You know, I agree, very few of us have portable jobs that would allow us to recreate our lives in a less conventional way.

I still like reading about it.

No - I can't imagine how I would do what the author has done but I sure would love the life he is describing.

What is does for me is provides the little pinpricks of motivation to make changes in my own life.

I'll never buy an old fixer upper in Tuscany either - but I appreciate other people's madness and dreams.

In many states if not the whole country it is ILLEGAL to buy raw milk!

Illegal.

So if you want raw milk - make friends with someone with milking cows or goats, or get your own.

The other way is to "buy" a share in a cow - small amount for monthly upkeep will get you the raw milk. it is the only way around the legal issue.

Weird, eh?

But then Americans are frightened of wild mushrooms and Europeans have festivals dedicated to them. I think this culture is frightened of a lot of nature but that is another subject.

Goats make totally awesome pets fyi.

It might be argue that an unconventional marriage structure is of a "liberal" bend, but how is maintaining a conventional marriage in public and lying/cheating to the one you made a vow to, how does that behaviour come under "liberal"

I don't think it is particularly conservative either.

Just hypocritical. And cowardly.

Hilton is going to milk this for all it is worth. And gleefully continue spotting photos with pseudo-cum on his site and feign shock, I say, shock! that his actions don't occur in a vacuum.

Sanford is now stating he intends to reimburse the state for the costs of his government paid for transportation to his girlfriend.

I think his wife probably helped this whole situation go public. I can sort of understand it if she did. Something tells me that if they had kept their private business private - Sanford would not be reimbursing the state for something that was "private" and when it finally did all come out - Mrs Sanford would be accused of being an enabler and foisting a fraud on the public - much like the accusations against Elizabeth Edwards.

But I don't have much faith in Jessica or the people who will make money off her.

I would love to see a show that explores the level of stupidty that so many cultures go to to achieve "beauty". I would love to compare and contrast, oh, say, the westernizing of oriental eyes and the ethnisizing of american lips.

Jessica could use her own experiences.

But somehow I just doubt the show will take that track.

A long time ago I noticed that when males and females want to attack a male - they cast doubt on their sexuality - be it calling them gay, or little dick, or can't get laid. (And yes - I have personally seen men do this to each other and not joking)

And when males and females want to attack a female - they do so by tearing down the looks - ugly, fat, old, undesirable.

And somewhere in there it says something about what most people still maintain at some lizard level to be a gender value.

There are some posters here in Salon, but not all, who are drawn to gender topics and who seem to be following some age old rule governing How to Tear Down the Other.

This whole argument here seems to have been started by the first poster-troll who decided to call all women 40 fat harpy bitches. And several pages later - people are still slamming women for being fat.

The email to the two women was tacky. If he wanted to have relations with the 2 women at the same time while he decided which he wanted - and be honest about it - it would still be far more respectful to contact each woman separately.

LW - I wouldn't be bothered to continue the relationship. This guy is shopping. You're a tomato he squeezed. Find someone closer to your home. Find someone who wants to date one person at a time.

The imp in me wants you to "reply to all" and very politely let the other woman she can have the man as he turned out to be nothing you wanted afterall. Of course - we would never know how it all turns out - but I can imagine the reactions . . .

@APC2007

Obviously guys never wanted skinny women, it was an ideal propagated by the fashion industry, which is predominately female and/or gay male.

Playboy models are a lot skinnier (boobs still the same - go figure) now than they were 40 years ago.

Obviously - it is not JUST the fashion industry. Perhaps it is what someone posted earlier - if thin females are considered more high status than chubbier - then men see high status as more "attractive"?

On the size thing - it is SO ridiculous. I hate shopping - by that I mean driving somewhere and roaming through stores trying to find something I want to wear. But the sizing is so different that you are almost forced to physically be there. Which maybe is what is desired.

Chicos sizing is 2,1, 0, 00. 00 - less than nothing? Which seems to fit the same way size 5-6 does. But they couldn't use the almost standard sizing for some reason.

I wish the industry would go to hip/waist/bust measurements with loose/fitted/snug descriptors. That would make sense.