sf wrote:
> On Sat, 29 May 2010 14:34:44 -0400, Dave Smith
> > wrote:
>
>> Last week she posted a picture of
>> her newest tattoo on FaceBook, a tree that covers most of the left side
>> of her back. Two days later she posed about needing to come up with
>> $22,000 for tuition. I must be different, aside from my personal
>> aversion to tattoos..... trailer trash artwork, I would be worrying
>> about tuition before I spent a lot of money on a tattoo.
>
> Money grows on trees, doesn't it???
>


I posted a comment asking her if it was the tuition money tree.

blake murphy wrote:
> On Fri, 28 May 2010 21:34:38 -0400, Dave Smith wrote:
>
>> Cheryl wrote:
>>
>>> What she didn't say was if they had to pay off a mortgage or two or
>>> three. Selling a house doesn't mean instant income.
>> I hope that she is smarter than one of my former co-workers. When he
>> retired, close to 10 years ago, he still owed $55,000 on his mortgage.
>> He bought the house in the mid 70s and it was probably not worth more
>> than $40,000 at the time, but he had taken out mortgages on it to pay
>> for his daughters' weddings.
>
> yikes! i hope at least the daughters are still married.

I don't know. What I do know is that I bought my house a few years after
that and I had my mortgage paid off by age 45. He is now close to 65 and
still owes more money on the house than it was worth when he bought it.

gloria.p wrote:
> Nancy Young wrote:

>> I think sometimes parents feel embarrassed if they can't throw the
>> wedding of their daughter's dreams so they make it look
>> like they can.

> These days an expensive wedding is one of the worst investments a
> parent can make. Spending a fortune (when you don't have one) for
> the prestige is pretty lame.

Weddings really aren't my thing, but when I proposed just a
small affair for my first wedding, oh the horror. But everyone
had to be invited! And all the inlaw's friends, too! What would
they say?

Fine. Had the big wedding, but we paid for it. I was on my own,
it wouldn't occur to me to expect my parents to pay.

The marriage didn't last, but that had nothing to do with the wedding.

> They are just as married in a small, simple, close family and best
> friends wedding as they are with 500 guests and doves flying.

Sounds like a plan to me. A ceremony and some horse-doovers
and cake. And people you care about.

nancy

blake murphy wrote:
> On Fri, 28 May 2010 19:57:09 -0400, brooklyn1 wrote:
>
>> This is me in my yard:
>> http://i47.tinypic.com/21ag02t.jpg
>>
> nice skirt.
>
> blake
>
He's got that skirt hiked up to his nipples.

On Sat, 29 May 2010 17:43:07 -0400, Dave Smith
> wrote:

> sf wrote:
> > On Sat, 29 May 2010 14:34:44 -0400, Dave Smith
> > > wrote:
> >
> >> Last week she posted a picture of
> >> her newest tattoo on FaceBook, a tree that covers most of the left side
> >> of her back. Two days later she posed about needing to come up with
> >> $22,000 for tuition. I must be different, aside from my personal
> >> aversion to tattoos..... trailer trash artwork, I would be worrying
> >> about tuition before I spent a lot of money on a tattoo.
> >
> > Money grows on trees, doesn't it???
> >
>
>
> I posted a comment asking her if it was the tuition money tree.

Heh! Good one! For most people it would be the tree of knowledge,
but for her it's the tuition money tree.

--
Forget the health food. I need all the preservatives I can get.

On Sat, 29 May 2010 20:04:13 -0400, Larry >
wrote:

So, Larry has to change emails to be noticed. Another attention hog.

--
Forget the health food. I need all the preservatives I can get.

On Sat, 29 May 2010 17:43:07 -0400, Dave Smith
> wrote:

> sf wrote:
> > On Sat, 29 May 2010 14:34:44 -0400, Dave Smith
> > > wrote:
> >
> >> Last week she posted a picture of
> >> her newest tattoo on FaceBook, a tree that covers most of the left side
> >> of her back. Two days later she posed about needing to come up with
> >> $22,000 for tuition. I must be different, aside from my personal
> >> aversion to tattoos..... trailer trash artwork, I would be worrying
> >> about tuition before I spent a lot of money on a tattoo.
> >
> > Money grows on trees, doesn't it???
> >
>
>
> I posted a comment asking her if it was the tuition money tree.


