Relationships

[ehowton]

I recently watched Guy Richie's Sherlock Holmes and its magnificent sequel, and will admit to being downright smitten with the intimate relationship Holmes and Watson share in this particular interpretation - what is it in the psychology behind the homosociality of bromance buddy-films that endears us to them?

Imagine observing two house

Comments

[michelle1963]

People often confuse the willingness to become physically vulnerable during the sexual act with the willingness to be emotionally vulnerable. While the emotional intimacy can occur during sex, it is not given. Many people can and do have sex without emotional intimacy.

Sex is a form of communication. Sex without emotional intimacy (as you have defined it ~ dialog, transparency, vulnerability and reciprocity) is akin to the experiential intimacy of the aforementioned house painters.

However, sex that was preceded by laying a foundation of emotional intimacy is merely punctuating the communication that has already taken place. You've laid bare your soul to another individual and are then ready physically merge.

I have experienced both types of sex (and some that would fall in between). They are light-years apart.

The second problem with mistaking the sex act alone as intimacy, is that it negates all of the same sex intimacy that has nothing to do with sex. I have intimate relationships with some of my female friends. I can show them my true self without fear of being judged; without fear of repercussion; without fear of rejection. And I have zero desire to bed them.

I suspect many people can't fathom ever showing their true selves to another. I have a feeling there are those who do not show their true selves even to themselves.

The Coolidge Effect

[ehowton]

Biology says painting the house isn't the issue. Paining the same house is the issue.