T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
---|
44.1 | watch out for takers | JUNIOR::FLOOD | AL | Fri Aug 22 1986 17:09 | 21 |
| I too, have suffered from the "you'd make a great
lover,boyfriend,husband routine". It's always followed by
"but not for me". I am not sure what drives women to be
complimentary about a guy and at the same time show no interest
in him.
My philosphy in the past of being a giving person has only generated
a lot of broken relationships. Someone recently told me that takers
have radar for givers. I have tried to sharpen up my radar so I
can avoid the takers and find a true giver/sharer. So far singles
notesfile has generated a number of meetings, none of which have
yielded the desired results - it has widened my scope of friends
but not the elusive special one.
I am not ready to give up and will keep trying.
as mentioned by 44.0 the aforementioned words do get to be quite
trying.
al
|
44.2 | Keep on keeping on! | FRSBEE::COHEN | Mark Cohen 223-4040 | Fri Aug 22 1986 21:14 | 21 |
| re: 44.1
I felt some of the frustration you do. I had just ended a very painful
relationship (ah, college romance) and was feeling the only way I would ever
find someone who could truly love me somehow I had to change. I reached this
conclusion because my style/personality/etc. seemed to get in the way over the
long term.
As it sometimes seems to happen, at the doorstep of despair I met a woman who
loved me just the way I was. I spent a lot of time pinching myself, making
sure that what appeared to be was indeed true.
Sunday is our eleventh anniversary. We've grown even closer together and have
two great kids. I feel very fortunate that Wendy came along before I gave up
on myself. My message is that I think you're right when you say you're not
going to give up. Don't lose heart or give up believing in yourself.
There's an old saying: "When the pupil is ready, the teacher appears." I think
that is at least sometimes true in relationships too.
Mark
|
44.3 | obligations? | OMEGA::YURYAN | | Sat Aug 23 1986 21:32 | 20 |
|
This *does* happen to women. I think it touches all humans
once or twice. I've received all types of complements and they
don't really carry much weight with me. What I think is missing
is the special feeling of sincerity that should exist behind the
words.
But, it almost sounds like the *obligations* here are the ugly part.
Why is it (or is it really) nessesary to have obligations enter
into a relationship?
Don't feel alone ...(if all else fails... LOVE yourself!)
Sue
PS:"the average insect found in soup" !
:-)
|
44.4 | Another woman it's happened to | APEHUB::STHILAIRE | | Mon Aug 25 1986 12:04 | 20 |
|
Re .0, why don't you talk to women over 35? Do you think our opinions
don't count anyway? I know there has to be a cut-off point for
everything, but as a 36 yr. old woman, not ready for the old-age
home yet, I sort of take exception. A woman doesn't automatically
turn into an old hag after age 35, ya know!
In regard to the rest of your note, I have met tons of interesting
men who seemed to think I was fine for a buddy (or worse yet as
a one-night stand - how many men run into women who are only interested
in them as a piece of you-know-what???) I met a lot of guys when
I was younger who told me that I "deserved" to meet the "right"
man, but assured me that, alas, it wasn't them!!
Fortunately, at the moment, I live with a man who seems to think
I'm the right one for *now* - forever is a strange concept.
Lorna
|
44.5 | | QUARK::LIONEL | Reality is frequently inaccurate | Mon Aug 25 1986 12:23 | 9 |
| It's happened to me too. I think the people who say it consider
it a "safe" compliment, not understanding how terribly frustrating
it is for those of us who, for various reasons, don't find ourselves
attractive to the opposite sex. I consider this to be on the same
order of "I love you - like a brother." AUGH! Meanwhile we see
others who DON'T seem to make good husbands/fathers/etc end up in
satisfying relationships. Is there a lesson to be learned here?
Steve
|
44.6 | The Shotgun Approach | GENRAL::TAVARES | | Mon Aug 25 1986 12:25 | 10 |
| I too, remember that one. It had me fooled for years into thinking
that I wasn't good enough for anyone -- the old great-for-someone-else
-but-not-for-me. What used to kill me was that I'd see the same
women get hooked up with some jerk that would cause them more trouble
than anything...just never could understand that one. Anyway, after
a long time, I came to play the singles game shotgun style -- go
through as many as you can, until one clicks. It takes a lot of
buckshot to bag one bird, but its worth it. As far as loving
oneself...that's what works in the meantime...noone has loved themself
more than me!
|
44.8 | Ick | OMEGA::YURYAN | | Mon Aug 25 1986 13:03 | 14 |
| .7
Whew! Bob if your ever used those lines with me I'd
see right through them in a second. ( the ones who hear them
all the time learn to recognize them instantly)
Isn't that a real indirect approach? I think the person
would just like it if you were honest. ANd said "I really
don't think we are meant for each other " Or what ever the
truth is.
