The Steampunk Forum at Brass Goggles
May 20, 2019, 09:11:14 am *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News: Brassgoggles.co.uk - The Lighter Side Of Steampunk, follow @brasstech for forum technical problems & updates.
 
   Home   Blog Help Rules Login Register  
Pages: 1 ... 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 [45] 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 ... 54   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Single Steampunks?  (Read 333345 times)
Isabella Stormrift
Snr. Officer
****
United States United States



« Reply #1100 on: October 12, 2009, 03:32:29 pm »

Am I correct in interpreting this as being an extended cohabitation type relationship?
If so, I could understand where the expectation of food payment being "your job" would arise. Generally in that sort of situation, finances are either pooled, or expenses divided- for example, when living with my girlfriend for 3 years, food was my expense, the cable hers, etc.
If not, well... I suppose I honestly couldn't say, as I've never had an experience where a situation remotely resembling such a scenario would arise.

Actually, we didn't live together.
She didn't want cohabitation. We spent almost every day together in some capacity, lived only a few blocks from each other, and I slept at her place most nights, but we did NOT live together. *snicker* She didn't want to live with me, but she kept asking me if I wanted to leave more clothing at her place, or to spend the night even if I had to work the next day. And she gave me a key. But we did NOT live together. *laugh*

It's funny now. It was frustrating at the time.

The situation had nothing to do with splitting bills. She always bought groceries for herself. I did most of the cooking if I were over at her place, but it was all her food.

I've learned my lesson from that relationship. I have a rule. Every interaction can teach you something. If you learn nothing, it's your own fault. Smiley




I'm glad it's funny now. From an uninformed outsider's perspective, it seems as though she was trying to eat her cake and have it, too.
Logged
Athena
Guest
« Reply #1101 on: October 12, 2009, 05:03:20 pm »

The reason I'm asking that is I was talking to a friend of mine two weeks ago. I was asking him what he thought about it, etc. He said that if it started to become a "hassle", then it wasn't worth it. But even hassles are worth working through.

For me, personally, I can go without being in a relationship, but if I find someone that I want to be with, then I want to be with them. Period. And I know I'm not the easiest person to be around some days, I can be needy as well Isabella, and Wraste I know what it's like to go through a relationship in a bad point in your life, but I'm willing to take the bad along with the good. It's not all give give give or take take take.
Logged
Cpt. Tobias Warde
Zeppelin Admiral
******
United Kingdom United Kingdom


Tobias T. Warde, Captain & Detective Inspector


« Reply #1102 on: October 12, 2009, 05:51:10 pm »

My, you've all been busy with discussions since I last checked Smiley

Ahh relationships, always an interesting subject. You have one end of the spectrum, my best friend & his lady who are perfectly combined (with the power of Greyskull!), absolutely dedicated to each other without getting in to each others pockets, and the other end of it, a friend of mine who is a virgin at 23 years old (he's not the most charming guy I know, nor the best looking, but a solid, steady chap who will get lucky on his first go, I know he will) and has only had a single relationship.

I know I trumpet my single status quite a bit when the subject is raised, and I do enjoy its 'benefits', but I'm prone to loneliness just like anyone else, and it is nice to have someone there, or to know there will be someone to go and see, and it can be really nice to see that person if you haven't for a week or so.
However, I'm not sure I'd know love if it struck me, to be honest. When I was at Secondary school (High School for those of you 'cross the pond), I was in, what I suppose is, a state of 'love on sight' of this lass a couple of year groups below. Nothing came of it, but thats the only time I've come close to what I imagine 'love' feels like...was actually quite painful >.< Chest tightening, heart beating fast enough to set a new world record (if there is one), throat constricting, muscles shivering... yes I think that was the closest ever.
So I don't know whether I'm meant to feel 'love' on sight, or whether it grows over time or what, so with my confused emotions, I don't think I'd spot it these days unless it slapped me in the face Tongue

And as for having a spine... I spent 10 months being a walkover, only I had the opposite reaction; she enjoyed it and wanted more and more power over me. She was the classic style of 'evil' girlfriend. She drained my bank account (knew how to put me on a guilt trip and play on my emotions to get what she wanted), stopped me from seeing my friends on nights out (same emotion thing), but what really woke me up to it was at an Alice Cooper gig (Cheesy) when she got really upset because just for 2 minutes, I'd spotted one of my best friend (the one I cited above about being in a perfect relationship) and went and chatted to him and his lady and my girlfriend at the time got the hump with me about it. It went downhill after that until I gave her the shove.
I used to joke/say I needed a woman who'd tell me what to do, and now I've experienced what I have, I don't think I'd ever wish that upon anyone, even the most spineless of men (and I was one for those 10 months :S).

