Gender differences

Cpt_pineapple
atheist
Cpt_pineapple's picture
Posts: 5486
Joined: 2007-04-12
User is offlineOffline
Gender differences

Take for example

 

Who's more likely to be moral? Men or Women?

 

 

A quick glance at some stats

 

 

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/glance/tables/cpgendtab.htm

 

 

  Number of persons under correctional supervision Year Male Female
 

1986 2,829,100 410,300
1987 3,021,000 438,600
1988 3,223,000 491,100
1989 3,501,600 554,000
1990 3,746,300 601,700
1991 3,913,000 622,600
1992 4,050,300 712,30

1993

4,215,800 728,200
1994 4,377,400 763,900
1995 4,513,000 822,100
1996 4,630,100 852,800
1997 4,797,200 895,300

 

 

According to the CIA fact book:

 

 

Sex ratio:

at birth: 1.05 male(s)/female
under 15 years: 1.04 male(s)/female
15-64 years: 1 male(s)/female
65 years and over: 0.75 male(s)/female
total population: 0.97 male(s)/female (2009 est.)

 

 

 

 

What other gender differences are there?

 

Such as for example in:

Intelligence?

Religiosity?

Coping with stress?

Obsession with buying shoes?

 

 

Discuss Smiling

 

 

 


treat2 (not verified)
Posts: 4294964979
Joined: 1969-12-31
User is offlineOffline
You're welcome.

You're welcome.


The Doomed Soul
atheist
The Doomed Soul's picture
Posts: 2148
Joined: 2007-08-31
User is offlineOffline
Cpt_pineapple wrote:Who's

Cpt_pineapple wrote:

Who's more likely to be moral? Men or Women?

Only detailed who got caught the most ;-p

 

Cpt_pineapple wrote:

What other gender differences are there?

I think thats a discussion i'll leave to your parents...

What Would Kharn Do?


butterbattle
ModeratorSuperfan
butterbattle's picture
Posts: 3705
Joined: 2008-09-12
User is offlineOffline
I'll play.Cpt_pineapple

I'll play.

Cpt_pineapple wrote:

  Number of persons under correctional supervision Year Male Female
 

1986 2,829,100 410,300
1987 3,021,000 438,600
1988 3,223,000 491,100
1989 3,501,600 554,000
1990 3,746,300 601,700
1991 3,913,000 622,600
1992 4,050,300 712,30

1993

4,215,800 728,200
1994 4,377,400 763,900
1995 4,513,000 822,100
1996 4,630,100 852,800
1997 4,797,200 895,300

Lol, women win.

Edit: Or the justice system is sexist.

Quote:
Sex ratio:

at birth: 1.05 male(s)/female
under 15 years: 1.04 male(s)/female
15-64 years: 1 male(s)/female
65 years and over: 0.75 male(s)/female
total population: 0.97 male(s)/female (2009 est.)

- People are more likely to abort girls? People reproduce until they have at least one boy? Maybe, naturally, there's a higher chance it'll be male?

- Males are more likely to die? 

Quote:
Such as for example in:

Intelligence?

Men are smarter. Hehe.

Quote:
Religiosity?

Men are more religious too...probably.

Quote:
Coping with stress?

Oh, that's tough. I don't know.

Quote:
Obsession with buying shoes?

That's obvious. Women spend more time and money on clothes, except maybe under Sharia law, where only the men are allowed to go out freely and buy stuff. 

Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare


Nordmann
atheist
Nordmann's picture
Posts: 904
Joined: 2008-04-02
User is offlineOffline
Just for future reference so

Just for future reference so you don't embarrass yourself in certain company, Ms Pineapple:

 

"Gender" and "sex" are not interchangeable nouns. The former applies to grammar, the latter to people. If you are discussing how males and females differ then you are discussing disparity between the sexes, not the genders.

 

Also your question regarding which of the sexes is "more likely to be moral" demands an answer that both have equal propensity to be moral. I assume you meant however to ask which is likely to be "morally superior", which is a whole other barrel of monkeys entirely.

 

Invitations to discuss badly presented data tend to elicit badly conducted discussions.

I would rather have a bottle in front of me than a frontal lobotomy


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
 To make sure we're

 To make sure we're absolutely clear on a couple of things:

Female - Makes an egg.

Male - Makes sperm

Sperm and egg are determined by size.  Period.  The egg is bigger, the sperm is smaller.  End of story.

Man ?

Woman ?

Sex refers strictly to the gamete contributed to the recombination process.  Gender is a social construct, and refers to, among other things, the role a person will be expected to play in society.  Gender is not fixed.  For instance, in Polynesia/Tahiti, there is a "third gender" which would be called transvestites in America, but is considered its own separate entity.  It may seem like just wordplay, but it's not.  Transvestites in the West are considered males who dress like females.  In Polynesia, it's a genuinely third gender.  It's very hard for us in the west to understand how this can happen because we're societally tied to the notion of genitals and gender being synonymous.  They are not.

Having got that out of the way, there are a lot of general differences between the sexes in humans.  Men tend to be better at spacial reasoning, making it likely that even in a completely egalitarian society, there would be more male pilots, advanced mathematicians, engineers, and such.  

Women are significantly better at social reasoning and recognition.  They can intuit another person's emotions, motivations, and likely actions better than men.  They're usually much better at verbal skills, remembering longer and more complicated lists, poems, or instructions.  Oh, and much to the chagrin of feminists everywhere, they do seem to be better suited to secretarial work than men.  They tend to be better able to remember long lists of detailed instructions, and tend to be more detailed oriented in carrying out such lists.

Many sex differences are obvious from before social conditioning can be offered as an explanation.  Boys really do like guns and trucks, and girls really do like dolls.  Female babies recognize and intuit mother's moods faster than boys.  Boys are better at baby toys sooner than girls.

Physically, men have a much larger inferior-parietal lobule than women.  In men, the IPL is larger on the right side, and in women, it's larger on the left.  This area is highly correlated with exceptional math ability.

In general, men's brains are about 5-10% bigger than female brains, but... duh... men are physically about 5-10% bigger than females.   Bigger body = need for more neurons to control bigger body.

 

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism


Cpt_pineapple
atheist
Cpt_pineapple's picture
Posts: 5486
Joined: 2007-04-12
User is offlineOffline
Then again there's people

Then again there's people like this:

 

 

 


Cpt_pineapple
atheist
Cpt_pineapple's picture
Posts: 5486
Joined: 2007-04-12
User is offlineOffline
Nordmann wrote:Just for

Nordmann wrote:

Just for future reference so you don't embarrass yourself in certain company, Ms Pineapple:

 

"Gender" and "sex" are not interchangeable nouns. The former applies to grammar, the latter to people. If you are discussing how males and females differ then you are discussing disparity between the sexes, not the genders.

 

Also your question regarding which of the sexes is "more likely to be moral" demands an answer that both have equal propensity to be moral. I assume you meant however to ask which is likely to be "morally superior", which is a whole other barrel of monkeys entirely.

 

Invitations to discuss badly presented data tend to elicit badly conducted discussions.

 

Okay, who's more likely to play semantics and act superiour men or women? j/k

 

Most official forms have "Gender" to cut down on the "Yes Please" responses.

 


If I say my brother throws like a girl, I am saying he is the region where the male throwing ability bell curve overlaps the female ability bell curve.

 

 

Quote:

Having got that out of the way, there are a lot of general differences between the sexes in humans.  Men tend to be better at spacial reasoning, making it likely that even in a completely egalitarian society, there would be more male pilots, advanced mathematicians, engineers, and such.  

Women are significantly better at social reasoning and recognition.  They can intuit another person's emotions, motivations, and likely actions better than men.  They're usually much better at verbal skills, remembering longer and more complicated lists, poems, or instructions.  Oh, and much to the chagrin of feminists everywhere, they do seem to be better suited to secretarial work than men.  They tend to be better able to remember long lists of detailed instructions, and tend to be more detailed oriented in carrying out such lists.

 

 

Another thing I want to address is by how much?

 

I knew that women are better at emotions, when men are better at spacial reasoning, but by how much? It's like saying my brother is taller than me, it gives virtually no information about my or his height except that his is greater than mine or if that is average height for males and females.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
The simple answer,

The simple answer, Pineapple, is that men are enough better at spacial and math reasoning, on average, that even in the (rare) places where there isn't a significant social barrier to women being scientists, there are many more men.  Studies on this subject go back fifty or more years, and there's wide disagreement about which results are more accurate.  The only thing everyone (except the most radical of feminists and PCists) agrees on is that there are general sex differences which are evident to the naked eye and bear out under scientific evaluation.

I think it's very telling how many women have become novelists since suffrage.  Pineapple, do you have the time or inclination to find out what the increase in female writers has been in the past century or so?

 

 

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism


Sinphanius
Sinphanius's picture
Posts: 284
Joined: 2008-06-12
User is offlineOffline
I'm sorry Captain, but I

I'm sorry Captain, but I have to call Bullshit on that guy.

For starters, his name is, apparently, 'Dick Masterson'.  I'm sorry, but that name is just too picture perfect of a name for a Male Supremacist.  I mean seriously, it is clearly an adopted name. Either that or one of his parents was a psychic.

I know Philly said he was real, but I don't trust anything Phil says, and the Description of his book on Amazon states it is satire, now that itself could be a lie, but I doubt it.  I think this guy is just trying to be a lame Maddox rip off.*

On the subject of the video itself, I am very dissapointed in the woman from the audience, who missed a beautiful openning.  She should have followed his treadmill comment up with an immediately delivered "I'm sorry, I could hear you, maybe if you worked out and weren't an emasculated pansy you would be able to project your voice better.

He even managed to get in a, blatantly wrong, quip about Hitler.

As for the actual subject, I treat women as equals until they prove otherwise, just as I treat men as equals until they prove otherwise.  Any supposed or actual physical or mental fundamental differences between the genders and/or sexes I don't give a damn about, and I expect any girl I plan on associating with to be able to keep up with me, just as I expect the same from any man I intend to associate myself with.

I've always hated the archaic concept of chivalry, and am no more polite to a woman than I would be to a man.  In the end, I'll hold the door open for either, unless I get bored or distracted.

*I don't care who came first

 

When you say it like that you make it sound so Sinister...


Cpt_pineapple
atheist
Cpt_pineapple's picture
Posts: 5486
Joined: 2007-04-12
User is offlineOffline
Hambydammit wrote:The simple

Hambydammit wrote:

The simple answer, Pineapple, is that men are enough better at spacial and math reasoning, on average, that even in the (rare) places where there isn't a significant social barrier to women being scientists, there are many more men.  Studies on this subject go back fifty or more years, and there's wide disagreement about which results are more accurate.  The only thing everyone (except the most radical of feminists and PCists) agrees on is that there are general sex differences which are evident to the naked eye and bear out under scientific evaluation.

 

 

 

Having a brother, I am aware of the differences.

 

 

 

Hambydammit wrote:

I think it's very telling how many women have become novelists since suffrage.  Pineapple, do you have the time or inclination to find out what the increase in female writers has been in the past century or so?

 

 

 

I never gave it much thought

 

 

 

Quote:

 

I'm sorry Captain, but I have to call Bullshit on that guy.

 

Poe's law FTW

 

Quote:

For starters, his name is, apparently, 'Dick Masterson'.  I'm sorry, but that name is just too picture perfect of a name for a Male Supremacist.  I mean seriously, it is clearly an adopted name. Either that or one of his parents was a psychic.

