Wait it out, or move on?

Post Reply New Topic

Roman,

Your example of your relationship with your ex-girlfriend is actually a good example of letting feelings and relationships flow naturally. Your "relationship" didn't start off romantically, and you wanted to analyze the dating potential. But as you said, the relationship "slowly and surely developed". What do you actually think this development involves? It certainly did not involve analysis every single step of the way. Any relationship can start off by analysis, but if they do, they don't start off romantically. That, however, by no means precludes the relationship from turning into a romantic relationship, like yours did. What I would think happened was that although you analyzed the potential to date right from the get-go, if you actually had talked to Jennifer about the relationship in a logical fashion, she forgot about it. This kind of situation is not too much unlike an arranged marriage or a friends (with or without benefits) situation in which the people involved "learn" to love each other.

I agree with everything here, except there is a major caveat in the last sentence about TheMinnesotaIceman's (TMI) case that you seem to be overlooking. You say that the "cost" is not too high, since there is no passion at the start. But as you said at the very beginning of your post, we don't know 100% if the answer to the "What do I need to do to become your boyfriend?" question will be positive (i.e. create passion) or negative (i.e. create animosity). So it'll be at best a gamble, a risk. To you the cost is not too high, but is it the same way for TMI? Is he willing to accept the animosity? None of us can answer that question accept TMI himself. Moreover, what about what TMI's friend wants? You didn't talk about her wants and desires at all. What if the passion is really important to her, such that she is willing to settle with some degree of prejudice? That might put her in a very bad light, as prejudice has such a strong negative connotation, but what I mean in saying "prejudice" is that she will make positive and negative assumptions. If TMI is basically sending a message to her, saying "I don't care about the passion, as long as there are absolutely no assumptions", would she like that? Sorry to tell you, but many people, especially NTs (though not all of them) actually want at least some amount of passion, even if you are willing to sacrifice it.


This again brings up the doubt that I mentioned in my previous post: the question of whether you or TMI would change strictly because of the other person in the relationship, or because you wanted the change for its intrinsic value. It's great that you value honesty in a relationship, but it wasn't Jennifer taking your statement about change "too seriously", it was simply her catching you in a lie. When you "maintain that the OP could make it work if he only makes promises he can keep," you are assuming that this is even possible without any form of resentment eventually developing. Relationships are about mutual understanding and compromise. Where is the compromise in making this kind of promise? The promise you are describing here boils down to basically, "I will do xyz thing for you, or you will leave me." Does that sound like a compromise? No! Is it therefore any wonder why you might feel resentful afterwards? NO! Your resentment doesn't lie entirely with the notion that she interrupted you from doing physics. At least part of your resentment comes from the feeling you probably had that she was controlling how you spent your time, i.e. she was controlling you to some extent. Please correct me if I'm wrong there. If I'm not, then why would TMI not be resentful after making such a promise? That's why these types of promises don't stick, they are not genuine changes in a person because these changes are forced. You cannot force the development of a person in an active manner like that; it only breeds resentment.


The point of asking the mutual friend is not to correct the girl, the point is solely to find out the truth, in an indirect way. It actually doesn't matter whether TMI would agree with what he hears or not, because the same thing would happen if he asked her directly: he could agree with it or disagree. Nobody likes it when people talk behind his or her back, but that doesn't stop people from doing it. You think that this is a bad thing, but if what people say is actually good, then would you be as vehemently against it?

The tricky part then becomes just how emotional and logical this girl really is. There are two levels of thought going on: an active, rational one, and a more passive emotional one. Your arguments have so far all been on the active rational line of thought... which is in itself fine and coherent, but would mean absolutely nothing if the girl thinks more on an emotional level. You can make all the active rational reasons until the cows come home, for a girl to get together with you, but if all the rational reasons tell her on an emotional level, "I don't care about passion between us and I don't care how you feel", your rational reasons will fail horribly. The only way to be more certain of the outcome is for TMI to know the girl better, to see if she is a purely emotional thinker or a purely rational thinker, or somewhere in between. Regardless, romance and romantic feelings belong in the domain of emotional thinking and not rational thought, so one has to get used to indirect communication and stuff, as otherwise the relationship becomes... "different". Not to say that that's necessarily bad... just different. And TMI and/or the girl might not want something different. It's for them to decide.

I agree. I will also add in that I don't think anybody is a purely rational thinker when it comes to romance and sexual attraction. A lot of people may think they are, but romance and sexual attraction happen at the primal, pre-logical, biological and unconscious level that no amount of argumentation and rational thought can reach. We all have lists we can write down of desirable qualities. But that's only part of it. There are also pheromones (which are under nobody's conscious control and never reach conscious awareness), our evolutionary sexual heritage (which billsmithglendale has written about at length) which is also subconscious at best, and our unconscious checklist. If a woman is unconsciously waiting for the man who will trigger toddler memories of security and happiness with Daddy before Daddy left when she was 3 (to give an example) she will neither be aware of that nor will the man who wants her be able to alter anything about himself if he doesn't trigger those buried memories. And she could consider herself a 100% logical and rational thinker and still be carrying around that unconscious wish list.

I think we are all carrying around an unconscious wish list. This is why you can't badger somebody into falling in love with you by sheer force of logic, even if the person you are pursuing considers themselves a very rational, unemotional person.

A friend of mine has been married for over 20 years to a guy she thought of as "just a friend." Originally. But they didn't have the conversation you just had until 2 or 3 years into their friendship, and she was asking for advice about someone she was dating, to which he replied something along the lines of: "to be perfectly honest I want you to dump him and date me."

You aren't going to change her mind in the near future. If you can handle it, stay in the friendship and ask again in a few years. Meanwhile, date others and see how life rolls for you. If you can't handle being with her as a friend, back away from that but keep in light touch in case you can reconnect down the road.

So much goes into making a relationship work. Timing is a part of it.

Just now skimming parts of the thread ....

I don't think you should ask her what she doesn't like about you. If she is truly enjoying the friendship, then it isn't about a checklist. It's about "feeling" or "intuition" or "timing." She won't be able to quantify it into anything you can change. And if she could - would it be wise to change for a checklist?

And feelings do change over time ... sometimes. It isn't something I would EVER recommend counting on, but it is also something I would never absolutely rule out. Hence, the light touch: be able to find her or she you, but move on without expectations.

I'm not interested in dating others. She means a lot to me.



Doesn't seem too hopeful.

Yes it did. From the very beginning we discussed how many hours a week we should spend with each other. We also discussed other issues, such as that I was going to go away for post doc next year and how we will be able to salvage a relationship in that case. Also, she was regulary sending me very long emails specifically about the impact of what I did each day on our relationship. For example, after the first date she emailed me that she didn't like the combination of long sleeves and short pants that I wore. Also, at some point I made a post regarding a video of animals being slaughtered and I compared it to the fate of aspies: just like animals try to stay alive so do aspies try to fit in. She wrote me another long email asking me to clarify my motivation behind making that post, and telling me that she finds it important that I have high self esteem in order to date me.

These are just two random examples. But it was a common place for her, after an interaction, to send me a long email telling me what it was that she didn't like about it, and what I should improve in order for our relationship to work. Thus, it was always very explicit that what I want is relationship and not just friendship, and her advice was specifically designed to tell me what I should change about myself in order for relationship to work.



Yes, but in my case romance was not ruled out either; in fact, from the start, the topic of discussion was specifically about advisiong me on what to do for romance to work. But in case of OP, the romance is in fact ruled out, and that is where his situaiton is worse than mine. I never said that she should immediately jump into romance with him the moment he refutes her assumptions. But what I do say is that she should give him a chance and make him a candidate for romance, in a good standing, just like I was candidate for romance with Jennifer. And then, as you said, they can have analysis.

Incidentally, in case of me and Jennifer, analysis continued 4 months into relationship. So this seems to suggest that the two can in fact co-exist.



And that is my point!



She didn't. These discussions lasted for four months, so it is very hard to forget.



Why would "friends" have to "learn to love each other"?



In case of an email, I agree with you, there is a risk. But if he talks to her face to face about it, he can stop at any point. So the moment he sees she becomes frustrated, he stops. Now, I am sure that first three sentences won't be enough to create animocity, given that he knows her for two months. So he is quite safe to start speaking, and then he can judge as he goes.



What I am saying is that may be negative prejudice have prevented the passion, and once the negative is removed passion can be created. Yes I did admit logical discussion kills both. But like you said, the logic doesn't prevent romance from developing at some later point. So he can tell her "lets be logical for now and try to use logic to see if we can create romance later". That is what happened between me and Jennifer anyway.



She didn't accuse me of a lie -- the dance class incident happened 9 months after I made these promises. No, she was not doing it to test me. She simply assumed I would go along with it and enjoy it. Then, when I didn't, she was disapointed. The reason I said it is "taking what I said too seriously" is that most other ppl err in the opposite dirction: they assume if I haven't been doing it on my own it is not for me. And actually I find it quite frustrating because that is what causes them to exclude me from things they do. Jennifer clearly didn't make this mistake, in fact she was the opposite to that. So thats why I said she took it too seriously that i am willing to change.



Well, while there are xyz that he is willing to change, there are also abc that he doesn't want to change. For example I learned a hard way that promissing to devote fair amout of time to someone is not in my best interst since physics is my priority. On the other hand, promising to learn to have a conversation and broaden my interests is good. So in his case he has his own examples of things he can and can't change. By promising to work on some of them, while asking her to accomodate to others, it makes it a compromize.



That is true, and this is also something he can discuss openly when evaluating the chances for a relationshp. Now of course it can't be predicted for sure, just like I couldn't predict I would resent Jennifer. But they can at least agree to honestly try and see how it goes. And they can decide ahead of time that if he starts disliking something, he brings it up openly. In fact, the ultimate mistake I made with Jennifer is that I didn't bring up everything I disliked right away, thus instead of doing something to solve the problem thigns built up. She even told me that the fact that I didn't tell her what she was doing that bothered her, is the reason that she can't trust me any more. If only I was more open she would have trusted me. So he can avoid making this mistake and be open.



It depends on the kind of promise. For example, promising to be more social won't breed resentment in my case since that is something I would wish for myself anyway, I just don't know how to accomplish it without some guidence. So like I said he just has to be more honest than I was, and only promise to change the things he would genually change on his own.



I never said that asking the mutual friend by itself is inappropriate. What I said was that if he first asks mutual firend and then tells that friend to pass down the rebutals to the girl, that would be inappropriate. My point is that he should be able to defend himself if some assumptions are wrong. This is only possible if he talks to a girl directly. Having a dialogue through a friend is plain weird.



Agreed. And that is something he can only find out for sure if he starts logical discussion. Then he can see to what extend she can participate in that discussion. Animosity is a very small risk, given that he can stop that discussion at any moment he sees something is wrong.



If differnt is not necesserely bad, why not try it?

Have you talked to her yet? Did you ask her for her reasons? What did she say?

Did you try to tell her you will change? How did she respond to it?

Roman, a request: please stay on the original topic. If you wish to talk about your relationships, it would be appropriate to discuss them in the threads you have already created on the subject. Understand that I am not asking you that you not share your experiences, but the sheer verbosity here is threatening to detail the OP's discussion.


M.

Not yet. I think this is something I should discuss with her face-to-face, rather than online or over the phone.

I agree. Didn't you say she was goign to come to your place today?

The reason I brought up my own relationship is because I wanted to show that there is a real life example where what I said actually worked.

1) The two situations are different;
2) I don't see evidence of your method 'working' in what you describe.

Again, I'm not discouraging sharing relevant points - but the sheer verbosity of your posts overwhelm the rest of the dialogue here. You could achieve the same effect by linking to your prior threads with the same content, as a possible alternative.

TMIceman: Best wishes in your conversation, and remember above all else... be patient, and be accepting.


M.

Why bother asking what she doesn't like about him? He can't change it anyways, and shouldn't.

(sorry mak, I'll keep this short and try to keep it on-topic as much as possible )

Roman: When I said that a relationship would become "different", what I meant specifically was that the relationship would begin to take on aspects of a logical relationship. My posts had been based on the assumption that you and your ex had a romantic relationship, but your description of it in your most recent response to my post doesn't really make it sound like a romantic one... it sounds more like a logical relationship, the mechanics of which are far different. While logical and romantic aspects can co-exist in one relationship (and such is the case in the vast majority, if not all long-term relationships), it's quite hard for me to spot the romance in your former relationship altogether. You were able to get as far as you did because it was a logical relationship at the start. It looked like Jennifer wanted it to become romantic, but it doesn't really seem as though it ever got that far. Incidents like the dance class example you gave seem to point in the direction that romance was not there at that moment, as she was disappointed that you did not enjoy spending time with her. Her constant criticism of you was an attempt to consciously change you so that her needs would be satisfied. Thus it begs the question of whether you ever had a romantic relationship, per se, with her at all. Although you say that what you did "worked", it worked (sort of) for a logical relationship, but it eventually collapsed. I think it's because there were romantic needs Jennifer had that the relationship did not meet. The lack of trust you mentioned is part of that.

(as an aside: I used to be in a relationship like this, but I was like Jennifer. So I can definitely relate to her and how frustrated she must've felt. In retrospect, my relationship was definitely not romantic, although I wished it had been. All of my criticisms were to try to make it more romantic, but it never got that far. Needless to say it got very ugly eventually, and we broke up.)

TMI: if your friend doesn't want a logical relationship, confronting her directly with the "What do I need to do to be your boyfriend?" question, with the hope of establishing a logical relationship, is not going to bode well. Asking the question directly will pretty much ensure that the relationship will start off logical rather than romantic, assuming that it starts off at all. If you insist on asking her, please try your hardest to make sure you're prepared for that prospect and for all of its consequences. This includes the possibility that whenever you don't satisfy her needs, she could become extremely critical of you, just as Roman's ex was of Roman. However that comes with the territory of extremely logical but nonromantic (i.e. unbalanced) relationships... and you'll be setting a precedent with your friend by asking her to tell you directly what she doesn't like about you. So be careful what you wish for, because you might actually get it!!

If she said she just wanted to be friends then I would just stop talking to her completely. your goal is to get a gf, and u cant get a gf just being friends with her, so move on to the next girl, because all you're doing is wasting your time with her. There's no reason to be friends with the opposite sex, that's what we have our same sex friends for. I may sound silly to some of you, but if you really think about it, you know I'm telling the truth. So just move on man.

The opposite sex are people too, not just something to root! Why shouldn't men and women be friends?



In that case you need physical distance, and enough of it for you o get over her and try and meet others. You can get to the point where you still talk occasionally but are distanced enough to be able to date others.



Maybe not, but at least it will give him an idea about what this woman likes. Although I wouldn't reccomend doing it, its hard not knowing.

She was supposed to, but there was a change of plan. She'll either visit sometime this week or next weekend.