Handbag Caddy

I guess it happens to some men, but it often happen to us women, that we constantly have to find a place to put our handbags. The back of the chair is one favored place, save that it's one of the easiest places to lift it up from. Then even if we were willing to take the chance, some places don't have a propper chair back because either the chairs are couch-like (like at Leroy), or they have no back, like the stools at many bars and discos. Men have this amazing hability at packing all they need in their pockets, which sure make women think that: a) they must have Mary Poppins pockets, or b) they walk around with one key, one credit card, one ID and a state-of-the-art ultra thin mobile. (The trick is, and I know this because now I have a boyfriend, that men actually pack into their wives and girlfriends and girl-friends' purses... the sneaky bastards.)

Then again, I must admit that sometimes I try to man-up myself, and carry around the strictly necessary things, and that's when the plot thickens. After all, what us women need? Our cosmetics bag filled with at least one lipstick, one chapstick, one eyeshadow, one eyeliner, one compact (hopefully mirrored, so you don't have to carry a mirror), alcohol gel, hand cream, comb, hairband, hairpins, a tiny parfume (samples work wonders! Use them!), one blush (if you use it), panty liners, pads or tampons, headache pills, period pills... and this is The Basic Kit. Because you may want to ad eyebrow clippers, nail clippers, earrings (a change of earrings can make the difference for that sudden change of plans. Large hoops for the sexy look and studs or a small dangling pearl for the solid, business-look), concealer, foundation, contact lens case, contact lens liquid, eyedrops, face cream... you name it. Well, I want to see the magician who can put all this in a pocket. And then, if we add to this our wallet, our keys, mobile, PDA/planner/filofax/agenda, notepad and pen or notebook, umbrella, water bottle, chewing gum or box of peppermint candy, half a chocolate bar and an iPod... well, we do need a purse.

When it comes to work, we usually manage to put our purse somewhere in the office, whether in a drawer or on a corner of our desk, on a shelve unit, some furniture... If there's really no other chance, we place put it on the floor, but as much as we can, we avoid doing so. But what happens whe you have to attend a meeting? You won't put your bag on the table because that's not proper, and sometimes meeting rooms are so uncomfortable you can't hang your bag from the back of the chair or the arm of the chair, because either everybody is sitting too close to each other or they are walking behind you and dumping your bag on the floor, or twisting it and turning it until it's contents rain out onto the floor, with your rather expensive Blackberry leading the fall. So what can you do? Well, thanks Hyne someone already thought of that, and invented the Handbag Hanger or the Handbag Caddy (also known as Purse Caddy). This thingie is some sort of hook that can be twisted into a flat shape (like you see in the picture) which you can store in your bag, and when you need to place it somewhere, you just twist down the wire part and place the decorative wide piece on the table, the hook underneath and you can hang your bag from it. Ain't that just cool?

The first time I saw it, Rose and Cyn flapped theirs out of their bags at a meeting. Hooks down, shiny millefiore squares framed in chrome-like metal on the table and their handbags, otherwise too big and in the waym went underneath, hanging close to them, entirely at hand to fhóish out phones, agendas, pens and whatever they needed, and yet keeping them comfortably seated without protuding bags anywhere. Needless to say, I had to have one, and now I do. This piece is not too extended, for I have not seen it in many places, nor have I seen other women or men using it, but hopefully it will. At the same time, things like a simple handbag caddy give me hope. In a world filled with "the only people with the success guarrantied are the ones who speak English, so you too purchase this no-pain-no-effort 16 CD program for just $19.99 a month for a year", and "it's not your fault that none of the diets you've tried worked! Get out super-revolutionary system and loose a pound a week!", and "tired of all that work in the kitchen? Sweat not! But our revolutionary cook-it-all and get a dinner in a snap!", and other stuff of the sort, there are shy, quiet inventions that are really good, that do not look forward to stiffle people, and deliever what they promise. It's not another sweeper that pretends to do the same thing the old sweeper does "but better", only to replace it in a few months or years for another that claims to do it even better, while the first one did it just fine. Truth is, ladies and gentlemen, that us women need our purses, and through the time we all struggle with the question of where to put it without exposing it to robbery, risking forgetting it, having it soiled, kicked or accidentally stepped over, or bumbing into people, or plain and simply, representing a source of discomfort. This invention is a relief, and if you don't believe me, look at women around you, trying to place their bags safely.

