in our minds and trumps common sense.

Speaking more specifically to human sexual selection, we are again at the mercy of our programmed desires. You cannot honestly tell me that a childless woman doesn’t feel strongly compelled by her biological clock to procreate. We are the sum total of our impulses and the human species single strongest impulse is for sex. In a more modern context, your point about women no longer needing the strongest male is well taken…inasmuch as it’s your point. “We” is actually “you.” You may prefer nerds or nice guys. Not every woman does. In fact, because of this, the BEST genes are often NOT passed on. Your argument sadly (but cutely!) devolves into a screed against what you imagine the men on this site to be like. Who’s to say they don’t try to advance themselves? Who’s to say these women are future strippers? Only God…just kidding! There is no God.

As for your personal invective against me, I avoid clubs at all costs and prefer a woman of substance and intelligence. I don’t have kids but I can assure you that they would be brought up well. To close I’d like to tell a little story. It’s a sad one. It is about the smartest kid in my high school. He was three years ahead in math, building computers in 7th grade, so smart he made the second smartest kid look like a retard. He now works at Wal-Mart. Do not buy into the societal adage that nerds will always somehow triumph because of superior intellect.

3:29 pm October, 14 Fenton Hardy said...

@ Medusa

Hahaha! I never read the Bobbsey Twins. I will admit to a childhood indulgence in The Three Investigators. As for my name, give me credit for at least reading the Hardy Boys “Casefiles” series which was geared toward more mature readers. Nice catch, by the way. And I sure do hope the Phillies outfielders make some nice catches this weekend!

3:35 pm October, 14 H. sapiens said...

^ See? I’m such a non-nerd that I just figured you were Ed Hardy’s retarded brother who found an unattended computer.

3:47 pm October, 14 Nancy Dreuche said...

Can someone pleaaase tell me who the Phillies are playing this weekend?!

4:09 pm October, 14 Vin Douchal said...

@ Fenton
.
How about a break in yer annoying drivel ? Something like , um, a paragraph? Better yet how about a break entirely? Go away. Don’t you have to go blast your delts or some other homoerotic self flagellating activity?
.
You’re making Yankees fans almost tolerable. Giants in five

4:16 pm October, 14 Dr. Bunsen HoneyDouche said...

@ Fenton Hardy
.
“You cannot honestly tell me that a childless woman doesn’t feel strongly compelled by her biological clock to procreate. We are the sum total of our impulses and the human species single strongest impulse is for sex.”
.
My wife and I have NO DESIRE to have kids. I hate just about everything that talks back to me. Kids are kind of annoying that way and a large majority of parents groom them to be that way (knowingly or unknowingly). Oddly I do not desire sex my every waking moment. Like right now. My desire is for a good beer. And lots of them. I would really like to be drunk as hell. And when I’m drunk as hell, I don’t desire sex then either. Or when I’m eating breakfast. Or when mowing my lawn. If wanting to have sex is so fuccen powerful humanity would never get anything done. And exactly what the hell does the story about you in the seventh grade (I’m assuming you were/are #2) have to do with anything. Maybe the poor kid has Asperger’s or something else wrong with him. Oh, and by the way, the Philthadelphia Philthies will get CRUSHED if they reach The World Series. Fact.

4:32 pm October, 14 Fenton Hardy said...

@ Vin

Ok, buddy. Hey, why don’t you also go tell Cormac McCarthy to use quotation marks? It’s a question of style. As for baseball, we shall see. Eagles already beat the Niners (though the Eagles did almost choke it at the end), and I’m thinking another Philly win over SF is in order. As far as blasting my delts…I did do shoulders today! Very good guess.

@ Doc Bunson

Fact: The Phillies have been in the last 2 World Series and won 1. The 1 they lost was not a sweep. Yes, it is strange that you do not desire sex every waking moment. Perhaps your testosterone levels are low. Kudos to you and the wife for not having kids, though; the world is definitely over populated, which I think is good evidence for the power of sex. As for the story, make of it what you will. I’m just saying life isn’t fair and, as much as you hate these douches, they are coming out ahead while smarter people are often left cruelly behind.

