NetNews Usenet Archive 1993 #3/NN_1993_3.iso/spool/soc/singles/37586

Text File | 1993-01-23 | 9.2 KB | 194 lines

Newsgroups: soc.singles
Path: sparky!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!qt.cs.utexas.edu!yale.edu!yale!gumby!destroyer!cs.ubc.ca!news.UVic.CA!uglv!atovorni
From: [e-mail] (dreas)
Subject: They're Attacking Again
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail]
Nntp-Posting-Host: uglv.uvic.ca
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: University of Victoria, Victoria, BC, Canada
References: <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 93 23:01:46 GMT
Lines: 180

Help Me. please.

I need some POWERfoolMeds!!!!!
drieux, what kind of PsykoTropikalPerSCRIPTion
can I use to make sense of this
AttakOfTheGrammatikalKorrektnessMalFucktionKonspirakiy????

dreas
________________________________________________________________________
In article [e-mail], [e-mail] (Ray Helie) writes:
>Ok, this is getting too interesting to keep out of.  8-)  Seems like a
>lot of misunderstandings are flying all over the place (the biggest of
>which could be mine!  Onwards!)
>
>Obviously, phantasm is happy being single.  That is great, and that
>is very possible.  I disagree that it is not possible to be happy
>while being single.  (However, before you argue, make sure you
>have read the entire article, /please/!  8-)
>
>[e-mail] (Edward V. Wright) writes:
>]  :
>]  Being honest enough to *admit* you
>]  don't enjoy being single, and believing there are obstacles to
>]  overcoming it, ...
>
>Ed believes that it is /not/ possible to enjoy being single.
>
>[e-mail] (Daniel Benbenisty) writes:
>]  All I have to is find one person who is happier doing something else
>]  than being in a relationship (evidenced by being forced to choose
>]  in favor of the 'something else'), to contract your ...
>
>And Dan believes not just that it is possible to be happy while
>being single, but that it is /possible/ to be /happier/ being
>single than being in a relationship /of your choice/.  The reason
>I say "of your choice" is because I think it is possible for
>just about everyone to imagine a relationship they could have
>where they would be happier being single, as opposed to being
>in that /particular/ relationship.  (Abusive relationship, etc.)
>(For those that don't need to imagine it, I'm sorry .... 8-(
>
>Time for a little net.logic (and possibly some net.humor  8-).  I
>think everyone can agree that it is possible for just about
>everyone to find an activity to get involved with that can make
>them happy.  So, while you are single, if you get into this
>activity a great deal (or several activities), you can obviously
>find some happiness.  So yes, you /can/ be happy while being single.
>
>So yes, Dan, I agree with you, it is possible to be happy while
>being single.  Ed, it would seem that I disagree with you, but
>I think you might have meant something else (or at least in
>a different way).  Read on! ...
>
>Now, the actual question (I /think/) is: Is it possible to
>be even happier (while you are single) than you are by being in /any/
>relationship?  Refrasing it in Dan's terms:  Is it possible that you
>have now become so happy that you are happier than if you did
>get into any relationship?  Do we agree on the proper question
>that we're trying to answer?  I will have to assume that we do.
>Well, let's try to answer that question.  (Work /with/ me!  I'm
>having some fun here!!  8-)
>
>There is one point that I have to make here: What exactly is it
>that you, without a doubt, cannot /experience/ (I didn't say enjoy)
>if you are not in a serious relationship?  I think it can be
>generally agreed upon that you cannot experience the level of deep
>love that a relationship offers.  No matter how much you think
>you love a friend, your level of love would be even higher if you
>were in a relationship (where appropriate!) with that person, sharing
>most everything about you with them (and that person sharing with
>you), spending time together, etc.  When you participate in that
>kind of sharing, it touches a part of you that, I believe, cannot be
>touched upon in /any/ other way, and this deep love can then also
>be expressed sexually between the two of you.
>
>So, that /level/ of physical and emotion bonding /cannot/
>be experienced with anyone else except a person with whom you are in a
>serious relationship with.  (Keep in mind that I am talking about the most
>/ideal/ relationship /you/ could possibly have, if you /chose/ to have
>it, and it came into your life -- you cannot say you are happier being
>single simply because you don't think you could find the kind of
>relationship you want -- that implies that you are /not/ happy
