Where Everybody Knows You're Numb

Nightowlhoot3 wrote:

---

 

Maybe, Psych, your list wasn't really what you actually wanted in a partner, but what you thought you wanted, or what would be ideal. I know that sounds like jabberwoky, but maybe if you look at the women with whom you've fallen in love over the last twenty years or so, you'll find commonalities, and those are what actually comprise your list.

no not jabberwoky i think thats probably true. what we think we want and what actually attracts us are not necessarily the same things. and thats often the catch. yes there are commonalities among the women ive loved. wild, crazy, edgy, artistic, passionate are all common but the catch 22 is that those are also the reasons why i got out of those relationships. those things can also be crazymaking. what first attracts later may chafe...which is where the list making comes in. once you realize that you have a pattern that isnt working you try and change the pattern, right? only problem is that if thats what attracts, thats what attracts and anything else may be forced. the only thing worse than having a relationship that drives you mad is having a relationship that leaves you in a state of ennui.  im thinkin  if you cant enter with 100 percent of your heart engaged its prolly not gonna work.

If one has wildly successful relationships throughout their lives then there's no reason to break the cycle,

oh heck if any relationship were wildly successful there would be no reason to have another. wed all still be on the first good one. i think its common for people to find attractive certain things that later bug the hell out of them. from the women ive had relationships with most have said they were attracted by my independence and my active life and at the end of the relationship theyve complained about my independence and about my always being busy. ive written about harville hendrix before. hes written a couple of books on this subject that i find to ring true for me.  his take is that we are attracted to people who represent the mirror image of the places where we are stuck in life and that the attraction represents an opportunity to work thru those issues safely.

I suppose, but for me, that's not been the case. I've learned important lessons with each past relationship, and so think they were "timely" -- perhaps what I "needed" at the moment to teach me something about "me." Once that something has been learned, though, what's left, and does one want to spend the rest of their life with that?

maybe not all relationships should survive. maybe they come into our lives just for the growth opp. but, the having learned the lesson to be taken reminds me of that attraction due to issues thing that hendrix was referring to. presumably if the lesson was learned on one side there is a corresponding lesson to be taken on the other. maybe then there can be two who move forward beyond that place of stuckness that originally brought them together?

if successful one would think that there would be many new things coming into the relationship from both people and that all of those new places represent an opportunity to grow together or drift apart.

 something a former love shared with the current object of our affection, or maybe they spark something missing in the last relationship. It does seem to all be relative, doesn't it, and sometimes based more on what we don't want (the "again" is silent) i

i think what we dont want or cant deal with is easier than determining what we do want. i can say categorically i wouldnt want to walk on eggshells in a relationship. i dont want to hear myself sigh all the time because its time to "process" yet again. lol. and this becomes maybe the point you were talking about earlier where you can control the not falling in love. this isnt so hard when its clearly painful but when those lines are not so clearly drawn it becomes a bit harder.

I think it beneficial to maybe look at the process from the perspective of one's self first, rather than the other person. "I want to be with a person who makes me feel ________." I want to be with a person who causes me to _______." Here's one which just popped into my head: "I want to be with a person who not only listens, but hears me."

yes and i think those youve listed are  important things in any relationship and ones that should be taken seriously in the weed in weed out of it all. two things come to mind tho, sometimes ya gots most of it but not all and then what do ya do?  and then there is that quote from marcus somebody or other who said there is nothing that training cannot accomplish or something like that:)

 and not allow our hearts to go further than the initial sigh. And too, maybe we can be "in love with" a person, but leave it only at that, and be "OK" with that, because we have a firm understanding that they're not "partner" material for us

i think this only works if they dont feel the same way. if they are in love with you too and that chemistry is sustained sooner or later theres gonna be that oh what the hell body slam up against some flat surface to contend with. there are few things hotter than that slow build up of sexual tension.

-- that they would not be "good" for us in the long term. I think we're "allowed" to love a lot of people at once.

sigh...if only:)





It would seem the idea scenario would be to have this a fluid, rather than rigid thing. Of course, that would require both parties wanting it, and I can see where they person with the most power might be reluctant to do that. Isn't it always true, that the person who is the least "invested" in the relationship is the one who typically has the power in that relationship, and the one who will struggle to whatever ends to make it "work" the least?

as a rule sure but thats because they are the ones who go around trying to make it work. if they stopped doing that the relationship might shift the other way.  people in relationship are getting at least some of their needs met on both sides even if its not 50/50. many people assume the power lies with the other without recognizing their own.  my experience with equally shared power or way mismatched power is that it leads to a power struggle and a lot of fighting. my last long relationship was 60/40 in my favor my current relationship 60/40 in her favor. waving fan and peeling grapes:)  but  i also recognize that i can say no if i want to and mean it and that were i to do so that power balance would abruptly shift in my favor.  if no werent a possibility wed be in the 80/20 range and that leads to an emotional crapfest too.

 ... if we've truly internalized our lists, then it stands to reason we'd find ourselves more attracted to people who meet some of the criteria.

youd think so. i dunno over the years ive had people set me up with some fine women who had all sorts of those qualities on any list id make but there was no chemistry. which maybe goes back to your question about friends or partners. i have welcomed some into my life as friends tho they wouldnt have worked as a partner.

dating seems a lost art these days. its fun to try out many different types of people and many types of relationships until you find one that sizzles!

Agreed. I think life-long lesbians are at a bit of a disadvantage here, in that many of us didn't have that high school dating education as did our straight counterparts. And the nuances of actually "having" the date, and both parties KNOWING it's a "date" ... :) oy.

---

lol. oh yeah.

---

 

---

 

Psych Lit wrote:

---

Nightowlhoot3 wrote:

---

These are, IMO all great replies, and for them, I thank you.

Usually, when I post an open ended question like this, I already have "my" answers in mind. Not so, this time, though.

I get the feeling though, that maybe I should at least have in the back of my mind some sort of ... for lack of a better, less judgmental sounding word, "criteria." Especially for the partnership thing.

there have been times in my life when single that i compiled lists of desirable qualities to look for in others but it never seemed to work as a strategy for me. i remember things on my old lists like must be super intelligent and gainfully employed, saintly, fiery hot and all of those kinds of laundry list things but what ive discovered is that there is no rational take on that irrational thing called love. it hits when you least expect it and it doesnt give a damn whats on the list!

Well? Maybe that has to do, somewhat, with how ingrained your list is. See ... there are people, women, with whom I've simply "not allowed" myself to fall in love. Happened the minute I found out they were straight. Yeah, I know, things can change, bla bla bla, but I closed the book on falling in love with straight women decades ago. I really did. The bad news, of course, is when they later become lesbian, you can't really "go back" and undo that mental/emotional barrier, and take it down. 

Maybe, Psych, your list wasn't really what you actually wanted in a partner, but what you thought you wanted, or what would be ideal. I know that sounds like jabberwoky, but maybe if you look at the women with whom you've fallen in love over the last twenty years or so, you'll find commonalities, and those are what actually comprise your list. 

If one has wildly successful relationships throughout their lives then there's no reason to break the cycle, I suppose, but for me, that's not been the case. I've learned important lessons with each past relationship, and so think they were "timely" -- perhaps what I "needed" at the moment to teach me something about "me." Once that something has been learned, though, what's left, and does one want to spend the rest of their life with that?

Sometimes, I think we can fall into the emotional trap of "old habits" when/as we fall in love. Perhaps it's a hint of the familiar -- something a former love shared with the current object of our affection, or maybe they spark something missing in the last relationship. It does seem to all be relative, doesn't it, and sometimes based more on what we don't want (the "again" is silent) in a relationship more than what we do. Had I, for instance, not been forced to return, however momentarily, to the closet for a past partner when he mother stormed into our home, after calling me from the airport HERE IN MY TOWN and saying: "I'm at the airport -- come pick me up" I probably wouldn't have that on my list as things I don't want to do again. Maybe if I'd read it on someone else's list, I might have thought a little more carefully about getting involved with that partner in the first place.

I flip back and forth a lot on some of these things, I know. Sometimes, I throw up my hands, thinking maybe I don't know what's best for me, and maybe "fate" is more likely to make the better selections for my heart, but that doesn't seem to work out too well, really.

I think it beneficial to maybe look at the process from the perspective of one's self first, rather than the other person. "I want to be with a person who makes me feel ________." I want to be with a person who causes me to _______." Here's one which just popped into my head: "I want to be with a person who not only listens, but hears me."

Then come, I think the "little" things, which I suppose are negotiable.
 
"I want to be with a woman who walks with and not in front of me."

"I want to be with a woman who doesn't interrupt me."

Those kinds of things, though, seem to be "groupable" falling under the umbrella of "considerate."

Anyway, I guess what I started to say, was ... ah, damn. Phone rang, and now, I've forgotten. :) And it was IMPORTANT, TOO! LOL.

Maybe if the list is deeply internalized, then when "required" elements are not present in a person, some sort of emotional red flag goes up, which can cause us to back away from the person of our lustful desire, and not allow our hearts to go further than the initial sigh. And too, maybe we can be "in love with" a person, but leave it only at that, and be "OK" with that, because we have a firm understanding that they're not "partner" material for us -- that they would not be "good" for us in the long term. I think we're "allowed" to love a lot of people at once. Some relationships permit having sex outside the relationship, or bring a third person inside their already existing one although that's not my cup of tea. 

  



you cant plan for it or force it to happen or try and pick a winner. it happens or it doesnt.  and i think thats prolly a good thing. most of those ive fallen in love with have had one or two of the things on any list ive made but never, not once, all of them or even most of them. i think how the balance works in a relationship is of more importance. and perhaps one of the reasons the list idea doesnt work for me is that it creates a situation where the power balance gets skewed. 50/50 doesnt work for me. 60/40 works a lot better but 80/20 doesnt work either. im not talking about things like how the expressions of love and the work load gets shared but something a lot more ethereal i guess thats what i mean by the balance of "power."

i dont think many of us want to think of the power dynamics in a relationship but they are there.


It would seem the idea scenario would be to have this a fluid, rather than rigid thing. Of course, that would require both parties wanting it, and I can see where they person with the most power might be reluctant to do that. Isn't it always true, that the person who is the least "invested" in the relationship is the one who typically has the power in that relationship, and the one who will struggle to whatever ends to make it "work" the least?



and i think that is an important aspect of desire no matter how the equation gets split. ive not done well either when deciding to try with people who are a lot like me in temperament or interests. so the differences also come into that aspect of desire.

but most of all i think when we try and analyze or scientize this wonderful yet whacky emotion we close off a lot of other possibilities that might come in packages that we hadnt considered.

Yeah, I agree with that. I think, though, the "key" is "have considered." Just seems to me that for a lot (and in the past, me, too) everything is forfeited for that "zing went the strings of my heart" thing, and I think that might be in part because our hearts are acting out of habit rather than wise guidance. In other words ... if we've truly internalized our lists, then it stands to reason we'd find ourselves more attracted to people who meet some of the criteria. We already do that to some extent, right? When we're recently out of a relationship, and we bump into a person who may posess the same qualities which drove us from the past relationship, doesn't our heart slam shut when faced with the same in different skin? And isn't that because our "gut" barks out some: "Danger, Will Robinson" alert? I'm just wondering if that can't be expanded, and effected even without having actually experienced the "negative" in the past. A sort of "pre-emptive" caution which comes not from our wounded histories, but rather from our advanced, and prudent decisions about what we need. Maybe our understanding of what we "need" is an age-related thing, too. At 20 or 30, perhaps it doesn't matter quite as much as it does 30 years later. Which brings us to the advisablility of "marrying" at 20 or 30, but that's another thread. :)

 

dating seems a lost art these days. its fun to try out many different types of people and many types of relationships until you find one that sizzles!

Agreed. I think life-long lesbians are at a bit of a disadvantage here, in that many of us didn't have that high school dating education as did our straight counterparts. And the nuances of actually "having" the date, and both parties KNOWING it's a "date" ... :) oy.

---

---

These are, IMO all great replies, and for them, I thank you.

Usually, when I post an open ended question like this, I already have "my" answers in mind. Not so, this time, though.

I get the feeling though, that maybe I should at least have in the back of my mind some sort of ... for lack of a better, less judgmental sounding word, "criteria." Especially for the partnership thing.

First, I guess I need to figure out if I'd look for the same qualities in a partner I would in a friend. Mostly, the answer would be "yes" but I'm not certain it would be a 100% "yes."

"Honest"

That would probably be at the top of my list for both. I'm really pretty damn intolerant of liars. I just am. Don't lie to me, (or about me) and don't steal from me, period. I can think of precious little I wouldn't give a person who asked for it, but if they just swipe it, it really bothers me -- especially if they're a friend, and a guest in my home. I've had that happen a couple of times, and am still bothered by it. I think a part of that is the simple fact that theft, sneaky, when you aren't looking theft,  is, IMO dishonest, and we're right back to the honesty thing.

I could never be at all closeted for a partner again. I did for a few weeks once, and it was one of those decisions I still regret. I don't know if I could do that for a friend, though. I couldn't LIE about it, but could I live with the lie of omission? Hmmm. Not sure, really. In this same vein, I could never be with a partner who was closeted. Too many complications, and it never works out anyway. I don't want to let someone else's lie -- someone I care about -- be forced upon me, and turn me into a liar too. We're still on honesty, hunh. OK, that's one -- and one for both.

"Supportive."

Covers a lot of territory.

In both a partner, and a friendship, I want to be around a person who won't tell me over and over again that my dreams are ridiculous. That it can't happen. That I should just drop it, and try something else LIKE _________. If I wanted to do "LIKE _______." There's a good chance I'd already be doing it. I'm open to and appreciative of ways to build on things which had not yet occurred to me, but I've been around too many people who were too eager to tell me, unasked,  "that" won't work, be it an idea for an invention, or a way to arrange a room, or the creation of a new kind of job, or a spur of the moment trip. I can live quite happily with "Cool! Hey, maybe you could ALSO ..." but not: "That's just stupid. Grow up." I marvel at the patience my best RT friend has with me sometimes. LOL. Whenever I take off on one of my wild flights of fancy, she is always, always "right there" supporting my endeavor, however unlikely, until we've together proven it CAN or CANNOT be done. In the end, regardless of the outcome, it always leaves us both with a good feeling. Amazing, how many times it CAN be done, when everyone is telling you it can't, btw. But don't tell me it can't be done. At least not if you want me to drop it. In a friend, I want someone willing to try some of those wild things with me. I don't know so much that I need that in a partner -- I mean, if the partner wants to do something else, that's cool -- I'll just go do that thing with my friend, and we can all meet up later. I'm not one of these "joined at the hips" kinda partners. Besides -- when you do things separately, then you get to swap stories at the end of the day with one another. Just as a footnote ... I don't want someone to lie to me, and tell me they're supportive of something they're not. I just like to be around people who are open to new ideas, and flexible, I guess. Mostly, I want (from both friends and partners) someone who encourages me to grow. So many people seem threatened by the growth of their friends or partners, and that's always been sort of puzzling, in a counterintuitive way, to me. For what purpose do we form these relationships, if not to support and have supported endeavors and dreams? I know some people who seem absolutely allergic to brainstorming. Drives me up a wall. LOL. I keep trying to gently interject that yes, that may be so, but in brainstorming, really, initially, you try to just get all the ideas out, without judgment being passed on them, and THEN you begin to evaluate their worth and feasiblity. Some people just cannot seem to do that, though. Some of the best ideas I've ever had came from some of the worst ideas I've ever had, because somewhere, buried in that worst idea was a valuable nugget from which to extrapolate and upon which to build. 

"Sensitivity/Vulnerability" 

This one ... I'm still working out the specific on. I have empathy and sympathy for people with wounded hearts, and when it comes to friends, I'm willing to accept that "closed heart" distancing, but not from a partner. I've too many times gone into relationships (of both kinds) thinking that if I'm just patient long enough, show them time and time again that they've no reason to fear me, and every reason to trust me, then one day they will eventually see that. That may still be true, but when it comes to partnerships ... there are just too many other things which also need to be worked through, and I think I'm finally just at a stage in my life, were I at least sort of need to have that at the outset as a "given." I don't want to spend years outside that closed door, waiting, listening for the lock on the other side to slide open. By the time two people declare themselves partners, that door should, IMO already be open. If it's not, then it's too soon to call it a partnership. 

"Priority"

For some reason, I feel a little sheepish even saying this out loud -- it feels unseemly -- but I don't ever again want to be in a partnership where, when it comes to personal relationships, our partnership isn't at the top of the list. 

This is dicey with people who have kids, I know. It's not, in my mind of choosing one over the other, but for me, at least, a partnership is about being, while not joined at the hip, at least cohesive in terms of the impact others may have upon that relationship. We all of us have other, vital relationships, and a "good" partner, will, I believe, support those other relationships in which we're in. I believe there are times partners can agree to make the kids "the priority" for them at any given time, and certainly, sacrifices are made for those other relationships, and that's cool too. But I've this notion that both parties in a primary partnership need to work to see that their time is equally honored. If, for instance, an elderly parent or child is hurting, or really needing companionship, then yeah, of course the one night out that week may be offered up for the greater good. But there is, I believe, a line in there somewhere, too. There is nurturing, and there is martyrdom and that line falls somewhere betwixt the two. I guess I just believe it's called your PRIMARY relationship for a reason. That's not compatible with everyone, I know, and I respect the differing points of view. That just happens to be mine, and so it's best for me to find someone who feels similarly. Right now, for instance, I'm the "primary" caregiver of my mother. I honor that relationship, and will do all within my power to do right by it. If that means I can't, for instance, drop everything here, including her, and move across the country, and I've exhausted all other options and am left with only that, and that is something I simply cannot do, then it's not the right time for me to be in a primary relationship with someone else. Hopefully, things can be worked out before it comes to something that drastic, but when it can't, I think one needs to make choices -- WITH the input of others involved.    

Soooooo I'm still working on my "list." I guess this is about as far as I've gotten for right now, but it seems a topic worth revisiting, so I may be back with more thoughts later. :)

-- Edited by Nightowlhoot3 at 14:20, 2009-01-04

Nightowlhoot3 wrote:

---

What are the top five qualities/things do you look for/require in/from a friendship?

Other than patience with overuse of slashes, I mean.

Are those the same five things you'd ask for in a partnership/marriage?

(See, I just KNEW I had at least one more slash in me ... LOL)

Do you see a primary partnership as a friendship with benefits? By that, I mean, do you think the relationship should meet all the friendship criteria, and then some, or is it a somewhat different set of requirements?

-- Edited by Nightowlhoot3 at 11:48, 2009-01-03

---

no to the last.  sexual expression within a love relationship is for me an expression of the love within the relationship. friends with bennies is more about a whole lot of other things not all of which are bad or misplaced:)

in friendships i look for people who are attuned to growth both interior and exterior

those who are adventurous

those who are respectful of the friendship and of me and that would include loyalty in the spiritual sense if that makes sense

those who are capable of more than the frivolous or the superficial

even handedness, even moodedness,

 

and while i would want all of those things in a partner id also want chemistry, fidelity in all forms, proximity, kindness, gentleness, the capacity for real and deepening love not the selfish sort that gets a lot of airplay around v day 

things i look for in a primary partner (in no particular order, cause ALL are important to me):

1. being loved and loving the other person because of most things and despite the not so great things....acceptance of each other.

2. expressiveness/openess/ablity to share/communication/able to forgive

3. fun/able to laugh

4. intelligence

5. monagamy/fidelity/loyalty

pretty much those same qualities except for the sexual fidelity part are the same that i look for in friends.


(sorry for the over-use of slashes.... )

-- Edited by My Turn at 14:17, 2009-01-03