B&D - that sounds more like an LSI vs SLE. And yeah, I have always seen you as an EIE... so it makes sense. At least in my mind =P
He would be my comfort, my support, my partner, my delight. The person I would see first every morning, and fall asleep in his arms every night. He would love me best, and I would give him the (my, our) world. He would bring me joy, and pain, and sometimes it would feel like too much, but never not enough. I would not be able to think of love without thinking of him.
He would understand that sometimes I need to take care of him - to feed him and iron his clothes, put a blanket on him or rub his shoulders. This is my way of putting my touch on him, in a subtle way that lingers. He wouldn't resist this, or call attention to it, but just accept it. He would do things in return, bring me a cup of tea in bed in the morning, a text message at lunch, bringing pastries home for dessert - to show me that I am loved in return. He wouldn't effusively and vocally express his love in so many words, nor would he expect me to. But he would know. I would know.
He wouldn't set out to test me, ever. If we are at a party, and I look over and see him talking animatedly with some girl, her hand on his arm and an encouraging smile on her face, well, these things happen. But he wouldn't have a problem when I walk over, introduce myself and slip my hand into his back pocket. Sometimes I'll drink too much, and lean too close to other boys, chin propped up my hand and eyes at half mast. I'd expect him to slide his arm around my shoulders before any other boy's hand starts creeping up my leg. We wouldn't be joined at the him when going out, but we'd always be conscious of where the other is in the room. I could look up and catch his eye, and we'd just know, have some reaffirmation in that moment, then return to our own conversations.
He would touch me with certain hands. Possessively, as if I am something special. I would feel like I am precious within the circle of his arms. He would know that nothing is forbidden between us. He wouldn't ask for permission verbally, he would read my non-verbal cues. He would give me free reign over him and not hold back.
He would read my moods, know when to cheer me up, when to leave me be. He would not let me wallow in the morass of my emotions when I feel so entangled in them I could never escape. Nor would he smother me with his, knowing when to push and when to be contained.
He would be my escape from the world. The place where I can be vulnerable, small, not strong. He would know all my secrets, all my weaknesses, and I would never fear he would use them against me. I would trust him, and his judgment, unquestioningly. This would mean I take him seriously when we disagree, and expect us to work through problems rather than making snap judgments. If we had problems, I would hear them from him first, not anyone else.
He would surprise me, interest me, fascinate me. He would never be boring, staid, insignificant. He'd always be reaching for something 'more', some different perspective. We'd always be growing, transforming.
He would be my everything, and I would be his.
allez cuisine!
idol.. it sound; like you want a dog
given your avatar, should I take that as a come on, babe?Originally Posted by mercutio
also, not really, I mean, I don't want slavish devotion or anything. maybe I didn't make it clear, but I want equality above all else.
allez cuisine!
idolatrie, that was fabulous. I love your passion, your idealism, your vision... I hope with all my heart that you find this person. something tells me you will.
IEI-Fe 4w3
The sentiments you outlined are a sure recipe for disaster, IMHO. I thought very much like that too in more idealistic days, though.
I still agree that "something" - as opposed to the depressingly common "nothing" - is the proper thing for the husband and wife to be wrt each other. But not "everything" in the way you described.
Greetings, ragnar
ILI knowledge-seeker
well you're different so of course you'll want something different in a marriage. I mean, not everyone wants the same thing. I've seen lots of successful marriages that look and feel VERY different depending on the partners involved. So all you're basically saying here is that you don't want to marry idolatrie. :tongue:
IEI-Fe 4w3
No.
I'm saying that anyone having such expectations would end up disillusioned and disappointed in a marriage with me or any real person as opposed to a fantasy figure.
With some women, such disappointments automatically translate into divorce. Others manage to make a soft landing in the real world, and a lifelong happy marriage ensues.
In either case it's still quite possible I would enjoy every moment of such a marriage thoroughly. Or at least prefer it to being single or any other available alternative.
Last edited by ragnar; 07-20-2009 at 01:15 PM. Reason: precision
Greetings, ragnar
ILI knowledge-seeker
I don't know. Is it better to have a high idealistic standard and hold out for that, or is it better to settle for "reality" and then be sad you did later on. I don't believe that what she's describing is sheer fantasy.
it's easy to think that marriage with someone you love is always going to be happy and happier than being alone. My own marriage has had its happy moments, for sure. But it's not ideal. I think I probably thought I made a soft landing, had come to grips with the fact that nothing is perfect and that I would be happy with him simply because I love him (and I do). And now, 15 years later, I'm not sure that was the wisest decision. I really don't know.With some women, such disappointments automatically translate into divorce. Others manage to make a soft landing in the real world, and a lifelong happy marriage ensues.
In either case it's still quite possible I would enjoy every moment of such a marriage thoroughly. Or at least prefer it to being single or any other available alternative.But as they say, it's water under the bridge.
I guess I'm just urging her NOT to give up her ideals. She reminds me of what it's like to be young with your whole life ahead of you and... I want her to be blissfully happy (even tho I don't even really know her)!
IEI-Fe 4w3
Ha. maybe so. I could see that. I'd be SO okay with that. You look to things "mechanically" and I'll provide the adoration.
IEI-Fe 4w3
Adoration, gross *blech*Ha. maybe so. I could see that. I'd be SO okay with that. You look to things "mechanically" and I'll provide the adoration.
ILE
7w8 so/sp
Very busy with work. Only kind of around.
IEI-Fe 4w3
Hahaha!
I think my LSI boyfriend may be hunting for some adoration of his own. Anytime I prove to him that he's wrong about something or play coy when he starts preening, he simply tells me that he's the center of the universe and as such he can't possibly be wrong.
ILE
7w8 so/sp
Very busy with work. Only kind of around.
idolatrie, that was fabulous. I love your passion, your idealism, your vision... I hope with all my heart that you find this person. something tells me you will.
Well, I was trying to describe an ideal there. I thought that was the point of this thread? Do I think I will necessarily ever get that? Not exactly. I think it is fine to aim high, know what would be the best case scenario. But I don't think it would prevent me from living life with all the imperfections that comprises reality. I don't think marriages are perfect things. I think they are relationships which require work and commitment, not just relying on any 'natural' attributes of the participants. But I think one can conceptualise what would be perfect, as something perhaps to strive towards.
What I want, most fundamentally, is someone who loves me. Is that too much to ask? I don't know, but I sincerely hope not. Everything else is icing. If I get it, it would make me happy. If I don't, well, that's life.
I find it strange that you refer to me in the third person, but ok, whatever. I've got to say I stand by wanting mutuality in my relationships. If I am willing to put him first in my life, to make sacrifices for him or whatever, then I do expect he would do the same in return. I mean, I thought that's a fairly uncontroversial kind of assumption in this day and age. I can't say that 'content and faithful' are really things I would use to measure the health of a relationship though. I think there are many faithful relationships which are fundamentally flawed, and ones where the participants are merely content, but lack any true passion or depth of feeling.
allez cuisine!
Removed at User Request
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
