Do not wear slightly ridiculous, yet nonetheless beloved, Abercrombie and Fitch miniskirt near Alex, nor permit him to see pictures of same.
Posted by Jane Galt at April 30, 2007 10:13 PM | TrackBack | $raw=rawurlencode($_SERVER['PHP_SELF']); $technolink="http://www.technorati.com/cosmos/links.html?rank=&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.janegalt.net$raw"; echo ("Technorati inbound links"); ?>The real test is the smile. If Alex is getting a warm and welcome smile, and only pays attention to the skirt, well, we can now write off trying to contact Alex' non-existent character.
If there isn't a smile, Alex' attention belongs elsewhere anyway.
Just a thought ..
Posted by: Brad K. on May 1, 2007 2:26 AMReminds me of the old Garry Shandling gag about how clothes should come with expiration dates so people know when they're out of fashion.
Posted by: Larry on May 1, 2007 3:56 AMA man notes not the woman, he is yet redeemable. A man notes not her body, he's hopeless.
Posted by: Alan Kellogg on May 1, 2007 7:02 AMIt's not the miniskirt (or shorts), but the legs behind it.
Posted by: D------ on May 1, 2007 12:50 PMWisely, Alex has added the following to his post:
UPDATE: Clearly this otherwise sound principle does not apply to you, Megan.
I concur.
Posted by: Not that jim on May 1, 2007 10:39 PM