Quote:
Originally Posted by Baneling
it does involve these, these people makeing a sacrifices are called hosts. the parasit (fe the baby) exploits the host (the motherbreast). Or is the mother the parasit exploiting her breast to tie the baby to her?
I think i did a bad job explaining the theory as i am just beginn understanding the book and english is not my first language, but you people are giving it far to less credit. I think it has potential.
I was talking about organ transplants where the "host" (okay, the one giving the organ) willingly does it, where the relationship between "host" and "parasite" becomes very blurred if not reversed.
Regardless, I feel like seeing the world this way is just fairly suboptimal, requiring a lot of contortions to make it fit, and in many cases it just isn't terribly appropriate, or at best just makes things sound more sinister than they could otherwise be seen.
I love a girl, girl loves me. I can see it as we're both parasites living off each other's affection (and bodies), or we both are giving and taking and appreciating the exchange as "traders". I feel like "trading" makes 10x more sense as a general approach, with many exceptions in the form of "parasite relationships". "Parasites", in my mind, are unthinking carnivores that provide no benefit to the host, and on the contrary extract resources with some considerable pain to the host. This seems a fairly simple and tight definition, and it just doesn't fit with a large portion of human relationships (although it does with some, of course).
Typical, depressing French rubbish imo. It is popular because there are a lot of typically depressing people who devour such rubbish like so much cheese and frog legs. That is my interpretation of these sparse bits of information. I have no desire to look into it more to confirm them.