posted June 03, 2007 04:09 PM         

"The U.S. army", lol.

"And that is one of the most thrilling experiences of intimacy; when we can be comfortable sharing our power with each other, without giving it away".

posted June 03, 2007 07:24 PM         

I like this quote you posted:

"Instead of getting hard ourselves and trying to compete, women should try and give their best qualities to men - bring them softness, teach them how to cry." ~Joan Baez

and this one, too:

"I, with a deeper instinct, choose a man who compels my strength, who makes enormous demands on me, who does not doubt my courage or my toughness, who does not believe me naïve or innocent, who has the courage to treat me like a woman". ~Anaïs Nin

You are Wonderful.

posted June 03, 2007 09:15 PM         

It seemed from your psychological analysis that you were in fact demeaning women who don't like pet names otherwise what would have been the reason for even posting that analysis?

I did not take it directed personally at me but all women who didn't particularly care for pet names. I was not the only woman here who said that so please tell me why you would ASSUME that I took it personally?

There you go again, Steve. Making unfounded accusations. You assume I took it personally when in fact I didn't. I did not use the term "me" in my post. I used the term "women " and "we." Go back and read my post again and this time with comprehension. Then you should be able to see it is you, not I who is taking things personally.

Besides that your analysis is dead wrong. If you don't believe me then go check out any psychology site or book on the subject. In fact if you really want to be a femininist go read up on that subject too and you will find out how unfeminist that analysis of yours truly was.

You see in your last post to me you said you were not talking about using pet names with strangers. We didn't say you were. We talked about men who do that in general and no where did any of us say you did that. So why did you take it personal as if we were referring to you when we were just discussing some men who do that? Did you see me say Steve does this, or even imply it in my comments about pet names? No. No one else did either yet you ASSUMED that we were talking about you.

See what I mean? It is you taking things personally here, Steve. Thus the analysis which if not intended to demean us does demean self-assured, strong women who are their own person and speak their minds. And it was a very anti-feminist analysis.

posted June 03, 2007 11:36 PM         

quote:

---

People are often suspicious of others when they think themselves vulnerable. I find that women who are especially suspicious of men already feel weak and inferior, which makes them too scared to explore their femininity with a man. Like they have to act tough, or they are somehow less than he is. I think women like that are the real women-haters. They must see the act of trusting a man enough to enter into those roles as weak and degrading, because they are so sure that trust will be abused. And they are so sure trust will be abused because they already feel weak and degraded before even putting on the role; and once they put it on, they will only lose themselves in it, give their power away, and then blame it on the man. It's sad. Though it is easy to understand when you see how many men there are out there who will fit their stereotype and betray their trust.

---

I can't speak for the other two ladies but I simply don't like petnames because I think they're cheesy. I'm not the most gushy person on regular occasions (virgo mooner, remember that). It has nothing to do with the issues of "male-dominance" or whatever you were saying. I could care less if others like it and I don't usually find it degrading unless there is an obvious condescending "flavor" to it.

Me thinks we were reading WAY too much into what was said. Sometimes we should take things as they are;this is the internet afterall.

posted June 04, 2007 12:27 AM         

LoveLoaf!!!!

Stinkybuns rumpleshanks!!!! Very creative & funny!!!!

I don't care to be called any of these pet names!!!

But each to their own devices!!!!

Heart Sharped Cross & Mirandee, Just agree to Disagree!!!!

posted June 04, 2007 12:33 AM         

Why would anyone assume that just because some women are strong and opinionated and self-assured in their feminitiy enough to be that way, that they are putting on a "tough act" because they feel somehow less than men? Maybe some women do that but that doesn't mean that all women who are strong or opinionated and who don't flirt and carry on with guys all the time are somehow untrusting of men, don't like men, or feel inferior to men in some way. For myself being married flirting is out. Though there are some men who think that if you talk to them at all you are flirting with them. They never become friends of mine.

