You know what? On the whole, this is pretty brilliant.
There's not a whole lot more I can say; I definitely want to save it and (with your permission) forward it to a few folks. For the sake of conversation, just between us, I would add a few random thoughts:
I think one of the things that tends to bog down unified theories of queerness (to queer them, as it were) is the obligation to normatize every neurotic tendency. You've done a nice job of describing how ACTUAL sexuality may limit the specific ways in which our POTENTIAL desire to share space and time with each other. You've also stated that these limits and desires are not necessarily static. That part is okay, as far as it goes. But, I still think it can be tightened up a bit. What I mean, is that -- IMHO -- there are ways in which these dissonances can be minimized even further by mutually agreed upon therapies, examples being, gestalt techniques ("the glass is actually half-full--and so is your bosom"), visualization/actualization ("Okay, I'm undressing you with my eyes -- and that's okay"), or substitution ("Omigod, you have the sexiest, um -- thumbs!") and to the degree that some people exhibit actual scary behavior, just ordinary therapy. Otherwise, I think you're on the right track.
None of these activities have ever occured to me (and I'm not sure I fully understand them) but they seem like excellent methods for pragmatically sharing pleasure in a way that's most desired by each of the individuals involved (I think). Could you actually describe gestalt techniques, visualization/actualization, and subsitution in more depth?
Well, first a disclaimer: I don't actually profess to be an expert in any of these techniques. I just know that what I've seen of reevaluation counseling (RC) over the years suggests that Harvey Jackins "borrowed" a lot of theory and practice from different sources, including the ones that I've mentioned. Here's what I THINK I know and I THINK I've seen practiced in nearly 30 years of RC experience:
Gestalt - gestalt emphasizes keen observation and a grounding of those observations strictly in the present. Partly, this requires a certain acceptance that things "are what they are" and that there is nothing intrinsically bad or good about any particular thing -- or person -- once they are stripped to their essence. It also requires an acceptance of the notion that anything that distracts you from appreciating a person or thing for its essentially benign nature --is probably more about you than them. Thus, one gestalt technique might be for you to list all the things that "catch" you about a particular person -- both bad and good. These things are nearly always based on events that took place in your past -- seldom the present. Once you understand the nature of the "catch" fully you can move on to appreciate the person for themselves rather than for who or what in your past they reminded you of (a movie star, a brother, a sister -- parents, etc.)
visualization/actualization is basically about using your imagination to overcome an irrational fear, for example, fear of flying: the person is guided through various simulations of boarding a plane, taking a seat and hearing the engine start until the fear is overcome. In RC this was a common device to use in a situation where the other person was so shy or scared of physical closeness (quite literally unable to sit in the same room with you) that you would start off by asking them to "imagine what it would be like to be sitting next to me" and they might even try to inch a little closer to you, shiver and shake while doing it, go back to where they were, talk about what was hard (it's almost always something that reminds them of a past event) and try again. But, each time, before they attempt to move closer (or board that plane, or aske for that raise), it is important that they try to imagine what it would be like first. I've also seen it used in situations that were the complete opposite (e.g., where the person had a highly sexualized crush on me.) Often, just asking the person to describe in detail (emphasis on _detail_) all the things they would love to do with me in bed, was enough to rob the crush of much of its erotic power (thus, enabling them to see the essential me -- just another human being.)
Substitution - the most problematic because it is premised upon the notion that there is some kind of hierarchy of fetishes. You can see this in what is probably its best known application: Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) where people are basically encouraged to substitute an addiction that is perceived as extremely harmful (alcohol) with one that is perceived as less so (coffee, nicotine -- belief in a higher power.) I've also heard it called Harm Reduction. Personally, I have found that just foreswearing pornography (either alone or in the company of another person) makes an enormous difference in what "catches" me about other men. I've noticed over the years that men actually have eyes and necks (and feet!) and the most delightful callouses on the palms of their hand (if they ever let you get close enough to hold their hand) rather than making a fetish of their pecs or what's inside of their pants.
There's not a whole lot more I can say; I definitely want to save it and (with your permission) forward it to a few folks. For the sake of conversation, just between us, I would add a few random thoughts:
I think one of the things that tends to bog down unified theories of queerness (to queer them, as it were) is the obligation to normatize every neurotic tendency. You've done a nice job of describing how ACTUAL sexuality may limit the specific ways in which our POTENTIAL desire to share space and time with each other. You've also stated that these limits and desires are not necessarily static. That part is okay, as far as it goes. But, I still think it can be tightened up a bit. What I mean, is that -- IMHO -- there are ways in which these dissonances can be minimized even further by mutually agreed upon therapies, examples being, gestalt techniques ("the glass is actually half-full--and so is your bosom"), visualization/actualization ("Okay, I'm undressing you with my eyes -- and that's okay"), or substitution ("Omigod, you have the sexiest, um -- thumbs!") and to the degree that some people exhibit actual scary behavior, just ordinary therapy. Otherwise, I think you're on the right track.
Reply
Reply
Gestalt - gestalt emphasizes keen observation and a grounding of those observations strictly in the present. Partly, this requires a certain acceptance that things "are what they are" and that there is nothing intrinsically bad or good about any particular thing -- or person -- once they are stripped to their essence. It also requires an acceptance of the notion that anything that distracts you from appreciating a person or thing for its essentially benign nature --is probably more about you than them. Thus, one gestalt technique might be for you to list all the things that "catch" you about a particular person -- both bad and good. These things are nearly always based on events that took place in your past -- seldom the present. Once you understand the nature of the "catch" fully you can move on to appreciate the person for themselves rather than for who or what in your past they reminded you of (a movie star, a brother, a sister -- parents, etc.)
visualization/actualization is basically about using your imagination to overcome an irrational fear, for example, fear of flying: the person is guided through various simulations of boarding a plane, taking a seat and hearing the engine start until the fear is overcome. In RC this was a common device to use in a situation where the other person was so shy or scared of physical closeness (quite literally unable to sit in the same room with you) that you would start off by asking them to "imagine what it would be like to be sitting next to me" and they might even try to inch a little closer to you, shiver and shake while doing it, go back to where they were, talk about what was hard (it's almost always something that reminds them of a past event) and try again. But, each time, before they attempt to move closer (or board that plane, or aske for that raise), it is important that they try to imagine what it would be like first. I've also seen it used in situations that were the complete opposite (e.g., where the person had a highly sexualized crush on me.) Often, just asking the person to describe in detail (emphasis on _detail_) all the things they would love to do with me in bed, was enough to rob the crush of much of its erotic power (thus, enabling them to see the essential me -- just another human being.)
Substitution - the most problematic because it is premised upon the notion that there is some kind of hierarchy of fetishes. You can see this in what is probably its best known application: Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) where people are basically encouraged to substitute an addiction that is perceived as extremely harmful (alcohol) with one that is perceived as less so (coffee, nicotine -- belief in a higher power.) I've also heard it called Harm Reduction. Personally, I have found that just foreswearing pornography (either alone or in the company of another person) makes an enormous difference in what "catches" me about other men. I've noticed over the years that men actually have eyes and necks (and feet!) and the most delightful callouses on the palms of their hand (if they ever let you get close enough to hold their hand) rather than making a fetish of their pecs or what's inside of their pants.
Hope this helps!
Reply
Leave a comment