Science and the modern economic plight
3 views
Skip to first unread message
archytas
Feb 7, 2012, 7:17:20 AM2/7/12
to "Minds Eye"
E = mc2 is the most important upshot of relativity. Write a 5,000
word essay. Well, don't worry too much, someone did one earlier -
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/equivME/
This is only one example, outside my sphere of expertise, I can think
of concerning just how difficult thinking, experiment and proof can
be. How different it all is from moroneconomics that makes
assumptions of standardised human behaviour and outcomes that bless
the rich. I wonder what physics would be like if it allowed such
prejudiced thinking?
When I walk Max I'm rather proud of him - he does his business in our
backyard and is an all round nice guy. I can't but notice our
neighbours have let their dogs foul and that local kids foul with
litter. We need quite draconian measures to stop the worst in our
society levelling everything down to the midden and jungle. It seems
reasonable not to expect the best as standard human behaviour. When
I look at the stealing going on under the name of economics, politics
or whatever I get the same feeling.
As a scientist, I realised most people know very little of the
reasoning and skills involved. One tries to be charitable and assume
this is because they don't get the chance, but to be honest I've felt
for a long time this is more to do with dullardry, ineptitude and
laziness. I don't believe the natural human condition is one of hard
work and animals are not much of a model for this. The 'busy bee'
usually isn't and spends more time incumbent.
When one looks at such as the consideration of mass and energy in
physics, one should wonder on such matters as 'work' in human
interaction, and how that may 'break down'. We don't and still live
in the Dark Ages. If I ask for a 5,000 word essay on work motivation,
95% of responses from those forced to comply for qualification
purposes will be a regurgitation of textbooks on Maslow, Hertzberg,
Lawler and other 'names' (all dross). The odd student might start in
such contradiction as that of the wealthy manager sated with money and
the poor farmer in India saddled with debt.
The content of management textbooks has long been a scandal and the
only change I've noticed since the 1950s is 'weight and gloss'. They
just weigh more these days, glossing over the same old trash One can
note the same in legislative documents. Glass-Steagal was 30-odd
pages, whereas the 'Facilitation of Bankster Fraud Acts' of modern
times run to thousands.
What strikes me as a scientist is that questions like what kind of a
world do we want ourselves and others to live in, what is the work
needed to do and maintain this and so on is all excluded. If physics
was like economics we'd only be able to describe earth, wind, fire and
water. All that's come from science in this direction is unwarranted
abstraction, usually of maths-based 'proof'.
The farce of our system lies in allowing people to get rich and then
control wealth and politics. This is obvious. We rightly worry that
simply overturning this only produces another set of such 'worthies'
likely to be worse. We may even worry that the absence of such
libidinal wealth opportunity takes away all motivation. Whatever this
is about, it's not science. Unlike science, which you won't be doing
unless you can demonstrate some competence, general argument assumes
you have some. Hearing this, many fear the message is a call to be
ruled by scientists. All the scientist really wants is a break from
superstition.
word essay. Well, don't worry too much, someone did one earlier -
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/equivME/
This is only one example, outside my sphere of expertise, I can think
of concerning just how difficult thinking, experiment and proof can
be. How different it all is from moroneconomics that makes
assumptions of standardised human behaviour and outcomes that bless
the rich. I wonder what physics would be like if it allowed such
prejudiced thinking?
When I walk Max I'm rather proud of him - he does his business in our
backyard and is an all round nice guy. I can't but notice our
neighbours have let their dogs foul and that local kids foul with
litter. We need quite draconian measures to stop the worst in our
society levelling everything down to the midden and jungle. It seems
reasonable not to expect the best as standard human behaviour. When
I look at the stealing going on under the name of economics, politics
or whatever I get the same feeling.
As a scientist, I realised most people know very little of the
reasoning and skills involved. One tries to be charitable and assume
this is because they don't get the chance, but to be honest I've felt
for a long time this is more to do with dullardry, ineptitude and
laziness. I don't believe the natural human condition is one of hard
work and animals are not much of a model for this. The 'busy bee'
usually isn't and spends more time incumbent.
