Vertex Posted April 19, 2006 Posted April 19, 2006 I talked with my ex-girlfriend for one last time. We got into a pretty heated argument, over why/how we hurt each other. She admitted that she had been leading me on for nearly a year and didn't understand it until now. But I got angry back saying that that only justifies every concern I've ever had -- that they were not "paranoid" but in fact well-founded. She knows she pulled away and blamed other nonexistent issues and I know that perhaps I should not have pursued back so heavily to find out what was wrong, but I think relationships need communication and she kept so much from me, I feel. It angered me so much that instead of telling me how she really feeled, she'd blame other things and put me through emotional struggle trying to change all these problems that in fact did not even exist in the way she made them exist. I told her I was jealous and had wanted her affection. I remember a story she told me where she chased her ex down and tried to get a kiss from him. I didn't understand why she was dependent on others for love and yet not me when I was willing to give it to her. I said, if I were him I would have kissed you. She replied, "And I would have lost interest." In turn I retorted that the idea was ridiculous -- love should not be defined by silly high-school games where you seek those who ignore and neglect you. She put it simply, "But I like the games -- they excite me." I asked whether or not she really believed that since she was hurt so much in her last relationship due to these "games" but she seemed to like it much better than the "security" of a relationship where people seek each other and avoid the whole push-and-pull routine. She said without those games, relationships are inherently boring because there is no suspense or anticipation -- you cannot have that equilibrium and the only way for attraction to work for a long period of time is for there to be an imbalance. Of course, I thought it was a silly idea. In short, it was a messy fight and we ended it on a very bitter note, blocked each other on messengers, etc, but I strangely feel better. We had said it would be best not to speak again because we had too much together and it would be hard to continue onward normally without the past butting in. However, I felt like the fight was closure for me. I was always accused of being paranoid despite the fact that my observations seemed rather sound (every time I've had a concern it later turned out to be true, or I'd learn of something externally, etc). I know I've gotten quite emotional lately and deviated from the calm/collected self I try to maintain most of the time, but I guess love does that to you sometimes. It really helped me to know that we are truly not on the same page anymore. We just don't want the same things in life right now -- she wants games, I want mutual connection and affection. We were sad though that we could not continue our friendship as we invested so much time in talking to each other over the past two years. It's like rejecting history somehow. I'll always have the fondest memories of our good times. Regardless I want to pose a question to you all. We had a small debate over love itself... we seem to share different views and I am wondering what you all think. She believes in "neverending love" where no matter what, you feel love for that individual and will naturally be unable to pull yourself away. Like, it's an inevitable connection that you can never deny no matter what problems arise. This sort of love is not definable in her words and cannot be explained by logic, reason, etc. It's just THERE. I, on the other hand, thought love can always be explained given you know certain things. If two people have similar values, want similar things in a relationship, etc, then they will more naturally have that connection through similarities in how they conduct their lives and so it will be a much stronger attraction/"love." In short I felt like she was being too ideal and thought love was something that just prevails anything and does not require work to keep sustained (her words), whereas I think any form of love will require work to keep it alive.
alphamale Posted April 19, 2006 Posted April 19, 2006 Regardless I want to pose a question to you all. We had a small debate over love itself... we seem to share different views and I am wondering what you all think. Read the book The Five Love Languages...., I think there's a thread on it somewhere around here.
littlekitty Posted April 19, 2006 Posted April 19, 2006 Love is a living, breathing thing. And therefore it requires feeding and nuturing to keep it strong and healthy. I agree 100% with this: If two people have similar values, want similar things in a relationship, etc, then they will more naturally have that connection through similarities in how they conduct their lives and so it will be a much stronger attraction/"love." It makes it easier to make things work if you have these things in common. It allows you to hopefully grow together, in the same direction. The romantic ideal that love conquers all and is all enduring is fine, but not realistic IMO. I believe a relationship needs working at, at all times to keep it strong and healthy. It needs time together, communication and many other things. Marriages of 60 years + don’t just happen because they are ‘in love’. Ask any couple with a long standing marriage and they will tell you, you need to be friends and you need to work at it.
