HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: mel@niblick.ecn.purdue.edu (Meloney D Cregor)
Subject: Re: Picking up the Tab (was: Re: What is gold-digging?)
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 23:39:33 GMT

In article <15932@auspex-gw.auspex.com> johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira) writes:
>I would much prefer a "Thank you very much for dinner tonight.  I had
>a wonderful time", and maybe a kiss on the cheek than 25% of the tab and
>a handshake.

So, John, when are you going to take me to dinner?

(well, it seemed like a good deal to me....)

I have to go with the 'whoever asks, pays', wrt 'dates'.  If I ask, I expect
to pay.  If I don't ask, I'll check.

If it's friends, it depends.  Sometimes it's dutch, sometimes I pay and
sometimes I get treated.

I once gave a good friend of mine a 'day'.  It was her birthday, and for
a gift, I told her she could do whatever she wanted ( within reason :-)
and she wanted to go to the renaisance festival. So I got the tickets,
did the driving, sprang for lunch and  in general tried to be attentive
and make it a special day for her.  She enjoyed it and I enjoyed 
giving it.

ON the other end, I had a friend I used to go to lunch with fairly
often and he always insisted on paying and would get quite upset
if I even offered to pay.  But, there were a couple of times when
he got caught with his wallet down and I got the pleasure of treating 
him.

--
              For flavor, instant sex will never supercede 
              the stuff you have to peel and cook. 
                                  -- Quentin Crisp
From: sms@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (steven.m.stein)
Subject: Re: New Relationships...
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 19:12:25 GMT

In article <1992Dec14.034342.38078@watson.ibm.com> margoli@watson.IBM.com writes:
>In <oneil.724227891@cwis> oneil@cwis.unomaha.edu (Sharon O'Neil) writes:
>>
>>How important /is/ sex to a relationship?

To me, sex is a means of feeling closer to a woman.  Almost a way
of becoming "ONE" in body and soul.  An intimate form of sharing,
giving and taking at the same time.  

So, to answer your question:  To me, it's important!

Although, sex isn't important enough to sustain a relationship that
has nothing or little else going for it. 

How important is sex to a relationship to you, Sharon ???


				
                 Steve Stein  (609) 639-2264
    *******************************************************
    *  Just my opinion, though it could change tomorrow   *
    *******************************************************
From: johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Picking up the Tab (was: Re: What is gold-digging?)
Date: 17 Dec 92 21:45:24 GMT
Organization: Auspex Systems, Inc.

In article <1992Dec16.233933.6617@noose.ecn.purdue.edu> mel@niblick.ecn.purdue.edu (Meloney D Cregor) writes:
>In article <15932@auspex-gw.auspex.com> johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira) writes:
|>I would much prefer a "Thank you very much for dinner tonight.  I had
|>a wonderful time", and maybe a kiss on the cheek than 25% of the tab and
|>a handshake.
|
|So, John, when are you going to take me to dinner?
 
Mel, my sweet, I would be delighted to take you out to dinner.

All I expect in return is air fare, a "thank you very much for dinner 
tonight. I had a wonderful time", and maybe a blowjob.

-- 
+==========================================================================+
| John Fereira        | Auspex Systems | "Ask me about my vow of silence." |
| johnf@auspex.com    | Santa Clara CA |                                   |
+==========================================================================+
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: atovorni@engr.UVic.CA (dreas)
Subject: Re: New Relationships...
Reply-To: atovorni@engr.UVic.CA
Organization: University of Victoria, Victoria, BC, Canada
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 92 06:19:01 GMT

