mark ruffalo is attractive

iirc you have excellent taste in cute actors, justine

adult straight men are also in love with tim olyphant iirc

i guess he is appropriately threatening

the man who has it all i wonder what he got for christmas

http://cache.daylife.com/imageserve/08ZDbvD2QS10b/610x.jpg

body language mirroring

salt and pepper!

xp

I would rank Olyphant in the bottom half of males mentioned in this thread, since you asked.

Ruffalo's irl anti-fracking campaign is pretty sexy.

someone should make a movie where olyphant shoots ruffalo w/a gun

maybe later they become best friends

idk

yes

are you listening hollywood people

maybe mark ruffalo should join the cast of justified

just spitballin here

no country for straight men

pitching u, wake up america

(horseshoe tho srsly u were right and it is totally a ~thing~ and I'm glad u articulated it bcuz you are wise like that)

you articulated it better, Kate!

no country for straight men

― paul reiser is attractive (t. silaviver), Tuesday, December 27, 2011 4:10 PM (44 seconds ago) Bookmark Permalink

looooool

WHOIS t. silaviver

Straight men: the underrepresented minority. Totally wanna start a "female gaze / queer gaze: objects of desire" thread to oppress teh poor str8 mens.

how do we feel about Fassbender

http://www.elle.com/var/ezflow_site/storage/images/elle/pop-culture/celebrity-spotlight/glourious-basterd-michael-fassbender/4604225-1-eng-US/Glourious-Basterd-Michael-Fassbender_articleimage.jpg

I should have known not to ask for "special rights."

that guy is hot; he looks crazy in that picture. seems like he would definitely qualify as "threatening" if i had any idea what that means.

xp

All these overly masculine men with their JAWLINES.

Just want some eyelinered British fops up in here. :-/

Tom Hiddleston

http://www.exposay.com/celebrity-photos/tom-hiddleston-thor-los-angeles-premiere-00d9tT.jpg

I dunno -- he looks like the guy dowsed in toxic waste in Robocop.

I would rank Olyphant in the bottom half of males mentioned in this thread, since you asked.

hmmmmmm

seems like he would definitely qualify as "threatening" if i had any idea what that means

Maybe you should try un-gendering the language (like I did in the first place before other people gendered it for me)?

if you un-gender the language it's hard to think how "threatening" would be a good thing?

i dont like the look of this hiddleston fellow

I didn't say it was. Neither bad, necessarily, though it was judgmental.

the threatening thing is just calling the guy a pussy and saying u could beat him up, nbd

Fassbender cracks me up every time in Basterds, curious to see Shame

man there is hella language gendering itt

language can't really be ungendered i mean come on also we're talking about who people want to fuck so

i appreciate you guys discussing this touchy topic in such an un threatening manner, god bless

you people

that was belatedly directed at ck dexter holland, not max, just to be clear

xp lol

http://fc01.deviantart.net/fs46/f/2009/234/8/b/What_Do_You_Mean_You_People_by_EncasedxInxPorcelain.jpg

max is v unthreatening

he is a doll, it's true

i could punch him w/my fist and then his attractiveness would be transfered to me

*makes threatening face*

http://www.suprmchaos.com/talky-tina1_moz_mam.jpg

^^^threatening doll

language can't really be ungendered i mean come on also we're talking about who people want to fuck so

I see. So when discussing the nature of one person's interest in another, we must do so in a way that is accepting a priori of traditional gender roles rather than positing a theoretical if not actual relationship plane on which potential partners meet as ungendered equals. To do the latter would be sexist, and to explain it in the interests of being properly understood would be patronizing.

http://images.alibi.com/image/pix_id/20264/Another-example-of-a-menacing-top-hat.jpg?image_height=292&image_width=300

max, a-menacing

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/84/Chuckydoll.jpg
max

cooper chuckybutt

I see. So when discussing the nature of one person's interest in another, we must do so in a way that is accepting a priori of traditional gender roles rather than positing a theoretical if not actual relationship plane on which potential partners meet as ungendered equals. To do the latter would be sexist, and to explain it in the interests of being properly understood would be patronizing.

― illegal crew member (C.K. Dexter Holland), Tuesday, December 27, 2011 4:34 PM (38 seconds ago) Bookmark Permalink

come on, dude. commenting on attraction is a weird time to posit that we're all brains in vats.