A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » Mountain Biking
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

OT rant aargh!



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old September 19th 03, 06:12 AM
Monique Y. Herman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default OT rant aargh!

On Fri, 19 Sep 2003 04:53:04 GMT, Greg P. penned:
You and my "ball-and-chain" would really get along =(

Whenever I ask for her opinion on politics, law, etc, her answer is "I'm a
woman and my opinions are my own". But that's only when she's in a mood =p


I hope not to cause offense, but your post saddens me a bit. You call
your wife a "ball and chain" ... you use a frown to express your
feelings about her opinions ... you previously lamented the fact that
you were already married and therefore couldn't go after a woman like
Penny ...

Mind you, maybe you love your wife and are thrilled to be with her every
day. If so, perhaps you should consider the impression your words leave
on others. You certainly don't give the impression, to me, of a happily
married man.

I have no idea how to respond to your comparison of your wife to me.
Granted, I don't know her, but I have absolutely never used the excuse
"I am a woman" to get out of defending my views ...

I don't mean to be a downer, but every so often I meet people who always
refer to their spouses in slightly disparaging ways. They may mean it
entirely in jest, but it certainly doesn't come across that way.


(And for those of you guys who have said that Eric must be a lucky guy,
here ya go -- this thread may cause you to reconsider =) I am indeed the
master at over-analysis, and it does indeed drive Eric nuts!)

--
monique

My pointless ramblings:
http://www.bounceswoosh.org/phorum/index.php?f=6
Ads
  #22  
Old September 19th 03, 06:13 AM
Monique Y. Herman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default OT rant aargh!

On Fri, 19 Sep 2003 00:11:54 -0500, deluxe penned:
"Sheer entertainment value" doesn't count as a reason anymore?

I'm so bored right now, I'm entertaining myself with Pete.


So I noticed! Kind of weird to see a flamewar in a post about my
parents ... heh ...


--
monique

My pointless ramblings:
http://www.bounceswoosh.org/phorum/index.php?f=6
  #23  
Old September 19th 03, 06:17 AM
deluxe
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default OT rant aargh!


"Monique Y. Herman" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 19 Sep 2003 00:11:54 -0500, deluxe penned:
"Sheer entertainment value" doesn't count as a reason anymore?

I'm so bored right now, I'm entertaining myself with Pete.


So I noticed! Kind of weird to see a flamewar in a post about my
parents ... heh ...

I hope he's having as much fun as I am.

Living in south Louisiana, and dealing with storms (two last September), I
know that feeling of concern. I'm glad all is well.

  #24  
Old September 19th 03, 07:27 AM
MrSlantEye
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default OT rant aargh!

Monique Y. Herman wrote:
On Fri, 19 Sep 2003 04:53:04 GMT, Greg P. penned:

You and my "ball-and-chain" would really get along =(

Whenever I ask for her opinion on politics, law, etc, her answer is "I'm a
woman and my opinions are my own". But that's only when she's in a mood =p



I hope not to cause offense, but your post saddens me a bit. You call
your wife a "ball and chain" ... you use a frown to express your
feelings about her opinions ... you previously lamented the fact that
you were already married and therefore couldn't go after a woman like
Penny ...

Mind you, maybe you love your wife and are thrilled to be with her every
day. If so, perhaps you should consider the impression your words leave
on others. You certainly don't give the impression, to me, of a happily
married man.

I have no idea how to respond to your comparison of your wife to me.
Granted, I don't know her, but I have absolutely never used the excuse
"I am a woman" to get out of defending my views ...

I don't mean to be a downer, but every so often I meet people who always
refer to their spouses in slightly disparaging ways. They may mean it
entirely in jest, but it certainly doesn't come across that way.


(And for those of you guys who have said that Eric must be a lucky guy,
here ya go -- this thread may cause you to reconsider =) I am indeed the
master at over-analysis, and it does indeed drive Eric nuts!)


Good Lord... shut up and fetch me a beer, woman!


  #25  
Old September 19th 03, 09:19 AM
Who Wants To Know?
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default OT rant aargh!

Good lord woman, you dissect all my words. shoo!

