romantic relationahips

Chocolate Body Paint & Darwin'sLoophole!

A woman and I were chatting the other day about love and her finding a significant other. She adamantly told me, “I don’t need my significant other to love me. If I want to feel loved, he can pay for me to have a massage or get me a dog to love me unconditionally…” Trying to understand where she was coming from, I curiously asked her, “How can you lie down with someone at night (or whenever) if you do not have a strong and affectionate bond with him?” She did not answer. Like many individuals I have encountered and discussed this topic with, seem to be “OK”, with the surface and sensory aspects of “love” and “image” as Relationship or even just as a way of r e l a t i n g.

Could this kind of existence be yet another aspect of Darwinism? Survival at any level is still survival? Can we consciously have sex with someone that we do not love or at least think that we love?…

(I have heard from many men that they do not have the issue of this question …)

I wonder if people who live this way of relating can be contented and present with the person that they are involved with, especially, sexually. The whole sexual act is altered when it lacks love. Personally, I would be very distracted to say the least, let alone be able to think about the “end result”. Maybe I would catch myself daydreaming and wonder if he would catch me daydreaming too! Maybe he wouldn’t care that I was lost in reverie about My Knight in Shining Armor and not present and intimate with him! If I was that woman, perhaps I would not be fantaticizing about anyone but rather, imagining some fantastic shopping event or my next, future purchase that I could make from the current sale

of my—s o u l…)

I have read that we choose mates and partners either like ourselves or individuals who propel us to grow, whether that is a positive growing experience or not, I think there is some truth to that. In this case, if the man chooses a woman who chose him to solely fill her sensory needs, there is a good chance that she is filling his sensory needs only and that neither one can experience intimacy. During an act that should be one of emotional bonding, in this case, this gentleman would likely be daydreaming too (!) about someone else (or perhaps—his In Box). He could also be fantaticizing about his next business deal that he would need to make in order to keep her in her shopping extravaganzas! After all, if there is no love, sex is just sex and fleeting at that. In a way it can be related to the high some people get when they shop. The purchase is exciting at first, but eventually the things we buy are no longer new and sooner or later the things that were once new are no longer so and  find their way to the bottom of our drawers or the back of our closet.

Do we not want more from our relationships that are supposed to be founded on intimacy?

* * * * *

When individuals exist in relationship on the physical plane only, they end up treating each other with this “shopping” value system, which is actually a lack in valuing the individual. When love is present it is always reciprocated. There is no unrequited love. Love is love. It does not ask for reciprocity…

* * * * *

I am the curious type. I wonder: How do people partner themselves up with images and bodies and incomes and then try to justify and reduce their hearts to being satisfied with the-things-of-this-world or that the affection of a dog can stand higher than intimate love from a human being?

What would Darwin say? Darwin should have had a theory to secure the well-being of the survival of our hearts. There should have been a loophole for people like myself. There should have been an escape button!

(oh yeah. There is: Faith and divorce!)

Sex is an interesting topic to discuss with people, but intimacy seems to be more fascinating and even too ambiguous for many to contemplate, let alone —to experience. If we could go beyond the surface of life, the image-and-things-of-our-days…perhaps we would discover that intimacy had little to do with sex but that sex, with intimacy is held in a higher regard than any sale, shopping event, massage or affectionate pooch!

But intimacy/love involves so much more risk and from what I see around me, people tend to be comfortable with partnering with the bodies of others, rather than with the sharing of their souls…and when two people give their soul to each other, they discover how intimacy is not as passing as a shopping spree or an hour long massage. The sharing of our souls lasts a lifetime. It is no shocking wonder why our country is filled with unhappy and tumultuous, possessive based relationships that are thought to be “love”. Intimacy involves risk and for many, bearing their soul makes them too vulnerable and that is far more frightening than the “immediate auctioning off” of their flesh.

* * * * *

For those who are willing to join the flesh with the soul? Ahh now, there is a product out there called, Chocolate Body Paint and it is quite the yummy soulful experience when shared with the right two bodies and the right two minds…

It will take you to adventures and chocolate covered Lands you never knew existed. The perfect amount of calories enjoyed and spent. And when you return from That Place and That Destination of The Intimate and The Soulful -----the sensory world will never look the same again and will most assuredly pale in comparison to your new discovery of Intellectual Consummation. It is the best kept secret that only Underground Lovers and Rumi know exist.

Bon appétit!

Xxoo

So, when that Clock is about to strike 12 and that noon train is approaching around the bend; the tracks are laden with golden bricks pointing in a Direction and your life is asking you:  Decide, Decide, Decide...who are you going to listen to?  Your heart or your mind?

(only time will tell...)