I'm happy with my handbag caddy. ^_^

On The Defense of Men... Again

I guess it is part of my fate, as a feminist, to walk around defending men from the attack of rabid females. I can't just wrap my head around the idea some people have that women should debase men, just as retarded men (and some retarded women) debase women. First of all, and i want this to be perfectly clear, being a feminist doesn't mean that I believe women to be better or superior to men, BUT that I believe that men and women are EQUAL. Now this "equal" word is quite hard to understand for some (many, many, many). By now women are stating harder that they can do any job men can, and also that we are capable at performing at high positions, and hold high offices and manage, be CEOs, CFOs, AGs and even Presidents and Prime Ministers. But do we earn this by taking it away from men? I don't think so. This is not a Summ Zero equation.

But let's not go into the labor sphere, but the personal sphere. Then again, though I addressed this topic before, the topic comes back thanks to three ladies: Gitta, who wrote in her blog an entry titled "Protected Men", where she pretty much said that women are entering every aspect of life, priorly reserved to men, men are being pushed out and left to oblivion. Like I stated before, lets obliviate the "labor part" and concentrate on the "choice".

The other two ladies, Rosario and Cynthia, were happily commenting that marriage should never happen because people are in love, but only when the guy has enough money to buy a comfortable life for the woman. Needless to say that I oppose this idea, and then again, here we have the core concept of "choice".

Though our choices form us as individuals, choices do not define our gender. The gender is something you are born with and is part of who you are, but not the determinant element of your whole being. Let's keep in this in mind, shall we?

Lets ask ourselves, what is a man? A man is a person, a human who has been born male. In every aspect is equal to it's female counterpart, known as woman, save in the organs needed to reproduce the species. Both have one brain, both are capable of thought, both have feelings, both are capable of communication, both have the need to communicate. Both laugh, cry, smile, whine, shout, burp, frown... and so on. Both can solve a math excersize and learn a language, read a book, play a sport and just about anything you can think of.

Through the feminist revolution, as women broke from their socially imposed chains and proved that they can work shoulder to shoulder with men, what did men lose? Were they not able to do a given job because women were doing it? No. Men can still choose to be engineers in spite of women chosing to be engineers. Women are still being paid less, in average, than men for the same job, and it's nto because they are given a differenciated wage, but because in many companies women are given less chances for promotions or chances to get "points" that would make their wages bigger (business trips, seminars, time to study, because, you know, women "get pregnant" and are not a "good, reliable investment" in that sense). Of course, that could make a capitalist pig to choose women over men, because they are "cheaper" and "easier to manipulate". This doesn't mean that women are pushing men out.

The idea should not be about who does the job, but about everybody having the same chance to do the job. A man shouldn't feel different about his choices just because women can make the same choices. On the other side, men should have the same chance to do whatever job and whatever activity us women choose to do. There shouldn't be "man jobs" and "woman jobs", just jobs. Men should be able to be secretaries, assistants or even stay home dads and househusbands, why not? They are just as people and just as human as any woman who chooses to take any of those paths. Why do we have to deny these from men? Are they not equal to us?

This brings me to the "role of men" in a relationship. Sure, I'm not an authority in the matter of "relationships", but even so, I can't believe that I, as a former bed-hopping one-night-stander, have a better understanding and a far deeper appreciation of men, than that of women who have spent significantly more time with men. First of all, why should men have a role and women have another role? Shouldn't a relationship be about equal shares? Why is a man expected to protect and provide, and the woman to serve and care? Can't a man care and do chores? Can't a woman provide and stand out and defend her man?

The idea that there's a given "role" is what, I believe, fucks up the whole thing, because as individuals we don't have the same "gifts" and "tendencies" and, regardless of the gender, one partner might be more fit for providing and the other more fit for caring. Just think about gay couples. In a gay couple, you've two men or two women, who does what? The one who is more fit. Does that make the other one less of a man or less of a woman? No. People don't go "genderless" or change their gender because they don't "act" the way they are supposed to in the frame of society. So, if gay couples remain man-man, woman-woman, why should it be any different for straight couples?

