read at your own risk

[arguchik]

i'm feeling irritated, for no apparent reason. i've had a good day. the weather was nice--cool and a little cloudy. i wore a sweater, a pleasantly cozy and fuzzy one. i started reading a really interesting novel that i might use in my dissertation. i got actual work done--by which i mean writing, not just reading. i met a new friend for tea late in the afternoon and had an excellent conversation with him. he's a great combination of intellectually up my alley and easy on the eyes (without "knowing it," if you know what i mean), and he has been unambiguously gay for as long as he can remember, so it's like...good conversation without anyone trying to maneuver anyone else into bed. not that there's anything wrong with that, of course (so long as maneuv-or and maneuv-ee are both into it), it's just a more relaxed dynamic. *and* he told me i look like naomi watts, who is completely hot, so that was nice to hear (even though i don't really see the resemblance). ;-)

so what the fuck is my problem? a couple of neighbors just knocked on my door--they want me to go out for a late-night drink with them in a little while, and i don't want to go. in fact i have decided that i'm not going to go. i want to stay home and work some more. chez gaudy, the place they are headed, is cool...but they serve overpriced cocktails just like bleu bistro. it's owned by the same folks, actually--decorated by them too, so it has a similarly sexy, opium-den feel to it. it's hard to justify paying that much for a cocktail, and drinking it in an atmosphere like that, unless it's foreplay. no danger of that tonight. maybe that's why i'm grumpy.

or maybe it's the glaring contradiction made apparent by the juxtaposition of those two paragraphs: i liked the one situation because it wasn't sexual, and i want to avoid the other situation because it won't be sexual. i'm both sex-starved, and really tired of first-date sexual maneuvering, is what it boils down to. that awkwardness of trying to negotiate different styles of getting to know each other and deciding whether or not to come on to each other. the contrasts can be very stark. on the one hand, i had a seriously bad date a couple of weeks ago...and it was bad because the guy couldn't keep his fucking hands to himself, even though i told him like 3 times to knock it off (and then i told him to get lost, in case you were wondering). lol--he thought i was intimidated by his "sexual presence." whatever. on the other hand, i had an intriguing date on sunday afternoon--time literally flew--but i couldn't tell if he was taking his time, being respectful and not rushing things (which would be good); or just not into me (which would be disappointing). what does it mean, that "mr. too-much-affection" annoyed me, and "mr. does-he-like-me?" intrigues me? probably nothing all that cosmos-shaking. i just prefer lower-key men, that's all. i'm deeply suspicious of instant intimacy. it makes me want to run screaming.

Comments

[beneluxboy.livejournal.com]

"Sexual presence"—hah!

I have no other insights, save the fact that I'm often (or usually) too cautious.

[arguchik.livejournal.com]

yeah...he actually said that. "i exude a strong sexual presence, and some people find that very intimidating." i couldn't stop myself from laughing at him.

Sexual desire... feh.

[the-kender.livejournal.com]

Sexual curiousity, while annoying to receive, is sometimes just as annoying to have. Being unsure of what one can say without offending someone or making them think that -all- you're into is some kind of tail chasing action is ridiculous. One friend told me that he had the most sexual luck while telling people he didn't want any serious relationship. All relationships seem to be these days is a constant source of sexual activity until one person or the other is done with you, leaving you feeling wasted and unnecessary. No one wants to connect anymore because everyone's afraid of sexual interaction, lack of it or bad versions of it. ::ramblerambleramble::

Re: Sexual desire... feh.

[arguchik.livejournal.com]

i kind of like it, myself, at least to some extent. if i'm into someone the tension that comes from "the dance" can be very nice. if one person isn't into it, though...all kinds of badness can ensue.

frankly, i think people are afraid of the emotional intimacy that comes from really good sex (and leads to more of it). including myself. vulnerability is scary, and we are culturally conditioned to avoid that kind of vulnerability. rugged individualism, don't need noone but myself, and all that. on the other hand, that kind of intimacy benefits from time and trust. when someone (like mr. sexual presence, for example) doesn't respect a very basic boundary, all kinds of red flags go up.

so how goes the move across the mountains? you there yet?

Re: Sexual desire... feh.

[the-kender.livejournal.com]

It's such a shame that so many people are conditioned to protect themselves entirely -- that society has created emotional monsters, both offensive and defensive. I bond entirely too strongly and when someone breaks that bond it hurts all that much more. Intimacy breeds such strong pulls, but it's so sad when there lacks an intimacy that one is accustomed to.

I am not there yet, no... I'm uncertain of when I will be now.

intimacy?

[(Anonymous)]

I feel the need to scold you in much the same way I scolded L for not telling me about your blog. Perhaps you did a long time ago and I forgot. Perhaps I said something snotty about the blogs of some crazy people you had to deal with a year ago and you decided not to tell me.

Regardless, here are my thoughts:

Sexual chemistry is sexual chemistry. It either happens, or it doesn't. I'm sure some person would have sexual chemistry with that ego-centric sexual pseudo-deity you had to deal with (granted, not a person I that I would ever want to encounter in my universe, but whatever, they're out there. They deserve to get laid, too, as long as they're not republicans). Clearly, there was no real sexual chemistry with mr wannabe sex god, and he was extremely horny and willing to jump you, chemistry or not. It is a pattern amongst many of the male beasts.

I think over-sharing or 2 people not being in sync about the boundaries and progression of a relationship in its various stages is the scary thing. I don't know if I think "instant intimacy" is what I find scary-- sometimes people are very intimate with one another very quickly because they just happen to be in sync.

Hmm . . blathering. There's my two cents.

I miss you and L :(

M

Re: intimacy?

[arguchik.livejournal.com]

that is a great clarification. i'm talking about your second paragraph. as for your first paragraph...i'm still trying to get the image of republicans getting laid out of my head. but yes, i agee with you that even mr. sexual presence deserves to get laid (he is clearly not a republican). just not by me!

it's definitely true that what freaks me out is when someone wants to move faster than i do or doesn't respect my boundaries (also if that person isn't clear about his/her boundaries, if they go hot and cold on me, push me away/pull me close again, etc.). fortunately, as i've gotten older i've learned how to better recognize and articulate both what my boundaries are, and when they are being transgressed. i'm also getting better at reading people, but i still probably tend a little too much toward giving them the benefit of the doubt, or being too forgiving or diplomatic. anyway, i guess what i mean by "instant intimacy" is when the other person wants to move a lot faster than i do. however, there have been times when i have wanted to move fast too--and the other person and i were in sync about that (e.g. when my ex-husband and i started dating)--and at a certain point i think, "this is too good to be true."

p.s. i definitely sent you and L my blog address last summer when i first started it. i just didn't post much to it at first.