RoadBikeReview.com's Forum Archives - Non-Cycling Discussions


Archive Home >> Non-Cycling Discussions(1 2 3 4 )


Who's more self-involved, men or women?(17 posts)

Who's more self-involved, men or women?Spoiler
May 20, 2003 1:29 PM
Sure there's exceptions, but just to indulge in blatant generalizations, let's share.
What do you mean by "self-involved"? (nm)TJeanloz
May 20, 2003 1:31 PM
No contest, Men by a wide margin...nmrwbadley
May 20, 2003 1:38 PM
women. ha! what are you gonna do? nmmohair_chair
May 20, 2003 1:48 PM
Conservatives. (nm)sacheson
May 20, 2003 1:53 PM
cyclists nmDougSloan
May 20, 2003 2:16 PM
male or female cyclists ?nmSpoiler
May 20, 2003 3:03 PM
among cyclists, definitely men nmDougSloan
May 20, 2003 3:07 PM
Your question presupposes the existence of a 'self'carnageasada
May 21, 2003 3:55 AM
Long disagreed with the train of thought introduced by Descartes which posited the self as the 'determiner' of truth, before he proved there was a self. I myself question the existence of the self. Maybe we are not selves at all but billions of spiritual nerve endings for a much larger, advanced species (GOD? ALLAH? WALMART?) and we merely have the false impression that we have selves with individual experiences.
But otherwise I think it's a good question. My guess is that there is as many self-involved women as there are men unless you're in a bad relationship with the opposite sex.
Spiritual nerve endings--that's a good oneContinental
May 21, 2003 6:34 AM
So if someone is an obnoxious, irritating jerk then he's probably a spiritual nerve ending in God's hemmorhoid. A manic depressive is a spiritual nerve ending in God's sex organ. If you're a spiritutal nerve ending, where do you reside in God's anatomy?
now we're getting all metaphysical?DougSloan
May 21, 2003 6:54 AM
I think we have a bit more autonomy than the concept of "spiritual nerve ending" would suggest. It is interesting to think about, though. I think it would be good to be leukocyte, gobbling up all the bad stuff...

Doug
now we're getting all metaphysical?Jon Billheimer
May 21, 2003 7:35 AM
Aw geez, c'mon guys, use some imagination! As cyclists, if you're a sprinter you're one of God's fast-twitch fibres; if you're an endurance type you're a slow-twitch fibre or maybe to cut it even finer you're a divine mitochondria or even just a lowly enzyme!:)-
Lower intestine would be my guess. nmcarnageasada
May 22, 2003 3:29 AM
Interesting53T
May 21, 2003 9:06 AM
So what you're saying is that if a tree falls in the middle of a forest and someone IS there to hear it, it still might not have made a sound?
Hypothetically you would hear the tree fallingcarnageasada
May 22, 2003 3:28 AM
but be transmitting it to something else. Hypothetically.
Your question presupposes the existence of a 'self'Spoiler
May 21, 2003 1:05 PM
Hey, when Lazywriter's home on Saturday night doing the knuckle shuffle, while I'm half-way across the country, eating icecream out of a supermodels hoohaa, I guarantee our nerve endings are involved in totally seperate, individual experiences.
Not knowing much about Fabio's hoohaacarnageasada
May 22, 2003 3:25 AM
I suppose you could be right but just because you think you have Fabio all to yourself does not neccesarily mean you do. Neither does it mean you're not transmitting your experiences with Fabio to something else.