--
Forget the health food. I need all the preservatives I can get.

"gloria.p" wrote:
>Nancy Young wrote:
>> Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>> "sf" wrote in
>>>>
>>>> I've never understood the concept of taking out a loan to finance a
>>>> wedding.
>>>
>>> The son of a friend of mine did. The loan terms were a year longer
>>> than the marriage lasted too.
>>
>> I think sometimes parents feel embarrassed if they can't throw the
>> wedding of their daughter's dreams so they make it look
>> like they can.
>> nancy
>
>
>These days an expensive wedding is one of the worst investments a parent
>can make. Spending a fortune (when you don't have one) for the prestige
>is pretty lame.
>
>They are just as married in a small, simple, close family and best
>friends wedding as they are with 500 guests and doves flying.


If one has the economic wherewithall and can *easily* afford it why
not, but going into debt at any level and/or foregoing necessities for
any party is lunacy. And not only can I understand but I support not
using the cash as a down payment on a house, many young couples are
not homeowner material, and/or have no idea where they will live month
to month or that they will even be a couple, but a new automobile to
ones child (the other parents can buy their kid whatever) is a far
better gift than a stupid party just to impress... no one will be
impressed anyway (at best anything nicer than theirs will be
resented). Me, for my kid I'd make some long term investment in her
name... in fact I did exactly that, I bought a gorgeous 91 acres and
placed it in her name and mine with right of survivorship. I pay the
taxes and manage it, one day it will put my grands through college
with plenty left over. I would never pay big bucks to entertain a
herd of people I don't know and who don't know me... and I'm certainly
not about to support any fercocktah caterer... and I'm definitely not
making any investment in my kid's spouse who she really doesn't know
and I certainly don't know who at any time may not be my kid's spouse.
I'm very sorry but in this day and age of equal-equal I don't think
one set of parents has all the onus of the wedding reception... has to
be equal-equal or nothing.

In article >,
(Steve Pope) wrote:

> One thing that was pointed out to me that I hadn't intuited
> was that tattoos indicate "access to wealth that nobody can
> take away from you"... unlike a fancy car it can't be stolen
> or repossessed. A large tattoo means you at one point either
> had enough money to pay for it, or were worth that much to
> somebody else.

Which reminds me of a short story by Saki. Ah, here it is, free and
online. <http://www.readbookonline.net/readOnLine/501/>.

leo

In article >,
sf > wrote:

> They probably had a lot of money issues too.
>
> $150 per plate is standard for a decent reception (not extravagant)
> here. I don't believe in sit down dinners or even buffets for
> weddings, but it's the fashion. My attitude is - give them lots of
> hors d'oeuvres with an open bar & some music; and call it a day.
>
> I also think wedding gifts are way too extravagant. Why is the bride
> asking for such expensive china and silver when she doesn't have a pot
> to p*ss in? Fortunately, it seems like the tide is turning because
> the registry lists for the last couple of weddings were very practical
> and most of the choices were not at all expensive.
>
> --
> Forget the health food. I need all the preservatives I can get.

The best wedding reception I ever went to was a potluck. ;-)
Much more REAL!
--
Peace! Om

Web Albums: <http://picasaweb.google.com/OMPOmelet>
Only Irish coffee provides in a single glass all four essential food groups: alcohol, caffeine, sugar and fat. --Alex Levine

> sf > wrote:
>
>> They probably had a lot of money issues too.
>>
>> $150 per plate is standard for a decent reception.

Buying someone I never met and will never see again a $150 meal would
make me psychiatric institution fodder... I'd much rather hand 15
skidrow alkies $10 each.

On Fri, 28 May 2010 20:08:43 -0400, "Cheryl" >
wrote:

>"Janet Baraclough" > wrote in message
...
>>
>> Terry also said, they sold two properties. So they have the capital,
>> plus income from it.
>> Their assets are unaffected by downturn in property values. The
>> landlord pays insurance and maintenance.
>>
>
>What she didn't say was if they had to pay off a mortgage or two or three.
>Selling a house doesn't mean instant income.

Only had the first and we both did pretty well, although in hindsight,
parking the equity in the stock market might not have been my swiftest
move. OTOH, if I'd kept the house 3 years longer, I might be singing a
different tune.

WTH, everyone's mileage varies. What works for Bill and me might not
work for someone else. Or anyone else.

