Tiger Woods

[NotCranky]

[quote=davelj][quote=Russell]That’s why I didn’t become a banker. What the hell would anyone become a banker for except to negotiate success against what gold diggers offer? No that’s not right. That is just a career for people following the most primitive instincts, and once under taken, is a sure fire stop to an individual’s social evolution.[/quote]

[quote=davelj]
You lost me at “why I didn’t become a banker.” I have absolutely no idea what you’re talking about here.[/quote]

This bit remains baffling…[/quote]
Keep trying.

[NotCranky]

[quote=davelj][quote=Russell]How about the men who subscribe to playboy or put touched up silk screened, pictures selected from 1000’s of shots to get the very best one, of already beautiful women, who are almost exclusively in their best child bearing years. Aren’t these fellas sex groupies of a sort?[/quote]

This is solely about looks/sexuality – it has little or nothing to do with the “celebrity” of the person. If the woman is hot, the picture goes up.

Although there is a “novelty” issue…
[quote=Russell]
Perhaps closer to the point of Sex Groupie, isn’t it true that a pornographic video of angelina Jolie or whatever her name is would be much more of a sensation than an equal one of a much more beautiful but humble woman who isn’t in the lime light of fame and fortune? [/quote]

This gets to the issue of “novelty” – which is apart from Groupiedom. I’m sure a sex tape of Hillary Clinton would also do quite well due solely to its inherent novelty.

You’re really stretching…[/quote]
No I am not stretching. It is pretty similar behavior and is derived from the same place in the brain with small variations for gender and societal ramifications.

[NotCranky]

[quote=davelj][quote=Russell]How about the men who subscribe to playboy or put touched up silk screened, pictures selected from 1000’s of shots to get the very best one, of already beautiful women, who are almost exclusively in their best child bearing years. Aren’t these fellas sex groupies of a sort?[/quote]

This is solely about looks/sexuality – it has little or nothing to do with the “celebrity” of the person. If the woman is hot, the picture goes up.

Although there is a “novelty” issue…
[quote=Russell]
Perhaps closer to the point of Sex Groupie, isn’t it true that a pornographic video of angelina Jolie or whatever her name is would be much more of a sensation than an equal one of a much more beautiful but humble woman who isn’t in the lime light of fame and fortune? [/quote]

This gets to the issue of “novelty” – which is apart from Groupiedom. I’m sure a sex tape of Hillary Clinton would also do quite well due solely to its inherent novelty.

You’re really stretching…[/quote]
No I am not stretching. It is pretty similar behavior and is derived from the same place in the brain with small variations for gender and societal ramifications.

[NotCranky]

[quote=davelj][quote=Russell]How about the men who subscribe to playboy or put touched up silk screened, pictures selected from 1000’s of shots to get the very best one, of already beautiful women, who are almost exclusively in their best child bearing years. Aren’t these fellas sex groupies of a sort?[/quote]

This is solely about looks/sexuality – it has little or nothing to do with the “celebrity” of the person. If the woman is hot, the picture goes up.

Although there is a “novelty” issue…
[quote=Russell]
Perhaps closer to the point of Sex Groupie, isn’t it true that a pornographic video of angelina Jolie or whatever her name is would be much more of a sensation than an equal one of a much more beautiful but humble woman who isn’t in the lime light of fame and fortune? [/quote]

This gets to the issue of “novelty” – which is apart from Groupiedom. I’m sure a sex tape of Hillary Clinton would also do quite well due solely to its inherent novelty.

You’re really stretching…[/quote]
No I am not stretching. It is pretty similar behavior and is derived from the same place in the brain with small variations for gender and societal ramifications.

[NotCranky]

[quote=davelj][quote=Russell]How about the men who subscribe to playboy or put touched up silk screened, pictures selected from 1000’s of shots to get the very best one, of already beautiful women, who are almost exclusively in their best child bearing years. Aren’t these fellas sex groupies of a sort?[/quote]

This is solely about looks/sexuality – it has little or nothing to do with the “celebrity” of the person. If the woman is hot, the picture goes up.

Although there is a “novelty” issue…
[quote=Russell]
Perhaps closer to the point of Sex Groupie, isn’t it true that a pornographic video of angelina Jolie or whatever her name is would be much more of a sensation than an equal one of a much more beautiful but humble woman who isn’t in the lime light of fame and fortune? [/quote]

This gets to the issue of “novelty” – which is apart from Groupiedom. I’m sure a sex tape of Hillary Clinton would also do quite well due solely to its inherent novelty.

You’re really stretching…[/quote]
No I am not stretching. It is pretty similar behavior and is derived from the same place in the brain with small variations for gender and societal ramifications.

