Jump to content


Gold Member
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by chaku

  1. Sorry guys. This is eating me alive. I need to address this point. This is a human rights violation. Defining what sexual intimacy means to another person has a name, it is called rape. No ifs ands or buts. Human beings have a right to define and consent to whatever situations feel sexually intimate for themsselves, and your efforts to 'own the definition' are extremely domineering and disturbing. If you or anyone else believes you have the right to define what sexual intimacy means to another person outside the definition they consent to, you are condoning rape. Sexual intimacy is whatever he or she defines it to be. Period. It has nothing to do with you unless it is your body involved. The presence of one person holding another person's body with or without a penis in a vagina isn't what makes sexuality intimate. Consent does. You don't define consent for other people. If anyone is confused about what consent means, or maybe have a a manipulative presence in their lives and feel a little lost. Really weird advice? I hope my post will help them stand up for themselves and say no to others defining which sexual experiences feel intimate for them. Removing another person's right to define this, is like rape 101. This is not complicated. And I will not forgive this statement unless it is fully retracted. I didn't see this until now. This is horrific.
  2. Yeah, I think the 'why' is more important than a number. I think that's what matters much more so than the other factors. Even your honesty of "I was drunk, it was a mistake I don't want to repeat" is better to me than the ideas that enter my head in a vacuum, which is.... "It could have been that guy I knew, and she could have loved every minute of it." If I were to throw a rock at a lot of the girls I knew back in school, there was a surprisingly good chance one of them had been with him. I knew him as a child, before he became horrific. I knew him as an adult and he actually did settle down and improve as a human being after getting married. But his glory days with women, I can't believe he isn't dead. Every woman he ever slept with was automatically crossed off my list. Some seemed like maybe an option before, but not after.
  3. Whether I can spend a lifetime (or most of it) with someone depends entirely on the other person. My friend? Yes. I could commit to her without psychological trauma. What I gain (a truly good person) is worth what I lose in sexual freedom. The women who slept with that guy I knew growing up though? No. He was a pig. He curb stomped someone's face in. Incredibly violent, rampant drug use, women swarmed to him more than almost anyone I've ever met. So it does matter to me who and why people choose. More what was going through their minds. If women have the power to have sex with most men, can't they do a tiny background check? To make sure somoene isn't a complete sociopath? I don't have the power to sleep with most women. I'd love to have the power to be able to safely do background checks and proceed afterward, right? But by the time I do one, she'll have done the same on me, and will likely reject me for not being 'manly enough' like that guy who would go for it and call them names afterward. Once they learn about my low status, it's like shooting myself in the foot. I don't know if it is better to keep shooting myself in the foot and keep my ethics, or just accept that I don't have the same power that women have, and if a woman misguidely thinks I'm a sexy rock star, just go with it, don't bother correcting her with background checks.
  4. Oh well. fair enough. We all have our own view on things. Just like how most women view guys that are virgins past a certain age as undesirable. Oh well. fair enough. We all have our own view on things. Just like how most women view guys that are virgins past a certain age as undesirable. As a man I never really had any negative attitudes towards promiscuous women or an instinct to shame them. I never paricipated in slut shaming or anything like that, but I heard girls calling other girls '*****' a lot in my school. At the time, I found it distasteful. I remember even asking one girl directly about her former friend, and she was like, 'we don't hang out anymore. She's a slut now.' I knew a guy growing up who was hugely successful with women. He told me a story about how a girl straight up asked him if he thought she was one after they had sex, and he just said 'yes' and she was in tears. So I've encountered like huge negativity from various sources, but it was almost always the most negative people were either women or successful guys in person growing up. But I do recall earlier in my life, feeling pretty much monogamous and highly romantic. The monogamy may have been social programming that was lifted as I aged or it may have simply changed naturally through life experiences. Even though I had no ill will towards these women, I wasn't very comfortable with the idea of committing to a promiscuous woman. I think it's partly instinct, and partly ethics. My ethical platform is the most objectional part of me having casual sex, and it is still a major objection, is the idea of is sociopaths giving and receiving enormous pleasure, stimulating huge reward sensations in the most primitive parts of their brains.. One or more participants could be a ******er and the one thing they are being rewarded with most is having no conscience. They could be 'anything' and casually you'll never know.. It's still my biggest objection to casual sex. After researching various civilizations and human history, I also realized it wasn't realy something for guys like me. It was for guys like the guy I knew growing up who would do it, then call her a slut afterward. He was a stud, women loved him and still do. He's married with children so he got to have loads of casual sex to sow his wild seeds and then got marriage. He gets it all and he get to call them ***** too. He was always the best fighter at the parties, violent, all that stuff. It was pure alpha male attraction. They couldn't help themselves. Regardless, sex is not a plentiful resource for me. So choosing a 'decent friend with benefits' scenario may never be an option. My friend loves me, but I had to invest in her a very long time before she was open to the idea of being with me, and those opportunities may never happen again where I could invest in someone that much and have her be receptive. I can spend most of my money, try to get through all of the other obstacles, and see my friend maybe one time. But that would hurt us both maybe more, to be together one time, lose it forever, and have to compare for the rest of our lives our love in person and at a distance. But anyway, it's a bit weird to me that women get angry at low status guys for the slut shaming thing. It is true, that monogamy as a social structure is the closet thing to a 1 to 1 pairing for most human beings, but I was never consciously aware of that intellectually until much later. Even after intellectually realizing the benefits to humanity of people being more likely to have a father and mother, less harems, and probably ultimately more stability for civilization (both genders get something), I'm still not really one to pass much judgment. But I still do feel the concern and fear of entering into a relationship where I'm basically worth astronomicaly less and knowing it's very possible she slept with lots of people people like that guy I knew growing up once upon a time, and is now is approaching me with a life sentence.
