Loneliness, how do you deal with it?

reply to post by TKDRL


Or a couple beers...

wtbengineer
reply to post by TKDRL

 

Or a couple beers...

This... This is wisdom of the highest order. Seems that we have a learned one among us!

:p

Being lonely and how to deal with it.. Honestly, I haven't got a clue.
I've been lonely for many years now, have always been the brother instead of the lover, if you know what I mean.
Socially awkward ? Check. At this point, I've got only one friend. Sure, I know a lot of people, but just one I consider to be a true friend. A long time ago I was someone who would go out, have fun, talk to everyone and get along with everyone. For some reason people always came to me with their problems, be it private life, work, relationship stuff, you name it. But I never really had anyone to talk to about my own issues.
Sometimes there was a girl that I liked, but it seems women only want to be with men that treat them badly. Not sure if true, but it sure seems that way. And me being the good guy.. I'm alone.
Eventually I did find someone I liked and even loved, online. Things seemed great, she was even coming over to this country, but we never did get to meet. She died before that, I've spoken to her through a "channeler" but that was more then ten years ago. I miss her every day, every night going to sleep hoping never to wake up again, just so I can die and be happy already.
Being lonely.. Yeah, I think I know what it feels like.

I just go get laid.

Yeah yeah, having a FWB isn't the same as love, but then, who would wanna be in love? It's a source of total negativity. Do what I do, keep a steady rotation of FWB, that's way better than love and devotion....BARF!!!!

Think about it, your desire for "love" which doesn't exist, and is nothing more than a fantasy in your own mind, has caused you to not only reside in a pit of loneliness but to..in your own words...not understand people.

When your expecting people to be "in love" you're gonna be let down.

When you expect Jesus to return, you're gonna be let down.

When you expect a purple unicorn from mars to land in your backyard, you're gonna be let down.

It's all the same thing in my eyes. Love doesn't exist, people are individuals, respect that, live your life, stop chasing fairytales = step one to utopia.

reply to post by TrueBrit


Actually, quite the opposite.

Using a drug like alcohol to anesthetize the pains of daily life . . .

is at best extremely unwise . . . and typically one of the dumbest things a person can do . . . particularly if they have a family history of alcoholism and/or a personality/DNA profile that makes them vulnerable.

Life is complex enough; fast paced enough . . . and increasingly crazy enough, one NEEDS, DESPERATELY NEEDS

ALL their faculties just to stay alive, much less make progress.

reply to post by liquidsmoke206


Soooooooooooo . . . you've essentially

reduced yourself and any partner to DILLDO status and that's

PROGRESS AND HEALTHY?

That increases your sense of self-worth; quality; maturity; value?

Before long, they'll have cubicles at the mall . . . insert your card or chip-bearing hand and the virtual FWB gives you XX seconds or minutes of dopamine high . . . .

and you & cohorts pretend that's satisfying?

What a cheap level of "satisfying."

All because the intricacies of the profoundly enriching dance of a REAL HEART-INTIMATE RELATIONSHP

are too troublesome to learn . . .


Sounds quite familiar . . . perhaps very difficult to almost impossible to learn atop the likely handicap so many of our era have of ATTACHMENT DISORDERED brain damage in the areas of the brain dealing with emotional expression and relationship navigation--as MRI studies have affirmed.

Yeah, LOVE IS COSTLY.

Else it would not be worthy the word.

It's also the most rewarding experience available.

reply to post by TKDRL



How to not feel lonely is

1) Stay active, go out, do things
2) Always keeping an open mind about what girl you really want
3) Go to places where its chill, where you can walk up to a girl, starbucks
4) Try online dating.

reply to post by BO XIAN


Actually, I think you may have misread the chain of the conversation somewhat. I agreeing that having another beer can be a good hangover cure, and my experience is that this is true to an extent, depending on ones metabolic rate and several other factors.

reply to post by BO XIAN


OK, so you're condescending and make wild assumptions about myself and the way I live my life. Then try and tell me that love makes you mature, wise, fulfilled, or whatever other generic positive description of a human that a closed, fearful, spiteful little mind can muster up. Hogwash. Take a look in the mirror, bub.

