Discussion:
OT: High School Kids No Longer Shower after Playing Sports or Gym Class?
(too old to reply)
Thanatos
2009-08-19 00:36:58 UTC
Permalink
In article
If I'm not mistaken, many schools do have a policy
banning cell phone use during class hours.
I wouldn't just ban their use. I'd ban their possession
on school grounds.
I made it through junior high and high school just fine
without one. So can they.
Uphill in the snow both ways, right?
hehehe, not even I, at my age, had it that bad.
I think, seriously, that those hardships were far more prevalent in
our parents' generation. My father literally did walk 5 miles each
way to high school, often in the snow in the winter time. There were
no school busses in the '30's. We baby boomers were a privileged
generation compared to our parents. And the younger generation is now
so far removed from any of those hardships that having to walk miles
in the snow to go to school has become a joke.
I didn't mean it that way. I was objecting to the mindset that
if *he* had to do without something, then *everyone* should
do without the same thing and be happy about it.
I never said they should be happy about it. They should just deal with
it.

It'll do them good to learn early on they can't always have whatever
they want.
Vandar
2009-08-19 00:44:34 UTC
Permalink
There's nothing more awkward than having to sit a grown adult down and
explain the concept of basic hygiene to him.
I would agree with you on this, also what constitutes appropriate
business attire, particularly with women in more cases than men. These
can be quite challenging subjects to bring forth even with a good HR
Dept.
Proper business attire to me is the same thing you'd wear if you were
playing a round of golf - dress pants and a collared shirt.
Not for working in the White House, it isn't.
It would be if I were elected to work there. ;)
That's the way it was with the Clintons. Every day was casual Friday.
I've never seen a more sloppy, unprofessional looking bunch. And when
you look that way, you tend to act that way, too.
Maybe them, not me. I'm a techie, so "unkempt" is an acceptable dress
code. Just look at Bill Gates.
I'm most productive when I'm comfortable. I've never found suits
comfortable and constricting. Maybe I just need to find a good tailor.
Susan
2009-08-19 01:00:57 UTC
Permalink
x-no-archie: yes
Post by Vandar
Maybe them, not me. I'm a techie, so "unkempt" is an acceptable dress
code. Just look at Bill Gates.
I'm most productive when I'm comfortable. I've never found suits
comfortable and constricting. Maybe I just need to find a good tailor.
Well, yeah. Techies can show up in their fuzzy slippers and no one
cares. Tom is always thrilled when he has at least one techie
presentable enough to bring on a sales call or with enough social skill
to be permitted to speak to customers on the phone.

Susan
Vandar
2009-08-19 01:25:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Susan
x-no-archie: yes
Post by Vandar
Maybe them, not me. I'm a techie, so "unkempt" is an acceptable dress
code. Just look at Bill Gates.
I'm most productive when I'm comfortable. I've never found suits
comfortable and constricting. Maybe I just need to find a good tailor.
Well, yeah. Techies can show up in their fuzzy slippers and no one
cares. Tom is always thrilled when he has at least one techie
presentable enough to bring on a sales call or with enough social skill
to be permitted to speak to customers on the phone.
Phone calls are easy. It's the face-to-face meetings that suck. For the
first meeting, I usually show up in a dress shirt, pants (real ones),
and shoes. Once I assess the code being followed by those in the
business, I dress accordingly for subsequent meetings unless
specifically requested otherwise.
The best part of my job is I rarely have to meet with clients in person.
That's what consultants are for.
SLGreg
2009-08-19 01:52:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Vandar
Post by Susan
x-no-archie: yes
Post by Vandar
Maybe them, not me. I'm a techie, so "unkempt" is an acceptable dress
code. Just look at Bill Gates.
I'm most productive when I'm comfortable. I've never found suits
comfortable and constricting. Maybe I just need to find a good tailor.
Well, yeah. Techies can show up in their fuzzy slippers and no one
cares. Tom is always thrilled when he has at least one techie
presentable enough to bring on a sales call or with enough social skill
to be permitted to speak to customers on the phone.
Phone calls are easy. It's the face-to-face meetings that suck. For the
first meeting, I usually show up in a dress shirt, pants (real ones),
and shoes. Once I assess the code being followed by those in the
business, I dress accordingly for subsequent meetings unless
specifically requested otherwise.
The best part of my job is I rarely have to meet with clients in person.
That's what consultants are for.
I've always been of the motto: "When in doubt, better to be
overdressed than underdressed." Not much feels worse than being the
sole slob in a room full of nicely dressed people.

-greg
fmomoon
2009-08-19 02:26:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by SLGreg
Post by Vandar
Post by Susan
x-no-archie: yes
Post by Vandar
Maybe them, not me. I'm a techie, so "unkempt" is an acceptable dress
code. Just look at Bill Gates.
I'm most productive when I'm comfortable. I've never found suits
comfortable and constricting. Maybe I just need to find a good tailor.
Well, yeah. Techies can show up in their fuzzy slippers and no one
cares. Tom is always thrilled when he has at least one techie
presentable enough to bring on a sales call or with enough social skill
to be permitted to speak to customers on the phone.
Phone calls are easy. It's the face-to-face meetings that suck. For the
first meeting, I usually show up in a dress shirt, pants (real ones),
and shoes. Once I assess the code being followed by those in the
business, I dress accordingly for subsequent meetings unless
specifically requested otherwise.
The best part of my job is I rarely have to meet with clients in person.
That's what consultants are for.
I've always been of the motto: "When in doubt, better to be
overdressed than underdressed." Not much feels worse than being the
sole slob in a room full of nicely dressed people.
-greg
Agreed, Greg. I don't want to look stuffy, but I refuse to look like a
slob, too.
--
Moni
I am a Nobody.
Nobody is Perfect.
Therefore I am Perfect.
Vandar
2009-08-19 02:33:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by fmomoon
Post by SLGreg
Post by Vandar
Post by Susan
x-no-archie: yes
Post by Vandar
Maybe them, not me. I'm a techie, so "unkempt" is an acceptable dress
code. Just look at Bill Gates.
I'm most productive when I'm comfortable. I've never found suits
comfortable and constricting. Maybe I just need to find a good tailor.
Well, yeah. Techies can show up in their fuzzy slippers and no one
cares. Tom is always thrilled when he has at least one techie
presentable enough to bring on a sales call or with enough social skill
to be permitted to speak to customers on the phone.
Phone calls are easy. It's the face-to-face meetings that suck. For the
first meeting, I usually show up in a dress shirt, pants (real ones),
and shoes. Once I assess the code being followed by those in the
business, I dress accordingly for subsequent meetings unless
specifically requested otherwise.
The best part of my job is I rarely have to meet with clients in person.
That's what consultants are for.
I've always been of the motto: "When in doubt, better to be
overdressed than underdressed." Not much feels worse than being the
sole slob in a room full of nicely dressed people.
-greg
Agreed, Greg. I don't want to look stuffy, but I refuse to look like a
slob, too.
I wouldn't say I look like a slob. It's just that as long as there are
no visual meetings scheduled, unkempt is acceptable.
fmomoon
2009-08-19 03:18:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by fmomoon
Post by SLGreg
Post by Vandar
Post by Susan
x-no-archie: yes
Post by Vandar
Maybe them, not me. I'm a techie, so "unkempt" is an acceptable dress
code. Just look at Bill Gates.
I'm most productive when I'm comfortable. I've never found suits
comfortable and constricting. Maybe I just need to find a good tailor.
Well, yeah. Techies can show up in their fuzzy slippers and no one
cares. Tom is always thrilled when he has at least one techie
presentable enough to bring on a sales call or with enough social skill
to be permitted to speak to customers on the phone.
Phone calls are easy. It's the face-to-face meetings that suck. For the
first meeting, I usually show up in a dress shirt, pants (real ones),
and shoes. Once I assess the code being followed by those in the
business, I dress accordingly for subsequent meetings unless
specifically requested otherwise.
The best part of my job is I rarely have to meet with clients in person.
That's what consultants are for.
I've always been of the motto: "When in doubt, better to be
overdressed than underdressed." Not much feels worse than being the
sole slob in a room full of nicely dressed people.
-greg
Agreed, Greg. I don't want to look stuffy, but I refuse to look like a
slob, too.
I wouldn't say I look like a slob. It's just that as long as there are no
visual meetings scheduled, unkempt is acceptable.
Not saying you would, Vandar, I'm using Greg's word.
--
Moni
I am a Nobody.
Nobody is Perfect.
Therefore I am Perfect.
Bob Rudd
2009-08-19 05:53:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by SLGreg
Post by Vandar
Post by Susan
x-no-archie: yes
Post by Vandar
Maybe them, not me. I'm a techie, so "unkempt" is an acceptable dress
code. Just look at Bill Gates.
I'm most productive when I'm comfortable. I've never found suits
comfortable and constricting. Maybe I just need to find a good tailor.
Well, yeah. Techies can show up in their fuzzy slippers and no one
cares. Tom is always thrilled when he has at least one techie
presentable enough to bring on a sales call or with enough social skill
to be permitted to speak to customers on the phone.
Phone calls are easy. It's the face-to-face meetings that suck. For the
first meeting, I usually show up in a dress shirt, pants (real ones),
and shoes. Once I assess the code being followed by those in the
business, I dress accordingly for subsequent meetings unless
specifically requested otherwise.
The best part of my job is I rarely have to meet with clients in person.
That's what consultants are for.
I've always been of the motto: "When in doubt, better to be
overdressed than underdressed." Not much feels worse than being the
sole slob in a room full of nicely dressed people.
-greg
Very smart thinking on your part, greg. It's like dressing for the job
you want, rather than the one you currently have.
--
I'm thinking of writing a satirically humorous post entitled "My
Colonoscopy."
Susan
2009-08-19 14:07:55 UTC
Permalink
x-no-archive: yes
Post by SLGreg
I've always been of the motto: "When in doubt, better to be
overdressed than underdressed." Not much feels worse than being the
sole slob in a room full of nicely dressed people.
Techies don't even notice the diff!

Susan
Susan
2009-08-19 14:06:14 UTC
Permalink
x-no-archive: yes
Post by Vandar
Phone calls are easy. It's the face-to-face meetings that suck.
Not so much; Tom has found too many techies offend clients with their
phone manner. Some won't even call, so ill at ease with human
interaction. :-)

For the
Post by Vandar
first meeting, I usually show up in a dress shirt, pants (real ones),
and shoes. Once I assess the code being followed by those in the
business, I dress accordingly for subsequent meetings unless
specifically requested otherwise.
The best part of my job is I rarely have to meet with clients in person.
That's what consultants are for.
Yes, it's not for nothing folks choose their professions.

Susan
fmomoon
2009-08-19 02:26:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Susan
x-no-archie: yes
Post by Vandar
Maybe them, not me. I'm a techie, so "unkempt" is an acceptable dress
code. Just look at Bill Gates.
I'm most productive when I'm comfortable. I've never found suits
comfortable and constricting. Maybe I just need to find a good tailor.
Well, yeah. Techies can show up in their fuzzy slippers and no one cares.
Tom is always thrilled when he has at least one techie presentable enough
to bring on a sales call or with enough social skill to be permitted to
speak to customers on the phone.
Susan
When I worked in the large business office for AT&T, I had to wear suits.
So stuffy, but I dealt with it. I would meet with customers about 2 to 3
times a week, at that time, so I needed to be more in line with the sales
reps. I'm so glad I'm out of that rat race.
--
Moni
I am a Nobody.
Nobody is Perfect.
Therefore I am Perfect.
Peach
2009-08-19 14:14:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by fmomoon
Post by Susan
x-no-archie: yes
Post by Vandar
Maybe them, not me. I'm a techie, so "unkempt" is an acceptable dress
code. Just look at Bill Gates.
I'm most productive when I'm comfortable. I've never found suits
comfortable and constricting. Maybe I just need to find a good tailor.
Well, yeah.  Techies can show up in their fuzzy slippers and no one cares.
Tom is always thrilled when he has at least one techie presentable enough
to bring on a sales call or with enough social skill to be permitted to
speak to customers on the phone.
Susan
When I worked in the large business office for AT&T, I had to wear suits.
So stuffy, but I dealt with it.  I would meet with customers about 2 to 3
times a week, at that time, so I needed to be more in line with the sales
reps.  I'm so glad I'm out of that rat race.
--
Moni
I am a Nobody.
Nobody is Perfect.
Therefore I am Perfect.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
I agree! I've worked at home since 1997. There was a stint after
9/11 when our work "dried up." I was forced to get an office job,
right down to the skirts and heels. Luckily, it was only for 6
months, then I got an even better position and went back home. For
that 6 months, though, it was hell.

Peach
Bob Rudd
2009-08-19 16:36:52 UTC
Permalink
In article <baa62a8e-f45e-425a-8b57-
***@z34g2000vbl.googlegroups.com>, ***@lpbroadband.net
says...
Post by Peach
Post by fmomoon
Post by Susan
x-no-archie: yes
Post by Vandar
Maybe them, not me. I'm a techie, so "unkempt" is an acceptable dress
code. Just look at Bill Gates.
I'm most productive when I'm comfortable. I've never found suits
comfortable and constricting. Maybe I just need to find a good tailor.
Well, yeah.  Techies can show up in their fuzzy slippers and no one cares.
Tom is always thrilled when he has at least one techie presentable enough
to bring on a sales call or with enough social skill to be permitted to
speak to customers on the phone.
Susan
When I worked in the large business office for AT&T, I had to wear suits.
So stuffy, but I dealt with it.  I would meet with customers about 2 to 3
times a week, at that time, so I needed to be more in line with the sales
reps.  I'm so glad I'm out of that rat race.
--
Moni
I am a Nobody.
Nobody is Perfect.
Therefore I am Perfect.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
I agree! I've worked at home since 1997. There was a stint after
9/11 when our work "dried up." I was forced to get an office job,
right down to the skirts and heels. Luckily, it was only for 6
months, then I got an even better position and went back home. For
that 6 months, though, it was hell.
Peach
I've lived through a decade of "entire business clothing all the time,"
into "casual Fridays" leading into a "relaxed dress code of *business
casual?* save for meeting with clients, and now into a moderate shift
back into moderate required usage of business clothing.

I think it's all cyclical, really. As we progress more and more into
telecommuting and work from home, as long as one doesn't videoconference
etc., I don't care if anyone works in their pajamas as long as the work
gets done.

I do swear though, that come 1/11 (and hopefully earlier, fingers
crossed), it will be all about, as much as possible, elastic waist Bean
pants, XL puma cotton polo shirts and athletic "shoes" as much as
possible. I'll keep a few suits, etc. but my plan is to donate as much
as possible, my work wardrobe closet's contents to whatever charities
can use them for those who could make the most of them in (re)starting
their business lives/careers over, given the economy etc. I got better
plans for that closet!!!!
--
I'm thinking of writing a satirically humorous post entitled "My
Colonoscopy."
Cheri
2009-08-19 17:53:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Susan
Well, yeah. Techies can show up in their fuzzy slippers and no one cares.
Tom is always thrilled when he has at least one techie presentable enough
to bring on a sales call or with enough social skill to be permitted to
speak to customers on the phone.
Susan
There are such people? A techie that has enough social skills to man a
phone? Who knew. ;-)

Cheri
Susan
2009-08-19 18:25:11 UTC
Permalink
x-n-archive: yes
Post by Cheri
There are such people? A techie that has enough social skills to man a
phone? Who knew. ;-)
Not any more. The single one who did got hired by Google.

Susan
Ron Capik
2009-08-19 01:31:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Vandar
There's nothing more awkward than having to sit a grown adult
down and explain the concept of basic hygiene to him.
I would agree with you on this, also what constitutes appropriate
business attire, particularly with women in more cases than men.
These can be quite challenging subjects to bring forth even with a
good HR Dept.
Proper business attire to me is the same thing you'd wear if you
were playing a round of golf - dress pants and a collared shirt.
Not for working in the White House, it isn't.
It would be if I were elected to work there. ;)
That's the way it was with the Clintons. Every day was casual Friday.
I've never seen a more sloppy, unprofessional looking bunch. And when
you look that way, you tend to act that way, too.
Maybe them, not me. I'm a techie, so "unkempt" is an acceptable dress
code. Just look at Bill Gates.
I'm most productive when I'm comfortable. I've never found suits
comfortable and constricting. Maybe I just need to find a good tailor.
I have to agree with Vandar. From my observations the more basic the
research the more chaotic the lab and the more casual the dress code.


Later...

Ron Capik
--
fmomoon
2009-08-19 02:24:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Vandar
There's nothing more awkward than having to sit a grown adult down
and explain the concept of basic hygiene to him.
I would agree with you on this, also what constitutes appropriate
business attire, particularly with women in more cases than men.
These can be quite challenging subjects to bring forth even with a
good HR Dept.
Proper business attire to me is the same thing you'd wear if you were
playing a round of golf - dress pants and a collared shirt.
Not for working in the White House, it isn't.
It would be if I were elected to work there. ;)
That's the way it was with the Clintons. Every day was casual Friday.
I've never seen a more sloppy, unprofessional looking bunch. And when you
look that way, you tend to act that way, too.
Maybe them, not me. I'm a techie, so "unkempt" is an acceptable dress
code. Just look at Bill Gates.
I'm most productive when I'm comfortable. I've never found suits
comfortable and constricting. Maybe I just need to find a good tailor.
When I first started teaching, I wore skirts every day. Now, I wear pants
90% of the time. Some teachers wear jeans (which I only wear on the casual
"rah rah" sports days), but I still dress up. I don't wear suits, but I do
wear nice jackets and tailored slacks.
--
Moni
I am a Nobody.
Nobody is Perfect.
Therefore I am Perfect.
Bob Rudd
2009-08-19 05:52:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Vandar
Maybe I just need to find a good tailor.
Bring several ounces of gold or silver, depending on what you're having
done. Good tailors these days are definitely expensive.
--
I'm thinking of writing a satirically humorous post entitled "My
Colonoscopy."
Vandar
2009-08-19 00:46:49 UTC
Permalink
The root problem is that "Physical Education" has nothing to do with
education. Having kids play volleyball or run around a track for 40
minutes teaches them *nothing*.
Who says it's about teaching/learning? It's not. It's about getting some
exercise.
It's a class named Physical "Education" and takes place in a school.
It's not a great leap of logic.
Okay, so you're hung up on semantics. A simple name change will solve
that particular problem.
If they changed it to "exercise class" or "sports 101" or what have you,
yes. It still shouldn't be a prerequisite to graduation though.
Ok, a minor disagree here, I think some types of physical activities,
should be a requirement for a high school graduation. It might be
either sufficient participation in a sport sufficient to have earned a
letter, it might be a formalized running and/or weight training program
etc., but something along a physical line should be a requirement.
How about requiring them to take a class on proper nutrition and how to
properly exercise *should you choose to do so*?
Bob Rudd
2009-08-19 05:55:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Vandar
The root problem is that "Physical Education" has nothing to do with
education. Having kids play volleyball or run around a track for 40
minutes teaches them *nothing*.
Who says it's about teaching/learning? It's not. It's about getting some
exercise.
It's a class named Physical "Education" and takes place in a school.
It's not a great leap of logic.
Okay, so you're hung up on semantics. A simple name change will solve
that particular problem.
If they changed it to "exercise class" or "sports 101" or what have you,
yes. It still shouldn't be a prerequisite to graduation though.
Ok, a minor disagree here, I think some types of physical activities,
should be a requirement for a high school graduation. It might be
either sufficient participation in a sport sufficient to have earned a
letter, it might be a formalized running and/or weight training program
etc., but something along a physical line should be a requirement.
How about requiring them to take a class on proper nutrition and how to
properly exercise *should you choose to do so*?
A class in nutrition is fine but I also think requiring physical
exercise is also necessary.
--
I'm thinking of writing a satirically humorous post entitled "My
Colonoscopy."
Peach
2009-08-19 14:12:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Vandar
The root problem is that "Physical Education" has nothing to do with
education. Having kids play volleyball or run around a track for 40
minutes teaches them *nothing*.
Who says it's about teaching/learning? It's not. It's about getting some
exercise.
It's a class named Physical "Education" and takes place in a school.
It's not a great leap of logic.
Okay, so you're hung up on semantics. A simple name change will solve
that particular problem.
If they changed it to "exercise class" or "sports 101" or what have you,
yes. It still shouldn't be a prerequisite to graduation though.
Ok, a minor disagree here, I think some types of physical activities,
should be a requirement for a high school graduation.  It might be
either sufficient participation in a sport sufficient to have earned a
letter, it might be a formalized running and/or weight training program
etc., but something along a physical line should be a requirement.
How about requiring them to take a class on proper nutrition and how to
properly exercise *should you choose to do so*?- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
My daughter's high school has "Health" class for one semester. Pretty
sure that's what that is....so a good thing.

Peach
Lesmond
2009-08-19 00:52:37 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 18 Aug 2009 20:27:16 -0400 (EDT), "Lesmond"
Post by Thanatos
In article
Oh, they can't play dodgeball any more, either. Much to violent. Someone
might get an owie and then sue.
Right, because there's absolutely nothing wrong with the biggest and
strongest kids using the smallest ones for target practice.
See what I mean?
Did that not happen when you played dodgeball as a kid? When I was in school
at least one kid got sent to the nurse everytime we played. I don't find
that acceptable, myself.'
Dodgeball is a horribly cruel, brutal and basically unskilled sport.
Luckily, I was always fairly quick, but some poor stooges were always
singled out for a pummeling, either for being fat/slow or generally
disliked.
Absolutely. I was small, but I was quick and never got hurt. I can't say
that about other unfortunate kids.

Thanatos will likely be along to say that it builds character.



--
The house was full of wildlife and all the pies were gone.
Ryan
2009-08-19 01:02:51 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 18 Aug 2009 20:27:16 -0400 (EDT), "Lesmond"
Did that not happen when you played dodgeball as a kid? When I was in school
at least one kid got sent to the nurse everytime we played. I don't find
that acceptable, myself.
Hmm. That may explain all your unresolved hostility:-)

Ryan
----------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------

ATAI Bragging Rights Champion, 2006


Everything that is ever going to happen,
has already happened.
Tin@

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xj1Xn3VB818
Lesmond
2009-08-19 01:11:11 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 18 Aug 2009 20:27:16 -0400 (EDT), "Lesmond"
Did that not happen when you played dodgeball as a kid? When I was in school
at least one kid got sent to the nurse everytime we played. I don't find
that acceptable, myself.
Hmm. That may explain all your unresolved hostility:-)
Hmmm. Yes, that makes perfect sense. The reason I stick up for victims of
aggression and violence is because I have unresolved hostility.

Let me guess...you majored in Logic at school.



--
The house was full of wildlife and all the pies were gone.
Lesmond
2009-08-19 01:14:40 UTC
Permalink
As I think others, including myself, have mentioned, cell phones are not
allowed at many schools, including my own. This hasn't stopped a thing.
Short of patting down every student as they enter the building, it is an
unenforceable rule.
No more unenforceable than the ban on chewing gum when I went through.
Somehow teachers always managed to find it.
It's because you were chewing. They could see it.

