Caitlin89

It's been brought to my attention by Dr. Shah, himself, that he's been banned from the Women's Forum. While I don't know what exactly he did to be exiled from such a captivating forum, I do know that while sometimes a bit deusch-y, Shah is usually right about what he's saying. Exhibit A: His 'Size 8' Rule. The only people (with some exceptions) who seem to be bothered by this rule are as follows: 1.) Ladies larger than a size 8. 2.) Men married/dating/sleeping with ladies larger than a size 8. Sure the average size of women in the U.S. is a 14, but that doesn't mean it's healthy or natural, so who can really blame the guy for seeking healthy women who like to take care of themselves? I think Exhibit A pretty much says it all. Which leads me to my next/final point, Dr. Shah is a decently nice, furry little Persian who means no harm. (In fact, I envy the manner in which he takes shit from the women around here.) Time for this size 6 lady to chow down on some Chinese food. Good day!

Not reading through all of these posts, but as somebody who lives in the general area Shah is referring to... I can say that he is pretty on point. Many many mothers choose to stay home and care for their children. Yes, they drive 85k SUVs and yes, their husbands bring home a decent pay check (to live here, as Shah stated, significantly north of 100k). The majority of them are not working from home. And yes, it is the life, providing it does in fact make these women happy.

You don't know who I voted for and it is not any of your business. I resigned because there were too many Republican fags in political prominence. You mean homosexual men forced to deny their natural urges based on a combination of Christian indoctrination and brainwashing? Disgusting.

I'm from NJ... We don't pump our gas. I can say that most gas attendants round up, though I'm sure it's only so that the end-of-the-day total ends in a 5 or 0.

Disgusting. I hate to break it to you, but trash is trash is trash. And, judging by your statement, I'd say you're all too familiar with 'trailer trash'.

Actually I think that the point of Shahs original few posts was that first dates can be low cost without the need for coupons, and that he likes spending the time talking and spending doesn't need to be part of the equation. Thank you! I'm going to go out on a limb here and become the bad guy (or girl in this case)... I spend my days with 22 fourth graders, and can say that without a doubt, they act more maturely than a few of the people in this thread are currently acting. So what if Shah said that he prefers girls who are a size 6 and attractive? NEWSFLASH: That is not abnormal or uncommon. Because I'm not living in a state of complete denial, I know that my physical appearance is what first got my current S/O's attention 3 years ago in Zhills. Of course, he didn't date me based solely on physical attributes, but it got the ball rolling (Jon, you know it's true ). This is simply how the world works. [Disclaimer: Am I saying that women need to be a certain size to get attention? Absolutely not. In the long run, mutual attraction and an emotional connection (and hard work) maintain a relationship.] But to constantly criticize a person based on a few candid (and dare I say NORMAL) opinions is petty, mean, and childish. Ah, the sweet ugly truth.

Now I think I understand where you are coming from, however still misguided. For example, AMEX regularly sends us special offers (not point redemptions) to higher-end restaurants in our area that are affiliated with AMEX. Usually the special offer (aka "coupon") is a postcard good for $50-off our dinner bill so long as we pay with our AMEX card. The most recent one I received (and used) was to The Capital Grille. Even after the $50-off, our bill was still three or four times what I am guessing your total is at Chili's. We can certainly afford the extra $50, but what reason is there to pay $50 more? We do not dine out too frequently, with one exception--also a higher-end restaurant and my personal local favorite. Often-enough our bottle of wine is "on the house" and I am never mortified by the gesture, nor do I insist to the manager I can afford the bottle and demand to prove it by paying for it instead. Well, that's all fine and good, though I'm not much into wine or frills. SO, I think I'll stick to my Chili's and Fridays, sans coupons. Hey, to each his own

You're looking at it with the wrong viewpoint. Don't think of it as being cheap and tacky, think of it as someone increasing their disposable income. Let's say your date has a fixed amount of bills and a fixed income and there's no way he has time to add another job to his day. What's the best way for him to pay for that weekend getaway with this hot chick he just started dating? He needs to increase his disposable income, which means spending less on things like dinner. You just never know the reason why someone might be whipping out that coupon! Believe me, in most cases, I think coupons are great. I am the first to take advantage of the coupons I get, to say Nordstrom or Neim's. But to a restaurant? On a first date? EEK! I understand that there is often a reason behind the use of a coupon... BUT, I'd much rather him cook for us at home, as opposed to taking me out to a restaurant he ordinarily couldn't afford.

Do you maintain your position that you would be mortified if your boyfriend of 2.5 years used a coupon? probably so but not mortified enough to pick up the tab herself I pay as frequently as he will let me, which is probably 40% of the time (and I wouldn't dare use a coupon ).

Yes, it says that I am a 21 year old who has never had to worry about coupons (thankfully). Perhaps, with age, will come wisdom, and I can showcase some of this amazing fiscal responsibility you speak of. Until then, I maintain my position that using a coupon on a first date is BEYOND tacky.

Hi, Bolas

What restaurants do you frequent? Usually inexpensive chain restaurants (Chili's, Applebees), though the occasional nice restaurant, also. Like I said, an inexpensive date (and I do pay often). Fortunately, neither he nor I, feel the need to use coupons at these places

Yes, mortified... Mainly humiliated. I wouldn't be offended, just embarrassed.

No, not simply the reduction in cost. I was referring exclusively to coupons. Paying less, in general, is a good thing... Taking out a coupon in a restaurant, especially on a first date, is however, IMO, tacky. Very tacky

I am, by no measure, an expensive date, but admittedly, would be MORTIFIED if my boyfriend of 2.5 years whipped out a coupon at dinner, no less on a first date! Amusement park, 2 for 1, type deal? Not the first date, but there after, sure. I think it's safe to say that I voted 'no'. Cheap and tacky.

America's story? Though this concept is probably more clear to rational-thinking human beings, America is a nation which thrives upon diversity and opportunity. It thrives upon these two items because our constitution allows it to. Blatant racism is absolutely vile in any form, though considerably more so when displayed as outwardly as you choose to do so. Fortunately for us all, America is not solely comprised of middle-aged, white bikers. But, now that you've adequately expressed your distaste for Muslims, you should probably get back to your Klan meeting. Nauseating.

10 over? If that's all you've got, prepared to be tailgated (and passed on the right, flipped off and finally cut off)... at least in NJ.

How much of this racist, radical garbage can you post, before you realize how idiotic it sounds?

For me, yes. I highly doubt I could maintain a healthy relationship with a person who holds strong religious convictions. My boyfriend is what I would refer to as a non-practicing Christian, and that is MORE than enough religion for me

I think it goes beyond that even. Many religions don't allow birth control. the "quiverfull" sect has the deliberate strategy of churning out as many kids as possible, on the theory that in just a few generations they will outnumber the rest of us or at least have enough of a voting block to be able to "turn this country back to God". At least that was the very clear explanation I heard one of the quiverfull members give when they were interviewed on TV. All these kids are to be "arrows in God's quiver". So the plan is to breed a voting block to turn the US into a right-wing Christian theocracy. Which is kind of scary, I think. Don I've read that, yes (just didn't want to go into a full explanation of why I disagree so strongly with their lifestyle). It is also frightening, the emphasis they put on mothers and sisters being subservient to their sons and fathers. People may argue that those children are happy, but I'm more inclined to call them indoctrinated. And on the political note, Jim Bob (the father) has made very clear his desire to hold a seat in the senate. I believe he ran, lost, and is planning to run again. Scary

Thank you! I've watched this show, and these people are absolutely insane. They follow and preach this 'quiverfull' nonsense. Essentially, quiverfull followers don't believe in birth control, as it's preventing 'His work'... Give me a break. They wonder why they have a 1.6 lb baby in the NICU right now. The human body is not intended to birth 20 babies in a 20 year time span. Disgusting.

"The bottom line is that no valid purpose is served by blocking the left lane when other vehicles wish to pass. Let the police sort out the reckless and irresponsible drivers." That says it perfectly. Unfortunately, many people do not grasp this concept. Bottom line: Doing 65mph in the left lane is not only dick-ish, but also dangerous. Get off your high horse, and move over.

Technically, yes. But, I think most drivers would agree that the left lane is for passing, or people wishing to drive faster than those in the other lanes.

"Sorry, but if you are pacing traffic to your right-move over. I don't care if you're going the limit. You might be going to the store 4 miles down the road but I've got 600 miles to put behind me before I can see my wife and you are in my way." +1 The left lane isn't exactly ideal if you intend to 'do the speed limit' (on major highways at least). I don't know about other areas of the country, but in the tri-state area, doing anything less than 80-85 in the left lane will not only get you tailgated, but also high beams. Just sayin'

Where exactly are you getting this information?