Let's go ahead and dismantle your entire post line for line to really shine you on. You're welcome, since I know you don't have the patience, intellect, or grapefruits to do the same for me.

Soooooooooooo . . . you've essentially

reduced yourself and any partner to DILLDO status and that's

PROGRESS AND HEALTHY?

Sometimes, sure. There's no one way that a relationship can go. Sometimes people use each other for sex, sometimes it's companionship, sometimes it's money, sometimes it's for business. There can be any level of depth so long as it doesn't reach unhealthy levels(love). Love is associated with codependency. When things stay more casual people are less dependent on each other. They fight less, and if they do fight, cutting ties is much easier, and makes for faster healing wounds too. You see, here's where your closed mindedness really shines. You think just because I sleep with multiple girls that somehow I don't respect them. What is this weird association you have with sex and disrespect. Why do you make that assumption? I happen to like my friends. Keeping our relationships civil means less need for lying, less need for being possessive, no jealousy, none of the negatives that always develop out of so called loving relationships. Even when we aren't seeing each other romantically I manage to remain friends or acquaintances with most of these girls for a long long time. How many loving relationships can say that after a breakup?

That increases your sense of self-worth; quality; maturity; value?

um, yes? maybe? no? I don't care. I don't reduce people to "dilldo status"(seriously?) often, but when I do there's an understanding. It's never a one way street. And I'm not out looking for another person to increase my self worth, and value....that sounds like the type of stupid behavior of some desperate person looking to fall in love.

Before long, they'll have cubicles at the mall . . . insert your card or chip-bearing hand and the virtual FWB gives you XX seconds or minutes of dopamine high . . . .

and you & cohorts pretend that's satisfying?

What a cheap level of "satisfying."

wow, yeah, me and my cohorts, that's what we do. We just run around looking for the next orgasm. You come into a thread and just start posting this type of stuff about another member of whom you know nothing about and then have the nerve to act all holier than thou with me? You're a joke.

All because the intricacies of the profoundly enriching dance of a REAL HEART-INTIMATE RELATIONSHP

are too troublesome to learn . . .

I guess a real heart intimate relationship is only what you think it is, screw everyone else. And since you're the sole keeper of this information, better keep it a secret and not elaborate even a little bit on what a vague term like real heart intimate relationship actually means. You see, ask ten people what they think love is and get ten different responses. By virtue of this, the term becomes generic and meaningless. It also creates conflict in what people see as a loving relationship which creates a high probability of one or both partners being less than satisfied with the relationship, to say the least. The actual use of the term is for no other functional purpose than a false sense of security of one's self or others, and of course for coercion and manipulation. Does that make sense, or are thought out descriptive responses too troublesome to read?

Sounds quite familiar . . . perhaps very difficult to almost impossible to learn atop the likely handicap so many of our era have of ATTACHMENT DISORDERED brain damage in the areas of the brain dealing with emotional expression and relationship navigation--as MRI studies have affirmed.

Yea, thanks for providing a link to whatever junk science website can back up this totally outrageous statement. Many can't fall in love because they have brain damage? Yeah brilliant. I would contend that almost everyone would say they've been in love. Try flipping it around. What if not forming codependent attachments was the norm? What if not forming bonds with people out of fear or desperation was the norm? If "love" was only happening to a few people it would be considered a mental disorder. Open your eyes.

Yeah, LOVE IS COSTLY.

Else it would not be worthy the word.

It's also the most rewarding experience available.

Wow, a cliche wrapped in sappy ballad rhetoric. There's more to life than making bad investments in vague concepts like love. Costly indeed.

reply to post by TrueBrit


Good. Glad to misread you on that. It's just as a former alcoholism counselor . . . I can't easily let such things pass without comment.

liquidsmoke206
reply to post by BO XIAN

 

OK, so you're condescending and make wild assumptions about myself and the way I live my life.

Conceivable. Not per se my goal in personal terms. I apologize for all personal slights, put downs. I don't apologize for putting down destructive notions, ideas, assertions. I am quite willing to be hostile to dysfunctional ideas, hypocrisies etc.

Then try and tell me that love makes you mature, wise, fulfilled, or whatever other generic positive description of a human that a closed, fearful, spiteful little mind can muster up. Hogwash. Take a look in the mirror, bub.

Ahhhhhhhhhhh what grand humility displayed in quadruplicate.

Let's go ahead and dismantle your entire post line for line to really shine you on. You're welcome, since I know you don't have the patience, intellect, or grapefruits to do the same for me.

Sometimes, sure. There's no one way that a relationship can go. Sometimes people use each other for sex, sometimes it's companionship, sometimes it's money, sometimes it's for business. There can be any level of depth so long as it doesn't reach unhealthy levels(love).

imho, it is INCONCEIVABLE to me that such a perspective on love would arise out of anything but A HORRIFIC AND INTENSE DEGREE OF ATTACHMENT DISORDER.

You evidently have no clue nor awareness of and certainly no significant experience of a sacrificial, open-handed, intense love. Yet, without such an experience or close observation, you set yourself up as a paragon pontificator against the supreme value in the multi-verse.

Speaking of that mirror . . .

Love is associated with codependency.

Welllllllll, I had one supervisor who'd have largely agreed with you. He claimed that all close relationships had a measure of co-dependency. I think it's a twisting of labels.

Clinical co-dependency has to do with a DYSFUNCTIONAL, ANEMIC, LACKING, LOW SELF-WORTH etc. psychology on the part of both partners.

Mature, healthy love involves choosing to love (not out of desperate need) and sharing from a place of maturity and strength the ups and downs of life and the inner most depths of being--joyfully, freely, open-handedly.

I don't think you have the faintest clue about THAT level of true love. Yet you pontificate about it as though you had a PhD in it. What nonsensical blather.

When things stay more casual people are less dependent on each other. They fight less, and if they do fight, cutting ties is much easier, and makes for faster healing wounds too.

Welllllllllllll, certainly LESS OF A CONNECTION is easier to break than a stronger connection. DOH!

And less of a connection has been less up-building; less rich; less rewarding; less kind; less selfless; less servant-hearted; less mature; less admirable . . .

and is MORE cheap, more shallow, more transitory, more selfish, more manipulatve, more utilitarian, more coercive . . . how WONDERFUL /sarc

You see, here's where your closed mindedness really shines.

More of your quality higher road maturity showing through, obviously.

You think just because I sleep with multiple girls that somehow I don't respect them.

You might ask for a refund from your mind-reading courses.

Respect can be a complex thing. You could respect such girls in a diversity of ways . . . as you might prefer one tubular vibrator over another. Impressive, that. /sarc.

What is this weird association you have with sex and disrespect.

Oh . . . observing life for 66 years . . . counseling a diversity of traumatized-from-sexual craziness persons for 30+ years . . . .

Seeing countless folks toss one another aside like a used condom quickly and seemingly without much thought about the pains triggered on the other side.

Actually, it's kind of sexist to take the stance you espouse. Women genetically identify more fully in a more personally vulnerable way with their sexual partners.

For many men, sleeping with women is more like fancy masturbation wherein the other body is essentially little more than a fancier hand for a fancier kind of masturbation. There's little concern about how the 'fancier hand' feels about the 'exchange.'

It sound like you are trying to talk out of both sides of your fingers. One of your paragon values seems to be personal pleasure at whatever expense on the part of others involved . . . and hang the details. THAT VALUE COMES THROUGH SCREAMINGLY LOUD AND CLEAR.

Yet you evidently, seem to want to also be seen as a kind of benevolent user and abuser--who, like Clinton, pauses to say--"Put some ice on that." . . . to Juanita Broderick who he's just raped, biting her lip in the process. HOW ADMIRABLE! How thoughtful. /sarc.

Continued with next post and more characters.
.

Get a pet.

reply to post by liquidsmoke206

Why do you make that assumption? I happen to like my friends.

How MAGNANIMOUS of you.

Here's a clue, in case 7/11 is out of clues . . .

Healthy and most other women giving themselves sexually to man don't WANT to be merely LIKED.

They want to be cherished, treasured, the whole nine yards of the knight on the white horse . . . It's in their genetics as well as their hormones.

They are not that interested in a slam-bam-thank-you-mam sexual burst built on selfishness with the man keeping one foot out the door.

Mature men KNOW that and relate to women responsibly accordingly.

Keeping our relationships civil means less need for lying, less need for being possessive, no jealousy, none of the negatives that always develop out of so called loving relationships.

Thanks for MORE evidence of SEVERE ATTACHMENT DISORDER screaming through.

Mature men and women have little of such hindrances and flaws in relationships anyway. Sad you've never seen such fine examples of loving relationships. Obviously your parents didn't display the healthy and intense kind of love.

Even when we aren't seeing each other romantically I manage to remain friends or acquaintances with most of these girls for a long long time. How many loving relationships can say that after a breakup?

That's admirable to a point. Perhaps, they are as ATTACHMENT DISORDERED as you display yourself as.

However, basically all you're saying is . . . that you maintain relationships with gals with whom you've contracted to scratch their itch as they scratch yours. IMPRESSIVE. SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO IMPRESSIVE.

Maybe some pop your pimples and clip your toenails as a bonus--quite freely generously, of course?

It Must be very challenging and difficult to manage that level of scary intimacy. You seem to try to make it sound like a mutually comfortable shallow type of contracting for a mostly emotionally disconnected relationship dance. And, for women who are as ATTACHMENT DISORDERED AS YOU ARE and who have decided that risk of true intimacy is far too painful to engage in . . . I can imagine such arrangements seeming quite utilitarian.

As though love was about utilitarian anyway.

um, yes? maybe? no? I don't care. I don't reduce people to "dilldo status"(seriously?) often, but when I do there's an understanding. It's never a one way street.

Of course it's a MUTUAL DILLDO DRIVER exchange. You'd have no partners, otherwise.

That doesn't mean that the woman is getting out of the fancy masturbation what she most deeply desires. Maybe she's even given up on such desires and repressed them beyond consciousness. But they are there, in their genetics regardless of how covered over with pain and denial.

And I'm not out looking for another person to increase my self worth, and value....that sounds like the type of stupid behavior of some desperate person looking to fall in love.

OBVIOUSLY personal insight is not one of your paragon strengths.

imho, it is IMPOSSIBLE to screamingly display such a horrific degree of ATTACHMENT DISORDER without some desperate dynamics lingering regarding searching for self-worth affirmation. Perhaps you've denied and squelched and repressed such in the sexual area and have transferred it more in work or hobby or other areas. I cannot believe such intense needs are no longer there. I've NEVER observed such a case. Never.

Denial of facts doesn't remove the facts.

wow, yeah, me and my cohorts, that's what we do. We just run around looking for the next orgasm. You come into a thread and just start posting this type of stuff about another member of whom you know nothing about and then have the nerve to act all holier than thou with me? You're a joke.

Just going by your own assertions . . . which are quite elaborate enough, for sure.

Of course, I'm merely going by the persona you present. If the character you type about is merely an online figment of your imagination, then the analysis is built on that figment and imagination.

However, you don't write as though it's a fantasy. You write as though you are truly speaking about the perspective you live from.

I guess a real heart intimate relationship is only what you think it is, screw everyone else.

Not at all.

My PhD Dissertation was smack in the middle of such values.

My own ATTACHMENT DISORDER left me intensely curious about the dynamics and factors involved.

