<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_07_10_1726256</id>
	<title>Sperm Travels Faster Toward Attractive Females</title>
	<author>samzenpus</author>
	<datestamp>1247249280000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>A new study has shown that even <a href="http://dsc.discovery.com/news/2009/07/08/sperm-attractiveness.html">sperm can be superficial</a>.  Researchers found that males of many animal species, including humans, can adjust the speed and effectiveness of their sperm by regulating the amount of seminal fluid they produce during copulation. The determining factor on that amount of fluid seems to be whether the male finds the female attractive.</htmltext>
<tokenext>A new study has shown that even sperm can be superficial .
Researchers found that males of many animal species , including humans , can adjust the speed and effectiveness of their sperm by regulating the amount of seminal fluid they produce during copulation .
The determining factor on that amount of fluid seems to be whether the male finds the female attractive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A new study has shown that even sperm can be superficial.
Researchers found that males of many animal species, including humans, can adjust the speed and effectiveness of their sperm by regulating the amount of seminal fluid they produce during copulation.
The determining factor on that amount of fluid seems to be whether the male finds the female attractive.</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653867</id>
	<title>Re:Some sperm will even find you in a pool..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247257980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is the funniest thing I have heard all day.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is the funniest thing I have heard all day .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is the funniest thing I have heard all day.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653041</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28655359</id>
	<title>Re:and what makes a female rat attractive?</title>
	<author>NoPantsJim</author>
	<datestamp>1247223120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>More to the point, how can the researchers assess which female rats are "babes" and which ones are fuglies.</p></div></blockquote><p>
I have a hard enough time not finding female rats attractive.
<br> <br>
I'm gonna go see a doctor.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>More to the point , how can the researchers assess which female rats are " babes " and which ones are fuglies .
I have a hard enough time not finding female rats attractive .
I 'm gon na go see a doctor .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>More to the point, how can the researchers assess which female rats are "babes" and which ones are fuglies.
I have a hard enough time not finding female rats attractive.
I'm gonna go see a doctor.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653117</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653613</id>
	<title>Knew that all along</title>
	<author>Drakkenmensch</author>
	<datestamp>1247256660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Isn't that discovery already demonstrated eloquently in bukake porn?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is n't that discovery already demonstrated eloquently in bukake porn ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Isn't that discovery already demonstrated eloquently in bukake porn?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653559</id>
	<title>Re:Evolutionary bias?</title>
	<author>wasabii</author>
	<datestamp>1247256480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Because there is a finite amount of sperm. This is about allocation of sperm. Allocate more sperm to attractive females, where attractiveness is established by ability to care for offspring. Strong body. Upright posture. Features which hint at youth, etc. The genes which then cause you to do the allocation are promoted more strongly.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Because there is a finite amount of sperm .
This is about allocation of sperm .
Allocate more sperm to attractive females , where attractiveness is established by ability to care for offspring .
Strong body .
Upright posture .
Features which hint at youth , etc .
The genes which then cause you to do the allocation are promoted more strongly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because there is a finite amount of sperm.
This is about allocation of sperm.
Allocate more sperm to attractive females, where attractiveness is established by ability to care for offspring.
Strong body.
Upright posture.
Features which hint at youth, etc.
The genes which then cause you to do the allocation are promoted more strongly.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653099</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28655553</id>
	<title>Re:Doing the Dog</title>
	<author>Sponge Bath</author>
	<datestamp>1247224680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr><i>...think swallow</i></p><p>African or European?</p><p>Yeah, Python references always get them hot.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...think swallowAfrican or European ? Yeah , Python references always get them hot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ...think swallowAfrican or European?Yeah, Python references always get them hot.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653583</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652923</id>
	<title>Re:Research</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247253960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <i>This didn't happen when the clip was bad...</i></p><p>Ugh, and I thought cleaning food crumbs out of the keyboard was nasty.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This did n't happen when the clip was bad...Ugh , and I thought cleaning food crumbs out of the keyboard was nasty .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> This didn't happen when the clip was bad...Ugh, and I thought cleaning food crumbs out of the keyboard was nasty.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652619</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28657169</id>
	<title>Don't believe me?  Click the link.  Seriously.</title>
	<author>SteveFoerster</author>
	<datestamp>1247239380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That just leaves more women with nice big round asses for <a href="http://finance.chyden.net/?p=1007" title="chyden.net">Barack Obama and Nicolas Sarkozy</a> [chyden.net].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That just leaves more women with nice big round asses for Barack Obama and Nicolas Sarkozy [ chyden.net ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That just leaves more women with nice big round asses for Barack Obama and Nicolas Sarkozy [chyden.net].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653529</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28655631</id>
	<title>Re:For animals yes,,, but...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247225280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>For some reason, maybe it is genetic, most women seem to have almost a masochistic streak in them....we all observe this when we see women out there that are actually physically abused by their men, and yet go back to them.</p></div></blockquote><p>I'm sure it's genetic, but not for the reasons you think IMHO. In all my years of observation, I found that what women *really want* above anything else in a man is <b>confidence</b>. It just so happens finding a man that exudes confidence in a detrimental fashion (abusive b/f, the usual wife beater...etc) often comes across as more potent than a man that exudes confidence in a positive life supportive manor. The key here to exuding confidence, is to first be confident in yourself and whatever unknowns life throws your way. Everything else with regards to finding a loyal mate falls into place naturally there after.</p><p>If you ask me, I think this behavior goes back toward our primate heritage. While women hate men that are abusive, they can at least be counted on for physical protection from other predators. Basically, it's the devil that you know vs the one you don't.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>For some reason , maybe it is genetic , most women seem to have almost a masochistic streak in them....we all observe this when we see women out there that are actually physically abused by their men , and yet go back to them.I 'm sure it 's genetic , but not for the reasons you think IMHO .
In all my years of observation , I found that what women * really want * above anything else in a man is confidence .
It just so happens finding a man that exudes confidence in a detrimental fashion ( abusive b/f , the usual wife beater...etc ) often comes across as more potent than a man that exudes confidence in a positive life supportive manor .
The key here to exuding confidence , is to first be confident in yourself and whatever unknowns life throws your way .
Everything else with regards to finding a loyal mate falls into place naturally there after.If you ask me , I think this behavior goes back toward our primate heritage .
While women hate men that are abusive , they can at least be counted on for physical protection from other predators .
Basically , it 's the devil that you know vs the one you do n't .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For some reason, maybe it is genetic, most women seem to have almost a masochistic streak in them....we all observe this when we see women out there that are actually physically abused by their men, and yet go back to them.I'm sure it's genetic, but not for the reasons you think IMHO.
In all my years of observation, I found that what women *really want* above anything else in a man is confidence.
It just so happens finding a man that exudes confidence in a detrimental fashion (abusive b/f, the usual wife beater...etc) often comes across as more potent than a man that exudes confidence in a positive life supportive manor.
The key here to exuding confidence, is to first be confident in yourself and whatever unknowns life throws your way.
Everything else with regards to finding a loyal mate falls into place naturally there after.If you ask me, I think this behavior goes back toward our primate heritage.
While women hate men that are abusive, they can at least be counted on for physical protection from other predators.
Basically, it's the devil that you know vs the one you don't.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654703</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28658531</id>
	<title>Re:and what makes a female rat attractive?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247306400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It isn't just symmetry, it's NORMALITY. Ugly people are mutants. Just go to UglyPeople.com and have a look. Then look at people who are attractive, and NOT the nobodies which Hollywood pushes out as 'stars' every year, the 'titless wonders' like Keira Knightley. Look at Milena Velba, if you want to see what MOST men regard as incredibly attractive.</p><p>Attractive women are fitter, literally, than ugly women. Attractive women are better in bed, better at sex, and their children are more likely to survive than ugly women's.</p><p>Ugly people are far more likely to be child abusers. They are far more likely to kill their own children.</p><p>Look at women in prison - they are ALL ugly. You will NEVER see a beautiful woman in prison. Thus proving my point. (Child abuse causes criminality...)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It is n't just symmetry , it 's NORMALITY .
Ugly people are mutants .
Just go to UglyPeople.com and have a look .
Then look at people who are attractive , and NOT the nobodies which Hollywood pushes out as 'stars ' every year , the 'titless wonders ' like Keira Knightley .
Look at Milena Velba , if you want to see what MOST men regard as incredibly attractive.Attractive women are fitter , literally , than ugly women .
Attractive women are better in bed , better at sex , and their children are more likely to survive than ugly women 's.Ugly people are far more likely to be child abusers .
They are far more likely to kill their own children.Look at women in prison - they are ALL ugly .
You will NEVER see a beautiful woman in prison .
Thus proving my point .
( Child abuse causes criminality... )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It isn't just symmetry, it's NORMALITY.
Ugly people are mutants.
Just go to UglyPeople.com and have a look.
Then look at people who are attractive, and NOT the nobodies which Hollywood pushes out as 'stars' every year, the 'titless wonders' like Keira Knightley.
Look at Milena Velba, if you want to see what MOST men regard as incredibly attractive.Attractive women are fitter, literally, than ugly women.
Attractive women are better in bed, better at sex, and their children are more likely to survive than ugly women's.Ugly people are far more likely to be child abusers.
They are far more likely to kill their own children.Look at women in prison - they are ALL ugly.
You will NEVER see a beautiful woman in prison.
Thus proving my point.
(Child abuse causes criminality...)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654037</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654515</id>
	<title>Re:Wonder if this will work.</title>
	<author>meta-monkey</author>
	<datestamp>1247217900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>And me without my mod points...</htmltext>
<tokenext>And me without my mod points.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And me without my mod points...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652939</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653465</id>
	<title>Re: Sperm Travels Faster Toward Attractive Females</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247256120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>!newsfornerds vs. !clevertag</p><p>Tag Wars!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>! newsfornerds vs. ! clevertagTag Wars !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>!newsfornerds vs. !clevertagTag Wars!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28657811</id>
	<title>Re:This is bad</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247249100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Charlotte Gainsbourg<br>Liv Tyler<br>I could go on.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Charlotte GainsbourgLiv TylerI could go on .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Charlotte GainsbourgLiv TylerI could go on.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652849</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28665347</id>
	<title>joke</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247332800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>yo momma's so fat that when your dad makes love to her, his sperm swim backwards.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>yo momma 's so fat that when your dad makes love to her , his sperm swim backwards .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>yo momma's so fat that when your dad makes love to her, his sperm swim backwards.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28655871</id>
	<title>This is kind of gross</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247226840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Does this mean attractive women have more cleaning up to do afterwards?  No wonder they seem less motivated sometimes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Does this mean attractive women have more cleaning up to do afterwards ?
No wonder they seem less motivated sometimes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does this mean attractive women have more cleaning up to do afterwards?
No wonder they seem less motivated sometimes.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652803</id>
	<title>How do they know?</title>
	<author>DesScorp</author>
	<datestamp>1247253600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How does a sperm "know" if a female is attractive? Or are we talking about money shots from porn films here?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How does a sperm " know " if a female is attractive ?
Or are we talking about money shots from porn films here ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How does a sperm "know" if a female is attractive?
Or are we talking about money shots from porn films here?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28658235</id>
	<title>Re:From the department of duh?</title>
	<author>CodeBuster</author>
	<datestamp>1247343180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>That said, it's apparently also really freaking hard for many women to show the same level of respect for men's similarly simple expectations.</p></div><p>Amen. Why must women always make getting sex like trekking through a 100+ hour RPG, pushing all of their buttons in the right sequence and completing all of the side quests (with speech challenges!), from the standpoint of the guy? They complain about how we don't respect their expectation of the ultimate romantic encounter every time there is intimacy. No wonder some men, generally those with WAY more money than time, opt for the high-end call girl instead; its an efficient allocation of scarce time and effort on their part and girl doesn't complain that they are getting a bit fat around the middle and don't spend enough time with them.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>That said , it 's apparently also really freaking hard for many women to show the same level of respect for men 's similarly simple expectations.Amen .
Why must women always make getting sex like trekking through a 100 + hour RPG , pushing all of their buttons in the right sequence and completing all of the side quests ( with speech challenges !
) , from the standpoint of the guy ?
They complain about how we do n't respect their expectation of the ultimate romantic encounter every time there is intimacy .
No wonder some men , generally those with WAY more money than time , opt for the high-end call girl instead ; its an efficient allocation of scarce time and effort on their part and girl does n't complain that they are getting a bit fat around the middle and do n't spend enough time with them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That said, it's apparently also really freaking hard for many women to show the same level of respect for men's similarly simple expectations.Amen.
Why must women always make getting sex like trekking through a 100+ hour RPG, pushing all of their buttons in the right sequence and completing all of the side quests (with speech challenges!
), from the standpoint of the guy?
They complain about how we don't respect their expectation of the ultimate romantic encounter every time there is intimacy.
No wonder some men, generally those with WAY more money than time, opt for the high-end call girl instead; its an efficient allocation of scarce time and effort on their part and girl doesn't complain that they are getting a bit fat around the middle and don't spend enough time with them.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654153</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654127</id>
	<title>Hey, is that the new Eclipse icon?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247259240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hey, is that the new Eclipse icon?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hey , is that the new Eclipse icon ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hey, is that the new Eclipse icon?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653489</id>
	<title>are we missing something ?</title>
	<author>parallel\_prankster</author>
	<datestamp>1247256240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Is there something more fundamental here? From the study, if it is true that ejaculation is better if the man finds the woman attractive and/or is highly turned on and it is more likely that the man is more turned on with a new girl (assumption ofcourse)  than the same boring spouse that he sleeps with every night, does this mean that man was fundamentally a creature of  instinct than commitment and that for better reproduction he should mate with more females than be married to one or something like that ?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is there something more fundamental here ?
From the study , if it is true that ejaculation is better if the man finds the woman attractive and/or is highly turned on and it is more likely that the man is more turned on with a new girl ( assumption ofcourse ) than the same boring spouse that he sleeps with every night , does this mean that man was fundamentally a creature of instinct than commitment and that for better reproduction he should mate with more females than be married to one or something like that ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is there something more fundamental here?
From the study, if it is true that ejaculation is better if the man finds the woman attractive and/or is highly turned on and it is more likely that the man is more turned on with a new girl (assumption ofcourse)  than the same boring spouse that he sleeps with every night, does this mean that man was fundamentally a creature of  instinct than commitment and that for better reproduction he should mate with more females than be married to one or something like that ?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653963</id>
	<title>If sperm like the pretty... what about the stupid?</title>
	<author>Psyber\_Netik</author>
	<datestamp>1247258460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>We've all heard the saying "Stupid people shouldn't breed." Does this mean evolution is going to the deet dee dee's? I've never meet a hottie with an IQ above a dog.

Sit... on it
Fetch... a beer..
Speak... durty
Roll over...<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...
GOOD DOG! Who likes the skippy?</htmltext>
<tokenext>We 've all heard the saying " Stupid people should n't breed .
" Does this mean evolution is going to the deet dee dee 's ?
I 've never meet a hottie with an IQ above a dog .
Sit... on it Fetch... a beer. . Speak... durty Roll over... .. . GOOD DOG !
Who likes the skippy ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We've all heard the saying "Stupid people shouldn't breed.
" Does this mean evolution is going to the deet dee dee's?
I've never meet a hottie with an IQ above a dog.
Sit... on it
Fetch... a beer..
Speak... durty
Roll over... ...
GOOD DOG!
Who likes the skippy?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654699</id>
	<title>Inquiring Minds Want To Know</title>
	<author>BigBlueOx</author>
	<datestamp>1247218800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The first part of the FA says that my sperm will go faster if I think the woman is attractive. Ok. But then they say that smoking marijuana will slow my sperm down! Now wait! If I think the woman is attractive after I've smoked because she looks like a Frito<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... which effect is stronger?? Did they test for that?? Does one does one effect cancel the other?? C'mon guys!<br>
<br>
This is sloppy research. We are not impressed.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The first part of the FA says that my sperm will go faster if I think the woman is attractive .
Ok. But then they say that smoking marijuana will slow my sperm down !
Now wait !
If I think the woman is attractive after I 've smoked because she looks like a Frito ... which effect is stronger ? ?
Did they test for that ? ?
Does one does one effect cancel the other ? ?
C'mon guys !
This is sloppy research .
We are not impressed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The first part of the FA says that my sperm will go faster if I think the woman is attractive.
Ok. But then they say that smoking marijuana will slow my sperm down!
Now wait!
If I think the woman is attractive after I've smoked because she looks like a Frito ... which effect is stronger??
Did they test for that??
Does one does one effect cancel the other??
C'mon guys!
This is sloppy research.
We are not impressed.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28655665</id>
	<title>Faster swimmers or a bigger kablooie?</title>
	<author>Beerdood</author>
	<datestamp>1247225520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I still can't tell from reading the article whether this means the sperm just leaves faster or if the sperm actually swim faster once they've landed.  I wouldn't be too shocked if it just shot out faster - being more attracted to someone could easily result in a faster money shot.  I can't understand how this would make a difference though, seems like they still have a long way to swim, and the vaginal walls probably would probably block most of the shot anyway, they still have a long way to swim.  Other factors like length, or depth at time of ejaculation seem like they would be much bigger factors. <br> <br> <br>  On the other hand, the sperm actually swimming faster seems remarkable.  Maybe someone can clarify, does the amount of seminal fluid determine the rate the sperm swim or the velocity of the sperm leaving upon ejaculation, or both?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I still ca n't tell from reading the article whether this means the sperm just leaves faster or if the sperm actually swim faster once they 've landed .
I would n't be too shocked if it just shot out faster - being more attracted to someone could easily result in a faster money shot .
I ca n't understand how this would make a difference though , seems like they still have a long way to swim , and the vaginal walls probably would probably block most of the shot anyway , they still have a long way to swim .
Other factors like length , or depth at time of ejaculation seem like they would be much bigger factors .
On the other hand , the sperm actually swimming faster seems remarkable .
Maybe someone can clarify , does the amount of seminal fluid determine the rate the sperm swim or the velocity of the sperm leaving upon ejaculation , or both ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I still can't tell from reading the article whether this means the sperm just leaves faster or if the sperm actually swim faster once they've landed.
I wouldn't be too shocked if it just shot out faster - being more attracted to someone could easily result in a faster money shot.
I can't understand how this would make a difference though, seems like they still have a long way to swim, and the vaginal walls probably would probably block most of the shot anyway, they still have a long way to swim.
Other factors like length, or depth at time of ejaculation seem like they would be much bigger factors.
On the other hand, the sperm actually swimming faster seems remarkable.