5:46 pm October, 14 Medusa Oblongata said...

I’m 36 and have no children. I was married for eight years and neither one of us had any interest. I’m about to get married again and I really would prefer to not have children. I do not feel compelled by my biological clock, or societal pressure, or cuteness of the little bambinos, to pop out any. So, yeah,
I CAN honestly tell you that NOT any and all childless women are driven to procreate. I would have thought my alarm would have started ringing furiously by my age and I don’t even hear it ticking. So, sorry, you’re wrong there. My Grandmothers’ sister died at 74, childless and glad. My good friend is 42 and childless and glad. And when people ask her when she decided not to have children, she says, “When did you decide to not live on the moon?” Not all of us live to be hatcheries, I think you’re quite out of your mind as a man to assume that we live to breed. You don’t even have children yourself, so you’re not with anyone who’s needling you to have one. I don’t have a Cadillac, but I’m not under the assumption that everyone wants one.
.
“We” is much more than “me”. Unless you’re talking about 22-year olds, well then they’re mostly just after good looks and a good time and they don’t give a toss about intellect. I was the same way at that age. How old are you, anyway? Now, you tell me that “ALL women” are driven to breed, “ALL women” are after alpha males, but cannot possibly buy the argument that “SOME women have no interest in douchebags.” You’re not even a woman! You have a rather unfair and uninformed view of women. As a baseball fan, you’re definitely not running into women who are on the same page as I, you’re looking at a bunch of vapid, sun-worshipping, cheap beer in a plastic cup-drinking chicks whose favorite word is “WOOOOOO”. Naturally, you’re unlikely to meet anyone like me and therefore I don’t think you have a bloody clue what I or those like me would have any interest in. And as for preferring women of substance, if you really were into women of real substance, you would have run across more than one who was into nerds. By the way, I was never under the illusion that nerd in no way equals financial success. Your immediate equation of smarts with money assumes I was making the same point. You’ve missed the point entirely, and so you go back to the idea that a woman would be drawn to a money-flasher, be he nerd or douchebag, over someone who is kind and honest.
.
The attraction to “nerds”, as you call them, like you’re Ogre and we’re the Tri Lambs, is that they’re more real, they’re less interested in showing off and more interested in being themselves. They’re totally fine with being pasty and into horror movies. That what you see is what you get” is much more attractive than “I gotta pump up and get tan and buy a shirt I can’t afford so I can get laid.” I once dated the $2,000 suit-wearing, BMW Z-3 driving, downtown condo bank guy. I was so fucking bored and annoyed and frustrated with his constant need to show off his car, his clothes, his place, his money, and me, as if i was another accessory to prop up his carefully constructed lifestyle that was designed to mask his glaring insecurities. And between his personal meltdowns and tantrums, and his vapid, pretty-boy friends, who were handsome and had money and nice cars and loved sports and whatnot, I wanted to put a shotgun in my mouth. Especially when he started screaming and crying about having a baby, like a fucking chick would, you know, ’cause that’s all they want, that and ice cream, right?
.
Best dude ever? The one I have now. A skinny, nerdy metal dude who loves Legos and worships the ground I walk on, makes monster faces with fruit on top of my cereal in the morning, who scarcely has a penny but loves me with all his heart. I’d never give that up for your alpha-sperm bullshit. Some people beat the genetic map, and that is how evolution happens. If women were all thinking along your lines, the world would be populated with Britney Spearses and K-Feds.
.

5:51 pm October, 14 Medusa Oblongata said...

Oh, and as for my screed against what I “imagine” these men and women to be like? Go back through the archives and read what they write in to us sometimes. It’s like a drunk chimp took a shit on a keyboard. They can barely spell and construct a sentence, much less make a point and appear to have an IQ over 27. I don’t have to imagine what they’re like, they write in to bitch and they TELL us what they’re like. Every now and then one writes in about their appearance here, and they’re funny and cool about it and have a good laugh with us. We then absolve them of their Douche or Bleeth sentence and uphold them as an example of the fact that not all of these people are total asswipes. But take a look at Stackhouse, Donkey Douche, um….’hunters, any examples of Bleeth write-ins? I can’t think of any offhand and I have a meeting to get to. Mr. Hardy, I assure you, these people offer much more evidence than mere photos of their vapidity and stupidity.

