You know how there’s the whole black Cat x Golden retriever relationship thing that’s kinda been going around. I was watching the short film Kitbull and I really resonated with the dog in it so I thought of a new one.
Pitbull x Stray cat
Like based on the senario of the movie. The Pitbull is a big loyal sweetie but carries a lot of pain and distrust from previous abuse by others (could be partners, friends, family) that can make them seem scary, or hard to approach
The Stray cat part would be some one who feels the need to be independent and fend for themselves and is a tad anxious
I think what would make this senario good and worth while and something that I want as a friendship or relationship is while the pit bull’s baggage can be scary and some of the ways they have been scarred is scary the stray cat an see their kindness and can relate to how they have been scarred. in turn the pit bull gives the stray someone who will be there for them, who will be loyal and protect them from being hurt.
Might be a tad unrealistic but Idk I think kitbull is a beautiful short film, one of my favorite films ever and I think there’s something beautiful about two people who have been through a lot bringing each other the kind of comfort and healing that each other need.
Thank you for coming to my Kitbull themed Ted talk
Relationship Archetypes: Why You Clash with Some and Click with Others
You have probably noticed: with some people, conversation flows effortlessly. You finish each other’s sentences. Disagreements are rare, and when they happen, they resolve quickly. Continue reading Relationship Archetypes: Why You Clash with Some and Click with Others
Hey guys! Here's the part we went over today. Apparently, he anticipated not finishing this, because it ends at Direct Exchange. So, you'll have to wait for the second part until next week.
Purpose on why I'm posting this: I think it might help in understanding how different rp characters interact with one another, and how to vary your relationships perhaps.
Warning: Thing is long.
Edit: Formatting is weird. Lemme know if it's an issue and I can send you the word file.
Archetypes and Relationships:
Every relationship comes with conflict. It’s eventual.
Intuition (the creative self): knowing without awareness. See the hidden meaning behind something ordinary.
Issues of Performance:
Continuity and change
Collaboration and conflict
Shared Goals
Issues of capacity (capex/within us):
1. Relationship to the sacred (preconscious depths or forces that give life meaning): this aspect of our beings shapes the archetypal relationships, archetypal dramas, and archetypal ways of life in which we live:
a. How much of our preconscious (psychic energies inside us that have yet come to our awareness) is beyond the depth of our understanding within a given relationship
b. What living, underlying patterning forces has hold of us or participates with us?
c. What aspects of our unconscious do we have to repress—given our present archetypal commitments?
2. Consciousness: our awareness shaped by a given relationship, especially its four aspects: thinking, sensation, feeling, and intuition. Our relationships shape our awareness.
3. Creativity: the degree to which we are free to be creative in this relationship
a. Does this relationship limit us to incremental changes?
b. Or does it enable us to act with fundamentally more freedom?
c. “Thanks to what we have learned from the past, we need not be subject (prisoners) of the present.”
d. “Thanks to what we still can learn, we need not be subject to the past.”
e. Opens us to new things that the past can’t give us.
4. Linkage with Others:
a. How freely and broadly does this relationship allow us to interact with other poles (turning point) in a given relationship?
b. Does this relationship as such limit the relationships we can have with others?
c. Or does it simply intend to include more poles but within this same type of relationship?
d. The just use of human resources:
i. How does this relationship shape our capacity for the just use of physical and human resources?
NOTE: AS USED HERE, THE TERMS CAPACITY AND PERFORMANCE ARE NOT SYNONYMS FOR INPUT AND OUTPUT.
NINE ARCHETYPAL RELATIONSHIPS:
A. Emanation:
1. An archetypal relationship in which the self lives to the maximum extent possible as an extension of, or at least in unquestioning conformity with, the other.
2. The self accepts the denial of freedom for exploring and expressing her or his own capacity in order to:
a. Experience fully and accept the mysterious and overwhelming power of the source of emanation (to see what’s so mysterious and powering about the other)
b. A yielding which is rewarded with a sense of seemingly total security or at least of a fundamentally right commitment and the sense of power flowing through us from that source.
3. Basically the mystery lies within any power or competence whose roots or manifestations the self cannot understand: such a mysterious power may have its source in:
a. Charisma (grace, people who move other people just by virtue of personality)
b. Unfathomable competence
c. Unanalyzed or unanalyzable power over vital resources
d. Covert manipulation
4. As long as change takes place solely at the command of the source of emanation continuity of this form of relationship remains assured.
5. Collaboration is unilaterally shaped at the cost of repressing conflict.
6. Justice in this form of encounter means seemingly limitless security for the self, thanks to the seemingly limitless capacity of the other.
7. The crucial point about emanation is this: as long as your consciousness remains submerged in someone else (or something else), you cannot question the source for yourself.
8. Examples of Emanational Relationships:
a. Some fathers or mothers treat members of their households as emanations (extensions) of themselves.
b. People eager to connect themselves as emanational extensions of another:
i. A political movement
ii. A dogma
c. In African American communities, during the 60s and 70s, members of the Nation of Islam, when asked about their doctrines, rarely said, “I believe.” Their recurring answer—which demonstrated their connection to an emanational source—was, “The Honorable Elijah Muhammad teaches us that…”
d. Parents with their children.
B. Subjection: a relationship in which I treat the other as a means to my ends, or alternately stated, as an object of my will. In the words of Mario Puzo’s Godfather, “I make him an offer he can’t refuse.”
a. Encounter in this archetypal patter no longer represents mysterious, unanalyzed power as it did emanation.
i. No individual or group is any longer denied a separate identity
ii. What is legitimized in this encounter is a power that is demonstrably strong and naked in its source and imposition, and specific in all its requirements.
b. In the archetypal relationship of subjection, conflict is not primarily repressed, as in emanation, but suppressed (but if the pressures and limitations imposed on us through subjection became too painful, we may also repress them from our consciousness).
c. People who experience subjection however must remain conscious of what specifically they fear and therefore specifically what to do and what they must not do.
d. Within subjection, one yields to necessity, but only as long as one calculates that it is necessary.
e. People in subjection are conscious both of their loss of power and their right to create changes—unless the use subversion.
f. Collaboration is based on explicit rules defined solely by the dominant pole and is most likely to exclude permission to collaborate freely with others similarly subjected.
g. The one in power seeks to assure continuity and change solely in order to serve his or her power and its rewards.
h. For the subjected survival is their form of justice.
i. Mere survival, even when it is harsh in its conditions, is hard to achieve in most of the world.
ii. To most of the world, mere survival remains continuously problematic, requires daily struggle, and hence remains both the minimum and maximum justice that can in practice be attained.
iii. Mere survival is a value which marginalized ethnic and racial minorities have understood throughout their history
iv. In the context of post-9/11, unprecedented crises now facing the American capitalist-liberal order at home and abroad suggest that survival will be a value for which many Americans will increasingly gain a profound understanding.
C. Isolation: an archetypal relationship in which the individuals and groups reciprocally agree upon one mode of collaboration, i.e. to avoid all conflict intended to lead to any change in the relationship between the self and the other.
a. Given that the energies of life remain in motion, self and other must in this case use their energy to repress, suppress, or deflect their energy lest it reach the other.
b. No human beings can ever completely insulate themselves through their own inaction or action—except thereby to enter the archetypal relationships of incoherence and deformation.
c. The purpose of Isolation:
i. Continuity, if possible, but no change or conflict: that is the purpose of collaboration in the archetypal relationship of isolation, and
ii. As far as possible, the just disuse of resources between self and other
iii. Justice means self-determination.
iv. Examples of the relationship of isolation are:
1. Japan’s relation to the rest of the world for a prolonged period lasting to the middle of the 19th century.
2. White-Black relations in most of the North until the 1960s
3. The political program of the Nation of Islam and the Republic of New Africa which called for a complete geographic separation of Blacks and Whites in America with a separate nation-state for Blacks
d. Isolation cannot be obtained unilaterally.
i. The attempt to isolate without achieving agreement to avoid conflict, change, and new forms of justice produces a breaking of archetypal linkage, i.e., incoherence and not isolation.
ii. A person who wishes to be alone to relax needs the collaboration of the rest of society to honor that stance.
iii. A nation’s policy of isolation in international politics—sometimes also called “neutrality” is an entirely one-sided assertion and depends decisively on the will of more powerful and aggressive nations to respect that position.
D. Buffering: an archetypal relationship in which intermediaries manage the balance of costs and benefits in encounters between self and others. Never directly.
a. Such a position may be occupied by:
i. An arbiter
ii. Mediator
iii. Political and economic power broker
iv. A concept
v. Standardized procedure
vi. Theory
vii. Conventions
viii. Conventional Habits
ix. Rituals
x. Routines
b. Unlike isolation, buffering allows for change by permitting indirect and limited forms of conflict and collaboration. Examples:
i. In intergroup relations, Indian castes have related to each other through ritualized avoidance.
ii. Cultural etiquette in the de jure segregated South
iii. Individual members, factions, interest groups, and regional linguistic, caste, and class divisions within the Indian Congress Party were held together through political brokerage.
iv. In American market society (in the service of living with fragments/incoherence):
1. Money often serves as a buffer through which we see, evaluate, and deal with each other.
2. Social and official roles may serve as buffers
3. The media which inform us and interpret life for us
4. Mediating one’s own experiences through a filter of habits, clichés, and rituals.
c. Unlike the encounter of isolation, buffering combines continuous self-determination with change by permitting indirect and limited forms of conflict and collaboration.
d. Justice means the reciprocal enhancement of self-determination.
e. The encounter lasts as long as self and other have values that they wish to exchange through the mediator.
f. Examples:
i. Within historical circumstances characterized by exploitation, marginalization, powerlessness, cultural imperialism, and violence—dimensions of deformation as a way of life—African Americans have frequently enacted the relationship of buffering as a psychological strategy for survival.
ii. This is the first archetypal relationship in which individuals and groups and other poles collaborate and conflict with each other directly and on the same terms of encounter (even though they seldom do so as equals).
1. In interpersonal relations direction exchange is found at:
a. The top levels of modern bureaucracies and legislatures
b. The intergroup relations between city bosses, minority groups, special interests, and among the latter.
c. In intrapersonal relations, direct exchange is found in individuals who turn themselves into a commodity in which they themselves trade.
d. The justice of direct exchange is the bargain we can achieve now, but its use of just means is constituted by the reciprocal capacity to seek a different bargain as the balance of power changes.
e. The particular bargain that may accrue to one side or the other at any movement serves primarily to fuel or diminish new energy into this form of encounter.
f. Any attempt to take all, or to preserve any particular outcome against unfavorable change, puts an end to open and free direct exchange between its present participants.
E. Direct Exchange: the first archetypal relationship in which individuals and groups and other poles collaborate and conflict with each other directly and on the same terms of encounter (even though they seldom do as equals)
a. In interpersonal relations, direct exchange is found:
i. At the top levels of modern bureaucracies and legislature
ii. The intergroup relations between city bosses, minority groups, special interests, and among the latter.
b. In intrapersonal relations, direct exchange is found in individuals who turn themselves into a commodity in which they themselves trade.
c. The justice of direct exchange in the service of emanation and living with fragments is temporary:
i. It is the bargain we can achieve now, but its use of just means is constituted by the reciprocal capacity to seek a different bargain as the balance of power changes.
ii. The particular bargain that may accrue to one side or the other at any movement serves primarily to fuel or diminish new energy into this form of encounter.
iii. Any attempt to take all, or to preserve any particular outcome against unfavorable change, puts an end to open and free direct exchange between its present participants.
d. Examples of direct exchange in America:
i. Voting
ii. Pluralistic interest group politics
iii. Within or outside of legislatures, executive offices, and administrative agencies
1. On what can I count that this politician or official will do for me?
2. What financial of public support can I bring to bear to have him or her vote my way or decide on my behalf?
3. How far off is the next public election in which the bargaining can be renewed for a different outcome?
