I wonder if there's any similarity between how my human desire to know what other people do may hide a yearning for an overarching framework that gives cohesive meaning to events and existence, and my more uxorious desire for my partner's rules rituals and other symbols of structure and authority in our relationship. Clearly my wife is an authority to me and I do find experiential meaning in our relationship and our symbols; and frameworks, philosophies, ideologies, and religions are systems of symbols that carry the weight of authority - even sociological studies surveys and statistics can have the weight of authority, if perhaps slightly less systematic in their symbology.
And this begs the question of how meaning and authority are related, and which came first; meaning might cohere through the lens of authority, or authority might arise wherever meaning is found, or there might be a more dynamic relationship including both of these with our without the addition of (an)other variable(s). And even this doesn't answer the question of why we, in our fundamental and essential humanity, desire this meaning-authority matrix so much we often don’t even recognize when and where it happens around us. At times I wonder if the very point and purpose of our existing is somehow hidden in this somewhere - which is humorous, because although I often arrive naturally at this thought through my own interior process, upon immediate reflection I realize it's not exactly a new thought, or even an uncommon one.
January 20, 2010
January 19, 2010
What Other People Do
Truly this might be titled 'Gendered Sex and Love Symbols pt 4' (part 1, part 2, part 3), for I think there what I've really been wondering about is why any couple achieves their level of compatible complicity in the use of the man's sexual energy, though what I found is that ultimately stereotypes are just too poor a place to begin thinking about anyone's interior relationship decisions. While clearly there have always been women willing to use a man's sexual energy to direct his attention where she wishes, and men willing to have their sexual energy thusly used, the matrix where a couple's interior variables come together is too complex for anything but guesswork and sociological survey statistics. Moreover, I now think why I want to understand people's interior process and this matrix of motives might be more valuable and worthwhile.
To be sure, I do want to understand how men and women might initiate female led relationships (actually any kind of relationship) more easily and of course with more frequent success, and I also want people already in (female led) relationships to learn how to have happier, healthier, stronger relationships. Yet underneath these somewhat altruistic desires I think I just want to know what other people do, and why they do it because I could use such information to strengthen my own relationship, use such information as a form of fuzzy map to move myself forward more precisely. I want to understand how my wife and I reached our level of compatible complicity and how to increase it and our intimacy, and our mutual self-respect, and our love and romance, and accentuate all the other positives, without falling prey to any negatives.
On one hand, I think when faced with a tough or new situation it's perfectly natural to ask what other people do in similar circumstances, but no one has ever collected statistics specifically germane to female led relationship and there is no general consensus, no 'top five ways for the female led to solve the top five female led problems'. And yet on the other hand even if there were (as there are for other relationships) I'm not sure where or when such 'merely informational help' might become the hindering crutch of a template, an obstacle of assumption to achieving the rewards two individual people enjoy when working these things out on their own instead of whole cloth resorting to other people's frameworks and philosophies.
Relationships, all relationships, are comprised of individuals (not statistics) who experience problems and then work together to discover choices and compromises that work for them and meet their individual needs. Thus not only is every (female led) relationship going to be different because people are different and interact differently, but because people experience and value things differently, at different times and in different ways. The 'difference' from or 'similarity' to other couples' solutions isn't what makes their solutions work for them, it's the worth and value they have learned by their experience that makes their solutions work for them; and the value of a fact's worth learned from experience is not easily taught to another person without the engendering experience, nor is it easily found in a (female led) relationship statistic.
To be sure, I do want to understand how men and women might initiate female led relationships (actually any kind of relationship) more easily and of course with more frequent success, and I also want people already in (female led) relationships to learn how to have happier, healthier, stronger relationships. Yet underneath these somewhat altruistic desires I think I just want to know what other people do, and why they do it because I could use such information to strengthen my own relationship, use such information as a form of fuzzy map to move myself forward more precisely. I want to understand how my wife and I reached our level of compatible complicity and how to increase it and our intimacy, and our mutual self-respect, and our love and romance, and accentuate all the other positives, without falling prey to any negatives.
On one hand, I think when faced with a tough or new situation it's perfectly natural to ask what other people do in similar circumstances, but no one has ever collected statistics specifically germane to female led relationship and there is no general consensus, no 'top five ways for the female led to solve the top five female led problems'. And yet on the other hand even if there were (as there are for other relationships) I'm not sure where or when such 'merely informational help' might become the hindering crutch of a template, an obstacle of assumption to achieving the rewards two individual people enjoy when working these things out on their own instead of whole cloth resorting to other people's frameworks and philosophies.
Relationships, all relationships, are comprised of individuals (not statistics) who experience problems and then work together to discover choices and compromises that work for them and meet their individual needs. Thus not only is every (female led) relationship going to be different because people are different and interact differently, but because people experience and value things differently, at different times and in different ways. The 'difference' from or 'similarity' to other couples' solutions isn't what makes their solutions work for them, it's the worth and value they have learned by their experience that makes their solutions work for them; and the value of a fact's worth learned from experience is not easily taught to another person without the engendering experience, nor is it easily found in a (female led) relationship statistic.
January 18, 2010
Gendered Sex and Love Symbols part 3
Gendered Sex and Love Symbols part 1
Gendered Sex and Love Symbols part 2
A man might gain more sex in the short term in the 'tit for tat' paradigm of sex bargaining, however he is still ostensibly, and stereotypically, looking for sex as love symbol in the long term. Thus it seems the love and romance paradigm has more benefits and seems better than the sex bargaining paradigm.
Yet, there are significant caveats with the female led paradigm line of thinking, not the least of which are that even I think I'm too biased in favor of the love and romance paradigm, that sex bargaining might work as a functional love symbol for some individuals, and last on the tip of the iceberg that these stereotypes are so wide and general it's extremely likely most couples, female led or not, have varying degrees of both paradigms and rather than only two ways, there are an infinite number of ways.
Thus, as with what is or isn't kinky, I don’t think there can be a conclusion about 'female led paradigms', other than to say what works for any couple is what works for them, and if it isn't quite working as well as they'd like there are plenty of variables for them to try adjusting.
As far as the stereotypic gendered sex and love symbols becoming reasons for couples to turn to female led relationships, it seems there may be a correlation between those stereotypes and interior reasons but again the stereotypes are so wide it's seems impossible to isolate a clear and common causal pattern.
Gendered Sex and Love Symbols part 2
A man might gain more sex in the short term in the 'tit for tat' paradigm of sex bargaining, however he is still ostensibly, and stereotypically, looking for sex as love symbol in the long term. Thus it seems the love and romance paradigm has more benefits and seems better than the sex bargaining paradigm.
Yet, there are significant caveats with the female led paradigm line of thinking, not the least of which are that even I think I'm too biased in favor of the love and romance paradigm, that sex bargaining might work as a functional love symbol for some individuals, and last on the tip of the iceberg that these stereotypes are so wide and general it's extremely likely most couples, female led or not, have varying degrees of both paradigms and rather than only two ways, there are an infinite number of ways.
Thus, as with what is or isn't kinky, I don’t think there can be a conclusion about 'female led paradigms', other than to say what works for any couple is what works for them, and if it isn't quite working as well as they'd like there are plenty of variables for them to try adjusting.
As far as the stereotypic gendered sex and love symbols becoming reasons for couples to turn to female led relationships, it seems there may be a correlation between those stereotypes and interior reasons but again the stereotypes are so wide it's seems impossible to isolate a clear and common causal pattern.
January 17, 2010
Gendered Sex and Love Symbols part 2
Gendered Sex and Love Symbols part 1
Gendered Sex and Love Symbols part 3
When a couple already strained over sex symbols turns to a female led relationship, I wonder if a woman no longer uses sex as a tool to obtain comfort and security, or if she simply uses sex differently to obtain the same goal.
It seems to me if the couple has a 'tit for tat' paradigm of sex bargaining, wherein they exchange sex for relationship control, I would argue the woman continues using sex as a tool to gain the stereotypic comfort and stability a woman desires. On the other hand it seems if the relationship paradigm is one of romantic interest, the woman need not concern herself so much with sex-tool facet of capturing and holding the attentions and resources of a willing mate.
I also think in the love and romance model the woman becomes free to more singularly pursue sex as an interior symbol of her sexuality and sex drive rather than needfully continuing to share the sex symbol with its tool capacity.
Gendered Sex and Love Symbols part 3
When a couple already strained over sex symbols turns to a female led relationship, I wonder if a woman no longer uses sex as a tool to obtain comfort and security, or if she simply uses sex differently to obtain the same goal.
It seems to me if the couple has a 'tit for tat' paradigm of sex bargaining, wherein they exchange sex for relationship control, I would argue the woman continues using sex as a tool to gain the stereotypic comfort and stability a woman desires. On the other hand it seems if the relationship paradigm is one of romantic interest, the woman need not concern herself so much with sex-tool facet of capturing and holding the attentions and resources of a willing mate.
I also think in the love and romance model the woman becomes free to more singularly pursue sex as an interior symbol of her sexuality and sex drive rather than needfully continuing to share the sex symbol with its tool capacity.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
