I've been coming to this site and reading the posts every few months for about four years now, though I have never posted myself. I'm not one generally to post on such sites, but decided today to post a few observations I have made over the years. There are some patterns in the posts that with time begin to emerge. I'd like to record some of these observations. My intent is not to insult anyone, but only to spur thought.

The illusion of the on-line community: Many people come here to participate in what they consider a community. It is not in reality a community at all, but a collection of artificial persona, false intimacies, and, all too often, disturbed people with hidden agendas. Were there any real value to such communities as this, the participants would make significant and rapid progress in self-discovery and before long out-grow the need to participate. Yet there are particpants who have been posting on this site for years and seem no more enlightened today than they were the day they first posted. Certainly they aren't in as much emotional turmoil and perhaps they found comfort here. hbut the fact that they are still here evidences that they have becomed trapped in the illusion of the on-line community as a place for growth. It is, in reality, a place for stagnation. People should be out engaging in the real community, not inventing new ones in cyberspace. More ominous, some parpticipants here are in need of a good therapist, but use these forums instead. Well-meaning participants attempt to help and often offer good insights. But in reality, this is a very dangerous practice.

Embracing the stereotypes: So may people here have embraced false stereotypes in regard to personal behavior and male-female interaction. While there are certainly commonalities in human behavior, most of the stereotypes perpetuated here are false - the products of Hollywood and popluar magazines. Embracing these stereotypes is dangerous because they prevent one from truly embracing one's own individuality and to apporach others with a set of unrealistic expectations. We set ourselves up to categorize others with an artificial set of evaluative criteria and end up missing the real person. This is why so many people here get into relationships that confound and frustrate them. Their potential mates will never fit into the fantasy that they have created for themselves.

Immature ideas about love: Too many people here seem to be desperate to be "in love." They mindlessly follow a model that is uniquely American and completely false. It has been said that being "in love" is a form of temporary insanity. There is wisdom in this saying. We would expect a teenager to meet someone with whom he or she makes an emotional connection and be head-over-heals "in love." It's all brand new to these youngsters. Of course they are going to be elated. But as all of us who have been down this road already know, what they are experiencing isn't real love. At least we should know this. Yet too many of us never come to understand that true love, the kind that lasts, is not something that hits us out of the blue like a bolt of lightening, but is an emotion that grows slowly. We should approach potential mates in a much more pragmatic way, seeking friendships and allowing intimacy to progress naturally until we understand that what we feel for a friend is more than just friendship. This approach keeps our heads out of the clouds and allows us to really get to know someone without filtering everything through a set of pre-conceived expectations and eliminates the danger of the relationship developing as the result of false postures and behaviors. Simply put, a true friendship is a much stronger foundation upon which to build a life-long relationship than a few months of romantic love and a set of formulaic evaluative criteria. All one need do is read here the posts of those who are in a new relationship to see that they are mentally checking off items on a list, with an expectation of feeling once again that thrill of our first love. But how valid is that checklist? Some of us are desperate to feel that alolescent giddiness again. We do not want to accept that that was unique ot that period of our lives and that now as adults, we we will never experience that again and we must approach relationships much differently. Our refusal leads us astray and we find ourselves flitting from one failed relationship to another. After a awhile we put our blinders on and try to force a relationsip to be what we want it to be, ignoring important warning signs that we will never get any real satifaction from the relationship. I believe that this refusal to embrace reality is the root cause of our astounding divorce rate. We marry the wrong people for the wrong reasons and discover too late that the relaionship is not sustainable.

