Time to lighten up a bit. All that accident analysis writing and pondering worked me. So, I’ll take some shortcuts today – both in length and depth (that’s what…oh, nevermind). My friend Peter Haeussler, who introduced me to the fun scale, was cleaning-up his office the other day and found a personal ad that he’d clipped (for amusement only, mind you — happily married for 25 years) from the Anchorage Press years back. Given that we all seemed to get a kick out of my total flop of a personal ad, as well as people’s great replies/comments with their own stories, this seemed a nice addition. Only question – where was this “goddess” around the time I posted my ad? Then again, something in the tone spells “psycho,” does it not? And that was one of my original qualifications: Psychos need not apply. As if I could be choosy. But I digress, and it’s worked out for the better anyway. Especially considering, as Peter wrote in email, “If she’s real, she might give you something that would make for Type 3 fun…” All you climber dudes up in AK, home to the wintertime adage, “She might not be much to look at, but she’s warm,” take note — the goddess could still be out there.
Does she work in the ‘industry’? hmmm…
Now perfect and breast pair up very nicely, but prodigiously and long? Makes for a lot of productive surface area, like for making yeasties and other such don’t-want-em-on-me bugs.
As usual… even the dirtbag climbers are drawn to the “Barbie” types! Sheez, where does that leave us less-than-lengthy, taut, perky-boob girls? Here’s the deal boys… perfect breasts – SAG! Kel, ask Aaron for his sexuality rating regarding psychos… This chick might qualify as a front runner!
Oh of it wasn’t for the fact that I am so sleep deprived….