Joy of joys! I have my shipment from Prague! Oh sweet mother of all that is good and pure, you have finally seen fit to return to me my precious books!
Yesterday I lovingly (well, I should say "Duke lovingly") carried my boxes into my flat. I started ripping them open immediately, but then had to leave for the evening as poor Kanga is deathly allergic to cats and my stuff is covered in my little Katka's fur. The evening was topped off by having some fantastic wine (only one glass, I was very proud of myself) and cheese and the watching of one of my favourite movies: Maelstrom. It's a French Canadian movie and I highly recommend you all go out and rent it as soon as possible.
Okay, it's been brought to my attention that I must clarify my "perks to open relationships" blog. Excluding #4, which was really a bit of a joke. Honest. Kanga said that she had all those perks in a monogamous relationship. And many of you are thinking the same thing. And what I have to say to that is "well, I should fucking hope so!". The efficient solving of problems, feeling secure, and feeling appreciated are key factors in any strong relationship, be it friend, lover, parent etc. If you don't have them at all in your relationship with the person you love, then something is wrong! I misrepresented my basic point, for which I apologize. The two main points here are:
1. That those 3 sacred elements (Resolution, Security, Appreciation) are often forgotten about and neglected in relationships that have been going for more than a couple of years (that two year mark is a toughie) I'm saying they aren't forgotten about as easily in an open one. I'm not saying they aren't occasionally neglected in an open relationship too, but just not as often and not for as long. Some monogamous relationships can and do prove me wrong about this, but for the reasons I stated in the previous blog, the sacred 3 can be easier to maintain within polygamy. This has been my observation.
2. And this is my main point here, so pay attention! For the sacred 3 to occur, both people have to be feeling generous. In order to feel generous, you have to feel that this generosity is reciprocated and to feel like you are getting what you need. I'd wager that it's impossible to sustain generosity in any couple if the individuals aren't getting what they need. So Adam and I analysed what each of us needed and he needed sexual freedom - so I gave it to him, no skin off my back. By giving Adam what he needs, he becomes much more generous and vice versa. It's all a big circle. This has nothing to do with open relationships, it has to do with getting everything you need from your one partner and then, as a result, giving everything you can to that partner. If your partner needs something you can't give (and this happens, no one should be forced to give something they just can't bear to give), then I'd suggest that the relationship isn't going to work, because way too much bitterness is going to accumulate and generosity goes out the window.
If any of you have any additional problems with this you can go fuck your mothers. Kidding, please email anything you want about this. I welcome thought and discussion of any kind.
Okay, onto something different.
Had a lovely morning with my globe and mail. There was an article about the atrocious slaughtering of grizzly bears in the wilds of Siberia. Two Canadian researchers had been there for 8 years, trying to see if bears and humans could co-exist peacefully - very controversial research. They tried to get the bears used to humans and to see if the natural response of the bears was still anger. Well, they discovered that the bears were okay with the interaction, but then some murdering bastard decided to take offense to this research and went in and slaughtered all the bears in the study (about 30), using their basic trust of humans to make the killing easier. Whoever did it nailed the bladder of a baby bear to the research centre for the researchers to find. If you're interested in the research that was done look for: Grizzly Heart: Living Without Fear Amoung the Brown Bears of Katchatka (book) or see the PBS special Walking with Giants: The Grizzlies of Siberia
There was another story about the punishment of teenage crimes that has me a bit confused about my own morality. It seems more people are going to the cops about stuff that used to be "just kid stuff" before. You know, you're a 14 year old girl at a party, a little drunk and some dude rudely grabs your boob while you're making out with him. You didn't really want it to happen so now you go to the cops and report a sexual assault. Didn't happen in my day, that's for sure. A kid has his jacket stolen at school by some other kids, so you tell your parents and you go to the cops. Now, for some reason this kinda bothers me. Logically: two kids stole a jacket, fucking yeah you tell the police! It's a crime and you want your jacket back. But I've got a weird feeling about it.
I guess schools have always been "law of the jungle" places and while it's true that this hasn't worked out for the most part (just listen to most people's accounts of school day trials and tribulations) I don't know if running to the police really works for me as a solution. I guess I have some issues with turning to the state run criminal justice system to solve every little thing (which stems from my problem with all the people going to court over getting too hot a coffee). But also, okay I don't want to excuse young boys who have raped and beaten and pressured girls and it's not a bad thing to bring these guys into the limelight, but at the same time, at 14 we were all pretty damn confused about how much we wanted to do and with whom. So the idea of turning in a 14 year old boy to the cops because he mistakenly took some drunken or confusing sign from you to mean that he could grab a boob...okay let me rephrase. I'm suggesting that sometimes bad sexual stuff happens at that age, not out of aggression and disrespect but out confusion on the parts of both girl and boy. My solution would be to bring better sex ed into the schools so maybe girls figure out how to express boundaries better and boys learn how to read and respect those boundaries. But to turn the boy in and get him labeled at school as some kind of rapist isn't going to do much for his sexual mental health. And with the bullying it's hard to say. I kind of always thought of all that crap as being part of what you have to learn while growing up, you gotta learn to rise above what others think of you. To a certain extent of course, when you're beaten up and afraid of going to school something has to be done. But we all took some verbal beatings at school, and it was a defining moment in life when you realized that none of that shit mattered. I don't know if going to the cops would really give you that same feeling. Plus, the criminal punishment for stealing that jacket probably would be a slap on the wrist and then those boys are back to school with revenge on their minds...
What do you think?
To end on the most uplifting article in the paper, there is a new educator in town. I read that Chris Spence of Toronto is changing the face of schooling. He has organised a program called Boys to Men in his school (without gov't funding, he's raising his own funds and calling on other dedicated teachers) wherein he's trying to teach inner city boys about what it really is to be a man and how educating yourself is important. Aside from that, in 1998 he took over Lawrence Heights Middle School. One of Canada's worst performing schools, in a neighboorhood with gangs, drugs, and shootings and in the spring of 2000 discipline problems had all but vanished, the kids were scoring higher than the provincial average and there was a waiting list to teach there. Why don't we have him train some people to go talk to kids in school, rather than encouraging police involvement, that's my question?
Okay, I'm off to the park. Hope all of you have wonderful weekends.
Yesterday I lovingly (well, I should say "Duke lovingly") carried my boxes into my flat. I started ripping them open immediately, but then had to leave for the evening as poor Kanga is deathly allergic to cats and my stuff is covered in my little Katka's fur. The evening was topped off by having some fantastic wine (only one glass, I was very proud of myself) and cheese and the watching of one of my favourite movies: Maelstrom. It's a French Canadian movie and I highly recommend you all go out and rent it as soon as possible.
Okay, it's been brought to my attention that I must clarify my "perks to open relationships" blog. Excluding #4, which was really a bit of a joke. Honest. Kanga said that she had all those perks in a monogamous relationship. And many of you are thinking the same thing. And what I have to say to that is "well, I should fucking hope so!". The efficient solving of problems, feeling secure, and feeling appreciated are key factors in any strong relationship, be it friend, lover, parent etc. If you don't have them at all in your relationship with the person you love, then something is wrong! I misrepresented my basic point, for which I apologize. The two main points here are:
1. That those 3 sacred elements (Resolution, Security, Appreciation) are often forgotten about and neglected in relationships that have been going for more than a couple of years (that two year mark is a toughie) I'm saying they aren't forgotten about as easily in an open one. I'm not saying they aren't occasionally neglected in an open relationship too, but just not as often and not for as long. Some monogamous relationships can and do prove me wrong about this, but for the reasons I stated in the previous blog, the sacred 3 can be easier to maintain within polygamy. This has been my observation.
2. And this is my main point here, so pay attention! For the sacred 3 to occur, both people have to be feeling generous. In order to feel generous, you have to feel that this generosity is reciprocated and to feel like you are getting what you need. I'd wager that it's impossible to sustain generosity in any couple if the individuals aren't getting what they need. So Adam and I analysed what each of us needed and he needed sexual freedom - so I gave it to him, no skin off my back. By giving Adam what he needs, he becomes much more generous and vice versa. It's all a big circle. This has nothing to do with open relationships, it has to do with getting everything you need from your one partner and then, as a result, giving everything you can to that partner. If your partner needs something you can't give (and this happens, no one should be forced to give something they just can't bear to give), then I'd suggest that the relationship isn't going to work, because way too much bitterness is going to accumulate and generosity goes out the window.
If any of you have any additional problems with this you can go fuck your mothers. Kidding, please email anything you want about this. I welcome thought and discussion of any kind.
Okay, onto something different.
Had a lovely morning with my globe and mail. There was an article about the atrocious slaughtering of grizzly bears in the wilds of Siberia. Two Canadian researchers had been there for 8 years, trying to see if bears and humans could co-exist peacefully - very controversial research. They tried to get the bears used to humans and to see if the natural response of the bears was still anger. Well, they discovered that the bears were okay with the interaction, but then some murdering bastard decided to take offense to this research and went in and slaughtered all the bears in the study (about 30), using their basic trust of humans to make the killing easier. Whoever did it nailed the bladder of a baby bear to the research centre for the researchers to find. If you're interested in the research that was done look for: Grizzly Heart: Living Without Fear Amoung the Brown Bears of Katchatka (book) or see the PBS special Walking with Giants: The Grizzlies of Siberia
There was another story about the punishment of teenage crimes that has me a bit confused about my own morality. It seems more people are going to the cops about stuff that used to be "just kid stuff" before. You know, you're a 14 year old girl at a party, a little drunk and some dude rudely grabs your boob while you're making out with him. You didn't really want it to happen so now you go to the cops and report a sexual assault. Didn't happen in my day, that's for sure. A kid has his jacket stolen at school by some other kids, so you tell your parents and you go to the cops. Now, for some reason this kinda bothers me. Logically: two kids stole a jacket, fucking yeah you tell the police! It's a crime and you want your jacket back. But I've got a weird feeling about it.
I guess schools have always been "law of the jungle" places and while it's true that this hasn't worked out for the most part (just listen to most people's accounts of school day trials and tribulations) I don't know if running to the police really works for me as a solution. I guess I have some issues with turning to the state run criminal justice system to solve every little thing (which stems from my problem with all the people going to court over getting too hot a coffee). But also, okay I don't want to excuse young boys who have raped and beaten and pressured girls and it's not a bad thing to bring these guys into the limelight, but at the same time, at 14 we were all pretty damn confused about how much we wanted to do and with whom. So the idea of turning in a 14 year old boy to the cops because he mistakenly took some drunken or confusing sign from you to mean that he could grab a boob...okay let me rephrase. I'm suggesting that sometimes bad sexual stuff happens at that age, not out of aggression and disrespect but out confusion on the parts of both girl and boy. My solution would be to bring better sex ed into the schools so maybe girls figure out how to express boundaries better and boys learn how to read and respect those boundaries. But to turn the boy in and get him labeled at school as some kind of rapist isn't going to do much for his sexual mental health. And with the bullying it's hard to say. I kind of always thought of all that crap as being part of what you have to learn while growing up, you gotta learn to rise above what others think of you. To a certain extent of course, when you're beaten up and afraid of going to school something has to be done. But we all took some verbal beatings at school, and it was a defining moment in life when you realized that none of that shit mattered. I don't know if going to the cops would really give you that same feeling. Plus, the criminal punishment for stealing that jacket probably would be a slap on the wrist and then those boys are back to school with revenge on their minds...
What do you think?
To end on the most uplifting article in the paper, there is a new educator in town. I read that Chris Spence of Toronto is changing the face of schooling. He has organised a program called Boys to Men in his school (without gov't funding, he's raising his own funds and calling on other dedicated teachers) wherein he's trying to teach inner city boys about what it really is to be a man and how educating yourself is important. Aside from that, in 1998 he took over Lawrence Heights Middle School. One of Canada's worst performing schools, in a neighboorhood with gangs, drugs, and shootings and in the spring of 2000 discipline problems had all but vanished, the kids were scoring higher than the provincial average and there was a waiting list to teach there. Why don't we have him train some people to go talk to kids in school, rather than encouraging police involvement, that's my question?
Okay, I'm off to the park. Hope all of you have wonderful weekends.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home