In article 12DEC199223015971@stars.gsfc.nasa.gov, casey@stars.gsfc.nasa.gov (Sean Casey GSFC (301)286-4558) writes:
>In article <1992Dec9.182323.23707@cbfsb.cb.att.com>, sms@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (steven.m.stein) writes...
>>In article <1992Dec9.022705.4868@sol.UVic.CA> atovorni@engr.UVic.CA writes:
>>>In article 15901@cbfsb.cb.att.com, jjd1@cbnewsg.cb.att.com (james.j.dutton) writes:
>>>>In article <1992Dec8.151118.15818@cbfsb.cb.att.com> sms@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (steven.m.stein) writes:
>>>>>In article <1fu1r8INN2la@golem.wcc.govt.nz> parks_typ@med.wcc.govt.nz writes:
>>>>>>In article <1992Dec3.162529.15470@netcom.com>, aahz@netcom.com (Mean Green Dancing Machine) writes:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Nowadays I go for those shy Nice Guys, and I have to work so hard
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I've decided to keep on kissing the frogs in the hope one will turn into a
>>>>>>prince.  I've found that the princes usually turn into frogs sooner or later
>>>>>>anyway.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Rachel 
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>How about those of us who have already been:
>>>>>
>>>>>turned into a "Prince" by the kiss of a "Princess"
>>>>>who have lost our "Princess"
>>>>>who have no intention of returning to "frog" status
>>>>>who are on that long and hard search
>>>>>with hopes of finding another "Princess"
>>>>>to fill the void left by our lost "Princess"?
>>>>>
>>>>>                 Steve Stein  (609) 639-2264
>>>>
>>>>If that isn't an 8.9 I don't know what is.
>>>
>>>Sesquipedalians is sooooo generous! 
>>>It is not an 8.9...It's a 9.3!!!!!!
>>>
>>>Sharkey
>>>
>>I'm flattered.  Shall we start a club?
>> 
>>  The "Nice Guy in Search for His Princess Club".
>> 
>>It's interesting.  You always hear about the woman searching for her
>>Prince.  How about us guys?  What are we looking for?  Slugs ????
>> 
>>					Steve
>
>
>I thought Guys were just looking to get laid?
>

You never know with NiceGuys [TM] </.)

dreas

Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: cocoa@netcom.com
Subject: Re: Picking up the Tab (was: Re: What is gold-digging?)
Organization: Bourbon Street
Distribution: usa 
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 06:48:05 GMT

In article <8061@news.duke.edu> diamond@acpub.duke.edu (Elizabeth Abrams) writes:
>In article <15932@auspex-gw.auspex.com> johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira) writes:

[Arguments about whether a woman who is asked out on a date should pay
a certain percent of the bill deleted]

>>I would much prefer a "Thank you very much for dinner tonight.  I had
>>a wonderful time", and maybe a kiss on the cheek than 25% of the tab and
>>a handshake.
>
>Oh, John, you didn't just say that, did you?  I think I'm going to close
>my eyes and count to ten, and hope it disappears from my screen.
>
>Nope, still there.  
>
>WHAT DOES PAYING PART OF THE TAB HAVE TO DO WITH KISSING?  Are you really
>saying that you think the kiss is contingent on the contribution, that
>you feel that if you pay for dinner she should kiss you in gratitude, whereas
>if she chips in for half she can get away with a handshake?  Oh, boy.

Which reminds me of why I always insist on paying at least half of the bill
when I go out with a man that I don't know well.

Many men seem to feel that a woman "owes" them something when they spend
money on her for a date.  They feel it entitles them to some sort of 
physical affection gesture, or the right to a second date, or whatever.
Whenever I encounter this kind of attitude I get furious and any speck of
enjoyment I had that evening vanishes.

Now I don't think that this is the kind of attitude John has, but the sorry
truth is that many men don't even realize that they're acting the way I
described.

I guess my point to this, is that whoever *wishes* to pay, should do so, but
not because they are doing it to *get* something.  I'd like to feel comfortable
in knowing that the man I am with does not think he can buy my affection
with dinner and a movie, but that he takes me out because he enjoys being
with me and likes to do nice things for me.  And I'm willing to be fair and
pay my way when I can, but that doesn't mean I'm tickled pink each time I
see my bank balance go down when I pull out that ATM card on a date.

Just me.

little 'e'

(I'm not cheap, just poor)  :(

Former boss's quote: Man: What do you mean 'no'? I bougt you a drink."
                     DB: Mr., I don't sell it, I give it away,
                            but if I was selling it, you couldn't afford it."

-- 
*  *  *    Chocolatier at Arms, and Castle Wetware Liason            *  *  *
*  *  *    e-mail: cocoa@netcom.com   -    voicemail: 415-337-4940   *  *  *
From: thomas@datamark.co.nz (Thomas Beagle)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Speak For Yourself
Date: 11 Dec 92 21:54:04 GMT
Article-I.D.: datamark.1992Dec11.215404.21750
Organization: Datamark International Ltd.

In article <1992Dec11.011522.14217@sol.UVic.CA> atovorni@engr.UVic.CA writes:
>In article 49811@datamark.co.nz, thomas@datamark.co.nz (Thomas Beagle) writes:

>>BTW, count me in for the anti-tobacco brigade. :-)
>
>And YOU evidently lack the maturity to live & let live, PAL!!! </.Q

No, I'm quite happy for you to smoke all you like. Please continue.
 
On the other hand, most smokers I know smell bad. If I got close
enough I'm sure I would find that they taste even worse.

Don't worry - there's still lots of smokers for you to go out with!
-- 
    Thomas Beagle | thomas@datamark.co.nz           Work: 64 4 233 8186
Datamark Intl Ltd | thomas@cavebbs.welly.gen.nz     Home: 64 4 499 3832
 Technical Writer | Yes, I do have long ears, a black nose, and a tail.
From: aa752@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Louise Billi)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Over 40 and single....Anyone that "OLD"?
Date: 14 Dec 1992 12:09:31 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: aa752@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Louise Billi)
NNTP-Posting-Host: slc12.ins.cwru.edu




Over 40 (just a tad) women have a terrible time of it.
Men in that age group are all looking for the young "Tenderoni"
to make him feel like a kid again.  Can't men realize that 
most younger women see them as either a "Father Figure" or
a "Sugar Daddy"?  Is that what they really want in a mate?

And it is sad today that wrinkles on a woman mean she is OLD, 
yet on a man, they add character.  This 'youth oriented' 
culture leaves the over 40 woman out in the cold.

Brrrrrrr.....

Louise

-- 
If you ever look back,          @->->----    
   Will you like what you see?   Louise      I keep looking,
                                  aa752          Ain't sure what for.
          ==> go party          @->->----  
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: jjd1@cbnewsg.cb.att.com (james.j.dutton)
Subject: Re: Am I banished?
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 15:20:18 GMT

In article <248@cnmhnet.UUCP> keithg@cnmhnet.UUCP (keith garrard) writes:
>In article <1gjfdpINNj93@FUNCTOR.SYSTEMSZ.CS.YALE.EDU> loosemore-sandra@cs.yale.edu (Sandra Loosemore) writes:
>>OK, I'll post my favorite weird wedding story.  A couple of years ago
>>my younger brother got married.  At the time, neither one of them was
>>working regularly and since she's a foreigner (Japanese) there wasn't
>>much point in having a big family wedding.  So one day my mother gets
>
>OK Sandra, I have to ask about what you are saying here.  In the
>above message, you state "...since she's a foreigner (Japanese)
>there wasn't much point in having a big family wedding."  
>I've got to say that at first glance, I took offense with that.
>Are you saying that foreigners aren't worth having big weddings
>for?  Or you saying that because she was a foreigner, that 
>'the marriage probably won't last long enough to have a big
>wedding for, or are you saying that Japanese aren't worth
>having big weddings for.  I hope that what you meant was that
>since her family would be unable to attend due to the fact that
>they are in Japan, that a big wedding wouldn't be practical.
>Please clarify.
>--Keith
>
 
Kill me. KILL ME NOW. Shoot me. Blow my head off. Plunge the knife deeply
into my throat. Pluck out my eyes. PLEASE END MY SUFFERING.
AAARRRRRGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHBANG.
                                                   .
                                                     ....
                                                         .

