Random Relationship Babbling Thread (alias Relationship Rant Thread #2)

Remove all ads!

My first advice would be to sort out whenever it's *love* or *lust* you feel for that girl... take time to sort out your feelings, dude.

 

Not necessarily love OR lust. Why can't it be both?

 

Perhaps it's all about definitions. You can define lust as simply sex drive, but it has some innate bad connotations. But you also have lust as one of the seven deadly sins, an obsessive, unrestrained craving.

 

In that case, I was refering to lust in the sexual desire way. And HB, I never said it couldn't be both at the same time... perhaps I was unclear. I actually meant to say to clear out if it was only lust, or both lust and love.

 

It's definitely not lust, since I do, or at least *did* have genuine feelings for her.
The background story is a little complicated. There was another girl whom I really did feel *lust* and I *think* that I tried to get over it by going for this girl, if it's actually possible to conciously fall for a girl. I did have feelings for her prior to that which I just...nudged a bit. We do know each other pretty well as friends, although just friends.

What a nice web I have made for myself!

 

So I'm going to repeat myself: Enjoy your single life. Seriously, it's not like you're marrying within the closest decade, so you can't really tell if it's going to work out and it probably isn't. I would say study, have fun, develop your interests and hobbies, you will have the time for romance later.

 

You know, there was a nice document about this a little while ago, on our local TV. According to it, there can be no lust without feelings, since our bodies try to make their everything to make us stay together (drugs in brains giving fuzzy feelings, etc). Therefore you could say that if there is sex, there will be, inevitably, also sparks in the mental side. Then, imagine, some people use years before they get even near that phase. Just like in some bad romance movies.

 

Yes, imagine, oh, let's be judgmental and biased again.

Take some time to figure out what you feel and want and as chev said, being single for a while won't kill you.

 

Once again, the Chev makes another good point.

You also make a good point too, Wirhe. I remember vaguely a documentary on TLC (or Discovery? I can't quite remember) titled "The Chemistry of Sexuality", or something like that, which spoke more extensively the synergy of lust and love. Unfortunatly, it's been such a long time that I barely remember it. A rerun would be interesting.

 

Humans want love and it's inevitable that when they behave like lovers they are going to lack love even more. Sometimes that lacking will make them feel as if they were in love. That's because nature didn't give us sex as a way to have a varied and rich sex life with lots of fun but as a way to bond people and produce offspring. Sex without feelings and obligations is simply unnatural and human psyche... heck, probably even human organism rebels against that.

As for internet "relationships" (call me Victorian if you like but I'm freaking Catholic), there's no need to presume that they are boring. Wirhe, do you remember the definition of an intellectual? An intellectual is a person who has discovered entertainment other than sex. Seriously, though, not only isn't sex everything, but it can actually (and will) screw things up even further where they aren't right. You probably wanted to say that cyber isn't the same as real sex, so wonder what you would say about a situation where there is no cyber, either.

The real problem with "internet relationships" is when they are indeed internet relationships, which means a relationship only for the internet, with no real life claims or relevance (the real life partner, the online partner(s)... some people live like that). It's easier to deceive people on the internet and it's easier to separate the girlfriend/boyfriend from real life, reducing her/him to the status of a pastime rather than a human person. It's a scary thought. But it can happen in "real life relationships", as well. I've talked to way too many people feeling like vibrators or rubber dolls, let alone my own experiences. People married for years in real life can hide the fact of having a lover or a bastard child or the fact that one of the children has a different father, so why wouldn't certain lesser erm... inconsistencies happen online? Quite tangible people from real life can make a toy of you, so why not people you meet on the internet. They are real people from real life, after all, you just meet them online. It's just a matter of it being a real relationship instead of an online activity like playing a game or filling an interactive form and then things will be good. Things will always be bad in relationship which is a hobby or is based on deception, no matter if you live in the same house or thousands of miles away.

 

Yes, Chevalier; shame on you.

Then it was quite likely the same show, since our national television often displays programs coming from Discovery (or whatever the name was).

I'm not completely sure are you joking or not, but this *did* give me the laughs.

It's called "celibate."

 

Chev, it's not necessarely unnatural. For some, sex without feelings is just as natural as sex with feelings and engagement is natural for us. However, I believe that being a collector of carnal conquests notes a deeper problem, maybe a fear of commitment, or attachement. I know what it is, simply because I have been such a person for many, many years. My own problem was a fear of commitment. Redemption is never easy, as it leads to a deep introspection, however, it is worth it in the end.

 

You wouldn't believe the number of coworkers I have who are A: 20 or under and B: married.

 

Victorian is attached to Protestant values, whereas I'm Catholic. About as funny as being called a puritan (a radical Protestant sect from 16th-17th century).

Perhaps people marry sooner over there. Round here, my sisters who married at 18 have been an exception... How does it work out for your coworkers?

