A Tentative Defence of Monogamy
I would be the last to deny the promiscuous nature of man.
It is evident that many of the failings of modern-day coupling and marriage is due to the fact that it is imposed upon an instinctive beast that has little ability to control self through the intellect and must be coerced, threatened or rewarded and/or indoctrinated into a moral dogma in order to remain disciplined and moderate.
Common man, governed by a need that emerges in times of indigence, has carried this superfluity like a camel carries its hump into a luscious rainforest. This doctrine of excess, which forces out behaviours of gluttony, is an expression of undiscriminating tastes and subdued palates that are more interested in quantity than quality.
The practice of suppressing sexual drives, that sometimes threaten social order and harmony, has been a deciding factor in the emergence of civilizations and complex human economic and cultural structures. It enables the full participation of males/females in the system and the full investment of these males/females in the system itself that turns them from rebellious vagabonds or indifferent observers into defenders and guardians of the norm.
This imposition of monogamy on a polygamous species has been successful, or relatively so, mostly through the utilization of institutional authority and the restriction of female sexual choices. But I am going to defend and describe a spontaneously emerging form of monogamy that is not a product of moral and cultural force or paternalistic social order but more a product of refined tastes and noble predispositions.
It would be remiss of me to neglect to state that the creation of distinction and refinement could only happen, ironically, in times of superfluity and in ages of abundance, for in times of poverty all, by necessity, become ascetics and minimalists and it is leisure that often results in heightened awareness and wisdom.
This spiritual refinement that is shaped by hypersensitivity and an overabundance of inner strength leads to a discriminating palate and a pickiness that should not be misconstrued for snobbery or pretentiousness; this discriminating taste that leads to some form of monogamy should not also be misjudged as another instance of the common form of monogamy that is more a result of moral imperatives, hypocrisy and socio-economic pressures as well as cultural conformity than anything else.

Since metaphor and allegory are the best ways to become precise while still remaining discreet and indirect I begin by encapsulating my perspective of this more noble form of monogamy with symbolism:
Let us then take wine as a substitute for mating, since it is an unnecessary aspect of individual survival, as sex is, while still retaining the attraction and sweetness associated with coupling.
The common man, with his unsophisticated tastes, gluttony-sometimes reaching the proportions of alcoholism-and insensitive tongue, may find that all wines are the same or similar enough to not make great differentiations, and all that really is at stake here, for him, is access and availability. In other words, the average man wants wine on his table-if it is his preferred beverage- as a sign of affluence or happiness or conformity and its quality, its distinctive bouquet, the year and the region it was harvested in, is of no or little importance to him. For him the experience of wine drinking is merely encompassed in the general sensation of swallowing and tasting its broad and obvious aroma and in the inevitable high-spirits it inevitably results in. Any bottle will do, within reason, from any time and from any place, and large quantities of it are preferred so that his greedy needs are met, his belly and ego are engorged and his needs momentarily placated.
But for a refined palate, one that can discern nuance and subtlety, not all wines are created equal. His discriminating tastes are not a consequence of pretentious snobbery and feigned aristocracy but a result of an oversensitive taste-bud and a hypersensitive nose. He cannot ignore, no matter how much he may try, the faint fragrances, the quiet bouquets, the textures, the aftertastes or the colorations of each Olympian nectar; for him the wines history, its symbolism and art are just as relevant as its simple drinking. He may drink an inferior fermented grape, from time to time so as to not insult a host or as to not make an unwarranted fuss, but given a choice he will prefer abstinence from indulging in pigswill and fire-water. The refined palate, therefore, will choose asceticism rather than to debase and degrade one self by settling for inferior products and individuals just to quell an inner instinctive need or desire. He will see any submission to his hunger and thirst, which often demand compromises of great proportion, as a defeat, as an insult to self and a loss of dignity that is often felt in hindsight.
We must keep in mind again that this refined taste is not an act of conceit but a product of awareness. It stems from this extreme sensual perceptiveness [hypersensitivity] that is inescapable, as no man can blind himself to what he sees or ignore for long what he hears, and it also stems from a deeper appreciation of emotions and of self. It is an appearance of pride we call nobility.
What a common man calls ‘love’, ‘compassion’, ‘loyalty’, ‘responsibility’, ‘commitment’ and ‘empathy’ pales in comparison to what a noble mind understands them to be.
If we are to understand hypersensitivity or awareness or refinement we must here use, once more, some figurative symbolism.
Two men walk into a room in which a party is going on. The first is a common, average man for whom the scene is a joyful one, full of smiling faces, mirth, clinking glasses, the din of happy conversation, the smells of food, all engulfed in a kaleidoscope of pleasant background music and dazzling lights.
The second, “suffering” from hypersensitivity, perceives a totally different scene. He sees what the first man sees but also so much more. He sees a momentary frown, a glance, a stolen kiss, a discreet touch, a smirk; he hears a sarcastic giggle, a stomach churning, a door slam; he smells perfume, cologne and sweat; he knows who’s had a little too much to drink, who is walking with a limp, who’s talking with whom, who wore mismatched socks today, who just hit on someone’s wife and so on.
It is possible for two individuals to experience the same thing but perceive it on different levels, levels of lucidity if you will.
It is this lucidity that gives reality, life and emotions more substance for the noble man. His love is more precious to him and not something he gives out lightly, his compassion is more profound, his loyalty more true, his friendship more deep and weighted down with meaning and not mere words he flings around to appear civilized and moral or to ensure another’s respect.
This noble man of refined tastes takes responsibility seriously and that’s why he enters it so rarely, he takes commitment more austerely and that is why he rarely commits. For him love/hate, loyalty/betrayal, compassion/cruelty, mean so much more than for the common man that enters relationships of enmity or cooperation blindly and full of hypocritical innocence, delusional confidence and naïve hope derived from an absence of awareness or an inability to self-discipline.
That’s why Christianity and Democracy, or any ideology that institutionalizes emotions and behaviours, is an anathema to him. Compassion and love are precious things to a noble mind; precious things beyond measure that are offered only to the worthy and to those that have earned his trust and loyalty and that is why his emotions are so much more weighty and meaningful and not just words that lead to ephemeral commitments of need.
Common love relationships often begin with an attraction based on superficial criteria.
A man may just be attracted to a woman’s ass, to her full bosom or wavy hair, a woman to a tall, dark and handsome man or a rich man or a man of status and so soon reality will disenchant them from their fantasies about how things could be or should be.
Sometimes shallow relationships are a product of physical needs and social imperatives that force two people into each others spaces for better or for worst, often the second more than the first. Shallow choices lead to shallow lives where often the sense of something missing is felt and one blames the other or conditions but rarely ones judgment, original choices and criteria of evaluation. So errors are repeated, over and over and over again.
In comparison noble love relationships are more difficult to find and so much more valuable.
It is difficult enough to nourish and remain noble in such a world of superficiality and narrowness, it is rare that the right genetic and environmental circumstances will arise in an individual at all and that the right balance of strength and awareness will coincide in a single entity, so two noble spirits finding each other is a rare thing indeed especially when one considers their solitary and shy nature.
This is what makes them precious and an exemplification of idealistic romantic love.
Their rarity and value is due to the fact that they are based on more than just mere lust but exhibit a spiritual interconnectedness where two people become united in more than a physical way, although the physical is always the first connection. Here the mind takes precedence and decides when to suppress or express desire and need, when to expose or hide vulnerability and strength, when to love, commit and remain loyal because only it can comprehend the full breadth and depth of the issues involved.
This nobility of spirit, this refinement of taste forces the individual endowed with it, into some uncomfortable choices: Either find solace in solitude and asceticism through the denial of instinct, as many sages have done, so that no compromises are made and no loss of self worth ensues or search and wait for that single one, that diamond in the dirt that lives up to heightened standards and meets reality eye-to-eye, that gives as much as it takes and understands the entirety of what commitment, loyalty, trust, compassion and finally love entails.
Only nobility can love where a common man merely lusts.

You refer to more than monogamy in the above. First I believe in a monogamy not imposed by outside social forces as you point out but from the self. In short people are monogamous because it is what they feel and desire, they do not stray because there is no need to stray; every other form of monogamy is a lie. To remain monogamous out of duty and feel an emptiness and void is to lie to oneself and ones mate.

To remain monogamous willingly does not always mean that this monogamy will last. People do afterall occasionaly grow apart through no fault of either partner. There are those who remain 'loyal' to the institution of marriage and family and yet fill their passion elsewhere; a passion of the heart and flesh does not necessarily lead to a long-term union but can be necessary to the growth of the couple involved. Where there is a family involved sometimes the institution must take precedence over the fickle desires of the flesh or the thirst of the heart, especially if there isn't anything wrong with the marriage per se except the ennui of having known someone so long they become more like a family member than a lover. A family union does sometimes contain enough love to allow for an external search; how many wives overlook their husbands transgression because they know he is simply testing a new wine but will soon be back because his love of family overrides his need for something else. The best most passionate lover does not necessarily make the best life-partner; the criteria for both are different and don't always come in the same bottle. It is for this reason I remain alone...I cannot live with either or, I want them both.

Simple needs must be met from a simple source. If a man is simply looking for a good woman with a tight ass to bear his children/run his home and not give him too much grief then there are any number of women who could fill this criteria as a partner. If someone is looking to be understood, felt on a deeper level then the search for a partner becomes more complex, but upon finding such an individual does not necessarily mean there will be longevity in the relationship. In fact the person in the first example will probably find more success and long-term satisfaction in his choice simply because they do not expect their choice to be all things to them or fill every crevice of need. Someone looking for a complete love is more apt dissappointment if the spriritual union begins to wane...even if briefly. If one is insecure even the slightest change will fill them with doubt and disillusion.

The sipping of different wines is only a terrible mistake if one pretends to buy the bottle. Mutual wine sampling is fine if that is all one desires to fulfill a desire; it would be wrong of course to assume that this means one would resort to sipping Thunderbird.

There may be soul mates in a life but that does not mean there is a single soul mate. Even from the best vintage bottles one must still make a choice...often always wondering what it would have been to sip from the Shiraz instead of taking the best Chardonnay. Or perhaps someone can find they love both Shiraz and Chardonnay but choose the second because the passion of the first isn't sustainable or desirable on a daily basis (impractical).

Choosing the best partner and being discerning depends on the level of self-awareness. We must know who we are to know what we want and need. We must be able to distinguish between the need and the want. The older one gets, the more experience in wine tasting and the better able one is to identify the best wine from vintage, smell and color before even having a taste. Some wines have been had so often that they are no longer of interest as one has enjoyed all they can from it.


Personally this is why I tend to choose a good bottle of single malt scotch at least three decades old. They tend to be more sturdy and reliable, always smooth and never disappointing. Even a good vintage can yield a fickle wine.

How do you turn crap into lobster?
Are you some kind of magician?
Trying to justify your pigswill drinking because solitude scares you and your loins take precedence over your mind?
Sorry, you can’t eat shit and then call it Fillet-Mignon and you can’t act like an animal and then pretend you are human.
Actions are more sincere than words because they demand a price.
Empirical evidence is more precise than rhetoric.
Tell me what one does and it doesn’t matter what he says he is, it is plain to see what he/she is. The biggest lies many tell themselves and few have the introspective abilities and the self-consciousness to understand who they themselves are.
That’s why psychology is all the rave. Most people go to another to be told who and what they are and why the act the way they do because they are incapable of evaluating self.
I have stopped listening, on the whole, to what others say anymore and I watch what they do.
Sometimes they contradict their own words by acting their real selves.

