[lbo-talk] lbo-talk] Re: light of my life, maybe not the fire of my loins

[Carl Remick]

>From: Chris Doss <lookoverhere1 at yahoo.com>
>
>--- andie nachgeborenen
><andie_nachgeborenen at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > We are down to brass tacks, now: Chris is "creeped
> > out" by other peole's harmless sexual preferences.
> > That's impossible to argue with, and has no moral or
> > medical weight, but I don't know ahy he feels
> > obliged
> > to announce it as if his disgust should be of
> > interest
> > to or shared by anyone else.
>
>True enough. But I am curious as to why the concept of
>mental disturbance seems to end when we get to sexual
>relationships. We generally have no problem with
>calling certain forms of thought/behavior "disturbed"
>in other spheres of human activity. If someone, e.g,
>decorated his or her apartment with photos of
>dismboweled cats or Nazi concentration camp victims,
>or sends passionate love letters to celebrities they
>never met, or has a violent phobia about water, we
>would generally think that something was probably not
>OK with them psychologically. Why is sex the holy of
>holies where everything goes?

It's been many years since I read Lolita, but as I recall Nabokov presented 
a very mixed picture of Humbert Humbert.  On the one hand, Humbert has great 
affection, even love, for Lolita and expresses those feelings in lyrical 
terms, but on the other hand he does steal her childhood, something 
invaluable that can never be replaced.

Long story short:  "If if feels good, do it" is an inadequate philosophy of 
life.

Carl