Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site decwrl.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxj!ihnp4!zehntel!dual!decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-kirk!williams
From: williams@kirk.DEC (John Williams 223-3402)
Newsgroups: net.singles
Subject: I tot I taw a puddy tat ( bull's eye )
Message-ID: <110@decwrl.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 30-Nov-84 17:23:56 EST
Article-I.D.: decwrl.110
Posted: Fri Nov 30 17:23:56 1984
Date-Received: Sun, 2-Dec-84 03:55:19 EST
Sender: daemon@decwrl.UUCP
Organization: DEC Engineering Network
Lines: 180



	Now, for a few carefully chosen harsh words directed at 
chuq. I could not let this article go unnoticed. I feel you have 
made some pretty severe mistakes in judgment, and I would like 
to personally point them out for you. I know we have had some 
rather dramatic disagreements in the past, due mostly to your 
lack of humor, so I have painstakenly taken the time to express 
each and every little sentence as to avoid your 
misinterpretation. I am sure you will wish to comment on this at 
some point, and I would not wish you to miss this article, so I 
will send you your own copy. You may reply in any manner you feel 
is, to use your own terminology, appropriate.

Jeff> Admittedly I haven't personal experience to back this up,
Jeff> but have you 

Chuq> If you didn't admit this up front, your further comments
Chuq> would make this fact painfully clear... *urg* 

	Perhaps you have a suggestion as to how he could gain a 
little. My opinion is that he has what you might call a natural 
fear of the unknown. Perhaps you could elaborate as to how he 
might possibly want to face this risk, and why. I say this only 
because you seem to want to take the position of self appointed 
moderator. Why don't you just tell him that he should put aside 
any fears of making a fool of himself. That the only way he will 
learn is by trial and error, beginning, of course, with the 
errors?

Jeff> It occurs to me that if you and your SO could successfully
Jeff> deal with the stresses of sharing a residence, for an
Jeff> extended period, *without* using sex to paper over
Jeff> disagreements, then your friendship would be so solid that
Jeff> you would greatly increase your 

Chuq> We HAVE been doing that, wonderfully enforced by distance
Chuq> and the fact that sex is exceptionally unsatisfying when
Chuq> carried out over a pair of computer terminals or a
Chuq> telephone. We don't like that option now, why would we like
Chuq> that option when we are actually in the same room? During my
Chuq> recent visit to my SO we didn't bother with that celibacy
Chuq> claptrap and got along rather splendidly, so why ruin a good
Chuq> thing? If I wanted celibacy in my relationship I'd marry a
Chuq> priest or something... 

	Please tell me if it's only my imagination, but do I 
detect an ulterior motive for this newsgroup? Did I actually 
interpret correctly that you met your current lover though 
net.singles? Not that I am against something like that, but it 
does alter the picture a little.

Jeff> chances of a successful marriage, should you decide to
Jeff> exercise that option. 

Chuq> I just got OUT of that option (final 11/18, yippee, sigh).
Chuq> I'm in no hurry to tie myself down again, if ever, until I'm
Chuq> sure I'm going to want to stay tied down until I die (or
Chuq> beyond). 

	I'll not mince words with you. The spiraling divorce rate 
is history. If you understand statistics, you will understand 
that your past failure will not necessarily effect your future 
success. The only thing that might stand in the way are your 
preconceptions. There are many cases of successful marriage. The 
primary reason for the divorce rate is due to the fact that the 
classical authoritarian figures can't apply as much pressure to 
keep destructive relationships together. Human nature hasn't 
changed that much in recorded history.

Jeff> Another way to look at it is: one thing at a time.  Work out
Jeff> the balances of plain vanilla daily life first; when they
Jeff> are running reasonably swimmingly, *then* start working on
Jeff> the adjustments of sex.  Don't try to do everything at once.

Chuq> Jeff, sex simply isn't that BIG of a problem. In fact, I'd
Chuq> be willing to wager that most people wouldn't consider it a
Chuq> problem at all (It's a feature, not a bug!). You ought to
Chuq> try it sometime. Until you do, please don't give
Chuq> illconceived advice based upon your own naive fears. People
Chuq> have been fooling around for hundreds of years, at least,
Chuq> and the world hasn't gone off it's axis yet. 

	I would strongly disagree, friend. Sex is a form of 
communication. It is something that is learned. There are 
problems that arise. For Jeff, I do think the best thing for him 
to do is to wait until the other aspects of his life are more or 
less stable before facing the educational experience of relating 
to a lover on a sexual level. I think perhaps he is mistaken in 
thinking that it should be the last thing a couple should 
explore, but then again, it is his choice. I think the experience 
would be good for him, and would probably make him more confident 
in his approach to relationships. I also feel that he will have 
trouble finding people willing to make the kind of strong 
commitments he speaks of with out exploring that aspect of his 
nature. The fact that `` everyone else '' does it doesn't make it 
wrong or right. If you're in it for more than just getting your 
rocks off, sex can present some significant problems. It can be 
awkward while you're still learning the language. O.K.?

Jeff> The obvious difficulties in this arise from this not being
Jeff> the best of all possible worlds: a) the temptation to go
Jeff> ahead with sex would be there, and would probably be very
Jeff> strong; 

Chuq> The word 'understatement' comes to mind. As a matter of
Chuq> fact, we are both so weak in our vows that we've given into
Chuq> the temptation. Repeatedly. I don't see any problem with
Chuq> that, as long as we don't disturb the neighbors or do
Chuq> terrible things to their dog with a fork or something. 

	The important thing here is that, what ever you do, it is 
natural. I think that if he were ever in that situation, sex 
would occur much earlier than they would ever suspect. Once that 
happens, it is important how you respond to it. A really terrific 
relationship can be ruined beyond repair by sexual guilt 
transferral. If the feeling is that strong, it might be a better 
idea to bend to it, rather than waiting for it to break you. I 
will repeat, communication is important. Not only during, but 
afterwards. It is a process of getting to know your partner. 
Intimately. With a lack of experience, it can be clumsy, which 
means you have to work that much harder at it.

Jeff> b) even if you didn't give in to that temptation, you'd have
Jeff> a tough time convincing outsiders of your celibacy
Jeff> (particularly parents, I suppose). 

Chuq> No, I could convince people of our celibacy, it's our sanity
Chuq> they would wonder about... 

	If I were you, I wouldn't talk so freely about sanity. I 
have this feeling you confuse sanity with conformity. I think it 
is important to remember that your relationship is between your 
partner and you. No one else. Nobody. Absolutely. Do what you 
feel is right. It really is no one else's business. You will have 
enough to deal with without peer pressure, believe me.

Jeff> But the idea still seems to me to have some wisdom in it. 
Jeff> Perhaps you could try it, and let the net know how it works
Jeff> out? 

Chuq> you've been working on the celibacy thing a lot longer than
Chuq> we have, and have been reporting at great length about it.
Chuq> Tell you what-- we'll try it our way, and if it works out
Chuq> maybe you might be interested in joining the human race with
Chuq> us sometime, too... 

	I get the distinct feeling that you are attempting to 
stifle this person. If he is indeed having problems, you are 
succeeding only at making them worse. He appears to me to be 
fairly intelligent, and his postings make excellent food for 
thought. I think he is trying to open up to us. I would 
personally like to see more. The manner in which he expresses his 
opinions reveal a fairly open mind. I hope you don't confuse him 
with the other religious zealots that have been known to inhabit 
this newsgroup. For Jeff, I would like to recommend that you read 
a good book on psychology. And digest it. The longer you hold 
out, the stronger your fear of noncommittal relationships will 
manifest itself, the harder it will be to adjust to an 
experienced partner. You will have alot of catching up to do.
You may hold out for someone with as little experience as 
yourself, but you will probably want to consider that these 
people become increasingly rare as you get older. The choice is 
up to you.

	And to you, Chuq, I would remind you that you are 
supposedly the self appointed law enforcement in this news group, 
and if you wish to remain so, should put your personal feelings a 
little more to the side. Let me give you a clue:
	Jeff is NOT your primary threat.

					----{ john williams }----

	< You remind me of someone from long ago >

(DEC E-NET)	KIRK::WILLIAMS
(UUCP)		{decvax, ucbvax, allegra}!decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-kirk!williams
(ARPA)		williams%kirk.DEC@decwrl.ARPA
		williams%kirk.DEC@Purdue-Merlin.ARPA