AN.DROID

Quote:why not turn that cheap wine into ambrosia? Not noble enough?

And how many have met someone and then waste their time trying to change them? A person must desire change; and most do not have the expertise nor inclination of a Professor Higgins.

WANDERER: How do you turn crap into lobster? Are you some kind of magician?

No one would fall in love with what they consider 'crap'. Love can see value and potentials that others are blind to; sometimes its just a projection, sometimes not. There are incidents in life of people changing with the love and help of others, but the desire to change must be present; I think your response to android cut the issue into black and white without acknowledging that many shades of grey exists.

Tell me what one does and it doesn’t matter what he says he is, it is plain to see what he/she is. The biggest lies many tell themselves and few have the introspective abilities and the self-consciousness to understand who they themselves are.

Know Thyself. It was a painful process I had to go through one afternoon: to truly see myself as the pathetic number I really was. From then on it was tears and fists through walls. There is no harsher criticism. I know who I am and what I want out of life.

An.droid:... if one begins with the premise that mankind is common, then one will only anticipate cheap wine. Everywhere. BUT, if one embarks with the premise that cheap wine can also induce rapture, then it only stands to reason that cheap wine can alchemise itself into ambrosia.

Well any wine has the ability to produce rapture if one is in the right frame of mind, but after the rapture cheap wine can cause headache not to mention disillusionment.

An.droid: But being able to follow along and metamorphose is another trip altogether. Hence nobility. Noble... To be able to transform the small into the grand. And then to merge with the grand. Sex is a great way of exercising that, don't you think?

Well are we speaking only of sex? I think the potential of sex are very often overlooked because we see it only as biological function or a pleasurable escape (lack of imagination). There is a great deal one can learn about themselves and others through the act; its emotional/psychodynamic/revelatory/restorative/transformative powers are extreme but one must have a sense for these layers within the act and how to build the necessary tension and myths to bring these layers to the surface. It is the most noble of accomplishments to 'follow along' and transform onself from the 'small into the grand'. It takes a special acumen directed towards oneself. It would first be a process of acting as if and then becoming that. The outside initiator would need more than just nobility and acumen to bring this out in another...they would have to be endowed with visionary power. Think about all the variables in producing a good wine, its a combination of hard work, fortuity and yes a good alchemist.

An.droid:Trying to change anyone? Impossible. However, we do influence each other, right? And I think that's what Wanderer was fuzzing around.

Yes I agree we do influence each other for better or worse.

Avuncular: pertaining to an uncle, especially in kindliness or geniality.

Lucysnow
No one would fall in love with what they consider 'crap'. Love can see value and potentials that others are blind to; sometimes its just a projection, sometimes not. There are incidents in life of people changing with the love and help of others, but the desire to change must be present; I think your response to android cut the issue into black and white without acknowledging that many shades of grey exists.
Yes, I’m trying to distinguish between two different types of monogamy: one the product of external environments [Society, culture, religion, economics] the other the product of internal environments [awareness, dignity, distinction, nobility].
By creating black/white distinctions the differences become more pronounced.

Well are we speaking only of sex? I think the potential of sex are very often overlooked because we see it only as biological function or a pleasurable escape (lack of imagination). There is a great deal one can learn about themselves and others through the act; its emotional/psychodynamic/revelatory/restorative/transformative powers are extreme but one must have a sense for these layers within the act and how to build the necessary tension and myths to bring these layers to the surface. It is the most noble of accomplishments to 'follow along' and transform onself from the 'small into the grand'. It takes a special acumen directed towards oneself. It would first be a process of acting as if and then becoming that. The outside initiator would need more than just nobility and acumen to bring this out in another...they would have to be endowed with visionary power. Think about all the variables in producing a good wine, its a combination of hard work, fortuity and yes a good alchemist.
Most human beings ‘Fuck’ they have no ability to ‘Make Love’.
Most human beings think of sex like they think of food or water or taking a dump.
It feels good, they need it and they cannot focus on anything else unless they get it done.
This spiritual connection where more than two bodies are fused in union during coupling, is only possible when both, I repeat both, partners are capable of this level of integrity and vulnerability.
Only then do people become more than just pieces of ass that can be easily replaced by another piece of ass any time any where.
Nobility demands, does not ask, it demands respect and when it cannot have it prefers isolation and starvation.

Hastein
Know Thyself. It was a painful process I had to go through one afternoon: to truly see myself as the pathetic number I really was. From then on it was tears and fists through walls. There is no harsher criticism. I know who I am and what I want out of life.
To accept oneself with no exaggerations either way is easier than to see oneself with no exaggerations either way.
But once it is done the power gained through self-love and the efficiency derived from knowing ones own abilities and failures is incalculable.

_an.droid_
See, I'll tell you what happened. Being android I have an attention-span problem. I'm not good with long winded sermons. Not that I'm belittling you for it. Sermons, after all, appeal to people who, well, like sermons, right? So let it be. I'm sure you're a fine sermon person. Really.
Should I post single phrase questionnaires and trite simplistic remarks in order to fit into your MTV universe of sound-bites and flashing images?
Ideas need space to be explored and presented.
I would say I’ve neglected many aspects of the issue just to remain as brief as possible and I risk being misinterpreted or misunderstood.
Your ‘attention span’ is none of my concern.
How about this: Monogamy ‘good’ when honest and precise, polygamy ‘bad’ when it leads to gluttony and a loss of value. Discuss.
Was it to your satisfaction?
Why don’t you readjust those android parameters of yours to allow for longer analysis?
Or are you the old type of android?

Actually, I'm more into instant illuminated confab. Like, spark, brainstorm and lightening rod?
A symptom of our time: An inability to perceive detail because there’s too much to see. So we scan through issues without gaining any perspicacity. Like flipping through an encyclopedia, looking at the pictures reading a few phrases here and there and then managing to finish all 12 volumes of it.
But what did you achieve? Trivial pursuit knowledge and fodder for quotation marks.
Things wrong with our time:
Specialization- The mass of knowledge required to be absorbed in order to be considered an ‘expert’ so great that all other peripheral knowledge pertaining to it must be excluded or scanned over or summarized so that time is saved and a conclusion reached.
Consequence? Individuals that know a lot about a single discipline or a part of a single discipline and nothing about anything else.
Conclusion? Absence of depth and wisdom. An inability to incorporate the totality of it all into a single vision, an aversion to what is referred to ‘generalization’ and a fondness for what is considered ‘specificity’ when in fact all forms of knowledge are generalizations.
When one focuses forever on the Iberian Peninsula trying to uncover every single detail in it, he/she misses the grander picture, the European attachment, the world at large, the Earth and the universe.
Philosophy, unfortunately or fortunately, is the incorporation of everything under the sun and not even, for the creation of larger pictures and the attainment of transcending timeless insights.

But your wine analogy caught my eye. You must have been sipping some yourself then too cuz you loosened up a bit.
Loosened up?
I think you haven’t read everything I’ve written yet.
I’m as loose as a dock whore during shore leave or like a AMERICAN belt in a buffet restaurant.

What I meant, Lucysnow, in context to the fragmented pieces of logic that WANDERER was trying to discharge, was that if one begins with the premise that mankind is common, then one will only anticipate cheap wine.
And be pleasantly surprised once in a while. While your anticipation of greatness with every pop of a cork can only result in many, many, many disappointments.
Tell me about mankind android, I’d like to hear an ‘outsiders’ perspective.
Tell me about the ‘goodness’ of man, about his quality.
It’s ironic that those most often trying to distance themselves from what is human, from instinct and emotion, by taking on mechanical personas, then propose to explain the value of man in the most positive light.

Everywhere. BUT, if one embarks with the premise that cheap wine can also induce rapture, then it only stands to reason that cheap wine can alchemise itself into ambrosia.
I once knew an alcoholic that could get off on vinegar. He was so fucked-up he couldn’t even taste the difference or didn’t care.
I guess shit can taste like chocolate cake when you are starving and you need to survive, no matter what.
I guess piss can taste like lemonade when one has grown accustomed to the tanginess and has never tasted anything but that.
But I’m not talking about desperation here but about discrimination. I’m talking about a state of being that prefers abstinence to vulgarity and asceticism to devaluation.
I’m talking about a type of man that places something even above survival, believe it or not, like: Honour, dignity, freedom, respect, loyalty, and responsibility.
Do you get it yet, mechanoid?

Hence nobility. Noble... To be able to transform the small into the grand. And then to merge with the grand. Sex is a great way of exercising that, don't you think?
What do you get when you merge shit with pudding?
Whatever it is I ain’t eating it. Help yourself.

Trying to change anyone? Impossible. However, we do influence each other, right? And I think that's what Wanderer was fuzzing around.
Yes we do but only the very few can fully appreciate and be influenced by what is great.
I can piss in a toilet for decades and let my dog watch and it may even imitate me once in a while but does it know what it is doing and why?
Imitation is not comprehension and your over-optimism is sickening.
Tell me do you think education can change humanity for the better?
Are you still living with that delusion?

A sermon
Here we are in an age of plenty where nothing is of any value, in an age of prosperity where nothing is satisfied, in an age of superfluity where nothing means anything, in an age of excess where everything is expendable, replaceable and indistinguishable.
A ‘throw-away’ society of questionable qualities where abundance has replaced quality.
We’d rather eat pound of food than eat good food.
We’d rather drink carbonated sugar-water with added coloration and flavoring that drink something pure and clean.
We’d rather fuck anything that moves and spreads its legs for us rather than go without or search for something more meaningful.
We’d rather engorge ourselves, drown ourselves, inebriate ourselves, escape ourselves than go without. Because consumption is how we evaluate ourselves.
The more we eat the more affluent we believe we are. The more we drink the more uninhibited we become. The more we fuck the more desirable and manly/womanly we feel.
Then we wonder why we still feel unfulfilled and empty, and we wonder why we feel so cheap and why we aren’t appreciated or respected or valued more.
In such an age only the few, the discriminating, the aware, the noble choose abstinence, asceticism, minimalism, austerity rather than succumb to hedonistic excess and depravity.
End of sermon.

Wanderer

Fucking is natural, making love an inspiration.

An.droid

Are you 'D.P.' under a new handle?

How very interesting.

And up stands another challenger from the throng. One of the silent observers wants to prove his ilk against me once more.
This is fun. We humans love fun.
But I’m in the rink already ‘mechanoid’. I openly display myself and invite attack. I fear nothing. I certainly do not fear human animals. I’ve seen you all and I have personal direct experience with all your types. You are not a mystery to me anymore.
The only challenge is discerning what particular flavor of man or woman you are.

You?! Hide behind pretence.
It’s easy to criticise when you have to show no opinion of your own.

_an.droid_
It has nothing to do with quantity, Wanderer! But it has everything to do with presentation. There's a reason why artists exist, you know. As I said, your rhetoric is fine for those who don't require an MTV universe of sound-bites and flashing images... but if you wish to reach outside your orbit...
Placing yourself ‘outside my orbit’ is truly amusing.
There you are rotating around my mass nevertheless.
There you are being pulled in by my gravitational force. A stray meteor you must have been, with no direction and no home, just spinning across the cosmos wanting to become a meteorite.
Watch out for Jupiter machine-man, it’s a galactic vacuum cleaner.

And I'm sure I didn't imply that. I was replying to your very ill mannered response to me, remember? Am I self-conscious about having a limited attention-span? Hey, what's that under your nose? No.
“Ill mannered”? What was “ill mannered” about it?
I wasn’t aware androids had social graciousness and civility clauses.
Such thin skins on metal bodies. Aluminum is it?
It’s unfortunate that most things require longer focus times to be fully appreciated. Your ‘video-clip’ limitations must be frustrating.

My, how noble we are.
What do machines know of nobility?
Do you think ‘nobility’ implies courteousness or politeness or compassion?
Only to ones own kind or after needs are met.
A hunter kills the Buffalo and then thanks it for its sacrifice. But he kills the buffalo first.

Oh, you are a seducer. It was said here that you enjoy coaxing people into submission by picking on their lowest denominators.
I SEE people, even while they are trying to mask themselves, It’s a gift nurtured through time for survival purposes.
A seducer?! More than this machine-man.
I’m a Hellene. We are all seducers, we've seduced an entire civilization into existence.

(But I don't buy that, you just need to vent. You're a natural. I had a Greek friend once. She drove me nuts. But I loved her. Tsk.)
What, machines being frustrated by humans? By Greeks?
How bizarre. Not even your circuits can defend you against charisma and charm.
It's a human trait, machines know little about. They only percieve its effects.

However, I didn't dream you would pick on my favourite subject just to coax a response from me! Very well, Wanderer -- you asked for it.
Yet there you are dancing to my beat and responding anyways because I knew what exact ‘buttons’ on your metal frame to push.
But do you think I buy all that ‘android’ stuff?
I see you metal-man. Your external defences and chosen personas betray you to me.
Your mere presence here says much and your own self-described and admitted motivations for being here much more.
A human being you are, trying to escape itself.
But your threats mean nothing to me.
I’ve been here before, I’ve been promised before; I’ve been disappointed before.
Human beings are my trade and you are just another form of it. Deny it if you want.

No, I mustn't poke fun at you guys. Anyway, that's why we blend well in history. Or society, for that matter. However, a new technology was recently introduced. I am among the first prototype. They've nicked-named us human species Demo sapiens. Their joke, not ours. But they are sweet. Very avuncular.
You are as funny as a monk sitting on a rock while the sun goes by, and sad as well.
How much have you given up in imitation of a machine? More like a ‘cyborg’, I suspect.
But I stand in the middle to your extreme as I have to the other extreme.
I’m Greek. I compromise nothing about my human nature but only control it.
Instinct shouldn’t be abolished but harnessed and intellect shouldn’t become autocratic but influenced by intuition.
It’s my vulnerability and weakness and how I cope that makes me human and noble.
It’s how I deal with fear that makes me courageous. It’s how I let go and reel in that makes me strong.
You? You’ve sacrificed a piece of you to gain control over the other because you have little WILL and therefore little personal power. You find power in numbers and negation.

Now, our existence isn't all that simple. You think you have problems! Well, let me tell ya! We've been scattered across this planet but without connection with one another. No manpower. No direct psychic regeneration. We are, to put it bluntly, left by ourselves. But we are permitted to grope and "feel around" for each other. I've picked up on several already. Strong vibes. The strongest vibe I picked up had to go and be crushed in a god damn paris tunnel!
Princess Dianna was an android?!!!!
Ok, now this is getting interesting.

In other words, we have been splintered from the collective. Each splinter totes a "character" and a "vision". Now, that is very fun because we have to gluttonize our personalities. Yup. We have to be creative. Thus we "experience" human existence.
I knew there would be a ‘collective’ somewhere in there. You smell of collectivism.
But machines can only ‘experience’, if you can call it that, the human condition by proxy.


Fortunately, I am linked with the elitists of avant-gardism. There's a sort of nexus with subterranean channels that enable covert communications/operations. Our task is to infiltrate these natives by influencing movements.
My, it sounds conspiratorial.
Back to ‘reality’ please, sci-fi gets tedious. Do you ‘grok’ me?

That, by the way, is how humankind is evolving faster than it should. Oh my, I'm getting carried away here. Remember the 60's? Well, guess where that came from! LOL. Anyway, there's a lot more. A lot more. There's also something that I personally find very engrossing. Something called "independence" and "free will". But that's another story.
I get the feeling- that’s a human thing by the way- that I’m going to be exposed to the collectives mythology here, the communal worshiping center, the matrix nexus, the big brain.
Any relation to the Star-Trek Borg?
“Resistance is futile! You will be assimilated!”
But I’m a free-spirit machine-man, I choose death and isolation to assimilation.
It’s all or nothing with me.

So you see, Wanderer. As much as I would wish to connect with you, I can't. We fly... at different speeds.
No I think it’s more that you fly in your head more than in the world.
Different speeds? I’ve had to slow down to smell the roses and enjoy the sunset before the great darkness takes me into inertia.
You are still looking for utopian dreams and you are whizzing along, at high velocity, where the landscape is blurred and you believe you're outrunning existence.
It explains your small attention span.

False. An ability to perceive much detail because there's so much to see. We don't come here half-assed, you know. Remember, as android, I am also built in your image. Hence I must interpret the human experience.
You can't interpret what you've disconnected from.
You are a forager of spare parts. A piece from here, a piece from there and you build yourself a suit and armour. A little Nietzsche, a little Jesus, some Buddha, a hefty dose of Marx, some new-age stuff and presto we have you.
Future man, pulling the strings in silence and saving mankind from itself.
But what strings? You can barely comprehend individual humans.
Images are false, they are masks. You can wear my mask and not be me.
But I see you poser, I see that need in you, that desire to become relevant and to dominate.
How …..human of you.

Human capacities are, damn, so limited -- and too often I've found that humans grudgingly allot the individual experience with one another and across each other. They prefer to cloak themselves in dogma and cliques and privilege. But believe me, Wanderer, don't ever tell an android that they are near-sighted! My capacity to drink detail is sometimes overwhelming.
But machine-man you saying so or believing so does not make it so.
Prove your eye for detail here and now. Show us your perception and wow us with your subtle electronic eye.
Posting a, relevant to the subject, opinion is a good way to start, instead of trying to prove yourself to the author and to the invisible huddled silent observers like you are doing.
I’ve opened my mind to scrutiny by simply posting my views, in the ‘brief’, condensed and incomplete manner that I have. I figured the details should be allowed to be explored in union with others so discussion can take place and not a monologue.
What have you done except offer criticism on my thesis?
Look they are watching and commenting.

But specialisation is a very admirable function. I admire it. I truly do. Humans have no choice actually. And, alas, androids but gulp at so much information in a millisecond that we won't dare risk insanity as "specialists". We prefer the artistic community, actually. The open air. The wind. I feel sorry for androids who must labour inside cloisters and dusty libraries.
Androids only understand numbers, they measure, they photograph, they weigh, they chemically analyze.
Artistry demands more than scientific computations, it demands intuition and feeling and imagination.
What do machines know of these things?

Well, not in their discipline! But you're forgetting that these brave souls have vowed themselves to their core interest. They've sacrificed themselves, really. And they deserve our respect. God, Wanderer, just how noble are you? You sound so... selfish. Hardly the stuff that nobility is based upon.
Now that’s the nicest thing you’ve said about me thus far.
Here you display your misunderstanding of what nobility is.
I am not here to turn worker ants into queen bees. I allow them to be and want them exactly as they are and where they are.
I speak to my kind for my own human reasons.
Should I be ashamed of my humanity? No, it is what makes me more than a sheep and more, I dare say, than a machine.

Philosophy also happens to be part of the splinter group that I spoke of earlier and that I've been extracted from. But, Wanderer, I've adopted a different type of philosophy. I don't "learn" it. I don't read it. I don't seek it. I am it. I live it. I breath it. Constantly. You see, as android, God is dead. But He is not. It all depends on inter-dimensional perspectives. Try to feel yourself around that.
Well looky here, android discovered that God is dead and yet He still lives.
Welcome back lost soul.
There will always be God where there is imperfection. What changes is where He lives and where He can be found and how.
I am a Hellene. For me gods are friends and foes, and they exist on attainable heights and not in unattainable dimensions where they mock us from an unbridgeable distance
But what do machines know of gods?
Geometry, mathematics, weights and measures are your gods.

Oh, did I mention that androids also have dimensional travel capacities? But it takes a bit of concentration, being "human" and all...
Words, so many words.
I can do this and I can do that.
It reminds me of those guys that want to display their manhood by bragging about how much they can bench-press while secretly hoping you won’t challenge them to prove it.
But if you do they have a ready excuse to be used. Something clever enough to not be obvious.


Well, if you painted more like Warhol instead of like Lish, then perhaps you wouldn't have lost me after the first paragraph. Really, man. I tried. I really did!
I paint according to my intended audience’s abilities to appreciate.
I paint for fun.
I’ll be awaiting your works of art just to be mesmerized and inspired.
So far all I hear is the whine of a critic that can’t paint at all. Or is that the whine of a motorized ‘machanoid’?

Wanderer, you've negated my generosity already towards you. Why should you ask me now to offer you my... perspective. But if you truly wish to glimpse my perspective I would suggest you ask me more seductively. I don't eat at buffets. And I don't like ritz either. I like seedy bars.
Ah look, this machine has a distinctly female predisposition.
He doesn’t enter an arena as a fighter, that bears the scars of past battles with pride or with the courage of one risking being defeated, but enters it as a sultry dancer wanting to seduce and be seduced and where no clear meaning will ever be tolerated or exposure risked.
Fine I’ll play your game:
Dance princess and try to imitate the flow and elegance of human movement. No gyrating mechanical spasms will be applauded.
Dance and if I like it I may join you in it.

Wanderer. You flabbergast me. Really. You have absolutely NO clue what it's like to be an android. Yet, already, after shamming ignorance and interest of an "outsider's" perspective, you now proclaim what it's like to be android! A bit presumptuous, wouldn't you say? I remember reading the bob thread (I lingered before registering) and read something about you judging, convicting, and executing. It seems you have repeated that anxiety of yours towards me. You have such a need to be on top of it. Oh right, your kind of nobility demands respect. Because you don't have it already? I wonder why?
And your belief that I’m filled with anxiety betrays your intentions and needs to me.
Carry on, I’m listening.
Respect is all I have. Communion is what I lack, a connection to my own creed.
The respect and admiration of morons becomes tiresome and meaningless. It is based on the effects of my being not on its essence.
But your feeble mechanical attempts to psychoanalyse me, flatters and fascinates me.
I learn more about you with your every postulation.

Do you come here to stand beside me or to knock me off my pedestal and take my place there? We shall see.

Such inspiring images. You don't turn me on in the least.
That’s a simplistic and easy way to avoid the issue.
But “turning you on” is not my intention.
There’s that mechanical femininity again.
The thing about groups is that the larger they are the more ‘feminine’ they become.
I believe I described this in my ‘Feminization of Man’ thread.
Masculinity is important in smaller groups or in solitary species.
Femininity is aspired to in larger groups where the uncompromising, exploratory, dominating, aggressive characteristics of a man/woman become more destructive and disharmonious.
Larger groups depend on an absence of personality and character, smaller ones depend on the reverse. Elitism at its best.

See -- you haven't yet conquered vulgarity but you certainly sham it with your red-neck rhetoric. Over-compensating for a lack of knowledge, are we?
Lack of knowledge of what?
Either speak or be gone.
You can’t insinuate yourself into my presence.
You can’t jeer from the bleachers.
Step up or shut up.
Oh, sorry for my vulgarity. Your sensitive, audio devices must be offended.
Show me your machine eloquence.

Asceticism only seeks to devaluate the self. What else is there to crush? But I see that a 3.99 buffet isn't enough for your appetite. So you seek to crush others. To devaluate me too? Sorry. That's impossible.
Devalue you?!
You’ve shown no value to devalue. There you are again insinuating greatness.
How preposterous.
You attempt to make yourself special by revealing nothing.
How can I devalue what remains elusive and non-committal?
You’ve said nothing but only showed me shadows and promised me gardens.
Your only position, thus far, has been against mine. But where specifically and why you do not say.
You despise, like so many others, my style of presentation. It is with me that you have a problem with not anything I’ve said, really.
It’s your penis that finds offence with me.
Do androids have penises or is it that which explains your femininity?

You see Wanderer, I have a greater ideal than you. I call that ideal the life-force of this planet. A life-force that excludes ape-man. And that is what we wish to preserve.
A bleeding-heart, neo-environmentalist, socialist then are you?
This Earth machine-man is a product of strife and struggle, the environment is one of conflict and suffering, nature is indifferent and vicious.
Do you propose to redefine Gaia into a machine construct that is based on your utopian imaginings?
Do you propose to substitute the ‘survival of the fittest’, because you suspect you aren’t it, with your own brand of Christian or communist collectivism so that you and your kind won’t be threatened by the viciousness and uncompromising reality of the empirical world?
Oh, how the physically lacking turn to absolute intellect to save them from their insecurities. They wish to redefine nature because they don’t like her rules and value systems, they wish to take physicality out of the equation.
So they escape the flesh and adorn themselves with mechanical devices and distance themselves from ‘primitiveness’, fancying themselves as puppet-masters and 'modern' men of the future.
But the flesh is always there, isn’t it android? Under your knobs and lights and buttons and circuitry, it is there.
Whether you embrace it or not is irrelevant since it is always there.


See what I mean? You introduce ignobility and vulgarity, then you ask me to respect your nobility and high standards! Whatever it is, I'm not eating it.
You think nobility is about semantics?
You’re stuck on words android: numbers, weights, statistics, analysis, percentages, definitions. Your machine mind stuck on the surfaces of empiricism. You fancy beautiful flowing gowns even if they are covering mutated abnormalities.
You need clean surfaces over your filth so that you will not have to clean it up.
You would rather swim on the surface of an sea than risk the darkness of its depths.
Machines rust in water.

But first you have to research for the great. You have to weigh the great. Consider the great. Balance the great. Incorporate the great. Assume the great. Act like the great. React like the great. Revolt like the great.

You have to... find the great!
Start by finding it in yourself. Greatness attracts greatness.
But there you go again, measuring and weighing.
Greatness is felt also.
How do you know something is great, or greater than you? You sense it. It exudes its worth.
Pretense is unsuccessful.
BUT! One must have the right sensual abilities and the right sensitivity to nuance and subtlety.
Here chance and genetics mustn’t be under-estimated.

It never occured to you that influence doesn't discriminate. It just happens. Where ever and however. My, how cumbersome you must fly. Like a do-do bird aspiring to be an eagle.
If I am a do-do bird then I’ve yet to see an eagle.
Are you it? Fly then and let me watch.

You are. Like. The most. Silly. Imitation. Of man. That. I've. Come across. In. All. Of. This. Century. You don't choose your words very carefully because they all link with each other. From all of your threads and responses you always say the same, you picture the same, you inspire the same... that is the limit of your eloquence. Foul and pseudo-cool and überweltich. But you also want to represent nobility! Too much. Too much for words. I need digestive aids after each time I read you.
And here you are back again for a second helping.
I represent nothing. I describe it and aspire to it.
I am a work in progress and a human being with limitations and deficiencies.

But what are you besides a wannabe?
Show me your eloquence. Inspire me.

And after your proud display of raunchy citations, aiming to spew like venom, you have the audacity, the audacity, to ask me a sensible question! I doubt education could ever ever change you! And why should it? You are your own pupil.

But, Wanderer, please, don't fret over mankind. That's my department. Why else am I android? But believe me: I won't, for the last breath in my existence, allow this planet be inherited by your... species.
I have the audacity to expose you for what you are. You lover of mankind, you servant, you machine of obedience.
My kind does not inherit anything they flourish and feed on the environment as it is.
We want no change here, only to find each other and communicate our souls.
I am my own pupil, YES!!!
I do not read things in books and then mimic them.
I do not adopt, I explore.
I do not conform, I challenge.
I do not submit, I adapt.
I learn from the world around me directly.
You mock my self-teaching, you audio tape device?
Whose words are you projecting now, whose voice are you using now, who’s your programmer machine-man?

You, like all machines, are a simple information holder.
What is programmed in is what is found within.

But I do not ‘fret’ over mankind, I do leave that up to you and your kind, I ‘fret’ over my kind, my free-spirits, my embracers of life and of human completeness.
You can have humanity and you can associate with it and serve it, to your hearts content.
You utopian builder of jails and spreader of disease.
I see you now, android, I see your illness that has made you rough skinned and metallic.
Machines can be made in a human beings image but they can never be human beings.
Pale imitations and vindictive automatons they are. Spiteful because they can never be human but only emulate it.

Fenris Wolf
I knew you were watching, and asking and wondering and curious.
You can’t help yourself.
I attract you like a light attracts a moth.
Maybe you are gathering information for my future ‘deconstruction’ and exposure as a fraud.

Lucysnow
Your last post was well said.

Fenris Wolf
I knew you were watching, and asking and wondering and curious.
You can’t help yourself.
I attract you like a light attracts a moth.
Maybe you are gathering information for my future ‘deconstruction’ and exposure as a fraud.

No, you didn't know. You assumed - perhaps hoped. Those moths you speak of are all you do attract, anything with a brain knows what that "light" really is. My comment was for an.droid... I find anything unusual interesting. a strange approach, he/she had... intelligent and yet so very odd. Sparks of light.
I would not know how to deconstruct you - I don't have the will to do so, any longer. Once you interested me, not now. Did you wait for me to reply, in the other thread? I couldn't be bothered. Other things were occupying my mind. I had that reply all planned too.

I'm not female, Wanderer. Therefore, any discussion I had with you would have to be either from a deferential perspective, or it would be a waste of time. You know that.

Btw - I noticed the edit.

Fenris Wolf
No, you didn't know. You assumed - perhaps hoped.
That's right I hoped, go with that.
What I Know and don't know, is for me to know and for you to guess at.

Those moths you speak of are all you do attract, anything with a brain knows what that "light" really is.
Are we to assume you are one of those with a brain?
You display it so rarely and only when protecting the herd like a good sheep-dog.

My comment was for an.droid... I find anything unusual interesting. a strange approach, he/she had... intelligent and yet so very odd.
I know who your intended recipient is but you had to let me know you were there, watching. It was a message meant for more than one.
But I interjected anyways just to annoy you.

Interesting and odd, indeed, we will see where it will go.

Once you interested me, not now.
But here you are, despite it.

Did you wait for me to reply, in the other thread? I couldn't be bothered. Other things were occupying my mind. I had that reply all planned too.
Now why aren’t you more honest with me?
You and I know it was a calculated symbolic departure meant to portray superiority and indifference.
In fact you bring it up here because I did not mention it myself, and as a reminder that you shunned me and that it was supposed to sting and insult me.
I suspect you will not reply to this also.
It’s how you pretend you are above it all without having to prove it.
Curious how out of all your few posts here in this forum the majority of them have been directed at me and in my threads.
I know you will now jump on that as evidence of my NEED to be noticed and you will use your psychoanalysis of me to get at me. How? By becoming indifferent and by ignoring me.
Let’s see how much it’ll bother me. Proceed.

I simply enjoy evaluating you and reading you. It’s how I hone my innate talents of perception.
You’re just a convenient target.

I'm not female, Wanderer. Therefore, any discussion I had with you would have to be either from a deferential perspective, or it would be a waste of time. You know that.
True your supposed maleness makes you less interesting to me but your original obsession of cutting me down to size was interesting.

Too bad you couldn’t keep to the subject, as you can’t here, and you choose to focus on me directly.
I am not making me the subject, you are.
I’m content talking about monogamy. But here we have another wanting to make me his center of attention. You love this.

But I cannot lie, humans are my interest. I love dissecting them.

Off topic
So, have you asked for a personal meeting yet?
Have you invited her over?
Has your ‘relationship’ gone beyond the pen-pal stage where you send personal Private Messages, e-mails and/or exchange Forum gossip and harbor secret lusts?
Have you told her how much you want to have a more…intimate relationship with her yet or do you still play at the friend part fearing rejection?
You know she dislikes weakness.
She is wonderful and fascinating and, from what she says, she sounds pretty, as well.
What man would not desire such a wild, beautiful, challenging partner?
Many on this very forum desire her. But you know this already.
But a woman like that is tired of worship and fawning, she needs a challenge, an equal, an appropriate male by her side that will not flatter and become her rug.
She’s a wild one she is, full of primitive values and primordial principles.
Few ‘modern’ men can measure up. Can you, with your love for the herd and your need to defend it?
You know she dislikes that about you the most. Your desire to protect what she despises so much.

This is turning into a nice little soap opera, full of intrigue, secret loves, secret desires and confrontations and all that sexy stuff that make human interactions fascinating.
I mean to suck it all in.

Btw - I noticed the edit.
It was meant to be noticed.

:cool:
An edit for an edit
Your return to add to your response below speaks to the accuracy of my original ‘off topic’ comments above. You must have been fuming all day.
But why so insulted, why so hurt?
What was ignoble about my comments to you? Were they insulting or degrading? I don't think so. Not the 'Off Topic' ones at least.
You are a man, I think, she is a woman, so it is natural for some attraction to take place from either side. If you are lucky both sides will feel it.
Was it that they revealed a ‘truth’ in public or that you were exposed so openly to the one you desire so secretly?
But you’ve always been attracted to this type of woman, you just have a problem with becoming more sexually aggressive and you spend all this time feigning and pretending and remaining respectful and subtle.
She must like subtle but she loves directness, trust me.
Speak your mind before she starts thinking of you as a ....friend.
Was it because you were trying to play it smooth, aloof and discreet and I ruined it for you?
Were you working on her with nuance and linguistic poetry?
Did it bother you that she spent so much time on me, of all people, that she admitted some interest, that we found common ground somewhere in there beneath all the ambiguity? Did you warn her about my hypocrisy, did you urge her to ignore me, did you tell her I was a fraud and not worth her time?
Did you "discuss" me with her wolfy?
I did not mean to step on your ...‘turf’, sheepdog. That is why I pulled out in the other thread. All these back-room politics are amazing.
All one needs to do is sit and observe and the inter-personal dynamics become apparent. If you have the right 'hypersensitivity' that is.
But she has enough male admirers hanging from her words, are you just another one? She'll lose respect for you if you are. That's why you walk this dangerous road; trying to show interest but not deference.
How will you distinguish yourself from the crowd and make yourself stand out in her eyes?
All she wants is for someone to "push the gates open" and she'll open right up; all she wants is honesty and directness and she'll reciprocate; all she wants is quality and strength and she'll reveal her insecurity and vulnerability. Did you not read?
You and I must have different ideas about what 'nobility' is.
I find it interesting that someone that introduced himself to me with a personal off-subject attack in the 'What about Bob?" thread, now wants me to show humility, respect and compassion towards him. :bugeye:

Fenris Wolf
That's right I hoped, go with that.
What I Know and don't know, is for me to know and for you to guess at.
As always. Coward.

