Fashionistas you have arrived 3-25-03 - 10-3-03

[SlaveNoMore]

Originally posted by leagleaze
I was wondering when someone would ask that. In this case, it is two women. Does it matter though?

I note you didn't ask if it was M-M. How come? Just assumed two men wouldn't move in together that quickly or no particular reason?

You used "she" when describing house seller A.

It makes a difference insofar as the "wait until marriage" argument can be removed from the discussion.

noy7yS

Originally posted by leagleaze What do you folks think? How soon is too soon, with or without kids?

Doomed.

I know a couple disturbingly similar to this. They got engaged about 4 mos after their first date and before the "I wuv you, Schmoopy" love-is-blind stage had passed. They married within a year of the first date and now hate each other. She hates his kids and is jealous of the time he spends with them and he hates how she treats the kids (badly, btw.) They are currently divorcing and the kids are in therapy.

At least a year without kids, with kids, much slower. After 2 months, how do you know they are not an axe-murderer(ess)? At least your couple won't be legally locked to each other when the relationship goes down the toilet, but selling your house is pretty drastic.

-TL

[barely_legal]

Originally posted by NotFromHere
Well they date each other for 8 weeks during the shooting - what I don't get is why they wait so long to air the show. And what I'd really like to see is the finale live - like Survivor. Make the girls wait to see who really wins and then show it live.

That's actually a great idea. It would be hilarious to make them both wait a few months before they found out who he chose. It would also be interesting to see if he changed his mind after having no contact with either of them for a few months. But then the editors of the show might be able to influence his decision by choosing the footage that went into the episodes.

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally posted by leagleaze
If I had kids, I would be very very hesitant about moving them in with someone else.

What do you folks think? How soon is too soon, with or without kids?

Well, to me, there are two kinds of moving in. There's moving in where everyone's mailing address is the same, there are no other homes, etc. And then there's moving in where "I keep my clothes and my furniture at my house, but I sleep, eat, watch tv, etc, at his house."

Depending on the relationship, it can be a only matter of weeks before it's perfectly ok to de facto move in together.

The scenario you describe is complicated by two factors: distance and kids.

Distance: I have some familiarity with long distance relationships, and in my experience, there's a certain point where both parties have to agree that the distance is going to go away or the relationship is not going to work. Vauge assurances that someday circumstances will bring us together don't cut it. I could see being in a situation where I would move to another town or insist that someone else move to my town in a very short time if we were going to continue the relationship. Money, not knowing any one else in town and other factors may make it practical that you move in with the other person, though I personally couldn't see doing that. I'd like to ease in from the dating, to the informal moving in to the formal moving in.

Kids: I have less familiarity with kids, though I believe that a more formal moving in is probably preferable to the informal wake up and see "Uncle" at the breakfast table four out of the seven mornings a week. The informal moving in doesn't work as well with kids around. That said, I also think that the space between meeting and moving in, formal or informal, should be at least six months, and the kids should be comfortable with the person in the house.

[NotFromHere]

Dane Acquitted in Goldfish Blender Case
A Danish art museum director was acquitted of animal cruelty charges Monday after a court ruled that a display featuring goldfish inside working blenders was not cruel.

The display at the Trapholt Art Museum in Kolding featured 10 blenders and invited visitors to blend the fish if they wanted to. Somebody did in early 2000 - and two goldfish were ground up.

goldfish in blender

Ruling, not cruel - just gross.

[spookyfish]

Microsoft is evil. People pretending to be Microsoft are evil, too.

I just received this warning through the e-mail about a worm that is infecting computers. It's supposedly being sent to people as an attachment from Microsoft.

spree: article about "worm"

http://rss.com.com/2100-1002_3-1007603.html

Everyone be careful about what you open.

sf

[leagleaze]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
You used "she" when describing house seller A.

It makes a difference insofar as the "wait until marriage" argument can be removed from the discussion.

noy7yS

True enough. Here you cannot make that argument. Most gay people I know who go through a committment ceremony already live together before they go through one. Often, they have been living together for a long time. In fact I cannot think of one gay couple who had the ceremony before they moved in. Of course, these days, I can't think of too many straight couples who got married before they moved in. Engaged maybe, but not married.

[str8outavannuys]

Originally posted by NotFromHere
Dane Acquitted in Goldfish Blender Case
A Danish art museum director was acquitted of animal cruelty charges Monday after a court ruled that a display featuring goldfish inside working blenders was not cruel.

The display at the Trapholt Art Museum in Kolding featured 10 blenders and invited visitors to blend the fish if they wanted to. Somebody did in early 2000 - and two goldfish were ground up.

goldfish in blender

Ruling, not cruel - just gross.

There's a whole bunch of contemporary art for which I have no use, but I actually think the artist did a good job on this one. That's thought-provoking stuff. Well done.

And by the way, animals are killed for art all the time, so don't even go there.

Onto a different topic, I saw X-Men and Matrix back to back on Saturday night, which worked out well because while all the other Matrix ticket holders were lined up out front for seats, the s/o and I got to hang out in front of the theater-doors and got in first, by virtue of our having just seen X-Men.

If you had to see one of the two, I'd pick Matrix. It's more of an event, I guess. That said, I don't think that many thinking adults are going to consider it deep or saying anything important about being, consciousness, choice, etc. But the three big set-pieces (martial arts, weapons, and the car/motorcycle scene) are really really extraordinarily well done and worth the price of admission.

Speaking of which, the Grove in LA has upped their prices to $11.50 for Fri/Sat nights, and $10.50 other times. It had Matrix on four screens, every show sold out. Damnnn.

As for X-Men, I thought it was damn good. Much better than I'd expected. Again, nothing really profound about prejudice and difference (I could feel it coming, and yet I cringed at the heavy-handedness of the line "Have you tried, you know, not being a mutant?"). But like everyone else here, I think Nightcrawler rocks, the kiddies did great, and Storm got to be appropriately kick-ass, which was missing from the first. A sneak preview of Colossaus even.

So here's my question. The books I remember from my youth had Rogue/Kitty (and Colossaus) as full-fledged members of the X-men, and no mention of Iceman or Pyro. So are the movies going a different path from the comics? Or is this just an earlier period of X-men history that I don't know about?

Trailers that got the biggest response: Bad Boys II (second last trailer for Matrix, lots of applause), and Freddy vs. Jason (last trailer, TONS of applause). Word is that Freddy/Jason is awful, however. People love the idea though.

[leagleaze]

I think they are blending different xmen periods/storylines.

For example you have the whole Nightcrawler/Mystique is she or isn't she his mom thing. Which enabled you to read the scene where he asks her why she doesn't pretend to be "normal" and they put on that lovey sort of music and he gets a lovesick look. Is that an incestuous thing, he doesn't know she is possibly his mom at that point, since he just met her? Or is she not supposed to be his mom in the series?

Iceman et al I remember from some of the earlier tv shows, and he was a full fledgedmember there. Rogue was the foster daughter of Mystique and her partner...Destiny is it? So she didn't start out as an x-man at all. She started out on the other side. She was thrown out of her house though, when the mutant stuff started to show itself.

I never was a huge reader of the comics though, most of what I know just comes from reading some of the history of the series, which is confused by all the different comics there are, which have sometimes contradictory things going on.

It makes it hard to be sure what the movie is taking as "true" and what it is throwing out.

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally posted by str8outavannuys

So here's my question. The books I remember from my youth had Rogue/Kitty (and Colossaus) as full-fledged members of the X-men, and no mention of Iceman or Pyro. So are the movies going a different path from the comics? Or is this just an earlier period of X-men history that I don't know about?

The movie is reconstruction of the story using some stuff from the books some stuff out of the air.

Warning: I am a huge geek.

First five X-men were Jean Grey, Cyclops, the Beast, Iceman and Angel. They ran around for a few dozen books, were cancelled, and relaunched and joined by Wolverine, Storm, Collosus, Nightcrawler, Banshee and Sunfire. Kitty Pride joined up another couple dozen issues later and she and Collosus had a thing that's been going on for decades (though think that Collosus has been killed off recently).

Rogue is a totally different person than Kitty Pride. Kitty can walk through walls, and she's fairly good at fixing computers. Rogue is the adopted daughter of Mystique (and therefore Nightcrawler's adopted sister), and she has additional powers in the book. She has the power absorption thing, and she's invunerable and can fly. She's always been an adult in the comics, whereas Kitty has grown up over the years.

My guess is the next movie will focus on the Dark Phoenix saga, without the confusing space stuff, and certainly no suicides on the moon.

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally posted by leagleaze
I think they are blending different xmen periods/storylines.

For example you have the whole Nightcrawler/Mystique is she or isn't she his mom thing. Which enabled you to read the scene where he asks her why she doesn't pretend to be "normal" and they put on that lovey sort of music and he gets a lovesick look. Is that an incestuous thing, he doesn't know she is possibly his mom at that point, since he just met her? Or is she not supposed to be his mom in the series?

Iceman et al I remember from some of the earlier tv shows, and he was a full fledgedmember there. Rogue was the foster daughter of Mystique and her partner...Destiny is it? So she didn't start out as an x-man at all. She started out on the other side. She was thrown out of her house though, when the mutant stuff started to show itself.

I never was a huge reader of the comics though, most of what I know just comes from reading some of the history of the series, which is confused by all the different comics there are, which have sometimes contradictory things going on.

It makes it hard to be sure what the movie is taking as "true" and what it is throwing out.

The rec.arts.comics.marvel.xbooks faq (http://users.rcn.com/kateshort/faqs/racmxFAQ/faq1.html) is fairly comprehensive for backstory on the comics, including cancelled titles like X-Factor, X-Force, X-cetera.

Marvel has been selling trade paperbacks of the older stories in the Essentials series. You can get twenty or so comics in one trade paperback if you're itching to find out why the hell Angel hates Wolverine or why the Beast is sometimes furry and sometimes normal looking.

[leagleaze]

Wow. And I thought I was a geek.

If I had kids, I would be very very hesitant about moving them in with someone else.

As someone who has had step-parents/live-ins in the double digits, I would have to agree with the wait six months to a year philosophy - both Mom and Dad seem to be on the hunt for that elusive perfect spouse. The live-in thing can be very difficult to unwind if assets are intertwined. Marriage raises all sorts of issues when you have kids/assets - case in point - Mom met/married stepfather number two within a six month period only to discover that he had been cheating on his income taxes for numerous years and she has lots of assets - they were married in Jan and divorced by April 15th.

The kid thing is also hard because you don't want to foist someone on your kids if they are not going to be around. Stepmother #9 actually pranced around the wedding chanting "this will be (insert Dad's name here)'s last wedding," (my uncle thought to should "someone get that on tape, we may need it for the (murder/wrongful death) trial," inference being that that is the only way to guarantee such a thing, which kind of insured that we did not have to see her at family gatherings for an entire year.) She has unfortunately recovered and is now urging the kids to refer to her as "Grandma" which I am discouraging, although I do wish that Ritznephew had not repeated that "temporary/revolving door Grandma" comment on Mother's Day. Who knows, it may guarantee that we don't have to see her for yet another year.

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally posted by leagleaze
Wow. And I thought I was a geek.

I know. I scare myself on a fairly regular basis with this crap.

[SlaveNoMore]

Replaced_Texan
The movie is reconstruction of the story using some stuff from the books some stuff out of the air.

Warning: I am a huge geek.

First five X-men were Jean Grey, Cyclops, the Beast, Iceman and Angel. They ran around for a few dozen books, were cancelled, and relaunched and joined by Wolverine, Storm, Collosus, Nightcrawler, Banshee and Sunfire.

Wasn't Beast in the Defenders by then? And you forgot the "not long for this Earth" Thunderbird. I forget when Havok and Polaris show up.

Kitty Pride joined up another couple dozen issues later and she and Collosus had a thing that's been going on for decades (though think that Collosus has been killed off recently).

She shows up in issue 129, which incidentally, is begins to frame the Dark Phoenix storyline

Rogue is a totally different person than Kitty Pride.... Rogue is the adopted daughter of Mystique (and therefore Nightcrawler's adopted sister), and she has additional powers in the book. She has the power absorption thing, and she's invunerable and can fly.

As she permanently stole them from Ms. Marvel - later, Binary.

My guess is the next movie will focus on the Dark Phoenix saga, without the confusing space stuff, and certainly no suicides on the moon.

Or the Hellfire Club? and the Shi'ar? Or the Starjammers? Or the X-factor "coccoon" nonsense?

not7y(I cannot remember what I ate yesterday, yet I remember comic books from 1981)S