And losing a $300 iPhone is
a more bitter pill to swallow than losing a pack of gum. Wouldn't take
too many kids losing them before the word would get out.
It also sounds completely illegal to me. They can and do confiscate them,
but they have to give them back.

By the way, I never saw a kid lose a pack of gum. They just had to spit out
what they were chewing. Did they frisk the kids for the gum?



--
The house was full of wildlife and all the pies were gone.
Lesmond
2009-08-19 01:17:48 UTC
Permalink
Butt cracks though.... no offense taken by me. Everyone has had a
moment of two such as that, whether from a repairman or themselves.
It's a smile and a stifled laugh. ;-)
That's because it usually a male thing, and not "everyone" has had a moment
or two such as that. Thankfully.
Cheri
It happens to men because men grow fat tummys (as opposed to what
"blossoms" on women), which forces men's pants to ride UNDER their
bellies (unless you're into the Fred Mertz look with pants pulled up
to your tits), thus handily exposing their buttcracks when bending
over, etc.
Most times it can't be helped, but many women seem to think it's
somehow a voluntary action men choose and is more avoidable than it
actually is.
Yes, I know this from experience, as my belly has grown over the
years.
Have you tried suspenders?



--
The house was full of wildlife and all the pies were gone.
SLGreg
2009-08-19 01:25:48 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 18 Aug 2009 21:17:48 -0400 (EDT), "Lesmond"
Post by Lesmond
Butt cracks though.... no offense taken by me. Everyone has had a
moment of two such as that, whether from a repairman or themselves.
It's a smile and a stifled laugh. ;-)
That's because it usually a male thing, and not "everyone" has had a moment
or two such as that. Thankfully.
Cheri
It happens to men because men grow fat tummys (as opposed to what
"blossoms" on women), which forces men's pants to ride UNDER their
bellies (unless you're into the Fred Mertz look with pants pulled up
to your tits), thus handily exposing their buttcracks when bending
over, etc.
Most times it can't be helped, but many women seem to think it's
somehow a voluntary action men choose and is more avoidable than it
actually is.
Yes, I know this from experience, as my belly has grown over the
years.
Have you tried suspenders?
Jesus, I'm not THAT fat. Do you think I actually LOOK like Walter
Brennan ;=)

Don't answer that!

-greg
fmomoon
2009-08-19 03:13:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by SLGreg
On Tue, 18 Aug 2009 21:17:48 -0400 (EDT), "Lesmond"
Post by Lesmond
Butt cracks though.... no offense taken by me. Everyone has had a
moment of two such as that, whether from a repairman or themselves.
It's a smile and a stifled laugh. ;-)
That's because it usually a male thing, and not "everyone" has had a moment
or two such as that. Thankfully.
Cheri
It happens to men because men grow fat tummys (as opposed to what
"blossoms" on women), which forces men's pants to ride UNDER their
bellies (unless you're into the Fred Mertz look with pants pulled up
to your tits), thus handily exposing their buttcracks when bending
over, etc.
Most times it can't be helped, but many women seem to think it's
somehow a voluntary action men choose and is more avoidable than it
actually is.
Yes, I know this from experience, as my belly has grown over the
years.
Have you tried suspenders?
Jesus, I'm not THAT fat. Do you think I actually LOOK like Walter
Brennan ;=)
Don't answer that!
-greg
No you don't, Greg. You, also, are not fat in the least!
--
Moni
I am a Nobody.
Nobody is Perfect.
Therefore I am Perfect.
Bob Rudd
2009-08-19 04:53:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by SLGreg
On Tue, 18 Aug 2009 21:17:48 -0400 (EDT), "Lesmond"
Post by Lesmond
Butt cracks though.... no offense taken by me. Everyone has had a
moment of two such as that, whether from a repairman or themselves.
It's a smile and a stifled laugh. ;-)
That's because it usually a male thing, and not "everyone" has had a moment
or two such as that. Thankfully.
Cheri
It happens to men because men grow fat tummys (as opposed to what
"blossoms" on women), which forces men's pants to ride UNDER their
bellies (unless you're into the Fred Mertz look with pants pulled up
to your tits), thus handily exposing their buttcracks when bending
over, etc.
Most times it can't be helped, but many women seem to think it's
somehow a voluntary action men choose and is more avoidable than it
actually is.
Yes, I know this from experience, as my belly has grown over the
years.
Have you tried suspenders?
Jesus, I'm not THAT fat. Do you think I actually LOOK like Walter
Brennan ;=)
Don't answer that!
-greg
Hey, good suspenders are a great look, especially with a bow-tie in the
summer.
--
I'm thinking of writing a satirically humorous post entitled "My
Colonoscopy."
Cheri
2009-08-19 17:56:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bob Rudd
Hey, good suspenders are a great look, especially with a bow-tie in the
summer.
Now you sound like Ina Garten. ;-)

Cheri
Bob Rudd
2009-08-19 18:12:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Cheri
Post by Bob Rudd
Hey, good suspenders are a great look, especially with a bow-tie in the
summer.
Now you sound like Ina Garten. ;-)
Cheri
Until her most recent new season, I've always liked that show. ;-)

(what I really would like is Jeffrey's money!)
--
I'm thinking of writing a satirically humorous post entitled "My
Colonoscopy."
Cheri
2009-08-19 19:21:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bob Rudd
Post by Cheri
Post by Bob Rudd
Hey, good suspenders are a great look, especially with a bow-tie in the
summer.
Now you sound like Ina Garten. ;-)
Cheri
Until her most recent new season, I've always liked that show. ;-)
(what I really would like is Jeffrey's money!)
Jeffrey? I imagine Ina has made a fortune with all of her cookbooks,
catering for the "in crowd," T.V. show, endorsements etc., what exactly does
Jeffrey do, except drool over Ina's cooking? I know he's only home on the
weekends, but I don't think I ever heard what he does.

Cheri
Susan
2009-08-19 19:37:17 UTC
Permalink
x-no-archive: yes
Post by Cheri
Jeffrey? I imagine Ina has made a fortune with all of her cookbooks,
catering for the "in crowd," T.V. show, endorsements etc., what exactly
does Jeffrey do, except drool over Ina's cooking? I know he's only home
on the weekends, but I don't think I ever heard what he does.
He teaches at Yale school of business, and has authored some business books.

I'm sure she's the big bread winner at this point.

Susan
Peach
2009-08-19 18:53:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Cheri
Post by Bob Rudd
Hey, good suspenders are a great look, especially with a bow-tie in the
summer.
Now you sound like Ina Garten. ;-)
Cheri
Ugh...hate that odious woman.

Peach
Cheri
2009-08-19 19:22:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Cheri
Post by Bob Rudd
Hey, good suspenders are a great look, especially with a bow-tie in the
summer.
Now you sound like Ina Garten. ;-)
Cheri
Ugh...hate that odious woman.

Peach

==========

Really? I just love her. She's very calming and easy going when she's
cooking, but she does use only the "good" stuff. :-)

Cheri
Susan
2009-08-19 19:38:51 UTC
Permalink
x-no-archive: yes
Post by Cheri
Really? I just love her. She's very calming and easy going when she's
cooking, but she does use only the "good" stuff. :-)
But she often suggests more pedestrian substitutes.

I like her soothing manner and relaxed, unfussy approach to food. She
has the same relaxed approach to measuring stuff that I do, too.

Susan
Peach
2009-08-19 20:00:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Susan
x-no-archive: yes
Post by Cheri
Really? I just love her. She's very calming and easy going when she's
cooking, but she does use only the "good" stuff. :-)
But she often suggests more pedestrian substitutes.
I like her soothing manner and relaxed, unfussy approach to food.  She
has the same relaxed approach to measuring stuff that I do, too.
Susan
I hate her voice....it aggravates me like you wouldn't believe, to the
point I want to jab ice picks in my ears. Mainly because I'm a voice
person, and her voice is incongruous when one sees what she looks
like. I watched one episode where she was having a group of friends
over to play bridge at her house in the Hamptons. All I can say to
this is...give me a break.

Surprisingly, do a search on Ina Garten....people seem to hate her as
much as Raechel Ray (who I also do not like, voice having something to
do with it, as well.) Everyone else on Food Network is pretty cool,
though. ;-)

A few Ina pages:
http://pophangover.com/?p=859
http://theneedsofthefew.blogspot.com/2007/05/needs-of-sophie-i-hate-ina-garten.html

Peach
Susan
2009-08-19 20:06:54 UTC
Permalink
x-no-archive: yes
Post by Peach
I hate her voice....it aggravates me like you wouldn't believe, to the
point I want to jab ice picks in my ears. Mainly because I'm a voice
person, and her voice is incongruous when one sees what she looks
like. I watched one episode where she was having a group of friends
over to play bridge at her house in the Hamptons. All I can say to
this is...give me a break.
Her whole show is based upon making food easy but wonderful and sharing
it with friends and family. And she catered and had a shop, so her show
reflects her life and her profession. Sometimes it's about testing
recipes and having her staff taste for her. Just vignettes from her
life, I don't see why that's an odd way to make a show.
Post by Peach
Surprisingly, do a search on Ina Garten....people seem to hate her as
much as Raechel Ray (who I also do not like, voice having something to
do with it, as well.) Everyone else on Food Network is pretty cool,
though. ;-)
I was shocked to learn that some folks find her really irritating. I
don't care for the manner of Giada DeLaurentis, but I don't hate her or
anything. I can't take a minute of RR, and I think her food looks
disgusting. Same for Sandra Lee. So far, Ina's the one whose food
appeals to me the most and whose recipes have been standout hits when
I've made them.

I think folks have strong feelings about a lot of celeb chefs who they
seem to love or hate, nothing in between. I just think of Ina as so low
key and easy that I found it surprising that some folks don't like her
or think she's snooty.

Susan
Peach
2009-08-19 20:19:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Susan
x-no-archive: yes
Post by Peach
I hate her voice....it aggravates me like you wouldn't believe, to the
point I want to jab ice picks in my ears.  Mainly because I'm a voice
person, and her voice is incongruous when one sees what she looks
like.  I watched one episode where she was having a group of friends
over to play bridge at her house in the Hamptons. All I can say to
this is...give me a break.
Her whole show is based upon making food easy but wonderful and sharing
it with friends and family.  And she catered and had a shop, so her show
reflects her life and her profession.  Sometimes it's about testing
recipes and having her staff taste for her.  Just vignettes from her
life, I don't see why that's an odd way to make a show.
Post by Peach
Surprisingly, do a search on Ina Garten....people seem to hate her as
much as Raechel Ray (who I also do not like, voice having something to
do with it, as well.)  Everyone else on Food Network is pretty cool,
though. ;-)
I was shocked to learn that some folks find her really irritating.  I
don't care for the manner of Giada DeLaurentis, but I don't hate her or
anything.  I can't take a minute of RR, and I think her food looks
disgusting.  Same for Sandra Lee.  So far, Ina's the one whose food
appeals to me the most and whose recipes have been standout hits when
I've made them.
I think folks have strong feelings about a lot of celeb chefs who they
seem to love or hate, nothing in between.  I just think of Ina as so low
key and easy that I found it surprising that some folks don't like her
or think she's snooty.
Susan
I don't really hate anyone. ;-) But she does annoy me. I don't
necessarily sense the pretentiousness that everyone else does, though
she is clearly upper class, it's just that *voice.* :-)

Peach
Susan
2009-08-19 19:23:03 UTC
Permalink
x-no-archive: yes
Post by Peach
Ugh...hate that odious woman.
I like her a lot. And I LOVE her recipes; the ones I've used have been
amazing.

Susan
Lesmond
2009-08-19 05:25:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by SLGreg
On Tue, 18 Aug 2009 21:17:48 -0400 (EDT), "Lesmond"
Post by Lesmond
Butt cracks though.... no offense taken by me. Everyone has had a
moment of two such as that, whether from a repairman or themselves.
It's a smile and a stifled laugh. ;-)
That's because it usually a male thing, and not "everyone" has had a moment
or two such as that. Thankfully.
Cheri
It happens to men because men grow fat tummys (as opposed to what
"blossoms" on women), which forces men's pants to ride UNDER their
bellies (unless you're into the Fred Mertz look with pants pulled up
to your tits), thus handily exposing their buttcracks when bending
over, etc.
Most times it can't be helped, but many women seem to think it's
somehow a voluntary action men choose and is more avoidable than it
actually is.
Yes, I know this from experience, as my belly has grown over the
years.
Have you tried suspenders?
Jesus, I'm not THAT fat. Do you think I actually LOOK like Walter
Brennan ;=)
Don't answer that!
I think color coordinated suspenders are sexy.



--
The house was full of wildlife and all the pies were gone.
Suzy
2009-08-19 19:04:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by SLGreg
On Tue, 18 Aug 2009 21:17:48 -0400 (EDT), "Lesmond"
Post by Lesmond
Butt cracks though.... no offense taken by me. Everyone has had a
moment of two such as that, whether from a repairman or themselves.
It's a smile and a stifled laugh. ;-)
That's because it usually a male thing, and not "everyone" has had a moment
or two such as that. Thankfully.
Cheri
It happens to men because men grow fat tummys (as opposed to what
"blossoms" on women), which forces men's pants to ride UNDER their
bellies (unless you're into the Fred Mertz look with pants pulled up
to your tits), thus handily exposing their buttcracks when bending
over, etc.
Most times it can't be helped, but many women seem to think it's
somehow a voluntary action men choose and is more avoidable than it
actually is.
Yes, I know this from experience, as my belly has grown over the
years.
Have you tried suspenders?
Jesus, I'm not THAT fat. Do you think I actually LOOK like Walter
Brennan ;=)
Don't answer that!
-greg
Larry King is the suspenders man today :-)

No, you don't look like Larry King either!
--
Susie
Time flies when you are having rum!
Lesmond
2009-08-19 01:25:08 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 18 Aug 2009 17:23:04 -0600, "Suzanne D."
And in fact, bathing TOO often can
remove
good bacteria and make you sick!
--S.
Oh, for god's sake. Now we've gotten to the point where taking a shower
after a PT session is dangerous to the wee ones' health?
No. We've gotten to the revelation that a little sweat isn't going to hurt
you.
But the question is not whether a little sweat is going to hurt
anyone. The question is whether bathing too often can remove good
bacteria and make you sick as you clearly asserted as fact.
Citation please.
The first hit on Google for "bathe too much" is
this:

http://chestofbooks.com/health/natural-cure/Health-Without-Medicine/On-Bathing
.html

Which states in part:

"Too frequent bathing does injury by stimulating the pores of the skin too
much. When the skin acts naturally, it constantly throws off, by insensible
perspiration or exhalation, a substance which it is necessary the system
should part with for the continuance of life and health. When, from any
cause, that exhalation is impeded, the system suffers by being oppressed with
that which should be thrown off. But if the skin be made too active, it
throws off too much -- more than is required, and more than the system can
afford to spare: hence the system is gradually weakened."

;)



--
The house was full of wildlife and all the pies were gone.
Suzanne D.
2009-08-19 03:33:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lesmond
The first hit on Google for "bathe too much" is
http://chestofbooks.com/health/natural-cure/Health-Without-Medicine/On-Bathing
.html
"Too frequent bathing does injury by stimulating the pores of the skin too
much. When the skin acts naturally, it constantly throws off, by insensible
perspiration or exhalation, a substance which it is necessary the system
should part with for the continuance of life and health. When, from any
cause, that exhalation is impeded, the system suffers by being oppressed with
that which should be thrown off. But if the skin be made too active, it
throws off too much -- more than is required, and more than the system can
afford to spare: hence the system is gradually weakened."
I thought it was fairly well-known that too much bathing upsets the balance
of your skin, washes away too much healthy bacteria, and dries your skin
enough to injure it slightly and thus make it more susceptible to infection.
I didn't know about the above, though. I think I heard something similar
(much more recently and in modern language!) about how it is unwise to use
antiperspirants, because they block the sweat from coming out of the pores,
and this isn't good for the body. I love the old-fashioned writing of the
book, though. It's like they sort of knew what was going on, yet didn't
quite know how to explain it.
--S.
Ryan
2009-08-19 04:20:30 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 18 Aug 2009 21:33:32 -0600, "Suzanne D."
Post by Suzanne D.
Post by Lesmond
The first hit on Google for "bathe too much" is
http://chestofbooks.com/health/natural-cure/Health-Without-Medicine/On-Bathing
.html
"Too frequent bathing does injury by stimulating the pores of the skin too
much. When the skin acts naturally, it constantly throws off, by insensible
perspiration or exhalation, a substance which it is necessary the system
should part with for the continuance of life and health. When, from any
cause, that exhalation is impeded, the system suffers by being oppressed with
that which should be thrown off. But if the skin be made too active, it
throws off too much -- more than is required, and more than the system can
afford to spare: hence the system is gradually weakened."
I thought it was fairly well-known that too much bathing upsets the balance
of your skin, washes away too much healthy bacteria, and dries your skin
enough to injure it slightly and thus make it more susceptible to infection.
I didn't know about the above, though. I think I heard something similar
(much more recently and in modern language!) about how it is unwise to use
antiperspirants, because they block the sweat from coming out of the pores,
and this isn't good for the body. I love the old-fashioned writing of the
book, though. It's like they sort of knew what was going on, yet didn't
quite know how to explain it.
--S.
I was going to respond to Lesmond's reply earlier but waited because I
figured Suzanne would believe this nonsense.

Just because someone posts something on the internet does not make it
true.

The only way to make your skin more susceptible to infection is to
break the barrier. Simple washing would not do that unless you really
scrubbed hard with some abrasive or washed for hours at a time.

Some people who suffer from OCD will wash their hands until they bleed
but this is an extreme situation.

Frequent bathing, say 2-3 times per day is not harmful.

Suzanne originally talked about getting rid of good bacteria that will
make the body more susceptible to infection. There are no "good
bacteria" on the surface of the skin that are protective. There ARE
good bacteria in the GI tract that are important but that is very
different than skin bacteria.

I thought that Suzanne educated herself about medical matters since
she is averse to going to physicians. I guess one must wonder about
the source of her information.



Ryan
----------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------

ATAI Bragging Rights Champion, 2006


Everything that is ever going to happen,
has already happened.
Tin@

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xj1Xn3VB818
Lesmond
2009-08-19 05:24:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ryan
On Tue, 18 Aug 2009 21:33:32 -0600, "Suzanne D."
Post by Suzanne D.
Post by Lesmond
The first hit on Google for "bathe too much" is
http://chestofbooks.com/health/natural-cure/Health-Without-Medicine/On-Bathing
.html
"Too frequent bathing does injury by stimulating the pores of the skin too
much. When the skin acts naturally, it constantly throws off, by insensible
perspiration or exhalation, a substance which it is necessary the system
should part with for the continuance of life and health. When, from any
cause, that exhalation is impeded, the system suffers by being oppressed with
that which should be thrown off. But if the skin be made too active, it
throws off too much -- more than is required, and more than the system can
afford to spare: hence the system is gradually weakened."
I thought it was fairly well-known that too much bathing upsets the balance
of your skin, washes away too much healthy bacteria, and dries your skin
enough to injure it slightly and thus make it more susceptible to infection.
I didn't know about the above, though. I think I heard something similar
(much more recently and in modern language!) about how it is unwise to use
antiperspirants, because they block the sweat from coming out of the pores,
and this isn't good for the body. I love the old-fashioned writing of the
book, though. It's like they sort of knew what was going on, yet didn't
quite know how to explain it.
--S.
I was going to respond to Lesmond's reply earlier but waited because I
figured Suzanne would believe this nonsense.
Just because someone posts something on the internet does not make it
true.
Whoosh.




--
The house was full of wildlife and all the pies were gone.
Suzanne D.
2009-08-19 19:06:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lesmond
Post by Ryan
Just because someone posts something on the internet does not make it
true.
Whoosh.
Not a lot of people could get by with demanding a cite, and then immediately
following that demand with the sneer that just because it's on the internet
doesn't make it true.
--S.
Ryan
2009-08-19 19:27:50 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 19 Aug 2009 13:06:32 -0600, "Suzanne D."
Post by Suzanne D.
Post by Lesmond
Post by Ryan
Just because someone posts something on the internet does not make it
true.
Whoosh.
Not a lot of people could get by with demanding a cite, and then immediately
following that demand with the sneer that just because it's on the internet
doesn't make it true.
--S.
You asserted that frequent bathing is harmful because the washing gets
rid of good bacteria. I asked for a citation. You have yet to provide
one that passes the giggle test.

But interestingly you have ALSO said at some other time that you think
that the most important preventative health measure is washing of the
hands. This I actually agree with.

Lesmond came up with an article that agreed that frequent washing is
harmful as it gets rid of some "substance" which is beneficial to the
body. I asked for a scientific citation for *that* assertion.

Then I said that you cannot believe everything you read on the
disinformation highway. This is true. If there is objective evidence
that frequent (within reason of course) bathing/washing is harmful, I
have yet to see it.

Seems to me that my comments and requests for citations are quite
reasonable.

Ryan
----------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------

ATAI Bragging Rights Champion, 2006


Everything that is ever going to happen,
has already happened.
Tin@

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xj1Xn3VB818
Lesmond
2009-08-19 05:24:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Suzanne D.
Post by Lesmond
The first hit on Google for "bathe too much" is
http://chestofbooks.com/health/natural-cure/Health-Without-Medicine/On-Bathing
.html
"Too frequent bathing does injury by stimulating the pores of the skin too
much. When the skin acts naturally, it constantly throws off, by insensible
perspiration or exhalation, a substance which it is necessary the system
should part with for the continuance of life and health. When, from any
cause, that exhalation is impeded, the system suffers by being oppressed with
that which should be thrown off. But if the skin be made too active, it
throws off too much -- more than is required, and more than the system can
afford to spare: hence the system is gradually weakened."
I thought it was fairly well-known that too much bathing upsets the balance
of your skin, washes away too much healthy bacteria, and dries your skin
enough to injure it slightly and thus make it more susceptible to infection.
Americans seem to be unique in needing so many moisturizing products. We
strip our skins of the essential oils and then try to replace them. I'm
fairly confident that daily bathing is not a health danger, but it does
enrich the cosmetic companies. I have very dry skin. I do not bathe every
day. I've never had a complaint. I won't even get started on my hair.
Post by Suzanne D.
I didn't know about the above, though. I think I heard something similar
(much more recently and in modern language!) about how it is unwise to use
antiperspirants, because they block the sweat from coming out of the pores,
and this isn't good for the body.
Sure. Clogged pores can lead to sebaceous cysts. They are extremely
unpleasant. But both a lack of washing or overuse of antiperspirants can
lead to such. Normal cleanliness with a plain deodorant prevents them and
stinking, too. I'm willing to bet these guys who claim you *must* shower
constantly are the ones who refuse to use a deodorant. I used to date a guy
like that. Hell, my dad was like that.

I love the old-fashioned writing of the
Post by Suzanne D.
book, though. It's like they sort of knew what was going on, yet didn't
quite know how to explain it.
Well, it was written in 1848. But they had an idea.



--
The house was full of wildlife and all the pies were gone.
Suzanne D.
2009-08-19 09:36:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lesmond
Americans seem to be unique in needing so many moisturizing products. We
strip our skins of the essential oils and then try to replace them.
Absolutely. Using soap too often (in the case of kids who take a half-assed
shower at school and then a real shower at home, twice a day, which may be
too often) can dry out the skin enough to cause rough patches and rashes
that can become infected. We have oils on our skin for a reason--they
protect it. There is a school of thought that says one of the best ways to
aggravate acne is to wash it too much, because the resulting dryness causes
tiny openings in the skin that can get infected and exacerbate the cysts
that are already there.
Post by Lesmond
I have very dry skin. I do not bathe every
day. I've never had a complaint.
I never use soap on my face and try to avoid it on my arms. I usually just
scrub my face with cool water and my fingers when I take a shower. My skin
isn't particularly dry, but why should I make it so by using soap on it?
Post by Lesmond
I'm willing to bet these guys who claim you *must* shower
constantly are the ones who refuse to use a deodorant.
I think the two best quick-fixes after I am outside all day are to use
deodorant, and more importantly, to change my clothes. It is AMAZING how
much odor clothes absorb. Changing into a clean t-shirt usually gets rid of
it all for me.
--S.
Cheri
2009-08-19 01:56:48 UTC
Permalink
Butt cracks though.... no offense taken by me. Everyone has had a
moment of two such as that, whether from a repairman or themselves.
It's a smile and a stifled laugh. ;-)
That's because it usually a male thing, and not "everyone" has had a
moment
or two such as that. Thankfully.
Cheri
It happens to men because men grow fat tummys (as opposed to what
"blossoms" on women), which forces men's pants to ride UNDER their
bellies (unless you're into the Fred Mertz look with pants pulled up
to your tits), thus handily exposing their buttcracks when bending
over, etc.
Most times it can't be helped, but many women seem to think it's
somehow a voluntary action men choose and is more avoidable than it
actually is.
Yes, I know this from experience, as my belly has grown over the
years.
-greg
Did you know that there are longer shirts for people in the trades listed
specifically in the catalog for that problem? There are. :-)

Cheri
zob
2009-08-19 04:18:50 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 18 Aug 2009 18:56:48 -0700, "Cheri" <***@newsguy.com>
wrote

Cheri, I don't know if your ever saw my website way back when we were
posting on the ASDLC newsgroup. This is the large picture I had on my
homepage:

Loading Image...

:-)
---
Zob
Cheri
2009-08-19 18:07:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by zob
Cheri, I don't know if your ever saw my website way back when we were
posting on the ASDLC newsgroup. This is the large picture I had on my
http://zob1.hostrator.com/crack.jpg
:-)
---
Zob
Yes, I did see it zob, I got a huge laugh out of it.

Cheri
fmomoon
2009-08-19 02:22:04 UTC
Permalink
There's nothing more awkward than having to sit a grown adult down and
explain the concept of basic hygiene to him.
I would agree with you on this, also what constitutes appropriate
business attire, particularly with women in more cases than men. These
can be quite challenging subjects to bring forth even with a good HR
Dept.
Proper business attire to me is the same thing you'd wear if you were
playing a round of golf - dress pants and a collared shirt.
Not for working in the White House, it isn't.
Do they ever let you wear anything besides a black suit? Maybe, I don't
know, tan?
--
Moni
I am a Nobody.
Nobody is Perfect.
Therefore I am Perfect.
Bob Rudd
2009-08-19 05:57:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by fmomoon
There's nothing more awkward than having to sit a grown adult down and
explain the concept of basic hygiene to him.
I would agree with you on this, also what constitutes appropriate
business attire, particularly with women in more cases than men. These
can be quite challenging subjects to bring forth even with a good HR
Dept.
Proper business attire to me is the same thing you'd wear if you were
playing a round of golf - dress pants and a collared shirt.
Not for working in the White House, it isn't.
Do they ever let you wear anything besides a black suit? Maybe, I don't
know, tan?
Depends on the color of the weapons that the Secret Service agents are
carrying that day. ;-)

(One of my buds, once told me that black "provides the best cover for
weapons" as the reason they wear so much black..... Thanatos will
probably weigh in, pro or con, I'm sure).
--
I'm thinking of writing a satirically humorous post entitled "My
Colonoscopy."
fmomoon
2009-08-19 02:29:00 UTC
Permalink
Funny, as this thread moved forward, I was thinking about you. Being
MYOB nosy.....do you get a clothing allowance?
Yep, it's called my salary.
:) Now, that made me smile. My daughter said that the clothing allowance
was always one of the perks of being in the military. She likes wearing a
uniform so she doesn't have to make decisions at 6 a.m. as to what to wear
that day.
--
Moni
I am a Nobody.
Nobody is Perfect.
Therefore I am Perfect.
fmomoon
2009-08-19 02:30:45 UTC
Permalink
The root problem is that "Physical Education" has nothing to do with
education. Having kids play volleyball or run around a track for 40
minutes teaches them *nothing*.
Who says it's about teaching/learning? It's not. It's about getting
some
exercise.
It's a class named Physical "Education" and takes place in a school.
It's not a great leap of logic.
I think phys-ed has become a joke in most schools today. It's usually
throw out a group of balls (dodge, basketball, kickballs) and little
else from what I've observed through the years.
I liked college PE where I went to school in Mass. Six PE credits per
year were required to graduate, but besides the usual sports
activities like baseball, volleyball and gymnastics we got to choose
from activities like bowling, ballroom dancing and cross-country
skiing. We had to pay for the PE activities just like any other
college course).
---
Zob- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Yep! I took ballet and bowling. :-)

Peach
-------
I took swimming and modern dance. Needless to say, I swim about as well as
I dance, so it obviously did a lot of good.
--
Moni
I am a Nobody.
Nobody is Perfect.
Therefore I am Perfect.
Peach
2009-08-19 14:15:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by fmomoon
The root problem is that "Physical Education" has nothing to do with
education. Having kids play volleyball or run around a track for 40
minutes teaches them *nothing*.
Who says it's about teaching/learning? It's not. It's about getting
some
exercise.
It's a class named Physical "Education" and takes place in a school.
It's not a great leap of logic.
I think phys-ed has become a joke in most schools today. It's usually
throw out a group of balls (dodge, basketball, kickballs) and little
else from what I've observed through the years.
I liked college PE where I went to school in Mass. Six PE credits per
year were required to graduate, but besides the usual sports
activities like baseball, volleyball and gymnastics we got to choose
from activities like bowling, ballroom dancing and cross-country
skiing. We had to pay for the PE activities just like any other
college course).
---
Zob- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Yep! I took ballet and bowling. :-)
Peach
-------
I took swimming and modern dance.  Needless to say, I swim about as well as
I dance, so it obviously did a lot of good.
--
Moni
I am a Nobody.
Nobody is Perfect.
Therefore I am Perfect.-
Me, too! (I ballet as good as I bowl.) ;-) But I really did love
taking ballet.... made me feel like a princess. :-)

Peach
Ron Capik
2009-08-19 16:35:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peach
Post by fmomoon
The root problem is that "Physical Education" has nothing to do with
education. Having kids play volleyball or run around a track for 40
minutes teaches them *nothing*.
Who says it's about teaching/learning? It's not. It's about getting
some
exercise.
It's a class named Physical "Education" and takes place in a school.
It's not a great leap of logic.
I think phys-ed has become a joke in most schools today. It's usually
throw out a group of balls (dodge, basketball, kickballs) and little
else from what I've observed through the years.
I liked college PE where I went to school in Mass. Six PE credits per
year were required to graduate, but besides the usual sports
activities like baseball, volleyball and gymnastics we got to choose
from activities like bowling, ballroom dancing and cross-country
skiing. We had to pay for the PE activities just like any other
college course).
---
Zob- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Yep! I took ballet and bowling. :-)
Peach
-------
I took swimming and modern dance. Needless to say, I swim about as well as
I dance, so it obviously did a lot of good.
--
Moni
I am a Nobody.
Nobody is Perfect.
Therefore I am Perfect.-
Me, too! (I ballet as good as I bowl.) ;-) But I really did love
taking ballet.... made me feel like a princess. :-)
Peach
Hey, I took ballet some time ago ...but it was in snow, on skis.
Never ever made me feel like a princess. :-)


Later...

Ron Capik
--
Suzy
2009-08-19 19:45:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by fmomoon
The root problem is that "Physical Education" has nothing to do with
education. Having kids play volleyball or run around a track for 40
minutes teaches them *nothing*.
Who says it's about teaching/learning? It's not. It's about getting
some
exercise.
It's a class named Physical "Education" and takes place in a school.
It's not a great leap of logic.
I think phys-ed has become a joke in most schools today. It's usually
throw out a group of balls (dodge, basketball, kickballs) and little
else from what I've observed through the years.
I liked college PE where I went to school in Mass. Six PE credits per
year were required to graduate, but besides the usual sports
activities like baseball, volleyball and gymnastics we got to choose
from activities like bowling, ballroom dancing and cross-country
skiing. We had to pay for the PE activities just like any other
college course).
---
Zob- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Yep! I took ballet and bowling. :-)
Peach
-------
I took swimming and modern dance. Needless to say, I swim about as well
as I dance, so it obviously did a lot of good.
--
Moni
You really should have gotten together with Peach and taken water ballet.
--
Susie
Time flies when you are having rum!
Suzy
2009-08-19 02:33:51 UTC
Permalink
I wish they had done that when I was in school lol no showering after
gym class but it was something we had to do I guess I was shy back
then and I didnt wanna take off my clothes in front of people and we
didnt even have shower curtains made it worse lol ,It wouldnt bother me
now to take one but back then it sure did but had to do it :)
We had plenty of showers, but no curtains. Good thing it wasn't mandatory
back in the dark ages. Besides, I was one of those who wasn't going to
break a sweat. After all, I might mess up my hair! My daughter is the same
way only 10 times worse. I'm not sure she has any sweat glands. If she
does I have never seen any evidence of it. Not gonna sweat, not gonna mess
up her hair, not gonna mess up her makeup.

And now that I think of it, I still wouldn't have showered even with
curtains. I'm really strange about public showers, bathrooms, pools, all
that sort of thing.
--
Susie
Time flies when you are having rum!
fmomoon
2009-08-19 02:36:47 UTC
Permalink
PE is a waste of time and resources. Having it be required for
graduation is beyond stupid.
That's a very shortsighted view. It's important that in school students
not only develop their minds, but also develop their bodies so they are
in good working order as they become adults.
It's not a school's job to develop a child's body, only assist in
developing their mind.
Says who?
Me, as there is no law dictating that schools are responsible for the
development of a child's body. If they were, the parents of kids who
graduate fat could sue the school.
The fact that childhood obesity is such an issue even though PE is
required only shows that PE doesn't serve any purpose.
But it's not required anymore in many, many places. Hence the obesity
problem.
Among others, it's required in every school in KY, TN, and WA. Those being
the states with highest rate of childhood obesity in the country.
I believe the ancient tenants as to why PE is in the schools may go as far
back as Roman or Greek history. PE (called something else then) was
considered necessary for men (never mentioned women) to be able to clear the
mind so they could think properly. In the classic style of education, PE
was considered as educating the whole child as in "a healthy body leads to a
healthy mind."

In a high school setting, I certainly see the reasons for PE. We don't have
recess anymore, but that doesn't mean our hormonally challenged students
don't need physical activity after sitting at a desk for a period of time.
I had an English class after lunch one year where half the varsity soccer
team was in my room. They were beyond squirrelly. Once in a while, I'd ask
if anyone needed to do a lap around the parking lot so that we could all
settle down to work. I always had four or five boys race out the door to
see if they could beat each other in their "lap." After they came back in,
always smiling, they settled down and went right to work. YMMV
--
Moni
I am a Nobody.
Nobody is Perfect.
Therefore I am Perfect.
Vandar
2009-08-19 02:46:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by fmomoon
PE is a waste of time and resources. Having it be required for
graduation is beyond stupid.
That's a very shortsighted view. It's important that in school
students not only develop their minds, but also develop their
bodies so they are in good working order as they become adults.
It's not a school's job to develop a child's body, only assist in
developing their mind.
Says who?
Me, as there is no law dictating that schools are responsible for the
development of a child's body. If they were, the parents of kids who
graduate fat could sue the school.
The fact that childhood obesity is such an issue even though PE is
required only shows that PE doesn't serve any purpose.
But it's not required anymore in many, many places. Hence the obesity
problem.
Among others, it's required in every school in KY, TN, and WA. Those
being the states with highest rate of childhood obesity in the country.
I believe the ancient tenants as to why PE is in the schools may go as
far back as Roman or Greek history. PE (called something else then)
Lion wrangling?
Post by fmomoon
was
considered necessary for men (never mentioned women) to be able to clear
the mind so they could think properly. In the classic style of
education, PE was considered as educating the whole child as in "a
healthy body leads to a healthy mind."
In a high school setting, I certainly see the reasons for PE. We don't
have recess anymore, but that doesn't mean our hormonally challenged
students don't need physical activity after sitting at a desk for a
period of time. I had an English class after lunch one year where half
the varsity soccer team was in my room. They were beyond squirrelly.
Once in a while, I'd ask if anyone needed to do a lap around the parking
lot so that we could all settle down to work. I always had four or five
boys race out the door to see if they could beat each other in their
"lap." After they came back in, always smiling, they settled down and
went right to work. YMMV
I would've walked to my car and had a cigarette. :)

Seriously though, a 5 minute break is good, but your students needed
that lap while still having a PE class that day (and probably practice
after school). Soccer players are like those little yip yap dogs that
never stop jumping and barking.
fmomoon
2009-08-19 03:21:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Vandar
Post by fmomoon
In a high school setting, I certainly see the reasons for PE. We don't
have recess anymore, but that doesn't mean our hormonally challenged
students don't need physical activity after sitting at a desk for a
period of time. I had an English class after lunch one year where half
the varsity soccer team was in my room. They were beyond squirrelly.
Once in a while, I'd ask if anyone needed to do a lap around the parking
lot so that we could all settle down to work. I always had four or five
boys race out the door to see if they could beat each other in their
"lap." After they came back in, always smiling, they settled down and
went right to work. YMMV
I would've walked to my car and had a cigarette. :)
Ah, you were one of *those!* :)
Post by Vandar
Seriously though, a 5 minute break is good, but your students needed that
lap while still having a PE class that day (and probably practice after
school). Soccer players are like those little yip yap dogs that never stop
jumping and barking.
I'm certainly not going to argue that one with you! LOL One of those kids
is now a PE teacher/soccer coach. I see him at district meetings and he
reminds me of the Mrs. M. laps every time I see him. He hasn't changed at
all! Still can't sit still.
--
Moni
I am a Nobody.
Nobody is Perfect.
Therefore I am Perfect.
Bob Rudd
2009-08-19 05:58:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by fmomoon
PE is a waste of time and resources. Having it be required for
graduation is beyond stupid.
That's a very shortsighted view. It's important that in school students
not only develop their minds, but also develop their bodies so they are
in good working order as they become adults.
It's not a school's job to develop a child's body, only assist in
developing their mind.
Says who?
Me, as there is no law dictating that schools are responsible for the
development of a child's body. If they were, the parents of kids who
graduate fat could sue the school.
The fact that childhood obesity is such an issue even though PE is
required only shows that PE doesn't serve any purpose.
But it's not required anymore in many, many places. Hence the obesity
problem.
Among others, it's required in every school in KY, TN, and WA. Those being
the states with highest rate of childhood obesity in the country.
I believe the ancient tenants as to why PE is in the schools may go as far
back as Roman or Greek history. PE (called something else then) was
considered necessary for men (never mentioned women) to be able to clear the
mind so they could think properly. In the classic style of education, PE
was considered as educating the whole child as in "a healthy body leads to a
healthy mind."
In a high school setting, I certainly see the reasons for PE. We don't have
recess anymore, but that doesn't mean our hormonally challenged students
don't need physical activity after sitting at a desk for a period of time.
I had an English class after lunch one year where half the varsity soccer
team was in my room. They were beyond squirrelly. Once in a while, I'd ask
if anyone needed to do a lap around the parking lot so that we could all
settle down to work. I always had four or five boys race out the door to
see if they could beat each other in their "lap." After they came back in,
always smiling, they settled down and went right to work. YMMV
Perhaps if you had spruced up that English class a bit....... hehehe
--
I'm thinking of writing a satirically humorous post entitled "My
Colonoscopy."
fmomoon
2009-08-19 02:39:36 UTC
Permalink
School is supposed to be about learning. PE does not teach, thus they do
not learn from it. Around here, teaching kids how to stay fit and
healthy is done in a class called "Health".
PE is a waste of time and resources. Having it be required for
graduation is beyond stupid.
I don't really get P.E. as a requirement either. I guess some kids NEED
that 40 minutes of activity a day, but not everyone does. Especially if
they walk to school instead of drive. My son has to walk almost two
miles to school, run a mile at the end of the school day (in 105 degree
weather these days), then come back home another almost-two miles. I'd
think the four-mile walk would be sufficient to excuse him from P.E., but
the school doesn't agree with me.
--S.
Way back in 1492 when I was in high school, we were required to take PE in
the 8th and 9th grades. Beyond that was elective. But the odd thing was,
girls had to do a lot of book studying and testing (Health?), and boys did
none of that. We didn't do a whole lot of physical activity. We learned
how to play certain games, such as basketball, volley ball, softball,
tennis, but truly spent little time actually playing the sport. I think
our teacher disliked going outdoors, so we stayed inside as much as
possible.
We got the old "fallout shelter" training without being told what that was
for, as well as the VD training, again not actually telling us what the
diseases were, just how they invaded our bodies and wreaked havoc. Great
teaching, huh?
--
Susie
Time flies when you are having rum!
I'm a little off topic, but I still remember, in the 7th grade, when the
local priest came to our class and was assigned to "teach" sex ed. I think
he was more embarrassed than we were! :)
--
Moni
I am a Nobody.
Nobody is Perfect.
Therefore I am Perfect.
Vandar
2009-08-19 02:51:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by fmomoon
School is supposed to be about learning. PE does not teach, thus
they do not learn from it. Around here, teaching kids how to stay
fit and healthy is done in a class called "Health".
PE is a waste of time and resources. Having it be required for
graduation is beyond stupid.
I don't really get P.E. as a requirement either. I guess some kids
NEED that 40 minutes of activity a day, but not everyone does.
Especially if they walk to school instead of drive. My son has to
walk almost two miles to school, run a mile at the end of the school
day (in 105 degree weather these days), then come back home another
almost-two miles. I'd think the four-mile walk would be sufficient
to excuse him from P.E., but the school doesn't agree with me.
--S.
Way back in 1492 when I was in high school, we were required to take
PE in the 8th and 9th grades. Beyond that was elective. But the odd
thing was, girls had to do a lot of book studying and testing
(Health?), and boys did none of that. We didn't do a whole lot of
physical activity. We learned how to play certain games, such as
basketball, volley ball, softball, tennis, but truly spent little time
actually playing the sport. I think our teacher disliked going
outdoors, so we stayed inside as much as possible.
We got the old "fallout shelter" training without being told what that
was for, as well as the VD training, again not actually telling us
what the diseases were, just how they invaded our bodies and wreaked
havoc. Great teaching, huh?
--
Susie
Time flies when you are having rum!
I'm a little off topic, but I still remember, in the 7th grade, when the
local priest came to our class and was assigned to "teach" sex ed. I
think he was more embarrassed than we were! :)
A priest? Really!? We had to watch a rather graphic movie.
Nowadays, they should just hand out copies of the Kama Sutra with a free
box of condoms. :)
fmomoon
2009-08-19 03:23:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Vandar
Post by fmomoon
I'm a little off topic, but I still remember, in the 7th grade, when the
local priest came to our class and was assigned to "teach" sex ed. I
think he was more embarrassed than we were! :)
A priest? Really!? We had to watch a rather graphic movie.
Nowadays, they should just hand out copies of the Kama Sutra with a free
box of condoms. :)
We had one or two girls (we were segregated with boys in one room and girls
in the other) went out of their way to ask embarrassing questions. Heck,
those girls could have taught the class themselves!
--
Moni
I am a Nobody.
Nobody is Perfect.
Therefore I am Perfect.
Vandar
2009-08-19 03:26:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by fmomoon
Post by Vandar
Post by fmomoon
I'm a little off topic, but I still remember, in the 7th grade, when
the local priest came to our class and was assigned to "teach" sex
ed. I think he was more embarrassed than we were! :)
A priest? Really!? We had to watch a rather graphic movie.
Nowadays, they should just hand out copies of the Kama Sutra with a
free box of condoms. :)
We had one or two girls (we were segregated with boys in one room and
girls in the other) went out of their way to ask embarrassing
questions. Heck, those girls could have taught the class themselves!
So what kind of embarrassing questions did you ask? :p
fmomoon
2009-08-19 03:28:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Vandar
Post by fmomoon
Post by Vandar
Post by fmomoon
I'm a little off topic, but I still remember, in the 7th grade, when
the local priest came to our class and was assigned to "teach" sex ed.
I think he was more embarrassed than we were! :)
A priest? Really!? We had to watch a rather graphic movie.
Nowadays, they should just hand out copies of the Kama Sutra with a free
box of condoms. :)
We had one or two girls (we were segregated with boys in one room and
girls in the other) went out of their way to ask embarrassing questions.
Heck, those girls could have taught the class themselves!
So what kind of embarrassing questions did you ask? :p
When did you get yourself out of that corner, young man?
--
Moni
I am a Nobody.
Nobody is Perfect.
Therefore I am Perfect.
Suzanne D.
2009-08-19 09:23:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by fmomoon
We had one or two girls (we were segregated with boys in one room and
girls in the other) went out of their way to ask embarrassing questions.
Heck, those girls could have taught the class themselves!
And on the boys' side, meet Rio, who asked if it was rude to refer to
testicles as balls, and who asked if masturbation was okay.
--S.
zob
2009-08-19 13:03:11 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 19 Aug 2009 03:23:12 -0600, "Suzanne D."
Post by Suzanne D.
Post by fmomoon
We had one or two girls (we were segregated with boys in one room and
girls in the other) went out of their way to ask embarrassing questions.
Heck, those girls could have taught the class themselves!
And on the boys' side, meet Rio, who asked if it was rude to refer to
testicles as balls, and who asked if masturbation was okay.
--S.
The correct answer to the last question should have been, "Yes, but
not when you're driving."
---
Zob
Suzanne D.
2009-08-19 19:04:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by zob
On Wed, 19 Aug 2009 03:23:12 -0600, "Suzanne D."
Post by Suzanne D.
Post by fmomoon
We had one or two girls (we were segregated with boys in one room and
girls in the other) went out of their way to ask embarrassing questions.
Heck, those girls could have taught the class themselves!
And on the boys' side, meet Rio, who asked if it was rude to refer to
testicles as balls, and who asked if masturbation was okay.
--S.
The correct answer to the last question should have been, "Yes, but
not when you're driving."
Unfortunately, he was told it was "generally not encouraged," which we both
found hilarious.
--S.
Bob Rudd
2009-08-19 06:00:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Vandar
Post by fmomoon
School is supposed to be about learning. PE does not teach, thus
they do not learn from it. Around here, teaching kids how to stay
fit and healthy is done in a class called "Health".
PE is a waste of time and resources. Having it be required for
graduation is beyond stupid.
I don't really get P.E. as a requirement either. I guess some kids
NEED that 40 minutes of activity a day, but not everyone does.
Especially if they walk to school instead of drive. My son has to
walk almost two miles to school, run a mile at the end of the school
day (in 105 degree weather these days), then come back home another
almost-two miles. I'd think the four-mile walk would be sufficient
to excuse him from P.E., but the school doesn't agree with me.
--S.
Way back in 1492 when I was in high school, we were required to take
PE in the 8th and 9th grades. Beyond that was elective. But the odd
thing was, girls had to do a lot of book studying and testing
(Health?), and boys did none of that. We didn't do a whole lot of
physical activity. We learned how to play certain games, such as
basketball, volley ball, softball, tennis, but truly spent little time
actually playing the sport. I think our teacher disliked going
outdoors, so we stayed inside as much as possible.
We got the old "fallout shelter" training without being told what that
was for, as well as the VD training, again not actually telling us
what the diseases were, just how they invaded our bodies and wreaked
havoc. Great teaching, huh?
--
Susie
Time flies when you are having rum!
I'm a little off topic, but I still remember, in the 7th grade, when the
local priest came to our class and was assigned to "teach" sex ed. I
think he was more embarrassed than we were! :)
A priest? Really!? We had to watch a rather graphic movie.
Nowadays, they should just hand out copies of the Kama Sutra with a free
box of condoms. :)
Never gonna happen in your school district, Vandar, even though I know
you'd like to be the reader and provide the jello video!
--
I'm thinking of writing a satirically humorous post entitled "My
Colonoscopy."
zob
2009-08-19 04:05:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by fmomoon
I'm a little off topic, but I still remember, in the 7th grade, when the
local priest came to our class and was assigned to "teach" sex ed. I think
he was more embarrassed than we were! :)
Um, isn't a priest teaching sex ed kind of like a paraplegic teaching
drivers ed? <g>
---
Zob
fmomoon
2009-08-19 06:07:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by zob
Post by fmomoon
I'm a little off topic, but I still remember, in the 7th grade, when the
local priest came to our class and was assigned to "teach" sex ed. I think
he was more embarrassed than we were! :)
Um, isn't a priest teaching sex ed kind of like a paraplegic teaching
drivers ed? <g>
---
Zob
I would hope, but the choice was the priest or the nuns.
--
Moni
I am a Nobody.
Nobody is Perfect.
Therefore I am Perfect.
Suzanne D.
2009-08-19 09:21:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by zob
Post by fmomoon
I'm a little off topic, but I still remember, in the 7th grade, when the
local priest came to our class and was assigned to "teach" sex ed. I think
he was more embarrassed than we were! :)
Um, isn't a priest teaching sex ed kind of like a paraplegic teaching
drivers ed? <g>
That might actually have been the point.
--S.
Cheri
2009-08-19 18:01:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by fmomoon
I'm a little off topic, but I still remember, in the 7th grade, when the
local priest came to our class and was assigned to "teach" sex ed. I
think he was more embarrassed than we were! :)
Back in my day, they only showed a film about having periods, and only when
you were in the fifth grade or older, it was very hush- hush, no boys
allowed anywhere near the building, and permission slips had to be obtained
from the parents. No sex-ed though.

