Well how about a psychologist, Dr. SD Mann, who seduces his lovely patients into thinking an affair will solve all their emotional issues, that's the 'how to love again part'.
On May 7, 9:29 am, Chris Jenkins <[email protected]> wrote: > With a name like Slip Disc, you're in, but it's a toss up whether you'd be > the Jack Black comic relief character who shows everyone the error of their > driving ways, AND how to love again, or the antagonist villain, two time > fender bender offender, determined to sabotage any chance at happiness for > our heroes. > > > > [ Attached Message ]From:Slip Disc <[email protected]>To:"\"Minds Eye\"" > <[email protected]>Date:Thu, 7 May 2009 06:28:04 -0700 > (PDT)Local:Thurs, May 7 2009 8:28 amSubject:[Mind's Eye] Re: What is the > nature of Love? > > Can I at least be the traffic school instructor? > > On May 7, 8:24 am, Chris Jenkins <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Well then you have your next three screenplay ideas all set to go. You can > > collaborate with Fran for clever multilingual wordplay which may be lost on > > the American audiences, and Neil will make an outstanding Executive Editor, > > putting his deconstruction skills to work on your masterpieces. > > > For 'Limits of Desire', let me bounce this off you: > > > Lee's the rowdy blue collar rugged type, whose infectious smile and booming > > laugh is matched only by the length of his turban. Ornamental is the Sean > > Connery-ish world hardened Professor with a well hidden heart of gold. > > Rosey is the free spirited woman both would love but neither could have. > > The drama unfolds within the setting of a court ordered traffic school for > > habitual speeders. > > > Eh? It has Summer Blockbuster written all over it. :-D > > > [ Attached Message ]From:gabbydott <[email protected]>To:"\"Minds Eye\"" > > <[email protected]>Date:Thu, 7 May 2009 06:00:19 -0700 > > (PDT)Local:Thurs, May 7 2009 8:00 amSubject:[Mind's Eye] Re: What is the > > nature of Love? > > > But that's what I mean! Limits of desire ... peaks of fulfillment ... > > bare depths - that's Paramount Pictures! Bingo! :-) > > > On 7 Mai, 14:31, Chris Jenkins <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > *laughing* What exactly are you responding to, Gabs? Your tangents are > > > entertaining, but near impossible to respond to given their near complete > > > disconnect with anything that's actually been posted. Has begging been on > > > your mind, or is it American ideals that has you flamed up? > > > > For the benefit of your understanding, since I doubt anyone else had a > > > hard time with it, I was speaking of exploring the limits of > > > desire...begging doesn't factor into that at all. If you have to beg for > > > intimacy, the relationship has far deeper issues. Given that I'm speaking > > > of reaching the peaks of fulfillment, and you're focused on the bare > > > depths of barely togetherness, I don't think you're following > > > along...your translator license has been revoked! It's ok though...ich > > > liebe dich anyways... > > > > [ Angehängte Nachricht ]Von:gabbydott <[email protected]>In:"\"Minds > > > Eye\"" <[email protected]>Datum:Thu, 7 May 2009 04:54:02 -0700 > > > (PDT)Lokal:Do 7 Mai 2009 13:54Betreff:[Mind's Eye] Re: What is the nature > > > of Love? > > > > I thought you had travelled the world, Chris. And what did you do > > > there? Went to the local movie theatres? Americans and how they live > > > their belief in ideals. *sigh* > > > > OK, let me translate "to please others" for you. In international > > > terms it means "begging" and is strictly unerotic. > > > > On 7 Mai, 06:45, Chris Jenkins <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > In classical psychology, it's the Madonna-Whore complex. In modern > > > > culture, Ludacris calls out for "a Lady in the streets but a freak in > > > > the bed!" The clash of puritanical public values with animalistic > > > > private sexual desires creates a conflict that men (and less often > > > > women) who are not honest with themselves and/or their partners often > > > > express extra-relationally. In the ideal Eros relationship (ever > > > > IMHO), honest communication and a desire to please the other allows > > > > for mutual open exploration of the poles of desire, negating the > > > > desire to engage in such dalliances. Despite a variety of cultural > > > > relational phenotypes to choose from, I believe monogamy to be the > > > > Eros ideal. > > > > > On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 11:06 PM, archytas <[email protected]> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > Somewhat over-long as I remember Chris. An old French mate of mine > > > > > kept two mistresses - one who treated him like a mother. He was > > > > > somewhat surprised that I didn't approve, even suspecting I was in > > > > > love with his wife because of this. Sadly, I was only in love with > > > > > her cooking and brilliant sense of humour. He was a very gentle soul, > > > > > except when it came to arresting blaggers known to use violence and > > > > > intimidation on women. > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
