Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Location: RI, MA, VT, WI, IL, CA, IN (that one sucked), KY
41,937 posts, read 36,951,955 times
Reputation: 40635
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by VanMarlton
Pardon please, but that is not insecurity. Just because people understand human condition and are smart enough to realize that people can and indeed DO screw up once in awhile dont make them insecure. I think you are actually overcompensating by trying to come off as invincible, super cool kind of dude.
People screw up. Who said they didn't? Trying to control people, or trying to limit their social connections will never change the fact that people screw up. If people are trying to create situations where a person doesn't interact with the opposite sex as friends out of fear of them screwing up, that is in fact insecurity.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TaoistDude
Of course it's insecurity - it's fear of what could happen. And it clearly does happen to a variety of people, so the fear does have a basis. However, if you try to control someone's behavior, they may eventually rebel, and do what they want with or without informing you, with or without permission. Especially if they are above board, yet are being limited in their legitimate friendships and associations because a partner is fearful of a possibility.
If a person has exceeded boundaries before, then it is reasonable to ask for boundaries they may not like. If a person has shown honesty and good character, it is untrusting and punitive to set limits out of fear. It is better to let them continue to show integrity, and watch for transgressions - then you'll know their nature, if you don't already know it. And if they do misbehave, you are better off knowing this and removing them from your life, than living in fear that it could happen.
Fear is debilitating. Facts are freeing. How do you want to live your life? I do realize that many people have been hurt, and will live in fear, and that is sad - and unfortunate as it negatively impacts their choices and options for the future.
Yes, exactly. Thank you for saying it better than I did.
I'm also finding as I get older, monogamy losses it's glamour, because it's getting harder to intertwine my life with another person's life. My life is full of things that I WANT TO DO and that I ENJOY. It's no different for her either and I have no right to say what she can or cannot do with her free time. Know what I mean?
For me, in some ways, I am also guilty of putting my needs ahead of someone else's. It's well documented on this site that I wanted a relationship for a good 2-3 years. I tried as hard as I could, but nothing came to fruition from my efforts. Ultimately, I had to decide what my middle ground was for what could still bring me happiness and also keep me emotionally sane. That answer has been me to date around and whatever happens, happens. That doesn't mean I don't want, or am against monogamy, but fact of the matter is, something had to give. I WASN'T HAPPY, so in order to become happy, I had to bump up against what society doesn't deem "normal".
I agree. And this is exactly the result of modern millennial mentality of "you have to be happy by yourself before you start a relationship". Its all about the self entitlement nowadays.
People screw up. Who said they didn't? Trying to control people, or trying to limit their social connections will never change the fact that people screw up. If people are trying to create situations where a person doesn't interact with the opposite sex as friends out of fear of them screwing up, that is in fact insecurity.
No one is trying to control anyone else. They simply would prefer not to get involved in the first place. Simple as that, no hard feelings.
Location: RI, MA, VT, WI, IL, CA, IN (that one sucked), KY
41,937 posts, read 36,951,955 times
Reputation: 40635
Quote:
Originally Posted by VanMarlton
No one is trying to control anyone else. They simply would prefer not to get involved in the first place. Simple as that, no hard feelings.
And that is their right. But, if they think a person of low moral character who would cheat won't cheat because they don't have female friends that they happen to have dated, I think they are sorely mistaken.
Sex is easy to have. It's all around us, if a person wants to have sex.
I'm in the boat that if a person isn't trustworthy I would rather know it sooner than later so I can move on. Perhaps others are different in that respect.
I understand where timberline is coming from but also where his usage of terms like "insecurity" would be upsetting. Something jumped out at me here, though:
Quote:
Originally Posted by BirdieBelle
Again with insults?
Does it have to be insecurity? It can't just be smart? Someone is not allowed to have learned from a past mistake? Why does YOUR preference supercede a potential partner's?
I know, I know ... you wouldn't be with "that kind of person" anyway.
Why does it appear to mean SO much to you, though, that you come across as this person who is so egalitarian that they won't dare cut ties with someone from their past lest it make you look bad somehow??
The issue I have, is where someone is taking the past mistakes, the actions of previous partners, and projecting the assumption onto me, that I'll do whatever someone did to them in the past.
Again, cheating isn't just a thing that happens. Assuming everyone is consenting (and since I don't drink or do drugs, I wouldn't be excusing bad behavior that way) if your partner cheats on you, it's an action they took, it's not a thing that simply happened because the opportunity was there, for which they can hardly be blamed. They need to stand there and say, "Yeah, I messed up." Because they did.
That person, deserves to lose your trust.
Your next partner, however, should not have to pay for their sins, in a lack of trust.
Unfortunately that is sorta human behavior...when we have our trust betrayed, it gets harder to give it in the future. And often enough, fears based on past experience (which...sorry, it IS insecurity, and no, that's not an insult, that's natural and human to feel sometimes) can lead to controlling behaviors. Such as demanding that a partner not talk to an ex, even if that partner feels very certain that they are able to not cheat. I do think it's a little bit illogical to be afraid of a situation that can only happen based on the choices and actions of human beings, yet say you trust the human beings to make the right choices and actions. Like...ya do, or ya don't. And I would say that not trusting a partner, when they do in fact deserve trust, it's just that your life experience has handed you cause to have trust issues...that's sort of what insecurity is all about.
