Muff hair, being kinky and curly, should be treated like beard hair: if you shave, you have *shave in the direction of hair growth*. If you treat it like leg hair and shave against the direction of growth, you get mad ingrown hairs that take tweezers, loofahs, and just weeks of patience and itching to grow out.

Waxing, it should be noted, does not result in this problem if you loofah for the first few days afterwards, although you do have to let the hair grow back in about 1.5cm before you can do it again, so you anti-muff menfolk will just have to deal with some bona fide carpet-licking for a couple of weeks before your lady can get it all ripped out again. Fortunately, since it came out at the root, it grows back in quite soft instead of bristly.

As I understand it, the original muff maintenance actually came from *gay* porn, where dudes would trim or shave their hair because it made their junk look bigger. This moved over into m-f porn because when *women* shave or wax, you can actually see what's going on (if you're into the hardcore stuff).

See, it's all about cinematography and art direction. Nothing sinister.

Word.

Bare skin feels better for both parties, at least that has been my experience.

I like men who manscape a bit although I do confess I like the menfolk with a little chest hair. Too much male grooming and I start to feel self-conscious about what I might have missed...

I wonder if the women who are so adamantly against muff-maintenance because they think all men who like it are perverts also let those rogue chin-hairs grow out instead of plucking them. I mean for heaven's sake, embrace your status as crone! Any man who wants you beard-less must secretly be into little kids, right?

1) Muffin Buffin' = hilarious

2) Apparently bush is back, albeit in a well-manicured way, like a golf course. Or topiary. Which is nice, because waxing hurts like a motherfucker even with the best of waxers. If I can get away with just the edges, that's fantastic news.

3) There is something seriously, pathologically wrong with any person who thinks that an adult woman's body minus pubic hair resembles *in any way* that of a prepubescent girl. Really, you have problems.

4) Charlotte Roche can speak for herself about the alleged shame of growing up female. Menstruation is what it is, with me, my mom, all my friends. Its not silence on the subject that's weird, its the obsessive overanalysis.

5) As for not talking to daughters about masturbation -- who wants to admit that their little babies are growing up?? Boys don't get kleenex boxes because moms think its cute that they spank it five times a day, they do it to keep the jizz off the sheets for god's sake. Do you feel like doing a load of laundry every day, with the hot water bill and detergent prices? In this economy?

...whose name I have immediately forgotten: the nurses.

That's when I really started to tune out (as with bigguns, in fits and starts with occasional relapses), when the dropped the serious storylines with the nurses. I found a lot of value in their storylines, and was actually quite annoyed when Maura Tierney went from being an OB nurse to (very) suddenly being a doctor. I wish they'd taken her original characterization more seriously.

I liked it, it was a nice ending. I especially liked Rachel Greene showing up again at the end, following in her father's footsteps after a turbulent teenage-hood and then her father's death. It was a nice full-circle touch.

Behold:

http://tinyurl.com/cvayet

he opening story was about a woman whose license renewal date was being monitored(how else did they know it expired).

Monitored how, exactly?

The most likely scenario is that she had to rent a car to go somewhere (if she hadn't driven in over a year, its unlikely she owns a car), wasn't able to get the car, and therefore wasn't able to to whatever was required of her at the time. I don't know what the task was or how time-sensitive it might have been, but their comment about if they'd known in advance they would have given her time seems significant: maybe whatever it was could have been rescheduled if they'd known earlier than whenever she realized she couldn't drive?

I won't get into whether or not she should have been dismissed for that, but if driving somewhere is a requirement of your job -- as it was in her case -- and you can't drive, then you can't fulfill one of your job requirements. What are they supposed to do with you?

What astounds me & what nobody can explain (apart from the whole business of what exactly autism is) is the huge rise in numbers of those being diagnosed.

Your parenthetical comment answers your own question: combinations of behaviors and neurological conditions are grouped together in a blanket diagnosis of "Autism Spectrum Disorder", even though they may not bear any similarities from person to person (or very spare similarities.)

The diagnosis, or more specifically the grouping of discrete diagnoses, is what has changed, not necessarily the numbers of people afflicted with the condition. How many people over the last few hundred years have been locked away in "insane asylums", and how many of those would be considered by today's medical understanding as mentally retarded, schizophrenic, psychotic, or autistic? How many people simply considered "eccentric" would get the "high functioning autistic" label slapped on them now?

There is no way to do an apples:applies comparison of then:now diagnoses of autism, because the diagnosis simply didn't exist. The only thing left to do is extrapolate potential diagnoses from scant records kept of people long passed, and that's pretty shaky methodology.

A+ for the Toonces reference.

Block the user. They can't see anything about you and I assume you will not be able to see anything about them.