Why do women ask?
WILLIAM
"Is the waitress good looking?" No matter what we answer it will be
wrong. I am interested in what questions, and any answers you have
to give so we do not get in trouble. My question that I need to learn
how to anwer is "Does this dress make me look fat? I have answered
this question yes, trying to be honest and have got into deep
trouble, and if I answer no I have been accused of being a liar.
Tell me how to answer this.
Thanks
William
Joe Quellen
>From: wjt...@msn.com (WILLIAM )
>Subject: Why do women ask?
>Date: 18 Jan 96 03:56:32 -0800
>Why do women ask men questions that have no correct answers. Such as
>"Is the waitress good looking?"
Correct Answer: "She is very nice looking . . . but not as great looking as
you are."
> No matter what we answer it will be >wrong. I am interested in what
questions, and any answers you have >to give so we do not get in trouble. My
question that I need to learn >how to anwer is "Does this dress make me look
fat?
Correct Answer: "You could never look fat."
Diamond
>Why do women ask men questions that have no correct answers. Such as
>"Is the waitress good looking?" No matter what we answer it will be
>wrong. I am interested in what questions, and any answers you have
>to give so we do not get in trouble. My question that I need to learn
>how to anwer is "Does this dress make me look fat? I have answered
>this question yes, trying to be honest and have got into deep
>trouble, and if I answer no I have been accused of being a liar.
>Tell me how to answer this.
I suspect your question is not, "Why do women ask men..." but "Why
does my girlfriend ask me...". Women are NOT one homogenous, undifferentiated
mass. Please have this tattooed on your forehead.
To address your question, the ideal solution is to choose partners that
don't ask questions that are essentially bear traps in verbal form.
However, this is nearly impossible, since *most* people, male and female,
occasionally do this. It's not all that uncommon to want reassurance on
an issue and yet believe that reassurance isn't justified, which is the
kind of feeling that leads to the sort of behavior you're describing.
Another possibility might be to amplify your answer so that it's harder
to misinterpret. "Well, actually, yes, I don't think that particular
dress suits your wonderful body as much as the green one you wore
yesterday."
A third possibility is to make nice and approach the problem head on
at a later time. Point out to her that when she asks you questions
of that sort she doesn't seem to like any of the possible answers,
and ask her what she *wants* you to say. While doing this, I'd take
great pains to emphasize your attraction to her and affection for her;
it sounds like she's insecure about her looks, and it may be possible
to make it clear that a dislike for a certain dress or the awareness
that the waitress is a bombshell doesn't alter your feelings about her.
If it happens all the time, and it's driving you crazy, and she's not
willing to talk about it directly, you may need to consider moving on.
In the end, it's not your problem, it's hers, and you can't make her
fix it.
--Diamond (all of the above IMHO, of
course)
-gordon.d.woods
>Why do women ask men questions that have no correct answers. Such as
>"Is the waitress good looking?" No matter what we answer it will be
>wrong. I am interested in what questions, and any answers you have
>to give so we do not get in trouble. My question that I need to learn
>how to anwer is "Does this dress make me look fat? I have answered
>this question yes, trying to be honest and have got into deep
>trouble, and if I answer no I have been accused of being a liar.
>Tell me how to answer this.
>
>William
"You like nice in anything you wear, dear." You don't answer the
actual question, you tell her something she wants to hear. Watch
People's Court sometime and you'll hear Judge Wapner constantly
saying "That is not an answer to the question I asked." People
are always answering questions with things unrelated to the
original question. Go for it.
Larry K
>
> to give so we do not get in trouble. My question that I need to learn
> how to anwer is "Does this dress make me look fat? I have answered
> this question yes, trying to be honest and have got into deep
> trouble, and if I answer no I have been accused of being a liar.
> Tell me how to answer this.
Snort, then throw her an ear of corn.
Larry Kahn "Winning isn't everything, but losing sucks."
lk...@mitre.org
Tonya
b)needing more attention. Here's a word of advice, never, ever tell a
woman she looks fat. If a woman asks you a question like that, and
you honestly think she looks large, you have to be smart enough to reword
the answer so it doesn't sound like you're saying she doesn't look
good.
In article <00002176...@msn.com>, wjt...@msn.com says...
>
>Why do women ask men questions that have no correct answers. Such as
>"Is the waitress good looking?" No matter what we answer it will be
>wrong. I am interested in what questions, and any answers you have
>how to anwer is "Does this dress make me look fat? I have answered
>this question yes, trying to be honest and have got into deep
>trouble, and if I answer no I have been accused of being a liar.
>Tell me how to answer this.
>
>William
suki
look fat?" Anticipate that kind of questions when you go shopping with
her and before she asks it, say tactfully.... you look great in that
dress (eventhough you are lying your ass off) but you would look better
in this... or this.... or you can say something like the colour is not
right for you. Don't criticize her figure. Criticize the clothes.
Eventhough you and I know that it's her figure you're looking at.
SUKI
the tree by the river
>"Is the waitress good looking?" No matter what we answer it will be
>wrong. I am interested in what questions, and any answers you have
>to give so we do not get in trouble. My question that I need to learn
>how to anwer is "Does this dress make me look fat? I have answered
>this question yes, trying to be honest and have got into deep
>trouble, and if I answer no I have been accused of being a liar.
>Tell me how to answer this.
Personally, I just go ahead and answer with what I think, though in
the case of "does X make me look fat," I usually go into more detail
than a simple "yes" or "no" answer (for example, "I think thus-and-such
tends to overemphasize your hips; perhaps it would work better with
this other top here"). I figure that if folks don't want to know the
answer to a question, they'd best avoid asking me in the first place;
of course, knowing this, they can also feel confident that, when I do
say that I like a particular outfit/food/whatever, that I'm not just
saying it to keep from hurting their feelings.
--
Trygve Lode | 6529 Lakeside Circle, Littleton CO 80125 | (303) 470-1011
Want a copy of the soc.singles FAQ? Send mail to tl...@nyx10.cs.du.edu
"I will stare at the sun until its light doesn't blind me...I will walk
into the fire until its heat doesn't burn me...." -- Sarah McLachlan
DreamDate
> how to anwer is "Does this dress make me look fat? I have answered
> this question yes, trying to be honest and have got into deep
> trouble, and if I answer no I have been accused of being a liar.
> Tell me how to answer this.
Tell the truth, but have an alternative outfit in mind that DOES look
good. I've asked this question of former boyfriends, and well....sometimes
I WAS fishing for compliments *smile*, but other times I really wanted a
straight answer.
Just my .02
Erika
--
Erika Linden Green - egr...@design.chi.il.us
freelance art director, traveler, rabbit owner
Amy Millard
> Why do women ask men questions that have no correct answers. Such as
> "Is the waitress good looking?" No matter what we answer it will be
> wrong. I am interested in what questions, and any answers you have
> to give so we do not get in trouble. My question that I need to learn
> how to anwer is "Does this dress make me look fat? I have answered
> this question yes, trying to be honest and have got into deep
> trouble, and if I answer no I have been accused of being a liar.
> Tell me how to answer this.
>
If you stop dating baffoons who ask stupid questions that they don't want
answers to, you might not have this problem. Be honest and if they don't
like it they won't ask. As far as questions like the first, the only
thing I have ever said that was even remotely like that was an assertion
of liek or dislike on my own part. Besides, it's fur to go girl/boy
watching with the oposite sex. Grin. You learn a lot.
Andrew Jenkins
>
>Why do women ask men questions that have no correct answers. Such as
>"Is the waitress good looking?" No matter what we answer it will be
>wrong. I am interested in what questions, and any answers you have
>to give so we do not get in trouble. My question that I need to learn
>how to anwer is "Does this dress make me look fat? I have answered
>this question yes, trying to be honest and have got into deep
>trouble, and if I answer no I have been accused of being a liar.
>Tell me how to answer this.
>
>William
Like this: ____________________ :-)
(Please note how little I actually said)
And remember to smile.
Ren Mika
It makes you look really hot.
Craig Macbride
>Why do women ask men questions that have no correct answers.
Well, as with many probing questions, they say as much about the person
asking as about the person answering.
>Such as "Is the waitress good looking?" No matter what we answer it
>will be wrong.
No, there is no wrong answer. If she's attractive, say so. If not, say so.
If the person asking the question is sufficiently miffed by your answer,
you should probably try going out with someone who doesn't ask dumb
questions.
>My question that I need to learn
>how to anwer is "Does this dress make me look fat?
There is no way. Have you ever met a woman who had a good self image and
who asks questions like that? I doubt it. If she's going to ask questions
like that, you are going to have to deal with the inevitability of giving
the "wrong" answer or preferably try to get her into a frame of mind in
which she doesn't place any emotional importance on the answers to such
questions.
--
_--_|\ Craig Macbride <cr...@rmit.edu.au>
/ \ <cr...@central.apana.org.au>
\_.--.*/ "Computers in the future may weigh no more than 1.5 tons."
v ... Popular Mechanics, 1949
Andreas Tovornik
WILLIAM (wjt...@msn.com) writes:
> Why do women ask men questions that have no correct answers. Such as
> to give so we do not get in trouble. My question that I need to learn
> how to anwer is "Does this dress make me look fat? I have answered
> this question yes, trying to be honest and have got into deep
> trouble, and if I answer no I have been accused of being a liar.
> Tell me how to answer this.
OK... Tell her it makes her look really huge. Tell her
that no clothes could possibly disguise that moo-cow
body of hers. Tell her how homely and grotesque she is
no matter what she wears...
After doing this, you will have no trouble getting her
into bed with you because you just acted like a jerk.
Women always go for jerks, you see, because jerks present
them with a challenge. Beware! They will try to manipulate
and change you afterwards...
--
'dreas... If you want something bad enough, you will get it.
VictoriaTaxi15 When you get it, you may wonder why you wanted it.
Cheezits
>Why do women ask men questions that have no correct answers. Such as
>"Is the waitress good looking?"
You know, I've never asked any man that question. I don't need to, because
they always volunteer the information. I haven't met a man yet who didn't
find it necessary to tell me how gorgeous other women were. (Well, there
was one who didn't, but I don't want to think about that.) What the hell
am I supposed to do with that information, anyway? One guy that I used to
go out with was always drooling over other women, while the most he could
say about me was "You look nice." I just wish I'd ditched him sooner than
I did.
