"You Belong to Me"

[amicus]

A song made popular in the 1950's by Patti Page.

Someone replied to one of my threads or posts, "You can't own a woman, she is not property!"

Technically, thas true, what with the Constitution and all, but...

The song was sung by a woman from a woman's point of view and she was saying to her lover, no matter where you are, how far away you are, what ever temptations come before you, remember...you're mine, you belong to me.

I liked the song; a lot of people did, some even still remember it. It was popular, I think, because the lyrics expressed a yearning in all of us for that special 'one', that fulfilled a dream.

The song also cherished chastity and fidelity and discipline in foregoing momentary pleasures or escapes in favor of a long lasting, eternity kind of thing with another person.

Men in general seem to be chided for acting 'possessive' of a woman, considering her, his only, to the exclusion of all others.

Jealousy and rage are seen to be incorrect behavior, when the male finds his 'possession' being an object of possession in the eyes of another, "You can't even look at her that way, she is mine!"

Since such emotions do exist and since we write of them... must if we are to be accurate in character building...how do you handle them?

Amicus...

 

[voluptuary_manque]

In the Fifties, I could see it. But Ami, I was still in elementary school back then and I ain't no spring chicken no mo'. And it was popular in Middle America, that part that Disney believed in, whether it really existed or not. And, besides, it was just a song.

You might even do a wikipedia check on Patti to see how her real life worked out. I'll bet it wasn't like the song, at all.

Remember, she also sang "Fever", if I'm not mistaken . . .

 

[glynndah]

In the Fifties, I could see it. But Ami, I was still in elementary school back then and I ain't no spring chicken no mo'. And it was popular in Middle America, that part that Disney believed in, whether it really existed or not. And, besides, it was just a song.

You might even do a wikipedia check on Patti to see how her real life worked out. I'll bet it wasn't like the song, at all.

Remember, she also sang "Fever", if I'm not mistaken . . .

That was Peggy Lee.

 

[amicus]

If memory serves, Peggy Lee sang Fever...

I am one of those identified as a 'dinosaur' who should be long extinct, that perceives human morality as immortal, transferred from generation to generation because it is the right and proper way to act and to live.

The modern generation accepts nothing as absolute and all things as relative and transitory, thus I do comprehend your meaning.

Amicus...

 

[voluptuary_manque]

That was Peggy Lee.

Ah, I wasn't sure. Peggy was a hot item, she was. Clear up until she was in her 70's she could still growl that out in a way that would raise the temperature of the room.

 

[DeeZire]

...Men in general seem to be chided for acting 'possessive' of a woman, considering her, his only, to the exclusion of all others.

Jealousy and rage are seen to be incorrect behavior, when the male finds his 'possession' being an object of possession in the eyes of another, "You can't even look at her that way, she is mine!"

Since such emotions do exist and since we write of them... must if we are to be accurate in character building...how do you handle them?

Amicus...

Since I do like to play with character stereotypes in my stories, I cast conservatives as jealous, spiteful and dangerous, and libs as open, tolerant, and giving. Of course, I'm just basing this on life-experience, not on media hype or expected norms.

Come to think of it, I have seen a few jealous and dangerous liberals. It seems jealousy is one of those basic human emotions - like greed - that many people have a hard time getting a handle on - which leads us to the failure of free market... oh never mind.

I would like to see an uptempo rockin' remake of "You Belong to Me" with a Maddonna-esque woman shoving some guy around (or girl. I don't care, really.) Or a parody with Nancy Pelosi cracking a whip. You'd like that, wouldn't you Ami?

 

[amicus]

Heh! Imagine me with hearty laughter at your post and you get the picture.

Thanks.

You are rather taking on the appearance of a stalker, following me around from thread to thread like an angry wife so you can nag me to death, egads, woman!




Amicus....

 

[Leto Degeneres]

...Men in general seem to be chided for acting 'possessive' of a woman, considering her, his only, to the exclusion of all others.

Jealousy and rage are seen to be incorrect behavior, when the male finds his 'possession' being an object of possession in the eyes of another, "You can't even look at her that way, she is mine!"

Since such emotions do exist and since we write of them... must if we are to be accurate in character building...how do you handle them?

I think those feelings are universal, regardless of a song, though maybe more often you could substitute possessiveness for rage; "jealousy and possessiveness" that is.

I think MOST of us deal with those emotions internally, though some lucky humans (in my experience these are usually women, but not always) are able to vocalize those feelings with snarkiness, non-confrontational sarcasm, and humor, and maybe others.

I haven't actually described those feelings in writing yet, though I will soon, so I'm interested. Unless I missed your point, the two choices are describing thoughts or transcribing those verbalizations.

Since I say I'm going to do this soon, let me see what I might could do, speaking for myself. hmmm, jealousy - bruised ego, fear of loss, loss of control, abandonment. Flushed skin, heart pumping, hot face, head pounding, muscles tensing, hands shaking, eyes closing, intentional calming, inability to speak, clenched fists, preemptive abandonment, tit for tat.

"He saw her 'friend' maneuver closer to her in the crowd until their hips touched. With disbelief, he watched her friend, maybe justifying this move because of the noise, twist into her, crushing her breast into his chest. She smiled at him as his face neared hers to say something."

"'Are their cheeks touching?' he wondered."

"He could feel the heat in his face, a terrible hollowness in his chest, pounding in his head. No matter what they might say, he knew her friend was too close, knew how that subtle manipulation worked."

"Thoughts cascaded through his head and he couldn't make sense of any of them. 'Should I interrupt? Maybe it's innocent. I don't want to appear childish. Am I seeing things that aren't there?' Without even knowing why, he turned and cast his eyes on the woman who had smiled seductively at him earlier."

I don't know....is that what we're talking about here?

 

[amicus]

ldegeneres
Experienced

Thank you for actually reading and understanding the intent of the post and welcome to the forum.

Yes, that is it exactly. I hope you do write that and if so, please link me to it if you post on Literotica.

Your snippet was written from a male pov, I would be interested in reading a female pov on the same incident should any one offer?

regards...

Amicus...

 

[Leto Degeneres]

...I would be interested in reading a female pov on the same incident should any one offer?

You and me both. It just so happens that the jealousy that I need to describe is actually from a female point of view. If I don't see it soon I might take a stab at it anyway and paste it in here to see what someone has to say.

 

[amicus]

I understand that exactly...but...I say...ahem, who cares what I say, but, go ahead, write it yourself.

I did a rape story, ahm, non consent is the politically correct, from the female pov and did as you suggest, run it by a few ladies to see if it flew.

They doubted my gender. Thought I had to be female to have written it as I did.

So, take the plunge into the deep end of the pool...it is certainly a challenge to create a believable opposite gender story.

Good luck!

Amicus...

 

[Guest]

Some of us still doubt your gender, ami.

 

[miss_trust]

Possession can be defined as the desire to dominate (in my opinion a more accurate definition in this case given some of your other posts i've stumbled across) - not ownership as in buying and selling... Though, if that's what you meant, well, of course people of any gender can be bought and sold - anything tangible can be bought and sold - world history & current news shows us evidence of slave trade. Of course anything of flesh can become chattel & be owned but i don't believe that's the point - whoever replied to your post elsewhere was referring to the impossibility of owning what makes us human or gives us humanity - that is not contained in our physical nature it is something completely intangible and cannot be owned but can be dominated. While this isn't your focus, you've included it as part of your premise & i like clear air rather than cluttering details.

...
Men in general seem to be chided for acting 'possessive' of a woman, considering her, his only, to the exclusion of all others.

Just on a side note: women are chided quite regularly for acting possessive of a partner, regardless of gender - the street is not one-way - again, not your point but you've included it as a piece of the puzzle...

...
Jealousy and rage are seen to be incorrect behavior, when the male finds his 'possession' being an object of possession in the eyes of another, "You can't even look at her that way, she is mine!"

rage, if understood to mean a violent and uncontrolled anger or fit of wrath - of course it's frowned on... it's destructive... it's negative... it's a backward movement. if, on the other hand, you're defining rage as interchangeable with passion, then ok - gotcha, rage it shall be - just know that your use of words creates a lack of clarity (i'm guessing this is intentional because you seem to thrive on saying things you have a fair certainty will piss people off or get some reaction edging more toward passionate)...

Lots of assumptions in your initial post, which leads me to wonder: if you believe that possessiveness and (forgive me here) passionate rage are natural, normal and acceptable, what do [bold]you[/bold] do about people who say they are not jealous or possessive in a relationship?

Since such emotions do exist and since we write of them... must if we are to be accurate in character building...how do you handle them?

and the main assumption...

from a female pov - as you know every person is different -- his hip has touched that of a female friend, he's turned into her and their bodies are pressed closely, i perceive the contact as more intimate than is appropriate for a man in a relationship with me and a woman other than myself... reaction: self-loathing - what did i do that wasn't good enough? - resentment - why can't he just tell me he wants someone else? why doesn't she know she's hurting me by getting so close? - confusion - what do i do? interrupt or leave well enough alone & pretend i haven't seen anything or something else entirely?... actual action: i would likely do nothing at the time but would be clear with him about how it made me feel after the fact and ask that he be aware of how he contacts other people in the future and how that might look & feel to me... i would also ask if he preferred someone else because i'm not the kind of person who deals well with anything other than monogamy.

or are you asking about how to handle them in a story? meh - short answer long here

 

[xssve]

Since I do like to play with character stereotypes in my stories, I cast conservatives as jealous, spiteful and dangerous, and libs as open, tolerant, and giving. Of course, I'm just basing this on life-experience, not on media hype or expected norms.

Come to think of it, I have seen a few jealous and dangerous liberals. It seems jealousy is one of those basic human emotions - like greed - that many people have a hard time getting a handle on - which leads us to the failure of free market... oh never mind.

I would like to see an uptempo rockin' remake of "You Belong to Me" with a Maddonna-esque woman shoving some guy around (or girl. I don't care, really.) Or a parody with Nancy Pelosi cracking a whip. You'd like that, wouldn't you Ami?

Of course in an ostensibly monogamous culture, jealousy is a trait that will be selected for to some degree: males require paternity assurances, i.e., that the children they are working to provide for are their own, while women are jealous of those resources, including time, for the sake of their half of the genetic contribution.

So yes, jealousy is a basic human emotional trait, once two individuals have combined their genetic destinies, so to speak, they both have something to lose if one or the other strays, and stray they do, because the flip side of qualitative devotion the family is the urge to diversify ones genetic legacy - the main difference between liberals and conservatives here is that liberals call a spade a spade, and find ways to cope with it normatively, while conservatives prefer to downplay this particular aspect of human nature, often to the point of hysteria, which mainly results in incentivizing significant deception that itself tends to undermine the social controls they're trying to maintain - as it turns out, these turn out to be largely concerned with maintaining male prerogative, to no ones particular surprise, the deception here being the ostensible concern with "family values", which just happen to coincidentally, coincide with a male supremacist (androcentric) philosophy.

I mention this, because I notice it appears far easier for a female submissive to find a suitable dominant than the converse; female dominance is still a relatively new concept in this culture, and there has yet to emerge any cultural consensus on what these roles might look like - at this juncture, radical feminism/female supremacy (gynocentrism) is still largely separatist, and sexual integration is occurring largely only at the margins. In utilitarian terms, it really doesn't matter who is in charge, or to what extent, within the dyad, the efficacy of these hierarchies is largely to reduce intragroup conflicts, so that energy can be focused on mutually beneficial co-operative behavior rather than internecine strife.

Not surprisingly, despite the seeming oppositional duality, gender supremacists of either stripe resemble each other more than they do the lines between liberalism and conservatism, and radical feminists are only liberal in the sense that they have broken with what conservatives see as traditional roles - they are both mainly concerned with the prerogatives of their respective genders, gynocentrists simply don't have the centuries (millenia?)of institutional organization and social strategy that androcentrists enjoy.

Naturally, the conservative way is that both of them attempt to crush each other: note that conservatives tend to frame everything in militant terms, it's always some kind of "war", and war, as a symbol, represents the abrogation of the rules of common courtesy and civility - the liberal way would be to find a way to get along in spite of our differences.

This, ami, is why even women who enjoy being submissive in private, resent the public implication that they are property - it's a classic form of conservative deception to try to exploit private behavior towards political ends - in short, you are mixing the emotional complexity of human pair bonding with gender politics - your entire post is a bait and switch: you start by praising and individual woman whose philosophy you happen to admire, and using that to create a false dichotomy, a strawman framework from which you can issue the usual condemnation of liberals, and whining about how nobody understands you and fails to recognize your innate superiority. It's vanity baby, and that's why you're so fucking miserable.

It really is not the P/E, or the the D/s, or the "ownership" dynamic that Cloudy is objecting to, in terms of interpersonal relationship dynamics, it is that you take it to the next, abstract level, of objectifying all women in the social/economic sense. It's exploitative, and objectionable in purely human terms without even dragging gender into it: it's dehumanizing and there is a historical record that establishes this, it's not open to debate, you can't just gloss over it with romantic ideological blather. Your cherished institution is not a rule, it's not a law, it's just a thang, and it cuts both ways.

Another of the great ironies of evangelical conservatism and their formulation of "natural law": they deny that they're animals, and then insist that everybody act like animals - i.e., to reject reason and science is to reject the very thing that makes us human, and different from all of the rest of the flora and fauna. In most species, one sex or the other is "dominant", and in practical terms, this usually means they eat first, period, the rest is pure romanticism - among humans, dominance is more abstracted, and female alphas are not at all anomalous - for reasons I'll not go into at the moment, in order to keep this short.

If you're you're so naturally dominant, simply by virtue of your sex, why don't you go dominate Cloudy and show us all how it's done?

Lol, I'd pay money to see it, I'd even spring for the cardboard box they'll have to ship you home to mother in.

 

[DeeZire]

You are rather taking on the appearance of a stalker, following me around from thread to thread like an angry wife so you can nag me to death, egads, woman!

You and I have similar interests, my friend. The fact that I respond so often to your posts is based on my desire for accurate information to be presented here. I have actually made an effort to avoid your political threads, but when you poop all over someone else's thread, someone needs to clean up the mess. In fact, your impositions on other peoples threads could be seen as stalking, especially since you post to incite rather than to discuss.

After all that, it is nice to see you back and in good health, woman.

 

[cloudy]

It really is not the P/E, or the the D/s, or the "ownership" dynamic that Cloudy is objecting to, in terms of interpersonal relationship dynamics, it is that you take it to the next, abstract level, of objectifying all women in the social/economic sense. It's exploitative, and objectionable in purely human terms without even dragging gender into it: it's dehumanizing and there is a historical record that establishes this, it's not open to debate, you can't just gloss over it with romantic ideological blather. Your cherished institution is not a rule, it's not a law, it's just a thang, and it cuts both ways.

Yes, exactly.

If you're you're so naturally dominant, simply by virtue of your sex, why don't you go dominate Cloudy and show us all how it's done?

Lol, I'd pay money to see it, I'd even spring for the cardboard box they'll have to ship you home to mother in.

I wouldn't charge you if you're taking care of the box and shipping, after all...it wouldn't take very long.

 

[amicus]

]A song made popular in the 1950's by Patti Page.

Someone replied to one of my threads or posts, "You can't own a woman, she is not property!"

Technically, thas true, what with the Constitution and all, but...

The song was sung by a woman from a woman's point of view and she was saying to her lover, no matter where you are, how far away you are, what ever temptations come before you, remember...you're mine, you belong to me.

I liked the song; a lot of people did, some even still remember it. It was popular, I think, because the lyrics expressed a yearning in all of us for that special 'one', that fulfilled a dream.

The song also cherished chastity and fidelity and discipline in foregoing momentary pleasures or escapes in favor of a long lasting, eternity kind of thing with another person.

Men in general seem to be chided for acting 'possessive' of a woman, considering her, his only, to the exclusion of all others.

Jealousy and rage are seen to be incorrect behavior, when the male finds his 'possession' being an object of possession in the eyes of another, "You can't even look at her that way, she is mine!"

Since such emotions do exist and since we write of them... must if we are to be accurate in character building...how do you handle them?

Amicus...

[/I]


~~~

I reposted t he entire thread to emphasize, if you will only read, that this was a 'writerly' thread, not an expose' of my personal thoughts and feelings on the subject but including observations which I maintain are objective ones.

Only one person who has commented understood and replied in kind as to how one might write about these emotions.

These emotions have been classified and pondered as far back as the Greeks and before and do, I maintain, involve the majority of human emotions in relationships

I understand the reluctance of many to address this subject as even the tentative assumption that these emotions are valid, tosses a monkey wrench into your entire philosophy and moral behavior.

The progressive, liberal, relativistic manner of viewing human action limits the possibilities of both living and writing about real people who do not accede your premises that all things are gray and relative and situational. I refer once again to the work of art, the Bohemian culture, that is passive in nature and does not innovate, but conforms to the will of the group.

Some of the greatest writers and poets in all of human history, those passed down through the ages, have addressed these issues in real, living terms and demonstrated and illustrated that these universal emotions, common to all men and women, played and play a great role in both the highest and lowest realms of society.

To ignore them or dismiss them as mere relativism without any objective base, is to limit the scope of your understanding of basic human nature and must, by definition, leave your created figures as one dimensional characters adhering fanatically to an agenda that few accept.

Amicus...

 

[Leto Degeneres]

Only one person who has commented understood and replied in kind as to how one might write about these emotions.

Actually, that's not quite acurate. I just went throught this thread again. There is a good take on a female point of view and I missed it myself.

...reaction: self-loathing - what did i do that wasn't good enough? - resentment - why can't he just tell me he wants someone else? why doesn't she know she's hurting me by getting so close? - confusion - what do i do? interrupt or leave well enough alone & pretend i haven't seen anything or something else entirely?... actual action: i would likely do nothing at the time but would be clear with him about how it made me feel after the fact and ask that he be aware of how he contacts other people in the future and how that might look & feel to me... i would also ask if he preferred someone else because i'm not the kind of person who deals well with anything other than monogamy.

I've heard those very words myself and had forgotten. Two phrases that stand out to me are "do you want someone like that" and "what did I do that wasn't good enough". That second one I never would have guessed could indicate self-loathing, though.

I thought some of the similarities between male and female reactions were pretty interesting as well. What miss_trust says about confusion holds true for feelings of jealousy that I've had myself.

One striking difference is that it seems like a woman can more easily set aside her reaction until a better time.

This is good, and it rings true.

 

[DG Hear]

A song made popular in the 1950's by Patti Page.

Someone replied to one of my threads or posts, "You can't own a woman, she is not property!"

Technically
Amicus...

You belong to me was one of my favorite songs back in 1962 by the Duprees. Here they are singing it on you tube.
Please enjoy.
DG

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CIEBErVs0fY

 

[xssve]

Feminine responses to masculine jealousy run the gamut: some women expect it, might even play it - it's notoriously conspicuous in Latino, and other Machismo cultures, Islam, etc., but it is largely depreciated in modern mainstream Anglo-Saxon culture, where it has taken on a dysfunctional meaning: controlling OCD type behavior, stalking, handicapping, etc., i.e., behaviors that interfere with normal social activity on the part of the target. With women participating fully in the workforce, it's a lot less flattering when you have to network and appear competent while some asshole is calling you every five minutes at work, hassling your friends and co-workers, slashing your tires, painting "slut" on your car, kidnapping and killing you, etc.

The emphasis here is on emotional self control, i.e., being "well adjusted" - while this itself can be taken too far, IMO, reducing passion to petulance, it does have some practical value in terms of at least helping in weeding out potential psycho's, of which remains, unfortunately, a stable and statistically significant population.

Going against the grain as I do, and being who I am, concealing my volcanic passion behind my calm rational exterior p), I tend to manfully and spontaneously express my reasonably jealous insecurities by moping and sulking, caustic sarcasm and passive aggressive behaviors - that's the modern, well adjusted way.

At least until I find somebody who doesn't mind wearing a leash...

 

[Selena_Kitt]

Going against the grain as I do, and being who I am, concealing my volcanic passion behind my calm rational exterior p), I tend to manfully and spontaneously express my reasonably jealous insecurities by moping and sulking, caustic sarcasm and passive aggressive behaviors - that's the modern, well adjusted way.

See, no. This just pisses me off more. If you're gonna be jealous, BE JEALOUS. Grab me and kiss me against a wall and tell me, "You're mine!" Take my breath away with the force of your emotion. I'd much rather have that - honestly - than the passive aggressive crap.

But that's me. I'm just sayin'...

 

[Huckleman2000]

See, no. This just pisses me off more. If you're gonna be jealous, BE JEALOUS. Grab me and kiss me against a wall and tell me, "You're mine!" Take my breath away with the force of your emotion. I'd much rather have that - honestly - than the passive aggressive crap.

But that's me. I'm just sayin'...

This kind of raises a male/female issue for me, and it has to do with research like I cited in the "What Do Women Want?" thread:
Jealousy, for women, seems to be of her mate's attention, while for men perhaps it is more jealousy of her body - hence, the "ownership" aspect. I also think women often provoke jealousy in men, whether consciously or not. (If not, they should examine the sources of their self-esteem in a deeper way.) Provoking jealousy in one's partner is extremely passive-aggressive behavior, and I think men get the short end of the stick sometimes. Not to excuse any abusive behavior, but it's like what happens often in sports - the guy who retaliates is the one who gets the penalty.

Again, a Tennessee Williams-like world in our reptilian brains.

 

[Monazwx]

I love that song.
Edit - Oops, thought you meant Carly Simon's version

(Either way, I like the twist/spin on it seeing that a woman is singing this song to her man.
It's possessive, but not creepy possessive, ya know)

 

[Leto Degeneres]

See, no. This just pisses me off more. If you're gonna be jealous, BE JEALOUS. Grab me and kiss me against a wall and tell me, "You're mine!" Take my breath away with the force of your emotion. I'd much rather have that - honestly - than the passive aggressive crap.

But that's me. I'm just sayin'...

Amen to that. Makes me shudder to think of having to choke on my own feelings. Besides, I really have no memory of expressions of jealously causing problems for me or her, except for in a couple of cases. Those times it wasn't just jealousy, it was my brain yelling "Danger, Will Robinson!" and I was wise to listen.

I'm kind of thinking that I was seeing subtle sarcasm and a shot at extremist thinking with this:

Feminine responses to masculine jealousy run the gamut: some women expect it, might even play it - it's notoriously conspicuous in Latino, and other Machismo cultures, Islam, etc., but it is largely depreciated in modern mainstream Anglo-Saxon culture, where it has taken on a dysfunctional meaning: controlling OCD type behavior, stalking, handicapping, etc., i.e., behaviors that interfere with normal social activity on the part of the target. With women participating fully in the workforce, it's a lot less flattering when yo uhave to network an appear competent while some asshole is calling you every five minutes at work, and hassling your friends and co-workers, slashing your tires, painting "slut" on your car, kidnapping and killing you, etc.

and that I was seeing subtle satire with this:

I tend to manfully and spontaneously express my reasonably jealous insecurities by moping and sulking, caustic sarcasm and passive aggressive behaviors - that's the modern, well adjusted way.

 

[xssve]

See, no. This just pisses me off more. If you're gonna be jealous, BE JEALOUS. Grab me and kiss me against a wall and tell me, "You're mine!" Take my breath away with the force of your emotion. I'd much rather have that - honestly - than the passive aggressive crap.

But that's me. I'm just sayin'...

Wait a minute, let me regain my composure....











...right, but you would want to know things about me first, like my name at least, yes?