Im distancing myself from the ones I love (17)

1 Name: Secret Admirer : 2007-11-19 22:32 ID:y2fmLIav

I've been wondering what's wrong with me.

Two days ago I met someone who I really really liked.
She was fun, cute, and almost too good to be true.
We ended up spending the day together, and we both had a great time.
I haven't felt this great in a long time, and I at the end of the day I had fallen for her.
Though since the day was good, I didn't say anything to not ruin that great day.
I got her MSN tough, and of course, added her.

Problem is that I seem to be doing something rather odd.
And if this was a single case, I wouldn't be bothered by it.
But it seems that I am kind of distancing myself from people I love.
Im almost afraid of answering her on MSN.
This has happened to me at two other occasions, and I simply don't understand it.
Why am I afraid of talking to her?
Is there someone who could perhaps explain what's going on in my head, or even better tell me how to get rid of this?

2 Name: Secret Admirer : 2007-11-20 00:18 ID:JG9v+9D+

I do the same thing too. I can't explain it either. I want to be on my own but I dont want to be lonely. maybe its paranoia and fear of rejection. My friend has been calling me all the time and texting me but im ignoring her. not because I hate her
I'm just scared. Dont know why lol.

3 Name: Kurono : 2007-11-21 14:40 ID:KA+uyhZt

This sounds like it's a fear of being rejected. However, even though I'm sure you guys are aware of this, pushing people aside won't do anything. You have to accept that people can hurt you, but in the end that we, as people, need companionship. We want people to be there for us and it's likely that fear that has us pushing people away, so that we dont' lose them. In the end, I guess it depends on you. Is it better to have love and lost than never to have loved at all?

4 Name: Secret Admirer : 2007-11-21 23:10 ID:hiyLx/53

>>3 is right,...

5 Name: Secret Admirer : 2007-11-21 23:45 ID:NTk6CFY9

i am >>2.
so should i talk to my friends even though im extremely paranoid and believe it could be a fake friendship where they are just using me??

6 Name: Secret Admirer : 2007-11-22 00:47 ID:BzVB1GHY

>>2 / >>5

She has been texting you all this time? I mean, if she didn't care about you and is just using you, why the heck would she make such an effort to keep in contact? You're thinking not only bad but stupid thoughts :]

Believe in friendship or something D:<!

7 Name: Secret Admirer : 2007-11-22 02:56 ID:TQ7r6AU+

>>3

>>Is it better to have love and lost than never to have loved at all?

No. If you've never loved at all, you don't know what you're missing. Ergo, you have no conception of whatever pleasure derives from a relationship, so you can't mourn its absence. (You can idealize it, and lament being unable to achieve your ideal, but that really isn't the same thing.)

The person who has never loved at all suffers nothing save the relentless pressures of society. The person who has loved and lost, however, suffers the acute pain of that loss. Of course, the latter person will probably have experienced pleasures of love that counteract, to some degree, the pain of loss, but the one who has never loved will have found other pleasures in lieu of the pleasures of love.

Therefore, judging from measures of pleasure versus pain, the one who has loved and lost suffers much, but also feels much pleasure. The one who has never loved suffers not at all, yet also feels much pleasure.

Advantage: never loving at all. QED.

8 Name: Secret Admirer : 2007-11-22 03:48 ID:3kCJ0N69

>>7

> If you've never loved at all, you don't know what you're missing.

You mean the human experience?

> society

Unless you happen to be a hermit, then you are a part of society. If you are a hermit... then what pressure?

> acute pain

time heals all wounds

> have experienced pleasures of love that counteract

not counteract, but contrast

> you have no conception of whatever pleasure derives from a relationship, so you can't mourn its absence.

You can, in the same way a person orphaned from a young age can mourn never having had the love of a parent.

> the one who has never loved will have found other pleasures in lieu of the pleasures of love.

The only thing better would be an opiate, which carries far greater costs.

> QED.

quod eram futurus reproba

9 Name: Kurono : 2007-11-22 05:22 ID:2CHJSyZx

I like how >>8 more or less figured where I was going with it. >>7, I wasn't talking about being asexual and never wanting to love. I was referring to those who want to love and choose not to because they may be rejected or are paranoid or whatever. Thank you >>8 for arguing my point.

10 Name: Secret Admirer : 2007-11-22 14:40 ID:TQ7r6AU+

>>8

>>If you've never loved at all, you don't know what you're missing.
>You mean the human experience?

There's more to the human experience than just love.

>>society
>Unless you happen to be a hermit, then you are a part of society. If you are a hermit... then what pressure?

The pressure placed upon people by society and culture that attempts to force people to adhere to behavioral norms. An example of this would be a corporate policy that grants vacation preference to married employees over single ones. Such a policy represents an implicit push to get employees to marry -- fulfill society's expectations of proper behavior (get married) and you can take vacation whenever you want, provided you've accumulated the time. Refuse to get married, and you can take your vacation only if no married employees want that particular vacation slot, regardless of how much time you've banked up.

>>acute pain
>time heals all wounds

Fair enough, but the wound's still there.

>>have experienced pleasures of love that counteract
>not counteract, but contrast

But if one loses love, one might reasonably attempt to use fond memories of the relationship to help temper the blow of its end. I stand by my wording.

>>you have no conception of whatever pleasure derives from a relationship, so you can't mourn its absence.
>You can, in the same way a person orphaned from a young age can mourn never having had the love of a parent.

Such mourning, however, would be founded solely in idealism, given that the individual has no experience of that which he/she mourns. It is not genuine mourning, but rather pained nostalgia for a fantasy.

>>the one who has never loved will have found other pleasures in lieu of the pleasures of love.
>The only thing better would be an opiate, which carries far greater costs.

The person who has never loved would not know that. Example: if I live my entire life underground, from birth to death, and see only through the aid of artificial illumination, I have no comprehension of the qualities of sunlight that most people find to be refreshing. Does that mean that my life, as I see it, is diminished through my subterranean existence? No, because I am still capable of living a full and complete life without once ascending to the surface. One who lives above ground might gape with incredulity at how one could possibly bear a life lived without once experiencing the sun's rays warming one's skin, but that is not a statement of absolute human truth -- that is the evaluation of one form of experience through the lens of another. It's purely relative.

In my example, there is no fundamental aspect of the human condition that necessitates living under natural sunlight, so neither party is denied the human experience. Likewise, with respect to our current argument, the contribution of love to the human experience is relative. A life lived without love is only incomplete as viewed through the lens of experience possessed by one who has loved.

>>QED.
>quod eram futurus reproba

I think not.

11 Name: Secret Admirer : 2007-11-22 15:41 ID:mDNa0MW4

You get hurt very badly when you love and then lose. However, you know what love really is and you can actively seek out further lovers - so it's not all bad.

If you don't love then you yeah you don't feel so hurt because you don't know what losing love is like, but you also don't get the highs of love which you can chase.

Before I had my first girlfriend I thought I was fine on my own and didn't need a relationship. I started going out with her, started to fall in love but then we broke up (She drunkenly slept with her ex) and after that I was really hurt. Now I see her with a new boyfriend and that hurts, but it spurs me on to find a new love for myself rather than hiding away not wanting to be hurt again.

12 Name: Secret Admirer : 2007-11-22 16:16 ID:Heaven

>>6

>>I mean, if she didn't care about you and is just using you, why the heck would she make such an effort to keep in contact?

Playing devil's advocate here, but it could be that he's the most convenient tool for her to use to achieve her ends. She might figure it's more efficient to try to get closer to someone with whom she already has a rapport than to try and sucker someone completely new.

13 Name: Secret Admirer : 2007-11-22 20:28 ID:/QmaZimM

Just on the whole "better to have loved than lost" thing...

My take is that the one who has had love knows that they are capable of being loved, and they can believe "if it has happened once, it can happen again." Even if they had the perfect relationship and then lost it and are sent into crushing despair or whatever, they still have this small hope.

The one who has never loved does not have this reassurance, and is left to believe that they are ugly/mean/completely useless. It causes them to get a distorted idea of their self-worth, which will affect them in more areas of their life than just romance.

I don't think that the matter of 'whether one knows how love really feels or not' enters into it as much as this does.

14 Name: Secret Admirer : 2007-11-22 21:37 ID:TQ7r6AU+

>>13

>>The one who has never loved does not have this reassurance, and is left to believe that they are ugly/mean/completely useless.

Only if one's whole sense of self-worth is based on being loved by another. Not everyone is so dependent on received affection.

15 Name: Secret Admirer : 2007-11-23 20:26 ID:Heaven

Man is a social animal.

>>14 is a Panda.

16 Name: Secret Admirer : 2007-11-26 19:49 ID:Heaven

>>15

Go back to bed, Aristotle.

17 Name: Secret Admirer : 2007-11-27 08:16 ID:Jb5l7jSd

porcupine's dilemma ITT

Name: Link:
Leave these fields empty (spam trap):
More options...
Verification: