I thought about your post for five minutes, Zero-effected, and decided that your protestation was rightful.

My joke here was too obscure. You said you don't let anything to get to you; that is an idiom in the figurative sense. Then I did a switch, for the joke's sake, that meant that you literally did not get anyone or anyone get close to you or all the way to you. This was necessary, but I appreciate it was not reasonable of me to expect others to sub this in. And then I was sorry for your fleas (yes, I misspelled it) because the fleas of a person NEED to be on them... literally the closest they can get to them. If you don't let your fleas close to you, they you are of no use to them... so I am sorry for the little baby-fleas that go hungry.

I admit my jokes sometimes only mean something to me. Thanks for reminding me.

000000000000

You're right, i did appear as stealing your thread. Not hijacking it, but stealing it.

I appreciate property boundaries, and I appreciate their purpose and meaning.

I just got carried away. It is a habit with me. I participate only in a few threads, customarily as is my wont, and then I leave many posts in that one thread. If you check my recent posting history (not necessary, you can take my word for this), you will find that this is my usual and customary forum behaviour.

-----------

Explanations given as requested. No hard feelings here.

Sigh... zero for two today alone.

I gotta take a vacation from this site, it seems.

You are a late riser, aren't you... I already don't find here what you are just GOING to not find here.

If you want to LOVE, then you need to forget that you could DIY for fifty bucks less a pop.

Be careful of what you ask for, because you might just get it one day.

You are funny. In my opinion that's the best part of her love.

ShareAHug, you raise a few interesting points, that lead to other interesting points.

The main thing is to have one's wants and needs met, to feel satisfied or happy. There are other things that make people happy, but on the long run, most people need stability, and either physical and sense's fun (like travelling and going to shows and exibitions and sports events) or have their apparent competitiveness, the appearance of it, be maintained.

Some people have kids and cars and vacations because they enjoy kids and cars and vacations; some have these to keep up with the joneses; some have the same for both reasons, both for keeping their social competitiveness at par, and because they truly enjoy driving, vacations, kids.

Everybody has a stronger than average point, though, that they treasure in their own selves, that they base most of their own human worth on. A girlfriend of my aunt was getting depressed in her old age because she was losing her looks. She still looked dynamite at age 70, but not nearly as good as at age 50.

A guy I was told about was a successful businessman, and he was utterly depressed coz he could not get it up. He remarried, and he met my friend, to whom he said with incredible sorrow that the situation is the same. The new wife piped up, and blasted the guy for telling about it to someone. For this impotent but good man, life ended when his erections never worked any more.

So I told all these to my shrink, at the time, and he consoled me that people enter old age with envisioning a lifestyle they would like, with one they don't like, and they sort of know which is the one they will get. Once they get the one they don't want, they will go depressed, which is due not to some mental disease, but to their falling short of their own expectations.

Some plan, like hoard money, for retirement. Some others are surprized, and not all of us are surprised negatively.

To the point, I discovered that I need very little. Very little money, very little socially, very little in terms of luxuries. I don't need clothes, but only for their practical value. I need and want food, and good food, and with a little research one can find the hole-in-the-wall restaurants in every town that serve good and cheap food. I want intellectual stimulation, so I go to lectures, and sometimes take a course (if it's free). I used to hang on to my extensive social life, but since I've gone mad and depressed six or seven years ago, I feel solitude is better for me (this is the surprise).

And for the biggest surprise, I find a lot of joy in writing. Luckily I can do it too. I am not a popular writer, because I am either too deep and too much, or too irreverent and too light, and too much that way. But I find writing nevertheless fun and very entertaining, whether I get appreciated for it or not by many.

Yes, I do need a few to show their appreciation, and I do get it on sporadic bases. Luckily it's enough for me to keep going. More would be not good, I would get addicted and need even more than that later, and soon enough I would need even more than that. That's the problem with being a celebrity. I thank my lucky gods I am not a celebrity.

So I feel content, more-or-less, with my life. I am not ecstatic, but I am comfortable, and it's not a pain to keep on going with living. This is the most anyone can say about their lives, it seems.

Can you imagine anyone being constantly happy? Or do you KNOW anyone in your circle of acquaintances who is constantly happy, and never sad or angry?

The big thing is that I accept that I am poor and will never amount to anything.

But here is the BIG question: How much of this acceptance comes from lack of need, denial of need via rationalization, or having learned that there are commonly enjoyed things that people want and need, but I truly don't?

And seeing that i feel sorta happy, is it important on the grander scheme of things that I know which of the above three reasons is thae one truly responsible for my no longer being sick, depressed, angry, or bored?

Is this a case of "end justifies the means", or is this a case of "sour grapes"?

Should I be happy, or should I be sad about it?

Well, at least this is a bit better than being desparate. I am not saying I am "better than to be desparate". Not at all. I am saying, that I don't feel desparate, though many others in my position would.

Furthermore, this I strongly deny: my case is not the case of mind over matter. I did not consciously talk myself out of needed needs, or wanted wants. I just got on without them, and along the way I realized I really did not need the vacation, the car, the kids.

This may be a case of recognizance, via first-hand experience, what makes me happy and what does not. A recognizance, because by my circumstances, by my own doing, I was in a situation for a very long time (in poverty) in which I needed to adapt to not being able to keep up with the jonses, but do other things, and see how they felt as opposed to the car and Caribbean cruises.

Most people are not given this opportunity of experimenting with their lifestyles. They are forced into being in one, from birth, and that happens all over the world. Individual, differentiated lifestyles are severly punished in most places, and punished here in America too, but I don't have to die from the punishment. In fact, I can become happy. But those who are FORCED into the one lifstyle of the land, and fail to maintain it for whatever reason, they become situationally depressed.

And I will be the last to fault them. The same system that giveth, was the same sistem that hath taken away, with little regard to the participatory willingness and compliance to the one lifestyle. A disaster can hit, and a successful person can become unsuccessful. I don't mean celebrities only; I mean everyman. A successful person is a person who played the role of the one lifestyle he could choose from in youth, and never swayed from the role, and all along kept on reaping the ongoing rewards. That's success, in this sense.

And this is where the old psychiatrists advice comes in. He said "it's what you make with your old age when you are there, which will make you happy or unhappy."

That is, when the one lifestyle is unable to sustain your happiness, because its rewards have become no longer constantly available, then you are either out of luck, or you are lucky to have an interest which is conceivably even different from golfing, ball room dancing, or fine dining.

I feel I was lucky with this writing thing. It happened to me, I did not have to fight to get the inner urge or the apparent talent. It also saved me from boredom, by saving me from not having the strength or the ability, but only the will, to stay contributory in society. Productive. I am not productive, but I am not unhappy. Many retired old people feel not productive, but not happy, either.

So to stay happy through old age one needs to have luck which will help him find some sort of purpose or an activity that will take his mind off of not having a purpose.

Unfortunately a large number of retirees don't have that luck. In fact, they have negative luck, misfortune, by pursuing such life goals that can't be pursued during old age, and yet that's all they know how to do.

It's a bit of a luck of the draw how you feel about your life in retirement; it's also a bit of an exercise in your ability to practice rationalization to alleviate the pain of cognitive dissonance; and it's also a bit of an exercise in having developed hobbies and other skills that may or may not sustain your interest in your old age.

Some depend all their lives on their beauty, like that lady friend of my aunt, to stay happy, and when it's gone, there is nothing left. Some depend on a lifestyle of travel, parties, cruises, luxury vacations. Good for them, like I said, but when the money runs out, what then. Some depend on a lifestyle of screwing, and when that goes, what's left.

-----------------

This was prompted by ShareAHug's post, but I wrote it for someone else. The person I wrote it for is Spicy Exel. You, SE, complained about the "jokers" on this site, and were unhappy why we, jokers, can't be serious.

This is what I read like when I am serious.

I am funny for a different reason. For a number of different reasons.

For one, humour is not illegal, and the rules of this website do not rule out fun.

For two, I am old enough to say what I feel like, and not have to say what some random guy says everyone should be saying, or how they should be saying it.

For three, I enjoy my sense of humour. I appreciate that not everyone does. In fact, I'd be lucky to be able to say honestly, that one out of each ten who reads my funny posts finds them funny. The main thing for me is that I, *I* find them funny.

For four, it is not in good form to say "my style and preferences are obviously superior to yours." You say all the serious stuff you want, SpicyExel, and I say all the stuff that I want.

I appreciate that reading my so-called "humorous" posts which are not funny, are a pain. I find it a pain to read "serious" posts that contain nothing serious that would make me want to read them.

So this is when I want to be serious, the above article. I don't become serious on command. it's the topic or the mood I am in that brings the humour and the seriousness out of me. Wild horses can't drag me from humour mood to serious mood. And wild horses are sorta VERY serious when they drag you.

---------------

Do you know what the differnence is between the two? Or you are just making conversation.

Do you hear people say "I godded me a fish" or "god off, already, I want to sleep".

Or do you hear people say "I pray to God", or "God, please help me."

This should give you a pretty good idea, as well as a primer in English grammar.

This thread should be presented to all school boards in America, with a note, "Dear sirs and madames, you achieved your ultimate goal, now the nations students get out of school dumber than a kite in a Jewish bazaar. Well done, people are more stupid and ignorant after they graduate from university than how they got in, this is great, let's all have a raise in salary"

This... this really angers me. "God is a verb or a noun". this is what I can't stand about Americans, they don't know dumbassshiitt from their own holes, their entire cranium is filled with it, and they want to appear smart.

This goes word-for-word also to those who say "god" is an adjective.

You people should be ashamed of yourselves and of your country, your leaders, who allowed and promoted this disaster of inability to think by you guys, and to allow it it to proliferate and happen to the nation.

If they had told you "I love you" while you were doing this, then that would amount to no more than just "poppy love".

On some other sites the women and men are shown by the username or by a word when they post on forums, whether they are boys or girls.

for instance, on one site the boys get blue ink for their user name for forum posts, and the girls get red or pink ones.

