From: Jason Joel Thompson (jasonjthompson@home.com)
Date: Mon Oct 09 2000 - 22:08:28 MDT
Hi everyone. Pleased to be back.
Having the opportunity to briefly puruse a vast cross-section of messages
(the accumulation in my absence) has given me some macro perspective on list
activities. Very interesting actually.
I'm pleased to find that the "will AI be unfriendly?" thread seemed to have
genuinely knocked itself out of its negative attractor state momentarily
(no, I'm not wrong, you're wrong, etc, repeat.)
Although Eugene's comments were sensational (probably intentionally,) I do
think that he has helped to define an important tension (embrace vs.
reliquish)-- I think it is uncontested: we truly must excercise cautious
optimism.
A comment: it isn't necessary or desirable for all of us to be cautious
adopters-- it is acceptable for us as a group to have some who are cautious
and some who are early adopters-- so long as we allow that we share a common
vision-- and so long as we allow that we are to a degree united by this
vision-- and so long as we temper our behavior in this context (we are
greater than the sum of our parts, etc.)
---
It's interesting as well to have had the opportunity to experience the
dialogue thread of individual posters over a longer period of time. I took
this opportunity to apply the Turing test to list members: curiously,
several failed. (Sorry Molloy, I'm on to you. :)
---
I really like that we've started a bisexual thread-- and I'm pleased to find
that a number of list members are forthcoming about their respective
sexualities-- let's face it folks, these are the days of miracles and
wonders.
I, for instance, am a straight male, however I have long held that we
are -all- bisexual to a degree. I disagree with the J.R. bot that this
distribution is unequally weighted amongst the sexes-- I suspect this
perception is as a result of the fact that:
a) Women are less threatened/insecure regarding their sexuality.
(probably as a result of:)
b.) It is (still) (very generally) less societally acceptable to be a
bi-sexual male, than a bi-sexual female. (In fact, as indicated, bi-sexual
females are often the stuff of male-fantasy.)
This is a topic of some interest to me and I have a fair bit of direct
experience regarding issues of sexuality.
I have been in close association with gay communities for many years. I
have been an actor in the -theatre- for several years, I currently live in
Vancouver (San Fran North) and I have consistently been 'mistaken' as gay...
(I am an artist, I'm emotional, sensitve, I have good fashion sense (often
flamboyant) and I make lots of physical contact with individuals of both
genders)
Indeed, I am often flattered by this assumption, and I am flattered by the
male attention I have accrued-- it is not an assumption that I have actively
sought to debunk.
I am truly in favor of an individual's ability to love *people*. I can't
deny that there is an important sexual/chemical aspect missing as far as my
appreciation of males goes-- but I am, nonetheless, extremely pleased by the
close relationships I have with them.
I think it would be nice, actually, if we were all more fully (and
acceptably) bi-sexual-- I remember with some clarity being propositioned by
a male acquaintance of mine for whom I had the utmost respect and
admiration-- I can "intellectually," in retrospect, recognize it as being a
pity that I could not generate 'deeper' feelings for him.
Sorry, no butterflies. (And, damn, it ain't worth shit if there ain't no
butterflies!)
I also disagree that women are more attracted to bi-sexual men *in general,*
(As indicated, the reverse is more probably true,) although, to be honest,
my -personal- experience seems to suggest that women do find sexual (and
bi-sexual) -comfort- to be attractive (particularly once you get to know
them.)
--
::jason.joel.thompson::
::founder::
www.wildghost.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:31:30 MST