Maybe someone can clarify, does the amount of seminal fluid determine the rate the sperm swim or the velocity of the sperm leaving upon ejaculation, or both?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28658167</id>
	<title>Re:and what makes a female rat attractive?</title>
	<author>ignavus</author>
	<datestamp>1247255820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I guess the rats are "babes" when the researchers start going out on dates with them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I guess the rats are " babes " when the researchers start going out on dates with them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I guess the rats are "babes" when the researchers start going out on dates with them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653117</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28707757</id>
	<title>Re:Research</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247649720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;  Ugh, and I thought cleaning food crumbs out of the keyboard was nasty.</p><p>Yep,  ugly clip and cleaning the keyboard from both the food crumbs and the short go is definitely nastier...</p><p>Though moving the keyboard away from you-monitor line and using only mouse for the browsing definitely helps...</p><p>I think it should be ISO-standarized as Best Practice...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; Ugh , and I thought cleaning food crumbs out of the keyboard was nasty.Yep , ugly clip and cleaning the keyboard from both the food crumbs and the short go is definitely nastier...Though moving the keyboard away from you-monitor line and using only mouse for the browsing definitely helps...I think it should be ISO-standarized as Best Practice.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;  Ugh, and I thought cleaning food crumbs out of the keyboard was nasty.Yep,  ugly clip and cleaning the keyboard from both the food crumbs and the short go is definitely nastier...Though moving the keyboard away from you-monitor line and using only mouse for the browsing definitely helps...I think it should be ISO-standarized as Best Practice...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652923</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28655149</id>
	<title>Re:HUH?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247221740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Meanwhile, some of us always found these people attractive. For example, even in her pre-crack-hoe days, Lindsay Lohan was still grossly unattractive to me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Meanwhile , some of us always found these people attractive .
For example , even in her pre-crack-hoe days , Lindsay Lohan was still grossly unattractive to me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Meanwhile, some of us always found these people attractive.
For example, even in her pre-crack-hoe days, Lindsay Lohan was still grossly unattractive to me.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653529</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652837</id>
	<title>Re:Research</title>
	<author>WebManWalking</author>
	<datestamp>1247253660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>By aswell, I assume you mean aswollen. As for speedometers, try a tennis tournament with one of those really pretty Russian blondes. They use speedometers to measure the speed of serves, but they probably have to factor out all of the ongoing research.</htmltext>
<tokenext>By aswell , I assume you mean aswollen .
As for speedometers , try a tennis tournament with one of those really pretty Russian blondes .
They use speedometers to measure the speed of serves , but they probably have to factor out all of the ongoing research .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>By aswell, I assume you mean aswollen.
As for speedometers, try a tennis tournament with one of those really pretty Russian blondes.
They use speedometers to measure the speed of serves, but they probably have to factor out all of the ongoing research.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652619</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654989</id>
	<title>link to full text</title>
	<author>cinnamon colbert</author>
	<datestamp>1247220660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>free pdf of full text<br><a href="http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/early/2009/07/02/rspb.2009.0807.full.pdf+html?sid=33180554-cb6e-4047-abd9-c3a16bc8667a" title="royalsocie...ishing.org">http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/early/2009/07/02/rspb.2009.0807.full.pdf+html?sid=33180554-cb6e-4047-abd9-c3a16bc8667a</a> [royalsocie...ishing.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>free pdf of full texthttp : //rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/early/2009/07/02/rspb.2009.0807.full.pdf + html ? sid = 33180554-cb6e-4047-abd9-c3a16bc8667a [ royalsocie...ishing.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>free pdf of full texthttp://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/early/2009/07/02/rspb.2009.0807.full.pdf+html?sid=33180554-cb6e-4047-abd9-c3a16bc8667a [royalsocie...ishing.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652741</id>
	<title>lol</title>
	<author>syrinx</author>
	<datestamp>1247253300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The best part of this article is the tag "!newsfornerds".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The best part of this article is the tag " ! newsfornerds " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The best part of this article is the tag "!newsfornerds".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653573</id>
	<title>The attractiveness scale</title>
	<author>S7urm</author>
	<datestamp>1247256540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I can't for the life of me remember the study, or who the man was that was considered the most un-appealing, but there was a study done that measure aesthetics, and then judged celebrities based on their "scientific aesthetic value" and from what I can remember of the study, it was actually based on something more than the "Schwing" factor.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I ca n't for the life of me remember the study , or who the man was that was considered the most un-appealing , but there was a study done that measure aesthetics , and then judged celebrities based on their " scientific aesthetic value " and from what I can remember of the study , it was actually based on something more than the " Schwing " factor .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can't for the life of me remember the study, or who the man was that was considered the most un-appealing, but there was a study done that measure aesthetics, and then judged celebrities based on their "scientific aesthetic value" and from what I can remember of the study, it was actually based on something more than the "Schwing" factor.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653117</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653915</id>
	<title>Re:For animals yes,,, but...</title>
	<author>interkin3tic</author>
	<datestamp>1247258160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm also not sure that this is easily applicable to people.  The blurb mentions that female comb and her fertility are strongly correlated in several ways</p><p><div class="quote"><p>female attractiveness is determined by the expression of a sexual ornament -- the comb -- which is phenotypically and genetically correlated to the number and mass of eggs females lay</p></div><p>Is there a similar correlation for human females?  I've never heard such a stat, seems like it would be much more complicated (quantifying attractiveness, factoring in health, contraceptives... normal "humans are more difficult to study" stuff), and the article didn't mention it.</p><p>I considered a google search, but decided the results might not be work appropriate, and my boss is milling around...</p><p>That egg mass also is correlated to combs to me suggests there's more at work here than the mechanism they describe.  The real paper may have done this, but I'd expect a control group of females who had great combs which were surgically removed.  If the hot combs are making the males fire... uh... both barrels because they're so turned on, then sperm should be slower, wheras if its something like the same genes that make nice combs also, say, make a female more fertile, or make her reproductive tract more stimulatory to sperm, then cutting off the comb wouldn't change that.</p><p>Anyone know where the real article is?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm also not sure that this is easily applicable to people .
The blurb mentions that female comb and her fertility are strongly correlated in several waysfemale attractiveness is determined by the expression of a sexual ornament -- the comb -- which is phenotypically and genetically correlated to the number and mass of eggs females layIs there a similar correlation for human females ?
I 've never heard such a stat , seems like it would be much more complicated ( quantifying attractiveness , factoring in health , contraceptives... normal " humans are more difficult to study " stuff ) , and the article did n't mention it.I considered a google search , but decided the results might not be work appropriate , and my boss is milling around...That egg mass also is correlated to combs to me suggests there 's more at work here than the mechanism they describe .
The real paper may have done this , but I 'd expect a control group of females who had great combs which were surgically removed .
If the hot combs are making the males fire... uh... both barrels because they 're so turned on , then sperm should be slower , wheras if its something like the same genes that make nice combs also , say , make a female more fertile , or make her reproductive tract more stimulatory to sperm , then cutting off the comb would n't change that.Anyone know where the real article is ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm also not sure that this is easily applicable to people.
The blurb mentions that female comb and her fertility are strongly correlated in several waysfemale attractiveness is determined by the expression of a sexual ornament -- the comb -- which is phenotypically and genetically correlated to the number and mass of eggs females layIs there a similar correlation for human females?
I've never heard such a stat, seems like it would be much more complicated (quantifying attractiveness, factoring in health, contraceptives... normal "humans are more difficult to study" stuff), and the article didn't mention it.I considered a google search, but decided the results might not be work appropriate, and my boss is milling around...That egg mass also is correlated to combs to me suggests there's more at work here than the mechanism they describe.
The real paper may have done this, but I'd expect a control group of females who had great combs which were surgically removed.
If the hot combs are making the males fire... uh... both barrels because they're so turned on, then sperm should be slower, wheras if its something like the same genes that make nice combs also, say, make a female more fertile, or make her reproductive tract more stimulatory to sperm, then cutting off the comb wouldn't change that.Anyone know where the real article is?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652661</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28655933</id>
	<title>Re:More Seminal Fluid == Male Thinks Woman is Hot?</title>
	<author>bughunter</author>
	<datestamp>1247227320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You're aiming for a "+1 Funny," but I'd give you an "Insightful."  Considering the scale of the mean volume of his ejaculate, it would be far easier to make relative measurements of the individual samples, especially in non-ideal conditions such as porn movie sets.</p><p>Thus, <i>The North Pole</i> series could serve as useful research material, provided one could make an accurate objective assessment of the attractiveness of each female partner.</p><p>This idea is validated by my past observations that the dude really does launch a bigger fleet of tadpoles when the actress is a hottie.  He appears to make especially messy glazes on the faces of cute blondes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're aiming for a " + 1 Funny , " but I 'd give you an " Insightful .
" Considering the scale of the mean volume of his ejaculate , it would be far easier to make relative measurements of the individual samples , especially in non-ideal conditions such as porn movie sets.Thus , The North Pole series could serve as useful research material , provided one could make an accurate objective assessment of the attractiveness of each female partner.This idea is validated by my past observations that the dude really does launch a bigger fleet of tadpoles when the actress is a hottie .
He appears to make especially messy glazes on the faces of cute blondes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're aiming for a "+1 Funny," but I'd give you an "Insightful.
"  Considering the scale of the mean volume of his ejaculate, it would be far easier to make relative measurements of the individual samples, especially in non-ideal conditions such as porn movie sets.Thus, The North Pole series could serve as useful research material, provided one could make an accurate objective assessment of the attractiveness of each female partner.This idea is validated by my past observations that the dude really does launch a bigger fleet of tadpoles when the actress is a hottie.
He appears to make especially messy glazes on the faces of cute blondes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653247</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652675</id>
	<title>Speed vs inner beauty</title>
	<author>indre1</author>
	<datestamp>1247253120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Does the speed vary depending on inner beauty too?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Does the speed vary depending on inner beauty too ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does the speed vary depending on inner beauty too?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652751</id>
	<title>hmmz</title>
	<author>santax</author>
	<datestamp>1247253360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Interesting, allthough I'm pretty sure that Santax's balls do not make that difference.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Interesting , allthough I 'm pretty sure that Santax 's balls do not make that difference .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Interesting, allthough I'm pretty sure that Santax's balls do not make that difference.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654555</id>
	<title>Makes sense for promiscuous species</title>
	<author>Arthur B.</author>
	<datestamp>1247218080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In promiscuous species, a male has a seminal fluid budget to spend carefully, there's every reason in the word to weight the amount produced by the expected fitness of the offspring. Humans are not that promiscuous, which is why our testicles are not as big as say bonobo who need a large sperm budget to go through their day.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In promiscuous species , a male has a seminal fluid budget to spend carefully , there 's every reason in the word to weight the amount produced by the expected fitness of the offspring .
Humans are not that promiscuous , which is why our testicles are not as big as say bonobo who need a large sperm budget to go through their day .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In promiscuous species, a male has a seminal fluid budget to spend carefully, there's every reason in the word to weight the amount produced by the expected fitness of the offspring.
Humans are not that promiscuous, which is why our testicles are not as big as say bonobo who need a large sperm budget to go through their day.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654829</id>
	<title>Re:From the department of duh?</title>
	<author>Isaac-1</author>
	<datestamp>1247219640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If your using a condom, I think your missing something about improving chances of conception.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If your using a condom , I think your missing something about improving chances of conception .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If your using a condom, I think your missing something about improving chances of conception.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652933</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654579</id>
	<title>Re:For animals yes,,, but...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247218200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Huh?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Huh ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Huh?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652661</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654247</id>
	<title>So the conclusion here...</title>
	<author>Mechanik</author>
	<datestamp>1247216640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>... is that Peter North finds women <i>really, really, really</i> attractive?</htmltext>
<tokenext>... is that Peter North finds women really , really , really attractive ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... is that Peter North finds women really, really, really attractive?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28660973</id>
	<title>Re:and what makes a female rat attractive?</title>
	<author>elgatozorbas</author>
	<datestamp>1247333640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>More to the point, how can the researchers assess which female rats are "babes" and which ones are fuglies. </i>
<p>
Easy enough. The "pretty ones" are being fucked more than the ugly ones.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>More to the point , how can the researchers assess which female rats are " babes " and which ones are fuglies .
Easy enough .
The " pretty ones " are being fucked more than the ugly ones .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>More to the point, how can the researchers assess which female rats are "babes" and which ones are fuglies.
Easy enough.
The "pretty ones" are being fucked more than the ugly ones.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653117</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654565</id>
	<title>Re:From the department of duh?</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1247218140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>But really people, is it so freaking hard to just take us out to dinner, kiss our neck afterwords in an intimate and quiet environment, and actually DO the foreplay (and for those in longer-term relationships, not have it become formulaic?)</i></p><p>Not hard for me. The hard part is when you ask her out to dinner and she laughs at you. Some women are incredibly cruel.</p><p><i>but they can't even get the damn condom out of the wrapper and a bra off without completely ruining it...</i></p><p>I'm certain that bras are designed by either gay men, or mysandrists. Don't know why anyone would have trouble with a condom wrapper, but a condom is kind of offtopic here, isn't it?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But really people , is it so freaking hard to just take us out to dinner , kiss our neck afterwords in an intimate and quiet environment , and actually DO the foreplay ( and for those in longer-term relationships , not have it become formulaic ?
) Not hard for me .
The hard part is when you ask her out to dinner and she laughs at you .
Some women are incredibly cruel.but they ca n't even get the damn condom out of the wrapper and a bra off without completely ruining it...I 'm certain that bras are designed by either gay men , or mysandrists .
Do n't know why anyone would have trouble with a condom wrapper , but a condom is kind of offtopic here , is n't it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But really people, is it so freaking hard to just take us out to dinner, kiss our neck afterwords in an intimate and quiet environment, and actually DO the foreplay (and for those in longer-term relationships, not have it become formulaic?
)Not hard for me.
The hard part is when you ask her out to dinner and she laughs at you.
Some women are incredibly cruel.but they can't even get the damn condom out of the wrapper and a bra off without completely ruining it...I'm certain that bras are designed by either gay men, or mysandrists.
Don't know why anyone would have trouble with a condom wrapper, but a condom is kind of offtopic here, isn't it?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652933</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654151</id>
	<title>Re:Thanks Captain Obvious...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247259300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Cute, but they didn't report that sex was "more enjoyable".  They reported that "sperm travels faster".</p><p>So maybe not so obvious, huh?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Cute , but they did n't report that sex was " more enjoyable " .
They reported that " sperm travels faster " .So maybe not so obvious , huh ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Cute, but they didn't report that sex was "more enjoyable".
They reported that "sperm travels faster".So maybe not so obvious, huh?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652659</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653761</id>
	<title>Re:Doesn't make sense</title>
	<author>blahplusplus</author>
	<datestamp>1247257380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Then why is the world full of so many ugly people?"</p><p>Because the heritability of beauty is not 1 to 1, you can have beautiful people have ugly children and vice versa.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Then why is the world full of so many ugly people ?
" Because the heritability of beauty is not 1 to 1 , you can have beautiful people have ugly children and vice versa .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Then why is the world full of so many ugly people?
"Because the heritability of beauty is not 1 to 1, you can have beautiful people have ugly children and vice versa.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652955</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652785</id>
	<title>nature does its best</title>
	<author>salesbot</author>
	<datestamp>1247253480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>nature does its best to let you make beer-goggle copulation decisions</htmltext>
<tokenext>nature does its best to let you make beer-goggle copulation decisions</tokentext>
<sentencetext>nature does its best to let you make beer-goggle copulation decisions</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28658229</id>
	<title>Re:Research</title>
	<author>sean4u</author>
	<datestamp>1247343180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Hmm, wonder where they sell speedometers...</p></div></blockquote><p>They're called seedometers </p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hmm , wonder where they sell speedometers...They 're called seedometers</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hmm, wonder where they sell speedometers...They're called seedometers 
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652619</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654655</id>
	<title>Re:Thanks Captain Obvious...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247218560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How do you know my wife?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How do you know my wife ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How do you know my wife?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652659</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28658365</id>
	<title>Re:and what makes a female rat attractive?</title>
	<author>Celsius10</author>
	<datestamp>1247345640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The attractive rats were the ones on the pinball machine.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The attractive rats were the ones on the pinball machine .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The attractive rats were the ones on the pinball machine.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653117</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653117</id>
	<title>and what makes a female rat attractive?</title>
	<author>petes\_PoV</author>
	<datestamp>1247254740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>More to the point, how can the researchers assess which female rats are "babes" and which ones are fuglies.
<p>I really hope they're not projecting their own feelings and biases into the equation here. For this experiment to have any scientific value, there must be an objective measure of attractiveness, one with a proper definition and units (including a calibration standard). Can someone please tell me, for humans, what this measurement is based on, what the units are (Helens? the amount of beauty required to launch 1000 ships - but beauty is not attractiveness) and, most important, who the calibration reference is?
</p><p>
Men need to know.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>More to the point , how can the researchers assess which female rats are " babes " and which ones are fuglies .
I really hope they 're not projecting their own feelings and biases into the equation here .
For this experiment to have any scientific value , there must be an objective measure of attractiveness , one with a proper definition and units ( including a calibration standard ) .
Can someone please tell me , for humans , what this measurement is based on , what the units are ( Helens ?
the amount of beauty required to launch 1000 ships - but beauty is not attractiveness ) and , most important , who the calibration reference is ?
Men need to know .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>More to the point, how can the researchers assess which female rats are "babes" and which ones are fuglies.
I really hope they're not projecting their own feelings and biases into the equation here.
For this experiment to have any scientific value, there must be an objective measure of attractiveness, one with a proper definition and units (including a calibration standard).
Can someone please tell me, for humans, what this measurement is based on, what the units are (Helens?
the amount of beauty required to launch 1000 ships - but beauty is not attractiveness) and, most important, who the calibration reference is?
Men need to know.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652803</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654731</id>
	<title>But what if you are fantasizing....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247218980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Didn't RTFA, but what if you are fantasizing about another (more attractive, at least in your eyes) woman whilst having coitus with another woman? Say you are thinking of engaging in coitus with Tia Carrere/Brad Pitt during intercourse with your spouse. Will you produce more sperm during that session?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Did n't RTFA , but what if you are fantasizing about another ( more attractive , at least in your eyes ) woman whilst having coitus with another woman ?
Say you are thinking of engaging in coitus with Tia Carrere/Brad Pitt during intercourse with your spouse .
Will you produce more sperm during that session ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Didn't RTFA, but what if you are fantasizing about another (more attractive, at least in your eyes) woman whilst having coitus with another woman?
Say you are thinking of engaging in coitus with Tia Carrere/Brad Pitt during intercourse with your spouse.
