the reason hope in a jar is so great, other than the rave reviews and the amazingly reasonable price for a high end product, is other than the antioxidants, etc that are great for your skin but it's mainly the lactic acid and the other aha's that REALLY help out our skin. one of our main skin issues is the build up of dead skin, which we develop at an amazing rate, daily...... it causes acne, lines, our sun spots and damage are sitting on the surface as well as underneath, depending. also dullness, uneven pigmentation and texture. it's HUGE, but especially as we get older, it slows down our new skin renewal rate and even worse, our own natural sloughing of the dead skin. that is why I get dryness and some peeling and such on my own skin!
so with the lactic acid (The best aha) and the other ahas, it is MAKING the skin then renew and make ready to shed that dead skin. which it can do on it's own, but i think that everyone needs to exfoliate as well, to help it along cause it's still too slow. and as i mentioned oprah uses this cream and i NEVER see A DROP of dead, peeling, dry skin on her face! granted she has the best of everything and surely gets great facials and all to take care of that.
some of that stuff is hype and bs though, that's what i hated when i was working for cosmetic companies. lying about stuff that doesn't work. sure some does, but the cellulite stuff no, it can create a SMOOTHER appearance, because it's caffeine which is a diuretic and makes the area lose water so it's doesn't look so bumpy. get this, i was working for christian dior, lancome, guinot, etc in bev hills and there is a famous famous dior ad for their cellulite cream that was in vogue and all the huge magazines for years back in the 90's, maybe even now and we had one in our store. it was a pic of a "woman's" ass and long, beautiful, thin, perfect thighs. just that, no face, no body and she had some fabric, i think it was orange? draped around her vagina area and of course cosmetic co.s use false advertising all the time which i wonder how they can, i know it's a fine line...for example EVERY mascara ad, every one i've ever seen....the model/actress ALWAYS has false eyelashes on in the ad or on tv. every time. and yet they can pretend it's just the mascara. how do they get away w/that?
sooo.....that pic, that ad, he legs/butt were incredible and i used to always look at it and go "man that cream must really work!" then at one point, the dior reps came in to give us product classes and tons of gratis, man i LOVED the gratis! nothing better than free makeup/skin care. so dior was out and one of the reps told us that "woman" in the cellulite ad was a 14 yr old girl!!! figures huh? once again a lie to make us feel not beautiful or perfect enough.
ok yeah so the lactic acid is great but you always have to make sure it's a high enough percentage to be effective, cause most aren't. but even w/that i recommend exfoliation, at least twice a week, depending on skin type, more for oily skin. and i DON'T like the ones that are too creamy or the exfoliation delivery is too tiny, it's not enough. and the creamy thing is a cheat, leaving on a residue so your skin feels all soft, making you think it's from getting the dead off, when really it's just the leftover emollient on your skin surface. and i like one w/a stronger grain BUT you have to be careful, some are apricot shell kernels and such which are TOO hard and too sharp and are cutting and damaging your skin, almost microscopically, but still damaging and yes, visible to the eye, upon close examination
. i really like the mary kay microderm system. i can see the results RIGHT after using it. so much dead skin is cleared off that i can then sit at my magnifying mirror and all these pores are now free and cleared up, well, meaning all the dead skin blocking the surface of them is gone. or a good amount of it. and THEN i can "empty" my pores, do extraction very easily, wheareas i couldn't before, with too much blockage with the dead skin.
ALL my life, since i was a kid, i ALWAYS gave myself facials. i would steam it over the stove, exfoliate, masque, etc and i swear that's when my skin was pretty much always amazing. then i stopped for the most part some years ago. it's rare that i ever use a masque anymore. once in awhile i will use a moisturizing masque, when i'm dry and flaky and dull looking, but i stopped the thing that i had done my whole life! and duh! it finallly hit me! why did i stop? my skin was much better when i was. i'm now getting back into that. funny considering i've spent years giving people facials. even my son! he would bitch and moan when i'd insist, cause he'd get blackheads, not a lot, and congested pores, a few pimples....so i wanted to clean that stuff out for him. he HATED the extraction part but i would do the whole kit and kaboodle too. the steaming, the cleansing, masquing, exfoliation, so on, and then the massage, the best part, which is soooooo good for your skin, circulation, removing toxins, keeping it firm, moist, pliable, youthful. but feels amazing too. so he loved the massage so much and i do back of neck, top of shoulders, scalp, occipital bone.