When Rosario was proudly telling how she showed a friend "the right path" because her friend was about to get married but she realized she didn't love her boyfriend, and so Rosario told her that getting married isn't about love but the money the guy has, reminded me of the "other role" many women expect men to fulfill. Cynthia goes on the same line. Both Rosario and Cynthia seem to take great pleasure in lecturing me about milking money from my boyfriend, making him pay absolutely everything, which I find utterly hideous and unbecoming. The question that rises here is: are men organic ATM?


Yes, in the female subculture many see men as walking wallets, that must be exploited. Something like women's very own RPG where you walk these passages killing other females and loting on men to get their "stash". This is the world of golddigers, where the women who preys more on men's money is the hero. This is the world where all little girls want to grow up and be Ivana Trump. But are men's only value in the size of their accounts? Is the worth of a man measurable by the figures he makes? Because if women want to be valued by their personality, their thoughts, their capabilities, their true selves, shouldn't men, as our very equals, be valued by the same paramethers?

I don't want to be with a man because he can buy me all the Swatch watches I want and take me to travel here and there. I want to feel the PRIDE of being able to give myself what I want and what I need. The man I am with, should be great just by being himself. I don't need a man to support me, or at least I shouldn't: that's what "work" has been invented for, and that's why we have fought and struggled, and why so many of our sisters died for.

Truth is that sexism works both ways and either way is wrong. Women are to slaves made to serve men and replace their fists around their dicks and so men are not income sources to be pounded for the things we want but are not willing to work for, which must be kept "oiled" with nookie. Lets stop objectifying each other! Please, they are our friends, our brothers, our sons, our fathers and grandfathers, why can't we love them for who they are? Why can't we respect them for who they are? And foremost, how can we demand their respect when we do not return the courtesy.

Some women are not different from the men who mistreat us, who see us as bounty, as property that can be sold, bought or used, abused and destroyed at will. But why do they think they have the right to do to men what we do not like done to us?

I think a lot of people don't like humans to be equal because they life to exploit these irrational, unrealistic differences. This rises one last question, which I leave to all: does it mean that the people who relay on these fake differences are actually the ones uncapable of developing themselves, growing up and fulfilling themselves in the ways they pretend "the others" to serve them? Are they the flawed ones? I think they are.

The Bragging Rights of Mankind

Lately I'm getting kind of mixed up with the "numbers" of the dates. My last entry was on the 29th, but that constanty felt like "yesterday" or something around "tomorrow". Well, it was not. It was Wednesday, and Today, thanky the All Mighty and small miracles, is FRIDAY. Shall I express with a usual "happiness dance" just how freaking happy I am that it FINALLY is Friday? Then again, this week I wouldn't mind any other day of the week. I have finally moved to another area, and am out of the process of Mr. B. Thanks Hyne for the small favors.

New office, new functions, new assignments, new boss, new guardrobe, new furniture... Yes, life is good, and it's even better when you are doing what you like to do. Don't you think? ^_^

And talking about what you "like to do" (and this is not another plotbunny for a sassie SNP slash fic, though I do have in mind this awesome idea about a --- never mind), the other day I was watching an episode of Girls of the Playboy Mansion (yes, I watch that, thank you), and there was this "seek for the 55th aniversary Playmate". Well it happened that one of the contestants was the daughter of a Playmate, which Mr. Hefner had as girlfriend for around 3 years. Nothing unusual there, only that it got me thinking about, why a man would publish pictures of his girlfriend all naked and for other men to lust and jerk off to her. I mean, one would think that men are usually jealous and they don't want to share their women with other men. Well, most of them are not wiling to share. I mean, if I were to tell Kari that, hey, I'm flying over to California to pose for Playboy on the nude, I'm pretty sure he would not like the idea, and probably would even make an attempt, however feeble, to keep me from getting naked for the camera. And it's not because he thinks I'm not pretty enough, for I'm too fat for the pictures, or too small chested, or too brunet, or whatever. It's a matter of him not really liking the idea of having other men drooling and lusting over my naked body. (Not like his feelings in this matter would stop me if I were set on doing it, but whether I'm sensible to his opinion or go after my own head, he would still have those feelings...)

