Buggers in Disguise: A Three-prong approach to duping hapless lasses

Firstly, I wish to thank all my readers who visited and commented on my previous post.

The thoughts I will present are based on an interesting conversation I had the other day with a male friend. His perspectives are submitted through my own prism of understanding. However, the terminology I have used is based on what I have come to accept as common usage amongst the societal circles concerned.

Before I begin, it is important to understand that these views are based on a number of generalizations, which admittedly have certain restrictions in applicability.

This post relates to four generalized groups of individuals. a) Intelligent Women; b) Attention Seeking Females; c) Impostors disguised as ‘buggers’; and d) Buggers. I wish to make it absolutely clear that this list is non-exhaustive and should be considered merely as a descriptive categorization. It is probable that some individuals would find themselves unable to relate to any of the categories. It is also possible for an individual to find personal applicability in more than one or even all of the above categories.

(NB: This remark pertains to my schizophrenic, transvestite and gender-confused readers.)

A short description of the four groups is perhaps necessary. My sincere apologies to those of you who dislike the use of acronyms.

An Intelligent Woman (IW) finds pleasure in all forms of stimulus and is aware of the many elaborate schemes hatched by her male counterparts to “get into her pants”. If any male actually succeeds in achieving this feat, it is merely because the IW intended for it to happen in the first place. This is a real category since I myself am acquainted with a number of such individuals. Needless to say, exposure to the opposite sex as well as a keen measure of self-esteem may be considered prerequisites to falling within this category.

An Attention Seeking Female (ASF) is one who craves the attention of men and women alike and who is willing to compromise on an assortment of values as well as a good measure of self-respect to achieve this. I am tempted to attach naivety and the lack of maturity as source traits for this behavour. However, this conclusion may be slightly premature given my own inability to relate completely to such females. An ASF is most often oblivious to the larger game being played around her, and is, under ordinary circumstances, a prime target for exploitation. It is however possible for a life lesson to transform an ASF into an IW, given her ability to alter her outlook on relationships and avoid the radical feminist trap of “men-hating after one bad experience”.

A Bugger in Disguise (BID) may be characterized as a sleeper amongst his friends, who lays dormant (in terms of expressing his true views) until an opportunity is provided in which he may move onto greener pastures. His main ambitions are to find acceptance within the “coolest clique of men” and achieve admiration and appeal amongst the “hottest clique of women”. However, it must be appreciated that a BID is both cunning as well as versatile in terms of the impact he has on members of the opposite sex. Though not always the case, it is very likely that good looks supplement a BID’s methods of operation.

A Bugger is a genuine, straightforward “man’s man” who is neither skilled in nor bothered about fallaciously enhancing his image in order to win favour amongst those around him. His main appeal relates to the fact that people are paradoxically attracted to this sort of nonchalance. A woman that loves a Bugger appreciates him for his lack of ambiguity about his true intentions, whether it be simple friendship or a strong desire for coitus.

Now that the groups have been loosely defined, the interrelationships between them must be addressed.

An IW will most often ignore or patronize an ASF. When it comes to a BID, an IW may indulge in his company for short, bearable spells at a time, only to follow it up with laughter bordering on hysterics once he leaves the room. An IW will only date another IW, a Bugger or some other category I haven’t referred to in this particular post.

The real problem however resides in the relationship between the ASF and BID groups. Since the often politically incorrect honesty of Buggers is not easily palatable for an ASF, it is sometimes branded, and rightly so, as “chauvinist”. However, an ASF fails to identify the subtleties adopted by a BID when he deliberately sullies the image of a Bugger in order to win favour amongst his ASF constituents. The methodology most often observed is the “Three Prong Approach to Duping Hapless Lasses” found in theofficial BID handbook (or so I am told). They are as follows:

1) Get amongst some Buggers and befriend them by exploiting their trusting nature

2) Get to know their friends, acquaintances and even girlfriends who fall within the category of an ASF

3) Establish the “sweet guy who likes them for who they are and listens to what they have to say” image. This may involve a number of other sub-activities which could include lending books, CDs and DVDs, pretending to share interests, and making disparaging remarks about Buggers they know.

In any case, a BID is very successful with the ASF category since he skillfully sheds his “Bugger disguise” to reveal his second and equally convincing “Sweet-guy disguise”. One is often tempted to wail out warnings to ASF victims, but the restrictions in terms of effectiveness are too overwhelming to achieve results.

I must admit I am curious to know what lies beneath this second disguise – Perhaps an individual who suffers from deep insecurity and constantly needs the acceptance of his peers?

It would be unfair to simplify the issue by attempting to explain such behaviour merely in terms of attracting the opposite sex. Rather, the problem seems to lie with a genuine lack of substance in terms of personality and self-belief. It relates directly to the fact that we now live in a society which fails to recognize honesty (not merely to others, but also to one’s self) and honor as being essential features of building lasting relationships with both the opposite as well as one’s own sex. The majority of relationships we now crave are entirely superficial, based more on money, sex and recognition than on trust. Who are we attempting to fool?

Thank you for reading.


~ by Archangel on March 20, 2007.

53 Responses to “Buggers in Disguise: A Three-prong approach to duping hapless lasses”

  1. To put a “Bugger” on a morally superior pedastal, is, in my beiw, wrong.. what is it that men crave?, some might argue more than anything else? (at least during puberty!), is sex.. and the realization os such a goal lies paramount in his ladder os desires.

    Now the examinations of a “Bugger in Disguise” does, overall, correctly define such a person. However, it can be seen that our perception of such a BID is laced with a certain amount of spite, probably due to the fact that a Bugger envies the sucess such a person has with women.

    This is no defense of BID, however, we should not approach such people with condension. a bugger wants to get laid, its just that a BID does, and not as often as us.

    In a perfect world, a bugger, due to his inherent, if unpalatable (in this day and age) honestty, deserves to have more success with women than a BID (due to his ‘insidious’ nature). However this is NOT a perfect world, and if superficial women want the temporary happiness that is bought from a charlatan, then they deserve everything they get.

    Its just that Buggers, should stop complaining about BID and about not getting laid, and just aspire to be as sleezy as possible, cos it seems to work.

    Basically, we want sex, we dont get any, BID do, so lets stop the honesty, give up on the nonchalance, and transform. If women complain that there are no good men in this world, its cos they got rid of the few who were!

  2. If this is all true, and it may well be, how come so many intelligent women end up having relationships/marrying people with very very low IQ’s (buggers)?

    Smart women tend to select dumb mates (I do not know why). Perhaps it’s a complex genetic trait which prompts them to do this. Smart men, on the other hand, tend to look for counterparts who are intellectually equal (or better). Since there are more dumb men than smart women, there are more single smart men available than single smart women.

  3. Thank you for the comment. It is perhaps necessary to reestablish the fact that the term “intelligent” was used in the context of a woman’s social aptitude. My intention was to remain true to the original terminology used in the conversation alluded to in my post. I however admit that adoption of more precise terminology may have avoided this confusion.
    Thank you for reading.

  4. ur article sounds like something a woman will write. we r a bit confused as to whether u r a guy or a gal!

  5. Also, it sounds like the person u had this “conversation” with is a “bugger”…
    We only liked ur last para.

  6. I’m a bugger. Most definitely. I think Ranil’s point is valid although his resentment is probably isolated. Buggers get laid too. Superb post. Although…like your penis…slightly long. Or should I say our penises.

  7. eh, sophist, how on earth do you know if the writers penis is long or not??? are you honestly a bugger or do you just ‘like’ to bugger????

    btw, no offence intended

  8. Trust a salacious Sophist to turn a sensible conversation smutty 😛

    Buggers in Disguise tend to be sleazy-smooth in their operations, no doubt, but as ranil said, they shouldn’t be disparaged just because they get some. Their chameleon-like ability to blend is fascinating, and if buggers possess bona fide paleolithic consistency of character, these metrosexuals represent a shallow form of evolution.

    On a tangent, Disco Bob would like to note that he has known Intelligent Women who use Attention Seeking Females to separate the Buggers in Disguise from actual Buggers. In the great relationship game, only the umpires observe niceties. The players are too busy to bother.

    Sometimes it helps to reflect that we’re all just educated anthropoids with clothes on.

  9. Are metrosexuals a shallow form of evolution? or are ‘Buggers’ an archaic anachronism? The social version of the apendix, i.e. its there, it just dosent serve a purpose?

    What must be admitted, in this day and age, is that the stereotype male is slowly being eliminated, to be substituted by the clean shaved, designer perfume smelling, designer trendy pastel pink clothes wearing, metrosexual. this in itself is not a bad thing, but the emotional qualities which are supposed to go hand in hand with the attire is not.. women might disagree, but the sensitive, caring, empathy showing guy, and the need to attain such a emotional state, is anathema to what a guy should be, and his function in sociaty.

