The plight of the Man who would go his own way.

HAL said:
Hi Wu,

I take it that you were among the folks on the other site that didn't get time to read the actual post that caused all the trouble for me. The boss was pretty damn quick in removing it.

Basically I was accused of heresy.

Proper people know that there is only one way to go through life. The one the church insists on (or rather it did when it had the power) and that is you get married, be faithful to your spouse. Don't covert the neighbour's ass etc. Then you die and go to Heaven.
Of course, many marriages doesn't last very long for a variety of reasons. But back in the day, the folks had to put up with it. Divorce was hard to come by and brought with it a sense of failure and shame. Didn't matter what the problems were.

Thing is, the option was to live as a bachelor.(or spinster). Both these options carried some form of negative cache. If you were female you were probably a witch, if male probably homosexual. The church was a bit uncomfortable with that one.

So, all I suggested was that the option for living alone be considered at late school level. By that age, the kids were able to understand what was going on and why couples didn't last. And the effects of the break ups; both financial and psychological.

I was suggesting that the kids, maybe in their last few week at school, were shown that it was ok not to form a partnership. That there really was no need to get hitched simply to have access to (theoretically) unlimited sex with someone who would be honour bound to accept the situation. Even if it did mean you would have to wash your own cloths and do your own cooking. After all, you can't marry your mother; well, not in the UK.

And this applies to both girls and boys. It may be a lonelier existence, but it doesn't need to be. And it can save a lot of trouble in the future. Do you want to work at a relationship for the best part of your life only to find out that one of you is unfaithful or totally unsuitable for you. That you did in fact make a mistake. A mistake that it is now going to cost you most of what you worked for. And time is moving on.

This applies to both sexes. I only know two people who are still married to their first partner, and one of them wishes he hadn't.

But, by doing this I am denying the wish of society, and deep down, the church.

HAL, Heretic. Damn glad we don't still have the Holy Roman Inquisition.

Wait ! do I hear a knock at the door ? It's the Inquisition. But I'm not expecting them.

(No one expects the Inquisition)

So, Dundee, Yes, it may seem transnational. But you yourself point out the positive aspects.

The trick is to see them BEFORE getting attached.

You need a plan.

(I didn't)

HAL.
Click to expand...
I didn't see the post that got you into trouble before it got removed.

If that's the whole story it's dreadful but normally there are 3 sides to every story, yours, theirs & the truth. I can't really judge unless I know the whole story as I haven't got enough information to make a proper judgement.

That's a load of rubbish. There is no single right way & no single wrong way to live your life. There are many different right ways to live your life. There are also many different wrong ways to lead your life too & these are only dictated by the law of the land in which you live unless you decide to believe in & practise a religion. Then you live your life according to the rules of the religion you believe in & practise.

There was a 3rd option. That was to devote yourself to the church & become a monk if you were male & a nun if you were female (until Protestantism took over of course).

I'm very sorry to disappoint you but the idea of teaching children that it's o.k. not to find a partner & get married is unnecessary as many already know that & they're aware of all their options.
 
Dundee said:
Like minded folks are drawn together. I am into motorsport, not many local motorsport events escape my notice.
I am hetrosexual, I notice a pretty girl, but not a good looking dude.
Most folks now about stuff, and if they don't initially, often the fallout from traumatic events provide an opportunity through councelling and so on. We tend to seek out the things we are drawn too.
The whole rebound relationship thing is well known and usually short lived.
Not all are sucetible to it though.
Darn sure I did not need it as a crutch to hold me up. :)
Click to expand...
Not always. People sometimes get into more arguments with people they're more similar to than those they're not. If people like the same things & know about the same things after a while they already know everything they need to know about what they're interested in & there's nothing to talk about. Sometimes it's good for them to be interested in something that the other person wants to get interested in then they can learn from each other & have interesting conversations.

I've never really been in a relationship so don't really know whether I'm straight, bi, gay or asexual. I don't feel attracted by a person's looks though but their voice & what they have to say. I find nice voices (both speaking & singing) & clever conversation attractive.

I agree. Not everyone needs to learn what Hal thinks they need to be taught as some people know it instinctively.
 
I just think for most folks their emotional and sexual disposition is known to themselves. You may have issues with a person openly acknowledgeing their disposition. But it does not mean they are not aware of the similar interest groups relevant to their disposition.
Sorry to speak of you as a third party Hal. But it seems to me you are trying to tell a bad footballer about football. He may be a shit player. But he know the opportunities before him.
 
Dundee said:
I just think for most folks their emotional and sexual disposition is known to themselves. You may have issues with a person openly acknowledgeing their disposition. But it does not mean they are not aware of the similar interest groups relevant to their disposition.
Sorry to speak of you as a third party Hal. But it seems to me you are trying to tell a bad footballer about football. He may be a shit player. But he know the opportunities before him.
Click to expand...
I agree. Not only is most people's emotional & sexual disposition known to themselves but it's also their business & their business only unless it is forced on others.
 
No worries.

I was only saying that there is an option. As Fleetwood Mac say, 'You can go your own way'.
By the way, sexual orientation doesn't come into the matter. At least I never mentioned it.

Anyway, I threw it out for discussion. Let that be the end of it.

;)
 
HAL said:
No worries.

I was only saying that there is an option. As Fleetwood Mac say, 'You can go your own way'.
By the way, sexual orientation doesn't come into the matter. At least I never mentioned it.

Anyway, I threw it out for discussion. Let that be the end of it.

;)
Click to expand...
I wasn't meaning anything wrong. I was just meaning there were a lot more options than the ones presented & that most people knew that. I think it does though like you said you never mentioned it.

O.k. End of discussion. ;0)
 
I had better add one small thing.

It appears that I didn't emphasise that my theory is based on the observation that for the first, say, twenty years of life both male and female are driven by chemicals in the brain to fulfill the prime imperative. I.e reproduce a copy of yourself to carry on the specie. Once the new person has reached their own reproduction age, then the parents are redundant . The Prime no longer has power so it doesn't effect us.
This is the point where many of the relational problems become apparent.

Hence my 'going ones own way' is simply trying to avoid what is almost inevitable. The expensive break up.

Way back at the beginning of the specie, people simply didn't get that old.
 
I do understand the point your trying to make. I look at my sons in their relationships and see little things that I recognize as... Danger sighns from my past. But maybe it is just how things are meant to be biologically. We are healthier when young generally so this is the prime time to reproduce to keep the species going. When we are older there is a lesser biological imperative to reproduce. Bonds between people sometimes fade an they sometimes go there own ways and think back like you and question the model. But there are enough people who prioritize careers for example over the standard model... Or balance the two.
They keep the world running as researchers and so on.
But I still think it is a model that works for the species. I think genetics looks after it all as designed.
 
Another thing is what effect would changeing the balance have on society. Here in Australia we have immigration to add to the workforce and the economy. It's a fine balance. What would be the effect of changing population growth across a country or the planet by say 20% less. It probably would be a good thing in a poverty stricken country. But what about 1st world countries..
 
The question becomes how much of the population increase (particularly with respect to immigration) is required to support the increasing population ?

And every nurse, doctor, engineer that comes to our countries is one removed from a country that probably needs them more.

If we take our NHS, there is a very large percentage of staff from other countries. But if the population were to decrease then we wouldn't need as many to maintain a similar staffing level.

It could all gradually roll back.
 
HAL said:
The question becomes how much of the population increase (particularly with respect to immigration) is required to support the increasing population ?

And every nurse, doctor, engineer that comes to our countries is one removed from a country that probably needs them more.

If we take our NHS, there is a very large percentage of staff from other countries. But if the population were to decrease then we wouldn't need as many to maintain a similar staffing level.

It could all gradually roll back.
Click to expand...
Yeah OK fair enough. I'm no economist. I just think to some extent its almost like natural selection. Given time things balance out to the most balanced way that works. But then you can hardly call out world balanced
 
Dundee said:
I do understand the point your trying to make. I look at my sons in their relationships and see little things that I recognize as... Danger sighns from my past. But maybe it is just how things are meant to be biologically. We are healthier when young generally so this is the prime time to reproduce to keep the species going. When we are older there is a lesser biological imperative to reproduce. Bonds between people sometimes fade an they sometimes go there own ways and think back like you and question the model. But there are enough people who prioritize careers for example over the standard model... Or balance the two.
They keep the world running as researchers and so on.
But I still think it is a model that works for the species. I think genetics looks after it all as designed.
Click to expand...
I agree

I didn't get into a relationship for 2 reasons. I wanted to go for what I really wanted was the 1st 1 but I realised in time that what I settled for wasn't right for me & I wasn't happy in, left it too late to do what I really wanted to do & found something else suited me better & I was happier & loved it more as it was very varied, fun & interesting. I didn't find the right person for me.
 
Top Bottom
Back