Tenderness

Passages

Every passage tagged with this emotion in the Vela corpus. Search the body text, narrow by source or register, click through to a book’s profile to see how the passage sits with the rest of the work.

Page 141 of 145 · 20 per page

• From Three Contributions to the Theory of Sex (1905)

  The Sexual Object of the Nursing Period.—However, even after the separation of the sexual activity from the taking of nourishment, there still remains from this first and most important of all sexual relations an important share, which prepares the object selection and assists in reestablishing the lost happiness. Throughout the latency period the child learns to love other persons who assist it in its helplessness and gratify its wants; all this follows the model and is a continuation of the child's infantile relations to his wet nurse. One may perhaps hesitate to identify the tender feelings and esteem of the child for his foster-parents with sexual love; I believe, however, that a more thorough psychological investigation will establish this identity beyond any doubt. The intercourse between the child and its foster-parents is for the former an inexhaustible source of sexual excitation and gratification of erogenous zones, especially since the parents—or as a rule the mother—supplies the child with feelings which originate from her own sexual life; she pats it, kisses it, and rocks it, plainly taking it as a substitute for a full-valued sexual object.61 The mother would probably be terrified if it were explained to her that all her tenderness awakens the sexual impulse of her child and prepares its future intensity. She considers her actions as asexually “pure” love, for she carefully avoids causing more irritation to the genitals of the child than is indispensable in caring for the body. But as we know the sexual impulse is not awakened by the excitation of genital zones alone. What we call tenderness will some day surely manifest its influence on the genital zones also. If the mother better understood the high significance of the sexual impulse for the whole psychic life and for all ethical and psychic activities, the enlightenment would spare her all reproaches. By teaching the child to love she only fulfills her function; for the child should become a fit man with energetic sexual needs, and accomplish in life all that the impulse urges the man to do. Of course, too much parental tenderness becomes harmful because it accelerates the sexual maturity, and also because it “spoils” the child and makes it unfit to temporarily renounce love or be satisfied with a smaller amount of love in later life. One of the surest premonitions of later nervousness is the fact that the child shows itself insatiable in its demands for parental tenderness; on the other hand, neuropathic parents, who usually display a boundless tenderness, often with their caressing awaken in the child a disposition for neurotic diseases. This example at least shows that neuropathic parents have nearer ways than inheritance by which they can transfer their disturbances to their children.

• From Comrade Loves of the Samurai (1972)

  That night Sennojyo received his patrons in the tea-house with the greatest cordiality; but at dawn he went to the bank of the river Kamo to look for his former patron. He went alone, without a servant, along the gritty and pebbly river bank, with the river flowing at his side. At last he reached the bridge, and called: 'Samboku, my dear Owari patron! 'But no one answered him. It was the twenty-fourth of November, and not yet very light; therefore he could not distinguish the faces of the wretched men lying under the bridge. There were many beggars and vagabonds there. Then he remembered that his patron had a little scar on his neck; so he Started to examine all the sleepers closely, and after a long search found his man. 'You are cruel, 'he said. 'I have kept calling you, and you never answered.'And he wept for pity and joy at finding his old lover again, and chatted with him a little of past days and of their former love. The morning air was fresh, and to warm the two of them Sennojyo poured out the wine which he had brought, and they both drank. When the sky grew light in the East he could distinguish his old lover's features. He had lost all refinement, and Sennojyo was very sorry for this. He tenderly caressed the scurfed feet, and lay down with the old man under the bridge. Day came and people began to pass over the bridge; and the time came for the announcement of the theatre programme. Sennojyo was obliged to retire secretly, for he could not Stay there in the sight of all. He said to the old man: 'I beg you to wait for me here this evening. I shall come and take you back to my house with me.'But the old man had no wish to accept such a proposal. This meeting with his former lover had, in fad, troubled him. He wished to continue in his simple and serene obscurity. Therefore he disappeared. Sennojyo sought him through all Kyoto, but in vain. He collected all the gun flints that his lover had left behind, and made a tomb of them among the bamboos, in a corner of the field of Nii-Kamano at Higashiyama. His lover's favourite tree had been the violet paulownia, so he planted one beside the tomb. He engaged a priest, who lived in a little hut near the field, to pray for his lover's and his own soul. People named this tomb, 'The new tomb of love.' [image file=image_rsrc1KR.jpg] 10 Letter from a Buddhist Priest telling his Friend that his Lover comes to himDEAR FRIEND IN THE TEACHING OF BUDDHA: The cherry trees in flower at Kyoto so troubled me that I left the capital last spring. I send you this letter by a man who is going to visit the city. I hope that you are zealous in our religion at your temple, and without disturbance.

• From Love 2.0: Finding Happiness and Health in Moments of Connection (2013)

  At the heart of love is a feeling—a feeling with both physical as well as mental components. Physically, your whole body feels relaxed, with a warmth and openness in your chest, as if your heart were stretching open to let in or embrace another being. This is the feeling that makes you want to move in closer, to listen and observe more carefully. Mentally, you yearn for good fortune for others. You wish them well with great sincerity. You also wish to show how much you care, to enact tenderness and concern. We’ve all experienced love like this at one time or another. It’s that warm and tender feeling you have when you first hold a newborn, or greet a cherished friend after many months, or even years, apart. Some of this tenderness, along with its associated impulse to show care and concern, is even released when you come across a kitten, puppy, or other baby animal. Think here of a time when some small creature drew a slow “Awwww . . .” out of you. If you’re like many people, you recognize this tender feeling rolling through you mostly when you’re with loved ones. Indeed, scientists from Darwin to Ekman suggest tenderness like this honors familial bonds. Yet by now I hope you’re recognizing that your potential for micro-moments of love is far greater. Each time you encounter another—or yourself—you have the opportunity to do so with tenderness and warmth, and with relaxed openness and goodwill. The goal of this chapter, and indeed part II of this book, is to provide specific tools for expanding the circle of those with whom you share the warmth and tenderness of love. Preparatory Practices As you read through part II, you’ll notice that most of the practices that I recommend to seed love are solo activities. They are activities you can undertake completely on your own, just by redirecting your attention, or taking time for self-reflection, or meditation. How can these practices work, you may wonder, if love is only experienced in connection with others? Why not dive right into interventions that alter how you interact with others, such as that you smile, nod, or lean in toward them more often, or mirror their gestures?

• From The City of God

  7. _Of the love of the holy angels, which prompts them to desire that we worship the one true God, and not themselves._ It is very right that these blessed and immortal spirits, who inhabit celestial dwellings, and rejoice in the communications of their Creator's fulness, firm in His eternity, assured in His truth, holy by His grace, since they compassionately and tenderly regard us miserable mortals, and wish us to become immortal and happy, do not desire us to sacrifice to themselves, but to Him whose sacrifice they know themselves to be in common with us. For we and they together are the one city of God, to which it is said in the psalm, "Glorious things are spoken of thee, O city of God;"[393] the human part sojourning here below, the angelic aiding from above. For from that heavenly city, in which God's will is the intelligible and unchangeable law, from that heavenly council-chamber,--for they sit in counsel regarding us,--that holy Scripture, descended to us by the ministry of angels, in which it is written, "He that sacrificeth unto any god, save unto the Lord only, he shall be utterly destroyed,"[394]--this Scripture, this law, these precepts, have been confirmed by such miracles, that it is sufficiently evident to whom these immortal and blessed spirits, who desire us to be like themselves, wish us to sacrifice. 8. _Of the miracles which God has condescended to adhibit, through the ministry of angels, to His promises for the confirmation of the faith of the godly._

• From Little Sister: A Memoir (2019)

  I had just celebrated my fifty-first birthday. I kept my promise. * * * And so I started the new millennium as a full-time mother, taking my children to school each morning, driving them to their skating lessons (peering over the top of my Wall Street Journal to catch their eyes as they twirled past me), their gymnastics classes, their playdates. These were novel activities for me, having never enjoyed them myself as a child. The experiences of childhood form the base of one’s own approach to parenting, and one either revisits those experiences with the next generation or eschews them. In my case, there were three elements of my upbringing that guided me immensely in raising my children, and they came with varying degrees of complexity. It took no soul-searching to be convinced that hitting a child served no purpose other than expressing one’s own frustration. More complex was a deep instinct within my mothering wellspring that related to food, and I was well aware that it reflected the agony I experienced during my childhood, as I watched and mostly was helpless to solve the eating problems of my sister Cathy (that started when she was only four years old). As an adult and a mother, I was emotionally incapable of forcing our children to eat anything if it didn’t appeal to them. So I let them pick their meals—breakfast, lunch, and dinner—each day. It was gratifying to observe that such a philosophy had a more salubrious outcome than might be expected—the child who liked white toast with the crusts cut off also loved raw green vegetables. The one who found it difficult to chew beef adored chicken. On occasion, dinner consisted of as many different meals as there were people at the table. It might be criticized as being overindulgent, but I was determined that mealtime would be stress-free. Growing up in the milieu of monasticism, I became accustomed to every facet of daily life being regulated and rule bound, strictures that chafed at my innate free spirit, and I fantasized about exploring the world unimpeded. Once out of the Center, both as a professional and as a parent, I made it my endeavor to say “Yes” rather than “No.” And when I had to say “No” to my children, I tried to find a way to keep a door open for the future.

• From Survival of the Prettiest: The Science of Beauty (1999)

  13. maternal grooming and stress: D. Liu, J. Diorio, B. Tannenbaum, C. Caldji, D. Francis, A. Freedman, S. Sharma, D. Pearson, P. M. Plotsky, and J. M. Meaney, “Maternal care, hippocampal glucocorticoid receptors, and hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal response to stress,” Science, 277, 1997, 1659–1662. R. M. Sapolsky, “The importance of a well-groomed child,” Science, 277, 1997, 1620–1621. 14. massage and premature infants: F. A. Scafidi, T. Field, and S. M. Schanberg, “Factors that predict which preterm infants benefit most from massage therapy,” Journal of Development and Behavioral Pediatrics, 14, 1993, 176–180. 15. “most intimate time of the day”: Mary Catherine Bateson, With a Daughter’s Eye: A Memoir of Margaret Mead and Gregory Bateson (New York: HarperPerennial, 1994), p. 51. 16. “totally hair” Barbie: In M. G. Lord, Forever Barbie: The Unauthorized Biography of a Real Doll (New York: William Morrow, 1994). 17. money on personal care: P. K. Francese, “Big spenders,” American Demographics, August 1977, pp. 51–57. global market: Asiaweek, August 16, 1991, p. 15. 88% wear makeup: S. Dortch, “Women at the cosmetics counter,” American Demographics, March 1977, pp. 4, 6–8. 18. red ochre … forty thousand years old: Steven Mithen, The Prehistory of the Mind: The Cognitive Origins of Art, Religion, and Science (London: Thames and Hudson, 1996) C. Knight, C. Powers, and I. Watts, “The human symbolic revolution: A Darwinian Account,” Cambridge Archaelogical Journal, 5, 1995, 75–114. 19. Egyptian cosmetics: Richard Corson, Fashions in Makeup: From Ancient to Modern Times (London: Peter Owen, 1972). 20. “Let no rude goat”: Ovid, The Art of Love. Trans. Rolfe Humphries (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1957), p. 159. 21. pubic waxes: M. Frankel, “Bikini-wax wars,” Cosmopolitan, August 1997, p. 146. 22. body builders: Sam Fussell, Muscle: Confessions of an Unlikely Bodybuilder (New York: Poseidon, 1991). 23. Clive James: Quoted in K. R. Dutton, The Perfectible Body: The Western Ideal of Physical Development (London: Cassell, 1995), p. 339. 24. only one Tarzan: From ibid., 1995. 25. “shaved muscle boy”: M. Signorile, Life Outside: The Signorile Report on Gay Men: Sex, Drugs, Muscles and the Passage of Life (New York: HarperCollins, 1997), p. 25. 26. Tattoos: Margot Mifflin, Bodies of Subversion: A Secret History of Women and Tattoo (New York: Juno, 1997). V. Vale and Andrea Juno, Modern Primitives: An Investigation of Contemporary Adornment and Ritual (New York: Juno, 1989). For an excellent summary of cross-cultural practices of the body arts, see Robert Brain, The Decorated Body (London: Hutchinson, 1979). 27. 1990 survey: Marilynn Larkin, “Tattooing in the 90’s: Ancient art requires care and caution,” U.S. Food and Drug Administration, FDA Consumer, October 1993. 28. Tattooed aborigines: Charles Darwin, The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1965), pp. ii, 339. 29. cicatrization, European missionaries: See Brain, 1979. 30. “definition of ‘dressed’ ”: Ann Hollander, Seeing Through Clothes (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1993), p. 83. 31. male vanity market: A. Farnham, “You’re so vain,” Fortune, September 9, 1996, pp. 66–82.

• From Saint Augustine (Penguin Lives) (1999)

  Augustine argued, in his treatment of the Genesis story, that Adam committed his sin deliberately in order to maintain his “bond of company” (socialis necessitudo, CG 14.11) with Eve. In the book First Meanings in Genesis, which he began while finishing The Testimony, he wrote of Adam’s misguided gallantry (11.59): After Eve had eaten from the forbidden tree and offered him its fruit to eat along with her, Adam did not want to disappoint her, when he thought she might be blighted without his comforting support, banished from his heart to die sundered from him. He was not overcome by disordered desire of the flesh, which he had not yet experienced as a thing in his body at odds with his mind, but by a kind of amicable desire for another’s good [amicali quadam benivolentia], which often happens, making us sin against God so as not to turn a friend [amicus] against us. Augustine’s point is that Adam helps neither Eve nor himself by trying to separate off a lower love from the Source of love. That is the lesson he finds in his own courting of favor from his fellow thieves in the pear orchard. He sees here his own distant echo of Adam’s sin, the primordial sin, the quest for love by motion away from the one place where it can be found. To find the Genesis narrative coming alive in his own past is a continuing surprise for Augustine in The Testimony. We have seen that already in the story of his father and the public baths, when he was “clothed” in Adam’s shame. We shall see it in other key episodes of the book, including the death of his friend and his prayer with Monnica at Ostia. Genesis haunts the whole work. Augustine began, in book 2 (6), the account of his sexual activity at sixteen, only to break it off in his concentration on the pear episode. He resumes the sexual story at the beginning of book 3, which O’Donnell (2.145) rightly calls “recapitulative,” though it is marked by his arrival in Carthage. It is in book 3 that he first mentions his concubine. But O’Donnell (2.207) draws an interesting conclusion from the age of Augustine’s son: Adeodatus was [almost fifteen] at the time of his baptism in the spring of 387 . . . and [aged sixteen] at the dramatic date of The Teacher not long after; on this calculation he was born 371/72, when Augustine was perhaps seventeen . . . or perhaps even 370, thus apparently probably in the first years of study at Carthage but conceivably during the years of indolence recorded at 2, 3.5–6 (the philoprogenitive optimism of Patricius did not have so long to wait). Adeodatus’ mother was dismissed from Milan and returned to Africa in 385/6 . . . and thus shared his entire adulescentia.

• From Saint Augustine (Penguin Lives) (1999)

  How to suck, to sleep when soothed, to cry when my body vexed me—this I knew, and no more. . . . Gradually I became aware of my surroundings, and wished to express my demands to those who could comply with them; but I could not, since the demands were within me, and their fulfillers, outside me, had no faculty for entering into my mind. So I worked my limbs and voice energetically, trying to enact something like my demands, to the best of my little (and little availing) ability. Then, when I was frustrated—because I was not understood or was demanding something harmful—I went into high dudgeon that adults did not obey a child, that free people were not my slaves. So I inflicted on them my revenge of wailing. That Augustine has Godsend in mind when describing his own infancy can be established by the repetition in The Testimony of themes explored earlier in his dialogue The Teacher, which he conducted with Godsend when the latter was sixteen. Both texts are concerned with the way one learns in general, with words and how they signify, with the role of natural signs in establishing conventional signs, with memory and the self-teaching that it makes possible. Here, for instance, is The Teacher (1.33): By noticing the times when the word “head,” often repeated, was used, I realized that it referred to a thing I was familiar with from having seen it before. Until I made that connection, “head” was merely a noise to me. It became a sign when I recognized the thing it signified. But I learned not from the sign but from the reality. The sign is learned from prior knowledge of its object, instead of the reverse. And here is The Testimony (1.13): All by myself, using the brain you gave me, my God, after failing to get whatever I wanted from whomever I wanted it, because my screams and inarticulate noises did not work, I used my memory to grasp what was outside me. Whenever people named something and showed with physical action the thing that matched that sound, I would take note and store in memory the fact that they used this sound when they wanted to indicate that thing. It was clear they wanted to do this from the physical action that is a “body language” for all humans—facial expressions, winks or other bodily indicators that, linked with vocal articulations, reveal the mind’s desire to get, retain, repel or evade something. The words I heard, used in the same way [with relation to the signified] no matter how surrounding words varied, I made a collection of [in memory], and, shaping my mouth to these conventions, I made my own will plain to others.

• From Looking for Alaska (2005)

  Sarah and I are very lucky to like each other’s work and to be able to collaborate—we both read everything the other writes, and I am continually astonished by the clarity, rigor, and wit she brings to her work about art and art history. Is there significance to Miles’s last name, Halter? Halt Her Can you talk about the blow job scene? The oral sex scene in Looking for Alaska between Lara and Pudge takes place immediately before a far less sexually intimate but far more emotionally intimate encounter between Pudge and Alaska. The language in the oral sex scene is extremely clinical and distant and unsensual. The word “penis” is used rather than member or hot rod or whatever else you’ll find in romance novels. The adverbs and adjectives that appear in that scene include weird, nervous, and quizzically. This is in very stark contrast to the scene where Pudge and Alaska kiss a few pages later: “Our tongues dancing back and forth in each other’s mouth until there was no her mouth and my mouth but only our mouths intertwined. She tasted like cigarettes and Mountain Dew and wine and ChapStick. Her hand came to my face and I felt her soft fingers tracing the line of my jaw.” There’s a lot of evoking of senses in that paragraph (some might argue too much), and it’s much more passionate than the language used to describe the blow job. I wanted these two scenes to present a dramatic contrast, because I wanted it to be clear (1) that Pudge and Lara were curious about each other, and interested in exploring, but not really that passionate about each other, whereas (2) Alaska and Pudge were clearly very passionate and caring and attentive in the way they kiss, and most importantly that (3) physical intimacy isn’t and can never be an effective substitute for emotional intimacy. It seemed to me pretty obvious that I was arguing against vapid sexual encounters in which no one has any fun and celebrating the underappreciated virtues of super-hot kissing in which everyone keeps their clothes on. (Some censors, clearly, feel otherwise, although most of them never read the blow job scene in context.) What were some of the working titles for Looking for Alaska ? Misremembering Alaska Misimagining Alaska White Flowers and Warm Malt Liquor Alaska The Great Perhaps Searching for Alaska Waiting for Alaska Famous Last Words There were many others. Looking for Alaska was suggested by my friend Keir Graff (who had not read the book at the time).

• From Scandalous Liaisons (2007)

  “Feel better now?” he asked gently. And then she understood. “You were teasing me,” she accused without heat, her heart racing madly that this resplendently wicked man was now hers. Forever. “Relaxing you a bit,” he corrected. “You looked tense when I came in.” Lucien strolled toward the bed, untying his cravat. The rest of his clothing was hastily discarded. Then he was pressing her into the bed, his body hard and beautifully built. “We must set some ground rules here, my lady.” His kissed the tip of her nose. “First of all, I do all of the touching.” He covered her protest with his hand. “I’ve needed you too long; I won’t last if you touch me. For the rest of our lives, you can touch me all you want, whenever you want, but not this first time.” He waited until she nodded her acquiesce and then removed his hand, sliding it downward between her breasts, before letting it come to rest on her hip. “Second, it may be painful. You’re very small, and I’m fairly large.” He bit back a smile at her choked laugh. “But I’ll pleasure you, my love. I promise you that.” “I know you will,” she said, loving him even more for his reverent approach to her first time. “And last but not least, I love you, my wife.” He rested his forehead against hers. “With every fiber of my being, I adore you. I intend to cherish you and worship you forever.” He brushed kisses against her mouth. Slow, sweet kisses that skillfully stoked her ardor. “I thank you for becoming my wife.” “Oh, Lucien,” she sighed, and tugged his mouth back down to hers. With a chastising murmur Lucien disengaged her hands from behind his neck and laced their fingers together. He concentrated long moments on exploring her mouth, his kisses lazy and drugging, until she writhed against him, begging for his touch. “Please . . .” He smiled, and her heart stopped. His mouth moved to the slim column of her throat, licking and nipping the sensitive skin. He began to undulate his body against hers, slow, sinuous movements of his powerful frame, awakening every nerve, making her moan with the torment. Lucien made love to her with his mouth, with his hands, with the gentle friction of his body, murmuring praise and encouragement so sweet she wanted to cry. “These, my love, are perfection.” He lavished long licks of his tongue across her nipples and then blew on them, grinning as they puckered. “There is no greater pleasure than having these in my mouth.” Bending his head, he suckled her, the rhythmic tugging pulling at places deep inside, driving her to madness. She began to writhe, yanking at his hands, needing to touch him. Burning, aching, her skin was too hot . . . too tight . . . “Darling,” she pleaded. But he wouldn’t cease, wouldn’t release her.

