Home→Forums→Emotional Mastery→Thoughts from a cell phone bill
- This topic has 82 replies, 8 voices, and was last updated 7 years, 11 months ago by XenopusTex.
-
AuthorPosts
-
October 3, 2016 at 9:01 am #116995AnonymousGuest
Dear XenopusTex:
It is a good thing the woman, the mother of a young daughter, is not available to date you. I strongly believe it will be very wrong for you to be involved in parenting a child, be it your natural child or one by marriage.
I would like you to have a loving relationship with a woman, only not with a woman who is also a mother to a minor child, or who intends to be one.
I state this because you believe that a child does not have a value. When you wrote that you believe children have potential value, that means, maybe they WILL have value later.
No, no, no: you are wrong, XenopusTex. You are still suffering from not having been valued as a child, just for being. You are still suffering… Please do not pass this suffering on. You told the story that your grandfather called you “worthless” the very last time you saw him. Remember?
Don’t pass this legacy on to another child.
At this point, you are breaking my heart, XenopusTex. I mean it: the coldness in your heart, for yourself and for others- I can feel it, that ice.
Write me more, I need some time to recover.
anita
October 3, 2016 at 4:01 pm #117100XenopusTexParticipantAnita, where does the purported enhanced innate value of man come from? I have met dogs with more value to society than some humans.
Why is it “cold” to not believe in any such enhanced value?
You seem to be happy that she was dating somebody else. There is absolutely no way of knowing what his beliefs are, yet you seem to believe that he would be a better option? I am puzzled.
October 3, 2016 at 6:42 pm #117112AnonymousGuestDear XenopusTex:
I will clarify: a child is valuable because a child starts loving- a child will do anything to be loved by the parent/ care takers. The child looks up to the adult with nothing but love. The only true unconditional love is that of a child to a parent. Really, no matter who the parent is, the child will love the parent. The child trusts the parent. Again, no matter how untrustworthy the parent may be. A child who looks up to his parent with unconditional love, complete trust is a worthy child and all children are loving and trusting. Therefore all are worthy.
You were such child. This woman’s child is worthy as well. If you dated and married her, being a father figure to that child and treated the child as worthless, you will be a bad father figure, abusive and damaging to the child. It wouldn’t matter to the child how much money you make, what higher education degree you hold, how many hours you worked and how many people you put away to protect society.
The man she is dating may (I hope) value the child and so, he would be a better option.
In fact ANYONE who valued the child would be a better choice than you as you don’t value the child.
You asked: “Why is it “cold” to not believe in any such enhanced value?” Don’t you feel the coldness of your own life- you described that coldness in so many words over time, the experience of your own life! And it started when you were a child, not valued.
Regarding dogs (the beginning of your last post)- they do trust their owner and they do love their owner unconditionally, no matter who the owner is- just like children. And so they are valuable.
Love, that reaching out to be loved, that willingness to love, this is what makes a child worthy. With harsh childhoods many lose that loving nature: many of the defendants in your courtroom as well as their prosecutor- you.
And so, loving nature absent, you… are as worthy as some of the defendants you prosecute.
anita
October 3, 2016 at 9:55 pm #117122XenopusTexParticipantAnita, I said that I view children as having value for their potential. I didn’t say they were worthless, just that I don’t believe that humans have additional value compared to other things simply because they have a particular set of genes. Does a triploid or tetraploid offspring (read that not human in terms of chromosome count) have the same enhanced value as the diploid or “normal” human offspring?
RE the dog comment, our narcotics canine for example has more value to society than some people I have met. The narcotics canine serves a useful purpose, the strung out druggy with over a dozen felony convictions who turned somebody into Swiss cheese using a high-powered rifle does not. The same can be said for the various versions of gang-banging thugs.
Kind of hurts that you think somebody who you have minimal information on would be a better option than me, sort of like saying that playing the dating version of Russian roulette is better. Same for your comment regarding equating me with criminal defendants.
So, at the age of 39, what would I gain from recovering this “loving nature” that I have purportedly lost? I’m lonely, bitter, tired, and jaded, but pretty good at what I do. Not sure what a “loving nature” would do for me.
October 4, 2016 at 10:29 am #117161AnonymousGuestDear XenopusTex:
You measure human value in terms of usefulness to society. Therefore, a child has a potential value- if he becomes a useful-to-society person then he WILL have value some day. If he become useless and harmful to society then, he will be of no value. According to your understanding, a whole lot of people are worthless: children until they prove otherwise, people who are uneducated, have jobs that are not clearly helping society… the unemployed, those living off the grid, not to mentioned the handicapped. In your mind, the great majority of people are of no value, not only the criminals.
The way you view human worth leaves you a very “lonely, bitter, tired, and jaded” man because there are only a few people like you, worthy humans, in a sea of worthless humans.
Let’s look at what makes you worthy in your own mind: your job is one, being “pretty good at what (you) do”
Whenever you put away, in prison, a person who is harmful to society, you are indeed being useful, preventing that individual from further harming others. True.
But what is the usefulness in protecting a society of mostly worthless people?
You wondered “what a ‘loving nature’ would do for (you)”-
It will take away your “lonely, bitter, tired, and jaded” life experience.
When you are as unloving, un-empathetic as you are, you are and will be a bad choice for any woman (and one with a child!), no matter how many people you put in prison and how much money you earn, and the fact that you pay taxes and follow the law.
anita
October 4, 2016 at 8:38 pm #117218XenopusTexParticipantAnita, I have tried the empathy thing. Really cared about the last two women I was interested in, it hurt to see them hurt. End result was still the same.
The loneliness and emptiness keep me up at night at times. It has been a long time since I have felt happy, and the last couple of times I felt that way it was accompanied by crushing disappointment.
So, what would be a better choice for women?
October 5, 2016 at 10:34 am #117266AnonymousGuestDear XenopusTex:
A better choice for women?
At the very beginning of my communication with you I stressed the need to be selective as to who we associate with, who we attempt to have a relationship with, and to evaluate the person over time.
It is not a good policy to be empathetic to anyone and everyone at all times. It would be exhausting, for one. To be empathetic to a person who hurts you or is likely to hurt you is unnatural and against your self interest. In nature, that would translate to suicide.
So always evaluate, at the beginning and during: who is this person?
Thing is, you, XenopusTex, are inclined to think the worst of any person. That inclination is bound to be in your way, to cloud and distort your evaluation of the people who although are imperfect, are not bad people.
Back to your question, I will modify it then: What would be a better choice for a good woman (one who is empathetic to you, kind to you, honest with you, reliable and trustworthy, and otherwise imperfect)?
A better choice for her would be a man who is empathetic to her, kind to her, honest with her, reliable and trustworthy, although otherwise imperfect.
Oh, I forgot, the value topic: got to value the woman you get involved with; if you don’t value her, don’t get involved with her at all. And the value needs to be not for her occupation but for her empathy, kindness, honesty, reliability and trustworthiness.
anita
October 5, 2016 at 11:05 am #117270XenopusTexParticipantAnita, the frustrating thing is, have tried being empathetic, etc. and it didn’t seem to do any good. I really cared about those women. When I pretty much got told that I wasn’t good enough, I admit that I kind of stopped caring. In fact, I find it ironically amusing that the first woman who thought she found somebody better and thought that she was better than where she was working, now seems to be relationshipless and looking at being canned from her new position due to economic pressures. Her old position doesn’t exist anymore because they aren’t refilling the position when she left. No longer my concern if she finds herself unemployed and alone.
Will type more later.
October 5, 2016 at 7:54 pm #117300AnonymousGuestDear XenopusTex:
I didn’t know that any of the women told you that you weren’t good enough…? I thought you were late to the last date with the second woman, and she became involved with another. The first woman was not emotionally available to anyone, from my reading about her behavior.
As far as empathy- it shouldn’t be something to try and see if it works, a mean to an end. And besides, it may very well be that although you felt empathy for the two, you may not have expressed it and it didn’t get communicated. You may have that stern look, that rough look about you and the empathy didn’t come through.
Till your next post-
anita
October 5, 2016 at 10:33 pm #117310XenopusTexParticipantAnita, while I still stand by my statement that I was not late because I arrived at the time indicated by the conversation, I would note that the decision to move to somebody else is a decision based on whether a person things someone is good enough for them or not. People change jobs because they think something else might be better. People have affairs because the grass is greener on the other side of the fence. People move because they think living in the neighboring state/country/etc. would be better. Making a choice is a de facto statement that A is better than B.
If we were to agree to meet somewhere, and one of us didn’t show up “on time,” there would be many ways to analyze that. One would be being PO’ed about it. Another would be concern about reason for the untimeliness. Another would be looking at it as excrement happens and waiting a while to see what happens. Yet another would be to wonder if there was some confusion as to the date/time. Questions such as previous incidents, etc. would also be something to look at. She would have known that my general practice is to be early to things from when I worked with her in court, I don’t like waiting and hate to impose the same on others. Is it not a choice as to how one interprets something like that?
