Engagement

I've always been a hopeless romantic... And, yes, ever since I can remember I have dreamt about getting engaged and married. I remember fantasizing about a huge wedding with lots of guests, a spectacular event which would include me singing (of course), all my family, friends and basically everybody I have ever met; it'd take place in an incredible party hall or in a beautiful garden... etc. etc. The funny thing though, is that I never actually thought about who I'd be getting married to... Or what it meant... Or why'd I'd do it. In fact, I think this was the least of my worries. 

I spent many years wondering whether I'd propose to someone or if I'd wait for someone to propose to me... If a gay couple is supposed to follow the straight protocol of making it a surprise or if both talked about it and exchanged rings instead. This brought me to the conflict of "should I plan a big romantic event to propose? I'd love to do it! Yes, I will! But wait, I want to be proposed to as well! Grrr!!".

...And, again, I never thought of the person I'd be proposing to or why.

The answer, however, came to me last Saturday. And it was much simpler than I ever imagined. I had it backwards all along. And for a good reason too, I think.

So, my partner and I were at my cousin's wedding last Saturday. It was amazing and extra special since my family was so welcoming towards him. They interacted with us and were very happy for us being together. We drank, danced and did everything one normally does at a wedding (that goes well)...

When the evening came, my partner asked me to walk with him a little to get some air - my usual paranoid reaction being "why? is there something wrong?". Anyway, he led me away from the dance floor and all the people, to this little love seat set next to a pond. The day had finally cooled down and there was a general feeling of merriment in the air - perfect setting. We sat down and started talking about nothing in particular. And then, he did it. He took my ring from my finger (my 'commitment' ring to him), got on one knee and asked me if I would marry him. 

I looked at him and realized something unusual. There were no people around to applaud and gasp. There was no romantic violin music in the background. There was no surprise ring hidden in the cake or on the bottom of a glass of champagne. And it was then that I knew I had been waiting for the wrong thing. Being focused on all those details I had always ignored the fact that I'd been expecting things that happen on TV, or proposals that made other people happy, trying to make them my own. 

In my case, there was the man I love. That one person at whose side I have been meant to be. The one with whom I've been through so much this year, in an unlikely relationship, enduring distances that were literally across continents; my 'bullet-proof love' as my mother called it. The one I am willing to wait for and I have no problem making my one and only. He was on one knee, asking me to be his husband and take on the world together.

That's when I understood what an engagement was about. 

Of course, I said yes. (Yay! I'm getting married! ... ^_^ ... Ok, I'm back now). And then I said "of course I'll marry you... ... Ummm... There are no witnesses to the proposal!" - alcohol makes me overly direct perhaps. So, what did he do? A couple of hours later (maybe less), as I was talking with my cousins, he sneaked behind me, slipped the ring of my finger and proposed again in front of my family. If it hadn't already been perfect, that made it so.

Later I was thinking about the kind of wedding I'd like. And, for the first time in my life I thought "I don't need a big over-the-top, super expensive wedding. I need the man I love at my side. I want us to vow to be together, make it official, share it with the people I love (not with everyone I've met just for the sake of having lots of people at my wedding)."

Perhaps that's what love is really about, huh? When you realize that the things around you, the plans you make around the relationship are just pluses, decoration - and the real focus of your happiness is having that person in your life.

Healthy Love

That's what everybody wants, right? That's why Psychologists like me have work, actually... And why people buy those cheap, tacky magazines with the 20 question test that can tell you if you have a 'codependent' relationship. Also, it is rather in fashion to watch all those shows that give you tips on how to have a 'healthy' relationship... Most of which, I think, should have informercials instead of regular commercials... Very often, those shows only present utopic, ideal relationships which only Buddha would have.

It's funny how there seems to be a generalized concept of what is the ideal relationship; the one that can make you happy and, if you read this book or that, you'll find the recipe for it. Well, what if you don't really want something like that?

The concept of 'health' itself has changed in the last few years; before, it was considered 'the absence of illness or disease' whereas now it is 'the physical, mental and emotional well-being of a person'. And, no, it is not the same thing.

A relationship can be free of jealousy, deceit, arguments and problems, and still be awful... On the other hand, the presence of these factors doesn't necessarily indicate that the relationship is faulty or destructive.

When you start a new relationship, have your friends ever made comments like "you shouldn't see each other so much", " you shouldn't show you care so much", "you shouldn't be so jealous", etc. etc. It's like everyone has advice on how to have the perfect relationship - and yet, how many of those actually have it?  In fact, most of those comments only reflect what most of them are afraid of or are doing themselves, and have very little to do with you or your relationship.

In the end, I believe 'healthy love' is that which leads you to create something new in your life. To grow and make the union of the two something bigger than what they are on their own. If you're jealous, distant, cold, affectionate, intellectual, monogamous, polyamorous, etc. What does it matter as long as it makes you happy?

How long should you wait?

It's funny how often it happens that a book comes into my life bearing a message that applies to my life so accurately, it's scary. 

A couple of days ago, I started reading 'Giovanni's Room' by James Baldwin. I must confess that, so far, I find it to be a very depressing story - at least potentially. However, there's a beautiful romantic side to it that I can't help but adore; it's always nice, inspiring even, to read about two people falling in love and how nothing else matters to them... For a while at least.

There is a part, though, that had me reflecting for quite a while.

Giovanni: "Tell me, what is this about time? Why is it better to be late than early? People are always saying we must wait, we must wait. What are they waiting for?"

David: "Well, I guess people wait in order to make sure of what they feel."

Giovanni: "And when you have waited - has it made you sure?"

Giovanni's Room - James Baldwin

It had me thinking about how this illusion is so deeply embedded in most of our cultures - the idea that one should not be impulsive, but rather wait as long as possible to ensure that the desired outcome will turn out as expected... But, isn't this silly? I think that, when you want to do something and get that feeling deep in your gut, that itch to start moving, time will hardly make it any 'easier' to go through with it.

Perhaps the main issue is that most people believe that, by obtaining more information before taking action, it is easier to make the right choice... And I do not disagree on this point.

Except when it is about human relationships and matters of the heart. I heard somewhere that 'the brightest light will always cast the darkest shadows'; wouldn't this mean that a feeling that can change your life as much as love does, will also come with ghosts and other mischievous feelings attached? Obviously the possibility of getting all you have ever wanted cannot be separated from the fear of losing it as well...

So, how long should one wait? I think that, when two people meet, it takes only a few minutes to know where the relationship can go. Let's say, on a date, it takes very little time to know if the person in front of you can, potentially, stir your soul. 

When you feel you love someone, how long do you wait to say it? How do you 'make sure' you really love someone? It's funny to me how people can throw words around like 'hate', 'stupid', 'idiot', etc. as if they were nothing, but find it extremely difficult to say the 'L' word...

Waiting, in my opinion, is overrated. Perhaps we should be more focused on living?

Commitment : What makes a long distance relationship work.

Why would you want to stay with one person when there are so many other choices? Why stay with someone despite all the trouble it causes and the effort it takes to make a relationship work?

I found a very interesting article that addresses these questions (and many others that most of us have) with a very simple concept: commitment.

The main statement of the article drew my attention instantly: "A study has suggested that Long Distance Relationships (LDR) are more stable than Geographically Close Relationships (GCR)."

Wouldn't it be the other way around? I mean, surely being close to someone makes the relationship grow stronger and makes it easier to stay together; and I'd think it quite obvious that those who spend lots of time separated tend to slowly grow apart. However, this study attests that the factors that we assume could break such a relationship aren't really intensified by the physical closeness or lack of it.

Commitment, they say, is influenced by three factors: a) satisfaction or happiness with the relationship; b) perceived alternatives (such as other attractive partners); and c) investments that would be lost if the relationship ended.

According to this research, there's not much difference between satisfaction in LDR's and GCR's, which is the main predictor of whether these relationships will last or not.

Now, the second predictor, alternatives or other possible partners, is one that drives someone like me completely crazy. I mean, why would two people choose to be in a relationship in which they can't see each other if they have plenty of other choices right around the corner, right? Well, according to this study, this isn't that much of an issue either. Evidently, people who go for LDR are normally those who have a hight work intensity and idealization; they tend to segment their life into work and relationships. This means that people in LDR's normally focus a lot of their time apart on their work. Oddly enough, high alternatives do predict lower commitment when talking about GCR's.

This actually makes sense. People who are actually happy with the relationship they have will hardly put some time aside to look for other alternatives. Also, focusing on their work keeps them occupied and allows for more experiences the couple can share when together; isn't it awful when you spend all day, every day with someone and, come nighttime, you have nothing to say to each other?

The third predictor, investments that would be lost, is a little colder but also easier to understand. People in LDR's invest money in communication and commuting (at least), all which would be lost if they broke up. Also, when both people are striving towards being together after whatever period of time, this is seen as an investment for the future... Which makes the relationship grow even stronger. Something that, by the way, is not as easy in GCR's, since most investments are limited to shared possessions (which they can just fight over in the end).

So far, the article seems to be quite cheery about LDR's and even appears to suggest they aren't that hard. However, there is one point yet to be discussed:

"Attachment and caregiving cognition, motivation, and behavior are aspects of evolutionary-based behavioral systems that produce strong emotion (Bowlby, 1988). In important romantic relationships, partners have attachment and caregiving bonds with each other. Theoretically (Bowlby, 1969), LDR separations activate the attachment system and lead to separation protest, even when separation is a choice. The protest is attachment behavior, action designed to gain or maintain a comfortable range of proximity to the partner. Protest is evident in LDR interviewee comments (e.g., "I grieve every Monday"; Magnuson & Norem, 1999, p. 131) and reports of loneliness, sadness, missing the partner, and dreading  separation (Guldner, 1996)."

Ouch, right? So, how does one deactivate this natural reflex? This 'separation protest'? Well, here's where it gets interesting.

In GCR's, the satisfaction of each other's attachment and caregiving needs depends exclusively on their ability to do so; conversely, in LDR's this means little, since neither can do much while being apart. No matter how 'functional' their relationship may be, the apart-together cycles  they go through naturally inflict stress in the relationship.The article here relies on a theory of separation anxiety which I am not going to describe in much detail here; I will only say that most people deal with separation either by being anxious to be with the other person (and thus needing the closeness) or by avoiding contact so as to minimize the effects of said separation.

Happily, the authors of the article has some suggestions for both:

For the first kind of people, research indicates, there are many ways to reduce this anxiety as long as they can perceive the partner as available. This can be done by having pictures of the partner or frequent e-mails or phone calls.

The second group has it a little easier, since avoidant attachment makes distance work as a motivating factor for commitment. Still, this isn't always a good thing. Since this kind of partner doesn't feel as much anxiety from the separation right away, they might feel their commitment is weakening... But with time they realize it is not so.

The one thing that is definitely compromised in LDR's is caregiving. The couple may feel disappointed that they can't be there for the other person and thus 'fail' in being a safe 'haven' for them. Still, this is normally compensated through finding ways to actively demonstrate their love for the other person and substituting physical caregiving with verbal communication. Actually, this also makes for the development of better communication with each other.

In the end, the research goes on to show that what most people believe makes LDR's break up (anxiety, avoidance, fear of losing the other person, etc.) is significant only when ignoring the three factors which influence commitment. In other words, commitment in GCR's and LDR's is quite similar, except the former rely more on satisfaction and the latter on the investments made in the relationship; this since LDR partners are more likely to rule out any other alternatives before beginning said relationship. 

Once I read that "some men seem larger at a distance"; I found it funny that, in this research, people in GCR's are more likely to compare their partner's flaws with other possible alternatives, while people in LDR's tend to be in their best behaviour and appearence in the little time they see each other and, thus, increasing the satisfaction factor. Still, this also means that they see each other in situations of high anxiety and stress due to separation, which keep them from idealizing each other.

Letting go versus bear-hugging someone to death

Lately I've understood this saying, perhaps truly for the first time. If you love someone, let them go... Well, you know the rest.

I've been reflecting on the idea of 'holding on to someone'... When I try to picture it, it's like that person is trying to run away and you're stopping them, grabbing on to them for dear life, because it feels like letting go would mean not seeing them again. But, how much satisfaction can one possibly get from achieving 'love' like that? Forcing someone to stay despite what they may want? Also, when you hold someone too tight, you mostly end up suffocating them.

I am the kind of person who (and perhaps this is a cultural thing, but I'll get to that on some other post), when I start dating someone, I spend as much time as I can with that person. And only in the past few years did I learn that when someone says 'I need some space' it doesn't necessarily mean they don't want to be with me or they want to go hunting for someone else...

I have especially grasped the concept that, when you love someone, if you let them go they won't necessarily run away; I mean, why would they? Someone who loves you is with you because they want to be with you, not because you're holding on to them.

In short, now I think that if you love someone, you should let them go (even if just as an experiment)... They will probably stay in the same place they were, close to you, showing you that they have more than one reason to be there... And if they do run away, you're better off - there's no point in trying to force someone to stay since, eventually, they will find a way to escape anyway.

The gap between 'Te amo' and I love you.

For a while I have been thinking about how language plays such an important role in the way people interact. Even among those who speak the same language, some concepts might be understood so differently that it could cause misunderstandings and chaos - so, of course, when two cultures clash it can get a bit complicated.

Specifically, I am interested in how Spanish and English speakers express their affection for each other, the words we use and what they mean.

Here's a scenario I consider rather typical: Two people meet, they talk for a while and one says to the other "I like you". They date for a while, feelings start to get stronger and they feel comfortable saying... What? 'I love you'?

In Spanish we have two different ways of saying 'I love you': "Te quiero" and "Te amo". And this is a BIG difference and kind of a relief since there is something between 'like' and 'love'. For us, 'Te amo', which many might consider closer to 'I love you', means a deep love for someone; something serious and strong. However, "Te quiero" is more like saying 'I want you'... It is still affection but on a different level.

The way I see it is like this, you say "me gustas" when you want to get to know someone; "te quiero" when you feel you want to be closer to that person, you 'want' them by your side, to be yours... I think love transcends that, it is a desire to see the other person happy, to share experiences and be more than what two people are when they're on their own. I don't think 'love' can hurt... Even when two people are apart, love can remain. I think it hurts when you 'want' the other person by your side, when you want them to be yours... Also, if someone said "Te amo" to me after only a few dates, I'd totally run away... LOL

Somehow, I think this can be a problem when two people with different native languages start a relationship. Especially if neither is aware of this cultural difference. Saying 'Te amo' in Spanish, at least for me, requires a lot of time of knowing the other person... And yet, I think I have come to understand 'I love you', in English, more as a 'Te quiero'... I think that, as a native speaker of Spanish, there is no way to express those feelings of love in any other way than saying: Te amo.

The flavor of life

Standing at the end of a story that ended too soon - or rather, just when it was meant to.

In the past month I loved, lived, cried, sang, hugged, kissed.. With a passion I hadn't in years. A love meant to end, a relationship that was not to be, and yet it was.

During this time, I also came across many people who did not understand why I would put my heart in a seemingly "pointless relationship" (sic). These people told me that they did not believe in 'Disney' love; love, they said, is a companionship, a relationship through which two people share a common project. And I agree completely.

However, isn't that also a friendship? Or just a partnership? I believe love is made of all these things as well... But, like the Gestalt theory suggests, the whole is greater than the sum of its parts.

Then again, I've heard people say that such feelings (which develop so quickly) can't be 'real love'... That makes me wonder, 'what is REAL love?' Why can't we let ourselves be reckless for a while, allowing a feeling to take us over and show us a whole new world?

I live by the idea that everything in this world has a price, and we need to pay exactly that - no more and no less. I know so many people who say they want to find someone to love and who will love them back, and yet they are not willing to pay the price! I think that the cost of such a relationship is, mainly, getting out of your comfort zone and betting your heart. Actually, once I heard someone say that "to receive a certain amount of happiness, you have to pay with an equal amount of unhappiness" - and while it might sound a bit extreme, I'd say it makes a lot of sense. A connection with someone that makes you smile like never before can, by definition, access that part of you which can make you cry like never before.

And isn't it worth it?

Quoting Rose (from Gypsy) "Some people can get a thrill, knitting sweaters and sitting still; that's peachy for some people who don't know they're alive! But I at least gotta try!".

Love is meant to be felt, not understood. Someone who brings you a feeling of completeness, who makes you smile just by thinking about them, whose goodbye feels like a part of you is being torn... Someone like that... Why let them just pass you by?

Someone asked me some time ago how it was that I had long term relationships and always managed to find someone who wanted that. I think it's because I take the risk; I've seen what loving someone is like.. I've felt what it's like to be loved. And there is nothing, absolutely nothing (and certainly not fear), that could keep me from trying to get that again. It's too precious a feeling to undermine just because it 'might not last'. If the person goes away, if it doesn't work, I'll still have those fond memories with me for as long as I live... And, if you're the kind of person who believes in the afterlife, maybe even after I die.

So, why did I say it was too soon? Because I wish it had lasted forever. Why did I then correct myself and say it was when it was how it was meant to be? Well, what I want is not always what I need, right? The timing was right for the time we had. And, if it really is meant to be, well... The world is not that big anymore... And time goes by quite quickly... Things can happen... And things can change... At their own pace.

This relationship gave me more than I could have asked for and helped me realize that, yes, I can still fall in love. I have no regrets.

The L word... Not lesbian-related, by the way!

No, it's not Lesbian... I've never even seen that show! I just found it an appropriate title for this entry.

Once, after saying "I'm in love!" someone said to me "well, you fall in love every 15 minutes"... At first, I was offended and it even got me thinking whether it was true, but not long after I realized some things: firstly, I do not fall in love every 15 minutes, however I am very intense when I like someone; secondly, what if I did?

I have met so many people who live in panic of saying or hearing the 'l' word. Why is it so hard for people to say that word? Some responses are "because it's not REAL love" or "you don't really mean it"... And while I agree that someone who says they love you and want to move in with you on the second date should be sent to therapy, I think that keeping yourself from telling someone how you feel because of how they MIGHT react is also mental.

About 6 years ago, while dating the guy with whom I've had my longest relationship, I came to the conclusion that my feelings themselves were what mattered... We went to a restaurant and I told him "I need to tell you something... And, don't worry, I don't need you to say it back, I know you don't feel it yet; I have waited until being at the point where I don't need you to say it for me to feel fine" and then I told him I loved him. He cried and said he was very happy to hear it and he didn't love me back... Yet... A couple of months later he said it and we were together for 4 and a half years.

