Stanford: Taxonomies of Love
Ever since my little affair (no link), I have become considerably less interested in relationships. Indeed, I’ve been puzzled at how others bring themselves to pursue them — sometimes to significant extents. As just one example, I read a memorial of Ossie Davis which mentioned he and his wife “enjoyed an open marriage as a way to accommodate demanding schedules and to satisfy unfed appetites.” This is perhaps an extreme case, but numerous such references have made me thought about the differences between others’ appetites and mine.
Sex is often presented as some irresistible natural drive and thus impossible to prevent, especially among the young. And while I certainly support frequent sex among the young, I think the reality is far more complicated. For example, as presented in the Times, girls’ desire for sex may mainly be socially constructed.
In a world where “limerence” is a word saved by activist lexicographers, where a significant number of married couples never have a real rapport, and where television uses straight brown hair as code for “ugly”, I think it might be useful to set out, with relentless physicality, the little I know about feelings between people, since apparently nobody else will.
There seem to be three separate feelings:
Limerence: Twice (TGIQ, history of science) I have found girls I am just drawn to look at — even just their coats and so on. When they look into my eyes it feels as if my heart explodes. Later, when I pass them in the street or in a crowd, I can sense their presence and feel in my chest before I even consciously recognize them. I never do anything about it and eventually the feeling wears off and you realize that once the bright shining light of limerence is shorn away, just a plain old girl is left behind.
Rapport: The first semester here I became drawn to my sociology professor. At first I just loved how she taught. Then I would ask her questions after class. Then I would visit her in office hours. Then my questions after class would extend as we walked back into her office, stretching past lunch and my other classes and her office hours. I never noticed though, our conversations, while perhaps not particularly educational, were constantly enthralling and filled with laughter. After the final I followed her out into the lot outside her office building where we parted.
She had last semester off and this semester I’m taking another class from her. When she first entered the room my face lit up and never stopped smiling. As I exited she stared up at me with this searching gaze. “Hi,” I said, before walking on. She made a comment continuing our last conversation. I made a comment in response and walked out ecstatic, hitting myself on the chest with joy. After the following class I asked a question and we walked back to her office and, without me realizing it, ran right through lunch and my other classes and so on again. We laughed uproariously throughout and the three hours felt like twenty minutes.
Attraction: There is a girl here who is smart and tall and stunningly beautiful. Once I was finishing up lunch and she asked if she could sit with me. I said yes and she put her tray down and went to get a drink or something. Terrified, I picked up my empty tray and left. Yesterday she walked into my room (to speak to someone else) and I blushed. (Once inside, she confessed (to the same someone else) her secret love for a boy downstairs who sounds an awful lot like me.) But the attraction seems simply aesthetic.
posted April 04, 2005 02:51 AM (Personal) (13 comments) #
This is obvious, but, plenty of people have a dreadful time with ‘relationships’ at certain times in their lives. It’s never for ever.
Relationships occur, pursued or not. Fate, perhaps?
posted by Robert Brook at April 4, 2005 03:44 AM #
And then there’s love, which happens whether persued or not. It’s a lot like rapport, but instead of 3 hours feeling like 20 minutes, it’s 10 years feeling like 6 months.
posted by Anna at April 4, 2005 08:39 AM #
It’s really worth it, you can trust the billions already served…don’t let one bad experience throw you.
posted by Bob at April 4, 2005 10:41 AM #
Let me recommend a book: Love Signals by David Givens.
Givens is a researcher of nonverbal communication who also runs a useful site called the Nonverbal Dictionary.
In both works, Givens breaks down the communications that define different kinds of relationships. By paying attention to these nonverbal signals, you can get very good at reading people. (Love Signals is basically a guide to using these skills for effective courtship.)
