Active Members
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

450 Excellent

About TheCrowing

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

3,277 profile views
  1. Hey again, everyone!

    Whoa...Hey there! Some of you will remember me, some won't. Can't believe it's been over a year since I've logged in. 2015 was an interesting year for me, to say the least...! This will be short and sweet. I just wanted you guys to know that you still inspire me, EVERY SINGLE DAY! I really missed you all. Sure there are some differences amongst us, but at the end of the day we are all united under a common cause, and that is WTM! That's all that matters, friends. I won't be the active poster I used to be, but I told myself to still make a point to stop in periodically. I like to think of this place as an oasis in a huge worldly internet desert. You can journey away, but you still need to make a stop every now and then! I really hope everyone is doing well! Peace, Eric (TC)
  2. I don't even have the words for this. There are some decent arguments out there for not waiting till marriage, but this one... The generalizations are out of control. Out. Of. Control. Some highlights: The notion that men who don't want sex before marriage aren't sexual beings, as in they don't desire sex at all, and aren't capable of attracting good women. Most of the guys I know who waited till marriage have very attractive wives. I guess they don't apply? I've noticed this article operates under one particular premise: That all humans (women especially) rely solely on their animal instincts when choosing their SO, and not at all on their intellect or emotional convictions. This is pretty offensive. The science of sex is never absolute, and hardly the same for every person, man or woman. Sure there are basic mating principles, but to act like they perfectly govern the actions of every person is false, and like I said before, offensive. Yeah, the pretending that 26 year-old virgins don't exist thing. He tries to act like he was kidding, but I don't think he was, unfortunately. My favorite highlight, however, was this: "Nice guys" who wait for sex aren't sexual creatures (again, they don't desire sex), therefore women's genes won't survive and he'll in turn give the woman sons and daughters that are weak. What in the actual hell? He also mentioned more than once that couples who marry early to (presumably) consummate end up mostly in divorce soon after. So much for the substantial proof that couples who wait divorce less, heh. Probably just another case of one trying to rationalize and justify their own obsession with sex. Judging by his other articles, he seems to be yet another self-proclaimed "pick-up artist" blogging their life away. It happens. You know how I know this is REALLY bad though? The fact that some of our more liberal members here have shot it down.
  3. Celebrity Crush?

    Nobody here's mentioned Molly Quinn yet. Good god almighty... Redheads are fascinating to me. They're rare, which makes an extremely attractive one even more rare.
  4. Favorite Horror Movies

    Believe it or not "The Ring" is the only movie that has legitimately scared me, of course I was like 16 when I first saw it. I don't go near wells anymore! On that note, I find psychological-horror type movies to be far more chilling than flash-horror (or whatever you want to call it), aka the movies that make you jump. Also, I can't name any specific movies with this other than House on Haunted Hill, but there's something about haunted hospitals that gets me. There should be more movies with such a setting!
  5. Older women???

    Depends on how much older, of course, but I've been on a couple dates with women in their early 30s (I'm 28), and found that it's not much different than going on a date with someone in their early 20s, and on a similar note I don't really feel anything different lol. Of course the older a woman is, the more likely it is they'll have past marriages and/or children, which is kind of a deal breaker for me and presumably for most single, never-married guys. There is something about a single, mature woman in her early 30s that I find attractive though.
  6. That's fine, continue to single me out, I can handle it. It's as if every rebuttal to my argument(s) has been done with tons of respect. Ya'll can't be serious. If you guys REALLY think I disrespected Dianna or BF before they each disrespected me then I have no idea what to tell you. Now is it necessarily right to disrespect someone because they disrespected you? No, but if you're going to give lectures on respect, there's several people that need to hear it. I still don't know if I'd even call what I said to Dianna "disrespect" to begin with. And as far as what I said to BF, I don't really think it was worse than what she first spouted off towards me. I don't know how I can tell you that what I said was a reaction from people making things personal with me and yet you end up only telling me to behave. None of this is anything but perception. You simply cannot get a true read on someone based on what they say online, so if ya'll want to think I'm a cocky, arrogant, disrespecting jerk based on me sticking up for my beliefs and simply responding to disrespect towards me, then fine.
  7. Totally agree with this, which is exactly why I felt the need to post over there to begin with. Maybe fighting fire with fire wasn't the right thing to do in this case, but I felt compelled to make a stand, and I still maintain that I was no less respectful toward her (Dianna) than she was toward me. She attacked my lifestyle, so I let her know about it. She then quickly dismissed my arguments and threatened to ban me for saying some harmless word, which is showing about as little respect as you can show someone, so I gave her none in return, and she banned me from her site. End of story. I sincerely hope people will get the whole story before just automatically deciding that I'm the bad guy, which BF obviously feels that I am, because of course, she's friends with that author. Don't worry, I'm still leaving the site for the time being. I just wanted to clear some things up.
  8. Whether or not there are "answers" to my questions somewhere on her blog doesn't change the fact that her article was FULL of misconceptions about waiting, virginity, and purity movements. In fact, I don't see how she could have somewhere dispelled all of these misconceptions without better articulating herself in the present article. Uninterested in real discussion? Okay.
  9. No, but other people on that article have been banned. Why does it matter if it's every person, or if they're from WTM? I noticed she didn't address about 85% of the points I made to her. It just looks bad on her part. She's the one with a reputation to uphold, not me.
  10. I maintain respect until someone makes it personal, then all bets are off.
  11. account delete option?

    EDIT: I'm going to try extremely hard not logging in for a very long time. Months probably. No point in having to re-create everything someday. Thanks and farewell for now.
  12. I just now picked up on this. HAHAHA @ "crazy" being an able-ist slur. Are you fricking serious? So what, I used "crazy" to describe parents who shove things down their kids' throats, in order to make a point. Not only that, but this obviously would be a sentiment they agree with. Further proof that they had no interest in even focusing on the topic at hand. Oh My God! Screw this bull. I've been trying so hard to refrain from going political, but things like this are why for the most part I can't stand liberalism. As if I purposefully meant to be prejudice against those with mental illnesses. LOL okay. Give me a break. Oh and feminism is a great idea, but I've almost never seen it carried out in a prudent fashion, and you're no exception, BF. Had to get that off my chest too. I'm done with this site. So disappointed in the last couple months here.
  13. Good posts. There's a noticeable gaffe in her reasoning, that you can point out if you wish to (I'm banned lol), but she argues in her original article that abstinence is okay as long as one takes the time to arrive at the choice for personal reasons. However, it's pretty clear in her comments that she simply does not condone abstinence at all, for anyone, made very evident by her using the most popular criticism in the book: lack of sexual compatibility! Haha. She is now arguing against abstinence itself, not the method at which one arrives at being abstinent, which is what she claimed originally. I told myself I'd stop posting about this. I'm trying! Lol.