Topic: I Wanna Hold Your Hand

[Arachne]

Looking up the Internet Monk blog (which is still running, wheee!), I found this post, that got the cogs turning something fierce:

I Wanna Hold Your Hand: Being Physical in a Sexual World

It is not written from an Orthodox perspective (the author is obviously Catholic) and it does not refer exclusively to children, but both the post and - even more - the comments underneath make it obvious that, whatever idea kids get about physical contact, that's what they will carry over into their adult lives.

Thoughts?

[Luke]

I wonder if the author would also include how people, me included, spend more time communicating on the Internet these days than in person?

[Shiny]

whatever idea kids get about physical contact, that's what they will carry over into their adult lives.

As somebody who was in a brief relationship with someone that suffered sexual abuse as a child (as well as the rest of her sisters) from her step-father, I can tell you it definitely carried over. I'm not going to get into details unless you want me to, but once I broke it off after seeing way too many red flags, she ended up dating a man just as old as the abuser.

I don't think Freud is as facile as this article assumes here. We do engage in the world sexually, even as children.

But as PtA said before, and he's right, sexual sin is probably the hardest to deal with. So this idea that society is too obsessed with sex, well it is a stronger passion than the rest.

[Faith2545]

whatever idea kids get about physical contact, that's what they will carry over into their adult lives.

As somebody who was in a brief relationship with someone that suffered sexual abuse as a child (as well as the rest of her sisters) from her step-father, I can tell you it definitely carried over. I'm not going to get into details unless you want me to, but once I broke it off after seeing way too many red flags, she ended up dating a man just as old as the abuser.

I don't think Freud is as facile as this article assumes here. We do engage in the world sexually, even as children.

But as PtA said before, and he's right, sexual sin is probably the hardest to deal with. So this idea that society is too obsessed with sex, well it is a stronger passion than the rest.

I've never experienced such atrocity, and for some reason, I am completely bothered by the act of physical abuse. Mostly because I don't know who really is to blame - the abuser or the one suffering from the abuser and somehow ending up BECOMING an abuser. The vicious cycle. I cannot get over it. Innocence that is lost and then innocence taken away again. Awful. I commend those who seek help for their suffering, as I do commend those who make conscious efforts to not victimize others themselves. Gold help them.

[orthonorm]

Talk to parents of the kids they adopted from "orphanages" where almost no contact was offered and ask them about their bewilderment why johnny ain't turning out to be the all American accoutrement they had hoped for.

[orthonorm]

And people think Freud is irrelevant. The cognitive scientists keep rediscovering him over and over again.

[orthonorm]

whatever idea kids get about physical contact, that's what they will carry over into their adult lives.

As somebody who was in a brief relationship with someone that suffered sexual abuse as a child (as well as the rest of her sisters) from her step-father, I can tell you it definitely carried over. I'm not going to get into details unless you want me to, but once I broke it off after seeing way too many red flags, she ended up dating a man just as old as the abuser.

I don't think Freud is as facile as this article assumes here. We do engage in the world sexually, even as children.

But as PtA said before, and he's right, sexual sin is probably the hardest to deal with. So this idea that society is too obsessed with sex, well it is a stronger passion than the rest.

Bah. We don't engage in the world sexually as if there is any other mode.

The grossest perversion of the human mind is to imagine engaging in the world in an asexual manner.

[orthonorm]

After looking at the article, eye-rolling is the only sensible action.

[IoanC]

Well, your environment will inevitably define you unless you are able to choose against. Most deeply, I believe, what we inherit from our birth is a state of spiritual illness, and it is very hard to change spiritually because one doesn't even know there is something so deeply wrong. So, as I read from an elder, it is generally safe to assume that man is very susceptible to sin from his birth. It's all quite compromised from the very start. So, it's hard and sad.

[orthonorm]

I wonder if the author would also include how people, me included, spend more time communicating on the Internet these days than in person?

This is the sorta basic nonsense I would like rid in people's heads.

How are you ever communicating except in person? And this obsession the physical arises out of a rather simplistic although important advent within the understanding of persoonhood.

So explain to me how you communicate (a word I think is already problematic) without recourse to your person, thus personally, and without recourse to any definition of the physical?

[vamrat]

whatever idea kids get about physical contact, that's what they will carry over into their adult lives.

As somebody who was in a brief relationship with someone that suffered sexual abuse as a child (as well as the rest of her sisters) from her step-father, I can tell you it definitely carried over. I'm not going to get into details unless you want me to, but once I broke it off after seeing way too many red flags, she ended up dating a man just as old as the abuser.

I don't think Freud is as facile as this article assumes here. We do engage in the world sexually, even as children.

But as PtA said before, and he's right, sexual sin is probably the hardest to deal with. So this idea that society is too obsessed with sex, well it is a stronger passion than the rest.

Bah. We don't engage in the world sexually as if there is any other mode.

The grossest perversion of the human mind is to imagine engaging in the world in an asexual manner.

Water, food, shelter, reproduction.  Humans are social creatures but I would put forward that all of our social interactions at their most basic level involve trying to obtain/construct/attract and secure those four base elements.

[IoanC]

From the perspective of physical love (without it having to be sex), as the article seems to say, I believe showing children loving affection is definitely important. A person who knows affection will definitely be different than one who doesn't.

[orthonorm]

whatever idea kids get about physical contact, that's what they will carry over into their adult lives.

As somebody who was in a brief relationship with someone that suffered sexual abuse as a child (as well as the rest of her sisters) from her step-father, I can tell you it definitely carried over. I'm not going to get into details unless you want me to, but once I broke it off after seeing way too many red flags, she ended up dating a man just as old as the abuser.

I don't think Freud is as facile as this article assumes here. We do engage in the world sexually, even as children.

But as PtA said before, and he's right, sexual sin is probably the hardest to deal with. So this idea that society is too obsessed with sex, well it is a stronger passion than the rest.

Bah. We don't engage in the world sexually as if there is any other mode.

The grossest perversion of the human mind is to imagine engaging in the world in an asexual manner.

Water, food, shelter, reproduction.  Humans are social creatures but I would put forward that all of our social interactions at their most basic level involve trying to obtain/construct/attract and secure those four base elements.

Yeah, and you would be wrong, a lot of people have made a lot of hay doing so, so why not?

[orthonorm]

From the perspective of physical love (without it having to be sex), as the article seems to say, I believe showing children loving affection is definitely important. A person who knows affection will definitely be different than one who doesn't.

There is no love which isn't physical.
There is no love which isn't sexual.

Not this side of human personhood.

[vamrat]

whatever idea kids get about physical contact, that's what they will carry over into their adult lives.

As somebody who was in a brief relationship with someone that suffered sexual abuse as a child (as well as the rest of her sisters) from her step-father, I can tell you it definitely carried over. I'm not going to get into details unless you want me to, but once I broke it off after seeing way too many red flags, she ended up dating a man just as old as the abuser.

I don't think Freud is as facile as this article assumes here. We do engage in the world sexually, even as children.

But as PtA said before, and he's right, sexual sin is probably the hardest to deal with. So this idea that society is too obsessed with sex, well it is a stronger passion than the rest.

Bah. We don't engage in the world sexually as if there is any other mode.

The grossest perversion of the human mind is to imagine engaging in the world in an asexual manner.

Water, food, shelter, reproduction.  Humans are social creatures but I would put forward that all of our social interactions at their most basic level involve trying to obtain/construct/attract and secure those four base elements.

Yeah, and you would be wrong, a lot of people have made a lot of hay doing so, so why not?

So we do it just for whatever reason?

[orthonorm]

whatever idea kids get about physical contact, that's what they will carry over into their adult lives.

As somebody who was in a brief relationship with someone that suffered sexual abuse as a child (as well as the rest of her sisters) from her step-father, I can tell you it definitely carried over. I'm not going to get into details unless you want me to, but once I broke it off after seeing way too many red flags, she ended up dating a man just as old as the abuser.

I don't think Freud is as facile as this article assumes here. We do engage in the world sexually, even as children.

But as PtA said before, and he's right, sexual sin is probably the hardest to deal with. So this idea that society is too obsessed with sex, well it is a stronger passion than the rest.

Bah. We don't engage in the world sexually as if there is any other mode.

The grossest perversion of the human mind is to imagine engaging in the world in an asexual manner.

Water, food, shelter, reproduction.  Humans are social creatures but I would put forward that all of our social interactions at their most basic level involve trying to obtain/construct/attract and secure those four base elements.

Yeah, and you would be wrong, a lot of people have made a lot of hay doing so, so why not?

So we do it just for whatever reason?

Do what? You are already too late with such reductive notions of anything as helpful as they might for stuff like theories of how to better take advantage of workers, prisoners, children, stuff like that.

But they are always too late as they require an already never which can be articulated understanding with always within a world and among others. Without that prior understanding, nothing is else possible by creatures like ourselves.

But to think, that are behavior is built up from various combinations of needs is nuts. The unarticulated which articulates us has been referred as many things by many people, since the author made some grauitious jab at Freud, it is the Id or the Death Drive for him, depending on what you are reading.

Which reminds me, I still need to get back to podkarp for calling me a modernist and "subjectivist" recently. What an odd notion based on the garbage I post here.

[IoanC]

From the perspective of physical love (without it having to be sex), as the article seems to say, I believe showing children loving affection is definitely important. A person who knows affection will definitely be different than one who doesn't.

There is no love which isn't physical.
There is no love which isn't sexual.

Not this side of human personhood.

Not sure I understand. Physical manifestations of love don't have to be sex which has a particular place in this world, it is for multiplication.

[Hawkeye]

But they are always too late as they require an already never which can be articulated understanding with always within a world and among others.

I don't doubt that you're light-years beyond me and I'm willing to admit that I rarely, if ever, understand what you're trying to get across, but... wut? Is this even a sentence?

[orthonorm]

But they are always too late as they require an already never which can be articulated understanding WHICH always IS within a world and among others.

I don't doubt that you're light-years beyond me and I'm willing to admit that I rarely, if ever, understand what you're trying to get across, but... wut? Is this even a sentence?

Sorta. It's close enough. Between a nagging neurological issue that messes a bit with typing nowadays and a phone it is pretty good.

One mistyped word and dropped verb. OCCURS and the like works as well.