>No matter what we answer it will be
>wrong.
She's probably trying to get you to tell her how good-looking she herself
is. Which you're supposed to do at least once in a while. Some women
require that feedback more than others, of course.
>My question that I need to learn
>how to anwer is "Does this dress make me look fat?
I don't even use that one in real life, because it's *such* a cliche.
Besides, I can usually tell whether something makes me look fat or not.
Maybe you should ask her if *she* thinks it makes her look fat,
emphasizing the fact that she isn't really fat, after all.
Sue (does my post look okay?)
-----
"Stop it, Kramer. You're freaking me out." - George Costanza
songbird
>In article <00002176...@msn.com>, WILLIAM wjt...@msn.com> wrote:
>
>>Why do women ask men questions that have no correct answers. Such as
>>"Is the waitress good looking?"
>
>You know, I've never asked any man that question. I don't need to, because
>they always volunteer the information. I haven't met a man yet who didn't
>find it necessary to tell me how gorgeous other women were. (Well, there
>was one who didn't, but I don't want to think about that.) What the hell
>am I supposed to do with that information, anyway? One guy that I used to
>go out with was always drooling over other women, while the most he could
>say about me was "You look nice." I just wish I'd ditched him sooner than
>I did.
*bwahahaha!*
most of my dates have pointed out which ones they like to me. i
usually don't agree since my taste in women is different than theirs.
it is usually a fun time trying to figure out what types turn each
other on (visually).
songbird (the mental stuff is a whole nother arena
piranha
>Why do women ask men questions that have no correct answers. Such as
>wrong. I am interested in what questions, and any answers you have
>to give so we do not get in trouble. My question that I need to learn
>how to anwer is "Does this dress make me look fat? I have answered
>this question yes, trying to be honest and have got into deep
>trouble, and if I answer no I have been accused of being a liar.
>Tell me how to answer this.
what do you want? peace and quiet for now? then tell her
that she looks great, and tell her so before she gets to
ask any questions. if you got into trouble for answering
the question honestly, then she isn't really interested
in a truthful answer to the question asked, but wants
reassurance that you find her still attractive, that you
care about her.
if you want a close and honest relationship, you might
want to express to her over time that you don't really
know how the hell to deal with questions like that, and
that maybe she could phrase them so you actually _know_
what she wants to hear from you. if she continues to
leave you hanging in trap questions like that, she's not
very considerate of _your_ well-being either. personally
i can't be bothered with people who beat around the bush
all the time; i find it excessively tedious.
but before you move on, write this on a piece of paper
and tape it on your mirror: women don't all think alike.
if i am wondering what my girlfriend means, i should ask
_her_ and not expect some other random woman out there
to enlighten me. women don't all think alike.
-piranha
Lars P. Fischer
>>>>> "William" == WILLIAM <wjt...@msn.com>
William> Why do women ask men questions that have no correct answers.
Yeah, that's truly annoying. I mean, there you are, the candles lit
and the music soft, half thru' that #&%!@ expensive Krug, your arm
around her shoulder, her head resting on your shoulder, and suddenly
she looks up, those innocent, blue eyes telling you she trusts and
depends upon you for happines, and she says "Darling, is light really
waves or particles?".
I hate it when that happens.
/Lars
--
Lars P. Fischer, fis...@dina.kvl.dk, http://www.dina.kvl.dk/~fischer
A distributed system is one in which I cannot get something done
because a machine I've never heard of is down --Leslie Lamport
Amy Millard
> In article <Pine.ULT.3.91.960119...@essex.UCHSC.edu>,
> Amy Millard <mill...@essex.UCHSC.edu> wrote:
> >On 18 Jan 1996, WILLIAM wrote:
> >
> >If you stop dating baffoons who ask stupid questions that they don't want
>
> ^^^^
> Little harsh there Amy, no?
>
Well, okay, maybe. I was having an off day. Replace the word with one
you prefer.
> >answers to, you might not have this problem. Be honest and if they don't
> >like it they won't ask. As far as questions like the first, the only
> >thing I have ever said that was even remotely like that was an assertion
> >of liek or dislike on my own part. Besides, it's fur to go girl/boy
> >watching with the oposite sex. Grin. You learn a lot.
>
> Don't think it's only buffoons...can also be someone who's insecure and wants
> some reassurance.
BTDT got over it with honest folks, not those that pretended for me.
Playing that game is not helping either party.
It's a great thing to have a supreme sense of
> self-confidence but not everybody does and that comes out in different ways -
> one of them is asking these kinds of questions. A kinder tack would be to
> give an answer that's a little warm and fuzzy but not dishonest, along the
> lines of Trygve's if I remember his post correctly.
>
There are many things in my life that don't involve nearly enough self
esteem, but people tip-toeing around them is only going to feed the
insecurities. Sure I was having an off day, and I wasn't exactly nice,
but the point is that it's folks like T and people who were even more
blunt than he that actually can help these folks get over it.
Mean Green Dancing Machine
Cheezits <chee...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>You know, I've never asked any man that question. I don't need to, because
>they always volunteer the information. I haven't met a man yet who didn't
>find it necessary to tell me how gorgeous other women were.
Well, I only tend to do that when I'm with a bi woman. For me, it's not
that different from looking at a porno mag (i.e., "look, don't touch"),
and there's not much point in sharing if the other person won't have any
chance of appreciating the 'art'.
--
--- Aahz (@netcom.com)
Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6
Androgynous kinky vanilla queer het
Netcom's newsfeed is currently flaky. If you want me to see your
article, please e-mail me a copy.
Lars P. Fischer
>>>>> "songbird" == songbird <ro...@mtu.edu>
songbird> most of my dates have pointed out which ones they like to
songbird> me. i usually don't agree since my taste in women is
songbird> different than theirs. it is usually a fun time trying to
songbird> figure out what types turn each other on (visually).
Agreed. Comparing tastes in wine and women is definitely a good way
to get to know each other better. I've found, though, that the women
I'm with are, in general, more interested in men, so when with a
woman, it's usually more fun comparing tastes in men.
crys...@exit109.com
Amy Millard <mill...@essex.UCHSC.edu> wrote:
>On 18 Jan 1996, WILLIAM wrote:
>
>> "Is the waitress good looking?" No matter what we answer it will be
>> wrong. I am interested in what questions, and any answers you have
>> to give so we do not get in trouble. My question that I need to learn
>> how to anwer is "Does this dress make me look fat? I have answered
>> this question yes, trying to be honest and have got into deep
>> trouble, and if I answer no I have been accused of being a liar.
>> Tell me how to answer this.
>>
^^^^
Little harsh there Amy, no?
>answers to, you might not have this problem. Be honest and if they don't
>like it they won't ask. As far as questions like the first, the only
>thing I have ever said that was even remotely like that was an assertion
>of liek or dislike on my own part. Besides, it's fur to go girl/boy
>watching with the oposite sex. Grin. You learn a lot.
Don't think it's only buffoons...can also be someone who's insecure and wants
some reassurance. It's a great thing to have a supreme sense of
self-confidence but not everybody does and that comes out in different ways -
one of them is asking these kinds of questions. A kinder tack would be to
give an answer that's a little warm and fuzzy but not dishonest, along the
lines of Trygve's if I remember his post correctly.
Crys
Ecstasy ain't free, compromise is chance...
-M. Etheridge
piranha
>chee...@aol.com (Cheezits) said:
>>
>>Maybe you should ask her if *she* thinks it makes her look fat,
>>emphasizing the fact that she isn't really fat, after all.
>
>makeup sucks too. Can we go already, we're going to be late."
if i was only poly, and you were only poly, and bighair
and HURL were only poly...*sigh*.
-piranha
Ogre
>
>>Why do women ask men questions that have no correct answers. Such as
>>"Is the waitress good looking?"
>
>they always volunteer the information. I haven't met a man yet who didn't
>find it necessary to tell me how gorgeous other women were.
[...]
>Sue (does my post look okay?)
Looks fine.
Hey, did you see Jackie's post? Now *there* was a gorgeous
post!...
--
- "Pipeline", the Alan Parsons Project
Trish Roberts
Cheezits <chee...@aol.com> wrote:
>In article <00002176...@msn.com>, WILLIAM wjt...@msn.com> wrote:
>>Why do women ask men questions that have no correct answers. Such as
>>"Is the waitress good looking?"
>You know, I've never asked any man that question. I don't need to, because
>they always volunteer the information. I haven't met a man yet who didn't
>find it necessary to tell me how gorgeous other women were. (Well, there
>was one who didn't, but I don't want to think about that.)
My ex used to ask that question, and it generally meant, "Are you attracted
to this person?" So, I could answer, "Lots of people might find him
attractive, but I don't." Or, "You have a cuter butt." At other times,
it meant that I was staring at someone--a bad habit that I have when I get
lost in thought, so I could answer, "Who? Him? I don't know, I've been
trying to figure out if one could say that language is socially
constructed, but ideas aren't."
>What the hell
>am I supposed to do with that information, anyway?
You are supposed to say, "Yeah, she's better looking than I am, and I bet
she has better taste in men, too." Then you walk away.
>>My question that I need to learn
>>how to anwer is "Does this dress make me look fat?
>I don't even use that one in real life, because it's *such* a cliche.
>Besides, I can usually tell whether something makes me look fat or not.
I can't. My thinking whether or not I'm fat has completely to do with
how my work is going. (Seriously.) So, the correct answer is an
accurate but flattering answer, such as, "It's doing something funny
around there" or "I don't like that dress as much as the blue one" or
asking for more information (like, "What do you mean by 'fat'?")
>Sue (does my post look okay?)
Yeah, does mine? Wanna wear the same color tomorrow?
--
Trish Roberts eng...@showme.missouri.edu [standard disclaimer applies]
"The singular is not Love's enemy;
Love's possibilities of realisation
Require an Otherness that can say I." (W. Auden)
Seth Breidbart
Cheezits <chee...@aol.com> wrote:
>In article <00002176...@msn.com>, WILLIAM wjt...@msn.com> wrote:
>
>>Why do women ask men questions that have no correct answers. Such as
>>"Is the waitress good looking?"
>
>You know, I've never asked any man that question. I don't need to, because
>they always volunteer the information.
Really? I can think of only one occasion on which I did something
like that (and the woman I was talking with is bi, we were both
checking out the passersby, and we weren't dating each other). I
might sometimes tell a friend that I'm attracted to a particular
woman, but that's a different issue.
> I haven't met a man yet who didn't
>find it necessary to tell me how gorgeous other women were.
Might I suggest you try switching planets? I suspect Trygve's might
be good for that problem.
> What the hell
>am I supposed to do with that information, anyway?
Have a head start when you turn bi?
>She's probably trying to get you to tell her how good-looking she herself
>is. Which you're supposed to do at least once in a while. Some women
>require that feedback more than others, of course.
And there are many different ways of expressing it. I prefer the
personal ones, rather than the abstract ones.
>Sue (does my post look okay?)
I can't tell from here; why don't you come a bit closer and show it to
me in person?
Seth
Insect God
>In article <00002176...@msn.com>, WILLIAM wjt...@msn.com> wrote:
>>Why do women ask men questions that have no correct answers. Such as
>>"Is the waitress good looking?"
>
>You know, I've never asked any man that question. I don't need to, because
>find it necessary to tell me how gorgeous other women were. (Well, there
>am I supposed to do with that information, anyway? One guy that I used to
>go out with was always drooling over other women, while the most he could
>say about me was "You look nice." I just wish I'd ditched him sooner than
>I did.
Men almost never do that around me. Maybe I pick 'em differently from you,
but I think it has a lot to do with taking the preemptive-strike approach: I
tend to notice the cute girl and mutter "hey, check those hooters!" while
elbowing the guy in the ribs. (One may also do this about hot men, but IME
there are a lot more great hooters than buff dudes out there, so the chance
doesn't come up as often.)
It's not a hard habit to get into, and once you're in it has about the same
emotional gradient as looking out a car window and saying "nice sunset"...I
don't know if men see it that way, but I wouldn't find it hard to believe.
Mate is mate, others are scenery.
But yes, it's in poor taste for him to do it and not also appreciate _your
charms. And vice versa.
>>My question that I need to learn
>>how to anwer is "Does this dress make me look fat?
>
>I don't even use that one in real life, because it's *such* a cliche.
>Besides, I can usually tell whether something makes me look fat or not.
>
>Maybe you should ask her if *she* thinks it makes her look fat,
>emphasizing the fact that she isn't really fat, after all.
How about "Honey, it makes you look like a walrus in suspenders, and your
makeup sucks too. Can we go already, we're going to be late."
Whatever happened to looking in the _mirror to find these things out?
-Sheba
Lars P. Fischer
>>>>> "Joe" == Joe Quellen <que...@azstarnet.com>
Joe> Correct Answer: "She is very nice looking . . . but not as great
Joe> looking as you are."
Why is that the "correct answer". It would be unlikely that I never
ran into someone (even a waitress) who could be said to "look better"
or be more physically attractive in a passing glance then my current
partner. Why is it wrong to say so?
Joe> Correct Answer: "You could never look fat."
Again, why is that the "correct answer"?
Lars P. Fischer
>>>>> "Trish" == Trish Roberts <eng...@black.missouri.edu>
Trish> My ex used to ask that question, and it generally meant, "Are
Trish> you attracted to this person?"
That's how I'd interpret such q question, and in most cases I'd assume
that zie asks because zie is genuinely interested in what I find
attractive, wants to compare attractions, or discuss attraction in
general. I'd therefore try to ask truthfully and try as best I can to
explain why I do find or do not find this particular person
attractive.
Trish> I can't. My thinking whether or not I'm fat has completely to
Trish> do with how my work is going. (Seriously.) So, the correct
Trish> answer is an accurate but flattering answer, such as, "It's
Trish> doing something funny around there" or "I don't like that dress
Trish> as much as the blue one" or asking for more information (like,
Trish> "What do you mean by 'fat'?")
Again, if I'm asked questions regarding how something looks, I'll
generally assume I'm being asked for assistance in choosing or
whatever -- probably since that's the only reason to ask a question
like that I can think of. *I* ask that kind of questions, since I'm
never sure that the green silk jacket goes with the black leather
pants and so on. So, I try to give advice as best I can.
Depends on the situation, of course. If someone happened to ask a
question like that at a dinner party, I'd probably react differently,
since it's unlikely that a bad choice can be backtracked by then.
DreamDate
> Men almost never do that around me. Maybe I pick 'em differently from you,
> but I think it has a lot to do with taking the preemptive-strike approach: I
> tend to notice the cute girl and mutter "hey, check those hooters!" while
> elbowing the guy in the ribs. (One may also do this about hot men, but IME
Heh, heh, heh. This is something that never really bothers me. If a person
stops looking at members of the opposite sex, even when with an SO, seems
to me they'd be dead, or otherwise devoid of pulse.
I do it myself, look at men AND women.It's all about appreciation of
beauty, and only someone who is terribly insecure would take offense.
As always, though, there are right and wrong ways to comment on it.
DreamDate
Fischer) wrote:
> she looks up, those innocent, blue eyes telling you she trusts and
> depends upon you for happines, and she says "Darling, is light really
> waves or particles?".
HAhahahahahaa!!!!!!!! I adore you!
E.
Julie Jauregui Holloway
*snip*
>Because they don't make mirrors anymore that say "You, oh fair queen, are
>the fairest of them all!"
Damn their eyes - I'd pay handsomely for such a mirror.
So for many women, the S.O. is supposed to fill
>that function.
There's always your manicurist or hairdresser...
ju...@vanity.thy.name.is.holloway
Ogre
Cheezits <chee...@aol.com> wrote:
>|post!...
>
Oh, I don't know. I never paid all that much attention to
fonts...
--
"The Ogre does what ogres can / Deeds quite impossible for Man /
But one prize is beyond his reach / The Ogre cannot master Speech"
- W. H. Auden
crys...@exit109.com
Amy Millard <mill...@essex.UCHSC.edu> wrote:
<snipped>
>>
>There are many things in my life that don't involve nearly enough self
>esteem, but people tip-toeing around them is only going to feed the
>insecurities. Sure I was having an off day, and I wasn't exactly nice,
>but the point is that it's folks like T and people who were even more
>blunt than he that actually can help these folks get over it.
Good point...agree totally.
Julie Jauregui Holloway
aa...@netcom.com (Mean Green Dancing Machine) wrote:
>In article <4du19m$4...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>,
>Cheezits <chee...@aol.com> wrote:
>>
>>they always volunteer the information. I haven't met a man yet who didn't
>>find it necessary to tell me how gorgeous other women were.
>
>that different from looking at a porno mag (i.e., "look, don't touch"),
>and there's not much point in sharing if the other person won't have any
>chance of appreciating the 'art'.
I think it really depends. From what I've observed, some men are just
admiring objectively, and would make the same kind of comment about an
old house or a sunset (and I do the same thing - I just like looking at
anything beautiful and that includes women). Other men make comments
like that to make their companion feel inadequate and unattractive - and
I think you can usually tell when that's the case. I wouldn't comment on
another man's appearance if I thought it would bother my companion.
julie@don't.put.up.with.dissing.cheezits
Seth Breidbart
Cheezits <chee...@aol.com> wrote:
>Because they don't make mirrors anymore that say "You, oh fair queen, are
>the fairest of them all!" So for many women, the S.O. is supposed to fill
>that function.
>
>Sue (does this wallpaper look frumpy?)
With you around to compare with, how else could it look?
Seth
Cheezits
>chee...@aol.com (Cheezits) said:
[etc.]
>>One guy that I used to
>>go out with was always drooling over other women, while the most he
could
>>say about me was "You look nice."
>
>Men almost never do that around me. Maybe I pick 'em differently from
you,
>but I think it has a lot to do with taking the preemptive-strike
approach: I
>tend to notice the cute girl and mutter "hey, check those hooters!" while
>elbowing the guy in the ribs.
Believe me, I pick them better now. The guy I mentioned above was someone
I dated about ten years ago, when I duidn't know any better. If I had
thought he appreciated me, I would have felt a lot differently. As it was,
the effect he had on my self-esteem was pretty destructive, for other
reasons as well.
My last boyfriend was a lot better. I only heard him admire someone else
maybe once or twice, in contrast with the numerous occasions where he told
me I was cute.
>>>My question that I need to learn
>>>how to anwer is "Does this dress make me look fat?
[etc.]
>Whatever happened to looking in the _mirror to find these things out?
Because they don't make mirrors anymore that say "You, oh fair queen, are
Twitch
Machine) wrote:
>In article <4du19m$4...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>,
>Cheezits <chee...@aol.com> wrote:
>>
>>You know, I've never asked any man that question. I don't need to, because
>>they always volunteer the information. I haven't met a man yet who didn't
>>find it necessary to tell me how gorgeous other women were.
>
>Well, I only tend to do that when I'm with a bi woman. For me, it's not
>that different from looking at a porno mag (i.e., "look, don't touch"),
>and there's not much point in sharing if the other person won't have any
>chance of appreciating the 'art'.
Before I climb up onto my soapbox, I'd probably better clarify
something here. When you say "it's" not that different from looking
at a porno mag, to what are you referring? Looking at passing
strangers, or something else? If the former, I'd say you've squicked
me in a major way. If the latter, then what?
_____________________________________________________________________
Lauren Crawford Holmes lho...@ix.netcom.com
Literacy is more than just knowing how, it's a matter of attitude.
-- Kenn Barry
_____________________________________________________________________
Cheezits
|>Sue (does my post look okay?)
|Hey, did you see Jackie's post? Now *there* was a gorgeous
|post!...
Hmmph! That Roman font makes her look cheap.
Sue
Seth Breidbart
You say that likes it's a bad thing.
Se...@i.like.cheap.posts
wendy c
Machine) wrote:
>Well, I only tend to do that when I'm with a bi woman. For me, it's not
>that different from looking at a porno mag (i.e., "look, don't touch"),
>and there's not much point in sharing if the other person won't have any
>chance of appreciating the 'art'.
and if you're female, you have to be bi (or gay) to appreciate beauty
in other women? doubt it.
wendy c (never been impressed with 'look, don't touch' rules either)
Andrew Jenkins
>
>
>>>>>> "Joe" == Joe Quellen <que...@azstarnet.com>
>
>Joe> Correct Answer: "She is very nice looking . . . but not as great
>Joe> looking as you are."