Confusing libido with love: We all know that sex with someone we care for deeply is far more satisfying than casual sex with a relative stranger. What we tend to forget is that sexual desire and love are two completely different experiences. We forget that we can be very sexually attracted to someone with whom it is impossible for us to have a healthy relationship. We can have mind-blowing sex with someone we simply cannot abide outside of the bedroom. Likewise, we can love someone for whom we have absolutely no sexual attraction. What we don't even stop to consider is that we will often become strongly sexually attracted to someone only after we begin to love them. Hence, if that man or woman doesn't make our groins throb with desire, we dismiss him or her out of hand. In addition, we place far too much importance on sex in general. While having a satisfying sex life is a birthright, it is not the be all and end all of the human experience. yet, over the years we have inappropriately mythologized sex and have come to insist that sex be one of the most important aspects of our relationships. Indeed, a marital relationship cannot be healthy without a good sexual relationship, but this doesn't just happen. It has to be fostered, just like every other aspect of the relationship. Placing too much importance on sex leads us to select the wrong mate for the wrong reasons. Hence it is important for the single person to seperate the need for sex from the need for love. If you want sex and Mr. Hottie makes you pant, have sex with him, but do so for the sex, not for a relationship. At the other end of the spectrum, if you find that you have developed a deep regard for a woman for whom you have never felt sexual desire, explore the possibility. You may just find that she is the best partner in bed you've ever had. Either way, it is important to determine your's and your potential mate's sexual compatibility. What is not important is to make sex a condition of love or vice versa.

The myth of the "soul mate": This is one of the most absurd notions to come out of modern culture. The idea is that there is a person "out there" who is so like you that if you find him or her, you will magically become one with the Cosmos and everything will fall into place. Life with this person will be a fairy tale "and they lived happily ever after." This is really a rather recent idea. No one ever heard of a "soul mate" 20 years ago. Several people have locked onto the concept and used it to make an awful lot of money (Dr. Neil Clark Warren of EHarmony comes immediately to mind). When you think about it, you come to understand just how flawed a notion this really is. We are all individuals with unique traits, value systems and experiences. While there may be commonalities with others that would naturally attract us and allow us to make deep emotional connections, there are many, many people with whom we would experience this phenomenon. Some would make good mates, but most would not. Some people have bought into this soul mate idea so completely, they find that they can't make a real connection with anyone. When you think about it, it isn't really even desireable to "find" a soul mate. One of the most tantillizing and rewarding aspects of developing a relationship is not the commonalities, but the differences. If you settle in with someone exactly like yourself, you will will not grow. It is the incorporation of the differences of the individuals into a common reality that gives a relationship it's depth, satisfaction and potential for personal growth. Think about it; you don't get too excited by looking in the mirror. Likewise, someone who is exactly like you is more likely to bore than to stimulate you.

Discomfiture with the self: It is almost painfully obvious that many participants here are motivated by fear. They fear being alone. They feel that they are somehow incomplete if they don't have a mate. They view being alone (often expressed as dying alone) to be the worst possible thing that could ever happen to them. They feel this way because they have never become comfortable with themselves. If they had, they would never feel that they must be in a relationsip to be complete. Rather they would enjoy just being who they are - just being, with or without a mate. Before you can truly love someone else, you must first love yourself. If you aren't completely comfortable with yourself, however can you expect someone else to? As an extension of this, you cannot reasonably expect someone to accept you for who you are, if you haven't first accepted yourself for who you are. And you can only do this outside of a relationship. More importantly, if you have to have someone else in your life in order to feel complete, you must perforce surrender yourself to someone else's care. This is always a recepie for disaster. A healthy relationship is not one of surrender of the self, but one where two people who already feel complete share themselves and compliment one another. Complement, never complete. So if you find yourself struck dumb with fear when you feel lonely - and we all feel lonely sometimes - rather than going out and looking for a mate, you need to work on becoming comfortable with yourself. Until you can say to yourself "I don't have to have a mate and being alone for the rest of my life isn't the worst thing that can happen to me", you have no business being in a relationship. This fear of being alone is such a powerful motivator, that we often rush headlong into relationships with blinders on. On average, a divorced person is single for just under three years before he or she marries again. Often participants here want to know how long they should wait before beginning to date again. There is really only one correct answer to the question: if you have to ask, you aren't ready. But the motivation for the question is always the same: fear of being alone and a strong desire to get into another relationship as quickly as possible in order to assuage the loneliness. Maybe this is why second marriages have so high a divorce rate. Rather than giving themselves time to heal from the last failed marriage, carefully evaluating one's own mistakes that contributed to its demise, and learning again who they really are and what they really want and need out of life, they rush blindly back into the game and make the same mistakes they made the last time around.

What about the children?: This is a hard one for almost everyone. Statistics show that that one of the leading cause of failure of second marriages is dysfucntion resulting from the attempt to blend families. It is a hard nut to crack to say the least. It is possible and many people have successfully done this. I believe that this is only possible when the mates are themselves very emotionally healthy and that they are in the relationship for all the right reasons. Contrary to what some may have us believe, children are indeed traumatized by the divorce of their parents. So not only do the parents need to be fully healed from a divorce before starting a new relationship, it is even more important for the children. Even then, putting together a new family is fraught with emotional challenges that even a well-adjusted child will have difficulty meeting. For this reason, a good family therapist is a must to help the new family navigvate these dangerous waters. The biggest mistake that couples in a second marriage make is to insist that their children regard the new spouse as a parent. A child has but two parents: the man and the woman who begat him. He should never be asked to accept another in this role unless the biological parent is dead or missing in action. Even then, it must be the child's choice, never a requirement. The notion of the "step-parent" should be driven out of our thinking. Rather a child should be requried only to accept and respect the new spouse as mother's or father's husband or wife. While a former spouse may be a former spouse, he or she is always your co-parent. Hence, there is really no such thing as a divorce "a vinculo matrimonii" when there are children from the marriage. The former spouses must continue in their roles as parents and, therefor, must maintain a relationship. A child needs both his parents, so it is important that the parents get beyond their differences and learn to continue their parental roles together, even after they have remarried. If this goal has not yet been acheived (and yes, it's very, very hard), you shouldn't even be considering re-marrying. The new spouse must accept that the former spouse will continue to be a part of his or her spouse's life; there can be no negotiation on this point. If he or she cannot accept this - really accept - before marriage, the second marriage is doomed to failure. Finally, the very process of finding and developing a new relationship that will culminate in marriage is time-consuming, rife with emotional risks, and in many ways incompatible with parenting. Once you become a parent, your children will always be your number one priority. Their welfare always trumps anything you may want or need. This is easy for us to accept in concept, but all too often, impossible to accept in practice. We have to accept that we can only go out seeking a new mate when our children are ready for use to do so. Most children will come to the point when they desire that their parents be happy and will want them to remarry. But this takes time; how much depends on the child and his emotional health. It cannot be rushed or forced. This is another reason why it is important for us to be comfortable with ourselves. We must instill this love of self in our children by example. A desperately lonely parent, hungry for a relationship, sends a signal to a child that being alone is a tragic thing. Moreover, it tells him that he is not your first piriority and when push comes to shove, you will place your needs above his.

troll

uh whaaaat?

sorry, I know some of these folks offline too dude. they ARE WHO THEY ARE...as am I.

JustinObserver,
Can you please share with us your experiences that have led you to all of these conclusions?
Thank you.

tltr

Wonder what had brought you here because you just did`nt stumble upon this site by accident.

The ease JustinObserver has shown with pontificating is...interesting. His observations must have taken him a great deal of time to put into words. I'd be interested in knowing where he came by his opinions. Justin? <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

I'm thinking justinobserver has been here before...with a different name, of course...old timers may remember threads of similar opinion by at least one other poster.

Maybe we should just let this thread die...?? Or perhaps Tempest will remove it...

I can only hope the length of it will deter many -- who are here with serious questions, or want to learn and grow through our "community" -- from actually reading it.

First off, the notion of "soul mate" is not an modern phenomenon. The undercurrent runs through many religions and ancient myths, usually the creation myths. (To the religious zealots, I'm using the word "myth" in the sense of "story explaining the world" not as in "untrue.")

Second, I happen to have two friends whose step-dads are as important in their lives as their fathers. They have two dads. They may be in the minority, but they are not really exceptions.

And Finally, I'd like to come clean to the Board. I'm not me. I'm actually a cross-dresser named Andrew and I pretty much go both ways. I totally understand lidido versus love. Since I have trouble having long-term relationships after my lovers see my tattooed-on lacy panties, I mostly just go for the sex. I just hope I can find love and libido for me and my lacy-panty tattoo.

Oh, and how did I get my name? When I was 12, I fantasized about being Anne of Green Gables, then I fantasized about doing her. Given my name, Andrew, it was a natural choice.

LOL

The tattoo cost extra because it's red and pink lace

Cool! I've been temted to get a tattoo but I always chicken out.

Sounds like some psycology student that's been scanning sites to work on a college thesis but has no clue about real life. Real life is messy and often irrational. I know this site has probably kept me out of jail or a psyco ward a few times because it gives me an outlet to vent rather than taking out that frustration on WH. It's great that it's not the same as a "real community." We can say things here that we might be afraid to say to our best friends. We start to care about others on the board, but it doesn't replace those other relationships. Instead, it gives us an outlet and sounding board so that we can make those other relationships stronger.

"We can say things here that we might be afraid to say to our best friends."

Why? I mean why would you be afraid to say what you share here to your *best* friends?

Afraid of what they might think?

If they are your "best" friend they shouldn't think any worse of you, just because you share your deepest concerns with them?

I guess I look at it, if I can't share my deepest thoughts and cares with my *best* friend, then they really aren't a *best* friend, they are just a 'friend'.

Well, I might have worded that wrong. There are times when I know my best friend will take my side but I feel I need a more impartial viewpoint. Also, there are some SF questions on this board that would be improper to ask a friend of the opposite sex. That best friend remembers all those complaints said in anger about WS (often only part of the story) and may interfer if recovery is still possible. Also, no matter how good of a friend, there are some things a friend cannot fully understand unless they have been through it as well.

Sounds like S&N is trying to make a come back, if any one remembers him and his long statements.

I think he was trying to write his theis here on the Marriagebuilders.

still a troll

The original poster is not, I think, a troll. And he is not yet another incarnation of SNL, unless SNL has become more thoughtful and articulate.

The original poster's alias is telling. My guess is that he lives a life of frustration, watching the world go by around him while he himself gets nowhere relationally. Wounded, he wants no one to know it and he tries to hide his pain even from himself, using dissociation as a defense mechanism while he observes and analyzes. He stands on the sidelines, never invited to join in and not sure he even wants to, because he cannot escape the absurdity and tragedy of the people whose lives he watches as they play out their unaware and foolish games.

But his frustration builds, because he remains alone and aloof, and he cannot remake the world into one in which he can live without fear or compromise. He sees problems, but he cannot solve them, and his frustration winds tighter and tighter until it must be purged somehow.

Hence the post here.

Is my analysis accurate? I have no idea; I have merely described myself. I did something very similar once, on another site. Ironically, my diatribe got stickied, and is still stickied there after more than a year.

It is reasonable to be suspicious of the original poster of this topic. We have no idea where he is coming from really, and those of us who have been here a while have not forgotten the hypocrisy of SNL. This post has some exaggerations, to be sure, but it is full of some really good insights. It's sort of a shame that, coming out of nowhere as they do, they are presented without the benefit of established credibility.

Sometimes a "secret" is not merely one's own, but also belongs to another. In that case, one might forbear to reveal it unless it could be done anonymously.

GDP, was that you?

Er...was what who?

This is me. I mean, I'm me. No secrets here. I really am a gnome in real life, about two feet tall, no tattoos of any sort, and a nose the size of...oops, for some reason it just grew to the size of Pinnochio's.

Or did you mean the original post? Naw, if I were going to write something like that, I would use my established account. I wouldn't assume yet another alter ego.