Think the perfect situation for me, re: relationships, would be to see them 2 times a week, maybe 3 at times Smiley, spend at least a whole day with them during that week but otherwise leave them to their devices and get on with what I want to do. Thing is, my girlfriends have all gotten very clingy (well 3 I've had) and they ended up wanting me to go round daily. Think I need someone who is independant, so I can be too Smiley Or just be single for now.
Logged


G-Man, Half-life 2, Episode 2:
"There was a time when they cared nothing for Miss Vance, when their only experience of humanity was a crowbar coming at them down a steel corridor"
Athena
Guest
« Reply #1103 on: October 12, 2009, 06:13:12 pm »

Think the perfect situation for me, re: relationships, would be to see them 2 times a week, maybe 3 at times Smiley, spend at least a whole day with them during that week but otherwise leave them to their devices and get on with what I want to do. Thing is, my girlfriends have all gotten very clingy (well 3 I've had) and they ended up wanting me to go round daily.

See, I don't mind being independent I guess is how you would say...but I think I have a tendency to get clingy as the relationship progresses. Maybe that's my problem. I dunno...I've had a boyfriend that wanted to be around me all..the..time..and that drove me nuts, so I always said I wanted to be in a relationship where that wasn't the case. More than just 2 or 3 times a week tho. Truth be told, I wouldn't mind everyday, but let me have my space and he have his. Does that make any sense?
Logged
bizarre_chicken
Zeppelin Admiral
******
United Kingdom United Kingdom


I like vegetarians, but I couldn't eat a whole one


WWW
« Reply #1104 on: October 12, 2009, 07:08:15 pm »

Me, I'm in things for the long haul. Marriage, cohabitation, the whole bit. Ideally, he brings home the bacon, I take care of the household, and we spend our free time on mutual interests. Obviously we'd each still have our own recreations we enjoy separately as well, but at the end of the day, we'd be a team.

One step at a time, honey.

Getting into a relationship and wanting long-term right away is never good - since you might really be into someone initially, but later lose interest or find something about them you really don't like.
The best way forward is to take things <i>as they come</i> and not <i>expect</i> anything. That way a fruitful relationship can blossom at it's own pace and you know you won't have made any mistakes, nor be disappointed or put off.
Logged



Click here for win. ---^
theladyofshalott
Guest
« Reply #1105 on: October 16, 2009, 07:55:47 pm »

Yeah, I looked, I have even had, to a degree, and then I over thought. my thinking will be the death of me...
Or it went bad, and I am afraid...

what is it they say now?

"Wise men say only fools rush in.."

I think that if your too wise, to thoughtful, it will never happen. I sabotage it every single time.

there is an innocence about the fool, but then again the fool can be ruined... AND THEN having to renounce apart of your thinking or ideals, is that apart of it?

OH it could go on. There are so many reasons men here dont like me- thinking too much is a major one.
I prevent going out, I hide. Esp after the last experience, or two... *shakes head*

Distance may very well help this, too. And I will say, I look, I imagine, hope even, but then I fear... If it comes, it will hopefully feel alright. Till then, well, I dont know.
« Last Edit: October 16, 2009, 07:58:22 pm by theladyofshalott » Logged
Bonny Gallows
Gunner
**
United States United States



WWW
« Reply #1106 on: October 22, 2009, 12:55:58 am »

By the time my last relationship ended, I was pretty much just in it for the sex. We had great chemistry, but over time I found I liked him as a person less and less, and once he became emotionally and verbally abusive, I ended things. He wanted to continue "being friends" without sleeping together, but I told him I wasn't interested. He seemed to think our disagreements were enjoyable, but I told him without the physical component, I would basically be letting him irritate me for no reason. I would never enter into such an arrangement again.
Logged
bizarre_chicken
Zeppelin Admiral
******
United Kingdom United Kingdom


I like vegetarians, but I couldn't eat a whole one


WWW
« Reply #1107 on: October 22, 2009, 01:02:12 am »

The irony, I suppose, is that I look back on those failed relationships with fondness and to some degree, miss them. It's common knowledge that things become rosier with time. Perhaps I just cannot hold a grudge.
I think the only times I cannot forgive someone for are when I was humiliated or used by a person. Even then, though, I sometimes find myself in quiet reverie, thinking about the good times even though sometimes things have ended catastrophically.

