Rants
19 Mar 2009, 2:44 pm
I'm going to say to Stan:
"The reason why I only bring up things I'm angry with you about months later is that even though I know what you did wrong and why it was wrong, I had to figure out how to explain it and that took time.
Also, I may have sounded accusatory when telling you what you did wrong. That was accidental. All I meant to do was tell you what you did wrong (without harming you) and get assurance that it wouldn't happen again. And I obviously didn't put enough of an effort into figuring out how to tell you nicely, in a way that wouldn't hurt you. I should have seen that the way I told you was accusatory and I should have cared enough about you to change the way I said it to you before sending it to you. Because I didn't even mean to sound that way and I didn't feel hateful or angry towards you like my writing was. I really don't think that the things you did wrong were your fault; I just didn't want them to happen again."
19 Mar 2009, 3:03 pm
He sent me this:
Quote:
3. "He insulted me, he struck me, he overpowered me, he robbed me."
Those who harbor such thoughts do not still their hatred.
4. "He insulted me, he struck me, he overpowered me, he robbed me."
Those who do not harbor such thoughts still their hatred.
5. Hatred is never appeased by hatred in this world. By non-hatred
alone is hatred appeased. This is a law eternal.
6. There are those who do not realize that one day we all must die.
But those who do realize this settle their quarrels.
I will reply with this:
Those who harbor such thoughts do not still their hatred.
4. "He insulted me, he struck me, he overpowered me, he robbed me."
Those who do not harbor such thoughts still their hatred.
5. Hatred is never appeased by hatred in this world. By non-hatred
alone is hatred appeased. This is a law eternal.
6. There are those who do not realize that one day we all must die.
But those who do realize this settle their quarrels.
"The only way to settle a quarrel is to ask nicely why the person did it and they will (nicely) give you a reason and an assurance that if theycan help it it will nver happen again, if it hurt you. There is such a thing as damage done by things that people do to you and it will become permanent if it isn't reversed, and this is the way to reverse it. Then and only then can you rest and die peacefully."I should have added, "And gotten onto a better life after death."
EDIT: I just told "Stan" that he might be able to let things go, but there are some things I can't let go (even though I can let go of most things) and that it's not my fault.
EDITED AGAIN: I told him "You're right about people having to let things go, but some people need help letting things go. They need to do what I described."
Edit: I'll tell him, "I don't think anything you think or do wrong is your fault, it's just the way your brain works and it just so happens to work that way, and it's the only way it works, but you still need to use it, so you do, and so you make mistakes."
Edit: I said to him, "When I said that it wasn't your fault your brain worked a certain way, I wasn't insulting you. Most people, myself included, can't help many or all of their faults because what's in their brains (which IS real, even though it's in their heads) clashes with what's going on outside their heads and so there are misunderstandings."
I'll tell him: "Yes, you didn't bring things up with me about the mistakes I made in the past, but you should have. If you were nice about it and said you knew it wasn't my fault, and all the things I told you about it not being your fault, it wouldn't have hurt me. It would have just corrected me. It would have helped me understand you better and it would have helped you be understood by me better.
I'm just correcting you."
19 Mar 2009, 6:07 pm
Stan sent me this:
Quote:
so maybe your thinking i did something wrong is just a fault of your
brain, which isn't to be blamed on you because that's just the way
your brain works? it's a big step for you to recognize that what's in
your brain clashes with what's going on outside of head, as you put
it.
brain, which isn't to be blamed on you because that's just the way
your brain works? it's a big step for you to recognize that what's in
your brain clashes with what's going on outside of head, as you put
it.
I sent him this back:
Quote:
I didn't mean that. I didn't mean that I just thought you made a mistake when you didn't. What I meant was that you making the mistakes is not your fault, and me making my mistakes that you chose not to bring up with me is not my fault, but each of us still needs to correct the other when the other makes a mistake, but nicely and gently, because it isn't the other's fault. That way you don't hurt the other for something that isn't their fault and you're making sure for your own good that the other doesn't hurt you any more.
Edit: I'll also tell him:
Quote:
Talking about it like that naturally corrects the problem in the person's brain that makes them do something that bothers you. And if they still can't help what they do and keep doing it after you've succeeded in correcting them in that way (telling them it bothers you when they do that because of the way YOUR brain is wired that you can't help), that's a different story; they need treatment for something else.
EDIT: I just wanted to show everyone that we were making progress. Because I said some things about him that I thought were true that weren't, and I feel bad about that and am trying to correct it by posting what's really going on, how he wasn't to blame after all (and neither am I), and that we're making progress.
I didn't use his real name.
People can still post in the stickies; I don't think I hijacked them.
I did this because I want people to see that he isn't as bad as I made him out to be, that no one is bad.
I HAD my own thread about this, but Sinsboldly said I was using it to point fingers and lay blame (I was defending myself but not considering how I was making Stan feel) and Sinsboldly locked the thread. Maybe she shouldn't have done that because I had to post about it somewhere for my own mental health.
Stan just told me:
Quote:
you're thinking backwards. you're saying there's a problem in a
person's brain that makes them do something that bothers you. if
you're the one being bothered, that's the problem, and it's in your
brain. can't you see that?
or are you just too busy trying to be incredibly insulting? (again...).
you said something about wanting to be friends, but you're still not
being friendly, and i wish you would.
person's brain that makes them do something that bothers you. if
you're the one being bothered, that's the problem, and it's in your
brain. can't you see that?
or are you just too busy trying to be incredibly insulting? (again...).
you said something about wanting to be friends, but you're still not
being friendly, and i wish you would.
I just told him:
Quote:
What I'm trying to say is that it's NEITHER of our faults... not your fault for having a brain that bothers me, not my fault for having a brain that gets bothered by it. But we have to come to an agreement; we both have to understand that it's your brain's fault for bothering me (and that you can't help it) and that it's my brain's fault for being bothered, but that I can't help it.
Thinking like you do, it's your fault you were bothered by me painting the walls!
And I was NEVER trying to be insulting! I was trying and trying and trying by explaining this to be as not-insulting as possible!
Thinking like you do, it's your fault you were bothered by me painting the walls!
And I was NEVER trying to be insulting! I was trying and trying and trying by explaining this to be as not-insulting as possible!
Then I said to him:
Quote:
You're not acting like a friend. You are attacking me by saying things like "Can't you understand that?" I wasn't attacking you. You're trying to blame it all on me. If you don't think any of it was you, then why did you apologize for those things before? Why?
Then I told him:
Quote:
Sorry. I'm sorry I wasn't too diplomatic when I told you you weren't acting like a friend.
He said:
Quote:
so if you say the problem's all in my head, that's ok, but if i say
that by the exact same logic maybe the problem's in your head, that's
bad?
have i ever mentioned that i don't want to fight with you, and i don't
know why you're still trying to fight with me, and i wish you'd stop
and just be friendly to me?
so how was your day? what'ja get up to? any exciting meals? i had
microwave stuffed cabbage, and it was good. you don't seem to be going
to the mall all of the time anymore. hmm...
i'll talk to you tomorrow. unless you're still being... whatever it is
that you're being... in which case i don't really want to feed into it
any more. by responding to it i'm just legitimizing it and therefore
enabling it to continue. perhaps i'm dumb, or just weak, for getting
suckered into that cycle of codependence. sigh.
that by the exact same logic maybe the problem's in your head, that's
bad?
have i ever mentioned that i don't want to fight with you, and i don't
know why you're still trying to fight with me, and i wish you'd stop
and just be friendly to me?
so how was your day? what'ja get up to? any exciting meals? i had
microwave stuffed cabbage, and it was good. you don't seem to be going
to the mall all of the time anymore. hmm...
i'll talk to you tomorrow. unless you're still being... whatever it is
that you're being... in which case i don't really want to feed into it
any more. by responding to it i'm just legitimizing it and therefore
enabling it to continue. perhaps i'm dumb, or just weak, for getting
suckered into that cycle of codependence. sigh.
I said:
Quote:
I was trying to explain to you that it's NEITHER OF US. Did you not read the email in which I said that? You're the one that said that it was all in MY head and that it wasn't okay to say that some of it was your head. Let me say it again: What I meant was, If someone bothers someone else, it's the bothered person's brain's fault for being bothered, and it's also the fault of the brain of the person that bothered the other person for bothering them.
I'm sorry I wasn't clear, and I'm also sorry you were incapable of getting it.
I don't want to fight with you. I want you to understand me and I want to understand you, so I'm trying to have this discussion, so that there won't be any more fights about "You bothered me when you did that!"
I'm sorry I wasn't clear, and I'm also sorry you were incapable of getting it.
I don't want to fight with you. I want you to understand me and I want to understand you, so I'm trying to have this discussion, so that there won't be any more fights about "You bothered me when you did that!"
19 Mar 2009, 8:32 pm
What I was trying to say to Stan all this time:
Say Person 1 does something that upsets Person 2. It's Person 1's brain's fault for not knowing that that would upset Person 2. It's also Person 2's brain's fault for forcing Person 2 to be upset about it in the first place. If Person 1 can, he should say he's sorry his brain worked in a way that bothered Person 2 and if Person 2 can he should say he's sorry his brain worked in a way that forced Person 2 to be upset, and Person 2 should say he's sorry him being upset at Person 1 made Person 1 upset, if it did that. And they should both agree that the incident was neither Person 1's fault or Person 2's fault but that it was unfortunate and each one should understand the the other is upset and what they are upset about and they should comfort each other.
I'll tell him that.
Edit: I told him that. He hasn't replied yet. If he doesn't understand that, there's something else wrong with him that he needs treatment for, besides having the kind of brain that doesn't know how to not upset me.
