patricia

You're right. It's all my fault. However, there is, if I'm not mistaken a way that you can re-create your "boys only" treehouse thread, without B-3 having to blow up the thread. As the thread originator, you can blow it up yourself, by deleting the very first post and starting a new thread, to talk about whatever I'm preventing you from talking about. Better yet, why not simply ask to have NO WOMEN permitted to post, not just on your treehouse thread, but on the entire Organissimo site, if it cramps your style?? We women clearly are not welcome and that would be the best solution, if women cause bands, as well as interesting conversations between men to turn to shit. How foolish we are to think that we have anything interesting to contribute. Chris has doubtless dealt with your querie, however he chose to and the rest of the rather long thread has evolved the way it has, through my fault alone and for that, I sincerely apologize.

You read far too much into my comment about Tennessee Williams. What the hell are you talking about?? Sorry about the failure of your last marriage. That, the death of your first wife and the others not working out must have been painful for you. I would never make light of it, seriously. As for your putting women on a pedestal, well, I was on one for my one marriage and that doesn't replace real communication, or passion. BTW, when did I mention a comparison of you with a dog?? I was referring to the recent passing of our thread-originator's dog and of the reluctant putting down of my dog. Are we all doomed?? I enjoy lively banter, even ribald lively banter, but personal attacks are hurtful to everybody. Gotta go to work now.............

Of course you do and I hope that you are happy. Did it ever occur to you that there are women who are as passionately interested in it all?? I guess not. You catagorize women and I have never been catagorized, nor will I ever be. Thank my late father for that. I think you could have learned a lot about women from him. As it is, you've learned nothing. I talk about other things, share my interests with those who matter to me, and they theirs with me. Oddly, I am also every bit as sensual and passionate as you claim to be. But, you would prefer to see me as one-dimentional. I find that insulting to me, as a person, a friend and as a woman. As I said. What a waste. Undergroundagent, I have a few glaring flaws, one of which is that I have to defend myself, when directly attacked. You're right, that if I simply ignored this thread, it would probably sink out of sight. The thread-originator knows that I won't let personal insults just stand there, naked and not contest them. What can I tell you? I'm a scrapper.

Well, there you go. That actually explains a lot. Women are not real people to you, just cleverly designed, one step up from blow-up dolls. Sad. Which is, I suppose, why women resist being upgraded from a friend to a lover. All of a sudden, they're not a person anymore. THAT'S why I have many more men friends than I do ex-lovers. What a shame that both of you glory in the dehumanization of women you've had sex with. Yes, I'm referring to the "surprise" date-rape of a women who, our thread originator said, gleefully, was "in love" with him. He and his friends sure showed her, didn't they?? Even the clarification later didn't make up for the fact that none of you objected to the original account, ASSUMING it was consentual, despite the way the incident was recounted. If that makes GROPER a romantic, then I question either of you can relate to me, or to any other women who is foolish enough to believe your aging-Lothario lines. You're afraid of women who might want to be friends, as well as lovers. Such a waste of two apparantly smart men. Well, too late for either of you to change now.

Were the new velvet paintings the classic Dogs Playing Poker/Dogs Playing Pool, or did you go for Big-eyed Children, or perhaps a lovely example of Johnny Cash on black velvet?? YOU rent a sense of HUMOUR. I was ribbing you. Obviously, I don't know what your taste in art, or clothing is. Nor do I know how you chose to decorate your domicile. I WAS KIDDING YOU. But, somebody is buying those ugly plaid sofas and those ugly plaid shirts and that art. Slammin' me for being Canadian is silly. Neither you, our thread originator, nor I had any choice over where we were born. To have pride, or embarrasment about our nationality makes no sense. Each of us are individuals and we made the choice of who our parents would be and where we would be born when we were much too young to make rational choices. Just an accident of birth. Not a legitimate point of pride, or for that matter, embarrassment, in something beyond all of our control. I'm not tough. I don't smoke, although I did until last year, as our thread originator well knows. Like all former smokers, he is extraordinarly proud of having quit, and rightly so. It's very difficult and I congratulate him. Unfortunately, he is, as a lot of former smokers are, sanctimonious about those who still smoke. His memory seems a little faulty in his dotage. I was very proud, also, at having quit smoking, after decades. But, he has no idea what my personal life includes, so he's just guessing about my sex life. I was not linking you, GROPER, with Tennessee Williams, because he was gay. You seem to forget that YOU mentioned Blanche Dubois, not me, which brought up the subject of gay writer's portrayal of their female characters. It was not a direct reference to either one of you. Re-read the posts and ask yourself why you thought I was suggesting anything beyond what I was saying. In fact, I wasn't saying either one of you are gay. I was saying that, judging by your posts, you find the fact that I take umbrage to your suggestion that I am BUTCH, to use your term, without knowing me at all, that I must be. After all, who but someone who is not a "real woman" would not find the suggestions, you both have made, particularly the one in our thread originator's latest post, alluring?? I do have a sense of HUMOUR, though it has been severely strained in recent weeks.

