Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 (Tek) 9/28/84 based on 9/17/84; site tektools.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!tektools!janec From: janec@tektools.UUCP (Jane Caputo) Newsgroups: net.singles Subject: Re: Your SO's friends and you Message-ID: <382@tektools.UUCP> Date: Sat, 24-Aug-85 12:18:45 EDT Article-I.D.: tektools.382 Posted: Sat Aug 24 12:18:45 1985 Date-Received: Mon, 26-Aug-85 01:14:31 EDT References: <467@moncol.UUCP> <5608@tektronix.UUCP> <1084@lumiere.UUCP> <481@moncol.UUCP> Organization: Tektronix, Beaverton OR Lines: 57 John Ruschmeyer writes:: > A note on this whole discussion: > > With the exception of Moira's posting, all the followups and replies have > been from men. Don't women perceive themselves as being mistreated by men > as much as men perceive themselves as being mistreated by women? Don't worry, John, women know all about this kind of treatment. As a women's problem, it's as old as humanity. I suppose as a man's problem, it really was created by "the woman of the 80's". Another charming byproduct of our progress, like equality of lung cancer. . . > I probably was operating on a false premise at the time. Since the young > lady and I had been dating for about three months, I assumed she might > actually have *wanted* to spend time with me, even if that did mean telling > her friends that she was going out with me instead of them. (Looking back, > it seems more like I was something that filled in those evenings when no > other distractions were left.) > > Actually, this is where the whole thing got confusing to me. We had > dated for three months by this time with no indication from her that she > did not want to continue. On the contrary, we had shared what (for me, > anyway) was a lot of physical intimacy. It confuses me that a person can go > out with you and share so much of themselves with you, yet not want to > make half an effort to spend time with you. Is this the woman of the 80's? > If so, I may wait for the 90's to come out. > As far as I'm concerned, someone who's treating you like that is neither a lover nor a friend, and the only appropriate response is "goodbye". Keep in mind, though, that there are plenty of people who would disagree. How many men do you know who would jump at the chance to get laid once in a while, with no strings attached? It seems that the fact that she was willing to be intimate with you was what really led you to misinterpret her intentions. Unfortunately, actions have no particular meaning in themselves. It's people's interpretation of what they are doing that counts. Some people can't make love unless they are in love. For them, the act implies a great deal of commitment, if not forever after, at least in the short term. Other people consider it just another form of recreation. Often the people in the second group are pretty obvious about it, and you can eliminate them immediately. Sometimes, though, you are bound to get fooled. Don't give up on modern women. There are plenty of women who take their relationships seriously, just as there always were plenty of men who did. You just have to learn, as every girl learns at Mama's knee, to watch out for the other kind. At least you're only hurt, you're not ruined for life. See, we really have made some progress in the modern world. Jane Carrasco Caputo {allegra, ihnp4, decvax, ucbvax...}!tektronix!tektools!janec Tektronix, Inc. M.S. 74-900 P.O. Box 500 Beaverton, OR 97077 (503) 627-1764