Sneak back !!! Ick icK icky icky icky!!!!!!!!
Sue
|
44.9 | Up font and personal | FRSBEE::COHEN | Mark Cohen 223-4040 | Mon Aug 25 1986 13:14 | 7 |
| Here's another vote for open and honest. We get all mucked up with lines,
strategies, tricks and games. Often times we tell ourselves that these
back-door ploys are to protect the other person, but my experience is that
they're almost always to protect ourselves. I applaud Sue (.8) straight
and honest is the best -- well put.
Mark
|
44.10 | How cute is cute enough? | APEHUB::STHILAIRE | | Mon Aug 25 1986 15:22 | 8 |
|
Re .5, unfortunately, I think the lesson to be learned here is that
there are a lot of shallow people in the world, especially in regard
to what qualities they are looking for in a romantic partner.
Lorna
|
44.11 | On the other hand ... | JON::MAIEWSKI | | Mon Aug 25 1986 17:12 | 16 |
| In many cases, it may be that the reason a person says that "you'd
make a great lover,boyfriend,girlfriend,husband,etc for someone but not
me" is that they feel "you'd make a great lover,boyfriend,girlfriend,
husband,etc for someone but not me".
Not everyone is compatable with everyone else. It is probably more
the case that if you are a wonderful person, you are compatable with
a small percentage of the other wonderful people. You can recognize
the others as wonderful and tell them so but in many cases, a relationship
would not work.
In such a case, it would seem to be better to acknowledge the other
persons good qualities and move on rather than putting you both through
a lot of unnecessary aggravation.
George
|
44.12 | speak now or forever hold your own | MISTAH::CURCIO | Sauna_Rat, In the Heat of the Night | Tue Aug 26 1986 08:56 | 9 |
| one such >compliment< I hear most often is "Too bad your already married!"
If I'd thought I'd get this many womens interest before I'd gotten
married I wouldn't have gotten married.. but then if I hadn't gotten
married I wouldn't have gotten that many womens interest %^)
some kind of catch 22 there somewhere
Sauna_Rat
|
44.13 | it has been said to me! | REGENT::KIMBROUGH | gailann, maynard, ma... | Tue Aug 26 1986 12:39 | 16 |
|
I think it is important to note that sometimes we realize that we
could really ruin a great friendship by taking it any further...
Sometimes we are just meant to be good friends rather than lovers
and if you really like that person and recognize that fact than
why not voice it? I have some male friends that I would prefer
to keep just that way.. we get along just fine and just because we
are of opposite sexes I would not want to make it anything more
than what we have.. if they were to suggest anything more I would
have to say the classic line "but you are like my brother!" sorry
but in certain circumstances I think it is a valid statement!
too many good friendships are ruined by trying to assume more into
it!
ga
|
44.14 | Ditto | PABLO::ROGERS | | Tue Aug 26 1986 14:16 | 9 |
| I agree with Gail there!! A similar situation happen with me and
We slept together! Then we didn't talk to each other for a few
weeks..I was used to talkin with her at least once a week!! Until
finally we got together and discussed what had happened (Which we
both enjoyed :�)!!) and decided it was a mistake that almost cost
our friendship!! So... some people would not want to make the mistake
of ruining a friendship!!
Zing
|
44.16 | | AKOV68::BOYAJIAN | Forever On Patrol | Wed Aug 27 1986 06:49 | 25 |
| Ok, let's try this scenario...
I meet a wonderful, attractive, vivacious, fun-loving woman who
complements my personality. We have many common interests, enjoy
each other's company a great deal, etc., etc., etc. A permanent
commitment is not undesired. Only one problem. She is a devout
Catholic, I'm a non-practicing Christian agnostic. If we married
and had kids, she'd want them brought up Catholic, obviously; I
would not. She is also bothered by the fact that my personal
philosophy, according to her beliefs, does not reserve me a place
in Heaven after death.
So what do we end up with? Hey, you're a great person and would
make a wonderful spouse, but for someone else, not for me.
I realize that this might seem to be an extreme example, but it's
not unlikely. The above scenario actually happened to me. It's
also happened (with another woman) to a friend of mine.
On the other hand, it is frustrating to have someone tell me,
"You'd make a great husband." At least it was when I was available
and looking and wondering, "Great! So where are the women for whom
I would?"
--- jerry
|
44.17 | | QUARK::LIONEL | Reality is frequently inaccurate | Wed Aug 27 1986 09:55 | 9 |
| I think I'd make a distinction between deciding "you're not for
me" after getting to know each other well, and being told that
before anything even starts. It's the latter that would bother
me more.
In any event, I agree that it is desireable to have good friends
of the opposite sex, and I am privileged to have several, some of
several years. It is an especially pleasurable experience.