Why don't the two of you get together? You're a match made in heaven. Neither one of you seem to like women in general or me in particular. I simply gave a ridiculous answer to an equally ridiculous question about personal grooming, which was none of the thread originator's business. What kind of man asks that?? The information about your having a very personal groomer, your *divertimento* was totally unnecessary, though probably titillating to those, like GROPER who think of women as subservient. That struck me as smarmy and disrespectful to her. Not surprising though. Being called BUTCH was particularly telling, GROPER. Do you think that because I'm less than thrilled at being put down and didn't find it amusing, that I was not going to retaliate in kind?? Because I don't like being insulted, doesn't mean that I must surely be gay. That's the last defence of the mysonynist. Thanks guys.

I own only one collection, both on CD and on vinyl. It's the 1976 Woody Herman 40th Anniversary Concert at Cagnegie Hall, my favourite concert. I had the CD first, then I was in my vinyl emporium, and there the two-record vinyl was and I loved the cover notes. Otherwise, it's either I have the CD OR the vinyl and alternate formats, sometimes in the same evening, or day. I'm too cheap to duplicate the LP's I already have, with the CD. I know that there is additional added material on the CD quite often, but I resist.

I guess that "THE GROPER" has emptied his quiver. Or, perhaps his delicate feelings were hurt by my suggestions that he is past it. Or, maybe he just doesn't have anything more to contribute. Who knows?? Sorry about the MARION THE LIBRARIAN posts. Conversations, even in real life, don't always stay on topic, even one as endlessly facinating as various people's perversities, or their puerility. As to your rather personal query, no. I employ tweezers. As for the rest of my person, I use Nair to remove every last vestige of hair from every part of my body, of course. I've been seriously considering shaving my head as well. That way I would be much like those expensive, totally hairless cats, which are, somehow eerie. And you?? Why do you ask??

Why recommend books to people who are unworthy? What I meant by that was, should I be in conversation with somebody and have read something they may find interesting, I may recommend it to them, not lend them my book, which I would possibly never see again. Some of my books are long out of print, irreplaceble, which is fine, if I want to share the enjoyment that I got from them by giving them to someone who will treasure them, as I have. I am reminded of a copy of "As It Happened", a collection of transcripts from a Canadian live talk show called "As It Happens", back in the seventies. At that time it was co-hosted by Barbara Frum [who, interestingly, is David Frum, George Bush's speech-writer's mother]. Her politics were directly opposite to what her son's seem to be. David Frum wrote the "axis of evil" catchphrase, which Mr Bush recites as a mantra. Barbara Frum was one of the most interesting and sharp-witted broadcasters the CBC ever had, IMO. Sadly, she died of cancer some years ago. The book was almost a primer on how a live talkshow can be so interesting that people look forward to it every week. The interviewees, all over the world, were called cold, on battlefields, in brothels, wherever they were. There were no screeners, and no call-ins, just the interviews. Fabulous!!! In any case, I lent my copy to a friend and she gave it to somebody else, who gave it to somebody else.............. I'd rather know at the outset that it's gone because I intended the person to have it. By *worthy* I meant that I thought enough of them to give them my book as a gift, not lend it to them. By *unworthy* I didn't mean that someone wouldn't enjoy reading something I had found interesting. In that case, I would just recommmend whatever it was. Sorry for the confusion, Berigan. Dmitry, I've seen that "stolen" thing in some library books too. Made me smile.

Hey Jad and Big Wheel. HAPPY BIRTHDAY!!!! Just a note. Is everyone going to have a birthday this year?? This could get to be a daily thing. :D

HAPPY HAPPY HAPPY BIRTHDAY TO YOU. MAY ALL YOUR TROUBLES BE LITTLE, TINY......AND SOLVEABLE.

Novel? Saki never wrote anything longer than five pages. His oevre consists of finely crafted little short stories. Start with "Tobermory." Can't get better than that. I gave my own copy out to someone and have never gotten it back. It's easy enough to find another copy. You find his stuff in short story anthologies. Report back when you've read a few... I told you I hadn't read any of Saki's work. I'm up to my hips in work for the next week or so, but as soon as I can I'll check out the library. Thanks again. BTW, I NEVER lend books. I either give them, if I feel the person is worthy, or merely recommend them if I don't. Saves a lot of grief.

So, Ben and Debbie Franklin are at home, warming their toes at the Franklin stove and Ben looks up and says: "I feel it strongly. We must all hang together, or most assuradly we shall all hang separately." Deb [reading] "Hmmmm" Ben then says, "Say, Debby, that wasn't bad" Deb looks up and says, "What wasn't?" To which Ben answers, "What I just said. Or didn't you hear me? 'We must indeed all hang together, or most assuredly we shall all hang separately.' Might be good for the Almanac." Deb says, "I don't know. I guess it's all right." Then Ben says, "What do you mean, 'all right'? It's damn good. Or, maybe you didn't get it. First I use 'hang' in the sense of 'stick' - together. Then I --" Ms Franklin then, impatiently answers, "Oh, I get it all right. It just strikes me as wordy. Long-winded. Needs sharpening. Actually, Ben - and I've been meaning to mention this - you've been getting away with some pretty sloppy stuff lately. Last issue, wasn't it, that you had something about 'a penny saved is a penny got' ". Now, for God's sake. What are you trying to say? If you save a penny, you'll have a penny? So what? And that one about patience - how did it go - 'He that have patience can have what he will.' That's not a bit catchy, Ben, and furthermore, it's a crock and you know it. Sit in the same office for fifty years and what do you get? Retired with a gold-plated watch and a cheap dinner. Patience, my ass. What about the Pilgrims? Where'd we be if they'd been all that patient?" Ben answers [under his breath] "God defend me from a literal-minded woman." Deb, [hearing that] says, "Yes, and another thing. You'd better knock off all that sex stuff if you don't want to go down in history as the original male chauvinist pig." Ben [looking a little sheepish] mumbles, "You mean---uh--" To which Deb says, "I mean advising that young men take an old mistress 'because they're so grateful' --- Well, I have to admit it, a mature woman does find a young man a delightful change from wattles and potbellies and skinny shanks and toot-toot-puff-puff the little engine that couldn't --- Say, maybe I could use that somewhere. Could you pass me the quill?"...... What's the point of telling a man he's wrong??? He's not listening.

Good idea. I'll do my best to be here. MARCH 6, 12PM EASTERN TIME. I think that's around 9 or 10AM here. I'll check the time difference. I'm so easily confused, or as I like to think, charmingly eccentric.

GS, don't worry. I'm not about to involve myself with a has-been Franklin Stove-like old guy, calling himself THE GROPER, or our vulgarian thread originator, neither of whom know thing one about women in general, and even less about what makes me tick. And in answer to our thread originator's ravings, save your gasoline. Mohammed doesn't go to the mountain, nor do I travel all over the place, to provide amusement for you. You surprise me, as someone who knows very well that I am not even naked under my clothes. I have an outfit that I wear for showering. THAT'S how clenched my keester is. I own no scuba gear and, sadly have no canine pet, since, like you, I was forced to put down Bubbles, the bichon frise, some time ago. The association of even a sterling silver dog dish is just too much. As for educating the GROPER about the virtues of solid-coloured shirts and other niceties, just not worth the effort. The man has demonstrated that he is totally in the dark about women, times five. Being an expert on divorce is not one of my ambitions. Once is quite enough, thank you. So, don't hold your breath. Conn, thanks for the book rec. I'll look for the novel you mentioned by Saki.

OK. I've heard there are many books in the library/gas station/general store/barbershop/brothel log cabin two dogsled nights from here and I will see if that's one of them. Thanks.

I'm not familiar with Saki, but you're right about Maugham, in fact both Maughams.

Matchmaking is one thing, Patty; doing my utmost to prevent you from falling into the soiled and twisted clutches of DEEP is another. Don't be fooled by GROPE's plaid shirts and all his talk of sexual quiescence. I bet he's a real tiger! And don't think I don't appreciate your chivalry.. However, I could never be with an ugly plaid-shirted, baseball-capped man who has no style, no matter what tiger-like, boudoirian prowess he may possess. I regret my shallowness, but there it is.

Referring to...? Did I do....? Must have missed something. No. No. A thousand times, no. I was still fuming from the previous post. Not you.

So you feel that there's a similarity in the way these authors portray women and it's likely because they were homosexual? Hmm, interesting theory. Maybe they were very accurate observors as are many authors. I guess I just never considered that angle before, Patty. BTW, if I could offer some friendly advice: Choose GROPE! B) Just stop the match-making, or I'll laugh on the front of your shirt too. Yes, I do feel that the authors I mentioned's characterization of women is unique to them, because of the authors being gay. It's not a criticism. They were also, as you say, accurate observors of human nature, but in a peculiar way, IMO. Both Maughams as well as Williams, to a lesser degree are favourite authors. Read them again, any one of them and see if you can see what I do. However, the last thing I want is somebody who explains literary references to me as if I were a child. Introducing me to favourite books is one thing. Treating me as though I were illiterate is another. Nothing which has been said on this thread, so far, no matter how purile, is more insulting than that.

What on earth are you talking about??? Hell will freeze over first.

That Williams was gay, was not innuendo, but fact, as was the fact that Maugham was gay, as was his nephew,author, Robin Maugham, none of which were slams against gay people in general. I mention it only because of these authors' eerily similar characterizations of women in all their novels. I have no claws. Just an iron fist in a velvet glove. As for my guess about your sartorial sense, I have no idea whether you actually have any, but I can imagine a sofa-sized, mass-produced landscape over the ugly plaid sofa and your television on a wire stand, complementing your recliner chair, directly across from it.

Thank you for the helpful explanation. Those unfamiliar with Tennessee Williams' fictional character who, frankly annoyed me, I'm sure are most grateful. Williams' female characters, much like Somerset Maugham's female characters, were viewed through the lens of gay men, as both these authors were. The women were characatures. Also, the definition of "coquette" was most helpful. I would never have known what that meant, had you not explained. TOUGH GUY or DELICATE BLOSSOM?? I laugh on the front of your ugly plaid shirt, you PHILISTINE!!! I'm both, as most women I know are. I have learned, quite recently, actually, NEVER to depend on the kindness of not only strangers, but even more so, those who pretend to be friends. Real women, and I like to think I am one of those, are not one-dimensional people, any more than real men are. As for my political opinions, they are my opinions, just as your political opinions are yours. I am never disingenuos, though sometimes I am making an observation that may differ from those who choose to lock-step behind a smirking simpleton, as you have chosen to do. But, it's a free country. At least it used to be. If ever anyone had no idea who I am, or what I'm like, it's you. So, as I suggested earlier, BACK OFF.

Yeah. Right. You and "GROPER" know me so well. Oh, and GROPER, the comment you wondered about simply referred to my lifelong fear of saying something hurtful to someone and never having the opportunity to take it back, due to their unexpected death. I simply was making reference to the unpredictability of life and that I'm always mindful of how fragile we all are [with the exception of the two of you, apparently]. Clearer now???

You and "GROPER" should just join hands and take a long walk, together, off a short pier. A couple of Franklin Stove replicates, toddling into the sunset. I, for one, would pay a dollar to see that. As for blowing you both..........................a kiss, I've been doing that all along, but both of you insist on misinterpreting my intent. Nothing I can do about that. LIFE IS WAY TOO SHORT TO BE MEAN FOR FUN. I don't want the last thing I say to someone, before they're gunned down in the street to be something I didn't intend to say.