One of the themes and problems in LOST was how it treated relationships. Many viewers were confused by the choices the writers gave to the final couples in the sideways church. Some people were meant to be with each other, others were not.
A huge amount of social and scientific resources have been spent on trying to figure out the complexities of social relationships. Why people connect. Why people are attracted to each other. Why people fall in and out of love.
It does seem our modern experience does center around attraction. But attraction is a nebulous concept. It is hard to define. It is part emotional bond and instinctive reaction. It may be more superficial than deeply lasting affection.
One way to define ATTRACTION is:
A: Acceptance
T: Time
T: Trust
R: Respect
A: Admiration
C: Counsel
T: Touch
I: Intelligence
O: Overtness
N: Nurturing
No one can really argue that these ten relationship traits are the foundation for strong bonds between couples. If one adds the modifier "mutual" to each one of these traits, then there is no question there is an unbreakable bond of love.
Sometimes it is easier to accept someone else than to accept yourself. Every individual wants to be accepted for who they are - - - because trying to "fake" it through life is too time consuming and emotionally draining. Everyone has faults, flaws and quirks. Accepting the whole person instead one or two minor issues is the first step on the path to happiness.
Time is an extremely limited and precious commodity that most people take for granted in their lives until it is too late. Spending time with some one you care about is more valuable than working to exhaustion for a couple extra bucks. Time together, even in the dark silence of movie theater, is an expression of commitment.
People are born with instincts to fear the unknown, and to distrust "new" things that could hurt them. Trust must be earned. Trust must be respected. Trust is that the person you care about will be there for you; stand by your side; have your back; fight for you and trust you to make the right decisions.
Respect is also earned. It is important to respect the person your partner is, what they believe in, being non-judgmental and being kind are all moons orbiting the space of Trust. Do not regrade the other; treat people like you want to be treated.
Admiration is the pleasurable assurance that your partner is doing well. Any supportive gesture goes a long way in smoothing out the highs and lows in any relationship. The effort put into a relationship is just as important as the end result.
Counsel is related to the openness and honesty in a good relationship. You should not have to hesitate in asking the other person questions. You should be able to ask or tell the other person anything that is on your mind without fear of anger or reprisal. You should look to your partner as a best friend and confidant, who can help you make decisions which are in your best interests.
Touch is important because science has shown that in human behavior, non-verbal cues are more important than words. A kiss, a stroke of hair, holding hands speak volumes about the state of the bonds in a relationship. The transformation to the physical aspect of love make two individuals into one being has been discussed for thousands of years. Compatibility, fun and pleasure are the benefits of a full and healthy relationship.
Overtness is openness and honesty in a relationship. Hiding secrets or feelings are destructive hidden landmines that couples can set which can suddenly destroy what is good between them.
Nurturing is the care for and encouragement the growth or development of another person, physically, mentally, emotionally, professionally and personally. It is the unconditional support of another person who is trying to find their way, expand their horizons, seeking their dreams or yearning to accomplish goals. This is the glue that will cement any solid relationship.
Showing posts with label couples. Show all posts
Showing posts with label couples. Show all posts
Monday, November 16, 2015
Monday, August 24, 2015
HAPPY NEWS TO MARRIED COUPLES
The reaction of happy married couples to news is now news.
New York Magazine report sunder the heading of this question:
Have you ever waited with excitement to share some amazingly good news with your partner, only to experience a surge of frustration and resentment when he or she barely reacts to your announcement?
As a society, we place a huge amount of emphasis on being there for each other when we’re in need, but past research has actually shown that relationship satisfaction is influenced as much, if not more, by how we react to each other’s good news. Whereas emotional support from a partner when we’re down can have the unfortunate side-effect of making us feel indebted and more aware of our negative emotions, a partner’s positive reaction to our good news can magnify the benefits of that good fortune and make us feel closer to them.
An unusual brain scan study, published recently in Human Brain Mapping, has added to this picture, showing that the relationship satisfaction of longtime married elderly women is particularly related to the neural activity they show in response to their husbands’ displays of positive emotion, rather than negative emotion.
