ever have a friend that was like a brother to you..

Lauri

soulsinging wrote:

you mean there are more people out there as disinterested in sex as you?

Jeas, it keeps getting worse. What is THIS all about? You have NO idea what my interest in sex is. This is REALLY out of line now. That's nothing outside of slander. Respecting your friends means you're not interested in sex? That's not jumping to conclusions, it's like taking a transcontinental flight to conclusions.

soulsinging

Lauri wrote:

I was just thinking: soulsinging, if you were dating a girl and she stopped calling you and made it clear she didn't care to have you around, would you keep trying to call her and wait around for the phone to ring and say to you friends, "I know she's acting like a jerk, but deep down she really still likes me and eventually she'll see the light"? There's no difference between the two scenarios, really. Just as friendships are as important as romantic relationships, you also shouldn't stay in a bad one that's hurting you emotionally.

no, i wouldnt wait around. but i've been clear from the beginning that expectations are different with respect to a love interest and a friend. i have had many friends disappear when they got a gf and not once did i stop calling them, talking to them, hanging out, or anything else. it didn't hurt me that they didnt return calls or were too busy to hang out, becos i knew why they were so busy and excited and knew our friendship was strong enough to survive him focusing on other people for a while. no biggie. the one time i stopped talking to a "friend" was when said friend was a girl and i really wanted more than friendship so the fact that she was blowing me off hurt for very diff reasons. and this saga about the friend that hurt you so bad... he was a guy that you spent tons of time with when he was single... hmm....

soulsinging

Lauri wrote:

soulsinging wrote:

you mean there are more people out there as disinterested in sex as you?

Jeas, it keeps getting worse. What is THIS all about? You have NO idea what my interest in sex is. This is REALLY out of line now. That's nothing outside of slander. Respecting your friends means you're not interested in sex? That's not jumping to conclusions, it's like taking a transcontinental flight to conclusions.

just meant that you said your friends are disinterested in sex. i never met anyone that was disinterested in sex. are your friends robots? and i was poking fun at your for approaching the prospect of hot sex with virile young bodies from the perspective of risk and evaluating future potential relationship problems... just enjoy the sex!

i also think it's libel or defamation... slander is spoken and this was printed

Lauri

soulsinging wrote:

i see. so the snide remarks about "welcome back to 1954" and accusing me of supporting a female-opporessive patriarchy were not comments on my personal values and relationships?

I didn't accuse you of supporting anything. I suggested a theory to explain the phenomenon we were discussing. I just put it out there, it doesn't have anything to do with you. The welcome back to 1945 was in response to your language, "find a man to marry you." That is very 1954 language as far as I'm concerned. I take it as a given that most people realize women aren't walking around trying to "find a man to marry them" in that very strong sense, in the post-feminist era.

soulsinging wrote:

you have not been saying to be nice to your friends, otherwise we'd all be agreeing becos we have all said the same. and i would argue that cutting off a friend becos they got swept up in their romantic entanglement of the moment is not a very nice thing to do. the nice thing to do would be happy for your friend.

But you don't know all the facts of the story. I couldn't even express all of them here, or accurately explain how I was feeling at the time. It was a repeat offensive. His feelings were clear to me. There is a point when being nice to your friends doesn't matter because they're not really your friend anymore anyway. It's about not calling for a few weeks or canceling plans, it's about a real pattern of behavior that makes clear to you your position in someone's life. I concluded that in this situation, my position was not that of a friend anymore.

Lauri

soulsinging wrote:

Lauri wrote:

soulsinging wrote:

you mean there are more people out there as disinterested in sex as you?

Jeas, it keeps getting worse. What is THIS all about? You have NO idea what my interest in sex is. This is REALLY out of line now. That's nothing outside of slander. Respecting your friends means you're not interested in sex? That's not jumping to conclusions, it's like taking a transcontinental flight to conclusions.

just meant that you said your friends are disinterested in sex. i never met anyone that was disinterested in sex. are your friends robots? and i was poking fun at your for approaching the prospect of hot sex with virile young bodies from the perspective of risk and evaluating future potential relationship problems... just enjoy the sex!

i also think it's libel or defamation... slander is spoken and this was printed

Yeah a lot of people aren't very interested in sex. It's a common side effect of birth control and anti-depresants, and think of how many people in this country take one (or both!) of those. I know some of my friends are experiencing it now, and I've gone through it in the past. There are lots of other reasons for it too. There are some people who are never interested in sex. There is controversy over whether asexual should be classified as a sexual orientation (or I guess lack thereof???). And believe it or not, some people just don't like it. It's not something that is generally accepted as "normal" so people often don't talk about it if that's how they are feeling. I've seen some web sites devoted to people who, for one reason or another, just aren't interested in sex, and they really feel stigmatized. You read about it all the time in "mainstream" stuff too, medical sites, women's issues sites, hell even advice columns.

Oh and that's not what I was getting at wrt the "risk" in the other thread. I was talking about STDs, pregnancy, even just short term awkwardness...

The Champ

Lauri wrote:

soulsinging, I'm not going to sit here and defend my value as a human being to you. You cross the line with the personal attacks. Judgments like "petty jealousy" and "self-centered" are uncalled for, and I don't see a hint of those things in anything I've written anyway.

Maybe not as "Lauri," but let's stop with the nonsense ..

soulsinging

Lauri wrote:

Yeah a lot of people aren't very interested in sex. It's a common side effect of birth control and anti-depresants, and think of how many people in this country take one (or both!) of those. I know some of my friends are experiencing it now, and I've gone through it in the past. There are lots of other reasons for it too. There are some people who are never interested in sex. There is controversy over whether asexual should be classified as a sexual orientation (or I guess lack thereof???). And believe it or not, some people just don't like it. It's not something that is generally accepted as "normal" so people often don't talk about it if that's how they are feeling. I've seen some web sites devoted to people who, for one reason or another, just aren't interested in sex, and they really feel stigmatized. You read about it all the time in "mainstream" stuff too, medical sites, women's issues sites, hell even advice columns.

Oh and that's not what I was getting at wrt the "risk" in the other thread. I was talking about STDs, pregnancy, even just short term awkwardness...

seriously? that would suck. :(

that's what i'm asking... it came in the context of it being worth it to sleep with younger guys, why would the risk for std or pregnancy be any different?

The Champ

Lauri wrote:

The Champ wrote:

Regarding the meat of this thread, not the initial post...casual boyfriends and girlfriends aside, your spouse and kids should always take priority over friends and family....bottom line..and Lauri, that cannot be argued, even by you ..

And as for taking priority over family, I really hope I never have to make that decision. I hope I never have the option of either saving my parents from a burning building or saving my partner from a sinking ship.

So I would say that with the exception of the kids issue, there is a lot of room for argument here. It's a major problem that people will say things like, "you can't argue with that" in response to these issues. It's not like it's a natural phenomenon beyond the scope of human manipulation. This is all a social issue, and there are ALWAYS arguments with respect to any social issue. That's how positive change is made.

Sure, anything can be argued, but it doesn't make it any less ridiculous. "Lauri," maybe the problem is that you haven't experienced the kind of love that many of us feel for our wives/husbands. For me, it's on a completely different level than the love I feel for my friends and family. In your scenario above, I wouldn't think twice or hesitate for a second to save and protect my wife first. Not even close, and I love my parents very much..

Thoughts_Arrive

Yep!

The Champ

Ledbetterman10

The Champ wrote:

I could beat Super Macho Man by TKO in the first round without taking a hit......but I've never lasted more than 25 seconds with Tyson.

BinFrog

Tyson was all about timing. Once I figured him out, I beat him every time.

I actually trained my dad to beat him too. That was more of a feat than beating him myself!

Ledbetterman10

BinFrog wrote:

Tyson was all about timing. Once I figured him out, I beat him every time.

I actually trained my dad to beat him too. That was more of a feat than beating him myself!

I never really gave it a real try because it was annoying how if you lost, you had to re-type the password rather than getting an immediate rematch. Maybe now that I have it on my computer and can save states whenever I want, I'll give it another chance.

The Champ

Ledbetterman10 wrote:

The Champ wrote:

I could beat Super Macho Man by TKO in the first round without taking a hit......but I've never lasted more than 25 seconds with Tyson.

No one does, and whoever says otherwise, is just a hater ..

Indian Summer

The Champ wrote:

Ledbetterman10 wrote:

The Champ wrote:

I could beat Super Macho Man by TKO in the first round without taking a hit......but I've never lasted more than 25 seconds with Tyson.

No one does, and whoever says otherwise, is just a hater ..

I could limp my way to a decision and always lose, but that was about my best effort.

theoceansmademe

nope, my brother was a/is a DICK.

I have 3 friends who are my brothers. I just wish they didn't live so far away.