  5. I haven't been able to work effectively in my life. It is indeed probably the most universal requirement amongst women, and it was the one thing I'm not effective at. I'm hugely capable of a lot of other tasks. But work life was extremely traumatic and distressing for me. I planned suicide from about 14 onward, when I realized social pressures were distressing me immensely and everyone was dead set on forcing me to assimilate as a square peg into a round hole. My family learned about 'emotional disabilities' and I got signed up. I'd be dead without a doubt if that didn't exist. I know exactly the emotions I was experiencing at the time. I'm not wired the way other people are wired, to seek out strangers and follow their orders. Not long after, I got additional health problems compounding this. My genetic quality is completely useless in this society. I think I would have functioned a lot better in a hunter gatherer society that wasn't based on 'the eternal job.' Sometimes it's just 'one' thing that damns a person. I'm very blessed to meet a woman in my life (my friend) who values me for the other things. She likes my kindness, intellect, art, creations, demeanor, pretty much everything about me. But like you said, that's the thing for a man. If you experience disability from the 'work force' then there you go. It's a giant uphill battle. Good luck to any guys in my position.
  6. Not at all. How exactly am I wrong to say a woman has way more options than a guy does in terms of sex? Who said they don't want them? In terms of relationships, fair enough. But just to ****, some women still do it with guys they find attractive but aren't dating material. what does this argument have to do with what you were saying before? You keep saying how women's standards are high. I think your standards are also high and that's why you are having problems. For me, as a brass tax issue, as a reproductive animal, it's objectively a more successful bet to be a human woman. Relationships are easier to obtain (men pursue more), and sex is way easier (men pursue, way way, more). Does that always equate to a woman finding the man of her dreams to commit for a lifetime? Nope. But that's a pretty 'extreme case' of a scenario given the really broad spectrum of reproductive situations that exist in the species. A lot of marriage end in divorce, and many don't even go that route. Does that extend to women as human beings always being objectively better off in all aspects of human existence? No. It doesn't mean she would be subjectively happier with her reproductive lot in life, either. Some people have billions of dollars, masses of reproductive opportunities, and are still depressed. So having more 'reproductive value to leverage' in interactions doesn't guarantee happiness. Given the average disposition of men and women, long term relationships can facilitate with multiple motivations. The first is supply and demand: out of necessity, lower genetic value men likely invested time, energy, and resources into nurturing women, which is how many low status male ancestors likely exist in our ancestry. Supply and demand still exists today. It wasn't suddenly removed as soon as birth control was invested. The second way one can faciliate is that with higher conscience over other mammals our evolved minds gained ability to try to understand each other as human beings and not only ourselves. Sometimes when people understand each other more deeply, they can learn to invest in each other more mutually, Rather than having a man waiting on a woman on his hands and knees, which is probably how things originally got started, 'paying genetic deficit,' women can learn to invest back in men. Which means respecting and nurturing each other as best as we can while also acknowledging we are different people. I've made the decision to not allow the first situation to facilitate a long term relationship if I can help it. If a woman wants me on my hands and knees laboring over her, and has no sympathy for my plight as a man of lower genetic value, I'll use my higher conscience to leave her alone. I evolved the higher conscience for a reason. With birth control and modern civilization, things have changed a lot. At bare minimum the second way is a requirement for me given the current state of my brain and my understandings.
  7. Do you want men to stop having this attitude? What if they can't control their attitudes either, and it's just like depression? I think it's probably a bit of both, but if men want to invest long term in a woman, they usually subconsciously, or consciously want to be fairly sure the woman finds them attractive. Since on average men lower standards for causal sex, on average women raise standards for casual sex. If a woman is super casual with everyone but you, it's often a sign she's just 'not that into you.' http://www.livescience.com/5625-men-choosy-night-stands.html Men have had really bad experiences for milllions of years investing into women that 'weren't that into them' and raising other men's children as a result, since they couldn't measure their own paternity. If a woman is not casual with anyone and seeks a long term relationship with only them, there isn't a comparison of other men she was more 'interested' in so they typically feel more comfortable. Male and female instincts are often statistically opposite when measured scientifically, and often men and women will have to find some way to meet in the midddle for longer term relationships to function. It's usually not about one person 'changing' their atittude to please another. It's usually both sides adapting as best as they can given the cards they were dealt. So there is precedent in our ancestry for there being a reason why men prefer what they prefer and women prefer what they prefer on a statistical average. One gender telling the other gender what to do, is not always a successful strategy.
