How to Deal with a Curve Ball I NEVER Saw Coming (death by puns)

[tiredofvampires]

Oh man, I have my business cut out for me here. Whoo!

 

I know I've already done my mea culpa's on this thread already, but I just have to say again I'm guilty of some pretty horrendous thread etiquette. Jumping around all over the place, missing a few majorly thoughtful/on-the-mark posts with a reply yet to manifest on my part...it's hard to do justice to the magnitude of such frank, varied, and individually gifted advice.

 

But I'm going to try, so bear with me.

 

YOU GUYS ROCK. Lucky me. I mean, having so many different POV's brought to the table is a bit of a ToV paradise, heh. Even a few heavyweight veteran quasi ENA-dropouts (lol) came out of the woodwork, came through for me.

 

I'll be going roughly in the order of "more straightforward to least", rather than "in the order they were received", mkay...(sort of been the running methodology, but thought I'd make that explicit...)

[tiredofvampires]

So to summarize.... His idea of "giving you the full treatment" was to lay back with his arm over his eyes as you pleasured him??? ToV....Why are you trying to turn this toad into a prince??

 

I think in his mind "the full treatment" was my legs clamped around his waist, going at a fairly fast clip, with him getting what, apparently, is the Holy Grail for men. No gravy, no BBQ sauce, no salt and pepper. Not even potatoes. Just MEAT. Meat, meat, meat, and not even cooked meat. Which I think he assumed, given probably how many women respond fairly favorably to that offer (at least outwardly), would be an in-kind exchange.

 

Since I did have to draw a line in the sand because of the condom issue, which I was not wavering from (which still bothers me, because saved by the lack of them or not, I don't like technicalities determining outcomes, where my own internal process would have been a better gauge of where I was at) -- neither he nor I got "the full treatment," by his definition.

 

I find it moderately disturbing that one poster here (though with completely benign, helpful intent) said quite frankly, he'd consider that as a woman who had "chickened out." (in answer to my questioning his views on the matter.) Disturbing, because remember...I wasn't only in it to satisfy a sexual need, and derive pleasure. I was also in it to prove to myself that I was not made of glass...and that I could both physically and emotionally "take it," and walk away relatively unscathed (like most "normal" people who have lived through a variety of experiences), with just a notch in my belt for confidence and newfound breath in my sexual self, which was feeling terminally ill. So for me...that still feels kind of like a "fail." I know it doesn't sound rational. But it was left...unfinished in that way. Certainly in his mind, that not happening would not have been "the full treatment," and even though I thought he'd be happy as a clam with what I was offering in lieu, the pressure on the second night to get it fully on made it clear that he, for one, needed "the full treatment". I'm not trying to be gauche when I say that half the time spent the 2nd night was him pleading in no uncertain language, and me saying, "No hun, no can do, you know that." Which was really awkward and discombobulating, because the fact is, with protection, I am 98% sure I would have.

 

But you're right, PWL. For what we DID do, I felt that it was clearly imbalanced, at very, very least. The first night, I was just so taken with the whole novelty of the situation and flying by the seat of my pants, I was more able to look past the glaring negligence. I announced to him at the very outset, when we lay down, "I need to tell you that I'm not going to take this to the end, I just have to say that". He closed his eyes and had a look of amusement that was difficult to interpret. I don't know whether he thought, "Well, we'll see about that," or he was thinking I was a mood-ruiner, or that I must be a bit Victorian, or if he even respected it, but I got the sense that he accepted it and seeing as how I couldn't "fix" that fix we were in, I was happier than happy to oblige him with the rest, since in fact it's not like I don't get a rush from that activity anyway (for me, it's neither degrading in implication or submissive as an act, as though I can't ask for my own pleasure [though I can see that take, as penelope13 presented it], nor a chore -- it's all good. So at that point I felt like I was still not being torn in too many conflicting directions.)

 

What happened (and I'm gonna talk about this some more) is that he, being extremely keen to social/emotional cues (as PTH has correctly characterized him) is that this gave him what he perceived to be some kind of edge (as arrogance works), and then he upped the ante on that dynamic the next go-around. THAT'S when it started to feel like diminishing returns.

 

And though I was prepared with condoms for another encounter, I at that point had become clear that some things would have to be cleared up -- that at this point, I need to be feeling a different way, and if he can figure that out, great. If not, no go. I had that little spiel somewhat prepared, though rather muddily in my mind, because I really was betting on it not coming to fruition. And my bets were right on.

 

So it's not that I'm trying to turn him into a prince. I'm trying to be honest. Honest with myself. And fair. About what I should/could feel entitled to, and what not. Since these circumstances defy my normal codes of values and behavior, and I'm out of my element, it's like trying to talk in a foreign language and innocently saying something that brings the opposite reaction you expected, because it's not your mother tongue and nuances are lost on you.

[tiredofvampires]

Though I will say, I'm shamelessly reveling in capilot (a number of pages ago, but memorable for that!) calling him a "shallow twerp" and now from PWL, "toad."

 

Do the flamboyant flames ring the bell for me? Not gonna lie. lol

 

All creative language used to describe him that legitimately passes these censors is warmly welcomed here.

[tiredofvampires]

Oh, and I just want to add, PWL --

 

It might be easier to roundly condemn him as thoroughly as you have if our interactions were just isolated to a sexual situation.

 

The fact is that we had talked about quite a number of things over the months and I felt that our "bond" (however tentative, and circumstantial) provided me a glimpse into his various other facets. And if you just took the sex off the table, or if it never happened, would he have been a toad for all of the rest?

 

I may be weird, and maybe it's just me, but my respect, affection, interest and basic care of someone doesn't just go out the window, or even morph into something else when we're in the bedroom. So for me, that's just an extension of the rest of whatever kind of connection we've made. So if we're sitting and talking about stuff in a way that feels like a decent conversation, with good rapport and stimulation, and I get the sense that this is a non-toad...the disconnect (and I did feel like he was almost a different person) in the bedroom doesn't leave me with, "what a toad." It leaves me with an enigma. The enigma being what value I have at all, whether this is the "real" person, or just a "side" of him, or what. I know I've covered that point a lot on the thread, but that's the reason it wasn't a simple cut-and-dried label/rejection I could attach to him.

 

Just as a small anecdote:

 

The landlady, as I mentioned, was operating a pretty neurotic household. But she, herself, at least in the beginning, struck me as someone who was incredibly charming for her idiosyncrasies. I actually knew her from many years ago, as an art model (who took the most idiosyncratic poses, as well). She's what anyone would call "a character" -- British, which is rare in our neck of the woods, with a flair for the dramatic and peppering her expressions with European stylistic flourishes. All the rooms in the house were named after quarters in a ship; so I was occupying the "Starboard Cabin." Mr. No Condoms was in the "Stern Suite." For some reason, the in-between open space we shared, that was no one's bedroom -- with his loveseat and the tv, which he told me was "mi casa, tu casa", SHE called "The Ruplestiltskin Room" (which has nothing to do with ships, but whatever.) The kichen: The Galley. And what did she call herself? "The Admiral." I am not kidding when I tell you that after she was divorced many years ago, she dropped her first name and took on the moniker "HRH", aka, "Her Royal Highness." And I also kid you not that she uses that in all official and legal documents as anyone would a given name.

 

Now I, as someone pretty comfortable with the off-beat and creative, thought this was pretty cute, as eccentricities go. But I would imagine a tough, insensitive, culturally, socially, and intellectually closed-minded, brutish version this man would only see this as pure madness. He might mock it, or even freak out enough to want to be out of there. But he had been there long before me -- about a year -- and he told me again and again that despite all the other family pathos and dysfunction, and some of his practical qualms about staying there...he partly stayed because of the landlady and how much he liked her. We talked a lot about how we both enjoyed and liked her. This was BEFORE the crap hit the fan and she became my nemesis' (her daughter's) handmaiden, which spilled over on him as well (though I bore the brunt of it, by far.)

 

The reason I bring this up is that I could not imagine that a truly insensitive and shallow man, of which I've seen and met many, would feel such a fondness for her. He didn't judge her for all those kooky things, he rather found them endearing, as I did. I do believe that this was no act -- I truly feel that he was able to appreciate what some others would ridicule (the girl in the downstairs room who we were thinking of getting a place with just thought this woman was nuts.) And this seemed indicative (along with other subtle things) of something good in him. It antidoted the "I'm a badass who only cares about how big I can get my biceps" hole he could be pegged in.

 

I didn't share too much about my inner strife, or complex life challenges, but he did know I was on disability and that my mother was covering this rental, and he didn't judge me for that. I told him I felt pretty bad about the situation I'm currently in, and he said, "Everyone has something. I'm certainly not perfect. My life has problems. Everyone has problems of some kind." Those sentiments were real. I saw sides of puffed up arrogance, and I saw sides of humility. And that tolerance and even, I'd say, compassion, afforded him such a leg up in my estimation, that the things I found troubling, inconsistent, flakey, and contradictory in him from time to time I just assimilated as "a complex person."

 

So that's another reason I couldn't just write him off as a toad. Because there was too much other information that offset that, and the being treated like meat, well...it didn't fit. And it also wasn't the whole story. As far as I was concerned, the "real him" was more the person he was before that last week or so.

 

But I could be wrong.

[Capricorn3]

So that's another reason I couldn't just write him off as a toad.

Just a little toadish is one small area ... (sorry, couldn't resist, lol).

