In progress...

So, my regular readers (I found out recently that I actually have regular readers!) may have noticed I have repeatedly promised an indepth essay on capitalism, I have said at least once that it would be my next post, and I keep posting other stuff.

Well, it really is in progress.  I've written a lot of it.  But there is a lot more to go, and I decided not to start posting the finished ones until the entire thing is finished.

In the meantime - since I am saving each section in my drafts folder - I discovered a whole bunch of stuff I wrote, sometimes years ago, and for reasons I can't even guess at, I never posted. 

I'm going to start posting those, while I work on my biggest writing project to date.


Oh, and by the way - if you read 5 Years Later and Not A Great Start to the New Year, and you were wondering if I was still in a bad place... noooo.  I am not.  Not even a little.  A very very good place right now. 
I don't want to get into it too much here - its very exciting, its very mutual, but its also very new and we all know my patterns.  I can't be objective. 
As far as I can tell thus far, there is real potential, and regardless of how it turns out I am having a hell of a fun time in the moment.  If you remember, way way back, New Year's (2009); I honestly did not think it would be possible - I mean, literally, physically possible - to top that experience.  Well, it turns out it is.

Wearing the Skirt

Been thinking a bit recently about gender.

Thanks, primarily, of all things, to being more active on Facebook than I've ever been.

Which exposed me to:

http://denisdutton.com/baumeister.htm

(A ruler can only lead with the consent of at least most of the people. Women make up slightly more than half of the population. Sure, today institutions are set up that hold the status quo, but how did it get this way in the first place? This is a pretty plausible theory of how and it puts a lot of other stuff into a different perspective too.)

and this

http://www.buzzfeed.com/tabathaleggett/lego-just-got-told-off-by-a-7-year-old-girl

(I'm afraid the larger issue is that we all assume the standard lego person is male. The standard lego person looks like this:

which has no features which indicate gender.
Kind of like when cartoons give a female animal character long hair or eye lashes, lipstick, or (human type) breasts - even if she isn't a mammal - because if a cartoon animal just looks like an animal "obviously" it must be male(??)
It goes way deeper than corporations and marketing. We have all internalized it. Even the girl who wrote the letter.)

and then this

5 years later

Four months since I have written anything at all here.

I am really letting my two or three readers down! I'm sorry. Well, not sorry enough to necessarily do better, but enough to write this, right now, even though I'm not really feeling inspired.

My next real post will be on the difference between capitalism and the free market, how they are actually opposed, how government favors the former, and how it could (and why it should) be doing the opposite. Actually, it might even be a series of separate posts.
I already have basically everything I want down in my head, but it still may be a few months or a year before I get around to it. But I have always eventually written all the things I said I would so far, haven't I? So, unless I randomly die before then, it will really happen.


A part of why I stopped writing was the time and thought and energy that went into a major life transition.

Some Thoughts on Partnership and Extra-Marital Sex; Monogamy VS Sexual Exclusivity

First of all, I need to clarify a very important point, that many people seem to get wrong more often than not.

The suffix "-gamy" means "marriage".
It does NOT refer to sex.  It refers to romantic commitment - and more specifically, a religious and/or government sanctioned commitment (because two people can be entirely committed to each other without ever getting married).
The alternatives to monogamy are being single, or being polygamous, which means being married to more than one person.

The term for not having sex with anyone other than your spouse (or other committed romantic partner) is sexual exclusivity.


This is not just semantics.  It is in fact a crucial distinction, and without proper and consistent terminology, it is completely impossible to talk about the topic in any meaningful way.
So, for example, in a culture where polygamy is legal and culturally accepted, a man could have two or three wives.  If he never has sex with anyone other than those several wives, he is maintaining sexual exclusivity, even though he is not monogamous.  On the other hand, a married couple who are into swinging are monogamous, even though they are not practicing sexual exclusivity.
And both of them are practicing sexual fidelity - the word fidelity means "faithful" or "loyal", and none of the people in these examples are cheating.  It is only cheating if it is against the rules, and everyone involved in both the polygamous relationship and the swinger's relationship is agreeing to the same set of rules.
When people talk about "open" relationships, or polyamory, they can mean either having multiple committed romantic relationships (which might not, but probably will, involve sex), or they can be talking about having only one committed romantic relationship, but one or more other non-romantic sexual partners.


I am only going to be talking about the second option.