OB: I just made a dessert I've not tried before called "Sour Cream
Apple Crumb Kuchen" that turned not very nicely indeed for tomorrow's
Memorial Day barbecue gathering. Well, it *looks* good, anyway. We'll
see how it does on the palate! I needed something that travels well,
can sit in the car for 3 hours while we sit through "The Lion King" at
the Orange Coast Performing Arts Center with a 7 year old
granddaughter. It'll do fine in the cooler, even though it's supposed
to get to 80°F tomorrow.

Terry "Squeaks" Pulliam Burd

--

"If the soup had been as warm as the wine,
if the wine had been as old as the turkey,
and if the turkey had had a breast like the maid,
it would have been a swell dinner." Duncan Hines


To reply, remove "spambot" and replace it with "cox"

In article >,
brooklyn1 > wrote:

> > sf > wrote:
> >
> >> They probably had a lot of money issues too.
> >>
> >> $150 per plate is standard for a decent reception.
>
> Buying someone I never met and will never see again a $150 meal would
> make me psychiatric institution fodder... I'd much rather hand 15
> skidrow alkies $10 each.

I do so totally agree!

Unless said "guests" pony'ed up for the bill. That's becoming a common
theme too. Paying for your plate at the reception.

Submit a check with your acceptance notice. <g>
--
Peace! Om

Web Albums: <http://picasaweb.google.com/OMPOmelet>
Only Irish coffee provides in a single glass all four essential food groups: alcohol, caffeine, sugar and fat. --Alex Levine

Omelet wrote:

> Unless said "guests" pony'ed up for the bill. That's becoming a common
> theme too. Paying for your plate at the reception.
>
> Submit a check with your acceptance notice. <g>

Tacky, tacky, tacky. About as tacky as pot luck reception, IMO.

If you can't afford to host a big reception, you should host one you
*can* afford. Cake and punch with plentiful well wishes is all that is
necessary and can be done quite tastefully.
Weddings are also family reunions, college chum reunions and
occasionally business pay-back events. Some families are celebrating a
happy event with all their friends and neighbors and aren't putting a
dollar value on it. As long as a couple and their family can afford it,
more power to 'em, I say!

Leonard Blaisdell > wrote:

> (Steve Pope) wrote:

>> One thing that was pointed out to me that I hadn't intuited
>> was that tattoos indicate "access to wealth that nobody can
>> take away from you"... unlike a fancy car it can't be stolen
>> or repossessed. A large tattoo means you at one point either
>> had enough money to pay for it, or were worth that much to
>> somebody else.

>Which reminds me of a short story by Saki. Ah, here it is, free and
>online. <http://www.readbookonline.net/readOnLine/501/>.

Good one. I think I've read all of Saki at one point or another
but I had not remembered this one.

Steve

In article >,
Goomba > wrote:

> Omelet wrote:
>
> > Unless said "guests" pony'ed up for the bill. That's becoming a common
> > theme too. Paying for your plate at the reception.
> >
> > Submit a check with your acceptance notice. <g>
>
> Tacky, tacky, tacky. About as tacky as pot luck reception, IMO.

I rather like the idea of a potluck reception. Much more "neighborly".
But I doubt that you are capable of being such.

>
> If you can't afford to host a big reception, you should host one you
> *can* afford. Cake and punch with plentiful well wishes is all that is
> necessary and can be done quite tastefully.
> Weddings are also family reunions, college chum reunions and
> occasionally business pay-back events. Some families are celebrating a
> happy event with all their friends and neighbors and aren't putting a
> dollar value on it. As long as a couple and their family can afford it,
> more power to 'em, I say!

Talking as one of the biggest snobs on the group again "Goomba"?

"http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=goomba"
--
Peace! Om

Web Albums: <http://picasaweb.google.com/OMPOmelet>
*Only Irish *coffee provides in a single glass all four *essential food groups: alcohol, caffeine, sugar *and fat. --Alex Levine

On Sat, 29 May 2010 10:40:06 -0500, George Shirley wrote:

> On 5/29/2010 6:40 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>
>> "sf" > wrote in
>>>
>>> I've never understood the concept of taking out a loan to finance a
>>> wedding.
>>
>> The son of a friend of mine did. The loan terms were a year longer than
>> the marriage lasted too.
>
> I borrowed ten bucks from my wife to pay for the marriage license. Does
> that count?

