Where does she go?

I think there's an issue in intimacy being both something we can describe in relation to each individual or as something they share between them.

When describing I might accidentally flip between the three perspectives which is probably confusing

naps wrote:No, but I did have a very extroverted day. At noon I took out the garbage and then around seven thirty I looked out a window.

I meant to say when you brought it up, but I forgot: next time you feel that way, you should just do it

worst case, you'll remind yourself why you don't like it

solemnlysworn wrote:I suppose I'm not really interested in the idea of being able to share myself with others and so the underlying 'attachment' that keeps people together after heavy sexualisation doesnt work for me

the idea of having to move between intimate sexual and non-sexual contexts with the same person is one of the many things I bind baffling about sexual relationships

Treating another the way you want to be treated is the deluded empaths way of justifying being emotionally demanding while insulating themselves from any real intimacy. It's a self indulgent bubble that has nothing to do with love or real connection.

Everyone is unique. So unique it hurts with a blinding brilliance if you dare burn through the layers of cliches. How each individual responds is different. Assuming they like what you like is sticking them in a box of your own projections.

I think intimacy is discovering the other. Why base interactions from a place of desperate emotional or sexual need, when it can be based on curious, courageous discovery.

Using the other to fulfill ones own need for a high is not intimacy. For me that is objectification. As a male, I have had women infatuated with me. I felt like I wasn't even there at all. Am I an art piece that you can project your ideals of good and evil onto? It works both ways. Women do not have a monopoly on intimacy because objectification is commonly associated with the physical.

At the end of the day, we all want to be seen and heard and defined by another. To exist in another eyes in totality, all the light and dark, beauty and filth, there is nothing more interesting than that. To confuse this with parasitically getting illusory highs from each other is f*cking blasphemy.

Not even sorry for being so dramatic. It was fun.

I think intimacy is discovering the other. Why base interactions from a place of desperate emotional or sexual need, when it can be based on curious discovery.

I like this.

-- Thu Oct 25, 2018 10:44 pm --

To exist in another eyes in totality, all the light and dark, beauty and filth, there is nothing more interesting than that.

The converse of this reminds me of Oscar Wilde

“[..]Because to influence a person is to give him one's own soul.[..]"

The rest of the speech is irrelevant

sexual attraction is there to make you feel/act illogical

Thanks solemlysworn. I agree with the irrelevant part. It was more of me flexing my d1ck and taking a picture of it really. Not nearly as impressive as I thought it was. How embarrassing.

A side note:
I enjoy infatuation and drugs.
I could poop out an equally charged conviction from the other side but I suspect it would be too nauseating for the schizoids.
I don't actually have any beliefs about it one way or another. Guess that really does make my opinion empty.

Of Oscar Wilde's speech. Not yours. Your post was fun to read

I'm having issues directing comments to people properly today lol. My bad

^ no need to apologize, I felt a sudden excitement at being exposed as an irreverent fraud actually. I appear to have strong opinions but I'm secretly a hollow tube that turns food into poo too.

I've noticed that for me part of my intimacy with others is that they see through whatever fabricated layers and see that I'm not that different from a rapey dog that want's to f*ck and witness that as well. It's like someone undressing me. Being naked is dangerous against the elements, but also an intimate experience for me to be seen as whatever emptiness is underneath.

I'm sure many can relate to this as one of the aspects of real intimacy is the disclosure of truths, both beautiful and ugly and trust is a maintenance of these disclosures as the come.

Just be yourself isn't such a bland cliche after all, if I take into consideration of all the things I want to hide about myself as well.

This topic reads like a foreign language.

"Hi (John), (I) hope you had a good weekend. (I) am at ****** today. (Having a great time). (I) hope you have a good week' (If you want to meet again, let me know). (Take care)' X"

"Hi. Hope you had a good weekend. Am at ********* today. Have a good week"


I would write like her. I feel uncomfortable with people who use too much the name. It's sort of closer and more distance at the same time. Neither would i write a very clear sentence about a project of meeting or not.
You met, you got along well. She sends a little sign. She still doesn't know how it will be between you two. She flies a little, like a bird. Maybe you can fly with her. Then decide if meeting or something.