(no subject)

[vicarz]

More from "I don't know:" Marriage
Today's not important line of thought started when talking to a friend in the gym who I hadn't seen in ages (a girl from the original Gold's boxing club, washboard abs > age 40) was when she mentioned someone I know having long-term relationship problems with his girl, problems I didn't know about. She theorized that he was with her because he had been with her so long he didn't know what else to do, or feared the alternatives. This is a strong woman, but her note was that you never compromise and settle in a relationship. She hadn't, but noted that all of her friends who committed despite problems are all getting divorces (with and without kids). We debated a bit, and I don't know what the answer, or my answer, is on that subject. It's not important right now, but I've been noting recently that sometimes the difference between a relationship and not was simply deciding to commit and staying committed. Perhaps those that succeed are just the ones that try, and that those that keep seeking perfection just don't understand what a real commitment is. So, the converse is that if you just lay down a commitment, you're just begging for a much harder crash further down the road.

And I don't know, nor is it important in my life right now. Still curious.

Comments

[vicar.livejournal.com]

I also sing that song whenever I realize that for however hungry I get, that it's worth holding on to (realistic) standards. Every time I see a eharmony ad, every time someone tells me about craigslist, I hear "Lowered...ex-pec-tay-shuns" in my lil head.

Expectations, and reasonable forecasts of ranges of probabilities, can be communicated. Communication is another key.

[sparklypoof.livejournal.com]

just sayin', cuz you mentioned it:

my parents divorced over 8 years ago now. my dad started dating after a while, and signed up w/match.com. he met the insane woman who lived w/us for a year [and made our lives hell and all that] through that site. she's obviously long-gone now.

he signed up for eharmony, went on a few dates, and found the love of his divorced life. he's been happily married to my step-mom for 2 or 3 years now [I am bad and can't remember how long ago it was], and she's a wonderful woman.

'm just sayin'. eharmony = not insane people. match.com = insane people.

at least, in our experience. kay, done.

[vicar.livejournal.com]

I disagree - sounds like a % play in each case. My issue is thinking that on-line, to me, may put you into a pool of people with less to offer who are more desperate. Sure there are some gems out there, but the ratio of gems to desperate people (who are desperate for a reason, in most cases) is far worse in on-line dating ads than just running around in real life. Lowered expectations isn't comparing one site to another - it's talking about the idea that you've given up and started trying really hard to meet someone instead of just letting it happen.

[sparklypoof.livejournal.com]

see, my dad hadn't dated in 20+ years. he hadn't expected to be dating again later in life - and those websites, while they may seem a lowered expectation arena to you, and I admit that is an angle to take on them - they're a relatively safe place for older adults to meet new people. my dad was lonely and looking for someone, sure - but I dont think by joining these sites he lowered his expectations. they were there as a tool for him to meet new people, and he could have not acted on any of the messages he got. he did go on a few dates that were not so spot-on, and he lucked out in finding the wonderful woman who is my step-mom.

I agree with you in that the gems to desperate people ratio is skewed in the desperate end of the spectrum, but that desperation could be born of not knowing how to date after being married for so long - it's not always the token loser trolling for dates.

it's talking about the idea that you've given up and started trying really hard to meet someone instead of just letting it happen.

but if you're nearing 50 and your home life has fallen apart after a divorce and you just want to meet someone to spend the next 50 years of your life with, wouldn't you rather seek them out actively through as many avenues as possible, vs. just waiting for "fate" or "chance" to bring you together?

[vicar.livejournal.com]

That makes sense - I guess for me, at my age and in my circumstances, it would be desperate (irrationally so) whereas were I 50 with kids the complications of life would be more understandable.

[pastor-saturn.livejournal.com]

it's talking about the idea that you've given up and started trying really hard to meet someone instead of just letting it happen.

What's wrong with trying? I don't mean "trying" like buying a vroom-vroom car and wearing inappropriately young clothing; I mean getting out there and making an effort. "Just letting it happen" works better at different times in one's life, but that old magic where our-eyes-lock-and-we-both-forget-what-we-were-going-to-say-and-we-crush-each-other-to-our-heaving-chests ain't gonna happen every time. Have a viable Plan B or C, I say. Just because you didn't trip and fall into a relationship doesn't make it less valid, magical, or special. Or difficult, for that matter.

Online dating specifically: I have some limited experience with it (eons ago). My feeling is that the anonymity of being online is attractive to all kinds of people, some simply because they're shy (like me) and others for less innocent reasons. It can certainly bring out the worst in people because there are no consequences if they act like a tool; they just move on to the next not-real person they're pretending to get to know.

But then there are plenty of very nice people who've met other very nice people online. You hear more tool stories, as much because people like hearing them a bit more than "happily ever after--so far" stories.

YMMV, of course.