|
|
| Author |
Message |
popcorn
|
|
The smoker or the tattoo?
| 
Jul 22 23:06 UTC 1994 |
This item has been erased.
|
| 34 responses total. |
omni
|
|
response 1 of 34:
|
Jul 22 23:17 UTC 1994 |
the tattoo. At least they will decent to kiss. ;)
I'll make this clear right now. I will not date any woman who smokes,
simply because I want mychildren to know the love of thier mother
and not have to visit a tombstone in a lonely cemetar This is
the very least I can do for my family.
P.S. I am not married, nor do I have any children out of wedlock
|
roz
|
|
response 2 of 34:
|
Jul 23 00:53 UTC 1994 |
That's a tough one (exactly how repulsive is this tatoo?), but I hate
kissing a smoker, even a little peck. Maybe I'd decide I had to wash
my hair on Saturday night instead.
|
aruba
|
|
response 3 of 34:
|
Jul 23 01:17 UTC 1994 |
I'd take the tattoo, hands down.
|
scg
|
|
response 4 of 34:
|
Jul 23 02:13 UTC 1994 |
I don't think I'd make such a decision on such little information, but it
would depend on what sort of person they were in other ways, andhow
repulsive the smoking and tatoos were. I have dated a smoker, but she
didn't smoke around me and didn't "smell like a smoker." Because of that,
the smoking worried me because I cared about her, but it wasn't a big turn
off or anything. OTOH, smokers who insist on smoking around people who
don't want to be smoked around, or who reek of smoke, are people I don't
find it very easy to even be friends with.
|
davel
|
|
response 5 of 34:
|
Jul 23 12:50 UTC 1994 |
Um, seriously, Valerie, what's "have to choose between" supposed to mean in
a case like this? Even if no one else in the whole world is available,
dating neither would still be an option. Depending on the tatoo, it would
probably be the one I'd choose. (That is, I'm imagining the case to require
that the tatoo be as offensive as the smoking to me.)
|
mta
|
|
response 6 of 34:
|
Jul 24 07:54 UTC 1994 |
I think I'd choose the tatood person first...after all, a tatoo is
arguably "past tense", where smoking is an ongoing decision. Some
of the people I love best have gone through some really wierd
stages in their lives -- and it makes them who I love today. On
the other hand no amount of affection can make a tobacco induced
migraine more fun.
|
nadine
|
|
response 7 of 34:
|
Jul 25 20:43 UTC 1994 |
I used to smoke and used to date a smoker. I do neither now. Depending
on the degree to which I liked the guy and the disgust factor of the
tattoo, I would pick the tattoo. My reasoning: tattoos can be removed,
lung cancer cannot.
However, if the tattoo in question was something involving bloody organs
or drippy genitalia on the forehead or something like that, i would
reserve my right to date neither.
|
flem
|
|
response 8 of 34:
|
Jul 27 16:41 UTC 1994 |
That would have to be one HELL of a tattoo to even come close to the amount of
disgust smoking gives me. I don't think even the bloody organs or drippy
genitalia would do it. Definitely the tattoo.
|
brenda
|
|
response 9 of 34:
|
Jul 29 04:19 UTC 1994 |
hmmmm- sounds like a venting of anti-smoking propagandae to me :)
|
dang
|
|
response 10 of 34:
|
Jul 29 04:22 UTC 1994 |
don't tell me smoking isn't bad. my grandma died of smoking related
cancer.
|
scg
|
|
response 11 of 34:
|
Jul 29 04:42 UTC 1994 |
There's a difference between being against smoking and against smokers. I
can't stand tobacco smoke, but I still have lots of friends who are
smokers. It's when they start smoking around me that I start to have a
problem with it.
|
flem
|
|
response 12 of 34:
|
Aug 4 03:33 UTC 1994 |
exactly. I'm not disgusted with smokers, merely with smoking. The sooner
it becomes illegal, the better, sez I. And before you flame me for people's
right to smoke, etc, try spending a week with athsma in the house of a chain
smoker.
|
gracel
|
|
response 13 of 34:
|
Aug 4 20:14 UTC 1994 |
I couldn't possibly answer this without more information -- what
kind of "date" is this? Public, private? 4-H fair, rock concert
(no thanks, anyway), private confession, or what? I remember a
really neat fellow from the Netherlands (Jan whatshisname, davel
might remember) who joined our church choir during his time in A2,
and *stank* of tobacco smoke even though I never saw him smoking --
I wouldn't *want* to be in a confined space with that kind of fumes,
but I could put up with it for a while for a good reason.
A tattoo would be easier to ignore unless it was associated with
undesirable personality traits.
|
popcorn
|
|
response 14 of 34:
|
Aug 8 02:52 UTC 1994 |
This response has been erased.
|
popcorn
|
|
response 15 of 34:
|
Aug 8 02:57 UTC 1994 |
This response has been erased.
|
bonita
|
|
response 16 of 34:
|
Nov 22 01:55 UTC 1994 |
I'm glad to see that I'm not the only one with a strong dislike for smoke.
I would choose the tatoo, because I can't breathe around smoke, I get
headaches.
|
mta
|
|
response 17 of 34:
|
Dec 10 09:49 UTC 1994 |
*sigh* It turns out I lied up there. Well, maybe not lied -- but I never
thought it'd happen and it has. Not only did I start dating a fellow
I knew smoked (he's an awfully sweet guy!) but I'm now plnning to move
in with him. Of course he volunteered to smoke only in his office and
mostly when I'm not there. And I got an inhaler and a migraine medecine
to make the allergies better...
Love is funny, I guess. I wish he didn't smoke. But I guess it's not *thatbig
a deal after all...
|
vester
|
|
response 18 of 34:
|
Mar 28 20:38 UTC 1995 |
yes on both. I'd date a smoker or even someone with a tattoo. I,d even date
a smoker with a tattoo. because I wouldn't want to shut people out of my life
based on something they did or are doing. If we did that where would it endI
can't date you because you're republican or I can't date you because you still
listen to cassette tapes and not CD's. Think about that the next time you
don't have a date or feel lonely.
|
scg
|
|
response 19 of 34:
|
Mar 29 03:46 UTC 1995 |
I think it would be hard to have a good relationship with somebody I
couldn't breathe around, and I am very sensative to smoke. Still, if she
didn't smoke aroudn me it would probably be workable, although I question
how long something like that could last.
|
nephi
|
|
response 20 of 34:
|
Mar 29 04:38 UTC 1995 |
Would you shut someone out of your life that has killed someone, or does
kill people?
|
chelsea
|
|
response 21 of 34:
|
Mar 29 13:13 UTC 1995 |
You mean like a Vietnam vet who killed Vietnamese not because he
felt they deserved to be killed but because he was told to kill
after being drafted?
Or do you mean a negligent parent who left a gun where a child
was able to get to it and experiment?
Or maybe the party host who let the drunk friend drive home
rather than cause a nasty scene?
Define "kill".
|
nephi
|
|
response 22 of 34:
|
Mar 30 08:33 UTC 1995 |
I rise to your challenge, Mary!
I'll define kill for now as "purposely, directly ending the life of a
homo sapiens sapiens".
Whaddya think?
|
chelsea
|
|
response 23 of 34:
|
Apr 1 06:46 UTC 1995 |
Well, I've been known to be friendly to a few vets who were
drafted. So I guess for me the answer is yes.
|
nephi
|
|
response 24 of 34:
|
Apr 2 08:54 UTC 1995 |
Okay then. How about a liar?
The point I'm trying to make is that people *should* shut people out
of their lives because of things they did, or are doing.
|