Sex and Reciprocity. And other Social Media DOHs

Sex and Reciprocity. And other Social Media DOHs

by Stan Faryna

Stan Faryna
ATB, Ecstasy

Marjorie Clayman reflects here on the triumphs and defeats of the Medici as an inspiration for social media success. It may even apply to gaming. And sex? Yes, sex too.

Wealth, power and influence – for the obvious reasons – will always be interesting.

But I have occasionally wondered whether or not the meek, the poor in spirit, and the pure of heart can profit by the ways and means of the wealthy, powerful and influential. Are these ways and means the rising tides that can lift small boats?

This was, in fact, the hope, promise and merit of capitalism.

Reciprocity, itself, is a greater challenge than we may care to admit – especially when everyone, equally, wants something for nothing.

However, if reciprocity is to be providential and reciprocal, it must provide an equity in results – not action.

The economics of sex should be fairly obvious in regard to results and satisfaction. I hope you can forgive me for not illustrating the intimate details of our expectations, results and satisfaction. But I would like to imagine that you get my point.

Likewise, if you mention me on your Facebook fan page and bring me to 50,000 eyes, my mentioning you on your fan page to 100 eyes is not a reciprocity. Reciprocity requires me to commit myself to liking a 100 posts (or more), supporting your posts with encouraging comments for months and months AND sharing your posts across Facebook, G+, etc. across a year.

Who does that?! Who tries?

Sadly, it is the rare individual who pays his/her social debt. And rarer for the individual who pays it gladly. And this, I fear, is why more people do not succeed in their ambitions – social, game-wise, friendship, or everlasting love.

Alas- even the meek, the poor in spirit, and the pure of heart seem to lack a basic understanding of economics. And equitable reciprocity.

Of course, I could be mistaken. But I also could be a little bit right.

Stan Faryna
25 March 2013
Fairfax, Virginia


2 Responses to Sex and Reciprocity. And other Social Media DOHs

  1. Betsy Cross says:

    As you request (above), I’ll speak my heart. This approach is obviously good business. It’s cold and calculating and without heart.

    When we serve to serve for anothers’ benefit we might be naive in others’ eyes. But truly, how else can one be at peace and truly rich? I might always stand alone on this, but that’s okay with me. I can’t imagine always feeling like I can never pay back enough or fast enough. I’d rather ask, how can I help you? Ya know?

    Good questions. Got me thinking. (I read Marjorie’s, too.)

    • Stan Faryna says:

      Justice requires a fair exchange of equal value and service between two parties. It’s not just good business, it is the basis for moral exchanges between persons and between groups. As some suggest, Justice is the cornerstone without which there can be no community or civilization – not to mention that Justice is counted among the principal natural virtues a la Plato, Aristotle and Aquinas.

      What is cold, calculating and heartless?

      I didn’t say that generosity (largesse) is foolish or unadvised. But we all must recognize largesse for what is – a gift. And we should not take such gifts for granted – as is too often the case online and offline. But more so, online.

      And love, in fact, demands us to serve others. But, if I think about it, those who can not be fair and just in their dealings with others are less likely to love strongly and to live whole-heartedly.

Speak from your heart!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: