Okay, I know nobody wants to hear me whine about this but I don't know how to handle internet dating. Too many men ask me out and I don't know how to put men on inactive status like Corri suggested. Should I just send out a stock e-mail that says something like "I liked your profile but I am already dating too many men. I will get back to you as soon as possible." ?
"Tell me, what is it you plan to do with your one wild and precious life?" - Mary Oliver
Should I just send out a stock e-mail that says something like "I liked your profile but I am already dating too many men. I will get back to you as soon as possible." ?
that would be funny. some guys like the thrill of the chase and the idea of winning though, so that could get you even more emails...
If i can't fall in love... I'd like to fall in chocolate! ~ Author Unknown
I have no problem getting rid of the ones I don't want to date. There are too many that I do want to date. Why did I ever hypothesize that I could be polyamorous? Just flirting with 6 guys at the same time makes me feel kind of nauseous and like I'm going to be struck by a bolt of lightning.
"Tell me, what is it you plan to do with your one wild and precious life?" - Mary Oliver
You don't have to "get rid" of them. Just don't reply. Put them in a hierarchy order and only correspond with two or three at a time. You don't owe everyone a reply immediately.
Mojo, I think your new grand theory about learning how to fall is great. I'm going to cut out and keep and give to my daughter when she's 16. And the fence tending part too.
You crack me up the way you are just like a kid in a candy store over this whole internet dating thing btw. Love it. And also if you want to date black guys then date black guys, who cares? Maybe it makes you feel shallow that you are arbitrarily dismissing guys on looks - but that's what guys do all the time. Whether you want a one-night-stand, a lover or an LTR you've still got to be hot for the guy. Anything that happens after that is a bonus.
Happy New Year
Fran
if we can be sufficient to ourselves, we need fear no entangling webs Erica Jong
You crack me up the way you are just like a kid in a candy store over this whole internet dating thing btw. Love it. And also if you want to date black guys then date black guys, who cares? Maybe it makes you feel shallow that you are arbitrarily dismissing guys on looks - but that's what guys do all the time. Whether you want a one-night-stand, a lover or an LTR you've still got to be hot for the guy. Anything that happens after that is a bonus.
Yeah, I agree with what you're saying here. Anyways, I discovered that my "only attracted to black guys" thing was rather psychosomatic because I have a date with a tall, ruggedly handsome blond who seems rather assertively perverted this weekend and I'm looking forward to it in a sexual way. On the plus side he has the cute nerdy hobby of mushroom hunting. On the negative side too conservative and well-off. Of course, the good thing, in my experience, about me dating a good-looking conservative white guy is that my cow feels absolutely no sympathy or mercy (lost at golf- boo-hoo-hoo-have-a-cookie-NOT)so my monkey has free rein to tear down his power structure one erection at a time. However, the mushroom hunting thing might slow me down, so sweet and hobbit-like.
"Tell me, what is it you plan to do with your one wild and precious life?" - Mary Oliver
Wow, I'm bummed. I had posted a reply to your brilliant post... and it isn't here... course my internet connection has been horrid... guess it got lost in the ether.
Quote:
Therefore, IMO, it is "wrong" or at least counter-productive to spend too much energy tending fence with a guy until/unless he asks you to marry him.
I get that.
Quote:
If you attempt to hold a guy to monogamy if you aren't willing to marry him then you are, as BF said, attempting to render him p*ssy-whipped and he quite possibly will react with monkey like behavior.
This is, in part, that double standard to which I referred earlier. I'm not trying to PW anyone... but I do need to know where the lines are... I'm just like that, I guess. But I also think it is a very valid point that I am kidding myself, as you, BF, LFL and NOP have pointed out, in that... 'playing house' IS in fact a PWing method. As you say, you either do it, or you don't, but don't 'play' at it. But if we decide that that is all that it is, we are playing, it seems to me the same rules should apply to both of us. Clearly, this is where I am deluding myself.
Quote:
If you choose to have sex with him if he hasn't asked you to marry him then you are operating in violation of the whole cow/milk sexual economic structure for reasons of your own about which you should be self-aware.
I suppose, at the core of me, I AM a monogamous woman. There was a time in my life, when I was much younger, that I did the 'having sex for the pure enjoyment of just having sex'... I recall one very yummy, yummy guy in college who was an Adonis... great sex... dumb as a flippin' rock... we had quite the lovely time for most of my junior year in college. He moved on to other pastures when we both went our respective ways for the summer.
