The Feather Pillow Horacio Quiroga

Affection is, as C.S. Lewis describes it, "Love in which our experience seems to differ least form that of the animals" (p. 31). The Greeks call affection love storge. C.S. Lewis gives us an example of storge, which involves a women and her child. C.S. Lewis explains "The Need and Need-love of the young is obvious; so is the Gift-love of the mother…. There is a paradox. It is a Need-love but what it needs is to give. It is a Gift-love but it needs to be needed" (p. 32). C.S. Lewis goes on to say that this love is the most discriminating of all the loves and "Almost anyone can become an object of Affection; the ugly, the stupid, even the exasperating" (p. 32). Affection pays no attention to age, sex, class, education, and even species. C.S. Lewis gives the most important cause of Affection, familiarity. One must be familiar with an object, animal, or person in able to feel Affection towards it. Once Affection is noticed within the relationship some time has already gone by after Affection has become. In other words no one can say when Affection actually began in a relationship. C.S. Lewis describes Affection as "The humblest love. It gives itself no airs. People can be proud of being ‘in love,' or of friendship. Affection is modest- even

In chapter 9 Looking Out, Looking in by Ronald. B. Adler, Adler informs us about intimacy in close relationships. The four dimensions of intimacy are physical, intellectual, emotional, and shared activities, and it’s quite often that a majority of relationships exhibit all four of these dimensions, while others exhibit one or two. According to research Masculine, and feminine styles can demonstrate how women are shown to be more willing to share their feelings, than men. An abundance of cultures influence intimacy, and the notions of public and private selves have changed dramatically. Collectivist cultures generally do not reach to outsiders, although they often wait until they are introduced before entering a conversation. Individualistic

In the study, it gives the example of affectionate people and their environment. People have always told me that I am like a mom, and I have my parents to thank for that. The study supports that if you are an affectionate person, it is because you received a lot of affection from your parents.

I had issues with being intimate, especially PDA because I had never had a boyfriend, let alone held a boy’s hand in public. He is the exact opposite: loves to give and receive hugs, will hold his (girl) best friend’s hand in public, gives people kisses on the cheek, and the list goes on. My discomfort with intimacy and his unwillingness to understand that proved very problematic and caused a lot of strain on our relationship. According to an article by Carolyn Bernie (2010), “…the presence of intimacy (but not sexual intimacy) was associated with greater perceived relationship quality…”(Vol. 71, pg 45). Now that I am more comfortable with being intimate, not necessarily sexually intimate, but doing things like holding hands, and kissing, and more, I realize how important it can be to a relationship, especially to someone who is a naturally intimate person. However, I did not realize this until long after so back and forth the arguing went until we reached the breaking point and I decided to end it. Our fight only lasted a few weeks though, as both of us broke down saying we missed each other, and ended up dating again a month later. After more arguing, a jealous girl lying about him cheating on me, and the buildup of freshman year stress, we broke up again a few weeks before summer.

Our own National Institute of Health confirms that close contact between loved ones, hugging included, can release this treasured substance, resulting in increased affection and trust between participants. In fact, the NIH describes a study conducted by Dr. Kathleen C. Light at UNC where couples held hands for ten minutes; lab results found a correlation between a positive relationship and oxytocin levels. If mere hands could produce such compatibility, I fail to fathom the adhesive reach of hugging. However, as seen in American marriages, love can be temporary, so hugging twice a day will resolutely ensure that no ill will remains between spawn and parents, husband and baby-carrier. If there are any doubts regarding this lovely notion, I am reminded that a certain athlete from Buffalo had notoriously low amounts of oxytocin; I heard it hadn’t fared well for the spouse. Yet, I admit that ensuring the hugs are maintained requires constant inspections; luckily, it will take minimal effort to acquire the necessary workforce.

Throughout the novel, Bechdel seems to struggle with the more affectionate side of love, especially when it comes to her family. This is demonstrated when she writes, “We were not a physically expressive family, to say the least” (Bechdel 19). It is quite likely that this had a pretty major effect on Bechdel in which she did not know how to express herself through affection, which lasted throughout most of her childhood. However, as she got older, she was able to partake in the more intimate forms of affection with her female partners. It is during her search for personal identity that she not only discovers her sexual orientation, but is able to engage in affectionate moments without feeling overtly awkward of

American author and Professor at the University of Southern California, Leo F. Buscaglia; also known as the Dr. Love says, “A loving relationship is one in which the loved one is free to be himself — to laugh with me, but never at me; to cry with me, but never because of me; to love life, to love himself, to love being loved. Such a relationship is based upon freedom and can never grow in a jealous heart.” Relationships are shared with the people we cherish or care about. Ways to express what and how we feel toward people we care about is achieved through interpersonal communication, verbal or nonverbal. If communication is ineffective in a relationship potential strain results. A way to notice tension in a relationship is by the examination of relational dialects. Relational dialectics are tensions that are embedded in interpersonal communication interactions. Three major primary tensions that will be discussed in this paper are dialectic of expression, dialect of integration, and the dialectic of certainty.

In both the novel and article, the main characters look up to another character while trying to gain their affection; however, they treat those who are loyal to them, poorly. For example, in The Kite Runner, Amir wanted affection from Baba and strived to meet his high expectations. Yet when Baba praises Hassan and treats him with

The difference between the bounding and the way affection is shown it’s critical. Manning find himself with a physical and somehow of psychological while Vowell find herself with a more emotional relationship with more communication. Manning mentions, “We never communicated as well in speech or in writing […]” (1, paragraph 2), the bounding between Manning and his father wasn’t emotional, instead a more physical and psychological, were Manning always felt like the ‘inferior’ since his father is the dominant and always beat him in arm wrestling. Basically, Manning’s father transmitted love to his son through competition, and through “His [physical] words” (1, paragraph 3). In Vowell’s life, his father is more in

I have great affection for my brothers and my close church friends and business partners. I’m good with hugs, bearhugs, handshakes, tears. I’ve even kissed my male cousins on the cheeks at times. I’m totally comfortable sharing and expressing it too. Saying, “I love you, man.” Or, “peace and love.” But there's a line and it's clear and if someone tries to cross it they'll know they shouldn't have.

Those with insecure attachments tend to have lower relationship satisfaction compared to those who are securely attached. Those who have a secure attachment style provide a caregiving role, their behaviors are responsive and sensitive, non-controlling and show interest during interactions. Secures are affectionate with touch, enjoy physical contact (intimate & sexual) and are willing to ask for support. Individuals with an insecure anxious attachment are more self-focused and always looking for approval and support from their partner regardless of low and high stress situations. Anxious attachment individuals are also over caring and hyper vigilant. Lastly, individuals with an avoidant attachment value independence and have low levels of self-disclosure. Avoidant individuals are less likely to use touch to express affection and are uncomfortable with intimate sexual contact. In short, being aware of your attachment style and your partners can shed light on marital conflict and possible solutions and corrective behaviors to better marital

Behavioral flexibility involves “knowing and using a number of different behaviors to achieve appropriate communication” (O’Hair et al. 16). At the same time, Ray returns home early after realizing how silly their fight over the suitcase is. Ray and Debra engage in using mature behavior and communication to handle the situation, rather than using nonverbal and negative communication, to end their argument. Consequently, since Ray and Debra are husband and wife, they begin to show their affiliation to one another. Affiliation can be described as “the feeling of connectedness you have with others” (O’Hair et al. 6). Furthermore, Ray and Debra use haptics or “the use of touch to send messages” when they nonverbally interact by hugging each other (O’Hair et al. 111). More specifically, this is also an example of love-intimacy touch which shows “example include embracing and caressing” (O’Hair et al. 112). Love-intimacy touch is generally used by two very close romantical partners or family members to express affection. In this case, because Ray and Debra reconcile with one another, their relationship grows stronger and their affections toward one another grow. Therefore, Ray and Debra go from arguing about the suitcase to using the symbol to as means to grow closer to one another and even leads to Ray suggesting that they should have “coming home action”

Care experts are in an exceptional position with respect to touching other individuals. In numerous settings where individual care is given, the standard hindrances that confine where and how regularly we touch others in ordinary life are suspended. Care experts are for the most part permitted and anticipated that would touch others as a major aspect of their work. In this context, care providers can utilize touch as a method for imparting consolation, to do care systems and to show sympathy toward others; it is essential that touch isn't misconstrued or utilized as a method for conveying predominance or sexual yearning. Asking whether it is alright to hold a man's hand or to touch them in another way-and clarifying why this is vital can diminish

“a way of conceptualising the propensity of human beings to make strong affectional bonds to particular others and of explaining the many forms of emotional distress and personality disturbance, including anxiety, depression, and emotional detachment, to which unwilling separation and loss give rise” (Bowlby, 1984 p.27).

Another similar theory proposed by Patterson in 1982 deals with providing information, regulating interaction, and expressing intimacy. “However, Patterson (1982) also proposed two other functional categories, social control and service-task functions, neither of which is identified in the earlier classification systems” (Edinger and Patterson, 1983, p. 31). The main function, and more readily accepted is social control. Social control, or attempting to change the behavior of another, is unique because it describes a motivational contrast with the function of intimacy (Edinger and Patterson, 1983, p. 31). Intimacy, or the underlying affectionate reaction towards another, also deals with negative and positive reactions. The positive affect could result in concern for, liking, love, or interest in another; however, the negative ends results in dislike or hate (Edinger and Patterson, 1983, p 31). “…The social control function is characterized by independence of affect and nonverbal behavior…in some cases the real affect is opposite to the affect represented behaviorally; for example, when smiling at, gazing at, and standing close to a disliked superior to win favor with that person”(edinger and Patterson, 1983, p. 31). In this case, by standing close, smiling at and gazing at a disliked superior the person is using intimacy to gain