I have a good male friend who has been a friend of mine for years. He calls me by a pet name sometimes which was born out of a conversation we had. I had joked with him that I was a good "straightman" for him. When we talked again he ended the conversation with "goodnight, Gracie." I came back with "goodnight, George." He then laughed and said you watched that show too. I told him yes, as a kid I loved George Burns and his wife Gracie Allen and watched their show every week. From that point on he always referred to me as "Gracie" and I call him "George." We sign off every conversation that way. Mostly though he calls me by my given name. It was an endearing name and I like it because it was born out of a conversation and is a private joke between us so he does not use that with anyone but me. I am okay with that and I like that my husband calls me "brat" or other made up names that pop in his head. Guys that I hung out with as a kid and teen had nicknames for me too.

I just don't like it when men with whom I have no friendship or relationship with call me "hon" or "sweetie" or any other name like that. I was agreeing with Pix in that it comes of as condescending. I knew a guy who was friend that did that with all women and I told him he should be careful because some women don't like that. Like a lot of men he did that with women who work in retail. Total strangers.

And like you DL, I am not nor have I ever been a gushy person. I prefer to be called by my given name. I am an earth sign. I have never been sentimental either. I like it when my husband buys me things or brings flowers home but it isn't a requirement on my part to know he loves me. I think that song "You Don't Bring Me Flowers Anymore," by Barbra Striesand and Neil Diamond is stupid.

Also like you, DL, it's okay with me if some women do like pet names. I just stated that I don't. This is a public forum so I just gave my opinion for what it is worth.

posted June 04, 2007 01:17 AM         

I also burst out laughing at the "The U.S. Army?" and had it cut and ready to paste for my reply. Adrienne, you beat me to it!!! HSC and A, I think I'm in love with you both, we might have to get a summer house together...

Ok, I'll respond to the analysis so it isn't wasted.

"I find that women who are especially suspicious of men already feel weak and inferior, which makes them too scared to explore their femininity with a man."

When I read this, I thought: Hmmm... I am a bit suspicious.... (weighing and balancing, Jeopardy music plays)..... (final decision coming).... but, "Its not paranoia if they're really out to get you", sums it up. I've known too many boys/men/guys intimately (and I don't mean sexually) and although most of them either have the best intentions or believe they have the best intentions, when it comes right down to it, they can't trust THEMSELVES. When they are filled with the Love they see in my eyes, they believe they can accomplish ANYTHING, but they don't have enough belief in themselves to accomplish it WITHOUT the look in my eyes, which means if I faulter, which I will, then it all comes crashing down. Ice weasels.

I always dance to this song:

"Kryptonite"

I took a walk around the world
To ease my troubled mind
I left my body laying somewhere
In the sands of time
But I watched the world float
To the dark side of the moon

I feel there is nothing I can do, yeah

I watched the world float
To the dark side of the moon
After all I knew it had to be
Something to do with you
I really don’t mind what happens now and then
As long as you’ll be my friend at the end

If I go crazy then will you still
Call me Superman
If I’m alive and well, will you be
There a-holding my hand
I’ll keep you by my side
With my superhuman might
Kryptonite

You called me strong, you called me weak,
But still your secrets I will keep
You took for granted all the times
I never let you down
You stumbled in and bumped your head,
If not for me then you'd be dead
I picked you up and put you back
On solid ground

If I go crazy then will you still
Call me Superman
If I’m alive and well,
Will you be there a-holding my hand
I’ll keep you by my side
With my superhuman might
Kryptonite

If I go crazy then will you still
Call me Superman
If I’m alive and well, will you be there
Holding my hand
I’ll keep you by my side
With my superhuman might
Kryptonite
Yeah!!

If I go crazy then will you still
Call me Superman
If I'm alive and well,
Will you be there a-holding my hand
I'll keep you by my side
With my superhuman might
Kryptonite
Yeah!!

