Alt Text
i think i'm a bit misunderstood on this point, or at least the stress i have in mind isn't clear. i use “not purely” rather intentionally to negate without positively identifying with assumed opposite
triangles are not my strongest shape. i kinda suck at geometry in general. the attractive part of the concept is the connections and overlap i can observe relatively independently, almost this one-sided non-dyadicism. there’s a reason i also made this post, and don’t see them as contradictory:
i’m still being confusing, so i think an example might help. i am comforted by the continual overlap in music for *o and *, despite them never being in direct contact. the affinities i note are this sprawling and blooming thing, and the density is gratifying and lovely.
i really mean to say that my loves are contextualized with all my other loves, and yes this often means i want to share those noticings and reflections with the beloveds! nonetheless there is some preferred separation there, at least for the satisfaction of this specific type of desire to flourish.
i also like “non-dyadic” because it can also imply “less than 2 (but not quite 1!)”, which fits nicely with the related schizoid-style fantasy indulgences.
sometimes i like not fleshing all this out, because i feel locked in to a specific interpretation once i articulate it, and it has the ability to imply too one-dimensional a view. but i have been leaning on that too much for quite some time, and occasionally it’s nice to put the effort in to
figure out what i mean, try to put myself together. i usually learn a lot in the process, new things come into focus, it’s then generative material to bounce off of and engage with, contrary to this (tongue-in-cheek) post:
i often don’t know what i mean yet, and sometimes it’s not the right season for me to know. but i believe my current season is one of grasping the knowledge i previously discovered