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."