BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Underground > Conversation >

Lust and long term relations

  
 
Elijah, Freelance Rabbi
12:40 / 13.06.02
Bill Mahr (sp?) said on Politically Incorrect a few nights back, in defense of his anit-marriage stance, that "Love is the bricks and Lust is the mortar" or something similar. He and his crew of the day were discussing whether or not marriage is an exercise is self delusion.
Basically, If i am thinking about a supermodel and she is thinking about the pool boy, is there any reason for us to be "In love"?

anyone have opinions?

in my current relationship our sex life has slowed a bit, but i am still very much in love, so i disagree with Bill on a level, but on the other sex fiend lvl of me, i can kind of see where he is coming from. If the bulk of my sexual fulfillment comes while fantasizing about someone else, is there any reason to stay together?
 
 
bitchiekittie
13:15 / 13.06.02
I would suppose that would depend on why you are fantasizing about someone else, and the whys behind that one.

and this scenario also seems to me to assume that you can only have feelings of non-platonic love for one person, which most of us know isnt always the case

if you want to think about long term, such as growing old with someone, then I dont think lust really plays too much of a factor in the very long future. Im in no way suggesting gramma and gramppa dont have sexual feelings, only that there will be times when sex will be beyond insignificant
 
 
Elijah, Freelance Rabbi
13:36 / 13.06.02
and this scenario also seems to me to assume that you can only have feelings of non-platonic love for one person, which most of us know isnt always the case
and as much as us intellectuals can say we know that isnt the case, try explaining it to your sig fig....

but i see what you mean about growing old.
a bit off topic, the idea of why to get together and grow is to have a horde of tinies running around while you get older. What if 1 or both partners dont want to have children? At that time, is there any point?
 
 
bitchiekittie
14:11 / 13.06.02
thats a hard one. theres always the idea of "we'll cross that bridge when we come to it...". and the thought that one or both of you may change your mind in the future. and the opposite idea that you should never go into a serious relationship expecting the other partners intentions or behaviors to somehow change. I suppose it depends on how flexible the two are, what factors come into play, how willing they are to make changes in their lives and expectations.

kids are sticky - being a mom Im very very aware of the depth of the changes that having one makes in your life, for better and worse. I think the best thing a person can do is to try to be realistic - people do change their minds. but dont ever rely on it
 
 
bitchiekittie
14:18 / 13.06.02
and my personal opinion is that monogamous relationships arent about making/adopting babies - thats just a possible side effect.

again, just my opinion, but to me spending my personal time with one person is about a building on a strong friendship (with the added benefits of sex and consistency).
 
 
Mr Tricks
19:54 / 13.06.02

  • the idea of why to get together and grow is to have a horde of tinies running around while you get older. What if 1 or both partners dont want to have children? At that time, is there any point?


Well, I would have to disagree with that. The closest to first hand experience I can speak on is watching my Brother who has been married to his wife for over 10 years now... they where both very clear that kids where out of the question for them, yet that hasn't kept them form a seemingly "happy" marriage.

Personally I think the concept of Lust is prettymuch based on short term satisfaction. While it's certainly fun, it's doubtful there's any sustainability, which of course is a major aspect of our societial drive... smoking also seems to be baised on short term satisfaction. We as a culture are not conditioned to value long term comitment... look at how we view "health," again short term.

Sure, the average 20th century "MAN" (and to a lesser extent, Woman[IMO]) is driven to move from one short term satisfaction (relationship?) to the next. This works really well for a consumerist society. However, this seems to conflict with what I would call the pre-20th century institution of marriage.

Originally intended to secure material resources with-in a generational structure and of course move that whole structure forward in time via reproduction. The ever rising devorce rates seem to be the point where these conflicting priorities meet. Both marriage & devorse are continually being comodified, while tradition is becomming more and more of a nostalgia fix (also a comodity).

Polyamorious relationships are finding more space in modern culture. There are surely plenty of valid reasons for it and I'm sure under the right circumstance is would work. This of course is also case for monogamous relationships.

My gf & I have been together for close to 5 years now. It's been great, there's certainly alot of passion in our relations still, but sure it's not the rampant ernest drive of say 3 year ago. By the same token alot of our energy has moved up out from that desire for "satisfaction." That same passion has gradually been moving towards creating & achieving satisfactions that are sustainable over a longer period of time. I suspect it's this inspiration that drives many of our peers towards a seemingly outdated institution of marriage, over simple baby making.


  • this scenario also seems to me(bitchiekittie) to assume that you can only have feelings of non-platonic love for one person, which most of us know isnt always the case.


True... Yet this doesn't mean we are all slaves to our drives either, Why make commitment you can't keep? Why enter into a lifelong endevor with out first a true examination of the Whats, Whys & Hows of personal motivation? Know thyself?

Is sex really a strong enough basis for such a major decision?

Of course plenty of people have changed their lives (often for the worst) based on a short term sexual decision...
 
 
Persephone
20:54 / 13.06.02
Not to seem unalluring, but sex is not my Holy Grail. It strikes me as a little bizarre to organize one's life into a mechanism for getting good sex... though I suppose that's as good as any, as goals go. But I wouldn't think that it's universal in any way.

And I don't want kids either. I have barely enough maternal instincts for cats.

So what's the point? Eurgh... I guess you might ask what's the point of being alive. Probably the idea that the point of being married is to have sex and make kids is based on the deeper idea that the point of being alive is to have sex and make kids? Personally I think that the point of being alive is to have a life (and I am *not* equating having sex and making kids with not having a life.) I mean, the point of being alive is to be alive. To be an instance of aliveness. Therefore, that's the point to me of being married. I see being alive as work, as my work. So Husb & I have formed this partnership to share the work, to work on this life-project together. And maybe, to bear witness to each other that we are here.
 
 
Mr Tricks
23:30 / 13.06.02
...and said by Persephone, wife to the underworld...
 
 
pacha perplexa
08:56 / 14.06.02
I so like Persephone's view - "partnership to work on this life-project together". Teaching each other, learning to compromise and see the other sides of things, help and be helped for no other reason than that "because we're partners", plus living with someone that knows your body and sexual preferences and to whom you can speak about complicated emotional issues - or just make comments on life and the world around you. That is, if you're lucky to find the one (or one of the ones).
 
 
bitchiekittie
11:58 / 14.06.02
True... Yet this doesn't mean we are all slaves to our drives either, Why make commitment you can't keep? Why enter into a lifelong endevor with out first a true examination of the Whats, Whys & Hows of personal motivation? Know thyself?

first of all, what is the commitment? is it sexual, or does it extend to thoughts and feelings? if its the latter, at which point is the line drawn?

I in no way equate love with sex. while I personally want both in a single package, they can each exist without the other. if you commit to a monogamous relationship, are you then expected to restrict your desires and your feelings of love for just that one person? some people can, and do. others dont. you really cant expect other people to have the same exact drives as you do - you can only state your expectations, listen to theirs, and hope that you can come to some mutually satisfactory middle ground. this middle ground is easier for some of us to reach than others, but the fact that its more of a struggle for others does not mean that they shouldnt even try

to clarify: when I said "non-platonic love", I wasnt trying to politely say "sex" - I only meant that you can care for more than one person in a non platonic way
 
  
Add Your Reply