Men seem to think they have the monopoly on these feelings and SO MANY men look to women to be their pure angel (yah Madonna) and have a lot of, shall we say... "issues" with any sign of weakness on the woman's part. In fact, I haven't found many men who can even follow a psychological dynamic, let alone remove themselves from it and look upon the situation impartially, viewing it from the myriad perspectives, and specifically his partner's perspective (which he has grown to understand through a great deal of time getting to know the person, not just his best guess or pre-drawn conclusions of feminine behavior) using increased awareness and gentle, forgiving wisdom to allow his partner to make a "mistake" or to honestly see that the "mistake" is his own.
But hey, there are no "mistakes" right?
"It's been a while" since this one was a favorite. Six years or more.
I sing this one from the female point of view as a duet with feminine harmonies.

"It's Been A While"

And it's been awhile
Since I could hold my head up high
And it's been awhile
Since I first saw you
And it's been awhile
Since I could stand on my own two feet again
And it's been awhile
Since I could call you

And everything I can't remember ( I sing this as "I CAN remember" with a high harmony)
As ****** up as it all may seem
The consequences that I've rendered
I've stretched myself beyond my means

And it's been awhile
Since I can say that I wasn't addicted
And it's been awhile
Since I can say I love myself as well
And it's been awhile
Since I've gone and ****** things up just like I always do
And it's been awhile
But all that **** seems to disappear when I'm with you

And everything I can't remember
As ****** up as it all may seem
The consequences that I've rendered
I've gone and ****** things up again

Why must I feel this way?
Just make this go away
Just one more peaceful day!

And it's been awhile
Since I could look at myself straight
And it's been awhile
Since I said I'm sorry
And it's been awhile
Since I've seen the way the candles light your face
And it's been awhile
But I can still remember just the way you taste

And everything I can't remember
As ****** up as it all may seem to be
(I know it's me)
I cannot blame this on my father
He did the best he could for me

And it's been awhile
Since I could hold my head up high
And it's been awhile
Since I said I'm sorry

I would also like to mention that women with a lot of masculine cardinal energy are bound to switch between roles and be comfortable in both roles. Buckle up and enjoy the Lunar Coaster.

(Oh yeah, I just read my own post and applied it to myself with my *mirror within mirror* and *what you say about others you are really saying about yourself* mind game and it looks like I need to trust myself more.)

posted June 04, 2007 01:30 AM         

From the male perspective, if a woman calls me "Sweetie," or "Hun," or "Dear," (etc.) I'm ok with it. I usually just take it as an attempt to be warm and inviting, and I generally see the woman's motivation as her attempting to make her own job more comfortable.

posted June 04, 2007 08:46 AM         

I never thought you or anyone else was talking about me. That is the assumption on which at least a dozen or so of your objections are based, and it is a false one. My thoughts spiralled off from others thoughts, just as others thoughts spiralled off topic before mine did. Thats how posts work, but I was definitely not making any direct and final pronouncement on anyone here, as you are suggesting. Nor was I saying that all women who do not like pet names are frigid or whatever. I was refering to a certain psychological type which is seen to exist, and contrasting it with the view taken by many modern women (who are not all weak, as the ones you mentioned), that these playful terms of endearment are perfectly acceptable and highly pleasurable in a variety of romantic contexts. If someone is going to bring up how these innocent and beautiful words are embraced by weaker men and women, then, I am naturally going to talk about how the words are also rejected by weaker people, who feel they cannot make use of them without losing their dignity. It's just something that I've been seeing a lot lately. I believe such people see things as inherently negative, because they cannot admit the negativity in themselves. They are suspicious and judgemental of everything because they believe everything is a threat to them, they feel so vulnerable. This was something your post and other posts got me thinking about, and, as I said, its been on my mind anyway. It doesnt mean I am taking about anyone here, and it certainly doesnt imply that i believe anyone here was talking about ME - that is a leap I cant even wonder how you made.

