First Person

Men in Black

“Hubby’s home,” I type swiftly, my fingers dancing across the soft keys. I turn off the phone and let it fall to the side of my pillow just as he walks in. He suspects nothing.

October 15, 2012

By Sury Neuvelt

I glance at the bedside clock as I hear the front door open and then close. It is past midnight.

“Hubby’s home,” I type swiftly, my fingers flying over the soft keys of my Blackberry. I turn off my phone and let it fall to the side of my pillow just as he walks in. He suspects nothing.

We make small talk: he just came from a vach nacht and tells me who was there; I complain that the dentist wouldn’t give me an appointment for Chany until next week; I remind him of the dry cleaning to pick up the next day.

Soon he too is in bed, and I take my phone again. I don’t open my chat app, though. I can’t risk it. Instead, I sort through my emails, organize my apps or browse the web. But soon I can no longer resist. Just a quick check to see if there’s a new message, I think to myself. In his bed across the room, his own phone in hand, my husband watches a Lipa Schmeltzer clip, then Yoely Lebowitz and some other singer/comedian I don’t know. My husband chuckles a couple times, lets out a sigh of admiration for one performer or another, and finally reaches for his earphones. Soon I hear the grating guttural sounds of a Yiddish lecture. A short while later I notice one of the buds falls from his ear. His eyes are closed, his breathing has slowed, and I know he is asleep.

“You there?” I type.

He’s there. He’s been waiting, and we ease back into our conversation. We talk of spouses and relationships, the inadequate education systems for our children, the crazy rules that govern our lifestyle and how we flout them. (Me: stopped wearing seams. Him: gets coffee at Starbucks.) Hours pass and I barely notice them. Soon I can hear birds chirping. It is still dark out but daytime is approaching. I glance at my husband, fast asleep in his own bed for hours now. Some nights I notice his eyes flutter open occasionally, momentarily roused by the harsh backlight of my phone, but I am relieved that tonight he has slept through it all.

My mind drifts back to a time over a decade ago. It is a dreary evening; school is over, forever, and now decisions need to be made. There is a tentative job looming, but I can’t decide whether I want a job now at all. Perhaps I should return to seminary and escape life’s responsibilities for just one more year. Just then I hear a sound from outside my door, heavy footfalls, burdened, weary. My mood plunges another notch. I know what this means: we’re going to have that conversation again.

My father rarely comes to my room, and I brace myself now for what is sure to follow. I know that I am not ready. I am not even eighteen yet and I don’t feel capable of making life-altering decisions. I dread locking myself into a future with someone I’ll meet only once or twice. I dread a life of giving birth annually. In my mind, I see a houseful of little mouths to feed and diapers to change and laundry to clean and I cannot bear the thought. In recent years I’ve begun to learn about the world, through cautious and tentative visits to the library or the bookstore. I now have dreams, forbidden ones that can only cause problems, but I cannot banish them. I imagine myself in foreign countries, places I know nothing of but wish to learn about. I want to be awed by the world’s wonders, be inspired by strangers, to hear stories about worlds apart from my own but no less human. I don’t know where these dreams were born, but I have them. I also know they are unlikely to come true: Marriage, pregnancy, giving birth to one child after another, the myriad duties of housekeeping and family-building will surely shatter them.

I pull myself together as I hear my father approaching, calling for me: “Sury?”

I open the door and respond hesitantly: “Yes?” I’ve always been anxious around him, but especially now, when we are to talk about my future, a future for which we do not share the same dreams, barely even the same language.

My father stands in the doorway and gets straight to the point. There have been several more proposals, he says, and he wants to update me. A learning boy would have been ideal—at least in theory—but none of those proposed are learning boys. This says something about my status, my “name,” and, in spite of myself, I feel slightly disturbed. But I quickly tell myself that I don’t really care. What does it matter when I don’t feel ready for any boy at all?

As far as I am concerned, all boys are the same: White shirts, black pants, black shoes, black coats, the same sidecurls framing their faces. The only differences I notice are in the facial hair: some have clean and boyish chins—the way I think I like it—while others show uneven patches sprouting haphazardly along chiseled or fleshy jawbones. But these differences only exist when I observe closely, which is rarely, and they hardly matter. There’s little about boys and men that I can relate to; nothing about them fits into how I see my own life unfolding. In fact, there’s something entirely foreign about the opposite sex. It is, I am convinced, an entirely different world they inhabit, and I do not see our worlds meeting at any point. I know only their ridicule, their disparaging and dismissive remarks when, on a rare occasion, I might offer an opinion, tell a tale, share a desire. Surely, then, they do not experience the world as I do. Do they even have feelings at all, these boys, these men? Do they experience fear? Joy? Sorrow and shame? Even if they do, I tell myself, it must be of a different sort. And so I wonder, could I ever like a man, find his company pleasant, converse with him in the easy way with which I banter with friends? It doesn’t seem possible at all and I cannot even imagine wanting it. Very likely—ever.

But I can’t articulate these thoughts to my father. I know he won’t understand. All I can muster is the courage to ask for one thing:

“I want more than one meeting,” I tell him. He looks at me as if startled by my assertion. I know he thinks it unnecessary, but still I insist. I will not marry a boy whom I’ve met only once. “Two meetings minimum,” I say.

Does my father agree? I no longer recall, only that events proceed with my mind foggy and disoriented. A few day later, I am summoned home early from my temp job as a salesgirl in a clothing boutique. I am told that the other side is ready to meet—today. Right now, in fact. There’s no time to protest, nor do I suspect it would be of any use. I call a cab and head home, pick out an outfit, and set out with my parents for the selected meeting place—the dining room of an elderly aunt.

In the small room, the boy and I talk for about an hour. He is four years older than me, I was told, but his beard conceals so much of his face that he looks far older. Our conversation feels scripted, questions and answers all prepared beforehand, most of them about matters already known to us or of little consequence. I feel uncomfortable looking directly into his icy blue-gray eyes; when I do, I am unable to focus on what he is saying. My ears perk up, though, when he praises his mother: she is geshikt, he says, as capable with planning a tea party as with baking a kugel; as eager to keep the books of her husband’s business as she is with staying up all night with an ill child. This gives me hope. If he speaks appreciatively of his mother, perhaps he will do so of me one day.

We are only meant to meet for an hour, but it feels far longer. I sense his legs shaking restlessly beneath the table, and I pinch my palms anxiously. At last the hour is up and within seconds I am surrounded by an army of girls and boys, men and women of all sizes and ages—my prospective groom’s many siblings. Where did they all come from so suddenly? My father is in the adjacent room, waiting for my consent. Am I supposed to decide right now, with all of them hovering over me, only moments after concluding what has surely been the strangest encounter of my life?

I feel bewildered, mildly lightheaded, a touch angry even, which I quickly suppress by imposing upon myself a kind of numbness. What would be the point of insisting on another meeting? I don’t think I would know the difference if I met more boys. This match will proceed regardless, it is clear. Why suffer another awkward hour on another odd day, only to delay the inevitable? I see scores of eyes gazing at me expectantly. The plate is ready to be broken, the cries of mazel tov already perched, waiting, on two dozen lips. I nod to my father, and a diamond-studded watch appears and is wrapped around my wrist.

It appears that I am engaged.

I look back at the device in my hand. I struggle to remain focused, to keep my eyes open. It is not the first time we’ve chatted for hours, and our conversations have begun to touch on more personal matters, thoughts and feelings reserved for those we trust deeply. I find myself emboldened to ask a question that has been burning in me for some time:

“Have you ever cheated?”

“I’ve shaken hands,” he says. “I’ve hugged occasionally. But nothing more, not really.” Then, with what I take to be sheepish hesitation, he adds, “A couple strips clubs. That was long time ago, though.”

He asks the question in return.

“No,” I say, “never.” I consider whether to reveal my next thought, and then I do, raising the stakes. “But emotionally I’m being unfaithful right now.” Immediately I wonder if I should’ve said it, if I am not giving him the wrong ideas. “LOL,” I add. “If that’s what you’re asking.”

I catch a glimpse of my sleeping husband, his head accidentally bare, yarmulke stuck between pillow and headboard. A pit forms in my stomach.

I type: “And I’m feeling really guilty.”

There’s a pause in the steady stream of lines scrolling up on the screen as we both digest the import of all this. My eyelids shut intermittently, and in my sleep-deprived state I suddenly have a thought, a surprising desire. I long for this strange man’s arm around me, for his touch, for his body pressed closely against mine. “I wish you were here,” I type, barely awake.

An hour or two later I discover that I had fallen asleep, the phone still clenched tightly in my palm. The demands of an ordinary morning are quickly upon me. Between the toasted bread waiting to be buttered and knotted strands of hair waiting to be combed, my hands reach for my phone again.

Contrary to my anticipation, my daily routine does nothing to release the crushing grip that this device, this phone and all it has brought me, has over me. My children complain exasperatedly about my new addiction. “Again you’re typing on your phone,” my 8-year-old says the moment she walks in from school. I don’t understand it. I’ve never even met this man, and still I am smitten. It is a feeling that, even after a decade of marriage, I have never felt.

My husband is home early that evening, uncharacteristically. The children are asleep and the mood is relaxed. I feel frisky and unafraid to show it. My husband responds eagerly. But only with words, not touch. I have only yesterday begun to count seven days. My thoughts wander, and think of how nice it would be if our relationship was always this playful and relaxed. My husband leaves the room for a moment, and I steal a few seconds. My fingers dance across the tiny keys:

“Standing next to my H. We’re flirting, it’s kinda fun. Unusual, especially during niddah.”

“He doesn’t mind?” he asks.

“He doesn’t mind,” I write. “But it’s you my insides are filled with… I know it’s a fantasy. But still.”

Later, as I settle into bed for another night with my phone, I confess: “I don’t know what this is leading to.”

He offers an attempt to alleviate my concerns: “My appearance will cool things off. I guarantee it.”

What does he mean by that? I wonder. Could he really be so grotesque-looking?

“Maybe we shouldn’t meet???” he writes. He phrases it as a question, tempting me to reject him, making it my decision.

We move on to something else, but still I wonder about how he might look. Still I can’t shake that feeling throughout the next day… or the next… I go about my day almost as if in a trance, obsessed with the thought of this man I never met but whose thoughts and feelings appear to be so like mine, whose sentences we now finish even though we both exist for the other only inside the devices in our palms. The thought of him is a constant hum in the background of my mind; his faceless image follows me everywhere.

I think about what he’s said over and over again, about his appearance disappointing me, repulsing me; that any meeting between us will soothe the storm within. The rational part of me hopes for it to be true, hopes for averting tragedy—or a mess, at the very least. But the rest of me aches for this feeling to remain. I cannot let him—this—go. I go about my day in a stupor, yearning to feel his arms around me, his breath upon my skin.

On Shabbos morning, I stroll down the street, my four-year-old pushing her doll stroller beside me. I realize after a moment that I’ve been observing each black-clad figure that passes, tallis under the arm, strutting off to shul. These fashions never held any appeal for me, but now I notice them. Shtreimels with and without crowns. Shoes polished or scuffed. Subtle bekishe patterns, large geometric shapes and fine baroque ones—I wonder, do they reflect personalities?

A few doors down, I see a figure skipping hurriedly down a flight of concrete stairs. He is of a medium build, his dark payess perfectly curled, neatly framing his face and dissolving into his short black beard. I wonder: is this the image of the man that has been occupying my mind? I continue down the street and try not to get too distracted. My daughter needs me, and I should be present with her. But then I spot another figure turning the corner, a bit more disheveled than the previous one.

I notice signs of a paunch above his gartel, breaking the straight line of black. His light-colored side curls are not as perfectly formed. Perhaps this fits the description better. I imagine what it would be like to approach him. Would those feelings remain—that smothering, incessant, insatiable desire—or would the magic dissolve? I observe this man from a distance of several yards, this person who is not the person I chat with but now stands in for him, and the possibility opens as I think of it. He is not particularly handsome, this man, but something inside me is changing. I may begin to handle this look, which until now I’ve found foreign and mildly repellent. In fact, something inside me now stirs at the sight of it. I may begin to like it, suddenly intrigued by this facade of piety concealing the humanness beneath.

Now, as the days continue to drift by, my mind still in a daze, I notice them everywhere. Suddenly they appear vibrant, monochromes as colorful as a rainbow. I observe and I wonder; I want to know what else hides beneath those uniforms. What passions, fears and emotions do those side-curls and bushy beards conceal? What stories do they tell—those nearly indistinguishable slabs of black and white?

Printable Version

Share |

Tags: arranged marriages, beshow, cheating, featured, infidelity, Lipa Schmeltzer, relationships, sexuality, shidduchim, texting, women, Yoely Leobowitz

Top post ‘kooloytoyra’.

TheOtherOne on December 5, 2012 at 5:31 pm

Sury,

Very well written and very well articulated!

I wanted to take your article and go under the hood, look at it from beneath the surface, but I need some clarification. I would appreciate if you can clarify a few questions.

1) So based on what you wrote, it appears that the driving force behind your gravitation towards this man, was/is animalistic opposite gender gravitation. Are there any other factors (both rebeling isn’t a factor)?

2) Do you find your husband physically and/or intellectually attractive?

3) Do you and your husband have any common interest(s)?

4) How does your husband feel about religion in general and Chassidim specifically?

Tuli on December 13, 2012 at 6:14 pm

Wow wow wow
As a seasoned “player”, sury didn’t miss a beat! Every single nuance of the “game” so AMAZINGLY stroked. The “comparing game” conjured up in fantasy while analyzing every passer by…. BEYOND WORDS!

Suri on December 18, 2012 at 8:04 pm

The Other One:

I’ll say this much, my husband and I are on very different pages in many respects, however, investigating as to the details of my marraige per se misses the point. The writing addresses an issue which is quite central to the chasidic approach to and treatment of the genders, which, of course, includes the shidduch system. Now, I’m not saying there aren’t those who are happily married, but overwhelmingly, this approach fails to cater to a very essential human need – namely that of true, compatible intimate relationships and connections. .

TheOtherOne on December 19, 2012 at 12:34 am

First of all, just so you understand my position, I’m sort of (to a certain extend) playing devil’s advocate.

I don’t care about the specifics of your marriage, nor do I care to know the details of your husband (in relevance to this article). I completely understood the point(s) you were trying to convey. I just wanted to use those details to analytically formulate a philosophical view (as a whole), a view you may not see.

Let’s take a step back for a second and -in a nutshell- look at some known basics. We’ll start from the ground up.

All living beings are set to expire. Its only survival is reproduction. Without reproduction, all living being would cease to exists within a 100 or so years. The complete set of needed chromosomes stored in the reproductive cells (sex cells) are split up in two different genders, each gender carrying half the number of chromosomes. The process of combining those chromosomes in order to successfully form a new cell (upon which a new being is created), is known as sex. Sexual reproduction is absolutely CRUCIALLY vital for the survival of the universe (at least the part that hosts life) and the survival of the entire ecosystem, else, all would come to a screeching halt. This is true for all living beings, from fish to birds, reptiles to mammals. Fast forwarding -and let’s for now omit elaborating on whether those genders do or don’t want to engage in the process (they don’t). So because of the implementation of expiration (aka death) and because living being are so vital for the creation (Gd or evolution, whatever you choose to believe), we the living have been designed to gravitate towards those who carry the second half of the needed cell, and gravitate how? Yup, you guessed, towards the very process that generate new offspring’s, surprise surprise. Again, fast forwarding and omitting many details. For a number of reasons, that gravitation in its-self isn’t enough, it creates a range of issues and ramifications. So along with gravitation, there’s another design (known to us and) described as a wonderfully amazing warm bubbly feeling, aka love. This feeling is fully automated and achieved by a decreased serotonin level, aka, mentally ill (shown through a number of large psychological studies). This mental illness would last long enough for (what we call) marriage to take place.

With that in mind. In your article you describe an intense, overpowering and (almost) obsessive “being in love” feeling you have towards a complete stranger who you never met, yet you fail to mention what the driving force is. Ironically, its the same article in which you describe a flawed system that calls for being in love with one who you did meet and get to live with for a decade or so. Do you see something missing and/or not adding up?

Sury on December 26, 2012 at 2:23 am

I can understand the intensity that the sexual drive consists of and the reason for that as well – namely, the perpetuation of life. However, I do think that, what you describe as “animalistic”, would rather apply to physical attraction as opposed to intellectual or emotional attraction. Certainly, and obviously, not a factor here. Which leads leads to the answer of your final question:
You can live with a person for a decade or more with incompatible personalities and interests. Perhaps, having children and shared experiences together will provide something to bond over. However, that doesn’t change the fact – or rectify the pain and resulting conflicts of two people who are of very different dispositions, who do not share many interests or a common communication style may experience due to not having had the opportunity to explore that prior to marriage. I don’t find the development of a deeper connection with someone whom you may share more commonalities and interests with than someone you have shared your life with for a decade or so ironic at all.
Now, the ability to connect on a level that is more than just sexual and animalistic is what I believe to be so beautiful about the human species. And this strong desire, or need, for a more complex and deeper intimacy is probably true of every human being, though, possibly, some may be more attuned to and aware of it than others.

TheOtherOne on December 28, 2012 at 1:44 pm

Sleepless in Brooklyn Sury. Was it him again keeping you up 2:30 in the morning ?

Thanks for your response. I’m gonna need to find some time to formulate a proper explanation, and try to get all my points across. it might be a long one.

TheOtherOne on January 1, 2013 at 8:39 pm

Happy new year Sury!

I agree with the basic premise of what you wrote, but its a bit more than meet the eye, and like i said, i dont think you see or understand what it is that’s truly happening here.

First of all, you said “I do think that, what you describe as “animalistic”, would rather apply to physical attraction as opposed to intellectual or emotional attraction”. Actually, intellectual attraction that’s based on emotions with the opposite gender in the equation, especially in your situation, IS an animalistic by-product, if not the core product. Secondly, almost everything you feel about the person that’s on the other side of your blackberry, and lets call him Mr A, is a complete myth. Now before you go off on me “HOW DARE YOU CALL MY FEELINGS A MYTH”, allow me to explain both points.

I need to reiterate that I totally understood everything you’ve said so far, and not only in a matter of words, but in practice. Trust me, I’m not some alien from a foreign planet spewing non-sense and unable to relate . I pretty much live your life. Both you and I were born, raised, and continue to live in the same camp. We are both in a setup marriage (roughly the same amount of years) that consist of no common grounds, held together by the offspring’s. I too am part of those human mammals with all those desires, and i too perceive the existence of the opposite gender in the same way you do (though in the male aisle), I know exactly how you feel. But, it annoys me to hell watching those Obama-Yes-We-Can types blind zombies cheering Yeah to anything gravitational related w/o giving it much thought, as some of the comments here illustrates. I bet you that the person that just turned around in slow motion to follow the passing girl, made no conscious decision to do so, but rather driven as a robotic zombie. Having said that, lets dive back into some philosophical analysis.

So as I explained in my previous post, procreation is absolutely crucial for the survival of living beings, we HAVE to replace our eventually lifeless corpse. Its so crucial that the system in place had to be one billion percent fool-proof, and fool-proof it is, so fool-proof, that no living existence can outsmart the system. The system is sex.

For reasons unknown (at least to me), the intellect-minded humans species (who belong to the mammal family) find the act to be beyond disgusting, sick-to-the-stomach disgusting (I will soon explain how we know this). In fact, they find it so disgusting, that no breathing human would ever engage in such acts, which is a huge problem in the area of human survival. To address this problem, a design known as opposite gender gravitation (or OGG) was implemented. The OGG design has only one primary function, force the two pieces of the puzzle to come together into procreation before they themselves expire. However, this created another problem. The force of OGG had to be equally as strong, or stronger, than the opposing mindset. It had to overcome the humans nauseating, sick-to-my-stomach, repulsive, abominable, detestable feel about sex. We needed to WANT what we DON’T want, and as such, the dose of OGG in humans is so indescribable strong, that we now want it equally as much as we don’t want it if we were off OGG, which in turn created a total disaster. These poor humans were so OD’ed on OGG that they now can’t go outside of it, which completely destroyed (and continues to destroy) the human species. But even worse, it didn’t even address the problem of procreation, cuz humans were so OD’ed on OGG that the last thing they wanted to do was to use it for procreation, they just wanted the raw sex. To address these two major issues, there was a need to implement 1) Massive precautionary measures to prevent/eliminate/minimize the disaster OGG created 2) Design an enormous desire to want to produce an offspring (have a baby). Im only going to address number one, number two is outside the scope of this topic.

So for the precautionaries, we have the following:

Religion:
Among the many forms of different religions, and within the framework of reward/punishment that religion carries, OGG was placed on top of everything. Within religions, enormous emphasis was put on limiting and restricting the effect of OGG, and its working really well. However, its obviously working only for the religious, its still doesnt address the non-religion people. And even for the religious, its not good enough because religion is (to the average person) no match when it comes to wrestling OGG. So along/outside with/of religion, a very powerful and highly effective counter-force was designed; this force is known as Guilt.

Guilt:
Guilt is unequivocally one heck of a powerful force, so powerful that it can almost go head-on with OGG. Guilt -if we don’t listen to what it wants- has a very unique way of torturing us to the core. Guilt rips you apart, eats you alive, burns you deep down, makes you suffer like hell, and stretches every nerve and organ of your existence to no end. With the deployment of the Guilt system, we have a force that goes onto directly attacking OGG. In reality, the whole guilt design has no logical explanation, well it does, if the wrongful act is logically wrongful, but else, and particularly in relevance to many areas of OGG, one might do such and such and suddenly guilt activate itself and start its daily torture sessions. This (guilt) works pretty well, but, it order to fully maximize its effectiveness and make it even more torture, one needs guilt with logical reasoning. In other words, have something to be guilty about, give guilt more tools with what to work with. The solution: tight integration between guilt and almost all precautionaries, which in our case means guilty about religion, guilty about morality, guilty about marriage and so on. In short, guilt is the basic yet powerful framework upon which the precautionary model is build, a tool with which to execute the precationaries. So guilt is equally addressing religious and non-religious people alike, only one problem, the non-religious have no logical reasoning (we so far only discussed religion). To address this, the Morality design was created.

Morality:
Morality in itsself -in relevance to OGG- has no logical explanation either, but its just there built-in. It sorta gives you this awful dirty creepy feeling (not to confuse with guilt). The primary objective of the illogical part of the Morality design is to address the issues (in correlation with the other precautionaries) OGG creates. Have you ever seen the Seinfeld episode in which George is caught having sex with the cleaning lady? So his boss confronts him and asks: “It’s come to my attention that you and the cleaning woman have engaged in sexual intercourse on the desk in your office. Is that correct?” George’s response really illustrates the morality design. He says: “Was that wrong? Should I not have done that? I tell you, I gotta plead ignorance on this thing, because if anyone had said anything to me at all when I first started here that that sort of thing is frowned upon… you know, cause I’ve worked in a lot of offices, and I tell you, people do that all the time”. Now of course the George character has no value or integrity, he certainly has no moral values, he cannot for the life of him see why its frowned upon. The truth is, without the morality design in place, there really is no logical reason. He had sex with the cleaning lady, so? Two humans voluntarily engaging in an act they both wanted, why should anyone care? If they had decided to sing together, would the boss be bothered? What if they decided to bake cookies using the toaster in the company kitchen? I mean seriously, who cares? But that’s the morality system at work. If a guy would compliment a women’s smile “i think you have a really nice/charming smile”, the women would really appreciate the quick validating-feel-good fix, but move just a few inches and compliment the women’s breast and she’ll probably file a sexual harassment case against you. The women’s illogical response is pretty much the morality design, and it really is illogical. It’s the same person being compliment, both were a body part inches from each other, one compliment is welcome, the other is frowned upon. Now of course to this women her response makes perfect sense “what do you mean? its inappropriate!”, she is completely unaware that her thinking is her built-in illogical morality design to keep OGG in place. Same is true with the modesty mindset, same is true with thousands of other illogical mindsets and rules which are all directly tied to the morality system attacking OGG and then tying it back into guilt. So while the morality design works for the religious and non-religious, it’s certainly not enough juice for the logical part of guilt. So how can we produce more juice to feed guilt? Well, say hello to the marriage design.

The Compete design and its use in Marriage:
The design of marriage encompasses a number of functions, one of which is precautionary, and no I don’t mean pecautionary as in it allows one to unload sexually, if you will, im talking about something entirely different. Have you ever thought about the concept of sports? Why is some dude Eli Manning a millionaire? If I could summarize sports into one sentence, it would be something like this: There is some sort of circular or oval object that goes from point A to point B and you suddenly have millions of people screaming bloody murder, thats it!. Honestly, that’s pretty darn stupid if you ask me, and you’re damn right, it is stupid, but its also where you see the “compete” design on full display. The concept of “competing” is –much like everything else i’ve mentioned– a built-in functionality among all humans, except that the “compete” design exists across all living beings. The entire universe is structured on competing forces. So in a marriage, if you play close attention, you’ll notice something quite unusual. The ONLY absolute guarantee one has to end a marriage is placing a condom in their pocket/hand bag. Otherwise, a marriage can survive even with the worst form of emotional/psychological/physical abuse (obviously not a rule of thumb). Why?! It really makes no sense! A spouse can put up with the worst form of abusive hell for years, suddenly one little plastic and bamm! The only logical explanation for this illogical extraordinary phenomenon, is watching a hard core giant fan during a super-ball game. Our entire survival is largely based on competing forces, large fish feeding off small fish, large animals feeding off small animals, good bacterial organisms fighting with bad bacterial organisms, one group of species fighting with other groups species, Red Sox competing with the Diamondbacks, person A competing and wanting to be better than person B, and on and on and on. Our entire life, our entire immune system, revolves around completing force. This Giants fan is completely and totally clueless, go tell him that the reason he is screaming like a complete idiot is cuz his immune system needs to compete and fend off his next cold virus, and he’ll probably strangle you. All he knows is that he’s coming home hoarse, GO Giants! Obviously, the reason he believes he is enjoying this otherwise dumb event, is completely false and a complete myth. What he feels about the Giants is directly linked to the fact that we, and all living beings, are designed from ground up to survive on competing forces and competition. That’s why these various competing event are SO important to us, its an instinct, our whole existence is made up of competing forces. So in the marriage, the compete design brilliantly bundled into the marriage, is yet another powerful anti OGG force. When the piece of plastic (condom) reveals itself, the “compete” instinct kicks in full force (competing against the spouse) and all hell breaks loose. But wait, this isn’t making any sense, this frantic spouse had (in some cases) put up with MUCH worse! In fact, in the condom scenario its usually a spur of the moment type of thing, absolutely nothing personal, where the emotional/psychological/physical abuse is (in most cases) well calculated and very personal, yet look at the spouses illogical response when it comes to this little piece of plastic. Move the muscles of your mouth in the formation that’s representing a smile, across from that formation is a living being with organs that’s representing a gender opposite than you, and your spouse will freak. This dumb, stupid, illogical response is the compete design to address the issues OGG creates.
A sub category of Compete (utilized in a marriage) is the “possessiveness” design and the built-in human desire to claim complete ownership, whether it’s a piece of property or a spouse. Dare someone step onto someone else’s private property and face the immediate raging “get off my property” reaction. This component is playing a vital role in fighting OGG, and it ties back to guilt. Should a spouse face a shred of a doubt over the complete ownership of their spouse (or anything else in their life for that matter), the immediate “get off my property” type response is activated with rage. There is a (not very well appreciated) saying: “marriage is a prison sentence”, the saying is actually accurately describing the possessiveness design. So all the “Where have you been for the last 2 hours? Who are you talking to? What are you doing on your phone? What did you do in your office so late? Where are you now? Why did your drive home take 45 minutes longer than the usual? What business do you have talking to this person? Why are you so friendly to this OG person (usually a raging thought to ourselves)?” and much more, is pretty much the possessiveness design. Obviously, this ownership behavior or -perhaps a better word- this form of enslavement mindset, is making perfect sense to us (both spouses) as we see it using our possessiveness mindset. One would be literally vilified for even thinking of thinking about questioning it, and as such, it brilliantly ties back into logical guilt. A spouse who thinks about breaking the ownership mark –in even the slightest of the slightest form, applies their own possessiveness mindset in the other direction (in plain English, how would I feel if my spouse did the same), and logical guilt activates its highly effective torture program. The whole concept of faithful/unfaithful utilized in a marriage is the possessiveness design. So when we hear that Yankel cheated (messed around or wtvr) on Ruchel, the term “unfaithful” is so clear to us, it makes such sense, we understand it so well, our possessiveness mindset can only formulate the word “of course, divorce”. Is it all logical? Nah. But it works pretty damn well when combined with marriage and guilt to keep OGG in place.

Marriage of course has many other functions, one which is to make sure that this baby (we’ve been designed to crave) has a healthy functional home, so that this baby can grow healthy and continue the reproduction process. But like i said, this is outside the scope of this topic. The compete-possessiveness-bundled-with-marriage design, works for both the religious and non-religious, it works well across all walks of life. There is only one problem, why would anyone get married? Unlike the other designs which are built-in, marriage is a decision one must decide to do, and with all the challenges marriage creates (such as what I’ve just described and many more); no human in their right state of mind would ever get married. Maybe the religious would marry, but whats with the rest of society? There was a need to design yet a new solid system that would guarantee humans end up married. A similar concept to OGG, make the human WANT what they DONT want. The solution: Love.

Love:
Love is a very broad and diversified term, a very complex component utilized in various different scenarios. Love ranges from i love my child to i love double fudge ice cream, really galaxies apart. The love that was created to guarantee the occurrence of marriage, is -much like OGG- a total delusional false myth, but yet so powerful that absolutely no one can outsmart it, no matter who. So the love design -throughout ones life, continues to sense and monitor for potential prospects. It starts with the racing heart, sweaty palms, difficulty breathing, potential prospect detected! So when found, it manipulates our brain chemicals to activate love mode. From men’s health “As with obsessive-compulsive disorder, love decreases brain levels of serotonin, the neurotransmitter responsible for mood and flexibility. Low serotonin means you can get stuck on ideas—you become obsessed. Which is just fine, unless she suddenly dumps you. That’s when the short supply of serotonin makes you vulnerable to depression. In extreme cases, the serotonin shortage can trigger obsessive behaviors, such as exhibiting extreme jealousy or even stalking”. Another, “Researchers are using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to watch people’s brains when they look at a photograph of their object of affection. According to Helen Fisher, a well-known love researcher and an anthropologist at Rutgers University, what they see in those scans during that “crazed, can’t-think-of-anything-but stage of romance” — the attraction stage — is the biological drive to focus on one person. Another possible explanation for the intense focus and idealizing view that occurs in the attraction stage comes from researchers at University College London. They discovered that people in love have lower levels of serotonin and also that neural circuits associated with the way we assess others are suppressed. These lower serotonin levels are the same as those found in people with obsessive-compulsive disorders, possibly explaining why those in love “obsess” about their partner”. In other words, a person “in love” is pretty much an OCD patient, otherwise known as mentally sick. It is practically impossible for those OCD/in-love patients to escape this can’t-think-of-anything-but stage and thus want NOTHING but marry. Absolutely brilliant! . Once married, they remain OCD patients for about a year or two (enough time for a single offsrping), at which point the mental illness begins to wear off. So one day the couple wakes up to a new sunny day and they have this strange feeling, something has changed, they cant quite put their finger on it, but its just not the same, the magic, the awesome cloud feeling, its gone! From that point forward, frictions are becoming a rather frequent occurrence. Various different things about their spouse, things they never even noticed, is suddenly annoying them immensely. These poor people cant for the life of them figure it out… they’ve been mentally healed and awoken to reality! They try to hold on with all their might, but more often than not, its downhill from there. Nevertheless, they are stuck cuz they already have the baby! With the baby in the equation, everything changes and the couple’s primary objective now becomes the baby. Tricked into something you’d never wanna do? yeah, you might say that. In any case, even with the baby, it continues to spiral downhill, but, it doesn’t really matter cuz from there to divorce is another 2 or so babies (which is really what the entire system is all about, procreation!). The downhill spiral continues until the final divorce. The United States divorce rate is roughly around 50%, and this doesn’t include the remaining huge percent living as roommates. From Wikipedia “More recently, having spoken with academics and National Survey of Family Growth representatives, PolitiFact.com estimated in 2012 that the lifelong probability of a marriage ending in divorce is 40%–50%”. But hold on, didn’t all these millions of US couples test for compatibility prior to marriage? Well at least they thought they did, yet they end up in a divorce. Why? Allow me to break it down. First of all, what exactly happens immediately after OCD wears off? What does keep them somewhat together? So this is broken down into 4 categories 1)OGG 2)Friendship 3)Baby 4)Love transition.
1) If they are lucky and there is physical attraction, they would utilize sex as a tool to hold the (otherwise meaningless) marriage together. Is it possible for them not to have physical attraction? Yes, absolutely. Then why did they marry? Cuz that’s what OCD patients do. Not always is it OGG leading to OCD love, online dating is a good example. Once the OCD love kicks in, the lack of OGG is overshadowed by this delusional love. Other probabilities are going out of shape during the course of the marriage (i.e. losing hair, putting up weight etc) and so with OCD worn off, everything falls apart.
2) Here is an undeniable fact: Spouses cant be friend because there is a conflict of interest. The 2 spouses have a business partnership; they are running the Neuvelt Inc business. There is nothing they each care more about than Neuvelt Inc (the kids, finance etc). A true friendship is based on two people and on two people only; the friendship is only about them with no other external factor. Add external factors and the friendship is shot. Marriage includes enormously a lot of external factors, those factors are huge. But, as mentioned before, they tested and married for reasons of compatibilities, don’t they have the compatibilities to form a friendship of that and keep em afloat? Yes and no.
-No because OCD patients have no abilities to test for compatibility. You see, marriage is decided during the can’t-think-of-anything-but stage. In that stage, the prospect spouse is everything we want them to be and isn’t anything we don’t want them to be. When OCD wears off and the blindfold comes off, we see an entirely different image/person, all those compatibilities we thought exist are gone with the wind.
-Yes some couples are actually left with true compatibilities from which they can feed and fuel the relationship, but even that is constantly killed by the conflict of interests. I should really spend a little more time explaining this conflict of interest and our connections to our kids, but this is already too long as is.
3) As mentioned before, there is nothing on earth we care more about than our kids and those babies. This whole kid caring concept/feeling (not to confuse with baby craving) is yet another brilliant design I wont really go into now. Without this concept, who in their right mind would ever consider and actually crave to put up with the shit and challenges it takes to deliver and raise a kid. So when the OCD wears off, they usually already have a baby. Just the thought of not seeing, holding, kissing, hugging, talking to the child daily, sends shivers up their spine, and suddenly they want nothing more than keep the marriage in place and not risk losing the child’s daily hug. Now as the years go on and the marriage continues to worsen, it takes more than one baby to get the job done. In other words, they need to up the “shiver up their spine” dose, and they get it. Like I said before, from the initial wearing off to divorce its usually another 2 or so babies. But wait, the marriage isn’t all too great, why are they, or better, why do they want to be making more babies? They want it because of this eNORmous built-in baby craving design in place (generally the females). Again, this baby craving is outside the scope of this topic, but the craving keeps those babies coming and thus increasing the shiver up the spine dose.
4) Yes a small percent of couples do manage to transition from this delusional OCD love to genuine love, and have a beautiful successful marriage. I wouldn’t go as far as saying that ts rare, but lets just say its not very common.

All of the above is true no matter how the marriage came into existence, whether it was pre-arranged or bf/gf who they slept together. That’s right Sury, the outcome is identically the same, just look at statistics. Thats pretty much the nature of the design in place.

The OGG design:
The years in which we (the living) can procreate is limited. We have pre-procreation years (kids) and post procreation years (elderly, well, not really elderly per sa, say roughly 50ish+/- for female and 60ish+/- for male). Now, considering that the only purpose for OGG is procreation, one would imagine that OGG exists only within those procreation years. Guess what? that’s precisely how it is! OGG starts to increase as the likelihood for procreation increase, and it starts to decrease as the likelihood for procreation decreases. Talk to one about OGG towards a kid, and not only will you get locked up (rightfully so), but one would become sick for weeks just by having to process the thought. Likewise, tell one to go have sex with an 80 year old (male or female) and they will puke for weeks just for having to entertain such a disgusting thought. What does this mean? It means that if you want to know how you truly feel about the whole Sex/OG crap, you need to go outside the procreation years, think about how you feel having sex with that 80 year old (who you will call a pervert). That “EWWWW, Yuck, you sick disgusting pervert, I’m sick to my stomach now” type of response and feel that you feel towards that 80 year old, is precisely how you feel towards (what u see now) that hot, young, sexy 25/35 year old, if not for the OGG design. If the situation was reversed and it was the 80 year old who was able to procreate, you’d EWW and Yuck the 25/35 old and attribute hot/sexy towards the 80 year old. Point in case, in reality, you find the process, aka sex, grossly disgusting. Now, while in your current mindset, what kind of overdosed drug would u need to take to actually want, no not want, CRAVE to sex with the 80 year old? Is there even a strong enough drug to make you crave an 80 year old, it would have to be insanely strong. Welcome to OGG, here’s your prescription! So essentially by knowing how much we DO want it, we can fully understand how much we DONT want it.

But that’s not all. We also have an additional factor which is the concept of attractive/unattractive, even within the procreate age range. This topic actually opens a whole new discussion in the area of aesthetic philosophy. I will briefly touch on this.

Aesthetic philosophy/Beauty:
Beauty is a rather complex entity; it exists in many forms, all branching off beauty. Arguably, beauty isn’t a de facto existence across the board (even the panoramic Mountain View), but rather based on how we (for one reason or another) perceive it. However, beauty is certainly not a de facto in the area of OGG. Beauty can generally be broken down in two categories 1)Survival 2)Temptation for the purpose of survival (it really all boils down to survival). We can call Survival as preventive and “Temptation for the purpose of survival” as proactive. An example of Survival might be spoiled milk or spoiled fruits (preventing food poisoning). An example of “Temptation for the purpose of survival” would be taste buds or the tempting color of a healthy fruit. Beauty in the OGG design is also broken down into the above two categories.
1)Survival:
We can learn a lot from our non-intellect-minded close relatives. A short, weak chimpanzee has almost no chances of mating. Why? Here is why: Our offspring’s are born incapable and helpless and need full protection (physically) from all sorts of threats that surround us. We humans also have the state of mind to worry about; we need to make sure that the undeveloped states of mind of our offspring is developed to a healthy state of mind (which -as mentioned above- is accomplished by marriage). So the built-in beauty design is essentially here to ensure that we protect our helpless offspring’s. So for example, the “short” characteristic the poor chimpanzee displays is reflecting weakness, incapable of protecting the helpless offspring’s. Likewise in our human word, the tall (male and female), muscular (male), large breasted (female), are all signs of strong characteristics, where the opposite reflects weakness. Other non de facto characteristics is weight, and is (like many other non-de-facto beauty entities) completely society driven. In one century the fat pple are considered the strong and healthy (and therefore considered the Hot as we call it), in other centuries (ours) the thin are considered the strong and healthy. It all boils down to protecting our offspring’s.
2)Temptation for the purpose of survival:
We see this on display in the following examples: a)I didnt like such and such facial feature b)s/he is acne faced c)his/her hair color is unappealing d)she is unappealing without makeup e)his beard is not tempting (beards are also a topic on its own). This type and concept of beauty is carried over from our proactive survival instincts. So in comparison, an area with more trees can recycle more carbon dioxide into oxygen and thus is more appealing to us (lets walk in the park). Sunlight is crucial for the health of the tree (and a vast number of other things) and thus an area with more sunlight is more appealing to us (i.e. it’s been cloudy for 3 days, it’s depressing me). There is a lot more to this, but this will do it for now.

Here is a perfect example that displays both. I stumbled upon a comment from someone Kirly and it really cracked me up, and not because its funny, but because of what idiotic zombies we are (no offense, its “we”, all of us, i’m including myself). Kirly said: “This is why texting must be banned. Because some woman will fall in love with a 300-hundred pound chasid”. So Kirly and the six people liking the comment are unknowingly yet subconsciously displaying what i’ve explained perfectly well. Kirly’s comment consists of both categories. We first have the 300 pounder concern which is category 1 (survival), we then have the Chussid concern (read: bearded) which is category 2 (Temptation for the purpose of survival). Kirly is essentially saying the following: I dont know why, but my OGG design is deactivating its-self when certain conditions are met, and so with a deactivated mindset, I’m passing along those parameters and saying that texting should be banned in areas in which my OGG design decides to deactivate cuz with my deactivated mindset its unappealing. You get it? Hysterical! My god are we stupefied!

So to summarize, here are the chain of events: OGG. Religion > guilt > morality > marriage to address the issues OGG create. Delusional/OCD love to address the issue of people not wanting to be in a marriage (rightfully so).

So now back to you Sury and your article. You and Mr A are currently in the can’t-think-of-anything-but phase of the procreation cycle. You might ask, how did I manage to get to this phase without OGG, given that we never met or saw each other (at the time the article was written). Although it is possible to get to this phase w/o OGG (as i mentioned in the love section), you actually did get there purely through OGG (revealed between the lines of your article). In fact, not meeting only magnifies the can’t-think-of-anything-but phase and that’s because you can place any desirable image of Mr A when thinking of him, so can he of you. So if the two of you were single, there are good chances the two of you would get married (not considering the whole forbidden love temptation, a topic on its own), make a baby of two, wait for the OCD to wear off and in less than a decade end up with Mr A in exactly the same place where you and your husband currently are. Do you and Mr A have a chance of surviving the OCD wearing off phase? One reading and summarizing your article must conclude that the answer is no. One reading and summarizing your article will not find a single intellectual connection, nor will they find any other driving force other than OGG.

Lets assume for argument sack that even with OGG in the equation (as is the case with you, as i’ll explain in second), its still possible for males and females to connect only on an intellectual level, and lets ignore the whole argument about the possibility of a platonic relationship between male and female. If connecting on an intellectual level was such a huge (or only) part of your relationship with him, you’d sure mention something about it, especially after i repeatedly asked you what the driving force is. For example, you might have said something like “we would spend endless hours talking about our fascination with the moon/solar system”. The only time you do get somewhat specific is when you describe OGG moments, for example, you mentioning flirting with the hubby during Nida, pure OGG.

Where else do you get specific? Well, let’s see:
You: “I long for this strange man’s arm around me, for his touch, for his body pressed closely against mine. “I wish you were here,” I type, barely awake”
Mr A: “I’ve Shaken hands, hugged (whats that dreadful word that comes to mind from My Rabbis? Ah, Leigan De Hant Ve Man Tor Nisht), strip clubs”
You: “And I’m feeling really guilty”
You: “He [stranger on the street] is not particularly handsome, this man, but something inside me is changing. I may begin to handle this look”
You: “Could he [Mr A] really be so grotesque-looking?”
Mr A: “My appearance will cool things off. I guarantee it”
You: “I think about what he’s said over and over again, about his appearance disappointing me”

All of the above is pure OGG and absolutely nothing else (except that you now moved into the can’t-think-of-anything-but phase). Let me ask you this and please be very open-minded and very honest with yourself. If Mr A’s organs resembled that of the female gender, would you still feel the same way about him (her)? I mean after all, its still a human and you can still connect on an intellectual or emotional level, you know, the part thats “beautiful about the human species” and thats really all you care about, right?. So the persons organs have a slightly different configuration than that of Mr A, why should that matter, it shouldn’t, right? What of Mr A was an 80 years old; would you feel the same way about him? Its really all about that beauty of the human species able to connect on intellectual/emotional levels, which can be accomplished perfectly well with an 80 year old, and you wouldn’t care, right? And how would Mr A feel about you if your organs resembled that of his gender and/or if you were 80? And what if you did find Mr A’s appearance grotesque-looking? What if he found your appearance grotesque-looking? Why should any of it matter?

Why do you care whether the guy on the street is handsome when this guy on the street is reminding you of an “intellectual relationship”? What “look” do you need to handle, when the basis of the relationship is intellect? Why should Mr A imply that his looks will cool things off? how did he even come up with such an idea? Why should his appearance “disappoint” you?
Ah that’s right, This is animilistic OGG my friend!

You see Sury, as i described in great details, guilt automatically kicks only when there’s OGG. Guilt wouldn’t have kicked in if the event the relationship was truly intellectual in nature; even you knew your husband doesn’t appropriate the “intellectual” relationship. There is feeling bad and there’s guilt, what you describe is Guilt/OGG.

So i had asked you whether you find your husband physically attractive to which you didnt respond. If you do still have OGG with Mr hubby, then what you have now with your husband is more than what you have with Mr A. Reason being: What you have with Mr A is a complete delusional myth! If you strip out physical attraction to Mr A (which at the time of your writing don’t even know whether it exists), you are really left with a whole lot of nothing. Your current OCD like mind wants nothing but be with him/marry him, but at wear off time, it will all fall apart faster than the speed of light and shatter into dust. I’m willing to bet that if the situation was reversed, you’d feel about your husband the same way you feel about Mr A. In other words, if your father’s setup marriage was with Mr A and you BBMed/WhatsApped your husband, you’d feel this immense feeling towards him.

In conclusion, we are a bunch of stupid, idiotic, pathetic zombies. At least if one can see it for what it is and keep things in prospective. Anyways, I’ve got so much more to say, but I think I got my points across, if not, ask for clarification.

Shragi on January 2, 2013 at 12:13 pm

Jesus.

Jesus on January 2, 2013 at 6:27 pm

Yes?

Shragi on January 2, 2013 at 6:32 pm

Will you be so kind and explain what just went on there ^^ .
Thank you.
Your humble servant,
Shragi

Jesus on January 2, 2013 at 6:33 pm

Why you askin’ me? It wasn’t me who took that dump…

Shragi on January 2, 2013 at 6:36 pm

I called out in desperation to the only authority I recognize.
I do feel violated by that dump though.
Thank you for heeding my call, you are a balm to my soul.
Your humble servant,
Shragi

Jesus on January 2, 2013 at 6:36 pm

I’m sorry, it’s just tiring, every time someone does something weird, someone calls my name. My neck hurts from turning around so much. Can’t it just stop already? Jesus.

Shragi on January 2, 2013 at 6:38 pm

Really, I do appreciate the effort you put forth.
Your humble servant,
Shragi

TheOtherOne on January 2, 2013 at 7:05 pm

You know Shragi, you may not be aware of this, but there actually isn’t anyone holding you at gun point. if you see something that doesn’t sit well with you, look the other direction and go about your day.
What else? Oh, you wanna know why i did something you wouldn’t have done? Because were different, because you are you and i am i. Welcome to our diversified planet earth!

Shragi on January 2, 2013 at 7:08 pm

Thanks. I feel welcome.
I really do appreciate the effort you put forth, it makes this world a better place.
In awe,
Shragi

TheOtherOne on January 2, 2013 at 7:11 pm

And now its my turn to say huh?

C'mon on January 16, 2013 at 4:03 pm

While I can apprciate that the author is going through chalenges, on the bright side, you have a family, a husband who loves you and children who need you. Yet, you are making a concious desicion to single handedly destroy whatever you have built. Your children are noticing that you have an obsession with the hand held device and your attention to them is being compromised. I’ts only a matter of time before your husband picks up whats going on and shit hits the fan. It will probably cost you your marage and harm your children in a very bad and confusing way. Here you are, putting them through yeshivos that are teaching them to keep torah and mitzvos and live a ceratin way yet you decided to give in and entertain some strange feelings and endulge in them. There’s nothing wrong with having emotions but those can be dealt with in other ways rather then betrayal. Rather then associating yourself with people who will encourage you to give up everything you were taught to keep holy, you should talk to a trusted friend who might be able to help you overcome this. Your lying in you and your husbands bedroom and having an “affair” with your phone and clearly this is heading in a very dangerous direction. Be loyal to your husband and children. Save your family while you still can. Delete this misterious contact from your phone and make the commitment that your family comes before any “fun” you may have missed out on in life. Your husband is in shul and your taking a stroll with your 4 year old, fantasicing about a stranger whom you want to be with. I’m not saying you should completely ignore your feelings but I am saying that you should deal with them in a mature, respobonsible and moral way. save your family while you still can. I write these lines because I honestly care for a Yidishe family.

Sury on February 14, 2013 at 1:25 am

I’ve read your comment – more than once and appreciate the effort you have invested in explaining your stance. However, since it isn’t to the short side and I’m not sure that I entirely understand what you are trying to say, I’ll have to get back to this when I can find the time to focus and understand your position before I can provide any answers.

C’mon:

Admittedly, I’m unsure if you’re being sarcastic or not. And that is because I have difficulty understanding why you would be wasting your time reading this if saving a yiddishe family was your true concern. (Don’t you have one of your own?)

Having said that, the purpose of the writing is mostly about commenting about a specific issue inherent within the yiddishe, more specifically, chasidish, system that affects me as well as many others quite strongly, causing much – possibly preventable – grief on a continuous basis. Whether that mysterious contact is still part of the contacts on my phone or not is of little consequence to the central message.

TheOtherOne on February 14, 2013 at 7:22 pm

Wow, even i already forgot the specifics of what i wrote. I’ts been a while…

In a nutshell, i believe that i’ve described to you -with hard philosophical facts- that what you’ve described and feel, is w/o a shred of a doubt nothing more than animalistic opposite gender gravitation (wrapped around the Chassidish finger pointing).

It is indeed a long one, feel free to ask for clarification or drop me a note to keep the length more practical @ issoy123 AT gmail DOT com.

Btw, i neglected to prove read it, so sorry for the typos. i had emailed a slightly revised (corrected) version to the site admin, but it wasn’t taken care of.

Chaptzem on February 14, 2013 at 7:57 pm

The Other One: You’re making a mistake to read a philosophical position into this essay. You posted a ridiculously long comment attempting to prove (as far as I can tell–since it wasn’t entirely coherent) that the author’s intentions were animalistic. But the author never claimed they were anything but. Yes, it’s animalistic, but on some level every human desire is, as we are, after all, nothing more than animals.

Additionally, there’s no such thing as “hard philosophical facts.” Philosophy, by definition, does not deal in hard facts but in speculation. When a philosophical position becomes a hard fact, it is no longer philosophy and moves into its own appropriate scientific discipline.

TheOtherOne on February 14, 2013 at 8:28 pm

Chaptzen,

You’re right, its ridiculously long for a comment, but that was/is my only form of communication. Besides I didn’t force anyone to read it.

I was attempting to prove and/or explain and/or bring to the surface a whole lot more than that. But to your point, i had asked the author to explain her feelings, she said: “Now, the ability to connect on a level that is more than just sexual and animalistic is what I believe to be so beautiful about the human species”. That’s clearly not the case, and you’re correct, we are nothing more than animals.

You are totally correct about philosophy not being a fact, it is not. I actually appreciate you saying this because i thought about the very same thing as soon as i submitted it, but i didn’t bother. I did not intend to use the term literally; i meant fact from a speculation stand point, as in, speculating a speculation or factual speculation (i know, it really makes no sense). A better term is “hard philosophical arguments”.

It wasn’t so much about reading into this particular essay/article, it was more about people in general and their on-the-surface zombie-like-thinking mindset, it drives me nuts!

donny on February 22, 2013 at 10:00 am

hi Suri , is there any way to contact you privately?

Sury on February 25, 2013 at 6:23 pm

Donny:

As I’m sure you’ll understand, I am not entirely comfortable with having any private contact; however, I would consider communicating via Unpious editors for verification reasons and would possible reconsider my policy re private contact after that.