Here’s the problem — I love M, and she’s not enough for me. I hold those two things at once — notice the conjunction “and” — not “but.”
An incident occurred recently in which I was quite distracted (by a meal I was thinking about, or another woman — doesn’t matter). M was very upset about most everything, as is her wont — work, kids, work, life, work work work etc. – and it was one of those situations in which I knew it was a time thing — just had to spend the time with her to allow her to unwind the whole ball of thread. So I uh-huh’ed and mmm’ed and she calmed down after a bit, but all the while I just wanted to get back to what I was doing (maybe I was writing a poem). I was very little there, in fact — not something I’m especially proud of. And then she was suddenly in the mood for physical affection and — my mind could not go there. I was still very distracted by my poem. But, because I’m such an excellent husband, I gave her what she needed, although magnanimously begged off receiving anything because I said I was anxious about work. The rarity of that happening belies my level of distraction.
Well.
The next morning she was all cooey and about ready to pedestal me for being so good to her. Really very grateful. And in that moment I realized that she allows me to give her such little bits of myself, and she’s satisfied with that. I mean, I was barely present, and yet she didn’t notice my absence. I could have been a yes machine, a latex nodding dummy. As a philosophical question, if I can satisfy her, make her feel wanted, and heard, and valued, without actually extending myself very far — well, what is my responsibility? Did I violate some contract? Is the point to love someone silly, way beyond her wildest dreams, no matter what comes your way? Or to just do it in such a way that she feels satisfied, and full — just as much as she thinks she needs/wants? How much is too much water, how much not enough?
And anyway — so what does this have to do with her not being enough for me? Doesn’t this sound pretty much like its opposite?
Muse-woman sez: I guess my argument against your argument would be that if it only takes this tiny portion of you to fill her up then it’s YOU who’s getting cheated, not her. Isn’t love all about being challenged & stretched? Won’t you grow stale sitting there on the counter with no one to eat all of you? Don’t you need someone who can go hog-wild & belly up, devouring you & asking for more cause doesn’t the magic happen when you must come up with more? Not someone who will drain you like a vampire, let’s be clear with our metaphors, but an adventurous eater with a hearty appetite for you.
Ah, muse-woman. There’s a reason I love ya.
This only addresses the “not enough” side of the conundrumic equation. Later I’ll look at the love part of this — stuck, struggling, on the left side. (to be continued…)
A fascinating post.
I’m glad you thought so. Sounds like you probably have a point of view on the matter gleaned from experience.
Perceptive and true.
This be true.
Thanks for reading — sounds like you agree with Muse-woman then. It’s hard not to — but then, what to do?
Love it!
Ah, thought you might.
So… what DOES one do in this situation? Wouldn’t you get bored with having to give so little?
Is it not one’s hope to be challenged in a relationship? Not, in a bad way, no one wants to struggle for love. But, one hopes for mental stimulation as well as physical… not?
Well, at least I do.
VR, you’re asking the questions I ask myself very, very often. Especially — what DOES one do? There are lots of options. 1) Settle. This involves “making do” with the hand one has dealt oneself. See related posts on this blog (http://wp.me/pfUuS-24 and http://wp.me/pfUuS-2s) 2) Cheat, Classic Version. Do that when you really don’t want to be in the relationship at all and are looking to replace it, or looking to get booted without making the decision. Doesn’t work if you actually still love the person. 3) Cheat, Version 2. This involves attempting to fill the missing piece, rather than replace the entire relationshhp — aka loving two people at once. Doesn’t go over well when discovered. However, it can actually enhance the relationship. 4) Get lots & lots of hobbies. This is actually related to “settling” — it’s what one does in the free time that you’re not relating to your mate in any sort of interesting way. 5) Become spiritual. This is sort of an elevated variation on “settling.” 6) Try hard as hell to make it work. 7) Leave. 8) Join a singing group called “The Castrati”. What one chooses comes down to the shape of one’s “ultimate concern” in life, what matters most, how to live that and choose that. With kids, the choices become much more complicated.
Well Gamma, you HAVE certainly thought about this quite a bit.
And… what it boils down to, once you’ve explored all the options… is … the simple question of : Is This Worth It?
My word version of your ‘ultimate concern’.
And life, thank god, is a constantly changing energy. So what is right for you now … aka:settling … could (and will if you want it to) be altered into what you need in the future.
Whether you’ve become more comfortable in the ‘settled for’ relationship and decide to stay there or go explore your heart’s desire, will be up to how one answers the ‘worth it’ question.
Having piglets in the equation kind of weighs heavy on the settling side temporarily… don’t you think?
This conversation could go on forever…
VR, thanks for your thoughtful comment. I like your formulation but for me the math changes from day to day. Some days it’s yes, some days — there are always some days that are “no,” right? Is it always the relationship that’s the “no”? No. Does my heart’s desire have to take the shape of a woman, a relationship? Well, it mostly has. And yes, the energy changes all the time. Piglets or not (“devil spawn” also works), making a black or white decision (stay or go) based on shifting evidence scares the bejesus out of me. You know? If it weren’t for that damned cliff, by god… Anyway — happy happy hour to you in the meantime!
That damn cliff… I tell you! Scary, Scary, Scary. And what if the safety net thought to be tied securely to it’s slope, really isn’t there at all?
What if one jumps regardless and crashes and burns? arg!
We could ‘what if’ until the cows come home… and until one runs out of the ‘what ifs’, it’s my belief to stay put. Because if you are questioning your decisions, then they probably weren’t well thought out decisions to begin with. *Although… who the hell am I to say?*
(I believe) what is meant to be, shall be. Whether we take that jump or not, whether we need a push or a gentle nudge…we’ll know it in our hearts that it’s right… today or tomorrow.
Until then, my motto is… never go backwards… always forward. And enjoy those Happy Hours as often as you are able!
Thanks for letting me know you dropped by!
The heart can be fickle, is pretty much all I know. The body, too, for that matter. And we make decisions all the time based on their whims, thinking them permanent.
As for the cliff — I think of it like hang gliding (which I’ve never done, but I have a good imagination) — it’s not so much there’s a safety net anywhere, as that to leap, I must trust in my powers of flight and my correct observation of the wind — and also, in the bad aim of anyone attempting to shoot me down! (Crap, I think I’ve tangled myself in a metaphor). At any rate — staying put seems safe and reasonable. But men over 50 — we want to buy fast cars for a reason. Safe? It’s funny, but we spend much of our time getting to a safe place, financially and otherwise — and maybe *because* we get there, danger becomes so much more attractive.
Anyway — probing onward (forward) like a blind man I go. Thanks again for stopping by & reading & commenting. Keep serving up those happy hours for us! – David
I’ve come to this post a little late, but it’s an honest and fascinating one.
But why do we evaluate people by their cost, like cars? Why is it that a person who asks less of you is, somehow, the economy model?
I guess, for me it is the opposite. The person who I love asks very little of me and that affords me a great deal of freedom. I absolutely adore them because they can be present and yet have such a small carbon footprint. They can love me without draining me dry. And I, for my part, am eternally grateful for it.
I’ve lived with the other – the all consuming, demanding, draining. The fireworks and drama and hurricane force clash of wills. I use to find it exciting. Now I just find it vampiric.
A connection — lightly held, deeply felt. I think that’s pretty close to my ideal. And yet —
In this unrealized dream of mine, “lightly held” and “deeply felt” cannot do without each other. Because when I can truly let you go, and you can let me go, and you come back, and I come back to it — it’s a testament to the strength of that connection. It’s so damned refreshing, and inspiring, to hear that there are those who manage it.
“Vampiric” is a perfect word. And when I initially read it, I thought of the relationship I’m in right now, of her. But thing is, it works both ways — I’m complicit; I’m baring my neck. (Sounds kinda sexy but trust me). I’m quite capable of lightly holding and deeply feeling a connection — but, here I am with someone who likes to hold on to things very tightly. The cost of that — a few pints of blood every week. Does she hold on tightly because I don’t? Not in my case — she’s just a very conrolling, anxious person — but I’m sure that’s common. There’s definitely part of me that’s drawn to those fireworks and the drama. What would I do without it? Oh, right — look in the mirror.
Some people need lots of space — I’m one of them. She’s not. So, like you, I’d prefer to “go away” for a while, and when I come back, I’m refreshed and more myself, and I bring all of that into that connection. I should not *have* to come back, though — I should *want* to. And that’s the key. That’s the “deeply felt” part of the equation. Fundamental insecurities about oneself cannot be assuaged by forcing an ownership model on a relationship.
Thanks for reading and for sharing your experience, RG.