Internet romance part 2

Subject: Internet romance part 2
From: hesperis
Date: 24 Jan 01 - 10:10 PM

Ok. Here's the continuation. (Duh!)

Matt - WHAT?????!!!!!!!! HEL-lo, your voice is SEEEXXXXXXYYYYYY! What kind of stupid people are these guys, anyway? Sheesh! And I really mean that. SHEESH! Grrrrrrr!!!!!!!!

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: Matt_R
Date: 24 Jan 01 - 10:13 PM

Sexy? Hah. It's nasal and whiny.

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: hesperis
Date: 24 Jan 01 - 10:14 PM

Forgot to add a link to the first thread

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: catspaw49
Date: 24 Jan 01 - 10:23 PM

Okay....Its nasal and whiney. Is that what you wanted to hear?

Spaw

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: Matt_R
Date: 24 Jan 01 - 10:31 PM

Yep! Thanks!

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: Allan C.
Date: 24 Jan 01 - 10:35 PM

Lesse, we were talking about confidence and such, weren't we? Confidence was a total stranger to me when it came to being around women. Here's a brief story about how my life once was:

Years ago I shared a dwelling (okay, it was a trailer, are you happy now?) with two other guys. They would cruise the local bars regularly and would almost invariably come back with companions for each of them. I was far too withdrawn to ever attempt such a feat. What would I say? Who would care if I said anything?

It wasn't until years later that I learned that those guys were telling the women, "Hey. Do you like folk music? You just MUST come hear our roommate."

The women would come along to hear the roommate. I would sit in the living room and sing songs for hours. At some point during the evening, each of my friends would whisper something to their respective companions and moments later I would be alone while everyone else had disappeared into the bedrooms.

I was honestly in awe of this. For years, I wondered what it was that was said that had such dramatic results. In fact, I am still wondering.

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: CarolC
Date: 24 Jan 01 - 11:25 PM

Ok, now I have a big question. bert, that's a nice song. But it raises questions that trouble me. I've been getting the impression for a while now, that men (some men?) want women to be bitchy toward them, and that they even find it attractive. Your song, bert sounds like some of that to me. But I have observed that men also resent it when women are bitchey toward them.

Am I wrong? If I'm right, how can women possibly have a satisfying relationship in that kind of context? I hope someone can enlighten me on this one. It's got me awful confused.

Carol

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: katlaughing
Date: 25 Jan 01 - 12:08 AM

Little Hawk said, "In my experience, 97% of the women in the world, for example, think their nose isn't shaped right...or their hair isn't curly enough...or straight enough...or thick enough...or it's too thick. They commiserate with their girlfriends for hours about this kind of stuff. They wonder why they keep going out with jerks. I've heard them. That's lack of confidence in a specific area. The girl might be entirely confident in several other areas."

The women who buy into that are ones who let Hollywood and Madison Ave. etc dictate their lives to them. I don't know what all your experience entails, but I can assure you there are plenty of women who don't fall for that crap and do NOT spend hours commiserating about this kind of "stuff!" Jaysus, I cannot even remember the last time any of my friends, my daughters and/or their friends everhad such a conversation!

Yes, everyone does lack confidence in some areas. If some women think there is something wrong with their looks it is because the ads on television and the way women are portrayed in most movies have told them so in very blatant terms. Some men, as well, have bought into that. I have a very dear and handsome, fifty-something friend wh has spent the past several years of his life in and out of relationships with women who somewhat resemble Heather Locklear because she is his dream. Maybe this comes from his own insecurity...set the standards so high that he knows he will always fail...he'll never getLocklear. It makes me sad for him because he is a kind and very intelligent, wickedly funny man.

Please, LH, try not to make such sweeping pronouncements. They may be so in your realm of experience, but that does not mean the rest of the world is exactly like that.

BTW, for any of you guys who are wondering what women want: honesty. I've found in the relationships I've had, whether marriage or just dating, that being upfront with one another, about everything was the best way to get along.

kat

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: Bert
Date: 25 Jan 01 - 02:57 PM

Well Carol, "Bitchy" is not something that I would have thought of about Tree, She is strong, and maybe at times even fierce, but NEVER bitchy.