    Just ‘cos we are clothed and perfumed dosent meen that a man should stop being a man, regardless of the radical feminist goobledegook, those charastics in a man are essential to social servival. A son wants a father to be a fighter, not a meek follower. a man to look up to. a man, from whom his own perceptions of sexuality, his own pride and place in the world can be garnered. nothing is wrong with a sensitive man, but sensitivity should not be a precuser to meekness, and servility. This world is still a jungle, and man must perform his role in it… to be a fighter.

    i say this not out of any latent antipathy i bear to any metrosexual, but just out of a fear that this ‘fad’ is unhelpful to our social evolution… i hope i made sense 🙂

  10. The world as we know it is changing, and feminism ( at least some forms) continue to insist that the process of ‘wussifying’ men does not halt in its long march to social chaos. The battle is on, buggers must take sides. The buggers in disguise are spies, but have unequivocally cast their lot with those whose actions would lead to anarchy, more single parents, women philosophers and shorter cocks, all in the simple desire of a lay, or even worse, an intimate chat. No, the world hasn’t changed. BID’s have changed the world because the simple notion that a lay without honour is not worth its salty discharge has been thrown out the window.

  11. Buggers of the world unite, this is the time for all good men to come to the aid of the party! we will NOT go gently into that good night, us buggers should burn and rave at close of day, let us rage, RAGE, against the dying of the light…
    ….with sincere apologies to Dylan Thomas

  12. Thank you all for those insightful comments.
    Disco, that was food for thought. I have new found respect for your skills in analysis.
    Thank you for reading.

  13. I think u BUGGERS dont know what u’re talking about. All girls know when a guy wants to sleep with them. It makes on difference if you’re pretty coz the attention comes freely. It’s only when u’re unattractive that u have to rely on personality. The “INTELLIGENT WOMAN” is only a girl who can’t find a guy to give her attention in the first place. Coz all most guys want is looks.

  14. *no
    and i agree with Q & A, the last para was good. Is ADD a guy? Sophi seems to know him intimately. 😉 But i think he’s just pretending coz no one’s sure.

  15. Very well written post Archangel… thank you for writing. It made interesting reading, but I must say that hidden behind the well constructed prose, logical argument and tactical disclaimers, was a rather simplistic and unoriginal post. I don’t mean to be harsh; I really did enjoy reading it, but I feel I must chastise you for hiding behind your obvious intellect and writing skills, rather than utilising them to treat us to something really original and thought provoking.

    I take that back; if I were to deconstruct your post, I would argue that it is not as simplistic and harmless as it seems. I spy (with my little eye) a hidden agenda. Pray, read on and tell me if I’m wrong.

    Having read your previous post, and the post on that poor girls site (the one against University MCPs), I believe that in this current post, you have further developed your multi-pronged attack on her rather emotionally charged one! Let me elaborate…

    You initially took her on directly through your replies to her blog entry; you then deconstructed, analysed and critiqued the theoretical concepts surrounding her very thin argument in your last post; and in this one, you have explored the social dynamics of her (and our – as urban english speaking young adults) situation, suggesting that her entire outburst is the result of interplay between the four acronyms you so meteciulously described. In doing so, you have completely anhilated her argument, exposed her insufficient grasp of theory and now cast questions as to a possible divide between the acronym she sees herself as, and the acronym which possibly suits her better.

    You are obviously a very smart person, and so have engaged in your little frolic extremely subtlely… I guess it also helps that you come across as being genuinely curious about human behaviour and social interaction, further clouding your little agenda. But if my analysis is correct, it begs the question – ‘why bother?’.

    Show yourself more respect by being more harsh on yourself, on what you chose to write about and whose battles you fight. Show us more respect by accepting that we demand ‘better’ if we are to be truly entertained, provoked and intellectually engaged.

    As a resulst of your post, Anki and Ranil have started the next revolution on behalf of all ‘buggers’! Buggers dont need to unite and fight for their rights… even thinking of doing so completely contradicts the very concept of a ‘bugger’ (as defined by Archangel). Let us (buggers and IMs and anyone else who wishes) unite to fight a larger more important, less selfish battle… or let us never unite and go our seperate ways… as long as we are not subjected to the indignity of being boxed and labled and judged accordingly, of being fed mediocrity packaged in clever words, of being drawn into other people’s battles unknowingly… (and this list can go on)

    I hope I have not offended. Thank you for writing Archangel; don’t stop!

