Archive for the ‘Giving Rejection’ Category

Judy’s Silent Rejection

Monday, June 7th, 2010

From audio journal episode:  AJE-2010-05-31-21-52

I thought when I got back in touch with [Judy] a few weeks ago (details  here), that things would be different this time.  But so far, we’ve only talked once on the phone in nearly a month, and my messages have either gone tersely answered, or totally unanswered.  So, I’m concerned.  Further, the single time that we did talk, [Judy] revealed some disheartening information; stuff that suggests that her feelings for me are today, no deeper or abiding than they were in 1997; the year we met.  I fear therefore, that allowing myself to “fall” for her again will only result in the same emotional torments that I remember so well from those early days.

Indeed, I wonder just how caring [Judy] would be now based on the choices she made at first, and in the years since.  Plus, I might either lose romantic interest altogether, or go too far the other way, and fall head over heels should we become romantically and physically involved.  Either she won’t care enough, or I’ll shortly stop caring as much as I do.  Both scenarios daunt me. 

But a third situation scares me most of all; that I’ll keep caring too much, and she’ll continue caring too little.  She’s always been less vulnerable to me than I’ve been to her, and I so hate being “the underdog.”  It’s happened too many times with [First Love], [Vee], and others.  I’ve waited for them to call or write way more than they have on me.  At this point, [Judy] appears no different.  So I’d need some intense assurance that this imbalance does not exist, before fully sinking my heart into a new romance with [Judy].

In 1997 and 1998, [Judy] was usually unavailable to talk on the phone; even though I was paying for all the calls.  Eventually, we agreed to establish a Saturday morning call schedule, and we’d talk for an hour each week.  Not bad.  But after a few weeks, this fell apart as well, as [Judy] took to traveling, schooling, vacationing, and other pursuits.  Something always seemed to get in the way of our growing closer. 

Unfortunately, it seems that after a month, we have the same patterns emerging all over again.  Not even thirteen years has changed this apparently.  So time does not heal all wounds.  I’ve sent three emails and one voice mail; two of those messages have gone unanswered, and the other two were tersely answered at best.  True, our one phone conversation a couple weeks ago was highly enjoyable.  We got caught up and shared our current life aspirations.  But I want conversations like this a couple times a week anyhow, and I wish to be able to count on them occurring.  But with [Judy], though they’re nice when they do happen, this sharing is hard to come by on a consistent basis.  Though she says all the right things, she typically does not act them out, and she’s slow to reply besides. 

As I’ve written previously, a mission of mine is to avoid those who repeatedly care insufficiently; especially those as intensely sexy as [Judy].  She was beautiful 1997, and based on things she’s told me recently, I suspect her to be just as pretty now. 

Further, as it did then, her extra allure makes her inattentiveness hurt more than the same behavior from someone less well-endowed would.  So, I do hold prettier girls to higher standards of affection and special treatment, to best protect myself from needless pain because greater appeal implies a greater chance of deeper hurt.  So deciding to pursue a “perfect ten” accordingly, warrants greater caution. 

Thus with [Judy] so extraordinarily stunning therefore, coupled with her apparent casual regard for my feelings, I think I’d best halt pursuing her for now.  I wish never to again experience the pains of 1997. On many August and September afternoons at that time, I could feel depressing waves of dismay roll over me and hold me down many times, as I lay on my couch at the Ben Franklin Parkway place, unable to concentrate on work.  [Judy’s] choice to be absent so often hurt me so much that for some weeks, I cared  nothing about advancing my software engineering career.  I can’t afford such distractions today. 

She and I have a rich history of disagreeing on how quickly and in what fashion our relationship ought to develop.  So I’m concerned that we’d continue the arguing, if what we have now is allowed to blossom into more than mere friendship.  I so wish to not repeat history.  But history does tend to repeat itself, as humans tend to be creatures of habit, and [Judy] appears to be no exception. She acts today as she did back then, and I feel today as I felt back then.  Indications are that her tendencies where I’m concerned have not changed through the years, and so repeating our history is a virtual certainty if I was to show my belly again.  I’m sure of this for reasons I’ll bring up below.

She always says things that make me think that perhaps we really have something wonderful this time.  But she rarely backs up those pleasant words with supportive actions. Her failure to return my messages in more timely manners is proof of this, and is likely a red flag that I should heed and stay away.  Why?  Because if she doesn’t care enough after all this time to behave in more consistently affectionate ways, then she’s never going to.  I’ve conveyed my interest and done what I can to assure her that I’m for real.  She’s even lamented about wanting someone to hang out with in New York City, and that she hasn’t sampled more of that great place because she has no one to see it with. I’ve told her that I’d love to be her guide and have her be mine.  But her silence persists.  Yes, we may have something very special.  But it seems to be lopsided; tilted against me.   

In fact, her choices in the 1990s support this conclusion.  They suggested with piercing ferocity that she cared way less back them for me than I did for her.  Indeed, my pain then was likely a strong signal from my intuition to get clear immediately because something was terribly wrong with the situation.  But I listened not; ignoring my better judgment in the hopes that I’d guessed her incorrectly, and that she would someday, come around.   The “electricity” I felt anytime she’d touch me proved impossible to ignore.  So any doubts I had about her intensions I pushed aside; that is, until the emptiness became too much to shoulder.  Eventually, I finally ended all communications in the winter of 1998; but not before I’d already invested a lot emotionally, and hurt a big amount when no return on that investment came back. 

Up until our severance, I told myself everyday that I was just being ridiculous and childishly insecure, and that I was worrying too much that she did not love me. I made excuses for her; saying that she was young and thus, inexperienced.  So, I should allow for a little inconsistency and lacking resoluteness in her.  Young people, I reasoned, need lots of time to sort out their priorities, and it wasn’t fair that I expect her to know her life at 23 as well as I knew mine at 37 years of age.   

She said back then that she loved me.  Yet she cancelled a three-day visit she’d earlier agreed to make to Philly over Labor Day weekend; opting instead to travel out west and spend that time with friends instead of me.  Now in her defense, as a consolation she offered to meet me for dinner at the train station during a layover on her way out there.  But we’d only have had a couple hours together instead of the few days that we’d originally discussed.  Well, I was so angry and hurt that she’d decided not to stay longer, that I told her thanks but no thanks. 

As mentioned above, these sorts of disappointments plagued our entire first-round involvement.  In the following months, reaching her by telephone once she’d gone back home to eastern Europe became increasingly more difficult. She was just not around enough; good excuses notwithstanding. 

She’s led quite a colorful life though ever since I’ve known her; finding both time and capital to travel extensively.  Indeed, she told me last month that she had come back to America several times following the summer of 1997; the year we met for the first time.   In 1998, she returned to work as a cocktail waitress in Atlantic City; a mere two hours from Philadelphia.  I would have taken the bus there to visit her often; if only I’d known she was there.  In 1999, she came back to see other parts of the US; all of which were a mere phone call away.  In the early 2000s, she reappeared to secure a language teaching job in CA, and lived out there for at least a year.  But though I was happy for her and all of the enriching experiences she was no doubt acquiring through all her visits, I couldn’t help but wonder: Why in all that time she was so close by, did she never, EVER call me?   There’s no reason I can fathom except that she just did not desire it. 

She also revealed that she met an American man in CA, fell in love, got married, and took him home to the Czech Republic, where for several years anyhow they lived happily.  They’ve separated now however, because one day, he just up and admitted that he simply did not love her anymore.  Apparently, once he got over there, he found the Czech women way too appealing to stay married to [Judy], and he has since moved another woman into the very apartment that he and [Judy] once shared.  Nice guy, ‘eh?    Anyway, she’s come back to the US yet again, without him, to escape the pain of seeing him so often with other girls. 

But while her plight saddens me, I’m offended too because she was here all that time.  She said that she loved me, and that she appreciated the depth of my feelings toward her.  Yet she chose him, (HIM!) while I was so easily reachable.  She could have picked me, and I would have moved mountains to get to her.  But she didn’t, and now that he’s left her and she is once again without a man, does she view me as a mere consolation?  That’s probably so, given her inattentiveness.  So could I ever trust that she’s come to think of me as “top dog” when she’s for so long treated me as second best?  Probably not.  Besides, she’s making plans to move back to her country if things in NYC don’t brighten for her over the next year.  Scary.  I mean, what if I fell deeply in love with her again only to have her say one day that she’s leaving?  Not good.  I might take this risk if this was the only worry.  But with all these other misgivings, this is just one more of an already robust collection of straws that finally broke the proverbial camel’s back, I’m afraid.  I’m uninterested in trying to overcome any woman’s indifference, even a lady as exciting as [Judy]; especially a lady as exciting as [Judy].  She may pity me, yes.  But she’ll never love me. 

Perhaps intellectually, she realizes now that my feelings might have lasted longer than his.  She may reason that I’m a great guy, based on the consistency and enthusiasm I’ve offered her.  But nonetheless, she’ll never love me.  She can tell herself all the good things about me she wants.  But this will never make her heart skip two beats when I walk into a room where she is.  She may have intended, by choice, to work to build a new association between us.  But her heart’s just not into it.  She likes me, and may want to help me.  But she’s not enthralled with me. 

In light of all this, I doubt that I could ever believe that she would come to see me as her night in shining armor or her prairie song.  Throughout our history, she just hasn’t been around enough, and this has not changed in the entire thirteen years we’ve known each other.  She doesn’t care for me in that way; though she tries to disguise this fact with kind words and pleasing conversation when pressed.  But again, her actions speak a different story; way more loudly than anything she might say.  While she has COMpassion; she has no passion for me.  I see that clearly; though she may refuse to. 

Though I don’t blame her for what she feels (or does not), at times I can’t help but cringing and feeling a little angry at her for all that time I spent in Philly, where we could have been together, but were not.  Those were lonely years for me, and her nurturing presence could have made all the difference between the joyous existence that I’d so hoped to find when I moved there, and the life of melancholy that I actually experienced.  I could have fed her French fries, covered her ears when loud trucks passed by, and shared my umbrella during those blustery late fall evenings, when ocean winds whipped around those tall downtown buildings.  We could have skated at The Palace, strolled along South Street, sampled the finest of Philly cuisine, ridden the subways, and taken in all those great cultural and historic attractions that southeastern Pennsylvania offers.  But instead, I did most of that alone, with a hole in my heart all the while.  I needed her.  But she chose not to be there, and try as I might, I don’t think I’ll be able to fully forgive her for that chronic absence; though that was thirteen years ago.  Seeing me has never been a high priority for her.  In fact, she could have located me, had she really wanted to; my name has been all over the Internet now for at least ten years, and my phone numbers were always listed in the telephone directory.  So a couple simple Google searches would have revealed me to her.  Nonetheless, it seems that she never tried. 

So it must be clear to readers now that learning that, at least during one of those summers she was so close by but did not bother to call, really upset me.  While I’d never wish her to do anything that she did not wish herself, I was still surprised to learn that I carry some of that old anger for her today.  So why is that anger still within me?  Because, with her words, she mislead me into thinking that she cared more than she did, and perhaps it’s that deception that is making my blood boil now because she was at it again last month.  Our history has fanned my sense of foreboding, and I hate relationships that have anger built into them from the get-go.  I just wish she would have owned up to her lacking feelings for me during those early months, and I resent her because she didn’t.  If our history is any indication (and I think it the best one), she’ll always and frequently discover other places and priorities, that please her more than I.  I’m just a better-than-nothing to her, and I’ll never strap myself to that lovers cross again. 

Thus, now that I’ve had a few weeks to fully absorb all that she told me last month, I’ve become quite comfortable in my decision not to pursue her further and to reject any pursuits she herself might initiate; for history shows that she actually cares less than she says, and she’s still never around enough besides.  I see a pattern now as warning that back then I’d become so caught up in, and hated.  So I’m hell bent on steering clear of it in this second round.  I love her so.  But because of that, I must avoid her like the plague, since she does not love me with equal vulnerability. 

I may discuss this with her at some point.  But after one voice mail unanswered and one email message tersely answered, not to mention that weeks have elapsed since she last called, I think I’ll just let her discover this on her own.  So effectively, I’ll reject her in the same silent way that she’s rejected me repeatedly; not because I wish to “get her back” mind you.  It’s just easier to say nothing; particularly since getting hold of her has proven time and time again to be so difficult.  Besides, talking about this further will not change my mind, and I’ll never be able to convince her to love me in the ways that I need to be loved.  While I enjoy fantasizing about the two of us together, my wakeful side realizes that in light of the evidence, this will never be; not really. 

I’m trying not to take her disinterest too personally.  But I expected to hear much more from her by now.  So, it’s time to move on, and thus, I’ll trouble her no more.  Should she call again, I may say all this.  Or I may direct her to this blog.  Or, perhaps I won’t even answer the phone at all.  We’ll see.  I owe her nothing at this point; and am hard pressed to volunteer any compassion right now.  I’m raw.

Take care.

Tom Hesley

Related Posts

Avoid Distracting Compassion

Tuesday, June 1st, 2010

I’ve found that a fulfilling relationship starts with picking the right women.  But to do that, we should know what we must have, and must not, in order to fall in love.  Our “requirements” should be clear in our minds, and we should insist on them as gently as possible, but firmly as well.  However, if we allow our sense of compassion to get in the way, we’ll end up picking the wrong people every time. 

We should not compromise for the sake of the other when evaluating how attractive we find them.  True.  We may feel sad that someone is lonely; someone that we deem non-datable.  Indeed, their loneliness may be due to their lacking allure.  It probably is in fact.  That’s no one’s fault really; it’s just an unpleasant fact of the human condition.  So we may wish to ease their pain by agreeing to take them out.  But allowing our compassion to soften our resolve, to persuade us to ignore our preferences, and then go out with them anyway despite the missing attraction, is ill-advised.  It may please them in the short term.  But we’ll be miserable and unfulfilled all the while.  For every smile they aim at us as a result of our kindness, we’ll be frowning inside no mater how strong our kindly persuasions are.  Their happiness would come at our expense; which is terrible soil for growing a fulfilling union that endures. 

