I was serious about the icahbod crane referance. When I said looks dont matter, I was speaking from experience. Imagine my trust in a woman when she says something like that. Imagine if a man came up to you and said wow you have nice hair and look like [insert blond actress here that you dont look like-- alley mcbeal]... its obvious what she wants, and your left thinking... whats wrong with you.
Looks don't matter and they do. A great actor can go up on the stage with no props or costumes and perform a one-man show and make every character believable. However, I think costuming and props are useful if for no other reason than they can help the actor suspend his own disbelief.
GP told me I looked like a "thick" version of the blond Milla Jovovich from Resident Evil. Of course, I knew exactly what was wrong with him when he said that - lol
Quote:
and I said long time ago. there is something innately unfeminine when you have to require the cow
I really don't know what you mean by this. It could be interpreted a number of different ways. Is it unfeminine for a woman to require that a man appreciate the cow or does a woman seem unfeminine if you have to require that she be more cow, or what?
Quote:
Be monkey and random all you want. I like it.
Of course you like it. If big sister misbehaves a bit than little brother can do whatever in the f*ck he likes and blame it on her bad influence. Anyways, what you like is irrelevant. The monkey can't pay my bills and neither can the stupid bunny so I gave bunkey a triple dose of baby Tylenol with codeine and tossed her in the crib.
"Tell me, what is it you plan to do with your one wild and precious life?" - Mary Oliver
Mojo said I should integrate Alpha and Top. I still dont know what she means by that. Im willing to listen. Then Mojo changed to be puppy.
On my very first date with GP he said "I would rather just jack-off and say a woman's name than go out and randomly hit it anymore." I think the reason I found that attractive was that it showed a willingness or effort to integrate Alpha/Top/PuppyDog. He was simultaneously projecting confidence/dominance AND a desire for emotional connection. I can't imagine a "nice guy" saying that on a first date but a guy who was all wolf wouldn't say it either. GP basically had the same philosophy/theory of women as you and it might interest you to note that one of the main reasons we broke up was that I couldn't figure out how to convince a man that I wasn't interested in sucking away his life energy (money) and then dumping him because I am currently so weak*ss lioness broke. I wouldn't lend me $1000 at the moment.
"Tell me, what is it you plan to do with your one wild and precious life?" - Mary Oliver
Everything you talk about in Rs, attraction, etc., BF, I get. And to me, a great deal of it has to do with the balance of power in the R. It is darn near impossible, for man OR woman, to be attracted to someone who is in a One Down position.
I am with you, however, in saying that if BOTH people are not willing to examine, learn and put into practice everything they possibly can about this R dynamic, it will be incredibly difficult to sustain it (and attraction) over the LT.
There is STILL a power imbalance in Choco's R, at least in my opinion... and I'm thinking he may be the covert One Up. I say that because there was no 'hyper-honeymoon' period in his R after Mrs. Choc came clean and stopped the A.
In your own case, you move a man into your home who is a known wife seducer, your xW comes to you on several occasions about her concerns regarding her feelings and this man, you insist she take care of her own problem, and then come down on her because she didn't tend her own fences.
The decision to have the A was hers and hers alone. But in my mind, you turned your back on the 'our' part of the fence when you moved the wife seducer into your home and when you dismissed her concerns. That exposed her fences in a VERY unnecessary way (could even be viewed as intentional weakening, which, if that is the case... puts a different spin on your theories).
It is a valuable thing to be able to objectively consider any situation. As time passes, more and more things become clear to me from my own situation. When you are in the midst of it... ain't so easy, is it? So while your theories are objectively invaluable, you can't see what you can't see.
I understand completely LFL's reluctant feelings toward her H. Those feelings of resentment in her... we tell her to try this, or try that... she knows what to do... it's those feelings that are attacking her... and they are THERE for a REASON. She isn't making them up. She isn't being lazy. She's dam confused by them, and I bet any amount of money, if she knew how to get rid of them immediately, she would. But in the midst of those frustrating feelings, in the midst of that confusion and anger and helplessness, fantasies about leaving the R, having an affair... maybe even that your spouse dies of some mysterious disease (I am NOT referring to murder)... are actually COMMON.
And it is because the R is in a state of imbalance, in some cases severe... and BOTH people are in a state of crisis. Attraction, at this point, has about as much to do with R success as the price of tea in China. People do not function well in a state of crisis. This state may be more apparent in one spouse than the other, but... by and large, if one person is in crisis, both are... because it takes two people to make an R.
There is a very strong case for restoring the balance of power in the R to address the problems/complaints of both spouses. And this particular approach leaves blame (for the most part) out of it.
There is a very strong case for restoring the balance of power in the R to address the problems/complaints of both spouses. And this particular approach leaves blame (for the most part) out of it.
I agree with a lot of what you are saying. I think that the equal and opposing problem to "not being attracted to one-down" is, in a sense, "only being attracted to one-up". The woman who is a one-up and cuts her man down to a placating one-down is matched perfectly with a one-down man who is only attracted to one-up women. Of course, the same applies to either gender. That is why so many HD folk who come to this BB are like "Oh my spouse/marriage is so perfect except he/she is mean to me and won't have sex with me." Clue in. If you put somebody up on a pedestal or make them into a tin god so that you can feel a high level of sexual or romantic attraction for them then you get what you deserve in terms of intimacy. Of course, the one-up is often guilty of subconsciously seeking security or ego gratification at the expense of sexual attraction themselves. People need to learn how to move in a fluid and self-aware fashion from the role of the sexual one-down to the sexy one-up without engaging in deceptive and destructive games.
