Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
Parenting
ParentingMothersSingle ParentsStep ParentsAdoptionTwinsSpankingChildren's Health
Pregnancy
PregnancyBreastfeeding
Marriage
MarriageDivorce
FamilyKB.com
Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map

Family Forum / Parenting / Parenting / November 2006



Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Generation 'In' gets a new nudge: Go out and play

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Fred Goodwin, CMA - 11 Oct 2006 03:59 GMT
Generation 'In' gets a new nudge: Go out and play

http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/1011/p01s02-ussc.html

October 11, 2006 edition
By Ben Arnoldy | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor
POMFRET CENTER, CONN.

The great outdoors doesn't have the same pull it once did.

Attendance at national parks has slipped around 25 percent since 1987.
The decline is even more precipitous at some state parks. Here at
Connecticut's Mashamoquet Brook State Park, attendance on peak days has
fallen by roughly half during the same period, says the park
supervisor.

The main culprit, experts suspect, is a generational shift.

Today's youngsters and their parents are more wired and more scheduled
than earlier Americans, leaving less unstructured time to spend
outdoors. For the kids, that can mean missing out on childhood bonds to
nature.

Alarmed, conservationists and government officials are looking for ways
to reverse the trend. Connecticut has already started, with a new
campaign this year called "No Child Left Inside." The idea: bring
families back to parks, families like the Verdones.

"I was always in the woods. As soon as my bed was made, I was out the
door," says Brenda Verdone, strolling with her family through
Mashamoquet Brook. Pointing at her daughter, Deanna, who is skipping
ahead after their white husky, "I want her to do this stuff. Being
inside isn't good for you."

Connecticut has begun advertising and promoting the outdoors. Borrowing
a concept from reality TV, organizers invited teams of families with
kids to follow clues in an adventure contest spanning eight state
parks.

A key to the adventure program was getting entire families to
participate. Each team had to have at least one adult and at least one
child. Families could share online photos and blogs of their trips.
Some 400 families signed up, more than organizers could handle
initially.

The "No Child Left Inside" idea is part of a larger national discussion
among park wardens, government officials, and environmentalists about
how to reverse a growing alienation from nature, particularly among
youths. Those concerned cite the health of future generations, and the
long-term support for conservation efforts by an indoor civilization.

"For thousands of years in human history, kids went outside and spent
their childhood outdoors, in nature. In the matter of a few decades, we
are seeing the disappearance of that kind of play ... and that has
enormous implications," says Richard Louv, author of the recent book
"Last Child in the Woods."

Studies of children, he notes, show that exposure to nature boosts
attention spans, reduces stress, and could be an antidote to the rising
problem of childhood obesity.

But the changing landscape of America - from grass and asphalt-only
neighborhoods to highly structured schedules for kids - means this
interaction with nature is no longer a given. Mr. Louv says parental
fear of strangers also plays a role: A 1991 study found that the radius
around the home that parents allowed 9-year-olds to wander had shrunk
to one-ninth of what it had been in 1970.

Enrollment in the Boy Scouts fell 14 percent between 1999 and 2005. The
Girl Scouts, meanwhile, are looking to augment their outdoor programs
with indoor concerns like cyber-bullying.

These trends prompted academics and officials - including US Interior
Secretary Dirk Kempthorne - to gather last month in West Virginia for a
first-of-its-kind conference entitled "Children and Nature." Offering
some hard data were the authors of a study that found a high
correlation between the drop in national park visits and the increased
time spent with TV, home movies, video games, and the Internet. While
oil price rises also correlated to a lesser degree, the study found,
many other factors did not, including vacation time and federal
funding.

"We may be seeing evidence of a fundamental shift away from people's
appreciation of nature ... to 'videophilia,' which we here define as
'the new human tendency to focus on sedentary activities involving
electronic media,' " reads the study, funded by the Nature Conservancy
and published earlier this year in the Journal of Environmental
Management.

Patricia Zaradic, one of the study's authors, has discarded her TV and
urges other parents to go outdoors with their children. "The kids are
going to do what you do," she says. "If you are spending the majority
of your time glued to some sort of boob tube, how can you tell them to
go outside and play?"

Too often, argues Louv, children who don't have such experiences assume
there isn't anything to do outside.

