Conference hydra::dejavu

    I usually sense a calmer energy from women than I do men.  I don't
    understand why this is, since I don't believe our souls are one
    particular sex.  But the women friends I have are generally more
    serene, and have a soothing effect on me.  This is not always the
    case and there are exceptions on both sides.  DISCLAIMER:  That
    statement was in NO WAY meant to be feminist.  I am not at all
    a feminist.  For that matter I don't feel that I am "anything" 
    that has a label.  I rebel against labels.  I am just ME.  *8-)
    
    Sexual attraction between two people is as natural as a sunrise.
    It is sometimes easy (at least for me) to get so wrapped up in
    spirituality that I forget that I am, after all, a human (at
    least for the moment...) with a human body.  A spiritual
    connection with someone is beyond the definition of wonderful,
    and I think the *human* interference can be detained for a
    while, but I also think that human feelings and tendencies
    in SOME cases are inevitable and must be dealt with in some
    form or another.
					Carla        
    
    P.S.  Why am I not surprised that mine was the first reply??
    	  (Enter mischevious grin!!)

To me, the fact that the sex drive is an urge is proof of its purely animal
nature (although human sexuality is, from a biological standpoint, more
remarkable than human intelligence).

If I were God, I would not have made sex an urge.  Coitus would ALWAYS
result in pregnancy, and ejaculation would be as painful for a man as giving
birth is for a woman.  This system would be more "fair," and there wouldn't be
a single unwanted child!  Rape would not exist.  There would be no sexual
molestation.  Sex would be a *purely reproductive* act.   

The Old Testament suggests that sex (for women) is a punishment.  Don't have
my Bible on me, but will support this statement later if someone is interested. 

John M.

    (I purposely will ignore the prior responses in the interest of
    my available time right now...there was good info. in them, of course.)
      
        In regards to understanding of masculine/feminine ENERGY, I
    no of no source that has defined it more clearly than Lazaris has.
    For a synopsis of his statements, see topic 358.29 and also topic
    358.30.  Also in 358.30 is a short summary of what he once said
    in regards to CHAUVINISM.  (This is *some* of what I had in mind
    when I started this topic.)
        As for SEX, per say, though I feel that I have had a great,
    formal education on this subject (from Margaret Mead to Eric Fromm,
    etc.) I have been very impressed with what, again, Lazaris has said
    on this subject (whenever he has talked about it...which *directly*
    is seldom.)  Herewith is what I can remember at this moment some
    of what he has said:
        To start with, there are three states of relationship available
    to all of us:  we can be alone, we can have many simultaneous
    relationships, or we can have a monogamous relationship with one
    significant other (at one time.)  He said that roughly, at any given
    time, one third of the population falls into one of those three
    categories.  Further, there is no "right" or "wrong" way to be in
    any of those states.  No one is more valuable than any other one.
    The difficulty for many of us, however, comes in that we feel that
    there is a "perfect" way to be and it isn't the way we "really"
    want to be.  In other words, we could feel that we MUST HAVE the
    committed, monogamous relationship when, in fact, we would be much
    happier to admit that we are indeed happier alone.  Moreover, this
    "state" is not set in concrete.  Though you may find yourself in
    the first condition and happy there, later, at some point, you may
    find that you would be happier in one of the other two states. 
    There is a great deal of latitude here.  The point is that we should
    recognize what the preferred state for us is AT THE MOMENT and be
    contented with that state.
         (The next set of remarks is somewhat more to the point of sex
    itself.)
         Sex is simply one way of being able to express love and intimacy
    with someone else.  What is important is not WHO you love (male
    or female for a male or a female) but THAT you love.  Additionally,
    having sex does not mean that there is either great love or great
    intimacy.  They may be exclusive of each other.  
         ANYONE can have sex.  There is a tremendous amount of energy
    available through sex.  The release of this energy could be called
    "fission."  Fission, as the term applies in chemistry or physics,
    is a powerful reaction.  HOWEVER, if you seek a greater union...if
    you seek a more powerful reaction, if you seek a COMBINING of energy
    (as opposed to a SPLITTING of energy,) then the BEST way to arrive
    at it is through the SYNERGY that can be attained by the exclusive
    union with another like-minded person.  The energy available to
    this union could be called FUSION, or the combining of energies.
    According to Lazaris, this energy is not available to the person
    who wishes to share sexual energies with many partners.  A reason
    is that there is a certain set and setting which is required for
    this particular release of energy.  So, the point of *this* matter
    is that if you desire to attain this particular state of emotional
    energy, then the best place for it is in a monogamous relationship.
    Conversely, this energy is not (as readily, perhaps?) available
    to those in the other two states of relationship.
         Another of his statements regarding sex is that he highly
    recommends lots and lots of sex in a committed relationship.  Orgasm,
    by the by, is considered by him (and many, many others) the EASIEST
    and QUICKEST way to enlightenment.  It is during the orgasm that
    all the planes of reality are open to us.  (So, if you want to
    know what the higher or highest levels of reality feel like, experience
    orgasm and get an idea.)  As I facetiously but truthfully related
    to John M. a few weeks ago, according to Lazaris, one can draw MORE
    energy from the universe with his/her sexual pleasures rather than
    LESS energy that so often we feel, IF one is using SEX to its greatest
    potential.
 
         Speaking for myself, I know that not all of my sexual relationships
    have given me equal sexual pleasures.  There have been a few that
    I feel have reached the FUSION state that Lazaris has described.
    What I have observed from them is that this has occurred only in
    a completely loving state, on the part of both participants.  The
    "high" was as or maybe more powerful than any high achieved by any
    drug that I have sampled.  I will make one additional comment to
    this statement.  I have also achieved this state WITHOUT sex, with
    another person.  I do not know the range of human potentials in
    this regard...I can only relate my own experience.  Based on them,
    though, I feel that the above several paragraphs ring true for me.
      
        Discussions are our pleasures, here, so herein reply or add,
    if you feel so moved.
      
     
    Frederick
    

    So..this formerly unwanted child wouldn't be here then would I?
    Nor my two beautiful genius children?  Nor my unique ability to
    solve in minutes problems which take others months?  Or would this
    god we anthropomorphize into ontological existence have found
    another animalistic vessel for that collection of lusty drives
    and urges I call my soul?  I've already outlived the fighter
    pilot who fathered me before he left, unmarried for the Pacific
    meat-grinder of WWII created by the sexless urges of militaristic
    dominance.  I'm glad to be here by whatever means......
    
    Why is divinity perceived to be exclusive of lust and desire?
    I know the time I spent in the military surrounded by other men
    was the most depressing of my life, I need the soothing/exciting
    presence of women, children & emotions to feel alive and vital.
    
    I would postulate here that we perhaps incur more dissonance in
    our lives by denying whay some call our animal nature than by
    accepting it...The dirtiest kind of war is a Jihad....I would
    also propose that the concept of a personified god is a sign of
    immaturity in a society...A transfer our responsibility for our
    growth with its' attendent discomfort to some unseen deity whose
    commandments supplant enlightenment with one-stop salvation.
    
    It may scary for most to comtempate that we've the onerous task
    to re-coalesce the fragmented bits of spirit scattered with matter
    and energy at the birth of the known universe...How much easier
    to suppose the task will be managed for us?  And what force is
    there which drives us together more powerfully than the attraction
    and sharing of sexual, physical love and the intensity with which
    it can imprint the image of another soul so indelibly on our own?
    
    But, of course, that's only one man's weltanschung...what's yours?
    
    						MWR
    

    Please note for clarity that .5 was inspired as a reply to .3, but
    apparently .4 &.6 were being entered while .5 was being composed...
    
    						MWR
    

    To put this into my perspective, a given: sex is neither good nor
    bad; like any other natural phenomenon, it just _is_.  What may
    be good or bad is how it is used (intent).  Sex-in-love is (generally)
    good; sex-in-rape is (universally) bad.
    
    Sex in metaphysics leaves sex as sex and approaches sex as symbolism.
    The alchemical hermaphrodite symbol is clearly metaphysical, and
    it calls for a union to a higher end.  The sex act can produce a
    high state of mindless intensity (try to do a complex mental
    calculation, as solving a differential equation, at the moment of
    orgasm/climax and see how far you get), and that "ectasy" some people
    try to use to direct whatever energies are generated by the act.
    
    On a symbolic level outside of actual coitus, the sex/gender symbols
    are often based on "planetary" influences; the woman is lunar (as
    per the 28-day menstrual cycle), the man is solar.  The solunar balance
    is critical in some esoteric philosophies.
    
    Steve Kallis, Jr.

    
    	So *thats* why I'm so enlightened...I've always wondered ;')
    ...just kidding.                                            
    
    Really, I've started to believe that the goodness of it all stems
    from the META-state of your head, i.e. what level of consciousness
    you're operating from whence your into it. For example, if it's
    just a power play or a sensation for you, I'd expect it to *not*
    to bring you to any higher level of enlightenment. Say, you happen
    to be so physically attractive, that you can satisfy any sexual
    based ego doubts you may have at any time. But will this lead to 
    happyness or a blissful state of tranquility? I'd think not.
    
    	So it boils down to the fact you have to *be* on certain levels
    before you can "transcend" to a yet higher ground. Since most people
    operate from lower levels of thinking, I'd expect the probability
    of finding a "higher union" with many partners to be low. When you
    find a partner whose thinking is on par with how you think, that's
    when you can go really far and thats when you'd be inclined to seek
    an exclusive relationship.
    
    	Joe Jas
     

    I think that it's worth pointing out that "sex" refers to two distinct
    though related subjects (you know the prank/joke of answering YES
    on a form to the question SEX?).
    
    One is what has recently started to be called "gender" (apparently
    since the word sex started to be used frequently in polite society
    for "The Act").  People come in two varieties, as do most animals
    that people, in their speci-centrism, consider important.  Culturally
    and biologically the roles, reactions, strengths, weaknesses, etc.
    of the two have been very different.  This has had a great deal
    of significance attached to it in many metaphysical (warning: I'm
    using this word in its proper sense) systems of thought.  This has
    in turn influenced many occult, spiritual and religious practices.
    
    The other sense of the word refers to the sexual act, along with
    its preliminaries, aftermath and corolaries.  This has been
    incorporated into the interpretations of sexual dualism, and to
    a lesser, though by no means small, extent has been included in
    its own right in occult, spiritual and religious.  As any homosexual
    will testify, sexual intercourse does not depend on their being
    two sexes available.  As any adolescent boy (among others) will
    testify, it does not depend on having two of *any* type of person.
    As any biologist will testify, this is not unique to humans --
    virtually all gregarious mammels "practice" homosexuality.  And
    as any earthworm will tell you, two genders are not even needed
    to evolve sexual intercourse.
    
    					Topher

    Re .10 (Topher):
    
    >as any earthworm will tell you, two genders are not even needed
    >to evolve sexual intercourse.
     
    Wow!  How do you get them to talk? :-)
    
    Steve Kallis, Jr.

RE: .11
    
    I just channel their higher selves.
    
    				Topher ;-)
    

    

    Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
    hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
    hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
    hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
    hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!
    
    That was good!
    
    Cindy

    .3 - Glad you're not God either !  
    
    If one takes the word "procreate" and spell it as pro-create, then
    one might say that the sex act is "for creation".
    
    The good God in His/Her/Their infinite wisdom wished us humble 
    earthlings to partake in HIS act of "pro-creation" by reproducing
    ourselves for the SOLE purpose of evolving a higher race.
    
    Now, what better way than to try to get us to do that than to create
    a most pleasurable desire ?  The fact that over-indulgence, perversion
    & whatever have crept in is not due to the fact that sex is "bad".
    Obviously drinking too much water is bad - we would drown !
    
    Our souls are neither male nor female. As the philosopher said,
    "As above, so below !".  The positive and negative polarities are
    two major forces in the universe. Hence, TWO sexes ! The male,
    representing the positive (electrical charge, that is) and the
    female the negative aspect. When we join together we create a
    third condition, sometimes wanted, sometimes unwanted, but
    NEVER an accident !
    
    We can channel this sex energy in two ways, one physical, and the
    other mental. Great geniuses, such as Einstein and Tesla had a
    fair amount of sex appeal for the ladies.
    
    

RE: .6 (Henry)


    >  John, wouldn't your creation be a little short-lived? I don't think
    a species would last very long if the main components of regenerating
    the species (eating, sleeping, sex...) caused pain.  < 


Right!  That's part of my point.  Sex feels good so that creatures
will do it.  There is nothing metaphysical about it (man, am I going to
catch "h---" for that one).


    >  For an alternate viewpoint, consider whether giving Man intellect
    was the mistake.  < 

Henry, you know not what you do!  That is a subject I will talk about for hours
and hours....

Man's intellect was a mistake, and one that nature has been paying for ever
since.  Wait for my book for more on this subject. 



RE: .14 (Josh)


    >  .3 - Glad you're not God either !  < 

That's OK; that position is filled anyway.  
    

    > If one takes the word "procreate" and spell it as pro-create, then
    one might say that the sex act is "for creation".  < 


Yes. Draconian as it sounds, reproduction is the original reason for sex.
    

    >  The good God in His/Her/Their infinite wisdom wished us humble
    earthlings to partake in HIS act of "pro-creation" by reproducing
    ourselves for the SOLE purpose of evolving a higher race.  < 


To what end?  What constitutes a "higher race" and what is its purpose?
Is this supposed purpose limited to humans only?

    >    Our souls are neither male nor female. As the philosopher said,
    "As above, so below !".  The positive and negative polarities are two
    major forces in the universe. Hence, TWO sexes ! The male, representing
    the positive (electrical charge, that is) and the female the negative
    aspect. When we join together we create a third condition, sometimes
    wanted, sometimes unwanted, but NEVER an accident !  < 

If souls are neither male nor female, as you state, then it doesn't matter
what sex one choose for intercourse.  Anyway, as Topher already pointed out,
the earth is filled (no pun intended) with creatures that are neither male
nor female (to say nothing of plants).  Certain fishes even switch between
being male and female throughout their life (the best of both worlds, I'd
say).


    
    > We can channel this sex energy in two ways, one physical, and the
    other mental. Great geniuses, such as Einstein and Tesla had a fair
    amount of sex appeal for the ladies. < 
                                          
    
There are as many geniuses who had little or no sex drive.
    
    
John M.

    	Ok, dear, you ask of it!  This is where the test we talked about
    yesterday starts!!
    
    	I've been a passive participant of this conference for quite
    some time, and was challenged to get involved.  So here I am.
    
    	I've always be intrigued by the connection made with physical
    sex and spiritual love!!  And this note brought the expected 
    together.  What I have to say here may not have any connection
    with sex and metaphysics (I'm no expert in metaphysics).  It is
    simply a message of the connection or lack thereof of sex and
    the higher spiritual love.
    
    	Before I go any farther let me explain a little about myself.
    I am, as you would define, a channel for the spirit ST (more about
    him later).  And he wants to say something to all you who want
    to listen.  It was eluded to in .14 by Josh.  Here is the message:
    "You are tethering yourselves too much to this earth and all its
    physical limitations.  Let go!"  Think about that for a minute and
    I get back to it.
    
    	This started out as a very innocent note on the connection of
    physical love (sex) and metaphysics, and if it stayed that way I
    won't be here.  But as he continually reminds me, everything happens
    in its PERFECT timing and here I am as the result of what has come
    to pass.  "Coincidence" is not a word in my vocabulary anymore!!!!
    
    	You have talked abou the ectasy of this physical love, and how
    IT is the ultimate connection with the higher self (I assumed you
    meant spiritual world) or at least the moment at which the pathway
    is the widest, and at which time the spiritual connection can be
    made.  I've been there and I mean to say unless I'm a real fast
    talker that few minutes doesn't buy me much!!!!!  When I communicate
    with ST I want it to last a lot longer than that, for sure!  Don't
    get me wrong,  I get off on physical love just like the rest of
    you.  But don't confuse physical love at any level with spiritual
    communication.  I agree totally with Josh (.14),  physical love
    (sex) and the ectasy that goes with it is only a means of sustaining
    our existence.  He gave all animal life this desire for intercourse
    in order to reproduce.  What you're feeling during this ectasy is
    the moment of creation, where everything you have that is a part
    of you, color of your eyes, shape of you jaw, is being collected
    to be passed on in the creation of another human being.  So as 
    Josh said why shouldn't it be the greatest feelin' God could
    muster up!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (at the physical level that is)
    
    	Now back to the message.  Pull yourselves above it and experience
    the TRUE ectasy of spiritual love.  A climax that doesn't just last
    for a few moments, but one that will last...........as long as you
    want!!!!!!!!!!  Awhile ago I couldn't have even started to explain
    this spiritual love to any of you, but now it's so much a part of
    my life that I coldn't live without it.  More on that later if you
    want to hear it.
    
    	I've gone on long enough for now.  I'm sure I'll be talkin'
    to you all later.
    
    	Expect higher love and it will be yours!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    
    ed

    
    
    Re .15 - may I point out that there is a great difference between
             sex appeal and sex drive?  And that we can only surmise
             the extent of either for any 'genius' we may want to 
             trot out?
    
             I think, rather, that the point may be this: in the 
             presence of strong positive spiritual energy, one 
             feels a strong attraction that can sometimes be 
             interpreted as sexual. The existence of that energy
             is implicit in the meaning (in Greek) of the word
             'charisma'.  
             
             In its religious sense, charisma is the presence of 
             divine inspiration. We've taken it to describe that
             ineffable, ever-so-possibly sexual aura that emanates
             from some of our political, religious, and cultural
             and mythological stars.
    
             Einstein may have had it - but did Newton?
             Pope John Paul? The Dalai Lama?   
             Mother Teresa? Marilyn Monroe?
    
             Beauty? The beast?
    
    
    
   Gloria
     
    
         

    Issue 36 of the "Master of Life" magazine has an article on "Sex
    and Spirituality ... excerpt follows:
    
    "A New Age view of sexuality suggests a spiritual or enlightened
    approach, something that transcends the "me Tarzan, you Jane" primate
    urges. For a spiritual context, conside the sage advice of Swami
    Beyondananda,
    
    Question: Swami, please enlighten me as to the practice of sex while
    on the spiritual path - is it proper?
    
    Answer: Absolutely not. Having sex while on the path is very improper
    indeed.  If you must have sex, go into the bushes or behind a sign,
    okay?  It's very distracting for the other seekers." ....
    
    
    
    

    re:  .18
    
    Very Good!  You have brightened this otherwise lack-luster Monday morning.
                
    Marion

    re .18
    
    Reminds me of a similar story about a new Catholic bride.
    
    Knowing that food before mass was a no-no, she asked her priest
    if sex before mass was alright.
    
    He thought a minute, and said "Well, I guess so, as long as you're
    married and don't block the isle."
    
    Elizabeth
    

    
    I was wondering on some thoughts and came to some ideas....
    
    	so I figured I would drop them off here to see what folks had
    to comment on them. You can take this on many levels and so far...for
    me they all seem to work but I have been known to miss things every
    now and then.
    
    	Female/feminine emotions/energies: are those forces that cause
    		the destruction of a set system. Or creation of a new
    		system or sub-system. Death and the seed for life to
    		take place.
    
    	Male/Masculine emotions/energies: are those forces that keep
    		the balance of a set system. Inertia. Life, the space
    		between seed and death.
    
    Sex, being the combination of these two, uses alot of effort...
    (if it's done right...) and brings alot of different ideas with
    Archtypes... Sex Magick... ;-)... Religion... everyday sex...
    Society... Sex... Emotions... and of course... sex. I can drag
    it out more but want to see if someone can pick it up from here.
    

    re: .21 (Craig)
    
          In my opinion, what you have done is to basically reverse
    established definitions of feminine/masculine energy.  I do not
    agree with the definitions you stated.
      
          As for sex, I understand it to be an attempt to know someone...
    to merge, to become one with, to understand what they are--to
    understand what I am.  It is a sharing and a coupling, perhaps
    as a way to integrate masculine/feminine energies, but I'm not
    sure I believe that.  Mostly why I don't is because when I am
    in balance and in harmony and feeling my masculine/feminine
    energies that way (which is not often enough :-) )  and when
    I have a partner who is in a similar state (and it is difficult
    to know if these states are present) then the union of the
    sex between us is not to complete ourselves but rather to ADD
    to ourselves.  By experiencing MORE of what we are.  Make sense?
    
    Frederick
    

    
    Re: .22
    
    Maybe what's wrong with all this is that it is a paradox.  At least the
    part about either becoming whole or adding more to yourself.  I was
    reading _Man_and_His_Symbols_ the other day (what else is new :-) ) by
    C.G.Jung and I came across a statement the one of the sub-authors,
    M.-L. von Franz, made.  He said that the uncontrollable passion between
    people was often really an urge to become one with the inner Self of
    the other person - to unite with the God manifest in that person.
    If you will agree that God is paradoxical, then the person feeling the
    passion may become both whole AND more than he/she is.  Of course,
    whether or not this can actually occur (the unity with God) is debate-
    able, and even assuming that it does occur, there is still the question
    of whether it did any lasting service to either party involved.  The
    short term benefits are obvious. :-)
    
    
    Guy
    

            
    re: .22 (Frederick)
    
>          In my opinion, what you have done is to basically reverse
>    established definitions of feminine/masculine energy.  I do not
>    agree with the definitions you stated.
 
	I tend not to agree with things that are established after
	I look at them for a bit. ;-) 

>	 Make sense?

	Yes it makes sense! You can look as woman as creator if you
	dont look at what she gets her energy from or what she is
	destroying to make room for the creation.... (you might say
	it was created in a void... but that void might have been what
	I consider to be my front yard.) ;-)

	Man...can appear to be a destroyer when in fact he is only
	continuing a cycle. (outdated cycles can appear to be destructive
	when in fact it is feminine energy disrupting them in the
	creation of a new cycle.) Creation/Destruction is in the eye of
	the beholder.
	
	Sex.. by my understanding.. is an experiance in honesty with
	self. To experiance what one truly is. (My goodness! I think we
	agree!) I dont however see it as an ADDING TO but as a stripping
	away of all the falseness that isn't. (again... point of view
	difference of same experiance.) Allowing for ones true self to
	expand in the vaccuume that is created. (which can feel
	like one is adding to himself.) 

	Different sides of the same coins/coin.
    
	Craig ;-)  

    
    RE:Guy

	Interesting.... I think religion (when used in a healthy way) can
	be an outstanding aphrodisiac. Prayer/meditation and various rituals
	can turn out to be stimulating in many ways and lead to all sorts of
	fun stuff. I think this is a problem many "religious" groups are
	facing or fleeing and my interpretation of the Madonna song and 
    	video "like a prayer" brings this out of the closet... so to
    	speak... but I am getting away from the paranormal and onto 
    	religion...so I will shut up.

	Perhaps Sex... brings folks down to a common level/plane that
	they can both enjoy. A common level that all humans share...
	male and female.. I guess some could call it God... but I
	wouldn't.    

	Lasting service? Yes there is one. The honesty that we come to see
	ourselves as we are... and to share that with another. (and
    	let us not forget the locker room stories we can tell later
    	on after the bimbo breaks up with us. ;-)  )

	Craig ;-)
                                                    

    
    Gosh Craig,
    
    That's not the way the story is told in the locker rooms I frequent.
         
    (;^)
    
    Cindy

    re: .26 (cindy-roo)
    
         Well, I for one would like to hear these stories of yours,
    Cindy (give us a hint...what sex are most of the inhabitants of
    the locker rooms you frequent?)
    
    Frederick
    ;-)
    
    

    
    RE:.26 (Cindy)
    
       I thought I told you to stay out of the men's locker room!
    
       
    
       (of course, something could be arranged)  
    
    
       :-)
    
    
    
    
    Guy
    

    
    Well, actually it was changing in the woman's locker room after yoga 
    class.
    
    The conversations were generally on dimensions and performance.  I 
    think they were talking about cars.  Some fared better than others.
    No Bimbos in the lot though.  Wards and Bests, but no Bimbos.
    
    (;^)  
    
    Cindy

    
    No good cindy... They have cars and locker rooms  in Australia
    too, and I would imagin that dimensions and performance are talked
    about their also.... 
    
    	But I will send off a letter to CAR and DRIVER asking them 
    the question just in case.
    
    	Dear sirs,
    	A friend of mine said she was going to Australia following
    	a description of a locker room chat she had with some folks
    	about "dimensions and performance" of the cars called "Wards"
    	and "Bests". I have not heard of these cars... are they 
    	Australian? And would it be possible in your next issue to
    	publish the stats on these models for all your readers to
    	view? A few pictures of the stripped down version and a list
    	of options and attachments would also be of intrest.
                                                            
    			Thanks.
                               
    ;-)

    
    When can I have my stats taken? 
    
    
    :-)
    
    
    Guy
    

       Very good, Craig!
    
    
       Is there anything about pouches in any of this, Cindy?
    In any case, a WARD is meant to be "experienced", not read
    about.  Dimensions, accessories, or amount of chrome doesn't
    really cover the quality of workmanship.
    
    Frederick
    ;-)

                         
    So Frederick,
    
    Are you suggesting that I should connect through San Fran on the
    way to OZ to do a test drive and find out for myself?  (;^) 
    
    As for pouches...totally unrelated however the the 7 year-old daughter
    of a friend of mine asked him if boy kangaroos had pouches too.
    I put that question in the OZ conference and got some good responses.
    (;^) As it turns out, only female kangaroos have pouches.
    
    This topic is going downhill fast.
    
    Cindy             
    
    PS. Frederick - whatever are you doing on a node named MISERY???
        Did you create that reality?

    re: .33 (cindy-"pouch"-roo)
    
          [Enter a martyr's "Sigh!" here]  :-}
    
          Yes, obviously I created that reality.  It genuinely reflects 
    the situation that has been developing here, however.  Today a part
    of the tension has been alleviated with the sudden quitting by an
    individual I was unhappily working with.  So I am happier now
    (as I put it, I have solved "A" problem, not necessarily "THE"
    problem.)
          Actually, after I found out about this node name change, I
    complained to my boss (who shrugged his shoulders) and to the
    person who named it (who said it reflects the attitudes around
    here.)  I indicated to them that no one wants to be constantly
    reminded of this and that others will undoubtably reflect it
    as they send mail to MISERY::, e.g.  Oh, well, maybe I should use
    another account I have on WR1FOR.  This one is easier for
    several reasons, though.
    
          Well, Cindy, I offered you a "deal" if you came this way,
    but you decided L.A. would be more your kind of town.  As for 
    a test drive, I think you'd find the upholstery quite tactile.
    
    Frederick
    ;-) ;-) 8-)

re: .25

>	Perhaps Sex... brings folks down to a common level/plane that
>	they can both enjoy. A common level that all humans share...

Yes, didn't someone (G. B. Shaw?) once say, "Sex is the great equalizer,
taste the great divider"...?  (i assume he was referring to "taste" as
in "sophistication" or "learned preferences", not as in "Tastes Great! -
Less Filling!" ;-))
							paul

    
    RE: .35
    
    	Wasn't it "Death is the great equalizer... ect..." ? Of course
    sex and death.... did someone say scorpio?.... are somewhat related.
    
    Craig ;-)
    

re: .36
>    sex and death.... did someone say scorpio?.... are somewhat related.
    
i didn't quite hear you, craig, was that "scorpio" or "woodyallen"?
;-)							paul ;-)

    
    re: -1
    	yes.   ;-)
    
    anywho...
    I was wondering what possible meanings can be derived from dreaming
    of sex. Not that I would ever admit to such a thing..... but IF
    I was a sick pervert and did dream of such a thing what could it
    relate to. ;-)
    
    Craig              
    

    
    I was just reading about this last night.  Depending on the nature of
    the dream (generally positive or generally negative) you could be
    repressing your sexuality or not.  Dreams of this sort are usually a
    compensation for reality, for the out-of-balance workings of your
    ego.  So stop it!  :-)
    
    I read this in "Symbols of Transformation" by C.G.Jung.  He said that
    unless the symbols of the dream suggest a deaper meaning to you and
    if the dream contains sexual references, you can just leave it at the
    sexual level of interpretation I mentioned above.
    
    That's funny - I just realized that I dreamt of sex all last night
    (and believe me, I'm not repressin' nothin').  :-)
    
    
    
    Guy

    re: -.1
    
         Craigly, if you were a sick pervert and dreamed of sex, it
    would probably mean the end is near (whose end?  what does this
    end look like?)  In any case, this is probably true since it would
    signify a return to normalcy (described best as a condition which
    affects most humans and maybe even non-humans.) If you start having
    dreams like this, and you aren't having marital discord, I'd 
    suggest running out and buying a good novel, like the Bible for 
    instance, then start saying hosannas or something.  Oh, and by
    the way, you may also want to strap your hands down to the sides
    of the bed before you lay down to sleep at night.
    
    Frederick
    ;-)