Monday, May 08, 2006
MARRIAGES
The definite word. Marriages have not worked since the day of inception of the institution for any one the man or the woman. It may be a design more in keeping the woman in mind. There may be such a institution in the future may be an open question that begs it self. It may, I say just may have been created by the woman herself, given the parameters under study currently.
Saturday, May 06, 2006
We have a sense of self. That may be amorphous or in patches or have a feel of the misty and shroudy is another question altogather. The fountainhead of all action/misaction/inaction is always the self. May be a relationship should nurture the sense of self in a very balance. The sense of self mostly comes from appreciation of a given matrix/matrices. And self is heavily dependent on thought. We think about everything, mostly, except the self. Thoughts are by nature post transaction, that is they are about. Thoughts are never it. Always about. But if we look at all our endevours it is mostly this post transaction analysis that has got us where we are at, good/bad whatever.Any kind of analysis depends on data that is frozen inlinear time. I am digressing a little. But it seems evaluation of a relationship is not possible without looking at our thought processes. On reaching a point of continous awareness, when there is no bull and no clover for the bull, there wont be any wandering mind.
Friday, April 07, 2006
Reflections on the Myth
For reference to the Myth please visit: http://www.sindur.blogspot.com/
Reflections on the Myth
I am making certain issues clear at the outset so that there are no confusions of any kind later. I am not a professional wordsmith that is as in author. I am not placing any blame or any accusation on the womankind for any of these issues that I have brought forth here. The same can be said about us men too. One to one, I personally think the woman is more caring than man, more intelligent, more tolerant, in fact more everything than man except physical strength and even that difference will not be significant down the line say after another five hundred or thousand years. I am writing about these because of many reasons, but primarily to create awareness in all responsible males and females about the issues involved. Males are as a rule more emotional about their women than women are about their men. There exist many writings on the subject of man-woman relationship, volumes of psychological, philosophical texts. What I wish to bring out is not along these established lines but different. I have a lot of questions that puzzle me all the time. For example. Could we define a Meta class on the man woman relationship? Could we have been wrong about this marriage between man and woman all along? To my mind the marriage model of relationship has not worked from the time it has been set up. Or is it a model of how things will be in the future and is a top down system? How is it that men all over the world decided to bring the women to their Home instead of going to stay at the place of the woman? Some women had pretty powerful fathers, but invariably they permitted the woman to be taken away to the man’s home. Why? What did man know about woman or about himself that led to this? How has such implicit knowledge changed over the past thousands of years to lead to this state? And many such related and unrelated questions. I have some hard questions too. For example, do we know of any sexually satisfied woman? And if there is one such, what is the exact length of such satiation in terms of linear time. Or, worse still is there anything such as a clinically definable sexual satisfaction point in women. I am sure doctors will say that yes there is. But I am talking of a sexually satisfied woman that would have her satisfaction level so high that she wont seeks sexual satisfaction anywhere else. Or that is the Myth? Consider age, environment, culture and everything in between. Again I wonder what is the satisfaction level of women. Women that I have talked to say, such a thing as a repeat need may vary from woman to woman and may be from a half hour to several years and depends upon a lot of factors. That means that the need is more psychological than physiological as we are led to believe. If such a need were to be purely physiological then I as a male could understand it and rationalize it. God help us if it is anything other than physiological. A brief introduction about myself is in order here. I am an Indian, born and brought up by very Indian parents in the heart of India. I will make just one statement about Indians here. We carry a lot of baggage of the past, without really knowing their significance or implications. Some Indian/s, very long ago obviously decided that only possible sexual relationship was within marriage. Some Greeks, Chinese and Negroes and Eskimos did like wise, without consulting each other. Funny coincidence isn’t it? That was that and Indians have been trying to carry that down through the ages. Even when their heart and mind tells them otherwise. I have tried to figure out the origin of such and related baggage and where and how such behavioral issues could have been defined as an unspoken but learnt well truth. I am speaking of married and indian couples to whom, divorce was not an option. In the Indian context divorce is hard to get and is not looked upon favorably. Once married you stay married. Divorce is still not an option, because men and women need each other, of this I am sure. To my mind if we could divorce our need of a woman that would be actual divorce, but that seldom happens and likewise the woman divorced her need for a man. But being as we are that is not an advisable option some say, because the human race will then be extinct. But really does that worry you, the extinction of the human race or our unhappiness at the great imbalance. Let us stick with our own unhappiness and see if we can work out something. I have read the original versions of the Upanisads, a large part of the Vedas, Bhagabad Gita and a lot of other related Indian documents that the majority of well read Indians do not know exist. I have also read the Kamasutras as well as some other related Indian Tantric documents that the majority of well read Indians do not know exist. The Kamasutras are a much later document, but pertinent, never the less. Also at no point of time in any literature of the world, that I have read, have I found any direct reference to what I am talking here. Men do not discuss their women, that is simply not in fashion. Among other things, it hurts their ego to admit