i think that means she's a keeper.

your pal,
blake

On Sat, 29 May 2010 19:33:56 +0200, Giusi wrote:

> "Ed Pawlowski" > ha scritto nel messaggio
>> "sf" > wrote in
>>>
>>> I've never understood the concept of taking out a loan to finance a
>>> wedding.
>>
>> The son of a friend of mine did. The loan terms were a year longer than
>> the marriage lasted too.
>
> Is it any wonder that people who can't settle for the dress they can afford,
> the flowers they can afford and the meal they can afford, return from their
> "dream" honeymoon and find they don't particularly like this imperfect human
> being they got, either.

sometimes it seems like the groom is merely an extra in the production.

your pal,
blake

On Sat, 29 May 2010 18:56:24 +0000 (UTC), Steve Pope wrote:

> Dave Smith > wrote:
>
>> Some people have no money smarts. My nephew just got married
>> a few months ago. He and his wife are marginally employed and
>> don't have much money, except for tattoos. They used wedding
>> present money to fly out to Edmonton to visit her brother.... for
>> two days. Hardly worth flying close to 3,000 for three days IMO.
>
>> Last week she posted a picture of her newest tattoo on
>> FaceBook, a tree that covers most of the left side of her
>> back. Two days later she posed about needing to come up with
>> $22,000 for tuition. I must be different, aside from my personal
>> aversion to tattoos..... trailer trash artwork, I would be
>> worrying about tuition before I spent a lot of money on a tattoo.
>
> One thing that was pointed out to me that I hadn't intuited
> was that tattoos indicate "access to wealth that nobody can
> take away from you"... unlike a fancy car it can't be stolen
> or repossessed. A large tattoo means you at one point either
> had enough money to pay for it, or were worth that much to
> somebody else.
>
> Steve

so what do nose rings and tongue studs signify?

your pal,
blake

On Sun, 30 May 2010 03:54:57 +0000 (UTC), Steve Pope wrote:

> Leonard Blaisdell > wrote:
>
>> (Steve Pope) wrote:
>
>>> One thing that was pointed out to me that I hadn't intuited
>>> was that tattoos indicate "access to wealth that nobody can
>>> take away from you"... unlike a fancy car it can't be stolen
>>> or repossessed. A large tattoo means you at one point either
>>> had enough money to pay for it, or were worth that much to
>>> somebody else.
>
>>Which reminds me of a short story by Saki. Ah, here it is, free and
>>online. <http://www.readbookonline.net/readOnLine/501/>.
>
> Good one. I think I've read all of Saki at one point or another
> but I had not remembered this one.
>
> Steve

could be a forgery.

your pal,
blake

On Sun, 30 May 2010 11:41:35 -0400, blake murphy
> wrote:

>On Sat, 29 May 2010 18:56:24 +0000 (UTC), Steve Pope wrote:
>
>> Dave Smith > wrote:
>>
>>> Some people have no money smarts. My nephew just got married
>>> a few months ago. He and his wife are marginally employed and
>>> don't have much money, except for tattoos. They used wedding
>>> present money to fly out to Edmonton to visit her brother.... for
>>> two days. Hardly worth flying close to 3,000 for three days IMO.
>>
>>> Last week she posted a picture of her newest tattoo on
>>> FaceBook, a tree that covers most of the left side of her
>>> back. Two days later she posed about needing to come up with
>>> $22,000 for tuition. I must be different, aside from my personal
>>> aversion to tattoos..... trailer trash artwork, I would be
>>> worrying about tuition before I spent a lot of money on a tattoo.
>>
>> One thing that was pointed out to me that I hadn't intuited
>> was that tattoos indicate "access to wealth that nobody can
>> take away from you"... unlike a fancy car it can't be stolen
>> or repossessed. A large tattoo means you at one point either
>> had enough money to pay for it, or were worth that much to
>> somebody else.
>>
>> Steve
>
>so what do nose rings and tongue studs signify?

Stupidity.

Lou

Steve Pope wrote:

> One thing that was pointed out to me that I hadn't intuited
> was that tattoos indicate "access to wealth that nobody can
> take away from you"... unlike a fancy car it can't be stolen
> or repossessed. A large tattoo means you at one point either
> had enough money to pay for it, or were worth that much to
> somebody else.
>
>


To many of my generation, it means that you:

1. have horrible taste and self-image
2. are an exhibitionist
3. don't care how you spend your money
4. are trying to attract scummy people
5. don't ever expect to grow up beyond today
6. were drunk and stupid at the same time.
etc. etc. etc.


