News:

Today, for a brief second, I thought of a life without Roger. It was much like my current life, except that this forum was a bit nicer.

Main Menu

Am I Being Selfish?

Started by POFP, August 26, 2016, 02:17:47 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

minuspace

I do not envy this and cannot answer your question to satisfaction: your position is probably more nuanced than most would be willing to relate to ATM.  Although I can pretend to understand and formulate a response, I must admit that part of me is trying to somehow retroactively advise a version of myself from a past life.  This is not meant to be disparaging.

Mesozoic Mister Nigel

Quote from: Fernando Poo on August 27, 2016, 08:06:57 PM
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on August 27, 2016, 07:54:11 PM
You didn't get the answer you wanted. :lol:

No, I got one that was based on reading only portions of what I wrote without the context that I outlined in the thread. I'm not going to sit here and be told how I feel about someone else. I shouldn't have to quote myself from earlier in the thread to refute your argument.

So go derail someone else's thread. Otherwise, change the title of this thread to "Walls and Walls of CATS."

Sorry, you're right; what you wrote totally is totally different from what everyone in this thread read and responded to. I'll change the title, since I can totally do that, and then I will proceed to never, ever comment on your posts because your tantrums are not hilarious at all.

:lol:
"I'm guessing it was January 2007, a meeting in Bethesda, we got a bag of bees and just started smashing them on the desk," Charles Wick said. "It was very complicated."


Mesozoic Mister Nigel

#32
Quote from: Fernando Poo on August 27, 2016, 07:03:22 PM

Nigel: I could understand if you were answering the question that the OP brings up, which is "Am I being Selfish?"

The answer is yes. You are demanding that someone who is trying to plan their future refrain from discussing commitment until after they commit. So, basically, you want her to not explore options or make plans until she has FIRST decided that she is 100% committed to you no matter what the circumstances. At age 19. And you are having an adorable little meltdown and insisting that every single person in this thread is simply misreading, ignoring, or misinterpreting what you have written.

Selfish, childish, spoiled, bratty, unreasonable, controlling, patronizing, assholish; whichever adjective you prefer, they all apply here.
"I'm guessing it was January 2007, a meeting in Bethesda, we got a bag of bees and just started smashing them on the desk," Charles Wick said. "It was very complicated."


Pergamos

Yes you are being selfish, but not or the reasons you think.  It's selfish of you to prioritize your career over the relationship and to expect her to do the same.  It's selfsh of you to insist that she not express her dreams regarding both marriage/kids and career.  You can be the voice of reason that says "well, we can't do both those things because I am on the career track I want to be on here and don't think i will be if we move" but that doesn't mean you should expect her not to talk about it.  I suspect her responding that you might have to break up was due to anger over your approach as much as a lack of attachment.

POFP

Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on August 27, 2016, 10:11:33 PM
Quote from: Fernando Poo on August 27, 2016, 08:06:57 PM
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on August 27, 2016, 07:54:11 PM
You didn't get the answer you wanted. :lol:

No, I got one that was based on reading only portions of what I wrote without the context that I outlined in the thread. I'm not going to sit here and be told how I feel about someone else. I shouldn't have to quote myself from earlier in the thread to refute your argument.

So go derail someone else's thread. Otherwise, change the title of this thread to "Walls and Walls of CATS."

Sorry, you're right; what you wrote totally is totally different from what everyone in this thread read and responded to. I'll change the title, since I can totally do that, and then I will proceed to never, ever comment on your posts because your tantrums are not hilarious at all.

:lol:

Actually, literally EVERYONE ELSE seemed to say completely civilized things, and helpful things about the discussion (QG was slightly mean for a moment, but made it obvious that she was not intending to be completely hostile.). You decided to assume a context that I blatantly disagreed with from the beginning (And many times throughout the thread), and decided to attack me based on that context. That context being that I don't care much for my girlfriend, which is 1. Crossing a fucking line, seeing as how you can't even begin to claim that you know ANYTHING about me, or my relationship with my girlfriend, or how deeply I care about her, and 2. Completely contradicted by the context outlined in the posts you obviously didn't read.

Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on August 27, 2016, 10:18:01 PM
Quote from: Fernando Poo on August 27, 2016, 07:03:22 PM

Nigel: I could understand if you were answering the question that the OP brings up, which is "Am I being Selfish?"

The answer is yes. You are demanding that someone who is trying to plan their future refrain from discussing commitment until after they commit. So, basically, you want her to not explore options or make plans until she has FIRST decided that she is 100% committed to you no matter what the circumstances. At age 19. And you are having an adorable little meltdown and insisting that every single person in this thread is simply misreading, ignoring, or misinterpreting what you have written.

Selfish, childish, spoiled, bratty, unreasonable, controlling, patronizing, assholish; whichever adjective you prefer, they all apply here.

I'm only insisting that YOU are misreading, ignoring, and misinterpreting what I have written. Who in their right mind would consider marrying someone who was willing to leave you for a better job? Who in their right mind would consider marrying someone who hasn't hardly even started their career, yet, when you know they plan to? Who in their right mind would consider marriage with someone if they weren't sure they could be with the other person in just a few years (And they aren't dying)? If wanting both partners to be realistic about their expectations of the relationship makes me a selfish, childish asshole, then I'll wear that label on every forum I visit.

Quote from: Pergamos on August 27, 2016, 10:19:53 PM
Yes you are being selfish, but not or the reasons you think.  It's selfish of you to prioritize your career over the relationship and to expect her to do the same.  It's selfsh of you to insist that she not express her dreams regarding both marriage/kids and career.  You can be the voice of reason that says "well, we can't do both those things because I am on the career track I want to be on here and don't think i will be if we move" but that doesn't mean you should expect her not to talk about it.  I suspect her responding that you might have to break up was due to anger over your approach as much as a lack of attachment.

I assume you meant "Not to do the same."

All I did was suggest to her that I would have to start out from scratch again, and that the real estate there is much different than where we are. I just expressed that it would be difficult if we had to move out there. That's not manipulation. That's a fact. An expression of my feelings. She responded with an implication that we would probably break up in the event that I wasn't able to live out there with her.

That is a demonstration that she prioritized the career over me regardless of whether I were to be out there with her. I'm not going to consider or talk about marriage or kids with someone who does not take family to be her highest priority at the time. I told her we could talk about those things once she was capable of having those priorities, and that there was nothing wrong with that. I told her that there are 0 hard feelings about being truthful and realistic about that. And again, if that makes me a selfish, childish asshole, then so be it. I'm not going to risk putting a child through what I went through because I considered commitment with someone who wasn't capable of being committed yet. If that makes me a piece of shit, then I'll wear that label like a suit of fucking armor.

The thing is, I did plan on going out there with her no matter what I had to sacrifice. I was putting everything out on the table that was important to consider, and she showed me what was important to her at this point in time. I'm not upset with her about that. There's absolutely nothing wrong with that. It hurts, but it's something I'll have to live with. What I'm upset with, is the implication that she is dedicated enough to consider marriage and/or children before we're even over that hill.
This Certified Pope™ reserves the Right to, on occasion, "be a complete dumbass", and otherwise ponder "idiotic" and/or "useless" ideas and other such "tomfoolery." [Aforementioned] are only responsible for the results of these actions and tendencies when they have had their addictive substance of choice for that day.

Being a Product of their Environment's Collective Order and Disorder, [Aforementioned] also reserves the Right to have their ideas, technologies, and otherwise all Intellectual Property stolen, re-purposed, and re-attributed at Will ONLY by other Certified Popes. Corporations, LLC's, and otherwise Capitalist-based organizations are NOT capable of being Certified Popes.

Battering Rams not included.

Pergamos

No,  I meant to do the same.  You expect her to move out there and discard the relationship.

POFP

Quote from: Pergamos on August 27, 2016, 11:53:51 PM
No,  I meant to do the same.  You expect her to move out there and discard the relationship.

Her intention is to take that job offer at all costs, and I support that sentiment.
This Certified Pope™ reserves the Right to, on occasion, "be a complete dumbass", and otherwise ponder "idiotic" and/or "useless" ideas and other such "tomfoolery." [Aforementioned] are only responsible for the results of these actions and tendencies when they have had their addictive substance of choice for that day.

