Over this past weekend, Las Vegas-based Jamie Jungers, New Yorker Cori Rist and Florida-based Mindy Lawton (perhaps Tiger’s first romp known) have all been identified as having extramarital connections to Woods, bringing the total of named women up to six. But seeing other woman getting in the act today the number might already be up to nine. According to MSNBC’s The Scoop, by Courtney Hazlett, the number of women connected to Tiger Woods could topple a dozen by week’s end, according to several sources familiar with Woods’ behavior during his frequent trips to Las Vegas. According to several prominent Las Vegas-based nightclub managers: “He wasn’t one to send away someone who was interested. There was a revolving door of women with Tiger,” said one. “I can think of half a dozen off the top of my head. But if you want his business — and you do — you make sure it’s kept as discreet as possible.
If You Fed A Lion Steak All Day - He'd Still Kill The Occasional Zebra. It's In His Nature.... What exactly is "cheating"? What tiger did with these ... whores ... is the moral and spiritual equivalent of masturbation. An unhealthy habit men stop when they grow up.
37 comments:
According to the Tom Joyner Morning Show, the headcount is up to nine, including a Perkins waitress he was doing in his church's parking lot.
And here I was thinking that Wilt's record would stand forever!
I mean man ... shiiiiiiiit ...
If a muhfuggah had given me a BILLYUN DOLLAHS when I was in my 20's ... Every cutey with a bootey would have beeen HIT.
I think Tiger should get an award for keeping it under a hundred.
The real story is how many are real, and how many are attention seeking ho's.
If he had all these chicks, why weren't these skanks coming out before?
uh.., just guessing here, but when the hypothetical gravy train turned into the tangible ca$h money gravy train - it may have sparked a paradigm shift within the Tigre skeet-recepticle demographic.
Good point, CNu. Just wonder how many were actual previous TSR's rather than just GSR's (General Skeet Receptacle's).
LOL@GSR's - whew....,
That's a keeper.
U guys are heeelarious!
That SNL skit -- now THAT'S heelarious!
I think everyone involved in this situation except for Tiger's wife is shady at best. He was cheating on his wife with several women from the very beginning of the marriage, and these other women knew he was married and are just trying to profit off the situation.
DMG, if these women are skanks, what is Tiger Woods?
MB
"DMG, if these women are skanks, what is Tiger Woods?"
I'm a Young Money Billie in aire, tougher than Nigerian hair!
Makheru,
If Tiger Woods was doing all these women as reported, he is...I don't think there's an adequate masculine word for skank...we'll have to make one up. Start us off MB.
Our host, has suggested previously that this is just regular normal not abberant heterosexual behavior--he's also suggested that we are made in his gods image. Are we to come to the conclusion that he believes his god is also a ho?
I honestly can't believe anyone is surprised of passing moral judgment on the cat. I truly don't see what the big deal is. Tiger likes p*ssy. JFK liked pussy. MLK liked pussy. Bill Clinton liked pussy. RFK liked pussy. King Solomon liked pussy. See the trend? Rich + handsome + powerful + heterosexual = likes pussy.
Tiger is about about to learn some hard lessons in capitalism. Fool thought he could play above this eternal paradigm.
Men, always build your family before your tangible wealth.
IWAIW,
Our society has deemed that serial (or parallel) sexual and or/emotional couplings are undesirable (these are not my exact feelings on the subject...but that's another time). Society (which includes the folks on this blog) has come up with names for these folks. I believe skank is a derogatory comment made about females. Unfortunately, there aren't any adequate masculine forms (right or wrong). But having a derogatory term for a female but not a male for engaging in the same behavior (right or wrong) is inconsistent. You could have just as easily subsituted female names and male anatomy. I wouldn't have a problem with it.
There not being an equivalent is one thing, but using female derogatory terms towards the women is not an excuse for not throwing some derogatory remarks Tiger's way. I'm sure your vast vocab of insults could find an appropriate sentence or two to express your disapproval. Don't be shy now.
DMG,
The difference is that a woman of honor wants her pussy to be dedicated to one honorable man. There is no such thing as an honorable woman who is a slut.
The liberal tendency is to equalize male and female infidelity and therefore require "equivalent" labels for the "same behavior." Of course, the sameness is only in the most stripped down and meaningless context. Of course in the real world guys like tiger only need one label, anti-capitalist. The idea that somehow tiger is escaping the consequences of chasing so many birdies is directly proportional to the vast number of people who know nothing about the God-ordained nature of Capitalism.
KW,
What are you doing over here? I thought I assigned you a very simple question that you've been dodging for about 2 days now...
"The difference is that a woman of honor wants her pussy to be dedicated to one honorable man. There is no such thing as an honorable woman who is a slut."
Hmm..let me ponder that for a moment.
"The difference is that a man of honor want's his dick to be dedicated to one honorable woman. There is no such thing as an honorable man who is a (insert favorite term for manwhore here)."
That doesn't quite fit, Wonder. I think that simplifies things too much. Maybe if you take "honor" out of the picture. I can kind of understand what you are getting at though.