I don't care if you are a concert musician or a nuclear physicist,
a tattoo is ugly and self-mutilation.

gloria p

Omelet wrote:
> In article >,
> brooklyn1 > wrote:
>

>> Buying someone I never met and will never see again a $150 meal would
>> make me psychiatric institution fodder... I'd much rather hand 15
>> skidrow alkies $10 each.
>
> I do so totally agree!
>
> Unless said "guests" pony'ed up for the bill. That's becoming a common
> theme too. Paying for your plate at the reception.
>
> Submit a check with your acceptance notice. <g>


That's getting into the territory of:

"Hey, come join us, Dutch Treat, at Too Expensive Venue.
Oh yeah, and watch Susie and Bill get married at the same time."

Ugh.

gloria p

Janet Baraclough wrote:

> The message >
> from "Dan Goodman" > contains these words:
>
> > Have to get the group back on topic.
>
> OK, has to be cooked like big spaghetti. Are you planning to eat
> the laundry too?

Laundry is optional.

--
Dan Goodman
"I have always depended on the kindness of stranglers."
Tennessee Williams, A Streetcar Named Expire
Journal dsgood.dreamwidth.org (livejournal.com, insanejournal.com)

On Sun, 30 May 2010 11:50:13 -0600, "gloria.p" >
wrote:

> Omelet wrote:
>>
> >
> > Unless said "guests" pony'ed up for the bill. That's becoming a common
> > theme too. Paying for your plate at the reception.
> >
> > Submit a check with your acceptance notice. <g>
>
>
> That's getting into the territory of:
>
> "Hey, come join us, Dutch Treat, at Too Expensive Venue.
> Oh yeah, and watch Susie and Bill get married at the same time."
>
> Ugh.
>
While I've never heard of paying for your own reception meal, I've
heard brides talk about return value: can/will said guests pony up a
gift in the ballpark of the dollar amount of what's been put out per
person on the reception for a wedding gift. To me, it means: If your
guests can't afford that dollar amount, you need to rethink your
wedding because it's going over the top.

--
Forget the health food. I need all the preservatives I can get.

gloria.p wrote:

> To many of my generation,

And what is your generation?

When I met someone who had an earring for each of his grandchildren, I
realized piercings were no longer for young people only.

I expect one of the next few generations to decide that piercings and
tattoos are for OLD people.

--
Dan Goodman
"I have always depended on the kindness of stranglers."
Tennessee Williams, A Streetcar Named Expire
Journal dsgood.dreamwidth.org (livejournal.com, insanejournal.com)

On May 29, 11:42*pm, Goomba > wrote:
> Omelet wrote:
> > Unless said "guests" pony'ed up for the bill. That's becoming a common
> > theme too. Paying for your plate at the reception.
>
> > Submit a check with your acceptance notice. <g>
>
> Tacky, tacky, tacky. About as tacky as pot luck reception, IMO.
>
> If you can't afford to host a big reception, you should host one you
> *can* afford. Cake and punch with plentiful well wishes is all that is
> necessary and can be done quite tastefully.
> * Weddings are also family reunions, college chum reunions and
> occasionally business pay-back events. Some families are celebrating a
> happy event with all their friends and neighbors and aren't putting a
> dollar value on it. As long as a couple and their family can afford it,
> more power to 'em, I say!

I hate being a guest at a wedding that is nothing at all like the
bridal couple. It all feels so phony and stuffy. Jeans and flannel
shirt people should not have a black tie wedding reception. I'm not
saying get married in jeans and flannel shirts, of course. But the
wedding reception should be reflective of the bride and groom's style.
Which means, within their financial means, as well. I disagree about
"pot luck" being tacky... there are ways to do it so it's not. For
example, not every guest need bring a dish. You can plan a buffet
menu and members of the family or bridal party can make a dish. That's
their wedding gift to you. This is how it was done in the 40's and
50's. Sometimes, it was sandwiches and cake in the church basement,
from what I hear. Sounds much more fun and personal than some of the
modern weddings I've been to over the years.

Subject

Very carefully.

