Waiting to Exhale...

Art Clemons

unread,

Jan 1, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/1/96

to

In article <4c3ebc$n...@ipof1.fla.net> DARKSTAR wrote:
>Date: 30 Dec 1995 13:20:44 GMT
>From: <DARKSTAR>
>To: gdan...@rigel.oac.uci.edu
>Newsgroups: soc.culture.african.american
>Subject: Re: Waiting to Exhale...
>
>It is really amazing that black men can not recognize
>themselves in this movie, because there are a whole bunch of
>them out there just like John and that character that Leon
>played.

If you can recognize yourself in characters with such anti social habits and
no redeeming characteristics except being male and capable of sustaining an
erection, what does that say about you? Someone who recognizes himself is a
knowing, intentional villain.
>
>About 10 years ago a friend of mine experienced a similar
>situation like Bernadine. Not only did my friend help the
>brother build (from the ground up) a multi million dollar
>chemical company, but she also raised his 6 years old daughter
>from a previous marriage.

If I know men, who have been taken advantage of by women, does that make all
women the equivalent of the men in Waiting To Exhale? I do know men who have
been taken advantage of, but I don't assume that every woman should see
herself if an analagous character were placed on the movie screen.
>
>Currently another friend is going thru the same stuff that
>Robin fell into. My friend is with a character that lives
>with her, but has to go home everyday to check on the wife and
>kids. He won't get a divorce until his children can take care
>of themselves.

Isn't it strange that men are criticized if they attempt to break all ties in
that situation, and criticized if they don't. This society still forces
interaction between the mother and father of children if the father is to be
involved in the children's lives. Further, to be blunt, no woman should want
to be involved with a man who can easily walk away from his children to keep
her. The implications for the future of the relationship if nothing else
aren't good.
>
>There are thousands of brothers out there like those in the
>movies, so brothers don't be so defensive, or did the movie
>remind you of something you did? Are you guilty?
>
>
The only problem is that there are MILLIONS of brothers out there. A million
equals one thousand thousands. Which position are you adopting, either most
men are dogs which Waiting To Exhale implies, or that some small percentage
of men are like the characters in the movie?
acle...@gnn.com (Art Clemons)

Gabrielle Daniels

unread,

Jan 1, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/1/96

to

On Mon, 1 Jan 1996, Art Clemons is at it again:

> >It is really amazing that black men can not recognize
> >themselves in this movie, because there are a whole bunch of
> >them out there just like John and that character that Leon
> >played.
>
> If you can recognize yourself in characters with such anti social habits and
> no redeeming characteristics except being male and capable of sustaining an
> erection, what does that say about you? Someone who recognizes himself is a
> knowing, intentional villain.

Oh, get off it.

Some black men are like that. DARKSTAR should have predicated his
remarks to indicate that, and only that.

> If I know men, who have been taken advantage of by women, does that make all
> women the equivalent of the men in Waiting To Exhale? I do know men who have
> been taken advantage of, but I don't assume that every woman should see
> herself if an analagous character were placed on the movie screen.

Brothers and sisters who don't recognize themselves in the movie and
don't puff out about it are taking care of business. Like BamBam and
Bear, for instance.

Y'know, people who are fans of morning and afternoon soap operas on TV
should have no problems with this movie. The characters on these mirrors
of some people's lives have four or five husbands or wives, kill off male or
female rivals, have babies out of wedlock, sleep with any new thing on
the block and so on. And people--men and women, of all ages, colors and
sexual preference--are fans of these shows. Including some who call
themselves religious.

Compared to the action going on Monday through Friday on your local
channels, "WTE" sounds mild.

This is a better argument.

> >Currently another friend is going thru the same stuff that
> >Robin fell into. My friend is with a character that lives
> >with her, but has to go home everyday to check on the wife and
> >kids. He won't get a divorce until his children can take care
> >of themselves.
>
> Isn't it strange that men are criticized if they attempt to break all ties in
> that situation, and criticized if they don't. This society still forces
> interaction between the mother and father of children if the father is to be
> involved in the children's lives.

What is keeping the man from fighting for custody of his kids? If he has
been a good provider, has been a loving and attentive father, and has
people who can back him up on this, why would you expect that he would
automatically lose custody? Unless he's been creeping, and would rather
buy a boat than clothe his kids.

Give me some examples as to why he would lose custody.

> Further, to be blunt, no woman should want
> to be involved with a man who can easily walk away from his children to keep
> her. The implications for the future of the relationship if nothing else
> aren't good.

You got that right. Women don't want to think that as number two, they
or their progeny are prone to be just as expendable.

> >There are thousands of brothers out there like those in the
> >movies, so brothers don't be so defensive, or did the movie
> >remind you of something you did? Are you guilty?
> >
> The only problem is that there are MILLIONS of brothers out there. A million
> equals one thousand thousands. Which position are you adopting, either most
> men are dogs which Waiting To Exhale implies, or that some small percentage
> of men are like the characters in the movie?

"WTE" is not such a slur on brothers who ARE taking care of business. If
anything, brothers who are doing and loving well, will be saying, "I know
a guy like that from college," or "I sure am not those brothers." And
they will step on.

Brothers who appear to holler loudest about the sisters' morals (and the
sisters' morals have always been in question since we landed here in 1619)
or how many dogs outweighed the good men in "WTE" had betta be checking
their own acts or simply leave brothers and sisters to make up their own
minds about the movie.

Gabrielle Daniels

unread,

Jan 1, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/1/96

to

On 2 Jan 1996, Benjamin Smith wrote:

> The problem is what people are looking for. There is a huge
> emphasis on the slick, good-looking, humorous, educated, financially
> successful, charatable, and faithful man. That's a lot to ask.

Check. Too beautiful for words. But on the flip, distaff side we have
the same problem.

> If some
> women who want this package could take a compromised package then
> there are good brothers out there. If you can take a man who may be
> balding (none of these guys in the movie were balding, did you notice?
> - yet many
> guys are balding), who may not have great teeth, who may be
> struggling financially, hopefully he will be faithful. Some men
> get uncomfortable in certain social situations and don't always
> have each step down right - in other words, they are human.

Perhaps that is too much to ask for certain people. I've liked a few bald
guys in my time, but I'll stop at bad teeth. He's got to be faithful,
number one.

> Robin and Savannah were looking for the fantasy package. The book
> with the impressive cover. They were responsible for the slime they
> were dealing with. Bernadine and Gloria had terrible situations in
> their lives, and deserved compassion.

Remembering the book, I agree.

> I am not saying lower expectations. I am saying have expectations
> that are realistic and be aware that great looking packages are not
> always good for you. There are the OJ's and the Ike Turners out there.
> Too many women want Denzel Washington.

Or reasonable facsimiles. But Denzel's a preacher's son. He would have
inherited the patriarchal touch and have good manners and attitude. He has
a voice connected with an agile mind. Some women dig that along with the
package. Sometimes, it's not just looks. It's what he appears to emanate
or project, and what the woman fetishizes.

> But it takes a lot of strength
> from a brother like Denzel *not* to give into all the temptation and
> the many women who are interested in getting him as a prize.

IOW, don't descend to the dog level.

> Basically, I think many people, both men and women,
> want prizes not relationships.

Unfortunately, yes.

Benjamin Smith

unread,

Jan 2, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/2/96

to

acle...@gnn.com (Art Clemons) wrote:
>
>
>If you can recognize yourself in characters with such anti social habits and
>no redeeming characteristics except being male and capable of sustaining an
>erection, what does that say about you? Someone who recognizes himself is a
>knowing, intentional villain.
>>

Some of these guys did not sustain their erections for very long. I really
know nobody like these characters. These guys seemed extreme to me. I've
seen hairdressers like the one in the beginning of the movie.

>If I know men, who have been taken advantage of by women, does that make all
>women the equivalent of the men in Waiting To Exhale? I do know men who have
>been taken advantage of, but I don't assume that every woman should see
>herself if an analagous character were placed on the movie screen.
>>

There is another wrinkle, but many of these characters were underdeveloped.
You have advantage of having read the book. Are the characters more developed?
I would guess that they are. Many women seem to see these characters as
analagous to themselves and their friends.

What I did not see are the many men friends who are decent who they could
confide in. This movie dealt with men as mates and sexual partners, but not
as *friends*. Don't some or even many relationships come out of friendship?

What about male coworkers or something else. I guess this movie is supposed
to focus on woman's relationships with each other and how they discuss
experiences with
the men in their life with each other. However the lack of men, as something
other than potential mates or some professional hire, bothered me.

Only Bernadine spoke to a man as a confidant, and it did not lead to sex.

>
>>
>>There are thousands of brothers out there like those in the
>>movies, so brothers don't be so defensive, or did the movie
>>remind you of something you did? Are you guilty?
>>
>>
>The only problem is that there are MILLIONS of brothers out there. A million
>equals one thousand thousands. Which position are you adopting, either most
>men are dogs which Waiting To Exhale implies, or that some small percentage
>of men are like the characters in the movie?

>acle...@gnn.com (Art Clemons)
>

That's a good question Art. How many brothers out there are some variation of
the men, save the two redeeming characters, in the movie? Or, how many men do
many Black women perceive are like these Black men in this film? How many men
like this, or what percentage of men have they experienced in their relationships
or their friends relationships that are some variation of these types of men?

