I was disappointed in your response. Did you recognize frank’s quote as my response to one of your posts? You kept encouraging me to tell everyone what I thought. Then you come back with a bullshit response beating your chest like a (male) ape. “I’m not afraid,” “That’s fucked up.” Did you even read what I wrote. — T Clark

I was responding to what Tiff wrote which included a comment about a violent intimate relationship that ultimately resulted in a great deal of difficulty for her. I think you are confusing the profound psychological and emotional fear one has when threatened with violence with some type of fear you have disappointing or saying something that may offend an authoritative figure, the interpersonal checks and balances that makes us conscious of our behaviour.

I believe in equality through and through and the idea of someone controlling me makes me swell up, but despite this men do have that authoritative presence. I want to impress him, I want him to like me, so I watch how I behave. When I say that I am not afraid of most men, it is because most men do not have that authoritative presence over me (a kind of respectful indifference) and my eyes light up into flames of rage when a man attempts to impose that authority over me. O hellll no. However, if such a man attempted this and had no empathy, that the more I responded the worse he became, a man without a conscience and no consciousness of his behaviour, his aggression and ego becomes dangerous and even life-threatening. That is when I stop and feel fear.

You are supposed to feel safe at home, your partner is supposed to protect you and admire you so this little jab at me is really your silly little ego, and being my virtual uncle I am sure you know that I know you are an emotional little mushy thing if ever there was one.

The exchange of Valentine's Day gifts is not a good example of a meaningful condition for the relationship to continue forward, and I would doubt many real relationships end for failure to remember the day.. — Hanover

Valentine's Day has zero value other than economically. It is just an archaic exchange of objects that is largely borne from a self-interested obligation and not because there is any authenticity in the exchange. Society tells you 'this is how you show your love' and people oblige thinking that buying a box of chocolates proves some romantic unity. How is this love between you both unique and real if you are doing what everyone else is doing? Valentines Day reeks of globalisation. It is economics.

I would rather a guy buy me breakfast and tell me he is only doing it because he knows I like porridge and wants to shag me later. This is what friends would do. Whereas without friendship, there would be this awkward tension as though if the guy forgot Valentine's Day then that shows he does not love her and he has to apologise and make it up to her or whatever the fuck people do in these strange rituals, because their relationship is just sex and economics and such activities keep them facing the fact that there is no genuine love between them.

There are real ways of loving someone and expressing that love and Valentine's Day is not one of them.

Romantic relationships are complicated by deeper dependence and there is a pragmatic conditionality to them, which requires fidelity and specific contributions to continue forward. There are also firmer commitments in romantic relationships where the notion of breaking up exists in a far more real capacity than exists in non-romantic relationships, where there are less distinct beginnings and endings. — Hanover

I understand that but these special conditions that make this love and bond authentic has nothing to do with society or other people. It is distinct and personal. The contributions that are required is a mutual understanding, that deeper love and inner need to have that person near them as well as trust. Love is not an enlarged egotism where one loves only because they are loved, neither is it forming attachments and feeling dependent because of a deeper loneliness and fear of being alone.

Just like we meet person after person in our day to day activity until we suddenly meet that one person who we 'click' with and friendship, laughter, sharing all seems natural, that is what we should be seeking. It should be effortless and known.

“When considering marriage one should ask oneself this question; 'will I be able to talk with this person into old age?' Everything else is transitory, the most time is spent in conversation.”

... you are supposed to feel safe at home, your partner is supposed to protect you and admire you... — TimeLine

:up:

would rather a guy buy me breakfast and tell me he is only doing it because he knows I like porridge and wants to shag me later. — TimeLine

Note to self...

Valentines Day reeks of globalisation. It is economics — TimeLine

I mean, whatevs. Valentines Day is just Valentines day and you can celebrate it with an obligatory box of chocolates or not. If it pisses you off for some great big serious reason, then fine, the guy can pour some gruel all over you and bang away. Pouring the gruel on you was my idea.

There are real ways of loving someone and expressing that love and Valentine's Day is not one of them. — TimeLine

Says you. Maybe I've had some lovely Valentine's Days that I didn't overthink and turn into a day of Marxist revolution.