There are many reasons for people to say 'I love you', like getting laid, getting someone to do something they're not too enthusiastic about, to hear it back, to feel needed, etc. But I think that when you say it just because you feel it, with no other objective but to let the other person know, then there's no way you can lose...

So, my advice? If you feel something for someone... TELL THEM SO! Don't be afraid to say 'I love you'! So what if you say it to many people? It just means you have a great capacity to love! And let people criticize you, it's just a reminder that they can't feel what you do... 

We should be less worried about loving people forever and more concerned with loving people NOW! If you wait too long, it might be too late.

Knowing when to leave.

This concept has eluded me for years now. I have been in situations where I end up losing just because I either stayed too long or too little. So, when do you know when to leave?

When you date someone almost twice your age who makes less than you do?

When you have an awesome relationship and things are going too well?

When you date someone with a crappy life, help them build a new one and get less than a 'thank you' for it?

When you find an awesome guy who has had too little life experience and needs to live on his own for a while?

When you find yourself being more dramatic than soap operas and swearing you'll "never beg any other man not to leave"?

Have you ever asked yourself this? It doesn't matter if it was during or after the relationship; was there ever a time when you wondered why you were together? ...Or worse, a time when you just assumed there was just no other way?

It's odd how things work out sometimes. In the end, I think you cannot really 'learn' from past relationships because every person is different... And, as much as 'statistics' or any other 'science' tries to prove otherwise, there's no way to predict how the next situation will fare considering previous events.

As I look back, I think I have always 'left' right at the moment I was supposed to; at least, I know I got something from each separation, at least enough to prepare myself for what's to come. I mean, I might not be able to know how the next guy will deal with jealousy or the future, but I will hardly will date another guy whose major aspiration in life is to work at a 7-eleven while I work in a hospital (not that there's anything wrong with that, mind you, I just refuse to play 'bread-winner' or 'problem-solver' -not to say 'daddy'-).

In fact, I have seen this, not only in myself, but in people around me as well: we tend to stick with someone who 'kind-of-works' because we're too afraid there might not be a better option... Or worse, we doubt that 'better option' will even take a second look at us. On this matter, what I have observed is that, people who settle normally can't answer to the question 'why are you with him?' with more than a half-smile (which looks more like some weird frown). And then we're stuck with the ideas of 'oh, but we have built so much together!' or 'but oh, whatever will I/he do without him/me??'. 

I think that the best time to leave is when you cannot find this one simple reason to be with someone: this person makes me happy and we can share our lives together... Of course, this also implies that both parts actually HAVE lives to share, instead of one mushy lump of a half-life built out of whatever was salvaged when they tried to fuse with each other out of sheer desperation and fear of being left alone.

I know for instance that, through time, I have been able to answer the questions I posed at the beginning of this entry...

If your aspirations don't match, there's no way you can build a future together... Unless you're willing to give up yours to take up his.

If you think it's 'too good' then you're probably not ready for it... And if you want to be, you better work to keep it instead of spending valuable energy self-commiserating.

If you want to help someone 'get a new life', you need to consider they already lost one (or more); which probably means they are not that grateful or aware of what they receive to begin with, so what can you expect?

If you're not both at the same stage of your lives, one of you will either have to speed up or slow down; and who has all that time? Unless both reach a compromise, it's really hard.

If you want to be that intense, just remember that love like that is exactly like a raging fire; it'll consume everything until nothing is left... And it will act quickly...

A 'masculine' kind of love.

"Hey asshole, how are you today?" literally means something like "Hey buddy, did you have a good day?"... Also, "you like that? wow, you're really stupid" means "you like that? wow, I haven't heard much or been interested in it because I'm afraid people will think I'm stupid"... Or so it seems...

I've seen this happen a lot among straight men; there is this dire need of using violence and aggression to mask anything which might pass for affection. This comes, of course, from that inherent fear of being judged as "too feminine" or just plain queer.

Now, one thing that supposedly characterizes the bear community is the fact that the men are masculine and virile; this is sometimes understood as 'acting straight' or rather making sure that you keep following the same guidelines they do. And while I admit to having a homophobic part of myself where I don't hang out with guys who are too flamboyant or refer to each other as 'girl' and use feminine pronouns and other similar words while talking to each other, I believe that it is important to evaluate some aspects of our behaviour before we go along with it.

Personally, while not 'big', I do consider myself masculine and pride myself in the fact that I am a man who likes men. This, however, does not stop me from being loving with my friends - I hug them, and try to demonstrate my affection as much as possible. Of course, this is the way I am and I do not intend to say it's the "right way". I just don't understand this tendency to hit someone or call them names when you clearly feel affection for them.  Even more when it's so plain that what they really need is more-obvious affection.

Making fun of someone's interests or something they say, trying to show that you think it's too gay just out of fear because someone else might judge you first is just plain stupid. 

I had a boyfriend who was a big mean-looking bear who was one of the most loving people I've ever met; I remember it was the thing that drew me to him so strongly, someone brave enough to match that masculine appearance without losing the ability of letting those he loved know what he felt for them.

My own conclusion on this topic is that, while it may be 'obvious' that calling your friends names and making fun of them is a way to show them you love them (from the safe side, since you can always deny it), I think it is important to reflect on whether that's really what they need to hear... Moreover, whether that's what you need from them as well.

One-night stands = Bootleg love.

With sex being so available, love has become a luxury item in the market... So to speak... 

I love buying TV series on DVD and take special pleasure in getting the "limited boxed editions" whenever I can lay my hands on them (I swear I have a point, bear it for a bit); of course, this also means that I pay a bit extra and can't buy as many as I might like. However, I do not think this is a bad thing.

Someone convinced me once to get the bootleg versions they sell on the street (which are, of course, way cheaper). The problem I found is that, while the quality of the video might be practically the same, the packaging was really unattractive; also, there comes a point where it was so easy to get them, that I wouldn't really mind which I bought, I'd just get three or four seasons of different series just 'to try and discover new things'.

In the end, I'd hardly watch half of the stuff I'd bought since I wasn't really interested, and the things I did want to see became less important - I would watch them once and put them away somewhere. It's like, if I buy an album by an artist I really like, I listen to the 13+ songs many times, enjoying each one to the fullest... While if I buy a 'discography' on mp3 for 10 pesos, I might listen to one or two songs and forget it exists.

I have found that 'express sex' is pretty much the same thing. At one point, having sex gets to be so easy, it loses meaning; it becomes an activity you do for the pleasure of the moment and it doesn't really matter who the other person is.

When you invest something else in a relationship with someone - and I don't necessarily mean 'true love' -, at least getting to know who you're sharing the bed with. You get to enjoy every moment, discovering something new in things you've done many times before. 

While this might be rather obvious, I have found it's really easy to forget that it can be so much more... That, rather than a one-time experience which will satisfy your immediate desire, it can become something that more than satiates the physical needs, going a bit farther.

Today I think I want to go back to getting the 'special limited edition' when it comes to being with someone... Even if it does require a bigger investment, patience and risk.

Of love and... Desire.

"Love is the yearning of loving and preserving the loved one. A centrifugal impulse; unlike the centripetal desire. It is an impulse towards expansion (...) it implies the impulse of protecting, nurturing, give shelter and caress and pamper, or protect jealously. (...) While 'desire' longs to consume, love wishes to possess. Desire is self-destructive; love, self-preserving." Zygmunt Bauman on "Liquid Love".

Two people meet, like each other and decide they want to know whether they can be compatible on other things besides aesthetics. They talk, laugh and find each other's company pleasant, even satisfactory. As the evening develops, they long to feel the other person and feel a fire whenever there is a surreptitious touch... When they say goodbye, they kiss and realise there is something there...

So, what do they do? Or rather, what can they do? 

This initial connection is a powerful desire which could consume both of them in a blazing fire (which I'm not saying is wrong). But what happens after the flames are gone? After that first attraction fades away and you see the person bare, without the mystery of the unknown that surrounded them. Desire centers one's attention towards itself... Or rather, oneself... Sometimes it takes longer for the blaze to expose what hides beneath, but it never fails. 

If let alone, desire can be too intense and scald the surface of whoever is feeling it, altering their perception and making them too sensitive to what comes afterwards; thus preventing them from exploring the newly discovered individual.

Love, on the other hand, is a feeling of growth; an impetus to become better and improve the one beside you. While Bauman says love is possession, and I agree, I also think it is creation. In a previous entry I talked about the 'admiration' component in a romantic relationship, I think that is what can keep the desire renovating itself; I believe it is a fire centered, not around devouring, but absorbing and making that part of whoever you love, yours. 

Of love and... Admiration.

Hard as I try, I cannot seem to recall where it was I saw this idea... I know I read it somewhere, though...

Anyway, it was something like this: For love to grow between to people and transcend the mere 'infatuation' stage, there has to be something they admire in each other. When one falls in love with someone, that person seems completely flawless and sent from Heaven; but after a couple of months, half the things you used to find adorable turn out to be annoying, illogical or simply disgusting.

So, how do some couples manage to stay together for so long? Well, some just decide to turn a blind eye towards their issues and take their frustration out by starting senseless arguments; however, there are those who find qualities in their partner which surpass those things they cannot stand. 

Nietzsche once said that for a couple's love to go beyond 'animal attraction' (which is what most people mistake for 'true love' or 'being in love'), they need to be able to create something bigger than what they are together. This could be, but isn't necessarily, a child, of course - and for most people, that's what it is... I mean, in the end, how difficult is it to 'make a child'? Raising it IS tough but by the time you're faced with that problem it's too late to turn back (if you have some decency). 

Therefore, it all comes to knowing that you can learn something from the person you're with; that he or she can make you want to be a better person and inspires you, not only to improve your life together, but also to pursue your own dreams in order to keep providing the relationship with a reciprocal contribution.

So, lately, I have found myself thinking (when I meet someone) "what can I learn from you? is there something you do that I admire?" And I don't mean being wealthy or famous; but simply by being someone who is passionate about something they do - this is, perhaps, the greatest thing a person can do for their lover...

Conversely, I think it is just as important to ask myself daily if the things I do, the life I lead, could provide inspiration or foster admiration in someone else. 

The union of two should be to create something bigger than their combined result. 

Some things are best kept as memories - no use in trying to rewrite history.

Sitting on the stage of the bar (since there was no show going at the moment) my jaw dropped as I saw my ex-partner walk by through the sea of people...

Why was I so shocked? Well, this was my first serious boyfriend; we were together for about four and a half years (in total) and lived together for almost two... We had a great relationship and I have always remembered him as the man that made me feel loved and safe. He had this way of hugging me and saying "it'll be all right" that always made me believe it actually would.

So, I had thought of contacting him for the past three years, to see how he was - I guess, in a way, I wanted to salvage some of that relationship I remembered we had... I did text him a couple of times on his birthday and Christmas but, of course, I got no reply.

Anyway, tonight, as I walked towards him I realised that he looked quite different from what I remembered... And yet, he was the exact same person. When he looked at me, his eyes opened wide and he had this look as if he had seen a ghost or something... I said, "hey! how have you been?" and offered my hand as a greeting; he hardly moved, said "fine" and just stared at me. I got the message and walked away... I must say I was shocked and rather confused... I mean, it has been three years! A bit later he walked towards the exit and stood there - when I was on my way out, he gave me an angry look and turned his back to me. So much for the man I remembered!

However, I kind of understand. It can't have been easy for him (I know it wasn't for me); I just figured that what we had could probably evolve into something else. I must admit I still miss him from time to time... Or at least I did. I guess today I can finally move on, knowing that we will probably never talk again. 

A friend told me, not long ago, that we have 'memory so we can have flowers in winter'... And I guess that's the way it should be. The memories of what we had will forever stay in my mind, and some of them actually help me go on when I am in a pinch. 

I know every break up is different. Still, I can't stop thinking of that song "Rewriting History" everytime I think of him... Or rather, I couldn't - today I think that has finally become another chapter in my life.. A chapter that I will cherish as a memory and will not chase or try to bring back anymore.

What do you think? Is it easy for you to stay friends with someone you were romantically involved with?

Of love and like and lust...

Someone posted on Facebook the other day the following quote "The difference between lust, like and love is the same as that between 'for now', 'for a while' and 'forever'". While I think this is very romantic and awarded no less than an "awwwww" the moment I read it, I have my doubts as to whether one can put such feelings in a hierarchy as if one was a consequence of the other. 

I think of 'liking' someone as that feeling of attraction in which you want to know more about the other person, you are interested in learning the way they think, sharing the things they like and, generally, just being with that person; lust is when you find someone you have good 'chemistry' with and all you want is to get in that person's pants to enjoy the pleasures of the physical realm; and, finally, I believe that love is creation, when you want to be with someone in order to create something extraordinary - when you know you admire something in the other person and they see something worthy of being admired in you as well. I believe that love transcends the union of the two and becomes something bigger than both of them together - be it a child, a project or just the creation of a new life.

Some time ago, I remember reading an extract from Octavio Paz's "El laberinto de la soledad" ("The labyrinth of solitude) where he discussed this topic with some interesting insights. In the mexican culture (as, I think, in many others) the difference between 'love' and 'lust' is normally related to the dichotomy between seeing a woman as a prostitute or as a mother. Whilst the former can be seen as an object of pure sexual desire and someone with whom you can enjoy your deepest and darkest erotic fantasies (with no remorse or fear of judgment), the latter represents a completely opposite set of values and morals which get in the way of the previously listed ideas - mind you, I don't mean your 'own' mother, but once that person has your child, they immediately are recognized more as a mum than as a wife.

In other words, when you meet someone you feel attracted to, it is normal to have your libido at its peak, finding it easy to explore and enjoy each other's company and body. However, when the relationship takes a step forward and the individual's role evolves into a more 'nurturing' and 'caring' companion-type, it is hard for both concepts to co-exist. 

Of course, this is not always true, there are couples where their sex life evolves at the same pace as their companion-role and it becomes an experience of deep connection and intimacy... Though I find it hard to believe that most people are able to keep that flame of the unexpected curiosity alive. It is said that there comes a point where, either subconsciously or not, one starts to think of the spouse, partner, boyfriend, girlfriend, etc. as 'family'... And one doesn't fuck one's family, right? 

These are just some ideas I find quite interesting since they can be the root of a lot of relationships which feel like their interaction is changing and cannot seem to figure out how.

Back to mono... gamy... Is it possible?

Ok, so I've never really been in an open relationship, much less a polyamorous one - in fact, I think I might be too jealous to do it; however, with my ex we had an arrangement where we would admit a third as long as it was the two of us together.

Still, after we broke up, I dated some people casually and enjoyed the pleasures of being able to do whatever I wanted - this led me to the idea that, perhaps, I was ready to try a more modern kind of lifestyle. Would it be possible for me to actually separate the sexual and affective components of relationships?

Well, I still don't know the answer to that question. Nevertheless, recently I was presented with a situation which would mean going back to being completely monogamous... So... Ouch...

I mean, taking the step from being faithful to one person to fooling around with other people is not that hard... But going back?

As I was pondering this question, I, of course, started listing the pros and cons of the situation. On the one hand, I believe it really promotes a deeper connection between the two people, there is more of a romantic, idealistic tint to the relationship and it is way safer. On the other hand, you only have sex with one person... Now, don't get me wrong, I think that growing to love someone and enjoying intimacy with them is an experience that (takes time, obviously and) can't be beaten; but I also think it's true that we humans are not built to be monogamous. In the days when sex was all about reproduction and making little heirs, of course it was vital to make sure the baby was your own, and yet I think that there is way more to it.

Another factor that I think is very important to consider is questioning this custom; asking yourself if you want to be monogamous because YOU really want it or if it is because that is the way you were brought up.

Personally, I went through this process and discovered that, while it is mostly because that's what my parents (and the media) taught me, I still think there is some value to that commitment.

I am, evidently, still considering the option... In fact I am reading a book on modern relationships which I really want to talk about here... I hope I get a chance to do it soon.

So, what do you think? Can one be monogamous after trying the alternatives?

Before cooking the perfect relationship, don't you have to know what your favourite ingredients are first?

Wow, it has been A WHILE since I last wrote something on here, huh? Glad to see you guys are still checking it out every now and then!

Now, on to today's topic...

I've been carrying out an investigation on polyamorous relationships and I have found out some very interesting things... And, although I will not post them here until I am finished, I have come across some ideas that have definitely got me thinking.

When I was little, I, perhaps as many of us have, dreamt of a romantic disney-movie-like love story; of course, as I grew a bit older, it got a bit more explicit, no longer PG-13... But still with the same ending! A life with someone special I'd love more than anything in the world, both of us doing what we love and earning enough to have a place to live and enjoy our lives. Perhaps, some time later, we'd adopt a child and raise him or her into an amazing person... But, what happens when the fairy tale doesn't quite work out? Worse still... What happens when you realise that this fairy tale is not the ONLY possibility?

As I was interviewing one of the participants in the study I mentioned before, I realised that, very often, people like me just accept that we want this or that idea just because that's the way we have been taught all our lives... Like, how can you possibly consider that, say, chocochip cookies might not be your favourite flavour ever when it is the only thing you have eaten all your life?

Now, don't get me wrong, I'm not saying I want to rush into a non-traditional relationship just because I met a couple of people who have tasted other flavours in the fridge... But, rather, it has got me thinking about how judgmental we (and, by 'we', I mean 'I') can be. When I met one of the participants (about 7 years ago) and he told me of his relationship (where they are a couple who will, every now and then, have a third boyfriend they get emotionally involved with... or perhaps each of them might have a different boyfriend on the side as well), I was beyond shocked! How could that possibly be? Love is ONLY between two people who share absolutely EVERYTHING!! In fact, they are supposed to be SO "meant to be" that there is only ONE person in the WHOLE WORLD that is right! Oh, but that's fine, they'll break up and have so many issues they'll surely regret it! ... ... ... Or at least that's the way I thought before. Today, they have been together for 10+ years and are happy as can be, sharing a life and planning a future that fulfills them both.

Does this mean I want to do it too? Not really. To me this only means that having a relationship with someone is like cooking your favourite dish (not that I do it that often, but it's the first example I could think of... Perhaps I'm hungry?), someone gives you the recipe the first time but, when you taste it, it is rarely as good as you wish it were... At that point you have two options: you either stick to that recipe or take a chance and modify it. The latter will certainly disappoint you a few times, it might even make you sick or blow up your kitchen... But when you find it, the moment you know which ingredients make your favourite dish perfect... Well, I guess it's all worth it!

Is that the happy ending we were all hoping for? Perhaps... Of course, eating the same dish might get boring with time... And, when that happens, you just need to modify the recipe again!