Generally speaking, there’s no room for pity in romance; the two rarely exist together because someone who is desirable is not pitiable, and someone we pity we do not desire romantically. People generally do not fall for folks that they believe to be lacking or needy.  Pity (or whatever it is that promotes it) extinguishes romantic love; particularly if the traits they lack that make them pitiable in our eyes, are ones that we require in order to intensify our own passions.  E.g. If a lady prefers to date taller men, then, though she may feel sorry for someone shorter, she’ll never feel in-love with him as long as she feels sorry for him.  By definition, if she feels sorry for his inadequate height, then though she may wish to be kind to brighten his days a little, she’ll always, deep down, think him inadequate.  He will never be “perfect” to her as long as she sees something about him to feel sorry for.  In fact, we don’t feel sorry for people we consider completely adequate.  No amount of good will on her part will cancel out her sense that while he’s a great guy, he still just doesn’t “do it” for her.

There are essential roles for compassion to be sure; such as when a child gets sick, or when a lover is hurting once true love has already been established.  But pity is a lousy reason to move forward in a relationship when there’s no romantic motivation to do so.  Pity is never a good reason to stay, so don’t mistake it for true love.  While it may be a useful component in a relationship to get us through some rough patches, it should never be made the primary reason we stay involved with someone. 

Now when an already-existing attraction is suppressed due to prejudices, diagnosis biases, and ill-informed judgments, eliciting compassion might work to persuade someone to lower these barriers and allow their underlying feelings to come through.  But the joy of being kind is a poor substitute for the desires and gratifications of true love.  If there is no attraction, then pity for the other will never suffice to fulfill us as much as a deeper, truer love for them will.  So don’t go out with someone because you think they deserve it; do so because you feel that you deserve it and that you desire it.  Being a do-gooder might score you some brownie points with God.  But in my experience, it will never net you the love of your life. 

But, while the choice to be kind to another should never form the sole basis for why you would go out with them, it is nonetheless, best to treat all people kindly and respectfully; whether you wish to date them or not.  This information is critical.  But voicing your preferences is usually unpopular, for few like to hear from someone that they do not meet our preferences.  So it does no good to tell heavy women for example, that we’ll only date the thin, or to say to smokers that we find their habit unattractive. 

Experience proves that little positive effect results from sharing our individual passion preferences with potential lovers, and it’s probably a bad idea to tell someone outright that we find them unattractive at all.  Even if they would change, there’s no guarantee that after they did, per our preferences, that we’d find them any more alluring than we do now.  Further, implying that they do not measure up can make them cry, and this can tug hard at our heart strings.  When we see them so sad because we rejected them, we may be tempted to pity them and reverse course.  We may decide to go out with them anyhow, in spite of our better judgment.    

However, as much as we may wish to “save them,” we can neither change what we desire, nor what we do not.  So there’s probably nothing they can say should they learn this that will change our minds.  A drug addict would probably never convince me to find her attractive enough to fall in love with, even though I might be highly sensitive to her plight and be amazed that she’s gotten this far in life. 

The cold truth is that if we’re not predisposed to desire them already, then they won’t turn us around by arguing their hard-luck case.  They either have what we want or they don’t, because passion can be neither elicited, negotiated, nor coaxed.  It’s either there, or it isn’t; and if it isn’t, then attempting to explain to someone we’ve rejected precisely why it isn’t, will not console them, but only hurt them.   All they really need to know is that it isn’t, but they need not know why.  The very fact that it isn’t should be good enough for them. 

Indeed, I’ve erred here in my early years by allowing folks to talk me into revealing my exact reasons (as if I could even know those for sure) for declining to date them.  But my honesty, though gently expressed, offended them deeply, and the result was that they betrayed me in public forums; painting me as shallow, heartless, and needlessly brutal.  They shamed me for answering the questions that they themselves insisted that I speak.  Some even played recordings of me for all the others to hear in these discussions.  So I quickly came to understand that I gave them too much honesty; more generally, too much information. 

While some responded to me with contempt and vengeance, others cried, and blamed nature for not better equipping them to get me to fall for them.  Either that or they blamed themselves for my lacking interest.  My opinions of them lowered their opinions of themselves.  But I never wished to have that much power over another; for someone giving this much leverage to me might make them appear overly needy and thus, unfortunately, unattractive. 

Keep in mind that the object of not dating them is just that: not dating them.  It’s no more, and it’s no less.  Saying things that insult them, even if no insult is intended and even though the words might seem true, is a bad approach.  Indeed, telling them anything that implies that we think them inadequate in some way whether they can change it or not, will invariably be seen as hurtful and insulting as discussed above.  So, don’t do it.  Instead of going into details about why not, just say, “I don’t feel it, and I can’t help it,” and leave it at that.  Most people will accept this detail-sparing rejection without further challenge, and you’ll avoid being compelled to pity them when they show signs of being hurt.  Even if they react badly to your jilting them, telling them precisely how they fail to live up to your dating standards only makes matters worse.  So keep it quiet, and you’ll observe less agony from them and thus be less likely to be drawn into the quagmire of pitying them; a situation that can be quite difficult and time-consuming to get yourself out of once you’re in.  While I support honesty in most every endeavor, I also believe that it can be over-used.  Some things really are best left unsaid. 

Take care.

Tom Hesley

Related Posts

Why Is This Different

Tuesday, May 12th, 2009

Dear [Linda],

Please forgive my enthusiasm over us, possibly dating. Perhaps I’m writing too often.  I’m sorry about that if that’s true. But it’s been so long since I’ve written romantic letters, and so I have much lost time to make up. Plus, I love the feelings that are running through me right now, inspiring me to write more than usual. This hole in my heart that our “first date” made has yet to close.  I find that writing you, even if you’ll never read these words, makes it feel a little better.

I still miss you.  That hole today is as big as it was one week ago. But even though you’re not here and I cannot contact you, these monologues help me better understand the emotional forces that you unleashed within me some nine days ago. I hope that if you ever do read this, that you’ll realize that though my attraction to you was immediate, it is also quite strong and more likely to last than anything I’ve felt for any other lady so far.

True. I can’t promise this. Indeed as we discussed, I have experienced these same feelings for others only to have them disappear as I got to know each lady. Frankly, this could happen with us too. But I want you to know why you might be different. I believe that this time, it could be for real.  It won’t disappear nearly as quickly as before.  Let me tell you why.

I enjoyed myself at our first encounter more than any other, except for maybe two or three. In those few cases, the ladies pulled back from me while my interest in them still ran high.

But usually it goes the other way; I end up rejecting them. I quickly notice something I don’t like about the lady or her circumstances, and this stops romance from flourishing later. So I’m most interested romantically during the first few minutes, while she’s still mysterious. After that, the interest fades the more I learn, so that by the time the date is done, she and I have become friends but no more, and I don’t want any more; not usually.

But you’re different as I described in this previous letter.  Our date at the party started out like others; attraction, curiosity, interest, and hope filled my mind when I first saw you. But instead of all that fading as the night progressed, it grew more intense so that when the date was over, I hated to let you go. I could have sat with you all night and not grown bored. Indeed, this is one of the first times I’ve ever experienced romance that grew out of the first date rather than shrinking. This is why I think I would not so quickly lose interest in you, if we were to date again, again, and perhaps again.

However, I can’t be sure, because this intrigue is not time-tested; it’s only nine days old. It feels like something very special though; like it will survive the test of time. So I want to test it thoroughly to see. I hope you’ll be at the next party in June so we can meet up again, then again in July, and then again in August. If I saw you once each month for several months, and after each visit I find that this hole in my heart has returned, then I’d know that you are very special and that you’ll stay that way indefinitely. So how about riding that wave with me as I wrote earlier?   Let’s see how long it will keep going.

Take care.

Tom Hesley

The Breakup

Tuesday, May 5th, 2009

Dear [Emmy],

You’ve been my rock these past six years. We’ve spent so many hours talking about so many things. We’ve helped each other through some difficult times, and what’s always impressed me so about you in all that, is your great capacity to love another, even when there isn’t too much good in it for you. You’ve always been there for me; your dedication never faltering and I love you so much for that and I always will.

You are one of perhaps three or four people who has accepted me as I am so unconditionally. In fact, I’ve pondered over the idea that you could actually be my grandmother Jewell reincarnated. The timing would be about right because she died in 1980 and you were born in 1983. I see in you all the loving qualities that made her such a wonderful gram and I’m pleased to know firsthand, because of our time together, that even if you are not her in a younger body, that her generous, caring, and loving, benevolent spirit lives on in you. I love you for everything you’ve tried to give to me, as well as for everything that you did give. You are a very special person, and the world would be a more harmonious place if more women possessed your capacity to love. I love you too.

As such, I want to see you happy and I wish I had it within me to stay with you to see you get there. But this past weekend in Philly has changed so much for me that I can’t keep on in our relationship. I’ve found there, the eroticism and excitement I’ve been looking for, for so many years. Please believe me when I tell you that I so much wanted to find it with  you.   But as you know, we’ve looked for it long and hard, and found nothing. It’s not fair to ask you to keep looking with me, especially since my heart is not into it anymore. I can’t see continuing our struggles to re energize our sex lives as a couple, when it came without any great effort whatsoever over the weekend. I know we’ve been fighting this since 2003. But it’s time, I think, to accept the reality that in spite of how caring and accepting you are, and in spite of how much I love you for that, you’re just not the right girl for me; not at this time.

While I met no one there that I’m certain would be *the* right lady, I did make acquaintance a few who managed to restore my romantic passion, and one that I’d really like to date as a result. But even if that never happens, I also learned that I can’t stay in a relationship devoid of romantic passion for the years that you and I have spent in ours.

I honestly wished to find an answer to help you and I as a couple.  As you know, I did not go to Philly with the express intent to replace you, and I explained this to the girls there too. But as the night wore on and I became more and more enthralled with this remarkably beautiful lady that I spoke of last night, I found my motivations changing right before my eyes and heart. At the end of the party, I knew that I must see where things will go with her.

Now she has expressed no direct interest in anything but seeing me more at the parties, and I suspect that she won’t. But even if things never move beyond the party context with her, I want to be emotionally free to enjoy her there, and to not have to worry about how such activities will hurt you. So I must ask you now to release me from our committed relationship. I need my freedom to pursue this remarkably beautiful woman and others like her. I need to live my fantasies before I get too old, and last weekend was sure a great start down the road to doing just that.

I love you [Emmy]. But I want her. I want to be free to seize moments like those I had with her and ride the waves of passion for as long and as high as they carry us.   I need to ride the roller coaster again, and can’t afford to miss this or other opportunities to be truly happy, even if they turn out to be very short-lived, as this one is likely to be.

I’m sorry that this hurts you. If I could keep you happy but still go after my dreams as well, I would. But I can’t. My happiness and yours are no longer in lock step.  That is, what makes you happy no longer does so for me and vice versa.  So I need to be selfish here and put me first.  I must follow my heart, and my heart is telling me to end this before we waste too much more time in the futile effort of trying to get it right.   

Please understand.

More later.

Tom Hesley

But I Must Play A Little

Tuesday, April 14th, 2009

Dear [Emmy],

So, you know from   my last letter   that I love you.  My will is to actively love you, to take care of you, and to make sure that you’re always okay and provided for. I love your personality, your smile, your playful side, and how often you laugh. But as you know, I’ve felt no eroticism for several years now. We’ve been trying to figure out what’s wrong. We’ve been to group and individual therapies. We’ve read books. We’ve created our own experiments in the bedroom. But none of that has rekindled those wonderful fires of passion that I felt that first session we spent together at camp back in 2003. Nothing.

I don’t like this anymore than you. I’m tired of searching for bedroom pleasure because I have to search so much to get so little. I’m tired of spending months getting to know each new lady, only to have them become strangers again after a few years. I’m tired of the build-ups, followed by the let-downs. I’m tired of the humiliation of rejection, and of women looking at me like I’m some sort of crazy pervert, just because I’ve expressed a natural sexual interest in them. I’m tired of excitedly removing her clothes only to find that she’s not what I’d hoped. I’m tired of all the trickery and lies people use to attract others in the mating game. I’m tired of analyzing myself looking for problems to fix, and finding nothing that’s fixable. I’m tired of bringing new women to my family, only to discover after a short while that I’ve lost those feelings of love. And then, all must be told that it’s over. I’m tired of jilting ladies. I’m tired of repeatedly going through the same motions and winding up with the same results. I’m tired of feeling deprived so much of the time.  In short, I’m tired of this whole love quest.  I want to end it once and for all.

It’s not just me either. After reading numerous books about why relationships fail and watching the TV talk shows that focus on repairing broken relationships, it appears that many others suffer this fading libido too.  Most (if not all) couples reach this point eventually; something I avoided believing as a young adult. Back then I was convinced that I would eventually find an all-enthralling person to fall in love with; one that I could  stay  in love with. But today, after questing for her for four decades and coming up empty time after time, I believe now that this forever-pleasing woman simply does not exist and that pleasures in the bedroom, by nature, just don’t last with just one woman. So this is not a problem specific to me; it’s just the fleeting nature of erotic love.

In my experience, good sex is temporary, no matter who it’s with; whether that be the ugliest woman around or the most beautiful one. Eventually the plain as well as the pretty come to have the same effect on my libido; they come to have no sexual appeal whatsoever. The unattractive one may have started out as plain to me. But after a short time, the pretty one becomes plain too. The looks of the pretty one only serve her during the early months. Then she no longer has any sexual advantage over her average-looking competitor. Contrary to my childhood beliefs, I feel today that there’s no such thing as a goddess who can keep me excited forever.

You and I have seen this in our romance, just as I have with several others. At first, I couldn’t keep my hands off of you. You were beautiful in every way. You’re still beautiful in every way.  Yet I don’t have the same reaction to your beauty as when we first met. Beauty impresses me but only for a short time.  After that, it becomes just another fact about the woman that I note without getting terribly excited about; like the fact that she has five fingers on each hand or that she likes rhubarb pie. Her beauty does not disappear. It just assumes less prominance in our relationship over time. It’s still there, yes.  But I don’t regard it the same way as in the beginning. This demise of desire seems to be inevitable with any woman, since it’s happened every time to me, and I’ve dated several of the prettiest girls in school too.  So even the sexiest are not immune.