Tonight was supposed to meet with an acquaintance at about 5:15 PM and do a few things. The jury trial of mine that was supposed to go next week got reset due to not having enough time due to another case (not mine) spilling over into next week. The next trial folded up like a wet paper napkin. That left me with the third case, which had been mine. Due to these changes I was trying to meet with opposing counsel on the third case to sort out some issues, and was supposed to meet with him after 5:00 due to the massively overtime trial he had been in. He blew me off at about 5:30, could see me waiting while he was talking to his staff about the trial he was in, then decided that he was going to leave for the day (his stated MO is to delay and demand things in an attempt to bury the opposition). Finally met up with my acquaintance at about 6:00. Got an emergency call to deal with a decent sized problem at about 6:15. While there was somebody else still in the office when I got there who could have handled it in theory, nobody wants to call the person to solve problems (complains about the rare after-hours calls and takes forever to get problem addressed).
So, would something like that cause you to punt a potential relationship because a planned event didn’t occur?
Do I appear weak because of the lack of schedule control? Was I wrong to make myself available from the beginning of my career and to make an effort to have answers, compared to the people who supposedly don’t have answers and therefore aren’t bothered?
I wish I could express the internal stress of trying to figure out how to have a relationship. In many respects it is my most important desire. At this point, I really feel sort of like being on the outside looking in. Amusingly, a couple of years ago, my boss thought that I was probably one of the more eligible bachelors in town, combination of age, position, resources, etc.. Funny how that didn’t turn out. All I know is that I just keep getting older, and getting nowhere.
October 6, 2016 at 9:37 am #117345AnonymousGuestDear XenopusTex:
Regarding the second woman, I remember very well that you didn’t ask her for her cell phone number and then, you were very, very busy at work. You didn’t contact her for a long time. So she may not have gotten involved with the other man because she thought he was a better man but because he was AVAILABLE. You stated yourself that you are busier than you would like because other people take personal time and you fill in for them, and that he was one of those people!
Your second paragraph above is about how she could interpret you being late to the date with her (before you told her of the reason when you did show up)- your late arrival in combination with not asking for her phone number and not trying to contact her day after day and week after week (was it?) would translate to me a lack of motivation and/ or availability. Either lack of motivation or availability means the same thing- no hope there.
As to the rest of your last post, none of it changes my points above, in this very post to you. There is no Mr. justice-in-the-sky who will give you relationship points for being overly busy and for having an unpredictable schedule or for other people not doing their share of work. No credit. Fact is: you are unavailable for a relationship, that is all that matters in regard to you not having a relationship.
anita
October 6, 2016 at 10:52 am #117365XenopusTexParticipantAnita, I don’t miss the irony.
Maybe I should have tried emailing her. I didn’t think it would have been appropriate. I didn’t ask for her number because I was concerned about seeming pushy.
Will type more later.
October 6, 2016 at 11:58 am #117377AnonymousGuestDear XenopusTex:
Irony? I don’t know: I think I just stated the facts as I see them. I like facts, reality, the bare-minimum of what things are about.
About you being concerned about being pushy- my goodness, you were the farthest thing possible from being pushy. The way I read your posts at the time, you were pushing, only not in her direction, but in the opposite direction.
Till your next post-
anita
October 6, 2016 at 11:13 pm #117406XenopusTexParticipantAnita, what I meant was that I did not miss the irony of the fact that I probably contributed to his ability to have a relationship with the woman I wanted to. Hurts to see her look at him the way she used to look at me. I got a file that he was supposed to handle plopped back on my desk as something he didn’t want to address.
Kath mentioned resentfulness. A big part of it is that after a while, it it gets old being the go-to guy all the time when various promises were made about spreading out workload. At first, it felt good being sought after; now I am seeing how much of my life got wasted while others were out doing what they wanted to.
Have started to take steps to improve the time in office issue. For the first time in a long time, I told folks that I didn’t have time to meet with them today.
There is one woman who does show interest in me. She is from a law enforcement family and does analytical chemistry.
October 7, 2016 at 9:20 am #117423AnonymousGuestDear XenopusTex:
On my walk, after posting to you yesterday, I realized what you meant by the irony comment. Congratulations for asserting yourself at work, telling people you didn’t have time to meet them!
And this woman you mentioned, the third woman then: a law enforcement family and one engaged in analytical chemistry reads fitting to me, fitting you (you are definitely analytical, scientific, just-the-facts kind of a person and one who adheres to law personally and professionally).
And she shows interest in you. Are you going to do anything about this third woman?
anita
-
AuthorPosts