But please, I am not responsible for Timeline's coquettish improprieties, and our contacts, such as they are, have at all times been both public and well chaperoned. Young ladies are sometimes prone to flights of fancy, which should not be taken seriously, or repeated as if they are factual. — unenlightened

Young? Lady? I thought you knew. TimeLine is really a 53 year old, male didgeri farmer living 300 kilometers (2.5 miles) east of Perth in the part of Australia known as "The Shit Box." It got that name from the fact that it's a box full of shit. Digeri doo. Little known fact - If you visit there and ask where you can take a crap, they'll tell you "Out back." That's where that name came from.

Hanover's Guide to Creative Writing: How to Be 10 Times More Disturbing Than You Thought You Could Be

But to you, do you think buying a Valentine's Day card is a game if both find it a meaningful gesture that truly expresses love? — Hanover

Yes, almost always it is a game. I agree with your criterion of sincerity; if I buy a card to please, it is a manipulation, and therefore a game. Hallmark does not know how I feel, or when I feel it. So now that you know, your random flowers to TL would also be a manipulation, and if she is likeminded, unappreciated. You should have sent some earlier.

I used to buy my ex the sappiest cards I could find, and she would get really emotional and cry, like the words were so touching even though written by a corporate cog in a factory designed to blow sunshine up people's asses. It really worked, until it didn't, so that's why her name is ex, but I got a sneaky suspicion that had more to do with things other than the cards I got her.

Young? Lady? — T Clark

All ladies are forever young, and the details of their toilette are not a suitable topic of conversation unless like Hanover, it is the sincere expression of your love.

You should have sent some earlier. — unenlightened

I did. I addressed them to "Timeline of Australia or some such shit." She should be getting them soon. You'll notice when she gets them by her happy change in demeanor.

Why all this talk of flowers?
Have I not mentioned in the last decade the word chocolate once or twice to you guys? :roll:
It's like a pony keg of beer for you all...

Why all this talk of flowers?
Have I not mentioned the word chocolate once or twice to you guys? :roll:
It's like a pony keg of beer for you all... — ArguingWAristotleTiff

It used to be flowers and chocolate, but my wife has lost a lot of weight over the last five years, so it would be insensitive for me to give her much. Our anniversary (41) was on Monday. I got her a case of a very nice, not expensive Sauvignon Blanc I know she likes. Along with the flowers. Are anniversaries "designed activities to declare something I am unable to do within the intimacy of our mutual understanding (or lack thereof)?"

The best gifts your partner gives you are ones which are deeply unpleasant to receive. When they're on the side of the best version of you rather than the deeply flawed one you always are. When they remind you that the flaws are acceptable, so long as their mitigation is attempted. When they give you a little nudge to overcome the barriers such flaws put in the way.

That's much more relationship glue than bought goods, but presents can serve as expressions of love in the sense of deeply felt affection or ritual significance. It's really just a question of how comfortable you and your partner are of using such bizarre social norms, under the aspect of eternity, to signify shared feelings. Put another way, it's a question of how you and your partner feel about using norms to express feelings for each other. We do that all the time while speaking, a gift can be as much a signifier as a good, and as much a compliment as giving praise.

An ex of mine thought Valentine's day was very strange, so I gave her a bunch of roses with a tube of bacon flavoured lubricant gaffer taped to the side of the bouquet. She enjoyed that it was a symbolic representation of the strangeness. Neither of us enjoyed the bacon flavoured lubricant though.

I’ve been ambivalent about this thread. It went somewhere I found unhelpful, but now it’s come back and is dealing with things I’m interested in discussing. So let me try to get out what I want to say. I’ve thought a lot about two factors I think affect men’s and women’s attitudes toward each other. I’m going to say “pervasively,” by which I mean that, if we agree that there are underlying attitudes that are damaging to relationships of all kinds between women and men, these are major factors in those attitudes. I am referring to 1) fear and 2) longing.

We’ve been talking about fear. Let me try, again, to state my position as clearly as I can. In my experience, women are physically afraid of men and men are emotionally afraid of women. As I’ve been trying to explain, I’m not just talking about intimate relationships. I’m also not primarily talking about people who have been the victims of actual physical violence. I’m also not making any judgment about the reasonableness of those fears – whether they are rational or irrational. I’m talking about the way I think things are, not how they should be.

Ok, longing. I’ve read some Freud and I see value in it, at least in a broad sense. I’m not claiming my understanding is based on a Freudian analysis, but I see that people’s attitudes, feelings, and behavior are strongly influenced by their experiences as children. I really like Christopher Lasch, although I haven’t read his books in a long time. He’s a social philosopher with a Freudian slant. I guess he would be considered conservative. In one of his books, I can’t remember which, he talks about how, over history, changes in family structure have changed the structures of our minds, including our understanding of human relationships. In turn, changes in family structure are strongly related to changes in the structure of the economy, e.g. farming versus industry. I found his discussion plausible.

Oedipus complex or whatever you call it, people come out of their childhoods with something missing, lost. There’s a longing to find it again. Maybe someone else has thought this through better than I have. If so, help me out. Because of that longing, we bring a lot of expectations to our relations with the opposite sex. Obviously, these show up most strongly in our intimate relationships, but I think they have a more general and pervasive effect also. Our desire for sex and mature human intimacy is all mixed up with a childish yearning for surrender. For someone to find us and give us back what we’ve lost. Take care of us. The fact that the people we relate to can’t, shouldn’t, don’t want to, don’t know they should, don’t know how to give us what we want leads to incredible resentment, again, most strongly in our intimate relationships, but also more generally.

These observations are based on my own experiences, although I think they have more general validity. I think you can see I’m just working this out for myself. As I've been writing, it struck me we should talk about how these factors affect and are affected by gender roles. Maybe later.

This is my best shot. I’ve put a lot of thought into it, but I’m bringing this out here because I want to examine it. As I said long ago back in the thread – everything I write is based on my own experience in a limited social, intellectual, political, and class environment. Be fair. I’ve shown I have insults and bitter vituperation ready and I’m willing to use them if I feel that I’m being mistreated. :ambiguous sneer:

The best gifts your partner gives you are ones which are deeply unpleasant to receive. — fdrake

Clever reference to anal sex that most would have missed, but fortunately we're both on the same wavelength so that your humor is not lost.

I actually didn't think of bumming. Thank you for the insertion.

I'm just more meta than you s'all.

All ladies are forever young, and the details of their toilette are not a suitable topic of conversation unless like Hanover, it is the sincere expression of your love. — unenlightened

I edited my response. I forgot to mention he's a man.

These observations are based on my own experiences, although I think they have more general validity. — T Clark

They may be valid for others that are like you.

I’m bringing this out here because I want to examine it. — T Clark

It's great that you're working things out for yourself.

I’ve shown I have insults and bitter vituperation ready and I’m willing to use them if I feel that I’m being mistreated. — T Clark

Assuming you're not joking, do you think this is an adult position to take?

These observations are based on my own experiences, although I think they have more general validity.
— T Clark
They may be valid for others that are like you.

I’m bringing this out here because I want to examine it.
— T Clark
It's great that you're working things out for yourself. — praxis

As I said, I think the factors I'm discussing have a broad application, not just to me. Everyone? I assume not. How many? I don't know. Some? Many? Most? Large majority? Even if you're right, that this only applies to people like me, it's social consequence is probably a lot broader.

I’ve shown I have insults and bitter vituperation ready and I’m willing to use them if I feel that I’m being mistreated.
— T Clark

Assuming you're not joking, do you think this is an adult position to take? — praxis

I was referring to an earlier episode. Also, I don't always feel the need to act like an adult, although I've promised @fdrake I will behave.

Even if you're right, that this only applies to people like me, it's social consequence is probably a lot broader. — T Clark

Because people like you are socially consequential?

men are emotionally afraid of women — T Clark

Men who are emotionally... let's say underdeveloped, must have problems when dealing with all emotional situation that exceed their development and not just situations involving women, right? If this is the case, then we might conclude that people with low EQ are emotionally afraid of people with high EQ. On the other hand, people with high EQ, if they actually do have high EQ, should be able to succesfully put an emotionally underdeveloped individual at ease.

I guess that I don't know what you mean when you say that men are emotionally afraid of women. Can you explain?

