note passing

https://x.com/korashimenojoel/status/1912623038136479791?t=BcZqtCN6uYhdCEhqB_WWDg&s=19

to understand why I talk about force.

Just one, they say it doesn't happen, but how many convicted rapists decide to claim to be women and then continue to commit rape inside the women's prisons?

Answering Trans Activism

"You haven't answered my question."

From the middle of a long thread on XTwitter on why I oppose trans activism: https://x.com/Feio36332258/status/1912526794634281082?t=G1q5-eOPPZBEZL5ikQt_NQ&s=19

Here is my response:

 

I can't. Something in your head or in my words just is blocking things.

I could turn to religious stuff, but I suspect you'll have a lot more preconceptions that don't match what I intend to say there.

Hmm. Let's give it a try.

Picking a random place to start, (cont)

Our purpose in coming to this world is to solve problems. 

There is a God in charge of things, and most of what you've heard about that God is stuff people make up because they don't want to solve their own problems.

But that God and you had a heart-to-heart conversation (cont)

before you came, and you agreed to the problem set as part of the condition of coming here. 

Part of the problem set was your body.

That does not mean there is nothing one should fix about the body, but it does mean we shouldn't try to fix things wrong. (Cont)

People have really strange ideas about all sorts of things. That's also part of the problem set.

Among the things we misunderstand are things we call sex and gender.

Almost always, the sex and gender of the body are not wrong. Rather, it is what we believe about them (cont)

that is wrong. And it is invariable that what society teaches us about them is wrong.

Some people think power is the fundamental principle of life and relationships. They see a power dynamic in relationships and decide they should be on the top of that dynamic. (Cont)

But our attitude is upside-down and sideways, so trying to be on top is a really evil thing and leaves us on the bottom, beneath things we shouldn't let be on top of us. Better to be equal in our attitudes and not try to force things.

Part of the power dynamic that (cont)

is so evil is the idea that it's better to force or seduce than to go someplace quiet, by ourselves, to solve our internal pressures.

Solitaire is almost always a less evil option than force or seduction.

There are people misassigned at birth, because of (cont)

what we call intersex expression, or what we used to call incomplete differentiation. That intersex expression can be really deep because of genetic chimera.

In such cases, society needs to be flexible enough to allow people to declare themselves to be (cont)

the other biological sex than what they were assigned at birth. But that is really, really rare. 

It is more common that a person might seek medical intervention to allow them to produce viable gametes or in other ways aid the natural process of childbearing. (Cont)

But these sorts of things are not what trans activism is about. Trans activism is not about helping nature. It is fighting nature, and not in a good way. And it is mostly about giving men and women a crutch because they refuse to understand that relationships are not forced.

 

"Why are you talking about trans activism and force?"

https://x.com/korashimenojoel/status/1912623038136479791?t=BcZqtCN6uYhdCEhqB_WWDg&s=19 

I hesitate to suggest you go follow some detransitioners. I've seen too many members of the trans community harass, bully, insult, and threaten them, including physical harm, rape, and murder threats. But if you did, you would have access to plenty of reason (cont)

 

to understand why I talk about force.

Just one, they say it doesn't happen, but how many convicted rapists decide to claim to be women and then continue to commit rape inside the women's prisons?

Tchaikovsky and Sexuality

Thinking about Tchaikovsky and his gender issues.

I was under the impression, for a long time, that it was generally assumed that he was intersex -- that it was, indeed, considered more than just a possibility that he was as close to a true hermaphrodite as we have knowledge of. Now I see that such interpretation has not been at all common, that the general interpretation is that he was gay, even though that is hard for some people to settle.

I personally can hold three or four related, but different, interpretations in my head at once.

I don't believe in what is currently called gay, personally, but I am willing enough to allow others to believe in it, and I am willing to try to work in their paradigm -- as long as they have a mutual respect for me and mine.

I don't believe in the current medical practice of gender transition, but, again, I am willing to allow others to believe in the paradigms that work for them, and I am willing to try to work in their paradigm when necessary -- only as long as they are willing to let me and mine, and any others who do not agree with them, work in ours.

Mutual respect is required.

(Yes, this is intimately related to the freedom of religion and freedom of speech clauses in the US Constitution, but that is a rant for another day.)

Mutual respect is required, even if some people are unwilling to understand that allowing others to hold a different paradigm is not automatic disrespect of one's own.

Back to Tchaikovsky, with the caveat that I know I am going to offend some people. If you are not willing to allow me my paradigm, don't bother reading this. It will hold no meaning for you.

There is a reason why artists often operate on the edge -- wait. No.

There is a reason why artists often operate beyond the edge of the shared social semantic set.

There is a reason why art is born in the crèche of confusion and forged in the furnace of affliction.

(Art is a lot like faith, especially in this.)

There is a reason why purveyors of etiquette easily become Pharisaical, even hypocritical in their enthusiasm. Etiquette sets the near bounds of the shared social semantic.

You think I have wandered from the topic again. Actually, I have not wandered from the topic at all. The topic reaches into a lot of other topics.

Why did Tchaikovsky not pursue Désirée Artôt, leaving her to be influenced by rumor and inconvenience to marry an associate still younger? Why was he even ever interested?

Why did he marry Antonina Miliukova, in spite of being aware that he had little patience for the woman? 

Why did Tchaikovsky and his patroness, the widow von Meck not marry, not even meet except a very few times by accident?

Preoccupation with oneself is often seen as an attractive quality.

Bear with me on this. If you look at a desert scene, nothing really catches your eye until something moves. 

If you look out at Zion's Canyon from Angel's Landing, the view is breathtaking, but you have to look for things that stand out unless you see a vehicle moving way down below or people on the trail up.

It's the same with a tropical wilderness. It's not until something moves that your attention is grabbed, and it is not just about safety and the search for possible prey.

Even in pre-school, the kids who move on their own are the ones who grab attention.

Okay, it is not just preoccupation with self. It is not just narcissism. It is also the ability to lose oneself in pursuit of something interesting or grand.

This sense of self has nothing to do with Greek ideal proportions, but it is the actual center of all aesthetic.

If you remember Happy Days, think of the Fonz. If it moves, it's cool. Until it jumps the sharks.

A diva can become tiresome, particularly to a creative who needs to focus on his own art.

A fellow divo is usually going to go wandering of to his own art pretty soon, so is attractive, but not burdensome.

And, from the point of view of the diva, the divo is interesting until it becomes clear that he is not ready to come running when you want and go away when you want.

Having gotten to this point, I think I realize that I'm not really ready to belabor the point I have just made, and I'm not really ready to proceed beyond it.

notes

Sometimes it's useful to compare life to a school staffed entirely by students, or a hospital staffed entirely by patients. 

And the ones who finally figure things out keep graduating, either leaving of their own accord, or getting pushed out.

 

Meeting management's requests is important but Sometimes we should ask ourselves such questions as whether meeting their demands at the expense of ruining our health with beer, tobacco, and other drugs is really even good for management 

Likewise, we need to question our devotion to society's demands 

A Lay Philosophy of Sex and Gender

You don't have to be an expert on every kind of alcoholic beverage to know that people who drive under the influence tend to cause accidents in which other people die.

And you don't have to be an expert on every kind of tobacco to understand that second-hand smoke is harmful to yourself. Nor do you have to have first-hand smoking experience to watch the effects of tobacco on your coworkers.

I personally can tell you a lot about that. It's one of the reasons I left the software industry. Watched too many companies get dragged to the ground because management and the board of directors had the engineers so focused on getting the job done that they failed to make sure that the job should even be done, much less that it was being done correctly. (Witness Bruce Schneier waxing eloquent on Crowdstrike.) 

And one of the tools engineers use to focus themselves on deadlines instead of safety is tobacco. Coffee is another. And pornography.

You don't have to experience every possible sexual position to understand that sexual position is not what sex is all about.

And you don't have to have sex with every person on the planet, or even just every attractive person you meet, to understand that quantity is not better than quality. Neither do you need to have sex with a whole lot of people to understand that carefully sculpted and painted-on beauty can hide some serious hideousness behind the endomorphin-induced haze.

And there is something about sex, drugs, and rock and roll that makes us too susceptible to society's demands about all sorts of things, just like they can be used to make employees too susceptible to managements demands.

Management and society aren't entirely evil, any more than they are entirely good. 

We can't really be happy if we can't defend ourselves, and we need to understand ourselves to defend ourselves. 

But being happy also requires us to be able to bring the good things we have out for the people around us, in both business and non-business relationships.

Sometimes it's easy to see a whole lot of trees and miss the forest.

