Well, yes, sometimes you love someone so much you just want to try, you are just bursting with the urge to make the effort. If both of you could only be that way! And stay that way, oh, wouldn't that be nice.
What I did, Ann Marie, was too things, I realized you were very bright, and someone who must and will learn, whether you do it yourself or not, and I envisioned what I will now call a soulmate for you, a perfect match for you, who I would see as someone to help you learn, among other things. But if you don't agree, at least do this exercise, try to imagine the perfect match for yourself. If it isn't someone very smart who knows a lot, I think it would be a mistake. What kind of person would you envision?
All this talk about trying still bothers me. Your earlier talk, Ann-Marie, in the soul-mate thread, where you say of someone, I assume the father of your children, that you always get back together, at least as friends, describes what is called a dynamic equilibribum, like a marble at the bottom of a bowl, or suspended on the end of a string, where if disturbed, it will get back to the centre without much trying. But there is also the situation of trying balance a broomstick on the tip of your nose. With a lot of trying, it can be done. Yes, with enough trying all sorts of things CAN be done, but that doesn't mean they should be done. With the right relationships, you shouldn't have to try. That is part of what soul-mate means, an answer belonging on another thread, but here, it is part of what romance is all about, in a really romantic situation everything is just right, and you don't have to try, or maybe you try without realizing you are trying, and it doesn't feel like trying, because no effort seems to be expended. dpw
Personally, I always make a little note at the beginning when I am writing to someone whose profile indicated one thing but I think they might be interested anyway, but I know some men send out messages without that, in other words they do read the profile, but decide that maybe its worth a shot anyway.
Does that make them spam, to be ignored? Maybe. I would think a single word "sorry" wouldn't hurt you, but if you get dozens of them, I suppose that's too much to ask.
The thing is, an owful lot of women seem to have rather unreasonable expectations in their profiles, and if you never suggested they expand the envelope, there would be few to write to.
Betcha had a good time on your birthday after all, Ann Marie, you've been conspicuously absent. Betcha also missed another of those long posts of mine that make you so angry, just above our new Texan friend's contribution. I hope you go back and look at it. I wouldn't want you to go through life thinking a sleeping dictionary is some kind of sleep learning thing. Compulsory on topic: are you happy, woman?
I started the thread about whether women's mailboxes were always stuffed partly to answer this question, because so many men report being igored. I am ignored constantly, all the time. Now I am old, another reason to not be interested, but is that a reason to ignore my messages completely? I wouldn't have thought it would be so difficult to type the one word message "sorry", but I don't even get that. So when I read on another forum on another site a woman complaining that her mailbox was always completely stuffed full, I thought that might explain it. It does seem that women do get a fair bit of mail (more that I do, that's for sure), but I still think there is something wrong.
I don't know if we have a moderator. I kinda guessed she installed the software, seems to have had to bugfix it. Did you read her profile. Wow. My kinda woman. For her, I'd move to Minneanapolis!
Yes we all wish the best for William and Ann-Marie, and yes, we should realize, as I realized, that they are just friends planning a get together. But still I say, I trust William and I am sure Ann-Marie can take care of herself, but others should be careful. An interesting but distorted parallel on another thread is the case of Russian women trying to lure William and others to going to Russia where they might be "milked". There would be not the woman but the man who might be at risk.
Why? Really, I meant none. Well, what can I say. I was hoping to advise others, not you, just others, to be careful. I thought that a public spirited thing to do. I said at the beginning you were trustworthy. If you think that a lie there is little more I can say.
I don't know how easy it would be to post pictures here, even in profiles, but I could dedicate a page on my website to pix from here, and we could just put a URL in here, if we can get away with that. I do worry a little about the rule against URL, but so far I've ignored it and not been decapitated.
Ann-Marie, you are being, I think, stroppy, if I grasp the term. The first line of my post said that William was trustworthy and that was all that needed to be said, then I said you could take care of yourself. The rest of the message was for OTHER PEOPLE who might be tempted to imitate you. I did NOT mean to insult yuou or William. However I am sorry for not making this clear. I did not mean to insinuate anything, I was not insinuating anything. But I am sorry for not making that clear.