Another point to make though, is what friendship means to an individual. To some people, it's based on what they get from it, it seems. To some, it's more about really appreciating the other person just for being who they are, and wanting to be generous with them. Being happy for them when they're happy, for instance, instead of sad that you didn't get what someone else got. When it comes to my boyfriend's friends, I assume that they care about him, and are happy that he's happy. In at least 2 instances now, that's not been the case. One (male) friend was upset because he took for granted that his "forever alone" buddy would always be on call and on tap to be there for him at any time, day or night. Having him suddenly partnered and saying "no, I have other plans" was upsetting. What the guy lost personally was more powerful in his mind, than being happy for his friend. Then recently, an old female friend my bf had "friend-zoned" ages ago is now upset that he's partnered, like she assumed he'd always be available even as she went on to have other relationships...and now finding out that there is no "someday" for them, she's furious and hurt. Her approach to this friendship seems pretty unfair and self-centered to me. I wish she'd been able to manage these feelings, because she seems really cool and I wish we could all be friends. But she's actually mad at me, though we've never met, for "taking" someone who was never "hers" to begin with!
That is so incredibly weird to me. I really don't get it.
There are a million variations to these dynamics. All any of us really gets to control, is our own self.
Tell me what else it can be? Limited thinking? Well, expand my thinking.
If someone is threatened by a date's friend because they had dated previously, what else could it be?
"Smart" doesn't make sense, unless they automatically think the person is undermining the relationship (see insecure).
Learning from past mistakes? What mistakes? If a relationship went south because the person, what, hooked up with a friend who was an ex? Well, that wasn't a relationship that was healthy in the first place. No loss there. Work on having a healthy relationship, and don't project past issues on future relationships.
I guess my question, since "facts are freeing," is ...
If the "whatever-ship" was good enough to be SO insistent on keeping the person around, as a friend or FWB or whatever you want to call her, why are you not still together?
Circumstances? Come on. Actual love can overcome circumstances.
There has to be something fundamentally different about someone who just wants to be with a lot of people. Or "more than one." Someone who doesn't want to be told they can't have someone else.
So if there wasn't a personality conflict, why did it end?
Please enlighten us poor, constrained, limited souls.
Location: RI, MA, VT, WI, IL, CA, IN (that one sucked), KY
41,937 posts, read 36,951,955 times
Reputation: 40635
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sonic_Spork
I understand where timberline is coming from but also where his usage of terms like "insecurity" would be upsetting. .
If I'm in a monogamous relationship, and I'm fearful that my partner may cheat on me, I can only think of the term insecurity. I would be insecure in the relationship. I would be insecure. I would be having insecurity issues.
Now, those fears may be warranted, but it's my view that if a person lives in fear of a person cheating than they don't have a healthy relationship even if they are being faithful, and they should get out.
If its a chronic thing, like, the person is insecure in every relationship, professional help is probably in order to address that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BirdieBelle
I guess my question, since "facts are freeing," is ...
If the "whatever-ship" was good enough to be SO insistent on keeping the person around, why are you not still together?
Circumstances? Come on. Actual love can overcome circumstances.
There has to be something fundamentally different about someone who just wants to be with a lot of people. Or "more than one." Someone who doesn't want to be told they can't have someone else.
So if there wasn't a personality conflict, why did it end?
Please enlighten us poor, constrained, limited souls.
Love always can't overcome circumstances, that is a myth.
But, in my experience, most relationships end because:
A) the relationship ran its course, it stopped growing (like and caring about someone is just beginning, for me, if I don't fall in love and have that deeper connection then it isn't a good fit for a long term relationship)
B) the two people realized they weren't a great fit romantically despite really liking and caring for one another (that is not enough!) and they're better fit as friends
C) the two people wanted different things from the relationship (whether is it marriage, or children, or monogamy, or non monogamy, etc)
D) Logistics, a person needs to move for work
Liking someone, caring about them, being attracted to them, having things in common and enjoying time together, having good and healthy communication and even great sex is NOT enough for a relationship. That's fine for a beginning, but its not enough. Not close.
Don't be mad at me for saying this, but you are the most eccentric person I have ever had the pleasure of reading of. None of the standard/regular/common thinking of relationships applies to you - which is fine - but it is just not for .... I would say 90% of other people.
It works for you - you found a great person.
It wouldn't work for most others - and it doesn't work for Timberline, since he is going from one person to the other, and back to the old one and then a new one ... I get dizzy just listening to his stories of all these different women over the years.. and even though he says his ways work for him - none of the women stick around for a serious relationship, soooo... you know ...??
Personally, I believe it is Timberline who gets to say what works and what doesn't work for him. That's his call no matter what anyone else thinks. What works for me may not work for someone else... whether I understand it, agree with it or believe it.
Personally, I believe it is Timberline who gets to say what works and what doesn't work for him. That's his call no matter what anyone else thinks. What works for me may not work for someone else... whether I understand it, agree with it or believe it.
That's already settled, you do not need to rescue him
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
