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: Comments on -Sex Message-ID: <1132@peora.UUCP> Date: Sun, 30-Jun-85 00:40:19 EDT Article-I.D.: peora.1132 Posted: Sun Jun 30 00:40:19 1985 Date-Received: Tue, 25-Jun-85 08:04:58 EDT References: <2814@decwrl.UUCP> Organization: Perkin-Elmer SDC, Orlando, Fl. Lines: 28 > Has anyone out there forgotten your "first love"? (any base counts as a > 'hit'!) Is it too much to draw an analogy from that memory with the > "imprinting" of ducks? Yes, it definitely is ... how many people become permanently emotionally attached to their "first love" the way ducks do to their imprinted mother? People retain greater emotional ties to their "first love" in the literal sense, than in the sense you mean... not because of imprinting, but because of a lower level of emotional defensiveness. [I notice, incidentally, that you cross-posted your comment to net.philosophy and net.religion. This says a lot. If you are going to make such an argument from RELIGIOUS grounds, that is a different thing altogether, i.e., is OK! But ducks have little to do with it.] This posting, however, will stay purely in net.singles... something to do with all evidence of D-needs disappearing completely when satisfied, etc., you know... I have never thought it particularly wise, in the light of that principle, for married people to attempt to proscribe the behavior of people who are not. [Even though there are tons of married people right here, yes, right here in net.singles!] -- 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 "Real ists don't use Kodachrome."