• From The City of God

  "He stands immovable by tears, Nor tenderest words with pity hears."[335] 5. _That the passions which assail the souls of Christians do not seduce them to vice, but exercise their virtue._ We need not at present give a careful and copious exposition of the doctrine of Scripture, the sum of Christian knowledge, regarding these passions. It subjects the mind itself to God, that He may rule and aid it, and the passions, again, to the mind, to moderate and bridle them, and turn them to righteous uses. In our ethics, we do not so much inquire whether a pious soul is angry, as why he is angry; not whether he is sad, but what is the cause of his sadness; not whether he fears, but what he fears. For I am not aware that any right thinking person would find fault with anger at a wrongdoer which seeks his amendment, or with sadness which intends relief to the suffering, or with fear lest one in danger be destroyed. The Stoics, indeed, are accustomed to condemn compassion.[336] But how much more honourable had it been in that Stoic we have been telling of, had he been disturbed by compassion prompting him to relieve a fellow-creature, than to be disturbed by the fear of shipwreck! Far better, and more humane, and more consonant with pious sentiments, are the words of Cicero in praise of Cæsar, when he says, "Among your virtues none is more admirable and agreeable than your compassion."[337] And what is compassion but a fellow-feeling for another's misery, which prompts us to help him if we can? And this emotion is obedient to reason, when compassion is shown without violating right, as when the poor are relieved, or the penitent forgiven. Cicero, who knew how to use language, did not hesitate to call this a virtue, which the Stoics are not ashamed to reckon among the vices, although, as the book of that eminent Stoic, Epictetus, quoting the opinions of Zeno and Chrysippus, the founders of the school, has taught us, they admit that passions of this kind invade the soul of the wise man, whom they would have to be free from all vice. Whence it follows that these very passions are not judged by them to be vices, since they assail the wise man without forcing him to act against reason and virtue; and that, therefore, the opinion of the Peripatetics or Platonists and of the Stoics is one and the same. But, as Cicero says,[338] mere logomachy is the bane of these pitiful Greeks, who thirst for contention rather than for truth. However, it may justly be asked, whether our subjection to these affections, even while we follow virtue, is a part of the infirmity of this life? For the holy angels feel no anger while they punish those whom the eternal law of God consigns to punishment, no fellow-feeling with misery while they relieve the miserable, no fear while they aid those who are in danger; and yet ordinary language ascribes to them also these mental emotions, because, though they have none of our weakness, their acts resemble the actions to which these emotions move us; and thus even God Himself is said in Scripture to be angry, and yet without any perturbation. For this word is used of the effect of His vengeance, not of the disturbing mental affection.

• From Mating in Captivity: Unlocking Erotic Intelligence (2006)

  Sometimes the emotional weaving is done through talk; often, it is not. Building a bookshelf for your lover, changing the snow tires on your wife’s car, and learning to make his mom’s chicken soup all carry the promise of connection. Golde in Fiddler on the Roof reminds us that even ordinary daily activities will, over time, weave themselves into a rich tapestry of connection. Eddie and Noriko, masters of nonverbal communication, can teach us all a lesson in alternative ways to express our love. When we value only what is disclosed through words, we do ourselves a disservice. At a time when we could use just about any way to connect, we need to honor and recognize the many ways we can reach out and touch someone. 4 Democracy Versus Hot SexDesire and Egalitarianism Don’t Play by the Same Rules No bill of sexual rights can hold its own against the lawless, untamable landscape of the erotic imagination. —Daphne Merkin SEVERAL YEARS AGO I ATTENDED a presentation at a national conference where the speaker discussed a couple who had come to therapy in part because of a sharp decline in their sexual activity. Previously, they had acted out fantasies of domination and submission; now, following the birth of their second child, the wife wanted more conventional sex. But the husband was attached to their old style of lovemaking, so they were stuck. The presenter took the approach that resolving this couple’s sexual difficulty was going to require working through the emotional dynamics of their marriage and their new status as parents. But in the discussion that followed, the audience proved far less interested in the couple’s overall relationship than in the disconcerting presence of domination and submission in their erotic life. What pathology, several participants asked, might underlie the man’s need to sexually objectify his wife, and her desire for bondage in the first place? Perhaps, some people speculated, motherhood had restored her sense of dignity, so that now she refused to be so demeaned. Some suggested that the impasse reflected long-standing gender differences: men tend to pursue separateness, power, and control, while women yearn for loving affiliation and connection. Still others were certain that couples like this needed more empathetic connection to counteract their tendency to engage in an implicitly abusive, power-driven relationship. What these remarks made clear was the unspoken subtext that such practices are inherently degrading to women, a rebuke to the very idea of gender equality, and antithetical to a good, healthy marriage.

• From Sex Matters: How Modern Feminism Lost Touch with Science, Love, and Common Sense (2018)

  Communication disorders sciences and services: 94 percent female; Visual and performing arts: 77 percent female; and Health and medical preparatory programs: 55 percent female.5 Dangerous jobs such as power line installer, logger, and truck driver are held primarily by men, and they pay more because of the risk involved. Men suffer 92 percent of work-related deaths.6 Diana Furchtgott-Roth, of the Manhattan Institute, has reported—many times, as this seventy-seven cents figure is the Rasputin of statistics—that males who work full-time tend to put in forty-three hours a week, while females who work full-time average forty-one hours per week. If you compare childless women and men under the age of thirty, not only does the so-called wage gap disappear but women outearn men.7 When earnings for men and women over the age of thirty with the same education, skills, and job tenure are compared, the differential in wages reduces to between three and seven cents (depending on the study). The only explanation most mainstream commentators can imagine is “lingering discrimination.” Well, that’s possible. We all know of situations in which men are treated as more authoritative or competent simply because of their sex. But human interactions are complicated, and wage differentials may exist for reasons that can’t be quantified. I’ve been struck by studies showing that women are less likely to ask for raises than men.8 We know testosterone boosts both self-confidence and risk taking. Perhaps men are more willing to take risks on the job, a choice that can have high rewards (along with unfortunate outcomes), while women choose to play it safe. The National Organization for Women waves away these explanations, saying that women are still being “steered” into different training, career paths, and family roles.9 The data (as well as my own experience) suggest that this is just not true. The urge to care for children feels hardwired, though women and men don’t express it in exactly the same way. Women, who bear and nurse babies, feel a more pressing need to be with them, to touch them, to guard their every moment. Men receive satisfaction in providing for their wives and children. They, too, have a profound desire to nurture, but fathering is different. My husband was dutiful with babies, but his pleasure in children really kicked into high gear when they were walking and talking. Like most dads, he engaged with them in a more playful way than I did, throwing them in the air (which always made me nervous) and letting them climb on his back as he crawled on all fours. Social science research tells us that these typically paternal behaviors are important for children’s brain development, especially for boys’ ability to regulate their emotions later in life. In general, fathers stimulate more and mothers soothe more.10

• From Sex God: Exploring the Endless Connections Between Sexuality and Spirituality (2007)

  I was talking last week with a couple whom I’ve known for about four years. The wife has cancer. It came on strong, she received treatment, it came back, she received more treatment. If you have been down the cancer road yourself or with someone you’re close to, you know what I’m talking about. A roller coaster. Often when I run into this couple, they give me an update on how she’s doing, how their last visit to the doctor went, what the latest test scores were. She’s amazing—the strength of her spirit, her faith—but I’m always struck as well by his attitude toward her. His body language, the way he looks at her, his involvement with the doctors and the tests and the procedures—you can’t be around the two of them for very long before you become convinced he’d take the cancer for her if he could. Agape. Imagine a wife whose husband isn’t the man she wishes he was. He lets her down, again and again and again. She begins to withdraw, to retreat, and to hold his failures against him. If they are even capable of discussing the problems between them, often she will have a list of things she wishes he did. And so this puts him in an awkward position. If he does the things on the list, she won’t know why he’s doing them. Because it just comes naturally? Or because he’s trying to score points with her? From her perspective, his motives are unclear. And so she develops a scorecard, usually subconsciously. If he’s good, she comes near, but if he fails, she stays at a distance. Her affection, her actions, and ultimately her love become conditional. Not agape. Agape doesn’t love somebody because they’re worthy. Agape makes them worthy by the strength and power of its love. Agape doesn’t love somebody because they’re beautiful. Agape loves in such a way that it makes them beautiful. There is a love because, love in order to, love for the purpose of, and then there is love, period.7 Agape doesn’t need a reason. Pulled into the Future It’s written in the book of Romans that Christ died “while we were still sinners.”8 And in the letter to the Corinthians, it’s written, “Think of what you were when you were called.”9 And the prophet Jeremiah is told that God knew him and set him apart before he was born.10 Jesus reminds his disciples, “You did not choose me, but I chose you.”11 People in the scriptures essentially are loved into their futures.12 Think of how many of us had encouraging or affirming or inspiring words spoken to us years ago about our worth, our value, our future, and how those words shaped us. We often carry those words of agape around with us our whole lives.

• From Introduction to the Hebrew Bible and Deutero-Canonical Books (2018)

  This form of the story is presented as a decree of Nebuchadnezzar in acknowledgment of the Most High God and recounting the wonderful experience that had befallen him. (There is a discrepancy in versification between the MT and the English Bibles. English 4:1-3 = MT 3:31-33l.) As in chapter 2, Daniel has a dream. The Chaldeans fail to interpret the dream, although in this case, the king narrates it to them. Given the content of the dream, they might well be reluctant to explain it in any case. The dream concerns a great tree, which gives shelter to birds and beasts. Then “a watcher and a holy one” appears from heaven and decrees that the tree be cut down and its stump left in the earth. At this point, however, the image is switched. The watcher decrees, “Let his lot be with the beasts of the field in the grass of the earth and let the mind of an animal be given to him until seven times pass over him.” (At this point, part of the interpretation seems to be given already in the dream.) Daniel explains the dream with some diffidence: “May the dream be for those who hate you and its interpretation for your enemies.” Later rabbinic interpreters found Daniel’s concern for Nebuchadnezzar scandalous: Why should a Jew be so concerned for the destroyer of Jerusalem? But Daniel’s goodwill toward his master is consistent throughout. He goes on, however, to explain to the king that he will be driven away from human society and be made to eat grass like oxen, “until seven times pass over you” (that is, for seven years). He advises the king to “atone for your sins with righteousness” (4:27; MT 4:24). The word for “righteousness” was commonly used for “almsgiving” in later Judaism. Daniel’s advice was a subject of controversy at the time of the Reformation, as Lutheran interpreters objected to the implication that the welfare of the king depended on good works (rather than faith). Nebuchadnezzar undergoes the transformation and is ultimately restored. He learns his lesson, that the Most High alone is sovereign and that he can raise up and put down kings at his pleasure. Nebuchadnezzar stops short of converting to Judaism, but he is unstinting in his praise of the God of heaven. Needless to say, there is no evidence that the historical Nebuchadnezzar was ever forced to eat grass like the beasts of the field. Attempts to diagnose his medical condition are beside the point. Indeed, we know something of the way in which this story developed. The last king of Babylon, Nabonidus, was absent from Babylon for several years. He spent the time in Teima, in the Arabian wilderness, and devoted himself to the worship of the moon-god.

• From Buddenbrooks: The Decline of a Family (1901)

  His hands were still not entirely clean, but they were slender and extraordinarily noble, with long, slender fingers and pointed nails. And still his reddish-yellow hair, briefly parted in the middle, fell into an alabaster-white and flawless forehead, under which, deep and sharp at the same time, the light blue Eyes gleamed... The contrast between his badly neglected toilet and the racial purity of this delicate-boned face with the very slightly curved nose and the slightly pursed upper lip was even more obvious than before. "No, Kai," said Hanno with a twisted mouth and moving his hand around his heart, "how can you frighten me like that! Why are you up here? why were you hiding Were you late too?” "Save," answered Kai. 'I've been here for a long time... Can't wait to get back to the asylum on Monday morning, as you know best, dear... No, I just stayed up here for fun. The profound chief teacher was in charge and did not consider it robbery to drive the people down to worship. So I made it so that I was always close behind his back... No matter how he turned and peeked around, the mystic, I was always close behind his back until he went away, and that's how I was able to stay up... But you «, he said compassionately and sat down next to Hanno on the bench with a tender movement... »You had to run, didn’t you? Poor! You look very harried. Your hair is sticking to your temples..." And he took a ruler from the table and loosened it, seriously and carefully, little John's hair. "So you slept through the time? By the way, I'm sitting here in Adolf Todtenhaupt's place," he interrupted himself and looked around, "in the place dedicated to Primus! Well, I guess it doesn't matter for this time... So you slept through it?" Hanno had laid his face back on his crossed arms. "I was at the theater last night," he said after a heavy sigh. "Oh, right, I forgot!... Was it that nice?" Kai got no answer. "You're lucky," he continued persuasively, "you should consider that, Hanno. You see, I've never been to the theatre, and there's not the slightest chance I'll ever get into it for many years to come...' "If only it weren't for the hangover," said Hanno tightly. "Yes, I know the condition anyway." And Kai bent down for his friend's hat and overcoat that were lying on the floor next to the bench, took the things and carried them quietly out into the corridor. "Then you don't have the Metamorphosis verses in your head very well, then?" he asked, coming in again. "No," said Hanno. "Or are you perhaps primed for the geography extemporal?" "I'm nothing and I can't do anything," said Hanno. “So not chemistry and English either! All right!

• From The Principles of Psychology (Volume 1 of 2) (1890)

  It is a part of the consciousness as much as the joint is a part of the bamboo . The superficial introspective view is the overlooking, even when the things are contrasted with each other most violently, of the large amount of affinity that may still remain between the thoughts by whose means they are cognized. Into the awareness of the thunder itself the awareness of the previous silence creeps and continues; for what we hear when the thunder crashes is not thunder pure , but thunder-breaking-upon-silence-and-contrasting-with-it.[225] Our feeling of the same objective thunder, coming in this way, is quite different from what it would be were the thunder a continuation of previous thunder. The thunder itself we believe to abolish and exclude the silence; but the feeling of the thunder is also a feeling of the silence as just gone; and it would be difficult to find in the actual concrete consciousness of man a feeling so limited to the present as not to have an inkling of anything that went before. Here, again, language works against our perception of the truth. We name our thoughts simply, each after its thing, as if each knew its own thing and nothing else. What each really knows is clearly the thing it is named for, with dimly perhaps a thousand other things. It ought to be named after all of them, but it never is. Some of them are always things known a moment ago more clearly; others are things to be known more clearly a moment hence.[226] Our own bodily position, attitude, condition, is one of the things of which some awareness, however inattentive, invariably accompanies the knowledge of whatever else we know, We think; and as we think we feel our bodily selves as the seat of the thinking. If the thinking be our thinking, it must be suffused through all its parts with that peculiar warmth and intimacy that make it come as ours. Whether the warmth and intimacy be anything more than the feeling of the same old body always there, is a matter for the next chapter to decide. Whatever the content of the ego may be, it is habitually felt with everything else by us humans, and must form a liaison between all the things of which we become successively aware.[227] On this gradualness in the changes of our mental content the principles of nerve-action can throw some more light. When studying, in Chapter III, the summation of nervous activities, we saw that no state of the brain can be supposed instantly to die away. If a new state comes, the inertia of the old state will still be there and modify the result accordingly. Of course we cannot tell, in our ignorance, what in each instance the modifications ought to be. The commonest modifications in sense-perception are known as the phenomena of contrast.

• From The Principles of Psychology (Volume 1 of 2) (1890)

  On waking from sleep, we usually know that we have been unconscious, and we often have an accurate judgment of how long. The judgment here is certainly an inference from sensible signs, and its ease is due to long practice in the particular field.[224] The result of it, however, is that the consciousness is, for itself , not what it was in the former case, but interrupted and continuous, in the mere time-sense of the words. But in the other sense of continuity, the sense of the parts being inwardly connected and belonging together because they are parts of a common whole, the consciousness remains sensibly continuous and one. What now is the common whole? The natural name for it is myself, I , or me . When Paul and Peter wake up in the same bed, and recognize that they have been asleep, each one of them mentally reaches back and makes connection with but one of the two streams of thought which were broken by the sleeping hours. As the current of an electrode buried in the ground unerringly finds its way to its own similarly buried mate, across no matter how much intervening earth; so Peter's present instantly finds out Peter's past, and never by mistake knits itself on to that of Paul. Paul's thought in turn is as little liable to go astray. The past thought of Peter is appropriated by the present Peter alone. He may have a knowledge , and a correct one too, of what Paul's last drowsy states of mind were as he sank into sleep, but it is an entirely different sort of knowledge from that which he has of his own last states. He remembers his own states, whilst he only conceives Paul's. Remembrance is like direct feeling; its object is suffused with a warmth and intimacy to which no object of mere conception ever attains. This quality of warmth and intimacy and immediacy is what Peter's present thought also possesses for itself. So sure as this present is me, is mine, it says, so sure is anything else that comes with the same warmth and intimacy and immediacy, me and mine. What the qualities called warmth and intimacy may in themselves be will have to be matter for future consideration. But whatever past feeling appear with those qualities must be admitted to receive the greeting of the present mental state, to be owned by it, and accepted as belonging together with it in a common self. This community of self is what the time-gap cannot break in twain, and is why a present thought, although not ignorant of the time-gap, can still regard itself as continuous with certain chosen portions of the past. Consciousness, then, does not appear to itself chopped up in bits. Such words as 'chain' or 'train' do not describe it fitly as it presents itself in the first instance. It is nothing jointed; if flows.

• From On Becoming a Person: A Therapist's View of Psychotherapy (1961)

  But we are getting ahead of our client. Let us examine some of the other aspects of this experience as it occurred to her. In earlier interviews she had talked of the fact that she did not love humanity, and that in some vague and stubborn way she felt she was right, even though others would regard her as wrong. She mentions this again as she discusses the way this experience has clarified her attitudes toward others. C: The next thing that occurred to me that I found myself thinking and still thinking, is somehow—and I’m not clear why—the same kind of a caring that I get when I say “I don’t love humanity.” Which has always sort of—I mean I was always convinced of it. So I mean, it doesn’t—I knew that it was a good thing, see. And I think I clarified it within myself—what it has to do with this situation, I don’t know. But I found out, no, I don’t love, but I do care terribly. T: M-hm. M-hm. I see. . . . C: . . . It might be expressed better in saying I care terribly what happens. But the caring is a—takes form—its structure is in understanding and not wanting to be taken in, or to contribute to those things which I feel are false and—It seems to me that in—in loving, there’s a kind of final factor. If you do that, you’ve sort of done enough. It’s a— T: That’s it, sort of. C: Yeah. It seems to me this other thing, this caring, which isn’t a good term—I mean, probably we need something else to describe this kind of thing. To say it’s an impersonal thing doesn’t mean anything because it isn’t impersonal. I mean I feel it’s very much a part of a whole. But it’s something that somehow doesn’t stop. . . . It seems to me you could have this feeling of loving humanity, loving people, and at the same time—go on contributing to the factors that make people neurotic, make them ill—where, what I feel is a resistance to those things. T: You care enough to want to understand and to want to avoid contributing to anything that would make for more neuroticism, or more of that aspect in human life. C: Yes. And it’s—(pause). Yes, it’s something along those lines. . . . Well, again, I have to go back to how I feel about this other thing. It’s—I’m not really called upon to give of myself in a—sort of on the auction block. There’s nothing final. . . . It sometimes bothered me when I—I would have to say to myself, “I don’t love humanity,” and yet, I always knew that there was something positive. That I was probably right.

• From The Great Believers (2018)

  He massaged the meat of her palm gently, peered at her hand through his glasses. “Thank you,” she said. “Have you done this before?” “I’m just finding the bits of light.” Fiona imagined her palm littered with a thousand slivers of reflective glass, ones she could carry with her forever. Her whole body ought to be like that. Her skin ought to cut the people who touched it. She wanted to say nice things to him, but didn’t want to sit here endlessly repeating her thanks. “Do you paint, too? Besides the critic stuff? Your hands are so steady.” “I studied painting.” He looked up and smiled, and she felt she could stay in the bathroom forever, being taken care of. “Terrible idea. Critics shouldn’t know how to paint.” Jake appeared in the doorway. She didn’t have the energy to send him away. Fernand daubed more antiseptic on her skin with a flat circle of cotton. He said, “I attended the Académie des Beaux-Arts. Very, ah, old-fashioned.” Fiona perked up. “Are you still there? Do you teach?” “No.” He laughed. “Not for me.” “I just—” she stopped while he dug into the base of her middle finger with the tweezer point “—my family’s always been trying to track down this one artist who was there. He was my great-aunt’s boyfriend, and he died young.” “What year?” “Oh, way before your time! I didn’t mean you’d know him, I just—I don’t even know why I’m asking. I’m a little woozy. He won the Prix de Rome, but then he died right after World War I.” “Ha, yes, that’s before my time!” “His name was Ranko Novak. We were just always curious.” “You’re trying to find what, records? A picture?” He turned to where Jake still hovered. “Do you have a light on your phone?” Jake turned on his phone’s flashlight and, grimacing, held it above Fiona’s palm. “I tell you what,” Fernand said. “I have a friend there. You write the name down before you leave tonight, I’ll ask him.” “That’s so kind!” “Well, you nearly severed your fingers at our house. This is so you won’t sue!” —Fiona held a glass of ice water in her gauzed hand because it felt good, even if the condensation made the gauze wet. She’d found Richard in the dining room, holding court over platters of smoked fish. She could barely follow the conversation, and only thanks to Richard’s occasional translation. (“Marie is his wife.” “This was the Gehry retrospective last year.” “She’s talking about her daughter’s work.”) Fiona wanted codeine. She wanted to find a pharmacy. And then what? Maybe walk around the Marais till morning. Richard said to her, “Paul here was asking how fame changed me. I’m explaining that I’ve only been famous a quarter of my life! Such a short time!” And then he spoke French again to this Paul, who had a giraffe neck and tiny teeth.