A guest post by TikunOlam
On the thread of my "What goes on in the bushes" post, one commenter wrote:
. . .The question of “is a real plutonic (sic) relationship possible between members of the opposite sex” is an age old question across all ethnicities and cultures. Anonymous | 11.24.08 - 11:03 am | #
Earlier, this is what JS had to say:
. . .In Chareidi society you only associate with the opposite sex for one reason and one reason only: to get married. Thus, interpersonal relationships between the sexes have only one purpose: sex. Thus, anyone who wants to or does associate with the other sex can only have illicit intentions. The idea of a platonic friendship, or even the idea of people liking each other but not acting on these feelings, seems impossible to a mentality where every inter-gender relationship is only sexual.To me, the biggest shame is that the opposite sex is looked at solely as a sexual object and not as a person. Thus, there are very strict gender roles, and anyone who tries to break these roles is too sexual and immoral.JS | 11.24.08 - 10:43 am | #
Where I stand:
I think the key is in where JS said, "the idea of a platonic friendship, or even the idea of people liking each other but not acting on these feelings, seems impossible to a mentality where every inter-gender relationship is only sexual."
I know that men and women can have platonic friendships. Not all men and women who are friends are attracted to each other in a sexual way. And as JS said, if there is an attraction between the two grown adults, they are fully capable of choosing not to act on that attraction. To say that platonic friendships are impossible, is to say humans are walking ids. They aren't. And those that are, won't be stopped by any rules forbidding them to associate with members of the opposite sex as walking ids tend to ignore rules like that.
No comments:
Post a Comment