Thought Experiment on Ages

Next time you think there is a 20 something waiting for you just consider the sequence of unfortunate events that would have to occur in a woman's life for her to find herself alone in a room with YOU, naked, in West Dallas, at a "spa" with $140 lying on the table. Now consider how vanishingly small the probabilty is that those events could all transpire before the age of 23. No 23 year old K pop look alike wakes up and says, "what can I do today? Yeah, that sounds great!" It does not happen more than once or twice a decade.

Next time you think there is a 20 something waiting for you just consider the sequence of unfortunate events that would have to occur in a woman's life for her to find herself alone in a room with YOU, naked, in West Dallas, at a "spa" with $140 lying on the table. Now consider how vanishingly small the probabilty is that those events could all transpire before the age of 23. No 23 year old K pop look alike wakes up and says, "what can I do today? Yeah, that sounds great!" It does not happen more than once or twice a decade. Originally Posted by hellotherekitty

Excellent point!

They have a lot better opportunities out there. Every pretty girl in the world at that age gets bombarded with sexual opportunities - why give it away for almost nothing at some nondescript storefront in an aging industrial area?

The number of uninformed, old-white-man, misogynistic assumptions are too many to list. Suffice it to say you have no way of understanding the opinions and options perceived by these women. To reach conclusions based on extremely limited information is not an intellectual exercise but an assumption. What is that saying about what happens when we assume something?

https://youtu.be/7ePXck9H1pI

What is the obsession on this board about ages? Who cares as long as they look good?

What is the obsession on this board about ages? Who cares as long as they look good? Originally Posted by Duffy21

Plus a thousand or more.

plus a million! (which is the age in years Foxy will be soon if the trolls have their way!)

Aoi elsewhere called the age obsession “pretty amateur levels of trolling” and this latest thread again highlights that. Given that, and the good points about age being mainly a personal preference based on mood and context (though provider youth is in general an evolution-based, perennial desideratum in this hobby as in life at large), I should probably emulate the more enlightened hobbyists and simply refrain from responding. Especially since the trolls aren't really concerned with facts or truth.

But because some few susceptible readers might still be misled, I’ll make this humble little effort once again.

We’ve heard this same tired and absurd claim that OP makes, in exactly the same words no less (!), from a number of different handles now. The staggering illogic and confrontational confidence of the enforced and smug ignorance – “the world is flat, the world is flat” – remains transparently fake and biased.

Exhibit A is how Foxy suddenly became her true age (early twenties) when she temporarily shifted spas for a day, and is now being ludicrously attacked again as somehow “old” now that she’s back at Blue. I won't single out the specific negative nanny hobbyists who first attacked her as old, then shamelessly bumped her reviews at the temporary new place with high praise for her youth (!), because you can research them yourself to see the more outrageous instances if you wish.

There’s not even the semblance of intellectual or moral honesty here: everyone knows or should know that a “thought experiment” (just like a supposedly “rational” economic theory in that ludicrous thread) gives way to actual experience, evidence, and facts.

As Kathleen Wilkes wrote in her 1988 book on the subject, Real People: Personal Identity without Thought Experiments, when such facts are available, fiction and fantasy should be avoided. She rightly points out (right up front on page 2) that in such circumstances such thought experiments are “both problematic and positively misleading.”

The widespread fact-based testimony from many experienced hobbyists, in numerous reviews, ancient and current, should be sufficient to refute the silly notion that one never finds genuinely young girls in AMPs. Just go to Blue at present, where most of the girls are in their twenties, attractive, and Catholic as well. But these trolls would never let the facts get in the way of their agenda-driven theories!

Let’s let them continue to live in their imaginary world debating how many angels dance on the heads of pins in the manner of the medieval scholastic theologians. The rest of us living in the real world can continue to enjoy the fruits of the true young angels at Blue, Lucky Haven, Luxury, NYNY, Rainbow, Lilly, and wherever else they may be found.

While we're on the subject of intellectual honesty, your "Exhibit A" is a poisoning-the-well ad hominem logical fallacy. Just sayin.

No, my good friend Dogberry.

