Slow burn believer- feeling untrue to myself

[TheBlingRing14]

I have always been a firm believer in- well I will say an anti-believer in "The Spark." In that lightning in a bottle moment. The fireworks. Love-at first-sight. That kind of thing. I just.....I don't believe in it. I am a much bigger believer in the slow burn. That romantic feelings can develop over time. That attraction can build. That a natural easiness can develop....a comfort that leads to a much happier romance than The Spark. Often, with that intense chemistry it burns fast, it burns hot, and then it flames out just as quickly. 

That said....with my first boyfriend....he told me a couple of dates in, he really liked me but he just wasn't feeling  the "butterflies". However, we both agreed to move forward and see if anything developed. We were together on and off for a couple of years. The breakup was for other reasons, but.....ultimately, I find myself wondering if he was able ever to get over that lack of initial desire. 

Fast forward to today. I find my beliefs being challenged. I met a guy via online dating, we exchanged some messages. And, we had a video call the other night. I thought the call went well, we have a lot in common; there were a couple of lulls, but otherwise, the conversation flowed nicely. But....he didn't indicate he wanted to see me. And he didn't say he would like to do it again sometime. But...we did continue to exchange messages. He did tell me during the video call, he typically blocks someone when he knows they are a "No." So....I thought the fact that we were still talking was a decent sign. That there was at least a chance. 

But....it starts to feel like go or get off the pot time. So.....I ask him if he'd like to meet up. The response takes a while. Which.....is typically never a good sign. I finally receive something saying that he doesn't see anything romantic, he doesn't feel romantic chemistry; he enjoys talking to me, but he'd like to meet up as "just friends."   My confidence couldn't be any lower. After all...how can you tell "romantic chemistry" without meeting someone? The only thing could be how I look. Should I really be meeting someone when my confidence is so low? But, we get along and have a lot in common, so I would like to be his friend. 

 

Which leads to my beliefs being challenged. A part of me wants to meet up in the spirit of friendship. A part of me thinks if I do, I am going to get my heart broken. After all, if I believe that the best relationships start as friendships......then I have to be willing to have that friendship first. I am just feeling torn, and like I said, feeling untrue to how I've always believed. 

 

Thoughts?

[flitzanu]

you are going to be lying to yourself if you go meet him just to be friends.

you didn't set out to "be friends" you set out for a date, and yes, you are going to be disappointed because it already sounds like you have romantic interest, otherwise you'd just block this guy and move on.  

this guy has been honest up front, it hurts, but you should be glad you got this information without wasting more time, that he told you he isn't interested.  

[ShyViolet]

When a person tells you they don't feel romantic chemistry with you, I think still meeting up with them is a really weird thing to do.  I think hoping they will change their mind or hoping an attraction will grow is wishful thinking and is kidding yourself.  I don't believe in "love at first sight" but I do believe that an initial attraction or initial chemistry is very much important and necessary in order for two people to date.  If someone goes on a first date with someone and is saying "I'm not feeling it", they shouldn't continue.  I do not believe it's likely to grow over time.

When someone tells you they aren't feeling chemistry or aren't feeling a spark after one date or a few dates, it seems a bit desperate to keep trying with them anyway, hoping they'll change their mind.  

[TheBlingRing14]

2 minutes ago, ShyViolet said:

When a person tells you they don't feel romantic chemistry with you, I think still meeting up with them is a really weird thing to do.  I think hoping they will change their mind or hoping an attraction will grow is wishful thinking and is kidding yourself.  I don't believe in "love at first sight" but I do believe that an initial attraction or initial chemistry is very much important and necessary in order for two people to date.  If someone goes on a first date with someone and is saying "I'm not feeling it", they shouldn't continue.  I do not believe it's likely to grow over time.

When someone tells you they aren't feeling chemistry or aren't feeling a spark after one date or a few dates, it seems a bit desperate to keep trying with them anyway, hoping they'll change their mind.  

Okay but.....and I am NOT referring to this case, but your response in general. 

I am not attractive. I'm just not. Objectivly, I'm not. I have my good days. But most men are not going to find me attractive initially. Which means, if I am relying on initial attraction......I won't date anyone. I'll just be alone forever. But, I am fun and intelligent and well-spoken. And, I do believe I am the kind of person who will become prettier and prettier as you get to know me. 

