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: epicure who wrote (71176)	1/6/2000 3:19:00 PM
From: pezz	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 108807

<<a biological father's instinctive desire to benefit and advance his genes through his children. ....The non-biological male does NOT have this relationship.>> This makes the faulty [imo] assumption that biologically on an instinctive level the male can distinguish his own offspring from off spring living with the family over a period of time. Of course on an intellectual level he can do so but on this level he has every reason to nurture and protect the child.[assuming we are talking of a healthy normal male] There was a time in my life thatI was close to a woman who had a three year old daughter.I became very close to this child. Taking her to the Merry go round and beach on week ends. Just myself and the child as she didn't want the mother to join us {we eventually figured out that when the three of us were together the child didn't receive the same attention as on our outings } Believe me my instincts to protect this child were as strong as were she my own. In the wild a male lion will kill the off spring of a pride that he takes over for the very reasons that you state. What do you think would result if a female resident of the pride were impregnated without his knowledge by another lion? Would he have the "instinct" to protect these cubs? I am sure he would.I believe that this instinct must be triggered by close proximity and family life style.Not by intellectual consideration....If your assumptions were correct then the majority of step fathers would be dangerous...I don't believe this to be the case...do you?

To: epicure who wrote (71176)	1/7/2000 1:44:00 PM
From: lorrie coey	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 108807

Well, XX[?]...You're as Racist as I am Sexist! That's good. Ummmm, yes, 'morality and biology' are interrelated. If that idea mixes you up...oh well. Error "An update to this software is required"... "I questioned having children when I was a teenager- Yes and...? "...you strike me as very immature." You're Incredibly Perceptive! "Are you very young?" Yes, I Am... I totally disagree with your "biological father is in a better position to/will protect his own offspring" theory. Rape and Incest is just as likely to be perpetrated by a 'biodada', as it does by any other male. If a biodada/man is protective, it's because the individual has that quality...ie, he's just as likely to protect every/any other mans child. My awful "Jesse Jackson school for the Rhyming impaired" rhyme means: A dreaded or denied thought or emotion will persist through a cycle of awareness and denial. The cycle creates obsession and the obsession itself is an expression...which usually escalates to direct confrontation of the dreaded/denied emotion or idea.