Conference quark::human_relations-v1

    Same situation for me.  Rules that seem to work are (1) don't let
    the friendship negatively influence the other person's relation-
    ship(s), (2) with respect to a spouse, use the golden rule if
    possible, (3) keep the friendship honest by setting the previous
    two rules, and (4) don't push the friendship beyond the platonic
    stage unless you are prepared for the consequences.
    
    Here's an interesting twist.  People want to feel that they are
    attractive to the opposite sex.  It was difficult for me not to
    say to a friend that she was attractive (which she was, both
    physically and intellectually).  Part of me wanted to and the
    other part didn't want to do anything to jeopardize the friend-
    ship.  For many years I said nothing.  Then I told her how (and
    why) being a friend was difficult and that she should take this
    as supreme compliment and nothing more.  Yes, it is complicated.

    I have a problem with the implication that friendship is some sort
    of inferior relationship ("still good friends (only)" in .1).  But
    that's the substance of another topic.
    
    As far as Platonic relationships are concerned, I think that they are a
    very special relationship.  A lot of our relationships have either
    explicit or implicit sexual overtones.  Whereas the prevalent
    definition of Platonic relationship is along the lines  of a
    relationship which is free from any sexual involvement (anyone want to
    change the definition?) (anyone want to argue that there is no such
    thing as a completely asexual relationship?), it is refreshing to be
    able to relate to another person (opposite sex in this situation)
    without feeling under any (1) threat or fear of or (2) obligation to
    respond sexually.  It does free up the relationship to develop along
    non-physical lines which might otherwise develop less quickly or
    easily.
    
    There is a difference which is hard to put into words about being
    "free" to relate deeply with someone without sex "getting in the way".
    Perhaps this is related to the recent interest in and spate of books
    being published on the celebate life style (this was pre-AIDS mind
    you!).
    
    Steve  

    I have 2 very longtime male friends who are married.  In one case,
    the wife is almost as close a friend as her husband.  In the other
    case, I have only met the wife a time or two and I'm not her favorite
    person in the world.
    
    I believe the key is just to never even allow yourself to THINK
    about anything other than a platonic relationship.  Don't even allow
    the thought to enter your mind.  If it ever does, think about the
    pain and hardship you'd be causing for one or maybe both people.
    Do you really want to do that to a friend you love?  Do you really
    want to do that to YOURSELF?
    
    The other thing I've done is not to accept any responsibility for
    whatever problems are caused by the other person in the relationship.
    Well, let's see, that didn't come out right.  If the wife is jealous of
    our innocent, platonic relationship, then that's between my friend and
    his wife.  He can choose to end our friendship if he wants, but his
    problems with his wife's unfounded jealousy are in no way my problem. 
    
    It's worked for me for a very long time.
    
    							Pat
    

        Re: 147.1
        
        I don't see why telling a Platonic lady friend that she is
        attractive should jeopardize the friendship. That's probably
        because I have always expressed my appreciation for the effort
        taken by female acquaintances regarding the appearance as well as
        anything else that they do well. Just because I am attracted
        to someone is no reason why I have to act on that attraction.
        
        I have almost always had more female friends than male, and have
        found a very great fraction of them sexually attractive at least
        upon occasion. On the other hand, I am a great respecter of
        other people's relationships, and do not wish to jeopardize my
        own, either. It has often been the case that I am strongly
        attracted to friends with whom it is impractical, or improper to
        act up on that attraction. In these cases I can see no reason
        not to say explicitly what the situation is.
        
        JimB. 

    Re .5:
    
    I agree - I like to tell female friends that I find them attractive,
    or that they are looking especially good that day - it usually results
    in a big smile.  Such compliments work best when the recipient KNOWS
    that you're not trying to "get something" out of it.
    
    					Steve

        I, in turn, will disagree with Steve Thompson's 147.7.
        
        Friendship to me is based on love or very close to it. Love is
        caring for, valuing, and considering someone else as much as
        yourself. Friendship, in my mind, involves either caring (etc)
        for someone else as much as yourself, or almost as much as
        yourself. (I don't much care to quibble over which.) Love and
        friendship are concerned not with what we get out of a
        relationship but what we put into it.
        
        If we love or are friendly because of what we get out of it,
        then I don't think that it is essentially love. 
        
        For my money you get much more out of the world if you love
        unconditionally. In my book, being nice to others is like doing
        the morally right thing. You should do it for itself. You should
        be nice to others in order to be nice, and not for what it gets
        you. You should do the right thing not for hope of reward or
        fear of punishment, but because it is right. You should love
        (value) others because they are valuable, and because it is the
        great commandment for relating to other people (but this gets us
        to religion, which I will defer to another conference). 
        
        JimB.

    Wait a minute fellas!  I agree that you should be nice just
    for the sake of being nice.  BUT-9 times outa 10, when you
    are nice, you receive niceness in return.  Which encorages
    (reinforces) nice behavior.  So-be good for goodness sake,
    and reap the benefits too!
    
    Also, don't forget the pyramid effect.  When you brighten
    someones' day, they are a little happier, and they pass 
    that sunshine on to someone else, who in turn smiles at that
    stranger in the hall, and they feel a little better...and on
    and on and on!!
    
    Heres a smile, guys-   ;-} (my favorite smile includes a wink!)-
    please pass it on to someone who needs it!!
    
                     Hugs-Deb
    

        	I once heard it put as "Altruistic Hedonism".  To paraphrase,
    We all like goodies, but if all you do is take and take and take,
    eventually the goodies run out.  So... you learn to give, and in
    giving, you discover that you get more goodies back...
    
    	Altruistic Hedonism - Getting More By Giving Yourself Away
    
    						--D

        I believe that I do appreciate that we are each of us different
        and that we each have a fundemental right to be different.
        However, I also believe that there is a real right and wrong and
        that living by principles is important.
        
        Please understand that when I state what I believe to be right
        and wrong and when I advocate living by principles in general,
        that I don't mean to attack those who don't share my views.
        (Among other things that would be selfish and unloving and I
        don't believe that one should be either.)
        
        Personally, I think that if all your friendships are grounded in
        self-intrest you are cheating both yourself and your friends. I
        believe in essence that what you are doing is wrong. I do NOT
        believe that my believing you are wrong means that you are in
        fact. I may be mistaken. Nor do I believe that just because you
        do something which is wrong, but which you believe is right,
        that you are any worse a person than anyone else. It is both my
        experience and my religious belief that we all do things which
        are wrong. We should try to avoid it, but I will happen. If I
        demanded that anyone be perfect, I would be very disappointed. 
        
        All of that is a long way of saying that, yes, I do believe that
        selfishness is both wrong and a bad idea, but that doesn't mean
        that I hold you personally, or anybody, in contempt either for
        disagreeing with me or for acting on what you honestly believe.
        
        JimB.

        RE: 147.9
        
        I am well aware that it is a popular position to claim that
        altruism is itself motivated by selfishness. It is a position
        which I feel does more to hinder understanding of behavior and
        ethics than to aid it.
        
        It is, of course, true that we all in some sense do what we want
        to, that if some people embrace a selfless philosophy, they do
        so because they want to. On the other hand, to say that since
        they are doing what they want to they are therefore being
        selfish obscures an important distinction.
        
        If I make friends only because of what they can do for me, and I
        find someone can't do anything for me I will no befriend them.
        If I decide that I should be friendly to people regardless of
        whether they personally can do something for me because I expect
        that being friendly will cause others to do good things for me,
        then I will only continue to be selfless if the world rewards me
        for it. If I decide to be friendly just because it is good to do
        so, then I will continue to be friendly, regardless of whether
        people are good to me.
        
        As it happens, I do believe the being loving, and selfless works
        better than being selfish, that if you give a lot you will
        receive a lot in return. But more than that, I am convinced that
        it is right to be loving, to value others as you do yourself,
        and that you should do so because it is right, and not merely
        because it works better for you. The expectation is very
        important.
        
        I basically reject self-interest as the major source of value.
        
        JimB. 

    RE: Eagle_friends
    
    	Steve, I think (and this is MY opinion and doesn't mean it;s
    right) that you should re-consider how you look at friends, female
    in particular. I get the impression from your notes that you look
    upon every female you know as a "possible-SO" when in fact, you
    should look upon them as a "Possible-Friend".. By doing this you
    are more likely to gain ALOT more friends both male and female.
    Women are WONDERFUL friends and I think you are losing out by looking
    at them as "Possible-SO's" because that is easy to pick up on. It
    can be considered threatening by some and by that you have possibly
    lost a good friend.
    
    	Telling a woman-friend she looks great or complimenting her
    in any way, shape or form is perfectly natural. Anyone who thinks
    different doesn't have many women friends. I think nothing of
    complimenting my female friends. It's easy for me to say that they
    are looking great or the dress they have on perfect on them or even
    just saying they look nice. I get the same in return (without asking
    or demanding BTW) and we both feel the better for it. What's so
    un-natural or wrong about that??
    
    	"Dahling, you look mahvelous" "And Michael, you smell great!"
    
    	Nothing the matter with that! :-)
    
    								mike

    Gee, I guess I'm guilty as well of not always telling a feminine-gender
    friend that I think she's looking good because of being viewed as
    a wolf.  Thanks, Mike, for your comments!
    
    You make a valid point about stressing "friend-ships" before
    "SO-ships".  In my book, the friendship must be there before the
    SO effect can happen, at least for a relationship which has a strong
    foundation.
    
    Steve

I've been looking for such a note as this in my long trek of catching up a 400+
note backlog in H_R...

I've been wondering about this for a while...  I've allways had a hard time
dealing with women Platonically.  every female that I've been attracted to in
other ways, I've been attracted to sexually; and it's hard for me not to want to
act on that.  The exception to this is when the woman is part of a couple, and
it is possible for me to be friends with *both* of the couple.

Now as far as being unselfish, I guess I follow somewhat along the lines
of what Jim Burrows said...

I enjoy helping people for selfish reasons, because I get a lot of joy out of
it!  I don't do it for any selfish reasons, or because I expect to get something
back.  I enjoy helping/giving to people most, when it literally is a gift, when
it is not expected of me.  Start expecting me to do things for you
unnecessarily, (things you could/should do for yourself), and watch out! You can
allways tell if it is a gift or something expected by whether or not you can say
no freely, without the other person getting upset.

Now, I certainly have wants and needs myself, and from time to time I will ask
people who I think can fullfill them, if they would/want to.  But if they can't
or don't want to, I'll live, and I will not hold it against them.

The only time you can complain about someone not giving to you, is when the
other person has agreed to fill a certain role in your life, maybe exclusively.
If that person is not filling that role consistantly, it's important to make
that clear. ('Hey, are you my spouse/friend/*, or not?')  And address the
problem, ('Yes, I am, but I have not been doing a good job of it have I? ...')
or face reality, ('Well, I guess that I'm not...') 

...

Jim.

    
    	This is a topic I have been interested in for some time now,
    myself.  I'm glad to see it was brought up!  There were many good
    points presented in the previous replies.  
    	RE.:  .5      I, like Jim, only the opposite way, have always
    had more MALE friends than FEMALE.  For the most part I have found
    my male friends to be more reliable, trustworthy, and giving than
    my female friends.  I have had no problems receiving compliments
    from them / giving them compliments.  
    	RE.:  .6      Take it from one who knows, Steve, we appreciate
    it when our male friends compliment us -- be it on our appearence,
    a new dress, or on our job, etc.  etc.  I feel that we also usually
    know the difference between a TRUE compliment and a "come on". 
    Usually, if the friendship is one of some duration, the relationship
    has already been defined and established so we know that this FRIEND
    would not "come on" to us.  In cases where I have heard of good
    friends becoming lovers the relationship is strong enough that the
    couple can talk it out before coming to a decision to "further"
    their relationship (re-define it, in a sense).  
    	I could safely say that all my close friends right now are male,
    several within DEC (you know who you are!) and I value and treasure
    these friendships immensely!  You all give me more support and "love"
    than any female friend I ever had.  I would like to say thank you
    for that at this time and let other readers of this note know that
    it's appreciated!  
    	re.:  .16    I guess as far as being sexually attracted to some
    of my male friends, yes, that happens, but each case is different.
    And it doesn't happen with every one.  And for some the attraction
    is still there, it just has not been acted upon for some reason
    or other.  And our relationship is strong enough that I know we
    can discuss it before it IS acted upon and figure out how it might
    change our relationship.  But so far all my friendships with males
    have stayed platonic, and it's great because I can have a man to
    talk with, do things with, etc. without the pressures, hassles,
    or involvement that I would have with my "lover/spouse/whatever."
    	All in all, I'm FOR platonic friendships 100%!  Men -- you are
    MY  BEST  FRIENDS!!!
            Thanks. 
    		Myra
    

Note 160.0                  selfishness vs. Hedonism                  No replies
USMRM2::SWHITTICK                                    11 lines  25-NOV-1986 15:37
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Re:147.12
    "selfishness is both wrong and a bad idea" 
    I thoroughly disagree with that assumption.  "love thy neighbor
    as thyself" implies that love of self would be a model of what
    one who extend to "thy neighbor". As a prime consideration, self-
    love (selfishness) is practical motivation for giving.  When this
    becomes the *only* consideration, however, one becomes so consumed
    in self agrandizement (Hedonistic), that other values are easily
    pushed aside, often causing harm.  I feel, that to be truly altruistic,
    one must start by not only loving oneself, but by liking oneself!!
    

                         -< selfishness vs. Hedonism >-

Note 160.0                  selfishness vs. Hedonism                  No replies
USMRM2::SWHITTICK                                    11 lines  25-NOV-1986 15:37
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Re:147.12
    "selfishness is both wrong and a bad idea" 
    I thoroughly disagree with that assumption.  "love thy neighbor
    as thyself" implies that love of self would be a model of what
    one who extend to "thy neighbor". As a prime consideration, self-
    love (selfishness) is practical motivation for giving.  When this
    becomes the *only* consideration, however, one becomes so consumed
    in self agrandizement (Hedonistic), that other values are easily
    pushed aside, often causing harm.  I feel, that to be truly altruistic,
    one must start by not only loving oneself, but by liking oneself!!
    
[ End of note ]

        I never said that you shouldn't value yourself highly. What I
        meant by "selfishness is both wrong and a bad idea" is that
        valuing yourself *more* than others, being more concerned over
        your gain, caring more about yourself more than others is wrong
        and a bad idea from a practical standpoint.
        
        Clearly, in order for love, which I define as "to value,
        consider and care for someone else as much as you do yourself"
        to be really meaningful, you must value etc yourself. If I think
        "I'm low-life, and so are you, none of us count", it is not
        really love.
        
        "Selfish" as defined in the dictionary means "Concerned only
        with one's self". That, I believe, is morally wrong and not even
        a good idea from a selfish point of view. If you want to give
        "selfish" some other meaning and then defend it, fine, but what
        I mean when I use the word is the standard old dictionary
        meaning.
        
        JimB. 

        Steve, you are perfectly free to have your own opinions on
        selfishness and on the morality and practicality of valuing
        other's more than yourself. I feel your views on this are wrong,
        but I respect your right to have them. It would be nice if I
        could elicit from you the same in return.
        
        I, as almost anyone who knows me can no doubt attest, also value
        myself highly. However, there are many people in this world whom
        I value more highly, both immedite family members and close
        friends, and in fact in some ways even perfect strangers.
        
        Your statement that "to claim to place the welfare of another
        above our own welfare is at best a falsehood," is I would argue,
        not only rather offensive to me (although you no doubt did not
        so intend it), but provably incorrect. All that is necessary to
        disprove your statement is one instance of a person risking
        their own life for that of another because they were more
        concerned with the welfare of the other, than with their own.
        Even more clear is the case of someone risking their own life
        protecting someone else from something less than mortal danger.
        
        What I have been trying to convey in my replies under this topic
        is just this: that first of all it *is* true that there are
        people who do value others above themselves, who are more
        concerned with the welfare of others than with their own, and
        secondly that I personally feel that that is the right way to
        be. You may disagree with me on this last point--many people in
        our rather cynical and individualistic culture do--but please do
        not deny that it is even possible to hold the other opinion or
        to act on it.
        
        One interesting notion that I put forth for your consideration.
        You have said that people who value others above themselves have
        a problem. Without putting too harsh an edge on it, it has been
        my experience that people who place a high value on themselves
        and an equally high or higher value on others are for the large
        part very happy. I believe you'll find that those who put
        themselves first have a much higher rate of divorce, holiday
        blues, and seething attitudes, than those who put others first.
        You may feel that I have a problem because I value others more
        than myself. You'll have to excuse me if I don't believe you.
        
        JimB.