Radio

Before they burn the entire state to the ground? It’s turning into a third world socialist hell. Schools teach radical socialist and chicano propaganda, police are outgunned by Los Zetas, hospitals are closing and businesses are going to Nevada. There are bums and hobos everywhere and you can’t walk the streets without them demanding money. Can we get a military intervention before it becomes Mexico?

Wow. You’ve got some issues.

The pundits who lambasted Hillary for her commments have gone one step further w/ Obama ? He publicly claimed his grandfather was among American Forces that liberated Auschwitz at the end of WW II.
This wonderful alert, meaningful, press punditry-professional corps of reorters hasten to point out that Auschwitz was liberated ENTIRELY by the Red Army !!

Grampa Obama had to settle for Buchenwald !!!!

I am positive that Granpa was severely dissappointed that only 56,000 had been put to death there instead of the more g(l)orious 1.000,000 who died at Auschwitz !
He was so overcome with that discrepancy that he hid in the attic at home for over 6 months !!
Poor guy ! This is of course if you can rely on the accuracy of this press corps(they gotta be bored outta their shorts by now!!)I really wonder if Gramdpa Obama knew this would be fodder for a presidential primary campaign one day ?Had he known that my guess is he most certainly would have resigned the US Army/joined RedArmy!

Oh yes, it’s the bad ol’ media at it again. That must be why Hillary is trailing miserably.
I think YOU are being petty.

My essay is basicly a compare and contrast essay between the two British Authors: Mary Wroth and Robert Herrick. You don’t need to know them to help me out though

Here’s what I’ve got so far (as brainstorm):
I’ll be concentrating on the concept of Carpe Diem (live every moment like it’s your last) Like how some authors (Herrick) encourage it, while others like Mary Wroth would see it as degrading to women in the sense that they would be brought down compared to men if they were to even think of acting in that way. Maybe on her point of view, to follow Carpe Diem is impossible for women of the time and not true love?

I also want to argue that from Wroth’s point of view, she argues that love’s like a poison dart, because it brings one to lose control and it’s quite unexpected. To her, it is also a negative thing since it tends to bring with it a sort of loss of consistency (rarely do people stick to one person)… aka loss of true virtue while the other author sees love as being a liberating thing that needs no consistency.

Wroth is trying to say that she wants consistency in love and she feels like she had no choice in falling in love. Those are the two things that stick out in her poems… she doesn’t seem to want to be in love and according to my teacher, consistency is virtue (its basically remaining a virgin until you are with the only ONE you’ll ever be with and are therefore married…)

Then I have to compare her with another poet who’s all about Carpe Diem (very erotic poetry, writing about his many mistresses and the beauty their bodies. He writes about how they should just have sex while they still can; just have some fun and bed as many women as he can.)

In that time, women NEEDED to be chaste to be virtuous and worthy of praise and the love of a good man. But men didn’t need to be chaste to have virtue and be considered noble or virtuous. Mary Wroth (the author), wants to promote equality in a sense, saying that the fact of that men don’t need to be chaste to be virtuous isn’t right. They should have the same definition of noble and virtuous as women do.

If I could relate this essay to feminism that’d be awesome XD Because this author was a bit of a feminist… she sees true love as being Aphrodite while cupid is a nuisance…
Aphrodite is consistency -> female, while cupid is inconsistence -> male.
"Cupid’s" version of love vs. Apherdite’s version?
The child version of love versus the adult version?
Basicly the immature version (Cupid) vs. the matured version of love (Aphrodite)
I mean cupid is this little baby that throws arrows around like they’re candy

I need another person’s perspective, lol! (I get all my ideas when bouncing off someone else… almost like when I have to explain it to someone else, I come to understand it better myself)

Thanks for the help!!!

Women in Poems by Wroth and Herrick

Robert Herrick and Lady Mary Wroth treat women very differently in their poems. Herrick’s poems focus on the external qualities of women, and Wroth’s poems examine women’s internal world – their thoughts and feelings. In addition, Herrick finds the social codes that govern women’s behavior are natural and appropriate. By contrast, Wroth argues that these rules are not natural at all but are rather conventions that oppress women. Perhaps the most significant example of divergence of the two perspectives of women concerns love: Herrick’s suggest a women’s experience of love is pleasurable and grounded in external, physical attraction, but Wroth finds love to be a painful and a mostly internal, mental experience. In my analysis of their poems with attention to these three features – the poet’s external or internal treatment of women, the poet’s view of the social roles assigned to women, and the poet’s perspective of what love is for women – I will reveal that Herrick, while not bashing women as many seventeenth-century commentators did, does objectify women by viewing them purely for their external features. Furthermore, by presenting male speakers who direct women’s behaviors without considering their thoughts and feelings, Herrick contributes to the societal habit of oppressing women. Meanwhile, an examination of Wroth’s poems will show that she attempts to liberate women from suffering and oppression by challenging several sexist traditions: She turns the tables on male poets by objectifying men in her poems; she reverses many Petrarchan traditions, most importantly by asserting that women frequently suffer in love at the hands of cruel men, and not vice versa; she challenges the belief commonly held in the seventeenth century that men are intellectually and morally superior to women; and she calls attention to other social norms, such as the restriction of the women to inside the home, that oppress women.