>
>Why is that the "correct answer". It would be unlikely that I never
>ran into someone (even a waitress) who could be said to "look better"
>or be more physically attractive in a passing glance then my current
>partner. Why is it wrong to say so?
>
>Joe> Correct Answer: "You could never look fat."
>
>Again, why is that the "correct answer"?
Well, it obviously isn't, is it. Each of us is going to respond in our
own way.
aj
Julie Jauregui Holloway
og...@iglou.iglou.com (Ogre) wrote:
>In article <4e31k3$i...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>,
>Cheezits <chee...@aol.com> wrote:
>>og...@iglou2.iglou.com (Ogre) writes:
>>
>>|>Sue (does my post look okay?)
>>|Hey, did you see Jackie's post? Now *there* was a gorgeous
>>|post!...
>>
>>Hmmph! That Roman font makes her look cheap.
>
>fonts...
Yeah, right.
I guess you're one of those guys who say "oh, I never even notice a
woman's fonts. I'm a paragraph-format man, myself."
Funny how you always see guys like that dating women with fabulous,
curvacious, lush fonts - and the concommitmant* absolutely pathetic
paragraph format.
ju...@buncha.damned.hypocrites
* I mean, unless she's had surgery or something - and you can usually
tell - it looks so fake.
Mean Green Dancing Machine
Twitch <lho...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>On Mon, 22 Jan 1996 17:03:33 GMT, aa...@netcom.com (Mean Green Dancing
>Machine) wrote:
>>Cheezits <chee...@aol.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>You know, I've never asked any man that question. I don't need to, because
>>>they always volunteer the information. I haven't met a man yet who didn't
>>>find it necessary to tell me how gorgeous other women were.
>>
>>that different from looking at a porno mag (i.e., "look, don't touch"),
>>and there's not much point in sharing if the other person won't have any
>>chance of appreciating the 'art'.
>
>something here. When you say "it's" not that different from looking
>at a porno mag, to what are you referring? Looking at passing
>strangers, or something else? If the former, I'd say you've squicked
>me in a major way.
Yup, I'm talking about looking at passing strangers. Note that I did
say "looking at a porno mag" not "masturbating with". So, what squicks
you about it?
An Exceedingly Well-Favored Piglet
>In article <4e0l93$t...@panix3.panix.com>, Insect God <sh...@panix.com> wrote:
>>chee...@aol.com (Cheezits) said:
>>>emphasizing the fact that she isn't really fat, after all.
>>How about "Honey, it makes you look like a walrus in suspenders, and your
>>makeup sucks too. Can we go already, we're going to be late."
> if i was only poly, and you were only poly, and bighair
> and HURL were only poly...*sigh*.
Why then you'd all be poly, and no one would be only poly.
Piglet
An Exceedingly Well-Favored Piglet
>Again, if I'm asked questions regarding how something looks, I'll
>generally assume I'm being asked for assistance in choosing or
>whatever -- probably since that's the only reason to ask a question
>like that I can think of. *I* ask that kind of questions, since I'm
>never sure that the green silk jacket goes with the black leather
>pants and so on. So, I try to give advice as best I can.
>Depends on the situation, of course. If someone happened to ask a
>question like that at a dinner party, I'd probably react differently,
>since it's unlikely that a bad choice can be backtracked by then.
Thank you!! Now if I could just sidle this into my housemate's
brain.....
Piglet, who'd actually started wondering if it were a "gender thing"
(I *blush* to say)
An Exceedingly Well-Favored Piglet
>Whatever happened to looking in the _mirror to find these things out?
The queen threw it out. (It was already broken. Stuck in a weird
tape loop, or something.)
Piglet
whimsey
-gordon.d.woods <g...@leigh.wh.att.com> wrote:
>In article <00002176...@msn.com>, WILLIAM <wjt...@msn.com> wrote:
+>>"Is the waitress good looking?" No matter what we answer it will be
+>>wrong. I am interested in what questions, and any answers you have
+>>to give so we do not get in trouble. My question that I need to learn
+>>how to anwer is "Does this dress make me look fat? I have answered
+>>this question yes, trying to be honest and have got into deep
+>>trouble, and if I answer no I have been accused of being a liar.
+>>Tell me how to answer this.
+>>
+>> Thanks
+>>William
=>
=>"You like nice in anything you wear, dear." You don't answer the
=>actual question, you tell her something she wants to hear.
That sounds dishonest, but it's not really. Anybody who asks "Do you
think the waitress is attractive?", is probably really asking, "Do you
still find me attractive?" The trick is to figure out what the person is
trying to ask. You don't have to do this all by yourself. You could say
something like "Are you wondering if I am more attracted to her than I am
to you?" I confess, I have been known to say when my SO is within
earshot, "I feel fat." The response, "I think you look wonderful, "
always turns out to be exactly what I was hoping for.
Twitch
Machine) wrote:
>In article <31044d6f...@nntp.ix.netcom.com>,
>Twitch <lho...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>>On Mon, 22 Jan 1996 17:03:33 GMT, aa...@netcom.com (Mean Green Dancing
>>Machine) wrote:
>>>In article <4du19m$4...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>,
>>>Cheezits <chee...@aol.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>You know, I've never asked any man that question. I don't need to, because
>>>>they always volunteer the information. I haven't met a man yet who didn't
>>>>find it necessary to tell me how gorgeous other women were.
>>>
>>>Well, I only tend to do that when I'm with a bi woman. For me, it's not
>>>that different from looking at a porno mag (i.e., "look, don't touch"),
>>>and there's not much point in sharing if the other person won't have any
>>>chance of appreciating the 'art'.
>>
>>Before I climb up onto my soapbox, I'd probably better clarify
>>something here. When you say "it's" not that different from looking
>>at a porno mag, to what are you referring? Looking at passing
>>strangers, or something else? If the former, I'd say you've squicked
>>me in a major way.
>
>Yup, I'm talking about looking at passing strangers. Note that I did
>say "looking at a porno mag" not "masturbating with". So, what squicks
>you about it?
Simply that, unlike people who pose for porno magazines, passers by
have not given you carte blanche to leer at them.
I suspect we have widely differing opinions on what constitutes
showing respect to another person in this matter.
Cheezits
writes:
>In article <4e31kf$i...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>,
>Cheezits <chee...@aol.com> wrote:
[etc.]
>>Sue (does this wallpaper look frumpy?)
>With you around to compare with, how else could it look?
Let me guess - you're the resident flirt here, aren't you?
Sue (not falling for it)
Mike Ehlers
I always believed that it wasn't the size of the font, it was how you use
it -- or so I've been told.
Mike (same font for 23 years).
Lars P. Fischer
>>>>> "Julie" == Julie Jauregui Holloway <nut...@uclink4.berkeley.edu>
Julie> I guess you're one of those guys who say "oh, I never even
Julie> notice a woman's fonts. I'm a paragraph-format man, myself."
Well, we really need women to be more bold; I'm sure Ges Hu will agree
with me on this.
/Lars
--
Lars P. Fischer, fis...@dina.kvl.dk, http://www.dina.kvl.dk/~fischer
Think Globally & Act Locally: hate the world and get pissed at the local pub
Mean Green Dancing Machine
>On Mon, 22 Jan 1996 17:03:33 GMT, aa...@netcom.com (Mean Green Dancing
>Machine) wrote:
>>
>>Well, I only tend to do that when I'm with a bi woman. For me, it's not
>>that different from looking at a porno mag (i.e., "look, don't touch"),
>>and there's not much point in sharing if the other person won't have any
>>chance of appreciating the 'art'.
>
>in other women? doubt it.
I wouldn't say that, but I don't think that het women can appreciate why
I find women sexually attractive.
Phillip J. Birmingham
Rumo(u)r has it that fis...@dina.kvl.dk (Lars P. Fischer) said:
>
>>>>>> "William" == WILLIAM <wjt...@msn.com>
>
>William> Why do women ask men questions that have no correct answers.
>
>Yeah, that's truly annoying. I mean, there you are, the candles lit
>and the music soft, half thru' that #&%!@ expensive Krug, your arm
>around her shoulder, her head resting on your shoulder, and suddenly
>she looks up, those innocent, blue eyes telling you she trusts and
>depends upon you for happines, and she says "Darling, is light really
>waves or particles?".
>
Hey, if you can't give 'er what she needs, send 'er my way...
--
Phillip J. "Photon phiz^H^H^H^H^H fis^H^H^H^H scientist" Birmingham
phi...@mcs.com "Tampering in God's Domain since 1965!" TMA#7
http://www.mcs.com/~phillip/home.html
quir...@ix.wcc.govt.nz
>William> Why do women ask men questions that have no correct answers.
>Yeah, that's truly annoying. I mean, there you are, the candles lit
>and the music soft, half thru' that #&%!@ expensive Krug, your arm
>around her shoulder, her head resting on your shoulder, and suddenly
>she looks up, those innocent, blue eyes telling you she trusts and
>depends upon you for happines, and she says "Darling, is light really
>waves or particles?".
The *correct* answer to that, both in romance and science, is to
reply "Which do you want it to be, Snoogums ?".
- Tony Q. (Hmm. If we had two observers, one looking for particles, one
looking for waves, would light develop MPD ?)
---
Tony Quirke, Journeyman Semiotician at Arms, Wellington, New Zealand.
"I saw his body thrashing 'round / I saw his pulse rate going down.
I saw him in convulsive throes / I said 'I'll have one of those !'"
- _I'm On The Drug That Killed River Phoenix_, Tism.
Ogre
Julie Jauregui Holloway <nut...@uclink4.berkeley.edu> wrote:
>
>og...@iglou.iglou.com (Ogre) wrote:
>>In article <4e31k3$i...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>,
>>Cheezits <chee...@aol.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>Hmmph! That Roman font makes her look cheap.
>>
>>Oh, I don't know. I never paid all that much attention to
>>fonts...
>
>Yeah, right.
No, really.
>I guess you're one of those guys who say "oh, I never even notice a
>woman's fonts. I'm a paragraph-format man, myself."
Well, yeah, okay, fonts do have their points. But what good's
a great font if the paragraphs have no format?
>Funny how you always see guys like that dating women with fabulous,
>curvacious, lush fonts - and the concommitmant* absolutely pathetic
>paragraph format.
Oh, you're just not noticing the ones who're dating women
with plain Courier fonts and flawless paragraph formats.
>ju...@buncha.damned.hypocrites
Yeah, don't ya just hate 'em?
Julie Jauregui Holloway
fis...@dina.kvl.dk (Lars P. Fischer) wrote:
*snip whether men notice women's fonts*
>Well, we really need women to be more bold; I'm sure Ges Hu will agree
>with me on this.
Oh, sure, you say that, but we all know that women who are bold are
really "uglies" or in financial straits.
ju...@bold.and.sassy.is.that.a.shampoo.or.what
Michael Sullivan
Twitch <lho...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>On Wed, 24 Jan 1996 00:13:33 GMT, aa...@netcom.com (Mean Green Dancing
>Machine) wrote:
[Aahz compares looking at a prono mag to commenting on passing stranger's
attractiveness]
>>Yup, I'm talking about looking at passing strangers. Note that I did
>>say "looking at a porno mag" not "masturbating with". So, what squicks
>>you about it?
>Simply that, unlike people who pose for porno magazines, passers by
>have not given you carte blanche to leer at them.
>I suspect we have widely differing opinions on what constitutes
>showing respect to another person in this matter.
I suspect that your widely differing opinions are about what constitutes
"looking at a porno mag." Leering is not required. And I thought Aahz's
comparison had more to with what one's state of mind is vis-a-vis one's
partner while doing it, not that the experience as a whole was the same.
i.e. "I comment on passing stranger's attractiveness to my lover in the
hopes that we can compare opinions and share the experience of beauty, in
the same way that we might look at porno-mags together."
I could be wrong (Maybe Aahz does like to leer at passing strangers), but
if I'm not are you still squicked?
If I saw you on the street, commented quietly to my paramour that I found
your figure and gait entrancing, and you were to later learn that I had
done so, would you feel disrespected?
Michael
Robert Blackshaw
writes...
<lotsa stuff about people leering at strangers>
>Simply that, unlike people who pose for porno magazines, passers by
>have not given you carte blanche to leer at them.
>
This is something that really bothers me. Where I grew up (Quebec) one
could walk down the street and seeing a woman who was walking toward one,
feeling great, happy with herself, exuding that certain "Je ne sais quoi"
and as a recognition of her day, one would smile as an acknowledgement,
and get a smile in return. No one was making passes, no one was implying
any "other" deal, it was a "salute"'
Then we moved to Ontario, and I thought that some of the women were going
to scream "Rape". Funniest thing was that on a business trip to L.A. I was
(out of habit) doing the same thing and getting smiles in response.
Drove my associate out of his mind. :-)
Bob
>I suspect we have widely differing opinions on what constitutes
>showing respect to another person in this matter.
>_____________________________________________________________________
>Lauren Crawford Holmes lho...@ix.netcom.com
> Literacy is more than just knowing how, it's a matter of attitude.
> -- Kenn Barry
>_____________________________________________________________________
--
Opinions expressed are those of the author and are copyrighted
RB & Associates - Consultants in Multimedia Teleconferencing
Twitch
>In article <3106e8c9...@nntp.ix.netcom.com>,
>Twitch <lho...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>>On Wed, 24 Jan 1996 00:13:33 GMT, aa...@netcom.com (Mean Green Dancing
>>Machine) wrote:
>
>[Aahz compares looking at a prono mag to commenting on passing stranger's
>attractiveness]
>
>>>Yup, I'm talking about looking at passing strangers. Note that I did
>>>say "looking at a porno mag" not "masturbating with". So, what squicks
>>>you about it?
>
>>Simply that, unlike people who pose for porno magazines, passers by
>>have not given you carte blanche to leer at them.
>
>>I suspect we have widely differing opinions on what constitutes
>>showing respect to another person in this matter.
>
>I suspect that your widely differing opinions are about what constitutes
>"looking at a porno mag." Leering is not required. And I thought Aahz's
>comparison had more to with what one's state of mind is vis-a-vis one's
>partner while doing it, not that the experience as a whole was the same.
>
>i.e. "I comment on passing stranger's attractiveness to my lover in the
>hopes that we can compare opinions and share the experience of beauty, in
>the same way that we might look at porno-mags together."
>
>I could be wrong (Maybe Aahz does like to leer at passing strangers), but
>if I'm not are you still squicked?
(Sorry to have included all that; I have no idea what to cut.)
Yes. If you'd said: "I comment on passing strangers' attractiveness
to my lover in the hopes that we can compare opinions and share the
experience of beauty in the same way that we might look at a Renoir
exhibit together," I'd have a different response. Particularly if you
compared notes with people other than just your lover.
>If I saw you on the street, commented quietly to my paramour that I found
>your figure and gait entrancing, and you were to later learn that I had
>done so, would you feel disrespected?
Probably not. If you'd gone on to say, "I bet her breasts look like
XXX; she makes me hard; too bad about her ass," I would (and not just
because of the ass).
The item "porno mag" is what moves my take on this issue past one of
appreciating attractiveness and into a much more heavily sexual realm.
Porno mags are designed to induce sexual arousal, whereas a Renoir art
exhibit celebrates beauty in human, often female, form. While there
may be an appreciation of beauty involved in a porno mag, and while
there may be sexual arousal produced by a Renoir exhibit, these are
not the focus or raison d'etre of either one.
Seth Breidbart
Twitch <lho...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>On Wed, 24 Jan 1996 00:13:33 GMT, aa...@netcom.com (Mean Green Dancing
>Machine) wrote:
>>Yup, I'm talking about looking at passing strangers. Note that I did
>>say "looking at a porno mag" not "masturbating with". So, what squicks
>>you about it?
>Simply that, unlike people who pose for porno magazines, passers by
>have not given you carte blanche to leer at them.
I've always thought there was something hypocritical about people who
didn't want me to look at them. If you don't want me looking at you,
then you shouldn't be looking at me, either, right? And if you don't
look at me, then you can't know whether or not I'm looking at you, so
what difference does it make?
Seth
Seth Breidbart
It took you this long to notice?
>Sue (not falling for it)
I hate it when that happens.
Seth
An Exceedingly Well-Favored Piglet
>>Twitch <lho...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>>>On Mon, 22 Jan 1996 17:03:33 GMT, aa...@netcom.com (Mean Green Dancing
>>>Machine) wrote:
>>>>Well, I only tend to do that when I'm with a bi woman. For me, it's not
>>>>that different from looking at a porno mag (i.e., "look, don't touch"),
>>>>and there's not much point in sharing if the other person won't have any
>>>>chance of appreciating the 'art'.
>>> When you say "it's" not that different from looking
>>>at a porno mag, to what are you referring? Looking at passing
>>>strangers, or something else? If the former, I'd say you've squicked
>>>me in a major way.
>>Yup, I'm talking about looking at passing strangers. Note that I did
>>say "looking at a porno mag" not "masturbating with". So, what squicks
>>you about it?
>Simply that, unlike people who pose for porno magazines, passers by
>have not given you carte blanche to leer at them.
He did say "looking at", not "leering at".
Piglet
Twitch
>In article <3106e8c9...@nntp.ix.netcom.com>,
>Twitch <lho...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>>On Wed, 24 Jan 1996 00:13:33 GMT, aa...@netcom.com (Mean Green Dancing
>>Machine) wrote:
>
>>>Yup, I'm talking about looking at passing strangers. Note that I did
>>>say "looking at a porno mag" not "masturbating with". So, what squicks
>>>you about it?
>>Simply that, unlike people who pose for porno magazines, passers by
>>have not given you carte blanche to leer at them.
>
>I've always thought there was something hypocritical about people who
>didn't want me to look at them. If you don't want me looking at you,
>then you shouldn't be looking at me, either, right? And if you don't
>look at me, then you can't know whether or not I'm looking at you, so
>what difference does it make?
I think you've missed my point.
It's lovely to admire and be admired (as in the post by Bob). On the
other hand, I think it's deeply disrespectful to presume that one has
the right to mentally undress passers by, and that's the conclusion I
drew from Aahz's comparison to looking at a porno mag.
As to whether or not said passers by will ever know -- they probably
won't. Does that negate the disrespect implied in the act itself? I
don't think so; it just puts it on a different level.
My squick, I should point out, wasn't a directly personal one (as in,
"Oh no, is that evil, nasty man entertaining naughty thoughts about
poor, pristine little *me*?"); I don't spend time worrying about it.
The squick came more from the idea that this is now a perfectly
acceptable way to treat others.
Kenn Barry
Twitch <lho...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>It's lovely to admire and be admired (as in the post by Bob). On the
>other hand, I think it's deeply disrespectful to presume that one has
>the right to mentally undress passers by, and that's the conclusion I
>drew from Aahz's comparison to looking at a porno mag.
"You can't go to jail for what you're thinking."
>My squick, I should point out, wasn't a directly personal one (as in,
>"Oh no, is that evil, nasty man entertaining naughty thoughts about
>poor, pristine little *me*?"); I don't spend time worrying about it.
>The squick came more from the idea that this is now a perfectly
>acceptable way to treat others.
"Now"? Lauren, the quote I wrote above is from a hit from the
1950s called "Standing On the Corner Watching All the Girls Go By".
This was pre-rock, the kind of thing the WWII generation went for. And
I hardly even need mention how strictly moral purity was enforced in
pop music back then. Approve or disapprove as you like, but there's
nothing modern about either girl-watching or fantasizing. It is
traditional and traditionally acceptable. What's modern is the questioning
of it.
Kayembee
Trish Roberts
Twitch <lho...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>The item "porno mag" is what moves my take on this issue past one of
>appreciating attractiveness and into a much more heavily sexual realm.
>Porno mags are designed to induce sexual arousal, whereas a Renoir art
>exhibit celebrates beauty in human, often female, form. While there
>may be an appreciation of beauty involved in a porno mag, and while
>there may be sexual arousal produced by a Renoir exhibit, these are
>not the focus or raison d'etre of either one.
