Comments
Please wait...
Comments are closed.
Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.
Editors' Picks
is a proud member of the
media network
media network
All contents © Index Newspapers LLC
800 Maynard Ave S, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134
800 Maynard Ave S, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134
Lots of people don't bother to grow up, yes. LW should still grow up.
1. How do you know that I haven't been there? As a matter of fact I have been abused in my life, and quite a lot, thank you. So let's just say I'm as entitled to say what I think on this public board as you are?
2. For fuck's sake, will you point me to specific words where I "keep insisting that one and only one of them can be in the wrong"?
Actually, I can't believe I just read something like that here. I can't even describe how douchey it feels. I've been in fucking therapy for YEARS and here some asshole just assumes that because I don't agree with his incendiary words, I have "never been there" and tells me to shut up and listen to him, because I'm a crazy woman. I think that's enough. Bye everyone. Can't say it was nice.
I suppose it's wrong of me to hope that the scene ends with him wiping a drink off his face and blinking his eyes open to the sight of her ass as it sashays out the door.
That's what would happen if 1930's Bette Davis were the star of this letter.
1. Because you don't seem to know what you're talking about. And you keep telling the people who do that they can't be right because he's not perfect. Apparently you think that only perfect people can be abused? Reality is precisely the opposite.
2. I pointed you to the specific words several times, and you ignored it each time. What would make me believe that you won't ignore it this time too?
This is why the "team sport" nonsense isn't a very useful analytical tool. It's not worth trying to score points for your "side;" you're not on a side, and there aren't any points to be scored.
Okay, listen very closely: She's treating her boyfriend badly. The fact that he is not treating her perfectly is not a counterargument. What about this is so complicated?
Can you respond in some way that doesn't rely upon the assumption that being treated less-than-perfectly magically transforms your own poor behavior into perfection?
BUT: let's go with me being immature because some of us can't figure out that a 32yr old acting this batshit should grow up.
I am a man who thinks slowly when it comes to my emotions. If i was required to constantly update my partner about my feelings, two things would happen: 1. I would withdraw or... 2. I would drive her nuts with my seeming indecision. This is not because i am an abusive partner...it is precisely because i am thoughtful. I take TIME to understand my own emotions.
All that said, i think asking for a specific amount of time is strange. That would make ME feel pressured to have a resolution on a deadline. If i was feeling conflicted about my compatibility with someone... I would simply ask them for more space (i.e. that i needed some alone time throughout the week... us sleeping in our own apartments, etc)... but not a defined chuck of time.
There are many well functioning relationships where one partner is emotional and the other is staid. But... if one person makes the other person feel crazy... just by being themselves... well... that doesn't sound good
@107 - couldn't agree more - that's a decent outcome as well.
I came to see what the latest update is, and while I agree with many that she may be "needy" or "clingy" or - completely over the top - co-dependent - none of that is relevant. If she's too clingy and is rushing him too fast, then he should just end it. As @76 said: he's a douchebag, and for that alone, DTMFA. Break up or sit down and tell your partner "things are moving too fast" or "I need more personal space, let's see each other only X times a week", etc. Not "let's take a break". The only reason one should ever pull the 'take a break' lever is to convey just how seriously close to break up things are and how seriously important it is issues get discussed and worked on; it's to convey a sense of urgency - to declare DEFCON 1 or 2.
@88 - love the new avatar!
Agreed on the rest, though; I'm much the same way. Sometimes, y'need some time alone to sort things out on your end. People who won't permit you that time aren't usually a good fit. The killer is the "usually" part, because sometimes you're thinking "Well, maaaybe..." when the answer should really be "no."
