(Mojo) But consider the classic gesture of romance which is the man who kneels in front of you to ask for your hand in marriage. There is no way a man can render himself more vulnerable than that.

So far we've unearthed two notable exceptions to the "no puppy" theory: when a family member dies and when proposing marriage. Seems reasonable.


(SM) I have a theory that Blackfoot's xw became alienated from him because he signaled to her that he didn't have any use for her.

I know little of blackfoot's sitch. Recently he's said that although he didn't make her feel secure, she stepped out when she lost her attraction for him. That's all I know.


...she offers to help, why would you deny her the personal satisfaction of helping?

If you're denying her some personal satisfaction, that sounds like your St. Bernard is need of a tune up. If you're taking care of her by allowing her to take care of you, I don't see that as puppy.


It's not all about attraction, it's also about bonding.

I'll say this about the relative merits of bonding and attraction...if she loses her attraction for you all those cups of coffee will retroactively turn from gestures of love to proof of how demanding and unappreciative you've always been.


...it helps foster the "you and me against the world, baby" mindset that a couple needs in order for their relationship to survive the peaks and valleys of attraction and thrive in the long haul.

Is that really a necessity?

Stop WaitingFeel EverythingLove AchinglyGive ImpeccablyLet Go