  16. Thanks for your analysis. It seems you have taken a lot of trouble to deconstruct my post and assign it with a hidden agenda. This may be due to either a remarkable imagination, or some resentment over the categorization.
    However, I assure you that my comments are impartial to the “hapless lass” you refer to.
    It is my opinion that the writer of the post on MCPs is more intelligent than you give her credit for. I doubt she needs you or anyone else for that matter to rescue her. So my social commentary is devoid of petty sandals and sordid defamatory campaigns on the blogsphere.
    Thank you for reading.

  17. Pularika, if bemoaning the BID’s sacrifice of honour and dignity in the pursuit of a lay or a chat is the same as starting a revolution, mea culpa.

  18. in relation to the writers last para, is there anything called ‘true, unadaultarated, pure honesty’? i admit that, supericially speaking, honesty is necessary to build lasting relationships… but is true honesty? does that type of honesty even exist? are not the musings of a “bugger” still coloured by social conditioning? and is not a buggers general deamenour mearly a replification of what that individuals conception of what a bugger should ‘really’ be? are not all of us just playing roles? the problem with sociaty is that the battles of defining ourselves are fought in the extermes… if we dispise a BID, we we display our antipathy towards such a person by being the exact opposite?

    i spoke about metrosexuals and a desire to see a reaffirmation of mans true nature, but, contrary to what some people have adduced from my post, that was not a clarion call to arms, in aid of some great testostrone fuelled revolution, but just a thought i wished to express.

    what i am trying to say, and rather convolutedly i agree, is that a re-affirmation of our true nature, does not imply that we become a beer swigging, dirty joke cracking, ball scratching. typical male… cos that initself is a falsity, to be a fighter, and to play our role…yes we have a role ladies, so do you… equality of the sexes does NOT mean a assimiliation of the the two sexes… we do not have to subscribe to a streotype… just be ourselves.

  19. Guys?!? How can yal be so daft? Like u’ve NEVER EVER paid attention to a pretty girl who’s looking for it. U have different standards depending on our looks. So please, get real!
    I think everyone’s disagreeing with pularika just coz she’s a girl with brains. Yes there are a few of us.
    And ADD, you haven’t answered my question…

  20. I was expecting this reaction…

    Archangel, Ofcourse you will defend your integrity. I’m sure it means the world to you, and I don’t expect you to succumb to the vulgarity of admitting to such accusations in public. But please consider my comments when penning down future posts… like I said before, give yourself and us, that minimum respect!

    Anki, you sound like a bitter, emotional and vorbose young boy. I hope for your sake you are just 16, in which case I not only excuse you, but also support your expressiveness and anger. If you are in your twenties, my advice would be some serious self reflection and meditation. If you are in your thirties, my guess would be you are beyond help!

    Please stop being self-righteous! who are you (or I) to be patronising and condescending towards others, to the level that we bemoan their most often harmless behaviour?

    you lable their behaviour as a “sacrifice of honour and dignity in the pursuit of a lay or a chat” and then bemoan their sin on their behalf. Maybe you ‘buggers’ (I’ll take your word for it that you are one) just think too much of yourselves and expect the whole world to follow suit! maybe your ‘BIDS’ don’t consider you important enough in their world, and therefore, discarding you at some point is no real ‘sacrifice of honour and dignity’! We all have disregarded others at some point in life, be they lecturers, colleagues, domestic aides, annoying acquaintances or random strangers. This act only becomes one of significance if the relationship is held in high value by both parties. I think your ego has been dented by BIDs and perhaps by a range of other persons, because they dont give you the recognition you feel you deserve.

    Welcome to the true world Anki, and for your sake, lets hope you’re just 16 (going on 17), with ample time to readjust!

    ps. disagreements aside, lets unite in spirit to watch Sri Lanka kick Indian butt today, and Mahendra Dhoni losing the foundations of his house… lets also drink to the good health of Greg Chappell… this world cup doesn’t need another scandal.

  21. Some thoughtful words, pularika. I appreciate them. I will clear the matter for good by commenting on this person’s blog tonight.
    Is a Bell, are you missing an “e” at the end of “bell”? This misplaced pun is telling on your character. I fear you’ve missed my point. I would prefer if you articulate yours more clearly.
    Thank you for reading.

