From: webber@world.std.com (Robert D Webber)
Subject: Re: ISO Bi-Fem and Girlfriend
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 04:36:51 GMT

In article <MUFFY.92Oct1102623@remarque.berkeley.edu> muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu (Muffy Barkocy) writes:
>
>In article <lcm2sgINNl0n@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM> williamt@athena.Eng.Sun.COM (Dances with Drums) writes:
>>In article <MUFFY.92Sep30133423@remarque.berkeley.edu> muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu (Muffy Barkocy) writes:
>>>repellent idea, when they might have been interested in you if you
>>>looked on them as a person rather than an instance of, for example, a
>>>polyamorous woman.
>>---
>>You could broaden this statement, Muffy, like suppose a guy wants
>>a human that is 'female'.  If she is female, he starts off by being
>>attracted to her.  Surely you cannot be suggesting he ignore the
>---
>Aha! You have finally hit it.  "minimum but not sufficient."  When it
>*is* sufficient that, for example, I am female, then I *do* feel that
>the person is NOT ATTRACTED TO *ME*, and I do not find *that*
>attractive. ...

So if another person finds you attractive for fairly superficial
reasons, is it that you do not find that person attractive for that
reason, or that this is an active disattractant?  I think that I
can understand the former, but not the latter.  Presumably people
may find one superficially attractive and feel motivated by
that attraction to find out more about one.  That seems like it
should be okay, so long as the person didn't treat the attraction
as somehow conveying a right to one's time, attention, or intimacy.

> It has nothing to do with them indicating that they want
>something and me therefore "trying to make it scarce.". ...

I couldn't see how this idea got into the discussion in the
first place.  It seems somehow like a kind of jealousy statement,
with the jealousy developing before the relationship.  "Hey, you'll
do it with [or probably 'for'] all o' them, why not me?"

> I am not saying
>that they should *ignore* what they find attractive, I'm saying that I
>do not find it appealing when a single quality (or even a pair of
>qualities, such as poly and bi) are *sufficient* for this person to want
>me, without knowing anything more about me.  In that case, they don't
>want *me* they would take ANY person with those qualities. ...

But at some point others have to get more interested in you, find
you attractive enough (in some sense: emotionally, physically,
sexually, intellectually) to start paying more attention.  It seems
to me that I've gotten involved with people for some pretty superficial
attractions and then had the relationships ripen in some pretty
wonderful ways.  It doesn't seem to matter whether it's a way with
a phrase or a passion for a cause or a curve of the nape of the
neck into a shoulder and the soft fuzz on the skin: any can
indicate a person who can make my life better.

So it can be sufficient to get an interest started.  I'm not really
capable of starting a relationship with someone without knowing
something about (usually) her personality and intellect, but I
couldn't say whether the time I give it and the depth of knowledge
I need are up to anybody else's standards.  Does it seem like
a wrong way to approach life?  How could I do otherwise?  It seems
as if sometimes snap judgements are okay and appearances aren't
all that deceiving, though the devil is in the details.

> One of the
>NECESSARY qualities for me to be attracted to someone is that they are
>interested in me, personally.  If I find out that they'd take anyone
>with a certain quality that I have, then I no longer believe that they
>are interested in me personally, so I am no longer attracted to them.

But what if you just happen to have this trait in common with a lot
of other people, and that's attractive in itself, but what really
makes it all seem possible is _you_?  There's an attraction, there's
a period of getting to know each other, and the attraction either
develops enough to be a self-sustaining relationship or it fades
away with acquaintance.

>Muffy
>--
>
>Muffy Barkocy                               muffy@mica.berkeley.edu
-- 
Bob Webber, webber@world.std.com ===========================================
==========================================================  Laurie Anderson:
Our plan is to drop odd objects onto your country from the air.  And some
of these objects will be useful, and some of them will just be odd.
Xref: sparky alt.polyamory:1329 soc.women:17150 soc.men:17067