The CUF Valentines Day Thread

[LiveCoug]

Those are the shoes. I run in them and work out in them and generally wear them around town (including at Disney World). They are awesome - most comfortable shoes I own.

Rob Lowe loves those shoes.

[byu71]

He stole it from Cougarboard and is trying to pawn it off as his own. He just wants to be cool!


Sorry for busting you 71.

Damn you, no gosh damn you.

[wuapinmon]

Women will never be happy on Valentines day, because no man has a chocolate wacker that spews money.

The historicity is excellent. We have a women vs. man set up that implies that happiness centers not on a relationship, but on material and sensorial pleasures.

Spoiler for A brief analysis (not for prudes):

The lack of a chocolate wacker allows for the possibility that 'chocolate' can be made from actual chocolate (which would be brittle if subjected to sufficient force/friction, and that it could indeed melt, as chocolate does, when placed in relative proximity to a source of body heat). What's more, chocolate is a food source, primarily (a secondary use is to make Aaron Neville's arms glisten), and food is generally consumed in/by the mouth. Thus, the placement of a chocolate "wacker" in the mouth could be construed as insinuating that women would only enjoy doing so if the flavors were less smegmish, and more chocolaty.

The choice of wacker betrays a certain intention to be both proper and subversive. A euphemism for penis indicates a desire to not be explicit, but the use of 'wacker' implies that a penis is primarily for whacking, both to it, and with it, thereby implanting an image into the reader's mind of masturbation (perhaps mutual) that conuteracts the attempt at decorum by using a euphemism in the first place.

The verb 'spew' also evokes an image of uncontrolled issuing, perhaps the quintessential image of the male orgasm. Does the passage imply that women want uncontrolled amounts of money? An endless stream, as it were? Do we need to consider that the loss of control due to sex is how a woman gains a man's heart? What other flavors might entice women to enjoy Valentines Day more if the wacker still spewed money? Spew is also slang for 'vomit.'

Do we believe then that the heterosexual sexual relationship is all about money? How might lesbians react to the maxim? Is the paradigm only valid on Valentines Day?

Further research is warranted.

[cougjunkie]

The historicity is excellent. We have a women vs. man set up that implies that happiness centers not on a relationship, but on material and sensorial pleasures.

Spoiler for A brief analysis (not for prudes):

The lack of a chocolate wacker allows for the possibility that 'chocolate' can be made from actual chocolate (which would be brittle if subjected to sufficient force/friction, and that it could indeed melt, as chocolate does, when placed in relative proximity to a source of body heat). What's more, chocolate is a food source, primarily (a secondary use is to make Aaron Neville's arms glisten), and food is generally consumed in/by the mouth. Thus, the placement of a chocolate "wacker" in the mouth could be construed as insinuating that women would only enjoy doing so if the flavors were less smegmish, and more chocolaty.

The choice of wacker betrays a certain intention to be both proper and subversive. A euphemism for penis indicates a desire to not be explicit, but the use of 'wacker' implies that a penis is primarily for whacking, both to it, and with it, thereby implanting an image into the reader's mind of masturbation (perhaps mutual) that conuteracts the attempt at decorum by using a euphemism in the first place.

The verb 'spew' also evokes an image of uncontrolled issuing, perhaps the quintessential image of the male orgasm. Does the passage imply that women want uncontrolled amounts of money? An endless stream, as it were? Do we need to consider that the loss of control due to sex is how a woman gains a man's heart? What other flavors might entice women to enjoy Valentines Day more if the wacker still spewed money? Spew is also slang for 'vomit.'

Do we believe then that the heterosexual sexual relationship is all about money? How might lesbians react to the maxim? Is the paradigm only valid on Valentines Day?

Further research is warranted.

This was really not necessary and it has nothing to do with being a prude. We got his joke no reason to expound.

[wuapinmon]

This was really not necessary and it has nothing to do with being a prude. We got his joke no reason to expound.

While I'm sure there are inside jokes in your field, this is one from mine. Comprende?

[Mrs. Funk]

Btw, my wife posted the last paragraph of this on my facebook page this morning. I posted the "I swear by all flowers" part. This is one of the best love poems around.

Agreed. And even for avant-garde poetry, it's pretty accessible.

[Katy Lied]

You have very little idea of how iconoclastic I really am.

So your wife has a plain copper or silver band for her wedding ring? No stones on her engagement ring?

[smokymountainrain]

Good for her. She never has to worry about her birthday menu.

[Jarid in Cedar]

I sent some roses to Mrs. JIC today. It sucks being away from home on Valentine's day.

[falafel]

So your wife has a plain copper or silver band for her wedding ring? No stones on her engagement ring?

Think even more iconoclastic. No ring at all!

Sent from my Sprint EVO 4G

[All-American]

Valentines day was all right, I guess.

[Pheidippides]

So your wife has a plain copper or silver band for her wedding ring? No stones on her engagement ring?

We became more iconoclastic after marriage. If we were to do it over again, the answer would be yes. Probably tungsten though.

[falafel]

We became more iconoclastic after marriage. If we were to do it over again, the answer would be yes. Probably tungsten though.

Tungsten. So trendy.

[Pheidippides]

Tungsten. So trendy.

Screw trendy. Cheap, nearly indestructible, and available at walmart. That is where my current wedding band came from.

[falafel]

Screw trendy. Cheap, nearly indestructible, and available at walmart. That is where my current wedding band came from.

Why not just get a ring tattooed on? Cheap, as (in)destructible as your finger, and you'll never lose it.