  22. No, there’s no E! I mean Bell as in the one you ring! Sheesh.
    Pularika, why the heck are u writing such long post to ppl that don’t care about what we have to say? I’ve made myself as clear as i can get, ADD! May be u should read it again.
    Thank u for reading… NOT.

  23. What do we have to say Bell? you certainly havent said much beyond casting assertions at my gender.

    which brings me to a rather interesting point… what is it that makes us jump to conclusions of ones gender based on what or how they write? what social constructs compel us to categorise thought and style into gender exclusive boxes? why is it that I must be a woman (and I see no reason to reveal my true gender to anyone anyway) if I oppose a man on a gender relevant debate in the blogoshpere? These are interesting questions… Archangel? food for thought for a possibly more challenging and useful future post?

    I take back what I said before. You have said a lot Bell, and I have now caught on to it, so ‘we’ have said it together. Thanks for the inspiration… keep on doing what you do, its folks like you that make the world go round!

  24. Pularika: Disco Bob is amused by your comment that betrayal is significant only if a relationship is held in high esteem by both parties. Ignoring the logical fallacy contained therein, he’s curious if are you white-washing the mercenary manipulation of existing relationships for short-term personal gain? In a purely nonjudgmental way, of course.

    Marginally less nonjudgmentally, Disco Bob also wonders how someone who says “Please stop being self-righteous! who are you (or I) to be patronising and condescending towards others, to the level that we bemoan their most often harmless behaviour?” could be quite so vituperative in the next two paragraphs. Slippery slope, anyone?

    Is a Bell: you might want to reconsider adopting an ‘e’. It might provide a veneer of wit.

  25. Enjoyed the post. Not too sure what the motivations were. May be you should consider writing to a wider audience.

  26. did not get your point at all. doesn’t a “bugger” mean somethin a little nasty…????

  27. Belle, I was wondering if I had in fact missed your point, so I did revisit your comments. However, I feel that you are more interested in who the contributors to this web-lob are, as opposed to what they have to say. No one who adopts a pseudonym will reveal anything more than is necessary for the articulation of his/her comments.
    Disco, the silence of the original Bob is indicative of submission? We shall have to wait and see.

    Thank you for reading.

  28. ranil… are you single?

  29. Who the heck is sach?
    ADD, I’m curious, coz i think i know who u r, mr/ms colombo university!
    disco bob, get a life…

  30. Pularika, I accept your judgment on my judgmentalism. While I’ve already been chastised by you for asserting the virtue of honour and dignity, I don’t want to get into your bad books for asserting the importance of consistency in thinking. I know, I should be more tolerant of those who don’t even bother making an attempt at avoiding contradiction.

  31. Still awaiting a proper reply to my questions. What’s the big deal???

  32. Pulakira, my apologies but your comment has not been accepted even by the party concerned. I guess, we’ll have to put it down as good fiction.
    Thank you for reading.

  33. as a brief observation on is a bell’s comments, I feel her thinking that every girl knows when a guy wants to get with her, and her general understanding on beauty, appreciation and attraction make it plain to those astute observers among us as to which of ADD’s categories young bell belongs to. I don’t think I need to spell it out any further and comments such as hers only go to add more credence to ADD’s own observations.
    It’s unfortunate that she has failed also to understand that ADD’s categorizations are seemingly based neither on physical appearance nor on what is traditionally seen as intellectual brilliance, but mostly on ones capacity to understand the people around them and the impact this understanding has on the manner and strategies they adopt in conducting relations with others. This is possibly identifiable as “social intelligence” linked to what is known by some as ones EQ (emotional intelligence) as opposed to ones IQ.
    It’s unfortunate bell seems to be running low on both.
    She peals both loudly and in plenty but the communion her discordant cries has drawn us to is both hollow and yields no substance.
    Is a bell, a failure as a bell and it would bring me no surprise of her failure as a belle as well.

  34. Anki – nice retort… you seem really mature for a 16 year old… APPLAUSE to you.

    Bob – thanks for taking the time to read and critique my comments, but I really find it difficult to take anyone who refers to him/herself in the third person seriously.

    Archangel – I’m glad I did not take your comment at face value and decided to visit the other ‘parties’ blog as well… having read your little exchange with her, it’s clear that you have mastered the art of selective information dissemination (to your benefit ofcourse). Anyway, regardless of her opinion on the matter, you and I both know that there is absolutely no link between her acceptance of my analysis and its validity/relevance. But if its just the last word you want… you’re more than welcome to it!

