Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Grainne who wrote (26114)	11/22/1998 9:43:00 PM
From: Impristine	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

grey hair in the ears, grey hair in the nose, no body heat retention, what is up with that, teenage behavior, can we put a lid on it, can we just break it, would a broken bone help, spinal fusion, who needs a spine, why touch your toes, do you really need to wear shoes, no gain no pain, is this all a game, how do we win, can we just cut off all surgeons hands. marathon running, when do we stop, is the end ever in sight, things go better with lactic acid.

To: Grainne who wrote (26114)	11/24/1998 1:49:00 AM
From: Krowbar	Read Replies (5) \| Respond to of 108807

Well. Christine, I really don't see any purpose for those nose hairs. I pull out about 20 a week (ouch). They tickle when I breathe and drive me nuts. Scientifically, your theory of body hair in older men being a survival advantage doesn't have much merit. After men, and women, are past child rearing age they are disposable. All that matters is to pass on viable DNA when we are in our prime, and to live long enough to raise our offspring. Evolution doesn't care about making us comfy in our old age. In fact we are programmed to expire. Anyway, cavemen probably didn't survive long enough to ponder why his nose hairs were growing. The real purpose of body hair is probably to disgust the young females, so that they don't want to mate with someone whose DNA is becoming defective. Del

To: Grainne who wrote (26114)	11/27/1998 4:48:00 PM
From: George S. Montgomery	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 108807

Christine, I listened to a Public Radio program this morning ("On The Line," WNYC) that caused my thoughts to turn to your and penni's current concerns with offspring... It is true irony that you two admirable - each in her own way - ladies find ruffled harmonies within your most intimate circles. The radio program was an interview with the boss of Who's Who in Highschool. (http://dmarie.com/asp/history.asp?action=process) No! Damnit! That URL is a fun one I had in copy/paste - about just what was happening, who was born, and such on anybody's birthday. Give it a shot. The Highschool URL is >>http://www.honoring.com.<< And its only relevance is in its recent survey's finding that 80% of the cream of our hs students have cheated, they and their parents approving of that process; and that the biggest threat they feel is of social and moral decay; and more than 90% consider themselves happy. But that is only more evidence. You both have evidence within your homes. I have evidence with my most recent brood. A very dear old friend of mine has evidence with her children. Evidence is all too overpowering. I write to offer the thought that there is probably very little cure for the problem. It, I believe, is societal. The generation that is now beginning to appraise itself is saying "me happy" (above); "me gonna do anything me feel like" (freedom to); and "nobody gonna stop me" (freedom from). I was terribly disappointed by the movie "Titanic." It seemed one-dimensional, lacking true drama, and carried by soap opera and special effects. Thought I was way off base until I heard another oldie say about the same thing after the movie in the men's room. Texture, subtlety, delicacy, innuendo, grace, romance - all the softer things - are so weak in the world of these kids. (Sadly, it appears to have happened in the chic new metropolitan China. I used to love the tradition and spirit of that vast society. But, a single generation seems capable of burying such venerable traits.) I will stop this train, as it doesn't seem solidly on the tracks, with a statement of deep conviction: The spirit, the defiance, of the 60's was directed, to a great extent, at producing results - at standing for causes. That spirit, that defiance, has continued - but without the causes. It has become nihilistic and hedonistic, defying everything that defies it. I believe it, environmentally, has produced a different breed. A lesser breed. A breed that will identify more with its uncivil, anarchistic contemporaries than with those who love, and, because of that love, urge moderation. I close by saying that we - you, penni, me - have pretty positive attitudes about our selves. So, when our offspring fail to respond to those 'selves' with respect, we shrivel. But, it ain't us, Christine. It's the whole idea of the extraordinary extension of civil rights into both opening the floodgates, and preventing them from being shut. geo