Throwing out words that would never be heard by those who ought to

[silver_notebook]

I’d laugh it wasn’t sad that you should be so scared of me you have to hide. I jest that fear’s what first holds so many back, not knowing the fearlessly friendly form this fierce frame contains; but later, it’s the friendliness that makes fresh fears, as it’s mistaken for something more than could be merited by such as you.  Such things come much

Comments

WE all rationally know it's not worth being devoured by such people

[silver_notebook]

Yes; it's the stop talking that's most irritating: so rude and cowardly. If one is to engage in 'adult' relationships, one owes it to those involved to behave kind and respectfully, unless they've done something that merits otherwise.

In terms of the 'why', I'm not sure I need an explanation. If there are doubts that early on which aren't hidden by initial passion, then they're likely seeds that will stay there ready to burst through the foundations at a later date. I'm trying to think of the 'whys' I might have had to give if pressed too hard beyond the 'we're not right: we're very different people'; however, if I've had those feelings, I've always made sure to give the person involved a little bit of my time to tell them and not just stood them up then, failed to pick up calls. It's the rudeness and disrespect that irritates, especially when it's actually not that hard. Manners!

The funny thing is, I think he read it all much bigger than it ever needed to be; but even if light weight fluff, I still want respect and reasonable communication.

Gosh, all this talk almost makes it into something bigger than it was.

[silver_notebook]

Oh, I wasn't referring to me as light weight fluff (though, of course I can be): I was referring to that being an option for certain 'relationships'. If they're not going to work beyond what they are and there's pleasure in that and both parties can live within those limits, then 'light weight fluff' can be fine - and fun!

Yes, I was quite irritated; but the irritation went beyond him. Sadly, too many of my friends have been subject to various types of thoughtless behaviour, which only leaves them angry and bemused. When I encountered it in someone I had not expected to see it in, I wanted to confront him about it, and explain that such behaviour only adds to the general air of cynicism that exists between sexes, and how a small, polite gesture could have stopped things dead with no hard feelings; however, his refusal to respond put me in a 'no win' situation, where any further attempts would make me appear like some obsessive, stalker, bunny boiler (which I'm not); thus making me want to justify myself to him, which I could not do.

I'd seen things like this more from the outside, but I'd not realised how 'passive aggressive' controlling it is, when there is NO means of contact. No answer service to explain yourself to; text is too short and always open to misinterpretation; and letters seem rather OTT and grand and old-fashioned and obsessive. It also caught me at a bad time (which I'd explained to him), as I have some important stuff to get done, so my head is down and my social life is on rations. Being aware of that, and then booking some of my precious social ration time for a chat, inferring he thought it a good thing we speak, then failing to show up or be contactable; well, I'm sorry, that's just sooooo rude! Irritated? You're right, (especially as I'd been so considerate of his circumstances).

The thing is, I don't like being angry, and seeing him and explaining things would have dissipated any anger I had (without needing to be rude to him or anything). Luckily, my life is bigger than him, and I have lots of friends and a few years experience of life and other such stuff that allows my anger to go away quite quickly (it wasn't BIG anger, just the stuff that exists on that territory where irritation starts to turn to anger, more indignation); but if he'd behaved properly and not messed me around it would have all smoothed over so much sooner AND we could have been friends. Silly boy!

I 'knew' they'd loose on penalties before the match started

[silver_notebook]

It's weird, the 'stalker' thing and the way that the internet gives a whole other dimension to it. Having been the subject of an old-fashioned 'stalker', in that someone I once saw carried on writing to me, my friends and family for almost ten years after we split up, with occasional reference to things he could only know by 'stalking' me, I'm quite careful about information. I realise that everything I say here is open to anyone and if that particular man were to find this journal and start throwing his views about, then this journal would close. Dead. Having said that, there have been rare occasions in the past that I've 'googled' his name: partly to ensure he's still roughly where I believe him to be (now safely far from me), and partly just out of bored curiosity. Had I known back then about IP logging I probably wouldn't have clicked certain links; but while I would NEVER want him back in my life, my curious nature is such that if I heard information about him, I wouldn't close my ears to it. Just because she's still curious about you, doesn't mean she'd want you back in her life.

When something ends it's sometimes difficult to judge the boundary between a reasonable request for access to information one is due, and 'stalking'; but if one party considers it's over, then it's over. At some point there has to be a stop to the 'whys?' and 'what ifs?' and an acceptance of that stop. If marriage or children are involved, then perhaps the 'stop' needs more serious consideration, because that involves broken promises and innocent third parties; but likely then it's just a case of finding the least acrimonious way to tease out the tangled ends of things. However, if NO chance for ANY dialogue is given and the deserted party hasn't done anything overtly overstepping all limits (violence, affair etc), it's just a case of change of mind (or affirming what they'd always known) on the part of the one leaving, they owe it to say something: not just 'disappear'. That only acts as seed to stalking (although; confusingly, too much contact can be another seed, especially in the heads of those who don't accept that something's dead).

On a personal and more casual level, if I have 'politely' told someone that I don't wish things to continue (or even start, if they never did), and then they invite me to social things, then I will either choose to go along, assuming they've understood, or politely refuse. If they repeatedly press me with, '..but I don't understand?..but I don't mind if you're not serious about it, ..why can't.. ?' then I will pull back from any contact with them; but remain polite if we meet socially. If I feel threatened, then my friends will become my shield. If someone doesn't respect my words and privacy, then I'll build a wall and if they bash at that then I'll stop being nice.

This occasion was sooo silly, in that we'd only seen a little of each other, but it had all been quite positive and he'd been incredibly enthusiastic, until at some point after our last encounter he appeared to get The Fear. He cancelled a date by text only to become almost uncontactable; however, on the subsequent occasions we spoke he agreed we should meet: he even proposed times twice, then failed to confirm. Perhaps if I'd let him be when I first detected that 'fear', he wouldn't have run screaming from the monster that never was; but perhaps if he'd verbalised stuff, I would have happily let him be. It was the disrespect of the 'no communication' that made me pissed off: he'd not even read me well enough to realise certain key things about me. Also, it mirrored an early pattern in an unhealthy relationship I had, and I thought I'd rather kill it with my demands for manners and what I was entitled to (a chat), than go down that path again. It had Big Limits stamped all over it, but it could have been fun while it lasted, and we should have ended up as friends. His behaviour messied what could have been a pleasant little 'romantic' interlude. I suspect, one day we'll meet and he'll realise how silly he was and apologise, because I truly belief his underlying nature is better than his flaky surface has shown him to be; but maybe it's such optimism that leads to disappointment in human nature?

Re: The bottom line?

[silver_notebook]

Indeed: sometimes unnecessarily so.

God: I just reread some of what I wrote and it sounds all 'advice' and 'this is how you should play it', when that's not what I intended, and I don't even know the details to take that stance! If that's how it came across, please ignore. It was more a little rant in my own journal about what I consider acceptable behaviour, based upon my experiences. Whether it's something tiny (in my case) or something more major (as yours would appear to be) that flicks that switch that makes you need to contact someone, and what ever the rational justification for that need, it's still bloody irritating if it happens, especially when you can see the pointlessness of acting on it. It must be so much worse when real emotions are involved, not just disappointment and indignation.

Glad to make you smile

[silver_notebook]

Well if you will ask for the bottom line, don't be surprised if that's what you get!

Also, hope I've not overstuffed your inbox, as my responses initially appeared to go in the wrong place in this thread.

It stays well under wraps in public places!

[silver_notebook]

.."Kiss my arse" they'd probably form a queue...
I still believe it would depend what part of town I said that in as to what response I would get. Having been brought up in an era when not having a skinny arse was cause for derogatory comment - if you allowed it to be noticed - it was quite amusing when I moved to Notting Hill and all the local Afro-Caribbean men viewed it as some prized attribute that merited comment.

(Also, those bikini bottoms are rather fab and flattering, having more than adequate fabric for the task in hand)

Not too much information; but perhaps a ramblingg response?

[silver_notebook]

I can imagine this could mess one up: so much emotional tension with the illness and everything on top of what were obviously strong feelings. It sounds like, when things were good, she was a tonic to your life and loosing that must have been hard. It also sounds like she is much younger than you and still has lots of changes to go through and things to resolve, coming to terms with her life as a 'well' person and all the possibilities which that might hold for her.

From watching on from the outside, I have the impression that relationships tend not to work if one party is not yet 'resolved' in themselves about who they are, the likely path they plan to take through life and a means to do it. Such confidence/ clarity/ acceptance or what ever else that's necessary to reach that state can come at different times for different people and isn't necessarily associated with age. However, being so much younger and with all that she'd been though, she was likely still hungry to explore those things before eschewing them for a 'big' relationship. Also, one can never force matters of the heart, and sometimes it's as much a burden to be loved as it is to love.

When I was much younger, I saw a man who loved me very much. He is an intelligent and kind man and we got on; although, fundamentally we are very different. I came to have 'love' for him (a deep seated affection towards him and caring about him); but wasn't 'in love' with him. Never having really been loved (my mother had great difficulties liking me and my father wasn't around when young), I felt it was so generous of him to love me, I should respect and be grateful for his love; so I almost gave more of myself to compensate for what I couldn't give, yet still felt guilty much of the time. I used to think if I lived in an era of arranged marriages, I'd be so grateful to have got someone such as him, and that it was very grand and arrogant of me to think of throwing it away in search of something 'more'. It ended because I couldn't give him what he wanted: I was evasive, not wanting to be controlled and contained (no, not unfaithful), and he needed something sure to go forward with. Sometimes, I would wonder if I'd thrown away something more valuable than would ever likely come my way again; but ultimately, I have always known that it was the right thing to do. If I had been a 'broody' woman I may have chosen to settle for him, as I could always tell he'd be a good father to his children (he is). However, if I'd married him, I would have become an international Stepford wife, trailing well groomed children around the world and watching on while a little piece inside of me had the life squeezed out of it by my perfect facade.

No time to edit - so you've got way too much!

[silver_notebook]

As for 'cake and eat it': sadly; human nature: many people take great solace in knowing there's someone out there who loves them, even if they don't want that love. I try to be very careful not to let people fall in love with me now, as I don't want to be responsible for the hurt that goes with disappointment; but in some respects it was a rite of passage I had to go through; the 'being loved', that I might understand all this better. Even though throughout the time we were together I was never in love with him, I wasn't being untrue: I was mentally exploring the possibility of throwing away a part of me to feed his love; but I couldn't do it.

I have no idea what was going on in the head of your woman; but it sounds like she wasn't ready for something as big as what you had to offer. Also, you the way you describe things, your mental welfare sounds like it was very bound up in her behaviour. That might have been a frightening thing to take on, having just freed herself of the burden of her own physical illness. I have no idea of the level of connection between you: if it was big on both sides, it's sad that the events surrounding it and timing put such strain on it couldn't 'be'. It may, however, have been something she had to go through, to honestly and openly explore the limits of things that she might know if she could go beyond them, and finding she couldn't she had to throw it away even though it had a certain value. I'm not sure if that makes any sense?

I've no idea if this has any relevance, but like you say, one sad thing of it is that what ever behaviour you engaged in after will likely have made her more wary; but sadly, it's a common human failing to behave ones worst at the end of things, making going back less possible. You say time is not a factor; but in its way it is. In the subsequent time one can lay on more layers of life so that while that event might still be there, it's not the only thing one focuses on when looking back, and the busyness of the 'now' stops to too much looking back. I hope some good things come along for you, which help put this all into a different perspective.

Perhaps crossing all boundaries of excess!

[silver_notebook]

We are - clearly - very different people
Indeed; but it's the variety of human nature that's perhaps contributed to our 'success' as a species. One is not 'better' or 'worse' just more or less suited for particular environments and roles and times. If everyone was more pragmatism than passion, a lot of things would never have happened.

I think having recognised quite how different we are, I was just attempting to put another perspective on things, in terms of where she may have come from, and though her behaviour has proven hurtful to you, perhaps that wasn't her goal, just a consequence of meeting her own needs and desires. If she subjugated them to make you happy now, she would become unhappy and you'd both be stuffed. Where possible, we have to try to take personal responsibility for our own health and happiness (though not explicitly at others' expense) and hopefully, create an excess for others to access, or that we might do bolder things and take more risks.

I envy your personal strength.
I have some strength, but much weakness: that's why it's important that I try to maintain and protect my strengths. As for the 'saved you more than one broken heart', sometimes I wonder if I've put up too many defences around it (or if I even have heart to break); although I am yet in life to encounter a situation that could rationally merit taking them down. And because my 'heart' doesn't hurt, it doesn't mean I don't sometimes hurt in other ways. Instead, I sometimes get a feeling of great disappointment in others: that they didn't act in a kind or considered way or according to what they said or presented of themselves. Realising this, I 'm also realising that such indignation is not an appealing trait, and there's an unattractive arrogance in assuming that others will behave well for me. Why should they behave differently for me than they do for everyone else? Of course, ideally, I want them to treat others decently too, and my indignation can extend to being indignant on others' account. I suppose the key way to quash it is to become more cynical; but I don't want to be a cynic: I don't want those 'bad' people out there to make me cynical in my encounters with most people who are good.

I'm also sometimes overly sympathetic; imagining others' circumstances are sufficiently hard that they might excuse some of their behaviour, and again, unwanted sympathy is not appealing: it can be perceived as slightly insulting, superior and undermining.

All in all, I guess I might be a little complicated to work out: kind natured, but ultimately heartless; high hopes of others, yet ready to accept or forgive those that don't meet them if they're prepared to tell me what's going on. Even higher standards that I hope for from myself, accompanied by a not infrequent feeling of dissatisfaction with myself for failing to meet even half of those standards too much of the time. Like you said, life is complicated, and there's nowt as strange as folk.

I guess I've realised that most of what I'm writing here is about me: exploring and affirming ideas about how I am, as perhaps one does in a journal, (I've never really kept a proper journal). Also, I think saying out loud what you are and what you want to be can help you hold that in your head as a goal for the good things, and something to be wary of at first sight of the less appealing traits. Doing these things when you're emotionally detached might provide a 'mantra' and a set of standards to try to hold to when in a crisis of some sort. If it does that, it's worth rambling sometimes. Apologies, if - as you inferred with regard to your own comment - there is Too Much Information.