Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: lorrie coey who wrote (71165)	1/6/2000 1:58:00 PM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 108807

I don't think it's excusing or justifying to say that something is unreliable, and therefore should not be relied on. In this case, unrelated males who form a sexual relationship with a mother who has children are dangerous to the children, and should not be relied on. Perhaps what you find offensive is the suggestion that there is a natural explanation for the behavior, i.e., maximizing the reproduction of one's own genes, not those of a rival. It may offend you, but it seems to be a fact, nonetheless.

To: lorrie coey who wrote (71165)	1/6/2000 2:05:00 PM
From: epicure	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 108807

You are mixing up biology and morality. I have no LEGAL tolerance for abuse (as was quite clear from what I said). I questioned having children when I was a teenager- you strike me as very immature. Are you very young? When I talked about brakes (excuse use of the wrong word- my mind thinks almost completely in sound, I often have this problem but usually I catch it on edit)it has nothing to do with moral brakes. I am talking PURELY about a biological father's instinctive desire to benefit and advance his genes through his children. This innately puts the biological father in a better position to defend/not harm his own young. The non-biological male does NOT have this relationship. There is no morality in this relationship- it is a mere matter of happenstance. I do not JUSTIFY I explain. It is sad if you cannot tell the difference. For example, if you walk on the rims of volcanoes SOMETIMES they collapse- I do not JUSTIFY this, I do not think it is a good thing, but I DO think people should be educated about that. And what does "repression yields expression" mean? Are you going to Jesse Jackson's school for the rhyming impaired?