~ Like a Dream ~

[upsidedown]

As I recall, this is why the \"off topic\" forum was created in the first place, so people who don\'t like this kind of bickering and garbage don\'t have to read it. Theoretically, if we just stick to reading the actual Pheromone Discussion forum, we can continue discussing pheromones and gaining knowledge to help us, and can avoid these types of inflamatory conflicts if we can\'t stomach them..

It\'s just a shame that Ghostclown originally posted this on the Pheromone forum before it got moved her to the off topic forum.

[franki]

Hey, wait a second.

Unlike some others, Ghostclown at least mentioned what kind of phero\'s (SOE, PI) and cologne he used. So that part of the thread belongs to the pheromone forum IMO.

Other than that, this off-topic forum is the place for flame wars, which can be amusing from time to time. FullTilt has the right to get \"sickened\" by some people, but she shouldn\'\'t be surprised when people don\'t like that.

[upsidedown]

Well, I suppose it did start out listing pheromones...but it did contain a bit of bragging about the circumstances as well. So, perhaps it did have a reason to start out in the pheromone discussion. But, the focus did tend to shift fairly quickly.

[**DONOTDELETE**]

Not too much surprises me anymore. [img]/ubbthreads/images/icons/smile.gif[/img]

Scoldings are so boring. I\'d much rather have a spanking.

[Bruce]

Yes, it is true. Actually, Ghostclown was minding his own business and posted a reasonable message about a pheromone mixture and folks started picking on him based on his previous behavior. I\'m not defending his lifestyle and I probably should have posted something to this effect earlier, but I think we should give folks a chance to change their ways. In this case, I think Ghostclown was trying to avoid getting into the kind of conflict he had earlier and ended up getting goded into another fight.
Bruce

[**DONOTDELETE**]

With respect, Bruce, GC wasn\'t even fighting. The fight started when GC posted, three women on the forum expressed their distaste for him, and were preached at by the doc, whose message was, in essence \"shut up and be nice.\" It\'s hard, as a female, to hear a man talk as GC does and not be affected. His behavior, as you may have gathered, is hugely offensive and deeply alarming to many of the women. The women said so, and the doc didn\'t want us to. I refused to shut up about it, and took the heat.GC did not start the fight. The fight was between the doc and the women, and a few of the men who stood up for us.GC won\'t change. And probably as long as he continues to post, he\'ll get slammed, even if I sit in my corner like a good girl.Polishing my tiara as Queen of the Love-Scent Forum, I remain,yours sincerely,FTR

[tounge]

Good post Bruce. I don\'t try to judge anyone as far as their life style, but I have to say there are quite a few women who come across as sexual pigs also. Maybe some of them post here?

[DrSmellThis]

First, regarding FTR: I guess when you work for DC attorneys you learn how to be a spin doctor, and make people seem like bad guys vs. you, the hero. It\'s \"Doc vs. Women and the gallant few who defend us!\" [img]/ubbthreads/images/icons/laugh.gif[/img] Whatever. Nice calculated forum politics.

By the way, please do stop sending me PM, FTR. I don\'t care if -- let\'s see -- you don\'t listen to anything I say, feel I\'m not worthy of your respect; that I don\'t really have any values, am not qualified be a psychologist, am a coward about strong feelings; am a \"little girl with my panties bunched up;\" and, that all my posts are really just self-serving. [img]/ubbthreads/images/icons/laugh.gif[/img] I also don\'t care how much, and how deeply you detest me. I don\'t want to be harrassed any more.
***

Now that the thread is on the off topic forum, to the extent Bruce doesn\'t mind, people can engage in whatever stuff they want to, ugliness or not. YeeeeHaaaa!

I just didn\'t feel it was appropriate in the other one, as the forum had long been a really first-rate place for cross-disciplinary intellectual discussion; as well as a safe, mutually supportive place for personal discussions of sexuality. That\'s not me being idealistic. It really had been a unique, wonderful forum. Anger has it\'s place and an appropriate means of expression (assertiveness) in such a forum, IMO. On the street what is appropriate is different. That is just my opinion. Others may want a different kind of forum. OK fine. There\'s room for everything on the internet. I had taken pride in what folks had created (before I ever got here), and came to feel a little bit homey about it, \"as if it was my own\". But I defer to Bruce, who really does own the site. I can\'t control anything here. I was trying to take a little responsibility for keeping it civil, not to tell \"women to shut up and be nice\". [img]/ubbthreads/images/icons/smile.gif[/img] I have asked men to keep it civil too.

I have read over what I said, and upon relection it might look a bit too controlling. [img]/ubbthreads/images/icons/crazy.gif[/img] I\'m not sure. I apologize to everyone if I was that way. I should perhaps learn to back off from challenges more often, and not get sucked in. Oh well, we all have egos.

Anyone who knows me personally knows I really do support women (and men) standing up for themselves, anger and all. My women friends feel fine about expressing anger toward me as well, as long as it\'s appropriate and constructive. I do want women (and men) here to feel the same way! I\'m trying to strike a balance between intellectual and personal.

Again, I really don\'t blame any of y\'all for being rubbed the wrong way by someone proclaiming they want to screw their wife\'s sister! (That is why I\'m not \"flaming\" everyone that is angry, Elena.) Especially if any of you had something similar happen! That\'s just normal humanity, and I\'m quite fond of normal humanity. I hope that is now clear to most everyone.

But people are always going to say things in an open sexuality forum about behaviors that we don\'t like. People engage in a mind boggling array of sexual and relationship behaviors. If it gets too offensive to where constructive, assertive feedback is no longer possible, I bet Bruce would be happy to ban them, if we ask. He did it just recently when someone was out of control with inappropriate posts.

So yes, I would like to have a civil, mutually supportive (of each other as persons) forum, since the topics are inherently both very personal, and controversial. I wouldn\'t even mind if there was some guidelines written up to that effect. I don\'t know how others feel.

[tounge]

Hey Doc, you owe no one an apology. You did nothing wrong but state your beliefs. And a few self rightous folk were bothered by it. Big effing deal.

[DrSmellThis]

Thanks.

[**DONOTDELETE**]

Doc, I didn\'t say you weren\'t qualified to be a psychologist. I said I can\'t believe you are one, with your apparent terror of strong negative emotions. It\'s ok to be mad but I have to act exactly the way you want me to while I\'m mad or it upsets you. You left out the \"sanctimonious\" part and the part about the irony re those people who \"judge\" are ruining everything! starting wars! they should all go away, you don\'t want to hear what they have to say, etc. being also a judgmental statement. I didn\'t say I don\'t respect anything you say -- I said I do respect what you have to say regarding pheromones and perfumes, but that I don\'t respect you on other subjects -- not to the point of allowing you control me. I didn\'t say all your posts were self-serving. I said the bit about your taking time off from your exhausting schedule of saving the world to blast me was. I said however much you detest me (which seemed quite apparent), I return those feelings. I didn\'t say you had no values; I said the only thing I\'ve ever seen you get riled and stand up for is yourself. I\'m no more politician than you, I don\'t think. And if I\'ve made you feel uncomfortable on the forum, I apologize. I pm-ed you to try to keep it off the board, since you said you don\'t like angry exchanges here. I thought maybe we could duke it out in private, since you didn\'t seem ready to let it go. People have asked that GC be banned and he hasn\'t. They\'ve probably asked that I be banned, and so far I\'m still kicking. Bruce apparently feels there\'s room here for most everybody. Hope you can come around to feeling the same, even though I go off on a rant from time to time and the way I express myself when I\'m angry is inappropriate to you. My saying your angry post sounded like a little girl with her panties in a bunch was nasty and I apologize -- it was probably a reaction to your referring to me as narcissistic. I do feel there\'s a bias -- it\'s ok for a guy to be angry and express it, even somewhat recklessly, but not for a woman; then, she\'s being unseemly. I can\'t be ladylike all the time. Ditto your rhetorical questions about how many actual and phone sex partners I\'ve had in my life. Probably more than you. Probably more than most people. If a guy does it, he\'s a stud. If a woman does it, she\'s a slut. This kind of thing gets tiresome. But I guess I have a sex role bias, too. It makes me uncomfortable if a guy isn\'t chivalrous, and contemptuous if he\'s out of control in public. It\'s ok for me to have a hissy fit, but not for you, since you\'re a man. Oops. Wrong. I\'m not sorry for what I wrote about GC, but I am sorry for what\'s occurred between you and me over it. I could promise to try to be nice in the future but in the face of extreme provocation, it will fall apart, so I won\'t. Maybe you could just ignore me, since your attempts to correct and control me just incite my defiance. Peace? P.S. ARG, I can\'t let it go ... Dr, read ccbythesea\'s post again, if you would, please (I can\'t copy and paste on this machine). Do you see that she feels GC abuses women? and my response to her was about \"those who *would* defend him.\" Unfortunately, I\'m rude enough in the heat of the moment to address you directly. I wasn\'t speaking to you. I was talking about those who would defend a man who abuses women. You didn\'t exactly defend him; you asked that he be treated civilly. That you can hate the sin while loving the sinner is admirable; I can\'t, in the case of a man who abuses a woman, and perhaps that speaks to my own shortcomings. Women are conditioned to be nice, to be understanding and sweet and patient. That social conditioning keeps many of us with men who use us for punching bags or humiliate us, as in the extreme disrespect of sleeping with our sisters. I can\'t be nice or dispassionate about it and your asking me to drove me over the edge. I have tried to be deferential and respectful to you and to account for the fact that we tick one another off without much effort, and I apologize for the very insulting letter I sent you. But I hope this explains why my anger is so deep and why I was so very angry at you, in particular, for appearing to be insensitive to the issue and wanting us not to say what we felt. I\'m obviouslly willing to through just about anything, including being kicked off the forum or being perceived as a high and mighty, judgmental bitch if I can get you or anyone else to see the issue -- it\'s more important that what you think of me -- that hurt is my problem -- I bring it on myself because I won\'t shut up, but I can\'t shut up or be nice about men who abuse women. You kept saying it was about his sexual morals. I have no leg to stand on in that regard -- as you brought to the forum\'s attention, I\'ve had many partners, so much of my own sexual behavior is against conventional morals. It was never about that. It was about how he treats women.

