Don't put women on a pedestal

Page 7 of 7 [ 106 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7

puzzledoll
Snowy Owl
Snowy Owl

User avatar

Joined: 10 Apr 2017
Age: 48
Gender: Female
Posts: 167
Location: the mountains by the ocean

02 Jan 2019, 8:17 pm

AngelRho wrote:
puzzledoll wrote:
AngelRho wrote:
If only...

In all seriousness, though, sly, I think you’re right. What we want is a warm body in close proximity. That’s just objective reality. Staring across the room—well, ok that’s something, I guess. But “distance relationships...”?

Warm, living bodies in your personal space are REAL. Everything else is just fairies and unicorns. Objective reality or gtfo.


I'm a unicorn and my objective reality has involved several "distance relationships" that were intensely fulfilling and very decidedly REAL. Limiting yourself to warm, living bodies in your personal space really cuts out a WHOLE lot of options. Just saying...

How is that objective?

I’ve had online relationships through chat and, later on, virtual worlds. I wasn’t exactly looking for meaningful relationship, so I was amused by how women might act all devoted one day and ghost me the next. I even “caught” some of them, um...cheating(?) on me for lack of a better term. There were times I became aware of being catfished. It didn’t upset me so much because it was just time-wasting entertainment for me.

There’s nothing wrong with that and I know firsthand that it CAN in the proper context be enriching.

The problem with it is that some people confuse the fantasy with reality and chase the fantasy like it’s real. They get hurt when they find the girl of their dreams flirting with some other guy. They get hurt when they get ghosted. Or maybe they actually meet up and she’s too fat or he’s to bald or their too old or don’t have enough teeth...

For someone who wants a real relationship in objective terms, this just isn’t good enough. We want to meet f2f, have dinner, see a movie, or whatever IN PERSON. We want to actually hold hands, kiss, or otherwise. We want to actually get married and start a family. There are any number of things we want, maybe not all the same things, but it has to be objectively real. Not phone sex. Not cute text messages. Not X-rated animations in Second Life. I mean actual warm bodies physically, tangibly present.


You are saying that my 7+ year relationship with my boyfriend was not "good enough" because we only saw each other in person a week or two a year? Huh... That makes me feel unhappy for you. It was a wonderful and fulfilling relationship where we were completely present for each other just like any other long term relationship I've ever had. In ways it was more intimate than most I've had. I don't think I could manage a relationship where I never saw someone, but it was two years before he and I met face to face so, perhaps, and I do know there are people out there who have meaningful relationships like that. A person who loves you and is there for you is a person who loves you and is there for you. Yah, touch is nice and all, but I'd rather have someone typing to me on a screen and being there than a warm body that is physically present and not actually present.



AngelRho
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Jan 2008
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,366
Location: The Landmass between N.O. and Mobile

02 Jan 2019, 10:58 pm

puzzledoll wrote:
AngelRho wrote:
puzzledoll wrote:
AngelRho wrote:
If only...

In all seriousness, though, sly, I think you’re right. What we want is a warm body in close proximity. That’s just objective reality. Staring across the room—well, ok that’s something, I guess. But “distance relationships...”?

Warm, living bodies in your personal space are REAL. Everything else is just fairies and unicorns. Objective reality or gtfo.


I'm a unicorn and my objective reality has involved several "distance relationships" that were intensely fulfilling and very decidedly REAL. Limiting yourself to warm, living bodies in your personal space really cuts out a WHOLE lot of options. Just saying...

How is that objective?

I’ve had online relationships through chat and, later on, virtual worlds. I wasn’t exactly looking for meaningful relationship, so I was amused by how women might act all devoted one day and ghost me the next. I even “caught” some of them, um...cheating(?) on me for lack of a better term. There were times I became aware of being catfished. It didn’t upset me so much because it was just time-wasting entertainment for me.

There’s nothing wrong with that and I know firsthand that it CAN in the proper context be enriching.

The problem with it is that some people confuse the fantasy with reality and chase the fantasy like it’s real. They get hurt when they find the girl of their dreams flirting with some other guy. They get hurt when they get ghosted. Or maybe they actually meet up and she’s too fat or he’s to bald or their too old or don’t have enough teeth...

For someone who wants a real relationship in objective terms, this just isn’t good enough. We want to meet f2f, have dinner, see a movie, or whatever IN PERSON. We want to actually hold hands, kiss, or otherwise. We want to actually get married and start a family. There are any number of things we want, maybe not all the same things, but it has to be objectively real. Not phone sex. Not cute text messages. Not X-rated animations in Second Life. I mean actual warm bodies physically, tangibly present.