No matter how bad things go with someone, except, I suppose, with rare cases, you may always find yourself thinking back to them with some small feeling of loss.
Logged
Narsil
Immortal
**
United Kingdom United Kingdom



WWW
« Reply #1108 on: October 22, 2009, 01:04:05 am »

to a certain extent I think that's how all relationships work, its just a question of degree. Sometimes the most interesting ones are those with a bit of friction.
I disagree.
Sexual tension, sure, but for a relationship to work one has to have an understanding and level of communication that would make actual arguments rare and more workable.

The last relationship I was in ended, not because of any misunderstandings, but because she was going off to collage and I was moving VERY far away. We got along great. There were a few misunderstandings and these got worked out without any drama or arguing. The only time voices got raised it was never in anger.

I would NOT be in a relationship with someone that I could not stand.

I don't know, I think that to get on so well with someone so well that you rarely argue is unrealistic, in fact I think that avoiding arguments probably ends up wrecking a lot of relationships. Obvioulsy being involved with someone you really dislike isn't going to work but in some ways I think that the closer two people get the more likely it is that there will be flare ups. After all I think that most people would want a relationship to have a certain amount of passion, intellectual as well as physical ans thats going to lead to conflict. I think the communication aspect comes in with how you deal with those arguments. I think its not so much about not screaming at each other but having enough mutual respect to deal with it afterwards.

I don't think that love is about roses and picnics by the river its about caring enough about someone to put up with the times when you'd really just like to kill them Smiley
Logged







A man of eighty has outlived probably three new schools of painting, two of architecture and poetry and a hundred in dress.
Lord Byron
Taillte
Zeppelin Captain
*****
United States United States



WWW
« Reply #1109 on: October 22, 2009, 01:06:47 am »



I don't know, I think that to get on so well with someone so well that you rarely argue is unrealistic, in fact I think that avoiding arguments probably ends up wrecking a lot of relationships. Obvioulsy being involved with someone you really dislike isn't going to work but in some ways I think that the closer two people get the more likely it is that there will be flare ups. After all I think that most people would want a relationship to have a certain amount of passion, intellectual as well as physical ans thats going to lead to conflict. I think the communication aspect comes in with how you deal with those arguments. I think its not so much about not screaming at each other but having enough mutual respect to deal with it afterwards.

I don't think that love is about roses and picnics by the river its about caring enough about someone to put up with the times when you'd really just like to kill them Smiley

I agree. As long as you're not beating each other and cheating on each other, arguments are fine if you know how to deal with them afterwards. I think you can last with someone that you argue a lot with as long as you always forgive each other or at least let the arguments go.
Logged
Narsil
Immortal
**
United Kingdom United Kingdom



WWW
« Reply #1110 on: October 22, 2009, 01:21:30 am »

to a certain extent I think that's how all relationships work, its just a question of degree. Sometimes the most interesting ones are those with a bit of friction.
I disagree.
Sexual tension, sure, but for a relationship to work one has to have an understanding and level of communication that would make actual arguments rare and more workable.

The last relationship I was in ended, not because of any misunderstandings, but because she was going off to collage and I was moving VERY far away. We got along great. There were a few misunderstandings and these got worked out without any drama or arguing. The only time voices got raised it was never in anger.

I would NOT be in a relationship with someone that I could not stand.

I don't know, I think that to get on so well with someone so well that you rarely argue is unrealistic, in fact I think that avoiding arguments probably ends up wrecking a lot of relationships. Obvioulsy being involved with someone you really dislike isn't going to work but in some ways I think that the closer two people get the more likely it is that there will be flare ups. After all I think that most people would want a relationship to have a certain amount of passion, intellectual as well as physical ans thats going to lead to conflict. I think the communication aspect comes in with how you deal with those arguments. I think its not so much about not screaming at each other but having enough mutual respect to deal with it afterwords.
This part, I think we agree on but have different ways of saying it.
I don't think that love is about roses and picnics by the river its about caring enough about someone to put up with the times when you'd really just like to kill them Smiley
See, I still just couldn't be with someone that drove me to wanting to do them bodily harm.
I realize you may be kidding here, but I went through that on both sides. I'll not do it again.

