 | | Re: Lavender Brick Society
|
|
(...) Johannes, I think you stated yourself very well on these points. The issue that underlies this is that these people want you to know they are gay - they don't want you to assume the are not because they are offended at being assumed to be gay (...) (20 years ago, 18-Sep-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Lavender Brick Society
|
|
(...) I always liked my mother's succinct summation of Reader's Digest: premasticated literature. But I must admit, the Groucho Marx Dilemma would be woise (Help, help, let me out of here! At least throw me a magazine). Locked in a bathroom for (...) (20 years ago, 18-Sep-04, to lugnet.fun.community, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Lavender Brick Society
|
|
(...) Oh well, no worries :-) Shocking thought it may be, I *like* Readers Digest. Anything with words on a page can't be all bad, right? It could have been worse. It could have been the same cornflake package for all eternity. At least with RD I (...) (20 years ago, 18-Sep-04, to lugnet.fun.community, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Lavender Brick Society
|
|
(...) Allow me to politely disagree with this view. I don't think they are seeking any sort of approval - they seem to just wish to avoid disapproval, which is not the same thing. Basically, they just want to post with people who are comfortable (...) (20 years ago, 18-Sep-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Lavender Brick Society
|
|
(...) I won't swear to it, but I think that puts you in the Pit of People Condemned to read Reader's Digest for All Eternity. If it didn't have any sugar in addition to being decaffienated, you'd simply be an atheist. -->Bruce<-- (20 years ago, 18-Sep-04, to lugnet.fun.community, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