When one looks at such as the consideration of mass and energy in
physics, one should wonder on such matters as 'work' in human
interaction, and how that may 'break down'. We don't and still live
in the Dark Ages. If I ask for a 5,000 word essay on work motivation,
95% of responses from those forced to comply for qualification
purposes will be a regurgitation of textbooks on Maslow, Hertzberg,
Lawler and other 'names' (all dross). The odd student might start in
such contradiction as that of the wealthy manager sated with money and
the poor farmer in India saddled with debt.
The content of management textbooks has long been a scandal and the
only change I've noticed since the 1950s is 'weight and gloss'. They
just weigh more these days, glossing over the same old trash One can
note the same in legislative documents. Glass-Steagal was 30-odd
pages, whereas the 'Facilitation of Bankster Fraud Acts' of modern
times run to thousands.
What strikes me as a scientist is that questions like what kind of a
world do we want ourselves and others to live in, what is the work
needed to do and maintain this and so on is all excluded. If physics
was like economics we'd only be able to describe earth, wind, fire and
water. All that's come from science in this direction is unwarranted
abstraction, usually of maths-based 'proof'.
The farce of our system lies in allowing people to get rich and then
control wealth and politics. This is obvious. We rightly worry that
simply overturning this only produces another set of such 'worthies'
likely to be worse. We may even worry that the absence of such
libidinal wealth opportunity takes away all motivation. Whatever this
is about, it's not science. Unlike science, which you won't be doing
unless you can demonstrate some competence, general argument assumes
you have some. Hearing this, many fear the message is a call to be
ruled by scientists. All the scientist really wants is a break from
superstition.
archytas
Feb 8, 2012, 12:30:25 PM2/8/12
to "Minds Eye"
What intrigued me when I took science seriously was the way I had to
learn what others were finding, and that. at least after school and
university, I could check on what was going on and marvel in the
complexity and shared language. It was hard work I can't sustain
now. Some take science as a clerical method and sometimes, as Vam
points out, this is true. I take the method as one of
demystification, something of an anarchist view. The rest of our
lives are shrouded in mystification. The current England football
manager has 'earned' over £24 million in the last few years and most
of us seem to think this is OK (and all the bwanking rest), apparently
with no clue on of how this is paid for and who really does the
paying. The heir apparent is Harry Rednap, who admitted whilst on
trial for tax evasion not done through an offshore bank, that he can't
read, write or use a computer.
Human beings have been 'happy' with all kinds of madness, from the
divine rights of kings to lives dedicated to stone carvings that
required the destruction of their ecosystems (Easter Island). Most in
the West are so stupid they imagine a world of dynamic individualistic
capitalism when, in fact we are now dominated by State enterprise (see
the Economist at http://media.economist.com/sites/default/files/sponsorships/MM150/20120121_state_capitalism.pdf
). The majority of our populations can't do science (school exams are
facile yet most still can't do them and choose not to).
This problem of a largely ineducable population is crucial in our
democracies. I don't see any solution in 'philosopher kings' or
'Guardians'. The essence of the problem is that argument is no good
because most can't hack it. It entails personal admission of
inferiority that individualism can't allow because it can't give up on
identity or realise this identity is formed as a world-view. The
lacking ingredient is imagination - to think of throwing oneself off a
cliff and see the flight of a cannonball as a straight line - yet also
the presence of imagination that allows all kinds of brutal facts
about the world to be ignored or rationalised. In this trance we can
see a disabled family on welfare as a drain on the public purse but
not the soccer manager or bwankster costing us much more (because
somehow hard work justifies the welfare of the rich - even though for
the worker it may just lead to a broken back).
In science I can speculate on whether space structures appearances and
on transfer of our information to planets nearby in information speed
terms (think of the play 'Andromeda') - in politics it appears to be
as fantastic to wonder of a society free from the grasping rich, or to
see this condition as a failure to understand our biology and the long
history of debt peonage.
On Feb 7, 12:17 pm, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
> E = mc2 is the most important upshot of relativity. Write a 5,000
> word essay. Well, don't worry too much, someone did one earlier -http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/equivME/
learn what others were finding, and that. at least after school and
university, I could check on what was going on and marvel in the
complexity and shared language. It was hard work I can't sustain
now. Some take science as a clerical method and sometimes, as Vam
points out, this is true. I take the method as one of
demystification, something of an anarchist view. The rest of our
lives are shrouded in mystification. The current England football
manager has 'earned' over £24 million in the last few years and most
of us seem to think this is OK (and all the bwanking rest), apparently
with no clue on of how this is paid for and who really does the
paying. The heir apparent is Harry Rednap, who admitted whilst on
trial for tax evasion not done through an offshore bank, that he can't
read, write or use a computer.
