Only a four-digit Twitter following? You can probably find somebody with a higher Klout score.
I'm not sure what "emotional parity" is. Generally, I think that if the other person loves you more than you love them, you win the relationship. Like in the Pat Benatar song.
"My clone sleeps alone"?
(of course I did not know that song existed until 30 seconds ago.)
You should sing her that Meatball fraction song, and if after that she still wants to be with you it means either that she has terrible taste in music, or that she loves you so much that you might as well just succumb.
Fraction song? Weirdly, that's perfectly clear.
..... because 0.66666666667 ain't bad.
"Paradise by the 2/5 of the visible dashboard."
Wait. 12 to 3. The 80s were too long ago.
Also, "win the war" is WTW, not WTF.
11: Though nothing, will keep us together
We can beat them, forever and ever
11: Maybe the news hasn't reached you yet, but we're about to get started on another Civil War.
Find a woman who looks at you the way John Bolton looks at Iran.
But not Iraq, because some mystery is important.
And stay away. She won't conquer you, but will leave you in a state of collapse.
In your otherwise beautiful poem, one verse reads, "Every minute dies a man, Every minute one is born"; I need hardly point out to you that this calculation would tend to keep the sum total of the world's population in a state of perpetual equipoise, whereas it is a well-known fact that the said sum total is constantly on the increase. I would therefore take the liberty of suggesting that in the next edition of your excellent poem the erroneous calculation to which I refer should be corrected as follows: "Every moment dies a man, And one and a sixteenth is born."
Poets are always ahead of their time.
What have you told her about what you're thinking and feeling? You're doing a lot of reading into what she's said (not that you shouldn't when "love" is in the air), but I'm curious what she knows and how she's responded to knowing it.
In order for the relationship to move forward, you need to find out what her favorite Pat Benatar song is.
Yes. You need a woman to love you enough that they will risk the various unavoidable risks they face in heterosexual sex, but not enough to boil any pet bunnies.
Also, men might ask random internet people to tell them what you are thinking instead of just asking you what you are thinking.
Heebie is immensely practical. What I find weird, though, is the line about "she likes me too much too soon". It's not as if you're starting from scratch - that she declared love on the third date. For her it's obviously the 3rd+six months date an chronologically that's true for you as well.
She already thinks she knows enough about you to know her feelings, and it seems to me you have similarly enough info about her to know yours. Which, gut-level, don't seem to be that much into her. "Objectively pretty great" is good, but what she clearly wants to be is subjectively pretty great as well.
Also, call me an old cynic who is misunderstanding you, but the line that "They're an adult; let them risk heartbreak so long as I get my ashes hauled" doesn't seem to me equitable. Like it or not, we are responsible towards people who love us. Either respond or turn them away, but don't string them along. This is a cruder and crueller version of Heebie's advice. It is also directed at my younger self.
In any case, the obvious and urgent thing to do is to have a serious conversation with her about why you flamed out last time and whether it is inevitably going to happen again. If not, why not?
Sorry if this is prodnosed.
To state 28 in another way, how can she evaluate risk if it's not actually clear to her that although you know, like, and respect her, you don't love her. It seems fair to me that you dispel any misimpression on her part that the fact that you're not saying it isn't because you're just hesitant to talk like that, but because you're genuinely not feeling it.
Yet? You might, later on, if . . . what exactly? You've been to plenty of rodeos: what's the potential path from where you are to actually loving her back?
It sounds like you're unlikely to fall in love with this woman. Unless you think she's genuinely ok with that, I think you should stop dating her sooner rather than later.
It's fine to have warning bells about "too much too fast" -- I think that's a perfectly respectable human impulse, since in my experience a majority of people are pretty emotionally continent and don't like emotional surprises. This is part of why "no drama" is a dating-profile cliche. Your gut may be telling you that you're unhappy and uneasy being out of sync with a partner in this way, and that really is pretty normal. Beyond this, I have no idea. I feel that it maybe can work, sometimes, occasionally, for one person (the femme-ier half of the couple?) to be burning much hotter than the other for a while. But -- for a third time -- totally normal not to want it that way. (For what even-less it's worth, I have also never been warmed up by a more-interested partner, ever. Not remotely.)
