10/3: Eagles cheerleaders

Undertoad · 10-03-2001, 03:30 PM

Welp, I'm not AGAINST the lawsuit, I do want to make that clear. I'm only against hypocrisy, which is still not against the law. I'm sure that Mr Lurie [Eagles' owner] will put things right as he is a feminist.

I would say that #2 is the only fake (bc, excellent first post). And ridiculous too. An old gf of mine had a natural chest like that, but she weighed about 180. (Bring on your pathetic comments; I'm a feminist too, a dham-style feminist who believes that modern sexuality is empowering to women. Or have I said too much???)

And my guess is that the cheerleaders with underwear lines are really just looking for some extra support. And given the choice between support hose lines and painful, expensive surgery, I personally would go for option #1.

On the UT server front, I am far too lazy still. Give me another week!

10-03-2001, 03:30 PM	#12
Undertoad Radical Centrist Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Cottage of Prussia Posts: 31,423	Welp, I'm not AGAINST the lawsuit, I do want to make that clear. I'm only against hypocrisy, which is still not against the law. I'm sure that Mr Lurie [Eagles' owner] will put things right as he is a feminist. I would say that #2 is the only fake (bc, excellent first post). And ridiculous too. An old gf of mine had a natural chest like that, but she weighed about 180. (Bring on your pathetic comments; I'm a feminist too, a dham-style feminist who believes that modern sexuality is empowering to women. Or have I said too much???) And my guess is that the cheerleaders with underwear lines are really just looking for some extra support. And given the choice between support hose lines and painful, expensive surgery, I personally would go for option #1. On the UT server front, I am far too lazy still. Give me another week!

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)