From: purp@wixer.cactus.org (Jim Meyer)
Newsgroups: rec.motorcycles
Subject: Re: new bike .vs. vasectomy
Date: 5 Sep 92 20:02:39 GMT
Organization: Real/Time Communications

In article <1992Sep02.155353.15245@i88.isc.com> jeq@i88.isc.com 
 (Jonathan E. Quist) writes:
>In article <1992Sep1.225534.7525@wixer.cactus.org> purp@wixer.cactus.org 
  (Jim Meyer) writes:

>>* They talked about it, they agreed, he took the money, cold-footed, and
>>  bought the bike.
>
>This is how it read to me as well.
>
>>* She gave him money of hers to get a vasectomy; he didn't, he got a
>>  bike.
>>
>>* She told him to spend his *own* money on a vasectomy; he didn't want
>>  to and then bought a bike.
>
>Nothing in the original readily led to these conclusions.
>
>>ANY of those conclusions can be drawn from reading Joe's earlier post.

I'm quoting  from memory, so forgive the tenuousity (is that a word?) of
this; as I recall, Joe said that she said something like "He took the
money he was supposed to use for aa vasectomy and bought a motorcycle."

From that, I can't tell whose money it was, whether it was given to him
or he orignally had it, whether they discussed it or she unilaterally
decided he need to knife his personals, or whether he's an ireesponsible
blackguard or she's an intolerable harridan. Can you?

>I stand corrected.


Please, have a seat. Typing while standing leads to all sorts of nasty
back problems. :)

>>Often times what one person thinks someone is "supposed to use" their
>>money for is not what the OWNER of the money thinks it is best spent on.
>
>Of course, if they insisted on a marriage with "my money" and "your money",
>they had a fundamental problem to begin with.

I don't agree. I know several couples who have a joint account, and
separate accounts for each. All the money starts in the joint account,
and then "allowances" are handed out to each separate account. Makes
gift-giving a bit more of a surprise, for one, and allows each to retain
their independence to the degree that they wish. Important, if you're
spending the rest of your life with someone and you're not chronicly
co-dependent, don't you think?

>I can't see why, after deciding on a vasectomy, he'd not want to
>"go under the knife", unless maybe he just didn't want to have sex with
>his wife anymore.  Oh, you say he was _afraid_?  Well, by induction, then,
>he had no business buying a motorcycle.  (Didn't someone just prove that
>if someone's afraid they shouldn't be on a bike?)

Again, from what do you draw the conclusion that they discussed
anything? I didn't see anything in the post that stated that.

Note: I didn't really take a side on this one, because I don't know the
whole story. But I agree that in a marriage, if one of the folks is
going to get cut, they guy is the obvious choice. Easier, less recovery
time, and less costly. And reversable, too.

>Sorry, guys, but regardless of what happened between the two, sitting back,
>belching, scratching your crotch and proclaiming "Yaap.  Dat guy's a _real_
>man.  He got a new bike _and_ told the uptight bitch wat to do." just doesn't
>cut it.  Marriage isn't an anarchy.  It might not be a democracy, but it
>should at least be a munificent polyarchy. Go ahead, go bowling with Al Bundy,
>but don't expect a lot of empathy from the rest of us.

#1: I didn't say that.
#2: Al's busy with the new kid.
#3: <skritchskritch> >BRAAAAAAAP!<

ObMoto: Gee, Joe, I think some of these folks must have damaged their
senses of humor in a serious conflict with a cager...

--Purp, still looking for a good bike.
-- 
+---------------+------------------------------+-----------------------+
| Jim Meyer     | If I express an opinion, you | purp@wixer.cactus.org |
| Austin, Tejas | can bet no one else agrees.  | DoD#0680 LiveToFlame! |
+---------------+------------------------------+-----------------------+