Cloudy Days
Jun. 10th, 2003 03:07 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
greenstormThe sun's gone and with it any sort of manic energy wellbeing. I've settled into being comfortable now despite the kind of weird circumstances that I find myself in.
The Juggler's bringing a friend from work home today and the Other Woman's out, so I've been picking up around the house just a little. Puttering, mostly, digging used condom wrappers out of the sofa, folding blankets, putting things away when I know where they go. It's a relaxing sort of way to be, and it's nice just to put things straight unhurriedly. The Juggler isn't out to his work people, so if the SO and I are still here when he gets home I'll need to act innocent, or at least hopeless.
Maybe hopeful? ;)
Bah. Entertaining as it would be I don't think it would make anyone else very happy to mess with that. Alas for growing up and having to be responsible and stuff.
I've been messing with some concepts lately, relationship-wise. It's occurred to me that intensity and depth of relationship has nothing to do with the per day sort of time commitment of the relationship and that in turn has nothing to do with the permanency commitment in the relationship.
A number of factors have brought that one up. I've sort of realised, what with the scattering of things that's resulted in my not really having a primary right now, that what I want from a relationship is a sense of permanency. When I say I want a committed relationship that's to a large extent what I mean; the other cluster of my relationship needs seems to float around making the relationship more reliable/permanent in the sense that it's mostly tool-building for long term relationships.
That's probably been tripping me up quite a bit recently. Commitment is a very confusing word. I'd tried using 'commitment to X' before, but I like the idea of splitting it up into things like permanency and emotional support and daily reliability better. It just pulls fewer strings. It has fewer connotations and is less likely to get confused with things like exclusivity and permission/ownership.
It's both interesting and scary to realise that maybe I don't want One Relationship and some side stuff, but that instead I like a scattering with the idea that they're all there long term but that one can do things like take breaks, go one a month's vacation without offending anyone... hmm. I'm running out of words but there are a lot of concept-images floating around that surround tis still. Practically it's not all that different, but I do feel like I'm standing taller and more independently. It's not a bad feeling and it's especially good when I'm lonely -- I don't feel like someone's let me down, I just feel lonely which is okay.
But enough of this. I need a nap again (grilling chicken at 2:30 am was fun, but leaves little in the way of sleep time) and I'm curious about this book. It's called The Skies of Pern, Anne McCaffery, and it's a really terrible book. I like a lot of hers but this one's... just terrible, heavy-handed and obvious like a bad fanfic. I don't think I'll finish it but I want to see if it gets better.
Take care.
The Juggler's bringing a friend from work home today and the Other Woman's out, so I've been picking up around the house just a little. Puttering, mostly, digging used condom wrappers out of the sofa, folding blankets, putting things away when I know where they go. It's a relaxing sort of way to be, and it's nice just to put things straight unhurriedly. The Juggler isn't out to his work people, so if the SO and I are still here when he gets home I'll need to act innocent, or at least hopeless.
Maybe hopeful? ;)
Bah. Entertaining as it would be I don't think it would make anyone else very happy to mess with that. Alas for growing up and having to be responsible and stuff.
I've been messing with some concepts lately, relationship-wise. It's occurred to me that intensity and depth of relationship has nothing to do with the per day sort of time commitment of the relationship and that in turn has nothing to do with the permanency commitment in the relationship.
A number of factors have brought that one up. I've sort of realised, what with the scattering of things that's resulted in my not really having a primary right now, that what I want from a relationship is a sense of permanency. When I say I want a committed relationship that's to a large extent what I mean; the other cluster of my relationship needs seems to float around making the relationship more reliable/permanent in the sense that it's mostly tool-building for long term relationships.
That's probably been tripping me up quite a bit recently. Commitment is a very confusing word. I'd tried using 'commitment to X' before, but I like the idea of splitting it up into things like permanency and emotional support and daily reliability better. It just pulls fewer strings. It has fewer connotations and is less likely to get confused with things like exclusivity and permission/ownership.
It's both interesting and scary to realise that maybe I don't want One Relationship and some side stuff, but that instead I like a scattering with the idea that they're all there long term but that one can do things like take breaks, go one a month's vacation without offending anyone... hmm. I'm running out of words but there are a lot of concept-images floating around that surround tis still. Practically it's not all that different, but I do feel like I'm standing taller and more independently. It's not a bad feeling and it's especially good when I'm lonely -- I don't feel like someone's let me down, I just feel lonely which is okay.
But enough of this. I need a nap again (grilling chicken at 2:30 am was fun, but leaves little in the way of sleep time) and I'm curious about this book. It's called The Skies of Pern, Anne McCaffery, and it's a really terrible book. I like a lot of hers but this one's... just terrible, heavy-handed and obvious like a bad fanfic. I don't think I'll finish it but I want to see if it gets better.
Take care.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
Hrm.
Date: 2003-06-10 04:07 pm (UTC)I don't completely understand the last part of this. "Mostly tool-building for long-term relationships" sounds strange to my ears; as if that committed relationship were to be a mere stepping-stone for other relationships to be reached. That's not what you mean, but I don't understand what you mean.
[...] I like the idea of splitting it up into things like permanency and emotional support and daily reliability better. It just pulls fewer strings. It has fewer connotations and is less likely to get confused with things like exclusivity and permission/ownership.
I don't know. Permanency without emotional support seems to lack something -- though it could work, I now think, in the sense of 'dating' someone steadily besides other partners that one has a closer (?) emotional relationship with. Interestingly, these things are all things I would -- on their own -- take as things that one would find in good friends: they may not be permanent, but they can give emotional support; or they may not be so good in the emotional support, but are 'available' if you feel like calling them up; or they're long-lasting, though maybe weekends-only friendships. Personally, I would have to say that the word "relationship" implies a combination of all three of those.
It's both interesting and scary to realise that maybe I don't want One Relationship and some side stuff, but that instead I like a scattering with the idea that they're all there long term
I had two reactions to that, which stay in a sort of equilibrium. The first makes a very strong stand for the "One Relationship with Side Stuff" cause, and feels slighted by the idea that it would be otherwise; the other is a little more subdued, but points out that not having that wouldn't be the end of the world.
Admittedly: The ideal state of either is... enticing isn't quite the word. Looking at the ideals, I can see myself in either setup; it's the way there that worries me a little bit. (Maybe because my background gives me pointers as to how to reach the one and how to ensure that it endures, but not so for the other.) Now I'm the first to point out that I swing between being a constantly worrying and a happy-go-lucky person, so while I don't outright discard this worry, I take with a grain of salt.
Just some thoughts before I go to bed. Cheers.
Re: Hrm.
Date: 2003-06-10 05:30 pm (UTC)A committed relationship will have emotional support, yes, but it won't necessarily have permanent emotional support. That is, I don't think I need any one person to be there one hundred percent of the time constantly for me with emotional support -- good, because it's not humanly possible -- and so though emotional support is an aspect of my relationships it isn't the major aspect of commitment to my mind. Certainly someone who could never support me emotionally would worry me but this isn't a major aspect of stuff.
I also don't think availability is something I'd go in for. Or, no: it's not something I need, and 100 percent availability isn't something I can give. I need to be able to say, sometimes, I'm not talking to anyone today. Sure, if someone died I'd come to the funeral, but short of that I don't want to make a permanent always-available commitment. I could deal, I think, with a permanent commitment to consider requests for availability as long as a 'no' was respected.
Certainly the above are components of a committed relationship to a greater or lesser degree; they do not define it for me, though. That was the point of this post, to work out my definition of committed and choose a word that was less confusing.