So why would Hefner actually have his women spread in glossy paper for his subscribers and ocasional newstand purchasers? Well, first, because he can, and second, because there comes another feature seen both in men and women alike: the bragging instinct. Of course, most men don't parade their women on "gentlemen" magazines, but must of us know how men like to show of their women with the sexiest clothes ever. Either for their own pleasure, or for sharing with the crowd, when a man has a beautiful women at his side, he usually (unless he's somewhat unhinged) like her to dress sexy so that other men can see, desire and die of envy because HE has that sexy piece of ass. Many women, also like to be displayed that way, so I guess there's no hurt in that, but before the feminist society roars up and tears down men for objectify them and display them as prizes or "just bodies", let's get clear with something first: everybody brags.

Sure, us women don't usually dress our men in skimpy clothes and have them walk around half naked for other women to admire their body, but we do objectify men, and we are not more subtle about it. I mean, you sure know the case where the chick shows around the engagement ring she got, or the jewelry, the car, the purse... Our society is not used to display the body of men naked, so we don't dress them in a boxer and a wife beater, but the "worth of men" is actually on other things. Socially, that worth is his capability to "provide". Women sit around and brag about what their men bought them, and what they have. His job, his car, his bank account. Seldom someone brags with the brain of the other, and I don't mean about winning prizes and competitions, but brag about just how good the other is at some intellectual task.

Though objectifying people is wrong, I'd say the need of bragging has a double purpose: first, we want to be assured of our choice, because probably looking for another mate is a very difficult task, and we don't want to be doing it again, and second, we need our entourage to accept our choice. Here's either because we want our entourage to see out mate as one of their own, or for a merely competitive impulse, where we want to be assured that we have "the best choice ever", and therefore, in the eyes of our entourage, that improves our standing. Kind of like a "hunter thing": the better the prey you get, the better and more skilled you are, and truth to be told, none of us want to be a "collector", a "reaper" in this: we all want to be the best hunter.

So, what makes us that "best hunter"? Bragging so much and so good we "talk" ourselves into the "best hunter" position? Certainly, our "prey" makes us a hunter, and the prey's qualities and how our entourage receive them ranks us into the different degrees of huntership. My question now is: what do we brag about?

Looks, money, skills, bed skills, connections, social standing... but what do each of us tend to brag more about? What makes us prouder?

In my case, two things are simply invaluable for bragging: sex performance and education. Sex I rate considering different categories, which is much like an Iron Chef America grading. There goes creativity, delivery, wording, sounds, rhythm, ease or confidence, lenght of each "time", number of times and how many times and how good does he make me cum. (I had years of experience to perfect my metrics, so yeah, I can go that detailed.) But when it comes to education, a lot of factors come in consideration, and they are mainly related to what interests me or what can impress me. Certainly a man who can quote and work into a conversation the physics' treaties worked out by Albert Einstein won't amaze me, or a man who knows just about anything about stars and planets won't sweep me off my feet, but they would rather bore me, but a man who knows his classics, can make references to good books... that can make me surrender. These are the things that impress me from a man, and the things I brag about.

On the other hand, we also tend to brag about things we suddenly find awesome about our mate and which we want others to admire. So, at the end, while we don't get tired of our mates and don't think of them as our "worst half", we handle around this box of "bragging items", some of them standard for us, and some of them that come as "extras" attached to the given person, that may or may not end up included into our permanent standard item, and so we go around publishing them to our entourage. If each of us were owner of a magazine, how many of our "significant others" would have made it to their pages? Covers, centerfolds... you name it. And that's because, in the end, we all brag. It's part of who we are.

Moments of Pain and Uncertainty

Yesterday has been far darker, deeper and more painful that I would have thought. Not only has the Month of Mourning begun for me, but also a plane has disappeared over the Atlantic Ocean. No, naturally, I don't give a dime about such things normally. I mean, there are refugee women living in constant fear of sexual violence in Darfur and Zimbabwe, and that's worse that some plane in the ocean. Worse is war, children being killed by their parents and relatives, kids killed in the streets and their killers getting away with it. The crisis that has deveiled the capitalism cruelest face, where it is blatant how those who have more are willing to send to starvation and misery thousands of families so they can keep their private jets, and toasting with $3000 cocktails. So yeah, compared to that some plane going Houdini shouldn't mean a dime.