any skin, makeup or hair questions....if anyone out there is reading this, please feel free to ask me!
thanks
Apr 29, 2008
Miley Cyrus' "NAKED pictures" in Vanity Fair........
well, as everyone knows, miley cyrus posed for pictures for vanity fair, with and without her father. now everyone is in a HUGE uproar saying that they are too provocative, too sexy, too "exposed", too old for her, that now she is a bad influence, that she is going the way of all the teenage celeb sluts. and on and on and on. as usual. what a puritan society we live in!! and while i'm NOT advocating it and saying it's the best thing ever, ONLY because of her very young fans, i'm also not a prude, freaking out over a 15 year old girl ENTIRELY covered by a sheet! all you can see in the photo's is her upper back!! not a hint of a breast! not any stomach, not any ass, not anything but back!! have we NOT seen her back in perhaps a tank top or something else?? and no, i don't watch the girl or her show, but i've seen her around. and i know i've seen her a FEW times in skin skin tight pants. doesn't that offend everyone as well? i would think a camel toe would be waaaay more offensive than shoulder blades!!
while i agree that i'm sick and tired of EVERY star and young star especially, and basically everyone in magazines, TV, films, the music industry, all media and so on, (even young girls walking around in the world in general. older girls and women too,) ALL having to end up being about sex.......and i hate to say it, but that is the world we live in and we ALL well know....... sex sells!!! and sells VERY well!! our media is FULL of sex. and we all buy it and view it and basically condone it, so we can't pick and choose when it's convenient to us. i'm also for freedom of speech, the press and people doing what they want, though i don't always agree with the choices by a long shot. i'm wondering why people are so upset about it or think that it's so wrong?
is it because of what everyone was saying on the news and the morning shows? or because you are truly offended?
it IS a sexy shot, but it is also an art shot, annie liebowitz does that stuff all the time and has been for years, hello naked, pregnant demi moore? which also had people in an uproar. OH MY GOD, a naked, pregnant woman!! how horrifying!! and our corneas weren't burnt off? small wonder.
in miley's pics you can't see ANYTHING. yes, it's meant to allude to naked under a sheet or sexiness, but it's by far the tamest "sexy" shot i've seen of ANY teenage star! she is also a developing, hormonal teenager who is NOT a little girl anymore. and she didn't regret it at all (nor did her parents or handlers) until all the backlash and now she's groveling out apologies left and right. and so is annie liebowitz. not to mention, as you know, her parents, and adult handlers were all at the shoot and saw all the proofs and approved them. little girls grow up and WANT to be a little sexy. NOTHING was shown. but i also am NOT happy w/everything having to be about sex. but what about the pics of britney on the cover of rolling stone when she was what? 16? and lindsey too, in all her various stages of undress. and i DO think that miley is very grounded and has full family support and complete involvement with her life and career, so unlike other child stars and won't end up like those other trainwrecks that only care about marketing their kids.
so i'm torn on where i stand. i know everyone is all pissed off because of her young children fans, BUT that is why it's not in tiger beat or whatever. what little kids read vanity fair? and once again, as always it is up to the PARENTS to censor what their kids see, watch and are exposed to.
what i find most disturbing of all is the violence that is ALL over the TV, video games, movies, commercials, magazines, everywhere and everyone seems to be soooo cool w/all of that. we see heads blown off (in iraq alone! supreme violence sanctioned by OUR country) and blood and gore and unspeakable things constantly, but hey, who cares about that? it's all fine. but god forbid anyone ever knows about bodies or sex!!