I fear it's universal in our civilisation nowadays. It often looks like one part of single people fears commitment and the other doesn't understand it. My problem has been quite opposite to yours: I expected commitment where there was none to be given, ending up with a girl who didn't intend to stop hitting on some other guy(s), a girl who had time for everyone but me and her friendships were casually flirtatious, not to mention some girls being cool with being suggestive but less cool with living up to it. You know... giving too much, expecting the same, my speciality. I got bitter and started thinking people weren't ready to care and show you the same fidelity and attention as you give them. Couple it with some experience with excuses that weren't really truthful (e.g. hearing a girl would like to go but had no time and bumping into her walking with another guy on a pub crawl the following evening and so on) and you'll have a picture. I've been recovering but it's a slow process. Pretty much everything hurts me and sometimes I'm scared to realise that some of my reactions to being hurt resemble the original behaviour that hurt me times ago.

[ November 28, 2005, 08:39: Message edited by: chevalier ]

 

Maybe they did this because they did not get from you what they needed, i.e. sex?

I don't want to say you bear the guilt. There are several other factors that could trigger such behaviour.
But the knowledge that you would not have sex with them until marriage could have triggered the subconcious search for another partner for reproduction.

 

There's a reason why I always make sure that everyone female hears I'm Catholic when I'm in a new company and single. But seriously, though, no. IIRC only one of the mentioned was sexually active and perhaps another one wanted to be but I didn't. Otherwise, they either didn't know or didn't care (too early a stage or similar reasons or not aiming for sex in the immediate future).

As for triggers, I wonder if my caring didn't trigger the opposite in them. I tend to be very serious about relationships, be fair, kind and polite and give the person top priority. While people generally claim that they require this from partners, the truth is that bastards get better treatment because there is always the fear how they will take it. It's not like I have skyhigh expectations but I wonder if caring a lot doesn't give people a push towards the opposite in their own behviour. The more easily you adjust, adapt and make concessions, the less seriously you're being taken yourself. The more faithful and exclusive you are, the more inclined you are to listen to stories about how other people are sexy or about fantasies or even see or hear about your partner hitting on other people or flirting, if not actually getting more physical. My friend has recently found the strength to break up with a girl who was a master of excuses. Classes on a free day, ear/hand hurting from talking with a friend for two hours (not like she would with him), whatever it took not to meet, visit or have him over. My theory is that his readiness to give up on friends and hobbies and leave everything to reply to a message from her or talk to her or meet her when she actually would go (means when she needed some nookie), being available always when she needed him, making a big deal of every her whim etc etc led to such a result that she thought she didn't have to care herself. She keeps telling him she loves him, like always when he has a problem with anything, and I keep telling him to leave her alone.

 

A good point, Fabius. I am inclined to agree that this could indeed have been a possibility.

That happened to me a good number of times too. It would always end pretty ugly.

You're Light and I am Darkness, or what?

 

Yeah, but you need to know first and this isn't always the case. I can tell you it has played a role, of course, but not really such a great lot can be attributed to it as it might seem at first glance.

Yeah, I don't like such crappy excuses, as well. I can understand a lot and accept even more, provided everything is spelt out clearly or at least there's no lying. I have some tolerance for not so perfectly accurate excuses which aren't lies (beating around the bush, not telling the whole thing, sometimes even playing with interpretations) because I tend to be diplomatic myself, too, although my preference to be straight and up to the point increases with age. But they are only "good" in moderation and lying is definitely behind the line, anyway. Lying is behind the line and when people use an excuse like having different plans or having to do something and their plans change later, they could try to throw in at least one sentence of an explanation. Surprisingly, it was one of the bad girls on my list who turned my attention to this after I told her I needed to go to bed and excused myself (we were already at the "nothing more than friendship" stage) but she met me still online on the communicator two hours ago. Initially, I was like, "I didn't lie. I really wanted to go to bed but I changed my mind later," but I eventually came to understand the frustration caused. Therefore, I try to explain such things to people and be less liberal with verbs like "need" or "have to", not only in relationships. It's only for the better. I don't miss crappy excuses and I remember the effort it took to unlearn the "silly excusive" reflex (like going to the person and telling the real whole thing in extenso). Most silly reflexes absorbed from the environment can be unlearnt, anyway. I just can't make myself more brief, you see...

But as a matter of a more serious and a bit less related, more abstract reflexion... It's rarely as simple as Light and Darkness. Sometimes we are hurt the most by those we have loved and trusted. Sometimes we always remember the isolated goodness experienced from people who have otherwise been hurtful in our lives. Sometimes we learn good things from the bad guys or girls. Sometimes it's time to realise one hasn't been as good himself as he has supposed so far. You never know when the villain will throw you a floater and you never know when the saint will put a dagger in your back. Doesn't it take more effort, more strength to straighten up than always to be and have been good? But the past wrongs didn't come out of nowhere. People are complicated.

 

Ay, you can say that again.


And for all you nice guys that finish last... I have a nice link for you. (Warning, mild language): Ta-Dah!.

In found it quite true...

 

I pretty much agree too, although it's better to be slighly "evil" than one of those nice guys that never get anything.

[ November 29, 2005, 19:25: Message edited by: Wirhe ]