"jmcquown" > wrote in message
...
> On 8/17/2014 8:23 PM, Julie Bove wrote:
>>
>> "S Viemeister" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> On 8/17/2014 6:09 PM, Janet Wilder wrote:
>>>
>>>> I think one has to remain an adolescent in their mind, to some extent,
>>>> to be able to write poetry. I'm betting that many here wrote poems
>>>> when
>>>> they were teenagers.
>>>>
>>> Indeed. Lots of angst-ridden stuff. Then I grew up.
>>
>> Really? I never did that at all. I don't even think that I had any
>> angst while growing up.
>
> You certainly seem to have a lot of angst now.

What? Dictionary.com says it is a feeling of dread, anxiety or anguish. I
don't feel *any* of those things. What are you talking about?

On 2014-08-17 20:31, Julie Bove wrote:

>> It's just some sub rosa boasting.
>> Janet US
>
> Whatever. No clue what that means either.

You can lead a whore to culture but you can't make her think.

"graham" > wrote in message
...

> WHAT??
> You should peruse the singles ads and you would be surprised at the number
> of 60+ women who are looking for a younger, often MUCH younger man. They
> don't want to look after an older guy but see no reason why they shouldn't
> be looked after themselves.
> Graham

I imagine they're looking for someone who doesn't need little blue pills,
not someone to look after them.

Cheri

"Cheryl" > wrote in message
b.com...
> On 8/17/2014 3:11 PM, graham wrote:
>
>> On 17/08/2014 1:00 PM, Cheri wrote:
>>>
>>> Yes, a lot of women finally wised up to the fact that some of those
>>> single older men are looking for a caretaker.
>>
>> WHAT??
>> You should peruse the singles ads and you would be surprised at the
>> number of 60+ women who are looking for a younger, often MUCH younger
>> man. They don't want to look after an older guy but see no reason why
>> they shouldn't be looked after themselves.
>> Graham
>>
> I'm sure there are both sexes looking for someone to take care of them. It
> isn't a bad thing unless it is completely one sided, but then again, there
> are people who enjoy taking care of someone.

I don't find that to be true with older people in my circle at all.

Cheri

"Ophelia" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> "Cheri" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> > wrote in message
>> news
>>> On Sun, 17 Aug 2014 10:10:48 -0700, "Cheri" >
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>"jmcquown" > wrote in message
...
>>>>
>>>>> Absolutely, Janet. A woman alone is not "she wants to be picked up".
>>>>> That's so archaic.
>>>>>
>>>>> Jill
>>>>
>>>>Someone should clue the men into that fact. :-)
>>>>
>>>>Cheri
>>>
>>> You are overlooking the fact that these days it is much more difficult
>>> for older men to find women who would jump at the chance of marriage
>>> and thereby give them a housekeeper to no doubt replace the one who
>>> died. I know that sounds cynical but when you have been used to free
>>> housekeeping...
>>
>> Yes, a lot of women finally wised up to the fact that some of those
>> single
>> older men are looking for a caretaker. I have seen it within my circle of
>> friends. One friend was involved with a man that used her for packing him
>> back and forth to medical appointments, cooking, and any number of
>> things,
>> but he balked at taking trips, going out etc. It didn't last long and we
>> laugh about it now, but she was still a chump for awhile there. :-)
>
> I would never marry again. I could never find what I have now so the
> problem would never arise.

Me either.

Cheri

"Janet" > wrote in message
t...
> In article >,
> says...
>>
>> On 8/17/2014 11:30 AM, Janet Wilder wrote:
>>
>> >
>> > You fellows should clean up your act. You are dinosaurs!
>> >
>>
>>
>> Poor analogy. The dinosaurs are extinct because they did not pick up
>> female dinosaurs at restaurants and reproduce.
>
> You mean, the female dinosaurs stopped reproducing because they'd
> rather read a good book than get humped by an ugly pick-up ?
>
> Janet UK

LOL
>

"Sqwertz" > wrote in message
...