I'm not an expert on sex like Masters, Johnson, and Kolodny. But I have observed people getting hung up on sex and gender for over half a century, and with so much public focus on the topic, I'm re-exploring my previous analysis and understanding of sex -- and of how it fits into the general puzzle of social relationships.

And I'm inviting you to come along for the ride.

(But nobody's going to pay me up-front to write this, so the chapters will tend to be rather intermittent, as I have time to write. It'll be a slow ride. Take it easy, as the song goes.)

 

A Lay Philosphy of Sex and Gender

Joel Matthew Rees

Japan, 2024

Copyright 2024, Joel Matthew Rees, all rights reserved.

1. What Is Sex, part 1
   

Did You Get to First Base?

Somebody on eXtwitter posted an assertion of traditional sexual morality.

Somebody else posted the old dodge, 

How are people supposed to know if they are sexually compatible?

(This particular instance was last fall, when I wrote this blog post too late to be sure I was ready to publish it and then forgot about it.)

My reply started with 

Two people who want to be sexually compatible will find a way to be sexually compatible.

The response proposed an analogy about batting cages.

If two people want to do batting practice with each other, they will head to the park with a bucket of balls and a couple of bats, not to the batting center.

But batting practice is a little different from sex. Batting practice doesn't make babies.

-- unless pitching is a metaphor pitching woo, I guess.

That metaphor about first base being holding hands or something, and a home run ...

Here's how it really stacks up:

Holding hands is a game of catch.

Kissing is batting practice.

Sex before marriage is a foul ball

Sex after marriage is first base.

Having babies is bringing a runner home. 

Getting those babies safely grown up is winning games.

It's not the only way to win games, but it is the usual way. 

And foul balls don't necessarily mean a lost game. They can be recovered from.

Yeah, this is taking a metaphor too far, but it needs to be said.

Penetrative sex is not going all the way. Neither is getting pregnant.

Going all the way for real is doing your best to get your kids safely grown up.

(In a certain religious context, grown-up would include safely into God's heaven, but that's another topic.)

(Posted without the wall and revising here.)

Spreading the Dis-ease

Let's say, just for argument, that I wanted to spread a disease among a certain population sexually. What would be the most effective method?

How about this --

(1) Make condoms and other prophylactic sex toys readily available to that population.　Claim that this is educational and preventative.

(2) Fail to fully explain their use, limits, and effects. 

(Slipping and cracking when used too long or too energetically? Pinpricks and other manufacturing defects? Human failure to use them in the emotional rush? Etc.? Why make them worry?)

(3) Encourage the members of that population to engage in a lot of casual sexual experimentation with random partners within that population. 

(4) ...

(You want to complain that I am calling condoms sex toys? Think about the various kinds of condoms you can get -- bumps, ridges, "natural shape", ....)

(Also published here.)

Why Covenants for Sexual Relationships?

What is marriage, but a pledge, a covenant of mutual loyalty, fidelity, and support?

Why should that be?

Sexual intimacy is the kind of intimacy specifically authorized by marriage.

Why does sexual intimacy require a covenant of mutual fidelity and support?

Sexual intimacy involves the exchange of micro-flora (fungi, yeasts, molds, etc.), micro-fauna (bacteria, etc.), small insect pests (cooties!), and gametes. Micro-flora, micro-fauna, and small insects that the body is not used to can cause drastic changes in health, including death. Gametes, of course, can cause drastic changes of health.

We think we have modern miracle medicines that overcome the health problems. But that medicines, themselves, tend to cause health problems. Too much of the strong antibiotics necessary to control syphilis, for instance, can cause the body to have serious adverse reactions. We should not want to deliberately put our bodies at that kind of risk.

I'll note unwanted pregnancies in passing here. Condoms slip, develop pinprick holes, and have manufacturing defects, etc. And it is really easy to forget them in the passion of the moment. And, no, abortions are not easy on the female body. This should be enough discussion of this question.

How do we avoid these kinds of dangers?

Simple. Limit the number of people we get that intimate with.

If no one ever had sex with any but one partner, there would be very few sexually transmitted diseases, and there would be zero chance of them being spread in epidemic numbers. No matter what your attitude about sex outside of marriage, this principle cannot be argued with.

This is part of the reason for mutual fidelity.

But mutual support?

What happens when one partner gets cooties because of a hygiene slip-up? Mutual support in this case is that the partner with cooties will go to the trouble of getting rid of his or her own bugs, and stick around to help the other partner get rid of the shared infestation.

When this kind of relationship is forced, one partner or both is likely to break the agreements, which allows for the spread of disease and other undesirable results. This is why love is the appropriate motivation for this kind of relationship, instead of greed or tradition or power relationships or such.

Especially instead of power relationships.

They say you can't rape the willing. They are wrong.

Mutual rape is still rape. It's about power, not love.

Now, I have spent a bit of words discussing physical intimacy.

Sex also involves emotional and mental intimacy. (Did I forget to say that up there? I guess I didn't want to get distracted.) 

Yeah, certain people do seem to feel more comfortable with anonymous sex. (Do I need to point out that that requires multiple partners?) I'm not going to try to discuss such here -- anything I could say about that is likely to be wrong in some cases, so it really would be a distraction.

Most people looking for sex are looking for that emotional and intellectual intimacy. That's the part that makes the release of the hormones in the brain complete. And that's what they don't get when they don't settle down with a single partner.

Sex without these promises tends to be done under power relationships. Think about this. 

You can't buy love. 

You can buy greed, lust, desire, attention, and all sorts of other things, but you can't buy love.

And you can't force love. Again, you can force what you can buy. You can even force loyalty, which you can't really safely buy. But you can't force love.

There is one exception to the rule about buying love. In some cases, loyalty can be a coin of exchange with which love can be bought, but that requires both partners to give the same coin. And then it's no longer forced, and no longer bought.

That's one reason why some people stay in abusive relationships -- hoping that loyalty will be returned, and the relationship be converted to a relationship of love.

Is it not apparent that the covenant of loyalty, fidelity, and mutual support should be up front, and unfeigned? That such pledges be respected by society instead of torn down?

(Posting this in my freedom blog, as well.)

Gender Rubrics in Sports

(This doesn't really need to be here. I've re-posted it in my free-is-not-free blog, and that's where edits will occur.)

A niece of mine posted an article about Lia Thomas, and it got me thinking about the knotty problem of gender again. 

I don't have an answer, but I do have questions that I don't see anyone asking, that I think might lead to viable solutions.

So that you know where I'm coming from, my sport of choice is dance, which, even though dance has recently been developed into a competitive sport, is not a competitive sport in the model of swimming, track and field, ball games, martial arts and such. 

Even though there are tournament-style competitions in dance now, complete with metrics and rubrics, dance remains naturally a sport where everyone can be a winner. Except in the more recently contrived competitions, competition is not for one unique crown, nor for the runner-up crowns. Natural competition in dance is more about finding someone interesting to yourself, to dance with for a while. Or about finding new ways to move from here to there, or to exercise your own body and keep it running.

Whoa. Wait. There's my entire post, already done in one paragraph.

Except that most people who find this rant somehow and start reading it will not see in that paragraph what is so obvious to me.

When you have disagreements like we have about Lia Thomas, it usually is indication that we need to go back and examine our basic assumptions. That's what I want to do, examine basic assumptions about sports and then come back to the question of how gender and sports should relate to each other.

So -- assumptions.

Of what use is sports?

Okay, of what use is dance?

The easy answers include getting rid of stress -- relaxation, physical exercise and training, possible opportunities for social interaction, and such. If talking about dramatic dance, it can also be useful for self-expression.

With sports, we get a similar list. Self-expression? Yes. Self-expression. Sports provides a sort-of legitimate outlet for aggression and glory-seeking, in a less violent and destructive venue than war. And the training, with the metrics and rubrics, provides a lab for research in health and nutrition. It's all beneficial, all to the good, right?

One of my great grandfathers was an educator. He left me a little saying that was pithy and colorful in late 19th-century American English. Essentially, he noted that we are generally careful when training horses, not to push them so hard as to cripple or injure them, or to be excessive in ways that leave the horses with bad habits, even if the horse seems willing. 

But we often fail to be so careful with our children. Especially if they seem to be willing.  

We all know the stories about the promising little-league pitcher who ruins his throwing arm winning that all-important game and never plays baseball again. About the high-school track star who collapses at the big meet and never runs in competition again. About the high-school football players who never learn to study and wash out in college, or the college football stars who ride their scholarship into the pros only to find that they are really only good enough for a year or two of pro and then have no way to earn a living.