Oh, I'm not sure about that. Quite a bit of Great Art was intended to
arouse the patron--that's why the patron wanted it in the first place.
They wanted an acceptable form of porn, but they still wanted something
that would make the little guy sit up and take notice.
And there are famous pieces of Great Art which were considered so
arousing that they were not shown to single men (such as that lovely
sculpture of--is it Aphrodite?--in the Uffizi).
--
Trish Roberts eng...@showme.missouri.edu [standard disclaimer applies]
"But you gotta go where your heart says go
She lets the bright lights guide her
Through the rain and the driving snow" (J. Hiatt)
Twitch
wrote:
>In article <3109623...@nntp.ix.netcom.com>,
>Twitch <lho...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>>The item "porno mag" is what moves my take on this issue past one of
>>appreciating attractiveness and into a much more heavily sexual realm.
>>Porno mags are designed to induce sexual arousal, whereas a Renoir art
>>exhibit celebrates beauty in human, often female, form. While there
>>may be an appreciation of beauty involved in a porno mag, and while
>>there may be sexual arousal produced by a Renoir exhibit, these are
>>not the focus or raison d'etre of either one.
>
>Oh, I'm not sure about that. Quite a bit of Great Art was intended to
>arouse the patron--that's why the patron wanted it in the first place.
>They wanted an acceptable form of porn, but they still wanted something
>that would make the little guy sit up and take notice.
That's an interesting assertion. On what is it based?
It also brings up a possible tangent to this discussion: Is all
appreciation of the human form sexually based? I'd say no, but I
suspect we're soon going to hear the argument that it is.
Mean Green Dancing Machine
Twitch <lho...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
>It also brings up a possible tangent to this discussion: Is all
>appreciation of the human form sexually based? I'd say no, but I
>suspect we're soon going to hear the argument that it is.
No, I can certainly appreciate _David_ or even the occasional
Adonis-on-the-street, and I'm pretty near to Kinsey 0. OTOH, I'd say
that babe-watching (which is what we were discussing), is at least
somewhat based on the visuals that stimulate you sexually.
Note that babe-watching is different from people-watching.
Mean Green Dancing Machine
Twitch <lho...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
>It's lovely to admire and be admired (as in the post by Bob). On the
>other hand, I think it's deeply disrespectful to presume that one has
>the right to mentally undress passers by, and that's the conclusion I
>drew from Aahz's comparison to looking at a porno mag.
Are you under the impression that one needs to mentally undress someone
in order to feel a sexual interest? In many ways, a person with a
certain amount of clothing can be *more* sexually attractive than the
same person completely naked.
Angela C. Lukach
[tangent on the discussion]
> Is all appreciation of the human form sexually based? I'd say no, but I
> suspect we're soon going to hear the argument that it is.
i'd have to say no too. but i suspect that it is tied to a culture's view
of sexuality. given the political/social climate of North America today,
i'd have to say we're heading for an era where, once again, the piano legs
must be draped in fabric, lest they be thought *suggestive*. :(
angie
Seth Breidbart
>It's lovely to admire and be admired (as in the post by Bob). On the
>other hand, I think it's deeply disrespectful to presume that one has
>the right to mentally undress passers by,
I have the right to _mentally_ do anything I want. Only the Thought
Police believe otherwise.
That my thinking some things is disrespectful, sure. So what? Absent
telepathy, you can't know what I think anyway, at best you can know
what I tell you about what I think (and you can try to guess what I
think from how I act (which will be no more successful than I want it
to, and anybody who feels otherwise is invited to my next poker
game).)
> and that's the conclusion I
>drew from Aahz's comparison to looking at a porno mag.
I see the similarity as: that's an _image_, and that's all it is.
>As to whether or not said passers by will ever know -- they probably
>won't. Does that negate the disrespect implied in the act itself? I
>don't think so; it just puts it on a different level.
It also makes it irrelevant: a difference that makes no difference is
no difference.
>My squick, I should point out, wasn't a directly personal one (as in,
>"Oh no, is that evil, nasty man entertaining naughty thoughts about
>poor, pristine little *me*?"); I don't spend time worrying about it.
>The squick came more from the idea that this is now a perfectly
>acceptable way to treat others.
That's a strange meaning of "treat" you're using. I take that word to
refer to the _actions_ one performs with respect to others.
But that's OK, I'm just a Turing Simulation of a person, so you don't
have to worry about me _thinking_ anything at all.
Seth
theurgy
>It also brings up a possible tangent to this discussion: Is all
>appreciation of the human form sexually based? I'd say no, but I
>suspect we're soon going to hear the argument that it is.
You rang?
I'm not well read on philosophical esthetics, so these are primarily my
own musings. I can think only of three sources of beauty: one based upon
symmetry, one based upon natural forms, and one based upon sexual attraction.
(In what follows I use the term symmetry to refer to regular patterns of
all kinds)
For some probably very deep reasons symmetry in all its variations is
deeply appreciated in every form of art and music. Much of music consists
of ever more elaborate variations of symmetric structures, often broken so
as to make their re-appearance even more pleasing.
Natural forms are seen as beautiful even when they are not symmetrical,
though of course many of them are on many levels at least partly
symmetric. I think their appeal arises largely out of the fact that
natural forms are the environment in which we have evolved. We
necessarily are at home and comfortable among them, have adapted
ourselves to them, are in tune with them.
Human beauty partakes of all three sources of beauty, with the sexual
component probably most eminent. The beauty of a baby, or of an old
person is not as easily or as generally appreciated as that of a person
at hir reproductive peak.
Felicitations,
M.
Robert Blackshaw
>>appreciation of the human form sexually based? I'd say no, but I
>>suspect we're soon going to hear the argument that it is.
>
>Adonis-on-the-street, and I'm pretty near to Kinsey 0. OTOH, I'd say
>that babe-watching (which is what we were discussing), is at least
>somewhat based on the visuals that stimulate you sexually.
>
>Note that babe-watching is different from people-watching.
Sigh, I've probably written this before, but what I miss about Quebec
is the healthy attitude of its women. Walking down the street you
may see a woman walking toward you, she has a half-smile on her lips,
she is feeling good about herself and it shows. You smile at her and
keep on walking (it's a salute) , she smiles and walks by, and you
both enjoy the day a little more. I treid it in Toronto (1967) and
I thought she was going to call a cop.
Bob
>--
> --- Aahz (@netcom.com)
>
>Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6
>Androgynous kinky vanilla queer het
>
>Netcom's newsfeed is currently flaky. If you want me to see your
>article, please e-mail me a copy.
--
Robert Blackshaw
writes...
<snip>
>
>It also brings up a possible tangent to this discussion: Is all
>appreciation of the human form sexually based? I'd say no, but I
>suspect we're soon going to hear the argument that it is.
>
painters who celebrated the human form but not in a sexual manner.
Now one may look at a photo or painting of a nude human and get
aroused, but that is the eye of the beholder. One quick example;
Where is the 'sexiness' in Michaelangelo's David?
Bob
>_____________________________________________________________________
>Lauren Crawford Holmes lho...@ix.netcom.com
> Literacy is more than just knowing how, it's a matter of attitude.
> -- Kenn Barry
>_____________________________________________________________________
--
An Exceedingly Well-Favored Piglet
>Sigh, I've probably written this before, but what I miss about Quebec
>is the healthy attitude of its women. Walking down the street you
>may see a woman walking toward you, she has a half-smile on her lips,
>she is feeling good about herself and it shows. You smile at her and
>keep on walking (it's a salute) , she smiles and walks by, and you
>both enjoy the day a little more. I treid it in Toronto (1967) and
>I thought she was going to call a cop.
Yes, you have posted it before, and I found it just as annoying then.
Why should the health of my attitude be judged by whether or not I'm
willing to smile at total strangers on the street? Piss off and mind
your own business.
(I just love the way you indict all Toronto women on the basis on one
encounter, 30 years ago. Really. Warms the cockles of my heart.)
Piglet
David E. Brown
>Yes, you have posted it before, and I found it just as annoying then.
>Why should the health of my attitude be judged by whether or not I'm
>willing to smile at total strangers on the street?
Because your attitude is all one has to judge you by during a casual
pass-by?
Piss off and mind
>your own business.
QED.
Susan T. Graul
>
> pig...@panix.com (An Exceedingly Well-Favored Piglet) writes:
>
> >Yes, you have posted it before, and I found it just as annoying then.
> >Why should the health of my attitude be judged by whether or not I'm
> >willing to smile at total strangers on the street?
>
> Because your attitude is all one has to judge you by during a casual
> pass-by?
Why judge at all? That's not much to go on.
> Piss off and mind
> >your own business.
>
> QED.
Piglet's got a 'tude. That's why we love zir.
Sue, ISO 'tude
Angela C. Lukach
An Exceedingly Well-Favored Piglet (pig...@panix.com) writes:
> blck...@clark.net (Robert Blackshaw), while prying the lemmings from hir ankles, exclaimed:
[bob's experiences in quebec and toronto snipped]
> Yes, you have posted it before, and I found it just as annoying then.
> Why should the health of my attitude be judged by whether or not I'm
> willing to smile at total strangers on the street? Piss off and mind
> your own business.
>
> (I just love the way you indict all Toronto women on the basis on one
> encounter, 30 years ago. Really. Warms the cockles of my heart.)
thank you, sweetie! *smooch*
angie
David E. Brown
>deb...@hubcap.clemson.edu (David E. Brown) wrote:
>>
>> pig...@panix.com (An Exceedingly Well-Favored Piglet) writes:
>>
>> >Yes, you have posted it before, and I found it just as annoying then.
>> >Why should the health of my attitude be judged by whether or not I'm
>> >willing to smile at total strangers on the street?
>>
>> Because your attitude is all one has to judge you by during a casual
>> pass-by?
>Why judge at all? That's not much to go on.
Like peristalsis, it just happens.
>> Piss off and mind
>> >your own business.
>>
>> QED.
>Piglet's got a 'tude. That's why we love zir.
Yeah, people we like with 'tudes, we like because we know deep down
inside they are wuvely, wittle, wascally, wabbits.
-Dave
Lars P. Fischer
>>>>> "Tony" == quirke a <quir...@ix.wcc.govt.nz>
Tony> The *correct* answer to that, both in romance and science, is
Tony> to reply "Which do you want it to be, Snoogums ?".
What do you take me for? A lawyer?
/Lars
--
Lars P. Fischer, fis...@dina.kvl.dk, http://www.dina.kvl.dk/~fischer
Think Globally & Act Locally: hate the world and get pissed at the local pub
Robert Blackshaw
>
<snip>
>(I just love the way you indict all Toronto women on the basis on one
>encounter, 30 years ago. Really. Warms the cockles of my heart.)
>
Free translation. I tried it once, ergo I only got the reaction of
one woman. If this somehow can be thought to indict all women in
that city I fail to see it. Having gotten to know many women in
that fair city over the years I would imagine that they are as
self-assured as anywhere. Back then I was rather shy, which is
probably why I never tried the smile again.
Have a jolly day.
Thbbbbt!
>
>Piglet
Susan T. Graul
>
> In article <4egqad$o...@panix.com>, pig...@panix.com writes...
> >
> <snip>
>
> >(I just love the way you indict all Toronto women on the basis on one
> >encounter, 30 years ago. Really. Warms the cockles of my heart.)
> >
> Free translation. I tried it once, ergo I only got the reaction of
> one woman. If this somehow can be thought to indict all women in
> that city I fail to see it.
Oh, Bob, Piglet was harsh, but I *know* you can see it. It had to do
with the way you wrote it: "the healthy attitude of _women_ in Quebec"
vs _women_ in Ontario, specifically Toronto. If you only tried it once
in Quebec, then you have committed the Dreaded Sin of Generalization.
Even if you tried it a large enough number of times to result in a
statistically significant sample, you committed the Dreaded Sin of
Remote Psychoanalysis. That is, smiling = healthy attitude, not smiling
= unhealthy attitude/fear of rape/flight or fight reaction. This
assumes a lot, right? Being one of those morose types who prefer to
think of themselves as contemplative and introspective, and having
rather slow social reflexes as well, I prefer to think that not smiling
at someone in response to zir [genuine, non-slimy] smile might be an
indication of my great Depth of Intellect, or that a mere acknowledgment
of zir existence by way of momentarily focused eyes suffices. (And
there are many other possibilities that have nothing to do with similar
delusions of grandeur: exhaustion, distraction, residual emotion from a
day at work.)
I'm also curious (seriously): if you smiled at a man and he didn't smile
back, would you have considered it an indication of an unhealthy
attitude?
Sue
Michael Sullivan
>>i.e. "I comment on passing stranger's attractiveness to my lover in the
>>hopes that we can compare opinions and share the experience of beauty, in
>>the same way that we might look at porno-mags together."
>>I could be wrong (Maybe Aahz does like to leer at passing strangers), but
>>if I'm not are you still squicked?
>Yes. If you'd said: "I comment on passing strangers' attractiveness
>to my lover in the hopes that we can compare opinions and share the
>experience of beauty in the same way that we might look at a Renoir
>exhibit together," I'd have a different response. Particularly if you
>compared notes with people other than just your lover.
Well, I do. Not everyone, of course. I probably wouldn't compare them with
you, for instance.
I think this is a personal/cultural difference, and it has to do with
what you consider acceptable entertainment (Dimestore psychologists 'R Us).
I'm having trouble reconciling your distinction, as Renoir nudes are much
more effective at exciting me sexually than most porno magazines. To the
extent that I consider "makes me hot" a prime feature of the Renoir
experience, and you'd have a hard time convincing me that this wasn't at
least partly the intention of the artist. The romantics were pretty
heavily into sexuality.
>The item "porno mag" is what moves my take on this issue past one of
>appreciating attractiveness and into a much more heavily sexual realm.
[Lauren supposes that Renoir isn't primarily intended as sexual where a
porn mag is.]
There's certainly a distinction I draw between Renoir or Botticelli and
"Hustler" or what have you, and it isn't simply one of technical mastery.
There's a maturity in the way sexuality is portrayed by the master
painters that isn't present in pulp porn. So, yeah -- a comparison to
David is much more flattering than to Long John Silver.
But not all "porn" is about big dicks, breasts, and cum shooting across
the room. There is some fairly interesting erotica about, that some folks
might call porn, but seems closer to Renoir on the maturity scale than
to Hustler.
I guess what I have trouble understanding is why it makes a difference
what some stranger thinks about you, assuming that zie isn't planning to
act on whatever fantasies zie may have.
Michael
Robert Blackshaw
writes...
>
>blck...@clark.net (Robert Blackshaw) wrote:
>>
>> In article <4egqad$o...@panix.com>, pig...@panix.com writes...
<snip>
>I'm also curious (seriously): if you smiled at a man and he didn't smile
>back, would you have considered it an indication of an unhealthy
>attitude?
Agreed that I did not cover the whole matter well. Partly because of
how my newsfeed reacts to long pauses (it goes away) and partly due
not explaining that I lived in Quebec for 40 years. During that time
I did get to know a lot of women and found that they do have a
'different' attitude. I picked up much of that attitude myself and
when we moved to Ontario I found the people there, who were of
English descent as I am, very different. Apparently some of the
French view of life rubbed-off. But it left me wondering where
in hell did I fit in.
Whatever, I'll continue this in installments if necessary or it
simply won't get out.
Bob
Oh yeah, about the men, I would probably think that the guy might
be thinking I'm trying to pick him up :-)
>
>Sue
Ravi Narayan
>
>Yes, you have posted it before, and I found it just as annoying then.
>Why should the health of my attitude be judged by whether or not I'm
>your own business.
>
ouch!! come on, smile a bit! its healthy for you!! and if you met me on
the street and smiled at me, that would make my day just that bit better.
wouldnt that be a nice thing to do? ;-)
-- ravi
--
------------------------------------------------------- none-%er #2 -------
Ravi Narayan AT&T Bell Labs, Holmdel NJ. 89 Suzuki GS500E
H: 908-940-9058 W: 908-949-5714 92 Ducati 750SS
r...@research.att.com __ http://vger.rutgers.edu/~ravi _ DoD Squid #1 _____
quir...@ix.wcc.govt.nz
>What do you take me for? A lawyer?
Why, no. I'd take you for the piranha.
- Tony Q. (I hate it when zie *toothy grins* at me, so I make sure zie's
well fed)
---
Tony Quirke, Journeyman Semiotician at Arms, Wellington, New Zealand.
"I saw his body thrashing 'round / I saw his pulse rate going down.
I saw him in convulsive throes / I said 'I'll have one of those !'"
- _I'm On The Drug That Killed River Phoenix_, Tism.
Andreas Tovornik
> In article <Ql3Nhuu00...@andrew.cmu.edu>, sgr...@andrew.cmu.edu
> writes...
>>
>>blck...@clark.net (Robert Blackshaw) wrote:
>>>
>>> In article <4egqad$o...@panix.com>, pig...@panix.com writes...
> <snip>
>
>>I'm also curious (seriously): if you smiled at a man and he didn't smile
>>back, would you have considered it an indication of an unhealthy
>>attitude?
>
> Agreed that I did not cover the whole matter well. Partly because of
> how my newsfeed reacts to long pauses (it goes away) and partly due
> not explaining that I lived in Quebec for 40 years. During that time
> I did get to know a lot of women and found that they do have a
> 'different' attitude. I picked up much of that attitude myself and
> when we moved to Ontario I found the people there, who were of
> English descent as I am, very different. Apparently some of the
> French view of life rubbed-off. But it left me wondering where
> in hell did I fit in.
From my perspective, having lived in Quebec for the first 28 years
of my life, I had the ever-encroaching feeling that I was not welcome
and didn't belong there, where I grew up. I didn't fit in anymore, if
ever...
I moved to an alien landscape, more foreign than even Ontario, and
the first year was the roughest. I fit in less than I ever did back
home. The second year was a bit easier, but it was a struggle...
Now, going on four years of living here, I still don't know where
I fit in, but the fit is better than anything I ever experienced
up until now. Maybe it's because I'm nocturnal, and that lifestyle
works best for me. Anyway, day people around here are most bizarre
from my upside-down way of experiencing life, and I know that I
can't fit into their world even if I try...
Too bad many of the women are stuck up.
--
'dreas... If you want something bad enough, you will get it.
VictoriaTaxi15 When you get it, you may wonder why you wanted it.
Angela C. Lukach
Ravi Narayan (r...@allegra.tempo.att.com) writes:
> In a previous article, pig...@panix.com (An Exceedingly Well-Favored Piglet) said:
>>
>>Yes, you have posted it before, and I found it just as annoying then.
>>Why should the health of my attitude be judged by whether or not I'm
>>willing to smile at total strangers on the street? Piss off and mind
>>your own business.
>
> ouch!! come on, smile a bit! its healthy for you!! and if you met me on
> the street and smiled at me, that would make my day just that bit better.
> wouldnt that be a nice thing to do? ;-)
no. social studies have found that men *expect* women to smile at them.
and many women do because they have been socialized to please people and be
*nice*. it annoys the hell out of me when total strangers tell me to *smile*.
when i was younger, i did it. now, i'm most likely to glare at him.
i am not on this earth to make some strange man's day better. but i do not
mind appreciation if i am in a mood to smile and someone offers a compliment.
i specifically recall my visit to The Taste of DC Festival last fall - it was
a beautiful, warm, sunny day and the music, adorable children, beautifully
dressed young women, exotic foods, and handsome men had a smile plastered to
my face. several men passed me and said "nice smile". i responded with a
wider grin and a sincere "thank you" [if you had seen my teeth when i was a
teenager, you'd understand!]!
angie
Jim Dutton
Ravi Narayan <r...@allegra.tempo.att.com> wrote:
>In a previous article, pig...@panix.com (An Exceedingly Well-Favored Piglet) said:
>>
>>Yes, you have posted it before, and I found it just as annoying then.
>>Why should the health of my attitude be judged by whether or not I'm
>>willing to smile at total strangers on the street? Piss off and mind
>>your own business.
>>
>
>ouch!! come on, smile a bit! its healthy for you!! and if you met me on
>the street and smiled at me, that would make my day just that bit better.
>wouldnt that be a nice thing to do? ;-)
the street. Our eye's meet. We get closer. Just as you pass by the mouth of an
alleyway a gang of ensyphillatic blue mo-hawked degenerates jumps you
and stabs you repeatedly in the heart and buttock region with ice picks.
-Jeem, that'd put some spring in my step!
alt.cuddle two doors down look for the boiler sign.
========================================================================
http://www.mcs.net/~jjd
Steatopygias's 'R' Us. doh#0000000005 That ain't no Hottentot.
Sesquipedalian's 'R' Us. ZX-10. AMA#669373 DoD#564. There ain't no more
"The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a little long
er. " -- Henry Kissinger
========================================================================
Lars P. Fischer
>>>>> "Susan" == "Susan T Graul" <sgr...@andrew.cmu.edu>
Susan> I'm also curious (seriously): if you smiled at a man and he
Susan> didn't smile back, would you have considered it an indication
Susan> of an unhealthy attitude?
I might consider it an indication the guy's het; same thing, right?
Robert Blackshaw
writes...
>
>Robert Blackshaw (blck...@clark.net) writes:
>> In article <Ql3Nhuu00...@andrew.cmu.edu>, sgr...@andrew.cmu.edu
>> writes...
>>>
>>>blck...@clark.net (Robert Blackshaw) wrote:
>>>>
>>>> In article <4egqad$o...@panix.com>, pig...@panix.com writes...
>> <snip>
>>
>>>I'm also curious (seriously): if you smiled at a man and he didn't smile
>>>back, would you have considered it an indication of an unhealthy
>>>attitude?
>>
>> Agreed that I did not cover the whole matter well. Partly because of
>> how my newsfeed reacts to long pauses (it goes away) and partly due
>> not explaining that I lived in Quebec for 40 years. During that time
>> I did get to know a lot of women and found that they do have a
>> 'different' attitude. I picked up much of that attitude myself and
>> when we moved to Ontario I found the people there, who were of
>> English descent as I am, very different. Apparently some of the
>> French view of life rubbed-off. But it left me wondering where
>> in hell did I fit in.
>
>From my perspective, having lived in Quebec for the first 28 years
>of my life, I had the ever-encroaching feeling that I was not welcome
>and didn't belong there, where I grew up. I didn't fit in anymore, if
>ever...
>
spoke French much better than today (It was only in Paris that they
didn't like my accent). It's quite odd how people change as you go
acroos the country. I've been in every province except Newfoundland
and the contrasts are interesting.
>I moved to an alien landscape, more foreign than even Ontario, and
>the first year was the roughest. I fit in less than I ever did back
>home. The second year was a bit easier, but it was a struggle...
>
>Now, going on four years of living here, I still don't know where
>I fit in, but the fit is better than anything I ever experienced
>up until now. Maybe it's because I'm nocturnal, and that lifestyle
>works best for me. Anyway, day people around here are most bizarre
>from my upside-down way of experiencing life, and I know that I
>can't fit into their world even if I try...
>
I thought I was doing pretty well here, but given the current wave
of mistrust in everyone and everything I guess as an incurable
optimist I'm on the outs again.
>Too bad many of the women are stuck up.
>
>
>
>--
>'dreas... If you want something bad enough, you will get it.
>VictoriaTaxi15 When you get it, you may wonder why you wanted it.
--
the tree by the river
>Rumo(u)r has it that fis...@dina.kvl.dk (Lars P. Fischer) said:
>>
>>she looks up, those innocent, blue eyes telling you she trusts and
>>depends upon you for happines, and she says "Darling, is light really
>>waves or particles?".
>>
>>I hate it when that happens.
>
> Hey, if you can't give 'er what she needs, send 'er my way...
I was reading Westword, one of Denver's weekly newspapers, the other
day and ran across an ad that made me think of you. Under the category
"physics," it exhorts us to dial their 800-number with extra-large,
boldface promises of "AMAZINGLY ACCURATE PHYSICS! GET ANSWERS NOW!"
(So, naturally, I couldn't help but imagine a lingerie-clad Phillip
surrounded by stacks of textbooks providing sensual but technically
accurate answers to the callers' deepest and most intimate questions
about the Higgs boson, Bell's inequality, and whether neutrinos have
rest mass. Hmmmm...I wonder if I could have brought a cellular
phone to my quantum mechanics exams....)
(This same page also contains ads for a massage school with a
biohazard symbol for a logo and a doctor claiming to be able to
add 1"-3" to your penis and/or nipples; I'm not at all sure I'd
want my nipples to be 3" larger.)
--
Trygve Lode | 6529 Lakeside Circle, Littleton CO 80125 | (303) 470-1011
Want a copy of the soc.singles FAQ? Send mail to tl...@nyx10.cs.du.edu
"I will stare at the sun until its light doesn't blind me...I will walk
into the fire until its heat doesn't burn me...." -- Sarah McLachlan
the tree by the river
>On 27 Jan 1996 16:01:45 GMT, eng...@black.missouri.edu (Trish Roberts)
>wrote:
>>In article <3109623...@nntp.ix.netcom.com>,
>>Twitch <lho...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>>>The item "porno mag" is what moves my take on this issue past one of
>>>appreciating attractiveness and into a much more heavily sexual realm.
>>>exhibit celebrates beauty in human, often female, form. [...]
>>
>>Oh, I'm not sure about that. Quite a bit of Great Art was intended to
>>arouse the patron--that's why the patron wanted it in the first place.
>
>That's an interesting assertion. On what is it based?
>
>It also brings up a possible tangent to this discussion: Is all
>appreciation of the human form sexually based? I'd say no, but I
>suspect we're soon going to hear the argument that it is.
I'd say "no," but I'd also say, "why is it so important?" What makes
one's appreciation of the human form automatically base and ignoble
if it's tinged with sexuality? Whether we're talking about the written
word, music, or images, the power of "great art" is its ability to
inspire strong feelings in the observer: what makes elation, sorrow,
serenity, and all these other feelings so different from lust and
arousal? What makes one set "uplifting" and the other "debasing"?
Ross Ridge
>(I just love the way you indict all Toronto women on the basis on one
>encounter, 30 years ago. Really. Warms the cockles of my heart.)
Robert Blackshaw <blck...@clark.net> wrote:
>Free translation. I tried it once, ergo I only got the reaction of
>one woman. If this somehow can be thought to indict all women in
>that city I fail to see it.
Bullshit. By comparing it to your experiences in Quebec you indicted
all Toronto women on the basis of one encounter.
(I never understood why I've seen so many posts over the years by men
complaining about Toronto women. I've smiled at Toronto women on the
street, sometimes I'm ignored, somethings I'm looked at with distaste
and sometimes the woman smiles back. Sometimes Toronto women smile at me
and I've reacted in all the same ways. I've had a number conversations
with women who were total strangers. I don't see a problem. I certianly
don't see why they always seem so indignant about it.)
Ross Ridge
--
l/ // Ross Ridge -- The Great HTMU +1 519 883 4329
[oo][oo] rri...@csclub.uwaterloo.ca http://csclub.uwaterloo.ca/u/rridge/
-()-/()/
db //
Phillip J. Birmingham
> phi...@MCS.COM (Phillip J. Birmingham) writes:
>>Rumo(u)r has it that fis...@dina.kvl.dk (Lars P. Fischer) said:
>>>
>>>she looks up, those innocent, blue eyes telling you she trusts and
>>>depends upon you for happines, and she says "Darling, is light really
>>>waves or particles?".
>>>
>>>I hate it when that happens.
>>
>> Hey, if you can't give 'er what she needs, send 'er my way...
>
>I was reading Westword, one of Denver's weekly newspapers, the other
>day and ran across an ad that made me think of you. Under the category
>"physics," it exhorts us to dial their 800-number with extra-large,
>boldface promises of "AMAZINGLY ACCURATE PHYSICS! GET ANSWERS NOW!"
Oh, wow! As a TA back at Vanderbilt, I was similarly inspired by
the students I had. Vanderbilt attracts some fairly wealthy students (I
walked past countless BMW's and one beautiful, black Ferrari 308 GTS in
the parking lots during my time there,) all of whom were required to take
physics, but not all of whom were any good at it. Imagine being a physics
student with decent teaching ability in a market with (1) a great deal of
money and (2) a strong need for physics clues.
The idea we came up with was indeed a 900-number physics help
line, where folks could call up ad get amazingly accurate answers. We
never did it, partly because we never did the research into getting a 900
number, and partly because there was a bit of a conflict of interest
involved (I mean, what if one of my *own* students called) but it's
interesting to see someone actually doing it.
>(So, naturally, I couldn't help but imagine a lingerie-clad Phillip
> surrounded by stacks of textbooks providing sensual but technically
> accurate answers to the callers' deepest and most intimate questions
> about the Higgs boson, Bell's inequality, and whether neutrinos have
> rest mass. Hmmmm...I wonder if I could have brought a cellular
> phone to my quantum mechanics exams....)
Thanks, Trygve. It'll be a week before I can sleep well again.
--
Phillip J. "With the weather we're having, all my lingerie is
flannel." Birmingham
phi...@mcs.com "Tampering in God's Domain since 1965!" TMA#7
http://www.mcs.com/~phillip/home.html
Ravi Narayan
>Ravi Narayan (r...@allegra.tempo.att.com) writes:
>>
>> ouch!! come on, smile a bit! its healthy for you!! and if you met me on
>> the street and smiled at me, that would make my day just that bit better.
>> wouldnt that be a nice thing to do? ;-)
>
>and many women do because they have been socialized to please people and be
>*nice*. it annoys the hell out of me when total strangers tell me to *smile*.
>when i was younger, i did it. now, i'm most likely to glare at him.
>i am not on this earth to make some strange man's day better. but i do not
>mind appreciation if i am in a mood to smile and someone offers a compliment.
>
my post was in a lighter vein, really. i didnt ask the person i was
addressing to smile for me as a man to a woman, but as one person to
another. i find it nice to have strangers smile at me. and i randomly
smile at strangers irrespective of whether they are men or women or
children! sometimes even dogs and an occasional frog too! possibly i
am wierd?