Will you produce more sperm during that session?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28657987</id>
	<title>You MUST be female</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247252820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If she is pretty, who cares what her personality is like.</p><p>The only way men connect to woman is via the skin. All the other crap we just make up to get into woman's pants.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If she is pretty , who cares what her personality is like.The only way men connect to woman is via the skin .
All the other crap we just make up to get into woman 's pants .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If she is pretty, who cares what her personality is like.The only way men connect to woman is via the skin.
All the other crap we just make up to get into woman's pants.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652661</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28655747</id>
	<title>Re:This is bad</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247226120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Dude, you have a weird fetish. I don't think of the children when sperm and stunningly attractive women are around!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Dude , you have a weird fetish .
I do n't think of the children when sperm and stunningly attractive women are around !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dude, you have a weird fetish.
I don't think of the children when sperm and stunningly attractive women are around!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652849</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652861</id>
	<title>Re:For animals yes,,, but...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247253780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is knows as the Hottie-Frigid paradox. The most scorching hot women are nearly certain to be lousy in bed.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is knows as the Hottie-Frigid paradox .
The most scorching hot women are nearly certain to be lousy in bed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is knows as the Hottie-Frigid paradox.
The most scorching hot women are nearly certain to be lousy in bed.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652661</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654003</id>
	<title>Re:Thanks Captain Obvious...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247258640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Don't listen to him Worf! You are beautiful...so...beautiful. *sigh*</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't listen to him Worf !
You are beautiful...so...beautiful .
* sigh *</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't listen to him Worf!
You are beautiful...so...beautiful.
*sigh*</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652659</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654847</id>
	<title>Attractiveness or turned-on-ness?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247219700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Would the result be the same if it was a less attractive partner, but one who was still a great turn on?  Like a plain looking woman who can talk at length about the Uncertainty Principle and knows where your buttons are....</p><p>By the way, this isn't about being "superficial" this is about enhancing the likelihood of healthier, arguably better members of the species passing on genes.  Nature isn't superficial... it's pragmatic.  Superficial is a word invented by ugly people to hurt the feelings of better looking people.  It's not my fault i like big boobs, slender waists and bright blue eyes.  i didn't choose that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Would the result be the same if it was a less attractive partner , but one who was still a great turn on ?
Like a plain looking woman who can talk at length about the Uncertainty Principle and knows where your buttons are....By the way , this is n't about being " superficial " this is about enhancing the likelihood of healthier , arguably better members of the species passing on genes .
Nature is n't superficial... it 's pragmatic .
Superficial is a word invented by ugly people to hurt the feelings of better looking people .
It 's not my fault i like big boobs , slender waists and bright blue eyes .
i did n't choose that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Would the result be the same if it was a less attractive partner, but one who was still a great turn on?
Like a plain looking woman who can talk at length about the Uncertainty Principle and knows where your buttons are....By the way, this isn't about being "superficial" this is about enhancing the likelihood of healthier, arguably better members of the species passing on genes.
Nature isn't superficial... it's pragmatic.
Superficial is a word invented by ugly people to hurt the feelings of better looking people.
It's not my fault i like big boobs, slender waists and bright blue eyes.
i didn't choose that.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652647</id>
	<title>Too small a sample size.</title>
	<author>Hogwash McFly</author>
	<datestamp>1247253000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I, for one, find their statistics sub-par and wish to volunteer my services for further study into the effect of having sex with attractive females on sperm behaviour.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I , for one , find their statistics sub-par and wish to volunteer my services for further study into the effect of having sex with attractive females on sperm behaviour .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I, for one, find their statistics sub-par and wish to volunteer my services for further study into the effect of having sex with attractive females on sperm behaviour.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653979</id>
	<title>T Giggidy I F</title>
	<author>192939495969798999</author>
	<datestamp>1247258460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hey baby, you make me produce faster sperm!  giggidy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hey baby , you make me produce faster sperm !
giggidy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hey baby, you make me produce faster sperm!
giggidy.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28656081</id>
	<title>Re:This is bad</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247228640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>So how does thinking of children change sperm count?</htmltext>
<tokenext>So how does thinking of children change sperm count ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So how does thinking of children change sperm count?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652849</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654857</id>
	<title>Re:This is bad</title>
	<author>COMON$</author>
	<datestamp>1247219760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I didn't read the article you linked. However it makes sense as an ugly person would need a higher fertility rate to increase the rate of procreation.  A more attractive person wouldn't have to have this high fertility rate as they would have sex more often.  Of course my wife and I are relatively attractive people by society's standards maybe that is why we are having fertility trouble...it is evolution's fault!</htmltext>
<tokenext>I did n't read the article you linked .
However it makes sense as an ugly person would need a higher fertility rate to increase the rate of procreation .
A more attractive person would n't have to have this high fertility rate as they would have sex more often .
Of course my wife and I are relatively attractive people by society 's standards maybe that is why we are having fertility trouble...it is evolution 's fault !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I didn't read the article you linked.
However it makes sense as an ugly person would need a higher fertility rate to increase the rate of procreation.
A more attractive person wouldn't have to have this high fertility rate as they would have sex more often.
Of course my wife and I are relatively attractive people by society's standards maybe that is why we are having fertility trouble...it is evolution's fault!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652849</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652933</id>
	<title>From the department of duh?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247253960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, and? It's also been established that other male mammals, including humans, can reply with something call <i>semen displacement</i> (circumsized males need not apply, some restrictions may apply, see mate for full rules and details) Women aren't without their biological defenses either; Concealing ovulation, various vaginal defenses, such as lack of secretions leading to a lower likelihood of fertility, etc., etc.</p><p>But really people, is it so freaking hard to just take us out to dinner, kiss our neck afterwords in an intimate and quiet environment, and actually DO the foreplay (and for those in longer-term relationships, not have it become formulaic?) Because if the sex sucks, it isn't going to matter how much scientific knowledge you have about the mating process -- it doesn't change the fact that it will still end in tears for you! *mutters* <i>They can tell me down to the molecular level how conception works, but they can't even get the damn condom out of the wrapper and a bra off without completely ruining it...</i></p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , and ?
It 's also been established that other male mammals , including humans , can reply with something call semen displacement ( circumsized males need not apply , some restrictions may apply , see mate for full rules and details ) Women are n't without their biological defenses either ; Concealing ovulation , various vaginal defenses , such as lack of secretions leading to a lower likelihood of fertility , etc. , etc.But really people , is it so freaking hard to just take us out to dinner , kiss our neck afterwords in an intimate and quiet environment , and actually DO the foreplay ( and for those in longer-term relationships , not have it become formulaic ?
) Because if the sex sucks , it is n't going to matter how much scientific knowledge you have about the mating process -- it does n't change the fact that it will still end in tears for you !
* mutters * They can tell me down to the molecular level how conception works , but they ca n't even get the damn condom out of the wrapper and a bra off without completely ruining it.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, and?
It's also been established that other male mammals, including humans, can reply with something call semen displacement (circumsized males need not apply, some restrictions may apply, see mate for full rules and details) Women aren't without their biological defenses either; Concealing ovulation, various vaginal defenses, such as lack of secretions leading to a lower likelihood of fertility, etc., etc.But really people, is it so freaking hard to just take us out to dinner, kiss our neck afterwords in an intimate and quiet environment, and actually DO the foreplay (and for those in longer-term relationships, not have it become formulaic?
) Because if the sex sucks, it isn't going to matter how much scientific knowledge you have about the mating process -- it doesn't change the fact that it will still end in tears for you!
*mutters* They can tell me down to the molecular level how conception works, but they can't even get the damn condom out of the wrapper and a bra off without completely ruining it...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654967</id>
	<title>Re:Thanks Captain Obvious...</title>
	<author>couchslug</author>
	<datestamp>1247220420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"In other news, men find sex more enjoyable with a woman who they find attractive instead of a "been-around-the-block-20-times, looks like the love child of Chewbacca and Worf, old battle-axe" woman."</p><p>The two types are not mutually exclusive.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" In other news , men find sex more enjoyable with a woman who they find attractive instead of a " been-around-the-block-20-times , looks like the love child of Chewbacca and Worf , old battle-axe " woman .
" The two types are not mutually exclusive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"In other news, men find sex more enjoyable with a woman who they find attractive instead of a "been-around-the-block-20-times, looks like the love child of Chewbacca and Worf, old battle-axe" woman.
"The two types are not mutually exclusive.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652659</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653441</id>
	<title>Re:For animals yes,,, but...</title>
	<author>Maxo-Texas</author>
	<datestamp>1247256000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's because scorching hot females who like sex move to places like hollywood or palm beach or even go into business in some way (even if it is only as a vegas show girl).  And if you happen to hook up with them, they are likely to sleep around on you ( and not just women- attractive men also sleep around a lot ).  Hot women have different expectations of life-- just like people who are born and grow up rich.</p><p>They also have pretty severe defense mechanisms having been hit on and flattered since they were 13 by everyone.  Meanwhile, the more normal females who didn't get as much flattery are still open to it.  In a way, being pretty sucks because they have trouble accepting compliments.</p><p>Never got that lucky (or unlucky?) until I was in my late 30's.  And then I hooked up with a hotty who later turned out to have been a stripper back in her 20s and tho it was incredibly fun for 10 years, it ended as horrifically as you can imagine (maybe more so).  Before then, I'd have a decently average hot high school sweetheart (so I missed the whole bar scene/college party scene) and then a nicely hot dancing lady who was really sweet but had terminal religious problems with me (I'm not religious-- sometimes it would be easier if I was).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's because scorching hot females who like sex move to places like hollywood or palm beach or even go into business in some way ( even if it is only as a vegas show girl ) .
And if you happen to hook up with them , they are likely to sleep around on you ( and not just women- attractive men also sleep around a lot ) .
Hot women have different expectations of life-- just like people who are born and grow up rich.They also have pretty severe defense mechanisms having been hit on and flattered since they were 13 by everyone .
Meanwhile , the more normal females who did n't get as much flattery are still open to it .
In a way , being pretty sucks because they have trouble accepting compliments.Never got that lucky ( or unlucky ?
) until I was in my late 30 's .
And then I hooked up with a hotty who later turned out to have been a stripper back in her 20s and tho it was incredibly fun for 10 years , it ended as horrifically as you can imagine ( maybe more so ) .
Before then , I 'd have a decently average hot high school sweetheart ( so I missed the whole bar scene/college party scene ) and then a nicely hot dancing lady who was really sweet but had terminal religious problems with me ( I 'm not religious-- sometimes it would be easier if I was ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's because scorching hot females who like sex move to places like hollywood or palm beach or even go into business in some way (even if it is only as a vegas show girl).
And if you happen to hook up with them, they are likely to sleep around on you ( and not just women- attractive men also sleep around a lot ).
Hot women have different expectations of life-- just like people who are born and grow up rich.They also have pretty severe defense mechanisms having been hit on and flattered since they were 13 by everyone.
Meanwhile, the more normal females who didn't get as much flattery are still open to it.
In a way, being pretty sucks because they have trouble accepting compliments.Never got that lucky (or unlucky?
) until I was in my late 30's.
And then I hooked up with a hotty who later turned out to have been a stripper back in her 20s and tho it was incredibly fun for 10 years, it ended as horrifically as you can imagine (maybe more so).
Before then, I'd have a decently average hot high school sweetheart (so I missed the whole bar scene/college party scene) and then a nicely hot dancing lady who was really sweet but had terminal religious problems with me (I'm not religious-- sometimes it would be easier if I was).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652861</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654037</id>
	<title>Re:and what makes a female rat attractive?</title>
	<author>MBGMorden</author>
	<datestamp>1247258820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If I remember correctly based on one documentary I saw, symmetry plays a very large role in attractiveness.  I'm sure there are many other (possibly measurable?) factors that come into play, but the more symmetrical a person's face, figure, etc were, the more attractive others perceived them to be.  All in all it comes down to healthiness.  Being physically fit is associated with being healthy.  Symmetry is associated with being healthy.  Things like abnormal growths and the like are associated with being unhealthy.  Youth is also considered positively since younger people tend to be healthier than older ones (on average).  Even skill at dance or display is perceived to show health.</p><p>What it comes down to is at a subconscious level we have an instinct to sexually pursue those who we instinctively believe to be more likely to produce strong offspring and who will be best able to care for them.</p><p>This is also pretty much the reason for the uncanny valley in robotics.  There comes a point when a robot/android/etc looks human enough that we start to mentally process it much like we would a human, but the many "tells" that is has (blank emotionless stare, oddities in body movements, cryptic dialog) that rather than an innovative robot, we start to view it more like a human who as something very, very wrong with them.  It's simple instinct that we become repulsed by it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If I remember correctly based on one documentary I saw , symmetry plays a very large role in attractiveness .
I 'm sure there are many other ( possibly measurable ?
) factors that come into play , but the more symmetrical a person 's face , figure , etc were , the more attractive others perceived them to be .
All in all it comes down to healthiness .
Being physically fit is associated with being healthy .
Symmetry is associated with being healthy .
Things like abnormal growths and the like are associated with being unhealthy .
Youth is also considered positively since younger people tend to be healthier than older ones ( on average ) .
Even skill at dance or display is perceived to show health.What it comes down to is at a subconscious level we have an instinct to sexually pursue those who we instinctively believe to be more likely to produce strong offspring and who will be best able to care for them.This is also pretty much the reason for the uncanny valley in robotics .
There comes a point when a robot/android/etc looks human enough that we start to mentally process it much like we would a human , but the many " tells " that is has ( blank emotionless stare , oddities in body movements , cryptic dialog ) that rather than an innovative robot , we start to view it more like a human who as something very , very wrong with them .
It 's simple instinct that we become repulsed by it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If I remember correctly based on one documentary I saw, symmetry plays a very large role in attractiveness.
I'm sure there are many other (possibly measurable?
) factors that come into play, but the more symmetrical a person's face, figure, etc were, the more attractive others perceived them to be.
All in all it comes down to healthiness.
Being physically fit is associated with being healthy.
Symmetry is associated with being healthy.
Things like abnormal growths and the like are associated with being unhealthy.
Youth is also considered positively since younger people tend to be healthier than older ones (on average).
Even skill at dance or display is perceived to show health.What it comes down to is at a subconscious level we have an instinct to sexually pursue those who we instinctively believe to be more likely to produce strong offspring and who will be best able to care for them.This is also pretty much the reason for the uncanny valley in robotics.
There comes a point when a robot/android/etc looks human enough that we start to mentally process it much like we would a human, but the many "tells" that is has (blank emotionless stare, oddities in body movements, cryptic dialog) that rather than an innovative robot, we start to view it more like a human who as something very, very wrong with them.
It's simple instinct that we become repulsed by it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653117</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28663227</id>
	<title>Re:Research</title>
	<author>Zantetsuken</author>
	<datestamp>1247307120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You mean like <a href="http://xkcd.com/598/" title="xkcd.com">this</a> [xkcd.com]?</htmltext>
<tokenext>You mean like this [ xkcd.com ] ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You mean like this [xkcd.com]?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654569</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654113</id>
	<title>Re:For animals yes,,, but...</title>
	<author>CAIMLAS</author>
	<datestamp>1247259180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The results of this study are somewhat disturbing. For instance: how did they determine the attractiveness of non-human females?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The results of this study are somewhat disturbing .
For instance : how did they determine the attractiveness of non-human females ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The results of this study are somewhat disturbing.
For instance: how did they determine the attractiveness of non-human females?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652661</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28656283</id>
	<title>New Study: Beer makes sperm travel faster!</title>
	<author>randy of the redwood</author>
	<datestamp>1247230380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>If drinking makes women more attractive, and attractive women make sperm travel faster, it follows that...</htmltext>
<tokenext>If drinking makes women more attractive , and attractive women make sperm travel faster , it follows that.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If drinking makes women more attractive, and attractive women make sperm travel faster, it follows that...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652619</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28656927</id>
	<title>Re:From the department of duh?</title>
	<author>Degro</author>
	<datestamp>1247236560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Great, now semen displacement is in my google search history...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Great , now semen displacement is in my google search history.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Great, now semen displacement is in my google search history...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652933</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654695</id>
	<title>Re:Evolutionary bias?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247218800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You're confusing low cost with no cost. There's still a refractory period that depends in part on how much was "dispensed" in the last encounter. Since you don't necessarily know what will happen in your next encounter, or when it will occur, it makes sense to only go full out in cases that are more likely to result in high quality progeny.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're confusing low cost with no cost .
There 's still a refractory period that depends in part on how much was " dispensed " in the last encounter .
Since you do n't necessarily know what will happen in your next encounter , or when it will occur , it makes sense to only go full out in cases that are more likely to result in high quality progeny .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're confusing low cost with no cost.
There's still a refractory period that depends in part on how much was "dispensed" in the last encounter.
Since you don't necessarily know what will happen in your next encounter, or when it will occur, it makes sense to only go full out in cases that are more likely to result in high quality progeny.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653099</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28658471</id>
	<title>Re:Research</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247304960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If only this were true, there wouldn't be so many ugly mutant human beings in the world.<br>More than 95\% of the human population are ugly - i.e. mutants. In some countries it's 100\% (Somalia, Bangladesh, etc.)</p><p>Human beings use their brains to supply false information before and during mating- i.e. paedophiles fantasise about raping children while having sex with their wives, desperate sickos fantasise about attractive women while having sex with their ugly wives, etc. and go on to produce more and more fucked up, ugly children.</p><p>Just look at muslims, for a prime example...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If only this were true , there would n't be so many ugly mutant human beings in the world.More than 95 \ % of the human population are ugly - i.e .
mutants. In some countries it 's 100 \ % ( Somalia , Bangladesh , etc .
) Human beings use their brains to supply false information before and during mating- i.e .
paedophiles fantasise about raping children while having sex with their wives , desperate sickos fantasise about attractive women while having sex with their ugly wives , etc .
and go on to produce more and more fucked up , ugly children.Just look at muslims , for a prime example.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If only this were true, there wouldn't be so many ugly mutant human beings in the world.More than 95\% of the human population are ugly - i.e.
mutants. In some countries it's 100\% (Somalia, Bangladesh, etc.