a4a Posted April 19, 2006 Posted April 19, 2006 she is living in fantasy land! what utter bulls*** is that. another line to feed you I suppose. Love will prevail all bounds......... NOT! Tell her to turn off the lifetime channel and get a real life herself. For crying out loud she said she gets off on playing games....... this is just another one. Sorry you got duped, not all women are this way.
basscatcher Posted April 19, 2006 Posted April 19, 2006 Regardless I want to pose a question to you all. We had a small debate over love itself... we seem to share different views and I am wondering what you all think. She believes in "neverending love" where no matter what, you feel love for that individual and will naturally be unable to pull yourself away. Like, it's an inevitable connection that you can never deny no matter what problems arise. This sort of love is not definable in her words and cannot be explained by logic, reason, etc. It's just THERE. She is a dreamer and infatuated with the idea of love. The kind of love she thinks is lasting is the honeymoon stage. She has the Cinderella Complex... I, on the other hand, thought love can always be explained given you know certain things. If two people have similar values, want similar things in a relationship, etc, then they will more naturally have that connection through similarities in how they conduct their lives and so it will be a much stronger attraction/"love." I agree more with your beliefs. You are a realist. In short I felt like she was being too ideal and thought love was something that just prevails anything and does not require work to keep sustained (her words), whereas I think any form of love will require work to keep it alive. Any Psychologist, Pastor, Preist, Councelor and long lasting couple will tell you that your ideals of love are more on base. The other form of love is a illusion, a fairytale. its a Cinderella Complex... She must have read to many fairytales and romance novels. She is a love addict. She will go from relationship to relationship to get that HIGH from the rush of a new relationship. She will become depressed and feel like a failure. She will learn to question love if it is real. She is lost in the illusion right now in her life... She will get her wakeup call one day and you don't need to inflict your health and life into all her drama as it unfolds in her life. Cut youself loose for good and move on in your life. Your values are healthy and your beliefs are reality.
a4a Posted April 19, 2006 Posted April 19, 2006 Ask any couple with a long standing marriage and they will tell you, you need to be friends and you need to work at it. and a little silly thing called RESPECT!
SmoochieFace Posted April 19, 2006 Posted April 19, 2006 Marriages of 60 years + don’t just happen because they are ‘in love’. Ask any couple with a long standing marriage and they will tell you, you need to be friends and you need to work at it. Yeah, and 60+ year-long marriages also do not involve silly, stupid, *exciting* games. Vertex... your XGF has lots of growing up to do if she is *excited* by games... you are much better off without her as you seem to be much more mature.
littlekitty Posted April 19, 2006 Posted April 19, 2006 Alright, alright, so I missed a couple of things off the list!!
Moai Posted April 19, 2006 Posted April 19, 2006 I don't think that she is living in reality. It is telling that she enjoys games (at least she admits it) and thinks of love like she does. IMO, those two things go together. The most important aspect of lasting love is friendship, followed closely by trust. I have no idea from personal experience, of course, that idea just "feels" right to me.
AriaIncognito Posted April 19, 2006 Posted April 19, 2006 Love definitely requires work. Any relationship we take on in our lives , be it romantic, or otherwise, will require work. You need to learn to compromise, and how to deal with other peoples needs, and how to love them despite the hard times. Your idea of love is definitely more on the mark. Hers is just one of laziness. She doesn't want to put work into a relationship, and will therefore never truly find her "everlasting love" because everlasting love, takes time and effort to survive. Jennifer
littlepiggy1 Posted April 19, 2006 Posted April 19, 2006 She sounds like one of those women who is going to bounce from relationship to relationship forever chasing an ideal that doesn't exist in reality. Vertex, congrats on getting some closure. Just keep everything you wrote her in mind the next time you get the urge to contact her.
bluetuesday Posted April 19, 2006 Posted April 19, 2006 i agree with everyone else. she has a little girl's notion of romantic love. seek a woman next time.
tanbark813 Posted April 19, 2006 Posted April 19, 2006 She said without those games, relationships are inherently boring because there is no suspense or anticipation -- you cannot have that equilibrium and the only way for attraction to work for a long period of time is for there to be an imbalance. There you go, man. Be glad you got rid of her. She's simply too immature. Girls start to grow out of that kind of thing around age 30 (sometimes ). Read the book The Five Love Languages...., I think there's a thread on it somewhere around here. Yeah!
Author Vertex Posted April 19, 2006 Author Posted April 19, 2006 Wow I did not expect to get so much agreement... but I feel a lot better now. I was worried I was being far too irrational or something. But yes this last conversation startled me because it was the first time she admitted she liked playing games and thought the "mature relationship" I sought was too boring. She's always jumped from relationship to relationship throughout middle school and high school, and now she realizes this and says she needs to be alone, but admits she still wants random play. She is happy during the honeymoon stage -- she herself has said she loves the feeling of newness, but I think if that's all you seek, you're doomed to fail and you'll never find that everlasting love. I feel like perhaps I want something I can't have for many years to come. I want a life partner -- she at one point did too, but now realizes it isn't what she wants. Unfortunately she never told me this straight-up until now -- always made me guess at things. It is such a sad thought that people tend to gravitate towards things that do not gravitate back. Perhaps it is because there used to be a gravitation, so you hope it can return, but it seldom does.
basscatcher Posted April 19, 2006 Posted April 19, 2006 Where the hell are men like you in my neighborhood.. You sound like the kind of guy I WANT..... Practically ever post I have read of yours I see the kind of man I want......
MadDog Posted April 19, 2006 Posted April 19, 2006 I think having a fulfilling relationship takes work but if it's a good one, it doesn't feel like too much of a chore. Unconditional love, I think, is pretty unhealthy. I can't say I'll love a girl no matter what. I mean, I've been with girls I thought I loved but they turned out to be terrible for me. I obviously don't feel anything for them anymore.
Author Vertex Posted April 19, 2006 Author Posted April 19, 2006 Where the hell are men like you in my neighborhood.. You sound like the kind of guy I WANT..... Practically ever post I have read of yours I see the kind of man I want...... LOL I appreciate the compliment! MadDog: Right, I think unconditional love can be dangerous. It has a certain implication that no matter what the actions may be, the love will still exist. Somehow I feel as if this will just open oneself up to a lot of suffering because I don't think love should include a lot of negative actions or things that just continuall degrade life, although sometimes it is hard to give up because of that hope of things getting better. Anyone who is afraid of working in a relationship has already sealed their fate, in my mind. Yes some relationships take more work than others, but for some people there have to be more problematic occurrences before it feels normal, I guess. My ex and I got along great until this suddenly exogenous change in outlook and change in view of relationships.
MadDog Posted April 19, 2006 Posted April 19, 2006 I think relationships should still be pretty easy if you're with a compatible person. Finding a compatible person is the difficult part. Example. I'm dating a girl who works tons of hours working a job that keeps her constantly busy. I've sent her a text or voicemail before that she never got around to replying to until several hours later or even the next day. I totally understand that she's busy though and don't take any offense when she can't respond. In that way, I'm compatible with her. Now, if I didn't take it that way, I could be a guy who tells her how I don't like it when she doesn't respond and even give her s*** about it to try to make her respond. If I were that type of guy, I'd be incompatible with her. The major conflicts arise when you're with someone who's incompatible and you try to "fix" things. It's so much easier to just find someone else.
CaliGuy Posted April 19, 2006 Posted April 19, 2006 Vertex, are you sure you're not dating my ex? That's exactly what happened to me. That's why I've started laying down boundaries where I never had them before. It's helping me keep out the bad people in my life. I imagine it will do the same in regards to women.
Author Vertex Posted April 19, 2006 Author Posted April 19, 2006 I think relationships should still be pretty easy if you're with a compatible person. Finding a compatible person is the difficult part. Example. I'm dating a girl who works tons of hours working a job that keeps her constantly busy. I've sent her a text or voicemail before that she never got around to replying to until several hours later or even the next day. I totally understand that she's busy though and don't take any offense when she can't respond. In that way, I'm compatible with her. Now, if I didn't take it that way, I could be a guy who tells her how I don't like it when she doesn't respond and even give her s*** about it to try to make her respond. If I were that type of guy, I'd be incompatible with her. The major conflicts arise when you're with someone who's incompatible and you try to "fix" things. It's so much easier to just find someone else. What you outline here though is the kind of compatibility I speak of. You are willing to be understanding of each other's situations. What happened with me is that despite an initial understanding and love, my ex pulled out without any real reasons and led me on with a lot of fuzzy logic (at least, fuzzy to me). Even knowing that we had physical distance due to college, I tried to be understanding and not too demanding of her time, and I did not make any unreasonable requests as a result. It's things like, unless I called her we wouldn't have spoken on the phone at all. She stopped Emailing, etc. Things that indicate something's awry. Caliguy: What exactly happened with you? I'm just curious how similar it all is and how you've dealt with the future since then in terms of boundaries (what type of boundaries, how to enforce them, etc)
MadDog Posted April 19, 2006 Posted April 19, 2006 What you outline here though is the kind of compatibility I speak of. You are willing to be understanding of each other's situations. What happened with me is that despite an initial understanding and love, my ex pulled out without any real reasons and led me on with a lot of fuzzy logic (at least, fuzzy to me). Even knowing that we had physical distance due to college, I tried to be understanding and not too demanding of her time, and I did not make any unreasonable requests as a result. It's things like, unless I called her we wouldn't have spoken on the phone at all. She stopped Emailing, etc. Things that indicate something's awry. I think the problem with your relationship was that she just wasn't into the relationship for whatever reason. It could have been that she didn't feel the same connection as you, or maybe she just wasn't ready for a serious relationship. Two people could potentially be compatible but if they meet each other at the wrong time, it won't work out. Timing is huge when it comes to relationships.
Author Vertex Posted April 19, 2006 Author Posted April 19, 2006 I agree 100%. I think it was just wanting different things in a relationship, and the timing was off. I don't feel as if she was ready to have something long-term. But how do you figure out what people want before you start a relationship? I feel like somehow it's too easy to miss signs and they later develop into big things. How do you know what will be a fundamental incompatibility later? How can you even tell if you're in that honeymoon stage where you can't get enough of each other?
CaliGuy Posted April 19, 2006 Posted April 19, 2006 Caliguy: What exactly happened with you? I'm just curious how similar it all is and how you've dealt with the future since then in terms of boundaries (what type of boundaries, how to enforce them, etc) I was boring, predictable and not much of a challenge to her. I constantly talked about the relationship and where we were heading instead of letting things happen naturally. I started to revolve around her and lost touch with my own personal goals/desires, etc. I basically turned into a wuss. When she came back I was better, but still not where I should have been. I wasn't ready. I still am not now but I'm getting there slowly. The next relationship that rolls around for me I will have learned a lot and will use this experience to guide me. Think "counter-intuitive"
Author Vertex Posted April 19, 2006 Author Posted April 19, 2006 Heh, counter-intuitive indeed I mean every relationship is still a learning experience... perhaps each one is better than the previous? Has this not held true for most people?
Touche Posted April 19, 2006 Posted April 19, 2006 I agree 100%. I think it was just wanting different things in a relationship, and the timing was off. I don't feel as if she was ready to have something long-term. But how do you figure out what people want before you start a relationship? I feel like somehow it's too easy to miss signs and they later develop into big things. How do you know what will be a fundamental incompatibility later? How can you even tell if you're in that honeymoon stage where you can't get enough of each other? You figure those things out by having conversations about the BIG issues BEFORE you fall too deep. You shouldn't even fall for someone without knowing the answers to the important questions. Kids do that not mature adults. If you do, it means you're not REALLY in love because you don't know the person. It's infatuation in that case.
Recommended Posts