 
================================================================================
 Sesquipedalian's 'R' Us. ZX-10. DoD#564. There ain't no more.
                                 doh#0000000005
================================================================================
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: tlode@nyx.cs.du.edu (trygve lode)
Subject: Re: Size 8? (Re: What is NOT attractive to "SINGLE" men)
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix @ U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Distribution: usa
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 92 21:48:37 GMT

In article <7895@news.duke.edu> diamond@acpub.duke.edu (Elizabeth Abrams) writes:
>In article <MARTINC.92Dec11221443@hatteras.cs.unc.edu> martinc@hatteras.cs.unc.edu (Charles R. Martin) writes:
>>In article <227@cnmhnet.UUCP> keithg@cnmhnet.UUCP (keith garrard) writes:
>
>>>   Oh Elizabeth, please cancel my previous posting whereby I said I 
>>>   was in RDU last weekend and I wished I could have met you. 
>>
>>Hey, Beth, if you can get him to stop off here, I'll hold him down while
>>you kick him.
>
>Thanks, Charlie, you're a sweetheart.   However, I think I'd rather sit on 
>his ribcage for a few hours..  As Gilbert and Sullivan said, let the 
>punishment fit the crime. :-)

Hmmmm...does that mean if I'm unspeakably rude to you that you'll come over
and sit on my ribcage for a few hours as well?  (Though I should warn you--
I'm awfully sturdy, so you might want to make the punishment even worse by
shifting variously forward or back and bouncing up and down a bit....)

Trygve   (Looking for his 'Don Rickles Jokebook'....)
From: jmd@bear.com (Josh Diamond)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: What is NOT attractive to "SINGLE" men
Date: 14 Dec 92 16:03:54 GMT
	<75416@apple.apple.COM> <75420@apple.apple.COM>
Organization: Bear, Stearns & Co. - FAST
In-reply-to: stef@Apple.COM's message of 10 Dec 92 14:49:58 GMT


In article <75420@apple.apple.COM> stef@Apple.COM (Stef Jones) writes:

   pooh@Apple.COM (Pooh) writes:

   >In the referenced article, leo@cpd.Tandem.COM (Leo Hejza) writes:
   >>So here is the question to all of you net.women who consider themselves
   >>"overweight".  What could your SO do or say that would help you feel
   >>good about yourself, and what could be done or said that would convince you
   >>that you really were viewed as attractive?

   >That's a very good question, Leo.  My advice:

   >1.  Don't deny her view of herself.  <...>
   >2.  Don't talk about weight or diets unless she wants to.
   >3.  When you compliment her on her appearance, be sincere.
   >    Don't exaggerate.  Don't compare her to other people.
   >4.  If you REALLY want to show her that you accept her as she is,
   >    offer her a hot fudge sundae.  

   This is really great advice. It applies to all women, actually. Probably to
   men as well.

Very true.
About point 2, though -- if she/he _does_ commit to some sort of weight
loss program, support her/him in that committment.  This falls under
the "yer friends tell ya when y'have a booger hangin' out yer nose"
category...

   I also want to add this: although one's self image can be affected by the 
   way others behave, one must actually change one's own self image. 

   You can and should show your SO, with words and actions, that you find 
   her attractive. But you cannot singlehandedly solve the problem for her. 

I couldn't have said it better.  She has to believe it herself.


Spidey!!!

--
You don't hunt ducks with a turnip! 

 /\ \  / /\  Josh Diamond                                          jmd@bear.com
//\\ .. //\\ AKA Spidey!!!                        ...!ctr.columbia.edu!ursa!jmd
//\((  ))/\\
/  < `' >  \                                              Do whatever it takes.
From: mel@niblick.ecn.purdue.edu (Meloney D Cregor)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Bad Timing
Date: 11 Dec 92 19:41:32 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network

In article <lihlfsINN8br@news.bbn.com> dhardin@bbn.com (Dawn Hardin) writes:

>I'm not really sure what you mean here.  I'd guess that this sounds like
>an unhealthy view of love on her part -- that the passion and intensity
>is more of an unhealthy, addictive kind of thing than a good thing that
>can be maintained.  After all, a broken bone is more intense than an
>orgasm, if intensity is what you're looking for.  That "I gotta have him,
>gotta have him, I'd do anything to keep him" thing is very intense but
>it's also pretty stupid.  But I'm not sure that this is the kind of thing
>your friend meant -- I'm not sure what you were trying to say.