)Human beings use their brains to supply false information before and during mating- i.e.
paedophiles fantasise about raping children while having sex with their wives, desperate sickos fantasise about attractive women while having sex with their ugly wives, etc.
and go on to produce more and more fucked up, ugly children.Just look at muslims, for a prime example...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652619</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653743</id>
	<title>Re:lol</title>
	<author>Doug52392</author>
	<datestamp>1247257260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well, this IS useless information in my book.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , this IS useless information in my book .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, this IS useless information in my book.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652741</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653835</id>
	<title>Re:For animals yes,,, but...</title>
	<author>blahplusplus</author>
	<datestamp>1247257800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Also... one can be turned on just as much by other things (porn) and it doesn't necessarily have to be an attractive female, just something that really turns you on.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Also... one can be turned on just as much by other things ( porn ) and it does n't necessarily have to be an attractive female , just something that really turns you on .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Also... one can be turned on just as much by other things (porn) and it doesn't necessarily have to be an attractive female, just something that really turns you on.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652961</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28656701</id>
	<title>Re:HUH?</title>
	<author>thePowerOfGrayskull</author>
	<datestamp>1247234100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's so fun when fellow slashdottians pretend like we can get girls if we only just wanted to.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's so fun when fellow slashdottians pretend like we can get girls if we only just wanted to .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's so fun when fellow slashdottians pretend like we can get girls if we only just wanted to.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652631</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653891</id>
	<title>Re:This is bad</title>
	<author>greywire</author>
	<datestamp>1247258040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That would explain why I have three kids then, I guess.</p><p>Interestingly, I've noticed, with mine and other similarly mismatched couples (that is, ugly dude and attractive mom), the kids usually come out really cute.  Of course, thats just useless anecdotal evidence, but still...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That would explain why I have three kids then , I guess.Interestingly , I 've noticed , with mine and other similarly mismatched couples ( that is , ugly dude and attractive mom ) , the kids usually come out really cute .
Of course , thats just useless anecdotal evidence , but still.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That would explain why I have three kids then, I guess.Interestingly, I've noticed, with mine and other similarly mismatched couples (that is, ugly dude and attractive mom), the kids usually come out really cute.
Of course, thats just useless anecdotal evidence, but still...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652849</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653983</id>
	<title>Cross-cultural attactiveness studies?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247258520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Haven't they done cross-cultural studies that tie attractiveness to specific physical characteristics that appear linked to successful child bearing &amp; rearing?  Specific bust/waist ratios, etc?  Wouldn't it make some kind of sense that the body would invest more resources in a reproductive partner though to be a better child bearer?</p><p>The study *I* want to read isn't "Why do hot girls get fucked more?" --- we know that, but we don't know why we put up with all the narcissism and bitchy attitude for the nominal improvement in sex and a palpable dent in our wallets.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Have n't they done cross-cultural studies that tie attractiveness to specific physical characteristics that appear linked to successful child bearing &amp; rearing ?
Specific bust/waist ratios , etc ?
Would n't it make some kind of sense that the body would invest more resources in a reproductive partner though to be a better child bearer ? The study * I * want to read is n't " Why do hot girls get fucked more ?
" --- we know that , but we do n't know why we put up with all the narcissism and bitchy attitude for the nominal improvement in sex and a palpable dent in our wallets .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Haven't they done cross-cultural studies that tie attractiveness to specific physical characteristics that appear linked to successful child bearing &amp; rearing?
Specific bust/waist ratios, etc?
Wouldn't it make some kind of sense that the body would invest more resources in a reproductive partner though to be a better child bearer?The study *I* want to read isn't "Why do hot girls get fucked more?
" --- we know that, but we don't know why we put up with all the narcissism and bitchy attitude for the nominal improvement in sex and a palpable dent in our wallets.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653247</id>
	<title>More Seminal Fluid == Male Thinks Woman is Hot?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247255220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Thus, Peter North thinks every single woman is a total babe.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Thus , Peter North thinks every single woman is a total babe .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Thus, Peter North thinks every single woman is a total babe.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652661</id>
	<title>For animals yes,,, but...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247253060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... I can see a problem with this study if applying it's conclusions to people. I imagine the amount of sperm has to do more with being extremely turned on and not just attractiveness, you can be with a beautiful girl and not be that turned on because you don't get along that well, and you can be with an average girl who you connect with on a fundamental level that turns you on way more then the prettier girl.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... I can see a problem with this study if applying it 's conclusions to people .
I imagine the amount of sperm has to do more with being extremely turned on and not just attractiveness , you can be with a beautiful girl and not be that turned on because you do n't get along that well , and you can be with an average girl who you connect with on a fundamental level that turns you on way more then the prettier girl .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... I can see a problem with this study if applying it's conclusions to people.
I imagine the amount of sperm has to do more with being extremely turned on and not just attractiveness, you can be with a beautiful girl and not be that turned on because you don't get along that well, and you can be with an average girl who you connect with on a fundamental level that turns you on way more then the prettier girl.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653583</id>
	<title>Doing the Dog</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247256540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In my younger days, quantity was more important and I would often "do the dog".  This had several advantages.  They were eager because they didn't get much attention paid to them.  So not much work (or money) was needed to woo them.  They would also be eager to please and would do things that the hot girls wouldn't  (think swallow).  Now I find that there was another great reason for doing the dog.  My swimmers weren't as eager and it saved me a lot of child support money.</p><p>Yes, I am old enough to remember going bareback and not worrying (or even knowing) about AIDS.  It is a different world now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In my younger days , quantity was more important and I would often " do the dog " .
This had several advantages .
They were eager because they did n't get much attention paid to them .
So not much work ( or money ) was needed to woo them .
They would also be eager to please and would do things that the hot girls would n't ( think swallow ) .
Now I find that there was another great reason for doing the dog .
My swimmers were n't as eager and it saved me a lot of child support money.Yes , I am old enough to remember going bareback and not worrying ( or even knowing ) about AIDS .
It is a different world now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In my younger days, quantity was more important and I would often "do the dog".
This had several advantages.
They were eager because they didn't get much attention paid to them.
So not much work (or money) was needed to woo them.
They would also be eager to please and would do things that the hot girls wouldn't  (think swallow).
Now I find that there was another great reason for doing the dog.
My swimmers weren't as eager and it saved me a lot of child support money.Yes, I am old enough to remember going bareback and not worrying (or even knowing) about AIDS.
It is a different world now.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652619</id>
	<title>Research</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247252880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've actually done some research on this aswell. On majority of times when I found a good clip, I had to clean my monitor. This didn't happen when the clip was bad or the women on it unattractive. Hmm, wonder where they sell speedometers...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've actually done some research on this aswell .
On majority of times when I found a good clip , I had to clean my monitor .
This did n't happen when the clip was bad or the women on it unattractive .
Hmm , wonder where they sell speedometers.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've actually done some research on this aswell.
On majority of times when I found a good clip, I had to clean my monitor.
This didn't happen when the clip was bad or the women on it unattractive.
Hmm, wonder where they sell speedometers...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653993</id>
	<title>Re:Evolutionary bias?</title>
	<author>greywire</author>
	<datestamp>1247258580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What occurs to me is that this in some sense promotes the idea that humans are not meant to be monogamous (or at least the males arent).  Because holding back means you are saving it for the next, potentially more attractive mate.  Otherwise, why not give it your all each time?</p><p>I'd like to see this correlated with married men, single men, and married but cheating on their wives, to see if that changes anything..</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What occurs to me is that this in some sense promotes the idea that humans are not meant to be monogamous ( or at least the males arent ) .
Because holding back means you are saving it for the next , potentially more attractive mate .
Otherwise , why not give it your all each time ? I 'd like to see this correlated with married men , single men , and married but cheating on their wives , to see if that changes anything. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What occurs to me is that this in some sense promotes the idea that humans are not meant to be monogamous (or at least the males arent).
Because holding back means you are saving it for the next, potentially more attractive mate.
Otherwise, why not give it your all each time?I'd like to see this correlated with married men, single men, and married but cheating on their wives, to see if that changes anything..</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653099</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654077</id>
	<title>Re:HUH?</title>
	<author>cayenne8</author>
	<datestamp>1247259000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That type of talk always brings to mind the moped/fat chick analogy.....</htmltext>
<tokenext>That type of talk always brings to mind the moped/fat chick analogy.... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That type of talk always brings to mind the moped/fat chick analogy.....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653529</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653333</id>
	<title>Re:For animals yes,,, but...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247255640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Who says that only humans experience more than physical beauty or anything for that matter.</p><p>Animals have deeper relationships than that (maybe not the little ground hogs i saw in a group orgy at the zoo once) but I know many animals use sounds, feeling, and can distigishly clearly one individual from another by memory/experiences and more than just how they visually precieve them.</p><p>What's the difference?  Just because you can understand a human trying to describe an emotion doesn't mean they are special.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Who says that only humans experience more than physical beauty or anything for that matter.Animals have deeper relationships than that ( maybe not the little ground hogs i saw in a group orgy at the zoo once ) but I know many animals use sounds , feeling , and can distigishly clearly one individual from another by memory/experiences and more than just how they visually precieve them.What 's the difference ?
Just because you can understand a human trying to describe an emotion does n't mean they are special .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who says that only humans experience more than physical beauty or anything for that matter.Animals have deeper relationships than that (maybe not the little ground hogs i saw in a group orgy at the zoo once) but I know many animals use sounds, feeling, and can distigishly clearly one individual from another by memory/experiences and more than just how they visually precieve them.What's the difference?
Just because you can understand a human trying to describe an emotion doesn't mean they are special.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652961</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28655107</id>
	<title>Being a good looking guy in college</title>
	<author>Il128</author>
	<datestamp>1247221380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I was doing it five times a day...  The poor girl getting the end of day encounter got a thimble full no matter how good looking she was or wasn't.  The morning girl always got a full two table spoons<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...
-Truth</htmltext>
<tokenext>I was doing it five times a day... The poor girl getting the end of day encounter got a thimble full no matter how good looking she was or was n't .
The morning girl always got a full two table spoons .. . -Truth</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was doing it five times a day...  The poor girl getting the end of day encounter got a thimble full no matter how good looking she was or wasn't.
The morning girl always got a full two table spoons ...
-Truth</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654825</id>
	<title>Re:lol</title>
	<author>steelfood</author>
	<datestamp>1247219640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, I have experienced this numerous times in the past, so it certainly is not news.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , I have experienced this numerous times in the past , so it certainly is not news .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, I have experienced this numerous times in the past, so it certainly is not news.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652741</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652939</id>
	<title>Wonder if this will work.</title>
	<author>wilburx</author>
	<datestamp>1247254020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Don't worry, I don't need to pull out because you're ugly.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't worry , I do n't need to pull out because you 're ugly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't worry, I don't need to pull out because you're ugly.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28655097</id>
	<title>If she's very, very attractive</title>
	<author>reboot246</author>
	<datestamp>1247221320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>sometimes the sperm are in such a damned hurry that you don't even have time to get inside.</htmltext>
<tokenext>sometimes the sperm are in such a damned hurry that you do n't even have time to get inside .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>sometimes the sperm are in such a damned hurry that you don't even have time to get inside.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653183</id>
	<title>Re:Doesn't make sense</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247255040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In the UK it was reported as ugly men, due to getting laid less, shoot more sperm, increasing chance of copulation in the rare times they get sex. Attractive men, getting laid more often, have low sperm counts per encounter because they're spreading the seed around.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In the UK it was reported as ugly men , due to getting laid less , shoot more sperm , increasing chance of copulation in the rare times they get sex .
Attractive men , getting laid more often , have low sperm counts per encounter because they 're spreading the seed around .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In the UK it was reported as ugly men, due to getting laid less, shoot more sperm, increasing chance of copulation in the rare times they get sex.
Attractive men, getting laid more often, have low sperm counts per encounter because they're spreading the seed around.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652955</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654599</id>
	<title>Re:and what makes a female rat attractive?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247218320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This seems like a rather easy issue.  Measure the pheromone/hormone/endorphine/etc. levels of the male when he has solo time with no visual aids.  Then measure the levels when he has sex with multiple different people.  The higher the levels the more "attracted" he would be.  Then you just need to measure the motility...or I guess the projection distance depending upon the exit vector.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This seems like a rather easy issue .
Measure the pheromone/hormone/endorphine/etc .
levels of the male when he has solo time with no visual aids .
Then measure the levels when he has sex with multiple different people .
The higher the levels the more " attracted " he would be .
Then you just need to measure the motility...or I guess the projection distance depending upon the exit vector .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This seems like a rather easy issue.
Measure the pheromone/hormone/endorphine/etc.
levels of the male when he has solo time with no visual aids.
Then measure the levels when he has sex with multiple different people.
The higher the levels the more "attracted" he would be.
Then you just need to measure the motility...or I guess the projection distance depending upon the exit vector.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653117</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653467</id>
	<title>Nice Icon</title>
	<author>Joe Snipe</author>
	<datestamp>1247256120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I cant believe<nobr> <wbr></nobr>./ has that graphic, but not the Ubuntu graphic</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I cant believe ./ has that graphic , but not the Ubuntu graphic</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I cant believe ./ has that graphic, but not the Ubuntu graphic</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652781</id>
	<title>Re:HUH?</title>
	<author>spun</author>
	<datestamp>1247253480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why would a (more than likely) rotund, homely, socially awkward nerd who (more often than not) smells of cheetos and flop sweat be in there with an ugly girl? I can't even begin to guess.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why would a ( more than likely ) rotund , homely , socially awkward nerd who ( more often than not ) smells of cheetos and flop sweat be in there with an ugly girl ?
I ca n't even begin to guess .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why would a (more than likely) rotund, homely, socially awkward nerd who (more often than not) smells of cheetos and flop sweat be in there with an ugly girl?
I can't even begin to guess.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652631</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653873</id>
	<title>uh yea.....</title>
	<author>johnnyR</author>
	<datestamp>1247257980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sperm Travels Faster Toward Attractive Females</p><p>NO DUH!!!! I mean geez, come on of course it does!!!!  hehe I said come...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sperm Travels Faster Toward Attractive FemalesNO DUH ! ! ! !
I mean geez , come on of course it does ! ! ! !
hehe I said come.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sperm Travels Faster Toward Attractive FemalesNO DUH!!!!
I mean geez, come on of course it does!!!!
hehe I said come...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28656829</id>
	<title>Some open questions</title>
	<author>vikstar</author>
	<datestamp>1247235300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>1) How did they judge the sexiness/hotness of fish? Did one of the scientist's say "Whoa! Look at her dorsal fin! This one's super sexy, throw her into the tank". Perhaps the male fish went for the ugly and easily accessible ones, and the sperm traveled faster in those?<br>2) How is this supposed to have anything to do with humans?<br>3) Why didn't Discovery News elaborate on the methods?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>1 ) How did they judge the sexiness/hotness of fish ?
Did one of the scientist 's say " Whoa !
Look at her dorsal fin !
This one 's super sexy , throw her into the tank " .
Perhaps the male fish went for the ugly and easily accessible ones , and the sperm traveled faster in those ? 2 ) How is this supposed to have anything to do with humans ? 3 ) Why did n't Discovery News elaborate on the methods ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1) How did they judge the sexiness/hotness of fish?
Did one of the scientist's say "Whoa!
Look at her dorsal fin!
This one's super sexy, throw her into the tank".
Perhaps the male fish went for the ugly and easily accessible ones, and the sperm traveled faster in those?2) How is this supposed to have anything to do with humans?3) Why didn't Discovery News elaborate on the methods?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28656899</id>
	<title>Re:From the department of duh?</title>
	<author>DNS-and-BIND</author>
	<datestamp>1247236320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Don't worry - after you have a child, it will become the focus of your life.  Love from your husband will become a distant second, and sex will be an unwanted chore.  After childbearing, women go through changes and find sex rather uninteresting...think about how a young boy likes toys and candy, and then loses interest when he gets hair on his balls and starts noticing girls.  Same thing with women and kids.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't worry - after you have a child , it will become the focus of your life .
Love from your husband will become a distant second , and sex will be an unwanted chore .
After childbearing , women go through changes and find sex rather uninteresting...think about how a young boy likes toys and candy , and then loses interest when he gets hair on his balls and starts noticing girls .
Same thing with women and kids .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't worry - after you have a child, it will become the focus of your life.
Love from your husband will become a distant second, and sex will be an unwanted chore.
After childbearing, women go through changes and find sex rather uninteresting...think about how a young boy likes toys and candy, and then loses interest when he gets hair on his balls and starts noticing girls.
Same thing with women and kids.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652933</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28661027</id>
	<title>You have to ask for what you want</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247334000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You have to ask for what you want. Really, you do. This is true in general, but it is specially true for sex, because men and women want different things when they have sex.</p><p>Inexperienced women typically don't understand this, and are bitterly disappointed when their boyfriends don't give them what they want. Inexperienced men typically don't understand this, and are blindsided and bewildered when their girlfriends aren't happy with what they give them.</p><p>I gained my experience in these matters through many long, painful, and sometimes tearful fights--arguments--discussions. You could short-circuit this process by telling your boyfriends, directly and explicitly, what you want.</p><p>If you choose to go this route, keep in mind that men are not subtle, and don't understand hints. The old joke about the mule applies: hit 'em over the head with a 2 by 4 to get their attention, then speak very gently to them.</p><p>All I Really Need To Know I Learned Watching \_Married With Children\_</p><p>(Bud and an unidentified girl are sitting on the sofa. Bud is wearing jeans, sneakers, and a nondescript shirt. The girl is wearing a mini-skirt, crop top, high heels, tousled hair, and heavy makeup.)</p><p>Bud: (hopefully) So, you want to, like, do something?</p><p>Girl: (arms folded, scowling) I want to get fed, and I'm not riding on a bus.</p><p>(Bud stands and walks over to his father.)</p><p>Bud: (urgently) Hey, Dad! I need 20 bucks.</p><p>Al: (looks at girl; grimaces) But son, she's a tramp!</p><p>Bud: (nods eagerly)</p><p>Al: (smiles approvingly; gives Bud $20)</p><p>The girl will get what she asked for, Bud will probably get what he wants, and that's about as good as it gets for anyone in this life.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You have to ask for what you want .
Really , you do .
This is true in general , but it is specially true for sex , because men and women want different things when they have sex.Inexperienced women typically do n't understand this , and are bitterly disappointed when their boyfriends do n't give them what they want .
Inexperienced men typically do n't understand this , and are blindsided and bewildered when their girlfriends are n't happy with what they give them.I gained my experience in these matters through many long , painful , and sometimes tearful fights--arguments--discussions .
You could short-circuit this process by telling your boyfriends , directly and explicitly , what you want.If you choose to go this route , keep in mind that men are not subtle , and do n't understand hints .
The old joke about the mule applies : hit 'em over the head with a 2 by 4 to get their attention , then speak very gently to them.All I Really Need To Know I Learned Watching \ _Married With Children \ _ ( Bud and an unidentified girl are sitting on the sofa .
Bud is wearing jeans , sneakers , and a nondescript shirt .
The girl is wearing a mini-skirt , crop top , high heels , tousled hair , and heavy makeup .
) Bud : ( hopefully ) So , you want to , like , do something ? Girl : ( arms folded , scowling ) I want to get fed , and I 'm not riding on a bus .
( Bud stands and walks over to his father .
) Bud : ( urgently ) Hey , Dad !
I need 20 bucks.Al : ( looks at girl ; grimaces ) But son , she 's a tramp ! Bud : ( nods eagerly ) Al : ( smiles approvingly ; gives Bud $ 20 ) The girl will get what she asked for , Bud will probably get what he wants , and that 's about as good as it gets for anyone in this life .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You have to ask for what you want.
Really, you do.
This is true in general, but it is specially true for sex, because men and women want different things when they have sex.Inexperienced women typically don't understand this, and are bitterly disappointed when their boyfriends don't give them what they want.
Inexperienced men typically don't understand this, and are blindsided and bewildered when their girlfriends aren't happy with what they give them.I gained my experience in these matters through many long, painful, and sometimes tearful fights--arguments--discussions.
You could short-circuit this process by telling your boyfriends, directly and explicitly, what you want.If you choose to go this route, keep in mind that men are not subtle, and don't understand hints.
The old joke about the mule applies: hit 'em over the head with a 2 by 4 to get their attention, then speak very gently to them.All I Really Need To Know I Learned Watching \_Married With Children\_(Bud and an unidentified girl are sitting on the sofa.
Bud is wearing jeans, sneakers, and a nondescript shirt.
The girl is wearing a mini-skirt, crop top, high heels, tousled hair, and heavy makeup.
)Bud: (hopefully) So, you want to, like, do something?Girl: (arms folded, scowling) I want to get fed, and I'm not riding on a bus.
(Bud stands and walks over to his father.
)Bud: (urgently) Hey, Dad!
I need 20 bucks.Al: (looks at girl; grimaces) But son, she's a tramp!Bud: (nods eagerly)Al: (smiles approvingly; gives Bud $20)The girl will get what she asked for, Bud will probably get what he wants, and that's about as good as it gets for anyone in this life.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652933</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654423</id>
	<title>Re:and what makes a female rat attractive?</title>
	<author>Mr2001</author>
	<datestamp>1247217360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>A bust:waist:hip ratio of 3 to 2 to 3 (in humans, 36-24-36)</p></div><p>Heh. Maybe if she's 5'3".</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>A bust : waist : hip ratio of 3 to 2 to 3 ( in humans , 36-24-36 ) Heh .
Maybe if she 's 5'3 " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A bust:waist:hip ratio of 3 to 2 to 3 (in humans, 36-24-36)Heh.
Maybe if she's 5'3".
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653681</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652815</id>
	<title>HE SHOOTS!</title>
	<author>Philip K Dickhead</author>
	<datestamp>1247253600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>HE SCORES!</p><p>Or vice versa, if I read the article correctly...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>HE SCORES ! Or vice versa , if I read the article correctly.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>HE SCORES!Or vice versa, if I read the article correctly...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652619</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28655753</id>
	<title>Re:Some sperm will even find you in a pool..</title>
	<author>DigiShaman</author>
	<datestamp>1247226180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ya, I all BS on that.</p><p>Even if the pool wasn't chlorinated, the probability of getting pregnant by a few stray sperm is so astronomically high, it might as well be called immaculate conception.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ya , I all BS on that.Even if the pool was n't chlorinated , the probability of getting pregnant by a few stray sperm is so astronomically high , it might as well be called immaculate conception .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ya, I all BS on that.Even if the pool wasn't chlorinated, the probability of getting pregnant by a few stray sperm is so astronomically high, it might as well be called immaculate conception.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653041</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28662777</id>
	<title>Sperm Conversation</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247303520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sperm 1: Do we arrive soon?<br>Sperm 2: No, we only just passed the tonsils.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sperm 1 : Do we arrive soon ? Sperm 2 : No , we only just passed the tonsils .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sperm 1: Do we arrive soon?Sperm 2: No, we only just passed the tonsils.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653519</id>
	<title>Re:Evolutionary bias?</title>
	<author>MaWeiTao</author>
	<datestamp>1247256360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What I suspect is meant by an attractive woman is someone with nice hips and ample breasts, meaning the appropriate qualities for child-bearing. However, because of humanity's appreciation for aesthetic qualities other factors may come into play. I also think that popular culture was twisted what men find attractive so that guys end up going for woman who are overly plasticky or, at the other extreme, thin as toothpicks.</p><p>I think there is probably a general template for what is considered attractive, but certainly there are specific characteristics that are more appealing in some cultures. And again, I think popular culture has turned beauty into a caricature.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What I suspect is meant by an attractive woman is someone with nice hips and ample breasts , meaning the appropriate qualities for child-bearing .
However , because of humanity 's appreciation for aesthetic qualities other factors may come into play .
I also think that popular culture was twisted what men find attractive so that guys end up going for woman who are overly plasticky or , at the other extreme , thin as toothpicks.I think there is probably a general template for what is considered attractive , but certainly there are specific characteristics that are more appealing in some cultures .
And again , I think popular culture has turned beauty into a caricature .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What I suspect is meant by an attractive woman is someone with nice hips and ample breasts, meaning the appropriate qualities for child-bearing.
However, because of humanity's appreciation for aesthetic qualities other factors may come into play.
I also think that popular culture was twisted what men find attractive so that guys end up going for woman who are overly plasticky or, at the other extreme, thin as toothpicks.I think there is probably a general template for what is considered attractive, but certainly there are specific characteristics that are more appealing in some cultures.
And again, I think popular culture has turned beauty into a caricature.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653099</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653385</id>
	<title>I saw, I came...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247255880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I conquered?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I conquered ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I conquered?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653041</id>
	<title>Some sperm will even find you in a pool..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247254380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That is, if you are a <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1198596/My-daughter-13-got-pregnant-using-hotel-swimming-pool-claims-mother.html?ITO=1490" title="dailymail.co.uk" rel="nofollow">13 year old</a> [dailymail.co.uk] "virgin".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That is , if you are a 13 year old [ dailymail.co.uk ] " virgin " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That is, if you are a 13 year old [dailymail.co.uk] "virgin".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653371</id>
	<title>The more important subtext of this study</title>
	<author>raddan</author>
	<datestamp>1247255820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>is that men will have sex with women that they <em>don't</em> find attractive.
<br> <br>
Of course, this fact may only be surprising to you if you are not a man.</htmltext>
<tokenext>is that men will have sex with women that they do n't find attractive .
Of course , this fact may only be surprising to you if you are not a man .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>is that men will have sex with women that they don't find attractive.
Of course, this fact may only be surprising to you if you are not a man.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28655079</id>
	<title>Re:Doing the Dog</title>
	<author>MindlessAutomata</author>
	<datestamp>1247221140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I "did the dog" once.  Never again.  Fleas everywhere.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I " did the dog " once .
Never again .
Fleas everywhere .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I "did the dog" once.
Never again.
Fleas everywhere.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653583</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28655685</id>
	<title>Re:This is bad</title>
	<author>Shemmie</author>
	<datestamp>1247225760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Combined with <a href="http://www.ucl.ac.uk/news/news-articles/0907/09070902" title="ucl.ac.uk">this research</a> [ucl.ac.uk], which shows that ugly men release more sperm, the chance of conception appears to be highest when a stunningly attractive woman sleeps with an truly ugly man.</p></div><p>
THANK YOU GOD!!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Combined with this research [ ucl.ac.uk ] , which shows that ugly men release more sperm , the chance of conception appears to be highest when a stunningly attractive woman sleeps with an truly ugly man .
THANK YOU GOD !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Combined with this research [ucl.ac.uk], which shows that ugly men release more sperm, the chance of conception appears to be highest when a stunningly attractive woman sleeps with an truly ugly man.
THANK YOU GOD!
!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652849</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654623</id>
	<title>Re:From the department of duh?</title>
	<author>bitt3n</author>
	<datestamp>1247218380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I find the best way to remove a bra is to make sure that things are moving smoothly and then say, "Lose the bra".</p></div><p>I prefer to use that as a pickup line. To each his own I guess.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I find the best way to remove a bra is to make sure that things are moving smoothly and then say , " Lose the bra " .I prefer to use that as a pickup line .
To each his own I guess .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I find the best way to remove a bra is to make sure that things are moving smoothly and then say, "Lose the bra".I prefer to use that as a pickup line.
To each his own I guess.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653267</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653141</id>
	<title>In other words...</title>
	<author>Ragnarok21</author>
	<datestamp>1247254800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...drink until she's cute, but stop before the wedding.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...drink until she 's cute , but stop before the wedding .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...drink until she's cute, but stop before the wedding.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652631</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653233</id>
	<title>Re:For animals yes,,, but...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247255160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Maybe I was smoking something before that one class but I clearly remember humans being classified in the animal kingdom.</p><p>At least I can't punch a hole in this definition to think otherwise....</p><p>"any member of the kingdom Animalia, comprising multicellular organisms that have a well-defined shape and usually limited growth, can move voluntarily, actively acquire food and digest it internally, and have sensory and nervous systems that allow them to respond rapidly to stimuli: some classification schemes also include protozoa and certain other single-celled eukaryotes that have motility and animal like nutrition modes"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe I was smoking something before that one class but I clearly remember humans being classified in the animal kingdom.At least I ca n't punch a hole in this definition to think otherwise.... " any member of the kingdom Animalia , comprising multicellular organisms that have a well-defined shape and usually limited growth , can move voluntarily , actively acquire food and digest it internally , and have sensory and nervous systems that allow them to respond rapidly to stimuli : some classification schemes also include protozoa and certain other single-celled eukaryotes that have motility and animal like nutrition modes "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe I was smoking something before that one class but I clearly remember humans being classified in the animal kingdom.At least I can't punch a hole in this definition to think otherwise...."any member of the kingdom Animalia, comprising multicellular organisms that have a well-defined shape and usually limited growth, can move voluntarily, actively acquire food and digest it internally, and have sensory and nervous systems that allow them to respond rapidly to stimuli: some classification schemes also include protozoa and certain other single-celled eukaryotes that have motility and animal like nutrition modes"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652661</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654567</id>
	<title>Re:This is bad</title>
	<author>Basilius</author>
	<datestamp>1247218140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Combined with <a href="http://www.ucl.ac.uk/news/news-articles/0907/09070902" title="ucl.ac.uk">this research</a> [ucl.ac.uk], which shows that ugly men release more sperm, the chance of conception appears to be highest when a stunningly attractive woman sleeps with an truly ugly man. Somebody please think of the children.</p></div><p>Or, given the odds of that, we may just need to think of the child.</p><p>We've already had Christine Brinkley/Billy Joel.</p><p>Odds of another truly ugly man overchicking that much?  Very small.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Combined with this research [ ucl.ac.uk ] , which shows that ugly men release more sperm , the chance of conception appears to be highest when a stunningly attractive woman sleeps with an truly ugly man .
Somebody please think of the children.Or , given the odds of that , we may just need to think of the child.We 've already had Christine Brinkley/Billy Joel.Odds of another truly ugly man overchicking that much ?
Very small .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Combined with this research [ucl.ac.uk], which shows that ugly men release more sperm, the chance of conception appears to be highest when a stunningly attractive woman sleeps with an truly ugly man.
Somebody please think of the children.Or, given the odds of that, we may just need to think of the child.We've already had Christine Brinkley/Billy Joel.Odds of another truly ugly man overchicking that much?
Very small.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652849</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654153</id>
	<title>Re:From the department of duh?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247259300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>But really people, is it so freaking hard to just take us out to dinner, kiss our neck afterwords in an intimate and quiet environment, and actually DO the foreplay (and for those in longer-term relationships, not have it become formulaic?)</p></div><p>Apparently it's really freaking hard for most guys, based on the difficulty many women seem to have in finding guys that meet those criteria.  That said, it's apparently also really freaking hard for many women to show the same level of respect for men's similarly simple expectations.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>But really people , is it so freaking hard to just take us out to dinner , kiss our neck afterwords in an intimate and quiet environment , and actually DO the foreplay ( and for those in longer-term relationships , not have it become formulaic ?
) Apparently it 's really freaking hard for most guys , based on the difficulty many women seem to have in finding guys that meet those criteria .
That said , it 's apparently also really freaking hard for many women to show the same level of respect for men 's similarly simple expectations .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But really people, is it so freaking hard to just take us out to dinner, kiss our neck afterwords in an intimate and quiet environment, and actually DO the foreplay (and for those in longer-term relationships, not have it become formulaic?
)Apparently it's really freaking hard for most guys, based on the difficulty many women seem to have in finding guys that meet those criteria.
That said, it's apparently also really freaking hard for many women to show the same level of respect for men's similarly simple expectations.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652933</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653071</id>
	<title>if you are talking ejaculate volume</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247254500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>in the animal kingdom and in humans, you need to talk about testicle size</p><p>testicle size is a very good indicator of how monogamous females are. for example, chimpanzee females are very promiscuous. therefore, male chimpanzees have huge testicles. why? well, if the idea is you have to leave some offspring in this world, the only valid route you can take to ensure that with promiscuous females is to have a huge ejaculate load, to literally flood out competing males' sperm</p><p>it follows then that attractive females, with more frequent mating possibilities, require more "output" to ensure your reproductive success. so, biologically, it may not be a matter of aesthetic pleasure leading to greater sperm volume, but simply a matter of fear: you need to dump a huge load to make sure your sperm outcompetes all the other mating opportunities an attractive female can command</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>in the animal kingdom and in humans , you need to talk about testicle sizetesticle size is a very good indicator of how monogamous females are .
for example , chimpanzee females are very promiscuous .
therefore , male chimpanzees have huge testicles .
why ? well , if the idea is you have to leave some offspring in this world , the only valid route you can take to ensure that with promiscuous females is to have a huge ejaculate load , to literally flood out competing males ' spermit follows then that attractive females , with more frequent mating possibilities , require more " output " to ensure your reproductive success .
so , biologically , it may not be a matter of aesthetic pleasure leading to greater sperm volume , but simply a matter of fear : you need to dump a huge load to make sure your sperm outcompetes all the other mating opportunities an attractive female can command</tokentext>
<sentencetext>in the animal kingdom and in humans, you need to talk about testicle sizetesticle size is a very good indicator of how monogamous females are.
for example, chimpanzee females are very promiscuous.
therefore, male chimpanzees have huge testicles.
why? well, if the idea is you have to leave some offspring in this world, the only valid route you can take to ensure that with promiscuous females is to have a huge ejaculate load, to literally flood out competing males' spermit follows then that attractive females, with more frequent mating possibilities, require more "output" to ensure your reproductive success.
so, biologically, it may not be a matter of aesthetic pleasure leading to greater sperm volume, but simply a matter of fear: you need to dump a huge load to make sure your sperm outcompetes all the other mating opportunities an attractive female can command</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28657285</id>
	<title>Does this mean that if I Shagged Paris Hilton,</title>
	<author>darkonc</author>
	<datestamp>1247240940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>that my sperm would run backwards???</htmltext>
<tokenext>that my sperm would run backwards ? ?
?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>that my sperm would run backwards??
?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654259</id>
	<title>Re:Research</title>
	<author>clone53421</author>
	<datestamp>1247216700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I was going to respond to this story and point out that the title should probably read "Sperm travels faster INSIDE attractive females", but in your case it's probably better as it was originally put.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I was going to respond to this story and point out that the title should probably read " Sperm travels faster INSIDE attractive females " , but in your case it 's probably better as it was originally put .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was going to respond to this story and point out that the title should probably read "Sperm travels faster INSIDE attractive females", but in your case it's probably better as it was originally put.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652619</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653267</id>
	<title>Re:From the department of duh?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247255340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>But really people, is it so freaking hard to just take us out to dinner, kiss our neck afterwords in an intimate and quiet environment, and actually DO the foreplay (and for those in longer-term relationships, not have it become formulaic?)</p></div><p>That goes both ways (<b>especially</b> if you're talking about a long term relationship).  We guys accept the duty of keeping things interesting, but chicks have to play too if things are going to keep going well after a decade into the relationship.  But I agree - Mood &gt;&gt; biological process.  There is very little less sexy to a guy than a chick that just wants to score a baby.  Ugh - I'd rather fly solo, thanks.</p><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr></p><div class="quote"><p>...<i>They can tell me down to the molecular level how conception works, but they can't even get the damn condom out of the wrapper and a bra off without completely ruining it...</i> </p></div><p>Again, it all comes down to mood.  I find the best way to remove a bra is to make sure that things are moving smoothly and then say, "Lose the bra".  Beats even the 1-handed Fonzie-level-cool maneuver and, assuming that the environment is right, can actually warm things up.  (<i>Of course, that is not always appropriate and a guy should be prepared to adjust.</i>)</p><p>On topic, though, I can personally testify that a guy who is thoroughly turned on and has been for a while will, um, launch much more thoroughly and with more velocity than somebody who's just going through the motions.</p><p>Wow - WTF is this discussion doing on slashdot?!?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>But really people , is it so freaking hard to just take us out to dinner , kiss our neck afterwords in an intimate and quiet environment , and actually DO the foreplay ( and for those in longer-term relationships , not have it become formulaic ?
) That goes both ways ( especially if you 're talking about a long term relationship ) .
We guys accept the duty of keeping things interesting , but chicks have to play too if things are going to keep going well after a decade into the relationship .
But I agree - Mood &gt; &gt; biological process .
There is very little less sexy to a guy than a chick that just wants to score a baby .
Ugh - I 'd rather fly solo , thanks .
...They can tell me down to the molecular level how conception works , but they ca n't even get the damn condom out of the wrapper and a bra off without completely ruining it... Again , it all comes down to mood .
I find the best way to remove a bra is to make sure that things are moving smoothly and then say , " Lose the bra " .
Beats even the 1-handed Fonzie-level-cool maneuver and , assuming that the environment is right , can actually warm things up .
( Of course , that is not always appropriate and a guy should be prepared to adjust .
) On topic , though , I can personally testify that a guy who is thoroughly turned on and has been for a while will , um , launch much more thoroughly and with more velocity than somebody who 's just going through the motions.Wow - WTF is this discussion doing on slashdot ? !
?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But really people, is it so freaking hard to just take us out to dinner, kiss our neck afterwords in an intimate and quiet environment, and actually DO the foreplay (and for those in longer-term relationships, not have it become formulaic?
)That goes both ways (especially if you're talking about a long term relationship).
We guys accept the duty of keeping things interesting, but chicks have to play too if things are going to keep going well after a decade into the relationship.
