Five love languages aren’t enough

In 2005, a guy with an obsession for the number five wrote a book called “The Five Love Languages.”

The premise of the book is pretty straightforward, and in hindsight reasonable; different people express love and affection in different ways. The author, Gary Chapman, went on to start an entire empire around the notion, and has even trademarked the phrase “five love languages™”. Since then, he’s continued on to explore the number five in other aspects of human interpersonal relationships; there’s a new book out or coming out or something called “The Five Languages of Apology.”

Which is all well and good, as far as it goes, but I’m a little skeptical about the number five. Why would there be five different ways to express love and also five different ways to apologize? Why not four or six or seventeen? Is it because five is half of ten, and we human beings have a deep sense of emotional resonance with the number ten? Is it because the number five has some sort of magical connection with the ways we interact with each other? Is it just a load of bollocks, and five happened to be the number of ways that Mr. Chapman could think up off the top of his head?

I suspect the answer is the latter. According to Chapman, the five l”love languages”–the five ways that people express love for one another–are words of affirmation, spending quality time together, giving or receiving gifts, giving or receiving acts of service, and physical touch.

And to be fair, there’s some merit in that list. I know people who express affection in each of those ways, and for someone whose preferred way of expressing affection is, say, through words of affirmation, giving gifts might not be as effective. (I personally don’t care much for gifts, giving or receiving, but physical touch is very important to me.)

Problem is, I think that folks have built a religion around the notion that there are exactly five and only five love languages, and I think the reality is that the list is woefully incomplete. There are at least three more that are important to me, and I bet there are still more important to other people.

The three that are missing for me are:

Creating together. This is not the same as “quality time.” It is, instead, the act of bringing another person into the process of making something new, which for me is an extraordinarily intimate thing. When I have created something with someone, I am quite likely to feel much greater intimacy for that person; the birthing of something new is something that’s powerful to me, and sharing it is an expression of love.

The thing itself, once created, becomes a tangible representation of that love. There’s something incredibly powerful in being able to see and touch and hold a thing that would not have existed save for the act of will I’ve shared with another person in bringing it to life.

Nesting together. I would not have guessed this about myself before I moved to Portland. The making of a shared space with zaiah has been something that I feel very strongly about. It’s not an expression if love in the creation of the space, although there’s something of that in there as well; it’s about having that space, which I share with a partner, that carries with it each of our unique signatures.

I’ve lived with partners before, and even built a house with a partner, but that was different; those spaces did not carry our own personal touches the way the home I’m building now does.

Sex. Anyone who thinks that “sex” is merely a spacial case of “physical touch” doesn’t have sex the way I do. Past a certain point, physical touch alone isn’t enough to carry the day. There is a unique kind of vulnerability in sex that is absent from any other kind of touch, and that unique vulnerability, at least for me, carries a tremendous ability to create intimacy.

Note that “sex” in this context does not necessarily imply sticking tab A into slot B. Sex is highly contextual; in the right context, whipping is sex. It’s not the slippery bits touching; it’s the thing that we become when I’m sharing sexual intimacy with a partner, or partners. When I have sex, especially good sex, I let down barriers that other sorts of touch don’t pass through.

And, like I said, I bet there are others as well that Mr. Chapman, in his near-religious fixation on the number five, has missed. Got any more? I want to hear ’em!

Map of Non-Monogamy Re-Revisited

[Edit] There is yet another update to the map here. You can also find my book on non-monogamy here.

Because my brain is totally broken…

I woke up very, very early this morning and couldn’t get back to sleep, because it suddenly occurred to me that entire classes of non-monogamy were missing from the last version I did. Plus, I thought of a lot more edge cases. And since the only way I can get this stuff out of my head is to put it on the Interwebs, here it is!

As before, click for a bigger version. A much, much bigger version, that will pulverize your bandwidth the way Chuck Norris pulverizes your pelvis. Or something. I don’t know.

Sexual Informatics: Non-Monogamy Revisited

A while back, I did a graphic of the various overlapping types of non-monogamous relationships. I’ve re-visited that chart, with some revisions and additions, and at zaiah‘s suggestion I’ve added some specific tags to various parts of the graph.

Click for a bigger version. A much, much bigger version.

Kitteh adoption

We have three little teensy cute fuzzy teensy little adorable cute teensy fuzzy cute little kittens right now, which we’re trying to find homes for.

In the meantime, my cat Liam has adopted one of them. The kitten and Liam love each other and are almost inseparable–when I take the kittens out, he tends to go straight for Liam.

It’s heart-melting, really. I think Liam is going to miss him when we find a new home for him.

Woohoo! Site move is finally finished!

I’ve finally completed porting the entire xeromag.com Web site to a content management system on a new server, which is something I’ve been working on for about five months or so. The new xeromag.com has cleaner design, more consistent navigation, a totally revamped photography section with built-in slide show software, and generally brings the site from 1992 Web development standards to 2007 Web development standards. Woo-hoo!

Part of the goal in moving to a content management system was to make updates easier, so I plan on adding all sorts of new content soon. I am definitely interested in feedback about the new layout and navigation, so take a look!

Movie review: Inception

Just got back from watching the new Leonardo DiCaprio movie “Inception.”

Now, normally I like Leonardo DiCaprio movies about as much as I like using rusty razor wire as dental floss, and then following it up by gargling gasoline. While it’s on fire. Plus, the previews made it look like it’d probably end up being visual candy that went nowhere.

But everyone I know who’s seen it raves about it, and so Zaiah and I decided to go see it, Leonardo DiCaprio notwithstanding.

As near as I can tell, the entire point of the movie is a cockwaving fight with Michael Bay, of Transformers fame. In fact, I bet the conversation went something like this:

Michael Bay: I am going to make a movie filled with explosions.
Christopher Nolan: I am going to make a movie filled with explosions.
Michael Bay: I will have car chases in my movie.
Christopher Nolan: I will have car chases in my movie.
Michael Bay: I will have cars that unfold into giant killer robots.
Christopher Nolan: I will have an entire city that folds up into an M. C. Escher piece, with strange and bizarre rules of gravity.
Michael Bay: I will have a hot chick in my movie.
Christopher Nolan: I will have a hot chick in my movie, who is smart, courageous, insightful, strong-willed, and creative.
Michael Bay:
Michael Bay: I will film scenes on location in the Middle East.
Christopher Nolan: I will film on location in Monaco, Japan, Canada, France, and England.
Michael Bay: My movie will be about giant killer robots blowing things up.
Christopher Nolan: My movie will be a surprisingly intelligent, thoughtful introspection on the nature of perception and reality, that also works as a meditation on loss, grief, guilt, and remorse.
Michael Bay:
Michael Bay: I don’t even know what you just said.
Christopher Nolan: I will make a movie that will work on a number of different levels: as a straight-ahead knuckle-biting action-adventure flick, as a study in surrealism, as a character drama, or as a piece on the healing value of catharsis and self-determinism.
Michael Bay: My movie is based on children’s toys.
Christopher Nolan: My movie pays homage to everything from The Matrix to Donnie Darko to the James Bond books, with a nod to the classic cyberpunk notion of corporate multinationals that act like sovereign states and wage wars with their own teams of corporate hit men.
Michael Bay:
Christopher Nolan: And my movie will weave different layers of reality together seamlessly.
Christopher Nolan: Plus, in my movie, the things that happen during the car chase in one reality will affect the things that are happening in the other realities in strange ways.
Christopher Nolan: And I will do it without resorting to any easy storytelling gimmicks.
Michael Bay: Ooh! Easy storytelling gimmicks!
Michael Bay: I will have car chases in my movie!

Six Views of Mt. Hood

A couple of weeks ago, zaiah and I went out a couple hours shy of sunset to do a photo study of Mt. Hood, which looms over Portland like a…well, like a volcano looms over a valley, now that I think about it.

We traveled in a semicircle, getting nearer and nearer to the mountain as the sun set. Sunset on the face of a mountain is nothing if not dramatic. Idon’t think I’ll ever get tired of the view as long as I live here.

Clicky to see more!

Some thoughts about assumptions in relationships

A friend of mine on a different forum remarked recently that we live in a society that doesn’t teach us how to end romantic relationships.

I’ve been chewing on that for a while, and I think it’s true but doesn’t go far enough. We live in a society that doesn’t teach us how to nurture relationships OR end relationships. In fact, it doesn’t even teach us how to START relationships. We seem to hold this notion, as a society, that if you are single and you meet someone you share a connection with, that means you’re supposed to start dating, without any regard as to whether or not you might be remotely compatible. In fact, I’ve even encountered folks who sneer at the notion of “compatibility,” saying that if you REALLY love each other, you should be able to work out any difference you have.

This is, I think, a very toxic idea.

That started me down the path of thinking about the sorts of assumptions we make about our partners, which is something I’ve written about a few times before. I definitely think that many folks carry around with them some pretty poisonous assumptions about their partners, without even thinking about it, so that’s started me setting out some of the productive and non-productive premises on which to build a relationship.

Destructive assumptions to make in a relationship

– My partner doesn’t REALLY love me–not really.

– Given the choice, if someone ‘better’ comes along, my partner would prefer that person over me, and would rather be with that person.

– My partner says things like “I like being with you,” “I find you sexy,” “I am attracted to you,” and “I value our relationship” because those are the things you’re supposed to say. They don’t really mean anything.

– My partner’s exes are dangerous to me because I believe that my partner would secretly prefer to be with them than with me. Anyone my partner finds attractive is dangerous to me because my patner would secretly prefer to be with that person rather than me.

– If I want to preserve my relationship with my partner, I need to keep him or her on a short leash. If given free rein to do whatever he or she wants, my partner would leave me.

– I am not pretty enough/not smart enough/not sexy enough/whatever for my partner. If someone prettier/sexier/whatever comes along, I’m screwed.

– I can not talk openly to my partner about things like my own sexual desires, especially if I think they’re weird or unusual, because if my partner thinks I’m too weird he or she will dump me.

– If my partner masturbates or watches porn, it means I am not enough. I am a failure; I have not done my job in pleasing my partner.

– If my partner talks to someone of the same sex I am, it means he or she is trying to replace me.

– My partner is with me because I tricked him or her, or because I was convenient at the time, or because I was the only thing available, or whatever.

Constructive assumptions to make in a relationship

– My partner loves and cherishes me, and wants to be with me.

– My partner has chosen to be with me because he or she wants to be with me. I offer value to my partner, and given a choice, my partner would still choose to be with me.

– My partner says things like “I like being with you,” “I find you sexy,” “I am attracted to you,” and “I value our relationship” because those things are true.

– My partner is with me because I add value to his or her life. Given a choice, my partner would still choose to be with me.

– Given free rein to make any choice he or she wanted, my partner would choose to be with me. In reality, my partner HAS free rein; he or she could find a way to leave me, if that’s what he or she wanted to do. The fact that my partner is still here should tell me something!

– My partner finds me attractive and worthwhile. I add value to my partner’s life which nobody else can replace.

– A healthy sex life depends on open communication. My partner values me and wants to have a healthy relationship with me; I can count on my partner to listen to what I have to say with respect and compassion.

– Not everything my partner does is about me. The things my partner does are not always a reflection on me. If my partner looks at porn or masturbates, that has nothing to do with me at all.

– Not everything is about sex. My partner can talk to someone of the appropriate sex, or even be friends with someone of the appropriate sex, without it being about sex or about replacing me.

– My partner is with me because he or she wants to be with me, because I add value to his or her life.

Now, it is true that the things I’ve listed as “constructive assumptions” aren’t always valid. There are assholes, liars, manipulators, abusers, cheats, and sneaks of all stripes; and many of them will gladly stomp all over any or all of those basic premises.

So underlying all of these premises is a sort of zeroth premise, which is this:

– I am worth, and deserve, to be treated with a certain basic minimum of respect and love. It is better to have no relationship at all than a relationship in which these things are not true. By starting with these positive assumptions, I can build healthy relationships; partners for whom these assumptions are not true are not worthy of being my partner.

Comments? Suggestions? Got any more?

Fragments of Oregon: Reed Canyon

A couple of weeks ago, zaiah and I had a chance to tour the Reed Canyon Watershed here in Portland. Oregon is a place of amazing and sometimes unexpected natural beauty; they have so much of it they just leave it lying aorund all over the place.

The Reed Canyon Watershed is a natural spring and stream smack-dab in the middle of the city. You could easily drive past it and not even know it’s there. There’s a footbridge and a vehicle bridge crossing over the canyon, with Reed College wrapped around it, but once you get down into it it looks like this:

Click for lots more images!