How about this:
Over the course of 365 days a man may impregnate 365 +/- women (with alot of accuracy, timing, hydration, and ice for his balls...) and theoretically father at about 90 kids. Over the course of 365 days a woman can produce 1(+/- for multiple births) and approximately 1/3 viable offspring.
Male mammals tend to produce by quantity, females by quality.
In other words females tend toward being more picky about finding a mate with whom to reproduce.
I believe this is the root of where we get negative terms for women who sleep with many men, while having very few terms for men who sleep with many women. Going against ones reproductive stereotype will get a person labeled.
But humans are more cerebral than instinctual some may say. Can thinking really defeat 150,000 years of instinct? Yes, but it's difficult. Those who fall out of societal or group norms are labeled.
LOL. I answered the day you asked me; you just have comprehension problems.
Tiger Woods is an anti-capitalist??? What's more capitalist than cavorting with Chevron. Woods is a philanthro-capitalist who's made a deal with one of the most shadiest corporations.
Konwomyn,
tiger is losing the most important type of capital, his credibility. In this time, his skill as a golfer which has accumulated him great TANGIBLE capital is absolutely useless in now protecting his INTANGIBLE capital, i.e., his credibility.
Any man that works AGAINST his own credibility is an anti-capitalist.
Konwomyn,
In order to argue against my premise that tiger is an anti-capitalist one would have to assert that tiger was completely oblivious to the potential anti-capital fallout that would follow his "discovery" as a man of holes-n-one.
Unfortunately, such a take would paint tiger as a radical autonomist.
KonWomyn,
I comprehend that you can't answer the question straight up or the house of cards you helped out host build would come crashing down. But thanks for entertaining.
DMG I answered you. Why you crossing threads anyway? I just asked you to please provide further info so you can get a yes or no. Either find the info I asked for or give it a rest.
Thordaddy,
In economic terms he's a capitalist whose world came crashing down - he was not entirely oblivious to the possibility of his philanderings being exposed because he paid top dollar to keep it under wraps. The moral argument on his behaviour is sumthin' else. Given that he did ask one of his mistresses to delete his number and allegedly paid another for her silence is evidence of him acknowledging that all cld be exposed or thinking he was the world's top golfer so he thawt he was an autonomous being.
But that's not all there is to it. Methinks he has deeper issues than just being an invincible sex freak.
There is a term for men who are pathetically promiscuous and unable to properly bond with women.
It is...HOMOSEXUAL.
Konwomyn,
How much deeper do we need to go to observe the self-evident fact that tiger thought that he could do what he wanted BECAUSE he had the tangible capital?
But the dude was oblivious to the REAL GAME OF CAPITALISM and that is why, in real time, tiger exists as an anti-capitalist. He is destroying his own credibility.
Is this even arguable?
But there is more. There is a pattern that only the radically autonomous pretends to be invisible. The entire debate simply becomes a debate about whether this actually means anything. Ergo, the closer you align your principles towards Absolute Truth the more meaning you will find. Likewise, the closer you align your principles towards no Absolute Truth or relative truth the less meaning you will take from this event. In truth, this latter tendency merely functions as a way for players to opt out of the game and recreate their own rules and definitions.
Ask tiger how well that's working in his state of anti-capitalism?
Homosexual? As in Wilt Chamberlain is a homosexual? I think I missed your meaning.
KonWomyn,
I see, because you've been caught tongue tied, I have to figure out the cryptic bullshit you tried to pass off as an answer to a yes or no question.
Again, weak.
Thordaddy
Nah, I wasn't even going that far, I just wanted to understand what made like that - and I'm not talking in philosophical terms. Being a child prodigy, being unable to share a bed with another person, whatever inadequacies he might have felt thus compensated for in being a sex-a-holic. That kinda thing.
Whether this means anything is not really the qsn - more to whom does this mean anything and what is that anything. The same society that sees marriage as a 'burden' now turns around in shock, casting judgements on the very behaviour it encourages and profits from. Even in its moralizing still continues to profit proving that anything goes as long as there's money to be made.
Cryptic meaning you lack the cognitive skills - ok, I'll do a search and break it down for you for the umpteenth time so quit wailing and crossing threads.
Konwomyn,
But the people that say anything goes and the people who are "capitalizing" are the same people, namely, radical autonomists of various persuasions doing what AUTONOMISTS DO... Make the rest of us debate about what it all means until we get so fed up that we disconnect and don't care if it means anything. Ergo, we become radically autonomous.
I'm saying we're not radically autonomous. This all means something. This is Absolute Truth. Now we work on the details.
Yes or no questions don't require long drawn out excuses or Google searches. Stop trying for points KW, you've been caught with your dirty draws down around your ankles. Admit that it was laundry day and move on.
Stop trying for points KW, you've been caught with your dirty draws down around your ankles.
Daaayyyuuuuummmm.....,
Professor DMG cleaning house today!
All of Lucifer's misguided little minions being held to account for trying to pass off flies as elephants....,
Nope I wasn't trying for points - to do what? Points are earned when you actually make a point and yours was so I concede.
DMG 10 - KW 0
Post a Comment