But I agree - Mood &gt;&gt; biological process.
There is very little less sexy to a guy than a chick that just wants to score a baby.
Ugh - I'd rather fly solo, thanks.
...They can tell me down to the molecular level how conception works, but they can't even get the damn condom out of the wrapper and a bra off without completely ruining it... Again, it all comes down to mood.
I find the best way to remove a bra is to make sure that things are moving smoothly and then say, "Lose the bra".
Beats even the 1-handed Fonzie-level-cool maneuver and, assuming that the environment is right, can actually warm things up.
(Of course, that is not always appropriate and a guy should be prepared to adjust.
)On topic, though, I can personally testify that a guy who is thoroughly turned on and has been for a while will, um, launch much more thoroughly and with more velocity than somebody who's just going through the motions.Wow - WTF is this discussion doing on slashdot?!
?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652933</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653865</id>
	<title>OPE</title>
	<author>Vinegar Joe</author>
	<datestamp>1247257980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"I can assure you it has not recurred, Mandrake. Women uh... women sense my power and they seek the life essence. I, uh... I do not avoid women, Mandrake.........But I... I do deny them my essence." - General Jack D. Ripper</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" I can assure you it has not recurred , Mandrake .
Women uh... women sense my power and they seek the life essence .
I , uh... I do not avoid women , Mandrake.........But I... I do deny them my essence .
" - General Jack D. Ripper</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"I can assure you it has not recurred, Mandrake.
Women uh... women sense my power and they seek the life essence.
I, uh... I do not avoid women, Mandrake.........But I... I do deny them my essence.
" - General Jack D. Ripper</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654757</id>
	<title>Very true.</title>
	<author>93,000</author>
	<datestamp>1247219160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>in the animal kingdom and in humans, you need to talk about testicle size</p><p>testicle size is a very good indicator of how monogamous females are. </p></div><p>Very true.  My wife has HUGE testicles, and she's always flirting with other guys.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>in the animal kingdom and in humans , you need to talk about testicle sizetesticle size is a very good indicator of how monogamous females are .
Very true .
My wife has HUGE testicles , and she 's always flirting with other guys .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>in the animal kingdom and in humans, you need to talk about testicle sizetesticle size is a very good indicator of how monogamous females are.
Very true.
My wife has HUGE testicles, and she's always flirting with other guys.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653071</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28660451</id>
	<title>Re:Research</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1247330400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, they can. You just have to use pure distilled water, optionally a special cleaning substance that does not attack the materials, and let it dry for a long time afterwards. I saved at least two keyboards with that method.</p><p>Oh, and how about keeping your dick <em>below</em> the table at all? Set your chair to the lowest position, &lt;cillit-bang&gt;and the problem is gooooooooone&lt;/cillit-bang&gt;.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , they can .
You just have to use pure distilled water , optionally a special cleaning substance that does not attack the materials , and let it dry for a long time afterwards .
I saved at least two keyboards with that method.Oh , and how about keeping your dick below the table at all ?
Set your chair to the lowest position , and the problem is gooooooooone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, they can.
You just have to use pure distilled water, optionally a special cleaning substance that does not attack the materials, and let it dry for a long time afterwards.
I saved at least two keyboards with that method.Oh, and how about keeping your dick below the table at all?
Set your chair to the lowest position, and the problem is gooooooooone.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654221</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654921</id>
	<title>Re:Some sperm will even find you in a pool..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247220120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Pool's closed due to... wait what?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Pool 's closed due to... wait what ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Pool's closed due to... wait what?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653041</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653681</id>
	<title>Re:and what makes a female rat attractive?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247256960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>More to the point, how can the researchers assess which female rats are "babes" and which ones are fuglies.</p></div></blockquote><p>A bust:waist:hip ratio of  3 to 2 to 3 (in humans, 36-24-36)</p><p>It applies to all species.  There's no debating that.  It's science.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>More to the point , how can the researchers assess which female rats are " babes " and which ones are fuglies.A bust : waist : hip ratio of 3 to 2 to 3 ( in humans , 36-24-36 ) It applies to all species .
There 's no debating that .
It 's science .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>More to the point, how can the researchers assess which female rats are "babes" and which ones are fuglies.A bust:waist:hip ratio of  3 to 2 to 3 (in humans, 36-24-36)It applies to all species.
There's no debating that.
It's science.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653117</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653611</id>
	<title>Re:For animals yes,,, but...</title>
	<author>evilkasper</author>
	<datestamp>1247256660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>... At least thats what we like to believe, since the most scorching hot women will never let us test this theory.</htmltext>
<tokenext>... At least thats what we like to believe , since the most scorching hot women will never let us test this theory .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... At least thats what we like to believe, since the most scorching hot women will never let us test this theory.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652861</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654439</id>
	<title>Re:From the department of duh?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247217420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Wow - WTF is this discussion doing on slashdot?!?</p></div><p>Making really interesting reading for your potential future employers.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Wow - WTF is this discussion doing on slashdot ? !
? Making really interesting reading for your potential future employers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wow - WTF is this discussion doing on slashdot?!
?Making really interesting reading for your potential future employers.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653267</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654015</id>
	<title>Congratulations slashdot!</title>
	<author>Chad Birch</author>
	<datestamp>1247258640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think this is a new low, and for samzenpus, that's a difficult feat.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think this is a new low , and for samzenpus , that 's a difficult feat .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think this is a new low, and for samzenpus, that's a difficult feat.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652659</id>
	<title>Thanks Captain Obvious...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247253060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In other news, men find sex more enjoyable with a woman who they find attractive instead of a "been-around-the-block-20-times, looks like the love child of Chewbacca and Worf, old battle-axe" woman.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In other news , men find sex more enjoyable with a woman who they find attractive instead of a " been-around-the-block-20-times , looks like the love child of Chewbacca and Worf , old battle-axe " woman .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In other news, men find sex more enjoyable with a woman who they find attractive instead of a "been-around-the-block-20-times, looks like the love child of Chewbacca and Worf, old battle-axe" woman.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28655987</id>
	<title>Re:For animals yes,,, but...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247227800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>That's because scorching hot females who like sex move to places like hollywood or palm beach or even go into business in some way (even if it is only as a vegas show girl).</p></div><p>I don't deny that there are plenty of women that aren't that into sex, but I have met lots of scorching hot females who love sex that aren't in "the business".  They are teachers and moms and everything else that life throws at them.  Some are full-swap, some are soft-swap, and some are bi (look up the terms if you need help) - but they have one thing in common... they love sex.  If you have any doubt, go visit Iniquity in Dallas (sorry, the one in Houston closed).</p><p><div class="quote"><p>And if you happen to hook up with them, they are likely to sleep around on you ( and not just women- attractive men also sleep around a lot ).  Hot women have different expectations of life--</p></div><p>As always, some do, but many do not.  And if you are involved at the same time and place that she is, is it really cheating?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's because scorching hot females who like sex move to places like hollywood or palm beach or even go into business in some way ( even if it is only as a vegas show girl ) .I do n't deny that there are plenty of women that are n't that into sex , but I have met lots of scorching hot females who love sex that are n't in " the business " .
They are teachers and moms and everything else that life throws at them .
Some are full-swap , some are soft-swap , and some are bi ( look up the terms if you need help ) - but they have one thing in common... they love sex .
If you have any doubt , go visit Iniquity in Dallas ( sorry , the one in Houston closed ) .And if you happen to hook up with them , they are likely to sleep around on you ( and not just women- attractive men also sleep around a lot ) .
Hot women have different expectations of life--As always , some do , but many do not .
And if you are involved at the same time and place that she is , is it really cheating ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's because scorching hot females who like sex move to places like hollywood or palm beach or even go into business in some way (even if it is only as a vegas show girl).I don't deny that there are plenty of women that aren't that into sex, but I have met lots of scorching hot females who love sex that aren't in "the business".
They are teachers and moms and everything else that life throws at them.
Some are full-swap, some are soft-swap, and some are bi (look up the terms if you need help) - but they have one thing in common... they love sex.
If you have any doubt, go visit Iniquity in Dallas (sorry, the one in Houston closed).And if you happen to hook up with them, they are likely to sleep around on you ( and not just women- attractive men also sleep around a lot ).
Hot women have different expectations of life--As always, some do, but many do not.
And if you are involved at the same time and place that she is, is it really cheating?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653441</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653443</id>
	<title>In other news...</title>
	<author>MJMullinII</author>
	<datestamp>1247256000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>attractive people seem to have more dates!</p><p>More at 11!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>attractive people seem to have more dates ! More at 11 !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>attractive people seem to have more dates!More at 11!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654101</id>
	<title>Re:and what makes a female rat attractive?</title>
	<author>notarockstar1979</author>
	<datestamp>1247259060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> Helens? the amount of beauty required to launch 1000 ships</p> </div><p> And burn the topless towers of Ilium.  Therefore 1 picoHelen is equivalent of enough beauty to put a rubber duck in the bathtub and light a scented candle.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Helens ?
the amount of beauty required to launch 1000 ships And burn the topless towers of Ilium .
Therefore 1 picoHelen is equivalent of enough beauty to put a rubber duck in the bathtub and light a scented candle .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Helens?
the amount of beauty required to launch 1000 ships  And burn the topless towers of Ilium.
Therefore 1 picoHelen is equivalent of enough beauty to put a rubber duck in the bathtub and light a scented candle.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653117</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28667377</id>
	<title>Late comment but something is missing...</title>
	<author>hcs\_$reboot</author>
	<datestamp>1247414760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Researchers found that males can adjust the speed and effectiveness of their sperm by regulating the amount of seminal fluid they produce during copulation</p></div><p>While I belong to the men species, I thought, in all fairness, that we have to add something here. The more aroused the female is, the more vaginal lubrication fluid she secretes. This fluid makes a more aqueous environment favorable to sperm mobility. Meaning, the more a man is attractive, the more the female will help sperm mobility.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Researchers found that males can adjust the speed and effectiveness of their sperm by regulating the amount of seminal fluid they produce during copulationWhile I belong to the men species , I thought , in all fairness , that we have to add something here .
The more aroused the female is , the more vaginal lubrication fluid she secretes .
This fluid makes a more aqueous environment favorable to sperm mobility .
Meaning , the more a man is attractive , the more the female will help sperm mobility .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Researchers found that males can adjust the speed and effectiveness of their sperm by regulating the amount of seminal fluid they produce during copulationWhile I belong to the men species, I thought, in all fairness, that we have to add something here.
The more aroused the female is, the more vaginal lubrication fluid she secretes.
This fluid makes a more aqueous environment favorable to sperm mobility.
Meaning, the more a man is attractive, the more the female will help sperm mobility.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28660747</id>
	<title>Re:Research</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1247332200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There are sites for that too!*</p><p>Rule 34 baby! It strikes again!</p><p>\_\_\_<br>(* No. My fetish is another one.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are sites for that too !
* Rule 34 baby !
It strikes again ! \ _ \ _ \ _ ( * No .
My fetish is another one .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are sites for that too!
*Rule 34 baby!
It strikes again!\_\_\_(* No.
My fetish is another one.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654569</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654629</id>
	<title>Re:For animals yes,,, but...</title>
	<author>cayenne8</author>
	<datestamp>1247218440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>"...you can be with a beautiful girl and not be that turned on because you don't get along that well..."</i> <p>
What? You actually talk/listen to them??</p><p>
Wow..that's a new one. I figure if I'm fuckin' them...I'm getting along with them.</p><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" ...you can be with a beautiful girl and not be that turned on because you do n't get along that well... " What ?
You actually talk/listen to them ? ?
Wow..that 's a new one .
I figure if I 'm fuckin ' them...I 'm getting along with them .
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"...you can be with a beautiful girl and not be that turned on because you don't get along that well..." 
What?
You actually talk/listen to them??
Wow..that's a new one.
I figure if I'm fuckin' them...I'm getting along with them.
:)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652661</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28656059</id>
	<title>Every guy knows this</title>
	<author>sqrt(2)</author>
	<datestamp>1247228460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>More arousal and longer buildup means more ejaculate. Also a factor is the time since last orgasm. There are also various medical conditions and anomalies that can have an effect there too. I'd say that arousal probably has the least to do with it out of those three factors.</p><p>And either way, it's not the sperm deciding to travel faster when inside an attractive woman, it's that they can travel more easily when they are in more seminal fluid which is released in larger quantities in certain situations.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>More arousal and longer buildup means more ejaculate .
Also a factor is the time since last orgasm .
There are also various medical conditions and anomalies that can have an effect there too .
I 'd say that arousal probably has the least to do with it out of those three factors.And either way , it 's not the sperm deciding to travel faster when inside an attractive woman , it 's that they can travel more easily when they are in more seminal fluid which is released in larger quantities in certain situations .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>More arousal and longer buildup means more ejaculate.
Also a factor is the time since last orgasm.
There are also various medical conditions and anomalies that can have an effect there too.
I'd say that arousal probably has the least to do with it out of those three factors.And either way, it's not the sperm deciding to travel faster when inside an attractive woman, it's that they can travel more easily when they are in more seminal fluid which is released in larger quantities in certain situations.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652811</id>
	<title>Re:For animals yes,,, but...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247253600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Attraction isn't just physical...  "turned on" = attracted</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Attraction is n't just physical... " turned on " = attracted</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Attraction isn't just physical...  "turned on" = attracted</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652661</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28657343</id>
	<title>Re:Research</title>
	<author>scaryjohn</author>
	<datestamp>1247241660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I've actually done some research on this aswell.</p></div><p>I dont know that the results can be generalized from heterosexual attraction to homosexual attraction.  Those are the ass-wells you're talking about, yes?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've actually done some research on this aswell.I dont know that the results can be generalized from heterosexual attraction to homosexual attraction .
Those are the ass-wells you 're talking about , yes ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've actually done some research on this aswell.I dont know that the results can be generalized from heterosexual attraction to homosexual attraction.
Those are the ass-wells you're talking about, yes?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652619</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652849</id>
	<title>This is bad</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247253720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Combined with <a href="http://www.ucl.ac.uk/news/news-articles/0907/09070902" title="ucl.ac.uk" rel="nofollow">this research</a> [ucl.ac.uk], which shows that ugly men release more sperm, the chance of conception appears to be highest when a stunningly attractive woman sleeps with an truly ugly man. Somebody please think of the children.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Combined with this research [ ucl.ac.uk ] , which shows that ugly men release more sperm , the chance of conception appears to be highest when a stunningly attractive woman sleeps with an truly ugly man .
Somebody please think of the children .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Combined with this research [ucl.ac.uk], which shows that ugly men release more sperm, the chance of conception appears to be highest when a stunningly attractive woman sleeps with an truly ugly man.
Somebody please think of the children.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652835</id>
	<title>Fertility</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247253660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>This article was pretty interesting; for example the possible link between this and fertility rates. If there is indeed a link, it's going to come as a slap to the face for some couples having trouble. I also found it pretty interesting that sperm quality can be improved by daily masturbation.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This article was pretty interesting ; for example the possible link between this and fertility rates .
If there is indeed a link , it 's going to come as a slap to the face for some couples having trouble .
I also found it pretty interesting that sperm quality can be improved by daily masturbation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This article was pretty interesting; for example the possible link between this and fertility rates.
If there is indeed a link, it's going to come as a slap to the face for some couples having trouble.
I also found it pretty interesting that sperm quality can be improved by daily masturbation.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653529</id>
	<title>Re:HUH?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247256360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Depends on your definition of "attractive". Latest pop culture trend is to find large asses "attractive". Personally, I do <b>not</b> find large 'booty' or 'thick' females "attractive" and thus would not "hit it".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Depends on your definition of " attractive " .
Latest pop culture trend is to find large asses " attractive " .
Personally , I do not find large 'booty ' or 'thick ' females " attractive " and thus would not " hit it " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Depends on your definition of "attractive".
Latest pop culture trend is to find large asses "attractive".
Personally, I do not find large 'booty' or 'thick' females "attractive" and thus would not "hit it".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652631</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654293</id>
	<title>Re:Too small a sample size.</title>
	<author>drcln</author>
	<datestamp>1247216820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I, for one, find their statistics sub-par and wish to volunteer my services for further study into the effect of having sex with attractive females on sperm behaviour.</p></div><p>Did you RTFA?  You do realize that you would be conjugating with red junglefowl.</p><p>Well, to each his own.  Live and let live I say.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I , for one , find their statistics sub-par and wish to volunteer my services for further study into the effect of having sex with attractive females on sperm behaviour.Did you RTFA ?
You do realize that you would be conjugating with red junglefowl.Well , to each his own .
Live and let live I say .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I, for one, find their statistics sub-par and wish to volunteer my services for further study into the effect of having sex with attractive females on sperm behaviour.Did you RTFA?
You do realize that you would be conjugating with red junglefowl.Well, to each his own.
Live and let live I say.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652647</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28656223</id>
	<title>Re:and what makes a female rat attractive?</title>
	<author>Col. Bloodnok</author>
	<datestamp>1247229900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Speaking as a 33 year old man.</p><p>Agent Scully circa 1995. Beauty and rational intelligence.</p><p>Also, your rat model issue is simple. Get a bunch of female rats, get a bunch of male rats. Contrive a situation where all male rats get to see all female rats. Let the male rats choose. Not rocket science.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Speaking as a 33 year old man.Agent Scully circa 1995 .
Beauty and rational intelligence.Also , your rat model issue is simple .
Get a bunch of female rats , get a bunch of male rats .
Contrive a situation where all male rats get to see all female rats .
Let the male rats choose .
Not rocket science .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Speaking as a 33 year old man.Agent Scully circa 1995.
Beauty and rational intelligence.Also, your rat model issue is simple.
Get a bunch of female rats, get a bunch of male rats.
Contrive a situation where all male rats get to see all female rats.
Let the male rats choose.
Not rocket science.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653117</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28657377</id>
	<title>But attractive men give fewer sperm</title>
	<author>bobdevine</author>
	<datestamp>1247242080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
Another study says attractive males <a href="http://www.scienceblog.com/cms/spread-your-sperm-smart-way-22825.html" title="scienceblog.com" rel="nofollow">release fewer sperm per mating</a> [scienceblog.com].

</p><p>
So the conclusions are:
<br>
  attractive women = faster sperm
<br>
  attractive men = fewer sperm
</p><p>
While that may explain Ron Jeremy, I think that these studies show that the scientists have too much time on their hands, so to speak.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Another study says attractive males release fewer sperm per mating [ scienceblog.com ] .
