Subject: Re: ONE MORE THING ON THE VIRGIN

Date: 10 Aug 1997 00:00:00 GMT

From: nospamum@radix.net (MegaLiz)

Organization: MotPU: Where Binary Moodswings are ALWAYS on the Menu

Newsgroups: alt.slack

References: 1 , 2 , 3

On 9 Aug 1997 15:24:24 GMT, dflync01@homer.louisville.edu (David F

Lynch) wrote:

>_I'd_ love to see JACK'S reaction.

It would disappoint you, I'm pretty sure. He believes EVERYTHING I

tell him, assuming that he's even listening at all. In fact, I figure

that if I get knocked up AGAIN, I can just say, "Immaculate

conception, babe. Let's go bowling!" He'd say, "KEWL! I want pepperoni

this time, though."

>But what I'd like to know- what I'd REALLY like to know- is if one can

>declare oneself NON-VIRGIN without having SEX. To revoke one's so-called

>"purity" and still not at this time be FUCKING one. I mean, hell, if

>you can reclaim something you don't have, you should be able to renounce

>something you DO, right? I think you should raise all your daughters

>to not be virgins regardless of sexual activity.

As far as I'm concerned, I'd say it's absolutely renounceable. At any

time, one can declare oneself FUCKED IN THE HEAD and be done with it!

I ALSO think "virginity" is perfectly suited to teenage girls who

can't manage to look directly at their potential penetrator (without

giggling and/or DYING) and say, "Mount me," very LOUDLY.

I'm sure you can design an equivalent qualifying test for boyz.

In YOUR case, Dave, I'm quite sure that you could manage to approach a

woman and declare that her undulating breasts are your DESTINY, or

somethinglikethat. So you're virginity is FINISHED in any case.

--------------------------------------------------

Temporary Identity Crisis Pacifier:

just call me NANA MEGSKOURI DRACHMA-DRACHMA

It won't help you remember my email address and it

will not fatten your feets, so what's the HARM?!?*