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.