This is why I was joking that my new "test" was that I was going to signal to men "I doubt that you are man enough for a woman as nice as me."
Last edited by MJontheMend; 12/22/0708:26 PM.
"Tell me, what is it you plan to do with your one wild and precious life?" - Mary Oliver
We're still apart 5/7 of the time. For her it's probably not bad, she only sees the omega wolf a couple of days and then he saunters off. The wolf, however, is still hungry.
I think that the equal and opposing problem to "not being attracted to one-down" is, in a sense, "only being attracted to one-up". The woman who is a one-up and cuts her man down to a placating one-down is matched perfectly with a one-down man who is only attracted to one-up women.
Well... actually, when two people start out in an R, it is usually very balanced... because both people are insecure in the 'newness' of it, and both have as much to lose, equally... and that is why it seems so perfect and intoxicating at first... 'balance' is THE relationship aphrodisiac.
Not all Rs are out of balance, and not all of them stay that way. A lot depends on circumstances and how two people work together to resolve issues. Many times people have no clue that their R is in a power imbalance.
It can also be that over a lifetime of Rs, you can have the experience of being the One Up and the One Down (but most people are usually one or the other).
Remember... the one who loves the least controls the relationship.
Quote:
People need to learn how to move in a fluid and self-aware fashion from the role of the sexual one-down to the sexy one-up without engaging in deceptive and destructive games.
Exactly.
Quote:
This is why I was joking that my new "test" was that I was going to signal to men "I doubt that you are man enough for a woman as nice as me."
No offense, Mo, but you have to get that Lioness in shape before you start throwing out tests like that... find a man you KNOW you will not marry... ever... and practice.
Remember... the one who loves the least controls the relationship.
I know what you mean but it seems wrong to use "love" as the describer. How about the one who is least ego-invested controls the relationship? Of course, wanting to be validated for being "loving" is a form of ego-investment. I think it could be a very loving gesture to become less ego-invested in a relationship.
Quote:
No offense, Mo, but you have to get that Lioness in shape before you start throwing out tests like that... find a man you KNOW you will not marry... ever... and practice.
I'm not in the least offended. However, I don't think that I need to self-protect in the manner you describe. I'm perfectly content to f*ck up a few potentially great relationships if necessary. I might even discover some new animals for my zoo along the way. I sure as sh*t do need to get that lioness in shape. I've got some definite boundary forming issues around financial and related matters due to my FOO. I'm sure you can relate.
"Tell me, what is it you plan to do with your one wild and precious life?" - Mary Oliver
Corri, While I didnt agree with some of this post, I did appreciate its thoughtful measured response.
There is STILL a power imbalance in Choco's R, at least in my opinion... and I'm thinking he may be the covert One Up. I say that because there was no 'hyper-honeymoon' period in his R after Mrs. Choc came clean and stopped the A.
No he is not the covert one up. This is a complete misread on Choco's stich and misunderstanding of the dynamic on why she stopped.
In your own case, you move a man into your home who is a known wife seducer, your xW comes to you on several occasions about her concerns regarding her feelings and this man, you insist she take care of her own problem, and then come down on her because she didn't tend her own fences.
Lets go with the supposition that this is true and factual. You defined OM as a 'known wife seducer'. Actually I did. I believe the words I used several years ago were- black widow. So lets say YOU are the W, and YOU know. Would he be able to seduce you? If he can and she knows, I wouldnt call that seduction. I would call that a choice. If thats what she wants in a man, who am I to judge her or stand in her way. Not my job. Not in my power. If you think I came down on her about tending her fences to accomplish what I did, in the time I did, You dont get it. Thats ok. You dont have too.
The facts are, thats not what happened, she didnt come to me, in teh way you described, and if you read my first posts here, you would know what happened. She hid many things from me during our R. Failing college. wrecking a car. stuff about her parents in the early days. Pretty hard to plan and make plans without all the info. Seems like some people dont respect their spouse enough to give them the truth and give them a choice. Again, thats not in my control.
Im not afraid of giving people choice. Sometimes it hurts like hell the choice they make. Ill survive.
you turned your back on the 'our' part of the fence when you moved the wife seducer into your home Yeah. It was a joint decision. Im not in the habit of cammanding and ordering my W around. I try, but I dont care for it.
(could even be viewed as intentional weakening, which, if that is the case... puts a different spin on your theories). Yep. Your welcome to view me in that light. Of course prior to the A I had never read a book on Marriage or R dynamics in any but the most cursory and eyerolling manner. so that would put a kabosh on that. Your still welcome to run with that theory. Thanks for assuming the positive.
I understand completely LFL's reluctant feelings toward her H. Yep me too.
And it is because the R is in a state of imbalance, in some cases severe... and BOTH people are in a state of crisis. People do not function well in a state of crisis
True as well. So do you recommend people make life altering financial and marital and familial decisions during this 'feeling' of crisis?
It was one of the mistakes I made, but it was that or another bad choice that I was losing control over.
Remember... the one who loves the least controls the relationship. No one controls the R. People give away power based on their willingness to implement or not -boundaries. We are equal in that.
find a man you KNOW you will not marry... ever... and practice. I think that is advice Mojo will have trouble implementing, because she, like me and most of us, doesnt date with Intent.
How about the one who is least ego-invested controls the relationship? Of course, wanting to be validated for being "loving" is a form of ego-investment. I think it could be a very loving gesture to become less ego-invested in a relationship.
blackfoot, it might be a few days until I can get to your post. The peas were a reference to Gregor Mendel father of modern Genetics. He also worked with honeybees, but they stung, and the queens refused to mate with whom they were supposed to.
I hope you and everyone on this forum has very Happy Holidays.
