260118

I recalled a conversation I had with my friend Trey nearly a month ago where he confronted me on my
identification of competition as being something I wanted to minimize absolutely in a romantic
partnership. This is one of the many challenges he's made to me but with toothpicks as bayonets;
he might as well posit of an aerospace engineer (not that I'm in any way likening myself to someone
of such stature) "what's your quarrel with option?" when he outlines that he's designing something
to operate in one manner and in that manner only.

Without expounding on my aversion to competition, I will trace the general conversation and pretext
underlying the confrontation; he will ask and provide these hypotheticals, A & B selections which
could entail sentences depicting undesirable situations, or JPEGs of women and asking which is less
unfortunate looking or which one I'd rather pork, with some huge caveat to the tune of never being
able to make music again, or use drum machines in my work ever again, yadayada. Well anyway, the
topic of women was, like it has been and will likely continue to be, at hand that evening - only
this time he had spun a requisite for being able to accept a woman as a partner as some admittedly
(my admission) obtuse familiarity with combustion physics. He outlined that he would need his woman
to have a not superficial understanding of how a car engine operates in order to be comfortable with
acknowledging their value, and while I'm not quick to acknowledge the values of women myself, I
found this left field requirement of his to be principally flawed. Women, for one, aren't intended
and are not conventionally understood to be competent mechanics. Their role is supposed to be in
having deeper emotional (yeah, I know this is rich) intelligences that benefit their children as
well as all components of the nuclear model that the mother sits in the center of. So to make such
a deal of the subscription to male interests in automotive and material sciences in relation to an
amorous candidate; a sweetie, a honey; is ridiculous - and I communicated this. I likely mentioned
competition as a value to be wary of in partnerships, where for productive structures it is fine
and well, could be entirely necessary - but for a man and a woman, who hope to lead a sustainable
and comfortable existence together, their interests ought to not overlap so to prevent alienation,
emasculation and general dissonances that arise from competitive architectures and dynamics (burnout,
disillusionment, nihilism - inversely you can be the exceeder and begin formulating diminutive ideas
about the other person on a basis that is entirely inappropriate to your union (virtuosity in the
case of Edward Van Halen and Michael Anthony perhaps - bit of an esoteric example).).