403. The Comfort Zone, Mutual Adapting And Compatibility

The Comfort Zone, Mutual Adapting And Compatibility

Someone commented on entry 350, where I described a man's beard as an expression of naturalness.    This instigates me to clarify the difference between compatible mutual adapting and incompatibility. 

There are two principles as the basis of a relationship:

• The importance of accepting the other as is, without any attempts or demands to change him or her.
• The importance to be reciprocally as attractive as possible, in all aspects, emotionally, intellectually and physically.   That means, attractive according to the perception and the taste of the other.     

Therefore adapting to the other is an active process based upon the motivation to be knowledgeably beneficial for and attractive to the other.   It is voluntarily, by free will and own decision.    Adapting to the other is an expression of appreciation, affection and caring.  

If one or both partners refuse to adapt and/or demand the other to change, the relationship is doomed to fail.   This happens often, when a couple's initial infatuation wears off and they discover to be mismatched. 

Compatibility of a couple means, that reciprocal adaptations are both, sufficiently beneficial or pleasing to satisfy the other's needs and still entirely inside the comfort zone.   

A couple is incompatible and should not get involved, whenever either the adaptations are painful sacrifices for one or the lacking adaptation is painful for the other.                 

A man's beard as an expression of naturalness is a good example to illustrate the difference, even though it seems a trifle.

  
Some men

1. have beards because naturalness is a part of their personality.
2. are temporarily shaving for whatever external reasons, but it is inside their comfort zone to allow their beards to grow.
3. experience having a beard as unpleasant.   It is outside their comfort zone.   This strong wish for self-modification indicates, that they identify too much with their body.   There is more superficial vanity than naturalness, if there is any.       

A woman like me, who values naturalness very much, considers a bearded man as compatible.  She feels appreciated and valued, when a man adapts by growing a beard to please her, but only, if this is in his comfort zone and not a sacrifice of his own comfort.    Because physical intimacy requires, that both partners are in their comfort zone.  This goes both ways, by what each perceives as attraction and by meeting the partner's taste and expectations.  
But if a man feels an urge to shave and a beard is not in his comfort zone, then we are not compatible, because there is no shared comfort zone.    By his choice to be clean shaven he is making himself deliberately repulsive to me so that he can feel comfortable.   The fact, that it is his choice and decision, impedes the physical attraction, that would enable intimacy.     

A man, who wants sexual homeostasis from a woman is foolish, if he makes himself repulsive or if he chooses a woman, who perceives him as repulsive by what makes him feel comfortable.   And if he thinks to be entitled by considering himself as god's gift to all women, or if he thinks to be able to compensate by spending money on her, he is even more a fool.    But if he would grow a beard and feel uncomfortable, this would be equally disruptive.    A healthy relationship requires both partners sharing a common comfort zone of behavior.

The beard is of course just an example for a very important general problem.  It seems to be a tiny trifle by itself.  But as often, it has a huge significance as an indicator of a personality trait.   In the case of the beard, it is the fundamental difference between naturalness and physical vanity, and this is not a trifle.  

Before getting involved, every couple should carefully find out, what mutual adaptations they need and if all necessary adaptations are possible inside the comfort zone of both partners.  

350. Pognophile - Naturalness - Self-Modification

Pognophile - Naturalness - Self-Modification
I just happened to discover the word 'pognophile' for people, who like beards, and I started to ponder about my own preference for fully bearded men.

My choice of a mindmate is not influenced by differences between the natural looks of a man, my choice is for compatibility.    Even though my subjective taste is such, that hair growing naturally adds to what I perceive as physical attraction, this does not influence my choice.  
While the choice between different kinds of self-modification is a question of taste, a person's choice between naturalness and self-modification is a personality trait.  My choice of a mindmate is entirely based upon the compatibility with his personality.   I am strongly attracted by a man's decision to refrain from any self-modification, no matter what would be the resulting external appearance due to self-modification. 