Thank you, Dawn. You just gave a fairly good description of
sexual addiction.

--
       Philosophy is to the real world as masturbation is to sex.
                                -- Karl Marx
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: R9S@ECL.PSU.EDU (Roberto G Sung)
Subject: Re: Calendars
Organization: Penn State Engineering Computer Lab
Distribution: usa
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 92 19:51:16 GMT
X-News-Reader: VMS NEWS 1.24

In <102636@netnews.upenn.edu> crawford@ben.dev.upenn.edu writes:

> My guess is that gay men are the primary customers for such calendars.  I
> don't know any women who truly like them (except as a joke gift), but I
> know men who do.
> 
> Lauren Crawford  //  crawford@ben.dev.upenn.edu

you can't be too serious. good grief! after all these years of feminism
there are still some women who insist on being sexist. FYI, i for one
am blind to physical appearances so are most of the colleagues here
at office. They didn't choose their mates based on the look, as a matter
of fact they don't do the choosing at all, there are never enough women
to allow for this luxuary. What i have seen on the media, and Hollywood
in particular, has struck me as totally stereotypical and misleading
at best. Real MAn(tm) don't fall head over heels for anyone that can not
hold a normal conversation or pursue some interests in life other than
shopping and aerobics.
as for the gay men, well, i can't speak for them. but, quite frankly
since they are not game for either you or me, why should they count
as data points?


Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: cocoa@netcom.com
Subject: Re: Kissing Frogs
Organization: Bourbon Street
Distribution: na
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 16:23:48 GMT

In article <MARTINC.92Dec12161427@hatteras.cs.unc.edu> martinc@hatteras.cs.unc.edu (Charles R. Martin) writes:
>In article <92347.125341SAUNDRSG@QUCDN.QueensU.CA> SAUNDRSG@QUCDN.QueensU.CA (Graydon) writes:
>
>   In article <7894@news.duke.edu>, diamond@acpub.duke.edu (Elizabeth Abrams) says:
>   >This reminds me of something one of my friends (one of my MALE friends,
>   >mind you) says about men.
>   >
>   >"All men are either clueless or assholes.  If you meet one who seems
>   > to be neither, he's probably an asshole."
>
>   Oh, drat.  Yet another data point that sugguests I really *am*
>   an alien.
>
>Maybe you're just clueless.

And that makes you what Charlie?  Just what *does* that make you? :)

Just me,

little 'e'

(Currently suffering from "AMS" ActuallyMovingSyndrome.)


-- 
*  *  *    Chocolatier at Arms, and Castle Wetware Liason            *  *  *
*  *  *    e-mail: cocoa@netcom.com   -    voicemail: 415-337-4940   *  *  *
From: johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Height Differences, etc.
Date: 16 Dec 92 18:02:37 GMT
Organization: Auspex Systems, Inc.

In article <1992Dec15.194345.9374@sol.UVic.CA> atovorni@engr.UVic.CA writes:
>In article 107899@watson.ibm.com, margoli@watson.ibm.com (Larry Margolis) writes:
|>Substitute any location where you're both horizontal.  In fact, it's just about
|>*only* when you're both standing flatfooted that height matters.
|
|Tall POLICE WOMEN. Now there's a thought! </.)

I always figured you'd be one for going for a woman in uniform... or out
of uniform as the case may be.

-- 
+==========================================================================+
| John Fereira        | Auspex Systems | "Ask me about my vow of silence." |
| johnf@auspex.com    | Santa Clara CA |                                   |
+==========================================================================+
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: tlode@nyx.cs.du.edu (trygve lode)
Subject: Re: Attraction -> Acquiantance or vice ver
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix @ U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Distribution: usa
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 92 04:37:41 GMT

In article <1992Dec11.170228.2506@cbnewsk.cb.att.com> krw@cbnewsk.cb.att.com (keith.r.smith) writes:
>
>	1) how many of you ever approached a woman on your own, who
>	   _did not_ push "your buttons", for purposes of
>	   making her acquaintance?

Lots of times--itwould be pretty silly to spend every social event that
one attends approaching only women that one finds sexually appealing and
other men.  (Indeed, it would probably require some effort to carefully
avoid starting up conversations with interesting but not necessarilly 
sexually interesting to you females.)  

Trygve   (Conversation can be fun.) 
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: blowfish@carina.unm.edu (rON.)
Subject: Re: What is gold-digging?
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 92 13:29:43 GMT
Organization: University of New Mexico, Albuquerque

In article <kDYKrAbEBh106h@wildrose.infoserv.com> wildrose!rkf@infoserv.com writes:
>That became a useful rule-of-thumb for me...if I ask, I'm prepared to
>pay.  But if it turns out that I do pay, that violates my *default*
>assumption of sharing ...a very bad sign, we're working from different
>assumptions... and reliably (IMExperience) predicts another walletsucker.

Dunno, this seems sorta harsh. Usually if I ask, I pay (or am willing to
pay). I appreciate it if she offers to chip in, but usually I pay for at
least the first date and tell her 'you can pay for the next one' :)
Now, 2 or 3 dates of her not even offering to pay is a bad sign, imho...
r.
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: gds@york.cs.ucla.edu (Greg Skinner)
Subject: Re: Females have it easy!
Originator: gds@york.cs.ucla.edu
Reply-To: gds@cs.ucla.edu (Greg Skinner)
Organization: in your face
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 92 06:33:45 GMT

In article <1grgmiINNq52@agate.berkeley.edu> monaghn@garnet.berkeley.edu (Mara Monaghan) writes:
> steven.m.stein wrote:
>> In other words, women may have to deal with 20 men
>> before she is approached by one she's attracted to,
>> whereas we could luck out after the 8th or 9th approach.
>First a quibble about your choice of words: I think of "deal" as
>having a negative connotation.  (My Webster's dictionary defines this
>usage as: "to take action with regard to someone or something, ex. to
>deal with an offender").  *I* don't use "deal" when I referring to
>people because I don't like the cold image it projects.

Hmmm.  I have gotten the impression from some women that a guy
expressing interest in them is somewhat of an invasive thing, at least
in the sense that if she gave no indication of interest on her part,
his interest is most unexpected and unwelcome.  I don't know if it is
just me, but I tend not to feel that my "space" has been entered if
someone's interested in me.  On the other hand, I am not approached by
jerks and slime constantly who (may be) threatening my safety, so
that's why I may be more open.

>So if your generalization is wrong (re: weekly offers) and the women
>you "approach" are not overwhelmed with other offers, why are you
>having to approach 8 or 9 women before you "luck out" ?  (BTW, what do
>you mean by "approaching", "luck out", and "offers"? Just curious) I
>think this ties into my earlier comment about the technique being
>inappropriate for the women involved.  Are you trying get to know
>them or just pick 'em up?

I'd like to know why you chose to phrase your question in this way.
It may be that for every 9 or 10 women that he meets, befriends, and
is romantically interested in, only one is romantically interested in
him.

--gregbo
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: larry@b8.b8.ingr.com (Larry Billings)
Subject: Re: Attraction -> Acquiantance or vice versa?
Organization: Intergraph
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 19:24:44 GMT

In article <JULIE.92Dec13171033@cucbs.chem.columbia.edu>, julie@cucbs.chem.columbia.edu (Julie Wright) writes:
> 
> ---Julie (who, however, doesn't really go for tattoos)

So tattoo parlors deliver now?

Larry