> Another menstruating *******.
>
> -sw

A perfect male example of why many women would choose to be alone.

Cheri

On Sunday, August 17, 2014 10:49:48 PM UTC-5, Sqwertz wrote:
>
> On Sun, 17 Aug 2014 12:48:30 -0700 (PDT),
> wrote:
>
>
> > On Sunday, August 17, 2014 12:26:15 PM UTC-5, wrote:
>
> >> You are overlooking the fact that these days it is much more difficult
> >> for older men to find women who would jump at the chance of marriage
> >> and thereby give them a housekeeper to no doubt replace the one who
> >> died. I know that sounds cynical but when you have been used to free
> >> housekeeping...
>
>
> > AMEN, AMEN, AMEN!! I agree 100%.
>
>
> Another menstruating *******.
>
> -sw
>
>
Wrong on BOTH counts.

On Sunday, August 17, 2014 2:48:30 PM UTC-5, wrote:
> On Sunday, August 17, 2014 12:26:15 PM UTC-5, wrote:
>
> >
>
> > You are overlooking the fact that these days it is much more difficult
>
> > for older men to find women who would jump at the chance of marriage
>
> > and thereby give them a housekeeper to no doubt replace the one who
>
> > died. I know that sounds cynical but when you have been used to free
>
> > housekeeping...
>
> >
>
> >
>
> AMEN, AMEN, AMEN!! I agree 100%.

"Free housekeeping"???? Really? Personally, I wouldn't care if a
spouse couldn't boil spaghetti, nor even find the switch on the vacuum
cleaner. If I found myself single, I'd be looking more for bedroom action.

--Bryan

On Sunday, August 17, 2014 2:50:43 PM UTC-5, Janet Bostwick wrote:
> On Sun, 17 Aug 2014 13:11:04 -0600, graham > wrote:
>
>
>
> >On 17/08/2014 1:00 PM, Cheri wrote:
>
>
>
> >> Yes, a lot of women finally wised up to the fact that some of those
>
> >> single older men are looking for a caretaker.
>
> >
>
> >WHAT??
>
> >You should peruse the singles ads and you would be surprised at the
>
> >number of 60+ women who are looking for a younger, often MUCH younger
>
> >man. They don't want to look after an older guy but see no reason why
>
> >they shouldn't be looked after themselves.
>
> >Graham
>
>
>
> Oh, honey you've got that wrong. They're just looking for someone
>
> with some spunk left in the tank
>
Younger people of both sexes tend to be more physically attractive.
>
> Janet US

--Bryan

On Sunday, August 17, 2014 3:11:59 PM UTC-5, Janet Wilder wrote:
>
>
> UGH! No more men for me. Two husbands and I'm done!
>
No more husbands, or do you really mean "no more men"? I have a female
friend who is about 12 years older than me, and is widowed. She doesn't
date, but then she just couldn't care less about sex. That seems so
foreign to me. She also said that if she ever does have another live-with
relationship, she'd prefer it be with another woman, even though she's
never been bi.

My first real girlfriend, who is almost 52 is now with a woman, all but
legally married. She had a few relationships with men that didn't turn
out well. What a strange life I've had. At one point in her and my
relationship, there was a little "love triangle" thing going on with
another guy, except now the other guy isn't a guy anymore.
>
--Bryan