[DrSmellThis]

Let\'s not address all those innacurate characterizations but say we did. I doubt people care; and you have mistaken me for someone who cares about controlling you. Your male chauvanist cookie cutter is getting rusty and bent. I make my own peace. So do you.

[jose]

Don\'t apologize Doc and don\'t leave because of certain people who think there higher than most. You always been very informative on the forms and would hate to see you go.

[MaxiMog]

I second that!

[DrSmellThis]

Regarding the addendum to your last message, I\'m very sorry if you were abused, though it\'s none of my business. It would be patronizing to say more. I do hope your future turns all the more positive for what you\'ve learned through pain.

It\'s very hard to both deal with our own abuse, and hold on to the fact that most of us both are/aren\'t abusers, depending on definitions. I personally empathize with that struggle through experience, just as I now publically advocate for respect among all forum members.

Respect is not necessarily dependent on internal feelings, which can be fleeting. If I may wax academic, there was a fundamental concept in Ancient Greek society about the level of universal respect due to strangers. Athenians were very polite and gracious. Here were the beginnings of our Western culture. [img]/ubbthreads/images/icons/smile.gif[/img]

Though dikeosune, or the Greek concept of \"justice\", always had to do with an overall way of life beginning with internal peace, the concept of stranger-respect eventually devolved into sets of rules. [img]/ubbthreads/images/icons/frown.gif[/img] In this inadequate, piecemeal form, it became the basis for our modern concept of \"rights\", as well as for the \"justice\" system that is your profession.

Unfortunately, \"rights\" fail as personal guides to living, because we can respect someone\'s legal rights and still treat them utterly without respect. As we have lost the original Greek context, few of us in the West really know how to treat strangers. It\'s not our fault. We were never taught. We\'re told to be \"nice\", but that empty admonition doesn\'t help much. Our culture has been \"cleaned out\" of this practical philosophy by the forces of History; especially by Medieval Church authorities, who sought to elimenate any practical philosophy that did not come from them. Later, the Church was at war with the Enlightenment, existentialism, and Nietzscheanism, all of which failed to instill much of anything positive for daily living. We have inherited the ruins of those battles, and the original practical philosophy of Western culture, which was once very rich, is now in shreds.

Accordingly, confusion and intellectual battling is our culture now! [img]/ubbthreads/images/icons/crazy.gif[/img] We haven\'t moved beyond that episode in history. So we know how to attack others\' morals, and ways of life, but we have no adequate practical philosophy of our own.

Many of us turn now to Eastern traditions for this type of practice; traditions which are still alive and functioning in places like Japan, as Bruce could doubtless teach us.

The Japanese I have known are more respectful the less they know you! [img]/ubbthreads/images/icons/smile.gif[/img] So it is probably no accident that Bruce treats \"mere customers\" or strangers the way he does. We\'re fortunate to have a role model on board.

[**DONOTDELETE**]

It wasn\'t about me. It was never about me.

Lovely post, doc.

[Whitehall]

Doc brings up an excellent and insightful point - Western Civilization has lost a common, central moral position on sexuality supported by a broad consensus (well, maybe the broads on this forum have one....)

This is good in that we\'re leaving behind a system with limited current applicablity (strict Victorian Christian morality) to modern conditions and struggling to create a new system of sexual morality based on working women, birth control, DNA testing, population explosion, and other economic, technical, and social changes.

We simply don\'t have a central, authoritative morality to agree to these days - it\'s all changing and has been for 50 years with little stability in sight.

In the mean time, proposals flourish then fade, \"eternal verities\" are forgotten, and we still don\'t have consensus.

What is bad is that we are continually making mistakes and we can\'t agree they\'re mistakes until the damage is done. The thought that freewheeling homosexuality was just fine now helped propagrate the AIDS epidemic - I lost a respected colleague here in San Francisco to it. The notion that women should seek \"self-actualization\" resulted in millions of newborns being warehoused in childcare centers.

So, we will disagree as we grope to a new consensus. In the mean time, let\'s try to keep the process civil.