Cheri
SLGreg
2009-08-19 18:20:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Cheri
Post by fmomoon
I'm a little off topic, but I still remember, in the 7th grade, when the
local priest came to our class and was assigned to "teach" sex ed. I
think he was more embarrassed than we were! :)
Back in my day, they only showed a film about having periods, and only when
you were in the fifth grade or older, it was very hush- hush, no boys
allowed anywhere near the building, and permission slips had to be obtained
from the parents. No sex-ed though.
Cheri
It was fifth grade for us, too. All the girls went off with a female
teacher and saw their film/had their talk and the boys went off with a
male teacher, saw a film designed to help us understand our own bodies
and had our little talk.

-greg
fmomoon
2009-08-19 02:43:01 UTC
Permalink
How'd you do it, greg? I haven't reached that point to the degree you
have and I would like, as yet.
Depersonalize it. Nine times out of ten, rude, public behavior is not
about you. Letting it go is a long, on-going and sometimes arduous
process, but ultimately very satisfying.
Internalizing and getting angry over other people's behavior will make
you a bitter and unhappy person yourself.
-greg
Have I told you lately, Greg, that I think you are a very wise man? You
are.
--
Moni
I am a Nobody.
Nobody is Perfect.
Therefore I am Perfect.
fmomoon
2009-08-19 02:47:50 UTC
Permalink
In article <f6176372-5e54-432c-902a-e93927dc9691
@e18g2000vbe.googlegroups.com>, ***@lpbroadband.net says...
In article <57d95046-6e1e-4ba6-b96f-7a290923d9e5
@r34g2000vba.googlegroups.com>, ***@lpbroadband.net says...
I have honestly, no joke, heard people talking on cell phones
while
shopping, saying things like, "There are two brands of sour
cream
here...which should I get?" Actually having a conversation about
which
brand of sour cream to buy. Oh my god, just make a choice on
your own.
If for some reason it's the wrong choice, then just buy a
different brand
next time.
--S.
LOL, and the sour cream is a major crisis compared to some of
those cell
phone conversations.
Cheri
Cell phone use in a grocery store is a pet peeve of mine. Usually
those people are slowly sashaying through the aisles, completely
oblivious to their surroundings, the ones that cut people off or
stand
in the way of a much-needed item, etc.
Peach
Interesting Peach....as someone who enjoys grocery shopping....for me
the far bigger annoyances are: 1) Mothers who cannot/will not control
their kids in a store, by far and away, number 1. and 2) Honest to
goodness seniors who just stand in front of a product for minutes
trying
to figure if they want Peter Pan or Skippy for example. It's not cost
in their cases, I assure you, it's the inability to make a decision.
Those two cases bug me, too....but the self-centeredness of a person
on a cell phone, oblivious to their surroundings, is much more
annoying. I'm not saying that you can't use one to discuss brands of
sour cream, but get the hell out of the way and call, then get off.
I'm talking about the people who carry on personal conversations for
the duration of their 45 minutes shopping trip.
Peach
When I use it in a grocery store, I always go off to a side and away
from the main aisles. I agree with you about the continual talkers, be
they in a store, restaurant etc.
For me though, the worst by far are the uncontrolled kids. Just because
one is a stay at home parent (mother or father) does not mean that the
grocery store is your kids' personal racetrack and playground. Keep em
under control, or get the spouse/babysitter or shop at a different time
when they can do so.
--
Few events change the way you view life as when you hold your grandchild
in your arms.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
My daughter liked riding in the cart. I talked with her and she
"helped me." Of course, I only had one....

Peach
---------
I used to put one in the basket and the other was instructed to hold on to
the basket and never let go because it might cause an accident. She never
questioned me as to what I meant and I never explained to her that it meant
nothing. I just wanted her to stay put. She helped out by getting specific
boxes where she could reach and always enjoyed acting like a grown up. She
thought she was so cool! :) The funniest things would happen as we got up
to the counter and she would try to help lift items to the counter top.
Half the time, she couldn't be seen and here comes this box appearing over
the side of the counter...:) I miss those days.
--
Moni
I am a Nobody.
Nobody is Perfect.
Therefore I am Perfect.
Peach
2009-08-19 14:18:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by fmomoon
In article <f6176372-5e54-432c-902a-e93927dc9691
@e18g2000vbe.googlegroups.com>, ***@lpbroadband.net says...
In article <57d95046-6e1e-4ba6-b96f-7a290923d9e5
@r34g2000vba.googlegroups.com>, ***@lpbroadband.net says...
I have honestly, no joke, heard people talking on cell phones
while
shopping, saying things like, "There are two brands of sour
cream
here...which should I get?" Actually having a conversation about
which
brand of sour cream to buy. Oh my god, just make a choice on
your own.
If for some reason it's the wrong choice, then just buy a
different brand
next time.
--S.
LOL, and the sour cream is a major crisis compared to some of
those cell
phone conversations.
Cheri
Cell phone use in a grocery store is a pet peeve of mine. Usually
those people are slowly sashaying through the aisles, completely
oblivious to their surroundings, the ones that cut people off or
stand
in the way of a much-needed item, etc.
Peach
Interesting Peach....as someone who enjoys grocery shopping....for me
the far bigger annoyances are: 1) Mothers who cannot/will not control
their kids in a store, by far and away, number 1. and 2) Honest to
goodness seniors who just stand in front of a product for minutes
trying
to figure if they want Peter Pan or Skippy for example. It's not cost
in their cases, I assure you, it's the inability to make a decision.
Those two cases bug me, too....but the self-centeredness of a person
on a cell phone, oblivious to their surroundings, is much more
annoying. I'm not saying that you can't use one to discuss brands of
sour cream, but get the hell out of the way and call, then get off.
I'm talking about the people who carry on personal conversations for
the duration of their 45 minutes shopping trip.
Peach
When I use it in a grocery store, I always go off to a side and away
from the main aisles. I agree with you about the continual talkers, be
they in a store, restaurant etc.
For me though, the worst by far are the uncontrolled kids. Just because
one is a stay at home parent (mother or father) does not mean that the
grocery store is your kids' personal racetrack and playground. Keep em
under control, or get the spouse/babysitter or shop at a different time
when they can do so.
--
Few events change the way you view life as when you hold your grandchild
in your arms.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
My daughter liked riding in the cart. I talked with her and she
"helped me."  Of course, I only had one....
Peach
---------
I used to put one in the basket and the other was instructed to hold on to
the basket and never let go because it might cause an accident.  She never
questioned me as to what I meant and I never explained to her that it meant
nothing.  I just wanted her to stay put.  She helped out by getting specific
boxes where she could reach and always enjoyed acting like a grown up.  She
thought she was so cool! :)  The funniest things would happen as we got up
to the counter and she would try to help lift items to the counter top.
Half the time, she couldn't be seen and here comes this box appearing over
the side of the counter...:) I miss those days.
--
Moni
I am a Nobody.
Nobody is Perfect.
Therefore I am Perfect.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Ah, so do I!! Such a precious time.... sigh.

Anna still helps me get groceries, and she still enjoys it. She's my
"produce" gal. I *hate* picking out fruits and veggies. It's too
tedious. So I send her around to pick up fruit, whatever looks good
to her.... she actually likes to do it.

Peach
fmomoon
2009-08-19 02:50:24 UTC
Permalink
For me, it's the unsupervised kid, running around like a whirling
dervish, who could really "accidentally" run into me and put me back
into the hospital for another premature knee/leg operation.
_______________________
My two older kids could usually be counted on to stay pretty close to me,
but my third child is amazing. I can't tell you how many times I've said
in alarm, "Where's Bexley??" and then discovered he was right under my
elbow the whole time. I never met a more well-behaved-in-public kid.
--S.
The thing that is amazing is that you have no doubt raised your boys the
same way. Yet, sometimes it is nature, not nurture, that makes one child
behave differently. Now, what about Cedric? :)
--
Moni
I am a Nobody.
Nobody is Perfect.
Therefore I am Perfect.
Suzanne D.
2009-08-19 03:11:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by fmomoon
My two older kids could usually be counted on to stay pretty close to me,
but my third child is amazing. I can't tell you how many times I've said
in alarm, "Where's Bexley??" and then discovered he was right under my
elbow the whole time. I never met a more well-behaved-in-public kid.
--S.
The thing that is amazing is that you have no doubt raised your boys the
same way. Yet, sometimes it is nature, not nurture, that makes one child
behave differently.
They don't really behave differently; it's just that the two older ones
always sort of orbit me, while Bexley sticks to me like a shadow. He's
always so close that I can't see him and fear he's run off! It's almost a
joke with us now, as the older kids always laugh when I spin around looking
for Bexley and find he's been at my elbow the whole time. "Now Mum, WHEN
has Bexley EVER left your side??" Even Bexley is starting to get sick of it
by now.
Post by fmomoon
Now, what about Cedric? :)
Cedric actually asks to go in the cart each time, so I don't know yet! I
would like to think he takes after his brothers, but who knows?
--S.
fmomoon
2009-08-19 02:53:06 UTC
Permalink
I remember once being asked "...and get some olives." Then I get there
and black or green, pitted/unpitted, whole or chopped. I was confused.
Cottage cheese can be a nightmare..... same as sour cream. I tell ya I
know from personal experience. ;-)
Cottage cheese? Sour cream. Was it between lite and regular or the size?
Non-fat, low-fat, large curd, small curd, small, medium, large, with
pineapple? So many questions....
--
Moni
I am a Nobody.
Nobody is Perfect.
Therefore I am Perfect.
Bob Rudd
2009-08-19 06:01:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by fmomoon
I remember once being asked "...and get some olives." Then I get there
and black or green, pitted/unpitted, whole or chopped. I was confused.
Cottage cheese can be a nightmare..... same as sour cream. I tell ya I
know from personal experience. ;-)
Cottage cheese? Sour cream. Was it between lite and regular or the size?
Non-fat, low-fat, large curd, small curd, small, medium, large, with
pineapple? So many questions....
You understand the critical and crucial nature of the mission and the
urgent need to have a cell phone, very well.
--
I'm thinking of writing a satirically humorous post entitled "My
Colonoscopy."
Suzy
2009-08-19 19:39:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by fmomoon
I remember once being asked "...and get some olives." Then I get there
and black or green, pitted/unpitted, whole or chopped. I was confused.
Cottage cheese can be a nightmare..... same as sour cream. I tell ya I
know from personal experience. ;-)
Cottage cheese? Sour cream. Was it between lite and regular or the size?
Non-fat, low-fat, large curd, small curd, small, medium, large, with
pineapple? So many questions....
--
Moni
I am a Nobody.
Nobody is Perfect.
Therefore I am Perfect.
With pineapple, please!
--
Susie
Time flies when you are having rum!
fmomoon
2009-08-19 02:56:47 UTC
Permalink
I remember once being asked "...and get some olives." Then I get
there
and black or green, pitted/unpitted, whole or chopped. I was
confused.
Cottage cheese can be a nightmare..... same as sour cream. I tell
ya I
know from personal experience. ;-)
Cottage cheese? Sour cream. Was it between lite and regular or the
size?
You name it....lite, fat free, regular, size, brand......
I love to do the grocery shopping. I get to speak with a broad
demographic range while in the store and I can "tune out" the outside
world. However, the land mines of items like "sour cream" on the list
provided me can be frustratingly painful. Having my cell phone along
with me, for clarification, is a necessity.
I would think after being married to someone for as long as you have
(30+ yrs, right?) you would know the brand of sour cream that your
wife prefers, or are you that oblivious to things that happen in the
kitchen?
-greg
Closer to 40 now, greg, and it's never obvious....particularly in this
day of new products, Food Network, America's Test Kitchen, etc. I know
the basics: double stuff Oreos, Peter Pan smooth etc.
Olive oil, sour cream etc. are all things though that are subject to
change and I'm not good at noticing that a particular brand has changed
around the kitchen if my wife has purchased it on the few occasions when
she does the shopping either in total or "spot shopping" as I call
getting a list of ten things or less that pops up occasionally, usually
on a weekend or when company is coming over.
Example, I have a list right now in my wallet for later today. It says
"butter." Now, I know the brand but unsalted vs salted? I'm waiting
for the email response from my boss on that one as I don't know what
she's got in mind to use it in.
BTW, just because one's been married for longer than one's been an
adult.....there's always "stuff" you never catch up on or get. I think
that's more the case with men than with their wives. I know it is in
our lives as I don't "catch" a fair amount of things because I'm either
occupied or I just don't notice. Many of our light bulbs changed over
the past six months but until I changed one in particular, recently....I
went "huh?" and asked the boss of the house. We went to those new curly
light bulbs against my "discussion point." They were, subsequently all
removed and properly disposed of, being replaced with traditional light
bulbs in all cases soon thereafter. One of the few things where I
insist on "my way" around the house.
I have to back you up on this one, Bob. My husband and I just celebrated
our 26th anniversary. He still acts surprised when he learns that I don't
like chili or that I like pickles in my potato salad or that I don't like
cornbread. I just smile and tease him about his age and that he needs to
pay more attention. It really has become quite our joke. He really doesn't
notice my likes and dislikes, but I know his to a T.
--
Moni
I am a Nobody.
Nobody is Perfect.
Therefore I am Perfect.
fmomoon
2009-08-19 02:57:19 UTC
Permalink
It's weird how threads can morph to other topics. From taking showers to
buying sour cream. Hard to connect the dots, but they are there.
There will be a test later, Salad, so be sure to study.
--
Moni
I am a Nobody.
Nobody is Perfect.
Therefore I am Perfect.
fmomoon
2009-08-19 02:58:24 UTC
Permalink
Cottage cheese? Sour cream. Was it between lite and regular or the size?
ONE OF EVERYTHING! Seriously, though, just make an executive decision,
and if it's the wrong one, blame the other person for not being specific
enough.
--S.
LOL. Oh, I can just picture my husband's eyes if I did that. Mr. Coupon
Shopper would implode!
--
Moni
I am a Nobody.
Nobody is Perfect.
Therefore I am Perfect.
fmomoon
2009-08-19 03:02:09 UTC
Permalink
I can't speak for school districts across the nation, but most schools I
know have a no cell phone policy. Not that the policy actually stops
anything, but there are rules...
It probably works about as well as the hands free cell phone usage while
driving law that was passed in CA. :-)
Cheri
Exactly.
--
Moni
I am a Nobody.
Nobody is Perfect.
Therefore I am Perfect.
Ron Capik
2009-08-19 03:13:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by fmomoon
I can't speak for school districts across the nation, but most
schools I know have a no cell phone policy. Not that the policy
actually stops anything, but there are rules...
It probably works about as well as the hands free cell phone usage
while driving law that was passed in CA. :-)
Cheri
Exactly.
Ah, but that law at least has some fund raiser value.


Later...

Ron Capik <<< cynic-in-training >>>
--
fmomoon
2009-08-19 03:23:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ron Capik
Post by fmomoon
I can't speak for school districts across the nation, but most schools
I know have a no cell phone policy. Not that the policy actually stops
anything, but there are rules...
It probably works about as well as the hands free cell phone usage while
driving law that was passed in CA. :-)
Cheri
Exactly.
Ah, but that law at least has some fund raiser value.
Later...
Ron Capik <<< cynic-in-training >>>
--
Yup. California needs the money!
--
Moni
I am a Nobody.
Nobody is Perfect.
Therefore I am Perfect.
fmomoon
2009-08-19 03:04:00 UTC
Permalink
I can't speak for school districts across the nation, but most schools I
know have a no cell phone policy. Not that the policy actually stops
anything, but there are rules...
It probably works about as well as the hands free cell phone usage while
driving law that was passed in CA. :-)
Cheri
The irony is that bluetooth/in-your-ear headsets have been shown to be
equally distracting and make little to no difference. It's about the
distraction.
For me, it's true, too. I can talk to a passenger all day in the car
and drive just fine, but put me on a phone (handheld or bluetooth)
while I'm driving, and I noticeably FEEL the additional attention it
requires. Not sure why, but 'tis so for me, anyway.
-greg
I've seen people get distracted by beautiful cars or someone attractive to
the point where I am surprised accidents don't happen. For some, it really
doesn't take much.
--
Moni
I am a Nobody.
Nobody is Perfect.
Therefore I am Perfect.
zob
2009-08-19 03:57:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by fmomoon
I can't speak for school districts across the nation, but most schools I
know have a no cell phone policy. Not that the policy actually stops
anything, but there are rules...
It probably works about as well as the hands free cell phone usage while
driving law that was passed in CA. :-)
Cheri
The irony is that bluetooth/in-your-ear headsets have been shown to be
equally distracting and make little to no difference. It's about the
distraction.
For me, it's true, too. I can talk to a passenger all day in the car
and drive just fine, but put me on a phone (handheld or bluetooth)
while I'm driving, and I noticeably FEEL the additional attention it
requires. Not sure why, but 'tis so for me, anyway.
-greg
I've seen people get distracted by beautiful cars or someone attractive to
the point where I am surprised accidents don't happen. For some, it really
doesn't take much.
I wonder what the odds would be that there *wouldn't* be an accident
if TC was driving down the road and spotted McPhee walking down the
sidewalk.
---
Zob
fmomoon
2009-08-19 06:07:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by zob
Post by fmomoon
I can't speak for school districts across the nation, but most schools I
know have a no cell phone policy. Not that the policy actually stops
anything, but there are rules...
It probably works about as well as the hands free cell phone usage while
driving law that was passed in CA. :-)
Cheri
The irony is that bluetooth/in-your-ear headsets have been shown to be
equally distracting and make little to no difference. It's about the
distraction.
For me, it's true, too. I can talk to a passenger all day in the car
and drive just fine, but put me on a phone (handheld or bluetooth)
while I'm driving, and I noticeably FEEL the additional attention it
requires. Not sure why, but 'tis so for me, anyway.
-greg
I've seen people get distracted by beautiful cars or someone attractive to
the point where I am surprised accidents don't happen. For some, it really
doesn't take much.
I wonder what the odds would be that there *wouldn't* be an accident
if TC was driving down the road and spotted McPhee walking down the
sidewalk.
---
Zob
I would not be taking that bet. :) I think some things are a certainty.
--
Moni
I am a Nobody.
Nobody is Perfect.
Therefore I am Perfect.
SLGreg
2009-08-19 04:16:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by fmomoon
I can't speak for school districts across the nation, but most schools I
know have a no cell phone policy. Not that the policy actually stops
anything, but there are rules...
It probably works about as well as the hands free cell phone usage while
driving law that was passed in CA. :-)
Cheri
The irony is that bluetooth/in-your-ear headsets have been shown to be
equally distracting and make little to no difference. It's about the
distraction.
For me, it's true, too. I can talk to a passenger all day in the car
and drive just fine, but put me on a phone (handheld or bluetooth)
while I'm driving, and I noticeably FEEL the additional attention it
requires. Not sure why, but 'tis so for me, anyway.
-greg
I've seen people get distracted by beautiful cars or someone attractive to
the point where I am surprised accidents don't happen. For some, it really
doesn't take much.
Totally different thing. I'm not actively interacting with cars or
beautiful people I see walking down the street. Carrying on a
conversation with someone not even physically there requires immense
concentration for participation. Body language and subtle nuance
cannot be read, etc.

-greg
Salad
2009-08-19 05:06:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by fmomoon
I can't speak for school districts across the nation, but most schools I
know have a no cell phone policy. Not that the policy actually stops
anything, but there are rules...
It probably works about as well as the hands free cell phone usage while
driving law that was passed in CA. :-)
Cheri
The irony is that bluetooth/in-your-ear headsets have been shown to be
equally distracting and make little to no difference. It's about the
distraction.
For me, it's true, too. I can talk to a passenger all day in the car
and drive just fine, but put me on a phone (handheld or bluetooth)
while I'm driving, and I noticeably FEEL the additional attention it
requires. Not sure why, but 'tis so for me, anyway.
-greg
I've seen people get distracted by beautiful cars or someone attractive
to the point where I am surprised accidents don't happen. For some, it
really doesn't take much.
I was watching the Seinfeld episode tonight where Elaine's friend is
walking down the street, her top a bra. Kramer crashed the car.
Suzy
2009-08-19 18:11:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by fmomoon
I can't speak for school districts across the nation, but most schools I
know have a no cell phone policy. Not that the policy actually stops
anything, but there are rules...
It probably works about as well as the hands free cell phone usage while
driving law that was passed in CA. :-)
Cheri
The irony is that bluetooth/in-your-ear headsets have been shown to be
equally distracting and make little to no difference. It's about the
distraction.
For me, it's true, too. I can talk to a passenger all day in the car
and drive just fine, but put me on a phone (handheld or bluetooth)
while I'm driving, and I noticeably FEEL the additional attention it
requires. Not sure why, but 'tis so for me, anyway.
-greg
I've seen people get distracted by beautiful cars or someone attractive to
the point where I am surprised accidents don't happen. For some, it
really doesn't take much.
--
Moni
But the real question is, can you shower and drive without getting
distracted?
--
Susie
Time flies when you are having rum!
Cheri
2009-08-19 19:28:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Suzy
Post by fmomoon
I can't speak for school districts across the nation, but most schools I
know have a no cell phone policy. Not that the policy actually stops
anything, but there are rules...
It probably works about as well as the hands free cell phone usage while
driving law that was passed in CA. :-)
Cheri
The irony is that bluetooth/in-your-ear headsets have been shown to be
equally distracting and make little to no difference. It's about the
distraction.
For me, it's true, too. I can talk to a passenger all day in the car
and drive just fine, but put me on a phone (handheld or bluetooth)
while I'm driving, and I noticeably FEEL the additional attention it
requires. Not sure why, but 'tis so for me, anyway.
-greg
I've seen people get distracted by beautiful cars or someone attractive
to the point where I am surprised accidents don't happen. For some, it
really doesn't take much.
--
Moni
But the real question is, can you shower and drive without getting
distracted?
And could you really sit next to somebody that wasn't freshly showered
during the drive? ;-)

Cheri
Suzanne D.
2009-08-19 03:05:18 UTC
Permalink
Did that not happen when you played dodgeball as a kid? When I was in
school
at least one kid got sent to the nurse everytime we played. I don't find
that acceptable, myself.
I played dodgeball as a kid once, and as a teenager once. I don't remember
anything interesting about the childhood game, but as a teen someone threw
the ball hard enough to knock me to the ground with the wind knocked out of
me. I had a gigantic bruise on my stomach. Not the wisest game out there.
--S.
Lesmond
2009-08-19 05:29:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Suzanne D.
Did that not happen when you played dodgeball as a kid? When I was in
school
at least one kid got sent to the nurse everytime we played. I don't find
that acceptable, myself.
I played dodgeball as a kid once, and as a teenager once. I don't remember
anything interesting about the childhood game, but as a teen someone threw
the ball hard enough to knock me to the ground with the wind knocked out of
me. I had a gigantic bruise on my stomach. Not the wisest game out there.
It didn't teach you to become a better person? It must have at least taught
you that stronger kids could hurt you.

You should just suck it (up). What doesn't kill you makes you stronger.

And that is apparently what some here think is an important life lesson.

Both ways in the snow.



--
The house was full of wildlife and all the pies were gone.
Suzanne D.
2009-08-19 09:09:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lesmond
Post by Suzanne D.
I played dodgeball as a kid once, and as a teenager once. I don't remember
anything interesting about the childhood game, but as a teen someone threw
the ball hard enough to knock me to the ground with the wind knocked out of
me. I had a gigantic bruise on my stomach. Not the wisest game out there.
It didn't teach you to become a better person? It must have at least taught
you that stronger kids could hurt you.
It taught me that I am way too small and weak to play a game where people
throw large things at you.
Post by Lesmond
You should just suck it (up).
Oh I sucked it up but good. I think they may have even had to pry it out of
the gigantic cavern on my stomach.
--S.
fmomoon
2009-08-19 03:05:15 UTC
Permalink
I can't speak for school districts across the nation, but most schools
I
know have a no cell phone policy. Not that the policy actually stops
anything, but there are rules...
It probably works about as well as the hands free cell phone usage while
driving law that was passed in CA. :-)
Cheri
The irony is that bluetooth/in-your-ear headsets have been shown to be
equally distracting and make little to no difference. It's about the
distraction.
For me, it's true, too. I can talk to a passenger all day in the car
and drive just fine, but put me on a phone (handheld or bluetooth)
while I'm driving, and I noticeably FEEL the additional attention it
requires. Not sure why, but 'tis so for me, anyway.
Yep, same here. I catch myself being guilty of "automatic driving"
when I'm talking on the cell phone in my car. I'll take a call, chat,
and suddenly realize that I've driven 10 miles and don't remember the
drive or the traffic. That is admittedly dangerous.
Of course, for me, singing along at the top of my lungs to an Il Divo
CD does the same thing, so I can't single out the cell phone I guess.
---
Zob
My license plate cover says it all : "Caution, singer on board." I'm
always singing in the car. :)
--
Moni
I am a Nobody.
Nobody is Perfect.
Therefore I am Perfect.
Bob Rudd
2009-08-19 06:05:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by fmomoon
I can't speak for school districts across the nation, but most schools
I
know have a no cell phone policy. Not that the policy actually stops
anything, but there are rules...
It probably works about as well as the hands free cell phone usage while
driving law that was passed in CA. :-)
Cheri
The irony is that bluetooth/in-your-ear headsets have been shown to be
equally distracting and make little to no difference. It's about the
distraction.
For me, it's true, too. I can talk to a passenger all day in the car
and drive just fine, but put me on a phone (handheld or bluetooth)
while I'm driving, and I noticeably FEEL the additional attention it
requires. Not sure why, but 'tis so for me, anyway.
Yep, same here. I catch myself being guilty of "automatic driving"
when I'm talking on the cell phone in my car. I'll take a call, chat,
and suddenly realize that I've driven 10 miles and don't remember the
drive or the traffic. That is admittedly dangerous.
Of course, for me, singing along at the top of my lungs to an Il Divo
CD does the same thing, so I can't single out the cell phone I guess.
---
Zob
My license plate cover says it all : "Caution, singer on board." I'm
always singing in the car. :)
Hmmm...mine says "warning, it's now the legal hunting season on singers
in cars."

That special license though is only good for 14 days or one singer,
whichever comes first.
--
I'm thinking of writing a satirically humorous post entitled "My
Colonoscopy."
fmomoon
2009-08-19 07:05:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bob Rudd
Post by fmomoon
I can't speak for school districts across the nation, but most schools
I
know have a no cell phone policy. Not that the policy actually stops
anything, but there are rules...
It probably works about as well as the hands free cell phone usage while
driving law that was passed in CA. :-)
Cheri
The irony is that bluetooth/in-your-ear headsets have been shown to be
equally distracting and make little to no difference. It's about the
distraction.
For me, it's true, too. I can talk to a passenger all day in the car
and drive just fine, but put me on a phone (handheld or bluetooth)
while I'm driving, and I noticeably FEEL the additional attention it
requires. Not sure why, but 'tis so for me, anyway.
Yep, same here. I catch myself being guilty of "automatic driving"
when I'm talking on the cell phone in my car. I'll take a call, chat,
and suddenly realize that I've driven 10 miles and don't remember the
drive or the traffic. That is admittedly dangerous.
Of course, for me, singing along at the top of my lungs to an Il Divo
CD does the same thing, so I can't single out the cell phone I guess.
---
Zob
My license plate cover says it all : "Caution, singer on board." I'm
always singing in the car. :)
Hmmm...mine says "warning, it's now the legal hunting season on singers
in cars."
That special license though is only good for 14 days or one singer,
whichever comes first.
--
I'm thinking of writing a satirically humorous post entitled "My
Colonoscopy."
hehe...good luck on that one. :)
--
Moni
I am a Nobody.
Nobody is Perfect.
Therefore I am Perfect.
Bob Rudd
2009-08-19 14:03:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by fmomoon
Post by Bob Rudd
I'm thinking of writing a satirically humorous post entitled "My
Colonoscopy."
hehe...good luck on that one. :)
I'm been feeling it welling up inside me for a couple of weeks. I've
got the pieces and parts flowing down, and out of, the creative river of
my mind. The challenges are getting the time and putting them into a
cohesive whole.
--
I'm thinking of writing a satirically humorous post entitled "My
Colonoscopy."
Lesmond
2009-08-19 19:04:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by fmomoon
Of course, for me, singing along at the top of my lungs to an Il Divo
CD does the same thing, so I can't single out the cell phone I guess.
---
Zob
My license plate cover says it all : "Caution, singer on board." I'm
always singing in the car. :)
Back when I was in college, I was in a car with two members of the choir,
including the driver. They got really caught up in singing The National
Anthem, of all things. She cut off a car. He put his little flashing light
on top. Yep. Cut off an unmarked cop car.

We pulled over and he asked the usual, "What have you been drinking? What
have you been smoking?" When he received negatives to those questions, he
asked, "Well, what *were* you doing? That was a really dangerous move
there."

So we told him. He was suspicious and asked them for a demonstration. After
a few lines he cracked up and let us go, with the admonition to do the
practicing in a safe place.

They really were excellent singers.



--
The house was full of wildlife and all the pies were gone.
fmomoon
2009-08-19 03:06:41 UTC
Permalink
I can't speak for school districts across the nation, but most schools
I
know have a no cell phone policy. Not that the policy actually stops
anything, but there are rules...
It probably works about as well as the hands free cell phone usage
while
driving law that was passed in CA. :-)
The irony is that bluetooth/in-your-ear headsets have been shown to be
equally distracting and make little to no difference. It's about the
distraction.
For me, it's true, too. I can talk to a passenger all day in the car
and drive just fine, but put me on a phone (handheld or bluetooth)
while I'm driving, and I noticeably FEEL the additional attention it
requires. Not sure why, but 'tis so for me, anyway.
When I'm using my Bluetooth speaker with my cell phone in my car, I don't
feel it's any more distracting than when I'm talking to a passenger. In
both cases though, while I'm still paying attention to the road and cars
around me, I tend to lose focus of where I'm actually supposed to be going
and tend to miss turns or exits if too engrossed in a conversation (either
will a passenger or on the phone).
It's like I can just do two things at once. I can pay attention about how
I'm driving including what the cars around me are doing and either 1)
remember when I'm heading to *or* 2) have a conversation with someone.
:)
I'm a horrible multi-tasker. It's a guy thing.
-greg
Ah, it's a woman thing, too. Just ask any woman who has ever had to fix
lunches while doing a child's hair while signing permission slips etc...
--
Moni
I am a Nobody.
Nobody is Perfect.
Therefore I am Perfect.
fmomoon
2009-08-19 03:08:25 UTC
Permalink
Yesterday on the news I saw an television ad from England on texting
while driving. Three girls and a baby are in a car, motoring down the
road, having fun, giggling, and texting while driving. The car veers
over the middle and gets slammed head-on and the girls heads rock back
and forth and the airbags explode while the car gets turned into
oncoming traffic and another car nails it from the side. The three
passengers are dead and it shows the emergency workers using the jaws of
life in an attempt to get the driver free. The ad is pretty graphic but
the intent is get noticed.
Just last month, as of July 1st it is illegal to text while driving
here in Virginia. The same new law also band reading while driving.
As crazy as it sounds, I'm admittedly guilty of the latter. When I
used to make the 60 mile work commute daily from Williamsburg to
Chesapeake, I'd often read the newspaper while stuck in stopped or
stop-and-go traffic. That was pretty stupid I guess, although if a
law has been passed against it I must not be the only one doing it.
Now about those women who apply their makeup while driving ...
---
Zob
I remember one mom ahead of me who turned clear around from the front seat
while driving to correct something with the children in the back seat! We
were on the freeway.....<shaking head>
--
Moni
I am a Nobody.
Nobody is Perfect.
Therefore I am Perfect.
Salad
2009-08-19 05:08:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by fmomoon
Yesterday on the news I saw an television ad from England on texting
while driving. Three girls and a baby are in a car, motoring down the
road, having fun, giggling, and texting while driving. The car veers
over the middle and gets slammed head-on and the girls heads rock back
and forth and the airbags explode while the car gets turned into
oncoming traffic and another car nails it from the side. The three
passengers are dead and it shows the emergency workers using the jaws of
life in an attempt to get the driver free. The ad is pretty graphic but
the intent is get noticed.
Just last month, as of July 1st it is illegal to text while driving
here in Virginia. The same new law also band reading while driving.
As crazy as it sounds, I'm admittedly guilty of the latter. When I
used to make the 60 mile work commute daily from Williamsburg to
Chesapeake, I'd often read the newspaper while stuck in stopped or
stop-and-go traffic. That was pretty stupid I guess, although if a
law has been passed against it I must not be the only one doing it.
Now about those women who apply their makeup while driving ...
---
Zob
I remember one mom ahead of me who turned clear around from the front
seat while driving to correct something with the children in the back
seat! We were on the freeway.....<shaking head>
With kids nowadays locked into seatbelts they're easier to hit.
fmomoon
2009-08-19 03:10:28 UTC
Permalink
Yesterday on the news I saw an television ad from England on texting
while driving. Three girls and a baby are in a car, motoring down the
road, having fun, giggling, and texting while driving. The car veers
over the middle and gets slammed head-on and the girls heads rock back
and forth and the airbags explode while the car gets turned into
oncoming traffic and another car nails it from the side. The three
passengers are dead and it shows the emergency workers using the jaws of
life in an attempt to get the driver free. The ad is pretty graphic but
the intent is get noticed.
Just last month, as of July 1st it is illegal to text while driving
here in Virginia. The same new law also band reading while driving.
Why do we need these ridiculous laws?
Because being distracted means different things to different people. Some
are distracted by personal issues. Some are distracted by the radio. Many
don't think that they are distracted at all. You have to spell things out
for some people, T.
--
Moni
I am a Nobody.
Nobody is Perfect.
Therefore I am Perfect.
Bob Rudd
2009-08-19 06:07:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by fmomoon
Yesterday on the news I saw an television ad from England on texting
while driving. Three girls and a baby are in a car, motoring down the
road, having fun, giggling, and texting while driving. The car veers
over the middle and gets slammed head-on and the girls heads rock back
and forth and the airbags explode while the car gets turned into
oncoming traffic and another car nails it from the side. The three
passengers are dead and it shows the emergency workers using the jaws of
life in an attempt to get the driver free. The ad is pretty graphic but
the intent is get noticed.
Just last month, as of July 1st it is illegal to text while driving
here in Virginia. The same new law also band reading while driving.
Why do we need these ridiculous laws?
Because being distracted means different things to different people. Some
are distracted by personal issues. Some are distracted by the radio. Many
don't think that they are distracted at all. You have to spell things out
for some people, T.
I can listen to a radio, CD, use a cell phone etc. without problems. I
cannot, however, listen to a book on CD and drive safely. I find that
it takes away from my concentration.
--
I'm thinking of writing a satirically humorous post entitled "My
Colonoscopy."
zob
2009-08-19 03:53:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Thanatos
I never said they should be happy about it. They should just deal with
it.
It'll do them good to learn early on they can't always have whatever
they want.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Abt722ufGUI
---
Zob
zob
2009-08-19 04:09:11 UTC
Permalink
Butt cracks though.... no offense taken by me. Everyone has had a
moment of two such as that, whether from a repairman or themselves.
It's a smile and a stifled laugh. ;-)
That's because it usually a male thing, and not "everyone" has had a moment
or two such as that. Thankfully.
Cheri
It happens to men because men grow fat tummys (as opposed to what
"blossoms" on women), which forces men's pants to ride UNDER their
bellies (unless you're into the Fred Mertz look with pants pulled up
to your tits), thus handily exposing their buttcracks when bending
over, etc.
Most times it can't be helped, but many women seem to think it's
somehow a voluntary action men choose and is more avoidable than it
actually is.
Yes, I know this from experience, as my belly has grown over the
years.
-greg
I'm adamant on wearing my pants belted at the waistline. When I was
younger I used to say that I would kill myself before I'd wear my
pants with a huge belly hanging over the buckle just so I could say
that I still wore 32" waist pants. And so far I've stuck with it. No
plumber's cleavage for me!
---
Zob
Bob Rudd
2009-08-19 04:54:46 UTC
Permalink
In article <***@4ax.com>, zob <zobva1
@ gmail.com> says...
Post by zob
Butt cracks though.... no offense taken by me. Everyone has had a
moment of two such as that, whether from a repairman or themselves.
It's a smile and a stifled laugh. ;-)
That's because it usually a male thing, and not "everyone" has had a moment
or two such as that. Thankfully.
Cheri
It happens to men because men grow fat tummys (as opposed to what
"blossoms" on women), which forces men's pants to ride UNDER their
bellies (unless you're into the Fred Mertz look with pants pulled up
to your tits), thus handily exposing their buttcracks when bending
over, etc.
Most times it can't be helped, but many women seem to think it's
somehow a voluntary action men choose and is more avoidable than it
actually is.
Yes, I know this from experience, as my belly has grown over the
years.
-greg
I'm adamant on wearing my pants belted at the waistline. When I was
younger I used to say that I would kill myself before I'd wear my
pants with a huge belly hanging over the buckle just so I could say
that I still wore 32" waist pants. And so far I've stuck with it. No
plumber's cleavage for me!
---
Zob
Just give me Bean's elastic waist pants and life will always be well.
:-)
--
I'm thinking of writing a satirically humorous post entitled "My
Colonoscopy."
Bob Rudd
2009-08-19 04:52:33 UTC
Permalink
Oh, for god's sake. Now we've gotten to the point where taking a
shower
after a PT session is dangerous to the wee ones' health?
Really?
One more notch in the pussification of America...
I wouldn't call it quite that bad, but, if only out of consideration
for
others, if you sweat etc and have B.O., bathe.
Seems simple enough.
At home, on a daily basis works well. Most tradespeople do it that way,
and
I have yet to have a repair person in my home that smelled bad. Now, the
butt crack is an entirely different story. That's offensive. LOL
Cheri
Gosh, we have different service people in our neck of the woods then I
guess. Some of ours could use a little help in the "human fragrance
areas," apart from a (or then again maybe because of not taking a)
morning shower.
Butt cracks though.... no offense taken by me. Everyone has had a
moment of two such as that, whether from a repairman or themselves.
It's a smile and a stifled laugh. ;-)
That's because it usually a male thing, and not "everyone" has had a moment
or two such as that. Thankfully.
Cheri
It's definitely not a "male thing," Cheri. We've had some female phone
techs who had butt cracks as well.
--
I'm thinking of writing a satirically humorous post entitled "My
Colonoscopy."
Cheri
2009-08-19 18:10:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bob Rudd
That's because it usually a male thing, and not "everyone" has had a moment
or two such as that. Thankfully.
Cheri
It's definitely not a "male thing," Cheri. We've had some female phone
techs who had butt cracks as well.
I said *usually,* and only once have I seen a woman with a butt crack
showing, she was squatted down in a store looking at something on the bottom
shelf, but I've sure seen a lot of men.

Cheri

Cheri
Peach
2009-08-19 18:54:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Cheri
That's because it usually a male thing, and not "everyone" has had a moment
or two such as that. Thankfully.
Cheri
It's definitely not a "male thing," Cheri.  We've had some female phone
techs who had butt cracks as well.
I said *usually,* and only once have I seen a woman with a butt crack
showing, she was squatted down in a store looking at something on the bottom
shelf, but I've sure seen a lot of men.
Cheri
Cheri
The low cut jeans make it pretty tough sometimes.....ultra low.....my
daughter always wears a belt because she fears this.

Peach
Bob Rudd
2009-08-19 04:55:06 UTC
Permalink
Taking a shower after P.E. should have nothing to do about a show
of
authority and everything to do with developing good hygienes.
Yeah, but kids can learn to shower at home.
It's not about learning how to shower, it's about learning when to
shower. Waiting through an entire school day smelling like clabbered
milk, then showering when you get home doesn't really do the trick.
Damn, they're going to be lost in the work force if they're in the
trades
then. It's amazing how many physical exertion workers shower when they
get
home
Is it equally amazing to you that they work all day doing that job and
don't stop halfway through and crowd into a small room together for
hours at a time?
Tell that to the crowd of roofers (friends of ours) that have lunch at
Denny's just about every day. They don't stink, and after working at a
high
school for many years, after the mandatory showers were over, I never
smelled a ripe kid either. Now, if you want to work on some of those
ghastly
perfumes/after shaves that are knocking us over in confined places, I
could
get behind that.
Cheri
Hey, you work at Denny's?
Nope, but I have worked at a high school, and I was a bartender. Now, some
of those people in the bar could have benefitted from a good scrubbing.
Cheri
Good mix of jobs. Good on you.
--
I'm thinking of writing a satirically humorous post entitled "My
Colonoscopy."
Bob Rudd
2009-08-19 05:30:27 UTC
Permalink
In article <***@4ax.com>, zob <zobva1
@ gmail.com> says...
If I'm not mistaken, many schools do have a policy banning cell phone
use during class hours.
I wouldn't just ban their use. I'd ban their possession on school
grounds.
I made it through junior high and high school just fine without one. So
can they.
Uphill in the snow both ways, right?
--
The house was full of wildlife and all the pies were gone.
hehehe, not even I, at my age, had it that bad.
I think, seriously, that those hardships were far more prevalent in
our parents' generation. My father literally did walk 5 miles each
way to high school, often in the snow in the winter time. There were
no school busses in the '30's. We baby boomers were a privileged
generation compared to our parents. And the younger generation is now
so far removed from any of those hardships that having to walk miles
in the snow to go to school has become a joke.
---
Zob
Ok zob, please sit down. You might want a glass of water by your table
as well.

We agree totally on this without one point, at all, of disagreement.

