my final entry for now

A kiss undoubtedly has varying connotations. A kiss on the forehead can mean respect, cheek – affection; lips – more complicated.

I submit that kissing on the lips, or even French kissing, need not mean that you have to romatically like that person, or as a prelude to sex, or anything of that nature.

Of course an argument like this has problems. If anyone is free to kiss anyone else on the lips, society itself would degenerate. Therefore behaviour like this should be confined between very limited individuals, a friend which you have a special understanding with; friends whom you know won’t misinterpret the action.

Also, there are problems with drawing the line. If I support the notion of French kissing as completely acceptable behaviour, what is to say that I wouldn’t support 3rd-base behaviour or having sex as an equally harmless indulgence. I submit that indeed, there could be a point where I would argue that they are just that –harmless indulgences- but that is too extreme a view to take as of now.

I am attached now. Say if I wanted to French this close girlfriend of mine – there’s nothing wrong with that. It is plainly a sign of affection, of wanting to feel closer to someone.

So what insinuates against an attached guy kissing someone else as a social taboo?
It is precisely that – social conditioning. We are all victims of the ambient morality. Morality has been defined over centuries by religion, by people. We are all trapped in this enclosure of morality and not many of us would dare or deign to breach the fortress.

My girlfriend would not accept it – no girlfriend will. I wouldn’t accept it if she Frenched a purely platonic friend on the lips either. But the fact is if you are put in that situation, which I have been in the past, you would see things differently. What is required, as aforementioned, is an understanding that it is a mere sign of affection – that is all. We are constrained from thinking so because physical intimacy with another member of the opposite sex should be kept exclusively to one’s partner. So it all boils down to a definition of degree – what is defined as intimate and hence morally unacceptable? Hugging probably isn’t, a peck on the cheeks isn’t, so why is a French kiss?

Is it because it’s a sensual act? Indeed, 3rd-base and sex are sensual (indeed, sexual) I think that is why they are disallowed. But why should morality be governed by sensuality/ intimacy? It seems to me that History has taken the wrong path and linked these ideas together and used one to define the other, at least in this context.

I can’t be bothered to write anymore, just a lil food for thought.

I am going to close this blog down for the moment. Im also gonna delete msn come Friday. Exams are approaching. I need to rid myself of any distractions.

So ladies and gents, thank you for taking the time to read my entries, I know not all of them are of a high quality. Ill catchya guys in a coupla months. Adieus!