I need help separating from my bf!? Related Questions

I need help separating from my bf!?
Asked By Uranus,Last Answer By Molevolent At 2009.12,1 Answers

My boyfriend and I had sex this morning—you know, a little morning w00d. It was really great, and it lasted forever. The only problem is that we seem to have created some kind of vacuum, because we can't, ehem, you know...get him out.

I've been a little dry since menopause, so we used a little extra lube. Maybe that helped create some kind of seal. I don't know. But that was six hours ago, and he's still "there," if you know what I mean.

We can't go to the hospital. That would be too embarrassing. But we need to take care of this soon, because he has homework to do, and his parents give him a nine o'clock curfew. And I need to be back at the senior center in time for Bingo. (Chicken legs!) Plus, the clock is ticking on the motel. I've already had to pay for five extra hours, and the maids really want to get in.

Does anyone have any experience with this? What should we do?

I need help separating from my bf!?
Asked By Uranus,Last Answer By MOLE ON MY PUTHIE At 2011.03,1 Answers

My boyfriend and I had sex this morning—you know, a little morning w00d. It was really great, and it lasted forever. The only problem is that we seem to have created some kind of vacuum, because we can't, ehem, you know...get him out.

I've been a little dry since menopause, so we used a little extra lube. Maybe that helped create some kind of seal. I don't know. But that was six hours ago, and he's still "there," if you know what I mean.

We can't go to the hospital. That would be too embarrassing. But we need to take care of this soon, because he has homework to do, and his parents give him a nine o'clock curfew. And I need to be back at the senior center in time for Bingo. (Chicken legs!) Plus, the clock is ticking on the motel. I've already had to pay for five extra hours, and the maids really want to get in.

Does anyone have any experience with this? What should we do?

Separating the artist from the art . . . What do you think?
Asked By arab3sque,Last Answer By TSR At 2009.12,1 Answers

The following is a post I read while looking something up online this morning (the question follows it):
-----
"It is important to be able to separate the artist from the art. They have nothing to do with on another. If you read some of the Ezra Pound, TS Elliot and John Crowe Ransom essays on literary criticism, their main point is that the only person who is unfit to actually interpret a work of art is the creator of said art, simply because there is no way to separate ones self from your art enough to keep all of the underlying psychological influences from your life from affecting ones own interpretation of a piece.

It is sort of analogous to the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle in Quantum Mechanics. The observer cannot observe a system without altering the system he is observing. Thus, the artist cannot give an interpretation of his work without obfuscating the true meaning (if there be such a thing) because of a lifetime of psychological factors that cannot be looked at independently without changing the meaning or interpretation of the work in a way that does not reflect the work itself apart from the psychology.

Anyway, the meaning of art is based solely on the observer and not on the artwork or the artist, only on what the work invokes in the observer."
-----
I know this isn't a new topic, but what do you think? Do you agree that the artist should be separate from the art? That the artist and art "have nothing to do with one another"? Do you let your opinion of the artist influence your opinion of their work? Is that a concious choice?

What does that mean for the artist?

Separating the artist from the art . . . What do you think?
Asked By arab3sque,Last Answer By TSR At 2009.12,1 Answers

The following is a post I read while looking something up online this morning (the question follows it):
-----
"It is important to be able to separate the artist from the art. They have nothing to do with on another. If you read some of the Ezra Pound, TS Elliot and John Crowe Ransom essays on literary criticism, their main point is that the only person who is unfit to actually interpret a work of art is the creator of said art, simply because there is no way to separate ones self from your art enough to keep all of the underlying psychological influences from your life from affecting ones own interpretation of a piece.

It is sort of analogous to the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle in Quantum Mechanics. The observer cannot observe a system without altering the system he is observing. Thus, the artist cannot give an interpretation of his work without obfuscating the true meaning (if there be such a thing) because of a lifetime of psychological factors that cannot be looked at independently without changing the meaning or interpretation of the work in a way that does not reflect the work itself apart from the psychology.

Anyway, the meaning of art is based solely on the observer and not on the artwork or the artist, only on what the work invokes in the observer."
-----
I know this isn't a new topic, but what do you think? Do you agree that the artist should be separate from the art? That the artist and art "have nothing to do with one another"? Do you let your opinion of the artist influence your opinion of their work? Is that a concious choice?

What does that mean for the artist?

Between the living room and balcony doors with glass floor separating or separated good?
Asked By Abe Douglas,Last Answer By Jane black At 2011.05,1 Answers

Balcony faces south, the scenery in general.

AD Questions

insert image

image url:

such as: http://www.justaaa.com/**/**.jpg

insert video

vedio url: