First, I would like to applaud distinguished gentleman from South Carolina for bringing up a topic that has much need for debate. All men would agree that there should be some form of rules, mores, etc. when dating, otherwise mankind would degenerate into concupiscent beasts made most infamous by German schiesty films, hipsters at MisShapes, and the 2005 Minnesota Vikings. Wearing leather suits, rocking eye make-up/lipstick, and using a double-sided dildo in full view of your teammates is no way to go through life, son(s)!
But I think it’s important to distinguished between what noted man philosopher Ice-T characterized as the only three women that a man needs: his wife, his mistress, and his ho’. If you meet a girl who might potentially be your wife, rules should apply. The same essentially goes with a mistress. However the ho’ deserves no such accommodations. I’ve dealt with these chicken-headed strumpets for quite some time, and the truth of it is that they want you to treat them badly. The nicer you are, the less they like you, and the more you treat them like crap, they either (a) like you more or (b) get so offended that they leave you entirely. The latter has never happened. The only rules that should apply to the man trying to bed one are...
1. Wear a rubber
2. Never pay for anything/pay only for alcohol
3. Seek immediate and ultimate self-gratification with no regard for anything else
4. Seriously dude, wear a fucking rubber.
We need to define our terms. I move that the title of HR 1 “To ordain and establish the requisite waiting period to have sex with a new significant other” should be struck, and changed to “To ordain and establish the requisite waiting period to have sex with a potential wife and/or mistress.”
From there we can continue this debate.
INTERNAL NOTE: Will the kind speaker of this house place this movement in a field that is appropriate if it is not already so.
28 August 2007
filed under: sexy time