I'm willing to cut JFK a little more slack than some others here. I got married 20 years ago after we were together for four years. It took awhile for both of us to figure out where we were going.
I am fond of saying,* "It's not chemistry; it's history." You spend time with people and things grow, or they don't.
You're asking me will my love grow? I don't know. I don't know. **
*I have always believed I coined that phrase, and Google seems to back me up. The only relevant search result seems to point to here.
**That one probably isn't original to me.
a majority of people are pretty emotionally continent
For the rest, there are pee-pee tapes.
I was going to make a geography joke, but that's much better.
I understand that you wouldn't want to get into why you broke up the first time, but I think it's really hard to get a feeling for what's going on without knowing more about that. At any rate I find the "win the war" comment much much more of a red flag than her saying she loves you. You already dated for six months, I don't see why you should just pretend you just met and that time doesn't count.
The way this is written, I think it's clear that you should break up with her. Not because she said she loves you too soon, but because of your reaction to her saying it. You've dated before, neither of you is so young that you could plausibly not know at least a bit what you actually want and need from a relationship, and you dated before and broke up. In my experience, there are usually good reasons why couples break up and except in rare cases those reasons often show up again if you try again.
I think it's doomed.
The way this is written, I think it's clear that you should break up with her. Not because she said she loves you too soon, but because of your reaction to her saying it. You've dated before, neither of you is so young that you could plausibly not know at least a bit what you actually want and need from a relationship, and you dated before and broke up. In my experience, there are usually good reasons why couples break up and except in rare cases those reasons often show up again if you try again.
I think it's doomed.
"I'ma seal your various deals", he said, as he opened his burgeoning attaché
43. In the long run, we are all doomed.
Georgia White's "Marble Stone Blues" seems apposite.
I'm home sick and cranky because my throat hurts, so this may be ruder than usual. First, she's not being weird and premature with the 'love', you're being weird to be put off by it. As a couple of people have said already, this isn't a new relationship, this is you getting back together with someone who you were talking about love with before. Second, that 'win the war' comment sounds worrisome but without context it's completely incomprehensible, so I've got no advice based on it. Third, the fact that you are being weird about this suggests that you don't want the relationship for some reason. I would do some introspection and figure out what you're thinking, and see if your reasons stand up when you look at them consciously, or if you think you're talking yourself out of a good thing. Or, as Ogged says, go with your gut.
But 'she said she loved you too soon' isn't a reason. It'd be silly even in a genuinely new relationship unless it was part of a whole constellation of weirdness. In the context of getting back together with an ex, there's nothing to worry about there at all.
LB sounds like she's drafting a breech of promise complaint.
Not really, but the phrase was on my mind because I reread "Strong Poison" recently.
Apologies for not being around to answer questions earlier in the thread. I'm not going to go through comment by comment, but context:
It blew up 3 years ago because I tried introducing her to my kids in what was a low stakes environment for the kids (at a large party where they could wander off after being polite for two minutes) but I didn't listen to her fears and it was a very high stakes environment for her (in public among my friends). I wasn't emotionally intelligent enough to handle her ensuing freak out, and finit. Or at least so I thought.
My concern with her being too into me too fast is because she has no intermediating experience. I literally was in love with another woman and contemplated spending my life with her and had several other relationships of various seriousness, all attenuating my memories and emotions. I stopped carrying a torch about two months after the first round ended in what to me seems like a healthy way. She... didn't.
If I had my druthers about reconnecting with her, she would have spent her intervening years doing what I did--loving and learning and picking up an emotional scar or two.
But that's not what I am working with. I have tried having conversations with her explaining that I am on board for dating and hopeful that it could grow into something long term, I feel like she is rushing me.
(gotta go, more later)
Responding specifically to 34, this isn't me saying it's fine if she gets hurt as long as I get my ashes hauled, it's is it paternalistic to preemptively end a relationship that might be good for the both of us to protect her (to me) overly fragile heart. She knows I am not where she's at and that I want to take it slow--I don't feel like I have the right or capacity to make decisions for her sake when she is an adult with all relevant information choosing to take the risks.
I'll apologize if I haven't given enough detail. I don't want to completely remove the figleaf of presidential anonymity, plus I already felt like I was writing a book. I think it's reasonable to ask that people credit me with some good faith. I wouldn't still be here if I didn't think there was a path forward, potentially to cohabitation and maybe even marriage. But I want the emotional cadence to advance at a pace that doesn't make me feel rushed or like I am being pushed too fast. I could love her again. 4 dates isn't going to get me there.
JFK: I think at the end of the day the answer to this one is the same as most issues in adult relationships. Be completely honest with yourself, kindly honest with them. Have effective communication about where you both are and where you both want to be. Let them make informed decisions (and make them yourself) - don't assume you understand where they are coming from without verifying and hearing it in their own words. Don't avoid necessary conversations because they are difficult.
damn. that was entirely too earnest.
Excessive earnestness is the crux of the thread.
59: You're right. It's good advice. Thanks.
Let me come at what I was saying above from another angle. Nothing you've said about her makes her sound like objectively a bad idea to be involved with. This does not mean you have to be involved with her if you don't want to, or that you need to try to feel more strongly about her than you do.
But the only reason you've given for breaking up with her is that you think she feels more strongly about you than you do about her, and while you could see yourself being in love with her in the future, you're not there yet and you feel rushed. This is either silly, or it's you telling yourself that you don't want to be involved with her at all and coming up with a story that gives you a reason to get out.
If you don't want to be involved with her, you don't need a reason to end it other than that it's not working for you. If you do, on really trying to understand your own feelings, want the relationship to continue, listen to soup. Tell her how you're feeling clearly enough that she can make her own decisions about you on the basis of honest communication, and see how things progress from there.
61: excessive earnestness and indiscretion
I'll fix this one too, but the next one stays -- it's a hassle. Now I miss SEK - I spent more time anonymizing comments for him than was reasonable at all.
While we are being earnest: I don't know how long I'm staying this time, but I missed you guys.
68: Fixing each one takes a long time to load for some reason, which is why I get irritable about it.
I think 64.2 is very wrong. For JFK this is another spin of the wheel, one of many such over three years. For Jackie this may be an effort to recapture "the one who got away". That implies she is not just investing more emotion than JFK, but expects a bigger return, a more serious relationship, than he does. Their investments and expectations may converge over time, but in the interim there's strong potential for damage, even more so if convergence never in fact occurs.
Could be. All sorts of things could be. But I liked the way soup put it:
Let them make informed decisions (and make them yourself) - don't assume you understand where they are coming from without verifying and hearing it in their own words.
(I mean, I saw you on other recent threads as well, I just haven't been participating at the same times.)
Stanley! `Soup'! JFK! I'm very glad to see you all here.
The beacons were lit, and the 'tarians answered.
||
or a few kilometres we sledge each other's teams, teasing and laughing good-naturedly, though we agree there are players whose skills surpass any sort of team loyalty, and for nearly an hour we list them off and count their many virtues. The fact that every one of them is a blackfella goes unremarked.|>
A year ago I got out of a 12-year relationship that included eight years of marriage and a kid. I spent the last year dating. A lot.
There were several instances where I was more interested or the other person was more interested, and all those relationships failed because emotional parity is key. In my experience, if you're not equally interested in each other from the beginning, it introduces insecurities that are hard to overcome.
I think I've found "the one" and we have both been equally interested the whole time. Great sex helped too, but I think we could have had that and remained more casual if the emotional parity had been lacking.
Thanks for the advice everyone. One adult difficult conversation ahead, to be held some time after the expensive concert she's already bought tickets for (because that's the next time we see each other in person and I am not going to ruin her big night).
And I'm curious, what's the adult difficult conversation going to be? "It's over," or "You should know that I'm not yet as invested in this relationship as I believe you are; I might catch up with you but there's no way to be sure."
"I just learned that my couch is covered in ticks. Have you been checked for Lyme disease?"
And I'm curious, what's the adult difficult conversation going to be?
Have the one I recommended having!
85: The latter, with a side of asking her to put her cards on the table instead of dancing around most of the time. Ending things preemptively seems like cowardice. We might break up, but I don't want to go into the conversation having decided anything.
And yes, I will report back, but it might be a couple of weeks.
Kind of on topic: In North Carolina, you can be out $750,000 if some other person's spouse finds you so great that they leave their own spouse for you. But only if the couple was happy before they met you.
In other news, have I mentioned that Tim's business-partner/second wife lived in North Carolina when they met and they live there together now?
If you google "alienation of affection" and "$750,000", you can find the lawyer to call.
Occasionally I feel as if it's a pity that I have too much professional experience to be personally litigious.
92: It's taken all the fun out of being so gosh darn hot.
91: If you liveblog it, we can offer suggestions in realtime.
Also, it can be really hard to start this kind of conversation, so one way to get around that is to send her this link.
http://www.unfogged.com/archives/week_2019_09_29.html#017017
Hey, JFK -- I actually realized I was a little confused about this:
The latter, with a side of asking her to put her cards on the table instead of dancing around most of the time.
That is, I thought the problem was that she was pushing things along emotionally too fast by dropping the 'L' word. You said earlier:
But I want the emotional cadence to advance at a pace that doesn't make me feel rushed or like I am being pushed too fast.
Which seems inconsistent with asking her to put her cards on the table rather than dancing around -- that is, if she's not putting her cards on the table, that sounds exactly like not rushing or pushing.
If you want to break up with her because it's not working for you, you should absolutely do that. But if the conversation you're planning to have is one where you talk her into opening up completely about all of her feelings, and then you break up with her because you think it's premature of her to be opening up completely about all her feelings, that seems like a bad way to handle the breakup.
More sex in North Carolina:
(From the WSJ, which, sadly, turns out to be worth at least the cost of a promotional subscription)
Federal investigators were closing in on Greg Lindberg. FBI agents confronted the North Carolina insurance tycoon last year as they probed whether he tried to bribe a state regulator. In March, officials obtained a sealed warrant for his arrest. His attorneys were negotiating his surrender.
Mr. Lindberg also had something else on his mind--the comings and goings of a number of women he was dating, interested in dating or, in at least one case, cultivating as an egg donor for his future offspring.
Mr. Lindberg paid for dozens of surveillance operatives to tail the women up to 24 hours a day, taking surreptitious photos and sometimes putting GPS trackers on their vehicles, according to former security staffers and copies of internal reports produced by these operatives that were reviewed by The Wall Street Journal.
"Information of Concern: Romantic Encounter," read one such report just days after the arrest warrant was issued. Lindberg operatives had followed a Los Angeles woman as she met a man at a bar, then to his house, where she left "in the early morning hours."
One Lindberg agent spied on a different woman by secretly enrolling in a school she attended, while his staff kept tabs on yet another by renting an apartment across the hall from hers, according to the reports and former staffers
Rats. blockquoting all to hell. Let me try again
Federal investigators were closing in on Greg Lindberg. FBI agents confronted the North Carolina insurance tycoon last year as they probed whether he tried to bribe a state regulator. In March, officials obtained a sealed warrant for his arrest. His attorneys were negotiating his surrender.Mr. Lindberg also had something else on his mind--the comings and goings of a number of women he was dating, interested in dating or, in at least one case, cultivating as an egg donor for his future offspring.
Mr. Lindberg paid for dozens of surveillance operatives to tail the women up to 24 hours a day, taking surreptitious photos and sometimes putting GPS trackers on their vehicles, according to former security staffers and copies of internal reports produced by these operatives that were reviewed by The Wall Street Journal.
"Information of Concern: Romantic Encounter," read one such report just days after the arrest warrant was issued. Lindberg operatives had followed a Los Angeles woman as she met a man at a bar, then to his house, where she left "in the early morning hours."
One Lindberg agent spied on a different woman by secretly enrolling in a school she attended, while his staff kept tabs on yet another by renting an apartment across the hall from hers, according to the reports and former staffers
I'm now trying to imagine how many reports he was getting at what frequency. It sounds almost like a job of its own, but a very dull one.
7:30, Los Angeles: Laura eats muesli, brushes teeth.
18:00, Raleigh: Taylor attends evening seminar.
If, as Pat Benatar advises, love is a battle field, then following women around becomes military recon.
99: L bombs were dropped when tipsy. Otherwise it's vaguer stuff like "winning the war."
If the H bomb is worse than the A bomb, then the L bomb must be really bad.
104: Nevertheless, if she's avoiding the L word when she's sober, then it does sound like she's trying not to rush things, despite possibly feeling really enthusiastic internally.
To a first approximation, nobody on my dad's side of my family born before 1960 ever said, while sober, that they loved anybody.
My grandma from the other side of the family was always nearby and continually frustrated that she was surrounded by people who never expressed a feeling.
Man, JFK, you seem kinda paranoid about the possibility that her talking affectionately when she's tipsy means that her emotions about you are prematurely intense enough to be a problem.
I repeat again, if you don't want to be involved with her, you should break up. But having an intense conversation with her to open all the way up about her feelings so that you can reject her if you think she's overly into you seems like recreational sadism. You can just break up without making it her fault for feeling more than you do.
On the other hand, if you don't want to break up with her, and the worst thing about her is that when she's feeling uninhibited she says she loves you (and I'm not sure that's what happened -- you talk about dropping an L bomb but don't give the context), have you considered that possibly you're borrowing trouble and maybe there isn't a problem at all?
Tough to give advice, but I'm with LB. She's not pushing, and having a pushy conversation and then breaking up if it turns out she likes you sounds.... A little weird?
To a first approximation, nobody on my dad's side of my family born before 1960 ever said, while sober, that they loved anybody.
My paternal grandfather, born in 1897, once said of me: "Ah well, I guess she's got a good head on her shoulders." This was his way of saying that he loved me; but he never once uttered those words, because he came from a generation where you just didn't say such things.
(We called him "Da" because he was the father/patriarch of the family, but that's not to say that my grandmother wasn't actually in charge ... )
Is it wisdom or self-sabotage to keep in the back of your mind the idea that anybody too into you must have flawed judgement?
There's a club you probably wouldn't want to be a member of.
Not without protection, at least.
The Shriners group here is called the Al Aska Shrine. (I'm not a member.)
||
NMM to Ginger Baker who I was surprised to hear was till recently still alive
|>
First, let me thank everyone for the excellent advice, even when you conflicted with each other. Finally had "the talk," in part initiated by her. Upshot is we both got real vulnerable with our insecurities, and now we are using "boyfriend" and "girlfriend" to describe each other. All seems well.
Feelings yay! I hope she isn't as dangerous as you made her sound!
Just don't let her steal your letter jacket.
Aw, hooray for vulnerable middle-aged dating!
It's also less vulnerable in some respects because a forty year old kidney isn't worth as much as a new one.
Why are you happy about my shitty kidneys?
Just so you have some peace of mind about organ harvesting.
Because I'm married, I don't need to worry about my organs being harvested in my sleep. I'm worried about not having too much life insurance.
Having shit in your kidneys should take care of that.