of any deficiency in their maleness. That is one of the primary fallacies that I wish to destroy among many others. As an aside, you may not know it, women discuss their men freely and is a major past time for them. But you in whose hand lies this little document are the best judge about what I am to say here. To my mind the male sexuality pales into insignificance when compared to the female’s in terms of intensity, depth, effect on the whole body etc. This reflection has been written roughly two years after I wrote the book. I have covered a lot of ground since then. I have had sufficient time to read the text many times over and have not wished to change it. I think I am in a position to evaluate the issue as objectively as possible, call it the creator’s perspective or what you will. The book has come about as a genuine concern for the state of affairs in the man-woman relationship. No doubt my own unhappiness and a broken marriage have contributed greatly to this work. I have had ample time to look at healthy couples and not so healthy couples. The findings are uniform across the table. There is no sexual fidelity in marriage. I earnestly hope you want to differ, and if you do, you will one of the very rare ones and for that you should thank our maker. But the average marriage knows no sexual fidelity. I know of couples sleeping out of their marriage as early as within five days. I am talking of only Indian couples. The fourth day in an Indian marriage is very important at least in my part of the country, in that it is the first day the couple get to have sex. Male sexuality is very different from female sexuality. Males need rest and recharging between each sexual act and having carefully looked at the apparel of men all over the world I can safely say that no male dress is sexually aggressive. Males do not look at sex the same way as females do. Males do not dress for sex. Females do. The same is not true of the female dress. The Indian sari, the five meters of cloth is a very sexually aggressive dress and can be lethal, let alone European blouses and American mini skirts. Multi billion dollar industries are fuelled by female sexuality, apparel, cosmetics, fashion, pornography, advertisements; wow, some drive isn’t it? It will not be wrong to say that the female sexuality is a major driving factor in most spheres of human activity. Not so the male sexuality. The male sexual ability is a limited resource and has nothing to write home about. The female sexual ability is not a limited resource as compared to the male. I have seen that very few adult males seek out sex. Same can not be said of adult females. So who and how decided on marital fidelity? This observation may be partly because I am a male and would not notice any advances of adult males, a woman may have a different opinion on this. This is however an observation in public places where one sees a lot of mixed crowds and observes casual personal interactions. What attracts us to each other? It seems males are more attracted to outward female appearance but females are attracted to some inner aspect of the male. The woman sees height. The woman sees intensity. The woman sees smoothness in an obviously socially unaccepted behavior handled well in the male. She sees how much protection, the man will provide to her ego, and take the entire responsibility of the elicit relationship on his own shoulders. These are complex requirements and many women have a hard time finding all in a single extra marital relationship. The woman does not expect any break in the social status while the man and woman are in the company of others. She expects the man to understand when to proceed with the act, and devise ways and means to create the opportunities. She expects no acceptance of this until at least the male spouse has been conveyed of the situation indirectly. This may happen with a common known gesture between the woman and her spouse or by other non-verbal means. This communication is seldom verbal. So much of duplicity. For whose benefit? Clearly the sexual ability of the male and female are a distinct mismatch, so how was marital fidelity decided upon through out the world? The male was the provider and the protector till date so the male was instrumental in designing the relationship model; well then isn’t it time now to change it. The male was the provider, he had a social standing in the community. I do not understand how social standing could be equated with sexual efficiency? Can you figure it out or is it just an ego issue? But if we look at the origin of the community, we could find some indirect answers. The chief was the man who fought most successfully. Fighting skills were equated with sexual ability. Could have been. But is there a relationship? Good fighting skills meant excellent physical condition. The male was healthy, if nothing else. Those days are gone at least in many parts of the world. The woman is earning and finding respect in the eyes of men. So perhaps the males of the world have been in the wrong all this while in demanding fidelity out of an unwilling woman, who in fact rejoiced in the sexuality of the gardener and found husband, the Governor repulsive. Let us look at a man-woman relationship in brief. What does it consist of? One obvious component is the comfort level of being together. The second level is sexual. Given a man and a woman, they will sleep with each other. A comparison is bound to occur with previous similar experiences. So, the second layer must be, I don’t know which word to use, satisfying or fulfilling or enjoyable, something on these lines. More importantly, it must be sustainable over the years. And that it is not sustainable at the same level for years is the actual and practical side of the equation. A sexually unsatisfied woman is irritable, given to anger easily and has low tolerance levels. The third layer is bringing up a child. Mostly woman does all the bringing up. It is no use pretending otherwise. She is more sensitive, more caring and more tuned in to the needs of the child than the man. OK, I am not saying man should not be involved in or is therefore absolved of all child rearing activity. He does and will be involved in child rearing, but at the most that is marginal and from a woman’s point of view insignificant. All his efforts at child rearing will not count to much in the eyes of the woman. This perception is important. You think you are doing enough, but does your spouse think the same? Not enough sweet talk, not enough foreplay, not enough attention, not enough care, not enough excitement, not enough in short. At