On Sunday, August 17, 2014 3:18:48 PM UTC-5, wrote:
> On Sun, 17 Aug 2014 21:13:25 +0100, "Ophelia"
>
> > wrote:
>
>
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >"Cheri" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
> >>
>
> >> > wrote in message
>
> >> news
>
> >>> On Sun, 17 Aug 2014 10:10:48 -0700, "Cheri" >
>
> >>> wrote:
>
> >>>
>
> >>>>
>
> >>>>"jmcquown" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
> >>>>
>
> >>>>> Absolutely, Janet. A woman alone is not "she wants to be picked up".
>
> >>>>> That's so archaic.
>
> >>>>>
>
> >>>>> Jill
>
> >>>>
>
> >>>>Someone should clue the men into that fact. :-)
>
> >>>>
>
> >>>>Cheri
>
> >>>
>
> >>> You are overlooking the fact that these days it is much more difficult
>
> >>> for older men to find women who would jump at the chance of marriage
>
> >>> and thereby give them a housekeeper to no doubt replace the one who
>
> >>> died. I know that sounds cynical but when you have been used to free
>
> >>> housekeeping...
>
> >>
>
> >> Yes, a lot of women finally wised up to the fact that some of those single
>
> >> older men are looking for a caretaker. I have seen it within my circle of
>
> >> friends. One friend was involved with a man that used her for packing him
>
> >> back and forth to medical appointments, cooking, and any number of things,
>
> >> but he balked at taking trips, going out etc. It didn't last long and we
>
> >> laugh about it now, but she was still a chump for awhile there. :-)
>
> >
>
> >I would never marry again. I could never find what I have now so the
>
> >problem would never arise.
>
>
>
> It isn't really even a question of that - I would not consider
>
> re-marrying but I can enjoy a lovely evening out as much as the next
>
> person, it's just surprising how often if that is with a guy my age
>
> (or close) he gets a glint in his eye seeing a nice replacement, well
>
> NO WAY. So the younger man is far more enticing.

It is true that younger men are interested in older women for sex-only
relationships, and that older women also find that to be a good
situation. Partner sex is good, and just because someone isn't in, or
even doesn't want a pair bond, doesn't mean the person should give up
that aspect of life. Old fashioned sexual morality belongs on the
shit-heap of human history.

--Bryan

On 2014-08-18 8:24 AM, Bryan-TGWWW wrote:

>> Oh, honey you've got that wrong. They're just looking for someone
>>
>> with some spunk left in the tank
>>
> Younger people of both sexes tend to be more physically attractive.
>>

Are they? You should check out a YMCA gym or bicycling trails.

On 8/17/2014 9:10 AM, wrote:
> On Sat, 16 Aug 2014 21:54:34 -0700, "Julie Bove"
> > wrote:
>
>>
>> I am just the opposite. If there were people around to talk to, I'd talk to
>> them and not read the book. Reading is only something I do to fill time.
>> Or if I have a need to read the specific material. I would never read a
>> book at a restaurant though. I find that to be rude. I would do it at a
>> coffee shop though. Lots of people do that.
>
> Why ? What's wrong with doing exactly what you want (so long as it
> doesn't infringe on the other diners pleasure) - you say you are a
> writer and yet now you say reading is something you only do to fill
> time?
>
(snippage)

Give it up. She doesn't dine alone; she can't imagine dining alone.
(Too bad at some point in her life she just might have to.) I see no
reason why reading a book in a restaurant when dining alone could be
considered rude. Of course I'm not talking about formal dining settings
with white linens, sterling silver and crystal water goblets.

Jill

Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>
> On 8/17/2014 10:40 AM, Gary wrote:
>
> >
> > As I've said before...eating alone in a restaurant is just odd to me.
> > I've never done it and I would never do that. It's not being ashamed.
> > If I eat restaurant food alone, I'll get take out or delivery and eat
> > it at home. Better to read a book or watch tv in the comfort of your
> > own home than sitting at a table alone to eat....boring.
> >
> > G.
> >
>
> What do you do when traveling hundreds of miles from home? You never
> stop for lunch?

As I said...I'll eat in the car or take it to the motel room. I've
actually just never cared to eat in restaurants at all whether alone
or with someone. It's just me.

G.

Janet Wilder wrote:
>
> I think talking on the phone in a restaurant is a bit rude.

Even worse is when you are talking to someone (in person) and their
phone rings and they put YOU on hold to answer it. Then they often
talk way too long. I walk away when people do that to me.

G.

"Gary" > wrote in message ...

> As I said...I'll eat in the car or take it to the motel room. I've
> actually just never cared to eat in restaurants at all whether alone
> or with someone. It's just me.
>
> G.

I'm a lot like that. I prefer to cook at home and don't care much for eating
out at all.

Cheri

"Gary" > wrote in message ...
> Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>
>> On 8/17/2014 10:40 AM, Gary wrote:
>>
>> >
>> > As I've said before...eating alone in a restaurant is just odd to me.
>> > I've never done it and I would never do that. It's not being ashamed.
>> > If I eat restaurant food alone, I'll get take out or delivery and eat
>> > it at home. Better to read a book or watch tv in the comfort of your
>> > own home than sitting at a table alone to eat....boring.
>> >
>> > G.
>> >
>>
>> What do you do when traveling hundreds of miles from home? You never
>> stop for lunch?
>
> As I said...I'll eat in the car or take it to the motel room. I've
> actually just never cared to eat in restaurants at all whether alone
> or with someone. It's just me.

No, not just you.

--
http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk/shop/

"Cheri" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Gary" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>> As I said...I'll eat in the car or take it to the motel room. I've
>> actually just never cared to eat in restaurants at all whether alone
>> or with someone. It's just me.
>>
>> G.
>
> I'm a lot like that. I prefer to cook at home and don't care much for
> eating out at all.

+1

--
http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk/shop/

On Saturday, August 16, 2014 5:48:56 PM UTC-4, Sqwertz wrote:

>
> Women reading books at restaurants labels you as a unsocialble,
>
> homely spinster. Bonus point if it's a Harliquen Romance. Extra
>
> bonus point if you bring two of them in case you finish the first one.
>


Comment from 6 days ago:

DavidWNicholas
"I think this is an old-fashioned gender thing. Back in the day when
I was young, my mother had a serious thing about eating alone, and told
me that she'd actually heard of restaurants that wouldn't serve single
women. Presumably there was a stigma attached to the woman alone,
presuming that she was making herself available to be picked up or
even a prostitute (similar to the 'no visible means of support' laws
in some rural areas in the '30s) so they wouldn't serve them, or even
allow them in the restaurant. My wife still won't eat alone in a
sit-down restaurant, prefers drive-through where she can eat in the
car without feeling self-conscious. I, on the other hand, enjoy an
old-style diner where I can sit at the counter and eat, have the
waitress refill the coffee regularly, be leisurely and even spread
out a bit, occupying the space next to myself. I too usually have a
book (sometimes more than one) and I can be found there, reading by
the hour at times."

(end)


Lenona.

"Ed Pawlowski" > wrote in message
...
> On 8/18/2014 8:20 AM, Bryan-TGWWW wrote:
>
>> "Free housekeeping"???? Really? Personally, I wouldn't care if a
>> spouse couldn't boil spaghetti, nor even find the switch on the vacuum
>> cleaner. If I found myself single, I'd be looking more for bedroom
>> action.
>>
>> --Bryan
>>
>
> What are you going to do the other 23 hours 50 minutes?

lol

--
http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk/shop/

On 8/18/2014 8:20 AM, Bryan-TGWWW wrote:

> "Free housekeeping"???? Really? Personally, I wouldn't care if a
> spouse couldn't boil spaghetti, nor even find the switch on the vacuum
> cleaner. If I found myself single, I'd be looking more for bedroom action.
>
> --Bryan
>

What are you going to do the other 23 hours 50 minutes?

On 8/18/2014 1:39 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> On 8/18/2014 8:20 AM, Bryan-TGWWW wrote:
>
>> "Free housekeeping"???? Really? Personally, I wouldn't care if a
>> spouse couldn't boil spaghetti, nor even find the switch on the vacuum
>> cleaner. If I found myself single, I'd be looking more for bedroom
>> action.
>>
>> --Bryan
>>
>
> What are you going to do the other 23 hours 50 minutes?

LOL Ed! As if some woman wants his constant attention. He's obsessed
with sex, as he has proven here many times in the past.

