LawTalkers
Page 15 of 124 « First 51314 15 16172565115 Last »
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

LawTalkers (http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/index.php)
-   The Fashionable (http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=14)
-   -   Congratulations Slave and Catrin!!! (http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=814)

Hank Chinaski 10-21-2008 08:12 PM
Re: Annoyances
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adder (Post 368093)
Underlying all of this, allegedly, is her difficultly getting over a serious relationship with her ex. The "needing to be single" thing was actually several months ago, and was followed by all of a few days of not seeing her before she reached out to me again. My main reaction to it was surprise that I wasn't really upset and it has been awhile since I initiated anything.

But you guys are probably right, and my anxiety is probably misplaced. I just worry that she is taking things more seriously when the conversation turns more emotional/intimate, but that is probably just because those topics make me uncomfortable in general so if I was her I wouldn't bring them up casually. That probably isn't true of her.

To some degree this is also driven by some interest in a friend who recently moved back into town. Oddly enough, she actually asked me why I never dated this friend (which is a long story of its own).

I have really only done FWB once in that past, which didn't end all that well after she started to take it more seriously, which probably colors my reactions here.
I am very happily married. I think i speak for several other socks here who are also when I tell you, my advice was very heartfelt, and the only thing you should listen to.

ltl/fb 10-21-2008 08:13 PM
Re: Annoyances
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adder (Post 368093)
Underlying all of this, allegedly, is her difficultly getting over a serious relationship with her ex. The "needing to be single" thing was actually several months ago, and was followed by all of a few days of not seeing her before she reached out to me again. My main reaction to it was surprise that I wasn't really upset and it has been awhile since I initiated anything.

But you guys are probably right, and my anxiety is probably misplaced. I just worry that she is taking things more seriously when the conversation turns more emotional/intimate, but that is probably just because those topics make me uncomfortable in general so if I was her I wouldn't bring them up casually. That probably isn't true of her.

To some degree this is also driven by some interest in a friend who recently moved back into town. Oddly enough, she actually asked me why I never dated this friend (which is a long story of its own).

I have really only done FWB once in that past, which didn't end all that well after she started to take it more seriously, which probably colors my reactions here.
God almighty, order a stack of porn and stock up on hand lotion. Stay away from all women. Please.

Hank Chinaski 10-21-2008 08:17 PM
Re: Annoyances
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ltl/fb (Post 368095)
God almighty, order a stack of porn and stock up on hand lotion. Stay away from all women. Please.
you don't seem to get it. women only engage in sex as part of a serious relationship with a view towards, well, let's say it, commitment. adder just is not willing to debase a woman who says she just wants casual sex by engaging in casual sex. I, for one, respect him for it.

sebastian_dangerfield 10-21-2008 08:25 PM
Re: Annoyances
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adder (Post 368093)
Underlying all of this, allegedly, is her difficultly getting over a serious relationship with her ex. The "needing to be single" thing was actually several months ago, and was followed by all of a few days of not seeing her before she reached out to me again. My main reaction to it was surprise that I wasn't really upset and it has been awhile since I initiated anything.

But you guys are probably right, and my anxiety is probably misplaced. I just worry that she is taking things more seriously when the conversation turns more emotional/intimate, but that is probably just because those topics make me uncomfortable in general so if I was her I wouldn't bring them up casually. That probably isn't true of her.

To some degree this is also driven by some interest in a friend who recently moved back into town. Oddly enough, she actually asked me why I never dated this friend (which is a long story of its own).

I have really only done FWB once in that past, which didn't end all that well after she started to take it more seriously, which probably colors my reactions here.
I'd normally never say this, but in your situation, think with your dick.

ltl/fb 10-21-2008 08:26 PM
Re: Annoyances
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield (Post 368092)
Do that thing that turns her off in bed. You know... talking.
I love you. Granted, it's not going to last longer than the time it takes me to catch up on the PB, but like Camelot, this right here is a spot with one brief shining moment. Don't let it be forgot.

ltl/fb 10-21-2008 08:27 PM
Re: Annoyances
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski (Post 368096)
you don't seem to get it. women only engage in sex as part of a serious relationship with a view towards, well, let's say it, commitment. adder just is not willing to debase a woman who says she just wants casual sex by engaging in casual sex. I, for one, respect him for it.
I am so glad I don't fuck women.

sebastian_dangerfield 10-21-2008 08:28 PM
Re: Annoyances
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski (Post 368096)
you don't seem to get it. women only engage in sex as part of a serious relationship with a view towards, well, let's say it, commitment. adder just is not willing to debase a woman who says she just wants casual sex by engaging in casual sex. I, for one, respect him for it.
I think I speak for all women here (I don't have to be one to speak on their behalf*) when I say women don't like (a) guys who overthink shit, or (b) long foreplay.

To all the women who claim to enjoy lengthy foreplay, you are not real women.

*I have spoken on behalf of all Buddhists, Communists and World of Warcraft Fans elsewhere.

notcasesensitive 10-21-2008 08:31 PM
Re: Annoyances
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ltl/fb (Post 368098)
I love you. Granted, it's not going to last longer than the time it takes me to catch up on the PB, but like Camelot, this right here is a spot with one brief shining moment. Don't let it be forgot.
...ten.

Hank Chinaski 10-21-2008 08:33 PM
Re: Annoyances
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield (Post 368100)
I think I speak for all women here (I don't have to be one to speak on their behalf*) when I say women don't like (a) guys who overthink shit, or (b) long foreplay.

To all the women who claim to enjoy lengthy foreplay, you are not real women.

*I have spoken on behalf of all Buddhists, Communists and World of Warcraft Fans elsewhere.
we're doing a newlywed game and i need question help.

1- suggest questions.

2- help with this one:

Ladies, the last time your husband drove you two to whoppieland, would you say; he got on the expressway and sped too fast, got lost and wouldn't ask for directions or ?

I'm thinking "took the safe way home."

ltl/fb 10-21-2008 08:51 PM
Re: Annoyances
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by notcasesensitive (Post 368101)
...ten.
Are you trying to make me break out The Simple Joys of Maidenhood?

bold_n_brazen 10-21-2008 09:31 PM
Re: Annoyances
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski (Post 368102)
we're doing a newlywed game and i need question help.

1- suggest questions.

2- help with this one:

Ladies, the last time your husband drove you two to whoppieland, would you say; he got on the expressway and sped too fast, got lost and wouldn't ask for directions or ?

I'm thinking "took the safe way home."
Whoppieland?

bold_n_brazen 10-21-2008 09:32 PM
Re: Annoyances
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bold_n_brazen (Post 368106)
Whoppieland?
I've just been told this is next to Wallyworld.

ltl/fb 10-21-2008 09:34 PM
Re: Annoyances
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bold_n_brazen (Post 368107)
I've just been told this is next to Wallyworld.
Willieworld?

Hank Chinaski 10-21-2008 10:39 PM
Re: Annoyances
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bold_n_brazen (Post 368106)
Whoppieland?
if you do a Newlywed game, then you need to do it, with the whole 60s feel.

please don't fight the hypo, and help me develop the questions.

ltl/fb 10-21-2008 10:41 PM
Re: Annoyances
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski (Post 368110)
if you do a Newlywed game, then you need to do it, with the whole 60s feel.

please don't fight the hypo, and help me develop the questions.
Whoopieland. I think you were thinking floppy/woppy.

Maybe you can work in floppy? Your subconscious was going there . . .

Jack Manfred 10-22-2008 02:59 AM
Re: Annoyances
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by notcasesensitive (Post 368083)
From the sound of it, she isn't that into him (I have never told someone that I'd like to be single for a while unless I have written off any sort of serious connection). Adder, don't keep yourself up at night. You seem not to be a person who is capable of FWB. Cut the cord. If you want to, remind her of that period when she wanted to be single. Heck, if you are not a breaker-upper, just annoy her in the ways that you must have when she made the single comment and maybe she'll initiate the break-up again.
Or, alternate plan... suggest a threesome. After a couple of after-work drinks, tell her you've been thinking about spicing things up, and that a threesome might be fun.

It confirms that you think the relationship should remain casual. It could dampen any plans she had to discuss your kinda/sorta relationship at work because she might be embarassed to mention that fact (and if she does mention it and a different woman at the office pursues you down the road, well, that's just something else for the dossier, now isn't it?) Plus, she might go along with it. Or she might end everything right there, which might be merciful to you as you're agonizing over your situation while you have a woman in your bed.

I think George would agree that this is a good plan. Barney Stimson too. See them if you need the math done for you.

Jack Manfred 10-22-2008 03:05 AM
Re: Annoyances
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield (Post 368097)
I'd normally never say this, but in your situation, think with your dick.
You're lucky the search function here is disabled, Sebby.

And what constitutes "long foreplay"? Are we talking Hours? Minutes? Seconds?

robustpuppy 10-22-2008 08:42 AM
Re: Annoyances
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.) (Post 368067)
Of course it will--the description has friend with benefits written all over it, with the added downside of its being a coworker. Adder needs to find himself a new love interest at least for the short term to extract himself from the situation.
I'd have given this a 10 if you had written "pull out" rather than extract. As it stands, you get a 9.0, with points for subtlety cancelled out by the fact that extract reminds me of many past dental traumas.

robustpuppy 10-22-2008 08:46 AM
Re: Annoyances
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield (Post 368092)
Do that thing that turns her off in bed. You know... talking.
Yours goes to 11.

Hank Chinaski 10-22-2008 08:49 AM
Re: Annoyances
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ltl/fb (Post 368111)
Whoopieland. I think you were thinking floppy/woppy.

Maybe you can work in floppy? Your subconscious was going there . . .
the two of you don't allot for regional dialects?

Diane_Keaton 10-22-2008 09:17 AM
Obama Busting Moves on Ellen
 
Clip here Cute and fun, but boy did they practice a restrained, presidential version of his dance moves. He's young, energetic and has much better moves than this. Would be fun if he busted them out at the election night party.

ThurgreedMarshall 10-22-2008 10:43 AM
Re: Annoyances
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adder (Post 368073)
Thus far, I am trying the fizzle approach. Although as I may attempt to pursue something with someone else, it may have to become more affirmative just out of general decency to both.
I don't understand what the hell you're talking about. You said she wasn't that interested. You aren't that interested. Just tell her it's not going anywhere and you should just be friends. What's the big deal?

TM

ThurgreedMarshall 10-22-2008 10:48 AM
Re: Madness
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski (Post 368085)
so. They wouldn't have noticed early enough to make up 10 minutes. how many marathons all you guys with opinions have under your belts?
Why would there have to be such a large stagger? The group of elites should be small enough to start 30 seconds ahead of everyone else. Coltrane just said it is damn near impossible to run at the pace at which they run, so anyone who catches, keeps up and/or passes them from the second group should be respected.

TM

ThurgreedMarshall 10-22-2008 10:51 AM
Re: Annoyances
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adder (Post 368093)
Underlying all of this, allegedly, is her difficultly getting over a serious relationship with her ex. The "needing to be single" thing was actually several months ago, and was followed by all of a few days of not seeing her before she reached out to me again. My main reaction to it was surprise that I wasn't really upset and it has been awhile since I initiated anything.

But you guys are probably right, and my anxiety is probably misplaced. I just worry that she is taking things more seriously when the conversation turns more emotional/intimate, but that is probably just because those topics make me uncomfortable in general so if I was her I wouldn't bring them up casually. That probably isn't true of her.

To some degree this is also driven by some interest in a friend who recently moved back into town. Oddly enough, she actually asked me why I never dated this friend (which is a long story of its own).

I have really only done FWB once in that past, which didn't end all that well after she started to take it more seriously, which probably colors my reactions here.
Let me ask you a question, since you think by staying with her, you are somehow preserving her feelings.

Do you want to be in a long-term relationship with this girl?

Because if you don't, you're just making things worse and will have to dump her silly ass at some point anyway. Do it now so you both can get on with your overly sensitive, mushy lives, separately.

TM

ThurgreedMarshall 10-22-2008 10:54 AM
Re: Annoyances
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bold_n_brazen (Post 368107)
I've just been told this is next to Wallyworld.
So, it's closed too?

TM

ThurgreedMarshall 10-22-2008 10:55 AM
Re: Annoyances
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Manfred (Post 368113)
Or, alternate plan... suggest a threesome.
That won't work. He'll have to get a whole new wardrobe.

TM

Hank Chinaski 10-22-2008 11:13 AM
Re: Madness
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall (Post 368126)
Why would there have to be such a large stagger? The group of elites should be small enough to start 30 seconds ahead of everyone else. Coltrane just said it is damn near impossible to run at the pace at which they run, so anyone who catches, keeps up and/or passes them from the second group should be respected.

TM
I don't get that either. If they actually enforced only elites at the front they don't even need a stagger. the real problem with that would be for the next group. they'll be pissed that they lost 10 seconds at the start.

Hank Chinaski 10-22-2008 11:14 AM
Re: Annoyances
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall (Post 368130)
That won't work. He'll have to get a whole new wardrobe.

TM
plus a second woman.

Replaced_Texan 10-22-2008 11:24 AM
Re: Annoyances
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall (Post 368124)
I don't understand what the hell you're talking about. You said she wasn't that interested. You aren't that interested. Just tell her it's not going anywhere and you should just be friends. What's the big deal?

TM
2. Tell her the truth. She's an adult. Don't stay in something just to spare her feelings, and don't keep stuff from her because you think it'll hurt her. There's no point in staying in this thing if you're not into it anymore.

Did you just call me Coltrane? 10-22-2008 11:28 AM
Re: Madness
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by LessinSF (Post 368081)
They started the "elites" 20 minutes before the rest. 10 minutes would have prevented this because the winner (yes, she won) would have caught the lead pack and been noticed.

I don't understand why the elites start any minutes before. As long as they have their own corral, no one will catch them. And so what if they do? Both Chicago and Boston use the corral system. I usually cross the start line 45 seconds after the elites start (not because they hold you back, but b/c everyone jogs up to the start line, and it just takes time for each corral, which is crowded before the start line, to make its way up there).

