some men automatically seem threatened by me at times just because I'm an engineer. It hasn't happened often but I have met men that are threatened by a woman who is smart or has a good career. Some guy might be doing that because he thinks someone like you want someone with more education, money, whatever.
It doesn't have to be he is threatened. It could be he is thinking the woman is looking for more than he has to offer, time, money, social status, or whatever.
I don't look at Corvetts because I don't want to be obligated to what it cost to operate a car like that.
Welp, I'm going to go with the rise of modern society... frontal lobe development, sacrificing virgin brides to the fire gods... advent of class systems, marriage as a form of ownership and ally bolstering... the notion of romantic love... and the industrial movement, which led to instant gratification societies and wars by computer.
Now the biological connection is a very interesting and slippery thing. Humans are very good at bonding with children, and even animals, to whom they have no biological connection at all... my father is one of many men who took a child he knew damn well wasn't biologically his and spent the rest of his life fathering that child and leaving no doubt in anyone's mind that I was his in every way that counted. One thing I noticed looking back over my own life, and reading the experiences of other adoptees, is that while the adults are more than ready to bond with and actively, lovingly, and diligently parent a child that isn't biologically theirs, the babies have a much harder time bonding with their new moms. I guess there's a whole lot more instinct and a whole lot less higher brain functions at work there.
a fine and enviable madness, this delusion that all questions have answers, and nothing is beyond the reach of a strong left arm.
One thing I noticed looking back over my own life, and reading the experiences of other adoptees, is that while the adults are more than ready to bond with and actively, lovingly, and diligently parent a child that isn't biologically theirs, the babies have a much harder time bonding with their new moms. I guess there's a whole lot more instinct and a whole lot less higher brain functions at work there.
Nod. It's there. There's all kinds of information, historically, anthropologically, biologically... how we've evolved... we're having kids now, not as a necessity, but as a preference... you should look into it... you sound rather fascinated by it.
Rogue Creation or Rogue Reformation. I don't know that I'm of the mind to have to teach a man how to do anything. I'd rather just accept them as they come, and then decide if I'm going to hang around.
That's uninspired Lioness, huh?
Hmmm...I think if one were to make a plan to practice Rogue Creation or Rogue Reformation or any related plan on any particular gentleman that would be quite dysfunctional and lacking in differentiation. I doubt that Rogue Creation is my final plan but it's a plan for exercising myself, not for teaching any man or men. I could call my Rogue Creation plan my Strong Bunny>Strong Monkey>Strong Cow Workout Routine. It's about me learning/practicing skills that I can apply in any relationship not about me trying to Femme-Svengali some guy. Besides, in real life I'm mostly just interacting non-sexual monkey with my current swains. That's probably my lazy default mode like uninspired lioness is yours. I guess I'm just slowly swinging in a tree on a bright, hot summer day and absent-mindedly dropping banana peels -lol.
"Tell me, what is it you plan to do with your one wild and precious life?" - Mary Oliver
However. Look how SG and Ms. IC came in to defend their H's. Loyalty. IC came real close to breaking Ms. IC's loyalty, and not to go down a dark alley... but if that R were to have crumbled, I bet money she'd fight tooth and nail to keep her girls... not that IC would fight any less... but from a mother's standpoint, those are her babies... that's how she'd feel about it, I bet.
I wasn't defending my h, I was defending my gender. *s* And my H wouldn't fight me for custody, simply because I'd be the better 24/7 parent, and he's both smart and practical. If he were married to someone where he thought he'd be better able to provide their daily needs, he'd fight. As I happen to think fathers are crucial I'd do my best to work something out where he could see them as much as possible.
I still think you and I are arguing two different matters. I don't dispute the mother/child connection or do I dispute that women are "programmed" to take care of children, I simply don't think you can extrapolate about the origins of their loyalty, honor, or honesty from the fact that they can get pregnant and give birth. But I have no problem agreeing to disagree.
I could call my Rogue Creation plan my Strong Bunny>Strong Monkey>Strong Cow Workout Routine. It's about me learning/practicing skills that I can apply in any relationship not about me trying to Femme-Svengali some guy. Besides, in real life I'm mostly just interacting non-sexual monkey with my current swains. That's probably my lazy default mode like uninspired lioness is yours. I guess I'm just slowly swinging in a tree on a bright, hot summer day and absent-mindedly dropping banana peels -lol.
LOL. As long as you drop your banana peels over there so I don't have to get up and possibly swat at you.
I understand the workout routine. It's a good one. I was doing that for a time, I suppose. Now if I can just keep my local, well-intentioned friends at bay... I can take a long nap.
I simply don't think you can extrapolate about the origins of their loyalty, honor, or honesty from the fact that they can get pregnant and give birth. But I have no problem agreeing to disagree.
K. Like I said... just a theory. A working one at that.
Did you ever stick up for any of your guy friends that you played ball with? I'd say if so, your reason for jumping into the fray, and their reason for jumping into the fray, is probably different. "Friend Loyalty."
Corri, interesting. Certainly I have felt that loyalty, and am in fact quite apt to become *extremely* protective if anyone close to me is being abused. I never thought of it as maternal, although maybe it is. But I'm not convinced that it comes from a different place when it comes from a man. I've seen some pretty visceral displays of protectiveness from men, too, which I decline to believe are merely (on some level) displays of "That is MINE, so you can't mess with it!"
Originally Posted By: Burgbud
(Kett) Burgbud, you cannot respect women too much.
Oh, a guy can definitely respect women too much.
Just for one example, do you want your man to respect you every time you say, "Not tonight dear; I've got a headache"? I can assure you that several women on this very forum have said that it's quite attractive when a man pushes thru that resistance without getting pissy about it.
Ah, but actually, what you've just described there is a form of respect, by my definition. Respect that says, "I trust you to know your own limits and stick up for your own best interests and not break into a million little bitty china-shepherdess pieces if I keep pushing, so I'm gonna push a little." See anecdote below. (This assumes you mean "pushing through resistance" in a ... legal? way. Some serious seduction, some saucy tease. I *assume* you aren't referring to *actually* not taking a *serious* "no" for an answer. Which would be the deal-breaker to end all deal-breakers with me, right up there with physical violence. The epitome of disrespect. But I'm sure that's not what you meant.)
Originally Posted By: Burgbud
If I was with a man who caved up whenever his puppy might be making an appearance, I would feel like he didn't trust me to care well for his puppy, whereas I am perfectly competent with puppies.
I could be wrong, but I'm willing to bet that even if you feel like he doesn't trust you with his puppy, if his other animals are in order you're not going to care much. You may complain about it to your friends but it won't threaten your M at all. If anything it probably makes him more interesting and attractive.
Interesting premise, but nope. Hypothetically, I could probably f*ck such a man and be perfectly happy. But I want something a bit more egalitarian in a LTR. If I never see a puppy, one of two things: either he doesn't trust me with his puppy, which means he doesn't consider me trustworthy, which means he doesn't respect me as a kind and ethical person, which is respect I desire, deserve, and aim to earn from a life partner. It doesn't really matter if it's me personally or all women he doesn't trust with his puppy; the vibe is the same.
Alternatively, he isn't comfortable with even having a puppy and has attempted to evict it from the zoo. I don't believe this is practical; evicted animals just tend to hang around the other cages and beg for scraps, causing way more trouble than they would if they were properly cataloged and cared for. IMHO.
True intimacy (not fusion) resulting from the endless quest of learning to know oneself and one's partner need never get boring, because each other will always be Other (especially if both partners are continuing to grow and change), but that all gets derailed if either partner is unwilling to know or be known, needy animals and all. I want that *and* all the rampant sex; grin.
Interesting experience and conversation last night and this morning. Out of nowhere, I was woken up to have my brains "wolfed" out last night. He was saying this morning how hot and all it was (I was pretty much reduced to giggling in response, it was that good). He mentioned that it was unlike him (true) and that he seemed to have somehow mislaid his usual inhibitions (over-nice tendencies to not want to "disturb my sleep" and/or "impose his animal lusts on me", etc, as if I don't try to impose mine on him *all* the time ....) I said how delighted I was by that, and that I was perfectly capable of saying "no" if I had really wanted to. He replied something along the lines of "I know. It makes a lot easier for me, now that you're no longer operating out of guilt." As if he had to censor himself somehow, become more St. Bernard and less wolf to "protect" me from unwanted sex, because I apparently couldn't be trusted to do it myself. That kind of hit me between the eyes. 'Cause I can't say he's wrong. Over the last couple years, and especially since I got Schnarched, I have gotten a lot more confident and tend to do things for better reasons, as opposed to "he/she/they might think badly of me if I don't go along/make waves/be flawed/what have you all". And less perfectionisty overall. But I didn't realize until he said that what a weak-assed cow I must have been manifesting .... weak bunny, too. Live and learn ... at least it's getting me laid!
"Show me a completely smooth operation and I'll show you someone who's covering mistakes. Real boats rock." -- Frank Herbert
Out of nowhere, I was woken up to have my brains "wolfed" out last night. He was saying this morning how hot and all it was (I was pretty much reduced to giggling in response, it was that good). He mentioned that it was unlike him (true) and that he seemed to have somehow mislaid his usual inhibitions (over-nice tendencies to not want to "disturb my sleep" and/or "impose his animal lusts on me", etc, as if I don't try to impose mine on him *all* the time ....) I said how delighted I was by that, and that I was perfectly capable of saying "no" if I had really wanted to. He replied something along the lines of "I know. It makes a lot easier for me, now that you're no longer operating out of guilt." As if he had to censor himself somehow, become more St. Bernard and less wolf to "protect" me from unwanted sex, because I apparently couldn't be trusted to do it myself. That kind of hit me between the eyes. 'Cause I can't say he's wrong. Over the last couple years, and especially since I got Schnarched, I have gotten a lot more confident and tend to do things for better reasons, as opposed to "he/she/they might think badly of me if I don't go along/make waves/be flawed/what have you all". And less perfectionisty overall. But I didn't realize until he said that what a weak-assed cow I must have been manifesting .... weak bunny, too. Live and learn ... at least it's getting me laid!
I'm so happy things are going so well for you. I may be way off the mark but I picture you and H as this kind of hip-laidback vaguely academic couple- all gender-neutral at the food co-op but vibing sub/dom on the futon. I would say that based on what you H said, you were vibing weak monkey rather than weak cow/bunny. Strong monkey is shameless and selfish and will get laid. A good example of someone who vibes strong monkey is the Sean Hayes character on Will & Grace. Obviously he is deficient in some other animals but I'd bet the bank that he would never end up on this BB. Of course, all the animals are important if one wants to be sexual within the context of a good relationship. When I say that my 2bx is a PAL, I'm really just saying that he's a monkey/dysfunctional wolf/weak puppy with pretty much non-existent St. Bernard.
Last edited by MJontheMend; 01/10/0801:27 PM.
"Tell me, what is it you plan to do with your one wild and precious life?" - Mary Oliver