The Oldest Profession

First of all, let’s make one thing clear.  A prostitute does not sell their body.  The only circumstance in which any person actually sells a body part is when someone sells a kidney.  When you sell something, the buyer takes permanent possession of it, and the seller can not get it back.  The new owner can do anything they want with their purchase, because it is now their property.  This does not describe the prostitute / client transaction at all.  Even when people accepted indentured servitude arrangements they were only offering themselves on a long-term lease, not actually selling themselves.  A prostitute normally only allows her (or his) clients limited use of a portion of their body for a short, usually designated time period, an hour perhaps, maybe a few. 

This is not just semantics.  It’s a very important distinction.   

Really, what the transaction consists of is a person agreeing to engage in a specific activity for a specified time period which they otherwise might not do, to the benefit of another person who offers compensation for the time and labor involved.

Which, if you think about it, kind of describes every job.

Why is sex a special case? 

A year later

• May 26, 2009

A year later

I am so sick of dating.

I can't say it hasn't been fun.
Its been really fun.  Many first experiences.

I have been asked out.  I have gathered the courage to ask out. 
Some time later I replaced courage with confidence.

I have learned an awful lot of things (and confirmed a few I suspected all along).
I learned just how different I am compared to so many of my peers in this area.
I learned that finding what I am looking for is really hard.
I learned that all the common stereotypes about gender and dating are totally false.
I learned that people really do have sex on first dates (and not just desperate people, drunks, or players, but ordinary healthy well-adjusted people)
I learned that women are just as superficial as men (just with height instead of weight)
I learned that (at least for those whose standards start at 5'6" or less) I am much more attractive than I had thought I was.
I learned that there is very little correlation between stated views on sex and actual comfort and enthusiasm in practice; and little correlation between visual sexiness and actual quality of performance.
I learned that the single most important variable is that she is truly comfortable with her own sexuality.
I was shocked to learn how many people think that the actions of the female partner have little bearing on the overall quality of sex, or that being "good" can consist solely of how much she is willing to have done to her.  I learned that not everyone can match my stamina.
I learned that people are much more forgiving of me for my infidelity than I am of myself (I decided against ever making that story a blog, but I have nothing to hide, so if you ask me I'll tell you about it)
I learned that I can easily fall in love with someone I am totally incompatible with - in fact, I'm starting to suspect that I have a tendency to do just that.
I have learned a lot about emotional responses and how rare it is to just be told, directly, when something I do is upsetting or annoying or offensive.
I learned just how guarded and polite people are, and how it breeds a sort of inadvertent falseness which I honestly never noticed before.

I have had sex with a number of beautiful intelligent compassionate women of various shapes and sizes and colors. People involved in social justice and environmental protection and education, younger than me, older, people who want to get married someday and others who think monogamy is an artificial social construct. More women in just this past year than I expected to be with in my entire life.
(I've also had my first ever STD test, and got the equivalent of an 'A' on it.) 
I've shared both physical and emotional intimacy with women who I could have conversations with and find myself questioning beliefs I've refined over a lifetime of thought and debate and felt totally confident about. 
I've even fallen in love.  It may have been with someone totally incompatible with me, but it was still nice to know for sure I still can.

Flamboyant introvert

• Feb 23, 2009

Flamboyant introvert

I feel like I want to write, but I don't have a topic.

Actually, that's not true. I have several: adoption, consciousness, short-term dating/serial monogamy, and I doubt I'll ever be satiated of ranting about the injustice of a system that allows unrestricted accumulation of wealth across generations.

But as much as I feel like writing, I even more don't feel like writing about any of that stuff.

So I guess this will be more diary entry than essay.

Te Quiero

• Jan 13, 2009

Te Quiero

In Spanish the term for "I love you" is the same as "I want you"

Contrary to what English speakers might assume, this isn't meant to imply lust.
Te quiero is just as applicable to love for family or friends (with te amo reserved for romantic love - though te quiero is appropriate for a spouse or lover as well)

This is perhaps no more than an idiosyncrasy of language and translation, but it strikes me as the dominate view of love in our own culture.

We might say "I love ice cream" or "I love that movie", meaning that you really really enjoy it.  When something brings us great pleasure, we love it.
Certainly our friends and family and lovers ought to bring us great pleasure.

This type of love, possessive and self-centered, can certainly be applied to people.  I love you because you make me happy, I enjoy your company, I want you around.

It is perhaps unfortunate that we have one word that should cover such a broad range of emotional experience.

