The Nondating Life

Sunday, August 14, 2005

Process this

I'm sitting in a Starbucks on Sunday morning, eating marble cake, drinking coffee--not something I do often, mind you, but someone gave me a $15 Starbucks Card and it wasn't going to use itself. My only regret is that Starbucks doesn't serve fried chicken.

To my right, on the couch in the window, sits a woman, tarted up in a nice sun-dress and strappy heels. The dress has a support system that makes her boobs look like two cantaloupes about to roll out of a fruit basket. An ivy vine tattoo climbs up her left arm. She's waiting for her boyfriend or fiance or husband or what not. I know this because another woman asked if the seat next to her was taken, and she replies in a chirpy little voice, "Yes, I'm sorry, it is."

The boyfriend comes in. He's going through the ugliest stage of baldness: he's got that sad little island left up front and only wisps of hair, originating above the ears, reaching up and covering the middle section. For everyone's sake, he should grab the razor, but I imagine he hasn't quite reached the acceptance stage, is still hoping that one morning he'll wake up and his hair will be back. He's wearing shorts, sneakers, an old t-shirt--what normal people wear when they're just going to sit in Starbucks and read the paper on a Sunday morning.

They exchange a "Hi, baby" and he gives the table in front of her a short glance, noticing that she's been in here ten minutes, is sitting comfortably in the air conditioning, lounging almost--and hasn't ordered anything. He's sweating. Outside, the air is like a dirty, moist dish cloth--already close to 90 degrees. He's annoyed. Whatever it is, I can see in his shoulders that he's a little ticked off that she hasn't ordered. But a quick look around tells him that the place is packed and she was wise to grab a seat.

"What will you have?" he asks.

Then it happens.

I've often said that I don't think there are that many differences between men and women. Most of the problems faced in the dating world, most of the neuroses, are shared equally by both. But there is one major difference. Women, all of them, are under the mistaken impression that the world cares what they think.

Now before you all rush over to email or your local NOW representative (because you know how you people rush to judgment), let me clarify. This isn't about politics or philosophy or deep thoughts of any sort. I'm all for an equal exchange of ideas. And I think women are just as good at men in the heavy thinking categories and more men would do well to listen to women.

What I'm talking about is this uncontrollable and unnecessary urge women have to vocalize. Everything.

And this Starbucks episode is a perfect example. When the man asked, "What will you have?" what should have happened is this: The woman falls silent for a second or two, maybe even an entire minute--perhaps she strokes her chin--then she looks up, opens her mouth and the says, "I'll have a Venit decaf supercalifragilistic chai mocha whozihwhatzit."

But does that happen? Of course not.

Like some malfunctioning robot that starts vocalizing its programming subroutines, she starts babbling. "Well, let's see, what do I want?" (Hey, lady. He doesn't know. That's why he asked you.) "I guess I could get a blahblahblahblah. Or a hibbitygiggityhoohoohoo. Do I want that? Hmmmm. I don't know. I think I might want something hot. Or cold."

Meanwhile, the guy's standing there, his shoulderd climbing up to his ears as he gets closer and closer to the snapping point. I conclude that they live together a few blocks away. She decided she wanted to go to Starbucks and he thought it would be a good idea. But then she takes an hour getting dolled up... TO GO TO STARBUCKS. Then, halfway there in the soupy weather, she remembers she forgot something, can he go back and get it. So now he's standing there, the sheen of sweat on his body cooling, getting sticky, in the air-conditioned room.

And just when he thinks it can't get any worse, she says, "You know what, I could have something sort of sweet, but not to sweet. So if they have that. Yeah. Sure."

That's it. That's her order. He's trapped. Because if he snaps at her for this stupidity, he'll suddenly be the unreasonable one. I can only see the back of his head, but I can tell he gives her one of those looks, before turning around. It probably takes every ounce of will in him not to stomp to the counter like a three-year old sent to his room.

"What!?!" she says as he sulks away. "What!?!" as if she has no idea. And the thing is, she probably doesn't.

Then she gets up from the couch and follows him and my first thought is "Holy shit, not only has she pissed him off, she's going to lose their seat in a futile attempt to make everything better." Luckily, she doesn't lose the seat and he doesn't have to kill her (and everyone else in the building).

She returns to the couch. He comes back five minutes later with what I swear looks like a cheese plate. She smiles and starts eating and he just sits there staring at the paper. I can tell he's not reading. He's just trying to reset, trying to forget what a pain in the ass she can be. "Hey, she's a good looking girl," he's telling himself. "She's nice, treats me well, doesn't seem to care that my scalp looks like the hide of a mangy dog. And she has nice tits. ... But god DAMN, why does she have to do this?"

Sorry, guy. It's in her nature. Women like to externalize their thought patterns. Annoying? Yes. Stupid? Sure. Ever going to stop? Not a chance.

I lectured a girl friend of mine a few weeks ago about pestering her boyfriend after he'd had a bad day.

"But all I wanted to do was ask him about it, show some support," she said.

"Yeah," I replied, "you were pestering him." Also, she was partially lying. She didn't necessarily want to support him. She wanted to see what was going on in that head of his. She wanted HIM to talk.

Women have a bad day and they want to talk about it. And by talk, they mean they vent, you listen, then you talk back, then she says something, then you say something. This, of course, is the height of silliness. If a man has a bad day, he just wants it to go away. If he DOES want to talk about it, what he means is he wants to let forth a stream of "That cocksucking piece of shit down at the office is gonna get a three-ring binder shoved up his ass and then I'm gonna rip off his secretary's head and go bowling with it, the sonsabitches. All of 'em" and so forth, and so on until the steam blows off and the day goes away and he goes in the next day. The last thing he wants to hear is, "Well, what happened?" or "Well, maybe the other person..." or "Do you wanna talk about it?" Hell, he usually doesn't even want you hanging all over him. He wants to be left alone until he resets and the unhappy thoughts subside--as he knows they will. If you want to give him a massage or oral pleasure, fine, but don't expect any reciprocation. It's best just to leave him alone.

Why? Because men know that talking about something that's happened already doesn't actually solve anything. If you've had a bad day--and we're talking run-of-the-mill bad day, not "I got caught boning the cleaning lady and I lost my job and we won't be able to pay rent"--it will go away of its own accord. If the human mind is capable of erasing child abuse and alien anal probes, surely it can easily deal with the fact that your boss, like, a total douchebag yesterday. Talking about it accomplishes nothing except maybe reliving the misery, dragging it out. And unless he's a 19-year-old English or Philosophy major (or a 30-year-old musician), a man just isn't interested in wallowing in his misery.

And having a conversation about it? Forget it. We know damn well that having a two-way conversation is more likely than not just to bring up some other issue that will piss us off even more.

Men, after all, are about results. Sure, women are interested in results, but they're equally interested in "the process." This sort of thing is reminiscent of all the pedagogy bullshit that I ran across when teaching writing. It's infecting school systems and I think it's one reason that people can't write any more. "Writing is a process. It shouldn't just be about the results." Yeah? Well, why don't you take your "process" and go try to publish it in something other than an academic journal, toots.

This happens at work as well, when the back-and-forth emails start up between (mostly women) reporters and they decide to include editors in the "discussion." (Men have started doing this, too, but I think that's more of a "Hey, look at me. These emails prove that I'm working and definitely not searching for nude photos of Jessica Alba online.") It's the good ol' let's include EVERYONE. It's a PROCESS!!! It'll be fun! No. It won't. I'm not interested in your process. I want you all to shut up, leave me alone and let me know when you have something I can actually work with. (In the mean time, I'll be googling Jessica Alba)

You think I'm making this all up? Next time you're out with a group of people at a restaurant, watch what happens. Guys look at the menu. Women look at the menu. And perhaps the exact same thoughts are going through their heads. "Man, I don't know what I'm in the mood for. I think I want a steak, but I can smell the fish and it smells good. Then again, I haven't been eating any vegetables lately, maybe I should get a salad. But what if everyone laughs at me? Oooh, that roast pork looks good, too. Damn."

But guess who's going to be saying all of this out loud--which only makes it harder for the rest of us to make our own damn decisions.

And guess who's usually the first person to say, "What are you having?!?" (Oddly enough, my first impulse when faced with this question is, "A big plate of none of your goddamn business, that's what I'm having.")

Guys, for many reasons, like to decide, then open their mouths and speak. We'll struggle with our inner menu demons and make a decison. Perhaps we'll make two and then, when faced with the pressure of the waiter, open our mouths and let the subconscious decide.

Women? Well, they'll include the whole damn restaurant in the decision. Yes. Sometimes, if you're with a large group of people at a new place, the woman's approach just might be better... after an initial round of debating, you can all order different dishes and then share. And everyone's moderately happy.

But you know what, ladies? Sometimes, we just want a damn steak. We don't want to talk about it, not with you and not with your friends and definitely not with your friends' boyfriends. This is my steak, goddamnit, and I'm not sharing. You want me to talk AND give up territory? As if. I looked at the menu, I made up my mind, I will share this information with the wait staff. If you want to order chicken, fine, go ahead, but you reach your fork over toward my piece of cow, you're gonna lose a damn finger.

Sorry, I got kind of side-tracked there (and my lady friends who dine with me know that I'll always share).

But, yes, there is a difference between men and women here. Women like to externalize their thought processes. Men don't. For two reasons: 1) Men focus on results and want to seem sure before they open their mouths and 2) Quite often, we don't even HAVE a thought process going on. It's just a whole lot of white noise up in there. Hence the oft-asked question, "Honey, what are you thinking?" And the familiar response, "Huh?"

And this time around, I'm going to side with the men. Men, keep being stubbornly silent. After all, any woman will admit that one of the things she likes about a man is that appearance of strength through silence, an economy of words and the ability to make a decision. Yes, even if it is a moronic decision--how do you think all those meathead guidos get hot chicks? Because they're discussing their innermost feelings or because they ACT like a man, despite obviously bad decisions involving hair product and gold jewelry. Sure, women might whine about you being uncommunicative, but just as they don't really want to see a grown-man cry, they don't really want you to turn into a Chatty Cathy and start talking all the time about your emotions (besides, if you start talking about yours, she won't be able to bore you with hers).

And, ladies? Really, sometimes you just need to put a damn lid on it. Think. Then speak. Get your shit together, then open the mouth. After all, the world's noisy enough as it is.

(Previous post)

29 Comments:

  • Not since "Dave Barry's Complete Guide to Guys" has the nail on this particular subject been hit so squarely on the head.

    Every word strikes with laser-like precision, my friend.

    By Anonymous The Insurrectionist, at 4:27 PM  

  • Wow, I expected to find some hate mail here. What you say is true, my man. It seems like that dude's girl had enough assets to put up with her babble-on. If I ever find a date that knows what she wants to order before I do, I know I've got a winner. Great post.

    By Blogger Plantation, at 4:53 PM  

  • I admit occasional ordering-related anxiety and indecision. But not at Starbucks. Clearly, if she felt the need to vocalize her thought process on ordering a caffeinated beverage, she'd never been there before.

    And btw, since I'm assuming that you haven't been dress shopping lately, Ken, let me say that most dresses don't have great support systems. If her melons looked like, um, melons, and there was no obvious bra in attendance, they're likely fake and look like that all the time.

    Descriptions like "tarted up" and "chirpy" give us the impression that you find her so atrocious that you wouldn't like her. But let's face the reality, I imagine that if she gave you the eye, you'd be over there trying to tap that, even if you find her "process" annoying.

    (Did I just use the term "tap that"? I'm so mortified.)

    By Anonymous Esther, at 6:02 PM  

  • Hmm, this post is so . . . bitter. Usually, you're a little more good natured about the small stuff. Are you baiting your female readers for comments?

    Anyhow, it seems like a broad and perhaps inaccurate generalization. I'm am going to take note of the ordering thing, and see whether it applies. The "how was your day thing" works exactly opposite in my house, though. Mr. Pearatty can get quite frustrated because I don't usually want to re-hash, and if I do, I definitely don't want to dissect. He, on the other hand, is very happy to go on about his day in minutest detail. (And I'm happy to hear about it -- helps me move on from work.)

    By Blogger pearatty, at 6:49 PM  

  • I laughed, I cried, it was better than cats!! ;) Seriously, Ken - you've totally hit the nail on the head. And as a girl, I might get slammed for even admitting to it, but for the most part we, women, are very talky & process oriented. Yes, I like to talk about my bad day. Not all the time, but sometimes. I do. I know it solves nothing. However, I am the first one to know what I am ordering, and writing isn't about the process - it's about the results. Yes, the process is lovely, but just like jewelry, it's not the thought that counts, it's the end result ;) just kidding, women like the thought of jewelry, they just hate getting the ugly pieces. As for sharing food... Hmm. In my universe, sharing food has to be agreed upon prior to ordering. And if I say "can i have a bite?" what i mean is "can I have a bite?" and not, "please, fork over half of your steak onto my plate." I don't expect my bf to share, which is why we always wind up ordering the same exact meal. :) Anyway, one of your best posts on the whole male/female conundrum. I'll even link to it!

    By Blogger writersbloc gal, at 9:32 PM  

  • "I smell the fish and it smells good"
    bullshit! Fish Stinks!
    Gimme a steak! A nice thick ribeye, No bullshit thankyou, don't tell me your problems, ma'am, I just want a tall beer and shut up, beyotch!
    .
    PS: small wonder you're not dating if I wasn't married I wouldn't either!

    By Blogger youngbrews, at 9:52 PM  

  • The menu chat DOES serve a purpose. If we both sit silently, it's weird. Plus, if I know that he's going to order steak, then I can order the salad and just steal a few pieces from his plate. Which means that my figure doesn't suffer from eating out, and I can get tarted up enough that he won't yell or leave me when I babble about my ordering process. Circle of life, man!

    By Anonymous kim, at 12:36 PM  

  • You hit that on the head, all of it, every single word. Once upon a time I read something that was from the male pov, and the discussion thing was particularly enlightening at the time. It might have been the Dave Barry thing someone mentioned here, but what I had read wasn't properly credited.
    You're right on every account here, and if the female in question wasn't on a hottie on some level, she'd be sitting there alone.

    By Blogger Jen in Door County, at 5:06 PM  

  • I only ask the question about what he's ordering if I know that he's paying. I try to order something of equal or lesser value. It serves a purpose, in my case. If we're going dutch, however, I don't really care what he's going to eat.

    By Blogger Delia, at 5:51 PM  

  • After several emails back and forth with my local NOW representative, we've decided that this post is, in fact, funny...because it is true.

    But since I've been single for a while, I have to say I've become quite decisive. I think boys tend to melt our brains as we seek approval, "whaddya think Honey? yeah, hmmm, that sounds good...how about this one? yeah, i that sounds good too...geee, I just don't know!"

    By Blogger citygurl, at 9:53 PM  

  • This is my first time I've read The Nondating Life and I will be back! Great post!

    You are right about us girls - surely the majority anyway. And the whole menu thing really emphasised it for me. I do that!

    Thanks for the insight.

    By Anonymous Beck, at 12:08 AM  

  • so here's the thing - i know plenty of guys who are external processors and plenty of girls who are internal processors. and yeah, i get that you guys have an unwritten code among each other that you "don't talk about it" and girls have a tendency to get each other to talk about whatever. but really you're just venting about personality types and not liking people who are different from you. you have a right to do this. but it's kind of obnoxious in itself.

    is having to go through this over a starbucks order perhaps excessive? yeah. does this woman seem particularly obnoxious? yeah. but are there some of us who legitimately need to think out loud to get a handle on things? yeah, and we tend to talk to ourselves, because talking, like writing for some people, like thinking for some people who are very blessed, gives our thoughts some kind of tangibility. didn't i hear that geniuses frequently talk out loud to themselves? makes you think.

    i mean, you can make it a misogynistic thing if you want, and you will, and that's fine, whatever, because you have a point -- but it's not about talking, it's about this girl demanding that her boyfriend do everything she wants and make decisions for her.

    as for us external processors, leave us alone already. it's how we think. and really? you're the one with the blog, so you've not got much room to rant about those of us who need tangible markers to guide our thinking.

    By Anonymous candy girl, at 6:41 PM  

  • You described my boyfriend to a tee. I'm telling ya, if he has a bad day, he eats dinner and goes to bed. If we have an argument, he eats dinner and goes to bed. There will be no discussion about feelings or what happened. Just his own isolation. Fortunately, if the tables are turned and I have a bad day, he will give me about 5 minutes to talk about it and then we are on our way. But yeah, if its a bad day, I just stay away. And the decision thing, I'm quiet in general, he is always asking me what I am thinking. Which makes me say,"Oh...nothing."

    By Blogger astrocoz, at 5:30 AM  

  • candy and pearatty,
    How about a little more perspective and a little less, I don't know, projection? Funny how I rag on men and take the ladies' side on this site and I'm a-okay. I make fun of women and suddenly I'm a bitter misogynist. Generalizations? You're darn tootin'. This surprises you?