I've studied such issues for at least 40 years.

And since you're the sole keeper of this information, better keep it a secret and not elaborate even a little bit on what a vague term like real heart intimate relationship actually means.

Here's a good representative article on what such is all about . . .

MARRIAGE ISN'T FOR YOU

sethadamsmith.com...

Having been married only a year and a half, I’ve recently come to the conclusion that marriage isn’t for me.

. . .

I met my wife in high school when we were 15 years old. We were friends for ten years until…until we decided no longer wanted to be just friends.

I strongly recommend that best friends fall in love. Good times will be had by all.

My dad giving his response to my concerns was such a moment for me. With a knowing smile he said, “Seth, you’re being totally selfish. So I’m going to make this really simple: marriage isn’t for you. You don’t marry to make yourself happy, you marry to make someone else happy. More than that, your marriage isn’t for yourself, you’re marrying for a family. Not just for the in-laws and all of that nonsense, but for your future children. Who do you want to help you raise them? Who do you want to influence them? Marriage isn’t for you. It’s not about you. Marriage is about the person you married.”

It was in that very moment that I knew that Kim was the right person to marry. I realized that I wanted to make her happy; to see her smile every day, to make her laugh every day. I wanted to be a part of her family, and my family wanted her to be a part of ours. And thinking back on all the times I had seen her play with my nieces, I knew that she was the one with whom I wanted to build our own family.

. . .

I don't think you have a clue about wrapping your understanding around that kind of deeper RELATIONSHIP.

Continued next post

.

reply to post by liquidsmoke206


Continued

. . . You see, ask ten people what they think love is and get ten different responses.

Of course. People are unique and quite varied.

However . . . most women want deeper emotional bonding and lifelong COMMITMENT in intimacy and mutual respect and mutual responsibility in their mate love relationships.

You have chosen to not even attempt to measure up to that level of quality relationship.

Given the degree of DISPLAYED ATTACHMENT DISORDER, that's probably saved a lot of heartache on some women's parts . . . while spreading a shallower degree of heart-ache far and wide.

By virtue of this, the term becomes generic and meaningless.

In YOUR mind.

Certainly the media have conspired to brainwash more than just you.

Certainly the oligarchy has worked for at least 60 years to shred the family and the marriage bond because it serves their tyrannical goals.

However, most folks still hold a reasonably accurate understanding of the ideals of love.

I Corinthians 13 is a good foundational description.

New Living Translation (NLT)
Love Is the Greatest

13 If I could speak all the languages of earth and of angels, but didn’t love others, I would only be a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal. 2 If I had the gift of prophecy, and if I understood all of God’s secret plans and possessed all knowledge, and if I had such faith that I could move mountains, but didn’t love others, I would be nothing. 3 If I gave everything I have to the poor and even sacrificed my body, I could boast about it;[a] but if I didn’t love others, I would have gained nothing.

4 Love is patient and kind. Love is not jealous or boastful or proud 5 or rude. It does not demand its own way. It is not irritable, and it keeps no record of being wronged. 6 It does not rejoice about injustice but rejoices whenever the truth wins out. 7 Love never gives up, never loses faith, is always hopeful, and endures through every circumstance.

8 Prophecy and speaking in unknown languages and special knowledge will become useless. But love will last forever! 9 Now our knowledge is partial and incomplete, and even the gift of prophecy reveals only part of the whole picture! 10 But when the time of perfection comes, these partial things will become useless.

11 When I was a child, I spoke and thought and reasoned as a child. But when I grew up, I put away childish things. 12 Now we see things imperfectly, like puzzling reflections in a mirror, but then we will see everything with perfect clarity.[c] All that I know now is partial and incomplete, but then I will know everything completely, just as God now knows me completely.

13 Three things will last forever—faith, hope, and love—and the greatest of these is love.

It also creates conflict in what people see as a loving relationship which creates a high probability of one or both partners being less than satisfied with the relationship, to say the least.

OH DARN!

WELCOME TO THE HUMAN CONDITION!

Wimping out on relationship intimacy and bonding doesn't remove the human condition.

Are you trying to PRETEND that your shallow relationships have a 100% LACK of LESS THAN PERFECT AND FULL SATISFACTION in the relationships?

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL TO THE MAX!

Sheesh.

The actual use of the term is for no other functional purpose than a false sense of security of one's self or others, and of course for coercion and manipulation.

You're merely showing your paucity of EXPERIENCE and even quality observation . . . yet again.

Sad, that.

Literature has ample examples of quality love relationships that WERE WORTH IT, regardless of the pains.

Yea, thanks for providing a link to whatever junk science website can back up this totally outrageous statement.

There's plenty of quality refs and links to solid science on the topic here:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Your diatribe in that sentence merely displays YET AGAIN, your ragingly narrow and intense biases and ignorance on the topic.

Many can't fall in love because they have brain damage? Yeah brilliant.

Please AVOID putting your twisted words in my fingers.

I never said that.

It's not that difficult to "fall in love" or "fall in infatuation."

The issue is the dysfunction that is hardwired into the brains of children who the first 8 years of life suffered serious degrees of ATTACHMENT DISORDER.

MRI studies HAVE DOCUMENTED that the brain centers for managing emotional exchanges and RELATIONSHIP exchanges--those brain centers are abnormal in adults who suffered serious degrees of ATTACHMENT DISORDER the first 5-8 years of life.

I would contend that almost everyone would say they've been in love. Try flipping it around. What if not forming codependent attachments was the norm? What if not forming bonds with people out of fear or desperation was the norm? If "love" was only happening to a few people it would be considered a mental disorder. Open your eyes.

It's not my eyes that are closed and willfully blind.

I'm sorry that truly loving and being truly loved in mature, lasting, quality, robust ways is such an impossible unattainable goal for you. That's enormously sad.

LADIES, HOW ABOUT IT? Please answer the poll questions below or write your own genuine response to the perspective of maintaining only shallow sexual etc. relationships.

BTW, I wonder how many women reading your narrative would say to themselves one of the following:

1. WHAT A MAN! I'd love to jump in the hay with him!

vs

2. WHAT A TORTURED SOUL. Better steer clear of him!

Wow, a cliche wrapped in sappy ballad rhetoric. There's more to life than making bad investments in vague concepts like love. Costly indeed.

I understand that you've never found love worth the cost or the pain.

That's deeply sad.

That far from means that LOVE is unattainable or not worth it.

It merely means you have been unable &/or unwilling to rise to the occasion, to the task involved.

.

