Not all that [bleep]ed really. Having new found siblings is cool, nothing more. You've added to your life, not subtracted. And obviously you've got lady killer in your blood if your dad had kids you've never heard of. And don't define your friends into "jocks" and "nerds". Friends are people not labels. Most "jocks" can get pretty nerdy over fantasy football, just the way "nerds" Will stomp your ass in their game realm. People are people, don't define them in such generic terms.

That was beautiful.

Agreed^ The fantasy football reference had me at hello.

But that jocks and nerds is almost exactly who the 2 groups I hang out with are. With ones I play AoE 2 or L4D2 or Quake 3 or something in LAN almost daily. With others I play FIFA or I play real soccer and basketball. The people in those 2 groups do not mix, I have tried to get them to hang out together.

 

I get along with both of these groups pretty well, but my time isn't limitless and I have to make compromises... But I am not sure, on who those should come from.

Do what you want man. That's the key to [bleep]ing happiness. Maybe a bit overstated, but you get the idea.

I have 4 major groups of friends that I generally hang out with. Sometimes I blend them with little success. That doesn't make any of these groups less of my friends.

I read this article and felt so nauseated by it I just had to vent somewhere: http://elitedaily.com/dating/sex/raise-expectations-date-hopeless-romanticgentleman/

 

The article essentially says that women should expect their partners to do absolutely everything possible on Earth to please them, without having to provide anything in return. The whole idea of a relationship being a mutual exchange between two people is totally destroyed in favour of treating one person as an object to be worshiped and obsessed over. The author creates some bizarre and ambiguous distinction between men taking away independence from women due to incompetency^[1] and men taking independence from women because, deep down, women get happy when men do perfectly easy and achievable tasks for them unconditionally.^[2]

 

The whole thing is premised on this self-defined image of chivalry. I would personally hope anyone in a loving and caring relationship of any description would want to treat their partner with respect and that this would work both ways, but this article seems to suggest it is only something a male should worry about, and even then, it's something only a select 'type' of man is able and willing to give. He states women are independent and capable, yet seeks to remove responsibility away from women providing needs to a male partner in a relationship, or perhaps more productively, women making more of an effort to provide for or lessen their own needs. At the most fundamental and basic level, it justifies the concepts of an objectively perfect 'breadwinner' man providing to a helplessly sensitive woman whose needs must be doted at every available turn or else she has a right to leave and blame the failure of the relationship on her partner not providing enough for her.

 

What it fails to do is make a meaningful or useful attempt to address many of the challenges of what most would recognize as a 21st century relationship between two 20-somethings with two people going to work, earning a similar level of income, wielding an equal level of power. A relationship where both people have needs, and a desire to reciprocate other people's needs, as well as a capacity to trust and be trusted in return. Having started out as a promising endeavor aiming to reduce the influence of sexism and masochism in modern-day relationships, the article ends up being an exercise in convincing impressionable women that they're goddesses who deserve, by the fortuitous default of being a woman and (presumably) being attractive to somebody somewhere, to have their every desire waited on and that only a few men, author included (fancy that!) have the "manliness" to accommodate a "proper" woman's needs.

 

The Suffragette movement, this ain't.

 

1. We know you are a grown, independent woman who can complete endless tasks without a man’s help

2. But, we want to be the ones who make you smile nonstop

I didn't really read it from an equality perspective. I just read it as more of a "I'm a White Knight beta male and here's my advice on how to get your girlfriend to cheat on you" perspective. But then again, I don't really believe in equality and I think people who whine about inequality are insane. But that's another issue. :P

 

I like how he says, "A hopeless romantic is focused on your pleasures, desires and needs because you have the potential to become the center of his universe." Then his very next sentence is, "We are hardworking and have plans, ambitions and goals that require long work hours. For us, there is no time available for playing games or for pretending to be somebody else."

 

I agree with the second sentence wholeheartedly. The problem is, the second sentence completely contradicts the first one. :P I imagine he himself doesn't actually follow through with what he claims to advise if he's truly a "hopeless romantic." Meaning, he's the guy that women consider to be "perfect" until the honeymoon period wears off. At which point he's just another boring needy guy who has no meaningful ambitions outside of her.

 

If you want a girl to get bored and consider cheating on you, make her the center of your universe and prioritize her over your life's ambitions and goals. If you want her to remain interested, then you have to have bigger fish to fry than her, regardless of how amazing she is.

 

Anyways, I wouldn't take anything in that article too seriously. As always, those kinds of articles are loaded with Disney airy-fairy bullshit that sounds great on paper, but quickly falls apart when you ask yourself, "does it work? and does it work forever?"

 

Edit: read the first comment at the bottom of the article. +1 faith in humanity.

 

Edit2: read the first response to the first comment at the bottom of the article. -1 faith in humanity.

Yeah, that article to me was more of a guideline on what not to do if you want a healthy relationship.  I've absolutely been down that path before (although not to that extreme I hope) and I would have to say its probably what killed my relationship.  Not a mistake I plan on making again. If I end up back in a monogamous relationship at any point, I'm certainly not going to be devoting all of my time to making sure that she gets whatever she wants at whatever cost.

 

Also that article was absurdly cringe-y to me. I don't know if it's just the way its written or the fact that I had a somewhat similar mindset in the past, but I had a really hard time making it through the article.

Dammit had a mildly-lengthy post written out for Ginger but I accidentally hit the "back" button and lost it.

 

In a nutshell...

 

Yes, society encourages women to be "strong" and "independent" now. At the same time, society still sees women the same way it sees children-- without accountability or responsibility.

 

There's a lot of women out there who will feel victimized if her relationship sucks, and blame all of the problems on the man.

There's a lot of men out there who will feel victimized if his relationship sucks, and blame all of the problems on the woman.

 

Instead of pissing yourself off and trying to change the world to how things "should" be, it's a lot easier to just examine how things actually are and structure your life such that you're still happy regardless of the world's unfairness.

 

In other words...

-expect women to behave the way their biology tells them to behave, not how society tells them to behave

-structure your life such that you maximize all the good parts of your biology (e.g. sex), and minimize the bad parts (e.g. jealousy)

-accept responsibility for everything that happens to you-- both good and bad; never consider yourself a victim

-don't spend time with people who think they're victims

-focus your attention on things that make you happy, that you have control over

-don't focus your attention on things that make you unhappy and that you have no control over

 

 

Simple stuff. "Gender issues" and femininity/masculinity become pretty much irrelevant.

-accept responsibility for everything that happens to you-- both good and bad; never consider yourself a victim

Whoa, you're asking way too much there man. Society would crumble if people took responsibility for themselves!!!

I'd like to imagine that if every person just quit worrying about what's best for society, and instead focused on what's best for themselves, a lot of the "issues" society has today would begin to disappear pretty quickly.

But yeah people hate responsibility. It's easier to sit on your ass and blame the world for all of your problems than it is to figure out how to solve your problems by yourself. No wonder my country has so many overweight, bored, hyper-sensitive people looking to be offended at all times. :P

#merica

"you remind me of my pinky toe. you're small, cute, and I'm probably going to bang you on my coffee table later tonight..." :lol:

I am a complete dipshit.

Total dimwit.

Borderline moronic.

Un-[bleep]ing-believably oblivious.

Complete idiot.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Had my first real make-out session tonight.

Already have plans with her for tomorrow.

I'd recommend never saying make out session again lol

I have no idea what else to call it. English is not my mother tongue.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Still, something pretty amazing for me.

kissy kissy sesh is the preferred nomenclature

What is it called in Estonian?

Меня это не ебёт

Ha-ha, very funny.

That's kinda too much.

Ohhhhhhh

SHOTS FIRED SHOTS FIRED

Someone should come over and punch me in the face. Really hard.

I am such a [bleep]ing wuss.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Woke up at the girl's place.

Success?

Why are you a wuss for choosing not to take advantage of a one night stand?

For it is not a one night stand.

I've known her for about 3 months and we've been out before.

So it goes. Trust me, you'll have plenty of opportunities.