![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Well, I've been very busy lately, as you might have guessed from the lack of entries. Schoolwork, personal life, work. . .
I saw Thank You for Smoking on Friday night, which wasn't as good as the trailer seemed, but entertaining enough. I went with my friend L and her friend R, who she had apparently gone on a few dates with before deciding he wasn't for her. Well, the guy asked me out! This of course led to a conversation between me and L about what was "wrong with him" and "should I say yes" and how did she feel about it. Etc.
Apparently, they met through an online dating service (like match.com or one of those) a few years ago, went on a few dates, and it didn't work out. Then he moved to California for his job. Well, they ran into each other again recently (he moved back to NYC not long ago) and after one date he rejected her. She could not remember anything about him--not anything they talked about in the few dates they had, not going to his flat, not having sex with him! The reasons he gave her for not wanting to date were because she could not remember much of him and because of a little, uh, problem she recently contracted from her cheating ex-boyfriend that she's now being treated for (not viral, thankfully). But he still wanted to be "friends with benefits" and she seems very insulted by this proposition. She said "I think he's a sex addict." I said it just makes him a hypocrite, but then I have not heard his side of the story. So, despite feeling insulted by his proposition, she's still friends with him (without said benefits). So, I'm not sure how I feel. But it's nice to be found attractive and he doesn't look like a troll. He has a decent job and can hold a reasonable conversation and seems intelligent and so on. I guess my radar will be UP for a bit, because I now have a bit of L's baggage to filter through. She actually said to me "I want to see if he treats you like he treated me, if it's him or if it's me." I guess she wants to see if he treats all women as a sex object, or if it's just her and something about the way she presents herself to men. Fair enough, I'd say. I have no problems with people being interested in casual sex. I make no moral judgments about people's right to seek physical pleasure. But, not being one who is interested in casual sex at the moment, I guess I will see too. Aaaah, the messy lives of others...
As a side note, L has become obsessed with the new Trader Joe's that opened up in NYC last weekend. Apparently, she's not the only Joe Ho in town. When I went by there on Saturday there was a line down the street just to get INTO the store. Crikey.
Elsewhere, I had a nice chat last night with a few people interested in developing an interesting Snape-based project. I shall not divulge more at present, but to say I have ideas and am excited about the idea of giving some time to develop it (not that I have any time, but that's beside the point!).
Anyway, I've not been nearly as busy as some nice lovely NYTimes reporters who unveiled this bit of news (which we all knew or suspected anyway) about the extent of Bush's lust for provoking war in Iraq.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/27/international/europe/27memo.html?hp&ex=1143522000&en=1a8220fd45b2aca0&ei=5094&partner=homepage
At least Tony Blair comes off a teeny tiny bit better than Bush about realistic planning concerns and prospects of assassinating Hussein. I'm sure the British people take great comfort. (end sarcasm).
Now it's Monday and my boss is on holiday and I hope to minimize the mayhem. I have a Stats exam on Wednesday and a gazillion books and articles to start reading for a paper due next month.
Happy Monday, flist.
I saw Thank You for Smoking on Friday night, which wasn't as good as the trailer seemed, but entertaining enough. I went with my friend L and her friend R, who she had apparently gone on a few dates with before deciding he wasn't for her. Well, the guy asked me out! This of course led to a conversation between me and L about what was "wrong with him" and "should I say yes" and how did she feel about it. Etc.
Apparently, they met through an online dating service (like match.com or one of those) a few years ago, went on a few dates, and it didn't work out. Then he moved to California for his job. Well, they ran into each other again recently (he moved back to NYC not long ago) and after one date he rejected her. She could not remember anything about him--not anything they talked about in the few dates they had, not going to his flat, not having sex with him! The reasons he gave her for not wanting to date were because she could not remember much of him and because of a little, uh, problem she recently contracted from her cheating ex-boyfriend that she's now being treated for (not viral, thankfully). But he still wanted to be "friends with benefits" and she seems very insulted by this proposition. She said "I think he's a sex addict." I said it just makes him a hypocrite, but then I have not heard his side of the story. So, despite feeling insulted by his proposition, she's still friends with him (without said benefits). So, I'm not sure how I feel. But it's nice to be found attractive and he doesn't look like a troll. He has a decent job and can hold a reasonable conversation and seems intelligent and so on. I guess my radar will be UP for a bit, because I now have a bit of L's baggage to filter through. She actually said to me "I want to see if he treats you like he treated me, if it's him or if it's me." I guess she wants to see if he treats all women as a sex object, or if it's just her and something about the way she presents herself to men. Fair enough, I'd say. I have no problems with people being interested in casual sex. I make no moral judgments about people's right to seek physical pleasure. But, not being one who is interested in casual sex at the moment, I guess I will see too. Aaaah, the messy lives of others...
As a side note, L has become obsessed with the new Trader Joe's that opened up in NYC last weekend. Apparently, she's not the only Joe Ho in town. When I went by there on Saturday there was a line down the street just to get INTO the store. Crikey.
Elsewhere, I had a nice chat last night with a few people interested in developing an interesting Snape-based project. I shall not divulge more at present, but to say I have ideas and am excited about the idea of giving some time to develop it (not that I have any time, but that's beside the point!).
Anyway, I've not been nearly as busy as some nice lovely NYTimes reporters who unveiled this bit of news (which we all knew or suspected anyway) about the extent of Bush's lust for provoking war in Iraq.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/27/international/europe/27memo.html?hp&ex=1143522000&en=1a8220fd45b2aca0&ei=5094&partner=homepage
At least Tony Blair comes off a teeny tiny bit better than Bush about realistic planning concerns and prospects of assassinating Hussein. I'm sure the British people take great comfort. (end sarcasm).
Now it's Monday and my boss is on holiday and I hope to minimize the mayhem. I have a Stats exam on Wednesday and a gazillion books and articles to start reading for a paper due next month.
Happy Monday, flist.