An example:
A completely bald man and a man with a shaven head look exactly the same.    But it is far from being the same.   Baldness is genuine and not a decision, a shaven head is a choice, while there is an alternative.   This choice implies considering the impact of the looks upon the beholder and is thus an expression of appreciation or depreciation.  

For me, the visual difference between a man with a full head of hair and a bald man does not influence my choice, because both are their genuine natural selves.    But self-modification can never make a man more attractive, it only can make him repulsive.    Wearing a wig does not make a bald man more attractive, but shaving his head makes a man with natural hair repulsive.  

The difference between a man, who allows his hair to grow, and a man, who shaves his head, is not a difference between looks, it is a fundamental difference between attitudes.   

Shaving the head as an example of self-modification indicates

•  The man is shallow, his looks are important to him
•  and
• He is limiting his choice of a mate to those equally shallow women, who accept or prefer men with hairless heads
  or
• He considers himself as god's gift to women, who should feel attracted to whatever he does to his exterior.
  or
• His exterior is a submission in conformity to influences, that he considers more important than being attractive according to a woman's taste

I used the head without hair as an example, because the exactly same looks can be either natural or the result of self-modification.    The same reasoning as for removing the hair from the head can also be applied to removing the hair from the face, except that to my knowledge, there are no men with a naturally bald face.  

All men with a full beard indicate their naturalness, while all clean shaven faces are an expression of self-modification, either by choice or by gullibility.         

Naturalness is an attitude of what is important, of what defines a person's identity, either his body or his brains and his mind.    Naturalness expresses the evaluation of what is worth time and effort and what is not.   I have been wondering, if pognophile really describes me or not.    Naturalness in a man means of course that he has a full beard.   I value, perceive and consider this as the baseline.    Therefore shaving is a form of deviant behavior when compared with this baseline.    

Pognophile means to be attracted to beards, but since I am attracted to personalities and not prone to get infatuated by bodies, it is more precise to declare, that I feel comfortable with a bearded man, while the clean shavenness makes a face repulsive to me, independent of its attractiveness.   My indirect repugnance as a reaction to his attitude of self-modification causes my physical recoiling from shaven faces. 
 
When I see the face of a man, who shaves, no matter if he does this to his entire face or if he creates some more or less weird patterns in his face, or has stubbles, I perceive this as if something is not right, awkward, faulty, visually dissonant, missing.   It is hard to to put it into words.  It is like seeing a picture with a corner missing or a cracked vase.    It is visible, that he is wasting his time for the completely futile and irrational task of shaving again and again, what keeps regrowing as long as he lives.  
That leads to the question, how gullible he is, how much he is prone to do irrational things under influences pressing him to conformity.   If a man conforms to the weird behavior of shaving, I suspect him to do other weird things too in submission and by gullibility to mainstream society and external influences.    

It is certainly no coincidence, that many great independent thinkers like Darwin, Freud, Marx and Epicure had beards.  They had better things to do than to shave.  

Therefore naturalness is an important factor of compatibility.   I do not want or demand a man to grow a beard to please me, if shaving is his own preference, I am looking for a man, whose own innate naturalness is expressed in his having a beard. 
If a man feels being his own genuine self with a beard, then we are compatible.   If a man wants to shave as his preference, I respect his choice.   But it is also a choice for my recoiling reaction.   Asking him to grow a beard against his wish would not make us compatible, as we do not share naturalness.  


But my preference is based upon reciprocity of naturalness.   If a man is looking for a woman indulging in self-modification of any kind like damaged feed in high heals or shaven legs, I am not that woman and will never be.    I am the same natural as what attracts me in a man.   

I have never in my life painted my face or any other part of my body.    All my hair grows as it grows, I have never removed any hair from my body.    I have never worn high heels and I could not even walk in them.   Superfluous to say, that I would not accept damage to my body as are tattoos or piercings, except under the threat of a gun pointed at my head.   I do not only wear no jewellery, I do not even own any.  

A man with a clean shaven face

looks faulty like a cracked vase.