It makes sense for the elites to start a few minutes earlier in triathlons, but not for running races.

ThurgreedMarshall 10-22-2008 11:31 AM
Re: Madness
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Did you just call me Coltrane? (Post 368137)
I don't understand why the elites start any minutes before.
So they don't have 50 Coltranes mugging into the camera for the first 100 yards while they lead the marathon?

TM

Did you just call me Coltrane? 10-22-2008 11:35 AM
Re: Madness
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall (Post 368126)
Why would there have to be such a large stagger? The group of elites should be small enough to start 30 seconds ahead of everyone else. Coltrane just said it is damn near impossible to run at the pace at which they run, so anyone who catches, keeps up and/or passes them from the second group should be respected.

TM
Exactly. I finished in the top 2% of finishers in 2002. And I would only be able to keep up with the true elites for one mile. They are so many levels above even a decent amateur runner.

Did you just call me Coltrane? 10-22-2008 11:36 AM
Re: Madness
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski (Post 368133)
I don't get that either. If they actually enforced only elites at the front they don't even need a stagger. the real problem with that would be for the next group. they'll be pissed that they lost 10 seconds at the start.
Chip timing.

Did you just call me Coltrane? 10-22-2008 11:38 AM
Re: Madness
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall (Post 368140)
So they don't have 50 Coltranes mugging into the camera for the first 100 yards while they lead the marathon?

TM

Well, with corral starts, those people would still have to catch them. If they have a 30-45 second head start, I don't think anyone is catching them, even sprinting.

But yeah, that was definitely part of my plan: to wave at the cameras and get my name in the paper as the leader through two miles.

I never said it was a good plan.

Mmmm, Burger (C.J.) 10-22-2008 11:42 AM
Re: Madness
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Did you just call me Coltrane? (Post 368142)
Chip timing.
Isn't that the same problem? It's fine for an "unofficial" time, or even qualifying purposes, but you're back in the same situation if you use it for determining the winner.

BTW, I thought Boston now sent off the elites, or maybe it's the elite women, 1/2 hour earlier.

Replaced_Texan 10-22-2008 11:45 AM
Re: Madness
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Did you just call me Coltrane? (Post 368142)
Chip timing.
Yeah, but even with chip timing, isn't the "winner" determined by the time from the starting gun, not the time that the runner crossed the sensor at the starting line?

*Hank caveat: I've run a grand total of one (1)** half marathon in my life. I believe my chip crossed the starting line 4:45.7 after the starting gun went off. In order to "win" I would have had to shave off 4:45.8 from the time of whoever came across the finish line first. Since none of this is ever, ever going to happen, I've never really thought about it much.

**I just started training for my second, which is in about three months.

Did you just call me Coltrane? 10-22-2008 11:54 AM
Re: Madness
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.) (Post 368146)
Isn't that the same problem? It's fine for an "unofficial" time, or even qualifying purposes, but you're back in the same situation if you use it for determining the winner.

BTW, I thought Boston now sent off the elites, or maybe it's the elite women, 1/2 hour earlier.
One issue: if you use chip timing, it's probably very tough to monitor non-elites to see whether they are cutting through alleys or otherwise cheating a la Rosie Ruiz.

I last ran Boston in 2004, so it may have changed. Actually, the elite women may have started early then, too, now that I think about it.

Mmmm, Burger (C.J.) 10-22-2008 12:01 PM
Re: Madness
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Did you just call me Coltrane? (Post 368153)
One issue: if you use chip timing, it's probably very tough to monitor non-elites to see whether they are cutting through alleys or otherwise cheating a la Rosie Ruiz.
Doesn't the same problem exist without chip timing? I'm pretty sure Rosie wasn't chipped.

Also, aren't there random/hidden chip test points to prevent the Ruiz problem?

Did you just call me Coltrane? 10-22-2008 12:15 PM
Re: Madness
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.) (Post 368155)
Doesn't the same problem exist without chip timing? I'm pretty sure Rosie wasn't chipped.

Also, aren't there random/hidden chip test points to prevent the Ruiz problem?
But Rosie ran before they had designated "elites" at races. That's probably one of the reasons why the elites get their own start corral/wave. So they don't have to monitor thousands of people. I wasn't saying that chip timing prevents cheating. Rather, I meant that creating an elite corral/wave does.

Chip timing actually allows non-elites to compete against elites, just like our Arien did. I don't think chip timing solves any of the problems; I was just commenting on Hank's post that the non-elites "lose 10 seconds" because a later start. They don't.

I think all of the time points are open and obvious (and labeled as such).

Did you just call me Coltrane? 10-22-2008 12:23 PM
Facebook
 
I want out. Someone make it stop.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:35 PM.
Page 15 of 124 « First 51314 15 16172565115 Last »
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.
Hosted By: URLJet.com