🚀 go-pugleaf

arlyn@shore.net (Arlyn J. Hubbell) wrote:
>In article <DpLwDt.E5B@world.std.com>,
>John Cooley <jcooley@world.std.com> wrote:
>>-=Weezel=-  <louise@mv.mv.com> wrote:
>>>I do pottery up at the Manchester Institute of Art (NH) and most of the 
>>>classes are 100% women. I think you'd find that in most art classes. Even 
>>>photography has more women than men. And pottery, especially, requires NO 
>>>artistic skill if you're a beginner. Just the ability to like getting 
>>>really messy. And heck, it's one way to find out if the woman's too 
>>>prudish to get messy. *grin*
>>
>>
>>From a hunting-for-a-perspective-mate point of view, some of these
>>take-a-class activities can be a collossal time investment for very 
>>little return unless they're focused singles events.  (I used to give
>>that same pat answer of "take a class" to my friends looking for a
>>significant other until they reported back how dismal these courses
>>were numbers-wise.  For example, a pottery class may contain 12 people
>>of which: 2 are guys, 3 are children, 4 are senior citizens, 2 are
>>married women -- leaving one possible "elligible" female.)  My angry
>>buddy told me: "I would have met more women watching female mud
>>wrestling in a seedy bar in Las Vegas before I found a good one in
>>that damn pottery class you told me to take!"
>
>To whit, it would appear wisest to take a class that is interesting and
>enjoyable in its own right.  That way, time isn't wasted and the event of 
>meeting possible significant others is merely an added fillip to time
>well spent.  
>
Absolutely. I would have a hard time justifying my time, $, and energy taking a 
class in something I really wasn't interested in in order to meet MOTOS. I guess the 
"take a class" answer would be more for your friend's own growth and interests. (Of 
course, if he's really interested in mud wrestlers.....)
>
>"Some mornings it's just not worth chewing through the leather straps."
>
I *love* this .sig!
>
> 
>