The Five Languages of Love, Dark of the Moon, and Beauty's Punishment

[snugglekitty]

I read The Five Languages of Love by Gary Chapman on the advice of avivasedai and chiennefolle. Hearing a book suggested by two disparate sources made me want to try it, so I got it out of the library. Wow. Just wow. Yes, there were some problems - the author has very traditional ideas about marriage and gender roles, not to mention sex, but the central thesis of the book was great. He writes that men have a physical need for sex, from sperm building up in their testicles, while women only have an emotional need for sex when they feel that their husbands are attracted to them... right then. He also writes that because of the sexual freedom movement, we now know that open marriage doesn't work... Basically, the idea is that people need different things in order to feel loved, which fall into five different categories. The ways that we try to express love for each other are often unsuccessful because we are not speaking the language our spouse or child understands. This makes a lot of sense, and I'm hoping I can do a better job of figuring out what my sweeties' love languages are. Four stars, I'll come back and add another star if this actually works.

I also finished reading Dark of the Moon by PC Hodgell. The first book in this series, God Stalk, was funny and city-based, kind of a Thieves World thing. The second book had a very different style - more of a classic fantasy sort of thing. It was okay, but I didn't like it as much. Three stars.

And, I finished Beauty's Punishment by Ann Rice. Somehow, I need to slow down my reading of the Beauty books even more, as suggested by avivasedai. Otherwise, they start to get a little... monotonous. Yes, monotonous. I was struck by a few things about this book. 1) I don't care what you say, someone washing the floor with a scrub brush in their mouth is Not Efficient. If I owned a slave, I would get MUCH better use out of them than that. 2) "Before we were pampered pets. Now we're having to actually WORK in between being used sexually and beaten horribly - oh, the horror! And if that wasn't bad enough - it's by people from a LOWER CLASS!" 3) I was unsurprised to see that the next iteration, as demonstrated by the end of the book, is being used by people WHO AREN'T WHITE. Once again, oh the horror.
The classist/racist aspect of these books is Not Sexy. That's my opinion. Three stars for book #5.

Comments

[hanseth.livejournal.com]

women only have an emotional need for sex when they feel that their husbands are attracted to them

That totally and completely cracks me up. But I'm interested in the central thesis of the book, it sounds intriguing.

btw, love the new reading icon. The red eyes make it.

Two mentions in one post!

[avivasedai.livejournal.com]

I'm glad you've found Love Languages to be a useful book. I might have to read it myself to get all the details - I recommended it based on someone else's recommendation. I don't know if it's what happens first in a relationship for me, but touch is very important to me to affirm what's already there. Physical withdrawal from a partner is very painful for me and causes me all sorts of doubts; this causes problems when a partner, dealing with stress, shuts themselves down and tries to isolate themselves. Given that almost all of my relationships have been some sort of long-distance, time spent together is also a significant thing.

[dilletante.livejournal.com]

He writes that men have a physical need for sex, from sperm building up in their testicles, while women only have an emotional need for sex when they feel that their husbands are attracted to them... right then. He also writes that because of the sexual freedom movement, we now know that open marriage doesn't work...

hm. i'd expect you to disagree with both of these claims, possibly with derisive laughter; but from the context above it sounds as if you're saying these are part of the central thesis of the book, which is "great"? so i am confused.

in any case, though i'm always suspicious of one-size-fits-all prescriptions for love, the notion of seeking different expressions of love does seem valuable to me; though i suspect his five types are not the only ones, and in some cases they may be too broad even. i know someone who claims her husband sees food as love-- not service generally, but specifically making food. she says they were both much happier once they figured this out.

[lady-anemone.livejournal.com]

hm. i'd expect you to disagree with both of these claims, possibly with derisive laughter; but from the context above it sounds as if you're saying these are part of the central thesis of the book, which is "great"? so i am confused.

Poor use of cutting, those claims were actually the parts of the book I found very problematic.

...though i suspect his five types are not the only ones,

I agree, but I had a hard time thinking of other ones, besides "energy" for those of us who are witchy.

and in some cases they may be too broad even. i know someone who claims her husband sees food as love-- not service generally, but specifically making food. she says they were both much happier once they figured this out.

Yes, actually he does talk about that. He says that his languages have dialects, and talked about one couple who both had the language Acts of Service and were doing service things for each other, and were miserable, because they weren't using the SAME acts of service.