New Year's

• Jan 2, 2009

I still do not put any real stake in sexual compatibility.
What I want is a partnership. 
What matters most to me is being able to fully respect my partner, admire her.
I want us to enjoy each other, have fun together, teach each other, challenge each other, support each other.
I want intellectual and emotional compatibility.
I want shared values and priorities.
What matters to me is who she is as a person, not just what I get from contact with her.

It is very early, we have a lot to learn about each other; I can't say anything with any confidence.  We haven't had a chance to talk about these things.  I don't even know what she is looking for in terms of a relationship.  I have always had a tendency to idealize people, to emphasize the good and overlook the bad, and especially now I am not in a proper emotional state to judge - that being said, I have not felt so positively about a new person so quickly since... well, actually, I don't think I ever have.  

This is too much

• Oct 12, 2008

This is too much

You all know what has been going on.

I didn't seriously expect things to get so...
so quickly

I feel ok
Better than ok

I am in constant awe of everything, of everything, not just the people in my life and our interactions, and it is non-stop, it has been constant - and all but overwhelming - nearly every moment for as long as I can clearly remember (which is about the past two months or so)

As I mentioned before, it is exhausting - but with a week off last week (off from working anyway, though a date, time with friends, and/or a party every single day; and somehow I am becoming aware of my age?  While I have felt like a kid playing grown-up all my life, (well, except when I really was a kid.  Then I felt much more mature than my peers.  Its like I have been at the same maturity level my whole life, and at some point I grew into it, but then I kept aging as it stayed the same (I'm (mostly) kidding)), I have been noticing certain details - owning my home, running a business, being divorced, driving conservatively - which I always associated with "real" adults.  Yet recently I seem to be in the young adult world all over again) I feel re-energized and ready for more.

Except that now I am starting to fear hurting certain people (who shall remain nameless and detail-less to protect the privacy of the innocent (particularly since I was specifically asked to and I am most certainly not the type to pull a Lucy Ford on anyone, no matter how disgruntled or resentful I might be - not that I am, not at all, but I'm just saying, in theory, none of you ever have to worry about that; although I tend to assume that anything is ok just so long as you don't tell me otherwise so if you want not to be mentioned here make sure and tell me explicitly because I'm not any good at taking hints) and while I knew in theory this possibility was lurking, I really never expected it and so now I'm wondering how to cope if this trend continues on its current trajectory and certain other things pan out in a way like they look like they might possibly could and of course I am basing this on so little, I am, and I know it, but it sure looks more likely than average and I can't help but to think about worst case scenarios and its making all sorts of wacky (and sometimes terrible! :( ) things pass briefly  through my mind (the sort of things which are in direct opposition to the ideas in the love essay I've been telling you all I have been working on (I really have been, life is just very distracting at the moment and its hard to focus) if you know what I mean).
I added a note on the ok account about these potential changes, and deleted the lines with Craig, but as Malomar would have it, these actions are exactly 2 hours too late and as things are I don't feel like it would be reasonable to not at least find out because this is a potentially narrow opportunity to learn, and its too important not to find out.  Is it selfish?  That is the question I am struggling with.  That is the question which is forcing me to write this against my better judgment.  Everything I have said has been true, but all of us know (sometimes we choose to ignore, but I believe that deep inside everyone of us knows) that it is always more complicated than can be forced into a set of rules or theories.

My next therapy session is not going to have enough time to cover a small fraction of all this.
The hour goes by unbelievably fast every time as it is, even when I come in feeling like I don't have much to talk about (this isn't just my perception, he is surprised every week when time runs out)

Bonus Points:

If any of my readers actually read through this and are able to make sense of all the ((((())))) and explain in more comprehensible terms what the hell I am talking about here, I will take you out: ice skating or for ice cream; your choice, my treat (your explanation has to be accurate)

effective expression, intelligent love

• Sep 3, 2008

effective expression, intelligent love

What tells one person they are loved may be no more than background noise to another.

We are limited to words, gestures, actions, to express our whole range of feelings to one another. 
A smile, a cringe, expressions are largely universal.  But we are quite able to misunderstand each others communication, both verbal and non-verbal, and do so all the time.

Of course the words alone ("I love you"), with no action to support them will not be convincing...though the words are a vital addition for some). The range of potential actions is enormous.

