Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Oh Hell..Wonder pill lets women conceive at sixty

0 views
Skip to first unread message

Jeff Freeman

unread,
Jun 29, 2000, 3:00:00 AM6/29/00
to
Just what was needed....

http://www.lineone.net/express/00/06/29/news/n0100splash-d.html

Jeff

--
Front Porch Computers Inc.
Offering 50,000+ Computer items to customers Worldwide
Visa/Mastercard/American Express<Amex> Discover
As seen in Nation's Business mag, World trade, etc.
www.porch.com in...@porch.com

Christie

unread,
Jun 29, 2000, 3:00:00 AM6/29/00
to
Gee, so they can be DEAD before the time their kid gets out of college!
What a concept!

Christie from Dallas


Kent

unread,
Jun 29, 2000, 3:00:00 AM6/29/00
to
Jeff Freeman told us:

: Just what was needed....
: http://www.lineone.net/express/00/06/29/news/n0100splash-d.html

"It's quite hard to criticise", a spokeswoman said.

Let me count the ways...


Kent

JD2B2001

unread,
Jun 29, 2000, 3:00:00 AM6/29/00
to
Hold on tight; there's a serious rant coming on . . .

What the HELL is so important about child-rearing that the possibilty
for conception must be strengthened? Why is so important that the
child-bearing years be increased? It is as if there is some conspiracy
to ensure that there are no biological excuses to avoid having
children. They are not just an entitlement; a movement wishes to make
them a requirement. This is revolting as hell.

There are six billion plus people on this planet and it can only
sustain a billion if all are to live the SUV-consumerist lifestyle of
the American Suburbs. Yesterday, when I was in
Sellwood-Yuppie-Central-Portland, OR, I noticed a couple, with six kids
(no I'm not exaggerating), all under eight, stuffing them into a
Mercedes Wagon. It was the quintessenial Yuppie "Overpopulation is a
Poor Country's Proplem" scene. Rich Americans; Mommie "I'm having
baybees and you're paying for them" and Duhdee dutifully strapping up
four car seats--who I might add was seriously leering at Yours Truly.
I couldn't feel anything from them; they were cardboard, empty. As I
reflected upon how many resources that brood sucked up, it made me
physically ill. This is why we have a greenhouse effect, people.
Those six brats will all be suck, suck, sucking for a long time.

Despite this scene, despite the fact that the Earth is over its
carrying capacity, and despite the fact that the population numbers are
becoming scary, there are assinin inventions like this. Misguided
priorities to the max. Stupid people--rich, poor, all ignorant as
hell--galore. We are doomed; we will be cause of our own extinction.

And frankly, I don't believe the Earth will grieve our disappearance.

JD


* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!


JD2B2001

unread,
Jun 29, 2000, 3:00:00 AM6/29/00
to
> Jas - you always thinks some poor slob is after you. I don't
> think so; I saw
> your picture on the ASC web page. Get over yourself.

Ummmm . . . in the real world J.A.S. are my initials, however I am not
the "JAS" you wish to insult. In this world, I go by JD and leave
"Jas" to Jas; no relation to Jas; although I find it flattering that
you would confuse me with someone so cool. I do not have a picture on
the ASC web page as I am fairly new here.

Next time, I suggest you investigate before spewing venom. This is a
support group; not a forum for people needing to flame others because
they disagree on personality traits. If you have nothing to contribute
other than bad wishes on the rest of us, then I suggest you go on your
merry little way.

I believe an apology is in order . . . then I will write of this no
more.

Lynda

unread,
Jun 30, 2000, 3:00:00 AM6/30/00
to
>Duhdee dutifully strapping up
>four car seats--who I might add was seriously leering at Yours Truly.

Jas - you always thinks some poor slob is after you. I don't think so; I saw
your picture on the ASC web page. Get over yourself. You perceive yourself as
some avante-guarde hep-cat chick living on the razor's edge. Puhleeze!!! You
are tres ordinaire.
Lynda - Currently Reading THE CLINIC by Jonathan Kellerman

Ellen

unread,
Jun 30, 2000, 3:00:00 AM6/30/00
to

>> Jas - you always thinks some poor slob is after you. I don't
>> think so; I saw your picture on the ASC web page. Get over yourself.

JD2B2001 wrote:
>Ummmm . . . in the real world J.A.S. are my initials, however I am not
>the "JAS" you wish to insult. In this world, I go by JD and leave
>"Jas" to Jas; no relation to Jas; although I find it flattering that
>you would confuse me with someone so cool. I do not have a picture on
>the ASC web page as I am fairly new here.

Based on the 2 photos I've seen, I think Jas is very pretty.
It's definitely a compliment to be mistaken for her, looks-wise
or writing-wise.

>Next time, I suggest you investigate before spewing venom. This is a
>support group; not a forum for people needing to flame others because
>they disagree on personality traits. If you have nothing to contribute
>other than bad wishes on the rest of us, then I suggest you go on your
>merry little way.

SnowLynn, have you written *anything* supportive on this ng?
Some of the most caustic posters, and even a parent who pretends
to be CF, contribute more substance and/or support than you have.

--Ellen (using slrn; my killfile is on tin)

Noelle

unread,
Jun 30, 2000, 3:00:00 AM6/30/00
to

Lynda <snow...@aol.combookworm> wrote in message
news:20000630211445...@ng-cq1.aol.com...

> >Based on the 2 photos I've seen, I think Jas is very pretty.
>
> She's all right, even cute, but hardly the hep-cat raving beauty she
perceives
> herself to be.

Are we thinking of the same person? I've never seen Jas brag about her
appearance the way you seem to be accusing her of doing.

Noelle

unread,
Jun 30, 2000, 3:00:00 AM6/30/00
to

Lynda <snow...@aol.combookworm> wrote in message
news:20000630221608...@ng-cq1.aol.com...

> >re we thinking of the same person? I've never seen Jas brag about her
> >appearance the way you seem to be accusing her of doing.
>
> Puhleeze!! She brags ad nauseum on how "independent" and "free spirited"
she
> is - she yammers so much about bondage that, what seemed interesting about
her
> at first, now is trite and boring to read.

*shrug* I guess you see what you want to see in it. Talking about one's
*appearance* (the first accusation you made) is a different thing from
talking about one's *personality* (the second accusation). I've yet to see
evidence of bragging about either on her part, and I've been reading this NG
for a long time. Be nice if you had some actual evidence to back up those
opinions. Seeing as you don't, why do you bother reading this NG if all you
can do is complain about it? Wait a minute...I've asked that before.

Come to think of it, YOU haven't offered up a picture for US to make fun of,
yet you snipe at us with impunity.

Noelle

unread,
Jun 30, 2000, 3:00:00 AM6/30/00
to

Lynda <snow...@aol.combookworm> wrote in message
news:20000630235828...@ng-fd1.aol.com...

> It's not an "in your face" bragging - it's more subtle. The constant
> self-praise about her assertiveness, independence, free-spiritedness, love
of
> bondage creates the impression that she perceives herself as some sort of
new
> age hep cat. At first, Jas' posts were interesting to read, but the
> long-winded thread on bondage and submission got boring after a while.

Still...I've been reading this NG a long time and don't remember a bit of
what you're talking about. And I do read, and pay attention to, and absorb,
all of the non-troll posts I read. So maybe it happened before I started
reading this NG...in that case, what's the point of mentioning it?

> I don't feel like going through deja and perusing her old posts.

But you felt like bringing it up.

Lynda

unread,
Jul 1, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/1/00
to
>Ummmm . . . in the real world J.A.S. are my initials, however I am not
>the "JAS" you wish to insult.

My apologies for misidentifying you. That was not cool of me.

Lynda

unread,
Jul 1, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/1/00
to
>Based on the 2 photos I've seen, I think Jas is very pretty.

She's all right, even cute, but hardly the hep-cat raving beauty she perceives
herself to be.

Lynda

unread,
Jul 1, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/1/00
to
>SnowLynn, have you written *anything* supportive on this ng?
>Some of the most caustic posters,

Sigh, I tried being "nice" and posting a few supportive posts, but nobody
responded; I guess that it was too boring. LOL!!

Lynda

unread,
Jul 1, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/1/00
to
>re we thinking of the same person? I've never seen Jas brag about her
>appearance the way you seem to be accusing her of doing.

Puhleeze!! She brags ad nauseum on how "independent" and "free spirited" she
is - she yammers so much about bondage that, what seemed interesting about her
at first, now is trite and boring to read.

Lynda

unread,
Jul 1, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/1/00
to
> I've yet to see
>evidence of bragging about either on her part, and I've been reading this NG
>for a long time.

It's not an "in your face" bragging - it's more subtle. The constant
self-praise about her assertiveness, independence, free-spiritedness, love of
bondage creates the impression that she perceives herself as some sort of new
age hep cat. At first, Jas' posts were interesting to read, but the
long-winded thread on bondage and submission got boring after a while.

>Be nice if you had some actual evidence to back up those
>opinions.

I don't feel like going through deja and perusing her old posts.

>Come to think of it, YOU haven't offered up a picture for US to make fun of,


>yet you snipe at us with impunity

No way!! I am not a beauty, but I never claimed to be. Just an ordinary girl
of 5'4, brown eyes, brown hair, 125 lbs. Nothing much to look at. :-)

Lynda

unread,
Jul 1, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/1/00
to
>And I do read, and pay attention to, and absorb,
>all of the non-troll posts I read. So maybe it happened before I started
>reading this NG...in that case, what's the point of mentioning it?

Yea, you got a point. I can always just ignore the boring bondage threads and
femi-nazi threads. Tres yawn.

>
>> I don't feel like going through deja and perusing her old posts.
>

>But you felt like bringing it up.

Nah - would feel like her friend Brucie if I went trolling for her posting
history.

Rat & Swan

unread,
Jul 1, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/1/00
to
Lynda wrote:

> >Duhdee dutifully strapping up
> >four car seats--who I might add was seriously leering at Yours Truly.

> Jas - you always thinks some poor slob is after you. I don't think so; I saw

> your picture on the ASC web page. Get over yourself. You perceive yourself as
> some avante-guarde hep-cat chick living on the razor's edge. Puhleeze!!! You
> are tres ordinaire.

> Lynda - Currently Reading THE CLINIC by Jonathan Kellerman

As opposed to you, the troll who was anally raped with an ungreased
ugly-stick?

Girlchild, you so ugly that when you moved to a new house, the neighbors
all chipped in to buy you some curtains!

Part of appearance, whether ugly or beautiful, is the spirit. Trolls
are, by their very nature, catbutt ugly! You are the trolliest,
therefore the ugliest.

Now go crack someone else's mirror.

Swan

Currently reading Lynda's beads!

Noelle

unread,
Jul 1, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/1/00
to

Rat & Swan <lab...@pacbell.net> wrote in message
news:395EA9...@pacbell.net...

> Part of appearance, whether ugly or beautiful, is the spirit. Trolls
> are, by their very nature, catbutt ugly!

Hey now, my cats are always sticking their butts in my face to show me what
a good job they did cleaning them. I'd rather look at a catbutt than troll
leavings any day. And I'm not even a fetishist. ;)

Lynda

unread,
Jul 2, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/2/00
to
>Girlchild, you so ugly that when you moved to a new house, the neighbors
>all chipped in to buy you some curtains!

That is an old one. LOL!! Well, you are so skanky that when you were little
your mother tied a pork chop around your neck so the dog would play with you.

>Part of appearance, whether ugly or beautiful, is the spirit. Trolls

>are, by their very nature, catbutt ugly! You are the trolliest,
>therefore the ugliest.

Ooooh, my self-esteem has plummeted severely. How will I recover? <sarcasm
off now> You don't even know what I look like. I know it's not kosher to rag
on the leaders of the elite club, but too bad. :-D

Lynda

unread,
Jul 2, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/2/00
to
>Hey now, my cats are always sticking their butts in my face to show me what
>a good job they did cleaning them.

That is truly gross!! I hope they don't rub their shit on your face as well.
I'll give this to the breeders: no parent that I know has ever discussed their
babies rubbing their buts on mommy's face. Get professional help.

Noelle

unread,
Jul 2, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/2/00
to

Lynda <snow...@aol.combookworm> wrote in message
news:20000702111614...@ng-cq1.aol.com...

