Newsgroups: alt.slack

Subject: Re: Speaking of love...

From: nuts@nowhere.com (RevLurch)

Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1998 19:39:10 GMT

 

bg19354@NoMoReSpAm.binghamton.edu (Nully Fydyan) wrote:

>Yes, well, I know we weren't, but we are now.

>

>I recently had a not very satisfying conversation with a friend about what

>love is, how one defines it, the different permutations and degrees of it.

>This friend believed that loving someone means being willing to die for

>the person, and I countered that love means that the person's happiness is

>as important to you as your own. But I'm not sure either definition

>suffices. I'm SURE his doesn't, and I think mine is pretty weak.

>

 

it's a bullshit term. Essentially meaningless and impossible to

define. But, in practice, it generally means that one person's

dependence on, enjoyment of and/or fondness for another person (we'll

leave critters out of it. How many people claim to be willing to die

for THIER CATS, even though they claim to "love" them?) is sufficient

to override the INVARIABLY maddening downside to remaining in their

company. And sure, this should involve caring about whether or not

they are happy, hopefully as much as you care for your own happiness.

But what the hell does happy mean? At what price should we purchase

happiness or try to secure it for our "love" interest? Is

self-delusion okay as long as it makes the practitioner HAPPY? Should

your mate's character faults be overlooked or even indulged in fear of

making him or her UNHAPPY? No answer to any of this shit. Gotta play

it by ear. But I think the hearts-and-flowers notions about what this

meaningless term should mean, and the INEVITABLE failure of the

reality to live up to those gloriosky expectations engendered by the

swoony "you'll hear hear bells" definitions is a BIG reason why most

people CAN'T manage to stay in long term relationships. Men and women

are just people. AND they all fuck up.

 

Just the same, as long as there is a core of genuine feeling to it

all, as long as you stay with a person because you WANT to, as opposed

to doing so because you fear the alternatives, as long as you miss a

person when he or she is not there, and are glad to see them when they

reappear, are comfortable with spending the rest or your life with

them and passing up whatever shots you may or may not have for some

horizontal gratification with others just for that privilege, then I

guess love is a good a term as any to apply to what you feel.

 

But I do think (in most cases) the domination of one's thinking

processes with thoughts of another is just obsession (usually rooted

in lust), and it fades with time. And a willingness to stay with a

person "for better or for worse" is just plain gutless stupidity (what

if he becomes a slobbery drunk, fucks around, lies, and beats the

living shit out of you?).

 

Anyway. But this is not to say one wouldn't be willing to die for the

person they feel even my cynically defined sort of "love" for, but a

lot of people make that claim secure in the belief that they will

never have to prove it. Fact is, nobody really knows how they will

react in life or death situations until they are in one. Some end up

being more courageous than they could have ever imagined themselves

being, others fall apart over trivialities and lose both the person

they claimed such "love" for long before being in the running for a

such a silly, slim and hypothetical chance to prove it.

 

It all is what it is. Could say you'll know it when you feel it, but

how the fuck would I know what anybody else will feel? Language is a

decent tool for certain kinds of communication, but for the most part,

it is of limited utility for defining ANYTHING we feel rather than

observe. Sometimes it's not even all that useful for the latter.

 

ah, fuck it.

 

(then you'll know. HONK)

 

lurch

 

 

 

From e/wbear@hibernia.ca Sat Apr 11 15:23:51 1998

Newsgroups: alt.slack

Subject: Re: Speaking of love...

From: e/wbear@hibernia.ca (e/w bear)

Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1998 22:23:51 GMT

 

In article <352fb875.96391590@news.mindspring.com>, bLEEEARRRGhghg wrote:

 

///snip///

 

> But I think the hearts-and-flowers notions about what this

> meaningless term should mean, and the INEVITABLE failure of the

> reality to live up to those gloriosky expectations engendered by the

> swoony "you'll hear hear bells" definitions is a BIG reason why most

> people CAN'T manage to stay in long term relationships. Men and women

> are just people. AND they all fuck up.

 

There's a flipside to this. At some point the desire (need?) to have

someone to share our life with overrides our optimism and we settle for

less. Our criteria for acceptability are also eroded by other

considerations such as family pressure, age, desire to have children, and

so on. The ticking clock. Poor self esteem plays a big role here too.

It's a set up for disaster down the road, when comprimise starts to look

like a bad choice after all.

 

I think much of the problem is due to a lack of social venues. Bars are a

good place to meet future alcoholics, but do they foster any sort of

meaningful exchange? Ditto for discos where the dominant theme is proving

how cool we are by being distant and aloof. Post secondary education is the

only environment for meeting lots of people that I can think of, but the

problem here is most are focused on their grades and have little time for

serious dating.

 

After a failed marriage, several failed romances, and a long period of self

pity I was ready to give up. Then I started a new job which brought me into

contact with LOTS of people. I had a good run for several years, dating

many women, not even thinking of marriage, until one day...there she was.

The sad part is, it would probably never have occured if it weren't for the

job. I simply wouldn't have met enough people in the time available.

 

If it were up to me, I'd create a Ministry Of Dating, with a really big

budget devoted soley to creating practical ways for people to meet. I'm

convinced from my own experience that it's a numbers problem more than

anything else. The romantic images we're spoon fed (such as Titanic) have

a debilitating effect, of that there's no doubt. But if you could actually

depend on getting a new date EVERY weekend, think what a difference it

would make. You'd have a much wider sample, plus some practice at not

screwing it up for when you did meet someone special.

 

Actually, this is something the Church could do, just like other Churches

with their youth groups and dances. Why isn't there a SubSite for young

Bobbies who want to date other Bobbies? The Church is big enough to

support this, at least in the major urban zones.

---

ewb

 

From nospamum@radix.net Sat Apr 11 06:24:27 1998

Newsgroups: alt.slack,alt.love

Subject: Re: Speaking of love...

From: nospamum@radix.net (MegaLiz)

Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1998 13:24:27 GMT

 

 

: The romantic images we're spoon fed (such as Titanic) have

: a debilitating effect, of that there's no doubt.

 

Fairy tale romances are a RILLY EFFECTIVE survival hoax. I don't think

anyone should knock them OR their necessary impact on stupid girls. If

we didn't have happily-ever-after stories to swindle breeder dummies

into matrimony, well then, we'd have SOCIAL CHAOS!

 

I don't know WHY "love" should get boiled down to SEXUAL LOVE, but

maybe that's because it's the most COMPLETE love. Not only can you not

fuck your car (in most cases), you also cannot be challenged to face

its APARTNESS from you (except when it decides to roll over your ass

or something, WHICH reminds me of a story...but not today).

 

None of that means that you can't love your car or your garden or your

moose--you CAN--but in order to have WHOLE LOVE the love object has to

be able to look you directly in the eye and say, "You're fulla shit."

Or ELSE it has to give you head, or BOTH.

 

I'm not gonna talk about this ANY MORE unless we're in alt.love.

 

-------------------------------------------------------------

"Is it just me...or do I have tape in my hair?" - Spunky

 

From e/wbear@hibernia.ca Sat Apr 11 20:18:06 1998

Newsgroups: alt.slack,alt.love

Subject: Re: Speaking of love...

From: e/wbear@hibernia.ca (e/w bear)

Date: Sun, 12 Apr 1998 03:18:06 GMT

 

In article <352f541f.179837522@news1.radix.net>, nospamum@radix.net wrote:

 

> : The romantic images we're spoon fed (such as Titanic) have

> : a debilitating effect, of that there's no doubt.

>

> Fairy tale romances are a RILLY EFFECTIVE survival hoax. I don't think

> anyone should knock them OR their necessary impact on stupid girls. If

> we didn't have happily-ever-after stories to swindle breeder dummies

> into matrimony, well then, we'd have SOCIAL CHAOS!

>

> I don't know WHY "love" should get boiled down to SEXUAL LOVE, but

> maybe that's because it's the most COMPLETE love. Not only can you not

> fuck your car (in most cases), you also cannot be challenged to face

> its APARTNESS from you (except when it decides to roll over your ass

> or something, WHICH reminds me of a story...but not today).

>

> None of that means that you can't love your car or your garden or your

> moose--you CAN--but in order to have WHOLE LOVE the love object has to

> be able to look you directly in the eye and say, "You're fulla shit."

> Or ELSE it has to give you head, or BOTH.

>

> I'm not gonna talk about this ANY MORE unless we're in alt.love.

>

 

Well inspect my butt for flying monkeys... you actually read my post?! I

know it's getting thin in here...I guess it's the nice weather.... that or

folks are busy cleaning up after all the floods and tornados we've had this

spring, but really... is it THAT bad? Geezz... and here I thought i was

wasting my time when it appears I'm actually performing a valuable social

function!

Kiss me Liz... I think I'm in love:)

---

ewb

 

From kevbob.AlLsPaM@ecsis.net Sat Apr 11 21:04:40 1998

Newsgroups: alt.slack,alt.love

Subject: Re: Speaking of love...

From: "kevbob" <kevbob.AlLsPaM@ecsis.net>

Date: 12 Apr 1998 04:04:40 GMT

 

e/w bear <e/wbear@hibernia.ca> wrote in article

<e/wbear-ya02408000R1104982016520001@news.direct.ca>...

> Kiss me Liz... I think I'm in love:)

> ---

> ewb

>

 

just wait until her warranty goes.

 

she's already thrown two axels, and i heard her radiator has been rebuilt

twice,,

 

but that's just an unfounded rumor.

 

From revjack@radix.net Sun Apr 12 06:58:15 1998

Newsgroups: alt.slack,alt.love

Subject: Re: Speaking of love...

From: Sketchy Albedo <revjack@radix.net>

Date: 12 Apr 1998 13:58:15 GMT

 

Previously, kevbob <kevbob.AlLsPaM@ecsis.net> wrote:

:e/w bear <e/wbear@hibernia.ca> wrote in article

:<e/wbear-ya02408000R1104982016520001@news.direct.ca>...

:> Kiss me Liz... I think I'm in love:)

:> ---

:> ewb

:>

 

:just wait until her warranty goes.

 

:she's already thrown two axels, and i heard her radiator has been rebuilt

:twice,,

 

:but that's just an unfounded rumor.

 

Hoo hah! I'm not saying ANYTHING.

 

--

_________________

revjack@radix.net

Give way to your worst inpulse

 

From nospamum@radix.net Sun Apr 12 01:54:59 1998

Newsgroups: alt.slack,alt.love

Subject: Re: Speaking of love...

From: nospamum@radix.net (MegaLiz)

Date: Sun, 12 Apr 1998 08:54:59 GMT

 

Sketchy Albedo <revjack@radix.net> wrote:

: Previously, kevbob <kevbob.AlLsPaM@ecsis.net> wrote:

: :e/w bear <e/wbear@hibernia.ca> wrote in article

: :<e/wbear-ya02408000R1104982016520001@news.direct.ca>...

: :> Kiss me Liz... I think I'm in love:)

: :> ---

: :> ewb

: :>

: :just wait until her warranty goes.

:

: :she's already thrown two axels, and i heard her radiator has been rebuilt

: :twice,,

:

: :but that's just an unfounded rumor.

:

: Hoo hah! I'm not saying ANYTHING.

 

Y'all are just SO FULLA SHIT!

 

See? I CAN be affectionate! Oil me!

 

-------------------------------------------------------------

"Is it just me...or do I have tape in my hair?" - Spunky

 

From kevbob.AlLsPaM@ecsis.net Sat Apr 11 21:18:20 1998

Newsgroups: alt.slack,alt.love

Subject: Re: Speaking of love...: "kevbob" <kevbob.AlLsPaM@ecsis.net>

Date: 12 Apr 1998 04:18:20 GMT

 

"She had the widest bright ideas all along about my love

and i need this fucking fix and i beg her

to pick from one of a billion ways to feel no pain " - Hum, You'd Prefer An

Astronaut, "The Pod"

 

i think that sums up love as well as anything else.

 

love is:

pain,

joy,

hope,

a let down,

everything you have ever wanted it to be, AND MORE!,

nothing.

 

love is what you make it, just like everything else.

 

if you want love to be great, and you want to love someone, do it.

thinking about it and wondering about it and trying to diagram its

interaction within your psyche, well, that way lies madness.

 

love, generally, in my experience, pipe dream, cynical world view,

 

is a fallacy. but, i'm generally wrong.

 

yet,

 

everytime i look around, i see "LOVE" projected as "The Next Big Thing",

 

yet, all the places you are told NOT to look, love is nothing big, just a

simple little thing that makes the world go around.

 

maybe the problem with love is that we are told what love is by the wrong

people,

 

and just expected to watch and learn by all the right.

 

media (movies, poetry, sitcoms, religious books, wive's tales, faerie

tales, et. al.) tell us love is a many-splendored thing.

 

ma' and pop show us that love is the thing that let's you wake up in the

morning next to the person that has been stealing the blankets every night

for thirty years and not kill them.

 

most of the time, you gotta RTFM to learn AROUND what you are looking for.

then, when you go back and say, RTFM'd it, now what, the person is trapped

and HAS to answer.

 

so, go out and read all the sonnet's, all the plays, watch all the movies,

etc.

 

then, walk up to the CON, place you feat firmly upon the ground, and look

into the deep black eyes of hell,

 

and say

 

 

"Now what?"

 

 

 

From twgs@whatsthepoint.net Sat Apr 11 22:03:00 1998

Newsgroups: alt.slack,alt.love

Subject: Re: Speaking of love...

From: twgs@whatsthepoint.net (Jahweh David Lynch)

Date: Sun, 12 Apr 1998 05:03:00 GMT

 

Thus spake MegaLiz:

 

>None of that means that you can't love your car or your garden or your

>moose--you CAN--but in order to have WHOLE LOVE the love object has to

>be able to look you directly in the eye and say, "You're fulla shit."

>Or ELSE it has to give you head, or BOTH.

 

You know, there's a wonderful little device for your car called the

"Auto-Suck", available at finer adult bookstores everywhere.

 

>I'm not gonna talk about this ANY MORE unless we're in alt.love.

 

OK. Bring it on! I've always thought alt.love is the WAY COOLEST of any

of the Usenet groups about this, because it's so goddamned unadulterated.

With alt.romance, soc.singles, alt.personals, alt.sex, it's all this foofy

shit. With alt.love, you really get down to brass tacks.

 

----------------------------------------------------------

| _ _ | Nasi bianchi come Fruit of the Loom, che |

| | \/ | | diventano piu' rossi di un livello di DOOM |

| | | | Dave Lynch heeft geschreven mit keine "whats" |

| | http://www.thepoint.net/~twgs/jiggy/jiggy.htm |

----------------------------------------------------------

 

From twgs@whatsthepoint.net Sat Apr 11 21:59:58 1998

Newsgroups: alt.slack

Subject: Re: Speaking of love...

From: twgs@whatsthepoint.net (Jahweh David Lynch)

Date: Sun, 12 Apr 1998 04:59:58 GMT

 

Thus spake e/w bear:

 

>I think much of the problem is due to a lack of social venues. Bars are a

>good place to meet future alcoholics, but do they foster any sort of

>meaningful exchange? Ditto for discos where the dominant theme is proving

>how cool we are by being distant and aloof. Post secondary education is the

>only environment for meeting lots of people that I can think of, but the

>problem here is most are focused on their grades and have little time for

>serious dating.

 

College is a social venue? I don't think so. I've gone to college for

fucking four years now, and frankly it's been utter agony beyond my wildest

imaginings.

 

Of course, the only _real_ social venue is Usenet. (GUFFAW)

 

>Actually, this is something the Church could do, just like other Churches

>with their youth groups and dances. Why isn't there a SubSite for young

>Bobbies who want to date other Bobbies? The Church is big enough to

>support this, at least in the major urban zones.

 

It's been tried. The big problem is that most SubGenii really hate most

other people, including most other SubGenii, and that if you tried to do

something like that it's even money whether Generic Q. SubGenius would wind

up mating successfully or killing someone first. SubGenii are by nature

heavily iconoclastic and much more difficult to get along with than your

average Pink. I try to be more amiable than most, but at a certain point I

have to either start spewing bile in a desperate self-defense manoevure or

withdraw from the situation completely. I generally choose the latter

option. I readily admit to going out very seldom, not just because I don't

really know of anywhere to go and have no way to get there, but because

other people have a tendency to make me vomit. If I'm going to vomit, I'd

at least like to be drunk first, but on the other hand I have no plans of

embarking on a career as an alcoholic.

 

The other problem is that nobody wants to go out with SubGenii, even other

SubGenii, because everybody thinks they're a bunch of loser geeks with poor

personal hygiene (a theory not helped by certain unsavory implications in

the Books).

 

The other other problem is that no, the Church really _isn't_ big enough to

do this.

 

Pardon me. I always get cranky around my period.

 

----------------------------------------------------------

| _ _ | Nasi bianchi come Fruit of the Loom, che |

| | \/ | | diventano piu' rossi di un livello di DOOM |

| | | | Dave Lynch heeft geschreven mit keine "whats" |

| | http://www.thepoint.net/~twgs/jiggy/jiggy.htm |

----------------------------------------------------------

 

From mtown11send@earth11link.net Sun Apr 12 07:36:20 1998

Newsgroups: alt.slack

Subject: Re: Speaking of love...

From: mtown11send@earth11link.net (Michael Townsend)

Date: Sun, 12 Apr 1998 10:36:20 -0400

 

In article <e/wbear-ya02408000R1104981522350001@news.direct.ca>,

e/wbear@hibernia.ca (e/w bear) wrote:

 

--> this is something the Church could do, just like other Churches

--> with their youth groups and dances. Why isn't there a SubSite for young

--> Bobbies who want to date other Bobbies? The Church is big enough to

--> support this, at least in the major urban zones.

 

Hey, read up on your Church history big guy! Didn't you ever hear of

Pastor Buck Naked's Mutant Dating Service?

 

--

dad's new slax po box 4722 portland me 04112-4722

remove "11 11" for email p