Which is why when I often see videos or articles talking about how there can never be anything without the initial attraction......I honestly fall into a state of depression. 

What do people like me do? Like I said....just resign themselves to a life of solitude and loneliness?

[TheBlingRing14]

12 minutes ago, flitzanu said:

you are going to be lying to yourself if you go meet him just to be friends.

you didn't set out to "be friends" you set out for a date, and yes, you are going to be disappointed because it already sounds like you have romantic interest, otherwise you'd just block this guy and move on.  

this guy has been honest up front, it hurts, but you should be glad you got this information without wasting more time, that he told you he isn't interested.  

I get what you are saying, I do. 

But....I will never get anywhere if I don't make friends with anyone. So....if this is what it takes to make a friend.....then yes, I think I can do it. 

 

And....to my original point.....isn't the idea that I don't meet up with this guy because there is no chemistry there, just conceding that The Spark is required?

[Acacia98]

I don't think "the spark" is the same thing as chemistry. But then again, maybe it depends on who's doing the experiencing/describing.

Edited May 16 by Acacia98

[TheBlingRing14]

5 minutes ago, Acacia98 said:

I don't think "the spark" is the same thing as chemistry. But then again, maybe it depends on who's doing the experiencing/describing.

 

I don't necessarily believe that either. 

But, in this case, I am kind of equating it, because........it was based on one video call. I am not sure how anyone feels anything in one video call. 

 

I honestly didn't necessarily feel any romantic chemistry either.......but I didn't NOT feel it. Does that make sense? I usually don't feel any sort of way, whether positive or negative, through a phone call or video call. So, it's hard for me to relate. To me, that's what meeting in person is for. 

[ShyViolet]

1 hour ago, TheBlingRing14 said:

Okay but.....and I am NOT referring to this case, but your response in general. 

I am not attractive. I'm just not. Objectivly, I'm not. I have my good days. But most men are not going to find me attractive initially. Which means, if I am relying on initial attraction......I won't date anyone.

You're equating the initial "spark" with someone thinking you're pretty or physically "hot".  That's a very shallow and superficial definition of the "spark" and it doesn't accurately describe all the factors that would make someone decide that they feel chemistry with someone.  Any guy who sees a "hot" woman and wants to date her, without caring what her personality is like, is probably dumb as a box of rocks himself and not someone I would consider a good catch.  There are lots of people in this world who are not so shallow.

Anyone of depth and character judges a person based on much more than how pretty or hot they are.  There are a lot of people who will go for a person who is not conventionally attractive, if they feel a connection with their personality.  A person can decide they feel chemistry with another person based on their sense of humor, their intelligence, their confidence, their taste in music, a myriad of things.  And this does not mean that you need to adopt a strategy of always trying to be friends first with guys.  This is still something that can be determined from the start, by having a first date with someone.

Edited May 16 by ShyViolet

[TheBlingRing14]

1 hour ago, ShyViolet said:

You're equating the initial "spark" with someone thinking you're pretty or physically "hot".  That's a very shallow and superficial definition of the "spark" and it doesn't accurately describe all the factors that would make someone decide that they feel chemistry with someone.  Any guy who sees a "hot" woman and wants to date her, without caring what her personality is like, is probably dumb as a box of rocks himself and not someone I would consider a good catch.  There are lots of people in this world who are not so shallow.

Anyone of depth and character judges a person based on much more than how pretty or hot they are.  There are a lot of people who will go for a person who is not conventionally attractive, if they feel a connection with their personality.  A person can decide they feel chemistry with another person based on their sense of humor, their intelligence, their confidence, their taste in music, a myriad of things.  And this does not mean that you need to adopt a strategy of always trying to be friends first with guys.  This is still something that can be determined from the start, by having a first date with someone.

Hmmm.....yes but I was responding to your message about "Initial attraction." I would consider initial attraction or chemistry to be......in the immediate moments after meeting someone. 

 

And, in such a short amount of time, initial attraction boils down to a very limited amount of things- looks. Smell. Maybe voice. 

 

But....in a 15 minute coffee meetup. Or a lunch date. Or in my case, a video chat....I would say initial attraction has very little to do with personality or depth or character. After all, how much can you learn about those things in such a short amount of time? Not much. These are things you learn over time. Ergo, my philosophy that attraction can build and can develop. 