I understand that but these special conditions that make this love and bond authentic has nothing to do with society or other people. It is distinct and personal. The contributions that are required is a mutual understanding, that deeper love and inner need to have that person near them as well as trust. Love is not an enlarged egotism where one loves only because they are loved, neither is it forming attachments and feeling dependent because of a deeper loneliness and fear of being alone. — TimeLine

This is very romantic and lovely actually (and I'm not being sarcastic), but it is very idealistic and may not really reflect the goings on in a long term relationship or marriage. A lot of love is what happens among spouses, close friends, and family members where there's a lot of day to day stuff where all these lofty ideals really aren't so much considered, and it's perfectly fine to admit to yourself that your attachment to someone isn't just loving affection. Your views are like a Disney movie. If that was mean, I take it back.

“When considering marriage one should ask oneself this question; 'will I be able to talk with this person into old age?' Everything else is transitory, the most time is spent in conversation.” — TimeLine

I agree, totes, but I'd change "talk" into "bang."

Well this is what I'm talking about. You ask an intimate question, seem to want an honest relationship, and when you get a response, walk out. It's a very small thing here, of no importance. But let's not dismiss it as mere spirituality. — unenlightened

This is a little perplexing. Are you saying you don't like it that I'm not hanging around now that you've responded? Well, it's ironic that we are finally talking about the things I wanted to talk about all along. You know "Women, Men, What's up with that?" Problem is, this thread feels corrupted to me. That has nothing to do with you. I'm really ambivalent about continuing.

I am suggesting that intimacy demands honesty, and honesty involves vulnerability. There might be a love that is invulnerable, that we could call spiritual, but whenever you are offered it, it is almost invariably not that, but bullshit. Normally, I offer you a little piece of my heart, trusting you that far, and fearing that you are not trust-worthy. And as you have proved the latter, I retreat, as you see, into abstraction.

It's not the fear that kills love, it's the running away. — unenlightened

I don't disagree with any of this, but it's not exactly what I'm talking about. Although I used an intimate relationship as an example, the point I was trying to get at is more general - Relations of all sorts between men and women are complicated, undermined by fear on both sides. Everybody? Of course not. How many? I don't really know, but I think it's probably a large percentage. A majority maybe. I brought this forward as a hypothesis based on my own experience hoping for a reality check.

I was responding to what Tiff wrote which included a comment about a violent intimate relationship that ultimately resulted in a great deal of difficulty for her. I think you are confusing the profound psychological and emotional fear one has when threatened with violence with some type of fear you have disappointing or saying something that may offend an authoritative figure, the interpersonal checks and balances that makes us conscious of our behaviour. — TimeLine

I've never been talking about "profound psychological and emotional fear." I'm not talking about abused women. I'm talking about more or less regular, more or less normal men and women in their everyday lives. I'm talking about feelings that affect more or less regular, more or less normal human relationships. That's what I always wanted this thread to be - As I said previously - "Men, Women, What's up with that?"

So, no, there is no confusion on my part.

You are supposed to feel safe at home, your partner is supposed to protect you and admire you — TimeLine

As we say in the US, "Well, duh." You're talking normative, I'm talking the way (I think) things are. See, I said "normative." A year ago I would have been embarrassed to use that kind of word. Now, I only should be embarrassed.

We are confused, mostly wondering why all of a sudden that guy at the gym is flexing his chest muscles as he stands in front of us to try and get our attention, doing some random groin stretch where he thrusts his crotch about before getting up and walking away in slow motion, his arms protracted out like he is carrying two sheep in between them. — TimeLine

He finks your hot.

Valentine's Day has zero value other than economically. It is just an archaic exchange of objects that is largely borne from a self-interested obligation and not because there is any authenticity in the exchange. — TimeLine

I have a woman friend who feels the same way you do. If her husband bought her flowers on Valentines Day, she would not respond favorably. I, personally, don't care about Valentines Day at all, but I know my wife does and really loves flowers. Why would I not spend half and hour and a little money to make her happy? Why is this some kind of big principle for you. Pick your battles somewhere else.

@TimeLine Every special day is contrived and commercialized, which is why you should resist the urge not to go along with it to some extent in the full knowledge of that element of absurdity. A fear of the absurd suggests an absurd faith in the non-absurd imho.

This is a little perplexing. — T Clark

Why is it perplexing? You ask a fairly personal intimate and specific question, and then are bored with the answer. Let's talk honestly - well actually let's not bother. That's not irony, it's a feeble manipulation.

Problem is, this thread feels corrupted to me. — T Clark

As others have said, it is exposing, and corruption is exposed along with other stuff.

________________________________________________________________________________________

I am quite surprised that people want to be safe in relationships - like having a pet with benefits. Or a discussion forum where we talk about the weather. For better or for worse, life on the line, climbing the mountains, is a relationship, and there is only safety is the grave. Which ones not mean I am not cautious about who I throw caution to the wind with.

Why is it perplexing? You ask a fairly personal intimate and specific question, and then are bored with the answer. Let's talk honestly - well actually let's not bother. That's not irony, it's a feeble manipulation. — unenlightened

I still don't get it. I just went back and checked 1) I talked about fear between men and women 2) You responded saying that intimacy makes us vulnerable and that can be frightening. (I do agree with that) 3) I respond that isn't the point I was trying to make. I'm not talking about fear in intimate relationships. I'm talking about a generalized fear that exists between men and women that poisons their attitudes towards each other in a broad range of situations.

I don't find what we're discussing now particularly intimate, painful, or frightening. I think that's why I'm having trouble figuring out why you are upset.

I had a feeling you were a member of the itty bitty titty committee. — TimeLine

Snap! Crack! Zing!

'I like small titties... (Big'uns too...).

But it depends on how she's sellin em'.

In all living memory, summary mammary mummery is sexual gunnery; summarily skull-duggery; flim-flammery for jiggery-pokery :D

Women are not picky — TimeLine

Women are individuals, and some of them are picky as hell! (same goes for men while we're at it)

But there's also valid evolutionary cause that may be responsible for an evident trend of 'pickiness' among females, on average, when compared to males.

Reproductively, evolutionary, pregnancy necessitates massive investment on the part of the female whereas in some situations the only cost to the male is the energy spent on a single orgasm. Pregnancy is a very big deal for women, and hence there's a selective force which chooses "pickiness" because the mothers with the foresight to choose the right partner and at the right have tended to be more successful. The same logic also applies to men, but there is an additional option which is not open to women: men can go around and impregnate many women without directly contributing to the rearing and therein achieve reproductive success through sheer strength of numbers.

Sexual dimorphism in humans is actually quite varied, but there are definitive differences between men and women that result from our biological history. We can find examples of women who are more masculine than the average man, and vice versa, but on average there are measurable differences of many kinds. Without getting straight into "intelligence" it's quite easy to see why when it comes to reproduction women have incentive to be much more selective than men.

I can accept that you aren't picky, TimeLine, (though experience seems to contradict this :)) but it's an undeniable fact that men, on average, will basically take any opportunity for sexual gratification while women employ a much more rigorous checklist.

We are confused... — TimeLine

We're all confused; life is complicated, but I would even say that on average men are more confused than females. Women have a more rigidly defined biological role than men, or at least, the reproductive function women perform is a limiting factor for success of the species as a whole. Evolutionarily speaking, this has caused women to converge toward forms more ideal for child birth and rearing, while men have been diverged in many other directions (fighting other males, doing physical labor, hunting, etc...). To speak metaphorically, evolution knows that women need hips of a certain ratio and a reduced penchant for violence if they are to be good child rearers, but it doesn't always know what the best strategy for males is, and so, it rolls more dice with the male form, sometimes producing 'pair-bonding' homologous mates who can both raise children well, or, heterologous 'sexually dimorphic' mates where the male is suited to an environmental niche of some kind (or many) and the female more closely to the reproductive niche.

A real world result of this is that the bell curve distributions of traits for women are generally tighter grouped around the human average, whereas men exist in greater populations at both extremes of the curve. This is why there are more genius males than there are genius females, and also why there are more mentally incompetent males than there are mentally incompetent females; sometimes communities need geniuses and sometimes they need ditch-diggers, but they always need functioning wombs and mothers; fatherhood is secondary beyond sperm donation.

Men are more confused because we're more varied in general (unless 'confusion' is a paradoxically ideal for motherhood). We're less picky on average, but more universal plugs are attracted to more sockets which makes us thralls to our sexuality more easily than women.

Tabula rasa was misguided; environment isn't everything. Your biology does play significant role in determining who you are, who you will become, what makes you happy, what kind of games you like to play, but there's some good news: you aren't defined by the average genetic makeup of your gender or ethnicity because you have your own individual genetic makeup. Women can be successful geniuses and unsuccessful criminals too! But if we ignore the biological reality of the way many people just are - the strutting peacock, the shrinking violet, the red-assed baboon - then we might have a hard time trying to understand why they are unhappy or unfulfilled.

