Haven for the Human Amoeba

Yes, this group does span all ages. I remember someone mentioning that she was about 60 yrs old and another member said that he was about 50. There are/were some high school aged members in this group and many of us are in our 20s and 30s. ...and WELCOME, by the way! You're not spamming. Your questions and thoughts are interesting and most of us can relate to your concerns. :)

Does this list span all ages? I seem to recall in some article I read the other day that people of all ages responded to a poll questioning sexuality with "asexual" ... I guess I'm curious? I know people who claim that people of "abnormal" sexual preference (or nonpreference, as the oft- forgotten case may be) are mostly young people who want to be different, challenge the status quo, be cutting edge, whatever. I don't believe this theory, and I'm willing to bet it doesn't hold true for asexualism either.

Sorry if I'm too talkative and spamming the list or anything. This is all very new and exciting for me.

-Selie

---

Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com

I don't think the word "antisexual" applies to me. I'm not against sex, it just doesn't interest me. Perhaps "nonsexual" is a better adjective for how I feel. I like it, anyway.

Anyway, hm. You know how they say that gay men have some effeminate tendencies and lesbians have some masculine tendencies? Well, hm. What do we say? I'm very, very girly. I love cute, pretty things, dressing up and feeling beautiful (I like things aesthetically. I REALLY like aesthetically beautiful things... I just don't find aesthetically beautiful people sexual at all), lots of emotion and cute fuzzy kittens and flowers and all that stereotypical nonsense. I also play fighting games and hate romantic comedies. However, I consider myself an exceptionally feminine girl.

Is there any common trend in people like us? I mean, are we generally very much like our gender, stereotypically? Does gender really mean all that much to a nonsexual (asexual, whatever) person? I know I enjoy being a girl for many reasons ... I can't say it would be the end of the world to be male, but I really like being female. It suits my personality very well. I love children, want to be a foster mother, assistant-teach (albeit semi-unofficially) at my old elementary school, babysit, storytelling... I'm like the mother-figure to a number of my friends. Being nurturing is generally attributed to females... I love kids, I just have no interest in giving birth to any of my own.

I guess if nonsexual/asexual people want to have flesh-and-blood children they can do the whole test-tube kind of thing. It seems like a reasonable idea to me. But I digress...

I'm not really into the whole gender-bending thing. I was just wondering if there are some quirks that people in this classification share. And I'm curious to know what the differences, if any, between asexual males and females are.

I don't think I was entirely clear here but I guess you can probably guess what I mean, enough to understand and answer my question?

-Selie

Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp.

I'll be thirty-five years old this year. I can't speak for anyone else.

Does this list span all ages? I seem to recall in some article I read the other day that people of all ages responded to a poll questioning sexuality with "asexual" ... I guess I'm curious? I know people who claim that people of "abnormal" sexual preference (or nonpreference, as the oft- forgotten case may be) are mostly young people who want to be different, challenge the status quo, be cutting edge, whatever. I don't believe this theory, and I'm willing to bet it doesn't hold true for asexualism either.

Sorry if I'm too talkative and spamming the list or anything. This is all very new and exciting for me.

-Selie

---

Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com

This is a question I've been asking myself about alot lately, partially b/c I go to a campus where trans and genderbending stuff is talked about alot, and I don't know where I fit. Its complicated b/c alot of what it means to be "masculine" is about being sexually attractive. Muscles, must, all that I find myself not really going for, so I sort of take the dorky unattractive (or not necessarily attractive) aspects of what's considered masculine: computer games, sort of play-sparring, not giving a shit about how I look (actually, not in a calculated way), etc. I definitely come across as masculine, but I don't expend effort trying to be MORE masculine (which is usually code for trying to be more attractive) and I dont' really worry much about not being masculine enough. Male is sort of my default, but when its time to dress in drag/enjoy a chick flick/whatever then I'm not going to let myself be limited.

I think I can relate to the "dressing up to feel beatiful." When I'm conscious of my dress (which I am, generally, to some extent) it's less about trying to be attractive and more about self-expression. I definitely enjoy looking like a badass, in one form or another. I've had lengthly discussions with my friends about the sexual attractiveness/sexual neutrality of The Badass. We decided that most badasses are sexually attractive, the James Bonds of the world, who invite you to swoon over them/be attracted to them. Then there are those who take it to the next level, the Yodas and Morpheus's, the Gandalfs who invite you to be a badass yourself instead of being sexually attracted to them...

