Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!security!genrad!decvax!yale-com!debenedi
From: debenedi@yale-com.UUCP (Robert DeBenedictis)
Newsgroups: net.singles
Subject: Re: On "platonic" friendships
Message-ID: <2601@yale-com.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 14-Dec-83 16:32:32 EST
Article-I.D.: yale-com.2601
Posted: Wed Dec 14 16:32:32 1983
Date-Received: Sat, 17-Dec-83 03:27:06 EST
References: umcp-cs.4412
Lines: 27

Randy Trigg (umcp-cs!randy Mon Dec 12 21:41, Article-Id: umcp-cs.4412)
noted the following:

        In every close friendship between MOTOS at 
        least one of the two people at some time 
        had a physical attraction for the other.
    So what do you think?  Plumb the depths of your experience.  Have
    you ever had a *completely* platonic close friendship (i.e. one
    that was always platonic for both of you)?  I haven't.  

I think this is a really neat observation.  Might it be the case
that platonic relationships only exist between MOTIS (Members Of
The Inappropriate Sex).  Hmmm.  What are the combinations of
people that are unlikely to result in ANY sexual tension.  Well,
two straight guys, two straight women, and a gay guy and a lesbian.
Hmmm.  And then there are some combinations where the "physical
attraction" could only possibly rest on one side of the relationship;
say with a lesbian and a straight guy.  Another Big Hmmm.  The only
relationships which inherently involve a potential imbalance of
physical attraction are those involving gay people.  All this assumes
that the labels 'straight' and 'gay' are a lot more black and white
than they are.  How do bisexuals fit into this?  Hmmm.  Hmmm.  Hmmm.

"Fascinating," as Mr. Spock would say.

Another Message In The Bottle from
Robert DeBenedictis