quest


I am a woman of 64 and my quest is to find a mindmate
to grow old together as a mutually devoted couple
in a relationship based upon the
egalitarian rational commitment paradigm
bonded by intrinsic commitment
as each other's safe haven and secure basis.

The purpose of this blog is to enable the right man
to recognize us as reciprocal mindmates and
to encourage him to contact me:
marulaki@hotmail.com


The entries directly concerning,
who could be my mindmate,
are mainly at the beginning.
If this is your predominant interest,
I suggest to read this blog in the same order
as it was written, following the numbers.

I am German, therefore my English is sometimes faulty.

Maybe you have stumbled upon this blog not as a potential match.
Please wait a short moment before zapping.

Do you know anybody, who could be my mindmate?
Your neighbour, brother, uncle, cousin, colleague, friend?
If so, please tell him to look at this blog.
While you have no reason to do this for me,
a stranger, maybe you can make someone happy, for whom you care.

Do you have your own webpage or blog,
which someone like my mindmate to be found probably reads?
If so, please mention my quest and add a link to this blog.


Saturday, October 23, 2010

118. Unsuitable Men 5: Confounding a Partner with a Utility

Unsuitable Men 5:  Confounding a Partner with a Utility

The bonding-disabled man believes to love the woman, but he confounds infatuation and love.   Whatever qualities and values that woman might have, he is oblivious of them, he only perceives her as a body.    When the body does not attract him anymore, his bonding-disability impedes him from perceiving any further value in her. 

He loves her as he loves to eat cheese or he loves the high utility value of his bicycle.   He loves her as an object.

As long as the infatuation with her body lasts, he values the body enough to care for it.   He may consider her as a valuable property, like the bicycle, that needs good maintenance, and what grease is for the bicycle, is food and other basic necessities for a woman's body.  

People do not ask, if the beloved cheese wants to be eaten or if the beloved bicycle wants to be ridden.   They do not ask, if they are loved back, when they love cheese and the bicycle, nor how the cheese or the bicycle feel.   As long as cheese and bicycle are available, people are content.    When a man loves a woman's body the same way as he loves such an object, it is logical, that the same questions also never occur to him concerning the woman.

As long as he keeps her body in good maintenance, he subjectively feels being a good man, who does all, that is required from him as a partner.   Would he neglect the maintenance, he would not feel a bad conscience towards her, but like a fool depriving himself of the usability of his utility. 
If he has temporarily no need for a utility, he puts it in storage and feels entitled to find it there, whenever he attempts to retrieve it.
 
He is infatuated with her body, but when the infatuation fades and is gone, and there is nothing else, that attracts the man to be with the woman, then logically one day he gets rid of her, moving on to find a new infatuation with another body. 

Perceiving himself as the owner of the utility, dumping a woman is the same as discarding of an object having become useless, he considers it as his right.   Since he does not perceive a utility to have any feelings, he has no conscience about whatever he does with it, no matter if the utility is a broken tv or a woman.


Obviously, the woman's needs do not get fulfilled, when she is mistaken for an object.   But they would not get fulfilled even if she were recognized as being different from an object.  

If someone is stuck in the immaturity of an age of selfishness and selfcenteredness, then he forever feels entitled to get everything for free.   Earning is not a part of his morals or his behavioral dispositions.   Giving something in return for a benefit or advantage is only done, when there is no alternative.   The suggestion of something to be earned is perceived as an outrage by a person, who feels entitled to be given and served by others. 

Subjectively, he does not experience to ever receive from the woman anything given voluntarily.   She is not allowed a choice or an own decision.   Not only does he expect her to serve all his needs as if it were her duty, but nothing else, that she could offer, has any value for him.    She is supposed to function, as if her only purpose on earth were fulfilling every one of his needs.   Whatever he gets out of her, he considers it as his by entitlement.

Never receiving anything from her except what he considered owed to him, logically he gives nothing to her and does not care about her needs.