 

But, during a brief date/visit (or video call as it may be)....you don't really have time to learn all those things. So, it boils down to the basics- looks, smell, voice. 

Yes, it's possible that there could be some non-shallow deal-breakers that pop up- the way a person treats other people, if they act unusually reserved or excitable, either way- in a way that you wouldn't click with. If they use foul language, show up late, act bored. Yes, those are things that could pop up that contributes to Initial Attraction. 

BUT all things equal, if a conversation/meetup/date is relatively normal, or even positive, you guys have things in common, you guys have things to talk about, etc....then Initial Attraction is about looks, it's just that simple. 

 

And, it's silly to pretend it doesn't. Do societally unattractive people have success in dating? Sure. But, it's the exception and not the rule. And it's almost never from Initial Attraction. 

 

[basil67]

29 minutes ago, TheBlingRing14 said:

And, it's silly to pretend it doesn't. Do societally unattractive people have success in dating? Sure. But, it's the exception and not the rule. And it's almost never from Initial Attraction. 

I'm an outlier, but a person's looks don't really have a lot to do with my attraction.  Yes, they need to do the best they can with what they've got....so I'd want someone who appears healthy, dresses nicely and has a good haircut...but that's about it.  I can sit on a bus and find something attractive about many of the men who are around me.

Are you doing the best you can with what you've got?  When's the last time you got a new hairstyle?  Do you wear clothes which flatter your figure?   What about makeup? 

[TheBlingRing14]

16 minutes ago, basil67 said:

I'm an outlier, but a person's looks don't really have a lot to do with my attraction.  Yes, they need to do the best they can with what they've got....so I'd want someone who appears healthy, dresses nicely and has a good haircut...but that's about it.  I can sit on a bus and find something attractive about many of the men who are around me.

Are you doing the best you can with what you've got?  When's the last time you got a new hairstyle?  Do you wear clothes which flatter your figure?   What about makeup? 

 

New hairstyle was about 8 months ago......but got it colored about 2 months ago. It's not long though, which I know a lot of men prefer, but....not much I can do about that. 

Flattering my figure? Yes....I will admit that growing up, I tried to cover up my body in clothes about 3 sizes too big. But, within the last....I dunno....10 years, I have been learned how to dress myself in body-positive clothing. 

I don't wear makeup most days. For a date date, I will. But, minimal.....it's not like i would look like a completely different person without it. For a coffee meetup? Mascara and lipstick maybe. That said, I really don't think it's that. My eyes and face are probably the most redeeming thing about me. 

 

By the way- I am like you.....I can usually find myself attracted to many people. That said....I'm not a man. 

What I have always said is...when it comes to men, 9s want 10s, 7s want 10s, 5s want 9s, 2s want 7s. 

So when it comes to a woman who is a solid 5 or 6.....she looks for similar, for a 5 or 6, or hey even a 4..........but even those men are looking for those 7-10s. 

It makes it very frustrating. 

Edited May 16 by TheBlingRing14

[basil67]

25 minutes ago, TheBlingRing14 said:

So when it comes to a woman who is a solid 5 or 6.....she looks for similar, for a 5 or 6, or hey even a 4..........but even those men are looking for those 7-10s. 

If it's any consolation, you can have a quiet little chuckle when those men complain on message boards that they are permanently single because no beautiful woman will give them a chance.    We tell them about leagues and 'punching above your weight' but they can't/won't change their attitudes.   They will never get a girlfriend

Otherwise, it sounds like you're doing what you can

[TheBlingRing14]

12 minutes ago, basil67 said:

If it's any consolation, you can have a quiet little chuckle when those men complain on message boards that they are permanently single because no beautiful woman will give them a chance.    We tell them about leagues and 'punching above your weight' but they can't/won't change their attitudes.   They will never get a girlfriend

Otherwise, it sounds like you're doing what you can

The funny thing is.....I can fully admit to punching above my weight, and matching with guys that are way out of my league. 

But.....it's not like I am not trying to match with the others either. 

[Gebidozo]

OP, you appear to think that men only feel initial attraction / spark / chemistry with women who are objectively “beautiful” or “pretty” or “conventionally attractive”  or however people choose to call it.

As a man, I assure you that is not true. Initial attraction is based on many factors, of which looks are a fairly peripheral, secondary one. 

We aren’t attracted to conventionally beautiful women. We are attracted to sexy women. Between a conventionally beautiful woman who is dull, dumb, mean, and frigid, and a plain-looking woman who is cute, playful, sweet, witty, passionate, intelligent, and naughty, any normal man would choose the second.

Of course, it is possible that a high school boy gets “attracted” to a model from a magazine or some such, but that’s because he hasn’t grown up yet, his perception of beauty is superficial, and he has no experience in feeling true mutual attraction based on strong sexual chemistry and personal sympathy.

[TheBlingRing14]

24 minutes ago, Gebidozo said:

OP, you appear to think that men only feel initial attraction / spark / chemistry with women who are objectively “beautiful” or “pretty” or “conventionally attractive”  or however people choose to call it.

As a man, I assure you that is not true. Initial attraction is based on many factors, of which looks are a fairly peripheral, secondary one. 

We aren’t attracted to conventionally beautiful women. We are attracted to sexy women. Between a conventionally beautiful woman who is dull, dumb, mean, and frigid, and a plain-looking woman who is cute, playful, sweet, witty, passionate, intelligent, and naughty, any normal man would choose the second.

Of course, it is possible that a high school boy gets “attracted” to a model from a magazine or some such, but that’s because he hasn’t grown up yet, his perception of beauty is superficial, and he has no experience in feeling true mutual attraction based on strong sexual chemistry and personal sympathy.

 

Of course.....I am not saying model beautiful. Lots of normal-looking women find dates every day.    But, I am saying objectively unattractive according to society...you have almost no shot.  

 

And this I know for a fact: I know I am a catch. I am all the things you said: sweet, witty, fun, intelligent, and yes, naughty. I am a great conversationalist. I am well-read, so I know a little about a lot of different subjects, meaning....I can hold my own in conversation. I am a great cook, which you can't really get from a first date/meet, but.....it's a bonus. 

 

And also this: when you go on several....I mean several.....dates in a row where.....you connect on a number of different levels, conversation is easy, you have a ton of shared interests and shared values. But, you can also challenge each other in a playful way. You laugh a lot......and every single one ends with either ghosting or "No romantic chemistry"?   I am a big Occam's Razor fan. The simplest explanation is usually the right one. 

 

[Gebidozo]

While Occam was undeniably a great philosopher, you can’t really apply his “razor” to things pertaining to love and romance. They are too complex and multi-layered for that.

Romantic chemistry has little to do with looks. Otherwise only good-looking people would feel that chemistry. Romantic chemistry occurs on all levels. That includes the physical level, but we’d be naive to think that only good-looking people feel strong mutual sexual attraction and have great sexual connection.

When people who consider themselves “objectively unattractive according to society” complain that they have no success in dating due to that, I’d also like to bluntly ask why they don’t try to date “objectively unattractive” people of the opposite gender. For every such thread as yours initiated by a woman, there is a mirror one initiated by a man. And vice versa.

If you’re aiming for “objectively attractive” men, there is a higher chance that they won’t feel that romantic chemistry with you, especially if they are spoiled by success with women they consider more attractive. I’m not saying that there are sharply defined “leagues”, but both women and men should really stop this insane obsession with looks and choose dating partners with whom they feel at ease, comfortable, and not self-conscious about their physical appearance. 

Edited May 17 by Gebidozo

[TheBlingRing14]

7 hours ago, Gebidozo said:

While Occam was undeniably a great philosopher, you can’t really apply his “razor” to things pertaining to love and romance. They are too complex and multi-layered for that.

Romantic chemistry has little to do with looks. Otherwise only good-looking people would feel that chemistry. Romantic chemistry occurs on all levels. That includes the physical level, but we’d be naive to think that only good-looking people feel strong mutual sexual attraction and have great sexual connection.

When people who consider themselves “objectively unattractive according to society” complain that they have no success in dating due to that, I’d also like to bluntly ask why they don’t try to date “objectively unattractive” people of the opposite gender. For every such thread as yours initiated by a woman, there is a mirror one initiated by a man. And vice versa.

If you’re aiming for “objectively attractive” men, there is a higher chance that they won’t feel that romantic chemistry with you, especially if they are spoiled by success with women they consider more attractive. I’m not saying that there are sharply defined “leagues”, but both women and men should really stop this insane obsession with looks and choose dating partners with whom they feel at ease, comfortable, and not self-conscious about their physical appearance. 

 

My issue with this is two-fold:

Not sure if you caught this from my previous posts or not but...I TRY to date....anyone. Usually in my "league." Sometimes below my "league." But....I don't get matches there either. So, at some point, you have to just play the field and see who comes through and who doesn't. I can't speak for all people, only myself. But....I am not actively trying to match with any particular set of people. Your comment assumes that people are just not trying, which in my situation, and I am sure others, I can assure you is not the case. 

I'd also say that it particularly stings when you get rejected by someone that you feel is realistically within your realm. 

 

My other issue with this is....I really hate the notion that people should date.....or deserve to date....people within their own subset. Tall people should only date tall people. White people should only date white people. Fat people should only date fat people. And so on. The bolded part comes dangerously close to insinuating this. 

 

And yes...I agree with you on romantic chemistry. But, in THIS particular case.....when we are going solely on a video call- what are we judging? When conversation is firing on all cylinders, when you are connecting on various subjects, when you have a solid amount of common interests....the lack of chemistry must come down to very few variables. As to me.....I don't feel chemistry via video call, but I don't not feel it either. It would be hard for me to judge chemistry from a video call, unless the call just went particularly bad.

The ONLY way I could see myself having a superb conversation with a guy but being sure there is no future....would be if he was SO unattractive I couldn't stand it. Which again, would be rare, because I find most people attractive or to have attractive qualities. So, someone would have to be pretty extremely bad looking to qualify. 

And I guess that's where I am. I guess I am in the so extremely bad looking camp that not even great conversation, common interests, and intelligence can redeem me.   

[introverted1]

17 hours ago, TheBlingRing14 said:

I am not attractive. I'm just not. Objectivly, I'm not. 

Even assuming this is true (and we have no idea because we can't see you and your self-assessment could be wrong), it is contextual. In other words, it might be true that the men you find attractive don't reciprocate that feeling, in which case this is an issue that you are targeting the wrong men.  Or it could be that men find you physically attractive but are put off by something else. 

 

1 hour ago, TheBlingRing14 said:

My other issue with this is....I really hate the notion that people should date.....or deserve to date....people within their own subset.

People should date people with whom there is a mutual attraction and interest.  

 

1 hour ago, TheBlingRing14 said:

But, in THIS particular case.....when we are going solely on a video call- what are we judging? When conversation is firing on all cylinders, when you are connecting on various subjects, when you have a solid amount of common interests....the lack of chemistry must come down to very few variables.

And that lack of spark can be due to many things other than appearance.  As someone who has done a reasonable amount of dating, I can tell you that I am able to have lively, engaging conversations with ease; this does not mean I feel a spark.  And, further, it does not mean that the lack of spark is due to physical appearance.  Someone can say something that moves them out of the romantic category but I can still enjoy the conversation even though I realise I don't want to date them.  

1 hour ago, TheBlingRing14 said:

The ONLY way I could see myself having a superb conversation with a guy but being sure there is no future....would be if he was SO unattractive I couldn't stand it.

See above.  Just because this is true for you does not make it true for everyone else. 

[introverted1]

Bling, gently... you posted this back in 2014:

 

Here you were lamenting that this guy, who'd never met/seen you, only wanted to be friends.  And you have had many similar posts over the last 11 years. This suggests that the problem is something other than your appearance.  Have you considered discussing this with someone who can help you get to the bottom of things, like a counselor? 

[Sanch62]

3 hours ago, TheBlingRing14 said:

When conversation is firing on all cylinders, when you are connecting on various subjects, when you have a solid amount of common interests....the lack of chemistry must come down to very few variables.

Not even the person who doesn't feel chemistry can or wants to pinpoint exactly why, necessarily. But I have great conversations with people all the time, and it's rarely about romantic chemistry--it's just fun.

I just had two women wave to me when I stood looking over a crowded waiting room. One said, "You look like you want to come sit over here..." and I asked, "Is this where the party is?" We laughed ourselves silly for a half hour or so. But I didn't want to date them.

I flirt with couples, elderly, small children, retrievers, muts... all of whom I'm not 'rejecting' as potential partners, it just doesn't fit. So when I'm trying to find a potential date, I'm able to roll with the fact that most people are NOT our match. Not even ones who check boxes or strike me as fabulous people. This is natural odds, and dating requires a thick enough skin to roll with this.