Happy Birthday Ann-Marie! I wish you love and happiness!
Oh, dear, Ann-Marie, how you did misunderstand me. When I said a "sleeping dictionary" I was making a very common joke, understood throughout the language learning community. When a woman who wants to learn Spanish, for example, says she is going to get a sleeping dictionary, she means she is going to get a Spanish boyfriend to help her learn the language during pillowtalk. I was suggesting that what you needed was a lover, and I did not mean to exclude a husband, but let's say a lover, a smart as you, but with a vast education, a sleeping dictionary, to teach you everything he know during pillowtalk in a few years. You see? Oh, yes, Ann-Marie, I do truly believe you are capable of growing on your own and I am sure you have been from an early age, but don't you want to be part of a couple? Couldn't you handle the two of you growing on your own, together? You could teach him, too, teach him to have what the Phoenix and I have both called your wonderful insights, during the same pillowtalk. That is what I envision for you, two people, teaching one another, growing on their own, together. My vision for you. But anyway, best wishes on your birthday, dear woman.
I agree Ann Marie has wonderful insights and I am outraged when she says she has no brainbox. You're obviously smart, Ann, though the educational system has betrayed you, no matter what it taught you, it gave you no confidence in it. But you could learn more. Not in school though. No, you are too independent of mind for that. I'll think of something. Of course the best way to learn anything is the equivalent of the best way to learn a foreign language. What's that? To get a sleeping dictionary, of course. The man you get should be smart, like you, Ann, but have an incredible education, and be a great teacher, then after a few years with him you'll know it all too. And your kid(s) then get a head start on it as well. All of which should help with everything.
Yes, we need someone who will want us for who we are. That would be the right person for us, and we would be the right person for them. But if you are NICE enough, they just might overlook the differences and take you anyway, even if you are not the right person. The moral of the story: be very very nice to a woman, or keep looking.
Though I get so little mail I envy you even the mail you don't want Blondelady, but I must say there is something wrong with services that made no provision for feedback. It would be so simple to add a button "No this was not from someone I wanted to hear from!" so they could adjust their matching. Connecting singles doesn't seem to bother using matching, really, it's mostly a catalogue, but JumpDates does, and could. There is a lot of what I call social technology that is so so obvious which most of these sites don't use. Of course these are free sites, and we should not expect too much, they seem like they want to compete, and add all sorts of features I consider silly. Anyway, good luck, and I'd like to hear any comments you might have. dpw
Finnish stats or not, that's what I am so curious about the experiences of women, not only on this site but others. I started a threat about women getting their mail boxes stuffed here, and Blondelady did post a message on it, but didn't mention these interesting statistical data. Two mails, and you said ONLY 2 mails, so you were expecting more, Ms. Lady. Added a pix, then 20. Hmmm. Interesting. Thanks. Of course you are a beauty, so I understand.
From reading his posts and looking at his website I would say that the Phoenix is trustworthy, and that is all that need be said. I am certain Ann-marie can take care of herself, too. But since there are other people reading these pages who might take this example to hand, let me just note that in general, if a man flies to England from America, he wants something for his airfare, even if he talks of friendship, and the women should be careful. That seems unkind, but as I was noting in another post, there are nasty people out there, people who are not honest. Of course there are women who wouldn't mind, and that is up to her. But it would be so much more romantic if it was all above board, either just friendship, like William and Ann-marie, or romance, which I hope will send some of us flying across that ocean one way or the other.
Please, Miss Foxy Eyes, do not confuse the important distinction between The Nice and The Nasty with the easier distinction between The Mature and The Childish. A childish guy of any age who makes comments about what you are wearing might actually be quite nice, well, perhaps not, but he might be. You'd never know until you got to know him, and he'd be so annoying you might not ever get get to know him. A mature guy, of any age, well, but certainly NOT me! might think about what a pretty woman like you was wearing, but would be much too mature to ask. That wouldn't make him a nice guy. He might actually be a rather nasty guy, once you got to know him (but NOT me!), and unfortunately because he behaved so well, so maturely, there is a very good chance you might get to know him, only to discover afterwards just how nasty he could be once he got what he wanted. Separating the sheep from the goats is not as easy as noting what they ask about your lingerie, sad to say. The easiest answer is the one on another thread. Take it slowly. After enough messages the nasty will get bored and drop away or the mask will slip.
I sympathize with Blondelady's complaint about being far away. I couldn't make the system tell me how many men are near her, but there are only 7 women ConnectingSingles has in Finland, and she is the only one in North Finland, so the odds aren't good. They do a lot better for my area, but it's not good coverage, just a few in my city, mostly kids. It's worth browing by area to see what the odds are, but I think if you meet the right person, one of you might have to move. It would be worth moving, for the right person. So first it's typed words in a message or maybe on a forum then in a message, then maybe a real e-mail between your real e-mail addresses, exhchanging phone numbers, then phoning, and someday someone will have to decide either to go to Finland or have you and the kids move somewhere else. I actually got a real message today, on another site, from a 26 year old South Aftrican in Spain! Hmmmm. Most unlikely. But if you get one, Spain is a lot warmer than North Finland, milady. dpw
Unless there's a huge number of people signed up here there just won't be many in your area. If there aren't many in your area, then the odds on successful dating are low. It's much easier to get people to be friendly than to consider dating, with all that implies. But still, it can work, even where the numbers are low, if you wait long enough, as people keep coming and going, eventually someone from your area who is compatible with you is likely to sign up. That's me being optimistic, anyway.
Did you say very few emails? That's better than I'm doing. Really, I'm not doing well at all, approximately no emails except on another site one short polite response to a specific query about this exact subject, how many emails a person gets. I believe women tend to get emails, and slightly youngish women tend to get a lot of them, even remotely youngish and remotely cutish women do. But statistics on dates? I don't know. Funny, ironic, really, in my (unpublished) novels written before I got back on line recently, I had my characters loudly agreeing that dating services don't work. I couldn't imagine myself using one. When I signed up here I told myself it was research. But dammit, I am lonely.
well, I've changed it a little. For me simplifying is hard, but I've changed it a little. I'll try some more.
Here is another of those (forbidden) URLs, this one for the site I changed overnight, just in case you want to take a quick peek. It is a little simpler, on the first screenful, anyway, the rest will have to wait.
It's not going slow to enable a perfect match, Ann-Marie, it is going slow to make sure you are with the right one. In the old days you used to date several people at once, if you could, I couldn't, but that was the idea, but go slow till you figured out the best one, then go steady with him or her, then do that for a long time, then have a long engagement, lots of time to back off.
Is there a computer scientist in the house? What happened to dear WildStrawberries? She disappeared. I hope she won the game. Anyway she was a computer scientist and would recognize the diffrence between breadth-first and depth-first searches. We are looking for something. We can try to find it by a shallow examination of every branch of the tree, that is to say, every person we meet, or we can follow the first branch we come to right to the very tip before rejecting it, that is to say, we can become very intimate very quickly with the first person who will have us. People very between these strategies, men tending to do the latter, which it depth-first searching, and some women are very much the former, breadth-first searching, getting to know a lot of men but never getting very close to any of them.
Personally, I don't think people are very good at searching for love, and I think if you are with the right person it is completely obvious. It is only when you are with someone who isn't right that it becomes a problem. However in our current society only about 1 in 1,000 people are lucky enough to meet the right person.
But what is slow and what is fast? In my experience if you don't kiss by the second date and start getting intimate by the fifth then a woman feels either uncomfortable, and looks for someone who will try harder, or too comfortable and settles for friendship, or both. So that's the time frome. But it is also my experience that you never really get to know someone for six months. Until then, you don't really know if they are right for you. They may just be on their best behaviour, or, oops, you may be. So, in a sense it was better in the old days when you weren't expected to make a move on someone for six months, at least the two time frames conincided and by the time you got close you really knew the person was right for you. dpw
A park, especially a park with nice benches to sit on good things to watch, places to walk, concessions serving food and drink, and so on. For example, Vancouver's Stanley Park, or the many safe areas of New York's Central Park -- in daylight, or the mall in Washington DC, which has nice museums nearby if one feels inspired.
LL187 Forum Posts (611)
RE: forums
Yes, we do pretty well, all of us. I am very impressed. Let's keep it up.dpw