the current level of feminine assessment may be ninety of hundred men will have to stay without a woman. Is having a woman a demographic process as well meaning, must each man have at least one woman and vice verse. If women were to make the selection, which is the actual basis of a relationship I don’t think many of us would qualify. In ancient India, the princess had the choice of selection. The princes were paraded before her much like horses and she chose one of them. The choice was of course guided by other factors, but the important point is that such a format was in existence once upon a time. Only Draupadi had five husbands, the lucky one. Other Indian women have had only one legal husband so far. In this rough three-layer relationship for the woman, the layer of sexual relationship, the layer of marriage, living and the layer of the male whose child she should like to bear. The requirement of these three layers seldom find themselves in one man, I am told. As I said in the book is the woman looking for a God and a very healthy animal in a mere mortal? Some of us say that a relationship is a very complex issue and cannot be subject to rational analysis. Our ancestors who obviously knew something and were different from us significantly have decided this marriage model for us. Here I am assuming that this model worked for them, but I know for a fact that it does not work for any one, the male or the female. It may have been designed keeping in mind the human child that needs a lot of care and protection. But elephants are not married to each other and take care of their babies efficiently; the herd takes care of that. So how have we landed into a situation that is potentially unstable and rife with conflict and tension because of just one reason, our own little understood sexuality, our male vanity. Now we have gay and lesbian marriages, and we are going crazier by the minute. While on the child issue, my observation is that most women do not want any child. Why should she? It is such a thankless chore anyway. If we are not happy, should we create more unhappiness for another human being by bringing him/her into this world? For that matter, no male wants a child either. Continuation of blood line is as much a myth as marital fidelity. These days guys are not sure if they are bringing up their own child, or the neighbor’s with so much effort. What is this baggage with the blood line anyway? There definitely is such a thing as a blood line, but we see that later in another title may be. There was the question of emotional and physical sustenance in old age, but old age homes are doing pretty well, thank you. Ask any senior citizen, most have bitter experiences with their offspring or his spouse and are touchy about the whole issue. I as one human being have done nothing significant for my parents. I would have liked to but that is just the point, I haven’t been able to and that is what counts. So that issue is also settled. It is not gratifying to bring up another human being for a quarter century to have him leave you high and dry once he gets married and decides to stay away from home. Such a decision is made mostly by the woman and who pays for it, the uneasy son and the old parents. Such a decision by the woman is more often than not is fuelled by the excitement of finding more guys to sleep with in an open community. Talk about marital fidelity! The objective of these reflections is to assess the assertion that marital fidelity is a Myth. By fidelity I mean just one thing, sexual fidelity. If it is in fact a myth then who is in pretense and who is in ignorance? If there were to be no fidelity in a relationship, then isn’t it high time we rational humans designed a better human relationship model that accepts this fact in the relationship without a lot of bitter recriminations on both sides? And redesigned our laws to suit this new model? Why do we abide by this myth? Why are we males not doing anything about this? All kinds of views on the subject exist. But I am putting forward certain lines of thinking that we should follow if we are to find a consensus on the subject. I am sure of the one fact, even if this hurts the male vanity somewhat grievously, is that our perception of own maleness is not the same as our sexual partner's. We rarely take feedbacks from the woman. Even if we asked, the woman wont tell us, that is for sure, if she is married to us and is the mother of our child. And we let it go at that. I am happy to see woman expressing such a private thing as this more openly, but expressions have been more out of disgust or derision for the male. But they still need some gentle coaxing. But I am ashamed that we males, who pride ourselves on our superiority in many domains, and those domains we are loosing very fast to woman, should be so naïve about practically the only thing that makes us different from woman. Are the work pressures too high? Are the secretaries more sexually attractive options than the wife at home. The wife was the prime option once upon a time, we seem to remember. Why does the woman not tell the man? Why does she seek a liaison outside the holy matrimony as we remember it was called not so long ago. The man continues to think He can satisfy the woman and seeks fresh women out, where as his wife seeks out new guys to sleep with. Isn’t that puzzling behavior? Who is in serious error here? The man I should assume and my assumption will be correct. Some men may be worried about their knowledge, if they know it and can a man self correct such a situation, without interfering with the outward behavior of the woman. Imposition of behavior patterns has resulted in the mess we are currently in anyway. Man has a wrong perception of his sexual prowess and tends to equate it with his other physical, intellectual, material or achievements. We pride ourselves on thinking and rationality. But when it comes to our own private sexual behavior there appears to be mental block. I see many men permitting their wives, extramarital sex. This is done covertly and the drive may originate in the woman herself. This is done out of compulsion to retain the woman and child at all costs, by the man. This is the whole issue. Why not think out something clearly and on lines of less guilt for both the man and the woman? Leaving a marriage is not seen as a manly thing to do. And admitting that you as a man are unable to cope with your wife’s sexuality is a blow that many men will not be able to sustain. I keep going back. This sexuality of the wife is a projected issue or a power response in the relationship? To me it appears as if the woman were to be saying you are no good as my husband in matters of sex, so you are no good as a husband as well. She appears to take over the household just on this reasoning. In my observation houses with dominant female partners also have the highest occurrence of female marital infidelity. Now is this a coincidence or there is some design behind it? Now, it seems to me, there will be some genuine cases of sexual inefficiency, but most of the time it is the woman who is defining this inefficiency and not the man. This definition is not clinical. Women also will sleep out of a relationship, even if the man was sexually efficient. This is puzzling behavior. Perhaps there is some kind of a drive that the woman has of which we the males are not aware of as yet. Men are not sure of the sexual requirements of their relationship with women, but are the women themselves? Obviously we do and fidelity is a casualty but should we use sex as a tool to achieve any other end? One interesting observation here is that if such a thing happens it some times strengthens the man-woman relationship. That is in a different matrix altogether and merits a separate discussion. But one telling point. The strength comes from the assumption that fidelity is a given. Unfortunately that is actually never the case with the man or the woman, so I wonder how or why there should be a gain in the strength and where does it comes from. This is very important and the main reason of my going to such lengths to write about an issue that is prickly to both the sides. Do we men and women know what attracts each other and what leads to the sexual act? If we are sensitive enough to follow our response and actions you will very soon observe that it is always the woman that initiates the sexual act, but we don't know it yet, we guys are that stupid. If we derive any satisfaction from the same then it was OK, but if leaves you unsatisfied then it is time to evaluate our means of locating and evaluating partners or better still the reasons of that attraction. But I am way ahead of myself and we were discussing fidelity. There is also the fact of dominance in a relationship, though why should that be a major issue, I have not understood as yet. Perhaps this happens as a reaction to the partner’s ego. The sense of self or the I in the eye creates this problem. Can we have a self without the I. For the time being let us assume yes. I will discuss it at length later. Are the women seeking something in a relationship that they are unable to find in the men? That indefinable something that is just beyond the reach of a relationship, there yet not there. Is there a clearly definable point where a man can say that the woman is sexually satiated. Let us rephrase the question is there a clearly definable point where the woman can say she is sexually satiated and needs no more for such a duration of time? My discussions with friends have led me to believe I have some kind of unique experience with myself. I have read some of the Indian documentation on the subject as well as Chinese and Japanese. I am trying to correlate some underlying truths so that we could reach some point of understanding about what needs to be done here. Any form of self awareness is meditative. Meditation as we Indians understand is the beginning part, but when matured, as in the Zen monk in the Japanese folk lore, it is extraordinarily attentive even when selling wine. That state is what I am talking about. Men, who have mattered around the world, were the men who were self aware. Like the old saying the men who mattered down the ages were the ones the Gods talked to. Those men still matter. These men must have found one common aspect in their women, I say must have because their uniformly independent decision to let the woman be the taken to the man’s home points towards this conscious or subconscious finding. · The woman does not have inner energy configuration as the self aware man has. At this point let us say she has a different configuration. · Woman’s energy configuration is subtle and may be more complex than the man’s. She definitely has one, that is for sure. · Sex alone can reconfigure a woman’s inner energy lines into some semblance that has some kind of synchronization with the man’s. · The energy layers in the woman correspond over a period of time with the man she is sleeping with. · If she has inherited superior energy configuration, she will configure to that and will be directly unhappy with her spouse, energy wise. · The energy lines configuration between men vary. My local documentation says sixteen. Accepted North Indian configurations are eight. · The best way to maintain harmony between the man and the woman was to get them married and let them stay that way, so that any growth in the man would be reflected in the woman. · There may not be any other reason except this. As of the moment of my writing this, I am aware that the conscious men of the world are beginning wonder if the women are differently configured and if so exactly what is the configuration. I am also aware that woman’s energy lines do not develop or grow as man’s does. As an aside, it is pertinent to note that women have had no right to Vedas, not by some male chauvinistic design, but because they could not benefit from it directly. This may have been the real reason, woman has been the second sex all along. But true feminine independence, may not be that far away. But that is only as far as the Indian context goes. May be that is why man did not permit the woman sexual infidelity in marriage. Just may be. The irony is that it is the man who must find this configuration and set the woman free. My elders say this is true Love! · A lot of experiment with the energy substratum of the woman has been carried out in India and USA, but with partial success. Then again, there is a qualifier. If the woman inherited some distinct configuration, it has been successful. But the woman, has mostly behaved like her father or grandfather, and not as a woman. · If, that is a big if, if we men find the feminine configuration may be the man’s energy lines could be redesigned along the same lines, for is not woman, the mother of man? I say this because, firstly, there exist a lot of methods, I have been exposed to at least three, of realigning the man’s energy lines and no one seems to be very sure about the exact configuration either. Secondly, the man’s energy lines are too unwieldy and appear to be a mapping of some sort. The subject of my next title will be these energy lines, configurations, movements, responsibilities and such.