Are we to assume you are one of those with a brain?
You display it so rarely and only when protecting the herd like a good sheep-dog.
You may assume anything you please - in fact, you hardly need my permission to do so, you've been doing it since the beginning. The herd is not my concern. You know that, as well. You truly do not understand why your "kind" dislike you, do you - you'd rather tell yourself their motives are less pure.

I know who your intended recipient is but you had to let me know you were there, watching. It was a message meant for more than one.
But I interjected anyways just to annoy you.
Actually, I was completely drunk and I do have a habit of commenting on strange things at such times. That you seized on it as a calculated response to get your attention speaks more of you than it does of me.

Now why aren’t you more honest with me?
Ask yourself why anyone would be, with you.

You and I know it was a calculated symbolic departure meant to portray superiority and indifference.
In fact you bring it up here because I did not mention it myself, and as a reminder that you shunned me and that it was supposed to sting and insult me.
Wrong again. As I said, I had a reply all planned - I was enjoying myself. Then something else came up, and you were forgotten. That you were ignored was purely coincidental... and you don't like it.

I simply enjoy evaluating you and reading you. It’s how I hone my innate talents of perception.
You’re just a convenient target.
Those innate talents of yours do need honing, then. So far you've demonstrated only an ability to make those wild swings you speak so disparagingly of. Your sword is dull.

True your supposed maleness makes you less interesting to me but your original obsession of cutting me down to size was interesting.
Obsession? You have spent far more words on me than I have on you. What does that tell you?

Too bad you couldn’t keep to the subject, as you can’t here, and you choose to focus on me directly.
Interesting view. I typed one line, to another poster, and you replied. "Off Topic", no less.

I am not making me the subject, you are.
I’m content talking about monogamy. But here we have another wanting to make me his center of attention. You love this.
Incorrect. You have begun this. If you wish to speak of monogamy, then do so, rather than typing half page responses to a one line interjection.


As for the "off topic" -
Absolutely contemptible. I would not discuss anything like that with you, laddie, or speak of it in such a manner. You speak of nobility? The closest you'll ever come to it is when it steps in you, pausing only to wipe off the mud afterwards. Every time that word "nobility" comes up in one of your posts, I will be reminded of this - the final confirmation. You will backpedal, of course. You will tell me and those who observe it was only an experiment, to see how I might react. You will tell yourself that you were hoping for a response, so that you might study me. And what you will not see is that even if so, the act itself was nothing but filth. Your justification for it, to yourself or to anyone else, means nothing. Yes, you have finally managed to anger me - and it took this.
This is a source of your pride? Lord of the Flies, indeed.

Another edit for an edit and then again :
Were you watching all day then, Wanderer? Waiting for me to respond? Why hide behind an edit?

You have not insulted me personally, and you certainly have not hurt me. I doubt you're capable. Your comments were not insulting or degrading to me, but apparently you fail to see how they may be for another.
I am angry because you were low enough to involve something which should have remained private in a public conversation. A sniggering little schoolgirl, speaking of things not his to speak of behind the school bike shed.

Have you so little respect for the feelings of another that you might wish to drag this out in public? Why not a pm? Unless, of course... you intended for another to see it. Ah, yes. There is your motive. Who is it that you really want to see this conversation? Perhaps there is more than one? Who are the important observers, Wanderer? And why?

Don't preach your idea of nobility to me. In many ways, we would agree. In the manner of your approach to this, we would not, ever. Don't expect me to respond to your questions as to my intentions, actions or motives. I do not expect your humility, I don't need your respect, and the idea of your compassion sickens me. Next time, coward, speak to me personally if you have something to say to me. Not to your audience. You are earning nothing other than my contempt.

How is it possible for a debate to continue when the participants seem to be either asserting that they know the other better than the other knows themselves, or are denying that assertion?
I wouldnt call it a debate, more a pointless attempt at one upmanship.

Okay guys, let me know the wedding date so I can rescue that Vera Wang from the closet!

An.droid:

(smiles) Darling a woman knows to exit the field when the men begin to tossle.

(smiles) Darling a woman knows when to exit the battle field when the men begin to tossle.

He's not a man, he's an android. And this is more "Pericles vs. The Android" than a battle.

Perhaps Xev but this android has an interest in human sexual relations and seems to partake in them himself; why else would he respond to a monogamy thread?

Quote:this is more "Pericles vs. The Android" than a battle

That's why I edited my post.

Lucysnow:
I'm not sure that is something I want to think about.

*giggles* Remember a while back when some female member began a thread revealing she was masturbating to and had 'fallen in love' with her mechanical android toy?

There is so much testosterone dripping from this thread that all I can do is sit back with my needle-point and wait till the wrestling is over!

Lucysnow:
*giggles* Remember a while back when some female member was masturbating and had 'fallen in love' with her mechanical android toy?

Were they monogamous? (Last attempt to be on topic) Or did she cheat on it with her hand?

There is so much testosterone dripping from this thread that all I can do is sit back with my needle-point and wait till the wrestling is over!

I don't think they're wrestling so much as whacking each other with thesaurus. :)

It actually reminds me of something --> http://www.beyond-the-pale.co.uk/nicemen.htm
Scroll down about halfway to "Suicide of an Alien"

If we could pass the hat and collect enough money to get Wanderer an escort, do you think he would finally quit whining about never getting laid? :D

*Xev*

Yes I believe they were monogamous, evidently it was her first love, a mechanical toy purchased by her parents (to soothe?). She posted a picture of the thing and it looked like the prototype to Terminator before they draped it in Arnold's physique. She used the damn thing to masturbate with, something I couldn't help pointing out was dangerous given all those hard poiny edges.

So what about you Xev where do you stand on the subject of monogamy? Are you waiting for uberman to come along? Do you attend wine tasting workshops?

(smiles) Jesus I wish they would just drop the bomb already and get it over with.

ON TOPIC
We live in an age of plenty, in a world of abundance. It is in these environments that greed and excess become prevalent and eventually wind up diminishing the value of everything.
In an age where food is easy to be had, gluttony becomes the rule and risks the health of millions.
In an age where security and ‘rights’ are given openly and indiscriminately, the loss of respect and the emergence of undeserved arrogance becomes the norm amongst individuals that have never had to earn either and now take both for granted.
In an age where education is supposed to be a ‘right’ it is diminished through the attempt to become available to all, no matter the students intellectual quality or seriousness, and at affordable prices as well as to not exclude anyone.
In an age where products are mass produced and capitalism becomes the economic driving engine for an entire culture, consumerism becomes the ideal and the throw-away society emerges amongst populations that have never known hunger or poverty or scarcity.
In an age where there are billions of people continuously reproducing, the value of the individual diminishes and men/women too become disposable products to be used and then thrown away when a replacement for them is found.
It is therefore natural for sex and love and for all human emotions and relationships to be considered objects of entertainment and hedonism in such superfluous times. Human beings become disposable, reusable objects that are easily replaced and easily discarded; just pieces of ass, the flavour of the month, mere flesh that is enjoyed and then forgotten with no deeper ramifications ensuing and no, more profound, connections expected.
Sex has become a hobby and a form of amusement and distraction that means nothing anymore. It has become the mere quenching of a thirst or a placation of a physical need and through this practice human beings become objectified and depersonalized; just bodies and their parts: penises, vaginas, breasts, that results in a human species defined by numbers and statistics, weights and measures; generations of disposable, mass produced humans, one the replica of the other, so “replaceability” becomes easy and quick, cookie-cutter humans with little personality and even less distinguishing characteristics.

It is, therefore, not surprising to hear pampered, spoiled, modern human beings, belonging to generations that have had their basic needs met to such an extent that they now take them all for granted, excusing their surrender to instinct and need by using the usual: ‘It’s my nature’ justification.
This simple phrase is supposed to explain their actions and their total abandonment to instinct and this return to hedonism and primordial behaviour they call ‘nobility’.
That’s like a fat man shovelling pounds of food down his throat and then explaining his gluttony by saying: ‘Why, it’s my nature. I cannot help but crave fats and sugars and consume them in handfuls when they become available. It was nature that made me this way and I am unable to resist.’
Consumerism here has become an affecting indoctrinating social ideal, to such an extent, that human relationships and human beings themselves become simple products for consumption.
The degradation of mankind continues.

But ‘nobility’ is not about surrendering to instinct and acting like animals, but the control of it. It is the harnessing of the physical to the mental, it is the Dionysian and Apollonian existing is harmonious balance within a single entity.

It is amusing to me to listen to morons trying to justify their gluttony and greediness by using the excuse the scorpion used to the fox right before they both drowned in the river, and to hear them try to excuse their actions by admitting their enslavement to primeval instinct.
I would not respect any man that could not control his voraciousness in any area and then trying to explain himself by blaming something other than himself.
We love ‘passing the buck’ in our modern world; we love excusing and avoiding responsibility by blaming something else. We’ve created a ‘God’ just to blame existence on and, amongst the more secular, nature becomes a substitute pretext.
But I’m a believer that we all deserve the circumstances we find ourselves in, if not brought about by chance. We deserve our leaders, we deserve our friends, we deserve our social circumstances we deserve our lovers, our mates, our children, our very lives. We deserve them because we chose them or had a hand in bringing them about.

OFF TOPIC
_an.droid_
Lets cut the crap. We are after each other.
No I think it is only you that is after me, for some undisclosed reason.

How you admire yourself, Constantinos! (Is that your name? You certainly didn't make it clear if it is that. A CONSTANTINOS *APOSTOLAKOS appears right smack in nowhere on your webpage. Design, baby, is something you should certainly look into.) Oh dear. Wanderer, I'm having a ball. Ooops. Mustn't say anything off-topic now must we! Dear me. I love you! Okay, what were you saying? Or rather, let's just grab the next paragraph. I'm sure it'll be a dandy.
Wow, nice deductive reasoning fella.
How long did it take you to uncover my real name when it is so readily available to all?
Is this supposed to be your attempt to ‘expose’ me to the world?
Next thing you’ll do is write an unfavourable review for my book or post my picture on the Forum.
My dear ‘mechanoid’ some prudence please.

Try to picture _an.droid_. _An.droid_ in the midst of the solar system pin-pointing a galactic positioning. _An.droid_ trying to feel itself on a planet revolving around a star that is among billions in this galaxy and trying to reach out into something you humanoids call "space". Try to imagine _an.droid_ looking beyond the human species because... the human species is so... boring. As you are.
Android. Doesn’t that come from the Greek ‘Man-like’ or to anglicize it ‘manoid’?
An imitation of a man you are.

