The Day The World Stopped Shopping - J.B. MacKinnon

[7Wannabe5]

What did seem to be the case, however, si that consumer culture as most of us know it is an increasingly powerful force. "It thrives in situations of instability and contradiction, on social disruption and individual mobility,"

I've only read the chapters available for free, but agree that it's of interest to all. I think this sentence you quoted actually speaks to the fact that consumerism is not just consumerism, but rather it is representative of some stronger underlying human tendency or theme. For example, in the olden days of the 20th century when resource depletion was primarily seen as a human population problem, some of the more conservative writers on the topic would chastise other groups for their egregious sexuality being to blame. Similarly, conservative types today may point to the weakened sexuality of Western youth as to blame for decline of marriage and birth rates. However, as a lever, the education of women seems to be more strongly implicated/influential in both cases.

I would suggest that accepting that humans often like "shiny new things/opportunities" and acknowledging that surely most of us can see the upside potential of some degree of "social disruption and individual mobility" unless we blindly wish to lock our own positions at the top in place as status quo, is what will open our eyes to the levers that in our own lives influenced us towards having fewer children than our parents and also then towards moderating our per capita consumption in our personal lives. Maybe framing it more towards the market basket of everything we want, more or less materially manifested, in our complex, post-post-modern, affluent lives? I mean, isn't actually sort of the case that what we mean by Simple Living is actually Even More Complex Living?

Maybe just what I am pondering in the moment, because I have decided to dedicate my 60th year to integrating some more "shiny new things" into or back into my lifestyle as I simultaneously maintain my overall lifestyle spending below 1 eco-Jacob PPP. Also, I was reading an article about how the Pagan religions introduced the practice of having sweet cakes for festival days, and then the Puritans banned the practice, and I'm tired of hearing myself become somebody who tells other people what not to do. It seems like it is almost always some grouchy old guy with gout and indigestion and only one book in his library who is afraid of dying and is therefore always trying to make life less fun for the rest of us. And who wants to be like that character? Blech.

I say let us have cake, shiny new earrings shaped like jeweled dragonflies, tickets to musical theater productions, nature preserves, permaculture parties, punk retro-cycling plants, beach walks, slutty afternoons spent reading piles of new-to-us novels, smart mornings studying new to us math, colorful chickens, solar experiment laboratories, cute babies to pass around, geeky game groups, hand-knit sweaters, very good pens, and all the sorts of fun sex we all like! We can do it! We just need to get rid of all the most boring expensive stuff. Okay, Interesting Fun for 7WB5 Living isn't for everyone, but Conscious Complex Living in Alignment with Only Your Own Individual Values/Druthers pretty much is by definition.

[AxelHeyst]

I mean, isn't actually sort of the case that what we mean by Simple Living is actually Even More Complex Living?

This is why I typically avoid using the phrase Voluntary Simplicity, even though what it describes/is pointing at is bang on. 'Voluntary' makes me think of someone who volunteers to take the lashes of another hence implying sacrifice, and Simplicity makes me think basic, monotonous, slow, mellow, etc. So the mind picture is something like 'choosing to sacrifice an interesting life for a boring and beige life.'

Post-consumer praxis works but it's nerdy/jargony and orients itself around what it is not. It's a niche insider term.

Fecund Complexity?

Your post also made me think of one of the models of giftedness being Intensity, Complexity, and Drivenness, and how at odds those attributes are with what Voluntary Simplicity sounds like it is. In reality, of course, the practice of Voluntary Simplicity grants the space and resources for ICD to flourish and self-direct, but you wouldn't know that upon a cursory examination of the philosophy.

I say let us have cake, shiny new earrings shaped like jeweled dragonflies, tickets to musical theater productions, nature preserves, permaculture parties, punk retro-cycling plants, beach walks, slutty afternoons spent reading piles of new-to-us novels, smart mornings studying new to us math, colorful chickens, solar experiment laboratories, cute babies to pass around, geeky game groups, hand-knit sweaters, very good pens, and all the sorts of fun sex we all like! We can do it! We just need to get rid of all the most boring expensive stuff. Okay, Interesting Fun for 7WB5 Living isn't for everyone, but Conscious Complex Living in Alignment with Only Your Own Individual Values/Druthers pretty much is by definition.

Amen, and where do I sign?

[Jin+Guice]

I say let us have cake, shiny new earrings shaped like jeweled dragonflies, tickets to musical theater productions, nature preserves, permaculture parties, punk retro-cycling plants, beach walks, slutty afternoons spent reading piles of new-to-us novels, smart mornings studying new to us math, colorful chickens, solar experiment laboratories, cute babies to pass around, geeky game groups, hand-knit sweaters, very good pens, and all the sorts of fun sex we all like! We can do it! We just need to get rid of all the most boring expensive stuff. Okay, Interesting Fun for 7WB5 Living isn't for everyone, but Conscious Complex Living in Alignment with Only Your Own Individual Values/Druthers pretty much is by definition.

To my great delight, I've found that spending less money begets this lifestyle much more easily than spending more. My dumpster/ ground scores from yesterday include: a giant houndstooth scarf and enough donuts to give a dinosaur diabetes.

Voluntary Simplicity are just the words you use to get the people who find those words to be new and shiny on your team.

Also, I liked this book. Great as reinforcement, not that much new information for someone who's been at this for awhile.

[7Wannabe5]

To my great delight, I've found that spending less money begets this lifestyle much more easily than spending more. My dumpster/ ground scores from yesterday include: a giant houndstooth scarf and enough donuts to give a dinosaur diabetes.

Absolutely, but sometimes I neglect to distribute my tiny bits of seed money in the most appropriate manner. For example, it's pretty easy for me to go years spending $0 on my wardrobe if I have no standard/vision whatsoever, when setting even the most miniscule seed budget might raise QoL in that realm much higher. OTOH, I'm speaking to the fact that a focus on "stuff" and "shopping" neglects the boring categories such as shelter or insurance on which we are most likely to feel like we must spend a large amount of money because middle-class, conservative values, blah, blah, blah. For example, you can "seed" many small interesting projects for the cost of the property tax outlay and roof replacement costs for any real estate footage beyond the 350 sq.ft/human which usually maximizes happiness in shelter accomodations. IOW, the categories which are most often exempted from challenges such as Buy Nothing Year are often actually the ones most likely to offer most substantial spending reduction possibilities. The dreary mid-grade frugal trade-off of buying paint to maintain your "investment" in DIY backyard shed to house riding mower, but not "wasting" money on tickets for "consumption" of live music performance. Maybe I'm just speaking to the fact that it can be pretty easy to drift into "penny wise pound foolish" in relationship to your own values/druthers/mojo absent periodic clarification. And, I may also be speaking to the fact that an individualistic perspective/practice may tend towards "wasting" money for those who are less individualistic. For example, I could buy a whole lot of sparkle fun for what many of the more introverted here spend on meeting their privacy druthers.

[Frita]

Absolutely, but sometimes I neglect to distribute my tiny bits of seed money in the most appropriate manner…

IOW, the categories which are most often exempted from challenges such as Buy Nothing Year are often actually the ones most likely to offer most substantial spending reduction possibilities.

A value-based QoL allowance or budget line item seems to be something to consider. For me, it would translate into more awareness. I already think about this somewhat while purchasing.

Examples: 1) The locally-stored organic kale supports small farming and methods, decreases transport costs, is healthier, and is an ingredient for lovely meals I can enjoy alone or with my veggie-lover-in-training son. 2) Or purchasing additional bulbs and perennials to support local business, beautify my front garden, attract bees/birds/hummingbirds , and reduce time and expense of buying annuals. 3) Buying a highest quality shower curtain reduces need to go shopping for a new one (time, expense, energy/trash production), is easier to clean, and looks and works better.

Connections: +1 on the live music and musical theater Replacing all my undergarments this past summer has been awesome. When changing/getting dressed in my mirror, I just think, “Wow, this stuff looks good on me!” Every. Time.

Question: How can I apply this to other areas of my life?

[7Wannabe5]

Connections: +1 on the live music and musical theater Replacing all my undergarments this past summer has been awesome. When changing/getting dressed in my mirror, I just think, “Wow, this stuff looks good on me!” Every. Time.

Yes! This is why some of the specific to Jacob advice in ERE/blog (as opposed to the elegant generalizations), such as "wear your underwear until it disintegrates" should mostly be ignored. The exercise in YMOYL which has you simply Yes/No whether you received value for each expenditure of money (life-energy) each month is first simple step towards integrating values clarification and work(s)/purpose(s)/capital(s.) Almost akin to becoming the "issue based voter" citizen equivalent in one's consumerism. I would go so far as to say that if you know the human who created something in alignment with their purpose which you wish to acquire with some of your trade-facilitating money then what you are engaging in is something other than Modern Consumerism.

Where I'm coming from is that although I did derive some benefits from shelling out for my very own tiny apartment for the last few years, the expense wasn't something I checked with a resounding "Yes!", like you would for your underwear purchase or I did for taking my daughter to musical theater production for her birthday. OTOH, I've known for many years that I do benefit from spending relatively more money in the categories which I label as Girl Stuff, Gear, and Edutainment, vs. "owning my own car" or even "owning my own bed." My main point here being that a stodgy, middle-aged, middle-class, millionaire-next-door XSTJ frugal man and I could agree on exactly the same frugal monthly total spending budget (perhaps for very different reasons, especially if he is also towards climate denier/decrier), but hold zero "Yes!" checked line items in common. And the same holds true for activities "purchased" with free time. And that's okay. Our Venn diagrams don't need to overlap to maintain functionality of the commons. However, I will note that I realized upon reflection that the reason why I do have a non-shortage of humans who meet this description (frugal, male, older, stodgy/rigid, millionaire) in my active social circle is usually that we overlap on Gardening (and/or Camping/Nature) as an activity/value, much more than even Sex. This is something we both/all shop for with a good deal of our time and also a bit of our money. The humans with whom I Venn diagram overlap on the activity/budget of reading/books are much more likely to be broke-azz Humans who do not do/make/shop/scavenge Gardening/Seeds and/or Reading/Books and/or Science/Equipment and/or Art/Supplies are pretty much invisible to me, but they could also have their own unique line item frugal budgets.

[Jin+Guice]

@7: I don't think there are that many holes in frugality as described by ERE. Along with the Buy Nothing Year is the encouragement to focus on the big 3 (housing, food, transportation) as the most likely cause of not being able to get you budget very very low.

To me, the territory that remains underexplored is what to do once you have freed yourself from the work/ consume treadmill. If you've done that using the heuristic of extreme frugality in a community of extreme frugality, it can be scary to buy some shiny stuff you can easily afford. This is why I am currently obsessed with actualization. And I think you are also a guiding light here as you are willing to fuck around and find out on a lot less $$ than the rest of us. The question remains, what do you do with all of our hard earned freedom as a post-consumer in a consumer world, once we recover from the salt mines and get tired of feeling smug about how post-consumer we are?

[Frita]

My main point here being that a stodgy, middle-aged, middle-class, millionaire-next-door XSTJ frugal man and I could agree on exactly the same frugal monthly total spending budget (perhaps for very different reasons, especially if he is also towards climate denier/decrier), but hold zero "Yes!" checked line items in common. And the same holds true for activities "purchased" with free time. And that's okay. Our Venn diagrams don't need to overlap to maintain functionality of the commons. However, I will note that I realized upon reflection that the reason why I do have a non-shortage of humans who meet this description (frugal, male, older, stodgy/rigid, millionaire) in my active social circle is usually that we overlap on Gardening (and/or Camping/Nature) as an activity/value, much more than even Sex. This is something we both/all shop for with a good deal of our time and also a bit of our money. The humans with whom I Venn diagram overlap on the activity/budget of reading/books are much more likely to be broke-azz Humans who do not do/make/shop/scavenge Gardening/Seeds and/or Reading/Books and/or Science/Equipment and/or Art/Supplies are pretty much invisible to me, but they could also have their own unique line item frugal budgets.

Continued below and planning to eat now. I apologize for the double post, all.

[Frita]

@5W7 Agreed, value-driven choices can look identical with different values driving the motivation. Rather than a two-dimensional model, it’s three (more, actually) model with values and behavior both having standalone Venn diagrams between the two people.

[Frita]

The question remains, what do you do with all of our hard earned freedom as a post-consumer in a consumer world, once we recover from the salt mines and get tired of feeling smug about how post-consumer we are?

Well put and the space I am in now, just doing my thing…I don’t really relate to the box-ticking but find it amusing. I need to ponder and addressing my journal update.

[7Wannabe5]

I don't think there are that many holes in frugality as described by ERE. Along with the Buy Nothing Year is the encouragement to focus on the big 3 (housing, food, transportation) as the most likely cause of not being able to get you budget very very low.

I agree, I was speaking more to the title of the book being discussed on this thread. However, it is the case that I purposefully choose to make Scavenging lists rather than Shopping lists myself. On the rare occasions when I purposefully choose to shop for stuff, it almost feels akin to doing something like choosing to snort some cocaine. And it is stupid for me to feel this way if/when I am "wasting" much more money on long-term locked in contracts, perhaps analogous to constantly taking some prescription drug without considering or reconsidering its benefits. Also, there are some "wasteful" ways in which I do spend money, such as going out to eat, to which I am somewhat habituated. So, if I'm picking up slices of pizza, but not buying myself earrings or new underwear, I am de facto valuing "expedience" over "personal aesthetics", and the only thing wrong with this equation is the "de facto" part of it. This is why periodic values clarification has to be part of my frugal practice towards maximizing quality of life within values clarified limits.

To me, the territory that remains underexplored is what to do once you have freed yourself from the work/ consume treadmill.

Yeah, this isn't a problem for me. More of an enjoyable challenge. I can always just default to "putter about reading and gardening." My initial motivation for frugal practice was not resource conservation, it was more time to putter about as a generalist. In fact, so much so, that I occasionally wonder if Jacob came up with resource conservation as an ingenious social morality cover story for choosing to putter about doing what he wants. I mean, it was a real boost to my self-esteem when I came to realize that I was a conservationist rather than a slacker.

Anyways, my main problem, okay one of my many problems, is that I keep having to shell out for more garden space. It's ridiculous. I'm going to have to write my own take on the classic collection of essays, "Garden Open Today" which will be entitled "Garden Foreclosed Today." Divorce, Illness, Theft, Vandalism, Insanity, Verbal Assault, Financial Default; there is seemingly no end to the tribulations that plague my attempts to putter about in peaceful planting (sigh,) At this juncture, I have basically given up on developing my own well-boundaried plot and intend to focus on community gardening, guerilla gardening, and foraging. It might be interesting to note that in contrast I have suffered few difficulties with maintaining boundary which allows me to putter about reading. Well, there was the occasion when my usually mild-mannered father ripped up and disposed of the copy of "Valley of the Dolls" which I was only halfway finished reading, but generally I am left undisturbed.

[Jin+Guice]

I agree, I was speaking more to the title of the book being discussed on this thread.

Ah, I see. This book is more of a booster shot to ERE than an addition of any useful information. I still very much enjoyed it and at times found it hard to put down.

Yeah, this isn't a problem for me. More of an enjoyable challenge. I can always just default to "putter about reading and gardening."

I should have said "we" instead of "you" although I meant the grand "you" and not 7w5 specifically. I think that as a group, this territory is under explored. This part is less likely to work through following instructions or copying OG original models, so while all the FIRE OGs remain interesting case studies, it's an area where I think a lot of case studies are useful as a guiding light, as opposed to everyone saving, index investing and retiring, where a lot of case studies are more about proof of concept.

My initial motivation for frugal practice was not resource conservation, it was more time to putter about as a generalist.

Yes, same, although I wasn't as sold on the generalist part as first, so reading about others doing it was helpful.

So, if I'm picking up slices of pizza, but not buying myself earrings or new underwear, I am de facto valuing "expedience" over "personal aesthetics", and the only thing wrong with this equation is the "de facto" part of it.

Trying to figure this out is why I became obsessed with self-actualization. After doing a bunch of thinking and reading, the people who talk about actualization seem to be the people with the best concept of why this question is important and at least studies of people appearing to have answered it to one degree or another. Mainly getting out of or understanding, accepting and to some degree interacting with your own personal "de facto."

[7Wannabe5]

Mainly getting out of or understanding, accepting and to some degree interacting with your own personal "de facto."

100%. And as you have noted elsewhere, sometimes trauma is implicated. I would suggest that sometimes it's just that we suck at doing the math in our heads, so we have to pull out the pencil and paper. Actually acknowledging the trade-offs we are freely making is towards increasing our skin in the game.

OTOH, sometimes when we second guess life shopping/budget decisions we made in the past, we may be forgetting some of the factors that were at play in the moment we made those decisions. For example, I sometimes forget that minor trauma combined with my unique flavor of ADD led to the reality that I did not learn how to drive a car well enough to pass the test until I was 32 years old and my kids were 9 and 6. And, like the cart placed in front of the donkey, the fact that I couldn't drive contributed to my tendency towards frugality, because it's more difficult to shop in the U.S. (prior to internet dominance) if you can't drive a car. It also contributed to my decision to be, quite literally, a stay-at-home Mom. It, obviously, also contributes to my tendency to think of car-ownership/operation as more optional to adult functioning than most other Americans of my generation. I would also suggest that finally acquiring my driver's license at twice the usual age almost certainly contributed to the eventuality of my divorce, although I still retain the habit of almost never driving when in the company of a male partner, which has the unfortunate effect of making me seem much more passive and old-fashioned than I really am. This is why, even though it is a waste of money and fossil fuels, I made myself start taking myself out to eat and on car road trips and similar activities after my last domestic break-up. I also err too much on the side of letting my male partners buy clothing for me, because I do not have the habit of shopping. For example, I currently own 13 pairs of shoes/boots (way more than usual for me, I'm overdue for round of clutter control) and I only purchased 2 of these pairs myself, 6 of them I somehow got for free (mostly from my mother's huge collection which she can't wear due to mobility issues), the other 5 pairs were gifts from my last male domestic partner, mostly because he wanted me to do things with him for which he didn't think I had the right kind of shoes/boots or sometimes because he wanted some new shoes for himself and it would be a good deal to buy me a pair too. My "ex" gave me $100 for my birthday with command to buy something frivolous for myself, because he knows that I usually won't. It's probably good to be a little bit frivolous sometimes, but I am kind of out of practice, even though I'm not a terribly serious person. My most consistent Girl Stuff category expenditure is the $8 I shell out to bleach my hair blonde every 6 weeks, and that's pretty frivolous. I guess frivolous kind of vibes a mix of fun and feminine. So, maybe towards what would Cindy Lauper buy?

[jennypenny]

I enjoyed the book. Not much new but well written.

I think it should be read in conjunction with books like Empire of Things and some early feminist writings through. While I'm all in on ending consumerism, targeted consumption is a way for underprivileged groups to buy a modicum of privilege. It's hard to fault them for that, and I think most (usually) white male writers miss that important component of consumerism. I think this too often while listening to Hagens' podcast too. There's a lack of understanding of how underprivileged people use consumerism in a way that [they perceive] brings them safety through social acceptance (not pleasure, as is assumed). It's not about dopamine hits unless one is already pretty far up Maslow's hierarchy.

[7Wannabe5]

@jennypenny:

100%. You very neatly summed up the point(s) that I was babbling around. The signaling of cultural capital or social class is often attempted with targeted consumption, and (as always) this is more often the task of females* and more often the display occurs upon their bodies or within their "bowers." OTOH, sometimes humans, particularly innately artistic types, are just shopping in aid of displaying their true aesthetic. And sometimes it is just a "shiny, shiny, thing" dopamine hit.

The fact that this desire to signal or display is so strong, even when not quite conscious, is often a problem in relationships that results in a sort of dueling through shopping. And at this level, it is important to even question what/if you may be attempting to signal or display by, for instance, shopping for financial investments of one kind or another. For example, the subtle art of not displaying your wealth/class/cultural-capital is not entirely unlike the subtle art of looking like you look beautiful without looking like you are wearing make-up. One book on the topic of Integral Relationships which I read actually included a list describing how to estimate a woman's Integral Development level based on her appearance, and I was not surprised to discover that Tier 2 women in their feminine energy "simply" "radiate" "beauty" from "within", as I simultaneously engaged a wee cynical bit of my masculine energy to calculate the likely lifetime "life-energy" expense (protein intake in youth, dentistry, dermatology, small yoga studio with smooth wooden flooring, unbleached linen, custom-blended with mortar/pestle moisturizer, leisure hours available for sleep, lunch with amusing friends at the new vegan cafe, swimming at the lake house...) resulting in the ability to perform such a stunt.


*In fact, if I think about the "thing" that a born-affluent-with-cultural-capital in early/mid 20th century man would most/first miss as signifier of his affluence, it very well might be the "quiet" presence/service of woman/women. This is part of the reason why affairs with the nanny are so prevalent. One of the weird archaic somewhat subtle snobberies I inherited from my father would be that it rings a bit "lower class" to "send your wife out to work" even if your wife was raised towards the goal of becoming "a lawyer who plays tennis." I also "inherited" his belief that worn, rumpled clothing is an upper-class signifier. So, it's pretty obvious why "ERE" sort of seems like a philosophy that might have been invented by a younger brother I never had.

[Jean]

I think you overestimate the cost of radiating beauty.
When young, nearly all women radiate natural beauty, and then, they abuse it away from them, by using various poisons.
The most extreme cases are the many west african women that start using ton of "beauty" product that make them look like shit at 25. I thought west african women just aged that much quicker, until i saw one of my friend's gf, that was putting her money in sewing machines instead, making good money and not ruining her face and hair. She was in her 30's, but she still radiated that youthfull beauty that disapear so quickly.

Well, that is to say, a lot of consumption could be avoided, if young women could be assured that they are beautifull.

Not that men are immune to buy shit to feel more secure.

[ducknald_don]

Not that men are immune to buy shit to feel more secure.

Men tend to be much worse, instead of $100 cosmetics they are buying $50,000 cars or $2000 TV’s.

[Scott 2]

It's not beauty. The power brokers seek class signals. When you need resources controlled by those with small power, you need to pass their petty (broken) class checks. Match the associated cultural norms.

In the US, a black woman interviewing for white collar position, needs to arrive with a classy purse, highly professional attire, hair done in specific ways. She will be judged otherwise, especially by other black women, conscious of how she reflects on them.

I could roll into that same interview - jeans, sneakers and a polo. And probably get preferential treatments. There may even be an assumption of excellence, due to my casual appearance. Hell - I could get praise and connect by biking there.


Those assumptions aren't wrong. I demonstrate my status and privilege, by opting out. Most leaders in the FI space are of the same background. Advanced degrees. Upper middle class or higher families. White. It's a lazy transfer of the associated trappings into freedom instead of showing off materially.

[7Wannabe5]

When young, nearly all women radiate natural beauty

Yes, I agree, but in the context I described, the woman is simultaneously described as being at Tier 2 level in her adult psychological development, which is rarely achieved before middle-age, except perhaps for the extremely small minority of women who are now born into a Tier 2 micro-culture. So, either (1)these women approximate age 40 and are very well-maintained OR (2)they are the mythical daughters of Hanzi Freinacht living on a mountain side in Scandinavia OR (3)they are the sort of young women one might encounter in any given yoga studio in Akron, OH, who some 50-something Integral Guy wants to delude himself into believing are extremely mature in their psychological development, ergo appropriate as partner(s) for him. The likelihood of (3) is clearly the highest.

Well, that is to say, a lot of consumption could be avoided, if young women could be assured that they are beautifull.

Quite true, and unfortunately a lack of such assurance is becoming worse due to social media. Suicide rates of young teenage girls are at record high. That said, there are also factors that could be brought into play in order to shorten the length of this phase of "angst and frivolity", although I also believe that it is to some extent unavoidable just like the Barbie phase many girls go through around age 6. I remember overhearing an extremely humorous (to me) conversation by a group of 6 year old girls whose parents were mostly affluent academic types, "I don't have to be a princess, because I can be anything I want to be, and it might not be that great to be a princess, but if I was going to be a princess, the princess I would be is Jasmine." "Do you like pink? I don't like pink. I like fuchsia and banana-mania. If I had a castle, it would be painted banana-mania." "Me too!"

The best defense is having some female friends who are like co-operative sisters (as opposed to catty competitors) and a Dad (or Dad figure) who mostly praises you for qualities other than your beauty, because this has the effect of making your core belief in your beauty more of an "of course, that too", even if the rough reality of the market may later inform you differently. IOW, much better to have the challenge of matching the outer to the inner than vice-versa.

[Jean]

This sound more like submissions signal than class signal.
And casualy clothing is way to signal that you know that you are one of them.
But i still think a lot of those effort are missing the point.
When you are from a different race, it is very important to communicating that your aren't hostile. I think we instinctively percieve people of different race as hostile.
People seem to try to communicate this by mimiquing, but the most successful attempts i observed where achieved by *pure openess". I don't have a better phrase, i'm sorry. Mimiquing signals an effort, but it also signals you're hiding something.

@7w5
Interesting. I was pretty sure a dad was implied in this, but i "knew" that telling your daughter is beautiful wasn't the right thing to do.

But also, my gf is slowly approaching 40 looking gorgeous, and all she does, is enjoying her job, not smoking or drinking, not using cosmetic product, and maintain a relationship with someone (me ) that remind her to sleep and eat.