And another thing: do they tip out of it? How many men go through a "dog" phase
before becoming men who are able to sustain a workable relationship and grow
along with the relationship (certainly these men could not)?
I don't know, as a look into women's views and experiences with men, I felt
underwhelmed by the movie. Robin and Savannah never seemed to put themselves
in a position to meet anyone decent. So if they want to persue
pretty boys and players then maybe this was part of their learning process.

Ben Smith

Benjamin Smith

unread,

Jan 2, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/2/96

to

The problem is what people are looking for. There is a huge
emphasis on the slick, good-looking, humorous, educated, financially

successful, charatable, and faithful man. That's a lot to ask. If some

women who want this package could take a compromised package then
there are good brothers out there. If you can take a man who may be
balding (none of these guys in the movie were balding, did you notice?
- yet many
guys are balding), who may not have great teeth, who may be
struggling financially, hopefully he will be faithful. Some men
get uncomfortable in certain social situations and don't always
have each step down right - in other words, they are human.

Robin and Savannah were looking for the fantasy package. The book

with the impressive cover. They were responsible for the slime they
were dealing with. Bernadine and Gloria had terrible situations in
their lives, and deserved compassion.

I am not saying lower expectations. I am saying have expectations
that are realistic and be aware that great looking packages are not
always good for you. There are the OJ's and the Ike Turners out there.

Too many women want Denzel Washington. But it takes a lot of strength

from a brother like Denzel *not* to give into all the temptation and
the many women who are interested in getting him as a prize.

Basically, I think many people, both men and women,
want prizes not relationships.

Ben Smith

Kenneth R. Crudup

unread,

Jan 2, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/2/96

to

In article <4ca6hm$j...@ixnews3.ix.netcom.com>,
Benjamin Smith <bsm...@ix.netcom.com> says:

>Too many women want Denzel Washington. But it takes a lot of strength
>from a brother like Denzel *not* to give into all the temptation and
>the many women who are interested in getting him as a prize.

I presume you haven't heard of Mr. Washington's latest marital difficulties,
huh? :-)

-Kenny

--
Kenneth R. Crudup, Unix & OS/2 Software Consultant, Scott County Consulting
ke...@panix.com CI$: 75032,3044 +1 617 524 5929/4949 Home/Office
16 Plainfield St, Boston, MA 02130-3633 +1 617 983 9410 Fax
OS/2 box: pkenny.tiac.net (when I'm online) Get Warp-ed! OS/2 3.0 is here NOW!

Kenneth R. Crudup

unread,

Jan 2, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/2/96

to

In article <4btbtq$l...@ixnews6.ix.netcom.com>,
ap...@ix.netcom.com(Apryl ) says:

>I've been into a discussion with several men on this very topic here on
>scaa. I think that men are more guilty of going for pretty packages.

>They call them gold-diggers.

If you think men call pretty women "gold-diggers", then you've been doing a
lot of talking, but little listening (which might come as a surprise to
precious few).

I think in logic classes, what you just did is a classic error, where just
because "A" (diggers) is a subset of "B" (pretty women) which is a subset of
"C" (all women) that you think that "A" and/or "B" and "C" are equivalent.

Doug Doyle

unread,

Jan 2, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/2/96

to

: > Yeah Aly, She mentioned four black men. And counting you, well..... that
: > makes five men but still....four BLACK men. -Doug

: ROTFLMAO. First he thought I was a woman, now I am *not* a *black* man.

Negro maybe. Definately not black. -Doug

: Aly "Hope to see you at the next SCAA reunion." Laurent
:

You won't. -Doug

Jason McDonald

unread,

Jan 2, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/2/96

to

GEN...@uabdpo.dpo.uab.edu writes:
> Tracey S Mitchell wrote:
>
>
>
> >> Hey! go easy on Jason, he's really cool,Marci, He just missed the point of
> >our convo and tried to correct us... He's good people too!
> >
Miss the point..not at all. Maybe I was too succint in my
response. sometimes brevity is not always the best way. See
below:
> >
>
> No offense intended to you, Jason. I'm not discounting the importance of
> good relationships. On the contrary! I'm against being in a relationship
> just for the sake of saying I have a man.
>
Sistas you don't have to preach that one to me. I have been in
6 cities in 5 years..and getting adjusted to the various ways
of life (ie social scenes) is a trip. And I for one refuse to
grab onto the first lady that winks her eye or wiggles her
hips at me. Not to mention, I am the first to cut off relations
if I think the lady is psycho, materialistic or not good for me.
And I have dated a broad range of sistas from surgeons to
grocery clerks, and fades to braids to wavey with length. It
don't make me no nevermind.. I will be single before I settle
for just anyone..Cuz just any woman cannot be the mother of MY
children, or share my life.

All I was trying to say before is that you have a choice in
life. And when you make those choices, base them on what you
know about yourself..not what you hope someone can provide for
you. Because you can't control anyone but yourself..If you
don't know who you are then you won't know what you want or
what you are willing to deal with. A person who possesses
knowledge of self cannot be led astray. Mainly because the
bull-sh*tters will invariably do or say something that
contradicts their front and screws them up.
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
_\||/_ ------------------
@-@ /Oh shuckey duckey |
O < Quack Quack |

ke...@infoserv.com

unread,

Jan 2, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/2/96

to

In article <4c3ebc$n...@ipof1.fla.net> <DARKSTAR> writes:
#It is really amazing that black men can not recognize
#themselves in this movie, because there are a whole bunch of
#them out there just like John and that character that Leon
#played.

First I liked the movie.

Second, it is true that a whole lot of men are like Leon, etc...

Third, the *MAJORITY* of men are not like those in the movie.

I know plenty of dogs, even related to or have had some as friends but they
are not the majority.
#
#About 10 years ago a friend of mine experienced a similar
#situation like Bernadine. Not only did my friend help the
#brother build (from the ground up) a multi million dollar
#chemical company, but she also raised his 6 years old daughter
#from a previous marriage.

I know women that have dumped their husbands only to leave them with
the kids, so what's your point?

#
#Currently another friend is going thru the same stuff that
#Robin fell into. My friend is with a character that lives
#with her, but has to go home everyday to check on the wife and
#kids. He won't get a divorce until his children can take care
#of themselves.

I know women just like that. Again, what's your point?

#
#There are thousands of brothers out there like those in the
#movies, so brothers don't be so defensive, or did the movie
#remind you of something you did? Are you guilty?

I happen to see the movie with my wife and we got a good laugh.
Yes, some folks see themselves in the movie and get upset, but the movie
doesn't portray the majority of black men.

The movie was not about black men as much as it was about four women
and their poor choices.

Kent
--
/* "There is no king who has not had a slave among his ancestors and */
/* no slave that has not had a king among his." ---- Helen Keller */
/* Kent L. Shephard ----- K. L. Shephard Consulting */

Art Clemons

unread,

Jan 2, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/2/96

to

In article <Pine.SUN.3.91.960101...@rigel.oac.uci.edu>
Gabrielle Daniels wrote:
>Date: Mon, 1 Jan 1996 19:00:48 -0800
>From: Gabrielle Daniels <gdan...@rigel.oac.uci.edu>

>Newsgroups: soc.culture.african.american
>Subject: Re: Waiting to Exhale...
>

>On Mon, 1 Jan 1996, Art Clemons is at it again:
>

>> >It is really amazing that black men can not recognize

>> >themselves in this movie, because there are a whole bunch of

>> >them out there just like John and that character that Leon

>> >played.

>>
>> If you can recognize yourself in characters with such anti social habits
> and
>> no redeeming characteristics except being male and capable of sustaining
> an
>> erection, what does that say about you? Someone who recognizes himself
> is a
>> knowing, intentional villain.
>

>Oh, get off it.

I responded to what he wrote. I even quoted it.

>
>Some black men are like that. DARKSTAR should have predicated his
>remarks to indicate that, and only that.

Even saying that implies that the movie and/or book shouldn't be criticized
for content. The fact that you like it, or see elements of some men you know
doesn't mean that I should accept those men as role models, or indeed see
myself in them. Using that logic, in the 30's Bojangles and Steppin' Fetchit
should have typical too.

>
>> If I know men, who have been taken advantage of by women, does that make
> all
>> women the equivalent of the men in Waiting To Exhale? I do know men who
> have
>> been taken advantage of, but I don't assume that every woman should see
>> herself if an analagous character were placed on the movie screen.
>

>Brothers and sisters who don't recognize themselves in the movie and
>don't puff out about it are taking care of business. Like BamBam and
>Bear, for instance.

I don't see any need to accept such characterization. If you like the movie,
fine, I'm not suggesting censorship. However, it can't be a moving
experience for me, and unfortunately, I've also run into idiocy based on the
film from whites. I would suggest for example that the Potato, or Orion38,
Weltner or even Bard would enjoy the movie if for no other reason than it
offers further ammunition. Frankly any woman who uses the movie or the book
as a guide to life needs to learn more about life, as does any man.

>
>Y'know, people who are fans of morning and afternoon soap operas on TV
>should have no problems with this movie. The characters on these mirrors
>of some people's lives have four or five husbands or wives, kill off male
> or
>female rivals, have babies out of wedlock, sleep with any new thing on
>the block and so on. And people--men and women, of all ages, colors and
>sexual preference--are fans of these shows. Including some who call
>themselves religious.

I however don't watch soap operas. I've detested them since I can remember
seeing them. It's also claimed that soap operas and comedies on television
influenced how people view life, and treated members of their families. I
condemn soap operas as a waste of time, but I also condemn the talk shows
which are slowly ousting them too.

>
>Compared to the action going on Monday through Friday on your local
>channels, "WTE" sounds mild.

But I never see that. I spend a lot more time driving than I do watching
television on a daily or weekly basis. Further, I would hope that an African
American audience to have higher standards than what you're describing. My
hope is probably doomed to remain only that, but it remains.

>
>This is a better argument.
>

>> >Currently another friend is going thru the same stuff that

>> >Robin fell into. My friend is with a character that lives

>> >with her, but has to go home everyday to check on the wife and

>> >kids. He won't get a divorce until his children can take care

>> >of themselves.
>>
>> Isn't it strange that men are criticized if they attempt to break all
> ties in
>> that situation, and criticized if they don't. This society still forces
>> interaction between the mother and father of children if the father is
> to be
>> involved in the children's lives.
>
>What is keeping the man from fighting for custody of his kids? If he has
>been a good provider, has been a loving and attentive father, and has
>people who can back him up on this, why would you expect that he would
>automatically lose custody? Unless he's been creeping, and would rather
>buy a boat than clothe his kids.

First, for various reasons, I've seen a lot of custody battles, they're
nasty, and usually only cost both sides money. They can in fact make
unethical lawyers a lot of money. Second, every court I've seen tends to
award at least physical custody to the mother if both parties are fit
parents. Third, even men are raised to believe that a mother is a better
choice for the main role in raising children. Fourth, custody battles are
invariably a method of getting even rather than any concern over the
children, many men would rather not put their children to the legal sword
even if it means they lose custody of the children. Fifth, some percentage
of men even with automatic child support deductions are much better off
economically and socially without trying to raise kids, and make a conscious
decision not to seek custody for that reason. I'ld guess about 20%, but note
I said "guess".

>
>Give me some examples as to why he would lose custody.

See the above. I won't repeat the claims of the divorced fathers groups, nor
quote their statistics. I do know however that if you bet on custody
outcomes, you're a fool if you bet on the father.

>
>> Further, to be blunt, no woman should want
>> to be involved with a man who can easily walk away from his children to
> keep
>> her. The implications for the future of the relationship if nothing
> else
>> aren't good.
>
>You got that right. Women don't want to think that as number two, they
>or their progeny are prone to be just as expendable.
>

>> >There are thousands of brothers out there like those in the

>> >movies, so brothers don't be so defensive, or did the movie

>> >remind you of something you did? Are you guilty?
>> >

>> The only problem is that there are MILLIONS of brothers out there. A
> million
>> equals one thousand thousands. Which position are you adopting, either
> most
>> men are dogs which Waiting To Exhale implies, or that some small percenta
>ge
>> of men are like the characters in the movie?
>

>"WTE" is not such a slur on brothers who ARE taking care of business. If
>anything, brothers who are doing and loving well, will be saying, "I know
>a guy like that from college," or "I sure am not those brothers." And
>they will step on.

Yet, I'm not sure that's really such a good approach. Hiding from the issue,
or proclaiming innocence because one isn't typical reminds me of people who
attack affirmative action, they're responding to the implied shame rather
than to the issue. I won't cheer for the movie, and I'm not going to
proclaim my innocence either. Either is hypocrical posturing for the benefit
of an audience.

>
>Brothers who appear to holler loudest about the sisters' morals (and the
>sisters' morals have always been in question since we landed here in 1619)
>or how many dogs outweighed the good men in "WTE" had betta be checking
>their own acts or simply leave brothers and sisters to make up their own
>minds about the movie.

Why should I check my act? Isn't it surprising that you, an African American
will take a movie based on stereotypes and use it as a litmus test for
African American men. Since no movie gets 100% penetration of the potential
market, those who don't see the film will always be the majority. The movie
and the comments made by people who like the movie can only be interpreted a
limited number of ways, and I long ago learned not to pretend I didn't notice
obvious things. Incidentally, aren't you also confusing me with someone
else? I didn't attack the morals of the women going to see the movie, but I
did attack using the movie or its characters as a guide to life, and the
film's attack on African American men in general.
acle...@gnn.com (Art Clemons)

Jason McDonald

unread,

Jan 2, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/2/96

to

ap...@ix.netcom.com writes:

>
> I should have known better than to approach you as if you were a human
> being,
You're right I'm so much more:)

> as if you had the ability to participate in a discussion devoid of insults.

Oh PLEASE the DRAMA!!! How are you going to attempt to sit
there and insinuate that you were not insulting men. If you
can't eat the food don't dish it out sweetie.
>
> What was I thinking???

It's clearly obvious that you weren't.

> You are so right when you say the wheels fell off of my sanity
> cart. I proved that when I tried to engage you in a reasonable
> discussion, started with a direct question. I should have known that
> I couldn't, and shouldn't, thin that you wouldn't be able to answer
> the question about what you are willing to look for.

Maybe you should revisit you original post and try to see
where the above statement is contradictory.

> And I will never allow Kenny to call himself Canus Prime, any more.
>
> You are the real master.
>
> You are the king
>
Hey Kenny I finally usurped your throne. Long Live the New
King. And as King there are a few rules that need correcting.

1. No generalizing gender related posts.
2. No encouraging Apryl to fly off half-cocked..she needs to be
fully cocked at all times.
3. No bashing unless you recieve a permit from the royal
magistrate.
4. Sarcasm is permitted only after passing an exam that tests
wit, originality and timeliness.

Rich Thompson

unread,

Jan 2, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/2/96

to

On Tue, 2 Jan 1996, Kenneth R. Crudup wrote:

> I presume you haven't heard of Mr. Washington's latest marital difficulties,
> huh? :-)

Care to enlighten those of us who don't live in media centers like Boston?

Peace,
Rich

Richard Thompson
Dept. of Psychology
McGill University
1205 Dr. Penfield Ave
Montreal P.Q.
H3A 1B1

"It is when there is ice and snow on them that the strength of the pine and
the cypress can be seen. I am grateful for this trouble around me, because
it gives me an opportunity to realize how fortunate I am."
Kung Fu-Tse

Tracey S Mitchell

unread,

Jan 3, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/3/96

to

In article <DKB1K...@murdoch.acc.virginia.edu>,
Jason McDonald <jm...@kelvin.seas.Virginia.EDU> wrote:

>First of all you have to live in Columbus for awhile in order
>to understand where I am coming from and it would take tooooo
>much bandwith to explain it to ya. Suffice to say it is a

All I can say Jason, is that I can harldy *stand* columbus, even though it
has been pretty good to me and that I look forward to the right season
(figuratively) to leave this place!!!!

Tracey "you made it out alive, ole buddy!" Mitchell

Earl T. Bryant, Jr.

unread,

Jan 3, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/3/96

to

>In article <4ca6hm$j...@ixnews3.ix.netcom.com>,
>Benjamin Smith <bsm...@ix.netcom.com> says:

>>Too many women want Denzel Washington. But it takes a lot of strength
>>from a brother like Denzel *not* to give into all the temptation and
>>the many women who are interested in getting him as a prize.

Then, ke...@world.std.com (Kenneth R. Crudup) gave this witty
rejoinder:

><snicker>

>I presume you haven't heard of Mr. Washington's latest marital difficulties,
>huh? :-)

Kenny...gotta stop readin' those National Enquirers when yer in the
checkout line.... :-)

Earl Bryant/ebr...@cris.com/Protecting and defending since 1987
----------------------------------------------------------------
The only red man I've ever seen had a terrible sunburn.
The only black man I've ever seen had the lights turned off.
The only yellow man I've ever seen is Homer Simpson, and
The only white man I've ever seen is Homer before the animator painted him.
Race is a social construct to facilitate subordination.
We are all different shades of beautful. --Kimberly Chapman

VHEvans

unread,

Jan 3, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/3/96

to

jm...@kelvin.seas.Virginia.EDU (Jason McDonald) wrote:
>>All I was trying to say before is that you have a choice in
life. And when you make those choices, base them on what you
know about yourself..not what you hope someone can provide for
you. Because you can't control anyone but yourself..If you
don't know who you are then you won't know what you want or
what you are willing to deal with. A person who possesses
knowledge of self cannot be led astray. Mainly because the
bull-sh*tters will invariably do or say something that
contradicts their front and screws them up. <<

Succinctly put! That is exactly the bottom line. It all begins with deep
introspection and self analysis of past relationship experiences to
determine the pattern of habits, both good and bad. To know and to
improve oneself is key to any relationship, which is what I understood
from reading the book. I didn't get the same satisfaction from the movie
because development just wasn't possible, I guess, in two hours. Anyway,
when you know yourself, you will not sell yourself nor settle for less
than you rightfully deserve. And, with respect to previous posts, such as
Ben's, a deeper perspective will produce more realistic expectations
which should mirror what you yourself already are and can offer to someone
else. To that end, my quest is more self-directed than other-directed;
the better I become, the more I have to offer to a future soulmate. Time
is not an issue.

Vicki
vhe...@aol.com
--

Kenneth R. Crudup

unread,

Jan 3, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/3/96

to

>> I presume you haven't heard of Mr. Washington's latest marital difficulties,
>> huh? :-)

In article <Pine.SUN.3.91.96010...@ego.psych.mcgill.ca>,
Rich Thompson <tho...@ego.psych.mcgill.ca> says:

>Care to enlighten those of us who don't live in media centers like Boston?

I'd actually heard this in Dallas, but the story goes that he's been getting
sh*t from his wife and having to do the "Aw baby I'm sorry" treatment 'cause
he's been seen with a certain "fan" one time too many in public. Had to buy
the Mrs. a huge rock (ahem ....) and go on a 2nd honeymoon to "atone".

I just *knew* the strain would get to be too much. He ain't no Superman.

Apryl

unread,

Jan 3, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/3/96

to

In <DKK6J...@world.std.com> ke...@world.std.com (Kenneth R. Crudup)
writes:

>
>In article <4btbtq$l...@ixnews6.ix.netcom.com>,
>ap...@ix.netcom.com(Apryl ) says:
>
>>I've been into a discussion with several men on this very topic here
>>on scaa. I think that men are more guilty of going for pretty
>>packages.
>
>>They call them gold-diggers.
>
>If you think men call pretty women "gold-diggers", then you've been
>doing a lot of talking, but little listening (which might come as a
>surprise to precious few).

Nerve!!!!!!!!!

>I think in logic classes, what you just did is a classic error, where
>just because "A" (diggers) is a subset of "B" (pretty women) which is
>a subset of "C" (all women) that you think that "A" and/or "B" and

>"C" are equivalent.

There you go again, trying to tell me how I think.

Especially since I know too many gold-diggers that aren't pretty,
to begin with... but that's another story.

Did you bother to read the entire post that I left, or for that matter,
try to read his post. (I do try to copy pertinent information, but then
I don't try to tell any one else what they think)

Apryl
Where ya been, Ken?

Kenneth R. Crudup

unread,

Jan 3, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/3/96

to

In article <4cdc1a$r...@ixnews2.ix.netcom.com>,
ap...@ix.netcom.com(Apryl ) says:

>Did you bother to read the entire post that I left, or for that matter,
>try to read his post. (I do try to copy pertinent information, but then
>I don't try to tell any one else what they think)

WTF? It's plain as day. You wrote:

>>>I think that men are more guilty of going for pretty packages.
>>>They call them gold-diggers.

Seems to me you're saying that "men call pretty packages gold-diggers", as if
the reverse is automatically true.

>Where ya been, Ken?

In Dallas and in NYC. Although I kept waiting for the captain of the flight
back from Dallas and/or the conductor of the train back from Penn. Station
to tell me that there was a nuclear disaster, and there was no Boston to
return to, alas, this "city" still stands.

But, it's just as well; I have a couple of my better suits still in the
cleaners I'd hate to lose.

Apryl

unread,

Jan 3, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/3/96

to

In <DKKnL...@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> jm...@kelvin.seas.Virginia.EDU

(Jason McDonald) writes:
>
>ap...@ix.netcom.com writes:
>
>>
>> I should have known better than to approach you as if you were a
>>human being,
>You're right I'm so much more:)

This is America. Every one can have a dream.

>
>> as if you had the ability to participate in a discussion devoid of
insults.
>
>Oh PLEASE the DRAMA!!! How are you going to attempt to sit
>there and insinuate that you were not insulting men. If you
>can't eat the food don't dish it out sweetie.

Yes. I will 'insinuate' that I don't insult men. I haven't.
Unless you were painted in my ambiguous descriptions of the kind
of men that I don't want to have in my life. But those have
been few and far between.

And don't call me sweetie. You don't know me that well.

>> What was I thinking???
>
>It's clearly obvious that you weren't.

(Touche' - I left myself wide open for that... but I was being
sarcastic, wasn't I?)

>
>
>> You are so right when you say the wheels fell off of my sanity
>> cart. I proved that when I tried to engage you in a reasonable
>> discussion, started with a direct question. I should have known
>> that I couldn't, and shouldn't, thin that you wouldn't be able to
>> answer the question about what you are willing to look for.
>
>Maybe you should revisit you original post and try to see
>where the above statement is contradictory.

No, maybe YOU should revisit my original post. And read all the
words. Not just the ones with the letters you like.

>> And I will never allow Kenny to call himself Canus Prime, any more.
>>
>> You are the real master.
>>
>> You are the king
>>
>Hey Kenny I finally usurped your throne. Long Live the New
>King. And as King there are a few rules that need correcting.
>
>1. No generalizing gender related posts.

(If you can't eat it, don't dish it)

>2. No encouraging Apryl to fly off half-cocked..she needs to be
>fully cocked at all times.

You do realized that you left yourself wide open? You are allowed
three passes.

Thank you for acknowledging me, though.

>3. No bashing unless you recieve a permit from the royal
>magistrate.

Where are the applications, because I think that I will be bashing
in 1996.

>4. Sarcasm is permitted only after passing an exam that tests
>wit, originality and timeliness.

Yea, right.

Apryl
No special comment

Apryl

unread,

Jan 3, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/3/96

to

In <DKLI6...@world.std.com> ke...@world.std.com (Kenneth R. Crudup)
writes:
>

>In article <4cdc1a$r...@ixnews2.ix.netcom.com>,
>ap...@ix.netcom.com(Apryl ) says:
>
>>Did you bother to read the entire post that I left, or for that
>>matter, try to read his post. (I do try to copy pertinent

>>information, but the I don't try to tell any one else what they

>>think)
>
>WTF? It's plain as day. You wrote:
>
>>>>I think that men are more guilty of going for pretty packages.
>>>>They call them gold-diggers.
>
>Seems to me you're saying that "men call pretty packages
>gold-diggers", as if the reverse is automatically true.

It is after 3am. So I may be a little sluggish (no excuse, just an
explanation)

You copied (4 carrots) a post that I made, but removed the context
in which it was written. I won't deny that I used those words,
but I believe that I was responding to a message that was talking about
women who are either attracted to men that they find have nothing
else to offer than their looks, or the one where we were discussing
women who preferred 'ugly' men.

I don't remember every thing that I write!!!!

Let me try to make myself really clear:

I have read posts from writers who have identified themselves, or
hinted that they were, male, where they described bad experiences that
stemmed from women that they met because they were attracted to the
pretty packages, only to learn that these women were after something
from them, (from this I inferred that you meant that they weren't after
an equal relationship).

I did not try to say that every pretty woman that you met was a gold-
digger type. I know that every good looking man isn't a door-knob.
I didn't try to say that you thought that.

But you did identify the BAD EXPERIENCES that you had were with woman
that you were attracted to purely for the packaging that turned out
to be just that: packaging --

My point: check out her friend who is holding her purse, sometimes.

>>Where ya been, Ken?

I wrote that because no one else is as fun to 'argue' with as you.

Shuckey Duckey is good, though. But I was just playing when I said
he could be Canus Prime :->

Apryl
Who is glad she can blame it all on 23 hours with no sleep.

Nicole Anderson

unread,

Jan 3, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/3/96

to

On 2 Jan 1996, Benjamin Smith wrote:

> > That's a good question Art. How many brothers out there are some
variation of > the men, save the two redeeming characters, in the movie?
Or, how many men do > many Black women perceive are like these Black men
in this film? How many men > like this, or what percentage of men have
they experienced in their relationships > or their friends relationships
that are some variation of these types of men?

My experience with Black men has been very positive, especially those I've
had relationships with. That is not to say that I haven't been hurt by
any of them or that we as a couple were perfect for each other (because we
weren't), but I can't relate to any of the four women and their
experiences with men. However, I do know a Russell and a Troy, I just
knew better than to get involved with them. And, just because they make
bad mates doesn't mean they are bad friends. > > And another thing: do

they tip out of it? How many men go through a "dog" phase > before
becoming men who are able to sustain a workable relationship and grow >
along with the relationship (certainly these men could not)?

I don't know if all men go through this phase, but I was warned by many
that my fiance was a "dog" when we first started dating. I don't mean to
blame the victim, but whose fault is it when a women has sex with a man
off top and assumes that it means love. Sex is sex and love is love.
They are not one in the same, so why is a man a dog if he has sex with a
willing partner but doesn't love her? Women need to realize that just
because they give it up doesn't mean he's going to love them. A man
can't dog a woman who respects herself. He can only grow with her if he
wants to remain with her.

Nic

Krystakila

unread,

Jan 3, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/3/96

to

On Wed, 27 Dec 1995, Jason McDonald wrote:

> Lela's air head/penis envying char.

Please explain how Robin is guilty of penis envy.

> Gloria didn't even know her own husband was bisexual, uh Hello,
> I think there should have been some clues somewhere along the
> line.

That was her ex-husband wasn't it? Who only appeared every couple of years?

Kila
"Once you get on stage everything's all right. I fell the most beautiful,
complete, fulfilled." Leontyne Price

Kenneth R. Crudup

unread,

Jan 3, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/3/96

to

In article <4cdfuf$9...@cloner3.netcom.com>, ap...@ix.netcom.com(Apryl ) says:

>But you did identify the BAD EXPERIENCES that you had were with woman
>that you were attracted to purely for the packaging that turned out
>to be just that: packaging --

Well, you *certainly* can't be talking about *my* so-called "bad experiences"
with any woman, 'cause I don't have that many with women to post about it
(the worst thing that can happen is she doesn't want to deal with me at all,
so it doesn't even count).

Tracey S Mitchell

unread,

Jan 3, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/3/96

to

Nope, Denzel has a spotless repututaion, Men *can* live in this world and
not cheat you know!

Tracey

In article <4cdh5e$8...@spectator.cris.com>,

Earl T. Bryant, Jr. <ebr...@deathstar.cris.com> wrote:
>
>
>>In article <4ca6hm$j...@ixnews3.ix.netcom.com>,
>>Benjamin Smith <bsm...@ix.netcom.com> says:
>
>>>Too many women want Denzel Washington. But it takes a lot of strength
>>>from a brother like Denzel *not* to give into all the temptation and
>>>the many women who are interested in getting him as a prize.
>Then, ke...@world.std.com (Kenneth R. Crudup) gave this witty
>rejoinder:
>
>><snicker>
>

unread,

Jan 3, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/3/96

to

In article <DKMLq...@world.std.com>,

Kenneth R. Crudup <ke...@world.std.com> wrote:
>
>>It kills me that many men will have sex if given the chance, when they could
>>be more of a concerned human and say," I know you want more but this is all
>>the man I am,I can only give you sex, so now YOU choose what steps we will
>>take now."
>
>Seems to me that this should be obvious. If the man doesn't say he's out for
>anything else, why is she making the assumption?
>

You don't REALLY mean that... What's obvious got to do with being open, up
front and honest anyway? Nothing... All he has to do that. Esp. when most men
know that many women act like they can't live w/o a man or even just a balanced
normal woman( by whosever standards) says she is looking for a real
relationship.... By NOT saying certain things can be just a deceiving as
outright lying... But no doubt, good judgemnt should be made on both parts, but
she and I were specifically speaking of the women looking for love and
confusing it by giving sex because of HER feelings toward him instead of...

Tracey

Kenneth R. Crudup

unread,

Jan 3, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/3/96

to

In article <4ceksi$p...@Door.lotus.com>,
george...@crd.lotus.com (Dr. Midnight) says:

>Besides, Dallas is nothing but Boston South - dullsville USA!

You're *buggin'*- but what do *you* know, being from Houston and all (5th
ward in da house!)

Aly Laurent

unread,

Jan 3, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/3/96

to

In article 4cbpms$j...@titania.pps.pgh.pa.us Doug Doyle wrote:

>>> Yeah Aly, She mentioned four black men. And counting you, well..... that
>>> makes five men but still....four BLACK men. -Doug

To which I replied:

>> ROTFLMAO. First he thought I was a woman, now I am *not* a *black* man.

Then he came back with:

> Negro maybe. Definately not black. -Doug

Fellow SCAAers, have you ever observed such a vulgar display of ignorance?

Aly "*DEFINITELY*" Laurent

Tracey S Mitchell

unread,

Jan 3, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/3/96

to

In article <DKMn9...@world.std.com>,

Kenneth R. Crudup <ke...@world.std.com> wrote:
>

>If there's any disagreement in what I say/do, and what I'm interpreted as,
>that's one of those "Venus/Mars" things to me, and really not my fault.
>

Any way you slice it, if it comes up and you keep quiet or change the
subject, it's deception.. and that's is awful if a woman you date just happens
to be stupid enough to NOT see warning signals...

Tracey "well, for the record, deception is just bad in general" Mitchell

Myra Royal

unread,

Jan 3, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/3/96

to

: In article <4ca6hm$j...@ixnews3.ix.netcom.com>,
: Benjamin Smith <bsm...@ix.netcom.com> says:

: >Too many women want Denzel Washington. But it takes a lot of strength

: >from a brother like Denzel *not* to give into all the temptation and

: >the many women who are interested in getting him as a prize.

. . . . And then Kenny snickered. . . .

That's the really bad part about all of this. Women, as well as men,
don't know how to respect someone's personal life. It bothers me that
there are women and men out there who will try everything in the book
just to get with someone, regardless of the fact
that the person is married or involved with someone. If I find out that a
person I'm interested in is married, well, I put a stop to it right then.
I've had married men approach me, but I know in my heart that if I were
his wife, I wouldn't want some other woman trying to get with my husband.
I always try and put myself in the other person's shoes. If I can't have
him all to myself, I don't want or need him.

Just my $.02 worth. . . .
Myra

Ron Drake

unread,

Jan 3, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/3/96

to

In article <4c1ir4$l...@ixnews8.ix.netcom.com>, ap...@ix.netcom.com(Apryl )
wrote:

> But you didn't answer the question: how is a woman to know that
> she's pumped the wrong brother? What are these warning signs -
> In your opinion?
>

Top Ten Warning Signs That She's "Pumped The Wrong Brother"
===========================================================

He:

10. Frisks all visitors to the house.
9. Brags about having recently gotten Rick James's autograph.
8 Refers to a bus station rest room as "the office."
7. Doesn't fall asleep so much as he just passes out.
6. Assures you that the madwoman who calls at all hours screaming
his name and demanding her alimony check "doesn't have a leg to
stand on."
5. Wears a cape.
4. Consistently says, "...that is, IF I live to be forty!"
3. Gets all glassy-eyed watching Milk Bone commercials.
2. Thinks "Internet" is a type of stocking.
1. Refers to you as his "number one ho."

Apryl

unread,

Jan 4, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/4/96

to

In <DKMLq...@world.std.com> ke...@world.std.com (Kenneth R. Crudup)
writes:
>

>In article <4ceram$h...@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>,
>tmit...@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Tracey S Mitchell) says:
>

>>It kills me that many men will have sex if given the chance, when
>>they could be more of a concerned human and say," I know you want
>>more but this is all the man I am,I can only give you sex, so now YOU
>>choose what steps we will take now."
>
>Seems to me that this should be obvious. If the man doesn't say he's
>out for anything else, why is she making the assumption?

You know what, that's the same logic that I have to use when a man
takes me out, and then wants to come to my house and... y'know.

They tell me that they aren't out for anything else. Plain as day.
Why should I assume more.

(I guess I'm thinking I'm in the Mike Tyson was Framed thread again)

Apryl
Who is feeling a little crazy today (I need sleep)

Apryl

unread,

Jan 4, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/4/96

to

In <4cdh5e$8...@spectator.cris.com> ebr...@deathstar.cris.com (Earl T.
Bryant, Jr.) writes:

>>In article <4ca6hm$j...@ixnews3.ix.netcom.com>,
>>Benjamin Smith <bsm...@ix.netcom.com> says:
>
>>>Too many women want Denzel Washington. But it takes a lot of
>>>strength from a brother like Denzel *not* to give into all the
>>>temptation and the many women who are interested in getting him as a
>>>prize.

>Then, ke...@world.std.com (Kenneth R. Crudup) gave this witty

>rejoinder:
>
>><snicker>
>
>>I presume you haven't heard of Mr. Washington's latest marital
difficulties,
>>huh? :-)
>
>Kenny...gotta stop readin' those National Enquirers when yer in the
>checkout line.... :-)

Does this mean that all this time Kenny was talking about DW admitting
that he had cheated (in the past, as in all is forgiven)???

Apryl
tsk, tsk, tsk

Apryl

unread,

Jan 4, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/4/96

to

In <4ce752$c...@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>

tmit...@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Tracey S Mitchell) writes:
>
>
> Nope, Denzel has a spotless repututaion, Men *can* live in this
world and
>not cheat you know!
>
> Tracey

Sorry, Girlfriend.

It has been reported in several reputable sources that Denzel admitted
to his wife that he did slip. At least once. But he said it wasn't
worth it, and hasn't slipped since.

Apryl
Who reads trash, but not garbage ;-)

Eugene Charles Reed

unread,

Jan 4, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/4/96

to

On 3 Jan 1996, VHEvans wrote:

> jm...@kelvin.seas.Virginia.EDU (Jason McDonald) wrote:
> A person who possesses
> knowledge of self cannot be led astray. Mainly because the
> bull-sh*tters will invariably do or say something that
> contradicts their front and screws them up. <<
>
> Succinctly put! That is exactly the bottom line. It all begins with deep
> introspection and self analysis of past relationship experiences to
> determine the pattern of habits, both good and bad. To know and to
> improve oneself is key to any relationship, which is what I understood

> from reading the book. <a little snipping> Anyway,

> when you know yourself, you will not sell yourself nor settle for less

> than you rightfully deserve. To that end, my quest is more self-directed than other-directed;

> the better I become, the more I have to offer to a future soulmate. Time
> is not an issue.
>

Just a few pennies to add. . .

1. A healthy relationship is made up of two people who love themselves
first. If you need someone to "fill a void" or "to make you happy" then
those relationships are almost always destined to fail.
2. People want what they cannot get. If there is some measure of
unattainability in each other, it draws you together closer. A common
mistake I saw in WTE and my own experience is the more you do, the more
you are taken for granted. People generally don't want doormats or slaves.
3. Lastly, the harder you look for something, the tougher it is to
find. Looking for a "man" or a "woman" usually ends up in heartache and
war stories. When you aren't looking, that's when they come.

Kenneth R. Crudup

unread,

Jan 4, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/4/96

to

In article <4cf72f$5...@cloner2.ix.netcom.com>,
ap...@ix.netcom.com(Apryl ) says:

>It has been reported in several reputable sources that Denzel admitted
>to his wife that he did slip. At least once.

>But he said it wasn't worth it, and hasn't slipped since.

Uhhhm, *yeah, OK*- Let's think about this for a second:

Mr. Washington has two options:

- Come off like Teflon. "Yeah, I f*ck*d her- so what."
See him cry as he's stripped of his cars, home, kids, and money.

- Kiss ass 'till his lips are chafed. "Baby, she wasn't even worth it! I don't
know what I was doing! It took 40, maybe 50 times before I realized I
shouldn't have been bonin' her! [Last sentence is specuation. -krc]"

It don't take a rocket scientist to figure out which one he'd use.

-Kenny, who is *dying* to see who this woman is he cheated with

Tracey S Mitchell

unread,

Jan 4, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/4/96

to

In article <4cgmg3$m...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>,
Alissande <alis...@aol.com> wrote:

>are all that and gravy. You know everything there is to know about women
>and their little moods and habits. Why do you need to lie to get or keep
>a woman?
>

Well, if he's lying like you said, maybe they have higher standards than
that of a nice looking guy, tons of money, great career, and he jsut still
can't figure out what they need....

Tracey "BY Thw Way, the above is not a compliment to Kenny, it is just
reapeated hearsay...." Mitchell : )

Tracey S Mitchell

unread,

Jan 4, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/4/96

to

In article <Pine.SV4.3.91.960104054830.23642B-100000-100000-100000@larry>,

Eugene Charles Reed <er...@emory.edu> wrote:
>
>find. Looking for a "man" or a "woman" usually ends up in heartache and
>war stories. When you aren't looking, that's when they come.

War stories and heartache is right...
And the ones that come when you aren't looking are usually the best!!

Tracey

Jason McDonald

unread,

Jan 4, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/4/96

to

Krystakila writes:
> On Wed, 27 Dec 1995, Jason McDonald wrote:
>
> > Lela's air head/penis envying char.
>
> Please explain how Robin is guilty of penis envy.

Directly from the line where she stated she was into pretty
boys with big d*cks. had she been into handsome men possessing
a complete package then....things may have been different.

> > Gloria didn't even know her own husband was bisexual, uh Hello,
> > I think there should have been some clues somewhere along the
> > line.
>
> That was her ex-husband wasn't it? Who only appeared every couple of years?
>

They were married and stayed together before the rump-rider
rolled out...so she had time. but so many women avert their
minds that their man/men are not homosexual. sometimes the
stack of Playgirls in his dresser drawers is a clue..and don't
buy the line that he's just reading the articles.

--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
_\||/_ ------------------
@-@ /Oh shuckey duckey |
O < Quack Quack |

Tracey S Mitchell

unread,

Jan 4, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/4/96

to

OH But I MUST save this!! I laughed so hard at his, folks were laughing at
ME like what? what is she laughing at??!

Ron, You simply have to think up more top ten lists.. I could get used to
your humor!!

Tracey "still LOL esp. #1,4 and 5!!" Mitchell

In article <jawara-0301...@mac738.kip.apple.com>,

Kenneth R. Crudup

unread,

Jan 4, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/4/96

to

In article <4chhe8$t...@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>,

tmit...@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Tracey S Mitchell) says:

>Tracey "who knows you are human underneath that mouth" Mitchell

Human, yes.

Naive, no.

-Kenny

Kenneth R. Crudup

unread,

Jan 4, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/4/96

to

In article <4ch20v$q...@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>,

tmit...@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Tracey S Mitchell) says:

>... so I would say she forgave him. I certainly would.
>Tracey" he is still a class act, one mistake, does not a dog make" Mtichell

See, Jason- you're so right!

Women kill me with their arbitrariness. This is most of the reason I simply
don't give a damn about what I do about 'em.

Alissande

unread,

Jan 4, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/4/96

to

From: ke...@world.std.com (Kenneth R. Crudup)

>I remember Maris saying "I used to not dis Kenny 'till I found out he
lies",
>but my statement of "I say what I need to" also includes what I *don't*
say,
>which is far more often.

>If there's any disagreement in what I say/do, and what I'm interpreted
as,
>that's one of those "Venus/Mars" things to me, and really not my fault.

That is a load of crap. Lies are lies whether you are a man or a woman,
and being a man doesn't give you license to connive.

Besides, you're a 10-percenter. You have everything a woman wants. You

are all that and gravy. You know everything there is to know about women
and their little moods and habits. Why do you need to lie to get or keep
a woman?

> -Kenny "I never promised you a rose garden" Crudup

Beautiful to look at, but beware of the thorns. Hmmm... Sounds like it to
me.

A.R.

--<-{@
"... his hand hovered over the petals of her body like a bee drawn to a
flower, waiting to enter them and taste the nectar ..."
--- A
Touch of Love

Tracey S Mitchell

unread,

Jan 4, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/4/96

to

In article <DKo70...@world.std.com>,

Kenneth R. Crudup <ke...@world.std.com> wrote:

>In article <4ch20v$q...@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>,
>tmit...@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Tracey S Mitchell) says:
>
>>... so I would say she forgave him. I certainly would.
>>Tracey" he is still a class act, one mistake, does not a dog make" Mtichell
>
><snicker>
>
>See, Jason- you're so right!
>
>Women kill me with their arbitrariness. This is most of the reason I simply
>don't give a damn about what I do about 'em.
>
> -Kenny
>

WHo cares your reason Kenny, it's till trifling to feel that way..

Kenneth R. Crudup

unread,

Jan 4, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/4/96

to

In article <4cgmg3$m...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>,
alis...@aol.com (Alissande) says:

>Besides, you're a 10-percenter. You have everything a woman wants. You
>are all that and gravy. You know everything there is to know about women
>and their little moods and habits. Why do you need to lie to get or keep
>a woman?

Well, thanks for the overhanded complements, but women lots of times simply do
not know what they want, and sometimes need a little push in the right
direction.

Any time women won't talk to guys 'cause there's a little dirt on their shoes,
or "I thought someone like you only liked light skinned/White/professional/
youger/older/bigger/smaller women" (I've heard all these), or "if you got all
that going for you, you must be married", or one of several excuses, I see
this self-defeating attitude that screams "chase me", so it's evidently what
y'all want.

Besides, I don't lie on *what* I am, only what I intend to do- and in that
case, I say nothing.

Besides, it's only women I'm lying to- what's the harm?

Tracey S Mitchell

unread,

Jan 4, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/4/96

to

In article <4cf72f$5...@cloner2.ix.netcom.com>,

Apryl <ap...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
>It has been reported in several reputable sources that Denzel admitted
>to his wife that he did slip. At least once. But he said it wasn't
>worth it, and hasn't slipped since.
>

>Apryl
>Who reads trash, but not garbage ;-)
>

unread,

Jan 4, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/4/96

to

On Jan 04, 1996 21:45:03 in article <Re: Waiting to Exhale...>,
'tmit...@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Tracey S Mitchell)' wrote:

>this is beyond, sex appeal, money,I really believe he knows the magnitude

>of his mistake and it has nothing to do with amterial things... I think he

>hanoestly loves her or else he could've said "I cheated so let's breeak up

>now.."

I really have a hard time believing Denzel Washington would risk half his
funds and custody of his children by saying a statement like that.
--
Michael Rimpel
ri...@pipeline.com

Kenneth R. Crudup

unread,

Jan 4, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/4/96

to

In article <4ch2cb$q...@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>,

tmit...@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Tracey S Mitchell) says:

>>It don't take a rocket scientist to figure out which one he'd use.

>Sorry, I really doubt it was like that. This is a man that goes to church.

Big deal, this means nothing. Do you know how many men I used to hang out
with on Saturday nights and do whateva who would religiously (forgive the
bad pun) attend services on Sunday?

>Not all men (even rich ones) are thinking of their purses (: ))

Yeah, but a fool and his money are soon parted. Not only that, a messy divorce
would have temporarily cost Denzel points in his sex-appeal, which is his
box-office charm, and that's a professional loss he can't chance.

>I really think that he knows how significant his cheating was...

>Denzel is a preacher's son on top of that!

SO? Do you have any idea how many preacher's daughters came to college and
became "D*ck-suck Sally"s, or how many prechers sons are out being hoes (like
the Hailey brothers from Jodeci, who bone anything that moves)?

>But she did have the option to leave him, but didn't ..so by rule, she will
>be with him till death unless he cheats again...

Yeah, well, I bet $100 that's becuase she's "Mrs. Denzel".

Rich Thompson

unread,

Jan 4, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/4/96

to

On Fri, 29 Dec 1995, Gabrielle Daniels wrote:

> > > But if you'll read the post that started the 'gaggle of squawking
> > > geese flying over head', it was pointed out that the problem with
> > > so many men is that they sell a bill of goods that they themselves
> > > are not ready to deliver.
> >
> > Hey, as long as someone's willing to pay for the goods sight unseen, why
> > would anyone worry about the delivery?
>
> I would, especially when it takes too damn long to get to my doorstep...

I guess I meant, that if you pay someone upfront without any contract,
what's the person's motivation for worrying about the delivery? Other
than good faith, which seems to be in short supply these days.

> There is such a thing as truth in advertising, and due desserts per
> verbal contract.

I guess I was looking at the "buyer beware" angle. But most of the
players I know can be spotted a mile away.

> Most liars end up in the dog pound.

Well, I believe in karma, but sometimes it takes a long time to kick in.
And if you're the type of person who is short-term, present-oriented, you
aren't going to be focussing a lot of your attention on where you end up.

Peace,
Rich

Richard Thompson
Dept. of Psychology
McGill University
1205 Dr. Penfield Ave
Montreal P.Q.
H3A 1B1

"It is when there is ice and snow on them that the strength of the pine and
the cypress can be seen. I am grateful for this trouble around me, because
it gives me an opportunity to realize how fortunate I am."
Kung Fu-Tse

Rich Thompson

unread,

Jan 4, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/4/96

to

On 29 Dec 1995, Apryl wrote:

> That's not true. Many men avoid the obvious 'warning signs', since
> they know this will get them caught. All men, correction: all
> dogs, don't operate the same way. Some even play a good role until
> they reel in their catch (tell them what they want to hear, to get
> what he wants).

I don't know. I'm not a terribly smart person, but I can always tell when
one of my female friends is getting involved with someone who won't treat
her right and I can always tell when they're getting involved with a nice
guy. To be honest, I haven't made a list of the objective signs but I
haven't been wrong yet (if only I could get this to work with women), so
I assume they are relatively subtle things, the way he looks at you or at
other people, the way he carries himself, whether he orders for you,
whether he calls back when he says he will, whether he shows up when he
says he will, etc. My single best peice of advice is to have a couple of
friends who you trust and who you know don't have a vested interest in
you being either single or involved meet him and ask them for their
opinion and LISTEN to them. But the not showing up or calling when
promised is a big sign that a lot of people ignore.

> >Hey, as long as someone's willing to pay for the goods sight unseen,
> >why would anyone worry about the delivery?
>

> And to think that I had put your name in the 'with brain cells' pile
>
> Guess I'll just make a quick correction....

Good grief!! I was simply saying that if you give a guy you DON'T KNOW
THAT WELL all your money or yourself or whatever, you can't be terribly
surprised if he takes advantage of you. Of course there are nice guys out
there who won't, but unless you take the time to get to know them before
you commit yourself to them, it'll be just a matter of luck whether the
man you give yourself to is honorable or not.
I'm not condoning men who take advantage of women, but telling people
they're dumb for not keeping their apartment locked is not condoning
burglary, but acknowledging it.

> Apryl
> Who thinks Richard let someone else get into his account

I think April has missed my point.

Tracey S Mitchell

unread,

Jan 4, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/4/96

to

In article <DKo7B...@world.std.com>,

Kenneth R. Crudup <ke...@world.std.com> wrote:
>

>>Sorry, I really doubt it was like that. This is a man that goes to church.
>
>Big deal, this means nothing. Do you know how many men I used to hang out

It means something when he knows the Lord, He may be totally different form
your "only church going" friends. I gues when I said goes to church I should
have said "knows the Lord" for those that took my words at face value.. As it
is true that many people only go to church.

>Yeah, but a fool and his money are soon parted. Not only that, a messy divorce
>would have temporarily cost Denzel points in his sex-appeal, which is his
>box-office charm, and that's a professional loss he can't chance.
>

this is beyond, sex appeal, money,I really believe he knows the magnitude

of his mistake and it has nothing to do with amterial things... I think he
hanoestly loves her or else he could've said "I cheated so let's breeak up
now.."

Yes, therea are many P Kid's that trip but my point was that his background was
to try hard to do waht was right, what he was raised to believe.. Not the fact
that daddy was a preacher.

>
>>But she did have the option to leave him, but didn't ..so by rule, she will
>>be with him till death unless he cheats again...
>
>Yeah, well, I bet $100 that's becuase she's "Mrs. Denzel".
>

Sorry Kenny, People on this earth *actually* have love in thier hearts..
> -Kenny
>
>--
Tracey

Matthew C. Scallon

unread,

Jan 4, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/4/96

to

In article <4cdh5e$8...@spectator.cris.com>, ebr...@deathstar.cris.com

(Earl T. Bryant, Jr.) wrote:

> >I presume you haven't heard of Mr. Washington's latest marital difficulties,
> >huh? :-)
>
> Kenny...gotta stop readin' those National Enquirers when yer in the
> checkout line.... :-)
>

Thank you! I hate it when people spread gossip like this. Aren't they
allowed some privacy. I mean, Denzel doesn't exactly flaunt out there
like Madonna, you know.

--
Matthew C. Scallon
sca...@nosc.mil
Llanfairpwllgwyngyllgogerychwyrndrobwllllantysiliogogogoch.
Say that ten times fast.

Matthew C. Scallon

unread,

Jan 4, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/4/96

to

In article <Pine.ULT.3.91.960103...@rac4.wam.umd.edu>,
Krystakila <kbu...@wam.umd.edu> wrote:

> > Gloria didn't even know her own husband was bisexual, uh Hello,
> > I think there should have been some clues somewhere along the
> > line.
>
> That was her ex-husband wasn't it? Who only appeared every couple of years?
>

No, if you read the book (and they didn't really explain this well in the
movie), he is Tarik's father. They had a relationship back in college.
He was a track athlete. She got pregnant, and, because of her Catholic
upbringing (something that also disappears in the movie), she kept the
baby and dropped out of school.

The father supported the baby financially, only visiting when he was in town.

So, since there was little contact between her and Tarik's father, there
would have been little indication to her. She tended to internalize
things, thinking that his lack of attraction was because of weight gain,
and therefore wouldn't have noticed.

They didn't say it in the movie, but in the book, he said was strictly
homosexual.
>
> Kila
> "Once you get on stage everything's all right. I fell the most beautiful,
> complete, fulfilled." Leontyne Price

Kenneth R. Crudup

unread,

Jan 5, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/5/96

to

In article <scallon-0401...@imageboss.nosc.mil>,

sca...@nosc.mil (Matthew C. Scallon) says:

>Thank you! I hate it when people spread gossip like this.

Keep reading- I ain't the only one who knows this by a long shot.

>Llanfairpwllgwyngyllgogerychwyrndrobwllllantysiliogogogoch.
>Say that ten times fast.

I thought the "Black men and oral sex" thread was long gone? :-)

-Kenny "I'll take 'Welsh Rarebit' for $200, Alex" Crudup

--

Earl T. Bryant, Jr.

unread,

Jan 5, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/5/96

to

>In article <4cgmg3$m...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>,
>alis...@aol.com (Alissande) says:

>>Besides, you're a 10-percenter. You have everything a woman wants. You
>>are all that and gravy. You know everything there is to know about women
>>and their little moods and habits. Why do you need to lie to get or keep
>>a woman?

To which ke...@world.std.com (Kenneth R. Crudup) wrote:

>Well, thanks for the overhanded complements, but women lots of times simply do
>not know what they want, and sometimes need a little push in the right
>direction.

But you have to admit, Kenny, the ones that need "pushing" ain't all
that anyhow, and should not have the time/resources of a young
tackhead wasted on their wicketty-wack asses...

>Any time women won't talk to guys 'cause there's a little dirt on their shoes,
>or "I thought someone like you only liked light skinned/White/professional/
>youger/older/bigger/smaller women" (I've heard all these), or "if you got all
>that going for you, you must be married", or one of several excuses, I see
>this self-defeating attitude that screams "chase me", so it's evidently what
>y'all want.

Err..._yall_? Paintin' with a big brush these days, eh?

>Besides, I don't lie on *what* I am, only what I intend to do- and in that
>case, I say nothing.

Oooh...okay...only a lie of omission! That's _different_!! :-(

>Besides, it's only women I'm lying to- what's the harm?

Yikes!! I _know_ you're just being sarcastic, right?!

If not, I'm glad I live on the West Coast...what, with the fallout
from the nuclear firestorm headed your way.... ;-)

Earl Bryant/ebr...@cris.com/Protecting and defending since 1987
----------------------------------------------------------------
The only red man I've ever seen had a terrible sunburn.
The only black man I've ever seen had the lights turned off.
The only yellow man I've ever seen is Homer Simpson, and
The only white man I've ever seen is Homer before the animator painted him.
Race is a social construct to facilitate subordination.
We are all different shades of beautful. --Kimberly Chapman

DarkStar

unread,

Jan 5, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/5/96

to

In article <4ccd7o$6...@news-e1a.megaweb.com>,
Art Clemons <acle...@gnn.com> wrote:
>
>In article <Pine.SUN.3.91.960101...@rigel.oac.uci.edu>
>Gabrielle Daniels wrote:

...

>>Some black men are like that. DARKSTAR should have predicated his
>>remarks to indicate that, and only that.

It's not DarkStar's faulut that Gabby can't comprehend; the word of the
day is context.

>Even saying that implies that the movie and/or book shouldn't be criticized
>for content. The fact that you like it, or see elements of some men you know
>doesn't mean that I should accept those men as role models, or indeed see
>myself in them. Using that logic, in the 30's Bojangles and Steppin' Fetchit
>should have typical too.

This is a good point.

...

>>
>>Brothers and sisters who don't recognize themselves in the movie and
>>don't puff out about it are taking care of business. Like BamBam and
>>Bear, for instance.

Are you, Gabrielle, puffing out about it? I think so.

...

>>"WTE" is not such a slur on brothers who ARE taking care of business. If
>>anything, brothers who are doing and loving well, will be saying, "I know
>>a guy like that from college," or "I sure am not those brothers." And
>>they will step on.

Until they meet a woman who insists they are a dog, when they are not.

>Yet, I'm not sure that's really such a good approach. Hiding from the issue,
>or proclaiming innocence because one isn't typical reminds me of people who
>attack affirmative action, they're responding to the implied shame rather
>than to the issue. I won't cheer for the movie, and I'm not going to
>proclaim my innocence either. Either is hypocrical posturing for the benefit
>of an audience.

...

>>Brothers who appear to holler loudest about the sisters' morals (and the
>>sisters' morals have always been in question since we landed here in 1619)
>>or how many dogs outweighed the good men in "WTE" had betta be checking
>>their own acts or simply leave brothers and sisters to make up their own
>>minds about the movie.
>
>Why should I check my act? Isn't it surprising that you, an African American
>will take a movie based on stereotypes and use it as a litmus test for
>African American men. Since no movie gets 100% penetration of the potential
>market, those who don't see the film will always be the majority. The movie
>and the comments made by people who like the movie can only be interpreted a
>limited number of ways, and I long ago learned not to pretend I didn't notice
>obvious things.

Good point.

> Incidentally, aren't you also confusing me with someone
>else? I didn't attack the morals of the women going to see the movie, but I
>did attack using the movie or its characters as a guide to life, and the
>film's attack on African American men in general.
>acle...@gnn.com (Art Clemons)

I didn't attack the women's morals, but she wants to say that I did.
Your last paragraph is an interesting comment.

--
-------------------------- Sign below the dotted line --------------------

Welcome to my virtual reality!

Ed Brown - dark...@cais.com
http://www.tnp.com/~darkstar (construction in progress)
Copyright, 1996, Edwin Brown

Kenneth R. Crudup

unread,

Jan 5, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/5/96

to

In article <4cir5p$i...@spectator.cris.com>,

ebr...@deathstar.cris.com (Earl T. Bryant, Jr.) says:

>But you have to admit, Kenny, the ones that need "pushing" ain't all that
>anyhow,

*Wrong*.

-Kenny

Rich Thompson

unread,

Jan 5, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/5/96

to

On 3 Jan 1996, Apryl wrote:

(To Kenny, no less:)

> But you did identify the BAD EXPERIENCES that you had were with woman
> that you were attracted to purely for the packaging that turned out
> to be just that: packaging --

Let me get this straight- KENNY was complaining about women who turned
out to be merely packaging? I figured that would be the ideal package for
kenny- nice wrapping, without all that squishy, mushy crap that comes on
the inside (Kenny's view, not mine). the only women I've ever heard kenny
complain about are the ones that disagree with him and the ones that he
doesn't find attractive. I'd be surprised if he's terribly concerned
about women being superficial.

Tracey S Mitchell

unread,

Jan 5, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/5/96

to

In article <4chqnl$i...@pipe4.nyc.pipeline.com>,
Michael Rimpel <ri...@nyc.pipeline.com> wrote:

>
>I really have a hard time believing Denzel Washington would risk half his
>funds and custody of his children by saying a statement like that.
>--

First, I doubt he would lose total custody... But you have to admit that men
have given up many things for lust/love whatever...

Tracey

Nicole Anderson

unread,

Jan 5, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/5/96

to

On Thu, 4 Jan 1996, Rich Thompson wrote:
>
> Good grief!! I was simply saying that if you give a guy you DON'T KNOW
> THAT WELL all your money or yourself or whatever, you can't be terribly
> surprised if he takes advantage of you. Of course there are nice guys out
> there who won't, but unless you take the time to get to know them before
> you commit yourself to them, it'll be just a matter of luck whether the
> man you give yourself to is honorable or not.
> I'm not condoning men who take advantage of women, but telling people
> they're dumb for not keeping their apartment locked is not condoning
> burglary, but acknowledging it.
>

Rich,

i agree 1000%.
nic

Rich Thompson

unread,

Jan 5, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/5/96

to

On Tue, 2 Jan 1996, Art Clemons wrote:

> offers further ammunition. Frankly any woman who uses the movie or the book
> as a guide to life needs to learn more about life, as does any man.

Well, anyone who uses ANY single book, even the Bible as a guide to life
is asking for trouble.
Interesting anecdote. A friend was telling me about this "friend" hers, a
really scummy kind of guy who has been treating her like shit. I was
telling her she should get as far away from him as possible. "but", she
whines, "he's better than any of the men in Waiting to Exhale".
"What? Where'd you get that from?"
"Well, that's what HE said".

I haven't quite figured what to make of that, but I did find it interesting.

Dr. Midnight

unread,

Jan 5, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/5/96

to

In article <4ceu7r$r...@bigblue.oit.unc.edu>, my...@email.unc.edu (Myra Royal) says:

>That's the really bad part about all of this. Women, as well as men,
>don't know how to respect someone's personal life. It bothers me that
>there are women and men out there who will try everything in the book
>just to get with someone, regardless of the fact

BRAVO!!!!

I can't understand why some people can't respect the instutuion of
marriage. I have had interest shown by married women. I tell 'em, no go.
And I respect that boundary. If you're going to play around, why get
married?

Dr M.

Nicole Anderson

unread,

Jan 5, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/5/96

to

On 3 Jan 1996, Tracey S Mitchell wrote:
> Nicole,
>
> I don't feel that it is that clear cut.. Many women have sex out of lookin
> gfor love, it isn't solely that they just want to give it up, women want to be
> loved. And though I feel sex is wrong outside of marriage, Some women have no
> other concept of love EXCEPT the "I give myself to the one I love" school of
> thought. Men do need to take responsiblity for how they treat people in their
> lives that want a real relationship with them.. It kills me that many men will
> haev sex if given the chance, when they could be more of a concerned human and
> say," I know you want more but this is all the man I am,I can only give you
> sex, so now YOU choose what steps we will take now." That at least lets a
> woman know what the deal is up front and can save herself some heartache..
>
>

Tracey,

I agree with you in principle. I agree that it is wrong to mislead and
deceive people. I also agree that it would be nice if a man would say up
front that all he is interested in is sex, but this isn't a perfect world
and everyone isn't interested in having the truth up front. My point was
that if a woman doesn't want to be hurt because she feels men use her for
sex, she shouldn't give it up so easy. Patterns are pretty easy to
recognize, and if a womans pattern is to "fall in love" with men after
having sex with them off top, then the problem isn't necessarily with the
men. That type of behavior gives men too much control over your life. I
just think that we as a group need to take responsibility for our actions
and stop blaming men for situations that we allow ourselves to be in.

Nic

Dr. Midnight

unread,

Jan 5, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/5/96

to

In article <DKM4q...@world.std.com>, ke...@world.std.com (Kenneth R. Crudup) says:

>I just *knew* the strain would get to be too much. He ain't no Superman.
>
> -Kenny

Oh? That's not what the lady said I'm sure ... :-) :-)

Dr M.

Nicole Anderson

unread,

Jan 5, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/5/96

to

On Wed, 3 Jan 1996, Ron Drake wrote:
>
> Top Ten Warning Signs That She's "Pumped The Wrong Brother"
> ===========================================================
>
> He:
>
> 10. Frisks all visitors to the house.
> 9. Brags about having recently gotten Rick James's autograph.
> 8 Refers to a bus station rest room as "the office."
> 7. Doesn't fall asleep so much as he just passes out.
> 6. Assures you that the madwoman who calls at all hours screaming
> his name and demanding her alimony check "doesn't have a leg to
> stand on."
> 5. Wears a cape.
> 4. Consistently says, "...that is, IF I live to be forty!"
> 3. Gets all glassy-eyed watching Milk Bone commercials.
> 2. Thinks "Internet" is a type of stocking.
> 1. Refers to you as his "number one ho."

ROTFLOL

Tracey S Mitchell

unread,

Jan 5, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/5/96

to

In article <Pine.SOL.3.91.96010...@bio1.acpub.duke.edu>,
Nicole Anderson <n...@acpub.duke.edu> wrote:

Point taken!

Tracey

Apryl

unread,

Jan 6, 1996, 3:00:00 AM1/6/96

to

In <DKnxL...@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> jm...@kelvin.seas.Virginia.EDU

(Jason McDonald) writes:
>
>Ap...@ix.netcom.com writes:
>> In <DKKnL...@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>
jm...@kelvin.seas.Virginia.EDU
>> (Jason McDonald) writes:
>> >>
>> >You're right I'm so much more:)
>>
>> This is America. Every one can have a dream.
>
>Unles they have you then its a nightmare.

Does this mean that I have been an element of your every thought? Even
when asleep???

>> Yes. I will 'insinuate' that I don't insult men. I haven't.
>> Unless you were painted in my ambiguous descriptions of the kind
>> of men that I don't want to have in my life. But those have
>> been few and far between.
>
>You have not only made gross and false generalizations in your
>characterizations of men but you have done the same with
>women..see Tracey M's response to your big boobs/gold digga
>comment. But then again you don't remember half of what you
>have read, for that matter I'm not quite sure you understand
>much of what is written in anyone's posts.

Show me where any thing that I've posted about men is false!!!
To ask a question doesn't make a statement.

I am stating that you are lying about me. Get your facts together.

>> And don't call me sweetie. You don't know me that well.
>>
>You are right...a sourpuss like you could neva,
>eva,neva..neva.neva.neva..neva...neva be a sweetie.

Oh, I could be a sweetie. But only to a real man. And only to
a real man that I choose to be a sweetie to. He and old people.

>> (Touche' - I left myself wide open for that... but I was being
>> sarcastic, wasn't I?)
>
>Such a feeble attempt could never be labeled sarcastic...try
>'trite' it's more fitting your style.

Better trite than trifling, I always say.

>> >Maybe you should revisit you oFrom: ap...@ix.netcom.com(Apryl )
Newsgroups: soc.culture.african.american
Subject: Re: Waiting to Exhale...
References: <4cf0jk$i...@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> <DKnxL...@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>