Psychologist Raluca Petrican at the Rotman Research Institute in Toronto and her colleagues at the University of Toronto recruited 14 women with an average age of 72 who’d been married for an average of 40 years. The researchers scanned these women’s brains as they watched some carefully prepared videos.
The silent ten-second videos showed each woman’s husband or a stranger displaying an emotion that mismatched the way the video clip was labeled in a one-sentence description on the screen. For example, the clip might show the husband smiling or laughing about a happy memory (such as the first house they bought), but the video was labeled misleadingly to suggest that the man was showing this emotion while talking about a sad memory (such as the time he got fired). Other videos showed the reverse mismatch: a negative emotional display, ostensibly shown while talking about the memory of a happy event.
Essentially, the videos were designed to make the women feel like they were seeing their husband or the stranger display a surprising emotional reaction that didn’t match their own feelings. The real-world equivalent would be a situation in which a husband is happy about something that his wife doesn’t “get”; and the questions are whether she will notice, and whether she is she more sensitive to this in congruent emotion in her husband than she would be in a stranger.
The first important finding to emerge from this setup was that the women showed enhanced overall brain activity — which suggests more mental and emotional neural processing — when watching the videos of their husbands compared with videos of the strangers, but only when the videos showed displays of surprisingly in congruent positive emotion. During the other types of videos (when the men appeared to display strangely negative emotion), the women’s brains showed just as much overall activity when watching a stranger as when watching their husband. In other words, their levels of whole-brain activity betrayed a special sensitivity to their husband’s (versus a stranger’s) unexpected positive emotion.
This jibes with the past research that’s shown it’s our response to our partners’ positive news that is all-important for relationship satisfaction. Remember that these women had been married for decades, so it’s likely that they and their husbands have been doing something right relationship-wise. The brain-imaging data suggest part of the reason might be that the women are acutely tuned to when their husbands are showing happiness that’s personal to them (rather than common to both partners).
This specific interpretation trips up a little with another main result: The women’s levels of marital satisfaction (according to a questionnaire) correlated with the amount of neural processing they showed in response to their husbands positive and negative emotion.
However, the special importance of how we respond to our partners’ positive emotion was supported by another key finding. Namely, women who scored higher on relationship satisfaction showed more brain activation in regions thought to contain mirror neurons (neurons that are considered important for empathy) when watching their spouses than they did when watching a stranger. Moreover, this enhanced mirror-neuron activity was especially present for the videos showing their husbands’ positive, rather than negative, emotion. Again, this appears to support the idea that marital happiness goes hand in hand with sensitivity to our partners’ positive emotion (though the researchers acknowledge a different or complementary interpretation that people in happy relationships have a suppressed response to their partners’ in congruent negative emotion).
We need to interpret these preliminary and complex findings with caution. And the exclusive focus on wives’ reactions to their husbands’ emotions does lend the study a slightly retro ’70s vibe — what about the way that husbands respond to their wives’ emotions, and the importance of that for the marital happiness of both parties? But that said, the results are tantalizing in suggesting that at a neural level, people in a long-term, committed relationship are especially sensitive to their partners’ positive emotion, and particularly so when this emotion is different from their own. This neatly complements other research showing, for example, that people who are unable to differentiate their partners’ emotions from their own (they assume they’re the same), tend to be viewed by their partners as more controlling and smothering.
As a whole, this entire body of research gives pause for thought. How do you react when your partner arrives home on an emotional high? Would you only notice if you were feeling happy too?
Positive responses to positive emotions makes a married couples more positive toward each other. It also goes to show that when a partner is "indifferent" to their significant other's news or needs, the relationship can quickly turn toxic. There is a probability of negative reinforcement that will gradually build between couples because they think since they are together, they should each feel the same toward each other. In most cases, that is probably true. But in every relationship, there is a roller coaster ride of highs and low points. Listening, respect and trust are the most important factors to get through any rough times. If one can try to mine a nugget of positive out of a negative situation, it is better for everyone.
New York Magazine report sunder the heading of this question:
Have you ever waited with excitement to share some amazingly good news with your partner, only to experience a surge of frustration and resentment when he or she barely reacts to your announcement?
