| re: Regarding Jim's sexuality. | |
|
Posted by: |
Markus 10:42 am UTC 12/29/06 |
| In reply to: | Regarding Jim's sexuality. - Lasse86b 09:43 am UTC 12/29/06 |
| Fine. Maybe you can start a thread every day and ask the same question? Oh, you already started it. It won´t bother me I´d only think somethings damn wrong with you. Markus. > It really beats me, that theres so much anxiety about > touching this issue, and a lot of people seem to be > getting real angry with the curious on the board (esp. > you, Pudding). It's slightly contradictory when people at > the same time as claiming that they always see a pure Jim, > free of sexuality etc. Sort of, the unpolluted Jim. yet > still I see people shrieking, when the suspicion arises as > to whether Jim is a NYC liberal or not. > > My point is, a lot of people obviously get offended by our > asking (Jim seems to take it with a pinch of salt tho, > which is refreshing), but in fact this IS, or should be, a > free board, so in essence everyone's entitled to ask. If > know one really knows, well then it ends there. Fine by > me. But I don't need anyone teaching me what I should be > asking and when and when not to get a life. Besides THAT, > I sincerely think that Pudding and others who don't wanna > know, and for some reason wanna stop us who do dead in our > tracks, should participate, but you really shouldn't be so > judgmental. We're just curious. | |
| reply | | |
| Previous: | Get over it - Pudding 10:56 am UTC 12/29/06 |
| Next: | Vampirok Balja update - Pudding 01:24 am UTC 12/29/06 |
| Thread: | |