hahahaahhaah so what Im about to describe is the opposite of science A sample size of 53(!!!!!) young ladies were followed for five years. They all attended the same college. They all lived on the same floor. The University of Michigan think-tank responsible for embarrassing pseudoscientific bullshit concluded that these 53 girls, who were neighbors for five years and saw each other every day, handed out blowjobs that they considered classy while writing off poor-girl blowjobs as inferior and slutty. While Im a major proponent of the advancement of blowjob science, it apparently falls on me to clarify that science did not occur here. You just asked a bunch of girls to rate the classiness of their friends blowjobs. Is it possible, SCIENTISTS, that their knowledge of one another as people factored into their rating more than their knowledge of who owns the sweetest Uggs? Is it possible, SCIENTISTS, that a sample size of 53 friends from Michigan does not represent the entire female population of Earth? Is it possible, SCIENTISTS, that upper-class girls have more hookups because they go to more parties because they can afford to pay their way into sororities, rather than your implied hypothesis that collegiate men treat the smell of money like pheromones? Is it possible, NBC, that you gave publicity to this misappropriation of grant money because the word slut in the title would catch everyones attention? cuz this looks, to anyone with a high-school understanding of the scientific method, like a gutless advertising shtick. That you should be ashamed of. Come on, dude. You made Hannibal and 30 Rock. Youre better than this.
Posted on: Thu, 29 May 2014 20:34:54 +0000
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015