71–80 of 171 posts
The best time to search for funding is when you don't need it. The best time to search for a job is when you don't need it. The best time to search for a partner is when you don't need it. I got my current girlfriends after two years of being single and realizing that being single is okay.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> My ex before we broke up used to take days and days to respond but she was unemployed and had nothing going in her life Not to speak of your ex specifically. But this could just be a case of "shitty at replying to texts", which I also have (in relation to my mother and some of my friends, but not to other friends or my girlfriend). It's not necessarily about being a faker.
Not really, depending on what type of text it was she'd reply instantaneously. Also, honestly in this day and age is it really appropriate to take at minimum 4 days to respond to a question from your "significant other"? That is not normal. Everyone is always on their phone, like she was. In any case, regardless of whether she was faking it or not, it's difficult to maintain a relationship with someone who is always…
This is the real problem. Once you're dating someone (that is, it's past the courtship part and you've acknowledged the relationship), if you can't check your communication devices at least once or twice a day for messages from them (excluding hectic work/life schedules), there's a problem. You're continuing the game from courtship, you don't respect them, or you aren't actually into the relationship.
EDIT: Added 'once or '. I realize this is a YMMV moment, but even if you don't carry your phone during the day (like me), you can check it when you wake up and before bed. And if you're interested/invested in someone, you've got to make more time than that or there's never an actual conversation.
Yeesh. Finding a girlfriend in college and getting married not too long after graduation remains the best decision I've ever made. I don't know how people deal with this shit.
I read it somewhere, so no credit, but here's a good one all around in the age of massive profiling and asocial media (or should it be ass-social?). Flip-phone. No really. like nokia circa 2000. Plug in to your computer to sync your contacs.
We make ourselves too available to the noise makers. What's on fb or that really matters to your happiness? Why pursue a relationship attempt with someone that cant be 100% available for a 30-secs phone call in crucial courtship phase, to book a date?
Disconnect. It's all fake. Go and meet someone at the local library. Or the laundromat. Give him/her 5 full minutes of undivided attention(until he/she pulls out his/her phone, less likely to happen in front of a stranger, especially someone that shows genuine appreciation) and find him/her 3 qualities. Say his/her name. You'll be surprised that meaningful relationship are easier to develop in this paradigm of constant partial presence/absence.
Yeesh. Finding a girlfriend in college and getting married not too long after graduation remains the best decision I've ever made. I don't know how people deal with this shit.
I love being married, but some of my friends would be miserable if they were. To each their own!
Uncertain reply-time-window dynamics enabled by the era of asynchronous/deferred indirect communication (aka "texting"/"emailing") create a situation where the psychological principles of the Variable Ratio Reinforcement Schedule (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reinforcement) kick in, which, as it turns out, is the most addicting, thus creating the most drama.
I get that about right? ;)
Word to the wise (single men): Online dating apps put much more power into the hands of women than men. If you want to score something "out of your league," you're going to have to take a walk out of the ballpark, and get your hands dirty in the real world with some face-to-face time. Uncoincidentally, this takes advantage of another psychological principle, Repeated Proximity Breeds Attraction (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mere-exposure_effect)
Is it only me that finds this type of obsessive-compulsive over-thinking somewhat bizarre; yet the author is trying to pass it off as the norm. Perhaps it's the author's fretful nature and over analysis that drives women away? I've found the following 'tactics' have worked quite well: - If you want to send a message, send a message. - If they don't reply, they're busy, or they don't want to speak with you. How is it…
What are you going to say next -- that love is really simple?
If the person on the other side loses interests because you are indeed being yourself, take it as an advantage. If they don't want to make the effort in the period when they should make the effort, they've saved you time.
The flipside, of course, is that if you're somewhat like the author and have an fretting behavioural trait, you'll probably scare off a lot of people - which is still a good thing. The ones that stay are worth your time.
The best time to search for funding is when you don't need it. The best time to search for a job is when you don't need it. The best time to search for a partner is when you don't need it. I got my current girlfriends after two years of being single and realizing that being single is okay.
Do your current girlfriends know about each other? :P
There were many things wrong with how Aziz approached the situation. Firstly, he should NOT have invited her to a big concert right away: concerts/events are a big commitment, time and attention-wise. If he had just met the person, the best thing to do would probably have been to meet for coffee/drinks, get to know each other better and THEN propose going to the concert IN PERSON. Secondly, there are a lot of factors…
“Hey—don’t know if you left for NYC, but Beach House
playing tonight and tomorrow at Wiltern. You wanna go?
Maybe they’ll let you cover The Motto if we ask nicely?”
2) He knew she enjoyed the music, they'd listened to it the night before. So while a concert is a time commitment, he at least knew it was one she might be interested in.
3) He gave her both that day and the next as options for the date.
4) He referenced both the music they'd listened to while together and her singing at the party. Reinforced the shared experience, and pointed out that he was paying some attention to her.
He did fine. See the note at the end about their second encounter when she said there'd be no games the second time around, and she went right back to it. The lack of reply was all on her, he did everything he could/should have done (much more would've been inappropriate since they didn't yet have much of a connection, and less would've been doing nothing which he'd likely have regretted for the missed opportunity).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think that's how attraction works :( Maybe building a stable, committed relationship -- something that not all people want, by the way, and that's ok -- is an exercise in restraint and rationality, but immediate attraction and hookups? It works irrationally almost by definition.
My point is not about how attraction works, it's about what people do about it. You can feel attraction and decide to act on it almost instantly, but that's still your choice and you are responsible for what you do. But if you feel that attraction is "making you do something" against your will, when you realize negative consequences of your actions – that's definition of addiction.
Falling in love or feeling sexually attracted to someone are irrational things by definition. You do not decide to do it. You cannot force yourself to feel attracted to someone because they "play fair", either. Because of (reasonable) society norms, you cannot simply engage with everyone you're sexually attracted to -- it's not ok to harass fellow coworkers, or someone else's partner, etc. But the core of it is irrational. You cannot impose rational rules like "I'll pay more attention to people who text me back immediately or who are more considerate of other people, or who I agree with on serious issues, even though what I'd really like is to call X and do the naughty all night long".
The best time to search for funding is when you don't need it. The best time to search for a job is when you don't need it. The best time to search for a partner is when you don't need it. I got my current girlfriends after two years of being single and realizing that being single is okay.
It's not a sufficient condition: I don't need make-up, yet the best time searching for it is never.
It's not a nuanced statement: I don't need a car now. Even if I could get a cheap car, it would be extra baggage and a distraction. I don't need it.
It's not that your advice is nonsense, I never said that ;)
Research on the poor shows that because they need money, they get stressed. I think the same applies for: funding, a job and a partner. It adds stress, which in turn, lowers one's decision ability. I presume you were hinting at this.
But then the statement doesn't become: "the best time to search for x is when you don't need it." It should be: "the best time to search for x is when you don't need it right now." Perhaps still a bit unnuanced -- improvements are welcome -- but your examples (funding, job and partner) implies that you'd need it at a later stage. Or perhaps better said, that is when it gets interesting. I probably can find the best make-up deal in town, because I don't need it. I also couldn't care less.
Additions and changes are welcome.