My fist post and I just have a few questions..
I never imagined dating in my 30s would be so much of a game..You go on a date and there is obvious chemistry..you hit it off really well..afterward you go home and its like a competition to see who will call or text first. Everyone is afraid they are going to scare someone off, afraid to say what they feel. If out send a text message longer than 3-5 words it must mean your obsessive. I just like to talk and communicate. .. men seem to flatter themselves too much thinking that if you text them a couple times a day that you are infatuated..lol.. I'm just looking for a really good friendship and not interested in a soulmate at this point.
Also, as far as sex goes..I mean if you want it, you want it..and just because a woman wants it doesn't mean that she is a slut...lol

I believe in being honest and upfront about what you want and hate playing these stupid games..

So answer me this, why is dating such a game?

well this is gonna be fun...For yourself,quit generalizing...use the term 'The males I have met"..We are all not of one mindset.
You say you do not like games but you are still married? .oh my my...
Now what we have here is a married (Oh yeah Seperated)woman who says that if a woman wants "it"she is not a slut..(the law calls that adultery not slut).Hmm..Only if she acts upon it.That is my opinion...No differant for men, is it,We get called players or male sluts but for you it is okay?
It also seems to me that you picked the worst venue for not playing games...Internet dating by far is a game with hearts at stake....Big gamble......Good luck with your quest whether it be sex or talk or getting a divorce...

ya I don't understand why they on here if they don't want to meet anyone

That thin Blue wall you speak of is all there is between the criminals and society in general.
Unquote......

Miss Star there is something so wrong about what you stated and I must help you out here in understanding what you believe and maybe showing you where you are wrong...
We in Florida among many states have a concealed weapons permit which adds a very large force of law abiding folks to the wall between criminals and society.Police are not your only protectors ...The theory here is that we have a right to defend ourselves or another's life as if it were our own without waiting on the police to get there .This stops numerous deaths and for the criminal mind ,it puts a element of doubt about whether their prey may blow their brains out...
Hense the police are not the only answer , just the one you call once you survive an attack rather than be just another dead body with no wallet.....

Miss "I am going to be a CRIMINOLOGIST",This is for you.
You said you do not do circular arguements and none have been presented to you..You are good at evading questions so why don't try answering these two....
My first question is why we hire Officers who can not defend themselves from bodily harm from a 74 year old woman without the use of what could be deadly force.For this officer to claim he was in harms way would be ludicrous to say the least considering his size.If he were in danger ,I might not pose this question but it is clear there was no dangerous situation..
Question 2.......Hypothetically we are a couple...you spit on me and I tazer you. OR You throw a punch at me and miss and I tazer you..Now before you did either action ,I warned you ....do not do it and you proceed..Do you still believe that I should be prosecuted? Or is that a rule only for the police?

I see your wasting your time again...try answering and showing how criminologist think...It should be eye opening for all.....

my sympathies, i'm sorry the young man u raised decided on such a despicable career.

more cops need to get run over and die.

See what blame gets us? Endless back and forth. In my opinion , they BOTH made bad choices. Hers was not to comply, his was to use unnecessary force on a grandmom.

Kind of reminds me years back when some citizens decided to protest the LAWFUL demolition of a site. A female stood in front of a bulldozer, the female got bulldozed. People said the driver must have been an animal, others said the girl must have been unreasonable..I said, both made a bad choice.

We used that police video in my criminology class for a discussion on police procedure. We were also given copies of the incident report.

She didn't comply to his command (for handcuffs) and she was tazered.

The topic of debate was whether the officer felt he was in fear of his life to use non-lethal force.

His report stated she rushed him and threw a "punch". The legal definition of assault is the ATTEMPT to hit whereas actual battery is the connection of an assault.

Examples: ASSAULT - throw a punch or spitting but missing. BATTERY: squirt someone with a hose (during a verbal) or spitting on them and it lands.


I sided with the officer after reading the police report. Even though she was a 72 year old woman, she did not comply and she "dared" him to tazer her after she squared off to him and threw a punch. She was a wild and wily 72 years old! Mouthy and all about being trouble!

In this day and age of police shootings and other bodily harm that befalls our officers, I don't think anyone is above the compliance law regardless of age, gender, being with child, or handicapped.

When an officer gives a lawful command -- our reaction as citizens is to comply (period). The officers are simply following the law -- and the courtroom is here we dispute, defend, and seek justice. I am not saying the system is perfect -- not by a long shot -- but I staunchly support the officers in the field.

Please don't get tired of hearing this: I am almost done with my master's!!! 16 more units after this semester!
I will be a criminologist and court expert witness during trials!!! Hmmm, kind of scary!!