> >Hey now, my cats are always sticking their butts in my face to show me
what
> >a good job they did cleaning them.
>
> That is truly gross!! I hope they don't rub their shit on your face as
well.
> I'll give this to the breeders: no parent that I know has ever discussed
their
> babies rubbing their buts on mommy's face. I

If they DID, you can bet I'd come back here and describe it in loving detail
for you to sputter over. It's just cat etiquette--they don't understand that
people don't consider this sort of behavior. Anyone who's been owned by a
cat can sympathize.

>Get professional help.

Why? So I can be more like you?


Lynda

unread,
Jul 2, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/2/00
to
>Anyone who's been owned by a
>cat can sympathize.

Owned by cat? Sad that you allow an animal to rule your lives.

Lynda

unread,
Jul 2, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/2/00
to
>>Get professional help.
>
>Why? So I can be more like you?

No, so you can stop treating your pets as children and learn to find a better
outlet for your maternal instincts.

Noelle

unread,
Jul 2, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/2/00
to

Lynda <snow...@aol.combookworm> wrote in message
news:20000702172836...@ng-fd1.aol.com...

> >>Get professional help.
> >
> >Why? So I can be more like you?
>
> No, so you can stop treating your pets as children and learn to find a
better
> outlet for your maternal instincts.

I'm not getting into this tired old argument with you again (although you
never, ever seem to tire of it), and I don't even want to know what you
would consider a "better" outlet for what YOU call my "maternal" instincts.
How does it *remotely* affect your life one way or another how I treat my
cats? It doesn't pick your pocket or break your leg, to paraphrase Thomas
Jefferson, and certainly no one's making you read my posts. Get over it.
Move on with your life.

Sad, SnowLynn. After the discussion on P&J I'd thought you might be halfway
decent. I'm sorry that you feel the need to be the burr under everyone's
butts on here.

Anyway, Swan brought up the topic of catbutt first. I claim no
responsibility for that. :)

Rat & Swan

unread,
Jul 3, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/3/00
to
Lynda wrote:
>
> >Hey now, my cats are always sticking their butts in my face to show me what
> >a good job they did cleaning them.
>
> That is truly gross!! I hope they don't rub their shit on your face as well.
> I'll give this to the breeders: no parent that I know has ever discussed their
> babies rubbing their buts on mommy's face. Get professional help.

> Lynda - Currently Reading THE CLINIC by Jonathan Kellerman

Oh, but kitties do that AlL the time! They get up on your desk and then
turn around to show your their cute, tight rosy little Kittysphincters!
All rosebut tight and pink! They look far better than a sprog's mouth1
Cleaner, too.

Just think of it, Lynda, Little kittybutts all lined up for your
perusal. I think kitten's bottoms are the cutest, though. Tiny and
fresh, licked clean by the mother and ready for humans to marvel at!
Puppybutts, too! And what could compare with the tiny buds that belong
to rats. Rats and birds have the cutest little rear ends!

Really, SowLynne, you just don't understand that with pets and their
cute little starfishes, it's just DIFFERENT when they are YOUR pets!
Scooping out a catbox or picking up after a dog is a labor of love! To
see the love shining in their honest eyes as you clean up after them...
they're ONLY ANIMALLLLLLLLLS!

I'm glad you don't want pets, or have them! You're doing the cat and dog
races a favor by not having pets! You can rant all you like about those
of us who choose to have pets but you'll never understand because you
don't have any!

I think that people who refuse to have pets are selfish! What if
everyone refused to adopt sweet kitties and lovable pups into their
homes! What would happen to the world if people didn't have pets? We
need tax subsidies and daycare! Pets Are Our Future!

I love kittybutts, doggie derriers and Rattie rumps. The only anus that
I think is truly unnatractive is that of a horse. I will presume that
you agree. That's why there are no mirrors in your hiome.

Swan.

Wondering how many drinks *that* little rant will earn.

Veronique

unread,
Jul 3, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/3/00
to
In article <20000702172836...@ng-fd1.aol.com>,

snow...@aol.combookworm (Lynda) wrote:
> >>Get professional help.
> >
> >Why? So I can be more like you?
>
> No, so you can stop treating your pets as children and learn to find a better
> outlet for your maternal instincts.
>
> Lynda - Currently Reading A FIELD GUIDE TO KITTYBUTTS by I. M. Furrie
>

ROTFLSOIFOTC! Oh you have such a sense of the ironic, don't you? Wish I
still had some of the scotch from the tasting last night to toast your oh
so unique sentiments!

V.
--
Veronique Chez Sheep
Love will get you like a
case of anthrax


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

Scott Eiler

unread,
Jul 3, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/3/00
to
Rat & Swan wrote:
>
> I think that people who refuse to have pets are selfish! What if
> everyone refused to adopt sweet kitties and lovable pups into their
> homes! What would happen to the world if people didn't have pets? We
> need tax subsidies and daycare! Pets Are Our Future!

Pets? Obviously these small living creatures are a surrogate for your
suppressed baby-urge. Have you considered letting comic books into your
life instead?

(signed) Scott, who's catching up on the drinking game this afternoon.

--
-------- Scott Eiler B{D> -------- http://www.ultranet.com/~seiler

A baby born today owes at least $4,347.83 to the Federal Government
alone before his eyes open. (No wonder he yells.)

-- Robert A. Heinlein (writing in 1980).

Noelle

unread,
Jul 3, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/3/00
to

Rat & Swan <lab...@pacbell.net> wrote in message
news:3960CC...@pacbell.net...

> Oh, but kitties do that AlL the time! They get up on your desk and then
> turn around to show your their cute, tight rosy little Kittysphincters!
> All rosebut tight and pink! They look far better than a sprog's mouth1
> Cleaner, too.

See, I said anyone who's been owned by a kitty would understand. Somehow I
knew that Swan would not only understand, but run with it as well... :)

> Just think of it, Lynda, Little kittybutts all lined up for your
> perusal. I think kitten's bottoms are the cutest, though. Tiny and
> fresh, licked clean by the mother and ready for humans to marvel at!
> Puppybutts, too! And what could compare with the tiny buds that belong
> to rats. Rats and birds have the cutest little rear ends!

Oh goodness, Swan...that's the hardest I've ever laughed at one of your
posts! Oscar is perched on my shoulder as I type this, wondering what's so
funny. He's a shoulder-percher as well as a chin- and ear-biter.