20 Mar 2009, 2:58 pm
I shouldn't have told him just this:
Quote:
Say Person 1 does something that upsets Person 2. It's Person 1's brain's fault for not knowing that that would upset Person 2. It's also Person 2's brain's fault for forcing Person 2 to be upset about it in the first place. If Person 1 can, he should say he's sorry his brain worked in a way that bothered Person 2 and if Person 2 can he should say he's sorry his brain worked in a way that forced Person 2 to be upset, and Person 2 should say he's sorry him being upset at Person 1 made Person 1 upset, if it did that. And they should both agree that the incident was neither Person 1's fault or Person 2's fault but that it was unfortunate and each one should understand the the other is upset and what they are upset about and they should comfort each other.
I should have told him this:
Quote:
Say Person 1 does something that upsets Person 2. It's Person 1's brain's fault (or the fault of what happens to be in his brain) for not knowing that that would upset Person 2. It's also Person 2's brain's fault (or the fault of what happens to be in his brain) for forcing Person 2 to be upset about it in the first place. If Person 1 can, he should say he's sorry his brain (or what was in it besides his soul) worked in a way that bothered Person 2 and if Person 2 can he should say he's sorry his brain (or what happened to be in it besides his soul) worked in a way that forced Person 2 to be upset, and Person 2 should say he's sorry him being upset at Person 1 made Person 1 upset, if it did that. And they should both agree that the incident was neither Person 1's fault or Person 2's fault but that it was unfortunate and each one should understand the the other is upset and what they are upset about and they should comfort each other.
But I'll leave it be for now and see if he understands the first one as it is.
So now that's finally over! Now all I have to do is tie up loose ends by saying this to Stan:
Quote:
I forget if you actually said this was fact or if you just said "Did you ever think this cold be true?" but you said something to the effect of "You hurt me by bringing up things I did in the past, more than I hurt you by doing those things you brought up." Maybe that's true, and I apologize if it is. I'm so sorry I had to hurt you at all, even if that isn't true. I didn't realize that I didn't sound nice. I don't know how to sound nice, but I wasn't thinking bad things about you when I said all that, and I wasn't thinking "I want to be mean" either. Or was it just the fact that I brought it up that upset you? Anyway... But how would you have known how hurt I was? How did you know that I hurt you more than you hurt me? You didn't. It was impossible for you to know how hurt I was. Maybe I was more hurt than you were. (And maybe I wasn't.)
Also, I remember when you were bringing up things with me about what I did. You wanted to know what was going on between me and [Allen] and you wanted me to explain to you, not ignore you, and when you thought I was ignoring you you said I was ignoring you and said "I can't believe you're treating me like this." Yet when I brought up things you did and asked for an explanation, you didn't give it to me. Instead, you either tried to talk about something else instead or said "Why are you doing this to me?" Saying "Why are you doing this to me?" and trying to talk about other things is okay, but not giving me the explanation I needed (especially when you've needed explanations from me in the past) is not okay.
By sending you this email I'm just trying to tie up the final loose ends. You seem to find it okay to leave loose ends dangling; can you explain why?
I'm still doing this because us understanding each other is important to me. I'm sorry if I'm hurting you by bringing all this up, or for not sounding nice (if I don't sound nice... I really don't know how to SOUND nice).
Also, I remember when you were bringing up things with me about what I did. You wanted to know what was going on between me and [Allen] and you wanted me to explain to you, not ignore you, and when you thought I was ignoring you you said I was ignoring you and said "I can't believe you're treating me like this." Yet when I brought up things you did and asked for an explanation, you didn't give it to me. Instead, you either tried to talk about something else instead or said "Why are you doing this to me?" Saying "Why are you doing this to me?" and trying to talk about other things is okay, but not giving me the explanation I needed (especially when you've needed explanations from me in the past) is not okay.
By sending you this email I'm just trying to tie up the final loose ends. You seem to find it okay to leave loose ends dangling; can you explain why?
I'm still doing this because us understanding each other is important to me. I'm sorry if I'm hurting you by bringing all this up, or for not sounding nice (if I don't sound nice... I really don't know how to SOUND nice).
Edit: He replied with:
Quote:
i don't know what you're talking about. the things you seem to be
talking about never happened, at least not when i was around.
I told him to read my email again.talking about never happened, at least not when i was around.
Sometimes I think it's no use, that he isn't even trying.
I sent him this:
Quote:
When we were on the phone you said that by bringing up the incidents that weren't resolved (stuff you did during the hyperemesis incident and the fluorescent light incident) I was hurting you more than you had hurt me during those incidents.
As for the second paragraph, I was talking about when I was trying to ask you questions about why you did this or that during those incidents I mentioned, the fluorescent light incident and the hyperemesis incident. You didn't answer right away. Instead you said "Why are you doing this to me?" And I asked again, I begged, "Please answer my question!" and you still didn't answer it, you still said "Why are you doing this to me?"
As for the second paragraph, I was talking about when I was trying to ask you questions about why you did this or that during those incidents I mentioned, the fluorescent light incident and the hyperemesis incident. You didn't answer right away. Instead you said "Why are you doing this to me?" And I asked again, I begged, "Please answer my question!" and you still didn't answer it, you still said "Why are you doing this to me?"
He just sent me this; my answers I wrote back to him quoting him are in bold:
Quote:
i read it fine the first time.
> I forget if you actually said this was fact or if you just said
"Did you
> ever think this cold be true?" but you said something to the effect
of "You
> hurt me by bringing up things I did in the past, more than I hurt you by
> doing those things you brought up." Maybe that's true, and I
apologize if it
did i say that? Yes, you did.
> Also, I remember when you were bringing up things with me about what I
did.
> You wanted to know what was going on between me and Chris and you wanted
me
> to explain to you, not ignore you, and when you thought I was ignoring you
i don't think that happened. It did.
> You seem to find it okay to leave loose ends dangling; can you explain
why?
you seem to indicate a finality which doesn't jive with the reality of
the situation. and you assume way too much. What do I assume? I was asking you questions. What situation are you talking about?
> I'm still doing this because us understanding each other is important
to me.
you don't seem to be trying to understand me. I'm asking you questions trying to understand you!
> I'm sorry if I'm hurting you by bringing all this up, or for not
sounding
why would you even think you're hurting me? that's quite unrealistic.
> nice (if I don't sound nice... I really don't know how to SOUND
nice).
yes, you do. it's happened before. you choose not to most of the time
that you've been emailing me. That's not true.
I just sent him this:
Quote:
You have to stop thinking I'm the only deluded one here. You have to admit that you're probably just as imperfect as me. I'm admitting to my side of it. Now it's your turn to realize and admit to your side of it. Stop blaming it all on me!
I also told him that I just didn't know how to sound nice in these instances.He sent me:
Quote:
i never denied that i'm imperfect. i never said anything like that.
what did i blame on you? i don't think i said anything like that either.
I told him:
Quote:
You say, basically, that you understand the situation better than I do.
You also say I'm assuming things, but that's what you're doing. You're assuming I'm assuming things.
And I want you to admit not just that you're imperfect, but that you're probably just about as imperfect as me and that your imperfection also contributes to you misunderstanding this situation or just not understanding it.
You also say I'm assuming things, but that's what you're doing. You're assuming I'm assuming things.
And I want you to admit not just that you're imperfect, but that you're probably just about as imperfect as me and that your imperfection also contributes to you misunderstanding this situation or just not understanding it.
I'm also going to send him an email saying the thing about Person 1 and Person 2 again and telling him he never replied to it before but needs to now.
He said:
Quote:
> You say, basically, that you understand the situation better than I do.
what situation? what are you talking about?
> You also say I'm assuming things, but that's what you're
doing. You're
> assuming I'm assuming things.
you're not paying attention. it's disheartening.
> And I want you to admit not just that you're imperfect, but that
you're
> probably just about as imperfect as me and that your imperfection also
> contributes to you misunderstanding this situation or just not
understanding
> it.
what situation? what am i misunderstanding? are you having some of
this conversation without me?
you never answered my question. you said you were trying to fix
things, but you never told me what you thought was broken.
what situation? what are you talking about?
> You also say I'm assuming things, but that's what you're
doing. You're
> assuming I'm assuming things.
you're not paying attention. it's disheartening.
> And I want you to admit not just that you're imperfect, but that
you're
> probably just about as imperfect as me and that your imperfection also
> contributes to you misunderstanding this situation or just not
understanding
> it.
what situation? what am i misunderstanding? are you having some of
this conversation without me?
you never answered my question. you said you were trying to fix
things, but you never told me what you thought was broken.
I said:
Quote:
If I think about it, I'll remember what I was trying to fix.
What am I not paying attention to? What does that have to do with you assuming I assume things?
I don't even remember the damn situation we were talking about anymore, because you kept saying all this other stuff that's unrelated to it and I got sidetracked.
You still haven't admitted that you're probably just as imperfect as me, give or take a little.
What am I not paying attention to? What does that have to do with you assuming I assume things?
I don't even remember the damn situation we were talking about anymore, because you kept saying all this other stuff that's unrelated to it and I got sidetracked.
You still haven't admitted that you're probably just as imperfect as me, give or take a little.
I'll also say to him: When I ask you if something was because you were having flashbacks, you said that I was making stuff up about you that was insulting. Yet right now you ask me if I'm having a conversation without you, and I could interpret that as you making stuff up about me that's insulting, but I don't because I know better.
20 Mar 2009, 4:14 pm
Also, a few times when posting about Stan I made some accidental mistakes. I said he likes to sit and drink and play compter games when he's depressed, but he hasn't done that in a while. I also said that when he got food stamps he let me get whatever I wanted in the grocery store. Well, he did that even when he didn't have food stamps. Also, I said that he had said that our Aspie friends weren't invited to the hospital for my son's birth. I meant that they weren't invited to the birth, not that they weren't invited to the hospital at all. Stan had said "They're not invited to the hospital" but he had meant they weren't invited to the birth, not that they weren't invited to the hospital at all.
I felt uncomfortable around Stan off and on, before we broke up.
I felt too bad to do housework (I was pregnant and depressed and on meds with side effects) but I know he wanted me to do housework.
I always felt that he knew better than me, or at least that he thought he knew better than me.
And then of course there was the way he acted during those incidents, the way he treated me, that made me so uncomfortable around him afterwards... the fluorescent light incident and the hyperemesis incident and then of course after the hyperemesis incident when he was depressed because of the incident even though it was over; I had gotten pills for my vomiting problem.
21 Mar 2009, 6:49 pm
[Edited again... I forgot to put something essential in my assessment that was neverytheless in my head.]
My initial assessment was wrong.
Quote:
"Stan" apologized for treating me like I was less conscious than I was one day in the ER and ignoring me, and said he'd never do it again. He also still loves me and asked me if I still wanted to be with me. He also said he was sorry he didn't communicate to me that he was sorry, like he thought he had. (He thought saying my written medical advance directive was good was enough, but I had wanted him to say "I'm sorry I treated you like you were less conscious than you were and I won't do that anymore", and he finally did today.
I feel much better now.
However, he said it's not his fault that he didn't know that I wanted him to treat me like I was fully conscious in case I was, but he should have done that anyway, without my advance directive. He should have assumed that a person who is sick might still be conscious enough to talk to and reassure. "Allen", however, says he already knew that and would have given me the benefit of the doubt and assumed I was conscious enough to hear conversation, without me having to tell him beforehand that that was necessary... as that is something you SHOULD know instinctively. So naturally, I go for Allen.
Allen and Stan both say they will follow my medical advance directive (which I made after the incident with Stan assuming I was less conscious than I was and includes my need to be treated like I'm conscious and aware even if I don't appear so, and is one of the two things I care about). Stan understands my scientific theory about love and life (the other one of the two things I care about) and and Allen understands it too. Both of them say they love me and will do anything to make me happy (like read and understand my scientific theory and read and promise to follow my advance directive). Both of them prove by things they said that they understand things I write that are important to me that I show them. Stan doesn't reply to everything I write (I write about things like my scientific theory and my advance directive... the things I care about) like Allen does, however. Both Stan and Allen seem sincere about honoring my AD and reading my scientific theory. Both seem to have an equal amount of soul in them, of passion, passion for respecting what I care about (understanding my theory and honoring my advance directive) without having to be prompted to do so. Allen never gets tired of promising me he'll read my scientific theory and understand it and follow my medical advance directive. Stan read and understood my scientific theory on the first try but he got tired of promising me he'd follow my advance directive. Allen understands that him understanding my scientific theory and him following my advance directive are the things that mean the most to me. I didn't tell Stan that, so I don't think he knows that they're the two most important things to me, and he'd probably argue that the two most important things to me should be him and our son, and I would agree that they are, and that them understanding my theory and my advance directive would therefore mean everything to me.
My son can have a happy life with his parents and his stepfather and his stepmother if Stan gets another girlfriend. And his little brother or sister who would not exist if I stayed with Stan (Because Stan wants to wait years before having another baby).
Other factors, like food and shelter and other psychological things, do not matter to me.
So I'm still picking Allen.
But what if Stan needs me? It's not just what I need from them but what they need from me. He might specifically need me to be there for him. So I don't know. EDIT: Well, actually, Allen needs me as much as Stan needs me. Stan would have our son Lars and our other Aspie friends, so he'll probably be okay, just like Allen was probably okay when he didn't have me but he had our Aspie friends. Stan says he still wants me and was sad to see me go, even crying a bit, and when I suggested that he might need me more than Allen did Allen said something to the effect of "NO!! ! I need you BADLY!" and I could tell by his tone of voice that I broke his heart the first time I left him for Stan.
I promised Stan I wouldn't leave him. But then, when Stan was refusing to talk to me about my problems with him, I promised Allen I'd be with HIM.
So I'm still leaning toward Allen.
Stan is better-looking, but that means nothing to me. As I see Allen treating me with respect in the ways I describe that counted to me, he will come to look more attractive.
Allen is more positive and patient, but that means nothing to me either. Stan was positive when he said he loved and agreed with my scientific theory and said my advance directive was good, and he was impatient only because he had already agreed with me about those things and was tired of me trying to get him to agree with me.
I'm probably just used to Stan and that's why I have those feelings that I should never be leaving him.
Edited to say that Allen read my scientific theory and understands it now.
I feel much better now.
However, he said it's not his fault that he didn't know that I wanted him to treat me like I was fully conscious in case I was, but he should have done that anyway, without my advance directive. He should have assumed that a person who is sick might still be conscious enough to talk to and reassure. "Allen", however, says he already knew that and would have given me the benefit of the doubt and assumed I was conscious enough to hear conversation, without me having to tell him beforehand that that was necessary... as that is something you SHOULD know instinctively. So naturally, I go for Allen.
Allen and Stan both say they will follow my medical advance directive (which I made after the incident with Stan assuming I was less conscious than I was and includes my need to be treated like I'm conscious and aware even if I don't appear so, and is one of the two things I care about). Stan understands my scientific theory about love and life (the other one of the two things I care about) and and Allen understands it too. Both of them say they love me and will do anything to make me happy (like read and understand my scientific theory and read and promise to follow my advance directive). Both of them prove by things they said that they understand things I write that are important to me that I show them. Stan doesn't reply to everything I write (I write about things like my scientific theory and my advance directive... the things I care about) like Allen does, however. Both Stan and Allen seem sincere about honoring my AD and reading my scientific theory. Both seem to have an equal amount of soul in them, of passion, passion for respecting what I care about (understanding my theory and honoring my advance directive) without having to be prompted to do so. Allen never gets tired of promising me he'll read my scientific theory and understand it and follow my medical advance directive. Stan read and understood my scientific theory on the first try but he got tired of promising me he'd follow my advance directive. Allen understands that him understanding my scientific theory and him following my advance directive are the things that mean the most to me. I didn't tell Stan that, so I don't think he knows that they're the two most important things to me, and he'd probably argue that the two most important things to me should be him and our son, and I would agree that they are, and that them understanding my theory and my advance directive would therefore mean everything to me.
My son can have a happy life with his parents and his stepfather and his stepmother if Stan gets another girlfriend. And his little brother or sister who would not exist if I stayed with Stan (Because Stan wants to wait years before having another baby).
Other factors, like food and shelter and other psychological things, do not matter to me.
So I'm still picking Allen.
But what if Stan needs me? It's not just what I need from them but what they need from me. He might specifically need me to be there for him. So I don't know. EDIT: Well, actually, Allen needs me as much as Stan needs me. Stan would have our son Lars and our other Aspie friends, so he'll probably be okay, just like Allen was probably okay when he didn't have me but he had our Aspie friends. Stan says he still wants me and was sad to see me go, even crying a bit, and when I suggested that he might need me more than Allen did Allen said something to the effect of "NO!! ! I need you BADLY!" and I could tell by his tone of voice that I broke his heart the first time I left him for Stan.
I promised Stan I wouldn't leave him. But then, when Stan was refusing to talk to me about my problems with him, I promised Allen I'd be with HIM.
So I'm still leaning toward Allen.
Stan is better-looking, but that means nothing to me. As I see Allen treating me with respect in the ways I describe that counted to me, he will come to look more attractive.
Allen is more positive and patient, but that means nothing to me either. Stan was positive when he said he loved and agreed with my scientific theory and said my advance directive was good, and he was impatient only because he had already agreed with me about those things and was tired of me trying to get him to agree with me.
I'm probably just used to Stan and that's why I have those feelings that I should never be leaving him.
Edited to say that Allen read my scientific theory and understands it now.
The reason why Stan ignored my emails about a certain aspect of my advance directive was because he thought that he had made it clear to me that the incident in which he didn't honor my advance directive (which didn't exist at the time anyway) would never happen again. That was also why he seemed to be tired of reassuring me about it (because this wasn't the first time, he had thought that he had made it clear before thus reassuring me). I also need to give him another chance; he's learned not to treat me like I'm less conscious than I am in case I'm not that out of it, even though Allen did already know that without having to be told.
Here is my new assessment of the situation:
Quote:
I have a son with Stan, but he'd probably be just as happy with me and Stan and Allen than with just me and Stan, so that is not an issue. If it was an issue, I would automatically do what was best for him.
Allen wants to have a child right away. That child would not exist if I was with Stan because he wants to wait years to have another child. We would be very stimulated by this child and we would have the child to stimulate, to love. However, Stan might be open to having another child, and he did have a good attitude about having another child by accident.
Now I care about Stan but I care about myself just as much, and I care about Allen but I care about myself just as much. But my connection with Stan is bigger than my connection with Allen, and I therefore want to have Stan for his benefit, because I care about him.
1. Both Stan and Allen want me badly and would be crushed if I left them. Stan, however, has more of a connection with me and I with him, and therefore he needs me more.
Stan--drove all the way up to Canada to get me, as opposed to Allen telling me to take a bus down, I promised him I wouldn't break up with him
Allen--I promised him I'd be with him
2. Otherwise, the only things I care about and the only things that I want from them are for them to understand my scientific theory about life/love/life 100%, and to honor my medical advance directive when I need it.
Stan-- read and understands my scientific theory about life and light and love as fact, found it amazingly true and that
read and understood and agreed with my medical advance directive, sounds sincere, may or may not be capable of honoring it while under stress
Allen-- read and understood my scientific theory about love/life/light to a certain extent only, he thinks that the theory isn't necessarily true with all light everywhere, just the light in his head and he says that's why he finds it 100% true. Perhaps because he didn't concentrate on it
read and understood and respects my advance directive, sounds passionate and positive about it, is patient with my talking about it and wanting reassurance about it, may or may not remember to honor it
I don't care about food, shelter, other emotional things or any other factors.
I had Stan first and should therefore be with him, but Stan didn't stimulate me enough with reassurance and allowed me to forget about him and go off with Allen, so it's still a tie. I might HAVE to bring in the other factors to break the tie.
