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 : THE SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (15163)	6/22/2002 11:22:55 PM
From: E	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 21057

Well, in N's case, the reality turned out to be much more interesting, if less illustrious, than the myth. In fact, I'll bet we all have 'interesting' family background stuff that has been lost in the mists of time because it was just a bit too interesting to tell the children. I've known, personally, two women (and a possible third, but the two are definite) of whom one child each was not the biological child of the husband, and so was only a half-sibling of his (boys in both cases) brother. If I know 2 or 2+ for sure, there must really a lot out there. So just looking at that one factor, somebody unknown to the rest of the family being the actual father, there are a lot of myths being believed. Not that it matters, really. It's all just stories, more or less accurate, mostly less.Though the medical background thing could make accurate paternity important. One of the fathers definitely knew in those cases (the actual father was his best friend, who was a very different physical type from him, and the boy looked just like his best friend) but loved the boy and treated him exactly as though he were his own son. The same is true about the second 'father,' raised the son lovingly; except in this case, no one was sure what he knew.