> No, *some* men prefer inexperienced women and virgins. People are
> going to moan as I throw the monkeywrench of relativism into this
> dicussion, but men and women simply can't reduced down to simple
> stereotypes. The categories of men and women contain individuals.
Precisely, which is why I find this type of discussion not very involving. I suppose it's entertaining for some people, but so is sports. I can't get too interested in a bunch of guys kicking a ball around and piling on top of each other for three or four hours, even if the tedium is revealed by a glimpse of a pop singer's breast. (Sorry, CBS, but I already know what the human female mammary gland looks like.)
As for "Sex and the City," I just can't see the fascination about it. I've only watched the odd episode (and "odd" is the right word) or two when I had nothing better to do, so I'm not extremely familiar with it, but as far as I can tell, it's badly written, the characters are silly stereotypes, the endless traipsing around expensive Manhattan "shops" doesn't relate to my life at all (perhaps it does to other LBO-talkers), and the guys Carrie picks up are the most boring part of the show, including that Russian artist. (No, I lie; the most boring parts are Samantha's "sex-pot" bits. Vampire? She has about as much sexual wattage as a refrigerator bulb.) I wouldn't date or copulate with any of them, much less marry them, because they're not interesting people. I don't remember who said "the brain is the most important sex organ," but she or he was right.
If you're going to waste time watching HBO, I would recommend "Six Feet Under" and "Curb Your Enthusiasm." At least they show some signs of intelligence.
Jon Johanning // jjohanning at igc.org __________________________________ Had I been present at the Creation, I would have given some useful hints for the better ordering of the universe. -- Attr. to Alfonso the Wise, King of Castile