Worried Mom

"karentpp" wrote in message
...
Paul, "BTW, no, didn't even bother to date in H.S. I was focused on
saving money
and getting grades for college. I wasn't the only one either."

You sound all ego to me. Chances are no girls wanted to date you.
'Didn't bother to date in HS' conveys you were somehow above the hormone
urges almost all boys suffer from at 16. I dated the smarter boys in my
class. All had decent grades and all loved making out. She never painted
all 16 Y.O. with the same brush. You may of studied a lot, and might be
book smart, but your intuition of what people are trying to tell you is
missing. And you're not nice, your attitude shows it. A tiny mistake and
you jump on it like a jackal. Were you so above it all Paul? Or did you
reject those who were rejecting you?


snicker Have to love the ASSuming. Jumped on her like a jackal? LMAO
you ain't seen nothing. And your reading comprehension leaves a lot to be
desired. A tiny mistake? Hardly. if she is painting all 16 y.o. with the
same brush, if you cannot understand the meaning of "I learned at an early
age nothing controls young men more than lust" then I suggest remedial
reading comprehension 101. Too bad you appear as shallow as the OP not to
understand that

Now I will make an assumption, YOU dated boys that were only thinking with
one head, and it wasn't the one on their shoulders.......sounds to me like
you made poor choices in life and are on the outside looking in.......to bad
to sad.

AND BTW, there was no rejection or rejecting, I saw no need to squander
money on girls like that at that age. I could make similar broad brush
statements about girls of the same age and what they weer after, but I saw
and knew the whole range.....from ones that would sleep with anything that
moved, to ones that were just as focused on studying and getting ahead in
the world. NOT all (and not almost all)16 y.o. boys are driven by lust,
didn't believe it then, don't believe it now.


Paul Fritz wrote:

"dorisP" wrote in message
...
Paul Fritz wrote:

"kim" wrote in message
...
But there isn't any greater pleasure than sex for a 16 year boy
but
more
of it. I dated as many as three boys at a time just because I was
pretty. I learned at an early age nothing controls young men more
than
lust. They cause their own problems.


I guess that is because you hung out with boys as shallow as
yourself


Give her a break will you? I didn't know anyone at that age who
didn't
like to party. You never made a fool of yourself over a girl Paul?

She obviously had not learned from "making a fool of herself" if she is
still painting all 16 Y.O with such a broad brush.

BTW, no, didn't even bother to date in H.S. I was focused on saving
money
and getting grades for college. I wasn't the only one either.

Paul Fritz wrote in message
...

'Kate wrote in message
...
On Fri, 7 Nov 2003 10:41:06 -0800, "Paul Fritz"




AND BTW, there was no rejection or rejecting, I saw no need to squander
money on girls like that at that age. I could make similar broad brush
statements about girls of the same age and what they weer after, but I
saw
and knew the whole range.....from ones that would sleep with anything
that
moved, to ones that were just as focused on studying and getting ahead
in
the world. NOT all (and not almost all)16 y.o. boys are driven by lust,
didn't believe it then, don't believe it now.

You forgot the girls who were sleeping with whomever, whenever to
overcome self-image issues. Or girls who are using sex to get things
just because they're "pretty" or developed sooner than other girls.
There were always easy girls - the ones who have 3 boyfriends - because
they put out. The question is, who had the advantage?

'Kate


And from observing my own H.S. reunions, the ones that had the three
boyfriends, and the guys that were 'driven' by lust, have ended up in dead
end jobs, (receptionists, mill worker etc.) the ones that put there
education as a priority are bank V.P.s, business owners, college
professors
etc.



I don't think it matters who had the advantage..... everyone loses out when
they are to consumed with sex to work on goals that are useful in life.

T

'Kate wrote in message ...
On Fri, 7 Nov 2003 10:41:06 -0800, "Paul Fritz"




AND BTW, there was no rejection or rejecting, I saw no need to squander
money on girls like that at that age. I could make similar broad brush
statements about girls of the same age and what they weer after, but I
saw
and knew the whole range.....from ones that would sleep with anything
that
moved, to ones that were just as focused on studying and getting ahead in
the world. NOT all (and not almost all)16 y.o. boys are driven by lust,
didn't believe it then, don't believe it now.

You forgot the girls who were sleeping with whomever, whenever to
overcome self-image issues. Or girls who are using sex to get things
just because they're "pretty" or developed sooner than other girls.
There were always easy girls - the ones who have 3 boyfriends - because
they put out. The question is, who had the advantage?

'Kate


And from observing my own H.S. reunions, the ones that had the three
boyfriends, and the guys that were 'driven' by lust, have ended up in dead
end jobs, (receptionists, mill worker etc.) the ones that put there
education as a priority are bank V.P.s, business owners, college professors
etc.

I don't know why some people in this newsgroup can't disagree without
turning nasty and defensive on one another.

I fell into the same boat because of my reaction to somebody's comment
on my priorities, placing more importance on sex than on my kids!!!
That hit a major chord with me for reasons that go beyond anything
that was discussed. I stayed in a marriage for over 15 years with a
man who had extremely LSD...or NSD. I didn't stick around because I
placed more importance on sex than my kids either!He was always like
that too...I married him at 24 expecting him to change or not having
an understanding of the long term implications of the situation.

I find there are a couple of people here who just love to start flame
wars. Come on! We're all supposedly here for the same reason...We're
all single parents trying to do our best...whether it be that we're
going through teenage angst or school issues or whatever.....

IMHO, Paul has some major issues there....HOLY ****....That guy'll go
out of his way to create opportunities to flame women!!!

That's why I choose to ignore him.....I won't react to him.... He's
undeserving of any woman's time or energy.

Personally, I hate flame wars...If I knew I was stepping into that, I
would have never approached this newsgroup in the first place...but
then, you sort of get to know the characters and it's sometimes a
little intriguing to check up on those threads that I've contributed
to.

Rhonda

I don't know why some people in this newsgroup can't disagree without
turning nasty and defensive on one another.

Okay I nominate this for the ironic post of the week. Rhonda-"You Killed Your
Husand"is lecturing us on how to behave when someone posts something you don't
like.

Joelle

Rhonda wrote in message
om...
I don't know why some people in this newsgroup can't disagree without
turning nasty and defensive on one another.

I fell into the same boat because of my reaction to somebody's comment
on my priorities, placing more importance on sex than on my kids!!!
That hit a major chord with me for reasons that go beyond anything
that was discussed. I stayed in a marriage for over 15 years with a
man who had extremely LSD...or NSD. I didn't stick around because I
placed more importance on sex than my kids either!He was always like
that too...I married him at 24 expecting him to change or not having
an understanding of the long term implications of the situation.

I find there are a couple of people here who just love to start flame
wars. Come on! We're all supposedly here for the same reason...We're
all single parents trying to do our best...whether it be that we're
going through teenage angst or school issues or whatever.....

IMHO, Paul has some major issues there....HOLY ****....That guy'll go
out of his way to create opportunities to flame women!!!

That's why I choose to ignore him.....I won't react to him.... He's
undeserving of any woman's time or energy.

Personally, I hate flame wars...If I knew I was stepping into that, I
would have never approached this newsgroup in the first place...but
then, you sort of get to know the characters and it's sometimes a
little intriguing to check up on those threads that I've contributed
to.

You are definitely doing the right thing by ignoring those you choice to.
Everyone does have the right to an opinion. Some just don't throw it out
there nicely.

T

(Rhonda) wrote in message . com...


IMHO, Paul has some major issues there....HOLY ****....That guy'll go
out of his way to create opportunities to flame women!!!

That's why I choose to ignore him.....I won't react to him.... He's
undeserving of any woman's time or energy.

Why is it that people on Usenet always make a public point of not
talking about people by talking about them?

lm

"Rhonda" wrote in message
om...
I don't know why some people in this newsgroup can't disagree without
turning nasty and defensive on one another.

I fell into the same boat because of my reaction to somebody's comment
on my priorities, placing more importance on sex than on my kids!!!

LMAO......time for you to look in the mirror!!!!!

That hit a major chord with me for reasons that go beyond anything
that was discussed. I stayed in a marriage for over 15 years with a
man who had extremely LSD...or NSD. I didn't stick around because I
placed more importance on sex than my kids either!He was always like
that too...I married him at 24 expecting him to change or not having
an understanding of the long term implications of the situation.

HOw typical of a shallow woman......wanting to 'change' a man to fit your
image of what a man should be. Seems to me YOU didn't understand the long
term implications...........and it seems you STILL have not learned from it



I find there are a couple of people here who just love to start flame
wars. Come on!

You for example

We're all supposedly here for the same reason...We're
all single parents trying to do our best...

Except you and a couple of posters trolling around

whether it be that we're
going through teenage angst or school issues or whatever.....

IMHO, Paul has some major issues there....HOLY ****....That guy'll go
out of his way to create opportunities to flame women!!!

snicker ROTFLMAO snicker
BWHAHAHAHHHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.....(just couldn't hold that in)



That's why I choose to ignore him.....I won't react to him.... He's
undeserving of any woman's time or energy.

Seems to me you are reacting now......hypocrite.


Personally, I hate flame wars..

Sure.....and the pope is a methodist.

.If I knew I was stepping into that, I
would have never approached this newsgroup in the first place...but
then, you sort of get to know the characters and it's sometimes a
little intriguing to check up on those threads that I've contributed
to.

You've cpntributed? could have fooled me.

IRONIC? I nominate her for hyopcrite for the year.

"Joelle" wrote in message
...
Rhonda

I don't know why some people in this newsgroup can't disagree without
turning nasty and defensive on one another.

Okay I nominate this for the ironic post of the week. Rhonda-"You Killed
Your
Husand"is lecturing us on how to behave when someone posts something you
don't
like.

Joelle

Not many at my particular H.S. but it would be interesting to see some
numbers on it in


'Kate wrote in message ...
On Fri, 7 Nov 2003 13:09:35 -0800, "Paul Fritz"


And from observing my own H.S. reunions, the ones that had the three
boyfriends, and the guys that were 'driven' by lust, have ended up in
dead
end jobs, (receptionists, mill worker etc.) the ones that put there
education as a priority are bank V.P.s, business owners, college
professors
etc.

I wonder how many of the boy users were from fatherless homes.

'Kate