Polygamy

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-31-2009
Polygamy
31
Wed, 09-19-2012 - 8:47pm
iVillage Member
Registered: 10-31-2009
Mon, 09-24-2012 - 5:38pm
iVillage Member
Registered: 10-31-2005
Mon, 09-24-2012 - 8:38pm

Hmmmm...MI...fascinating.

When one thinks about it, it is nigh impossible to be completely matched up on ANYTHING. There will always be some degree of separation - libido, intellect, emotion, sense of humor, sense of adventure....the list goes on.

I suppose when any of these gaps become impassable, problems arise. If the gulf happens to be in an area that is not important to either person, no big deal....Maybe Mazlow comes into play here...if a person is fully satisfied on the sexual (physical) need level, then the gaps in items that are belonging, esteem or self-actualization take on a greater importance. MI would come somewhere between esteem and self-actualization.

On the other hand, I have noted that ML seems to be a magnifier of other gaps. 

---------------------------------------------------

FREE TIBET! *

* - with the purchase of one Tibet of equal or greater value

iVillage Member
Registered: 12-06-2007
In reply to: my_sex_toy45
Tue, 09-25-2012 - 2:38pm

You make a great point about Mazlow's needs hierarchy. I do wonder sometimes what new needs would crop up for me once my sexual needs are met since they have never been met for more than a few days at a time.

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-04-2006
In reply to: mirandarr8
Tue, 09-25-2012 - 6:29pm
I still don't get sex as a need with an order of magnitude equivalent to food, water and shelter. Lots of people throughout history have lived without sex, and I doubt they were all miserable freaks....(monks and nuns come to mind) And I know I can live quite merrily without it for long periods of time. I know this is an old discussion that has never been settled in a satisfactory way, so sorry to dredge it up, but I just can't wrap my head around that idea.
iVillage Member
Registered: 10-31-2005
Wed, 09-26-2012 - 1:44pm

I might argue that it is a need for the species (at least for the next 4553 years).

---------------------------------------------------

FREE TIBET! *

* - with the purchase of one Tibet of equal or greater value

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-04-2006
In reply to: mirandarr8
Wed, 09-26-2012 - 1:55pm
Yes, yes, the species, I know. However, I was under the impression that Maslow applies to the individual. And on the level, I just don't get it.
iVillage Member
Registered: 10-31-2005
Wed, 09-26-2012 - 2:34pm

"Yes, yes, the species, I know. However, I was under the impression that Maslow applies to the individual. "

I think it's the "zero'th" level on Mazlow's pyramid....much like the zeo'th law of robotics (reference left to the Asimov geeks among you,if there are any) :smileyhappy:

---------------------------------------------------

FREE TIBET! *

* - with the purchase of one Tibet of equal or greater value

iVillage Member
Registered: 12-06-2007
In reply to: my_sex_toy45
Thu, 09-27-2012 - 2:31am

I don't think the need for sex is on the same order of magnitude as basic survival--at least for me. However, once survival seems assured (and I can only think of 5 or 6 times in my whole life when it was in question), the first motivating need for me is the personal acceptance and validation of sex.

 

 

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-04-2006
In reply to: mirandarr8
Sun, 09-30-2012 - 12:37pm
TG, that passage sounds like my DH and I. You are on the money there. This is one reason why DH has a hard time finding regular sex partners. The ones with a brain figure out pretty quickly that he loves me first and foremost, and most of them find that disquieting, in spite of the fact that he has more than enough love to love them too. They want to be loved in the way that he loves me, and it's not likely that he will.
iVillage Member
Registered: 10-31-2009
Sun, 09-30-2012 - 4:49pm