verte's profile . verte's homepage
 |
| verte |
I had a long phone conversation with the recent-ex last night, at last. I cried, we had a long conversation about shit, and the resolution is that there is no resolution. But I think I understand myself better, or at least how my non-monogamy tends to work.
It's a crude way of defining it, but it really does come down to 'eros' and 'thanatos'. I realise that my relationship with T is based on everything my other relationships tend not to be. That is, he's positive not negative, he's constructive not destructive, he believes that certain things are 'good' for me, and others are not. He likes clarity where I like complexity. His philosophy of how to live is fundamentally not one we share, but I recognise that this difference is complimentary, and it's important, and that a full-on live-in primary relationship with someone whose philosophy is similar to mine would never be sustainable.
A friend said to me the other week, "Well, you just like your other relationships to be with bad boys who don't much care for anyone, but make an exception for you." But I think it's more complex than that. The two other partners I've had in my life for years now have both shared my 'negativity' and hostility towards 'normal', I suppose. The scarceness of men whose belief system (and therefore sexuality) is predicated on this kind of philosophy is in part what has made me cling on to my sexual relationship with J. They're a rare breed. Someone with those instincts who is AWARE of them, even more so. That I have also somehow managed to form a relationship with someone supremely sadistic whose philosophy is not dissimilar and that for whatever peculiar reason loves and cherishes me is, quite frankly, a miracle.
It's hard to sum up what I mean by 'negativity', but theoretically I think this is a pretty neat little explanation:
