Long Distance Relationships
Matthew Ward
I'm new to the soc.singles newsgroup.
I'm also new to being single, and looking for a little free advice.
Background: Married at 21 for 13 years (divorce => long story).
Three children, ages 9, 12, and 14. I lived with an SO for 2 years
until this March when I got transferred to Texas (from L.A.) ... she
didn't move. So here I am, out in the real world for the first time
in my life on my own, not even family near by.
I'm 38, good looking and my interests include ... (no, just kidding).
My relationship with my SO is what I have questions about. After I
moved, she called to discuss our situation re: dating others. She
knew that me (being a _guy_) would probably want to start sleeping
around a bit. Plus, I had talked with her earlier (and occasionally)
about the fact that I had never experienced 'being single'. She felt
it would be a good idea for us to be free to see/date others until
such time as 1) It was time for her to move, too, to TX (unknown
still if/when), 2) I that I had met someone else that I wanted to get
serious with, maybe closer to my own age (SO is 23), 3) She found
someone, or 4) A year passed, at which point we needed to renegotiate
the terms of this agreement.
My basic question is: Has anyone else had this type of long distance
relationship? With or without some form of the above 'liberties'
(either voiced or not)? What happened?
-- /\/\ a tt
Mary Reiter
>
>I'm also new to being single, and looking for a little free advice.
>
>
>My relationship with my SO is what I have questions about. After I
>moved, she called to discuss our situation re: dating others. She
>knew that me (being a _guy_) would probably want to start sleeping
>around a bit.
Gee! This increases my comfort level regarding the ability
of men to stay faithful.
Aaaarrrrrrggggggg!
*grumble* *grumble*
Mary
nvon...@msuvx1.memst.edu
I don't think either one of them is going to be faithful, and maybe
they should just agree to *disagree* (as amicably as possible) and
they should go on about their lives. It appears to me that they
didn't really have a solid relationship all along or these things would
have been decided before he moved.
Nancy
Mary Reiter
She knew that me (being a _guy_) would probably want to
start sleeping around a bit.
I wrote:
Aaaarrrrrrggggggg! [among other things]
Nancy writes:
I don't think either one of them is going to be faithful, and maybe
they should just agree to *disagree* (as amicably as possible) and
they should go on about their lives. It appears to me that they
didn't really have a solid relationship all along or these things would
have been decided before he moved.
I just don't think that "being a _guy_" is an excuse to sleep around.
Mary
Graydon
mre...@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Mary Reiter) says:
>I just don't think that "being a _guy_" is an excuse to sleep around.
>
However, this sort of problem has a lot to do with the perceptions of
the people involved as to what the relationship purposes.
Many people view sex as only being legitimately obtainable within an
exclusive pairwise relationship, and so have their desire for sex
(which they frequently believe that they cannot control) acting to
disassociate them from the relationship, which they may have entered
into for purposes greatly involving obtaining sex in the first place.
Relationships founded on some other purposes than legitimizing
intimacy have been known to regard sex as a pleasant expression
of affection, and to find the borders drawn very differently than
to regard sex with another as a betrayal. They have also been
known to regard sex as a sacramental expression of commitment to
the purposes of the relationship - it, like so much, varies with
the people.
Graydon
Angelwing
> In article <1tc87p$8...@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>,
> mre...@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Mary Reiter) says:
> >I just don't think that "being a _guy_" is an excuse to sleep around.
> >
> It isn't.
>
> However, this sort of problem has a lot to do with the perceptions of
> the people involved as to what the relationship purposes.
I don't think this was the intent of the post - a debate on who is going to
sleep around and why. It seems on the surface that his girlfriend (who was
only 21 when they got together [aren't I a whiz at math] and coincidentally
that is the age he got married) has a grip on reality and Matthew isn't quite
there yet. He got married at 21, had babies and got divorced and went
*directly* into another relationship. He's not experienced singleness as an
adult, as she pointed out, and he might want to taste that delicious freedom
of not only being able to make your own decisions but having some life
experience to back them up. She is not backing away from the possibility
that he might have sex with someone. Who knows who says "being a guy" ...
maybe he just thought that was what she was inferring. The point is that
he's asking if LDRs work and if anyone has experience with them working with
these caveats. And I say that since he's not had much experience with being
on his own it certainly wouldn't hurt for them to see other people,
especially with the quite large age difference between them. Excuse my arm
chair psychology, but going right into a relationship with someone the same
age as your just divorced spouse when you got married is just re-living the
past - maybe to get it right this time? But one will continue to make the
same mistakes if big changes aren't made, right? Take a chance, Matthew. Go
out with someone your own age. Live a little. If it's meant to be you'll
make it happen.
Angelwing - besides, it's more likely for a women to sleep around.... :-)
Dave Heisler
> chair psychology, but going right into a relationship with someone the same
> age as your just divorced spouse when you got married is just re-living the
> past - maybe to get it right this time?
How about going right into a relationship with whatever aged person
after a breakup / divorce? Sounds like therapy to me.
d ( i got a couch, but I ain't no doctor )
James Preston
}wa...@hermit.suite.com writes:
}>My relationship with my SO is what I have questions about. After I
}>moved, she called to discuss our situation re: dating others. She
}>knew that me (being a _guy_) would probably want to start sleeping
}>around a bit.
}Gee! This increases my comfort level regarding the ability
}of men to stay faithful.
}Aaaarrrrrrggggggg!
Notice that it was the *woman* here who just *assumed* that the man
would want to sleep around. I can assure you that some of us not
only would prefer to remain faithful in such a situation but would
also be deeply offended at the suggestion that we would want otherwise.
--James Preston
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bad blood will drive you crazy. Bad blood will drive you mad.
Bad blood, is like an egg stain on your jeans.
You can lick it, but it still won't go away.
--Bonzo Dog Band
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Gordon Weaver
Why take this so seriously? The way I read this, one 23 year old woman
told her SO, a 38 year old man, that she thinks that he is not capable
of being sexually monogamous if that requires long periods of sexual
abstinence. He (or perhaps she?) suggest that this is normal for a
guy.
I don't think this says much about the ability of men to stay faithful.
First, they are coming to an agreement, so it is not really an issue
of unfaithfulness, but rather commitment.
Second, a man who excuses his behavior 'because that is what guys do'
is avoiding personal responsibility. Just as a woman would be if she
excused her behavior 'because that is what women do.' Not to rag on the
original poster, but the word 'guy' tends to convey a sense of a male
who is too old to be a boy and too immature to be a man.
Third, men are not all the same. Some are more monogamous, some are
less. Some are more responsible, some are less. Usually, you can
tell what sort of person you are dealing with, and thus avoid
getting involved with someone whose behavior you don't like.
Peace,
Michael.
=======
He: "I can't do that. Guys don't do that."
She: "Don't be a guy. Be a *man*."
--paraphrased from the movie "Say Anything."
CatWoman
] mre...@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Mary Reiter) writes:
]
] }wa...@hermit.suite.com writes:
] }>My relationship with my SO is what I have questions about. After I
] }>moved, she called to discuss our situation re: dating others. She
] }>knew that me (being a _guy_) would probably want to start sleeping
] }>around a bit.
]
] }Gee! This increases my comfort level regarding the ability
] }of men to stay faithful.
]
] }Aaaarrrrrrggggggg!
]
] Notice that it was the *woman* here who just *assumed* that the man
] would want to sleep around. I can assure you that some of us not
] only would prefer to remain faithful in such a situation but would
] also be deeply offended at the suggestion that we would want otherwise.
Thank you - I am glad to see someone else read the paragraph
the same way I did - that she was making an assumption of
what he would do based on his gender, not on HIM.
Maybe she was projecting *her* possible actions onto him?
Diana
Michael Nielsen
No wonder not many females trust males! When there are guys
like that around. That Really does wonders for the reputations of the
male of the species.
Then again as a species we have been a dismal failure.
[figure that one out :->]
mike
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
JOKE == (:->) Michael Nielsen @ 1993
ce...@groper.jcu.edu.au Disclamer :- I'm Innocent
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Nielsen
Not a problem as long as that goes for GALS aswell.
aa...@minster.york.ac.uk
: I just don't think that "being a _guy_" is an excuse to sleep around.
:
Is 'being a _guy_' and it being Spring enough? :-) No??
Aaron
aa...@minster.york.ac.uk
: I just don't think that "being a _guy_" is an excuse to sleep around.
:
Speaking seriously for a moment - it is an outrageous suggestion and
indicates that she [the woman in the original tale] has a low opinion
of men, and maybe even herself.
Aaron