From: Olga Bourlin (fauxever@sprynet.com)
Date: Tue Jun 12 2001 - 22:42:25 MDT
> > Mike Lorrey wrote:
> > >A lifelong freind has kept his wife at bay
> > in the baby department with this tactic for 7+ years now. They have two
dogs, and
> > whenever she slacks off in the dog care department, he's saying,"How do
you expect
> > > to be responsible for kids if you don't want to take care of dogs?"
This has had
> > > the added benefit of making her become very good with dogs.
Olga Bourlin wrote:
> > This is facetious, yes? I mean, these days - what with the recent
advent of
> > Doggie boutiques (gourmet dog treats and gifts of distinction for
pampered
> > pooches), one never knows ...
Mike Lorrey wrote:
> Actually, it's not. I know it sounds entirely manipulative, etc... i.e.
the sort
> of BS girls do to guys all the time as a matter of course. However if two
people
> go into a marriage with the understanding that one person doesn't want
kids, I
> don't think that such tactics are any less manipulative than the tactics
that
> the one that wants kids typically goes through to have an 'accidental'
> pregnancy. What's good for the goose.....
In these days of sperm banks (they're even listed in the Yellow Pages) no
woman -- ever -- has to resort to these "tactics" (and shame on women for
using such tactics in the past). But comparing the experience of having
children to owning dogs ... what kind of a woman would fall for this?
Ooooooh, my, but you're cynical (or else you've been hanging around very
thick - in the English sense - women, sheeesh).
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 08:08:06 MST