How many times have you been in love?

Been in love: 2 times
Been in relationship: 0 times

I guess I am kind of a nutcase, considering I am 36 years old now.

I am not outgoing at all, so the only new people I meet are either new direct co-workers (hardly happening) or people on the internet. The 2 persons I mentioned before I actually met on the internet about 14-15 years ago. Visiting them in person wasn't the "horror scenario" as people like to paint it, but (for reasons too complex to share here) it ultimately didn't work out in either case and it remained at 1 visit each (after months of online conversations).
And in the first case I'd say now that I probably was in love back then, but back then I didn't feel sure about it.

So in the end I don't naturally encounter possibilities to fall in love, my "demands" are very high or specific, while what I "offer" is also extremely specific and hard to get along with, and I also need quite a while to actually figure out that I am in love.
 
Joined
Jun 2, 2012
Messages
4,691
BTW @Darth Tagnan; , you're really asking the pondering questions here these days. Just for fun, or are you having some introspective mid-life events?

I'm always asking "pondering" questions - though not always out loud :)

My whole life has been an introspective event, so far.

But it's essentially just for fun, for the most part. That said, I find the Watch a relatively quiet place these days - and I want to contribute a little to provoke some exchanges, if I can.
 
Hard to define where to draw the line between infatuation and love, I've probably been "in love" with somewhere around 30 different girls. But in regards to actually saying "I love you" to a woman that's not my mother nor my daughter, 4. That feels like a more reasonable number. ;)

This is an interesting use of words. You'd have thought that infatuation would be a stronger version of love than just love & therefore a situation more prone to eliciting the phrase "I love you" than regular family platonic love.
 
Joined
Nov 1, 2014
Messages
4,754
Just a reminder about saying words. Unreturned love or love you didn't want to admit (example - already a spouse) is still love. And, at least in my experience, lasts the longest. Maybe I'll think differently once I'm dead. ;)
 
Joined
Apr 12, 2009
Messages
23,459
Never! The dance of getting to know someone intimately is too much for me so I avoid it. Funny though; I'm a bodybuilder and put lots of time into my appearance, so everyone around me in real-world land is under the assumption I'm a player of sorts. I just let them run with it but little do they know haha.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Dec 12, 2007
Messages
211
Been in love: 2 times
Been in relationship: 0 times

I guess I am kind of a nutcase, considering I am 36 years old now.

I am not outgoing at all, so the only new people I meet are either new direct co-workers (hardly happening) or people on the internet. The 2 persons I mentioned before I actually met on the internet about 14-15 years ago. Visiting them in person wasn't the "horror scenario" as people like to paint it, but (for reasons too complex to share here) it ultimately didn't work out in either case and it remained at 1 visit each (after months of online conversations).
And in the first case I'd say now that I probably was in love back then, but back then I didn't feel sure about it.

So in the end I don't naturally encounter possibilities to fall in love, my "demands" are very high or specific, while what I "offer" is also extremely specific and hard to get along with, and I also need quite a while to actually figure out that I am in love.


It's not as unusual as you might think.

I was a late bloomer myself - and my first real relationship didn't happen until I was 26 or 27.

I never cared for the "norm" in terms of social interactions and ways to meet women. I despise bars and places like that.

Also, as a teenager I was entirely absorbed in gaming and was very out-of-shape, so it's not like I had a ton of offers.

As an adult, I have had my share of encounters and relationships - but most of those have been initiated "online" - through dating sites or whatever. Mostly for comfort reasons - and I find myself getting a reasonable amount of attention, as I'm apparently quite appealing in writing ;)

My approach is to let them take the initiative. It's so much easier that way.

But it's not exactly a brilliant plan when it comes to being in love. In fact, I haven't been in love with any of the women I've been involved with. I've GROWN to love (some of) them - but that's not the same thing, and it's usually around the time when they're sick of not feeling they're needed and they leave that I realise it.

So, I can't say I've been terribly good at that.

One might say I'm a complete moron for not following my heart more.

Which is why I've been on an extended break from relationships. I don't really see how it would fit into my current plans. Obviously, I want love and I don't think it's smart to be by yourself as a human being.

But I honestly don't know if there's a realistic chance of meeting a woman "naturally" that I will fall in love with. Because, like you, I'm not outgoing and I don't meet a lot of them.
 
As for love and being "in love" - I consider them two very, very different things.

Not that I have a lot of experience with the latter, mind you. Well, except that I've had a number of women feeling that way about me. At least, according to them - and they've given me no reason to doubt it, at least not at first.

Which is why I can say with reasonable assurance that it's quite the illusion :)

Well, not necessarily. The obvious explanation is the whole biologically conditioned propagation thing.

But, if that is so - then why do we need two separate concepts of being horny and being in love?

Infatuation? To me, that's just wanting to fuck someone. As in, being horny because you haven't yet done it to your satisfaction.

I'm sure I don't need to tell you that a lot of people don't need to be in love to propagate with pleasure.

I suppose truly being "in love" might be some sort of biological insurance policy for short-term parenthood? Well, who knows - but it's quite flawed in that way, as it's rarely mutual.

I do know, however, that I have a relatively easy time actually loving another person. At least, I've grown to love most of the women I've been close to for extended periods of time.

Why is that? I really don't know. I do know that I never enter into a relationship unless I fully believe we're compatible in the longer term. Not that I've been right about that - so far, but I've certainly believed it.

Truth be told, I actually did enter into a relationship once against my better judgment. It wasn't easy for her to persuade me, though.

But it was just as terrible a mistake as you might imagine.

So, for me, it doesn't really take much more than liking and respecting another person for me to be able to love them. I don't even need to be terribly attracted to them - and I can love males as well, though in a platonic sense, as I'm not sexually aroused by anything expect adult females. Sometimes, I find that regretful - as I think I would be a lot more compatible with a male - but whatever.

It's also been my experience that the VAST majority of females I've dated or had "romantically charged" talks with - have had being "in love" as a prerequisite for relationships. Not just a prerequisite - but THE dominant factor.

To me, that's just stupid - and asking for trouble. I'm very much a living example of why that is definitely so.

So, I've never pursued the feeling of being in love - and while I would like to try it in a mutual sense - I fear that it would cloud my otherwise reasonable judgment when it comes to long-term compatibility.

I think it's much, much, MUCH more important that you like each other as people - and you're able to actually see the other person in a relatively clear light.

So, for my part, I think the people who manage to stay together after having been in love - have been extremely lucky, rather than particularly smart in a strategic sense.
 
I think I have this ridiculous notion of the person I have wanted all my life but never found so I settled for whatever looked good-smelled good-sounded good,etc. Or what was available at the time. So many times I thought I found her but she was with somebody else. Is it possible that invoking Freud would lead us to the conclusion that men want someone like their mother? Someone who loves unconditional, and does the old traditional things like cooking and cleaning but is sexual appealing to us as well? Funny, forgiving,loving without being clinging? Someone I know who wants me and is always thinking about me as much as I am them? Someone who when you look in each others eyes, the rest of the world stops existing. A spiritual half of your soul but not a soul mate.

I probably just showed my baby boomer status by saying that but I can tell you I have never found that person in the western world and probably never will. Western women have changed drastically, starting with my generation. Cheating became a norm, not saying it was only women who cheat and women today only seem to be after what you have or what you can do for them. I am probably average looking, workout a lot and people say I look much younger then I am. Women flirt all the time with me but you can tell by the kind of questions they ask what they are trying to find out. "Could he support me and what would I do with more income? Does he have a place I can move in? Would he support my kid(kids)" Sorrry. I am so done with that.

I have come to the conclusion that falling in love is so very teenager and not such a bad thing but I cant get over now being adult and having experiences where a woman can:
!. ruin my relationships especially my family and kids.
a. subject me to her crazy family much later in the relationship after its too late to pull out(literally and figuratively) Really, I think dinner's with families should be the norm again before anything serious so someone can snap me out of it in time.

2. wreck me financially. I mean it. Why am I every woman's savior? I have paid enough bills for 3 lifetimes. Sometimes I wonder if I had commited really bad crimes against humanity in a past life.
I am learning to say no however.

3. push my good natured and giving personality to the limit to the point where I hate myself for giving in for sex or a date of company or what have you. I love newness and excitement as much as anyone but I am taking a leave of absence from relationships also. My apartment has strict rules against people moving in which I think I am going to post on the fridge in big bold letters.

4. I want to emphasize that I believe time is to tell whether you can trust someone and are you compatible. I now believe firmly that I am so done with jumping into bed right away. In fact I think at least six months or real communication before that stage. But as I told a woman the other day, I am not looking, this time of my life is now reserved for me and working on myself. I'm back to playing music again, working out and getting involved in church duties to help out. Running my business and spending 3- 4 nights a week with my teenagers.

I think love is something that resides in the person. Some have it. Some don't. Love makes you want to be a better person. I see people I help all the time with small acts of kindness and it can brighten their day. Love is as easy as becoming aware. Love is within you.
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
1,397
Location
USA-Michigan
I think I have this ridiculous notion of the person I have wanted all my life but never found so I settled for whatever looked good-smelled good-sounded good,etc. Or what was available at the time. So many times I thought I found her but she was with somebody else. Is it possible that invoking Freud would lead us to the conclusion that men want someone like their mother? Someone who loves unconditional, and does the old traditional things like cooking and cleaning but is sexual appealing to us as well? Funny, forgiving,loving without being clinging? Someone I know who wants me and is always thinking about me as much as I am them? Someone who when you look in each others eyes, the rest of the world stops existing. A spiritual half of your soul but not a soul mate.

I probably just showed my baby boomer status by saying that but I can tell you I have never found that person in the western world and probably never will. Western women have changed drastically, starting with my generation. Cheating became a norm, not saying it was only women who cheat and women today only seem to be after what you have or what you can do for them. I am probably average looking, workout a lot and people say I look much younger then I am. Women flirt all the time with me but you can tell by the kind of questions they ask what they are trying to find out. "Could he support me and what would I do with more income? Does he have a place I can move in? Would he support my kid(kids)" Sorrry. I am so done with that.
You can’t have the ‘best’ of both worlds. If you like to have a traditional minded woman, a woman finding satisfaction in putting her husband and her children first, and enjoys cleaning and cooking all day and changes her apron into a more appealing outfit the minute her guy walks in, you have to accept the fact that such a woman depends on a man to provide the income.

A woman that considers financial independence to be important will pursue a career and a partner that accepts that at times the demands of her job will interfere with wishes of husband and children, and a husband that is willing to do half of the cleaning and cooking and the child care, himself, for she - like him - is away for 40+ hours, making money elsewhere. And of course, when at home, such an independent woman expects an equal say (and room to take the initiative) in many other areas as well, areas that have little to do with housekeeping and cooking.
I gather you find such a woman less attractive and prefer a woman you saw in the nineteen forties and fifties, where only unmarried women had an (unimportant, helping/assisting, service oriented) job. The other side of the coin is of course those women need to look for men (needing men) to be their first and foremost financial provider. But you seem not to like that side.
 
Last edited:
I'm not really sure we can categorize people in quite so stereotypical a fashion. Cultural norms can't be ignored, certainly - but we're all individuals and we all have the ability to set ourselves apart from the norm.

From my point of view, it sounds a little like redman5427 thinks of relationships as some kind of mutually beneficial trade - which, in my opinion, will tend to lead to exactly that - a trade.

But in 9 out of 10 trades - one party will come out on top.

If you go around thinking that you "do this" for her and so she should "do that" for you - then such an arrangement can only work if you're both on the same page in terms of the value of whatever you have to offer.

In my experience, that's not the most successful approach - unless you're extremely good at predicting future behavior and how people change once they get what they think they want.

That's often the problem with people, I find. They think they want something or need something - and yet they don't actually know, because how could they know?

How can you know if you want to be rich and you're willing to sacrifice everything for it - when you haven't actually BEEN rich?

How can you know if you want to be a parent if you haven't actually been one, and so on.

No, personally, I don't think of a partnership/relationship as a trade.

My own (probably very naive concept) is that it (should be) a very mutual desire to share life and all that's good and bad about it. The mutual intention of compromise and sacrifice - because it's all worth it, and because you truly believe in a future together.

However, it should never be at the cost of yourself or your needs. No one should ever have to change who they are - at the core - because we can't. Which is partly why so many relationships fail.

There seems to be a tendency to expect that kind of change - which is, of course, futile.

So, of course, finding a "soulmate" or a strong match is the tricky part. I honestly don't think there's a particular strategy that will lead you to such a person.

I think you can "up your chances" to a certain degree, but even the most solid strategy would represent a small portion of what's required in a combined sense.

As in: Luck and fortunate circumstance.

Strategy might be 5-10% - and the rest would be luck and circumstance.

Circumstance include things way beyond our control - such as our core personalities.

I do believe there are people with core personalities that are compatible with a much wider range than other people.

It's hard to know and it's certainly not an exact science.

But if you look at it as a trade - or as joining based on obligation and expectations that haven't been carefully laid out and agreed upon beforehand - then I don't see how it could ever work.
 
Oh, and though I can't claim to have had many successful relationships: My ultimate advice for my fellow heterosexual males is very simple indeed:

Do NOT follow your cock. It taints everything from the beginning - and you never, ever, want to give another person that kind of power, because it will skew everything from the beginning.

Trust me, all things being equal: women want sex just as much as you do - if not more.

But sex should never be something you give or you get in return for something else. It should always be a natural consequence of mutual attraction and desire.

If it's not - then something primal or basic is wrong - and though it's not necessarily impossible to fix, it can be very hard to change.

It might sound like a very obvious thing - but I can't tell you how many times I've seen that sort of imbalance utterly ruin everything in a relationship - some of my own included.
 
Back
Top Bottom