So with that said, I’m not looking to replace you, because the same thing would happen after a short time with any new woman I might find. There is nothing wrong with you, and I’m not proposing to leave you so I can look for someone prettier to start over with. I don’t think I have the stomach or the patience for that these days. As I said in the last letter, I love what we have. I love your smile and the way you talk and hum. Your concern for me is boundless and your generosity undeniable. I am to this day amazed at all you do for me; those long massages, your dinner treats, all those long train trips you often make just to be with me, the way you grew your hair down to the middle of your back at my request, and how you check up on me whenever I’m sick. I love our shared memories which after six years together, have grown into a sizeable collection.  In terms of true love, there is no purer love than yours. No woman could make me feel more appreciated, respected, doted over, and loved than you. You are a gem and I so much want to keep you in my life.

I’m perfectly satisfied with all of our relationship except for the sex. While our kisses hold a great deal of emotional value, they have today no sexual value I’m afraid.  Everything we did that first summer at camp that got me so horny does nothing now. But I miss that part a lot. I wish to be horny again and I’m angry that nature has short-changed me because it drained the passion from us so quickly.  Sometimes I cry over it even.

I desperately want to get that love lust back with you, but don’t know how. As you know, we’ve tried numerous exercises without success, and this was under the direction of our licensed sex therapist to boot. Had I secured more experience with sex earlier in my love quest, I might understand now that fiery sexual encounters mean little next to the sort of loving emotional bonds that we share. I might have learned to value the latter way more than the former. But sadly, that’s not what happened. I have actually enjoyed few encounters throughout my quest. So though I’m nearly fifty years old, I have yet to grow past the novelty and wonder of fantastic sex. Perhaps what we have, even without the sex, should be good enough. But it isn’t for me, at least not right now.

Now do understand that I truly need what you and I have and wish not to give it up. But I also need some good sex once in a while too. I need to feel that thrill that results when desire meets gratification. But since we’ve been unable to restore this lost joy to “us”, I feel I must go looking for it outside of us. I need to get it from other women.

I know this pains you, as perhaps it should, and I’m very sorry for that. It pains me too, to see you hurting. But please know that I’m not looking to replace you; I only want to supplement you. I’ll still keep seeing you and having you visit me. You’ll always be welcome in my home and bed. We can watch I Dream of Jeannie or Star Trek like in times past. I’ll still help you do your grocery shopping and buy you gifts for your apartment. I’ll continue finding the best seats in the train for you and I’ll pour you a cup of stevia-sweetened green tea anytime you want it. I’ll still come running if anything happens to you because we are family now, and so I will never cast you aside. You simply mean too much to me for that. In short, you’ll be my buddy forever and I’ll always love you.

I would just like to find that missing piece, to have an occasional fling a few times a year in places where I can again feel that thrill that I’ve missed for so long. Our therapist suggested that I visit   polyamorous   parties, where guys swap girl friends and wives, and where no-strings-attached sex is the norm. People share their mates with others in arrangements like this, and I think this could be what I need to light the fire in my loins once more, and to finally make all those fantasies I’ve harbored since childhood come true. I’m eager to attend some foot parties and do a little swinging now and then. Since I would presumably be seeing lots of new women, I hope that the novelty of sex would never be exhausted, and that sex would therefore remain consistently pleasing. If it is in fact novelty and newness that turns me on about a woman, then polyamory could supply all of those I need.

This doesn’t mean that I love you less because these other ladies I wish not to know. I don’t want to be their therapist or provider, or get involved in their lives beyond the occasional encounter. No bringing them into my family, no shopping for their groceries, and no telling them my deepest secrets. In fact the less I know them, the better. Believe me, I know how long and how difficult it was to build the loving relationship we have. [Emmy], I’m not looking to build anything like that again with anyone else, because except for the sex, our relationship couldn’t be better. No other woman could love me more than you, and I’ll not be fooled into leaving you just because another warms my middle for a time. I realize that no matter how great that feeling is, that no single woman can keep it alive forever. If I get to know a beautiful woman too well, then her beauty will become meaningless. So no woman’s beauty will ever be grounds for me to end our association.

But I understand if you want to date others while I do this. Just watch out for the jerks, and let me meet them before you go off alone with them.

I can’t say if this endeavor will work. In fact, I fear that it won’t. I may find that sexual experience is not the trumped up, fantastic occurrence that I’ve dreamt it would be in my childhood and young adult years. I hope that’s not the case. But it’s possible that I have for all these years, overestimated how pleasurable real-life sex is. If that turns out to be true, then my heart will be truly broken, and I’ll need you to help me put it back together again. Is this selfish? Perhaps. But I think it shows how much I feel for you. Nonetheless, the deep love for you I feel notwithstanding, I need these erotic experiences with others for a while to know for sure the true pleasure limits of sex. So I hope you’ll bear with me through this exploration, and that you’ll be there waiting for me when I finish.

I love you.

Tom

Outer Vs. Inner Beauty

Friday, March 27th, 2009

Dear [Ballerina],

Hi. How are you? I hope you’re well and that you remember me, because it’s been five years since we last spoke. You remember that summer of 2004 when I winked at you on the web. I wanted you from the first time I glimpsed the pictures you put up there. I figured that you wouldn’t respond because women who look like you most often do not respond to me. Your face reminded me of Helen of Troy because, in another time, just like hers did, yours would have launched a thousand ships as well. So I was not surprised that you didn’t respond right away. In fact when you did, a month and a half later, I’d all but forgotten who you were, but was pleased that you wrote nonetheless. Right away, we began emailing and swapping pictures, and talking on the phone a couple weeks later. I tell you that you made September of 2004 one of the most romantic months of my life, for I’ve never felt the passion for a woman more strongly, than I did for you back then. Your memory to this day in 2009 fills my heart with joy as well as my eyes with tears.

Yours is a great memory. But it’s a sad one too. I never got over how things so abruptly ended, and what’s more, I never understood it. I never had closure. You just stopped communicating one day without any explanation, and that was that. Our relationship was suddenly through, though in my view, we were just getting started on the most wonderful journey of my life.

I still wonder what drove you away, and since I never had anything from you afterwards to go on, I can only guess at what it was. I suspect that was several factors. But I’ll only talk about one in this letter.

You remember in early October I came to Pittsburgh to see you? You’d just visited me a week earlier and you spent one night here. I remember that you sure liked TV, as you watched mine all night long. We had such a good time then, that we decided that I’d visit you this time. So I came out and you picked me up at the train station, and drove us to your apartment in South Hills. I met your son and daughter then, and your son and I helped your daughter with her math homework. That was so much fun.

Well, during the second afternoon of my visit, I walked into your kitchen to find you cooking our supper. I stood in the doorway watching you for what could have been an hour, but what only felt like a few seconds. Your hair was just the right length. Your skin was fair and healthy. Your east European accent was so cute as you called out orders to your kids to help with the meal. Your legs were strong yet long and intensely sexy, and nowhere on your person was there even one extra ounce of fat. You were the healthy woman I’d been seeking for decades, and with more people in the US obese today than not, believe me I considered you quite the find. In old Europe, you could have been a queen, and I’d have gladly worshipped you too because everything about you, and I mean everything, was perfect. The way you walked, the way you talked, the way you smiled and watched me as I spoke; it was all so wonderful. The way you cooked, the way you cared, the way you wanted to serve was so very charming and disarming.

I fell in love with you then, standing in that doorway, and I didn’t just suspect that I’d fallen. I knew it in no uncertain terms. These indescribably sweet feelings of pleasure and peace swirled in my mind and brought me close to fainting. The sense that my decades-long search for my dream girl was finally over flooded my entire being, and if I was a believer in God, I might describe this moment as Him, making a miracle. With one loud snap of his fingers, he drove any doubts I had about you and how quickly things were moving between us, away from my heart. In that instant, I would have married you. I would have thrown all caution to the wind and had no misgivings about doing so either. What I was feeling then, was precisely opposite to the pains of loneliness and missing fulfillment that I’d come to know so well in my life. But all that had changed this weekend as I watched you cooking that meal. Every last painful emotion from past relationships disappeared. Not one voice in my head said that you might be wrong for me. In fact, they all argued profusely that you were so, so right.

I was certain that our sex had been, and would continue to be phenomenal. This was important to me because I’d always wanted good sex but never found it consistently; at least, not until you. So this was another reason I valued you so much. I’d been looking for someone like you for so long and was desperate to end the search, and here you were, the embodiment of my salvation. You were the first woman in 25 years who could make me hard with but a single look or one kiss, or a brief but tender caress with your beautiful index finger. Unlike with all my other women prior, with you I didn’t have to fantasize or concentrate in order to warm my loins. With you, it happened automatically and naturally, without any forcing whatsoever. It was as though my body had been waiting for you to unlock its deep vaults of sexual and romantic passion, that had been filling up for years. By the time I met you for the first time, I was convinced that I had none of this to offer any woman and was also frustrated that I couldn’t find someone who could please me this way. But oh my, you sure proved me wrong. My body responded to you like a thirsty cactus does to water. It drank you in, loving the sensations, but never quite getting enough. I was convinced that there would always be more pleasure to be had and to give to you.

I don’t know exactly what it was about you that revved up my romantic interest so. But I do know that that lust resulted from the confluence of many factors that both you and I brought to the table. It was much more than just “your body,” and it wasn’t just me. It was you too, though not just you. It was the circumstance of our lives at that time; how each of us was raised, the values with which we’ve been instilled, our particular experiences, and so on. It was not a desire I chose to have. Never did I decide on the sorts of women who excite me. Those ladies, whoever they are, just do, perhaps due to natural selection or some other big forces that dwarf my puny will. As I see it, we don’t voluntarily decide when and where or for whom our bells of lust ring. Put simply: We don’t control who turns us on. That’s determined by many forces beyond our control at very young ages; probably before we’re born or even conceived in fact.

You caught me looking then, and threw back a big smile for a few seconds, then returned to the meal without a word. I wanted to kiss you and to thank you for being my dream girl. I wanted to compliment you too on your charms, and I figured that some of this feeling, but not all of it mind you, came from how physically fit and trim you were. I was glad that keeping yourself healthy was very important to you and I admired your ability to do that well. In our phone talks, you revealed that you spent many hours each day exercising and dancing, and as I saw it, that work paid off for you. Though in your mid-forties and now an ex-ballerina, you still looked great; just as good as you did a decade earlier in those pictures you’d shown me the previous night, of you twirling and dancing joyfully around the stages of the most exclusive theaters in Pittsburgh. I revered your discipline that allowed you to stay as thin at 47 as you were when you were 17. So as you cooked on, I walked over to and stood at your back, putting my hands under your arms and around your waist to cup your flat stomach. Then I said, “You’ll never know how glad I am that you’re thin.”

You grew angry. This one statement of mine would put up a wall between us that never came down again. “What do you mean?” you snapped, clasping each of my wrists in your hands and throwing them away from your ribs. “You know,” you argued, “I used to be just like you. I hated fat people, and always avoided them. But I’ve learned! I’ve learned that they can’t help the way they are, and that it’s wrong for people like us to hold their weight against them. But you don’t care that they’re human beings. It seems like all you care about is a woman’s body, and if she happens to be too fat, then you ignore the person inside and just throw her away. But they have feelings too. Don’t their minds and hearts mean anything to you? How can you be so cruel? That’s mean and crazy, and you really ought to grow up!”

I was so shocked and dismayed at the abruptness and degree of your hostility that I said nothing back. I just walked into the living room without another word, and we didn’t speak of this again for the remaining two days of my visit. But oh, how cold and distant we became. You stopped sleeping with me that very night, instead choosing to stay on the couch in the living room. You gave short, yes-no answers whenever I’d ask you anything. The morning you drove me to the train, you were cordial but I know that once we said good-bye and you kissed me on the cheek, that I’d never hear from you again. And I haven’t. Not even to this day in 2009.

When I got home that afternoon, I called you only to get your voice mail. I left several messages during the following week, inviting you to call me back. But you never did. I sent you email too, but to no avail. You totally ignored me and I had no way to discuss it with you.

I was crushed. For months afterward, I frequently awoke in tears. What we had seemed so right. So how could it have turned out so wrong. It profoundly saddened me. What’s more, you allowed me no say, preventing any way to explain what I meant when I said that I was so thankful that you were so thin. But I want you to know. So I’ll write it here and maybe someday you’ll find it. Maybe someday, you’ll understand. Maybe someday you’ll call me again. Maybe someday we could be friends. Maybe, maybe, maybe,… Maybe not. But I hope you’ll at least read the rest of this, even if you do nothing more.

First off, I do not hate fat people. I maintain good friendships with lots of them, and I’ve worked productively with many more. I enjoy their company, value their opinions, and respect their judgments. I also empathize with their difficulties in losing weight because I’ve struggled myself to stay thin. So I get that trimming down and keeping the pounds off is hard. It’s a never-ending battle, to be sure. But I believe nonetheless, that it can be done. In fact, it has been done by millions. So I disagree with your passionate claim that the heavy cannot help that they’re heavy. While a small percentage of them do have medical problems that prevent them from losing, this is not true for the vast majority; as proved by the masses who lose weight all the time.

I do care about these humans. Perhaps you didn’t know that before you came along, I dated mostly the heavy. So you don’t have to convince me that there are some heavy, yet very wonderful people out there who’d give everything to make their lovers happy. I dated several such women and those relationships lasted the longest of all, at least until I met my current girlfriend. These women were very caring, understanding, and thoughtful. I could not leave them for months sometimes, because I couldn’t bare the thought of jilting them. Believe me, I cared about them.

