i cut my long-distance thing. i feel like s**t

Post Reply New Topic

ZEGH8578, you didn't answer my first question.

none of the posts above made me think any differently about this.

online relationship is not real. maybe there should be a different word for it to make it less confusing. you really can't compare the two.

online friendship definitely can exist, but friendship in and of itself does not need to have a physical aspect. it's different with romantic relationships though. what you guys have said is biologically illlogical!

lepetitprince: she initiated to begin with, then stopped. you know, in retrospect i see tons of obvious signs, you dont have to analyze that particular part, as i *get* it

anna banana: i get two "conclusions" from you; 1) inter-human relations arent real unless they see or touch live. 2) online relationships have a 100% failure-rate, or else they wouldnt be any different from a normal relationship, who seems to have a 50% failure rate (at least in norway)

you can be as stubborn as you want, the fact remains, you're "the only one" who dont get it. let it be a mystery then! :]

I was talking about romantic relationships, not human relations in general. that would be absurd, unless one is really really paranoid :p.



when did I say anything about that?



yeah, f**k the majority! they are never right anyway.

by bluntly stating that theyre _not real_. we'd go into a whole definition of real. endorphins releasing through the recieved input from the information read in text? you never had that happen? a loving text message or something? thats as real as it gets, you could attach a tube to the actual GLAND and DRIP OUT measurable realness.



yes, but im never in a majority otherwise. it feels good. i... am... hooked...

AS IF! your right anyway, cus the distance makes it a crapfest unless at least ONE of the two can afford to airplane around for fun, which usually is not very likely.

Zegh, if I'm ever online on my messenger again you know I'm there for support on this. Hell, you could serve as an inspiration if I have to drop my own troublesome (read: often nightmarishly cursed) relationship.

As for the "online relationships aren't real" argument, I don't understand. I totally agree that people are people, and connecting in various ways, and through various mediums, is still connecting. I've made plenty of very real friendships online, and both my relationships were started there, as well. I connect to people online exactly the same way I do off, but with the handy plus of having various mediums to share more quickly than, say, dragging my friends over to watch Youtube together. And this is just a perk, hardly something I go for one way or the other.

I'm guessing that, for those who 'don't get it,' there is either some sort of preconceived notion that online = unreal, or that an AS difficulty in connecting to people in a certain way is causing the confusion. I've noticed for some Aspies, connecting or even realizing people are 'real' in their personal lives can be difficult (it isn't called 'autism' -- 'selfism' -- for no reason, I imagine), so this may be the misunderstanding.

I doubt that clears anything up, but I gave it my best shot.

Romance need not have physical contact; it helps, but there are many forms of love. Just because you don't believe in it doesn't mean that it doesn't exist; that you continue to insist so is rather frustrating. Whether or not you are convinced isn't relevant to me, but to act in a manner which insults those who do have such relationships is... while my fiance and I met in person, spent a great deal of time together as colleagues and friends, our friendship deepened through the conversation online and on the phone, and the development of our relationship started at a distance of 1600 miles and remained such for some time before we spent time together again... confirming what we knew already, and knowing that we both wanted something more. For some people, the romance of words allow for a lifetime passion in correspondence; others find their solace in the warm arms of strangers. Again, it does not matter to me whether you are convinced, only that you allow for them instead of being dismissive. To have another name is akin to having another name for same-sex marriage, though not nearly so laden with controversy - why do you have to have another name for something to make yourself comfortable? It is, as it were, only a word. The adjective of "online" might well be exactly what you state you desire. Something to consider.


M.

Because love = sex.

This has more truth than what some people would like, and whether it's a good thing or not is not up to me. If this was to be debated, it would result in:

1: online relationships are real.
2: no they're not
(1: yes they are
2: no they're not)^(100^100)

Nobody is going to change their minds.

""Because love = sex.""

I just saw this and felt like pointing out that
this is not an universal law that applies to all,
to me its no way near being true, but people
are different. Sex is just one of many great
details that togheter can be love, but its not
love on its own. If i`m in a relationship with
a girl 5000 miles away its still a relationship
to me, distance have little to do with love.
But i understand that many people dont
agree, probably because they cant imagine
being in a relationship with someone and
not get laid on a regular basis. But a relation-
ship can be so much more then the dropping
of pants, for me anyway.

That is the ideal way to think of online/long-distance relationships.

Too bad not very many people think like that.

where was I insulting? if I did insult, I'm sorry, it was not my intention.

and I wasn't talking about relationships that had started online, or about relationships between people who have actually met in person. I was talking about people who IM-email, have never even met each other and still call what they have a "relationship".

personally I think they are fooling themselves, I don't know, maybe to conform to the majority since being single is perceived as so uncool... :p

or maybe they are just delusional, but what do I know

so a 70-year old couple cannot be in love cuz they don't have sex anymore???

When you deny that their relationship exists, I would consider that insulting. You're superimposing your sense of needs and definition on the behaviors and needs of another person, which is not going to have a great deal of success - some people find happiness and love in the context of that distant companion, and it is not up to your judgment whether or not that constitutes a relationship. If you think they're fooling themselves, that's your right - why do you need to criticize what makes another person happy?


M.

I feel the need to criticise everything, especially common beliefs, sorry.

drugs make people happy too, you know :p

Is anna channeling LPP?

...and alcohol, caffeine and nicotine are all drugs - just socially accepted. It's all a matter of perspective; you'll notice that I don't criticize people or judge them for their decisions in the past for their drug usage. If someone is a current user, it may influence my trust in them and what they say, but it does not make a determination for me. Again, I ask you - what makes you the qualified judge of what constitutes a relationship, why another person should not consume something if it makes them happy, et al? This is not a rhetorical question that I ask.


M.