Scivillage.com Casual Discussion Science Forum

(Apr 22, 2017 06:47 PM)Ben the Donkey Wrote: [ -> ]Not that there's anything wrong with that.

With what?  Not that there's anything wrong with what exactly?

(Apr 22, 2017 06:47 PM)Ben the Donkey Wrote: [ -> ]Not that there's anything wrong with that.

I feel this is along the line of:

"Extra! Extra! Politically endangered Male Underground timidly pokes up to surface to give ambiguous thumbs-up for challenged hemlines in agrestic settings!"

But who knows...

(Apr 23, 2017 12:22 AM)C C Wrote: [ -> ]

(Apr 22, 2017 06:47 PM)Ben the Donkey Wrote: [ -> ]Not that there's anything wrong with that.

I feel this is along the line of:

"Extra! Extra! Politically endangered Male Underground timidly pokes up to surface to give ambiguous thumbs-up for challenged hemlines in agrestic settings!"

But who knows...

My first thought...



but why assume when you can just ask?

(Apr 22, 2017 12:12 AM)confused2 Wrote: [ -> ]rather than wondering if the two guys were planning to bundle her into the boot of the car and never see daylight again. <- 

(Apr 22, 2017 06:47 PM)Ben the Donkey Wrote: [ -> ]Not that there's anything wrong with that.

 
You never know...

(Apr 23, 2017 01:32 AM)Secular Sanity Wrote: [ -> ]

(Apr 23, 2017 12:22 AM)C C Wrote: [ -> ]

(Apr 22, 2017 06:47 PM)Ben the Donkey Wrote: [ -> ]Not that there's anything wrong with that.

I feel this is along the line of:

"Extra! Extra! Politically endangered Male Underground timidly pokes up to surface to give ambiguous thumbs-up for challenged hemlines in agrestic settings!"

But who knows...

My first thought...



but why assume when you can just ask?

(Apr 22, 2017 12:12 AM)confused2 Wrote: [ -> ]rather than wondering if the two guys were planning to bundle her into the boot of the car and never see daylight again. <- 

(Apr 22, 2017 06:47 PM)Ben the Donkey Wrote: [ -> ]Not that there's anything wrong with that.

 You never know...

That's occasionally a problem with Ben's erratic visitations. Two weeks from now we may still not know.

But in the meantime... "The conjecture mill is oiled, fueled, washed, inflated, and running wild over the back forty!"

(Apr 21, 2017 05:45 PM)Secular Sanity Wrote: [ -> ]

(Apr 21, 2017 01:24 PM)Zinjanthropos Wrote: [ -> ]These days guys are too busy having their driving distracted by gazing at their cell phones to look up and be mesmerized by a great looking gal wearing a miniskirt. Ah, the good old days.

Maybe you’re on to something, Zinmann.  Not so much with a distraction created by hand held devices but maybe a deterrence.

Sexual violence has fallen by more than half since 1993, but it’s not just sexual violence.  The overall crime rate has declined and the reason is still a mystery.  There’s plenty of theories out there but no real consensus among scholars.  

I thought that Jonathan Klick's and his coauthors, John MacDonald's and Thomas Stratmann's link was stronger than all the others.  They suggested that that the introduction and growth of mobile phone technology may have contributed to the crime decline in the 1990s, specifically in the areas of rape and assault.

Mobile Phones and Crime Deterrence: An Underappreciated Link

So, Stryder's advice may have been way better than Syne's "Go ahead, make my day" spiel.

(Apr 2, 2017 12:10 AM)stryder Wrote: [ -> ]The only thing I can suggest if you ever end up in that situation again is to at least make it look like your talking to someone on a phone (You don't have to have a signal), while being in an isolated location means anything can happen, there is still the chance that if any would be attack thinks there is the remotest of risks, they might not take that risk.

Computer games ?
Cinemas ?
shopping malls ?
the price of cars ?
Gyms ?
Anti Depressants ?