Everyone agreed they dont appreciate these words from strangers, and I did not disagree with that. Everyone was saying that they liked to use these words in jest, and i was agreeing with that. Some people disagreed about whether or not some or most of the words were apropriate in more intimate situations. I agreed that they are appropriate in jest, and occassionally, some of them are appropriate, and can be quite beautiful, when spoken in earnest, at a poignant moment, during intimacy. But I think it is a matter of personal taste. Not everyone who embraces the free and easy use of these words with their lover is disturbed, and not everyone who disdains it is either. Lastly, I talked about how these terms can be used apropriately, and I tried to bring us back to the beauty of the original topic.

posted June 04, 2007 09:02 AM         

Where in the quote you posted do I say that I am talking about all women who do not like pet names? I said "women who are especially suspicious of men". I even sympathized and said I understood how it happens, as I see there are many men out there who can't be trusted.

Melody brought up the whole "just because you are paranoid, dont mean they are not after you" thing, and I agree with that, but, at the same time, just because they are "after you" doesnt mean you have to be mindful of that to the point where you would abandon the use of playful words with a lover, and see the words themselves as demeaning, just because they have the potential to be misused.

Here is an anonymous quote Melody posted in Yellow Wax,
and I think it applies to what I am saying:

"A woman is usually comfortable in following masculine leadership if her man is loving, gentle, and worthy of her respect."

The same may of course be said of a man following the lead of a woman. I think this can be equally beautiful. Would you or Mirandee object to that, I wonder.

posted June 04, 2007 09:38 AM         

quote:

---

Where in the quote you posted do I say that I am talking about all women who do not like pet names? I said "women who are especially suspicious of men". I even sympathized and said I understood how it happens, as I see there are many men out there who can't be trusted.

---

Ummm, it cannot be coincidence that both Mirandee and I took that paragraph in the same way so obviously you had to have meant it in the way we interpreted. Looks like a duck, walks like a duck....
Anyways, I don't appreciate the passive agressiveness so why don't we just stop right now,ok? (And I'm even asking you politely)

quote:

---

Melody brought up the whole "just because you are paranoid, dont mean they are not after you" thing, and I agree with that, but, at the same time, just because they are "after you" doesnt mean you have to be mindful of that to the point where you would abandon the use of playful words with a lover, and see the words themselves as demeaning, just because they have the potential to be misused.

Here is an anonymous quote Melody posted in Yellow Wax,
and I think it applies to what I am saying:

"A woman is usually comfortable in following masculine leadership if her man is loving, gentle, and worthy of her respect."

The same may of course be said of a man following the lead of a woman. I think this can be equally beautiful. Would you or Mirandee object to that, I wonder.

---

posted June 04, 2007 10:51 AM         

quote:

---

it cannot be coincidence that both Mirandee and I took that paragraph in the same way so obviously you had to have meant it in the way we interpreted

---

Actually, that's exactly what coincidence is. For instance, when two or more people take something the wrong way. Your thoughts triggered my thoughts, so, there is a correlation, and I am not denying that. It seems like an assumption anyone might make, especially if they were someone who is already inclined to make assuptions. As you can see, not everyone did interpret it as you and Mirandee did. By your logic, this is "obvious" proof that those people are right. So I guess everybody is right, and it is inconceivable for more than one person to misinterpret anything.

quote:

---

Anyways, I don't appreciate the passive agressiveness so why don't we just stop right now,ok? (And I'm even asking you politely)

---

You need to chill. If my words have no relevance for you, you need to let them go. They may be relevant for someone else. Rest assured, if my words do not apply to you, they are not intended for you. I have no desire to direct words to you that have no relevance to you. Why would I want to do that? But, if you suspect they do have relevance for you, you may do what you like with them.

Whether or not you inspired my thoughts, and whether or not I personally believe my thoughts apply to you, is really none of your business anyway. I am free to think what I think, say what I wish to say, and keep silent about what I wish to keep silent about. That is my business. I had not chosen to single you out in the instances you are referring to, although you have singled yourself out by taking my comments personally. And even if I had singled you out, as you seem to think, I would've been within my rights. It might have offended you, and it might even have made you look a little silly, but that is no reason against it, and you would have no legitimate complaint, other then, "hey, that made me look bad!" If I think it is the truth, and if I think it will encourage greater awareness of human nature in others, and/or greater self-awareness in you, I will have no problem voicing it. And if I think it serves a purpose to single you out, I will single you out. If I think it doesnt, I will continue to speak in general terms, whether I am secretly applying my thoughts to you or not, and you may make whatever assumptions help or hinder your spiritual progress, as you prefer. Again, what my personal reflections are concerning you are absolutely none of your business.

quote:

---

Did you read anything I just said? I already stated that the only reason I personally do not like petnames is because I find them cheesy and that is all. It has nothing to do with being mistrustful of the opposite sex (which I will admitt I have been), sexism or whatever. Please stop making it to be anymore than it is. Yes, my boyfriend does have ONE name that he uses for me (infrequently) but its in Spanish so its sounds better and more sincere to me and is therefore not as cheesy to me, and is therefore acceptable to me. If I really had these issues with petnames that you keep projecting onto me, don't you think I would've ripped his head off for that a long time ago?

---

Okay. I missed that. My bad, I thought you were saying something else. I'm sorry if you were offended by that, as it was mistakenly directed at you.

Anyway, I agree with you, I think using most of those words in a sincere, rather than a playful, ironic way, is cheesy, and, i would say, even a little creepy or unnerving, for me. I think we can all agree that it really depends on the word, the mood, and the individuals involved, to such a great extent that nothing can really be said too generally.

posted June 04, 2007 12:46 PM         

Lol! I would hardly say that call-signs qualify as petnames. Yeah they are ment to be affectionate nicknames of fellow comrades but they are more based upon a person's integral skill that makes he/she unique. And unlike petnames, a call-sign isn't just given to you; You have to earn it .

I personally think "Solid Snake" has to be the coolest call-sign ever.

Anyway, I doubt anyone would use a totally exuberant petname for someone they have just met (unless you are one desperate loser trying out a very lame pickup line.) A petname or any thing intimate is usually taken as an offense if its used out of context. In saying that however, I do use "Sweets," "Beautiful," and "Babe" quite a bit around my female friends and Aquantences Lol! However as I said, they aren't met as a degrading remarks at all.

I do cringe at some of the very... non-creative yet annoying petnames; I personally loath the term "cutie" as applied to both males and females.

I usually give my friends "petnames" based on their personalities (much like callsigns.) A good female friend of mine is totally obsessed with Japanese culture so we affectionately call her "Seppuku" LOL! I think such names are more approprite since they do have that level of intimacy yet still don't make you look like a total sap Lol!

As for my nicknames... wayy too many to list Lol! The most prominent one that ever one uses is "Cat."

posted June 04, 2007 01:31 PM         

quote:

---

"A woman is usually comfortable in following masculine leadership if her man is loving, gentle, and worthy of her respect."

The same may of course be said of a man following the lead of a woman. I think this can be equally beautiful. Would you or Mirandee object to that, I wonder.

---

quote:

---

"Don't walk in front of me, I may not follow. Don't walk behind me, I may not lead. Walk beside me and be my friend."
- Albert Camus

---

posted June 04, 2007 01:42 PM         

quote:

---

Hold your horses. I was not talking about flirting or using those terms with strangers, even if you and others were. There is no reason for you to suppose that I am referring to you. In any case, from your reply, you show very plainly you are not just talking about relations with strangers.

---

This is why I stated to you that we were not talking about you but in general about men who do this with stranger who happen to be women. No where did I, or any of the other ladies, imply we were talking about you. If you were not taking it personally then you would feel no reason to defend yourself as in the above quote would you? Yet you continue to tell me I am making unfounded assumptions. I think anyone would assume the person is taking it personally when they go so far as you did in defending yourself. To the point of attacking, in fact. We were not attacking you. Just expressing our thoughts on the matter of pet names.