[tiredofvampires]

Just a little toadish is one small area ... (sorry, couldn't resist, lol).

 

HAHA, you know...I'm probably cutting him too much slack. Yeah...I'm probably working overtime in his defense, so PWL (and Quirky + like the preponderance of this thread) has a point.

 

One thing I can say is that I have never trusted him, for the other small pop-up "windows" to his soul, in other cases. For instance, when all three of us (he, the girl roomie, and I) were huddling in my room about our escape plan, they got worried about what if the family got a whiff of our conversation. "How will we explain this?" they asked. And for some reason, looked at me. I said, "Well, I have an explanation, but it's kinda BS." And he said, "Go for it. What is it? I love BS."

 

Noted.

 

Then when we were re-working the plan, we came up with the idea that we'd only get a 2-bedroom house, because the girl said she would probably have to move in 6 months. She said she'd be fine sleeping in a screened off area in the livingroom, she's easy. When I was alone with him later, he said, "We could get a 2-bedroom, with a den. And we could just throw her in the den."

 

Um...throw her in the den? I thought.

 

Is that how he's thinking of me?

 

So things like that.

 

So when he asked me to drive him back from the airport (like I said, he had car issues), after seeing off his ex girlfriend/highschool sweetheart, and I said sure...I was a bit torn about that. As I said earlier in this thread, I do things because I'd want someone to do them for me, if they could. I mean, I took that girl to get her dog groomed, too, because she doesn't have a car (and is a broke student), and I'm just grateful to have wheels. But I wondered if that car ride was part of his drawing the erroneous conclusion that because I find him attractive, I'd just be putty in his hands. And that then just sowed the seeds for what eventually happened.

 

If he extrapolated like that, honestly, he was mistaken. But all evidence would seem to prove otherwise to HIM.

 

And ironically enough, on that very car ride home, we were talking about being men vs. being women. He told me that he was SO glad to be a guy. And I said strangely enough, I don't share the sentiment, about being a woman. Haha. I told him it can be brutal sometimes, really. And he said, "Yeah, I don't know how you guys do it. But I've never met a girl who doesn't like being one. Every one I know really, really likes being a girl. But I could never be one. It would really suck. It's so easy being a guy."

 

I was like, hmmm. And I told him, "You know, I've often felt that if I were a guy, or in another life, I might be a womanizer [this elicited a hearty laugh from him]. Because it's so easy to be a jerk and just live it up, and have a blast of it, without all the complicated fallout that invariably happens with women. I'd be living it up too, maybe." That was not facetious. But I was curious what he'd say.

 

He said deploringly, "Yeah, but women flock to the jerks."

 

I had to almost suppress a bit of a smirk, thinking, "So..........who is this a indictment of? Women? Or yourself? Because if women flock to you (which I'm sure you would not dispute), and women flock to the jerks, then you = a jerk. By your logic?" LOL.

 

I said, "Well, after age 25, that starts to calm down a bit, because women get sick and tired of that, and want something real."

 

And he said, "Nope. Nope. They don't."

 

I see.

 

Well, my heart bleeds for you to hear of your misfortunes with the women who don't flock to you.

 

See, I didn't exactly think of him as a jerk, and probably a toad would have been over-stating it at that point, anyway -- but a player stocked with all the tendencies. I just didn't know how flagrant it could be until he was baring himself for me.

 

I know it sounds like I've just completely contradicted myself about the good things I saw in him. But that's just the point.

 

I don't think he was any one label or stereotype, even when he looked to be fitting into a few nicely.

 

Like I said....just hitting on ME so hard (a girl with visible silver hairs, legs that aren't shaved, non-waxed nether-regions [ahhh, you accursed pubes threads, kiss my arse forever, ptttttttt!!! must mean he's not your average.

[tiredofvampires]

You should post more, because your English is far better than you think! And your spelling is flawless. So I'm not going to dumb down my English, myself.

 

Thanks for following along, and sharing this experience, Leonardo. But you know, a 30-year-old+ woman who is breaking in a virgin really should not be expecting much more than what you did. That's all to be expected -- that you were nervous and just wanted the deed done. Any 18-year-old virgin is going to be inexperienced by very definition, and people broaden their menu as they get seasoned in intimate situations.

 

So I don't believe you should be at all shocked or ashamed of yourself in hindsight, or anything of the kind. And if she knew you were a virgin (did she?), being disappointed would be pretty inappropriate. Even with you being THAT young, she would be stupid to have high expectations, virgin or not.

 

What do you think you'd have done if she guided you to try other things, like foreplay? Would you have tried?

 

If she said, "touch me", and showed you how or where, would you have tried? Because I did tell this guy, "Kiss me..." at one point, but after that, I felt it would be beneath me to verbalize the obvious to a man who has lived with a woman, and therefore knows a female body needs to be touched.

 

You see, this guy is 25 and even though he may get a lot of information from porn (which is really about the banging, not the foreplay and the touching that warm women up), and even if he's a dud because he doesn't believe he needs to work to be a good lover (skating by on his looks, as others have pointed out -- I like how Lavenderdove put it: "just showing up with an erect penis"), and even if he may be used to women who don't ask for much and don't know their own bodies well (common in the 20's), and even if he knows little about female sexuality, I can't imagine that he has no clue what turns women on. What cave would you be living in to not have any clue that playing with my boobs at very least would be a nice touch?

 

So there's no comparison between you and this guy. You were just a newbie. Can't say the same for him.

 

You're 100% off the hook.

[tiredofvampires]

Of course I'm glad you've chimed in even though you're not a guy!

 

You've made some really great points -- ones that haven't been made yet, and they built on what was already said by adding more clarity about this "you can respect someone for this/but not for that" argument. I really, REALLY like the distinction you made, above in the bold. Distinguishing between respect as a feeling vs. an action (and comparing it to love as a feeling, vs. an action) really hits the nail on the head for me. I feel like that was a missing piece, Wayfara. I never really considered it that way. It's hard to imagine that if someone really respects you (in feeling), that that won't translate into action (and some hardliners, like in the Infidelity forum, may disagree, saying that if you cheat, it MEANS you don't love your partner; which I disagree with). It seems an extension of your value system that it would play out in action, but of course, if everyone did that, we'd have a much more humane and perfect world than we do. So that makes a lot of sense here, and it very well could explain these seeming contradictions.

 

Only I still have a problem with the idea of someone respecting "my intellect" or personality, but "not my sexuality." Which has been postulated here with other posts, too. What in heck does it mean to not respect someone's sexuality, unless they're a chauvanist (which I don't think he is), they think of sex as inherently disrespectable (which I have a hard time thinking he thinks, if he respects a LTR girl's sexuality), or we're talking about something criminal like pedophilia, or some other hung-up notion about sex itself?

 

I don't understand why sex would become a point of disrespect between two people apart from a mental dynamic between them, or a judgment of another person's conduct. And that's where this still mystifies me, if we're framing this as disrespect. Because what, either in my conduct, or in our dynamic, would produce that disrespect?

 

 

 

Again, I really agree with you. And I ultimately feel that, walking away from this, that as someone else said, what he thinks of me is really what he thinks of me. I can't control that. I guess that's a take-home piece as well...the only piece in my jurisdiction is how I'm seeing myself.

 

Just about the girl he spoke of marrying, though...I have to say, if the only thing keeping him from disrespecting her or being selfish is that he wants to be marriageable in her eyes, I can't see how that would hold up over a lifetime. You either respect people as a habit or you don't.

 

I don't think I can be too close to people who are selectively disrespectful, when that disrespect is simply a matter of lack of history together, or because someone hasn't yet "earned" it. On a very basic level, I think respect is something that everyone deserves to have, and it's disrespect that you earn.

 

I don't think he would actually disagree with that, given what I've gathered about his principles. It's just that...it seems flimsy and given to degeneration.

 

 

 

That's true....and those thoughts are kind of what keep me bolstered when I'm feeling really down about things.

 

But you see more women with men in wheelchairs than vice versa. Have you noticed? That's just my observation, and it fits into a general paradigm about men and women (GENERAL, I emphasize), which would be too off-topic for me to go into here, but has been beaten silly in other forums.

[tiredofvampires]

HP, what a similar experience in so many ways, you're right! Thank you so much! Sharing that you went through something like this is really reassuring, that you know what I mean about the "wake-up" shock. Like I said earlier in the thread -- it felt like I'd been struck by lightening, so even your "electric shock" description hit home. Even though you don't have the physical limitations and pain issues I do...it sounds like you have some body issues too that may manifest in similar ways. (though I've always seen you as a really brave, resilient woman, physically.)

 

It's different in some crucial ways to my situation, because it is more like a drawn-out "affair" (can I ask, is he also a lot of years your junior?), and this with me was SO flash-in-the-pan, it more closely resembles a ONS (it was sort of a 2NS). And for all the detachment and distance with your guy, it sounds like he was fully present in the moments you were intimate, with affection, demonstrativeness, and so forth. What was lacking here were those basic, basic elements.

 

It was the first and only time in my life I felt that a guy would barely even look at me or look me in the face. It was actually making me wonder if there was something about my body he didn't really want to see, which made me feel pretty self-conscious (and while my body has many imperfections, it's not an old, wrinkly body, and younger women have imperfections, too.) I think what killed it progressively was the notion that he may be trying to block out me as a face and persona...so that, as I mentioned, in his world, what he was doing wouldn't really "count". Maybe his feelings for the other girl, and the guilt if that was present, made him physically unavailable in the ways I wanted him to be present. But of course, that's guesswork on my part, as his thought process was entirely opaque.

 

And I certainly didn't feel that I could ask for things, so that was a difference. (more to come in an upcoming post on that). Being vocal was not working. I TRIED that, and what I was getting in response -- in body language, verbal utterances, and general, global intangibles/inferences as cues -- was that my asserting either what I wanted or needed was not part of the plan here. I really did feel that I was signing on some invisible dotted line that he was setting the ground rules and this was going to play out in the way that HE wanted it -- sans the things he wasn't naturally keen to do, sans the things that would get too close to "intimate", sans the things I might want but would cross some line with him. I knew that I was walking into a situation where I could say no, and make that kind of gross choice; but that choice came with an inability to make other choices or to at least make them known. Making the choice to assert anything that wasn't on his agenda would probably terminate the mutually-entered upon agreement that we were even doing this. And given my curiosity/lust (emphasis strongly on curiosity), and the wish to break out of that shell overwhelmed my other considerations, I just went with it. That was not sustainable for me, and I pushed it as far as it could go without speaking up and calling a few more shots than this, telling him something would have to change in the way this was feeling for me. But that chance passed us by, as he didn't approach me again after the second time, and I certainly let that be my signal to let go, because to do otherwise would have felt like I was chasing something and lowered me.

 

So I think that was my version of what you're now going through with the feeling of diminishing returns. That you're taking the pain with the gain, and it's come to where the pain is now dominating in a way that winding it up while you're ahead and cutting your losses is looking more attractive.

 

Part of me wonders...would my having sex with him have made him more like your guy was with you?...probably a silly thought, but...

But there was a level of hurt there that you were spared because it seemed he was quite responsive and giving to you, sexually, at least, and I'm glad for you that you have come through this with so much more confidence and with the sense of being liberated from that cocoon (another word I used, too!) It's very liberating, isn't it? I agree. I wouldn't take this back for the world, as checkered as it is.

 

And you'd think with all these pages and pages devoted to the criticisms and (rightful) condemnations of his behavior on many counts...you'd think I'd have to be pretty unhealthy to walk away feeling anything but regret and a desire to "learn my lesson" for next time. I don't think there will be a "next time" like this...but I do feel that something good was planted in me; and the lesson wasn't what would conventionally be considered. A 500 mile high wall and wide was partially demolished. Not anywhere near completely. But something was jolted, shocked, sledghammered that needed to be.

 

I also relate to your saying that some people I spoke with about this really didn't understand, and it was not helpful. A couple of them were VERY trusted confidentes. Which made it all the more difficult, and I felt alone in my feelings. I asked one of my physicians (a woman only a few years my senior, also very youthful looking, who I've known for 20 some-odd years, and she knows my constitution inside-out), "What woman in her 40's, who's single, wouldn't want a wild romp with the epitome of youthful masculinity?" and she said, "ME! I wouldn't! And nor would all the other women I deal with who value themselves and know what they need [a lot of her clientele are more mature/older women]. I don't have ANY desire to be with some guy who cares nothing about my body, doesn't know a second thing about how to be a good lover, except to STICK IT IN, and only wants instant gratification. NO THANKS. I wouldn't want that served up on a golden platter." Okay, so that made me feel fairly damaged and retarded, lol. But the fact is, she doesn't know what it's like in these shoes. She's married for half her life, and to a guy who is her soulmate, so she's set for life. Touch and sex are on tap for her, and she's not teetering on the edge of her mortality. They co-authored a book that's she's on a national book tour with, called "Great Sex Naturally", of all things, haha. (She's a women's health specialist). I'm not going out prowling for younger men. This just HAPPENED. But no matter what I said about what I needed out of this, what I felt I had achieved in some way, she was adamant that I'm such a sensitive person, and so tuned into my body, this couldn't possibly be worth it with him. I just felt pretty deflated after that.

 

And then my best friend (sister) said the same thing. Again. Easy for you to say. You're settled into a consummate life of domesticity, with a young child to focus on, a marriage to hold down, duties of family life...why would this even register in your universe, what my soul is needing? You have no comprehension. Even the most empathetic people in my life who have known me the longest were voices of "reason" that told me, this is a misguided path to liberation.

 

I know what I know though, and what I feel. It's certainly a mixed bag, isn't it, HP.

 

As you said, it's really what we do with it now. I'm happy for you that you've made so many positive changes. I'm honestly not sure what I'm going to "do" with it now...take more risks. That sounds right. But I have no idea what that actually will mean for my life. And I fear also that as these events speed away from me, receding in history, that I could regress back to where I was before.

 

I need to find things to occupy the space this has left that are fulfilling. I'm just afraid of the dreary and scary things about my life eclipsing this.

 

Perhaps that's the one way I was vulnerable -- that I'm at a point in my life where losing one good thing doesn't mean much, because there are still a ton of other good things. And that's not been the case for quite some time. So...it's kind of shaky. Of course, I'm very actively working on all of my life, I'm not sitting still.

 

But this was the first time something made me feel ALIVE in my body, not just in my head, and that seems critical now to BE alive. To continue to be.

[capilot]

Though I will say, I'm shamelessly reveling in capilot (a number of pages ago, but memorable for that!)

 

 

[leonardo5]

Thank you so much for your warm words and cheers TOV.

Throughout this thread (and other posts as well) you’ve shown us that you are an intelligent woman.

I saw sides of puffed up arrogance, and I saw sides of humility. And that tolerance and even, I'd say, compassion, afforded him such a leg up in my estimation, that the things I found troubling, inconsistent, flakey, and contradictory in him from time to time I just assimilated as "a complex person."

 

So that's another reason I couldn't just write him off as a toad. Because there was too much other information that offset that, and the being treated like meat, well...it didn't fit. And it also wasn't the whole story. As far as I was concerned, the "real him" was more the person he was before that last week or so.

 

But I could be wrong.

 

Reading this post I realize you are also a very fair person. Would be easy fall in the temptation to blame him for being such unkind as he was in the bedroom with you. But you chose to take all about him and do a balance that ended up in his favor. Bravo for you.

And answering your question…no, she did not know she took my virginity. She just asked me how long I had stayed without sex. I answered vaguely it was so long; but I didn’t dare to tell her the truth. Silly I was I know now.

[tiredofvampires]

^hee hee, capilot.

 

I've been doing case research for a while, got bored, hopped on the forum, and saw this thread. Since I'm so late to the game I feel like an appellate judge dealing with principles instead of factual outcomes, lol, but I will post because I (respectfully) feel that many people have simplified the issue in calling this guy a selfish douche.

 

Well, I sure don't know if this thread would be a reprieve from boredom, lol, but I see this a little differently from you. First of all, even if you were an appellate judge, at 149 posts strong (when you posted), consider yourself sitting firmly on the Supreme bench. So, nothing to scoff at there! But nah, we're still firmly in the trial phase, so you're still in. And I'm not even done presenting the factual substance and outcomes -- in that I've left this whole "how we parted" piece dangling, not intentionally -- so you're right on time.

 

Having said that, more than once during the progress of this thread I've thought, "Where the hell is PTH?!" LOL. "Yooohoooo, when are you gonna log on and see this, PTH? What's taking so long, this thread is made, made, MADE for you! This is your area of expertise/specialization!!! Show up already, goddammit!!!"

 

HAHAHA.

 

So seriously. I can't be happier that your case studies could afford to be put aside for a spell. So that you could do what I only imagined you would do: punch the holes wherever they needed to be punched, redefine was not being properly appropriated/designated, and just as I could have predicted, ROFL -- that you'd endeavor to dismantle the prima facie here that this guy has fallen unequivocally into consummate "selfish douche and depraved selfish jerk" territory. AH!! I knew it, ahaha! I just needed to know the how's and why's. From your perspective. (And of course, this doesn't diminish the validity of all the other superb advice I respect so much from both men and women, including men who are taking a different position than you.)

 

I don't know how much of the thread you got through...that being somewhat relevant in that I'd like to reference things I said earlier, in relation to your remarks, and I'm not sure whether I'd be rehashing or excerpting what you've read already (as I err on the assumption that one sitting/night's read couldn't possibly encompass all these posts, even with your reading comp skills).

 

Simply, I just love your post. For its distinctions and separation of the issues; for not being simplistic in any of the analysis; for what you've always had, which is an economy of words, yet for how much you packed in, content-wise there; for the fact that in each paragraph, a question arose in my mind which you immediately and directly then addressed in the next paragraph, as if flowing with my objections before my even raising them; for turning a heap of randomly tangled string (the irreconcilables I'm struggling with here) into an elegant pattern, lace, but with the unique strength of conviction that grabs me about your posts. Ha, that was a post, PTH, but that was also art (sorry, but I actually don't throw that word around as much as you may think, lol).

 

You said so much that I feel zeros in on some truths about this situation. Whether or not that feels good -- and a lot of it doesn't. A good deal of it leaves me feeling disphoric, even though your message is at the end, edifying (which I think is where I'm having to focus on this.)

 

I think what your voice lends here is unique in that you've been on both sides (or all sides?) of this fence. You've been in the shoes of the one not feeling physically acknowledged and viable; and you've then been the one observing the other person's wanting something, to feel valued through physicality in a way that wasn't going to happen. You've been treated coldly. And you've been called "cold." You've known the inner workings of the "douche lookalike"...and the workings of the "true douche." And their defining features. So all this goes into a pretty informed view on all this. Like I said, if there's any thread I might have written that'd be relevant to any of your own experiences...it might be this one.

