f13.net

I'm pretty sure someone posted another okcupid blog a while back but I couldn't find it with search, so:

Your Looks and Your Inbox (http://blog.okcupid.com/index.php/2009/11/17/your-looks-and-online-dating/)

It's a writeup about the differences between how men and women rate each other online (at least on okcupid), and who they actually send messages to.   Nothing groundbreaking, but I thought it was interesting how men seemed to be less judgemental on overall looks while still (mostly) only sending messages to the highest rated women, while women rated most men's looks as below average but still sent them messages anyway.

The comments range from well thought out to deeply, deeply bitter. :heartbreak:

I find these statistics, thought mostly useless, oddly compelling.

Saw something similar to this, although it was done from outside the service so they didn't have as much data, it involved photoshopping the pics to either reduce or enhance asymmetry, the more symmetric versions got ridiculously higher response rates than the un-shopped pictures, which did significantly better than the ones where the assymetry was slightly enhanced.

So, now you know: When setting up online profiles, it's not about lighting, filters, or pictures taken 15 years ago.  Just move your facial features around until your face is symmetrical and matches the Golden Ratio, and you're good.  Best part is that your victims won't be able to explain why you don't quite look like your photo, if they even notice (if they look at it enough before actually seeing your real face, they may mentally filter out the discrepancies, especially if the first few face-to-face meetings involve poor lighting).

--Dave

Black passports work too, or so I am told.

I met the woman I love on OKCupid.  Not sure how that correlates to this thread though.

As I recall the most attractive faces were the ones that closest approximated symmetry without actually reaching it. Truly symmetrical faces fall into uncanny valley.

I love the replies. Apparently everybody rates people on personality, and everybody else is shallow for implying otherwise. Awesome!

I rate people on looks, I admit.. But then I filter personalities afterwards. ;) I figure that's the norm, but I'll just speak for myself.

Hah, political correct mating my ass.
As a leftist youth I left the ideals of a consumption crazed society behind me and shagged many a fine mind.
I mounted the quivering heap, I braved bushes Bear Grylls wouldn't survive and I lived through encounters with amorphic beings who's expressions contorted into shapes only described in the realm of bad science fiction.
I lived it, survived it and wouldn't recommend it to anyone.
Shag a hottie. And if you can't, for the love of god, just have a wank.

That's quite the beautiful tribute to ugly chicks.

Which is why "Beauty Mark" moles were such a critical piece of the sex appeal of Marilyn Monroe, Liz Taylor, Cindy Crawford, and Halle Berry: It gave their otherwise mathematically perfect faces that hint of asymmetry that suggested they were actually attainable.

--Dave

Don't forget Lemmy!

Sheer brilliance, Signe.

okay, I laughed out loud at that one!

What does Bowser's son have to do with this?  His world was shitty anyway. 

It means you were god damned lucky.

I met my wife on OkCupid, I guess I'm God damned lucky too.

Lucky is when that marriage results in a life time of happiness. Not finding a random person to marry on the interweb.

Oh gryeyes, aren't you all cynical and jaded.

These days, people should be happy if they find someone who is worth a good six months. Most folks self obsessed, cocksure, and jackasses on the internet.

FIFY

Proof that quality mods can be found on the Internet. :)

I'd settle for six weeks or six days at this point.

Anyone able to find a significant other that they are happy with beyond the first few months (aka Honeymoon period) is  fortunate.  It doesn't matter where or how you met them.  I see some merit to online dating, personally.  As we keep closing ourselves off with technology, we're finding fewer and fewer social venues to meet like-minded individuals.  I had a friend once tell me to try online dating saying that I would never meet someone between my office and my lab.  Ok, noone that I wouldn't risk losing my job for!  :why_so_serious:

I met my wife at school.  We started going out when I was at university.  We've been going out, engaged then married for a total of 19 years now and we've been happy throughout.  So there is hope :)

It helps that she is phenomenally patient.

I know rather a lot of people who met via online dating and are doing really well together. Anecdotally, it appears to me to work better than regular dating for finding viable long term relationships.

How to put this without seeming cruel?

If you're at the stage of advertising for love on the web you're perhaps more likely to be aware that you can't go throwing it away on a whim.

I disagree.  It's just an exercise in efficiency, especially if you're relatively busy.  You can scan hundreds of people in minutes, and then approach the one's you find interesting.  Dating is just a numbers game, and going out to bars to meet someone can be fun, but is otherwise like digging trenches with a trowel versus an excavator.

It also allows people to meet others outside of their normal social circles.  I tend to think of online dating as a really large cocktail party that you wouldn't otherwise attend. 

To be honest, I think that women have a lot more reason to be apprehensive about this than men.  Guys are predatory and prone to lying about their intentions and marital status. 

I don't know about dating services, per se, however I have seen plenty of people who were friends online and started dating later.

Well, it wouldn't be cruel to me, as that's not how my relationship started (see Lantyssa's comment instead). Are you saying people are pickier/more careful when they're desperate (assuming that's what you left out in order to avoid cruelty)? I'm not sure that makes sense.

Ugly people try harder to make a relationship work?

Hmmm, I wonder. I'm not sure there's a correlation between "ugly" and "likely to use dating service", though. Again, sample size small enough to certainly be irrelevant, but the people I know who've used them (or I should say, the ones who've admitted to it anyway) are generally from the normal-to-good-looking end of the spectrum.

I didn't mean ugly as such.  Just that people who have found that they're not natural at conventional means of procuring a partner might not be quite so quick to lose their temper and break up over stupid/little shit.  Maybe because of a lack of self-confidence, maybe because of old-fashioned humility, maybe through not having their excitement about a relationship dulled by repetition, I dunno...

And sometimes, yeah, what tazelbain said.

I'm ugly and I never used a dating service ;-)

I have no idea how to trust anyone for internet dating.  I wouldn't even know how to trust dating in the real world!

This has always been the advantage I've seen.   I wouldn't want to marry anyone I went to school with, or those in firms I've worked for.  Women architects.. no thx. 

Online game players? Nah, I'm trying to kick the habit, not reinforce the bad habits/ lifestyle it produces.

Other than that it's down to picking up random strangers in bars and shopping venues, based primarily on looks and finding out later how shallow, vapid, uninteresting or uninvolved in things you like they are.  That or trusting friends to hook you up with who THEY think you'll get along with.

I don't know what kind of x-mas gifts you all have gotten from friends, but the choices I've seen all lead me to believe that it'd be a bad end there.

Whereas online dating, you've filled out surveys, appraised yourself, mentioned your interests and are match with a variety who are similar in persona and interests.  Only seems to have upsides to me.

But then, based on prior conversations here I wouldn't have stuck around two weeks in relationships with most of y'all's S.O.

it falls  prey to people who intentionally deceive.

You get a couple of those in a row and it will make you question the process.

Upon reflection I think my issues are more with my selection choices. I tend to gravitate towards those with psychological issues. I've stopped looking while I reassess things.

If you're actively looking there will be problems regardless of where you search.

Finding the right person is about both luck and meeting enough people that you cross paths with and being in circumstances which allow you to realize it could work.  For some it works out quickly, for others not so much.  If you're not interacting with anyone then chances are pretty slim.  If that is the case, then I see internet dating sites as good a way as any.

I had this problem for a long time, myself.  Yay for falling prey to White Knight/ Prince Charming syndrome.

You can't save people from themselves, don't try.  It'll only cause you heartache, headache and financial destitution.  Walk away as soon as you realize they're broken, don't make excuses for them. You can only save one person in this world, yourself.

All my major relationships started as friendships and then evolved, and they butted right up against each other, so I have no personal experience with the whole dating-as-a-grown-up thing. But we do have a fair amount of friends who did the internet dating site thing, and even the relationships that didn't ultimately work out, the people involved were all nice, normal people. It's looking without having to be ZOMG LOOKING all the time, and you theoretically know more about the person at a glance than you would out in the real world, so you can shuffle through people you know without a doubt you wouldn't work out with. You have to assume most people are on there in good faith, of course, but if you aren't willing to do that, you probably aren't using this service to find dates. :P

The main thing I've gotten from this thread is that Draegan and Stark have black passports.

I learned this one some time ago. Now i gravitate to the creative madness of bi-polars. Well, I did. Now I'm a bit preoccupied, so it's a perfect time to just let that sort of thing go and not worry about it.


I'll agree that getting out is better, but  when compared to a club or similar environment, I'll stick with an internet environment. I usually have no problems  with conversations, but there's something about that whole scene that's just unappealing, personally.

I've never in my life met someone worth knowing in a club.

Ah yes, that would be it.

I absolutely loathe clubs.  Only ever go to bars.

Clearly "extremely good sex" is not a useful indicator of "worth knowing" in your world.

Also I met my best friend in a club.

There is a reason why people call you "Dirty Euro Endie".

Top 40 clubs are universally shitty but some of the more niche ones are great places to meet people. Most bars don't have room for dancing which is a great ice breaker.

I've never met someone at a club primarily because I get really, really annoyed at trying to hold conversations that mostly consist of, "What did you say?" "Huh?" "What?" I don't know if I've got shitty hearing but I can never make out what people are saying. Pubs I can do but way too many of those now also think people would rather listen to really loud music than talk and generally dating prospects in places that don't have loud music are pretty sparse.

Yeah, exactly.  I hate them primarily because you can't hold a fucking conversation with a group of people.  Best you can do is find one person and yell into their ear.  Then again, I also just hate dancing in general, so there's that  :oh_i_see:.

I just like to drink, talk with lots of people, and play drunken bar games with them.

Get over your inhibitions about dancing. Saying you hate dancing is like saying you hate laughter and music. Dancing is one of the easiest ways to demonstrate your value.  :awesome_for_real:

Entirely true.  Going to a goth club if you're a goth or an alt-metal club if you're into alt-metal is, after all, giving you a leg up in meeting people who are, on at least one level, a bit like yourself.

This makes me lol.

I had this problem too in my clubbing days. I have since figured that I have some kind of auditory deficiency in the ability to filter out background noise from 'present' noise. I also don't really like large gatherings of people, say at a party or something. I can't keep track of a conversation when I have 4 other ones going on around me.

So, ya, I went to a ton of clubs. I don't think I ever hooked up with anyone, because even the sluttiest of girls require you to not look like a stunned codger with an ear trumpet.

Why do I come here?  Everyone is deaf, drunk or retarded!  (http://cdn.sheknows.com/graphics/emoticons/waiting.gif)

I think I've got that same problem but this sentence here is not necessarily a barrier provided you skip the talking part.

This is one of the reasons I avoid any gathering of people.  It gets very disorienting not being able to make out anything.  I've considered seeing if there's a hearing aid which can help with it, but I'm not yet ready to admit I need one.

I prefer to let a jumbo condom fall out of my wallet.  :grin:

One trick to help with being heard in clubs is to speak a tiny bit slower than normal, in a slightly lower tone and at a fairly normal volume but very close to the girl's ear and with a hand shielding her ear from the music.  She doesn't have the pain of you shouting in her ear, you sound calmer and more assertive.  I think it might be more effective to speak in a higher tone in such situations, but who wants someone squeaking in their ear?

Engels, space bar floozy.

/whispers heyyyyyy, want to see my titan class spaceship?

I think that burn was meant for me?

I do not romance anyone with a space bar. I use all the keys equally.

That's the second time so it must be official.  Endie is Engels.  (it might be the other way around)

So you use the FRANK system?

Well, yea, wrote the wrong name. Whoops. Blame the time of post.

I tend to assume that you never sleep.

Exploiting Facebook is a 24/7 job.   :why_so_serious:

I don't think there is anything inherently wrong with online dating, you're mistakes are prone to be more drawn out (as in you meet someone on a site, call them, set up a date, wait for it then you find out it was a waste of time, whereas in real life you know immediately when you meet someone.)  Someone said it; technology is shrinking our world so online social sites are becoming more the norm for meeting people.  I meet, or hear about, very normal people meeting online and creating a relationship.

It's largely irrelevant. Online is just the same as real life:

Girls are still shallow and say stupid shit.
Guys are still egotistical and say stupid shit.
Fat guys bat out of their league and claim online dating doesn't work.
Fat girls say they have personality and don't think there are any "nice guys" left.
The skinny and stupid of both sexes try (in vain) to sound intelligent.
Meanwhile, everyone's standards go up except those at rock bottom.
Bonus: Everyone says their sarcastic.

That word, it does not mean what these people think it means.

Edited for Clarity: When the out of the norm becomes the norm it tends to follow the typical laws of society. That being, people don't change - they just get dumber.

Technically because it's all being written, no-one on-line is ever sarcastic they're being ironic. Calling it sarcasm is one of those little things that annoys me but then if we called it the right thing we wouldn't have the sarchasm so swings and roundabouts.

I don't get the Black Passport reference.

One of the reasons I liked online dating was that it got rid of the deal-breaker questions, right away:

Do you want kids?
What religion are you and how religious are you?
Do you have pets?
Do you smoke?
How much money do you Make?

Some of these are questions that are not supposed to be brought up according to dating etiquette.  Conventional wisdom says you are not supposed to bring up child-rearing until the relationship has been going for months.  WTF?  I have a friend that was in a 10 year relationship that he had to break out of because he wanted kids and she didn't.

On most dating sites that information is in the summary.

I believe someone is confusing you and I.

Agreed. Online dating makes it easier to separate those who want relationships from those just playing around. That distinction is much harder to make when you meet someone in a casual setting. 

Seems to me that if you're looking for a quality match, you'd be more open-minded to the answers to those questions to begin with.  Often, the best women I've ever met had a "deal breaker" and I would have missed my relationship with them had I let it actually be a "deal breaker". 

The only deal breakers for me are questions of morals and ethics and few, if any will be honest about those on teh interweb. 

There's a fallacy in your logic, Nebu. I don't think you can really stretch the definition of deal-breaker. It means one thing, going the wrong direction means the deal is off. Being open-minded makes them something other than deal-breakers.

I'm just suggesting that not dating a woman because she has a kid (or some other superficial reason) is a fundamentally flawed decision.  Then again, most relationships are doomed to failure to begin with.  May as well just end them before they even start... AMIRITE?

There's absolutely NOTHING superficial about having a kid nor is it fundamentally flawed. It is in fact one of the most major things someone who doesn't have a kid looks at in a potential mate, and you know it. It's probably - outside of a raging case of AIDS - the most important decision one makes before jumping into that shit because mothers are a different breed from "women."


Don't dodge the point.

Not dodging the point.  We differ in opinion.  If someone is genuinely interested in a mate for life, then they're interested in the woman herself.  The child will be mostly out of the picture in a matter of years.  It's hard enough to find someone worth sharing a lifetime with.  I'm not going to throw a potential mate out just because she may have a child.   You see it differently... it's your right and your life.

...what?

Yea, I chortled a bit at that too.

Children become adults.  They move on and have their own lives.  

You know what I meant.   

The problem phrase was "a matter of years."

More like, a quarter of your adult life, minimum.

I find it strange you're arguing the definition of a deal-breaker. It's not like there's gray area in the word. Everyone has different deal-breakers, and most of the stuff above for MOST people falls under that category.

ESPECIALLY kids.

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahhahahahahahaahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

No, really...

Do you have kids? Current readings point to "no"

Nebu, being older than a lot of us, has a different perspective on this, I think.

I'm coming at it from a early 30s point of view, where "kids" means more than a decade, maybe two, before they are out of the house. Nebu's a bit older, so it might only be a matter of years for him.

Someone failed Leykis 101.

My point is that it's damn near impossible to find a quality, compatible mate for life.  Ruling people out because they have children reduces an already infinitesimally small pool.  If you have the good fortune of finding someone that meets whatever criteria you set as limiters, you've beaten the odds.  Good for you.  I choose to keep as many of my options open as possible.  Being single and in my mid-40's, the women I meet with no children are usually childless for a reason, though I have met a few rare exceptions (like some women I've dated in their 20's.  :grin: )

As an aside, dating women with grown children is VERY different from dating a woman with a toddler.  Still, I'd consider both if they were someone that didn't make me crazy after a week.  

Ironically, a woman wanting a quality, compatible mate for life just hit one of my deal-breakers.

While I agree that dating someone with a grown child is vastly different from dating someone with a wee tot, acting like the kids have nothing whatever to do with the mother (or father) being a good match is completely crazy. YOU don't mind if kids are in the picture. That's cool. But they will be in the picture forever. If it's a young child, you have to be OK with raising it and being The Step Parent. And it's also totally ignoring how the kids feel about it, something the parent won't just say, "Oh well, they'll be out of the house in a few years."

Kids aren't like dogs or something, jeez.

This is the gayest argument of all time you fucks.

How is an argument about breeding gay, exactly?

Beat me to it.

You should have taken me up on my offer of an introduction to my cousin, then.  You'd be divorced, bitter and mostly likely still (s)(child)(less).

Sorry, I didn't know what to do with that word.  It was freaking me out.

Between that and being told that I'm on crack, this is a good day. 

You all understand that having a child or not tells you nothing about the compatibility of the woman.  The child is a qualifier of the situation.  What I'm saying here is that tossing a woman aside because of a child would mean you didn't like the situation, not that you didn't like the woman.  As I said above, that's a personal choice.  You're just limiting your pool of women by removing any that have kids.   

I'm also coming to realize that there aren't many people here with adult children.  When your child leaves the house it makes for a profound change in the day-to-day dynamics in a relationship.  It's not that the child has vanished or something equally ridiculous.  It's just my way of saying that the effect of the child on your lifestyle changes pretty noticeably.  Ok, that's if the child is making it through life relatively independently.   

I think this whole 'discussion' could have been avoided (or at least would have gone differently) if you didn't use the word superficial. The decision whether or not to have a child or be involved in a situation where you are going to be a parent-like figure is about the single least superficial possible consideration I can think of involved in a relationship.

EDIT: And you simply can't have a relationship with someone who has kids without also having a relationship with their kids and probably quite a lot of the rest of their family. Again, nothing very superficial there.

So why would having a relationship with her kids make you miss out on the opportunity to spend your life with the woman of your dreams?   You're right that "superficial" wasn't a good word choice.  I just can't comprehend someone passing up on a lifetime of happiness with a great partner because she happens to have a child.   The only logical conclusion I can make is that they think that there are so many other quality matches out there that they can afford to let the ones with children pass them by.  I hope that they're correct.  I haven't found it to be the case in my life.  I've known MANY women and I have yet to find one that I want to share my life with.  Were she to come along, I'd be delighted to share her with her children. 
 

But see that's just it, you can't evaluate those parts of a relationship separately. If the kids are horrible - or even if they're not - then the relationship with the other person is automatically changed. It is another huge variable in the equation.

Wut?  Is this most peoples' experience?  I'm not trolling or anything, but I'm an ugly, irascible son of a bitch and even my experience is completely the opposite of that.

IIRC Nebu married a model -- nuff said.   :awesome_for_real:

It would be nice to go out on a successful date with a beautiful woman that leads to something passionate and brief. That's all I really want out of life right now. No kids, no relationships. Just a clean hook-up that leaves us both satisfied and demystifies a section of my life, without having to pay someone to fake the emotions.

I stopped going to strip clubs, especially after seeing the Butters episode this season on South Park. But I still think about it and want to go just for some female companionship, even though I know every single one of them is using their looks and charm to extort my wallet.

This is why I said you're acting like kids are dogs you don't like that much. You simply can't dismiss the child (or children) as a mere condition that will pass. Yes, of course they grow up and you don't have to take care of them all the time, but you have to get through that part first, and not as some impartial observer or anything, either. You'd be expected to also be a parent. That isn't something to be taken lightly, and I have a lot more respect for people who know themselves well enough to say, "No, that isn't for me," because the kid deserves someone who wants them.

I get that you personally wouldn't mind being in the step-parent role, but to act like it has nothing to do with the parent and what your relationship with them would be is a little ... well, weird. Because he or she is pretty unlikely to be OK with you closing your eyes and thinking of England whenever it is time to Be a Parent to their kids.

