13 April 2010
Might As Well...
I'm beginning to think the guys I'm sexually/physically attracted to are mostly terrible prospects for relationships, while the guys I see who are probable matches for a quality relationship are rarely initially physically attractive to me. I can't help but wonder at times: if I'm not going to "marry" for sexual attraction anyway, why not just find a woman with whom I can procreate and have a great, communicative relationship? Then I remember that the guy I probably most fell for was also the least initially attractive to me but with whom I still had chemistry of the kind I've never experienced with a girl, even the ones I thought were really good matches, and the "might as well" thoughts head backstage again into the "possible, but as-of-yet theoretical" corner as I say, "Oh yeah, that."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Why on earth do you think it would be ethically okay for you to marry a woman with no intention of loving her in the way a woman needs and deserves? Oh, that's right. She's breeding stock and can improve your social standing.
Great plan.
Maybe you should go ahead and pursue those Ken dolls you're drooling over until the flame burns itself out. Lots of people need to sow their wild oats before settling down. You wouldn't be the first. If it saves the woman whose life you would destroy in a loveless marriage, it'd be worth it. And who knows, after chasing a little tail you might eventually be ready to love a man who might even love you back.
Hawaii, I've been pretty patient with you in the past, but since we're being blunt, I don't buy this guise of righteous indignation in defense of poor, hapless women who need to be saved from the big, bad gay men who would ensnare them in loveless bondage. Your accusatory rants are beginning to look really over the top to me and seem to come from a very angry and defensive place. I could be wrong, but wow: you just took an incidental thought of mine, meant to be light-hearted, in which I remind myself of the need for a wholeness of love and appreciation, and you spewed your venom at the mere mention of a passing thought, much like ultraconservative folks do when someone admits to having questioned some doctrine. Get a grip, man.
Sorry I made you cross. Rereading your post and my reply, I concede your point-- you were giving a light anecdote and I reacted as if it were something other than that. I apologize for the unwarranted, accusatory tone of my comment.
Believe it or not, I'm on your side.
Hawaii, I appreciate that. Obviously, I was not in the mood to mince words in my earlier reply, but I don't think you're malicious in intent. I have some good friends who are in "mixed-orientation" relationships or marriages, a couple with spouses who've been married before, and neither spouse would trade what they have and both love each other dearly, and I know they get attacked unfairly from both sides. But IF I'd really been implying I should marry for procreation and social convenience, I can understand your emotional reaction. Touchy subject, eh? :-)
Post a Comment