XPost: alt.philosophy.taoism, alt.buddha.short.fat.guy, alt.philosophy.zen
From: invalid@invalid.invalid
Kitty P wrote:
>
>
> "liaM" wrote in message news:ntrn00$n73$1@dont-email.me...
>
> On 10/14/2016 5:49 PM, noname wrote:
>> liaM wrote:
>>> On 10/14/2016 8:36 AM, noname wrote:
>>>> Kitty P wrote:
>>>>> "noname" wrote in message news:ntp2bk$koi$6@dont-email.me...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Kitty P wrote:
>>>>>>> "noname" wrote in message news:ntodoe$8q9$6@dont-email.me...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> dagnabit wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "Ned Ludd" wrote in message
>>>>>>>>> news:pu2dnSimW7_mgGLKnZ2dnUU7-LXNnZ2d@earthlink.com...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "Tang Huyen" wrote in message
>>>>>>>>> news:eaa3691f-3775-5c70-5b47-b3af4d6a37ad@gmail.com...
>>>>>>>>>> On 10/12/2016 8:07 PM, Ned Ludd wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Holy moly. So you want to grab women's breasts and put
>>>>>>>>>>> your hand up their skirts?? (Mentally.) That's quite an
>>>>>>>>>>> admission, even for a.b.s.f.g.
>>>>>>>>>>> I suppose it was only a matter of time. You can only stay
>>>>>>>>>>> stoic up to a point. Then it all spews out. Like a late-term
>>>>>>>>>>> volcano.
>>>>>>>>>>> Any more revelations?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> "You can only stay stoic up to a point" should have been:
>>>>>>>>>> "You can only stay platonic up to a point."
>>>>>>>>>> Returning to your post, many women complain that men
>>>>>>>>>> in authority (like professors and managers) figuratively
>>>>>>>>>> strip them naked when ogling them up close.
>>>>>>>>>> Tang Huyen
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> But seriously, what do you think women want?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> security, protection and emotional satisfaction.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> These days that often includes every shiny thing that can be
>>>>>>>> squeezed
>>>>>>>> into
>>>>>>>> the credit-limit.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> men just want to get their dicks wet.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'd say that's necessary-but-not-sufficient.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have a great time reading what men think about women. The
>>>>>>> fascination
>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>> me is that women aren't all the same and I read the generalizations
>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> same good humor as when women talk as if all men are the same. Both
>>>>>>> those
>>>>>>> generalizations just aren't universally true in either case. For
>>>>>>> example, if
>>>>>>> dinky dunkin' were the only thing in men's motivations - things would
>>>>>>> be
>>>>>>> pretty tense with mom, sis, aunties, daughters, and female friends.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If I were to name something that I think most women want - it would
>>>>>>> be
>>>>>>> simple kindness.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You don't mean actually caring enough that you're the fun part of his
>>>>>> life,
>>>>>> do you?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't sleep much anymore. Seldom more than about 4 hours. Then I
>>>>>> get
>>>>>> up
>>>>>> and do the next thing for a while. Around dawn when it's about time
>>>>>> for
>>>>>> the Old Woman to drag it out of bed (she's a 10-12-hour sleeper), I
>>>>>> start
>>>>>> getting a huge erection right on my smile muscles cuz I've remembered
>>>>>> that
>>>>>> there's more to life than what doesn't include her.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I can see there might not be a lot of kindness in her household.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I thought your vision was better. Sad sad.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> It could be that your description of your old lady dragging it out of
>>> bed was somewhat derogatory from a woman's point of view. Might be
>>> of course this is your manner of being affectionate, uh?
>>
>> I'm an old man, she's an old woman, we both think it's humorous that we
>> can
>> now play the "oh my i am old and lame and stupid and don't remember shit"
>> card and get away with it, because, you know, we're old now. It's a hoot.
>> Sometimes we walk toward each other like cuckoo-clock people when the hour
>> rings, then hug and crack up. Maybe living at high altitude has twiddled
>> our humor zones here and there, inspired a few brain defects, that kinda
>> thing.
>>
>>> Just like
>>> African Americans were reported to be calling each other "niggers" and
>>> other racist expletives while love making, something that most white
>>> anglo saxon prudes wouldn't understand.
>>
>> Can't really comment on that, i've never been a fly on that wall. As I
>> remember, all the black folks I've run into had more interesting things to
>> do than hang out with some white geek. Not counting the ones I've run
>> into
>> late at night in places no sane whitey would go, who were just folks with
>> whom I shared a perspective. I'm pretty sure that cats also yowl and
>> carry
>> on when they make love, whatever floats their boat is their deal.
>>
>>> And when you start with
>>> "getting a huge erection" upon remembering "that there's more to life
>>> than what doesn't include her." - What the hell does that mean?
>>
>> You have trouble with double-negatives too? Some do, some don't. Note
>> that I get a huge erection OF MY SMILE MUSCLES. Like Kitty, your brain
>> has
>> been programmed to turn off when it encounters certain phrases and
>> concepts. Maybe I'm just some old drunk programmer who gave it up for
>> deprogramming and booze, who's to know?
>>
>>> That
>>> you have your own life in which you really don't give a shit about
>>> including her? Or what?
>>>
>>
>> It means that there ain't no sunshine when she's gone, just the next
>> thing,
>> which isn't all that bad, but without her there's hardly any sunshine,
>> it's
>> just next-thing, not fun or unfun, but kind of empty.
>>
>> You know the old pave-parking-lot song, don't know what you've got until
>> it's gone; she came within an inch of dying last year, and I had a few
>> days
>> without her while she was in the hospital; before then I'd been too busy
>> living the life and raising kids and getting over parenthood trauma to
>> grasp the depth of my love for her.
>>
>> Now here I am, in a newsgroup where people supposedly think about things,
>> and I find people who think exactly as they've been taught, in the most
>> politically-correct manner, which seems really close to not-at-all.
>>
>
>
>
> Ok. Thanks for the explanation. I think you're a bit off the mark with
> your accusation of Kitty and I blinded because of some conditioning.
> The accusation says more about you than it does about us. But that's
> neither here or there. Kitty and I are not unaware robots. As I see it,
[continued in next message]
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
