AFriendlyFace

Thanks for the pictorial proof Myr! It looked like a fun, exciting, and lively time was had by all! I regret not being present for the goat ritual, not to mention the pre-sacrifice debauchery. *sigh* perhaps next time. Glad you all had fun! -Kevin

Cool pic! Reminds me of the time I was in bed with four of my friends and remarked "Who knew you could get five queens into one queen size bed?"

Barenaked Ladies - "Sell, Sell, Sell"

Back in high school I remember going out with friends - think it may have been after Junior Prom not that I think about it - anyway me and another good friend were both really drunk, and we were at this waffle house (we hadn't driven ), and so we decided to go to the restroom. Anyway I opened the door and I said, "Oh no, there's only one toilet and no urinals." "no problem," he responded as he proceeded to pee in the sink while I used the toilet. So yeah, I've seen it happen in real life, lol.

Aaron does sound prone to drama... Remember though, there's three sides to this: Aaron's side Jeremy's side and the truth Good luck and take care -Kevin

Hmmm, I'm not sure the best way to respond to this. I will say that that's why I included the following qualifying conditions in my post: In other words I'm more or less not going to object at all (not that it's really any of my business in the first place). If the couple is: -"Married" or in a relationship that's more or less comparable to marriage in terms of seriousness and durability. -Has most definitely been completely monogamous for a long time (not all married people are/have been) -Not going to cheat at all -Have both been tested Under those circumstances would I personally have unprotected sex? Possibly/probably, but I would have to really trust the guy, which presumably I would if all the above criteria were met. On the other hand condomless sex isn't something I particularly yearn to have anyway. The problem is though: Exactly. I'm sure the majority of people in a very serious, committed relationship do trust the other person completely or almost completely, but look what does happen sometimes. It's a tough situation, but trusting someone in this particular way is not something I intend to do quickly or easily. Also, just for clarification at this point, just in case someone might read the above post and be unaware of the facts: Tops can and do contract HIV. The risk is higher for the bottom, but it is also very real and present for the top as well. Take care all, Kevin

Congrats on your 3,000th post, Tim!! Also for anyone who wants to read this particular, memorable post it's right here. We appreciate the time and dedication you put into making GA a special and fun place to be! It's been a pleasure! Thanks Tim -Kevin

Well I know I ultimately went with 'no' on this, and I can definitely respect where others are coming from, but I think I'm of a more moderate view than many of the sentiments recently expressed. First of all, unless it's some sort of weird situation where your committed partner was cheating on you and you didn't know, or maybe a person knowingly trying to infect others I really don't think it's right to blame the other person. Maybe they didn't know about their status? Maybe you had safe sex but the condom did break or something. That's scary of course and it's understandable that you're going to be pretty upset, but it's really not that person's fault. When you make the decision to have sex with someone the best you can hope for is having safe sex with someone who honestly disclosures their status to the best of their knowledge. If something freaky happens and goes wrong, I don't think it's right to blame that person. Similarly, while I'm very VERY opposed to people having unsafe sex, under any circumstances but especially with someone whom they're not very serious with, have been with for awhile, and have been tested with, but IF you make the decision to have unsafe sex then I think you're kinda throwing away your right to blame someone else if you contract anything. Of course we all make mistakes, and it sucks if the one time you make that mistake you have to pay for the consequences, but at least half the burden IS on you at that point. What I'm basically saying is that failing extreme situations like rape, malicious intent from your partner, or horrible betrayal, I think people are accountable for their decisions, and while I hope that if they do make mistakes or errors in judgment, that it still works out for them anyway, but if it doesn't I don't think they can go around blaming other people for it. Also, yes, HIV and AIDs suck and the treatment and ultimate prognosis is certainly no cakewalk, but for most people who take care of themselves and stick to their meds they can have YEARS of manageable time left. I don't say this at all to imply that it isn't a horrible, debilitating disease, or to mislead people into thinking that they shouldn't be careful because they can still survive for awhile with it, but I am saying there's no point in completely giving up on life if it happens. There are all sorts of horrible, debilitating diseases out there, there are all sorts of meds with terrible side effects, but the people on them are coping, even having happy moments. If I contracted HIV I'd like to think I wouldn't just lay down and wait to die (or jump off of something to speed it along), I'd like to think that after grieving for awhile I'd get to the point where I could accept my situation, get on a proper medical, diet, and exercise regimen, and go on with my life as well as possible, even despite the painful, unpleasant side effects. I'd like to think that I could still have many happy times with my friends and family, that I could still make a positive difference in the world, and that I could maybe even set a good example for other people dealing with the same situation. Finally, while I don't mean to marginalize the risks at all safer sex can make a lot of difference. As I said, I would be unlikely to get involved with someone with HIV (which in many ways I feel very guilty about), but if under some special circumstances it happened there are still things you can do. If you're really worried about (and I would be personally), maybe you could use TWO condoms, not do any high risk behaviours, and avoid internal ejaculation, it might not remove all the risk, but if it were someone you really loved it might bring the risk level down to a manageable state worth considering. -Kevin