As for the symantic distinctions, here's what all the terms mean for me. Everyone seems to have a different understanding, but I find this useful:

antisexual- someone who is against sex, often times but not always an asexual.

asexual- someone is oriented not to want to have sex with people, doesn't experience sexual attraction, whatever...

celibate- a sexual person who CHOOSES not to have sex

nonsexual- a catch-all term for all of us who don't have sex. Celibates, asexuals, antisexuals, plain ol' virgins, we all have a few things in common, so sometimes its useful to clump us together.

asexualism- this term gets thrown around alot, maybe someone can explain to me exactly what it's supposed to mean. The sufix "ism" implies a belief or a practice, performed by an "asexualist."

I don't think the word "antisexual" applies to me. I'm not against sex, it just doesn't interest me. Perhaps "nonsexual" is a better adjective for how I feel. I like it, anyway.

Anyway, hm. You know how they say that gay men have some effeminate tendencies and lesbians have some masculine tendencies? Well, hm. What do we say? I'm very, very girly. I love cute, pretty things, dressing up and

feeling beautiful (I like things aesthetically. I REALLY like aesthetically beautiful things... I just don't find aesthetically beautiful people sexual at all), lots of emotion and cute fuzzy kittens and flowers and all that

stereotypical nonsense. I also play fighting games and hate romantic comedies. However, I consider myself an exceptionally feminine girl.

Is there any common trend in people like us? I mean, are we generally very much like our gender, stereotypically? Does gender really mean all that much to a nonsexual (asexual, whatever) person? I know I enjoy being a girl for many reasons ... I can't say it would be the end of the world to be male, but I really like being female. It suits my personality very well. I love children, want to be a foster mother, assistant-teach (albeit semi-unofficially) at my old elementary school, babysit, storytelling... I'm like the mother-figure to a number of my friends. Being nurturing is generally attributed to females... I love kids, I just have no interest in giving birth to any of my own.

I guess if nonsexual/asexual people want to have flesh-and-blood children they can do the whole test-tube kind of thing. It seems like a reasonable idea to me. But I digress...

I'm not really into the whole gender-bending thing. I was just wondering if there are some quirks that people in this classification share. And I'm

curious to know what the differences, if any, between asexual males and

females are.

I don't think I was entirely clear here but I guess you can probably guess what I mean, enough to understand and answer my question?

-Selie

---

Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp.

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [email protected]

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

i used to use thw word "nothing-sexual" i think that fits me well

and i am still tomboyish, though i grew my hair out, but its about what i do and your argument about gays and lez you know how the sexual world protraits the heterosexual world so its about half of the lez are macho, half od the gays are flamboyant but you see, they are in fact less than half the stereotype was from AGES ago, back in those days, there were only dykes, and straight girls, not many femme back then

but these days, of course you can tell a guy is gay is he is flamboyant, but more half of them will look "normal" same applied to lez

and about asexuals we had a discussion abotu this a while ago there is no sterotype about asexuals becasue we dont talk about it, and we dont have it tattoo in our forehead

i remember one of the guys here said he was one of those "spring break partier" but he found out he didnt like the "sex" part in the spring break holiday, and refused to get laid

this group include everyone, so there is nothing wrong with how you look, and your look does not determine what you are inside

I don't think the word "antisexual" applies to me. I'm not against sex, it just doesn't interest me. Perhaps "nonsexual" is a better adjective for how I feel. I like it, anyway.

Anyway, hm. You know how they say that gay men have some effeminate tendencies and lesbians have some masculine tendencies? Well, hm. What do we say? I'm very, very girly. I love cute, pretty things, dressing up and feeling beautiful (I like things aesthetically. I REALLY like aesthetically beautiful things... I just don't find aesthetically beautiful people sexual at all), lots of emotion and cute fuzzy kittens and flowers and all that stereotypical nonsense. I also play fighting games and hate romantic comedies. However, I consider myself an exceptionally feminine girl.

Is there any common trend in people like us? I mean, are we generally very much like our gender, stereotypically? Does gender really mean all that much to a nonsexual (asexual, whatever) person? I know I enjoy being a girl for many reasons ... I can't say it would be the end of the world to be male, but I really like being female. It suits my personality very well. I love children, want to be a foster mother, assistant-teach (albeit semi-unofficially) at my old elementary school, babysit, storytelling... I'm like the mother-figure to a number of my friends. Being nurturing is generally attributed to females... I love kids, I just have no interest in giving birth to any of my own.

I guess if nonsexual/asexual people want to have flesh-and-blood children they can do the whole test-tube kind of thing. It seems like a reasonable idea to me. But I digress...

I'm not really into the whole gender-bending thing. I was just wondering if there are some quirks that people in this classification share. And I'm curious to know what the differences, if any, between asexual males and females are.

I don't think I was entirely clear here but I guess you can probably guess what I mean, enough to understand and answer my question?

-Selie

---

Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp.

I'll be 28 tomorrow.

q:o) Quyet-One

Does this list span all ages? I seem to recall in some article I read the other day that people of all ages responded to a poll questioning sexuality with "asexual" ... I guess I'm curious? I know people who claim that people of "abnormal" sexual preference (or nonpreference, as the oft-forgotten case may be) are mostly young people who want to be different, challenge the status quo, be cutting edge, whatever. I don't believe this theory, and I'm willing to bet it doesn't hold true for asexualism either.

Sorry if I'm too talkative and spamming the list or anything. This is all very new and exciting for me.

-Selie

---

Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [email protected]

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Does this list span all ages? I seem to recall in some article I read the other day that people of all ages responded to a poll questioning sexuality with "asexual" ... I guess I'm curious? I know people who claim that people of "abnormal" sexual preference (or nonpreference, as the oft- forgotten case may be) are mostly young people who want to be different, challenge the status quo, be cutting edge, whatever. I don't believe this theory, and I'm willing to bet it doesn't hold true for asexualism either. I'm fifteen...not really "out" with my asexuality since maybe I'm simply going through the emotional part of adolescence really late or something...so introvertedly trendy? Maybe... --Nothing

Yah, asexuals are just like all other people, we come in all types of shapes and sizes. I'm 22, I love to party, but I don't have sex. I don't want to have sex. Maybe its because I'm usually too drunk to stand on my own two feet, maybe its because I can't stand all these stupid people breeding, maybe its because I want to rebel against society and it's obsession with sex, maybe its because I'm too ugly or too rich or too poor or too tall or too white or with not enough hair, or with whatever else Cosmo says guys shouldn't have, and girls should do in order to have mind blowing sex. I guess in the end it doesn't matter. The means to end doesn't really matter if you're asexual or anti sexual, or a 'freak of nature' Did this post make any sense what so ever? Is whatsoever 1 word?

Is whatsoever 1 word?

Yes, it is. I've seen it split for poetic reasons (or just ignorance,) but these usages are incorrect.

.:.

in order to have mind blowing sex.

Ok, so now that I look at it I'd like to point out the rediculousness of this cosmo-i phrase. Mind-blowing? That implies some intense transformative experience. A piece of music is mind-blowing, a conversation is mind-blowing, but sex?

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [email protected]

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

In a message dated 6/11/2002 8:23:14 PM Eastern Daylight Time, yahoo@... writes:

Am I wrong in thinking that it *could* in fact be compared to those things you listed for a sexually inclined person? I've always assumed that it is possible, since so much of their lives are literally wrapped up in the pursuit of that "moment." There are even entire philosophical, half-religious followings of sex enlightenment. All I really have are assumptions though. They could just be lying to themselves.

*shrug*

I actually agree. While sex isn't for myself, someone who isn't asexual probably could see it a "mind-blowing."

-Lane

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Ok, so now that I look at it I'd like to point out the rediculousness of this cosmo-i phrase. Mind-blowing? That implies some intense transformative experience. A piece of music is mind-blowing, a conversation is mind-blowing, but sex?

Am I wrong in thinking that it *could* in fact be compared to those things you listed for a sexually inclined person? I've always assumed that it is possible, since so much of their lives are literally wrapped up in the pursuit of that "moment." There are even entire philosophical, half-religious followings of sex enlightenment. All I really have are assumptions though. They could just be lying to themselves.

*shrug*

Hmmm.. I suppose it depends on your perspective. I just don't imagine sex as something with enough...personality. Maybe its subconscious shorthand for "I had sex witha mindblowing person," which might make more sense. Maybe I just shouldn't talk..

In a message dated 6/11/2002 8:23:14 PM Eastern Daylight Time, yahoo@... writes:

Am I wrong in thinking that it *could* in fact be compared to those things you listed for a sexually inclined person? I've always assumed that it is possible, since so much of their lives are literally wrapped up in the pursuit of that "moment." There are even entire philosophical, half-religious followings of sex enlightenment. All I really have are assumptions though. They could just be lying to themselves.

*shrug*

I actually agree. While sex isn't for myself, someone who isn't asexual probably could see it a "mind-blowing."

-Lane

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [email protected]

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

I'm 18, I think I'm nearly the youngest in the group, although I have always been asexual, until this year I didnt know what to call it other than the possibility of low libido.

Does this list span all ages? I seem to recall in some article I read the other day that people of all ages responded to a poll questioning sexuality with "asexual" ... I guess I'm curious? I know people who claim that people of "abnormal" sexual preference (or nonpreference, as the oft-forgotten case may be) are mostly young people who want to be different, challenge the status quo, be cutting edge, whatever. I don't believe this theory, and I'm willing to bet it doesn't hold true for asexualism either.

Sorry if I'm too talkative and spamming the list or anything. This is all very new and exciting for me.

-Selie

---

Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com

I always felt perfectly comfortable with the term low-libido. I'd prefer that over asexual, after all, I am theoretically capable of sexual reproduction on a physical level, and I'm, well, not an amoeba. Everyone's got their own term I suppose. And that's fine, if confusing. Someone also said sex doesn't have enough personality. I'd agree with that one completely. If its mindblowing, how come I'm doing something exactly like what billions of other people are doing? Usually an activity like that isn't mind blowing to me. Sure, my partner might have a personality, but I'm not altogether sure that comes out that much in sex. My and my partner's personality typically, probably would be ignored in favor of just... sex. Not a good prospect to me. Some people mention bdsm as well... but, now we're getting into things that, technically, are not necessarily related to the sexual act (uhm, I think... don't quote me on that one) ;) So give me a way to make sex have more personality, more intelligence, more depth on the level of the mind, and we'll see. Some people would say "well isn't true love a deeper level?"... yeah, maybe. I wouldn't even consider actuall sex without any feelings of that sort. But there's love and then there's true love that people talk about. Its something I've never known, at least I hope not, because its not been as strong as anything I've heard. Maybe that's part of the problem. I worry that maybe my problem isn't that I don't want sex, but a combination of the fact that I want to wait for love first, but might just be too logical, too analytical, too practical, whatever you call it, for that concept of true romantic love... that's a little more disturbing to me than just being uninterested in sex. I'll deal with sex. I won't be happy if I'm incapable of love. Time will tell, eh?

I'm 18, I think I'm nearly the youngest in the group, although I have always been asexual, until this year I didnt know what to call it other than the possibility of low libido.

Lauren Liebowitz said:

Does this list span all ages? I seem to recall in some article I read the other day that people of all ages responded to a poll questioning sexuality with "asexual" ... I guess I'm curious? I know people who claim that people of "abnormal" sexual preference (or nonpreference, as the oft- forgotten case may be) are mostly young people who want to be different, challenge the status quo, be cutting edge, whatever. I don't believe this theory, and I'm willing to bet it doesn't hold true for asexualism either.

Sorry if I'm too talkative and spamming the list or anything. This is all very new and exciting for me.

-Selie

---

Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com

So give me a way to make sex have more personality, more intelligence, more depth on the level of the mind, and we'll see.

This statement made me think of "cyber-sex". I imagine this takes place between two people who are actually typing provocative words to each other (online) that stimulate the mind into thinking about having sex (I think). Anyway, what's your take on this kind of "intellectual sex"? This question is posed for anybody to answer. (I'm just being a little gremlin!) ;)

Hi. I just started a new related e-group. Go to http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Uncoupled for more info. -Rob

Not according to your link you haven't..

Hi. I just started a new related e-group. Go to http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Uncoupled for more info. -Rob

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [email protected]

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Yes, indeed. My bad. Here you go...

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Uncouplehood/

...sorry about that. I just set it up and the name didn't sink in deep enough yet!

Not according to your link you haven't..

Hi. I just started a new related e-group. Go to http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Uncoupled for more info. -Rob

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: havenforthehumanamoeba-unsubscribe@y...

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Interesting...

Though I can see the groups being related in some way, I want to be extremely careful about drawing a line between not wanting sexuality and not wanting "intimate relationships." I know that I still do (a sentiment echoed by many people on this forum), in fact I think that the idea that one can somehow avoid emotional relationships by not being sexual is preposterous (if socially reinforced.) That being said, there is a certain relevant crossover. While I definitely find myself forming intimate relationships I don't really "couple." I'm all for emotional closeness, but monogomy (which I'm not that hot on to begin with) doesn't make sense for me as an asexual. How could an asexual monogomous partner "cheat"? For that matter, why should I purposely elevate one relationship to a seperate catagory from all the others? It's unclear to me exactly what your group is about. Is it against, say, close but non "couplish" friendship? Would sexaul polyamorous people fit?(I'd argue that most asexuals are polyamorous by default, since we don't have access to a meaningful system of monogomy.) Or is it for people who want to be alone emotionally and, by extension sexually? (As opposed to people who just don't want to be sexual, which is us.)

Yes, indeed. My bad. Here you go...

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Uncouplehood/

...sorry about that. I just set it up and the name didn't sink in deep enough yet!

djay@w... said:

Not according to your link you haven't..

Hi. I just started a new related e-group. Go to http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Uncoupled for more info. -Rob

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: havenforthehumanamoeba-unsubscribe@y...

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [email protected]

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

i think the line is between 1) asexuals who want a relationship with no sex 2) asexuals who does not want any relationship or sex

uncouplehood also can be seen as----one night standers dont you think, rob? gotta explain that throughly

Interesting...

Though I can see the groups being related in some way, I want to be extremely careful about drawing a line between not wanting sexuality and not wanting "intimate relationships." I know that I still do (a sentiment echoed by many people on this forum), in fact I think that the idea that one can somehow avoid emotional relationships by not being sexual is preposterous (if socially reinforced.) That being said, there is a certain relevant crossover. While I definitely find myself forming intimate relationships I don't really "couple." I'm all for emotional closeness, but monogomy (which I'm not that hot on to begin with) doesn't make sense for me as an asexual. How could an asexual monogomous partner "cheat"? For that matter, why should I purposely elevate one relationship to a seperate catagory from all the others? It's unclear to me exactly what your group is about. Is it against, say, close but non "couplish" friendship? Would sexaul polyamorous people fit?(I'd argue that most asexuals are polyamorous by default, since we don't have access to a meaningful system of monogomy.) Or is it for people who want to be alone emotionally and, by extension sexually? (As opposed to people who just don't want to be sexual, which is us.)

Yes, indeed. My bad. Here you go...

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Uncouplehood/

...sorry about that. I just set it up and the name didn't sink in deep enough yet!

djay@w... said:

Not according to your link you haven't..

Hi. I just started a new related e-group. Go to http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Uncoupled for more info. -Rob

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: havenforthehumanamoeba-unsubscribe@y...

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: havenforthehumanamoeba-unsubscribe@y...

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Oops! can't find this group...

Hi. I just started a new related e-group. Go to http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Uncoupled for more info. -Rob

I wonder where we all stand on this. I wonder how many of us here want 1) a relationship with no sex or 2) no relationship and no sex I'm personally leaning toward the first one myself...

i think the line is between 1) asexuals who want a relationship with no sex 2) asexuals who does not want any relationship or sex

uncouplehood also can be seen as----one night standers dont you think, rob? gotta explain that throughly

djay@w... said:

Interesting...

Though I can see the groups being related in some way, I want to be extremely careful about drawing a line between not wanting sexuality and not wanting "intimate relationships." I know that I still do (a sentiment echoed by many people on this forum), in fact I think that the idea that one can somehow avoid emotional relationships by not being sexual is preposterous (if socially reinforced.) That being said, there is a certain relevant crossover. While I definitely find myself forming intimate relationships I don't really "couple." I'm all for emotional closeness, but monogomy (which I'm not that hot on to begin with) doesn't make sense for me as an asexual. How could an asexual monogomous partner "cheat"? For that matter, why should I purposely elevate one relationship to a seperate catagory from all the others? It's unclear to me exactly what your group is about. Is it against, say, close but non "couplish" friendship? Would sexaul polyamorous people fit?(I'd argue that most asexuals are polyamorous by default, since we don't have access to a meaningful system of monogomy.) Or is it for people who want to be alone emotionally and, by extension sexually? (As opposed to people who just don't want to be sexual, which is us.)

Yes, indeed. My bad. Here you go...

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Uncouplehood/

...sorry about that. I just set it up and the name didn't sink in deep enough yet!

djay@w... said:

Not according to your link you haven't..

Hi. I just started a new related e-group. Go to http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Uncoupled for more info. -Rob

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: havenforthehumanamoeba-unsubscribe@y...

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: havenforthehumanamoeba-unsubscribe@y...

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

On Thursday 13 June 2002 19:36, athenayu9 wrote:

I wonder where we all stand on this. I wonder how many of us here want 1) a relationship with no sex or 2) no relationship and no sex I'm personally leaning toward the first one myself...

I pretty much heavily lean towards the latter. I think that question has more to do with personality than asexuality. The 'no sex' bit is the common denominator, so it can really be broken down to wanting a relationship, or not wanting one.

Personal choice, in my opinion.

.:.

I love the intimate friendships I have right now. They make me feel fulfilled. I don't see what romance could give me that I don't already have. So I would say that I am not opposed to relationships, I just don't feel the need to pursue romance.

That's an answer, right?

-Selie

http://www.bengoodman.com/selie/ ~~AROH~~

"And when you draw your number, Remember, Remember when we wondered what would be When we grew up? And you didn't say Someone Lost, And I didn't say Someone Frail, And we watched the sun seep into the sky, Knowing that the next day, The next day, There'd still be one." -- from "Lauren's Poem" (Kristin Chirico, a friend)

Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com