  8. It happens and is not uncommon, but women aren't clones either. It's ok to accept truth, but don't extend this to all women. You can keep yourself grounded this way and if the right woman is there, you can be more receptive.
  9. Most people can't control their actions or emotions completely, men or women. How is considernig the possibility that someone isn't choosing a result an insult on a depression forum? If you could just 'snap out of your natural states' you'd just quit being depressed and go on with your life. It is supportive to acknowledge potential limitations rather than immediately blame others when potential harm arises. I only learned this by being depressed and not being able to 'snap out' of various states through will power. Men and women aren't the same. Depressed and not depressed people aren't the same. So not everyone is always fully in control of how they feel and their actions are often dependent on this. If this was not true, then just letting depressed people die would be more logical as they'd simply be 'making choices to emotionally 'struggle.' If women are biologically predisposed to something that is hurtful to me, I forgive it, much like someone would forgive someone with depression for not always being perfect. Such attitudes make people really resilient from hatred, and often reduce hostility. I did want you to know was authentic. It was not an intention to manipulate you. I genuinely forgive whatever harm you may cause here to my person. I don't think it's on purpose.
  10. This is fair. It goes nowhere. I'll be leaving this site which is for the better. Women here can remain happy with whatever pleasurable outside intepretations they have of what my life entails, I can live my actual reality with the objective data that exists in it and make my own judgments. I am in no need of expertise of women who don't even know my name, interspersing it with insults, accusations, judgments of 'what makes a true healthy relationship' and so forth. I have offered indeed offered the perspectives here to my friend, for her consideration. She can post if she wants to. I don't think she wants to, as anonymity is pretty valuable and people here do not seem to have a very high opinion of either of us and may wish one or both of us harm.
  11. I am equally distrustful of men, believe me. Different reasons. We both evolved from apes and are both jerks naturally in trying to get what we want. Men are more prone to physical viiolence for one, but are also prone to performing violence when a woman requests it, I've had women sic men on me with violence. Given my health problems she could easily take me down herself, but women have a naturally acquired posse of male body guards, that I will never have access to. A lot of men are more likely to beat me for access to sex than help me one way or another. The reason why the article is relevant is not to paint women as inferior to men, which is not my belief. It's because there have always been a lot more women on this website from my earliest memories. It's very relevant for my situation as a minority male in a female dominated culture that I'm not only outnumbered, but also likely will have biological or strong social bias against anything I say. All I can do is reduce awfulness in my own world. Which traditionally means a lot of isolation. I believe our species is fundamentally hurtful and are brutish ape descendants when not held in check by higher conscience. If others share my belief in our brutishness, most seem to be satisfied with flashing lights of emotions. I'm a red light to like 90 percent of the population when I speak with honesty and my best intentions. If I 'tow the line' by telling people what they want to hear, obscure objective facts that that could trigger an emotional red light, I can pass for a green light. I know the technique, and exactly why people do it probably more than most of the population. It's because if they don't, they'll be treated like me.
  12. I do forgive your negative assumptions about me. I'm tired of experiencing them relentlessly, and it has been an upsetting life to live as a man with disabilities in this world, but it's very possible your judgmental attitudes are biological and if not, deeply ingrained subconsciously or socially enough they are not a conscious choice, so I can't 'blame' you for your attitudes. I do hope you find help with your depression. I do not wish you harm, but I am healthier as a man with disabilities if I surround myself with people with open minded attitudes around me who would attempt ot learn objective truth about me prior to making long lists of negative assumptions. Outgroups exist for a reason, and at best we can build our mini societies of tolerance and open mindedness in little bubbles. A man in my position simply catches too much flak. We're not part of any wanted group, we're low status men who were genetically disposed of historically, we violate gender roles, we're poor, we're sick/ill/disabled. So it's just.... What happens in my experience. I don't have the endurance anymore when there is no benefit. It doesn't work. The same patterns repeat endlessly. Everyone gets shot when they grow tired of patterns in human civilizations and call them out. If my health allowed it, I'd likely be screaming something similar on a daily basis: WAKE UP! WAKE UP! WAKE UP! WAKE UP! WAKE UP! Coined by some more famous musicians than I. It's a great message. No matter how much it was screamed, it doesn't work though. The patterns just repeat. The socially elite are beloved and outsiders are blamed and spat upon. Hatred, war, conformity, assimilation, violence, cheating, lying, manipulation, callousness, it all persists. Everywhere. I'm glad healthy people without disabilities scream it for me though. They do make me happy.
  13. If anyone is interested in science, there have been a lot of studies conducted on in group bias between the genders: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15491274 Women have tested remarkably stronger for in group bias than men on average, repeatedly. In group bias is a phenonomon where all else being equal, if there is a conflict between groups, someone will choose their own group as 'right'.' Women have much stronger preferences to choose women, while men have weaker preferences and are willing to consider other groups positions more objectively, even if it isn't the same group they belong to. So when large groups of women gather, like on this website, which is predominately female, in group bias would be reinforced both by numbers and the biological preference of the average woman vs men. When women demonize men and angelize women given the same situation (like a consensual relationship), they are showing in group bias by 'choosing their own group as superior.' It's often why I don't hang out with large groups of women, as the studies and my experiences match. That they will simply choose 'their' side, no matter the facts. If you notice in the studies, there is a smaller percentage of women who are more like men, and don't automatically favor their own group in any given situation. There is a lot of diversity in gender, it's not black and white. My friend is an example of this. She doesn't automatically pick sides based on her gender, race, social status, and so forth. That's why I love her. She's one of the few women I've met who didn't automatically result to in group bias and sought more objective information. If you really break down in group bias, it's the 'green light sensation' someone feels when someone is 'part of their approved group.' The outgroup bias is the 'red light sensation when someone is an outsider to their approved group.' So it is extremely emotional. As a low status outsider man, women on average have been relentlessly vicious andI have been blamed for almost anything under the sun. If a man and a woman have an accidental collision, it can be accused as a patriarchal act of domination on the part of the man and a saintly act of victimhood by the woman. When in reality they accidentally bumped. But if you're a man, especially an outgroup man reading this, it's probably not wise to let women bully you. If you read the studies, it's not that hard to connect the dots. It may be that women simply can't control their actions and it isn't their fault. Even though women do this habitually to me, I've tried to forgive them. We don't have to fight back, but we can just remove ourselves from vicious female societies. If you look at the statistics, there aren't enough women like my friend to go around who would be more interested in out group life experiences, like people with disabilities, or whatever. So it's a sad future as a man for a lot of us. But they do exist, so if you find a woman who is not 'biased' towards her own kind, treat her very well. Reward her with kindness. I'll likely have to leave this society. Black guy walks into a KKK meeting, everything he does is wrong, right? I can't exist in societies where in group bias is strong. This site helps people who are part of the in group with their depression, so I have a lot of respect for the positive goals it achieves. But for an out goup participant, it's probably more damaging than helpful.
  14. Yup, someone laying traps would totally tell you intimately about their plans and have their partner read your responses. You sure do connect dots like a pro. Virgin Man = HUGE FLASHING RED LIGHTS!!! ITS LIKE A GIANT SPIDER!!!!! SOUND THE ALARMS!!! Virgin Woman = HUGE FLASHING GREEN LIGHTS. ITS LIKE AN ANGEL!!!!!! PROTECT PROTECT PROTECT!!!!!!! I get it. Most people do rely on flashing lights programmed in a bygone era. They don't use logic, they use emotion. It 'feels like red lights' is exactly what you said so you chose to make uniformly negative assumptions about me. Just like if a black person makes someone feel bad (red lights), they get racism. Disabled people? Yup. LYNCH THEM. If it feels like green lights, you'll make uniformly positive assumptions about them or give them the benefit of the doubt like you have my friend who is equally responsible for our relationship. It's funny you mention, 'it might **** her if a certain situation might happen," as something you specifically care about. But I've already described situations that have already put me in more danger. I'm the one with repeated stays in mental hospitals. They've already been mentioned. Your eyes just gloss over the facts that I've been more in danger of death by suicide than her, and she has been relatively stable over the past 8 years. You only care about the emotional distress she experienced one time, survived, and has consciously made her peace with. I can be in a mental hospital. I could be dead, and you singularly care about the 'one time the girl has had emotional distress, survived, reflected on the experience, and made a decision what it meant to her.' Why? Because she's a woman. You only care own kind, it's like racism. Lynch the others! I've had more than enough bigotry from people who only care about their kind and what benefits them. In my every day life I will remain cold, calculated, and resourceful in the face of bigots. In the chance I meet the tiny percent of the population that cares more about facts than primitive 'ape brained flashing lights' when deciding to make negative assumptions about others, I will give them my utmost honesty. Just like I did with this girl. And think about this for a moment, I never even had to tell her about other women at all. She's online and has no way to measure what I do with other women in my life. The woman I met who was thinking of cheating specifically advised me to not tell her about it. "Why does she have to know? Most people just don't tell!" As long those primitive flashing red lights don't get triggered in my friend, all is good in relationship world, right? Facts are irrelevant. Let's all rely on ignorant assumptions based on faulty perceptions of reality! I get it. But yeah, now my honesty with this girl gets twisted into an 'evil male power trip.' I'm such a bad man for being continually honest with this girl through thick and thin for 8 years when I could have lied and cheated and she'd be none the wiser. When honesty is so profoundly evil and creates so many flashing red lights in women, it's no wonder things are the way they are. It's great that at least one person in my life has always preferred the truth from me no matter what it was. That's why she is so special. ______________________________________________________ From the horses mouth: Her: I think she just believes that our long distance relationship is not healthy, and is blaming only you for it, while trying to protect the woman. Her. Yeah, even if she believes our relationship is unhealthy, she has the right to believe that, but why would she blame only you? She said it more succinctly than I. I get the patriarchal responsibility of 'blame' for being in an honest relationship involving a man and a woman. I get full 'responsibility' as man when our relationship isn't perfect, and she remains forever a powerless victim with no responsibility to fix this relationship because she's a woman? Sounds like stereotypical gender roles.
  15. Ok. I stand up for men, when they need help, So here we go. Chaku, going to be blunt. You are coming across as her teacher and father. This is called a negative assumption about another person's intentions/ I would assume she is a woman and not a girl ? She seems like a safe and giving bet for you. Negative Assumption about me. Even uses the word assume. You said she has no interest in the men in her culture. Have you used that to create, in part, a relationship where you can continue to feed that to your benefit ? A Negative assumption about my intentions. I met her knowing nothing of her culture and we fell in love before we even knew about the immigration difficulties. I'm just seeing lots of flashing lights. Eight years is a long time for one person to be in limbo. You keep yourself open to sexual relationships, but she doesn't seem to want that with anyone else ? That is some heady power...yes, power... You're assuming I have some kind of power, that makes her turn into a helpless child and is incapable of preventing her from ending a consensual relationship? So now, she can advocate for herself, but she totally can't. Cause she's a total weakling pathetic loser. to have someone be so open ( and I use that word with a block of salt ) to you and your ' male needs '. Neither of you " like prostitution ", yet she would say fine if you decided on it ?? Do you like testing this woman ? Another negative assumption. We've both discussed prostitution ethically pros and cons over the years. Thousands of words. It's a popular ethical discussion. We love those discussions. If she finds that one man in her culture that she likes and decides to have sex with him without totally abandoning you...it would be fine with you. And if not fine, you would graciously accept it ? I will adapt as needed. If I have to experience pain for her to be happy, I will. Are you afraid of physical intimacy ? That is not a slam. Long distance situations which also contain immigration issues, cultural and religious concerns...that seems like a shield erected to allow for a shoulder to lean on, without any real danger of things developing in any healthy manner. Afraid of intimacy? With YOU? YES. With her. Hell no. Healthy manner? How dare you define what is healthy for two consenting adults. YOU declare what is healthy for this woman now? What about her adult capability to make decisions on what is a healthy sexual relationship? You get to define healthy relationships. I guess since homosexuality is not a popular slam, online relationships are. Sure, relationships, whatever they are, can and do look many different ways. This tiny chance of anything changing and you don't believe you have an obligation to start the talk of your relationship with her being a friendship and only a friendship ? How many times do people have to have these talks? I've had at it at least 15 times. OF course, as an adult she need to make her OWN decisions. You are all over the map. First she's a child, then I control, then I need to 'take' control and tell her to begin a friendship. Remember, people will sometimes agree with things to try and keep something that may not be in their best interest. Let me ask you - does she talk about wanting a relationship with a man that contains sexual intimacy ? What the hell? Of course, we are sexually intimate every day. Are you insane? What business is that of yours? Be her friend and not a mentor who says he would use clever tricks to use on other men who would have to go through him to get to her. If she is that unable to advocate for herself, then that is another clue that prolonging this situation has control issues all over it. This is an incredibly innaccurate statement and utterly hypocritical. I have been lied to and manipulated. It can happen to anyone. Everyone can use friends who offer extra perspectives in their lives. It is NOT controlling behavior. When people who aren't friends, and know nothing about each other start offering 'advocacy' of changing behavior with NO knowledge or context of the people inside the relationship, that IS a control issue. Re read exactly what you said to me. All you did was 'advocate' and mentor what was 'healthy, what was likely wrong with our relationship' with uniformly negative outlooks. Not as a friend. Not even as an informed bystander. There wasn't a single positive assumption made about me, and every line was about 'advocating me changing my behaviors' to suit your ignorant whims. You seem to have have HUGE control issues. I won't say that unless I have evidence. It's likely you also have a really negatively attitude towards sexually inexperienced men. You waited for the first sign of a potential vulnerability to lay out a wash of horrifically innaccurate negativity while attempting to tell me the healthy ways of living my life. Guys, if a woman makes horrifically uniform negative assumptions about you whenever you talk about your sexual inexperience, please, just keep walking. I know women do this frequently, but you're worth so much more than this. I'm calling this out so you can keep your heads up. If this is what passes for 'supporting' depressed men these days. Just leave. It ain't worth it. Find beautiful people like my friend who appreciate your unique personality and would give you a chance to get known, for who you really are, on the inside rather than your social status, your sexual experience, your disabilities, or whatever. If you find 'All knowing women' with no knowledge about you, your personal circumstance, are mentoring you and labeling you with a bunch of terrible qualities about you? This has been a sign of very bad things in my life. You don't have to put up with it.
