Well, not really an UNANSWERED question

[Ramblinman]

"We need them for protection at times."
The protection we seek most is to keep others from seeing the real me.

Do we NEED it or simply WANT it?

[Petros]

Interesting. I of course understand the principle and agree it works for many - and liklely isd part of Herself's attitude. But for my sister Diana it would be rather, her chosen clothes project the desired image, for my sister Maureen it ids closer to, choice of clothes declares that she does not identify with any group around her. For me, clothes choice both proclaims part of my identity and projects a protective persona, and I would deny that the portions of the real me I prefer to keep to meself can be accessed whether I am clothed or nude.

[prairieboy]

"We need them for protection at times."
The protection we seek most is to keep others from seeing the real me.

Do we NEED it or simply WANT it?

I believe that for many people it is a very strong NEED. That is why people buy houses they can't afford, cars they should not have, country club memberships, exotic vacations, etc., all to project an image of themselves that they have no hope of maintaining. I know that for myself, learning to be open and vulnerable at a nude beach helped me to be open and vulnerable when I started going to my present church, and that accelerated my spiritual growth. Finding, being lead to, a church that was truly loving and caring helped a great deal as well.
Gerald

[Petros]

Does this count as NEEd or WANT? As CONCEALMENT or as PLEDGING ALLEGIANCE? Wee Corylat one stage in her life very much liked the color green as a color and felt good wearing it. But most of the time she avoided wearing green - because her mother [with whom she dd not get on well which made her feel guilty and ovber compensate] maintained that it was unlucky to wear green [not a received superstition, her personal decision].

- if any of you by strage chance know anyone firttying those descriptors, I am talking of someone totally different -

[natman]

- if any of you by strage chance know anyone firttying those descriptors, I am talking of someone totally different -

Petros, is there anyone on this board who would know whom it was you were referring to?

It might be like talking about a man who happens to be black, a democrat with a very liberal bent, who was a senator from Illinois and is occupying a big White House in Washington DC. Oh, if you are thinking it is Barack Obama, it is someone totally different.... yeah, right.

[Petros]

The odds on anyone here having at any point been exposed [no pun intended] to Wee Coryl or her family are extremely small, but it is not impossible.

Technically, even a match for the grerat BO [and I cannot for the life of me imagine he made it through an American high school without somebody making that mental connection] is not absolutely impossible.

Still, I strive to preserve anonymity where it COULD matter.

[jochanaan]

...a democrat with a very liberal bent...

(Off-topic alert!) Interestingly, many progressives of my acquaintance say that this "democrat with a very liberal bent" has disappointed them greatly by not being liberal enough!

[Petros]

Item:
someone who to a degree matched that set of descriptors was a disappointment to one who initially believed that whether or not they agreed the person in question had firm principles.

Item:
it is very hard to keep up. Paul Soglin, once arguably the most outrageous person in Madison, reincarnate as 21st century mayor has been perceived by many as too conservative and far from with it.

Item:
You cannot please everyone [certainly not God and Mammon] That said, best choices would be please yourself, please your loved ones, please God. Ideally all three.

[Ramblinman]

...a democrat with a very liberal bent...

(Off-topic alert!) Interestingly, many progressives of my acquaintance say that this "democrat with a very liberal bent" has disappointed them greatly by not being liberal enough!

Why Jochanaan! I thought everyone knew that Christians could only be Republicans.
And Democrats know that you must stick to the talking points or you risk disqualification.
(but isn't that true of the Republicans as well?

And what about third party or "none of the above" people?
Are they in a state of purgatory until they repent and get with the program.

Really, folks need to read the memos from the party bosses and all this confusion would be avoided!

[Petros]

Problem is, us Didymists either don't read the paper or fail to fall in line. A problem where consensus is de rigueur

[jochanaan]

Interestingly, many progressives of my acquaintance say that this "democrat with a very liberal bent" has disappointed them greatly by not being liberal enough!

Why Jochanaan! I thought everyone knew that Christians could only be Republicans.
And Democrats know that you must stick to the talking points or you risk disqualification.
(but isn't that true of the Republicans as well?

And what about third party or "none of the above" people?
Are they in a state of purgatory until they repent and get with the program.

Really, folks need to read the memos from the party bosses and all this confusion would be avoided!

I only said I was acquainted with progressives, not that I was one! Other than that, I appreciate the satire.

[natman]

I thought everyone knew that Christians could only be Republicans.
And Democrats know that you must stick to the talking points or you risk disqualification.
(but isn't that true of the Republicans as well?

Evidently not. Otherwise there would not be such a thing as RINOs (Republican In Name Only). (I wonder if there are an "DINOs" Perhaps my dad and late father-in-law. When we sat down and talked about issues, they followed the Republican Party Platform almost 100%. My dad was a registered Democrat because his father was a Democrat and his grand-father was a Democrat and on and on. My father-in-law was a registered Democrat because he had been a part of a union and he was afraid he would lose his union pension if he voted Republican).

And what about third party or "none of the above" people?

"None Of The Above" sounds bestest to me. Personally, I think we should do away with the party system and move to a coalition government whereby people are elected solely upon how the individually approach the issues, and can be impeached if it is found that they act in such a way as to oppose their stated position.

Really, folks need to read the memos from the party bosses and all this confusion would be avoided!

Not really. They only have to do as "I" say.