Adequacy front page
Stories Diaries Polls Users

Home About Topics Rejects Abortions
This is an archive site only. It is no longer maintained. You can not post comments. You can not make an account. Your email will not be read. Please read this page if you have questions.

 Author:  Topic:  Posted:
Nov 18, 2001

Gender differences.

Anger/regret mixed with self pity.


More diaries by zikzak
My espresso machine is broken
Art House/Indy Films: Going too far
Gin and CHiPs
Talkin 'Bout My Generation
Old Friends
Shapes, colors and textures
What am I supposed to do with all of this?
Oh blech.
The evening ended...
A thought from today's activities
Fundamental lifestyle change
Confessions of an editorial tyrant
I'm bored
Trouble with my thumbnail
Weight Loss
Sad realization
A request (and warning) to our readers
Time for festive Holiday tunes!
Further adventures in late night television
Just curious
Exciting new diary
Saying Goodbye
Breaking News
Spikey-Haired Asian Chicks
Who are we?
There ya go. Get to work, folks.


Getting Laid is Great! (5.00 / 1) (#1)
by egg troll on Sun Nov 18th, 2001 at 08:38:13 PM PST
I must say, it really puts things in perspective. For anyone who doubts my virality, you're welcome to come closer and I'll let you take a whiff of my fingers!

Posting for the love of the baby Jesus....

"Traditional" Families Best? (5.00 / 1) (#2)
by Chocolate Milkshake on Sun Nov 18th, 2001 at 09:11:05 PM PST
I think it's time for us as a society to seriously think about going back to the age-old system of arranged marrirages, as opposed to the Darwinian chaos that is the present dating scene.

The advantages of this scheme will be numerous:

  • No more anxiety about ending up a spinster/bachelor: parents simply pick out a suitible mate for their children when they are still young
  • Marriages will provide an effective method of cementing political and business alliances. Everyone knows the family dynasty is the most effective method of running a business or government.
  • Sex crimes and prostitution will be greatly reduced when most everyone is guaranteed a mate.
  • Increased upper mobility: underpriveleged families can marry off their attractive daughters to socially inept, wealthy young males: a fine alternative to having these girls end up bitter, abandoned single mothers.

    Of course, divorce would have to be illegal, but that's no reason love would not be able to bloom. Haven't the great love stores of western culture been adulterous? Paris and Helen, Lancelot and Guinevere, Tristan and Isolde. Arranged marriages would usher in a new age of romance! I'm sure it can now be seen just how much our society needs to make this change. Please write your congressperson immediately.

  • "Sexual Love" is a liberalist myth. (none / 0) (#3)
    by tkatchev on Sun Nov 18th, 2001 at 10:34:06 PM PST
    Love cannot be based on sex, any more than love can be based on money, food, intelligence, or any number of other material goods. Love is love; you are supposed to love your mate in a similar way to the way you love your parents, your siblings, your friends. That is what "love" was supposed to be, in the original meaning of the word.

    The industrial age, however, invented a strange homunculus: the concept of "sexual love". From now on, the love for you mate is supposed to be different from all other kinds of love, it is now supposed to be a strange sort of "love" that is based on sexual domination, intimidating sexual practices, and an ever-increasing sensuality. Indeed, this new sort of "love" was "love" only in name; in reality, it is nothing but an obsessive-compulsive hypersexuality mixed with delusional, repressed sexual complexes. In the original sense, "love" was supposed to mean a deep feeling of kinship, a way to assert your individuality and a way to stay secure in a turbulent world, a way of overcoming difficulties together. This new "sexual love", however, was nothing of the sort; this "love", instead of bringing solace and guidance to lost souls, brought anguish and angst to impressionable, sexually unprepared young minds. This new sort of "love" convinced young men that to assert your individuality you need to assert your raw physical and sexual power, much like a stallion or a prize bull breeder. The young women, in turn, were convinced that the only way to get support and understanding in this world is to whore your body for it. An extremely degrading and anti-humanist world-view, the concept of "sexual love" created much of suffering we see in the modern world.

    Why did the society at end of the industrial revolution suddenly need this new concept of "sexual love"? Simple: at the time, conservative, Christian-based victorian attitudes still held their ground in society, at least in name if not in spirit. At the same time, this was one of the darkest times for Christianity, with various anti-human philosophies at their peak -- a small example of the intellectual climate at the time: communism, socialism, nihilism, Nietzsche, nationalism, imperialism, and social-darwinism. In effect, the lip-service to victorian values, coupled with rampant liberalist philosophies, created an immense moral vacuum in Europe at the time. Just as an example: in the later 19th century, the number of prostitutes in Europe was at an all-time high! This number has been going down as time goes on. In fact, at the time, prostitution was seen as something casual and irreverant, a light act of entertainment.

    In short, European society at the time needed a way to justify their immoral lifestyle and world-view. It found a perfect candidate: the mythical concept of "sexual love".

    Peace and much love...

    You are on the right track, but... (none / 0) (#5)
    by Chocolate Milkshake on Sun Nov 18th, 2001 at 11:08:02 PM PST
    The concept of "sexual love" as you describe it is really just the idea that individual fulfillment, be it sexual or otherwise, should be the basis of society. From this concept arose the idea that people should be free to seek out a life-partner, and, should that person prove unsuitable, to separate from them and try again.

    The concept of arranged marriages does away with all this: individuals are locked into predetermined pairings for life, thus cementing the nuclear family as the cornerstone of society. Of course, there will be "flings", even full-blown love affairs, on the part of either partner, but these will be viewed as secondary to the marital bond. Thus, one would be free to follow the whims of love without the constant nagging worry of: "is this person the one for me?" or fear of ruining the life of one's spouse or one's children through a messy divorce.

    Given how epehemeral so many matters of the heart can be, it can be seen how this arrangement will make for both a more stable society and stress-free love lives on the part of its constituent individuals.

    you are on the right track, but ... (none / 0) (#7)
    by Anonymous Reader on Sun Nov 18th, 2001 at 11:31:53 PM PST
    You fail to point out that love (as opposed to the social bond of marriage) is perfectly capable of developing under an arranged marriage. The idea that people must fall in love first, presumably as the result of love fairies sprinkling magic love dust, then marry, debases the species connection we have with each other as human beings. Anyone can love anyone else.

    Been there, done that (none / 0) (#4)
    by SpaceGhoti on Sun Nov 18th, 2001 at 10:45:31 PM PST
    Already discussed it.

    Nice try, though. I'd rate it as a reasonably good idea.

    A troll's true colors.

    shut the hell up, spaghetti (none / 0) (#6)
    by osm on Sun Nov 18th, 2001 at 11:13:11 PM PST
    nobody is asking for your input. you just sit there and get preached to, like the sinful imp you are.

    Impness (none / 0) (#8)
    by SpaceGhoti on Mon Nov 19th, 2001 at 02:29:51 AM PST
    By my very nature, as you describe it, I am constitutionally incapable of sitting there and being preached at. It's detrimental to my sinful imp imperatives.

    Besides, zikzak issued the challenge of "Get to work, folks." I merely pointed out that we already had. This invalidates your complaint, since it isn't your diary.

    This is a fun game! What's next?

    A troll's true colors.


    All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest ® 2001, 2002, 2003 The name, logo, symbol, and taglines "News for Grown-Ups", "Most Controversial Site on the Internet", "Linux Zealot", and "He just loves Open Source Software", and the RGB color value: D7D7D7 are trademarks of No part of this site may be republished or reproduced in whatever form without prior written permission by and, if and when applicable, prior written permission by the contributing author(s), artist(s), or user(s). Any inquiries are directed to