One coping mechanism I have evolved is to just not care about anything.
(1) I don't care if you shag other women, because I don't love you that much
(2)I don't care if my ex does not answer my requests about my child, because my opinion doesn't matter
(3) I don't care if I'm not promoted, because I don't deserve it.
And so on which eventually leads to a loss of self...
I think I may be in a dark place at the moment, but I am too busy coping to even try to get out of it.
Tuesday, May 13, 2008
Monday, May 05, 2008
Addiction
I really hate to post about sex addiction, because it is one of the darker and more private parts of my relationship with my partner. And if anyone recognised me here, it would be something I would not want to share with my friends and family. But here I go...
I generally prefer to think of his (self diagnosed) sex addiction, as just an affair or final fling before he settled down with me. However, recently I read some stuff about alcohol addiction and how the addict lies and justifies their behaviour, and one particular style of justification that I had all but accepted from him has taken on a new light. Here is the argument which I have almost been forced to accept.
Women are equal to men. If they say they are happy to have a relationship that is "just sex" then who is the man to "nanny them" and probe further. If they are lying to themselves, and actually want a relationship, why should the man try to second guess them? this is an insult to their intelligence and personal autonomy.
However, when it is also obvious to said man that the woman's feelings have changed and he goes on treating her like a f**k buddy, perhaps it is time to look at himself, is it possible that this logical and quite elegant (feminist almost) argument is a justifying cover up for an addictive behaviour?
More generally, I think in this post-feminist era it is becoming obvious that casual sex has more to offer men than it does women, but I could be a prude.
I should also add that I am stressing about some behaviour in my partner that took place before I met him (with one exception I know about) see here
I would appreciate some general moral/philosophical/ethical direction on that one.
I generally prefer to think of his (self diagnosed) sex addiction, as just an affair or final fling before he settled down with me. However, recently I read some stuff about alcohol addiction and how the addict lies and justifies their behaviour, and one particular style of justification that I had all but accepted from him has taken on a new light. Here is the argument which I have almost been forced to accept.
Women are equal to men. If they say they are happy to have a relationship that is "just sex" then who is the man to "nanny them" and probe further. If they are lying to themselves, and actually want a relationship, why should the man try to second guess them? this is an insult to their intelligence and personal autonomy.
However, when it is also obvious to said man that the woman's feelings have changed and he goes on treating her like a f**k buddy, perhaps it is time to look at himself, is it possible that this logical and quite elegant (feminist almost) argument is a justifying cover up for an addictive behaviour?
More generally, I think in this post-feminist era it is becoming obvious that casual sex has more to offer men than it does women, but I could be a prude.
I should also add that I am stressing about some behaviour in my partner that took place before I met him (with one exception I know about) see here
I would appreciate some general moral/philosophical/ethical direction on that one.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)