 |
|
|
|
Prove Us Wrong Number 26
Yo ref, I can take this 13 year old girl! Ha! She ain't so tough! I can.. Ow! Hey! Quit it! Ahh! Not the face! NOT THE FACE!!! HELP!!!! Hey, I need that to breathe!
RESOLVED:
If a 30 year old man beat a 13 year old girl in kickboxing, no one would assume he cheated.
Date: Tuesday, September 4, 2001 6:45 PM
From: simmondsnick@(deleted)
Subj: RESOLVED: If a 30 year old man beat a 13 year old girl in kickboxing, no one wou
Stephen Hawking at 30 vs. Michelle Yeoh at 13
Woody Allen at 30 vs. his daughter/girlfriend at 13
T. Mike at 30 vs. anyone from a local girl scout troop
I win
--Nick
To Rebut:
Ooo! You almost had us until you pitted me, T. Mike, against a random local girl scout troop member. You obviously do not know me. A kickboxing girl scout would put me down like a rabid puppy. She would drop me like a rusty muffler. Not only would all my friends assume I cheated to win, I probably would have had to. I probably would have maced her, pushed her to the ground, grabbed any nearby girl scout cookies, and then ran for it.
As for Stephen Hawking, consarn it, you've proved us wrong.
As for the gratuitous Woody Allen crack, you'll wish you could get it that young when you're Allen's age. And how many movies have YOU made lately?
Date: Wednesday, September 5, 2001 3:18 AM
From: alan@vgg
Subj: Fwd: RESOLVED: If a 30 year old man beat a 13 year old girl in kickboxing, no one wou
Hmmm. Hawking was diagnosed with Lou Gehrig's when he was 20, so he
may not have been totally wheelchair'd out at the time. Oh, and I
still pick you over any Girl Scout Troop but Troop 116.
-alan
To Rebut:
Well the joke's on you, Alan! Any Girl Scout could kick my ass. Troop 116 wouldn't leave enough to identify me even by dental records. However, I could probably take on a Brownie scout...
Now, as to Stephen Hawking at age 30. According to his bio in "A Brief History of Time," he was 46 when it was published, in 1988. So he would have been 30 in 1972. In Carl Sagan's intro to the book, he speaks of encountering Mr. Hawking in the spring of 1974: "...a young man in a wheelchair... very slowly, signing his name...." So, at age 32, Hawking was wheelchair bound, but still had some arm movement. Extrapolating backwards two years, ...ummm, yeah, I'm gonna say Hawking would still get his ass whupped in a kickboxing match with a 13 year old girl, unless he cheated.
Date: Tuesday, September 4, 2001 3:15 PM
From: robandvic@(deleted)
Subj: dickhead americans with no humour
as you may be aware before the Chinese seize control of the usa you have no senses of humour, humour not Known in the Wagner dictionary but in the ENGLISH oxford one. Your sorry excuse for a democracy just pities my mind how can you think of yourselves as being a country that no one else including the rest of the west doesn't want to nuke. We could sleep easily if someone nuked you.
To Rebut:
Um, I'm going to let my fellow Van Gogh-Gogh Alan handle this bozo. Take it away, Alan...
Date: Wednesday, September 5, 2001 3:09 AM
From: alan@vgg
Subj: Fwd: dickhead americans with no humour
So I'm wondering a couple of things...
First off, whadya bet these guys just became the first 30-year-old
guys to take home the trophy in the Canberra Girls' Kickboxing Open?
Second off, can one of you guys loan me your "Wagner" dictionary? My
Webster's doesn't seem to be able to help.
Third off, how did he know that our sorry excuse for a democracy
pities his mind? And does he also know that our sorry excuse for
pretty much everything else also pities his mind?
-Alan
To Rebut:
Thank you Alan. Let's move on, shall we?
Date: Wednesday, September 5, 2001 4:52 PM
From: richsandford@(deleted)
Subj: proving you wrong already
If a 30 year old man beat a 13 year old girl in kickboxing, no one would assume he cheated.
ok, first off, there's nothing to necessarily push you
either way on this: from what you've written, the
natural conclusion would be to assume the guy wins,
but this is an inductive rather than deductive
conclusion, based on experience of adult men beating
little girls and not any conditions implicit or
explicit in the statement. If you're the kind of
people who like to see the bad in everyone, it would
be the most natural thing to stand at the side of the
ring shouting "you fat cheating fuck, you think this
makes you someone? huh? does it?".
Proved wrong simply because it is possible to imagine
the opposite state of affairs.
and also, how does a grown man compete in the under-14
female league without greasing some judgepalm? he'd
stand out a mile. no way did he qualify like the
others.
nice site, by the way.
bye.
To Rebut:
As to your first point, all I'm getting is a weird haze of nouns and verbs that refuses to coalesce into coherent thought. So I'm going to flatly ignore it and flaunt the fact. Woo, look at me! I'm ignoring his first point! And now I'm doing the "ignoring-the-first-point" dance! Wheee! Whoopee! Yahoo!
Ahem. That was fun. Now as to the second point, you have indeed proved us wrong! Provisionally. If the match was indeed a professional one and not the moonlit, back-alley, "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon" free-for-all I always imagine, then you'd be right. People would rightly assume the 30 year old man would have cheated to compete against a 13 year old girl, probably by dressing in drag. And now I'm doing the "agreeing-with-you-provisionally-on-the-second-point" dance! Look at me go! Whooo! Wheee. Ha. Um. This isn't nearly as much fun as the "ignoring-the-first-point" dance.
Poop.
Date: Friday, September 7, 2001 4:27 AM
From: namelessfool@(deleted)
Subj: I am proving you wrong and then proceding to take over the world
Well your idea i first thought to be true and really amazed me as fact. But it was then quickly proved wrong why what if the 30 year old man is blind or a quadrapolegic(spelled wrong you know guy w/o limbs). Or guy is a midget and girl is 6 feet and buff ( adnormal but you'll prolly see it on a talk show if you watch them ) Even though i could go on about possible disabilities this man may have i believe i have proved my point and disproved you guys so even though i have nothing better to do than write pathetic e-mails bye for now.
To Rebut:
Nuts. The 30 year old man being severly disabled proves us wrong! Damn, damn, damn! Damn you disabled 30 year old men! This is all your fault! Damn you all to hell!
Date: Sunday, September 9, 2001 8:53 AM
From: banzer18@(deleted)
Subj: Prove Us Wrong...
RESOLVED: If a 30 year old man beat a 13 year old girl in kickboxing, no one would assume he cheated.
Well, mabye not, but what if the man was, say legendary Physicist Dr. Stephen Hawking? Certainly, he'd have to cheat to be ANYONE in kickboxing. Probably with some kind of kick-simulating contraption hooked into that chair of his.
Yeah, he'd beat the snot out of a 13 year old girl, but I'd call it cheating, wouldn't you?!?
Bill
To Rebut:
Again with the Stephen Hawking! I guess I should be glad you people at least know who he is, even if you know nothing about his work on rotating black holes "evaporating" over time. I mean he is the most famous wheelchair dude since FDR.
Or maybe "Ironside." But that was a fictional tv character, so he doesn't count.
So definitely FDR.
Oh, and you proved us wrong.
Date: Sunday, September 9, 2001 9:37 PM
From: adilustr@(deleted)
Subj: kickboxing...who would kick who's ass?
Okay, I am not going to bore you with a
trying-to-be-serious-but-sounding-like-a-cheap-public-service-announcement-type response to the proposed kickboxing match that has to do with gender biases or
age discrimination or some crap like that. I will, however, comment on the
many possible outcomes of this match. (**Disclaimer**---I KNOW NOTHING ABOUT
KICKBOXING. So don't assume I am chock full of actual knowledge of this
sport....well, if you already have, you must be some type of moron.) First,
yes, I will comment on the age and sex of the competitors---the most obvious
reasoning for the 30 year old man to win is that a 30-year-old man has more
pent up rage and violent tendencies than the 13-year-old girl, right? He has
been through high school and college, and has therefore probably developed his
own type of "Don't mess with me man, I'll CUT YOU!" mentality in fear of being
defeated. Also, if a 30-year-old man has nothing better to do with his loser
life than to fight a 13-year-old chick at kickboxing, I would not be suprised
if the poor fellow suffered from mental illnesses, and you can't blame him for
his own issues.
HOWEVER, when viewed from a different perpsective, you must think about the
girl in question. What if she's one of those weight-lifter kids that are
stronger that He-Man and stuff? Or one of those crazy soldier kids that they
train in Yuzbekistan or something to fight off invading white people? What
about that? If she were one of those kids, of course the 30-year-old must
have
cheated! Especially at kickboxing, where those fighter kids could take you
out
in 10 seconds. So if the dude were to fight against a kid like that and won,
yeah, that would be fishy.
But of course, the whole thing would be out of question if the kid did the 1
thing that every 13-year-old girl should know---just kick him in the biscuits.
Adrienne D.
To Rebut:
Ah the biscuit kick. I'm crossing my legs and grimacing already, Adrienne. But seriously, you scare me. You have some major issues with men. "More pent up rage?" "I'LL CUT YOU mentality?" Lady, we're not monsters! At least, not all of us. Not all of the time, anyway.
Anyway, look, it's just a friendly informal kickboxing match! You don't have to turn it into a replay of the 1970's Billie Jean King-Bobby Riggs battle of the sexes kind of thing. We're not rooting for this 30 year old creep to win, you know. We're just saying if he did, people wouldn't think he cheated, which if he did, would make him a double creep. If the girl was some sort of buffed out, military-trained, national kickboxing champ of Oobleckistan, then yes, you have proved us wrong.
And stay away from my biscuits!
Date: Tuesday, September 11, 2001 4:36 AM
From: Corbis820@(deleted)
Subj: kick boxing
yeah he did cheat. now hes facing 20 for statutory
To Rebut:
Why you filthy-minded little git! You are talking about rape young man, which is NEVER a laughing matter! We are talking about a grown man kicking and boxing a thirteen year old girl into a bloody pulp, which is. So yes, while he would be facing 20, it would be for ASSAULT (funny) and not rape (not funny). Jerk.
Date: Thursday, September 13, 2001 5:44 PM
From: wieka@(deleted)
Subj: I will prove you wrong!!!!!
It can't be because young girls often beat older boys or shall I say old man, because they have the girl power!!
To Rebut:
Yes, yes, girl power. Hmmm. A formidable force, to be sure. Personally I would prefer to see it harnessed to drive industrial turbines than squandered on ass-kicking. But it's used for precious little ass kicking as is. For some reason it seems to be mainly used as a marketing gimmick to sell teen girls a whole lotta crap. What today's girl teens need is less Britney Spears and more Krav Maga. So, no you haven't proved us wrong. Unless they've started making teen-sized, Powerpuff girl-branded brass knuckles.
Date: Saturday, September 15, 2001 10:13 PM
From: MyHouseIsOnFire@(deleted)
Subj: Little men, Big girls
If the 30 year old man was a circus midget and the little girl, the product
of experimental hormonal testing- which had unfortunately raised her
testosterone levels to the point that she was now 6'2, 180 and could bench
220lbs- people might wonder if infact the mini-man had not indeed worked by
foul means to achieve victory.
To Rebut:
Midgets!!! Damn, I completely forgot about the midgets. That is so like me. Before I get an angry letter from the AMA (American Midget Association), I would like to apologize profusely for forgetting about midgets. I would also like to apologize for my repeated use of the highly offensive slur "midget," as well as the offensive and inflammatory epithets: "dwarf," "height deficient," "altitudinally challenged," "short," "below average height" and "not tall." I just wasn't thinking. In the future, I promise to think about them more often, especially sexually, only speak of their kind with respect, and describe Billy Barty's Sid and Marty Krofft oeuvre as "sublime."
And we were also proved us wrong, what with the 30 year old man maybe being a midg... dwar... under three feet in height.
Date: Sunday, September 16, 2001 3:22 AM
From: blucy@(deleted)
Subj:
the match could of been staged or it could of been his daughter that Faught against him.
To Rebut:
The daughter thing is weird, but I don't see how it alone could affect the outcome. As for your first point. Are you saying she deliberately THREW the match?! She took a dive?! Dang it, the fricking Mafia is RUINING kickboxing. You have proved us wrong, because every one in organized crime would know there was cheating, even if our 30 year old male participant didn't know.
Date: Tuesday, September 18, 2001 1:36 AM
From: justin_rounds@(deleted)
Subj: how rong U R!
If a 30 year old man beat a 13 year old girl while kick boxing, that'd be
child abuse, and most likely outside the rules of kick boxing, therefore
cheating. The man would most likely be arrested. However, if he had merely
defeated the girl, that may be a different story.
(This didn't happen to you recently did it? Are you trying to tell us
something?)
I win.
Justin
To Rebut:
Okay, okay! I should have used the term "defeated" instead of "beat!" Are you happy now?! Hanh?! But like the other guy, you're assuming this is some kind of official, whatever-professional-kickboxing-association-is-relevant approved match. And in that instance, yes, we'd be proved wrong. But if it's some weird all-ages donnybrook vendetta, then your argument holds no water. In any event, yes, the man should be arrested.
And don't pry into my personal life.
Date: Monday, September 24, 2001 12:26 AM
From: cliffhanger@(deleted)
Subj: Them girlies is vicious!
Have you ever been in a kick-boxing match with a 13 year old girl?
They have a couple advantages:
1) They have flexible hips. Do you know any 30 year old men who can
stand straight up on one foot, and put the other foot above their head?
Can you? Why aren't you trying, already? Wuss!
2) 13 year old girls can be vicious little monsters. They have the
cat-fighting, tazmanian-devil screaming brutality that only an
adolescent female can have. Ask any father of one of these creatures. No
30 year old man on Earth has the guts to stand up to a fully-enraged,
estrogen-filled, seventh-grade chic!
3) You definitely can assume that the girl will cheat. She has
nails. When she starts fighting, you might as well just call them claws.
She is intimidating. She will screech, hiss, swing wildly, and do
whatever she needs to to throw the man off balance. (Not that she even
needs this stuff, considering #1, but she'll do it anyway.)
And when she takes a break from this stuff to kick, she will be, ah,
unscrupulous
in her aim. And according to your "Ham" rebuke #2, paragraph 5, this
would doom the man to eternal damnation.
If a 30 year old man takes all this on and wins, particularly if he
doesn't end up in jail afterwards, then duh, he's cheated somehow.
Perhaps this cheating might possibly be as little as simply wearing a
cup, but it's still there. True, the girl cheated too, but the point is
that the man could not possibly win fairly.
Incidentally, there's nothing hotter than a girl who's just kicked the crap out of a 30 year old pervert. (And that includes your damn
pandas and chimps! Let's see one of them do that!)
To Rebut:
So, "there's nothing hotter than a girl who's just kicked the crap out of a 30 year old pervert?" Shame on you. Sounds to me like there's still a pervert around who needs some crap kicked out of him.
I'm sorry, I feel a focused kickboxer in fighting form is more than a match for the unfocused and hence squandered rage of squalling girl in hissy fit mode.
Date: Monday, September 24, 2001 12:28 AM
From: cliffhanger@(deleted)
Subj: You are wrong. Foolish mortal.
Did I read that right? "...no one would assume he cheated"? I would
assume he cheated. I am someone. Therefore, you can not say "no one". So
unless I am suddenly very dyslexic and read your statement incorrectly,
you are wrong. Dumbass.
To Rebut:
Hmm. Granted, you could be the type of person to always assume someone cheated. Or, you could just be a big fat liar, ya big fat liar.
Date: Monday, September 24, 2001 12:30 AM
From: cliffhanger@(deleted)
Subj: Man, this is too easy!
Cheating: breaking the rules. Societal and governmental rules
supersede the rules of an individual game or contest. Legally, a 13 year
old girl is too young to be a professional kick-boxer. Therefore,
regardless of whatever the jackass said to get her into kick-boxing
match, he does not have the right to hit her. It is assault. That is
illegal, i.e., against the rules. Thus, he has cheated.
To Rebut:
You again?! Geez, now what? Right, the professional match argument. Yes, yes, no professional match could ever take place between a 30 year old man and a 13 year old girl, because the event itself would be cheating. But if neither are professionals, but say highly talented amateurs working out a grudge on their own free time, away from the sensei's prying eyes then, our argument still stands. Granted, however, while people might assume the man broke the law to defeat the 13 year old girl, they wouldn't necessarily assume he fought dirty.
Date: Monday, September 24, 2001 12:34 AM
From: cliffhanger@(deleted)
Subj: I want some cheese.
Perhaps the man cheated by not informing the girl that the winner
would get a trophy made out of cheese. Thus he had incentive and she did
not. Behold the power of cheese.
Speaking of which, ham is very good with cheese. Perhaps if you wrap
the pineapple in cheese slices, the ham won't get soggy. The Hawaiians
have been foiled!
To Rebut:
Okay, obviously the strain of trying to prove us wrong has now driven you utterly, utterly mad. Class, please take note!
Date: Monday, September 24, 2001 2:48 AM
From: lsander@(deleted)
Subj: kickboxing
if the 13 yr old was 5'10" and 200 lbs and the 30 yr old was 5'6" and 140 (soaking wet) we might think he cheated, if weights are reversed, probably not
To Rebut:
I think we covered this better in the midget argument... crap, I'm not supposed to call them midgets, am I? Dammit! I did it again! Now I gotta go write one hundred times "I will not call them midgets."
Date: Wednesday, September 26, 2001 10:54 PM
From: shawna_banawna@(deleted)
Subj: Prove You Wrong
Well, now, i suppose it depends on both individuals. thirteen year old girls are certainly not the most strenghful of creatures, so i'd say it's likely a 30 year old male could beat a 13 year old girl at kickboxing. 30 really isn't very old.
But let's say, for arguments sake that this was kickboxing pro 13 year old, and a one legged midget 30 year old man. Then, yes, people would think he cheated. Like he bribed the judges, or something horrid like that. I'm not entirely sure how kickboxing works. But anyways, it's a stupid statement. You should have either made a more outrageous statement, or at least something more controversial.
To Rebut:
Oh, I don't know, it's plenty controversial enough for me. What with having my biscuits menaced and all. The one legged thing is a nice touch to the midg... the m-word. Let's just agree you proved us wrong, and we'll leave it at that.
Strengthful?!
Ref, stop the fight! I'm throwing in the towel! And the matching washcloth, even! It's a blood bath, people! A 30 year old, one-legged midget Stephen Hawking versus an overgrown, weight-lifting, military-trained, steroided, biscuit-kicking 13 year old girl! What were we thinking?! Obviously not about thinking up a challenging...
Prove Us Wrong!
|
|
|
|