 

And yet what's different here is that I feel that you have a...what's the word...advantage? (I don't want to minimize any of what you've experienced, nor make it about comparisons) that I don't -- for me, this is not a matter of socialized self-perception changing; the way I feel badly about myself is based on things that aren't so subjective. I do really have these "deficits" that work against me, and partly because they are invisible and no one can see the separation I feel because of them, I'll be up against the same fears (and attendant leaden weights of implicit expectations) each time something of this nature comes up -- regardless of what I see in the mirror, or think others see in the mirror. I'm grateful that my "ugly duckling" phase, which was very much about my image visually, passed (for the most part, leaving only ghostly traces) with growth and years, and realizing how very relative a thing looks can be. I guess it's the non-relative, functional piece here that persists in my psyche as this insurmountable boulder. I'm glad I don't have some severe appearance issue...but I'm not sure how to step into another pair of shoes, get on the other side of this fence, ever, with what I'm dealing with. This is my silent stalker.

 

I know that this requires an attitude adjustment of some kind. Just as it did with you. People can and do think "bigger" than this. Even despite all the negative reinforcements that have come my way (and continue to, in the form of social stigma only tangentially related to sexuality), there's got to be a shift. But there's a hurdle here...I'm working with limited materiality (oh boy, well that sounds like deja vu, doesn't it? lol) as I am, so this has gotten pretty logjammed.

 

I think this experience and my letting it happen was my way of of basically trying to shatter this status quo and mindset to smithereens, being handed the opportunity. And in some ways it's worked. But in other ways it's raised more questions and doubts. And there are some "what if's" that are still unsatisfied here, which are REALLY bothering me, because it could have gone farther, and just missed that mark. So I'm not sure how significant to the whole thing that would have been.

 

Now I feel like I'm meandering a bit, and none of this is specific to your post at all, which is my aim. It's a meta-response, a broad sweep. You've sized us a lot of things very accurately, as I said; other things you've said, while I may not disagree, or disagree entirely in concept -- I need to critically cross-examine a bit, so I hope you're still tuning into the thread for those particulars.

 

I feel there's enough meat to have to break this up a bit. Starting with this:

 

I think at the end of the day these sorts of issues arise from radically different views on things like sex and life. This guy doesn't view sex, in and of itself, as a big deal. In what way does he need to be validated? What flaws does he hope this new person won't notice? What historical context does a new partner need to understand how he views himself as a viable sexual being? He doesn't have any of those concerns, and when those of us who do try to explain them to people that don't, it's a lot like trying to tell a dog that it should be ashamed of being naked. It's not even conceptually significant because it's never come up and probably never will. Therefore, sex is not something that requires any particular associated emotion aside from consent and desire. Is this wrong? No. It's not a reflection of love, care, respect, or anything like that. Would anyone think about love, care, and respect if took them out for ice cream? No. Why? Because it's no big deal, and when there's never been a reason, driven by insecurity or otherwise, to codify sex as anything other than a manifestation of consent and lust then why would you all of a sudden change for one person?

 

This paragraph just stands out so much for me -- it was a bit difficult to read. Because it cuts to the heart of the matter, of how utterly lousy this feels and why...what lurks behind everything, and the shadow of isolation. I thank you for shaping this into words (yikes, this is enough of a trigger that I may need Kleenex suddenly here, ha...)

 

And it's why NO ENCOUNTER could ever wipe the slate clean (and why, in some respects, an encounter like this could be considered contraindicated -- because it heightens the feeling of disparity I deal with.) In the most childish of terms, it doesn't feel fair.

 

It doesn't feel fair that I can't live a life of oblivion.

 

Of course, anyone I respect will now say, "Why on earth would you want to live like that anyway?" The crazy thing is, I myself, don't want to live a life of oblivion. Not in any sphere, in any way. But look at the drawbacks. Life for this guy is easy, isn't it? It's as easy as life for a dog who lives naked without a care (haha, that cracked me up), and can s.t right on the sidewalk without any backlash, judgment, or shame. Against the backdrop of this dude's frame of reference being in another universe, his knowledge being limited to a world that doesn't even overlap in the tiniest way with my reality, how is any sort of physical exchange going to feel like a dual experience? "Dual", as opposed to "shared", because it seems to me that if I don't care about you and you don't care about me, but we're having sex, there is nothing we are sharing. We are simply HAVING. The fact that we are HAVING together doesn't make it a joining of any kind, and therefore, I have to leave MYSELF at the door and just hand over my body. How can someone who has to be in her body at all times, to remain aware...cleave these two in half, to enjoy the apparent freedom others seem to find in that?

 

And while I may not want to share or join a life with someone...share a home, a future...I guess for something this primal, where we are required for eachother...it feels anathema for me to feel that nothing about ME is relevant. NOTHING. Not even my laughter and opinions shared an hour ago. Let's just *poof* it all out.

 

I deeply envy him for not needing to share anything. To only be happy and satisfied to have HAD.

 

What does he lose from this? Does he lose ANYthing? Does a dog lose out for not knowing it's naked? Is there a payoff?

 

Is the payoff....that you're...just a DOG?

 

I think what you're saying is...the hard, cold truth is that that's no "payoff." It's neither good nor bad. So all the more power to the dog. Long live that which sustains itself through an automatic process of self-perpetuating fortune, without having its hand forced to consider the alternatives and their perils.

 

I have more on what you wrote, with some questions, putting the first-pass visceral responses aside. My apologies ahead of time for all the quoting -- your favorite, lol.

 

Maybe I should start with the most painfully simple question of all, for you:

 

I don't think that this guy can be painted as some incredibly selfish jerk.

 

Okay, so you don't feel he should be painted that way -- or as the complete douche (which you defined). So, how WOULD you paint him?

 

You've said he's arrogant. And that that arrogance is warranted. So is he just "someone who has an accurate self-assessment"? At what point does arrogance coupled with lack of concern/care start to cross lines into words like "jerk"?

[tiredofvampires]

And still @PTH -- I guess the sequela to that would be:

 

Most of the true douches that I know do not have the patience to cultivate anything beyond what is necessary to determine whether the girl is attracted to them, and once they know the answer they force her hand and move on.

 

In some ways I wonder...how is what happened not this, exactly? I mean, he and I cultivated something, but how much of that was simply by the nature of as you say, proximity? And that proximity spawning a little more getting-to-know than he probably had banked on (he had a very aloof demeanor that persisted throughout the time there, even though it loosened up considerably -- which was precisely when I started to view him less with all the sexualized overlays -- something you'd think would go the other way if becoming familiar with someone I find attractive breeds increased sexual desire, my SOP). But with that being an "asterisk"...and it being a friendship (a word I use too liberally here) of circumstance...let's say he might have been thinking of making a play for me at some point, what else was he to do besides what he did to remain socially appropriate, until that time?

 

I'm not saying this was calculated. I'm saying that I don't know if it was, and certainly the timing of it is suspect. As you point out.

 

And about his not pouncing right away -- I do have to wonder, because it occurred to me that he pulled this so close to our moving out -- how much of this do you think was spontaneous, as it seemed at the time, and how much premeditated? As I've said in this thread, I couldn't have possibly been less inviting in demeanor that particular night, and if anything, as I said, beit that he may have sensed my attraction early on -- as I said, I did a pretty masterful job of asphyxiating it, and then it started to naturally ebb. So....???

 

And I'm not sure what "forcing her hand" means, but I call your attention to my post above, to HP, where I described the dynamic that he established. Perhaps you've already read that, but this is the most relevant part:

 

I certainly didn't feel that I could ask for things, so that was a difference. (more to come in an upcoming post on that). Being vocal was not working. I TRIED that, and what I was getting in response -- in body language, verbal utterances, and general, global intangibles/inferences as cues -- was that my asserting either what I wanted or needed was not part of the plan here. I really did feel that I was signing on some invisible dotted line that he was setting the ground rules and this was going to play out in the way that HE wanted it -- sans the things he wasn't naturally keen to do, sans the things that would get too close to "intimate", sans the things I might want but would cross some line with him. I knew that I was walking into a situation where I could say no, and make that kind of gross choice; but that choice came with an inability to make other choices or to at least make them known. Making the choice to assert anything that wasn't on his agenda would probably terminate the mutually-entered upon agreement that we were even doing this. And given my curiosity/lust (emphasis strongly on curiosity), and the wish to break out of that shell overwhelmed my other considerations, I just went with it. That was not sustainable for me, and I pushed it as far as it could go without speaking up and calling a few more shots than this, telling him something would have to change in the way this was feeling for me. But that chance passed us by, as he didn't approach me again after the second time, and I certainly let that be my signal to let go, because to do otherwise would have felt like I was chasing something and lowered me.

 

It was really him calling the shots, at least from his vantage point, once I consented. And the consent was extracted like this: me expressing some reservations about going through with this, him putting his finger to his lips and going, "Shhhhh...[soo, soooo corny]. Too much talk. You're thinking too much." Me: "But I -- " Him: "Either kick me out [we were in my room at this point], or stop talking."

 

If that's not a "forcing of the hand", I'm not sure what isn't. So I think I'd like some clarification on that, and how this deviates from your definition of "true douche" -- even though you and I are clearly not talking about rape, this was fully consensual, and yes, I went in knowing that this was not about love, gigantic amounts of affection, or the future, and therefore, I did not project anything into this arrangement that wasn't there, emotionally speaking.

