Critique of Schnarch

FROM NOWHERE SPECIAL:

In The Transformation of Intimacy, Giddens 'pure relationship' is defined as one of "sexual and emotional equality". Moves towards the pure relationship, he believes, have been made possible by 'plastic sexuality', or sexuality which is "freed from the needs of reproduction" due to birth control and other reproductive technologies (1992:2). They have also been made possible by women's increasing autonomy and demands for sexual pleasure.

Confluent Love - "is active, contingent love" which relies upon equality in an emotional give-and-take. This pure relationship then, is based on a rational, utilitarian calculation of costs and benefits in the emotional realm and the ability to be intensely self-reflexive about one's needs and desires.

Whether in friendship, family, or romance he talks about how the trend today is that of only staying in a relationship that benefits ones own self. The minute that either party doesn't feel as though the relationship is profiting them, they leave. I wasn't upset that Giddens made those comments, I was upset because I can see how true it is! True friendship, true family, true romance happens when you lay down your desires and sacrifice something in your life to make their lives better. When we stop focusing on ourselves and start focusing on other people is when we catch a glimpse of heaven on earth.

"How is this going to benefit me?" But it's not all about you.

Rewarded behaviour is likely to be repeated.

So what has changed? In many ways, the most significant shift is not in the numbers of people getting married or otherwise, but in what marriage has come to represent. No social expectation surrounding it. Cohabitation is fully sanctioned. The 1990s marriage can be based on what Anthony Giddens terms the 'pure relationship' - 'a relationship of sexual and emotional equality'; the relationship exists solely for whatever rewards that relationship as such can deliver; for this relationship, marriage is less a social institution than a lifestyle choice.

Relationships are not maintained as institutions, but as a "project de couple" (Roussel, 1979), or as a "pure relationship" (Giddens, 1991).

Giddens argues that sexuality's separation from reproduction due to societal changes has produced what he calls plastic sexuality. Plastic sexuality is sexuality that is mostly feed from reproduction as well as from society's constraints such as the institution of marriage and other norms.

The proliferation of sophisticated contraceptive and reproductive technologies caused the rapid emergence of plastic sexuality. This plastic sexuality is changing marital forms into what is called a pure relationship. This type of relationship has several identifying features:

* The relationship exists for its own sake, not for any other purpose such as a shared project or common goals

* *Not anchored in or supported by external social criteria such as norms, traditions, or formal institutions such as marriage.

A major implication is that childbearing is not a necessary part of the pure relationship. Childbearing could be a potential threat to the pure relationship unless it is seen to contribute to the self-actualisation of both adult partners.

In contrast to close personal ties in traditional contexts, the pure relationship is not anchored in external conditions of social or economic life.

The pure relationship depends on mutual trust between partners, which in turn is closely related to the achievement of intimacy.

Plastic sexuality is decentred sexuality, freed from the needs of reproduction.

The 'pure relationship' is a relationship based upon emotional communication, where the rewards derived from such communication are the main basis for the relationship to continue.

A good relationship is a relationship of equals, where each party has equal rights and obligations. In such a relationship, each person has respect, and wants the best, for the other. The pure relationship is based upon communication, so that understanding the other person's point of view is essential.

FROM: LOBITZ & LOBITZ - RESOLVING THE SEXUAL INTIMACY PARADOX

SIP is when intimacy increases whilst sexual desire further declines.

Developmental model of intimacy consists of 5 stages/elements:

* Conflagration -

* Merger - individual boundaries ignored and identity of one partner subsumed by the other.

* Fusion - No intrusion of others boundaries; relationship is their identity. Crucial stage: facilitates intimacy & desire simultaneously.

* Differentiation - Partners connected by commitment (eg. Marriage, children), but have well-differentiated identities. Allows tolerance of others identity/differences but not connection with them.

* Integration - Joining differentiation with compassion, empathy and honour for partner's differences.

Intimacy present at all stages but full potential not reached until integration.

Lobitz approach - to help increase capacity for intimacy and decrease fear of intimacy in order to increase levels of sexual desire and expression, as increasing intimacy does not necessarily increase desire.

Power differences contribute