Blue October - "Calling You"

Cancer-free lungs? Sorry that was harsh, but I'm proud of you with all the progress you've made quitting and I don't want you to slide back into it -Kevin

How...romantic (?) Seriously, that's great Frosty! I'm really happy for you I hope you guys always stay together and find a way to work through your problems Best of luck that you never have to deal with a break up! -Kevin Yeah...I guess you're right

Well I can certainly understand and respect that and I think it's very admirable! I also agree that it's probably the only way it's going to get better. However, personally speaking there IS a limit to how much I'm willing to do and how much I'm willing to sacrifice, and that doesn't include living somewhere I'll be unhappy or won't be treated fairly. Worse, I couldn't imagine being comfortable raising kids (which is a goal for me) in such an environment. I agree that someone should do something about it, but I'm going to be selfish and defer that to someone else. For me living in a gay friendly city with a large gay community will probably remain a priority for the foreseeable future.

Awww Thanks, Graeme!

Good topic, Old Bob! I think that's a pretty good definition. I was going to say that I agreed with you guys about non-fiction being complete different, and I do agree that's very different. I certainly get much different things out of each. Personally I like to read fiction here online, and read non-fiction books related to sexuality, psychology, gender studies, sociology, and other related disciplines. However, I think in many ways those definitions would work for most of those even. Let's say we're talking about sexism which is something I often study. 1) to discover the antagonism in the text to me that translates into "What's the conflict or problem?" Answer: the subjugation of women and perpetuation of gender roles. 2) to solve them in the course of reading and to me that translates into "What can we do about? What are possible alternatives? What other options have existed throughout history?" Answer: we can try to empower people to behave and think as they really feel and desire instead of being bound by society's 'rules'. 3) to follow up the linearity of the text. to me this is the most straightforward and speaks of simply enjoying the way the text is constructed and getting pleasure to reading it (to me this would be the most basic part of your question 'what pleasure in reading?'). So Answer: I'm going to read the essay and take pleasure in the way the author has constructed it in a flowing, logical, linear sequence. (An illogical, poorly ordered text is certainly less enjoyable to read!) So to me those definitions would work for much of non-fiction. Let's look at it with the WWII book: 1) What's the problem or conflict? Answer: Well certainly there were tons with WWII! The holocaust maybe, or basically the bid for world domination and tyranny. 2) What can be done about it? One possible answer: What is the Allied response to this? 3) Enjoy the linearity Answer: Enjoy the information the author presents and the way it is presented. It would be slightly harder to apply this paradigm to something that was purely informational but didn't seem to reflect a struggle. However, there are really very few things like that when you get right down to it. Even if you're just studying something like the ways of the indigenous Eskimos most of their behaviour (solution) is based on some response to the environment or their general situation (problem). Obviously the linearity aspect will always come in with enjoying good literature. So I think those definitions do work for most any topic, nonfiction or fiction. Though I most certainly agree that there are huge differences between the two, that I read them for very different reasons, and that I get very different things out of them. Just my thoughts, Kevin

"4 minutes" - Madonna Featuring J.T.