The flight is the AF 447, from Air France. Departing from Sao Paulo (or was it Rio de Janeiro?) to Paris. 11 French crew members. I happen to know a crew member, which I have met in a flight pretty much in the same direction. Now I'm worried. I understand they are not tied to a single flight, so someone who does "Caracas-Paris-Caracas" will not spend the rest of his working days on that one flight, and then some work quite a hard shift doing Johannesbourg-Paris-Caracas. The Lord knows I know. So, maybe, and there are many chances (I hope) that this one crew member I know either decided to move permanently to the South of France and live there happily, flying no more, or maybe he's still flying, only he's on some other flight, but there's also a chance that he was on that plane. Passanger and Crew lists have not been released yet, but Air Frace opened a line for family and close friends. I'd love to call, I really do, but how could I do it? I don't know his last name, I don't know his exact address or his full birthday date.

So I scrapped all the info I could. The two pursers are older than he. That gives me a bit of ease, he told me he was a cabin officer, a purser, so hopefully he's somewhere else. I can only hope, can I?

I don't know enough of him to be able to research, but yet I know too much for me to know the odds, for me to care, and for me to worry. Hell, all I need is another death in June.

must share

It's a must.

On the other hand, I recently learned from someone completely unattached to my work circle, that a certain "lady" whom I used to know, who used to be a boss and for a brief period of time lost her "status" (but regained it by going to the asses that could give it to her) has a quite funny nickname. She's known as "la perruna", or "the bitch-like". Well, she is a prepotent bully, who wouldn't waste a second to stomp on anyone underneath her. It's amusing how many of her former subalterns have grown above her head, gotten from under her and rose to higher positions. As much as she can, she stays away from their "influence", for she knows she has generated so much resentment she will be squashed. However, can't she see she won't be able to run forever? Or does she thing that after more than 20 years stuck in the first level of chieftenship, just above the common proletarians, she will now somehow rise and get higher?

How delusional can people be?

Sex Related Scandals as a Democrat Campaing Weapon

This is growing just a bit too suspitious. Before the candidate campaing, when Republicans and Democrats were scouting for votes to win the House elections, dirty Republican senators and lawmakers popped up by the dozen. Add to it, all of them were related to gay sex. Mark Foley, accused of seducing underage pages at the Hill, Richard Curtis accused of paying a male escort for sex (other versions say he just paid some regular bloke to have sex, or others that he simply seduced the man), and Larry Craig, who was detained by the police for requesting sex in a public bathroom from other men (the thing about rubbing the separation between the stals).

(In order: Mark Foley, Larry Craig, Richard Curtis.) All these came to light when the Democrats needed to win. And in each case, they did. Well, what does this tell you? That it is a proven and effective weapon to make your opponent fall. So why would you go into reasoning, trying to win the people with smart and duable proposals, and philosophy, political vision, when unveiling sex scandals is far more funny, easy and it doesn't compromise you? It would have been just a coincidence (for most people. Even as they went for Mr. Foley, I smelled a scheme, but with Mr. Craig it was crystal clear.), but when they slam down on Ms. Clinton's right hand man, Governor Elit Spitzer, it is too much. Well, at least we can narrow down now where the "Mastermind" of this winning formula might be. Search among Mr. Obama's people. It does come to my attention how they have not picked a gay man this time to satanize the party, but rather just some poor fellow seeking for the services of a whore. Could it be because they don't wish to scat the Democrat party's image that much, or because it was just so beautiful to use a sex scandal to say: "You all say one thing and do the opposite". Either way it was low and they should really start considering what they are doing. These are today's Canuck Letters, and they are not fun. (Canuck Letter: a bogus letter sent back in the seventies, allegedly written by Sen.Edmund Muskie (Dem.) where he shows prejudice against French-Canadians. The letter was part of a White House operation, then under Republican controll.)

What's the deal? Well, Gov. Spitzer was promoting a law to fight prostitution penalizing the men who sought out the prostitutes. Funny thing, as you read the articles on the case, it is a matter worked out by Feminist Groups which seek to protect women from sexual exploitation. Question: what about men? They can be exploited? What about men who seek male escorts for some paid sex? That's okay? I admit I do not know details of this law, more than what the papers have published, but so far, the prostitute is seen as a victim rather than a partner in crime, because "she has been forced into the business". Well, what about women who like it? What about women who want to do it? There are cases, plenty of them where women chose this path because it is easy money. Prostitution takes form in many ways that go from the poor person (male or female, underage or legal) who stands in a corner selling his or her body, all the way to the golddiggers who offer their body and company to people with the means to give them expensive gifts. Of course, these golddiggers call it love or their "right to seek a better life". lets come clear with this right now: sex for any kind of material gratification is prostitution! Money, jewels, cars, furs, clothes, trips, houses, a promotion, a bigger office, a job, a grade... these are all ways of paying sex, these all turn sex into prostitution. People offering or agreeing into this kind of exchage, giving sex for them are soliciting.