Well yes I'm certainly looking at extremes here. It's certainly perfectly possible for tow people to be more or less perfectly happy together for all their lives and it probably depends to the personalities of the people involved some people thrive on conflict and some can deal with it at all, some people like stability and others like adventure, one isn't better than the other and most people like some balance of both.

I'm certainly not trying to suggest that actual violence or aggression in a realtionship is good (physical or emotional) and certainly not any kind of oppression  of one partner, but I think a degree of conflict is inevitable and perhaps a lot of relationships break down unnecessarily because people see any conflict as a sign that the relationship isn't working becasue they'v ebeen conditioned by the hollywood happy ending.

This actually brings the discussion into the realms of steampunk relevance, but I'll get into that later.
Logged
LukeHogbin
Zeppelin Admiral
******
Slovenia Slovenia


Steamcat


« Reply #1111 on: October 22, 2009, 11:11:22 am »

The infinite possibilities each day holds should stagger the mind.
The sheer number of experiences I could have is uncountable,
breathtaking, and I’m sitting here refreshing my inbox. We live
trapped in loops. Reliving a few days over and over, and we
envision only a handful of paths laid out ahead of us. We see
the same things each day, we respond the same way, we think the
same thoughts, each day a slight variation on the last, every
moment smoothly following the gentle curves of societal norms.
We act like if we just get through today, tomorrow our dreams
will come back to us.

And no, I don’t have all the answers. I don’t know how to jolt
myself into seeing what each moment could become. But I do
know one thing: The solution doesn’t involve watering down my
every little idea and creative impulse for the sake of someday
easing my fit into a mold. It doesn’t involve tempering my life
to better fit someone’s expectations. It doesn’t involve
constantly holding back for fear of shaking things up.

This is very important so I want to say it as clearly as I can:

F*@%. THIS. SH#T.
Logged

I have defied Gods and Demons. I am your shield; I am your sword. I know you: your past, your future. This is the way the world ends.
Ulfilias
Snr. Officer
****
United Kingdom United Kingdom


ulfilias
WWW
« Reply #1112 on: October 22, 2009, 11:12:59 am »

I find the equal rights thing somewhat silly at times. People are generaly equal, we all, have brains and bodies and the like. However Men and Women are very different in their views and roles.

I think the problem comes, not in that we have different roles in life, but some how, these roles have not been *VALUED* equaly. Being a mother is a highly stressful and demanding job. A housewife, if broken down into it constitute parts and paid for would be quite well earning. Yet we are being taught this is demeaning. Madness. On the flip of that, Woman can be the equal of any man in the work place or his better in a lot of cases, if the will to strive in that direction is there.

True equality is the choice to be what and where you want to be, without question.
Logged

"My clothes will impress you, and my claws will undress you" - The Damned
Dorian Ambrose
Guest
« Reply #1113 on: October 22, 2009, 07:45:33 pm »

I find the equal rights thing somewhat silly at times. People are generaly equal, we all, have brains and bodies and the like. However Men and Women are very different in their views and roles.

I think the problem comes, not in that we have different roles in life, but some how, these roles have not been *VALUED* equaly. Being a mother is a highly stressful and demanding job. A housewife, if broken down into it constitute parts and paid for would be quite well earning. Yet we are being taught this is demeaning. Madness. On the flip of that, Woman can be the equal of any man in the work place or his better in a lot of cases, if the will to strive in that direction is there.

True equality is the choice to be what and where you want to be, without question.

I completely agree.
Equality is not about who does what. But about equal recognition for what they do.

There is nothing wrong with the traditional gender roles. For the most part, they are there for a reason.
In my line of work (Or what will be in after the next 3 years in school  Smiley ) is very male dominated. And for at good reason. It requires a lot of physical strength. Few woman can compete with men in that area.

The point is, that each gender is better at certain things, none is above the other.
And I to will take my 6 months Paternity leave when I someday have children.
Logged
Orwin
Officer
***
United States United States

Typical Dabbler of Various Things


« Reply #1114 on: October 22, 2009, 09:31:52 pm »

I think then, you have to take into account, that there are women that CAN compete on a physical scale with many men, and more with every passing generation.

It seems a bit too casting to say "there are some roles men are good at, and some that women are good at."  Rather, there are some roles that individual people are good at. 

It's an issue I've seen both sides trying to enact.  If someone is able to do something definitely let them, but if someone is not able to do something, let them not.

