"Pearls" as well can arguably be sexual innuendo. Just sayin'.

LOL. You're pathetic.

You put a reference to me as a "bad girl" in a verse in which you make blatant sexual references to Paul, "playing with his toys", "getting ready for a long grind," and you still insist that it's not a sexual innuendo.

Yeah, whoever said you were capable of admitting you were wrong was clearly smoking crack.

Indeed it can. I think that, within the context of the rest of the verse, the sexual innuendo makes the most sense, as well. But I decided to let that one go since the others were far more blatant and don't require any pre-existing knowledge about certain sexual terms.

I take it all back. You've been reading far too much Catherine MacKinnon.

Maybe you can explain then what you were thinking of when you wrote "playing with Paul's toys". . . or maybe we don't want to know!

I've already made clear (what was clear to anyone of average intelligence within the religious context of the song (apostasy, swine, pearls - casting pearls before...well, you get the picture) what was meant.

You're a vector of darkness Beastie.

Oh, he's already admitted that his references to Paul were meant to be sexual. He's just denying that including me as a "bad girl" in the same verse with the clear sexual references was also a sexual innuendo. Hardly convincing.

This isn't the first time that Droopy has done this, of course. Nor will it be the last. He can't help himself.

So, when you stand before Jesus one day, you should be able to recite the verse that referenced me without a shred of embarrassment or shame, eh?

I hope you're buying what you're peddling, because I seriously doubt anyone else is.

Unless you are now going to accuse me of being Gay, I answered that on another thread. The references to Paul and Beastie are completely and utterly separate.

Paul has his "toys", his tools and methods of attack and bigotry, and much of it is, indeed, sexual.

Beastie has had many pearls cast before her which she has rejected.

IQs above room temperature will have little problem here.

Take a good look, Droopy. Paul obviously understood the sexual innuendo in your poem and riffed on it. However, unlike you, he had the good graces to delete my name from it when I so requested.

You, on the other hand, continue to deny what is painfully, laughably obvious.

So are "jewels". In Chinese Kung Fu, they are "peaches" and the "golden target". Peaches and pomegranates can be breasts. We can go on and on, can't we?

You see, now I can't write anymore satirical songs because everything is a potential sexual innuendo.

As Foucault would say, I've been silenced.

LOL! Aren't you some master song-writer? Don't you understand why certain phrases are put together in ONE VERSE?

I would be surprised by the extent to which you will go to deny accepting accountability for your own words, but I've seen you do it before. So no surprise whatsoever.

No, I didn't mean to accuse that, one does not need to be gay to engage in sexual relations with a person of the same sex.

Ya got to be meticulous about anything in the context of Paul O, because he is of such a specific posting style that cannot be seperated to mean anything other than one thing if you refer to Paul's "toys" or even his "tool". Obviously you can see that can't you?

I've never aimed sexual innuendo at any female here, ever, or spoken of the female anatomy in improper ways.

Be careful here Beastie, I'm not, unlike you, Scratch, and other anonymous cowards here, hiding behind a moniker, nor at MAD.

Isn't the proper response, "I didn't mean it that way. I'm sorry"?

I accept no accountability for the interpretations you force upon them.


Is your entire life as fraudulent as your continued attempts to character assassinate those here with whom you disagree?

No, the proper response is "Why don't you go out to Yellowstone National Park and watch a beaver eat your jacket."

Droopy's tap dancing so fast his feet are getting tangled up. He already admitted his reference to Paul was intended to be sexual:

Droopy, from page 1:



So, he admits that "Paul's toys" is a sexual reference. He then says "get ready for a long grind", which, following the clearly sexual reference to Paul's toys, is another obvious sexual reference. Then he calls me a "bad girl" in the same verse that, so far, contained explicit sexual references.

And he expects anyone to believe it wasn't a sexual innuendo?

Indeed pathetic. All of it. I'm not sure which is more pathetic of the following two options:

1 - Droopy is aware, as any reasonable adult would be, of the sexual innuendo, but just refuses to admit it because he's, well, Droopy.

2 - Droopy truly is unaware of the clear sexual innuendo, as he is unaware of his numerous other sexual innuendos towards women posters on this site. Why would he be in such a state of denial? Obviously his religious beliefs would frown upon making sexual innuendos towards women, and yet he can't help himself. There are a couple of possibilities why he can't help himself, and none of them are flattering. But he cannot bring himself to recognize that he can't help himself and behaves contra his religious convictions, so he remains in denial.

Just be sure that you keep your songs to yourself at work. "She took it the wrong way" isn't going to fly when you get slapped with a sexual harrasment charge.

Of course, as satire, it was. Paul has long distinguished himself here as someone rather overtly preoccupied with the subject. He provided the material.



This is just to Scratchian to be believed. The master speaks through his disciples.

I would have apologized. It's amazing how much the words "I'm sorry" can accomplish.