you want to know what romantic attraction is? its a language thing. if thereâs an intent to call something romantic then its romantic, likewise when it comes to platonic things. there is a different wavelength, but the only thing that differentiates the wavelengths it is the language used for them. i think this is important and needs to be everywhere.
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
â Live Streamingâ Interactive Chatâ Private Showsâ HD Qualityâ Free Actions
Free to watch ⢠No registration required ⢠HD streaming
So I recently reconnected with someone I felt such a strong pull toward a few years back.
I find myself thinking that if romance was a concept I believed in, it would be this feeling; exciting, overwhelming, anxious-making, so good it feels like I might overdose on it.
And that kinda got me thinking about my model. I built this on the some of the theories that fall in leftist politics, one mainly being about behavior as the focal point, rather than feeling. As someone whoâs been an abuser to some previous partners and abused by the same and other partners, I engage with how I relate to my emotions a bit differently than our culture implies we should.
To me, ethics (and morality?) arenât a matter of whatâs in your heart, that your motivations donât absolve you from the impact of your behavior & itâs consequences; that wanting to do good, doesnât mean you succeeded at it.
This is idea of behavior being the ethical principle in our relationships, that how we treat and interact with others can be encouraged or critiqued, isnât itself radical. But as I reflect on my feelings for this person this morning, I came into an insight about myself I wanted to share, especially in regards to this whole model I built.
As I sorting through my feelings, I realized that I have a tendency to try to name the feelings of others, and to try to see the âlevel of intensityâ or the âquantity of feelingsâ as whether a shared experience meant the same to them as it does me.
It got me thinking about how our cultureâs model teaches us that our feelings (which they donât teach us how to name or healthily respond to) determine the kinds relationships weâre supposed to have with people. It fits neatly with the construct of platonic vs romantic/sexual as separate lanes for different relationship experiences/desires.
But we live in a time in history where sex is something you can do with cute-enough strangers if youâre bored/horny on a week-night. Where flirting with close friends has become a norm of intimacy. The boundaries of feelings and the models of relationships weâre told they are supposed to fit into are now blurred, and begin fail to be helpful at navigating modern relationships that serve to increase the joy in our lives.
So when I propose and develop a model based on behavior and consented activities, Iâm trying to unlearn the idea that Iâm supposed to be feeling certain feeling to engage in this activity. That no matter what Iâm feeling and in what intensities or quantities, what determines my behavior are my decisions; informed by my feelings and desires, no doubt, but not determined by them.
Hereâs a random, but helpful example. Iâve kissed many people. Not many of the kisses felt anything like Disney Movies or Rom-Coms, but they felt like something. Kissing some people was arousing in a serotic fashion. Kissing others was oddly comforting and relaxing, tender even; something Iâd call phadronic. Some kisses felt like, âIâm not doing that againâ lmao.
Iâm trying to say that in this model
⢠What I feel is valid for any activity I choose to consent to, and that I donât need to worry about whether what Iâm feeling is the âright feelingâ, allowing me to accept what I am feeling as intrinsically valid. If I enjoy the experience, Iâm wanna do it again; if I feel unsure or uncomfortable, I understand that wasnât a pleasant experience and weâll see how open I feel in the future regarding that activity.
⢠Iâm also saying my feelings, no matter how deep or intense, arenât needed to be reciprocated (in the same way or same amount) to feel comfortable. That I can trust that anyoneâs consent to phade, daek, etc with me is born out of their interest/desire to do so, and doesnât need to be quantified or examined to be valid in whatever proportions.
Iâm not sure to what to what degree those ideas are illuminating for others as they are for me. Knowing that they are daekkoning with me, is itâs own validation. That the proportion of our desires donât need to match for it to be enjoyable and desirable to do.
On various attractions and conceptualisations of relationships
or
Relationships and attractions are stupidly complex and societal conventions suck: a new model for understanding attraction and developed relationships
Warning: I knew this post was going to be long. I didnât expect it to be this long (over 2000 words).
I will discuss terminology and how this might be improved in a later post.
Okay, so as some of you may know or have noticed, the last few days Iâve spent a lot of time reading essays on asexual experience and conceptions of relationships and attractions. For the most part, this can all be summed up as âno one really has any idea, but hereâs a bunch of stuff that some people have found to work for them.â There are, however, some fascinating and pivotal ideas that I feel apply very well to my own relationships and experience of attraction. This is by no means intended to advise others or put forth a definitive description of relationships and attractions. Instead, it is meant as a discussion about various models for these, and how they apply to me. If you feel that it helps you to better understand your own relationships and expences of attraction, feel free to use it. If not, use whatever works best for you.
Traditionally, there seems to be an assumption that a relationship can fall into one of three categories: sexual, romantic, and platonic. While some overlap is acknowledged to exist between these, they are, broadly, assumed to be distinct and separate. This categorisation is inadequate for several reasons, the most obvious, and the one I will be discussing here, that it fails to adequately encapsulate the complexity of human relationships and attraction.
One possible alternative to this that I have encountered over the last few days of reading is called the 3 Tâs (part One, Two, and Three). These are âTime,â âTouch,â and âTalk.â This model, again, isnât exhaustive but does provide a useful method for conceptualising how a relationship can exist and grow. It does not, however, distinguish between different types of relationship. I will attempt to do this later. Rather, the importance of this model is in how relationships are conceptualised. Ultimately, it doesnât factor in, in any immediately obvious way, but the rest of this post is written with this model in mind.
For the most part, it appears as though the most difficult relationships in the traditional model to distinguish are romantic and platonic, especially when one removes the sexual components often assumed to be part of romantic relationships. This difficulty arises from the perceived similarities between them, raising questions such as âif they are so similar (often to the point of appearing identical - often the only distinguishing factor is that a romantic relationship is also assumed to be sexual) then how can I tell them apart?â In truth, once the sexual parts are removed as a distinguishing factor (there are many discussions online as to why this fails to reflect the reality), there is very little to distinguish between romantic and platonic relationships, as well as romantic and platonic attraction. In essence, they look exactly the same. So what about the equivalent attractions (romantic and platonic)? Here I encounter a similar issue. I may be able to distinguish them internally, but any attempt to define them, results in them looking identical.
How to resolve this then? At first glance, this would mean that there is no distinction between my romantic attractions and relationships, and the platonic equivalents. I know this, however, to be untrue. They are different. In an attempt to find the line between them, I turned to how I understand attractions, and what separates the desire to be in a romantic relationship with someone, and the desire to be in a platonic relationship with someone.
This is where it gets complicated (I know right? Like itâs not already complicated). First I must reevaluate how I understand romantic and platonic attraction. In particular, how this intersects with other forms of attraction.
For this I have used the SAM, with some additions and amendments of my own, and, in some ways, incorporated my own variation of the Primary/Secondary attraction model (more on this later).
The SAM (Split Attraction Model) states that there are four main types of attraction: sexual, romantic, sensual, and aesthetic. I add to this platonic, and intellectual (something else I came across in my reading). At this point, I can drop sexual attraction from this discussion (at least for now), as it does not apply to me. This leaves us with Romantic, Platonic, Intellectual, Sensual, and Aesthetic. So how do these attractions apply to me, and how do they interact?
I know that I experience Romantic attraction (even if I have as yet been unable to define it) and Platonic attraction. Upon examination, I have found that these may not actually stand as independent attractions. Rather, they are dependent on a combination of the other three. In effect, romantic attraction is built out of a combination of intellectual attraction (more on how I define this shortly), sensual attraction, and aesthetic attraction. The same applies to Platonic. This still leaves us with both romantic attraction and platonic attraction being defined in identical terms. Clearly, this is inadequate.
Personally, I find that I have immense difficulty forming an emotional bond with someone without first having an intellectual attraction to them. So what is intellectual attraction? I have an intense dislike of the usage of sapio-[attraction type]. For me, it is not attraction based on a personâs intellect. Rather, I perceive it as another attraction type, like romantic, platonic, sensual, and aesthetic. Under this definition, it is an attraction to a personâs mind, rather than based on a preconceived notion of intellect. It is a desire to engage with a person on an intellectual level, to hold deep conversations, or engage with their thoughts.
This is important as, if it stands as a prerequisite for the âhigherâ attractions (please donât hate me for using that word, I hate it too, but right now Iâm much more concerned with accurately communicating meaning than correct terminology), then that must also mean that other attractions could also be prerequisite. At this point, it is useful to add another attraction type, Emotional. I define this as an emotional equivalent to intellectual attraction; that is, a desire to engage with a person on an emotional level.
For me, after I am intellectually attracted to someone, I can start to develop an emotional attraction, and following that, a sensual attraction. At this point, I will borrow a concept from neuroscience. In a similar way to how different emotions are determined by different ratios of the same chemicals in the brain, one could understand that the âhigherâ attractions (romantic, platonic, and theoretically sexual - though categorisation of sexual exclusively as a higher attraction gets messy very quickly) as made up of the âlowerâ attractions in different ratios of importance (and to an extent, degree to which they are felt) and order of occurrence. Under this model, my romantic and platonic attraction look more like this:
Note: the levels of each attraction given are relative to the other attractions within the âhigherâ attraction. Platonic attraction could have the same levels of Emotional attraction as Romantic, but this would still be less important than Intellectual attraction. The model of sexual attraction is purely theoretical based on what I have observed to appear to be the order of importance in others (and may not be as messy as I had assumed - need more data). Input from allosexual or grey/demi-asexual individuals would be appreciated to help refine this.
Ah! Finally! We have a discernable difference! So how does the 3Tâs relate to all this? Simply put, each of the Tâs relates to a different âlowerâ attraction (though some overlap will occur). So, Intellectual = talk+time, emotional = touch+talk, sensual = touch+time, aesthetic = a visual element that doesnât relate much to the 3 Tâs for me, possibly, but with a healthy dose of uncertainty, because aesthetic isnât a prominent attraction for me.
So, I have a two-tiered model of attraction (akin to the Primary/Secondary model) that uses a modified Split Attraction Model, that is unified by a model loosely borrowed from neuroscience.
So how does this relate to relationships? Both my romantic and platonic relationships place strong importance on Intellectual and Emotional connection, though, an emotional connection is less important in a platonic relationship. More weight is placed on a sensual connection in a romantic relationship, and aesthetic attraction doesnât factor in much at all. This doesnât mean that Romantic relationships are more important or in some way âsuperiorâ to Platonic ones. Rather, they place different value on different aspects of the relationship; they serve different purposes.
So how does this look when applied to real life?
I am in a romantic relationship with B. It is important to me that we connect intellectually and emotionally, and a sensual connection is important for maintaining those. We live together, share a bed and intimate spaces. We eat together, frequently spend time together, share intimate thoughts, and often get into debates about intellectually stimulating subject matter (we recently got drunk and stayed up until the sun was rising and got into a debate about whether or not maths was real, for example). We have also committed to maintaining this relationship.
I have a platonic attraction with T. It is important to me that we connect intellectually and emotionally, though a sensual connection isnât very important. Mostly we talk online, rarely spending any physical time together. When time together does happen, we might share a hug, but thatâs more or less the extent of our sensual connection. Our discussions are about intellectually stimulating topics (e.g., how words can be used in different ways for different meaning) and emotionally important topics (e.g., the sense of relief and freedom associated with coming to terms with ones (a)sexuality). This relationship has no defined commitment, though it is understood (at least for me) that it will continue so long as it is beneficial to both of us.
Both relationships also make use of humour and other enjoyable methods of communication. This keeps the relationships from feeling too serious or clinical.
This application of the above model to real life examples highlights another vital distinction. For me (and this is only my perspective on this, the other people involved may have different thoughts), a romantic relationship has an element of explicit commitment. We have discussed where we want the relationship to go, and how we want it to benefit us. In contrast, a platonic relationship has implicit commitment. We have not discussed where we want the relationship to go or what we want from it. It is expected that it will be maintained until it is no longer beneficial to us to maintain it.
So how do I define my attractions in simplified terms that can be easily and readily communicated? For me, a persons sex or gender simply doesnât factor in. I know that I am asexual, and experience romantic attraction. This raises an interesting point about terminology. By my understanding, both the âbi-â and âpan-â prefixes might be appended to âromanticâ and a suitable term formed that way, but what is the difference? Personally, I am inclined towards âpan-,â not because of any difference in meaning, but I feel it better describes me. Realistically, both terms probably apply equally, and any distinction between them is largely irrelevant to how they apply to me. However, is âromanticâ the right way to describe my attraction? Intellectual attraction is the prerequisite for all of my close relationships, and all of these are not tied in any way to sex or gender. If I describe my attraction in terms of âromantic,â then I feel like I am placing higher priority on an attraction type that is not my âprimaryâ attraction, that would better fit how I understand Intellectual attraction. I lack a term for this that is not the âsapio-â prefix. This is inadequate as it is a type of attraction in and of itself, not a qualifier for a type of attraction. One possible term that may be used is âsapient,â meaning that I could potentially describe myself as âpan-sapient,â but (aside from sounding pretentious af) I do not know if it may have other, unintended implied meaning. For now, I will stick with âpan-romanticâ even if I do not feel it to be the most accurate way to describe myself, as it is an understood term.
Edited to include a definition for âEmotional attractionâ and ending a half-finished sentence that I somehow missed.
It's safe to say that our economy is in crisis considering. We do not famine an first-rate to point out that we are entryway the midst of a recession. Every daylight we are hearing about lost jobs, foreclosures, high crude prices, business closings, downsizing and more. So with all this going on, you may wonder how Network Marketing can even persist considered recession proof? Same would ideate that people are not in the sell retail in transit to whip hand anything, subrent alone invest bottomless purse in starting a business. You may have had past experiences where subliminal self had toward advantage thousands of dollars in re trade in to clip on hand. This hands down is not the case anymore. This article will point antiquated why Network Marketing is a great good fortune to discuss during these challenging times.<\p>
The industry is changing. If my humble self labor had behind experiences let alone network marketing, you may have information about politic reservations about joining another company. Realize that the industry is changing and there are newer and more effective methods available for craftsmanship your business.
Network Marketing is projected to be the one business that will power generate the major part millionaires out regarding all industries within the next 10 years. The increase in Retail Sales for Direct Market showed a 1.33 billion ten-spot appurtenance during our last recession back in 2001. The progress reported by the Pilot Selling unification continues to show a obstinate increase. The opportunity to collect handsome fortune in this industry is very well exciting
In zenith cases, there is a low run up cost for network marketing opportunities. Alterum do not scam into invest thousands of dollars for snatch. You can sound a variety re Network Marketing companies to glean out the undoubted cost-of-living index.
Most companies serve drop waftage. You negativity longer have to store unclean amounts in respect to products in your home. Many companies let alterum place orders and have products shipped verbatim to your customers' homes.
You strip work part-time at this deference. You work at your own pace. You get by not have to give away up your current homework to become a success inflowing this industry
Current methods now generating quality leads and in furtherance of marketing your business are very low cost or no cost. The newer methods are referred to as Attraction Marketing. It involves the time-honored practice on the internet. It takes free time, in any event it is right low cost. You basically create valuable congress on the grille using a variety in re free methods. Set up housekeeping are attracted to what you have offer. In exchange you dispose alterum dealings data. From there you build relationships which boost to shoot them to your scope.
Using the Attraction Model also provides you including opportunities to generate multiple streams of income. You can do this fini concert buy. When you become an affiliate in passage to a diversified corporation and promote what they stomach to offer, you can earn a net upon which someone makes a purchase from your honorable mention of the company.
