Quote:
Originally Posted by evolveme
See, I saw this as problematic too, Jess. Even though you go on to say, "not for her support of me, but for the exact entity that she is."
While I love the love and respect you are showing her here, I also want to see you simply allow her the autonomy and agency she deserves (not that I believe you are necessarily disrespecting her). I understand that "the dance" has us thinking often of the bright space between us, the sharp contrast. But what was it about her that you loved before she was yours?
Who is she fundamentally? How can you define her without mentioning a role she inhabits (lover, sister, mother, friend)?
Tell us about her independent of you or even what she means to you.
I want to know if we are ever seen clearly enough in the skin we're in, or if we're always bleeding into our roles.
|
Gawd, I want to needlepoint your last sentence on a pillow.
And I've been thinking a lot about what you've said about roles.
And that got me thinking about my child. If I were to ask her to describe me without referencing the fact that I am her mother, would she be able to do it to my satisfaction?
No.
If I were to ask a friend to describe me without referencing my role or my contribution to their life as a friend, would they be able to do it to my satisfaction?
Probably not.
Your post resonated with me, e, but I don't know why. SyrJess's post resonated with me, but I don't know why.
My question is this:
Is it asking too much for our masculine counterparts to separate themselves from their devotion to us as life partners(or what-have-yous) and "objectively" describe us without mentioning our role in the relationship?