 

And now he's most certainly moved on. Which is the finale of the story, to come in my next post.

[tiredofvampires]

Oops:

 

If that's not a "forcing of the hand", I'm not sure what isn't.

 

That should be "is".

 

Dang edit window.

[Wayfara]

I still have a problem with the idea of someone respecting "my intellect" or personality, but "not my sexuality."

 

Sexuality might be the wrong word choice, I didn't know what to call it. When you were having conversations with him you were doing it in the role of a roommate/buddy, and if he liked talking to you he probably liked/respected you in that role. You mention he had a small vent about women loving jerks. When he got horny that first night he longer saw tiredofvampires "the buddy" but tiredofvampires "the woman", and if he is someone who believes women love jerks he probably doesn't think that highly of women in some aspects which might have lead him to not thinking that highly of you when he saw you in your role as woman. So his general feelings of women pass on to you.

 

About his "friend", he might think she is the rare exception, a woman who doesn't love jerks. It is not uncommon for prejudiced people to have some they view as exceptions, like their mother or sister if they are prejudiced against women, or their nice black workmate if they have racial prejudices. There are degrees of prejudice, some only come apparent in certain situations.

 

As I mentioned in the other post it could also be an inconsistency between feeling and action. That would mean he knew the way he was treating you was wrong but did it anyway for whatever reason. Usually when you go against your moral sense there will be some shame and guilt which can make it hard to look at the one you are wronging and make you not want to further the contact longer than you have to.

 

that tolerance and even, I'd say, compassion, afforded him such a leg up in my estimation, that the things I found troubling, inconsistent, flakey, and contradictory in him from time to time I just assimilated as "a complex person."

 

So that's another reason I couldn't just write him off as a toad. Because there was too much other information that offset that, and the being treated like meat, well...it didn't fit. And it also wasn't the whole story. As far as I was concerned, the "real him" was more the person he was before that last week or so.

 

I would say he is both, both are a facets of him. He is compassionate and he is a toad, maybe not both at the at very same time but both are traits of him.

 

I think there is an implied understanding of "you scratch my back and I'll scratch yours" in NSA sex. At worst he understood you expected something in return and decided to bolt out as soon it would come to that. At best he did the incorrect assumption that you got your sole satisfaction from giving him head (which seems a lot to assume unless said or implied by other person, especially as he didn't know you that well and you seemed to want to do other things when he felt he had to push your head down).

 

Shushing your concerns, trying to open your legs even when you said no and the pushing you to his groan, seeming to not want you to do anything but, seems very pushy to me and that is what in my mind would tip him over from just being a very disappointing lay to a toad. Calling him a toad though doesn't mean he hasn't non-toad qualities too or that everything he does is toadish. I think most of us have some toad in us in varying degrees and that many of the big toads also have some wonderfully sweet traits (not all of them but many).

 

But you see more women with men in wheelchairs than vice versa. Have you noticed? That's just my observation, and it fits into a general paradigm about men and women (GENERAL, I emphasize), which would be too off-topic for me to go into here, but has been beaten silly in other forums.

 

There might be some truth to the generalization that men go more for looks and women more for status but people are individuals, I've seen many men and women go against the generalization. I would believe the biggest obstacle is at the beginning, when one has to see past the disability. After love enters the picture they have already seen the real you and decided they like the package even with the disability in mind. I think if someone has a problem with your disability they will show it and probably not fall in love with you in the first place so if someone has already chosen you as his partner and seems happy you can only reckon he is honest, it's not fair to assume someone is pretending just because.

 

If you met this intelligent sweet happily married lady with the same condition as you would you immediately assume her husband must be secretly unhappy for having such a "disappointing" wife or do you think she could make a good partner even with her disability? If the later, why couldn't that be you?

[penelope13]

Did I miss it somewhere: what happened on your last day between you and him? Did you decide to mention something? Did you decide not to? Did he bring up what transpired???

[tiredofvampires]

Did I miss it somewhere: what happened on your last day between you and him? Did you decide to mention something? Did you decide not to? Did he bring up what transpired???

 

No, you didn't miss it. I've been working through responding to posts, though I've been meaning to wrap up that piece.

 

That's what this post is about.

 

The conclusion of our interaction occurred exactly one week ago, today. Even though it now feels like 2 months ago.

 

Where I left off on this was me emerging from the bathroom wrapped in a towel, seeing that he had arrived back at the house. He had already moved into his place and had come by bike to finish getting his stuff out and clean. And in passing, he called out, "Hey, {ToV}," taking the friendly initiative. I responded in kind, not lingering with it, and went into my room, surveying the jobs ahead of me: to consolidate the few remaining items, vacuum, and prepare for my friend who was supposed to come in 2 hours to break down my bed, the last thing to go.

 

He and I were supposed to share final bathroom cleanup, plus individually steam-clean our carpets. So some coordination was involved. We'd pretty much worked out which portions each of us would do before this. So there was really very little to confer about at this point. Mostly, it was just us beginning the end of our assigned tasks.

 

But he came to my room and looked around (my door was wide open). With a benign smile and tone, he asked me how my moving was going. I looked around, and said, "Pretty good. My friend's just going to come a bit later and help me break down the bed. But yeah, it's all under control." He just stood there a bit and nodded, and said, "Well, if you need help or anything, let me know." (which surprised me)

 

So over the next couple of hours, there was a lot of hustle and bustle, with a lot of us going in and out of the areas we had shared, now looking more and more untouched and uninhabited, as the cleaning progressed. The vibe was friendly, but duty-focused. We exchanged verbal notes about various practicalities relating to these matters. It was almost as it nothing "compromising" had happened between us. It felt like an implicit, mutual agreement that we'd keep those kinds of cues off the table. It was almost..."life back to normal," so we basically had reverted to the dynamic before any of the sexual stuff. I took a look at his room, asking him how HIS packing was going, and so we briefly chatted about that.

 

As he was now only on his bike, he was bumming out that he still had a stash of items that had to be transported but he didn't have a vehicle. He was busily stuffing things into large garbage bags and hauling them to the carport, where I was also piling my things to prepare for departure.

 

We exchanged a few wordless eye contact glances during these events, and he was either wearing that serious, somewhat brooding default expression, or it was a poker face. And I did not make any special efforts to engage him, but nor did I make any efforts to be avoidant. So it was fairly neutral/cordial/businesslike, but with a suppressed tension. Those rooms were so empty, except for that one elephant.

 

He had met my friend before, and when he (my friend) arrived with his vehicle and started to take apart my bed, they exchanged some friendly greetings and words, and then discussed how we'd be coordinating the use of the steam cleaner. There was a "let's finish this off all together" general friendliness all around.

 

I told my friend in private that I felt kind of bad not offering to help the guy with his things to his new place, and that he'd have to use a cab. I explained that he'd offered to help me at the beginning of this, and maybe I (we) could return that offer by giving him a ride with his stuff to his new place. My friend was open to the idea, but said we should wait on it to see how we were faring at the end.

 

I was really, really glad that my part was done, with our vehicles loaded, and I was ready to leave a bit ahead of Mr. Pouty. So that I could take my leave expediently. But as it turned out, with final wrap-up of the keys returned to the landlady (which YEAY, I managed to do in person) we actually fully completed everything at almost the very same time, so in fact, the timing couldn't have been better.

 

It was as perfect an alignment as I could have hoped for, considering all the concerns I had had about him not showing up that day, and not being there when I actually had to leave. So here we were, literally on the threshold of goodbye, side by side.

 

That's when I said to him, "Hey, you were nice enough to offer to help me with my stuff -- so I feel bad with you having to cart this all by taxi and spend the money. Would you want us to give you a ride?" My friend chimed in here, saying it was totally do-able, we just had to first drop off my stuff at my new place and come back for him, because our vehicles were maxed out. He was definitely enthused about this offer, and told me he’d rather ride with people he knew and give the money to us than a stranger. I said we wouldn’t take money for it, but the problem was that he’d have to wait for us to come back and fetch him. It became clear that this would require a longer wait than he wanted to deal with. So he thanked us but said he’d just go with the taxi after all. (Shucks, I really wanted to see where he lives! Now I won’t be able to stalk him! nah, j/k)

 

At this point, my friend took off and told me he’d meet me at my place, leaving the two of us alone.

 

(I should add here that even though this is my best male friend, I was loathe to tell him about what had happened with the sex – I was really worried he’d be really harsh and not very understanding. But I did break down and tell him the day before, since he didn’t get why my saying goodbye was so important. He actually had a laugh about it and thought it was kinda cool/entertaining, lol. And so he left us, as he told me later, so I could say bye to "my loverboy”.)

 

We rounded up our chit-chat, he put his iPod on, and I knew my little mentally rehearsed speech was now or never. And just as I’d figured, some of it came out as planned, and some of it was me blurting out a squirt of iffy garbage that wasn’t in the script.

 

I said, “So, I’m going to say goodbye to you now,” and advanced forward, but as soon as I said that, he stepped forward too, and reached out. We kissed eachother on the cheek close to the mouth (with equal conviction -- though as you'd kiss your cousin), with a brief hug (also equal conviction). And then I said, looking into his eyes and with a clear, earnest tone, “I really do care for you. [ah, the iffy garbage!! - evoking a bit of a nervous smile from him] You have my number, so feel free to – " and I was going to say “use it”, but he interrupted quite affirmatively and enthusiastically, saying, “Oh, oh, of course. We’ll be talking, for sure. I’ll let you know what happened with my security deposit. And yeah, we’ll be in touch.”