On the topic of catbutt...my Alistaire is solid black (well, at circa ten
years of age, he's starting to get distinguished little sprinklings of
white) and his nose, lips and pawpads are all black. I used to joke, why
wasn't there enough black skin left over for his butt? Shows up like a
beacon. Anyone else on here ever watch "The Benny Hill Show"? Remember
Tiddles the Wonder Cat as "Old One-Eye?"

Kitten pawpads are pretty damn cute, too. I was reading last night (a new
book I got called "A Cabinet of Medical Curiosities") and Oscar was sprawled
on his back between Shawn and I. His tiny little pink pawpads were showing,
because his feet were up in the air. Nearby, his sister's chocolate-brown
pawpads were also sticking up in the air...I have a couple of back sleepers!

Noelle

unread,
Jul 3, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/3/00
to
> Rat & Swan <lab...@pacbell.net> wrote in message
> news:3960CC...@pacbell.net...

> Oh, but kitties do that AlL the time! They get up on your desk and then
> turn around to show your their cute, tight rosy little Kittysphincters!
> All rosebut tight and pink! They look far better than a sprog's mouth1
> Cleaner, too.

Oh! I forgot to mention this. I have a book called "101 Questions Your Cat
Would Ask Its Vet (if Your Cat Could Talk", and # 2 is:

2. I normally say 'hello' by raising my tail and sticking my behind in
someone's face. Why do people find this unpleasant?

Odour [this is a UK-published book!] plays a major role in communication
between cats. But just as important as the odour is the willingness of one
cat to allow another to capture his scent. This is one of the reasons why,
when cats meet for the first time, they circle each other. What they are
trying to do is capture the scent produced from two different glands around
the other's behind. Cats that have just met haven't had time to work out
seniority, so they keep their tails down, protecting their perianal glands
and anal sacs from inspection, and move in a circular pattern as each tries
to sniff the other. The dominant cat eventually gets first sniff.

When cats meet other cats or people they know, there is no need to hide
their scent, so they carry their tails high and present their posteriors for
inspection. In this way, they are simply acknowledging that the other cat or
person is dominant or 'top cat'.

In cat hierarchy, people replace parents or, to be more specific, people
replace mother cats as providers of food, comfort and security. Mother cats
routinely lick clean their kittens' bottoms, so it is natural to the cat to
present her backside to her people parents. However, because bums in faces
have a different connotation in human behaviour, people find this form of
greeting unpleasant.

MRFeathers

unread,
Jul 3, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/3/00
to
>2. I normally say 'hello' by raising my tail and sticking my behind in
>someone's face. Why do people find this unpleasant?
>

This made me remember a joke from a few years ago. The governor of Arizona was
a guy called, I think, Meecham. He was homophobic and in the habit of making
obnoxious statements in public. So the joke went:

Why do Arizona cats walk around with their tails straight up?

They're displaying their Meecham buttons.

Mary


Noelle

unread,
Jul 3, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/3/00
to

Lynda <snow...@aol.combookworm> wrote in message
news:20000703224646...@ng-fd1.aol.com...

> Noelle - I never took you for butt-kisser, what a disappointment that you
are
> one of the flock. :-)

And, of course, your mindset will never allow you to see that I compliment
Swan because I honestly ENJOY Swan's posts. I have nothing to gain by
"butt-kissing," so I don't! My praise--and contempt, when warranted--for
other posters is unsolicited and genuine.

But no, it's much easier for you to write us all off as a bunch of
follow-the-leader types than to admit that we genuinely support and
entertain each other in this NG.

Noelle, never a flocker

Noelle

unread,
Jul 3, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/3/00
to

Lynda <snow...@aol.combookworm> wrote in message
news:20000703224855...@ng-fd1.aol.com...

> >Mother cats routinely lick clean their kittens' bottoms, so it is natural
to
> the cat to present her backside to her people parents.
>
> So if cat owners are surrogates for mother cats, does that mean that you
all
> <getting squicked here> LICK the asses of your cats clean? Wouldn't
surprise
> me with the amount of brown noses in this group.

Yes, and we also eat the afterbirth and teach kittens how to administer the
killing blow to prey. Grow UP, wouldja?

Pete

unread,
Jul 3, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/3/00
to
People you must remember that Snowjob *WANTED* to be a breeder but
turned out to be barren (in more ways than one apparently). If you go to
the infertility newsgroups you'll find her congratulating those whose
EPT comes back positive.

So when you reply to her, understand she is childLESS (like Preston) and
not childFREE (like Grim and me)...Pete

In article
<8BA8E7905D4761E7.A5C8AF14...@lp.airnews.net>,
"Noelle" <gno...@fastlane.net> wrote:

> Lynda <snow...@aol.combookworm> wrote in message

Lynda

unread,
Jul 4, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/4/00
to
>Oh, but kitties do that AlL the time! They get up on your desk and then
>turn around to show your their cute, tight rosy little Kittysphincters!
>All rosebut tight and pink! They look far better than a sprog's mouth1
>Cleaner, too.

At first I thought that you were being facetious, then, sadly, I realized that
you mean every word you typed. But, hey, if the anuses of your pets give you a
thrill, go for it. Sure hope that you don't go public with your fetish. Just
remember, the lovely Fido or Toonces the Cat has a very short life span; don't
get too attached.

>Swan.
>Wondering how many drinks *that* little rant will earn.

Not even worth one rancid beer, your response was not original, sarcasm too
obvious and you lost points on the banality of the topic. Of course, I haven't
read the next four messages; I am sure that the following folks probably loved
your "let's borrow from a breeder" rant as their noses are too far up your butt
to have an original thought of their own.

>You can rant all you like about those
>of us who choose to have pets but you'll never understand because you
>don't have any!

Oooh, you are SOO original. Tres lame when you have to borrow a favorite line
from a breeder. Shit is shit - don't need a mangy cat to understand shit any
better.

Lynda

unread,
Jul 4, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/4/00
to
>
>Oh goodness, Swan...that's the hardest I've ever laughed at one of your
>posts! Oscar is perched on my shoulder as I type this, wondering what's so
>funny. He's a shoulder-percher as well as a chin- and ear-biter.

Noelle - I never took you for butt-kisser, what a disappointment that you are


one of the flock. :-)

>Kitten pawpads are pretty damn cute, too.