every kid i've ever seen is allowed to play violent video games and fake kill each other and watch violent cartoons and movies but the SECOND there is sex or a hint of sex shown they are all forbidden. why is that?? and THAT is why the kids today are sucking dicks in bathrooms in junior highs and everything else. #1 because of the parents who let them see everything and/or #2 because it is sooo taboo that of course they are gonna run out and mess around with anything that's kept from them. only a few fools run out and actually kill each other because it's daily fare for them, they are used to it. it's not kept from them.
but i don't EVER hear or see parents in an uproar over ANYTHING violent and the second someone's shoulders are shown, it's a disgrace. look at the janet jackson/superbowl debacle. those kids were all allowed to watch men ram and slam each other and be ultra aggressive and yet to see ONE boob, holy mother of god!! didn't they see boobs when they were breastfed? or even when their mother was naked at some point in the home? and yet people were protesting and saying how that one breast scarred and ruined their children for life! a breast? really? a breast is a god given thing. the human body is beautiful and natural and meant to be appreciated. whereas violence is NOT. violence was created by man, but that all seems to be cool. seems pretty backwards to me. how twisted everything has become.......
while i agree that i'm sick and tired of EVERY star and young star especially, and basically everyone in magazines, TV, films, the music industry, all media and so on, (even young girls walking around in the world in general. older girls and women too,) ALL having to end up being about sex.......and i hate to say it, but that is the world we live in and we ALL well know....... sex sells!!! and sells VERY well!! our media is FULL of sex. and we all buy it and view it and basically condone it, so we can't pick and choose when it's convenient to us. i'm also for freedom of speech, the press and people doing what they want, though i don't always agree with the choices by a long shot. i'm wondering why people are so upset about it or think that it's so wrong?
is it because of what everyone was saying on the news and the morning shows? or because you are truly offended?
it IS a sexy shot, but it is also an art shot, annie liebowitz does that stuff all the time and has been for years, hello naked, pregnant demi moore? which also had people in an uproar. OH MY GOD, a naked, pregnant woman!! how horrifying!! and our corneas weren't burnt off? small wonder.
in miley's pics you can't see ANYTHING. yes, it's meant to allude to naked under a sheet or sexiness, but it's by far the tamest "sexy" shot i've seen of ANY teenage star! she is also a developing, hormonal teenager who is NOT a little girl anymore. and she didn't regret it at all (nor did her parents or handlers) until all the backlash and now she's groveling out apologies left and right. and so is annie liebowitz. not to mention, as you know, her parents, and adult handlers were all at the shoot and saw all the proofs and approved them. little girls grow up and WANT to be a little sexy. NOTHING was shown. but i also am NOT happy w/everything having to be about sex. but what about the pics of britney on the cover of rolling stone when she was what? 16? and lindsey too, in all her various stages of undress. and i DO think that miley is very grounded and has full family support and complete involvement with her life and career, so unlike other child stars and won't end up like those other trainwrecks that only care about marketing their kids.
so i'm torn on where i stand. i know everyone is all pissed off because of her young children fans, BUT that is why it's not in tiger beat or whatever. what little kids read vanity fair? and once again, as always it is up to the PARENTS to censor what their kids see, watch and are exposed to.
what i find most disturbing of all is the violence that is ALL over the TV, video games, movies, commercials, magazines, everywhere and everyone seems to be soooo cool w/all of that. we see heads blown off (in iraq alone! supreme violence sanctioned by OUR country) and blood and gore and unspeakable things constantly, but hey, who cares about that? it's all fine. but god forbid anyone ever knows about bodies or sex!!
every kid i've ever seen is allowed to play violent video games and fake kill each other and watch violent cartoons and movies but the SECOND there is sex or a hint of sex shown they are all forbidden. why is that?? and THAT is why the kids today are sucking dicks in bathrooms in junior highs and everything else. #1 because of the parents who let them see everything and/or #2 because it is sooo taboo that of course they are gonna run out and mess around with anything that's kept from them. only a few fools run out and actually kill each other because it's daily fare for them, they are used to it. it's not kept from them.
but i don't EVER hear or see parents in an uproar over ANYTHING violent and the second someone's shoulders are shown, it's a disgrace. look at the janet jackson/superbowl debacle. those kids were all allowed to watch men ram and slam each other and be ultra aggressive and yet to see ONE boob, holy mother of god!! didn't they see boobs when they were breastfed? or even when their mother was naked at some point in the home? and yet people were protesting and saying how that one breast scarred and ruined their children for life! a breast? really? a breast is a god given thing. the human body is beautiful and natural and meant to be appreciated. whereas violence is NOT. violence was created by man, but that all seems to be cool. seems pretty backwards to me. how twisted everything has become.......
Mar 17, 2008
NEED Makeup tips? Skin care, hair tips????
IF you do, please ask me!! I am the expert!!!, no ego intended, i just am. i have spent my WHOLE life learning and working on all of those things. so please feel free to ask me!!!
Mar 2, 2008
Tilda Swinton at the Oscars.....
ok, i respect and admire tilda swinton, think she is a great actress, BUT......oh wait, first let me state that i DO like when people wear different things to the oscars, don't try to follow some "fashion clone" rule or something. wee NEEDED bjork to wear the swan deal! who wants to see everyone always so boring, perfect and predictable? now having said that, there is interesting and unusual and then there is just plain UGLY!! or even fugly! WHY could she not be bothered to at LEAST put on some mascara!????? that's all i'm asking! OR even a drop of lipstick? something! anything. seeing her w/NO makeup at all. w/lips the color of her face, her lashes and brows invisible, blond, was bad enough. looked like she had just recovered from the plague. and THEN, oh yes, it gets worse!!! that dress, oh my god! was like a hideous, black, silk potatao sack that she then cut one arm off of! i'm sorry, as i said, i like her, but did she NOT have a mirror? or anyone that saw her? she woulda looked better had she wore a wet suit! anything. come on tilda, no need to follow the trends, but also no need to set out to make yourself look as hideous as possible. but kudos, you couldn't have done a better job. IF i see you out in public, i will hold you down and force some lip gloss or blush on you, so watch out!
Feb 25, 2008
SOME of my thoughts on dating, internet dating and otherwise......
(first was a response to an email i received from a guy)
i'm NOT looking for someone perfect, i'm not perfect, no one is and it would be boring if anyone was. nor am i looking period, for men (or dates) but then again, if someone great came along, i wouldn't turn them away. but i've had it w/men for the most part. and you are right, almost everyone and everything is about looks. which totally sucks but it's a fact i've mostly accepted, as lame as i may think it is. trust me, i DON'T find it flattering when everyone under the sun is trying to screw me or whatever and it's ALL based on looks. they don't give a * who i am, it's about a pretty face or a trophy or some equally lame bull * . or they "want" you, until they get you, that is. or get what they wanted. OR tried to get what they were after and got fed up and split when you wouldn't give it. and they will lie, scheme, flatter, promise and everything else under the sun to get it to try and get it. and then guys talk about women who are whores or easy when THEY were in on it too. or better yet, the ONLY reason the woman gave it up was cause the guy put on such a great show about how much he was into her! i won't even get into all the crap I'VE been told! even a guy i JUST met THAT night then "planning" our future! how the next night we were doing this or that and then the weekend we were then doing something else and what WE were doing the following week. and i was thinking "hes' insane!" and needy. and where does this guy get off planning our lives and assuming we are a couple, and how am i going to get out of this, 'cause i don't even LIKE HIM!? turns out, was ALL his little routine on how to get what he wanted. none of it was genuine or anything else, he just figured if he made future plans and acted like we were now a couple, i would then give him what he wanted. absolutely crazy. and i didn't even catch on for some time. i was so worried w/how i was going to make him go away, til i then noticed that i never heard from him again! whew! still lame and insulting though! but i have to say i was soooo not into this guy and that i also couldn't imagine that any other women were lining up for him either, that he probably figured that he HAD to have some big, phony, lying repertoire, cause it was the only way he might ever get any.