  16. You're the one treating her like a child. I should 'initiate a talk to make our relationship only a friendship?' after she explicitly tells me she wants to maintain the relationship as is as long as possible? How many times should we have that have that disscussion before I accept her adult answers? What about her concerns? What about her autonomy? I'm supposed to control her destiny? I guess as a man need to step in and control her destiny by ending relationships for her, right? Helpless baby woman. How many women have been abused by a man on this site? i've never done it. It's called having a conscience. I'm familiar with sexually experienced women getting 'red flags' from sexually inexperienced men and assuming they are 'abusers' who are the root problem. Ever think people might be projecting a bit of their bad relationship choices on someone else as a scapegoat? She has social phobias, duh. She stays home a lot so it would be helpful to introduce more people into her social circle. Most people are liars. As someone with social phboias myself, I've been lied to, manipulated, hurt. So why not use knowledge gained by my interactions to do a background check on someone else prior to introducing them to her? I shouldn't check and see if someone is a liar before introducing them to a friend? How patriarchal. Next time i introduce someone, I'll make sure I don't bother to learn anything about their honesty. By the way, 'here's Ted Bundy, he's good looking! Figure it out for yourself, I have a lot of faith in you!' You must be such an expert on the situation of strangers. Low status men are so evil, virgin men must be causing all of these relationship abuse everywhere! You make assumptions that I'm 'uncomfortable with having sex with her.' On what grounds? How many years have you known us and followed our sexual exploits? You're off your rocker. Sometimes it's downright amazing how quickly women will make assumptions about low status men and their 'evil ways.' Utterly ridiculous how women blame inexperienced men for relationship problems. No ladies, if you're having relationships problems, it's the ones you're having sex with, not the ones you aren't. As soon as sexual inexperience is mentioned in a man, there's always some (he's the bad guy go get him!) responses comes out of the woodwork like clockwork. It's amazing. Talk about double standards. If I was a real casavanoa and had even cheated on this girl and/or simply lied about my sexual experience, you'd never know a damned thing about her, about me, or anything else, and probably think I was a badass. Yet another example, honesty generally doesn't work guys. If you speak the truth, and you aren't a casanava, then everything wil be spun around in the blink of an eye that you're the devil incarnate before you know it. How do people fall for these kinds of shaming tactics? In case you don't undersand, you're a very, very, very distant observer to a relationship you've had NO part in. You're not an expert in spite of what you might believe. Your negative assumptions are flagrantly incorrect, and likely colored by personal bias. It even reeks of emotional manipulation, to try to target the first potential emotional vulnerability introduced into this thread by a stranger and manipulate it and paint it as a 'deficiency.' Frankly, I'm just sad men allow women to shame them like this and let it damage their self esteem. I'm very blessed at this point in my life to genuinely not care about your 'expertise.'
  17. In this case, I agree. If she can't stand the idea of Chaku in another relationship then I'm led to believe that she will not be able to let go of the romantic/sexual elements when it's decided to remove them. She is essentially monogamous. What I see happening is the relationship ending completely. But, maybe I'm wrong and things will work out as planned? Feelings can change I suppose. I'm curious, whatchagonnado, what is your take on this topic/thread, generally? The outcome is always unpredictable, but we've based our entire relationship on honesty. She knows I've been attracted to women for longer than most would admit and have never kissed one in my life time. She fully understands my wiring is that of a a typical red blooded male, and even says she she supports me seeking casual sex if this is a goal I should choose. Neither of us like prostitution, but she would support that too. She knows my instincts have been unsatisfied for most of my life and that the situation was a combination of voluntary factors, having less value as adisabled man, and a tendency to isolate. I believe her at this point. She knows that it has been torture as a man to live the life I have lived, and if you really love someone, you don't wish torture on them. If the right circumstance arises, I'lll remove the conflict between the primitive side of my brain and my higher brain. But if there is no right circumstance ethically, I will continue this current existence. In spite of psychological turmoil, I'm actually pretty happy with having followed my own path through life. I've definitely thought on a higher level about these issues than most apes, so I have no shame, guilt, or negative feelings beyond the distress caused in the primitive sectors of my brain that gets hungry, horny, etc.
  18. The possibility arised suddenly and unexpectedly when neither of us expected it. There was theory before but nothing in pratice. She hadn't had time to accept the possibility that we would never be together until the possibility happened. After experiencing the distress and mourning, she understands it better and says she has grown into a stage of 'acceptance' for what it is, rather than what we would have wished it to be nearly a decade ago. There is no such thing as equal footing between two different people. Every psychology is different. Every circumstance is different. There are crossroads where people intersect and benefit can be greater than harm. It's very possible I could commit suicide if she callously abandoned me too. Historically I've been more vulnerable of the two of us and abandonment can do almost anyone in if it hits them wrong. One of friends did exactly that when she felt abandoned by a guy. Those possibiltiies existing doesn't warrant not having relationships, it warrants having more responsible relationships, where both parties nourish the other's psychological state as best as they can. I studied the relationship in question, where the suicide took place, and very little ethics occurred from any party. People can survive pain, they can survive change, but abandonment hits really hard. It won't happen on my watch. No selfish woman wanting me for herself 'as soon as possible' is going to change my mind. If a potential future partner couldn't comprehend this situation enough to consider the other woman in the picture with compassion, and not as a 'competitor to be eliminated asap.' l don't care to invest in women like that. I'll only invest in a woman who cares about more than herself, including the well being of other women. I've asked her many times what she believes is best. She says she wants to make the best of a bad situation. I don't want to end our relationship either, but if I truly thought it would be best for her I would. If I were to end the relationship with no external reason, she wouldn't even get to make the best of a bad situation. She's not interested in the men in her culture and doesn't want to start more long distance relationships There is a tiny chance circumstances could change, but not very likely, as I am ill (in multiple ways) and am unlikely to have the sustained income to immigrate her. She'd have to abandon her entire culture, her family would disapprove and possibly disown her while the only support she'd have is an ill guy in a foreign country. In a stretch, I could try to research foreign atheist men for her, socialize with them and garden shrub out as many jerks as I could using clever intellectual tactics to expose their deviant plans. If I thought I'd found a decent guy, I could introduce the two. But it's a pretty weird idea for a girl you love and it's not a common social interaction for a man to seek other men for a woman. If I do find someone more accessible, it might be the last option I have left to help her. Regardless, she's like family to me, and if a suitor screws her over by lying and misleading I'm gonna get really angry. In the meantime, I've tried to make sure she has enough objective information to be weary of those who would mislead her for sex.
  19. There will be mourning, yes. But the idea that a certain process needs to be done in a specific order sounds like a rule. There are likely situations that contradict the theory. I never act according to rules unless a law will threaten my life. Everything is circumstantial and if I meet a polyamouras woman for example, I may have time to mourn with my monogamous woman.
  20. I've got pretty severe nerve pain. Tricyclics and SNRIS are both useful in reducing intensity, in most cases Tricyclics are more effective in test studies, but SNRIS have less side effects. You're right that tramadol already is very similar to an SNRI so transitioning to something purely opiod would allow a more controlled delivery. Take care in the use of opioids, as they are just like benzos in that they can include tolerance and dependence and social attitudes towards opioid users are very negative. I have found long term benzodiazepine use very useful, though there is a serious moral panic about this issue akin to Reefer Madness. Getting off these medications means using liquid solution and titrating down very slowly. Doctors cold turkey patients, and then say they drugs are 'evil' and useless. I don't want to stop this medication currently, as it is highly effective for my condition (and have seen studies indicating similar results). So even if benzos work long term, if you can find anything else that works, it will help you immensely as your son will be at risk of having his meds suddenly stopped and then being called a drug addict for taking them as instructed, whether they work. This has been done to me and really damaged my health. The most effective medications you can find with the least 'reefer madness' attitudes from your society will help your son in the long term. Even if now, people have sympathy for a child in pain, when he become a grown man, the witch hunts can start. Maybe at some point opioid and benzodiazepine tolerance will be solved biologically and we no longer have to worry about this, but in the meantime, get as much help as you can from the other ones, and resort to these as minimally as possible. Not because they don't work for various purposes, and cannot be responsibly taken, but because there is a risk of persecution no matter how responsibly they are taken. Persecution of people in severe pain is very dangerous and can end lives, so we don't want that for anyone.
  21. Individuality is really important. I have no interest in replicating people so we agree on that. But basically it is possible to refocus romantic love while still appreciating the platonic love that exists: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Platonic_love This has been the plan my friend and I have mutually shared for the past few years. If either of us find someone who is very compatible and accessable in person we will attempt to refocus our relationship into appreciating the beauty we have offered each other's lives, and appreciating the beauty of each other's humanity while removing the sexual and romantic elements so there can be a clean slate. She can't handle psychologically me being romantically involved with another woman either. The few times these situations have come close to occurring were extremely distressing to her, but since we both truly love each other, we both want what is best for each other, This would mean being open to the ideas of in person relationships. rather than being eternally stranded long distance. The transition would be painful, but if we love each other, we will experience pain if the end result is for the best. If she is going to experience any pain in the transition, she will not be abandoned however. She has depression too, it might **** her and I'm her best friend. I will never stop being her friend for any woman.
  22. Maybe you didn't love them? No kind of love I've experienced works that way for me. If someone in my life is situated in a position where I can be receptive of feeling love and they are worthy of love (parent, friend, romantic partner) then it generally can happen without 'stealing love' from others. Feeling love for one person doesn't stop me from feeling love for another if they are situated and also worthy. My childhood friend died, and I still love her, I dream about her frequently, though she was burned to ashes and is long since out of sight. If a parent does something horrific to me I can stop loving them. It's the same with a romantic partner. I have to make a conscious choice to stop loving and 'destroy' the love which seems pointless and harmful to people who have done me no wrong. If it doesn't last, to me it's not real love. It's probably infatuation and lust. Love transcends death, it's that powerful. I'll keep loving my dead friends, families, and anyone who has ever been authentically romantic with me, for what they are, as long as they deserve it. No one will ever own my affections to anyone.
  23. This is tricky. I've been in a long distance relationship for about 8 years. I love with her and she loves me, but due to various circumstances, we couldn't immigrate and we may never be able to work out this situation unless our health problems resolve or cultural barriers like immigration qualifications and religious structures change. I could probably love another person in my life time equally, but I don't think I could stop loving her, cause she's just too cool and she never did a single thing to deserve not being loved. She's not just good looking, but she's incredibly sweet, thoughtful, empathetic, and has literaly saved my life through cleverness when medical problems were directly threatening my life, and no doctors would do anything to help me. Could I give sexual exclusivity to another woman so she doesn't experience pain? Probably. Can I stop loving my best friend in the entire world just so another woman has 'all of my love.' Hell no. My best friend gets my love for the rest of our lives. I can probably love someone closer and more accessable equally, if not more in person, if they are equally cool. I'm not going to screw over my best friend just so I can get laid while someone else feels secure in my lack of love for others. I'd be dead, literally. I owe her some love and affection and I'll honor this. It is all quite tricky, but basically, 'circumstantial' is about as good as people will get from me. There is no 'rule' that could ever work for every situation.
  24. The issue is basically that our perceptions of what hurt us are our own perceptions and others don't automatically share them. If we feel someone else is intentionally hurting us, we might feel vindication to hurt them back. That's the eye for an eye, age old question. I prefer to just cut ties if someone has no interest in my well being and move on. It usually makes me feel better than stooping to another's level. But what makes this issue more complicated are perceptions. A lot of times when we hurt each other it's not like a conscious intentional process. It's more like stepping on someone's toe. A lot of the time people are just wandering through life relatively obliviously and are unaware of the 'pain causing' ramifications of their actions, unless someone is very vocal about it like, 'owww!!!!! You're stepping on my toe!' With emotions and psychological states, it's measuring how hurtful something is, is way more complex than a toe stepping situation as there isn't a concrete piece of evidence like 'foot on toe' that we can all point at. So people can deny the amount of pain, people can exaggerate the amount of pain, and people can be completely oblivious to the pain in the first place. So it's very possible for one person to 'feel' like another person doesn't care about them at all, but the other person may have a totally different way of expressing 'care' than we are familiar with, or we could be going through a tough time ourselves where emotionally (particularly with depression) we have difficulty seeing whatever is there for what it is or isn't. I'm not saying that is the situation with your boyfriend (it's very possible he didn't care at all, and you're completely correct), but in most situations for me, unless I have outright proof of direct intentional harm: 1. Foot goes on toe 2. I say that hurts, 3. Foot goes on toe harder Unless it is concrete like that I would never choose revenge, as my perceptions of why someone might be doing an action that causes me harm could be incorrect. Revenge is on purpose. It's very intentional action. Pain can be caused upon us by misunderstandings, by people being mentally challenged (unable to comprehend), immature (like children), or I often I could have done a very poor job of explaining my situation. It's unforutnately common for some to assume others are 'mind readers' and should just know better. I'm not saying this is something you do, but have you ever known someone who would get hurt about something, sulk, and stay vinditive about the issue rather than coming clean and talking about it to work on it? It's the equivalent of letting the foot sit on the toe and silently getting angry. Pain needs to be openly communicated for people to understand it and better prevent it. So yeah, the minimum criteria for an eye for an eye, is very very solid evidence I can pin on someone's intentions, and it can't be a vague feeling of being hurt. I need measurable proof in their actions. Even then, for me at least, it's usually healthier to just move on to healthier people for me who respect me more than continue to involve with unheathy ones. As for why things are right and wrong, it's basically cultural norms that define those things. Some of these norms had more positive aspects of goals (like monogamy is pretty good for children, to have stable parents) but a lot of them are just plain nonsense. Like illegal drug being a 'devil's drug' and alchohol being perfectly legal, when alcohol causes way more car accidents, unwanted pregnancies, and violence. I use ethics as an alternative method (harmful/helpful/neutral), which is basically a calculated trajectory of harm reduction. Ethics are a lot like watching where your feet go, so you don't step on others and hurt them, only your feet are your 'actions taken more broadly.' You watch and your study actions to reduce harm. The problem you'll run into is ethics require a lot of intellect and calculation to perform. Simple concepts like 'right and wrong' can be understood by children, or people with other kinds of disabilities (intellectual ones) and .... People who are too lazy or selfish to use ethics. So ethics aren't necessarily the right choice for everyone all the time. Having simple, often somewhat religious rules set forth by societies catches a 'broader' net of participants. When people like us aren't very responsive to rules, and start asking 'why?' this is terrifying to many. In general civilizations fear free thinkers, because the average person believes without 'rules' people would run amok and hurt each other greatly. But it's a choice what you make of life without arbitrary 'rules.' Societies are kind of right to be afraid. Once you've abandoned the rules. Who knows what you'd cook up? We can either try to be ethical, or stop caring about hurting others. I've put my vote in trying to not hurt others. My civilization isn't completely pleased with me, but I've got a pretty good record of reducing harm to others. So it can work to make up your own rules through study, but it requires diligent thought and continuously good intentions.
  25. On the contrary you're one the few people who have read something like what I wrote and accepted it for what it was rather than get angry at it for what it wasn't. So thank you. I don't have mainstream views and think for myself so it's It's been my experience most respond negatively. You responded with curiousity while articulating your own concerns. Those are very positive things. It's possible you could be even more open minded than I am. I do fully understand your desire for warmth and robotic honesty can be very damaging to psychologies too. It's something children and sometimes people in the autism spectrum struggle with. If I were to approach people I wasn't attracted to and robotically explain this 'fact' to them, with no context, no reason, it may be 'true' but the end result would simply cause people pain, with no benefit to anyone (who wasn't sadistic, which thankfully I'm not). In a relationship, heavy issues like 'truth' are double edged swords, it is best welded with the least pain possible. You're likely a well intentioned person if you can see both sides. It's refreshing.
  • Create New...