I knew that losing weight was a life challenge for them and felt mighty sorry for them because of it. But I also realized that I couldn’t be the superman who would save them; who would carry them away from a life of solitude, brought on because others avoided them for being so big. I wanted to be the hero though. I wanted to be the bigger man, and I cried for many an hour, once I understood that I couldn’t. Why couldn’t I? Because my strongest, most profound desire beyond good food, clothing, and a warm and quiet place to live, has always been to enjoy lots of erotic quality time with beautiful women. It’s a thirst that only women like you can quench. For whatever reason, I just don’t feel erotic when lying with heavy women. Before you, I struggled to reshape what I wanted in women many times; but never succeeded. Indeed, I wanted to love the fat ladies. After all, there were so many more of those types around than the skinny ones, and usually whenever I managed to attract someone, she was big. So changing for whom my heart beats seemed like a good pursuit since I was way more likely to attract a fat lady than a thin one. I longed to somehow learn to get off on the weighty. I prayed to God to make me lust after them. I spent hundreds of hours meditating; trying to convince myself that I physically enjoyed the big and beautiful just as much as the petite and trim. I dated heavy women lots of times and took them to bed often as well, though, truth be told, I found the encounters unfulfilling. In the worst cases, they disgusted me. So after five or six failed attempts at dating the heavy and close to two years in therapy, I realized that I can’t help that I want certain things in certain ways. I can’t help who I desire, and I desired you in a big way. So please don’t blame me for wanting you but avoiding them. I am a good man, and my aversion to fat ladies comes not from prejudice or shallow thinking or an unwillingness to get to know them, but rather from years of failed efforts to see them more favorably. I can’t help that I found you irresistible but not them, and found it strange that you would hold this biological nature of mine against me. Well, I hope you understand me better now and that you realize that my desire for you was a valuable thing that you discarded without taking the time to understand it.

So how would you have me handle this? Should I have continued dating the heavy while passing up chances to spend time with the thin that I so dreamed of? I couldn’t do that. If that makes me an uncaring person in your eyes, then I’ll just have to live with that judgment, because I cannot change. I can no longer lay with the Rubenesque while my heart longs for the slender.

Sure. I care that they’re human beings. I care about them a lot, as human beings. But I’m not willing to forego my dreams by staying with them, while they fulfill theirs by being with me. Yes, it’s a sad thing that so many guys pass by the pleasantly plump and that as a result, these women are often left alone. But that’s not my problem, for I cannot solve it unless I deny my own needs. Now honestly: Do you really think that a man should give up his dreams in order to make a woman happy that he does not desire? I do not.

Besides, even if I withhold from them what they want, others will love them. Lots of guys adore frumpy females, and I’d be doing a disservice to those fellows by clinging to one despite my true feelings against that. I’d be keeping a lady that I really don’t desire anyway, from men who do want her. That seems wrong to me. Just because I reject her doesn’t mean that she’s doomed to a life a rejections from all other men. So don’t blame me for the loneliness often felt by the heavy.

To me, the only way a person can ever achieve complete happiness is to know and accept his set of preferences for women unconditionally, and then spend his time seeking to fulfill them, as they are. He’s merely spinning his wheels if he wastes valuable time trying to change what he wants. My experience shows that such efforts are doomed to fail, and result in lower self esteem and much frustration. Why? Because instead of going after what we really want, we second-guess our desires when we believe that they can be changed, and then we never get around to actually fulfilling them. We question whether they are morally straight or unselfish enough to pursue. So the result is that we end up going without what we want because we think it lame or immoral. Thus, we’re left perpetually unsure of ourselves and sadly, unfulfilled to boot. So it makes little sense to think of me as shallow or selfish, for I am what I am, and I desire what I desire. I can’t change that, and if you thought about this at any length, you’d probably discover that you can’t change your desires either.

When we met, I knew what I wanted, and accepted that as unchangeable as my fingerprints. Whatever made you the goddess I saw working the stove that day, though I didn’t fully understand it, I cherished it. I was so thankful to have stumbled across our situation, where everything aligned perfectly. I was thankful for you. For the first time ever, I had this strong sense that I’d found a relationship that was as good as they get; I felt that I would never find another one better than ours. Even if ours would have gotten tough at times (which it didn’t), I would have stayed with it because I had this strong idea that no relationship would ever be better. Now I understand why people hold on to what, to the outside word, looks like a doomed love affair. Perhaps they feel about their lovers as I felt about you; that no other person could make them feel as wonderful. The good times, if they’re really good, make it possible to weather the bad times. We had good times like those, and if you hadn’t so completely cut me off, I would to this day, still be loving you.

You mentioned their minds. You seemed to be saying that while we might not be able to pleasure ourselves from a person’s outsides, then we should be able to do so with what’s on the inside. But I wonder: Does it really make sense to split humans apart in this way? Mind Vs. body, physical appearance Vs. personality, Inner beauty Vs. outer beauty, and body Vs. soul. I don’t think so.

When judging a person, people often place more value on his mental attractiveness than his physical. Their reasons are varied and go something like the following:
1. Beauty fades over time but personality is more permanent.
2. People who are attracted to bodies don’t care about what’s in the mind.
3. A man who is physically unattractive will probably have a much more attractive mind; so we should learn to ignore his outsides and focus more on his insides.
4. A person’s mind (personality) is more under his control than is the state of his body. In this vein, his character should mean more to others than his physical health.
5. People who reject another because of his appearance all have the same beauty standards, meaning that the rejected ones, by one, will also be the rejected ones,   by all.
6. Judging and scrutinizing based on looks is a bad thing because it ignores that better part of a whole person – his personality.
7. There’s an expectation that people should be able to love someone regardless of how pretty or ugly.
8. People can choose who they desire, and so can be blamed if they don’t happen to like someone who is unattractive to them.

Well, I’m not convinced that someone’s mental powers are any less susceptible to the effects of aging than their physical powers of attraction. The brain (mind) I would argue is subject to the same forces of aging that the rest of the body is. Why would it not be? It draws energy from the same blood supply that other body parts normally associated with physical beauty do. The brain grows tired when pushed too hard just as do the legs. The brain functions erratically, or stops functioning altogether when deprived of oxygen, calories, and nutrients; just as do breasts, arms, and feet. Aside from being the place where a person’s higher mental functions are carried out, the brain is no different than the rest of the body in terms of what can happen to it over time. Damage to the brain such as found in head injuries, may do more harm to a person’s mental being than say, a blow to a leg would. The brain therefore, is perhaps the most fragile organ in the body because it does so much, and can thus be damaged very easily. The body may grow old. But the brain can grow skeptical too. It can become too rigid in its thinking and can be irreversibly altered by traumatic experiences; experiences that leave the rest of the body unharmed so long as there’s no direct physical trauma applied. Does the brain’s susceptibility to more catastrophic injuries make it less of a good measure of a man? Certainly not. But nor does this make the body less of a measure. A person’s rationale may escape him eventually through the use of alcohol or from his chronically poor choices of foods. Perhaps dumb is forever but smartness is certainly not. One may be smart in her twenties but quite dumb in her sixties just as one may be thin in his thirties but quite obese in his seventies. People once considered very intelligent often lose their mental faculties over time; they lose their memories and cognitive abilities as diseases like atherosclerosis and Alzheimer’s run their courses. The brain is no less a part of the aging body than any other part, and so the qualities that it supplies about the person, can be just as temporary as that sexy set of six-pack abs or those wonderfully proportioned curves. Exercise the body and it thrives and looks nice. Exercise the brain, and it too thrives and produces an attractive personality. But allow either of these to go limp for too long and both will wither. Thus in my view, the brain is no more impervious to the ravages of living than is the rest of the body. So why would the personality, which emanates from the brain, be any greater a measure of a person’s attractiveness than any other physical part? In the end, every part of a person dies, including the brain. There’s nothing about the brain that makes it any more permanent than any other part of the body. So I don’t get why people judge fellows for liking other body parts. I’m sorry that my interest in your thinness bothered you so. It was not intended as an insult; but rather, it was a compliment, an expression of my admiration of you and how healthy you’d managed to keep your mind as well as your body through the years.

Perhaps you were upset because you thought I was placing too much value on your body and not enough on your mind. This idea is wrong because it’s not true that people who express interest in a person’s physical attributes have no regard for the person’s mind. I say that they can’t help but regard the mind since it’s the mind that animates an otherwise lifeless body. A body can’t very well be sexy without a mind controlling it in sexy ways. The mind and the body are fused into one in such extensive and broad-sweeping ways that it’s impossible to tell where the body ends and the mind begins when discussing sexual attraction. The ways in which the mind controls the body, along with the body’s shape work together to make the body sexy. You can’t have sexy without both of these working in harmony. So even when someone says that they like your sexy legs, they’re in fact saying so much more. Not only are they complimenting you on the shape of your legs, but they’re also admiring how you move them when you walk, or cross them when you sit down, and so on. They’re admiring your mind as well, just as I was admiring yours when I complimented you on your thinness. Again, I’m sorry you didn’t see my point of view more clearly. I would have gladly explained it to you if you hadn’t severed communications with me so abruptly and so completely.

The mind is certainly not always the better part of the person. Some out there have some pretty simplistic or ugly minds; whether they’re physically beautiful or ugly. There are some women whose minds are such that, rather than getting into deep conversations with them, I’d just as soon have sex and not talk at all. I appreciate a good mind when there’s one around. But if it’s not there, it’s not fair for you to expect me to relish it. Your mind however, was there and I enjoyed your stories of how you escaped from behind the iron curtain to come here to America. They demonstrated how smart and savvy you are, and showed how much you’ve mastered the art of self control. Again it was this part of you that I was complimenting as well as your shape.

If your anger at me stemmed from your pity for the heavy, then I think you underestimate how attractive some guys find them. Not everyone thinks them ugly. What about you? Do you think they’re ugly? Do you think you need to defend them because you seem them as ugly? Is this why you rose to their defense with such intensity and sharpness when I commented on how thankful I was that you were thin? If so, then perhaps you’re shallower than I. You did say that you were like me once. Perhaps you still are. The fact is that people’s tastes are not universal. Though admittedly, many prefer a healthy and thin mate, many choose the chubby. Some enjoy the pleasantly plump, and they worry about crushing someone who has too little meat on her bones. There are lots of married heavy folks. So they do a better job at mating than you give them credit for. Perhaps?

In light of the above, why do people expect others to love with a blind eye toward a person’s physical attributes? Do you expect this? Is this why you snapped at me, because I do not love with this blind eye? You know, it’s been said that you can tell a great deal about a person just from one drop of his blood. So if that’s true, then would not his appearance tell us so much more? After all, there’s much more of it than that drop of blood. At a glance we can deduce his general health and make some pretty good guesses about his life style and preferences. By listening to his cough, we’d know if he smokes or not, or has some lung disease that perhaps we should avoid. By smelling his scent over time, we can tell if he values cleanliness or if he is taking some medicines that alter his scent. A foul odor generally means poor health or at least, poor health practices on his part. By listening to his speech, we can learn much about his education level and the culture in which he was raised. By observing how heavy he is, we can figure out how much he likes to eat and what sorts of food. From his weight, we can also predict how healthy he’ll likely be in the future and how much he values good health besides. You’d agree I think, that a relationship with someone who does not value good health as we do would be difficult. So I say that with all this data, we can make wiser choices about whether this person would be a good mate. By paying attention to this data, we can avoid lots of wasted time by steering clear of relationships that would not be (could not be) what we want. Sometimes, you don’t need to actually get into a relationship with some to know that it would be bad if you did. I’ve learned over the years that relationships with the heavy don’t make me happy. So I hope you’ll forgive me when I turn away from them these days, without even giving them a try.

We don’t control who turns us on. Do you think I do, and because of this, do you think I can decide to be attracted to the heavy? Let me assure you. I don’t, and I can’t. Since I can’t control this, you’re wrong to judge me harshly for it. It was wrong of you to end our relationship without as little a single discussion. The reality is: What turns us on is a complex convergence of hundreds or thousands of variables that involve ourselves, our lovers, the genetics and upbringings of each, and the circumstances surrounding them. Perhaps a small number of these variables we control. But most we do not. Further, it’s usually not just one of these variables that makes us desire or not. This is why desire is so hard to manipulate. You’ve either got it by default or you don’t, and not all the makeup, hair color, fancy clothes, or perfume in the world will change that.

You had it with me and you didn’t have to try at all.

You know if I thought about you enough right now, I could bring a tear to my eye. Your sudden departure five years ago left a wound in my psyche that has not yet healed. Oh I don’t think of you very often. But when I do, there are still some strong emotions there and I always wish that things had worked out better. But I don’t regret complimenting you on your thinness; I’d do it over the exact same way. What I’d do differently though, would be to talk more to you before you sent me home. I’m sorry that I didn’t have the wherewithal back then to say what I’ve said in this letter. Let me ask you: Would this have made any difference? It seemed like you had made up your mind and that no amount of talking would have changed it.

Does it change anything now? I shouldn’t ask that because if you showed up in my life again tomorrow, I’m not in a position to respond to you. I have a wonderful girlfriend. [Emmy] never bolted on me and she always takes the time to listen to me. You didn’t do that. You handled the situation poorly and because you were so reckless with my heart, I don’t think I could ever fall in love with you again. Still though, when I look at the pictures you gave me, I wonder at what could have been, and regret that we didn’t get further than we did.

Well, thanks for listening. I needed to get this out. I hope that you’re doing well and that you’re not given to the sorts of too-quick reactions these days that drove us apart back then. I’ll just have faith that the experience grew you as well as it did me. Do take care and perhaps in the next life, we can try it again.

With love,
Tom Hesley

PS: For other posts that make similar arguments, see the following:

I Rejected One

Saturday, March 7th, 2009

[This lady wanted to go dancing tonight. But I was not attracted to her. So I respnded as follows:]

Thanks for the interest, LouAnn. But I don’t feel the chemistry. Sorry.

Take care, and good luck in your search. Hopefully, it won’t be a long one.

Tom Hesley

Related Posts

Thin Desires

Monday, March 2nd, 2009

A while back, I recorded an introduction for a chat line in Philadelphia. I described myself and listed my favorite activities — reading, programming, watching Star Trek, and the like. I said I wanted to meet tall thin women, and it didn’t take long for the hate messages to come. You’d think I’d threatened the pope! They called me shallow, superficial, and lame, and these are the nicest words. Even some thin women complained.