6:22 pm October, 14 Fenton Hardy said...

Dearest Medusa,

I’m so glad you wrote back. I’m really curious as to why you can’t separate what you want from all the possible things other women on the planet might want. Look, let me preface this by saying you sound like an intelligent, if sassy, little dame! I’m glad you found someone who is crazy in love with you. Further, as with Doc Bunsen, I’m glad you don’t see the need to fill our already overpopulated world with more kids. All good things. But as true as the stereotypes of douche bags on this website are, so too are the stereotypes of older, childless women. You are a bit older than me, but I tend to date older women and have had a front row seat for the agonies of the childless woman in her late 30’s. I don’t assume every woman lives to breed (except for the Duggar family with 19 kids. That’s God’s work!). As far as Cadillacs and moon colonies…we all want something different, which is my whole point.

In your next paragraph, I must say you start to sound a little bitter. I certainly hope you’re not jealous of the young ladies out there having a good time. I am just disappointed that you would so easily dismiss them as vapid caricatures. I think we all know that there is more to most people that meets the eye, and I have found older women to be messed up in their own way. I do also have to take issue with your assessment of my argument. Nowhere do I say all women are driven to breed or that all women are after alpha males. I actually have a pretty healthy view of women and supported Hilary for president. Which reminds me, you should give baseball a chance. Far from being a neanderthal sport it is enjoyed by millions of Americans, including our current President who is a pretty smart guy.
Finally, I have a problem with your argument that a woman of substance is automatically into nerds. It is quite clear that “nerd” in no way equals intelligence or kindness, just as financial success doesn’t equate to being an interesting person. Many nerds are just as big of losers as their douche counterparts (fact!). They are just douche bags of a different type. I am glad to hear your love life has found a happy ending. I mean, you’d think a woman who goes by “Medusa” would have an easy time meeting guys, right? Of course you think your ex was a douche. That’s why you broke up with him. And of course you think your current guy is perfect. Someday you may not feel that way. It is too bad there’s no way to make money by putting fruit monster faces on cereal though. I’m curious…is he younger than you? Either way, bless your fiery heart and I wish you both the best. One final thing, beating the genetic map sounds like more how mutations sneak through. Evolution happens because of a confluence of factors, not least of which is geography. WIth a larger or smaller pool of mates to choose from, would you still be with the same guy? Food for thought: K-Fed does seem to have a lot of kids which supports my argument that, douchey though he may be, he is the one shaping our species genetic future.

6:26 pm October, 14 Fenton Hardy said...

@ Medusa

re: your second comment

Believe me, I am sure lots of these guys are genuine douches. I have seen some of the things they write and it is laughable. However, I started commenting on here because of the douchey behavior of the supposedly superior nerds on this site. I guess everyone’s got a little bully streak in them!

7:39 pm October, 14 Turtle Boy said...

I like Turtles.

8:08 pm October, 14 Medusa Oblongata said...

You said this: “You cannot honestly tell me that a childless woman doesn’t feel strongly compelled by her biological clock to procreate.” And then you said this: “I don’t assume every woman lives to breed.” And then you said this: “Nowhere do I say all women are driven to breed….” Yeah, you did.
.
You said this: “Finally, I have a problem with your argument that a woman of substance is automatically into nerds” in response to my saying this: “if you really were into women of real substance, you would have run across more than one who was into nerds”. Your whole style of argument is based on either twisting or outright ignoring what the other person is saying to you, then contradicting yourself. You’re arguing to hear yourself argue now.
.
“It is too bad there’s no way to make money by putting fruit monster faces on cereal though.” <—what ever happened to doing things for someone because they bring you joy and you want to make another person smile? Oh, that's right, we're all just base critters, scouring the ocean floor looking for a fuck. You and I aren't even having the same conversation. For the record, he's a year older than I, and he currently lives in Italy, we're working on his K-1 visa. I think that says a lot that someone would travel this far for a relationship, and my selection pool has extended across continents and I would still choose him despite having plenty of options in town.
.
I'm not bitter about not being in a club in my underwear, drinking myself stupid every night. I had enough of that 13 years ago. I've lost my taste for alcohol. I hate to see young girls degrade themselves in the name of getting attention. Once upon a time I was in their shoes, and in retrospect, it really wasn't all that much fun.
.
"One final thing, beating the genetic map sounds like more how mutations sneak through." Damn right. And I wholeheartedly believe I am a glitch in many, many ways. And I'm glad. It's been lovely chatting with you anyway. The Medusa name, by the way, is a wink to my glorious mane of rich, red curls and that is one of only many things that makes this woman who goes by “Medusa” have an easy time meeting guys. I don't think a man would want to move to another continent for a horse-faced dipshit, especially when he's surrounded by smokin' hot Italian chicks and is a stone's throw from the border of France, Switzerland and Austria. Your ploy to get me to go "Nuh-uh!" and post a pic won't work,

8:37 pm October, 14 Douches Wild said...

I am truly amazed at what a vigorous debate a porcine tub of suet can inspire just because he’s surrounded by some quasi-adequate hott. Times are lean indeed.

9:10 pm October, 14 Fenton Hardy said...

@ Medusa
As much as I enjoy our repartee, I can live without seeing a picture of either of you. I will say, in my experience, long distance relationships are a big mistake. No relationship can sustain the pressure of one person moving so far to be with the other. Maybe it says something about you that you would hang your romantic hopes on a person so far away. Best of luck either way.

As far as the content of this argument, you clearly think that a “woman of substance” would be into nerds. I’m not twisting your words at all. I’m pointing out that substance and nerdiness don’t automatically go together. Thus far I have discovered that it is a small sub-set of women who are into nerds. Believe or not, I have even encountered a few members of that rare species. I’ve noticed they prefer nerds because they are actually intimdated by more stereotypically masculine men. Most women prefer a man who, while not a caveman, has outgrown playing with legos. To each their own, but with that in mind, who are you to denigrate the people featured on this site? Your own romantic situation and preferences are ripe for mockery. And despite what you might think, you’re no better than anyone else, douche bag or not.

As far as procreation, let’s just say “the majority of women.” I’m no scientist but, your childless friends aside, the vast majority of women I know have felt the pressure of the ol’ biological clock. This includes the ones who have said in the past they don’t want kids.

9:10 pm October, 14 fatness said...

I believe Mr. Hardy is auditioning for a position with Fox News with that rather amazing collection of misquotes, context-mangling and an entire army of strawmen. Did he even read what M. O. wrote? Evidently not. But she doesn’t need me to straighten him out…
.
What I do know is that Cubs fans and the disaster area which is Wrigleyville on game day pretty much eliminates any claim baseball has as a highbrow sport.

9:38 pm October, 14 Medusa Oblongata said...

@ Fatness–*snork*
.
@ Mr. Hardy–I never said I was better. I said these people in the pictures are douchebags and bleeths. And funny that you come in here to point out that we are sanctimonious pricks, but you’re doing it by being a sanctimonious prick. The one thing you don’t know about me is that nobody laughs at me harder than I do. And since I have a nice, healthy sense of self-deprecation, I don’t mock out of insecurity or feelings of superiority. I mock based on what I find ridiculous. And that spans the gap from politics to Douchebags. And paranoid, holier-than-thou sports fans whose hypocrisy and high-minded pontification stinks up what otherwise is a bunch of miscreants having a laugh between more pressing tasks. Hope that peptic ulcer and burning sense of moral outrage doesn’t keep you up tonight. Gorgon out!

9:52 pm October, 14 Steve L. said...

first we have Gator. then we have Fenton Hardy.
i guess there’s no rest for the wicked.

9:56 pm October, 14 Steve L. said...

i was gonna say that dark jeans blonde Sandra looks pretty hot too, but i don’t like her shirt with mutilated colors. therefore i have to agree that Jenny is the hottest of the bunch.

10:17 pm October, 14 Fenton Hardy said...

@ Medusa

I think you might be surprised how hard other people laugh at you. And name calling? You sure you’re not bitter? Don’t worry, I’m sure you’re boyfriend will comfort you…at least until he gets his green card.

Funny how mocking isn’t so enjoyable when the tables are turned. You make fun of people for wearing Ed Hardy and whatnot, yet you’re nothing more than another herd of a different type sheep.

In other news, Phillies are favored to win the World Series.

10:18 pm October, 14 Fenton Hardy said...

Meant “your boyfriend.” Oopsy!

6:34 am October, 15 Nancy Dreuche said...

That’s great that the Phillies are going to win the World Series, F-bomb. But what I would like to know is who are they playing THIS weekend?

8:47 am October, 15 Fenton Hardy said...

@ Nancy

If you must know, it is the SF Giants who are considered big underdogs.

9:47 am October, 15 Douche Bigelow said...

you people and ur big words,you think ur better than me?

10:02 am October, 15 Nancy Dreuche said...

@Fenton. Thanks, you’re better than those douches on SportsCenter. You know the ones.

5:39 pm October, 15 soy bomb said...

Go Sox (Red)!

12:55 pm October, 16 Sir David Douchenborough said...

Oh, my Fenton quoting sophomoric lessons of sexual selection? How quaint. By the way, dismissive handwaving when it comes to actually discussing recent advances of evolutionary biology is not a ‘technicality.’ Using terms like ‘superior’ are what I would hear from first biology students who think that by reading certain excerpts from Darwin’s writings make them experts on evolutionary science. It is that same simplistic thinking that spawned so many “just so” stories and the ‘what is/ought’ fallacy in evolutionary studies. In fact, evolutionary psychology has litany of such instances, and it is usually passed off as research.

Firstly, your awfully subjective term ‘superior’ betrays your poor reading and current knowledge of evolutionary science much less the criticisms of applying an panglossian adaptationist programme of evolutionary biology to human behaviour. Fisher expanded on Darwin’s theory of sexual selection by describing runaway selection in which the putative genes that do not increase fitness of survival are determined by sexual preference. Therefore, such genes which contribute nothing to survival would go to fixation as they sexually determined.

Later, Trivers contributed to adaptationist approaches to sexual selection by postulating that asymmetric parental investment is what determines female choosiness as well. This along with Fisherian views of selection later where expanded by evolutionary psychologists and the genic view of selection became popularized by Dawkins.

Of course, anyone outside looking in would conveniently ignore the massive amounts of work done that challenged these persepectives and highlight the limitations of using them as a panacea for explaining every trait, behavioural or otherwise, since it is so much easier to justify their own biases by appealing nonsensically to evolutionary science. The adaptatationist approach that colours studies of sexual selection, especially in human behaviour result in many ‘possible explanations’ most of which make a lot of assumption that have been legitimately challenged.

In Fisher’s time period, Wright was describing selection in population genetic terms using drift, which corroborated Darwin’s pluralistic approach to identifying more than one evolutionary agent. Wright articulated an adaptive landscape by viewing that selection would act on a set of alleles and drift would play a role in altering its path. In other words, selection did not necessarily mean a linear move to fixation, especially since organisms can occupy different adaptive peaks. Dobzhanksy later introduced co-adapted complexes, noting that certain genes will only result in high fitness if they occur together. Thus, most likely selection cannot act on any one trait. Further, correlated characters and genetic correlations complicate the adaptationist view of sexual selection because there is an assumption that what is observed is the optimal. When in reality, this assumption has been shown to be largely inappropriate for a number of evolutionary situations, not the least of which is human behaviour. Elliot Sober and Steve Orzack have done a yeoman’s work demonstrating the pitfalls of using an optimality model based on the adaptationist programme.

And all this above is not even including Gould and Lewontin’s landmark “Spandrel” paper which describes how genetic hitchiking and other forces can actually result in maladaptive individuals. Yet, none of these objections have ever factored into the quixotic quests of evolutionary psychologists to apply sexual selection in such a narrow way in human behaviour. For one thing, you would have to ignore the interaction effect of the genotype and environment to claim that the genetically determined behaviours, which evolutionary psychologists (EP) assert were all formed in the Pleistocene period, can explain all sexual human interactions.

It can’t because EP have been trying to address the various inconsistent results from ‘their surveys’ (note that they have yet to actually demonstrate empirically that some human behaviours we observe result in increased fitness). Women also engage in a number of extra pair copulations, but this, relative to the population level, rarely results in cuckolding. The sexy son hypothesis assumes asymmetric parental investment, but men are just as discerning as women when trying to look for a mate. Moreover, I will put this in big letters because I am surprised given the plethora of literature that people still assume this, but THE GOAL OF SEX IS NOT NECESSARILY FOR REPRODUCTION. Dismissing this underlying point by saying it is because of birth control ignores a mountain of work in the natural world showing that the number of times males have sex does not automatically translated into higher reproductive success, especially since fitness is multiplicative and natural selection most likely maximizes the geometric mean fitness as opposed to the arithmetic mean fitness. Also, females have employed sex as means of gathering resources without having to incur cost of reproduction is widely studied in bonobos.

So, no, Fenton, your novice assertion that because men who mimic each other in aesthetic material displays and are sleeping around somehow are indications of evolutionary superiority is tenuous at best and just another ‘just so’ story. My summary above of all the limitations and work that has been done in evolutionary science show that this situation is far more complex than simple frequency. If you want to keep borrowing from evolutionary psychologists, by all means. However, most of what they say are hypotheses and ‘just so’ stories, which laypeople like you interpret as fact. A prominent Neuroscientst Dr. Ramachandran actually as a joke to his evolutionary pyschologist colleague wrote a ‘just so’ evolutionary story why men prefer blondes. He managed to dupe them to the point that his joke article got published.

So, Fenton, please do some research before you invoke evolutionary science. It is reckless and it betrays your ignorance. If they were superior as you say, we should observe population division and substructure at the genetic level. Unfortunately, population substructure has been measured and despite geographical variation, at each scale, the population has been largely panmitic despite all the historical changes in modern human history. Learned people like Jared Diamond and Pigliucci, would say that demographics and environment play a significant role as well as genetics in behaviour, but hey, why listen to them?

1:44 pm October, 16 Medusa Oblongata said...

^ Dear Sir David: Your brains make me hot. Please impregnate my so hopefully I will have a smart baby. You don’t even have to stick around, but you’re welcome to join us for waffles on Sundays.

3:42 pm October, 16 Sir David Douchenborough said...

Why thank you, Medusa, most of what I learned is because I had to work doubly harder, than my more intelligent colleagues. So I am afraid I am the result of good old fashioned plasticity (still have to work on proofreading though). Regrettably, I discovered in another thread that Fenton has been banned, which is a shame.

3:44 pm October, 16 Sir David Douchenborough said...

P.S. I do like waffles, especially the Belgian ones.

9:41 pm October, 16 The Goob the Bag and the Pudly said...

Holy crap! Sir David, that was the most expansive and thorough smackdown of a poser-troll I have ever read on any discussion board in my life! I feel smarter for having read it, though I only understood maybe half of it.
.
.
I really wish Fenton hadn’t been banned, just so he could take Sir David’s broadside and feel his ego shrivel up and die.

3:45 pm October, 17 Nancy Dreuche said...

Go local sports team!

Leave a Reply

What is 8 + 12 ?
Please leave these two fields as-is:
IMPORTANT! To be able to proceed, you need to solve the following simple math (so we know that you are a human) :-)