Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84 SMI; site sun.uucp
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!decvax!decwrl!sun!sunny
From: sunny@sun.uucp (Ms. Sunny Kirsten)
Newsgroups: net.singles
Subject: Re: Just how far can friendship go?
Message-ID: <2433@sun.uucp>
Date: Wed, 17-Jul-85 15:46:09 EDT
Article-I.D.: sun.2433
Posted: Wed Jul 17 15:46:09 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 20-Jul-85 04:46:43 EDT
References: <317@azure.UUCP> <800@vax2.fluke.UUCP> <1371@hammer.UUCP> <1671@reed.UUCP> <979@sdcsvax.UUCP> <359@azure.UUCP>
Distribution: net
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Lines: 65

> >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.
> 
> 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.
> 

	Can you say "homophobia", boys and girls?  ...  I knew you could.

	You may hug someone with whom you're experiencing sexual relations,
	but that doesn't mean that hugs are, per se, sexual in nature.

> >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.
> 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.  
> 
	"SEX" is the most intimate of sharing experiences,
	"HUGs" are a less intimate    sharing experience...

You may approach sex seeking purely physical gratification, but doing so
is like wolfing down a BigMac as compared to spending hours of ecstacy
enjoying a sumptuous multi-course feast as the sensual delight it can be.

But even taking the time to invest the energy to fully enjoy an intimate
sharing experience can be simple physical gratification compared to the
truly soul fullfilling experience which CAN be shared between two humans.
When approached in the appropriate manner, a hug can give you more
satisfaction to the depths of your soul than hours of sexual intimacy.

What I'm alluding to is spiritual union.  When you get close enough to 
another person to hug them, your auras "hug" each other as much as your
bodies do.  The melting and merging of auras, the positive feedback of
love, life force, chi-energy, spirit, is the kind of experience which
truly meets your minimum adult daily requirements of "love".  You may
approach this level of sharing with almost anyone, but from my experience,
the deepest, most fulfilling of intimate sharing is typically only
possible with your "soul mate".  I'm referring to a sharing of the most
intense kind, of the type of energy you raise in your body through
practices such as meditation, yoga, and prayer.  Ritual can be a part of
it, but the essential ingredient is transending your raw animal passion
(or waiting until it has passed by having "sex" first), and focusing on
your "love" energy rather than your "lust" energy.

For anyone interested in exploring this further, I suggest checking out
your local library or bookstore, in the occult or eastern religion section,
for information on Tantra, or Tantra Yoga.

				Sunny
-- 
{ucbvax,decvax,ihnp4}!sun!sunny (Ms. Sunny Kirsten)