Our desire for sex and mature human intimacy is all mixed up with a childish yearning for surrender. For someone to find us and give us back what we’ve lost. Take care of us. The fact that the people we relate to can’t, shouldn’t, don’t want to, don’t know they should, don’t know how to give us what we want leads to incredible resentment, again, most strongly in our intimate relationships, but also more generally. — T Clark

There's more than one kind of 'surrender' and it isn't exactly clear which you mean, although you do mention being 'taken care of' and a 'childish yearning'. I can relate to the desire for the carefree days of boyhood and having no responsibilities, if that's what you mean. I know a couple of adults who seem to want to be taken care of in this way, as though they were children. It's pretty uncommon, in my experience.

Another sort of surrender is transcendent. You can kind of lose yourself in sexual intimacy with someone you love. I wouldn't call that a childish yearning. I do believe it's a deep yearning that we all share though.

Because people like you are socially consequential? — praxis

No, but if a significant percentage of the population have experiences similar to mine, it would probably have an impact.

Men who are emotionally... let's say underdeveloped, must have problems when dealing with all emotional situation that exceed their development and not just situations involving women, right? If this is the case, then we might conclude that people with low EQ are emotionally afraid of people with high EQ. On the other hand, people with high EQ, if they actually do have high EQ, should be able to succesfully put an emotionally underdeveloped individual at ease. — praxis

Is EQ emotional intelligence? I talking men and women, not general social difficulties. I don't think women are more "developed" than men or vise versa.

I guess that I don't know what you mean when you say that men are emotionally afraid of women. Can you explain? — praxis

People in general care what other people think of them. They want to be regarded with respect and affection. More specifically, more strongly, I think men care very much what women think of them. It's tied in with longing. Men want women to love them and take care of them. That gives women a lot of power over them. They have the power to hurt them with their scorn and that is frightening.

I think the same is true for women, maybe less strongly. I'm not sure about that. On the other hand, with women, there is an added dimension of fear of physical violence. Women don't trust men. There certainly are rational reasons that might be true, but I don't think the primary reasons are rational, especially in women who have not been abused.

There's more than one kind of 'surrender' and it isn't exactly clear which you mean, although you do mention being 'taken care of' and a 'childish yearning'. I can relate to the desire for the carefree days of boyhood and having no responsibilities, if that's what you mean. I know a couple of adults who seem to want to be taken care of in this way, as though they were children. It's pretty uncommon, in my experience.

Another sort of surrender is transcendent. You can kind of lose yourself in sexual intimacy with someone you love. I wouldn't call that a childish yearning. I do believe it's a deep yearning that we all share though. — praxis

Hard to describe. It definitely feels very vulnerable, childish. It's not a willful, adult feeling. You give yourself, surrender your will and desires to the other person in the hopes, expectations they will be close and intimate with you. That they will love you, hold you, protect you. I sure hope someone else will come along who can be more articulate about this than I am.

The transcendent surrender you talk about sounds similar to what I'm trying to describe. I think they're different, but probably come from the same place. One is mature and healthy, the other is childish and self-centered.

(1) lame because the first part attempted to sincerely paint a romantic and sexually tense moment, yet it didn't. — Hanover

Tense, yes, romantic, no. I was going for more of a lust portrayal. Lame is something I associate with all erotica so I've hit my mark here. Though, if it did appear sincere I really didn't do so bad. Satire is better if it feels authentic.

creepy because it felt like you were truly trying to woo someone with your comments but they were (1) lame — Hanover

:chin:

Hmm...

Perhaps if improperly read this can be seen as a genuine attempt at literary seduction, but the tone was supposed to be light and comedic ("flexing his calves like some super-star bus-driver", "inexplicably accentuated bulges and impossibly coiffed garnishes"). Her description of the man in the gym seemed... Descriptive... I decided to imagine what could happen if the man was more insistent that she return his serve. I tried to keep it appropriately silly without destroying the narrative (until the end), perhaps in failure.

I had hoped that the implicit barriers of time, space, and anonymity would have prevented anyone from questioning my motives so it could be read in it's proper context. Rest assured the aforementioned relief this was meant to provide was of a comedic nature... TimeLine does like a man who can make her laugh after-all!

If by "comments" you mean anything I've said outside of the gym scene, that would indeed creep me out as well. Lest I protest too much, please point them out :yikes:

The punch line (the fart) was (3) not absurd, but simply a faux pas that could actually happen. — Hanover

In terms of (3), absurd isn't a fart, it's a penguin flying into someone's vagina and pecking through their cervix to extract their 12 year old son who's annoyed because you disrupted his poetry reading. — Hanover

I think penguin-play is a third chapter theme at the earliest.

