ON HOLD?

Sep 05, 2005 18:04

... all your time worrying about one relationship or another- have you thought of calling "time out" and just being yourself... for three months?

Because of course 'secondary' relationships aren't *real* and can be switched on and off at your convenience. Or perhaps the in a merger of Mormon and Scientology, they've perfected suspended animation

Leave a comment

tisiphone September 5 2005, 17:11:22 UTC
You know, I'm completely unsure of the mentality that any relationship, primary, secondary or anything else exists except on agreement of both parties.

Reply

flick September 5 2005, 17:32:52 UTC
To be fair to the person being snarked, the advice was aimed at someone who's very burnt out, depressed and unsure what he wants to do with his life. The fact that two of his three relatioships are causing huge amounts of stress is not helping with that process.

Reply

flick September 5 2005, 17:34:19 UTC
(Assuming I'm correctly identifying the quote, of course.)

Reply

pinky_pt September 5 2005, 21:50:58 UTC
You've just described about 50% of the LJ population. But yes, you're thinking correctly on the source.

Reply

tisiphone September 5 2005, 17:35:58 UTC
I was actually back-snarking at the poster; kneejerk "but secondaries are people toooooooooo" reactions annoy me. Yes, they're people, but they don't get a "get out of being dumped free" card.

Reply

flick September 5 2005, 17:38:47 UTC
Ah, sorry - I wasn't sure!

Reply

red_girl_42 September 5 2005, 18:21:42 UTC
Aw shit. Guess I have to start being nice to my boyfriend then...

Reply

stacycat69 September 5 2005, 18:23:16 UTC
Dude! Where is my "get out of being dumped free" card! Damnit, is that in the secondary handbook that I never got? :-D

Of course I cant identify the quote in my sleep deprived state, so i'll reserve further snarkage.

Reply

tisiphone September 5 2005, 19:35:28 UTC
I think they discontinued the "get out of being dumped free" cards in favour of $5 amazon gift cards. They were cheaper.

Reply

stacycat69 September 5 2005, 23:18:20 UTC
Good point!

Reply

pinky_pt September 5 2005, 21:44:31 UTC
Granted, no relationship is unbreakable. In general I think being 'not the main relationship' means a much higher chance of being dumped in times of trouble, but that's a whole different thread.

It was the implication that after the 'rest period' they could be painlesly re-instated that was the snark-inducing bit.

Reply

thatwordgrrl September 14 2005, 21:53:00 UTC
Thank you.

Really.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up