In your statement you tell me to hold my horses and then go on to defend yourself. I'm sorry, but to me that definitly sounds as if you took it personally. Then you tell me that I am taking it personally when in fact, I am not nor did I ever take it personally. Do you also assume to know my motives and intentions and how I feel better than I do? If not stop telling me what they were and how I feel.

Perhaps we are just misunderstanding each other. So just let it go. I intend to from this point on.

MM, I understand what you are saying, but, sometimes it is the case, most times I would say, that women are suspicious and don't completely trust men because they have been hurt in the past by either one man or many men. So there would be very good psychological reasons for not totally trusting men on their part. You cannot expect any woman (or man either) to be completely trusting of the opposite sex if they have in the past been abused or hurt badly in any way.

If you are suspicious of men in any way, MM, I would venture to guess that it has a basis somewhere in your past of being hurt badly by a man you cared for and trusted. That's the problem when trust in a relationship is violated. It causes apprehension and suspicion in other relationships and that is quite normal. We tend to trust by nature until that trust has been abused, then it is real hard to gain it back. We can. But it takes time, more time depending on how deep the wound from the past was.

HSC, I didn't take your analysis personal as in it was directed at me. Again in my post I did not refer to just me. I just didn't like that you were speaking in general terms about strong, opinonated women when the fact really is that, while some women may feel this way about men and usually as I said above with good reason, it does not apply to women in general who neither like stangers calling them pet names, or women who are strong, their own person and not afraid to give their thoughts and opinions. If women are not afraid to give their true thoughts and feelings or disagree with a man, to me that more than proves that those women neither feel superior or inferior to men but instead see themselves as equals.

MM, I do realize that this thread was posted by HSC to be lighthearted banter. However, this is a public forum and people do have the right on a public forum to express themselves if they hold a different viewpoint. Which is all we did here. We just expressed that we are not fond of pet names. Does that mean we deliberately wrecked HSC's thread? In fact we would have just expressed our thoughts and left it at that had not HSC given his "random thoughts" on women in a generalizing manner. If he gave his thoughts on women are we not also allowed to speak out regarding those thoughts? You don't give your thoughts on public forums just to hear yourself talk and expect others not to give their own thoughts on the subject. If you want to write down your thoughts without others also giving their thoughts on subject then write those thoughts in a private journel. Not on public forums where those thoughts just might be disagreed with and scrutinized.

HSC may have taken offense at my using the term, "amatuer psychology or psychologist" but unless he is a trained, licensed and practicing psychologist he is in fact, as am I or anyone else without the professional credentials, an amatuer.

HSC, I think Solane Star had the best advice. Just agree to disagree. I think we either just misunderstand each other or we have a personality conflict or whatever! To me it is not worth the effort to analyze it or argue back and forth. However, my own self-respect demands that I not allow others to attach motives and intentions to me that are not there and accuse me of doing what in actuality I am not doing and in fact, they are doing. Or tell me what I feel and think. Be that person man or woman.

Having said that I am done with this unless HSC keeps insisting on infringing on my personal boundaries by assuming and making unfounded accusations.

posted June 04, 2007 01:59 PM         

quote:

---

Whether or not you inspired my thoughts, and whether or not I personally believe my thoughts apply to you, is really none of your business anyway. I am free to think what I think, say what I wish to say, and keep silent about what I wish to keep silent about.

---

Have I touched a nerve with you? Because it sounds as if you are the one getting personal now. Yes,you have the right to express whatever you want and keep silent about whatever you want, but if I in turn feel that you are being passive agressive, I also have the right to express and single you out on that whether you like it or not.

quote:

---

I had not chosen to single you out in the instances you are referring to, although you have singled yourself out by taking my comments personally. And even if I had singled you out, as you seem to think, I would've been within my rights. It might have offended you, and it might even have made you look a little silly, but that is no reason against it, and you would have no legitimate complaint, other then, "hey, that made me look bad!"

---

Hmmm...time for you to take your own advice, HSC. I felt you were making a very generalized statement about women who don't like petnames and I also have the right to challenge you on that point (it goes both ways, remember?). Don't try to silence me by telling me I have no legitimate complaint when I feel that I do.

quote:

---

If I think it is the truth, and if I think it will encourage greater awareness of human nature in others, and/or greater self-awareness in you, I will have no problem voicing it. And if I think it serves a purpose to single you out, I will single you out. If I think it doesnt, I will continue to speak in general terms, whether I am secretly applying my thoughts to you or not, and you may make whatever assumptions help or hinder your spiritual progress, as you prefer. Again, what my personal reflections are concerning you are absolutely none of your business.

---

posted June 04, 2007 02:54 PM         

Hum. Personally I definitely want to be the more submissive one in a relationship and totally dig the whole 'you're a man I'm a woman' thing. Pet names more elaborate than hun and babe are okay not often as a joke. But personally, I would not wimper in delight at being called something I found more schmaltzy than cute.
Does that make me some scary feminist? Aghh, I hope not. Thinking of astrology (haha and why not?) it might have something to do with it. If you're a feminine sign maybe you're more pleased with taking a feminine role. But I know having an Aries Moon makes me resent not being a man slightly but also makes me a bit insecure about my femininity.

Anyway
Does anyone else find sometimes that the most romantic thing is someone just calling you by your proper name?

posted June 04, 2007 02:59 PM         

HELLO EVERYBODY! Nice to see you all here hehe I was going to just check and and get started on Statistics homework (and there was much rejoicing, yay) but look! The Gang's All Here! hehe

I don't even know where to start, I think I've forgotten the first three things I wanted to reply on but briefly...

Hi Fayte The text you quoted (from my quote and HSC's comments) represents the epitome of true male/female equality to me and I honestly find all of those words in their context quite delicious.

Ok, Mirandee, you are going to be Mir or Dee or Ann or some other 3 letter nickname I come up with soon unless you tell me what shortened form I can use for you! You get to type MM but I have to type "M-I-R-A-N-D-E-E" every time! I don't like "M" so we need to pick something else you like. Not Agnes either, still too long. hehe

As for what you said:

"If you are suspicious of men in any way, MM, I would venture to guess that it has a basis somewhere in your past of being hurt badly by a man you cared for and trusted. That's the problem when trust in a relationship is violated. It causes apprehension and suspicion in other relationships and that is quite normal."

I just assume that is a given so I don't bother to type it. I forget that it is not a "given" to everyone.

About what you asked about "wrecked" threads, I didn't find it "wrecked" until the post where you first seemed irrationally angry. I was reading along and it seemed to come out of nowhere. I'm sure you have your reasons, but I thought I would make my perspective clear in case that it assisted anyone in resolving this disparagement.

And...

There's a FAN CLUB!?!? I want a t-shirt.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Heart-Shaped Girls~~~~~~~~~~~~~

In case my original comments contributed to this, I will clarify that I said "stinky" to my baby, my ex-EMIL (this is like ESD only means Evil Mother in Law) called Rosie Porkchop when she was small, even though she wasn't even one of the plumper babies, and that particular term tweaked a short circuit in my brain and added a little negative vibe to my originally happy post, which some extra sensitive/sensory types might have picked up on and attributed to some other motive, and monkeypants was just too weird and funny to not mention for my Mars in Aquarius self.
So, anyway, who else wants a t-shirt?

posted June 04, 2007 05:32 PM         

normally it is 'honey' or 'sweeto'.... now-a-days I use "shona" a lot...
('shona' means 'cute or adorable' in bangla, language in bangladesh)...