I am not an MD but my understanding is that oxytocin is just about the same as pitocin. You can inject pitocin - here's what it does: it causes a woman to have contractions that lead to delivery of a baby! It is used in hospitals if a woman needs to have stronger contractions or to have labor induced. Seven hours of a pitocin drip and the baby is born. Ouch. In addition to causing contractions, pitocin/oxytocin causes intense emotional bonding between mother and baby. I think lots of it circulates in the blood stream as long as a mother nurses and is also present in females in general.
Not sure what it would do to a male, but I suspect you would not want to be the guinea pig on this one. Making inhaling it would be ok. Hospitals have lots of it. Your music alone probably does something powerful enough. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" <curtisdeltablues@...> wrote: > > Much appreciated Susan. > > Lemme know if you have a good source for that oxytocin. Sounds like > something fun to heat up on a piece of tinfoil and inhale through a straw! > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Susan" <wayback71@> wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" > > <curtisdeltablues@> wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Curtis you wrote: > > > > "When I was actually under a cyber > > > > attack here by a member some people supported me and I appreciated > > > > that. But I > > > > would never expect it, even from my online "friends". I can handle my > > > > business > > > > here and everyone can handle theirs. So I don't have the kind of > > > > expectation > > > > here I would in my personal life offline." > > > > > > > > You also state: > > > > "We don't owe each other support or approval or any of the things we > > > > might value offline." > > > > > > > > Well, that is interesting for me to hear this viewpoint from you. I > > > > have considered it and I find that I live in a very different way. My > > > > rules for engagement, my definition of friends, my values of civility > > > > and interaction are not determined by the medium I am using , the > > > > location or the geographical situation I am in. I could be on Mars or > > > > in my kitchen, the way I conduct my life and how I view the world is > > > > not determined by the circumstances in which I find myself - i.e. > > > > whether I am typing to you online or speaking to you face to face I > > > > will treat you the same and expect you to do the same with me. I don't > > > > mean that you would treat me with respect if I treat you with respect I > > > > mean that you do not morph into someone other than who you are when you > > > > are not face to face with me. > > > > > > I don't think we really are in as much disagreement in this as that quote > > > seems to be saying. If I re-wrote that I would drop the ominous sounding > > > "or any other things we might value offline". That does make me sound > > > kinda psycho! Continuing in psycho mode for a moment: There is no form > > > of human decency that I recognize online and no matter how vile or how > > > disgusting or what an affront it is to decency. I support all evil here > > > as a avatar would in the darkest regions of Second City slums, where > > > human depravity can know no bounds! > > > > > > Ok, got that out of my system, I'm back now... > > > > > > I treat people pretty much the same in my correspondence here as I do in > > > person. I do post as myself here, everyone knows where to find me if > > > they want to. I guess I mean only in the area of scolding people who are > > > being unfriendly to each other. In person I would have a lower > > > threshold, online it is higher. I figure people here speak up for > > > themselves as do I. I should probably keep the discussion about Robin > > > who I judged didn't need my help rather than make pronouncements that > > > make me sound like an idiot. I guess I am assuming that you have read > > > enough posts of mine to know I don't act that way or maybe you have read > > > enough to decide that I do! Scary thought. > > > > > > > > > > > I know the internet is a great hiding place for some people and that > > > > they can change their persona in a multitude of ways.> > > > > > > I don't behave that way here. But I still pick my battles. I felt Robin > > > was handling himself just fine without me jumping it to "help" him. > > > > > > < But I don't think it is an excuse to abandon the ethics, the standards > > > that they hold highly when they are not on the internet.> > > > > > > Sure. No argument there. > > > > > > > > > < Why is FFL or any other online forum a place where we no longer "...owe > > > each other support and approval." ?? This double standard is just not me > > > and I don't understand that kind of reasoning. This seems to me that FFL > > > is/could be a forum for one to act really badly if one wanted to because, > > > after all, one is not really like that in "real life" (offline).> > > > > > > Practically speaking you can't chase after everyone who expresses > > > themselves in a different way than you would choose here. You just > > > can't, there is too much interaction. Right now most posters are being > > > really civil so all this is easy. When we had a poster who flung > > > obscenities at people in most posts it was harder. > > > > > > As an example, I like how you post here, and enjoy your contributions. > > > But if you got into a pissing match with someone I would figure you can > > > give as good as you get. So I am not laying down a rule for myself. But > > > Robin's expectation that I be concerned with people here who expressed > > > that they didn't like him wasn't gunna fly for me. He didn't have to > > > interact with Barry at all, it was his choice. Once he made it, against > > > my advice, he was on his own. So you are right in challenging my words > > > as some kind of rule. But it doesn't come out that way in practice. And > > > if you stick around you will see people using the term ethics in a > > > contrived way to put people down. I mean no one jumps into everyone > > > else's fights here, so you can always challenge someone's choices based > > > on the sin of omission. What you think they SHOULD have done. > > > > > > > > > > > You indicate that the newbies don't quite "get it", that the laws of > > > > good behavior and ethics and just plain life all of a sudden become > > > > obsolete when you hit the world of the internet.> > > > > > > That is not what I said or meant. It is just that lots of people blow > > > through here and few stay. One of my observations is that some people > > > have trouble adjusting to the odd combination of intimate conversation > > > and this disembodied context. When I first started posting I was much > > > more reactive emotionally. Now I am better able to let things go. I'm > > > glad I was able to let some of Robin's challenges go. I consider it a > > > sign of me making better choices here. > > > > > > < That there are rules and laws and, gee you greenhorns, get with the > > > program here because you'll go out like a comet or get eaten alive if you > > > don't. > > > > > > > That isn't what I said or what I meant. > > > > > > > > > > > You asked me if I enjoy posting at FFL. Yes I do, very much, but not > > > > because I see it as a chance to indulge myself in behavior that is not > > > > true to who I am, or who I am working hard to be in every other moment > > > > of my life. > > > > > > I can't think of any behavior I have indulged in that is not true to who > > > I am so I don't know how it relates. I understand that what I said can > > > be interpreted to mean these things, but it was not my intention and I > > > take responsibility for being clear. Lets say you really ran with this > > > ball and used it as a way to castigate me for promoting a phoney persona > > > so I could abuse people here. Lets say you really got worked up about > > > this POV and called me all sorts of names and told me you hate people who > > > try to pull that shit online and really invested yourself in this view of > > > me. > > > > > > Inside I would feel wronged because I don't act in an unethical way here. > > > That isn't what I meant at all. But I wouldn't expect a bunch of people > > > to jump in to address it. They might, both pro and con. But I don't > > > believe that anyone is obligated to correct what would be a misconception > > > about me. And lets take it one step farther. Let's say I answered you to > > > the best of my ability as I have here and you responded that it was all > > > bullshit and that you knew that I was really just a bad guy using the > > > cover of the internet to do bad things to people here. I might try again > > > to be understood, but if you came back and doubled down on your > > > unflattering opinion of me I would let it drop. I might not respond to > > > the next post directed at me. I might say, that is her opinion and I > > > obviously am not going to change it. Other people piling on would > > > probably not change it for you either if I can't myself. > > > > > > So that is the context I mean about our personal responsibility here. We > > > all have to choose for ourselves who we are going to interact with here. > > > And we all decide what discussions we want to jump in on. But > > > personally,I don't expect people to. And if you do, that is perfectly > > > fine too. You'll find people who agree with you here. > > > > > > > > > > > I am not judging you Curtis, I am giving you my viewpoint. > > > > > > > > > I appreciate an opportunity to clarify what I meant. And I still may not > > > have succeeded. But you are welcome to judge me here by the words I > > > write. It is really all you have to judge me by isn't it? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I agree that Curtis does not need defending, but I am going to add just a > > few words here, just to put in my 2 cents of this particular issue. First, > > I think Curtis has very clear "boundaries" that he lives by. By this I mean > > he has a healthy awareness of what is other people's stuff and what is his, > > and he won't interfere or trespass on the stuff that other people can and > > should deal with on their own. His posts reflect this. It is not a matter > > of not standing up for a friend - in the classic sense of that expectation > > I bet he would help a friend who needs defending. But he is allowing > > others to take care of themselves and assumes that they can. > > > > Second, there was a series of posts here by a person who is now longer > > allowed to post. This person threatened Curtis multiple times, and still > > Curtis asked that others not intervene or defend him. Partly I think this > > was to protect others from possibly getting themselves on the bad side of > > this poster. Partly he knew could handle it himself. > > > > Third, I think men are different than women in these areas. Women very > > easily and effortlessly support and empathize and help and connect. All > > that oxytocin in the hormone mix makes it automatic. I know there are many > > times that I have to step back and consciously not give advice and just > > listen and let people handle things themselves. It is a fine line.......... > > >