Good news, Tim! Click the link and read more!

Oh Tim, I'm so sorry You definitely should consult a therapist. Try to take it easy and relax Let me know if you need anything, Kevin

Thanks! I'll give it a shot, but to be honest it's not looking good since I've been up all night as it is

Thanks Drew Awwww thanks! I'd be honoured to have a look.

Woo HOO! Thanks for the update, Robert! It sounds like you guys are having an awesome time! I wish I could be there But I'm glad you're all having fun at least! Pst, pst, ask Myr who he pronounces his name Take care and have fun Kevin

Tim A good place to start, even if you're not quite ready to open up completely to other people about your inner feelings, is just to open up to yourself about them. Maybe write them in a journal or something in a very concrete, vocalized way, or just play them back in your head. Maybe you already do these things, but I find it helpful Take care and good luck Kevin

Miley Cyrus - "See you again"

Happy Birthday, Snowy!!! Have a terrific day and a fantastic day -Kevin

Good observations you guys! LOL, and Tim I don't think Aaron and the crew are ready for any major cliffys just yet. On the other hand I like Steph's idea of a fashion cliffhanger. Ronnie: "Which do you want, Aaron, the platinum blond highlights or the dark blond highlights?" Aaron doing Cavemanese: "uhh, oghh, umm" By the way, before I forgot the name of chapter four is: The Eyes Have It

Well you certainly did and that's a rare and powerful talent! This is definitely a poem I intend to read again. Which is saying something, because 85-90% of the literature, movies, television, etc. that I experience - even if I really really like it - I don't have any desire to experience again. I'm the sort of person who likes a surprise and savours something while experiencing it. So I read things very slowly and carefully, I stop and ponder before I continue, and I'll re-read within the same sitting. Similarly, I've often paused movies and DVDS and rewound them to watch a scene over again before I go on, or simply stopped them for awhile to reflect on things. Once I'm done though, once I've watched it, or read it, and had my contemplation and my discussion, I'm usually done. As I said, I like a surprise, so even if it's completely awesome I usually don't bother to experience it again unless I've somehow managed to forget most of it. I will continue to talk about it, and try to remember what I was feeling when I first experienced, and what I was originally thinking, but I yeah, seldom 'do it again'. This poem though is in the minority of literature (or any art, except possibly visual/painting art - although even there I think the deepest experience is often in the first viewing/pondering/feeling) that I definitely do intend to experience again. This is probably because not only is the message of the piece powerful and moving, BUT most importantly the meter and rhythm make it something more akin to music, something which can delight the mind the tongue and ears over and over. However, the thing that definitely brings it all together and nails it is that last couplet. I suspect as long as I continue to read the piece with care that last couplet will continue to affect me. On a side note, I have to say that this 're-readability' if you will, is probably the number one thing I get out of poetry that I don't get out of most literature. A good poem is a joy to be read from a linguistical and auditory point of view, and this presentation of the emotion often manages to make it powerfully enduring. I won't say I prefer poetry to standard literature, indeed if for some bizarre and twisted reason I had to 'choose', I'd almost certainly go with standard literature, but I will say that they're fundamentally different IMO and the pleasures to be gained from each are very different. The best literature is both beautiful and intellectually and emotionally moving; the best poetry is similarly both beautiful and intellectually and emotionally moving. However, 'decent' or 'acceptable' literature doesn't necessarily have to be beautiful, and 'decent' or 'acceptable' poetry doesn't necessarily have to be intellectually and emotionally moving. In any case, however, "Twirling, Swirling" is both -Kevin