?

Log in

No account? Create an account
Ask me no more questions and tell me no more lies - You don't know me. — LiveJournal [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]
randomposting

[ website | The Realm of Randomia ]
[ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ]
[ archive | journal archive ]

Ask me no more questions and tell me no more lies [Mar. 12th, 2005|08:02 pm]
randomposting
[mood |full bladdered]
[music |My son being naughty]

If Hooters were to become a door-to-door service would they have to change
their name to Knockers?
linkReply

Comments:
[User Picture]From: psychobgy
2005-03-12 07:56 pm (UTC)
During the last hurricane that came through here a Hooters had a couple lights knocked out... the "T" and the "R".......

Hooes.....
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: randomposting
2005-03-12 08:13 pm (UTC)
Haha, fantastic. ;)

No offense to anyone working at hooters...

But why not just work at a strip club? The pay's better.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: afropunk629
2005-03-12 10:26 pm (UTC)
But you don't have to take off your clothing at Hooters. And besides, it's a family restaurant. There's nothing outrightly offensive about Hooters, unless you count waitresses who were small clothing as/more offensive than srippers.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: randomposting
2005-03-12 10:32 pm (UTC)
I think it's basically the same thing. I really do.. And I don't know what family would bring thier kids to Hooters...
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: bloody_kisser
2005-03-12 10:45 pm (UTC)
I know a guy who brings his kid to Hooters when he gets good grades. He brings his kid's friends too.

I think it's kind of offensive to the women working there. "Hey son! You get some A's and I'll take you to see some D's!".

>.<'
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: randomposting
2005-03-12 10:49 pm (UTC)
Yeah.. I think it's offensive that they'd be allowed in the door. Yeah, let's teach little boys how to objectify women. Cool plan, they don't get enough of that in the media...
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: popsimon
2005-03-13 03:28 am (UTC)
dont worry, they'll probably end up gay - i mean have you seen childrens television nowwadays?
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: randomposting
2005-03-13 07:37 am (UTC)
Yeah... I don't know how tv can turn someone gay, when you're born with your sexuality predetermined.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: popsimon
2005-03-13 09:12 am (UTC)
to my knowledge, they have yet to definatively prove the exact cause of sexual orientation (or 'preference' as many evangelicals like to call it)

i tend to regard sexual orientation as more of a sliding scale in terms of attraction - you may be attracted to a male or a female, however, it is possible to be attracted to both equally or in diffferent proportions. however, few people ever have sexual interaction with every person they find attractive.

within the general population there is a significant tendancy towards hetrosexuality. however, with changes in society such as a greater level of acceptability, we may find in future that people become generally more fluid in their sexuality.

this of course could be catalysed by environmental factors (e.g. oestrogen mimics arising from plastics and chemicals) which have the potential to alter body chemistry and consequent behaviour.

the 'born gay' theory is often used as a defence against attacks by (normally religious) individuals who regard any sexuality other than thier own as a 'choice' and unnacceptable. the fact is that sexuality may be fixed at birth or during the formative years for some individuals and may remain fluid for others for much of thier lives.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: randomposting
2005-03-13 03:21 pm (UTC)
I agree for the most part.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: popsimon
2005-03-13 03:38 pm (UTC)
fair enough, excuse my occasional rant (have been working much of thew weekend)
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)