and age IS just a #. i don't care about age, but generally i hit it off a LOT more w/people my age or younger. interest wise. but once again, being blatantly honest here....sorry i don't have time or the inclination to be "nice" or diplomatic all the time, but i can tell in a hot second (and that is due to much practice AND trial and error from when i was on the internet AND dating) if i'm attracted to someone or not (even from pics online, as old or as "good" as they might be, i can tell asap). and i've never been wrong. there have been many times that i thought "well i might be attracted later". or "i really love their personality and /or talking to them" or "they are so good on paper" but it never came. i know if it's there or not. and it sounds hypocritical coming from me, cause i get SOOOO fed up w/all the visual, shallow bull * that men (and women), but mostly men do, but by the same token, i'm not asking for a greek god or a model. i don't care if someone is a dream physically, that is not it. BUT if i'm not attracted i'm just not, nothing i can do. but i think others standards are soooo bloody high that it's impossible. they want a playboy bunny but then get sick of her cause she has nothing to offer beyond the looks. then they say they want brains and personality but "aren't attracted". that they want it ALL in one package, ain't gonna happen!! so no one wants to let anything give on their laundry list of qualities. and i always say the same thing "that woman/man does NOT exist" and they disagree. i say "i'd like to see where you stand on all these things when you are 60 and alone and don't have your looks anymore to plow thru them all". i'm NOT by any means suggesting that anyone should be w/someone that repulses them physically. but that is a FAR cry from what actually happens. and it's almost ALL visual w/men. and i know women have their crap too, but i'm just tired of it all period.
i've had people i could have "settled" w/myself. could have been married a number of times, in fact, but in the long run, why would i want to? cause they were hot? or had money? or could make my life easy? or "take care of me"? or any other reason? NO. i'd rather be alone.
i DID date a guy from this site. a very nice guy, total gentleman. he's 53 (and i will only date so much younger, 9 years younger is almost too much for me) but i have to say that it DOES disturb me when men will date up to 20 yrs younger and more. i think it says a lot about the guy. that HE can pick and choose years and years younger, cause the women his age are too smart for them or "old bags" or whatever the case may be. they want someone to look up to them? i don't know, but it bothers me. i think if it randomly happens, fine, but them constantly searching out much younger women is telling.
but the guy i dated from here, i KNEW i wasnt' attracted to him. though i thought i might be able to be cause i enjoyed talking to him. he wasn't ugly and i was semi attracted to his pics BUT his pics are at least 10 or 15 years old, so it was false advertising. so i felt deceived on that count. granted most put up really good pics or whatever and i don't ever expect (out of experience) someone to look quite as "good" as their pics but they should at least LOOK like their pics! or have been taken in the last couple of years! but i guarantee you his are that old, or more. i wont get into the details of why. but i'm positive. you have a full head of hair then it's magically gone! overnight? nope, don't think so. and that's not the only reason, but whatever. anyway, i had numerous dates w/him and his age didn't bother me at all, what bothered me is that i didn't ever want anything to do w/him physically, not even hold his hand. HE didn't repulse me but the thought of us doing anything did. but more than that (otherwise i still might be seeing him), HE had a thing for much younger women and i then discovered why.......he was a TOTAL know it all. he would "lecture" me on any and every topic. it was NOT a conversation, it was a monologue, every time he got onto any topic. he wouldnt' allow me to interrupt him (until i learned and almost started shouting to interrupt and /or trying to change the topic asap before i fell asleep during another "class") and he assumed regardless that only HE was the expert on that topic. though i knew about everything he talked about. but he WANTS someone who's dumb or uninformed or someone to look up to him, hence the much younger thing. like "hey aren't i great? don't you enjoy my lectures"? don't you love listening to me go on and on for days and seeing how smart and informed i am"?
and no, i didn't at all. it was extremely annoying. and THAT turned me off more than anything. that and the fact that he NEVER once asked me about me. period. knew nothing about me! finally i asked him if he cared to know about others, and he said he had read my page online, so that he DID kow about me. so i guess he was done? that was enough info for a lifetime. so he was perfect "on paper" right? well, in many ways. WHEN i was allowed to talk, the conversation was good. so should i settle for him or anyone else just cause they fit a couple of things that i want? or cause i might not find someone else? or because i'm getting older or some nonsense? no. not gonna happen. and even IF i am alone at 60 or 70, i don't care. would much rather that than be w/someone that i'm not into or have no chemistry with or who annoys the hell outta me! would be like jail.
people get involved probably 97% of the time for ALL the wrong reasons anyway. attraction (that fades or can only go so far), loneliness (don't want to be alone. can't be alone. terrified to be alone. and every other alone theme out there), someone who can be a trophy and impress the public or their friends. an ego boost "hey, look who i can get, aren't i cool?" or they want someone to take care of them financially. or their biological clocks are ticking. or they think it's their last chance. or the person is "almost" good enough. no wonder no one ever stays together. it is the exception NOT the rule that 2 people are "soul mates" or truly in love, truly meant to be together. cause we live in an instant gratification society. and a throw away society. "hey once i get sick of him/her, or it's not working out, or even better yet....... once i meet someone i like a lot more, i can always just leave. divorce, break up, whatever" and i think it's all very sad.
i guess internal beauty REALLY doesn't account for much. anymore. if ever....
i'm NOT looking for someone perfect, i'm not perfect, no one is and it would be boring if anyone was. nor am i looking period, for men (or dates) but then again, if someone great came along, i wouldn't turn them away. but i've had it w/men for the most part. and you are right, almost everyone and everything is about looks. which totally sucks but it's a fact i've mostly accepted, as lame as i may think it is. trust me, i DON'T find it flattering when everyone under the sun is trying to screw me or whatever and it's ALL based on looks. they don't give a * who i am, it's about a pretty face or a trophy or some equally lame bull * . or they "want" you, until they get you, that is. or get what they wanted. OR tried to get what they were after and got fed up and split when you wouldn't give it. and they will lie, scheme, flatter, promise and everything else under the sun to get it to try and get it. and then guys talk about women who are whores or easy when THEY were in on it too. or better yet, the ONLY reason the woman gave it up was cause the guy put on such a great show about how much he was into her! i won't even get into all the crap I'VE been told! even a guy i JUST met THAT night then "planning" our future! how the next night we were doing this or that and then the weekend we were then doing something else and what WE were doing the following week. and i was thinking "hes' insane!" and needy. and where does this guy get off planning our lives and assuming we are a couple, and how am i going to get out of this, 'cause i don't even LIKE HIM!? turns out, was ALL his little routine on how to get what he wanted. none of it was genuine or anything else, he just figured if he made future plans and acted like we were now a couple, i would then give him what he wanted. absolutely crazy. and i didn't even catch on for some time. i was so worried w/how i was going to make him go away, til i then noticed that i never heard from him again! whew! still lame and insulting though! but i have to say i was soooo not into this guy and that i also couldn't imagine that any other women were lining up for him either, that he probably figured that he HAD to have some big, phony, lying repertoire, cause it was the only way he might ever get any.
and age IS just a #. i don't care about age, but generally i hit it off a LOT more w/people my age or younger. interest wise. but once again, being blatantly honest here....sorry i don't have time or the inclination to be "nice" or diplomatic all the time, but i can tell in a hot second (and that is due to much practice AND trial and error from when i was on the internet AND dating) if i'm attracted to someone or not (even from pics online, as old or as "good" as they might be, i can tell asap). and i've never been wrong. there have been many times that i thought "well i might be attracted later". or "i really love their personality and /or talking to them" or "they are so good on paper" but it never came. i know if it's there or not. and it sounds hypocritical coming from me, cause i get SOOOO fed up w/all the visual, shallow bull * that men (and women), but mostly men do, but by the same token, i'm not asking for a greek god or a model. i don't care if someone is a dream physically, that is not it. BUT if i'm not attracted i'm just not, nothing i can do. but i think others standards are soooo bloody high that it's impossible. they want a playboy bunny but then get sick of her cause she has nothing to offer beyond the looks. then they say they want brains and personality but "aren't attracted". that they want it ALL in one package, ain't gonna happen!! so no one wants to let anything give on their laundry list of qualities. and i always say the same thing "that woman/man does NOT exist" and they disagree. i say "i'd like to see where you stand on all these things when you are 60 and alone and don't have your looks anymore to plow thru them all". i'm NOT by any means suggesting that anyone should be w/someone that repulses them physically. but that is a FAR cry from what actually happens. and it's almost ALL visual w/men. and i know women have their crap too, but i'm just tired of it all period.
i've had people i could have "settled" w/myself. could have been married a number of times, in fact, but in the long run, why would i want to? cause they were hot? or had money? or could make my life easy? or "take care of me"? or any other reason? NO. i'd rather be alone.
i DID date a guy from this site. a very nice guy, total gentleman. he's 53 (and i will only date so much younger, 9 years younger is almost too much for me) but i have to say that it DOES disturb me when men will date up to 20 yrs younger and more. i think it says a lot about the guy. that HE can pick and choose years and years younger, cause the women his age are too smart for them or "old bags" or whatever the case may be. they want someone to look up to them? i don't know, but it bothers me. i think if it randomly happens, fine, but them constantly searching out much younger women is telling.
but the guy i dated from here, i KNEW i wasnt' attracted to him. though i thought i might be able to be cause i enjoyed talking to him. he wasn't ugly and i was semi attracted to his pics BUT his pics are at least 10 or 15 years old, so it was false advertising. so i felt deceived on that count. granted most put up really good pics or whatever and i don't ever expect (out of experience) someone to look quite as "good" as their pics but they should at least LOOK like their pics! or have been taken in the last couple of years! but i guarantee you his are that old, or more. i wont get into the details of why. but i'm positive. you have a full head of hair then it's magically gone! overnight? nope, don't think so. and that's not the only reason, but whatever. anyway, i had numerous dates w/him and his age didn't bother me at all, what bothered me is that i didn't ever want anything to do w/him physically, not even hold his hand. HE didn't repulse me but the thought of us doing anything did. but more than that (otherwise i still might be seeing him), HE had a thing for much younger women and i then discovered why.......he was a TOTAL know it all. he would "lecture" me on any and every topic. it was NOT a conversation, it was a monologue, every time he got onto any topic. he wouldnt' allow me to interrupt him (until i learned and almost started shouting to interrupt and /or trying to change the topic asap before i fell asleep during another "class") and he assumed regardless that only HE was the expert on that topic. though i knew about everything he talked about. but he WANTS someone who's dumb or uninformed or someone to look up to him, hence the much younger thing. like "hey aren't i great? don't you enjoy my lectures"? don't you love listening to me go on and on for days and seeing how smart and informed i am"?
and no, i didn't at all. it was extremely annoying. and THAT turned me off more than anything. that and the fact that he NEVER once asked me about me. period. knew nothing about me! finally i asked him if he cared to know about others, and he said he had read my page online, so that he DID kow about me. so i guess he was done? that was enough info for a lifetime. so he was perfect "on paper" right? well, in many ways. WHEN i was allowed to talk, the conversation was good. so should i settle for him or anyone else just cause they fit a couple of things that i want? or cause i might not find someone else? or because i'm getting older or some nonsense? no. not gonna happen. and even IF i am alone at 60 or 70, i don't care. would much rather that than be w/someone that i'm not into or have no chemistry with or who annoys the hell outta me! would be like jail.
people get involved probably 97% of the time for ALL the wrong reasons anyway. attraction (that fades or can only go so far), loneliness (don't want to be alone. can't be alone. terrified to be alone. and every other alone theme out there), someone who can be a trophy and impress the public or their friends. an ego boost "hey, look who i can get, aren't i cool?" or they want someone to take care of them financially. or their biological clocks are ticking. or they think it's their last chance. or the person is "almost" good enough. no wonder no one ever stays together. it is the exception NOT the rule that 2 people are "soul mates" or truly in love, truly meant to be together. cause we live in an instant gratification society. and a throw away society. "hey once i get sick of him/her, or it's not working out, or even better yet....... once i meet someone i like a lot more, i can always just leave. divorce, break up, whatever" and i think it's all very sad.
i guess internal beauty REALLY doesn't account for much. anymore. if ever....
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)