Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84 SMI; site sun.uucp
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxj!ihnp4!zehntel!dual!amd!decwrl!sunny
From: sunny@sun.uucp (Sunny Kirsten)
Newsgroups: net.singles
Subject: Re: Indoctrination (SO's expectations)
Message-ID: <1756@sun.uucp>
Date: Wed, 24-Oct-84 13:31:53 EDT
Article-I.D.: sun.1756
Posted: Wed Oct 24 13:31:53 1984
Date-Received: Fri, 26-Oct-84 08:44:35 EDT
References: <5390@brl-tgr.ARPA> <9524@watmath.UUCP>
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Lines: 39

> Not only is the advertising industry showering images of what we should be
> like, but we often get the same crap from the people we are most vulnerable
> with: our lovers.  Take an example purely at random: me.  With a few minor
> adjustments, I could very easily fit the body type of a model, yet I have
> had a high percentage (which might not be significant statistically as the
> sample set is relatively small, but significant enough for me to get serious
> doubts about my body) of my lovers complain about the way my body looked (some
> even helpfully suggested areas I should "work on"!).
> 
> I did get smart eventually, and I do not become intimate with anybody anymore
> without telling them that I am very sensitive to this, and could they please
> keep their comments to themselves.  I do wonder though, if I got this kind
> of abuse from usually well-meaning lovers, what other less "manhattanish"
> women have to go through.  How can the "target" NOT be fraught with insecurities
> if THE one person who is supposed to love them and find their body attractive
> is himself so critical?
> 
> Sophie Quigley
> ...!{clyde,ihnp4,decvax}!watmath!saquigley

The reason the SO is always one of the most critical people in your life,
is the way mating occurs.  Everyone walks around with a mental and emotional
template of how their "mate" should be.  But who we actually meet are just
real people like ourselves, not ideals like  our own personal ideal or the
madison ave ideal.  Often when we say "I love you" what we really mean is:
"You're pretty close to the ideal I love".  When we base relationships on the
"I'll be as close as I can be to your ideal, if you'll try to embody mine"
principle, we have to expect feedback like 'suggested areas I should "work on"'.

The real trick is to try to love each other as we "are", and try not to
project your "ideals" and then relate to them, but to relate instead to the
persons themselves.  When relationships are built on unconditional love,
rather than the conditional variety (I love you {when,if} you...), then
true security can occur.  Once you can feel secure in being loved for
yourself, rather than feeling insecure for being loved according to how
well you are doing at matching some "ideal", then you can avoid more easily
the mode of trying to live to ideals, be they madison ave or your SO's.
-- 
{ucbvax,decvax,ihnp4}!sun!sunny (Sunny Kirsten of Sun Microsystems Inc.)