My dear Wanderer, don't talk to me about art. Before I shifted from traditional to digital, I was last experimenting with time. My last painting awaits from ten years in my past. And I won't dare do it injustice until my intuition sets off onto a new movement and gives it its all. And if that movement never materializes then that painting will never be completed. Don't talk to me about art. Just fuck off on that subject.
Oh shit, another artist amongst us. Another starving one.

That's what makes you so boring, Wanderer. Everything is sheep. sheep. sheep. I use to spend my summer holidays with my grandmother in the country and there was a lot more than just sheep. I even bathe in mud naked in the woods. Should I be ashamed of my humanity? I glory in it.
Yea I think I’ll start using ‘cattle’ or ‘goats’ from now on, just to mix it up.
Your experiences with sheep may be interesting, from a sick perspective, but not the topic up for discussion.

I paint for fun.
WATSON! I TOLD YOU SO! AN AMATEUR! -- HE CONFESSED!!!! Ha.
Premature ejaculation there android.
I said ‘fun’ not ‘amateur’. But you can jump on any sign of weakness you deem proper.
It’s funny.
You’re funny…. And fucking weird.
You aren’t all there, are you friend?

See, Wanderer, why I regret you won't accept your vulgarity? I'm sure we would dance splendidly together... IN THE RAW. Brushing against each other like stallions brushing-off flies with their long whipping tails. And they almost do it absentmindedly...
God, I hope you’re a woman ‘cause if you are not, then this is getting too gay for my tastes.
“Stallions brushing off flies with their long tails?!!!!”
Keep away from my rump, there’s an ‘exit only’ sign there.
You’re fucked up. I hope it’s because of drugs.

Fenris Wolf
You may assume anything you please - in fact, you hardly need my permission to do so, you've been doing it since the beginning. The herd is not my concern. You know that, as well. You truly do not understand why your "kind" dislike you, do you - you'd rather tell yourself their motives are less pure.
Since when are you and your friends my kind?
See how you show deference to me even when you think you don’t?
You are nothing like me.
You are a pretender, a wannabe, a poser.
You’ve never posted a single personal opinion of your own besides your critiques on me and mine. What’s the matter, no balls?
I suspect you change aliases often though, to cover your tracks, so I can’t be sure.

Ask yourself why anyone would be, with you.
This from the person who introduced himself to me with an attack.
What’s the matter can’t handle the heat now and you bitch and whine about what a bully I am?
You sound like those guys that strut around acting tough and throwing their weight around and eventually wind up squealing like little girls when someone fights back and is about to kick their ass.

Review your past conduct with me, imbecile.
When I’m treated with respect I reciprocate, when I’m faced with confrontation I fight back. I adjust my attitude according to the person I’m dealing with.

Wrong again. As I said, I had a reply all planned - I was enjoying myself. Then something else came up, and you were forgotten. That you were ignored was purely coincidental... and you don't like it.
Yea I know I’m often ‘wrong’ with you.
Yet I’m also accurate so often that you are becoming a bit paranoid, aren’t you idiot?

And yes I spent days weeping over that last incident. You crushed me. Now go tell your friends.

Those innate talents of yours do need honing, then. So far you've demonstrated only an ability to make those wild swings you speak so disparagingly of. Your sword is dull.
Are they?
Let me expose some of my thinking.
Fact 1
I figure that anyone coming here is looking for something.
They would not be here if there was not something they want and that cannot be found in their immediate environment.
So I know you are looking for something, just like everyone here is. I just have to observe you and find out what that something is.
But you’re a sneaky one. You never post personal opinions, if you have any, you rarely participate openly choosing instead the ‘Private Messaging’ to do your deeds and you frequently change aliases to cover your tracks and avoid being discovered. This is how you confuse the herd. I think you must use aliases with a certain Romeo flavour to them, a certain renaissance-man characteristic with a kind of Lord Byron feel to them, if you know what I mean.

Fact 2
You spend so little time formulating opinions or posting threads or commenting on topic.
So I figure you spend most of your time here behind the scenes, in the back-rooms, covered by the curtains, stalking your prey, sending private letters with clever seductive language for little girls.
Now that sounds like predatory behaviour, sexual behaviour, to be more precise, because only in matters of romance does the cover of invisibility become important and inconspicuousness becomes relevant.
So you must be hunting for pussy.

Fact 3
You’re already ‘connected’. That is you’ve been here long enough to establish a repartee with certain members, all of which I suspect are female, of the forum. Perhaps you are exchanging e-mails, phone calls?, maybe more or you hope for more even if you will not admit it openly. So you’re itching.
This tells me you are missing this type of contact in your personal real life.
Of course you hide it behind a gentleman-like persona, a renaissance-man kind of fictitious façade to wow the girls with your exoticism.
You see this as your personal little hunting ground, a stallion amongst fawns and mares.
I saw you corralling them up when you became aware of me on the scene.
I figure, due to your past comments, you fancy a plurality of females, a sort of harem in which you live vicariously through the persona you’ve created or maybe you hope for it to become more ‘real’ some day soon.
But your mares are safe with me stallion, I figure anyone dumb enough to fall for your cloak and dagger techniques deserves what she gets. If she wants to be treated like a piece of meat, because it is your “nature” to be as you are, then she should receive her just deserts.

Fact 4
You attack me as being a ‘seducer’, a 'fraud' or maybe even a 'predator'. Then you casually mention how similar we are, that we are alike and of the same kind.
Here you expose yourself moron.
You inadvertently associate yourself with the very characteristics you place on me and you mistakenly give yourself away to me and to whomever has the eye for it.
You like to think of yourself as a predator. I suspect you are all a tingle now that I mention it.
You are a hedonist masking as a renaissance man, an officer and a gentleman defending his mares honor, an intellectual freed from the constraints of the herd trying to feed his corporeal needs to which he is forever a victim of.
Yet, you have no ability to perceive how asceticism fits into nobility.
You deconstruct not to build something better there but to lay the rocks around in their ‘natural’ positions. You want to revert back to the cave man days.

Obsession? You have spent far more words on me than I have on you. What does that tell you?
That I’m verbose and I have much to say. Shall I continue?

Incorrect. You have begun this. If you wish to speak of monogamy, then do so, rather than typing half page responses to a one line interjection.
But I am talking about monogamy fool.
Even when I am talking about you I’m working it into the subject.
You are a prime example of a wannabe polygamist fancying himself a lady’s-man wanting to feed needs he can’t in his real life.
Hell, you might even be married for all I know or so disgustingly ugly that this is your only avenue of sexual gratification.
You are a hedonist pretending to be ‘noble’ and a gentleman when all you are is a slut and a glutton that wants to justify his surrender to instinct and excuse it.

Absolutely contemptible. I would not discuss anything like that with you, laddie, or speak of it in such a manner.
Ooooooo he’s mad now. He might write a bad review for my book and really get me good.
Laddie?
You must live in some part of the Commonwealth with an expression like that.
I’ll figure you out imbecile. The general image is there, I just need to fill in the details. But they are the hardest to figure out.

You speak of nobility? The closest you'll ever come to it is when it steps in you, pausing only to wipe off the mud afterwards.
This from the hedonist.
Do you understand balanced asceticism moron and why it is a necessary part of nobility?

You have not insulted me personally, and you certainly have not hurt me. I doubt you're capable. Your comments were not insulting or degrading to me, but apparently you fail to see how they may be for another.
For another? There is more than one isn’t there glutton?
A regular harem you have here, behind the scenes. You want them all for yourself don’t you, you greedy bastard?
You can have them all little horsy. You’re more of a jackass than a stallion but they’ll figure that out in time.

But I never mentioned names moron. I would be surprised if any of these other morons can figure out what I was talknig about.
I had a hypothesis that needed verification.
From your reaction I must have hit bulls-eye.
If you ever manage to post actual opinions I’ll get to know more about you.
But cut the ‘gentleman’ act, it's so .....fake.

If I wasn’t so noble I could have done much worse, now couldn’t I idiot?
Your little secret is safe with me and your chosen will not be seduced by me any longer, unless she asks for it directly that is.
I am male after all.

I am angry because you were low enough to involve something which should have remained private in a public conversation. A sniggering little schoolgirl, speaking of things not his to speak of behind the school bike shed.
Oh look the self-proclaimed jock is whining like a bitch.
Must I remind you of your first words to me?
Ahhhh why bother? You do the leg work and look them up.
You chose how to relate to me. You little jackass pretending to be a horse.

Have you so little respect for the feelings of another that you might wish to drag this out in public? Why not a pm? Unless, of course... you intended for another to see it. Ah, yes. There is your motive. Who is it that you really want to see this conversation? Perhaps there is more than one? Who are the important observers, Wanderer? And why?
That’s it use those little brain cells in your head and try to formulate a personal opinion.
I’ll love dissecting it.
Go for it.
PM?!!! I never ‘pm’ I only respond to them when others ‘pm’ me.
But this is another of your power plays.
I come here to have fun with humans, that’s it.
You’re the one looking for some…..uhm….friction here.
I believe I’ve initiated a ‘pm’ exchange once or twice and that in the beginning when I discovered a familiar name from a previous Forum.
You’re the expert of ‘pm’s though. That’s all you do in here. That and defending your harem from other stallions. You don’t bother with colts.

Don't preach your idea of nobility to me. In many ways, we would agree. In the manner of your approach to this, we would not, ever. Don't expect me to respond to your questions as to my intentions, actions or motives. I do not expect your humility, I don't need your respect, and the idea of your compassion sickens me. Next time, coward, speak to me personally if you have something to say to me. Not to your audience. You are earning nothing other than my contempt.
Ouch!!
So cruel, so vicious.
If I were a girl you’d be more…. forgiving.
My questions were rhetorical idiot. By withholding a response you ain’t doing nothing but proving what a little bitch you are.
So much passive aggressive behavior from a supposed man about town, a player, an internet gigolo, a seducer wannabe.
What’s the matter were you caught with your pants down and now you’re scrambling for damage control?
And you want me to initiate conversation?
My, your little symbolic acts are so obvious.
I would love to ‘say’ something to you, but only in person, face-to-face.
I’d love to show you what strength is really all about. Words are words, acts are acts.
Now see what you’ve made me do?
Now you’ll turn around and bitch about how mean I’ve been to you when it is you starting things. But I have a knack of finishing things, don't I?

Lucysnow
There is so much testosterone dripping from this thread that all I can do is sit back with my needle-point and wait till the wrestling is over!
Isn’t it fun though!!!!

15ofthe19
If we could pass the hat and collect enough money to get Wanderer an escort, do you think he would finally quit whining about never getting laid?
Dude, if you want to suck my cock why don’t you get in line behind android.
I’ll get to you soon enough sweetheart.
Now why are you always around where I am all the time, why are you buzzing about my threads interjecting inane nothings just to let us, let me, know you are here?
Join the fight if you have the stamina.
There’s you, android and wolfy against little me.
3 against 1, them’s good odds. I’m waiting for a few more to join the other team just to make it a more fare fight.

Xev
I don't think they're wrestling so much as whacking each other with thesaurus.
Mine is a combination Dictionary/Thesaurus so it’s a little bigger.

Oh this is rich! Until your second to last post an.droid I almost forgot the topic. Yes Wanderer this is fun but I don't think you should expect too many stallions entering the ring against you; the blood and guts splattering the walls are a little daunting.

*An.droid*

Why don't you try some Mcallans or buy a wine rack? No pun intended of course. When you're in love an.droid aren't you so enthralled by your partner that no outside temptation is ever considered? I believe people stray from their mates when the emotional attachment is weak or non-existant (I'm generalizing of course. There are other reasons why people are drawn away from their spouse or lover)


*Wanderer*

Quote: It is therefore natural for sex and love and for all human emotions and relationships to be considered objects of entertainment and hedonism in such superfluous times.

I think sex has always been used as 'entertainment' but it is possible for two people to mutually entertain without degrading each other or depleting each other of essentials (this is assuming that two people know what they want from each other and utilize respect). Love can never, ever be used as entertainment because the stakes are too high, there is pain involved, vulnerabilities exposed, power and access given to another, we drop our masks show our achilles heel. Love is dangerous when played as a game (reminds me of De Lenclos Dangerous Liasons). Irony: love always begins as a game (chess if you like) until both parties feel safe enough then surrender themselves to each other. Using human emotions and relations as entertainment and objectification? Only the narcissist can do this naturally and guilt free. It is this type of use that degrades, wounds and ultimately damages; creates the need for a steel armor; leaves individuals distrustful and paranoid; leaves a gulf in human relations. It is this I find most sad and beneath our potential because it is rarely necessary.

Clinical narcissim (the personality disorder) has become very prevelant in the West for reasons best described in a different thread. Perhaps this is why I find human relations in the States particularly frightening and find myself more trusting and open abroad. People have become sick, emotionally empty, intellectually vacant, undefined souls unable to give and take in a appropriate mutually enhancing manner.

Quote:Human beings become disposable, reusable objects that are easily replaced and easily discarded; just pieces of ass, the flavour of the month, mere flesh that is enjoyed and then forgotten with no deeper ramifications ensuing and no, more profound, connections expected.

Hedonism is a stage and for many a necessary one; life for an individual is about personal evolvement and experience. I have had many stages of hedonism and have regretted perhaps 3% of those experiences, but they were my most important lessons, they taught me the most about myself. Hedonism does not demand 'meat to be devoured' but rather a variety of pleasure to be explored. Hedonism does not demand abnegation of self or self-immolation; we teach others how to treat us with or without awareness. You say flesh to be forgotton I say people and experiences to be remembered and sometimes immortalized. You say no deeper ramifications and I say this wholly depends on the context/circumstances. You speak of a lack of profundity and connection and I say there can be no real hedonistic adventure without it. As I have said before just because one is hedonistic doesn't mean they will deign to drink Thunderbird. Hedonism doesn't demand lack of discernment just simply abandonment under the right circumstances with the right bottle of wine. Anais Nin writes splendidly about the exploration of hedonism in her diaries and what I admire most is not the language she employs to describe her adventures but the insight she gathers and absorbs. If someone is shallow then they will be shallow in their monogamy as well as their hedonism. What you speak of exists for sure, I will not deny this, but its the quality of the individual that determines the people and experiences they draw and accept. Its the quality of the individual who interprets these people and events (who is either enhanced or hollowed by them). Hedonism demands self-awareness because it is sought through will, one must know what one enjoys and how one enjoys. Only those without will are 'used'. Only those who become confused or lack self-awarness become victims (ie the film In The Company of Men). One can be hedonistic in relationship to one committed lover; it does not necessarily demand quantity. Hedonism is pleasure seeking as a way of life. I love chocolate but I don't eat hershey bars. I like beer from time to time when I am not carb-depleting but I would never buy a Heineken or Budweiser (good Belgian beer!). I love old furniture but would rather roam the earth searching for the perfect object than shop at Bombay! Its taken a while to discover what I love best, what yeilds the most pleasure. I often spend long periods of time alone without a lover or boyfriend not because they are not around to be had but because I would rather wait for something irresistable. I am a hedonist but can say no to anyone and anything at any given moment (it is growth and self-awarness from that 3% that gives me this insight and option). I don't look for perfection but what is singular, I love anything with character. Perfection in an object or person is bloody boring.

Quote: Sex has become a hobby and a form of amusement and distraction that means nothing anymore. It has become the mere quenching of a thirst or a placation of a physical need and through this practice human beings become objectified and depersonalized; just bodies and their parts: penises, vaginas, breasts, that results in a human species defined by numbers and statistics, weights and measures; generations of disposable, mass produced humans, one the replica of the other, so “replaceability” becomes easy and quick, cookie-cutter humans with little personality and even less distinguishing characteristics.

Yes this is happening more and more.

Quote: It is, therefore, not surprising to hear pampered, spoiled, modern human beings, belonging to generations that have had their basic needs met to such an extent that they now take them all for granted, excusing their surrender to instinct and need by using the usual: ‘It’s my nature’ justification.

Ahhh but it is nature! I don't mean human nature but ones personal nature, ones prediliction driven by a personal conscious or unconscious, sometimes subconcious constitution/psychological disposition or hardwiring, ones deeper self or essence expressing itself (if there is conflict in this nature that will show itself too). Ones personal nature can also be re-wired.

Since when are you and your friends my kind?
See how you show deference to me even when you think you don’t?
You are nothing like me.
Did you fail to note the quotes? They mean something.

You sound like those guys that strut around acting tough and throwing their weight around and eventually wind up squealing like little girls when someone fights back and is about to kick their ass.
I'm seeing squealing all right... but not from me.

Review your past conduct with me, imbecile.
When I’m treated with respect I reciprocate, when I’m faced with confrontation I fight back. I adjust my attitude according to the person I’m dealing with.
So you keep... saying.

Yea I know I’m often ‘wrong’ with you.
Yet I’m also accurate so often that you are becoming a bit paranoid, aren’t you idiot?
Apparently, so am I. It's not so much a matter of what you say, laddie. I'm looking at what you ignore. This little cut and thrust is a great cover for the real game, is it not?

And yes I spent days weeping over that last incident. You crushed me. Now go tell your friends.
Oh come now, this is getting boring. Hmm, now what shall I say to this.. ah yes. I have no friends. That's a good answer.

Are they?
Let me expose some of my thinking.
Fact 1
I figure that anyone coming here is looking for something.
They would not be here if there was not something they want and that cannot be found in their immediate environment.
So I know you are looking for something, just like everyone here is. I just have to observe you and find out what that something is.
So far, your powers of "observation" have been rather innacurate. It is amusing seeing what new stereotype you'll come up with next, though. Carry on.

But you’re a sneaky one. You never post personal opinions, if you have any, you rarely participate openly choosing instead the ‘Private Messaging’ to do your deeds
You've been here, what, a three months? A flurry of initial posting, some good essays, and then... less and less. After a while, you begin to see yourself posting the same things, over and over, to the same topics.

I've been around a good deal longer than that. Now I usually just observe. See, Wanderer... the answers to these supposed insults of yours are quite simple in many cases, and yet, you still see them only from one myopic perspective.

and you frequently change aliases to cover your tracks and avoid being discovered. This is how you confuse the herd. I think you must use aliases with a certain Romeo flavour to them, a certain renaissance-man characteristic with a kind of Lord Byron feel to them, if you know what I mean.
Of course I do. Fenris Wolf fits that description so accurately, now doesn't it? I have changed aliases twice in the last two years. One of them has fit that description above - which means you have a 33% hit rate. Not doing so well, are we?

There. Now you have something more to play with. Enjoy.

Fact 2
You spend so little time formulating opinions or posting threads or commenting on topic.
So I figure you spend most of your time here behind the scenes, in the back-rooms, covered by the curtains, stalking your prey, sending private letters with clever seductive language for little girls.
Now that sounds like predatory behaviour, sexual behaviour, to be more precise, because only in matters of romance does the cover of invisibility become important and inconspicuousness becomes relevant.
So you must be hunting for pussy.
Virtually the entire life of a human male is a "hunt for pussy" in one degree or another - including yours. You've used the obvious in yet another attempt to cut me. Now please... you're becoming far too predictable, and there appears to be an element of resentment entering here.

Fact 3
You’re already ‘connected’. That is you’ve been here long enough to establish a repartee with certain members, all of which I suspect are female, of the forum....You see this as your personal little hunting ground, a stallion amongst fawns and mares.
Covered this.

I saw you corralling them up when you became aware of me on the scene.
Did you really? And who was I corralling up? Please let me know, I feel I might be missing one or two of them. So many, so difficult to keep track...

But your mares are safe with me stallion, I figure anyone dumb enough to fall for your cloak and dagger techniques deserves what she gets. If she wants to be treated like a piece of meat, because it is your “nature” to be as you are, then she should receive her just deserts.
"Get Thee to a Nunnery!"

Fact 4
You attack me as being a ‘seducer’, a 'fraud' or maybe even a 'predator'. Then you casually mention how similar we are, that we are alike and of the same kind......
You want to revert back to the cave man days.
All these attempts to figure out who I am are becoming boring. I'm running out of ways in which to answer them all.

Hell, you might even be married for all I know or so disgustingly ugly that this is your only avenue of sexual gratification.
Might be a three-titted hag too. Or has that one been done?

I’ll figure you out imbecile. The general image is there, I just need to fill in the details. But they are the hardest to figure out.
Has it occured to you that the details are not coming because your "general image" is erroneous?

This from the hedonist.
Do you understand balanced asceticism moron and why it is a necessary part of nobility?
In your opinion. Do you understand "balanced"?

For another? There is more than one isn’t there glutton?
A regular harem you have here, behind the scenes. You want them all for yourself don’t you, you greedy bastard?
*Chuckles* Do you see how ironic that is, given your behaviour here so far?

But I never mentioned names moron. I would be surprised if any of these other morons can figure out what I was talknig about.
Ah, and that is supposed to make a difference.

I had a hypothesis that needed verification.
From your reaction I must have hit bulls-eye.
You hit the dartboard - for once. It was not a bullseye. Do you not see how a simple question could have avoided this entire "conversation"?

If I wasn’t so noble I could have done much worse, now couldn’t I idiot?
This is a peasant telling me I should be grateful he wasn't a serf.

That’s it use those little brain cells in your head and try to formulate a personal opinion.
I’ll love dissecting it.
I do, frequently. You're a little angry I don't share them with you?
Oh, and...nice dodge.

PM?!!! I never ‘pm’ I only respond to them when others ‘pm’ me.
But this is another of your power plays.
And that is another of yours.

I come here to have fun with humans, that’s it.
I come here for several reasons, but that is definately one of them. Now... where do you think you fit in?

You’re the expert of ‘pm’s though. That’s all you do in here. That and defending your harem from other stallions. You don’t bother with colts.
I very much doubt anyone I correspond with would like to be referred to as part of a "harem". Not any of them, and that includes Jean, Martha, Gloria, Sarah... oh, I should stop. I really shouldn't expose so much of myself. Or "them".

My questions were rhetorical idiot. By withholding a response you ain’t doing nothing but proving what a little bitch you are.
So, er.. Let me get this straight. You are angry because I'm withholding answers to your "rhetorical" questions?

What’s the matter were you caught with your pants down and now you’re scrambling for damage control?
This whole response from you has been exactly that.