 

Yeah, kinda a ploy.

 

Quote:

I know Philly said he was real, but I don't trust anything Phil says, and the Description of his book on Amazon states it is satire, now that itself could be a lie, but I doubt it.  I think this guy is just trying to be a lame Maddox rip off.*

 

 

Have you been to the website?

 

Quote:

As for the actual subject, I treat women as equals until they prove otherwise, just as I treat men as equals until they prove otherwise.  Any supposed or actual physical or mental fundamental differences between the genders and/or sexes I don't give a damn about, and I expect any girl I plan on associating with to be able to keep up with me, just as I expect the same from any man I intend to associate myself with.

I've always hated the archaic concept of chivalry, and am no more polite to a woman than I would be to a man.  In the end, I'll hold the door open for either, unless I get bored or distracted.

 

 

I think that's the best system. Respect is earned.

One of the many things that fail with the femminist movement.

 

 

 

 

 


Di66en6ion
Di66en6ion's picture
Posts: 106
Joined: 2009-01-03
User is offlineOffline
Hambydammit wrote:The simple

Hambydammit wrote:

The simple answer, Pineapple, is that men are enough better at spacial and math reasoning, on average, that even in the (rare) places where there isn't a significant social barrier to women being scientists, there are many more men.  Studies on this subject go back fifty or more years, and there's wide disagreement about which results are more accurate.  The only thing everyone (except the most radical of feminists and PCists) agrees on is that there are general sex differences which are evident to the naked eye and bear out under scientific evaluation.

I think it's very telling how many women have become novelists since suffrage.  Pineapple, do you have the time or inclination to find out what the increase in female writers has been in the past century or so.

 

I can't remember which magazine I read it in but there were some studies done on spacial reasoning in women vs. men. I can't remember all the categories but video games was one of them. Basically stated that women can arouse the same level of spacial reasoning that men have through practice of the same activities (which I think makes sense). The difference was basically in men and women's interest in subjects that mattered, not in any inherent skill set.


theotherguy
theotherguy's picture
Posts: 294
Joined: 2007-01-07
User is offlineOffline
The reason men are more

The reason men are more common in prisons than women is that men tend to be more agressive, and thus are more likely to commit agressive, violent crimes. These crimes are punished most harshly by the justice system, resulting in more frequent and longer prison sentences.


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
 Quote:I can't remember

 

Quote:
I can't remember which magazine I read it in but there were some studies done on spacial reasoning in women vs. men. I can't remember all the categories but video games was one of them. Basically stated that women can arouse the same level of spacial reasoning that men have through practice of the same activities (which I think makes sense). The difference was basically in men and women's interest in subjects that mattered, not in any inherent skill set.

Without knowing if this was a video game magazine or a science journal, it's kind of hard for me to comment.  Were the authors suggesting that the difference in spacial reasoning that has been observed across diverse cultures is always a product of culture, despite the fact that the part of the brain that handles spacial reasoning is significantly larger in men -- genetically?

I'd be interested in knowing how this conclusion was justified.

 

 

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism


radikal
Posts: 15
Joined: 2009-01-14
User is offlineOffline
Cpt_pineapple

Cpt_pineapple wrote:

Hambydammit wrote:

The simple answer, Pineapple, is that men are enough better at spacial and math reasoning, on average, that even in the (rare) places where there isn't a significant social barrier to women being scientists, there are many more men.  Studies on this subject go back fifty or more years, and there's wide disagreement about which results are more accurate.  The only thing everyone (except the most radical of feminists and PCists) agrees on is that there are general sex differences which are evident to the naked eye and bear out under scientific evaluation.

 

 

 

Having a brother, I am aware of the differences.

 

 

 

Hambydammit wrote:

I think it's very telling how many women have become novelists since suffrage.  Pineapple, do you have the time or inclination to find out what the increase in female writers has been in the past century or so?

 

 

 

I never gave it much thought

 

 

 

Quote:

 

I'm sorry Captain, but I have to call Bullshit on that guy.

