Need

So the Astros, the team of the moment here in Houston, failed in their attempt to make it to the World Series. One would think that everyone's dog died at the office today, considering all the long faces and incessant talk about "the game."

Sorry - I'm afraid I don't particularly care. There was a time I thought baseball was okay, but when those guys who spend their time standing in the middle of a grassy field for a couple of hours went on strike a few years ago because they weren't being paid enough millions to stand in the middle of that grassy field, I lost interest. I think they should have lowered all their pay for being such whiners.

But anyway, what came to me today was how people seemed to need this baseball team - it galvanized people so that they had something to stand behind and bond with fellow Houstonians. You could go anywhere and, if you didn't happen to come across me, you could say, "See the game last night?" and instantly strike up a friendship with someone. The antics of a bunch of spoiled rich kids brought a city together.

You can look all around you and see people joining any number of groups so that they can feel they belong. What other reason could there be for someone putting a "W in 04" or "Kerry" sticker on their car? They have no real stake in the election, and it is very unlikely they know the guys - so why should they feel they align with one or the other so violently that they have to tell everyone else about it? A need to belong.

Religion is another area where people go to belong. And there are any number of clubs out there that exist for the same reason.

Now, belonging, by itself, is certainly nothing horrible. It does appear to be some kind of drive. However, there is a dark side to belonging - the "you're not one of us" syndrome. If you don't belong to the group, then you are an outsider...Republicans hate Democrats...Astros fans hate Cardinals fans...any number of religions hate - or at least distrust - any number of other religions (regardless of their own religion's doctrines of love). So belonging, while bringing some people together, tends to be divisive to society in general.

However, I suppose one cannot avoid belonging...my choice not to belong puts me into a group of those who stand outside, and we tend to find those who are mindlessly borne along on the latest whim of belonging to be no better than sheep. And thus, I belong and I ridicule, making me no better than anyone else.

And that's when I realize we're all in this together, whether we like it or not; regardless of what groups we belong to.

Go team!

Okay, so finally he gets around to sex...

Came across this rather interesting article today:

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/magazine/story/0,11913,1306267,00.html

If you don't have time to read it, here's a summary - apparently they're talking about legalizing prostitution in England, and this writer, a self-professed lover of prostitutes and a former escort himself, says that it would be a horrible pity if the world's oldest profession were made legal...and then proceeds to give more background than most people are comfortable providing about his long life of visiting ladies of the evening.

The thing that interested me most was this guy's attitude toward sex and the expression of sexuality. There's a section of the piece where he says, "The problem with normal sex is that it leads to kissing and pretty soon you've got to talk to them. Once you know someone well the last thing you want to do is screw them." One thing about this piece of information I instantly noticed is that he accepts his passion for prostitutes as not necessarily normal since he considers there to be something called "normal" sex. However, this isn't terribly surprising, since those who fall outside of the realm of what society would consider to be "normal" sex typically find it to be something of a badge of success to not be normal - thus the existence of such shows as Real Sex (and hey, more power to 'em!). Still, does he really not kiss any of these girls - I mean, geez...sex without kissing is terribly lacking! And frankly, sex without talking is kind of empty, if you ask me.

Of all the things he says that I generally disagree with, one would be hard-pressed to disagree with the idea behind his statement, "The great thing about sex with whores is the excitement and variety." There's a reason for the old saw, "variety is the spice of life" and why there are countless self-help books out there for lackluster relationships where the excitement has gone out of the bedroom. Our society tells us that once we slip on that wedding band, we just have to suck it up and somehow deal with the fact that we're out of circulation - though it would seem that a goodly portion of the married couples out there are turning their backs on what society expects of them. Studies of self-reported infidelity have returned 30% to 80% of all mates to have done a little sleeping around on their partner. Makes one wonder if perhaps society may be trying to foist something on us that our psyche is really not particularly interested in abiding by.

And why not? If you take a look at what society expects of us, it tries to mate sexuality and love. Sexuality is one of our purest animal instincts, a drive that is all action and sensation. Love is a feeling, a very personal view of someone else that the one in love can only really know how it feels (though often we make the mistake in believing that because we feel in love, the other person who says "I love you too" is feeling the same thing). I will grant (while the author of the piece above would not) that love CAN make sex a better thing, but to try to assume that sex must be coupled with love is a rather naïve idea, considering they are quite different entitites.

Don't think so? Okay - so look at our society...we start dating sometime in our teens with the main purpose of learning a bit about the opposite sex, eventually with the purpose of finding a mate (geez, these biological ways of explaining things are soooo impersonal). Depending on where you're brought up nowadays, it is pretty much expected that there will be some sex before marriage...in other words, it is acceptable to hop in the sack with a few folks to get a feel for the ropes. Some people enjoy this "getting the feel of things" so much they take a bit longer to find their mate since its...fun. Yes, fun. Sex feels great and having different partners throughout one's life is exciting. Sure, there are those out there who are tied-up with mostly religious edicts that they must save themselves for marriage and thus they keep thier pants on...but the great majority of us don't - and its because sex feels great with or without love.

So why on earth do we decide that it is normal for someone to get married and suddenly stop wanting variety? Most married people choose to feel horrible about themselves when they think about how nice it would be to have variety - at how your partner just doesn't really fan the flames like a good, sexy fling would. Wonder why romance novels are such big sellers? Wonder no more. They fan those flames!

So am I saying that we should all just start bedding each other in a mad frenzy to get our rocks off? No; our culture just isn't ready for that. There have been a lot of years put into creating the structure of a "couple" - though much of the reasons behind the structure are flawed and based on beliefs that have no solid reasoning. Nonetheless, these structures have become part of the collective consciousness, and most people would, in all honesty, prefer a monogamous close relationship with their partner.

So where do all these ideas come from? I happened across a rather interesting book by a doctor named Pepper Schwartz called Everything You Know About Love and Sex Is Wrong." I'll use it as a jumping-off point for further discussion soon, so stay tuned.