You are saying that my 7+ year relationship with my boyfriend was not "good enough" because we only saw each other in person a week or two a year? Huh... That makes me feel unhappy for you. It was a wonderful and fulfilling relationship where we were completely present for each other just like any other long term relationship I've ever had. In ways it was more intimate than most I've had. I don't think I could manage a relationship where I never saw someone, but it was two years before he and I met face to face so, perhaps, and I do know there are people out there who have meaningful relationships like that. A person who loves you and is there for you is a person who loves you and is there for you. Yah, touch is nice and all, but I'd rather have someone typing to me on a screen and being there than a warm body that is physically present and not actually present.

Touching story and all...but that's not my point. My point is that, at least from what I've gathered from men (and women, too) who post here regularly, is that an ACTUAL relationship is what is desired. Not all of us can really handle invisible, intangible relationships like you did. I certainly can't. I tried keeping my high school sweetheart through my first year of college. Didn't work. I ended up covertly chasing women within weeks. And when she finally followed me the next year, I was sweating bullets hoping she'd never find out what I was REALLY doing all that year.

When I left for grad school a few girls later, I honestly tried staying true to my gf 1,500 miles away. Nope. Didn't work. And she wasn't much more faithful than I was.

Some people are cut out for it. I'm not, and I don't mind being honest about it. And I think the absolute WORST thing you can do is delude yourself into thinking you can be faithful to someone, that they are being faithful to you, and you don't allow yourself to love someone close by--NOT because you genuinely love someone 1,500 miles away, but because you'd feel guilty as hell if you cheated. Part of the reason I broke up with my high school gf was I got sick and tired of feeling guilty. The best day of my life wasn't the day I realized I was being a jerk to her. It was realizing how big of a jerk I was being to MYSELF for no better reason than fear of being alone. I'll never apologize for taking back control of my life.

And I certainly will never again put myself through the cruelty of fake "distance relationships." Maybe you won a trophy and that makes you feel important, but I love myself too much for that. If she isn't physically in my presence, she doesn't count. That's the basic principle. That's foundational. That's objective.

To be clear, I'm not talking about relationships in which circumstances cause separation. I get that things happen. My gf was still my gf when I moved away for 2 years despite the trauma we caused ourselves and each other during that time. Couples separated through military obligations are no less couples. However, in these situations it's always the intent and expectation that the relationship either become or remain a tangible one. Would you consider your catfish, if the truth came out you had a catfish, to ever have legitimately been your bf? Even when I instigated quasi-"relationships" with women on SecondLife, I was very clear about my intentions. Those women either played along or they put on the brakes. I was ok with that and I didn't push it. But I never once considered those cute little fantasies even remotely "real."



Raleigh
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 7 Jul 2014
Age: 124
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 34,563
Location: Out of my mind

02 Jan 2019, 11:03 pm

hurtloam wrote:
So rdos posts tend to take threads off track. We all start trying to figure out what he's actually suggesting.

I'm sure we all have a soft spot for him because he seems pretty genuine, but should we keep on devolving into this conversation.

All the threads in L&D turn into a discussion about the same things and pet points of interest and gripes of a handful of members.

I don't care about thus thread. I regret starting in in the first place. Ive bedn out with this gut agsjn and we had a nice time. We have a really good rapport.

Great news.
Sounds like he's getting more comfortable with you.


_________________
It's like I'm sleepwalking


cberg
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Dec 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,183
Location: A swiftly tilting planet

02 Jan 2019, 11:15 pm

Now that we're talking about Second Life because reasons, would it improve my sex appeal if I got into selling virtual real estate?


_________________
"Standing on a well-chilled cinder, we see the fading of the suns, and try to recall the vanished brilliance of the origin of the worlds."
-Georges Lemaitre
"I fly through hyperspace, in my green computer interface"
-Gem Tos :mrgreen:


rdos
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jul 2005
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,089
Location: Sweden

03 Jan 2019, 3:52 am

puzzledoll wrote:
Yah, touch is nice and all, but I'd rather have someone typing to me on a screen and being there than a warm body that is physically present and not actually present.


Agreed. Many typical long-term relationships turn out that way. The number of hours you are physically close to each others, or how many times you have sex might not at all be a good indicator of the quality of a relationship. The total time you are close to that warm body is not interesting. The only thing that is interesting is how much of that time is quality time where both actually are present. Sitting at your computer, working, playing computer games, watching TV or using your smartphone typically doesn't count as quality time.



rdos
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jul 2005
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,089
Location: Sweden

03 Jan 2019, 4:01 am

AngelRho wrote:
Touching story and all...but that's not my point. My point is that, at least from what I've gathered from men (and women, too) who post here regularly, is that an ACTUAL relationship is what is desired.


Can you define "actual relationship"? :mrgreen:

AngelRho wrote:
Some people are cut out for it. I'm not, and I don't mind being honest about it. And I think the absolute WORST thing you can do is delude yourself into thinking you can be faithful to someone, that they are being faithful to you, and you don't allow yourself to love someone close by--NOT because you genuinely love someone 1,500 miles away, but because you'd feel guilty as hell if you cheated. Part of the reason I broke up with my high school gf was I got sick and tired of feeling guilty. The best day of my life wasn't the day I realized I was being a jerk to her. It was realizing how big of a jerk I was being to MYSELF for no better reason than fear of being alone. I'll never apologize for taking back control of my life.


I actually agree with you about online-only relationships, but if somebody finds that ok for a relationship, let them pursue it.

AngelRho wrote:
And I certainly will never again put myself through the cruelty of fake "distance relationships." Maybe you won a trophy and that makes you feel important, but I love myself too much for that. If she isn't physically in my presence, she doesn't count. That's the basic principle. That's foundational. That's objective.


I think my love story kind of puts a bit of strain on your principles. I mean, she is physically in my presence several hours per day, and you didn't put a requirement that verbal communication was needed, so I think it fits with your "basic principle", and so it is "objective". :mrgreen:



rdos
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jul 2005
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,089
Location: Sweden

03 Jan 2019, 4:11 am

AngelRho wrote:
For someone who wants a real relationship in objective terms, this just isn’t good enough. We want to meet f2f, have dinner, see a movie, or whatever IN PERSON. We want to actually hold hands, kiss, or otherwise. We want to actually get married and start a family. There are any number of things we want, maybe not all the same things, but it has to be objectively real. Not phone sex. Not cute text messages. Not X-rated animations in Second Life. I mean actual warm bodies physically, tangibly present.


You are so neurotypical. :wink:

What's wrong with online exchange? Why do we always have to meet face-to-face? Why have dinner, party & see movies and not play games in parks or along the beach? It all sounds so boring.



AngelRho
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Jan 2008
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,366
Location: The Landmass between N.O. and Mobile

03 Jan 2019, 7:01 am

cberg wrote:
Now that we're talking about Second Life because reasons, would it improve my sex appeal if I got into selling virtual real estate?

Sex appeal? LOL Who knows?

The problem with that is are you trading something of objective value? I’m wary of any kind of online currency. I’m even wary of real currency because it’s not backed by anything of objective value. Need more money? Just print more paper...easy enough. L$ is like that. The cool thing about it is if you’re an entertainer or artist, you can make half your living on L$ and cash out as needed because then you ARE trading in value, perhaps better since tips are a form of paying what you feel a product is worth. But if you go to that much trouble, wouldn’t it be more efficient and more profitable just to set up an internet radio station funded through Patreon, do two live shows a day, and curate relevant prerecorded material for the rest of your air time?

Sex appeal is hardly relevent in SL because you can look like who/whatever you want and I think they have more pre-packaged avatars now. Having your own Linden land affords you more virtual freedom, of course, but there’s very little in the way of property that has any actual privacy. You WANT people on your land. So it’s not usually like you’re gonna have a girl over at your place for Netflix-and-chill. You might end up in bed—ANY bed—with a girl and running a sex simulation. Then you’re glad it’s NOT real. IRL you don’t have to worry about an animation going haywire and ending up with your manhood bursting out through her rib cage Alien-style. In SL, that kind of thing is known to happen.



cberg
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Dec 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,183
Location: A swiftly tilting planet

03 Jan 2019, 9:42 am

Um wow thanks that is basically the last question I expected any answers to.


_________________
"Standing on a well-chilled cinder, we see the fading of the suns, and try to recall the vanished brilliance of the origin of the worlds."
-Georges Lemaitre
"I fly through hyperspace, in my green computer interface"
-Gem Tos :mrgreen:


The_Face_of_Boo
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Jun 2010
Age: 42
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 33,045
Location: Beirut, Lebanon.

03 Jan 2019, 11:55 am

hurtloam wrote:
So rdos posts tend to take threads off track. We all start trying to figure out what he's actually suggesting.

I'm sure we all have a soft spot for him because he seems pretty genuine, but should we keep on devolving into this conversation.

All the threads in L&D turn into a discussion about the same things and pet points of interest and gripes of a handful of members.

I don't care about thus thread. I regret starting in in the first place. Ive bedn out with this gut agsjn and we had a nice time. We have a really good rapport.



What’s worse, they are not even listening to you as the OP. :lol: The Rdos vs AngelRho everlasting thing is a real comedy.