Less is More... or is More Really Less?

The other day Samantha Brett tossed out a question on her Sam and the City blog, when being physically/sexually attracted to the opposite sex more skin/less clothes or more clothes/less skin. To which I responded:

I tend to agree with the more philosophy. It's not just that dressing provocatively gives off the "community property" vibe, it can also give off the vibe that:

a) Your body is all you have to offer, there's not much "under the hood" so to speak.

b) By dressing provocatively you're drawing attention away from your face, if you're trying to draw so much attention to your body what are you trying to draw attention away from?

A woman's body is beautiful, flaws and all. The "flaws" are what make you you and seperate you from "the pack."

And generally disrobing in front of someone shows a certain level of trust, a dropping of the guard. Men are generally more guarded than women and under-dressing gives the impression that the women are more open and sometimes that openness is a bit intimidating for men. "If you're that open about what you wear, what else are you that open about?"

So ladies, if you're trying to snare a bloke, wear clothes that accentuate your positives, not clothes that lay them bare for the world to see.

Your thoughts?

"Hot chemistry... or a sustainable relationship"

In today's Sam & the City blog posting, Samantha Brett breached an interesting topic on chemistry vs. sustainable relationship. Normally I just read Samantha Brett & Sam de Brito's blogs over on the Sydney Morning Herald website, but today I felt compelled to respond to Samantha's blog posting:

Before I met my wife I was in a head-over-heels, totally devoted relationship with a girl for about 8 months. The sparks flew from the start.

But what I noticed in that relationship and others I've been in, the relationships that start out as bonfires are usually the ones in which the passion burns out the fastest.

With my wife, we started out as friends and laid the foundation for something more. The passion and love grew from that passion. We didn't start out with a bonfire, we started out with a spark which we've nurtured into a steady burning fire. We have our ups and downs but I think we weather them far better than we'd be able to had we started out with an over-the-top, gushing, bonfire romance.

Maybe it's just me, but I noticed the earlier and hotter the fire burns for someone... the quicker that fire burns out.

Maybe the issue is that with our fast-food culture we want instant gratification. We want "fast-food" results in our love lives too. And true love isn't a fast-food prospect. Lust is the "fast-food" of relationships. It's intensely satisfying for an incredibly brief span of time. The kind of love that lasts, takes time to prepare and cook and rather than be shared in a handful of frantic wild chandelier-swinging mattress gymnastics real true and lasting love should be cultivated and savored over time.

Current Music: Supertramp - Take the Long Way Home