These most recent Olympic Games, postponed until just after the crest of the pandemic. Why were we willing to let tradition push us to risk the athlete's health that way? It seems to have (mostly) worked out okay, but couldn't we have just skipped a cycle, moved the venues back four years? And the winter Olympics, with Russia complaining that the rules about drugs were unfair to them?

I say I don't have an answer, but I might have a suggestion.

In high-school and college sports, there was no national championship in the US for a long time. Common sense told us two or three things:

1. There are always schools without certain advantages that can never make it beyond district play;
   
   
2. At the state level, there are usually several teams that are top-level and would be evenly matched if they meet in the finals, but simple chance will eliminate enough that, maybe, only one makes it to the final game. And if two make it to the final game, it is often a matter of luck which one wins.
   
   
3. (Actually, this is the most important:) The emotional investment of the championship games often leads the athletes to take unnecessary risks, which every now and then result in life-changing injuries. And we thought it seemed unfair to put the athletes at such increased risk of career-ending injury at the academic level.
   

Maybe we should either abolish national and international competition, or somehow create an environment in which even the national and international level can be played in the (intended) spirit of friendlies at the local level?

What is it that moves us to invest so much in championships?

Hmm. Sponsorships. Advertising campaigns. Market wars.

What is it that moves us as corporations to invest so much in winning the market wars? (... competition which has become a modern substitute for more literal warfare, less damaging physically, maybe, but no less emotionally/mentally)?

Excessive market warfare results in products that don't sell well being removed from the market. Many of those lost products were products that individuals wanted or even needed. And what remains does not match those needs or wants anywhere nearly as well.

Market competition, when it is done right, should result in good match between product and consumer. But our current markets are barely any better than controlled markets at anything but maybe volume. Sure, we do see some increase (finally) in the production of microbrews and such, but the race to the bottom that defines the market wars we currently engage in often drag any niche products that become sustainably popular down with them.

Back to sports.

It seems to me that we need to get rid of the idea that there can be only one winner. There never really is, except in some temporary and impractical sense.

I said I had no answers. This is not an answer, it's a sort-of a suggestion that just occurred to me now.

Looking at the metrics in swimming, speed within a style is the only metric. Well, there is water polo and such, and water ballet, but those are different.

Why?

What if swimming meets required each speed competitor to also compete in water polo or some similar team sport, and in water ballet or water gymnastics? And the overall scores weighted all the performances together? And we got rid of men's and women's divisions?

Hmm. Not workable exactly like that, but maybe there's something in there that might spark a solution.

...

No medals in single events. Medals for overall scores, maybe four gold for the top four, four silver for the next four, etc? Exact number depending on the number of athletes.

Are You Meeting with Acephobia? Do People Say You Must Be Asexual? Unemotional?

(Reposted, edited, in my main blog: https://reiisi.blogspot.com/2022/02/are-you-meeting-acephobia-do-people-say.html. )

(This is for people that get questioned over their lack of interest in sex.)

Don't ever believe that you don't have human emotions. Whoever tells you that is either lying for their own power or gain, or trying to use metalanguage you don't use to say something else. 

You can hope for their sake it's the latter, but that's not your problem. Just don't believe them.

The whole social conversation about sex is so skewed that you really can't tell what people are trying to say any more. People claim to be gay or lesbian or even bi-sexual, and yet they claim not to be practicing -- not sexually active. Other people claim to be defending the rights of the homosexually inclined, but they themselves are practicing bi-sexual. 

Machiavelli and de Sade were not the first, nor were they the last, to assign for more, and less, meaning to sex and gender than can be justified.

It can be sort of understandable sometimes. For too many people, the hormonal flux is the only thing they've experienced that makes them feel good about either themselves or life. Maybe nobody ever hugged them except to try to force them to feel better. Or maybe words of praise were always attached to conditions. Or some other such. So many ways we pervert natural affection.So many ways we pervert love.

Anyway, human emotion has lots of colors. 

(And the rainbow flag is now being used to mute those, even.)

If LGBQTetc. Is Real, Everyone is LGBQTetc.

(This is another rant that doesn't really work on several levels.) 

[JMR202412171406: On the other hand, it seems to work better than not talking about it.]

I have no right to deny anyone the right to choose their own labels. Nor, really, do i want to.

But when you choose your labels for yourself, be aware that you do not need to limit yourself to the labels society offers.

About twenty-two years ago, I read some in a blog by a guy who was the maintainer of a certain program that was considered by some to be essential in working with the SGML family mark-up languages. Or maybe it was XML. I don't remember the name of the program now, nor do I remember the name of the developer. Neither seem to come up in web searches any more. 

I guess the web is just too big now. (I can't even find my own blogs by simple web search on my name any more.)

He identified as gay, and had several posts that defended his identification and, as he thought, the existence of the gay community. 

In one particular post, he posited that there was no such thing as a true lesbian. The short version of his theory was that, at any particular time, one of the partners would be taking the role of butch. Gay males, on the other hand, would have no similar requirement.

I thought, at the time, of taking screen shots of the post, but I figured no one would believe I hadn't created them in the GIMP (i. e. Photoshopped them), anyway.

I rather fancy that he realized what he was saying, and took the post down.

At the risk of drawing the ire of all sorts of people, as near as I can tell, this is the substance underlying LGBQTetc.: identification based on mistaken concepts of sex, gender, and the nature of human relationships.

When I was in elementary school, somewhere around 4th or 5th grade, there was a group of budding jocks in the locker who would show each other what they had in their shorts and tease each other about it. They generally tried to get the rest of the guys to join in, teasing, or even bullying those who would not with crude comments about the supposed size or shape being the cause of their reticence.

I was tall enough and heavy enough that they mostly left me out of it, although some of the alpha-wannabees would complain that I didn't join in the fun.

What kind of is never said about this is that it is fun -- in a sense. Showing and seeing stimulates certain brain activities, which respond in blood rush to the gonads, which is perceived as pleasant, and cyclically reinforcing. Mix into that the sense of camaraderie when being part of a group engaged in edge behavior, and you get addictions. 

The alpha wannabees were the ones who would then seek out the most vulnerable of the other boys after school and badger them for sexual favors.

That's one of the lenses that I still view the whole question through.

Anyone who lets their own self-image get tangled up in the way they react to various hormones is going to get turned on by seeing flesh, whether of the same gender or the opposite gender.

You do filter your reactions by your subconscious perceptions of what is acceptable and desirable.

But turn-on is turn-on.

If turn-on is the purpose of relationships, we are all lesbian, gay, bisexual, queer, and transgender. The only question is whether we are in the closet or not.

There is a side question of physical expression of gender. 

No two people are alike, and it would be really difficult to specify what is "full sexual differentiation". 

Large breasts do not a woman make. Breast size does not indicate ability to lactate. Penis size does not correlate with sperm count. Etc.

So the term sexual differentiation has (probably rightly) become deprecated. (Yeah, I used to use it, too.)

Some men will not be able to produce a high enough count of viable sperm count to induce conception. 

Some women do not produce egg cells, or will produce egg cells that are not viable. 

This does not make them less than others. It's just one more way to be different.

Nature makes a variety of people for many reasons. 

(For those who believe in God or such, by the evidence we have before us, God makes us all different.)

One person will be good at raising wheat. One will be good at raising oats. One will be good at adding numbers. One will be good at manipulating abstract symbols.

Even within a "specialty" there will be specialties.

With all the different things people are good at, the necessary jobs and the important jobs are much more likely to get done. 

Put in the negative, if we were all the same, we would all have to live thousands of years to be sure there would be enough people with enough skills to handle every necessary job, because we would all have to pick up every specialized skill. 

... because we would all have to learn everything before we could learn anything -- before we could live.

One thing that cannot be forgotten is that specialization changes over time. Someone who is pretty good at raising grain may change paths and learn how to raise cattle or manipulate abstract symbols instead of just continuing to get better at raising grain. 

Sexual function is similar. So is sexual attraction. Both change. That is, I've seen plenty of blog posts by people who at one point identified as gay or lesbian, but later decided they were bi or even ace. 

Variety is good. Since we are all different, there is a greater chance for each individual to find someone, compatible or otherwise, with whom they can maintain a relationship, perhaps for the purpose of raising a family, perhaps just for the purpose of having companionship.

(It is a gross evil to box people up in stereotypes, and we, as a society, as a world, have been doing that since millennia before Machiavelli and de Sade.)

We separate children as boys and girls at birth for reasons that are and are not reasonable.

