Flying to Mexico... For a girl. Is it legal to bring her back?

Let'sgoflying! said:
Best way to '"find girls"? I can tell you that.

Get married.

Before marriage, there is a dearth of interest.
After married, when you are unavailable - they come out of the woodwork for some reason. It's some weird syndrome where they think they must have missed out on something because one of their own found you interesting enough to marry you.
Click to expand...


Not just marriage. When I got engaged I was astonished at how quickly word spread among the women at work. I never knew they were so interested! And they never flirted so much or paid so much attention to me beforehand.
 
Everskyward said:
Look how it's used in the image in post #104. It's pretty self-explanatory anyway. I think... unless I'm interpreting it wrong.
Click to expand...
If that is the type guy hanging out in the friendzone, maybe you should disavow your status!
 
One thing to add, I had no idea how terrible I was at reading signals before I got married. It took me about 5 years of marriage before I started seeing things outside of a single guy perspective. My opened my eyes to a whole new world of interpersonal communication that I didn't even know existed. By going back over some of our dating experiences, she pointed out things that I was totally oblivious to. I also realized that I had missed out on entire themes of movies we watched because I wasn't picking up on the non-verbal, but not necessarily subtle, references. It was through watching some of her movies that I realized I was way out of my league in the subtleties of interaction and had unwittingly been an oaf for many years. Women see things an entirely different way than men and it isn't something that a simple conversation can resolve. I'd say, probably 10years of marriage before we were getting close to being on the same page.
 
watch and study "Chick Flicks"....... consider them as "ground school" :)
 
Cajun_Flyer said:
It's easy to differentiate between *******s and confident men. Arrogance is a huge turnoff.
Click to expand...

I grew up next to a major university. Once I learned what the incoming female freshman thought they wanted, it was easy for me to find my prey, cut them off from the herd, then put on the act they expected, spend a night or two then off to the next one.

Confident? Yes. Arrogant? I would tell my friends tonight I will find a 6 feet tall red headed Oriental girl that can cook Tex-Mex, and I would. None of them ever figured me out until after I left, or long after I left for the next one. I am not proud of it now, though.

And when I thought it was time to get married, I did change my ways, several years before I met the girl I would marry.
 
Cooter said:
It's easy for men to see that difference, but obviously not for women. If you do, then you are the exception. I think what he's saying is men see nice girls hooking up with j@ck@sses that all the guys know will treat her like crap. And when he does, it's no surprise to all the guys who were watching it but the woman seems genuinely hurt because she was expecting Mr right. Most guys have seen this play out hundreds of times.
Click to expand...

I agree with you with one little change. The woman is genuinely hurt because she was expecting Mr. Right to change if he really loved her.
 
Cooter said:
One thing to add, I had no idea how terrible I was at reading signals before I got married. It took me about 5 years of marriage before I started seeing things outside of a single guy perspective. My opened my eyes to a whole new world of interpersonal communication that I didn't even know existed. By going back over some of our dating experiences, she pointed out things that I was totally oblivious to. I also realized that I had missed out on entire themes of movies we watched because I wasn't picking up on the non-verbal, but not necessarily subtle, references. It was through watching some of her movies that I realized I was way out of my league in the subtleties of interaction and had unwittingly been an oaf for many years. Women see things an entirely different way than men and it isn't something that a simple conversation can resolve. I'd say, probably 10years of marriage before we were getting close to being on the same page.
Click to expand...
Verbal communication only plays a small part in total. If you come to understand and master non-verbal communication, everything else in life becomes a lot easier.

Just look at how often pretty much everything on this board gets misinterpreted. :D
 
Cpt_Kirk said:
Verbal communication only plays a small part in total. If you come to understand and master non-verbal communication, everything else in life becomes a lot easier.

Just look at how often pretty much everything on this board gets misinterpreted. :D
Click to expand...

For years I demanded that my wife interpret only my verbal communication, and I would dutifully recall exactly what was said. I would win the battles but was slowly losing the war. Fortunately my eyes were opened to how simple-minded and foolish I was.
 
Cooter said:
...But I am familiar with it in terms of men attempting to re-take masculinity and reject the modern feminizing influence of political correctness that largely comprises the left....
Click to expand...
I know an organization that's devoted to helping men re-take their masculinity and reject feminization; it's based in Oakland, which hardly qualifies as a bastion of the right.

Why does everything have to be interpreted in the form of political stereotypes?
 
Last edited:
Rebel Lord said:
Ok so theres this girl in Mexico, we have mutual friends and we've been talking online for awhile now. We were kinda joking around and she asked if I could fly down and get her to "hang out". What do I have to do to fly down there and bring her back legally?
Click to expand...