Lew

On Sun, 30 May 2010 13:08:33 -0500, "Dan Goodman" >
wrote:

> I expect one of the next few generations to decide that piercings and
> tattoos are for OLD people.

That's the way I thought for a long time. My Dad was all tattooed up
from WWII. Still doesn't make it right. It was just as ugly then as
it is now.

--
Forget the health food. I need all the preservatives I can get.

gloria.p > wrote:

[tattoos]

>To many of my generation, it means that you:
>
>1. have horrible taste and self-image
>2. are an exhibitionist
>3. don't care how you spend your money
>4. are trying to attract scummy people
>5. don't ever expect to grow up beyond today
>6. were drunk and stupid at the same time.
>etc. etc. etc.
>
>I don't care if you are a concert musician or a nuclear physicist,
>a tattoo is ugly and self-mutilation.

That's right. It subtracts from Purity of Essence.

Where is Peter Sellers when you need him anyway??



S.

On Sun, 30 May 2010 18:35:43 +0000 (UTC),
(Steve Pope) wrote:

> gloria.p > wrote:
>
> [tattoos]
>
> >To many of my generation, it means that you:
> >
> >1. have horrible taste and self-image
> >2. are an exhibitionist
> >3. don't care how you spend your money
> >4. are trying to attract scummy people
> >5. don't ever expect to grow up beyond today
> >6. were drunk and stupid at the same time.
> >etc. etc. etc.
> >
> >I don't care if you are a concert musician or a nuclear physicist,
> >a tattoo is ugly and self-mutilation.
>
> That's right. It subtracts from Purity of Essence.
>
> Where is Peter Sellers when you need him anyway??
>
Forget about Peter Sellers, I want Woody Allen!

--
Forget the health food. I need all the preservatives I can get.

Goomba wrote:

>
> If you can't afford to host a big reception, you should host one you
> *can* afford. Cake and punch with plentiful well wishes is all that is
> necessary and can be done quite tastefully.

> Weddings are also family reunions, college chum reunions and
> occasionally business pay-back events. Some families are celebrating a
> happy event with all their friends and neighbors and aren't putting a
> dollar value on it. As long as a couple and their family can afford it,
> more power to 'em, I say!
>


But the whole discussion started about families who COULDN'T afford it
and went into major debt (house remortgage) to pull it off. Your first
paragraph dealt with that well. "Afford" is the operant word but not
the only one. Culture/ethnicity, sense of obligation, and the family's
concept of what a wedding should be also are really important.

gloria p

On Sun, 30 May 2010 16:59:24 +0100, Janet Baraclough
> wrote:

>The message >
>from brooklyn1 > contains these words:
>
>
>> The coast of Belize is below sea level,
>
> That's the sea bit. The yellow bit above the water is called sand,
>aka, beach.

You are truly an idiot, especially about what not too very long ago
was known as British Hondorus... the brits obviously have the worst
schools on the planet.

gloria.p wrote:

> I don't care if you are a concert musician or a nuclear physicist,
> a tattoo is ugly and self-mutilation.
>
> gloria p

About a year or two ago some study came out saying that women who had 2
or more tattoos had low self esteem.
LOL... ya think? And if they didn't before the tats, some of them sure
must after having some of the ugly ones I've seen put on.

gloria.p wrote:

> But the whole discussion started about families who COULDN'T afford it
> and went into major debt (house remortgage) to pull it off. Your first
> paragraph dealt with that well. "Afford" is the operant word but not
> the only one. Culture/ethnicity, sense of obligation, and the family's
> concept of what a wedding should be also are really important.
>
> gloria p

Okay, if one can't afford it (anything!)it shouldn't be done as if they
can. Yet I get annoyed by people who also pen that any large,
extravagant wedding is wrong when in fact it doesn't have to be.
Pot luck receptions are inherently wrong, IMO, because they're not
functions where you're sharing your good fortune with friends and
others. It is instead asking them to host *you* because you can't or
won't do it.

Goomba > wrote:

>gloria.p wrote:

>> But the whole discussion started about families who COULDN'T afford it
>> and went into major debt (house remortgage) to pull it off. Your first
>> paragraph dealt with that well. "Afford" is the operant word but not
>> the only one. Culture/ethnicity, sense of obligation, and the family's
>> concept of what a wedding should be also are really important.

>Okay, if one can't afford it (anything!)it shouldn't be done as if they
>can. Yet I get annoyed by people who also pen that any large,
>extravagant wedding is wrong when in fact it doesn't have to be.
>Pot luck receptions are inherently wrong, IMO, because they're not
>functions where you're sharing your good fortune with friends and
>others. It is instead asking them to host *you* because you can't or
>won't do it.

I can view a big wedding as a gift to one's friends in the
manner of a Northwestern potlatch, a sharing of one's fortune.
It does not necessarily mean going into hock, and/or pursuing some
crass self-centered effort to show off. But it can sometimes
mean these things.


Steve

gloria.p wrote on Sun, 30 May 2010 11:33:45 -0600:

>> One thing that was pointed out to me that I hadn't intuited
>> was that tattoos indicate "access to wealth that nobody can
>> take away from you"... unlike a fancy car it can't be stolen
>> or repossessed. A large tattoo means you at one point either
>> had enough money to pay for it, or were worth that much to
>> somebody else.
>>
> To many of my generation, it means that you:

> 1. have horrible taste and self-image
> 2. are an exhibitionist
> 3. don't care how you spend your money
> 4. are trying to attract scummy people
> 5. don't ever expect to grow up beyond today
> 6. were drunk and stupid at the same time.
> etc. etc. etc.

> I don't care if you are a concert musician or a nuclear
> physicist, a tattoo is ugly and self-mutilation.

I'm afraid that I agree with you. Tattoos do seem like self mutilation
to me and I have little enthusiasm for interacting with people with
them, however pleasant they really may be otherwise. I also wonder if
people realize how difficult and expensive it is to have tattoos
removed.

--

James Silverton
Potomac, Maryland

Email, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not

gloria.p wrote:
> Steve Pope wrote:
>
>> One thing that was pointed out to me that I hadn't intuited
>> was that tattoos indicate "access to wealth that nobody can
>> take away from you"... unlike a fancy car it can't be stolen
>> or repossessed. A large tattoo means you at one point either
>> had enough money to pay for it, or were worth that much to
>> somebody else.
>>
>>
>
>
> To many of my generation, it means that you:
>
> 1. have horrible taste and self-image
> 2. are an exhibitionist
> 3. don't care how you spend your money
> 4. are trying to attract scummy people
> 5. don't ever expect to grow up beyond today
> 6. were drunk and stupid at the same time.
> etc. etc. etc.
>
>
> I don't care if you are a concert musician or a nuclear physicist,
> a tattoo is ugly and self-mutilation.


My nephew has a ton of tattoos. Every time he shows me his latest tat I
tell him the same thing ... "You know those things are permanent don't you".

Goomba wrote:
> gloria.p wrote:
>
>> I don't care if you are a concert musician or a nuclear physicist,
>> a tattoo is ugly and self-mutilation.
>>
>> gloria p
>
> About a year or two ago some study came out saying that women who had 2
> or more tattoos had low self esteem.
> LOL... ya think? And if they didn't before the tats, some of them sure
> must after having some of the ugly ones I've seen put on.



Ten years ago I met a high school freshman girl who had her legs
covered with teal blue and orange paisley tattoos from (at least)
the tops of her Doc Martens boots to the hem of her miniskirt.
I honestly thought she was wearing an ugly pair of tights. She
wasn't the brightest child but she was noticed.

Lately I have seen young women in tank tops with flowers or dragons or
flames on their arms or chests and backs. What on earth are they
thinking and what will they look like when they are fat and fifty
or even slim and eighty? Can you imagine your grandmother with
huge butterfly or Lord-of-the-Rings tattoos? OMG.

gloria p

brooklyn1 wrote:
> On Sun, 30 May 2010 16:59:24 +0100, Janet Baraclough
> > wrote:
>
>> The message >
>>from brooklyn1 > contains these words:
>>
>>> The coast of Belize is below sea level,
>> That's the sea bit. The yellow bit above the water is called sand,
>> aka, beach.
>
> You are truly an idiot, especially about what not too very long ago
> was known as British Hondorus... the brits obviously have the worst
> schools on the planet.
>

She's an idiot and British schools are the worst on the planet? I think
that our schools must be similar to theirs because it is my
understanding that the coast at sea level. It is was below sea level it
would be the sea, not the coast. Part of the coast is underwater at high
tide, but it is the same in most places that are on the ocean.