As a society, we place a huge amount of emphasis on being there for each other when we’re in need, but past research has actually shown that relationship satisfaction is influenced as much, if not more, by how we react to each other’s good news. Whereas emotional support from a partner when we’re down can have the unfortunate side-effect of making us feel indebted and more aware of our negative emotions, a partner’s positive reaction to our good news can magnify the benefits of that good fortune and make us feel closer to them.
An unusual brain scan study, published recently in Human Brain Mapping, has added to this picture, showing that the relationship satisfaction of longtime married elderly women is particularly related to the neural activity they show in response to their husbands’ displays of positive emotion, rather than negative emotion.
Psychologist Raluca Petrican at the Rotman Research Institute in Toronto and her colleagues at the University of Toronto recruited 14 women with an average age of 72 who’d been married for an average of 40 years. The researchers scanned these women’s brains as they watched some carefully prepared videos.
The silent ten-second videos showed each woman’s husband or a stranger displaying an emotion that mismatched the way the video clip was labeled in a one-sentence description on the screen. For example, the clip might show the husband smiling or laughing about a happy memory (such as the first house they bought), but the video was labeled misleadingly to suggest that the man was showing this emotion while talking about a sad memory (such as the time he got fired). Other videos showed the reverse mismatch: a negative emotional display, ostensibly shown while talking about the memory of a happy event.
Essentially, the videos were designed to make the women feel like they were seeing their husband or the stranger display a surprising emotional reaction that didn’t match their own feelings. The real-world equivalent would be a situation in which a husband is happy about something that his wife doesn’t “get”; and the questions are whether she will notice, and whether she is she more sensitive to this in congruent emotion in her husband than she would be in a stranger.
The first important finding to emerge from this setup was that the women showed enhanced overall brain activity — which suggests more mental and emotional neural processing — when watching the videos of their husbands compared with videos of the strangers, but only when the videos showed displays of surprisingly in congruent positive emotion. During the other types of videos (when the men appeared to display strangely negative emotion), the women’s brains showed just as much overall activity when watching a stranger as when watching their husband. In other words, their levels of whole-brain activity betrayed a special sensitivity to their husband’s (versus a stranger’s) unexpected positive emotion.
This jibes with the past research that’s shown it’s our response to our partners’ positive news that is all-important for relationship satisfaction. Remember that these women had been married for decades, so it’s likely that they and their husbands have been doing something right relationship-wise. The brain-imaging data suggest part of the reason might be that the women are acutely tuned to when their husbands are showing happiness that’s personal to them (rather than common to both partners).
This specific interpretation trips up a little with another main result: The women’s levels of marital satisfaction (according to a questionnaire) correlated with the amount of neural processing they showed in response to their husbands positive and negative emotion.
However, the special importance of how we respond to our partners’ positive emotion was supported by another key finding. Namely, women who scored higher on relationship satisfaction showed more brain activation in regions thought to contain mirror neurons (neurons that are considered important for empathy) when watching their spouses than they did when watching a stranger. Moreover, this enhanced mirror-neuron activity was especially present for the videos showing their husbands’ positive, rather than negative, emotion. Again, this appears to support the idea that marital happiness goes hand in hand with sensitivity to our partners’ positive emotion (though the researchers acknowledge a different or complementary interpretation that people in happy relationships have a suppressed response to their partners’ in congruent negative emotion).
We need to interpret these preliminary and complex findings with caution. And the exclusive focus on wives’ reactions to their husbands’ emotions does lend the study a slightly retro ’70s vibe — what about the way that husbands respond to their wives’ emotions, and the importance of that for the marital happiness of both parties? But that said, the results are tantalizing in suggesting that at a neural level, people in a long-term, committed relationship are especially sensitive to their partners’ positive emotion, and particularly so when this emotion is different from their own. This neatly complements other research showing, for example, that people who are unable to differentiate their partners’ emotions from their own (they assume they’re the same), tend to be viewed by their partners as more controlling and smothering.
As a whole, this entire body of research gives pause for thought. How do you react when your partner arrives home on an emotional high? Would you only notice if you were feeling happy too?
Positive responses to positive emotions makes a married couples more positive toward each other. It also goes to show that when a partner is "indifferent" to their significant other's news or needs, the relationship can quickly turn toxic. There is a probability of negative reinforcement that will gradually build between couples because they think since they are together, they should each feel the same toward each other. In most cases, that is probably true. But in every relationship, there is a roller coaster ride of highs and low points. Listening, respect and trust are the most important factors to get through any rough times. If one can try to mine a nugget of positive out of a negative situation, it is better for everyone.
Monday, August 3, 2015
EXPECTATIONS
I can't imagine I am the only woman over 50, not married or in a serious relationship, that has been told by some well meaning friend that It would be so good for me to find someone. Find someone? Is there a specific spot I should look? Is there a lost and found pile I can dig through to see if someone in there belongs to me? Perhaps there's a room full of eligible smart kind men in a building somewhere I can't locate. Of course I am kidding. I know people are well intentioned when they say it. But did they ever think that people who aren't in serious relationships can still be seriously happy?
That while it may be lovely to be with someone it doesn't mean we can't be happy without someone? My happiness is based on me liking myself and loving the time I spend with my family and my friends. I've been in relationships that tore my very soul apart and left me desperately unhappy and marginalized. But, from the outside looking in I would have been seen to have it all. A handsome man and a ring on your finger is not the arbiter of a life or love fulfilled.
I have no problems with the truth on this matter. It will be nice if or when I meet the right, good man. But for now I am most happily living with exactly the right woman. Me.
--Arlene Dickinson
Society puts expectations on all of us. Especially on women on their role in our culture.
In fact, many people still judge another person by their status - - - whether it be social, wealth or relationship.
In Asian cultures, if a woman is not married by age 30, she is deemed a social outcast, an old maid, not worthy of total respect. In America, there was a strong Puritan ethic that women should marry early, raise children and tend a household. The American Dream was defined by a suburban house, picket fence, two cars in the garage and chicken in the stove pot.
But times change but the perceptions remain the same.
In the 1970s, women were told by feminists that they could have a career as good as men; that they did not need men to validate their lives; that they could find their own path to happiness. Women were no longer defined by the men around them.
Even so, there were expectations that women were to settle down, marry and have a "normal" life.
With the advent of no fault divorces (where the promise "until death do we part" has been nullified), more and more women find themselves at mid-life, alone and in the cross hairs of family and friend advice that happiness is sharing your life with someone new.
Some women are too hurt by their past experiences to try it again. Past pain does not equate to future unhappiness, but human minds do tend to lessen emotional risks with mental excuses and procrastination themes. Some women try too hard to find a new partner, only to change their personality to something they are not - - - and hurting both themselves and their new relationship in the process of unwinding the white lies.
In LOST, many of the women were defined in this cultural stigma.
Juliet was a medical doctor. But she was defined by her brilliant doctor husband. She was always in his shadow. Her accomplishments were secondary to his work. He cheated on her, disrespected her and then discarded her. But her upbringing and personality keep that bond with him even after they broke up. They were never compatible because he lacked the mutual trust and respect for her.
Kate was the rural farm girl. She had the spunk and fire of a tom boy. She was adventurous and fun. But at the point where she was supposed to grow up and become a responsible woman (settle down, marry, get a stable job, raise a family, etc.) she rebelled and lashed out at her own family. She valued her freedom more than her own happiness. It made her a bitter, lonely, frightened and sad young woman with no goals, desires or dreams.
Sun was the opposite. She was the daughter of a wealthy industrialist. She grew up in the power and position of a wealthy family. She had no hardships growing up. She became bored with the life of a rich princess. She hated the fact that her parents had their own path for her life (including marrying a proper man). Like Kate, she rebelled against her parents to marry Jin, a lowly, poor, uneducated fisherman's son. To her own shock, Jin did not take to her own adventurous side - - - he quickly changed to become Sun's father's "yes man," because Jin wanted what Sun already abandoned: wealth and status.