So the conclusions are : attractive women = faster sperm attractive men = fewer sperm While that may explain Ron Jeremy , I think that these studies show that the scientists have too much time on their hands , so to speak .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
Another study says attractive males release fewer sperm per mating [scienceblog.com].
So the conclusions are:

  attractive women = faster sperm

  attractive men = fewer sperm

While that may explain Ron Jeremy, I think that these studies show that the scientists have too much time on their hands, so to speak.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28655233</id>
	<title>Re:From the department of duh?</title>
	<author>wbren</author>
	<datestamp>1247222340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>...it doesn't change the fact that it will still end in tears for you...</p></div></blockquote><p>I think some people are actually into that. Wait, you <i>were</i> talking about sex, right?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...it does n't change the fact that it will still end in tears for you...I think some people are actually into that .
Wait , you were talking about sex , right ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...it doesn't change the fact that it will still end in tears for you...I think some people are actually into that.
Wait, you were talking about sex, right?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652933</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28655681</id>
	<title>Re:This is bad</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247225700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is also known as the Billy Joel paradox. (See daughter Alexa by former wife Christie Brinkley.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is also known as the Billy Joel paradox .
( See daughter Alexa by former wife Christie Brinkley .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is also known as the Billy Joel paradox.
(See daughter Alexa by former wife Christie Brinkley.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652849</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653099</id>
	<title>Evolutionary bias?</title>
	<author>scorp1us</author>
	<datestamp>1247254680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I wonder what the evolutionary mechanics are to this. Why race to an attractive woman's egg more than an unattractive one? Seems that from a male perspective, it doesn't matter who the recipient is as long as the generic material is transferred, so men should always give it 100\%. So we then arrive at the idea that men hold back on ugly partners. Now, why put yourself at a competitive disadvantage for unattractive women? What kind of evolutionary penalty is there? Does our reproductive system recognize that prettier people make for more successful future generation's mating? This would I believe be a new discovery in genetics and evolution. That our selves are organized just not for the immediate generation but successive generations as well.</p><p>Additionally, what does this mean for intercultural, interracial dating, where different societies find other societies' traits as attractive or repugnant?</p><p>Any other ideas on why giving it your all might not produce a favorable genetic distribution?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I wonder what the evolutionary mechanics are to this .
Why race to an attractive woman 's egg more than an unattractive one ?
Seems that from a male perspective , it does n't matter who the recipient is as long as the generic material is transferred , so men should always give it 100 \ % .
So we then arrive at the idea that men hold back on ugly partners .
Now , why put yourself at a competitive disadvantage for unattractive women ?
What kind of evolutionary penalty is there ?
Does our reproductive system recognize that prettier people make for more successful future generation 's mating ?
This would I believe be a new discovery in genetics and evolution .
That our selves are organized just not for the immediate generation but successive generations as well.Additionally , what does this mean for intercultural , interracial dating , where different societies find other societies ' traits as attractive or repugnant ? Any other ideas on why giving it your all might not produce a favorable genetic distribution ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wonder what the evolutionary mechanics are to this.
Why race to an attractive woman's egg more than an unattractive one?
Seems that from a male perspective, it doesn't matter who the recipient is as long as the generic material is transferred, so men should always give it 100\%.
So we then arrive at the idea that men hold back on ugly partners.
Now, why put yourself at a competitive disadvantage for unattractive women?
What kind of evolutionary penalty is there?
Does our reproductive system recognize that prettier people make for more successful future generation's mating?
This would I believe be a new discovery in genetics and evolution.
That our selves are organized just not for the immediate generation but successive generations as well.Additionally, what does this mean for intercultural, interracial dating, where different societies find other societies' traits as attractive or repugnant?Any other ideas on why giving it your all might not produce a favorable genetic distribution?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654221</id>
	<title>Re:Research</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247216520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>quick tip: angle it back, so it doesn't land all over your shit, and lands on you. YOU can take a shower. Your computer, desk, and other such things cannot.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>quick tip : angle it back , so it does n't land all over your shit , and lands on you .
YOU can take a shower .
Your computer , desk , and other such things can not .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>quick tip: angle it back, so it doesn't land all over your shit, and lands on you.
YOU can take a shower.
Your computer, desk, and other such things cannot.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652619</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654323</id>
	<title>Re:Doing the Dog</title>
	<author>seanadams.com</author>
	<datestamp>1247217000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>My swimmers weren't as eager and it saved me a lot of child support money.</i></p><p>So doing the dog saved you from screwing the pooch?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My swimmers were n't as eager and it saved me a lot of child support money.So doing the dog saved you from screwing the pooch ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My swimmers weren't as eager and it saved me a lot of child support money.So doing the dog saved you from screwing the pooch?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653583</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28655099</id>
	<title>Re:This is bad</title>
	<author>aaarrrgggh</author>
	<datestamp>1247221320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>C'mon, this is slashdot... think of the nerds!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>C'mon , this is slashdot... think of the nerds !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>C'mon, this is slashdot... think of the nerds!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652849</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653707</id>
	<title>Re:How do they know?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247257020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What don't you talk to your sperm? Show them a picture of the girl they are dieing for?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What do n't you talk to your sperm ?
Show them a picture of the girl they are dieing for ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What don't you talk to your sperm?
Show them a picture of the girl they are dieing for?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652803</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653185</id>
	<title>First Post!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247255040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Ah shit.  Premature again...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ah shit .
Premature again.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ah shit.
Premature again...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28658521</id>
	<title>Re:Wonder if this will work.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247306160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah. That works very well as a contraceptive - just tell her beforehand that she looks ugly, and there's practically no way of little "mishap".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah .
That works very well as a contraceptive - just tell her beforehand that she looks ugly , and there 's practically no way of little " mishap " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah.
That works very well as a contraceptive - just tell her beforehand that she looks ugly, and there's practically no way of little "mishap".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652939</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652889</id>
	<title>Re:Speed vs inner beauty</title>
	<author>Zakabog</author>
	<datestamp>1247253840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think that depends on whether or not the person truly feels a girls inner beauty adds to her attractiveness. Since a persons attractiveness is based on the observer then it's very well possible that someone could find a girl attractive based on personality, in which case the speed would depend on "inner beauty."</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think that depends on whether or not the person truly feels a girls inner beauty adds to her attractiveness .
Since a persons attractiveness is based on the observer then it 's very well possible that someone could find a girl attractive based on personality , in which case the speed would depend on " inner beauty .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think that depends on whether or not the person truly feels a girls inner beauty adds to her attractiveness.
Since a persons attractiveness is based on the observer then it's very well possible that someone could find a girl attractive based on personality, in which case the speed would depend on "inner beauty.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652675</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654529</id>
	<title>Re:For animals yes,,, but...</title>
	<author>bitt3n</author>
	<datestamp>1247217960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>This is knows as the Hottie-Frigid paradox. The most scorching hot women are nearly certain to be lousy in bed.</p></div><p>every girl I've had in my bed has been lousy, but to be fair, most of the louses were there to begin with</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is knows as the Hottie-Frigid paradox .
The most scorching hot women are nearly certain to be lousy in bed.every girl I 've had in my bed has been lousy , but to be fair , most of the louses were there to begin with</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is knows as the Hottie-Frigid paradox.
The most scorching hot women are nearly certain to be lousy in bed.every girl I've had in my bed has been lousy, but to be fair, most of the louses were there to begin with
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652861</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654001</id>
	<title>How sure are they of the accuracy of this?</title>
	<author>blair1q</author>
	<datestamp>1247258640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How can they be sure they got accurate results?</p><p>Q:  Did you have sex with this woman?</p><p>A:  Yes.</p><p>Q:  How much seminal fluid was there?</p><p>A:  Uh, a lot.  Yeah.  I'm like a ThirstBuster nozzle on game day.</p><p>Q:  Did you find her attractive?</p><p>A:  N-- uh, what? Of course! I dig hunches.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How can they be sure they got accurate results ? Q : Did you have sex with this woman ? A : Yes.Q : How much seminal fluid was there ? A : Uh , a lot .
Yeah. I 'm like a ThirstBuster nozzle on game day.Q : Did you find her attractive ? A : N-- uh , what ?
Of course !
I dig hunches .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How can they be sure they got accurate results?Q:  Did you have sex with this woman?A:  Yes.Q:  How much seminal fluid was there?A:  Uh, a lot.
Yeah.  I'm like a ThirstBuster nozzle on game day.Q:  Did you find her attractive?A:  N-- uh, what?
Of course!
I dig hunches.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28660567</id>
	<title>Re:HUH?</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1247331060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Look up the track "The Wrongstars -- Drink 'til She's Beautiful". I only has one paragraph of text in it, but that one describes it perfectly. And in a fitting Russian (think GTA4, but stronger) accent too:</p><p>(<a href="http://navid.radiantempire.com/pub/beautiful.mp3" title="radiantempire.com">Click for the audio sample.</a> [radiantempire.com])</p><blockquote><div><p> <a href="http://navid.radiantempire.com/pub/beautiful.mp3" title="radiantempire.com">She dansed, an she dansed,</a> [radiantempire.com]<br><a href="http://navid.radiantempire.com/pub/beautiful.mp3" title="radiantempire.com">an I drrank, and I drrank,</a> [radiantempire.com]<br><a href="http://navid.radiantempire.com/pub/beautiful.mp3" title="radiantempire.com">an den she was BEAUUUTIFUL!</a> [radiantempire.com]</p></div> </blockquote></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Look up the track " The Wrongstars -- Drink 'til She 's Beautiful " .
I only has one paragraph of text in it , but that one describes it perfectly .
And in a fitting Russian ( think GTA4 , but stronger ) accent too : ( Click for the audio sample .
[ radiantempire.com ] ) She dansed , an she dansed , [ radiantempire.com ] an I drrank , and I drrank , [ radiantempire.com ] an den she was BEAUUUTIFUL !
[ radiantempire.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Look up the track "The Wrongstars -- Drink 'til She's Beautiful".
I only has one paragraph of text in it, but that one describes it perfectly.
And in a fitting Russian (think GTA4, but stronger) accent too:(Click for the audio sample.
[radiantempire.com]) She dansed, an she dansed, [radiantempire.com]an I drrank, and I drrank, [radiantempire.com]an den she was BEAUUUTIFUL!
[radiantempire.com] 
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652631</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654171</id>
	<title>Re:Thanks Captain Obvious...</title>
	<author>COMON$</author>
	<datestamp>1247259420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Not Necessarily....<p>
<a href="http://snltranscripts.jt.org/01/01kvalour.phtml" title="jt.org">http://snltranscripts.jt.org/01/01kvalour.phtml</a> [jt.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not Necessarily... . http : //snltranscripts.jt.org/01/01kvalour.phtml [ jt.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not Necessarily....
http://snltranscripts.jt.org/01/01kvalour.phtml [jt.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652659</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653659</id>
	<title>From the article:</title>
	<author>drunken\_boxer777</author>
	<datestamp>1247256840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>"Males may alter the velocity of sperm they allocate to copulations by strategically firing their left and right ejaculatory ducts, which can operate independently," they explained.</p></div><p>"I know what you're thinking. 'Did he fire one ejaculatory duct or two?' Well, to tell you the truth, in all this excitement I kind of lost track myself. But you've got to ask yourself one question: Do I feel lucky? Well, do ya?"</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Males may alter the velocity of sperm they allocate to copulations by strategically firing their left and right ejaculatory ducts , which can operate independently , " they explained .
" I know what you 're thinking .
'Did he fire one ejaculatory duct or two ?
' Well , to tell you the truth , in all this excitement I kind of lost track myself .
But you 've got to ask yourself one question : Do I feel lucky ?
Well , do ya ?
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Males may alter the velocity of sperm they allocate to copulations by strategically firing their left and right ejaculatory ducts, which can operate independently," they explained.
"I know what you're thinking.
'Did he fire one ejaculatory duct or two?
' Well, to tell you the truth, in all this excitement I kind of lost track myself.
But you've got to ask yourself one question: Do I feel lucky?
Well, do ya?
"
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652631</id>
	<title>HUH?</title>
	<author>arizwebfoot</author>
	<datestamp>1247252940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If she was not attractive, why would he even be in there?  Unless of course it is right after the bars close.</p><p>Oh wait . . .</p><p>Bars = alcohol<br>alcohol = drunk<br>ugly girls = cute girls</p><p>Now I've got it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If she was not attractive , why would he even be in there ?
Unless of course it is right after the bars close.Oh wait .
. .Bars = alcoholalcohol = drunkugly girls = cute girlsNow I 've got it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If she was not attractive, why would he even be in there?
Unless of course it is right after the bars close.Oh wait .
. .Bars = alcoholalcohol = drunkugly girls = cute girlsNow I've got it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28655495</id>
	<title>If this was true...</title>
	<author>revjtanton</author>
	<datestamp>1247224200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Then why are we all knocking up the bar skanks instead of our actual hot girlfriends!?  Sheesh....stupid PBR...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Then why are we all knocking up the bar skanks instead of our actual hot girlfriends ! ?
Sheesh....stupid PBR.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Then why are we all knocking up the bar skanks instead of our actual hot girlfriends!?
Sheesh....stupid PBR...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653283</id>
	<title>8==C=O=C=K==S=L=A=P==D ~~-\_</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247255400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Let's have a little less nagging and talking and a little more sucking and fucking, K?</p><p>I don't know what is with you women. It should be enough that I liquored you up enough to let me cram my hand down your panties and tickle your clit.</p><p>Just get wet and shut the fuck up.</p><p>While we're at it<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... put your face in the ground, and your ass in the air, bitch.</p><p>Alright. I'm done.</p><p>You might want to grab yourself a towel...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Let 's have a little less nagging and talking and a little more sucking and fucking , K ? I do n't know what is with you women .
It should be enough that I liquored you up enough to let me cram my hand down your panties and tickle your clit.Just get wet and shut the fuck up.While we 're at it ... put your face in the ground , and your ass in the air , bitch.Alright .
I 'm done.You might want to grab yourself a towel.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let's have a little less nagging and talking and a little more sucking and fucking, K?I don't know what is with you women.
It should be enough that I liquored you up enough to let me cram my hand down your panties and tickle your clit.Just get wet and shut the fuck up.While we're at it ... put your face in the ground, and your ass in the air, bitch.Alright.
I'm done.You might want to grab yourself a towel...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652933</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28661377</id>
	<title>Re:Fertility</title>
	<author>soundguy4film</author>
	<datestamp>1247336280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Absolutely! Fertility and ed too.  At 25 I have always been told not to listen to my dick as it would get me in trouble.  Two years ago I found that was just what mothers and girlfriends tell you so you won't chase a hotter chick.  I dated a slightly tubby girl who was a stupid rich and self centered fashion designer.  The only time in my life I have not been able to get it up was for this chick and then she cheated on me and dumped me before I found out, good riddance!  But the point is my dick knew not only that she was not very hot but that she was completely wrong for me.  In case anyone wants to rag on me I have had sex with 3 girls since then and been dating the last one for more than a year and I have never had a problem getting it up, so it was the girls fault not mine.  Hot chicks definitely get more sperm faster!  It should be measured through the pull out method, eg how far does it go when you pull out... Below the belly button not hot, breasts pretty hot face gorgeous and the wall behind her supermodel.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Absolutely !
Fertility and ed too .
At 25 I have always been told not to listen to my dick as it would get me in trouble .
Two years ago I found that was just what mothers and girlfriends tell you so you wo n't chase a hotter chick .
I dated a slightly tubby girl who was a stupid rich and self centered fashion designer .
The only time in my life I have not been able to get it up was for this chick and then she cheated on me and dumped me before I found out , good riddance !
But the point is my dick knew not only that she was not very hot but that she was completely wrong for me .
In case anyone wants to rag on me I have had sex with 3 girls since then and been dating the last one for more than a year and I have never had a problem getting it up , so it was the girls fault not mine .
Hot chicks definitely get more sperm faster !
It should be measured through the pull out method , eg how far does it go when you pull out... Below the belly button not hot , breasts pretty hot face gorgeous and the wall behind her supermodel .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Absolutely!
Fertility and ed too.
At 25 I have always been told not to listen to my dick as it would get me in trouble.
Two years ago I found that was just what mothers and girlfriends tell you so you won't chase a hotter chick.
I dated a slightly tubby girl who was a stupid rich and self centered fashion designer.
The only time in my life I have not been able to get it up was for this chick and then she cheated on me and dumped me before I found out, good riddance!
But the point is my dick knew not only that she was not very hot but that she was completely wrong for me.
In case anyone wants to rag on me I have had sex with 3 girls since then and been dating the last one for more than a year and I have never had a problem getting it up, so it was the girls fault not mine.
Hot chicks definitely get more sperm faster!
It should be measured through the pull out method, eg how far does it go when you pull out... Below the belly button not hot, breasts pretty hot face gorgeous and the wall behind her supermodel.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652835</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654879</id>
	<title>Re:HUH?</title>
	<author>jhfry</author>
	<datestamp>1247219880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, some men will take an ugly woman over no woman.</p><p>Of course most of this research was done with animals... that way no feelings were hurt when the men rated their partner as unattractive.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , some men will take an ugly woman over no woman.Of course most of this research was done with animals... that way no feelings were hurt when the men rated their partner as unattractive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, some men will take an ugly woman over no woman.Of course most of this research was done with animals... that way no feelings were hurt when the men rated their partner as unattractive.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652631</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652955</id>
	<title>Doesn't make sense</title>
	<author>nysus</author>
	<datestamp>1247254080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Then why is the world full of so many ugly people?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Then why is the world full of so many ugly people ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Then why is the world full of so many ugly people?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653315</id>
	<title>Another study has attractive MALES releasing less</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247255520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Coincidentally(?) another study (American Naturalist) claims more attractive MALES releasing fewer sperm (they don't mention any correlation as to the attractiveness of females).  Not quite the same thing but related.<br>Found this article at ScienceDaily.com, a great website by the way.  <a href="http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/07/090709095425.htm" title="sciencedaily.com">http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/07/090709095425.htm</a> [sciencedaily.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Coincidentally ( ?
) another study ( American Naturalist ) claims more attractive MALES releasing fewer sperm ( they do n't mention any correlation as to the attractiveness of females ) .
Not quite the same thing but related.Found this article at ScienceDaily.com , a great website by the way .
http : //www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/07/090709095425.htm [ sciencedaily.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Coincidentally(?
) another study (American Naturalist) claims more attractive MALES releasing fewer sperm (they don't mention any correlation as to the attractiveness of females).
Not quite the same thing but related.Found this article at ScienceDaily.com, a great website by the way.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/07/090709095425.htm [sciencedaily.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654703</id>
	<title>Re:For animals yes,,, but...</title>
	<author>cayenne8</author>
	<datestamp>1247218800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>"They also have pretty severe defense mechanisms having been hit on and flattered since they were 13 by everyone. Meanwhile, the more normal females who didn't get as much flattery are still open to it. In a way, being pretty sucks because they have trouble accepting compliments."</i> <p>
But that's part of what you have to cut through with a hot chick. You have to get THEM interested in you, by talking to them, slightly ignore them at times, give little digs at them or their looks (backhanded compliments and such). Quite often this works, and they're not used to it. They are used to guys fawning all over them, and when you do this type of thing, it can weird them out a little, and make them want you...etc.</p><p>
Strange and hard to explain totally, but, I've seen it work really. In some ways, it works on most women. For some reason, maybe it is genetic, most women seem to have almost a masochistic streak in them....we all observe this when we see women out there that are actually physically abused by their men, and yet go back to them.</p><p>
A subtler version of this as I tried to describe above often works, especially on VERY hot women.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" They also have pretty severe defense mechanisms having been hit on and flattered since they were 13 by everyone .
Meanwhile , the more normal females who did n't get as much flattery are still open to it .
In a way , being pretty sucks because they have trouble accepting compliments .
" But that 's part of what you have to cut through with a hot chick .
You have to get THEM interested in you , by talking to them , slightly ignore them at times , give little digs at them or their looks ( backhanded compliments and such ) .
Quite often this works , and they 're not used to it .
They are used to guys fawning all over them , and when you do this type of thing , it can weird them out a little , and make them want you...etc .
Strange and hard to explain totally , but , I 've seen it work really .
In some ways , it works on most women .
For some reason , maybe it is genetic , most women seem to have almost a masochistic streak in them....we all observe this when we see women out there that are actually physically abused by their men , and yet go back to them .
A subtler version of this as I tried to describe above often works , especially on VERY hot women .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"They also have pretty severe defense mechanisms having been hit on and flattered since they were 13 by everyone.
Meanwhile, the more normal females who didn't get as much flattery are still open to it.
In a way, being pretty sucks because they have trouble accepting compliments.
" 
But that's part of what you have to cut through with a hot chick.
You have to get THEM interested in you, by talking to them, slightly ignore them at times, give little digs at them or their looks (backhanded compliments and such).
Quite often this works, and they're not used to it.
They are used to guys fawning all over them, and when you do this type of thing, it can weird them out a little, and make them want you...etc.
Strange and hard to explain totally, but, I've seen it work really.
In some ways, it works on most women.
For some reason, maybe it is genetic, most women seem to have almost a masochistic streak in them....we all observe this when we see women out there that are actually physically abused by their men, and yet go back to them.
A subtler version of this as I tried to describe above often works, especially on VERY hot women.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653441</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654683</id>
	<title>And...</title>
	<author>BerryMadness</author>
	<datestamp>1247218680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>thats why I'm not an illigitimate father...</htmltext>
<tokenext>thats why I 'm not an illigitimate father.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>thats why I'm not an illigitimate father...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652979</id>
	<title>So, can beauty contests be settled...</title>
	<author>Trip6</author>
	<datestamp>1247254140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>with a sperm race?  With betting!  A perfect blend of OTB and Miss Universe.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>with a sperm race ?
With betting !
A perfect blend of OTB and Miss Universe .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>with a sperm race?
With betting!
A perfect blend of OTB and Miss Universe.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654625</id>
	<title>Re:Fertility</title>
	<author>COMON$</author>
	<datestamp>1247218380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Being one of the people who is having trouble with fertility, I don't find it insulting. Rather I find it interesting that the fertility experts that I talk to and pay good money all say that holding out for 3 days beforehand increase fertility...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Being one of the people who is having trouble with fertility , I do n't find it insulting .
Rather I find it interesting that the fertility experts that I talk to and pay good money all say that holding out for 3 days beforehand increase fertility.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Being one of the people who is having trouble with fertility, I don't find it insulting.
Rather I find it interesting that the fertility experts that I talk to and pay good money all say that holding out for 3 days beforehand increase fertility...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652835</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28657277</id>
	<title>Re:For animals yes,,, but...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247240760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My brother went for the hottie. They got married, had a couple kids, but her tastes had him working himself to death. That was fine with her because it gave her time to fuck around on him. I haven't told anyone but my wife (who agrees), but I don't actually think his youngest kid is his (and actually, I think he has his doubts, and I strongly suspect my parents do, but he's a great kid so I think we've all just decided that he needs a family so we'll just go along with it). By both my brother and sister-in-law's accounts, though, the sex was great. It ought to be, because I'm pretty sure she was a professional when she was younger (she ran away from home--she is crazy).

</p><p>I went for the cutie. She thinks I'm better looking than her; I think she's better looking than me; we're both happy. Sex is not so great though (why I'm posting AC!). But, seriously? I'm happy and we have fun all the time and I know I can trust her absolutely. She would never bleed me dry and fuck my boss. I'm not 19 anymore; sex is an aside. It's not as important as being happy and having someone to rely on and laugh with.

</p><p>So what am I saying? I'm saying that pretty girls often have major issues, for all the reasons you've mentioned. I have a friend who is jaw-droppingly gorgeous. We get along famously (officemates), but guys sometimes ask how I can stand being around her when she's so cold and bitchy. And she was certainly like that with me at first. Now that I know her a lot better, I think that the only way she has been able to remain a kind and normal person was to keep that wall up and deflect the male attention. If you get past that wall, she's a really warm, fun person. She's actually a good example of someone developing a strategy to get around the shit that pretty girls (especially, I think) have to deal with. Her fiancee is a rock-solid, nice guy, but not much of a looker. She's made that choice, though: Despite her amazing looks, she's going to go for real companionship and family. For her, though, it comes at the price of acquaintances' opinions of her.

</p><p>I'm glad I'm not a pretty woman. It looks like a hard row to hoe.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My brother went for the hottie .
They got married , had a couple kids , but her tastes had him working himself to death .
That was fine with her because it gave her time to fuck around on him .
I have n't told anyone but my wife ( who agrees ) , but I do n't actually think his youngest kid is his ( and actually , I think he has his doubts , and I strongly suspect my parents do , but he 's a great kid so I think we 've all just decided that he needs a family so we 'll just go along with it ) .
By both my brother and sister-in-law 's accounts , though , the sex was great .
It ought to be , because I 'm pretty sure she was a professional when she was younger ( she ran away from home--she is crazy ) .
I went for the cutie .
She thinks I 'm better looking than her ; I think she 's better looking than me ; we 're both happy .
Sex is not so great though ( why I 'm posting AC ! ) .
But , seriously ?
I 'm happy and we have fun all the time and I know I can trust her absolutely .
She would never bleed me dry and fuck my boss .
I 'm not 19 anymore ; sex is an aside .
It 's not as important as being happy and having someone to rely on and laugh with .
So what am I saying ?
I 'm saying that pretty girls often have major issues , for all the reasons you 've mentioned .
I have a friend who is jaw-droppingly gorgeous .
We get along famously ( officemates ) , but guys sometimes ask how I can stand being around her when she 's so cold and bitchy .
And she was certainly like that with me at first .
Now that I know her a lot better , I think that the only way she has been able to remain a kind and normal person was to keep that wall up and deflect the male attention .
If you get past that wall , she 's a really warm , fun person .
She 's actually a good example of someone developing a strategy to get around the shit that pretty girls ( especially , I think ) have to deal with .
Her fiancee is a rock-solid , nice guy , but not much of a looker .
She 's made that choice , though : Despite her amazing looks , she 's going to go for real companionship and family .
For her , though , it comes at the price of acquaintances ' opinions of her .
I 'm glad I 'm not a pretty woman .
It looks like a hard row to hoe .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My brother went for the hottie.
They got married, had a couple kids, but her tastes had him working himself to death.
That was fine with her because it gave her time to fuck around on him.
I haven't told anyone but my wife (who agrees), but I don't actually think his youngest kid is his (and actually, I think he has his doubts, and I strongly suspect my parents do, but he's a great kid so I think we've all just decided that he needs a family so we'll just go along with it).
By both my brother and sister-in-law's accounts, though, the sex was great.
It ought to be, because I'm pretty sure she was a professional when she was younger (she ran away from home--she is crazy).
I went for the cutie.
She thinks I'm better looking than her; I think she's better looking than me; we're both happy.
Sex is not so great though (why I'm posting AC!).
But, seriously?
I'm happy and we have fun all the time and I know I can trust her absolutely.
She would never bleed me dry and fuck my boss.
I'm not 19 anymore; sex is an aside.
It's not as important as being happy and having someone to rely on and laugh with.
So what am I saying?
I'm saying that pretty girls often have major issues, for all the reasons you've mentioned.
I have a friend who is jaw-droppingly gorgeous.
We get along famously (officemates), but guys sometimes ask how I can stand being around her when she's so cold and bitchy.
And she was certainly like that with me at first.
Now that I know her a lot better, I think that the only way she has been able to remain a kind and normal person was to keep that wall up and deflect the male attention.
If you get past that wall, she's a really warm, fun person.
She's actually a good example of someone developing a strategy to get around the shit that pretty girls (especially, I think) have to deal with.
Her fiancee is a rock-solid, nice guy, but not much of a looker.
She's made that choice, though: Despite her amazing looks, she's going to go for real companionship and family.
For her, though, it comes at the price of acquaintances' opinions of her.
I'm glad I'm not a pretty woman.
It looks like a hard row to hoe.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653441</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652961</id>
	<title>Re:For animals yes,,, but...</title>
	<author>Chris Burke</author>
	<datestamp>1247254080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Seems like the same conclusion to me, if you simply expand the definition of "attractive" for human males to mean more than superficial physical features; shouldn't "sexually attractive" essentially be a synonym for "sexually arousing"?  The question would always be "what does the male find attractive in females?" and while for red junglefowl this may be a simple and largely empirical matter, for humans it obviously isn't.  For the human version of the study, you'd probably just have to ask the man his opinion to find the correlation, though if humans have this ability then I would expect that you would see it correlate with "sexual attractiveness" as you surmise, and not "physical beauty" which isn't necessarily the same thing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Seems like the same conclusion to me , if you simply expand the definition of " attractive " for human males to mean more than superficial physical features ; should n't " sexually attractive " essentially be a synonym for " sexually arousing " ?
The question would always be " what does the male find attractive in females ?
" and while for red junglefowl this may be a simple and largely empirical matter , for humans it obviously is n't .
For the human version of the study , you 'd probably just have to ask the man his opinion to find the correlation , though if humans have this ability then I would expect that you would see it correlate with " sexual attractiveness " as you surmise , and not " physical beauty " which is n't necessarily the same thing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seems like the same conclusion to me, if you simply expand the definition of "attractive" for human males to mean more than superficial physical features; shouldn't "sexually attractive" essentially be a synonym for "sexually arousing"?
The question would always be "what does the male find attractive in females?
" and while for red junglefowl this may be a simple and largely empirical matter, for humans it obviously isn't.
For the human version of the study, you'd probably just have to ask the man his opinion to find the correlation, though if humans have this ability then I would expect that you would see it correlate with "sexual attractiveness" as you surmise, and not "physical beauty" which isn't necessarily the same thing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652661</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654569</id>
	<title>Re:Research</title>
	<author>elrous0</author>
	<datestamp>1247218140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Speak for yourself. I have a fetish for plain and ugly women. I walked into a public library the other day and almost lost it right there.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Speak for yourself .
I have a fetish for plain and ugly women .
I walked into a public library the other day and almost lost it right there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Speak for yourself.
I have a fetish for plain and ugly women.
I walked into a public library the other day and almost lost it right there.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652619</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28655535</id>
	<title>Re:From the department of duh?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247224500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>is it so freaking hard to just take us out to dinner, kiss our neck afterwords in an intimate and quiet environment, and actually DO the foreplay (and for those in longer-term relationships, not have it become formulaic?) Because if the sex sucks, it isn't going to matter how much scientific knowledge you have about the mating process -- it doesn't change the fact that it will still end in tears for you! *mutters* They can tell me down to the molecular level how conception works, but they can't even get the damn condom out of the wrapper and a bra off without completely ruining it...</p></div><p>Will there be an equal salary demand to go with the neck-kissing and dinner taking?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>is it so freaking hard to just take us out to dinner , kiss our neck afterwords in an intimate and quiet environment , and actually DO the foreplay ( and for those in longer-term relationships , not have it become formulaic ?
) Because if the sex sucks , it is n't going to matter how much scientific knowledge you have about the mating process -- it does n't change the fact that it will still end in tears for you !
* mutters * They can tell me down to the molecular level how conception works , but they ca n't even get the damn condom out of the wrapper and a bra off without completely ruining it...Will there be an equal salary demand to go with the neck-kissing and dinner taking ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>is it so freaking hard to just take us out to dinner, kiss our neck afterwords in an intimate and quiet environment, and actually DO the foreplay (and for those in longer-term relationships, not have it become formulaic?
) Because if the sex sucks, it isn't going to matter how much scientific knowledge you have about the mating process -- it doesn't change the fact that it will still end in tears for you!
*mutters* They can tell me down to the molecular level how conception works, but they can't even get the damn condom out of the wrapper and a bra off without completely ruining it...Will there be an equal salary demand to go with the neck-kissing and dinner taking?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652933</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654711</id>
	<title>Re:Doing the Dog</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1247218860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>It is a different world now.</i></p><p>God, but I miss the seventies. These young guys will never know the joy of having a strange women come up and ask "wanna fuck?" without her asking for twenty dollars for crack.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It is a different world now.God , but I miss the seventies .
These young guys will never know the joy of having a strange women come up and ask " wan na fuck ?
" without her asking for twenty dollars for crack .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is a different world now.God, but I miss the seventies.
These young guys will never know the joy of having a strange women come up and ask "wanna fuck?
" without her asking for twenty dollars for crack.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653583</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654659</id>
	<title>Useful Research</title>
	<author>andrewbwn</author>
	<datestamp>1247218560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This kind of research is really useful, men will finally want to have sex with attractive women.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This kind of research is really useful , men will finally want to have sex with attractive women .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This kind of research is really useful, men will finally want to have sex with attractive women.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652933
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28655535
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653041
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653867
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653099
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653993
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652619
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28658229
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_84</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652835
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28661377
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652849
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28655747
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652849
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654857
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653041
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654921
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_83</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652619
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28656283
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652631
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653529
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28657169
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652803
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653117
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654101
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652661
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652861
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653441
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28655987
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652835
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654625
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_76</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652939
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654515
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652661
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28657987
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652933
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653267
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654439
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652849
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28656081
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652661
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652961
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653835
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_89</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653071
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654757
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653247
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28655933
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_82</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652675
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652889
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652939
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28658521
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_68</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652933
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654565
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652955
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653183
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652619
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654221
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28660451
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_73</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652619
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652815
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652659
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654655
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652631
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653529
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28655149
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652659
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654967
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652661
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653915
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652631
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654879
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_70</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652659
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654171
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_88</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652619
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652837
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652631
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653141
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_87</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652933
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28661027
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653041
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28655753
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652933
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28656927
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653583
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654323
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_71</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652661
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654579
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652619
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652923
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28707757
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653099
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654695
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652631
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652781
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652661
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652861
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653441
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654703
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28655631
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652933
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654829
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652803
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653117
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28655359
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652849
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654567
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652849
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28655099
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_86</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652661
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652861
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653441
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28657277
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_91</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652631
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28656701
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652955
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653761
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_77</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652619
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28657343
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_79</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653099
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653519
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652849
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653891
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652631
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28660567
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_81</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652631
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653529
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654077
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652659
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654003
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652741
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653743
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_67</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652933
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653267
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654623
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_69</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652933
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654153
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28658235
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652661
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652861
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653611
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652803
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653117
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654037
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28658531
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_74</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653583
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654711
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652803
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653117
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654599
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652619
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654259
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652803
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653117
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28658365
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652647
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654293
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653583
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28655553
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652741
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654825
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_80</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652661
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654629
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_75</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652849
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28657811
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_66</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652933
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28655233
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652803
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653117
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28658167
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652933
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653283
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_65</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652849
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28655681
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652661
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653233
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_72</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652661
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652961
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653333
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652619
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654569
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28663227
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652803
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653117
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653681
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654423
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652619
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28658471
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652933
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28656899
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652803
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653117
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653573
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652661
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652811
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652659
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654151
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_85</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652803
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653707
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652803
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653117
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28656223
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_90</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653583
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28655079
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652661
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654113
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_78</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653099
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653559
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652661
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652861
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654529
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652803
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653117
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28660973
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652619
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654569
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28660747
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_10_1726256_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652849
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28655685
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_10_1726256.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652933
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28656899
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28655535
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28661027
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654565
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654829
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28655233
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653283
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28656927
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654153
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28658235
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653267
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654623
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654439
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_10_1726256.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652661
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654629
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28657987
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652811
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654579
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652961
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653835
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653333
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654113
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652861
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653441
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654703
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28655631
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28655987
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28657277
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653611
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654529
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653233
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653915
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_10_1726256.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652939
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654515
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28658521
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_10_1726256.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652835
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654625
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28661377
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_10_1726256.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652619
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28656283
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28658229
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652837
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654259
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654569
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28663227
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28660747
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652815
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28658471
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28657343
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652923
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28707757
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654221
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28660451
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_10_1726256.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653247
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28655933
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_10_1726256.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653979
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_10_1726256.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652741
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653743
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654825
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_10_1726256.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652659
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654003
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654151
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654171
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654967
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654655
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_10_1726256.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653963
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_10_1726256.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652675
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652889
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_10_1726256.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652849
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653891
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28655681
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28656081
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28655099
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28655685
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654857
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28655747
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654567
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28657811
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_10_1726256.24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652803
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653707
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653117
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654599
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28660973
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28655359
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653573
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654101
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653681
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654423
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28658167
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28658365
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654037
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28658531
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28656223
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_10_1726256.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652631
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28660567
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28656701
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653529
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28657169
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28655149
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654077
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652781
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654879
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653141
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_10_1726256.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653315
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_10_1726256.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653385
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_10_1726256.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654847
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_10_1726256.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652647
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654293
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_10_1726256.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653099
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653559
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653993
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654695
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653519
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_10_1726256.23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653983
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_10_1726256.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653041
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653867
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654921
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28655753
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_10_1726256.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653659
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_10_1726256.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653583
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654323
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654711
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28655553
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28655079
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_10_1726256.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653071
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28654757
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_10_1726256.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28652955
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653761
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_10_1726256.28653183
</commentlist>
</conversation>
