Mark Sobolewski (mark_sobolewski{at}yahoo.com) writes:
> In article ,
>  dg411{at}FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Andre Lieven) wrote:
>
>> >> > So safe?  Agreed, nothing is safe in family court, but
>> >> > the key is that she won't be as quickly motivated to
>> >> > move against him for trivial reasons.  After all, all
>> >> > he's doing is trying to protect himself.
>> >>
>> >> Might such a woman pick through his records, when he's at work,
>> >> to get evidence of the moved off shore loot ? Could be...
>> >
>> > PO Box: $80 per year in the states.
>>
>> Well, my ex tried to hide some documents. I still got 'em.
>
> Safety deposit box?

Nope; Her post marital home. I had... sources. 

> Heck, I would just love it if there was a place to hide porn. :-)

Old stereo boxes stuffed into the furnace room ?

>> > As the industrial revolution kicked in, pseudo forms
>> > of prostitution evolved with men taking women out to
>> > fancy dinners and trying to get into their pants.
>> > Men and women developed a distrust for each other.
>>
>> Well, certainly more opportunity for that was created. It
>> was still every person's choice as to whether they would
>> decide to engage in all that.
>
> I remind Parg all the time that people's "choices" are dependant
> to a large part upon the society they "choose" to live in.
> Unless we live in log cabins in Montana, we have to
> learn how to be social.

Of course. The principle that " your right to swing your arm ends
at the start of my nose. "

>> > The sexual revolution, as many post-anti-feminists are screaming,
>> > was a tool by men to get into women's pants with men tolerating
>> > feminism because it meant more casual nookie.  I remember
>> > the days when Playboy was a big deal and getting oral sex
>> > from normal women was considered unthinkable.  Today, American
>> > women are slutty.  Many men like it that way.
>>
>> Young men... And, its possible to be *relatively* free, yet
>> not to slutty. Responsibility is the key word there.
>
> You're sounding a bit like Parg. :-)

Oh Gods no ! 

> In many ways, "relatively" free sex is the most expensive sex
> around even if the guy is "responsible" (to the point
> of paranoia.)

Well, I'm speaking of healthy and not suffused with victimology
cults adults. I am still on a good nodding acquaintence with at
least a few ex lovers, some where the relationship was two decades
ago.

> Many women, as you and I observe, are so messed up that
> sex with them is more emotionally draining than anything.

Of course: I was speaking of not that bunch. With them, anything
beyond a daughter-doting mommy isn't possible.

>> > Anyways, it's no wonder that these women today are at a loss
>> > on how to please men and treat them in a manner to get what
>> > they want beyond short-term casual relationships since our
>> > society has become focused upon that lifestyle and even
>> > worshipping it.
>>
>> Lets not forget that women's media lies to women about men,
>> and that many women *like* those lies, then they get pissed
>> off, when the Real World fails to match up with the sold
>> lies.
>
> How long have you had a woman in your house? :-)

About a year now...

> Women I know love to constantly obsess over possible
> horrors.  Take 5 minutes to think about taking out the
> trash and I hear a thousand ways that it can
> end in disaster.  Watch the Oxygen network sometime.

Can't: I'm in Canada. And, I will say that on the satirical
comedy show Royal Canadian Air Farce, one character routinely
slags the Women's Television Network. I *love* those bits.

Like I've said, my S/O loves " home porn ". Yet, we've had not
one issue with how we take care of this home, and she is very
positively appreciative of the efforts I make, in support of
us ( And I, of hers for us ). Shes said often that the fact
that I take out the trash, and that I dod so, on a routine
basis, even before she moved in, showed here that she had no
concerns at all about us covering everything, without anyone
needing to watch the other.

>> > A survey cited by The Week shows that most young men who are
>> > avoiding marriage do so because they get the nookie without it.
>>
>> And, because, in their view, marriage offers little for them,
>> and not a little against their interests.
>
> Those were reasons #2 and #3 respectively.  However, it's
> clear that the young men often do feel as if they're in
> paradise.

Sure. I'll agree that at that age, my views of what kind of
relationships I wanted, and how I'd get them, were... a tad
different from my views on them, now.

But, I'm confident that young guys are learning. It just takes
some time to get that done.

>> > This is as marriage is gaining new attraction and popularity
>> > as I've shown above (neat how they hid that by sandwiching it
>> > in with gay marriage.  Now the "liberated" gals don't have
>> > to admit they're old fashioned.  They're just joining their
>> > "liberated" lesbian friends :-)
>>
>> Who are among the " trendy " setters of women's fashion, and
>> I don't mean only clothes...
>
> HAHAHAHA!

One word: Ellen Show. OK, thats two words. 

> Actually, it's gay MEN who set fashion trends.  Lesbians are
> largely tolerated by heterosexual women, but viewed with suspician.

I think that they still get to slip in some influence. Gay men
surely get the cover stories, but don't sell the lickers short.

>> > The fact is that a young woman with little money for fashion
>> > lined up next to a 30 year old attorney with all the
>> > latest crap will beat them out.
>>
>> Indeed.
>
> A friend of mine in the fashion industry laughed at
> the paradox: All this shit is designed for young,
> thin, tall women and the only women who can
> afford it are thirty something married and career
> women with frumpy figures.  What to do?

LOL ! Can you say " stinky marketing plan " ?

> She told me that high end fashion designers take two approaches:
> The "special" size (women cannot be honest with themselves
> about size.  Have you heard about this?) and have special
> "size 7's" which are really size 9's.  Get it?  :-)

Oh, fuck. Well, I can't really say that I'm surprised. As
most women's fashions and cosmetics are all about the sheer
denial of any glimmer of honesty. Ditto dating.

> And they have special mirrors to try on the clothes
> that make them look thin (as in the seinfeld episode.)

Didn't see it, but I can well imagine...

> The other approach is to just price the shit outrageously
> and hope to sell a few to mistresses of rich hollywood
> leftists.  Only the highest designers can get away
> with this strategy, obviously.

Sure. See also " military industrial complex ". I just
read an explanation of how US naval shipbuilders can build
missile destroyers for 40% less, if they were allowed to
get multi year orders, so that they could ensure a steady
flow of materials and trained workers, in the right numbers
and jobs, at the right times. But, that would take a bit
away from the plodders along the Potomac...

> And they're oppressed by US?!?! :-)

Amazing, innit ? To heck with taking back the night,
they really need to take back Vogue and Cosmo... 

Oprah needs to be exiled to St. Helena, of course.

Andre

--
" I'm a man... But, I can change... If I have to... I guess. "
                                    The Man Prayer, Red Green.


--- UseNet To RIME Gateway {at} 3/3/05 1:38:44 AM ---