Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 (Tek) 9/28/84 based on 9/17/84; site azure.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!mtuxo!mtunh!mtung!mtunf!ariel!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!teklds!azure!chrisa From: chrisa@azure.UUCP (Chris Andersen) Newsgroups: net.singles Subject: Re: Just how far can friendship go? Message-ID: <336@azure.UUCP> Date: Wed, 10-Jul-85 02:08:44 EDT Article-I.D.: azure.336 Posted: Wed Jul 10 02:08:44 1985 Date-Received: Sat, 13-Jul-85 09:37:37 EDT References: <317@azure.UUCP> <800@vax2.fluke.UUCP> Reply-To: chrisa@azure.UUCP (Chris Andersen) Distribution: net Organization: Tektronix, Beaverton OR Lines: 56 Summary: In article <800@vax2.fluke.UUCP> cassidy@fluke.UUCP (Rion Cassidy) writes: > >First, I'm a little new to the net.singles group (possibly just naive) and >am really not sure what 'SO' (as in SOship) stands for. Could someone please >clarify the term? I think its meaning through context is pretty obvious. SO = Serious Other > >This article reminded me of a relationship that was very similar to one I knew >of a few years ago. A coworker and friend of mine became very friendly with >the woman who was the receptionist for our company (and also married). At >first they seemed to be just pretty good friends, then she was asking him(my >friend) out, then they actually started going out occasionally. > >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. > >Most of us who knew either or both of them didn't really condemn them, but >at the same time there was a nagging feeling in the back of our minds that >this really wasn't okay. I think this was mainly a result of our social >conditioning, but 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. How do you 'know' that they were having thoughts of a sexual nature? Did you just 'figure this out' on your own or did one or both of them actually tell you? Maybe you just 'naturally' assumed that they were. >My point here is that if you're 'snuggling' and hugging someone of the opposite >sex, yet not having any sexual contact, this isn't just a close friend (like >one of the same sex) and you're probably denying yourself of something you >really want. First of all, why can't they be just close friends? To me this would seem like a good definition of close friends. Second, by asking for this I'm not denying what I want. I don't want sex at the expense of physical pleasure. Sex is 'OK' but physical friendship is fantastic! And please note that physical friendship does not mean sex. It means being able to relate to each other on a physical level as well as a mental and spiritual level. What I really want is physical comfort, not sex. (does that mean I just answered yes to Ann Landers?) Life, Love, Laughter, Chris Andersen -- "Roads? Where we're going we don't need any roads!"