Shame, Sex, and Anthropology Thread

As Training Director of the Tomkins Institute, one of my most enjoyable duties is to disseminate relevant clinical and research developments arising from the theoretical formulations first advanced by Tomkins in the early 1960's. As a larger and larger group of people from varied professions and backgrounds learn affect/script theory, the number of new and exciting ideas grows exponentially. Members of the Tomkins Institute are the first to learn of these developments because they receive our journal and participate in an e-mail discussion group called Tomkins-Talk. And because they are, more often than not, the ones to propose these new extensions of Tomkins's work.

A recent thread in Tomkins-Talk really caught my eye. I feel compelled to share it with those of you who are not yet members. I hope it encourages you to join the Tomkins Institute so that you can participate directly in these exciting new developments. (Please see our home page here at BOL for a membership form that you can download.) Or, if you prefer to learn about us first in person, I hope you will consider attending our 1998 annual conference in Philadelphia, but more about that later.

The thread began with a post by SSTI member Alex Bruzzone and became known as the Shame, Sex and Anthropology thread. Alex's post was initially responded to by Bob Most, Don Nathanson, Joe Dubey, and Mel Hill, and then many others. I have included only the first four responses because they are so rich in content that I believe they will trigger a flood of responses from those tuning in to this forum. I will post them each separately below this message and then begin a new area for your responses.

WARNING: THE MATERIAL YOU ARE ABOUT TO READ IS NOVEL, EXCITING, SOMETIMES RATHER LENGHTY, AND MAY CHALLENGE YOUR CURRENT THINKING ABOUT MALE SEXUALITY. IT MIGHT CAUSE YOU TO REMAIN ONLINE OVERLY LONG AND MAY TRIGGER IN YOU THE DESIRE TO RESPOND—PLEASE DO!!!

• Alex Bruzzone's Initial Post by Alex Bruzzone, 10/30/97
• Bob Most's Response by Bob Most, 10/30/97
• Don Nathanson's Response by Don Nathanson, 10/30/97
• Joe Dubey's Response by Joe Dubey, 10/30/97
• Mel Hill's Response by Mel Hill, 10/30/97