Diversity and divergence is a natural evolution-endowed feature of humans, and while many of us do not conform to the emotional and cognitive average of our species (we look on in our clean white lab-coats, amused, bemused, fascinated and disgusted) the conclusion that the bulk of what appear to be absurd and sometimes homoerotic rituals shared between developmentally constipated monkeys are in fact among the highest expressions of their nature. To interrupt these rituals is sacrilegious, as it is into and for these rituals which people inexplicably pour and sacrifice the contents of their finite life and existence, usually in some real or fictitious pursuit of happiness.

I do feel I am roundly misunderstood by many, and I accept my share of the blame, so by way of apology to you, please accept my continuation of what appears to be comic-tragic-erotica. It's experimental of course (isn't everything?) but hopefully it can offer you relief of some kind!

"...mostly wondering why all of a sudden that guy at the gym is flexing his chest muscles as he stands in front of us to try and get our attention, doing some random groin stretch where he thrusts his crotch about before getting up and walking away in slow motion, his arms protracted out like he is carrying two sheep in between them.

Call me peculiar, but I like a guy who makes me laugh. As in with them, and not at them." — TimeLine

whispered TimeLine, in her familiar hushed, mousey tone. Suddenly, he turned.

"If you want to laugh just have a look at those abs of yours." he said, with a condescending smile.

"What is going on?" she thought. "What the hell does this gu-"

"If you want me to get you into it..." he said while approaching her and flexing his calves like some super-star bus-driver, "I can show you some things.".

" Uh....". The gap between them narrowed; a bed's length; an arm's length; ten inches. He stopped, and through the musk of confusion that then engulfed her the only other discernible scent was the odor of absolute confidence, peppered with inexplicably accentuated bulges and impossibly coiffed garnishes. "Wha...".

A haze descended.

At a glance, the fully dilated and blank expression on her friends face alerted and informed that back part of her mind that was still aware of what was happening, but the well-tapped mix of conflicting emotions which had usually kept her sharp in these situations was being washed away by this new flood of feeling.

"Well?" he said, offering his hand.

Her face was smiling and her hand reaching for his before she could gather the courage to reply "Alright.". The instant their hands touched, a she felt another wave of sensation rush through her body; her hair stood up; goosebumps. Her eyes and smile widened... Her chest, stomach and thighs tightened... She farted..."

She farted..." — VagabondSpectre

Damn you were doing so well, I almost suggested you pen personalized soft porn and will make a mint but then reality crashed thru the fantasy. Surely you could edit that out for the printed rendition. :up:

...but then reality crashed thru the fantasy. — ArguingWAristotleTiff

Indeed! But in the genre of erotic tragic comedy, the fantasy-crashing contrast reality provides is like a happy-sad-sobering bucket of water in the face. We're jolted awake from a sweet dream and left with the hilarious and bitter pill of our own human peculiarities and the taboo mystery of what might have been. A spoon-full of sexy sugar helps the ironic absurdism go down!

P.S. Do you really think it's well written? I've never been roused to write anything like this before, but its obvious satiric element aside, I do hope it struck a pleasing note. I'm anxious to hear back from my muse :D

Every special day is contrived and commercialized, which is why you should resist the urge not to go along with it to some extent in the full knowledge of that element of absurdity. A fear of the absurd suggests an absurd faith in the non-absurd imho. — Baden

I remember a friend who was punishing her partner for not getting a Valentine gift and he spent over a week grovelling and trying to make it up to her and the entire thing just made me nauseous. It is an unwritten game they are playing with each other to prolong ignoring whatever is wrong with their relationship; there is no actual communication and they rely on these designed activities to declare something they are unable to do within the intimacy of their mutual understanding (or lack thereof).

The point about Valentines day is a declaration of mutual affection and this declaration should be intimate since love is a decision that we make as one individual to another. Do something randomly, not on a specific day with specific things. What the heck has it to do with anyone else? A wedding is different and I understand that since it occurs only once you want to share that celebration but in an intimate backyard setting with some close friends and family and not by spending $50,000 and inviting people you don't really know.

People are disingenuous and they need these inauthentic practices to maintain the game.

I've never been talking about "profound psychological and emotional fear." I'm not talking about abused women. I'm talking about more or less regular, more or less normal men and women in their everyday lives. I'm talking about feelings that affect more or less regular, more or less normal human relationships. That's what I always wanted this thread to be - As I said previously - "Men, Women, What's up with that?" — T Clark

I know, which is why you need to reconsider how you articulate your position as the ambiguity led to misunderstanding as though you were some monster. You are about as monstrous as my pair of fluffy hedgehog slippers. The fear you are speaking of is that discomfort one feels when they need to check what they say, maybe stay silent or feel otherwise unable to be themselves and that is just personality differences, like how an extrovert has a forceful presence that could make some people feel uncomfortable, or maybe even just an indifference like I can't be stuffed wasting my energy on this person. The fear that one feels when they are threatened or coerced is completely different.

have a woman friend who feels the same way you do. If her husband bought her flowers on Valentines Day, she would not respond favorably. I, personally, don't care about Valentines Day at all, but I know my wife does and really loves flowers. Why would I not spend half and hour and a little money to make her happy? Why is this some kind of big principle for you. Pick your battles somewhere else. — T Clark

I like flowers, I love flowers. But why buy it on Valentine's day or where there is some reciprocal reward for this gift exchange? Why not give me flowers some random day when you simply just want to see me happy, or a way of telling me that and not because of any underlying motive where you benefit.

I am quite surprised that people want to be safe in relationships - like having a pet with benefits. Or a discussion forum where we talk about the weather. For better or for worse, life on the line, climbing the mountains, is a relationship, and there is only safety in the grave. — unenlightened

:heart:

I wish you were younger, and maybe not married.

I'm anxious to hear back from my muse — VagabondSpectre

What exactly did you expect to get from me? The post that I wrote against you was about this very thing where you and Agu where writing page after page of nonsense. Sorry to break your heart, but dude. :mask:

The fear you are speaking of is that discomfort one feels when they need to check what they say, maybe stay silent or feel otherwise unable to be themselves and that is just personality differences, like how an extrovert has a forceful presence that could make some people feel uncomfortable, or maybe even just an indifference like I can't be stuffed wasting my energy on this person. The fear that one feels when they are threatened or coerced is completely different. — TimeLine

It doesn't surprise me you and @unenlightened are engaged. You clearly have been getting together privately to discuss ways of driving me crazy by completely ignoring what I'm saying.

I know, which is why you need to reconsider how you articulate your position as the ambiguity led to misunderstanding — TimeLine

I would reconsider except I am, as everyone acknowledges, very articulant...articulous....Me talk good.

I like flowers, I love flowers. But why buy it on Valentine's day — TimeLine

Why the fuck not buy them on Valentines Day? It makes my wife feel good.

Next year I'll just get her a card. It will say "I would tell you I love you, but I realize you know I only rely on these designed activities to declare something I am unable to do within the intimacy of our mutual understanding (or lack thereof). Also - no flowers this year."

Alas, my love, you do me wrong,
To cast me off discourteously.
For I have loved you well and long,
Delighting in your company.

Alas, my love, that you should own
A heart of wanton vanity,
So must I meditate alone
Upon your insincerity.

If you intend thus to disdain,
It does the more enrapture me,
And even so, I still remain
A lover in captivity.

Thou couldst desire no earthly thing,
But still thou hadst it readily.
Thy music still to play and sing;
And yet thou wouldst not love me.

I bought thee kerchiefs for thy head,
That were wrought fine and gallantly;
I kept thee at both board and bed,
Which cost my purse well-favoredly.

They set thee up, they took thee down,
They served thee with humility;
Thy foot might not once touch the ground,
And yet thou wouldst not love me.

What exactly did you expect to get from me? The post that I wrote against you was about this very thing where you and Agu where writing page after page of nonsense. Sorry to break your heart, but dude. :mask: — TimeLine

Page after page? Guilty.. But nonsense? Nonsense?! Nonsense!...

Post-length is the mark of true passion; I appeal to it openly! I do in fact put effort into the things I write. If you are truly interested in serious discussion, there are very serious elements in my post(s). I try to make them Barnum style: something for everyone. You may find many of the games I play tedious or repugnant, but I don't, just as I may find the games you play ironic and challenged, while you find them honest and straightforward. Do you not want to play honestly and openly?

In fact I think I have been far more honest and straight-forward than you give me credit, and I've done nothing but reciprocate your advances. Yes: I'm crass; I beat around the glorious bush; I'm necromancing the "tome-format"; I use semicolons with reckless abandon, but I'm honest.

What I hoped to show you is that you think you're refusing to play, but it's inevitable in any engagement. Casually stepping on others in anecdotes to beget further interaction is the kind of game each of us intuitively plays without even realizing it. When it comes to sex (the content of my and Aug's intellectually bankrupt massive essays) the games are obvious and unavoidable. Mocking the peacock is easy but it takes balls to strut, and mockery is an essential part of the game. It can even conceal flattery (ex: "he thrusts his crotch about before getting up and walking away in slow motion, his arms protracted out like he is carrying two sheep in between them.").

We don't like petty superficial games, we share that, but there's no avoiding emotional games of some kind. Try to avoid them all and you'll only wind up losing. Instead, imbue them with meaning and purpose; make them fun. Games are supposed to be fun after-all. And so to avoid the risk of making this particular game even more un-enjoyable for you, I'll end it here.

Ah, TimeLine, now farewell, adieu,
To God I pray to prosper thee,
For I am still thy lover true,
Come once again and love me.

I do in fact put effort into the things I write. — VagabondSpectre

Yeah, awkward moment.

Mocking the peackock is easy but it takes balls to strut, and mockery is an essential part of the game. — VagabondSpectre

You are not a peacock. If you were a peacock, I would be mesmerised, your feathers would attract me to a dizzying point of hypnosis and I would be compelled to give you all that you desire without even knowing why. Right now, all that I desire is to eat a hazelnut sundae in a massive bowl with chocolate sauce and wafer and crushed whatever sweet thing I can find in the cupboard before crying myself to sleep.

You're more like a shaved bird sitting awkwardly in the corner chirping.

Ah, TimeLine, now farewell, adieu,
To God I pray to prosper thee,
For I am still thy lover true,
Come once again and love me.. — VagabondSpectre

Ok, bye.

It doesn't surprise me you and unenlightened are engaged. You clearly have been getting together privately to discuss ways of driving me crazy by completely ignoring what I'm saying. — T Clark

Alas, in my dotage I have confused you with the perfidious @frank, and you have become innocently swept up in my hostile environment. My humblest apologies, and please ignore my last few comments to you which I unreservedly withdraw. No wonder you have been perplexed!

But please, I am not responsible for @Timeline's coquettish improprieties, and our contacts, such as they are, have at all times been both public and well chaperoned. Young ladies are sometimes prone to flights of fancy, which should not be taken seriously, or repeated as if they are factual.

But please, I am not responsible for Timeline's coquettish improprieties, and our contacts, such as they are, have at all times been both public and well chaperoned. Young ladies are sometimes prone to flights of fancy, which should not be taken seriously, or repeated as if they are factual. — unenlightened

As Jane Austen once said, 'The person, be it gentleman or lady, who has not pleasure in a good novel, must be intolerably stupid. My idea of good company...is the company of clever, well-informed people, who have a great deal of conversation.

I agree that we hurt the ones we love the most because they have made themselves vulnerable. There is a kind if fear that would make that vulnerability impossible. My extensive research has allowed me to conclude that the women in my family and a neighbor think its absurd to say that women commonly feel that second type of fear in regards to their husbands and where that fear exists there's reason in the form of physical or emotional violence.

I don't find what we're discussing now particularly intimate, painful, or frightening. I think that's why I'm having trouble figuring out why you are upset. — T Clark

I see it sort of as @unenlightened here. You did, intentionally or not, make a provocative statement, namely that your wife feared you. We, not knowing a whole lot about you and absolutely nothing about your wife, asked the sort of expected questions, like "why?" Could it be she's timid or that you're overly aggressive or are you just making a generalized comment that you've noticed in all relationships where there's a fear factor. There were even posters who tried to read your post very generously, by suggesting that maybe what you were saying was that everyone feared their partner at some level and did things to be sure that fear wasn't aroused. You clarified that you didn't mean that, leaving us still to wonder what you're specifically referencing.

And so this conversation is left so vague that all we can do is offer platitudes like: No one should live in fear, open communication is the key resolving conflict, everyone has the right to certain boundaries, and on and on and on.

I'm not trying to goad you to reveal the personal details of your life and would be perfectly satisfied if you made up some details and presented this as a hypothetical, but I truly don't know what sort of fear you're talking about that exists between man and woman that you've noticed that you believe violates stated norms but exists pervasively nonetheless.

I remember a friend who was punishing her partner for not getting a Valentine gift and he spent over a week grovelling and trying to make it up to her and the entire thing just made me nauseous. It is an unwritten game they are playing with each other to prolong ignoring whatever is wrong with their relationship; there is no actual communication and they rely on these designed activities to declare something they are unable to do within the intimacy of their mutual understanding (or lack thereof). — TimeLine

I disagree. What you're telling us are your expectations in a relationship and the sort of behavior you find appealing and that which you find revolting, but just because that's how you feel doesn't mean the rest of the world does or even that it ought to. There are actually couples who find Valentine's Day a wonderful day filled with meaningful gestures of caring and who are not otherwise suffering from communication breakdowns. You might find those folks morons (testing, 1,2, 3, moron, moron, moron), but morons might legitimately be expressing their love in a very deep and meaningful way when they give one another flowers and chocolates on Valentine's Day.

I like flowers, I love flowers. But why buy it on Valentine's day or where there is some reciprocal reward for this gift exchange? Why not give me flowers some random day when you simply just want to see me happy, or a way of telling me that and not because of any underlying motive where you benefit. — TimeLine

Alright, let me write this down... Timeline doesn't like the societally imposed Valentine's Day game, but she likes the random day of the week game. If you wish to play the game with her, buy her flowers not on Valentine's Day, but do it for a different time, like right after she has had a bad day, the day she got a promotion, or just a Wednesday. Let me listen to her and figure out the rules to her game and not the rules dictated by the Hallmark Card company.

My point is that it's all a game. You haven't transcended the game playing just because you insist upon writing your own rules. As long as the intent was to make the other happy, how is that a bad game?

What you're missing is that the guy who buys you the Valentine's Day gift is just as much trying to make you happy as the guy who buys them on a random day. It's just that second guy has figured out your rules better.

My point is that it's all a game. You haven't transcended the game playing just because you insist upon writing your own rules. — Hanover

How universal do you want to get? If every interaction is a game, then 'game' is just another word for 'interaction'. If one can never unmask, then a mask is just another word for a face.

Indeed! But in the genre of erotic tragic comedy, the fantasy-crashing contrast reality provides is like a happy-sad-sobering bucket of water in the face. We're jolted awake from a sweet dream and left with the hilarious and bitter pill of our own human peculiarities and the taboo mystery of what might have been. A spoon-full of sexy sugar helps the ironic absurdism go down!

P.S. Do you really think it's well written? I've never been roused to write anything like this before, but its obvious satiric element aside, I do hope it struck a pleasing note. I'm anxious to hear back from my muse :D — VagabondSpectre

Alright, some serious literary criticism:

Your story was (1) lame, (2) creepy, and (3) not absurd. It was (1) lame because the first part attempted to sincerely paint a romantic and sexually tense moment, yet it didn't. It was (2) creepy because it felt like you were truly trying to woo someone with your comments but they were (1) lame. The punch line (the fart) was (3) not absurd, but simply a faux pas that could actually happen.

Don't take this the wrong way. I'm trying to be helpful.

In terms of (1), that's the hardest thing to correct because that will require actual literary skills in conveying a truly romantic moment. If you wish to draw from your past, like actually tell us about a precious moment with you and someone else, to where we really believe you're conveying a important event in your life, you're well on your way to a pretty good punch line when you fuck everything up with an absurdity.

In terms of (2), leave that part out. It truly gave me lame chills down my spine.

In terms of (3), absurd isn't a fart, it's a penguin flying into someone's vagina and pecking through their cervix to extract their 12 year old son who's annoyed because you disrupted his poetry reading.

Lemme know if you need more help.

How universal do you want to get? If every interaction is a game, then 'game' is just another word for 'interaction'. If one can never unmask, then a mask is just another word for a face — unenlightened

I'm satisfied as saying that if it's sincere, then it's not a game, but that fails under @TimeLine's description because she attempts to impose an objective standard on what is and isn't a game, with Valentine's Day being a game but flowers when it feels right not being a game.

Unless TL is willing to admit that it is unfathomable for her to believe someone could actually get something sincere from a Valentine's Day card, and that for some reason such gestures are per se insincere, we're left with games being whatever violates TL's idiosyncrasies.

But to you, do you think buying a Valentine's Day card is a game if both find it a meaningful gesture that truly expresses love?

If you were a peacock, I would be mesmerised, your feathers would attract me to a dizzying point of hypnosis — TimeLine

Reminded me. From @TheMadFool

No wonder you have been perplexed! — unenlightened

No problem. It's a relief. I'm used to having people pissed at me, but I can usually figure out why.