Sexyat40

There’s been much talk on the Internet about Will Smith’s ”confession” of having an open marriage with wife Jada Pinkett. Read more here 

 I’m sure Will is going to take alot of heat for his admission, but I’m not really sure what type of admission it is. While many of his fans seem up in arms that the straight laced, happily married celebrity now turns out to be a kinkster, it’s a shame that they are missing a few larger points.

 I understand that celebrity brings it’s own set of challenges, and therefore a completely different set of coping skills than most of us need. Celebrities do live with hype, pressure and temptations that we will, most likely, never understand. To be surrounded by people on a daily basis that prop you up and feed your ego will, sooner or later, allowing people to believe their own hype. So to develop some sort of system, or boundary line, to cope with temptation actually seems practical as well as realistic.

The actual statement was  

 “In our marriage vows, we didn’t say ‘forsaking all others.’ The vow that we made was that you will never hear that I did something after the fact … If it came down to it, then one spouse can say to the other, ‘Look, I need to have sex with somebody. I’m not going to if you don’t approve of it – but please approve of it.‘”

For me, the above statement is far removed from the comments and statements of most open relationship couples. It’s completely theoretical, based off of what might happen. It’s just not the same type of comment I would expect to hear. In other interviews, Will & Jada have said that they follow other celebrity marriages, especially breakups, ask questions, and put lessons learned into practice in their own relationship.  It seems that all they did was to look at the celebrity world around them, its pitfalls and temptations, and develop a practical agreement that says, “This happens all around us. If these things start to happen to us, we will discuss it before anything happens.”  

Rather than being vilified, or made a poster child for open relationships, I hope his comments are taken for what they are, a couple who communicate, talk about their future and how they might handle issues, and work at making their relationship work. The fact that they are able to discuss these things is a positive element, and hopefully that is the message people will hear, (but I’m skeptical of that.)

 But of course, the media hype will turn this into more than it is.

I found an article today that I found a little disturbing. The article, found here, states that 60% of women will embark on some sort of extra marital affair during their marriage.

 I’m unsure of my reaction. Should I jump for joy at the thought of equal rights for women, be saddened by the rising number of women leaving the confines of their  relationship, or take a look at my own personal perception of women and relationships?

I’m not sure if I fully believe the article. I have long held the position that while men will cheat for a myriad of reasons, women will only stray for two distinctive reasons, mental damage from their past or their emotional needs are not being met at home. While that may seem simplistic, those seem to be the two basic categories.

 This study seems to suggest that more women are participating in recreational sex, free of intimacy and the confines of a relationship. Other studies have come out as well, showing biologically that there has always been a percentage of women cheating, with the result throughout history being 10% of children living in a home without their biological father. In most of those cases, going back 30 years or more, neither the child nor the father was unaware of their non-biological relationship.

But that number is 10%, a far cry from the 60% that this survey is reporting.

If the survey numbers are correct, are we as women finding types of pleasure that only men were capable of, or heading down a slippery slope that will leave us feeling more insecure in our sexuality by feeling what can be the emptiness of recreational sex? Does my personal theory of emotional damage or emotional neglect still hold true? If that were the case, it would mean there are more women than ever walking around damaged or neglected.

I was visiting a website for older women, and one of the most common topics, of course, is cheating husbands, and how to control them. I was actually shocked at the number of women who have a set list of “deal breakers”, or situations that are non-negotiable and would immediately end the marriage or relationship.

I have a hard time with that. One thing I think most women look for in their life is unconditional love. But how is unconditional love possible when all you are offering in return is love with conditions? For me, having “deal breakers” in place immediately takes compassion and forgiveness off the table. 

In life, I want a partner, not a person that I feel I need to manage. And by setting conditions, I would be putting myself in a manager position instead of a partnership position.  I accept the fact that that I married another human being, and as such, is capable of stumbling and making mistakes. But by setting conditions, I am not offering partnership. A true partner would say, “If you stumble, I will help brush you off and get you back on your feet.”

 And does my husband see this as a permission to screw around? No, quite the opposite. He understands the true gift of unconditional love. And we all know that rules enhance temptation. He understands that the gift of unconditional love actually holds him to a higher standard, one that says “I know you might make a mistake, but I also know the great things you are capable of.” He is empowered to live his life, and works hard to never abuse the gift we have given each other.

 I’ve been visiting a family member who is completely unhappy with her life. At 40 years old, she is struggling financially, raising kids alone, and her life is not what she expected. And adding to her frustration, she has compartmentalized her life into pretty little boxes, all which tell her what life “should be like”.

Of course, life never neatly falls into the neat little boxes like on television. The box of “This is what makes a good mother” resides next to “This is how a good son or daughter should act”. In the real world, the boxes break or life spills over from one box to the next. Life is messy, and many times hard. To create a small box or vision of how aspects of your life “should be” can become very unrealistic. You have to pick and choose your battles. What’s important is the end result of winning the whole war not winning every small daily battle along the way.

Instead of appreciating the great qualities of her children and people around her, she has developed expectations of how they are supposed to be. She has created boxes for them, and attempts to force them into her vision since they are part of her life. Expectation very often leads to failure. She has become dependent on them to live up to her daily expectation, and quite often becomes dissapointed when they fail to meet that expectation.

 Thats not to say that expectation is bad. Just as equally frustrating would to create a situation where nothing is expected of each other. But there needs to be a balance. The expectation needs to be based on the limitations and goals of the people she is trying to define. And living within those limitations. To expect more will only dissapoint her.

 Even in her current relationship, a sort of “Stella Got Her Groove Back” situation, she finds herself frustrated. Her male friend is simply that, a male friend who she goes to dinner and movies with, and sometimes they share more intimate times, a friends with benefits type setup.