But when we find it difficult to assign gender, instead of just letting the assignment wait -- or, what may be better, just deciding we as a society don't need to assign gender -- we have doctors who believe they can "correct" nature's "mistakes". 

At very minimum, we should be much slower in our attempts to correct nature.

If we, as a society, were not so insistent on enforcing a binary classification between male and female from birth, rainbow and gay could go back to just being about art and about enjoying being alive.

Thoughts on Homosexuality

[This is a rant from back in 2018 that I was never able to finish properly. Some things about it just don't work on several levels.]

http://guerillamormonism.blogspot.jp/2018/01/getting-different-answers-to-prayer.html

Now, there are people who believe that there is such a thing as homosexuality. I personally believe the whole thing is a misunderstanding of sexuality.

Some people pray and believe that God is telling them that they are homosexual. I could guess at all sorts of reasons, but I know that at least some of my guesses will be wrong for any particular person.

One thing I could guess at concerns all the teenage jokes about sexuality. Come on. Teenagers have no idea what sexuality is. If the popular kids at school tease a less popular kid about his or her sexuality, they are almost guaranteed to be wrong. But that assertion doesn't help everyone. I don't know that it will even help anyone except me. I know it helped me.

Another guess I could make concerns the question of whether people have some inalienable right to find a passionate romance. Or whether a "rich, nuanced sex life" is even something to be desired.

The first big love of my life would have been miserable married to me. When I realized that, I bowed out of her life.

If I had married the second big love of my life, I would now be miserable. When I was trying to recover from that breakup, a bishop who had gone through a similar breakup advised told me that he thought maybe he was happier with someone who had not initially ignited the passion in him.

And I eventually settled for a relationship which I had to work at from the outset.

I can't even fathom, now, giving any weight at all to sexual attraction, unless it is within an already existing marriage relationship. Nor can I fathom an attraction within marriage that is not the product of the two partners' efforts to be each other's friend at all levels of intimacy they dare or deem wise. And I can't fathom thinking that the product of such efforts should ever be considered not enough sexual attraction. I know that even the physical relationship is not all about sex.

There are more important things.

These are my own answers. They were not always, but they are now, and I don't believe they are wrong, even though I know they won't work for everyone.

Correcting Gender

[This is a rant from 2017 that I was never able to properly start, much less finish. It's another rant that doesn't work at several levels.]

I have a friend who received gender correction surgery.

It's unreasonable of me to wish I could have talked with her about it first, but I wish I could have.

If you are considering gender correction surgery, for yourself or someone you have the legal authority to make such a decision for, I'd like to tell you my arguments.

If you are not, this rant is not for you. You would do well not to read it. Please don't read if just for your prurience.

First, there is no such thing as "gay" or lesbian. Not ultimately. There is intersex, but that isn't what the argument of gay/lesbian usually is.

That is, in almost every case I am aware of, the question of homosexuality quickly becomes an excuse for sexual promiscuity, generally of the bisexual kind.

Almost every case.

What does exist, then?

There are two issues here -- physical gender configuration and sexual orientation.

Physical gender configuration outside the twin bell curves around the binary human gender norms exist. There's no arguing with that.

We, as a society, inherit some terrible cultural baggage on this point. We accept all too many artificial norms as if normal were somehow equivalent to ideal.

Social norms almost always stray from any ideal, anyway.

And, if that's not bad enough, if true perfection exists, human ideals never match it. We'd do better to talk about parfection than perfection.

So many times in our shared cultural heritage in every nation, in every culture, we have viewed variation as flaw and destroyed true talent -- wasted the true gift.

We were lucky that Einstein, for example, found a way around the social impediments he faced. We are not always so lucky, and, we, as a race and as individuals, would be far better off to just accept those who don't match our artificial norms.

It is true that pushing ourselves to do better than we have is important. But pushing others to meet our ideas of narmel is not at all the same thing as pushing ourselves to be/do better. It's usually quite the opposite.

Normal. Narmel.

Normal is an illusion.

This is true of gender configuration, too.

Maybe you are not convinced, but I want to let you know I think society has no right to demand anyone change to fit society's norms, especially when it will effect your health. Ask questions first. Be sure that the change you want is not just giving into peer/social pressure to meet some arbitrary narm. Be wise.

Progenesis ch01 -- Hot!

[Yet another beginning of a novel that didn't go anywhere, from back in 2016 or 2017.]

TMX001 looked apprehensively at the apparition in front of him.

Her skin glowed softly in the dark. His eyes traced her features and curves, eyes, lips, arms, breasts, hips, legs, everything quite visible in the glow, in spite of the limited light.

He got out his geiger counter and directed its transponder window towards her. The counter ticked steadily, maybe three events per second. "Not good, but not so bad, I guess." He brought the transponder closer, and at about an inch from her abdomen the rate rose or so. "Sixty-five, plus or minus. Roughly a low C in ancient earth-human notations."

"Lower."

"What?"

"That's where I took most of it." She spread her legs, and he brought the transponder below her thighs. The frequency increased to a low buzz which echoed hollowly in the empty dark.

"Three hundred thirty events per second. You are so hot."

"Thanks. For checking." TFY000 blinked.

"Were you able to keep from breathing it?" he asked as he got out a clean rag and wiped her face, especially around her eyes and nose, so she wouldn't have to use her contaminated hands.

"Mostly."

"Let's see what we can do to cool you down." He got out gas masks for both of them, helping her put hers on first.

After they had their masks in place, he dug the filtered vacuum cleaner out of his kit and let it suck the dust from her skin. The glow faded as the dust disappeared into the vacuum nozzle. He let the vacuum run for a minute or more, to clear the nozzle as much as possible.

"How much damage do you think I've taken?"

"Who knows until we analyze the dust in the vacuum cleaner? But we need to put you in a detox bath."

He led the way to the airlock, where both were subjected to further blowing and vacuuming, and then after removing their masks, to more cleaning and a shower. Standing before the lock detectors and turning around, TMX001 was cleared for entry, but TFY000 was not. A compartment at the side of the lock opened, and TFY000 entered the detoxification bath. She fully submerged herself, working the oil over her face and head, then, after the timer rang, she raised her head above the surface of the oil and started working it over the rest of her body.

"What happened?"

"I was ambushed."

"TFY003?" He was asking the obvious, but it was equally obviously hard for him to understand.

"Yes."

"We aren't supposed to do this kind of thing. It's against our programming."

Chiriso and Kefumi watched their robots on the monitors.

"Why is it so hard to get the interactions between the emotional functions and the motivation functions right?" Kefumi asked.

Chiriso shrugged.

"Can't we just build them so they reproduce asexually?"

"The problem of pride remains, as long as they need to share genetic information to keep the redundancy up."


TFY003 and TMX000 were visible on separate monitors, waiting in standby mode where they had


The scientists who created these  robots, the last of a human-like race, as they attempt to produce a replacement race and decide to de-gender the robots, making them all hermaphrodite.

Sex Is Not For Fun

There is this social undercurrent that you may get from "authorities" that sex is UNCLEAN, or FORBIDDEN, or DANGEROUS!

Then there is this social undercurrent that sex is FUN!

Wait.

That's no longer an undercurrent.

Sex sells. 

It's a cheap way to shore up your sagging sales performance rating or sagging locker-room reputation, or, well, any sagging image problem.

So everybody and their dog is selling it.

Except.

It's not cheap.
And it doesn't really shore up anything.

UNCLEAN, FORBIDDEN, DANGEROUS, FUN, it's all the same -- lies by partial truth.

Sex is fun! For a moment.

It releases those endorphins in the brain, and those endorphins are what recreational drugs and rock-n-roll and romance novels and fast cars and so forth are all about.

But when used as a drug, it's just like the rest of the list. When you are done, it lets you down.

Now, it doesn't let you down if you are doing it for the right reasons. Using it as a safe drug is not a right reason, and it isn't safe, no matter what the people who like the easy sell tell you.

What's the right reason to have sex with someone? Well, it's a lot easier to talk about a bunch of the wrong reasons, and I'm in rant mode, so I'll talk about those first.

Sex is dangerous! They tell you we have conquered syphilis, scabies, and herpes, and then they'll say herpes and scabies really aren't that bad anyway, and "we" are going to conquer HIV/AIDS real soon now, ...

Even if all of that talk about conquering all the sexually transmitted diseases were for real, there is still the problem of the heat of the moment.

In the middle of the endorphin rush, you tend to do stupid things.

So sex is dangerous. That's why you should keep it within marriage. Then it's not so dangerous. (It's still dangerous enough to be an adventure, though.)

Sex is forbidden!

Well, yeah. Random sex really is forbidden to anyone who understands the dangers. And doing things just because they are forbidden has always been a bit brain-dead, anyway.

Now, there is a class of philosophy that forbids sex except for making children, and even wants to forbid it then. Test-tube babies, and man-made drugs to get the endorphin rush.

(It ain't going to work. Sure, we can use the test-tube to help sometimes, and it's important to understand endorphins, but the whole idea of the endorphin rush is to help us overcome all the mechanicalities that we tend to pile on ourselves, whether we call them "the law of Moses" or "rational behavior" or "tradition!" or whatever. Well, not the whole idea, but one major part of it.

Sex is unclean.

Whether solitary masturbation or between properly married partners or in large group orgy, it's unclean.

This isn't just about micro-organisms and dirt. When you have sex, you share some intangibles, too, emotional things and intellectual things and spiritual things and social things and economic things. But no one seems to want to talk about those, because sex sells!


Now it can be clean, and sacred, if still a bit stinky (funky?), between partners properly married to each other and consenting to it.

But it's still not perfectly safe and clean within marriage. That is, even between properly married, consenting spouses, sex leaves things behind that, if not taken care of, just get messier. In the best of cases, it's hard to have sex without leaving body fluids on the sheets or underwear or various places where they can get sticky and smelly and moldy and make people sick and, hey, you know this is not clean.

Babies? Babies are messy, too, but we don't complain about them because it's obvious they have to be messy to grow up. And we were babies once, no matter how hard we pretend we were never that uncool.

(Well, there have been, and still are, some who say children should be seen and not heard. And mean that they don't want to be bothered. This is another bad sort of philosophy.)

But the fact that babies are wonderful in spite of being messy does not mean that we should ignore the possibility of making babies when we do the sex thing. Maybe it's not a danger like getting sick, but bringing a baby into this world without even the promise of support is something we should avoid when possible. And if the burden naturally falls on the mother, it should be obvious that the father should be willing to commit to shouldering his part. And there we are back to marriage.

Oh. Pregnancy definitely can have adverse effects on health, in spite of all the wonderful medical stuff we have in our "modern" world. And all the wonderful modern contraceptives don't always prevent it happening.

Because of those endorphins, many people want to pretend that sex should be free and easy without marriage.

But you can get that endorphin rush in lots of ways besides sex. Interacting with people gives us lots of opportunities to be nice to others, and being nice to them makes them feel good (even though they may pretend they don't like to feel good), and it also makes us feel good.

Mutual appreciation is not mutual masturbation no matter how many cynics say it is. Masturbation requires getting one's hands on the sex organ, whether literally or metaphorically. And there are plenty of ways to make each other feel good without getting into sex.

Anyway, the mutual agreement of support and exclusion made in marriage may not be perfectly iron-clad, but it's a whole lot better than the assumption that your partner-of-the-moment has probably come from some other messy tryst without bothering to clean up and is probably going to leave you without bothering to help you clean up, too.

Random sex is extremely messy. And it's so unnecessary.

So how can sex be a good thing?

Clearly, it's primarily a good thing between people who are married to each other, when they are both agreed to it.

That's when it can be fun and not let you down. That's when it can be an adventure without (usually) killing you. (Yeah, childbirth is still dangerous, but spouses are supposed to help each other, okay?) That's when being forbidden really means, yes, you can -- with this one person with whom you have made the mutual commitments of marriage. That's when it is sacred, and not unclean.

Just because sex is not for fun doesn't mean it can't be fun. With your properly married spouse.

Backup JMR201604261650: Economics 101, a Novel, ch_31a -- Reality

[This is a backup. The current version is at http://joel-rees-about-sex.blogspot.com/2016/04/economics-101-novel-ch31a-reality.html and I assume youll prefer to read that. 
(I recognized pretty quickly that Karel had left some important things unsaid, and you'll find those things on that page, not here.)]

(The story starts here: http://free-is-not-free.blogspot.jp/2016/03/economics-101-novel-ch00.html.

The previous chapter is here: http://free-is-not-free.blogspot.com/2016/04/economics-101-novel-ch30-fear-at-night.html  If you missed that, there will be some discontinuity here, so you'll probably want to go back and read it.)

This chapter contains sexually explicit material. Nothing to get too excited about, Bobbie and Karel aren't having sex or anything like that, but I don't want people who aren't interested in reading their discussion of important sexual matters stumbling on it by accident. You may prefer to read the modest version, instead.

The modest version of the chapter is here: http://free-is-not-free.blogspot.com/2016/04/economics-101-novel-ch31-reality.html.

---

Karel leaned forward as if in pain, hands forming fists over his knees, suppressing a groan. He didn't seem quite able to talk, seemed to be holding his breath.

"What's wrong?" Bobbie was not sure what to do. She moved closer to him and massaged his back, and felt his body shudder. Then she remembered some of her experiences as a nurse, and the light came on in her mind.

"Oh, dear. That was not nice of me, was it?"

"Ah, ... " Her words, and maybe her hand on his back, too, seemed to have a calming influence, and the fear and confusion in Karel's face faded and he started to breathe again. "No, it's okay." He took another breath. "Two more weeks. Then you can kiss me when I'm asleep all you want." He winced, and breathed deeply once more and groaned softly and shivered, rocking back and forth, holding his legs below his knees. 

"Are you gonna be OK?"

"Uhm, yeah, I think so. Gonna have to wash my underwear, though."

"Oh. Sorry about that." She felt awkward, knowing that the apology was, at the same time, both not enough and too much. "Can I do something to help?"

Karel chuckled. "You just did." Then he relaxed and lay on the ground laughing, or maybe sobbing.

And both of them were praying in their hearts for direction from God.

"Now what?"

"Good question."
 
"Ehrm, does this mean, ..."

"Mean, ...?"

"Mean we ..., I don't know what I mean. Do you know what I mean?"

Karel sat back up. "Did you intend to open my valves?"

"Ick. No!"

"Then you have not sinned, my daughter," he said, imitating a father confessor he had seen in a movie. (Mormon bishops are not father confessors, and would generally not use such phrasing. The Mormon approach to confessing is a little different, as you can see.)

"You're joking, and I'm a little scared."

"Well, what did you intend by kissing me?" Karel asked with mock strictness, trying to lighten the mood. Then he grinned.

And Bobbie relaxed, too. "I had a kind of an odd dream, and when I woke up, you were talking in your sleep. So I came around to check on you, and, well, you just looked so sweet and you were mumbling something that sounded like you were saying you love me, and I was feeling a little strange because of the dream," and Bobbie paused for a breath, "and I just acted on impulse."

"I don't think I see anything wrong with that. What was your dream about?"

"Oh. You remember the argument we had with Dan and Kristie in the cafeteria?"

"Dan. Kristie. When they told us how unfair it was of us to be dating other people when we were planning to do the research project together, even though we weren't thinking of ourselves as romantically together?"

"Yeah. That one. When they tried to argue that the unfairness meant we should just give up the research project."

"And then, instead, we both just admitted we guessed we'd been dating them too long. Boy were they upset. Not that I blame them, really. We had been dating them too long. And they started dating each other after that, didn't they."

"Yeah, they did. I got a wedding announcement from them about a month ago."

"You did? Wonder why I didn't."

"It came addressed to me, but it had both our names on it. Sort of. 'Bobbie and Karel Pratt.' I didn't want to show it to you at the time."

Karel burst out laughing, and Bobbie joined him, their laughter echoing across the moonlit island.

When their amusement subsided, Bobbie continued. "It was like that time, but how it might have been if everything that has happened in the last four months, including Wycliffe's kidnapping us, were just a long and detailed, continuing dream we had both had separately, together, to warn us to get married before we came."

"Really? Interesting."

"And I was dreaming it in the omniscient point of view. Pure Harlequin Romance stuff. You come in, dodge their questions, tell me you're having nightmares about being alone with me on an uncharted island. And I know what you mean, but I'm scared to admit it, so I quibble about you finding my company unpleasant. And you come just right out and tell me it's rather the opposite. And I say that, if we are going to be kidnapped, we should do something to avoid the nightmare. And you realize you hadn't mentioned the being kidnapped, so you know I must be having the same dreams as you. And Dan and Kristie have no idea what we are talking about, of course. And they are a little over the top with their attempts to defend their territory. And you and I walk off together to talk about making sure we would not be single."

"Sounds surreal, alright."

"When I woke up, I wasn't sure where I was at first. The dream had left something empty in me, but that emptiness went away as I recognized the stars and smells and sounds of the island at night. Even the hard ground was reassuring, but I suddenly wanted to hear your voice. I listened for you, and I guess I was going to crawl out to make sure you were there anyway, when I heard you talking in your sleep."

"Oh. And then I looked cute in my sleep and ...?"

"and I wanted just a little more reassurance that this is all real."

"Wow. So. You think you're happy here?"

"I don't think I'd be happy if this were taken away from us." Bobbie's face crinkled into a strangely shy smile. "What was your dream?"

"It isn't obvious?"

"Why would it be obvious?"

"Oh, well, we were arguing about something inconsequential, and I kept trying to tell you I love you. I love you, by the way."

"It's nice to hear. I love you, too. What were we arguing about?"

Karel winced and tilted his head as if he wanted to dodge that question. "Do you really want to know?"

"I told you what I dreamed."

"We had some disagreement about getting married. I'm not sure what it was. Maybe it was about the marriage license."

"Have we ever really argued? Oh. Yeah. Never mind. It's easy to forget. That was all?"

"You, uh, said you didn't want to wait, and started taking your clothes off, and I was trying to stop you."

"EW! YUCK!"

"See. Sometimes it's better not to know things."

"Well, maybe not so yuck." Bobbie wondered whether Karel could see her blushing in the moonlight. "Well, if you're going to dream about a woman taking her clothes off, I'd rather it be about me."

"Erm, I'm glad you're not offended."

"Dreams shouldn't be taken literally. Are you blushing? It looks like you're blushing, but I can't really tell in the moonlight."

"Yeah. I'm sure I'm blushing."

"Me, too. Well, should we go wash your underwear?"

"We? Together?"

"Are you forgetting the buddy system?"

"Oh. Well, we could wait for our morning swim."

"Won't it come out cleaner if you wash it now?"

"Probably. I guess we can go for a midnight swim."

And they both stood up and started walking toward the beach, but then Bobbie stopped. "Wait. This isn't going to work very well."

"Oh. Yeah. We aren't married yet. We can't go skinny-dipping together at midnight just yet. Otherwise, why would I have been arguing with you in my dream?"

And they both started laughing again and went back to the tent to change to their swimming suits.

They continued talking as they walked down to the beach, Karel carrying his soiled clothes.

"Will that always happen when I kiss you in your sleep?"

"Oh, no. I've just been, well, sort of practicing my endurance."

Bobbie gave him a quizzical look.

"We've talked before about my reasons for not always having a temple recommend before, ..."

"Yeah. You've tended to interpret the law of chastity as including a ban against masturbation. Your current bishop back home seemed to agree with you, and my bishop seemed to think he should call your bishop and ask why, but, at the time, we were still not admitting we were interested in each other, so he didn't."

---

Back around the 1960s or so, there seemed to be a bit of disagreement among the leadership of the Church on this point. Some people think there still is. For those who might have questions on the subject, I suggest discussion with your nearest bishop. Other than to say we are neither Pharisees nor hedonists, it is not my place to state Church policy on the subject.

---

"Well, I haven't masturbated since a little bit after I broke up with Kristie. Wait. That doesn't sound right."

"I know Kristie, and she is a sweet girl, but she was too physical with you. And I told her so, but she wouldn't listen. It's funny, but I don't think she was that way with Dan, at least not while we were there."

"I always thought that she and Dan had better chemistry. She seemed not to be trying to prove herself all the time the way she was with me."

"Did you go home after your dates with Kristie and get relief?"

"Ouch. That's a personal question. But, no, she wasn't that physical with me, even when we were alone."

"That's nice to know."

"The fluids build up anyway. And they have to be released every now and then."

"And we've talked about this before, and I've offered my opinion as a nurse."

"And some of the leaders of the Church say that the only legitimate way for the release to occur is nocturnal emission."

"Yeah, and we've talked about that, too."

At this point, they had waded into the water up to their waists, and Karel started to wash his underwear and trousers.

"And that was what I interrupted when I kissed you. So it was just a matter of bad timing?"

"Yeah. But if you make a practice of kissing me in my sleep, the fluids are likely to build up faster."

"Of course. I really was not thinking clearly."

"Middle of the night, strange dreams, and this ambiguous situation, it's hard to keep a clear head. For both of us. Okay, Turn around."

"Hmm? Oh. Yeah."

And Karel took off his trunks while Bobbie's back was turned and bathed himself in the salt water.

"So, anyway, you're worried about whether we have ruined our purpose in waiting until we have the marriage license to actually get married physically?"

"Nope. Now I think I understand better why we should wait."

And Karel was finished, and they went back to camp and went back to bed under the stars, with the tent between them.

"Stupid ambiguities."

"Good night Karel. Sweet dreams."

"Good night, Bobbie. And thank you for being you. I can't imagine why we ever thought we would not like each other."


(The link to the next chapter will be here when it's ready.)

(The chapter index is here: http://joel-rees-economics.blogspot.jp/2016/04/economics-101-novel-index.html)

Backup of unpublished Economics 101, a Novel, ch_31xxx -- Not Reality

[This was an early version that I never published, for reasons that are obvious if you bother reading it. I don't recommend reading it. Go back to the previous chapter to get the current, and, I think, best version.

The real previous chapter is here: http://free-is-not-free.blogspot.com/2016/04/economics-101-novel-ch30-fear-at-night.html.
]


(The story starts here: http://free-is-not-free.blogspot.jp/2016/03/economics-101-novel-ch00.html.
The previous chapter is here: http://free-is-not-free.blogspot.com/2016/04/economics-101-novel-ch30-warning-about.html)

---

Bobbie's eye's opened and she saw the now-familiar stars of the island skies and smelled the now-familiar sea nearby and felt the now-familiar sand and salt on her clothes, and listened to the now-familiar and not-so-distant surf. She felt disoriented, stuck between two roads forward, knowing she had to choose, but not sure what it was she had yet to choose. There was some vague pining inside her, but it was evaporating and drifting away in the island breeze.

Suddenly she wanted to hear Karel's voice. "Karel?"

The reassuring hardness of the bedroll on the ground gave her some confidence that the surreal scene she could still see in her mind's eye was in fact the dream, and that the island underneath her was real.

Wycliffe asked Hanaka, "Shouldn't we try to help her, maybe suggest she stay on her side of the tent?"

But Hanaka replied, "Then she'd never know for sure where she would have drawn the line."

"Karel?" She could hear a low mumbling, as if Karel were talking to himself. She crawled out of her bedroll and peeked around the other side of the tent at her study partner lying dreaming under the stars on his bedroll, talking in his sleep, and she smiled to herself.

"... mumble mumble Bobbie mumble mumble love you mumble mumble don't ..."

She suddenly felt an urge to kiss him in his sleep, and, acting on impulse, crawled over to him and did so.

"Ahhhhggggg!"

Karel rolled away violently and sat up with his back against the tent wall, not fully awake, genuine terror and confusion in his face.

"Bobbie! What are you doing?"

"Uhm, ..." Bobbie was a bit perplexed. She wanted to laugh, but the terror in his eyes was real, and did not seem to be fading. As he leaned forward, almost as if in pain, she realized what had happened.

"Oh, dear. That was not nice of me, was it?"

"Ah, ... " At her words, the fear and confusion in Karel's face faded and he started to breathe again. "No, it's okay." He took another breath. "Two more weeks. Then you can kiss me when I'm asleep any time you want." He winced, and breathed deeply once more and groaned softly and shivered, rocking back and forth, holding his legs below his knees. 

"Are you gonna be OK?"

"Uhm, yeah. Going to have to wash my underwear, though."

"Sorry about that. Ehrm, does this mean, ..."

"Mean, ...?"

"Mean we ..., I don't know what I mean. Do you know what I mean?"

"Did you intend to open my valves?"

"Ick. No."

"Then you have not sinned, my daughter," he said, imitating a father confessor he had seen in a movie. (Mormon bishops would generally not use such phrasing.)

"You're joking, and I'm a little scared."

"Well, what did you intend by kissing me?"

"I had a kind of an odd dream, and when I woke up, you were talking in your sleep. So I came around to check on you, and, well, you just looked so sweet, and you were mumbling something that sounded like you were saying you love me, and I just acted on impulse."

"I don't think I see anything wrong with that. What was your dream about?"

"Oh. You remember the argument we had with Dan and Kristie in the cafeteria?"

"When they told us how unfair it was of us to be dating other people when we were planning to do the research project together, even though we weren't thinking of ourselves as romantically together?"

"Yeah. That one. When they tried to argue that the unfairness meant we should just give up the research project."

"And then we both just admitted we guessed we'd been dating them too long, instead. Boy were they upset. Not that I blame them, I guess. We had been dating them too long, really. Did they start dating each other after that?"

"Yeah, they did. I got a wedding announcement from them about a month ago."

"Wonder why I didn't."

"It came addressed to me, but it had both our names on it. 'Bobbie and Karel Pratt.' I didn't want to show it to you at the time."

Karel burst out laughing, and Bobbie joined him, their laughter echoing across the moonlit island.

When their amusement subsided, Bobbie continued. "It was like that time, but how it might have been if Wycliffe's kidnapping us were just a dream we had both had, to warn us to get married before we came."

"Really? Interesting."

"And I was dreaming it in the omniscient point of view. Pure Harlequin Romance stuff. You come in, dodge their questions, tell me you're having nightmares about being alone with me on an uncharted island. And I know what you mean, but I'm scared to ask, so I quibble about you finding my company unpleasant. And you come just right out and tell me it's rather the opposite. And I say something about if being kidnapped we should not be single, and you realize you hadn't mentioned the being kidnapped, so I must be having the same dreams as you. And Dan and Kristie have no idea what we are talking about, of course. And they are a little over the top with their attempts to defend their territory. And you and I walk off together to talk about making sure we would not be single."

"Sounds surreal. Remembering it makes all the more surreal, I guess."

"When I woke up, I wasn't sure where I was. The dream had left something empty in me, but that emptiness went away as I recognized the stars and smells and sounds of the island at night. Reassured myself I was, in fact, here. I listened for you, and I guess I was going to crawl out to make sure you were there anyway, when I heard you talking in your sleep."

"I see. So you are happy we are here, together?"

"Yeah. What was your dream?"

"Oh, we were arguing, and I kept trying to tell you I love you. I love you, by the way."

"It's nice to hear. I love you, too. What were we arguing about?"

Karel winced and tilted his head as if he wanted to dodge that question. "Do you really want to know?"

"I told you what I dreamed."

"You were taking your clothes off, and I was trying to stop you."

"Hmm." Bobbie wondered whether Karel could see her blushing in the moonlight. "Well, if you're going to dream about a woman taking her clothes off, I'd rather it be about me."

"Erm, I'm glad you're not offended."

"Dreams shouldn't be taken literally. Are you blushing? It looks like you're blushing, but I can't really tell in the moonlight."

"Yeah. I'm sure I'm blushing."

"Me, too. Well, should we go wash your underwear?"

"We? Together?"

"Are you forgetting the buddy system?"

"Oh. Well, we could wait for our morning swim."

"Won't it come out cleaner if you wash it now?"

"Probably. I guess we can go for a midnight swim."

They continued talking as they changed clothes and walked down to the beach.

"Will that always happen when I kiss you in your sleep?"

"Oh, no. I've just been, well, this is birds and bees stuff."

"I guess."

"Guys get stuff bottled up inside them, too."

"What do you mean?"

"Didn't your mom or you dad or someone explain this?"

"Yeah. And I studied a bit about the male physiology in my pre-nursing classes, too. But everyone seems to be embarrassed to talk about it, and there's stuff no one tells you. Like what happened just now."





"Oh, that's nice. I want another kiss, and then I'm going down to the sea. And we don't want to forget the buddy system in the middle of the night." Karel stood up and came over to her and she stood up and gave him another kiss. Then he went into the tent and got out a clean pair of underwear, and they walked barefoot together to the sea.
"What was your dream about?"

"That you're committed to live forever on this island?"
And she hit him over the head with his underwear.

"Okay, okay. Not the island forever."

They were at the waterline.

"Hmm. This is going to be awkward. I should be asking you to hold things for me so they don't get dirty, but I should not be asking you to watch me while I wash them wearing my birthday suit."

"Why should I turn around any more?"

Karel stood there, truly perplexed.

"We were unwise when we did not clarify our feelings for each other before we came. That was our sin. But we did not ask to be here, now

---

---

(The link to the next chapter will be here when it's ready.)

(The chapter index is here: http://joel-rees-economics.blogspot.jp/2016/04/economics-101-novel-index.html)

Economics 101, a Novel, ch_31a -- Reality

[This chapter has been superceded. Go here, instead: http://free-is-not-free.blogspot.com/2016/04/economics-101-novel-ch30-fear-at-night.html.]

(The story starts here: http://free-is-not-free.blogspot.jp/2016/03/economics-101-novel-ch00.html.

The previous chapter is here: http://free-is-not-free.blogspot.com/2016/04/economics-101-novel-ch30-fear-at-night.html  If you missed that, there will be some discontinuity here, so you'll probably want to go back and read it.)

This chapter contains sexually explicit material. Nothing to get too excited about, Bobbie and Karel aren't having sex or anything like that, but I don't want people who aren't interested in reading their discussion of important sexual matters stumbling on it by accident. You may prefer to read the modest version, instead.

The modest version of the chapter is here: http://free-is-not-free.blogspot.com/2016/04/economics-101-novel-ch31-reality.html. 

[Edit JMR201604261655: I realized that I had failed to record important parts of Karel's and Bobbie's conversation. Backup of the first posted version is at http://joel-rees-about-sex.blogspot.com/2016/04/backup-jmr201604261650-economics-101.html]  

[Edit JMR201605012049: Added a little moralizing at the end.]

---

Karel leaned forward as if in pain, hands forming fists over his knees, suppressing a groan. He didn't seem quite able to talk, seemed to be holding his breath.

"What's wrong?" Bobbie was not sure what to do. She moved closer to him and massaged his back, and felt his body shudder. Then she remembered some of her experiences as a nurse, and the light came on in her mind.

"Oh, dear. That was not nice of me, was it?"

"Ah, ... " Her words, and maybe her hand on his back, too, seemed to have a calming influence, and the fear and confusion in Karel's face faded and he started to breathe again. "No, it's okay." He took another breath. "Two more weeks. Then you can kiss me when I'm asleep all you want." He winced, and breathed deeply once more and groaned softly and shivered, rocking back and forth, holding his legs below his knees. 

"Are you gonna be OK?"

"Uhm, yeah, I think so. Gonna have to wash my underwear, though."

"Oh. Sorry about that." She felt awkward, knowing that the apology was, at the same time, both not enough and too much. "Can I do something to help?"

Karel chuckled. "You just did." Then he relaxed and lay on the ground laughing, or maybe sobbing.

And both of them were praying in their hearts for direction from God.

"Now what?"

"Good question."
 
"Ehrm, does this mean, ..."

"Mean, ...?"

"Mean we ..., I don't know what I mean. Do you know what I mean?"

Karel sat back up. "Did you intend to open my valves?"

"Ick. No!"

"Then you have not sinned, my daughter," he said, imitating a father confessor he had seen in a movie. (Mormon bishops are not father confessors, and would generally not use such phrasing. The Mormon approach to confessing is a little different, as you can see.)

"You're joking, and I'm a little scared."

"Well, what did you intend by kissing me?" Karel asked with mock strictness, trying to lighten the mood. Then he grinned.

And Bobbie relaxed, too. "I had a kind of an odd dream, and when I woke up, you were talking in your sleep. So I came around to check on you, and, well, you just looked so sweet and you were mumbling something that sounded like you were saying you love me, and I was feeling a little strange because of the dream," and Bobbie paused for a breath, "and I just acted on impulse."

"I don't think I see anything wrong with that. What was your dream about?"

"Oh. You remember the argument we had with Dan and Kristie in the cafeteria?"

"Dan. Kristie. When they told us how unfair it was of us to be dating other people when we were planning to do the research project together, even though we weren't thinking of ourselves as romantically together?"

"Yeah. That one. When they tried to argue that the unfairness meant we should just give up the research project."

"And then, instead, we both just admitted we guessed we'd been dating them too long. Boy were they upset. Not that I blame them, really. We had been dating them too long. And they started dating each other after that, didn't they."

"Yeah, they did. I got a wedding announcement from them about a month ago."

"You did? Wonder why I didn't."

"It came addressed to me, but it had both our names on it. Sort of. 'Bobbie and Karel Pratt.' I didn't want to show it to you at the time."

Karel burst out laughing, and Bobbie joined him, their laughter echoing across the moonlit island.

When their amusement subsided, Bobbie continued. "It was like that time, but how it might have been if everything that has happened in the last four months, including Wycliffe's kidnapping us, were just a long and detailed, continuing dream we had both had separately, together, to warn us to get married before we came."

"Really? Interesting."

"And I was dreaming it in the omniscient point of view. Pure Harlequin Romance stuff. You come in, dodge their questions, tell me you're having nightmares about being alone with me on an uncharted island. And I know what you mean, but I'm scared to admit it, so I quibble about you finding my company unpleasant. And you come just right out and tell me it's rather the opposite. And I say that, if we are going to be kidnapped, we should do something to avoid the nightmare. And you realize you hadn't mentioned the being kidnapped, so you know I must be having the same dreams as you. And Dan and Kristie have no idea what we are talking about, of course. And they are a little over the top with their attempts to defend their territory. And you and I walk off together to talk about making sure we would not be single."

"Sounds surreal, alright."

"When I woke up, I wasn't sure where I was at first. The dream had left something empty in me, but that emptiness went away as I recognized the stars and smells and sounds of the island at night. Even the hard ground was reassuring, but I suddenly wanted to hear your voice. I listened for you, and I guess I was going to crawl out to make sure you were there anyway, when I heard you talking in your sleep."

"Oh. And then I looked cute in my sleep and ...?"

"and I wanted just a little more reassurance that this is all real."

"Wow. So. You think you're happy here."

"I don't think I'd be happy if this were taken away from us." Bobbie's face crinkled into a strangely shy smile. "What was your dream?"

"It isn't obvious?"

"Why would it be obvious?"

"Oh, well, we were arguing about something inconsequential, and I kept trying to tell you I love you. I love you, by the way."

"It's nice to hear. I love you, too. What were we arguing about?"

Karel winced and tilted his head as if he wanted to dodge that question. "Do you really want to know?"

"I told you what I dreamed."

"We had some disagreement about getting married. I'm not sure what it was. Maybe it was about the marriage license."

"Have we ever really argued? Oh. Yeah. Never mind. It's easy to forget. That was all?"

"You, uh, said you didn't want to wait, and started taking your clothes off, and I was trying to stop you."

"EW! YUCK!"

"See. Sometimes it's better not to know things."

"Well, maybe not so yuck." Bobbie wondered whether Karel could see her blushing in the moonlight. "If you're going to dream about a woman taking her clothes off, I'd sure rather it be about me." And she giggled, of course. Wouldn't you giggle?

"Erm, I'm glad you're not offended."

"Dreams shouldn't be taken literally. Are you blushing? It looks like you're blushing, but I can't really tell in the moonlight."

"Yeah. I'm sure I'm blushing."

"Me, too. Well, should we go wash your underwear?"

"We? Together?"

"Are you forgetting the buddy system?"

"Oh. Well, we could wait for our morning swim."

"Won't it come out cleaner if you wash it now?"

"Probably. I guess we can go for a midnight swim."

And they both stood up and started walking toward the beach, but then Bobbie stopped. "Wait. This isn't going to work very well."

"Oh. Yeah. We aren't married yet. We can't go skinny-dipping together at midnight just yet. Otherwise, why would I have been arguing with you in my dream?"

And they both started laughing again and continued talking as they went back to the tent to change to their swimming suits.

"So my kiss helped you?"

"Why do you want to ask such a question?"

"Just curious. You said I had helped you already when I asked if I could help."

 "Oh. That was the talking to me and rubbing my back. But I'm not going to trade that kiss for all the gold in the world. Just, not until we get married properly. No more 'til then, please."

And Bobbie gave Karel a hug. "Thanks. You change first."

They changed in silence, both thinking their own thoughts. After changing, they continued talking as the walked to the beach.

"Will that always happen when I kiss you in your sleep?" Bobbie asked.

"Oh, no. I've just been, well, sort of practicing my endurance."

Bobbie gave him a quizzical look.

"We've talked before about my reasons for not always having a temple recommend before, ..."

"Yeah. You've tended to interpret the law of chastity as including a ban against masturbation. Your current bishop back home seemed to agree with you, and my bishop seemed to think he should call your bishop and ask why, but, at the time, we were still not admitting we were interested in each other, so he didn't."

---

Back around the 1960s or so, there seemed to be a bit of disagreement among the leadership of the Church on this point. Some people think there still is. For those who might have questions on the subject, I suggest discussion with your nearest bishop. Other than to say we are neither Pharisees nor hedonists, it is not my place to state Church policy on the subject.

---

"Odd that we would talk about such things even though we weren't interested in each other."

"We just felt comfortable together. Mom and Dad both noticed that."

"Well, I haven't masturbated since a little bit after I broke up with Kristie. Wait. That doesn't sound right."

"I know Kristie, and she is a sweet girl, but she was too physical with you. And I told her so, but she wouldn't listen. It's funny, but I don't think she was that way with Dan, at least not while we were there."

"I always thought that she and Dan had better chemistry. She seemed not to be trying to prove herself all the time the way she was with me."

"When you went home after your dates with Kristie did you have to get relief?"

"Ouch. That's a personal question. But, no, she wasn't that physical with me, even when we were alone."

"That's nice to know. I didn't think she was the kind to try to hold a guy by keeping him frustrated."

"The fluids regularly build up anyway. And they have to be released every now and then."

"And we've talked about this before, and I've offered my opinion as a nurse."

"And some of the leaders of the Church say that the only legitimate way for the release to occur is nocturnal emission."

"Yeah, and we've talked about that, too."

At this point, they had waded into the water up above their waists, and Karel started to wash his underwear and trousers.

Bobbie continued, "And that was what I interrupted when I kissed you. Dreams that often occur with nocturnal emissions. So it was just a matter of bad timing."

"Yeah. But if you make a practice of kissing me in my sleep, the fluids are likely to build up faster."

"Of course. I really was not thinking clearly."

"Middle of the night, strange dreams, and this ambiguous situation, it's hard to keep a clear head. For both of us. Okay, Turn around."

"Hmm? Oh. Yeah."

And Karel took off his trunks while Bobbie's back was turned and bathed himself in the salt water.

"So, anyway, you're worried about whether we have ruined our purpose in waiting until we have the marriage license to actually get married physically?"

"Nope. Now I think I understand better why we should wait. Is it going to be hard?"

Karel put his trunks back on. "I don't think so. I'm done. Do you want to bathe while we're here?"

"Mmmm No, I'll do that in the morning, like usual. Let's go back to camp."

"Okay." And they headed back to camp.

"It's funny about this," Karel said as they went. "When I'm with you, the stresses are good or something, and the seminal fluids don't build up so fast."

"Hmmm. That's kind of neat. Nice to think I'm so good for you."

"I hope I'm as good for you."

"You are. The feelings I have now are the best feelings I've ever felt. Can sex be any better than this?"

"Mom told me once that the pillow talk was more important than the acrobatics."

"You didn't have to say that."

"Woops."

"But, all those people getting excited about sex, and they're missing the best part?"

"I shouldn't have said that. We can find out more when we are properly married. For now, this is good enough for me."

And they fell silent, and just held hands as they walked back to camp. After they hung up their swimsuits and Karel's clothes to dry, they went back to their bedrolls under the stars, with the tent between them.

"Stupid ambiguities."

"Good night, Karel. Sweet dreams."

"Good night, Bobbie. And thank you for being you. I can't imagine why we ever thought we would not want to be married to each other."

---

[JMR201605012049
Some people will say that Karel is rationalizing.

If you lean that way, I'll ask you -- is he rationalizing his own behavior?

Is he making excuses for Bobbie because he wants her to do it again?

Is he using a moral bribe, trading forgiveness for her lapse of control for his future imposition of a meaningless imitation marriage license?

I guess I'll have to (sometime) add chapters 1 through 9, to lay groundwork for my claim that our co-protagonists really do love each other, but I'll admit that we really can't know for sure what Karel intends at this point, relative to their eventually being rescued. I personally think that being so suspicious of people's intentions tends to lead more away from happiness than towards.
]

(The link to the next chapter will be here when it's ready is here: http://free-is-not-free.blogspot.com/2016/04/economics-101-novel-ch32-weaving.html.)

(The chapter index is here: http://joel-rees-economics.blogspot.jp/2016/04/economics-101-novel-index.html)

What I Am Not Doing Here

This is not intended as a place to get your forced dopamine rush.

It is intended as a place where I can talk (mostly to myself) about things of explicit nature, rants that I would not want you to stumble on without warning.

Some posts will be more detailed versions of posts to my other blogs, or additional detail for posts to other blogs.

As such, I'm telling the search robots to stay away, and taking it off of google+ .

If you link to something here, I'd appreciate it if you mention, just before the link, that it may not be safe or comfortable reading.