[NotCranky]

[quote=davelj][quote=Russell]How about the men who subscribe to playboy or put touched up silk screened, pictures selected from 1000’s of shots to get the very best one, of already beautiful women, who are almost exclusively in their best child bearing years. Aren’t these fellas sex groupies of a sort?[/quote]

This is solely about looks/sexuality – it has little or nothing to do with the “celebrity” of the person. If the woman is hot, the picture goes up.

Although there is a “novelty” issue…
[quote=Russell]
Perhaps closer to the point of Sex Groupie, isn’t it true that a pornographic video of angelina Jolie or whatever her name is would be much more of a sensation than an equal one of a much more beautiful but humble woman who isn’t in the lime light of fame and fortune? [/quote]

This gets to the issue of “novelty” – which is apart from Groupiedom. I’m sure a sex tape of Hillary Clinton would also do quite well due solely to its inherent novelty.

You’re really stretching…[/quote]
No I am not stretching. It is pretty similar behavior and is derived from the same place in the brain with small variations for gender and societal ramifications.

[Arraya]

Eye on the TV
’cause tragedy thrills me
Whatever flavor it happens to be

[Arraya]

Eye on the TV
’cause tragedy thrills me
Whatever flavor it happens to be

[Arraya]

Eye on the TV
’cause tragedy thrills me
Whatever flavor it happens to be

[Arraya]

Eye on the TV
’cause tragedy thrills me
Whatever flavor it happens to be

[Arraya]

Eye on the TV
’cause tragedy thrills me
Whatever flavor it happens to be

[davelj]

[quote=Russell]
No I am not stretching. It is pretty similar behavior.[/quote]

Tell me, do you see men hanging out in front of the locker rooms at WNBA games waiting to hook up with the players? Or women’s Major League Soccer games? Or any other athletic event involving females?

Do you see crowds of men desperately trying to get backstage to have sex with Wynonna Judd? Or any other female singer/group?

Thought experiment: Susan Boyle is a 48 year-old now world famous singer. Talented, soon-to-be wealthy, but not particularly attractive (according to generally-accepted norms, rightly or wrongly). Keith Richards of the Rolling Stones is a haggard, weathered 66 year-old grandfather. Go backstage at each entertainer’s concert and count the number of men trying to get into Susan Boyle’s pants versus those women trying to get into Keith Richards’.

You’re trying to convince me that an apple is an orange, but I’m not buying.

[davelj]

[quote=Russell]
No I am not stretching. It is pretty similar behavior.[/quote]

Tell me, do you see men hanging out in front of the locker rooms at WNBA games waiting to hook up with the players? Or women’s Major League Soccer games? Or any other athletic event involving females?

Do you see crowds of men desperately trying to get backstage to have sex with Wynonna Judd? Or any other female singer/group?

Thought experiment: Susan Boyle is a 48 year-old now world famous singer. Talented, soon-to-be wealthy, but not particularly attractive (according to generally-accepted norms, rightly or wrongly). Keith Richards of the Rolling Stones is a haggard, weathered 66 year-old grandfather. Go backstage at each entertainer’s concert and count the number of men trying to get into Susan Boyle’s pants versus those women trying to get into Keith Richards’.

You’re trying to convince me that an apple is an orange, but I’m not buying.

[davelj]

[quote=Russell]
No I am not stretching. It is pretty similar behavior.[/quote]

Tell me, do you see men hanging out in front of the locker rooms at WNBA games waiting to hook up with the players? Or women’s Major League Soccer games? Or any other athletic event involving females?

Do you see crowds of men desperately trying to get backstage to have sex with Wynonna Judd? Or any other female singer/group?

Thought experiment: Susan Boyle is a 48 year-old now world famous singer. Talented, soon-to-be wealthy, but not particularly attractive (according to generally-accepted norms, rightly or wrongly). Keith Richards of the Rolling Stones is a haggard, weathered 66 year-old grandfather. Go backstage at each entertainer’s concert and count the number of men trying to get into Susan Boyle’s pants versus those women trying to get into Keith Richards’.

You’re trying to convince me that an apple is an orange, but I’m not buying.

[davelj]

[quote=Russell]
No I am not stretching. It is pretty similar behavior.[/quote]

Tell me, do you see men hanging out in front of the locker rooms at WNBA games waiting to hook up with the players? Or women’s Major League Soccer games? Or any other athletic event involving females?

Do you see crowds of men desperately trying to get backstage to have sex with Wynonna Judd? Or any other female singer/group?

Thought experiment: Susan Boyle is a 48 year-old now world famous singer. Talented, soon-to-be wealthy, but not particularly attractive (according to generally-accepted norms, rightly or wrongly). Keith Richards of the Rolling Stones is a haggard, weathered 66 year-old grandfather. Go backstage at each entertainer’s concert and count the number of men trying to get into Susan Boyle’s pants versus those women trying to get into Keith Richards’.

You’re trying to convince me that an apple is an orange, but I’m not buying.

[Author]

Posts