Touche Posted January 3, 2009 Posted January 3, 2009 I just wanted to add this...sometimes a man is really in to you but it may not be right at the same exact time as you want him to be in the WAY you want him to be. No one person is all things to you at all times. Does that make sense? The sooner in life we realize that, the more content we'll be. That doesn't mean that you have to settle or that you "put up with more." No. It means you understand human nature. It means you are a mature individual who isn't expecting instant gratification. It means that you're secure in yourself. It means that you can be patient. It means that you know what love really is. Love is not a person tapping their foot waiting for themselves to prove themselves to you. Nope. That's not love. That describes a person who is insecure and in need of control. You don't want to be that person do you? Only those who have LIVED a while and who have had real relationships will realize this. I know I sound arrogant but I'm sorry, it's the truth.
Tomcat33 Posted January 3, 2009 Posted January 3, 2009 I just wanted to add this...sometimes a man is really in to you but it may not be right at the same exact time as you want him to be in the WAY you want him to be. No one person is all things to you at all times. Does that make sense? The sooner in life we realize that, the more content we'll be. That doesn't mean that you have to settle or that you "put up with more." No. It means you understand human nature. It means you are a mature individual who isn't expecting instant gratification. It means that you're secure in yourself. It means that you can be patient. It means that you know what love really is. Love is not a person tapping their foot waiting for themselves to prove themselves to you. Nope. That's not love. That describes a person who is insecure and in need of control. You don't want to be that person do you? Only those who have LIVED a while and who have had real relationships will realize this. I know I sound arrogant but I'm sorry, it's the truth. You expressed that perfectly. Love is not that, it is also not I give you this so that you can give me that. You can have a perfectly normal set of standards that you adhere to when you are picking out the perfect mate for you but it doesn't mean you are waiting on a play by paly of what you get in return for everything you give. That is the REAL risk of love, you give naturally and with in reason and you don't sit on the sidelines waiting for rewards like some Pavlovian experiment. Most importantly you don't bank on a your partner to make you feel 100% secure, you make yourself feel secure, because if you trust yourself and the choices you make then the rest all follows naturally and you don't second guess a person's every move or lack there of in order to know where you stand. You get it! You don't sound arrogant you know what's what and it was beautifully stated.
Touche Posted January 3, 2009 Posted January 3, 2009 Thank you, TC. And THIS tells me that YOU get it: Most importantly you don't bank on a your partner to make you feel 100% secure, you make yourself feel secure, because if you trust yourself and the choices you make then the rest all follows naturally and you don't second guess a person's every move or lack there of in order to know where you stand.
OpenBook Posted January 3, 2009 Posted January 3, 2009 I just wanted to add this...sometimes a man is really in to you but it may not be right at the same exact time as you want him to be in the WAY you want him to be. Well said. We can't (and shouldn't) control anyone else's thoughts or actions. All we can really control is our own behavior. And that includes doing what is best for OURSELVES. Only those who have LIVED a while and who have had real relationships will realize this. I know I sound arrogant but I'm sorry, it's the truth. Yeah, that WAS a little arrogant.:laugh: I know some very young people who already get this. I attribute it to their awesome parental units (in some cases), or tragic circumstances that forced them to acquire wisdom beyond their years (in others) - kind of like a flower that springs up in a pile of crap. But for the most part, you're right. Most of us have to learn through trial and error.
Taramere Posted January 3, 2009 Posted January 3, 2009 He did not call yesterday evening or today, we are both off for the holidays. I called him just now (3pm) and he's with family going to the shooting range. I was a bit annoyed that he didn't call to say hi earlier. Some men won't call for the simple reason that they don't have anything specific to talk to you about. I think you can raise things like that and say "you know, even if you don't have anything much to tell me, it's nice to just hear from you. A quick "hi" to let me know you're thinking of me makes me happy." I don't think it's shameful or excessively needy to want that, but neither is it unacceptable for the other person to not think of calling "just to say hi". People just have different views on the merits and necessity of those touching-base-even-when-I've-nothing-particular-to-say calls in the early stages of a relationship. If he really dislikes and fails to see the point of them, and you need them in order to feel that he cares about you, then it's likely that this will be a continuing area of conflict for however long the two of you go out. Resulting in those "you're too needy" "well you're too distant" blame games. Perhaps you should just bite the bullet and tell him you would have liked to have heard from him before now; that that's just the kind of person you are - you like to touch base fairly frequently when you're romantically involved with someone. Popular advice along the lines of The Rules tends to discourage such actions. I can understand the rationale underlying such advice, but I don't think the aspects of human nature that it feeds into and encourages are necessarily healthy or conducive to honest communication and long term happiness. It taps into insecurity, fears (about rejection, being perceived as uncool etc) and avoidance strategies. Validating them by saying "never mind what you as an individual adult woman might want and need; this is the cool, non-needy way to be." Even if you raise your needs in a non-accusing "here's what I like and appreciate" way, he might react defensively or respond in a way that implies you're childish, overly demanding and foolish. He might feel crowded and start looking for a way to offload you. Or, if he really likes you and regards your feelings as valid, he may respond along the lines of "Oh, okay...if that's what makes you happy I'll try to cater to it." Hopefully it would be the last one. Good luck, whatever you decide to do.
EYECANDY000 Posted January 3, 2009 Posted January 3, 2009 I haven't read all of the posts, but it seems like the only thing redant was looking forward to was a call just to say he made it home safe and enjoyed spending time with her. I'm sure if he would have done that she wouldn't be having doubts about calling him so soon.
Trialbyfire Posted January 3, 2009 Posted January 3, 2009 There are a number of things that redant's two threads have reinforced for me: If it's not part of your internal natural progression to having sex, never do it, especially to keep a man.Never have sex with a man who won't commit to an exclusive relationship.Stay away from rubberbanding men.Stay away from men who play power and ego games, instead of focusing on the caring aspects of an honest relationship.Never be afraid to walk.
carhill Posted January 3, 2009 Posted January 3, 2009 To get the exact phrase, you'll have to ask carhill. But the gist of it is that the person who cares less, wins because they have less investment, thus less on the line. Enjoying the learning experience immensely, but will intrude to clarify this... "The person who cares the least has the most control" is the theory I came up with many years ago, mainly to work on my atypical (for a man) propensity to care too much. By investing less emotion, thought and action on any particular circumstance (doesn't have to be relationships of the romantic nature), a person maintains the upper hand in the relationship. The ultimate version is simply walking away without emotion or fanfare. On-topic, having only read as far as this post, I'd opine steady as she goes. I wouldn't infer any positives or negatives as of yet. As always, I'm welcomed to change my mind later
Taramere Posted January 4, 2009 Posted January 4, 2009 "The person who cares the least has the most control" is the theory I came up with many years ago, mainly to work on my atypical (for a man) propensity to care too much. By investing less emotion, thought and action on any particular circumstance (doesn't have to be relationships of the romantic nature), a person maintains the upper hand in the relationship. The ultimate version is simply walking away without emotion or fanfare. Hmmmm. Lying on your deathbed, you have the following convo with the Grim Reaper "What have you learned in life? What are you proud of?" "Well....I learned that in all my relationships - whether romantic, platonic or familial, I should always be the one who cares the least. I've learned to detach emotionally, and I'm very proud of that. It gives me a sense of having the upper hand over others, you see. And that's what life's all about. Feeling that you have the upper hand." Some people are naturally less emotional or needy of other people's attention. Re the opening post on this thread, some women might think nothing about not hearing from the guy the next day. Others, like the OP, might feel hurt because touching base regularly with those she cares about is important to her. I'm all for people learning to manage their emotions in order to create more harmonious relationships...but I'm struggling to see the wisdom of a naturally compassionate and emotional person getting into some kind of "who cares less" competition with people who happen to be less emotional by temperament. It smacks of a mindset along the lines of "I'm a carer by temperament, and this makes me inferior to less caring individuals. Less powerful than them." How can a person be happy and self respecting with that mindset? It's eminently possible to be a compassionate person who feels their emotions intensely, without becoming subservient or martyr-like in response to less emotional people. Without resenting them for being different or taking their temperament as some kind of personal slight/sign that they have the upper hand over you. Can't you take some pride in your own temperament and use its associated traits to your own (and your loved ones') advantage, rather than waste energy trying to be something that's in direct opposition to who you are at heart?
carhill Posted January 4, 2009 Posted January 4, 2009 That's exactly the kind of mind f*ck my wife uses
Taramere Posted January 4, 2009 Posted January 4, 2009 That's exactly the kind of mind f*ck my wife uses Never mind. At least you can keep smiling through all the injustice, you plucky duck.
carhill Posted January 4, 2009 Posted January 4, 2009 If you want to play, I can have a bit of fun with that, but calling people names and inferring personality characteristics from cartoon characters is a bit off-topic. I think I'd wait
Tomcat33 Posted January 4, 2009 Posted January 4, 2009 Well speaking about off-topic, the whole notion (though quite ingenius) of this power game of who cares less, seems out of line in this situation considering what the OP has discussed and I really don't see what the relevancy is to even bring it up and have you guys fight over why anyone would even want that for themselves? Lest we forget a man should be able to take a day off or two while visiting his family, after several days of closeness with a woman he is interested in, and not be deemed as some evil game player or the likes because he is not "checking in". "Reporting at 16hundred hours, SIR!" The OP has dissapeared for a few days, my guess is she is off with her guy while some are trying to find something deeply wrong with how they are relating.
carhill Posted January 4, 2009 Posted January 4, 2009 TBF brought it up, I clarified it, since my name was mentioned. People took issue; I responded. If you like we can take it to PM No one writes me anymore
Trialbyfire Posted January 4, 2009 Posted January 4, 2009 TBF brought it up, I clarified it, since my name was mentioned. People took issue; I responded. If you like we can take it to PM No one writes me anymore Yes, I brought it up. You know when someone's all in. You know when someone's not. There will be reactions to both scenarios, reliant on what you've compromised. Let's see how this one plays out.
Tomcat33 Posted January 4, 2009 Posted January 4, 2009 TBF brought it up, I clarified it, since my name was mentioned. People took issue; I responded. If you like we can take it to PM No one writes me anymore I'm on your side my friend, your theory is great. I just don't see what it has to do with this thread. I don't think it's the same thing at all. Anyway, you should name your theory and make it into a Personality Disorder we all know how much of a hit those are around here!
Author redant Posted January 6, 2009 Author Posted January 6, 2009 I appreciate all the posts. It's interesting going through them. I appreciate the help. Things are good. We spent the weekend together he called today. I don't think I will call him even if he doesn't call me through the week. I will just deal with it. I called him the first time (when I panicked) thinking that he might think I don't care, but what about him letting me know that he cares I need that. It is early on, I like him, we have some different beliefs so I am not totally sure about him either, but I do enjoy our time together alot.
Tomcat33 Posted January 6, 2009 Posted January 6, 2009 Awesome, glad to hear you spent the weekend together and he called you today. Now just out of curiosity, why would you not call him during the week?
Author redant Posted January 6, 2009 Author Posted January 6, 2009 I guess im thinking ahead, thinking he may not call for a few days? I'm thinking that I will just wait until he calls me, well not wait, but just not call. I'm thinking of giving him space and not be clingy.
Recommended Posts