I get my alone time in many ways... and sometimes i get it simply by reading in the same room as my partner...but... i have had partners in the past who simply could not function with silence in the room.... and would interrupt my reading constantly... or treat me like i was deliberately ignoring them by reading (which of course... at times... i was... haha.... but seriously... WTF)
Life's too short to tolerate manipulative shits who refuse to grow up.
you shouldnt ever feel guilty about your emotions... the best you can do is try to understand them... try to control how you unleash them.... and try not to let emotions make important decisions for yourself. Is it a huge deal breaker that he asked for 3 weeks? perhaps not. Entirely depends on his reasons i suppose. Should you give him that time? i say yes. However.... only you know if you are capable of absorbing that time without it causing you more trouble than it is worth. That is the key problem in my eyes. Is this relationship worth it to you? or does it only seem like it is worth it because the pain is so fresh? Contrary to my stated advice above....I find that if i divorce myself from the emotions of a situation... it can be difficult for me to get them back... i.e. if i force myself to let go... i can't easily grab ahold again...
I agree that using tears deliberately to try to manipulate someone is pretty shitty form. It also sort of contains its own antidote, since if you are able to learn deeply that you're not responsible for the other person's crying, you're not doing it to them yourself, it's a lot easier to cope with...and you're a lot harder to manipulate in general. (Ah, family!)
However, I do just want to put into the general discussion (not the specific, since the letter also read as deliberate crying to me): crying is a real honest-to-god scientifically verified sexually dimorphic trait. Women's tear ducts are different from me…. Women's hormones affect crying a lot (ask a transwoman, or a transman, who did an adult transition.). So just as a sidenote in this discussion: the fact that a woman is crying does not mean she's doing it on purpose to try to manipulate you and should be shunned. It's entirely possible she very much does not want to be crying, and cannot help it.
I've been accused of 'manipulative' crying in serious relationship talks when I was trying my very best to stop crying (because I knew the guy wouldn't accept my points as 'rational' if I was showing that much emotion), and it's pretty fucking maddening. Tears aren't evidence. (The phrasing of this letter, to me, kinda is.)
Your reading of her words suggests you're prone to paranoia, or intensely lacking in a base empathy. The only person here who's suggested manipulation is you.
He's being the drama-queen here, she's just trying and failing to cope with the instant shift of her situation and sense of stability.
He called shortly after he left and I think it's possible we will discuss at some point in the future, but for now, it is done and I feel peaceful.
And so it goes.
Re the comments. For most, thank you for the support.
I'm surprised and not surprised by the misogyny that under-girds of some of the comments. A woman can't cry: only anger or indifference are acceptable reactions. Tears are manipulations or weapons, rather than simply an honest emotional response. A woman can't have agency and express discomfort with a man's actions. She can't request a compromise. She is entitled to nothing. She has to simply sit back and accept. Reverse the genders and everyone would be telling a dude to go out there and get some pussy. No need to wait for that bitch. But... such is the internet. In the words of Michael Bluth, "I don't know what I expected."
I think Dan is right. It's either on or off. You're in it or you aren't. If my job told me I might be fired in three weeks, I'd immediately try to either 1) do a better job or 2) find a new job. It would be insane for an employer to say, hey, we might fire you. In the interim, please do not come to work, or ask us any questions about this possible decision. You are also not allowed to apply for other jobs. You just have to sit there and be thankful you currently have a job at all.
This whole "you're the best but I need three weeks to think" is a slow pulling of the band-aid. I think this is a classical he's not that into you.
Some people just think that saying things like "I'm very happy with you. This is the best relationship of my life" would make you feel better about yourself while in reality it's just hella confusing.
Walk away with your head high.
Exactly. Tears aren't always manipulation, but the LW explicitly told us she was considering using them as manipulation. Given that... yeah, I'm pretty confident in guessing that she's the kind of person who does things like that, given that she has made it absolutely clear that she's the kind of person who does that and left no room for doubt whatsoever. Not that this stopped some people...
@124: As usual, you didn't read the letter.
"Do I:
1. Talk to him today, break down in tears and hope he changes his mind about this weeks and weeks of time? Decides that he actually wants me?"
LW told us she was considering using this particular piece of intensely-manipulative bullshit. No one mentioned it? Can you read?
..."and that one-sided bullshit leaves you with thoughts resonating and no person to work it out through but yourself."
Yup! That's what adults do. I'm not sure why you and the LW think it's "misogynist" to expect adult women to be adults.
@128: " She is entitled to nothing."
Exactly. Get over the entitlement complex.
If people don't want to date you, they don't have to.
If people don't want to talk to you, they don't have to.
The fact that your first idea was to do something extremely shitty in order to punish someone for not feeding your entitlement complex means (at the very least) you've got a lot of growing up to do. Your nonsense claim that people would've treated you better if you'd been a dude is the dumbest thing I've read all day. Have you seen this place?
Good you feel clear about it.
IMHO, that's what I'm holding out for. If you're not 100% sure you want to be with me, go find someone you're 100% sure of - I deserve better. If I'm not 100% sure I want to be with you, I need to go find someone else - you deserve better.
http://robertcargill.com/2012/11/26/the-…
Either way, it sounds like little to no tears were shed in their discussion, which is good. I'm happy that she is feeling better... I'm similar, where I need to know if we're on or not. Ambiguity can be very hard for me emotionally.
Glad you are out, as bad as heartbreak is. Good on you for being strong.
Eudaemonic, I don't think that this statement is proof that she is considering bringing on fake tears as a way of emotionally blackmailing him. She's in a very emotionally fragile state of mind and she knows if she goes to talk to him today, rather than waiting, that she will break down in tears. This is not evidence of her planned manipulation of a meeting.
Having said that, lilmissCanada, stop being so bloody oversensitive. This is not a board with an atmosphere of misogyny, I think it's a pretty well-balanced place with a variety of opinions.
Sorry, this girl seems to be a little bit of a princess, no insight what might have been the problem with this man, from her side.
Relationships have to be living things, between real people.
Wow are you dense. Crying is inevitable. She in no way stated that it was a choice let alone what she was using against him.
You've read it wrong from the start.
Hurt people hurt people, and you've already told us that you yourself have been hurt badly in the past. Strangers on the internet have feels just like people irl.
Consider the fact that your insistence that the LW is emotionally manipulative is based entirely on your own assumption that she was planning to burst into tears on purpose, which is not based in fact/reality but pure speculation/your own head.
"the LW explicitly told us she was considering using them as manipulation."
No, actually she did not. You interpreted that from what she said. Others commenting here have interpreted differently. The LW has even responded stating that was not her intention.
Telling someone that they don't know what they are talking about and/or are "nuts" because they don't believe the same thing you believe is emotional abuse, imo. I wonder, have you seen many people in your life run for the hills when faced with a similar "my way or the highway" situation?
"Talk to him today, break down in tears and hope he changes his mind about this weeks and weeks of time? Decides that he actually wants me?"
If she'd said "break down in tears SO THAT he changes his mind", you'd have a point. But there is definitely room for interpretation, so how about you get off the whole manipulator thing?
Not only that, but you've accused someone who CAPPED a couple of words in her post of screaming, called her nuts, and basically told her what she thought (repeatedly) and basically respond with vitriol to anyone who disagrees with you. In short, you don't play nice. How about backing your position with facts instead of nastiness?
I don't either, which is why I never said anything about fake. Whether she's considering bringing on fake tears as a way of emotionally blackmailing him, or considering bringing on real tears as a way of emotionally blackmailing him, it doesn't matter. Whether her blackmail scheme uses fake tears or real ones doesn't make a difference, as far as I can tell.
Real tears don't turn blackmail into not-blackmail, even though that's a popular loophole which I'm sure every blackmailer attempts to exploit.
@145: "Consider the fact that your insistence that the LW is emotionally manipulative is based entirely on your own assumption that she was planning to burst into tears on purpose, which is not based in fact/reality but pure speculation/your own head."
It's also what she wrote, so it's painfully obvious that you're wrong. For future reference, gaslighting only works on people who trust you; it doesn't work on strangers on the internet, who can read, and therefore know that what you're saying isn't true. When someone's admitted that she was planning to be emotionally manipulative (and in a deeply shitty way), and she admitted it in print, in public, where her admission is still very visible? That's the wrong time to claim it never happened. Duh.
"I wonder, have you seen many people in your life run for the hills when faced with a similar "my way or the highway" situation?"
Certainly when people lie to me in such breathtakingly stupid ways as you are, they get shown the door. If they run for the hills at the first hint that a really embarrassingly pathetic attempt at gaslighting is failing, then I don't see a downside.
Even funnier is the fact that you're trying to hurt me by saying that, which is just shameful. Suggesting that the most absurdly incompetent emotionally-manipulative idiots don't spend time with me is, um, not as hurtful a suggestion as you guys seem to hope. Why would I want people like you in my life? Life's too short, and there are too many non-shitty people to spend time with. Running off the dumbest of the shitty ones is a good thing.
Practice what you preach, instead of practicing what you accuse me of. Like the shouty moron who accused me of shouting--not the other way around, though, good try!--you do exactly what you're saying I do.
The LW admitted that her first idea was an emotional blackmail scheme. It's too late to try to cover it up with personal attacks on the people who noticed. Would the LW's fake defense attorneys consider abandoning their war on those of us who possess reading comprehension? It's not going to work. It's really, really clear what she wanted to do, and it's extremely strongly implied that it's normal behavior for her. Sorry if this bothers you, but it's not my problem. Don't like what the LW said? Talk to her, rather than trying to shout down everyone who noticed what she told us about herself.
So, yes, you could claim she would be using the tears as manipulation BUT they wouldn't be serving either the LW or the bf. That's my two cents.
Good for you. People definitely over-reacted about the crying thing. I absolutely *hate* crying in front of other people, especially romantic interests, but it happens. It's frustrating that some people assume crying is on-purpose and/or a weapon. As if.
Also, your job analogy is great.
When my partner needed the summer to himself a couple years ago, it was hard to not talk to him (previously we'd talked every day, even if it was just five minutes before bed), but I didn't feel at all like he was putting me on hold, or stringing me along, and I'm a little surprised that so many people here say that this guy is. I'd have felt strung along if he said he needed time to himself and he didn't know when he'd be able to talk to me. That probably would have led me to end things. But saying that you need a certain amount of time and agreeing that you'll talk it over on a particular date...that seems totally reasonable to me.
I think it's probably a good thing they broke up. Sorry if that sounds harsh, but needing lots of attention / needing lots of space seems like a fundamental incompatibility to me. Doesn't mean either of them is an asshole, just that they're not right for each other.
LittleMissCanada, I hope you're doing okay, and that life brightens up for you soon.
@Lilmisscanada best of luck to you. Lots of negativity here however I guess that comes with the internet. Women cry - that is nothing new - no reason to apologies or feel bad about that. You are a strong woman to share that and to make this choice.
Projection much? Given that of the two of us, I backed up my comments with facts--like, say, the quote from the letter, which the bunch of you keep pretending doesn't exist--and you've never done this at any point, and your drooling ad-hominem whining makes up every bit of every post of yours in this thread, it's pretty clear you're not worth listening to. Have you ever said something that was true?
@Ginnie: I guess you can't even flounce with sincerity.
There's no power to be claimed here. Get over it. When you say something stupid in public, and someone notices, quit thinking you can win more power by irritating them. It doesn't work.
@165: Didn't watch enough cartoons in the 80s, I see. Embarrassed about missing the joke?
That's not a "fact", even the LW has advised that you're stubbornly wrong, but hey. If reality can't change your mind, keep giving "advice" to the fantasy LW in your head.
Nope, not at all embarrassed...I quit watching cartoons in the 70s, I was a bit too old to be doing that in the 80s. But thanks for helping date yourself youngster.
Google helped out a clueless oldster like me though, and what do I find? GI Joe Comic villains..."Terrorist military group" no less...yes, I'll stick by my analysis of your choice of imagery as highly indicative of the kind of frame in which you view the world - your choice of fantasy reading is indicative. Feel free to explain the "joke"...it's not even a good troll. C'mon little boy, lash and thrash some more for us all...dance, monkey, dance.
But, that's just me speaking for myself. And I direct my comments to everyone on this thread that is not you, Eudaemonic, because I can see that you don't need my input to come to your conclusion about what it is I'm saying.
@171 His posts share a palpable sense of threat from women common to the misogynists who make up the ranks of the MRA, but I don't think he is one.
Ok, I've violated my own rule|advice long enough; I'd bailed on a bunch of SLOTTD and SL comment threads precisely because I was tired of this particular voice (among others) and the bitch fests they turned the threads into. Time to revert to lurking more.
Shitting yourself and then accusing me of incontinence seems to be all this thread's about. I'm glad you're having fun, I guess?
Whether someone is consciously aware that they can hold their tears back or not is not always the point. What i see as Eudaemoinic's ultimate POINT in most of his posts on this thread... is that an ADULT's inability to hold back tears when having a serious conversation with another human being (a conversation that is not in their emotional favor)... is a FORM of blackmail....whether the crier is consciously aware of it or not. But the thread for this particular letter has gotten off track... instead of perhaps discussing this point.... people are going back and forth about the wording... re-quoting the same portion of the letter... etc.... and of course, it is going nowhere. But, i don't think Eud is wrong with his point. You all may decide he is overdoing it... he is heartless... it's all reactionary to some past hurt... but that doesn't change the fact that MANY adults still use tears in their favor.
Men who blow up with physical manifestations of anger when they don't get their way are the analog here. We don't defend them unilaterally... do we?
In short... cry if you need to cry... but when your partner is trying to express something to you... pull your shit together and LISTEN to them... if you want the same thing in return...
Where you both go astray is that it's not a conscious choice for the majority of persons. And in this case specifically it was not intentional, just inevitable.
Talk about missing the point.
What is this dumb posturing? Crying is a reaction, not a willful distraction. Emotion is not a failure of communication.
And that's a shitty way to raise a child.
i have missed no points. Nor am i trying to defend either position. Just injecting a pov that has been overlooked.
Ginnie - telling your child (indirectly) that you know they are trying to manipulate you is a "shitty way to raise a child"? hmmmmm.... really don't know why you added that part to your comment.
And yes... any process can be manipulative. Crying seems to get a free pass... the least we can do is acknowledge that free pass... rather than pretending it does not exist
and @183 -To tell a child you are "on to them" and use a threat of no TV is hardly the same as implying violence. WTF.
As for free passes, I'm pretty sure all other things I mentioned get a free pass too.
Like conflating an emotional response with manipulation in order to promote your own supposed neutrality? Give me a break.
Demanding stone-face and refusing to accept any expression of confusion and sorrow is itself a form of manipulation. If you hurt a person and blame them for responding as a hurt person may, you're doubly shitty.
Crying is their response, not an attack on your character. How you demand responses in order for you to communicate is just not grounded in reality.
may i ask: when is crying not okay in your book? (or if "not okay" is an oversimplification, replace that with "unfair to the other person").
Ginnie @187 - i see your point with that. Its true. The difference with children and adults is that children can't be expected to respond to logic. Adults should be able to do that. i.e. i can't tell a child "you are crying simply to try to manipulate me into getting what you want. Now that we have established that, i expect you to stop". if that worked... well... that would be awesome... but until they get a bit older, that option isn't really on the table. Are you a parent? have you never threatened an unwanted outcome in order to get your child back in line? its pretty common.... and i fail to see it as shitty.
"Like conflating an emotional response with manipulation in order to promote your own supposed neutrality? Give me a break. "
i would never presume to make an absolute statement (lol?). Some emotional responses are manipulative... some are an inevitable consequence of the situation. Neither are absolutes.
When someone's temper gets way out of control... would you defend that person the same way? that it is simply a reaction... and not a manipulation in any way? if yes, then i will drop this discussion... as we just dont see it the same way... and aren't going to be able to offer each other any insight.
That gang mentality just as ugly. And Mr E, watch your triggers.
Have you done some therapy? I think it would help you get released from this stuff.. Heal the pain.
Not saying everybody here hasn't got stuff, cause I'm guessing most of us do.
I know I do. Being controlled by our dysfunctional self is boring. Boring for others, boring for ourselves.
He is allowed his point of view re the LWs words, once he gets lost in some other dimension, then it gets weird.
If someone acts ugly, responding to their nastiness is not "as bad". There's no need to claim equivalence.
Well... humans. That's kind of what we're like, innit?