(As far as word of mouth proof of my claim that women can be just as strong, both my sister and my mother are at least as strong as most men, and they don't even work out.  My grandmother held off insurgence in indonesia on her own with my baby mother strapped to her back while the troops were away from the barracks.)

I would say the reason we have most of the traditional gender roles are evaporating somewhat, it's mostly a development of western society.  (not to say that a lot of eastern societies didn't, but that's beside the point.)

For instance, in ancient mongolia the women were expected to be every bit the warriors men were.  They just didn't go out raiding and were left to be the defenders against attacks, because they were the ones who could bear children and was thus more prudent not to send into active danger all the time.
Logged
Narsil
Immortal
**
United Kingdom United Kingdom



WWW
« Reply #1115 on: October 22, 2009, 09:48:41 pm »

I think that there's a degree of truth in both arguments. The problem occurs when the stereotypes become rigid an over-simplified. Gender is one aspect of what makes people different from each other and a significant aspect,  to draw a definite line with women on one side and men on the other is a gross over-simplification but then so is a blanket assumption that gender is irrelevant.

I think its reasonable to talk about masculine and feminine characteristic but not reasonable to assume that men have only masculine traits and women only feminine ones.
« Last Edit: October 22, 2009, 09:50:18 pm by Narsil » Logged
S.Sprocket
Administrator
Zeppelin Captain
*****
United States United States


Industria Proficiscor In!


« Reply #1116 on: October 22, 2009, 09:56:33 pm »

excellent conversation here lately..   THIS is how it should be in all threads.

However,

Any girls from Southern California visit these days?  or some who'd like to move ?  Smiley
Logged

"It's what a cove knows that counts, ain't it Sybil?  More than land or money, more than birth.  Information. Very flash." -Mick Radley

"Teaching boys to bake cakes? That's no way to maintain an industrial empire." --Fred Dibnah
Dorian Ambrose
Guest
« Reply #1117 on: October 22, 2009, 10:24:40 pm »

I think then, you have to take into account, that there are women that CAN compete on a physical scale with many men, and more with every passing generation.

It seems a bit too casting to say "there are some roles men are good at, and some that women are good at."  Rather, there are some roles that individual people are good at.  

It's an issue I've seen both sides trying to enact.  If someone is able to do something definitely let them, but if someone is not able to do something, let them not.

(As far as word of mouth proof of my claim that women can be just as strong, both my sister and my mother are at least as strong as most men, and they don't even work out.  My grandmother held off insurgence in indonesia on her own with my baby mother strapped to her back while the troops were away from the barracks.)

I would say the reason we have most of the traditional gender roles are evaporating somewhat, it's mostly a development of western society.  (not to say that a lot of eastern societies didn't, but that's beside the point.)

For instance, in ancient mongolia the women were expected to be every bit the warriors men were.  They just didn't go out raiding and were left to be the defenders against attacks, because they were the ones who could bear children and was thus more prudent not to send into active danger all the time.

I do not disagree with you.
But no matter how you spin it, there are things that woman do better than men and vice versa (generally speaking of course). Arguing genetics is just silly.

This is in no way a bad thing and does not have anything to do with equality. It is just the way the human species have evolved.
We humans like to think that we are above nature, but that is simply not the case. Nature has made men and woman differently for a reason. Blindly denying that, does not change it.

Please do not misinterpret this as if I want the clearly defined gender roles of past ages back. I do not.
I just believe that fighting nature, simply for the sport of it is not only utterly useless, but also not in our best interest.
We should acknowledge and celebrate our differences and give everyone the freedom to live their life in whatever way is right for them.

I think its reasonable to talk about masculine and feminine characteristic but not reasonable to assume that men have only masculine traits and women only feminine ones.

I agree.
All people have both masculine and feminine characteristics. But these are most often subtle, and does not change things very much.
There are more extreme cases, but these are quite rare, and almost always the result of a genetic defect or equivalent.
Logged
Orwin
Officer
***
United States United States

Typical Dabbler of Various Things


« Reply #1118 on: October 22, 2009, 10:56:43 pm »


I do not disagree with you.
But no matter how you spin it, there are things that woman do better than men and vice versa (generally speaking of course). Arguing genetics is just silly.

This is in no way a bad thing and does not have anything to do with equality. It is just the way the human species have evolved.
We humans like to think that we are above nature, but that is simply not the case. Nature has made men and woman differently for a reason. Blindly denying that, does not change it.

Please do not misinterpret this as if I want the clearly defined gender roles of past ages back. I do not.
I just believe that fighting nature, simply for the sport of it is not only utterly useless, but also not in our best interest.
We should acknowledge and celebrate our differences and give everyone the freedom to live their life in whatever way is right for them.


Well that's what I mean when I say "If someone can do something let them, but if someone can't do something let them not."

We should in no way change requirements and standards, so long as they actually apply to the job in question.


As far as that goes though.  I don't see how arguing genetics is silly.  Part of the claim of why men and women are so different is because we can only master our physical bodies so far, but everything that defines our physical bodies is genetics.  And so aside from that, most of the difference is in the actual reproduction process, and gender specific organs.

People have been fighting nature for the sport of it since man first put two sticks together to create fire.  It's part of the progress of mankind that is generally romanticized in steam-punk itself, in a way.  Why do you think people breed dogs and cats?  Why do we have computers and cars and such?  We don't NEED them, but we do it anyways because we can.

You also mention genetic defects, or I'll call them flukes rather.  How do you think evolution happens in the first place? (I'm not talking about that women's track runner that was discovered to actually have internal testes instead of ovaries here, but there are more applicable situations.)
Logged
Dorian Ambrose
Guest
« Reply #1119 on: October 22, 2009, 11:17:09 pm »

@ Orwin:

The examples you list all have one thing in common. They do not fight nature. They use it. We constantly create or change things, by using nature. Nature gives us electricity nad we find a way to use it. In some cases that means changing it somewhat, but doing so is not changing the way nature works. It is simply making it work for us.

About evolution.
Many scientists (and I) believe that humankind has lost the ability to evolve. We have come to a point where we can change things around us, or protect us from it, through science. So we no longer need to evolve, in order to survive.

The genetic differences between men and woman are more than just reproductive systems. It involves everything from physical potential in different areas, to brain chemistry.
 
Logged
Orwin
Officer
***
United States United States

Typical Dabbler of Various Things


« Reply #1120 on: October 23, 2009, 12:18:20 am »

The reason for differences in things such as brain chemistry is up for debate though.  Brain chemicals act in ways we do not quite understand yet.  It is part genetic, part hormonal, and there is some evidence that it is part environmental.  We treat men and women differently from the day they are born, it is to be expected that they turn out differently.

Saying that "it's nature" that men and women are different are preposterous.  It is the current natural state of things, but if you left things in their current natural state we'd have no technology either.  If you are then defining nature as simply using the physical laws of the universe to our advantage, genetics follows the same path.  There is no difference between us than our genetics and how we view one another.

On evolution, just because we are no longer evolving in the traditional sense does not mean there is no longer any genetic drift.  If anything, it means there is MORE genetic drift as the weak are no longer immediately culled due to harsh conditions.  Instead, society itself shapes genetic selection.  It is awful hard to find a mate if nobody finds you attractive.

Which, in and of itself, could count for a lot of the gender discrepancies. (Apart from things like testosterone levels, etc.  But women do have some testosterone in them, just like men have some estrogen.  It's just about the levels. But even those differences are directly linked to the given gender specific organs.  For instance the case that if a male for some reason does not get the right signals from their hormones while developing, it will be born female.)





Anyways, I'll probably give it a rest now.  We could probably keep going with this forever.  Wink
« Last Edit: October 23, 2009, 01:28:46 am by Orwin » Logged
eggberta echegaray
Officer
***
Canada Canada


Eggberta
« Reply #1121 on: October 27, 2009, 12:34:06 am »