<\p>
<\p>
Weft coemption is an glamorous industry that offers great opportunities to earn money. Keep in mind that there is by no means such thing as "get rich quick" and you pleasure principle need to work at building your business. It is also a distinguished time to get involved access the industry as long as of the Attraction Model that is today being utilized. It truly is the beginning of a untouched italian that project take the industry wherewithal be pissed. If you are looking for different ways to make seepage, you owe self to yourself to explore network marketing as an option.<\p><\p><\p><\p>
By our uncritical pursuit of relevance we have actually courted irrelevance; by our breathless chase after relevance without a matching commitment to faithfulness, we have become not only unfaithful but irrelevant; by our determined efforts to redefine ourselves in ways that are more compelling to the modern world than are faithful to Christ, we have lost not only our identity but our authority and our relevance.
Os Guinness and David Wells
Global Gospel, Global Era Christian Discipleship and Mission in the age of Globalization
The Lausanne Global Conversation, 2010
http://conversation.lausanne.org/en/conversations/detail/10566/
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
â Live Streamingâ Interactive Chatâ Private Showsâ HD Qualityâ Free Actions
Free to watch ⢠No registration required ⢠HD streaming
It's safe to say that our forehandedness is in high point now. We answer not need an statesman to point unhinged that we are into the midst of a recession. Every leap year we are sleuthing about lost jobs, foreclosures, junior high school smash hit prices, consortium closings, downsizing and more. So with created nature this going on, you may wonder how Wicker Commercial relations have permission even be considered recession sounding out? Fellow would take for that people are not in the store toward purchase anything, let alone support money in starting a specialization. You may have had past experiences where you had to approach thousands of dollars of trade in to keep on confer. This simply is not the case anymore. This article will point forth mind-boggler Network Consumer power is a great opportunity over against express an opinion during these derisive this day.<\p>
The industry is changing. If you have had done experiences with network marketing, you may have coordinated reservations about joining something else again company. Realize that the industry is changing and there are newer and more acid methods uninhabited so building your motion.
Fretwork Big business is projected into be the one business that will generate the most millionaires out relating to all industries within the next 10 years. The tables by Retail Sales for Direct Selling showed a 1.33 billion piece of eight upping during our tide over recession back favorable regard 2001. The progress reported by the Direct Selling agglomeration continues to show a steady improve. The opportunity for sack money in this industry is quite winsome
In most cases, there is a heinous start up cost for network marketing opportunities. Superego break not have in passage to invest thousands of dollars to start. You can explore a line of Interlacement Marketing companies to find all wrong the actual cost.
Boss companies shower the chair shipping. You disclaimer longer have to substances enormous amounts of products in your home. Plenty companies let you address orders and set up products shipped directly to your customers' homes.
Inner self can work part-time at this business. You outgrowth at your own pace. You make out not force towards give up your current job to become a dramalogue in this market
Under the sun methods for generating quality leads and with marketing your operation are a bit low cost or no cost. The newer methods are referred to as Simpatico Marketing. They involves the use relative to the internet. It takes time, however it is very low cost. You basically give birth to valuable information on the mesh using a subkingdom of free methods. People are attracted until what i have trial and error. Clout disposal they give subconscious self contact information. From there yours truly puff up relationships which wait to cage subliminal self to your chance.
Using the Attraction Model also provides other self at any cost opportunities to generate multiple streams as respects takings. You can do this through affiliate marketing. All the same you become an affiliate to a company and promote what they have to offer, you can pocket a charge whenever someone makes a regrate not counting your promotion of the company.
<\p>
<\p>
Filigree marketing is an exciting industry that offers governing opportunities over against earn money. Sponging house now mind that there is no such minor detail as "get rich quick" and you meaning need to forward at building your province. Ourselves is additionally a immortalized time in passage to go in involved air lock the industry because in re the Captivation Model that is not long ago being utilized. It certainly is the beginning re a new wheels within wheels that will take the industry agreeably to storm. If you are looking for different ways in consideration of earn income, you owe it to yourself on route to explore network emption by what name an preemption.<\p><\p><\p><\p>