    Misogyny? What's up with that? I'm going to save my thoughts about this whole knee-jerk tendency to use that word for the next post, but it does get a bit tiresome in the blog world to read all these "Rah-rah, you go girl" sort of posts after a woman has self-affirmed and crapped all over a man ... and then be subjected to misogyny claims because I poked fun in general. I'd be a litte more bothered by it if all my women readers claimed it, but most of them seem to be able to navigate my foolishness with sense of humor in tact. As it is, the word "misogyny" is becoming about as meaningful as the word "fascist."

    I'm going to have to hang a sign up on the Nondating life door. "Please leave your graduate degrees and Academia-influenced foolishness outside. Sense of Humor required."

    As for geniuses talking out loud to themselves. Whatever you need to tell yourself (out loud, no doubt). Sure, you've heard that. In crappy movies where it was necessary for exposition. And the claim that blogging is akin to talking or thinking out loud is foolish. Perhaps if this were some sort of livejournal blog or teenie bopper diary or stream of conscious stuff (of which there is plenty), you'd have a point. But it isn't. Writing for public consumption is the exact opposite of thinking out loud. You think in your room (perhaps even out loud), get your thoughts together, then write, then rewrite, etc., before you go foisting half-formed thoughts on an unsuspecting public.

    And I never said I disliked the girl or that I hated her. At that moment, I thought it funny that she was annoying her man to the point of combustion. I'm sure he's annoyed her plenty.

    By Blogger Ken Wheaton, at 11:21 AM  

  • I heard that women use two to three times more words than men.

    No, I don't know how valid that is, in fact, two to three times more seems a lot, but I've heard it more than once.

    I'm a girl, and well, I agree with just about everything you said.

    By Blogger kay-see, at 4:22 PM  

  • Ken:
    Actually, I almost always think you're funny, even when I disagree. But you know the old thing about "it's funny because it's true." Based on the comments, the people who thought it was funny recognized some of themselves in it. But this one just didn't ring true for me, and also seemed a little harsher than usual. I will admit to being sensitive to a post that's seems basically to be saying "will you chicks please just shut up for once." I really did think you might have been baiting for comments, because you're usually more nuanced.

    Kay-See:
    I'm not sure if you're saying women have larger vocabularies, or they use 3 words for a man's 1. I do know there have been a number of studies that show that men in mixed conversation groups take up about twice the conversation time as the women do.

    By Blogger pearatty, at 1:55 PM  

  • Pearatty,
    The thing about men taking up more space in a mixed company conversation wouldn't surprise me one bit. The old urge to be Alpha Male, to outshine the other guys, etc. is hard to resist. Put two girls at a table, add a handful of guys, a dash of alcohol and let the festivities begin. Cockblocking galore!

    By Blogger Ken Wheaton, at 2:37 PM  

  • it just seems unnecessarily mean, ken. i get annoyed by people who talk too much, too, but i also think you can't on one and say that girls should back off when men don't process out loud and instead make the compromise themselves, all the time. you don't have to like it, and you clearly think your way is better, but really, it could go both ways -- it drives "these women" you are describing crazy when their men don't talk and sometimes we only put up with their reticence because of their other assets. different strokes, dude. it would have been funny if it weren't quite so judgmental.

    i'm just sayin'. you could lay off the hate just a teency.

    By Anonymous candy girl, at 2:38 PM  

  • Candy,
    I give up. The only "hating" going on on this site are for comments like yours. You're starting to sound like one of those folks who finds a racists or a fascist under every rock. No one else seems to be picking up on these extreme hate/sexist rays that you are. Maybe they're simply not as smart as you.
    And mean? Unnecessarily MEAN? Are you five years old? More important, have you been confusing this site with some other site? This site has never been about nice. Obviously, whilst crossing the country, either your plane hit turbulence and you suffered a head wound, or pressure dropped in the cabin and you didn't fasten the oxygen bag properly... I can't think of any other reason that you start coming around here and a) taking this site as if it's supposed to be a serious venture and b) trying out some half-assed psychoanalysis and social criticism. I mean, really, you're going to knock me for being judgmental? Ha! A thousand times ha!
    I'm not going to hold this against you though, as your brain is no doubt all a wobble from being out of school for almost three months straight. I hope the semester starts up soon and you can get back to over-analyzing bad academic writing. Otherwise, I'm afraid we'll find you curled up outside of a sandwich shop and babbling about the subtle sexism in the take-out menu.

    By Blogger Ken Wheaton, at 4:03 PM  

  • Dang, Ken, that was pretty mean. But you hit it on the head with the cockblocking. Apparently, men in men-only groups form a conversational hierarchy, where one or two alphas monopolize the conversation. Women in women-only groups tend to share the conversation time more equally (they're more likely to gain status by being "nice" and listening than by hogging the conversation).

    When men and women are together, the men adopt the Alpha role, and the women become Omegas. What's funny is that in at least one of the studies, all the men except the Alphas stopped going to the men-only group but kept going to the mixed group. Why be an Omega among men, when you can be an Alpha among women?

    I knew that sociolinguistics class would come in handy some day.

    By Blogger pearatty, at 4:28 PM  

  • Pearatty,
    Man, yall don't even know from mean. One day I'm going to write a "mean" post at 100% mean capacity.

    By Blogger Ken Wheaton, at 4:38 PM  

  • Hmm... After rereading the entry, I am a bit confused. Where was Ken mean? Not to disagree with pearatty or candy girl, but i didn't find any mysoginy or villification in ken's entry. in a way though, this is precisely supporting the point ken was trying to make. we, the women, are going, "well, whatever did you mean by that statement? don't you think you're being too harsh?" there's that analysis-paralysis. things are much simpler. and not everything needs to be debated ad nauseam. not every feeling needs to be talked about. sometimes, when my boyfriend has a bad day, he just won't call, pick up the phone, or anything. he won't talk about it. that is how HE deals with it. i might want to discuss it, i might not. there are certain things that are off limits. but the important thing is NOT to over-analyse. this was an entry that had a degree of truth, but also a lot of caustic humor. not mean and spiteful humor, just slightly vitriolic. why some ppl sense that borders on hate, i'm not sure, unless it is touching upon a sensitive point within the ppl who find this entry harsh.

    By Blogger writersbloc gal, at 3:43 PM  

  • That was quite possibly the best blog entry/topic I have ever read! Fucking awesome... totally true... and interesting to hear it from a guy perspective!

    By Blogger Bella, at 11:47 AM  

  • writersbloc gal:

    First, caustic and vitriolic are both variants of mean. Second, I didn't (unlike Candy Girl) accuse Ken's post of being misogynistic or hateful, just innacurate, overbroad and bitter. I did think his response to Candy Girl was mean, but that's between them, I guess. Third, I am sensitive to this topic, becuase I did research work in this area, and it's important to correct inaccurate information when you see it. Finally, I don't think I was over-analyzing the post. It's pretty clear what Ken meant; I just responded to it.

    By Blogger pearatty, at 5:37 PM  

  • "And unless he's a 19-year-old English or Philosophy major (or a 30-year-old musician), a man just isn't interested in wallowing in his misery."

    HAHAHAHA that was HILARIOUS.

    By Anonymous JessieB, at 5:22 PM  

  • actually, i didn't find this post bitter or cynical or whatever. I found it helpful, for me, as a woman, to understand better how men work on the inside.

    Some of what I write may also be construed as bitter or cynical but it isn't, really...it springs from me being a disappointed idealist who still believes in love and hopes (perhaps beyond hope) to find it someday.

    thanks. :)

    By Blogger Spill The Beans, at 10:40 AM  

  • stumbled onto your blog today and am utterly hooked. far from bitter (or mean), i found this refreshingly on target, though i'd take issue with the generalization that it's a gender thing. but then, i'm big on the internal process and seem to have a knack for finding externally processing men...

    By Anonymous savannah, at 5:53 PM  

  • Best blog I've read in a while, I hate external processors, male or female. Don't go out for dinner if you're not hungry. And to do that at Starbucks, well that's just priceless.

    My first visit and I will be back too...RIGHT ON KEN!

    By Blogger Sandra, at 11:15 AM  

  • Nicely written, although I have to say that I do not do the "thinking out loud" stuff - I was trained out of it at a very young age. The couple of times I tried to pick it up again, seeing how it seemed to work so well for other women, turned into complete disasters. So, now I just comment on other people's blogs! (OK, I started my own again, too, but I know no one really cares to read it!) :)

    By Blogger lawyerchik, at 2:52 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home