Being a Product of their Environment's Collective Order and Disorder, [Aforementioned] also reserves the Right to have their ideas, technologies, and otherwise all Intellectual Property stolen, re-purposed, and re-attributed at Will ONLY by other Certified Popes. Corporations, LLC's, and otherwise Capitalist-based organizations are NOT capable of being Certified Popes.

Battering Rams not included.

LMNO

Quote from: Fernando Poo on August 26, 2016, 02:17:47 AM
Is it selfish to want your significant other to avoid talking about marriage or kids if they are willing to give up that possibility for a long-distance, permanent job offer?

Because I don't have a problem with my girlfriend taking the job offer if it possibly means us not being together. I couldn't live with myself if I found out that I kept her from a successful job offer she considered. But is it selfish to want her to NOT bring up the idea of permanent commitments if she is willing to take that job at all costs? Could you marry or have kids with someone who would be willing to give that up for a job offer that ends your relationship? Am I just being an asshole?

I'm taking this back to the OP, because I feel like it can be broken down into fundamental components and questions.

Premises:
1. Girlfriend (GF) has a potential long distance job offer (JO).
2. Fernando Poo (FP) is employed locally.
3. GF wants to talk about marriage (Long Term Commitment 1 (LTC1)).
4. GF wants to talk about kids (Long Term Commitment 2 (LTC2)).

Assumptions (made by FP):
1. FP wants GF to take the JO if offered.
2. If GF takes the JO, the relationship will be over.

Questions posed:
1. Is it selfish to want GF not to talk about LTC1 or LTC2 if accepting JO precludes either?
2. Could the audience accept a similar scenario themselves?
3. Does FP asking Question 1 make him an asshole?

Analysis:
1. LTC1 and LTC2 are vastly different types of commitment.
2. JO does not automatically imply LTC1 and LTC2 are impossible.  Anecdotal evidence and relationship statistics show, I believe, that long-distance relationships are or can be stabilized by LTC1, if not LTC2.
3. Basic relationship guidelines generally say that a healthy relationship is made with more, not less, communication.
4. FP seems to have an unspoken belief that he is unwilling to enter into a long-distance relationship, based on Assumption 2.
5. GF appears to be weighing her decision in part on whether LTC1 or LTC2 will be possible if she takes JO.

Conclusions/Answers:
1. FP is being selfish for not wanting GF to talk about LTC1 or LTC2 if she takes JO.
         --Based on Assumption 1 and Analysis 3 and 5, FP is creating a scenario where a decision cannot be reached, extending the relationship status quo, however unhappily for GF.
2. Personally, this audience member rejects Assumption 2, therefore the question is invalid.
3. FP may not be an asshole, if Conclusion 1 was not understood initially.  If Conclusion 1 is understood, then yes.

Mesozoic Mister Nigel

One thing that is not clear from the scenario as it has been described to this point is whether the GF is aware of FP's intention to terminate the relationship if she accepts the JO. Clearly, moving conflicts with his career plans, and he is choosing to prioritize his career over making the move to be with her. Does she know this? Or does she continue to talk about the possibility of long-term commitment because she is unclear on this?
"I'm guessing it was January 2007, a meeting in Bethesda, we got a bag of bees and just started smashing them on the desk," Charles Wick said. "It was very complicated."


LMNO

Agreed.  I made a go-ahead assumption that because FP did not want GF to talk about LTC1 or 2 and since we do not have her input/perspective, he had not yet communicated to her how he would be have if she accepted JO.

Also, because the initial question did not include, "do you think it's appropriate to terminate the relationship if she moves away?", I did not include it in my answers.  My answer would be a tentative "No", if such an question were posed, due to analysis 1, 2, and 5.

POFP

Yup. At this point, the issue has been vastly over-complicated to the point of exerting more energy than necessary to discuss.

It's been made clear that I made no indication in any way shape or form that I would terminate the relationship in any scenario. She was the one who made the implication that that was a possibility given the scenario I provided, which was simply that I would have to start my career over.

It's also been made very clear that she understands all of the arguments that I've made in this thread, and knows all of my thoughts on the matter.

