App
FML for mobile
Free
Open in app

Up your game

By Anonymous - 06/05/2009 15:07 - United States

Spicy
Today, I was giving my friend sex advice when she asked me when was the last time for me. Not only did I lie but I realized that it was in November and the time before that was June. I have had sex less times this year than she has this week. FML
I agree, your life sucks 54 580
You deserved it 12 088

Same thing different taste

Top comments

fretforyerlatte 0

i guess you're not in much of a position to give her advice then, huh? unless you used to get it on all the time or something.

Why did you lie? And what makes you a sex guru?

Comments

If the OP is a girl, there's really no excuse for not being able to get laid if you want to. Unless you're ugly. And even then, it's not impossible. If its a guy, well, just keep trying!

AntiChrist7 0

you're a girl, you can get laid anytime.

liveitlearnit 0

Who cares? Unless she's in a relationship, I'd say you're in the better position. Nobody likes a girl who sleeps around.

the student has surpassed the teacher.

So? All this means is that she's a ***** and ur not. This isn't a fml.

I fail to see the problem here. Your friend is a girl, and I'm assuming you're a girl. Are you saying that you've been TRYING to have sex often but fail? Because I would think that, unless you were blindingly I-would-rather-chew-off-my-own-arm-than-have-sex-with-you ugly, you should be able to go out and get laid if you want. If that's what you wanted. Who the hell cares how often your friend has had sex. It's not like you couldn't either. Bottom line: this is not a FML unless you are so unattractive that no one would want to have sex with you, because you could easily change the situation. #9: Slow your roll. #3 said the logical equivalent of "you don't go around having lots of sex, so at least you're not a *****." The contrapositive would be, "if you're a *****, you go around having lots of sex." BUT He/she didn't say "if you go around having lots of sex, you're a *****." If you've taken a class in logic, you'll notice there's a difference, so stop jumping to conclusions.

How do you know that being a ***** does not imply a bi-conditional relationship? Perhaps the inverse mapping function from lot's of sex to ***** holds as easily as the original function of ***** to lots of sex. I would have to see disproof that being a ***** does not form Reflexive Transitive Closure.

TheZephyrSon 3

not really a bad thing...You aren't a *****, that's a good thing.

I was about to type an essay of a comment, but #30 has basically said everything I wanted to :).