Anyhoo...if it's ok with you all, to let off a little steam *coughs* and vent my crap... Met my ex bf (?) (There's a reason for the ? mark)...online in 2003. We met in person twice, between then and now, and get along very well...but, (oh yes...there has to be a but), but there are many circumstances that hinder he and I, to have a "normal" relationship. It is a very Wuthering Heights type of affair, and it all could be simply remedied, if he got his crap together Smiley But alas, he is a chicken S%$#@T, thus I feel I have no option to claim myself single, even though, not more than a week ago, he professed his love for me. LOL! I'm being very serious here. seriously he did Tongue *sighs* The man is a piece of work. I know this sounds all surreall, but, since I've known him, we engaged in a L.D relationship for two years, we both decided to go our separate ways, we have been in relationships with different people, but all the while, he's carried a torch for me, even when he was involved with different females. I do find all of this very flattering and heart sick, but it's been 4 years since he and I saw one another face to face, and he, we, still enjoy each other's company, be it is limited to only online interactions. Pathetic? I suppose, but given the day and age we all find ourselves in, with regards to the amount of social time we spend online with our fellow humans, the only thing that seriously separates us all from being together in person, is a computer monitor, a border of land and money to get there. Life sure is strange. Anyhow, all of this has been very taxing on one's emotions, knowing this information, seriously did stir my soul, only to realize he truly is my soul mate. weird? Considering all the trials and tribulations he and I have endured, I don't doubt it for a second. As to will he and I end up together? Guess that's up to fate to decide. Smiley So there you have it...blah. LOL! Sickening isn't it. Cheesy
Logged

"She's got a touch of Tuesday Weld and has the right dynamics for the new frontier"
Elliot_Pending
Officer
***
United States United States



« Reply #1122 on: October 27, 2009, 12:48:11 am »

Take my advice for what it's worth, Miss Echegaray (and it's not worth much), but I have been and remain to be in somewhat of a similar situation.

There is not really any reason to define your relationship with any person as anything other than what you feel it is. If you mutually love each other, but cannot be together, then there you have it! Granted, it doesn't always feel that simple. As with my situation as well, it could be easily remedied by the other party if they chose, which makes the whole thing a bit more frustrating, but that if that doesn't change your feelings about him, then there's no reason to pretend that it does.

And if you wish to be in other relationships, then feel free! They are what they are as well. As long as you are always honest with any person whom you become involved with, then all is fair.

Love is not a limited resource.
Logged
eggberta echegaray
Officer
***
Canada Canada


Eggberta
« Reply #1123 on: October 27, 2009, 01:02:01 am »

Take my advice for what it's worth, Miss Echegaray (and it's not worth much), but I have been and remain to be in somewhat of a similar situation.

There is not really any reason to define your relationship with any person as anything other than what you feel it is. If you mutually love each other, but cannot be together, then there you have it! Granted, it doesn't always feel that simple. As with my situation as well, it could be easily remedied by the other party if they chose, which makes the whole thing a bit more frustrating, but that if that doesn't change your feelings about him, then there's no reason to pretend that it does.

And if you wish to be in other relationships, then feel free! They are what they are as well. As long as you are always honest with any person whom you become involved with, then all is fair.

Love is not a limited resource.

Glad I'm not the only one! LOL! Feels good to know this for some strange reason...I think you know what I mean. When I told my Mother about all this, the first thing out of her mouth was, "I always knew he had feelings for you!" Mother's know best is my motto. My Mum really likes him, and she has always said to me, out of all the fellas I've been with, hand's down he has always been the best one.

I really like what you have said here Elliot, it does make sense to me, and it does comfort me, reading your words about the situation...He and I have mutually agreed "what ever happens, happens" but in the mean time, we do love one another even if it's telling the other person through a text messages. blah. We are blatantly honest with one another, and tell each other things and what have you. It's weird, we can go ages without talking to one another, and when we "connect" it's like not a day goes by. He has grown a lot over the years, and is more mature...but he still has to get the other part of his life together! LOL! One cool thing though, I have been invited to his sister's wedding which will be this time next year...so we'll see what happens...much can happen in the span of a year, but in the meantime...not much is going on with me with regards to any dashing fellas beating down my door, nor am I looking for it. But at the same time, I would never refuse going out on a date if someone did ask me, and he said the same. So...we'll see what unfolds Smiley
Logged
Gentleman-Adventurer
Snr. Officer
****
Ireland, Republic of Ireland, Republic of


Freelance Hero, and Beau Sabreur.


« Reply #1124 on: November 05, 2009, 04:12:18 pm »

Haiku are easy.
But sometimes they don't make sense.
Refrigerator.

Quite. They can baffle
The inferior mind. Shame.
Microwave the jam.
Logged

"What do we do? You're asking me 'what do we do'? We do what we always do....We CHARGE, by thunder!" Captain Haephestus Burnside, of the "Reckless Abandon", shortly before a boarding action.

"You rampallian! You fustilarian! I'll tickle your catastrophe!" Henry IV, Act II Scene I, WS.
Pages: 1 ... 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 [45] 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 ... 54   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.497 seconds with 17 queries.