Of course, this is all also ignoring that it's OK to not have a Lifetime Forever Perfect Mate. That isn't for everyone either. :P

That last bit is simply not the universal truth that people think it is.  One of my best friends (an ex of mine) is a lap dancer, so I have socialised with, hung out with etc plenty of her colleagues (I also helped her quite a bit with writing up her doctoral thesis, which was an application of Foucault's approach to the broader sex industry).  Lots of them are broken, many are incapable of financial responsibility, or are disproportionately impressed with financial security (this thread is not the place to go into why that is, but the psych 101 answer is obvious if you consider another, darker element across depressingly, astonishingly many of their pasts), but surprisingly few of them are the sort of money-centred, calculating sociopaths you describe once you know them.  Of course, so long as you are in a frame where you are "the client" and they are "the dancer" they will follow patterns closer to what you describe.

Lap dancers are also phenomenally easy to get off with, once you spot the pattern.  It's just not very nice of you to do so.  A bit like taking advantage of single mothers.

Yeah I'm broken in that it is difficulty for me to recognize or adjust myself to other people who are broken in different ways. Plus, meeting anyone at a strip club tends to taint any future friendship / relationship you might have. If you met them anywhere else, that'd have been awesome, but instead...

Oh yeah: lap dancers are prestige catches, but utterly short-term.  You just need to see their horrendous long-term boyfriends (whose willingness to have their girlfriends grind on other men every night is fuelled by their pleasure in having their 16-hour-a-day playstation habits subsidised) to remember why.

Your dismissal of the child issue, Nebu, is coming from the purely male standpoint.  As if you're the one who gets to make or break that decision. 

My sister won't date, nor wants to even attempt to date, a guy who isn't into her kid and the kid doesn't also dig.  She doesn't want to talk to guys who hold your opinion, and - if I could talk her into trying dating sites - would be one of the first to be glad that little checkmark is there.

Kids aren't a temporary malady, they're blood and the only thing that's almost guaranteed to be around for the rest of your life.  Even your 'perfect mate' is more likely to leave your life before your kid.   Or did you stop talking to your mom & dad because you got married and "got a life of your own"?

Thinking about it a bit more and reading a few more responses.. this probably points out more about you than you realize.  You're removing yourself from a lot of women's pools - something you're chiding everyone else about - because of your lassiez faire attitude towards these women's families.  And coming across as a bit of a dick in the same moment.

Gotta lot respect for dudes who take on "families", as opposed to just one person. Don't know if I'll ever do it myself though, but you can't really take a stance on it in some theoretical way. You'd have to be in love with a specific person to start thinking about it. And I guess I can't blame single mothers for having a more serious commitment in mind when they date (not to say all mothers do.. some take their time like anyone else).

[edit] By "you" I mean you in general. And me. Not really addressing this to anyone.

I played in a D&D group with a couple where the wife was a stripper. Oddest fucking relationship I've ever seen. One time they came over with her "girlfriend" and while he played D&D with us, she and her girlfriend made out on the couch. While everyone else was staring in disbelief, the husband paid no attention to them and was far more interested in getting his character to the next level.

Oh, you get off with a few dancers you get blase (add your own acute) about this shit.  You go out for a drink and her friend, on being introduced to you, asks you quite seriously "so, when are the three of us going to have sex, then?"  Or you wander through in the morning, are introduced to her flatmate (who is sitting about in only a g-string) and remember to stop yourself saying "I saw you in some videos from Private, didn't I?"  Not that she'd care.

I'm married now, I stress.  But I was quite the denizen of the demi-monde in my time.

That said, I can only imagine the effect on a room full of my gamer friends of what you describe  :awesome_for_real:.  I lived with a couple of girls (not dancers) for a little while, and while one of them gamed the other disdainfully ignored my geeky hobby.  But I don't think my gaming group ever thought it was anything more than a flat-sharing thing.

How the above statement lead you to your conclusion, I'll never know.


You know what... I don't want to know.

Most likely in life, you will eventually get kicked to the curb by them being tired of putting up with your shit, or vice versa.  At least that's my experience.  People get tired of other people sometimes (broken or not) and so they decide they don't want to deal with them anymore.  Real lifelong relationships do exist, but they are seriously the exception and hardly the norm.

There will never be a situation in which the choice is "pass up a lifetime of happiness if she has a child". In reality the choice is "This chick I want to date has a child". The child is just as big a factor in the relationship as yourself (probably more so). I wont date anyone with a kid because I am then forced to account for a childs feelings in my dealings with the mother. Why would I want to deal with that added layer of drama if it can be easily avoided?

If by some act of magic I fell instantly in love with a woman with a kid I wouldn't deny the relationship. But this is the meat world and not some romantic comedy, it doesn't work like that. Im sure I "could" fall in love with junkies and paraplegics and those with a terminal illness, but if I can avoid those additional complexities I sure as fuck am going to.

Its not mine experience. I cant find a woman to safe my life. Never have. Hell some guys have explained to me how they do it and I've always thought they were yanking my chain. I tried some of the stuff they said and all I got was wierd quizzical looks from women. Girls are just not attracted to me. I've just had to accept it.

Hell when I did go out the only times women ever said anything to me is asking me where the toilets are. I'm not kidding.

Welp there are some kinda embittered people here! I was, when younger, a bit of a coward about breaking up with people (I am a sucker for the crying girl thing) and used to try to provoke them into breaking up with me (kidding myself that I was helping them by letting them be the ones doing the breaking up) and it proved virtually impossible to do so. Once a girl actually, for-real loves you, you have to be phenomenally awful to lose that. Just look at the people you know putting up with genuinely awful people for years.    

What if I don't want to deal with her "Babies daddy"?



 :awesome_for_real:

Yeah that would be a source of ongoing awkwardness for me if I was seeing a woman with a kid. For the sake of the kid you need to actively encourage her ex to stay in her life. Best case scenario, you have to put up with her bitching about how awful he is, with no prospect of closure. 

I can't deal with kids. I already have enough trouble dealing with people due to my Asperger Syndrome. Kids are even worse; they're too stupid to understand and I can't dumb myself down enough to talk on their level.

Honestly, I'm surprised this is still going.

Never fuck around with a mom.

Period.

Any discussion beyond that about Girls With Child is entirely off point.

I wouldn't even born if my Dad was that kind of prick. My mom was a single mother, but my Dad loved her, and instead of being some douchebag GI hooking up with some Asian chick temporarily, he decided to adopt my big brother and they all moved back to the states. Later, I was born. Therefore, I respect guys who do it. Not sure if I ever will. Not like it's my first choice or anything.. but there's nothing inherently wrong with it.

Once you get kicked in the gut by someone you thought things were fine with you'll be as bitter and jaded as the rest of us.  But I don't know, clubbing and drinking with other guys is more fun than me, so I guess I deserve it for being boring.

As far as letting someone else break up with me, you kinda have to actually be dating someone for that.  I would never stoop so low.  The only other time I've ever broken up with someone or been broken up with, I did it and it wasn't that painful since we had only been dating for like 6 weeks.

I was lucky.  I didn't want kids and neither did Righ.  I don't know what would have happened if one of us did.  I have a feeling it might have not even occurred to us to see each other if that were the case.  I think it makes a big difference to some people.  I'm not sure relationships can work if even grown children aren't considered.  It seems that either the marriage breaks or the bond between the parent and child would become strained.  Righ and I became inseparable only a couple of months after we met.  His recent visit home for two weeks this past year was the longest we've actually been away from each other.  

I might be wrong, though.   You could fill the Grand Canyon with what I know about kids and other people's relationships.  We don't have the usual sort, I think.  Anyway - don't listen to Endie.  I've seen pics.  He's not even remotely ugly.  Even with strangely bleached hair.  I totally get the irascible son of a bitch part, though, if you can see past his girlish good looks and dainty airs.

You can't be jaded forever. Fuck, I hope not.  :uhrr:

[edit] Damnit, I hate to get all patronizing, but you're probably not boring Selby. Your just haven't found your compatible brand of boring.  :grin: Everyone's interesting (almost). Anyways, don't define yourself by someone else's bullshit. I guess there's a period where it's hard not to, but don't do it for long.

OK, sorry for that. ;)

It's totally possible to be jaded forever.  Sure, flashes of romanticism flair up and you dream of a world filled with flowers, you see the couples that give you hope, but those moments always pass.

Absolutely you can.

Oh believe me you can.

This.  To a T.  Dreams and hopes are only there to be crushed and destroyed, so it's better to not have any at all and never be disappointed with how life turns out ;-)

I can't read what your saying with your boobs in the way.

Dreams aren't there to be crushed. They're just for children with no sense of reality.

OK, stay jaded...!  But never be so jaded if it comes to you. That's my Tony Robbins advice for the day.  :grin: I can understand being jaded where you're not willing to put yourself out there anymore. That can be exhausting. But eventually people come along and are putting themselves out there for you instead. Just don't be so jaded to the point that you push them away. You can be jaded all day about not getting what you want, but that person might be just what you need. And eventually what you want too.

Because that's a fucking arrogant statement. You don't get to "share" the kids mother with the kid, dork.  If anything you're lucky enough she decides to share the kid with you and include you in the family.  Mother-Spawn = Permanent bond.  You = interloper.

In all of my experience if someone is putting themselves out there for you, they want something (and no, a relationship is NOT what I am referring to) from you.  And as soon as they get whatever they want, they are gone.

I definitely agree with the "not putting yourself out there" part.  That's just excruciating and painful.

If you knew anything about my personal situation, you'd know that I never meant it in such an arrogant tone.  Of course, there's no way that you could have known my background.  At least now that you've clarified your point, I can better appreciate and understand your view.  I do agree with where you're coming from.  

I also apologize for the derail.

I don't know you or what you've dealt with, but not everyone wants something from you, man. And "by putting themselves out there", I don't mean in some dramatic way. I'd be weary of that too. I just mean if someone hints at some interest. If you don't even see that as a possibility of happening, then it's your fault. Got to be at least somewhat positive, and think there's shit worth liking about yourself. You mentioned being hooked up with some girl before - so it's definitely in the realm of possibility. What sucks is letting her crush you to the point that you believe her bullshit, that nothing is worth trusting, and you aren't worth liking. Fuck that noise.

Can you, in one sentence, explain what you were trying to say in that muddled mess of assumptive bullshit?

Nope, not in one sentence. Sorry.

He said earlier he's been kicked in the gut by some chick who had a better time hooking up with other dudes.. and that he guesses he deserves it for being "boring".

Fuck that, man. That's what I'm saying. I can only assume he's calling himself boring only because she said that. What little I know of Selby (and granted it's little), I think he's a cool dude. He shouldn't talk like that, and no one should. There's nothing "assumptive" or "bullshit" about what I'm saying. It's just fucking imperative that you not define yourself by other people - especially some bitch who can't stick with you for small reasons.

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

Hey! I'm only working with what I got.. but if someone says "clubbing and drinking with other guys is more fun than me", then it doesn't sound like him talking. Sounds like he's repeating something -- something that happens to be bullshit. I don't know him, but it's bullshit. Nobody's that boring. And if that's "assumptive" to say "I doubt you're boring. Fuck that." then so be it. You couldn't pay me to say anything else.

Wrong. There are indeed people that are that boring. I am proud to say that I would bore 90% of the girls I will ever meet. They'd bore me too. Who gives a shit?

That's the point. If there's that 10% you won't bore (or rather Selby won't bore), then wtf gives with the whole jaded thing? One shouldn't talk of getting kicked in the nuts for too long, and let that define their future outlook, when they have another 10% that's willing to jump on your nuts.

[edit] This isn't saying that it doesn't suck getting kicked in the nuts. It does.

Nevermind, I'm done with this line of conversation.

I'm pretty sure it was "Harden the fuck up."

I am indifferent to having them and Ingmar doesn't want them at all, and that works out pretty well too. We know people where one person didn't want them married someone who did and got pressured into having one ... it's not a relationship situation I would want anyone to be in, nor do I think it's actually good for the kids. Kids deserve to have both parents want 'em, imo. The problem is a lot of people think the have-a-kid-or-not thing isn't one worth breaking up over, when it really should be a no brainer. Sure one or the other might change their mind but ... it's not really something to bank on.

Ingmar and I would've liked to have been inseperable (or at least I woulda ;) ), but there was the little issue of living across the country from each other. I think that made us fast forward through a lot of the relationship, though, I moved in with him a lot sooner than I think I would've if we lived closer, for example. I think since moving the longest we've been apart has been a week or so. Amusingly, I STILL hate dropping him off at the airport.  :heart:

Heh.. Man, I'm honestly sorry if I frustrate you. If any of you have completely made your mind up about being jaded, then it's not something I can really debate. And I actually hate to sound like I'm blowing sunshine up anyone's ass anyways.

[edit]
How did you meet being long distance? Game related?

Yeah, we met playing on a MUD. We're so cool.  :grin:

I rate this thread  :why_so_serious: :why_so_serious: :why_so_serious: :why_so_serious: / 5.


You're right - I've stuck with women with who have two eyes and a full set of teeth. By setting such standards, I may have missed out on something special (and the gumming of a lifetime).


If she's half-naked and shaking her ta-tas at a PTA meeting, it'd be awesome, but I don't think the future relationship would be unblemished.

You're lucky I can't set custom titles. Yours would be "The gumming of a lifetime". That was the funniest thing I've read in weeks.

Did this thread just have a hug session?  :ye_gods:

In the end it doesn't matter anyway with how high the divorce rate is!

The solution is to live in sin forever.  Well, if you ever find anyone, which you won't.  'Cause love is a silly dream and whatnot.

I really feel sorry for all the jaded people here.  My mum and dad have been happily married for over four decades.  My wife's parents almost exactly the same.  I am entirely confident that she and I will remain happily married for the rest of our lives, and having known her for over 20 years I doubt if there are any really nasty discoveries on the way to change my opinion on this.

Love is something for movies and books to exploit. The reality is much more complicated. I've met people who seem absolutely awesome to me but wouldn't want to have anything to do with me. Those that do show interest either did so to rob me, take advantage of me, or toy with me. So, jaded forever? Sounds like a plan!

Love exists, it happens when you meet someone that makes you not give a shit about being right, or getting your way. Love isRelationships are hard work, it takes dedication and is not for the lazy or weak minded.

Well, Lore, I think we may have found one cause of your problems...

Love is not hard work. A relationship is. A lazy motherfucker can love as much and more as anyone else. It takes zero effort to love. I don't know why anyone would think otherwise.

Shoot, good point. Something must be broken in my head, I equate love to relationships for some reason. Well then, substitute love for relationship in my previous post.

I think that what schild is getting at is that anyone can harbor feelings that feel like love, while still acting like a complete asshat to the beloved. Stalkers, for instance, are often convinced that they do what they do out of love. Just because you're moonfaced over some pretty face that you're currently shagging doesn't mean you actually love him/her. It means you are having a biochemical response to another carbon-based lifeform.

Love itself, the acts that accompany a true sentiment of caring, require a dialectic between the lover and the beloved that takes a sense of ethics, work and patience.

That's a relationship.

I wasn't talking about stalkers and shit. I was talking about love. Towards people, objects, whatever.

I love the internet. LOVE IT. Top 5 motherfucker.

I love the Misfits, even without Danzig.

I love Deus Ex, even if Specter is making some lame muddy shit for the Wii.

All that other shit you said is bullshit. Relationships take effort, love does not. I could quote poetry and theory all day to support that but I don't love philosophical bullshit. I do, however, love the definitions of words and using them properly.

love
  /lʌv/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [luhv] Show IPA noun, verb, loved, lov⋅ing.
Use love in a Sentence
See web results for love
See images of love
–noun
1.    a profoundly tender, passionate affection for another person.
2.    a feeling of warm personal attachment or deep affection, as for a parent, child, or friend.
3.    sexual passion or desire.
4.    a person toward whom love is felt; beloved person; sweetheart.
5.    (used in direct address as a term of endearment, affection, or the like): Would you like to see a movie, love?
6.    a love affair; an intensely amorous incident; amour.
7.    sexual intercourse; copulation.
8.    (initial capital letter) a personification of sexual affection, as Eros or Cupid.
9.    affectionate concern for the well-being of others: the love of one's neighbor.
10.    strong predilection, enthusiasm, or liking for anything: her love of books.
11.    the object or thing so liked: The theater was her great love.
12.    the benevolent affection of God for His creatures, or the reverent affection due from them to God.
13.    Chiefly Tennis. a score of zero; nothing.
14.    a word formerly used in communications to represent the letter L.

I'd say 14 definitions with none even close to what you said proves my point.

I thought this was lust.  I guess the line is even blurred in the dictionary. 

I also think that my age is having a profound effect on my feelings toward this discussion.  After 40 my desire has become one more of friendship and companionship than one of lust/sexual desire.  Biology is a funny thing.  I'm less interested in the physical attraction (though it still matters, particularly with health and hygeine) and more interested in morals, ethics, and intellect.  Things I wish I had selected more for the first time I was married. 

Doesn't seem very blurred.

I'd love to fuck Charlize Theron.

I lust to fuck Charlize Theron.

Not really the same thing IMO.

I know better than to start a semantics argument with you.  

Just suggesting that many people, particularly inexperienced people, have a tough time differentiating between the two.  Like the whole "Love at first sight" bullshit.

I don't think it's too much to ask that people use words they know the definition of, I wasn't necessarily harping at you by the way.

Edit: Love at first sight exists and is completely physical. Relationships at first sight do not. Also, the entire notion of "Love at First Sight" is more creepy than romantic.

When in doubt about the correct usage of a word I tend to go for the oldest definition I can find.  Here's a pretty old definition of love that was read at my wedding:


 :why_so_serious:

Good point.  I even messed up there myself. 

I have to confess that I tend to think of "love at first sight" as "lust at first sight", so maybe I'm broken as well.  By my own definition, you have to know and interact with someone before you can love them (i.e. Love exists on a much deeper emotional level than Lust).  Then again, it doesn't take a deep emotional connection to love the taste of chocolate.  Perhaps my definitions of love and lust are unique for human interaction compared to any other context. 

That's the "I Love Jesus" definition of Love afaik.

Try Homer's Iliad or Dante's Inferno. Surely you can find something older than a 2000 year old document based on utter bollocks.

Edit: Samwise, that wasn't a jab at your wedding. I'm sure it was perfectly lovely and topical, but it doesn't really prove any sort of point here.

You love the study of medicine and chemistry in general.

Just saying.

And you're defending your point based on what some nerd who's never touched a woman wrote in an Internet dictionary.  I'm just saying.

Dictionary.com just copies shit from Oxford:


Edit:
The dictionaries that appear on Dictionary.com include:

    * Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1), Based on the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2006.
    * Webster's New Millennium Dictionary of English, Preview Edition (v 0.9.6) Copyright 2003-2006 Dictionary.com, LLC
    * Dictionary.com Word of the Day
    * Dictionary.com Crossword Solver
    * The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
    * The American Heritage® Dictionary of Idioms by Christine Ammer. Copyright © 1997 by The Christine Ammer 1992 Trust. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company.
    * The American Heritage® Stedman's Medical Dictionary Copyright © 2002, 2001, 1995 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company.
    * WordNet ® 2.0, © 2003 Princeton University
    * Investopedia.com. Copyright © 1999-2005 - All rights reserved. Owned and Operated by Investopedia Inc.
    * Wall Street Words: An A to Z Guide to Investment Terms for Today's Investor by David L. Scott. Copyright © 2003 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company.
    * Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of Law,© 1996 Merriam-Webster, Inc.
    * Merriam-Webster's Medical Dictionary, © 2002 Merriam-Webster, Inc.
    * Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary, © 1996, 1998 MICRA, Inc.
    * The Free On-line Dictionary of Computing, © 1993-2005 Denis Howe
    * Jargon File 4.2.0
    * U.S. Gazetteer, U.S. Census Bureau

Who needs the lusty part of love?  Not me.  The other bits are very nice, though.  I don't think it's age with me, though.  I don't remember ever being too big on sex and lust.  It's all sort of messy.  The Schild wibble of this discussion makes the most sense to me.  Strange, huh?  I find myself pretty much agreeing with all that.  Except the Danzig bit.  How can anyone love The Misfits without Danzig?  It was all about that muscle bound little dwarf, no?  Like, maybe, but love?