"Environmentalists also have a role to play in this because there has
been this look-but-don't-touch ethic that has sometimes been
appropriate, but sometimes not," he says.

The hunting community may offer lessons about engaging children
outdoors, says Kyle Scanlon, editor of the fish and game magazine
Outdoors. His home state of Vermont, like others, offers mentoring
programs to teach kids gun safety and sets aside youth-only weekends
during hunting season.

The proliferation of outdoor chic - from high-end REI or EMS camping
gear to glossy magazines like Outside - suggests an ongoing connection
with the outdoors.

"There are still plenty of people interested in outdoor activity, but
there aren't as many people interested in extended trips," says Shannon
Stowell, president of the Adventure Travel Trade Association. "They are
more inclined to do day trips and be back somewhere comfortable for the
night. And the gear sales reflect that as well." Day packs are in,
overnight packs are out.

Ms. Verdone's efforts to reconnect her family with nature - including
bike rides and hikes around southern New England - seem to be paying
off.

On this day's walk with her parents, Deanna says she discovered "stuff
you don't see every day." With wavy hand motions, she describes a tree
she found with rippled bark: "It was really weird." She also saw a tree
charred by lightning, as well as playful wildlife. "There was a
squirrel jumping tree to tree and chucking stuff at us," she says.

As for other ways to get the next generation into the woods, her mother
has a novel idea: "You know what they should do is tell guys [that
hiking] is a cheap date. And the girls will think it's romantic."
nyc kid - 11 Oct 2006 18:23 GMT
Turning off the TV, PC, DVD, PS2, PSP, DS, GBA and every other source of
brain-drain could help...

> Generation 'In' gets a new nudge: Go out and play
>
[quoted text clipped - 128 lines]
> has a novel idea: "You know what they should do is tell guys [that
> hiking] is a cheap date. And the girls will think it's romantic."
mcs - 13 Oct 2006 05:43 GMT
go out and play as long as your in a good air zone, everyone else its more
like go 0ut and get poisoned ..then pay for that poison with drugs
> Generation 'In' gets a new nudge: Go out and play
>
[quoted text clipped - 128 lines]
> has a novel idea: "You know what they should do is tell guys [that
> hiking] is a cheap date. And the girls will think it's romantic."
rick++ - 13 Oct 2006 15:51 GMT
There was a discussion about this in rec.backcountry.
Another point was ethnic demographics.
Some groups are rarely seen in NPs because it not
their habit yet.  And these groups almost the majority
in the younger generation.
datalines@excite.com - 13 Oct 2006 23:04 GMT
Today's kids are spoiled with digital electronics and are obsessed with
materialistic,  Hollywood type fashion.     Better to join the Boy
Scouts, NRA, or
other outdoor groups.    Tell those city-slicking youngsters to watch
the classic movie,  Deliverance,
and they'll wet in their pants in the outdoors and be city slickers
forever.
> Generation 'In' gets a new nudge: Go out and play
>
[quoted text clipped - 128 lines]
> has a novel idea: "You know what they should do is tell guys [that
> hiking] is a cheap date. And the girls will think it's romantic."
marika - 14 Oct 2006 01:03 GMT
> Today's kids are spoiled with digital electronics and are obsessed with
> materialistic,  Hollywood type fashion.

> Better to join the Boy
> Scouts, NRA, or
> other outdoor groups.    Tell those city-slicking youngsters to watch
> the classic movie,  Deliverance,
> and they'll wet in their pants in the outdoors and be city slickers
> forever.

In Anywhere but here, they approach the
sixty-four-thousand-dollar question

is there a single teen who doesn't hate their parents

there was no good one-liner

it was more a character and anecdote type story

susan sarandon and natalie portman got out of wisconsin

they move to Beverly Hills.

Portman's first day at school she shows up in sweaters because she only
has a
wardrobe for  three-dog night

this story is
on all fours
with almost every other teen is embarrassed of parent story.
sarandon's way to
take five
is to always go out for ice cream.

I don't think that it really matters whether the setting was Hollywood
or
Wisconsion, it is
six of one and a half dozen of the other.
and so on.  The saddest part was when sarandon got laid by this young
handsome
dentist, and of course she thinks he is in love with her, even though
it is
clear he is substantially younger than her and only wanted sex.  She
deludes
herself into believing that maybe just maybe she will hear from him
some day but
why in the seven seas
should she,  I feel the same as she does waiting for that phone call.

She quits her job as a speech pathologist, just when the family is
broke and
needs money.  Fortunately, she eventually trades that one in for
another
job, but she really  is looking for a financial provider.  In her new
job in the
nursing home, she meets a carpet salesman who is not particularly
dashing, and
she is on less than
on cloud nine.
It is clear he is not in her
top 10
of sexy men.  But at the
eleventh hour
she gives in and goes to dinner with him
I don't know what this means

mk5000

"So Bill D, are you saying, in a sport which is suppose to be promoting
HEALTH
and fitness, when the bodybuilders are on stage, after
        weeks of dieting, getting their bodyfat percentages down to
unhealthy
levels, and possibly using muscle enhancing drugs, that that is
        healthy ? "--       billdthrill
nospam@nospam.com - 16 Oct 2006 16:58 GMT
Not the boy scouts.. they don't teach love of nature.

>Today's kids are spoiled with digital electronics and are obsessed with
>materialistic,  Hollywood type fashion.     Better to join the Boy
[quoted text clipped - 135 lines]
>> has a novel idea: "You know what they should do is tell guys [that
>> hiking] is a cheap date. And the girls will think it's romantic."
none2u - 16 Oct 2006 17:28 GMT
Generation gap My A--.Its the Government gap. The gap between what they
spend and what they get in taxes.  It doesn't take a rocket scientist to
know as a kid you better hit the books, and get ready for college. They're
prepping kids in 8th grade now for college.  Everyone has to work , now, to
carry our  no control spending government. Everyone has to work , so I can
send my kids to college. Everyone has to attend college or load boxes at
night at Walmarts until you die.  . Everyone has to pay off the college
loans , and work, because their parents went camping, and got fired. . There
is no time to do anything unless you want to live under a bridge, in a box.
Or you want your kids to.  Leisure time in America is finished. Its only a
matter of time until they declare the parks or anything else that takes away
from their tax income , or their ability to spend money overseas , off
limits .  Our government can't even rebuild new Orleans. Over half still has
no water or electricity . Get used to it..

> Not the boy scouts.. they don't teach love of nature.
>
[quoted text clipped - 137 lines]
>>> has a novel idea: "You know what they should do is tell guys [that
>>> hiking] is a cheap date. And the girls will think it's romantic."
R. Steve Walz - 18 Oct 2006 04:59 GMT
> Generation gap My A--.Its the Government gap. The gap between what they
> spend and what they get in taxes.
------------------
That "gap" is NEGATIVE, it's called the deficit. Nobody is being given
handouts except the rich, LEGAL ones, make them ILLEGAL, the GAP IS
ACTUALLY THE RICH GAP, everything YOU DON'T HAVE is because the RICH
DO have it, stolen from our wages as "profit", and windfall payment
to rich corporations for military overcharging! That's why the Rich
Republicans always crank the budget up into the red, the deficit is
paid to the rich and your families have to pay it off for 50 YEARS!
Steve
>;^} - 24 Oct 2006 23:37 GMT
> That "gap" is NEGATIVE, it's called the deficit. Nobody is being given
> handouts except the rich, LEGAL ones, make them ILLEGAL, the GAP IS
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> Republicans always crank the budget up into the red, the deficit is
> paid to the rich and your families have to pay it off for 50 YEARS!

Hey Steve, that reminds me of a "story" my uncle used to tell me,
about the Federal Reserve being actually privately owned, primarily
by the "usual" rich families (DuPonts, Rockefellers, etc...).  The
story
went kind of like:  these families pressured the government to put
in place the Income Tax to support borrowing from their private bank,
thereby pressing the populace into "bondage" to pay, via taxes,
straight into the pockets of the rich, only under the name of "public
debt".

I have never been able to tell if my uncle's story is literally true,
but your account seems similar - is this scary picture really what
we're dealing with ?
R. Steve Walz - 25 Oct 2006 06:04 GMT
>;^} wrote:
>
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
> about the Federal Reserve being actually privately owned, primarily
> by the "usual" rich families (DuPonts, Rockefellers, etc...).
-----------------
Nope.
That's just a Right Wing conspiracy theory that ignorant lower-class
losers tell each other to try to explain why they never got rich and
why they still vote Republican, even though the Repubs are all
ignorant losers.