The whole point of my attempted discussion with TimeLine was to criticize her ironic game-like rejection of 'the games we play' as if she has ascended to inhumanity. See seems to dislike how un-serious it all is; petty sexual games are highly superficial and over-played. They're silly in her view; absurd. A narrative in which she is compelled to play is therefore funny to me.

And absurd can go two ways, generally, tragic or comedic. Penguins mixed with cervices isn't so funny, so it must be sad. Succumbing to a universally silly human biological function in the middle of quasi serious moment is, however, relatable and funny, and it illustrates my point that we are the games we play; the games are unavoidable bodily functions. The more one buys into the scene until then the more absurd the ending becomes. By trying to force TimeLine to at least pretend-to-imagine herself in such a situation I had hoped that she could begin to see the games we play as fun and funny instead of sad and pathetic (a view which she is somewhat less than reluctant to dip her brush in). I was trying to make light.

I do appreciate the criticism, but I think your expectations for a 50 word satirical imagined excerpt constructed from an out of context fragment and contrived to be a comedic anti-thesis to the described behavior of TimeLine, are a bit too high. I often find myself trying to write less rather than more, but I think you would agree laying the groundwork to create a genuine feeling of romance would not be prudent for a discussion. If it genuinely seemed creepy, either it's not silly enough or it's too long. I did attempt to mimic the style of erotica, so there's some unavoidably innate creepiness there, but I don't think your second objection helps me at all, as I am not the male peacock in this narrative (the actual man in the gym referenced by TimeLine is), a point which I'm now left to wonder might be lost on my muse herself.

I've taken your advice on board though: scratch cheap romance, go straight for lust; Keep it silly rather than creepy (penguins for instance); and acquire actual literary skills!

Why all the hand wringing, rationalizing. TL has made it pretty clear she doesn't find it welcome. Does anyone interpret her response differently than that? What more is there to say?

You are not a peacock. If you were a peacock, I would be mesmerised, your feathers would attract me to a dizzying point of hypnosis and I would be compelled to give you all that you desire without even knowing why. Right now, all that I desire is to eat a hazelnut sundae in a massive bowl with chocolate sauce and wafer and crushed whatever sweet thing I can find in the cupboard before crying myself to sleep. — TimeLine

I am not a peacock, no, just a humble illustrator, but the man you recalled from the gym was, and while you were not taken with his strut and plume, you recalled him so vividly and described a classical situation of sexual rejection as if to reminisce about a previous victory. Appraising the man as you did, also reminiscing about it, is a part of the same game I described in fiction. No I'm not talking about a game between you and me, but the games you play with yourself and everyone else. You can't not play. How you perceive yourself is a game, how you present yourself is a game. Human interaction is lousy with unavoidable games. Not playing - stoicism really - is just another way to play.

So I implore you to give them a chance. Make them fun, interesting, and challenging. Get your hands and ego dirty.

You're more like a shaved bird sitting awkwardly in the corner chirping. — TimeLine

Why all the hand wringing, rationalizing. TL has made it pretty clear she doesn't find it welcome. Does anyone interpret her response differently than that? What more is there to say? — T Clark

Homoerotic ritualized constipated war my friend. Within it all is fair.

I've been quite careful not to cross any tangible lines though, and satire is one of the ways I enjoy expressing my ideas which in this thread have been nothing but relevant and justified.

I think TimeLine can speak for herself about whether or not "it" is welcome, but perhaps you misunderstand. "It" is an earnestly expressed defense of my ideas, which are relevant to the thread, and which have been specifically shat upon by TimeLine in this thread well before my entrance here.

I'm hand-wringing because I enjoy cheeky dialogue, and rationalizing because evidently I'm of imprecise wit.

What more is there to say? Given that the straightforward and serious bulks of my posts have been ignored, I don't know. It's all nonsense so far, which might help explain the disparate or desperate facets of my approach.

I did put effort into the however brief satirical scene on page 13 and wanted to know if anyone else was entertained by it. Did it actually make anyone uncomfortable?

Can't a man write satirical erotica for a woman without everyone trying to make it about sex?

It's 2018 people...

