Virtual Morality Questions

The era of electronic entertainment has given rise to all sorts of interesting moral questions, questions that bring shades of gray to hitherto black-and-white issues of right or wrong.  Here’s one:

I was going to file this silly thing under INSIGNIFICA when I decided it wasn’t that silly, after all.

We might think that this is a modern morality question, but of course it isn’t.  People have been sending “love letters” to each other pretty much as soon as we discovered writing, only now the communication is electronic over the Internet rather than on paper and by messenger / through the mail.  In days gone by, therefore, a husband discovering racy love letters from another man in his wife’s possession would justifiably, in my opinion, be suspicious of his wife’s fidelity — and certainly so if the other man was a mutual acquaintance, or someone living close by.

Of course, the further the distance between writers, the less likely would actual adultery take place — but, to address the above question, is virtual adultery any different from actual adultery?

Note that I’m not talking about flirty communication here;  there’s an enormous difference, in my opinion, between “I’d love to take a walk on the beach with you someday”  to “I want to suck your penis”, although some might argue that the difference is only in degree.

The arrival of the telephone added sound to the situation — and one has only to see how many “phone sex” lines there are to see the effect of that.  Still, I suppose that one might argue that such activity is purely impersonal — I’m reminded of a scene in some movie of a young woman having phone sex on one of these lines while doing her ironing and watching her baby play on the kitchen floor — and it’s all just fantasy, not adultery.

What has changed, of course, is that communication nowadays can include video, where love letters never did.  Now we are talking about a whole different ball game, aren’t we?  Or are we?

Does adultery have to require actual physical contact to be classified as adultery?

I have to say “yes” to the above — although that said, I understand that virtual adultery has all sorts of “moth and candle” implications, especially if it’s between people who know each other.  As one woman of my acquaintance once put it:  “Virtual sex has replaced foreplay when it comes to fooling around”, and she’s absolutely right — if, that is, the couple are not just strangers getting a cheap thrill out of the thing.

And there, I think, is the crux of it.  It’s not the virtual aspect of it;  it’s who you’re talking to.  Which is more dangerous to a marriage:  talking sex to a complete stranger in a chat room, on a phone sex line or on a video call, or talking sex with a neighbor, a guy from the office or a friend’s husband?

I think we all know the answer to that.

Still Inappropriate?

Last week we saw how a woman was sent home from work because her tits were hanging out of her dress.

So she covered up completely, only to run afoul of HR once more:

The worker was wearing a midi length, high neck, black bodycon dress when she was approached by HR for the second time in a week about her ‘distracting’ and ‘revealing’ clothes.

Yeah, the dress is tight-fitting, but it’s actually very modest.  I remember seeing women dressed like this not just as daily office wear, but for formal meetings.

There comes a time in everyone’s life when you simply have to tell HR to fuck off, and I think that time has come for our young lady.

Killer Chick

If you watch this little episode and don’t fall in love with KC, we can’t be friends.  (Here’s her story, if you don’t have the time to watch the video, although the video does her more credit.)

And astonishingly, she went back out the very next day (in a new aircraft, as hers was just scrap at that point).

I’ll bet that there is not a man alive — a real man, that is — who wouldn’t take a bullet for KC.

No Clothes, Also No Body

Via Insty, I came across this priceless pearl of wisdom:

Can’t We Just Admit That Modern Art Is Garbage?

Of course we can.  Because, as one wise man on Teh Intarwebz has noted:

…because, as another Internet sage points out:

“Who the hell would notice?” 

And he’s right:

(That painting, by the way, sold for $12 million, proving that…. well, you know the rest.)

It’s not art — and by the way, the revelation that some series of straight lines by Mondrian has been hanging upside-down in some gallery for decades should come as no surprise to anyone except an art “critic”, “connoisseur” or some pretentious art phony (lots of overlap).

Another One Goes, Suddenly

Here’s an interesting one:

Colorado House Minority Leader Hugh McKean (R) died suddenly on Sunday morning in his home.  McKean passed away from a heart attack at the age of 55, according to the Larimar County Coroner’s Office.
“It is with great sadness we announce the sudden passing of House Minority Leader Hugh McKean. Hugh was fiercely passionate about serving the great state of Colorado and will be missed dearly,” Colorado House Republicans shared on Twitter. “Funeral services are being planned and details will be made public once finalized.”