Comments on: Sex http://rhinocrisy.org/2006/01/sex/ Sun, 01 Apr 2012 20:07:06 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Saheli http://rhinocrisy.org/2006/01/sex/comment-page-1/#comment-535 Saheli Tue, 24 Jan 2006 16:04:05 +0000 http://rhinocrisy.org/?p=548#comment-535 bah, clicked on wrong link again. bah, clicked on wrong link again.

]]> By: Anonymous http://rhinocrisy.org/2006/01/sex/comment-page-1/#comment-534 Anonymous Tue, 24 Jan 2006 16:03:36 +0000 http://rhinocrisy.org/?p=548#comment-534 The markets must think Kellogs and Nickleodeon will win---commodity markets <a HREF="http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1383870.cms" REL="nofollow">reached a 25-year sugar high</a> . Though I don't know if high-fructose corn syrup trades in Chicago.  <br/><br/><a></a><a></a>Posted by<a><b> </b></a><a HREF="http://ssrdatta.blogspot.com" REL="nofollow" TITLE="sahelidatta at hotmail dot com">Saheli</a> The markets must think Kellogs and Nickleodeon will win—commodity markets reached a 25-year sugar high . Though I don’t know if high-fructose corn syrup trades in Chicago.  

Posted by Saheli

]]> By: Anonymous http://rhinocrisy.org/2006/01/sex/comment-page-1/#comment-533 Anonymous Mon, 23 Jan 2006 19:36:20 +0000 http://rhinocrisy.org/?p=548#comment-533 english people are afraid of water, so they cover their swimsuits in frills that would be ruined if they got wet? <br/><br/><a></a><a></a>Posted by<a><b> </b></a>david english people are afraid of water, so they cover their swimsuits in frills that would be ruined if they got wet? 

Posted by david

]]> By: Anonymous http://rhinocrisy.org/2006/01/sex/comment-page-1/#comment-532 Anonymous Mon, 23 Jan 2006 08:53:55 +0000 http://rhinocrisy.org/?p=548#comment-532 drats! no footage of the report?<br/><br/>i've been on a semi-boycott of victoria's secret for years, but i have to say, even if they did not market their "pink" line to youngins' someone else would (abercrombie, anyone?) i remember telling my uncle's first wife (who had a pre-teen daughter from her second marriage), a couple of years back that she was really lucky that her daughter was into avril lavigne, and not britney, because it equated to more modest wardrobe choices.<br/><br/>i don't know if janice crouse addressed this, but i am more concerned about the VS mall displays featuring provocatively posed and dressed, real doll-type mannequins in the likeness of VS models. how do you explain that to a 4-year-old on the way to kay bee toys? <br/><br/><a></a><a></a>Posted by<a><b> </b></a><a HREF="http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/ecclog" REL="nofollow" TITLE="misschan at gmail dot com">echan</a> drats! no footage of the report?

i’ve been on a semi-boycott of victoria’s secret for years, but i have to say, even if they did not market their “pink” line to youngins’ someone else would (abercrombie, anyone?) i remember telling my uncle’s first wife (who had a pre-teen daughter from her second marriage), a couple of years back that she was really lucky that her daughter was into avril lavigne, and not britney, because it equated to more modest wardrobe choices.

i don’t know if janice crouse addressed this, but i am more concerned about the VS mall displays featuring provocatively posed and dressed, real doll-type mannequins in the likeness of VS models. how do you explain that to a 4-year-old on the way to kay bee toys? 

Posted by echan

]]> By: Anonymous http://rhinocrisy.org/2006/01/sex/comment-page-1/#comment-531 Anonymous Mon, 23 Jan 2006 04:12:14 +0000 http://rhinocrisy.org/?p=548#comment-531 She was not incredibly homely. But by the standards of broadcast TV, she was a total dog. I will make a correction.  <br/><br/><a></a><a></a>Posted by<a><b> </b></a><a HREF="rhinocrisy.blogspot.com" REL="nofollow" TITLE="">hedgey</a> She was not incredibly homely. But by the standards of broadcast TV, she was a total dog. I will make a correction.  

Posted by hedgey

]]> By: Anonymous http://rhinocrisy.org/2006/01/sex/comment-page-1/#comment-530 Anonymous Sun, 22 Jan 2006 21:35:44 +0000 http://rhinocrisy.org/?p=548#comment-530 i like that according to that bio, this spinoff organization of the CWA believes in "the unity of truth." i also believe in this, because bob marley told me:<br/><br/><i>one love, one heart<br/>let's get together and<br/>feel all right</i><br/><br/>and i believe that is what the concerned women of america are trying to tell us. <br/><br/><a></a><a></a>Posted by<a><b> </b></a>david i like that according to that bio, this spinoff organization of the CWA believes in “the unity of truth.” i also believe in this, because bob marley told me:

one love, one heart
let’s get together and
feel all right

and i believe that is what the concerned women of america are trying to tell us. 

Posted by david

]]> By: Anonymous http://rhinocrisy.org/2006/01/sex/comment-page-1/#comment-529 Anonymous Sun, 22 Jan 2006 19:33:15 +0000 http://rhinocrisy.org/?p=548#comment-529 I've been accused of having ridiculously low standards for applying the label of "beautiful" to people, and while that's certainly not in danger of happening here, I'm a bit surprised at the <i>incredibly homely</i>  tag. (Though she would appear to be <a HREF="http://www.vij.com/clash/essays/seas.html" REL="nofollow">traditional</a> . She may even be wheatish.) The juxtaposition does sound amusing, however. <br/><br/>To be fair, the scandal seems to be over "<i>t<b>w</b> eens</i>" not teens, that somewhat ridiculous demographic term for not yet 12. Which does strike me as (barely) slightly more shocking.  <br/><br/><a></a><a></a>Posted by<a><b> </b></a><a HREF="http://ssrdatta.blogspot.com" REL="nofollow" TITLE="sahelidatta at hotmail dot com">Saheli</a> I’ve been accused of having ridiculously low standards for applying the label of “beautiful” to people, and while that’s certainly not in danger of happening here, I’m a bit surprised at the incredibly homely  tag. (Though she would appear to be traditional . She may even be wheatish.) The juxtaposition does sound amusing, however.

To be fair, the scandal seems to be over “tw eens” not teens, that somewhat ridiculous demographic term for not yet 12. Which does strike me as (barely) slightly more shocking.  

Posted by Saheli

]]>