If it comes across in the song it's because I never even considered it enough to even think of avoiding giving that impresssion.

Bert.

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: CarolC
Date: 25 Jan 01 - 03:03 PM

bert, I appreciate you helping me out here. Could you help me understand the difference between bitchy and fierce? I hope you don't take offense at my questions. It's just that this is a dynamic that I don't understand, and I feel that I need to.

Thanks,

Carol

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: Allan C.
Date: 25 Jan 01 - 03:11 PM

My Merriam-Webster dictionary describes a bitch as a "malicious, spiteful and domineering woman. "Fierce" is defnined as "violently hostile or aggressive in temperment". So I would surmise that the difference is in the violent acting out upon the attitude.

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: Little Hawk
Date: 25 Jan 01 - 03:17 PM

God, Carol, I DON'T like bitchiness in women! Pull-lease! I do like it when they have a strong sense of identity.

Kat - Hey, come on, don't take me so danged seriously here. There was an element of humour in what I had to say. Women, like men, run the gamut...and anything you can say about them is liable to be true one time, and not the next. The ultimate "insecure woman" I guess, would be Kathy (in the comic strip). If a woman wants to know what pitfalls to avoid in life, she should just study that comic strip and conduct herself in the diametrically opposite fashion to the way Kathy does. (Is that Cathy with a "c" or Kathy with a "k"? Damn! Can't remember.)

I am presently with a woman who has a very good sense of self-worth, and at the same time is unconfident in certain other areas of life. Come to think of it, that sounds like a description of me...aside from the gender.

(Sigh!)

- LH

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: CarolC
Date: 25 Jan 01 - 03:26 PM

Is fierceness in a woman attractive to men?

Carol

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: Bert
Date: 25 Jan 01 - 03:26 PM

Fierce, I would say is an outward show of physical (or moral) strength. How you might imagine that Big Mick would appear when striding into a room for one of his union negotiations.
Whereas, bitchy would be kinda like that anonymous guest who pops his head up from time to time in here. Yeah Alan said it malicious & spiteful.

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: Bert
Date: 25 Jan 01 - 03:36 PM

I would say the many men are intimidated by women who show any strength at all.

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: CarolC
Date: 25 Jan 01 - 03:40 PM

Thanks, bert. So I guess the moral of the story is that I should just be myself and let the chips fall where they may. (And hope for the best.)

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: Allan C.
Date: 25 Jan 01 - 03:59 PM

Carol, that has always been the best policy.

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: CarolC
Date: 25 Jan 01 - 04:10 PM

Allan, I do believe you're right.

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: Little Neophyte
Date: 25 Jan 01 - 04:14 PM

From my experience, being strong which to me means self-aware, self-confident, self-reliant and independant is intimidating to the majority of men I have met. Not much you can do about that except once again like Allan says, be yourself. There is a match for everyone, even the bitchy and fierce will find the right mate.

Little Neo

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: Allan C.
Date: 25 Jan 01 - 04:16 PM

I have to say, though, that I have to wonder at the interest in bitchiness and fierceness. While I suppose anyone could be capable of similar attitudes, Carol displayed neither when I met her.

(I'm just trying to cover for you here, Carol - I won't tell. Honest!)

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: Bert
Date: 25 Jan 01 - 04:21 PM

Stick with the fierce and stay away from the bitchy. And Me and Allan will love you, if no one else does. (Just don't tell Tree;-)

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: Justa Picker
Date: 25 Jan 01 - 04:21 PM

Be yourself Carol, always. That way you that when you meet the right person, you are being accepted for exactly the way you are, not some projected role.
Men that gravitate towards domineering and aggressive women will always seek them out. Men that gravitate towards submissive and more vulnerable women will seek them out. If no one discovers you, to hell with them. Their loss...but someone invariably will.

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: CarolC
Date: 25 Jan 01 - 04:35 PM

I've probably given a strange impression with my line of questioning.