  35. dearest pularika, i sincerely hope you find it within yourself to distinguish between disco bob from the one true bob. I have had to learn to live with the impostor, but there is no need for my persona to be denigrated due to disco’s apparent shortcomings.

  36. Dear Bob, My sincere apologies… it was a genuine mistake.

  37. ouch, you called me a 16 year old. That quality of wit just stuns me into silence.

  38. Pularika, Disco Bob’s tendency to speak of himself in the third person should have little bearing on your assessment of his comments. No more than Disco Bob’s assessment of yours should be tainted by your presumed adoption of a pseudonym. Unless your name really is Pularika, in which case I extend my sincere sympathies while hoping that your surname is not what I fear it could be.

    Pseudo Bobs come and go but Disco is forever.

  39. Fanny- i have taken an involuntary vow of celibacy…. against my will? why? what does my relationship status have to do with my post? curious

  40. who the hell is pularika? The same avowed anti-blogger??? What is the world coming to?

  41. disco, point taken. I admit that was a silly comment on my part… made primarily because i was too lazy to respond in full to your comments…

  42. ranil, a free spirit such as yours shouldn’t be confined. I respect your vow, but my interest in you is not merely physical.
    Your relationship status is not seen in your comments which is why I had to bring myself to be so direct. I’m sorry if it caused any problems with possibly your girlfriend ( ? ) 😦 …

    But I must remind you that you haven’t answered my question.

  43. Who is Sach and where can i find this post of hers?
    What do i have to do around here to get an answer. Everyone seems to be talking abt totally irrelevant stuff now. It’s not even related to the stupid post in the first place.
    How funny, are ppl flirting on this blog????

  44. yes – flutter flutter – wink wink

  45. what the hell is wrong with flirting? this place is not sacred ground mate!!!!

  46. who r u calling mate u ignoramus! mayb u shud get out more often. meet some real ppl. ppl r now avoiding the real issues on this blog…? and where is ADD!!?

  47. is a bell – why dont you stop trying to seek answers to quaestions you obviously dont even remotly comprehend… after all, none of your previous post have even mildly indicated that you ‘are’ actually interested in the issues at hand, but mearlt trying to write, in a scattergun hope that your vague ramblings would, by some luck or chance, glance upon some issue at hand…. go home mate, leave the discussions to people with three digit IQ’s…

  48. This all quite hilarious. Pity work gets in the way of keeping abreast (pun intended) of the situation.

    Just an aside from the vicious, yet well camouflaged personal attacks…Shouldn’t BID’s be DAB’s. Because if I understand your post correctly (and the chances of this are slim to none) Buggers are the Blokes. The bees knees. The BID’s are the ones that attempt/feign to be buggers, while at the same time not having the requisite bugger mentality. Therefore it is my respectful submission that they are not Buggers in Disguise….but hateful impostors Disguised As Buggers. The distinction…if my understanding is correct…is a fundamental one.

  49. That’s a good point Sophist. It’s a question of semantics but not a serious problem. A BID is exactly what you describe as a DAB. Just a question of interpreting the words. However, I do agree calling these social creatures Impostors Disguised as Buggers would have been a clearer option. Incidentally, that’s how I have described them in my fourth paragraph prior to assigning an acronym.
    Thank you for reading.

  50. wutever, ranil. U probably think IQ stands for “I’m queen”. Seriously, who ever says “mate” to a girl? u’ve listened to too much of “Right Said Fred” in my opinion. I’m not ur mate.
    ADD, do u ONLY respond to ur friends??

  51. is a bell – like i said previously, why you still here? go seek enligtenment somewhere else, where people are better suited to adiquently chalanging your level of intelligence… maybe a 8 hour friends marathon would suffice….

    and i said mate becouse i was not sure of your sex, and that seemed a generally safe way of refering to a stranger of unknown gender, after all stupidity is not a solely feminin trait!

  52. Segu, thank you for that very amusing email. I have chosen not to publish it since most of its contents are irrelevant to this particular post. You are most welcome to resend it as a comment.
    You shall get your wish, since I will be submitting my next post this evening. I do pray you engage me in the public domain in the future.
    Thank you for reading.

  53. ranil… ? I’m still waiting for my answer…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: