"flexual"
stagesong
but rejects the idea of a cut-and-dried, black-and-white, binary
gender system. I sort of like it. I'm writing a paper for a class
called "Thinking Sex" about a sexual "sub-group" I identify with, and
I'd like to do one on "flexuality." Unfortunately, I can't find
anything about this term except that it exists, and that some people
identify that way. Does anyone know anything about flexaulity, the
word or the thing? The genesis of the term, the detailed meaning of
it, anything? Does anyone identify that way? I didn't know where else
to turn, so I thought I'd turn to my old friends at soc.bi, if I still
know anyone here.
Any thoughts or help would be greatly appreciated. Greatly.
And don't worry -- I've already been "de-muffined."
Michael Thomas
> Has anyone heard this hip, new term, "flexual"? It's like "bisexual,"
> but rejects the idea of a cut-and-dried, black-and-white, binary
> gender system.
Woop-diddly-do.
> Unfortunately, I can't find
> anything about this term except that it exists, and that some people
> identify that way.
The world is full of morons.
> Does anyone know anything about flexaulity, the
> word or the thing? The genesis of the term, the detailed meaning of
> it, anything?
Yes. It relates to a major step forward in evolution from
monobrowed monosexuals.
> Does anyone identify that way? I didn't know where else
> to turn, so I thought I'd turn to my old friends at soc.bi, if I still
> know anyone here.
I'm sure that one of the navel lint crowd around
here will be sure to oblige.
--
Michael Thomas (mi...@mtcc.com http://www.mtcc.com/~mike/)
Oh, the Bible is full of dribbling sperm-like fluids. All that
begetting and begotting! A race of genetic inbreds, that's us!
*X*
David Weinshenker
> (stagesong) writes:
> > Unfortunately, I can't find anything about this term except
> > that it exists, and that some people identify that way.
> The world is full of morons.
And _what_, in particular, is moronic about this particular term?
I admit that I've never encountered it before, but that's neither
here nor there: English is a living language, and new words do get
born once in a while!
-dave w
Michael Thomas
People do lots of different things in bed. Even
str8 people. The notion that liking boys and
girls at the same time makes you "flexible" is
ludicrous on its face. It's nothing more than a
crypto-bisupremist contortion.
Mr. Cow
Selfomatically I semiautoespy proaddifying socioidioms is a
flexointermutual way to say exresomething without alacking
to inreifically exsilencing anything. Antigenerally with
enheed of anthrocoitiality.
--
Adam C. Wick (aw...@bigmeanie.net) http://www.cs.utah.edu/~awick/
bisexual monogamous semiprudish judgmental bitter asshole fluffbear
Bratman
Omnisexual.
See, it's been done already.
--
Will
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Homepage http://www.bratman.org
ICQ 124522078 Webcam http://Bratman.camarades.com/
"I find that all of a sudden, I am a member of a
class — C.E.O.'s — that is held in lower repute
than priests." -Eric Schmidt, CEO of Google
Bratman
Mr. Cow wrote:
> David Weinshenker <daz...@earthlink.net> writes:
>
>>Michael Thomas wrote:
>>
>>>(stagesong) writes:
>>>
>>>>Unfortunately, I can't find anything about this term except
>>>>that it exists, and that some people identify that way.
>>>
>>> The world is full of morons.
>>
>>And _what_, in particular, is moronic about this particular term?
>>I admit that I've never encountered it before, but that's neither
>>here nor there: English is a living language, and new words do get
>>born once in a while!
>
>
> Selfomatically I semiautoespy proaddifying socioidioms is a
> flexointermutual way to say exresomething without alacking
> to inreifically exsilencing anything. Antigenerally with
> enheed of anthrocoitiality.
So I gather you don't believe that people who practice yoga
have their own form of sexuality?
Bratman
Michael Thomas wrote:
> It's nothing more than a
> crypto-bisupremist contortion.
Just cuz you can't touch your toes anymore is
no reason to dis someone else's trip dude.
--
Will
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Homepage http://www.bratman.org
ICQ 124522078 Webcam http://Bratman.camarades.com/
"Selfomatically I semiautoespy proaddifying socioidioms is a
flexointermutual way to say exresomething without alacking
to inreifically exsilencing anything. Antigenerally with
enheed of anthrocoitiality." -Adam Wick
David Weinshenker
>
> David Weinshenker <daz...@earthlink.net> writes:
> > Michael Thomas wrote:
> > > (stagesong) writes:
> > > > Unfortunately, I can't find anything about this term except
> > > > that it exists, and that some people identify that way.
> > > The world is full of morons.
> > And _what_, in particular, is moronic about this particular term?
> > I admit that I've never encountered it before, but that's neither
> > here nor there: English is a living language, and new words do get
> > born once in a while!
>
> Selfomatically I semiautoespy proaddifying socioidioms is a
> flexointermutual way to say exresomething without alacking
> to inreifically exsilencing anything. Antigenerally with
> enheed of anthrocoitiality.
I said _once in a while_!
-dave w
Bratman
David Weinshenker wrote:
> I said _once in a while_!
So here I was weinshenking while watching
a certain film involving Brazilian couples,
well actually most of the movie involved two Brazilian
men and one Brazilian woman, but I digress.
The thought occurred to me, during this weinshenking
session, that I might not be bisexual, but trisexual.
Considering that most of my weinshenking fantasies
involved triumvirs instead of couples, I'm having
a hard time figuring out what else could be going on.
So does this make me a trisexual, or just a dirty
old bastard?
--
Will
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Homepage http://www.bratman.org
ICQ 124522078 Webcam http://Bratman.camarades.com/
"Selfomatically I semiautoespy proaddifying socioidioms is a
flexointermutual way to say exresomething without alacking
to inreifically exsilencing anything. Antigenerally with
enheed of anthrocoitiality." -Adam Wick
David Weinshenker
> The thought occurred to me, during this weinshenking
> session, that I might not be bisexual, but trisexual.
So what does this mean? That you have
desires for me as well as for men and
women?
-dave w
Bratman
Hmmm. I don't think so. I mean, I don't exactly
think of *you*.
No offense. I can't even picture you in my head.
I have no idea what you look like and I'm an incredibly
visual person. Much to my detriment at times.
Larry Kessler
No. That just means he'll tri anything.
"Clichés explained to the clueless at no charge"
--
"I do not feel obliged to believe that same God who endowed us with sense,
reason, and intellect, had intended for us to forgo their use." - Galileo
Larry Kessler
wrote:
>fed...@starmail.com (stagesong) writes:
>> Has anyone heard this hip, new term, "flexual"? It's like "bisexual,"
>> but rejects the idea of a cut-and-dried, black-and-white, binary
>> gender system.
>
> Woop-diddly-do.
>
>> Unfortunately, I can't find
>> anything about this term except that it exists, and that some people
>> identify that way.
>
> The world is full of morons.
You may be one of them.
>> Does anyone know anything about flexaulity, the
>> word or the thing? The genesis of the term, the detailed meaning of
>> it, anything?
>
> Yes. It relates to a major step forward in evolution from
> monobrowed monosexuals.
I'm surprised nobody's flamed you yet for using that term. I got
raked over the coals for it not too long ago, but then the argument
over the word may have simply been a pretext for those bent on doing
the raking.
>> Does anyone identify that way? I didn't know where else
>> to turn, so I thought I'd turn to my old friends at soc.bi, if I still
>> know anyone here.
>
> I'm sure that one of the navel lint crowd around
> here will be sure to oblige.
I've never heard the term "flexual" and I'm not even sure I like it,
but I'm not about to kill the messenger. Chill.
Robert S. Coren
Bratman <dont...@40dboobs.com> wrote:
>
>So does this make me a trisexual, or just a dirty
>old bastard?
Most likely both.
--
---Robert Coren (co...@panix.com)------------------------------------
"My homosexuality is neither strange, surprising, unusual, or silly."
--FJ!! van Wingerde
Bratman
Larry Kessler wrote:
> On Sun, 22 Sep 2002 22:15:03 GMT, Michael Thomas <mi...@mtcc.com>
> wrote:
>> The world is full of morons.
> You may be one of them.
Micheal meet Larry. He'll next be seen hanging out
at a corner in The Heretic.
Bratman
> In article <3D8E7A11...@bellsouth.net>,
> Bratman <dont...@40dboobs.com> wrote:
>
>>So does this make me a trisexual, or just a dirty
>>old bastard?
>
>
> Most likely both.
That's a trick answer.
Mr. Cow
That's why I said 'semiautoespy.'
Duh.
Mr. Cow
> So does this make me a trisexual, or just a dirty
> old bastard?
It's a trisexual!
It's a dirtyolebastard!
It's BRATMAN!
David Weinshenker
>
> David Weinshenker wrote:
> > Bratman wrote:
> >
> >>The thought occurred to me, during this weinshenking
> >>session, that I might not be bisexual, but trisexual.
> >
> >
> > So what does this mean? That you have
> > desires for me as well as for men and
> > women?
>
> Hmmm. I don't think so. I mean, I don't exactly
> think of *you*.
>
> No offense. I can't even picture you in my head.
> I have no idea what you look like and I'm an incredibly
> visual person. Much to my detriment at times.
http://www.erps.org/pics/20010121/7.html
-dave w
Bratman
David Weinshenker
>
> David Weinshenker wrote:
>
> > http://www.erps.org/pics/20010121/7.html
>
> I never pictured you as a hippie.
You _didn't_??
-dave w
Tyrannic Hellish Cargo
<l_k_e_s_s_l_e_r@w_t_._n_e_t> eloquently pondered:
>On Sun, 22 Sep 2002 22:15:03 GMT, Michael Thomas <mi...@mtcc.com>
>wrote:
>> Yes. It relates to a major step forward in evolution from
>> monobrowed monosexuals.
>I'm surprised nobody's flamed you yet for using that term. I got
>raked over the coals for it not too long ago, but then the argument
>over the word may have simply been a pretext for those bent on doing
>the raking.
Um, Larry? Try reading for tone.
Craig, fluctually speaking
Annette
"Larry Kessler" <l_k_e_s_s_l_e_r@w_t_._n_e_t> skrev i melding
news:be0toukruscfap7s8...@4ax.com...
> >> Does anyone know anything about flexaulity, the
> >> word or the thing? The genesis of the term, the detailed meaning of
> >> it, anything?
> >
> > Yes. It relates to a major step forward in evolution from
> > monobrowed monosexuals.
>
> I'm surprised nobody's flamed you yet for using that term.
You really can't read for context, can you?
> I got
> raked over the coals for it not too long ago, but then the argument
> over the word may have simply been a pretext for those bent on doing
> the raking.
Sure. We're all out to get you because you're so...so...I don't really know
what you are beyond idiot.
>
> >> Does anyone identify that way? I didn't know where else
> >> to turn, so I thought I'd turn to my old friends at soc.bi, if I still
> >> know anyone here.
> >
> > I'm sure that one of the navel lint crowd around
> > here will be sure to oblige.
>
> I've never heard the term "flexual" and I'm not even sure I like it,
> but I'm not about to kill the messenger.
Kill the messenger? All I saw was someone making an attempt at the message.
> Chill.
Maybe you should sick your dog at him.
Brother Elf
Well, according to my sister, trisexual expands to "women, cats,
chocolate cookies". (She's just too cool for this world, my sis.)
Elf
--
"Is /it/ in you?"
-- trademarked Gatorade slogan
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
*** Usenet.com - The #1 Usenet Newsgroup Service on The Planet! ***
http://www.usenet.com
Unlimited Download - 19 Seperate Servers - 90,000 groups - Uncensored
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
David Weinshenker
>
> David Weinshenker wrote:
> > Bratman wrote:
> >
> > >The thought occurred to me, during this weinshenking
> > >session, that I might not be bisexual, but trisexual.
> >
> >
> > So what does this mean? That you have
> > desires for me as well as for men and
> > women?
>
> Hmmm. I don't think so. I mean, I don't exactly
> think of *you*.
So how can you call it "weinshenking" if you're
not actually doing me (even in your imagination)?
-dave w
The Millennium Wombat
>On Sun, 22 Sep 2002 22:15:03 GMT, Michael Thomas <mi...@mtcc.com>
>wrote:
>>fed...@starmail.com (stagesong) writes:
>>> Does anyone know anything about flexaulity, the
>>> word or the thing? The genesis of the term, the detailed meaning of
>>> it, anything?
>>
>> Yes. It relates to a major step forward in evolution from
>> monobrowed monosexuals.
>
>I'm surprised nobody's flamed you yet for using that term. I got
>raked over the coals for it not too long ago, but then the argument
>over the word may have simply been a pretext for those bent on doing
>the raking.
Or then again, you could just be paranoid. I read Michael
as being deeply sarcastic here. Maybe everyone else did too.
Jon
--
____________________ ____ _____________________________________________________
With metta from: \ _/__ It seems familiar somehow / Of course / The spell
j...@serf.org \X / we cast with Buffy must have released some primal
http://serf.org/jon/ \/ evil that's come back seeking/ I'm not sure what...
Sim Aberson
Larry Kessler <l_k_e_s_s_l_e_r@w_t_._n_e_t> wrote:
>On Sun, 22 Sep 2002 22:15:03 GMT, Michael Thomas <mi...@mtcc.com>
>wrote:
>> monobrowed monosexuals.
>
>I'm surprised nobody's flamed you yet for using that term. I got
>raked over the coals for it not too long ago, but then the argument
>over the word may have simply been a pretext for those bent on doing
>the raking.
It's a conspiracy against you, Larry. Michael Thomas is beloved by all
in this precinct. He's a great big fluffy happy plush toy whom everyone
wants to hold and squeeze and call George. Michael Thomas only hangs
out with cool soc.biters these days because he basks in the glory of
their universal love for him. That love is the only thing that
continues to give him self-esteem in his otherwise dreary life.
Everyone in soc.bi responds to this by heaping more and more praise and
love on Michael Thomas. If you knew how to read for content, yoou would
have figured this out long ago.
