Just popped into the verizon store to claim my free phone.
My old one is OLD: Jan. 3, 2003.
This one has COLORS. People, my old phone had COLOR:green--a pale, alien green.
This one has a camera with a FLASH. My old one had none of that.
This one has picture messaging. The old one had text messaging.
This one lets me download ringtones. The old one had standard, annoying tones.
This one has speaker phone. The other one had mute.
Talk about an upgrade.
Cell phone down...
Vespa to come!
Puppy to arrive!
Future boyfriend? Aw. C'mon, I've been really really good this year! Really.
I think the title says it all...depends on the mood--my mood!
Past Posts
- August 2009 (1)
- July 2009 (7)
- June 2009 (6)
- May 2009 (10)
- April 2009 (18)
- March 2009 (14)
- February 2009 (8)
- January 2009 (11)
- December 2008 (15)
- November 2008 (14)
- October 2008 (13)
- September 2008 (25)
- August 2008 (11)
- July 2008 (24)
- June 2008 (14)
- May 2008 (7)
- December 2007 (2)
- November 2007 (4)
- October 2007 (24)
- September 2007 (5)
- August 2007 (13)
- July 2007 (16)
- June 2007 (24)
- May 2007 (8)
- April 2007 (16)
- March 2007 (19)
- February 2007 (12)
- January 2007 (22)
- December 2006 (30)
- November 2006 (8)
- October 2006 (40)
- September 2006 (29)
- August 2006 (32)
- July 2006 (16)
- June 2006 (28)
- May 2006 (27)
- April 2006 (37)
- March 2006 (43)
- February 2006 (34)
- January 2006 (54)
- December 2005 (45)
- November 2005 (73)
- October 2005 (28)
12 comments:
It's too bad girls just can't decide they want to get laid, and then go out and do it. Noooo--that'd be too simple and logical . . feh!
email us the tea picture! if it's good then i'll REALLY be impressed...
There are girls who do JUST that...most guys will "do" them, but they'll also call them SLUTS!
It's not a fair world.
No way. The approbation towards women (if you were to be more aggressive sexually) would not come from men. Not in this day and age. It would come only from other women, whose agendas you would be upsetting.
The power to guide your own destinies is in your own hands, if you but sieze it.
Yes, we are engineered emotionally and biologically to behave in certain ways. [Women are held back by this more than men]. But modern savvy females, knowing these triggers, can avoid them. If you really wanted to.
So that leaves cultural conditioning. If you want to fight "tradition" then the right social moment in history is NOW.
Demand your sexual independence.
Its not men who would denigrate you! Its your own gender!
Good bar debate.
While I don't disagree on the count that women denigrate women, perhaps more than men...the truth remains that there is a LARGE contingent of men who would label a promiscuous woman as a slut.
Keep in mind, I'm all for a woman's right to choose, be it aborting babies or multiple sexual partners. To each her own.
Having taken that liberal perspective let me be clear that one must be comfortable with the choices one makes. Some of us don't wish to part with convention--I don't think that makes us less evolved or lacking in the empowerment dept. It's all in choices, right?
So, when I vote for your right to choose, I'm not saying I would choose the same way...
The type of men who glibly apply those 'slut' labels are either ignorant or just using that schema to make themselves look "better" when they eventually choose one girl from all the others.
Its a false classification system, constructed by the venal and the vain.
What sexual directness (not promiscuity) actually comes down to in practice--if all other factors like beauty, status, etc were equal--is rationalist and egalitarian. We probably won't ever live to see it.
But just think of how it would be if sex were not carrying these false masks of economics and classism.
When I ask more women to be
forthright in getting their needs met, I realize I am asking them to push against this force.
But you are also right in saying that some women themselves, will not ever feel the need to make the shift to a more amazonian way of dealing with sex. It makes no sense to them emotionally. Many women need to warm up to a guy slowly before allowing him into their bodies---thats just the way it is.
What I am saying is, when lack of boyfriend material irks you, this is the roadblack you have to find some way to drive through. Full throttle, break on through, the guy you need may be just on the other side of convention!
The guy I want is very much on THIS--my--side of convention.
What happened to tradition? I'm all for egalitarian--for OTHER people--I'll take my gender roles and feminized place in society, any day. But again, that's just me.
Power to the castrating females, the stay-home moms, the eternal grad students, the hippies, the celibate femi-nazis, the sex fiends with STDs...but I like the system. I'm born and bred on it.
Where's my male counterpart?
I'll tell you where: metro-sexualized, feminized, sensitized, and confused. I'm not asking for the arrogant, macho man but what happened to the balance.
Why does respecting a woman come at the price of projecting on her masculine roles? Conversely, why has chivalry become a burden only the chauvinists bear?
I can tell you where these 'balanced guys' are. All around you, in this city. Trouble is, they go unnoticed because they aren't fitting the proper template.
1) For just one example: Manhattan women sometimes "will not date anyone from the boroughs" and that nonsense. Nevermind that the love-of-their-life might be from the wrong style of town, they want attraction ONLY to "the right type of guy".
2) If so many guys have gone metro (or even bi-) I submit that a good reason for this is that women (and by extension, the media establishment) are continually playing shell-games with us. Sending us signals and goads that are ultimately meaningless, because not every guy can meet women's ideals.
3)Ask the misgyonists on CL what they hate most about women in NYC and you will hear one main complaint: gold-diggers. Women who have "shopping-lists" of qualities they MUST SEE in a guy in order to welcome his approach.
(I suspect that plenty of guys go dl/bi because they simply can't get dependable sex. So few guys fit these fantasy-land, Bride-magazine Prince Charmings).
4) In any case, its not men who are calling the shots here. We dance to your tune, its a seller's market. And in every modern generation, as society gets more and more PC and less and less favoring of traditional 'strong' or 'weak' gender roles, the situation gets more fuzzy.
5) If you need any proof that good old-fashioned, rough-around-the-edges, smack-her-on-the-behind guys exist, look no further than yours truly. You know I wear the pants in my abode!!
Maybe the whole thing hinges on the misapplication of old concepts of "promiscuity" when, for today's world, we just need a lot more straightforward "directness".
Women should not be castigated falsely: for example, the perception that by being more aggressive, they are being "less discriminating" in their choice of partner.
This simply does not follow. What might change is not their 'sorting wheat from chaff' process. . that definitely needs to stay in place. But it is the question of "to what end" are they sorting? Towards what goals?
The bottom line is that both genders physically enjoy sex. But it seems like only men treat pleasure in the free-and-easy manner it deserves. We aren't reserved about it, we don't use it as a tool to achieve other ends.
I think men would relish seeing women, enjoy it in the same way we do, which is without the addition of economic goals or using it as a medium of exchange, barter, or leverage.
Sex should just be sex, stripped of any "overhead" or "supercargo".
While, as a woman, I cannot concur with the purely physical attributions made to sex because as a woman, sex is more than just the act (at least most of the time, for most women)--I will say that hedonism as it is expressed in gratification and living by the pleasure principle are scorned in our society as a whole.
We live in a world steeped in moderation guided by over-developed superegos and under-fulfillied id responses. That's our lot in life--even in America, nay especially in America.
I am making a case for hyperbolic living, that perhaps is unsustainable given the "weak" but resilient nature of our biology. The reality is that however enjoy an activity, it gets tiresome after a while. The degree to which our bodies, nay our minds, can withstand pleasure has its limits as well. For example, who can drink a whole bottle of grey goose and not get their stomach pumped?
The sad truth is that most women have a lower threshold on the sex frequency/fervor factor than men. Maybe that's linked with the emotional drain, requiring recharging involved, maybe it's just a social pressure...but it's unfair to assume that there aren't women who are exceptions. It's also unfair to chastize them if they are living within the limitations of their respective ids.
I concur with these comments. . no objection here.
I'd point out, however, that people in Europe seem to live pretty free-and-easy, with grand pleasure, (in moderation if they want to), throughout their adult lives.
When are we ever going to catch up with that evolved society! Much less South America's!
The United States: first in commerce, industry, and technology: nearly last in sexual awareness and maturity.
First in prudery and puritanism...
Well we're ahead of ALL of Asia...kama sutra not withstanding.
So, we can pat ourselves on the back for something...
Post a Comment