This is a response to the 2 people dissecting each others posts.
Very interesting.
I am a 34 yr old single lady. I wont give my opinion of either of you regarding as people as I can not possibly know enough to have an opinion, as was asked to give but I can comment on the topic of love.
I am sure that the statement given that women do want more as a matter of fact, hormones etc... I would hazard a guess that this be quite true, relating to pro-creation perhaps. I do not however agree with the presumption that in some way the lady feels short changed by the exchange of no strings sex. You might find that a certain lady may choose to partake in casual sex for much the same reasons that a man might ie: excitement, interaction, stress relief, gratification, combat sexual tension, release of feel good vibes and perhaps the temporary joy of shared emotional connection. Women are quite capable of having these experiences with a person without there being an ulterior motive of seeking a long term love with the other. Some individuals feel that this sort of brief attachment to another is suited to there mentality and well being rather than the majority who are in a constant need to feel "love" whether it be on a deep level or just to have someone there to go through the trials of life as a double act. I do think a lot of people feel that to be with anybody is better than to be alone regardless of true love being present or not. Hence the comment regarding causing jealousy, fighting and other such negative things relating to committed relationships is in my mind very true in very many instances. I believe you can share times with people in a loving, caring, sharing, meaningful way emotionally enriching way without expecting/demanding it be an all or nothing way. This is only possible if both or all parties desire it to be that way. If for instance 2 people partake in sex and spend lovely times together (not only sexual) it could be quite true that the lady may be partaking in this with the intentions of it being much more than just this, in the hopes that if "I can catch him he will realise that he actually does want love & me as his G/F" (he already does have love that he shares on a moment to moment/person to person basis), only for her to then be heartbroken and disappointed when that does not materialize. Because the guy did genuinely only want the briefest of connections. The fact is that there are some women who also only want this type of experience. I think that the knack is for these 2 character types to locate one another to have the most fulfilling of moments together in that way there can be no feelings of hard done by one of the pair. It may actually come to be that the 2 persons of a casual nature may find this kind of constant love (on a deeper level so to speak) with eachother!
I see love a an energy that is in motion it can be shared by parties for the enjoyment of who is involved and then left at the bedroom door (or kitchen) with the mutual understanding that what you both have shared is special between only you and so a definite respect is gained and you may share it together again if the spirit moves you, but there is NO expectation for that to be the case & if it never does you dont feel any sorrow for this because what happened was just as you wanted. You can (as a woman) just be very sexually attracted to somebody with out the need for it to be more than joint intimacy and no other goal or need is in the equation. That doesnt necessarily mean attachment issues are at play, yes perhaps they are in the types that can not show love to another if even for the briefest. It could also be a case that the said person has had relationships and loved on higher & lower levels in their life but with the knowledge of hindsight & wisdom with age about themselves they feel that this course is more suited to them & their own happiness. Having this type of insight into yourself is a good thing from my point of view it can be painful for the other who had marriage in mind after going along with their own charade, in effect they actually got played by themselves because they took the chance by pretending they were cool with what they were doing all the while really believing that they would be the one to turn her/him and they failed. So for their own self preservation they should stick with the people who do want what they want ie: 2.4 kids a marriage & a mortgage and likewise it would be kinder for the commitment phobic to only have such dealings with others on that wavelength also. So after all my waffling the point is that each to there own & you can share love with others with out it having to be in the parameters of what we are told is correct and good. If you dont feel the need for the daily routine of a committed relationship in the false knowledge that this is how one feels enriched in all levels then who is anybody to say that is wrong or disorderly in some way. It may seem foreign to many, but perhaps the conventional shape is foreign to others, who is right? We all are. If how you live your life feels good and negativity is avoided in ways of not consciously hurting another then it can not be wrong. Thank you #stepsoffsoapbox and goodnight

reply to post by BitSlapper


great song/vid but ? What is your opinion regarding clip relating to topic? out of interest

reply to post by Vviena1606


I guess it portrays the mental struggle and the emotions that people have to deal with when they are depressed or lonely or heartbroken or all of the aforementioned.

I know it doesn't seem like it will lift op's spirits but I think people might relate and even though it is dark themed there still is a feeling of hope or acceptance in there. I picked the vid because it had the lyrics in it, I hope it doesn't give the impression of promoting suicide, because I think it actually doesn't.

Anyways when I am down I blast this.

reply to post by BitSlapper


I didnt even get the impression of suicide from it, it seemed to speak of the inability to bond on a level with others but as a first time viewer I would prob see all sorts with further views

GIVEN that extremely few people hereon tend to bother to read walls of text without paragraphing . . . including me with my aging eyes . . . I'll paragraph the below for more readers who may then bother and comment.

Vviena1606
This is a response to the 2 people dissecting each others posts.
Very interesting.
I am a 34 yr old single lady. I wont give my opinion of either of you regarding as people as I can not possibly know enough to have an opinion, as was asked to give but I can comment on the topic of love.

.

I am sure that the statement given that women do want more as a matter of fact, hormones etc... I would hazard a guess that this be quite true, relating to pro-creation perhaps.

.

I do not however agree with the presumption that in some way the lady feels short changed by the exchange of no strings sex. You might find that a certain lady may choose to partake in casual sex for much the same reasons that a man might ie: excitement, interaction, stress relief, gratification, combat sexual tension, release of feel good vibes and perhaps the temporary joy of shared emotional connection.

.

Women are quite capable of having these experiences with a person without there being an ulterior motive of seeking a long term love with the other. Some individuals feel that this sort of brief attachment to another is suited to there mentality and well being rather than the majority who are in a constant need to feel "love" whether it be on a deep level or just to have someone there to go through the trials of life as a double act.

.

I do think a lot of people feel that to be with anybody is better than to be alone regardless of true love being present or not. Hence the comment regarding causing jealousy, fighting and other such negative things relating to committed relationships is in my mind very true in very many instances.

.

I believe you can share times with people in a loving, caring, sharing, meaningful way emotionally enriching way without expecting/demanding it be an all or nothing way. This is only possible if both or all parties desire it to be that way.

.

If for instance 2 people partake in sex and spend lovely times together (not only sexual) it could be quite true that the lady may be partaking in this with the intentions of it being much more than just this, in the hopes that if "I can catch him he will realise that he actually does want love & me as his G/F" (he already does have love that he shares on a moment to moment/person to person basis), only for her to then be heartbroken and disappointed when that does not materialize. Because the guy did genuinely only want the briefest of connections.
.


The fact is that there are some women who also only want this type of experience. I think that the knack is for these 2 character types to locate one another to have the most fulfilling of moments together in that way there can be no feelings of hard done by one of the pair. It may actually come to be that the 2 persons of a casual nature may find this kind of constant love (on a deeper level so to speak) with each other!

.

I see love a an energy that is in motion it can be shared by parties for the enjoyment of who is involved and then left at the bedroom door (or kitchen) with the mutual understanding that what you both have shared is special between only you and so a definite respect is gained and you may share it together again if the spirit moves you, but there is NO expectation for that to be the case & if it never does you don't feel any sorrow for this because what happened was just as you wanted.

.

You can (as a woman) just be very sexually attracted to somebody with out the need for it to be more than joint intimacy and no other goal or need is in the equation. That doesn't necessarily mean attachment issues are at play, yes perhaps they are in the types that can not show love to another if even for the briefest. It could also be a case that the said person has had relationships and loved on higher & lower levels in their life but with the knowledge of hindsight & wisdom with age about themselves they feel that this course is more suited to them & their own happiness.

.

Having this type of insight into yourself is a good thing from my point of view it can be painful for the other who had marriage in mind after going along with their own charade, in effect they actually got played by themselves because they took the chance by pretending they were cool with what they were doing all the while really believing that they would be the one to turn her/him and they failed.

.

So for their own self preservation they should stick with the people who do want what they want ie: 2.4 kids a marriage & a mortgage and likewise it would be kinder for the commitment phobic

to only have such dealings with others on that wavelength also.

.

So after all my waffling the point is that each to there own & you can share love with others with out it having to be in the parameters of what we are told is correct and good. If you don't feel the need for the daily routine of a committed relationship in the false knowledge that this is how one feels enriched in all levels then who is anybody to say that is wrong or disorderly in some way.

.

It may seem foreign to many, but perhaps the conventional shape is foreign to others, who is right? We all are. If how you live your life feels good and negativity is avoided in ways of not consciously hurting another then it can not be wrong. Thank you #stepsoffsoapbox and goodnight

= = = =

Hmmmmmm . . . maybe I'm more "old fashioned" to a larger proportion of the populace than I thought.

However, I think still a majority of my students over the last several years still held to the IDEAL that a committed relationship is their goal. Now whether they behaved that way consistently is another issue.

I still contend that very significant degrees of ATTACHMENT DISORDER are involved with folks who are averse to bonding in a lasting way with a life partner. I think the research literature would bear that out but I haven't checked it specifically on those scores, recently.

And anyone who thinks that children can be healthily reared in single family homes compared to well parented homes with two parents . . . is not well informed. Bedroom roulette is horrendous in its impacts on children.