Love at the times of the Civil War

[longstreetlass]

My dear friend, Redeye,

Surely you jest.

I am sorry if my descriptions above seemed narrow, and I would not wittingly leave you out. Really, though, are you not exaggerating? You are not a man, and most people could tell that by your writing alone.

Also, unlike some women, men never complain about the difference between men and women. Have you noticed this? They know they are different and going to get more and more different from the time they stop kissing mommy and start following dad around. Age 7?

I suppose I have been changed because of my experiences with men, one man in particular lately. I struggled for years with my relationship to men. Now, I no longer care that men are so different.

In fact, I would not care if they no longer spoke English (or any other language I could learn to understand, for that matter). I find I just like men, period. I like them young and I like them old. I like them in the grocery store and in the bank. I like them on bicycles. I like them in cars. (Oooo, I feel a pome coming on!)

I do not know what happened to me, but I stopped complaining about men. I started noticing more how much they like me and how willing they are to be helpful and how easy and fun it is to flirt and how most men are really quite gentlemanly and thoughtful.

Yes, they are still quite dense in some areas because they find it hard to think on, or do, too many things at once, unlike women. They can be very stubborn and inflexible because of their narrowness of thought, the negative side of their ability to focus. Still, why should they change? I like them the way they are, and they are highly trainable, though it takes time and effort(and sweetness)to get a man to learn to do what you want him to do.

Redeye, on southern men, when I say they are direct, I mean they give you their whole attention. I do not mean that they are not also subtle. This is hard to describe.

Redeye, you should meet a southern man.

LongstreetLass

[blackirish]

Redeye,
I would attribute the tempestous nature of many breakups more to a failed sharing of inner thoughts than to a cosmic coupling of natural enemies. I believe that we neccessarily hold the inner workings of our heart near, safe from any threat of harm from the outside. Only when we relinquish this security by allowing another person into our heart do we risk the kind of harm that we have no defences against. When we lay down our defences and welcome another within the bounds of our inner securities we are truly vulnerable. Percieved betrayals of this trust are the sharpest wounds and the slowest to heal. Such breaches of trust are often met with immediate retaliation and sometimes spin utterly out of control into all out emotional warfare which is by nature the most damaging kind. The only thing more painful than exposing our deepest inner thoughts to another and feeling them withdraw is to have this soul-baring later turned against you by someone you cherish.
I subscribe to the theory that emotions (and most everything else) are more accurately charted on a circular scale than on a linear one. In other words, the line between love and hate can be very fine and even oscillate back and forth in some cases rather than being on opposite ends of a linear spectrum.
I would agree that attempts to lay failed relationships upon the altar of immutable biological differences is both defeatist and dishonest and serves only to guarantee that we don't discover the actual causes. I think there is some proof of the truth in this by the simple fact that these same people will then proceed to hopefully embark upon another relationship without addressing the incongruity of such reasoning with this hopefulness. Then again, it has been my experience that many people find it more comfortable not to know the answers to many questions.

blackirish

[redeye]

LL and Blackirish,

Lots of food for thought and positive points of view. Thanks! (And yes, I'd be curious to meet a true Southern man.) I won't be visiting this parlour for a few days due to a trip, but I'm looking forward to new discussions next week.

[longstreetlass]

Dear blackirish,

I would make a pot of tea and serve a tray of cookies just to keep you in the parlor a little longer.

Have you noticed that the "Ladies Tea" is introduced by the comment, "Stop in for a quick cup of tea..."? I believe Mike Kendra must drink coffee, or he would know that there is no such thing as a "quick cup" of tea. Anyway, this is very Yankee-like...

...but our parlor is an unhurried place for deep ponderings, meaningful digressions, and romantic delights.

Your words, blackirish, are delicious; and they feed my heart. You are a really, really good man.

LongstreetLass

[longstreetlass]

Redeye,

My dear friend, would you go back and read all of blackirish's posts on this thread?

I mean get really quiet inside, and read his words. Here, a southern man right in our midst, gentle, warm, delicious, and solicitous of your emotional comfort.

LongstreetLass

[unionblue]

Rick, I have followed most of your posts here and must say I find them VERY impressive, if not somewhat elusive. I feel that I must forever occupy that category of 'Northern Man' in Longstreet Lass's mind.

All of the posts here have made me think back to my first love and how I approached that difficult time with her. The confusion of the feelings and senses! The tounge-tied anxiety and stumbling over words. THe stabs of pain and sorrow when the fear of failing at a relationship would loom.

Sweet love and horrible depression rolled up into a huge knot in your stomach, night and day, day and night! I almost thank you for the memories you have returned to me.

I look forward to your next post as well.

Unionblue

[longstreetlass]

Neil! You're back!

Neil, only a few posts away we had planned to clone you, so do not get a long face about being our "northern man." You just need to spend as much time in the parlor as your southern counterpart. It takes a while to brew tea, you know, and to sip it.

Neil, we love to hear the stories of your heart. You are always welcome in the parlor, as you well know.

LongstreetLass

[blackirish]

Lass,
Some of the thoughts I stumble upon in here seem to bolt in and out of my consciousness until I take the time to examine them in detail. You mention that liking women is healthy and gives a man a good disposition. I think you are more on target than you might suspect and would further propose that the same wisdom holds true for women and the way they feel about men.
I wonder how many men or women actually like the opposite sex. In most cases it seems that a man will love a woman or maybe even several women but do most men actually like women in general as a group? It seems to me that men and women will, when left to their own devices, choose to spend leisure time (when apart from their chosen mate) with members of their own sex. Is this choice driven by our choice of activities or is our choice of activities driven by the choice to divide by gender? I suspect that there is some truth in both suggestions.
Relating this line of reasoning to the original subject of this thread; would you say that men "like" women as a group more today than they did in the nineteenth century or less? Is our relative level of understanding between the sexes better or worse?
I suspect that it is impossible to separate our personal view of the opposite sex from our past experiences with individuals in romantic relationships. If that is the case, is it not a vicious cycle that often leads to self fulfilling prophesies of failure in our personal relationships with the opposite sex based upon past experiences with individuals? In other words, is it possible to completely separate a past negative experience with a lover from our basic view of the opposite sex?
I once read a theory in a book of philosophy concerning the reaction of a worm when stepped upon and how it will double up. The action of doubling up is a protective measure with two effects; it protects the vitals from exposure and at the same time divides the chances of a repeat experience in half. I suspect that a fair amount of the gaps in understanding between the sexes can be traced to this same reaction in all of us. After all, is there any cut deeper than a relationship smashed upon the rocks of reality? It is somewhat of a testament to the boundless strength and immortality of the soul that we recover and reach out again but I wonder if our view of the opposite sex is ever the same afterwards.

still musing,
blackirish

[longstreetlass]

Dark Prince,

You ask a lot today. I am countering your intensity with a cup of strong tea and prepare to make answer.

I tend to believe that the reigning sexual confusion - which masks itself as the equality of the sexes - does not lend itself at all to a greater understanding of ourselves, male or female.

We wonder why Madonna and other popular divas are just this side of ****ographic. Is it just that "sex sells"? It could also be a mass unconscious urge to expose the basic differences, albeit in course terms.

I do believe, though, that men and women should have the same opportunities. I have a best friend who became a corporate attorney and travels the world for the company, and makes an incredible salary, plus company car, bonuses, and stock options. Now, she regrets she did not have children. (She also suffers emotionally in her job. She is invited to dinners at the homes of her colleagues, parties put on by the wives who get to stay home.)

My point here is that our lives do not seem long enough to do it all. Though having options is always wonderful, many women cannot have a career and a family. It just does not work, at least not in the economy we presently have. Women who do manage to have a career and a family, give over care of their house and children to other people. Is this really "having a family"?

It is not always easy, as a young person fresh out of school, to know what one wants from life. In the case of women, it seems we have to be unnaturally clear at an early age on what we want because time is not our friend.

Our differences, that is, between men and women, need to be considered carefully. Not everything is possible, for men or for women, though we have been fed physics theories on randomness and relativity that have been applied (perhaps falsely) to human relationship.

I have gone on a tangent. To sum this one up, I believe we have to get very, very real about our differences, or we can never really honestly know each other. If we want to truly respect each other, we have got to acknowledge that there is intrinsic difference. Even when it is painful.

For example, I just hate the way a man retreats when he needs to sort things out. My nature is to want to take care of him at such a time, so this frustrates me; and I get lonely and do not understand how he is not also lonely for me. So, I wait it out - horrible, just horrible. Objectively speaking, I am forced by the structure of relationship to a man to act otherwise than I would. I try to think of it now as the same as any endeavor that imposes structure: writing poetry, playing a musical instrument, and so on.

Now in my roundabout female way, I will tie this in with your initial inquiry about men and women liking each other. I have met a number of men who enjoy women as a class. My father was one of them. He was the darling among female relatives. He was also a man's man. I cannot say I understand this, but I believe having had such a father has saved me the many times I have been dashed upon the rocks of relationship and my vitals exposed.

Rick, it has taken me years to get a grip on relationship with men. Again, I believe that love for my father and belief in his love for me determined that I have never given up. I have been hurt quite beyond sanity. I have come right to sanity's edge many, many times over men. I was forced to set myself right and work a little harder at understanding.

I have come to love men as a class, and I acknowledge that this may not be easy in present cultural circumstances. Love them as I do, men are a rigor. There are certain rules to being around them because there are things they enjoy, and do not enjoy, in the company of women. Women need to be careful what they say, just as men do. So, yes, I relish time spent with my female friends. I refresh myself in the company of other women.

My own conjecture on men liking women more today or more in the nineteenth century, I would say that men were conditioned to considering women more as a class in the 19th century, because they were separated as a class. What man, then, would dare express scorn for women? (Maybe only an outlaw!) Men were more dependent on the labor of women then than now.

On our present, presumed level of understanding between the sexes, I really believe little has changed. Perhaps our understanding has actually sunk to a low. Will you remind me at some point to bring the theories of deep ecology into the discussion? I have taken up a lot of space here, and I think the administrators will want to start charging me rent!

I have survived the woes expressed in your last two paragraphs. I have survived quite nicely, as a matter of fact. I refuse to give up faith in my dreams. We can choose to be defined by the highest in our reality, or the lowest. Both are real. Both are true. What matters in the end is what we choose to believe and that will define us.

My dear prince, can you do anything but want love? Is it not divine between men and women? Is it not worth putting yourself back together again, picking your own flesh off those rocks and wringing out the blood?

LongstreetLass

[blue_zouave]

I have the definite feeling that I am intruding on a personal conversation when I read this thread... therefore, I am staying out of it from now on.

I may be a Zouave, but I'm no boor!

Loading the tea things into the haversack...
Zou