People have to decide their own paths. Yes, there are speed bumps along the journey of life. Some of those are created by luck, society's pressures, cultural perceptions and one's own mistaken choices. But in the end, every person must make their own decisions that are best for them and them alone. Only then can that person who is comfortable with their own life, open up to share the "real" them with another person.
That while it may be lovely to be with someone it doesn't mean we can't be happy without someone? My happiness is based on me liking myself and loving the time I spend with my family and my friends. I've been in relationships that tore my very soul apart and left me desperately unhappy and marginalized. But, from the outside looking in I would have been seen to have it all. A handsome man and a ring on your finger is not the arbiter of a life or love fulfilled.
I have no problems with the truth on this matter. It will be nice if or when I meet the right, good man. But for now I am most happily living with exactly the right woman. Me.
--Arlene Dickinson
Society puts expectations on all of us. Especially on women on their role in our culture.
In fact, many people still judge another person by their status - - - whether it be social, wealth or relationship.
In Asian cultures, if a woman is not married by age 30, she is deemed a social outcast, an old maid, not worthy of total respect. In America, there was a strong Puritan ethic that women should marry early, raise children and tend a household. The American Dream was defined by a suburban house, picket fence, two cars in the garage and chicken in the stove pot.
But times change but the perceptions remain the same.
In the 1970s, women were told by feminists that they could have a career as good as men; that they did not need men to validate their lives; that they could find their own path to happiness. Women were no longer defined by the men around them.
Even so, there were expectations that women were to settle down, marry and have a "normal" life.
With the advent of no fault divorces (where the promise "until death do we part" has been nullified), more and more women find themselves at mid-life, alone and in the cross hairs of family and friend advice that happiness is sharing your life with someone new.
Some women are too hurt by their past experiences to try it again. Past pain does not equate to future unhappiness, but human minds do tend to lessen emotional risks with mental excuses and procrastination themes. Some women try too hard to find a new partner, only to change their personality to something they are not - - - and hurting both themselves and their new relationship in the process of unwinding the white lies.
In LOST, many of the women were defined in this cultural stigma.
Juliet was a medical doctor. But she was defined by her brilliant doctor husband. She was always in his shadow. Her accomplishments were secondary to his work. He cheated on her, disrespected her and then discarded her. But her upbringing and personality keep that bond with him even after they broke up. They were never compatible because he lacked the mutual trust and respect for her.
Kate was the rural farm girl. She had the spunk and fire of a tom boy. She was adventurous and fun. But at the point where she was supposed to grow up and become a responsible woman (settle down, marry, get a stable job, raise a family, etc.) she rebelled and lashed out at her own family. She valued her freedom more than her own happiness. It made her a bitter, lonely, frightened and sad young woman with no goals, desires or dreams.
Sun was the opposite. She was the daughter of a wealthy industrialist. She grew up in the power and position of a wealthy family. She had no hardships growing up. She became bored with the life of a rich princess. She hated the fact that her parents had their own path for her life (including marrying a proper man). Like Kate, she rebelled against her parents to marry Jin, a lowly, poor, uneducated fisherman's son. To her own shock, Jin did not take to her own adventurous side - - - he quickly changed to become Sun's father's "yes man," because Jin wanted what Sun already abandoned: wealth and status.
People have to decide their own paths. Yes, there are speed bumps along the journey of life. Some of those are created by luck, society's pressures, cultural perceptions and one's own mistaken choices. But in the end, every person must make their own decisions that are best for them and them alone. Only then can that person who is comfortable with their own life, open up to share the "real" them with another person.
Friday, May 15, 2015
ANIMAL INSTINCTS
After Kate was kidnapped by the Others, she was told to wash up, put on a summer dress, and meet Ben on the beach for wine and a light meal. It was at this meeting that Ben looked to charm, seduce and use Kate.
We think that Ben's first purpose was to find a new ally in Kate. He knew her background. In some ways, they were compatible: they both had father issues, broken homes, issues with authority, the need to control, highly manipulative and willing to play dirty. Many believe that this beach meeting was an awkward attempt by nerdy Ben to make a pass at Kate. In order for Ben to rule his kingdom, he needed a queen. His last attempt, his try with Juliet, ended in failure. A failure so bitter that Ben sent Juliet's lover, Goodwin, on a dangerous spy mission which would eventually lead to his death. Ben showed Juliet Goodwin's grave and cursed "you are mine." However, the only thing that came from that was an uneasy truce.
With Kate, he could literally find a new partner-in-crime. Ben possessed the one thing that Kate wanted: freedom and the lack of accountability for her actions. Ben could manipulate events in such a fashion where those dreams could come true (and perhaps he did during the O6 arc where Kate basically got no punishment for any of her crimes).
We don't know the full extent of the beach meeting, the proposed deals or what the final response was between the two parties. It seemed that Ben was rejected, and Kate thrown in an uncomfortable choice. She had feelings for Jack (who knew and kept her secrets) but was attracted to the bad boy, Sawyer. When Ben found out about her magnetic connection with Sawyer, he pounced - - - basically pitting Jack and Sawyer in a deadly love triangle.
Ben needed Jack's surgical skills to operate on his tumor. He knew that Jack would not cooperate with him. He tried to lure Jack into cooperation by having Juliet get a professional friendship started between them, then push it towards a pseudo relationship. Ben knew from the beginning that Juliet would play along with the game while at the same time try to double cross Ben. Ben wanted Juliet and Jack to bond so he can control them as a couple. If Jack fell for Juliet, Ben had the leverage to make Jack do his bidding.
Ben made Kate make a choice of who would live and die between her potential lovers. Would she choose Jack, who represented her future, or Sawyer, who represented her past?
Looks and actions can be deceiving; when Kate returned to the Bear Cages after rebuffing Ben's advances, she looked at the forlorn Sawyer in a new light. She must have realized that Ben knew Jack was more valuable to the Others than an independent troublemaker in Sawyer. Perhaps her true feelings swelled up inside her. Maybe it was a small spark of human kindness. But Kate did something she would not have done in the past without some reward - - - climbed into Sawyer's cage and made love to him.
It was a passionate, wanton display of lust that was captured by the security monitors for Jack to see.
This also fit into Ben's grand scheme - - - for if Jack had any romantic feelings for Kate, they were shattered by her shagging his obstructionist rival.
But was Kate's fling with Sawyer true love or pity sex for a condemned soul?
Afterward, Kate and Sawyer were put on a work gang building the runway. Jack began to get closer with Juliet in a way to plot against Ben. So in one respect, Ben's plan was coming together. He had separated the castaways into two groups so they would not work together. He put Juliet and Jack into one joint venture against him; something that he knew about and could out flank.
But Kate's relationship with Sawyer never went any deeper to full, complete romantic love.
In the cages on Hydra Island, Pickett asked Kate if she loves Sawyer and she responds that she does. After the camp split, Kate went back to the Barracks for a little while, and she and Sawyer spent the night together. As Jack, Sayid, Hurley, Sawyer, and Kate leave the island on the chopper, Sawyer whispered something in Kate's ear, to her confusion. He kisses her and jumps off the chopper and into the ocean.
Prior to the Oceanic 6's return to the island, Sawyer tells Horace that he had a "thing for this girl once", but after three years, can barely remember her face. However, upon seeing Kate, he is awash with nostalgia, but it is short-lived as he reminds a worried Juliet that "nothing's changed", and that he's with her [Juliet]. After a young Ben gets shot by Sayid, Kate and Sawyer attempt to save his life by bringing Ben to the Others.
After Juliet's death, Sawyer leaves the main group, choosing to go at it alone. Kate, worried for his well-being, follows him back to the Barracks. She apologizes for Juliet's death, and starts to blame herself for the death by returning to the island.
Kate and Sawyer appear to be star-crossed lovers by their own choice. When Sawyer winds up back on shore after the helicopter escape, he drinks with Juliet on the beach. When the world goes strange (flash back in time), Sawyer becomes closer to Juliet than he ever did with Kate. So was Sawyer merely using Kate as a companion, or did he ever have true feelings for her. We could assume he did because he sacrificed himself to save her (in the helicopter).