I also had a very good male friend in college, one of my best friends, actually, and we once discussed having sex. We decided that there were way too many other people to potentially do that with rather than risk messing up a friendship we both valued if one or the other of us couldn't keep it to a 'just sex' level. So we didn't have sex.
Quote:
Anyways, I think you and BF are more alike than different. BF won't fall in love at all and you are afraid to fall in love until all sorts of safety structures are intact.
I'm assuming you are talking about Blackfoot, not x boyfriend. I can't speak for him, but me... no... I'm not afraid to fall in love... at all. I just don't like the hurt that I know will eventually come, because 'hurting' IS a part of loving. You can't escape it. No one is perfect. I suppose I think that if I keep someone at a certain distance, I can at least minimize it. LOL. Or, I can set my standards so high, that no one could ever possibly meet them, and I minimize hurt that way (that, I think, is kind of like Blackfoot, but again, I can't speak for him).
Quote:
My point is that in order to properly tend fence in a relationship you need to be able to be both the strong attacker who knows how to take a fall and the strong defender who knows how to deflect an attack in a manner that is not seriously injurious to the other.
I think I get this, but Mo, until you are actually divorced, this is only a theory. That 'limbo' state is actually protecting you... it is a lovely defense, and it is honest... and you don't even have to OWN it... you can blame your 2bx, your financial condition, etc., all of which are real... but it's still there, FOR you, nonetheless. It's up front, so it's honest, and 'other' cannot claim serious injury, for it is a known fact going in (or at least known very soon). It certainly aided the 'lack of hard feelings' when you and GP split. It was a fact neither one of you could argue with. Sure, you had some doubts about him... but, hey, your limbo state is a kick azz defense.
As far as your fence theory goes for BF... well, there are no relationship fences to tend, period. And he makes that very clear. So it may be a defense, but it is an honest defense. If a woman decides to get involved with him, that is her decision, and his conscience is clear (at least, if I understand what he's written correctly... he isn't always so easy to decipher )
Quote:
If two people remain in a relationship it is clear that the person locked into the defender/avoider role is just as weak as the person locked into the attacker/pursuer role because it is a reflection of their inability to take a fall gracefully.
No, I don't think so, for what you are describing is at the heart of The Passion Trap. The 'weakness' comes from one or both people being unaware of power dynamics in Rs. NO ONE ever has to remain 'locked' in a one up or one down position. If you think you have to stay in the R, then you are actually making a power play. Staying or going is always a choice. If you cannot see it as such, then all you are doing is projecting and solidifying the dynamic.
'Choice' is a very difficult thing. It is much, much easier for me to blame the other person for 'robbing me of my choices', than it is for me to own responsibility for my choices. If I can OWN my choices, there is no blaming, and the power dynamic is broken. If the other person cannot or will not claim responsibility for their choices, the R is going to be handicapped, but not necessarily unbearable if **I** choose to stay.
It is very easy to get lazy in an R and start giving away your power of choice. I think, personally, that that is where 'hurt' in an R comes from... because when something happens, we are fully aware that we must choose, and we don't WANT to. And then we get 'angry' because we feel we've been forced to make a choice. So... who then, is unaware? The imperfect person who is bound to make mistakes, or the person who doesn't want to make a choice?
No one can HURT me without my permission (I am speaking of emotional hurt within the confines of an R). Not because I've decided never to love. I do love, and when I do it, I throw my every all into it. **I** hurt me when I get mad at someone else for pushing me to make a choice I wasn't ready or willing to make. I face the loss of my 'supplier.' (supplier of sex, love, companionship, good times, laughing, co-parent, life partner, whatever). Hurt comes from my perception and degree of loss, either of other (they leave) or of self (failure to hold a personal boundary). Or both.
So it isn't that I expect safety structure in order to love... I hurt simply because I am human, and part of loving is hurting. Just like everyone else, I get mad when I am pushed to make a choice, when I have to surrender illusion... but that hurt lasts a far less amount of time than if I were to continue to kid myself, and continue to hurt the same hurt over and over.
People love, and people hurt, and people choose. Keeping yourself in the epicenter of choice awareness is the challenge. That's my grand theory, anyway.
I also had a very good male friend in college, one of my best friends, actually, and we once discussed having sex. We decided that there were way too many other people to potentially do that with rather than risk messing up a friendship we both valued if one or the other of us couldn't keep it to a 'just sex' level. So we didn't have sex.
You must have had much more mature college friends then I did (or was myself). I, unfortunately did not have the foresight not to screw up a good friendship.
Gone the carvings and those who left their mark. Gone the kings and queens, now only the rats hold sway.
)