Being overly sensitive may not necessarily be a good thing.
To some extent, I think that a person's socialization (that is, the manner in which he/she was raised, and their environment, both domestic and social) may contribute to the degree of his/her sensitivity or insensitivity. Note that I said to some extent, since some persons do rise above an adverse environment.
The effects of criticism are especially amplified in highly sensitive people.
Highly sensitive people have reactions to criticism that are more intense than less sensitive people. As a result, they may employ certain tactics to avoid said criticism, including people-pleasing (so that there is no longer anything to criticize), criticizing themselves first, and avoiding the source of the criticism altogether.
How do you view persons who frequently post "This blog does not allow comments" blogs? In my opinion, there are two male bloggers here at CS who often practise this.
One usually post mainly pictorial blogs and never allows comments (as far as I am aware), but at the same time, posts comments on other persons' blogs.
The other may post a blog allowing comments initially, and sometime later, shut off comments from others.
Of course, they are entitled to do so, but are these examples of 15?
What do you think?
I have seen blogs posted by others, questioning the rationale for posting "This blog does not allow comments" blogs.
There are a lot of positive attributes to "sensitivity" in a person, ever being highly sensitive. Perhaps, this is compensates for the "highly insensitive" persons of which there are quite a few.
Based on your profile (which I simply had to view after reading your blog), I must say you are an amazing person. It is very refreshing to know that there are people like you in this world. Just continue to be yourself! Have a lovely day!
If you still cannot access the song, do a google search with: Percy Sledge, It tears me up, youtube. Using that, you should find a video you can access.
Your blog reminds me of Kahlil Gibran's words: "...For that which is boundless in you abides in the mansion of the sky, whose door is the morning mist, and whose windows are the songs and the silences of night."
"So if things do not work for whatever reason, the feeling of being "in love" is a rich experience, something that we are given the opportunity to find and share with someone. Yes, I think it is "better to have loved and lost, than never to have loved at all."
I think your statement, quoted above, has captured the true meaning of the quote, based on retrospection (the postcommitment stage).
However, for the benefit of those who may be at the precommitment stage, I am asking the question:
In the initial stages of a relationship, how can one tell whether that relationship will grow into "real love"?
I am very happy for you that you had 26 years of marriage, filled with wonderful memories.
"Some relationships are not based on real love. They’re more chemistry than love".
"Some relationships start out as chemistry and grow into real love relationships. Relationships that last are the ones with people who understand what love is – a commitment".
With reference to your statements mentioned above, I view marriage as a commitment.
Perhaps, the quoted saying can be viewed from two perspectives:: the precommitment & the postcommitment
From the precommitment perspective (anticipation), the person says: I have decided to commit myself in the relationship, no matter how things may turn out since it is better to have loved and lost than to never have loved at all.
From the post commitment perspective (retrospection), the person has already been in the relationship, and may have lost, in the sense that although he/she wanted the relationship to continue, it was terminated by the partner. Nevertheless, there were positive aspects to it, based on which it is better to have loved and to have lost than to never have loved at all.
In the initial stages of a relationship, how can one tell whether that relationship will grow into "real love"?
1)"When loving someone deeply causes long lasting suffering to a person when its lost, often for years, I don't know that is "better" than never to have loved at all."
2)".however, it is definitely better to have loved and lost than to never have truly loved another person. Going through life and not loving is missing out on one of life's greatest experiences - love broadens the heart."
Viewing your statement in two parts, as shown above:
In the second part, you say it is definitely better to have loved and lost than to never have truly loved another person.
Isn't it possible for someone to have truly loved another person and to not have been loved by that person in return? In that sense, the first person can be said to have lost, that is, in love. As mentioned in the first part of your statement, in such a situation, the first person may experience long lasting suffering, often for years. This is likely to happen initially, upon the realization that he/she loved the other person, perhaps very deeply, but his/her love was not reciprocated.
With the passage of time, that suffering may be alleviated. It is at this point in time, or after, that one may look back in retrospection, and realize that there were some positive aspects of the experience, and agree with the quote.
In other words, one may experience long lasting suffering in love initially, and eventually come to the realization that it is better to have loved and have lost than to never have loved at all.
Throughout history, the theme of unrequited love has resulted in some of the most memorable and famous works of art, especially in poetry and song. It seems that the pain and heartache suffered in loving another and not having that love reciprocated has opened up a deep level of creativity and expression in the human psyche. And yet, despite the pain and suffering, the individual remains grateful for the experience. Perhaps this is a testimony to the power of love in our humanity.
Thanks for sharing your story with us. I am sorry about the unpleasantness you experienced in your marriage which ended in divorce. However, I am glad that the love of your children was able to change your life in a positive way. Best wishes to you for the future!
Yes, I used the term attraction in general sense. Looks are just a part of the process of attraction. Actions such as kindness, thoughtfulness, etc., may also be factors that influence attraction.
In the blog, I stated: Ultimately, one may have to make a decision with regard to committing or not committing oneself to the relationship.
I view marriage as a commitment.
Perhaps, the quoted saying can be viewed from two perspectives:: the precommitment & the postcommitment
From the precommitment perspective (anticipation), the person says: I have decided to commit myself in the relationship, no matter how things may turn out since it is better to have loved and lost than to never have loved at all.
From the post commitment perspective (reflection), the person has already been in the relationship, and may have lost, in the sense that although he/she wanted the relationship to continue, it was terminated by the partner. Nevertheless, there were positive aspects to it, based on which it is better to have loved and to have lost than to never have loved at all.
“To feel that loved and complete is something very beautiful and there is nothing quiet like it.. to have someone who you feel complete and whole with. To know that person loves YOU more than another person on earth... is quiet a special feeling and vice versa.”
I am happy that you have such beautiful memories of your marriage which eventually came to an end.
“Love is a decision, it is a judgment, it is a promise. If love were only a feeling, there would be no basis for the promise to love each other forever. A feeling comes and it may go. How can I judge that it will stay forever, when my act does not involve judgment and decision.” ? Erich Fromm, The Art of Loving
ceaser Just a suggestion for you! Perhaps, you can mention something of your interests and hobbies in your profile. This may attract persons with similar interests, or you can search for such persons and initiate a correspondence and discussion with them. You stated you are looking for talk, email, penpal. That may be a starting point to develop a relationship.
Here are some notable cases re the implementation of the Bradley Amendment in the U.S.:
Bobby Sherrill, a Lockheed employee in Kuwait from North Carolina, was captured by Iraqis and spent nearly five months as an Iraqi hostage. Sherrill was arrested the night after his release for not paying $1,425 in child support while he was a hostage.
Clarence Brandley, a Texas high school janitor, was wrongly convicted in 1980 of murder. After spending many years in prison and on death row, he was released in 1990 and he then sued the state of Texas for wrongful imprisonment in 1993. The state then responded with a bill for nearly $50,000 in child support that had not been paid while in prison. Dianna Thompson of The American Coalition of Fathers and Children told the Houston Chronicle that federal law makes it illegal for states to forgive child support payments regardless of circumstance. Michael McCormick, of the American Coalition of Fathers and Children said, concerning child support payments, "I'm not aware of any state where it says a wrongly convicted individual is relieved of their obligation." Despite paying child support every month since his release via wage garnishment, Brandley's child support total reached $73,000 in 2003, when a judge reduced his total to $22,000; however, this amount is still more than triple the $7,000 in back child support Brandley owed at the time of his arrest in 1980. Recently, Brandley lost his job in the economic downturn in 2008; he has since lost his car and house as the child support bills and interest keep coming.
Taron James, a U.S. Navy veteran from California, was forced to continue to pay child support until 2006, even after the child was demonstrated by DNA test in 2001 to be not his; James paid $12,000 in such payments. A California District Court of Appeal eventually set aside the paternity judgment against James in 2006, but the same court denied James' request to have his child support payments reimbursed.
Larry Souter was wrongly convicted of murder in 1992 and spent 13 years in prison before being exonerated and released in 2005. Upon release, he was ordered by the court to explain why he shouldn't be held in contempt for failing to pay $38,000 in combined back child support, interest, and penalties. Payments were not suspended for at least 3 years while he was in prison. The interest and penalties accumulated while he was still in prison, and presumably unable to pay.
Geoffrey Fisher was taken to court in 2001 due to being delinquent on child support payments, and had his driver's license suspended. Fisher pushed for custody, and a state-ordered paternity test determined he was not the biological father. In January 2002 a judge determined he no longer had to pay child support, but the attorney general's office claimed that Fisher still owed $11,450, approximately 3 year's worth of back support payments from the time of the child's birth until the time of the paternity test. State officials have stated that this is because Fisher failed to file a court motion to relieve himself of financial responsibility to the child, and that Fisher is thus regarded as the legal father and responsible for child support.
I agree with what you have stated re the hardships faced by single mothers. But does the woman have any legal right to claim child support from the man to assist with the financial expenses?
When it comes to maintenance, the law is fairly straightforward. It is in the application of the law that difficulties lie. One of the basic principles of child maintenance is that the extent of the obligation is based on the standard of living, income and means of the person/s obliged to pay. The obligation does not rest solely on the father; it rests on both parents, according to their respective means. The fact that the father can adequately support the child on his own does not mean that the mother can avoid contributing. In fact, it would be contrary to public policy and invalid to insert a clause into a divorce settlement agreement stating that only one parent need maintain the child. Neither spouse has a statutory right to maintenance. The language in the Divorce Act is clearly discretionary and the ex-spouse seeking an award for maintenance has no right as such. The discretionary power of the court to make a maintenance award includes the power to make no award at all. As mentioned, our law favours the ‘clean break’ principle, which basically means that after a divorce the parties should become economically independent of each other as soon as possible.
A lot of women may view it the other way. According to the research, more men have extra-marital affairs than women. This would suggest that it may also be easy for a man to find a partner.
online today!socrates44 Blog Comments (1,088)
16 Habits Of Highly Sensitive People
RainComeShineIn the article on which this blog is based, and for which I posted the link at the bottom of the blog, reference is made to two books:
1) The Highly Sensitive Person
by Elaine N. Aron
2) "Quiet"
by Susan Cain
Perhaps you can also view those books.
I wish you and your new love a wonderful "sensitive" relationship.