Long as she has a seat belt and you are within weight and balance limits.
 
Palmpilot said:
I know an organization that's devoted to helping men re-take their masculinity and reject feminization; it's based in Oakland, which hardly qualifies as a basti.on of the right.

Why does everything have to be interpreted in the form of political stereotypes?
Click to expand...

Because they largely define our culture. The alt-right movement, the man-o-sphere, and players of "the game", aren't confined to one political party. But the energy behind the movement can be rightly attributed to the right, not the left, I believe. It is primarily a rejection of the influence of the left and the feminist movement. I'm not an expert on this stuff, I mostly brought it up hoping I could learn more. I think the categories hold here, but I'm willing to be corrected.
 
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2423

18 U.S. Code § 2423 - Transportation of minors
(a)Transportation With Intent To Engage in Criminal Sexual Activity.—
A person who knowingly transports an individual who has not attained the age of 18 years in interstate or foreign commerce, or in any commonwealth, territory or possession of the United States, with intent that the individual engage in prostitution, or in any sexual activity for which any person can be charged with a criminal offense, shall be fined under this title and imprisoned not less than 10 years or for life.

Not sure if that applies here, read the whole statute.
 
Cooter said:
Because they largely define our culture.
Click to expand...
That's a big part of the problem, we not only stereotype the left and the right, we stereotype men and women. There are large variations in how people think within each category.
 
Everskyward said:
That's a big part of the problem, we not only stereotype the left and the right, we stereotype men and women. There are large variations in how people think within each category.
Click to expand...
Do you think the use of stereotypes is always wrong?
 
camel said:
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2423

18 U.S. Code § 2423 - Transportation of minors
(a)Transportation With Intent To Engage in Criminal Sexual Activity.—
A person who knowingly transports an individual who has not attained the age of 18 years in interstate or foreign commerce, or in any commonwealth, territory or possession of the United States, with intent that the individual engage in prostitution, or in any sexual activity for which any person can be charged with a criminal offense, shall be fined under this title and imprisoned not less than 10 years or for life.

Not sure if that applies here, read the whole statute.
Click to expand...

Yup. There is a version of that for crimes committed outside of the US. So if a prosecutor in Mexico decides that the OP used coercion to get some action and whatever he does turns into 'criminal activity', he not only has to pay his way out of a mexican jail, he also has to deal with the feds when he returns.
 
Everskyward said:
It often causes people to come up with the wrong answers about other people.
Click to expand...
For ease of communication, I think it's fine to make the generalizations. If there are circumstances that refute the point being made, they can be brought up. From there, they can refute the generalization or be accepted as an anomaly. But categorization will always have exceptions, or at least almost always will. That doesn't deny the general truth of the category.
 
Cooter said:
For ease of communication, I think it's fine to make the generalizations. If there are circumstances that refute the point being made, they can be brought up. From there, they can refute the generalization or be accepted as an anomaly. But categorization will always have exceptions, or at least almost always will. That doesn't deny the general truth of the category.
Click to expand...
I notice that none of your justification includes the possibility that the generalization is incorrect.

Nauga,
non-conformal
 
nauga said:
I notice that none of your justification includes the possibility that the generalization is incorrect.

Nauga,
non-conformal
Click to expand...
Sentence number two in my post. It can be refuted if the circumstances are valid.
 
Cooter said:
For ease of communication, I think it's fine to make the generalizations.
Click to expand...
No wonder you find it hard to understand women. They are not alike. Just as men are not alike. You only need to read this board to know that.
 
Cooter said:
Sentence number two in my post. It can be refuted if the circumstances are valid.
Click to expand...
So you don't have to validate the generalization you claim, it's up to us to refute it or accept it as truth. I claim no side as my own and associate with hardliners on both sides and accept them as they are even though we might disagree. This one's all yours.

Nauga,
generally specific
 
Last edited:
Cooter said:
Do you think the use of stereotypes is always wrong?
Click to expand...
No, but I do think that it is greatly overdone in our society, and often falls victim to confirmation bias. For example, the phrase "political correctness that largely comprises the left" ignores the fact that the right has their own form of political correctness, in which certain political ideas are just ASSUMED to be true. You can see this in statements from right-leaning politicians and right-leaning commentators just as much as from those on the left. The only difference between them is that the things that are assumed to be true among one group tend to be different from what's assumed to be true among the other group.
 
Palmpilot said:
I know an organization that's devoted to helping men re-take their masculinity and reject feminization; it's based in Oakland...
Click to expand...
Uh oh, what's @Sac Arrow gotten himself into this time?

Nauga,
Oaklandish
 
nauga said:
So you don't have to validate the generalization you claim, it's up to use to refute it or accept it as truth.
Click to expand...
That depends upon he context of the conversation and how willingly the generalization is accepted. All generalizations are not equal, and some are more accurate than others.
 
Cooter said:
Sentence number two in my post. It can be refuted if the circumstances are valid.
Click to expand...
A person who states a generalization has as much responsibility to provide evidence as those who disagree.
 
Everskyward said:
No wonder you find it hard to understand women. They are not alike. Just as men are not alike. You only need to read this board to know that.
Click to expand...
Do you deny that any general statements about women can be made that are true? I don't think that all women are alike, I chose one to marry specifically because of the things that made her different. That doesn't mean that there aren't many ways in which she is generally the same.
 
Cooter said:
Do you deny that any general statements about women can be made that are true?
Click to expand...
While you can make general statements about women and men that are true of some of the group, there are enough differences that your generalizations will not be useful when talking about someone you don't know.
 
Palmpilot said:
A person who states a generalization has as much responsibility to provide evidence as those who disagree.
Click to expand...
See my response above. It is an absolute denial of reality to say that generalizations about the sexes cannot be made in a way that "generally" conforms to the truth. The same goes for the political parties. If there are no general distinctions, then the ability to distinguish between them becomes extremely difficult. Not all generalizations are true, but certainly all aren't false. To say that a river flows North to South doesn't preclude the possibilities of eddies or back currents.
 
150 posts...did anyone find a way to get OPs girl here or not??

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk
 
Everskyward said:
While you can make general statements about women and men that are true of some of the group, there are enough differences that your generalizations will not be useful when talking about someone you don't know.
Click to expand...
Ok, but that statement would look different. Contrast these statements:

Women are more nurturing and compassionate than men. Men are better able to provide physical protection of the home.

Everskyward is more compassionate than Cooter because she's a woman. Cooter is better than Everskyward at defending his home, since he is a man.

You are speaking of the second group of statements, while I have in mind the first.
 
Cooter said:
See my response above. It is an absolute denial of reality to say that generalizations about the sexes cannot be made in a way that "generally" conforms to the truth. The same goes for the political parties. If there are no general distinctions, then the ability to distinguish between them becomes extremely difficult. Not all generalizations are true, but certainly all aren't false. To say that a river flows North to South doesn't preclude the possibilities of eddies or back currents.
Click to expand...
I was talking about your generalization about political groups.
 
@Everskyward, @nauga, @Palmpilot, thanks for the Saturday night entertainment. I enjoy a good debate. Unfortunately it kept me from my required studies tonight!
 
Palmpilot said:
I was talking about your generalization about political groups.
Click to expand...
Then we'll have to define Political Correctness. If we do, then I think it will be easy to associate it with the left. My first inclination will be to cite the limits on free speech on college campuses, and I'm sure I can find many examples of that. Anne Coulter and Milo at Berkeley immediately come to mind. I would be interested to see how the Right promotes PC although I won't deny that they play their part.
 
Cooter said:
Ok, but that statement would look different. Contrast these statements:

Women are more nurturing and compassionate than men. Men are better able to provide physical protection of the home.

Everskyward is more compassionate than Cooter because she's a woman. Cooter is better than Everskyward at defending his home, since he is a man.

You are speaking of the second group of statements, while I have in mind the first.
Click to expand...
I don't think you have any real proof of the first set of statements, it's only your opinion, and you have no idea whether or not the second set of statements is true or not since you don't know me.
 
Everskyward said:
I don't think you have any real proof of the first set of statements, it's only your opinion, and you have no idea whether or not the second set of statements is true or not since you don't know me.
Click to expand...
On the second we can agree and I wouldn't make those statements. But on the first, I would suggest that you no blind yourself to reality in order hold on to your rejection of the second.
 
Cooter said:
Then we'll have to define Political Correctness. If we do, then I think it will be easy to associate it with the left. My first inclination will be to cite the limits on free speech on college campuses, and I'm sure I can find many examples of that. Anne Coulter and Milo at Berkeley immediately come to mind. I would be interested to see how the Right promotes PC although I won't deny that they play their part.
Click to expand...
Don't even go there...
 
Cooter said:
On the second we can agree and I wouldn't make those statements. But on the first, I would suggest that you no blind yourself to reality in order hold on to your rejection of the second.
Click to expand...
I would suggest that you are stereotyping people according to their gender without knowing them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top