I like to think of dating as a willingness to enjoy some temporary conversations with people who don't 'get us' as we try to stumble across the rarest of people who own the right lens to 'see' our unique value. Even more rare, that vision is mutual. Some people will see it in us, but we don't have the capacity to see it in them. It's hit or miss, it's nobody's fault, and it's not tragic.

If you want to sink yourself by making this all about beauty, you can do that. But you've written some insightful things about attraction being more than that. So when a person says they don't feel a romantic chemistry, why not just take that at face value? It's not a reflection on you, it speaks of the match itself, in the same way two equally valid puzzle pieces can't point to either being 'unattractive' for having edges that don't fit together. They are both perfectly fine, they just belong somewhere else in the scheme of things.

[ShyViolet]

17 hours ago, TheBlingRing14 said:

But, during a brief date/visit (or video call as it may be)....you don't really have time to learn all those things. So, it boils down to the basics- looks, smell, voice. 

This is so untrue.  During a video call, or a brief first date, you get a sense of so many things such as intelligence, how interesting they are, whether you have things in common, their sense of humor.  It's entirely possible to get a sense of how smart, funny, interesting a person is from a 10 minute interaction.  Of course it's not enough time to get to know a person deeply.  It's enough time to get a basic sense.

Your insistence that if a person rejects a person from a video call or from a brief first date, then it can only be based on their looks, is just nonsense.

[ExpatInItaly]

22 hours ago, TheBlingRing14 said:

A part of me wants to meet up in the spirit of friendship

If I had turned down someone who wanted to meet me but I didn't feel a romantic interest and then the same person tried to bargain it down to meet as friends? My answer would still be: no, thank you. 

It's an awkward thing to do, girl.

[FredEire]

I agree with the first part of your OP largely, Hollywood and popular culture tells us about the magical love at first sight, you saw this person and suddenly birds start singing and you're head over heels for eachother. Usually this kind of thing is an infatuation driven by something feel you're lacking that you can gain from this person, it feels wonderful at first if it's reciprocated, but it often isn't and even when it is it usually burns itself out quite quickly.

However what you described here isn't a slow-burn romance. He flat out told you he's not interested. So the issue as I see it is that you're projecting hopes of turning it around with this guy when the feelings simply aren't there for him. Believe what he's telling you!

I don't see the point in meeting up "as friends" either, since clearly that's not how you're viewing it. I suspect this is probably something he offered out of politeness.

Edited May 18 by FredEire

[smackie9]

First impressions count tho....as women if we want to attract men we pretty ourselves up because men are visual creatures by nature and attractiveness does lead to desire/interest. None of that involves instant fireworks....it's just about attraction and getting your foot in the door. So if that is what you need to work on then get at it.

[Els]

On 5/17/2025 at 4:34 AM, TheBlingRing14 said:

Okay but.....and I am NOT referring to this case, but your response in general. 

I am not attractive. I'm just not. Objectivly, I'm not. I have my good days. But most men are not going to find me attractive initially. Which means, if I am relying on initial attraction......I won't date anyone. I'll just be alone forever. But, I am fun and intelligent and well-spoken. And, I do believe I am the kind of person who will become prettier and prettier as you get to know me. 

Which is why when I often see videos or articles talking about how there can never be anything without the initial attraction......I honestly fall into a state of depression. 

What do people like me do? Like I said....just resign themselves to a life of solitude and loneliness?

How does any of this mean that there won't be initial attraction? Initial attraction isn't just about looks. Maybe some people ARE solely attracted to looks, but I guarantee you that it doesn't apply to everyone. IMO for many people, the "spark" is a combination of several different factors, including the not-easily-defined feeling of connection or chemistry.

Also there's a huge middle ground between falling in love in the first 5 seconds of meeting someone, and someone literally telling you that they're not interested.

Personally, 15 minutes is enough for me to know that I DON'T want a relationship with a person. It's not enough to know for sure that I do, but it's enough to know for sure that I don't.

I feel like your low self-esteem and pessimism is hurting you more than your appearance ever will. You keep putting yourself in situations that most people with healthy self-esteem would realize that nothing good would come out of. And when these things fail, as of course they will, you blame your attractiveness, and the vicious cycle continues.

Have you considered talking to a therapist?

 

Edited May 18 by Els