RE: Fucking Psycho

RE: Fucking Psycho (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion

Message

Daddysredhead -> RE: Fucking Psycho (4/19/2008 7:33:40 PM)
giggles

Daddysredhead -> RE: Fucking Psycho (4/19/2008 7:36:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Leatherist You handle rejection poorly. I'm sure you will be very popular with the female tops here. Ditto... I, for one, do not suffer brats or SAMs well. I do, however, make them suffer.

Emperor1956 -> RE: Fucking Psycho (4/19/2008 7:44:44 PM)
quote: from the OP (the effing psycho said): "First it is NOT for me, I have a slave second you do NOT tell a Domme as long as you make no rules be gone!" FWIW: I took it to mean exactly the opposite of what LA thought -- loosely translated from psycho talk: "First I am not looking for myself, as I have a slave. I am seeking for another Domme. Second you are no submissive because you told me "A DOMME!" something. And I have no idea how to speak English so I'll use a double negative. Leave." When someone first starts to interpret the Talmud (the collected Jewish religious wisdom), there is an example in English I use. Translate this sign: Private No Parking You think you know what it means? Well, in Talmudic interpretation, it is perfectly reasonable to translate that passage as: Private? NO! Parking! Either the Domme in question is a subtle Talmudic scholar....or maybe she's a psycho moron. I'm betting on the latter. E.

ResidentSadist -> RE: Fucking Psycho (4/19/2008 8:20:18 PM)
I had to read this thread with a title like that. Psycho ... a Domme... surely you jest? I thought all Doms/Dommes/etc were infallible despite their grammar!

BoySlip -> RE: Fucking Psycho (4/19/2008 9:47:55 PM)
The thing that baffles me is that it almost seems like we were having two different conversations. Its kind of like when you say, "Hello, nice to meet you." and the person you are talking to responds, "Duck? For breakfast?"

TNstepsout -> RE: Fucking Psycho (4/19/2008 9:47:56 PM)
I think he was talking to Mistress Yoda. First it is! NOT for me I have. A slave second you do. NOT tell a Domme as long as you. Make no rules! Be gone!

xxblushesxx -> RE: Fucking Psycho (4/20/2008 12:21:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TNstepsout I think he was talking to Mistress Yoda. First it is! NOT for me I have. A slave second you do. NOT tell a Domme as long as you. Make no rules! Be gone! brilliant!!!

Arrrchibald -> RE: Fucking Psycho (4/20/2008 12:52:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BoySlip Okay, so i just let a local mistress know that i am okay with seeing a mistress who is married so long as her spouse is aware and okay with it, and what times i am availible so we can schedule a meet, and she sends me this: "First it is NOT for me, I have a slave second you do NOT tell a Domme as long as you make no rules be gone!" Incomprehensible. I have had been having trouble with what she would have been meaning to intend to be going to say.

xxblushesxx -> RE: Fucking Psycho (4/20/2008 1:05:46 PM)
[sm=banghead.gif] Thanks Aaaarch; that was incredibly annoying. lol

bamabbwsub -> RE: Fucking Psycho (4/20/2008 1:15:38 PM)
And who says that grammar doesn't matter?? [8\|]

BoySlip -> RE: Fucking Psycho (4/20/2008 2:28:36 PM)
Well, i don't want to keep ragging on her forever. She was probably just scared. Besides, psycho is when someone attaches a car battery to your testicles. Or insists that the cat be let in the room while your making love.

Lucylastic -> RE: Fucking Psycho (4/20/2008 2:39:38 PM)
attaching a cat to your testicles AND the car battery is psycho, but seriously could you please explain what the actual convo was? using some method of punctuation, because I couldnt make head nor tail of it and I speak fluent typonese and gibberish. Im not being a smart ass or a dumbass, well at the moment anyway. It might help? Lucy

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

1.757813E-02