Posting as someone who can disappear from the site for a few days at a time (mainly weekdays), I welcome it. Friendly missing-you/how-are-you PMs are good. Ok, so it's not quite the same as not coming on for weeks/months but it's the same point.
ago I had also been out of a 3yr relationship for 6months where she took the pill and we both knew we were clean, and my first time after that I was very nervous again and because of that it actually took me longer, but I can see nerves or just unfamiliarity with the new person being a possible cause. I did use them a few times with the ex, but we both weren't that fond of them. Having to wear them made a difference.
Hope it fixes itself or you find a solution.
Being a Subaru fan and owner, all theirs have all-wheel-drive so you won't slide around (great in snow/the rain/mud), the Forester (or is it Outback?) might be cheaper and certainly a bit less heavyweight than a full land-rover type. Drive very nicely too, the more modern revisions are based on the same chassis as an Impreza (if it's comfortable enough for you) and that's an awesome car and for extra pull the turbo version's pretty damn quick. The only other ones I know anything about are the LandRover/Range Rover which have already been discussed lots, or the Rav4 which is totally just the town run-about for those who want a 4x4 and a bit of a girly one too (excuse the comment but you know what I mean). Fine if that's what you want but is it suitable for your situation?
Range-Rover sport is the top car lots of celebs have been buying up and they liked on Top Gear, you can get it in very bright colours but I suspect that's way out of the budget. Would write more but I'm more a fan of sports cars than 4x4s.
Ok I cleaned this one Eagerslut:
Absolutely spotless as you can see...
Where's the next one?
You don't say much about what kind of fun you're after - just replying as a fellow Farnhamite. Men or women? Both? Anything in particular you want to do? You'll get better responses if you're more specific.
Irish definitely, Scottish too. Have some that don't appeal to me but if I got to know them a bit and fancied them anyway it wouldn't make any difference.
I could mention one evening (at a Madonna concert several years ago) of standing next to an absolutely drop-dead gorgeous blonde who I was all set on trying to chat up when I realised that a) the big well-built bloke standing the other side was her husband (not that it made any difference him being big), and b) she had a very strong Texan accent that just didn't appeal to me.
Why do I always spot these too late?
Oh well.
I remember coming back home one evening after a night out and turning on the TV, flicking through the channels as you do and coming across a girl I used to work with on a dodgy program on five. Actually it was one of those excuses for more titillation type documentaries . Mind you she had said at a work-outing dinner one evening that she was trying to get into modelling and glamour stuff.
That was a little scary.
Kinky Lizard,
Sorry to break the tradition in this thread but I'm going to try and help. I'm not an astronomer by any means but I do read some scientific mags very occasionally and did get quite interested in it at one point.
I seem to remember that reflectors are cheaper for the equivalent power but bigger and heavier to carry around cos mirros are heavier than the equivalent lenses. But can be supported better in the frame.
Refractors, conversely, are more expensive but smaller, lighter. As they get larger even the professionals are using reflectors 'cos there's only so big you can make a lens without it collapsing under it's own weight, and easier to build with better light transmission (I think? IIRC) with mirrors. Easier to reflect all the light than filter none of it.
If it's only a small one (oo-er.. couldn't help it!), the weight difference won't be so big or so important. Make sure you rate them by amount of light they pick up (measured in some silly unit I can't remember like luminance or er...) not by how much they enlarge things if it's for stargazing, and the quality of the optics. It's no good having it 500x life-size if it's too faint to see through the eye-piece or you can't get it in focus. Stars should always be a point of light by the way if you look through it no matter what enlargement (oo-er again..), any stars that look bigger are the telescope's inaccuracy cos they're just tooooo far away (almost about to quote an early part of HHgttG there). Or they're not stars and much closer. I had a book with some good advice in it somewhere, think it's back my folk's house though.
Also - do you wear glasses? If so you might want to get a corrective dioptre eyepiece for it, if it gets a bit more serious.
Handy links? usually does me proud, and I came across with a quick search - go to the guide section for buyers.
ER... that's about all I can say I'm afraid. Hope you boldly go...