Last night my girl, Green Eyes, said that there are three kinds of lovers:
Givers,
Takers,
and In Betweeners.
I almost choked on my coffee when she told me a story about a dude so selfish that it felt like he was masturbating inside her. #Damn Gina.
order cheap cialis The importance of hits for the success of your sexual life. It is the body’s main detoxifying agent, taking the toxins and organisms out of your blood that are there in this region. samples viagra The dedicated team of professionals at North York’s physiotherapy and sport clinic levitra without prescription works with all athletes to treat and heal premature ejaculation and erectile dysfunction. However, tadalafil is the compound in the drug that is definitely worth exploring if faced with this issue overall. tadalafil professional cheap pdxcommercial.com
Clearly this post reflects my immersion in Black women’s sexuality narratives during finals.
You agree?
Disagree?
More Categories please?
#PeacetotheGivers. #Pow.
Hmmm. I think in spring of this year, I dated a taker. To like, the nth degree, he was a taker. Of course, I didn’t realize he was a taker until it was too late. Wait. That’s not true. My Spidey-Senses had been tingling for a while but I ignored them because I thought “I’m in my mid-20s. I should be dating by now.” Ugh. And #doh.
Currently, I’m pretty sure that I’m seeing a giver. The difference is astonishing. And a little scary, but in a good way.
Girl, there’s got to be more categories than that (and I’m do it heteronormative just because that is what I know best):
Black Panther Men
not to be confused with the Race Man
or the Feminist New Black Man (H/T)
Then there is the Lesbian Man (word to my queer homegirl for that one)
perhaps also known as
“Sensitive Ass Drake Kinda Man” (A Kismet Quotable)
Perhaps the inbetween includes the “Colonize the Pussy Man” (A Kismet Quotable–this cat thinks he’s a feminist but he puts the breaks on all those politics when it comes to his or your freedom with your own vagina)
i could do this ish all day…..Hmm.
So if I’m a giver, then the Race Man and the BP Man will eat me alive…but so might the Colonize the Pussy Man. And the Drake Man (since he likes to process and croon).
If I’m a taker, then the Drake Man might be best, since he wants to give me all he’s got, but what do I do with the Race Man? Or he might like that ish…having someone to give all his impressively large intellect and political cred to….
#funtimes
These three categories are stations on a spectrum dependent upon quantifying and scoring givings and takings to be sure one isn’t losing in a relationship. This viewpoint is divisive in that the participants constantly are facing-off to measure their net benefit from each other.
Dear Wife and I are working towards a different paradigm: we are building a marriage (married last year) in which we can express what we need and we work together to make sure we are safe, sustained, free, and growing. I have an MBA in Finance and she knows the Lord so well that He talks with her regularly. We don’t expect equal contributions from us in either of these areas in which one of us has more-developed skills. How would we equalize $ I earn and spiritual blessings she brings (and how would we say $ received are not spiritual blessings)? We each have different strengths in the soft areas of our life; how would we measure and equalize them? We also have different levels of need in those soft areas; how would we quantify and equalize the level of satisfying our needs? Rather, we just achieve sufficiency against those varying levels.
I’m more grounded/boring; she’s more exuberant/flighty. I tell her I’ll be the platform upon which she dances; she tells me she’s glad I’m a nerd because she’s never had one before.
So far, we each’ve been putting what we can on our table and it usually has resulted in us receiving enough for us. When it hasn’t been enough, we’ve counseled and counciled together to create plans for us to have enough. These plans call for us to pitch in according to our abilities until we have enough. Each of us is free to say that we lack something and then we decide how we’ll fill that need.
An observer may be interested in the long-term prospects for our arrangement. So are we! I’m hopeful because we’re in our late 50’s and so have developed a pragmatic sense of the art of the possible. (Also, independent as she is, she’s incredibly easy to be married to).
I’ve been in score-keeping relationships. Sometimes keeping score is necessary if you haven’t come to know that you’re with the right person. For now at least, I like our mutual-improvement association better. You know, developing our at-one-ment.
– – – – –
Covey describes the levels of:
– Dependence
– Independence
– Interdependence
Interdependence is the highest, but requires independence to be achieved. As he says, if you’re not independent you can’t give yourself to an interdependent relationship; you don’t own yourself enough to give yourself. You can’t give what you don’t have.
“I’ll be the platform upon which she dances.” #LOVEBEARS #chills
So glad your blog space exists, M.DOT. And not just ’cause I like you.