I have seen clips in the news or elsewhere of European beaches with men of all ages and sizes donning tiny Speedos or similar with little material. At least it will save some synthetic plastics going to the landfill compared to more modest apparel.
I have seen clips in the news or elsewhere of European beaches with men of all ages and sizes donning tiny Speedos or similar with little material. At least it will save some synthetic plastics going to the landfill compared to more modest apparel.
The first speedo I ever saw was on a man I knew growing up. The image and memory are forever imprinted in my brain.Originally Posted by Rogar
To give pleasure to a single heart by a single act is better than a thousand heads bowing in prayer." Mahatma Gandhi
Be nice whenever possible. It's always possible. HH Dalai Lama
In a world where you can be anything - be kind. Unknown
https://www.honeylake.clinic/why-do-...ten-than-boys/
My guess it has to do with the link above, as well as marketing (if more girls have eating disorders, then the target audience for girls is more $ then boys).
It's not just women. Many men would prefer to go naked all the time if weather, safety, and sanitary considerations are favorable.
BTW please can the "nazi" crap. It's obviously over the top and demeaning to anyone who happens to hold a different opinion -- including me. The rule used to be that in any discussion the first person who calls their opponents nazis or compares them to Hitler, automatically invalidates whatever point they were trying to make and automatically loses the argument. We ought to bring that rule back in full force.
You have a valid point, and it's worth exploring, but you're totally turning off people who might otherwise agree with you by flippantly using the word nazi.
ETA: If anyone slams me for saying that, you're a nazi.
Yes, the size of the target audience and their willingness to buy this book (and the ones related to it) definitely influences what gets published and marketed. But I think all the little boys who are embarrassed to wear a swimsuit or undress in front of other boys because they're skinny, chubby, weak, too tall, too short, too freckly or whatever deserve equal consideration and consolation. Maybe that's because I was one, but IMO there ought to be an equal book series for boys, and I didn't find one in my casual search of book titles.
You bring up an interesting point. Generally the only clothing optional beaches in the US are on federal lands. State and local jurisdiction beaches pretty much all require a piece of cloth over one’s crotch. Similarly during the early lockdowns the only hiking trails in my area that weren’t mask mandatory were on federal lands. Trails that are under local or state jurisdiction did require them.
There are non Federal beaches where the clothing law is not enforced.
My only attempt at skinny dipping ended badly. I was in college with a group of other college women and we went to a pond. After we were done swimming we got out. We were wet so didn't want to put our clothes back on so we were carrying them. It was pitch black and we figured no one could see us. So we're walking along the trail and we hear people coming and jump in a ditch to hide. It was filled with mud and my clothes were white. Despite numerous attempts I never could get them clean.
That great American philosopher, Marie Osmond, once said, "If something happens and you think you might be able to look back and laugh about it later, you might as well laugh about it now."
I hope you all had a good laugh both then and now. After all, at least the ditch was full of mud. It could have been full of poison ivy instead.
https://www.newsweek.com/biden-raise...rowers-1795700
I am reviving this thread because I have a sincere question, and I want someone to explain it to me, preferably, Alan or Ldahl.
Joe Biden put into place new mortgage rate rules for government loans. That is all fine and within his purview as President of the United States even though I do not agree with his methodology.
What I cannot figure out from the various reports, and I read a couple of them, is how ot really works.
so here’s my question:
in a theoretical instance where there are two mortgage borrowers borrowing $200,000, and Borrower A has a credit rating of 780, and Borrower B has a credit rating of 585, will Borrower A pay more in mortgage fees than Borrower B?
As I understand it, Borrower A may or may not pay higher mortgage fees than Borrower B, it will now depend upon a variety of factors such as credit score, loan to value, debt to income and loan purpose, etc., which can change a borrower's basis points by 100 or more.
In a theoretical estimation I saw from a mortgage broker online, someone applying for a $400,000 mortgage with a credit score of 740 and 20% cash down payment would see their fees increase from around $2000 to about $3500. Someone applying for the same mortgage amount with a credit score of 640 and 3% cash down payment would see their fees decrease from around $11,000 to about $6,000. A borrower with a credit rating in the 500's may see their fees decreased even more as there seems to be a matrix involved that scores those borrowers in order to come up with an appropriate fee, although I've not seen it published anywhere.
So, Borrower A wouldn't necessarily pay more in mortgage fees than Borrower B, but would certainly be paying more in order to subsidize Borrower B. It's called a loan level pricing adjustment, but it's historically been better known as Robbing From Peter To Pay Paul.
I enjoy a credit rating in the mid 830's. If I were Borrower A in the theoretical I mentioned, I wonder how much higher my increase might be?
"Things should be made as simple as possible, but not one bit simpler." ~ Albert Einstein
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote