It all depends one's memories: my brother and sister are about 16 and 17 years older than I am, and both were gone from home by 18 yoa. I have no recollection of them at home, and have always stated I knew they are my my siblings because Mom and Dad said so - and I can see no reason they'd lie about it.*

While being interviewed by a doctor as a new patient - asking about my childhood - I absent mindedly stated I was an only child. Later he became confused when I mentioned my sister and brother.

From my POV I was an only child. That doesn't make me a liar, please. It's a totally accurate description of my childhood, and how I perceive my upbringing.

* Of course, I also say the third time's the charm, and the reason Mom and Dad stopped after three is because there's no reason to tempt fate, once perfection has been acheived *grin*.

My brother and sister are quite glad I was an on only child...

I'm sorry, but this comment is totally stupid, making no sense whatsoever. Everybody makes mistakes, but only abnormal mentalities spend the rest of their lives punishing themselves through self-denial.

[This message has been edited by Jerry Glenn Hartwig (edited August 24, 2008).]

Jerry, the thing is that Cindy's father also referred to Cindy as his only child. Not something you can blame on Cindy, I guess, except it's ironic that this is the guy McCain recently extolled for having built wealth to leave to his family, in the American Way, though the guy disinherited his firstborn. John himself, having discarded his first wife in a manner that he himself regards as a "moral failing," probably has a lot of sympathy for his father in law's discarding of his firstborn child -- in particular since it doubled Cindy's wealth.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that some men are created more equal than others, and that these particular men are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Sex, More Sex, and, in the event of being bored with their first wife, the Pursuit of Other Wives. The men who are not in this elite category, well, they can just forget about all this "Happiness" crap and deal with real problems.


Thanks for reminding me of these self-evident truths, Jerry.

Robert

ps: Don't push me on this or I'll starting quoting Matthew 19:3-9 and 1st Corinthians 7:1-16 (especially verses 10 & 11); and nobody wants that to happen!

"I'm sorry, but this comment is totally stupid, making no sense whatsoever." as someone said. Self-denial is not punishment.

Robert

Then why do you suggest he remain celibate, if not as a punishment for his 'moral failings'? Remaining celibate would prove nothing nor wouilf it improve anything. Self-punishment is the only the reason I think you could suggest anything as extreme as life-long celibacy.

And no, punishing yourself through self denial - especially tpo an extreme- is not a healthy, normal avenue of coping with an event.

(Sorry, I couldn't help that!)

But seriously Jerry, how can you say, "Remaining celibate would prove nothing nor would it improve anything." Of course it would "improve" things. Celibacy probably would give one the idea, crazy as it seems, that "I, and my own desires, are not the center of the universe."

OK, if you must know, I will put my cards all out on the table. I'm in my mid 50s and haven't had sex with anyone, ever. (I pause for the laughter to die down... "Ha, ha! Meyer is a loser! Ha, ha!" ...now, is it quiet again?) It is not that I didn't want love, I did, but at each stage of life something more urgent than any urge took precedence. First, it was to get the math degree (I'll have time for love later). Then, after the stroke, learning how to talk (more or less) and walk (more or less) again (still, I'll have time for love later). Then, to get a full time job because our wonderful President Reagan decided I'm not disabled (hey Gipper, ever talk to that Republican neurosurgeon, Hammargren, who held my bleeding brain in his hands?) and so again I was too busy (as always, I'll have time for love later).

You know what I found out? There are things more difficult than being celibate for half of a century. No "poor me." No envy. No sour grapes. It's just the way things are. There are a hell of a lot of things that are a hell of a lot worse than being celibate for 50 years. If people can't realize that, it just means those people have not really lived; or at least, not on the extremes.

Robert Meyer

[This message has been edited by Robert Meyer (edited August 26, 2008).]

Some clarification, mainly for Brian:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mark-n..._b_120381.html

As I said before, to self-aggrandize by exaggerating a relationship with the soon-to-be sainted is comically dishonorable.

Thorough article on Cindy (and fam) in this week's New Yorker.

Forgive me for not responding earlier I did not return to this thread until it was just popped back up.

I don't think the example of your life applies to the discussion as it were. You have been celibate your entire life due to both circumstances of ill health and personal decision, it seems.

We were discussing someone with an active sex life becoming celibate for moral or atonement purposes. No one is knocking a personal decision of celibacy: I am criticizing the thought that celibacy should be (self)imposed after a divorce because it is the 'right' thing to do - in one person's opinion - or for se-lf-punishment.

My apologies if it seems I ignored your post. It was not so.