So why did they not complete their romantic bond when both of them left the island in Frank's Ajira plane? Sawyer had lost his Juliet. Kate had lost her Jack. Both had lost their "spouses" after living with them for some time. Kate's relationship with O6 Jack fell a part before they returned to the island. Sawyer's love for Juliet was cruelly taken away from him - - - and he blamed Jack.
We don't believe Sawyer and Kate got together in the post-island mainland since they did not wind up with each other in the Sideways afterlife. So what was the Bear cage sex supposed to represent? Animal instincts? Fear released as passion? A way to make an terrible situation bearable?
One would have thought that the shared island experience, the good and the bad, would have made Sawyer and Kate a close couple in the mainland. They could have lived together happily ever after since their pre-815 personal baggage had been resolved on the island, for good and ill.
When rules of law and order breaks down, humans tend to fall back to their primitive survival modes. They tend to get selfish, self-centered and looking for instant gratification since the rules do not apply anymore. The island was a test ground for the animal tendencies of man when society's rules are suspended and there is little to no responsibility for one's actions. Kate and Sawyer thrived on that aspect of the island. So why could they have not found happiness together post-island?
One explanation would be that Kate never cared for Sawyer. That her "deal" with Ben was to become Sawyer's lover to control him. Kate would be the "double agent" that Ben needed in order to get inside the 815 camp and isolate its power-leaders. Kate stayed with Sawyer for a short time in order to get something she wanted - - - freedom and escape from the island. But Ben would not grant (or could not it seems due to Jacob's candidate power) Kate her freedom while the 815ers posed a threat to his dictatorship. So if you believe Kate was just acting with Sawyer in order to con him into submission, well played Kate. But in the heat of conflict, danger and near death experience - - - we think that Kate really did have true feelings for Sawyer, and his shelter puppy dog looks, to give Kate's heart a jolt of compassion and passion.
For unwritten in her back story is one of abuse. If it was sexual in nature, it could show why Kate's attitude towards sex was more for the manipulation of men than finding romance and stability in her life. She fled Florida when she felt her husband would find out about her past. She fled the island instead of going after Sawyer after he jumped from the helicopter. She got rid of Jack after she got a wrist slap from the court system in the O6 story arc. She never saw men as being a necessary part of her being. She never connected a physical relationship with love, but with power or self-preservation. So Kate's animal instinct for survival difficult situations encompassed much of her relationships with the men in her life. So much so that it clouded her feelings and ability to find and nurture true love.
Kate's passion for Sawyer was real, but it was lost. It may have been the first time that she took charge of her sexual desires and threw herself on a man she thought would be soon dead. She may have thought Sawyer was the one chance for survival and escape. But Kate never saw far enough ahead in a traditional viewpoint of marriage, home and family to have the bond that true soul mates find in their relationships.
Likewise, Sawyer had no basis for truly caring about any woman. His entire pattern was to love them and leave them. He feared stability because that meant he would lose his freedom. It would cramp his style. He could no longer run wild. He would be trapped in his old man's life - - - a dreadful, suicidal life. So Sawyer consciously kept all the women in his life at bay. He would use them, then throw them away. He needed to be constantly in motion, like a shark in the ocean. It was only when he was trapped with Juliet that he found some comfort in a "normal" relationship in a "normal" home life. At that point, Sawyer believed that he would never return to his past. The 1970s Dharma was going to be his life, forever. And Juliet was the best part of it.
How three years with Juliet changed Sawyer to the extent that he was a new man is not out of the question. Animal instincts can be tamed by the right woman and under the right circumstances. In Kate's situation, she also had a three year window of normalcy with Jack and Aaron - - - the suburban housewife, that she would learn to abhor. So it is possible that deep down, in the same comfortable situations of a classic American home life, Sawyer and Kate would not have been compatible.
So the Bear Cage may have been just what it seemed: instinctive animal passion brought upon by the stressful circumstances of captivity, danger and possibility of impending death.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
