this is gonna be a controversial post.
as i reflected about relationship and centered the reflections on the issue of sex and relationships, i was also cognisant of the fact that the crux of it all was the issue of "self". that is, what's in it for me? yes, the human critter is a self-obsessed, self-centric one. everything we do, or we try to make people do all contributes to our own self-preservation. and in the context where there is more than 1 party (eg a couple), how one person respond to the other person is also always about - so what does it mean to me?... it's a very me, me, me kinda of thing. for example, in a relationship where one seeks sex from another person, a natural response from his partner would be to resist, to make a fuss, to be drama. my view is that it is not the act of sex per se, rather, the partner's resistance and drama is the perceived loss that he would suffer eventually. that is to say, it is all about his own insecurities, his own sense of loss (loss or potential loss of security, face, dignity, finances, etc).
and if there is the element of trust and commitment established, somehow, the drama will be very much less, or for that matter, the cause of the drama becomes a non-issue. haven't we heard enough of - "if he has sex outside, it's ok lor, as long as he comes home..." my own personal experiences with my friends suggests that as a couple stays long enough with one another, one party will try to push the boundary to either have a third party or to have an open relationship. then all hell would break loose. but after trying out for a while and things are still ok, both party will naturally live and let live, even if one party looks for sex outside.
what do you think?
as i reflected about relationship and centered the reflections on the issue of sex and relationships, i was also cognisant of the fact that the crux of it all was the issue of "self". that is, what's in it for me? yes, the human critter is a self-obsessed, self-centric one. everything we do, or we try to make people do all contributes to our own self-preservation. and in the context where there is more than 1 party (eg a couple), how one person respond to the other person is also always about - so what does it mean to me?... it's a very me, me, me kinda of thing. for example, in a relationship where one seeks sex from another person, a natural response from his partner would be to resist, to make a fuss, to be drama. my view is that it is not the act of sex per se, rather, the partner's resistance and drama is the perceived loss that he would suffer eventually. that is to say, it is all about his own insecurities, his own sense of loss (loss or potential loss of security, face, dignity, finances, etc).
and if there is the element of trust and commitment established, somehow, the drama will be very much less, or for that matter, the cause of the drama becomes a non-issue. haven't we heard enough of - "if he has sex outside, it's ok lor, as long as he comes home..." my own personal experiences with my friends suggests that as a couple stays long enough with one another, one party will try to push the boundary to either have a third party or to have an open relationship. then all hell would break loose. but after trying out for a while and things are still ok, both party will naturally live and let live, even if one party looks for sex outside.
what do you think?
No comments:
Post a Comment