Luve is patientfu; luve is couthie an kind; luve is nane jailous; nane sprosie; nane bowdent wi pride; nane mislaired; nane hame-drauchtit; nane toustie; luve keeps nae nickstick o the wrangs it drees; finnds nae pleisur i the ill wark o ithers; is ay liftit up whan truith dings lies; kens ay tae keep a caum souch; is ay sweired tae misdout; ay houps the best; ay bides the warst.

And Schild isn't quite right: that version of love is, in the original text, agape: unconditional, self-sacrificing, considered (as opposed to necessarily instinctive) love, as in the love of a parent for a child, or (for example), what we might call the "tender" love of one person for another.  Not eros or philos, but not exclusive of them, either . The chapter it comes from is a Paul speaking in Platonic terms (as in "in the terms of Plato", not "sexless"), borrowing Plato's philosophy, language and ideas about the real and the perceived that most people know from the cave story.  He's specifically not just talking about "I love Jesus" (a couple of sentences on he says "And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love.")

Michael Graves had his moments, but I'm not sure I love him like Glenn.

It was all about the muscle-bound little dwarf, sure. But then they found a recording studio and even though Michael G is pretty much ass in a can, at least the quality was there and Jerry Only was still writing the majority of the shit. The new stuff with Jerry Only doing the vocals is as good as any Danzig-era stuff.

Anyway, I get not loving the Misfits after Danzig left. 100%, I understand it. I just happen to still love it, maybe in a different way, but it's still fucking great.

Edit:
I appreciate you furthering my point of how easy it is to love.

Shit, I don't know if it's Jerry or Michael's vox I'm listening to. Thought it was all Graves. I like Saturday Night and Lost in Space.

Famous Monsters is Michael.

http://www.amazon.com/Land-Dead-Misfits/dp/B002T921B6/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=music&qid=1262891209&sr=1-1

That is Jerry Only. Twilight of the Dead is probably the best thing they've done since the album Walk Among Us.

Philosophers are always talking about love. Part of the problem of the semantics argument is that we use love to describe a range of positive emotions towards people and things, sometimes interchangably but often we mean a specific version of love and then people start arguing dragging in lots of examples of love being used in other senses. To use a very tired example the ancient Greeks wouldn't be having half these discussions because they differentiated between love between friends, family, sexual desire, etc. The classic idea we've got of love now involves a relationship or at least the desire to have a relationship with a person. When Schild says he loves the internet I'm assuming he means it in the sense that he really, really likes it and wants it to stay around. It's useful and gives him a whole range of shit (similarly to money). There's a big difference between loving objects like that and Love in the sense we apply to people. Also claiming to have feelings without any outward sign of them is somewhat dubious, someone can claim to feel brave and then bottle it, we wouldn't describe them as brave. Someone can claim they feel in love with someone else then act like an asshole towards them and fuck someone else behind their back. We wouldn't say that they're obviously in love with their partner. Feeling like you're in love with someone is easy but it doesn't mean you're in love with them.

I'd say more but frankly that's plenty. My parents have been married almost 30 years and I got to have a drunken conversation with my dad this Christmas that involved him telling him how awesome my mum was and what a fantastic person she is. Love can exist and it can work although I've personally failed generally at it (what's up with lack of mutual attraction? I always seem to be on one end or the other).

Lazy people can so be in successful relationships! Ingmar and I are totally lazy. We're too lazy to have problems, maybe.  :drill:

To be fair, I don't consider ended relationships to be autofails. I am probably the only person on the planet that thinks this way.

Oh, like brand, brand new. Huh, I'll give it a shot.


I agree that love is easily pulled off by anyone. Yes, relationships are hard. The whole "Mutual love" thing does help though. And yes, even lazyness. :grin:

No, when Schild says he loves the internet, he loves it the same way my Mom does me or my stepdad. I really, really fucking love it. I would not be able to function very well without it. I'd find myself constantly bored and longing for the days of the internet.

And yes, there's an obvious difference between actually being in love and the chemical reaction that makes you feel like you're in love. But the end result probably feels the same to the end-user.


Unrequited love is fun.

Yeah I would argue that just because a relationship ended before one person died doesn't mean it was a failure or a mistake.

The only relationships that I've had that were "hard" are the ones I should have avoided in the first place. The good ones have all been easy.

Don't be snide.  I didn't disagree with you on that.  I thought you were spot-on about the confusion that people were making between love and relationships.  Your definition of "love" was kinda lazy and over-broad in extending to the colloquial.  The usefulness of discussing "I love you" or "I love your hair" in a thread about "relationship-love" are very different, after all.  And you've been on the internet long enough to know that discussions where someone is leaning on the OED are very often just about nit-picking.

I wasn't actually being snide.

Edit: And relationships are relationships, love is love. Throwing the two together is a recipe of theoretical bullshit and I wanted to separate the two. And yes, leaning on the dictionary is often about nit-picking, but in this case I wanted people to stop using that shit as synonyms because they fucking aren't.

Aside from what it gives you why do you love the internet? I can understand saying you love it the same way you love money or a library (it's useful, providing you with entertainment and access to stuff) but are those the same reasons your mom loves you? If you stopped talking to her would she still care about you? Along those same lines if you lost all net access would you keep tabs on it and care about the latest technology upgrade or net fad? It just seems unlikely you really do love it the same way, or at least really weird to love a thing in the same way you love a thing. Now I'll admit you can love a thing as much as a person but they seem to involve fundamentally different sorts of ways of loving something (for instance people who love their cars versus people who Love their cars and get to star in shitty documentaries on freaks)

fakeedit: Wholly crap this thread is moving quickly.

Freudian slip?   :grin:

Yes, and if the internet stopped talking to me, I'd still care about it.

We can wax poetic about love all we want, but really, love is love - it's easy and it can be applied to almost anything and we got dangerously close, in this thread, to making love out to be this untouchable thing that's some complication of the heart and mind when it really isn't. "Relationship-Love" as Endie said it a few posts up isn't love. It's a relationship. Love can lead to such a thing, but it doesn't intertwine the two words if you want to apply any logic to it whatsoever. They aren't mutually exclusive, nor are they necessary for the other to exist.

I believe that an old-fashioned term is a companion-marriage.

Here is Danzig doing Scream from Famous Monsters back in 1991 or so. Yea, Famous Monsters was written back then and not released til Graves did the vocals. Anyway, enjoy.

Scream (http://dl.dropbox.com/u/39720/f13/10%20Scream%20%5B%23%5D%5BDemo%20Version%5D.mp3).

I like the Graves stuff more.

Edit: By mistake wrote Doyle instead of Danzig.

Edit: Turns out this is an early, early cut with Graves channeling Danzig before doing his own thing for Famous Monsters. /shrug, this album is all over the map, not surprised Danzig and Only refused its release.

Still better than any shit I could write, whoever it is.  :grin:

I would like to say that this album, Cuts from the Crypt, should've been released.

I love it. Even if the vocals are performed by 4 different people and there's no logical progression.

Did you just start a mixed tape to give to the internet?  Did that just happen?

(http://dl.dropbox.com/u/963220/i_made_you_a_mix_tape_tshirt-p235661647227466111yqxf_400.jpg)

Also, I didn't really expect this thread to deliver.  But did it ever.

No, Cuts from the Crypt is an unreleased album of demos and early cuts of various stuff spanning the entire history of The Misfits.

Be careful what you wish for. Late last year, I went on an incredibly successful date with an impossibly beautiful and intelligent woman I'd known for a year, that led to something intense, passionate, lasting only a few weeks. She was angry at the world and before I knew it, this came to include me, leaving me broken and alone. Bring on the internet dating.

My wife and I had a "relationship at first sight" deal. It was rather awkward since she was dating my best friend at the time.  :grin:

Seriously.. What a fucked up thing to wish for. I guess he needs to try it himself though.  :grin:

I don't believe love can happen to me because I can't see how anyone would be interested in me.

I had one really serious relationship. I met her on the internet, in a muse. We hit it off immediately, and I fell in love with this person in text almost immediately. But it was a very long distance relationship. Eventually we met up and Yeah it was great. But the thing is, when we were together she never told me she loved me (except once when she was drunk). She insisted we were friends that were having sex. When we were apart she said she loved me all the time... until we met again and this look came into her face and she insisted we were really friends again. Eventually she told me she could not see me again as she had to give herself totally to her Uni career and had no time for a relationship. 2 weeks later she was happily shaked up with another guy who she married.

So I learned from that that people can love me on the internet, like the clever way I use words and other things. But not the real me, not the person you would meet in the flesh. Nothing in the following 12 years has changed that conclusion.

Emo Poetry Jam, featuring Sir T.

On the brightside, he bagged her. Obviously he had something going on in "real life", not just the internet.

Everyone else is contributing to this thread.

So, why can't you? Is that what you wanted to ask?

As a part-Greek Neo-Platonist I'm going to have to say that the "real" you isn't the bag of meat and bones that you define it to be.

Of course, that doesn't mean that you should send high-angle, high-contrast myspace pictures of yourself to girls because "the physical me doesn't matter in this context."  Some people still live in the cage.

Also boo-yah you fucked dat bitch, homes.

Not sure if you're being facetious Endie, but I'm serious. How could he go 12 years thinking he only has qualities "from a distance", when the fact is, he had some kind of physical relationship. Something worked at least.

I was being very serious in a light-hearted manner.  I was saying just what you were.

I'd say your lack of self-esteem has more to do with the following 12 years than anything. Confidence is attractive.

Yeah, "No one will ever love me because something is wrong with me," is often a self-fulfilling thing. Also, long long long distance relationships are hard as hell, especially if you are not in a place where you can/want to move closer. Just 'cause the relationship ended doesn't mean there was anything wrong with you or what you were like in real life. The fact she saw you in meatspace more than once indicates that pretty strongly to me.

I guess i'm just jaded

I pretty much gave up on relationships when my ex-fiance broke up with me after I had to move back home to take care of my ailing grandfather.

Self-fulfilling is true. But breaking the cycle is just as hard as a long distance relationship.

Gotcha

I'm tired of giving advice, but umm.. I suggest watching Rocky. Maybe Rocky 2. If those don't work, then the Rocky Dennis movie just to really drive it home that shit isn't so bad. 12 years is too long bro.

I don't understand the Rocky bits.   :ye_gods:

Better to be a sadistic champ than a masochistic wimp.

[edit] Granted, a sadistic champ with a very homely girlfriend.. But hey. He's happy

Yeah, I figure that, given how many people get stuck in it. I don't really blame people for being jaded, I'm pretty sure if Ingmar and I ended poorly I would be devestated for a long time.

Jaded implies you've had so much of something that you're worn out by it.

Like diku muds.

You aren't jaded, you're intensely inexperienced in reciprocal relationships. I'd err more on the side of "You hate that part of yourself, intensely."

A couple of these guys just need to realize that the reason they're failing at relationships is that they don't really like other people.  Talk about a deal-breaker.  Once they come to terms with that they'll stop trying so hard to be like everyone else (sheep who let their brain chemistry ruin their lives by tricking them into a 'relationship').  Also, this isn't meant to be funny.  You don't have to like other people.  I don't.  The instant I realized that, I became much more happy.  I also started getting along much better with others, ironically.

This.

The ladies love it when you're "all mysteriously angry" - Oghren  :awesome_for_real:

Yep, it's like what Lorekeep is saying: that miasma of Weltschmerz, suspicion, self-pity and misogyny/misanthropy is going to send potential partners running - well, the sane ones who're not looking for someone filled with Weltschmerz, suspicion, self-pity and misogyny/misanthropy.

Call them shallow little flibbertygibbits but the average girl, speaking in broad generalisations, is inexplicably attracted to balanced, confident, happy men who can at least fake a degree of empathy for their fellow humans.  Characters in Nick Cave songs may get away with the grim anti-hero with a dark past thing, but not so much if you're just batting for that girl from accounts.  I loathe most people, as a rule, but I'm not going to let on about that in the first - oh I dunno - few years of a relationship.  My wife knows, but she thinks it's sweet.

lol

I know that it's a waste of time trying to discuss this when all you do is definitely-not-in-a-snide-way quote a bit that you have anecdotal evidence isn't universally true despite me caveating to exactly that effect, but just because you once knew a girl who was a complete nightmare, or because you get your evidence on what women are attracted to by watching domestic violence calls on Cops, doesn't mean that being balanced, confident and happy isn't a better dating strategy than immersing yourself in bitterness and self-loathing.

Edit: spelling and fuck this keyboard

I'm pretty sure girls will flat out tell you they don't know what they want if you can get them to be honest for a minute and will explain that what they want changes 100% with any given age bracket, as small as they decide that age bracket should be.

Edit: I don't communicate with people in real life that are a complete nightmare. You can join Stray in the Assumptive-Bastard Box if you'd like.

I do love me a cynical, jaded at everything woman, though. We can commiserate and take heart that people suck! I think they have a name for that type of woman... is it British?

Not british, fat.

I had something similiar happen a few years ago. Met a girl on the internet (not through a dating site), became friends, she was unhappy with her husband (she was married a few years(and we were both in our early 20s)) and I was there for her, yada yada yada, long story short, she separated from her husband, and we started fucking (long distance) After a few months of the "I love you so much" back and forth she ended up screwing some chick (she was bi). Next day she tells me "oh ya I messed around with so and so, also, I can't handle a relationship now" Fast forward a month and she's back with her husband.

Anyway, that was my first and last relationship. After being bummed out for a year I guess I came to the realization that I'm happy being single. Actually happy. After seeing and hearing about other relationships my friends are in and out of, I realized that shit is too much of a hassle. There are far, far too many ways to get hurt playing the game that I'd rather just keep it simple. For every friend I have that gets married, I have 5x others in and out of shitty relationship.

On the flip side, at times I do get lonely. Fuck it, everyone does. I can honestly say was a lot more lonely and down after that first bad relationship then I've ever been single. The only way I'd ever get back in a relationship is if I became friends with the girl first. I'm not interested in random dating and looking for a relationship, I'm much more interested in looking for friendship. If it turned into something else, awesome.

Anyway, the point I'm trying to make is - just be happy. You don't have to date, you don't have to be in relationships and despite what your parents might tell you - you don't have to hurry up and make grandkids. Once I realized I don't have to be in a relationship to be happy, and started realizing all the negative shit that comes out of relationships, waking up in the morning became a lot easier.

edit: I'm not trying to say you aren't already happy.

Everyone has something wrong with them.  Luckily for some of us we have identified it ;-)  Sadly it ended my last relationship but at least we get to deal with it so we can hopefully not end the next (whenever I get around to caring about that) with it.

As far as not liking people, I like them in small doses and groups.  Large groups of 25+ people, most of whom I don't know?  Not my scene, I shut down.  The ex loved that scene and schmoozing with all the different people she knew and would leave me to hold her purse and drive her drunk self home at bar closing time (or later).  I used to think I hated everyone, but then I realized I just don't care for putting up with every kind of drama people give out, and just didn't like dealing with it and it showed in my attitude towards large groups.  And at least living the single life I get to play video games again, so my bitterness level is offset by my happiness level a bit ;-)

Perhaps he's just reacting to how you wrote it.. Seemed like you were saying guys needed to be uber sensitive or something, or that you have to cover up your meaner side for years. Heh.. I don't know anyone who needs that. Guys or girls. But also, I know it can go downhill if you pick the wrong time to be insensitive, even jokingly. That's would be the definition of selfish... ugh, something I admit to having my own bad luck with. Luck is not the word. Umm, fuck up more like.  :grin:

Not sure what I'm saying.. umm.. well placed sensitivity goes a long way, I guess. Not doing so will inevitably result in fail. Otherwise, it's ok to be yourself.

[edit] I'm beginning to hate that smiley.. It's too damn cheeky.

Cats are the answer.  Cats are always the answer. (http://www.iheartpaws.com/forums/images/smilies/kitten2.gif)

It's true, find a single girl who has a bunch of pets and impress her if you're desperate for a relationship that only you can screw up.

lol

Sure, everyone has something wrong with them. I can rattle off plenty of things wrong with me! But only when I am in my deepest periods of despair do I think that makes me unlovable. And I am pretty sure I am not attractive at all when I am having one of those episodes.

Some people have issues that make it really really hard to love them ;-)  And no, I doubt most people are attractive when sitting around wallowing in despair over how no one will ever love them.  I know a girl who is like that... and it's just not pleasant to be around.  Ever.

TLDR

Holy fucking shit, good thing I was too busy sucking at poker and working to jump back on this one.

But Lorekeeper...stay out of the clubs, they're not going to help. I know it sucks and is a pain in the ass, but you've just got to put yourself out there and meet some different people. If you're not comfortable with the clubs or whatever, you're setting yourself up for failure - women are going to pick up on the discomfort and lack of confidence (as much as I HATE the cliche), and you'll get nowhere in all likelihood.

I sure got a snort out of schilds bold declaration that love is love that was preceded by his condemnation of generalizations  :uhrr:

Love can mean any number of psychological and even physiological phenomena. Love and I will use it in the sense of "consuming passion" variety can be easy, then again there are people who are entirely incapable of experiencing it. The type of "love" that tends to be easy (and we all know people who are constantly in "love") is really about them being extremely emotionally dependent on another. They have a gap that must be filled and so they fill it. Whether you want define that experience as "love" is up to you, but what is certain is that its not the same as the previous type. But what we can be certain of is that anyone who makes such broad generalizations about "love" simply does not know what the fuck they are talking about.

People who simply need gaps to be filled aren't exactly loving you.. I mean, the whole thing with love is that "love", as in the verb, as in the action of giving affection to another person or thing.. isn't some sort of behavior meant target back at their own personal needs. Loving someone implicitly states that you're directing outward. If anything, they want to make the object of their affection feel even better.. they want to make their lives filled.. not necessarily the other way around.

'Love' is a myth.  It's a chemical floating in your dome tricking you.  That simple.  Darwin.  The end.

It's okay to hate people.  Most of us hate you, anyway.

(http://dl.dropbox.com/u/963220/darth-vader.jpg)

Whoah, stray. I certainly wasn't saying "be sensitive". I admit you need a good sense of timing for when to make a joke about her dying grandmother, but the rom-com version of "sensitivity"? Nah. Whatever she might say, the first time she sees you crying something will change.

No, I was just saying to lorekeep that his persona of distrusting bitterness will lose out to the guy with the confident and happy attitude for the majority of sane potential partners. Even among goths...

Fair enough :)

Erm, so what you're saying is that love is a "myth".  An invented story, idea or thing with no provable basis in fact.  But that it is also a measurable and observable series of electro-chemical exchanges occuring primarily in the limbic cortex, where neural responses in the amygdala stimulate increasingly addictive pleasure-reward responses in the nucleus accumbens while provoking cardiovascular reactions through the cingulate gyrus and the hypothalamus?

I think you have to choose one, really.

Also, I wish that we had a philosophy thread here, where it was possible to discuss things like the idea that one's own brain can meaningfully "trick" oneself, other than on the facile level interpretation of sensory data.  Preferably in the form of a proper Symposium with drink and dancing girls.

Apparently all emotions are myths because they correlate to physiological changes.

Ah, kinda like the Medusa.  I wish he'd explained that.