Are they victims? Yes, in some cases, but not in others. Assuming by default that they are victims is a mistake. Now, let's do a little fight for Equity of Gender. Perhaps this will come as a shock for the world, but men are also prostitutes. Yes. Men also sell their bodies for money. They sell it to men and women, mostly men since allegedly men are more into hiring whores than women. (It is not part of our culture.) Anyway, it would be nice for once that these humanitarian groups, particularly the feminist groups, would start showing some consideration towards men too. Why is everything always about women and women and women and no one stops five minutes to consider men and how we are not letting them be equal to us? Why do we have to absorb all they do, but we don't let them get to the things we have enjoyed, or the things we have done?

A friend of mine was complaing a little while ago about how uncivilized and unpolite we are becoming (okay mostly "they", you know the case), and told about not holding doors and pulling out chairs. Yes, indeed it is nice to be treated like that, but if we are fighting for equity, and I do mean EQUITY and not only "now it is time for women to get to boss", then why don't WE pull out chairs for our male companions and hold doors for them? Because that would make them feel weak and "feminine"? Because you only hold doors and pull out chairs for the weaker, fragile and helpless "women-creatures"? Oh yes, women are the victims of prostitution. And what about men? And what about the circumstances of men who seek prostitutes? Why do they feel compelled to pay for sex when us women can perfectly well live without ever paying for a fuck?

Truth is we are living still in a hypocritic world. Now you would hardly dare to question the equity of the sexes, or say that something is not for "women", or you'll risk something from a heavy purse repeatedly smacked againt your head to a law suit, and probably both of them. But at the same time, MEN are not considered in the least equal to women, because they HAVE to give up their chairs, get all uncomfortable, please us, serve us, play for us, and all for what? Because we have the babies. What about those of us who do not plan to have kids? It doesn't matter, we could, so we are entitled to get our share of male servitude. Well, in face of these things, I do understand that they wish to keep a few of their old prerrogatives such as do no home chores . But what do they get? Our bitching. They say: "You don't cook like my Mom", but we say "That's not how I told you to clean up? Are you mental? Can't you do it right?". Honey, poor guy needs practice, and he won't feel like doing shit if you keep telling him that all he does is wrooooong, and when he finally gets it right your compliment goes in the line of "About time! It sure took you long to get it!". Please bitches! Let the poor dude breathe!

So, we get their jobs, we FORCE a legislation where at least 40% of the "Power" (management and such) jobs and Government positions must be filled by women. And if we get 90% women? Oh that's okay. No men? Well, at least we fulfilled the 40%, right? What would happen if a law is passed where there should be at least a 60-40 of men and women? Outrage! What if that one position could be filled by a smart woman but has to be given to a man to keep the 60-40!? But it is perfectly okay if it happens the other way. If a man is caught with a female hooker he gets to jail and she gets help and social support. If a man is caught with a male whore would it be the same or we will just slam both motherfuckers into jail?

Feminism has long been corrupted when it stopped being about equal rights and equal oportunities and equal consideration and it has become about teaching men who is the Daddy now.

Pheromones in the Air

Let's just lay off a few odd things. It was kind of uncomfortable to get "instant karma" yesterday as I was made talk to Eric. Ouch... talk about awkward. Why? Well, try this:

1. Step One: You think he's fake and a joke.
2. Step Two: You tell him he's fake, religious-like maniac about "Dr. Covey" and a "formula person".
3. Step Three: the pretty much only time when he does talk about himself and what he does and what he likes you laugh at him and lable what he holds good and pure as an act of selfish god-complex, paired with a comment hinting that there's no behavior in the world more unspeakable and low as that.
4. Step Four: he pays your beer and your Don Julio tequila, which has already made him swallow hard. (Okay, he offered, but I might just abused of his offer...)
5. Step Five: after he even drove you to the bus stop, kissed you in the cheek and inspite of all the ill comments YOU made there was some laughing, all it comes to your mind is send him an SMS telling him "it was great" and that you are "sorry IF you made him feel awkward"?

Bitch, hand me over that "Best Apologizer of the Millenium" Award. Damned, not only I'm mean and unapologizing, but even when I try to apologize, I just can't do it right. So, thing is that I was trying to contact these Franklin Covey people to see if there was something from them I could pull a profit from. Yes, the right word is "beneficiate from", but I like the other way better. So I scouted their site, checked on things and they are so fucking hermetic a single coke blurp would destroy their system. So I located the stuff that could hold some interest for me and then called to ask questions. I have not taken in consideration that they would transfer my call to Eric. Shit, I almost screamed: "NO!!! Hold on! I'm not interested anyway!!!" So I was made talk to Eric. Fuck, his strong accent is even worst on the phone... So, what to do? I started with a smiley

"Worry not! I'm out of bad things to say!"

Oh well, FC has absolutely nothing else to offer me. They won't surrender the stuff I want, and what they can offer is either too catchy for my liking or just more of the "Stephen Covey's Church" shit. So, that's out of my scope. Hopefully the "Liljenstople file" will also be closed with this. Still yesterday some things kelt falling into place about Friday night, things that are just too complicated and too "sitcom-like" for me to enjoy. For the fucking shit, really, how in the fucking hell do men fucking dare to fucking say women can't speak directly? Thez speak in fucking RIDDLES!!! The ACT in fucking RIDDLES!!! How in the fucking HELL am I to fucking know what the FUCK do they fucking want? Do people actually get satisfied with random teasing and pointless dalliances? I know I do it for evil purposes, to exercise my control upon other, but --- oh. Um. Fuck. Good one. Could have been better, though. It is stupid to exercise your capabilities on a subject you can't measure.

Through the day-- how can I express this properly. Yesterday I had been often reassured of one thing: I'm beautiful. Over and over I had it pointed out, and I don't mean the cat-calling men do to random hotties on the street, I mean men I know let me know on one way or another that, yes, I'm a looker. Usually I take these comments in the bad way. It takes a very talented man to make me appreciate a comment about my looks or my brain. Sorry "you are a beautiful woman" leaves me cold. "Would you like to comment some other feature of mine? Such as 'you have five fingers in each hand'?". However, yesterday I was surprised by the amount of times I was told, and the way it was said and the people who said it. They were all men from whom I absolutely didn't expect it. Oh, I see where this is going: what was I wearing? Opaque black stockings, black skirt, black vest and tiny floral printed shirt. I looked preppy. But it wasn't the clothing, because similar things had been happening, and it isn't either just me overproducing pheromones, because I've been receiving comments from across the ocean.

I think it is the weather and it is raining men.

^_^ Well, no, seriously. It seems to me it answers to this general "pack behavior" I suspect people have. Have you ever noticed that you can spend seasons with no approaches from the opposite sex (I have no idea if it works the same way withthe same sex), perhaps with one "kill" here and another there, and then, periodically, they start to rain on you. The guy yho has never said a word to you, that you thought was the less interested subject, makes the comment "you are that kind of attractive woman, who can have anyone she wants. It's difficult to approach you.". Or one I received recently "I'm one of the Super Friends. I'm the Hollow Man because nobody sees me. Unlike you. You get constantly noticed". Yes, it was meant "looks-wise". The stare at your clivage... and I'm a flat chested woman, the stare at your legs with such an obsessive intensity you know it's making him feel even more awkward than you feel, as if you were some sort of highly addictive drug. The sudden stop or confusion in the guy's line of thought when you do the slightest movement, and either he saw something fascinating like a bit deeper down your clivage or more skin on your back, or a little bit more of leg, or an expression in your face... and he has to "reset" his mind because the groin-system took over for a moment.

This brough to my mind a question: do men are sensitive to scents? I know we women are, or at least I am to a very ridiculous level, where you become primal about a scent. It is outrageous to admit it, but, yes, it is like in the AXE advertizing: the right scent can make you wild. There is something about men wearing certain scents, that want to make you cling to his neck and inhale him, but if you do, the more you spend inhaling the scent, the wilder you get, until you are getting wet with all kinds of wicked thoughts. You want to lick him, suck him, fill your cheeks with his flesh and feel the alcoholic, burning, hot esence of the scent against your soft, wet part. (inside your mouth, thank you.)

Does this happen to men, or they are only visual?