I still the lack of responsibility’s why some relationships fail. In that it’s one thing to go for a fetish, it’s another to be able to commit to that relationship for life. Almost as if rather than being treated as interchangeable, they’re treated as people. But that would involve having to be actually accountable for others and for oneself.
If you can’t expect white women to emotionally satisfy you, then you should work on yourself first (and perhaps unexpectedly go for somebody else instead). If some black men aren’t sexually available (I actually know some black men who aren’t sexually active), then work on yourself first. Likewise if that black man has panic attacks, don’t stonewall him.
But that would involve a lot of work, which I think ruins the fantasy. Also even if they seem different, they’re ultimately the same. If some white men who can’t stand your outbursts or whatever, some black men will feel the same either. Though I think responsibility takes a lot of work to the point where lust may not be a priority anymore.
And if such people take this to heart, they might end up with somebody else altogether.
I sometimes think some Christians are bad at empathy, in that either they want somebody (or God) to do the emotional labour for them or worse feel powerful over somebody that they’d often chastise. I think Christians would benefit a lot more from embracing their inner cynic since there’s no point in trying to be somebody they really aren’t. Especially if they fail at empathy that being this wary of people would come naturally for them.
Or if Christians were to show empathy, do something hard and difficult to understand where those are coming from or something. I often feel as if Christians are poor at empathy as they want to be controlling to people, like they don’t trust them as they are. Even then, empathy would be needed. Though I’m inclined to think Christians tend to be aloof out of perceived necessity as showing negative emotion’s seen as bad.
Often to the point of stigmatising it. You can be angry without being a jerk though ironically only secular psychologists articulate it better without being off-putting to normal people. (I have this feeling Christians are practically like geeks in the sense of having a distrust of anybody who isn’t like them.) Either that or Christians are bad at being practical and empathetic.
There are cases where anger might be understandable or useful or in the case with Judaism, channeled into constructive complaining. But for some reason despite admiring Jews, most Christians never bother doing it. Even if it’s useful but that’s proving my point.
I honestly think God/Jesus shouldn’t always be treated as an unattainable ideal. Not because he smokes but because he loses his temper when tired that it’s something people can relate to. That’s if they work in occupations that are either really difficult or involve emotional labour that there’s a lot of common ground.
In fact he is comparable to a nurse or sports coach, which are pretty common occupations and the very last’s something people can get by because they like sports. My own issue’s that a good number of Christians tend to be too cynical for their own good, often seemingly bigoted that it intimidates outsiders. It shouldn’t be this way.
He’s not only comparable to those characters as they deconstruct him but also worthy of salvation that an athlete may come out as Christian and that the clergy were involved in medicine themselves. Something that can be attained or at least readily understand.
Or why Christianity really misses the point about a relationship with God being more like that of coaching and nursing or the army than friendship. In the sense that friends don’t always want to do emotional labour for people whereas coaches, therapists and nurses (and even doctors) need to. If God is a healer, Christians should see them as their tired therapist really.
I think the real problem with sentimentality in Christianity, as pointed by a few others, is that it’s kind of juvenile and even unrealistic. I don’t think God as friend holds up as well as God as nurse when you think about it. If you demand your friend to do a lot of emotional labour, at times you are violating their personal space.
Those in the medical and coaching fields need to do emotional labour for others as they’re expected to be put up with them until they lose their cool. But that would involve much less sentimentality and more practicality, which I think Christianity’s beginning to lose and ironically why it’s losing followers. If we were to treat the Church as a hospital for the unwell, that would make sense.
But that involves being practical above being unrealistic.
I don’t think God as friend makes as much sense as God as manager or better yet drill instructor’s because I think friends can also be a bad influence like introducing you to drugs and swearing whereas in the army people won’t have patience for that. But that would also necessitate less sentimentality and more restraint which I think Christians are ironically suspicious of. (As if Buddhists strive for it and understand this.)
Let’s not also forget that friends don’t want to do emotional labour at times to the point where you might even violate their personal boundaries. Whereas coaches, nurses and doctors provide emotional labour out of necessity to the point where they’d lose their cool from being tired. Just like God. (I actually think if Christians were serious about having a personal relationship, that would involve accepting that he has a bad temper but that would mean accepting him as he is, not what they can change him into.)
At any rate, the personal relationship with God would not be a friendship but internship in the sense of being guided. Actually the comparison to coaching or the army makes the most sense really.
I sometimes think Christians shoot themselves in the foot whenever they make God into their friend in the sense of demanding a lot of emotional labour from him. But since Christians are supposed to obey him, he should be seen as the Boss. Manager even but not sidekick.
Sadly, I honestly think Christians underestimate how assertive and tired God is and gets. To the point where either they have to let him be the boss that he really is or since they can’t control him, let him be a hothead. That’s what he is in the Bible.
He’ll easily lose his cool when people screw up. He’s that easily upset. If Christians want it their way, God would be the nurse and they have to accept this in the sense that those in the medical profession are obliged to do emotional labour whereas friends don’t want to.
Especially if they have other things to do or have their boundaries violated. In short, God the boss and God the nurse make more sense than God the friend in that he’s the one who calls the shots and obliged to do emotional labour. Friends can also be a bad influence.
Like your BF introduced you to porn, which God is unwilling and hesitant to, even wary of.
I still think some interracial relationships and possibly some relationships in general don’t go well’s that if/when emotional labour’s disproportionately done on one person with little to no reciprocation that it’s going to tire them. If some black men marry nonblacks for validation, it’s going to tire the latter. Especially if they’re often expected to that they’ll get mad anyways.
(Considering there are high divorce rates between Asians and whites, if Asian women are stereotyped as submissive yet some white men tire of them then it’s likely seeking validation from others is going to be stressful.)
Also if female breadwinners are much likelier to divorce (especially if they’re fed up with their husbands treating them like poop), since whites outearn blacks then white women will likelier be breadwinners for better or worse. (In all likelihood, they wouldn’t be submissive and the ones calling the shots whether if black men like it or not.)
If white women are stereotyped as submissive but since whites outearn blacks, there’s a frighteningly good chance that white wives would be the ones bringing home money. (But if some black husbands don’t help them out, they’re going to be just as tired of them as they do with their white counterparts.)
In addition to high expectations not going well (like what if some black men have small penises, are unathletic and lack swag, even introverted and celibate), there’s also the lack of any real responsibility. Though not all black men in interracial relationships are like this, if some interracial relationships do go badly expecting a person to be submissive or receptive’s going to tire them.
Especially if that involves doing a lot of unreciprocated emotional labour that they get tired anyways.
It’s debatable whether if God’s flawed at all but at other times it seems with many Christians, the idea that God is as loving as he’s vicious, ill-tempered and harsh. I actually think a hot-tempered God/Jesus makes a lot more sense in how and why his punishments are so harsh that it’s all that Christians have to accept. He’s just as grumpy as any nurse and sports coach can get.
Especially when it comes to stress and dealing with people who abuse or bother them in some way. But in order to accept the ill-tempered God of the Bible and of reality, Christians would be better off realising how angry he gets and sometimes getting angry’s not always a bad thing. You can be angry and constructive at the same time.
Just as you can be happy and unconstructive (as in watching porn or smoking pot to keep oneself happy). Even Jews do vent out of necessity. It’s called kvetching. But then again I think Christians are ultimately very uncomfortable with misfortune and pain that they strive to avoid it. Not that Jews are any better but they do have to talk about what bothers them a lot.
Alternately speaking, God is a very tired grouchy character that while loving, he’s also easily offended. That’s still saying and why Christians should accept that God can get very angry and it’s not wrong to be angry for as long as you be constructive about it.
Like I said, there’s a good possibility that single women might be happier than married women but in the sense of having much less emotional labour to do. It’s possible to be in a happily married relationship and to be healthy with kids. The real problem lies in some people’s inability to help do emotional labour themselves. Or at least bother to show compassion without being condescending.
I’m not condoning people who do sex tourism. But if I’m not mistaken, there are married women who actively seek out gigolos who find them more complacent (same with their male counterparts with genders reversed). The real issue, as I still think, lies with being unable to reciprocate emotional labour. As in having to help oneself comply with and care for others.
Especially if somebody else’s so stressed that they need somebody to help them lessen work. I’m not condoning the cheating as much as responsibility should also be laid out on their boyfriends and husbands to make their women’s lives easier.
I suspect part of the reason why single women maybe happier than married women’s partly due to less emotional labour. In the sense of being less expected to constantly tend to others’ needs and wants as well as expectations. It’s possible to be in a happily married relationship. The real issue might lie with some men’s reluctance to reciprocate emotional labour back.
There are men who do emotional labour themselves, most notably athletes and sports coaches. As well as being made to repress emotions all the time. The real problem lies with at least in some communities and relationships (if not all as some men do reciprocate) where there’s an imbalance of emotional labour. It’s like expecting women to put on a happy face even when they’re dealing with husbands who won’t become responsible themselves.
That women are expected to appear happy all the time whilst caring for others is going to tire them anyways. (One can only wonder why nurses and coaches are so pissed off from having to deal with people who even mistreat them or screw up at times.) Some men may feel satisfied in marriage if because they want their emotional needs met and reciprocated. However whenever some women want their emotional needs met, it sometimes gets invalidated.
(Trust me this happened to me despite not being married at this moment.)
I still highly suspect that when it comes to emotional labour, it’s inevitable girlfriends and wives are going to bear the brunt of it. As much as coaches and nurses have to do. This would only be alleviated if some boyfriends/husbands are willing to do emotional labour themselves, let alone without talking down to women.