Trying to define love in a vacuum is kind of pointless. I guess it has some definitions.. But objectifying it too much on it's own gives an excuse to get carried away with explanations about hormones and chemistry, as if love is some thing itself that needs to be examined (and in turn, disspelled). I think it's better defined by specific people. It's a relationship, just like any other. And relationships aren't "mythical". They actually exist. Some you are born into. Some are built into friendships. Some into lovers. But they exist for a ton of reasons, be it social factors, intellectual, behavioral, physical, genetic, philosophical, etc, etc. All the dynamics that make some people click. It's not merely "chemical". Not sure what Darwin has to do with anything either. Darwin would tell you to survive, multiply, and not be such a self defeatist dipshit.

"True love" may be a myth, since you can probably be compatible with many people.. if you're lucky enough to find them.

[edit] Not even sure why I addressed that. He's got to be joking.

[edit] On second thought, Darwin married his cousin. Probably not doing himself any favors there.

Stray, I totally agree with you that asserting that love is a purely chemical phenomenon is facile.  It smacks of the deterministic, mechanistic world-view of the 18th and 19th centuries that gave us the blind watchmaker view of the universe, and which disappeared in the first decades of the 20th century.  Darwin was an integral and important part of that post-enlightenment world, and we cannot criticise him for not anticipating what was to come sixty years later.

Obviously, I'm not saying that we cannot detect chemical changes in someonebody who is in love: enhanced seratonin levels, hormonal changes and so on.  But the ability to observe and describe is not the same as being able to predict or even, sometimes, fully understand.

As the geneticist and evolutionary biologist JBS Haldane said: "Now my own suspicion is that the Universe is not only queerer than we suppose, but queerer than we can suppose."

Asserting that love is nothing but chemical responses will net the same response as telling people that the mind and a soul don't actually exist.

It might be true, it might not be.  Either way though, good luck convincing people one way or another and all it does is cause heated arguments that never get resolved.

Love does not consist of gazing at one another, but looking in the same direction.

Antoine de Saint-Exupery

Eugh.  Seriously.

God damn you people are jaded and grumpy.

I'm proposing to my girlfriend next week.  Yes I love her.   :heart:

Cheers.

Marriage will do that.  :awesome_for_real:

I've been married for going on 5 years now and my wife and I are still very happy together.

However we have a lot more rough spots then I would of expected, I don't really think anyone should get married until they've lived together for at least a year.

Not even slightly: I'm apparently one of the few people in this thread who is happily in love, married, secure in the life-long nature of that commitment and looking back on many years of fun, enjoyable relationships which I don't regret a minute of.

But that quote was the sort of thing I'd expect to see in in terrible greetings cards or being forwarded in 1990s email chains.

Anyway, best of luck and I'm very happy for you.  So long as she says yes, at least.  :awesome_for_real:

I'm 100% confident she will.  Thanks.

"Love is the delightful interval between meeting a beutiful girl and discovering she looks like a haddock."

John Barrymore.

Better?  :grin:

This. Until you can be happy alone, you can not be happy with someone else.

What the fuck?  Has this become the inane Hallmark thread?

Nope. You can rub your stinky internet vag with a chainsaw for all I care.

What I said is the truth as far as I am concerned. If you can't find a way to be happy alone, your relationships are going to be codependent emo filled crutches of shit that prop you up so you can ignore the empty well inside your life that being alone makes you aware of.

If you think it would make a pretty card, knock yourself out.

Of course love is a chemical process. Fucking everything is a chemical process, including being bitter and telling people they're not REALLY experiencing anything real.

Calm down.  You can post your homespun wisdom as much as you like.  It just isn't true.  But that certainly is a very well-thought-out argument about "stinky internet vags".  It's certainly revealing.

We COULD start a successful line of cynical greeting cards with the insights delivered in this thread.

And, Grimwell, since my "aunt" (the sort you grow up calling aunt without being related to) was deeply unhappy for years, met her husband and blossomed into a lovely, outgoing, relaxed woman you'll have to restrict your epigram to "some people only learn to be happy in relationships after they come to terms with aspects of themselves, whereas some are just waiting for the right person to come along to undergo a striking metamorphosis. Which are only two of a multitude of possibilities."  Which is cool.

someemocards.f13.net

How lovely, and utterly fucking irrelevant to the discussion. Have anything of value to contribute that isn't plagiarized? Or perhaps something that directly applies to the topic at hand?

...plagiarized? You do know what that word means right?

I'm so confused.   :ye_gods:

Apparently not!

Myth was a bad choice of words.   :sad:


I'm totally not joking.  I think dispelling the idea of love, whatever you believe it is or isn't, makes way for meaningful relationships that people can define for themselves.  And I'm glad you recognize that relationships are real.  Of course they are.  But do you need to be in love in order to have a relationship?  I'm not trying to say I necessarily care if you think you're in love or not.  The world, and my mechanistic view, needs you to think you are in order to propagate our species long enough to prove love doesn't exist - as you can see below.  I'm sure as hell not going to propagate it.  I hate people, especially children.  All I'm trying to say is that it would be nice if we developed as a society to the point where we aren't shoving love up each other's asses.  If people didn't do that, I might not need to hate them.  That is totally not pointless.


Let me understand you correctly.  You're saying we're beyond the simplistic explanation Darwin provided?  We now understand that there may be forces at work beyond our knowledge?  Wut?  It seemed like what you did there was chide the scientific observations you made in your previous post, then offered only "God is maybe Love."  Really?  Totally not trying to be a dick, but if there's something other than that, you're going to have to explain it to me.

Maybe love is one of those things that's queerer than we can suppose.  You might be right.  It sure seems queer to me.  I'll give you that.  But until you ARE right, I'm gonna stick with my mechanistic (not necessarily deterministic) views.  Love is a chemical that engenders a social framework for necessary procreation.  That victory doesn't feel facile.  In fact it feels fucking liberating, if you ask me.  Like I just spit the bit, and threw the yoke of social, and biochemical oppression.  Yay me.  Maybe mother fuckers were doing that in the 18th and 19th century, but it took me until I was 30.  I'm not really ashamed.

Well, if you see the usefulness of relationships, then I can't argue with you. It's not really important to me how they are defined exactly. Whether a "strong bond" or whatever is "love" or the result of behind-the-scenes chemical reactions, the usefulness is still there either way. You say tomato, I say tomat-Ah-o..? Something like that.

Love is not just an emotional response, furthermore out of the number of people I have fucked or wanted to fuck I have "loved" an insignificant number of them. So obviously love is not required to propagate the species (In fact the modern concept of romantic love would have the opposite effect). All of these things seem to shit on your hypothesis.

Love in its modern context is counter intuitive to instinctual wiring, namely fucking everything that catches your eye. Lust alone is all that is required to propagate a species. The modern incarnation of romantic love is one of social convention not genetic hard coding. A vast majority of what you feel and are is emotional/mental trickery so when someone emphasizes one aspect of their being as more illusionary it is pretty telling about the person. Why do you place particular note on the illusionary nature of "love". Your entire being is equally as false.

Survival of the species doesn't end with your ejaculate finding an egg.

Either that your your aunt is codependent and has esteem issues.

Oh wait, I mentioned something about that didn't I?

Fuck it. If it happens it happens. I'll be over here having fun in the meantime.

No you won't.  Fun is just a chemical response in the brain to a stimulus.  You're not really having fun.  There is no spoon. We ARE the Matrix.

 :why_so_serious:

Its also not predicated on "romantic love", very few animals are monogamous. And based on human instinctual wiring I would venture the guess that human males aren't one of them by nature.

Grimwell, the psychological need for human companionship is well documented. We need interaction to remain "healthy", its very misguided to believe a human has to be complete as an individual. But I do understand and agree in the context of exceptionally broken individuals who seek out others to fill the gap. But humans inherently require social interaction.

By nature, humans also don't do everything according to nature either.   :oh_i_see: There's that little thing called free will, making choices in life. My dick doesn't think for me. It's merely one option among many.

Plagiarism would be if I'd paraphrased Lewis and pretended it was mine.  I also didn't think I could say it any better.   :awesome_for_real:

I'm guessing you didn't read the quote, since you (a) think it was somehow irrelevant and (b) seem to think I was disagreeing with you.

I can try paraphrasing if you like, though.  The "love isn't real because it's all chemicals" is dumb, as you and Ingmar pointed out, because everything is all chemicals if you want to look at it that way.  The point that Lewis made, which I think is both interesting and true, is that many people will disdain love as being "imaginary" on those grounds, and live their lives accordingly, but few apply that same reasoning to, say, hate or anger.

Plagiarize.. lol

He clearly attributed the quote to "Screwtape"  :grin:

Yeah, lets not do that.  :awesome_for_real:

Sorry I misconstrued your intent/quote samwise. I wasn't certain of the point and am familiar with CS lewis perspective on "romantic love" which generally is not that favorable.

You know, trolling is a lot more fun when people respond emotionally instead of logically. Where are your damned personal anecdotes to refute me???? :)

Um, I didn't mention God.  I was talking about non-deterministic world-views.  Not some hippy shit based around crystals and auras.  I started into a long discussion of the philosophy of science, Foucault, Feynmann, quantum mechanics and the rest but that's a terrible derail. Basically, in the simplest and least provocative terms, the idea of the blind-watchmaker view of the universe - the deterministic view that would say that we can look at the state of someone's brain, look at all the circumstances surrounding it and, with the right model, predict what will happen in it the next day (or even second) was thrown away the best part of a century ago.

I'm certainy not talkinhg about Darwin's description of evolution or anything like that.  


Wut?  That was a bit of a wild stab in the dark.  Anyway nope.  If anything I'd say she had and has a bit too much confidence and self-esteem.  Try again.

lolol guyz i was trolling i am da puppetmaster.

If you state a universal maxim then a single evidential counter-point is sufficient to defeat that maxim.  Your only hope is to attack the person statingthat point (which you tried) or mock them (which you tried).

Your mom is a bitch. I can't get her to shut her trap while I'm sticking it to your dad.

Like that?  :why_so_serious:

I should stop jizzing on supermarket eggs then.

I don't have anything relevant to add to this discussion. I just wanted to say I approve of Stray's new avatar. :awesome_for_real:

Hm.  Okay.  I'm not really interested in the predictions one can make.  Nor am I interested in whether the watchmaker is blind, or even there at all.  Ok, I'd be interested if he was tap-dancing naked in my living room.  I also don't think that would be a terrible derail.  While it's definitely still a science in it's infancy, it would also be interesting to watch what Epigenetics offers to this discussion.

Anyway, all I'm worried about is the false conclusions we as a collective society draw based on our antiquated notion of love.  It's way more antiquated than Dawkins.  Like, by a lot.  It's the reason these poor guys in this thread (and a few others) pour their hearts out, and profess to have tried everything to fit into their own interpretations of love.  I'm just trying to convey the message that it's actually crap.  Their unhappiness is their own fault, not someone else's.  They're projecting their own desires on people who have no hope of fulfilling them, even if they wanted too.  Of course, most of them don't want too - the good ones at least.  The smart ones take one sniff of that mess and run like hell, as they themselves would too if they weren't being overrun by the misfiring synapses, and chemicals in their brains every time they got within reach of the opposite sex.

Musashi the "blind watchmaker" is just a convenient, widely-used description of that deterministic model

Other than that we're a lot more in agreement than I thought.  Especially in your second paragraph.
 

Hush.   The grown-ups are talking.  You'll get plenty of attention later.

Edit: I'm quite serious.

Heh I was tempted to go Rodin from Bayonetta.  :awesome_for_real: Chock full of one liners.

What the fuck are you talking about?! The entire concept of "romantic love" exists as a social convention. Thats what it is, you can disagree with the convention but calling it "false" because it is in fact a convention is dumb. One can love outside of the constraints of total life long monogamy and nobody in this thread has asserted otherwise. But to say something is "false" because you personally have no fucking clue or experience about the subject is stupid. People can in fact have lifelong romantic relationships. It occurs and it tends to be the western cultural ideal. Whether you personally can attain the ideal has no bearing on the validity of the experience itself...at all.

This thread is like watching virgins talk about fucking.

Notice how all the *actual* step-parents are keeping their mouths shut?  Yeah, that's because it's exactly like virgins talking about fucking, even if there's a non-virgin in the room, they might as well explain "blue" to the blind man.

If you don't believe in love as a transcendent emotion that defies logic, then there's *no* rational reason to date a single mother that doesn't verge into Grimm's Fairy Tales or Pedobear territory.  Love makes you stupid, but it's more fun that way.

--Dave

Sorry I wasn't paying attention and I didn't really read the thread.

I married my wife back in 1999 after dating for a few years.  I adopted her son and daughter a few years after we got married.  Both kids have now moved out, and I have 2 grand-kids.  Unfortunately, our daughter is Bi-polar so we have been raising our granddaughter since she really isn't capable. 

What did you want to know?

I like how both of you are just making my point.

Don't fuck around with mothers. You're either in it to win it or you're an asshole.

Good talk though.

     :brickface:

Nothing in particular (have two step-sons of my own, as well as my daughter from my first marriage).  I will throw something into the mix: Once you hit your thirties, you either keep dating 20-somethings (which will become increasingly difficult and pathetic), or you accept that women your age fall into three broad categories: Those that have children; Those that don't and find the ticking of their biological clock has become a deafening roar, driving out all rational thought, or; Those that do not want or cannot have children (not a problem if you don't either, big problem if you do).

Nobody makes it to 35 without baggage.  Sometimes that baggage talks back.  Deal with it.

--Dave

Six years to go, taking bets.

In my early 20s  I wouldn't even have considered dating a woman with a kid.  Eventually I figured out that the "rules" of relationships were all just bullshit that were just holding me back.

What does rules have to do with a kid? Some people just don't want to deal with someone elses spawn.

Complete nonsense, you don't have to believe in fairy magic love to rationally justify a relationship with someone who has a child. But as younger male with "options" it seems a limiting choice. Its similar to why I would avoid a relationship with someone who has a terminal illness or some other giant burden. Im sure I can fall in love with an obese woman if I was really inclined to entertain the notion. But why would I at this stage in my life.

If you are older and winding down seeking stability whose romantic options are limited its perfectly rational to do so. Or say you instantly fall deeply in love with someone with a child (I suppose it could happen) that is also rational.  But before any bond is created it should be a giant red flag.

Oh. Hi. I'm pretty sure you don't know what us virgins are talking about.  If you can muster a thesis out of whatever you just wrote, I'll try to respond.  Otherwise, I'm just going to assume what I wrote hit a little too close to home for your personal comfort.  It's okay, man.  Soldier on. Other fish in the sea, etc.

Yes, your brilliant assertion that "romantic love" being a product of cultural,physiological and psychological factors makes it mythic in nature was too high brow for me to follow.

Love is not a myth just because you have never seen a vagina.

Agreed, that's a pretty bad generalization. Hell, at this point, I'd probably make it to 35 without a marriage.

Either that, or I'll fall into a common job cliche and marry some local at my first overseas post.  :oh_i_see:

This.

Agreed it was extremely stupid. But the underlying logic is just as faulty. Romantic life long relationships are a cultural IDEAL, and like all ideals its representation in the meat world is a bit different than the simplified romance novel version. But just because love is a matter of psychology,culture and physiology does not denigrate or lessen the experience. Which regardless of your choice of words is exactly what you were trying to convey.

Yeah, this.  Many posting in this thread falls into one of three categories-

(1)  Asexual or pretty close to it, and engaging in standard F13 cynic-emo-goth schtick.

(2)  Had a rough relationship/marriage and cynical because of that.  

(3)  Cheated on their significant other (or someone they like cheated on a significant other), so trying to say that long-term relationships can't exist scientifically and our genes say that we must be promiscuous etc. etc.- ergo, what happened wasn't morally blameworthy at all! 

All three categories are not exactly great to take advice from.  Some relationships work and are real and lasting and genuine and happy, some aren't.  Ignore the doomsayers who predict 100% failure and misery.  

I was just referring to self imposed limits.


I can completely understand not wanting to raise someone else's kids.  It can be an extremely difficult road to travel.

(4) Assumptive jackasses.

So, which one of those 3 do I fall into, ye olde gaijin?

Seriously though, for how bad this thread could've turned out, I expected much worse than what we got. This is the internet, you have to expect a certain quotient of "HOW COULD THIS HAPPEN TO ME?" posts in any thread about dating.

I don't see anything wrong with not having been married by the time you're 35.  Or 45.  Or ever.  It doesn't mean you can't have good relationships that involve sex - even long term.  I know quite a few people (mostly men) who do just this and are very happy about it.  In fact, I know several (mostly men) who flit from one short term affair to another and very much enjoy that sort of thing and wouldn't have it any other way.  A few of them even have kids because they wanted some but didn't want a long term relationship.  Not that it's a good idea if you fool the other person into thinking you do but c'est la vie.   

As for Schild - I don't know exactly what "category" he's in, since now we have categories.  From everything he's said to me, and around F13, he seems to have chosen not to have a significant relationship with a woman for whatever reason.  It's a nice thing when you decide something and it works out for you, no?  I don't know what category I'm in, either, but I want to know.  (I'm not being snarky or anything, by the way)

This thread is an interesting one, that's for sure.

Lorekeep - serious question regarding your Aspergers. Medically/clinically diagnosed or self-diagnosed?

Signe- I completely agree with all of that.

My minor quarrel with this thread is that people mostly aren't saying "I have had shitty luck, my relationships don't work."  Its more like "things didn't work for me, therefore love does not exist for anyone, anywhere, ever."  Its possible- just possible- that some people can be happy even if one poster isn't. 

The problem, dear Horatio, lies less in our relationships than in ourselves.

On children I still have to agree with Schild.  Not everyone is cut-out to deal with kids and I would rather someone recognize this than think they can handle it and be a bad parent.  It's not a deal-breaker for me, however it would be a huge mitigating factor in whether the relationship could work.  At my age almost all of my old friends have kids now.  We don't speak the same language and our priorities are very different.  That is a huge hurdle in making a connection with someone.



It's not that I don't believe quality relationships can exist, it's that I believe you can't force luck into finding the right person.  For some they have the right personality traits and have an easier time.  Others just have crap luck.  Even those with some trait they would think is a deal-breaker, may find it simply not as big a deal as they think, or happened to have a good pool within which to draw where it didn't matter.

As the personal anecdote, keeping in mind I fall into Tri's (1) category, I've known dozens of people whom I could be happy with had circumstances been different.  But with them being in a happy relationship or not being gay or whatever reason, there was no basis for a romantic relationship.  Timing and luck are simply factors we cannot control for.  Because of that, some people are going to always draw the short stick.   I do think the internet and dating sites can help create opportunities, however they're not for everyone, and sometimes they still won't overcome chance.

Do what you can to increase your odds, but ultimately it happens or it doesn't.  For those it doesn't, and are interested in companionship, it is bound to make them a tad bit jaded and negative about people's prospects, especially their own.

Watching my parents did a lot to cure me of thinking marriage was some sort of magical event that turns your life into a happy fantasy land.  My father made my mother very, very unhappy.  My sister used to beg her to leave him but she never would.  Sometimes I'm still surprised I'm actually married after seeing theirs at work.  When I was young, my only marriage plan was not to have one!

Sjofn seems to have a marriage very much like mine.    Geez.  We don't even argue except when one wants the other to make a decision about something.  Usually dinner.  :oh_i_see:   We don't raise our voices or anything, though.  Again, the only time we've been separated is due to his work (I totally get the going off on an airplane thing) or when he goes a long distance for a music gig.  And, of course, this last time due to a family tragedy.  I'm pretty sure this sort of "togetherness" would drive a lot of people insane but it suits us.

Most married people I know met in clubs, so I'm not getting why that's ruled out as a good place.  Maybe because a lot of my work before meeting Righ was club oriented.  I don't know.  Some of them worked and some didn't but I never got the impression that it had anything to do with where they met.  I also don't believe that you're limited to a certain type of person if you look for love in clubs.  Rave clubs, maybe, to a certain degree - but just normal clubs?

Show me the quote that contains a statement like your second.  I know I didn't say anything of the sort.  My comment above, which has been twisted into something more cynical than I could ever even think, was meant to say "happy, healthy, and lasting relationships are the exception rather than the rule".  

I'm not a doomsayer.  I believe healthy relationships can be found and am optimistic that they exist for everyone.  I just believe that most relationships fail because the two people involved chose their mate poorly.  Many of these bad choices can be directly linked to an unrealistic set of expectations.  

Every time I went to clubs, it was obvious that most people were there purely to drink and have a good time.  Which is fine, but at closing time it became an obvious "I don't want to go home alone!" attitude from many people who were quite drunk and were making very poor decisions at the same time.  And of course I had to drive them home while they verbally abused me about how they were going home alone.  If you can meet in a club and make it work, but at the clubs I went to, people were not interested in me (had I even been looking) and there was rarely a "good time" to be had.

From my experience clubbing (at a techno pseudohip hop club) became filled with a lot more pretentious people as the average age group got older.

That's why I prefer mixing it up at more relaxed places like ballroom, swing dancing clubs.

The barrier there is your dancing skills and I can respect that. The increasing vapidness at the other clubs I mentioned I can't respect.

Well, that's why I mentioned Rave type clubs as being different.  Of course, I'm not sure I can even remember the last club of any sort I went to for anything other than something work related.  Still, when I did, I met a lot of really nice people and saw a lot of them hook up and even stay hooked up.  Even hitched up! 

I'm pretty sure it's a norm, and not an ideal.  It may be your ideal, and well, that's cute.  But just because it's a norm doesn't mean it's got some inherent value other than in a Darwinian sense.  So grats, and thanks for trolling.

And in case anyone else is confused by my poor choice of words.  When I said love is a myth, I meant to say, "That late adolescent mating drive that we have all experienced - the one trying to convince us that 'love' is some kind of transcendent communion with the universe - is a total construct of scientifically measurable phenomenon."  I think the awareness of that is empowering.  It's a little bit unwieldy, and it would make the worlds shittiest wedding vow.  But you can't really argue with that (unless you're religious, and please don't go there).  However it's possible that in an alternate universe, you did fuck that cheerleader's brains out and live happily ever after, so keep hope alive.  Happy Endie?

Hey dude, I only disagreed with you the once, a couple of pages back.

I think your view of love is jaded and I'm glad I don't feel like that.  Which is to say that I disagree.  But whatever floats your boat (or leaves it stranded on a reef, in this case).

Wasn't meant as an insult, more of a joke.  Just my cynical view in reference to the many worlds possibilities of quantum physics.

Describing love as either "transcendence" or "construct" are both equally wankery. No one in a relationship is actually harping on about transcendence. It's like you're defining people by your own limited view of love.. As if everyone in love or believes in it is in some Hallmark card delusion. In practice, they are down to earth and just thinking about one person, without relating to some context as large as the "universe". They are simply happy with that person within the smaller context of their own lives.

And breaking it all down to construct is just having missing the forest for the trees. So you see the trees. Who gives a fuck. All the nitty-gritty details of a human being form up a new phenomenon - a person. And sometimes, two personalities/people are the right kind of "constructs" for one another. How that renders "love" meaningless is beyond me. It's still noteworthy enough if it works.

It's obvious by this thread that love is a battlefield! (http://www.mdstreetscene.com/forum/images/smilies/tomcat.gif)

Weak.

Heartache to heartache...


I do!  I think being blinded by love and missing out on those trees would be a travesty.  Like you said, tomato tomato.  I'm okay with you believing in love, if you're okay with me believing it's just chemical secretions - and as long as you don't take it to the extreme which is what the transcending construct is mainly referring to.  For example the people whose number is in question who allow themselves to be blinded by it to the point where they cease to function properly in its absence.



It only works in the Darwinian sense, jaded though that may be, as far as I'm concerned.  I mean, if you were an amoeba who successfully split yourself in two, would that still be noteworthy in any other way but to marvel at the complexity of life? 

Also, I'm not defining love by my limited view.  I'm just trying to be objective.  And my view is all I've got.

Well, I amused myself.   :oh_i_see:

What do you have in mind when you say not "functioning properly"? Not having love is not the end of the world for many people. Or rather, they know it could come around some time. Or if they went through a breakup and lost what they thought was love, they pick up again eventually. They still function properly, go to work, brush their teeth, etc., yet can still hope for it. People who fall apart because of the absence of love have additional issues, and I wouldn't characterize the whole thing because of them.

Your avatar amuses me, so we can let it slide.

If you're trying to say that the biological process involved in love is not the only reason people have trouble with love, you'll get no argument from me.  The functioning properly comment is of course relative and not meant to incite a semantic debate.  All I'm trying to illustrate is that there are people who act irrationally because of brain chemistry, and peer pressure that's commonly associated with love.  That may manifest itself in any number of ways, and in graduating degrees.  For instance the threads and posts about feelings of inadequacy because of a lack of dating proficiency, in my opinion, are irrational.  Perfectly natural, of course.  But irrational.  On the other hand if you're trying to say that those self esteem issues may be due to something else and not love chemistry at all, then I'm not with you.

Lifelong romantic monogamy is not MY ideal, but it sure as fuck is the cultural ideal. Why the fuck do yo think its the "norm".

As ive already explained and you seem incapable of fucking understanding is that lifelong complete monogamy is not derived instinctively. It is counter intuitive to our instincts, in the "wild" we would not be forming life long monogamous pairs (its almost unheard of for any mammal to do so). And you keep restating that the nature of love is derived from physiological changes in the body. NO FUCKING SHIT RETARD. All experiences,thoughts and actions are. What possible fucking value is there in restating this over and over as if it is pertinent to the conversation. Do you really believe people are unaware of this snippet of information? Do you think people experiencing love are under the mistaken impression that it is a mystical and magical experience? Do you have any related experience on the topic what so ever?

If people were conversing about "friendship" and some twat enters the conversation and asserts that friendship is a myth and does not REALLY exist because it can be reduced to physiological changes in the brain/body, do you think that person has any friends? Similar situation here. Virgin talking about fucking with no understanding clinically or practically about the subject...at all.

Dude.  Bro.  Dude.  You're just wrong on so many levels, I don't even know where to start.  Like I said, thanks for trolling.

I'm late:  are the other 9 pages like this ?

The last 5 or so are. It's basically a larf.  :awesome_for_real:

All the depressives have left so its safe now  :awesome_for_real:

I love myself more than enough for two people so I'm all set.  :awesome_for_real:

Exactly.  You're not going to get anything out of clubs or bars except depressed, drunk, and blue balls.

My current girlfriend I met through Facebook.  She was a year behind me in high school, and was a mousy, shy little thing.  She's now a cop of all things.  Work that social networking, guys!

I moved halfway across the country to get away from those people! ;-)

Not enough rock clubs in this city anymore. :\ Friends drag me to other types, but it's definitely not my thing. I wouldn't blame anyone for not going. Although it's always interesting, even if it leads to blue balls as Gulp said. Heh. If you're not "fun", bring a gay friend along then.  8-) Keep the girls entertained.

Now that depends on the club you are going to, doesn't it? ;-)

Not at all man. The dancing drunk gay friend is the ultimate wingman anywhere. ;) It also helps that the people I go to these places with already know someone to meet up with or you go with a group of chicks to begin with. Hell, I'm really only there as someone's wingman too. Otherwise, I wouldn't suggest it either.

[edit] This goes without mentioning that you need your "Whatever-take-one-for-the-team-I'll fuck anything." wingman too.

There are rules, you see.  :why_so_serious:

Self-diagnosis (I KNOW LOL RIGHT?) working on professional diagnosis this month. But I hit all the symptoms, every single one, right down to repetitive motion and trouble sleeping. It would take a mountain of evidence otherwise to convince me of something else.

It's funny you went down this path in this thread since I assumed you were sperged out when you asked how to aim with a controller like 10+ years after the dual shock came out.

I keed, I keed.

You know, there was a time I thought I had Asperger's as well. And hell, maybe I still do...but so what?

Lets say you DO have it...what then? Will that magically change something for you? Is there a magic pill for it?

Really, what you need to do, as cheesy as it sounds, is commit to changing yourself, and follow through on it. Yes, sometimes you will have some depressing or sucky times, but you have to really want it. Hell, I still have times when I almost completely shut down when I'm dropped into a gathering of random people I've never met and am expected to "mingle" (which, considering my job, is sorta lol-sucky) but you've got grit your teeth and deal with it. Saying something like, "Oh, I can't do X; I have Asperger's" is just using it as a crutch and is a complete cop-out.

I'd reiterate that you should probably stay out of the clubs (at least for the purpose of meeting people), and find groups of people to hang out with that you're comfortable around.

I'm still thinking decent clubs aren't a terrible way to meet people.  If you can find decent clubs, that is.  I don't know - maybe they really don't exist anymore?  They seem to have done the trick for a lot of people I know.

If he has aspergers, he can probably find a local aspergers support group. Maybe some chicks there.

http://www.meetup.com/ (http://www.meetup.com/)  :grin:

What then is that I deal. There is no magic pill, nothing that is going to correct the problem. It's like if you were all telepathic and I lacked that ability. I just shrug my shoulders and move on at this point.

You know what I'm tired of though? People looking at me like I'm different, not knowing what the fuck is going on, and knocking me for it instead of understanding that I AM different, I have problems, I'm trying to deal with them, and they should be a little more fucking open-minded. But that's asking too much.

That's the only reason I brought up Asperger. Anything involving relationships with human, be it for friends, fucking, or fucking over, is colored by this and explains to a T what my problems are and how I am. I'm textbook. It's comforting to know, but at the same time something I have to deal with.

I used to shy away from saying it because it was some stupid internet meme that self-diagnosed Aspergers (which schild has himself used as an insult to people) were a joke. Well fuck 'em. If someone said that to my face I'd grab the nearest thing of value to them, break it in front of their face, then use it to slit their throats. Yea, angry much. But that's how I feel when I come face to face with stupid; I want to put an immediate end to it.

I go to clubs now to have fun and hang with friends. I've got my coping mechanism and I've found people who respect me for who I am and I respect them and we have a good time every weekend. They recognize my problems, they'd love to see me get with a girl. The higher level analysis of my situation is everything is fucking great. Moping and moaning about women is a minor, trivial thing when everything else is just great.

I appreciate the advice Strazos, but it's not a fucking crutch. It's knowing why something went wrong and moving the fuck on and trying again.

Well, self-diagnosed anything is silly. Find out first. :) There are... doctors for that. You could just have.. social anxiety, and maybe hypochondria. ;) [edit] Not that those don't take coping mechanisms either.

Hang on, let me chop my dick off so I can be properly emasculated for the pages and pages of this thread that'll be used talking about this and make me second-guess what I know after more than a decade of analysis that should be discounted because I didn't go through med school.

...

Ok, go.

Btw, pardon my ignorance, but is there any difference between autism and aspergers? I knew an autistic kid, and he just jumped around in place, humming, never said a damn thing. I would think an illness at least slightly associated would be able to relate to that kid more than me.. I mean, I would think you'd be so fucked up you wouldn't even talk to anyone here very well right now.

Summary: Asperger's is the happy little trees version of autism.

And yeah, I can relate to that kid.

Just so you know, anyone familiar with aspergers could've spent 5 minutes in real life with you and figured out you were a sperger. Stray is just saying you should still see and doctor, and you should. If only for some uppers. :awesome_for_real:

I'm curious as to why you think people look at your like you're different, or how you know they think of you as "different." I use to have much the same mindset, thinking it obvious that my...social ineptitude was plainly obvious from sight or something. Was it?

Somewhat funny story...when I was in orientation for my job (with 96 other people), after knowing each other to varying degrees, the coordinators give us a Myers-Briggs test. Afterwards, people were *shocked* to find out I maxed out the introvert portion of the test.

What I'm trying to illustrate is that this idea you have that people see you as somehow "different" could mostly just be in your head, and when people really DO see you as "different," that could just be a manifestation of stuff going on in your head.

Man, it was obvious on the internet, so what do you think?

Do we have to have the Asperger's discussion?  Short form: Asperger's Syndrome is part a spectrum of neurologically-rooted behaviors, nearly all of which are common in the general population, and which have a significant (but hardly universal) correlation with higher performance in certain kinds of abstract problem solving and an inverse correlation with what are referred to as "people skills".  Virtually anyone with an IQ over room temperature will display *some* symptoms of Asperger's, if only on occasion.  The extreme forms of AS are Autism, which itself shows a spectrum from functional to nearly catatonic.

If you display behaviors you don't like, calling them "Asperger's" doesn't do much to help you change them, and makes an easy excuse to not try.

--Dave

Not to derail from the derail (ok maybe).. but I'm just curious what your result was? We should have have a Myer's Briggs test for F13.  :roll: :wink: Not sure if I completely take stock in it though, but I've gotten ENFP for years. I lack direction.. or something.

Sending to private. Any public dissemination is just more fodder for these guys.

Point of order: Saying that is pretty much fodder. :awesome_for_real:

I was I S T J/P (the last portion is a dead heat). I think that last one changes depending on my mood or time of day or something.


Yeah, no shit, though the question was rhetorical. Things change. I like to tell myself that getting out of NJ helped. :awesome_for_real:

Some things change.

But at least I can laugh along with you and not take it seriously when I say that versus going into nitty, gritty details and having a tough time telling when you guys are joking around in your usual cynically, from-the-peanut-gallery style. Granted, that's probably all the time, but you know, I take things seriously too much, and that's something I"m working on!

You're either Lance Armstrong or Warren Buffett.

I'm the Fresh Prince


[edit] Lorekeep, while I sympathize, I just think you need to get diagnosed. Wasn't trying to beat you up.

Taking things seriously in the real world is one thing, taking things seriously on the internet is just a mistake, sperged out or not. I mean, what difference does it make?

When you say sperged out I think of Carlos Mencia going De De De.

The difference is in real life I can choke a bitch, while John Gabriel's Internet Fuckwad Theory comes into play online. I already know I'm ill-equipped and unable to win any verbal duel, so its all the more frustrating, especially when it's the like of you who is doing the sparring.

Intent of words, whether it is to build acceptance, fucking around with someone, etc, whatever the social plus that comes out of what you guys do, is completely lost on me. You know this, people have said to my face on here that I have a thin skin and therefore don't want to talk to me. I'm always on the defensive. Only time I'm not is if I'm high or drunk. Then I REALLY don't give a fuck.

And that's why people say shit to me. I'm predictable. They know they can get the response they crave for their own amusement.

Well, you're not predictable to me.  This whole Asperger thing took me completely by surprise. 

The amount of amusement I take from your avatar every time I see it versus Sky's is a surprise to me!

I should read MMO threads more. Seems like all (mis)characterizing comes from there. I've heard of this grunk dude, for instance, but don't have a good idea wtf the big deal is. As for you Lorekeep, you seemed fairly OK to me. I wouldn't know any of that above unless you just told me.  :awesome_for_real:

1. Carlos Mencia is not referring to spergers when he does that.
2. Choking a bitch will never help your point is this is what the conversation is about.
3. I'm not sparring.

So I'm either awesome or awesome? Thanks, but I think I already knew that.  :grin:

1. Of course he isn't. He's making fun of idiots by making a motion reminiscent of handicapped people who can't help but be the way they are. Spergers, seriously, where the fuck did that phrase come from? It annoys the shit out of me that I might fall into a group you all seem to have a strong prejudice against because of a Cry Wolf mentality these people have.
2. It'll make me feel better at that particular moment more so than anything I could say back and make the fucker think twice about saying it again, consequences of a clearly-heinous-act be damned. It's not about my point, it's about respecting it that you don't fucking rail on me because of it.
3. See above. I'm always on the defensive when it comes to conversation, feeling it's a test of my social intelligence that I always fail due to self-generated pressure. This is something casual / natural for you. For me it's an endless test on whether I'm a part of a group I want to stay in or shot off the island from a Blastenheimer cannon because I said the wrong thing. Because that's all it takes: ONE wrong thing at any time and you're ostracized.

On second thought, I would agree that you're a very strange cat. You seem to want utmost sympathy for an illness you aren't even diagnosed with. And you lash out and call people prejudiced when they simply say "Go see a doctor".

That whole post is ridiculous.

(http://imagecache2.allposters.com/images/LIFPOD/5574232.jpg)

I'm gonna have a drink.

Oh, I get it. He's joking.

Clever. Oh you! ;D

About the drink? *hiccup*

Just give me acceptance. Don't think "poor you". Just fucking understand I'm crazy by normal standards.

See this is why alcohol is awesome. I have 1% the angst I had before and could give a fuck about everything I just said. I love you guys.  :awesome_for_real: Now if I could just transcribe this "could give a fuck" to my sober state...

What do you want my acceptance for? I'm not anyone. Not even sure wtf Asperger's is. I'm just a guy saying if you think you have a problem, get it checked out by a professional. I'll also tell you that nobody's normal. Some just have better social graces than others. And if you're someone with little social graces at all, and think you're crazy for that, then you are hardly crazy. When I said that autistic kid just jumped around and hummed, I literally mean that's all he did. That's what his life consisted of. Monday was jumping and humming. Tuesday was jumping and humming. And his 7th, 8th, and 14th birthdays and all days in between consisted of jumping and humming. His parents gave up on him and he lived in a youth mental illness facility. Nor are you severely schizo, where the most insane shit comes out of your mouth, followed by literal poo flinging. You are not that bad off from what I can tell.. So don't try to identify with "crazy" too much. Rather, you should respect what real crazy is, and be thankful you've got more to hope for, and at least some ability to work on things.

You've left evidence that I can say something and instantly change your opinion of me. People will come by and look at this. Pretty sure a lot of the forum has by now. So, you're someone who has made clear to me the folly of my ways and shown the type of change my words can have.

Yeah, I respect what real crazy is. Call me guilty for using it so casually much the same way any Fox News commentator will throw out Nazi.

Umm, hmm? Say what you want. I hereby tell everyone now to not color your opinions of Lorekeep because of anything I say. Cool? ???

[edit] Actually, I probably misread that. I'm not entirely sure what you're talking about.

What to have for dinner is totally the number one thing Ingmar and I squabble over.

Vegetarian chilli.

No need to congratulate me on saving two marriages.

We will credit you at our 75th wedding anniversary!

You think this makes him strange? The amount of people who fit that description is staggering. Interweb is no good for those who want names describing why they are unhappy. Especially "psychological" disorders that can be casually be applied to anyone.

Well, it's just strange compared to other people who suffer. If someone is bi-polar, for example, they usually get treatment. Or someone helps them get it. Feeling better is their priority. And they at least get diagnosed first before talking about it.. let alone get angry about it.

Asbergers draws most social discrimination from people who have reason to feel insecure about their own emotional maturity.  If someone dismisses you because of Asbergers-like symptoms in your social interactions, they are probably harboring a desperate need to be one of the cool people. You just became a scapegoat to hide behind. Don't worry, it would have been someone else other than you, but you were a convenient target.

Scapegoats? Tell me you are talking about shit he deals with real life and not anything in this thread.

I don't think Lorekeep is in Middle School and I'd wager knowing what tiny bit about him I know, he doesn't run with people who would ever fathom worrying about being one of the "cool people."

That's nice advice to give to a teenager though.

Really, it's more "if someone dismisses someone because of Aspberger's they are either a dick or totally creeped out."

I can name some sperger types that creep the shit out of me. I don't dismiss them offhand but I'm not going to go out of my way to friend them in any manner.

He's absolutely right. Unless you fit tightly within the social mold that makes you "cool", people tend to not want to be around you. I befriend the offbeat much better than the "normal."

As I said, there's no such thing as normal.