;-)
--
I'm thinking of writing a satirically humorous post entitled "My
Colonoscopy."
Bob Rudd
2009-08-19 05:38:49 UTC
Permalink
In article <***@4ax.com>, zob <zobva1
@ gmail.com> says...
Yesterday on the news I saw an television ad from England on texting
while driving. Three girls and a baby are in a car, motoring down the
road, having fun, giggling, and texting while driving. The car veers
over the middle and gets slammed head-on and the girls heads rock back
and forth and the airbags explode while the car gets turned into
oncoming traffic and another car nails it from the side. The three
passengers are dead and it shows the emergency workers using the jaws of
life in an attempt to get the driver free. The ad is pretty graphic but
the intent is get noticed.
Just last month, as of July 1st it is illegal to text while driving
here in Virginia. The same new law also band reading while driving.
Why do we need these ridiculous laws?
Every single state in the Union already has a law against driving while
distracted. That covers everything-- reading, texting, talking on the
phone, talking to kids in the back seat, corralling loose pets, putting
on makeup, fiddling with the CD player, eating, whatever.
Why do we feel the need to legislate against ever single possible
iteration?
If someone plows into someone else because they were texting, charge
them with reckless under the distracted driving law. No need for a
separate statute to cover every conceivable thing that could lead to a
wreck.
BTW, I did not write any of the above, and I agree with you about the need
for excess legislation.
Cheri
All of that is fine....until you are the one injured and you can't
collect because a court rules that the statute being discussed here was
not intended to protect you. That's really the crux of the matter.
I thought from what you said when John Edwards was running for VP
that you disdain injury lawyers and lawsuits.
---
Zob
Disdain yes although there is also a need to make use of the same from
time to time as required which I/wife have done at various stages and
levels. An example specific with you is when you were dismissed for
refusing to terminate your employee and were set up. Right to work or
not, I said "get to an attorney." You chose one road as a result but
I'd have been more likely, personality based, to have traveled down the
other one and pressed the matter. The proverbial "ambulance chaser" as
Edwards was, is a bit of a different breed of legal eagle in that
regard.

As I said in another thread, yesterday I think, ..... our personal
attorneys are on my wife's and I cell phones with a speed dial
associated with them. It's like carrying a legal weapon. You don't
expect to use it but it's a nice thing to have within close distance in
case you do.
--
I'm thinking of writing a satirically humorous post entitled "My
Colonoscopy."
Bob Rudd
2009-08-19 05:40:39 UTC
Permalink
In article <***@4ax.com>, zob <zobva1
@ gmail.com> says...
Post by Bob Rudd
@ gmail.com> says...
I have honestly, no joke, heard people talking on cell phones while
shopping, saying things like, "There are two brands of sour cream
here...which should I get?" Actually having a conversation about
which brand of sour cream to buy. Oh my god, just make a choice on
your own. If for some reason it's the wrong choice, then just buy a
different brand next time.
--S.
LOL, and the sour cream is a major crisis compared to some of those cell
phone conversations.
Cheri
I remember once being asked "...and get some olives." Then I get there
and black or green, pitted/unpitted, whole or chopped. I was confused.
Well, I guess when you're a Salad the status of the olives becomes a
lot more important. :-D
---
Zob
It's a married 30-40 year thing zob. Hades hath little fury greater
than bringing home the wrong sour cream, peanut butter etc.
And people wonder why I truly enjoy living alone ...
---
Zob
Ehhhh, it's all good in the end, except when I "forget" to buy bottled
water when it is on the list (pet peeve, paying for water unless it is
carbonated) :)
--
I'm thinking of writing a satirically humorous post entitled "My
Colonoscopy."
Bob Rudd
2009-08-19 05:43:39 UTC
Permalink
There's nothing more awkward than having to sit a grown adult down
and
explain the concept of basic hygiene to him.
I would agree with you on this, also what constitutes appropriate
business attire, particularly with women in more cases than men.
These
can be quite challenging subjects to bring forth even with a good
HR
Dept.
Proper business attire to me is the same thing you'd wear if you were
playing a round of golf - dress pants and a collared shirt.
Not for working in the White House, it isn't.
Funny, as this thread moved forward, I was thinking about you. Being
MYOB nosy.....do you get a clothing allowance?
Yep, it's called my salary.
I meant beyond that, Secret Agent Man! ;-)
I'm thinking, depending on what you might have to wear, armor and
"strike force" wise on any given day that you may need to purchase
larger than normal sized clothes than you normally would do so. Seems
to me, in that case, and because of the nature of your work (let's face
it, if you have POTUS....a $200 off the rack Syms suit might not cut it,
good as it might be), you merit a clothing allowance I would suggest.
Tell it to Congress. They don't seem to think so.
I'd be happy to take up the cause, free of charge, as the opportunities
arise. If enough pork can be thrown in most bills, that should be
something very small in cost (either as an expenditure or tax
deduction/credit) so as to be doable, regardless of party affiliation
since what you folks do protects VIPs of both parties.
--
I'm thinking of writing a satirically humorous post entitled "My
Colonoscopy."
Thanatos
2009-08-19 11:50:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bob Rudd
Post by Thanatos
In article
There's nothing more awkward than having to sit a grown adult
down
and
explain the concept of basic hygiene to him.
I would agree with you on this, also what constitutes
appropriate
business attire, particularly with women in more cases than
men.
These
can be quite challenging subjects to bring forth even with a
good
HR
Dept.
Proper business attire to me is the same thing you'd wear if you
were
playing a round of golf - dress pants and a collared shirt.
Not for working in the White House, it isn't.
Funny, as this thread moved forward, I was thinking about you. Being
MYOB nosy.....do you get a clothing allowance?
Yep, it's called my salary.
I meant beyond that, Secret Agent Man! ;-)
I'm thinking, depending on what you might have to wear, armor and
"strike force" wise on any given day that you may need to purchase
larger than normal sized clothes than you normally would do so. Seems
to me, in that case, and because of the nature of your work (let's face
it, if you have POTUS....a $200 off the rack Syms suit might not cut it,
good as it might be), you merit a clothing allowance I would suggest.
Tell it to Congress. They don't seem to think so.
I'd be happy to take up the cause, free of charge, as the opportunities
arise. If enough pork can be thrown in most bills, that should be
something very small in cost (either as an expenditure or tax
deduction/credit) so as to be doable, regardless of party affiliation
since what you folks do protects VIPs of both parties.
Yeah, it's amazing that the federal government is spending more money
than in all of American history combined, but are we seeing any of it?
Nope. Our budget is actually getting slashed.
Bob Rudd
2009-08-19 14:23:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Thanatos
Post by Bob Rudd
Post by Thanatos
In article
There's nothing more awkward than having to sit a grown adult
down
and
explain the concept of basic hygiene to him.
I would agree with you on this, also what constitutes
appropriate
business attire, particularly with women in more cases than
men.
These
can be quite challenging subjects to bring forth even with a
good
HR
Dept.
Proper business attire to me is the same thing you'd wear if you
were
playing a round of golf - dress pants and a collared shirt.
Not for working in the White House, it isn't.
Funny, as this thread moved forward, I was thinking about you. Being
MYOB nosy.....do you get a clothing allowance?
Yep, it's called my salary.
I meant beyond that, Secret Agent Man! ;-)
I'm thinking, depending on what you might have to wear, armor and
"strike force" wise on any given day that you may need to purchase
larger than normal sized clothes than you normally would do so. Seems
to me, in that case, and because of the nature of your work (let's face
it, if you have POTUS....a $200 off the rack Syms suit might not cut it,
good as it might be), you merit a clothing allowance I would suggest.
Tell it to Congress. They don't seem to think so.
I'd be happy to take up the cause, free of charge, as the opportunities
arise. If enough pork can be thrown in most bills, that should be
something very small in cost (either as an expenditure or tax
deduction/credit) so as to be doable, regardless of party affiliation
since what you folks do protects VIPs of both parties.
Yeah, it's amazing that the federal government is spending more money
than in all of American history combined, but are we seeing any of it?
Nope. Our budget is actually getting slashed.
....and God forbid something happens, because you folks will take the
heat about not getting the job done.
--
I'm thinking of writing a satirically humorous post entitled "My
Colonoscopy."
Bob Rudd
2009-08-19 05:46:50 UTC
Permalink
No more unenforceable than the ban on chewing gum when I went
through.
Somehow teachers always managed to find it. And losing a $300 iPhone
is
a more bitter pill to swallow than losing a pack of gum. Wouldn't
take
too many kids losing them before the word would get out.
The teacher would probably be in grave peril from the students... and
especially the parents. ;-)
a-yup. They'd better give it back to the kids after school ends that
day
or I'd pursue theft charges against the person who took it.
If cell phones were prohibited on the school property and your kid
took it to school, you'd sue the school for confiscating it? Why,
John Edwards would be so proud it would bring a tear to his eye!
Only if they kept it after class was over for that day. I'm certainly
not going to just say "okay" if they decide to permanently take
possession of something I purchased for my kid. That's called theft.
If you bring a prohibited item into a government building, assuming
you've been properly notified ahead of time, confiscation of that item
is perfectly legal and is not theft under any state's penal code.
A valid point, Thanatos. However, I don't think very many public school
board, especially in the D.C. area, want to chance a battery of lawyers
each bringing a separate filing to get cell phone back, regardless of
what you, practically and legally, have pointed out as to be the case.
We're really speaking here about the differences between something more
serious than a cell phone etc. where confiscation is likely to occur and
practically...be enforced under those laws, aren't we?
Well, since it's well-established law, it really doesn't matter how many
lawyers file suits. They'll all be dismissed summarily based on statute
and precedent.
Yes, but there is a cost to the local government/school board for each
suit, summarily dismissed or not.... and there is always the occasional
judge or two who will permit such a case to proceed which keeps the
locale's legal bill billing clock going tick-tock.
Besides, Vandar wasn't suggesting suing to get the phone back. He said
he'd press criminal theft charges, which simply don't exist under the
law.
I'd go the attorney phone call, followed by e-mail, followed by letter
etc. route, if I thought it was necessary.
--
I'm thinking of writing a satirically humorous post entitled "My
Colonoscopy."
Bob Rudd
2009-08-19 05:49:51 UTC
Permalink
Yesterday on the news I saw an television ad from England on texting
while driving. Three girls and a baby are in a car, motoring down the
road, having fun, giggling, and texting while driving. The car veers
over the middle and gets slammed head-on and the girls heads rock back
and forth and the airbags explode while the car gets turned into
oncoming traffic and another car nails it from the side. The three
passengers are dead and it shows the emergency workers using the jaws of
life in an attempt to get the driver free. The ad is pretty graphic but
the intent is get noticed.
Just last month, as of July 1st it is illegal to text while driving
here in Virginia. The same new law also band reading while driving.
Why do we need these ridiculous laws?
Because there will be someone capable of finding a loophole around them
in such a way as to render most of them already on the books as useless.
Don't get me wrong, buddy, we agree but pragmatically......
Look at the guy who single handedly appears to have beaten the DWI law
in the Commonwealth a few weeks back because the examiner wasn't present
for cross-examination?
That's not a loophole, that's basic Constitutional Law 101. A defendant
has the right to confront his/her accuser. A 1L law student could have
told them that. The fact that Virginia has been operating in an
unconstitutional manner for a decade or more speaks more to the
incompetence of the state administration than anything else.
Ah, but it also speaks to the inability of our VA lawyers to find such
loopholes as well, doesn't it? If so, why is that? Do they lack the
creativeness that lawyers in other jurisdictions have or is it something
else? Realistically though, Thanatos, stuff like this, which you're
right is ConLaw 101, happens a lot of the time, throughout the country
and results in new laws as well as amendments to existing ones. It's
just the way it is, not the way it should be.
--
I'm thinking of writing a satirically humorous post entitled "My
Colonoscopy."
Thanatos
2009-08-19 11:47:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bob Rudd
Yesterday on the news I saw an television ad from England on texting
while driving. Three girls and a baby are in a car, motoring down the
road, having fun, giggling, and texting while driving. The car veers
over the middle and gets slammed head-on and the girls heads rock back
and forth and the airbags explode while the car gets turned into
oncoming traffic and another car nails it from the side. The three
passengers are dead and it shows the emergency workers using the jaws of
life in an attempt to get the driver free. The ad is pretty graphic but
the intent is get noticed.
Just last month, as of July 1st it is illegal to text while driving
here in Virginia. The same new law also band reading while driving.
Why do we need these ridiculous laws?
Because there will be someone capable of finding a loophole around them
in such a way as to render most of them already on the books as useless.
Don't get me wrong, buddy, we agree but pragmatically......
Look at the guy who single handedly appears to have beaten the DWI law
in the Commonwealth a few weeks back because the examiner wasn't present
for cross-examination?
That's not a loophole, that's basic Constitutional Law 101. A defendant
has the right to confront his/her accuser. A 1L law student could have
told them that. The fact that Virginia has been operating in an
unconstitutional manner for a decade or more speaks more to the
incompetence of the state administration than anything else.
Ah, but it also speaks to the inability of our VA lawyers to find such
loopholes as well, doesn't it?
It's not a "loophole", Bob. It's rock solid constitutional law. One of
the fundamental freedoms we're guaranteed as citizens.
Bob Rudd
2009-08-19 14:21:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Thanatos
Post by Bob Rudd
Yesterday on the news I saw an television ad from England on texting
while driving. Three girls and a baby are in a car, motoring down
the
road, having fun, giggling, and texting while driving. The car veers
over the middle and gets slammed head-on and the girls heads rock
back
and forth and the airbags explode while the car gets turned into
oncoming traffic and another car nails it from the side. The three
passengers are dead and it shows the emergency workers using the
jaws of
life in an attempt to get the driver free. The ad is pretty graphic
but
the intent is get noticed.
Just last month, as of July 1st it is illegal to text while driving
here in Virginia. The same new law also band reading while driving.
Why do we need these ridiculous laws?
Because there will be someone capable of finding a loophole around them
in such a way as to render most of them already on the books as useless.
Don't get me wrong, buddy, we agree but pragmatically......
Look at the guy who single handedly appears to have beaten the DWI law
in the Commonwealth a few weeks back because the examiner wasn't present
for cross-examination?
That's not a loophole, that's basic Constitutional Law 101. A defendant
has the right to confront his/her accuser. A 1L law student could have
told them that. The fact that Virginia has been operating in an
unconstitutional manner for a decade or more speaks more to the
incompetence of the state administration than anything else.
Ah, but it also speaks to the inability of our VA lawyers to find such
loopholes as well, doesn't it?
It's not a "loophole", Bob. It's rock solid constitutional law. One of
the fundamental freedoms we're guaranteed as citizens.
Yes, I agree. However, again, why did it take VA lawyers so long for
just one of them to make the argument? Shouldn't one of them, most all
of them, hit that state law in the very first case it was used?
--
I'm thinking of writing a satirically humorous post entitled "My
Colonoscopy."
Peter Lawrence
2009-08-19 05:50:27 UTC
Permalink
Interesting Peach....as someone who enjoys grocery shopping....for me
the far bigger annoyances are: 1) Mothers who cannot/will not control
their kids in a store, by far and away, number 1. and 2) Honest to
goodness seniors who just stand in front of a product for minutes trying
to figure if they want Peter Pan or Skippy for example. It's not cost
in their cases, I assure you, it's the inability to make a decision.
Those two cases bug me, too....but the self-centeredness of a person
on a cell phone, oblivious to their surroundings, is much more
annoying. I'm not saying that you can't use one to discuss brands of
sour cream, but get the hell out of the way and call, then get off.
I'm talking about the people who carry on personal conversations for
the duration of their 45 minutes shopping trip.
Peach
==========
Block the aisles, and startle you with a loud reply when you think they're
talking to you too. I especially hate it when they're talking about very
personal stuff, that you don't even want to hear, but can't help hearing. No
class IMO.
Cheri
All of those bug me, too, but I've learned long ago that all I can
control is how I personally allow it to impact me and how I choose to
react. Makes life a WHOLE lot easier and my blood pressure lower.
I no longer personalize rude peoples' actions anymore (e.g.,
cellphones, aggressive drivers). It's not about me, they're just
asshole world citizens to everyone in their orbit.
-greg
How'd you do it, greg? I haven't reached that point to the degree you
have and I would like, as yet.
Depersonalize it. Nine times out of ten, rude, public behavior is not
about you.
Spot on point. Thank you for pointing it out to me. It should be obvious
but it was a "duh" moment.
Letting it go is a long, on-going and sometimes arduous
process, but ultimately very satisfying.
I readily agree.....it's the long and arduous sans results that I'm have
trouble grasping the concept though.
Think about it this way, if it helps.

Do you value your time? I bet you do.

Do you value your mind? I bet you do.

So why let a total stranger spend precious time in your mind rent free?

You mind could be more productive thinking about *other* things. So don't
let a stranger's (or just about anyone else's) actions that you can't
control occupy your mind and waste your brain's "CPU" cycles on something
that's totally unproductive and not useful in your life. You'll be doing
yourself a big favor not dwelling on the rude actions of others.

:)

- Peter
Bob Rudd
2009-08-19 06:30:23 UTC
Permalink
In article <h6g3r5$2tj$***@news.eternal-september.org>, ***@aol.com
says...
Post by Peter Lawrence
Interesting Peach....as someone who enjoys grocery shopping....for me
the far bigger annoyances are: 1) Mothers who cannot/will not control
their kids in a store, by far and away, number 1. and 2) Honest to
goodness seniors who just stand in front of a product for minutes trying
to figure if they want Peter Pan or Skippy for example. It's not cost
in their cases, I assure you, it's the inability to make a decision.
Those two cases bug me, too....but the self-centeredness of a person
on a cell phone, oblivious to their surroundings, is much more
annoying. I'm not saying that you can't use one to discuss brands of
sour cream, but get the hell out of the way and call, then get off.
I'm talking about the people who carry on personal conversations for
the duration of their 45 minutes shopping trip.
Peach
==========
Block the aisles, and startle you with a loud reply when you think they're
talking to you too. I especially hate it when they're talking about very
personal stuff, that you don't even want to hear, but can't help hearing. No
class IMO.
Cheri
All of those bug me, too, but I've learned long ago that all I can
control is how I personally allow it to impact me and how I choose to
react. Makes life a WHOLE lot easier and my blood pressure lower.
I no longer personalize rude peoples' actions anymore (e.g.,
cellphones, aggressive drivers). It's not about me, they're just
asshole world citizens to everyone in their orbit.
-greg
How'd you do it, greg? I haven't reached that point to the degree you
have and I would like, as yet.
Depersonalize it. Nine times out of ten, rude, public behavior is not
about you.
Spot on point. Thank you for pointing it out to me. It should be obvious
but it was a "duh" moment.
Letting it go is a long, on-going and sometimes arduous
process, but ultimately very satisfying.
I readily agree.....it's the long and arduous sans results that I'm have
trouble grasping the concept though.
Think about it this way, if it helps.
Do you value your time? I bet you do.
Do you value your mind? I bet you do.
So why let a total stranger spend precious time in your mind rent free?
You mind could be more productive thinking about *other* things. So don't
let a stranger's (or just about anyone else's) actions that you can't
control occupy your mind and waste your brain's "CPU" cycles on something
that's totally unproductive and not useful in your life. You'll be doing
yourself a big favor not dwelling on the rude actions of others.
:)
- Peter
Very well put Peter, thanks a great deal!
--
I'm thinking of writing a satirically humorous post entitled "My
Colonoscopy."
Bob Rudd
2009-08-19 05:50:41 UTC
Permalink
As the availability of pay
phones disappears,
You have pay phones around where you are? I think I've seen two in the
past year throughout the DC area.
--
I'm thinking of writing a satirically humorous post entitled "My
Colonoscopy."
fmomoon
2009-08-19 06:12:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bob Rudd
As the availability of pay
phones disappears,
You have pay phones around where you are? I think I've seen two in the
past year throughout the DC area.
--
I'm thinking of writing a satirically humorous post entitled "My
Colonoscopy."
That was my point. Around here, they're taking pay phones out at an
incredible speed.
--
Moni
I am a Nobody.
Nobody is Perfect.
Therefore I am Perfect.
Bob Rudd
2009-08-19 06:31:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by fmomoon
Post by Bob Rudd
As the availability of pay
phones disappears,
You have pay phones around where you are? I think I've seen two in the
past year throughout the DC area.
--
I'm thinking of writing a satirically humorous post entitled "My
Colonoscopy."
That was my point. Around here, they're taking pay phones out at an
incredible speed.
Even most of the better hotels in DC no longer have them. The sole
remaining traditional phone booth in DC was removed about a year ago and
was written up in the Post. I think about 5 free standing, non booth,
pay phones remain..and I bet they are not in working order due to
vandalism.
--
I'm thinking of writing a satirically humorous post entitled "My
Colonoscopy."
Bob Rudd
2009-08-19 06:47:38 UTC
Permalink
In article <***@4ax.com>,
***@madeitup.com says...


"Bob Rudd" <***@verizon.net> wrote in message
For me though, the worst by far are the uncontrolled kids. Just because
one is a stay at home parent (mother or father) does not mean that the
grocery store is your kids' personal racetrack and playground.
Yeah, I didn't quite get that association, either. Please explain it,
Bob.
-greg
At first greg, when I briefly glanced at your question a few hours ago,
my immediate mental response was "whoops, I made a mistake and stay at
home parents don't necessarily have the worst behaving kids," which I
was going to correct and apologize for, when I got to this point of
writing now.

However, I've been coming back to it, in my mind, the past few hours,
as I've been away and thinking about it.

Uncontrolled kids who use the grocery store as their personal racetrack
and playground, for me, is the worst part of grocery shopping, an
activity most find mundane, even painful, but one I enjoy. The parents
are really the ones at fault for not controlling and training their
children. My POV comes purely from self preservation and my desire to
keep from knee or rod replacement in my leg.

As I thought about it more and more...... I found myself thinking if
there might really be a difference in the behavior based on stay at home
or working parents in our area and locale, which is the only one I can
actually address and use as a basis for comparison.

After thinking about it, overall, I do think that the behavior, at least
in our grocery store, does tend to be worse with kids who have a stay at
home parent with them at the time. I don't know exactly why that is but
it is, IMHO.

I shop at various days and times. I see professionally dressed people
with kids in tow who, likely, have just picked their kids up from
daycare or grandmas, etc. Other times, I see parents either whom I am
acquainted with or whom I think I can make a reasonable estimaten that
they are a stay at home parent. It's more than one's way of dress that
leads me to conclude they are a stay at home parent. It's also the
conversations I hear from them in a checkout line with others, cell
phone
calls, etc.

For whatever reasons, I came to the conclusion about an hour ago, that
the kids from the stay at home parent's group tend to be just a bit more
uncontrolled in our local supermarket. The differences between the two
groups aren't that much so as to make a broad statement but rather a
narrow one in terms of my observation as to separating the two groups.

The daycare/grandma pick-up kids, their parents are on a mission...get
the groceries as fast and efficiently as possible and get on home for
dinner and to kick back. They keep a focus on the kids being more
focused on their behaviors that will permit them to do that. OTOH, the
stay at home parent.... while shopping is also housework and a job, it
is also a bit more of a social outing and activity for them. They see
others and interact more while they are doing it. They linger...take
more time etc. They are getting out as opposed to the working parent's
going home. In the spirit of getting out, their kids (again in our
market which is all I can address) tend to be a bit more unrestrained
and less controlled as a result. It also becomes more of a family
outing as compared to a family chore.

