Thinking about joining the gym? Well you might take a few moments to consider whether this is a good idea.
I’m a member of a certain gym. My fees are through a payroll deduction at my workplace, and so the gym gets their money from me religiously same time every month, so I am living up to my end of the bargain.
The problem is the gym is not living up to their end of the bargain, with broken equipment that isn’t being fixed in a timely manner.
Last year it was the men’s showers that were closed for a couple of months for construction.
Why so long?
Next it was a piece of equipment (that I liked to use) that was broken for months.
Certainly this gym makes a lot of money from our memberships, why can’t they fix their equipment?
If they can’t get the parts in a timely fashion, as seems to be the popular excuse… then hey, roll a new one in!
The other day I counted three pieces of equipment that were broken, and that doesn’t include the chiller on the water fountain!
One of those latest pieces of broken equipment I liked to use each visit.
It’s been “out of service” for five weeks now!
There is no amount of friendliness from the front desk staff that can cover my disappointment and growing contempt for this company.
They even try to get me to “rat-out” my friends cellphone numbers so they can hassle them into a membership.
The truth is, I certainly wouldn’t reccommmend this place to anyone I liked.
Upon looking online for an email address to send my complaint, I discovered all kinds of dissatisfied customers across the country.
Many complained about being billed after they cancelled their memberships!
I haven’t cancelled yet, and their location is convenient, but I have to say the other gyms are looking better by the day.
I encourage anyone who is considering joining a gym to take a few minutes and research the level of customer dissatisfaction before you decide to commit to a term agreement. —Biar B. Weir
This article appears in Sep 20-26, 2012.
Gyms are for people with OCD anyway (3 sets of ten reps, 20 mins on this machine/that machine), try going outside for a run/walk/bikeride, etc.
only stupid people ned a gym. a normal person would get a workout doing day to day shit. i bet that i’m in better shape than most of these idiots that spend a lot of time and money, doing something that they could do everyday, for free. and i’m quite fit. might not look it, but if you went head to head with me, in the outdoors, i’d leave you miles behind and lost. i have only been to a gym, once in my life, and sad to say all i see there are lazy people.
and o.p., there is always the better business bureau.(b.b.b.)
So work out at home. Honestly, there’s nothing in a gym you can’t do on your own. Jog, do situps and pushups, and spend two months worth of membership fees on weights and a jumprope at Walmart. Tada, home gym.
Gyms are for those of us who can’t commit to a regime on their own. As well, most gyms have an array of equipment so one can switch up their routines and keep it interesting. I have tried working out at home but it doesn’t work, I always slack off.
I can’t believe the polarized comments here.
I find that working out at the gym is not an “all or nothing” sort of decision for me.
When I’m working out at the gym, I am generally getting outside more often as well. And, I am also getting more things done at home. workouts, chores, projects, you name it. When I lift weights, I do more cardio, not less.
What’s wrong with good, old-fashioned promiscuous sex?
A pleasure as always.
Cheerio!
AIDS, herpes, venereal warts, chlamydia, gonorrhea, crabs, syphilis, hepatitis, unwanted pregnancy, catching feelings, stalkers…the list goes on and on. Just saying 🙂
yeah true, but so much fun, right?
That’s just the realist, literal part of me coming out. He asked, I answered lol
RSVP
: NurseHezz (09/22, 7:32PM)
But what about the romantic you?
A pleasure as always.
Cheerio!
80% of me is cupid, arrows, hearts & mushy love songs MM…all waiting for the guy who can set me on fire. Not literally, of course! 🙂
RSVP
: NurseHezz (09/23, 12:49AM)
“… all waiting for the guy who can set me on fire.”
Would it be possible to expand on just what would “set you on fire?” Do you have a coherent theory of romantic attraction? Could you develop it for us now? Write back soon.
A pleasure as always.
Cheerio!
MM, it’s not easy to put it into words, but here it goes:
Romantic attraction, for me, is a chemical phenomena…Likely chalked up to pheromones igniting between two people. Physical attraction is only one minor aspect of the larger picture.
A sense of humor is important to me. If a man can make me laugh, without trying too hard, he’s already won half the battle. People who take life too seriously make me nervous! I need a bit of a free spirit, much like myself.
Charisma is a trait that is very difficult for me to explain. Sometimes a man just has a smooth, sexy persona which cannot be put into words. I’m sure most people can agree to this, for both men and women. A man who is confident, but not cocky…Independent, not needy or ‘whiny’.
I’m a bit old-fashioned, so I like a guy who can treat me like a lady.
That’s about all for now!
Cheerio! 😛
CAN ONE, SIMULTANEOUSLY, PHILOSOPHIZE AND BE SEXUALLY AROUSED?
I am looking at an advertisement on The Gazette (Sept. 22) for something called “Zerona” which guarantees a loss of 3 to 9 inches of fat. It is in full colour and features a cross-section of a beautiful female body, shown only from just under her golden thighs up to just under her enticingly swelling left breast. Her right leg is placed lightly over her left and her loins are covered with a piece of blue, gossamer material which reveals the magnificent curve of her soft, bronzed left hip. Clearly, there is nothing under the material. Looking at this gorgeous body, I distinctly recognized the feeling of lust, not in any gross tumescent sense but rather one of utter appreciation as with a work of art. Nonetheless, I did feel that familiar tightening at the base of my stomach and ached to press my mouth to the inviting cleft of her inviting “mons veneris” underneath the wispy gossamer material. I was aroused.
But, and this is my point, is it possible to feel sexually aroused and yet, simultaneously, continue to philosophize – in this case about the nature of being aroused? I do, after all, want to help NurseHezz with developing her coherent theory of romantic attraction. I have reflected on this and concluded that yes, it is possible unless, that is, one has totally given oneself over to the delights of the flesh. Indeed, my title question – can one, simultaneously, philosophize and be sexually aroused? – demonstrates the legitimacy and coherence of my claim since, while I am still presently aroused – the advertisement is beside me as I write – I am able to question the possibility of continuing to philosophize about the nature of arousal. In other words, the title question itself provides the answer.
I hope that NurseHezz will take notes and proide us soon with her own reflections on her sexual arousal.
A pleasure as always.
Cheerio!
Come on now, MM. A lady never bares her intimate soul for the world to see. That is more of a private, behind-closed-doors discussion, wouldn’t you agree?
RSVP
: NurseHezz (09/23, 12:27PM & 12:46PM)
Our posts seem to have crossed each other but I think we can make some progress. I note a clear distinction which we attach to the word “romantic.” It seems to fall into three parts:
(1) The Physiological Element: Mine was based on the nature of physiological (ie. sexual) attraction of the male for the beautiful female. I believe I am fairly representative and when I say that it not simply one of blind tumescent lust I think I am right. Hoever, we must not lose sight of the fact that it IS sexual and deeply so. The question then arises as to the fundamental nature of female sexual arousal. This was not clear in your first post (12:27PM) which I found to be more psycnhological in nature and to which I now turn.
(2) The Psychological Element: You refer to physical attraction as being “only a minor part of the total picture” but yet you speak of the operation of pheromones which seems to me to be sexual in nature. Then you proceed to describe someone who “makes me laugh,” possessing “charisma” which “cannot be put into words,” “confident but not cocky,” someone who “treats you like a lady” and so on. But, in one sense, all these characteristics might be present but, even collectively, they need not add up to a “romantic” attraction to say nothing of a sexual one. What we’re looking for, of course, is what “turns you on” in a physiological sense. What is the content, in other words, of your sexual fantasies? What would be the content of that “behind closed-doors discussion?”
(3) The Philosophical Element: As might be expected I attempted a philosophical account of sexual arousal if only in the minimal sense that such arousal need not block out sexual attraction except, of course, “in extremis” when everything is blocked out. It is difficult to think of someone philosophizing while achieving orgasm, for example, but then s/he doesn’t of much of anything for that matter.
Overall, I think you interpreted the term “romantic” in the sense of “romantic love” while I had a more sexual take on the matter and, as much as possible, a philosophical perspective on the matter. In 12:46PM you state that “a lady never bares her soul for the world to see” and, if you were clearly identifiable, I would agree. But you have your pseudonym as do I and so I think you can let it all “hang out.”
We must look upon this as a mutual excursion into all the aspects of love. A social/scientific experiment you will. If progress is to be made, nothing must be held back. I am sure you agree.
A pleasure as always.
Cheerio!
I just cannot quite shake the feeling that Montrealman’s favourite Bond Girl was Rosa Klebb.
NurseHezz I agree with everything you said.You did a fine job putting that into words.Hell,I couldn’t have said it better…really, I couldn’t have.
MM: In a word your posts are ‘uggghghgh’ . More verbal diaherrea but hopefully you know what you mean because I sure as Hell don’t. lol
I live in a six-level building and running stairs is free and the best exercise ever.
