|
Post by petrushka on Oct 1, 2016 17:27:40 GMT -5
In the analogy of the knee degenerating in to bone on bone, what you say is absolutely correct. - PLUS, there are collateral effects. In adjusting to running bone on bone, or on a torn meniscus, you will have to adopt a new gait - or limp - to cope with the discomfort. This will throw new strains on your ankles, your hips and your back. And your other knee. - So the dysfunctioning knee joint will spread to otherwise sound joints, and over time, will render them dysfunctional as well. - All very analogous to an ILIASM shithole and the insidious effects that lead up to, and lead on from, the absence of sexual connection. Indeed - as a result of favouring my left knee for decades my muscles had atrophied to a point where I could no longer raise myself to "tippy-toes" on my left foot alone. A good physio saw and sorted me out on that one. But, as you said, the same thing of course applies to dysfunctional relationships - yes, indeed.
|
|
|
Post by petrushka on Oct 1, 2016 15:59:11 GMT -5
I note your gracious acceptance of my apology for the easily misunderstood post and recognition of my editing said offending post.
Also, I get the subtle allusions to insults left at home.
You are of course entitled to your opinions.
Proverbs 18:2
|
|
|
Post by petrushka on Sept 28, 2016 16:44:16 GMT -5
I know! He is! He even agrees that he is an Ass Hole. (The capitalization signifies his official title). Unfortunately, I seem to attract that type. Let's see.... "Sapiosexual" means "attracted to or sexually aroused by the intellect"... What would you call "attracted to or sexually aroused by assholes"? Maybe: "Rectophilia"? Or: "Sphinctosexual"? It's called 'buggery' or 'being a bugger'.
|
|
|
Post by petrushka on Sept 28, 2016 14:45:58 GMT -5
hello folks, the name is pronounced boo-dan balls and it's probably not what you think it is, unless you correctly thought of cajun food. anyway, i'm just an EP refugee, checking out the site, hoping to make some friends. G'day, g'day - make yourself at home
|
|
|
Post by petrushka on Sept 27, 2016 19:08:01 GMT -5
@thecelt , "Update: I think the one thing I wanted to know is the idea they are not sexually interested, asexual, low sex drive etc makes it a more palatable for us to accept this situation we are in?" No those excuses don't make it easier to accept. It just makes the refused spouse crazy and self destructive. It causes us to turn in on ourselves. It makes us go searching for answers. It can lead to alcohol or drug abuse and risky behavior. If I discovered that my husband has been having multiple affairs, it would hurt deeply but I'd at least be free. You are free anyway. All you need to do is say "enough". And of course Bazz would say "talk to a lawyer first". Personally I wouldn't bother. Once I decide I'm done: Enough is enough. I can talk to the lawyer afterwards .
|
|
|
Post by petrushka on Sept 27, 2016 7:16:34 GMT -5
She wants you to miss her. Anyone else think this is a control issue? It puts her back in the driver seat. Reverse the reversal, and tell her " I want you to miss having sex with me. I want you to miss my humor,charm, and all the giving in and compromising I have done for you. I'd say this is someone who is very insecure, has low self esteem, but is too ___whatever ___ to really want to put anything in to the relationship going on what we hear. This is not an uncommon scenario: a person with very low self esteem who does not love themselves cannot believe that anyone could love someone as unlovable as themselves and so they do not engage, and emotionally abuse the poor person who tries to love them. And yet, even so, they desire to be loved and desired and missed, because it would give them the feeling of being valued.
|
|
|
Post by petrushka on Sept 27, 2016 7:12:39 GMT -5
Last year I was gone for a week long training. I called at night, before bed, just to see if everything was ok. Then from her, it was "Talk to you tomorrow night. Bye"
If I ever am gone from home again, I will not call or text her.
Keeping in touch with your family when you're away is important. So typical isn't it? When I went to Oz for 3 weeks, a few years ago, I was on skype almost every evening. When she went to Germany for 3 months ... I think I got one postcard that arrived after she got back. 1 email or so.
|
|
|
Post by petrushka on Sept 27, 2016 0:45:36 GMT -5
Sometimes, for whatever reason we take my car. If I'm driving he starts "back seat driving". I slow down to pull over and ask him if he wants to drive. He says no, and crosses his arms and humphs and sighs the entire time. If he drive my car he messes with all my settings and complains about every aspect of the driving experience. He tells me how much better such and such car would have been. It's worse if it's a car I chose. That's why I'm now Solo Driver. My wife starts complaining as soon as she gets in the car. Says the car is too low for her to sit in. Then she starts "right seat driving". When I ask her if she wants to drive she says No because she doesn't feel comfortable driving it. She then just "brakes" if she thinks I'm not slowing down or see the car in front of me. Mind you, we've never had an accident the whole time we've been married.
She informed me after we bought her car last year that I wasn't allowed to drive it because I have to adjust the seat and mirrors for me and I never got them readjusted back to exactly the way she likes them. (God knows I tried).
So I now drive Solo everywhere we go. She drives her car and I drive mine. What a happy relationship!
Memory seats! Easy solution. My wife and I do not quibble over driving, we are both (I think) fairly competent and both love to drive hard and fast. But she's 6" shorter than I am. Memory seats are the perfect answer :-) But .... I don't think it would work in your case. She sounds like 'the optional airbag in the passenger seat'.
|
|
|
Post by petrushka on Sept 25, 2016 23:52:11 GMT -5
But, it sounds like you have a Niggler. I pity you, Rhapsodee. Your average niggler is incredibly high maintenance, does not perform well, tends to always break down when you really need it.
Did I mention it rattles and squeals and squawks all the time. You can't steer it around the corners because it will fight you for control all the way, every second of the day.
I just bet he has got 'mansplaining' down pat, eh? <snark, snark> <eye roll>
sending a {{friendly conciliatory hug}} your way.
B.t.w. what's wrong with electric cars? You drive 70 miles, and you have to find a power point before you can get home! A woman near my old home had one, she repeatedly had to be rescued by friends in the middle of the night.
|
|
|
Post by petrushka on Sept 25, 2016 23:45:02 GMT -5
It's a great drive! And incredibly cheap to run. I picked it up used, 6 years old, and not expensive at all. Wonderful car ...
|
|
|
Post by petrushka on Sept 25, 2016 23:37:43 GMT -5
So did it work? The root beer, I mean ...?!?
|
|
|
Post by petrushka on Sept 25, 2016 18:26:59 GMT -5
I wonder why I can't get @wingman to stick as a 'tag'. It always reverts to lower case and does not show up as tag. Odd.
|
|
|
Post by petrushka on Sept 25, 2016 18:24:31 GMT -5
@wingman : this is a misunderstanding -- in NO way was I trying to get at you with that line "have you stopped ...." ( I have edited the offending post)
I was using it as an example for how insidious it can be for someone to slap a label like 'mansplaining' on somebody else's contribution, when they don't agree with what the other has to say. Or let us say I was trying to use it as an example, but apparently did not express myself clearly enough. As unmatched suggested, so is slapping the label 'hysterical' or 'hormonal' on something a woman says whom you don't agree with. It kills the discussion. It permits no valid retort. The term may be used as a valid description of something most all of us will have experienced (if as participant or bystander) - but it can also be a sexist ad personam attack, or used to kill a contributor. ***** By the bye - that phrase 'have you stopped beating your wife yet' has no connotation for me, not having grown up in America. I kind of have an intellectual knowledge of the fact that it's considered to be an insidious attack, but nobody here would take it that way. If you said it to me, I'd say 'I never have beaten anyone since I was 12' and shrug. Same as I don't get the connotations of "your mother wears army boots". Just w.t.f. is that supposed to say or signify?
|
|
|
Post by petrushka on Sept 23, 2016 6:49:42 GMT -5
Since we are still on mansplaining, I have three thoughts: 1. Every woman here has had some man talk down to them, especially about mechanics or building or finance but probably about almost anything, just because they are a woman. That sucks. It does that. No question at all, there's misogynistic dinosaurs out there who think that women don't have two braincells to rub together and need to have it explained how to tie their shoelaces.
2. There are a whole bunch of people out there who like to talk bullshit about things they know very little about, and still try to sound like an expert. In fact most of us try to do it now and again to make ourselves look better if we think we can get away with it. And it is probably true that men are more prone to doing that than women. But it is definitely not something gender-specific. Maybe it's due to the kind of people I tend to hang out with, but I know about equally as many women who will talk out of their arse on subjects they haven't a clue about, trying to 'educate' the rest of us, as I know men who do that. More, in fact, but that's merely by chance: I have a lot fewer male friends.
3. When points 1 and 2 come together in the same package, it starts to get quite offensive and unpleasant. And at that point mansplaining is a very good word for it. BUT if somebody is just being a dick or trying to make themselves appear more knowledgeable than they are, that is not the same thing, and using terms like mansplaining to describe it is about as useful as me saying 'hormonal' every time a woman gets upset about something. It is an inaccurate generalisation and carries an inherent gender putdown, as well as an implicit accusation of sexism.THAT!
|
|
|
Post by petrushka on Sept 23, 2016 6:32:47 GMT -5
@boulderbob - there are two separate issues. 1.) MR and HT leaving over the thread lockdown and 2.) Z feeling disrespected by some of the men here. We were not privy to the PM or what transpired, when she got called a "feminazi". Z has deleted her account before, also over a PM in what she described as a stalker. The membership does not know how either transpired. Are her feelings valid? Of curse they are. She had them. Is her choice to leave valid? Absolutely. I would bet dollars to donuts that if you took a vote of the females here, the majority of us would say we have not experienced what Z has experienced (at least to a degree) and therefore don't understand the beef. The calling out of hurt feelings for mansplainin' (in an attempt to curtail it) would only serve to water-down everyone's responses or story posts in the future. A thread - like this - educating on mansplainin'? Sure. A general murky rule of thumb to keep it from happening? Ridiculous. We all have people in our lives that we know or don't know very well, all with different views and applications of those views. We can choose to engage them or not. Same here. We can scroll down and not engage if we wish, or engage if we wish to do that. There is also a block button. This place would lose valuable insights if we all collectively decided to walk on egg shells and tiptoed around everyone's feelings. Especially considering we all have emotional roller coasters of our own, and are all sensitive in different ways at any given time. No one is going to edit you or delete your comments. That only ever happened on the "vile Richard" thread. As if 'walking on eggshells' wasn't what most of us here have had ENTIRELY too much of in our lives. Hear, hear!
Incidentally, my experience of Z is the same as your perception. Oh, happy enough to be flirty and playful with some men here, but the moment a dude seriously opined something she was not on board with, the shutters came down and there was offense taken. I personally smelled more than a whiff of misandry. But frankly, I have a broad back and there are a lot of things out there in the world that bother me a hell of a lot more. Like censorship <snark, snark>. Anyway, I've already made my views of that clear in another post. I exercised my [block button] months ago. I go with JMX here, and really don't think I agree with @wingman 's conclusions that we men need to hitch up our pants, pipe down and get the egshell-walking sneakers out. The odd freak may blow in here (I never saw the ignominious Richard post(s)) but practically everybody here is generally very empathetic and respectful in my perception. I know damn well what 'mansplaining' is and don't need to have it explained to me <sic!>, and it's an annoying habit at best (and yeesh, I can put up with someone like that for a few hours, but would not want to live with someone who does that continuously) but - that there are folk like that does not justifiably give license to tar every bloke who has a different opinion with the 'mansplaining' brush. In fact I see the latter as worse ... the former is some idiot talking out of his arse, the latter is a veiled, passive aggressive ad personam attack when used in this manner. I can discredit you at any moment by painting, what you are saying, as 'mansplaining', discussion closed. Have a good day. Cut you off at the knees. You ought to feel like shit now and aren't you ashamed of yourself? It's no different than saying e.g.: "Have you stopped beating your _____ yet?"
|
|