Allen wants to have a child right away. That child would not exist if I was with Stan because he wants to wait years to have another child. We would be very stimulated by this child and we would have the child to stimulate, to love. However, Stan might be open to having another child, and he did have a good attitude about having another child by accident.
Now I care about Stan but I care about myself just as much, and I care about Allen but I care about myself just as much. But my connection with Stan is bigger than my connection with Allen, and I therefore want to have Stan for his benefit, because I care about him.
1. Both Stan and Allen want me badly and would be crushed if I left them. Stan, however, has more of a connection with me and I with him, and therefore he needs me more.
Stan--drove all the way up to Canada to get me, as opposed to Allen telling me to take a bus down, I promised him I wouldn't break up with him
Allen--I promised him I'd be with him
2. Otherwise, the only things I care about and the only things that I want from them are for them to understand my scientific theory about life/love/life 100%, and to honor my medical advance directive when I need it.
Stan-- read and understands my scientific theory about life and light and love as fact, found it amazingly true and that
read and understood and agreed with my medical advance directive, sounds sincere, may or may not be capable of honoring it while under stress
Allen-- read and understood my scientific theory about love/life/light to a certain extent only, he thinks that the theory isn't necessarily true with all light everywhere, just the light in his head and he says that's why he finds it 100% true. Perhaps because he didn't concentrate on it
read and understood and respects my advance directive, sounds passionate and positive about it, is patient with my talking about it and wanting reassurance about it, may or may not remember to honor it
I don't care about food, shelter, other emotional things or any other factors.
I had Stan first and should therefore be with him, but Stan didn't stimulate me enough with reassurance and allowed me to forget about him and go off with Allen, so it's still a tie. I might HAVE to bring in the other factors to break the tie.
I need to give Stan another chance because he was my first one and before I promised Allen I'd be with him, I was with him.
Or I need to get to know them both better and thus know which one I should be with.
What do I do?
EDIT: I had Stan first and should therefore be with him, but Stan didn't stimulate me enough with reassurance and allowed me to forget about him and go off with Allen, so it's still a tie. I might HAVE to bring in the other factors to break the tie.
Edited again to say that I don't know why, but I love Stan. I made a mistake. I still want him. I shouldn't have been looking for someone better than him. I shouldn't have needed to; I should have gone to Stan for stimulation instead of Allen.
Since the best person for me is someone I know will understand my scientific theory as fact and understand and follow my medical advance directive when I need it, I choose Stan. I wanted someone even better than Stan, and then something in my head made me suddenly believe that Allen saw my theory as fact as well and was better than Stan for me even though in actual fact I didn't know what Allen thought about my theory yet. Also, I just love Stan for some reason, and I didn't take that factor into account. I just love him for no reason. I didn't follow my intuition. I followed a smaller instinct instead, the need to have fun and get away from Stan for a bit, and then with perfect timing the delusion kicked in and started telling me that Allen was better for me. While part of me knew better, the bigger part, the part that had access to my hands and my mouth, didn't. I should have been more attached to Stan. True, Stan was the person that meant the most to me, but Stan didn't mean enough to me to make me talk to HIM all the time instead of Allen if given a choice.
Stan really did mean a lot more to me underneath even when I was talking to Allen. Stan was the bigger thing inside my head; it's just that right then I was totally focused on Allen. yes, I was totally focused on Allen, but now I'm totally focused on Stan. The delusion went away, and now there's enough permanent thoughts about Stan to keep another delusion away. (The delusion I had about Allen didn't give me enough permanent thoughts about Allen.)
I promised I would never break up with Stan, and I meant it, so I didn't truly feel that I had broken up with him, and thus I hadn't. Since I hadn't meant that my definition of being with Stan was that I couldn't be with anyone else, I succeeded in, in my definition that I had meant in the promise, not breaking up with Stan. True, later I had told Stan I was breaking up with him, but I hadn't meant it. It was the bigger part of me that said I wouldn't break up with Stan, too. So even though that part of me was with Allen, I hadn't broken up with Stan. Of course, I should have meant by saying I wouldn't break up with Stan that I would talk to him instead of talking to Allen, and that I would be stimulated enough by Stan to stay with Stan and only Stan.
Stan wrote:
> I was only trying to explain to you why I went off with Chris, and that
yes,
> it was wrong. It's true. I don't see how it doesn't make
sense to you.
no, you weren't.
>> I promised I would never break up with you, and I meant it, so I
> didn't
>> truly feel that I had broken up with you.
but you did break up with me. a couple of times, actually.
>> Since I hadn't meant that my definition of being with you was
that I
>> couldn't be with anyone else, I succeeded in, in my definition
that I
> had
>> meant in the promise, not breaking up with you. True, later I had
> told you I
>> was breaking up with you, but I hadn't meant it. Of course, I
should
> have
your 'definition of being with me' doesn't mean that you can't
be with
anyone else? so i could say that i want to be with you but i could
also have lots of other girlfriends, and say 'that's my definition of
being with you', and that would be ok?
and yes, you did mean it when you said you were breaking up with me.
yes,
> it was wrong. It's true. I don't see how it doesn't make
sense to you.
no, you weren't.
>> I promised I would never break up with you, and I meant it, so I
> didn't
>> truly feel that I had broken up with you.
but you did break up with me. a couple of times, actually.
>> Since I hadn't meant that my definition of being with you was
that I
>> couldn't be with anyone else, I succeeded in, in my definition
that I
> had
>> meant in the promise, not breaking up with you. True, later I had
> told you I
>> was breaking up with you, but I hadn't meant it. Of course, I
should
> have
your 'definition of being with me' doesn't mean that you can't
be with
anyone else? so i could say that i want to be with you but i could
also have lots of other girlfriends, and say 'that's my definition of
being with you', and that would be ok?
and yes, you did mean it when you said you were breaking up with me.
Ana54 wrote:
Yes, I was trying to explain to you how my head tricked me into going with [Allen]! Don't tell me what i was and wasn't trying to do.You can't read my mind. How do you know my intentions?
I'm sorry I didn't make it clear to you what being with you meant, and I really didn't want to break up with you when I broke up with you; I was hoping you'd make up with me or else I would have made up with you. And I never said that it was okay to have that definition of being with you; I should have said and believed that I wanted to be with ONlY you and that you were enough for me.
What I meant when I said I was breaking up with you was (because i still wanted to be with you) not that I was breaking up with you, but that I wanted to break up with a part of you. I should have also made that clear to you. It would have been clear to you if I'd made it clear to you that I meant my promise not to break up (traditional definition of breaking up) and if I'd made clear to you the definition of breaking up I was using when I said I was breaking up with you was not the traditional definition..
I'm sorry I didn't make it clear to you what being with you meant, and I really didn't want to break up with you when I broke up with you; I was hoping you'd make up with me or else I would have made up with you. And I never said that it was okay to have that definition of being with you; I should have said and believed that I wanted to be with ONlY you and that you were enough for me.
What I meant when I said I was breaking up with you was (because i still wanted to be with you) not that I was breaking up with you, but that I wanted to break up with a part of you. I should have also made that clear to you. It would have been clear to you if I'd made it clear to you that I meant my promise not to break up (traditional definition of breaking up) and if I'd made clear to you the definition of breaking up I was using when I said I was breaking up with you was not the traditional definition..
Edit: Stan may not take me back. That means or son may have only one parent with him. Our son probably okay; he's probably stimulated enough with you around him all the time, but if he had both of us with him at the same time all the time he'd probably be even happier.
Last edited by Ana54 on 23 Mar 2009, 5:01 pm, edited 24 times in total.
21 Mar 2009, 9:18 pm
It's not a tie anymore. 
The best person for me is someone I know will understand my scientific theory as fact and understand and follow my medical advance directive when I need it. I wanted someone better than Stan, and then something in my head made me suddenly believe that you were better than Stan for me even though I didn't know what you thought about my theory yet. Also, I just love Stan for some reason, and I didn't take that factor into account. I'm so sorry... but I still want you to come around every day to visit us! And if we're in PEI, I'll talk to you every day!
22 Mar 2009, 2:59 pm
Stan just told me sarcastically that it was romantic how I told him how little he meant to me, and he asked me what happened between me and Allen that made me change my mind. I told him about how Allen didn't understand my scientific theory as fact wherever there was light and how I just loved Stan more anyway.
I told him:
Quote:
This time I'll think to talk to you before talking to [Allen] or anyone else.
You really did mean a lot more to me underneath even when I was talking to [Allen]. You were the bigger thing inside my head; it's just that right then I was focused on [Allen].
I got indigestion just seeing that you had sent me an email and worrying about what might be in it.
I'll also tell him that yes, I was totalley focused on Allen, but now I'm totally focused on him. The delusion went away, and now there's enough permanent thoughts about Stan to keep another delusion away. (The delusion I had about Allen didn't give me enough permanent thoughts about him.)
You really did mean a lot more to me underneath even when I was talking to [Allen]. You were the bigger thing inside my head; it's just that right then I was focused on [Allen].
I got indigestion just seeing that you had sent me an email and worrying about what might be in it.
22 Mar 2009, 5:00 pm
RANT!! !!
I was just on an emotional roller coaster!
I was told that I was loved and needed, then I was placed under conditions, then I was told I was ugly, then I was made to defend her choice.
Now I have been rejected! 
Oh well, who wants to live forever anyway, right?
_________________
Pain and pleasure are the twins who slowly out of focus spin around us until we finally realize, that everything that gives us pleasure also gives us pain to measure it by!
02 Apr 2009, 2:37 pm
Stan once tried not to get upset in front of me so that he wouldn't upset me by being upset, but does that mean I shouldn't confide in him or tell him when I'm upset, but instead keep it inside me? He didn't need to do that for me; I could have handled him being upset, and I don't want to have to do it for him. Anyway, I have confidence in him; I feel that he can handle me being upset, and he should have confidence in me.
