Domestic Violence Permission Slips

refuge 1 in four domestic violenceWe, as a society, give many permission slips to abusers, excusing their abuse, violence & control with claims of “understandable stressors.” Perhaps no category of these permission slips is larger, more pervasive, than the economical permission slips.

Since society is made up of individuals, this is not surprising to me; I’ve seen the permission slips handed out personally — and in my own life.

When my ex husband, who was convicted of battery, first began his regime of oppression, I talked to others, including my parents, siblings, and friends.

When I complained that he was unrealistic in his expectations (a perfectly clean home with kids, the mandatory shutting of window blinds a specific time every evening, my accounting for every purchase down to each nickel, etc.), I was told to give him a break, “He’s got a new family,” “There’s a new mortgage,” “The economy’s bad in his industry,” etc.

When I expressed fear over his irrational anger (swearing, stomping, yelling, threatening to kill the cat), I was told the same things… And I could do a lot to help his disposition & my situation by doing the little things he asked for, like shutting the blinds at 5:30 and providing him with receipts and my left-over change for every purchase, including a soda pop at the gas station.

It may seem to you like “little things to do.” That even if they seem petty or downright silly, they are things I should have done to make him happy — and stop his yelling & stomping & threatening. I did them; I assure you I did. But there are problems with this theory, you see…

For one, my doing what he asked did not make him happy — or even happier. He simply made more lists of things I should be doing, and if I didn’t do them (or did them, but stopped doing the other things as well), the yelling & stomping continued. His greed for control grew.

And his power grew too.

I can’t say that he knew about my conversations, but he did know I was complying and doing the “fast as I can, Master” dance to please him. And so he knew he could ask for more.

And, boy, did he ask for more.

I mention this not just to point out examples of excuses we automatically give to controlling, abusive people, but to illustrate what happens to the one who is controlled and abused.

It wasn’t only that in doing such things I was devalued & debased — what adult, let alone a parent, has to account & atone for buying a soda and lazily dropping the change into her purse — or is forced to shut the window blinds at home for a man who is not there anyway?

It wasn’t only that I had more irrational rules to follow & unrealistic things to do for him.

While those things are bad enough by themselves (and if you see yourself, your sister, your friend in such a situation — get help!), probably the worst thing is that I was losing my support system.

With every “silly” complaint I made, I was losing credibility & respect outside my own home; I was the complainer.

Every time someone else that I went to for help told me to “buck up” (which, in reality, was saying, “knuckle under”), I lost my ability to trust them.

As time goes by, these are the things which only widens & deepens your isolation. You, bit by bit & one by one, kill-off your relationships and don’t have a support system.

Then, when you are on your own, you only have two voices: His & yours. And you can’t trust yours because you were wrong, see — otherwise your family & friends wouldn’t have said those things, wouldn’t have split…

I know because I lost my ability to trust myself.

I thought I should just “buck up” and “knuckle under” because that’s what everyone had said I should do — my own voice needed to shut-up, my own gut was horribly wrong.

So even if you have a person left who is willing to listen to you, you fear your fears will only be heard as whiny complaints… And if that’s what they are, complaints & not fears, then you are wrong. You are as wrong & bad & worthless as he treats you — no wonder you have to account for every nickel you spend & be given a time to shut the blinds & stomped at for not reading his mind! Saying anything to anyone else was a giant “I told you so!” — proof that he was right.

So you say less… Say nothing. Until you are bereft of power as you are support (external & internal support systems). The only thing you have is him, and when you’re so dependent upon him — you’d better do what he wants.

Giving him excuses, was giving him permission to be so controlling. With each additional permission slip, he was granted more power & control — while I was reduced to nothingness, completely dependent upon him because I was isolated & unable to trust myself.

We need to stop making excuses for abusive behaviors, stop giving them excuses for why they control, stop handing them permission slips for unacceptable actions & belief systems. We need to start believing in the “complaints” and fears of those who are abused, help them stand up for their rights, support them if/when they need to leave, and show the victims that we both hear them and are here for them. We must stop giving control freaks & abusive jerks excuses which are permission slips for continuing their persecution of the very people they profess to love.

Image from Refuge.

Happily Ever After?

In Wedded Blisters, Neely wonders if marriage is something she even wants to enter into. With the media, as she writes, “depicting marriage as this energy-sapping, miserable way of life, where husbands have to practically beg their wives for sex and wives feel like they’re not being validated enough by their husbands” she’s not enthusiastic:

But what about this daily bombardment of television shows and movies, depicting marriage as the root of all evil? The truth is that these comedies and films play off of real life, and we know this to be the case because we laugh at their humor. We laugh because we recognize truth. People love shows like Everybody Loves Raymond because a depiction of an average guy dealing with the daily struggles of marriage is true to the way it is outside of that rectangular, silver screen. Unmarried couples may not entirely relate to the humor but they understand that this is what they’ll eventually encounter once they walk down the aisle. Are we destined for the same path as Ed and Peggy Bundy, we wonder.

So we turn off our televisions, looking elsewhere for signs of encouragement, only to be bombarded by another reality check on the state of marriage today: the nation’s divorce rate, which towers over us at all times, giving us very good reason to doubt that we will escape the odds.

The media’s reflection of our marital problems may be exaggerated ~ but as Neely points out, it’s funny because it’s true. Marriage is a tricky thing, and certainly our libidos aren’t magically put in sync just because we live together. But if I were to look at our media for answers regarding how we’ve got to this place where Ed and Peggy Bundy are more typical than representative of our greatest fears, I’d say the problem lies with the fantasy of marriage.

From early on we are fed fantasies wherein once love is found they ride off into the sunset. If the story is supposed to be saying “and they lived happily ever after,” they never show it. In film, finding one’s mate is the end of the story when in truth it should be just the beginning.

While we often are entertained by (and feed-off of) the drama of ‘the chase’ and the obstacles faced in the pursuit, we forget that ‘ever after’ is a story complete with dramas of its own. There are obstacles, chases and pursuits to be found in every marriage and I think we should thank our lucky stars for that ~ for each one is a chance to reaffirm our love and dedication.

In the romantic movies, our heroes and heroines do not crumple at the first (or even the 10th) problem presented ~ instead they keep their eye on the prize and fight for the chance at true love. Shouldn’t we view and pursue our marriages with the same ardor, passion and dedication?

Work, bills, children, household chores ~ surely none of these is as difficult as the matter of finding, competing for, and securing your mate. (And in truth, now that we are a couple we can attack these problems together; it’s you and me against the world, kid.)

He’s a morning person while she’s most definitely not, he’s stressed out at the job, she’s afraid she’s not as lovely as she once was ~ surely these will yield to the holding of hands, a quiet shared look in a crowded room, a secret slap on the bottom…

We are presented with a myriad of opportunities to sweep our partners off their feet, seduce and charm our ways into their beds, and show that obstacles mean nothing in light of our love.

We need not be complete drama lovers and go overboard creating chaos or imagining things ready to tear the marriage apart, but we can view the problems, difficulties and obstacles with more passion. We can treat each obstacle as the romantic lead does: as a chance to prove our love and win our mate.

And of course, at the end of the day we should be as eager to fall into bed.

Image via.

“Give Your Wife An Extra Head For Chirstmas”

An ad from 1969 that likely couldn’t be published today:

OK, so it reads “an extra head,” not just “extra head” or just plain old “head,” but still, ad execs today would just know what we’d be reading into the buzzing gift of a Lady Remington.

Lady Remingtons, by the way, were quite popular gifts, judging by the number of them found at garage sales, thrift stores, etc. So this ad may have sent just the right message after all. *wink*

If You’re Lonely & Wistful This Valentine’s Day…

If the holiday of romance has you looking backwards, remembering a love you once had, a first love, instead of celebrating a romance of today or eagerly looking for the romance of the future, I ask you to limit your indulgent trip down memory lane to just this one day…

Anything longer, anything more than a fond remembrance over a carton of ice cream (shedding of tears optional) is putting your romantic future at risk.

See, we have this tendency to remember the relationships of the past through rose-colored glasses or an emotional layer of sepia tones, glossing over the reasons why it didn’t work out. And the further away in time those relationships were, the worse it gets.

Like the cultural recalling of the “good old days,” we tend to forget that those easy-peasy, lemon-squeezey relationships of yesteryear seem so easy largely because we were younger, our problems smaller. Especially when seen with the older & wiser (and somewhat world-weary) eyes of today.

But the danger of living even remotely in past romance isn’t just that we might be missing the moments of today; it’s that we are seeking simpler times, simpler relationships, setting up unrealistic standards for the relationships of tomorrow.

So feel free to enjoy or even wallow in the romantic past for the day. A day. But don’t try to live there.

Or you won’t ever be happy where you are now.

Image via Since She Left.

Why Asking That Trite Astrology Question May Not Be So Dumb

In the December issue of Psychology Today (fast becoming my favorite magazine), Matthew Hutson shares unusual and revealing information about birth months and personality, saying, “Astrology may be bullocks, but your month of birth still guides your fate.”

No one is sure why birth dates affect mental traits, but environmental effects during the third trimester (weather, amount of daylight, seasonal variation in the mother’s diet) are often blamed. Here’s what you birth date might portend.

And if such things as “people born in summer are more outgoing, curious, and imaginative, and less neurotic” are true, knowing the birth date of your mate — or potential mate — might give you some clues too. Click to enlarge and read the scan.

seasons-signs

The First Lady On What To Look For In Your Number One

1026-glamour-cover-michelle-obama This November, history will be be made when — for the first time in Glamour‘s 70-year history — a First Lady will appear on the cover of the magazine. Michelle Obama not only will be on the cover, but she’ll be honored with a Special Recognition award for her commitment to mentoring young women.

Included in the feature, some Q & A with the First Lady — including this bit of dating advice on assessing Mr. Right for the long-haul:

“Cute’s good. But cute only lasts for so long, and then it’s, Who are you as a person? Don’t look at the bankbook or the title. Look at the heart. Look at the soul…When you’re dating a man, you should always feel good,” the First Lady says. “You shouldn’t be in a relationship with somebody who doesn’t make you completely happy and make you feel whole.”

You can find out more at Glamour‘s blog.

Boo-Hoo, Poor Wife-Beater Complains

I was going to write a rabid response to this bozo who wrote into “Since You Asked” at Salon, whining that it’s unfair that he should have to worry about his current girlfriend’s response to discovering that he — on more than one occasion — abused his former wife:

On half a dozen occasions, during the first few years of my decades-long marriage, I physically abused my wife. This abuse, and the years we went without discussing it, was one of the factors that led to our recent divorce. The divorce itself led me into therapy where I was able to understand my reasons for the abuse, and the effect it had on both my wife and our relationship …

Currently, I’ve started seeing someone else and this woman means a lot to me. Our relationship is at a point where we’ve started talking about sharing a future together; however, I haven’t told her about the abuse in my previous relationship. I want her to know because it’s part of my past — albeit a very painful, unflattering part — but I believe that she may leave me once I tell her. To complicate matters, my ex-wife, in a bit of uncharacteristic malice, has announced her intentions to tell any woman I might be in a relationship with about the abuse at their first meeting.

So, I’m scared and confused. I want to tell my girlfriend about my past, but also want her to understand that she’s not at risk of being abused. And ideally, she would choose not to dump me.

But when I discovered that Heartless Doll had posted such a good response, I figured I should save my efforts for an issue/occasion when I’m more needed. You should go read her entire post, but here are her much applauded highlights:

  • Anyone with a history of abuse who thinks they are an “ex” abuser is a holy-cow-you’re-pretty-much-about-to-do-this-again-abuser, not dissimilar to the “ex” alcoholic who believes she can have “just one.”
  • Not disclosing a violent (and probably controlling) past to someone who has a vested interest in knowing whether or not you’re violent and controlling is … violent and controlling.
  • Not wanting to “get dumped” is a bad reason not to tell someone the truth about a history of abuse. Because she will find out, and then you will definitely be dumped.
  • An ex-wife who refuses to stay silent about your abuse is not exercising “malice.” She’s “refusing to continue be a victim” so that you can “bone some girl.”

Finally, Sexual Assault Tips That Don’t Blame The Victims!

I didn’t write these rules — and neither did Jess McCabe at The F Word, where I found them — but as you see, we’re all supposed to share these rules:

Please distribute this list. Put it up in your place of work, in your university’s library or wherever you think they might be read:

1. Don’t put drugs in people’s drinks in order to control their behavior.

2. When you see someone walking by themselves, leave them alone!

3. If you pull over to help someone with car problems, remember not to assault them!

4. NEVER open an unlocked door or window uninvited.

5. If you are in an elevator and someone else gets in, DON’T ASSAULT THEM!

6. Remember, people go to laundry to do their laundry, do not attempt to molest someone who is alone in a laundry room.

7. USE THE BUDDY SYSTEM! If you are not able to stop yourself from assaulting people, ask a friend to stay with you while you are in public.

8. Always be honest with people! Don’t pretend to be a caring friend in order to gain the trust of someone you want to assault. Consider telling them you plan to assault them. If you don’t communicate your intentions, the other person may take that as a sign that you do not plan to rape them.

9. Don’t forget: you can’t have sex with someone unless they are awake!

10. Carry a whistle! If you are worried you might assault someone “on accident” you can hand it to the person you are with, so they can blow it if you do.

Any tips you all would add?

Tips For Dating A Married Man?!

At HelloBeautiful.com, Von-Anise McCoy posted No Judgement Fridays: Five Tips To Follow When Dating a Married Man. While I applaud the spirit of no judgements, and I certainly agree that a man or woman in a committed relationship is the one doing the cheating (not the one dating the married or previously committed person) and is one who will likely cheat regardless of your individual “yes” or “no,” I cannot applaud this article.

I take great issue with McCoy’s tips for what they represent: agreeing to a relationship with a person committed elsewhere is to agree to center the relationship based on their needs, not your own.

That is a tacit agreement to make yourself secondary, if not worse. And by “if not worse,” I refer not only to the number of your subjugated position on the list, but to the game playing involved.

The whole set-up is abusive — and when you agree to that, you abuse yourself.

Look at McCoy’s rules — spot the degradation, the use (abuse) of others, the game-playing and dishonesty which plagues not the married or committed person, but the one dating him/her and others involved!

You are number two in his world so play your position.

Keep a man and when I say man, I mean another male companion.

Low-income men are not an option.

Never say the three words, “I Love You!”

This last one is an oldie but a goodie: He is never leaving his wife for you, never, ever, ever no matter how much he may complain about their relationship.

The advice isn’t wrong; it’s all sound if you want to play that game. But who wants to play a game that defeats them at every turn, with no chance of winning because the game is skewed to screw them (literally & figuratively) while it panders to the married or taken?

Wouldn’t the best sound advice be to point out to these women just how unfair to themselves dating a married man is?

I agree these women do not need a morality lecture, but wouldn’t these women be best served by advice which points out the truth of their own willingness to settle for less the least for themselves?

Quick, Check Your Stone Tablet For The Date!

A recent study reports that today, in 2009, 71% of Americans think women should take their spouses name after marriage — and half of the respondents said the act should be a legal requirement!

Researchers from Indiana University and University of Utah say these findings come despite a clear shift to more gender-neutral language. “The figures were a bit sobering for us because there seems to be change in so many areas. If names are a core aspect of our identity, this is important,” said Brian Powell, professor of sociology at IU Bloomington. “There are all these reports and indicators that families are changing, that men are contributing more, that we’re moving toward a more equal family, yet there’s no indication that we’re seeing a similar move to equality when it comes to names.”

Laura Hamilton, the Indiana University associate professor who lead study, was interviewed at NYDailyNews:

When the respondents were asked why they felt women should change their name after the wedding, Hamilton says, “They told us that women should lose their own identity when they marry and become a part of the man and his family. This was a reason given by many.”

Other respondents said they felt the marital name change was essential for religious reasons or as a practical matter.

“They said the mailman would get confused and that society wouldn’t function as well if women did not change their name,” Hamilton says.

Americans who feel that women should take their husband’s last name also tend to be conservative in other areas, according to Hamilton.

“Asked if they thought of a lesbian couple as a family, those who believe that women should take their husband’s name are less likely to say yes,” she says. “If you’re more liberal about the name change issue, you tend to include a larger population in the definition of family.”

Dating Advice From The Past (Or Female Dating Snark, 1940 Style)

This article, written by an anonymous female, was published in The Bedside Esquire, 1940 — just see how well it holds up today *wink*

The Wench Is Not Amused, by Anonymous

Any girl, if the body she possesses isn’t actually deformed and the face badly moth-bitten, is going to become acquainted with the gentle art of seduction fairly early in life. As for myself, I’ve had what I now recognize as more than my share of experience.

Not at the risk of sounding vain, because I know I am vain, I’ll say that when men look at me in the street I know why. They’ve good reason to. In 1930, when the agency I was working for folded, I posed for several commercial photographers. I’ve seen strange men studying my picture in a magazine and, though their eyes generally started at the ankles & worked up by degrees, I’m pleased to admit that they looked twice at the face, too. And I’ve read a book, I dance well because I love it, I know how to listen as well as talk, I can tell a touchback from a safety, I can hold my likker as well as my men – when I want to – and I know most of the right words. I seldom buy my own dinner.

I know it sounds conceited as the devil but, darn it, it’s true. I’ll lay twenty to one I can make any nine out of ten males, provided they are neither puling infants nor doddering antiquarians, ask for my phone number within any given half-hour.

So, when I say I’ve had more than the average experience with the technique of seduction (horrible phrase) I think I’m stating a simple truth.

When a gal is first turned loose on the world of man the game of seduction – win, lose or draw – is pretty exciting. And it continues to be for some years. At first, either your parents or your school keep you under observation & your only exposed to younger men. Their approach, naturally, isn’t as polished as that which you’ll encounter later. Also, the fact that you are under some sort of surveillance means that you’ll be exposed only occasionally & for brief periods of time & not to the extensive & intensive campaigns you’ll have to face when you become what is so quaintly known as a bachelor girl. During my lat four years of school, a year abroad, & my first three or four years in New York I must admit that I thoroughly enjoyed the whole tiresome process; particularly so when I learned that, so long as I kept my head, the game could be played according to my own rules without ever hurting the boy friend’s sense of masculine superiority in the least.

It was always a thrilling battle & the campaign itself was often more exciting than the storming, or attempted storming of one’s last citadel. How many times I’ve lost in this warfare is entirely a matter of my own business. But I will say this: no campaigner, no matter how hardened, ever overcame my last line of defense unless I deliberately chose that he should – and that can hardly be counted a total defeat.

