Headlines
Tue, 01 Jun 2010 17:48:52 -0700 - - Justice Dept. Called Unready for W.M.D. Attack - +++ Tue, 01 Jun 2010 17:20:57 -0700 - - Israel Holds Hundreds Seized During Raid on Flotilla - +++ Tue, 01 Jun 2010 16:53:40 -0700 - - BP Tries Again to Divert Oil Leak With Dome - +++ Tue, 01 Jun 2010 16:40:43 -0700 - - Al Qaeda Leader Reported Killed in Missile Strike - +++ Tue, 01 Jun 2010 16:23:46 -0700 - - Political Times: Move to Repeal Amendment Reveals Limits of Reform - +++ Tue, 01 Jun 2010 16:23:40 -0700 - - A.I.G. Rejects Lower Bid for Sale of Asia Unit - +++ Tue, 01 Jun 2010 16:23:25 -0700 - - Paterson Defends Layoff Plan - +++ Tue, 01 Jun 2010 16:00:25 -0700 - - Andrei Voznesensky, Defiant Russian Poet, Dies at 77 - +++ Tue, 01 Jun 2010 15:40:32 -0700 - - Iraqi Court Ratifies Election Results - +++ Tue, 01 Jun 2010 15:08:13 -0700 - - Mere Silence Doesn’t Invoke Miranda, Justices Rule - +++

 

RevellRay

Sway Frame

Miriam Dema


Da Blogs

Feb 28

Written by: Booker B
2/28/2008 8:36 PM 

So what's the rule on usage of this 'date' word? How much does it imply sex? Is it still a date if you both know that no sex will result? Is sex required for a 'hot date' or could that just be one with a heightened sense of fun or intensity or potential or something? is sex possible without any specific dating?

One of the many aspects of this 'dating' language that confuses me is the linkage to sex. I'm aware of the more or less universal acknowledgment that everybody who's dating is doing so with the goal of at least sex, and many want that to be part of a big-whoop, capital R Relationship. Dating is the way you get from acquaintance to routine bed partner, it would seem. Is that all it is?

To me, company makes a lot more sense as a goal. Seems like all those layers of expectations would nearly kill any prospects for the bigger connection, unless both somehow miraculously want exactly the same things. Given the inevitability of some mismatch, clarification of expectations is an undeniably vital part of coupling (in all senses of that word). Why would you want to start out under the weight of all that, while you're still uncertain about who's going to be into what with what balance of want and need and hope? You'll have to take that on as a joint project if things progress to that point, but it seems like an obstacle to simple friendly company in the early stages.

This mistrust of the whole tryst mythology undoubtedly reflects my own preference for said friendly company. I'm not opposed to greater intimacy, but damned if I'm going to set that up as some precondition that colors the whole process of getting to know one another and exploring a the wonders of a new person. And the chances that gears will mesh seem so low that you'd be cutting off almost all potential partners just by imposing all those filters on the dating experience.

Maybe that's not true if expectations are low enough. If all each person wants is regular sex and someone to hang with, then dating = sex = Relationship is probably good enough. Do significant numbers of people settle for that? Maybe they're just afraid of more. Or maybe the security of a mutual commitment to that level of relatedness creates a safe space for greater intimacy to develop. I'm thinking of Tevye and his wife, whatever her name was, with this. Or any arranged marriage.

But the odds seem so much greater than later exploration would uncover mismatches rather than matches, leaving people to live in dissatisfaction or lop off bits of themselves to fit one another's molds. I just hate hate hate the idea that a marriage bed would have any Procrustean character at all (with due apologies to Lydia for the image).

Ain't it better to date for company and activity and fun, and let the sex and whatever else just kind of take care of itself? Lord knows, that the sex makes its own demands known with no additional assistance, to say nothing of deeper connections.

,2008-02-27 19:24:45.793,1,NULL,1,0,NULL,http://www.arttartare.net/DNN/Default.aspx?tabid=158&EntryID=60 11,61,Tool of the Realtards,

I'm in a moderately serious fret about being forced to sell the damn house at a deep discount in the crappy ass real-estate market. According to all reports, it's tanking completely, even from the level of a couple months ago, when it was already tanked. But K will. not. wait. She wants out NOW NOW NOW so she can shop for a condo or something. I can't blame her.

But I don't want to get used by the realtards either. That building represents a whole lot of work and thought and intention and sweat. The fundamentals of the market are bound to kick it back up into a good range when the panic subsides, and I'm not willing to give that gain to some slick motherfucker who's willing to scavenge the corpse of the marriage and the poor market.

I'm starting to think about assuming the mortgage on my own, even knowing that the place has way too damn much space for me. Except (a) I'm not sure I'd qualify with the tight loan market and the hit to the credit rating that always happens with divorce and (b) I'm worried that this is me clinging to the cold comfort of the familiar place, with all the memories and crap. And I'd probably have to rent a room to somebody, and how would I do with some random stranger living there with me? Not well, I suspect.

I don't know, I don't know, I don't know.

Tags:

Your name:
Your email:
(Optional) Email used only to show Gravatar.
Your website:
Title:
Comment:
Security Code
Enter the code shown above in the box below
Add Comment   Cancel 

Blog_Archive
Print  

09.07.2010

Login
Register

Adventures in Art
Fri, 30 Apr 2010 22:45:26 -0700 -
Fri, 23 Apr 2010 19:16:00 -0700 -
Thu, 22 Apr 2010 00:08:46 -0700 -
Wed, 21 Apr 2010 15:59:27 -0700 -
Thu, 08 Apr 2010 21:25:32 -0700 -
Sat, 03 Apr 2010 21:55:40 -0700 -
Fri, 02 Apr 2010 21:00:03 -0700 -
Thu, 01 Apr 2010 18:26:26 -0700 -
Tue, 30 Mar 2010 16:49:51 -0700 -
Thu, 25 Mar 2010 17:24:51 -0700 -

From the Catalogs of Babes
Mon, 24 May 2010 15:44:21 -0700 -
Fri, 21 May 2010 23:43:49 -0700 -
Thu, 20 May 2010 23:16:19 -0700 -
Tue, 18 May 2010 23:20:11 -0700 -
Sat, 08 May 2010 01:28:19 -0700 -
Fri, 07 May 2010 20:21:51 -0700 -
Wed, 05 May 2010 02:52:54 -0700 -
Sat, 24 Apr 2010 21:48:13 -0700 -

The Social Customer
Mon, 24 May 2010 14:34:55 -0700 -
Wed, 12 May 2010 18:48:09 -0700 -
Sat, 24 Apr 2010 00:29:22 -0700 -
Thu, 22 Apr 2010 20:05:33 -0700 -
Thu, 15 Apr 2010 13:30:00 -0700 -
Wed, 14 Apr 2010 21:36:31 -0700 -
Tue, 13 Apr 2010 17:27:59 -0700 -
Sun, 28 Feb 2010 23:27:28 -0700 -
Thu, 25 Feb 2010 21:22:33 -0700 -

Robin Dodge at One Sheep Hill
Sat, 22 May 2010 01:34:56 -0700 -
Wed, 19 May 2010 07:13:48 -0700 -
Sun, 09 May 2010 09:05:55 -0700 -
Sun, 18 Apr 2010 06:58:31 -0700 -
Mon, 12 Apr 2010 03:56:53 -0700 -
Mon, 05 Apr 2010 06:17:04 -0700 -
Sun, 04 Apr 2010 20:25:15 -0700 -
Wed, 24 Mar 2010 08:55:42 -0700 -
Mon, 22 Mar 2010 09:56:50 -0700 -
Mon, 22 Mar 2010 08:28:12 -0700 -
Thu, 18 Mar 2010 07:44:46 -0700 -
Thu, 04 Mar 2010 08:11:23 -0700 -
Mon, 01 Mar 2010 22:47:29 -0700 -
Tue, 09 Feb 2010 22:19:28 -0700 -
Fri, 05 Feb 2010 08:34:01 -0700 -
Tue, 02 Feb 2010 21:29:01 -0700 -
Fri, 29 Jan 2010 04:20:11 -0700 -
Fri, 22 Jan 2010 21:17:09 -0700 -
Fri, 22 Jan 2010 09:01:23 -0700 -
Fri, 22 Jan 2010 05:10:02 -0700 -
Sat, 16 Jan 2010 20:45:12 -0700 -
Wed, 06 Jan 2010 07:12:17 -0700 -
Mon, 04 Jan 2010 04:52:25 -0700 -
Fri, 01 Jan 2010 19:28:20 -0700 -

Copyright 2008