BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Dilemma dilemma OMFG dilemma!

 
  

Page: 123(4)56

 
 
alas
11:06 / 10.01.06
Oh and as for the rest of the subject, no, no, dear god no. Don't put yourself through this shit mate, drag yourself out of the house, go see friends, go to the pub, don't do the obsessive thing, it's not good for you.

good advice for all of us, but here it is page three and I'm still reading.
 
 
Ex
11:30 / 10.01.06
Good luck with your thing, Fun with Phobias. I think if you were over her, you'd be saying 'This woman I used to have a crush on wants to live with me, how weird would that be?' rather than picking out curtain material, so I would slip in and pick up the alto line in the chorus of disaproval that is assembling.

BUt it also makes me think - should I start some kind of massive BarbeUberThread about romantic misadventure? It could answer questions like:

- Have you ever been utterly sexually uninterested in someone, hung out with them platonically for a year or so, and then suddenly they were wearing a different shirt, or they said something funny and OMG WTF you realised they were your intended life partner? Or is that optimistic bollocks?

- In your experience, if someone has an unreciprocated crush on you and you say 'Oh, I wish I'd met you when I was eighteen, you'd have been just my type...' is that more likely to be a sign that you will leave your current partner forthwith, or a sign that you've had a bad day and three Tia Marias?

And other pressing issues. Thus when a parallel situation arises, posters could be directed to an entire catalogue of wisdom on the matter. A catalogue of STRONG TRUTH.
 
 
Spaniel
11:37 / 10.01.06
Have you ever been utterly sexually uninterested in someone, hung out with them platonically for a year or so, and then suddenly they were wearing a different shirt, or they said something funny and OMG WTF you realised they were your intended life partner? Or is that optimistic bollocks?

YES! YES I BLOODY HAVE. I LIVE WITH HER AND SHE'S ABOUT TO HAVE MY CHILD.

Sorry for the caps mania, but my partner and I started out as flatmates (the kind who don't know each other from Adam) and lived with each other for a year before I realised that a) she'd had a big crush on me pretty much from the get go, and b) that I'd had a crush on her for at least a couple of months. Okay, so when we got together it wasn't all hearts and flowers, I was uncertain about my emotions for a while there, but now, well, let's just say I have never ever been happier in a relationship.
 
 
Evil Scientist
11:49 / 10.01.06
It could be a serious relationship in which holding hands and spooning other people is allowed, of course.

Do you think they drew up a contract then?
 
 
Tryphena Absent
11:52 / 10.01.06
Oh dear.
 
 
alas
12:19 / 10.01.06
Wait! Nina, are you suggesting there are people who have agreed that they don't own each other, body and soul, simply by agreeing to be romantically involved?

Tell me more about this strange new world.
 
 
Ex
12:27 / 10.01.06
YES! YES I BLOODY HAVE. I LIVE WITH HER AND SHE'S ABOUT TO HAVE MY CHILD.

So this is splendid, and just the kind of material we need in the BarbeRomance thread.
Now I just have to think of a better title.
 
 
Regrettable Juvenilia
12:31 / 10.01.06
'Tis Better To Have Loved & Lithed
 
 
Suedey! SHOT FOR MEAT!
12:37 / 10.01.06
I own my cat. But he doesn't love me.
 
 
Tryphena Absent
12:52 / 10.01.06
Evil Scientist you realise that there are lots of different ways to live and people do it differently not only in other countries but in the house next door, or the flat upstairs or three doors down. Right?
 
 
Suedey! SHOT FOR MEAT!
12:59 / 10.01.06
Some people love their pets a bit too much.
 
 
Char Aina
13:14 / 10.01.06
i feel it should be pointed out that i mentioned hulk hands first, and nobody laughed.
that is clearly the real tragedy here; that people arent reding this thread properly.

now if you all wanna go back to my initial hulk-fisting post, read it, laugh heartily and then share with us just how hard it made you LOL, or potentially ROFLYAO, then we can start to make some progress.

haus, i am especially surprised at you, not reading a thread fully before posting to it. if you dont wish to read what others have written, then why should we be expected to have any interest in what you have to say?
 
 
Evil Scientist
13:21 / 10.01.06
Evil Scientist you realise that there are lots of different ways to live and people do it differently not only in other countries but in the house next door, or the flat upstairs or three doors down. Right?

No! Seriously Nina? Is that true? You mean the world isn't composed of perfect duplicants? Damn these Homogenising Goggles of mine! Damn my everstick superglue too! (Sarcasm yes. But no offence intended. I obviously need to write more clearly).

I get that she may well be in a non-exclusive relationship. The thought had also occurred to me that perhaps Fun is reading too much into a few moments of body contact (no matter how aggressive) and has read sub-text that just isn't there. Maybe, as far as this young lady is concerned, Fun's just a friend she feels very comfortable with.

If she is in a non-exclusive relationship with her current paramour, and she's looking to get some more of that good spooning Fun gives, then I would suggest she has a responsibility to make that clear to him. Rather than just moving in with him without defining the desired parameters of their relationship.

It's all down to communication in the end. In this situation it would be best for the two main participants to actually talk clearly. Fun, stop dancing around and explain the situation to her.

Best case, she falls into your arms and it's love forevermore (ptui). Worst case she gets creeped out and never speaks to you again.

I still wouldn't recommend moving in with her straight away though.
 
 
alas
13:26 / 10.01.06
I do want to add my voice to Nina's, here, more seriously. There's been a vaguely misogynist, heterosexist edge to several postings on this thread. The picture of women that seems to be dominant here, which I didn't initially perceive in Phobia's posting so much as in the accretion of responses to it, is either "teh evil slutty man-eating bitches" caricature that Nina mentioned before or, hardly better, sexdoll props to be brought in to teach the slut group a lesson. (I.e. the best way to get over her for good is to screw her and then dump her...big time. Or, even better, bring a girl home and have crazy animal sex while she listens from the other room. This way, there's a pretty good chance she will fall for you, y'know.)

So, I guess I'm not shocked that the idea of mature, open, negotiated relationships between equals seems to strike some of you, or at least Evil Scientist, as utterly foreign, but, given this earlier context, this kind of basic ignorance borders on being offensive. If you really are unaware that many people live in open, negotiated partnerships with one another, you should feel some shame and you should educate yourself.
 
 
Spaniel
13:26 / 10.01.06
Fun, stop dancing around and explain the situation to her.

I think dialogue is perhaps not the best way to go in this situation. Phobias, would be running the very real risk of getting dragged back into what has been, for him at least, a very dodgy relationship.
 
 
alas
13:30 / 10.01.06
[Obviously I was typing while ES posted. I accept that you do understand that open relationships can exist, but we still really know nothing about what she has or hasn't told her partner, unless I missed something.]
 
 
Evil Scientist
13:40 / 10.01.06
So, I guess I'm not shocked that the idea of mature, open, negotiated relationships between equals seems to strike some of you, or at least Evil Scientist, as utterly foreign,

Don't be silly alas. The idea of ANY kind of relationship seems foreign to me!

We're only going on the information that Fun has provided us with. At no point have we been provided with any evidence that the female in question is in an open relationship, or even that she actually wants anything more than friendship from Fun. Considering this, I suggest it's a bad idea for her to move in with Fun when ve obviously hasn't sorted vis feelings out.

What I find offensive is having my name lumped alongside the "Screw teh btches that'll make her jelos!" crowd.

But that's just me.
 
 
Spaniel
13:45 / 10.01.06
Ummm, you might wan to edit your last post, my scientific fren.
 
 
Evil Scientist
13:54 / 10.01.06
Oops, apologies Boboss!

Editing now.
 
 
STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK
13:59 / 10.01.06
alas and Nina- yes, that's very true, and worthy of further discussion (though, alas, the part you quoted I assumed- well, hoped, anyway- wasn't actually meant seriously. Ah, damn the interwebnet and its enforced ambiguity of intent).