Reflections on the Myth
I am making certain issues clear at the outset so that there are no confusions of any kind later. I am not a professional wordsmith that is as in author. I am not placing any blame or any accusation on the womankind for any of these issues that I have brought forth here. The same can be said about us men too. One to one, I personally think the woman is more caring than man, more intelligent, more tolerant, in fact more everything than man except physical strength and even that difference will not be significant down the line say after another five hundred or thousand years. I am writing about these because of many reasons, but primarily to create awareness in all responsible males and females about the issues involved. Males are as a rule more emotional about their women than women are about their men. There exist many writings on the subject of man-woman relationship, volumes of psychological, philosophical texts. What I wish to bring out is not along these established lines but different. I have a lot of questions that puzzle me all the time. For example. Could we define a Meta class on the man woman relationship? Could we have been wrong about this marriage between man and woman all along? To my mind the marriage model of relationship has not worked from the time it has been set up. Or is it a model of how things will be in the future and is a top down system? How is it that men all over the world decided to bring the women to their Home instead of going to stay at the place of the woman? Some women had pretty powerful fathers, but invariably they permitted the woman to be taken away to the man’s home. Why? What did man know about woman or about himself that led to this? How has such implicit knowledge changed over the past thousands of years to lead to this state? And many such related and unrelated questions. I have some hard questions too. For example, do we know of any sexually satisfied woman? And if there is one such, what is the exact length of such satiation in terms of linear time. Or, worse still is there anything such as a clinically definable sexual satisfaction point in women. I am sure doctors will say that yes there is. But I am talking of a sexually satisfied woman that would have her satisfaction level so high that she wont seeks sexual satisfaction anywhere else. Or that is the Myth? Consider age, environment, culture and everything in between. Again I wonder what is the satisfaction level of women. Women that I have talked to say, such a thing as a repeat need may vary from woman to woman and may be from a half hour to several years and depends upon a lot of factors. That means that the need is more psychological than physiological as we are led to believe. If such a need were to be purely physiological then I as a male could understand it and rationalize it. God help us if it is anything other than physiological. A brief introduction about myself is in order here. I am an Indian, born and brought up by very Indian parents in the heart of India. I will make just one statement about Indians here. We carry a lot of baggage of the past, without really knowing their significance or implications. Some Indian/s, very long ago obviously decided that only possible sexual relationship was within marriage. Some Greeks, Chinese and Negroes and Eskimos did like wise, without consulting each other. Funny coincidence isn’t it? That was that and Indians have been trying to carry that down through the ages. Even when their heart and mind tells them otherwise. I have tried to figure out the origin of such and related baggage and where and how such behavioral issues could have been defined as an unspoken but learnt well truth. I am speaking of married and indian couples to whom, divorce was not an option. In the Indian context divorce is hard to get and is not looked upon favorably. Once married you stay married. Divorce is still not an option, because men and women need each other, of this I am sure. To my mind if we could divorce our need of a woman that would be actual divorce, but that seldom happens and likewise the woman divorced her need for a man. But being as we are that is not an advisable option some say, because the human race will then be extinct. But really does that worry you, the extinction of the human race or our unhappiness at the great imbalance. Let us stick with our own unhappiness and see if we can work out something. I have read the original versions of the Upanisads, a large part of the Vedas, Bhagabad Gita and a lot of other related Indian documents that the majority of well read Indians do not know exist. I have also read the Kamasutras as well as some other related Indian Tantric documents that the majority of well read Indians do not know exist. The Kamasutras are a much later document, but pertinent, never the less. Also at no point of time in any literature of the world, that I have read, have I found any direct reference to what I am talking here. Men do not discuss their women, that is simply not in fashion. Among other things, it hurts their ego to admit of any deficiency in their maleness. That is one of the primary fallacies that I wish to destroy among many others. As an aside, you may not know it, women discuss their men freely and is a major past time for them. But you in whose hand lies this little document are the best judge about what I am to say here. To my mind the male sexuality pales into insignificance when compared to the female’s in terms of intensity, depth, effect on the whole body etc. This reflection has been written roughly two years after I wrote the book. I have covered a lot of ground since then. I have had sufficient time to read the text many times over and have not wished to change it. I think I am in a position to evaluate the issue as objectively as possible, call it the creator’s perspective or what you will. The book has come about as a genuine concern for the state of affairs in the man-woman relationship. No doubt my own unhappiness and a broken marriage have contributed greatly to this work. I have had ample time to look at healthy couples and not so healthy couples. The findings are uniform across the table. There is no sexual fidelity in marriage. I earnestly