If we go about acting on feeling without really thinking, our own most natural expression of deeply felt love can come across as meaningless.
What matters is not if you find unexpected flowers to be romantic, but if your partner does. 
Our choice of method to express our care for another may be dependent largely on how it was expressed to us. 
Maybe I was not shown much affection growing up, but much emphasis was placed on my health, well being, and nutrition.  Maybe my partner’s experiences were just the opposite.  When I cook her healthy meals it feels to me like she takes this expression of love for granted.  She does take it for granted, since she never considered meal preparation an act of love.  Her parents never cooked, and she would be just as happy eating out.  She assumes I cook for her just because I enjoy cooking.  
When she gives me a hug it feels hollow to me.  I don't associate physical affection with love very strongly.  She feels the lack of response on my part, and takes it to mean I don't feel strongly about her, when really I just don't feel strongly about the method of expression. We don't understand each other, but we can't explain -  we may not even understand the reasons behind our own feelings.

It isn't so much selfishness as ignorance, immaturity.
Its only natural that one would assume that what makes them feel loved is what would make others feel loved, and would therefore express their own in the same way they would like to receive it.  After all, we are reminded to treat others the way we would like to be treated.  The golden rule is unfortunately a bit of an oversimplification, for perhaps I appreciate surprise guests and my neighbor appreciates being left alone and as we each try to be especially kind to each other by doing what we would want them to do our displeasure only grows.

A total change of perspective

• Jul 24, 2008

A total change of perspective

What an experience these last few days have been!

So, from where I left off...

I did not end up learning to sail that day, as my friend / instructor had last minute craziness.
However, I actually didn't feel very disappointed because, in a way, now I get to enjoy the feeling of looking forward to it for another week (or perhaps because I'm scared of falling into the cold wet bay - which is apparently inevitable)
With the unexpected free time I did the laundry, the dishes, a thorough work out (I am getting close to being able to clean and jerk my own body weight), proof-read the blog from the night before, checked my PO box, I can't remember all what else.

As night approached, after that horrible experience the night before of trying and failing to sleep, of spending hours awake in the silent dark, alone with my thoughts a second time, I decided that instead I would not even try to sleep.
This time I took the opposite route, modofinil and caffeine pills and some primeatene just to jump start it, cranked up the music, turned on every light in the house, and did some exercising.

With hours to kill, I looked up an internet forum I found months ago when I was trying to learn more about the sort of psychological issues I suspected my wife of having related to her traumatic childhood, and how it was likely to play out in our marriage.

This time though, instead of looking with a focus on figuring out how to best improve our relationship, I was just looking for general validation and emotional support from people who had dealt with the exact same issues themselves.  There are many post both from people who have attachment problems of their own as well as spouses and former spouses of them.

an update

• Jul 23, 2008

an update

devoid of meaning

a faint echo of death keeps whispering to me from the distance


I do not hear it

I can not heed it

I do not wish to

I know I will not

But it is there

Imagine

• Mar 21, 2008

Imagine

Imagine this:



We are at home, bed time.

We finished having sex about 20 minutes ago, which means I am not antsy and you are no longer alert from activity.
It was good, but not spectacular.  Ordinary, but satisfying to us both.

Once we settled back into bed, I spent some time rubbing your back, while we spoke of things we had been thinking about.
Nothing particularly important, but we were still awake, and it’s always nice to talk.

 
Now we are both getting sleepy, are ready to actually fall asleep.

You lie on your side, facing away from me.
I lie behind you, facing you, our bodies lightly against each other.
It’s a cool night, but not cold
still naked, beneath the blankets, the sex was not energetic enough to make us sticky, our natural warmth together is the perfect amount to combat the night air,
you, of course, have your feet outside of the blankets.

My arm is over and across you, my hand around your breast
your arm overlaps mine, your hand on my hand.

And we fall asleep feeling the subtle expansion and contraction of each other’s breathing
You, with the light touch of my breath on the back of you neck, me, with the subtle scent of your hair in my breath
For me, I fall asleep to the thought that I cannot imagine a more perfect existence

than spending my time with so beautiful a person
the only lover I have ever had, and ever wanted
than falling asleep next to my best friend

Love

Sep 18, 2007 

Love

My definition:

Several parts, all absolutely necessary without exception.

(In no particular order)

Intimacy:

Which I consider to also consist of two parts –

Trust: one should be willing to tell the other what they think and feel.

Comfort: one should be as comfortable doing or saying anything in front of the other as they would be if they were alone

Care: I define this as not only feeling sympathy, but the willingness to make a personal sacrifice for another's gain. One is not only willing, but will take the initiative to give up something they want, or to do something they don't want, in order to make the other happy. This should be up to, and including, a one to one ratio – i.e. a sacrifice of equal magnitude to the gain the other gets from it. In any particular instance the ratio can be higher (I give up something I strongly want to give you something you moderately want) but overall it should not exceed 1:1; that would be an indication of a non-mutual, and ultimately unhealthy, relationship.

Enjoyment: A desire to be with the person, just for its own sake. Not because it makes the other happy, not because one should, not because they provide some particular useful thing, but just because it is enjoyable to spend time with them.

Understanding: Both knowledge of and understanding of the reasoning behind the other's beliefs, principals, opinions and preferences, and having one's own beliefs principals, opinions and preferences known and understood. This does not mean that each must necessarily agree with them all, but they should know what they are and why.

All of these things must be present for me to call it love. Any one or any two of them I would not be comfortable calling love. I certainly have felt one or two of these for others before. Never before all three for the same person. I had to experience it before I could formulate my definition, and so I have used the term in circumstances which I wouldn't today. To me, it is not an easy thing to come by.

Note that the first 3 can exist without being mutual.

Any of the four can exist without the other 3, which would constitute a friendship.

Having, say, 3 of the 4 could make a very special and important relationship. But having all 4 makes a qualitatively different relationship. It is what separates a close friendship from a life partner, or a healthy "long term relationship" from an unhealthy one.

Each of the 4 can be present in varying amounts. None is likely to be 100%, at least not 100% of the time. In some cases a deficit in one (partial, not complete) may make a relationship unsustainable. Which is more important, and the exact amounts needed may vary from person to person. Ultimately, once all 4 are satisfied, there is no significant advantage to going to someone "better". There is some inherent value to commitment, (both emotional and practical) and any improvement in a new person would be only a quantitative change, not a qualitative one, and therefore would have to be very large indeed to be worth it. In a conflict, as long as all 4 are present (or have been, and can reasonably be expected to be again) it is probably worth the effort and difficulty to work things out. If one is missing, and has little hope of ever being present, it is probably better to let it go. Perhaps I am mistaken, but I can't help but to think that most people would prefer a partner who satisfied each of those requirements (mutually). Perhaps I am mistaken, but I also can't help but to think that there are very few (if any) people who can find all 4 in the same person with relative ease. I think that even the simplest, most easy going person would have trouble finding someone they were compatible with. Perhaps there are some who genuinely, under the layers of pride, distrust, fear, and "principal" really have no desire to have a life partner – but I doubt it.

Nostalgia means "I love you"

• Sep 18, 2007

Nostalgia means "I love you"

A few minutes ago my iPod, randomly shuffling between a 605 track playlist, played "Everyday" by Dave Matthews Band.
I was putting up window tint, and not thinking about you at all at the time.
It immediately made me think of - not of you exactly, but of the feeling of you, the general thought of you.

Within the next second, it reminded me of Stanford and then El Cerrito. Then again, not really the places, but the feelings that go along with them, a memory not of any particular site or sound, but of the feeling I had when I was there

And of course, the places themselves were of no significance, it was the person I was with who made those places interesting, something to look forward to.

I have the feeling of "nostalgia" now and then, from different things, about different things. In one way it is a good feeling, but usually it is more just interesting than it is pleasant. The good component is usually balanced by an unpleasant part, which is much too subtle to explain, almost too subtle to even notice, but it is there none-the-less.

I can't remember a feeling of nostalgia which was as filled with warmth. Warmth is precisely it. It was all pleasant feeling, even with what has been going on recently. It made me realize something:

I think I really was in love with you, long before I was aware of it, long before I told you, long before I admitted it. Not just "love" in the sense that I have loved you all along and continue to, not just care and positive regard, but "in" love, with that extra little special something which is indefinable.

-A digression:

I have updated my theories of love. I used to belittle the feeling of "in" love as either being "just" a crush or infatuation, or lust, in any case, not real, not sustainable.
These certainly can be factors, and the three can be impossible to distinguish sometimes. But, when accompanied by "real" love (you know what I mean), the distinction comes in the indefinable element.

You can list the factors which make a person someone you would love, but there are always other things, subtle, indefinable, unplaceable things, which are still very real despite being incommunicable, which are the extra element, which make it "in" love.

Sometimes I would say I loved you, and you would ask why, and I might say I wasn't sure. Which you took to mean it was either untrue or meaningless. But really, it was very true, and very meaningful. Probably more so than the list of qualities could ever be. You do fulfill the 'list', but another person who filled the list might not be the same to me as you are.

I had always assumed that when people used the term "chemistry" they were essentially talking about lust. But, this morning I was thinking about all this; you said something to the effect that if certain others had specific qualities, (and maybe they will turn out to) I would really like her - but I don't feel for anyone, now, ever, quite the way I did (and still do) for you, even back when I didn't admit it. Perhaps it could be called "chemistry"; whatever it is, it's missing with others.

I was also thinking about commitment. I used to think that if any two people are together, and a 3rd comes along who is better (by the standards of the 'list') for one, they should, logically, split, and be with the new person.
I disagree with that now.
There is an activation energy, a minimum threshold, which must be overcome for that formula to be valid.
The up hill which must be passed consists of many things:
The difficulty and unpleasantness of breaking up, the giving up of an acquired closeness, risk in replacing someone you know is good for you with someone you merely suspect to be better, and the lack of the stability, comfort, and reassurance which comes with commitment - whether or not it is ever acted upon.
The person has to be not only better in an absolute sense, but so much better as to be worth all of those negative aspects of both the transition and the mind set. For, even if the long term benefit of a new person outweighed the difficulties of the transition, just having that mindset means both people would have to live forever with the constant threat of the loss of their partner. This in and of itself would cause problems, jealousy, unhappiness, stress, fear, discomfort. For, no two people could ever be 100% perfect for each other 100% of the time, and the possibility of someone "better" is always present.
But when the drawbacks of a transition to a "better" are taken into account, the amount of "betterness" required grows considerably.

And when I think about it, you, for me, are too close to ideal for someone else, no matter how much "better" to ever overcome that threshold energy. You, plus the threshold, equals an unimaginably unrealistic vision of perfection - a perfection plus; it makes as much sense as sentencing 10 consecutive life sentences, its simply meaningless.

Given that, I know now that I would be willing to commit to you.
Not just "getting married" in the legal sense, or buying a house together, or even having a child together.
But as a decision inside myself.

I know that you don't feel that way. Which is unfortunate and sad, but its ok. It doesn't change my feeling, nor my willingness. If someday in the future you were interested, you should know where I stand. I realize that you probably feel completely different than me on the subject, and definitely at least somewhat differently, and also that even if you did see it the same way, you have doubts as to whether or not I could be that person for you. I suspect you will come around after going through what ever you have to in the mean time, but maybe I'll turn out to be wrong, and then that's just the way things go.

If we can not be together in the long run, I think I will want to know you again, be friends with you... eventually.
That would be hard for me, very, especially at first. I will still love you, and I will probably still be in love with you too. (Right, "still". As in, I'm beginning to suspect that I have been all along, but since its constant, I don't notice, like the hum on an airplane, except when it is unusually strong.) And, since we have already separated, most of the elements of that threshold are irrelevant, I am still confident you will remain my first choice for life partners. But a little of you is better than none at all, (once I get used to it), just like it is now. Another thing I think you should know.

Dr Cox on love; heterosexual ManLove; and does enjoying performing fellatio make a guy gay?

• Jul 6, 2007

Dr Cox on love; heterosexual ManLove; and does enjoying performing fellatio make a guy gay?

ok, first: I don't mean to imply any correlation what ever between the three topics.
They are totally independent, only there are overlapping themes, love without sex, sex without sex, love with love. Plus, the two clips are from the same show. And as a final pun, his name is "Dr. Cox" which in the context of this blog amuses me more than it should at my age.




I really like this show. Its rare that a show can be so utterly ridicules, and still catch the heart and make suckers like me cry now and then. The situations are often fantastic, the personalities blown to super proportions, the visual gags and gimmicks childish, almost surreal in a way, and yet the feeling in the relationships is believable - you get the feeling the writers have felt the way the characters do. Most of them, most of the time, under all the fun and, all basically unhappy people. And it isn't so hard to sympathize with Cox going back to his horribly dysfunctional relationship, to his deliberately psychologically abusive ex-wife. And you watch this; clearly he knows better. But sometimes, that's just how life is, and people are people.




Was it "Cat on a Hot Tin Roof"? Yes, where the wife is jealous of her husbands relationship with his best friends, and he insists she corrupts the relationship they had by suggesting there was a sexual element to it. Maybe there really was, maybe there would have been in a more open society, and maybe neither. Bottom line, it shouldn't matter. Certainly part of the feeling of love evolved to coincide with sex, as a mechanism to hold a family unit together, to get us to care for our mates and young. But we are a social specie as well as one which mates long-term, and there is naturally love for family, for kin, for friends. It is perhaps our deeply internalized homophobia (and literally phobia, as in fear) which prevents more open man love, more heterosexual life-partners, (as a friend of mine explains his relationship with his roommate/friend). Because we assume that love implies sex, even though many of us can decouple the inverse. This subconscious internalization is so pervasive that even I, raised as I was my a openly bi former hippy, with my gender-neutral mind (according to the BBC / PBS online tests), and my liberal philosophy, am often made uncomfortable by the relationship between Turk and JD - not despite their both being hetero, but because of it. That makes it worse somehow, like I can accept homosexuality so long as its something *other*, but in that context, it makes me think abut my own male friends, and it becomes creepy.

Just like my third topic, which is sort of the inverse, but really just different.

I had mentioned to a friend of mine that I thought I might be able to learn to be rather good at fellatio, and that it was in a way unfortunate that I'm straight. She questioned whether enjoying giving head automatically makes a guy gay. My reaction was the same as yours - uh, yeah, duh, by definition! But then I thought about it a bit. The giver doesn't have to be stimulated. Not all pleasurable experiences are sexual. And not all sexual experiences have any thing to do with a meaningful or long-term relationship. Remove the assumptions, implications, expectations, and you have left only a specific oral / sensual experience. Plenty of oral fixations are non-sexual; cigarettes have their nicotine and gum has flavor, part of it is just the sucking and the chewing, not to mention toothpicks, and pacifiers. And besides the sensation, it may just be fun, or pleasant to give pleasure, like giving a massage, or a good meal, to someone, without wanting anything from it. Which may be key. Some people (even some Hells Angels) think a person can receive oral from a man without being gay. I never understood that. As the receiver it is unquestionably sexual, and the person stimulating you is another man. As giver it isn't necessarily sexual. You may not want the favor returned. You may not find the person attractive. I can tell a good looking man from your average ugmo, but that doesn't make me want to have sex with him.

Think of a similar example:
In general attractive guys are hard (not like that, silly, I mean from their big muscles). They tend to be hairy. Women, even fit ones, tend to be soft. If I were female, I imagine I would still find sensual pleasure in attending a Japanese soapland. And if your gonna have a slippery naked body sliding around you, it would feel a lot nicer if they are soft and smooth. So aside from the sexual aspect, a straight woman would likely prefer her soapland attendant to another female. Or a male athlete may prefer a male masseuse for his stronger hands. Its a sensual experience without being sexual.

One could be attracted to women, desire only to have sex with women, fantasize about women, have relationships with women, and separate from that, enjoy sucking cock now and then.
I have yet to test this theory. It makes sense, but its still creepy. I'm curios, but the grossness overwhelms curiosity. Maybe someday. Just to prove to myself that I can. Just to add to my repertoire of useless skills and random experiences.
Maybe, if I'm lucky, I'll like it... after all, gay guys get way more sex than we do. Some times I wish I were gay for no other reason. I guess that won't really work, since I'm already in love with a female, and I want her to end up as my life partner. Well, its an interesting thought anyway.

original, independent, and dumb ideas

• Jul 5, 2007

original, independent, and dumb ideas

I have never been much of one to go with the crowd.

Probably the main thing that attracted my friends and I together in high school was that.

We were not necessarily so similar to each other.



A lot of people make a point of being "different", for its own sake, for the attention, whatever.

Many of us did that at some point, trying to not fit in, but at root, I think most of us had our own ways of doing things first, and figured if we were to be on the fringe anyway, may as well have fun with it.

It's different.

Me, I found my own ways to do stuff. No one suggested to me that I should, (or could) ride my bike to school (back in middle school). I never saw anyone else do it. I was the only one in the entire school. The happy van, I saw it, it was just perfect, so I bought it. Why pay rent? Why should only the homeless live in their cars? Why use deodorant when hand sanitizer does such a better job? You know what I mean.

I find that many, if not most of the people I find myself close to, or respect, tend to be this way too.

Don't get me wrong - I see value in the alternative, and there are people I enjoy who I would not classify that way. After all, there have been thousands of generations before us who have had plenty of time to figure things out. If we each had to reinvent the wheel, and fire, for ourselves, humanity would not be where it is today, (the bad or the good from collective knowledge). Nothing wrong with learning from others.

The trick is, I guess, to recognize which things have value and to discard the rest. Because sometimes an entire society is collectively blind to some bit of common sense and does something stupid for generations, (tank based water heaters, for example, or refrigerators with the compressor at the bottom and the freezer on top)

I notice this recently.

My mother and my wife, they are both this way. They have their own ways of doing things, which they think are better than how everyone else does. Having two independent minded people interact, it is inevitable that there be conflicts sometimes. I know that they both respect my opinion and consider my input, but when it comes down to it, neither care if I think an idea they have is dumb (like for instance traveling in the 2nd world on a new bike with non-standard parts, or suppressing weeds and grass with sheets of plastic). And in a way, I have to respect them for that. I'm glad that my word is merely one piece of input and does not override, even when I am right; well, when I am pretty sure I am. I wouldn't have it any other way.

I find it a little odd, ironic, that she (wife, not mother) thought for so long that she was passive and just going along, when she never was that way. As though she were any less independent than she is now. Not any time that I knew her. It was her who suggested we buy an RV together, and live in it, she who picked it... I remember debating philosophy, time, long ago, when she was just an acquaintance. I remember her choosing to leave home as a child. But she didn't feel it.
I guess a lot of us have a different self-perception than what those around us see as obvious. She didn't used to think she was pretty, and after all those modeling jobs, I'm still not sure that she fully appreciates just how beautiful she is. There are probably things like this about me too - but of course I can't imagine what they are.

Sexual Dimorphism, and Caveman Love

Jun 12, 2007

Sexual Dimorphism, and Caveman Love

Its the scientific term for species where the genders have non-reproductive body features which are distinct from each other, like a mallard's green head or a peacock's tail.  The fiddler crab probably doesn't count because his giant claw is used directly for the mating process.  Many species the genders are both the same size, but differential size sexual dimorphism is very common.

In insects, spiders, microscopic animals, some sea life, a lot of variety exists. Often the female is many times larger than the male, sometimes the male lives symbiotically or even parasitically within the female for a life time, or males live only a few days while females live for months or years.

In the larger animals, the chordates, there are two primary strategies. 
In some species, the males show off for the women, build a better nest, do a sexier dance, show off bright flashy colors, and the women get to choose. 

In others, the men threaten each other, fight if need be, and the winner gets his pick of women - or as many as he can handle, or even all of them.  In this case, it is purely a question of physical dominance.  It doesn't matter if he is ugly, or stupid, or mean.  As long as he's strong, he gets to mate with all the women, whether the other guys like it or not; not to mention whether the women like it or not.  Occasionally, in many species, the women have affairs with certain less dominate males, risking the wrath of Brutus for themselves and their partners.

Passion

• May 20, 2007

Passion

riding all day down the coast of California.

Typical early spring weather.

Cool.  Misty.  Bright.  Windy.

Tired, a little hungry.

Rain starts.

Rain gear doesn't help - all wet.  Cold.

Arrive at camp ground, check in, restroom / shower key

Clothes off, in the shower, all alone, faucet, hot, almost too hot, almost painful
Almost, but not

Perfect.
Warm.  Soft

Like your body is going to melt.
Right there in the campground shower, melt into a puddle, but you don't mind.

Wonder briefly what person in shower stall next door thinks of the pleasure noises involuntarily escaping you, but, the feeling is too distracting to think.  Ordinary showers never feel as good.

Take that feeling, the hot water enveloping, but instead, picture it in girl form.

Passion.

And yet -

Music.   Music in the genre they call "funk".
Sure, music is a matter of taste, personal preference.
But there is something ,  that, eee-gha. When your feeling the live band.  The rhythm gets into you.  People to ashamed to dance can't help but tap feet and wiggle heads.  There's a break, a pause, and then that first perfect beat, that first note, and if its done right, the dancers no longer have control over their bodies.  The musicians do.  And they know it, and they play with it.  And its not about what you look like, or about picking someone up, its just the music, just you and the music, and it just feels right, it just feels good.

Take that feeling, and put it in girl form.

The music with that ngha and the melting in a puddle.  They are not compatible.  They are both good, but one is calm and one is energy itself.  Or at least, not in any other context are they compatible.  Some how, passion, with all its physical movement, all its effort, makes you melt just like the shower, just like a really good massage.  Even with out sex, even with out love, it is like combining every good sensation, every good feeling that life has to offer us, into one concentrated moment, so intense as to boarder on excruciating, but somehow never crossing that line.

That sound, in the Beatles song "Girl" on Rubber Soul, the sucking in through the teeth, sssss, I can't find a proper onomatopoeia for it.
But you know what I mean.