BUT before we get too sidetracked, I'd like to reiterate my (and several others') answer to the original question posed- he shouldn't do it. NOT because he's being deliberately exploited (though he may be... not really my call, though) or because she's inherently untrustworthy (which she may be... again, not my call), and not because he's a guy and she's a girl. My advice would be the same either way round, or in any other combination- from what we've been told, to do this would be to seriously fuck with his own head. And I can't stress enough what a bad idea I think it is.
 
 
Goodness Gracious Meme
15:13 / 10.01.06
I do want to add my voice to Nina's, here, more seriously. There's been a vaguely misogynist, heterosexist edge to several postings on this thread.

Me three.

This stuff is difficult, we all seem to be groovy with that.

But as adults we have to take at lesat partial responsibility for the situations we end up in. And, as I said earlier, I am sympathetic to FWPs dilemma, but I'm not sympathetic to the creeping implication in this thread that 'girls do x', and 'boys do y'. Way to other the Other, chaps.

As with most discussions of barbelove, there seems to be an assumption in some posts in this thread that

a)1 boy- 1 girl is the only dynamic possible

and b)that the dynamic is always that of the active, manipulative, (unfaithful) bitch who preys upon the poor put-upon barbie-boy, who apparently, no agency of his own to change a situation he's unhappy with.

There is much good and fair advice in this thread, but there is also, as N and alas note, a tendency to view everything from the side we've been given, forgetting that there's almost certainly another side to this story.
 
 
Char Aina
15:19 / 10.01.06
+1.
i find the 'bring another bird home as a weapon' pish particularly troublemsome.
 
 
Char Aina
15:24 / 10.01.06
a tendency to view everything from the side we've been given

that, and the idea that if the way someone acts makes you feel bad then they were doing it for that very reason. its possible, but its by far the least common explanation in my experience.
 
 
P. Horus Rhacoid
15:31 / 10.01.06
Oh man, you go to sleep for eight hours and look what happens. To clarify a few things:

I'm not particularly lovelorn at the moment. My concern is that, because I was in the not-too-distant past, moving in with the former (or, as has become apparent, not quite so former) object of my affections might not be The Best Idea. Which it seems it is not. All the talk of winning her back (Hulk boxers etc) was more a joking response to the joking/unrealistic suggestions that I go for it. Alas quoted one of them above.

For the record, no, I do not think that she is a, er, Manipulative Whore Queen from Planet Television and I probably misrepresented her in my first post when I mentioned that she gets off on other guys liking her, which I don't know for sure; saying that might be doing her a disservice. However, she does have a lot of guys falling for her, and seems not to understand the potential effects that things such as spooning (aggressively!) at parties might have on them. I understand that it's not her fault if people keep falling for her but in my case at least she was doing things which encouraged it; my roommates at the time were astonished when I told them she had a boyfriend. I don't think she was cynically manipulating me for attention but unless she is incredibly bad at reading people (she's not, she's actually quite good) then she had at least some idea of how I felt and continued to do things to encourage it.

I also accept my own complicity in all this: there were times- and I certainly had people telling me this- when I realized fully what was going on. I also tend to get very emotionally attached very quickly, so there's a bit of give-and-take going on; had I been in a relationship with someone else at the time, I don't think I would have read so much into her actions. On the other hand I wouldn't have spooned with her.
 
 
alas
15:39 / 10.01.06
I apologize, ES, for lumping your post in with that crowd. And I agree with Stoatie's point that this relationship can still not be saved, for all the reasons he listed.

But, as GGM has helpfully clarified, It still strikes me that, you, ES, and others on this thread are suggesting that the default reading for any female in a relationship with a male is that she's his property in some way: until we know otherwise, we assume she's being "bad" for what she's doing, and she should just stay away from poor l'il FWP.

However, I repeat that it is true that you, ES, never suggested, even in jest, either that women were teh bitches or teh sex dolls. I should have more clearly demarcated the two issues: I'm explaining that when I read a thread like this, I experience these comments as an accretion. And in that accretion was a kind of silence about Megatron's post that I let build in me rather than addressing it. So I'll do it.

Although Megatron said he was "jokily exaggerating," after his post was called shit advice, which at a minimum it is. I read that literally: an exaggeration of how he really thinks. It's not just shit advice, for me it falls into the harrassment category, from the Wiki:

aggressive statements about types of people who might be represented on the board may be considered direct harrassment of the individuals concerned.

Just to show I'm trying not to be kneejerk about this: Haus's comment about starving a victim didn't have the same effect, for me, which admittedly may be partly because I know his posting style very well, but I think it was just quite clearly an OTT exaggeration used to demonstrate the implicit sexism of an earlier comment. DM's comment just seemed to be painting an offensive picture for the shock value.
 
 
Char Aina
15:50 / 10.01.06
I understand that it's not her fault if people keep falling for her


we-ell....maybe.
it may not be her fault, but she may also be able to do something about it. i have been that person, being super loveable and sweet towards folks i dont love, inadvertently leading them on and fostering a love thing.
when a friend pointed it out to me i didnt believe her at first, but eventually i had to take responsibility for not being clear.

it wasnt on purpose (not consciously at least), that just being the way i dealt, but it was something that i could do something about.

it was one of those "the meaning of any communication is the effect it has" moments.
this is not that, though, and she is not me, and i would warn you of taking my anecdote as anything other than an illumination of a possibilty.
 
 
Mirror
16:03 / 10.01.06
Mirror maintains that, in the grand scheme of things, one's previous 'romantic' ambitions/entanglements need not be a barrier to one maintaining a friendly platonic relationship as flatmates; the situation need not automatically lead to misery.

I agree that this is a possibility, but a hypothetical one for most. One would require Buddha-level detachment for such a situation to be "fun".


Well, that too, but that's not quite what I was getting at. I'm more of the opinion that if they do live together, it'll probably get physical and be great for a while and then will eventually blow up and they'll both move on. I've come to the conclusion that a having a number of headfuck relationships is not only par for the course, but healthy in that it gives you proper perspective on what an unhealthy relationship looks like.

I'm working under two primary assumptions: 1) FWP is not looking for TEH ONE and is not yet ready to settle down and raise a family, yada yada. 2) Despite (1), FWP is interested in being in some sort of relationship with this person.

As long as he doesn't assume that she is going to be his soulmate, and goes into the relationship with the full understanding that it's going to be temporary and will likely end badly, it's unlikely that he'll be permanently scarred by whatever happens. And, there's a small chance that things will turn out well.

My basic approach to romantic relationships is that if my partner thinks that she can do better than being with me, then more power to her. I honestly wouldn't want to be in a relationship where the other person could be happier with someone else, because it wouldn't be fair to either of us. As long as this is made clear, I think it actually works to strengthen the relationship, because it says "I am here only because I really want to be, without guilt or compulsion."
 
 
Char Aina
16:13 / 10.01.06
you do get that she isnt moving in to be with him as a partner, though, yeah?
i may be wrong, but i am getting the impression that you think she is moving back to be with him, rather than just to be his flatmate.
 
 
ibis the being
16:30 / 10.01.06
I love this talk of exploitation. People newsflash: just because she held someone's hand when she was drunk and engaged in spooning with another man does not make her a Manipulative Whore Queen from Planet Television. It sounds to me as if this is someone in her early 20s trying to work out a load of unclear social rules. We all do it.

Characterising the man as the victim of heartless bitch who wants to eat his soul happens far too much in these threads. Just because one person is a pathetic lovelorn fool does not mean someone else is exploiting them.


This is true, and I suppose there was some of that stereotyping happening in this thread... however, I don't think being manipulative and attention-seeking was necessarily connected to femaleness, by FWP or everyone who agreed that she was using him in some way or the other. Note that I mentioned my similar experience with a (straight) man. People DO use other people's affections to soothe their own egos and lonliness all the time, to the point of exploitation, but that behavior does not have its source in their genders nor sexual preferences.
 
 
alas
16:31 / 10.01.06
i would warn you of taking my anecdote as anything other than an illumination of a possibilty.

...a possibility which, note, would serve the very ego-gratifying task of letting FWP off the hook by, again, making her the primary culprit. In my own life, I try to be very aware of my own ego's wiliness in latching onto these very reasonable but ultimately self-serving arguments.

FWP, despite all the caveats, your response still indicates a desire, to me, to make her into a kind of evil temptress against whom you have no powers of refusal. I accept that we all, men and women alike, may want to absolve ourselves in this way for situations that are causing us pain and where we find ourselves, against our better judgment, doing that which we want not to do. To wit:

I understand that it's not her fault if people keep falling for her but in my case at least she was doing things which encouraged it; my roommates at the time were astonished when I told them she had a boyfriend. I don't think she was cynically manipulating me for attention but unless she is incredibly bad at reading people (she's not, she's actually quite good) then she had at least some idea of how I felt and continued to do things to encourage it.

Your roommates were "astonished" that she had a boyfriend, but you knew, right? And you were apparently bothered by the fact at the time, but said nothing? You did not, say, try to open a conversation about precisely what kind of relationship she has with that other guy, to see if having other 'friendships with benefits' is a norm for her and him? You didn't seem to directly and unambiguously sit her down and let her know where you were, how you were feeling? She's a "good reader"--"intuitive female"?--and should have just "known"?

Are you sure you're not expecting her, as a 'good' woman to be more attentive to your "needs" than to her own desires and interests?

I realize I'm also assuming you did not feel physically threatened by her, as would be true in a potential rape case--or at least you have not suggested that was true, here. (If you do feel physically threatened by her in some way I can understand that it might be difficult to admit, given gender norms.)

So, with the caveat that of course you may not be giving us the whole picture even of your own actions, from what I am reading here, you apparently continued to deliberately take part in the infamous aggressive spooning and sinister hand holding, and other actions that to you are unambiguously "come hither" signals, because you feel powerless in your attraction to her, not because you are fearful of her ability to physically overwhelm you, to blackmail you, or to directly harm you in some way. Is that fair?

I hate to say it, but, despite all your caveats, it sounds like you still want to see her as a "cock tease," so that you don't have to face the fact that you are feeling powerless around her because of the immensity of your physical attraction to her, the immensity of your emotions. That immensity is scary, but it's not the same as being threatened by someone as in rape cases.

It would not be fair to her to let her move into you when you are in this condition.
 
 
Char Aina
16:44 / 10.01.06
making her the primary culprit.

even if the situation is as mine with boy/girl roles reveresed, i wouldnt say she was the culprit. for all that my actions may have not helped a situation, i at no point intended to give the impression that resulted.
culprits usually have to be witting, dont they?

i was attempting to suggest that her actions may not help but that, even if that is the case, ultimately they are very unlikely to be purposeful or malicious.
 
 
Mirror
17:11 / 10.01.06
you do get that she isnt moving in to be with him as a partner, though, yeah?
i may be wrong, but i am getting the impression that you think she is moving back to be with him, rather than just to be his flatmate.


I have a hard time reading the situation that way. My take is that given her past behavior, she at least has some romantic interest in Fun, though she herself may not be certain of the degree.

It just seems improbable to me that she would desire to move in with him, given their history, if she didn't want to at least open up the possibility of a relationship. I guess I should state a third assumption: that she's not, in fact, a Manipulative Whore Queen from Planet Television (gotta love that phrase.)
 
 
grant
17:18 / 10.01.06
If you really are unaware that many people live in open, negotiated partnerships with one another, you should feel some shame and you should educate yourself.

With webcams?
 
 
Mirror
17:18 / 10.01.06
As an aside, I regard the fact that she already has a boyfriend as being utterly meaningless. My wife and I originally got together when she was ostensibly still in an existing relationship that had been going on for 3 years and she'd been having trouble ending, despite the fact that the guy was totally wrong for her.

The duration of a relationship is not necessarily a reliable measure of its quality, particularly between young people.
 
 
Dead Megatron
17:29 / 10.01.06
What`s this talk abour "rape" and "cock-tease"?. "It would not be fair to her to let her move whyle you`re in that condition"? Now, it`s the poor phobia who`s the bad guy. It seems as if we`re trying to find out who`s the victim and who`s the victimizer. What if there`s no victim here, just people being normal? Again, romantic love has got nothing to do with fairness.

aw, humans
 
  

Page: 123(4)56

 
  
Add Your Reply