 

Since we had seen on tv some nights before a trailer for the new Daniel Day Lewis movie, “Lincoln,” and agreed it looked really good (and agreed that DD Lewis is one of the best actors out there), I said in an offhand, very casual way, “Maybe now that we’re away from this craziness, we can get a coffee or something. Or Daniel Day Lewis…” and he nodded and said, “Maybe we can check out that Lincoln movie.” I told him I’d let him know how it went with my security deposit too, we cracked a final joke, and I said, “Well, I’m outta here, take care.”

 

“We’ll talk,” he said, confidently.

 

As soon as I drove away in my car, I saw his taxi arrive. So we went our separate ways there.

 

I’m still not sure how cringeworthy it was that I put out that impromptu, “I really do care for you” bit. My immediate gut reaction was “Agghghgh, why did I have to say that? That sounds so heavy duty, you've probably scared him off!” On the other hand, I almost felt like dancing around him and playing the "cool" game had come to an end, so this was me speaking my mind in the final wash. I had nothing to gain and nothing to lose anymore. It was my last chance to speak from the heart, so if he couldn't deal, well then, his taxi would be waiting anyways.

 

I presented it to my friend for his critique and he said he thinks it’s just the way I am; that it’s consistent with who I am that I speak that way, so it’s whatever. I don’t know, I’m not sure how it came off or if I like it. But minus that qualm, the rest came off pretty smoothly, and as I’d planned.

 

No notes. No confrontations. No playful allusions, or last-minute sermons. No piece-of-my-mind. No final mentions of anything that had happened. No hard feelings.

 

So that’s really it.

 

And what does that leave me with?

 

I deliberately put the ball in his court. To call me if he wants to. And in his court, it will stay. Do I think he’ll use it? Hell no. I think the chances that he’ll use my number rival the chances that I’ll be seeing him out on the street 10 years from now.

 

I am absolutely determined to leave it be at that. If he never calls, we will never speak again, and that will be that.

 

The one indecisive point for me is, I did say I’d let him know about the outcome of the security deposit issue, whether I got it back in full. So I’m not sure if, independently of his contacting me, it’d be okay if I texted him first on that, once I know. After all, we mutually did say we’d touch base about that. So I’m not sure how that’d look if I made that gesture.

 

Because of course, it’s just doing what I said I’d do, and following up as we said. But it’s also a pretext to float the notion that I still am available/present in some fashion. In the event that he has absolutely nothing invested in that (and I suspect he doesn’t), I don’t want to make a fool of myself. But I also think it’s pretty innocuous to text about something like that, after we did say we’d talk.

 

This is where I just feel I’m an “at face value” person. The way he was nodding and concurring that we should see that movie, even suggesting it – which he didn’t have to do – made me feel that he SINCERELY, at least in that moment, thought it’d be cool.

 

But I’ve known people for more time with a closer connection who exchanged such intentions with me, and then we drifted.

 

I left the scene feeling rather pleased. Pleased that we’d exchanged enough goodwill that he seemed like he’d be down for some kind of friendly connection that might, shock of shocks, have some continuity power.

 

That mood didn't last long.

 

Because I just know how things go. And people. And life. And he, in particular. My guess is that at a week later, he hardly remembers any part of that conversation.

 

So that one, “to text or not to text?” (about the deposit) is my one lingering question, about how to deal with him. Whether I should crack that one door open or not for him.

 

The last thing I want is for it to appear that I’m clutching at straws, because that, I certainly am not.

 

Other than that, I’m pretty clear that it’s completely over, and that it’s out of my hands, because without his hand, he’ll be seeing me no more.

 

 

 

This is even though...being very honest…I miss him. God, how did I ever get through real breakups? With BOYFRIENDS? If this is how I’m just feeling about this now? It’s subsiding. But the first couple of nights I was shopping for my groceries, knowing I was going to this new place (which I'm not getting used to, and it doesn't have the cozy atmosphere of the other place), I felt like something sweet was dissolved.

 

Honestly? I think we could have had a blast meeting up and going to “Lincoln” together, and then someplace to eat and fill eachother in on the latest.

 

And the truth is, I DO care about him. I want to know what happens for him. With his DUI court appearance. With his transfer to the University. With his "lady"/ex. With how his work is going. How he's liking his new place. I would've driven us somewhere fun, that's out of his biking range, somewhere we could swim, which is a common interest. I remember when we went to see one house with 3 bedrooms that he really liked, he was SO eager for us to put our deposits down, saying he couldn't wait to get ourselves a bbq in that yard. We could have been buddies, I think. And I really don't meet many people in that age bracket with whom I share that much, who are so otherwise unlike me. I like to keep a diversified portfolio, and he could have been so much fun, but more than that -- I meant what I said about caring what happens to him. For me, anyway, it's not out of sight, out of mind.

 

I don’t know where sex would have fit into this, or if it even would have come up again (if so, I would have relished the opportunity to be candid in ways I have not been in this segment of history); but if I was ever worthy in his eyes of anything other than that, and it was more compelling for him than merely passing the time amiably where we were forced into the same space, I guess we’ll find out.

 

Though I really do know already.

[ProtestTheHero]

You asked at what point does arrogance + lack of caring/concern = jerk? Again, IMO, you're starting things off with a different view of sex and so your premise is "wrong." It's as arrogant as a college student believing they'd do well in grad school because they've done well up to that point, but that wouldn't be a big deal. I don't fault the guy for forming a general outlook based on the number of times he's been validated. I also don't think he OWES anyone care or concern in arrangements like these, unless you started to break down and cry or something and it just became totally obvious that your words and your emotions were completely incongruous.

 

Fringe ONS/FWB scenarios like this don't really carry a lot of customary obligations. It's not this sensual thing where two people lock eyes and share an experience. Attach as much meaning to it as you would a jog or watching TV. Think of it as something that cures boredom and the "itch" simultaneously, because that's all it is. You can't presume that someone in this situation wants or even really cares what's going on inside your head during sex. Consent + desire + lack of paternalism = that's all.

 

"Forcing your hand" isn't the equivalent of dictating sex on his own terms. In situations like this (ONS/FWB), guys can ill afford to attach a bunch of self-serving rules without reciprocity if they expect to draw from the same well twice. If this is a one and done thing then you can be a crappy lay. The only check to this sort of behavior is to say no once he basically says the pleasure will be all his.

 

When I used the phrase, I was saying that as soon as a guy knows you're attracted he puts you into a yes-or-no situation and doesn't really care what your answer is. He knows he's got a better than average shot so it's less work and less risk and if you've done this enough times rejection isn't a big deal. You don't really sit up at night thinking about when you can make a socially acceptable pass at someone. I don't see "get wasted and aggressive" in the manual anywhere for socially acceptable behavior so I doubt that was on his mind. I think he probably had fleeting thoughts about it in the same way that you did, but his external stuff probably told him that it was not an intelligent idea to make this move with someone he lived with. He gets drunk, the filter for good ideas is weakened, he makes a move, and once he's done he bolts -- probably driven by the things telling him it wasn't a good idea in the first place. Also, jerks are generally self-serving enough to realize how awkward it can be living with someone after you do something like this, so that's another reason why I don't think he planned all of this out.

 

I think at the end of the day he's probably going to try to divorce himself from the awkwardness of all of this. I don't think telling him you cared about him is going to help him in that process, lol, but at the same time your friend is right -- that was a very TOV thing to do and it doesn't surprise me. Again, it was neither right or wrong to say it to him, but I do think that pretty much closed the door to continuing whatever it was you had. You can't have pseudo-ONS sex after one person tells the other that they care about them, and it's probably just as hard to go out and see a movie and eat a pizza or something, too.

 

You can text him about the deposit, but I wouldn't initiate anything beyond giving him the money.

[tiredofvampires]

You mention he had a small vent about women loving jerks. When he got horny that first night he longer saw tiredofvampires "the buddy" but tiredofvampires "the woman", and if he is someone who believes women love jerks he probably doesn't think that highly of women in some aspects which might have lead him to not thinking that highly of you when he saw you in your role as woman. So his general feelings of women pass on to you.

 

This makes a lot of sense.

 

I don't know his views of women well enough to judge them overall, but it seems to me that the stark contrast between his "friend", whom he respects and loves as a woman, vs. the kind of women he sees as sexual conquests, is the archetypal wanting the "good girl" for your wife/life mate, but wanting a woman who is sexually "easy" for kicks and cheap releases. (Though I don't remotely resemble in appearance the scantily-clad, tattooed girl he brought home a couple of nights, and even seemed to be dating/courting for a brief spell.)

 

I don't see him as sexist, because of some of his ideological leanings (from what I gather of our conversations), but it could be more latent in some form. I know precious little about his upbringing, except that his father -- who was born and raised in a South American country -- raised all three of his sons in Texas on his own. I'm not clear on how their parents split, but apparently his mother didn't pursue raising them and went off to live another life (in my state). He knows his mother, but what we're looking at is a complete absence of estrogenic effect and influence in the family, with a father who most likely carried strongly machismo values into his sons' lives. He's very close to his dad, apparently. And early on, showed me a picture of his dad's car on his phone, and it was a bright red sportscar. So that tells you something. These are his very early imprints, and how much that carries into his opinions of women is hard to guess at...but it was clear to me from the get-go that this guy, even though he may have deeper layers and want what we all do (love), it's so easy for him to get the external trappings that validate his ego, he's been using them as currency for that as an MO. And so objectification and exploitation of others is never far behind that kind of motivation.

 

I agree with everything you said, Wayfara. And about there being some toad, and some non-toad in him. And that we all have that. But I think it's got to be a question of degree, otherwise, how would we judge whom we spend time with and invest in, and whom to stay away from.

 

I think that's my concern now, even though it's more theoretical than anything, if you read how things wrapped up with him in my above post, and how unlikely it seems that we will be in contact.

 

I care about this person for the time we enjoyed and that we got to know eachother a bit. And he is someone who I seem to have shared enough with that we could actually carry on a friendship, if he were the least bit into that. If he called me tomorrow and said, "Hey, let's go to a movie", I would say yes. But then I think about all these things that he did (and didn't do), and ask myself if really, I'm setting my standards too low, because at some point you gotta decide whether the %age of toad is simply too high.

 

I think the question will be moot, because he won't contact me and I've left it to him to do. But IF he did, this question would be very relevant.

 

I see everyone as deeply flawed, as being human. So I could be friends with a compassionate toad. But that's a bit oxymoronic in my world, at a certain point. I mean, no, I would not want to go on casual dates with Hitler, even if we both loved dogs.

 

Certainly, continuing to have a sexual relationship with one adds another whole layer of ambiguity/jeopardy.

 

Admittedly, though -- even though I had far more consideration of him in the sexual realm, I was also "using" him in a way, because I had these other deep intrapsychic needs, questions, and pangs that were clawing at me, goading me to continue, once the opportunity arose.

 

There might be some truth to the generalization that men go more for looks and women more for status but people are individuals, I've seen many men and women go against the generalization. I would believe the biggest obstacle is at the beginning, when one has to see past the disability. After love enters the picture they have already seen the real you and decided they like the package even with the disability in mind. I think if someone has a problem with your disability they will show it and probably not fall in love with you in the first place so if someone has already chosen you as his partner and seems happy you can only reckon he is honest, it's not fair to assume someone is pretending just because.

 

The problem for me is, though, that this process is a bit reversed. Because there is nothing visual, or an obvious impediment, to "get past" with me, a man generally assumes I'm perfectly fine. Then, inevitably, if we get closer, he has to learn about this condition -- I have to educate him. And that's where it starts to get more and more of an apparent obstacle. If he's fallen for me because he's still not entirely able to comprehend the toll it takes on me, and therefore us...then as I'm already invested a lot in him and us, he may start to have serious second thoughts. And at that point, I'm really emotionally deep in. So for me, it's not that he'd fall in love with me and then I'd be home free, because we'd be past the disability. In my case, his "test" is only beginning when he falls in love with me.

 

I've been told to take more risks on this thread. But taking that risk -- and that's the risk I'd ultimately be going after, not sex with some man who couldn't care less about me -- feels insurmountably scary. The stakes for me are so, so high at this point in the game, when I see my mortality very clearly (and so every day has to count towards something worthwhile) and I don't want the last endeavors of my heart to turn into wreckage and shrapnel. Been there, done that.

 

So it's kind of a bind.

 

But you're right. Happy endings do happen for women like me. Most of the marriages I see where the wife is beloved and adored even with the disability is one that started with her being well, when they married. And it being a question of sticking by eachother "in sickness and in health," and having a very strong bond overall. But you're right.

 

Anything is possible. Anything.

[tiredofvampires]

Thank you so much for your warm words and cheers TOV.

Throughout this thread (and other posts as well) you’ve shown us that you are an intelligent woman.

 

 

Reading this post I realize you are also a very fair person. Would be easy fall in the temptation to blame him for being such unkind as he was in the bedroom with you. But you chose to take all about him and do a balance that ended up in his favor. Bravo for you.

And answering your question…no, she did not know she took my virginity. She just asked me how long I had stayed without sex. I answered vaguely it was so long; but I didn’t dare to tell her the truth. Silly I was I know now.

 

Cheers, leo. And thank you for the kind words.

 

Even if she didn't know your status, you're still completely off the hook, and what you did was perfectly normal. Virgins get a free "right to be lousy in bed" gift card.

[tiredofvampires]

You can text him about the deposit, but I wouldn't initiate anything beyond giving him the money.

 

Maybe I wasn't too clear on the matter of the deposits, and I don't know who else may be have been confused. But we have no financial obligations or ties of any kind to eachother.

 

The issue was that the landlady, in her greed and unreasonableness, had a history of not returning deposits fully. She'd screwed over the roomate he had before me (also a woman, and one that he had a very favorable opinion of.)

 

We both reckoned that she might try to withhold at least some of our deposits for some cracked-up reason, though since I was scapegoated in that house more than any other tenant for various problems, I was more worried than he was about this (especially since this is really my mom's money, and I will not allow anyone to take any of that, which was spent on my behalf, without a fight). But he was also concerned she might dock him for some stupid reason. (I don't know if you saw the post where I wrote about the note I slipped under his door with some landlord-tenant legal information, to arm himself. This was after the sexual episodes, btw.)

 

Our deposits were separate, of course.

 

So my contacting him or him contacting me about the deposits would simply be a friendly, "Hey, I got it all back, no glitches! Woohoo!" sort of thing. Or, "Guess what she pulled? She docked me for this or that, what should I do now?" It's more like we'd be comparing notes about the outcome of the concern we shared, but I don't owe him any money or even news of this nature, and vice versa.

 

So it's 100% about just a buddy call. (not booty call, buddy call, haha.)

 

And that's why I'm wondering whether I should initiate anything (I would do it with a text). Because technically, we don't have any more business to complete. It's sheerly a social act. Obviously, we parted agreeing to let eachother know, he ACTIVELY made the move to tell me he'd contact me, and I told him I'd do the same, which means either or us could make the contact....so if he doesn't bother to contact me....should I even make that move on my end?

 

As I said, it'd be more of a pretext to keep the door open to some further conversation. But that could obviously backfire.

 

If anyone has any thoughts on what would be better -- waiting for him to contact me about this or me taking the initiative -- that would be appreciated.

 

I'm leaning towards not doing it. But it's still open.

 

It's the last question mark.

[tiredofvampires]

What's a little ironic for me is that I see so many threads which involve questions like, "should I text/call/wait?"

 

"How should I approach him? Should I be more forward? Less forward? Am I sending the wrong signal if I show I'm interested? Will I scare him away?"

 

"Will she think I'm a pushover/become disinterested in me if I show my hand? Do I remain aloof and not too available?"

 

This forum is crawling with such threads and themes.

 

I usually don't take time on such threads, because it's my belief that if you have to treat a human relationship as a strategized game, you're already losing. It's a complete waste of time and investment. I mean, of course there are some social cues you should be attuned to, and generally, you should be aware of yourself and the other person's dynamic. But you shouldn't have to be learning fancy footwork, walking on eggshells, calculating your every sentence or glance or physical touch, or predicting which way the other person's wispy willow will bend if you just breathe on them wrong.

 

I've posted to this effect many times. That once you have to become contrived, affected, or maneuver around someone else's moods, guises, little power dynamics, etc...you're dealing with a person who is incapable in some pretty fundamental ways of connecting in a relationship-conducive way. So you're left with this illusion of there being *something* bringing you a chance at what your heart desires.

 

All these smoke-and-mirrors, cat-and-mouse plays leave me chilled to the bone.

 

And so I have limited patience with such threads.

 

Yet here I am, asking these kinds of questions.

 

Fancy that.

 

I think I'm going to end up giving myself the same reprimand. But as this is still an advice-seeking thread...it's also become a reflective chronicle of what happened here, as it shook me up in a big way.

[truman2017]

if you want to see him, make the call.

The worst that can happen is that he blows you off. I doubt that would happen, he said he wants to see Lincoln with you. Rejection may sting your ego, but that is the price one pays for taking the risk.

The best thing may be a continuing friendship, although that may end when a more permanent partner ultimately enters his life.

 

Either way report to ENA

[tiredofvampires]

I don't think telling him you cared about him is going to help him in that process, lol, but at the same time your friend is right -- that was a very TOV thing to do and it doesn't surprise me.

 

Lol, that's pretty enigmatic. It's got me smiling a bit -- because I'm not sure whether lurking behind that statement lies a compliment, or something that would make me want to shove my head into a paper bag. Hahaha. So maybe I'll let the implied question here remain rhetorical...

 

Though along those lines...back to your other post:

 

I think your personality and your values are far too codified for you to be really "vulnerable" in this situation; he was at the right place at the right term in terms of you being able to meet this possibility with curiosity instead of flat rejection. That doesn't make you vulnerable, IMO...So, I don't think the fact that this type of sexual episode is outside of your SOP necessarily indicates that it was a product of your vulnerability. Sometimes we're just bored of the status quo and things we don't expect become water to our deserts.

 

What I can tell you about reading this (as it is, coming from you), is that it's like the feeling one would have sitting in their doctor's office, waiting for him to come in and pronounce the results of your biopsy of "a very large, suspicious mass." And then he comes in and tells you that it's benign.

 

If someone can be vindicated in your court on this type of matter, you're pretty clear and free. lol

 

This is one of those things that I feel you're right about. About the vulnerability question being more a case of, "I'm seizing an opportunity because there seems to be reasons to, which are my own 'agenda' items," and as you said, taking a calculated (and as well-informed as possible) risk.

 

But that's not to say I feel I'm invulnerable. I still feel that I'm vulnerable in a way, because, while I don't feel the world OWES me care, when it doesn't provide that, invariably I find myself in an uneven position (this can be in any situation, not necessarily sexual ones). Which then can (and does) become emotionally disadvantageous.

 

It's important to add that while I agree care is not owed, and can't be demanded, respect is, and should be (until, as I said earlier, disrespect is earned.)

 

Because people can and do perceive that I am different from them in this way -- i.e, that I liberally give of both (vis a vis respect, I give it a prior [or at least I try]; vis a vis care, it arises naturally and spontaneously in me as a product of rudimentary relationship-formation) -- whether intentionally or not, people begin to prey on that. And then that's where the bad stuff starts to germinate.

 

A post by Firiel early in my thread very astutely pinpoints that problem:

 

Casual sex can be engaged in with a level of equality. Both parties can look for and have a good time with no strings attached. However, the relationship still has to be equal, and this one was not. First, I think he was leveraging a perceived power imbalance from the beginning, that you even allude to-- the 40-something having a torrid affair with the pool boy. He seems to think that you would be jumping at the chance to have sex because he is young and hot and sexy and you must be desperate. Now, that's not entirely true in your case. I've seen enough of your posts to know you are not typical a desperate middle-aged woman... far from it, actually. But that's what he was going in with. And then the sexual encounters you did have were all one-sided. And he was okay with that. When you tried to get something out of it for you (kissing, etc.) you were rejected, and he never made any advances to pleasure you... so there's that. And then... the pressuring for sex. That was just the epitome of trashy. You very clearly did NOT want to engage in sexual intercourse, and he kept trying to manipulate you into it, using what HE thought was his superior position in the relationship

 

So the question is, was this simply, "Consent + desire + lack of paternalism = that's it"? As you say?

 

I'm suggesting that that's not just "it". That there was something more insidious going on, and it has to do with a subtle ego-power trip that went further than just "let's scratch eachother's itch." What Firiel mentions likely may be part of it, but it could also be the case for other ONSs closer to his age, with whom he likewise finds potential "weakness" to gain his psychological upper-hand status -- ultimately for the purpose of his validation, which, though it would seem he does not need, not incidentally must be maintained anyway. (Just as the college student who assumes he will do well as a graduate student would still need to maintain his status, whatever his presumptions.)

 

But I'm saying his operational model may not be as benign as your equation, even if that is a legit model for some. Just because two boxes are wrapped identically doesn't mean what's inside in the same.

 

I agree with you, PTH, that these kinds of encounters are elementally very minimal, in terms of what is being sought and expected.

 

But I think you're whittling all of this (but especially the man and his behavior) down to the most BASIC of "contractual" assumptions of responsibility, as if the execution doesn't matter at all. What you're saying is that if I agree to NSA sex, and the guy takes that at face value as the "contract" we're agreeing upon, any sort of maltreatment on his part (barring actual rape) is fair game for him. Because if you don't even minimally care about someone, and those were the terms you signed on for (implicitly), really, the sky's the limit as to how badly you can comport yourself, while still escaping a "lowly douche" charge. He has carte blanche, because not caring at all about someone leaves open a pretty wide latitude for disregard and even damage.

 

I would argue that you may be missing the point about what went wrong here with him. Which is why others are seeing a jerk that you are not. You are essentially saying that the only criteria one must satisfy in order to be above a "jerk/douche/a-hole" is to make it clear what your intentions are in the arrangement and not lead the other on. Is that all?

 

Is that REALLY all that separates a jerk from a non-jerk? Making your intentions known?

 

Or does the manner in which someone executes their activities within the contractual understanding mean anything at all?

 

To take it out of the abstract, pulling on all the details of this account laid out, if you were in bed with a casual partner with all these non-paternalistic understandings notwithstanding, and she said she didn't want to have penetrative sex because she was afraid, would you try to pry her legs apart, saying, "Just a little, just a little?", while she said no no no a bunch of times? Would you have even TRIED, if she said at the outset that this was a boundary for her? If she was stripping your shirt off and kissing your chest, would you be turning haughtily away from her, sipping on your beer, and going, "Mmm...ahhh....that's good stuff" as if you were some kind of royalty and all you're missing here is someone with peacock feathers fanning you? If you started using your fingers on her, and she said, "can you be more gentle? I like it gentle..." would you have just stopped, instead of altering your touch? If she was astride you and bared her chest, brandishing her breasts and looking coyly and shyly at you, would you just lie there like a stone, not touching her/them? Would you not kiss her on the mouth, or anywhere else? Would you push her face away if she tried to nuzzle your neck? Would you have not altered your position when you saw she was fatiguing?

 

(I'm going to remind everyone here that this stuff became more and more apparent the second time around, so I didn't see all this coming at the outset; and also, as I said, I wasn't even sure of the "rules of the game", so that was throwing me off.)

 

And most of all, if you saw her looking really distressed (and I was at one point, when he said I should be quiet, after the "no" business; I know I was so taken aback, it was visible, as I struggled about whether to tell him to scram), would you just lie there watching the "show" of her grappling with that emotional shakeness and confusion?

 

Would you have prefaced this whole event (the second night this happened) while on the sofa, by saying how good it was last time, and then, "And it's going to happen again tonight," with complete presumptuousness? (And the only reason I didn't call him out on the spot for that level of audacity was because I didn't want to turn it into a power play; I felt it was pointless, that I should either consent or not consent, as before.)

 

I didn't add this one gem, but maybe for full accounting I will, here. I asked him to take a shower with me the second time, before the bedroom part. He told me to get into the shower and he'd follow. So I was in there for a few minutes, and then he came in, and he was laughing. I asked what was so funny, and he said he'd just gone downstairs into the kitchen where our other housemate was (the girl I've been talking about here, the one we buddied up with about moving out together) and he propositioned her for a threesome. He thought it was so hilarious, but to be honest, that hit me in the gut. I'm not a jealous person and certainly this is the last kind of relationship where jealousy would be appropriate. But it seemed to me that this was some kind of "test" of me, as though throwing another wildcard in there to throw me off and make me feel like it could be anyone and everyone he's bringing into this orgy was up for grabs. And what say did I have, because he just decided to put that out there without even telling me he was gonna do that? I certainly don't kid myself that we had a close enough sexual relationship, or something "special" enough for him to ask me how I felt about it. But that's just the point. I get the sense that he was trying to rub that in my face, gratuitously. Why else would he have done that? He knew she wouldn't go for it.

 

I played it off very light-heartedly, bantering with, "Aw, you gave us away? That implies there's already a twosome going on, you know? She could infer that from such a thing, you know!" He said, continuing to laugh in a faux, "I know, I'm bad, aren't I?" way, "I just wanted to get a reaction out of her." He told me her response was, "ARE YOU DRUNK?", so I don't know what she made of that. But I'm sure it caught her off guard and got her wondering, and what if I didn't want this advertised all over the place? I asked him what if she had said yes, and he said, "I'd be up for it, sure, why not." You know, when did that become part of the "contract"? On whose say-so was that what I signed on for with wanting a non-paternalistic bed partner, and at what point did I authorize such a twist? (I realize I'm adding new material evidence, but I'm not sure it would be tide-turning.)

 

And that shower progressed much like an upright version of the bedroom, btw -- me lathering his body and being attentive, while he just stood there silently, leaning against the wall, with an almost obnoxious, mighty indifference.

 

I removed myself from this emotionally as a concerted exercise, in order to be a spectator of sorts. I was determined to ride this out. But the voice was back there in my head.

 

Truth be told, PTH, I don't think you'd ever treat a partner like this. EVER. No matter how little you were invested in her, emotionally. I'm not entirely sure how much you are taking the Devil's Advocate for this guy, and how much you truly pronounce him a-okay, but I believe such things as I've described here you would feel beneath you to do. And so in some ways, your feedback may be coming through the lens of a different standard.

 

So perhaps your getting into his shoes in his defense overlooks the fact that you and he are different breeds. You know what I think? I think you wouldn't do this because even if you had no enduring feelings for the girl in question, and even if the nature of the arrangement was something she emotionally was not well-suited for, I think you would EXECUTE a NSA contract differently. I don't think my consent + desire + vote to not be paternalized includes an endorsement of this fine print, in the behavior. And I would argue that even though you have been "cold" by some women's standards because emotionally you did not give any more than you promised (which was nothing), that allegation was about THAT issue; not about how well or poorly she was treated during the actual events. You seem to be contending that a guy can do no wrong in the events themselves, the details, so long as he's not colder in the exit or ending than he led her to believe. And THAT seems simplistic to me.

 

What I'm trying to tell you is that we may have different definitions of "jerk" because yours is an extremely conservative one. It only encompasses the broadest scope of misconduct -- outright deceit.

 

That is an exceedingly narrow definition IMO. Within any given arrangement that appears to be equal and mutual, there can be innumerable insidious ways one party can use power, manipulation, and subtle contempt to destroy a basic foundation of equality and a priori basic dignity/respect. And does none of this count? It's harder to spell out in black and white.

 

But then again, real life, and what separates those of good character and bad character, is not lived by statute.

[tiredofvampires]

And another edit, over-ridden by the edit window:

 

What I'm trying to tell you is that we may have different definitions of "jerk" because yours is an extremely conservative one. It only encompasses the broadest scope of misconduct -- outright deceit.

 

narrowest. That should have been.

 

And I'll add to that, "and most obvious".