Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 (Tek) 9/28/84 based on 9/17/84; site azure.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!ihnp4!qantel!hplabs!tektronix!teklds!azure!chrisa From: chrisa@azure.UUCP (Chris Andersen) Newsgroups: net.singles Subject: Re: Just how far can friendship go? Message-ID: <359@azure.UUCP> Date: Tue, 16-Jul-85 04:50:58 EDT Article-I.D.: azure.359 Posted: Tue Jul 16 04:50:58 1985 Date-Received: Fri, 19-Jul-85 02:54:20 EDT References: <317@azure.UUCP> <800@vax2.fluke.UUCP> <1371@hammer.UUCP> <1671@reed.UUCP> <979@sdcsvax.UUCP> Reply-To: chrisa@azure.UUCP (Chris Andersen) Distribution: net Organization: Tektronix, Beaverton OR Lines: 113 Summary: In article <979@sdcsvax.UUCP> dbw@sdcsvax.UUCP (David Wollner) writes: > >Why is it that most people on this net seem to discuss only >physical relations (NOT sexual relations) with the opposite sex. >So far I have only noticed one person who will dare to hug both >men and women. Thanks Snoopy, I knew there were reasonable people >in this world. It's true that a physical relation with someone >who you can never be sexually interested in will not lead to >SOship, but it can be rewarding, and fulfill some of those RDA's. Yes, I have noticed this before. Hugging other men is not something that I would consider "wrong", I'm just not ready for it yet. Hell, I'm just learning how to act around women, I don't need the extra worry on top of that. When I think on it, I can't see any reason why I shouldn't hug a man as much as I should hug a women. After all, why does on need hugs in the first place? Warmth? Both men and women can give this. Companionship? Again, both can provide it. Love? Sure, why not? Why should love between men imply that they are not "right"? Still, I'm nervous about it. But I am getting better. > >Are most people looking solely for a sexual relation, and so rule >out anyone who might not fit? Some, maybe, but not all. I used to be like that, but not anymore. > This would lend credence to the argument >that the two of you are denying yourselves something you really want. >I have decided for myself that I would rather have a few extra physical >relations in order to get my daily requirement of affection. From the >physical relations, there are a couple of possibilities of sexual >relations, but somehow it doesn't seem so urgent to push it into that >realm. I agree. Sex used to be the big mystery to me. Over the years I had basically come to terms with most major aspects of my life (religion, politics, philosophy, what brand of Coke I like :-)), but sex was unkown to me. I was the kid at school whom everyone picked on. The butt of all the jokes. The spaz. The geek. The nerd. And frankly, it didn't help my social life a lot. Anywhere I might be threatened by abuse I avoided, and gained many benifits and losses. Most of those who picked on me were into sports so I avoided athletics like the plague, leaving me with a terrible physique. When I worked on math, science, computers, I was in my own little world, safe from "the bullies". Thus I ended up being "a brain". And girls! Hah! That was the worst part of all. Between the ages of 10 and 14 (approx.) we are meant to learn how to "socially relate" to those of the opposite sex. The hormones are running wild and we act like fools (usually) the first few times we ever try to get any where with the opposite sex. But we are forigiven for our fumbles because it is expected of us. It's part of the learning process. Within a few years, most of those initial problems have faded and we have a reasonable set of social graces from which to work with. That is IF you even went out and practiced. But no, I was stuck away reading books, and working on computers. (I don't regret this, but I know that this is what happened) So now, when I finally try to break out of my shell, I'm given none of the freedom we were given when we were younger (it may not have seemed like much, but it was there, trust me.) I better stop with this train of thought before you start thinking of me as a whiner. I'm not complaining (well, just a little). I just want others to realize where I'm coming from and to realize that not everyone is as socially graceful as they are. We all have faults. >I also agree that the beginning of SOship is when the two of you >decide on it. Sex is just an act and not a consummation. It has >no meaning in and of itself. The interpretations that we give to >sex cause all the trouble. [send 1000 agrees to net.agree] However, Sex is not always "just an act". It's degree of importance is dependent upon how much importance we place on it. That is, it's as important as we make. So for you it may be just an act (this is also fairly close to my view) but to others it is not. I do not wish to force my view of sex, hugging, kissing, etc. on anyone. I hope others will be open-minded enough to consider alternatives. >I vote in favor of a hug party, but given the wide dispersal of netters, >I don't think it would work. I have sent hugs over the net to people, >so if you need it, consider yourself hugged. If it's not enough >then look over at the person at the terminal next to you. If they are >also reading this article, give them a hug. You'll both feel better >for it. We may not be able to have a hug party per se with others on the net (unless they happen to live close to you), but we can have a sort of long distance hug party. Tell you what, next time your amongst a group of friends, give them a hug. They're just as infectious as laughing and just as much (if not more) fun. And maybe they will spread, who knows? Actually, who cares? Don't be concerned about how it will affect the state of the world. Don't do it as some "mission for mankind". Just do it for yourself, and for those around you. Life, Love, Laughter, and Hope, Chris Andersen -- "Roads? Where we're going we don't need any roads!" ----------------------------------------------------- tektronix!azure!chrisa