It’s the Trauma-Bonding Talking

as i continue on my roll against PIV…its come to this, and theres no avoiding it:  thinking about that post-coital meltdown that so many women have, when their mates “dont call.”  and i actually googled “trauma bonding”, if that tells you something.  i never google anything.

as i think has been made abundantly clear by now, women are literally putting their lives and physical and mental wellbeing on the line, every fucking time they engage in PIV.  (sorry!  really, i am).  if its not the very reasonable fear of being raped at some point during the encounter, its the fear of disease, and the dread, absolute dread of an unintended or unwanted pregnancy.  and that last one applies even in wanted encounters with trusted partners, does it not?  every single act of intercourse, from somewhat pre-menstruation to somewhat post-menopause.  or…until your mate gets his nads snipped…and even then.  fear, and dread.  foreboding, terror, and bargaining with god.  counting the days.

because we all know that pregnancy can kill you, or make you very ill, even if you have an early abortion.  right?  (imagine sitting under your desk at work and puking into a trashcan, if it helps bring it home…not that most women really need a visual.  but there is going to be someone on this thread who says they still dont get why PIV is so bad.)

this has got to be traumatic, no?  i mean, how could it not be?  this is a serious question.

speaking of trauma…when men go into battle with each other, they form intense, emotional bonds.  in relation to each other, these men are known as “war buddies.”  and its a close relationship, to say the least.  the feelings that the shared experience of death-defying elicit are “intimate,” in the extreme.  this is commonly known to be the case.  it just is.  something happens to the human mind when we encounter life-threatening situations with other people.  we…bond.  and women are human beings.  yes, they are.

when women have PIV with men, we are encountering a life-threatening situation, with another person, by definition.  not surprisingly, we form intense bonds with our war-buddies, these men with whom we have literally faced death and disfigurement.  terror.  the problem is, of course, that the men dont feel the same way.  because theres nothing dangerous to men about PIV, really, at all.  they were just getting their dicks wet.  or, you know, “making love.”  we were the ones putting everything on the line.  and if it seems like they dont get what it is that we were doing with them…well its because they dont.  nor do they care to.

heres a bit from google on trauma-bonding:

Exploitive relationships can create trauma bonds-chains that link a victim to someone who is dangerous to them. Divorce, employee relations, litigation of any type, incest and child abuse, family and marital systems, domestic violence, hostage negotiations, kidnapping, professional exploitation and religious abuse are all areas of trauma bonding. All these relationships share one thing: they are situations of incredible intensity or importance where there is an exploitation of trust or power.

bolds mine.  you see, any man who demands PIV or engages in it for that matter is making himself dangerous to women, by definition.  and when a woman trusts a man to keep her safe…if that man demands or engages in PIV with her, he is exploiting that trust.

“stockholm syndrome” might seem a bit extreme to apply to most het relationships that arent traditionally abusive…but theres something going on here.  at least, for those of us who arent essentialist, and who just dont believe this shit about women when it comes to sex “feeling” so deeply, and stuff, and things.

because the sad, sick truth of it is that every single man with whom we have ever had intercourse is just some tool who laid pipe, at our expense.  thats all.  if it hurts to think about it that way…well it hurts, whether or not you choose to think about it.  thats kind of my point, actually.  PIV hurts and is harmful to women, but not to men.  how can you tell?  we form emotional bonds with men we have fucked, that are inappropriate, and not reciprocal.  work backwards, if you have to, if you cant see that PIV hurts, and is dangerous to women.  look at the most common “female response” to PIV (emotional attachment), and tell me it doesnt look a hell of a lot like another commonly-recognized bonding-response to having experienced extreme terror, and the fear of death.

women also manage not to stalk or murder our lovers, really, ever.  they are our war-buddies, afterall.  not our pets, our our property.  see how womens alleged “obsession” with men really has no correlate with mens sexual obsession with women?  a more reasonable correlate (besides stockholm syndrome) would appear to be a kind of one-sided war-buddy syndrome, which normally creates intense emotional bonds between people, who face death with each other, in times of war. 

those are my thoughts at the moment.  that, and something i might have wondered about if i were about 15 years younger, cause i dont really care at this point: if we made PIV *more* traumatic for men, would they have the common decency to pick up the fucking phone the next day, but without going all stalker?  im just asking.  that is all.