Jump Menu:
Post Reply
Page 1 of 2  •  1 2 Next
If there's one thing feminism is good at
2 months ago  ::  Mar 20, 2017 - 1:23PM #1
Boardroomjimmy aka Miguel Kay
Posts: 4,393
it's making you ugly.

 
2 months ago  ::  Mar 20, 2017 - 3:10PM #2
laurenfrances
Posts: 27,375

Are you saying burnettes with short hair cannot be feminine or attractive?


Image result for audrey hepburn


Related image

Always proud to be a Yankee fan.

Photobucket

Photobucket
2 months ago  ::  Mar 20, 2017 - 3:14PM #3
GottaGoToMo
Posts: 66,507

She was gorgeous.

 photo yankeestadium.jpg

2 months ago  ::  Mar 20, 2017 - 4:11PM #4
ArtVandelay
Posts: 24,859

Mar 20, 2017 -- 3:10PM, laurenfrances wrote:


Are you saying burnettes with short hair cannot be feminine or attractive?






are you saying Rachel Maddow and Audry Hepburn can even be implied to be mentioned in the same encyclopedia, let alone the same sentence?

2 months ago  ::  Mar 20, 2017 - 6:11PM #5
laurenfrances
Posts: 27,375

Mar 20, 2017 -- 4:11PM, ArtVandelay wrote:


Mar 20, 2017 -- 3:10PM, laurenfrances wrote:


Are you saying burnettes with short hair cannot be feminine or attractive?




are you saying Rachel Maddow and Audry Hepburn can even be implied to be mentioned in the same encyclopedia, let alone the same sentence?




LaughingAudry is stunningly beautiful in anyone's books. In the looks column they are not in the same stratosphere...long hair or otherwise.  Just saying femininity is not defined by long tresses. Rachel's looks has dramatically changed with or without her long bloude hair. 

Always proud to be a Yankee fan.

Photobucket

Photobucket
2 months ago  ::  Mar 20, 2017 - 6:48PM #6
ArtVandelay
Posts: 24,859

Mar 20, 2017 -- 6:11PM, laurenfrances wrote:


Mar 20, 2017 -- 4:11PM, ArtVandelay wrote:


Mar 20, 2017 -- 3:10PM, laurenfrances wrote:


Are you saying burnettes with short hair cannot be feminine or attractive?




are you saying Rachel Maddow and Audry Hepburn can even be implied to be mentioned in the same encyclopedia, let alone the same sentence?




Audry is stunningly beautiful in anyone's books. In the looks column they are not in the same stratosphere...long hair or otherwise.  Just saying femininity is not defined by long tresses. Rachel's looks has dramatically changed with or without her long bloude hair. 




Rachel went full on bull dy&e...  she makes a handsome man now.  But it's her politics that are disturbing, no one cares about the other stuff except hard leftists, when someone on the right disagrees with a hard leftist the hard leftist goes through a checklist:


Is that person they disagree with a woman?  if so call the conservative anti-woman


Is that person they disagree with gay?  if so call the conservative a ****-phobe


Is that person they disagree with a minority?  if so call the conservative a racist


Is that person they disagree with over 60?  if so call the conservative anti-elderly (add in that they want to see them starve)


If all questons above are negative this person must be a white male - what does the liberal playbook say?  if so call the conservative any of the above, this is usually when a liberal loses their mind...

2 months ago  ::  Mar 21, 2017 - 7:43AM #7
yankoldfan
Posts: 471

Mar 20, 2017 -- 6:48PM, ArtVandelay wrote:


Mar 20, 2017 -- 6:11PM, laurenfrances wrote:


Mar 20, 2017 -- 4:11PM, ArtVandelay wrote:


Mar 20, 2017 -- 3:10PM, laurenfrances wrote:


Are you saying burnettes with short hair cannot be feminine or attractive?




are you saying Rachel Maddow and Audry Hepburn can even be implied to be mentioned in the same encyclopedia, let alone the same sentence?




Audry is stunningly beautiful in anyone's books. In the looks column they are not in the same stratosphere...long hair or otherwise.  Just saying femininity is not defined by long tresses. Rachel's looks has dramatically changed with or without her long bloude hair. 




Rachel went full on bull dy&e...  she makes a handsome man now.  But it's her politics that are disturbing, no one cares about the other stuff except hard leftists, when someone on the right disagrees with a hard leftist the hard leftist goes through a checklist:


Is that person they disagree with a woman?  if so call the conservative anti-woman


Is that person they disagree with gay?  if so call the conservative a ****-phobe


Is that person they disagree with a minority?  if so call the conservative a racist


Is that person they disagree with over 60?  if so call the conservative anti-elderly (add in that they want to see them starve)


If all questons above are negative this person must be a white male - what does the liberal playbook say?  if so call the conservative any of the above, this is usually when a liberal loses their mind...




How about a picture of you then and now art... 

2 months ago  ::  Mar 21, 2017 - 8:25AM #8
newinn
Posts: 26,473

Mar 20, 2017 -- 6:48PM, ArtVandelay wrote:


Mar 20, 2017 -- 6:11PM, laurenfrances wrote:


Mar 20, 2017 -- 4:11PM, ArtVandelay wrote:


Mar 20, 2017 -- 3:10PM, laurenfrances wrote:


Are you saying burnettes with short hair cannot be feminine or attractive?




are you saying Rachel Maddow and Audry Hepburn can even be implied to be mentioned in the same encyclopedia, let alone the same sentence?




Audry is stunningly beautiful in anyone's books. In the looks column they are not in the same stratosphere...long hair or otherwise.  Just saying femininity is not defined by long tresses. Rachel's looks has dramatically changed with or without her long bloude hair. 




Rachel went full on bull dy&e...  she makes a handsome man now.  But it's her politics that are disturbing, no one cares about the other stuff except hard leftists, when someone on the right disagrees with a hard leftist the hard leftist goes through a checklist:


Is that person they disagree with a woman?  if so call the conservative anti-woman


Is that person they disagree with gay?  if so call the conservative a ****-phobe


Is that person they disagree with a minority?  if so call the conservative a racist


Is that person they disagree with over 60?  if so call the conservative anti-elderly (add in that they want to see them starve)


If all questons above are negative this person must be a white male - what does the liberal playbook say?  if so call the conservative any of the above, this is usually when a liberal loses their mind...




no one cares about this stuff except the hard left? How about the right using homophobic terms like gay boy, fruitcake, ****, ****, and all that nonsense. How about those that scream about a gay lifestyle that no one asks them to lead. Geeez Art play whats wrong with both sides for a change

2 months ago  ::  Mar 21, 2017 - 9:34AM #9
GottaGoToMo
Posts: 66,507

Mar 20, 2017 -- 6:48PM, ArtVandelay wrote:


Mar 20, 2017 -- 6:11PM, laurenfrances wrote:


Mar 20, 2017 -- 4:11PM, ArtVandelay wrote:


Mar 20, 2017 -- 3:10PM, laurenfrances wrote:


Are you saying burnettes with short hair cannot be feminine or attractive?




are you saying Rachel Maddow and Audry Hepburn can even be implied to be mentioned in the same encyclopedia, let alone the same sentence?




Audry is stunningly beautiful in anyone's books. In the looks column they are not in the same stratosphere...long hair or otherwise.  Just saying femininity is not defined by long tresses. Rachel's looks has dramatically changed with or without her long bloude hair. 




Rachel went full on bull dy&e...  she makes a handsome man now.  But it's her politics that are disturbing, no one cares about the other stuff except hard leftists, when someone on the right disagrees with a hard leftist the hard leftist goes through a checklist:


Is that person they disagree with a woman?  if so call the conservative anti-woman


Is that person they disagree with gay?  if so call the conservative a ****-phobe


Is that person they disagree with a minority?  if so call the conservative a racist


Is that person they disagree with over 60?  if so call the conservative anti-elderly (add in that they want to see them starve)


If all questons above are negative this person must be a white male - what does the liberal playbook say?  if so call the conservative any of the above, this is usually when a liberal loses their mind...





Well said Art ... the liberals always have a name to call if a conservative doesn't agree with them.

 photo yankeestadium.jpg

2 months ago  ::  Mar 21, 2017 - 12:07PM #10
laurenfrances
Posts: 27,375

Mar 20, 2017 -- 6:48PM, ArtVandelay wrote:


Mar 20, 2017 -- 6:11PM, laurenfrances wrote:


Mar 20, 2017 -- 4:11PM, ArtVandelay wrote:


Mar 20, 2017 -- 3:10PM, laurenfrances wrote:


Are you saying burnettes with short hair cannot be feminine or attractive?




are you saying Rachel Maddow and Audry Hepburn can even be implied to be mentioned in the same encyclopedia, let alone the same sentence?




Audry is stunningly beautiful in anyone's books. In the looks column they are not in the same stratosphere...long hair or otherwise.  Just saying femininity is not defined by long tresses. Rachel's looks has dramatically changed with or without her long bloude hair. 




Rachel went full on bull dy&e...  she makes a handsome man now.  But it's her politics that are disturbing, no one cares about the other stuff except hard leftists, when someone on the right disagrees with a hard leftist the hard leftist goes through a checklist:


Is that person they disagree with a woman?  if so call the conservative anti-woman


Is that person they disagree with gay?  if so call the conservative a ****-phobe


Is that person they disagree with a minority?  if so call the conservative a racist


Is that person they disagree with over 60?  if so call the conservative anti-elderly (add in that they want to see them starve)


If all questons above are negative this person must be a white male - what does the liberal playbook say?  if so call the conservative any of the above, this is usually when a liberal loses their mind...




I don't find her at all disturbing, and her looks are inconsequential. Am I suppose to like/dislike her because of her looks or sexual perference?  I just focus on what she brings within the confines of her program. In fact I tried to tune in whenever I can.  I like how she structures her program.  She provides background info leading to a theme of each program which I find interesting. 

Always proud to be a Yankee fan.

Photobucket

Photobucket
Page 1 of 2  •  1 2 Next
Jump Menu:
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing

Yankees Forum