- May 18, 2009
- 3,757
- 0
- 0
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbi...rnold-Schwarzeneggers-lovechild-revealed.html
Lol.
*** edited by mod ***
Lol.
*** edited by mod ***
The Cycling News forum is still looking to add volunteer moderators with. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to
In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.
Thanks!
L'arriviste said:The thing is, it just doesn't matter. Not criticizing ChrisE, just expressing a bit of schadenfreude and this and a million other puff pieces.
The Daily Mail only prints stuff that doesn't matter. Since my grandfather passed away, my grandmother reads it every day. Small ads and everything. What my grandmother doesn't know about weedkiller and hair loss treatment isn't worth knowing. But what's great is, she's got something to talk about.
Click on the link above and you can read about a star eating too much and another star not eating enough. You can read about how Maria smiling to a TV camera proves she's soooo over Arnold. Or else she's putting a brave face on it? Whichever way the editor wants to spin it.
Look at the press trucks outside that woman's house. Imagine if you were her neighbour in that cul-de-sac. You'd be apoplectic with rage, wouldn't you? All that circus screwing up your peace and quiet for what amounts to absolutely nothing of importance.
Captain_Cavman said:The Daily Mail is so successful because it specifically targets female readers. So what that says about British women is that they are histrionic, bitchy and bigotted. But I already knew that.
Captain_Cavman said:The Daily Mail is so successful because it specifically targets female readers. So what that says about British women is that they are histrionic, bitchy and bigotted. But I already knew that.
ChrisE said:Is this the subject of this thread? I just grabbed the link where I first saw this referenced, who cares what it is? I could have just as easily grabbed one off of MSNBC.
The point of my original post was lost because Susan felt the need to delete what I wrote. Apparently I was being insensitive to the attractiveness-challenged vs what somebody like Swarzenegger should be screwing around with if he was gonna do such a thing.
So, let's talk about the Daily Mail instead of the subject I was throwing out, per political correctness of the mod staff. Carry on.
ChrisE said:Is this the subject of this thread? I just grabbed the link where I first saw this referenced, who cares what it is? I could have just as easily grabbed one off of MSNBC.
The point of my original post was lost because Susan felt the need to delete what I wrote. Apparently I was being insensitive to the attractiveness-challenged vs what somebody like Swarzenegger should be screwing around with if he was gonna do such a thing.
So, let's talk about the Daily Mail instead of the subject I was throwing out, per political correctness of the mod staff. Carry on.
and yet still they trymewmewmew13 said:I think it is obvious which way the OP wanted the thread to go
thank you, Susan.Susan Westemeyer said:The physical attractiveness of the woman in question is not a suitable subject of discussion. All further references to this will be deleted as well.
patricknd said:in this case, i think it's a valid point.
Siriuscat said:Should we be shocked at another powerful politician having a trail of conquests dragging behind him??
The Daily Mail masquerades as a quality paper, it's really just as trashy as the Sun or other tabloids but pretends other wise. Other than the puzzles it's awful.
The physical attractiveness of the woman in question is not a suitable subject of discussion. All further references to this will be deleted as well.
Merckx index said:At the risk of having my post deleted...When Arnold ran for governor, at one point someone dug up evidence of his wild party days when he was much younger. In the process of apologizing for it (which I think he should not have had to do), he made the point that he was always interested in the passion that a woman showed for him in bed, not her physical attractiveness. That was what turned him on. I think this affair speaks to that, and says something about him that I should think most women, regardless of how they feel about the affair, would like about him.
As to the affair itself…We all know that males evolved with a desire to impregnate multiple partners, and that while some struggle with (and/or enjoy) this more than others, for many it’s often a very difficult problem to overcome. Though modern Western society has proven very forgiving of other human frailties (gambling, drinking, drugs, etc.), most people, certainly women, seem to resist the idea that a man may have far less choice in the matter than is commonly assumed--that sex can be an addiction, a pathology, rather than simple evil. Something more in need of therapy than disdain.
I might have more sympathy with the mainstream view if women didn’t have their own evolutionary tendencies which get cut far, far more slack. Consider, for example, acquisition of material possessions. When Tiger Woods was revealed to have dozens of mistresses, he was a bad guy, pure and simple. The fact that his wife Elin couldn’t be satisfied with anything less than hundreds of millions of dollars—that she married the guy in the first place in large part because he was so rich—is passed over as normal, healthy behavior.
Yet which behavior is worse? Tiger hurt mainly his wife and his kids, and only them because in our particular culture (not all other cultures), having mistresses is considered cheating, and if your husband or father is cheating, by the rules of the game, you have to feel hurt. We have this fairy-tale notion that everyone has a unique life partner, and if he gives any love to anyone else, that fairy tale is destroyed.
(An aspect of Arnold’s affair that has gone totally unremarked upon by the media is the simple fact that if Maria and his kids had no clue that the affair was going on, who exactly was hurt by it? Their lives were not changed one iota by the affair until they learned of it. The pain only came from knowing, so if Arnold did anything hurtful, it was just finally being honest. The affair itself hurt no one except perhaps Arnold, by reinforcing his addiction—and perhaps, by the stress of leading a double life. And maybe the other woman, who might have felt guilty, but she would have to speak to that).
Elin, on the other hand, reinforced in hundreds of millions of people pure, naked greed, the desire for far more material wealth than is needed for a healthy existence. How many women looked at her and said, I want to marry a rich guy and be like her? Or even, I want to have a lot of money so I can have all the things she has? Nobody as far as I know ever calls her on this. Nobody ever suggests that if Tiger is a sleazeball because he can’t control his sexual desires, Elin is a sleazeball because she can’t control her desire for expensive homes, cars, jewelry, and on and on. This despite the fact that the world is in no danger of running out of sexual partners, whereas it is very much in danger of running out of the resources necessary to support Elin’s kind of lifestyle.
And yes, I know I have made some generalizations here. Some women are very promiscuous, and certainly many men are greedy for material possessions. But even if you don’t want to see these two desires as gender-biassed, the way most people look at them is certainly very different, and I would say, very badly in need of overhaul.
ChrisE said:I would have no problem if Elin wanted me to move in with her and have a relationship, mainly because I could spend some of Tiger's money on boats, trips in the Alps during the tour, Porche's, etc. I would even consider this if I was with somebody else at the time, and if Elin was not as good looking as she is. I would not consider a longterm relationship with Elin if she wasn't rich with Tiger's money.
I believe this would make me some type of hybrid of what MI is describing. Unfortunately, I have just discovered this due to MI's post, and now I will need to set my alarm clock for 1 minute early in the morning so I can be assured of losing sleep over it.
i totally agree. there is nothing good (as with the previous sexist themes disguised) coming out of this thread. politics in and of itself have enough controversial angles to leave this theme alone.mewmewmew13 said:I think it is obvious which way the OP wanted the thread to go
mewmewmew13 said:pure class.
so many of your posts involve declaring 'not losing sleep over it'..
huge theme.
do you think Arnie is 'losing sleep' over any of his classy life decisions.
real integrity