--
"Hurricanes and galaxies look alike, but while the former can strike
Puerto Rico, the latter CONTAINS Puerto Rico." -- Neal Dorst
Mike Jankulak
>It's a conspiracy against you, Larry. Michael Thomas is beloved by all
>in this precinct. He's a great big fluffy happy plush toy whom everyone
>wants to hold and squeeze
I'm trying to remember if I've ever squeezed Michael Thomas.
I imagine it would make his beautiful blue eyes bug (so to
speak) out.
>and call George.
Actually, I've always wanted to call him "Ethel." My Kink
Is Not Your Kink.
--
Anyway we can
We're gonna find something
We'll dance in the garden
In torn sheets in the rain -- the B-52's
Michael Thomas
> Sim Aberson <abe...@panix.com> wrote:
> >It's a conspiracy against you, Larry. Michael Thomas is beloved by all
> >in this precinct. He's a great big fluffy happy plush toy whom everyone
> >wants to hold and squeeze
>
> I'm trying to remember if I've ever squeezed Michael Thomas.
> I imagine it would make his beautiful blue eyes bug (so to
> speak) out.
> >and call George.
>
> Actually, I've always wanted to call him "Ethel."
I was browsing through some books down in the
Castro and was sorely tempted to buy a biography
of Vivian Vance. Apparently she was none too
pleased about being forever typecast as Ethyl.
> My Kink Is Not Your Kink.
My Kink is in the hands of the IESG.
--
Michael Thomas (mi...@mtcc.com http://www.mtcc.com/~mike/)
Oh, the Bible is full of dribbling sperm-like fluids. All that
begetting and begotting! A race of genetic inbreds, that's us!
*X*
Robert S. Coren
Bratman <dont...@40dboobs.com> wrote:
>Robert S. Coren wrote:
>> In article <3D8E7A11...@bellsouth.net>,
>> Bratman <dont...@40dboobs.com> wrote:
>>
>>>So does this make me a trisexual, or just a dirty
>>>old bastard?
>>
>>
>> Most likely both.
>
>That's a trick answer.
Just what question are you asking your tricks in order to get that
answer?
--
---Robert Coren (co...@panix.com)------------------------------------
"Similar economies might be effected in nature if lions could be
converted to vegetarianism." -- Donald Tovey [on the possibility of
peace between the followers of Brahms and Wagner/Liszt]
Larry Kessler
Craig, go flex yourself.
Robert S. Coren
The Millennium Wombat <j...@serf.org> wrote:
>Larry Kessler <l_k_e_s_s_l_e_r@w_t_._n_e_t> writes:
>
>>On Sun, 22 Sep 2002 22:15:03 GMT, Michael Thomas <mi...@mtcc.com>
>>wrote:
>>>fed...@starmail.com (stagesong) writes:
>>>> Does anyone know anything about flexaulity, the
>>>> word or the thing? The genesis of the term, the detailed meaning of
>>>> it, anything?
>>>
>>> Yes. It relates to a major step forward in evolution from
>>> monobrowed monosexuals.
>>
>>I'm surprised nobody's flamed you yet for using that term. I got
>>raked over the coals for it not too long ago, but then the argument
>>over the word may have simply been a pretext for those bent on doing
>>the raking.
>
>Or then again, you could just be paranoid. I read Michael
>as being deeply sarcastic here. Maybe everyone else did too.
Not possible. I've known Michael for a while, and he is *never*
sarcastic.
--Robert, nor am I
--
---Robert Coren (co...@panix.com)------------------------------------
"When angry, count four; when very angry, swear." -- Mark Twain
Larry Kessler
wrote:
>
>"Larry Kessler" <l_k_e_s_s_l_e_r@w_t_._n_e_t> skrev i melding
>news:be0toukruscfap7s8...@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 22 Sep 2002 22:15:03 GMT, Michael Thomas <mi...@mtcc.com>
>> wrote:
>
>> >> Does anyone know anything about flexaulity, the
>> >> word or the thing? The genesis of the term, the detailed meaning of
>> >> it, anything?
>> >
>> > Yes. It relates to a major step forward in evolution from
>> > monobrowed monosexuals.
>>
>> I'm surprised nobody's flamed you yet for using that term.
>
>You really can't read for context, can you?
Of course I can. Maybe it's just MY use of the word -- in whatever
context -- that brings out the flames.
>> I got
>> raked over the coals for it not too long ago, but then the argument
>> over the word may have simply been a pretext for those bent on doing
>> the raking.
>
>Sure. We're all out to get you because you're so...so...I don't really know
>what you are beyond idiot.
No, you don't. I'm WAY beyond idiot, but since you seem to be capable
of seeing people only in a binary way -- idiot or non-idiot -- I won't
bother trying to explain it to you beyond that.
>> >> Does anyone identify that way? I didn't know where else
>> >> to turn, so I thought I'd turn to my old friends at soc.bi, if I still
>> >> know anyone here.
>> >
>> > I'm sure that one of the navel lint crowd around
>> > here will be sure to oblige.
>>
>> I've never heard the term "flexual" and I'm not even sure I like it,
>> but I'm not about to kill the messenger.
>
>Kill the messenger? All I saw was someone making an attempt at the message.
No, it was Michael Thomas who *flamed* the messenger. I used the
metaphor "killing the messenger" without realizing that some in here
(you, for example) aren't well-read enough to have seen it.
>> Chill.
>
>Maybe you should sick your dog at him.
Why? He's not stalking me, my home, or my family. I only do that to
people who look up my address (since I don't hide my identity as some
Usenetters do...what's your last name, by the way?) and come around
making trouble.
Michael Thomas
> On Mon, 23 Sep 2002 06:04:44 GMT, "Annette " <a-h...@online.no>
> wrote:
> >"Larry Kessler" <l_k_e_s_s_l_e_r@w_t_._n_e_t> skrev i melding
> >news:be0toukruscfap7s8...@4ax.com...
> >> On Sun, 22 Sep 2002 22:15:03 GMT, Michael Thomas <mi...@mtcc.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> > Yes. It relates to a major step forward in evolution from
> >> > monobrowed monosexuals.
> >>
> >> I'm surprised nobody's flamed you yet for using that term.
> >
> >You really can't read for context, can you?
>
> Of course I can. Maybe it's just MY use of the word -- in whatever
> context -- that brings out the flames.
Respect my brow ridge.
Matthew
> Has anyone heard this hip, new term, "flexual"? It's like "bisexual,"
Ugh. neologisms. Ugh.
Matthew
--
Hwæt! We Gar-Dena in geardagum
şeodcyninga şrym gefrunon,
hu ğa æşelingas ellen fremedon.
Matthew
> Well, according to my sister, trisexual expands to "women, cats,
> chocolate cookies". (She's just too cool for this world, my sis.)
Sex with cats? ewwwwww
:)
Matthew
> That's why I said 'semiautoespy.'
I keep reading that as "semiautopsy". Clearly I've been in veterinary
medicine too long ;)
I'm not quite sure what a semiautopsy would be? Open it up and guddle
around looking for anything obvious, perhaps?
Annette
"Larry Kessler" <l_k_e_s_s_l_e_r@w_t_._n_e_t> skrev
> >
> >> >> Does anyone know anything about flexaulity, the
> >> >> word or the thing? The genesis of the term, the detailed meaning of
> >> >> it, anything?
> >> >
> >> > Yes. It relates to a major step forward in evolution from
> >> > monobrowed monosexuals.
> >>
> >> I'm surprised nobody's flamed you yet for using that term.
> >
> >You really can't read for context, can you?
>
> Of course I can. Maybe it's just MY use of the word -- in whatever
> context -- that brings out the flames.
You just proved my point. Thank you.
> >> I got
> >> raked over the coals for it not too long ago, but then the argument
> >> over the word may have simply been a pretext for those bent on doing
> >> the raking.
> >
> >Sure. We're all out to get you because you're so...so...I don't really
know
> >what you are beyond idiot.
>
> No, you don't. I'm WAY beyond idiot, but since you seem to be capable
> of seeing people only in a binary way -- idiot or non-idiot --
Don't flatter yourself. It's a sliding scale.
> >> >> Does anyone identify that way? I didn't know where else
> >> >> to turn, so I thought I'd turn to my old friends at soc.bi, if I
still
> >> >> know anyone here.
> >> >
> >> > I'm sure that one of the navel lint crowd around
> >> > here will be sure to oblige.
> >>
> >> I've never heard the term "flexual" and I'm not even sure I like it,
> >> but I'm not about to kill the messenger.
> >
> >Kill the messenger? All I saw was someone making an attempt at the
message.
>
> No, it was Michael Thomas who *flamed* the messenger. I used the
> metaphor "killing the messenger" without realizing that some in here
> (you, for example) aren't well-read enough to have seen it.
Oh, I know the story. Do you?
> >> Chill.
> >
> >Maybe you should sick your dog at him.
>
> Why? He's not stalking me, my home, or my family. I only do that to
> people who look up my address
You told me I could look it up, and I did.
> (since I don't hide my identity as some
> Usenetters do...what's your last name, by the way?)
My last name is available on a need to know basis (which is why most of the
regulars know it).
> and come around making trouble.
*giggle* As if.
Tyrannic Hellish Cargo
When you used the word "monosexual" last year, what you meant was
"this is an analytically and rhetorically valid label grouping
straight and gay people into a single category defined by their
non-bisexuality."
When MT used the word "monosexual" three posts ago, what he meant was
"you're the kind of person who *would* consider 'monosexual' to be an
analytically and rhetorically valid label grouping straight and gay
people into a single category defined by their non-bisexuality, aren't
you?"
If you're incapable of reading for context, that isn't anybody else's
problem but your own.
On Mon, 23 Sep 2002 15:14:01 GMT, Larry Kessler
<l_k_e_s_s_l_e_r@w_t_._n_e_t> eloquently pondered:
>On Mon, 23 Sep 2002 05:24:15 GMT, cas...@sympatico.ca (Tyrannic
>Hellish Cargo) wrote:
>>Um, Larry? Try reading for tone.
>>Craig, fluctually speaking
>Craig, go flex yourself.
You first.
Craig, being defiantly non-fluffy
Jason Parker-Burlingham
> Everyone in soc.bi responds to this by heaping more and more praise and
> love on Michael Thomas.
Oh, stop sucking up.
--
||----|---|------------|--|-------|------|-----------|-#---|-|--|------||
| ``Ooooaah! |
| I'm getting so excited about cheese-making I can't stand it!'' |
||--|--------|--------------|----|-------------|------|---------|-----|-|
Susan Davis
> abe...@panix.com (Sim Aberson) writes:
>
> > Everyone in soc.bi responds to this by heaping more and more praise and
> > love on Michael Thomas.
>
> Oh, stop sucking up.
What an outstanding post! You're the greatest, Jason!
--
Susan Davis <s...@sue.net>
serene
> Has anyone heard this hip, new term, "flexual"? It's like "bisexual,"
> gender system.
>
Pardon me while I barf.
serene
--
"If all your friends threw their breasts off a bridge, would you
throw *your* breasts off a bridge?" -- cute-poet-chick
serene
aw...@bigmeanie.net (Mr. Cow) wrote:
> David Weinshenker <daz...@earthlink.net> writes:
> > Michael Thomas wrote:
> > > (stagesong) writes:
> > > > Unfortunately, I can't find anything about this term except
> > > > that it exists, and that some people identify that way.
> > > The world is full of morons.
> > And _what_, in particular, is moronic about this particular term?
> > I admit that I've never encountered it before, but that's neither
> > here nor there: English is a living language, and new words do get
> > born once in a while!
>
> Selfomatically I semiautoespy proaddifying socioidioms is a
> flexointermutual way to say exresomething without alacking
> to inreifically exsilencing anything. Antigenerally with
> enheed of anthrocoitiality.
>
*smooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooch*!
serene
serene
serene
> Not possible. I've known Michael for a while, and he is *never*
> sarcastic.
>
Sarcasm upsets me.
B.C.^H^H^H^Hserene
Jed Davis
> It's nothing more than a crypto-bisupremist contortion.
As opposed, of course, to cryptochemocratic bisupremacy, which is
where the C*b*l secretly puts chemicals in the water supply which make
people believe that bisexuality is inherently superior.
HTH,
--Jed
--
<?xml version="1.0"?> <?xml-stylesheet href="http://panix.com/~jdev/xs/txt.xsl"
type="text/xsl"?> <sig name="Jed Davis"> <id dom="oberlin.edu" lp="sjld8197">
Student, 4th-Year</id> <id dom="cs.oberlin.edu" lp="jldavis">Major and Student
SysAdmin</id> <id dom="panix.com" lp="jdev">User</id> <q href="bin.q"/></sig>
Jed Davis
> On Sun, 22 Sep 2002 22:15:03 GMT, Michael Thomas <mi...@mtcc.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> The world is full of morons.
>
> You may be one of them.
Oh, great. Just what I needed: something else to distract me from
writing up my CS Theory problem set.
--Jed
--
<?xml version="1.0"?> <?xml-stylesheet href="http://panix.com/~jdev/xs/txt.xsl"
type="text/xsl"?> <sig name="Jed Davis"> <id dom="oberlin.edu" lp="sjld8197">
Student, 4th-Year</id><id dom="cs.oberlin.edu" lp="jldavis">CS Major and Student
SysAdmin</id><id dom="panix.com" lp="jdev">Panixer</id> <q href="bin.q"/> </sig>
Jed Davis
> Larry, just a friendly hint.
>
> When you used the word "monosexual" last year, what you meant was
> "this is an analytically and rhetorically valid label grouping
> straight and gay people into a single category defined by their
> non-bisexuality."
Note to self: define the M-Word as an SQL VIEW declaration the next
time the discussion comes around.
--Jed, who really needs to stop exiting emacs when trying to post from
Gnus; maybe I'll have to go over to using vi with mutt so the finger
macros will go away.
Jed Davis
> -bitty, who prefers to imagine most of soc.bi as hippies.
I might (now) have the hair for it, and I might own a tie-dye t-shirt
or two, but I am *so* not a hippie.
--Jed
Bratman
Brother Elf wrote:
>>>The thought occurred to me, during this weinshenking
>>>session, that I might not be bisexual, but trisexual.
>>So what does this mean? That you have
>>desires for me as well as for men and
>>women?
> Well, according to my sister, trisexual expands to "women, cats,
> chocolate cookies". (She's just too cool for this world, my sis.)
Well that rules *that* notion out. I don't care
for cats.
--
Will
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Homepage http://www.bratman.org
ICQ 124522078 Webcam http://Bratman.camarades.com/
"Selfomatically I semiautoespy proaddifying socioidioms is a
flexointermutual way to say exresomething without alacking
to inreifically exsilencing anything. Antigenerally with
enheed of anthrocoitiality." -Adam Wick
Bratman
> Bratman wrote:
>>David Weinshenker wrote:
>>>>The thought occurred to me, during this weinshenking
>>>>session, that I might not be bisexual, but trisexual.
>>>So what does this mean? That you have
>>>desires for me as well as for men and
>>>women?
>>Hmmm. I don't think so. I mean, I don't exactly
>>think of *you*.
> So how can you call it "weinshenking" if you're
> not actually doing me (even in your imagination)?
To quote someone around these parts...
"English is a living language, and new words do get
born once in a while!"
Just consider it my firstborn.
Bratman
> In article <3D8E8764...@bellsouth.net>,
> Bratman <dont...@40dboobs.com> wrote:
>>Robert S. Coren wrote:
>>>In article <3D8E7A11...@bellsouth.net>,
>>>Bratman <dont...@40dboobs.com> wrote:
>>>>So does this make me a trisexual, or just a dirty
>>>>old bastard?
>>>Most likely both.
>>That's a trick answer.
> Just what question are you asking your tricks in order to get that
> answer?
You know it's been so long I'm really convinced that
Tricks are for kids.
Bratman
> Brother Elf <broth...@gmx.net> writes:
>>Well, according to my sister, trisexual expands to "women, cats,
>>chocolate cookies". (She's just too cool for this world, my sis.)
> Sex with cats? ewwwwww
Matthew, do you know how to clean windows?
Bratman
> aw...@bigmeanie.net (Mr. Cow) writes:
>>That's why I said 'semiautoespy.'
> I keep reading that as "semiautopsy". Clearly I've been in veterinary
> medicine too long ;)
So you like dogs?
Bratman
Jason Parker-Burlingham wrote:
> abe...@panix.com (Sim Aberson) writes:
>>Everyone in soc.bi responds to this by heaping more and more praise and
>>love on Michael Thomas.
> Oh, stop sucking up.
It's pathetic what people will do to get
invited to a wedding, isn't it?
Bratman
> In article <3D8E947D...@earthlink.net>,
> daz...@earthlink.net (David Weinshenker) wrote:
>>Bratman wrote:
>>>David Weinshenker wrote:
>>>>http://www.erps.org/pics/20010121/7.html
>>>I never pictured you as a hippie.
>>You _didn't_??
> Neither did I.
Hey Serene, how did you picture him?
Bratman
> Yummy Cinnamon Goddess <bi...@panix.com> writes:
>
>
>>-bitty, who prefers to imagine most of soc.bi as hippies.
>
>
> I might (now) have the hair for it, and I might own a tie-dye t-shirt
> or two, but I am *so* not a hippie.
We won't believe you until we are provided
with photographic evidence.
Michael Thomas
> Yummy Cinnamon Goddess <bi...@panix.com> writes:
>
> > -bitty, who prefers to imagine most of soc.bi as hippies.
>
> I might (now) have the hair for it, and I might own a tie-dye t-shirt
> or two, but I am *so* not a hippie.
WOULD YOU PLEASE POST A URL SO THAT WE CAN ALL JUDGE FOR OURSELVES?
Thank you.
Mike, and if you're a good boy, we'll take you
through the Haight with flowers in your hair
on a tie-dye leash...
Michael Thomas
> Jason Parker-Burlingham wrote:
> > abe...@panix.com (Sim Aberson) writes:
>
> >>Everyone in soc.bi responds to this by heaping more and more praise and
> >>love on Michael Thomas.
> > Oh, stop sucking up.
>
> It's pathetic what people will do to get
> invited to a wedding, isn't it?
Ha! I've already thrown myself at the Newlyweds
to come and witness our pale imitation. It
didn't even garner a condescending "faggot
loser" response or anything.
Bug is crying in his gown as we speak.
--
Michael Thomas (mi...@mtcc.com http://www.mtcc.com/~mike/)
Oh, the Bible is full of dribbling sperm-like fluids. All that
begetting and begotting! A race of genetic inbreds, that's us!
*X*
Bratman
Michael Thomas wrote:
> Bratman <pars...@bellsouth.net> writes:
>>It's pathetic what people will do to get
>>invited to a wedding, isn't it?
> Ha! I've already thrown myself at the Newlyweds
> to come and witness our pale imitation. It
> didn't even garner a condescending "faggot
> loser" response or anything.
I will assume my engraved invitation has been
lost in the mail.
> Bug is crying in his gown as we speak.
Poor thing. He's such a sensitive sort.
Michael Thomas
> Michael Thomas wrote:
> > Bratman <pars...@bellsouth.net> writes:
>
> >>It's pathetic what people will do to get
> >>invited to a wedding, isn't it?
>
> > Ha! I've already thrown myself at the Newlyweds
> > to come and witness our pale imitation. It
> > didn't even garner a condescending "faggot
> > loser" response or anything.
>
> I will assume my engraved invitation has been
> lost in the mail.
Our mailman has an engraving fetish. Yours is
probably wrapped around a super-deluxe t-room
dildo as we speak. It's fitting in a way.
> > Bug is crying in his gown as we speak.
>
> Poor thing. He's such a sensitive sort.
Tell me about it. He's been bawling nonstop
since I suggested Calla Lilies as His Flower.
Fucking brides.
Mr. Cow
> aw...@bigmeanie.net (Mr. Cow) writes:
> > That's why I said 'semiautoespy.'
> I keep reading that as "semiautopsy". Clearly I've been in veterinary
> medicine too long ;)
> around looking for anything obvious, perhaps?
Well, for pigs, maybe part autopsy, part barbecue? ("Well, sir,
he died of heart failure, but his ribs sure taste good!")
--
Adam C. Wick (aw...@bigmeanie.net) http://www.cs.utah.edu/~awick/
bisexual monogamous semiprudish judgmental bitter asshole fluffbear
stagesong
do speak up. I'm in the process of writing my paper, and would love to
get a better sense of things. I'm not looking for support, just
opinions. (I like the point that it's absurd to call people who date
both men and women "flexible" when hetero couples can be just as
"flexible" in bed.)
Thanks guys.
stagesong
> In article <422d8989.02092...@posting.google.com>,
> fed...@starmail.com (stagesong) wrote:
> > Has anyone heard this hip, new term, "flexual"? It's like "bisexual,"
> > but rejects the idea of a cut-and-dried, black-and-white, binary
> > gender system.
> >
>
> Pardon me while I barf.
>
Look, I didn't mean to sound like a snob, or obnoxious, or anything. I
mean, if you need to barf, by all means -- do what you gotta do. But I
was only trying to explain a term based on my limited understanding,
and hoping people would further my understanding and help me
contextualize it.