hope you want to differ, and if you do, you will one of the very rare ones and for that you should thank our maker. But the average marriage knows no sexual fidelity. I know of couples sleeping out of their marriage as early as within five days. I am talking of only Indian couples. The fourth day in an Indian marriage is very important at least in my part of the country, in that it is the first day the couple get to have sex. Male sexuality is very different from female sexuality. Males need rest and recharging between each sexual act and having carefully looked at the apparel of men all over the world I can safely say that no male dress is sexually aggressive. Males do not look at sex the same way as females do. Males do not dress for sex. Females do. The same is not true of the female dress. The Indian sari, the five meters of cloth is a very sexually aggressive dress and can be lethal, let alone European blouses and American mini skirts. Multi billion dollar industries are fuelled by female sexuality, apparel, cosmetics, fashion, pornography, advertisements; wow, some drive isn’t it? It will not be wrong to say that the female sexuality is a major driving factor in most spheres of human activity. Not so the male sexuality. The male sexual ability is a limited resource and has nothing to write home about. The female sexual ability is not a limited resource as compared to the male. I have seen that very few adult males seek out sex. Same can not be said of adult females. So who and how decided on marital fidelity? This observation may be partly because I am a male and would not notice any advances of adult males, a woman may have a different opinion on this. This is however an observation in public places where one sees a lot of mixed crowds and observes casual personal interactions. What attracts us to each other? It seems males are more attracted to outward female appearance but females are attracted to some inner aspect of the male. The woman sees height. The woman sees intensity. The woman sees smoothness in an obviously socially unaccepted behavior handled well in the male. She sees how much protection, the man will provide to her ego, and take the entire responsibility of the elicit relationship on his own shoulders. These are complex requirements and many women have a hard time finding all in a single extra marital relationship. The woman does not expect any break in the social status while the man and woman are in the company of others. She expects the man to understand when to proceed with the act, and devise ways and means to create the opportunities. She expects no acceptance of this until at least the male spouse has been conveyed of the situation indirectly. This may happen with a common known gesture between the woman and her spouse or by other non-verbal means. This communication is seldom verbal. So much of duplicity. For whose benefit? Clearly the sexual ability of the male and female are a distinct mismatch, so how was marital fidelity decided upon through out the world? The male was the provider and the protector till date so the male was instrumental in designing the relationship model; well then isn’t it time now to change it. The male was the provider, he had a social standing in the community. I do not understand how social standing could be equated with sexual efficiency? Can you figure it out or is it just an ego issue? But if we look at the origin of the community, we could find some indirect answers. The chief was the man who fought most successfully. Fighting skills were equated with sexual ability. Could have been. But is there a relationship? Good fighting skills meant excellent physical condition. The male was healthy, if nothing else. Those days are gone at least in many parts of the world. The woman is earning and finding respect in the eyes of men. So perhaps the males of the world have been in the wrong all this while in demanding fidelity out of an unwilling woman, who in fact rejoiced in the sexuality of the gardener and found husband, the Governor repulsive. Let us look at a man-woman relationship in brief. What does it consist of? One obvious component is the comfort level of being together. The second level is sexual. Given a man and a woman, they will sleep with each other. A comparison is bound to occur with previous similar experiences. So, the second layer must be, I don’t know which word to use, satisfying or fulfilling or enjoyable, something on these lines. More importantly, it must be sustainable over the years. And that it is not sustainable at the same level for years is the actual and practical side of the equation. A sexually unsatisfied woman is irritable, given to anger easily and has low tolerance levels. The third layer is bringing up a child. Mostly woman does all the bringing up. It is no use pretending otherwise. She is more sensitive, more caring and more tuned in to the needs of the child than the man. OK, I am not saying man should not be involved in or is therefore absolved of all child rearing activity. He does and will be involved in child rearing, but at the most that is marginal and from a woman’s point of view insignificant. All his efforts at child rearing will not count to much in the eyes of the woman. This perception is important. You think you are doing enough, but does your spouse think the same? Not enough sweet talk, not enough foreplay, not enough attention, not enough care, not enough excitement, not enough in short. At the current level of feminine assessment may be ninety of hundred men will have to stay without a woman. Is having a woman a demographic process as well meaning, must each man have at least one woman and vice verse. If women were to make the selection, which is the actual basis of a relationship I don’t think many of us would qualify. In ancient India, the princess had the choice of selection. The princes were paraded before her much like horses and she chose one of them. The choice was of course guided by other factors, but the important point is that such a format was in existence once upon a time. Only Draupadi had five husbands, the lucky one. Other Indian women have had only one legal husband so far. In this rough three-layer relationship for the woman, the