Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site rti-sel.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!mcnc!rti-sel!wfi
From: wfi@rti-sel.UUCP (William Ingogly)
Newsgroups: net.singles
Subject: Re: Re: Nominally single????
Message-ID: <455@rti-sel.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 10-Oct-85 15:39:27 EDT
Article-I.D.: rti-sel.455
Posted: Thu Oct 10 15:39:27 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 12-Oct-85 08:20:23 EDT
References: <285@whuts.UUCP> <3850028@csd2.UUCP> <283@steinmetz.UUCP>
Reply-To: wfi@rti-sel.UUCP (William Ingogly)
Organization: Research Triangle Institute, NC
Lines: 59
Summary: 

In article <283@steinmetz.UUCP> hammond@steinmetz.UUCP (Steve Hammond) writes:

>Bravo Pooh, keep these two in line.  They both have their sights set
>at their own feet.  Granted, any relationship (anything for that matter)
>worth having is worth working for.  When is the last time that you
>had something *real special* just given to you?  To go as far as to
>say that there is nothing magical about sex OR love is absolutely
>ludicrous.  

I fail to see where sex and love are more than glandular responses and
bonding behavior, physical sensations that evolved to guarantee the
preservation of genetic material and mutual cooperation in the raising
of young. All the other stuff ('magic') is myth-making, something we
humans are all too good at. I don't deny that sex and love can lead to
some of the most pleasant physical and mental states the organism can
attain, and I don't think you see the point of what Isaac and I were
saying. I suggest you might want to reread our postings.

Do I think I will personally fall in love again? Yes. Do I think it
will be an overwhelming experience? Yes. Do I think those feelings
will last forever at their initial intensity? Probably not. Do I think
True Love has a magical property outside its obvious origins in
glandular secretions and chemical/electrical phenomena in the brain?
Definitely not.

>Isaac and Bill, if all you want your SO to be is a good
>friend then you probably won't find *any* magic at all, in anything.
>Any sapient being should be able to distinguish between lovers and
>friends.

Over the long haul, one's behavior toward an SO almost invariably changes.
The physical attraction may lessen or there may be other problems in
the relationship. What gets a couple through these rough spots? It
ain't the evanescent magic, it's FRIENDSHIP and mutual respect for the
value of the relationship.

As to the difference between lovers and friends, it's a quantitative
thing based on the importance of sexual attraction in the
relationship. If two people describe themselves as lovers, they either
have sex regularly in their relationship or they think about having
sex regularly in their relationship. If they describe themselves as
friends, they probably don't have sex regularly in their relationship.
These are just relative labels we use to tell other people something 
about our relationships and about our availability for new 
relationships, not labels that describe cut-and-dried phenomena.
 
>I think that there is a real return to romance in the 80's.  

I think you probably realize by now that at least some of us in this
group think this is unfortunate, especially if by 'romance' you mean
the reification of the True Love Myth.

=====================================
Language is a virus from outer space
And hearing your name is better than
Seeing your face  (L. Anderson)
=====================================

                              -- Cheers, Bill Ingogly