Sure there is, but its a very broad category. You have to be exceptionally fucking strange to be ousted by everyone. Shit, being an antisocial weirdo is "cool" in some circles. And despite after school specials the people who ridicule the weird are not inherently insecure or fucked up. Its just a convenient fiction to tell an omega ranked child. Someone is always an omega in a dominance hierarchy, thats just how humans roll.

Not that I've really thought this through, but I'd say there's.... "Banal", "Interesting", "Fucktard", and "Sick". No "Normal". Banal, I guess, can be mistaken for "Normal" and Status Quo, but really, it's kind of fucked up too. I've seen some Banals break down before. They are just Fucktards who hide well, or Interesting in denial.  :roll:

Lorekeep, contrary to opinion in some quarters the sort of violent urges and behaviour that you describe are not associated with AS: that's simply not supported by the data.  That's not to say that AS individuals present as placid, Ghandi-like figures, of course, just that AS itself is unlikely to be the cause of your rage issues and pre-occupation with expressing yourself through violent language.

Yes, I admit that - like many others - I'm by default sceptical about forums posters with self-diagnosed AS.  But reading your posts here I have no doubt that you are very anxious about something and I am sure that you are right that you could benefit from seeking the professional opinion that you say you're planning to get this month.  I think that's a great idea on your part and you're quite right in planning to do so.

By the way this is totally out of the blue for me: you seem to have been unremarkable in that regard on here so far as I remember, and I remember reading a few of your posts as long ago as 2007 in the (Eve) War thread.

Diagnose me next!

Stage 3 herpes of the mangina, I can tell by the way you type.

It was a wonderful feed line and I am disappointed that you beat me to it while I was still discarding possibilites, Gryeyes.

< Should really bail on this thread and pay attention kitty syndrome

Yes, I was refering to RL. I am pleasantly surprised that, from what I can see, most folks here have a pretty open mind about such things.

I'd also agree with Endie that violent urges or latent rage is not a typical part of the diagnosis. Its certainly not included in the DSM IV criteria. That said, it doesn't mean that someone with rage can't also have some form of autistic spectrum disorder. Rage can very easily build up with anyone that's had a frustrating time of it over the years.

schild, I don't think what I said was pertinent only to middle school. I think f13 may have spoiled you a little bit as to what to expect out there in the broader social forums (so to speak). There's a reason I hang out here; it does, at the end of the day, have a much higher quotient of maturity than you'll find on most gaming forums.

The last two pages of this thread have left me confused, and hungry.  Also slightly itchy. 

Are you aware of just how big a douche you've been in this thread? I'm almost tempted to diagnose you with Asperger's, you're doing a damn good job with the "lack of empathy" symptom.

Stray doesn't have a lack of empathy, he just doesn't think before he talks.

I  have a lack of empathy.

I disagree.  You're empathetic.  You just lack any sort of compassion.   :grin:

Yeah, I almost put a bit in there about "when you make schild look like the sympathetic one, you know there's an issue."

Here I thought I was giving Lorekeep a lot of time as it was -- at the expense of a very attention whoring cat.

As for empathy, I told Lorekeep to see a doctor. What else am I supposed to do?

Funnily there is a book on my dilemma.

http://www.amazon.com/All-Cats-Have-Asperger-Syndrome/dp/1843104814 (http://www.amazon.com/All-Cats-Have-Asperger-Syndrome/dp/1843104814)

Dude, you can keep playing the Asperger's card if you want to wallow and give yourself excuses, or you can make a concerted attempt to change your life.  It's not like you're fucking Rain Man.  You do have some social abilities, but they're like a muscle, you need to fucking develop them.

Expand your network.  I bet you spend most of your time going to work, maybe going shopping, and then home.  Leave your fucking comfort zone!

Take an adult education art class.  Lots of trim there, and it'll be arty, sensitive trim who can overlook eccentricities.  Shit, the art world is filled with odd guys.  Trust me, you've got nothing on some of the freaks there.  I can't tell you how many times I got laid for the low, low price of $150 every 4 months.  And I enjoyed myself in class!

Volunteer someplace!  Are you at all religious?  Even a little bit?  Find a service you can live with that has a lot of people in your age group (I'm assuming you're still in your 20's.  Us old fuckers need to work harder).  Don't just hit on women.  Make friends with LOTS OF PEOPLE.  You get laid more when you've got a lot of friends, because they can go a long way towards hooking your ass up.

Stop whining, and start doing.

 :uhrr:

I'm gonna make it really simple, and just be blunt about it.

My problem is that I truly do not give a fuck about other people or their views to an almost psychotic level of disinterest, and have difficulty accepting the reality of that situation based on societal perception of what a healthy, normal social life is. The "whining" is a fight I'm trying to have within myself to ignore the realities of who it is I am, and that what I am inside may not be very pretty. It's absolutely amazing I turned out the way I did, being focused on being respectful, avoiding bad situations, and generally being able to pass off as normal much the same way people don't look at Dexter Morgan as a monster.

Example: I wanted to be a designer forever based on some childhood fantasy of growing up and being in control of a creative vision. I am a terrible designer. I kept going despite the fact. I finally accepted I suck and have refocused my energies in other areas.

I do not give one god damn iota of a fuck about people that have nothing to do with my life. I've found people I can finally be comfortable with and will invest my energies there. A large social circle means fuck all to me; all that mattered was having quality friendships, not quantity. I've got that now. If I meet people, great. But I have a foundation of friendship that I've been looking so long for and it's made my life so much better.

What is getting fucked going to do to better my life? Make me a man? I'll still be the same person afterwards. Fucking is for pleasure and procreation. I get plenty of pleasure from other things. Call it denial, but pumping it up to be this big, important event is not helping things, as most of you have pointed out. So you can label me the f13 Virgin or whatever you guys want to make you feel better about yourselves by having someone that is worse off by your standards.

If I'm going to refer to myself I'll just stop saying "Asperger!" even though a good percentage of what I described, even in this post, could be quantified as that. Symptoms seem to sit well with most folks rather than a title on a package of fucked-up physiology.

I know that was a subtle attempt to rerail back into the dating thing, but since this thread started I've given less and less of a shit about my romantic "problems."

So spare me the "then stop complaining about it if that's how things are." Think about what it is I'm trying to avoid doing. I want to be a better person, and I can't tell if I'll be able to win that fight within me or if I'll fall to a state of Could Give A Fuck for the rest of my life.

Fuck I could probably script an award-winning dramatic series based on a character study of my personality. We can call it "The Whiner."

Because unless you're truly asexual (and that's a rare thing) you're bullshitting yourself into thinking that sex isn't important.  It is.  It's a big driver for us mammals.

And it's not just about sex, but that's a huge, huge part of it.  There's also caring about someone other than yourself.  It's back rubs and being able to tell someone things you'd never tell somebody else.  Frankly, it makes you a better, more complete human being.

That's actually fucking important.

I was the aforementioned dude who went to work, went to the store, went home, played on computer. I was ASTOUNDINGLY lucky that I met my now 12 year partner at work. Otherwise, I'd be Lorekeep with Big Gulp telling me to go to church and get frisky. Prior to my miraculous luck, I did 'push my comfort zone', but that didn't work for me. Clubs don't work for me, classes didn't work for me either. I'd just sit, pay attention in class, go home, do my homework. Maybe talk briefly to a guy or two, but never enough to start a social network of any type.

The only thing that 'saved' me was to have a steady and long term social environment where I had no other recourse but to engage in socially; the workplace. I guess I could have joined a church and pretended I believed in religious institutions.  :oh_i_see:

Lorekeep, you don't have to defend yourself or talk about any of this.. umm, if it makes you feel better though, go for it. If you feel like a whiner, then don't.

I don't think getting laid is the be all end all of things necessarily, but we're in a dating thread, so yeah.. It's going to be talked about. At the very least, it's important as far as this discussion is concerned. And strange to hear someone simultaneously wonder about dating prospects, get some input here and there, and then turn around and say it doesn't matter and that he hates people.

I'm a character, what can I say.

Hey!  I'm not asexual and I don't think sex is all that important. 

Oh, and EEK!  Don't join a church!  Or if you do, make sure it's a funny one, like that Church of Steve or something.  At least she'll have a sense of humour.  (of sorts)

I work with 35 guys behind a radiation shield.  And when I do come out to other meetings, it's all physicists and engineers (male again).  I'm in trouble ;-)

But yeah, going to classes and whatnot works for people like Big Gulp, doesn't work for everyone.  My hobbies are 100% male (and most are 45+) so the odds of finding female companionship there are slim and none as well.  But honestly, right now I really don't mind.  Sex isn't something I've ever cared about, so "trying to get laid" isn't even a blip on the priority screen.  Obviously if sex means something to you and you want it, this changes your priorities.

Sex is pretty fucking awesome, and internet dating does work - even a miserable fuck like me found someone awesome through the internet, and the jury is still out on whether or not I'm even a person.

Then why the fuck are you continually attempting to justify and rationalize yourself to everyone in this thread? If you were unique and not one of a 100 other fucks making the same silly fucking claims based on a wikipedia perusal perhaps your story would have a bit more credence. But to me you are just another sad fucker who feels the need to make grandiose claims about their dysfunction so they can be "exceptional" in some aspect of their life. But instead of donning a cloak and practicing ritualistic magic, or wearing fangs and pretending to be a vampire like most other social misfits who need to feel special.  You choose to be a scary psychotic. You don't get laid but instead of accepting you have no game and doing something about it you create this fantasy about how your psychotic tendencies make such a thing unappealing. Self diagnosed psychotic with AS, how completely common and utterly boorish. But I suppose the alternative is to accept that you are just a sad dude with no ability to interact with others.

Be aware this started with you asking for advice about dating...

Jury came back. They deferred to science. Science has conclusive evidence that you aren't human. Don't argue with science.

I think when you talk to your shrink, and you should - it can't hurt, he's going to tell you you don't have anything but maybe mild depression.  In other words, in terms of western culture, you're perfectly normal.  Feels good man. 

Negative. You are a meat popsicle.

That aside, just what the fuck is going on in this thread? I gotta go read the last couple pages.

I'm absolutely 100% not being snide about this when I say that you post repeatedly on a social forum about how little you care about what other people think.  Denial isn't just a river in Egypt, you know.

What he's got might be mild depression but if it's been long lasting (i.e. his whole life) there's a decent chance he's somewhere on the Asperger's spectrum, moreso if he's holding down a job and getting other stuff done in his life. Autism is pretty fucking vague diagnosis though, it's a set of symptoms that sound somewhat like what he's got but it can get pretty broad what goes in there especially if we're getting into what classifies as Asperger's. Also Big Gulp is a retard, provided it's what you've got then it's not a fucking muslce you can train up but rather a set of connections in the brain (or whatever else causes it) that didn't properly develop while growing up. Social skills can atrophy with disuse but comparing that to someone with autism is like telling somone who was born without leg muscles that they just need to work at it in order to get walking.

That said there are people who have probably more pronounced form of asperger's than you that have found people to live with and even have families, it's not hopeless and yes seeing a doctor for a diagnosis will help (fuck it may turn out to be something that medication can treat). I can also see someone with Asperger's being more comfortable interacting with other people in an on-line format because part of weirdness for autistic people in dealing with others is the whole face-to-face thing. They don't feel that same sort of connection (and in full blown autism cases don't really have a sense of other people, who are just weird unpredicatble furniture) and dealing instead with a block of text could make things easier.

Its like reading a horoscope. More vague generalizations based on ones anus and some guys fucking text!

I can't believe people are trying to diagnose this stuff over the internet.     :awesome_for_real:

Because you'll respond, good or bad, and I've got nothing better to do.

Edit: ok I'll be patient.

Fuck it's not like I devoted my whole post to saying this is what's wrong with Lorekeep just that based on what he's said his self-diagnosis might be right, I also told him to go see a real doctor. Most of the rest of it was talking about what he thinks he has, which is stuff that's true even if Lorekeep doesn't have any form of autism. It's more because I think autism is a really fascinating condition even if it's more a catch-all term for people who problems relating to others. It's fascinating because we really don't have a great understanding of how we do our relating to other people and seeing what happens when the process goes wrong might give us some indication of what we're actually doing. Things like children who fail the false-belief test (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sally%E2%80%93Anne_test) but can pass it with a camera replacing the doll (predicting what a polaroid picture will show). It shows that they're capable of understanding how objects will work but they seem not to be able to separate first and third person perspectives. They seem to only understand other people in terms of themselves or as bizarre objects in the world that they can't figure out. Mostly I posted because Big Gulp's post was, if this is what Lorekeep really has, fucking ignorant regarding the condition. The whole thing could be moot if he gets diagnosed with mild depression or something but I wasn't really doing anything better at the time.

I wasn't going to actually address what was exceptionally stupid in your diagnosis but since you persist. You are wrong, the whole "social skills being similar to an atrophied muscle" is EXACTLY how someone with AS would be treated. Behavioral Cognitive Therapy would be used for the brain/mind exactly as physical exercise would be used for a muscle. So not only was it a paragraph of silly enabling hurf blurf the hurf blurf isn't even informed.


Edit:
I am fully aware of why you are begging for attention. I am asking how you can beg for attention while simultaneously claim to be a psychotic whacko who does not give half a fuck about people or attention.

How was my post retarded?

A) He doesn't know if he has "Asperger's Syndrome" (which is pretty much just a convenient excuse for socially inept people to latch onto.  Telling yourself you have a condition doesn't alleviate your real problems).

B) How is anything I said wrong?  Expanding your network WILL help you meet women.  And that's what he was bitching about, regardless of whether he now says he doesn't care.  He's full of shit, he cares a lot.  You backing up his half-assed self diagnosis does him zero good.

C) The best thing he could do right now is break out of his fucking rut.  Strip/night clubs are NOT going to do that.  Forcing himself to be friendly and outgoing, and change his routine just might.

This thread got retarded fast, a few times.

Something I realised chatting to Righ last night - you can have traits from all sorts of mental disorders in your own personality and not have the mental disorder.  Aspergers, Bi-Polar, OCD, that adult version of the kiddy one where you can't pay attention (I can't remember but nearly every guy seems to have it lately), Schizo-watchamacallit, some other one that everyone around here seemed to decide they must have a while back, etc.  Maybe some people do latch on to one of them hoping to explain their personalities.  Or maybe, something I totally accept, you're all just weirdos.  Luckily, medical reefer is coming to a state near you!

I once killed a hooker because I didn't have my meds for my RLS.

But it's so interesting to have a condition.  It provides an excuse for anything you can't be bothered to change.  She's not feckless: she has ADD!  He's not rude: he has Asperger's!  He's not a self-centred arsehole: he has Narcissistic Personality Disorder!  Having medicalised everything else, we now medicalise unpleasantness.

Heaven forfend that a psychiatrist tells you that you've just brought your kids up to be spoilt brats getting, through increasingly vile behaviour,  the attention you denied them.  Give them a drug!  God forbid that someone say that you're a selfish prick: you're the victim here!

A great deal of depression amongst those in their teens and twenties is fuelled by unhealthy sleep patterns.  But watch the fury if you make even a nuanced statement like "perhaps some people with clinical depression could help themselves by the sheer act of will of going for the odd walk."  Now, the fact that walking in the countryside has been shown to alleviate depression in many individuals is not important.  People will shout furiously at you for saying that some cases of depression can be alleviated by the individual's behaviour.  That smacks of blame!

tl;dr I'm not saying these conditions don't exist.  But I am saying that internet - and indeed "real life" - is full of people claiming armfuls of personality disorders for themselves in order to avoid facing up to their habitual behaviour.

ADD!  That's the one I was trying to think of that everyone seems to have!  I guess your condition is being a Mr. Know-it-all.  It worked for me this time, though!

Classification of mental conditions is a diagnostic tool meant to be of some limited help to psychologists and psychiatrists. However, the first thing you learn going to any undergraduate psych 101 course worth its salt is that the DSM IV is entirely useless in a therapeutic environment. Its simply meant to quickly convey a series of symptoms observed. Its never meant to provide a snapshot of an individual as a whole.

Unfortunately, it has rapidly turned into a pop culture mechanism whereby we can pigeon-hole others, and indeed, ourselves into readily digestible personality formats that allow us to be mentally lazy about dealing with others and ourselves. We love easy answers that allow us to sit in front of the tube with our conscience unperturbed. Be it the War on Terror or some facile belief in the use of medication to solve all our mental anguish, we are too busy a society to stop and lead a reflective life anymore.

Individuals are not afflicted by mental conditions in the same way that we're afflicted by physical ailments. We do love us some mechanistic view of the universe, tho, so if we can just tighten this screw here, lube that depression up nice and slick, we'll squeeze by with an unexamined life of comfortable misery.

I feel like posting but you're right, I'm an attention whore too. It disgusts me. That's one negative label I'll not deny or shy away from.

I've gone through a range of emotions in this thread that lack consistency. It's why you're seeing my responses vary. I'm not some politician sticking to a platform. I'm a muddled human being wrestling with multiple severe issues.

I don't like what I've written, and it pains me to look at, seeing now the responses I'm getting. But I don't really think about it when I write it. I just write what I feel.

I care about you guys in my whacked up world view and am trying to earn your acceptance, and failing miserably. As I pointed out earlier, every conversation feels like I'm being tested on my worth. When I'm out amongst people, I'm usually focused on something and don't care. When I visit these forums, it's about contributing, and most if not all the contributors offer something unique, appealing, and entertaining, even if its negative (bloodworth, grunk, Broughden before he went off the fucking deep end) that keeps them posting.

I'll get that diagnosis, and its next week. Seems the perfect way to end this thread.

Have you been banned? You have our acceptance. Don't be so tough on yourself, don't hide behind false barriers, or even real ones. If you do have some disorder, use it as a strength to overcome adversity, not as an excuse.

In the banned's defense, you have to be a gibbering retard or have a long history of stupidity a la Dash / Broughden to get banned. Otherwise you might be kept around as a toy. That isn't acceptance.

I piss off everybody around here on a regular basis.  I've been on one version or another of these forums since Lum was running things.  I've stayed at Schild's house, for fuck's sake.

Stop looking for acceptance so damned much.  You've over 2000 posts.  I'm pretty sure you're there.

Alright, I've had enough of this line of talk - Lorekeep, here's the deal. Stop being a pussy. Life's tough, get a helmet.

We could have a long discussion about ADD or we could do something else.

Sometimes even subtle jokes aren't funny.

:awesome_for_real:

You broke your humerus.

I CONTRIBUTE! woot! Negative though? Humm..

:brickface:

Get a hobby.

Meh. I teach people who have Autism, including some Aspies.

Though people without an ID always seem to want to claim that they have AS with HFA. One of my co-workers has decided that he has AS, and also that I have AS. While I smile politely and nod for his benefit, it's clearly inaccurate because, I, you know, have fucking empathy (being a cock on the internet notwithstanding). Hey, ASD is a spectrum, and lots of people hit some (or a lot) of the markers. But I think it is often WAAAAAAY over self-diagnosed by guys on the internet and then used as a crutch/excuse of self-reinforcement.

Not saying you're doing that, I don't know you well enough to have an opinion. But fuck, even if you do actually have AS, use it to explain shit to yourself, not as a shield or badge of honor.


Hey, if you're bored, give yourself the baron cohen autism test when you get bored. There's a few of them online. Answer honestly instead of giving the answers which will say "YES, I AHVE THE AUTISM!"

Woot. Response to shit from 3 pages ago looks dated by the time I readcatchup!

 :awesome_for_real:




edit - time to go look up that Butters Episode from Southpark!

I would agree that mental illness diagnoses can be bullshit.... But I've seen some genuinely sick people, and had to spend a good deal of time with some in the past. I would never write off psychology/psychiatry totally. There's another category of being "situationally" crazy, or depressed, or at a loss in some way.. And that's different. Like some people are saying, you can unscrew yourself out of bad situations -- be it through changing environment, worldview, something. I would offer my sympathy to these people too -- everyone's got some shit to deal with. I just wouldn't encourage them to accept some "permanence" in the idea that they are ill, regardless of situation. And it's hard to even get to the subject of "illness" if they haven't seen a doctor yet. That's expecting too much, to want anyone to just fall down and excuse you just because you say so. And then raging about slicing their throats if they don't. We're the assholes???

(http://img5.allocine.fr/acmedia/medias/nmedia/00/02/55/27/p5.jpg)

[edit] Actually, Borat would have been better. It's all ruined now..  :oh_i_see:

I never said I'd slice the throat of someone who didn't excuse me. I said I'd slice the throat of someone who laughed in my face about my problems and disrespected me in a fashion that I could violently react and show them the error of their ways.

You know there's people out there that won't respect you until you prove you're "stronger", usually through fear of reprisal. Alpha Male syndrome or whatever. The internet removes that fear; hence, disrespect is abundant, because, what are you going to do, choke me through my monitor?

Once again, violence in your particular situation given what people would "laugh in your face about" would only hurt your case.

Even joking about it here only hurts your case.

I thought we did that as a group or something on here. Anyway, 31, right below 32 which is the threshold where most people with Autism tend to score, and way above 16.4, the average.

Remind me what my case is because I'm losing track.

Heh lets all take it. I like tests ;)

Score: 4

It's safe to say I'm on some different end of the spectrum to you Lorekeep.. From the questions it asked though, a lot of "introverted/focused" stuff doesn't strike me as "not normal". Again, I don't know much about Asperger's, but the world takes all types. Why does there have to be an illness created for focused introverts? Is there something more to it? Perhaps if you were in some high ass range, you'd be Rain Man I suppose. 16 seems OK enough. And I mean that in a good way, honestly. On my end, I get accused of not having enough focus. I switch jobs a lot, I'm jump around a lot in conversation, I get restless just sitting around. I guess if I wanted to I could say I had ADD.  :grin:

[edit] Oops my bad. 16 is avg, and you're 31. Hmm <scratches chin>

You think you're broken, and somehow trying to put that into words.

Yet you aren't already at a doctor, you haven't seen a shrink about it as far as I can tell, and you're self-diagnosing.

When really, despite the propensity for violence, odds are you just don't have enough practice being social. Were your parents social people? Don't answer that, just use your benefits to see a shrink.

Edit: I don't mean this in a bad way, because honestly, it's the better of the two scenarios. But there's a fair chance you're just stupid and terrible in social situations. That's absolutely fine. Speaking as someone with an autistic cousin, I'd rather be stupid and normal than be brilliant and not be able to enjoy it.

Also, if you really do have a rage problem and commonly threaten to stab people, or think about it, seek help today, not 'eventually'. If your response to a negative social interaction is to hulk out, there's a deep problem that needs addressing before you get yourself in trouble.

If you don't, stop tossing around lines talking about stabbing people, that isn't going to get anyone anywhere to want to help you. And it isn't funny, or even quirky-funny.

Think of me as your sweet old auntie and I'll give you some sweet old auntie advice. 

Don't worry.  You're just a boy.  You have plenty of time.  It'll sort itself out.

This is why sweet old Auntie's can't be trusted.

Although we might give out faulty advice, you know you can trust me with your deepest, darkest secrets.  Srsly.  You can. 
Go on, then.  The darker, the better. 

Sometimes, when I see about your avatar, I look like Sky's (old -.-) avatar.  :grin:

I am kind of in this camp. I never had a serious relationship until an EQ friend made a remark in game about my childhood that cracked open a memory* that released a floodgate of emotion that then allowed me to open up to others. I fell in love and got married within a year.


* My longtime childhood friend basically abandoned me in 6th grade to pursue girls way before I was ready and I had repressed that rejection but still let it prevent me from bonding with anyone seriously after that.

I had a rage problem for years.  Never actually did anything physical or verbal, but I would blow up at a minute's notice over little things and get very angry about some perceived transgression somewhere.  The doctors had me on so many different medications trying to "cure" me it was ridiculous (and they either made me so tired I didn't do anything or REALLY angry).  Finally got on the right diagnosis after seeing 6 different "specialists" and drug combo to make things all better.  That combined with just accepting that my family has anger management issues (that either blow over extremely quickly or turn into 50 year grudges) and accepting me for myself (however lame and as much bullshit it sounds like) has made me a much more pleasant person to be around.  And I didn't even need marijuana to mellow out!  My ex even commented over Thanksgiving and Christmas that I'm fun to be around again and she says I should have done this years ago.

I got a 12, whee!

My main thing is that I am good at socializing, but I don't really go out of my way to do it. Ingmar usually has to drag me kicking and screaming to parties, but once I'm there, I don't think anyone can tell I'd rather be at home.

I offer handsomeness and leet programming skills. That's two things!

I got a 32.  Which actually didn't surprise me, it's taken years of deliberately cultivating habits towards social engagement and learning to intellectualize things most people do by instinct to become the paragon of social skills you see before you.  In most of my parallel worlds, I do a lot of fingerpainting.

Lorekeep, if you're not trolling us, here's my suggestions: Build on your capacity to empathize with the people right in front of you.  Learn to force eye contact even though it makes you uncomfortable (stare at the center of their brow ridge, if necessary).  Speak clearly, try to avoid using mental shorthand out loud, and if your audience looks confused ask them for advice for how to get back to the same page.  Learn how to tell jokes based on esoteric rules of physics of math, audiences that can spot the punchlines are worth pursuing closer relationships.  Beware of "Likable Scoundrels".

--Dave

And brush your teeth before bed.

cousins, yo!

yes, for serious.

Aspergers/Autism aren't mental illnesses. They're neurological conditions. Like down syndrome or fragile X or global development disorder or whatever. Like being actually properly Intellectually Disabled (aka mentally retarded).
They can't be "cured", they can't be "fixed" but people with these conditions can learn/be trained to adapt and live more fulfilling/productive lives etc, depending on their individual cases. Medication may or may not be involved in the management of behaviours.

This is different from some other neuroses, it's especially different from fat nerds on the internet with no social skills deciding that they have Aspbergers (often really meaning High Functioning Autism with or without Aspergers) as an excuse for their lack of social skills.

Oh yeah, it's not ADD anymore. Hasn't been for years. It's now ADHD.  :grin:



This, like pretty much all cases of "big man on the internet" is just fucking retarded. Shut the fuck up with your "I'll punch your head" bullshit. If you spouted that horseshit to me in real life, I'd choke a bitch.  :awesome_for_real:
See how that works oh so well in endearing yourself to others, even in a "friendly" situation?

Fuck in fuck, stop. You were hated on before this?!

Anyone trolls me I'm going to find their house and gut them like a trout.

Edit: I got 28.  I think that's very slightly better than when I took this a few years ago.  I am becoming socialised.

Ah yes..

Well I kind of suspected it already. Sort of. Nothing severe, I'm sure.

Since I mentioned Myers Briggs somewhere earlier.. and just to tie it in with this, I'm pretty sure all EFNP's like myself can be mistaken for ADHD. One quick googling, and I find that other EFNP's think the same. Perhaps ADHD is something to do with personality type.

Which begs another question.. perhaps the Asperger's stuff may be associated with personality type too. I googled various AQ results around the net, and there's so many people with scores 32 and higher. I'm finding it hard to believe there's that many near-Autistics (for lack of a better term) out there. It's easier to believe they're all INTP's or something - who are known to be the less social, kind of ultra-rational temperament.

....


Too easy.

There seems to be an awful lot of people on F13 who are so intimate with mental disorders that they call them by their nicknames!  I wonder why that is?  It's a little bit worrying, no?

Perhaps the most revealing thing I've gotten out of this thread so far.  :oh_i_see:

Digression/question for people who work with this sort of thing: is there a reason those sorts of psychological tests never have a completely neutral answer? I always find myself having to slightly agree or slightly disagree with things that don't seem right to me either way.

Those sorts of tests are largely worthless unless the questions are answered by an objective third party after extensive observation.  Knowing what little I do of the condition, I'm certain that I could select answers that would produced my desired outcome. 

Since the questions are oh-so-subtle like "do you like being in large groups of people" and "do you like repeating the same tasks ad nauseum", I'm pretty sure even severe cases either way can, too. :grin:

What's interesting about the test is that answering with "slightly" for a majority of them can still return a result of 35.

Work harder, n00b!

What liquor should I have on hand for when you show up?  Maybe we can try socializing and avoiding that whole gutting bit.  Or I can look at you quizzically while trying to figure out why you are displaying such a pronounced emotional response to a bit of light jest.

So, I got a 12.

I guess that's good.

Or something.

Um, you do get that it was parody?

Nope, we're freaks too.  :awesome_for_real:

To Lorekeep.  If you feel like changing your state of being.  

If you want to see why people might have the urge to talk to women (and even anyone really) stop jerking off/looking at porn for two weeks.  I dare you.  Also, if you're of the sort who doesn't find it immoral, see a hooker or two*.  Check reviews online first and be careful.  Remember, Benjamin Franklin fucked hookers.  It's ok.

Get a dog.  Care for dog.  

Pay me the years worth of shrink bills.

*However, don't tell your hooker about how shitty your life because at that point you will be living the song Basket Case by Green Day.  But better that than Longview.



Got 29 on spergers test.  I think the most aspergery thing about me is that I simply cannot notice small details about people.  Haircuts, new glasses, whatever.  Also, everything around me just sort of merges into background and simply never enters my consciousness once I've spent a little while in an area.  Which can result in me leaving all sorts of embarrassing things about the house without realizing it.  And I'm a messy mofo.

When I picture people who would score high on that test, I see Emily Deschanel as Bones. Not anything so bad.

[edit] Hah..

Seems that was the intention. link (http://www.philly.com/dailynews/columnists/ellen_gray/20070131_Ellen_Gray___Boreanaz_says__Bones__is_not_procedural.html)

I'm displaying symptoms of Asperger's and was unable to tell.

(That's a joke, yo.  It did take me a minute to catch it though. :oh_i_see:)

I work there.  :awesome_for_real:

Aunt's a psychologist, uncle's a psychiatrist, studied Lacan etc.  Basically immersed in the stuff since I was old enough to ask "Julian, was Hitler mentally ill?"

My family will be first into the re-education camps when the Scientologists take over.

Aunt's a psychologis, uncle is a psychologist, I have a masters in psychology.

Oh, Psychology - one of those useful subjects, like Liberal Arts.

Liberal Arts isn't a subject, be specific.

That's true, but a degree in it is just as useful, no?

Any degree is useful, getting a specialized degree is just a means of getting into grad school or for stroking your ego.

Wow, that should take us off ontoanother tangent of faux umbrage and limitless retardation.  Can we get Tom Bombadil not being in LOTR into this topic somehow too? 

Tom Bombadil had no degree, thus was ineligible for the movie position. Stay in school kids!

 :oh_i_see:

How is stroking your ego useful? 

Reference your avatar.  :awesome_for_real:

That doesn't make any sense.  She's not stroking her ego, she's grabbing her titties. 

I don't need other people, I have Signe's avatar.

Yeah, I would like to take this opportunity to thank Signe for her avatar.

You're welcome, just as long as you know that they're neither my hands nor my titties and even if they were, grabbing them wouldn't do anything for my ego.

One can dream.

Lego my ego.

:brickface:

Have you made that an official emote yet?

:brickface:

I nominate  :gamecube:  :ipod: :nintendo: :eek3: be removed to make way for this clearly superior and more frequently used emote.

That one is kind of big. I added an alternate version that's smaller:

:argh:

I've fixed the big brickface then.

Any chance of  (http://sae.tweek.us/static/images/emoticons/emot-colbert.gif) or (http://sae.tweek.us/static/images/emoticons/emot-shobon.gif) ?  They'd be a lot more use than some of the emoticons up there that I've never actually seen outside a specifically emote-based post.

I nominate all riceball emoticons


I've tried hooking up with a psyche student occasionally. That's about my the extent of my "expertise". Oh, and I did time in rehab. I came to like Jungians over Freudians (bastards!).

I still think this one needs to be available here. (http://www.eastsideboxing.com/forum/images/smilies/buttlick.gif)

http://blog.okcupid.com/index.php/2010/01/20/the-4-big-myths-of-profile-pictures/ (http://blog.okcupid.com/index.php/2010/01/20/the-4-big-myths-of-profile-pictures/)

People might be shallow, but it looks like you might be ok with an animal or if you are interesting.

That was a fascinating read.  Yay statistics!

OK thread, I need an etiquette lesson.

I posted once above, about a recent relationship break-up. I wrote "bring on the internet dating". I'd never tried online dating before, but there was nothing to lose.

It, erm, worked OK. In 12 days, I got 74 messages. Of those, I ended up exchanging emails with eight women (edit - and so far, four gave me their phone numbers). From those, I've got three actual dates in the next week.

All of a sudden, I've gone from loneliness to juggling conversations with many women, stalling five. I'm at the same pre-date stage several times over. That wouldn't have happened naturally -- it happened because I'm new on an internet system. It feels a bit sneaky.

At what point am I being an asshole? Am I now shallow? Is being a three-timing (eight-timing) virtual Tiger Woods cool with internet dating etiquette until I'm actually in a relationship again? Spare me your fantasies about what I should be trying to do with eight interested women. On second thoughts, I'll go fantasize about that some more.

Not yet.  Maybe?  Yes.

If it helps, think of these dates as being like job interviews.  Or maybe even practice job interviews.  Either way, you're not signing any contracts yet.

You're never being an asshole in online dating. Period.

Yes, but...Are they refusing to date people who play WoW?

I hope so.

As stated, you're going through the interview process right now. When/if you start a relationship* with one of them, then you call the others off. BTW, You're shallow regardless of this internet dating thing.  :why_so_serious:

*use your own honest definition of a relationship. A one-night stand isn't a relationship, but regular dinner and make-out sessions might well be.


Also, from my limited knowledge, you're hitting the ball out fo the park with that kind of message ratio. My understanding of these sites is that guys send 1.4 million messages out, getting a reply rate of approximately 0.0000001%. Are you on eharmony.com? I'm seeing their TV ads doing heavy rotation all over the place for the last month, and they seem much more "female friendly" with all the "relationship" and "compatability" talk on their ads.

EHarmony is what it sounds like to me.

That's not it. But I think being a professional writer helps with online presentation. Most of the time it's been women initiating the contact.

Now I sound like an asshole.

Have you lied to anyone?  And if so, why?

They are all there to date.  You are there to date.  Great you got a few interested responses.  Go see what they are like, if one wants to know why you can see her sooner.  Tell her you have dates with three other people you met on the site and maybe you can go get coffee next week.

It's only sneaky assholeness if you make it that way.

I don't think you're being an asshole.  I think it's awesome.  I hope it turns into something nice.  Or you could just build up your black book and date a lot.  I never saw anything wrong with people doing that.  I know plenty of people who go from relationship to relationship and it never works  and it makes them depressed most of the time.  I wonder if they should really be going from date to date.  They're always happy when it first starts out.

Interestingly enough, I've read more negative reviews about eHarmony than any other dating site, and most of it is that the quiz they give is complete shit and doesn't cover a lot of things that are mentioned even in this thread as being important in a relationship (like if you want to do a long distance relationship and if you want kids or not).  Between that and watching a geek friend (about 24 years old) of mine go on there, find some random girl from boonfuck Iowa and watch her isolate him from all of his best friends and end up marrying her after 6 months (mind you this was his first relationship period) I would never go to eHarmony.

You say that like the guy had no control over his own actions.  Sounds to me like the guy chose to isolate himself. 

Tale:  I don't see how you're doing anything wrong.  These women are all probably talking to 50 other guys as well.  Just enjoy the conversations and take your time.  If it works, great.  If not, you've met a few new and interesting people. 

Really?  Are you a chubby chaser?  I'm not being snarky, but in the few years that I've done the whole internet dating thing, I've only gotten a handfull of messages from women, and they're generally fatties.  I think I've gotten one, MAYBE 2 emails from cute girls in ~3 years.

Fake edit: I'm 24, in school, tall, thin, well written, and not ugly.  IIRC you're in your 30s, and maybe the game changes?

Hot young chicks in their early 20s don't need online dating sites.

More like if they girls you are chasing are over 30 the game changes.

(oops edited this post instead of quoting it - lost it)

Oh we need updates and photos please.

Set up a Twitter so we can follow how the dates are going :awesome_for_real:

You guys are going to ruin his chances with all of them!

lol

You should get a phone with live audio and video stream, so we can be like your goblins in the mirror.

It will inevitably happen that a woman with whom you thought you clicked on a date will suddenly ignore all your emails and messages for no apparent reason.  This is normal. Just ignore her and move on.  There are motives other than finding an actual boyfriend/girlfriend behind using dating sites.

Like what?

- sex
- free meal/drinks/entertainment
- making someone else jealous
- random socializing

None of these require more than one meeting.

Is it not okay just to use this service for simple dating and not for anything long lasting?  I don't know.  I was married before they existed I think. 

You can use it for anything you want.  The people that are the most sincere and honest tend to get hurt the most, though, when they expect the same from random people.

Did speed dating not catch on? That always sounded like a huge time saver. Or does it sound like Speed Rejection to the insecure so they shun it?

Stumbled on this (no contact between us). Straight to the point, maybe suit some of the people above.


* ute (utility vehicle) is the Australian term for pickup truck

Straight to the point? Sounds like she wants to move to a new house and doesn't wanna pay for a Uhaul.

It doesn't sound like that to me at all.  It sounds as if she wants a man to help at her house which is out in the sticks somewhere.  She probably him to give her babies, too.  Then they'll live like little house on the prairie people. 

Could any of these women pick out your penis in a police lineup? And would they think they were the only one who could?

If the answer to either of these questions is no, you are not being an asshole yet.

Yea, as long as your honest about it, it's probably going to be a plus for you.

Anecdote <> data.  That said, here's my anecdote.

- 2 out of 3 guys were in IT ("hard to get out to meet people").
- 1 out of 2 women were teachers ("hard to get out to meet people").
- 90+% of participants were drinking before and during the event.
- Conversations seemed cliched after the 3rd to 4th "date."
- No immediate rejection - a website was used after the event to pick "matches" - only mutual picks get contact info.

YMMV.


Tangentially, but still on-topic:  I once had lunch with a matchmaker, and picked her brain a bit with regards to online dating.  She mentioned (somewhat frustratedly) that 90% of females she'd interviewed who had used online dating would never initiate contact with a guy - no matter how much they liked him.   :headscratch:

Why do teachers have a hard time getting out? My kids' teachers work 8-4.

I don't know what's normal with online dating, but the site I used has an option to password your pictures. Most women have their photos passworded for privacy, which makes their profiles difficult to interpret. Appearance isn't everything, but it's impossible to respond to "I'm looking for a man who is honest and likes to have fun" if you can't see whether she looks honest or fun herself.

I didn't password my photos, so I get women initiating contact by giving me their photo password. I guess this kind of setup encourages women to be bolder.

No, they don't (in general). US Public school teachers spend an average of 10 hours a week doing school-related work (e.g. grading papers) during non-school hours and average a total of 50 hours a week doing school stuff. 27% spend 55+ hours a week on school stuff*.

If your kids' teachers are working 35 hours a week that puts them in the bottom ~5% of public school teachers in terms of hours worked.

* stats from 2000 - 2001

http://www.nea.org/home/2233.htm

Yea, my mom pretty much worked from 6am till 6pm, and then came home and graded papers/worked on lesson plans.

For thirty years.

I am not a teacher.

Well, crap. News to me.

The answer is less papers and quizzes and other bullshit and better teaching. The best teachers I had in college had almost zero work on paper and actually TAUGHT you stuff. Same with high school, except English - obviously.

When my mom was a teacher, she was working at least 10 hour days, plus the occasional weekend, and paying for school supplies out of her own pocket.  And she had to constantly put up with all kinds of shit from parents who thought she had an easy job.

After a few years of that, dealing with other lawyers seemed downright pleasant by comparison, and she went back to law.   :why_so_serious:

, was pretty but much fatter than her photos (she was smoking hot two years ago), enjoyed her free expensive night out, helpfully advised me on my perceived flaws as I paid, and can fuck off.

Meeting date #2 tomorrow in the cheap coffee shop she suggested. Meanwhile I'm emailing #5 and #6. Wishing #7 would reply.

Now that is funny.  More screening next time?

No, I already figured her for that. Went ahead with it anyway. I enjoyed my expensive night out.

You will find that this is a common theme.  Not true of everyone, of course, but something that will re-occur pretty frequently.

My girlfriend being a teacher I will go out on a limb and say that the number of tests that they are required to give these days is a serious detriment to the depth and quality learning that can be attempted.

Not to derail this into politics but "No Child Left Behind" is probably doing more to undermine education that any other active policy.

Yeah, you have to give out quizes and all the other bullshit.  There is a certain amount of shit you need provide.  My girl is an 8th grade English teacher and she's got a bunch of shit she needs to get done.  She leaves the house at 6am everyday gets to work 1-1.5 hours early to do grading.  Gets home at 3:30 everyday and does more if needed and she's constantly grading shit during the day.

The she directs the school plays etc.

She absolutely hates "No Child Left Behind" because it's all bullshit.

My experience is that women rarely initiate when "send a freeform message" is the only option.  Subtle things, like the photo thing your site does (new to me) or "winks/nudges" will get them initiating a bit more.  And I agree with you that the lack of a photo makes it difficult to size someone up.

At the moment I know about 6 women who go in and out of the internet dating pool.  There is 1 of them that will initiate contact.

I think it is age-related too, and/or regional. I went on match.com in my early 30s in NYC and the women on that site seemed perfectly willing to initiate. I also had the famous photo-from-a-few-years-ago issue. In her pic she was a little bit overweight and tan. In person, well over 300lbs (and almost 6' 5") and pasty as a programmer. She was nice, though, and we had two dates.

Tale, you should also not get impatient with #7 and certainly don't spam her. When I first contacted the match.com woman that would eventually become my wife, she responded with interest and then I didn't hear from her again for 6 weeks. Why not? She had just joined the service recently (like me) and was dating. She just had to get around to me.

Why do people date.

Is that a question or is there more to come?

Lack of question mark for emphasis on detachment.

I don't date because meeting people willing to put up with my shit is a lot of trouble.  Date 2 people in 20 years?  That's doing it right!  Unless they pursue me, it's not going to happen.

You're so deep.  Not at all like someone affecting sperginess.

Awesome, it's back to the "sad fuckers" thread.

What is sperginess?

Tale, as far as being a douche is concerned, it's only douchey if you're actively lying and stringing people along. I did a bunch of internet dating crap during my last year of law school, and 99% of my dates were in the "job interview" category. Some panned out to second dates, etc., but most were false starts. Perhaps it's different in Australia, but in the US, you also have to go to the paid access sites to get some decent escort/porn filtering.

I ended up meeting my wife on eHarmony.

For the most part, I got decent but "meh" matches. That service operates a bit differently from the others I used. They do a staged communication process that can only be circumvented by mutual consent. IIRC, you literally start out with multiple choice quizzes, then short-answer questions, then internal email, and then you go from there. Users can choose at which stage they want to reveal their photo to you. In my experience, the ones who wouldn't let you see their photo until you were at the internal email stage were generally hiding their looks for a reason.

I also had some really odd dates. I'm 6' even. I was once paired with a girl who was 5' even. I felt like friggin' Gulliver.

It doesn't filter for political views too well. I speak a small, largely useless amount of Arabic thanks to some of my friends. One girl was all tweaked out that I knew any of it, and actually asked me if I knew any terrorists. Granted, this IS the US, so you'll have that.

The best date I had was the night after the first half of the bar exam. I had to be back at 8 AM for the 200-question multiple choice bits. We were hanging out together until at least 2 AM. I passed. We ended up getting married, etc. The key to that was, apparently, random luck. We had both had lackluster experiences dating via eHarmony. We had both recently canceled our accounts and were riding out the remaining month of access.

So yeah, go out, meet some people, it may or may not come to you. Know what your goals are and make them clear.

We never left. If you're doing Internet dating, you're a sad fucker.

It's not enough of an outlier these days to be a blank situation like that anymore.

I don't know that you are a sad fucker if you do internet dating.  Just look at the people here who did it and seem pretty happy now.  A few met other ways on the internet, too.  It seems to work. 

Seriously, there are considerably more things sadder than dating on the internet.

Random question: How prevalent are gold-diggers? Or, how much/little do you end up publicizing your job? I imagine someone that puts lawyer down has a higher chance of getting a response, but also a higher chance of someone being primarily attracted to your job.

Just curious, as I'm not in a position to even consider this option, which...stinks.

In my brief experience so far, I've spotted a number of women asking for narrow ranges of professions/job seniority. For example, specifically wanting senior manager/company owner/professional. That looks like gold digging to me. But date #1 herself was a wealthy senior manager.

Tradesmen are said to be popular (the type that are getting a good workout from their job). My profile makes it pretty clear I'm in the media, which always gets questions. I've also seen plenty of women stating they don't mind what you do for a living, it's about the chemistry between you.

Some might just want their potential relationship to be in the same place they are professionally, no?  It seems it would be more comfortable if you had that in common.  Especially, if they're looking for someone to start a family with.  It seems foolish to rule out people who take close interest in your career. 

I'd say its not just the men who worry about gold-diggers, my current girlfriend (who I met on OKCupid) makes substantially more money than I do, and in the very initial phases was definitely a little bit concerned with possible golddigging.

And you were still able to pull it off!  Good job!  (http://www.realitybbqforums.com/images/smilies/tease.gif)

Where their own careers were not as advanced than the ones they were looking for in a partner, it seemed opportunistic. Without fail, these women were also recent immigrants. Maybe actual women, maybe profiles set up by a mail order bride scam.

Four dates in one weekend is hard work. I couldn't remember whether I'd already told #4 things I'd told #3.

Now that I've done this internet dating thing, I reckon meeting for coffee in the morning works best as an introduction, not plunging straight into a nervous evening blind date.

Turns out #2 lied about her past, but is utterly hot. Seeing her again tomorrow. The photo of #3 was so beautiful I kept my expectations low, but she looked exactly like her photo and was great company, so we're going out again in a week. Which is good, because I initiated that contact. And from what I gathered, #4 was disappointed because she had wanted a man with bodybuilder's pecs. WTF.

There's totally a #5 and #6. But now that I'm not on the "new profiles" list, the flow of contact being initiated has fallen dramatically.

That's the way it is, January 31, 2010.

Don't die of exhaustion or anything!  Also, try not to be serial killed by some beautiful internet predator.  I swear I saw that on some TV show not long ago.

It's schildspeak for being an Aspie. Or attempting to affect the mannerisms of same.

I'm a teacher. I've worked in mainstream primary in the past but I am currently in Special, (where I had some specialist training before I started teaching mainstream) with a class of teenage boys with various forms of ID including (drumroll) Autism and Aspergers - hence a lot of my professional development stuff has been in this field over the past severla years. I can't be bothered talking about how hard or not I work, or how much of the work is various forms of mandatory bureaucratic bullshit or how much "teaching time" is wasted on crowd control for the unruly fuckers that shit all over your classroom and the opportunities for the other kids (usually the sprogs of those parents who think it's your responsibilty to raise their kids for them), but any fucker who thinks it's an easy cruiseville job can just go and fuck right off back into their puddle of cluelessness.  :awesome_for_real: I will say it's not a job you get to "clock off" and then go home and forget about work until tomorrow. :awesome_for_real:



Sorry? Aren't you single, virginal, and bemoaning of same throughout this thread? Any method of meeting people or communication is valid. Even people who meet on WoW. It's fucking 2010, not 1995. I'd also happily wager that the people that met their partners online in this thread are less of a "sad fucker" than your Mr."I can't get a woman! I have Aspergers! Just look how detached and emotionless I am when I type in this thread!" routine. Makes me want to slit your fucking throat with a shard of glass. Apparently.  :roll:

(Maybe you are, and maybe you're not, but you do appear to be trying way too hard to be so - a self-affected identity. On the internet!)  :why_so_serious:


If we're going to vicariously follow your misadventures, we need more details. How did she lie about her past? What was her deep dark secret? Tune in next week!

At the same time, I'm quite happy all this mating and courtship bullshit is long behind me.  :awesome_for_real:

This post needs more smilies. Ah rambling posts when you're tired FTW.

I tried to look up what a self-affected identity was and couldn't find it.

Never denied I wasn't a sad fucker myself, and if I did somewhere that I forgot about, then I'll set the record straight: I'm a sad fucker. You're right. You can pride yourself on knowing that you've integrated into society better than I have and have a firmer grasp on reality and other people than I can claim to. I mean, I don't know how better to drive this point home in a way that would resonate, and it might be an impossibility because, lol, internet, but what you and everyone on here do so easily is a fucking monumental challenge for me and something I WANT to be able to do.

Don't think I haven't learned from my mistakes in this thread; it's been very educational, and throwing myself out there, shamelessly pathetic that I am and giving you as much knee jerk and/or mocking fodder has helped heaps to better me. Unlike grunk or some other shit bag, I'll actually listen and try to compute and change based on the feedback.

I mean, do you seriously think I still think the way I did since the start of this thread? Are you too used to rigid idealogy or people who refuse to change positions or admit personal growth because that'd give you the win? I don't really care. If mocking me helps you feel better but helps me become a better person, then go right ahead. I think later on I'll be posting about the size of my dick and how it correlates to my inferiority complex. You can make fun of me about that for a couple pages.

Not a response that I'd call an Olbermann (Frank acceptance of a critical analysis of one's self without argument or retort), but it'll do.

Regarding dating websites, from my experiences, the explotiative and sludge of society tend to congregate in these places.

It means that you sound like you're trying to act like more of a sad fucker than you are (I cannot relate to any of you hu-mans, my life is a void of empty despair, oh woe upon me and my unique snowflakiness), either because you're fishing for attention, because you want to confirm your latest self-diagnosis, or because you want to convince yourself that your problems are so crushing that you shouldn't bother to deal with them.  

Odds are good you have no idea you're doing it, but it's still kinda annoying.   :why_so_serious:

She indicated she was never married, but there's a divorce in her past. Not a big deal. People can live together for decades without getting married, split up and don't have to mention it. Hers is not a simple story, but I don't have a problem with it on first hearing. Can't be more specific because it's a unique story.

OK, I'm speechless. Grats.

My natural inclination is to write something long and winded in response or try to somehow save face or post something you'd EXACTLY expect me to post right now, but I'm just gonna tell myself to fuck off on this one.

Sorry.

Sorry, not quite.  Many people do it these days.  I hear more and more stories about people meeting online.  The internet is just not for geeks and nerds anymore... in case you didn't know.

I know quite a few happy couples that met online.  So much so that I've considered it using it on occasion.  I don't think meeting online is all that different from being set up by a friend or meeting at a party.  It even has the benefit of helping to determine if the person can communicate by text.  No small feat in the era of texting.   

They're everywhere.  They need companionship just like anyone else.  There are also plenty of nice, normal and slightly off-kilter but okay people online, too.

The point of a dating site is to open up possibilities that one would not otherwise have.  Maybe your lack of proper social filters makes it harder for you to spot the good ones (gods know mine need work), but it's quite possible to meet decent people, too.  Remove the outliers and the people who are left are probably okay.  An attention whore or needy bastard isn't going to make themselves seem average.

Two of the nicest, most attractive people I know met online. I feel sorry for those sad fuckers.

Point taken, but drive it home for a couple more pages so the shame from my knee-jerk response forms a nice, black shell around my heart.

Pics or it didn't happen :why_so_serious:

Woman I know advised me recently to go for a dating agency or an online dating thing. Her reasoning is that at my age (37) because I have dated much, I simply don't have the skill or experience to date properly. She argued that dating like everything else is a skill, and if you have never done it you will be hopelessly outclassed in a sea of experienced people.

Kind of sobering, really. Probably will go for that, but I'll probably make an ass of myself as usual even if I get on an actual date.

The type of skills you're talking about are what I assume you get growing up in grade school and high school amongst other kids. Also, willing to learn by trial and error at great humiliation to yourself should you error.

The only social skill I got in Primary school was "how to get beaten up by 10 kids at once" so no help there.  :uhrr:

I wouldn't say great humiliation, aside from the possibility that you can magnify little mistakes massively in your own head. There's an extent to which humiliation can really be something that only you notice (of course that's versus people who massively humiliate themselves and are oblivious). Skill at dating is something you get from dating. It's only something you get in grade school if you do a lot of dating there (and even then it isn't something which directly translates to dating in later life). It's a case of being aware that you want to talk to someone and wish to present yourself as an eligible partner for them. It requires somewhat different social skills from interaction with friends because 1) there's more pressure on (especially if they're hot, god knows most of the dates I've spent with girls I've fancied have been some of the most horrifically dull evenings of my life because I cannot talk to cure girls) and 2) you want to be finding out stuff about them while hiding your own craziness/issues. Obviously not to a weird extent but the whole thing is like a job interview where you're both applying and vetting and like job interviews you're probably not going to be a natural and even if you are you have to be prepared that they still don't feel you'll fit in.

Lorekeep, you should take a break from this thread.

And is this woman happily married or still dating herself?  This comment reminds me of conferences/seminars where unemployed people gather to talk about job hunting strategies.  Talking to other unemployed people isn't going to help you find a job.

She's dating herself.

Tell her to find a man before she doles out any fucking advice if she wants you to actually listen.   :why_so_serious:

Sounds like a euphemism.

This thread makes me feel warm inside.

The best kind of dating service is having Signe pimp you out like you're her only child.

I didn't began learning social skills until my 30s.  Extreme shyness, high amounts of social anxiety, Aspie-like behavior likely caused by being celiac mixed with a high-wheat American diet.

Anyone can learn.  For most people it's more of an intuitive trial and error.  The funny thing about Aspies is they're trainable.  It may not be a full understanding, but it comes by analyzing those actions, mimicing them, and practice.  It needs to be approached from the perspective as a learned skill rather than "something people instinctively know".  Sure people will throw curve balls at you, but it's not like they haven't been doing that all along.  Now you at least have the skills to occasionally tag it anyways.

Everyone risks humiliation.  You remember more of the details of 'failure' than anyone else.  Some people find a bit of social awkwardness cute.  Get competent enough to survive social situations and strangely an annoying trait to you becomes an endearing quirk to others.  Your ever thickening blackened shell of a heart shouldn't care about humiliation anyways. :-P

Dating is just an extension of all that.  I've mostly avoided it personally.  I'm better in small groups where I can observe and give the occasional interjection.  The one-on-one stuff is really scary.  (Incidentally it is how I've gotten to know every person I have started a relationship with.)  Even if internet dating isn't for me, maybe not for you either, it has its place.  Recognizing what works for you and doesn't is vitally important, but keep in mind your needs will be different than a lot of others', too.

Wrong thread...

Where your analogy breaks down is that applying to lots of jobs will help you find a job.

If you have little or no experience dating than I can think of no better way to get experience dating than to go on dates.  So, yes, Sir T, go online and get out there.  Yes, you will be horrible the first time, don't worry about it.

This is very true.  I went through a couple of months of juggling four girls (the Student, the Colleague, the Lap Dancer and the Secretary - very Jungian but you start to think in stereotypes) like this (no, none of them thought they were the only one so don't get mad at me) and I started prefacing everything with hedges like "I think I mentioned that" or "I still love the time that" because I kept repeating stories or thinking that I was perhaps doing so.

That's not the biggest problem with that approach to dating, but it's a factor.

I work best in groups of one.

It's 99% physical appearance.  Being a lawyer doesn't mean dick on the internet or in real life.  Nobody cares outside the context of the lawyer-client relationship.  Now, if you write something like, "senior partner for Richards, Layton, and Finger" then you're just asking for it.

Edit:  To clarify, people are generally pretty vague about what they do, i.e., "lawyer" or "government contractor."

I don't understand the 99% physical appearance in regards to gold diggers.  Isn't that totally unimportant to gold diggers?  I should think the job and financial prospects would be all that would interest them.  Why would they care what the person looks like if all they're after  is money?  Isn't that what a gold digger is?

Internet dating was a distinctly "meh" experience for me.  Facebook?  Different matter entirely.  I can't sing the virtues of social networking enough.

You got dates from Facebook?  How?  Joining different groups and stuff?  If that works, it sounds a lot easier than joining a dating service.  Probably less expensive, too.  And you'd automatically know you have at least one thing in common with the person if you meet them through some sort of common interest group.

Old high school friends (and even people who I wasn't friends with).  Hell, one of my acquaintances from high school is married to another local tattoo artist, and she LOVES to play match maker.  Gotten at least 3 dates from her alone.

I tell you, Facebook is the happy hunting ground of dating.  Just be friendly and breezy, stay somewhat active on it, and dates will fall into your lap.  At least they have for me...

You're only competing with a population of guys that wouldn't fill Silent Hill up in Michigan though, rite?

I was always good at dating, bad at relationships.

 
LOL well I did get it down to two second dates (#2 and #3). Except now I have first dates with #5 and #6 on Saturday.

My second date with #2 went very well and she texts me all day. But we're opposites attracting, so I have to work too hard at conversation. I'd rather be hanging out with #3 (interstate on business) and I can't wait to meet #5.

I feel some pressure to resolve this well before Valentine's Day, or it will get messy (and expensive). Fuck you, internet dating.

I think we can all learn from the Gulp.  All I ever had on my social pages like those were lesbians and the occasional person I knew from college, no dates to be had from there!

Internet high five! I'm the same. I've become the brunt of many jokes because of how many girls I've dated. I probably have commitment issues, but that's ok. I'll always have Schild.

Second busy internet dating weekend, still find it weird. Me and #2 like to kiss, but we have nothing in common, she's stupid and it's stupid. Gotta end that. Except she's kinda hot. Next date would be at her place. But, no. Hmm.

There was #5 who wants to go out again, but I'd rather not. And #6 is a wonderful human being and would be a great friend, because I'm not attracted to her at all. Meanwhile #7 finally replied, but she's gone overseas, while #8's life got too busy to meet.

I have a third date with #3 this week and she's awesome. All my energies are going there. I told her about the others and indicated I liked her best, so I think going out again with any of the others would be a betrayal. Even if #2 lives so far away she'd never find out. I'm still not an asshole until I do that.

Do you have a spreadsheet or something to help you keep track of all of this?

Betrayal is too strong a word, but I agree that once you tell a woman you like her the best, you should act like you aren't still fishing to the best of your ability.  You should get points for being open and honest, so don't blow those points by then making her second guess your sincerity.

Out on a limb now. On the same night, I "broke up" with #2 and cancelled on #5's wish to meet again, leaving only #3. Now I am just a guy chasing a girl, so it's no longer an experiment in internet dating. Maybe she'll dump me tomorrow :)

Conclusions:
* This is a legitimate way to meet someone. There are desperados, people with dark secrets, but mostly just everyday people. Once you've met, it doesn't matter how you met.
* A sporty action shot with an intelligent bio attracts women (note: I'm told sporty action shots do not include posing in a muscle shirt with your guns).
* Meeting during daytime is by far the best way to start. Mid-morning coffee worked best, afternoon beers worked OK. It's cheap and there's no pressure.
* As with other dating, just treat the first date as getting to know each other a little and sharing some good stories, in the hope it might lead somewhere. Save the bad stories for later.
* Doing a lot of first dates fast is emotionally draining and confusing. Not recommended. But if I hadn't resolved my interest in them all fast, I would be left wondering about the others. Can't say what's best with this.