YMMV and I don't think the differences in behaviors of the kids are
sufficiently different for me to consider it a more significant issue as
compared to a simple and personal observation. If I had to put a number
on it, I'd put it at 55-45 or 60-40 at max. Again remember, for me, it
all comes down to unsupervised kids who race through aisles, don't pay
as much attention as they should etc..... all adding up to potential
injuries to my knee and leg that could really become a significant
problem for me. I'm looking at it from a type of "self preservation."
Once either groups kids hit around 8 or so, I'd call the behaviors even
and pretty good in both groups. It's the 3-6 year olds, albeit from
both groups, that I carefully watch as potential knee and/or rod
replacement initiators for me if they take me down/out while they are on
whirling dervish roaming spree. It's just that I think I'm a slight
percentage safer from that surgical visit when the kids in that age
group are with their working parent.
--
I'm thinking of writing a satirically humorous post entitled "My
Colonoscopy."
Suzanne D.
2009-08-19 09:45:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bob Rudd
OTOH, the
stay at home parent.... while shopping is also housework and a job, it
is also a bit more of a social outing and activity for them. They see
others and interact more while they are doing it. They linger...take
more time etc. They are getting out as opposed to the working parent's
going home.
Wow, you have never actually met a SAHM, have you? I don't know ANY who
would consider shopping a social experience. Do you honestly think we
literally "stay at home" all day? You make us sound like hermits who live
and die for that milk run twice a week.

If we are talking about "in my experience," then I can say that, in an area
where most of the moms are raising their own kids, the children's population
here is far better behaved than any I have seen elsewhere. My theory is
that, with one main disciplinarian, kids don't have the ambiguity of what
constitutes acceptable behavior. They only have one disciplinary
experience, as opposed to several that may conflict. Mom says no cookies,
grandma says two cookies, which is right? Kids with more than one main
disciplinarian get mixed signals in general, which may or may not transfer
to social behavior.

Not to mention that most working parents tend to be more concerned with
"quality time" than anything else, which may cause them to be a bit more
lenient with their kids (as opposed to a SAHM who can spare an hour or two
of "Go to your room!" "I hate you Mom!" "No TV for you tonight!" without
feeling like she's ruined their entire day together). You have three hours
with your kid, do you really want to say no and risk a screaming tantrum for
one of those three hours? Or do you just head the tantrum off at the pass
by giving them what they want?

(Hey, maybe THAT'S why you observe working-mom kids to be better behaved!
They get everything they want at the store for the sake of keeping the
waters calm!)
--S.
zob
2009-08-19 12:39:21 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 19 Aug 2009 03:45:56 -0600, "Suzanne D."
Post by Suzanne D.
(Hey, maybe THAT'S why you observe working-mom kids to be better behaved!
They get everything they want at the store for the sake of keeping the
waters calm!)
--S.
This topic reminded me of this really funny French tv ad:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ElgkLZX401E
---
Zob
Cheri
2009-08-19 13:56:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bob Rudd
For whatever reasons, I came to the conclusion about an hour ago, that
the kids from the stay at home parent's group tend to be just a bit more
uncontrolled in our local supermarket. The differences between the two
groups aren't that much so as to make a broad statement but rather a
narrow one in terms of my observation as to separating the two groups.
How would you even know how to separate the groups though? You said you go
at different times, and not knowing any of these people personally, how do
you determine that the parent of the misbehaved kids is a stay at home
parent, as opposed to maybe just having the day off of work, or being on
vacation? How do you know the person with the kids is even the parent, as
opposed to being an aunt or uncle etc. I don't think your observation could
hold up, since there are too many unknowns.

Cheri
Bob Rudd
2009-08-19 16:55:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Cheri
Post by Bob Rudd
For whatever reasons, I came to the conclusion about an hour ago, that
the kids from the stay at home parent's group tend to be just a bit more
uncontrolled in our local supermarket. The differences between the two
groups aren't that much so as to make a broad statement but rather a
narrow one in terms of my observation as to separating the two groups.
How would you even know how to separate the groups though? You said you go
at different times, and not knowing any of these people personally, how do
you determine that the parent of the misbehaved kids is a stay at home
parent, as opposed to maybe just having the day off of work, or being on
vacation? How do you know the person with the kids is even the parent, as
opposed to being an aunt or uncle etc. I don't think your observation could
hold up, since there are too many unknowns.
Cheri
Fair questions, Cheri and good insights which I partially had in mind
(day off, yes....vacation, no). Some basic assumptions.....if a parent
has kids in hand/tow around 6 PM and s/he is in a business suit etc. I
think they are coming from work/daycare/grandma's etc. If it's 2 PM in
the afternoon (ok, they could be telecommuting like me, or work from
home independently, I readily admit), but their conversations with
others, in the store and/or cell, indicate that they are stay-at-
homes....they probably are. I discount clothing in these encounters.

Some I do know. It's a community supermarket. You know people from
the: area, church, schools, neighborhoods etc. "Friends of friends" and
all that.

As I said, the spread of the differences is slight as well as it could
(likely is) a product of my locale and not related at all to anyone
else's area and circumstances. I neither mean, or imply, anything
regarding the overall parenting of one group over another....just a
casual, off the cuff, observation from a reconsideration of what was
originally a toss-away remark when I said "stay at home" instead of
leaving it out. It would have been easier for me to simply apologize
and move on but as I thought about it more and more, I noted that just
around us, it does seem to be the case but by a very small amount, IMHO.

I'm really only concerned with simple self-preservation. I'm one good 5
year old's "s/he didn't mean it" (and I know that) from my meeting "Mr
Knee Replacement" as well as "Ms. Remaining Titanium-Rod's" re-breaking
my leg....or worst possible situation, a marriage of the two along with
a "surprise" immediate birth announcment of a third orthopedic issue
resulting from the two's immediate conception.

After rethinking this some more, I've decided that as much as I really
like grocery shopping, I might consider some type of body armor on my
leg for protection. Maybe a combination of a catcher's knee/leg guard
with a couple of their "knee squatters" added in the back of my leg
rather than just the traditional one that they use. Hockey goalie pads
would be too cumbersome.
--
I'm thinking of writing a satirically humorous post entitled "My
Colonoscopy."
Cheri
2009-08-19 17:19:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bob Rudd
After rethinking this some more, I've decided that as much as I really
like grocery shopping, I might consider some type of body armor on my
leg for protection. Maybe a combination of a catcher's knee/leg guard
with a couple of their "knee squatters" added in the back of my leg
rather than just the traditional one that they use. Hockey goalie pads
would be too cumbersome.
LOL, I don't really care for grocery shopping after 45+ years of it, hubby
will simply not do it, other than picking up a forgotten item for me once in
awhile, but I always try to go early in the morning, usually by 8:00. Very
few kidlets out at that time, even in the summer. I never go on the weekends
if at all possible.

Cheri
Bob Rudd
2009-08-19 17:35:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Cheri
Post by Bob Rudd
After rethinking this some more, I've decided that as much as I really
like grocery shopping, I might consider some type of body armor on my
leg for protection. Maybe a combination of a catcher's knee/leg guard
with a couple of their "knee squatters" added in the back of my leg
rather than just the traditional one that they use. Hockey goalie pads
would be too cumbersome.
LOL, I don't really care for grocery shopping after 45+ years of it, hubby
will simply not do it, other than picking up a forgotten item for me once in
awhile, but I always try to go early in the morning, usually by 8:00. Very
few kidlets out at that time, even in the summer. I never go on the weekends
if at all possible.
Cheri
I'm probably nuts, Cheri. I've always loved grocery shopping as well as
doing the laundry.
--
I'm thinking of writing a satirically humorous post entitled "My
Colonoscopy."
Suzy
2009-08-19 20:20:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Cheri
Post by Bob Rudd
For whatever reasons, I came to the conclusion about an hour ago, that
the kids from the stay at home parent's group tend to be just a bit more
uncontrolled in our local supermarket. The differences between the two
groups aren't that much so as to make a broad statement but rather a
narrow one in terms of my observation as to separating the two groups.
How would you even know how to separate the groups though? You said you go
at different times, and not knowing any of these people personally, how do
you determine that the parent of the misbehaved kids is a stay at home
parent, as opposed to maybe just having the day off of work, or being on
vacation? How do you know the person with the kids is even the parent, as
opposed to being an aunt or uncle etc. I don't think your observation
could hold up, since there are too many unknowns.
Cheri
Not to mention the fact that not everyone works 9 to 5. Geez!
--
Susie
Time flies when you are having rum!
Thanatos
2009-08-19 11:48:33 UTC
Permalink
In article
Post by Thanatos
In article
Oh, they can't play dodgeball any more, either. Much to violent. Someone
might get an owie and then sue.
Right, because there's absolutely nothing wrong with the biggest and
strongest kids using the smallest ones for target practice.
See what I mean?
Did that not happen when you played dodgeball as a kid?
No, we all had a great time. We loved it when it rained, because that
meant outside PE was canceled and we'd be in gym playing dodge ball (or
battle ball, as we called it).
Lesmond
2009-08-19 15:58:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Thanatos
In article
Post by Thanatos
In article
Oh, they can't play dodgeball any more, either. Much to violent. Someone
might get an owie and then sue.
Right, because there's absolutely nothing wrong with the biggest and
strongest kids using the smallest ones for target practice.
See what I mean?
Did that not happen when you played dodgeball as a kid?
No, we all had a great time. We loved it when it rained, because that
meant outside PE was canceled and we'd be in gym playing dodge ball (or
battle ball, as we called it).
Well, it was violent in my school. One kid got a finger broken. Other, more
minor injuries were very common. It simply makes sense that if injuries are
forseeable and preventable that the schools would do something to make gym
safer.



--
The house was full of wildlife and all the pies were gone.
Cheri
2009-08-19 17:43:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Thanatos
In article
Post by Thanatos
In article
Oh, they can't play dodgeball any more, either. Much to violent. Someone
might get an owie and then sue.
Right, because there's absolutely nothing wrong with the biggest and
strongest kids using the smallest ones for target practice.
See what I mean?
Did that not happen when you played dodgeball as a kid?
No, we all had a great time. We loved it when it rained, because that
meant outside PE was canceled and we'd be in gym playing dodge ball (or
battle ball, as we called it).
I imagine the people that were doing the pummeling had a great time at
least. Seems to me that they should have sent everybody out in the rain to
play, then you wouldn't have to worry about sitting next to someone who
hadn't showered for a whole period. LOL


Cheri
Callen
2009-08-19 13:28:20 UTC
Permalink
In article <f6176372-5e54-432c-902a-e93927dc9691
@e18g2000vbe.googlegroups.com>, ***@lpbroadband.net says...
In article <57d95046-6e1e-4ba6-b96f-7a290923d9e5
@r34g2000vba.googlegroups.com>, ***@lpbroadband.net says...
I have honestly, no joke, heard people talking on cell phones while
shopping, saying things like, "There are two brands of sour cream
here...which should I get?"  Actually having a conversation about which
brand of sour cream to buy.  Oh my god, just make a choice on your own.
If for some reason it's the wrong choice, then just buy a different brand
next time.
--S.
LOL, and the sour cream is a major crisis compared to some of those cell
phone conversations.
Cheri
Cell phone use in a grocery store is a pet peeve of mine. Usually
those people are slowly sashaying through the aisles, completely
oblivious to their surroundings, the ones that cut people off or stand
in the way of a much-needed item, etc.
Peach
Interesting Peach....as someone who enjoys grocery shopping....for me
the far bigger annoyances are: 1) Mothers who cannot/will not control
their kids in a store, by far and away, number 1.  and 2)  Honest to
goodness seniors who just stand in front of a product for minutes trying
to figure if they want Peter Pan or Skippy for example.  It's not cost
in their cases, I assure you, it's the inability to make a decision.
Those two cases bug me, too....but the self-centeredness of a person
on a cell phone, oblivious to their surroundings, is much more
annoying.  I'm not saying that you can't use one to discuss brands of
sour cream, but get the hell out of the way and call, then get off.
I'm talking about the people who carry on personal conversations for
the duration of their 45 minutes shopping trip.
Peach
When I use it in a grocery store, I always go off to a side and away
from the main aisles.  I agree with you about the continual talkers, be
they in a store, restaurant etc.
For me though, the worst by far are the uncontrolled kids. Just because
one is a stay at home parent (mother or father) does not mean that the
grocery store is your kids' personal racetrack and playground.  Keep em
under control, or get the spouse/babysitter or shop at a different time
when they can do so.
--
Few events change the way you view life as when you hold your grandchild
in your arms.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
What on earth does being a stay at home parent have to do with
uncontrolled kids in the supermarket? I've seen plenty of kids with
Dad or Mom who have gotten off work, picked them up from daycare and
gone to the market, with the kids so wired that they're whirling
around like little dervishes.

Callen in VA
Bob Rudd
2009-08-19 14:13:40 UTC
Permalink
In article <48edeec2-7e92-4c92-b8b7-
***@s6g2000vbp.googlegroups.com>, ***@yahoo.com
says...
Post by Callen
In article <f6176372-5e54-432c-902a-e93927dc9691
@e18g2000vbe.googlegroups.com>, ***@lpbroadband.net says...
In article <57d95046-6e1e-4ba6-b96f-7a290923d9e5
@r34g2000vba.googlegroups.com>, ***@lpbroadband.net says...
I have honestly, no joke, heard people talking on cell phones while
shopping, saying things like, "There are two brands of sour cream
here...which should I get?"  Actually having a conversation about which
brand of sour cream to buy.  Oh my god, just make a choice on your own.
If for some reason it's the wrong choice, then just buy a different brand
next time.
--S.
LOL, and the sour cream is a major crisis compared to some of those cell
phone conversations.
Cheri
Cell phone use in a grocery store is a pet peeve of mine. Usually
those people are slowly sashaying through the aisles, completely
oblivious to their surroundings, the ones that cut people off or stand
in the way of a much-needed item, etc.
Peach
Interesting Peach....as someone who enjoys grocery shopping....for me
the far bigger annoyances are: 1) Mothers who cannot/will not control
their kids in a store, by far and away, number 1.  and 2)  Honest to
goodness seniors who just stand in front of a product for minutes trying
to figure if they want Peter Pan or Skippy for example.  It's not cost
in their cases, I assure you, it's the inability to make a decision.
Those two cases bug me, too....but the self-centeredness of a person
on a cell phone, oblivious to their surroundings, is much more
annoying.  I'm not saying that you can't use one to discuss brands of
sour cream, but get the hell out of the way and call, then get off.
I'm talking about the people who carry on personal conversations for
the duration of their 45 minutes shopping trip.
Peach
When I use it in a grocery store, I always go off to a side and away
from the main aisles.  I agree with you about the continual talkers, be
they in a store, restaurant etc.
For me though, the worst by far are the uncontrolled kids. Just because
one is a stay at home parent (mother or father) does not mean that the
grocery store is your kids' personal racetrack and playground.  Keep em
under control, or get the spouse/babysitter or shop at a different time
when they can do so.
--
Few events change the way you view life as when you hold your grandchild
in your arms.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
What on earth does being a stay at home parent have to do with
uncontrolled kids in the supermarket? I've seen plenty of kids with
Dad or Mom who have gotten off work, picked them up from daycare and
gone to the market, with the kids so wired that they're whirling
around like little dervishes.
Callen in VA
Callen, I responded, in detail, to greg about this late last night/early
this morning. I think it might be a function of how/when/where/etc. of
our individual shopping experiences....combined with our individual
motivations and reasons. For me, it's kids who by running around
crazily can do me some real serious physical harm purely by accident but
also because their parent isn't paying enough attention to their
behaviors at the time.
--
I'm thinking of writing a satirically humorous post entitled "My
Colonoscopy."
Suzanne D.
2009-08-19 19:02:09 UTC
Permalink
"Callen" <***@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:48edeec2-7e92-4c92-b8b7-
What on earth does being a stay at home parent have to do with
uncontrolled kids in the supermarket? I've seen plenty of kids with
Dad or Mom who have gotten off work, picked them up from daycare and
gone to the market, with the kids so wired that they're whirling
around like little dervishes.
_____________________

Frankly, I would think that anyone who attempts to go grocery shopping right
upon picking up children from a whole day in day care is just asking for it.
--S.
Peach
2009-08-19 14:05:07 UTC
Permalink
What? You don't think parents are capable of teaching good hygiene? If you
haven't learned hygiene by the time you're in high school, you're in
trouble and will probably be called on it by your classmates anyway. That
being said, I suppose that a roofer that has been working in the sun all
day, or anyone who breaks a sweat should stop and shower right after he
begins to sweat, and certainly before going to lunch? I don't think so.
YMMV
Plus, body odor isn't about poor hygiene anyway.  We tend to think that BO =
unsanitary, but that's not really the case.  You're not going to be any less
healthy if you stink for a while.  And in fact, bathing TOO often can remove
good bacteria and make you sick!
--S.
Oh, for god's sake. Now we've gotten to the point where taking a shower
after a PT session is dangerous to the wee ones' health?
Really?
One more notch in the pussification of America...- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Indeed.

Peach
Cheri
2009-08-19 17:37:29 UTC
Permalink
Oh, they can't play dodgeball any more, either. Much to violent. Someone
might get an owie and then sue.
Right, because there's absolutely nothing wrong with the biggest and
strongest kids using the smallest ones for target practice.
I was a small child, and I hated dodgeball. I was really good at tether ball
though. :-)

Cheri
Lesmond
2009-08-19 17:44:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Cheri
Oh, they can't play dodgeball any more, either. Much to violent. Someone
might get an owie and then sue.
Right, because there's absolutely nothing wrong with the biggest and
strongest kids using the smallest ones for target practice.
I was a small child, and I hated dodgeball. I was really good at tether ball
though. :-)
I've noticed a theme here. The smaller kids hated dodgeball and the bigger
kids loved it. I can't imagine why that is. Thanatos, do you have an idea?



--
The house was full of wildlife and all the pies were gone.
Bob Rudd
2009-08-19 18:10:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lesmond
Post by Cheri
Oh, they can't play dodgeball any more, either. Much to violent. Someone
might get an owie and then sue.
Right, because there's absolutely nothing wrong with the biggest and
strongest kids using the smallest ones for target practice.
I was a small child, and I hated dodgeball. I was really good at tether ball
though. :-)
I've noticed a theme here. The smaller kids hated dodgeball and the bigger
kids loved it. I can't imagine why that is. Thanatos, do you have an idea?
Throughout school, in every grade until college, I was the biggest (or
in junior and senior year of high school) among the biggest kid(s) in
class both in height and weight.

I was also the most physically picked upon. This was due to two facts.
First, I knew I could hurt, badly, anyone I wanted if I retaliated and I
did not want to do that. Second, because the ones who did the picking
(usually the smallest kids) knew it and used it to their advantage.

So, it goes both ways.

One time, one time only.... one of those kids hauled off and hit me as
hard as he could, right smack dab on my chin. It was a real haymaker.
We were 12, I think, at the time, maybe 13. He barely moved my face and
my body didn't move an inch. About the entire school yard came to a
screeching lunch recess halt. (I should add that I was a good kid who
followed the rules etc. and won the annual award for the same, most of
the time through 9 years of Catholic elementary school).

Anyways, this guy got to me. After his best shot (without provocation
other than taunting "The Gentle Giant."), I picked him up, sideways, and
threw him about four feet into the school's outside wall as hard as I
could.

Neither a nun or a priest ever said a word to me, or my family about it.
No kid ever picked on me again that was there that day, including as
many of us went through high school together.

The other kid wasn't hurt, other than pride, which was fortunate. Each
one of us on the playground that day, learned a lesson of one sort of
another and on an individual nature as well.

I avoided such physical confrontations then, and except for that day,
have always tried to do so. At the same time, at my advanced age now, I
realize that lawyers can do much better fighting for me if the need
arises. Fortunately, that also hasn't occurred very often.
--
I'm thinking of writing a satirically humorous post entitled "My
Colonoscopy."
Lesmond
2009-08-19 18:49:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bob Rudd
Post by Lesmond
Post by Cheri
Oh, they can't play dodgeball any more, either. Much to violent. Someone
might get an owie and then sue.
Right, because there's absolutely nothing wrong with the biggest and
strongest kids using the smallest ones for target practice.
I was a small child, and I hated dodgeball. I was really good at tether ball
though. :-)
I've noticed a theme here. The smaller kids hated dodgeball and the bigger
kids loved it. I can't imagine why that is. Thanatos, do you have an idea?
Throughout school, in every grade until college, I was the biggest (or
in junior and senior year of high school) among the biggest kid(s) in
class both in height and weight.
I was also the most physically picked upon. This was due to two facts.
First, I knew I could hurt, badly, anyone I wanted if I retaliated and I
did not want to do that. Second, because the ones who did the picking
(usually the smallest kids) knew it and used it to their advantage.
So, it goes both ways.
Of course it does. But it is still not right.
Post by Bob Rudd
One time, one time only.... one of those kids hauled off and hit me as
hard as he could, right smack dab on my chin. It was a real haymaker.
We were 12, I think, at the time, maybe 13. He barely moved my face and
my body didn't move an inch. About the entire school yard came to a
screeching lunch recess halt. (I should add that I was a good kid who
followed the rules etc. and won the annual award for the same, most of
the time through 9 years of Catholic elementary school).
Anyways, this guy got to me. After his best shot (without provocation
other than taunting "The Gentle Giant."), I picked him up, sideways, and
threw him about four feet into the school's outside wall as hard as I
could.
Neither a nun or a priest ever said a word to me, or my family about it.
No kid ever picked on me again that was there that day, including as
many of us went through high school together.
I'm glad to hear it. Now imagine if you were taunted the same way, but were
too small to effectively defend yourself.
Post by Bob Rudd
The other kid wasn't hurt, other than pride, which was fortunate. Each
one of us on the playground that day, learned a lesson of one sort of
another and on an individual nature as well.
I avoided such physical confrontations then, and except for that day,
have always tried to do so. At the same time, at my advanced age now, I
realize that lawyers can do much better fighting for me if the need
arises. Fortunately, that also hasn't occurred very often.
It has always amazed me that kids can get away with doing stuff in schools
that adults would be arrested for.



--
The house was full of wildlife and all the pies were gone.
Rachel
2009-08-19 19:04:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bob Rudd
Post by Cheri
Oh, they can't play dodgeball any more, either. Much to violent. Someone
might get an owie and then sue.
Right, because there's absolutely nothing wrong with the biggest and
strongest kids using the smallest ones for target practice.
I was a small child, and I hated dodgeball. I was really good at tether ball
though. :-)
I've noticed a theme here.  The smaller kids hated dodgeball and the bigger
kids loved it.  I can't imagine why that is.  Thanatos, do you have an idea?
Throughout school, in every grade until college, I was the biggest (or
in junior and senior year of high school) among the biggest kid(s) in
class both in height and weight.
I was also the most physically picked upon.  This was due to two facts.  
First, I knew I could hurt, badly, anyone I wanted if I retaliated and I
did not want to do that. Second, because the ones who did the picking
(usually the smallest kids) knew it and used it to their advantage.
So, it goes both ways.
Of course it does.  But it is still not right.
Post by Bob Rudd
One time, one time only.... one of those kids hauled off and hit me as
hard as he could, right smack dab on my chin. It was a real haymaker.  
We were 12, I think, at the time, maybe 13.  He barely moved my face and
my body didn't move an inch.  About the entire school yard came to a
screeching lunch recess halt. (I should add that I was a good kid who
followed the rules etc. and won the annual award for the same, most of
the time through 9 years of Catholic elementary school).
Anyways, this guy got to me.  After his best shot (without provocation
other than taunting "The Gentle Giant."), I picked him up, sideways, and
threw him about four feet into the school's outside wall as hard as I
could.
Neither a nun or a priest ever said a word to me, or my family about it.  
No kid ever picked on me again that was there that day, including as
many of us went through high school together.
I'm glad to hear it.  Now imagine if you were taunted the same way, but were
too small to effectively defend yourself.
Post by Bob Rudd
The other kid wasn't hurt, other than pride, which was fortunate.  Each
one of us on the playground that day, learned a lesson of one sort of
another and on an individual nature as well.
I avoided such physical confrontations then, and except for that day,
have always tried to do so.  At the same time, at my advanced age now, I
realize that lawyers can do much better fighting for me if the need
arises.  Fortunately, that also hasn't occurred very often.
It has always amazed me that kids can get away with doing stuff in schools
that adults would be arrested for.
--
The house was full of wildlife and all the pies were gone.
Have any of you read 19 Minutes by Jodi Piccoult??? It's an amazing
book about a school shooting and it addresses these issues. I highly
recommend it.
Cheri
2009-08-19 19:10:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lesmond
I've noticed a theme here. The smaller kids hated dodgeball and the bigger
kids loved it. I can't imagine why that is. Thanatos, do you have an idea?
:)
Cheri
2009-08-19 17:48:14 UTC
Permalink
If you had to sit next to that 17 year-old, 5'6 240 pound kid in the
next class after 50 minutes of exercise, I'd wager you'd change your
mind in a heartbeat, lol.
---
Zob
As I said Zob, I worked at the nearby high school for many years, there are
no mandatory showers there now, and I never once smelled a ripe kid coming
through, but are you saying that only 5'6 240 pound kids should shower? :-)

Cheri
Suzanne D.
2009-08-19 19:07:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Cheri
If you had to sit next to that 17 year-old, 5'6 240 pound kid in the
next class after 50 minutes of exercise, I'd wager you'd change your
mind in a heartbeat, lol.
---
Zob
As I said Zob, I worked at the nearby high school for many years, there
are no mandatory showers there now, and I never once smelled a ripe kid
coming through, but are you saying that only 5'6 240 pound kids should
shower? :-)
Being overweight may make you sweat more, but it isn't the sweat that
smells.
--S.
Cheri
2009-08-19 17:49:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bob Rudd
@ gmail.com> says...
I have honestly, no joke, heard people talking on cell phones while
shopping, saying things like, "There are two brands of sour cream
here...which should I get?" Actually having a conversation about
which brand of sour cream to buy. Oh my god, just make a choice on
your own. If for some reason it's the wrong choice, then just buy a
different brand next time.
--S.
LOL, and the sour cream is a major crisis compared to some of those
cell
phone conversations.
Cheri
I remember once being asked "...and get some olives." Then I get there
and black or green, pitted/unpitted, whole or chopped. I was confused.
Well, I guess when you're a Salad the status of the olives becomes a
lot more important. :-D
---
Zob
It's a married 30-40 year thing zob. Hades hath little fury greater
than bringing home the wrong sour cream, peanut butter etc.
And people wonder why I truly enjoy living alone ...
---
Zob
Fortunately, I make all those *earth shattering* decisions around here, what
kind of sour cream, what kind of peanut butter etc. ;-)

Cheri
SLGreg
2009-08-19 17:54:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Cheri
Post by Bob Rudd
@ gmail.com> says...
I have honestly, no joke, heard people talking on cell phones while
shopping, saying things like, "There are two brands of sour cream
here...which should I get?" Actually having a conversation about
which brand of sour cream to buy. Oh my god, just make a choice on
your own. If for some reason it's the wrong choice, then just buy a
different brand next time.
--S.
LOL, and the sour cream is a major crisis compared to some of those
cell
phone conversations.
Cheri
I remember once being asked "...and get some olives." Then I get there
and black or green, pitted/unpitted, whole or chopped. I was confused.
Well, I guess when you're a Salad the status of the olives becomes a
lot more important. :-D
---
Zob
It's a married 30-40 year thing zob. Hades hath little fury greater
than bringing home the wrong sour cream, peanut butter etc.
And people wonder why I truly enjoy living alone ...
---
Zob
Fortunately, I make all those *earth shattering* decisions around here, what
kind of sour cream, what kind of peanut butter etc. ;-)
Get Knudsen Hampshire Sour Cream and Jif Extra Crunchy PB and we'll be
good.

-greg
Susan
2009-08-19 18:26:03 UTC
Permalink
x-no-archive: yes
Post by SLGreg
Get Knudsen Hampshire Sour Cream and Jif Extra Crunchy PB and we'll be
good.
Breakstone, hands down, here. And only Smuckers PB.

Susan
Cheri
2009-08-19 19:18:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by SLGreg
Post by Cheri
Fortunately, I make all those *earth shattering* decisions around here, what
kind of sour cream, what kind of peanut butter etc. ;-)
Get Knudsen Hampshire Sour Cream and Jif Extra Crunchy PB and we'll be
good.
-greg
I don't buy peanut butter a whole lot, because I definitely overeat it when
I have it on hand, and I'm the only one in the house that likes it. I have a
bluejay in the yard that takes peanuts in the shells from my hand, so I buy
those, and when I want some peanut butter I shell a few, run them up in the
Bamix bowl, add a bit of equal, and I have peanut butter. I'm sort of the
same way with sour cream, don't buy it that much, but I do like Knudsen when
I do too.

Cheri

Cheri
Susan
2009-08-19 19:35:57 UTC
Permalink
x-no-archive: yes
Post by Cheri
I don't buy peanut butter a whole lot, because I definitely overeat it
when I have it on hand, and I'm the only one in the house that likes it.
I have a bluejay in the yard that takes peanuts in the shells from my
hand, so I buy those, and when I want some peanut butter I shell a few,
run them up in the Bamix bowl, add a bit of equal, and I have peanut
butter.
Sweetener, not salt??

Hmmph. :-)

Susan
Cheri
2009-08-19 20:18:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Susan
x-no-archive: yes
Post by Cheri
I don't buy peanut butter a whole lot, because I definitely overeat it
when I have it on hand, and I'm the only one in the house that likes it.
I have a bluejay in the yard that takes peanuts in the shells from my
hand, so I buy those, and when I want some peanut butter I shell a few,
run them up in the Bamix bowl, add a bit of equal, and I have peanut
butter.
Sweetener, not salt??
Hmmph. :-)
Susan
No, I buy the unsalted peanuts for the bird, but I do like about a half of a
pkg of equal in the finished product.

Cheri
Lesmond
2009-08-19 18:53:20 UTC
Permalink
And why is it so damn necessary that we track sex offenders and alert
the public to their every move, but not any other kind of offenders?
One word: recidivism.
Real sex offenders (not someone who got caught peeing outdoors) have one
of
the highest rates of recidivism of any felons, including most murderers
(serial murderers are an exception). That's why they are tracked.
So basically we're punishing people for what they might do in the
future, rather than what they've actually done.
Doesn't seem to be in line with the Constitution.
And even if the recidivism rate for sex offenses is high, there's a
bunch of offenses that are right behind it, coming close seconds and
thirds. Why not track those people, too? Why only the number one slot?
Maybe we should.
But because most real sex offenders prey on our children and women, they
have been singled out compared to other criminals.
So some citizens are more important than others?
You really don't have any idea what it's like to be small and weak, do you?
Crimes against children should most assuredly be prosecuted to at least the
fullest extent of the law.
Doesn't seem to be in line with the Constitution.
When children have the right to bear arms, then I say say every man or child
for themselves.



--
The house was full of wildlife and all the pies were gone.
Lesmond
2009-08-19 18:54:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Susan
x-no-archive: yes
But more so with pedophiles.
It's so high with so many types of crimes that your logic doesn't fit.
Try domestic violence, for one.
Adults have legal recourse. Abused women have many options. Children can't
pick up and go to a shelter.
Post by Susan
Drug crimes, two...
Define "drug crimes".



--
The house was full of wildlife and all the pies were gone.
Susan
2009-08-19 19:27:44 UTC
Permalink
x-n-archive: yes
Post by Lesmond
Adults have legal recourse. Abused women have many options. Children can't
pick up and go to a shelter.
What's that got to do with tracking them and alerting the communith to
their presence? Supervise the hell out of them, but protect everyone's
rights by not pasting scarlet letters on everyone who's committed a
crime and done time.
Post by Lesmond
Post by Susan
Drug crimes, two...
Define "drug crimes".
Ah, that's irrelevent here for the purpose of discussing public outing,
registration and tracking. It's currently illegal and highly
recidivist, dealing, meth labs and related turf violence, frex.

But I do believe that a lot of what's called drug crime is victimless
and should be legal.

Susan
Suzy
2009-08-19 19:02:25 UTC
Permalink
What? You don't think parents are capable of teaching good hygiene? If
you haven't learned hygiene by the time you're in high school, you're in
trouble and will probably be called on it by your classmates anyway. That
being said, I suppose that a roofer that has been working in the sun all
day, or anyone who breaks a sweat should stop and shower right after he
begins to sweat, and certainly before going to lunch? I don't think so.
YMMV
Plus, body odor isn't about poor hygiene anyway. We tend to think that BO
= unsanitary, but that's not really the case. You're not going to be any
less healthy if you stink for a while. And in fact, bathing TOO often can
remove good bacteria and make you sick!
--S.
Plus, there is a difference in "old sweat" and "new sweat" smells.
--
Susie
Time flies when you are having rum!
Suzy
2009-08-19 19:42:33 UTC
Permalink
The root problem is that "Physical Education" has nothing to do with
education. Having kids play volleyball or run around a track for 40
minutes teaches them *nothing*.
Who says it's about teaching/learning? It's not. It's about getting
some
exercise.
It's a class named Physical "Education" and takes place in a school.
It's not a great leap of logic.
I think phys-ed has become a joke in most schools today. It's usually
throw out a group of balls (dodge, basketball, kickballs) and little
else from what I've observed through the years.
I liked college PE where I went to school in Mass. Six PE credits per
year were required to graduate, but besides the usual sports
activities like baseball, volleyball and gymnastics we got to choose
from activities like bowling, ballroom dancing and cross-country
skiing. We had to pay for the PE activities just like any other
college course).
---
Zob
I'll take ballroom dancing for 100, Alex.
--
Susie
Time flies when you are having rum!
Suzy
2009-08-19 19:43:30 UTC
Permalink
The root problem is that "Physical Education" has nothing to do with
education. Having kids play volleyball or run around a track for 40
minutes teaches them *nothing*.
Who says it's about teaching/learning? It's not. It's about getting
some
exercise.
It's a class named Physical "Education" and takes place in a school.
It's not a great leap of logic.
I think phys-ed has become a joke in most schools today. It's usually
throw out a group of balls (dodge, basketball, kickballs) and little
else from what I've observed through the years.
I liked college PE where I went to school in Mass. Six PE credits per
year were required to graduate, but besides the usual sports
activities like baseball, volleyball and gymnastics we got to choose
from activities like bowling, ballroom dancing and cross-country
skiing. We had to pay for the PE activities just like any other
college course).
---
Zob- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Yep! I took ballet and bowling. :-)

Peach
----

At the same time?
--
Susie
Time flies when you are having rum!
Peach
2009-08-19 19:52:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by fmomoon
The root problem is that "Physical Education" has nothing to do with
education. Having kids play volleyball or run around a track for 40
minutes teaches them *nothing*.
Who says it's about teaching/learning? It's not. It's about getting
some
exercise.
It's a class named Physical "Education" and takes place in a school.
It's not a great leap of logic.
I think phys-ed has become a joke in most schools today. It's usually
throw out a group of balls (dodge, basketball, kickballs) and little
else from what I've observed through the years.
I liked college PE where I went to school in Mass. Six PE credits per
year were required to graduate, but besides the usual sports
activities like baseball, volleyball and gymnastics we got to choose
from activities like bowling, ballroom dancing and cross-country
skiing. We had to pay for the PE activities just like any other
college course).
---
Zob- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Yep! I took ballet and bowling. :-)
Peach
----
At the same time?
--
Susie
Time flies when you are having rum!- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Heh....wouldn't that be a scream? :-)

Peach
zob
2009-08-19 20:17:49 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 19 Aug 2009 12:52:09 -0700 (PDT), Peach
Post by Peach
Post by fmomoon
The root problem is that "Physical Education" has nothing to do with
education. Having kids play volleyball or run around a track for 40
minutes teaches them *nothing*.
Who says it's about teaching/learning? It's not. It's about getting
some
exercise.
It's a class named Physical "Education" and takes place in a school.
It's not a great leap of logic.
I think phys-ed has become a joke in most schools today. It's usually
throw out a group of balls (dodge, basketball, kickballs) and little
else from what I've observed through the years.
I liked college PE where I went to school in Mass. Six PE credits per
year were required to graduate, but besides the usual sports
activities like baseball, volleyball and gymnastics we got to choose
from activities like bowling, ballroom dancing and cross-country
skiing. We had to pay for the PE activities just like any other
college course).
---
Zob- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Yep! I took ballet and bowling. :-)
Peach
----
At the same time?
--
Susie
Time flies when you are having rum!- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Heh....wouldn't that be a scream? :-)
I think that you can get Ballet Bowling on Wii.
---
Zob
Susan
2009-08-19 19:59:25 UTC
Permalink
x-no-archive: yes
Post by fmomoon
Yep! I took ballet and bowling. :-)
I joined the equestrian team. Better than showering in a locker room
full of sweaty girls.

Susan
Suzy
2009-08-19 19:49:19 UTC
Permalink
If I'm not mistaken, many schools do have a policy banning cell phone
use during class hours.
I wouldn't just ban their use. I'd ban their possession on school
grounds.
I made it through junior high and high school just fine without one. So
can they.
Uphill in the snow both ways, right?
--
The house was full of wildlife and all the pies were gone.
hehehe, not even I, at my age, had it that bad.
I think, seriously, that those hardships were far more prevalent in
our parents' generation. My father literally did walk 5 miles each
way to high school, often in the snow in the winter time. There were
no school busses in the '30's. We baby boomers were a privileged
generation compared to our parents. And the younger generation is now
so far removed from any of those hardships that having to walk miles
in the snow to go to school has become a joke.
---
Zob
If one had to walk miles to and from school each day, he would get enough
exercise and not need PE. Whether or not he/she would need a shower upon
arriving at school still is up in the air.
--
Susie
Time flies when you are having rum!
Suzy
2009-08-19 20:08:33 UTC
Permalink
There has been exactly one time in my life where I genuinely needed a
cell
phone. And even that worked out okay in the end without one.
--S.
They're mostly useful for emergency calls on the side of road if the car
breaks down or something similar where you really would be stuck without
any other alternative,
When someone says that they were good for road emergencies, I remark that
I have rarely been in a road emergency that wasn't a short walk away from
a pay phone. Maybe if you're on the highway a lot, a phone might be
handy, but for most driving you're never far from help.
I understand the need for cell phones for midwives and OBs, people who
work outside of an office (like repairmen), and anyone who needs to be
constantly on-call but who is not always near a land line. That makes
sense. But for everyone else, can't they just get an answering machine?
The idea of needing to be constantly connected to everyone is just weird
to me. If I can't wait a few hours until I get home to check my messages,
doesn't that make me a little desperate?
--S.
Cars are much more reliable nowdays. You rarely see someone broken down on
the side of the road.

Having said that, I cannot remember when was the last time I saw a pay
phone. We don't have them around here anymore. Not since cell phones
became popular.

I have a cell phone not so much for others to call me, but for me to have
the freedom to call anyone from anywhere. I have heard many cell phone
users remark that they leave their phone turned off when not in use so they
don't get calls from anyone they don't know, and therefore incurring a
charge or burning minutes, depending on their plan.

Another big reason for me to have a cell phone is I can call long distance
without having to pay for long distance charges. This is important to me
since I live far from my family and friends. I can chat with them at
anytime without having to watch the clock or worry about a big phone bill.

But I generally take a shower afterward :-)
--
Susie
Time flies when you are having rum!
Suzy
2009-08-19 20:14:12 UTC
Permalink
In article <f6176372-5e54-432c-902a-e93927dc9691
@e18g2000vbe.googlegroups.com>, ***@lpbroadband.net says...
In article <57d95046-6e1e-4ba6-b96f-7a290923d9e5
@r34g2000vba.googlegroups.com>, ***@lpbroadband.net says...
I have honestly, no joke, heard people talking on cell phones
while
shopping, saying things like, "There are two brands of sour
cream
here...which should I get?" Actually having a conversation about
which
brand of sour cream to buy. Oh my god, just make a choice on
your own.
If for some reason it's the wrong choice, then just buy a
different brand
next time.
--S.
LOL, and the sour cream is a major crisis compared to some of
those cell
phone conversations.
Cheri
Cell phone use in a grocery store is a pet peeve of mine. Usually
those people are slowly sashaying through the aisles, completely
oblivious to their surroundings, the ones that cut people off or
stand
in the way of a much-needed item, etc.
Peach
Interesting Peach....as someone who enjoys grocery shopping....for me
the far bigger annoyances are: 1) Mothers who cannot/will not control
their kids in a store, by far and away, number 1. and 2) Honest to
goodness seniors who just stand in front of a product for minutes
trying
to figure if they want Peter Pan or Skippy for example. It's not cost
in their cases, I assure you, it's the inability to make a decision.
Those two cases bug me, too....but the self-centeredness of a person
on a cell phone, oblivious to their surroundings, is much more
annoying. I'm not saying that you can't use one to discuss brands of
sour cream, but get the hell out of the way and call, then get off.
I'm talking about the people who carry on personal conversations for
the duration of their 45 minutes shopping trip.
Peach
When I use it in a grocery store, I always go off to a side and away
from the main aisles. I agree with you about the continual talkers, be
they in a store, restaurant etc.
For me though, the worst by far are the uncontrolled kids. Just because
one is a stay at home parent (mother or father) does not mean that the
grocery store is your kids' personal racetrack and playground. Keep em
under control, or get the spouse/babysitter or shop at a different time
when they can do so.
--
Few events change the way you view life as when you hold your grandchild
in your arms.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
My daughter liked riding in the cart. I talked with her and she
"helped me." Of course, I only had one....

Peach
------

What I dislike are the "squealers". You know, the ones that can hit high C
and hold it for 10 minutes. And all the while they are drilling holes in my
eardrums, the parent is obliviously just going along as if they don't hear a
thing.

I don't know how obnoxious kids at the grocery store have anything to do
with stay at home parents. That makes no sense at all.
--
Susie
Time flies when you are having rum!
Peach
2009-08-19 20:22:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by fmomoon
In article <f6176372-5e54-432c-902a-e93927dc9691
@e18g2000vbe.googlegroups.com>, ***@lpbroadband.net says...
In article <57d95046-6e1e-4ba6-b96f-7a290923d9e5
@r34g2000vba.googlegroups.com>, ***@lpbroadband.net says...
I have honestly, no joke, heard people talking on cell phones
while
shopping, saying things like, "There are two brands of sour
cream
here...which should I get?" Actually having a conversation about
which
brand of sour cream to buy. Oh my god, just make a choice on
your own.
If for some reason it's the wrong choice, then just buy a
different brand
next time.
--S.
LOL, and the sour cream is a major crisis compared to some of
those cell
phone conversations.
Cheri
Cell phone use in a grocery store is a pet peeve of mine. Usually
those people are slowly sashaying through the aisles, completely
oblivious to their surroundings, the ones that cut people off or
stand
in the way of a much-needed item, etc.
Peach
Interesting Peach....as someone who enjoys grocery shopping....for me
the far bigger annoyances are: 1) Mothers who cannot/will not control
their kids in a store, by far and away, number 1. and 2) Honest to
goodness seniors who just stand in front of a product for minutes
trying
to figure if they want Peter Pan or Skippy for example. It's not cost
in their cases, I assure you, it's the inability to make a decision.
Those two cases bug me, too....but the self-centeredness of a person
on a cell phone, oblivious to their surroundings, is much more
annoying. I'm not saying that you can't use one to discuss brands of
sour cream, but get the hell out of the way and call, then get off.
I'm talking about the people who carry on personal conversations for
the duration of their 45 minutes shopping trip.
Peach
When I use it in a grocery store, I always go off to a side and away
from the main aisles. I agree with you about the continual talkers, be
they in a store, restaurant etc.
For me though, the worst by far are the uncontrolled kids. Just because
one is a stay at home parent (mother or father) does not mean that the
grocery store is your kids' personal racetrack and playground. Keep em
under control, or get the spouse/babysitter or shop at a different time
when they can do so.
--
Few events change the way you view life as when you hold your grandchild
in your arms.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
My daughter liked riding in the cart. I talked with her and she
"helped me."  Of course, I only had one....
Peach
------
What I dislike are the "squealers".  You know, the ones that can hit high C
and hold it for 10 minutes.  And all the while they are drilling holes in my
eardrums, the parent is obliviously just going along as if they don't hear a
thing.
Even if it's a happy squeal? Or do you just mean temper squeals? I
know there is an age where a little kid realizes they can make really
loud sounds with their mouths....usually the squeal. Most parents
find this adorable and laugh at it, so it continues for a long time
(when most little kids would be moving on to something else equally
obnoxious.) :-) So, yea, a lot of kids do the happy squeal or just
the innocuous, for the hell of it, just to hear their voices, squeal.
And, um..... I still hate it. ;-) (Noise sensitive, I am....as if we
haven't figured that out. I don't usually say anything about it,
though...it's what kids do.)

Peach
Suzy
2009-08-19 20:28:33 UTC
Permalink
I dunno Moni. I am of that generation. We did not shower after PE. I
don't know about the boys, but the girls didn't. Not only would we rather
die than strip naked in front of others, but we did not have time. We
barely had time to change out of our gym suits back into our regular
clothes
before the bell rang. We had plenty of showers, but nobody used them.
Same here, late '70s.
I also don't know if the boys showered after playing or practicing sports.
I do know one thing, the boys locker room door was across the hall from
the
band room and chorus room doors. When that door opened, the stench could
knock down an elephant! When we saw that door begin to open, we made a
run
for it!
Heh. You should have tried the bus ride home with the football team after
a
game.
I rode home on the band bus :-) But I have sons, sons that played football.
Not only did I have to drive home with them in the car, but I had to wash
the stinky clothing when we got home. Or burn them :-)
--
Susie
Time flies when you are having rum!
Suzy
2009-08-19 20:31:04 UTC
Permalink
Way back in 1492 when I was in high school, we were required to take PE
in the 8th and 9th grades.
I'd love to see the health pamphlets from that time. "Swooning for
Beginners." "Indians and You: How to Stay Safe." "Ten Simple Steps to
Avoid the Black Death."
--S.
We didn't have pamphlets, we had.... parchments!

You know, now that I think of it, that would make a cute play for school.
PE in the olden days. No showers!
--
Susie
Time flies when you are having rum!
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...