http://www.cbu.edu/Academics/honors/hj2k3_women.htm

Here’s my brainstorm so far, any questions that would help further my brainstorming would be amazing help!!!

well Im gonna argue that one author says that loves a prison because it brings one to lose control which brings loss of consistency… aka loss of true virtue while the other author sees love as being a liberating thing that needs no consistency

(poison dart) she’d trying to say that she wants consistency in love and she feels like she had no choice in falling in love. those are the two things that stick out in her poems… she doesn’t seem to want to be in love and according to my teacher, consistency is virtue (its basicly remaining a virgin until you are with the only ONE you’ll ever be with…)
and then I have to compare her with another poet who’s all about Carpe Diem, have some fun, bed as many women as you can

if we could relate this to feminism thatd be awesome XD cuz this author was a bit of a feminist… she sees true love as being aphrodite while cupid is a nuisance… Aphrodite is consistency -> female, while cupid is inconsistence -> male. In that time, women NEEDED to be chast to be virtuous and worthy of praise and love of a good man. But men didnt need to be chast to have virtue and be consider noble or virtuous

(this is some of the stuff I understood in class and through what little I found on the net)

Mary Wroth (the author), wants to promote equality in a sense, saying that the fact
of that men dont need to be chast to be virtuous isn’t right. They should have the same definition of noble and virtuous as women do.

the other author, Robert Herrick, is very erotic in his poetry, writting about his many mistresses and the beauty their bodies. He writes about how they should just have sex while they still can.

maybe I could concentrate on the actual concept of Carpe Diem? Like how some authors (Herrick) encourage it, while others like Mary Wroth would see it as degrading to women in the sense that they would be brought down compared to men if they were to even think of acting in that way? Maybe on her point of view, to follow Carpe Diem is impossible for women of the time and not true love?

like it’s "cupid’s" version of love, not apherdite’s version?
The child version of love versus the adult version?
well kinda like the immature version (cupid) vs. the matured version of love (aphrodite)
I mean cupid is this little baby that throws arrows around like they’re candy

I need another person’s perspective, lol! (funny how I get all my ideas when bouncing off someone else… almost like when I have to explain it to someone else, I come to understand it better myself, lol!

I’ll take this on…but it will take me about 30 minutes or so so check back ( slow typer here). Very interesting topic.

OK.

In the beginning, you say someone says love is like a prison because they can lose control. Prison is all about control. Do you mean that she wants to be in a controlled environment so she feels safer to lose control? Thus, when she loses control, she behaves outside her usual routine. Is she afraid of routine or unpredictabitly? That she will look like she is not consistent in her beliefs and actions, and look like a fool or hypocrite? Does she fear not being true to herself at all times? Then, the second author. She sees love as having no boundaries….and then I hear you saying someone wishes to control love, not be controlled by it.
And someone else says if you try and control love, you have missed the point of it. Being free of cupid is saying you want the sex but not the commitment. You want the love but not the pain. Usually men want the sex, not the commitment. But not always. In regards to feminism, there is a double standard that men "sow their wild oats" and this is healthy and expected; in a female, it’s sluttiness. I guess that cupid is "lust" and Aphrodite is "love" (commitment). So what is your view? Should we have both sexes equal as in…both should sow their wild oats before settling down? Or should both sexes behave chastly before marraige? In the original Greek myths, I think Cupid was meant to make couples fall in love and commit. Aphrodite was about sexuality (lust). Aphrodite has two beginnings, but one is she was born out of the sea, of no parents, and was so beautiful the three Graces brought her to Mount Olympus where she was made a Goddess. Zeus married her to Hephaestius, and she bore Eros, later named Cupid. Eros shot arrows of love into the hearts of unwary victims, while he laughed, mockingly. Lots of twists in these old myths.

There’s this girl, see – of course there is!!

When I met her, I was awestruck! She is the most exquisite creature! We’re both 30-ish.

That was a year ago. I was married at the time, in the process of a divorce. I finally got divorced in January, but didn’t date anyone.

Her and I work at a volunteer centre. We see each other only about once a week or so.

