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: j g cordes who wrote (16463)	1/23/1998 11:35:00 AM
From: Janice Shell	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 108807

What happens to our sexual energy, do we bottle it up in sixteenth century codes of conduct while guiltily having affairs until we get caught then living in denial? Actually, in the sixteenth century no one worried very much about adulterous public officials or anyone else. Even the Pope had mistresses, big deal. It's only been in the second half of this century that we--Americans and English--have become obsessed with sexual conduct.

To: j g cordes who wrote (16463)	1/23/1998 11:38:00 AM
From: Rambi	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 108807

(I've GOT to stop pausing to read this and get out of here!!!) You make no mention of the religious aspect of morality. A huge majority of people in this country consider themselves to be believers in a higher power and accept a fairly consistent set of behavioral "laws"; do you not think this will be a most difficult structure to "renogotiate" and change? Jealousy, hate, possessiveness--are very different from social customs. DO you really believe these are negotiable? These arise from our basic human nature--along with sexual needs and desire. How we deal with them in healthy, non-destructive ways is the issue. "Wondrous feelings"-certainly-but these feelings do not exist in a vaccuum to be indulged at whim; they involve responsibilities and yes-personal moral decisions, because they have such potential to hurt and destroy. What makes us human (and occasionally admirable) is our ability to consider these abstracts. I'm not at all opposed to renegotiation---we do it all the time-but it's a slow, cautious process. Clinton's behavior is hardly an example of the ideal way to address these questions. More than a year ago here at Feelings, these questions were raised and addressed in some provocative posts--Christine, do you remember when? I found them fascinating reading and I think you might also. They touched on the stages of life, monogamy, life expectancy changes, social mores, the outdating of traditional marriage.

To: j g cordes who wrote (16463)	1/23/1998 2:14:00 PM
From: epicure	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 108807

I agree with you. I think we need mores and morals to hold our cultures together, but we need a new larger myth to embrace us all, as so many of our mores and morals come from the "old" religions. I agree with Joseph Campbell that we need a new myth that will encompass the planet and from which, perhaps, we can develope a new morality, which most of the inhabitants of this planet can accept(you'll never get everyone to agree, but it would be nice to have some sort of Geneva convention on behavior and morality.) It is the old hawks and doves thing from ecology. I want people to be doves, but there has to be a system in place to check the hawks, and I think morality does this. But morality doesn't have to be repressive, imo, it could lead to the wonderous feelings and positive potentials you speak of. We jsut have found that new morality yet, but I hope we do.