But what they didn’t get is that I can’t help what I like, and I like thin. Real thin. I learned this the hard way over two decades of dating the heavy. So I never want to try that again. I’m no bigot, but do wish to avoid any more disappointing experiences like those I’ve had already, dating “big and beautiful” ladies.

I’ve tried to see beauty where I wouldn’t find it. Often I dated the frumpy, the stocky, the plump, and the obese, only to find no excitement when they finally reached my bed. In all cases, I suspected at the instant we met that this would be the outcome. But I didn’t trust my opinion as a young adult and didn’t want anyone to say that I hadn’t given the relationship a fair chance. So against my better judgment, I waded into these murky waters. Then I struggled to get back out, because I felt guilty over hurting the women. I’d take months to work up the courage to say good-bye, feeling lousy about them and myself all the while. A couple times, I had to seek professional help to break away. What a waste of time, and money!

Though I found the Rubenesque unattractive, I had compassion for them nonetheless. Seeing them cry as I jilted them really tugged at my heart strings. But ultimately, it came down to either their happiness or mine, and though I struggled with this often, eventually therapy helped me to chose mine and make a break.

I’ve always been more attracted to the petite. Even as a boy of five or six, my eyes followed the lanky lady teachers around the classroom as my ears savored their every word. I wanted to hear what they had to say, and I got better grades as a result. I listened more to those with the ostrich legs, but slept more in buxom teachers’ classes. Or I’d peer out the windows, bored to tears. I didn’t choose to feel as I did. I just did.

There’s nothing immoral about a desire particularly when it’s the product of evolution and, not chosen. So please! Don’t punish me for my wants. They are after all, my nature.

Tom Hesley

Related Posts

Compassion, Empathy, Pity

Friday, March 16th, 2007

Dear [Melinda],

But before I get to that, I’d like to make some initial comments.  I wanted to include a few definitions (for the words pity, compassion, and empathy) here for your consideration. Just follow the links to see them.

Given these definitions, I’m curious.  You have described yourself with pride seven times during our conversations of late, as an empathic person.  Now it seems to me that compassion is but one small step further toward the display of the purest forms of kindness.  So let me pose the following questions:

  • If it’s really true that you can effectively identify with the feelings and situational stresses of others (you are empathic), then I’m puzzled as to why you object so vehemently to he who asks others to show him understanding and compassion; particularly when that person’s hardships are well-documented?  When a person asks for help, he takes the guesswork out of empathy because the empathic need not figure out what he really needs if he’s forthright about it.  As an Empath, wouldn’t his frankness about his limitations make your job of walking in his shoes easier?  If it would, then why would you such admissions so abhorrent?
  • Is it possible to be maximally empathic if you’ve never experienced a particular hardship?  For example, could you really understand what someone else is going through if you’ve never dealt with their difficulties yourself?  Perhaps to a degree.  I mean, we can certainly be kind to those so troubled without really knowing their suffering first-hand.  We need have never experienced a cold night sleeping on a Philly street for example, to know that he who does this suffers immensely.  But what about those hardships that aren’t so universally well-comprehended by the mainstream population?  Examples of these include: Mental retardation, most forms of mind sickness, and autism.  Would you be as empathic toward someone whose hardship you did not understand?   I ask this because I’ve noted that people (not you specifically) who boast of their empathy often come up short when asked to assist others that carry the most profound hardships.  I wonder if you’d therefore be so opposed to my pity-soliciting letter if you’d ever experienced legal blindness and bore the stigmas associated with it yourself?  This is strictly a non rhetorical question.
  • Why would a person take such pride in his empathy, yet react with such disgust when another asks him to demonstrate his empathy by showing kindness to (or to pity) him?  I ask this, not to put you down, but rather to acquire a better understanding of my own discomforts surrounding the sending of this request for special dispensation to women.  Intellectually, I have no problem with my argument.  That is to say: When one is truly in need and has spent decades attempting to fulfill that need on his own but with only marginal success, then there’s nothing wrong with him asking for extra help  But emotionally, I’m not convinced.  Understanding your aversion to pity-seeking might help me eliminate my apprehension about doing it.  Either that, or I’ll learn that this is not something I really want to do.  I suspect that both our discomforts are based more in cultural more’ and superstition than solid fact-based reasoning.  Simply put:  There’s really no good reason for our objections except that most others find asking for and accepting pity distasteful. 
  • Compassion and pity are perhaps the finest outgrowths of empathy.  That is: They give meaning to its admirable quality, just as the thrills of spending money and the personal betterment that such spending affords make it appealing.  People want money because spending it wisely improves their quality of living.  If one could never spend his money, what would be the point in working so hard to earn it?  Likewise with empathy.  What practical value is empathy that results in no visible acts of kindness?  Is empathy just a trophy that we keep inside the display case and boast about but never take out and demonstrate?  Empathy as I see it is a frame of mind that creates the motivation necessary for reaching out and exerting sustained energy to help the needy.  If one never extends a gentle hand however, particularly when he is asked to do so, then I submit that the presence of empathy in his heart means nothing.  Empathy in and of itself is no more than a good intention, and so it cannot by itself augment a person’s appearance of goodness to others.  Only his actions can do that.  So if he has empathy but does no kindness with it, then he might as well not have it at all.  Without its external manifestations (kindly, understanding acts), empathy is reduced to a trite triviality.  You can appreciate this I’m sure, since you say that love is defined much more by a man’s actions than his intentions.
  • Are you really so empathic if you take such great issue with the help-seekers in love?  Now you’re an attractive woman, and by your own accounts, you’ve captivated the hearts of numerous men in the twelve years we’ve known each other.  This leads me to think that you’ve never experienced the levels of desolation that would make someone desperate enough to go pity-seeking.  There are those who go for decades without finding love.  But you don’t know about this firsthand.  Perhaps then, you think that they’re making their situation harder than it needs to be or that they’re exaggerating its defining parameters.  I’d urge you not to dismiss the validity of others’ problems solely because you’ve never experienced them yourself.

                                                                                                                              

I’ve noticed that your attitude toward the word pity seems to have a negative connotation which I cannot find in its definition.  Please explain.  Apparently, this word has been stigmatized, and perhaps it’s time to dispel the stigma. 

Perhaps people distance themselves so strenuously from pity because it can suggest that those offering it are underestimating the capabilities of those to whom it is presented. I remember a software development class I took at work.  A fellow there was mulling over an assigned problem for which I’d already found the answer.  I offered to share my solution since the problems weren’t for credit.  But man, oh man, was he offended!  He immediately backed away asking, “I don’t need your help.  Don’t you think I can do it?”  I hadn’t intended to anger him.  I wanted to help (not shame) him.  But put off he was nonetheless.   He, like so many, viewed the acceptance of help, particularly from someone vision-impaired, as an admission of inability.  Heaven knows that our culture forbids us from admitting to our shortcomings, probably because no one likes to be underestimated, and he thought that I was doing just this by presuming that he might need my help. 

But pity in and of itself, when it’s offered for purely altruistic reasons, is a good thing as I’ll discuss at length below.   As such, I see nothing wrong with asking for it when the need is genuine and other means of satisfying the need have been exhausted. 

I’d also say that I don’t believe this strategy will work with most women.  After all, many other reasons besides prejudice, ignorance, and concealed compassion compel ladies to reject suitors before knowing them.  Men are similarly moved (or not) by women.  In my case, I would most likely not date an overweight female or one who is shorter than myself, no matter how much she pleads, no matter how heart-wrenching her reasoning.  This is not mere prejudice, because I’ve dated many heavy and / or shorter females and consistently found the experiences lacking.  In this case, my preferences come out of genuine experience and not from misunderstandings and childish ideals.  However, many people reject a person  without  ever having tried similar people before.  It always amazes me that so many teen-agers and young adults have such long lists of requirements of their mates.  They want ‘em tall, dark, and handsome of course.  But some of them get really wild.  One 22-year old black woman I recently read about sought the following:

  1. Income of at least $150,000 / year.
  2. Plays a musical instrument.
  3. Works as a fireman or police officer.
  4. Black male (No whites, Indians, pacific islanders, or Hispanics allowed).
  5. Christian (no Jews, atheists, or non spiritual people allowed).
  6. Must be between the ages of 21 and 24.
  7. No brainiacs allowed. 

So I asked questions like the following:

  1. What could a $150,000 / year man give her that would be really important to the sustenance of a relationship, that someone who made, say, $80,000 / year could not?  She didn’t know. 
  2. Had she’d ever dated someone who did not play a musical instrument.  Her answer was no. 
  3. Had she ever considered a computer scientist or a store manager?  No, she hadn’t. 
  4. Nor had she ever gone out with Protestants and Jews. 
  5. Did she even know what an atheist was?  She did not.
  6. Why was she opposed to dating older men?  She told me that her sister had a bad experience with a 45-ish gentleman.  So this youngster concluded that all older males make undesirable lovers. 
  7. Why did she want to avoid the more intelligent males?  Again, she never dated one but always considered them “geeky” and weird. 

Before she and I talked, this woman had been assuming that her experience would invariably be unfulfilling with each and every one of these male types.  But she had little firsthand proof of that.  Almost all her tastes in men were based on misinformation, disinformation, folklore, and myth.  Obviously, she demonstrated little capacity for independent thought, and she wound up sniffling in the corner on the floor once the extreme ludicrousness of her baseless, prejudging ways was shown her.  I’m certain that today, she views men differently and is more willing to keep her mind open for longer periods after meeting a new man. 

So many feel as they do because their parents taught it to them, or in the case of the young adult, they reject an otherwise suitable suitor because their friends do, not because they themselves have a real problem with the person.  Clearly, they’re missing out on potentially wonderful relationships because they resist the effort and time it takes to really give someone a fair shake.  Not only does this prejudicial prejudging hurt them, but it hurts those so judged. 

Sometimes however, these girls can be shown how needlessly restrictive and unjustified their first impressions are.  Some go down more easily than others.  But none accept this immediately in my experience.  There are many out there, where the only reason they say no is exclusively because of their misunderstandings, inexperience, and prejudice.   It is these that this letter asking for pity targets.  Now I admit that there may only be a few per 1000 women who would change their minds after reading the letter.  But at this point in my life, every little bit helps.  Picking up those few extra points in my favor is worth incurring whatever humiliation such a request for extra kindness entails. I know that practically none of them have ever dated a handicapped person before, or even befriended one for that matter.  It’s my mission to show them what it’s like.

Now with all that said, let’s get to your letter, where I’ll further justify this mission and further show why it has the distinct possibility of eradicating at least a little prejudice out there.

Yes, I know you disagree [that eliciting pity is a valid means of overcoming prejudice].  That’s why I asked that you pretend.  :-)

Yes, passive resistance works at times.  At others however, it can get you killed.  Just ask the blacks who practiced this prior to the Civil Rights Act.  Many suffered irreparable injury because they allowed people to beat them.  I wonder how effective they would have deemed this passive resistance to be after they’d become encumbered with the chronic pain and paralysis that so frequently resulted from the beatings.  There were surely many regrets. 

As we’ll see below, asking for help, and bolstering that request by citing one’s difficulties, is not the same as playing the victim. 

No no.  You’ve misinterpreted.  I’ll be sure, in the final letter, to clarify this point somehow, so that others won’t read it wrong as well.  But let me say the following:

  • I consider myself most worthy. My level of self-esteem is not the problem.  I’m just frustrated that it’s taken this long to realize my dreams.  Believe you me; I know that I’m a good guy – upstanding, highly moral, honest, affectionate, thoughtful, responsible, and caring.  I value my health and take daily steps to preserve it: No drugs or alcohol, no smoking, minimal refined sugars, and no caffeine.  The issue however, is that women generally don’t see me as being worth as much as I know I am, and a big reason for that is that they spend no time getting to know me.  They rule me out before ever seeing where I truly shine.  I think you would agree that this is unjust, and a primary goal of any healthy and free society is to minimize injustice.     I’m indeed worthy of attracting women, and they should be [encouraged] to see that.  I believe whole-heartedly that I deserve them.  But historically, I just have not been able to interest the ones I desire.  Acknowledging this history does not lower one’s sense of self-worth however, and thus, it cannot be accurately interpreted as symptomatic of low self-esteem.  In fact, a realistic assessment of field conditions, which I believe I’m providing by acknowledging my difficulties, helps in the creation of a better solution to the problem. One cannot solve a problem by denying its existence. 
  • I’ve “work[ed] on myself” as you call it, for nearly three decades now.  And after years of trying and failing to meet others’ expectations, I came to understand that I am good enough to exist happily.  If I didn’t think like this, then I would have given up on my dream long ago, and began to play the victim for real.  I would have accepted failure and made excuses for giving up the quest.  But resignation has never been my mantra in this particular pursuit.  I’ve never been pushed into inaction by the victim mentality of which you spoke above.
  • I’d also point out here as I do elsewhere in this note, that merely believing that one is worthy to solve the problem doesn’t get the problem solved.  I can believe (to the point of arrogance) that I deserve a beautiful woman.  But that in and of itself, won’t draw them to me.  In fact, it often has the opposite effect.  Such extreme attitudes I find obnoxious, lacking in humility, and self-destructive, and I know that just about all the women I’ve known feel likewise. 
  • As far as simply dismissing those who don’t agree that I’m worthy and attractive:  One can do this if there’s plenty of others to choose from that like him.  But when these people are very rare, then other options must be considered.  Educating the disinterested is one choice.  In my situation, I can no longer just throw them away because they initially are unimpressed.  As a simpler example, it’s easy to toss out the single bad apple from a barrel where all the others are ripe and healthy.  Even with half the apples rotten, just discarding them is still a practical approach because the other half are good, and there would be less effort involved in finding a good one than attempting to salvage the good parts of a bad one.  But when almost all the apples show some signs of rot, now we can’t afford to discard them because we’ll go hungry if we do.  Instead, we must find the least bad apples and trim the rotten parts away.  So while it’s tempting to say. “to hell with those who don’t agree,” I’ve been forced to hold my tongue because my successes to failures ratio is so low (approaches zero).  In other words, I can no longer say to hell with them.  Again, if it takes a solicitation for compassion to get through their walls of prejudice, then so be it.

