And I'd immediately ask you... "so how's that working out for you?" it works out fine, so long as I ONLY speak to other engineers...who wouldn't assume that the vessel to which I previously referred contained water, and then go on to pollute that data through their own personal bias, based on their present requirements for a substance that I never mentioned.
Actually saying to someone: "have really hot sex with me or I'm going to dump your sorry azz."
And you really think there aren't more and/or less effective ways of communicating? well, you don't have to be crass about it.
But seriously, I know I can't talk to others like that, but I'd honestly prefer that they talk to me that way. Because it IS a much more effective form of communication. spare me the BS; it only clouds the issue. just give me the numbers. Covering up unpleasantness with flowery words is just another form of deception. and its just one of my "pet peaves"..."pc talk", speaking in euphamisms, changing words that define a negative condition, in an effort to make that condition something other than it is...its a waste of human energy.
anyway... back to what Cemar said, that got me started (again)... "women only like men that will dump them"
"women are attracted to men who uphold the "IWNLIASM" boundary"
same thing as far as I'm concerned. because if you don't do x...y will happen.
and it seems more than just a bit extreme. You shouldn't have to go to such lengths. maybe ya do, and that's just the way it is. It would be one thing to have a boundary like "If you don't pick up your socks...I won't put them in the laundry". that seems reasonable. W has her laundry boundaries, but she doesn't have to threaten divorce over it, because she knows...I will not live in a socks-less marriage. ok, seriously...I don't mean to imply that hosiery is as important to a R as a healthy SL, but my point is that there are far worse things that could happen to many (if not most) of us than "ssm". As important as an SL may be, it is not worth an act that would impoverish my family. That "boundary" might be fine for wealthy people, or people with grown/no children. But for those of us that have one and not the other, its not so easy a line to draw. then there's others who's religious convictions prevent them from putting this on the table/enforcing that boundary/threatening divorce.
I just have a hard time accepting that folks in these groups are doomed to live in misery, having no other recourse.