Steve
|
44.18 | Back from an absence... | GAYNES::WALL | I see the middle kingdom... | Wed Aug 27 1986 11:21 | 14 |
|
re: .4
I talk to plenty of females outside of that range. Just the recent
examples happened to fall in that age bracket.
My father's sisters (all over 50) and a whole squad of their daughters
and granddaughters did it to me this weekend. Big brother got added
to the list of possible avocations. It's enough to make a guy think
about the Foreign Legion.
*Sigh*
Dave W.
|
44.19 | Agnostic + Catholic = Marriage (in my case) | JUNIPR::DMCLURE | Vaxnote your way to ubiquity | Thu Aug 28 1986 04:10 | 49 |
| Boy does this sound eery or what? This scenario describes my
marriage almost exactly (with the exception that I'm actually a
practicing Unitarian Universalist - but this can sometimes be lumped
into a broader Christian agnostic belief system depending on the person).
I suppose I'll have to deal with these issues someday, so I might
as well get a headstart now...
> If we married
> and had kids, she'd want them brought up Catholic, obviously; I
> would not.
Not quite so obvious. As far as schools, you want the best of what's
available. While I firmly believe that public schools are fine, some
public schools far short of the private (including Catholic) schools.
As far as religion, well, tough subject. I guess I'm not real sure
how we plan to handle this either. Ideally, I'd like to alternate weeks:
one week everyone goes to the Catholic church, the next week everyone goes
to the Unitarian church.
Now if I could just get my wife to stay for the coffee get-together
after sermon (at the Unitarian church), then I'd be all set (especially
since this is a major facet of the service). Anyway, this is going to
involve alot of give and take from both of us, and I'm sure that when
(if?) we have kids, that this issue will become more of an issue.
> She is also bothered by the fact that my personal
> philosophy, according to her beliefs, does not reserve me a place
> in Heaven after death.
This is something that she will have to work out for herself.
While the current trend is for the Roman Catholic church to be very
strict about the "old ways", I think you will find a great deal more
freedom in the American Catholic church teachings (i.e. maybe she
should look for a different diocese).
> So what do we end up with? Hey, you're a great person and would
> make a wonderful spouse, but for someone else, not for me.
Maybe so, but don't rule out Catholic women in your continued
search.
> I realize that this might seem to be an extreme example, but it's
> not unlikely.
Obviously not too extreme.
-davo
|
44.20 | Digression! | QUARK::LIONEL | Reality is frequently inaccurate | Thu Aug 28 1986 09:59 | 3 |
| Maybe we can take the subject of religious differences into
a separate topic? I'd like to continue that line of thought...
Steve
|
44.21 | Other places and religions with similiar situations... | ZEPPO::MAHLER | Michael | Thu Aug 28 1986 13:04 | 10 |
|
You might want to also venture over to BAGELS where
similiar discussions take place.
Mike The Mod.
Hit the usual keys to get there...
|
44.22 | Just a little carried away... | JUNIPR::DMCLURE | Vaxnote your way to ubiquity | Fri Aug 29 1986 03:55 | 8 |
| Sorry, I got a little carried away. I've been staying up too
late working on the "Battle of the Languages" in the TLE::LANGUAGES
notesfile (note # 99.* press KP7 and all that jazz...).
Anyway, I was just trying to reply to .16, but I forgot to add
the little "re: .16," on there. If you want, I'll delete it.
-davo
|
44.23 | | AKOV68::BOYAJIAN | Forever On Patrol | Thu Sep 04 1986 06:22 | 33 |
| I hadn't really meant to bring up the subject of religion in a
relationship. It just happened to be the point of contention in
that relationship. If someone wants to bring it up as a separate
topic, fine by me.
re:.19
I suppose "obviously" is a very general term in this context, but
I used it for the reason that it was my understanding, confirmed
by the woman in my scenario, that the Roman Catholic Church only
sanctions marriages to non-Catholics on the condition that the
children be brought up Catholic. It isn't clear to me what censury
action, if any, they take if that condition isn't met.
I should also point out that my idea in regards to the hypo-
thetical children's religious (I hadn't had school in mind)
upbringing was that I'd like them to sample a number of different
denominations to see which had the most to "offer" ("no award"
being a valid choice as well) on a personal level.
As for the idea that she might find a diocese that had a less
traditional bent, this was not an option. She didn't really feel
constricted by these beliefs in the sense that she followed them
regardless of whether she liked them or not. She held them because
she believed they were *right*. I wasn't simply interpreting what
I thought was the case. She told me these things outright in so
many words.
One final point is that this experience did not "sour" me on
Catholics as potential SO's. I only brought this up, as I said,
as an example of how someone *could* "make a good partner, but
not for me".
--- jerry
|