 

I believe my paradigm to be proper given the history and circumstances from which it grew.  I’m worthy and respect myself highly.  That’s why I care so much about maintaining my health.  I just have no illusions about the difficulties I’m facing, and if I deemed myself as worthless as you suggest I do, then I’d not be chasing my dream girl.

While this may be outwardly true in the main [that people who don't believe that they're worth a high salary don't get a high salary], there are many cases where people insist that they’re worth a high salary when in fact, they’re not.  Yes, arrogance can work to a person’s advantage, particularly if the company needs his skills.  However, people who chronically overestimate their indispensability don’t inspire much respect among their peers and subordinates.  Their attitudes cause strife, hurt feelings, stress, and encourage a cut-throat mentality among the ranks which undermines the team-player ideal that most of today’s corporations embrace.  Sure, these self back-patters may win their fair share of battles.  But ram-rodding their way to the top right through the sensitivities and sensibilities of others is neither good for them, nor those working with them.  There’s little that’s more repulsive than unjustified confidence. 

Also, I’d point out that there are many other reasons that a person might receive a high salary besides his insistence that he’s worth it.    If he’s truly good at what he does, and if the company needs what he does, and if the company will profit by retaining him at the salary he requests, then they’ll pay him well and keep him.  Even if they perceive him as meek and unassuming, they’ll worry that if they don’t fairly compensate him, then someone else will.  So I’m certain that it’s not always the case that the humble do not make high salaries. 

Admittedly, a degree of earned confidence combined with self-assertiveness is necessary for this.  But these are frequently over-rated.   People place too much emphasis on appearing confident and too little time actually acquiring the skills and experience that would make them genuinely confident.  They spend all too many of their hours tooting their own horns rather than actually learning something to enhance their usefulness.  There’s nothing I found more off-putting as a technical leader, than when a new hire fresh out of college would come in, and within six months, expect to change the world.   These recruits acted like they knew more than the seasoned engineers, and thus felt that they deserved more money.  People of today just aren’t willing to wait their turns for cracks at the big chairs, and this is a major reason that I find the corporate structure so detestable any more.   The newcomers all too often cross the line from assertiveness to greed, giving unfortunate credence to the notion that the good guys finish last.  After all, the upstanding fellows wouldn’t stoop to such greedy and arrogant techniques, and so, very often, they do wind up at the back of the pack even though they’ve got many more valid reasons for their self-confidence than do the juniors.  The thing is that there’s more to acquiring confidence than just believing in one’s self.  Granted that this positive self-assessment is a crucial ingredient in confidence.  But without good reason to believe, such as the possession of highly sought skills or a well-established history of success, the self-belief is hollow and airy, and thus, it means little.  Unjustified exaggeration of one’s worth therefore, won’t get them a higher salary, unless the boss is extraordinarily gullible.  Attitude without the evidence to support it would in fact squelch a person’s chances at a high salary. 

Finally, in reference to your CEO, your past comments indicate that he’s not too likable.  He may have the dollars, but not the popularity.  So, how successful is he really?  Is he someone that you admire?  I’d also remind you that many of these overly aspiring individuals do not in fact, get what they think they’re worth.  As a result, they spend much of their lives unfulfilled and thus, unhappy.  I put it to you therefore, that overestimating one’s worth frequently doesn’t work as often or as completely as you might think, to secure him the best socioeconomic status.  It often has the opposite effect.

[Can the same be said of people in the process of finding a mate?]  Perhaps.  Perhaps not.  This attitude doesn’t seem to have worked for numerous others I’ve known.  It seems clear that your health is failing you and that you harbor lots of resentment and dislike toward those in your command structure and elsewhere in the company.  You’ve left many, many more jobs in your career than I.  Now if you like switching jobs every two to four years, that’s cool.  But this makes you appear chronically unhappy, and intensifies my impression that you are no closer to living your life’s dreams than I.  So any advice you might give in this area seems questionable.  Again, be careful about appearing too self-righteous.

Given the fallacies of this I-think-I’m-worth-so-much-so-therefore-I-am approach to living, I wonder if it would in fact, be any more effective in winning the mating game than the more genuine down-to-earth approach that I use?  My impression is that women don’t like a guy who, through smoke and mirrors, leads them to believe that he’s better off than he actually is.  His confusion of aspiration with reality would make him appear painfully pathetic and disingenuous to any woman smart enough to detect it.  A more grounded and, in my estimation, better approach would be to be forthright about one’s strengths as well as his weaknesses, and then let the chips fall where they may.  True, the honest will not win as often.  But the victories they do secure are the most benevolent and least hurtful to others.   Even in Plato’s time, they knew that the liar is far more likely to win life’s finest gifts.  But does this make his unjust techniques right?  Do the ends justify the means?   I suggest not.

I think you’re exaggerating some otherwise very small semantic differences in word definitions.  Generally, the word   attractive   means someone who is pleasing and thus desirable.  It does not imply that the interest is just physical, or just mental, or just short-term, or anything specific at all for that matter.  It just means interest in general, and says nothing about the quality of that interest.  Now in order for me to want someone, I must be attracted to them.  Thus it follows that they must be attractive to me.  What you say next depends on this attraction, even if it does not say it explicitly.

[You say that you're looking for someone whom you want, and who wants you equally.] Well, for you this may be the correct mindset.   And yes, it may politely generalize the mating desire while concealing the underlying details about what makes for such mutual wanting.  But what, if I may ask, fuels this wanting [...]?  As I just said, as I see it, it’s attraction in some form or other. What else could it be?  So why not use the word attractive

You’ve commented on how much you admire my down-to-earth nature.  Well, one of the tenants of maintaining such a persona is being honest, forthright, and as transparent as practicable with others.  So, in line with that, I admit that yes, I do feel some desperation about this.  Perhaps this is akin to that redoubtable biological clock that women hear as they approach menopause.  It’s normal for desperation to ensue when someone believes that she’s running out of time to have a baby, particularly when she’s passionately yearned to mother for her entire adolescent and adult life.  So why not be honest about the desperation?  Desperation is a reality of human existence that our culture unfortunately sweeps under the rug.  Now I know that therapists galore advocate putting one’s best foot forward and to hide any negative data, particularly at the beginning.  They have popularized this notion and it’s become so woven into the fabric of our customs and practices that most people today can’t imagine living any other way.  But this approach has definite drawbacks:

  • It encourages people to focus more on creating illusions of attractiveness than honing the traits that actually foster attractiveness in others, and as we’ll see, these creations tend not to last. 
  • It gives them excuses for not performing their best.  For instance, why lose the weight if you can wear girdles that conceal those extra pounds?   Why avoid smoking when there’s makeup that hides the premature wrinkling and spotting that frequently results? 
  • It undermines the longevity of love-at-first-sight (LAFS). You’ve noted how short-lived LAFS can be.  Well, a primary reason for this is peoples’ manipulative tactics.  Folks make themselves up, hide their imperfections, behave in exaggeratedly polite and yielding ways, and as such, create a more favorable impression than their real character warrants.   But they can’t keep up the acting for long, and once they begin to teeter and falter, so to does the LAFS they originally inspired in their mates. 
  • As such, this misleading persona creates needless disillusion in relationships once the fakery falls away.  This generates more money for the therapists since people seek them for the quick fix, and therefore it calls into question the real usefulness of the best-foot-forward philosophy.  The disappointed want the therapist to tell them why they stopped loving their lover, and spend thousands of dollars for that answer.  But the free and best answer is that they fell in love with an illusion created by their lover.  Once the lover stopped creating the illusion for whatever reason, they fell out of love.  A large part of the mating game involves this bate-and-switch strategy of trickery; and it has for eons.  But in spite of the historic precedent of this “harmless” fibbing, I tell you that we’d go a along way toward alleviating today’s unhappiness if people learned to put their   natural foot   forward in the first place, instead of hoodwinking potential lovers into believing that they offer more of the traits of attraction than they actually do.  We’re programmed to exaggerate our good sides while shrouding the bad.  This may help us in the short term to get the girl, but over the long haul, it harms society.  How so?  Read on…
  • Deception violates the Golden Rule.  People are always doing things to others that they’d rather not have done to themselves.  Surveys for example, suggest that people object far less to telling lies than they do to being victimized by them.  No one enjoys being played for the fool yet so many play others for fools and view this as acceptable behavior.  Now I do not mean to disparage women in general here.  But I all-too-often hear that age-old lament: “Wow, things were going so well between he and I. But as soon as we went to bed, he went off to find someone else.”   The women blame the men and their “shallow” ways. But I contend that females share the blame here because their own behaviors (which deceive the man until he gets them into bed – no hiding then) bring this about. 
  • Deception promotes insecurity in men and women alike.  As women assimilate this game of trickery, many become ashamed of their bodies and are thus afraid to show them, even after many months of coaxing.  They learn that they cannot possibly interest a man without pretense.  Of course, a simple walk down South Street in Philly on a warm Sunday afternoon dispels this notion.  There, we find couples who do not prop themselves up on the weak stilts of body decoration.  Some wear no makeup, and avoid clothing that accentuates and detracts.  Yet men still walk with them and love them.  People don’t need all the goop because while it may initially snare someone’s heart, it won’t last.  This sort of thing is starting to impact men as well, now that male pedicures and facials are coming into vogue. 
  • Lying needlessly complicates mating rituals.  It’s easier for all involved to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.  Yet our rituals, such as they are, require a measure of creativity, in order to mislead and convince more people than we might otherwise, that we’re loveable.  And unfortunately, these measures seem to work somewhat. But this doesn’t make them ethical.  That is, the ends do not justify the means. 
  • It promotes the excessive use of alcohol and illicit drugs.  With all the insecurity, defensive tactics, vengeance, and other stressors that current mating practices generate, people look for relief in the drink, the pill, and the smoke.  I’m sure you know the detriments of this behavior, so I’ll not elaborate further on them here.  I’ll just say that like the other mating instruments discussed above, the positive effects of alcohol in the mating game, in spite of its wide-spread popularity, are also most temporary, and most expensive.  When a person drinks, he feels good for, what, two to three hours?  Then he’s often wiped out for all of the next day and beyond.  And if he did manage to get a woman to come home with him, he regrets it as soon as he takes one look at her in the daylight of sobriety that follows.  Thus, the little story: At two o’clock I went to bed with a ten.  But at ten, I woke up with a two.  Not good. 
  • Lying erodes society’s moral pillars. 

 

I could go on about the negative effects of the treacherous strategies employed by both men and women these days to find true love.  But so you won’t fall asleep, I’ll stop here.  :-)  I’ll just conclude that the problems you’ve cited with love at first sight [LAFS] may not in fact originate in LAFS itself, but rather, grow out of an unhealthy mating game in general.  LAFS is real and it can last provided that both parties maintain an open and honest air throughout their romantic relationship.  If they don’t, then it won’t. 

Again I feel compelled to point out that even with the best behaviors and attitudes, a man may still remain largely unattractive.  Remember those disfigured people I told you about from my high school?  As noted, many have the sweetest personalities, but are viewed as undesirable by their mainstream contemporaries.

I mentioned Maslow because I thought you’d know his work since he’s mentioned so often in corporate managerial classes.  Though he died in 1970, he’s still considered one of psychology’s most forward thinking and on-point clinicians.  His hierarchy of needs triangle, which is based on the idea that gratification is healthy and frustration is pathologic, really seems to organize well the progression of needs satisfaction in humans. His discussions reveal that one has not realized his maximal potential to be happy until all of the following needs are met in order listed below:

  1. Food, shelter, and clothing needs.  Obviously, a person will seek food, clothing, and shelter before he does anything else.  Otherwise, he won’t survive.
  2. Once those are met, then there comes the Safety needs.  A person must feel safe, without the fear of being harmed, in order for him to pursue the goals at levels 3, 4, and 5. 
  3. The love needs (familial and romantic needs). Once people satisfy their food, clothing, shelter, and safety needs, they usually want to secure love.
  4. The esteem needs (recognition from others).
  5. Self actualization needs (Needs to express creativity, innovativeness at work, and such).

 

Check out Abraham Maslow’s book Motivation and Personality for a detailed explanation of this hierarchy. 

My point in bringing this up is that in order to be the best we can be at levels 4 and 5, according to the Maslownian school of thought, we first must satisfy our romantic associations.  If we do not, we won’t go as far or do as well at work or among friends in other social settings.  You’ve heard the saying that behind every good man is a good woman.   This is probably true because this good woman helps him meet his level 3 needs for love, and thus, he is unencumbered by loneliness and sexual frustration, and he can therefore do a better job at work and in his communal activities that cater to level 4 and 5 needs..

This is not to say that people without love in their lives cannot succeed in the other areas.  But true love has the effect of spicing everything else up by enhancing one’s enjoyment of all other activities, not just the loving itself. 

Finally, worrying about achieving the highest levels of happiness is indeed a worthy concern, for the following reasons:

  • When one is happy, one is healthy or at least, is more predisposed to good health than when he’s sad and depressed.  He can more quickly and completely recover from more illnesses and can better avoid them in the first place when his immune system is uncompromised by the typical stressors of unhappiness.
  • The happier one is, the higher his quality of life.  He gets along better with others because he’s more accommodating of their needs.  He would connect in more energizing ways with his neighbors, because happiness begets more happiness. 
  • Society loses out when unhappy people die prematurely.  Unhappy people do indeed die before their times. Get them to be happier though, and they’ll live longer and thus, with more time for reflection and introspection, they’ll be better able to acquire wisdom and pass it on to subsequent generations.  The happier the current generation, then the more benefit it will bestow upon subsequent generations.  Imagine if we could have added ten years to the average lifespan one to two hundred years ago.  If Einstein had lived longer, it’s humbling to think about what further great contributions to science he would have made. The same with Edison and Bell and so many others.  Imagine all those undiscovered edisons and bells that never became famous because they died before they had a chance to utilize their talents.  Make people happier, and we reduce these losses.
  • The happier one is, the more he’ll strive to help others find happiness.  When all of a person’s needs are satisfied, his selfishness fades.  He contends less with others for what he wants because by definition, his happiness indicates that his primary desires are met.  Happiness promotes harmony, and we certainly need more of that today. 
  • The effects of disappointment are minimized.  The happier one is, the more firmly he can stand against life’s disappointments involving loss of a lover or family member, loss of work, discovery of a long-term illness, and so on.  The happier we are, the stronger and the more independent we are.
  • Happiness promotes benevolence.  Happy people fight less and the need for hidden agendas and other forms of subterfuge all but vanishes. If people were as happy as they could be, then they’d have no reason to swindle their neighbors because there would be nothing that they’d want so badly that they’d consider it worth behaving immorally to get.  Without this trickery, people would have much less reason to fight.  Thus we’d see a more peaceful human nature develop.   