Human beings have been 'happy' with all kinds of madness, from the
divine rights of kings to lives dedicated to stone carvings that
required the destruction of their ecosystems (Easter Island). Most in
the West are so stupid they imagine a world of dynamic individualistic
capitalism when, in fact we are now dominated by State enterprise (see
the Economist at http://media.economist.com/sites/default/files/sponsorships/MM150/20120121_state_capitalism.pdf
). The majority of our populations can't do science (school exams are
facile yet most still can't do them and choose not to).
This problem of a largely ineducable population is crucial in our
democracies. I don't see any solution in 'philosopher kings' or
'Guardians'. The essence of the problem is that argument is no good
because most can't hack it. It entails personal admission of
inferiority that individualism can't allow because it can't give up on
identity or realise this identity is formed as a world-view. The
lacking ingredient is imagination - to think of throwing oneself off a
cliff and see the flight of a cannonball as a straight line - yet also
the presence of imagination that allows all kinds of brutal facts
about the world to be ignored or rationalised. In this trance we can
see a disabled family on welfare as a drain on the public purse but
not the soccer manager or bwankster costing us much more (because
somehow hard work justifies the welfare of the rich - even though for
the worker it may just lead to a broken back).
In science I can speculate on whether space structures appearances and
on transfer of our information to planets nearby in information speed
terms (think of the play 'Andromeda') - in politics it appears to be
as fantastic to wonder of a society free from the grasping rich, or to
see this condition as a failure to understand our biology and the long
history of debt peonage.
On Feb 7, 12:17 pm, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
> E = mc2 is the most important upshot of relativity. Write a 5,000
Allan H
Feb 8, 2012, 1:42:39 PM2/8/12
to mind...@googlegroups.com
Ghandis 7 Dangers to Human Virtue
1: Wealth without Work
2: Pleasure without Conscience
3: Knowledge without Character
4:Business without Ethics
5:Science without Humanity
6: Religion without Sacrifice
7: Politics without Principal
Allan
--
(
(
)
|_D Allan
Life is for moral, ethical and truthful living.
archytas
Feb 9, 2012, 1:44:54 PM2/9/12
to "Minds Eye"
I'm not sure Gandhi was helped too much in his personal life by such
Allan - but the core of the problem is in there.
> >http://media.economist.com/sites/default/files/sponsorships/MM150/201...
Allan - but the core of the problem is in there.
Don Johnson
Feb 10, 2012, 12:31:46 AM2/10/12
to mind...@googlegroups.com
Ah arch, you are wallowing in frustration yet again. Kick that black dog in the nads. The metaphorical one and not the happy, frolicking drooling one. That one you can scratch behind the ears. One day you must come to terms with the simple fact that human beings are irrational and selfish by nature. I hope I get a chance to read that article in the Economist but since I'm well aware of our Statist direction here in the USA it probably won't hold much news for me. (plus I'm lazy and probably inept as well) What makes the current situation easier for me to bear is I'm mostly concerned with only "local" issues. Very local most important and then branching out in importance so that my level of compassion for those in Darfur or Ethiopia and even Syria is near non-existant. I can't be bothered. I'm more worried about improving my lot and believe you me I'm getting a bit tired of hearing all about the troubles around the world on NPR with not NEAR enough attention being payed to our troubles at home. All that said I'm fully aware things are better here in America and even better here locally in the Houston area then they are most other places. Our poor are rich compared to other places. My knowledge of Britain is limited but I would assume it is much the same there. If you're poor and avoid the drugs you can live a pretty decent life and never have to work in our country. I don't see that as possible if we didn't grease the skids for the rich to make more money. The trick is too give the new kids a chance to become rich as well. As you have noted this is becoming less likely due to Statism. The super wealthy are bribing their way to permanent dominance. They do this by influencing regulation. Makes me crazy every time some new regulation that's suposed to "protect the consumer" does nothing of the sort. Lies and more lies. Still looking out for number One here.
