Most Americans now are disinterested in these "investigations" because they are turning up with nothing.

When they do turn up something if it is a liberal they are trying to annoint President they refuse to prosecute.

Not really political, but someone explain sapiosexuality to me?

"Being a fucking weirdo snowflake"

When making statements of one side having a smoking gun against it or another, I'd imagine links and concrete sources would be involved.

I've not seen any in this latest conversation for the claims of Clinton/Obama colluding with Russia any more than such has been presented for Trump.

Unless, perhaps, you mean the uranium deal?

When making statements of one side having a smoking gun against it or another, I'd imagine links and concrete sources would be involved.

I've not seen any in this latest conversation for the claims of Clinton/Obama colluding with Russia any more than such has been presented for Trump.

Unless, perhaps, you mean the uranium deal?

There's some very smokey metal bits between Clinton and Ukraine. Gun? Idunno.

<Snipped quote by Dynamo Frokane>
"Being a fucking weirdo snowflake"

Do you have the usernames of anyone I've supposedly pedo'd you hair-trigger flame-baiting edge-lord prick?

They're not rumours, it's objective fact you're a pedophile.

If you can demonstrate this 'objective fact' to the mods and you're choosing not to then you are a pedo enabler, so stop with the empty mattress girl accusations and provide some goddamn evidence.

@ArenaSnow

The Uranium deal, Fusion GPS and its involvement in the Magnitsky Act, Natalia Veselnitskaya that met with Donald Trump Jr., Loretta Lynch, John Podesta's Joules Unlimited, Obama's "hot mic" incident, attempted cover-up of classified and improperly destroyed servers and emails, and so on. There is plenty more evidence to suggest the opposition are the real source of smoke.

There are a few "guns" laying around as well, but who fired them and just who knew is where the lines become blurry. To date, the best Trump administration and Russian collusion tie was the meeting that was had then quickly cancelled. There is a reason the narrative has died and it is clear that stems from the fact no one is buying it anymore.

<Snipped quote by Andreyich>

Do you have the usernames of anyone I've supposedly pedo'd you hair-trigger flame-baiting edge-lord prick?

What the fuck are you talking about, I was referring to your question about sapiosexuality so calm your tits

Not really political, but someone explain sapiosexuality to me?

I suppose this would depend on context but basically attraction to intellect. A degree of intellect is certainly mandatory when I look for a partner so I suppose I can claim to at least a latent sapiosexuallity. It doesn't matter how physically attractive or how kind a guy is, if he seems like an idiot I'm not interested.

<Snipped quote by Dynamo Frokane>

I suppose this would depend on context but basically attraction to intellect. A degree of intellect is certainly mandatory when I look for a partner so I suppose I can claim to at least a latent sapiosexuallity. It doesn't matter how physically attractive or how kind a guy is, if he seems like an idiot I'm not interested.

Well, I was going to say "most people seem to be latent sapiosexuals," but...I thought of the world and realized I was wrong.
Anyway, same.

@POOHEAD189 Intelligence is sort of a tricky thing to define. I don't necessarily need a partner to be able to discuss Thucydides' interpretation of events in the Peloponnesian war (though I will admit that is hot!), but I do find erudition extremely attractive. It isn't the be all and end all of course. People can be intelligent and still be cruel malicious assholes. I have gathered an alarming number of data points to support this conclusion.

@POOHEAD189 Intelligence is sort of a tricky thing to define. I don't necessarily need a partner to be able to discuss Thucydides' interpretation of events in the Peloponnesian war (though I will admit that is hot!), but I do find erudition extremely attractive. It isn't the be all and end all of course. People can be intelligent and still be cruel malicious assholes. I have gathered an alarming number of data points to support this conclusion.

And I was just researching ancient greek warfare not 15 minutes ago!
Legit though, I concur. For some reason when I measure people's worth it's how moral they are, but when it comes to partners and attractiveness, intellect is more stimulating and, well, more attractive. Though of course, that doesn't take away the importance of morality. But there's something about a good wit and a keen mind.
Oh yeah, it doesn't take a sage to be an asshole, but they certainly have a tendency to be many times.

Victor Davis Hansen's book on Greek Warfare is excellent, its a shame the rest of his work is such hackery :(

Oh yeah, it doesn't take a sage to be an asshole, but they certainly have a tendency to be many times.

I like to think this is a result of faux intellect, sort of gathering all the trappings without integrating them or introspecting upon them. The more or learn about any given field the more conscious I am of the vistas I haven't yet glimpsed.

Victor Davis Hansen's book on Greek Warfare is excellent, its a shame the rest of his work is such hackery :(

*Rubs hands together* Ooo, I'll give it a look (despite my status). I've not heard of him, though I have heard of the book, Carnage and Culture. I never actually read it though. Why would he be a hack, elsewhere?

I like to think this is a result of faux intellect, sort of gathering all the trappings without integrating them or introspecting upon them. The more or learn about any given field the more conscious I am of the vistas I haven't yet glimpsed.

I suppose it's the difference between knowledge and intellect. Certainly an intelligent person would pursue knowledge, but that doesn't necessarily mean a person who knows much information is intelligent, or intuitive, or emotionally mature enough not to be an asshole.

<Snipped quote by Dynamo Frokane>

I suppose this would depend on context but basically attraction to intellect. A degree of intellect is certainly mandatory when I look for a partner so I suppose I can claim to at least a latent sapiosexuallity. It doesn't matter how physically attractive or how kind a guy is, if he seems like an idiot I'm not interested.

But surely a guy would still have to be somewhat physically attractive and kind, as well as intelligent. I doubt a sapiosexual would date a GonkFace or a raging asshole even if he was a nobel prize winner.

I suppose my problem with understanding the term is that implies a specialized attraction where it could be argued that most people outside of a frequent john or a sex tourist, probably have some expectation of intelligence in a partner.

I need to get a consensus on how the term is actually used today, but I was told it means being attracted to someone's mind as apposed to anything else. Which seems very hard to quantify, and probably in most cases untrue.

<Snipped quote by Penny>

But surely a guy would still have to be somewhat physically attractive and kind, as well as intelligent. I doubt a sapiosexual would date a GonkFace or a raging asshole even if he was a nobel prize winner.

I suppose my problem with understanding the term is that implies a specialized attraction where it could be argued that most people outside of a frequent john or a sex tourist, probably have some expectation of intelligence in a partner.

I need to get a consensus on how the term is actually used today, but I was told it means being attracted to someone's mind as apposed to anything else. Which seems very hard to quantify, and probably in most cases untrue.

If you want a practical definition then it is merely that someone is attracted to people based on their intelligence. This doesn't imply that their other attributes are not relevant. ALL forms of attraction are a synthesis of factors, your just stating that it is very high and perhaps highest in the list of things that attract you to people.

I've always assumed when people were like "I like an intelligent partner" what they were really saying was "I like someone that can contribute to a topic or conversation even if it's outside their wheelhouse. Sapiosexual is often used to indicate that the most attractive quality to a person is the mind of their partner. Physical appearance certainly plays a factor in it, when it comes to dating or physical intimacy there's always some level of appearance, but the mind of a person is the important bit. On certain dating sites and apps it's also used as a sort of statement against what some perceive to be superficiality, namely the whole 'looks are the most important thing'.

It's kind of a pretentious thing to see on a profile in most cases.

But sapiosexual people tend to not be attracted to a person from the start, like they don't look at a person and go "Shit, they're attractive I want to sling that D" but rather they build up an attraction the more they get to know them and their mind and they become more beautiful in return. If that makes sense. It probably doesn't because I'm bad at this. Sapiosexuals don't always value a deeply physical intimate relationship either.

A lot of sapiosexuals seem like the worst people to date though but that's just me being a bitch.

A lot of sapiosexuals seem like the worst people to date though but that's just me being a bitch.

Just from reading the above explanations I've come to this conclusion as well.

EDIT:
I doubt a say-pee-oh sexual would give a 5'1 balding 42 year old permavirgin who smelled like doritios 'a chance to build an attraction with his super-sexy mind' because there physical expectations would turn them off before that even came into play.

It seems like what sapiosexual really means is, "If you meet my initial physical and social requirements, I'd then be interested in learning more about what you know and if its to my liking then you might get somewhere." Which actually sounds like most people to be honest.

And not to get too gross, but dont sapios have normal libidos? Like do they need a vibrator to recite Shakespeare before they use one?

Also I guess you and @Penny aren't the same person after all, don't I feel silly.

And not to get too gross, but dont sapios have normal libidos? Like do they need a vibrator to recite Shakespeare before they use one?

Lmao. I am not entirely certain if you're being serious.

Sapiosexuality isn't a 'true' sexuality, like say, bisexuality. At least as far as I know. If you're a sapiosexual, that doesn't mean you can only get aroused if someone is doing something actively intelligent. You are just attracted to intelligent people.

If you meet my initial physical and social requirements, I'd then be interested in learning more about what you know and if its to my liking then you might get somewhere."

It's more like
"Wow, you're quite witty/intelligent, that's attractive. It makes you more attractive to me, despite the fact I might have thought you were only plain looking earlier, your intelligence let's me appreciate you more as a person of interest."

Also I guess you and @Penny aren't the same person after all, don't I feel silly.

Of course not.

Penny seems way cooler.