layer of sexual relationship, the layer of marriage, living and the layer of the male whose child she should like to bear. The requirement of these three layers seldom find themselves in one man, I am told. As I said in the book is the woman looking for a God and a very healthy animal in a mere mortal? Some of us say that a relationship is a very complex issue and cannot be subject to rational analysis. Our ancestors who obviously knew something and were different from us significantly have decided this marriage model for us. Here I am assuming that this model worked for them, but I know for a fact that it does not work for any one, the male or the female. It may have been designed keeping in mind the human child that needs a lot of care and protection. But elephants are not married to each other and take care of their babies efficiently; the herd takes care of that. So how have we landed into a situation that is potentially unstable and rife with conflict and tension because of just one reason, our own little understood sexuality, our male vanity. Now we have gay and lesbian marriages, and we are going crazier by the minute. While on the child issue, my observation is that most women do not want any child. Why should she? It is such a thankless chore anyway. If we are not happy, should we create more unhappiness for another human being by bringing him/her into this world? For that matter, no male wants a child either. Continuation of blood line is as much a myth as marital fidelity. These days guys are not sure if they are bringing up their own child, or the neighbor’s with so much effort. What is this baggage with the blood line anyway? There definitely is such a thing as a blood line, but we see that later in another title may be. There was the question of emotional and physical sustenance in old age, but old age homes are doing pretty well, thank you. Ask any senior citizen, most have bitter experiences with their offspring or his spouse and are touchy about the whole issue. I as one human being have done nothing significant for my parents. I would have liked to but that is just the point, I haven’t been able to and that is what counts. So that issue is also settled. It is not gratifying to bring up another human being for a quarter century to have him leave you high and dry once he gets married and decides to stay away from home. Such a decision is made mostly by the woman and who pays for it, the uneasy son and the old parents. Such a decision by the woman is more often than not is fuelled by the excitement of finding more guys to sleep with in an open community. Talk about marital fidelity! The objective of these reflections is to assess the assertion that marital fidelity is a Myth. By fidelity I mean just one thing, sexual fidelity. If it is in fact a myth then who is in pretense and who is in ignorance? If there were to be no fidelity in a relationship, then isn’t it high time we rational humans designed a better human relationship model that accepts this fact in the relationship without a lot of bitter recriminations on both sides? And redesigned our laws to suit this new model? Why do we abide by this myth? Why are we males not doing anything about this? All kinds of views on the subject exist. But I am putting forward certain lines of thinking that we should follow if we are to find a consensus on the subject. I am sure of the one fact, even if this hurts the male vanity somewhat grievously, is that our perception of own maleness is not the same as our sexual partner's. We rarely take feedbacks from the woman. Even if we asked, the woman wont tell us, that is for sure, if she is married to us and is the mother of our child. And we let it go at that. I am happy to see woman expressing such a private thing as this more openly, but expressions have been more out of disgust or derision for the male. But they still need some gentle coaxing. But I am ashamed that we males, who pride ourselves on our superiority in many domains, and those domains we are loosing very fast to woman, should be so naïve about practically the only thing that makes us different from woman. Are the work pressures too high? Are the secretaries more sexually attractive options than the wife at home. The wife was the prime option once upon a time, we seem to remember. Why does the woman not tell the man? Why does she seek a liaison outside the holy matrimony as we remember it was called not so long ago. The man continues to think He can satisfy the woman and seeks fresh women out, where as his wife seeks out new guys to sleep with. Isn’t that puzzling behavior? Who is in serious error here? The man I should assume and my assumption will be correct. Some men may be worried about their knowledge, if they know it and can a man self correct such a situation, without interfering with the outward behavior of the woman. Imposition of behavior patterns has resulted in the mess we are currently in anyway. Man has a wrong perception of his sexual prowess and tends to equate it with his other physical, intellectual, material or achievements. We pride ourselves on thinking and rationality. But when it comes to our own private sexual behavior there appears to be mental block. I see many men permitting their wives, extramarital sex. This is done covertly and the drive may originate in the woman herself. This is done out of compulsion to retain the woman and child at all costs, by the man. This is the whole issue. Why not think out something clearly and on lines of less guilt for both the man and the woman? Leaving a marriage is not seen as a manly thing to do. And admitting that you as a man are unable to cope with your wife’s sexuality is a blow that many men will not be able to sustain. I keep going back. This sexuality of the wife is a projected issue or a power response in the relationship? To me it appears as if the woman were to be saying you are no good as my husband in matters of sex, so you are no good as a husband as well. She appears to take over the household just on this reasoning. In my observation houses with dominant female partners also have the highest occurrence of female marital infidelity. Now is this a coincidence or there is some design behind it? Now, it seems to me, there will be some genuine cases of sexual inefficiency, but most of the time it is the woman who is defining this inefficiency and not the man. This definition is not clinical. Women also will sleep out of a relationship, even if the man was sexually efficient. This is puzzling behavior. Perhaps there is some kind of a drive that the woman has of which we the males are not aware of as yet. Men are not sure of the sexual requirements of their relationship with women, but are the women themselves? Obviously we do and fidelity is a casualty but should we use sex as a tool to achieve any other end? One interesting observation here is that if such a thing happens it some times strengthens the man-woman relationship. That is in a different matrix altogether and merits a separate discussion. But one telling point. The strength comes from the assumption that fidelity is a given. Unfortunately that is actually never the case with the man or the woman, so I wonder how or why there should be a gain in the strength and where does it comes from. This is very important and the main reason of my going to such lengths to write about an issue that is prickly to both the sides. Do we men and women know what attracts each other and what leads to the sexual act? If we are sensitive enough to follow our response and actions you will very soon observe that it is always the woman that initiates the sexual act, but we don't know it yet, we guys are that stupid. If we derive any satisfaction from the same then it was OK, but if leaves you unsatisfied then it is time to evaluate our means of locating and evaluating partners or better still the reasons of that attraction. But I am way ahead of myself and we were discussing fidelity. There is also the fact of dominance in a relationship, though why should that be a major issue, I have not understood as yet. Perhaps this happens as a reaction to the partner’s ego. The sense of self or the I in the eye creates this problem. Can we have a self without the I. For the time being let us assume yes. I will discuss it at length later. Are the women seeking something in a relationship that they are unable to find in the men? That indefinable something that is just beyond the reach of a relationship, there yet not there. Is there a clearly definable point where a man can say that the woman is sexually satiated. Let us rephrase the question is there a clearly definable point where the woman can say she is sexually satiated and needs no more for such a duration of time? My discussions with friends have led me to believe I have some kind of unique experience with myself. I have read some of the Indian documentation on the subject as well as Chinese and Japanese. I am trying to correlate some underlying truths so that we could reach some point of understanding about what needs to be done here. Any form of self awareness is meditative. Meditation as we Indians understand is the beginning part, but when matured, as in the Zen monk in the Japanese folk lore, it is extraordinarily attentive even when selling wine. That state is what I am talking about. Men, who have mattered around the world, were the men who were self aware. Like the old saying the men who mattered down the ages were the ones the Gods talked to. Those men still matter. These men must have found one common aspect in their women, I say must have because their uniformly independent decision to let the woman be the taken to the man’s home points towards this conscious or subconscious finding. · The woman does not have inner energy configuration as the self aware man has. At this point let us say she has a different configuration. · Woman’s energy configuration is subtle and may be more complex than the man’s. She definitely has one, that is for sure. · Sex alone can reconfigure a woman’s inner energy lines into some semblance that has some kind of synchronization with the man’s. · The energy layers in the woman correspond over a period of time with the man she is sleeping with. · If she has inherited superior energy configuration, she will configure to that and will be directly unhappy with her spouse, energy wise. · The energy lines configuration between men vary. My local documentation says sixteen. Accepted North Indian configurations are eight. · The best way to maintain harmony between the man and the woman was to get them married and let them stay that way, so that any growth in the man would be reflected in the woman. · There may not be any other reason except this. As of the moment of my writing this, I am aware that the conscious men of the world are beginning wonder if the women are differently configured and if so exactly what is the configuration. I am also aware that woman’s energy lines do not develop or grow as man’s does. As an aside, it is pertinent to note that women have had no right to Vedas, not by some male chauvinistic design, but because they could not benefit from it directly. This may have been the real reason, woman has been the second sex all along. But true feminine independence, may not be that far away. But that is only as far as the Indian context goes. May be that is why man did not permit the woman sexual infidelity in marriage. Just may be. The irony is that it is the man who must find this configuration and set the woman free. My elders say this is true Love! · A lot of experiment with the energy substratum of the woman has been carried out in India and USA, but with partial success. Then again, there is a qualifier. If the woman inherited some distinct configuration, it has been successful. But the woman, has mostly behaved like her father or grandfather, and not as a woman. · If, that is a big if, if we men find the feminine configuration may be the man’s energy lines could be redesigned along the same lines, for is not woman, the mother of man? I say this because, firstly, there exist a lot of methods, I have been exposed to at least three, of realigning the man’s energy lines and no one seems to be very sure about the exact configuration either. Secondly, the man’s energy lines are too unwieldy and appear to be a mapping of some sort. The subject of my next title will be these energy lines, configurations, movements, responsibilities and such.