Kitten paws are very cute - that makes sense. Even I consider the paws to be
cute.

Lynda

unread,
Jul 4, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/4/00
to
>Mother cats routinely lick clean their kittens' bottoms, so it is natural to
the cat to present her backside to her people parents.

So if cat owners are surrogates for mother cats, does that mean that you all
<getting squicked here> LICK the asses of your cats clean? Wouldn't surprise
me with the amount of brown noses in this group.

Lynda

unread,
Jul 4, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/4/00
to
> and I don't even want to know what you
>would consider a "better" outlet for what YOU call my "maternal" instincts.

Noelle, why even have the god-damned maternal instincts at all? That is so
typically womanish - blech! You don't see men waxing sentimental about shit
and that's why they run the world. It's not so much the pets I object to (I do
like the critters actually) it is the acknowledgment of maternal instincts.
Can't you just love your pets cleanly and simply without endowing them with
sprog-like or human qualities? Does every woman in the world have this
maternal instinct and just focuses it on her pets if sprog are not around?

>How does it *remotely* affect your life one way or another how I treat my
>cats?

I have no objection to pets being loved. Again, it's the stupid maternal
instinct rearing its ugly head again - it perpetuates the stereotype that all
women have it, and that those women who don't have kids will just focus their
"mommyhood" on their pets.

>Sad, SnowLynn. After the discussion on P&J I'd thought you might be halfway
>decent. I'm sorry that you feel the need to be the burr under everyone's
>butts on here.

Well, Noelle, you are the sanest and most reasonable poster in this group so I
try to respond to your posts with a modicum of respect. Whereas the P&J group
is composed of a variety of hep, tolerant folks, this group seems to be
dysfunctional - (heck, it's pretty bad when Pete is considered the leader of
the lunch table), and I just luvvvvvv to poke fun at folks who take themselves
too seriously.

Lynda

unread,
Jul 4, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/4/00
to
>Yes, and we also eat the afterbirth and teach kittens how to administer the
>killing blow to prey. Grow UP, wouldja?

Hey, I am not the one using pets as children or doll surrogates. I've grown up
and am not dependent on any animal or human for my self-esteem. :-)

Lynda

unread,
Jul 4, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/4/00
to
>But no, it's much easier for you to write us all off as a bunch of
>follow-the-leader types than to admit that we genuinely support and
>entertain each other in this NG.

Of course, you support and entertain each other - duhh!! However, this occurs
ONLY so long as most of you hold the same opinion and don't argue with the
majority. Look what happened to poor Pete. He was ousted from ASCM because he
dared to criticize the format of that newsgroup. He was exiled to Zima for a
long time with his expatriates until everything blew over and he started
posting again.

Lynda

unread,
Jul 4, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/4/00
to
>So when you reply to her, understand she is childLESS (like Preston) and
>not childFREE (like Grim and me)...Pete

Too funny. As I previously mentioned, I take birth control bills so that makes
me CF. Not that your opinion of my CF/CL state is going to pay my bills. :-)

>If you go to
>the infertility newsgroups you'll find her congratulating those whose
>EPT comes back positive.

In addition to being CF, dh and I also are infertile so I can empathize with
both groups. So sue me.

Veronique

unread,
Jul 4, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/4/00
to
snow...@aol.combookworm (Lynda) wrote:
> >So when you reply to her, understand she is childLESS (like Preston) and
> >not childFREE (like Grim and me)...Pete
>
> Too funny. As I previously mentioned, I take birth control bills so that makes
> me CF. Not that your opinion of my CF/CL state is going to pay my bills. :-)

You really don't understand, do you? You can be childless by default,
through infertility or poor timing or inability to get laid. You cannot
be childfree by default: it's a choice (not a child! Should I copyright
that? <g>)


>
> >If you go to
> >the infertility newsgroups you'll find her congratulating those whose
> >EPT comes back positive.
>
> In addition to being CF, dh and I also are infertile so I can empathize with
> both groups. So sue me.

Instead of embracing it, you sound like you're still working through a
lot of issues with your infertility to me. The women I've met who feel
unwanted by society and "less of a woman" because of their infertility
are the ones who have made such an issue of it that the rest of us can't
stand to be around them.

Noelle

unread,
Jul 4, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/4/00
to

Lynda <snow...@aol.combookworm> wrote in message
news:20000704125415...@ng-bg1.aol.com...

> >Yes, and we also eat the afterbirth and teach kittens how to administer
the
> >killing blow to prey. Grow UP, wouldja?
>
> Hey, I am not the one using pets as children or doll surrogates. I've
grown up
> and am not dependent on any animal or human for my self-esteem. :-)

You're NEVER going to get this, but I'll say it one more time, slowly.

My pets are NOT "child surrogates". My pets are not outlets for what you
call my maternal instincts (I do not acknowledge anything that could be
called maternal instincts, but I do have the ability to care for someone
other than myself, and to put their wants and needs above my own). My pets
ARE important to me, but you'll never understand why.

And I am not dependent on any animal or human for my self-esteem, either.
Yes, I would be very sad, devastated, in fact, if any of my animal
companions were to die. I know they don't live forever. When I was growing
up, our animals had a very short lifespan because *stupid humans* were
always shooting, poisoning, or running over them. I've gotten spoiled
because my oldest cat has been with me 9 years, but I know he's mortal and
will have to face that someday.

The human with whom I have chosen to spend my life--my husband--means a
great deal to me, and I love him, and he's my best friend. Relationships
based on one person being totally dependent upon the other are perhaps not
the healthiest of relationships due to their imbalanced nature.
Relationships in which the two balance each other and each supplies what the
other lacks are going to be the happy and lasting ones. I've been with Shawn
for 12 years and hope to be with him many, many more. But he would have
never been attracted to me , or stayed with me, if I didn't have some
self-esteem or personality that was not dependent upon him.

Finally, just because you make a pronouncement about my life, based on your
narrow perceptions of same, that doesn't make it true.

Ah, why am I bothering?

subvers...@my-deja.com

unread,
Jul 4, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/4/00
to
In article <8jt8un$nv5$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,

Veronique <veroniq...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> snow...@aol.combookworm (Lynda) wrote:
> > >So when you reply to her, understand she is childLESS (like
Preston) and
> > >not childFREE (like Grim and me)...Pete
> >
> > Too funny. As I previously mentioned, I take birth control bills
so that makes
> > me CF. Not that your opinion of my CF/CL state is going to pay my
bills. :-)
>
> You really don't understand, do you? You can be childless by default,
> through infertility or poor timing or inability to get laid. You
cannot
> be childfree by default: it's a choice (not a child! Should I
copyright
> that? <g>)

I love it!!!!

> > >If you go to
> > >the infertility newsgroups you'll find her congratulating those
whose
> > >EPT comes back positive.
> >
> > In addition to being CF, dh and I also are infertile so I can
empathize with
> > both groups. So sue me.
>
> Instead of embracing it, you sound like you're still working through a
> lot of issues with your infertility to me. The women I've met who feel
> unwanted by society and "less of a woman" because of their infertility
> are the ones who have made such an issue of it that the rest of us
can't
> stand to be around them.
>
> V.

I recall seeing one of the members of my church sporting a sign that
reads: "Celebrate Infertility!" What a beautiful message. While many
people have to undergo the inconvenience and expense of sterilization
surgery, those lucky enough to be naturally infertile should be
celebrating their freedom, instead of needlessly suffering and spending
their cash trying to make unneeded crotchfruit.

My church also has some great bumber stickers, such as, "Eat a Queer
Fetus for Jesus", "Thank You for Not Breeding", "Honk If You Need An
Abortion", and my personal favorite, "God Is Coming - Stick Out Your
Tongue". Their whole line of products can be viewed at:

http://www.enviroweb.org/coe/catalog/catalog.html

(No, I don't earn a cent off of any sales. This is a public service
announcement.)

"The Case Against Babies" is definitely a classic, too:
http://www.enviroweb.org/coe/e-sermons/babies.html

--
"If you give people the impression you're a smarty-pants, that's no
good for sure." - Al Gore

subvers...@my-deja.com

unread,
Jul 4, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/4/00
to
In article <20000703231523...@ng-fd1.aol.com>,

snow...@aol.combookworm (Lynda) wrote:
> Whereas the P&J group
> is composed of a variety of hep, tolerant folks, this group seems to
> be dysfunctional - (heck, it's pretty bad when Pete is considered the
> leader of the lunch table), and I just luvvvvvv to poke fun at folks
> who take themselves too seriously.

> Lynda - Currently Reading THE CLINIC by Jonathan Kellerman

God damn, I hate people who spew phrases like, "this group seems to
be dysfunctional".

Now, speaking as someone who has never really felt like part of any
group bigger than two people, I would have to say that most of the
people in here actually have a pretty healthy outlook, and are just
looking for someplace to share their disgust with the breeders we must
constantly come into contact with.

Indeed, it is you who is coming across as a conceited wench that takes
herself far too seriously. Honestly, do you really think that anyone
gives a flying crap what book you are currently reading, for christ's
sake???

Veronique

unread,
Jul 4, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/4/00
to
snow...@aol.combookworm (Lynda) wrote:
> > and I don't even want to know what you
> >would consider a "better" outlet for what YOU call my "maternal" instincts.
>
> Noelle, why even have the god-damned maternal instincts at all? That is so
> typically womanish - blech! You don't see men waxing sentimental about shit
> and that's why they run the world.

Sounds like you've been hanging around all the wrong men. I know plenty
of strong, successful alpha males who wax sentimental about all sorts of
"shit".

> It's not so much the pets I object to (I do
> like the critters actually) it is the acknowledgment of maternal instincts.

What, there is no such thing? Or are maternal instincts only reserved for
animals other than humans? Just because babies produce no emotional
reaction in me at all (aside from, "Thank heavens it's not mine,")
doesn't mean maternal instincts don't exist.

> Can't you just love your pets cleanly and simply without endowing them with
> sprog-like or human qualities? Does every woman in the world have this
> maternal instinct and just focuses it on her pets if sprog are not around?

Oh doG, you ARE a breeder, aren't you? And as much as you complain about
the rest of us being boring, I would think you'd be able to come up with
something better than this old, tired argument.

>
> >How does it *remotely* affect your life one way or another how I treat my
> >cats?
>
> I have no objection to pets being loved. Again, it's the stupid maternal
> instinct rearing its ugly head again - it perpetuates the stereotype that all
> women have it, and that those women who don't have kids will just focus their
> "mommyhood" on their pets.

Still working on those infertility issue, hmmm?


>
> >Sad, SnowLynn. After the discussion on P&J I'd thought you might be halfway
> >decent. I'm sorry that you feel the need to be the burr under everyone's
> >butts on here.
>
> Well, Noelle, you are the sanest and most reasonable poster in this group so I

> try to respond to your posts with a modicum of respect. Whereas the P&J group


> is composed of a variety of hep, tolerant folks, this group seems to be
> dysfunctional - (heck, it's pretty bad when Pete is considered the leader of
> the lunch table), and I just luvvvvvv to poke fun at folks who take themselves
> too seriously.

What amuses me the most is how you have appointed yourself judge, jury
and executioner of who is in the "in" crowd and who is considered the
leader of this ng. Let me tell you a secret: there isn't any leader.
None. Nada. No one. Whatever "in" crowd you seem to resent is all in your
head. There are no secret meetings. No secret ballots. You and everyone
else is free to respond to whomever you want, ignore whomever you want,
flame whomever you want. You like Noelle? Fine, respond to her. You
disagree with her? Tell her. Your point about the validity of maternal
instincts and whether women who love their cats sounds like a great topic
for dissection. *But that isn't what you said!* You made a snotty, bitchy
reply to something Noelle is obviously happy about, indicating to me
you're either jealous of her happiness or posting simply to troll.

It's a cliche, but get a life, dear.

V.
--
Veronique Chez Sheep
Love will get you like a
case of anthrax

Lynda

unread,
Jul 4, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/4/00
to
>You really don't understand, do you? You can be childless by default,
>through infertility or poor timing or inability to get laid. You cannot
>be childfree by default: it's a choice

There are a few infertile folk who post here and that was fairly insulting to
them - implying that ONLY the fertile can make an active choice to be CF. Not
so - if I were passively just waiting for nature to take its course one way or
the other, that would be not making a decision, but taking preventive measures
to prevent pregnancy is an active decision on my part. But, if you want to
believe that only the fertile can make such a choice, I don't take offense
since you are not in my shoes, so to speak.

>Should I copyright
>that? <g>)

No, again, your posts are not original in thought. I have had this sort of
thing mewled at me before.

>Instead of embracing it, you sound like you're still working through a
>lot of issues with your infertility to me

Just as many of you are working through the social awkwardness of being CF.
Reading through many of the posts, I see an attempt to express a decision to be
CF without alienating friends and family. It's a fine line that we walk and
some days are easier than others. It is obvious from reading the posts here
that many are struggling with mainstream acceptance despite their CF decision.
I don't include Pete and Grim in this - they are in a world of their own. LOL.

>The women I've met who feel
>unwanted by society and "less of a woman" because of their infertility
>are the ones who have made such an issue of it that the rest of us can't
>stand to be around them.

That is true and I have posted ad nauseum to them that if they let people know
that their infertility bothers them, people are going to be perverse and annoy
them with the very thing that bothers them.
Lynda - Currently Reading CRADLE AND ALL by James Patterson

Lynda

unread,
Jul 4, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/4/00
to
>You're NEVER going to get this, but I'll say it one more time, slowly.

I got it, Noelle - I understand what you are trying to express with your love
of pets. Sorry I misunderstood - but whoever posted about the cats rubbing
their butts on her face just got me going. This is one topic that I will not
understand, not having pets of my own.(So Swan was right!) And though I am CF
by CHOICE (despite the vehement outrage of some that the infertile can make
such a choice), I am not petless by strong choice. I would like to have a cat
or a dog but my dh and I work such long hours that it would not be fair for the
poor animal to keep it cooped up by itself.

Noelle

unread,
Jul 4, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/4/00
to

Lynda <snow...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20000704161216...@ng-fe1.aol.com...

> >You're NEVER going to get this, but I'll say it one more time, slowly.
>
> I got it, Noelle - I understand what you are trying to express with your
love
> of pets. Sorry I misunderstood - but whoever posted about the cats
rubbing
> their butts on her face just got me going.

That was me.

It was a joke, and you obviously didn't get it.

Lynda

unread,
Jul 4, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/4/00
to
>Honestly, do you really think that anyone
>gives a flying crap what book you are currently reading, for christ's
>sake???

Honestly, do you think I care whether or not you read my sig line? If it
bothers you, pluck out your eyes, moron. I post for myself and not for your
entertainment.

>Indeed, it is you who is coming across as a conceited wench that takes
>herself far too seriously

A little upset because I poke fun at the august ASC coterie? Me thinks that it
is not I who takes myself a tad too seriously. Lighten up.

>God damn, I hate people who spew phrases like, "this group seems to
>be dysfunctional".

The term too middle-class for you? Would you prefer that I use the terms
"avante-garde," "on the razor's edge," or "hep?" Then, again, those would not
apply either; no one here has yet to say anything original.

> I would have to say that most of the
>people in here actually have a pretty healthy outlook, and are just
>looking for someplace to share their disgust with the breeders

Uuuuh, when the golden boy of the group tells a newbie to fuck himself with an
e-coli tipped fork, I hardly think that is expressing a disgust with breeders
or when I run across yet another post expressing the wonder of a cat's
underbelly or clean butt, that is neither interesting or expressing a
frustration with breeders. When the leader of the group is one who can only
spew obscenities and rarely has anything to contribute, I'd say the group is
dysfunctional.

Lynda

unread,
Jul 4, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/4/00
to
>
>That was me.
>
>It was a joke, and you obviously didn't get it.

No, I did not - I have seen too many similar posts from others like it - so
it's hard to distinguish which ones are made in jest.

subvers...@my-deja.com

unread,
Jul 5, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/5/00
to
In article <20000704162659...@ng-fe1.aol.com>,

snow...@aol.com (Lynda) wrote:
> >Honestly, do you really think that anyone
> >gives a flying crap what book you are currently reading, for christ's
> >sake???
>
> Honestly, do you think I care whether or not you read my sig line?
If it
> bothers you, pluck out your eyes, moron. I post for myself and not
for your
> entertainment.

Right - you do not even want people to read your posts! Do you even
believe the bullshit you are writing?

> >Indeed, it is you who is coming across as a conceited wench that
takes
> >herself far too seriously
>
> A little upset because I poke fun at the august ASC coterie? Me
thinks that it
> is not I who takes myself a tad too seriously. Lighten up.

No, not at all. It is the entire tone of what you write that exposes
your delusions of grandeur.

> >God damn, I hate people who spew phrases like, "this group seems to
> >be dysfunctional".
>
> The term too middle-class for you? Would you prefer that I use the
terms
> "avante-garde," "on the razor's edge," or "hep?" Then, again, those
would not
> apply either; no one here has yet to say anything original.

No, I would prefer that you post something worth reading. I'm not
holding my breath, though.

> > I would have to say that most of the
> >people in here actually have a pretty healthy outlook, and are just
> >looking for someplace to share their disgust with the breeders
>
> Uuuuh, when the golden boy of the group tells a newbie to fuck
himself with an
> e-coli tipped fork, I hardly think that is expressing a disgust with
breeders
> or when I run across yet another post expressing the wonder of a cat's
> underbelly or clean butt, that is neither interesting or expressing a
> frustration with breeders. When the leader of the group is one who
can only
> spew obscenities and rarely has anything to contribute, I'd say the
group is
> dysfunctional.

Leader? I have no leader, in here or anywhere else in my life. your
mind is muddled.

> Lynda - Currently Reading CRADLE AND ALL by James Patterson

Good for you! I hope you entertained yourself typing that!!!

--
"If you give people the impression you're a smarty-pants, that's no
good for sure." - Al Gore

Jas

unread,
Jul 5, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/5/00
to
Lynda wrote:
>
> It's not an "in your face" bragging - it's more subtle.

<dang, this is just too easy! >;-D>

Oh, you mean like this?

"Or best yet - avoid the outdoors!! That's how I maintain my beautiful,
creamy complexion. Hee hee!! But I hate the outdoors, too hot here in
Texas."

which you wrote in article
http://x64.deja.com/[ST_rn=ap]/getdoc.xp?AN=480694952&CONTEXT=962433597.1072169039&hitnum=370

Now back into the box with you, dearie.

