Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site peora.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxn!ihnp4!drutx!mtuxo!mtunh!mtung!mtunf!ariel!vax135!petsd!peora!jer
From: jer@peora.UUCP (J. Eric Roskos)
Newsgroups: net.singles
Subject: Re: Just how far can friendship go?
Message-ID: <1253@peora.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 9-Jul-85 14:32:50 EDT
Article-I.D.: peora.1253
Posted: Tue Jul  9 14:32:50 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 12-Jul-85 00:42:26 EDT
References: <317@azure.UUCP> <800@vax2.fluke.UUCP>
Organization: Perkin-Elmer SDC, Orlando, Fl.
Lines: 51

>What made this seem somewhat unusual to most watching was that this
>relationship was supposedly all above board, that is they weren't hiding
>anything from anyone.  Her husband knew of and had met my friend and everyone
>who ate lunch in the company cafeteria would see them eating together
>every day, alone.

Now, this comment irritates me a lot, since I can identify with it first
hand.  When I was still a graduate student, I had a female friend, another
graduate student, who I was very good friends with, but with whom I had no
"romantic involvement" whatsoever.  However, about halfway through graduate
school, she got married, to someone who was also a (somewhat lesser) friend
of mine.  We continued to sometimes goto lunch together; sometimes all 3 of
us, sometimes just she & I (or some other people from her office).
However, several people at the office where she worked treated me like I was
some kind of heinous criminal.

If you read Miss Manners (which I strongly recommend), you will see that
Miss Manners also addresses this issue, and says there is nothing at all
improper about this; that only recently has it been required that married
women engage in all social activities in conjunction with their husband
as a "demonstration of marital solidarity".

I think the following assumption:

>I still feel these two were a little confused regarding their own desires
>since I know that they each were having thoughts of a sexual nature towards
>each other, yet doing nothing about them.
>
>My point here is that if you're 'snuggling' and hugging someone...

is the problem here.  Unless one of the two people confided in you that this
was the case, I think it is grossly unjust to question their integrity in
this manner.  If they did have such feelings, well, then they did have a
definite problem there... but it is unreasonable to just assume it was so,
since I think many people of good morals would consider it so wrong to
have such feelings as to largely discourage them from beginning.  I mean,
attractions of this sort often do have a rational element to them; and if
you could be "turned off" WRT someone because, say, they didn't believe in
giving aid to starving children in Africa, you could certainly as well
be "turned off" in this sense by the fact that they were married.  (Of course
to be logically sound in our arguments we have to establish that there exist
people who are "turned off ... in Africa", but I suspect such people (or
analogues) exist.)
-- 
Shyy-Anzr:  J. Eric Roskos
UUCP:       ..!{decvax,ucbvax,ihnp4}!vax135!petsd!peora!jer
US Mail:    MS 795; Perkin-Elmer SDC;
	    2486 Sand Lake Road, Orlando, FL 32809-7642

	    "Gurl zhfg hcjneq fgvyy, naq bajneq,
	     Jub jbhyq xrrc noernfg bs gehgu."  -- WEY