"Monique Y. Herman" wrote in message
...
| On Fri, 19 Sep 2003 04:53:04 GMT, Greg P. penned:
| You and my "ball-and-chain" would really get along =(
|
| Whenever I ask for her opinion on politics, law, etc, her answer is "I'm
a
| woman and my opinions are my own". But that's only when she's in a mood
=p
|
|
| I hope not to cause offense, but your post saddens me a bit. You call
| your wife a "ball and chain" ... you use a frown to express your
| feelings about her opinions ... you previously lamented the fact that
| you were already married and therefore couldn't go after a woman like
| Penny ...
|
| Mind you, maybe you love your wife and are thrilled to be with her every
| day. If so, perhaps you should consider the impression your words leave
| on others. You certainly don't give the impression, to me, of a happily
| married man.
|
| I have no idea how to respond to your comparison of your wife to me.
| Granted, I don't know her, but I have absolutely never used the excuse
| "I am a woman" to get out of defending my views ...
|
| I don't mean to be a downer, but every so often I meet people who always
| refer to their spouses in slightly disparaging ways. They may mean it
| entirely in jest, but it certainly doesn't come across that way.
|
|
| (And for those of you guys who have said that Eric must be a lucky guy,
| here ya go -- this thread may cause you to reconsider =) I am indeed the
| master at over-analysis, and it does indeed drive Eric nuts!)
|
| --
| monique
|
| My pointless ramblings:
| http://www.bounceswoosh.org/phorum/index.php?f=6


  #26  
Old September 19th 03, 09:56 AM
Slacker
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default OT rant aargh!

"MrSlantEye" wrote in message
...
Monique Y. Herman wrote:
On Fri, 19 Sep 2003 04:53:04 GMT, Greg P. penned:

You and my "ball-and-chain" would really get along =(

Whenever I ask for her opinion on politics, law, etc, her answer is "I'm

a
woman and my opinions are my own". But that's only when she's in a mood

=p



I hope not to cause offense, but your post saddens me a bit. You call
your wife a "ball and chain" ... you use a frown to express your
feelings about her opinions ... you previously lamented the fact that
you were already married and therefore couldn't go after a woman like
Penny ...

Mind you, maybe you love your wife and are thrilled to be with her every
day. If so, perhaps you should consider the impression your words leave
on others. You certainly don't give the impression, to me, of a happily
married man.

I have no idea how to respond to your comparison of your wife to me.
Granted, I don't know her, but I have absolutely never used the excuse
"I am a woman" to get out of defending my views ...

I don't mean to be a downer, but every so often I meet people who always
refer to their spouses in slightly disparaging ways. They may mean it
entirely in jest, but it certainly doesn't come across that way.


(And for those of you guys who have said that Eric must be a lucky guy,
here ya go -- this thread may cause you to reconsider =) I am indeed the
master at over-analysis, and it does indeed drive Eric nuts!)


Good Lord... shut up and fetch me a beer, woman!



ROTFLMAO.....excellent MrSlantEye...excellent!
--
Slacker - poor Eric ;^ 0


  #27  
Old September 19th 03, 10:17 AM
Slacker
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default OT rant aargh!

Are you a feminist?
--
Slacker


I like to consider myself an "individualist" ...

Sorry for the cop-out answer, but ... I used to think "feminist" meant
man-hater, and I know better than that now, but the definition of
feminism is still pretty convoluted and I'm not sure I do agree with
everything that feminism means ... If I understood my "philosophy of
physics" class in college, feminism also means "the realization that
people's backgrounds influence the way that they interpret data," and
that sounds pretty true but I don't think has much to do with what most
of us think of as "feminism."

--
monique



I had a feeling something was terribly wrong here. So much for Bomba's
perfect chick ;^ 0
--
Slacker


  #28  
Old September 19th 03, 11:15 AM
ClydedaleMTB_in_TN
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default OT rant aargh!



Penny S wrote:
I'm sorry but how does a woman teach boys to be men?


;-)

  #29  
Old September 19th 03, 02:13 PM
Tom Walker
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default OT rant aargh!

"Monique Y. Herman" wrote in message ...
On Fri, 19 Sep 2003 04:42:56 GMT, Greg P. penned:

Yes indeed. There is nothing to explain really, you have it all figured out.
The same thing can be said about mothers and daughters. Most girls who are
raised solely by masculine influence end up tom-boys, no? When my
stepdaughter got her first *ahem* period and asked me about *ahem ahem*
penis's, I turned to stone and told her that her mom would tell her all
about it (which I made her do). I know that's a poor example, but generally
to teach a sex on growing up (confidence, leadership, etc) one should be of
the same sex (as their experience far exceeds that of the opposite's).



Whoa whoa whoa. Are you saying that being a tom-boy is a bad thing?

Anyway, I had both parents around as very strong influences as a child
and throughout my life, and I was still a tom-boy who preferred hanging
out with the guys. Sure, you said "most," but I'd *love* to see any
statistical data to back up that claim. I've never heard of a study of
such things.


I was really trying to stay out of this but I'm weak.

I think this little discussion has broken down into a question of who
better to raise a child, a man or a woman. As the child of divorced
parents I can tell you its a trick question.

Boys need to spend time learning from men just as much as they need to
spend time learning from women. The fact that women aren't allowed in
Penny's son's scout troop isn't because women can't tie knots or start
a fire. Its because boys need time to be around men to learn to be
strong, self confident, efficient, and self reliant.

At the same time, boys need to spend time with women to learn to be
caring, nurturing and sensitive.

These are all sweeping generalizations. Not every man fits the role
model suited to teach boys to be men nor does every women represent
the prototypical nuturer. In general, however, the system works and
every child needs exposure to strong men AND women in order to become
a well round person.

Just my $.02

T
  #30  
Old September 19th 03, 02:26 PM
Bob M
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default OT rant aargh!

On 19 Sep 2003 06:13:00 -0700, Tom Walker
wrote:

"Monique Y. Herman" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 19 Sep 2003 04:42:56 GMT, Greg P. penned:
Yes indeed. There is nothing to explain really, you have it all

figured out.
The same thing can be said about mothers and daughters. Most girls who

are
raised solely by masculine influence end up tom-boys, no? When my
stepdaughter got her first *ahem* period and asked me about *ahem

ahem*
penis's, I turned to stone and told her that her mom would tell her

all
about it (which I made her do). I know that's a poor example, but

generally
to teach a sex on growing up (confidence, leadership, etc) one should

be of
the same sex (as their experience far exceeds that of the opposite's).



Whoa whoa whoa. Are you saying that being a tom-boy is a bad thing?

Anyway, I had both parents around as very strong influences as a child
and throughout my life, and I was still a tom-boy who preferred hanging
out with the guys. Sure, you said "most," but I'd *love* to see any
statistical data to back up that claim. I've never heard of a study of
such things.


I was really trying to stay out of this but I'm weak.

I think this little discussion has broken down into a question of who
better to raise a child, a man or a woman. As the child of divorced
parents I can tell you its a trick question.

Boys need to spend time learning from men just as much as they need to
spend time learning from women. The fact that women aren't allowed in
Penny's son's scout troop isn't because women can't tie knots or start
a fire. Its because boys need time to be around men to learn to be
strong, self confident, efficient, and self reliant.


I have to say that I think your last statement is totally wrong. There is
no reason that boys need time around men to become any of the things you've
suggested. I haven't spent much time around men (at least as a child), yet
I believe I'm all of the things you've mentioned. I have a BSEE, MSEE, JD,
can outcook most people (men or women), outclean most people (men or women)
, have excellent finances and credit, etc. The only thing I have problems
with is talking about most sports, like football, baseball, etc., because I
like sports like tennis, biking, mountain biking. So, if a man is
preoccupied with team sports, I can't talk to him.

At the same time, boys need to spend time with women to learn to be
caring, nurturing and sensitive.

These are all sweeping generalizations. Not every man fits the role
model suited to teach boys to be men nor does every women represent
the prototypical nuturer. In general, however, the system works and
every child needs exposure to strong men AND women in order to become
a well round person.

Just my $.02

T


I also disagree that you have to be of the same sex to teach a child about
sex. Granted, your view will come from your masculinity/femininity, but
who cares?

--
Bob M in CT
Remove 'x.' to reply
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Cyclist rant psycholist General 96 June 6th 04 02:02 AM
Further to Claire Petersky's rant psycholist General 34 June 5th 04 01:24 PM
OT (sorta) - UPS Rant voodoo Mountain Biking 20 August 15th 03 05:12 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:20 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.