 

Poe's law FTW

 

Quote:

For starters, his name is, apparently, 'Dick Masterson'.  I'm sorry, but that name is just too picture perfect of a name for a Male Supremacist.  I mean seriously, it is clearly an adopted name. Either that or one of his parents was a psychic.

 

Yeah, kinda a ploy.

 

Quote:

I know Philly said he was real, but I don't trust anything Phil says, and the Description of his book on Amazon states it is satire, now that itself could be a lie, but I doubt it.  I think this guy is just trying to be a lame Maddox rip off.*

 

 

Have you been to the website?

 

Quote:

As for the actual subject, I treat women as equals until they prove otherwise, just as I treat men as equals until they prove otherwise.  Any supposed or actual physical or mental fundamental differences between the genders and/or sexes I don't give a damn about, and I expect any girl I plan on associating with to be able to keep up with me, just as I expect the same from any man I intend to associate myself with.

I've always hated the archaic concept of chivalry, and am no more polite to a woman than I would be to a man.  In the end, I'll hold the door open for either, unless I get bored or distracted.

 

 

I think that's the best system. Respect is earned.

One of the many things that fail with the femminist movement.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Actually, that is the position of many feminists. Feminism is  the belief that men and women should be treated equally.  Im glad you brought up feminism. We live in a patriarchal society.  Men are obsessed with power, and when they don't have the power they demand, they resort to aggression to get it. This is not biological. This is a gender issue, not a sex issue.   A women's role is to be more submissive and emotional. Women are suppose to be caring and weak; men are strong and powerful. So, it makes absolute sense that men would make of the vast majority of the prison population.

 

There are other cultures where women are not as submissive and the guys do not have most of the power. Granted, these cultures are quickly disappearing. We have made some progress in the past 100 years. Thanks solely to the feminist movements. And many men actually think women and men equal today, just like many  men thought women and men were equal 100 years ago - there is simply the minor issue of women getting paid less, sexually harassed, and exploited.

 

Another interesting statistic: America has an estimated 24% of the world's prison population.

 

 

 

 


Cpt_pineapple
atheist
Cpt_pineapple's picture
Posts: 5486
Joined: 2007-04-12
User is offlineOffline
Hambydammit wrote: despite

Hambydammit wrote:

 despite the fact that the part of the brain that handles spacial reasoning is significantly larger in men -- genetically?

 

 

It's not so much the size of the brain, it's more the density of neurons. Otherwise smaller people, will be noticably smarter than bigger people.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Luminon
SuperfanTheist
Luminon's picture
Posts: 2455
Joined: 2008-02-17
User is offlineOffline
Men invented things like

Men invented things like crusades, inquisition, flagellation, witch burning, wars, weapons, slavery, etc. (and the etc word too)
Men can be certainly much more destructive than women. I long for the return of egalitarian/matriarchal society.  I believe that  there's no real difference in intelligence or importance of men and women, but there are kinds of intelligence and behavior which our patriarchal society prefers over others.

Men are usually more idealistic, even if the ideals are wrong or taken ad absurdum. But this world did not see for a long time what the women are like. We have priests, but we somehow don't have priestesses. Probably because there were times when a priestess was much more revered than any priest. Despite of the women liberation movement and technological development, our would-be civilization is still rather male, and still destructive.
The world is waiting for a female, supporting and nourishing cultural aspect to manifest itself. For example, among 60 musicians I listen to there's 1 woman I know of. The last globally known woman of the science (known to me) was Mary Curie Sklodowsky.  In politics, there is a minimum of women, though at least 30% of them would change the politics significantly.
The women occupy a positions where only a minority of decisions is made. I mean, fashion, pop music, education, and workers in a certain kinds of industry. Also, only a tiny fraction of world's wealth is owned by women. That's unfair, and this is one of reasons why the world is going through existential crisis.

I personally treat women just as respectfully as men. (but with much more interest if they're hot) As someone who worked for months as the only man in a group of about 30 women, I can say, they all liked me, less or more. (except of the supervisors) I admit, I'm chivalrous, but that's more like a sub-conscious urge to help and co-operate, supported by hidden fire of sexual lust

Beings who deserve worship don't demand it. Beings who demand worship don't deserve it.


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
 Quote:It's not so much the

 

Quote:
It's not so much the size of the brain, it's more the density of neurons. Otherwise smaller people, will be noticably smarter than bigger people.

I'm not aware of the evidence that females have more dense neurons.  Can you point me to the documentation?  I'm not being flippant.  I've just never seen this before.

 

 

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism


Cpt_pineapple
atheist
Cpt_pineapple's picture
Posts: 5486
Joined: 2007-04-12
User is offlineOffline
Hambydammit wrote:I'm not

Hambydammit wrote:

I'm not aware of the evidence that females have more dense neurons.  Can you point me to the documentation?  I'm not being flippant.  I've just never seen this before.

 

 

 

I don't know which is denser, but I was pointing out that size does not neccessarily mean that it is "better"

 

 

On an ancedotal level, lots of people say I'm dense.

 

 

 


SSBBJunky
Superfan
Posts: 209
Joined: 2009-02-06
User is offlineOffline
Hambydammit

Hambydammit wrote:

 

 

Physically, men have a much larger inferior-parietal lobule than women.  In men, the IPL is larger on the right side, and in women, it's larger on the left.  This area is highly correlated with exceptional math ability.

 

So the right side of my IPL is huge?

Hambydammit wrote:

 

Pineapple, do you have the time or inclination to find out what the increase in female writers has been in the past century or so?

 

This reminded me of A Few Good Men where jack nicholson gets all mad.

''Black Holes result from God dividing the universe by zero.''


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
 Quote:I don't know which

 

Quote:
I don't know which is denser, but I was pointing out that size does not neccessarily mean that it is "better"

I would just be really surprised if all the scientists who have documented the size differences had overlooked the possibility of females having denser neurons.  I mean... you thought of it in what... a few seconds?  It seems like that would have been mentioned.

So, anyway, is this just you speculating idly, or do you have any studies showing that females have more dense neurons than males?

 

 

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism


Cpt_pineapple
atheist
Cpt_pineapple's picture
Posts: 5486
Joined: 2007-04-12
User is offlineOffline
It appears that I'm

It appears that I'm wrong

 

 

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601124&refer=home&sid=a0BTFTQXGriY

 

Apperantly density doesn't matter that much

 

Quote:

It's also not better or worse to have greater density.''

 

And men have denser than women.

 

 

 

But I still can't find a quantity of the difference.

 

 

 

 


Awelton85
Superfan
Awelton85's picture
Posts: 143
Joined: 2009-01-03
User is offlineOffline
Men are here to fuck

Men are here to fuck everything up, declare war, fuck up the economy, rape, invent nearly everything, build things, check the oil in your car, get drunk and beat you, and make $1 for every $.75 women make. In short, you are welcome and I am sorry.

"So far as I can remember, there is not one word in the Gospels in praise of intelligence." - Bertrand Russell

Stewie: Yay and God said to Abraham, "you will kill your son, Issak", and Abraham said, I can't hear you, you'll have to speak into the microphone." "Oh I'm sorry, Is this better? Check, check, check... Jerry, pull the high end out, I'm still getting some hiss back here."


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
 Quote:But I still can't

 

Quote:
But I still can't find a quantity of the difference.

I'll see if I can dig up a journal article for you.  Give me a few days, though.  My new manager starts monday, and I am working pretty much 7 days a week until she starts.

 

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism


ClockCat
ClockCat's picture
Posts: 2265
Joined: 2009-03-26
User is offlineOffline
:3

Wait....was someone here taking anything on Dr. Phil as being serious? Or real?