Jill

On 8/18/2014 1:54 PM, jmcquown wrote:
> On 8/18/2014 1:39 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>> On 8/18/2014 8:20 AM, Bryan-TGWWW wrote:
>>
>>> "Free housekeeping"???? Really? Personally, I wouldn't care if a
>>> spouse couldn't boil spaghetti, nor even find the switch on the vacuum
>>> cleaner. If I found myself single, I'd be looking more for bedroom
>>> action.
>>>
>>> --Bryan
>>>
>>
>> What are you going to do the other 23 hours 50 minutes?
>
> LOL Ed! As if some woman wants his constant attention. He's obsessed
> with sex, as he has proven here many times in the past.
>
> Jill

Sex is a wonderful thing, but a really good relationship has much more
going for it. Especially as you get older and perhaps one of the
partners has health issues and both have changes in libido. It would be
interesting to see how the 60 or 70 year old Bryan handles it.

On Mon, 18 Aug 2014 09:49:12 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

>On Saturday, August 16, 2014 5:48:56 PM UTC-4, Sqwertz wrote:
>
>>
>> Women reading books at restaurants labels you as a unsocialble,
>>
>> homely spinster. Bonus point if it's a Harliquen Romance. Extra
>>
>> bonus point if you bring two of them in case you finish the first one.
>>
>
>
>Comment from 6 days ago:
>
> DavidWNicholas
>"I think this is an old-fashioned gender thing. Back in the day when
>I was young, my mother had a serious thing about eating alone, and told
>me that she'd actually heard of restaurants that wouldn't serve single
>women. Presumably there was a stigma attached to the woman alone,
>presuming that she was making herself available to be picked up or
>even a prostitute (similar to the 'no visible means of support' laws
>in some rural areas in the '30s) so they wouldn't serve them, or even
>allow them in the restaurant. My wife still won't eat alone in a
>sit-down restaurant, prefers drive-through where she can eat in the
>car without feeling self-conscious. I, on the other hand, enjoy an
>old-style diner where I can sit at the counter and eat, have the
>waitress refill the coffee regularly, be leisurely and even spread
>out a bit, occupying the space next to myself. I too usually have a
>book (sometimes more than one) and I can be found there, reading by
>the hour at times."
>
>(end)
>
>
>Lenona.

I'm pretty sure there used to be back entrances for unaccompanied
women -- they had a separate room. I remember seeing the sign over a
door in my home town.
Janet US

On 8/18/2014 2:36 PM, Janet Bostwick wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Aug 2014 09:49:12 -0700 (PDT), wrote:
>
>> On Saturday, August 16, 2014 5:48:56 PM UTC-4, Sqwertz wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Women reading books at restaurants labels you as a unsocialble,
>>>
>>> homely spinster. Bonus point if it's a Harliquen Romance. Extra
>>>
>>> bonus point if you bring two of them in case you finish the first one.
>>>
>>
>>
>> Comment from 6 days ago:
>>
>> DavidWNicholas
>> "I think this is an old-fashioned gender thing. Back in the day when
>> I was young, my mother had a serious thing about eating alone, and told
>> me that she'd actually heard of restaurants that wouldn't serve single
>> women. Presumably there was a stigma attached to the woman alone,
>> presuming that she was making herself available to be picked up or
>> even a prostitute (similar to the 'no visible means of support' laws
>> in some rural areas in the '30s) so they wouldn't serve them, or even
>> allow them in the restaurant.

>>
>>
>> Lenona.
>
> I'm pretty sure there used to be back entrances for unaccompanied
> women -- they had a separate room. I remember seeing the sign over a
> door in my home town.
> Janet US
>

Never saw it in a restaurant, but I saw many bars that had a Woman's
Entrance. That was usually on the side or rear and it took you to the
place where they had tables setup rather than walk through the bar
portion.

In article >, lid
says...

