Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site trwrdc.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!trwrdc!frith
From: frith@trwrdc.UUCP (Lord Frith)
Newsgroups: net.singles
Subject: Re: Love is an addictive drug... nominally single
Message-ID: <1088@trwrdc.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 1-Nov-85 16:13:38 EST
Article-I.D.: trwrdc.1088
Posted: Fri Nov  1 16:13:38 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 3-Nov-85 14:48:11 EST
Reply-To: frith@trwatf.UUCP (Lord Frith)
Organization: TRW Advanced Technology Facility, Merrifield VA.
Lines: 149
Keywords: willfully longingly lustfully oohhhhhhhhhhh....


In article <490@rti-sel.UUCP> wfi@rti-sel.UUCP (William Ingogly) writes:
> In article <1071@trwrdc.UUCP> frith@trwatf.UUCP (Lord Frith) writes:
>
> Can you honestly say that you've never felt at the end of a
> relationship a twinge of irrational fear that you may never fall in
> love again, or that the intensity of your experience together will not
> be repeated?

Never for the first question.

What I missed is that one unique irreplaceable relationship.  Love like
that might never be repeated with such intensity, but there's nothing
much I can do about that.  I don't EXPECT to fall in love on a regular
schedule though.  That's not the way life is.  Life is dull without
someone to love.  Life is painful having loved and then lost one's love
(especially through rather tragic means).  But better to have loved and
lost then never to have loved at all.  Hey that's pretty good... I
think I'll right that down.

God it's such fun pineing away for one's love.

>
> When the mourning period starts interfering with the rest of your
> life, you've got a problem. Period. Scars that cannot be forgotten are
> going to affect the way you relate to other people, the way you view
> life, and the way you perform your everyday tasks. This is a problem.
> Saying a scar can't be forgotten is surrendering your life to despair
> and/or pain. That's abdicating responsibility for your actions.

The problem with modern man is that he thinks the entire universe was
created for him to control and judge according to his own ego-centric
needs.

Some scars simply cannot be removed.  They don't HAVE to control your
life so completely that you become a basket case of course.  But the
bad experiences in life will become part of you just as the good ones
have.  They WILL effect your outlook and behavior in life.

Now I agree that surrendering your life COMPLETLY to pain and despair is
not a good thing.  But one must accept the pain and despair and not try
to submerge it or try to fool one's self into thinking that they don't
exist or are so unnatural and alien that they should not be there.
I don't think it's healthy to try and define, through rational means, how
long a mourning period should be.

> No. Charles Manson's behavior is not normal, Son of Sam's behavior is
> not normal, Richard Speck's behavior is not normal, John Wayne Gacy's
> behavior is not normal ... I suggest you go and spend a few weeks as an
> observer at a mental institution and then come back and tell us about 
> normality.

I assume you mean normality in our environment and not that of the mental
institution.  No I'm not tryin to be difficult.  I'm trying to point out
that we don't all conform to one standard of normality.  Besides, your
example is too hyperbolic.

> Abnormal behavior is destructive to the individual and/or to the
> community. When your 'mourning' goes on to the point where your
> enjoyment of life, interaction with other people, or job performance
> is affected you'd damned well better get some help because your life
> is out of control. I don't think the definition of the bounds of
> 'normal' or 'healthy' behavior is as difficult a task as you seem to
> think. 

People can struggle with such mourning periods and come out with a far
more mature and far more well-rounded outlook on themselves and life.
Of course some can't handle it and commit (self)destructive acts.  For
some it might be self-destructive.  For others it might be a time for
introspection that is necessary.

But aside from the benefits that are possible.... is such a period
"healthy?" That's an interesting question.  I would say often times
no.  But... I would also add that such unhealthy behavior does not
necessarily condemn one to self-destructive, life-threatening ACTS.  Is
such behavior "normal?"  I think sometimes yes.  Many people experience
such phases in their lives.  Many people don't.  But then many people
have never fallen in love.

>> Obsession is not always self-destructive.  The popular public opinion of
>> the obsessed person is someone who is driven.... derranged.... ready to
>> sacrifice ALL for his neurotic psychosis.  You know... like Bruce Dern.
>
> The kind of obsession I was referring to IS self destructive. I
> repeat: when you can't function because of your obsession, you have a
> problem.

But then that goes without saying doesn't it?  That kind of argument is
really just denotational... "It is unhealthy because it is self-destructive."
Sure... guarenteed self-destructive acts are unhealthy although I can argue
that self-destructive acts are not deterministically self-destructive.

>> By this I might conclude that you think Sex is necessarily a negative
>> thing because so many people NEED it.  Or that love is an unhealthy
>> thing because so many people say they NEED their loves.
>
> The sex drive can be controlled. A properly socialized person does not
> spot a sexually attractive person on the street, rip off his/her
> clothing and have at it. We make decisions whether or not to have sex,
> and some people choose to remain celibate for long periods of time.
> Dependency on sex or love is a form of addiction, I believe. If you
> can't go two days without a phone call from your sweetie or if you
> can't make a conscious decision to abstain from ALL sex (including
> masturbation) for X days you're an addict.

Ah but why would I want NOT to be addicted to sex?  Because I would be
forced onto the streets to slake my unquenchable thirsts?  Properly
controlled, an addiction might be directed positively.  But then I
guess it isn't really an addiction if it can be consciously controlled
is it?

What is the motivation for NOT wanting to call my sweetie every other
hour of the day?  If we both enjoy this then is it "unhealthy?"  is it
"unnatural?"  No one likes to admit that they are slave to anything,
yet I can't find anything wrong with this except in extreme cases.
It is in the extreme cases where socially acceptable behavior is abused.

Such social negativisms really reflect the maturity of the people
involved.

> Let me tell you a story:

Image wavers.... wierd Bernard Herman music in background...

> last Christmas holiday, someone I'm close to and I were both home for
> about a week. He had a picture of his fiancee and he would spend a good
> part of the time we were together morning and crooning over it. Every
> evening at about 7:00 PM he HAD to call his little sweetie; if he
> didn't he became frantic.

This guy must be an absolute joy at parties, right?

> He also told me during the course of the week that (1) she was so
> beautiful that he felt 'intimidated' by her beauty and

THAT'S TRULY SICK.

> (2) that she had told him to thank his mother for giving birth to a
> wonderful son like him. Now, this behavior kept him from enjoying his
> vacation and ruined the times we were together. Everyone (including his
> mother) had it up to HERE [hand extended flat just below my chin] with
> him. Oh, by the way, he's since married her. It's his third marriage.
> BEHAVIOR THAT RUINS A LONG-PLANNED HOLIDAY AND THAT MAKES FAMILY AND
> FRIENDS UNCOMFORTABLE IS NEGATIVE BEHAVIOR.

And this is entirely a reflection upon his maturity, I think.  She
doesn't sound so mature either if she actually participates in all of
this.  Is love the culprit?  Nope... it's the emotional maturiy of
those who think they are in love.