Jas
(diligently taking notes on Subtlety 101, Snow Flake style)
--
They say little children come from God.
I guess He couldn't stand the noise either.

Lynda

unread,
Jul 5, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/5/00
to
>Now back into the box with you, dearie.
>
>Jas

I can't possibly be intimidated by a woman who sleeps with dysfunctional men
she meets on the net who spend their days posting on newsgroups and their
nights jacking off. Thanks to Bruce, we all know about your paltry sex life
and your predilection to be tied up, spanked and submissive to a man. Nobody
will admit it, but the Bruce/Jas bondage fiasco is the first thing one thinks
of when you post. You are the last woman who could ever bring shame to my life.
LOL!!
Lynda - Currently Reading BACK ROADS by Tawni O'Dell

Lynda

unread,
Jul 5, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/5/00
to
>eaction in me at all (aside from, "Thank heavens it's not mine,")
>doesn't mean maternal instincts don't exist.

What I stated is that maternal instincts can be a weakness. Granted, it's
better that such instincts be focused toward animals than babies because most
women are not going to quit their jobs or quit contributing to society to stay
at home with their pets. I just don't like the instinct at all.

> Let me tell you a secret: there isn't any leader.
>None. Nada. No one.

Yea, right - even poor Preston quickly saw from where the brown noses
originated. LOL!!!

> You made a snotty, bitchy
>reply to something Noelle is obviously happy about, indicating to me
>you're either jealous of her happiness or posting simply to troll.

I like Noelle and I am not jealous of her. But you are right - that was a very
snotty reply on my part and upon finding out that she was joking and discussing
the issue with other cyberbuds of mine, I should not have responded as I did.
She did not deserve such a response.

>It's a cliche, but get a life, dear.

Again, try posting some original thoughts.

Sol Taibi

unread,
Jul 5, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/5/00
to
In article <15d84bec...@usw-ex0107-050.remarq.com>,
JD2B2001 <jaslaught...@sprintmail.com.invalid> wrote:
>
> Despite this scene, despite the fact that the Earth is over its
> carrying capacity,
>
> We are doomed; we will be cause of our own extinction.
>
> And frankly, I don't believe the Earth will grieve our disappearance.

I like most of your rant, but there is a failure of logic
at the end here. A species can't breed itself out of existence.

This has been seen in the wild. In the absence of predators,
a species may outbreed the food supply. Then there is a mass
dying off, until the number of survivors is small enough for
the remaining food supply. Then the process starts over again.

Perhaps billions will die and civilization is doomed, but there
will be survivors (unless there's a nuclear war or something
like that, but that's a different issue).

Overpopulation is an issue of *quality* of life.

I'm not so pessimistic as you. According to the latest figures,
world population is no longer increasing geometrically an will
level off at about 20 billion. With "green revolution"
agriculture it is just barely possible that the earth might
support that many. Not with current levels of wastefulness,
of course.

Still, I wouldn't want to live in such a world.

Dora Robinson

unread,
Jul 5, 2000, 3:00:00 AM7/5/00
to
subversionmania contributed:

> I recall seeing one of the members of my church sporting a sign that
> reads: "Celebrate Infertility!" What a beautiful message. While many
> people have to undergo the inconvenience and expense of sterilization
> surgery, those lucky enough to be naturally infertile should be
> celebrating their freedom, instead of needlessly suffering and spending
> their cash trying to make unneeded crotchfruit.

And I am!!! I've always said that I consider my infertility to be a
blessing and that my infertility is no accident and I was meant for other
things. However, with breeder family pressure, I sort of had this "someday"
in mind, but it was more of a belief that I would never be able to escape
becoming a parent. I also had a friend who is more CF mentally than I was
prior to finding ASCF who with lots of BC and arguments with her doctor for
a tubal, ended up with 3 so I had this fatalistic attitude that my time
would come and that we really don't have much choice as I also have a friend
who was tied many moons ago who has other friends who had their tubes tied,
but it had failed them.

I am celebrating my freedom and I LOVE having found ASCF even with all the
extra noise. I've backed up my infertility with BC because life is so much
better with making a firm decision. Being off that fence is so much more
comfortable, productive and happy. I've abandoned all the breeders in the
family, re-established contact with old friends and can enjoy their childed
positions better as instead of feeling guilty for my time, trips,
spontaneity, etc., I can smile--smugly.

In fact, I'm going on a road trip and was with my friends Saturday and said
I was going on an impromptu trip to New Mexico. I hadn't decided yet. They
went on and on about how could I plan a trip on such short notice. Then,
one friend bonked her head with her hand and said "That's right--She's
childFREE! She just runs off when she wants!" And it was said in such a
cool tone and I just sat there, chuckled, smiled and raised my brows
rapidly. It was a fun moment.

I'm so thankful I never even considered trying to conceive. In fact, I
still detest the words "are you trying?" I never considered ovulation
testing, never considered fixing my "problem" in order to conceive and hated
going to the doctor for illness and having to be tested for pregnancy before
they considered anything else. (Passing out, faint, dizzy...gee, diabetes
anyone?...but I've told that one a few times and this isn't the thread for
it...)

Anyway, so in celebration of my Infertility, I am taking off for Albuquerque
to meet up with ASCF's own Thelma and Louise--Elise and IleneB!!!!! and of
course, I guess we're all meeting up with Scott Amspoker too. Hi Scott!
I'll be there!!! Checked out your website...cool!

And, I'm taking my pooch, who, in keeping a little of the former thread, had
the cutest butt and I've been feeling really weird noticing it. I had a
cocker before and she was a lover dog, but I never really thought anything
was as pleasing as Bear's butt is. He's part shepherd, part chow and it's
his hindquarters that are all chow. When we take a walk, he sometimes gets
fearful and he lowers his tail and he looks like a shepherd but when he's
happy, he curls that tail right up, waves that feather-duster back and forth
and it appears like he's strutting that butt of his in high-fashion.

So, guys, in a ways, this is a "see ya later" post. I will be picking up my
rental car tomorrow and heading out Friday morning for a 1007.1 mile journey
(mapquest figures) to Albuquerque. I got AC in the car for that dripping
weather.

Later dudes, you've all been an inspiration over these past 2 years. CFdom
is a good place to be!

Dora
WOOOHOOO!!


0 new messages