Your problem, Zsan, is this ambiguity... if people looked at you on the Internet and could decide without any doubt in their minds and in a straighforward, automatic fashion, without needing extra information external to the presentment, to see whether you are a boy or a girl, maybe you'd hear "i love you" more often, or even just once.

I think it's so because in women's eyes (I ain't one, I am no expert, this is just an opinion) there is no such thing as a "state" of beauty... it is always a process, a progress or sometimes a regress (most often associated with aging).

A woman knows that no matter how beautiful she is, in any way you want to give meaning to "beauty", she can be more so, if she improves here or there.

And therefore when you say "you are beautiful", you are stating, in essence, that this is it, they can't get any more beautiful, because they arrived at a state which excludes the process of further beautification.

This is not something a woman wants to hear.

Because after the state comes the epoch in her life during which she will be losing her beauty.

----------------

This explains your question to the best of my abilities. Of course my explanation has as little to do with reality as your perception that women won't believe you when you say "you are beautiful".

In my opinion (please correct me if I am wrong) the problem is not that they won't believe you when you say "you are beautiful"; instead, they beleive you, but they take you as a narcissistic boob when you demand something of them after you pay the compliment, and their refusal to perform for what you value as equal value service for your compliment, gives you reason to think that they just did not understand you properly, or else they did not believe you in the first place.

Again, I am no expert, I hold no personal accuntability or responsibility for these opinions of mine, because they are 1. not professionally given and 2. I offer them as opinions, not facts or proper, inescapable conclusions.

--------

In my personal experience, to me it gives me satisfaction in and by itself to give the compliment. I was going to say that it does not matter if they accept it or not, to me the most important thing is to get a compliment to a woman about her fantastic looks in the process; the reaction is not as important as the need to satisfy, the need to utter the compliment.

But that was a lie, too, because I used to give compliments to a gf of mine and she was a really fine looking specimen; she never believed my compliments, and that bothered me. I cornered her one day, and she confessed that she does not take my compliments as true because she figures I just want something out of her.

This was an almost unique. Except I had another very good looking woman who also did not believe my compliments.

All other women were fine and happy with compliments about their physical beauty. Some lapped it up and ran with it, some fished for it, etc., except these two babes.

Turns out... well, what do you know. They were women who had facial beautification surgery. Cosmetic surgery, if you like. They could never again accept a compliment about their beauty once they came out of the operating room. They felt they are cheats, they are undeserving of a nature-related compliment because they were not natural.

For me, a man, it was different. She, or they, were beautiful, that's about the size of it, who cares if they were designed or just happened that way.

"I was a-laying in the deep grass, looking up at the milliards of beatiful stars, and I wondered if they is made or they jist happened."

-- Mark Twain, in Huckleberry Finn

After commenting on everyone else's, it's time I talked about my own.

Wux comes from an early argument by Greek philosophers that stated the constantly changing nature of the matter in our universe as in "everything is in a constant state of flux", wux, and combining it with the fact that philosophical theories employ mostly slippery arguments at best; slippery like wax, wux.

What follows in the next one paragraph was not part of the original idea, but it also fits.

In English a sexy person is called a fox, wux, and in Hungarian, my first language, fox is considered the cleverest animal of the kindgdom. Elephant is the smartest, owl is the wisest, donkey is the smart aleciest, and hyena is the funniest with the strongest sense of humour appreciation.

Truth be known, I needed a name that was quick to type, few keystrokes, not taken by other users, easy to type, easy to remember. The foregoing before this paragraph is all BS if you absolutely have to know the truth.

Those kids say the darndest things.

I bet the spelling error you did not correct was "gossippms".
(:0b

That ought to have been "Lowenblau". or better still, "Lowenblaublut." Or better still, "Lowenblaublutgeknoppenfstaffbucherheitsyahrhundert."

It would not fly in American TV commercials after "Zum Wohl!!", but Germans would definitely drink differently. I mean, think, not drink.

Love that word!

Combines the dork of "leotard" with the nerd of "we're a team" and the mentality of "retard" seamlessly, without diminishing the impact of the meaning of any.

Beautiful! And thanks. It's the best gift I got since an angry shopkeeper threw a crystal ball after me as I was fleeing her shop.

My guess would have been "Litte T.S. Eliott". Though someone's mother may be just an Indian, she can still hold a Ph.D. in English literature.

I feel very, very sorry for your flees.

Ha. That's cool. I've also had people ask if it was the robot Torgo from Marvel Comics.

The mutant poodle is from another cheesy horror flick I love The Boneyard.


so that's why I couldn't place the dawg.. horror flicks scare me!!




I am scared of horror flicks. And of poodle dogs. And mainly of people who own poodles as pets.

_____________________

Edit: I'm especially scared if they own oodles and oodles of poodles.

(I sincerely and profusely apologize. I know this was a socially not proper pun, but I could not resist saying it. There are some things that are just not meant to be kept inside, otherwise the person would explode and make a mess of the place.)

My girlfriend told me once, "In Canada, every Tom, Dick and Harry is named John."