Conference quark::mennotes-v1

    
    	Why do you think they call it adult-ery?
    
    	Joe Jas
    

I think the issue is that we all have (at least a little) lust in our
hearts but rarely act on it. Instead, we get vicarious pleasure by 
projecting our fantasies onto others.

When the victims are public figures, it's even better, because then we
can knock them down to our size and make them more human.


I have a couple of married women friends who always make sure that somebody 
else is present when we lunch. I'm sure this is to avoid any appearance
of impropriety.

Bruce

Perhaps we differ on how we define "older", but it seems to me that it is 
easier.  One thing that made it very difficult when I was had no children, and 
was unattached, was that I was never totally sure of whether I wanted a 
relationship to be platonic or romantic, or whether what I wanted matched what 
the woman wanted.  Now if I go to lunch with a female friend the topics of 
conversation are frequently heavy duty romantic stuff like potty training and 
finding day care.  And I sometimes feel like Erma Bombeck when she said "I 
couldn't have an affair even if I wanted -- I don't have the energy or the 
underwear".

As to the specific situations mentioned in .0 and .2, that's kind of sad.  In 
.0 that your friend's boyfriend doesn't trust her, and in .2 that either your 
friend is on a guilt trip or her husband doesn't trust her.

Of course there is common sense and common courtesy.  You tell your SO ahead 
of time, for example.  And the occasion should fit the purpose of the meeting. 
For example, you can have a good platonic discussion at a quiet, public 
restaurant.  You don't need a meeting at 11 o'clock at night, in your house, 
when your spouse isn't around.

And as for what the others think, it's none of their business.  And if they 
consider it their business, it's their problem, not yours.

Clay

    re .3
    
    the theory is very nice, but the Gary Hart incident shows that the
    problem *is* sometimes one's own...

    
         And, whether Gary is guilty or not, it shows that the media's
    unbridled ability to destroy the lives of individuals has grown
    greater in the past few years.  I don't know anyone who could survive
    a close surveillance, unscathed.
    
         As far as age is concerned, my 25-year-old point of view is
    that the older one gets, the more likely one is to marry the person
    who makes life easier for them, rather than clinging to that person
    as a friend.  My experience is that, at advanced age (over 30),
    close friends (of opposite sex) tend to marry or get involved more
    often than younger people.  Since my friendships have lasted
    (generally) longer than my 'romances', I am less likely to convert
    a friend to a 'love interest'.
    
                                 Bubba
    

    Re: .5
    
    The "media" wouldn't be so eager to poke and prod for "unsavory"
    activities if their audience didn't love it so much.  Sex sells,
    let's face it, even when there are more important issues to
    discuss.  Just look at all the furor over Jim Bakker's sex life,
    or Fawn Hall, for that matter.  Ridiculous!  But that's what
    the majority of Americans want to read/see/hear, so the "media"
    give them more.
    
    					Steve

    
    RE: .6
    
         ...and to this, I also credit the high sales of the
                  <<<<<<< NATIONAL ENQUIRER >>>>>>>
    
                              Bubba
    

    
    	In the eyes of the world you are guilty until
    	proven innocent, right?
    
    	>>>Peter
    

    
    
    Well, the press succeeded, Gary Hart is expected to withdraw his
    bid for the democratic nomination today.
    
    Tony
    

    
    But the press, in situations like this, is always GUILTY of starting
    SH*T!
    
    Sherm

    > I ran into one a few years after high school and called her up a couple of
    > times to talk over old times - that was a no-no, i got her in trouble
    > with her boy friend.  

I believe a healthy relationship needs to have friends of the opposite sex.
If the "friends" turn out to be lovers, then the relationship was never 
*healthy* to begin with.

I draw the line at past mates/lovers/boyfriends/girlfriends however. I believe
that unless there is a *reason* (such as a bond like kids) to stay in 
contact, the two people should go their seperate ways. I don't mind friends,
but not friends you used to sleep with.

As far as Gary Hartpence (his real name,) I believe he is a victom of a greedy,
selfish, money hungry media, that is only surpassed in lowness by politicians.
All this stuff, Reagan, contragate, watergate, bla bla bla, is worse than
watching big time wrestling. I'm bored with the whole scene. No wonder the 
ratings for "Lassie" have skyrocketed......

re -1:
    
>I draw the line at past mates/lovers/boyfriends/girlfriends however. I believe
>that unless there is a *reason* (such as a bond like kids) to stay in 
>contact, the two people should go their seperate ways. I don't mind friends,
>but not friends you used to sleep with.

    It doesn't always happen that way, I'm happy to say.  I have as
    friends a couple of men I was romantically involved in at one time.
    My SO does too.  I don't see the problem.
    
    	-Ellen

    
         Well, Mr. Hart threw in the towel.  The Washington Post said
    they had more evidence of misconduct, and they took 'credit' for
    making him give up.
    
                                  Bubba
    

    
         True.  He should have learned from Ronnie Reagan's experience
    that lies don't go over well.
    
                                Bubba
    

    No, it's worse than all that, friends .
    GH figured he was bigger than all that ,
    overnighters to Bimini....with gorgeous models ?
    Sounds like fun ...except if you want to be President.
    The real problem here is that he was just too stupid
    and egotistical (all politicians are egotists) to believe that
    he could get caught.
    
    The worst part ...he thought that a simple word from the great
    GH ,denying all would have us all ignore the facts. 
    For further examples of this attitude, the Irangate/Contragate
    now playing, is an excellent starting point,with similar historical
    examples abounding.
    
    Since politicians no longer fear the voter,then more power to the
    press ,get the dirty laundry out and make them fear something!
    A politician without fear is a most dangerous individual and 
    we need something to keep these SOB's in line.
    
    ....Robin

    So what is the big deal... One of the Quote BEST PRESIDENTS OF THE
    CENTURY unqoute was the biggest womanizers of the world. Or do we
    forgive assasinated presidents?
    
    Bruce...
    
    

    	Mr Hart's error was not in being a 'womanizer' but in preaching
    a level of morality which he ignored.  Mr. Hart has a very long
    history (15 + years) of actions which suggest he puts himself above
    his preachings.  He has not acted in a trustworthy manner.  He has
    not practiced basic honesty.  He has exhibited traits which suggest
    he does not think well under pressure.  He has proven, to me, that
    he will opt for the lie before even thinking of telling the truth.
    
    	President Kennedy, and I am not one who thinks he was a great
    president, was known to be a womanizer all during his political career
    (as was his father, brother Joe and brother Teddy).  The press in
    Massachusetts tried to make an issue of it when President Kennedy
    was a Representative but he did not take up the fight and the story
    died due to lack of public interest.  Had Mr. Hart told the reporters
    that his sex life was none of their business, I believe his
    'womanizing' would have become a non-story as well.
    
    	Mr. Hart told the press that he was not a womanizer and challenged
    them to follow him around.  The press took up the challenge and
    Mr. Hart reacted very very badly under pressure.
    
    	The story of Mr. Hart's decline and final resignation has been
    detailed in many newspapers.  The 'womanizing' issue is but a small
    part of the whole story.
    
    Douglas  

    THis is making the rounds around DEC
    
           TOP 10 THINGS THAT GARY HART AND DONNA RICE *DID* DO

10.  MADE RICE KRISPIES MARSHMALLOW SQUARES.

 9.  GAVE EACH OTHER HOME PERMANENTS.

 8.  MADE PRANK PHONE CALLS TO JACK KEMP.

 7.  LOOKED THROUGH CATALOGS FOR MRS. HART'S ANNIVERSARY GIFT.

 6.  LISTENED TO BARRY WHITE RECORDS WHILE RUBBING EACH OTHER IN A
     NON-AROUSING FASHION.

 5.  DEBATED WHETHER RED AUERBACH WAS GREATEST NBA COACH.

 4.  CALLED LARRY KING SHOW 30 TIMES TRYING TO TALK TO GENE RODDENBERRY.

 3.  SHARED A LAUGH OVER JIM BAKKER'S INABILITY TO KEEP AFFAIRS SECRET.

 2.  TOOK TURNS RIDING IN DRYER.

 1.  DISCUSSED HAVING SEX: DECIDED AGAINST IT.

    Re: .17 {SO WHAT}
    
    1. Hart proved to us that he cannot conduct clandestine activities.
            (poor sense of timing and secrecy).
    2. He provided a simplistic lie and expected us to believe it.
            (arrogant)
    3. He bluffed the press while holding a poor hand."FOLLOW ME..."
            (very poor judgement)
    4. He had Donna Rice come to DC after said bluff.
        (more arrogance,very dumb,*extremely* bad judgement)
    
    I think that I was misunderstood ,I could care less about the
    man's womanizing,or his sexual drives. It matters more to me that
    man exhibited many of the characteristics in this business which
    obviously disqualify from the job he wanted.
    
    ...Robin