It's just that in some previous relationships, the men I was involved with seemed to get very nostalgic when talking about the time one of their former partners scratched them on the face, or the fact that she had a temper that would fry and egg, things like that. Then I saw bert's song and it looked like he fell in love with her because she yelled at him about sitting on her stool and called him a liar. That was really hard for me to understand.

I like being nice. It's something I enjoy. I also like being strong, but I like to do it as diplomatically as possible. I was feeling kind of sad thinking about the possibility that men might only really appreciate women who act badly toward them.

I guess I'd rather be alone than to change myself in that way.

Carol

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: katlaughing
Date: 25 Jan 01 - 04:49 PM

Part of it is the semantics of society, Carol, imo. It still holds true in the business world that when a woman is forthright and assertive, she gets called an aggressive bitch, with little or no admiration. When a man does so, he might be called a son of a bitch or bastard, but it is usually with some sense of admiration.

It is still more acceptable for men to be aggressive and for women to demure. Look at how much rancour has been generated over Janet Reno, a woman I consider to be tough as nails and assertive.

My new favourite bumper sticker says, "You say I'm a bitch...like it's a bad thing." Kind of like "take back the night"...if we co-opt the word it might lose some of its sting:-)

Maybe some of those men you mentioned were the types who have fantasies about "take-charge" lovers?

kat

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: Bert
Date: 25 Jan 01 - 04:55 PM

Actually it was when I looked into her eyes and saw that sparkle there, she was having fun with me. I knew she was the one. Just because a woman is strong doesn't mean that she is agressive and domineering. Tree is neither of those things. She has a strong personality and is not afraid to say what she thinks. And she never acts badly towards me.

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: CarolC
Date: 25 Jan 01 - 05:00 PM

Thanks bert. That helps a lot.

Carol

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: Burke
Date: 25 Jan 01 - 05:54 PM

I believe all the be yourself stuff %100. Picker & Neo seem to think that it's inevitable that we all will find someone. Not so! Be true to yourself, but remember you may have to do it alone, so make sure you like your own company.

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: Little Hawk
Date: 25 Jan 01 - 06:02 PM

Women who show strength are not intimidating. If a woman didn't show any strength at all...now, that would be extremely worrisome.

- LH

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: Peter T.
Date: 25 Jan 01 - 06:03 PM

This thread seems to have moved from internet romance (which I find tedious to talk about) to romance in general (Which is always interesting). Something no one has mentioned is that there is a big divide between people who can stand back from themselves and laugh. A related version is having a sense of irony. I have often referred to a third conversational version of this as the ability to "metatalk" -- that is, talk about your conversation while it is going on, make asides, keep that thread going while you start others, etc. I have seen many people in relationships, even marriages, where one partner can only carry on the main discussion. They are usually deeply sincere, maybe even sweet, but they have only one thing in their mind at one time. Their partner is usually suffering from lack of oxygen or "play space".

I have seen this over and over again, and would certainly never have anything to do with a woman who couldn't metatalk. I have tried, and it is dreary beyond belief. The non-metatalkers also tend to be very beautiful, which is why there is no God.
yours, Peter T.

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: Bill D
Date: 25 Jan 01 - 06:05 PM

From about 7th grade on, I always admired and was attracted to intelligent, confident, competant women....it IS more work to deal with another person who has opinions and directions and 'depth'...especially when you ALSO are dealing with 'hormonal' responses and such...but it has always been more rewarding...(though some of the process has been scary at times)....

The thing about the internet is that you get MORE information about another person in some ways, and less in others...I have talked to a few people who simply can't see someone they know only in 'print' as real...and some people really do not project a 'persona' when they type...but, lets face it..people used to write and fall in love by letters when it was weeks or months between contact...so it is perfectly understandable that serious relationships CAN happen in this new medium...Care must be taken...but so must it in real life.

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: harpgirl
Date: 25 Jan 01 - 06:24 PM

...Peter...we call it "observing ego" and it is always a sign of ego-strength! Perhaps, if your supposition about beauty was actually true, it might be because beautiful women are raised and treated like hothouse flowers and not expected to develop ego strength in the thrust and parry of many families and by their lovers!

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: Bill D
Date: 25 Jan 01 - 06:34 PM

I am convinced the the IMMENSE pressure on women who have the stereotypical aspects of 'beauty' to spend most of their time just being 'beautiful' has cost the world a lot. And, sad to say, many women buy into how easy it is to 'get'..(status, wealth, attention) when they play that game...Hugh Hefner made a fortune exploiting that....

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: Justa Picker
Date: 25 Jan 01 - 07:25 PM

Some of my experiences.

The harder you look for someone to be with, the more elusive it is. Never project an air of neediness or desperation. Doing so shows certain vulnerability which certain opportunists may capitalize upon -some sincere, some not...but it's like wearing a sign that says either "VICTIM" or "TARGET" or "PLEASE USE/LOVE ME".
Always wait for the other to initiate or make the first move, no matter how much you want to jump his/her bones. Keeps them off balance and they will work harder to "make you like them". And never lose your cool. You can do primal screams when you get home, if contact wasn't initiated. Remember in certain situations dating is a lot like playing poker or Eucre. You want a poker face and you don't want to play your trump card till the other one has first.

Generally, you'll find love, romance, companionship, etc....when you are NOT looking for it. You just sort of stumble into it and it catches you off guard.

And why is it when you're single, it's impossible to get a decent date, but if you're married offers abound? (Perhaps it is because you are already taken, that makes you appear more desirable, because the attracted party figures you must be a hot commodity? (..I guess I just answered my own question.)

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: kendall
Date: 25 Jan 01 - 07:32 PM

I like strong, bright, witty, well read, well traveled women. Whining mirror gazers are a pain. Opinonated is ok--bitchy is not. Seems to me that bitchy is the second stage of frustration.

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: CarolC
Date: 25 Jan 01 - 08:14 PM

Justa Picker, I'm having a difficult time resolving some of the things you said in your posts.

First you said:

"Be yourself Carol, always."

Then you said:

"Always wait for the other to initiate or make the first move, no matter how much you want to jump his/her bones. Keeps them off balance and they will work harder to "make you like them". And never lose your cool. You can do primal screams when you get home, if contact wasn't initiated. Remember in certain situations dating is a lot like playing poker or Eucre. You want a poker face and you don't want to play your trump card till the other one has first."

I don't see how you can be yourself if you are behaving toward another person according to a strategy such as you have described.

Carol

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: Justa Picker
Date: 25 Jan 01 - 08:51 PM

I'll clarify this for you Carol, in an P.M.

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: Allan C.
Date: 25 Jan 01 - 09:42 PM

Not picking on you, I have to say that I can't agree with the poker analogy in that, if everyone played by those rules, nobody would make the first move. Besides, my own feeling is that part of what is wrong with the current concepts in dating is the idea that it is some sort of game. If people could drop all the pretense and just be real with one another, we could all have a lot more fun.

But that is just my idea of how I would prefer to have it. I am sure that there are folks who truly enjoy the games.

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: katlaughing
Date: 25 Jan 01 - 09:49 PM

I agree with you, Allan, can't stand the games and would much rather make the first move, be upfront, etc...you've got to be ready to risk a bit to find the possible one and only, IMO.

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: CarolC
Date: 25 Jan 01 - 10:01 PM

Justa Picker sent me a PM as he said he would. He seems to have found a method that worked for him. I have a different approach. But I guess with an issue as complicated as this one is, no one way will work for everyone.

Carol

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: Little Hawk
Date: 25 Jan 01 - 10:16 PM

That's right. There's no silver bullet. Every time I thought I had it figured out I ran into a new situation that changed the "rules" yet again.

One thing I have noticed, though. When you finally decide that you're perfectly okay on your own...then sometimes people decide they're interested in you. Probably because you aren't projecting that "desperate" quality any longer. This is also the case when you're already in a happy relationship, of course. Offers abound. How ironical.

It's the same with banks. They only want to lend you money when you don't need it!

- LH

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: Bill D
Date: 25 Jan 01 - 11:57 PM

I have an old comic strip in which a klutz of a fellow has just asked about how you ask a girl for a kiss...

The 'with it' chick who answers says..."Arnold, you don't ask a girl for a kiss...you just DO it!.......Unless, of course, she is the type of girl who wants to be asked..."

and he walks away sighing.."There's SO much to learn"

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: Peter Kasin
Date: 26 Jan 01 - 01:51 AM

I don't like bitchiness. I'm attracted to women who value treating people with kindness and sensitivity, who are bright, strong, and humorous I'm not much of a believer in "The Rules" and the "Men Are From Mars, Women Are From Venus" outlooks. Not that there aren't some generalizations to be made about emotional differences between the sexes, but they are sometimes way overstated, and since they are generalizations, they don't apply to everyone.

-chanteyranger

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: Little Neophyte
Date: 26 Jan 01 - 05:58 AM

What attracts us to another is complex. Under the list of attributes we can see in our mate flows a mysterious river where our souls seem to better understand.

Little Neo

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: kendall
Date: 26 Jan 01 - 10:10 AM

You gotta get out on the limb
Thats where the fruit is.

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: SINSULL
Date: 26 Jan 01 - 10:14 AM

Bitchiness is a problem??? I was recently told that I was too easy to get along with! I give up guys.

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: SINSULL
Date: 26 Jan 01 - 10:50 AM

Re: married men being more attractive. At least part of it is that the women who find them attractive are not looking for commitment or marriage. They want a man without the encumberances.

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: katlaughing
Date: 26 Jan 01 - 12:47 PM

Well, here's a fellah who isn't ashamed to tell it like it is in his search for a mate: click here and ladies, for a cleanliness next to godliness be sure to check out this: shower with jesus

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: Justa Picker
Date: 26 Jan 01 - 12:50 PM

Link above fixed.

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: Justa Picker
Date: 26 Jan 01 - 12:50 PM

One more time.

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: SINSULL
Date: 26 Jan 01 - 01:03 PM

Gee Kat, He likes long romantic walks. Gives a whole new meaning to "Just A Closer Walk With Thee", doesn't it? I am gonna get it now, ain't I?

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: katlaughing
Date: 26 Jan 01 - 01:23 PM

Thanks, Justa Picker, sorry I didn't check it. I've gone in there and fixed it in my posting, now.

Hey, Sins, it does say "young" women....'spose that leaves us out? LOL

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: SINSULL
Date: 26 Jan 01 - 01:30 PM

Speak for yourself, Kat. I am younger now than I ever was.

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: katlaughing
Date: 26 Jan 01 - 01:45 PM

Careful, Sins, I am catching up/back? withya...don't believe in agism...one of my favourite quotes:

"How old would you be, if you didn't know?"
Ruth Gordon, actress

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: Amos
Date: 26 Jan 01 - 01:54 PM

Gee, guys. Maybe people are individuals, varying widely in all sorts of traits, not defined by the shape of their gearboxes and exhaust pipes. Maybe a lot of our gender drama is a cultural overlay more based on a network of uninspected and less-than-rational expectations than any inherent character. And maybe genuine communication will always cut through the smoke and reach those who are capable of genuine communicatiion whether they are F, M, Bi, gay, or castrato...like certain possum people we know...

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: hesperis
Date: 26 Jan 01 - 02:06 PM

I read "The Rules". Most people look at it really superficially, and don't understand that what it's really saying is "respect yourself, get a life, and the guys'll fall over themselves asking you out." Which is what happened for me when I got a life.... *g*

The rules are only for people who don't know how to respect themselves and their creative/work projects when they're in a relationship or hoping to be in one. A lot of people won't even make themselves a candlelit dinner for one, because they're not doing it for someone they love. Pitiful, really. You gotta love yourself first, and love is really a series of actions - or decisions.

If you decide to treat yourself with care and respect, that is love.

If you decide to let someone else into your life, that is love. Then you can decide if you want to go through life together with this person. But you treat yourself well first, or you won't know how to treat the other person when you've "got" them.

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: Peter T.
Date: 26 Jan 01 - 02:14 PM

Making a candlelit dinner for one is my definition of truly pitiful. Sorry. Better to eat out of a can of cold beans sitting on a snowdrift.
yours, Peter T.

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: Matt_R
Date: 26 Jan 01 - 02:35 PM

If you can't love yourself, the how in the hell are you gonna love somebody else? Can I get an "Amen" in here?

--RuPaul

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: SINSULL
Date: 26 Jan 01 - 02:36 PM

Try it Peter. I do it every once in a while with good wine and a special meal just because I am worth the trouble. I know some single women who do it every night. Some men too come to think of it.
Mary

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: Amergin
Date: 26 Jan 01 - 02:37 PM

I agree with that, Peter....I for one find it hard to cook anything but ramen for myself....but for someone special....that's a different story

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: SINSULL
Date: 26 Jan 01 - 02:55 PM

"If you cook it, they will come."

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: Peter T.
Date: 26 Jan 01 - 02:58 PM

My whole soul revolts against the very idea. Candlelight was designed for the sole purpose of sparkling the eyes of a beautiful woman sitting opposite. Any other purpose is blasphemous.
yours, Peter T.

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: Matt_R
Date: 26 Jan 01 - 03:08 PM

Candles? Candles? THIS veteran of 4 class-3 and above Hurricanes in 6 years can tell you what candles were made for!

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: SINSULL
Date: 26 Jan 01 - 03:12 PM

Sure - to make it impossible to see the mold on the bread.

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: GUEST,chanteyranger
Date: 26 Jan 01 - 03:35 PM

"The Rules" teaches a strange version of self-respect. It teaches one to be highly manipulative.

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: Allan C.
Date: 26 Jan 01 - 03:41 PM

I have a hard time justifying the effort of cooking sometimes - no matter who it is for. A good meal can sometimes take two or three hours to prepare and then is eaten in only twenty minutes. Yeah, I take pride in my cooking; but that only goes just so far.

On the other hand, I have been known to take myself out to dinner in a fine restaurant. It is so-o-o nice to have someone else deal with the preparation, service and dishes! I knew someone who took herself out to dinner at least once each month. Then, after being served her after-dinner coffee, she balanced her checkbook and paid her bills!

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: SINSULL
Date: 26 Jan 01 - 03:51 PM

I have to admit, one of Kendall's finer qualities is his willingness and ability to prepare wonderful meals without any indication of effort. If you hate to cook, pay him a visit and offer to do the dishes.

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: Little Hawk
Date: 26 Jan 01 - 04:29 PM

Peter T. - Here's another possible use for candles at dinner, even in the absence of a beautiful woman on the other side of the table. Suppose that there are maybe spiritual presences around us...such as...guardian angels, devas, spirits of the departed, and numerous other friendly presences. They might appreciate the gesture while spending dinner with you. You could even try talking to them about it a little. Don't do it while "normal" people are around though, or they may think you're crazy! IMO you have to be somewhat crazy to be considered "normal" in the present conventional system of things...which knows a lot about a little and not much about the rest.

Then too, God is present, right? Unless you think God is Bill Gates or Madonna, in which case, probably not. Whatever the case, you are NOT alone (as far as I'm concerned).

Now, to take it further than that...suppose that everything, even inanimate objects is/are invested by conscious spiritual energy. Then, your apartment/dwelling place might appreciate the gesture and feel a little warmer for it. The candles might appreciate being honoured by being used for such a gesture, which is one of their purposes, instead of just having to wait for the next hurricane.

There are all kinds of other possibilities...

I realize you may believe in none of these things, but they are possibilities, nonetheless, because the world is full of things that various people neither believe in nor have any conscious awareness of, and it's always been that way and always will be. It's full of things I have no awareness of too, and that keeps me intrigued as to what I may discover next...

There are probably at least a thousand viable reasons for having a candlelit dinner (or other occasion) quite apart from wooing the lady of your choice.

That's just a cultural cliche, which is why it's so totally obvious. Kind of like counting down to midnight at New Year's...a totally arbitrary action which has been invested with great meaning by millions of drunken people for longer than I would care to remember.

Pick your chosen belief. It's true for you as long as you think it is....and blasphemy? That's just in the mind of the beholder. In truth there is no blasphemy. There is only further experience.

:-)

- LH

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: SINSULL
Date: 26 Jan 01 - 04:32 PM

You mean if you're eating Kentucky Fried Chicken, invite the late Colonel???

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: Little Neophyte
Date: 26 Jan 01 - 10:54 PM

I relate to Peter's thoughts on this matter. I must admit, I have tried the candle stick thing with the 'do it for yourself' gourmet meal & background dinner music. Doesn't cut it.
I also relate to Allan. When I am in the mood to pamper myself, I take myself out to a good restaurant for a fine dining experience. That seems to do the trick.

Little Neo

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: Peter Kasin
Date: 26 Jan 01 - 10:57 PM

Sounds like a romantic dinner! He was known to lean across the table and start licking fingers, though. :-)

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: Amergin
Date: 27 Jan 01 - 12:25 AM

Yeah, I like going out to a good restaurant every once in a while to treat myself, also....why spend a couple of hours cooking only for yourself?

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: Amergin
Date: 27 Jan 01 - 01:12 AM

One more thing....how does a person know when they're ready to jump back in the pool?

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: Allan C.
Date: 27 Jan 01 - 08:11 AM

You know it when you begin to ask the question, Amergin.

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: Amos
Date: 27 Jan 01 - 09:15 AM

When my Grannie was in her dotage she used to set her table and cook for several guests and chastise them for not eating their dinner; but she always forgave them, maybe because she nejoyed talking to them so much. She lived alone, and there were no guests, but she wasn't going to let a little thing like that spoil her evening.

A

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: Peter T.
Date: 27 Jan 01 - 09:36 AM

If there are spiritual beings, I suspect that they are like Raphael's descriptions of angels in heaven which interfuse their bodies, and are basically making love all the time (that is what is meant by heaven after all). So the chances of them being attracted like moths to a candlelight are pretty slim. When you get to choose between Audrey Hepburn for breakfast, Great Garbo for lunch, and an evening with Sarah Bernhardt in her youth; or, if female, Cary Grant, Clark Gable, and Leslie Howard (slot in as appropriate)? No. So another alternative must be the ubiquitous and pernicious -- "am I worth it?" -- and my answer is, I am worth not lying to myself about what I am doing, it being Friday night, and everyone else in the world is living la vida loca. What is left? I think candlelight dinners for one must be the much more civilized female equivalent of the blow-up doll: the blow up romantic environment, complete with cardboard cutout of Omar Sharif.

yours, Peter T.

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: katlaughing
Date: 27 Jan 01 - 12:17 PM

Ah, but Peter, I know you know it is an illusion that everyone else is living la vida loca.

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: Amos
Date: 27 Jan 01 - 12:21 PM

Ya, ya...Peter is proje- e-e-cting!!!!!

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: Amergin
Date: 27 Jan 01 - 12:24 PM

Uh, Peter, please leave my toys out of it.....

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: Little Neophyte
Date: 27 Jan 01 - 12:53 PM

Peter, I think you have come up with a brilliant solution to this issue. Next Friday night I will do the civilized female candle light thing and buy a blow-up male doll to keep me company at dinner.
Who knows where the evening will lead.

Little Neo

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: Amos
Date: 27 Jan 01 - 12:55 PM

Bonnie, given the level of initiative of the participants, you should be able to predict that!

A

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: flattop
Date: 27 Jan 01 - 12:59 PM

Cold beans on a snow bank constitutes a romantic dinner? Libby's beans? The problem, if you have too many romantic night in a row, wouldn't you be blowing holes in the snow bank?

I have a theory that big healthy guys and beautiful women are not necessarily stupid. They have brains but they have found easy ways to get what they want, ways that are not open to short, fat, dumpy, aging, guys who are going to seed like me. If you ask them the right questions you may get surprisingly intelligent answers.

I used to argue this with a six foot something accountant/bully character who I worked for in Orillia. He liked to say, "Why should I learn computers when I can hire an asshole like you to do it for me?" I'd tell him that just because he was big didn't mean he couldn't use his brain. He'd tell me that it was always the little guy with something to prove who want to play Parcheesi at parties. Later I'd have to apologize for upsetting him since he had dangerously high blood pressure.

There's a beautiful woman where I work who has a breathtaking body, a fabulous face, healthy hair, and a perfect airhead laugh. She dresses carefully, wears too much make up and looks like a Barbie Doll. One day I'm going to test my theory and ask her a question.

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: SINSULL
Date: 27 Jan 01 - 01:02 PM

Little Neo - word of advice. Don't use helium to fill the blow up doll. And don't place him too near the candle.

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: Little Hawk
Date: 27 Jan 01 - 01:04 PM

The trouble with blow up dolls is they puncture at inopportune moments. At least, that's what flattop told me, and he's quite well-informed.

- LH

p.s. By the way, I'm sick of these endless, verbose postings that go on and on forever, paragraph after paragraph, as if everyone would be fascinated, and I want you all to stop it right now! Y' got something to say, get it over with quick! Brevity is the soul of wit. :-)

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: Little Neophyte
Date: 27 Jan 01 - 01:11 PM

Amos, do you remember that bedroom scene from the movie 'Being There' with Peter Sellers?

SINSULL, I plan to fill my boy doll with warm water.

Little Neo

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: Little Neophyte
Date: 27 Jan 01 - 01:14 PM

Little Hawk, that is why I always keep a roll of duct tape on hand.

Little Neo

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: flattop
Date: 27 Jan 01 - 01:37 PM

What are you trying to say Little Hawk? Did someone slap you down and teach you a lesson in prose?

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: Amos
Date: 27 Jan 01 - 01:38 PM

Now there's Canadian ingenuity for you! :>))

A

Subject: RE: Internet romance part 2
From: hesperis
Date: 28 Jan 01 - 01:25 PM

Well, as I personally don't really like to manipulate people, especially in a mean way, I read "the rules" and I asked why they'd put those rules in there. And the answer I came up with is "so that you can learn to treat yourself with respect."

A lot of women do those so-called "rules" naturally, without thinking about it. They're the ones who are comfortable being surrounded by guys, because they act as if their own self is valuable. They also treat the guys with respect.

Some women don't know how to treat themselves as valuable people with a life of their own. These people sit around by the phone waiting for the guy to call, because they can't think of anything better to do. These are the people who, as soon as they meet an attractive man, decide how many children they're going to have, and what kind of house they're going to live in, and who they're going to invite to the wedding. These are the people who play the real games, like whining, making the guy feel guilty for any little thing, emotional blackmail, and so on, to try to tie that life to theirs because they can't stand the echoing emptiness of their own heads.

They are waiting for a guy to come and fill them, and make them valuable. If a man does, he is trapped into giving her an identity. That's not a healthy way to make a relationship! No other person can do that! Only you can make yourself valuable, by doing what is important to you.

After I read the book, I threw the rules out, because I understood the concepts behind them.

Those same "manipulative" rules, are the only thing standing between some men and being swallowed whole by the women in their lives.

If a woman is acting out of those rules, she is more likely to treat the man with care. She is less likely to throw a fit if he wants time alone, or time to visit HIS friends. She is less likely to manipulate him by using sex as a carrot that he never quite gets. When she has a headache, she really has a headache, and it's not some weird game! She is more likely to be secure in the relationship, and not freaking out that he's seeing someone on te side, because she knows that she's valuable. She also knows, that if he doesn't understand how valuable she is, that there are other guys who will.

Maybe by following those rules, they can have the life they always dreamed of, and develop real self-esteem on the way.

The goal is eventually to throw the rules away, and act as natural humans beings who love each other. I was lucky to be able to understand that, and go straight to that step.

If you look at the underlying psychological reasons that the authors chose those rules, it makes perfect sense.

And yes, like any other system, there will be some people who take it over, and do it in a way that is unkind. Christianity preached love and peace, and the Church sowed war and hatred. Christ's message is stil valuable, if you read between the lines.

"The Rules" is about women's self-respect, and personal romantic power. So of course, some people are going to use it out of weakness, and sow pain.

People who actually do it right, are less likely to be manipulative. They're too busy to act in any way that is not direct, and too respectful of themselves to act in a way that is dishonourable. Which is a bonus to the man.

(Anyway... sorry that was so long! I get really fired up about this subject!)