In any mutually agreed upon relationship, do the members lose individuality and freedom because of the necessity to compromise and sacrifice some aspect of themselves for the sake of the survival of the new relationship? Committing one’s self to another partner requires that the lifestyles of each must be able to blend in such a way that neither partner feels the other one has invaded personal space reserved for the individual self. The younger the individuals the easier it will be for them to be willing to adapt to fit into the new mold. Older partners bring together their own established isms which may be difficult to modify or eradicate altogether. Those even older, the seniors on their last voyage, take on issues of their own including physical limitations,
medical issues, established attitudes anchored onto immutable behaviors, and beliefs so deeply entrenched in mind and body that acceptance or rejection, in either case, could result in a no-brainer, non-deal, relationship-breaker.
Sacrifice is really a misnomer for what really happens when individuals decide to make a serious go of creating a unified relationship. The temptation to call giving up something of the self for the sake of survival of the coexistence of both is not really sacrifice in the true denotation of the term. There is no ritualistic, holy event – no confirmation, no circumcision, no Bar (Bat) Mitzvah – to make the truly compromising event a sacrifice. There is no blood-bath hecatomb. What those who pleadingly refer to their doting actions as sacrifices really mean is that they have compromised something in the totality of their composite freedoms for the sake of avoiding confrontation, disagreement, or contentious rebuttal to explain their actions, desires, or acquired ideologies. However, with English being a living language, words take on meanings of their own or acquire shades of meaning from other words that do not sound as daunting. Hence, sacrifice has taken on a new meaning: to give up something important or valued for the sake of other considerations. Ultimately, this new definition is nothing more than the one already established for the word compromise.
How does compromise fit when individuals, who are inherently different, decide they are attracted to each other and want to spend their lives together whether it may be a life-long commitment till death do us part or if it is a renewable contract with options for variable terms? It is certainly not the discussion for the first date. That prime-time event is reserved for determining how to deal with the temptations of a raging, starving libido, general likes and dislikes, social expectations and behaviors, and time for discussion of inbred attitudes, beliefs, expectations, and any and all of those very specific isms that form the persona as well as the personality of each one.
The Young and the Restless
Young people must first overcome the reckless abandonment of morals when they subject themselves to their libidinous drives that hurl all precautions to the wind in order to achieve that all-elusive climactic event, the orgasm. There is still the stark fear of impregnation or acquisition of an STD, but the desire for that momentary, blissful, memorable occasion is insuperable. These wayward youth are not Okinawa Flat Belly Tonic satisfied with mere singular events. They hunger for the full buffet of experiences and experiment with multiple variations in attempts to effect ultimate satisfaction in as many positions and venues as they care to imagine. Only the strictest of inhibitions limit the range of possibilities.
The inexperience and curiosity of wayward youth belie any thought of sacrifice (in the second meaning of the term) or compromise in any obvious form. Each wants the full gamut of whatever there is to experience no matter the cost. The dedication of emotions to one is as ephemeral as the wisp of smoke from candles burning at either or both ends. Not only are compromises the least of concerns but so also are the empty promises uttered during the wanton throes of emotionally charged sexual exploitation. The male will promise anything for his moment of gratification, and she will offer anything to grasp that moment of feeling important enough to have control over her elusive prey. Values change by the moment and last as fleetingly as the heat of lightning bolts through their all-embracing, ubiquitous vacuums. Both promises and offers are quickly forgotten once the high of the achieved orgasm subsides.
This youthful period is known for its variations and willingness for each to tolerate novel ideas from the other, but it also tests to what extent each will go to express limitations and boundaries from the other. It is the time when delving into unchartered territory may open up new avenues of what is acceptable and what is not. It is at this time that the toleration of specific actions will be part of the regimen or not. It is the time when preferred positions and actions that have deemed universally acceptable in general are acceptable in this specific situation. It defines what is good and that which is absolutely taboo for whatever reasons, rational or not.