From: Peterfabriani@aol.com
Date: Fri Nov 08 2002 - 15:46:48 GMT
In a message dated 11/8/02 1:48:39 AM GMT Standard Time, speterson@fast.net
writes:
> Doesn't such an analysis make more sense than trying to figure out if the
> photograph itself or the particular sex act itself is a particular type of
> pattern?
>
> Steve
>
Hi Steve,
But this depends by which category of patterning you are dominated by.
If you are dominated by social patterns then you will value social patterns;
this reinforces the differentiation of value types so to speak.
You are what you value i suppose?
And if you are what you value, then what you value is real and inherently
categorisable?
Peter.
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 08 2002 - 15:46:56 GMT