At this point, her and I are over the situation and have made our decisions. I'm going to start back at square one, as long as she is ok with me taking the first few months of living there to dedicate every second of my time to improving my work position. With this decision, the contemplation of LTC 1 and 2 are realistic again.

What made me fight the contemplation of the LTC 1 and 2 was her immediate assumption and acceptance of the relationship ending in the scenario I gave to her.
Fact: When something is priority number 1, it is not given up over something else.
Fact: I will not consider LTC 1 and 2 with someone if those things are not Priority 1. No hard feelings. I've seen the result of such considerations many times before. It doesn't end well for anyone.

Quote from: LMNO on August 29, 2016, 06:56:22 PM
Also, because the initial question did not include, "do you think it's appropriate to terminate the relationship if she moves away?", I did not include it in my answers.  My answer would be a tentative "No", if such an question were posed, due to analysis 1, 2, and 5.

This is irrelevant in this case, but that question depends entirely on the relationship. If neither people are capable of long-term relationships, or want one, then it wouldn't be inappropriate to end the relationship on that assumption. Analyses 1, 2, and 5 are completely subjective and/or situational.

Analysis 4 is false by the fact that I made it very clear what my stance was on the possibility of a long-distance relationship (Avidly against).

And she feels the same way (This was not stated, but I am stating it now.)


Now that we're done inventing bullshit to fight me on, let's move on with our lives, shall we?
This Certified Pope™ reserves the Right to, on occasion, "be a complete dumbass", and otherwise ponder "idiotic" and/or "useless" ideas and other such "tomfoolery." [Aforementioned] are only responsible for the results of these actions and tendencies when they have had their addictive substance of choice for that day.

Being a Product of their Environment's Collective Order and Disorder, [Aforementioned] also reserves the Right to have their ideas, technologies, and otherwise all Intellectual Property stolen, re-purposed, and re-attributed at Will ONLY by other Certified Popes. Corporations, LLC's, and otherwise Capitalist-based organizations are NOT capable of being Certified Popes.

Battering Rams not included.

The Good Reverend Roger

I have always said that this is the best place on the internet to get advice.
" It's just that Depeche Mode were a bunch of optimistic loveburgers."
- TGRR, shaming himself forever, 7/8/2017

"Billy, when I say that ethics is our number one priority and safety is also our number one priority, you should take that to mean exactly what I said. Also quality. That's our number one priority as well. Don't look at me that way, you're in the corporate world now and this is how it works."
- TGRR, raising the bar at work.

The Good Reverend Roger

The next time you get the urge to do something like that, may I suggest you instead just squeeze your testicles until you remember that you are unlovable and deserve nothing.

It's the same thing, only without people lining up to shit on you.


" It's just that Depeche Mode were a bunch of optimistic loveburgers."
- TGRR, shaming himself forever, 7/8/2017

"Billy, when I say that ethics is our number one priority and safety is also our number one priority, you should take that to mean exactly what I said. Also quality. That's our number one priority as well. Don't look at me that way, you're in the corporate world now and this is how it works."
- TGRR, raising the bar at work.

POFP

This is the best place to get advice, and plenty of people did so in this thread. Including you.

But I'm not going to play nice if all someone is doing is giving me a load of shit because they decided they didn't want to read anything I said in the thread.
This Certified Pope™ reserves the Right to, on occasion, "be a complete dumbass", and otherwise ponder "idiotic" and/or "useless" ideas and other such "tomfoolery." [Aforementioned] are only responsible for the results of these actions and tendencies when they have had their addictive substance of choice for that day.

Being a Product of their Environment's Collective Order and Disorder, [Aforementioned] also reserves the Right to have their ideas, technologies, and otherwise all Intellectual Property stolen, re-purposed, and re-attributed at Will ONLY by other Certified Popes. Corporations, LLC's, and otherwise Capitalist-based organizations are NOT capable of being Certified Popes.

Battering Rams not included.

Q. G. Pennyworth

Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on August 30, 2016, 03:00:18 AM
The next time you get the urge to do something like that, may I suggest you instead just squeeze your testicles until you remember that you are unlovable and deserve nothing.

It's the same thing, only without people lining up to shit on you.

Is it better if we don't queue?