You have been pretty much not at all helpful. Michael Thomas made a
very astute remark toward the beginning of the thread, but at this
point, it's been buried in drivel. I know drivel's what makes people
Usenet addicts, but it's a shame this is no longer a place we can spur
a real dialogue about something.
Brother Elf
>>>>> "C" == Cow <aw...@bigmeanie.net> writes:
> Matthew <matt...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> writes:
>> aw...@bigmeanie.net (Mr. Cow) writes:
>> > That's why I said 'semiautoespy.'
>> I keep reading that as "semiautopsy". Clearly I've been in veterinary
>> medicine too long ;)
>> I'm not quite sure what a semiautopsy would be? Open it up and guddle
>> around looking for anything obvious, perhaps?
> Well, for pigs, maybe part autopsy, part barbecue? ("Well, sir,
> he died of heart failure, but his ribs sure taste good!")
OK, how do I get the ersatz coffee out of the rear part of my nose now?
Brother "caffeine? whussat?" Elf
--
There are no problems with flatmates that couldn't
be solved with a pick and a sufficiently large icebox.
http://buerger.metropolis.de/brotherelf/bffh1.html
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
*** Usenet.com - The #1 Usenet Newsgroup Service on The Planet! ***
http://www.usenet.com
Unlimited Download - 19 Seperate Servers - 90,000 groups - Uncensored
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Ayana Craven
stagesong <fed...@starmail.com> wrote:
>serene <ser...@serenepages.org> wrote in message news:<MPG.17f93c72c...@news.nethere.net>...
>> In article <422d8989.02092...@posting.google.com>,
>> fed...@starmail.com (stagesong) wrote:
>> > Has anyone heard this hip, new term, "flexual"? It's like "bisexual,"
>> > but rejects the idea of a cut-and-dried, black-and-white, binary
>> > gender system.
>>
>> Pardon me while I barf.
>
>Look, I didn't mean to sound like a snob, or obnoxious, or anything. I
>mean, if you need to barf, by all means -- do what you gotta do. But I
>was only trying to explain a term based on my limited understanding,
>and hoping people would further my understanding and help me
>contextualize it.
I think you've gotten plenty of feedback.
>You have been pretty much not at all helpful. Michael Thomas made a
>very astute remark toward the beginning of the thread, but at this
>point, it's been buried in drivel. I know drivel's what makes people
>Usenet addicts, but it's a shame this is no longer a place we can spur
>a real dialogue about something.
Hey, if what you wanted was a rousing chorus of "oh, you're
wonderful", take a steak down to the dog pound. "Dialogue" takes
two sides -- so far the response has been pretty uniformly negative.
Now, if you want dialogue, apparently you're going to have to hold
up the "pro" side all by yourself.
"Drivel" is, however, a pretty good word for your original article.
BTW, what is "new" in your universe ? Didn't this pass through some
time last year ? And has nobody pointed out that "flexual" is
actually a word in use already ?
Ayana
--
I think that we have to consider the possibility that he's a
Promise Keeper.
-- Lisa, discussing soc.bi
Ayana Craven
>do speak up. I'm in the process of writing my paper, and would love to
>get a better sense of things.
Ah, right, that why you're all upset. You're waiting for us to
write your paper for you !
Sorry, you're going to have to come up with it yourself.
Andrea Merrell
> Basking in today's glorious sunshine, Bratman <pars...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> > Jason Parker-Burlingham wrote:
> >> abe...@panix.com (Sim Aberson) writes:
> >>>Everyone in soc.bi responds to this by heaping more and more praise and
> >>>love on Michael Thomas.
> >> Oh, stop sucking up.
>
> > It's pathetic what people will do to get
> > invited to a wedding, isn't it?
>
Is this where he should be wary of bisexuals bearing cookies?
Andi
--
Andrea Merrell, the fluffKitten.
a ratbag scruffy femme,
caffeine addict and known hater of mornings.
Susan Davis
>
> i have Piglet Party photos. OTOH, i also have ethics about
> photo distribution.
Eeeeeeeep! That's right -- I still have a big batch of Piglet Party
photos
that I've been meaning to send out to the relevant people (the ones
pictured)
for, like, a year, but have been too lazy to sit down and sort through.
Bad Sue, no biscuit....
-- Sue --
(I'll get around to procrastinating one of these days)
--
Susan Davis <s...@sue.net>
Ellen Evans
>do speak up.
This really en't the tone you want to adopt if you want "help".
>I'm in the process of writing my paper, and would love to
>get a better sense of things.
I'd say that the sense of things demonstrated here is that there is
already a perfectly good word for people who are sexually attracted to
both men and women, that attempts to come up with a new, "better'" word
are, historically, tied to folks trying to be trendy and avoid the very
real, very concrete complexity of being motss-attracted in a homophobic
world, and that this particular neologism is just silly.
HTH.
--
Ellen Evans je...@panix.com
Michael Thomas is . . . a great big fluffy happy plush toy whom everyone
wants to hold and squeeze and call George. -Sim, speaking for us all
Tyrannic Hellish Cargo
eloquently pondered:
>Look, I didn't mean to sound like a snob, or obnoxious, or anything. I
>mean, if you need to barf, by all means -- do what you gotta do. But I
>was only trying to explain a term based on my limited understanding,
>and hoping people would further my understanding and help me
>contextualize it.
I don't know that the discussion *could* have been clearer than it was
about the problem with "flexual", but here goes anyway.
For years -- decades, even -- people have invented new terminology
(pansexual, omnisexual, just sexual, peoplesexual, andro/gynosexual,
heteroflexible, down low, open-minded, *l*x Br*zz*n*, etc.) so that
they could say "I'm open to a little same-sex action" without actually
having to adopt one of the labels (gay, lesbian, bisexual) that
already exist to cover what they're trying to say. Adopting a label
such as gay, lesbian or bisexual might force them to actually deal
with the discrimination and the negative stereotypes that gays,
lesbians and bisexuals face on a daily basis. But no, we can't very
well accept *that*, can we?
So instead of taking some responsibility for helping to change
mainstream society's fucked-up attitudes about LGBT folk, these people
decide that the *words* gay, lesbian or bisexual don't describe their
reality, and create new words to apply to themselves -- words which,
at their base, mean "just because I {suck dick/lick pussy/get hot for
trannies} once in a while doesn't make me one of *those* icky queer
people, so don't take away *MY* heterosexual privilege!"
"Flexual" is just another in an *endless* line of weasel words whose
whole purpose is to facilitate getting that all-important same-sex
nookie without actually having to take the consequences of labelling
yourself gay, lesbian or bisexual.
That's its context. Happy now?
>You have been pretty much not at all helpful. Michael Thomas made a
>very astute remark toward the beginning of the thread, but at this
>point, it's been buried in drivel. I know drivel's what makes people
>Usenet addicts, but it's a shame this is no longer a place we can spur
>a real dialogue about something.
Just because it wasn't the dialogue you *wanted* doesn't make it
drivel, dear.
Craig, the human dictionary
Diana Galletly
>I'd say that the sense of things demonstrated here is that there is
>already a perfectly good word for people who are sexually attracted to
>both men and women, that attempts to come up with a new, "better'" word
>are, historically, tied to folks trying to be trendy and avoid the very
>real, very concrete complexity of being motss-attracted in a homophobic
>world, and that this particular neologism is just silly.
I'd agree that this particular neologism is silly, and not useful.
OTOH, it's a subject that's been rather exercising my mind lately,
since I stopped id-ing as entirely female. If one takes bisexual as
meaning "sexually attracted to both men and women" then I have fewer
(although not zero) problems with it then if one takes it as meaning
"sexually attracted to both MOTSS and MOTOS". And I don't think that
that's trying to be trendy or trying to avoid anything; it's a question
of wanting to have something that I feel comfortable id-ing as.
--
+ Diana Galletly <dag...@eng.cam.ac.uk> +
+ http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~galletly/ +
Annette
"stagesong" <fed...@starmail.com> skrev i melding
news:422d8989.02092...@posting.google.com...
> If anyone actually has anything to say about my original post, please
> do speak up. I'm in the process of writing my paper, and would love to
> get a better sense of things. I'm not looking for support, just
> opinions.
You got it. At least I got plenty of posts filled with opinion.
You'll have to write the paper yourself.
Annette
"stagesong" <fed...@starmail.com> skrev
> ...but it's a shame this is no longer a place we can spur
> a real dialogue about something.
There's been plenty of real dialog.
lisa cohen
>
>
> i have Piglet Party photos. OTOH, i also have ethics about
> photo distribution.
> wayside...
i have many books....
lisa
lisa cohen
alas, it would probably be cheaper to fly around and personally visit
all the attendees and take my own photos, than to replace those books.
but then you knew that.
lisa
--
Hey, if what you wanted was a rousing chorus of "oh, you're wonderful",
take a steak down to the dog pound.
Ayana on soc.bi
Cerulean
> Jed Davis wrote:
> > Yummy Cinnamon Goddess <bi...@panix.com> writes:
> >
> >
> >>-bitty, who prefers to imagine most of soc.bi as hippies.
> >
> >
> > I might (now) have the hair for it, and I might own a tie-dye t-shirt
> > or two, but I am *so* not a hippie.
>
> We won't believe you until we are provided
> with photographic evidence.
My thoughts exactly.
Cerulean, GIF! GIF!
--
\ / | Overheard at BiCon 2002 as people were packing to leave:
\/"\/ |
( c ) | A: "Why are you carrying that cardboard box?"
/\_/\ | B: "It's got her vagina in it."
Cerulean
> --
> "If all your friends threw their breasts off a bridge, would you
> throw *your* breasts off a bridge?" -- cute-poet-chick
*eyebrow*
Cerulean
Mr. Cow
> mean, if you need to barf, by all means -- do what you gotta do. But I
> was only trying to explain a term based on my limited understanding,
> and hoping people would further my understanding and help me
> contextualize it.
Is that not what we're doing?
"Flexual" is yet another new term made by people who want the
hipness of being queer without actually coming out of the closet.
By saying "I'm flexual" one says "Look, I'm cool and unique 'cause
I'm not straight" but at the same time never actually saying that
you've got a thing for any particular gender. One can even
immediately see people who are actually straight using the term
("I'm flexual because I like guys who are real butch and I like
guys who are real queens.").
It's slumming. Like all slumming, it's pathetic.
> You have been pretty much not at all helpful. Michael Thomas made a
> very astute remark toward the beginning of the thread, but at this
> point, it's been buried in drivel. I know drivel's what makes people
> Usenet addicts, but it's a shame this is no longer a place we can spur
> a real dialogue about something.
Forgive us for not flocking to your term with bounds of gay joy.
We'll try harder, next time, to approve of new ways for people
to pretend to come out of the closet without actually coming out
of the closet.
Susan Davis
> Selfomatically I semiautoespy proaddifying socioidioms is a
> flexointermutual way to say exresomething without alacking
> to inreifically exsilencing anything. Antigenerally with
> enheed of anthrocoitiality.
Marry me?
--
Susan Davis <futab...@yahoo.com>
Peggy Fieland
Robert Cumming <robe...@bredband.net> wrote:
>
>Hang on, would 'flexual' have something to do with cable guys?
I thought it had something to do with back pain. Must have misheard it.
Peggy
Tyrannic Hellish Cargo
eloquently pondered:
>My last name is available on a need to know basis (which is why most of the
>regulars know it).
I don't! *sniff sniff*
Craig, there is no c*b*l
Josh
<flexi...@panix.com> wrote:
>
> Mmmm... biceps...
Do you mean flexceps? I flex *my* muscles [1], so they should
be called flexceps.
[1] Don't all drool at once, I don't want have another earthquake [2]
[2] Major earthquake hits UK! Josh sleeps through it!
--
Mike: Umm, I thought there was a line between the dashes and the text?
Josh
>In article <422d8989.02092...@posting.google.com>,
>stagesong <fed...@starmail.com> wrote:
>>If anyone actually has anything to say about my original post, please
>>do speak up.
>
>This really en't the tone you want to adopt if you want "help".
>
>>I'm in the process of writing my paper, and would love to
>>get a better sense of things.
>
>I'd say that the sense of things demonstrated here is that there is
>already a perfectly good word for people who are sexually attracted to
>both men and women, that attempts to come up with a new, "better'" word
>are, historically, tied to folks trying to be trendy and avoid the very
>real, very concrete complexity of being motss-attracted in a homophobic
>world, and that this particular neologism is just silly.
Just thinking about it "flexual" *is* a better work than bisexual.
Bisexual -- lets look at the word itself. Its a long one, with eight
letters in. Thats way too long. Me, I usually fall asleep after five
letters, so longer than seven, I'm reaching for the coffee pot.
And the "bi" thing. Thats greek or latin or something, and doesn't
sound like it means anything. I'd guess its some kind of sex thing
the greeks or latins came up with back in Rome. Lets drop that. We're
americans god-damn it, and nothing outside matters. The sex bit is
good, though. Lets keep that. I like sex, me. Thats why I'm
not sure of my sexuality. Being indecisive lets me fuck girls, boys,
and, heck, even my girlfriend's neighbour's back porch. [1]
So lets have a work for the 21st century. And lets start with
"Flex". Sounds like a plastic and plastic is modern, not like those
outdated latin people. And "flex"ing is what I'm doing when I'm
with my girlfriend, with guy I met last night and the back porch.
Come to think of it, add "ex" from sex, but not "sex" as thats
a bit tacky. And we need "ual" to make it sound offical.
"Flexual" -- a cool, funky sounding work I think you'd agree. If
I use it people will know I'm not hetro, and my girlfriend won't
think I'm gay. And I can't be discriminated against because people
won't know what I mean. But then I don't know what I mean either,
just that I like lots of sex, and I'm too scared to admit it,
or that I'm queer, and I'm too scared to admit that, even to
myself.
Josh, nasty Phil Collins earworm for y'all...
[1] Originally "pooch" but I mispelt it, and it was way funnier
Annette
"Tyrannic Hellish Cargo" <cas...@sympatico.ca> skrev i melding
news:3d90c99d...@news1.sympatico.ca...
> On Mon, 23 Sep 2002 17:30:57 GMT, "Annette " <a-h...@online.no>
> eloquently pondered:
>
> >My last name is available on a need to know basis (which is why most of
the
> >regulars know it).
>
> I don't! *sniff sniff*
Now now. You must have forgotten. I'm sure I've told you...both that and
my adress.
> Craig, there is no c*b*l
Of course there isn't.
Tyrannic Hellish Cargo
eloquently pondered:
>"Tyrannic Hellish Cargo" <cas...@sympatico.ca> skrev i melding
>news:3d90c99d...@news1.sympatico.ca...
>> On Mon, 23 Sep 2002 17:30:57 GMT, "Annette " <a-h...@online.no>
>> eloquently pondered:
>> >My last name is available on a need to know basis (which is why most of
>> >the regulars know it).
>> I don't! *sniff sniff*
>Now now. You must have forgotten. I'm sure I've told you...both that and
>my adress.
Oh, you've given me your address. Over ICQ. With no surname attached,
so I didn't even know what letter to write it under in my address
book.
Craig, who wouldn't want to join any c*b*l that would have me as a
member anyway
serene
> "serene" <ser...@serenepages.org> wrote:
>
> > --
> > "If all your friends threw their breasts off a bridge, would you
> > throw *your* breasts off a bridge?" -- cute-poet-chick
>
> *eyebrow*
*chuckle*
> --
> \ / | Overheard at BiCon 2002 as people were packing to leave:
> \/"\/ |
> ( c ) | A: "Why are you carrying that cardboard box?"
> /\_/\ | B: "It's got her vagina in it."
*eyebrow*
serene
--
"If all your friends threw their breasts off a bridge, would you
throw *your* breasts off a bridge?" -- cute-poet-chick
serene
> do speak up. I'm in the process of writing my paper, and would love to
> get a better sense of things. I'm not looking for support, just
> opinions.
I gave you my opinion. You didn't like it. *shrug*
serene
> I'd say that the sense of things demonstrated here is that there is
> already a perfectly good word for people who are sexually attracted to
> both men and women, that attempts to come up with a new, "better'" word
> are, historically, tied to folks trying to be trendy and avoid the very
> real, very concrete complexity of being motss-attracted in a homophobic
> world, and that this particular neologism is just silly.
>
It's like you have a camera in my brain.
serene
> was only trying to explain a term based on my limited understanding,
> and hoping people would further my understanding and help me
> contextualize it.
Really? Sounded like you wanted to know what we thought of the
word. I think it makes me want to barf.
>
> You have been pretty much not at all helpful. Michael Thomas made a
> very astute remark toward the beginning of the thread, but at this
> point, it's been buried in drivel. I know drivel's what makes people
> Usenet addicts, but it's a shame this is no longer a place we can spur
> a real dialogue about something.
Well, everyone knows Michael Thomas is a much kinder, gentler
bisexual than is usually found around these parts.
serene
> Hey, if what you wanted was a rousing chorus of "oh, you're
> wonderful", take a steak down to the dog pound.
>
I'm really irritated that Lisa has already .sigged this.
serene
(Yummy Cinnamon Goddess) wrote:
> Basking in today's glorious sunshine, Bratman <pars...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> > Jed Davis wrote:
> >> I might (now) have the hair for it, and I might own a tie-dye t-shirt
> >> or two, but I am *so* not a hippie.
>
> > We won't believe you until we are provided
> > with photographic evidence.
>
> photo distribution.
>
Tell me who's in them, and I will wheedle permission from them
for you to send them to me me me.
Michael Thomas
> Well, everyone knows Michael Thomas is a much kinder, gentler
> bisexual than is usually found around these parts.
It's hard to figure out which part of this
sentence troubles me most.
--
Michael Thomas (mi...@mtcc.com http://www.mtcc.com/~mike/)
Oh, the Bible is full of dribbling sperm-like fluids. All that
begetting and begotting! A race of genetic inbreds, that's us!
*X*
Jason Parker-Burlingham
> [2] Major earthquake hits UK! Josh sleeps through it!
I could be wrong but I don't think a "4" is a major earthquake, is it?
--
||----|---|------------|--|-------|------|-----------|-#---|-|--|------||
| ``Ooooaah! |
| I'm getting so excited about cheese-making I can't stand it!'' |
||--|--------|--------------|----|-------------|------|---------|-----|-|
Sim Aberson
Jason Parker-Burlingham <jas...@uq.net.au> wrote:
>j-ba...@news.dircon.co.uk (Josh) writes:
>
>> [2] Major earthquake hits UK! Josh sleeps through it!
>
>I could be wrong but I don't think a "4" is a major earthquake, is it?
4.8. And for the UK, that's the big one.
http://wwwneic.cr.usgs.gov/neis/bulletin/neic_jjaw.html
--
"Hurricanes and galaxies look alike, but while the former can strike
Puerto Rico, the latter CONTAINS Puerto Rico." -- Neal Dorst
Larry Kessler
wrote:
>In article <422d8989.02092...@posting.google.com>,
>fed...@starmail.com (stagesong) wrote:
>> I
>> was only trying to explain a term based on my limited understanding,
>> and hoping people would further my understanding and help me
>> contextualize it.
>
>Really? Sounded like you wanted to know what we thought of the
>word. I think it makes me want to barf.
I happen to agree with you, Adam and Craig. It's a lousy word, a
weasel word, and I don't think it's good for much.
>> You have been pretty much not at all helpful. Michael Thomas made a
>> very astute remark toward the beginning of the thread, but at this
>> point, it's been buried in drivel. I know drivel's what makes people
>> Usenet addicts, but it's a shame this is no longer a place we can spur
>> a real dialogue about something.
>
>Well, everyone knows Michael Thomas is a much kinder, gentler
>bisexual than is usually found around these parts.
Except when flexing his monobrow.
--
"I do not feel obliged to believe that same God who endowed us with sense,
reason, and intellect, had intended for us to forgo their use." - Galileo
Larry Kessler
wrote:
> Respect my brow ridge.
It does give you an air of authoritaw.
Larry Kessler
Hellish Cargo) wrote:
>Larry, just a friendly hint.
>
>When you used the word "monosexual" last year, what you meant was
>"this is an analytically and rhetorically valid label grouping
>straight and gay people into a single category defined by their
>non-bisexuality."
I still see it that way. I've never seen or heard it used in a
pejorative way, but since some here see it that way, I don't use it.
Maybe because I make no value judgment on non-bisexuals for their
non-bisexuality, I infer no value judgment from the M word.
>When MT used the word "monosexual" three posts ago, what he meant was
>"you're the kind of person who *would* consider 'monosexual' to be an
>analytically and rhetorically valid label grouping straight and gay
>people into a single category defined by their non-bisexuality, aren't
>you?"
I think we can disagree about the term without it implying anything
about what "kind of person" might take differing viewpoints on this.
I hope you aren't suggesting that someone who sees this (or any other)
point differently from you is, ipso facto, some (shudder) "kind of
person."
>If you're incapable of reading for context, that isn't anybody else's
>problem but your own.
Oh, I got the implication right off.