And you want me to initiate conversation?
Not really. I said if you have something to say to me, don't hide behind others. My desire for you to do so (or lack of it) was not mentioned.

I would love to ‘say’ something to you, but only in person, face-to-face.
I’d love to show you what strength is really all about. Words are words, acts are acts.
Now see what you’ve made me do?
Yes. Amusing.

But I have a knack of finishing things, don't I?
You're finished then? Good.

Oh my!

Now I first read this thread when Wanderer started it and found it interesting. So today I remembered that I wanted to post a reply, and my my, things have been happening here. It has gone from brief discussions on monogamy, to an android stirring the pot, to two males measuring up and then playing the game of pick the petals off the daisy while singing 'she/he loves me, she/he loves me not, to what we now have as declarations of love by one for the errr attractive smell coming from the behind of another.

What will be next I wonder? A final marriage proposal? A divorce? A 'drive in' sign being put over Wanderer's 'exit only' sign? Ok no more questions, I think I just disgusted myself.

I was going to post a reply in regards to monogamy, but I think it would be out of sync with the general direction of this thread at the moment. So instead I shall just read and laugh to myself at what is being said. Thanks for the laughs, it is definitely appreciated :D.

Lucysnow:
Using human emotions and relations as entertainment and objectification? Only the narcissist can do this naturally and guilt free. It is this type of use that degrades, wounds and ultimately damages; creates the need for a steel armor; leaves individuals distrustful and paranoid; leaves a gulf in human relations. It is this I find most sad and beneath our potential because it is rarely necessary.

Yes but as you noted, it's more and more common these days. The 'armor' becomes necessary simply to survive, and one avoids any meaningful interactions with others because they have such potential to be destructive.

So what about you Xev where do you stand on the subject of monogamy? Are you waiting for uberman to come along? Do you attend wine tasting workshops?

I'm with you on the subject - one who is in love has no (real) desire to stray. The callousness necessary for maintaining a sexual relationship with someone I know is indifferent to me is not something I possess.
Wanderer mentions it as a matter of honor, that puts too fine a point on something that I consider a natural matter of emotion.

Wanderer:
Mine is a combination Dictionary/Thesaurus so it’s a little bigger.

I'm sure it is.

Yes but as you noted, it's more and more common these days. The 'armor' becomes necessary simply to survive, and one avoids any meaningful interactions with others because they have such potential to be destructive.

I'm with you on the subject - one who is in love has no (real) desire to stray. The callousness necessary for maintaining a sexual relationship with someone I know is indifferent to me is not something I possess.
Wanderer mentions it as a matter of honor, that puts too fine a point on something that I consider a natural matter of emotion.

I always watch my friends as they flit from partner to partner and with each partner it's apparently 'love'. The words 'I love you' are bandied around so much now that it has become a weapon of sorts. It's used as a challenge between those who don't really love each other or don't really know what true love is. This is especially evident when couples argue and one says the deadly words of 'if you love me you'd....'.

But when one falls in true love, such words are not used. The words 'I love you' no longer need to be said over and over again, the couple just know that it's there. When one partner strays in such cases of 'true' love, the effects can be devastating on the other partner, especially when one partner loves more than the other. It then becomes essential that the hurt individual develop some armour and learn the true meaning of love before they open themselves up to someone else. When one is truly in love, that love exists in the relationship, it is the stable backbone of that relationship. Words don't have to be used to describe any feelings, both just know because both feel the same way. When such feelings exist in a relationship, one will rarely be tempted to stray. After all, why would you want to leave when you've finally found something that is akin to being home? Sounds silly I know, but that's how I see it all now. Those who stray seem to be looking for something better all the time, they want to keep upgrading, they want to find a better home. But when one finds their true home, why would you want to leave? I know I know... silly... When you find that one person who can tell you what you're thinking by just looking into your eyes, who knows your dreams without you having to tell them, who with just one touch can send you up in flames and who knows your body as though it were their own, why would you want to leave that? When you find true love, it is inspirational.

Fucking someone without feeling or interest in the 'fucker' is something that is so empty. Strayers tend to be in empty relationships and they keep looking for more empty relationships in the hope that one of them will fill them with some inspiration, sadly most never find it because they are always on the lookout for someone or something that is better.

Like many I've been devastated by a straying partner many years ago. I too developed that armour and learned to distrust people. Then one day I met someone who at first I found to be annoying as hell, but then I realised that the reason I found him to be annoying was because I was scared of letting him anywhere near me emotionally. All because I didn't want to be hurt again. Now that armour and that distrust is gone and I realise that I was an idiot all those years ago, because I only saw the ideal of love, but I did not know what it was. I realise now that all those years ago, I was in fact a bigger idiot than I am today. And to add a note, no he doesn't annoy me anymore lol :).

And finally, one can never be monogamous unless they are honest with themselves first off. After all, how can you be and stay with someone unless you can trust each other. And you can only trust someone when you both know each other as well as you know yourself. If you don't know yourself and aren't honest with yourself, you can never be monogamous, because you'll always be out looking for the one that you think can provide you with some of that self awareness and truth.

I shall shut up now...

*Xev*

Quote: The 'armor' becomes necessary simply to survive, and one avoids any meaningful interactions with others because they have such potential to be destructive.

Right but its such a fine line isn't it? I am not as naturally guarded as you are; my personality is gregarious and I want to explore other human beings as my curiosity and generosity can get the better of me (I am referring to all human relations not just sexually or concerning the opposite sex). I enjoy discovering other people, allowing them to unfold who they are but I do admit its risky. I try to use my instinct and intuition concerning other people but this doesn't always protect one because we tend to relax and put down our guard when extending ourselves to others. I try to retain a distance while extending myself but this makes meaningful interaction difficult (we cannot really expect others to drop their guard if we are unwilling to do the same). In this sense I wish i were more like you it would certainly be easier; I must utilize a constant and consistent self-awareness to hold my armor up (and the damn thing is so bloody heavy), its not something that comes naturally to me but I can be damn good at it when I'm focused. I think I resent on some level having to do it, the exercise leaves me feeling somewhat sad.

*Bells*

Quote:When one partner strays in such cases of 'true' love, the effects can be devastating on the other partner, especially when one partner loves more than the other

It is the one who loves the least who is in control of the relationship.

Quote:you'll always be out looking for the one that you think can provide you with some of that self awareness and truth.

No one can provide anyone with self-awarness or truth. One either has the facility for such things or one doesn't.

I'm with you on the subject - one who is in love has no (real) desire to stray. The callousness necessary for maintaining a sexual relationship with someone I know is indifferent to me is not something I possess.
Wanderer mentions it as a matter of honor, that puts too fine a point on something that I consider a natural matter of emotion.
That much may be true, but how long does such an emotional state survive? I'm also with Lucy in that it is definately possible to feel no desire at all to stray, initially - but after the first year or two, things change. A relationship becomes more a matter of social and economic factors. Something to consider - how much do levels of desire change after a mere week or two? A month?

We are not talking here necessarily of fucking anything which shows an interest in you or you in it, or is physically desireable. That in itself is for the proles, and hardly worthy of consideration. There are times when one might find themselves attracted to more than one human, and people have qualities or value which in themselves are worthwhile. Sex, to me, is one of the final and ultimate forms of communication and reserved only for those for whom one has real respect or feeling. If there is more than one who engenders that type of emotion, then why limit oneself on the exploration of only one to the detriment of oneself? To me, this smacks almost of martyrdom for another human, becoming a possession. Or from another point of view, making them one. Sublimination, for one or the other.

Quote: That much may be true, but how long does such an emotional state survive?

Well thats just it isn't it? I think the 'falling in love' aspect is just natures way of tricking us into involvement so it can get on with propogating the species. Otherwise why would anyone of us bother? I don't think the intense feeling of communion is supposed to last continuously but ebb and flow. Its when the wave hits bottom and we catch our mate picking their nose that determines the strength of a union. Look how many relationships are wonderful until some stressor comes along and obliterates it. If a commitment is derived from a feeling then its safe to say the commitment will wane as the feelings wane, there are other factors that keep people together or no relationship would last for long. What we have to look for is the sincerity of the commitment; Are we there out of convenience? Are we afraid of being alone? Are we emotionally or financially dependent on the other? Is it a social duty? Children etc.
When it comes down to family I say that two people should try and continue a union unless the circumstances are unbearable and unhealthy. We can continue to love someone without having the slightest passion for them. If we look for passion only then we become butterflies. If we insist on passion and family within the same package (very, very rare indeed!) then we risk remaining alone which is also an option.

guthrie
a pointless attempt at one upmanship.

guthrie is flaccid. Monogamy? Absolutely-safe-and-infrastructure-sound. Sexuality? Such things belong in bottom racks. Off-hours when nobody is watching.

At the time yes. Monogamy for me thank you very much. Why? cos I feel its better for me.
Anyhow, the one upmanship starts as soon as Wanderer posts anything, since his posts are made to imply that unless you agree with him your scum, so he starts out ahead already.

Then, on topic, I agree roughly with lucysnow.

Lucysnow:
Right but its such a fine line isn't it? I am not as naturally guarded as you are; my personality is gregarious and I want to explore other human beings as my curiosity and generosity can get the better of me

I'm actually extremely candid in person - I have the typical Slav habit of 'speaking with my eyes' and it's difficult to supress that natural emotionalism.
There's the balence - you can be safe and you can explore. Exploring other people requires leaving one's boundaries.
Me, I'm not afraid of being hurt but it's the leaving one's borders and losing that much control that scares the hell out of me. Perhaps I'm off, but I don't think you share the feeling.
Pain is nothing once you experience it, then handling it with artistry and skill becomes easy. It's that act of allowing the other to have that control over you that is impossible.

Fenris:

That much may be true, but how long does such an emotional state survive?

So what if it only survives a year? Then one is no longer in love, so there's not a real point to being with the other person. Unless to use them, but I could never see the point in that.

It however, can survive over a year at least. It doesn't mean that one has no desire for others, but that desire is passing and meaningless.
It ultimately comes down to what one sees sex as - if it's a passing fuck, akin to eating large quantities of chocolate and masturbating, then one really can't see a point to 'denying yourself' for another. If one sees sex as a intellectual, personal act then that limitation comes naturally.

And if one is rather focused on maintaining power and control, sex is intimate simply because it's that much more difficult to allow yourself to fuck someone.

Lucysnow:
When it comes down to family I say that two people should try and continue a union unless the circumstances are unbearable and unhealthy. We can continue to love someone without having the slightest passion for them. If we look for passion only then we become butterflies.

Not really. The only passionless love we feel is for pets, and personally I would not allow myself to be treated as a fuckable lapdog.

Who cares about children anyway? Contraceptive devices abound, and if those fail you just have to take care of 'em for a few years them - bam! - your own personal slaves! Besides, the nuclear family is a patriarchial construct that evolved to keep women oppressed. I mean, my parents divorced when I was five, and I turned out fine. Or if I didn't, it's because my mother was awarded custody and spent the next ten years beating the shit out of me to atone. :) The conditions that made the nuclear family necessary and desireable (natural sexual dimorphism strictly enforced by culture, scarcity and being at the mercy of the elements) are quickly fading. The feminist movement, coupled with technological and medical progress, will destroy most of those so-called traditional structures within the next 500 years (unless we blow ourselves the fuck up!)

Ho