In the past year, sadly enough, I’ve come to realize that what was once an enthralling game is now a deadly bore. And I contend it’s all the men’s fault. A seduction should be above all things glamorous & exciting. But can there be glamour in a story repeated a dozen, yea a hundred times? Can glamour be expected to survive the hundredth ardent whisper of non-poetic time-worn words? Can there be excitement in a card game played eternally, with both players forever holding the same cards? There cannot!

Why don’t men vary their approaches? Damn it, haven’t they any originality? Must they be so monotonous?

Why is it that each man has at his command three or four of the seven standard approaches to seduction & selects his approach according to what he fondly believes to be his shrewd analysis of the character of the wench he is lusting for?

This is all wrong. And something should be done about it. Why don’t men realize that an injection of originality or novelty into their love-making will get them further with the gal of their temporary choice than any pet phrases or standard passes the gibbering idiots can produce?

Repetition is so damn boring. The fun is all gone if, after the first kiss & the first declaration, you can, from past experience, anticipate practically every word & gesture that is to follow, be it a one night stand or a three week siege. And that isn’t right – sex should be fun.

If you’re a girl who hasn’t given this matter any objective thought, stop now & take stock. You’ll be saddened & disillusioned to see what well-worn ruts your young men pursue.

And you, lad, believing yourself to be a Casanova as you do, cast your eyes over the following catalog – and blush for your sex’s limitations. Blush, too, for yourself, for you have nothing more on the ball than any other man. You’re unoriginal & trite. That swell build-up you were planning to use tonight & which you rather expected to send darling little Jean into a swoon will be the same build-up John used on her two months ago, Paul the week before, Ronald last year, and so on back to the days when she bought her first lipstick & lace panties. And you actually expected her to fall for it tonight? Fooey! Those girlish peals of laughter will probably be at you, rather than with you. But you have only to get yourself a new approach, my lad, really new, and your path will be paved with recumbent maidens.

The following list contains what I’ve found to be the seven fundamental approaches. There are, of course, variants but they are all variants of these basic seven. At least, my own experience & the experience of attractive girls I know leads me to believe that this is a complete list. If it isn’t, I’ve been neglected & I resent that. And if the young man will step forward to present credentials proving that he is in possession of an Approach Number Eight I’ll be glad to meet him on his home grounds, winner take all.

Approach One
The Crudest Simple, and very raw. The idea is for the male to ply you with likker until you lose control. The man who uses this approach is obviously a louse, obviously without resources, and so unsubtle that he is easily seen through & a cinch to out-smart. This technique is so bad it doesn’t merit serious discussion. The only ones who will succumb to this attack are the completely foolish, those who are particularly light-headed drinkers & potential nymphomaniacs.

Approach Two
The Cheapest As crude in its way as One. This man tries to get at you through passionate declarations of love. He may even plead with you to marry him, sometimes soon. Meanwhile, sine you are already man & wife in the eyes of God or, at the very least, two hearts that beat as one – how about it? The man who uses these tactics is probably an even greater louse than the likker-plying-male. The ‘I-love-you’-chanted-soulfully method will succeed only with susceptible virgins (any age) and those stridently emotional wenches of meager intelligence whose metier in life is rocking the cradle. The gal who has been around will merely enjoy her laugh, when approached in this manner, and promptly send the man back to the minor leagues, where he belongs.

Approach Three
The Ham-iest The long-bearded ‘misunderstood husband’ gag. No elucidation is needed. Only fools fall for this chestnut & it is doubtful if, after falling, they deserve any sympathy. It has been my experience that married men are seldom worth the trouble. It is generally wisest to send them home to the little woman, in short order.

Approach Four
The Outright Purchase Like the Greeks, they come bearing gifts; generally expensive & so tendered that it is possible for the semi-prostitute to accept her wages without feeling too professional. The man who pulls this one isn’t fooling. He means business & wants it tacitly understood that there are to be no strings attached to this business deal. And he is intelligent enough to know that the average female is capable of very long distance rationalizing & thus can graciously & righteously accept a fur coat or a diamond ring whereas would regard the offer of actual cash as a terrific insult. This system, probably because it has sound economic & not emotional basis, is liable to work with any of us who haven’t been an heiress. If the man is anywhere near as attractive as his gift it is sometimes necessary for a gal to summon up her last bit of will power to say ‘No.’ But it usually is worth it, if only to preserve those few remaining shreds of self respect.

Approach Five
The Big Brother Act This predatory gent is an insidious operator where the unwary female is concerned. In the first place, he is patient. This, in itself, is usually enough to throw you off. He starts off on a ‘just friends’ basis & worms his way into your heart as a confidant & pal. Before you know it you are, on those odd nights, telling him all about your joys or sorrows with whichever Tom, Dick or Harry you are at the moment involved. He is very sweet, sympathetic & understanding. But he is playing a waiting game. He knows that eventually, human nature being what it is, there’ll be a bust-up between you & the boy of the moment… and when it comes you’ll find his broad shoulder there for you to weep on. You weep & you weep. You’re on the rebound & desperately in need of masculine comforting. And suddenly you find that you’re getting it in a very big, and totally unexpected way. And because you are weak & blue& emotionally drained & in need of some male tenderness you all at once become aware of the fact that your Big Brother is is much sweeter & more desirable than you had ever found him to be before. And if he realizes this at the same time that you awaken… you’re lost. When he puts on the pressure you’re defenceless. I know that this approach depends upon extenuating circumstances but they occur far more frequently than one ever suspects. And a girl on the rebound is in no fit condition to put up an adequate defence. My only solution is this: never trust a man who tries to build up a platonic friendship with you. At the time it may seem to you that it would be such a relief to know a man like that, but you can with impunity bet your last garter-belt that you’re wrong because, some place in the back of his mind, he’ll have an idea or two…

Approach Six
The Pseudo-Sophisticate This approach has three subdivisions but they are all based on the same fundamental sophistry: 6-A. The Philosophical. The life-is-real, life-is-earnest, opportunity-knocks-but-once, so grab-each-fleeting-moment-while-you-may school. This is, of course, the veriest hokum, fit only for children in their teens. Every woman beyond the age of adolescence knows that this unique opportunity the gentleman is so magnanimously offering her is an opportunity that knocks all too damn frequently. Why any man who isn’t completely witless ever thinks a girl will believe him to be the only one who will ever offer her a chance to indulge in a life of sin is beyond me. So, girls, the nest time a man pulls this, ‘Tonight is ours!’ line on you, control your laughter, let him down gently, and send him on his way. The stronger sex? Physically, yes.

6-B. The Pagan. This lad is likely to have long hair. He has read Ulysses and has a glib knowledge of neo-realistic painting or something of that sort. He thinks very highly of individualism & quote Nietzsche’s remarks about the Superman (himself). he tells you that the old, conventional moral standards of our fathers are outmoded (news to you?) and insists that today we see such things as sexual relations with a new vision, a proper perspective. ‘After all, we want each other, and what is going to stop us?’ he asks. ‘Aren’t we free people, free to live our own lives?’ You are also free to point out to him that ‘we want each other’ is taking altogether too much for granted. You explain, in as tactful & gentle terms as the situation requires, that a fairly ardent kiss or two, permitted in a moment of weakness, doesn’t exactly establish the fact that you are willing to turn over the body beautiful. He’ll never believe, of course, that it wasn’t your inhibitions which prevented you from succumbing & he’ll go on his way, still proud of his free & soaring spirit, in search of a girl with low heels & spectacles, who thinks Communism would be nice. And he’ll say to her ‘Look at Russia,’ and get away with it. I don’t want to look at Russia. Blouses & smocks? Not with my torso.

6-C. The Physical. Whereas the first chap in this category went at you on a philosophical plane, so-called & the second tried to weaken you on a moral & individualistic grounds the ‘Physical’ lad goes to the root of the matter & attacks you with body blows. His weapons are psychiatry, Freudian psychology & your glands. These physical realists always have your well being at heart. They explain at great length that sex is an appetite which must be satisfied if one isn’t to become a victim of all sorts of fetishes & suppressed desires. Now, no girl would want to become amorous in public with Shetland pony or become addicted to horsewhipping her grandmother. It isn’t being done. The obvious solution is to permit whichever physical realist is at the moment spouting his propaganda to come between you & the tragedies of perversion. The whole affair is, of course, to be considered in your own best interests.

We may very well be animals & victims of appetites which must be satisfied in order to prevent complexes & frustrations. I’m willing to admit that the boys may have something there. But, so far, I’ve been able to order my own meals & I think I’ll continue to do so. When I’m hungry I’ll eat, if the proper food is available, and no one is going to force improperly prepared food on me when I’m not hungry… and my grandmother will have to take her chances.

Approach Seven
The ‘Forcing’ Method Or perhaps I should call it the cat-and-mouse attack. In any event, the glib gentleman who works this approach on you is primarily concerned with forcing you to make the final move and ‘Safety First’ is obviously his motto. The opening lines generally read something like this, ‘I don’t love you & I know you don’t love me – but I can’t help wanting you. Why pretend? I think you’re swell – sex excluded – but you’re so damned attractive that, no matter how hard I try, when I’m with you I want you.’ Then he adds, oh very frankly & fairly, ‘I like you so much that I have to be honest with you. If I continue to see you I’ll make love to you, I can’t help myself. If you want me to stop coming around, now that you know, you’ve only to say so.’ The catch in this last speech is that he only produces it when he is pretty damn sure that you like him a lot & enjoy being with him. Of course you, liking him as you do & feeling on safe terrain because he hasn’t so much as touched you, laugh it off & take your chances.

But after a night or two of conversation in the same vein but growing progressively more intense, the chances are that he will kiss you: ardently, of course, and probably with considerable finesse – and you’ve given the inch that may coast you your virtue.

Gently & insidiously the campaign progresses. Each night it will become a little more intense & each nigh your defences will fall back and inch or two. But he will never use force, never put on an any obvious pressure. Each time you feel called upon to say ‘Stop,’ he’ll stop – to your growing annoyance. And, though you probably won’t realize it, that is one word you’ll come to use less & less frequently.

Slowly & inevitably the tide, to use a figure of speech, creeps up & up until that night when you’ve forgotten even the meaning of the word – and then the louse stops of his own accord!

The speeches at this point are liable to be on the impassioned side & to deal at some length with his desire for you & your many darling qualities & so on far into the night. Eventually he gets around to asking you if you, too, desire him. After what has just transpired you wonder of he is a complete idiot, then reassure him in your own subtle way.

This generally calls for a clinch & the addition of fuel to the flame. After a proper interval he pulls the Remorse-stop. It goes something like this & is generally delivered in a somewhat throaty voice, ìI want you sooo much (pause) but I can’t let you do this unless you are sure in your own mind. We’re excited now, my dear, (He’s telling you!) and I wouldn’t want you to do anything you’d later regret. I want you more than anyone I’ve ever known, (this is standard: note careful evasion of the word love) but this is too beautiful an adventure to rush into headlong.î While you’re wondering just how he would have you rush into said adventure he makes a suggestion, ‘Sleep on it tonight & think it over in the clear light of day, tomorrow. We’ll meet for dinner, and then you can give me your decision.’

You agree, and this leads to another scene that wouldn’t get by the Will Hays’ office & considerable incoherent & what he thinks is poetic talk about how much he hopes you’ll feel tomorrow night as you do tonight.

Then there is much discussed sleep & ‘thinking (if any) in the light of day.’ It would serve the gent right if the daylight led to a decision he wouldn’t like but for some darned reason it seldom does.

When you meet him the next night he is pretty solemn about the whole thing (but you can be sure he’ll give you the best dinner he can afford, with a rather obvious emphasis on the wine list). Once you get back to whichever apartment is the scene of combat you’ll find that tenderness is the preliminary mood of the evening. He may not use his arms & hands as they were intended to be used as all, but if he does he’ll be very, very gentle. In desperation you finally take him by the hand, figuratively speaking, and lead him to the bedroom.

It may be several days before you begin to realize that you’ve been had in more ways than one. And if this realization doesn’t come to you shortly you are in an even worse position because you’ve been had so thoroughly that your heart may well be in your young man’s hands – and that is one section of your anatomy which should remain permanently yours.

There is a mild variant to this approach. In this method the man, at the critical point, doesn’t suggest a little daylight thought on the subject but, instead, goes dramatic & says, ‘No, this can’t be. The price you pay is too large,’ or words to that effect. It works out in exactly the same way. One says, ‘Perhaps.’ and the other says, ‘no,’ and in the end you are unconsciously forced into taking them both by the hand…

This is probably the most difficult form of seduction to work clear of – because you’ve been allowed to work yourself into it.

These are the standardized versions of sexual Blind Man’s Bluff, Tag, You’re It, or whatever you want to call it, as I know them. There are probably other, depending on race, color or previous condition of servitude but I wager that they are in their way just as standardized. What to do about it?

Sometimes I think I’d rather be attacked. Or at least meet a man direct enough to say bluntly & without preamble, ‘I think you’re swell & I’d like to make love to you. I warn you, if you say no I’ll ask you the same thing tomorrow night. What will it be, milady’s boudoir or the movies?’

The hell of it is, experience has so conditioned me that I’d probably choose the movies & be forced to sit through a Hollywood version of the preliminaries of one of the stereotyped brands of seduction I’ve listed. There’s no escape.

Romantic Pillow Talk – Of A Different Sort

Remember practicing kissing and caressing your pillow when you were a teen? Well, there’s a whole movement dedicated to romancing the pillow and other two-dimensional objects in Japan.

According to Lisa Katayama in the New York Times Magazine, there’s a fraction of men in Japan who adopt body-pillow girlfriends and other “2-D” lovers as a substitute for real relationships. These men take their pillow girlfriends out on dates to restaurants, to sing karaoke, to take photo-booth pictures — positioning their stuffed girlfriends gently, “making sure to keep her upright and not to touch her private parts.”

The guru of the 2-D love movement, Toru Honda, a 40-year-old man with a boyishly round face and puppy-dog eyes, has written half a dozen books advocating the 2-D lifestyle. A few years ago, Honda, a college dropout who worked a succession of jobs at video-game companies, began to use the Internet to urge otaku to stand with pride against good-looking men and women. His site generated enough buzz to earn him a publishing contract, and in 2005 he released a book condemning what he calls “romantic capitalism.” Honda argues that romance was marketed so excessively through B-movies, soap operas and novels during Japan’s economic bubble of the ’80s that it has become a commodity and its true value has been lost; romance is so tainted with social constructs that it can be bought by only good looks and money. According to Honda, somewhere along the way, decent men like himself lost interest in the notion entirely and turned to 2-D. “Pure love is completely gone in the real world,” Honda wrote. “As long as you train your imagination, a 2-D relationship is much more passionate than a 3-D one.” Honda insists that he’s advocating not prurience but a whole new kind of romance. If, as some researchers suggest, romantic love can be broken down into electrical impulses in the brain, then why not train the mind to simulate those signals while looking at an inanimate character?

Many single people here in the US might find some of this quite reflective of the culture here; only the display of physical substitutes for romance are less accepted here.

In Japan the fetishistic love for two-dimensional characters is enough of a phenomenon to have earned its own slang word, moe, homonymous with the Japanese words for “burning” or “budding.” In an ideal moe relationship, a man frees himself from the expectations of an ordinary human relationship and expresses his passion for a chosen character, without fear of being judged or rejected.

“It’s enlightenment training,” Takuro Morinaga, one of Japan’s leading behavioral economists, told me. “It’s like becoming a Buddha.” According to Morinaga, every male otaku can be classified on a moe scale. “On one end, you have the normal guy, who has no interest in anime characters and only likes human women,” he explained. “The opposite end, of course, is the hard-core 2-D lover.” Morinaga, a self-described otaku, didn’t have much luck with women until he became a well-regarded economist. Now he has a wife and a private office in a fancy apartment building near ritzy Tokyo Bay. “I’m a 2 — I still like human women better,” he said, a wide grin forming. “But there are many men who are on the opposite side of the scale. I understand their feelings completely. These guys don’t want to push ahead in society; they just want to create their own little flower-bed world and live there peacefully.”

Aside from the large scale physical display & touching, is this any different than the romantic fantasy of soap operas, romance novels, films like Twilight, etc.? I don’t think so. Retreating to a fantasy, love doll, pillow, erotic story ,or dreaming of your own vampire lover is just as sane — or insane, I guess.

Can any be replacements for real human relationships? Can Twilght fandom, eating chocolate, or profuse shopping be as emotionally satisfying as dating? Can rapid page turning of bodice rippers, caressing of printed pillows, or vibrators be as satisfying as real human contact?

Maybe not; but as long as you can tell the difference, know reality from fantasy, they can’t hurt you as badly as divorces, break-ups and rejections either.

That said…

I am creeped-out by the Japanese penchant for underage girls. Most of the Anime characters & other pillow girls seem to be pre-teen & teenage school girls. While that’s disturbing & debatable on it’s own, I don’t find anything wrong with the idea of pillows or 2-D romance per se.

…It’s a bit sad, but no sadder than the girl who buries her nose in a succession of Harlequin romances, downs her emotions in vats of chocolate, etc.

Criminal Cause Celebre

I don’t write about celebrities who get busted for domestic violence, rape & assaults because I don’t want to give them any attention and, if I may say so, press coverage. But…

In my thinking that as celebrities they are their own brands and that by the “any press is good press” philosophy by mentioning them I’m helping to promote them — but in reality, by not calling them on their crap am I somehow supporting them?

Recently, when an actor on one of the many popular crime scene science shows was busted, I thought about this all… I wondered if I should be pointing it out — if not calling for a boycott of the show &/or contacting advertisers, then implying same by letting readers know about it. My original thinking was that the actor is only one ingredient of the show, and that while he may be (at least allegedly) creepy & bad, the show isn’t “him.” He isn’t the only actor or participant; nor is his life &/or philosophy what frames the content or the messages of the show.

Yet, if his name is the billable one, if he’s the investment, the property, the celebrity which draws the audiences, then do I — do we — have a responsibility to act? Do we have the right to impact negatively upon his livelihood (as well as those of the cast & crew, etc.) based on his personal life?

If this man or the male singer who hurt Rihanna were regular Joes, we would be limited in what we could do & say. To disparage him & diminish his paycheck, even after the courts have found him guilty, could result in legal problems of our own. As employees, average Joes have protections to keep their jobs. If it didn’t happen at work, it’s not the employers business; if jail time affects work, employers may have to hold jobs for them (regardless of how the employer feels about it). But when celebrities have placed themselves in the fishbowls we have different expectations & results…

We collectively place upon celebrities (albeit slim in some cases) standards of decency in exchange for their fame. Entertainment contracts have clauses for this (whether they are “used” is another issue). Celebrities are given perks in exchange for being “role models” and so they are (sometimes) taken to task for their crimes (bringing attention to societal issues); other times they are so beloved their fame blinds people with a “he couldn’t have” or minimizes the crime in general so as to keep the hero a hero (resulting in additional victim blaming & diminishing the societal concerns for issues such as rape, domestic violence and abuse).

In a society in which we are all supposed to be equal, just where do celebrities fit in? Just how much are we allowed to hold them up? And when are we supposed to tear them down?

And does talking about them by name help or hurt their brands? Help or hurt the victims? Help awareness or hurt the causes?

Please do tell.

A Kiss On The Hand May Be Quite Continental, But…

In a case of “Oh My God, why would anyone have a need to write a post like this?!” Laura recounts a recent home invasion in which the person was invited to make a repair estimate — but thinks he has rights to her person. Astonishing.

But then, most of the replies are heartwarming & give me reason to hope that one day no one will ever need to write such a post because such stupid inexcusable things were done. (Except for “The Fixer,” who is obviously a very broken person.)

~~~

This post is part of the blogathon for Hope For Healing, raising awareness of domestic violence. Twolia generously sponsored me in this wonderful event! You can help too: Comment, link, Tweet & use this special link to iSearch.iGive.comclicking it and performing searches will raise money for HopeForHealing.Org.

Relationship Round Up: Liars & Cheats Edition

#1 People Believe They Have More Restraint Than They Actually Possess. New research from the Kellogg School of Management examines why individuals regularly succumb to greed, lust and self-destructive behaviors — and demonstrates that individuals believe they have more restraint than they actually possess, which ultimately leads to poor decision-making:

People are not good at anticipating the power of their urges, and those who are the most confident about their self-control are the most likely to give into temptation.

So, if you’ve got a guy or gal with fidelity or other issues, you both will need some support — especially if they boast they can control themselves.

#2 The Liar in Your Life. Robert Feldman, psychology professor at the University of Massachusetts Amherst and expert on lying, says what we think about how and why people lie is wrong — his insights into the world of lying are in his new book, The Liar in Your Life: The Way To Truthful Relationships.

In the book, he debunks the myths and says we’re not only bad at detecting falsehoods, but in fact are strongly and unconsciously willing to believe other people’s lies to make our lives easier — that people aren’t inclined to question the daily interactions they have with family members, or even strangers.

His research also finds that strangers meeting face-to-face for the first time will tell lies three times within 10 minutes, and if strangers meet through a computer conversation, he says, they’re even more likely to lie.  ABC’s got an excerpt, if you want to try before you buy.

More Bashing Of Single Mothers Who Wish To Date

If you’ve stopped gagging over this, grab a barf bag for this charmer:

Now it’s important that you don’t start dating as a means of getting financial help for single parents. You don’t want to date because you can’t pay the bills. This is, of course, common sense, but many people — particularly single mothers enduring financial difficulties — seek to date as a means to find someone to help pay the bills. This can cause a lot of problems down the road, so don’t do this.

Yeah, Jenny, way to alienate your supposed audience. I know that I always trust advice from folks who call me a gold digger.

And you do know that anyone who actually would date to “find someone to help pay the bills” isn’t going to suddenly become ethical because you wrote that drivel, right?

Sheesh.

Is Dating In The Dark Treating Us Like Mushrooms?

You know the old joke, “I must be a mushroom because people keep me in the dark and feed me BS,” right? So when I heard about ABC’s Dating In The Dark, I was suspicious. My verdict? The bad news is that the new reality dating show is unremarkable. But then again, the good news is also that it’s unremarkable.

As far as dating reality shows go — or any reality TV shows, actually — it’s rather refreshing to not watch a show and find yourself becoming pissed off at the exploitation of flesh (Dating In The Dark had the option to take peeps and bare or topless bods, and it didn’t take the usual sleazy route), irate at the mythinformation presented by “experts,” or screaming in anguish at the cruelty of manipulating people’s feelings.

OK, so some of the latter occurs, but that’s just part of dating; people put themselves out there and get rejected.

I don’t want to pick on people (even if those people have put themselves out there for such attention), but I have to say that Christina had attention-seeking bitch written all over her from the get go & so her decision not to continue to see Seth (who is a charming & attractive guy) because he wasn’t GQ cover material wasn’t at all surprising. In fact, by the time we got to her moaning in pain & hurt at the self-discovery that she was the kind or person who would dismiss a caring man who would be there for her — one she had a connection with — just because he wasn’t what the Greeks chiseled in stone, I was peeved. “Why,” I wondered, “would a person put herself on a show about proving appearances don’t matter when she so obviously (and callously) did?” Then the answer came to me: Because she’s not just a conceited bitch who thinks she’s prettier than she is — she’s an attention-seeking bitch who wants to pretend she’s nice and so puts herself on a reality television show.

But honestly, that’s about as typical (and icky) as the show gets for the genre.

There are no freaky-mean twists (like after telling the 6 participants that how they’d paired them off based on pre-show screening compatibility was a joke & tricking them into making then breaking the bonds they were making), no overly suggestive hype — in fact, most of this just proves what most confident & sane people will tell you about dating:

* Chemistry is important; but that’s not all about looks

* People have weird ways (both the down-right odd and the charming versions) of evaluating people, some of which are not suitable for happiness

* “Good looks” are in the eye of the beholder — and while we all see the same thing/people, we sure don’t “behold” the same way.

* Most people need to be directed towards potential mates because they would  otherwise continue to make the same dating mistakes, write-off potential relationships for silly reasons (armpit sweat on a shirt, think a guy is too handsome (intimidating), etc.) — so trust your family & friends to set you up!

* Some people are self-centered & mean; but if you close yourself off to protect yourself from the jerks, you’ll also prevent yourself from learning more about yourself and from discovering other nice people.

All basic stuff, yes; but not unhealthy. And lately, I feel like the world, especially reality TV shows and stupid dating experts, spends too much time ignoring the basic good stuff. But still, it was confusing.

And at the rate the hour long show clipped along, I became even more confused…

With 6 contestants/participants (3 female, 3 male) and ready to see each other about 1/2 way through, I wondered how this could be a series. Were we going to keep them in this living arrangement, force them to continue dating, mate & raise children, get divorces, find new loves, all via furtive visits to the dark room?

But no, Dating In The Dark offers 6 new participants each week.

I’m not sure if I will watch more shows or not; but I won’t suggest a boycott, nor will I make faces at people who say they do watch the show.

Is Paying For Phone Sex Infidelity?

Hi Alessia,

I’ve been happily but stressfully married to my husband for 5 years. I say “stressfully” because my job takes me away from home & to other countries for weeks & even months at a time. As a result, we’ve had to really work on communication and our sex lives long distance.

Recently my husband confided that he’s been using phone sex services to help, umm, bridge the gap in sexual loneliness and frustration while I’m way.  I honestly didn’t know what to say…

I’ve got really mixed emotions — and logical reactions — to this.  On one hand, he’s not physically cheating, just masturbating; and I totally understand his needs because I certainly use a lot of batteries in my hotel rooms. I know he watches/downloads porn, and that doesn’t bother me at all. But on the other hand, he’s interacting with another (other) women.  And because phone sex is all we have for long periods of time, I feel more than a bit jealous.  But then I go back to the facts, which are that with time differences etc., there are weeks when not even that is possible…

Alessia, can you help me figure this out so that I can understand myself well enough to communicate with him?

Thanks so much!

Kate

Dear Kate,

First of all, the matter of what is or isn’t cheating is something that the two of you must decide on.  It’s one of those areas that couples think is “so obvious” that they often don’t discuss it; but then you’ve got a relationship — and in this case, because you are married, a commitment — based on assumptions.  You know what happens with those.

(At this point, the cheating guidelines are like the horse already out of the barn; but I have to mention this need to clearly define your idea of “cheating” and coming to an understanding & agreement with your partner about the issue for other readers.)

So now you find yourself in this ambiguous situation; so let’s deal with that.

Since you said that you don’t mind his use of adult materials, at least while you’re away, I’m going to believe that you’re not just jealous in general for his *ahem* affections.  Porn usually upsets women more than erotica… Since you’re OK with his use of porn I have to say that personally, I don’t find paying for professional phone sex providers much different than erotic stories. Other than the ability to shop for the specific character you want and the ability to “write your own stories” with an interactive person, as opposed to a static erotic text or audio story, what’s the harm?

There’s no shared fluids; and because she’s a professional, she likely isn’t at all considering running off with your man like some girl in an IM or chat room. He’s just a guy paying (or helping to pay) her bills.

That’s no different than the girl in the films & photos, right?

So I’m gathering your personal reaction of jealousy & discomfort comes from two fear-filled places.

One, a fear that because she is real (not a fictional character that only exists & remains fixed in a written or read story) that there is the potential for your husband and the phone sex girl(s) to talk about other things…

For example, if he’s calling one of these women to discuss his bad day at the office, his loneliness without you, etc., rather than telling his buddies or family members, then perhaps there is more to their relationship than “just sex.”  If he’s growing dependent upon one phone sex provider for something more akin to a relationship — and that’s at the expense of your relationship as husband & wife — then you might want to establish clear boundaries.  Remember, though, do not accuse him of such emotional dependence or infidelities out of your fear; tell him of your concerns and establish whatever boundaries you have regarding them.

The second fear is likely that of performance anxiety.

We women can be very insecure creatures.  Just as some of us take our man’s lusty delight of a swimsuit model’s figure and turn it into fear that we will never measure up to that standard, you could be feeling that you will not be able to “give good phone sex” as well as a professional phone sex operator.  Since phone sex is one of the few ways that you and your husband can remain sexually & romantically intimate while you travel, this fear is likely increased.  But remember, you have lots of things the phone sex girls don’t, including the fact that he knows (and therefore can “see”) your body (always a great asset for turning men on), you have an intimate knowledge of his body & emotions (you know the buttons to push), a history to build on (“remember that time we…”), and the power of longing (he misses you!). Phone sex girls don’t stand a chance against you!

I suggest that you consider these issues for awhile and ask yourself not only how much they apply to you, but if these issues were removed, how much of a non-issue would his use of phone sex services be?

And once you have those answers, yes, communicate your thoughts, needs, and fears to him. And listen to his.  I suggest you long distance lovers do this via email so that you have time to carefully word what you have to say so that you are asserting your concerns without being attacking and accusatory. Plus, then you can save your precious phone time for *ahem* more fun conversations.

Let me know how it goes!

Alessia

When He’s (Sexually) Shrinking From You, Violet

In response to my “Helping You Get In The Mood” Contest, Violet writes in:

Hey, Alessia,

I have the opposite problem — I’m always ready and my husband’s never ever in the mood.

I’ve tried all the crappy magazine suggestions and the tips from your readers in response to your contest, but all I have is more rejection.

Any ideas besides spiking his coffee with little blue pills disguised as sugar cubes?

Thanks,
Violet

Violet, your situation is not as unique as you might think — frustrating & painful, yes; but it’s not rare for women to have, err, blue ovaries.

First, I’m hoping you read this — and this. Because that will save us all some time & ovary-ache.

Second, please consider having hubby get a check-up — and not just for the plumbing & physical parts, but for depression & other mental health issues. One of the most typical signs from men who are struggling with anxiety &/or depression issues is a lack of interest in sex. (Over) simply put, they do not feel worthy of having sex. It’s the emotional equivalent of women packing on the pounds (whether depressed or not) whereby males think they are not “masculine” enough in terms of “success” etc.

However, if hubby passes such screenings & is otherwise fine, the honest to gawd’s truth is the exact opposite of what most women’s & men’s mags tell you.

Cover text screams that men want sexually aggressive women — but that’s a lie. A big fat stinking lie.

At least for some men.

“Aggressive” should not be confused with “confidence”; confidence is sexy period, no matter the person or the gender. But when it comes to making the moves, giving out the sexual invitations, many men (unless they are into Dominatrix scenarios) literally shrink from sexual offers, Violet.

And it’s not just about the pressure to perform; it’s about a perception of your sexual value.

I know I’m going to get a bunch of men (and women) telling me this is BS. But please spare me your anecdotal evidence; I’ve got my own & I raise you some basic evolutionary evidence.

Men are hunters, providers; they are the risk-taking, chest-beating victors to whom the sexual spoils go because they have won. In this case, they’ve won “the woo” so they get to bed you.

Now, when you, female of the species, are on the sexual hunt yourself — especially when you are living with them or are otherwise sexually available to them — men no longer have to work, woo or win you & your favors. They lose interest because there is a shift (in their perception) of your value.

If you think I’m nuts, ask yourself why so many men are led around like bulls with rings in their noses by spoiled princess-types who demand trinkets or deeds in order to put out.

Some men just have to work for it in order for it to be any good.

Some women think, instinctively, that they can ignite more heat with a few sparks of jealousy; but don’t do it. Even if it works in the short-term, it’s eventually likely to garner you additional issues to sort out — and doesn’t he already have enough reasons not to go to bed with you? Let’s not add insecurities about your faithfulness to the mix. Not to mention that he might feel it’s fair game now for him to go after those other birds rather than your bush…

No, the best way to increase your sexual value & “up” his desire, is to have him think it’s all his idea — that he’s worked for “it” or talked you into “it.”

How?

For starters, just stop asking, hinting, insinuating and throwing yourself at him. I don’t mean become a cold mean bitch; just make yourself a little less obviously available… Instead of suggesting sex (verbally or by lounging naked in Saran-wrap), just relax.

It may mean dialing down your sex drive — pushing it out of your mind so that you aren’t watching the clock, expecting that since 15 minutes (or a two days) has passed, that he out to be lunging at you by now. And if you are having difficulty doing that, let me remind you that May is Masturbation Month. Spend some quality time with yourself — it will relax you in any case. (He’s likely doing it — otherwise how does he manage to function? If he’s not, I’d really drag him in for medical care — seriously.)

Generally speaking, a few days or weeks maybe and most men find themselves thinking of you in that way…  From there, you’ll likely find a balance for yourself between “aggressive” and “willing” that won’t feel like game-playing.

If you honestly have dialed down your sexual pursuit of him and he’s still just not that willing to get into you, then seek counseling. Because something’s just not right.

Trouble Getting In The Mood? Or In The Mood When Your Partner Is?

It’s a common complaint from married folks, couples living together, and even those who are dating: S/he wants to, s/he doesn’t want to. Well, actually, you both might want to, but one or both of you just isn’t feeling good about it right then…

Baring any big relationship deal breaker issues, this matter of seemingly incompatible moods usually boils down to three things: timing, transitions, and familiarity.

Timing Issues

Timing is a big issue, especially for heterosexual couples, due to practical & biological issues. He wakes up with morning wood, proof of high testosterone levels, ready to start his day with a “Bang!”; and we women prefer to end our days with sex, then drift off to sleep with satisfied grins on our faces. (Plus, it spares us the oozy mess in our panties, which occurs even when condoms are used, thankyourverymuch.)

If this basic bodily biology seems ‘off,’ consider too yet that (typically) men require sex to feel close and committed to their partners while women (again typically) require emotional intimacy & commitment in order to have sex. Men & women, we’re sort of automatically out of sync.

And then there’s our lives…

Transition Problems

It’s difficult to transition from workmate to soul mate, from mom to playmate, from exhausted caretaker of everyone to a being focused on your own pleasure; but that’s what you need to do.

Our days are spent in frantic pursuit of career goals & family duties, manifests broken down into smaller to digest day planners & to-do lists — even our social activities are often commitments of conscience, feeling more like obligations than relaxation — and as a result, we are stressed-out and tired. We may fantasize about sex, but have it? Nu-huh. That’s less sleep.

Plus there’s the whole feeling sexy… We just don’t feel very desirable.

That goes for men and women both. Typically, when he feels ineffective at work, his libido drops. Women, on the other hand, fear that the beauty shortcuts which have saved us time in making ourselves presentable enough to the world at large have left us with “gross” things, such as hairy legs & next-day hair, which will unhappy discoveries in intimate settings — things that will turn him off, if not forever, than at least leaving us rejected at that moment. And that hurts.

The Problem With Familiarity

The familiarity of having so much history & contact with one another often changes our response to one another. It’s not that familiarity breeds contempt, or that we necessarily become bored with one another; but in our fitting the other person into our lives we continue to live our lives — including all the work and commitments we have.

We have to sort of put that flush of romance a bit to the side to function. And that includes ignoring or subduing that erotic thrill we feel when we lay down to sleep by our partner’s side. Once you train yourself to bypass the thrill of laying beside the man (or woman) your bod is aching to love — just so that you can sleep in order to function the next day — it can be difficult to flip the switch back to “on” again.

With all of this buzzing around in our heads, and the natural but nearly opposite body rhythms, it’s no wonder we have difficulty getting in the mood at the same time.  But it’s important to note that is natural, common — and that none of this is personal.

But in light of all this, how can you relax and fan those smoldering flames into the heat of passion again? Stick around for part two and you’ll see!

Dates Are For Learning

My daddy, the one who calls ‘eunuchs’, ‘tunics’, always said that dating was equal parts learning about your date and learning about yourself.

Each & every date, each and every person you dated, was a field trip to learning. You might have thought you liked bowling but, as it turns out, you really only like drinking beer, spending time with your friends and wearing funny shoes. Go blowing with a guy you don’t like and bam! It becomes crystal clear: bowling is not fun, it’s the people you like. Then again, you might not like bowling, but you sure did enjoy spending time with that guy who took you bowling… It takes awhile to do the math, but eventually you figure it — and yourself — out. If you are wise, that is.

Too often, people spend time on dates just evaluating the other person as potential partner material, ignoring the self-evaluation. It’s important because maybe what you really really like about bowling is the flirtation with the guys in the other lane… So then it’s not the date that’s the problem (either going bowling or his seeming unlikelihood as a soul mate) but it’s that you aren’t really looking for a relationship.

I was reminded of this when I watched VH1’s Tough Love. It was the second episode but my first time watching the reality show — you might think that it would be ‘bad’ to miss the first show, but I found not knowing info about the eight women he’s trying to coach in the ‘boot camp’ far less distracting (like the whole “bitchy Taylor returns” thing — WTF?!) Anyway, professional matchmaker Steve Ward was trying to teach these girls some self-awareness. They must be pretty oblivious to themselves & their behaviors because Ward actually used a shocking device to zap the women whenever they broke dating rules — just like my uncle trained his hunting dog, or my sister’s invisible dog fence.

People reverting to old or bad habits, dating or otherwise, isn’t especially odd; new habits and behaviors take time. But the most amazing thing to me was Jody. This woman is completely unaware of the signals she sends. She comes off as a chick who doesn’t really want a relationship, but I think she’s got the same exact problem as Arian: neither one of them has the confidence in themselves to believe they’ll be loved that they’ve created tough-cookie exteriors to push (shove and kick) people away before there’s even a chance. Like those swaggering men with rotten cores I dated. It’s a neurosis as terribly isolating, self-destructive and painful as the clingy stalker chick, Jessa. And no fun for those dating them.

Stasha (who had to be zapped so often for bragging about being in Playboy that it went past comical into abrasive — I can only imagine what it would be like to sit across the table from her on a date. Ugh.) and Abiola also seem to be projecting a confidence they don’t feel… Or they could be so damn unrealistic about themselves and the realities of relationships that they’ll end up only accepting cartoon ones — superficial and, at best, two-dimensional.

(I didn’t see enough of Jacklyn, Natasha, and Taylor to get a read on them — yet)

Anyway, my point is that these ladies are all so busy looking at & evaluating men — immediately judging the men to be untrustworthy or otherwise unworthy so they can dump them and move on — that they require a third party to give them literal, physical shocks.

And even then they resist.

Along with not knowing how they behave (and how that behavior is interpreted), they don’t even seem to know themselves, their needs, or what motivates them.  It’s more than classic defense mechanisms that automatically go off; it’s ignorance about themselves.

If only these women had begun dating under my dad’s dating philosophy. It may not have spared them broken hearts & bad experiences, but at least they’d have walked away knowing something more about themselves. And then they wouldn’t have had to been zapped — on national television, yet.

Marriage: We’ve Come Along Way, Baby?

In Wives Legal Rights, by Richard T. Gallen, a Dell Purse Book, © 1965, marriage is defined as both an emotional relationship and a legal arrangement, “a valid contract between a man and a woman, granting certain rights to each, demanding certain responsibilities of each.” It’s taken decades for Webster’s to catch up on the definition of marriage to include same sex couples (which, as you’ll see at that link, is upsetting to co-called conservatives — selfish, intolerant bastards), and the legal definition is even worse. So it shouldn’t be surprising that other concepts are having an equally long a culture lag.

wives-rights-responsibilities-duties

Paging through this retro Dell booklet, it’s easy to see that the gender split isn’t just regarding who is in a marriage, but what role each gender has within a marriage. Women are legally required to perform domestic chores and to care for husband and children. On the flip-side, men are required to support, protect and maintain wives and children (but nowhere is is listed that husbands are to care for their wives and/or children).

wives-rights-responsibilities-duties-husband

This may not seem very alarming on the surface (to me it’s a giant WTF?! moment), but the antiquated way of legally assigning roles in a personal relationship sure is government dictating personal lives. Even if marriage laws are no longer written this way, the cultural lag exists and for many, such shifts in change have not been made, making it more difficult even for those who do believe differently.

It’s easy to see where the cultural assumptions of women having the ‘home sphere’ impacts equal pay for equal work, the pink ghetto from pink collar jobs etc. Women are still not true equals in society because we are not seen as having equal footing and participation, which leads to attitudes & assumptions about women’s roles in society and individual marriages.

It’s not just the cave men (and their families) who wish to keep women in their (historical) place, but the insidious perceptions off of which people operate — sometimes unaware they hold such notions (or the unhappiness they instill) until they are tested. But once you are married, it is often too late to renegotiate what has already been seen as accepted.

My advice to you is to clearly discuss your expectations about roles in relationships with prospective mates. Be clear about what you and won’t do or tolerate — and be equally clear what you expect. Better to leave that old fashioned thinking fish in the pond, than to forever be on the hook.

Of Labeling, Limiting & Running Your Fingers Down Some New Spines

Andi (of Outer Limits — a most fun blog), has an excellent post: lesbian fiction, or does this book make me look gay? (Who doesn’t get sucked into reading with a title like that?!)

Her discussion (similar to this round-table: Labeling Lesbian Fiction Debate) centers on the issue of whether or not it is a service, a disservice, or a meaningless point, to label works of fiction as “lesbian.”

I’m straight (but not narrow), so maybe my opinion doesn’t really count — but I’m not afraid of books or movies or TV shows or whatever with lesbians or gay or trans folk. If people want to play Guess The Reader’s Orientation By Her Book Purchases (Or Reading Habits), that’s their little game & I don’t care. Besides, they’d be puzzled anyway.

I think separating books by “character orientation” is as silly as categorizing them by marital status. So if we have “Gay Mysteries”, “Bisexual Westerns, “Trans Literature” and “Lesbian Sci-Fi” then why not have “Celibate Sci-Fi” (maybe that’s redundant? lol), “Old Maid Romance” (err, that fits some people who confuse fantasy fiction with real life expectations for relationships) and “Heterosexual Monogamous Adventures” (if strictly read in the missionary position, it’s surely an oxymoron)… Though “Married & Not Getting Any Mysteries” might actually be found in self-help. Heh.

I joke, but I’m serious about segregating books based on character orientation. What’s next, stories with African American characters can only sit on shelves at the back of the store? Because that’s what these categories feel like to me; just another way to label and limit.

A good detective story, adventure, or love story, is a good read no matter what labels the publisher or Barnes & Nobel clerk assigns the book in the shelving process. Fictional characters & their stories are no more limited to their orientation — or gender, race, marital status, religious beliefs, political party or any other label — then real people are. When you categorize, label, and therefore limit the fictional people, you are inches away from limiting the real people.

Which brings us to dating.

While it’s good to know yourself and know the characteristics you’re looking for & even require in a mate, it’s ridiculous to categorize, label and limit potential dates — you’re only limiting yourself.

OK, so maybe being totally, inflexibly straight &/or Republican means you may have limit yourself in a category or two.  But it doesn’t mean you need to ignore a million other people by the labels they have or the labels you think they have.  Meeting other people means you’ll be exposed to more characters, more stories.

So go ahead, run your fingers along a few spines outside your typical categories; see what new characters you find and what new stories you’ll have to tell.

Mind Over Relationship Matter

Sonia ponders her breakup and discovers that while it may be hard to do, the light at the end of the tunnel just might be her glorious self:

I am analyzing my relationships again. I am free from being in love with m, and my heart is flung open like a door to everything and everyone around me. It’s astounding how I was so unhappy for what seemed to be forever, now the days just pass me by. There aren’t enough hours in the day it seems. Every second is so pleasurable and I treasure every moment. I told myself that new years eve would be the last day for me to think about m in a loving manner- miss him, miss what we had, and I had to be done with it. I awoke new years day feeling like maybe it wasn’t real. A few days passed, and it became a reality. Those feelings were gone. I wanted with all of my heart for those feelings to pass and they did. Mind over matter. Putting good vibes out into the universe has finally paid off for me and I am the real me again. Looking back on the past year, I really do not know how I did it. Every day seemed like an absolute struggle, and I dreaded what the next day had in store for me. I felt so hopeless at times, but knew that life is so much better than that. I believed. Bad things happened, and I went on with my life. I opened myself up to change, and opened myself up again to being vulnerable to people, and allowing myself to love regardless of the consequences. It wasn’t nearly as difficult as it seemed. My life is considerably different than it was just 5 short months ago.

13 Reasons To Hate Cosmo – In Just One Issue

Gawd I hate Cosmo. It’s like they simply cannot fathom that we see they’ve been running the same articles over & over again since Helen Gurley Brown became editor-in-chief in 1965, and began using the mag as an extension of 1962’s Sex and the Single Girl.

Don’t get me wrong, Sex & the Single Girl was wildly wonderful for the time (and holds up much better than you might think); but it was one book in 1962 and if we’re supposed to have come a long way, baby, then why the hell are we operating off a 1962 manual?

Plus, you can only recycle so much.

Even if you think, “There’s new chicks aging into woman’s mags every year,” you have to accept the fact that they know — or should frickin’ know — that old news is not only old news but hurtful and dangerously inaccurate.

Thirteen Examples Why I Hate Cosmo
(All from the February, 2009, issue.)

1 On page 50, In The Best Times To Impress Him, under “When his buddy gets dumped,” the advice reads as follows:

If your female friend suffers a breakup, you bring over Sex and the City DVDs and talk about how she “feels.” If your guy’s male friend gets the ax, however, he has only one job: to help the dude get laid. So give your man the green light to spend more time than usual acting as a wingman when out with the boys.

Ugh. So A), couples only have same-sex friends, they are B) stereotypes. (My friends and I — male and female — have a strict code that should any of us own &/or view Sex & the City, we are to drive them to the closest impatient care facility & destroy the DVDs.) And C) pimping is good for your relationship, so to hell with the scars on either “your guy’s male friend” or his sexual conquests.

2 Page 54, “How I got him to…” is an ode to man-ipulation. It starts with the “men are easily distracted like babies” — so change his cell phone ring to his favorite tune to keep him from answering it (hey, he’ll like listening to the small clip repeated so much that he’ll totally ignore a call from work, his mom… maybe even you). And then ends with stuff you already should know how to do, like if he says it’s natural to flirt with other women so you’re free to do the same, feel free to do it. (We know it may not make him get jealous and stop like “Chloe” wanted; but hell, neither of you are dead; so why the hell not flirt? Flirting is not picking-up or cheating.)

3 page 67: Beauty News. It’s not “ads” but the usual editorial serving as ads; and even worse, it’s stupid.

When you pull off your tights, a cloud of dust pops up. Cold temps plus indoor heat zap moisture. Switch to a hydrating body wash, like Caress Glowing Touch, $3.50.

4 Page 74: Beauty Q & A:

Q: When I wear heavy fabrics, I sweat a lot. What can I do to prevent it?

A: “Layer a cotton tee under a sweater — the natural fibers absorb moisture,” says NYC derm Doris Day. Also try a stronger sweat blocker, like Secret Clinical Strength Anti-Perspirant, $7.99.

‘Cuz A) believing the “derm” wouldn’t sell Secret ad space and B) asking why she wears sweaters in the first place is out of the question… Because “Q” is a made-up question from struggling editors.

5 Fun Fearless Males 2009, page 83. Heavens, if they are so fun & fearless — and celebrities — why don’t I already know about them? And why would I care? It’s not like I’m so deluded to think that my discovery of them (should I even agree with their sales pitch selections) makes me frickin’ eligible to date them.

6 Page 98: What Sex Feels Like for Him. Yeah, we can count on Cosmo to tell us how our man feels about us & with us; so there’s no need, should we A) actually be curious or B) not already have him telling us what he wants and why, to actually ask our real, not pseudo-Cosmo-guy, ourselves.

7 Page 103 starts 50 Guy Phrases Translated, in which Cosmo rapes other written works, distilling them to hysterical uselessness. Cracking the male “cryptic code” includes translating, “Can we talk about this later,” to, “I never want to talk about this again.”

Gee, really?

I suppose next you’ll tell me that when he says “We should go out sometime,” that he’s just afraid to really ask me out… And “You look hot” means he wants to have sex. Oh wait, that’s #2 & # 29.

8 We are not to be “alarmed” by our “freaky sex dreams, we are soothed (starting on page106).” Sex with the ex, girl-on-girl action, and dreams of sex without condom use aren’t what we fear think they are — nope, they aren’t even hot dreams we should just enjoy.

Cosmo, you’re worse than a wet blanket; at least then I’d have a wet spot & be damn happy for it.

9 In Love & Lust (apparently a regular feature) the Cosmo skinny is that playing hard to get (but not too hard to get) is phat. Yes, it’s 2009 and we believe women don’t know that the thrill of the chase is thrilling to both chaser and chasee. I mean, come on; this is the stuff we all miss when we ‘settle down’ and, if we take each other for granted, end up in divorce court for.

But thanks, Cosmo, for telling the women of today who paid $4.50 for your rag that “texting him your location at all times” is “not hard enough”, that waiting to reply to his text a day later with “Who r u?” is “too hard” but that “sending short texts and resisting the urge to engage in volleys” is “just hard enough.”

10 On page 112, more of Love & Lust, has the classic, “he lost his class ring in my pussy” story. If you don’t know it, ask your dad to tell you a sex joke.

And then work on your freakin’ Kegles for gawd’s sake.

11 Page 192, in Cosmo Weekend Living, we are advised not to make our rooms too girlie &/or paint our rooms pink because “guys don’t feel comfortable in estrogen-heavy rooms.”

Yeah, unless our estrogen-heavy bods are naked; then, like they notice — let alone care.

12 Page 52: Cosmo for your guy — “show this to your man!” Two problems here: A) the whole mag is an ode pandering to negative male stereotypes, so if you’re going to encourage him, why stop at one page? and B) if your guy needs help to know that whispering “Remember that time on the kitchen floor?” is sexier than whispering “I’m so drunk!” to you, I doubt reading it in print in Cosmo will be of any help — to either of you.

(And then he might just flip through it and start thinking about your pink duvet and why you programmed the ringtone on his phone.)

13 Oh, are we at thirteen already? But there’s so much more… OK, I’ll give you just one more & then I’ll stop. For now. The perfumed ads reek. As if I didn’t have a headache already.

PS I didn’t buy this copy of Cosmo; I liberated it my sister-in-law from it. And yes, she heard all of this as an oral presentation as I took it.

Get the Thursday Thirteen code here! UPDATE: The original site appears to be down, so please check Thursday-13.com!

The purpose of the meme is to get to know everyone who participates a little bit better every Thursday. Visiting fellow Thirteeners is encouraged! If you participate, leave the link to your Thirteen in others comments. It’s easy, and fun! Trackbacks, pings, comment links accepted!

Drew Barrymore & I Agree

I normally don’t give a fig what celebrities have to say about dating — not only do they not live in the real world, but they are generally poor examples of what good relationships are. But when I read what Drew Barrymore reportedly said , I jumped for glee:

DREW BARRYMORE hates surfing the Internet for love – because it has taken all the romance out of dating.

The Charlie’s Angels star – who recently split up with the face of computer brand MAC Justin Long – confesses that even text messaging freaks her out – insisting she prefers the old fashioned ways of finding a man.

She says, “When I first started dating, it was like the Pony Express. We had to be frickin’ patient. And now everything is instantaneous. It’s too much! Where is old-fashioned romance and a little bit of mystery?”

I believe this is precisely why so many celebrity marriages & relationships fail — they are used to & demand instant gratification. Relationships may involve instant attraction, but the gratification comes over time. This is something which most celebrities seem to fear — perhaps because they fear time and it’s “ravages” rather than revere it.

While we regular folk may not be able to demand — or, more accurately, have our demands so regularly met — we seem to fall for the fallacy of instant gratification. Perhaps it’s because so many of us wish to emulate celebrities, too often for the wrong reasons. But in any case, many wish for instant gratification.

For example, Michelle at Dating Dames (where I discovered the Drew Barrymore news) defends her own quest for relationship instant gratification:

She had me until she complained about instantaneous. I’m not patient. …I’m all for mystery and old-fashioned romance, but I want it quick, baby. Like this, yes thank you for holding the door for me, now I’ll race you to the car. Lets go!

But relationships are the opposite of such a concept. I can’t help from making a reference to Drew’s movie, The Wedding Singer, and the song Grow Old With You:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7CYI5bKZMes[/youtube]

Let’s Date Like My Sister Eileen?

I made issue #14 of the Feminist Carnival of Sexual Freedom and Autonomy (yea me!), which reminds me that I should give you an update on that media and relationships survey I’m participating in

The survey is based on your TV and movie viewing habits of the past week, which means you’re reporting on your holiday season habits. Personally, my sitting-on-my-butt and watching television &/or films time has been very limited by holiday stuff — but also because TV programing has sucked the past month. This means I’ve watched mainly The History Channel and NatGeo (which, unless you categorize this watching as “news” puts your viewing in the “other” category on this survey) and it has had, upon reflection, little to do with my relationship values — other than to find great pleasure in the fact that my partner also likes geek TV.

I’ve also snuck in the occasional TCM (and other old film) viewing. This has been secretive alone-at-night-while-working movie watching — but not because it’s some naughty or guilty pleasure to watch a “chick flick”. Writing, being a solitary pursuit most enjoyed by night owls, lends itself to complete remote control domination when one is well, you know, screwing around and not working. However, my point is, that the movies I’ve watched (including The Pleasure Seekers, My Sister Eileen, and Sabrina) were retro films, if not all Classic Films with capital C & F, and as such it’s damn near impossible for a feminist to watch those films and not giggle, smirk, or groan at the sexist roles and actions. They are entertainment (served with an equally entertaining side dish of snark that I am unable to turn off) not some map for relationship bliss.

If they were, then I guess my first tip in getting a date would be to go out drinking with your sister & two fellas, walk drunkenly to a gazebo, and have the four of you burst into song, dance, and imaginary instrument playing a la My Sister Eileen. But then, you’ll also end up with some other guy… Which involves some lying, lots more song and dance, the Brazilian Navy, and lots more…

My point is, if I (and any other intelligent sentient being) can realize that musicals are fantasies, why would anyone expect to find tips on relationships & romance in such films?

Oh, and I also watched Elf; and that didn’t make me think that I might have missed an opportunity to mate a real elf and get myself closer to Santa’s Nice List.

So, over all, my feelings regarding media and relationships have neither changed nor become more enlightened by this survey process. While there’s still weeks to go (and I am interested in what may come from the experience), I’m still amazed that there are people out there — that I’m sharing this same world with — who honest to gawd, still base their real world relationship expectations upon images in film and television.

May gawd help us all.

Which Came First? The Chick-Flick Or The Egg On Your Face?

Jaynie asked if, when participating in the survey about media and relationships, I noticed anything about the survey.  The answer? Yup, I did.

I’m guessing Jaynie did too, or she wouldn’t have asked ;)

It’s pretty clear when I looked at my responses on the television shows and films I watch, by genre, that I don’t watch a lot of chick-flick-shit.  So maybe I’m totally not who they want participating.  But the interesting thing is that I also don’t believe that the stuff shown on the screen has anything to do with real relationships, let alone any expectations for my own.  That alone would seem to indicate a strong correlation between watching the drivel and believing the BS.  But does the watching cause the believing? Or is it that those who live in a fantasy world seek out fantasy entertainment?

I’m hoping I’ll be asked to participate in the study for its entirety — not for the possible money, but because answering the questions, looking at my replies, makes me wonder more and more about these things.  While I may not be ‘typical’ or in any way reflective of the study results as a whole; but discovering things about myself, my habits, and my beliefs is really fascinating. Perhaps because I am so fascinating.