Here's what I look like, unfortunately, I was wearing my
> jacket with the too short sleeves that day:
>
> http://italianretro.com/vip/marcello-otto-e-mezzo

I'd rather see a picture of your Guide Dog

Janet UK

On 8/16/2014 5:05 PM, Mayo wrote:
> On 8/16/2014 3:48 PM, Sqwertz wrote:
>> On Sat, 16 Aug 2014 13:52:28 -0400, jmcquown wrote:
>>
>>> I really don't know why
>>> there is a stigma attached to eating alone. It's not something
>>> shameful, as the topic of the post suggests.
>>
>> Women reading books at restaurants labels you as a unsocialble,
>> homely spinster. Bonus point if it's a Harliquen Romance. Extra
>> bonus point if you bring two of them in case you finish the first one.
>>
>> -sw
>>
> What is the root cause of your seemingly incurable misogyny?
>

Forcible eviction from his mother's womb. He and guys like him hold
that against all women, forevermore.

On 8/18/2014 10:11 AM, Sqwertz wrote:
> On Sun, 17 Aug 2014 22:16:39 -0700, Cheri wrote:
>
>> "Sqwertz" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>
>>> Another menstruating *******.
>>
>> A perfect male example of why many women would choose to be alone.
>
> Wasn't my term - somebody else have me that label for you. But you
> broads sure are doing a great job in this man-bashing thread while at
> the same time stereotyping us as sexist scumbags. So I can gladly
> reciprocate.
>
> ObFood: Project of the day will be focaccia. Fairly plain or topped
> is the question...
>
> =sw
>
Everyone knows you're a woman hater, Yappy - get over it.

On 8/18/2014 10:13 AM, Sqwertz wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Aug 2014 08:12:22 -0300, wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 17 Aug 2014 22:49:48 -0500, Sqwertz >
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 17 Aug 2014 12:48:30 -0700 (PDT),
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sunday, August 17, 2014 12:26:15 PM UTC-5, wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> You are overlooking the fact that these days it is much more difficult
>>>>> for older men to find women who would jump at the chance of marriage
>>>>> and thereby give them a housekeeper to no doubt replace the one who
>>>>> died. I know that sounds cynical but when you have been used to free
>>>>> housekeeping...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> AMEN, AMEN, AMEN!! I agree 100%.
>>>
>>> Another menstruating *******.
>>
>> Is that the best you can do ? You sound like some little 8 year old
>> school boy!
>
> Oh, come now. Don't get your panties in a wad!
>
> -sw
>
Grow up, or...have another cancer stick while you ponder how to...

On 8/17/2014 4:03 PM, graham wrote:
> On 17/08/2014 1:24 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>> On 8/17/2014 1:26 PM, wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> You are overlooking the fact that these days it is much more difficult
>>> for older men to find women who would jump at the chance of marriage
>>> and thereby give them a housekeeper to no doubt replace the one who
>>> died. I know that sounds cynical but when you have been used to free
>>> housekeeping...
>>>
>>
>> You have a point but the opposite is also true. I know men that
>> have to
>> fight off the women that are looking for sex and/or financial security.
>
> Especially the latter!

There are a number of guys I've known who were completely obsessed
with money. All their lives, they kept careful track of their savings
and investments. At any moment they could (and would) tell you their
net worth. They were extraordinarily cheap. They never had wives or
girlfriends, because they counted those as expenses, and unnecessary
ones at that. Until they reached retirement age, that is. At that
point, they decided having someone look after them as they aged and
their health declined was fiscally prudent, and so they went out and
found themselves mates.

On Monday, August 18, 2014 8:55:00 AM UTC-10, Janet wrote:
> In article >, lid
>
> says...
>
>
>
> Here's what I look like, unfortunately, I was wearing my
>
> > jacket with the too short sleeves that day:
>
> >
>
> > http://italianretro.com/vip/marcello-otto-e-mezzo
>
>
>
> I'd rather see a picture of your Guide Dog
>
>
>
> Janet UK

His name is Guido the Guidedog. He is poodle.

On Mon, 18 Aug 2014 17:18:58 +0100, "Ophelia"
> wrote:

>
>
>"Cheri" > wrote in message
...
>>
>> "Gary" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>
>>> As I said...I'll eat in the car or take it to the motel room. I've
>>> actually just never cared to eat in restaurants at all whether alone
>>> or with someone. It's just me.
>>>
>>> G.
>>
>> I'm a lot like that. I prefer to cook at home and don't care much for
>> eating out at all.
>
>+1

+2

On 8/18/2014 2:50 PM, Moe DeLoughan wrote:
> On 8/17/2014 4:03 PM, graham wrote:
>> On 17/08/2014 1:24 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>> On 8/17/2014 1:26 PM, wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> You are overlooking the fact that these days it is much more difficult
>>>> for older men to find women who would jump at the chance of marriage
>>>> and thereby give them a housekeeper to no doubt replace the one who
>>>> died. I know that sounds cynical but when you have been used to free
>>>> housekeeping...
>>>>
>>>
>>> You have a point but the opposite is also true. I know men that
>>> have to
>>> fight off the women that are looking for sex and/or financial security.
>>
>> Especially the latter!
>
> There are a number of guys I've known who were completely obsessed with
> money. All their lives, they kept careful track of their savings and
> investments. At any moment they could (and would) tell you their net
> worth. They were extraordinarily cheap. They never had wives or
> girlfriends, because they counted those as expenses, and unnecessary
> ones at that. Until they reached retirement age, that is. At that point,
> they decided having someone look after them as they aged and their
> health declined was fiscally prudent, and so they went out and found
> themselves mates.

What he would like to find, is a "nurse with a purse."

Becca

On Mon, 18 Aug 2014 14:23:14 -0400, Ed Pawlowski > wrote:

>On 8/18/2014 1:54 PM, jmcquown wrote:
>> On 8/18/2014 1:39 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>> On 8/18/2014 8:20 AM, Bryan-TGWWW wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Free housekeeping"???? Really? Personally, I wouldn't care if a
>>>> spouse couldn't boil spaghetti, nor even find the switch on the vacuum
>>>> cleaner. If I found myself single, I'd be looking more for bedroom
>>>> action.
>>>>
>>>> --Bryan
>>>>
>>>
>>> What are you going to do the other 23 hours 50 minutes?
>>
>> LOL Ed! As if some woman wants his constant attention. He's obsessed
>> with sex, as he has proven here many times in the past.
>>
>> Jill
>
>Sex is a wonderful thing, but a really good relationship has much more
>going for it. Especially as you get older and perhaps one of the
>partners has health issues and both have changes in libido. It would be
>interesting to see how the 60 or 70 year old Bryan handles it.

Same as now, himself.

On Mon, 18 Aug 2014 12:52:18 -0700 (PDT), dsi1 >
wrote:

>On Monday, August 18, 2014 8:55:00 AM UTC-10, Janet wrote:
>> In article >, lid
>>
>> says...
>>
>>
>>
>> Here's what I look like, unfortunately, I was wearing my
>>
>> > jacket with the too short sleeves that day:
>>
>> >
>>
>> > http://italianretro.com/vip/marcello-otto-e-mezzo
>>
>>
>>
>> I'd rather see a picture of your Guide Dog
>>
>>
>>
>> Janet UK
>
>His name is Guido the Guidedog. He is poodle.

Spayed.

Gary wrote:
>Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>> Gary wrote:
>>
>> > As I've said before...eating alone in a restaurant is just odd to me.
>> > I've never done it and I would never do that. It's not being ashamed.
>> > If I eat restaurant food alone, I'll get take out or delivery and eat
>> > it at home. Better to read a book or watch tv in the comfort of your
>> > own home than sitting at a table alone to eat....boring.
>>
>> What do you do when traveling hundreds of miles from home? You never
>> stop for lunch?
>
>As I said...I'll eat in the car or take it to the motel room. I've
>actually just never cared to eat in restaurants at all whether alone
>or with someone. It's just me.

I really don't care to eat in a restaurant alone, feels like I'm in a
fish bowl. I didn't like eating alone in my car and even worse is
eating alone in a hotel room. When I found myself alone away from
home I'd find a tavern and eat at the bar. I didn't like watching TV
alone in a hotel room, I much prefered watching TV at a bar and only
leave when I was ready to sleep.

On 8/18/2014 3:15 PM, Ema Nymton wrote:
> On 8/18/2014 2:50 PM, Moe DeLoughan wrote:
>> On 8/17/2014 4:03 PM, graham wrote:
>>> On 17/08/2014 1:24 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>>> On 8/17/2014 1:26 PM, wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> You are overlooking the fact that these days it is much more
>>>>> difficult
>>>>> for older men to find women who would jump at the chance of marriage
>>>>> and thereby give them a housekeeper to no doubt replace the one who
>>>>> died. I know that sounds cynical but when you have been used to
>>>>> free
>>>>> housekeeping...
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> You have a point but the opposite is also true. I know men that
>>>> have to
>>>> fight off the women that are looking for sex and/or financial
>>>> security.
>>>
>>> Especially the latter!
>>
>> There are a number of guys I've known who were completely obsessed with
>> money. All their lives, they kept careful track of their savings and
>> investments. At any moment they could (and would) tell you their net
>> worth. They were extraordinarily cheap. They never had wives or
>> girlfriends, because they counted those as expenses, and unnecessary
>> ones at that. Until they reached retirement age, that is. At that
>> point,
>> they decided having someone look after them as they aged and their
>> health declined was fiscally prudent, and so they went out and found
>> themselves mates.
>
> What he would like to find, is a "nurse with a purse."
>

Yep, one of the guys I know did just that. But more often, they found
women who had no jobs, no savings, who were willing to become
housekeepers/sex partners/caretakers in exchange for room and board
and a vague promise of something more in the future. The promise being
either "I'll marry you" or "I'll remember you in my will", with
neither promise ever being realized.

On 08/18/2014 08:35 AM, jmcquown wrote:
> On 8/17/2014 9:10 AM, wrote:
>> On Sat, 16 Aug 2014 21:54:34 -0700, "Julie Bove"
>> > wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> I am just the opposite. If there were people around to talk to, I'd
>>> talk to
>>> them and not read the book. Reading is only something I do to fill
>>> time.
>>> Or if I have a need to read the specific material. I would never read a
>>> book at a restaurant though. I find that to be rude. I would do it
>>> at a
>>> coffee shop though. Lots of people do that.
>>
>> Why ? What's wrong with doing exactly what you want (so long as it
>> doesn't infringe on the other diners pleasure) - you say you are a
>> writer and yet now you say reading is something you only do to fill
>> time?
>>
> (snippage)
>
> Give it up. She doesn't dine alone; she can't imagine dining alone.
> (Too bad at some point in her life she just might have to.) I see no
> reason why reading a book in a restaurant when dining alone could be
> considered rude. Of course I'm not talking about formal dining settings
> with white linens, sterling silver and crystal water goblets.
>
> Jill

And then there's JK Rowling, who didn't read in a restaurant, but WROTE
the early Harry Potter novels in an Edinburgh tea house. . . On paper
napkins.

On 8/17/2014 10:49 PM, Sqwertz wrote:
> On Sun, 17 Aug 2014 12:48:30 -0700 (PDT),
> wrote:
>
>> On Sunday, August 17, 2014 12:26:15 PM UTC-5, wrote:
>>>
>>> You are overlooking the fact that these days it is much more difficult
>>> for older men to find women who would jump at the chance of marriage
>>> and thereby give them a housekeeper to no doubt replace the one who
>>> died. I know that sounds cynical but when you have been used to free
>>> housekeeping...
>>>
>>>
>> AMEN, AMEN, AMEN!! I agree 100%.
>
> Another menstruating *******.
>

The two things kooks most love to hurl at their opponents: that
they're either a fag, or on the rag. You nailed both in one post.
Congratulations, kook!