I do wish everyone else well however. Especially you and everyone else on this forum. Cheers all.
dj
-The idea of taking on the burdens of the whole world scare me. We do enough, too much really, already. I don't want a world government and listening to Obama and Mrs. Clinton and pickyourUNdelegate that's what they all want and actively pursue. Speaking of Hillary has anyone else noticed she's looking rather.....medicated lately? Sleeping with Prince Valium perhaps? Oxycotin maybe. Ah well, we all get older and I noticed I look pretty shitty myself lately and all I abuse is caffeine.
Allan H
Feb 10, 2012, 3:49:39 AM2/10/12
to mind...@googlegroups.com
Yes on you are right ,, the question is why are not these bribers being prosecuted.
oh yes I for got almost all of congress is involved. including the present Republican Candidate. They have made him one of them and is solidly in their pocket..
Allan
Allan
Allan H
Feb 10, 2012, 3:53:22 AM2/10/12
to mind...@googlegroups.com
Neil I think it is important bring what the problems are in simple clear statements instead of long and non rememberable statements.
What I do not understand in his statement is : Knowledge with out Concience.
Allan
archytas
Feb 10, 2012, 8:25:41 AM2/10/12
to "Minds Eye"
The lesson from science is that bullshit can be deconstructed to find
out what we might really base argument on. In economics this leaves
us with more or less nothing to say and people can't see that as a
benefit. Science is now showing that most people are so useless at
problem solving they can't do stuff orang-outangs can. With this kind
of 'ability' its perhaps not surprising we vote for GOP and the rest!
out what we might really base argument on. In economics this leaves
us with more or less nothing to say and people can't see that as a
benefit. Science is now showing that most people are so useless at
problem solving they can't do stuff orang-outangs can. With this kind
of 'ability' its perhaps not surprising we vote for GOP and the rest!
rigsy03
Feb 10, 2012, 10:11:13 AM2/10/12
to "Minds Eye"
It takes hard work to be/stay wealthy.
Define pleasure- individual or cultural.
Education builds character supposedly.
Define business versus huckterism.
Science is indifferent- can be good or evil.
What religion?
Politics has become a wasteful, dishonest game.
Gandhi reintroduced home weaving, plus non-payment of taxes, general
strikes, non-violent demonstrations (satyagraha) and there was some
improvement- maybe strengthened by Indian participation in WWII for
the Brits...but was killed by a Hindu so the nation was not unified-
plus think of the slaughter in the partition- India and Pakistan-
which still is a thorny problem. The entire Middle East and North
Africa are a mess and very dangerous. The Green Zone may not last in
Iraq, for instance. Really- very stupid American policy since the Gulf
War or back to the 1840's for the Brits in Afghanistan (a total
wasteland). Good reads are The Blue Nile and The White Nile by Alan
Moorehead- or Something of Value by Robert Ruark (?). Anyway, I don
think the internet is going to solve humanity's problems- there is too
much smoldering resentment. What's our contribution? Weapon systems or
idiotic merchandise? Plus the displaced will flee to Europe and cause
more economic pressure, etc. I wonder if our goal is to destabilize
Russia and China?
I am cooking Greek today- moussaka. A humble tribute.
> >http://media.economist.com/sites/default/files/sponsorships/MM150/201...
> Life is for moral, ethical and truthful living.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Define pleasure- individual or cultural.
Education builds character supposedly.
Define business versus huckterism.
Science is indifferent- can be good or evil.
What religion?
Politics has become a wasteful, dishonest game.
Gandhi reintroduced home weaving, plus non-payment of taxes, general
strikes, non-violent demonstrations (satyagraha) and there was some
improvement- maybe strengthened by Indian participation in WWII for
the Brits...but was killed by a Hindu so the nation was not unified-
plus think of the slaughter in the partition- India and Pakistan-
which still is a thorny problem. The entire Middle East and North
Africa are a mess and very dangerous. The Green Zone may not last in
Iraq, for instance. Really- very stupid American policy since the Gulf
War or back to the 1840's for the Brits in Afghanistan (a total
wasteland). Good reads are The Blue Nile and The White Nile by Alan
Moorehead- or Something of Value by Robert Ruark (?). Anyway, I don
think the internet is going to solve humanity's problems- there is too
much smoldering resentment. What's our contribution? Weapon systems or
idiotic merchandise? Plus the displaced will flee to Europe and cause
more economic pressure, etc. I wonder if our goal is to destabilize
Russia and China?
I am cooking Greek today- moussaka. A humble tribute.
>
> - Show quoted text -
archytas
Feb 10, 2012, 1:32:35 PM2/10/12
to "Minds Eye"
Britain actually bombed Kabul as late as 1921 and prevented a secular
king who wanted to use the Turkish model to stabilise and modernise in
1930. Science would seek to stabilise the population and provide a
war free environment for all. But most people won't make the effort
to understand. Gandhi ended up in some weird rationalisations of
sleeping with children to save the world through denial.
king who wanted to use the Turkish model to stabilise and modernise in
1930. Science would seek to stabilise the population and provide a
war free environment for all. But most people won't make the effort
to understand. Gandhi ended up in some weird rationalisations of
sleeping with children to save the world through denial.
Allan H
Feb 10, 2012, 1:53:31 PM2/10/12
to mind...@googlegroups.com
Don't go blaming the borders of Pakistan and India on Gandhi. that honor belongs solely on the shoulders of a Brit,, I see nothing wrong with home weaving It helps the poor earn a living.. I have lost a lot of money mainly to import problems.. so I could not receive my merchandise.. these items I ordered were hand made in homes.. which people made about $1 US a day making,, filling my orders,, yes I paid in advance so I was able to make sure they could feed their families.. because the product could not make it through customs. I am foolish I ate the financial loss. better me than the poor.
indecently on simple interest of which is offered today.. I would be making some where between four and five times that I receive in retirement.. would you care to show where your money came from?? and how you worked hard to make it??? and how you have to work hard to retain it?
Yes a large contribution of the western and eastern countries to the world is weapons so they can make even more money from them and increase poverty,, a great statement for advanced society isn't it..
Allan
rigsy03
Feb 10, 2012, 10:48:15 PM2/10/12
to "Minds Eye"
I thought there was some mischief on the settlement of borders- maybe
by the leaders of Pakistan. And Gandhi was dead succeeded by Nehru.
Anyway I am getting beyond myself here...:-)
I am talking about any wealth. Wealth is also relative- it won't do
much re health, happiness, contentment in the long run and attracts
all sorts of problems, etc. One could ask how the wealth of the USA
has dribbled us into debt, for instance. We aren't the first to waste
our treasure- it's a constant theme in history- plus coming up
against the antagonists of undoing.
So- today I cooked: moussaka, a French apple tart and tonight made
garlic shrimp and pasta. 5 servings of moussaka are sleeping in the
freezer for the future. I lost my appetite when my youngest son went
off into the world- I really missed cooking dinner for the children.
Anyway, I'm cured. :-)
In agreement with you about weapons- a terrible business- the largest
manufacturers are the five permanent members of the UN Security
Council. But- sanctions and blockades are also a form of warfare-
maybe an act of war in reality- and it hurts the populations the most
as the rich and clever can escape to their seaside villas abroad, etc.
Like the middle class Iraqi's left and cannot find work elsewhere
easliy. Plus the left-behinds remember the sources- their leaders plus
the agitators of the moment so it is a no-win. Blather about liberty
will not buy groceries or a stable currency.
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
by the leaders of Pakistan. And Gandhi was dead succeeded by Nehru.
Anyway I am getting beyond myself here...:-)
I am talking about any wealth. Wealth is also relative- it won't do
much re health, happiness, contentment in the long run and attracts
all sorts of problems, etc. One could ask how the wealth of the USA
has dribbled us into debt, for instance. We aren't the first to waste
our treasure- it's a constant theme in history- plus coming up
against the antagonists of undoing.
So- today I cooked: moussaka, a French apple tart and tonight made
garlic shrimp and pasta. 5 servings of moussaka are sleeping in the
freezer for the future. I lost my appetite when my youngest son went
off into the world- I really missed cooking dinner for the children.
Anyway, I'm cured. :-)
In agreement with you about weapons- a terrible business- the largest
manufacturers are the five permanent members of the UN Security
Council. But- sanctions and blockades are also a form of warfare-
maybe an act of war in reality- and it hurts the populations the most
as the rich and clever can escape to their seaside villas abroad, etc.
Like the middle class Iraqi's left and cannot find work elsewhere
easliy. Plus the left-behinds remember the sources- their leaders plus
the agitators of the moment so it is a no-win. Blather about liberty
will not buy groceries or a stable currency.
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
rigsy03
Feb 10, 2012, 10:49:57 PM2/10/12
to "Minds Eye"
Over-population is one major problem of many. What work awaits all
those protestors and occupiers?
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
those protestors and occupiers?
Allan H
Feb 10, 2012, 11:59:34 PM2/10/12
to mind...@googlegroups.com
I do not know what work await the protesters and demonstrators . We can only look back to the hippie and Vietnam protester. Many survive including Bill Clinton. It is different now the military industrial complex is stronger wealth is more consentrated.
What will happen I don't know. Probably great hungry and poverty --yes we have many refuges want some?
US policy will not allow it, but their time is coming!
Allan
On Feb 11, 2012 4:50 AM, "rigsy03" <rig...@yahoo.com> wrote:
archytas
Feb 11, 2012, 9:23:30 AM2/11/12
to "Minds Eye"
Vam could no doubt give us an inside track to British horrors in
India. One interesting aspect is that current Al Qaida stuff has some
origins in India's 'Muslim unrest' in India, inspired from what is now
Saudi. The British Empire (and the 20th century US holocaust - see
Alex Blum) are matters of shame - but this is true across history
everywhere. We now know that peoples termed Barbarian were much less
so than the Greeks and Romans. The question concerns how we live in
peace and opportunity - along with what science and history not merely
the songs of victory can tell us about the pitfalls.
If you look at standard argument such as that on the conservation of
energy and think of this statement "women are weaker than men" in the
context of such discussion you should be able to see that "shorthand"
is a big problem. What we have received in common sense (in Bacon's
sense - idolatry) has to be dissolved - even time and matter. They
are reconstrued in an inertial frame of reference - and in some such
women are weaker than men - on the rugby pitch and such - though
perhaps stronger in that they don't usually want establish anything in
such competitive play. The general problem is that 'Idol-thinking' is
much easier and creeps back in all over.
In economic 'argument' there is no attempt to escape idolatry and the
subject as a whole reinforces it. There is something very appealing
about creating a society in which we can all be rich if only we try.
This is OK as speculation - but we should also speculate on what such
a society would be. Who would clean the toilets? What would money do
for anyone when everyone else had it? And so on. How do we forget so
easily what we generally think of people motivated by money? Or come
up so easily with the idea that the alternative is socialism in the
Marxist sense? It's almost like thinking the only alternative to
humdrum heterosexual pair-bonding monogamy is homosexuality!
> On Feb 11, 2012 4:50 AM, "rigsy03" <rigs...@yahoo.com> wrote:
India. One interesting aspect is that current Al Qaida stuff has some
origins in India's 'Muslim unrest' in India, inspired from what is now
Saudi. The British Empire (and the 20th century US holocaust - see
Alex Blum) are matters of shame - but this is true across history
everywhere. We now know that peoples termed Barbarian were much less
so than the Greeks and Romans. The question concerns how we live in
peace and opportunity - along with what science and history not merely
the songs of victory can tell us about the pitfalls.
If you look at standard argument such as that on the conservation of
energy and think of this statement "women are weaker than men" in the
context of such discussion you should be able to see that "shorthand"
is a big problem. What we have received in common sense (in Bacon's
sense - idolatry) has to be dissolved - even time and matter. They
are reconstrued in an inertial frame of reference - and in some such
women are weaker than men - on the rugby pitch and such - though
perhaps stronger in that they don't usually want establish anything in
such competitive play. The general problem is that 'Idol-thinking' is
much easier and creeps back in all over.
In economic 'argument' there is no attempt to escape idolatry and the
subject as a whole reinforces it. There is something very appealing
about creating a society in which we can all be rich if only we try.
This is OK as speculation - but we should also speculate on what such
a society would be. Who would clean the toilets? What would money do
for anyone when everyone else had it? And so on. How do we forget so
easily what we generally think of people motivated by money? Or come
up so easily with the idea that the alternative is socialism in the
Marxist sense? It's almost like thinking the only alternative to
humdrum heterosexual pair-bonding monogamy is homosexuality!
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages