Author torn_curtain Posted August 17, 2011 Author Posted August 17, 2011 Yes, an infant is totally needy. (All infants are.) But it is acceptable to be needy as an infant or child, to almost all human beings. Whether it's acceptable for an adult to be needy varies based on the person deciding and the decree of neediness (almost no one would want to date a woman who was as needy as an infant, obviously, and as EH says some people would see needing daily contact as 'acting like a child'). For the record, I did not say needy people were unacceptable to all human beings. Neediness does feel oppressive to secure/not needy people. And whether you are a needy person or are just needy at times varies as well; even secure as I am, I am sure there are occasions when I get needy. We all do. I called it! OMG. You're missing the point. *double face palm* What Olive Oyl was joking about (the humor seems to have totally flown over your head) is you'd probably call that infant "needy" in the pejorative sense that it was abnormally so. Her point is that neediness varies with context. You can't rely on the dictionary definition because it would imply that any time somebody needs something, some response, they are being "needy." When in fact "needing" is often perfectly normal depending on context, as for example needing some form of daily contact seems to be common in established relationships.
zengirl Posted August 17, 2011 Posted August 17, 2011 I called it! OMG. You're missing the point. *double face palm* What Olive Oyl was joking about (the humor seems to have totally flown over your head) is you'd probably call that infant "needy" in the pejorative sense that it was abnormally so. Her point is that neediness varies with context. You can't rely on the dictionary definition because it would imply that any time somebody needs something, some response, they are being "needy." When in fact "needing" is often perfectly normal depending on context, as for example needing some form of daily contact seems to be common in established relationships. I agree neediness varies with context, and I even said that (in that post). If your security in a relationship is at all shaken by a lapse in contact, I would call that needy in a pejorative sense, as I think it's behavior that could be harmful both you you (general you) and your relationship. I also disagree that we've established that "needing" daily contact seems to be common. You've gotten a mix of responses here, and hardly any after you changed the wording. And it's not a large enough sample to tell. I would say, if you look at LTRs, you'll often see couples HAVE daily contact, and that's why I said, it makes a big difference between having it and requiring it. Just like if a guy told you early on, "I need daily sex." That'd seem controlling to me. However, if we just happened to have daily sex. . . that seems good.
Mme. Chaucer Posted August 17, 2011 Posted August 17, 2011 I think that daily contact is positive because it helps to nurture the connection between people in an intimate relationship. Especially in cases like the OP's, where that contact is ALL there is to the relationship (I mean, they won't be seeing each other after his fishing trip this weekend and stuff like that). I was in a similar situation before my FIANCE (haha, I've got to say that whenever possible before it's too late!) and I actually met. Intuitively, we both did our parts to connect on the phone every day. Fortunately, we were aware that we weren't going to be able to have world-problem-solving or deeply revealing conversations anywhere near that often. We didn't want to get burned out or think of connecting as a chore. Frequently the talk was limited to a couple of comments about our days and a fond good night. Or, even just a voice mail. We continue to do this when we are apart. Probably because we are geriatric, we both realize very well that seemingly innocent lapses in communication even in daily life can end up growing into chasms between formerly loving couples. BUT, I have seen way, way too many threads here on LS where a person (sadly, usually a woman) is freaking out about lapses, or frequency (do you remember one poster who had her boyfriend texting HOURLY?). Basically, I'd hope that both people are on the same program where such things are concerned. And that if a person is freaking out, either that person has a problem, or there is a real compatibility issue regarding the couples need for contact.
Star Gazer Posted August 17, 2011 Posted August 17, 2011 (edited) You are the first woman I've met who didn't need (yes need) some form of daily contact in an established relationship unless external circumstances prevented it. You seem to always have one foot out the door, so it's not surprising that you would see needing daily contact as abnormal. Two things: YOU aren't in an "established relationship" yourself. You've never met the guy, only started talking to him online a couple months ago, and have expressed concern already about whether it can work (distance aside). ZG, although you haven't "met" her either, isn't the only one who doesn't NEED daily contact (if it happens, great, if not, I'm not going to question the relationship!) and finds NEEDING daily contact (as compared to having it develop and occur naturally or organically out of a want, not a need) as needy - in either the neutral or pejorative sense. I do too. But to be clear: having daily contact is great, if that's what fits the couple. I agree with MC that it helps forge a bond. It's the NEEDING it, compared to enjoying it and appreciating it, that I find troublesome...particularly when you're counting how long he takes to respond. Anyway, I feel like I'm being baited a bit by you and Star here, so this will be my last response to either of you in this thread. Whatawho?? Just because I disagree with you and have pointed out your inconsistencies, I'm somehow baiting you?? Edited August 17, 2011 by Star Gazer
sm1tten Posted August 17, 2011 Posted August 17, 2011 I like daily contact, but I don't need it. And I hate the idea of it being "required" of me. I probably couldn't date someone who needed daily contact; if someone said, "I need to talk to you every day to feel secure in this relationship," I would find that really off-putting. But if they said "I want to talk to you every day because I love talking to you," then I'd be making sure my phone was charged up. I don't even think the two are mutually exclusive, but they imply different things about the person to me.
Author torn_curtain Posted August 17, 2011 Author Posted August 17, 2011 (edited) I like daily contact, but I don't need it. And I hate the idea of it being "required" of me. I probably couldn't date someone who needed daily contact; if someone said, "I need to talk to you every day to feel secure in this relationship," I would find that really off-putting. But if they said "I want to talk to you every day because I love talking to you," then I'd be making sure my phone was charged up. I don't even think the two are mutually exclusive, but they imply different things about the person to me. I think this is turning into a semantic debate. Any need can be made to sound off-putting if phrased in the wrong way. Of course you'd find that statement off-putting because your word choice is so blatant, and people don't usually state their needs in extremely explicit terms. If they did, you'd probably think there was something wrong with the person, not because of what they said but because of how they said it, and that the need was even stronger than they were letting on. It would be like if I said to a guy at the first sign that he was gaining weight: "I need you to stay in shape, because if you let yourself get obese I will lose interest in you and end the relationship." That may be true, but I'd never phrase it in such an off-puttingly demanding way. If a SO said that to me I wouldn't just take it at face value and remind myself that many people probably have this need for a fit partner; rather I'd assume he was obsessed with my weight to an unhealthy extent because he had chosen to state it in such a bold, unforgiving manner. In other words, we judge what people tell us both by content (face value) and tone (subtext). My guy and I agreed that we both share a need for some form of daily contact unless otherwise specified. I think that's totally reasonable, especially given that communication is all we have since we're long distance. Here's how our conversation went down: Me: Hey babe. I know we've both really busy, and I'm fine with us falling into a more manageable rhythm, but I'd like it if we could have some form of daily contact, even just a text or two. Him: Totally. I very much want that too. Sometimes I've hesitated to text you because we're up at different hours and I didn't want to wake you up. Me: That's fine, I keep my phone on vibrate when I'm sleeping anyway. You can text me whenever you want. Him: Cool. Then I'll definitely make sure we stay in touch day by day, even if we're busy or whatever and can't have an extended conversation. Edited August 17, 2011 by torn_curtain
zengirl Posted August 17, 2011 Posted August 17, 2011 I think that daily contact is positive because it helps to nurture the connection between people in an intimate relationship. Especially in cases like the OP's, where that contact is ALL there is to the relationship (I mean, they won't be seeing each other after his fishing trip this weekend and stuff like that). I was in a similar situation before my FIANCE (haha, I've got to say that whenever possible before it's too late!) and I actually met. Intuitively, we both did our parts to connect on the phone every day. Fortunately, we were aware that we weren't going to be able to have world-problem-solving or deeply revealing conversations anywhere near that often. We didn't want to get burned out or think of connecting as a chore. Frequently the talk was limited to a couple of comments about our days and a fond good night. Or, even just a voice mail. We continue to do this when we are apart. Probably because we are geriatric, we both realize very well that seemingly innocent lapses in communication even in daily life can end up growing into chasms between formerly loving couples. BUT, I have seen way, way too many threads here on LS where a person (sadly, usually a woman) is freaking out about lapses, or frequency (do you remember one poster who had her boyfriend texting HOURLY?). Basically, I'd hope that both people are on the same program where such things are concerned. And that if a person is freaking out, either that person has a problem, or there is a real compatibility issue regarding the couples need for contact. Did you just get engaged to your long-term partner, Mme. Chaucer? I don't remember hearing of an upcoming marriage before! If so: congrats. And I totally agree with your points here. I would never say regular contact hurts a couple as long as it is organic, natural, and not forced out of some kind of need for regularity as security. But to be clear: having daily contact is great, if that's what fits the couple. I agree with MC that it helps forge a bond. It's the NEEDING it, compared to enjoying it and appreciating it, that I find troublesome...particularly when you're counting how long he takes to respond. And this is precisely my point. I'm failing to see how that was ever unclear or about semantics. The energy you bring to something is extremely important---if you go into your contact "needing" it on some set time frame, that's a stress and a burden to the other. If you go into it in an organic way, just wanting to reach out, that will not be needy, because when the person is not available, you'll (general you!) be totally okay with it and understand it's not about you. I like daily contact, but I don't need it. And I hate the idea of it being "required" of me. I probably couldn't date someone who needed daily contact; if someone said, "I need to talk to you every day to feel secure in this relationship," I would find that really off-putting. But if they said "I want to talk to you every day because I love talking to you," then I'd be making sure my phone was charged up. I don't even think the two are mutually exclusive, but they imply different things about the person to me. That's precisely it. Although most people who are needy and insecure about contact aren't going to come out and admit it; you'll see it through the way they act about contact----missed calls, natural lapses, etc.
Eternal Sunshine Posted August 17, 2011 Posted August 17, 2011 I have to comment on how weird I always found zengirl's jumping from one "serious" relationship to another in an almost robotic way. Each boyfriend is "awesome" and she connects "so well" with each one, and she is "in love" with each one. It's like she needs to be in a relationship and men are completely interchangeable. There is next to no grieving time and I have never felt a single genuine emotion from any of her posts. I find it odd that anyone can find people to seriously date and fall in love with so frequently
zengirl Posted August 17, 2011 Posted August 17, 2011 I have to comment on how weird I always found zengirl's jumping from one "serious" relationship to another in an almost robotic way. Each boyfriend is "awesome" and she connects "so well" with each one, and she is "in love" with each one. It's like she needs to be in a relationship and men are completely interchangeable. There is next to no grieving time and I have never felt a single genuine emotion from any of her posts. I find it odd that anyone can find people to seriously date and fall in love with so frequently I don't have any trouble believing you find it more difficult to connect to people than I do, ES. I love lots of people who aren't my romantic partners as well and am extremely open to the people I let into my life in RL. Love is not difficult if you are open to it. I can still appreciate a good man, even if he's not the right man for me. I have dated a not-so-great man before, but not in years. If I picked a guy for a boyfriend, he was something special, but that doesn't mean that when we don't work out, I'm lost or adrift. I can and have been alone. But it's easy to meet lovely people and connect to them if your heart is open, your conscious clear on everything you did in your past relationships, and you are lucky to run across many beautiful people in your life. I'm blessed with abundance, and I see it everywhere. If that's mechanical to you, so be it. I'm happy with my life. Though if attacking me randomly in a thread that's not about my relationships makes you feel better, go for it. Seems a silly way to go about life to me.
Author torn_curtain Posted August 17, 2011 Author Posted August 17, 2011 I think that daily contact is positive because it helps to nurture the connection between people in an intimate relationship. Especially in cases like the OP's, where that contact is ALL there is to the relationship (I mean, they won't be seeing each other after his fishing trip this weekend and stuff like that). I was in a similar situation before my FIANCE (haha, I've got to say that whenever possible before it's too late!) and I actually met. Intuitively, we both did our parts to connect on the phone every day. Fortunately, we were aware that we weren't going to be able to have world-problem-solving or deeply revealing conversations anywhere near that often. We didn't want to get burned out or think of connecting as a chore. Frequently the talk was limited to a couple of comments about our days and a fond good night. Or, even just a voice mail. Phew. I'm glad to hear you understand why this is an important need for us given the long distance nature of what we have. Yeah, it's been the same with us since we had our talk. We don't do the extended conversations every night anymore, but we exchange at least a few words when we're busy just to keep in touch. BUT, I have seen way, way too many threads here on LS where a person (sadly, usually a woman) is freaking out about lapses, or frequency (do you remember one poster who had her boyfriend texting HOURLY?). Basically, I'd hope that both people are on the same program where such things are concerned. And that if a person is freaking out, either that person has a problem, or there is a real compatibility issue regarding the couples need for contact. I agree. I think I did freak out too much about losing touch with him last time, and I feel a little silly about it in retrospect. I think it was partly that we were being so intense in our communication that any lapse seemed major. But now that we've fallen into something more balanced, I don't think losing a couple of days would worry me as much.
Author torn_curtain Posted August 17, 2011 Author Posted August 17, 2011 But it's easy to meet lovely people and connect to them if your heart is open, your conscious clear on everything you did in your past relationships, and you are lucky to run across many beautiful people in your life. I'm blessed with abundance, and I see it everywhere. This all sounds well and good in a magic candy land kind of way, but I don't think it's really true. It's easy to meet lovely people to have as friends but finding a suitable romantic partner is much more difficult since so many variables need to align (attraction, compatibility, timing on both ends). I guess you're less picky than most.
zengirl Posted August 17, 2011 Posted August 17, 2011 (edited) This all sounds well and good in a magic candy land kind of way, but I don't think it's really true. It's easy to meet lovely people to have as friends but finding a suitable romantic partner is much more difficult since so many variables need to align (attraction, compatibility, timing on both ends). I guess you're less picky than most. Maybe, though I certainly have some standards more than one girlfriend has raised an eyebrow at over the years, so I kind of doubt it. When I was single before I met my BF, my female friends frequently told me I was way too picky (ETA: They have the limiting belief that they cannot ask for the guy they want and then find him; I do not. I have more than once asked the universe for the kind of guy I wanted, made a list, and gotten it. Sounds hokey, but it works for me, and for that I'm grateful.). I mean, I am sometimes: I won't go out with a guy who has too many grammatical errors in his texts and all kinds of little things in addition to the big: educated, brilliant, sexy, attractive, happy, interesting, fun, kind, optimistic, and funny basic adjectives most people want. I've often thought I was more lucky than many, but I think (hope) part of that is my mindset. Optimism is a powerful force. Compatibility is hard, long-term, because I feel like I'm still "growing" and I cannot pretend to know where a relationship is going to go (maybe you never can; I'll defer to older and wiser posters on that) --- I'm almost to a point where I know myself really well, but I'm still young, and I do want to be very sure. So, I'm eager to learn from my past experiences, and I can celebrate them as learning experiences, rather than worrying about the fact that they ended. When I'm done, I know I'll have a great partner. And forever. Might be the BF I'm with now, might not. I'm not sure yet, but it feels possible. Either way, I'm always okay, and I know my life will work out for the best. Optimism is just a belief that your life will work out, and it's the best belief to take, I say. But if anyone is happy, with whatever they're doing, I say: awesome. Happiness is what's important. Happiness and treating the people around you with kindness. Nothing else matters, including what I think of you on a message board! Though if you go around thinking something will be difficult, I think it usually will be. ETA: I'm sure a lot of my beliefs sound silly to you. I also do a meditation at least once a week where I give thanks for all the cells in my body, my organs, my skin, my bones, my muscles, just the perfect miracle that is a healthy human body. Life really is pretty grand. So I'm used to sounding silly, is my point. Happiness often does. Edited August 17, 2011 by zengirl
Star Gazer Posted August 17, 2011 Posted August 17, 2011 I have to comment on how weird I always found zengirl's jumping from one "serious" relationship to another in an almost robotic way. Each boyfriend is "awesome" and she connects "so well" with each one, and she is "in love" with each one. It's like she needs to be in a relationship and men are completely interchangeable. Oh... the irony! I mean, hypocrisy!!
OliveOyl Posted August 17, 2011 Posted August 17, 2011 I think this is turning into a semantic debate. Any need can be made to sound off-putting if phrased in the wrong way. Of course you'd find that statement off-putting because your word choice is so blatant, and people don't usually state their needs in extremely explicit terms. If they did, you'd probably think there was something wrong with the person, not because of what they said but because of how they said it, and that the need was even stronger than they were letting on. I agree. If someone said "I need to be in contact with my exclusive partner in some way at least once a week," and that was actually necessary to feel secure about the relationship... whether it flows organically or not, I cannot see that ever being construed as "needy." What we are talking about is whether a need is seen as acceptable to the other party or not. If it's acceptable -- it's not needy. If it not acceptable -- it's needy. Otherwise, the term becomes meaningless. Neediness is in the eye of the beholder, so to speak. Some people want and NEED daily contact to feel secure in the relationship - and that's okay -- if the other person involved feels the same way. I also think it's all semantics about whether it's evolving organically or not. If you have a water cooler right next to your desk and you get eight full refreshing cups of water every day whenever you want, you will feel that fulfilling your need is "natural" compared to the person backpacking in the desert who is down to the last few drops of water in his canteen:
zengirl Posted August 17, 2011 Posted August 17, 2011 (edited) I agree. If someone said "I need to be in contact with my exclusive partner in some way at least once a week," and that was actually necessary to feel secure about the relationship... whether it flows organically or not, I cannot see that ever being construed as "needy." Well, if the attitude was because they felt insecure and lacking in validation, it'd still be bad, though if the parties weren't speaking once a week naturally, their neediness would probably be based on the poor nature of the relationship as much as their own psychology. And to be clear, I didn't mean any need is needy, and that's why I took care to define it. Every "need" isn't needy by the definition in the dictionary. The definition (again) is as follows ": marked by want of affection, attention, or emotional support <emotionally needy>". Of course, there are things every relationship needs to exist. But approaching it from a poverty mindset, from a mindset of want, of fear of lack, makes it needy. Am I needy (not emotionally) if I drink the water I need to stay hydrated? No. Am I acting needy if I feel the need to stock up on all the water in the grocery store and worry if it's enough because I believe there will never ever be any more water? Yes. It's all in the energy you put into it (which has always been my point). People who use contact for validation are doing so because they fear a lack of something. ETA: Hence the original definition I gave: But you are someone who needs daily contact. My current BF and I have near-daily contact, and it doesn't feel oppressive, but it's not something I need. It's just our natural flow. I think NEEDING daily contact is kind of a sign of neediness (to me), in either gender, but that could just be a style difference, I don't know----I do want to clarify I mean "needing it to feel validated and secure in the relationship," which isn't the same as naturally having it because you dig talking to each other; I know many couples that naturally develop it, but it's not a personal requirement so much as an evolution of the dynamic after you've been with the person awhile. Edited August 17, 2011 by zengirl
OliveOyl Posted August 17, 2011 Posted August 17, 2011 Well, if the attitude was because they felt insecure and lacking in validation, it'd still be bad, though if the parties weren't speaking once a week naturally, their neediness would probably be based on the poor nature of the relationship as much as their own psychology. I think this portion crystalizes the difference in our opinions right here. I think it's perfectly acceptable/okay (for me/relationship partner) to seek validation and security in a relationship. Apparently you don't think that's a good thing to seek in a relationship. And that's okay. Just different approaches. It doesn't bother me that my BF might "need" to see me to feel good or vice versa. Although, right now we seem to be on the same wavelength, so separating out the "need" is difficult. Am I needy (not emotionally) if I drink the water I need to stay hydrated? No. Am I acting needy if I feel the need to stock up on all the water in the grocery store and worry if it's enough because I believe there will never ever be any more water? Yes. It's all in the energy you put into it (which has always been my point). People who use contact for validation are doing so because they fear a lack of something. I do understand your point. My point with the water is... when you get what you need on a regular basis, you may not realize that you need it.... and there is not that "needy" energy surrounding it... until you don't have it (or as much of it) anymore. About the OP, I personally don't see Torn_curtain as needing excessive validation or putting out an excessively desperate energy just from the posts I've read. Being in a LDR is difficult and I think daily contact is actually very important to keep the relationship thriving in that type of situation.
zengirl Posted August 18, 2011 Posted August 18, 2011 I think this portion crystalizes the difference in our opinions right here. I think it's perfectly acceptable/okay (for me/relationship partner) to seek validation and security in a relationship. Technically, I did not say it was "not okay." I simply said it was needy. Apparently you don't think that's a good thing to seek in a relationship. My point with the water is... when you get what you need on a regular basis, you may not realize that you need it.... and there is not that "needy" energy surrounding it... until you don't have it (or as much of it) anymore. Hmm. Well, when we're speaking of emotional needs, I think people need to give themselves what they need on a regular basis and too few people do. And then they wig out when the slightest thing changes in their relationship, which often leads to failure where there could've been success. In terms of using a partner to fulfill emotional needs---I find it interesting because t__c has attacked me both for being "mechanical" and for not being able to be alone (which seem to counter each other, IMO). I would say I CAN be alone, precisely because I can fill my own emotional needs. I see a relationship as being about giving to my partner. "Needing" is about taking. And a relationship only works, IMO, when both people are interested in giving and don't really care that much about taking. (Which doesn't mean be taken advantage of, but when mutual giving is happening, no one is.) About the OP, I personally don't see Torn_curtain as needing excessive validation or putting out an excessively desperate energy just from the posts I've read. Being in a LDR is difficult and I think daily contact is actually very important to keep the relationship thriving in that type of situation. Well, this was never my point, but FTR, I don't think she, overall, puts out that energy, but in certain parts of the post we've been referencing, she did. She calmed down, which was good. But, again, that was never my point. It wasn't about her; it was about how daily contact can be a healthy dynamic and how it can't be. As I said, I wrote it so it could be applied or not applied to her, as my description fit.
OliveOyl Posted August 18, 2011 Posted August 18, 2011 I wrote: "I think it's perfectly acceptable/okay (for me/relationship partner) to seek validation and security in a relationship." Technically, I did not say it was "not okay." I simply said it was needy. You actually said it was "bad." Well, if the attitude was because they felt insecure and lacking in validation, it'd still be bad, I see a relationship as being about giving to my partner. "Needing" is about taking. And a relationship only works, IMO, when both people are interested in giving and don't really care that much about taking. (Which doesn't mean be taken advantage of, but when mutual giving is happening, no one is.) Relationships are equally about giving and taking. In a good relationship there is a good balance between giving and taking on both sides. If someone is giving, the other person who is receiving it, is taking.
zengirl Posted August 18, 2011 Posted August 18, 2011 (edited) I wrote: "I think it's perfectly acceptable/okay (for me/relationship partner) to seek validation and security in a relationship." You actually said it was "bad." Did I? Ah, well, I do think so---using other people for validation seems kind of gross to me in most cases, though it really does depend what you mean by it. I don't see you as someone who uses people for validation, FTR, so I assume when you say it there that you mean you simply FEEL validated by your partner, not that you actively seek to get them to do things to validate you, which is where it gets gross to me. I cannot find that comment for the context. ETA: Found it! I actually said: Originally Posted by zengirl Well, if the attitude was because they felt insecure and lacking in validation, it'd still be bad, though if the parties weren't speaking once a week naturally, their neediness would probably be based on the poor nature of the relationship as much as their own psychology. Yes, I think that's bad. I don't think that's the same as what you phrased above, but if that's what you meant. . . yes, I think it's bad. People who are deeply insecure and lacking in the ability to validate their own existence are, to me, essentially going to have toxic behaviors that hurt anyone they date, IMO. Relationships are equally about giving and taking. In a good relationship there is a good balance between giving and taking on both sides. If someone is giving, the other person who is receiving it, is taking. I think there's a difference between receiving and taking. For a classic example: If I expect a man to pay the bill for me, then when he does, I'm taking. If he simply decides to, and gives, then I'm receiving. If you expect daily contact and put that expectation on your partner, you're taking. If it happens naturally, from giving and receiving, that's different. Edited August 18, 2011 by zengirl
Star Gazer Posted August 18, 2011 Posted August 18, 2011 I wrote: "I think it's perfectly acceptable/okay (for me/relationship partner) to seek validation and security in a relationship." There's seeking validation of your relationship's value/worth to your SO, and there's using your relationship/SO to seek validation of your own self-worth.
zengirl Posted August 18, 2011 Posted August 18, 2011 There's seeking validation of your relationship's value/worth to your SO, and there's using your relationship/SO to seek validation of your own self-worth. True, I suppose. FTR, I meant the latter each time I said validation. I never think of the first kind---and I'm still not sure how good "seeking" sounds. In most cases, if you don't know your worth to your SO, something is likely to be wrong (though mishaps and miscommunications do occur). I do think everyone wants to feel they are valued by their SO, and that's not needy if you never come from a place of lack. Needy is when you start from the state of lack; I think healthy people in healthy relationships are prone to mostly assume their SO values them whereas people who come from that place of lack are prone to often assume (even when untrue) that their SO does not value them.
Almond_Joy Posted August 24, 2011 Posted August 24, 2011 Introvert -- both he and I are. Although I'm sort of a mixture because while I'm naturally quite shy, I'm very chatty once I feel comfortable around somebody, I feel happiest when I'm around other people, and I don't need a lot of alone time. I'm guessing you're a straight up introvert and need more alone time? Yeah, I am.
Recommended Posts