The reason you're a loser is you sh.t are so well brain-washed that
you keep voting for the rich people that keep you enslaved and poor.
Steve
>;^} - 25 Oct 2006 15:31 GMT
> >;^} wrote:
> >
[quoted text clipped - 18 lines]
> The reason you're a loser is you sh.t are so well brain-washed that
> you keep voting for the rich people that keep you enslaved and poor.

Still casting about aimlessly for someone to call names, eh ?
I've never voted Republican in my entire life.  I wasn't even
looking for an argument, I was merely curious about your
perception of that "story", which isn't all that different than
the picture you painted:  the rich somehow get the system
set up to direct wealth into their pockets at the expense of
the poor.

Why you choose to act like an a.s, and at times an irrational
one at that, is puzzling...
R. Steve Walz - 25 Oct 2006 21:14 GMT
>;^} wrote:
>
[quoted text clipped - 28 lines]
> set up to direct wealth into their pockets at the expense of
> the poor.
------------------
I guess you've never heard of interest, appreciation, or mortgage
and house rental. Those mechanisms are enough BY THEMSELVES to
deprive the working man of MORE than the HALF of his income that
the nobles or yore required as his rent on land in FEUDAL TIMES!
Steve
>;^} - 30 Oct 2006 23:13 GMT
> I guess you've never heard of interest, appreciation, or mortgage
> and house rental. Those mechanisms are enough BY THEMSELVES to
> deprive the working man of MORE than the HALF of his income that
> the nobles or yore required as his rent on land in FEUDAL TIMES!

Thanks, that's a much better response... makes a ton of sense.
So you don't think there's room for even heavier burdens to
encumber those that manage to adapt to those "cost-of-living"
weights on the yoke ?
R. Steve Walz - 31 Oct 2006 00:24 GMT
>;^} wrote:
>
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> encumber those that manage to adapt to those "cost-of-living"
> weights on the yoke ?
-------------------------
And when you breed a stronger slave are you ready for him to break
his chains, hold your face in the mud, and butt-f.ck your sorry a.s?
Steve
>;^} - 31 Oct 2006 02:09 GMT
> > So you don't think there's room for even heavier burdens to
> > encumber those that manage to adapt to those "cost-of-living"
> > weights on the yoke ?
> -------------------------
> And when you breed a stronger slave are you ready for him to break
> his chains, hold your face in the mud, and butt-f.ck your sorry a.s?

OK, I get the idea of the oppressed "rising up"... I'm more
asking about where the "breaking point" is - it doesn't seem
to be at our current state, which is what led me to wonder
why the interest/rent/mortgage burden that you refer to
would be the limit of oppression - surely there are other,
more concealed, and possibly more "dastardly" forms of
theft being committed by the rich - isn't the main reason
the poor haven't risen up the fact that they aren't privy to
all of the nastiness going on behind their backs ?
R. Steve Walz - 01 Nov 2006 01:02 GMT
>;^} wrote:
>
[quoted text clipped - 14 lines]
> the poor haven't risen up the fact that they aren't privy to
> all of the nastiness going on behind their backs ?
------------------------------------
No, actually it's a combination of feeling too tired after their day's
work to think about it, and not hearing anyone else saying
the things that they're thinking quietly to themeselves all the
time and are afraid to tell anybody about for fear of being either
shunned or being under suspicion or arrested with no result. Lots
of people are not really aware of their rights of speech and of
assembly and political activity. They don't know law and are simply
afraid that if they express themselves they will be victimized.

That along with simply having been brainwashed that "politics" is
as they have always been told repeatedly, that "you can't fix it"
"you can't fight city hall" and that "things will never change"
along with a media programmed pre-occupation with sports asnd
celebrities as a diversion from their secret hates and resentments.

Because of this persistent brainwashing that is the world according
to television, this power of wealthy media over the individual voice
prevents the Majority from taking power and serving the needs *OF*
the Majority, which obviously the Majority could easily do, remove
the wealth from the wealthy and run government and the economy
as benefits the greatest number and not merely the rich and lucky.

