I made a controversial post in the polyamory subreddit about my anti-monogamy views. It drew a wide variety of comments, most of which I tried to respond to calmly and appropriately
( Read more... )
Well, time - and maybe aging - as well as acquiring different pieces of knowledge have made me doubt about those relationship forms that are considered the "standard" in terms of their assumed self-evidence. If they aren't created, acquired through upbringing, parental and cultural. Combined with my own situation within it all - I think you can say, it has already formed an alternative attitude in me, which is a bit like: I know, if someone ever decided I should be a firm part of his life, I'm not going to be able to supply him with everything he desires. I simply won't without any exaggeragtion... So, then you need to get realistic and get used to the thought: I can't rule over someone else's desires and what he does with them. I may not come to like this thought, because humans are too sneaky to not suspect them to leave you again as soon as they found another pleace to eat their meals at, but I'll have to accept it. Vice versa, I also wouldn't let anybody tell me what I have to desire and how I live with the stuff from my own end. So, it's a "tit for tat" thing. A matter of fairness. I guess, I only had one really firm rule: Know where your home is. If someone voluntarily exploits me because he isn't able to get enough in his life and I take notice of that, it's gonna be capital punishment from my side. Such mindgames I don't support. I know what I'm worth and I move no lower beyond that.
In this point, I must say, it's so, so fucking important for a guy to be taught "to most guys, sex is only like eating". You know, so that you actually learn it's got nothing magical or relaionship-linked to do with it, or even is cheating, if a guy takes care of his physical needs by himself and NOT through his partner. That, if you take an average guy, sex doesn't necessarily have something to do with "relationship" to him. That simply physical needs play a big role in it. Or mental desires which he reocgnizes he can't live them with every person, but just with certain characters with certain personality traits or people who are into a particular kind of stuff.
I think I've found this detail to be the most helpful in it all. It makes you realize self-service is okay, porn is okay, even varying people can be okay, as nobody wants to eat the same meal for the rest of his life. Emotional relationship doesn't necessarily have something to do with that, or depend on that. Say, ultimately what they call in the asex spectrum "the difference between sex drive, sexual attraction and emotional bond". All can be aligned to each other and unaligned, or only two of them with the third component not attached to any of them.
Culture wants to whisper everyone the myth into their ears about the exclusive partner, the "only one", the perfect match - the one who is your perfect mirror. But that's a more artificial image - which maybe women carry the more likeliness along in their lives that this image may suit their original emotional needs and desires (the needs and desires without the socialization).
It's evil to say this here, but it seems to be a matter of fact: If you can detach sex from having a certain form of relationship with a person, and do the same in another case, then it speaks very much for the testosteron that your brain once was exposed to in the maternal body (I specifically pick this wording here as I think this is what matters way more - see the fact that there is also a minority of women out there which can separate sex from love too).
Combined with my own situation within it all - I think you can say, it has already formed an alternative attitude in me, which is a bit like: I know, if someone ever decided I should be a firm part of his life, I'm not going to be able to supply him with everything he desires. I simply won't without any exaggeragtion...
So, then you need to get realistic and get used to the thought: I can't rule over someone else's desires and what he does with them. I may not come to like this thought, because humans are too sneaky to not suspect them to leave you again as soon as they found another pleace to eat their meals at, but I'll have to accept it.
Vice versa, I also wouldn't let anybody tell me what I have to desire and how I live with the stuff from my own end.
So, it's a "tit for tat" thing. A matter of fairness.
I guess, I only had one really firm rule: Know where your home is.
If someone voluntarily exploits me because he isn't able to get enough in his life and I take notice of that, it's gonna be capital punishment from my side. Such mindgames I don't support. I know what I'm worth and I move no lower beyond that.
In this point, I must say, it's so, so fucking important for a guy to be taught "to most guys, sex is only like eating".
You know, so that you actually learn it's got nothing magical or relaionship-linked to do with it, or even is cheating, if a guy takes care of his physical needs by himself and NOT through his partner.
That, if you take an average guy, sex doesn't necessarily have something to do with "relationship" to him. That simply physical needs play a big role in it. Or mental desires which he reocgnizes he can't live them with every person, but just with certain characters with certain personality traits or people who are into a particular kind of stuff.
I think I've found this detail to be the most helpful in it all.
It makes you realize self-service is okay, porn is okay, even varying people can be okay, as nobody wants to eat the same meal for the rest of his life.
Emotional relationship doesn't necessarily have something to do with that, or depend on that.
Say, ultimately what they call in the asex spectrum "the difference between sex drive, sexual attraction and emotional bond". All can be aligned to each other and unaligned, or only two of them with the third component not attached to any of them.
Culture wants to whisper everyone the myth into their ears about the exclusive partner, the "only one", the perfect match - the one who is your perfect mirror.
But that's a more artificial image - which maybe women carry the more likeliness along in their lives that this image may suit their original emotional needs and desires (the needs and desires without the socialization).
It's evil to say this here, but it seems to be a matter of fact: If you can detach sex from having a certain form of relationship with a person, and do the same in another case, then it speaks very much for the testosteron that your brain once was exposed to in the maternal body (I specifically pick this wording here as I think this is what matters way more - see the fact that there is also a minority of women out there which can separate sex from love too).
Reply
Leave a comment