| Blogs > swallowtsui > Hopping Swallow 鍋爐焰焰 |
|
How much experiences suffice? How many women/men are enough for you? In the old times, our grandparents stayed young and old with their first, last and only companion/love until death. It's a traditional cherish and classic life aesthetic: "let me take your hands and grow old with thee. " Last night, when asked "did you ever love someone?" the 79 year old man affirmed with shine, "yes, I had loved". -"How many?" -"one." still with assurance. -"Did you marry her?" -"yes, she's my wife." -"are you still together." -"yeah!" very assured. ----------- Nowadays, we must have many different experiences. One mainstream Chinese women's view is: Man should have several experiences with different women, especially an excellent man, he should not be confined to one woman. His creativity must be flared up by different experiences. It sounds conservative and submissive and smells old-fashioned. Fact is, many Chinese women keep eyes shut to boyfriends'/husbands' affairs if the guys know to return home. They know to come back to the house, this is the basic rule. How about we women? -TBC- |
|||
11/22/2008 4:47 pm |
swallowtsui 11/21/2008 10:29 pm In the old times, our grandparents stayed young and old with their first, last and only companion/love until death. It's a traditional cherish and classic life aesthetic: "let me take your hands and grow old with thee. " Last night, when asked "did you ever love someone?" the 79 year old man affirmed with shine, "yes, I had loved". -"How many?" -"one." still with assurance. -"Did you marry her?" -"yes, she's my wife." -"are you still together." -"yeah!" very assured. ----------- Nowadays, we must have many different experiences. One mainstream Chinese women's view is: Man should have several experiences with different women, especially an excellent man, he should not be confined to one woman. His creativity must be flared up by different experiences. It sounds conservative and submissive and smells old-fashioned. Fact is, many Chinese women keep eyes shut to boyfriends'/husbands' affairs if the guys know to return home. They know to come back to the house, this is the basic rule. How about we women? Response: Everything has different cycles of it's process, many in the old testament had multiple wives, and many countries still have it as not just a passing fancy, but as a fixture in their system of relating. maybe it may be more the westernized sense of "ownership", that has spread wide and far, trying to make people think it's the only way to live, but the ancient civilization who have been around far longer than the westernized model, still respect and embrace their multiple wives concept.. maybe people may need to investigate what they follow, and find out what are within it's devise.. it was advantageous to women, to seek out the dire one man concept, to secure her survival when women could not work, and the stature of marriage was more beneficial to the woman’s than to the man, under the guidelines of it's practice.. I'm sure nature had a reason, why a man can impregnate many women at once and a woman can only be pregnant by one man at a time.. Women the world over claim that men, seek out more than one woman, so if they know this, and believe this, then why are they tripping about it..When it comes to the realism of life. every civilization on this earth, the women have a method and mindset to deal with the fact the man may be or may have another woman... and within many women, what matters is that he comes home, to see them, and helps take care of the home, and the children, and treat her with respect as an individual and not judge her by other women.. its probably why every civilization on this earth, still has the hidden process where women can engage women… and men engage multiple women.. and in some spectrum of manner it balances out that they each get variations within their wants of pleasure, and the woman can know who is the father of the children.. but she still has her outlets for pleasure beyond just the man she is with, because women engage each other with a drive as if many feel its as natural to them as being with a man, but they don't expect it to replace the nature of man, nor the want for man.... but many won’t admit it, but it exist.. Royalty is the gang, which set up these shams of process, it served more needs than just concerns for people, it was and is the core of the economic machine, which makes more money for the king and more money for the church, so the king and the church don't have to fitht about who get's paid first... and when they got the program in place, then next came the seperations of Church and State... and the people were divided, and conquered... the church had control over their minds, to either instill guilt or relieve it, the State had control over thei physical self, either to incarcerate them or to punish them in some physical manner... and the system of commerce was infused in a way.. that it became the greatest economic maching every known in the world... because it was built to make money, on controlling Man and woman getting together..... and as long as that can be controlled, then the agenda and prerequisits can be set, to make each of them, pursue money, as their measure, and woman had to pursue beuaty, to get that money.. and in the process, the State and church became more powerful and more rich, and more controlling... Royalty and clergy, were the main culprits who themselves had many mates tucked away in their various country villas while they pushed and prodded the people to think in terms on one man and one woman, because that way they could control the situation with "guilt" games.. and it just feeds the economic machine that was devised, and brought into being after the dark ages, and the so called new age, not only came with a lot of other stuff, they even came with a "revision of the bible"... which was crafted to suit their aims during the dark ages of it's re-construction... Clergy could not play in the marriage game, because they knew why it was created.. as it was.. so they had to put up the symbolism by abstaining... and so called putting models in place for people to be measured against.. but those models, were forbade form playing the game of marriage... but homosexuality, reigned supreme in their ranks... behind closed doors... Even in this country, the Mormon who have multiple wives, the women seem not to have a problem with it, it's the modification of the roman Catholic doctrines and the English church, that set up these standards, and they are the same people who 're constructed the bible", and introduced the King James version, and by some wild decree, declared the "old testament" non applicable.. and after the king James Versions hit the press, it benefited King James and his followers more than anything ever before it's existence of re-construction... Gods laws are simple and straight forth, be honest, be forthright, and be plentiful and multiple.. "Mankind is the one who wants to regulate the process of people getting together to multiply"... and controlling that, controls the lives of people. it's the greatest manipulation of mankind ever to exist.. and seeks to usurp the nature of mankind, to simply love.,. by constricting it to a process, and imposing standards, and then come up with some concept of a "license"... no one needs a license to love... love does not require a license.. it requires the heart to love... half the people could not even read when the concept of a license to be together was thrust upon them,.. and they were persecuted if they did not follow the conscript of the process,... women were stoned as if the nature of man had gone wild, to the point that it would attack a woman, for the simple nature acts of loving.. "now if people don't see something wrong with that, then they may ask themselves, then what is freedom, and why was it denied to women... was that not just another twist and slant to consider women, indentured servants to the system of the king. people need to think... and get their minds out of the delusion of the garbage that Shakespeare made into plays, his stuff was pure for the sake of entertainment.. not gospel./ it was nothing more than fantasy that cling to trying to tie in principals and make it appear as if it was the answer... and people have been making fools of each other ever since trying to recreate his delusions... He was probably a coke head, and he most certainly had his obsessive tendencies.. he wrote out in his plays, because his stuff is mostly about obsessive compulsive behaviors... and that themes exist across the expanse of his material.. people can't stay together today, not because they are incapable of love, but because they get lost into trying to live up to these fictitious models pushed by such madness... and dramatized by such people in playwrights... life is simple, find someone to share with, share appreciations, bang each other as the desire drives people to do, and take care of their daily living and appreciate any help that is shared within the relating.. and stop trying to own people, and thinking that you should own someone... then love will rest where it will. and it will be love still.
| ||
11/22/2008 4:54 pm |
It sounds conservative and submissive and smells old-fashioned. Fact is, many Chinese women keep eyes shut to boyfriends'/husbands' affairs if the guys know to return home. look at Chinese sxual art in the history of its existance, it was always much of it with 1 man and two women.. and it had no problem with the women hooking each other up... they even had a system which matched the younger women with the older women, and the man, to insure that the pleasure was transferable in understanding the depth of it's explorations.. before Confucianism.. in the Taoist system, please was viewed as part of the substance of life force that provided uniformity of energy transference... and was very much regarded as a necessity to a healthy life.. system of controls is what is within the structure that Confucian doctrine pushes... and sought to negate much of the Taoist concept of practices and habits of people and mating, and relating..
| ||
11/22/2008 7:36 pm |
i think your bf is kind of "manipulative" to have a relationship with you on such terms.... see it's comments and things like this that people say, trying to influence other peoples relationships... planting seeds because it does not fit your concept of a relationship... this happens all across life... other people imposing their concept of terms in another's situation where they already have an understanding.. thank goodness.. SG has her own strong mind, to not be influenced by such comments.
| ||
|
Nog, Thanks for the hearted sharing. I kind of support your thinking. And I doubt if there's a thing call mono-faith. We should decide what's more important: The claim of being only faithful to you; or The fact of spending time happily and respectedly together. Mind me to ask: how about youself as a woman, do you bed with someone else while beholding your bf on the highest position? I always think, especially in China, men flirt and fussk around, why not women? Such would maintian a balance. Another kind of women will have one choice only: If you steal some sexual food outside, NO TOLERANCE at all. Bang! The critical criterion is: having sex or not. Many have been discussed, how can one possss another's body and heart? And, you attach more siginiface to heart of body?
| ||
|
people can't stay together today, not because they are incapable of love, but because they get lost into trying to live up to these fictitious models pushed by such madness... and dramatized by such people in playwrights... life is simple, find someone to share with, share appreciations, bang each other as the desire drives people to do, and take care of their daily living and appreciate any help that is shared within the relating.. and stop trying to own people, and thinking that you should own someone... then love will rest where it will. and it will be love still. Touch, Your consistent love/life philosophy. I share it with you. These fictitious models seem to come from nowhere. Why ppl who dont read dramas at all still are clung by these models? A big wonder. Love is sense. Craziness is driven by senses. True ppl are living in their own mirage, laughing there, crying there, outraging there. Looking forward to a model molded from nowhere.
| ||
|
DVC & Noh One raised the theory and the other proves it! Thank you! NOh, you are sleeping on the comfort that your bf put you in the safe buffer zone. But watch out! And one more question, do you ever feel jealous? I could imagine i would.
| ||
|
DVC, Now the psychological effect is more on upper hand than the physical. If we women broaden our love scope, we can do it...
| ||
|
It is that view of "romantic" love that nurtures jealousy and exclusivity. It's said no jealousy no love. Or as my hypothesis goes, no jealousy means the zennith of love? I really keep wondering about how big and tolerant is our love capacity. I discussed it with my gf. One opinion is: before marriage, you can play. Afterwards, shld be abide by mono and be faithful to each other. This renders significance to the marriage. But can one, in this weird world, only stay within one landscape (if one person is one landscape) for years? Will it limit our vision and hinders the world's development? lol.
| ||
|
there is more chance for faithfulness in a shorter relationship than in a life-long one. I dont understand this statement. ??
| ||
|
NAN, Your pic looks cold, take care and take warm! Swallow
| ||
|
The most they talk sweet, the worst my suspicious for him. SG, There's no absolute. Anar As a woman, I have faith in your words. You choose what you want and need.
|
