8 months and still casual…leave or stay?

[ThatwasThen]

Yes, but then if you do become assertive, they view that as man-chasing! So what are we supposed to do?

 

Who is "they" and which of "them" told you that, either verbally or in actions?

[Naomi99]

Who is "they" and which of "them" told you that, either verbally or in actions?

 

Just reading; just generalizations.

 

Also he's told me that several times in passing…women who chase are a huge turnoff to him. I asked him do I chase. He said no, I'm fine, and that he hasn't met a someone this cool in a long time.

 

Yes…now we know it's because he gets drama-free POAS.

 

Think I probably need to find a fine medium between being demure with dashes of assertiveness.

[Hermes]

I wouldn't be a "chaser" either. Never did it in my life. And drama wouldn't be my thing either.

 

However, I believe assertiveness in general terms is good (and assertiveness is NOT the same as aggressiveness). It simply means having good boundaries IMO, and saying what you mean and meaning what you say. I don't think anyone would see that as "chasing".

[Hermes]

Read all about it!

 

"Bachelors: The Psychology of Men Who Haven't Married" by Prof. Charles Waehler

 

And, you can buy it for him for his birthday. lol

[ThatwasThen]

Just reading; just generalizations.

 

Also he's told me that several times in passing…women who chase are a huge turnoff to him. I asked him do I chase. He said no, I'm fine, and that he hasn't met a someone this cool in a long time.

Great way to condition you (you in general) to be a submissive, casual, long term partner.

 

Yes…now we know it's because he gets drama-free POAS.

Think I probably need to find a fine medium between being demure with dashes of assertiveness.

Egggggsacallly.

 

BTW: I'm not talking about "chasing." I don't call reciprocating an invitation as "chasing."

 

Maybe read this:

 

link removed

[annie24]

Just reading; just generalizations.

 

Also he's told me that several times in passing…women who chase are a huge turnoff to him. I asked him do I chase. He said no, I'm fine, and that he hasn't met a someone this cool in a long time.

 

Yes…now we know it's because he gets drama-free POAS.

 

Think I probably need to find a fine medium between being demure with dashes of assertiveness.

 

So, he doesn't like women who chase.... but he also doesn't like (or at least won't commit) to women who don't chase. Think about that.... and yes, he gets drama-free POAS.

[Someday_Soon]

Wow, this is sort of becoming a psychological thriller (in a non-violent sort of way). But nevertheless, the relationship must suffer from a romantic standpoint if there's this game of mental chess being played. It seems at some point you should just be able to relax and express your emotions without fear of rejection. Especially after having known someone that long. I'd say it's time to move on, personally, but then again I don't enjoy protracted chess matches. If you want a long term partner, start dating other potential candidates. This guy is flashing warning signs.

[Naomi99]

Hypothetical. Let's just say we continue seeing each other casually and dating others… who do you think will meet someone else first, me or him?

[Naomi99]

Maybe read this:

 

link removed

 

From the article:

 

Signs of Unhealthy Boundaries

Going against personal values or rights in order to please others.

Giving as much as you can for the sake of giving.

Taking as much as you can for the sake of taking.

Letting others define you.

Expecting others to fill your needs automatically.

Feeling bad or guilty when you say no.

Not speaking up when you are treated poorly.

Falling apart so someone can take care of you.

Falling "in love" with someone you barely know or who reaches out to you.

Accepting advances, touching and sex that you don't want.

Touching a person without asking.

 

 

I don't feel I have any of those signs except "not speaking up when you are treated poorly," but even then, it's not really poorly where I"m being lied to or backstabbed. Usually I don't realize something is unfair until days later. Then it's too late to say anything and usually not worth bringing up after the fact has passed.

[Helpexpressme]

I can see this turning into a huge mess. What's the doc got that's so great anyways. I mean, have you heard from him all weekend? Gone out once?

 

I guess all the answers are no. I guess it really is all about POAS.

 

But you seem so much better than that......oh well

[boltnrun]

I don't think you have boundaries issues.

 

I think the issue you do have is trying too hard to be the "cool girlfriend". You believe he will reject you if you ask for more from him, and you seem to believe he'll reject you if you ask for simple, common courtesies (such as the driveway issue, and have you ever asked him to help you carry groceries up the hill? How come you leave in the middle of the night to drive home when he's offered to sleep in the guest room? What are you afraid of???).

 

Do you think if you continue to offer up drama-free POAS, he'll eventually fall in love with you and ask for marriage or commitment?

 

Why is it OK for you to accommodate all his wants but it scares you to ask him to accommodate some of yours?

 

These are co-dependent tendencies, not necessarily boundary issues.

 

As for who will find someone first, my vote is him. Because he doesn't love you and because he's always been able to find the next woman who is willing to accommodate him, it would be easy for him to move on. You're obviously looking for love and that's harder to find, especially if you're afraid to ask for basic courtesies. He may stick with you for a while simply because you do NOT ask for more and because you won't ask for a single thing for yourself, and it's because it's rare to find a woman who's willing to completely subjugate herself to a man's wants without asking for anything for herself.

 

So, like the guy I used to date, he may keep you around because you're "convenient" and accommodating...but don't make the mistake of thinking he keeps you around because he loves you. I made that mistake and I paid for it.

[Naomi99]

I can see this turning into a huge mess. What's the doc got that's so great anyways. I mean, have you heard from him all weekend? Gone out once?

 

I guess all the answers are no. I guess it really is all about POAS.

 

But you seem so much better than that......oh well

 

That is super sweet of you to say.

 

I haven't heard from him since Thursday. This is the way it's always been with him. Consistently inconsistent.

 

I don't know what he has that is so great. Nothing, really. He's kind of dull.

 

I'm beginning to not want to do this anymore.

[Naomi99]

I don't think you have boundaries issues.

 

I think the issue you do have is trying too hard to be the "cool girlfriend". You believe he will reject you if you ask for more from him, and you seem to believe he'll reject you if you ask for simple, common courtesies (such as the driveway issue, and have you ever asked him to help you carry groceries up the hill? How come you leave in the middle of the night to drive home when he's offered to sleep in the guest room? What are you afraid of???).

 

I don't know why I did that. Those are all excellent points. I can't understand why I don't realize at the time how odd it seems to leave in the middle of the night. I think I have intimacy issues. I don't know. I wish I stayed now.

 

Do you think if you continue to offer up drama-free POAS, he'll eventually fall in love with you and ask for marriage or commitment?

 

No

 

Why is it OK for you to accommodate all his wants but it scares you to ask him to accommodate some of yours?

I think because he's older and has health issues, I don't want to be an inconvenience, and I'd rather be inconvenient and not ask him to do anything.

As for who will find someone first, my vote is him.

 

That is going to crush me and all the more reason leaning toward proactively moving on. I feel horrible that I didn't show him my vulnerable side and now might not see him again and he'll never know the real me.

[boltnrun]

I guess I don't get how asking him to park his car in a way that allows you room to park yours next to it would affect his health. Or, how him sleeping in the guest room while you sleep in the bedroom (or vice versa) so you don't have to drive home alone at 2:00 am would affect his health.

 

He's apparently healthy enough to take full advantage of the drama-free POAS. So how is parking his car a few feet to the left going to adversely affect his health?

[bluebell29]

You know whats funny? I never even said the word "serious" to him! I made sure I didn't and was consciously aware to let him speak more than I. HE was the one who said it first, like it was a rehearsed conversation he's had many times before with his many, many lovers.

Haha, sounds too much like my guy. He brought up my expectations of being serious way before I would have. maybe they just know the drill all too well!

[bluebell29]

Yes, but then if you do become assertive, they view that as man-chasing! So what are we supposed to do?

Assertive doesn't mean to chase at all! In relationship realm speaking for myself, I view it more as reactionary assertiveness. As in, let him make the move and you then actively react to it if you see what I mean. He says he can't give you what you want, you close the door and walk away. Don't keep standing there.

[East4]

To me this post reads like a serious exercise in feelings dissection, which, if done with a rational reasoning leads to killing body reactions to events, that feelings are in fact. Most probably the Dr. has started on the same train of thought some 25 years ago, and look what he has become today - a person perfectly happy to compartmentalize other people in little boxes, use people like objects to satisfy certain needs and then put them back in the box and simply forget about them. Naomi, if you continue to rationalize and suppress what your gut is telling you, one day you will end up the same like your doctor-cold, aloof loner, who thinks that as long as they are honest about their consumer's intention, they are absolved of all responsibility to treat humans in a human way.

 

It seems to me that you are trying to suppress your gut feeling, by applying pure logic. But be aware that the raw gut feeling (emotions) are the primary voice of your body, your primitive brain that was formed million years ago. The logic and the dry reasoning capacity of the brain is developed only in the last thousand years and if you choose to listen to it only, and ignore the rest, then you choose to ignore a large part of yourself, your raw subconscious mind, that is at your core (and the core of humans in general).

 

I'm not saying that you have to act on each emotion that you are feeling, but suppress and discard it, means ignoring important signs that come from the core of your being. When the gut speaks up, or feelings of anger, dissatisfaction, anxiety appear, these are warning signs that your core being is unhappy. Although, you present it as jokes, I can feel in your previous posts your resentment towards the Dr. for the way he treated you. He's using you for what he wants from you, and the rest he throws away like useless, he doesn't see you in your totality as a human, he only sees your pretty face and nice body. And your core reacts against it, because at a basic, raw level it feels that you've been hurt and diminished to an object. It is your own body that rebels against the way you are allowing this man to treat you.

 

I understand that your feelings make you uncomfortable. But do not suppress them. They are there to tell you an important message.

[bluebell29]

Great post. I think there is such a stigma in the dating world these days about being needy and emotional (for women) - like something is wrong with women if they feel that way. It could often be a faily natural gut reaction to a relationship that is not working out. Listen to it and act accordingly rather than ignore those feelings like East says.

 

Rationality and reasoning is not the sum of human existence.

[Hermes]

OK.

 

Naomi says in an earlier post>

 

"It is a very physical relationship, but there's more than that. I wouldn't categorize it as FB or FWB, but more like lovers or casually dating.

 

Also the non-sex thing happened!! There was an incident where I had a female problem and we couldn't have sex for three weeks, and we still hung out like regular and he was very respectful."

 

You know, I am unable to understand this drive to demonise this man. There are people, who, for one reason or another, do not wish to enter a relationship or marriage long/term. He may not be either cold or aloof, just someone who prefers to remain a bachelor. Being a bachelor does not mean someone becoems a monk. Once again, I repeat, this man has made his intentions clear to Naomi, and in my book that is honesty. Just because he is not marriage/long-term material does not render him "inhuman". Come on!

No one is forcing her to meet with this man. And should she wish to continue with him, on the basis of what he has clearly said to her, then that is her business. It does not mean she is needy. And btw, there are needy people out there and others who are not needy, both sexes. So I fail to see what this "stigma" is. Certainly being needy is not healthy. Seeking out a healthy relationship as in wanting it, that is healthy.

 

So, I-ll ask a question: because this man is a confirmed bachelor, likes his life, does not want a wife and family, then he must live like a monk, and is in some way perceived as a "freak". Now if you want stigmatising, there you have it!

 

If he were the type who, not wishing commitment, nevertheless led women on from the outset to believe he would eventually offer long-term relationship/marriage, whatever, then that is a different matter.

 

Naomi, you obviously did (or do) enjoy his company, otherwise you wouldn't have stayed within his radius for coming up to nine months. There is nothing wrong with you - and I cannot state this too clearly - enjoying being in his company, if that is what you want. I get the impression you would like more, but this is not the man to give that to you.

That does NOT make him a monster.

[bluebell29]

No one is calling him a monster!

You seem to be reading things out of context. Some people here are saying his behaviour is cold in the conetxt of people seeking loving committed relationships (usually the majority in real life or this board), of which we believe the OP is one.

[Hermes]

BB. Nor did I accuse anyone of calling him a monster.

 

And I most certainly am not reading anything out of context.

 

From what I see there are all kinds of people here, some seeking commitment (certainly NOT everyone), some not, some are seeking long distance, some into "meet-up", some just dating, a mixture. Naomi will tell us, I am sure, if she intimated to this man early on whether she was hoping for marriage/commitment.

 

Naomi herself said and I quote:

 

""It is a very physical relationship, but there's more than that. I wouldn't categorize it as FB or FWB, but more like lovers or casually dating."

 

Lovers. And nothing wrong with that either.

 

Again, and I repeat, being a bachelor at 56 is not a mortal sin, nor is such a man expected to live like a monk. He did make clear his intentions.

[East4]

A man who has formed even the slightest attachment to a woman, would not recommend her to go find another boyfriend. I do not think that the doctor sees Naomi as a lover, at least not in the classic sense of the word where the word "lover" is charged with connotations to passion and strong feelings in general. I do not see such thing from the doctor. A man who would be passionate for a woman would turn at least a little territorial, it is men's nature. The doc is turning territorial for self-centered reasons only-he wouldn't have sex with Naomi if she slept with another man, but this is not out of passion or to keep her for himself, it is because he's afraid of catching STD. Again, even his "protectiveness" is a protectiveness for himself.

 

To me this doc man has a serious disconnect with his emotional side, and because he is attractive and a catch, he sets an example to Naomi that she feels tempted to mimic. What she doesn't seem to realize consciously is that despite his outer attractiveness, this man is an emotional handicap. He may have a brain with 180 IQ, but his emotional sensitivity is the one of a reptile. And the danger is that Naomi, due to her own emotional unavailability issues, views him as a good example to follow. Which is an act of violence against her own softness, sweetness and sensitivity that are the basic ingredients of femininity.

 

I only noticed that Naomi mentioned being attracted to the younger of her dating prospects, a guy that is a dozen years her junior. Obviously a choice that will not lead to anything long term, as relationships with such a big age gap, where the woman is older, rarely lead to commitment. A lot of fireworks in the bedroom, but rarely more than that.

 

The other dating prospect, who is Naomi's age, and more suitable for something meaningful, as long as age goes-Naomi said she was not interested in him.

 

To me the relationship with the doc, the attraction to much younger (hence unavailable for serious commitment) man, and lack of interest to a man that might be suitable, points out to commitment issues that Naomi has to address in herself. The water seeks its own level. If Naomi is emotionally unavailable herself, sure she will be attracted to men who for some reasons are unavailable too-too young, eternal bachelor, etc.

[Hermes]

Well, I suppose we don't have Dr. Who on here to speak for himself and so we are second-guessing. Naomi is no longer a child either, by any means, if she is 16 years younger than this 56 yo man.

She said "...or casually dating". Nothing wrong with that either.

 

Because someone is a 56 yo bachelor does not mean he is lacking emotional sensitivity. He is what he is. I can tell you (and we only have to read other threads here) that there are a lot more emotionally lacking "reptiles" in marriages.

 

How Naomi views him is her view, to which she is entitled IMO. He has certainly made his view clear, as Naomi herself stated in an earlier post some days back. He did not, not, lead her on.

[East4]

Here it is a quotation from one established forum member (Catfeeder), that clarifies if being honest, but unkind is enough when dealing with somebody whose feelings we can't return:

 

"A word to the kind: when I sense I'm hurting someone, I am. The fact that someone would be weak enough to tolerate that from me doesn't make me less responsible for my actions, it makes me more responsible". Catfeeder

[abitbroken]

Personally I think a high-value woman is someone who practices radical acceptance, is able to separate her emotions from what is, and gives herself time to reflect on what she really wants. And she is able to gracefully leap over the misadventures of dating without throwing a tantrums or holding a grudge. And if she's skillful, she will walk away leaving everyone happy, most of all herself.

 

Now….all that being said. I have two potential dates lined up. One with a HOT guy who is a decade younger than I and looks like Robert Pattinson! Another one who is six years older who is not really my type, but I have to dip my toes in the water at some point, right, Doctor?

 

A high value woman knows what she is worth and knows what she wants, and if someone is offering something that is not healthy for her, she does not want, or does not fit in with her goals, she kicks the dust off her feet and moves on. She is not mean or cruel, you can say no without throwing daggers, but does not have to "leave everyone happy." You are not a server at a restaurant, nor a Hallmark Hall of Fame movie. People can be left unhappy - meaning that someone might be bummed about not getting access to you, or not getting to date you, etc.

 

It is not mean to "just stop contacting" someone you have known for eight months. he said himself that if you are looking for something serious, you should look elsewhere. If you said "okay" and did that, and never accepted a date again and did not contact him - is that mean??? Its mean to you because you are hanging on to him and he will fill your needs possibly for sex, but the need to dote on someone and take care of someone and for intelligent conversation so that you end up dating someone who is hot, who is more risky, etc, because you don't need that man to fill that need.

 

From the article:

 

Signs of Unhealthy Boundaries

Going against personal values or rights in order to please others.

Giving as much as you can for the sake of giving.

Taking as much as you can for the sake of taking.

Letting others define you.

Expecting others to fill your needs automatically.

Feeling bad or guilty when you say no.

Not speaking up when you are treated poorly.

Falling apart so someone can take care of you.

Falling "in love" with someone you barely know or who reaches out to you.

Accepting advances, touching and sex that you don't want.

Touching a person without asking.

 

You expected him to fulfill your needs without stating your needs - to which he had no clue of and couldn't possibly know based on your behavior towards him. You were stating that he was a loser/commitmentphone for not being a mind reader and automatically giving you what you need and want.

 

You did not speak up UNTIL NOW about being treated poorly. You grumbled in your mind about the parking space, him not seeing you with friends, but did nothing. You kept a score card in your mind of all the things he did that were bummy when a short sentence could have solved it. He didn't have to commit to you to pick up potato chips or move his car - those are pretty easy. Yet you fumed on the inside and agonized as the days went by and he didn't contact you.

 

You are feeling guilt about letting him go and are now downplaying your real needs - because you real need for something slightly more committed would mean letting him go or being "just friends" - you can't casually sleep with him while pursuing other men, quite truly.

 

So there you have it.