🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Jan28.202143.6600@overload.lbl.gov> asya@ux5.lbl.gov (Asya Kamsky) writes:
>In article <696589109.1@wyrm.rbbs-net.ORG> M..Stirner@f501.n914.z8.rbbs-net.ORG (M. Stirner) writes:
>...
>>if I were to come into a willing woman who was passibly attractive, had
>>a decent income, was at least trainable sexually & was truly serious
>>about making our life together something other than a living hell, I'd
>>damn well be in love with her inside of ninety days.  The thing would
>>probably last for the long haul, too.
>
>.M. seems to have left a whole lot of IMHO's or :-) from the post. The
>former seems assumed, since I have not encountered anyone male or female
>here yet who shared this peculiar view or love and long-term relationships.

Hmmm....  I can understand the bitterness in M's article.  As Louise puts
it "you get what you settle for," and that doesn't just apply to women.

I've been burned badly enough by my own idealism about "love conquering all"
to subscribe the romantic view of "relationships" that the culture puts
forward.  Even though I still have hopes for one day being with a woman who
meets all my requirements (which are considerably more demanding than M's),
I am also aware that I'm not nearly ready for such a thing to happen.  I don't
quite trust myself to be able to hold my own while "in love" with someone, and
that would make it far too scary to be any fun for me.

And if it isn't going to be _fun,_ I'm simply not interested.

-r