For example, rapport is expressed in part by reduced angular distance. Angular distance refers to the positioning of an individual’s shoulders relative to another. This is an enormously powerful subconscious cue; walk around a cocktail party or school lunchroom and you can recognize and judge the strength of most relationships based solely on this criterion. If you want to make someone feel more confident, you can intentionally reduce angular distance. Conversely, if you want to really piss off someone who is trying to connect with you, can can give them the cold shoulder again and again.
One of the mysteries of friendship and courtship is that its language is primarily nonverbal. For those of us who were drawn to computers in part because we are most comfortable with precise, formal communication, this can be quite a large unknown. Fortunately, just as English majors can be taught to program (with varying measures of success), nerds can be taught to become good nonverbal listeners.
Of course, that’s only one of the myriad mysteries of love. I’m afraid the taxonomy is so complex and dynamic that the best efforts to document it are… classic novels.
posted by Shimon Rura at April 4, 2005 12:37 PM #
Why do people pursue relationships, you ask? But in your earlier posts you have given an important answer that you have not mentioned here: kids. You need to be two to make them, and although you don’t strictly speaking need to be two to raise them, it probably makes the experience easier and more pleasant. If I were to give advice to young adults of today (and of course I am :-), then forget about the superficial stuff, don’t worry too much about understanding your own feelings, and look for someone you want to raise children with. Even if you never have them, you have a good basis for limerence, rapport, attraction, whatever :-)
posted by Harald Korneliussen at April 5, 2005 03:41 AM #
Some links to look at:
http://www.asimovlaws.com/reading/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_science
http://cogsci.tribe.net/
http://ocw.mit.edu/OcwWeb/Brain-and-Cognitive-Sciences/index.htm
posted by Dimitar Vesselinov at April 5, 2005 06:38 PM #
One can only hope that this new girl does not read your blog and discover your lack of personal hygiene. We readers do hope that you brush your teeth regularly and take daily showers. Small things to most of us, and essential for successful relationships. Obviously you must have some hormones; you just don’t know what to do with them. Time will tell.
posted by Anon at April 6, 2005 02:43 AM #
What new girl?
posted by Aaron Swartz at April 6, 2005 02:52 AM #
WHICH GIRL? The one mentioned below.
Attraction: There is a girl here who is smart and tall and stunningly beautiful. Once I was finishing up lunch and she asked if she could sit with me. I said yes and she put her tray down and went to get a drink or something. Terrified, I picked up my empty tray and left. Yesterday she walked into my room (to speak to someone else) and I blushed. (Once inside, she confessed (to the same someone else) her secret love for a boy downstairs who sounds an awful lot like me.) But the attraction seems simply aesthetic.
Girls do not randomly walk into men’s rooms. There is usually a reason and an attraction. Aaron, you have a lot to learn.
posted by Anon at April 7, 2005 10:33 PM #
For example, as presented in the Times, girls’ desire for sex may mainly be socially constructed.
Wow, that has to be one of the most absurd and phallocentric arguments I’ve ever heard. It sounds a lot like those arguments by uptight scientists who believed that “the female orgasm does not exist.”
Also interesting how the article contends that oral sex is usually performed “by the girl on the boy” - i.e fellatio. But I read an article recently about the sex lives of teens, that stated the opposite - that cunnilingus is becoming more common than fellatio.
That has to be a great thing! My number one tip for getting maximum enjoyment and “connection’ from sex:
Guys, learn how to give good cunnilingus, and practice it often!! It makes all the difference for both partners. I’m not sure how anyone could contend that women’s desire for sex is “socially constructed” if they’ve experienced a woman having deep, multiple orgasms.
I’m more inclined to say that mens’ desire for sex is socially constructed, as it has a lot to do with status and competition. i know it’s a social faus pas to mention the following film …. but American Pie illustrates this condition well. in many ways, the guys want to bond with each other and use sex talk and competitiveness as a means to accomplish this.
Women who have a low sex drive usually are that way, because they have never experienced good sex, or a caring partner. men will usually still have a high sex drive, despite having bad experiences.
Unfortunately, it is the competitive and self-centred nature of many mens’ sexual exploits, that leads to this inability to experience good sex.
Sex is basically a biological imperative - as are partnerships and attractions. It’s our social constructions that get in the way of experiencing this most wonderful thing. Many people waste their lives seeking status, or power in business, or uber-geek status, because of their inability to reconcile their social conditioning with their biological urges.
P.S: Oral sex is wonderful. Did you get that bit the first three times I said it?
P.P.S: Companionship, relationships, and attentive partners are also wonderful.
P.P.P.S: Having an “open” relationship that acknowledges sexual desires and diversity, do not diminish the power of a relationship or partner. They often enhance the strength of a relationship. however, one has to be fairly mature and sensitive, not to screw such relationships up. At younger ages, multiple partners are more about fantasy and status. As we mature, having multiple partners becomes more pragmatic and loving.
P.P.P.P.S: Sex is fantastic.
P.P.P.P.P.S: As fantastic as sex is, one doesn’t always want to have it. take a break, do something else, and the desire will return.
posted by person at April 8, 2005 09:59 PM #
I guess I wasn’t clear. I meant “girls’ desire to perform fellatio on lots of different guys” may mainly be socially constructed. As for your factual claim, I’m rather skeptical for the same reasons danah is. But I’d be interested in reading the article. The rest of your post seems pretty standard.
posted by Aaron Swartz at April 8, 2005 10:39 PM #
I guess I wasn’t clear. I meant “girls’ desire to perform fellatio on lots of different guys” may mainly be socially constructed.
Ahhh, but why do you believe this? Sure, some may be doing it because of social pressure - but don’t you think that many just enjoy that? I mean, I love giving oral sex to lots of different women, and that’s just about pleasure, not social pressure.
Do you think women are such a different species as to not want the same pleasure? Or maybe you think that it couldn’t be pleasant to perform fellatio? I’m just speculating here, and you could be saying something completely different. I don’t know because you do not make your argument clear or give enough reasoning for me to understand what it is you are saying. Your comments on this topic are quite vague.
Where do you get your information on girls’ sexuality? Do you ask them, or just go to the NYT?
As for your factual claim, I’m rather skeptical for the same reasons danah is. But I’d be interested in reading the article. The rest of your post seems pretty standard.
Which “factual claim” of mine are you talking about? I read danah’s comment - and it doesn’t really say anything. It just questions how safe the sex really is. Which is a valid concern - but I really don’t see how it has any bearing on my comment.
Also, my comment was just about my personal experience, and my opinion. I wasn’t trying to make a factual claim - just wanted to discuss sexuality, as it is something I have a lot of experience with.
But again, I really don’t understand where you are coming from, by linking my comment to danah’s reply about a different topic. Could you maybe elaborate on what you mean?
posted by person at April 9, 2005 06:55 PM #
I was referring to a comment by danah a little ways down, not her post. I think it’s unfair that you keep assuming I’m some crazy sexist. I made my comments because of things like:
She complained often about being depressed, and her hookups, which she hoped would make her feel better, usually left her feeling worse. But a few days after a hookup, she would have forgotten that they tended to make her miserable, and would tell me excitedly about a new boy she was planning to meet. When that boy failed to show or called to say he was running an hour late, Melissa’s spirits would sink — again.
… There’s a firm belief among many experts on teenage sex that girls … are not getting as much pleasure out of hookups as they claim.
which, considering the facts described, seems highly plausible.
I haven’t studied this much at all, but it seems clear that there’s enormous social pressure to have sex along with an enormous social taboo against talking about what sex really is. It wouldn’t surprise me if the result is what I described: social pressure to engage in some sort of sexual activity with guys while ignoring their true desires.
posted by Aaron Swartz at April 13, 2005 07:39 PM #
Subscribe to comments on this post.
If you don't want to post a comment, you can always send me your thoughts by email.
Aaron Swartz (me@aaronsw.com)