>being single).  So, all of the above implies that:
>
>!If you are single, you cannot /experience/ the level of emotional
>!and physical involvement that can only be experienced while in a
>!personally ideal relationship with someone else.
>
>So, where are we now?  Well, what this all means is that we now
>have a more exact definition of the question we are trying to
>answer:  Is it possible for someone to be happier /not/ experiencing
>that high a level of emotional and physical involvement?  That,
>it would seem, is the real question.  So, what do you think?  Let's
>see ...
>
>If it is not a desire to experience that level of emotional and
>physical involvement with someone, than yes, you can be happier
>being single.  Dan's point is proven if you can find someone who
>does not desire to experience that level of emotional and physical
>involvement with someone.  That could /also/ translate to:  the pain
>experienced by having to "give up" certain freedoms to be in
>a relationship /outweighs/ the pleasure gotten experiencing
>that deep emotional and physical bonding.  It's a matter of the
>sacrifice being worth it.
>
>Ed, it might be that /that/ is what you meant -- that everyone would
>be much, much happier experiencing this level of emotional and
>sexual bonding in their life, ... rather than that no one is able
>to enjoy being single.  If that is what you actually meant, I agree
>with you wholeheartedly!  I can be perfectly happy while being single,
>but there is no doubt in my mind that I am many times happier when
>I am in a relationship that is right for me!  8-)
>
>[e-mail] (Daniel Benbenisty) writes:
>]  My last SO was intelligent, very attractive, and very sweet.  After
>]  a year and a half of going out with her, I realized that I simply
>]  could not spend the time with her that she needed in a relationship,
>]  and still have time for my work+commutes (45 hrs/wk), band (15 hrs/wk),
>]  music practice, composition, and recording (15 hrs/wk), partying with my
>]  friends (10 hrs/wk), sleep (56 hrs/wk), meals (10 hrs/wk), various
>]  chores and errands (5 hrs/wk), and being alone for a bit and relaxing
>]  with a book or TV (10 hrs/wk).  Some weeks, I am even busier.  That
>]  leaves only 2 hours a week for a relationship (including phone time!)
>]  - not enough.
>
>]  :
>]  There are probably millions of people
>]  like me who break out of relationships, or choose not to get in them,
>]  essentially because they are unwilling to compromise their non-SO
>]  activities.
>
>]  :
>]  At this point in my life, I would like to do the above activities
>]  instead of giving some of them up for a relationship.
>
>]  :
>]  So you see, there are things that can make me even happier than
>]  can a romantic relationship!  What a thought!
>
>Dan, it seems that giving up some of these activities causes enough
>pain for you to not make it worth it to get involved in a relationship.
>Experiencing that high level of emotional and physical involvement is
>enticing to you, I'm sure (?), but the pain of the sacrifice outweighs
>it(?)
>
>Can I paint a scenario for you (remember how I mentioned a /personally
>ideal/ relationship):  Suppose you met a woman that you felt the
>same way about as your last SO that you mentioned.  Well, suppose
>/also/ that she plays an instrument (and is in a band as well, and
>could even join your band), she composes music (and does it even
>better than you do), likes to party, enjoys cooking (and is willing
>to show you how so you can cook together),  enjoys doing chores
>together (if you wanted to, doesn't matter), has errands of
>her own to run when you are running yours, likes to try reading the
>books you do, likes it if you wanted to read the books that she
>does (so you can talk about these books sometimes), and doesn't
>mind cuddling with you when you watch TV (or working on her designs
>for a better electronic guitar, if you'd rather be alone).
>
>In this situation, I don't see you having to sacrifice much at
>all to be in a relationship with /this/ woman.  /Then/ would you be
>even happier single, versus being with /her/?  If not, then you
>are not happier being single -- you just haven't found the
>right woman yet ... 8-)  It would be easy to confuse the
>two.  8-)  Not an attack, just an opinion.
>
>Man, this post got longer than I expected.  Well, as long as it
>was good for someone else.  It was fun for me! ...
>
>
>Ray  8-)
>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------
>   Ray Helie         8-)                   University Of Delaware
>   [[e-mail]]                   Newark, DE
>--------------------------------------------------------------------