It’s not ad hominem or fallacious when the main point isn’t insulting the character (although that too would be appropriate here; I could have gone further but refrained from doing so).

Instead, I was pointing to the hypocritical conduct that clearly reflects on (and undermines) the good faith and honesty of those I was referencing. I deliberately did not name them.

Those are legitimate, fact-based, non-fallacious, very relevant points here. (Read e.g. Doug Walton on this.)

So you bring up conduct that undermines the character of the other party, instead of providing evidence supporting your assertion. How is that not a poisoning-the-well fallacy?

The point is that the conduct is evidence, quite revealing evidence in fact (and only incidentally a reflection on their character as well). Again, please do your homework (and read Doug Walton on this). If you have any further questions you may PM me.

But as edifying as I hope this has been, that’s all the free instruction for today. I must keep my appointment at Blue.

plus a million! (which is the age in years Foxy will be soon if the trolls have their way!)

Aoi elsewhere called the age obsession “pretty amateur levels of trolling” and this latest thread again highlights that. Given that, and the good points about age being mainly a personal preference based on mood and context (though provider youth is in general an evolution-based, perennial desideratum in this hobby as in life at large), I should probably emulate the more enlightened hobbyists and simply refrain from responding. Especially since the trolls aren't really concerned with facts or truth.

But because some few susceptible readers might still be misled, I’ll make this humble little effort once again.

We’ve heard this same tired and absurd claim that OP makes, in exactly the same words no less (!), from a number of different handles now. The staggering illogic and confrontational confidence of the enforced and smug ignorance – “the world is flat, the world is flat” – remains transparently fake and biased.

Exhibit A is how Foxy suddenly became her true age (early twenties) when she temporarily shifted spas for a day, and is now being ludicrously attacked again as somehow “old” now that she’s back at Blue. I won't single out the specific negative nanny hobbyists who first attacked her as old, then shamelessly bumped her reviews at the temporary new place with high praise for her youth (!), because you can research them yourself to see the more outrageous instances if you wish.

There’s not even the semblance of intellectual or moral honesty here: everyone knows or should know that a “thought experiment” (just like a supposedly “rational” economic theory in that ludicrous thread) gives way to actual experience, evidence, and facts.

As Kathleen Wilkes wrote in her 1988 book on the subject, Real People: Personal Identity without Thought Experiments, when such facts are available, fiction and fantasy should be avoided. She rightly points out (right up front on page 2) that in such circumstances such thought experiments are “both problematic and positively misleading.”

The widespread fact-based testimony from many experienced hobbyists, in numerous reviews, ancient and current, should be sufficient to refute the silly notion that one never finds genuinely young girls in AMPs. Just go to Blue at present, where most of the girls are in their twenties, attractive, and Catholic as well. But these trolls would never let the facts get in the way of their agenda-driven theories!

Let’s let them continue to live in their imaginary world debating how many angels dance on the heads of pins in the manner of the medieval scholastic theologians. The rest of us living in the real world can continue to enjoy the fruits of the true young angels at Blue, Lucky Haven, Luxury, NYNY, Rainbow, Lilly, and wherever else they may be found. Originally Posted by BobbyMann

You can't be talking about me because I never said she was in her twenties when she went to the other spa since I barely noticed.

Additionally I have always said she is very beautiful and treated me extremely well she is a must see and a treat of the year and I love her.

Even though she is in her thirties.

Let the world know I have proposed a wager on her age and it has not been accepted.

ROFL


We go from stating exact ages (ie: 23) to "their age isn't important as long as they look good"


The promoters are cracking under the intense scrutiny of their claims.


Carry on.

ROFL


We go from stating exact ages (ie: 23) to "their age isn't important as long as they look good"


The promoters are cracking under the intense scrutiny of their claims.


Carry on. Originally Posted by Groot

They haven't taken my bet because they can't prove Foxy is in her twenties.

Using many words when a simple proof is available. Note also I am not disputing any individual claim. I am disputing the volume of implausible claims. I make no money from doing so. I know more than I share here. The booster / promoter / shill / tub thumper / carnival barker crowd has an obvious motive for there claims. I just want to let Ordinary Joe to not believe obvious nonsense.