Initially, her and I would just say Hi at a distance… Sometime later, we went on a skills training course. She chose to sit next to me most of the time. At the end of the course, I told her what a lovely person I thought she is and I hope we get to work together for much longer. She complimented me back, said the broke the mould when they made me… Then we hugged. My heart raced!

Back at the centre, we’d hug every week when greeting each other and saying goodbye. The hugs were short at first, but gradually became longer, tighter hugs. Soon after, she gave me a peck on my cheek – she initiated that…

After 3 weeks of this, I noticed our pecks getting closer to our lips, until 2 weeks ago, our lips touched at the sides – briefly!

Then one week, I felt cheeky and kissed her straight on the lips, which she didn’t dodge. It was really just a quick sort of friendly kiss (peck) on the lips, followed by a mutually tight squeeze.

The next week though, she seemed "in" on the lips thing and aimed straight for mine as I did hers. We shared quite a tight, long-ish hug. Then we realised the centre’s lights were off, so we went to switch them off. We came out, she moved to me. We kissed again, not too quick, but more than a peck and hugged tight again!

We have been greeting each other like this for near on 5 months now.

THEN, TODAY, I summed up some courage, took the Red Pill and told her how ardently I love her. It was so awesome and liberating, telling her! Man, she turns my life into 3-d HIGH DEFINITION! Her voice sounds like warm honey and soft silk. I actually wish she would read this and know I am serious – but Yahoo Answers isn’t her sort of thing

Anyway, she was a bit taken aback, since I have been trying to convince her (and myself) for a year now that my feelings for her are just plutonic – but they are not. I ADORE her! I find the idea of being with any other woman utterly repugnant. She replied, saying I am such a sweet guy. However, she said she is still very much in love with her 1st boyfriend that she broke up some 4 years ago with. She also said that I am too nice for her and she prefers different kind of guys. Like bad boy types, I guess.

But, more than this, it sounded to me like she was just trying to find excuses. She said she isn’t good enough for me, that she cannot love me the way I need and want to be loved. Said she is quite a b*tch sometimes and an utter cow. To be sure, she probably does have a bit of a temper – but don’t we all? I am not perfect by any stretch!

She said she wants to remain friends. I am, of course, happy with this – as I’d rather have her as a plutonic friend than not at all! GASP! I’d rather rip my beating heart out and stomp it into the ground than not have her in my life at all!

SO, WHAT IS THIS?? I am completely smitten with her. She doesn’t often communicate with me in the week, though it has actually picked up in recent times and we often speak on the phone for like 30-40 minutes!! Could it be that she has feelings for me, but is trying to be careful? Or are we just friends? Is she playing hard-to-get? Is she nervous that I came out of a divorce?

Or what? I’m really new and quite stupid at all this relationship/ feeling stuff, as only ever had 1 girlfriend that I got married to and we are now divorced…

OR, could it ultimately just be that I do not make her heart go boom, like she does mine?

I can’t believe what I’m reading. If she kisses and hugs you, that to me sounds like she is interested in you as more than a friend. But then you confide in her and tell her how you feel (which is understandable given how she has acted towards you) and then she is taken aback?

What kind of a bitch is this? She clearly gives you indications that she likes you as more than a friend. Who would kiss somebody they are just friends with?

Then she tells you she’s still in love with some other guy. I don’t know what to tell you. I think I might be in a similar situation, but it’s too hard to tell.

Sounds like she’s fu*king with you. Like she’s trying to drive you nuts. Either that, or she’s just a misleading bitch.

My suggestion is this. Don’t play right into her hands. Be somewhat distant, be a challenge. Then watch her come crawling back to you on her hands and knees.

Think about it. Liberals want to keep the status quo: An ever-growing government, entitlement programs galore and irresponsible/reckless spending.

Conservatives (not the ones in office necessarily) want things to change. They want the markets to be relaxed. They want way less government. They want the people to be liberated from the government.

Am I right or am I right?

*Note: whether you are a liberal or not, I am right since liberals don’t like to use words to their legitimate definition. Right is wrong in liberalspeak. So, I am right any which way.

Don’t waste your time answering!

You are right.
However, liberation from the government is not the liberation liberals want. They want to liberate money from the wallets of any and all who are better off than them, simple as that. That is the ONLY liberation liberals stand for.

"Everyone tells me I’m arrogant but my music’s the only thing I’ve got, so you’ll have to let me be confident about one thing…. I suppose that’s what you can expect from the album: a lot of hit records that will piss people off."

The album’s goal is to liberate, and support the demise of LGBT’s oppression. I’m glad someone has finally decided to stick their toes in. Thinking being gay is a choice is not an opinion, and it’s time we stop treating it like it is, and stick up for what’s right.

The most powerful pop star in the world is about to get a lot more political: watch out, conservatives.
Preferences change. Being gay is not changeable.

"Thinking being gay is a choice is not an opinion"

If not an opinion, what is it…a statement of fact?

Besides, do you REALLY think anyone will take a tranny in a meat dress seriously?

"Everyone tells me I’m arrogant but my music’s the only thing I’ve got, so you’ll have to let me be confident about one thing…. I suppose that’s what you can expect from the album: a lot of hit records that will piss people off."

The album’s goal is to liberate, and support the demise of LGBT’s oppression. I’m glad someone has finally decided to stick their toes in. Thinking being gay is a choice is not an opinion, and it’s time we stop treating it like it is, and stick up for what’s right.

The most powerful pop star in the world is about to get a lot more political: watch out, conservatives.

Rant, whine, lie, distort, and b*tch, as usual.

What I look like now. http://s962.photobucket.com/albums/ae109/JessicaWeasley10/Haircut/?action=view&current=_150-3ee1e9db6aa9e752f1f56c7006c22058-16d3232004134000039f000047f00000ff4040600070000000000000010000000000000000000000000000000000000000-295.jpg

Haircut I want to get well actually theres two and I’m trying to decide http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://cdn.buzznet.com/media-cdn/jj1/headlines/2010/08/emma-watson-haircut-liberating.jpg&imgrefurl=http://survivorsucks.yuku.com/reply/6326358/t/Re-Emma-Watson-s-new-haircut-yay-or-nay-.html&usg=__SbpYdZPTVhxUBgiKcRMTiaOgZbQ=&h=300&w=300&sz=16&hl=en&start=84&zoom=1&tbnid=fa3BKW1LN3PnvM:&tbnh=139&tbnw=139&prev=/images%3Fq%3Demma%2Bwatson%2Bnew%2Bhaircut%26hl%3Den%26biw%3D1064%26bih%3D439%26gbv%3D2%26tbs%3Disch:1&itbs=1&iact=rc&dur=98&ei=qFS5TOv7AsT68AahpJikDw&oei=hlS5TOLpLcL58Aac8fCmDg&esq=7&page=7&ndsp=11&ved=1t:429,r:10,s:84&tx=64&ty=104
Yes that is Emma Watson I love her:)

or http://www.zimbio.com/Pixie+Hair+Cut/articles/PcjAfaz77vC/Short+haircuts+Hairstyle+trends+Fashion+2010 the second one down.

I really want something alot shorter and more managable but if you think neither would look good im open to other options.
Dude, seriously? I didn’t ask you if I was attractive or not. I don’t need you petty imput. Do you seriously go around the internet saying things like that? If you do I feel very sorry for you, because I have a life and you don’t.
*****input

Omg you are so pretty that first person is such a jerk! I think the pixi look would be good for you. Another look would be maybe like this:

http://justabouthair.com/funky-hair-style-/short-cool-funky-hair-style.jpg

That is kind of how I am getting my hair cut.. For the fourth time (: I just spike it up in the back more… Here is a picture of my hair like that:

and this one

My hair is naturally curly, so the back curls real pretty, but sometimes I like to straighten it so that they are straight spikes, and it even looks good left down.

Here is one more picture (sorry I love hair and different short lengths hehe)

http://www.aahairstyle.com/wp-content/uploads/short_hairstyles_01_01.jpg

Haha sorry I found one more that I think you may like… Maybe lol:

http://www.hairfinder.com/celebrityhairstyles/victoria-beckham.jpg

Either way, your face is really pretty for short hair, and it takes a strong woman to cut her hair short because most men enjoy the long hair.

Some tips to style it, if you liked how my hair looks, is to part the longer sides that aren’t supposed to spike, away from the shorter spiky part with bobby pins and spray it with hairspray and if it is short enough you can just take your fingers and mess it up or take your brush and kind of rub the bristles back and forth (up and down motion I guess?) to help it spike and make it look fuller, and if it is longer then try spraying it with your hairspray and blow dry it upwards using your brush… I don’t know if this was helpful, but just my opinion (:

Currently, she’s working on repealing DADT. If you’ve read her FB or seen the VMA’s, you should know.

While I don’t necessarily think it’s the best idea to get political if you’re a commercial artist, Gaga is different. Her herself is not a commercial artist. She’s a lot more liberated than most in the industry today, obviously. Gaga’s using her power to give LGBT a voice, attempting to reverse our oppressed minority. She’s transforming her business into "quality over quantity", and I believe that was her plan in the beginning. Her quite possibly being the most powerful figure in the music industry today, I’m so grateful.

Her third album is dedicated to the gays, hence the title "Born This Way". I feel like she’s starting a mini revolution. I can’t wait until the release.

I LOVE LADY GAGA AND EVERYTHING SHE STANDS FOR!