The restrictions in the Constitution don't actually help or free
the individual or the Majority, though they are portrayed to do so.
Actually they simply PREVENT Majority power *FROM* doing things like
authorizing Majority government to start non-profit businesses that
directly compete with private business, and which could undersell
private business and drive them out of the markets with that very
power of its NON-PROFIT nature, and it could take away the Money
Funnel that currently pipes a constant flow of funding to the Right
Wing Rich who control the media and out-shout everyone else. The
Profit that is UNEARNED WINDFALL grabbed by the rich is in part
shipped right off to defend their wealth by funding the media version
of "THINGS AS THEY ARE" in the constant unchanging DIN of the media
and the lies about what "HAS TO BE" so that the rich can continue to
Profit by UNDERPAYING WORKERS! Majority Authorized NON-PROFIT business
could equalize all wages resulting in treating every work-hour EQUALLY!

And it is the nonsense of "eminent domain" that requires the Majority
pay for land that it OWNS and prevents the Majority from
simply dictating that everyone's home is NOW OWNED BY its RESIDENTS,
and NOT the Banks, Insurance companies, and Landlords. Can you
imagine the change in America if everyone OWNED their own home
free and clear and BY LAW NOTHING COULD EVER THREATEN THAT HOME??
The Majority can do this anytime it wants by a stroke of the pen!!
Steve
>;^} - 01 Nov 2006 06:14 GMT
> No, actually it's a combination of feeling too tired after their day's
> work to think about it, and not hearing anyone else saying
> the things that they're thinking quietly to themeselves all the
> time and are afraid to tell anybody about for fear of being either
> shunned or being under suspicion or arrested with no result.

Damn, you are so right about that - I even had to read it from you
before I remembered that I have thought much the same before,
but those thoughts either never made it beyond idle musings or
had been mostly forgotten, exactly as you describe...

> along with a media programmed pre-occupation with sports asnd
> celebrities as a diversion from their secret hates and resentments.

Yes, another great point.

> Actually they simply PREVENT Majority power *FROM* doing things like
> authorizing Majority government to start non-profit businesses that
> directly compete with private business, and which could undersell
> private business and drive them out of the markets with that very
> power of its NON-PROFIT nature

I wonder if we see a demonstration of something close
to that in OpenSource.  Maybe not exactly, but boy do
the rich corporate software moguls hate it !  Not to mention
the "partisan" investors expecting to get rich off of their scraps...

> and it could take away the Money
> Funnel that currently pipes a constant flow of funding to the Right
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> Profit by UNDERPAYING WORKERS! Majority Authorized NON-PROFIT business
> could equalize all wages resulting in treating every work-hour EQUALLY!

You've already enlightened me as to how the equal
work-hour solves so many problems, and I can see how
the non-profit business can be an effective and feasible
way to start fighting the profit-machines - what is it that
prevents or hampers non-profit business from being
leveraged - you mention something about how the
government works ?  I didn't get what you mean there...

> Can you
> imagine the change in America if everyone OWNED their own home
> free and clear and BY LAW NOTHING COULD EVER THREATEN THAT HOME??

I can begin to imagine an immensely positive impact, even
without completely understanding all the subtleties.

> The Majority can do this anytime it wants by a stroke of the pen!!

I agree that this could literally happen - I've always assumed that
a significant element preventing this is that the Majority has a hard
time identifying itself, let alone coordinating itself.  I personally
have
never considered myself part of the Majority, merely just because I
rarely seem to agree with the "observed" majority around me, but
that might be fairly localized - maybe I've been incorrect about
that all along.
R. Steve Walz - 03 Nov 2006 01:27 GMT
>;^} wrote:
>
[quoted text clipped - 42 lines]
> leveraged - you mention something about how the
> government works ?  I didn't get what you mean there...
----------------------------------
Because there is no mechanism to encourage INVESTMENT in non-profit
business, since there's no profit to be made, so it HAS to be started
by volunteer organizations or by the biggest volunteer agency of all,
namely, Democratic Government!! The ones you know well are the various
non-profit utilities that have been created as government-owned
monopolies, and the US Postal Service, and all of these are EXTREMELY
efficient and produce FAR better for us than profit business! Why is
this true? Because profit business is intended to let the rich profit
wildly from it and hijack its resources and reinvestment potential
as PROFIT to give them obscene incomes, financing their many vacations
and purchases of vast homes, lands, and industries, doing folks like
YOU out of the control of their lives and their NATION!!


> > Can you
> > imagine the change in America if everyone OWNED their own home
> > free and clear and BY LAW NOTHING COULD EVER THREATEN THAT HOME??
>
> I can begin to imagine an immensely positive impact, even
> without completely understanding all the subtleties.
--------------------------
If you own your home and it cannot be threatened, you have far greater
power to save a warchest to use in striking for higher wages, or in
lasting without taking LOW paid work because you're terrified of
eviction!! And in a fully Democratic nation, the People's Democracy
owns all land, factories and utilities not allocated to inviolable
residences, and it controls and equalizes all wages by that power,
preventing abuse of workers, because THEY decide all wages and all
business practices and investment. The People invest in their own
industries according to what they vote to produce and to build as
infrastructure in their nation.


> > The Majority can do this anytime it wants by a stroke of the pen!!
>
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> that might be fairly localized - maybe I've been incorrect about
> that all along.
-----------------------------------------------
The Majority is confused by the Untruth that they are shouted down
with by the Rightist Rich-owned Media. Most of it makes no sense
which makes it impossible to analyze, and the Media is careful NEVER
to discuss theory of government on their Media organs. Have you EVER
even SEEN a program detailing theoretical Democratic Communism? Of
course not, it would be suicide for them! Communism is only discussed
as an "obvious" evil with examples that violate what you learn in
college about communism!! They use Russia and China, which were NEVER
communisms, because they had/have huge wealthy classes that own most
everything that True Communism would NEVER permit to exist! What
Russia and China had/have is a Right-Wing controlled Slave State,
similar to a modern versiion of the Medieval Feudalism, and which
Captialism also resembles!
Steve
Victor Garrison - 26 Nov 2006 18:21 GMT
Maybe this is a joke that I've missed and I'm just being defensive.

If not I don't understand where this comment is coming from. Scout material
is based on a love of the outdoors. As a Cub Leader for my sons Pack I place
an emphasis on outdoor activities like camping, hiking and orienteering.
Family participation with youth at this age is mandatory so some can't make
it on these trips because of thier parents. But if you ask most any scout in
my Pack what thier favorite activities are  the top 5 answers will be
camping, hiking, fishing, compass navigation and archey / pinewood derby
(tie). This is coming from boys 6-10 years old. Teaching youngsters this age
about the Leave No Trace program is not easy. Honestly, I did a lousy job
trying to incorporate it into our last trip. But whatever they did get out
of it was much more than they would have gotten watching a Spongebob dvd in
the back seat of thier parent's SUV on the way to McDonald's had they not
gone camping that weekend. I'll just work harder preparing the material for
next time.

I did manage to focus them for about 2 hours on compass navigation which
they all were fascinated with. Some are still, one month later, carrying
around compasses and checking bearings for the fun of it. They had the time
of thier life and learned an essential outdoor skill. Chalk one up for Cub
Scouts.

This coming year I'm starting a Boy Scout Troop for the 3 communities on our
island. The older scouts will be working on conservation projects with state
and local govt. Camp trips and hikes will be longer and more frequent. Leave
No Trace will be practiced faithfully.

A love of nature seems to be inherent in all youngsters. What needs to be
TAUGHT is a respect for nature. Through teaching wilderness and survival
skills, frequent outdoor "adventures" and being a role model full of "love"
of the outdoors, I expect to play a big part in the development of  the
relationship these children will have with nature throughout thier lives.
It's a role that I don't take lightly (though I make sure these lessons are
as much fun fun as possible), and it's a position that I'm immensely proud
of , even though I know adults may be smirking when I pass by in uniform. (I
don't mind...I have a good sense of humor!).
I invite everyone to participate in this manner in your own communities.
Bob - 29 Nov 2006 03:12 GMT
I think this quote sums it up best:

" We cannot always build the future for our youth, but we can build our
youth for the future."

Franklin D. Roosevelt
Triman - 24 Oct 2006 22:56 GMT
http://www.tri-mansworldmailboxofficesupply.com/
> Generation 'In' gets a new nudge: Go out and play
>
[quoted text clipped - 128 lines]
> has a novel idea: "You know what they should do is tell guys [that
> hiking] is a cheap date. And the girls will think it's romantic."
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2010 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.