With all the benefits of maximal happiness to the individual and to society, it’s clear that attaining joy for all should be a primary goal of any enlightened nation that wants to survive longer than a millennium or so.   We should not dismiss it therefore, as “a big time-waster” [as you've done in your latest letter.  :-)

In response [to your interpretation that I have this I-am-handicapped-I'm-a-victim attitude], let me make the following points:

  • There does seem to be a perception problem here, I agree.  So perhaps I’ll use different words to express my sentiment.   The problem here is with the words used, but not with the sentiment itself.
  • My code of ethics demands that I not hide the handicap or obscure its resulting difficulties.  It is what it is, and to do so would violate my down-to-earth living policy. Though people who have never experienced it would rather that those who   have   just keep their mouths shut, the truth is that I can no longer keep silent.  Whether a victim or not, the handicapped life is tough, and it’s time to heighten mainstream awareness of that fact.
  • As noted above, thinking with clarity about the difficulties of being handicapped is not the same as using the handicap to justify one’s sense of worthlessness.  I’m realistic about the limitations of low vision but am not daunted by them, nor do I believe myself to be any less deserving of the fulfillment of my dreams. 
  • Admitting one’s handicaps differs markedly from stating that he’s a victim.  People who play the victim tend to paint their situations as more grave than they actually are.  They look for ways to get over on the system and escape the usual hardships that most others must endure to achieve success.  These types believe that they deserve the prize without having to work as hard for it as someone else.  But that’s not what’s going on here.  I’m not attempting to circumvent my share of fair hardship in dating.  Unlike the child who fakes an illness to get out of school, I’m not faking.  My difficulties are real, I’ve carried them all my life, and it’s unlikely that they can be overcome without the support and compassion of the women in my life.   

No.  I’m not a victim; just someone who’s strongly motivated to get love from his dream girls.  If, by “straightening out this unhealthy mindset,” you mean that I must conceal my unique hardships, then I believe that the mindset that you’re proposing is no healthier than mine.

You may not ask in so many words for a pity party [when you ask your boss for special consideration when yuo're sick].  But you do get dispensation for your illnesses, and, by your own accounts, you accept it most fully.  You don’t have to ask, because current corporate policy provides this allowance.  You’ve commented often about how understanding your boss is regarding your frequent absences and how much you appreciate it.  And yes, I agree that employees should be treated this way.

The sicknesses you’ve endured are commonplace nowadays. They’re widely experienced by much of the workforce, bosses and subordinates alike. Thus, most people either know what it’s like firsthand to be sick, or they can imagine the difficulties a particular malady poses pretty accurately since they’ve known similar ailments themselves.  It’s easier for them therefore to understand and empathize when a coworker becomes ill.  As a result, they’ll often go easier on him until he’s better.  That’s today.

But there was a time when bosses were not so accommodating, and viewed workers who needed time off to nurse a cold as slackers, and denied them raises, bonuses, and promotions accordingly. Often, the sick were fired for showing insufficient dedication to the job or they were judged as too lazy.  Policies prior to World War II incorporated far less compassion than they do today.  If you were working during the industrial revolution a hundred years ago and got sick as often as you do today, your boss would have fired you long ago.  Fortunately thank goodness, times have changed. 

So how did the white-collar workplace of the 21st century come to regard illness as a valid constraint to productivity, as opposed to in previous centuries, where it considered illness a grave sign of weakness?  This transition happened due to scores and scores of people challenging the status quo as follows: 

  • Some unionized and through the collective bargaining process and other less savory practices, made it difficult for management to profit unless it acknowledged workers’ ailments. 
  • Others, who had no union support, relied on the courts and legislature to understand their plights and to mandate a more compassionate work setting. 
  • Still others, such as those working in small businesses who could neither afford a lawyer nor to unionize, had to plead with their bosses for the needed convalescence time.  In the early days of the industrial revolution, before laws forbade worker cruelty, any time off was granted on a piecemeal basis, and was only secured through the sick person’s begging the boss to show a bit of compassion. Whether or not the people actually received the time off largely depended upon how compassionate the boss was feeling at the time. 
  • The rest kept quiet about their ailments, and many died before they should have because they couldn’t afford the time off to heal themselves, and they dared not ask bosses for any because they feared that doing so would tarnish their good names. 

The tyrannical bosses in the 19th and early to mid 20th centuries were neither compelled nor inclined to grant sick time, insisting that such requests were merely ploys by employees to avoid work yet still be paid.  These profit mongers were notorious for firing the ill without making any effort whatsoever to accommodate them.  And as a result work places were filled with apprehension as people feared confrontations with the redoubtable boss and wondered every day whether they’d have a job tomorrow.  You would agree I think that by today’s standards, such work conditions were horrible and would be tolerated by less people today than back then. 

But clearly, if folks hadn’t risen up and renounced such practices, the all-mighty profit margin would still be the supreme dictator of corporate policy today.  Fortunately however, due to the creation of organizations like The Occupational Safety And Health Administration (OSHA) and the Labor Relations Board among others, this systemic brutality is far less prevalent today.  The mistreatment of workers is no longer as profitable as it once was, and I contend that the seeds of this movement toward a culture of heightened compassion were made up of the meek and the weak asking for help from the powerful; by soliciting compassion and pity from them.  A commonplace tactic of the disadvantaged was to:

  • Show their would-be benefactors the hardships they faced daily.
  • To convince them that such hardships were debilitating, slavery-like, and torturous.
  • And then to outline the changes necessary to reduce said hardships. 

Often, this tactic failed.  But very often, it worked.  The laws that created suffrage for women, rights for minorities, and safer working conditions for all would not have come into their current, advanced form without a measure of pity that the weak instilled in the powerful.  People in high places felt sorry for those beneath them in the social pecking order, and wanted to help make things more right.  Therefore, this phenomenon cements the role of compassion as among the most weight-bearing pillars in our civilized society.  I shudder to think what our culture would be like today if pity were completely excised from our history.  Without it, we’d still be as barbarous as in times of antiquity where the gladiator, revered for his brutality, drew more crowds the more violent he was.  If those countless thousands so brutalized hadn’t cried out, and if the influential majority hadn’t heard them and felt sorry for them, this practice would probably still entertain us today.

Now if you still don’t think that pity works to better the lives of those who ask for it, then consider the Jerry Lewis Telethon that was held almost every September during the latter half of the 20th century.  This actor raised billions of dollars to assist those suffering from muscular dystrophy (MD) by letting the public see firsthand his deformed and decrepit beneficiaries. He graphically depicted their suffering; the braces they had to wear to keep their legs straight, their daily torment at being unable to bathe and dress themselves, and perhaps most movingly, the lives of solitude that those afflicted typically live.  People avoid them because without understanding, they perceive the hardships as too leachy, sacrificial, and otherwise too difficult to accommodate. But the telethon helped to dispel prejudice and showed potential benefactors that meaningfully helping the MD patients really wasn’t so difficult after all. Because the sick were willing to place themselves on public display and admit to the full extent of their hardships, they engendered monumental compassion which fueled an outpouring of wealth the likes of which hasn’t been seen since.  The able-bodied came out of the proverbial woodwork to assist once they better understood, and today, their generosity has resulted in numerous medical and psychological breakthroughs that reduce the pains MD.  These folks live far better today because they went to the rich and powerful with their hats in their hands so to speak, and asked for help. Does this asking make them losers?  I think not.  

Now back to my letter [asking women to temper their judgement of me with compassion] we’ve been discussing:  Virtually every woman I’ve encountered seems to reject me for among other reasons, ignorance and prejudice.  They’ve never dated someone vision-impaired before, and so do not know what it’s like.  They fear it because they don’t know it.  They detest it because of their misunderstandings about it.  Among the more popular premature assumptions they make and have communicated to me are that:

  • I’m too needy.
  • They won’t know how to meet those needs. 
  • A legally blind man will consume too much of their time.
  • I’m lazy for not having overcome my limitations by now.
  • They wonder why I’ve not taken surgery to fix my eyes.  They believe, in their ignorant fashion, that surgery can fix all eye problems, and so conclude that I should have had it, and think I’m psychologically damaged because I haven’t. 
  • They think me incapable of making a living.
  • They assume that if I am chronically lonely that it’s exclusively my own doing, and therefore don’t wish to help.  They regard me as a bum.
  • A modest income like mine currently, implies that there are seedy behaviors and questionable character traits involved. 
  • They’ll have to put more work into the relationship than when dating someone fully sighted.  

I say it’s time to take a more active role in dispelling their prejudices by showing them that the more tightly they hold on to their faulty information, the more alone they make me.  This hopefully, will generate compassion in their hearts; at least enough to motivate them to take a closer look.  This approach is no different than those that the blacks employed to secure their freedom or that women used to acquire voting rights or that pre World War II workers used to evolve a more compassionate work culture in the post industrial age.  At some point in any struggle for justice, compassion plays pivotal roles.  So I don’t see any problem with taking steps, as is done in my pleading letter, to bring it to the surface.  Securing the same level of acceptance for the handicapped in the mainstream dating arena is no less valid a social problem than minorities’ struggles for civil rights or any other freedoms.  So why not use the same techniques?

Finally, where’d you get this idea that asking for help is identical to admitting that one is a loser?  Why do you imply that seeking assistance and understanding makes he who does so a loser?  Would you suggest that the Jerry’s kids on the telethon I spoke of above were losers because they sought extra measures of kindness?  The fact is: We need not be independent to win.  For example, successful people ask for and get help every day, whether it be in corporate endeavors or familial tasks at home.  In fact the most consistent winners, very often, most effectively delegate and thereby tap most efficiently the talents of subordinates.  They succeed by effectively asking for help, and they’re not losers for having done so.  In my case, I’m just asking women to consider my limitations and the rough time I’ve had before they choose to reject me.  Acknowledging a limitation and asking for help to overcome it makes not one a loser.

Well, if that [challenging and grumpy] attitude [you have when people bother you when you're sick] works for you, then go for it.  It seems though that you’ll needlessly upset bosses with this arrogant vent, and then, they won’t be as willing to cut you a break. I see several problems with this screw-you-if-you-don’t-understand-me attitude:

  • It creates needless hostility and thwarts harmony.
  • It makes you appear like you’ve got a chip on your shoulder. When you approach a boss this way, it sounds a lot like you’re blaming them for your problems. Not a good idea. 
  • It ignores the concerns of others and as such, it makes you appear insensitive.  You’ll agree that the boss’s chief concern is maximizing productivity.  If you appear to dismiss his concerns as you seem to in this tirade, then you’ll likely alienate him / her.
  • It makes you appear overly selfish because you are more focused on your own good than that of the team.  Ultimately, I agree that we must put ourselves first. But shouting this ideal with such powerful words is almost never wise.   
  • It discourages others from empathizing with your position, particularly if you refuse to discuss your difficulties in a more inviting manner. This attitude of that’s-the-way-it-is-and-too-bad-if-you-don’t-like-it actually challenges people to resist you all the more.  Why should they want to accommodate a person who displays this kind of blatant disregard for their sensitivities?  You seem to expect their understanding here.  Unfortunately, another’s understanding is generally not a right, but a privilege that we earn through treating them equivalently.  Again, the Golden Rule applies, and I know that you’d be hurt if someone responded this way to you. 
  • It drips of excessive machismo.  We’d expect to find this sort of attitude among young adult uneducated males, but much less so in educated, well-established females such as yourself.  Simply put, your words above do not become you.   
  • People who go off like this are viewed as bad team players and as such, your success in most corporate environments will be seriously curtailed.  Since virtually every corporation utilizes the team-player mantra, disregarding team concerns, as you seem to do here, will probably mean needless difficulty and stress for you.  People will resist such colorful and negatively emotional language because it shows a distinct lack of empathy in you for them.
  • It communicates your sentiments too loudly.  You know, in Ham Radio, there is a code of ethics when operating a radio transmitter that says: Use no more power than necessary to maintain effective communication.  It’s bad practice to use the maximum allowable power of 1500 watts whenever less than 1 watt would work well.  In short, it says: Why yell when a whisper will do? 
  • There’s almost never a good time to employ the “F— off” sentiment. You might win a few battles with this, but you’ll virtually never endear yourself to anyone with this   your-concerns-are-trivial-next-to-mine-and-screw-you-if-you-don’t-agree   attitude. 
  • People often use bristling bluster like yours above, to conceal their weaknesses.  Might you be doing that here?  If so, you’re not fooling anyone.  It’s widely understood that males, and yes, sometimes females, beat their chests and thunderously roar to deceive their competitors into thinking that they’re stronger and more menacing than they actually are. It’s an outgrown tactic of intimidation which doesn’t work well these days, particularly in white-collar work places where, presumably, the people are more educated and attuned to current serological trends.
  • This implies that you don’t need your boss’s understanding.  But you do because it is generally he who decides the type of work you receive, how well you’re compensated for that work, and who, along with his peers, determines your rate of progress up the corporate ladder.  If you alienate him, you risk future advancement and perhaps even your job. 
  • This rant just doesn’t make you seem very likeable. You could have conveyed the same sentiment with far less abrasive language than is contained above.  If I were going to say what I believe you’re attempting to communicate about your sickness, I’d word it something like this:  “Gee, I’m really sorry I can’t make your deadline.  But I’m very sick.  However, I promise that you’ll get my work when I feel better. I know you need it right away and I feel awful that I cannot get it to you sooner.  But if I attempt to do it right now, while I’m still feeling lousy, it won’t be of very high quality and you’ll definitely not like it.  I understand that you might not be able to wait until I’m better.  So maybe we could delegate the project to someone else while I heal.  “  Rather than the bluster it’s better to fully own up to our sicknesses / weaknesses / limitations.  With this more humble approach, you’ll find people more accommodating than you imagined. I’m sure.
  • You act like you have no complicity in making your boss understand your plight.  But people can’t read our minds, and they may not understand, particularly if they’ve never experienced our difficulties. It’s unfair therefore, for us to mandate that they always know the depths of our pains and to automatically judge them as imbeciles when they do not.  The truth is that we do bear some responsibility for educating people about our peculiarities, and it isn’t always the case that someone who doesn’t is a hopeless fool that is incapable of understanding. We can’t rightly blame all of them for all their unawareness, unless of course they actively seek to remain in the dark once shown the light.  Your words above might be appropriate for example, if on three to five previous occasions, you tried more benevolent and gently persuasive tactics.  But to come out of the starting gate with them as your opening salvos makes no sense to me.  Sorry.  After all, there are those who, while not strongly opposed to embracing new knowledge, just haven’t done so due to prevailing circumstances.  They may misunderstand the handicapped for example, because they never went to school with them, nor did they grow up with a disabled family member.  But once they’re given a small taste, they sometimes accept it with great interest.  They eventually come to embrace it.  We can find countless stories like this within the numerous service organizations throughout the country these days like Kwanis International, Lions Club International, and churches of most denominations.  People want to help if they can be made to understand the following:
  •  
    1. the legitimacy of the need,
    2. and then, once that’s been established, they need to learn how they can help. 

 

The ignorant can be transformed into the enlightened with the correct strategies, and I think my request for pity aids in this transformation.

Finally, how would you feel if as a boss, a subordinate took this tone with you?  You wouldn’t like it, would you?  Again, employing a variation of the Golden Rule would work well here.  Only treat people as you would like to be treated yourself.

I don’t see soliciting pity as bad advice in some situations.  A letter that begs for compassion is but one of many strategies for winning a woman’s heart, and it is not one of the first ones I would use.  But it is a reasonable last resort.  I don’t like laying myself so open, but if it gets someone to more fully appreciate my situation and show me compassion as a result, then it’s worth it.  Whether they come to my bed because they desire me or because they feel sorry for me really doesn’t matter to me; at least not in the beginning.  At least if they pity me, I get a better opportunity to fully make the case for loving me to them.

Yes, I agree that men aren’t created equal. However, you might feel differently about society not needing equality if you were to ever experience discrimination or, more generally, oppression.  Then, you might better understand why people take these desperate measures to counteract it.   

Yes, [...] I am me and [...] I have a vast set of talents to offer.  But highlighting the good does not mean dismissing the bad.  Realize that this is part of what makes being down-to-earth work so well for me.  I make sure that people see the whole me, and not just the static-free, colorized, admirable parts.  By giving them an accurate summary of both my good and bad points, I find it easier to live with myself.  If I’m not forthcoming about the extent of my handicap, then my conscience bothers me.  I can’t live with it.  I won’t, because dealing with a pesky conscience has long-term and grave health effects both physical and mental that so far, I’ve managed to avoid. 

I’ve picked my own route.  You’d be amazed at how many friends and family members think that I’m crazy for trying to find true love for as long as I have.  But it’s my mission and I’ve stayed the course.  It’s more important to me than anything else, except my health that is.  And like I said before, I will either find it, or die trying.

I’m only concerned about others’ opinions to the extent necessary to promote the sort of relationship I want.  They don’t impact my self-esteem these days.  Beyond how they treat me, I don’t really care what they think. In fact, my argument of desperation could be viewed as illustrating a very high self-esteem, and not a low one.  After all, I’m willing to buck the illusory rhetoric of self-sufficiency which so permeates the media these days, and to stand up and say hey, this is not the case.  At least, not for me.  I need to be loved by a true love in order to achieve maximal happiness.    

Well, I could write on and on about this but I think I’ve said enough for now.  Take care and write again soon.

Tom Hesley

Related Posts

Different Sexual Strategies

Friday, March 9th, 2007

Dear [Melinda],

Yes, clearly it’s no good to go through the motions and pursue a long-term relationship / marriage if one really doesn’t want to. Society should not compel them to do so. I agree.

Further, I’m with you on the idea that the majority of marriages are full of unhappiness and thus, [usual] end that way [, unhappily].  [I know that many people say they need to settle down and get married to realize their happiness.  But as I see it, it's not that we need to be married to be happy; we just need to be romantically, emotionally, and sexually gratified to be happy.  These prizes can be obtained without getting married, yes.] 

I find much of Dr. Ruth and Howard Stern vulgar, although I do get a real kick out of Stern’s movie   Private Parts.   Neither of these folks are [necessarily] what I would consider to be [the best] role models for the citizens of a healthy society.  [Nonetheless, you can't blame them or the media in general for   creating   society's (perhaps) excessive interest in sex; we've had that need (yes, need) since the dawn of humanity.  So in my opinion, you're giving them too much credit here. 

Instead, they, and others like them just encourage a more open society about sex, where it's more normal and accepted for people to voice (and openly seek to gratify) their desires, and this I believeis a good thing.  When people can freely live their fantasies, they're healthier, happier, and once relieved of the burdensof unrequited sexual desires, they can be productive in other, more worldly pursuits, like making more money and devoting themselves to more selfless causes.  Though at times obnoxious, people like Stern and Ruth do effectively counteract sexual repression, and enable many to 'come out of the closet' and get what they want from the other sex.]

I suppose that the bulk of [yours and my] contention here centers on the definition of love. [Your definition is more practical while mine focuses more on the romantic and sexual aspects of it.] We apparently have different beliefs about it. But this is to be expected. Men and women see things very differently. The evolutionary psychology books I list below theorize as to why this is so and offer ways to reduce [or at least, to understand and accept these differences]. But some disagreement will likely always remain just by sheer virtue of the fact that by necessity, men and women have had to evolve with very different sexual strategies in order to procreate in bloodline-sustaining ways.

You can always find people who’ve achieved success without being “in love”. But I promise you that for every person like this you’d care to cite, I can cite at least one whose success was furthered by passionate love for a mate.

Finally, I’d say that the feelings you speak of [romantic and sexual desire] are in and of themselves not unhealthy. How people behave in response to them however, often is very unhealthy.

So, what do you think love is?

The issue [of love] is not trite to me, nor to the millions of people out there whose romantic lives aren’t what they’d like them to be. 

I’m doing what I need to be doing right now.  Nope.  No [corporate] job.  Been there.  Done that.  I lived that sort of life for nearly twemty years, and it did not accomplish for me the goodness that you’re attributing to it.  That is, I created that “right” life some nineteen years ago, and it did not make me happy.  I built it, but they [desirable women] did not come. 

You say I’m in a rut.  But I say I’m in the best place I’ve ever been.  I’m happier than ever before, and I am doing what I wish to do (writing, maintaining my technical savvy, DJing [, and caring for my mother]).  I’ve accepted, after two decades of hard-core experience that I’ll simply never fit into the corporate paradigm, and the nice thing is that fortunately, I don’t have to.  Having lots of money is not so important to me that I wish to sacrifice my health and integrity in order to get it. 

Sorry, but [unlike you] I don’t see love-at-first-sight [LAFS] as mere chemical reactions that should be dismissed as human failings.  [Indeed, such feelings are at the core of human essence.  Besides, if you think about it, all human desires and thought processes in general are based on chemical reactions.  Thus, the fact that lust is a chemical reaction does not make it any more trite than any other desire or thought.] Read any modern psychology book and you’ll see that these [failings as you suggest them to be] are actually very mental and highly evolved processes. They are not therefore, simple carnal matters.  Check out the following books for corroboration.  I’ve studied all these at length: 

  • The Evolution Of Desire   by David M. Buss.
  • Love At First Sight   by Earl D. Naumann, Ph. D.
  • Motivation and Personality    by Abraham H. Maslow.
  • Survival Of The Prettiest   by Nancy Etcoff.

 

I’d argue that feelings of attraction are supremely important in laying the foundation for long-lasting and happy relationships. They should not be discarded [therefore] or underestimated in importance.  

Yes, I agree that in times past, the idea of loving a person for love’s sake alone was a foreign concept, and did not really come into its own until after world war II ended.  You’re correct that historically, people married to establish allegiances among families and to combine their wealth and thus, expand their fiscal reach.  However, today, folks are looking for more, particularly now that women have achieved a great measure of economic independence from men.  This is explained in detail in the book,

  • Marriage, A History From Obedience to Intimacy   by Stephanie Coontz. 

A woman these days need not marry in order to live well, and many, though the numbers are still sadly rather small, are beginning to realize that the mere presence of “deep pockets” in a man does not go nearly as far toward making them happy, as he who they feel attracted to, and who feels likewise toward them; his money and familial connections notwithstanding.  Personally, I think we have the better system today.  Yes, you may point out that the divorce rates are higher now than ever before, and thereby conclude that our system is worse.  But the problems with this conclusion are numerous:

  • I suggest that the low [divorce] rates of yester-century occurred because people (particularly women) were far less free. Their roles in such unions were rigidly defined, prescribed, and in many cases, violently enforced.  Those who chose not to follow them were shunned, beat up, confined to their rooms, and often killed.  Yes, marriages may havelasted longer; but much of the credit for that goes to the coercion that husbands used to restrain and oppress their wives.  Women paid for longevity in their marriages with their freedom.  Certainly not an ideal situation, and I’m quite glad we don’t live like that in our century, even if it means contending with higher divorce rates as a result.    
  • People live longer today.  So the idea of “’til death do us part” means something very different now than it did in earlier times.     It’s far less of a challenge to make a marriage last for ten to twenty years, as opposed to today, where in order to keep that promise, marriages must last thirty to fifty years.
  • Longer marriages of today subject couples to greater stresses such as health problems and the increased likelihood that one or the other will have some sort of accident that drastically alters the dynamics of their marriage, and in many cases, damages it irreparably. 
  • Today’s society is changing at a much greater rate than [in times] past, owing to the development of the mass media and computers, not to mention the better-functioning brains due to better nutrition.  It’s far less likely therefore, that couples can avoid extreme value and goal differences, which spell the early demise of so many of today’s marriages, particularly now that so many women have their own careers and no longer must depend on a man for economic sustenance.  Without this dependence, it’s easy to see why far fewer people choose to remain in relationships without the feelings of love. 

True, modern society may have lost some of its ability to create long-lasting unions.  But I believe we’ve gained much more than we lost.

I’ve studied the history for hundreds of hours actually.  As noted earlier, I agree with everything you’ve said here about marriages of the past.  I’m just thankful that humans have moved beyond these restrictive viewpoints. 

[...] I don’t feel that a forever-lasting relationship is a healthy goal.  I never stated my goals this way.  What I said was that I’m looking for a mutually satisfying relationship that will last for an indefinite period.  Indefinite   does not mean   forever.  Whether I have one relationship that lasts for fifty years, or fifty relationships that last  one year each makes no real difference to me.  As long as I’m relating this way to someone, the duration of the relationship is but of secondary importance. 

Yes, hard work, mutual respect, compassion, and empathy are essential ingredients of a healthy love relationship.  But what, I ask you, motivates one to exhibit these traits?  Many say that it’s duty and sheer willpower.   Yes, one can   will   himself to behave like this just because [he believes] it’s the right thing to do or that he wants to be a good citizen.  But I contend that physical attraction is a much stronger motivation than willpower alone, or [willpower] which derives from a duty sense.  Now mind, physical attraction cannot replace willpower.  In any relationship, there will be those times when it pales, and willpower must step in to help the couple get over this rough spot.  But I think of lust as the sugar in the cake, and duty as the flour.  Without the sugar, a cake would still be a cake, but would be far less appealing.  Without the flour, the cake would not be a cake at all.  So lust and duty work together to strengthen the binds of a healthy relationship.  It’s not exclusively one or the other.  Thus, I don’t see these as opposing forces in relationship because a love affair devoid of either one is unhealthy. 

Desperation may indeed be unattractive to some, particularly those who lack sufficient compassion.  But like it or not, desperation is a part of life.  We’ve been programmed to reject it.  Yet it remains. [Besides, one can acknowledge being in need, without being needy.  Needing and   needy   mean two very different things with the former not sharing the negative connotations of the latter.]

I have done everything you suggest [using the pursuit of worldly goals to numb my desires for good sex, great romance, and divine love].  I just didn’t have the good luck with it that you claim to have had.

Yes, [Emmy] and I have a nice friendship, and I’d love to find a similar arrangement with someone with the added pleasure of passion to spice it up. 

[Yes,] people are born diverse.  My point (allow me to clarify) was that institutions historically have fallen way short of fully recognizing the value of this diversity, and in fact have mounted extreme methods of oppression to combat it (Nazi Germany for example).  Fortunately today, there’s a big push to tear down the walls of prejudice that blind people to this innate diversity.  When I implied that people weren’t diverse, I meant to say that peoples’ behaviors oppress diversity. 

And I appreciate [your encouragement].  I’d just ask that you be careful about appearing overly self-righteous.  

Further, the jury is still out on whose mindset [yours or mine] is the more healthy.  While I respect your belief system and understand how you came to have it, I’m not convinced that it’s worked any better for you than mine has for me.  You’re still single, like me.  You still have unfulfilled dreams, just as I do, that you think about much of the time.  But unlike me, you seem to bear much resentment toward men.  You speak often in very general terms about how men are pigs because all they want is short-term sexual fun.   Many are that way, yes.  But not all.  Not me.  Further, I don’t harbor such disgust toward women in general.  Thus, [...] are you [really] any more happy than I?  How meaningful would such a claim be? 

Tom