|
Lorelei115 -> RE: Sexual Tension (1/19/2007 10:33:17 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: cloudboy
I read this today on the train coming back from Washington DC.
>Sexuality is all about bridging distances -- but to bridge distances, you must have distances. And for all our sentimental talk of seeking an "other half" (perhaps the only expression to loom as large in Plato's Symposium as it does in the cursives of Hallmark), most of us do not, in fact, seek "a part of ourselves." We do not long for our left leg. We do not desire our brother, nor usually even our best friend. Erotic love -- for all of its attraction to what it recognizes and identifies with -- is drawn at least as strongly to what it does not recognize. In truth, it is drawn toward the distant and dangerous more than it is to the sweet, the solicitous, the familiar.<
Arguably BDSM comports with the above because it operates as a polarity --- keeping lovers as others ---- top from bottom --- Dom from Sub ---- maintaining a more fresh, more easily revived sexual connection. Its also a kind of triumph of discomfort (bondage, beatings, teasing, exacting, testing, probing) that dovetails nicely into sensual union.
Anyway, this article gives one food for thought. I do agree that over familiarity is an anti-aphrodisiac, marriage can devolve into the banal, and that passion --- whose kissing cousin is "the thrill" --- spring from something unfamiliar, new, or rediscovered.
Anyway, back on the SUBJECT of the post... I agree that overfamiliarity can have a deadening effect on a sexual relationship, especially if neither partner is willing to try something new. I don't think thats limited to vanilla relationships, though, as LA said, a lot of BDSM relationships have suffered the same fate. It's more about the people in the relationship, rather than the label that is put to it. After all, I think a lot of relationships have a bdsm or power exchange aspect to them, they just don't tend to put labels on it like people in the lifestyle do.
|
|
|
|