 But it doesn’t properly fit into the box of what a relationship “should be”, even though this is the type of situation she is currently looking for. Instead of putting it into the proper box, she is attempting to define the relationship by a different standard, because to her, this type of setup is immature and not her. In the process, she  frustrating herself as well as him.

 Defining aspects of our lives is important. But just as important is to define then realistic fashion, and not based off of how life is supposed to be.

This Is Who I Am: Our Beauty in All Shapes and Sizes is a new photography book by Seattle-based photographer Rosanne Olson. The project started  word-of -mouth, as individual women were delighted with their photos, and recommended her to their friends. Far from the perfect bodies, they are average women celebrating their bodies and forms.

Elizabeth Wellington, Fashion Columnist for the Philly.com writes about it here, and both Olson and Wellington make a connection between negative body image and the fashion industry. While fashion does play a part, between fashions designed for stick figures, no larger sizes available in trendy clothing, and advertising promoting an ultra thin version of beauty, the issues of body image are much complicated.

 While most of us have become immune to the ads from the fashion industry, a positive celebration of the average female form is easy to relate to, and a great celebration for all women.

Hips and Curves.com  is a site I just found offering really nice, full figured, lingerie. It is such a large collection that there is something for everyone.

 The styles are very classic, comfortable, and are very figure flattering for a real shaped woman. I love the amount of corsets and bustiers offered to show off a woman’s figure, and they are designed to give support where it is most needed.

 The pricing is competitive, and  the look of the site is very positive and supportive, even in their choice of beautiful, volumptous models. There’s even a buyer’s guide section with tips for men and an in-depth sizing chart. There are also gift cards!!!!

While visiting with a friend, we had a interesting conversation about men. She’s a single, 38 year old, white collar professional & mom of three. She has a nice home, car but struggling financially. There is really no reason for her to settle when it comes to men  , yet over and over again she does.

She knows full well in her head that there is no prince charming, but still in her heart keeps feeling one still will ride up and carry her away. She then becomes disillusioned when the man can’t live up to her unrealistic expectations.

If someone is claiming to be perfect and whisk you away from your troubles, be leery. There are no knights or princes. The ones that do show up are typically wolves in sheep’s clothing.

Those are the men to be most careful of. They are the ones that sit and wait and prey on the women that are lonely, desperate or weak. Women are leaving the door wide open for them to swoop in and get them right where they can have the most control over them.

 To reverse it a bit, a woman would be leery to sign onto a relationship with a man with no money, job or prospects. And those women that do sign on are expecting to repair the man, thinking that they can recreate him into their dream. The same applies to men. Those that are willing to sign on have their own motives, and rarely are they being generous or kind. They see a damaged object that they can “fix” to a certain point, but never enough to be truly free. The woman will always be dependent on him, and his investment of time and money.
Just because you read it as a child, there is no fairytale prince who will  ride up and “save” us. You have to write your own fairytale or story that is complete without a prince.  Only then will will you be able to find the right person to share your life with.

Known for their provocative ads, lingerie designer Agent Provocateur just released their new online campaign with a swash bucking pirate theme.

 You can have a taste of pirate life with their interactive movie, complete with hot pirates, sexy lingerie and treasure. As a matter of disclosure, I have to admit to having a pirate fetish, so the whole experience makes me tingle.  Aside from my personal appreciation, I love it when a company steps out of the box and offers us something more than a photo of their lingerie in front of a fireplace or bedpost. The pirate experience acknowledges women’s fantasies and fetishes in a steamy and positive fashion.

In other lingerie news, Boston College is getting heat from their conservative Catholic alumni over a deal with Victoria’s Secret that adds  the BC logo to Vicoria’s Secret’s Pink Collection. The article is here.

“There is no way that we want that (BC) logo to be interpreted as ‘We OK the sexualization of women,’ ” said Sharlene Hesse-Biber, director of the Women’s Studies Center at Boston College, about the products.

So what should we do, “desexualize” women? Victoria’s Secret is selling lingerie to women. And yes, we want to feel sexy and good, it’s part of the female experience. I’d rather embrace my sexuality than shroud it in Catholic guilt.

I’ve been working with a few different lingerie manufacturers, attempting to alter some existing designs to better fit women with regular shapes and bodies. Yes, it can be done, but even the slightest alteration increases the cost of the items more than it is worth. To me, there is no point of creating something that is outside the price range that people can afford, and to make it a great luxury item.

 Yesterday, I was out shopping, and stopped into a major lingerie chain in the local mall. I found a few items I liked, tried them on, and them proceeded to mix and match items to give me the look I wanted, but also give me the support I needed and the ability to cover certain areas. I purchased a really nice baby doll combination, and knew that the thong underwear that was part of the set wasn’t going to work. But I already own a pair of tap pants, really nice soft underwear that sits a little higher and closer to my belly button. It was perfect to match the babydoll top I really liked. Since the set was on sale, I purchased the outfit for less than $30, even though I would toss the thong.

 The thought occurred to me that this is how I typically shop. I mix and match items from department stores and lingerie boutiques that give me the look I want, the support I need and at a price I can afford. Why alter an existing $30 item and bring the price to $95, when the same look can be achieved off the rack for less?

The other side is that I feel good walking into a lingerie store and being able to buy off the rack. Yes, there are items I buy in the plus sized section, and even that has a negative connotation to it. Typically, you walk past the “regular” items, and find the plus sizes tucked away in a corner. But I enjoy the whole encounter, from smelling the lotions to walking out with the bag. There is pleasure in the whole buying experience.

So that’s my new goal, showing women how to mix and match “off the rack” items, and create new combinations that allow them to feel good