Is EQ emotional intelligence? I talking men and women, not general social difficulties. I don't think women are more "developed" than men or vise versa. — T Clark

I guess that I didn't understand your phrasing. Fear is an emotion, so it's redundant to say "emotionally afraid." That being the case, I though you were saying something to the effect that men were afraid of emotions in relation to women. Anyway, difficulties between men and women is social and rather general.

People in general care what other people think of them. They want to be regarded with respect and affection. More specifically, more strongly, I think men care very much what women think of them. It's tied in with longing. Men want women to love them and take care of them. That gives women a lot of power over them. They have the power to hurt them with their scorn and that is frightening. — T Clark

Fear of appearing worthless is basically insecurity. You appear to be making the general claim that men are insecure.

I think the same is true for women, maybe less strongly. I'm not sure about that.

A two minute search shows that in Western industrialized countries, according to research published by the American Psychological Association, men generally have higher levels of self-esteem than women.
Self esteem and gender - apa.org

Hard to describe. It definitely feels very vulnerable, childish. It's not a willful, adult feeling. You give yourself, surrender your will and desires to the other person in the hopes, expectations they will be close and intimate with you. That they will love you, hold you, protect you. I sure hope someone else will come along who can be more articulate about this than I am. — T Clark

I don't claim to be particularly mature now, but I do recall this sort of feeling when I was younger. Having said that, I should admit that in the relationship with my wife, she is far stronger and more capable than I. She's smarter, better looking, more willful and social, better educated, and she makes more money than I do. So maybe I've secured my childish yearning (to be loved and taken care of) and therefore no longer feel its influence? I know that I'm more dependent than I should be, and not entirely in a romantic or in a subsistence kind of way. Maybe that's what you're referring to.

Why all the hand wringing, rationalizing. TL has made it pretty clear she doesn't find it welcome. Does anyone interpret her response differently than that? What more is there to say? — T Clark

I read it as she's majorly into him. Stop interfering.

Did it actually make anyone uncomfortable? — VagabondSpectre

Nope.

Can't a man write satirical erotica for a woman without everyone trying to make it about sex?

It's 2018 people... — VagabondSpectre

I am guessing you are speaking tongue in cheek as most "erotica" satirical or not is still dipping into the inner sensual pool of others.

Which is why I made the comment about penning personalized erotica. Written erotica, especially for women, is some of the most favored form of sexual self arousal. As a result inserting someone's name or nickname into the written story increases the connection between the reader and her inner being that she often keeps protected from being put into vulnerable positions.

The fantasy that is created in the mind by words read, can rarely be matched by a partner in bed. :wink:

I guess that I didn't understand your phrasing. Fear is an emotion, so it's redundant to say "emotionally afraid." That being the case, I though you were saying something to the effect that men were afraid of emotions in relation to women. Anyway, difficulties between men and women is social and rather general. — praxis

Emotionally afraid as opposed to physically afraid. Afraid of cruelty, unkindness, withheld love and attention.

Fear of appearing worthless is basically insecurity. You appear to be making the general claim that men are insecure. — praxis

Yes, in my experience, men are insecure in their relationships with women. I think women are also insecure in their relationships with men.

A two minute search shows that in Western industrialized countries, according to research published by the American Psychological Association, men generally have higher levels of self-esteem than women. — praxis

What is the significance of that fact in this context?

I don't claim to be particularly mature now, but I do recall this sort of feeling when I was younger. Having said that, I should admit that in the relationship with my wife, she is far stronger and more capable than I. She's smarter, better looking, more willful and social, better educated, and she makes more money than I do. So maybe I've secured my childish yearning (to be loved and taken care of) and therefore no longer feel its influence? I know that I'm more dependent than I should be, and not entirely in a romantic or in a subsistence kind of way. Maybe that's what you're referring to. — praxis

I don't know exactly how the experience you're describing fits into what I'm talking about. Also, I don't expect that everyone experiences the relationships we are discussing the same way I do.

As a result inserting someone's name or nickname into the written story increases the connection between the reader and her inner being that she often keeps protected from being put into vulnerable positions. — ArguingWAristotleTiff

And this is how I learn how my name has been demeaned and used for a cheap thrill?

And this is how I learn how my name has been demeaned and used for a cheap thrill? — Hanover

:rofl: I'm sorry Hanover. I would ask for your forgiveness but not before coming completely clean and informing you that you are also a fire fighter. :up: :halo: