eastcoast1 wrote:

Ok, so I need to get some sleep.  Busy day tomorrow.  Then it is our "just us three" dinner tomorrow night with the kids and me.  This was fun, will do it again tomorrow? 

Ok goodnight Eastcoast  enjoy your dinner with the kids tomorrow and will talk to you tomorrow night

JetmamaDiDi wrote:

annieahoy wrote:

eastcoast1 wrote:

Interesting take from Gabrielle. 

There seems to be little or no interaction between them. However, I am wondering why they are spending so much time together and wouldn't be surprised if Peta suggested this lunch thing. 
 

 How can we assume or define "so much time" from 3 or 4 pics from one moment in time during lunch?? It is both dangerous and kind've unfair to assume anything other than the lunch together. When I mentioned earlier that I've had a meals with male friends who were not my husband on occasion, iI I put myself into Peta's spot in these photos, it could easily be assumed by onlookers that I was a friend to Maks; however, it doesn't look any different (although it would be sans phones, I might add!) than my lunch with anyone--although I WOULD likely be smiling or talking or joking around....so the relationship could also be construed as more romantic or involved than it actually is--because that is just how I am. I don't see a lot of emotion or expression in either of their faces or actions (just at face value).

So I think in all fairness to all parties we should be careful not to inject our own emotions too far into what we see. It is easy to "assume" what we want or don't want to see and/or read into it.

I think East might have referred to the number of times we have seen Maks and Peta together since December and the sheer time they would have spent together as established by tweets, travel schedules and other evidence, holidays and the like.    You are right, Jet.  These are a few snapshots at a lunch that would normally take about an hour or so. They don't necessarily give an indication of what's going on (or not going on) between them.  But neither do the touchy feely pics of MnM.  I say this, as the only picture of her with Fedor (Christmas, come to light unintentionally) looks equally cosy to me.  You are right, everything is circumstantial.  But the mere quanity of what we get is crushing imo.    
 

gabriele wrote:

JetmamaDiDi wrote:

annieahoy wrote:

There seems to be little or no interaction between them. However, I am wondering why they are spending so much time together and wouldn't be surprised if Peta suggested this lunch thing. 
 

 How can we assume or define "so much time" from 3 or 4 pics from one moment in time during lunch?? It is both dangerous and kind've unfair to assume anything other than the lunch together. When I mentioned earlier that I've had a meals with male friends who were not my husband on occasion, iI I put myself into Peta's spot in these photos, it could easily be assumed by onlookers that I was a friend to Maks; however, it doesn't look any different (although it would be sans phones, I might add!) than my lunch with anyone--although I WOULD likely be smiling or talking or joking around....so the relationship could also be construed as more romantic or involved than it actually is--because that is just how I am. I don't see a lot of emotion or expression in either of their faces or actions (just at face value).

So I think in all fairness to all parties we should be careful not to inject our own emotions too far into what we see. It is easy to "assume" what we want or don't want to see and/or read into it.

I think East might have referred to the number of times we have seen Maks and Peta together since December and the sheer time they would have spent together as established by tweets, travel schedules and other evidence, holidays and the like.    You are right, Jet.  These are a few snapshots at a lunch that would normally take about an hour or so. They don't necessarily give an indication of what's going on (or not going on) between them.  But neither do the touchy feely pics of MnM.  I say this, as the only picture of her with Fedor (Christmas, come to light unintentionally) looks equally cosy to me.  You are right, everything is circumstantial.  But the mere quanity of what we get is crushing imo.    
 

 
Valid points, Gabriele.  And safe to say simply that "we know nothing!!"   LOL  LOL

JetmamaDiDi wrote:

april6263 wrote:

JetmamaDiDi wrote:

 
LOL LOL.....perfect granny modeling them too!!! LOL

LOL.....and they have ruffles on the legs...LOL

 
Guess they came from Macy's instead of Kohl's!!!! LOL LOL

LOL!!!!!LOL!!!!!!!LOL!!!!!!   so does that mean that she should wear her Cantamessa with them???????LOL

annieahoy wrote:

april6263 wrote:

JetmamaDiDi wrote:

 
LOL LOL.....perfect granny modeling them too!!! LOL

LOL.....and they have ruffles on the legs...LOL

I don't think even Abby Lee Miller would need them this big!!
 

LOL!!!!LOL!!!!