Pair it with a resistance band and you’re in business. 🙂
RSVPs
: Col. Ivan Sonofabitch (09/23, 4:11PM)
Ah yes, Rosa Klebb. By God, one knew where one stood with her. Usually underneath her, but I would never complain. One can only wonder what sexual fantasies Rosa entertained. I think I’m becoming aroused even thinking of them.
: Boru 1014 (5:27PM)
Boru, one must place the progress of science before all else. Would you like to share your most private sexual fantasies with us so that greater knowledge might lead to greater understanding and, of course, improved treatment? Write back soon.
: wogdog (5:46PM)
For Christ’s sake, learn to spell “diarrhea” correctly! And no, we do not want you to share your sexual fantasies with us since they would no doubt involve loose feces and domestic violence and God knows we have had enough of that.
NurseHezz, are you listenng? Be forthcoming. Let me help you to divulge your sexual fantasies. Would it help if I gently cupped and stroked your breasts? Most females enjoy it. Write back soon.
A pleasure as always.
Cheerio!
MM, I’m at a loss for words, which rarely happens. I’ll need a day or two to ponder this one lol.
Boru…Thanks girl! 🙂
Thanks for the smile Ivan. I have to disagree though, Smeagol’s fav Bond Girl would have to be a young Carolyn Cossey http://www.universalexports.net/Graphics/t…
>: 0 – That’s just wrong on so many levels…
LMFAO!
MM: Why are you embarrassing Nursehezz by asking her such personal questions. Why don’t you go get your jollies the way you normally do, off the computer since you are not man enough to handle a real life romance. What makes you such a sicko? Who in their right mind would divulge their sexual repetoire to a stranger?? Wha??? Stick to what you do best, play higgy jiggie behind your keyboard no one is interested in supplying you with sex talk. that’s what the 900 numbers are for cheapo.
It happens it happens. real life has no emotional formulas. Just think, MM is also a philosopher. You could have at least tried for this one
RSVPs
: NurseHezz 09/23, 9:39PM
Yes, of course. Take all the time you need. These things can be difficult at first but, in addition to increasing the general store of knowledge of the nature of female sexual arousal, a frank and open admission of these matters can have a therapeutic, even a liberating quality. I know that this was the case when I admitted my arousal over the beautiful woman’s body in my post of 09/23, 12:31PM.
Perhaps you have had a comparable experience or, perhaps, since the female is, arguably, less sight-orientated than the male, sexual arousal might involve other factors such as those you mentioned in your post of 09/23, 12:27PM. These factors would, of course, require greater amplification. Write back soon.
: wogdog (09/24, 9:55AM)
This is science, dog, not cheap titillation. Get your mind out of the gutter.
A pleasure as always.
Cheerio!
MM: o yeah I forgot you’re also a Scientist now huh? Yep cheap thrills. Come on pay for the 900 call.
MM, after serious consideration, I have decided to take the 5th amendment with regards to the unveiling of my sexual fantasies, as they could be viewed as incriminating and/or immoral. Kidding…I just prefer to keep some personal things a mystery. 🙂
RSVPs
: NurseHezz (09/24, 1:47PM)
I understand perfectly. The question of the nature of autonomous sexual arousal in the female must remain something of a mystery, perhaps even to other females. By “autonomous” I mean those fantasies entertained by the female independently of and prior to the presence of the male. You recall your mentioning things like “charisma,” a “sense of humour” and the like. All, of course, required the presence of the male. What I was after was that prior state, that pristine condition of sexual arousal previous to the appearance of the male. This, of course, would involve different sorts of fantasies which might well be classified according to subject matter, nature of the activity involved, and so on. Questions such as the relationship between the nature of male tumescence and female lubrication would also have been explored. Sadly, however, the way ahead has been blocked. Progress has been halted. Pity.
: woondog (12:49PM)
Oh well, all right. Got any change?
A pleasure as always.
Cheerio!
MM Give it up. the lady said NO. You and your fancy talk to try and persuade her it is a scientific ‘experiment’. Not all women are stupid enough to fall for your double talking shit. NO MEANS NO!!
Wogy YOUR GODAMNED RIGHT, NO MEANS NO.But some women aren’t stupid but,crazy like a fox by playing MM the fool and fucking with his head.LOL
RSVPs
: wogdog (09/24, 5:26PM)
Wogdog, you musn’t be so cruel. You know how much I hunger for your touch. Come to daddy. Let’s do some science together.
: Boru (09/25, 8:29PM)
Playing me for a fool and fucking with my head? Sounds interesting Boru. Did you have any particular positions in mind? Could this be one of your fantasies? Share them with us, Boru.
A pleasure as always.
Cheerio!
http://www.freelancewritinggigs.com/wp-con…