The separator between the comment pane and the story pane is moveable. Drag it up or down if you need more room to read on the screen.
From: Jeff Zephyr
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: Wed, 07 Nov 2001 12:11:06 -0600
On 05 Nov 2001 21:44:30 GMT, desdmona22@aol.com (Desdmona22) wrote:
The following is story # 16. Mat has generously offered this story for our discussion. Fish Tank guidelines apply:
I liked the sweet romanticism throughout the start. The anniversary presents were very well done.
I liked how the ending half was done, but can't say that I "enjoyed" it. I'm not usually one for sad stories, though the message about losing your way - which happened rapidly, both failed to keep thing on track after the sad events, rather than making some effort to keep things going, or restore them. Of it, I really liked how Wendy acted. I agree with her about poor Edward.
I'd like a happy ending. But I wouldn't count that one as a negative, because there are fine reasons to do sad stories in this world.
I can't think of any real big negatives. I'd like a bit more detail in some of the sex scenes, but that may be just taste in sex stories. A romantic tale doesn't really have to have that, but this one is very suggestive about the sex parts. Oh, I know, there isn't a sad not quite working well sex scene near the end, after Edward knows but still goes to bed with his wife.
Jeff
Web site at http://www.asstr.org/~jeffzephyr/ For FTP, ftp://ftp.asstr.org/pub/Authors/jeffzephyr/
There is nothing more important than petting the cat.
From: PleaseCain
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: 09 Nov 2001 05:21:56 GMT
This is a difficult story. It has a creeping, unsettling power, and nailed me in the breadbasket.
The imagery is beautiful, the way the scarves "wrap around her spin" and the pale clouds stretch across the twilight. The sexual scenes with the scarves and at the writing desk are celebratory and jovial and firmly planted their relationship in my mind. Also, from just dialogue, the Wendy Jefferson character is well-defined, not a false note sounded.
My suggestion would be to protract the 'souring' (nice word?) process just a bit more, add one more rung to the ladder, so to speak, because as it stands, we are presented with a sniping argument in the wake of the miscarriage, followed by a summer frustrated by an unsuccessful job search, after which the doubts or infidelities are fully manifested; the sweet relationship turns bitter in a span of, say, four months, which admittedly is sufficient time for a relationship to change, but in terms of the total length of the story it seems like the flip of a card. Well, a few cards anyway.
But I'm not for lollygagging, no. Use this additional interlude to drop in a few more details about our couple, and you can't go wrong. I want more of both of them, and you will have a perfect story.
A couple of ticky-tackies: "Hello, Mrs. Pelz, this is Wendy Jefferson. Conrad's husband ..." "Husband" should be "wife," correct? Or am I reading this wrong? And the ellipses are inconsistent, three dots or four dots - my bit of anal proofreading for the day.
The open-ended conclusion really made me think, and then rethink the story preceding it. The way you define the action as a question of parallax, the relative perspectives of the different characters, is truly special, and executed like a pro.
Cain
From: Always Horny
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: Fri, 09 Nov 2001 09:17:00 +0100
I hated the story. Don't think it is fair to put it out here like this, not without some serious warning coding.
If the story had been coded properly I could prolly find something positive to say about how thoroughly the destructive drive is engineered. Without warning, it just feels like a getaway.
Yuck.
Des, I really wish you would warn readers when you put out something like this. Especially since this isn't the first time.
AH
A_H_01 at hotmail. com
t
From: Desdmona
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: 09 Nov 2001 13:41:00 GMT
The Fish Tank #16 The Way to Pittsburgh by Mat Twassel
I found this story to be poignant. It stirs emotions. It's so well written that it rips at my heart at the outcome of a couple that I liked.
It's a story about adultery. And adultery isn't pretty. We can write fluffy pieces about cheating on our spouses, but in real life cheating results in hurt. Deep hurt that doesn't go away. We have to live with the guilt of our actions if we're the adulterer, and the pain of it if we're the injured party. It happens! It's life! It stinks!
My gut feeling was I wanted Edward to get revenge. Maybe not by the typical solution of bedding Wendy, (which he tries and it fails) but maybe by using the scarves and tying Miranda up with them and then reading the love notes she wrote to her lover to her ... I wanted Miranda to suffer like Edward was suffering. Maybe if I see her suffer just a little, I'd feel better about the story as a whole. In fact, one idea is to have Edward read the love notes, but not let the reader actually see what is written in them until he's reading them aloud to Miranda.
But in the end what I want isn't the determining factor; the determining factor is the characters. The characterization is so well done that after thinking about it, I realize that Edward's character wouldn't want revenge. His character would probably prefer not even to know about it. And it may be simpler for Edward to pretend it didn't happen, so his life isn't put in turmoil. Denial is a well-used reaction to grief.
Do I like the way the story ends? No, I don't. I hate that Edward is so hurt. And that just may be the key to this story - that strong emotion it evokes in me.
Thanks Mat, for allowing us a chance to read such an evocative story.
From: Desdmona
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: 09 Nov 2001 13:16:30 GMT
From: Always.Horny@no.spam.thanks (Always Horny)
Des, I really wish you would warn readers when you put out something like this. Especially since this isn't the first time.
The first thing I'd like to say is, it isn't my place to code stories that are posted to the FishTank. The stories are not written by me, and my perceptions on how/if they should be coded are simply not valid. It is up to the author to make that decision.
There are some authors that do not like to have their stories coded. We must respect their wishes. And there are some readers who absolutely will not read stories that are not coded. We must respect their choices.
If an author chooses to write a story and not code it then the author has to accept that there will be people who will not read it because it isn't coded.
If a reader chooses not to read a story that is not coded, then the reader has to accept that there will be great stories that he/she has missed.
Their are always consequences to our decisions and our choices.
Having said that, even if I were to code this particular story, I wouldn't have coded it "caution" I might have coded it "cheat" but I can't even promise that I would have done that.
And there's the rub about coding - AH, you think it needs to be coded caution and I don't. Where does the decision lie? It has to be the author's choice.
I'm sorry AH found the story offensive. I did not, but I'll go into my story comments in another post.
I can only suggest, AH, that in the future, if a story isn't coded, then you can choose not to read and comment on it. And the author will have to understand why there is no comments from you.
Thanks,
Des
From: Vinnie Tesla
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: Fri, 09 Nov 2001 14:22:36 GMT
I feel like context is relevant here too. We're supposed to be reading Fishtank stories with an eye to craft and editorial considerations - not for pure readerly satisfaction (eaugh - sounds like a soft drink ad - "Pure readerly satisfacton in every can!").
Since the difference between Pittsburgh and a great many popular ASS stories was stylistic rather than thematic, it seems reasonable to expect readers to be able to handle the subject.
On 09 Nov 2001 13:16:30 GMT, desdmona22@aol.com (Desdmona22) wrote:
From: Always.Horny@no.spam.thanks (Always Horny)
Des, I really wish you would warn readers when you put out something like this.
...
And there's the rub about coding - AH, you think it needs to be coded caution and I don't. Where does the decision lie? It has to be the author's choice.
From: Always Horny
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: Fri, 09 Nov 2001 18:34:22 +0100
Hi Des
On re-reading myself I think I just was pissed yesterday when I read the story, and my post came out harsher than I meant it.
You're right that I do not read any story that is not coded in ASS or ASSM and I am happy this way.
If you don't want to warn the readers when the FT stories are not the expected "normal" sexy sex story, that is your right. In that case I'll just skip those stories, since IME the risk of getting into something that is actually very unpleasant is too high for my taste.
Besides, I guess I was really angry at Matt for misleading the reader, pulling a con, and (as Anoninsac said well) indulging in "hell of a way to screw with the reader's emotions". I definitely feel that Matt plays a dirty trick here. But it came out as directed to you and that is not what I meant.
Separately, if I were to warn readers about this story, I would not use a code. (Uther might chime in here, but I don't really see a code that is appropriate, except maybe CUCKOLD, which would be misleading anyway). I'd prolly just add a warning about the story being DARK, GLOOMY, or something like this.
AH
A_H_01 at hotmail. com
From: Jeff Zephyr
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: Fri, 09 Nov 2001 12:55:26 -0600
On Fri, 09 Nov 2001 18:34:22 +0100, Always.Horny@no.spam.thanks (Always Horny) wrote:
Hi Des
On re-reading myself I think I just was pissed yesterday when I read the story, and my post came out harsher than I meant it.
You're right that I do not read any story that is not coded in ASS or ASSM and I am happy this way.
If you don't want to warn the readers when the FT stories are not the expected "normal" sexy sex story, that is your right. In that case I'll just skip those stories, since IME the risk of getting into something that is actually very unpleasant is too high for my taste.
Besides, I guess I was really angry at Matt for misleading the reader, pulling a con, and (as Anoninsac said well) indulging in "hell of a way to screw with the reader's emotions". I definitely feel that Matt plays a dirty trick here. But it came out as directed to you and that is not what I meant.
OK, I can see that. The unhappy turn of the tale isn't one of the things in the general story coding, but it is something that can be a bit disappointing.
For the Fish Tank, I don't think it matters all that much, but in posting, maybe a warning for unhappy endings is a worthy thing?
Separately, if I were to warn readers about this story, I would not use a code. (Uther might chime in here, but I don't really see a code that is appropriate, except maybe CUCKOLD, which would be misleading anyway). I'd prolly just add a warning about the story being DARK, GLOOMY, or something like this.
Jeff
Web site at http://www.asstr.org/~jeffzephyr/ For FTP, ftp://ftp.asstr.org/pub/Authors/jeffzephyr/
There is nothing more important than petting the cat.
From: PleaseCain
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: 09 Nov 2001 19:16:11 GMT
You're way out of line. This one tiny bit of bandwidth is a sanctuary to encourage better writing. Contributors offer their unfinished work for critique, free of charge, to improve their skills and perpetuate the group.
The key words are: volunteer, free, and improvement.
Having generously exposed their personal work, they do not need to be insulted. Especially by non-contributors.
You could easily have framed your misgivings into constructive points. So next time try counting to 20 and coming back with a little bit of perspective.
Cain
From: Poison Ivan
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2001 00:32:23 -0500
"Always Horny" wrote ...
If the story had been coded properly I could prolly find something
positive to
say about how thoroughly the destructive drive is engineered. Without warning, it just feels like a getaway.
Yuck.
I agree and disagree. Yuck. Yes, yuck. Very much so. Rarely have I read a story where I felt so sorry for a character.
But I disagree about that it "just feels like a getaway" (although I may be misunderstanding what you mean). The power of this story comes from how we see Miranda and Edward treat each other, and to me, there were problems from the very beginning. I could tell in the first couple paragraphs that something was wrong here.
I'm going to break the rules and not list two positives and two negatives for this story. When I read this story, I jotted down a few notes about what I was thinking. So, instead of the usual Fish Tank fare, here's what I was thinking when I read the story though the first time.
It's all about anniversary presents. But there is something a little bit off with Edward's presents. Miranda doesn't quite "get" them. She doesn't seem to appreciate them. She doesn't know what to think of the scarves, and I have to admit, it seems like a funny gift to me, too. Was Edward clueless? Of course they are practically newlyweds, so you can't expect Edward to give a perfect gift on the first try. But Miranda's response seems reserved, as if she dislikes the gift but doesn't want Edward to know she dislikes it. I came away from the opening scene with a slight dislike for Miranda, and a suspicion that Edward might be a little bit clueless.
My hopes for Edward improved in the next two years. I thought the bicycles were a great gift, and the stationery, pen, and writing desk were wonderful. He's coming around, I told myself. But I was disappointed again by Miranda. Why isn't she more enthusiastic? These are cool gifts, woman! Personal, thoughtful, ... what more could you ask for? And then the "Only ... " thing in her note, about not having room for the desk in the nursery - what a crummy thing to say.
Everything gets complicated when she has the miscarriage, and then he loses his job. You can feel the tensions rise. Edward really screwed up with his remark about "Maybe it's for the best. That we lost the baby, I mean." Now Miranda has good reason to be angry, and their relationship is in a very bad place.On the positive side, Edward finally "fought back" a little when he wanted to go to Pittsburgh. I wonder: he's a little out of character; as he matures, is he getting a little backbone, or has the difficultly of their relationship just made everyone too irritable and stressed?
Of course he backs down on Pittsburgh, and I am disappointed in Edward. And then he discovers her in the parking lot with another man, and I know Miranda is having an affair. I'm angry at her. How could you cheat on this nice husband of yours? Well, I suspect she jsut doesn't have much respect for him. Is the lack of respect Edward's fault? Is he too passive? I suppose that could be some of it, but I blame Miranda more. Edward adores her. Edward is sometimes awkward in the way he shows her how much he loves her, but is that a reason to lose respect for your husband?
The discussion when Miranda gets home from the parking lot is creepy. I wanted him to confront her, accuse her. But I didn't think he would. And no surprises: he didn't. And she piles on the damaging remarks: she just wants to take a shower, she lost her anniversary pen. Poor, dear Edward.
The stuff with Wendy Jefferson just clarifies the situation. Edward holds out for hope against all the odds, but the sexually explicit note puts an end to his denial. Written on the stationery he gave her for their anniversary! Jabs about his underware! I wonder how much more of this Edward can take.
Finally he is so hurt he wants to hurt back. Unfortunately (or fortunately?), Wendy isn't available any more.
There's the final "show down" with Miranda, where Edward makes her lie over and over again. He brings up all those anniversay presents, all those "symbols" of his love. You have to wonder how Miranda can take it. I felt like crying."I think you're the best fuck," is an amazing sentence. Rarely have I read more hollow words.
I can't say I would change a single word. It's not often I get emotional reading a sex story, but this one really tugged at my heart.
Great job, Mat.
Poison Ivan
From: Uther Pendragon
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2001 08:32:56 GMT
desdmona22@aol.com (Desdmona22) wrote
From: Always.Horny@no.spam.thanks (Always Horny)
Des, I really wish you would warn readers when you put out something like this. Especially since this isn't the first time.
The first thing I'd like to say is, it isn't my place to code stories that are posted to the FishTank. The stories are not written by me, and my perceptions on how/if they should be coded are simply not valid. It is up to the author to make that decision.
There are some authors that do not like to have their stories coded.
And Mat is notoriously one of that number.
We must respect their wishes. And there are some readers who absolutely will not read stories that are not coded. We must respect their choices.
[snip]
Having said that, even if I were to code this particular story, I wouldn't have coded it "caution" I might have coded it "cheat" but I can't even promise that I would have done that.
(cheat) makes a little sense. I don't see where (caution) would come from.
Uther Pendragon FAQs http://www.nyx.net/~anon584c anon584c@nyx.net fiqshn http://www.asstr.org/~Uther_Pendragon
From: Uther Pendragon
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2001 08:33:25 GMT
desdmona22@aol.com (Desdmona22) wrote:
The following is story # 16.
Mat has generously offered this story for our discussion. Fish Tank guidelines apply:
1) 2 positive comments
1 This is a Twassel story. By which I mean that he sets the mood perfectly.
2 We really see these characters.
2) 2 things to improve
I can see so much of the characters, but not the critical questions.
A Why did Miranda cheat?
B What was Edward's response?
Uther Pendragon FAQs http://www.nyx.net/~anon584c anon584c@nyx.net fiqshn http://www.asstr.org/~Uther_Pendragon
From: Mat Twassel
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: 10 Nov 2001 17:00:29 GMT
Thanks to all who responded to "The Way to Pittsburgh," and a special thanks to Desdmona for organizing and administering The Fish Tank.
To Anoninsac, who wrote:
The language pulls you in and opens you up to the emotional impact of the story.
I'm glad it worked that way for you even if it pissed you off. Maybe I will try writing a story that turns the other way, that starts out sad and ends up happy. Can an adultery story go that way? I'm sure there are happy instances of adultery out there somewhere. Something to think about. Until then, Hecate's randomizer should share some of the blame - this was my ASSM Anniversary Game theme story. The final version, which hasn't changed too much from the Fish Tank version, is on ASSM now.
To Jeff who wrote:
I'd like a bit more detail in some of the sex scenes, but that may be just taste in sex stories. A romantic tale doesn't really have to have that, but this one is very suggestive about the sex parts. Oh, I know, there isn't a sad not quite working well sex scene near the end, after Edward knows but still goes to bed with his wife.
Good suggestions, I think. I think, too, that I consciously kept the sex between Edward and Miranda a bit bland or vague or distant in order to contrast it to the explicit sex in Miranda's letter. The other thing is that Edward's despair is not meant to be fully about sex so much as about togetherness. Even so, if done right that last sex scene, as Jeff suggests, could be just the thing.
To AH who wrote:
I hated the story. Don't think it is fair to put it out here like this, not without some serious warning coding ... it just feels like a getaway. I was really angry at Matt for misleading the reader.
Sorry, AH. I didn't mean to mislead the reader. I'm not quite sure what you mean by "getaway." I recognize that I will lose some readers and offend others by not coding my stories. If there are no codes, I'm not quite sure why you'd make any assumptions about the story, other than it has to do with sex. Isn't that fair? I do agree that there are lots of good reasons for story coding. I mean, most people going to a restaurant don't just say to the waiter, give me some dinner; they look at the menu, they decide what they're in the mood for. On the other hand, if you trust the chef, maybe you'd just like him to serve you according to his pleasure. Mm, food, good food, who cares whether it's fish or veal as long as it's fresh and prepared to perfection? I know, there are some vegetarians among us, and there are those who can't abide veal for "humanitarian" reasons. Once we get past the story code issue, I am tempted to take your criticism for a compliment. If the story were poorly done, perhaps it wouldn't have had to power to bring about your reaction.
To PleaseCain who wrote:
My suggestion would be to protract the 'souring' (nice word?) process just a bit more
I appreciate this suggestion. In truth I'm not sure whether the whole thing was gradual or abrupt. I believe it was a little of both. In any event, when we look back, we wonder: How did this happen? Where did we go wrong? What could we have done differently? I guess I'm talking about both the story and the story.
Thanks also for catching Wendy's mistake. If it weren't a mistake, that would make the story really strange, wouldn't it? Despite her emotions, Wendy would not likely call herself a husband instead of a wife, would she?
Regarding the ellipses, I agree that it's probably bad form to end a sentence without some terminal mark. And yet if the sentence leaves off ...? I also wonder if I overuse ellipses. So often my characters are unable to complete their sentences ... or they get interrupted. I'll try to cut down. I promise.
To Desdmona, who wrote so many nice things.
Regarding:
My gut feeling was I wanted Edward to get revenge. Maybe not by the typical solution of bedding Wendy, (which he tries and it fails) but maybe by using the scarves and tying Miranda up with them and then reading the love notes she wrote to her lover to her ... I wanted Miranda to suffer like Edward was suffering. Maybe if I see her suffer just a little, I'd feel better about the story as a whole. In fact, one idea is to have Edward read the love notes, but not let the reader actually see what is written in them until he's reading them aloud to Miranda. [ ...] after thinking about it, I realize that Edward's character wouldn't want revenge.
I agree. We think alike. Yay! When I first conceived this story, my intention was to put in a scene much as you describe. And I think it could be an excellent scene, but finally I just couldn't see Edward doing it. Actually, my idea was that Edward was going to tie Wendy to the bed with the scarves and have Miranda discover her, but your variation, if I were to go that way, is much better.
To Vinnie, who wrote:
Since the difference between Pittsburgh and a great many popular ASS stories was stylistic rather than thematic, it seems reasonable to expect readers to be able to handle the subject.
Thanks. Looking forward to more Fish Tank stuff from you.
To Uther, who wrote:
I can see so much of the characters, but not the critical questions.
A Why did Miranda cheat?
B What was Edward's response?
I wouldn't mind seeing this story from Miranda's point of view. Even then, though, I'm not sure it would answer question A. My short answer is: Miranda cheated because of who she was, who Edward was, and other circumstances. Anyway, it's a good question. Is it essential to this story? Is it critical as long as you have no reason to believe that it's impossible? Any thoughts on how the story should go about answering it? Edward's response may have seemed minimal, but that's most of what the end of the story was (or was meant to be). So I conclude that for you the story failed. To answer B, what do you think the story needed?
To Poison Ivan, who wrote so much wonderful stuff:
Thanks for getting it. You make the story sound better than it probably was, but I'm deeply grateful and pleased to have your reaction.
Thanks!
- Mat Twassel
From: Poison Ivan
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2001 15:28:04 -0500
"mat twassel" wrote ...
Thanks for getting it. You make the story sound better than it probably was, but I'm deeply grateful and pleased to have your reaction.
This makes me a little bit curious.
I've had readers write to me and say, "I liked this and that and such and such," which is all very nice, but sometimes the readers didn't "get it." At least they didn't get it in the sense that I hoped they would get it.
I used to consider it a failure on my part if someone read the wrong thing into a story I wrote. I suppose that's one way I've changed over the years. These days I'm more apt to say, "Well, isn't that an interesting reaction."
Poison Ivan
^ now thinks all responses are interesting
From: Always Horny
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2001 19:09:26 +0100
mat twassel wrote:
Sorry, AH. I didn't mean to mislead the reader. I'm not quite sure what you mean by "getaway." I recognize that I will lose some readers and offend others by not coding my stories.
In ASS or ASSM I don't even look at stories not coded. I made an exception for the FT, and that particular time I was sorry I did.
I meant "getaway" as in ambush, or sting. Maybe I'm not clear. I'll try an other metaphor: you go to a theater that usually shows movies for kids, like Disney's, and you watch a film that starts like Snow White or Bambi. But suddenly the film switches to horror a la Alien. That is how I felt that you set the reader up.
I am tempted to take your criticism for a compliment.
Definitely. Your horror movie was perfectly effective. Great job.
It is just that for my taste this type of story is about as attractive as food perfectly cooked to taste sour and rotten. It does appeal to some people, but ... To rate the story like Celeste, I'd give "technical realization: excellent", and "appeal to me as a reader: terrible".
I'm a silly and simple guy: for me sex stories are supposed to be sexy. My country boy origins, maybe. That's why I would expect a word of caution when something this different is posted. But maybe that is your usual style of writing and I just don't know it. (if you never code your stories I prolly never read one)
No hard feeling meant. Simply I'd really like to be forewarned if any future issue of the FT includes another nasty surprise like this
AH
A_H_01 at hotmail. com
From: Remy Nissin
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 22:39:01 GMT
Mat,
I'm not an author (yet), but the story and this thread compels me to come out of lurking and respond.
I have to agree with AH on the codes thing when he said:
I hated the story. Don't think it is fair to put it out here like this, not without some serious warning coding ... it just feels like a getaway. I was really angry at Matt for misleading the reader.
The story hit me like a stake through the heart. And that it was so well done made the pain all the more exquisite.
To comment on Desdmona's
My gut feeling was I wanted Edward to get revenge. Maybe not by the typical solution of
and Uther's
B What was Edward's response?
The reason this story had such an impact on me is (surprise) that I went through an experience very like Edward's. Not in the exact details, of course, but the feeling your story evokes is way too close to home.
As with Edward seeing them in the car, there were clues that I refused to see. I trusted her completely, and always accepted the innocent explanation.
When I finally had my eyes opened to the truth, I also wanted revenge. I ached to make her hurt as much as she hurt me. After a goodly amount of fantasies, most of which centered around actions which were illegal and immoral, I came to a realization: there was was no way I could make her hurt as much as I because there wasn't anything she treasured as much as I had our marriage and (my illusion of) our life together. Nothing I could do to her would restore what we once had (if we even ever had it). She was no longer (and maybe had never been) the person I thought she was, and any other pain I might inflict was no longer worth the effort. As the parenthetical remarks show, the deception and betrayal was worse than the infidelity. It made me always wonder what was real and what was a lie.
(There's a lot more to it than this, of course, but I understand that this is not the forum for it. I've been working some of it into a story, but after reading the elegance of "The Way to Pittsburgh," I'm not sure whether it will ever be worthy of seeing the light of day.)
So, like Edward, I didn't extract any revenge. Unlike Edward, I did confront her, but I guess this is not the place to go into what happened afterward.
Mat, you left the ending of the story somewhat open-ended, but if you read it in the right way, this is actually the most fitting revenge that Edward could extract (even though perhaps not intentional on his part). You see, having left Miranda in the shower, if Edward continues on to Pittsburgh and never returns, never sends a word back, he'll have left her without any closure. What do you think, Desdmona? Wouldn't this be a worthy revenge? His disappearing without a word, a trace, leaving her to wonder: where is he? is he coming home soon? did he have an accident? is he lying in a coma somewhere? did he somehow find out? Never to know, but just to wonder ...
From: Desdmona
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: 18 Nov 2001 00:05:50 GMT
From: remynissin-nospamplease-@hotmail.com (Remy Nissin)
HIya Remy~
It's nice to see a new face jumping in on the Fishtank! Welcome!>Mat, you left the ending of the story somewhat open-ended, but if you
read it in the right way, this is actually the most fitting revenge that Edward could extract (even though perhaps not intentional on his part). You see, having left Miranda in the shower, if Edward continues on to Pittsburgh and never returns, never sends a word back, he'll have left her without any closure. What do you think, Desdmona? Wouldn't this be a worthy revenge? His disappearing without a word, a trace, leaving her to wonder: where is he? is he coming home soon? did he have an accident? is he lying in a coma somewhere? did he somehow find out? Never to know, but just to wonder ...
Here's what I really think(although the idea of leaving without a word has merit, I can't bring myself to believe Edward would do that) and what gave me comfort after reading the story as part of the Theme Game (which I plan to praise in another thread) Edward won't have to confront her, he put the love letters in her desk. Mat, you sly old fox. I can't believe I missed that the first time through, but it's brilliant. Edward remains in character and yet Miranda has to suffer the guilt of knowing just how badly she's hurt Edward, because of his silence. I'm feeling much better about Edward.
Once again Remy! Welcome to our little tank. I'm terribly sorry about the past pain you've suffered, but glad that memory was enough to get you to jump in the conversation.
Desdmona
From: Remy Nissin
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 15:17:19 GMT
On 18 Nov 2001 00:05:50 GMT, desdmona22@aol.com (Desdmona22) wrote:
From: remynissin-nospamplease-@hotmail.com (Remy Nissin)
HIya Remy~
It's nice to see a new face jumping in on the Fishtank! Welcome!
Thanks for the welcome. I don't really feel that I have all that much to contribute, not being a writer and all. I've been not-working on this piece for months, though, so maybe someday that will change. :)
Mat, you left
the ending of the story somewhat open-ended, but if you read it in the right way, this is actually the most fitting revenge that Edward could extract (even though perhaps not intentional on his part). You see, having left Miranda in the shower, if Edward continues on to Pittsburgh and never returns, never sends a word back, he'll have left her without any closure. What do you think, Desdmona? Wouldn't this be a worthy revenge? His disappearing without a word, a trace, leaving her to wonder: where is he? is he coming home soon? did he have an accident? is he lying in a coma somewhere? did he somehow find out? Never to know, but just to wonder ...
Here's what I really think(although the idea of leaving without a word has merit, I can't bring myself to believe Edward would do that) and what gave me comfort after reading the story as part of the Theme Game (which I plan to praise in another thread) Edward won't have to confront her, he put the love letters in her desk. Mat, you sly old fox. I can't believe I missed that the first time through, but it's brilliant. Edward remains in character and yet Miranda has to suffer the guilt of knowing just how badly she's hurt Edward, because of his silence. I'm feeling much better about Edward.
Well, the unease building in me while reading the story probably meant that I didn't get as clear a picture into Edward's character as I might have, so I'll defer to your interpretation. (No, I don't think I'll go back and re-read it, thank you.) I wonder, though, just how much guilt Miranda will feel, if she can so blatantly lie to him during their final conversation.
Once again Remy! Welcome to our little tank. I'm terribly sorry about the past pain you've suffered, but glad that memory was enough to get you to jump in the conversation.
Desdmona
Well, the past is just that, and mostly put out of mind (some things are never truly forgotten) until something like this story ups and bites you. I don't dwell on it much, any more; I've learned a few things, and life goes on.
Again, thanks for the welcome.
Remy
From: Father Ignatius
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: 19 Nov 2001 04:58:50 -0800
remynissin-nospamplease-@hotmail.com (Remy Nissin) wrote in message news:<3bf6d6c4.293048848@news.erols.com> ...
[ ...]
I'm not an author (yet), but the story and this thread compels me to come out of lurking and respond.
[ ...]
As with Edward seeing them in the car, there were clues that I refused to see. I trusted her completely, and always accepted the innocent explanation.
When I finally had my eyes opened to the truth, I also wanted revenge. I ached to make her hurt as much as she hurt me. After a goodly amount of fantasies, most of which centered around actions which were illegal and immoral, I came to a realization: there was was no way I could make her hurt as much as I because there wasn't anything she treasured as much as I had our marriage and (my illusion of) our life together. Nothing I could do to her would restore what we once had (if we even ever had it). She was no longer (and maybe had never been) the person I thought she was, and any other pain I might inflict was no longer worth the effort. As the parenthetical remarks show, the deception and betrayal was worse than the infidelity. It made me always wonder what was real and what was a lie.
My God! What a de-lurk! Post of the Week.
Why isn't he an author yet?
[ ...]
From: Father Ignatius
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: 19 Nov 2001 04:59:30 -0800
desdmona22@aol.com (Desdmona22) wrote in message news:<20011105164430.23739.00001342@mb-fj.aol.com> ...
[ ...]
The Way to Pittsburgh
by Mat Twassel
=====================
1) 2 positive comments
1. This is quite simply the best Mat Twassel story I have read. This means that it is amongst the very best stories ASS* has produced. Reading it produces physiological reactions. It is well-plotted, finely balanced and beautifully thought out. It is an artistic achievement. It's real; the bad end happily (I guess) and the good unhappily. <Snip repetition of many positive comments others have already made>.
2. Independently of the quality of exposition, the story is according to my personal taste, as well. Tough shit, all you happy-enders - you get far too much attention as it is. This one's for the rest of us. Thank you, Mat.
2) 2 things to improve
Ummm ... Ummm ...
Hell.
Moving on ...
From: Mat Twassel
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: 19 Nov 2001 19:31:11 GMT
Father Nat,
Thanks very much for the kind words.
Tough shit, all you happy-enders - you get far too much attention as it is.
I like happy endings, too. I think sometimes I write sad stories to ward off evil spirits.
And they all lived happily ever after. When my parents read me those words I had to wonder about them. What did it mean?
- Mat Twassel
From: Frank McCoy
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 18:58:02 GMT
desdmona22@aol.com (Desdmona22) wrote:
The following is story # 16. Mat has generously offered this story for our discussion. Fish Tank guidelines apply:
1) 2 positive comments
Somebody pointed out about the spot where he left the letters in her desk. I liked that touch myself; even if it (my comment) is a repeat. (That's what I get for going last.)
Again (repeating) it ripped my heart out, bloody and dripping. I gather that was the idea; so that I see as a positive comment.
Sad stories like that may be true-to-life, well written, and grab your heartstrings ... But I much prefer happy endings. Ah well. Many people prefer art over pleasant reading; and I consider this story art of a fairly high quality. Now pardon me while I go weep in the corner for a few hours.
2) 2 things to improve
It's hard to tell at the end there, if he was leaving permanently, or going for a ride to temporarily get away. (In a misery feeling, I've done both myself.) I got the impression the latter. (Or was the ambiguity deliberate?)
Also, it's slightly unclear if something more was known about the "missing" pen. Somehow it seems implied that more was. (Did I miss something there?)
3) Try not to repeat
It's difficult at this time to NOT repeat. Nat said the best positive comment I could have made; while others covered most of the negative ones.
Story and comments can be found at:
Sorry I took so long for MY comments; but I just wasn't in a reading-mood for a while. Especially not a comment/read mood.
/ ' /
,-/-, . __ /
(/ / ((/|/ / </ <
From: Mat Twassel
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: 19 Nov 2001 19:22:20 GMT
Frank,
Thanks very much for your comments.
2) 2 things to improve
It's hard to tell at the end there, if he was leaving permanently, or going for a ride to temporarily get away. (In a misery feeling, I've done both myself.) I got the impression the latter. (Or was the ambiguity deliberate?)
My impression (for what it's worth) is that he didn't really know. Unlikely he could bicycle all the way to Pittsburgh even if he knew the way.
Also, it's slightly unclear if something more was known about the "missing" pen. Somehow it seems implied that more was. (Did I miss something there?)
I don't think Edward knew any more about the pen. If Edward did something with it, that certainly wasn't known to the narrator. I think Edward was just thinking about the pen, and I think he was probably hurt that she lost it, perhaps doubly hurt that she lost it at work, triply hurt that she took it so lightly. Okay, the pen was sort of a symbol. Not too blantant or unwieldy, I hope. If something is an overt symbol within the RL of the story, maybe that helps. Regardless:
Rare is the gift that is not more important to the giver.
- Mat Twassel
From: Frank McCoy
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 00:54:10 GMT
mmtwassel@aol.com (mat twassel) wrote:
Frank,
Thanks very much for your comments.
2) 2 things to improve
It's hard to tell at the end there, if he was leaving permanently, or going for a ride to temporarily get away. (In a misery feeling, I've done both myself.) I got the impression the latter. (Or was the ambiguity deliberate?)
My impression (for what it's worth) is that he didn't really know. Unlikely he could bicycle all the way to Pittsburgh even if he knew the way.
Also, it's slightly unclear if something more was known about the "missing" pen. Somehow it seems implied that more was. (Did I miss something there?)
I don't think Edward knew any more about the pen. If Edward did something with it, that certainly wasn't known to the narrator. I think Edward was just thinking about the pen, and I think he was probably hurt that she lost it, perhaps doubly hurt that she lost it at work, triply hurt that she took it so lightly. Okay, the pen was sort of a symbol. Not too blantant or unwieldy, I hope. If something is an overt symbol within the RL of the story, maybe that helps. Regardless:
Rare is the gift that is not more important to the giver.
I've got a wedding-ring on my left finger .... OTOH, I think I value my wife's wedding ring more than she does. A stone fell out, and it breaks my heart not having enough money right now to replace it. ;-{
Not that she doesn't value the marriage. It's just that the ring never did mean as much to her as it did to me.
/ ' /
,-/-, . __ /
(/ / ((/|/ / </ <
From: Frank McCoy
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 19:05:27 GMT
remynissin-nospamplease-@hotmail.com (Remy Nissin) wrote:
On 18 Nov 2001 00:05:50 GMT, desdmona22@aol.com (Desdmona22) wrote:
From: remynissin-nospamplease-@hotmail.com (Remy Nissin)
HIya Remy~
It's nice to see a new face jumping in on the Fishtank! Welcome!
Thanks for the welcome. I don't really feel that I have all that much to contribute, not being a writer and all. I've been not-working on this piece for months, though, so maybe someday that will change. :)
Mat, you left
the ending of the story somewhat open-ended, but if you read it in the right way, this is actually the most fitting revenge that Edward could extract (even though perhaps not intentional on his part). You see, having left Miranda in the shower, if Edward continues on to Pittsburgh and never returns, never sends a word back, he'll have left her without any closure. What do you think, Desdmona? Wouldn't this be a worthy revenge? His disappearing without a word, a trace, leaving her to wonder: where is he? is he coming home soon? did he have an accident? is he lying in a coma somewhere? did he somehow find out? Never to know, but just to wonder ...
Here's what I really think(although the idea of leaving without a word has merit, I can't bring myself to believe Edward would do that) and what gave me comfort after reading the story as part of the Theme Game (which I plan to praise in another thread) Edward won't have to confront her, he put the love letters in her desk. Mat, you sly old fox. I can't believe I missed that the first time through, but it's brilliant. Edward remains in character and yet Miranda has to suffer the guilt of knowing just how badly she's hurt Edward, because of his silence. I'm feeling much better about Edward.
Well, the unease building in me while reading the story probably meant that I didn't get as clear a picture into Edward's character as I might have, so I'll defer to your interpretation. (No, I don't think I'll go back and re-read it, thank you.) I wonder, though, just how much guilt Miranda will feel, if she can so blatantly lie to him during their final conversation.
I thought it was obvious that she felt guilty. That didn't stop her from lying though. In her defense, it might be said she was trying to go easy on Edward, and not rip his heart out, instead of assuming she wanted to hurt him. Perhaps that's the only reason she hadn't left herself. (Of course, there's also the guy she's cheating with.)
Somehow I wonder how she's going to feel when she ends up with Neither Edward nor her new lover. For it's fairly certain the other guy isn't leaving his present wife for her. I wonder if she'll blame Edward? People rarely blame themselves.
Ah well, "We only hurt the ones we love," applies to ourselves as well.
Once again Remy! Welcome to our little tank. I'm terribly sorry about the past pain you've suffered, but glad that memory was enough to get you to jump in the conversation.
Desdmona
Well, the past is just that, and mostly put out of mind (some things are never truly forgotten) until something like this story ups and bites you. I don't dwell on it much, any more; I've learned a few things, and life goes on.
Again, thanks for the welcome.
Remy
/ ' /
,-/-, . __ /
(/ / ((/|/ / </ <
From: Mat Twassel
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: 19 Nov 2001 19:36:35 GMT
Remy -
Thanks very much for your comments. I enjoyed them.
(There's a lot more to it than this, of course, but I understand that this is not the forum for it. I've been working some of it into a story, but after reading the elegance of "The Way to Pittsburgh," I'm not sure whether it will ever be worthy of seeing the light of day.)
Write your story. There is always room. And send it off the The Fish Tank, please. I have the strong feeling it will be great. If not, we'll try to help.
- Mat Twassel
From: Father Ignatius
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: 20 Nov 2001 11:44:44 -0800
mccoyf@millcomm.com (Frank McCoy) wrote in message news:<3c0fa8f0.48659198@news.alt.net> ...
[ ...]
I've got a wedding-ring on my left finger ....
How many fingers yuh got there, dude?
[ ...]
From: Frank McCoy
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 20:20:23 GMT
FatherIgnatius@hotmail.com (Father Ignatius) wrote:
mccoyf@millcomm.com (Frank McCoy) wrote in message news:<3c0fa8f0.48659198@news.alt.net> ...
[ ...]
I've got a wedding-ring on my left finger ....
How many fingers yuh got there, dude?
Tentacles.
/ ' /
,-/-, . __ /
(/ / ((/|/ / </ <
From: Remy Nissin
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2001 05:23:45 GMT
On Mon, 19 Nov 2001 19:05:27 GMT, mccoyf@millcomm.com (Frank McCoy) wrote:
remynissin-nospamplease-@hotmail.com (Remy Nissin) wrote:
On 18 Nov 2001 00:05:50 GMT, desdmona22@aol.com (Desdmona22) wrote:
[snip]
Here's what I really think(although the idea of leaving without a word has merit, I can't bring myself to believe Edward would do that) and what gave me comfort after reading the story as part of the Theme Game (which I plan to praise in another thread) Edward won't have to confront her, he put the love letters in her desk. Mat, you sly old fox. I can't believe I missed that the first time through, but it's brilliant. Edward remains in character and yet Miranda has to suffer the guilt of knowing just how badly she's hurt Edward, because of his silence. I'm feeling much better about Edward.
Well, the unease building in me while reading the story probably meant that I didn't get as clear a picture into Edward's character as I might have, so I'll defer to your interpretation. (No, I don't think I'll go back and re-read it, thank you.) I wonder, though, just how much guilt Miranda will feel, if she can so blatantly lie to him during their final conversation.
I thought it was obvious that she felt guilty. That didn't stop her from lying though. In her defense, it might be said she was trying to go easy on Edward, and not rip his heart out, instead of assuming she wanted to hurt him. Perhaps that's the only reason she hadn't left herself. (Of course, there's also the guy she's cheating with.)
It has always eluded me how someone can can construe lying to you about his/her infidelity as "going easy" on you. In my experience, the lying and betrayal are as bad as the transgression, if not worse.
If they are up front about a moment of weakness and their regret, and promise not to put themselves into that situation again, that at least gives you cause to hope for an improvement. If they are caught in the lie, then how could you ever believe their promises, if indeed they do wish to save the marriage/relationship.
Of course, no one ever lies expecting to be caught, but if I were to do a risk/benefit analysis, I think I'd go with the truth most every time.
Somehow I wonder how she's going to feel when she ends up with Neither Edward nor her new lover. For it's fairly certain the other guy isn't leaving his present wife for her. I wonder if she'll blame Edward? People rarely blame themselves.
I think some others said that they read Edward's character as such that he would not leave. I didn't think so at first reading, but don't wish to re-read it to get a clearer picture.
<snip>
Remy
From: Remy Nissin
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2001 05:29:37 GMT
On 19 Nov 2001 04:58:50 -0800, FatherIgnatius@hotmail.com (Father Ignatius) wrote:
remynissin-nospamplease-@hotmail.com (Remy Nissin) wrote in message news:<3bf6d6c4.293048848@news.erols.com> ...
[ ...]
I'm not an author (yet), but the story and this thread compels me to come out of lurking and respond.
<snip>
My God! What a de-lurk! Post of the Week.
Thanks.
Why isn't he an author yet?
Presuming that your question was not rhetorical, here is a list of excuses for not publishing yet:
1. Twelve-hour workdays (plus commute)
2. I have a tendency to [try to] write epics, rather than tightly polished gems like Mat's and Desdmona's. (Not that I could even if I would.)
3. I hate reading incomplete stories, so I won't post any. I think I'll make an exception for the fish tank after I finish the first segment of my current project, though, seeing as how feedback from such talented authors can only help.
4. The conflict of two homilies: "Better is the enemy of good enough" and "A thing worth doing is worth doing well." I know how to balance the two in my professional life, but have yet to figure it out in my writing. I've already rewritten or thrown out 5,000 words of my current project, almost half of what I've written in toto.
5. Reading is way more fun than writing.
6a. I type reeeal slow. (Okay, that's not true, but you folks don't know that.)
6b. I think reeeal slow. (Pick one)
I was going to do a top ten list and try to make it funny, like Letterman, but decided to spend the creative juices on my story instead. Sheesh, you folks are a bad influence.
But I'm trying, honest I am.
Remy
From: Remy Nissin
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2001 05:38:26 GMT
On 19 Nov 2001 19:36:35 GMT, mmtwassel@aol.com (mat twassel) wrote:
Write your story. There is always room. And send it off the The Fish Tank, please. I have the strong feeling it will be great. If not, we'll try to help.
- Mat Twassel
Mat,
Thanks for the encouragement. I'm working on it and will try to send the first part on to The Fish Tank by the end of the week. I'm opposed to posting partial stories or serials, hating to read those (you can blame Philip Jose Farmer and the 14-year wait for the conclusion of Riverworld for that), but the feedback will probably make an exception worthwhile.
I expect that I'll need lots of help, so TIA.
Remy
From: Always Horny
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2001 10:02:41 +0100
Remy Nissin wrote:
It has always eluded me how someone can can construe lying to you about his/her infidelity as "going easy" on you.
One case seems pretty obvious: If the adulterer's mindset is something like: yes I cheated and I'll cheat again; just for convenience don't want a fight right now (or maybe never), and I'll lie to my spouse as much as needed to avoid it.
the lying and betrayal are as bad as the transgression, if not worse.
That's different. (and true, too, but). You're on the values level. The liar isn't at that level and might just think "I did not force him/her to face something unpleasant right now". ...especially if you keep in mind the possibility that the background might be "yes I did it, and I will do it again" in the cheater's mind.
In general, for my taste and values, I find that this construing as "going easy on her" is exactly the same thing as parents feeding "white lies" to their children. (Which is so goddamn prevalent among the religious well-thinkers and drives me crazy)
If they are up front about a moment of weakness and their regret, and promise not to put themselves into that situation again, that at least gives you cause to hope for an improvement. If they are caught in the lie, then how could you ever believe their promises, if indeed they do wish to save the marriage/relationship.
This is prolly assuming more morals inside the cheater than really exist ...
Of course, no one ever lies expecting to be caught, but if I were to do a risk/benefit analysis, I think I'd go with the truth most every time.
...and mow more brains than ... (ROFL)
AH
A_H_01 at hotmail. com
From: Jeff Zephyr
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2001 07:35:19 -0600
On Thu, 22 Nov 2001 05:23:45 GMT, remynissin-nospamplease-@hotmail.com (Remy Nissin) wrote:
On Mon, 19 Nov 2001 19:05:27 GMT, mccoyf@millcomm.com (Frank McCoy) wrote:
remynissin-nospamplease-@hotmail.com (Remy Nissin) wrote:
On 18 Nov 2001 00:05:50 GMT, desdmona22@aol.com (Desdmona22) wrote:
[snip]
Here's what I really think(although the idea of leaving without a word has merit, I can't bring myself to believe Edward would do that) and what gave me comfort after reading the story as part of the Theme Game (which I plan to praise in another thread) Edward won't have to confront her, he put the love letters in her desk. Mat, you sly old fox. I can't believe I missed that the first time through, but it's brilliant. Edward remains in character and yet Miranda has to suffer the guilt of knowing just how badly she's hurt Edward, because of his silence. I'm feeling much better about Edward.
Well, the unease building in me while reading the story probably meant that I didn't get as clear a picture into Edward's character as I might have, so I'll defer to your interpretation. (No, I don't think I'll go back and re-read it, thank you.) I wonder, though, just how much guilt Miranda will feel, if she can so blatantly lie to him during their final conversation.
I thought it was obvious that she felt guilty. That didn't stop her from lying though. In her defense, it might be said she was trying to go easy on Edward, and not rip his heart out, instead of assuming she wanted to hurt him. Perhaps that's the only reason she hadn't left herself. (Of course, there's also the guy she's cheating with.)
It has always eluded me how someone can can construe lying to you about his/her infidelity as "going easy" on you. In my experience, the lying and betrayal are as bad as the transgression, if not worse.
It isn't, unless you think that deceiving someone to keep them from feeling the pain you'd cause them is a good idea. "White lies" they are sometimes called, but concealing infidelities (or many other major deceptions) certainly aren't little white lies.
In another sense, she had no apparent desire to give up on Edward, keeping him as a partner. We have no hint that she was making any plans to leave. She just wanted someone else, while still spending some time with Edward.
However, it sure looked like she was tending to spend more time away, and eventually that might have become most of the time. But that is a cheating risk. Sadly, most cheaters don't tell their partners about the activity, because they know it isn't permitted, and they also know that bringing it up may cost them their partner. If it is kept secret, they keep their partner "safe."
Until caught :-(
Which almost always happens, as did in this tale. The idea that you can conduct a secret life forever from a close partner goes right against the concept of having a close partner.
If they are up front about a moment of weakness and their regret, and promise not to put themselves into that situation again, that at least gives you cause to hope for an improvement. If they are caught in the lie, then how could you ever believe their promises, if indeed they do wish to save the marriage/relationship.
Sure. But in my experience, this is much easier to arrange if this issue comes up well before the outside affair happens. That requires a relationship where the partners can rationally consider the idea that one or both of them might be tempted, and might even do something about it sometime. And that they should be prepared for that event. After all, on pure statistics in relationships it happens an awful lot.
More breakups over affairs happen because of the lies and the pain they cause than because of casual affairs. Especially, just sexual relationships alone aren't likely to do so, though they can hurt or annoy, depending on the degree of jealousy and disrespect involved.
Of course, no one ever lies expecting to be caught, but if I were to do a risk/benefit analysis, I think I'd go with the truth most every time.
Sure, being honest all the time is what a lot of people try to promise to do. It is something of greater value IMHO than a promise to be faithful sexually, or many other things implicit in relationships. Even if being honest ends the relationship, that is often far better than letting it go on in secret until the dishonesty is discovered.
Somehow I wonder how she's going to feel when she ends up with Neither Edward nor her new lover. For it's fairly certain the other guy isn't leaving his present wife for her. I wonder if she'll blame Edward? People rarely blame themselves.
I think some others said that they read Edward's character as such that he would not leave. I didn't think so at first reading, but don't wish to re-read it to get a clearer picture.
It is hard to say. Temporarily leaving is one thing, but leaving forever, as implied at the end, is likely to be as hurtful to Edward as to Miranda. Maybe moreso, as she is going to find out that he knows soon enough, one way or the other. She sounds sufficiently seductive to be able to attract someone else for sex easily enough.
Whether she can find someone to truly lover her as Edward seems to, though, is another matter. I don't see a strong hint that her lover really does so. Sex is OK, for sure, but it isn't the only thing you want from a relationship. OK, it isn't the only thing that most people want from a permanent relationship.
Jeff
Web site at http://www.asstr.org/~jeffzephyr/ For FTP, ftp://ftp.asstr.org/pub/Authors/jeffzephyr/
There is nothing more important than petting the cat.
From: Jeff Zephyr
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2001 07:41:04 -0600
On Thu, 22 Nov 2001 05:29:37 GMT, remynissin-nospamplease-@hotmail.com (Remy Nissin) wrote:
On 19 Nov 2001 04:58:50 -0800, FatherIgnatius@hotmail.com (Father Ignatius) wrote:
remynissin-nospamplease-@hotmail.com (Remy Nissin) wrote in message news:<3bf6d6c4.293048848@news.erols.com> ...
[ ...]
I'm not an author (yet), but the story and this thread compels me to come out of lurking and respond.
<snip>
My God! What a de-lurk! Post of the Week.
Thanks.
Why isn't he an author yet?
Presuming that your question was not rhetorical, here is a list of excuses for not publishing yet:
1. Twelve-hour workdays (plus commute)
That is a strong deterrent. However, there are a couple solutions. A: weekends. B: writing at work
If neither is available, then finding time to write will require vacation time.
2. I have a tendency to [try to] write epics, rather than tightly polished gems like Mat's and Desdmona's. (Not that I could even if I would.)
There are fans of epics. I have the same tendency, but can write shorter stuff. Not sure if they are polished gems, though :-)
3. I hate reading incomplete stories, so I won't post any. I think I'll make an exception for the fish tank after I finish the first segment of my current project, though, seeing as how feedback from such talented authors can only help.
Any long story pretty much has to be posted that way, unless you finish an entire novel offline. While the serial cliffhanger effect is sometimes troubling, there is also the advantage of getting feedback (from the author's viewpoint) to help direct the tale, and for the reader, you get to read more stories with depth that way.
4. The conflict of two homilies: "Better is the enemy of good enough" and "A thing worth doing is worth doing well." I know how to balance the two in my professional life, but have yet to figure it out in my writing. I've already rewritten or thrown out 5,000 words of my current project, almost half of what I've written in toto.
That one takes practice. A lot of us do that at least some of the time, doing major rewrites. On occasion, I'll reread my tale, then start writing it again from scratch, with not a bit of copy and paste used. Usually, rewrites work around the thing, using most of what is there but with some major changes and additions.
5. Reading is way more fun than writing.
Well, that is sometimes true. I find that writing is compulsive, but tiring. I like doing it, but if I hadn't let myself get sucked into writing I would have had more reading time :-)
6a. I type reeeal slow. (Okay, that's not true, but you folks don't know that.)
6b. I think reeeal slow. (Pick one)
I was going to do a top ten list and try to make it funny, like Letterman, but decided to spend the creative juices on my story instead. Sheesh, you folks are a bad influence.
But I'm trying, honest I am.
No problem.
You don't have to write stories, but people who can string words together intelligently and interestingly aren't all that common. So we try to encourage them to think about writing, just in case they get into it.
Jeff
Web site at http://www.asstr.org/~jeffzephyr/ For FTP, ftp://ftp.asstr.org/pub/Authors/jeffzephyr/
There is nothing more important than petting the cat.
From: Jeff Zephyr
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2001 08:08:23 -0600
On Fri, 23 Nov 2001 10:02:41 +0100, Always.Horny@no.spam.thanks (Always Horny) wrote:
Remy Nissin wrote:
It has always eluded me how someone can can construe lying to you about his/her infidelity as "going easy" on you.
One case seems pretty obvious: If the adulterer's mindset is something like: yes I cheated and I'll cheat again; just for convenience don't want a fight right now (or maybe never), and I'll lie to my spouse as much as needed to avoid it.
But it is the same kind of "going easy" as not mentioning the money you spend on things you never tell about, or that you haven't paid the bills and are about to lose your home as a result, that the kid has an STD and needs treatment, or other troubles which come up.
At the very least, it is disrespectful. The only benefit is to keep a relationship going when one party has given up on it, and has changed the rules without renegotiating them.
the lying and betrayal are as bad as the transgression, if not worse. That's different. (and true, too, but). You're on the values level. The liar isn't at that level and might just think "I did not force him/her to face something unpleasant right now". ...especially if you keep in mind the possibility that the background might be "yes I did it, and I will do it again" in the cheater's mind.
In general, for my taste and values, I find that this construing as "going easy on her" is exactly the same thing as parents feeding "white lies" to their children. (Which is so goddamn prevalent among the religious well-thinkers and drives me crazy)
It is a thing that lots of people do. The problem is that doing so teaches the kids that lying is OK, if you do it for a good reason, such as concealing things which would make someone sad.
But if you took that to extremes, that would mean concealing just about every fact in the world :-)
Jeff
Web site at http://www.asstr.org/~jeffzephyr/ For FTP, ftp://ftp.asstr.org/pub/Authors/jeffzephyr/
There is nothing more important than petting the cat.
From: Frank McCoy
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2001 17:17:18 GMT
Jeff Zephyr <jeffzeph@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, 22 Nov 2001 05:23:45 GMT, remynissin-nospamplease-@hotmail.com (Remy Nissin) wrote:
On Mon, 19 Nov 2001 19:05:27 GMT, mccoyf@millcomm.com (Frank McCoy) wrote:
remynissin-nospamplease-@hotmail.com (Remy Nissin) wrote:
On 18 Nov 2001 00:05:50 GMT, desdmona22@aol.com (Desdmona22) wrote:
[snip]
Here's what I really think(although the idea of leaving without a word has merit, I can't bring myself to believe Edward would do that) and what gave me comfort after reading the story as part of the Theme Game (which I plan to praise in another thread) Edward won't have to confront her, he put the love letters in her desk. Mat, you sly old fox. I can't believe I missed that the first time through, but it's brilliant. Edward remains in character and yet Miranda has to suffer the guilt of knowing just how badly she's hurt Edward, because of his silence. I'm feeling much better about Edward.
Well, the unease building in me while reading the story probably meant that I didn't get as clear a picture into Edward's character as I might have, so I'll defer to your interpretation. (No, I don't think I'll go back and re-read it, thank you.) I wonder, though, just how much guilt Miranda will feel, if she can so blatantly lie to him during their final conversation.
I thought it was obvious that she felt guilty. That didn't stop her from lying though. In her defense, it might be said she was trying to go easy on Edward, and not rip his heart out, instead of assuming she wanted to hurt him. Perhaps that's the only reason she hadn't left herself. (Of course, there's also the guy she's cheating with.)
It has always eluded me how someone can can construe lying to you about his/her infidelity as "going easy" on you. In my experience, the lying and betrayal are as bad as the transgression, if not worse.
It isn't, unless you think that deceiving someone to keep them from feeling the pain you'd cause them is a good idea. "White lies" they are sometimes called, but concealing infidelities (or many other major deceptions) certainly aren't little white lies.
I never had any sympathy for "white lies" of any kind or size. Usually they do far more damage than any mental pain they're supposed to protect from.
This applies to children or adults, and interactions between the two as well. I never tried to sugar-coat unpleasant information that my kid asked for; and have never regretted telling the truth ... even when it was hard.
In another sense, she had no apparent desire to give up on Edward, keeping him as a partner. We have no hint that she was making any plans to leave. She just wanted someone else, while still spending some time with Edward.
However, it sure looked like she was tending to spend more time away, and eventually that might have become most of the time. But that is a cheating risk. Sadly, most cheaters don't tell their partners about the activity, because they know it isn't permitted, and they also know that bringing it up may cost them their partner. If it is kept secret, they keep their partner "safe."
Until caught :-(
Which almost always happens, as did in this tale. The idea that you can conduct a secret life forever from a close partner goes right against the concept of having a close partner.
Amen.
If they are up front about a moment of weakness and their regret, and promise not to put themselves into that situation again, that at least gives you cause to hope for an improvement. If they are caught in the lie, then how could you ever believe their promises, if indeed they do wish to save the marriage/relationship.
Sure. But in my experience, this is much easier to arrange if this issue comes up well before the outside affair happens. That requires a relationship where the partners can rationally consider the idea that one or both of them might be tempted, and might even do something about it sometime. And that they should be prepared for that event. After all, on pure statistics in relationships it happens an awful lot.
More breakups over affairs happen because of the lies and the pain they cause than because of casual affairs. Especially, just sexual relationships alone aren't likely to do so, though they can hurt or annoy, depending on the degree of jealousy and disrespect involved.
Of course, no one ever lies expecting to be caught, but if I were to do a risk/benefit analysis, I think I'd go with the truth most every time.
Sure, being honest all the time is what a lot of people try to promise to do. It is something of greater value IMHO than a promise to be faithful sexually, or many other things implicit in relationships. Even if being honest ends the relationship, that is often far better than letting it go on in secret until the dishonesty is discovered.
Somehow I wonder how she's going to feel when she ends up with Neither Edward nor her new lover. For it's fairly certain the other guy isn't leaving his present wife for her. I wonder if she'll blame Edward? People rarely blame themselves.
I think some others said that they read Edward's character as such that he would not leave. I didn't think so at first reading, but don't wish to re-read it to get a clearer picture.
It is hard to say. Temporarily leaving is one thing, but leaving forever, as implied at the end, is likely to be as hurtful to Edward as to Miranda. Maybe moreso, as she is going to find out that he knows soon enough, one way or the other. She sounds sufficiently seductive to be able to attract someone else for sex easily enough.
Whether she can find someone to truly lover her as Edward seems to, though, is another matter. I don't see a strong hint that her lover really does so. Sex is OK, for sure, but it isn't the only thing you want from a relationship. OK, it isn't the only thing that most people want from a permanent relationship.
So, she wants to keep her sex-partner as well as the one who loves her ... to the detriment of both. That's selfishness and uncaring, not love ... and a way to keep neither one.
/ ' /
,-/-, . __ /
(/ / ((/|/ / </ <
From: Remy Nissin
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2001 00:37:24 GMT
On Fri, 23 Nov 2001 10:02:41 +0100, Always.Horny@no.spam.thanks (Always Horny) wrote:
Remy Nissin wrote:
It has always eluded me how someone can can construe lying to you about his/her infidelity as "going easy" on you.
One case seems pretty obvious: If the adulterer's mindset is something like: yes I cheated and I'll cheat again; just for convenience don't want a fight right now (or maybe never), and I'll lie to my spouse as much as needed to avoid it.
That makes it "going easy" on themselves, not you. Unless you're saying that they're rationalizing that if they want it, it must be good for you too.
the lying and betrayal are as bad as the transgression, if not worse. That's different. (and true, too, but). You're on the values level. The liar isn't at that level and might just think "I did not force him/her to face something unpleasant right now". ...especially if you keep in mind the possibility that the background might be "yes I did it, and I will do it again" in the cheater's mind.
Um, same response as above applies.
In general, for my taste and values, I find that this construing as "going easy on her" is exactly the same thing as parents feeding "white lies" to their children. (Which is so goddamn prevalent among the religious well-thinkers and drives me crazy)
I've tried to avoid the white lies myself. Ask my child in another ten years whether I've succeeded.
As for the religious literalists, I try not to think about them too much. I had fun arguing with a devout catholic I sat next to in homeroom in high school. I liked him; he was good-hearted and sincere and never got angry so I tried to make my arguments logical and non-insulting. In the end, of course, I didn't change his mind, despite his being unable to refute any of my arguments. After that, I never bothered arguing religion with anyone else.
If they are up front about a moment of weakness and their regret, and promise not to put themselves into that situation again, that at least gives you cause to hope for an improvement. If they are caught in the lie, then how could you ever believe their promises, if indeed they do wish to save the marriage/relationship. This is prolly assuming more morals inside the cheater than really exist ...
Perhaps; it's too bad that some people are so good at concealing that lack.
Of course, no one ever lies expecting to be caught, but if I were to do a risk/benefit analysis, I think I'd go with the truth most every time. ...and mow more brains than ... (ROFL)
AH
From: Remy Nissin
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2001 00:37:48 GMT
On Fri, 23 Nov 2001 07:35:19 -0600, Jeff Zephyr <jeffzeph@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, 22 Nov 2001 05:23:45 GMT, remynissin-nospamplease-@hotmail.com (Remy Nissin) wrote:
If they are up front about a moment of weakness and their regret, and promise not to put themselves into that situation again, that at least gives you cause to hope for an improvement. If they are caught in the lie, then how could you ever believe their promises, if indeed they do wish to save the marriage/relationship.
Sure. But in my experience, this is much easier to arrange if this issue comes up well before the outside affair happens. That requires a relationship where the partners can rationally consider the idea that one or both of them might be tempted, and might even do something about it sometime. And that they should be prepared for that event. After all, on pure statistics in relationships it happens an awful lot.
More breakups over affairs happen because of the lies and the pain they cause than because of casual affairs. Especially, just sexual relationships alone aren't likely to do so, though they can hurt or annoy, depending on the degree of jealousy and disrespect involved.
I pretty much agree with what you said in the rest of your post. I suspect that I would agree with this point as well, although I haven't had first-hand experience in this regard. I pretty much accept that I won't succumb to temptation; I haven't before, and as the years go by, the opportunity for temptation wanes. :-P What I would hope for is a partner who has the strength to resist temptation as well.
That said, I agree that the deceit and the lack of trust that engendered contributed much more to my breakup than the affair. I think I could have gotten over the affair, but I couldn't see myself returning to the point of trusting her again. And without that, what was the point of trying to continuing the marriage? YMMV, of course.
From: Remy Nissin
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2001 00:37:54 GMT
On Fri, 23 Nov 2001 07:41:04 -0600, Jeff Zephyr <jeffzeph@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, 22 Nov 2001 05:29:37 GMT, remynissin-nospamplease-@hotmail.com (Remy Nissin) wrote:
On 19 Nov 2001 04:58:50 -0800, FatherIgnatius@hotmail.com (Father Ignatius) wrote:
remynissin-nospamplease-@hotmail.com (Remy Nissin) wrote in message news:<3bf6d6c4.293048848@news.erols.com> ...
<snip>
Why isn't he an author yet?
Presuming that your question was not rhetorical, here is a list of excuses for not publishing yet:
1. Twelve-hour workdays (plus commute)
That is a strong deterrent. However, there are a couple solutions. A: weekends. B: writing at work
If neither is available, then finding time to write will require vacation time.
Weekends belong to my wife. I can't deny her those, considering how little time we have together during the week.
It is not that kind of job, alas. Of course, if it were, it probably wouldn't pay as well. :) There's hope on the horizon for more reasonable hours, but not for a few months yet.
2. I have a tendency to [try to] write epics, rather than tightly polished gems like Mat's and Desdmona's. (Not that I could even if I would.)
There are fans of epics. I have the same tendency, but can write shorter stuff. Not sure if they are polished gems, though :-)
I certainly thought "Berry Picking in the Rain" was one such.
3. I hate reading incomplete stories, so I won't post any. I think I'll make an exception for the fish tank after I finish the first segment of my current project, though, seeing as how feedback from such talented authors can only help.
Any long story pretty much has to be posted that way, unless you finish an entire novel offline. While the serial cliffhanger effect is sometimes troubling, there is also the advantage of getting feedback (from the author's viewpoint) to help direct the tale, and for the reader, you get to read more stories with depth that way.
4. The conflict of two homilies: "Better is the enemy of good enough" and "A thing worth doing is worth doing well." I know how to balance the two in my professional life, but have yet to figure it out in my writing. I've already rewritten or thrown out 5,000 words of my current project, almost half of what I've written in toto.
That one takes practice. A lot of us do that at least some of the time, doing major rewrites. On occasion, I'll reread my tale, then start writing it again from scratch, with not a bit of copy and paste used. Usually, rewrites work around the thing, using most of what is there but with some major changes and additions.
I'm not quite good enough at the craft to say precisely what I want the first time around. Not only not precisely, but not even close. Sometimes I wonder if I even know what I'm trying to say, the first time around.
5. Reading is way more fun than writing.
Well, that is sometimes true. I find that writing is compulsive, but tiring. I like doing it, but if I hadn't let myself get sucked into writing I would have had more reading time :-)
I get the feeling that that is true for most authors. That probably explains why I'm not an author yet.
6a. I type reeeal slow. (Okay, that's not true, but you folks don't know that.)
6b. I think reeeal slow. (Pick one)
I was going to do a top ten list and try to make it funny, like Letterman, but decided to spend the creative juices on my story instead. Sheesh, you folks are a bad influence.
But I'm trying, honest I am.
No problem.
You don't have to write stories, but people who can string words together intelligently and interestingly aren't all that common. So we try to encourage them to think about writing, just in case they get into it.
This isn't my first foray into writing, but probably the closest I've come to getting a story out. Thanks for the encouragement.
Remy
From: Remy Nissin
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2001 00:42:26 GMT
On Fri, 23 Nov 2001 17:17:18 GMT, mccoyf@millcomm.com (Frank McCoy) wrote:
<snip>
So, she wants to keep her sex-partner as well as the one who loves her ... to the detriment of both. That's selfishness and uncaring, not love ... and a way to keep neither one.
My sentiments exactly. Thanks for saying it so succinctly.
From: dennyw
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2001 17:19:35 -0800
On Fri, 23 Nov 2001 07:41:04 -0600, Jeff Zephyr <jeffzeph@hotmail.com> held forth, saying:
There are fans of epics. I have the same tendency,
I'm shocked.
-denny-
"I fear that we have awakened a sleeping giant and filled him with a terrible resolve ... " - Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto, Dec. 8th, 1941
From: Jeff Zephyr
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2001 08:22:28 -0600
On Fri, 23 Nov 2001 17:19:35 -0800, dennyw@TANSTAAFL.zipcon.net wrote:
On Fri, 23 Nov 2001 07:41:04 -0600, Jeff Zephyr <jeffzeph@hotmail.com> held forth, saying:
There are fans of epics. I have the same tendency,
I'm shocked.
Where's the smiley? :-) I mean, is it at all possible that you are genuinely shocked by this revelation?
Jeff
Web site at http://www.asstr.org/~jeffzephyr/ For FTP, ftp://ftp.asstr.org/pub/Authors/jeffzephyr/
There is nothing more important than petting the cat.
From: Jeff Zephyr
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2001 08:33:44 -0600
On Fri, 23 Nov 2001 17:17:18 GMT, mccoyf@millcomm.com (Frank McCoy) wrote:
Jeff Zephyr <jeffzeph@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, 22 Nov 2001 05:23:45 GMT, remynissin-nospamplease-@hotmail.com (Remy Nissin) wrote:
On Mon, 19 Nov 2001 19:05:27 GMT, mccoyf@millcomm.com (Frank McCoy) wrote:
remynissin-nospamplease-@hotmail.com (Remy Nissin) wrote:
On 18 Nov 2001 00:05:50 GMT, desdmona22@aol.com (Desdmona22) wrote:
[snip]
Whether she can find someone to truly lover her as Edward seems to, though, is another matter. I don't see a strong hint that her lover really does so. Sex is OK, for sure, but it isn't the only thing you want from a relationship. OK, it isn't the only thing that most people want from a permanent relationship.
So, she wants to keep her sex-partner as well as the one who loves her ... to the detriment of both. That's selfishness and uncaring, not love ... and a way to keep neither one.
Though the story was sad, I felt it reflected this sentiment as truth. Which often seems to happen. The breach of trust is much harder to heal than the breach of the promise of fidelity. That your partner desires others sexually, but still wants to be with you, is one thing. That she/he wants it regardless of your wishes, and is willing to manipulate you with lies to get it, is quite another.
Jeff
Web site at http://www.asstr.org/~jeffzephyr/ For FTP, ftp://ftp.asstr.org/pub/Authors/jeffzephyr/
There is nothing more important than petting the cat.
From: Frank McCoy
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2001 22:40:13 GMT
Jeff Zephyr <jeffzeph@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, 23 Nov 2001 17:17:18 GMT, mccoyf@millcomm.com (Frank McCoy) wrote:
Jeff Zephyr <jeffzeph@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, 22 Nov 2001 05:23:45 GMT, remynissin-nospamplease-@hotmail.com (Remy Nissin) wrote:
On Mon, 19 Nov 2001 19:05:27 GMT, mccoyf@millcomm.com (Frank McCoy) wrote:
remynissin-nospamplease-@hotmail.com (Remy Nissin) wrote:
On 18 Nov 2001 00:05:50 GMT, desdmona22@aol.com (Desdmona22) wrote:
[snip]
Whether she can find someone to truly lover her as Edward seems to, though, is another matter. I don't see a strong hint that her lover really does so. Sex is OK, for sure, but it isn't the only thing you want from a relationship. OK, it isn't the only thing that most people want from a permanent relationship.
So, she wants to keep her sex-partner as well as the one who loves her ... to the detriment of both. That's selfishness and uncaring, not love ... and a way to keep neither one.
Though the story was sad, I felt it reflected this sentiment as truth. Which often seems to happen. The breach of trust is much harder to heal than the breach of the promise of fidelity. That your partner desires others sexually, but still wants to be with you, is one thing. That she/he wants it regardless of your wishes, and is willing to manipulate you with lies to get it, is quite another.
Amen.
I could take my SO wanting somebody else sexually, or even as a
permanent lover. LYING to me however, would be almost unbearable.
Heck, if my wife wanted another lover, but wanted ME as her love, then I'd probably invite him to move in!
/ ' /
,-/-, . __ /
(/ / ((/|/ / </ <
From: Jeff Zephyr
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2001 10:17:03 -0600
On Sat, 24 Nov 2001 00:37:48 GMT, remynissin-nospamplease-@hotmail.com (Remy Nissin) wrote:
On Fri, 23 Nov 2001 07:35:19 -0600, Jeff Zephyr <jeffzeph@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, 22 Nov 2001 05:23:45 GMT, remynissin-nospamplease-@hotmail.com (Remy Nissin) wrote:
If they are up front about a moment of weakness and their regret, and promise not to put themselves into that situation again, that at least gives you cause to hope for an improvement. If they are caught in the lie, then how could you ever believe their promises, if indeed they do wish to save the marriage/relationship.
Sure. But in my experience, this is much easier to arrange if this issue comes up well before the outside affair happens. That requires a relationship where the partners can rationally consider the idea that one or both of them might be tempted, and might even do something about it sometime. And that they should be prepared for that event. After all, on pure statistics in relationships it happens an awful lot.
More breakups over affairs happen because of the lies and the pain they cause than because of casual affairs. Especially, just sexual relationships alone aren't likely to do so, though they can hurt or annoy, depending on the degree of jealousy and disrespect involved.
I pretty much agree with what you said in the rest of your post. I suspect that I would agree with this point as well, although I haven't had first-hand experience in this regard. I pretty much accept that I won't succumb to temptation; I haven't before, and as the years go by, the opportunity for temptation wanes. :-P What I would hope for is a partner who has the strength to resist temptation as well.
Temptation can be circumstantial too. If you do things which require periods of separation, or work in a place where there are coworkers who might chase you, it is much easier to find opportunities. I do agree, though, that the desire for such temptations drops with time, maybe a matter of practicing resistance?
That said, I agree that the deceit and the lack of trust that engendered contributed much more to my breakup than the affair. I think I could have gotten over the affair, but I couldn't see myself returning to the point of trusting her again. And without that, what was the point of trying to continuing the marriage? YMMV, of course.
Definitely. Even if you can forgive, it is a lot harder to work back to the same point of trust. And if your partner doesn't seem strongly inclined to give up her other lover(s), then it is even harder.
I do wonder, though, how many couples consider this situation strongly enough to make their rule "forsaking all others, but if I should stray, I promise to tell you about it"?
I mean, it is all well and good to make promises, but if you can't keep them, how do you handle that situation?
Jeff
Web site at http://www.asstr.org/~jeffzephyr/ For FTP, ftp://ftp.asstr.org/pub/Authors/jeffzephyr/
There is nothing more important than petting the cat.
From: Jeff Zephyr
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2001 10:55:35 -0600
On Sat, 24 Nov 2001 00:37:54 GMT, remynissin-nospamplease-@hotmail.com (Remy Nissin) wrote:
On Fri, 23 Nov 2001 07:41:04 -0600, Jeff Zephyr <jeffzeph@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, 22 Nov 2001 05:29:37 GMT, remynissin-nospamplease-@hotmail.com (Remy Nissin) wrote:
On 19 Nov 2001 04:58:50 -0800, FatherIgnatius@hotmail.com (Father Ignatius) wrote:
remynissin-nospamplease-@hotmail.com (Remy Nissin) wrote in message news:<3bf6d6c4.293048848@news.erols.com> ...
<snip>
Why isn't he an author yet?
Presuming that your question was not rhetorical, here is a list of excuses for not publishing yet:
1. Twelve-hour workdays (plus commute)
That is a strong deterrent. However, there are a couple solutions. A: weekends. B: writing at work
If neither is available, then finding time to write will require vacation time.
Weekends belong to my wife. I can't deny her those, considering how little time we have together during the week.
I can understand that part. Sometimes, I get to use some of the time for writing then, but most often I don't. It is hard enough to steal time for posts on weekends, like I'm doing now.
It is not that kind of job, alas. Of course, if it were, it probably wouldn't pay as well. :) There's hope on the horizon for more reasonable hours, but not for a few months yet.
Well, that can be troublesome. I can write on breaks at work, but which is fine, but sometimes I get a bit more downtime with nothing better to do. Also, I can think about stories at work, sometimes, without being a problem for results.
2. I have a tendency to [try to] write epics, rather than tightly polished gems like Mat's and Desdmona's. (Not that I could even if I would.)
There are fans of epics. I have the same tendency, but can write shorter stuff. Not sure if they are polished gems, though :-)
I certainly thought "Berry Picking in the Rain" was one such.
Thanks! I like it too, and it got decent fan mail, but it is nice to hear that.
4. The conflict of two homilies: "Better is the enemy of good enough" and "A thing worth doing is worth doing well." I know how to balance the two in my professional life, but have yet to figure it out in my writing. I've already rewritten or thrown out 5,000 words of my current project, almost half of what I've written in toto.
That one takes practice. A lot of us do that at least some of the time, doing major rewrites. On occasion, I'll reread my tale, then start writing it again from scratch, with not a bit of copy and paste used. Usually, rewrites work around the thing, using most of what is there but with some major changes and additions.
I'm not quite good enough at the craft to say precisely what I want the first time around. Not only not precisely, but not even close. Sometimes I wonder if I even know what I'm trying to say, the first time around.
Well, you aren't alone. It does take practice writing in order to learn what you want to write.
5. Reading is way more fun than writing.
Well, that is sometimes true. I find that writing is compulsive, but tiring. I like doing it, but if I hadn't let myself get sucked into writing I would have had more reading time :-)
I get the feeling that that is true for most authors. That probably explains why I'm not an author yet.
It is an explanation, for sure. :-)
You don't have to write stories, but people who can string words together intelligently and interestingly aren't all that common. So we try to encourage them to think about writing, just in case they get into it.
This isn't my first foray into writing, but probably the closest I've come to getting a story out. Thanks for the encouragement.
Good luck!
Jeff
Web site at http://www.asstr.org/~jeffzephyr/ For FTP, ftp://ftp.asstr.org/pub/Authors/jeffzephyr/
There is nothing more important than petting the cat.
From: Father Ignatius
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: 24 Nov 2001 12:13:52 -0800
mmtwassel@aol.com (mat twassel) wrote in message news:<20011119143111.26895.00000653@mb-cc.aol.com> ...
Father Nat,
Thanks very much for the kind words.
I'm happy to pass on the gossip that Ruthie's Club (http://www.ruthiesclub.com/) has asked Mat if they may present "The Way to Pittsburgh" in a future edition, and that he has graciously consented. That, IMHO, is the accolade. And well deserved, too.
WBD, Mat.
Nat(smugly pleased to be confirmed in his opinion of artistic excellence)
From: dennyw
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2001 12:33:44 -0800
On Sat, 24 Nov 2001 08:22:28 -0600, Jeff Zephyr <jeffzeph@hotmail.com> held forth, saying:
On Fri, 23 Nov 2001 17:19:35 -0800, dennyw@TANSTAAFL.zipcon.net wrote:
On Fri, 23 Nov 2001 07:41:04 -0600, Jeff Zephyr <jeffzeph@hotmail.com> held forth, saying:
There are fans of epics. I have the same tendency,
I'm shocked.
Where's the smiley? :-) I mean, is it at all possible that you are genuinely shocked by this revelation?
Smiley would kinda ruin the irony. (ping Fr. Nat) -denny-
"I fear that we have awakened a sleeping giant and filled him with a terrible resolve ... " - Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto, Dec. 8th, 1941
From: Anne747
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: 25 Nov 2001 16:09:03 GMT
Jeff wrote:
B: writing at work
You might want to consider the company network could be set up for snooping. Yes, times like lunch are your own, but you're still using company property to do so.
Now, if the network cable just happens to pop out during your lunch hour ....
Besides, if you work in a big company, you don't want your newest masterpiece floating around until it's complete.
Anne
To reply by mail - remove the b in the address
Anne's Erotic Story Archive - http://annejet.pair.com/ Free Story FAQ - http://annejet.pair.com/fsfaq/
From: Psyclone Jack
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2001 20:52:41 GMT
In article <20011125110903.19259.00002699@mb-ch.aol.com>, Anne747 wrote:
Jeff wrote:
B: writing at work
You might want to consider the company network could be set up for snooping. Yes, times like lunch are your own, but you're still using company property to do so.
This is what ssh is for :-)
If I'm doing anything from work, I ssh to my machine at home, and do it. That's how I read news and chat from work - work is not the most creative environment to write from, though.
Still doesn't protect from keystroke loggers, or people looking over your shoulder, but if your workplace is that paranoid, then just don't even try.
Now, if the network cable just happens to pop out during your lunch hour ....
Besides, if you work in a big company, you don't want your newest masterpiece floating around until it's complete.
Anne
To reply by mail - remove the b in the address
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Anne's Erotic Story Archive - http://annejet.pair.com/ Free Story FAQ - http://annejet.pair.com/fsfaq/
psyclone@subdimension.com
From: Jeff Zephyr
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2001 15:30:13 -0600
On 25 Nov 2001 16:09:03 GMT, anon747b@aol.com (Anne747) wrote:
Jeff wrote:
B: writing at work
You might want to consider the company network could be set up for snooping. Yes, times like lunch are your own, but you're still using company property to do so.
Well, you could drag your laptop into work. Or maybe, your workstation isn't on the net?
Or best yet, the company doesn't mind you doing this kind of stuff.
Now, if the network cable just happens to pop out during your lunch hour ....
Besides, if you work in a big company, you don't want your newest masterpiece floating around until it's complete.
Surely, even with nice encryption stuff, people can still dig files up.
Jeff
Web site at http://www.asstr.org/~jeffzephyr/ For FTP, ftp://ftp.asstr.org/pub/Authors/jeffzephyr/
There is nothing more important than petting the cat.
From: Uther Pendragon
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 06:03:15 GMT
Mat Twassel wrote:
[snip]
To Uther, who wrote:
I can see so much of the characters, but not the critical questions.
A Why did Miranda cheat?
B What was Edward's response?
I wouldn't mind seeing this story from Miranda's point of view. Even then, though, I'm not sure it would answer question A. My short answer is: Miranda cheated because of who she was, who Edward was, and other circumstances. Anyway, it's a good question. Is it essential to this story? Is it critical as long as you have no reason to believe that it's impossible? Any thoughts on how the story should go about answering it? Edward's response may have seemed minimal, but that's most of what the end of the story was (or was meant to be). So I conclude that for you the story failed. To answer B, what do you think the story needed?
I wouldn't say that the story failed.
Desdmona's rules require 2 positives and 2 negatives. With your
feeling for word choices, you are going to get two plot
negatives.
As for Miranda's motives, I think you tried to give us a clue when she suggested that Edward tie her up. That's not a suggestion which Edward should have dismissed.
Edward was devastated, which I can easily believe. What did he do after he went for his aimless bike ride, though?
Uther Pendragon FAQs http://www.nyx.net/~anon584c anon584c@nyx.net fiqshn http://www.asstr.org/~Uther_Pendragon
From: Mat Twassel
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: 26 Nov 2001 15:37:54 GMT
Uther writes:
Edward was devastated, which I can easily believe. What did he do after he went for his aimless bike ride, though?
That would probably be answered in chapter two or chapter three, if there were a chapter two or three.
One possibility is that he bicycles on to the park and watches the river flow. Maybe he sees two children playing in a tree. A boy and a girl, maybe twelve or thirteen years old. They're sitting on a bough which stretches out over the stream, talking the way kids do, straddling the limb, face to face, and suddenly they're kissing. Edward thinks maybe it's their first kiss. Further down the trail, Edward encounters a little old man with a small dog. The dog is splashing in the small current at the edge of the stream, but he's on a leash and the old man is trying to tug the dog out of the water. Edward strolls further along the path and then he goes back. He gets about even with the old tree limb. The kids are still up there. Edward wonders if they'll kiss again.He waits for it to happen. While he's waiting, the little dog floats by, passing directly under the limb, the empty leash floating behind.
Then maybe he goes home, intending to tell this to Miranda.
Or maybe something else happens.
(In other words I think Edward's intentions would be to try to save his marriage. Whether or to what extent he's successful might not become clear until chapter eight or eleven or eighteen or the end, if then.)
How important is it for short stories to end "resolved"?
Sometimes (quite often) I like stories which just get us to the critical moment, as long as I can recognize the moment for what it is. In a way, in that way, short stories can be closer to poems than to novels. In any event, the important thing about a short story is that after the critical point, nothing should diminish it. Ideally, that is. Unless that's the point.
- Mat Twassel
From: Jeff Zephyr
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 12:06:53 -0600
On Sat, 24 Nov 2001 22:40:13 GMT, mccoyf@millcomm.com (Frank McCoy) wrote:
Jeff Zephyr <jeffzeph@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, 23 Nov 2001 17:17:18 GMT, mccoyf@millcomm.com (Frank McCoy) wrote:
Jeff Zephyr <jeffzeph@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, 22 Nov 2001 05:23:45 GMT, remynissin-nospamplease-@hotmail.com (Remy Nissin) wrote:
On Mon, 19 Nov 2001 19:05:27 GMT, mccoyf@millcomm.com (Frank McCoy) wrote:
remynissin-nospamplease-@hotmail.com (Remy Nissin) wrote:
On 18 Nov 2001 00:05:50 GMT, desdmona22@aol.com (Desdmona22) wrote:
[snip]
Whether she can find someone to truly lover her as Edward seems to, though, is another matter. I don't see a strong hint that her lover really does so. Sex is OK, for sure, but it isn't the only thing you want from a relationship. OK, it isn't the only thing that most people want from a permanent relationship.
So, she wants to keep her sex-partner as well as the one who loves her ... to the detriment of both. That's selfishness and uncaring, not love ... and a way to keep neither one.
Though the story was sad, I felt it reflected this sentiment as truth. Which often seems to happen. The breach of trust is much harder to heal than the breach of the promise of fidelity. That your partner desires others sexually, but still wants to be with you, is one thing. That she/he wants it regardless of your wishes, and is willing to manipulate you with lies to get it, is quite another.
Amen.
I could take my SO wanting somebody else sexually, or even as a permanent lover. LYING to me however, would be almost unbearable.
Heck, if my wife wanted another lover, but wanted ME as her love, then I'd probably invite him to move in!
Both are reasonable. But here is my strange theory: if it is OK to discuss the temptations which come up, and consider the other options out there, it is easier to hold those temptations at bay. Assuming, of course, that you aren't into swinging, and don't want to see your partner doing the same things you're tempted by.
Besides, I don't know about anyone else, but I don't think I'd be happy with a partner who wasn't turned on by other people, at least some of the time. Sure, I want to be the one that does it best, but it is an awful lot to expect that no one your partner meets will be exciting or interesting, just because they're with you. Talking about that reaction can, if you're lucky, redirect the excitement back at you. Ignoring it, or worse, acting jealous about it, means less fun for you.
Jeff
Web site at http://www.asstr.org/~jeffzephyr/ For FTP, ftp://ftp.asstr.org/pub/Authors/jeffzephyr/
There is nothing more important than petting the cat.
From: Jeff Zephyr
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 12:07:53 -0600
On Sat, 24 Nov 2001 12:33:44 -0800, dennyw@TANSTAAFL.zipcon.net wrote:
On Sat, 24 Nov 2001 08:22:28 -0600, Jeff Zephyr <jeffzeph@hotmail.com> held forth, saying:
On Fri, 23 Nov 2001 17:19:35 -0800, dennyw@TANSTAAFL.zipcon.net wrote:
On Fri, 23 Nov 2001 07:41:04 -0600, Jeff Zephyr <jeffzeph@hotmail.com> held forth, saying:
There are fans of epics. I have the same tendency,
I'm shocked.
Where's the smiley? :-) I mean, is it at all possible that you are genuinely shocked by this revelation?
Smiley would kinda ruin the irony. (ping Fr. Nat)
OK, but USA'ns don't really know about irony, unless you mean the metal sort :-)
Jeff
Web site at http://www.asstr.org/~jeffzephyr/ For FTP, ftp://ftp.asstr.org/pub/Authors/jeffzephyr/
There is nothing more important than petting the cat.
From: Frank McCoy
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 18:31:07 GMT
Jeff Zephyr <jeffzeph@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 24 Nov 2001 22:40:13 GMT, mccoyf@millcomm.com (Frank McCoy) wrote:
Jeff Zephyr <jeffzeph@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, 23 Nov 2001 17:17:18 GMT, mccoyf@millcomm.com (Frank McCoy) wrote:
Jeff Zephyr <jeffzeph@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, 22 Nov 2001 05:23:45 GMT, remynissin-nospamplease-@hotmail.com (Remy Nissin) wrote:
On Mon, 19 Nov 2001 19:05:27 GMT, mccoyf@millcomm.com (Frank McCoy) wrote:
remynissin-nospamplease-@hotmail.com (Remy Nissin) wrote:
On 18 Nov 2001 00:05:50 GMT, desdmona22@aol.com (Desdmona22) wrote:
[snip]
Whether she can find someone to truly lover her as Edward seems to, though, is another matter. I don't see a strong hint that her lover really does so. Sex is OK, for sure, but it isn't the only thing you want from a relationship. OK, it isn't the only thing that most people want from a permanent relationship.
So, she wants to keep her sex-partner as well as the one who loves her ... to the detriment of both. That's selfishness and uncaring, not love ... and a way to keep neither one.
Though the story was sad, I felt it reflected this sentiment as truth. Which often seems to happen. The breach of trust is much harder to heal than the breach of the promise of fidelity. That your partner desires others sexually, but still wants to be with you, is one thing. That she/he wants it regardless of your wishes, and is willing to manipulate you with lies to get it, is quite another.
Amen.
I could take my SO wanting somebody else sexually, or even as a permanent lover. LYING to me however, would be almost unbearable.
Heck, if my wife wanted another lover, but wanted ME as her love, then I'd probably invite him to move in!
Both are reasonable. But here is my strange theory: if it is OK to discuss the temptations which come up, and consider the other options out there, it is easier to hold those temptations at bay. Assuming, of course, that you aren't into swinging, and don't want to see your partner doing the same things you're tempted by.
Besides, I don't know about anyone else, but I don't think I'd be happy with a partner who wasn't turned on by other people, at least some of the time. Sure, I want to be the one that does it best, but it is an awful lot to expect that no one your partner meets will be exciting or interesting, just because they're with you. Talking about that reaction can, if you're lucky, redirect the excitement back at you. Ignoring it, or worse, acting jealous about it, means less fun for you.
Like I've said before:
Some people confuse jealousy with love; when the fact is jealousy
KILLS love.
Love is when somebody else's happiness is essential to your own. Jealousy is when you think you OWN somebody else, and get angry at another person using your proprty without permission.
Sure we like and care for our property. But that's not the same as wanting and needing that person to be happy.
/ ' /
,-/-, . __ /
(/ / ((/|/ / </ <
From: Father Ignatius
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 21:36:26 +0200
"mat twassel" <mmtwassel@aol.com> wrote in message news:20011126103754.22680.00001868@mb-mj.aol.com ...
Uther writes:
Edward was devastated, which I can easily believe. What did he do after he went for his aimless bike ride, though?
That's not part of the story.
[ ...]
Maybe he sees two children playing in a tree. A boy and a girl, maybe twelve or thirteen years old. They're sitting on a bough which stretches out over the
Nah. Younger. A little bit of childish innocence wouldn't go amiss.
stream, talking the way kids do, straddling the limb, face to face, and suddenly they're kissing. Edward thinks maybe it's their first kiss. Further
Okay.
down the trail, Edward encounters a little old man with a small dog. The dog is splashing in the small current at the edge of the stream, but he's on a leash and the old man is trying to tug the dog out of the water. Edward
Nah.
strolls further along the path and then he goes back. He gets about even with the old tree limb. The kids are still up there. Edward wonders if they'll kiss again.He waits for it to happen. While he's waiting, the little dog floats by, passing directly under the limb, the empty leash floating behind.
No! Chrissake, now you've spoiled it! <suspiciously>You haven't been attending and ill-digesting script-writing courses featuring post-Blavatskian symbolism, I trust?
Then maybe he goes home, intending to tell this to Miranda.
No, no, no. Dammit.
Or maybe something else happens.
No, no, no. Dammit.
(In other words
<snip>
NO! NO! NO! Dammit.
How important is it for short stories to end "resolved"?
Prezackly. As important as it is for all movies to be Hollywood movies.<sniff>
Sometimes (quite often) I like stories which just get us to the critical moment, as long as I can recognize the moment for what it is. In a way, in that way, short stories can be closer to poems than to novels.
Good.
In any event, the
important thing about a short story is that after the critical point, nothing should diminish it. Ideally, that is. Unless that's the point.
Oi. And then you spoiled it again. <irritated>WHY did you let him sucker you into this?
Now I'm off to kick stones.
<mutter, mutter, mutter> ...doing so well ...people ...<kick> ...leave well enough alone ...<kick>
"Father Ignatius" <FatherIgnatius@hotmail.com> http://www.asstr.org/~FatherIgnatius/Stories.html http://www.asstr.org/~FatherIgnatius/Images.html ...and gradually, when he found that his sensitive organ was really grateful for those grim favours, he conferred them with a better grace. Henry James, Portrait_of_a_Lady
From: dennyw
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 13:20:32 -0800
On Mon, 26 Nov 2001 21:36:26 +0200, "Father Ignatius" <FatherIgnatius@hotmail.com> held forth, saying:
Now I'm off to kick stones.
<mutter, mutter, mutter> ...doing so well ...people ...<kick> ...leave well enough alone ...<kick>
Question: is Father Nat kicking stones on the beach? And if so, has he his dog with him? -denny-
"I fear that we have awakened a sleeping giant and filled him with a terrible resolve ... " - Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto, Dec. 8th, 1941
From: Remy Nissin
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 04:53:57 GMT
On Sat, 24 Nov 2001 08:33:44 -0600, Jeff Zephyr <jeffzeph@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, 23 Nov 2001 17:17:18 GMT, mccoyf@millcomm.com (Frank McCoy) wrote:
Jeff Zephyr <jeffzeph@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, 22 Nov 2001 05:23:45 GMT, remynissin-nospamplease-@hotmail.com (Remy Nissin) wrote:
On Mon, 19 Nov 2001 19:05:27 GMT, mccoyf@millcomm.com (Frank McCoy) wrote:
remynissin-nospamplease-@hotmail.com (Remy Nissin) wrote:
On 18 Nov 2001 00:05:50 GMT, desdmona22@aol.com (Desdmona22) wrote:
[snip]
Whether she can find someone to truly lover her as Edward seems to, though, is another matter. I don't see a strong hint that her lover really does so. Sex is OK, for sure, but it isn't the only thing you want from a relationship. OK, it isn't the only thing that most people want from a permanent relationship.
So, she wants to keep her sex-partner as well as the one who loves her ... to the detriment of both. That's selfishness and uncaring, not love ... and a way to keep neither one.
Though the story was sad, I felt it reflected this sentiment as truth. Which often seems to happen. The breach of trust is much harder to heal than the breach of the promise of fidelity. That your partner desires others sexually, but still wants to be with you, is one thing. That she/he wants it regardless of your wishes, and is willing to manipulate you with lies to get it, is quite another.
That was the point at which I decided that it wasn't worth trying to make a go of it. When trust is gone, what else is left?
From: Remy Nissin
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 06:10:32 GMT
On Mon, 26 Nov 2001 12:06:53 -0600, Jeff Zephyr <jeffzeph@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 24 Nov 2001 22:40:13 GMT, mccoyf@millcomm.com (Frank McCoy) wrote:
Jeff Zephyr <jeffzeph@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, 23 Nov 2001 17:17:18 GMT, mccoyf@millcomm.com (Frank McCoy) wrote:
Jeff Zephyr <jeffzeph@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, 22 Nov 2001 05:23:45 GMT, remynissin-nospamplease-@hotmail.com (Remy Nissin) wrote:
On Mon, 19 Nov 2001 19:05:27 GMT, mccoyf@millcomm.com (Frank McCoy) wrote:
remynissin-nospamplease-@hotmail.com (Remy Nissin) wrote:
On 18 Nov 2001 00:05:50 GMT, desdmona22@aol.com (Desdmona22) wrote:
[snip]
Whether she can find someone to truly lover her as Edward seems to, though, is another matter. I don't see a strong hint that her lover really does so. Sex is OK, for sure, but it isn't the only thing you want from a relationship. OK, it isn't the only thing that most people want from a permanent relationship.
So, she wants to keep her sex-partner as well as the one who loves her ... to the detriment of both. That's selfishness and uncaring, not love ... and a way to keep neither one.
Though the story was sad, I felt it reflected this sentiment as truth. Which often seems to happen. The breach of trust is much harder to heal than the breach of the promise of fidelity. That your partner desires others sexually, but still wants to be with you, is one thing. That she/he wants it regardless of your wishes, and is willing to manipulate you with lies to get it, is quite another.
Amen.
I could take my SO wanting somebody else sexually, or even as a permanent lover. LYING to me however, would be almost unbearable.
Heck, if my wife wanted another lover, but wanted ME as her love, then I'd probably invite him to move in!
Both are reasonable. But here is my strange theory: if it is OK to discuss the temptations which come up, and consider the other options out there, it is easier to hold those temptations at bay. Assuming, of course, that you aren't into swinging, and don't want to see your partner doing the same things you're tempted by.
Besides, I don't know about anyone else, but I don't think I'd be happy with a partner who wasn't turned on by other people, at least some of the time. Sure, I want to be the one that does it best, but it is an awful lot to expect that no one your partner meets will be exciting or interesting, just because they're with you. Talking about that reaction can, if you're lucky, redirect the excitement back at you. Ignoring it, or worse, acting jealous about it, means less fun for you.
Temptation is one thing, succumbing is another. I won't ask for more than I'm willing to give, but sometimes I'm not willing to settle for less.
From: Remy Nissin
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 06:10:44 GMT
On Sat, 24 Nov 2001 22:40:13 GMT, mccoyf@millcomm.com (Frank McCoy) wrote:
Jeff Zephyr <jeffzeph@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, 23 Nov 2001 17:17:18 GMT, mccoyf@millcomm.com (Frank McCoy) wrote:
Jeff Zephyr <jeffzeph@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, 22 Nov 2001 05:23:45 GMT, remynissin-nospamplease-@hotmail.com (Remy Nissin) wrote:
On Mon, 19 Nov 2001 19:05:27 GMT, mccoyf@millcomm.com (Frank McCoy) wrote:
remynissin-nospamplease-@hotmail.com (Remy Nissin) wrote:
On 18 Nov 2001 00:05:50 GMT, desdmona22@aol.com (Desdmona22) wrote:
[snip]
Whether she can find someone to truly lover her as Edward seems to, though, is another matter. I don't see a strong hint that her lover really does so. Sex is OK, for sure, but it isn't the only thing you want from a relationship. OK, it isn't the only thing that most people want from a permanent relationship.
So, she wants to keep her sex-partner as well as the one who loves her ... to the detriment of both. That's selfishness and uncaring, not love ... and a way to keep neither one.
Though the story was sad, I felt it reflected this sentiment as truth. Which often seems to happen. The breach of trust is much harder to heal than the breach of the promise of fidelity. That your partner desires others sexually, but still wants to be with you, is one thing. That she/he wants it regardless of your wishes, and is willing to manipulate you with lies to get it, is quite another.
Amen.
I could take my SO wanting somebody else sexually, or even as a permanent lover. LYING to me however, would be almost unbearable.
Been there. It was, but not almost.
Heck, if my wife wanted another lover, but wanted ME as her love, then I'd probably invite him to move in!
That's a noble sentiment, but to be honest, I doubt that I could do that. Maybe it has something to do with my sense of worth, where I would take my SO wanting somebody else (especially permanently) as an indication of failure on my part. Whether that would be true or not, it's not a feeling that would be conducive to maintaining a healthy relationship, IMO.
From: Remy Nissin
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 06:10:55 GMT
On Mon, 26 Nov 2001 18:31:07 GMT, mccoyf@millcomm.com (Frank McCoy) wrote:
Jeff Zephyr <jeffzeph@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 24 Nov 2001 22:40:13 GMT, mccoyf@millcomm.com (Frank McCoy) wrote:
Jeff Zephyr <jeffzeph@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, 23 Nov 2001 17:17:18 GMT, mccoyf@millcomm.com (Frank McCoy) wrote:
Jeff Zephyr <jeffzeph@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, 22 Nov 2001 05:23:45 GMT, remynissin-nospamplease-@hotmail.com (Remy Nissin) wrote:
On Mon, 19 Nov 2001 19:05:27 GMT, mccoyf@millcomm.com (Frank McCoy) wrote:
remynissin-nospamplease-@hotmail.com (Remy Nissin) wrote:
On 18 Nov 2001 00:05:50 GMT, desdmona22@aol.com (Desdmona22) wrote:
[snip]
Whether she can find someone to truly lover her as Edward seems to, though, is another matter. I don't see a strong hint that her lover really does so. Sex is OK, for sure, but it isn't the only thing you want from a relationship. OK, it isn't the only thing that most people want from a permanent relationship.
So, she wants to keep her sex-partner as well as the one who loves her ... to the detriment of both. That's selfishness and uncaring, not love ... and a way to keep neither one.
Though the story was sad, I felt it reflected this sentiment as truth. Which often seems to happen. The breach of trust is much harder to heal than the breach of the promise of fidelity. That your partner desires others sexually, but still wants to be with you, is one thing. That she/he wants it regardless of your wishes, and is willing to manipulate you with lies to get it, is quite another.
Amen.
I could take my SO wanting somebody else sexually, or even as a permanent lover. LYING to me however, would be almost unbearable.
Heck, if my wife wanted another lover, but wanted ME as her love, then I'd probably invite him to move in!
Both are reasonable. But here is my strange theory: if it is OK to discuss the temptations which come up, and consider the other options out there, it is easier to hold those temptations at bay. Assuming, of course, that you aren't into swinging, and don't want to see your partner doing the same things you're tempted by.
Besides, I don't know about anyone else, but I don't think I'd be happy with a partner who wasn't turned on by other people, at least some of the time. Sure, I want to be the one that does it best, but it is an awful lot to expect that no one your partner meets will be exciting or interesting, just because they're with you. Talking about that reaction can, if you're lucky, redirect the excitement back at you. Ignoring it, or worse, acting jealous about it, means less fun for you.
Like I've said before:
Some people confuse jealousy with love; when the fact is jealousy KILLS love.
Love is when somebody else's happiness is essential to your own. Jealousy is when you think you OWN somebody else, and get angry at another person using your proprty without permission.
Sure we like and care for our property. But that's not the same as wanting and needing that person to be happy.
Let me apply the sentiment in a slightly different manner: would you succumb to temptation if you knew that your spouse would be hurt by it?
I wouldn't, and I never have. I need my spouse to display a similar level of commitment.
Perhaps, as Jeff suggests, an open marriage (with prior agreement) would be similarly equitable. I've never been serious with anyone who wanted that, so anything I could say about that would be sheer speculation.
From: Frank McCoy
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 02:02:33 GMT
remynissin-nospamplease-@hotmail.com (Remy Nissin) wrote:
On Mon, 26 Nov 2001 18:31:07 GMT, mccoyf@millcomm.com (Frank McCoy) wrote:
Jeff Zephyr <jeffzeph@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 24 Nov 2001 22:40:13 GMT, mccoyf@millcomm.com (Frank McCoy) wrote:
Jeff Zephyr <jeffzeph@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, 23 Nov 2001 17:17:18 GMT, mccoyf@millcomm.com (Frank McCoy) wrote:
Jeff Zephyr <jeffzeph@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, 22 Nov 2001 05:23:45 GMT, remynissin-nospamplease-@hotmail.com (Remy Nissin) wrote:
On Mon, 19 Nov 2001 19:05:27 GMT, mccoyf@millcomm.com (Frank McCoy) wrote:
remynissin-nospamplease-@hotmail.com (Remy Nissin) wrote:
On 18 Nov 2001 00:05:50 GMT, desdmona22@aol.com (Desdmona22) wrote:
[snip]
Whether she can find someone to truly lover her as Edward seems to, though, is another matter. I don't see a strong hint that her lover really does so. Sex is OK, for sure, but it isn't the only thing you want from a relationship. OK, it isn't the only thing that most people want from a permanent relationship.
So, she wants to keep her sex-partner as well as the one who loves her ... to the detriment of both. That's selfishness and uncaring, not love ... and a way to keep neither one.
Though the story was sad, I felt it reflected this sentiment as truth. Which often seems to happen. The breach of trust is much harder to heal than the breach of the promise of fidelity. That your partner desires others sexually, but still wants to be with you, is one thing. That she/he wants it regardless of your wishes, and is willing to manipulate you with lies to get it, is quite another.
Amen.
I could take my SO wanting somebody else sexually, or even as a permanent lover. LYING to me however, would be almost unbearable.
Heck, if my wife wanted another lover, but wanted ME as her love, then I'd probably invite him to move in!
Both are reasonable. But here is my strange theory: if it is OK to discuss the temptations which come up, and consider the other options out there, it is easier to hold those temptations at bay. Assuming, of course, that you aren't into swinging, and don't want to see your partner doing the same things you're tempted by.
Besides, I don't know about anyone else, but I don't think I'd be happy with a partner who wasn't turned on by other people, at least some of the time. Sure, I want to be the one that does it best, but it is an awful lot to expect that no one your partner meets will be exciting or interesting, just because they're with you. Talking about that reaction can, if you're lucky, redirect the excitement back at you. Ignoring it, or worse, acting jealous about it, means less fun for you.
Like I've said before:
Some people confuse jealousy with love; when the fact is jealousy KILLS love.
Love is when somebody else's happiness is essential to your own. Jealousy is when you think you OWN somebody else, and get angry at another person using your proprty without permission.
Sure we like and care for our property. But that's not the same as wanting and needing that person to be happy.
Let me apply the sentiment in a slightly different manner: would you succumb to temptation if you knew that your spouse would be hurt by it?
Nope.
I wouldn't, and I never have. I need my spouse to display a similar level of commitment.
Perhaps, as Jeff suggests, an open marriage (with prior agreement) would be similarly equitable. I've never been serious with anyone who wanted that, so anything I could say about that would be sheer speculation.
I've always said that I'd need my wife's permission first. However, even then, these days I'm not to sure I would anyway. SHE is frightened to death of AIDS; and if I had sex with somebody else she'd want me (at the least) to refrain from sex with her for several weeks afterward, and then be tested to be sure I didn't catch anything. I just can't see myself refraining from sex with HER, just for a one-night-stand with somebody else, no matter how nice or sexy they were. Only if the person was desperate, would I consider denying myself that; and only out of sympathy ... Not something most women would appreciate. I'd STILL get my wife's permission first.
/ ' / ™
,-/-, . __ /
(/ / ((/|/ / </ <
From: Remy Nissin
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 06:11:05 GMT
On Sat, 24 Nov 2001 10:17:03 -0600, Jeff Zephyr <jeffzeph@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 24 Nov 2001 00:37:48 GMT, remynissin-nospamplease-@hotmail.com (Remy Nissin) wrote:
On Fri, 23 Nov 2001 07:35:19 -0600, Jeff Zephyr <jeffzeph@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, 22 Nov 2001 05:23:45 GMT, remynissin-nospamplease-@hotmail.com (Remy Nissin) wrote:
If they are up front about a moment of weakness and their regret, and promise not to put themselves into that situation again, that at least gives you cause to hope for an improvement. If they are caught in the lie, then how could you ever believe their promises, if indeed they do wish to save the marriage/relationship.
Sure. But in my experience, this is much easier to arrange if this issue comes up well before the outside affair happens. That requires a relationship where the partners can rationally consider the idea that one or both of them might be tempted, and might even do something about it sometime. And that they should be prepared for that event. After all, on pure statistics in relationships it happens an awful lot.
More breakups over affairs happen because of the lies and the pain they cause than because of casual affairs. Especially, just sexual relationships alone aren't likely to do so, though they can hurt or annoy, depending on the degree of jealousy and disrespect involved.
I pretty much agree with what you said in the rest of your post. I suspect that I would agree with this point as well, although I haven't had first-hand experience in this regard. I pretty much accept that I won't succumb to temptation; I haven't before, and as the years go by, the opportunity for temptation wanes. :-P What I would hope for is a partner who has the strength to resist temptation as well.
Temptation can be circumstantial too. If you do things which require periods of separation, or work in a place where there are coworkers who might chase you, it is much easier to find opportunities. I do agree, though, that the desire for such temptations drops with time, maybe a matter of practicing resistance?
I meant that the desire for dalliance wanes with age, rather than time. Maybe not in every case, but in general, so that there would be fewer opportunities to be in a tempting situation. That remark was somewhat tongue-in-cheek. It could be, however, that when you're older, you have a better idea of where the limits lie, and what the consequences to certain actions may be, and are therefore less likely to blunder into an unanticipated situation.
That said, I agree that the deceit and the lack of trust that engendered contributed much more to my breakup than the affair. I think I could have gotten over the affair, but I couldn't see myself returning to the point of trusting her again. And without that, what was the point of trying to continuing the marriage? YMMV, of course.
Definitely. Even if you can forgive, it is a lot harder to work back to the same point of trust.
How do you prove a negative?
And if your partner doesn't seem
strongly inclined to give up her other lover(s), then it is even harder.
For any kind of relationship that I'd want to be in, I'd say impossible. When I was younger, I might have been amenable to entering into the kind of open relationship that you mentioned earlier, but I can't see that happening now.
I do wonder, though, how many couples consider this situation strongly enough to make their rule "forsaking all others, but if I should stray, I promise to tell you about it"?
One also wonders whether such an agreement would make it easier to stray.
I mean, it is all well and good to make promises, but if you can't keep them, how do you handle that situation?
I suspect that for most cases, through lies and deceit, alas.
From: Remy Nissin
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 06:11:13 GMT
On Sat, 24 Nov 2001 10:55:35 -0600, Jeff Zephyr <jeffzeph@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 24 Nov 2001 00:37:54 GMT, remynissin-nospamplease-@hotmail.com (Remy Nissin) wrote:
On Fri, 23 Nov 2001 07:41:04 -0600, Jeff Zephyr <jeffzeph@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, 22 Nov 2001 05:29:37 GMT, remynissin-nospamplease-@hotmail.com (Remy Nissin) wrote:
On 19 Nov 2001 04:58:50 -0800, FatherIgnatius@hotmail.com (Father Ignatius) wrote:
remynissin-nospamplease-@hotmail.com (Remy Nissin) wrote in message news:<3bf6d6c4.293048848@news.erols.com> ...
<snip>
Why isn't he an author yet?
Presuming that your question was not rhetorical, here is a list of excuses for not publishing yet:
1. Twelve-hour workdays (plus commute)
That is a strong deterrent. However, there are a couple solutions. A: weekends. B: writing at work
If neither is available, then finding time to write will require vacation time.
Weekends belong to my wife. I can't deny her those, considering how little time we have together during the week.
I can understand that part. Sometimes, I get to use some of the time for writing then, but most often I don't. It is hard enough to steal time for posts on weekends, like I'm doing now.
Amen, brother. Luckily for me, I get by on less sleep, so I can usually find some time in the wee hours to read or post.
It is not that kind of job, alas. Of course, if it were, it probably wouldn't pay as well. :) There's hope on the horizon for more reasonable hours, but not for a few months yet.
Well, that can be troublesome. I can write on breaks at work, but which is fine, but sometimes I get a bit more downtime with nothing better to do. Also, I can think about stories at work, sometimes, without being a problem for results.
Since I've started the latest story, I find I spend my commuting time thinking about it, rather than listening to news, sports, or music. Unfortunately, I also find that many of my ideas get lost before they can be captured.
My work requires active concentration, so I can't spend much time thinking about the story then. And I'm not quite obsessed enough to spend breaks doing so, yet.
2. I have a tendency to [try to] write epics, rather than tightly polished gems like Mat's and Desdmona's. (Not that I could even if I would.)
There are fans of epics. I have the same tendency, but can write shorter stuff. Not sure if they are polished gems, though :-)
I certainly thought "Berry Picking in the Rain" was one such.
Thanks! I like it too, and it got decent fan mail, but it is nice to hear that.
4. The conflict of two homilies: "Better is the enemy of good enough" and "A thing worth doing is worth doing well." I know how to balance the two in my professional life, but have yet to figure it out in my writing. I've already rewritten or thrown out 5,000 words of my current project, almost half of what I've written in toto.
That one takes practice. A lot of us do that at least some of the time, doing major rewrites. On occasion, I'll reread my tale, then start writing it again from scratch, with not a bit of copy and paste used. Usually, rewrites work around the thing, using most of what is there but with some major changes and additions.
I'm not quite good enough at the craft to say precisely what I want the first time around. Not only not precisely, but not even close. Sometimes I wonder if I even know what I'm trying to say, the first time around.
Well, you aren't alone. It does take practice writing in order to learn what you want to write.
5. Reading is way more fun than writing.
Well, that is sometimes true. I find that writing is compulsive, but tiring. I like doing it, but if I hadn't let myself get sucked into writing I would have had more reading time :-)
I get the feeling that that is true for most authors. That probably explains why I'm not an author yet.
It is an explanation, for sure. :-)
You don't have to write stories, but people who can string words together intelligently and interestingly aren't all that common. So we try to encourage them to think about writing, just in case they get into it.
This isn't my first foray into writing, but probably the closest I've come to getting a story out. Thanks for the encouragement.
Good luck!
Thanks.
From: Desdmona
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: 27 Nov 2001 07:46:45 GMT
From: remynissin-nospamplease-@hotmail.com (Remy Nissin)
Since I've started the latest story, I find I spend my commuting time thinking about it, rather than listening to news, sports, or music. Unfortunately, I also find that many of my ideas get lost before they can be captured.
I have a friend in my writing class who travels a lot. When she's on the road she takes a small tape recorder and tapes her thoughts. She writes them down later. Maybe you could try some variation of this.
Des
(Who would much rather be in bed right now, but can't sleep)
From: Remy Nissin
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 14:57:49 GMT
On 27 Nov 2001 07:46:45 GMT, desdmona22@aol.com (Desdmona22) wrote:
From: remynissin-nospamplease-@hotmail.com (Remy Nissin)
Since I've started the latest story, I find I spend my commuting time thinking about it, rather than listening to news, sports, or music. Unfortunately, I also find that many of my ideas get lost before they can be captured.
I have a friend in my writing class who travels a lot. When she's on the road she takes a small tape recorder and tapes her thoughts. She writes them down later. Maybe you could try some variation of this.
Des
(Who would much rather be in bed right now, but can't sleep)
That's an idea. "Books on tape" in reverse! : )
From: Remy Nissin
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 06:22:17 GMT
On Mon, 26 Nov 2001 21:36:26 +0200, "Father Ignatius" <FatherIgnatius@hotmail.com> wrote:
"mat twassel" <mmtwassel@aol.com> wrote in message news:20011126103754.22680.00001868@mb-mj.aol.com ...
<snip>
How important is it for short stories to end "resolved"?
Prezackly. As important as it is for all movies to be Hollywood movies.<sniff>
Sometimes (quite often) I like stories which just get us to the critical moment, as long as I can recognize the moment for what it is. In a way, in that way, short stories can be closer to poems than to novels.
Good.
In any event, the
important thing about a short story is that after the critical point, nothing should diminish it. Ideally, that is. Unless that's the point.
Oi. And then you spoiled it again. <irritated>WHY did you let him sucker you into this?
Now I'm off to kick stones.
<mutter, mutter, mutter> ...doing so well ...people ...<kick> ...leave well enough alone ...<kick>
And if wanted to have to think about a story, I'd be reading alt.literary.arts or somesuch, not ASS. I come here to exercise the other head, thankyouverymuch.
From: Father Ignatius
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 12:20:30 +0200
<dennyw@TANSTAAFL.zipcon.net> wrote in message news:pfc50u43f0l9ade7o0el17d9c0t5qq7h17@4ax.com ...
On Mon, 26 Nov 2001 21:36:26 +0200, "Father Ignatius" <FatherIgnatius@hotmail.com> held forth, saying:
Now I'm off to kick stones.
<mutter, mutter, mutter> ...doing so well ...people ...<kick> ...leave well enough alone ...<kick>
Question: is Father Nat kicking stones on the beach? And if so, has he his dog with him?
Nah. We have proper beaches, featuring sand. You might be thinking of English "beaches," in the style of rock gardens.
"Father Ignatius" <FatherIgnatius@hotmail.com> http://www.asstr.org/~FatherIgnatius/Stories.html http://www.asstr.org/~FatherIgnatius/Images.html ...and gradually, when he found that his sensitive organ was really grateful for those grim favours, he conferred them with a better grace. Henry James, Portrait_of_a_Lady
From: dennyw
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 13:05:27 -0800
On Tue, 27 Nov 2001 12:20:30 +0200, "Father Ignatius" <FatherIgnatius@hotmail.com> held forth, saying:
<dennyw@TANSTAAFL.zipcon.net> wrote in message news:pfc50u43f0l9ade7o0el17d9c0t5qq7h17@4ax.com ... On Mon, 26 Nov 2001 21:36:26 +0200, "Father Ignatius" <FatherIgnatius@hotmail.com> held forth, saying:
Now I'm off to kick stones.
<mutter, mutter, mutter> ...doing so well ...people ...<kick> ...leave well enough alone ...<kick>
Question: is Father Nat kicking stones on the beach? And if so, has he his dog with him?
Nah. We have proper beaches, featuring sand. You might be thinking of English "beaches," in the style of rock gardens.
<g>
-denny-
"I fear that we have awakened a sleeping giant and filled him with a terrible resolve ... " - Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto, Dec. 8th, 1941
From: Conjugate
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 18:03:09 -0500
<dennyw@TANSTAAFL.zipcon.net> wrote in message news:pfc50u43f0l9ade7o0el17d9c0t5qq7h17@4ax.com ...
On Mon, 26 Nov 2001 21:36:26 +0200, "Father Ignatius" <FatherIgnatius@hotmail.com> held forth, saying:
Now I'm off to kick stones.
<mutter, mutter, mutter> ...doing so well ...people ...<kick> ...leave well enough alone ...<kick>
Question: is Father Nat kicking stones on the beach? And if so, has he his dog with him? -denny-
No, I don't think so. I think the good Father has just found that he dislikes stones on the beach, and is just getting his rocks off, so to speak.
Conjugate
just happy that the stones Fr. Nat is kicking aren't those of any guy he
knows.
From: Frank McCoy
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 02:09:46 GMT
remynissin-nospamplease-@hotmail.com (Remy Nissin) wrote:
On Sat, 24 Nov 2001 22:40:13 GMT, mccoyf@millcomm.com (Frank McCoy) wrote:
Jeff Zephyr <jeffzeph@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, 23 Nov 2001 17:17:18 GMT, mccoyf@millcomm.com (Frank McCoy) wrote:
Jeff Zephyr <jeffzeph@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, 22 Nov 2001 05:23:45 GMT, remynissin-nospamplease-@hotmail.com (Remy Nissin) wrote:
On Mon, 19 Nov 2001 19:05:27 GMT, mccoyf@millcomm.com (Frank McCoy) wrote:
remynissin-nospamplease-@hotmail.com (Remy Nissin) wrote:
On 18 Nov 2001 00:05:50 GMT, desdmona22@aol.com (Desdmona22) wrote:
[snip]
Whether she can find someone to truly lover her as Edward seems to, though, is another matter. I don't see a strong hint that her lover really does so. Sex is OK, for sure, but it isn't the only thing you want from a relationship. OK, it isn't the only thing that most people want from a permanent relationship.
So, she wants to keep her sex-partner as well as the one who loves her ... to the detriment of both. That's selfishness and uncaring, not love ... and a way to keep neither one.
Though the story was sad, I felt it reflected this sentiment as truth. Which often seems to happen. The breach of trust is much harder to heal than the breach of the promise of fidelity. That your partner desires others sexually, but still wants to be with you, is one thing. That she/he wants it regardless of your wishes, and is willing to manipulate you with lies to get it, is quite another.
Amen.
I could take my SO wanting somebody else sexually, or even as a permanent lover. LYING to me however, would be almost unbearable.
Been there. It was, but not almost.
Heck, if my wife wanted another lover, but wanted ME as her love, then I'd probably invite him to move in!
That's a noble sentiment, but to be honest, I doubt that I could do that. Maybe it has something to do with my sense of worth, where I would take my SO wanting somebody else (especially permanently) as an indication of failure on my part. Whether that would be true or not, it's not a feeling that would be conducive to maintaining a healthy relationship, IMO.
Well, I would look on it as a chance to improve everything for everybody. As for the sex part, one woman can outfuck any ten men. As for the rest, if it was somebody my wife REALLY liked, then I find it hard to imaging my not liking him too. And finally, making her happy makes ME happy. Only if HE got jealous or possessive would things go wrong ... and then I think it would be obviously his problem, not mine or my wife's. If he wanted to spoil a good thing for everybody, then I suspect that he would be the loser. If (on the other hand) he wanted to join in, then we could all be winners. I can use all the friends I can get. So can my wife. If he could have her, have me as a friend, and put up with US together, then he'd not only be able to have his cake, but eat it too.
Which is also how I would look at it. I always did think that a foursome: Two men and two women would make the BEST marriage, if the four could get along well together.
/ ' / ™
,-/-, . __ /
(/ / ((/|/ / </ <
From: Jeff Zephyr
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 12:11:48 -0600
On Tue, 27 Nov 2001 06:10:55 GMT, remynissin-nospamplease-@hotmail.com (Remy Nissin) wrote:
On Mon, 26 Nov 2001 18:31:07 GMT, mccoyf@millcomm.com (Frank McCoy) wrote:
Jeff Zephyr <jeffzeph@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 24 Nov 2001 22:40:13 GMT, mccoyf@millcomm.com (Frank McCoy) wrote:
Jeff Zephyr <jeffzeph@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, 23 Nov 2001 17:17:18 GMT, mccoyf@millcomm.com (Frank McCoy) wrote:
Jeff Zephyr <jeffzeph@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, 22 Nov 2001 05:23:45 GMT, remynissin-nospamplease-@hotmail.com (Remy Nissin) wrote:
On Mon, 19 Nov 2001 19:05:27 GMT, mccoyf@millcomm.com (Frank McCoy) wrote:
remynissin-nospamplease-@hotmail.com (Remy Nissin) wrote:
On 18 Nov 2001 00:05:50 GMT, desdmona22@aol.com (Desdmona22) wrote:
[snip]
Whether she can find someone to truly lover her as Edward seems to, though, is another matter. I don't see a strong hint that her lover really does so. Sex is OK, for sure, but it isn't the only thing you want from a relationship. OK, it isn't the only thing that most people want from a permanent relationship.
So, she wants to keep her sex-partner as well as the one who loves her ... to the detriment of both. That's selfishness and uncaring, not love ... and a way to keep neither one.
Though the story was sad, I felt it reflected this sentiment as truth. Which often seems to happen. The breach of trust is much harder to heal than the breach of the promise of fidelity. That your partner desires others sexually, but still wants to be with you, is one thing. That she/he wants it regardless of your wishes, and is willing to manipulate you with lies to get it, is quite another.
Amen.
I could take my SO wanting somebody else sexually, or even as a permanent lover. LYING to me however, would be almost unbearable.
Heck, if my wife wanted another lover, but wanted ME as her love, then I'd probably invite him to move in!
Both are reasonable. But here is my strange theory: if it is OK to discuss the temptations which come up, and consider the other options out there, it is easier to hold those temptations at bay. Assuming, of course, that you aren't into swinging, and don't want to see your partner doing the same things you're tempted by.
Besides, I don't know about anyone else, but I don't think I'd be happy with a partner who wasn't turned on by other people, at least some of the time. Sure, I want to be the one that does it best, but it is an awful lot to expect that no one your partner meets will be exciting or interesting, just because they're with you. Talking about that reaction can, if you're lucky, redirect the excitement back at you. Ignoring it, or worse, acting jealous about it, means less fun for you.
Like I've said before:
Some people confuse jealousy with love; when the fact is jealousy KILLS love.
Love is when somebody else's happiness is essential to your own. Jealousy is when you think you OWN somebody else, and get angry at another person using your proprty without permission.
Sure we like and care for our property. But that's not the same as wanting and needing that person to be happy.
Let me apply the sentiment in a slightly different manner: would you succumb to temptation if you knew that your spouse would be hurt by it?
Maybe, but I'd feel really bad about doing it, and want to confess my guilt and take my punishment or whatever. Then again, this sort of thing would apply to any kind of deception or misbehavior, not just sexual temptation.
However, unlike some sorts of things we do, it does take some effort to get into a situation where temptation is likely to turn into action. I feel that unless you were already tending towards giving in, it would be awfully hard to get seduced - at least, not all in one go.
I wouldn't, and I never have. I need my spouse to display a similar level of commitment.
But could you forgive a mistake once made, if it was a fairly immediate confession? It may depend on the circumstances, too.
If you and your spouse were separated for 4 months, would it be easier to forgive a one-time fling, which is done and over with by the time you get back together?
Perhaps, as Jeff suggests, an open marriage (with prior agreement) would be similarly equitable. I've never been serious with anyone who wanted that, so anything I could say about that would be sheer speculation.
Conversely, I had a hard time getting into an arrangement which wasn't open. In large part, I'd bet, because I was pretty up front about my habits and my other commitments. Any relationship which tended towards a serious level tended not to get that far if she wasn't interested in that deal.
On the other hand, more than once I was tempted to give up most of my other relationships, if that was what she wanted. Still, this is talking about young love (age 25 and under), not a lifetime commitment.
At the end of that period, I was seriously thinking about a permanent relationship, and such things did fill my fantasies (other stuff too, naturally, but there is something about wedding nights, honeymoons, living together, etc, which is sexy). I think that it helped a lot that I lost track of a number of my casual partners, so I didn't have the feeling of being obligated to please them on request. Anyone new was just that, and it also was a lot harder to turn casual flirting into sex. Maybe, 30-something sorts don't go around offering you some pussy, or a roll in the hay, or stuff like that quite so casually as horny, very stressed college girls (and boys)?
Jeff
Web site at http://www.asstr.org/~jeffzephyr/ For FTP, ftp://ftp.asstr.org/pub/Authors/jeffzephyr/
There is nothing more important than petting the cat.
From: Jeff Zephyr
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 12:15:49 -0600
On Tue, 27 Nov 2001 06:10:32 GMT, remynissin-nospamplease-@hotmail.com (Remy Nissin) wrote:
On Mon, 26 Nov 2001 12:06:53 -0600, Jeff Zephyr <jeffzeph@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 24 Nov 2001 22:40:13 GMT, mccoyf@millcomm.com (Frank McCoy) wrote:
Jeff Zephyr <jeffzeph@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, 23 Nov 2001 17:17:18 GMT, mccoyf@millcomm.com (Frank McCoy) wrote:
Jeff Zephyr <jeffzeph@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, 22 Nov 2001 05:23:45 GMT, remynissin-nospamplease-@hotmail.com (Remy Nissin) wrote:
On Mon, 19 Nov 2001 19:05:27 GMT, mccoyf@millcomm.com (Frank McCoy) wrote:
remynissin-nospamplease-@hotmail.com (Remy Nissin) wrote:
On 18 Nov 2001 00:05:50 GMT, desdmona22@aol.com (Desdmona22) wrote:
[snip]
Whether she can find someone to truly lover her as Edward seems to, though, is another matter. I don't see a strong hint that her lover really does so. Sex is OK, for sure, but it isn't the only thing you want from a relationship. OK, it isn't the only thing that most people want from a permanent relationship.
So, she wants to keep her sex-partner as well as the one who loves her ... to the detriment of both. That's selfishness and uncaring, not love ... and a way to keep neither one.
Though the story was sad, I felt it reflected this sentiment as truth. Which often seems to happen. The breach of trust is much harder to heal than the breach of the promise of fidelity. That your partner desires others sexually, but still wants to be with you, is one thing. That she/he wants it regardless of your wishes, and is willing to manipulate you with lies to get it, is quite another.
Amen.
I could take my SO wanting somebody else sexually, or even as a permanent lover. LYING to me however, would be almost unbearable.
Heck, if my wife wanted another lover, but wanted ME as her love, then I'd probably invite him to move in!
Both are reasonable. But here is my strange theory: if it is OK to discuss the temptations which come up, and consider the other options out there, it is easier to hold those temptations at bay. Assuming, of course, that you aren't into swinging, and don't want to see your partner doing the same things you're tempted by.
Besides, I don't know about anyone else, but I don't think I'd be happy with a partner who wasn't turned on by other people, at least some of the time. Sure, I want to be the one that does it best, but it is an awful lot to expect that no one your partner meets will be exciting or interesting, just because they're with you. Talking about that reaction can, if you're lucky, redirect the excitement back at you. Ignoring it, or worse, acting jealous about it, means less fun for you.
Temptation is one thing, succumbing is another. I won't ask for more than I'm willing to give, but sometimes I'm not willing to settle for less.
Definitely, you need to make some sort of deal. In my case, my ultimate partnership deal came about because we noticed that we weren't hitting on anyone else, didn't seem interested in doing so anymore (though talking about other partners was very exciting), and maybe we really could just be together, the two of us, the more or less traditional way.
I think that the difference (the kinky part) was that our assumption was that a relationship was open, up to the point that both parties agreed to close it, rather than assuming that a closed relationship was the default, desireable one. There is also a renegotiation clause :-)
But you know, the attraction of making it with a stranger just doesn't seem as much fun as it did when I was younger. Also, I figure that the odds of getting really foolish drop a lot if you don't get drunk (or whatever) with potential new partners.
Jeff
Web site at http://www.asstr.org/~jeffzephyr/ For FTP, ftp://ftp.asstr.org/pub/Authors/jeffzephyr/
There is nothing more important than petting the cat.
From: Jeff Zephyr
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 12:28:38 -0600
On Tue, 27 Nov 2001 06:11:05 GMT, remynissin-nospamplease-@hotmail.com (Remy Nissin) wrote:
On Sat, 24 Nov 2001 10:17:03 -0600, Jeff Zephyr <jeffzeph@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 24 Nov 2001 00:37:48 GMT, remynissin-nospamplease-@hotmail.com (Remy Nissin) wrote:
On Fri, 23 Nov 2001 07:35:19 -0600, Jeff Zephyr <jeffzeph@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, 22 Nov 2001 05:23:45 GMT, remynissin-nospamplease-@hotmail.com (Remy Nissin) wrote:
If they are up front about a moment of weakness and their regret, and promise not to put themselves into that situation again, that at least gives you cause to hope for an improvement. If they are caught in the lie, then how could you ever believe their promises, if indeed they do wish to save the marriage/relationship.
Sure. But in my experience, this is much easier to arrange if this issue comes up well before the outside affair happens. That requires a relationship where the partners can rationally consider the idea that one or both of them might be tempted, and might even do something about it sometime. And that they should be prepared for that event. After all, on pure statistics in relationships it happens an awful lot.
More breakups over affairs happen because of the lies and the pain they cause than because of casual affairs. Especially, just sexual relationships alone aren't likely to do so, though they can hurt or annoy, depending on the degree of jealousy and disrespect involved.
I pretty much agree with what you said in the rest of your post. I suspect that I would agree with this point as well, although I haven't had first-hand experience in this regard. I pretty much accept that I won't succumb to temptation; I haven't before, and as the years go by, the opportunity for temptation wanes. :-P What I would hope for is a partner who has the strength to resist temptation as well.
Temptation can be circumstantial too. If you do things which require periods of separation, or work in a place where there are coworkers who might chase you, it is much easier to find opportunities. I do agree, though, that the desire for such temptations drops with time, maybe a matter of practicing resistance?
I meant that the desire for dalliance wanes with age, rather than time. Maybe not in every case, but in general, so that there would be fewer opportunities to be in a tempting situation. That remark was somewhat tongue-in-cheek. It could be, however, that when you're older, you have a better idea of where the limits lie, and what the consequences to certain actions may be, and are therefore less likely to blunder into an unanticipated situation.
Quite definitely so. Most coworkers and acquaintances aren't singles or swinger types out to score with someone, and if they are, they can see you're attached and avoid chasing you. The physical effects of age do slow down the responses, and then there is the matter of having some experience. It isn't as though a new random encounter is going to be likely to be something completely new sexually.
I also know that if I get turned on, the feeling will keep until I get home. Of course, that sort of response is a lot easier to control if you know there is a nice person waiting at home. Dating couples are often much less certain of that.
That said, I agree that the deceit and the lack of trust that engendered contributed much more to my breakup than the affair. I think I could have gotten over the affair, but I couldn't see myself returning to the point of trusting her again. And without that, what was the point of trying to continuing the marriage? YMMV, of course.
Definitely. Even if you can forgive, it is a lot harder to work back to the same point of trust.
How do you prove a negative?
Blind faith. Assume that she is trustable, and hope that you're right. But that is much easier if the whole affair thing blows up quickly, rather than something sustained for weeks, worse if longer. If your partner isn't eaten up with guilt over the situation, it is awfully hard to feel forgiving.
And if your partner doesn't seem
strongly inclined to give up her other lover(s), then it is even harder.
For any kind of relationship that I'd want to be in, I'd say impossible. When I was younger, I might have been amenable to entering into the kind of open relationship that you mentioned earlier, but I can't see that happening now.
True, when older it seems easier and safer to just go with a nice tight relationship, no extras. When younger, though, I found it very easy to do so. It probably didn't help at all that my college friends were into swinging parties or at least casual swapping, because I had no shortage of potential no-strings partners.
But then, in the 70s/80s, pre-AIDS, that just seemed like having fun. The fact that I was dead set against marriage prior to graduation also made it hard to get into a committed, closed relationship.
I was in a few nice, stable open ones, though.
I do wonder, though, how many couples consider this situation strongly enough to make their rule "forsaking all others, but if I should stray, I promise to tell you about it"?
One also wonders whether such an agreement would make it easier to stray.
It all depends on just how guilty you feel, and whether your partner seems hurt by your indulgences. Anyway, I think that works for me.
Big positive on that is that I'm not jealous or possessive, so a sexual fling alone has no big emotional impact. I've BTDT with a lot of partners who revealed affairs (usually not keeping them secret long), and the fact that I didn't blow up on them probably helped things out.
Worst case, and I'm willing to live with the risk, is that an openly revealed affair would end up breaking up the relationship. But I'd much rather have it end on an open note of trust than have the good parts of the relationship spoiled by a web of deception at the end.
I mean, it is all well and good to make promises, but if you can't keep them, how do you handle that situation?
I suspect that for most cases, through lies and deceit, alas.
I also suspect that. But then, it seems so much easier to some people to just lie, believing they won't get caught, and what the other person doesn't know won't hurt them.
Maybe, some people just can't take honesty? I mean, little white lies add up, until the bigger lies seem just as acceptable. A tight relationship has an implicit kind of trust and absolute honesty in it, but that is really intense. If your partner doesn't accept you as you are, then lying seems like a valid solution if you are to stay together?
OTOH, my parents stayed together "for the kids" so I have a somewhat skewed view of the subject. It would be so much better if marriages would break up before the kids got involved in this. Messing up two lives is much nicer than three or more.
Jeff
Web site at http://www.asstr.org/~jeffzephyr/ For FTP, ftp://ftp.asstr.org/pub/Authors/jeffzephyr/
There is nothing more important than petting the cat.
From: Remy Nissin
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 12:27:08 GMT
On Wed, 28 Nov 2001 12:11:48 -0600, Jeff Zephyr <jeffzeph@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, 27 Nov 2001 06:10:55 GMT, remynissin-nospamplease-@hotmail.com (Remy Nissin) wrote:
On Mon, 26 Nov 2001 18:31:07 GMT, mccoyf@millcomm.com (Frank McCoy) wrote:
Jeff Zephyr <jeffzeph@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 24 Nov 2001 22:40:13 GMT, mccoyf@millcomm.com (Frank McCoy) wrote:
Jeff Zephyr <jeffzeph@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, 23 Nov 2001 17:17:18 GMT, mccoyf@millcomm.com (Frank McCoy) wrote:
<snip>
Love is when somebody else's happiness is essential to your own. Jealousy is when you think you OWN somebody else, and get angry at another person using your proprty without permission.
Sure we like and care for our property. But that's not the same as wanting and needing that person to be happy.
Let me apply the sentiment in a slightly different manner: would you succumb to temptation if you knew that your spouse would be hurt by it?
Maybe, but I'd feel really bad about doing it, and want to confess my guilt and take my punishment or whatever. Then again, this sort of thing would apply to any kind of deception or misbehavior, not just sexual temptation.
However, unlike some sorts of things we do, it does take some effort to get into a situation where temptation is likely to turn into action. I feel that unless you were already tending towards giving in, it would be awfully hard to get seduced - at least, not all in one go. I wouldn't, and I never have. I need my spouse to display a similar level of commitment.
But could you forgive a mistake once made, if it was a fairly immediate confession? It may depend on the circumstances, too.
I could, but as you say, it depends on the circumstances. I agree with you that it would generally take some effort to get into that situation, so at what point does a premeditated action turn into a "mistake?"
If you and your spouse were separated for 4 months, would it be easier to forgive a one-time fling, which is done and over with by the time you get back together?
Again, it would depend greatly on the circumstances, and the amount of regret and determination to prevent a reoccurence. Just saying "I'm sorry" without changing the kinds of actions that got you there would not do the trick.
Perhaps, as Jeff suggests, an open marriage (with prior agreement) would be similarly equitable. I've never been serious with anyone who wanted that, so anything I could say about that would be sheer speculation.
Conversely, I had a hard time getting into an arrangement which wasn't open. In large part, I'd bet, because I was pretty up front about my habits and my other commitments. Any relationship which tended towards a serious level tended not to get that far if she wasn't interested in that deal.
On the other hand, more than once I was tempted to give up most of my other relationships, if that was what she wanted. Still, this is talking about young love (age 25 and under), not a lifetime commitment.
At the end of that period, I was seriously thinking about a permanent relationship, and such things did fill my fantasies (other stuff too, naturally, but there is something about wedding nights, honeymoons, living together, etc, which is sexy). I think that it helped a lot that I lost track of a number of my casual partners, so I didn't have the feeling of being obligated to please them on request. Anyone new was just that, and it also was a lot harder to turn casual flirting into sex. Maybe, 30-something sorts don't go around offering you some pussy, or a roll in the hay, or stuff like that quite so casually as horny, very stressed college girls (and boys)?
I think the entire mindset is different by then. By that time, more are likely to be in committed relationships, and of those that are not, many are more likely to be looking for one.
From: Remy Nissin
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 12:37:42 GMT
On Wed, 28 Nov 2001 12:15:49 -0600, Jeff Zephyr <jeffzeph@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, 27 Nov 2001 06:10:32 GMT, remynissin-nospamplease-@hotmail.com (Remy Nissin) wrote:
Temptation is one thing, succumbing is another. I won't ask for more than I'm willing to give, but sometimes I'm not willing to settle for less.
Definitely, you need to make some sort of deal. In my case, my ultimate partnership deal came about because we noticed that we weren't hitting on anyone else, didn't seem interested in doing so anymore (though talking about other partners was very exciting), and maybe we really could just be together, the two of us, the more or less traditional way.
I think that the difference (the kinky part) was that our assumption was that a relationship was open, up to the point that both parties agreed to close it, rather than assuming that a closed relationship was the default, desireable one. There is also a renegotiation clause :-)
But you know, the attraction of making it with a stranger just doesn't seem as much fun as it did when I was younger. Also, I figure that the odds of getting really foolish drop a lot if you don't get drunk (or whatever) with potential new partners.
You raise a good point. Alcohol or drugs probably have a lot to do with seeking and succumbing to new partners. This would be even more true, IMO, if you're already committed to an exclusive relationship.
Maybe that's why I've never been tempted enough to go beyond the bounds. I've never been much into drinking - I tend to get sick before I get drunk - and I'm one of the rare ones who has never taken any illegal substances. Not even without inhaling.
From: Jeff Zephyr
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 11:47:24 -0600
On Sat, 01 Dec 2001 12:37:42 GMT, remynissin-nospamplease-@hotmail.com (Remy Nissin) wrote:
On Wed, 28 Nov 2001 12:15:49 -0600, Jeff Zephyr <jeffzeph@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, 27 Nov 2001 06:10:32 GMT, remynissin-nospamplease-@hotmail.com (Remy Nissin) wrote:
Temptation is one thing, succumbing is another. I won't ask for more than I'm willing to give, but sometimes I'm not willing to settle for less.
Definitely, you need to make some sort of deal. In my case, my ultimate partnership deal came about because we noticed that we weren't hitting on anyone else, didn't seem interested in doing so anymore (though talking about other partners was very exciting), and maybe we really could just be together, the two of us, the more or less traditional way.
I think that the difference (the kinky part) was that our assumption was that a relationship was open, up to the point that both parties agreed to close it, rather than assuming that a closed relationship was the default, desireable one. There is also a renegotiation clause :-)
But you know, the attraction of making it with a stranger just doesn't seem as much fun as it did when I was younger. Also, I figure that the odds of getting really foolish drop a lot if you don't get drunk (or whatever) with potential new partners.
You raise a good point. Alcohol or drugs probably have a lot to do with seeking and succumbing to new partners. This would be even more true, IMO, if you're already committed to an exclusive relationship.
The loosening of inhibitions, most definitely can make you vulnerable to doing lots of stupid things. When you're young, you are more likely to think that being stupid is fun :-)
Maybe that's why I've never been tempted enough to go beyond the bounds. I've never been much into drinking - I tend to get sick before I get drunk - and I'm one of the rare ones who has never taken any illegal substances. Not even without inhaling.
I have mixed feelings on the stuff, because it did seem fun to do when I was younger, but I knew about the side effects socially from my parents' actions (and other adults). As I got older, I do it less and less, even for simple casual "social drinking." Soda, tea, coffee and juice are just fine, thanks.
Jeff
Web site at http://www.asstr.org/~jeffzephyr/ For FTP, ftp://ftp.asstr.org/pub/Authors/jeffzephyr/
There is nothing more important than petting the cat.
From: Remy Nissin
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 12:53:46 GMT
On Wed, 28 Nov 2001 02:09:46 GMT, mccoyf@millcomm.com (Frank McCoy) wrote:
Well, I would look on it as a chance to improve everything for everybody. As for the sex part, one woman can outfuck any ten men.
That's true as a theoretical maximum, but in practice, when you factor in the time requirements of family and career, it's often hard to find the opportunity to keep even one partner happy.
I think differences in libido is more of a factor than whether you're a woman or a man. I've never researched it and have no idea on tendencies for the general population, but I've seen (and been in) more relationships where the man wanted it more often than the woman. That misses the point of a committed, monogamous relationship, though.
As for the rest, if it was somebody my wife REALLY liked, then I find it hard to imaging my not liking him too. And finally, making her happy makes ME happy. Only if HE got jealous or possessive would things go wrong ... and then I think it would be obviously his problem, not mine or my wife's. If he wanted to spoil a good thing for everybody, then I suspect that he would be the loser. If (on the other hand) he wanted to join in, then we could all be winners. I can use all the friends I can get. So can my wife. If he could have her, have me as a friend, and put up with US together, then he'd not only be able to have his cake, but eat it too.
Which is also how I would look at it. I always did think that a foursome: Two men and two women would make the BEST marriage, if the four could get along well together.
I've never been in one. Not even close. I can visualize how it might work out great when things go right. I can also visualize how things can go horribly wrong. I have no idea which is more likely.
From: Jeff Zephyr
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 11:41:17 -0600
On Sat, 01 Dec 2001 12:53:46 GMT, remynissin-nospamplease-@hotmail.com (Remy Nissin) wrote:
On Wed, 28 Nov 2001 02:09:46 GMT, mccoyf@millcomm.com (Frank McCoy) wrote:
Well, I would look on it as a chance to improve everything for everybody. As for the sex part, one woman can outfuck any ten men.
That's true as a theoretical maximum, but in practice, when you factor in the time requirements of family and career, it's often hard to find the opportunity to keep even one partner happy.
I think differences in libido is more of a factor than whether you're a woman or a man. I've never researched it and have no idea on tendencies for the general population, but I've seen (and been in) more relationships where the man wanted it more often than the woman. That misses the point of a committed, monogamous relationship, though.
Physiologically, the male is more likely to feel uncomfortable if arousal isn't addressed. That is quite different from how often either sex can enjoy the act. In a monogamous relationship, the action stops when one of them runs out of steam. In a poly or open relationship, one of them gets to rest while the other(s) continue.
As for the rest, if it was somebody my wife REALLY liked, then I find it hard to imaging my not liking him too. And finally, making her happy makes ME happy. Only if HE got jealous or possessive would things go wrong ... and then I think it would be obviously his problem, not mine or my wife's. If he wanted to spoil a good thing for everybody, then I suspect that he would be the loser. If (on the other hand) he wanted to join in, then we could all be winners. I can use all the friends I can get. So can my wife. If he could have her, have me as a friend, and put up with US together, then he'd not only be able to have his cake, but eat it too.
Which is also how I would look at it. I always did think that a foursome: Two men and two women would make the BEST marriage, if the four could get along well together.
I've never been in one. Not even close. I can visualize how it might work out great when things go right. I can also visualize how things can go horribly wrong. I have no idea which is more likely.
I've been in a lot of threesome/foursome relationships, if you count just sex, and a few romances, including one which was very close to marriage (skipping legality, but handfasting is a public, moral commitment, even if the law won't recognize it).
I don't know about it going horribly wrong. The ending was mostly amicable, and no long-lasting animosity resulted. The stress from problems, though, may be amplified just as the joy shared is, from having more people to spread it around.
I can't tell you likelihood, except that you aren't going to get a real, stable poly relationship unless everyone involved accepts it, and the social problems are very high. Worse, maybe, than simply being just non-straight (presuming that your poly situation involves bisexuality, but a lot do). OK, even if you are completely straight (as Mormons and some others practice), I think that the situation is less well accepted. It is really hard to keep a marriage going when everyone around you thinks you're evil for your choice of partner(s).
Jeff
Web site at http://www.asstr.org/~jeffzephyr/ For FTP, ftp://ftp.asstr.org/pub/Authors/jeffzephyr/
There is nothing more important than petting the cat.
From: Remy Nissin
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 14:11:55 GMT
On Wed, 28 Nov 2001 12:28:38 -0600, Jeff Zephyr <jeffzeph@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, 27 Nov 2001 06:11:05 GMT, remynissin-nospamplease-@hotmail.com (Remy Nissin) wrote:
On Sat, 24 Nov 2001 10:17:03 -0600, Jeff Zephyr <jeffzeph@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 24 Nov 2001 00:37:48 GMT, remynissin-nospamplease-@hotmail.com (Remy Nissin) wrote:
On Fri, 23 Nov 2001 07:35:19 -0600, Jeff Zephyr <jeffzeph@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, 22 Nov 2001 05:23:45 GMT, remynissin-nospamplease-@hotmail.com (Remy Nissin) wrote:
If they are up front about a moment of weakness and their regret, and promise not to put themselves into that situation again, that at least gives you cause to hope for an improvement. If they are caught in the lie, then how could you ever believe their promises, if indeed they do wish to save the marriage/relationship.
Sure. But in my experience, this is much easier to arrange if this issue comes up well before the outside affair happens. That requires a relationship where the partners can rationally consider the idea that one or both of them might be tempted, and might even do something about it sometime. And that they should be prepared for that event. After all, on pure statistics in relationships it happens an awful lot.
More breakups over affairs happen because of the lies and the pain they cause than because of casual affairs. Especially, just sexual relationships alone aren't likely to do so, though they can hurt or annoy, depending on the degree of jealousy and disrespect involved.
I pretty much agree with what you said in the rest of your post. I suspect that I would agree with this point as well, although I haven't had first-hand experience in this regard. I pretty much accept that I won't succumb to temptation; I haven't before, and as the years go by, the opportunity for temptation wanes. :-P What I would hope for is a partner who has the strength to resist temptation as well.
Temptation can be circumstantial too. If you do things which require periods of separation, or work in a place where there are coworkers who might chase you, it is much easier to find opportunities. I do agree, though, that the desire for such temptations drops with time, maybe a matter of practicing resistance?
I meant that the desire for dalliance wanes with age, rather than time. Maybe not in every case, but in general, so that there would be fewer opportunities to be in a tempting situation. That remark was somewhat tongue-in-cheek. It could be, however, that when you're older, you have a better idea of where the limits lie, and what the consequences to certain actions may be, and are therefore less likely to blunder into an unanticipated situation.
Quite definitely so. Most coworkers and acquaintances aren't singles or swinger types out to score with someone, and if they are, they can see you're attached and avoid chasing you. The physical effects of age do slow down the responses, and then there is the matter of having some experience. It isn't as though a new random encounter is going to be likely to be something completely new sexually.
I also know that if I get turned on, the feeling will keep until I get home.
That's always been my response to temptation.
Of course, that sort of response is a lot easier to control if you know there is a nice person waiting at home. Dating couples are often much less certain of that.
I'm not sure how you're defining "dating" here. I view it as connoting a more casual, rather than a committed relationship. By that definition, there is no issue of infidelity.
That said, I agree that the deceit and the lack of trust that engendered contributed much more to my breakup than the affair. I think I could have gotten over the affair, but I couldn't see myself returning to the point of trusting her again. And without that, what was the point of trying to continuing the marriage? YMMV, of course.
Definitely. Even if you can forgive, it is a lot harder to work back to the same point of trust.
How do you prove a negative?
Blind faith. Assume that she is trustable, and hope that you're right. But that is much easier if the whole affair thing blows up quickly, rather than something sustained for weeks, worse if longer.
Faith is not proof. Most of us assume trustworthiness with the lack of evidence to the contrary, but I find it hard to do so when we're talking about someone who had lied and deceived you in order to pursue an affair. She had already proven that she was not trustworthy. Blind faith in assuming she is trustable seems rather foolish in this context. Or is it just me?
If your partner isn't eaten up with guilt over the situation, it is awfully hard to feel forgiving.
Oh, definitely. But even if she is, one wonders if the remorse is for the act, or for getting caught.
And if your partner doesn't seem
strongly inclined to give up her other lover(s), then it is even harder.
For any kind of relationship that I'd want to be in, I'd say impossible. When I was younger, I might have been amenable to entering into the kind of open relationship that you mentioned earlier, but I can't see that happening now.
True, when older it seems easier and safer to just go with a nice tight relationship, no extras. When younger, though, I found it very easy to do so. It probably didn't help at all that my college friends were into swinging parties or at least casual swapping, because I had no shortage of potential no-strings partners.
But then, in the 70s/80s, pre-AIDS, that just seemed like having fun. The fact that I was dead set against marriage prior to graduation also made it hard to get into a committed, closed relationship.
I was in a few nice, stable open ones, though.
I fell into an exclusive relationship early on in college and "missed out" on all the casual sex available. We weren't married then, but might as well have been. We did get married after graduation and the thought that it wasn't going to be forever did not even occur to me. That I caught her in the lie was mostly accident, because I had totally trusted her and believed her explanations for all the little clues. When the truth struck home, though, and I thought of all the times she had me frantic with worry when she was hours late from work, from the spa, from shopping with her girlfriends, I realized that someone who could knowingly put me through this was not someone I wanted to stay married to.
If the marriage was what I thought it was going to be, I wouldn't have felt I "missed out" on the college opportunities, but as things did turn out, I definitely wish I'd had more flings.
I do wonder, though, how many couples consider this situation strongly enough to make their rule "forsaking all others, but if I should stray, I promise to tell you about it"?
One also wonders whether such an agreement would make it easier to stray.
It all depends on just how guilty you feel, and whether your partner seems hurt by your indulgences. Anyway, I think that works for me.
Big positive on that is that I'm not jealous or possessive, so a sexual fling alone has no big emotional impact. I've BTDT with a lot of partners who revealed affairs (usually not keeping them secret long), and the fact that I didn't blow up on them probably helped things out.
That's fine for you. Most people I know don't go into marriage with that attitude. (Actually, nobody that I personally know.)
Let's say you asked your wife how she felt about your having a casual liaison with someone else, and she told you something like: "I won't freak out, but I'd prefer that you didn't. I think I might feel hurt by it and I really can't say how it would affect my feelings on our long-term stability." Would you or wouldn't you?
If not, why not? Is it wrong to expect the same kind of consideration from your spouse as you'd give her?
Worst case, and I'm willing to live with the risk, is that an openly revealed affair would end up breaking up the relationship. But I'd much rather have it end on an open note of trust than have the good parts of the relationship spoiled by a web of deception at the end.
No argument here.
I mean, it is all well and good to make promises, but if you can't keep them, how do you handle that situation?
I suspect that for most cases, through lies and deceit, alas.
I also suspect that. But then, it seems so much easier to some people to just lie, believing they won't get caught, and what the other person doesn't know won't hurt them.
That is exactly why I see getting caught in the lie as sufficient justification for ending a marriage. How can you ever know that the one you caught isn't just the tip of the iceberg?
Maybe, some people just can't take honesty? I mean, little white lies add up, until the bigger lies seem just as acceptable. A tight relationship has an implicit kind of trust and absolute honesty in it, but that is really intense. If your partner doesn't accept you as you are, then lying seems like a valid solution if you are to stay together?
Then again, a spouse who would lie is even less acceptable to me. I can overlook a lot of things (I think I can, anyway, but I suppose most people would say the same, whether others agreed or not), but lack of honesty is not one of them. A marriage in which I can't trust my spouse isn't worth much, IMO.
OTOH, my parents stayed together "for the kids" so I have a somewhat skewed view of the subject. It would be so much better if marriages would break up before the kids got involved in this. Messing up two lives is much nicer than three or more.
Interestingly, I've read an article about a study showed that staying together for the kids are better for the kids than breaking up into a single-parent unit. I haven't read the study itself, but I suspect that too much depends on upon the individual circumstances to be able to draw a general conclusion.
From: Jeff Zephyr
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 12:15:07 -0600
On Sat, 01 Dec 2001 14:11:55 GMT, remynissin-nospamplease-@hotmail.com (Remy Nissin) wrote:
On Wed, 28 Nov 2001 12:28:38 -0600, Jeff Zephyr <jeffzeph@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, 27 Nov 2001 06:11:05 GMT, remynissin-nospamplease-@hotmail.com (Remy Nissin) wrote:
On Sat, 24 Nov 2001 10:17:03 -0600, Jeff Zephyr <jeffzeph@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 24 Nov 2001 00:37:48 GMT, remynissin-nospamplease-@hotmail.com (Remy Nissin) wrote:
On Fri, 23 Nov 2001 07:35:19 -0600, Jeff Zephyr <jeffzeph@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, 22 Nov 2001 05:23:45 GMT, remynissin-nospamplease-@hotmail.com (Remy Nissin) wrote:
Of course, that sort of response is a lot easier to control if you know there is a nice person waiting at home. Dating couples are often much less certain of that.
I'm not sure how you're defining "dating" here. I view it as connoting a more casual, rather than a committed relationship. By that definition, there is no issue of infidelity.
Going out with someone, possibly even regularly, but without a specific explicit commitment to go steady, let alone engagements or other promises.
But even if you are "going steady," that doesn't mean that the relationship is solid with regards to sex. Maybe, you still need to seduce each time, and not all partners are open to just doing it all the time like that.
That said, I agree that the deceit and the lack of trust that engendered contributed much more to my breakup than the affair. I think I could have gotten over the affair, but I couldn't see myself returning to the point of trusting her again. And without that, what was the point of trying to continuing the marriage? YMMV, of course.
Definitely. Even if you can forgive, it is a lot harder to work back to the same point of trust.
How do you prove a negative?
Blind faith. Assume that she is trustable, and hope that you're right. But that is much easier if the whole affair thing blows up quickly, rather than something sustained for weeks, worse if longer.
Faith is not proof. Most of us assume trustworthiness with the lack of evidence to the contrary, but I find it hard to do so when we're talking about someone who had lied and deceived you in order to pursue an affair. She had already proven that she was not trustworthy. Blind faith in assuming she is trustable seems rather foolish in this context. Or is it just me?
No, but love can make you very foolish. Sometimes, it really can work out to be enough to fix things up, correcting the situation. Wouldn't she feel just terrible if she broke trust again, after you accepted her apology and let the past go?
If your partner isn't eaten up with guilt over the situation, it is awfully hard to feel forgiving.
Oh, definitely. But even if she is, one wonders if the remorse is for the act, or for getting caught.
Well, that is a problem for sure. Best to find out which reason it is, but figuring that out can be very hard.
True, when older it seems easier and safer to just go with a nice tight relationship, no extras. When younger, though, I found it very easy to do so. It probably didn't help at all that my college friends were into swinging parties or at least casual swapping, because I had no shortage of potential no-strings partners.
But then, in the 70s/80s, pre-AIDS, that just seemed like having fun. The fact that I was dead set against marriage prior to graduation also made it hard to get into a committed, closed relationship.
I was in a few nice, stable open ones, though.
I fell into an exclusive relationship early on in college and "missed out" on all the casual sex available. We weren't married then, but might as well have been. We did get married after graduation and the thought that it wasn't going to be forever did not even occur to me. That I caught her in the lie was mostly accident, because I had totally trusted her and believed her explanations for all the little clues. When the truth struck home, though, and I thought of all the times she had me frantic with worry when she was hours late from work, from the spa, from shopping with her girlfriends, I realized that someone who could knowingly put me through this was not someone I wanted to stay married to.
That makes sense to me, going with just one person because it was working out so well. I didn't do that, but primarily because my partners didn't seem to want it strongly (nor did I, but I was willing to compromise). Especially, since most often in my open relationships I was with my main partner, and not out with whoever, or looking for new fun.
If the marriage was what I thought it was going to be, I wouldn't have felt I "missed out" on the college opportunities, but as things did turn out, I definitely wish I'd had more flings.
That can be tricky to balance, because looking for flings can get in the way of getting a nice marriage (or even a nice steady relationship). Also, lots of partners can add some new experiences for variety, but some of them will be more or less the same as others, if you only count sexuality.
I do wonder, though, how many couples consider this situation strongly enough to make their rule "forsaking all others, but if I should stray, I promise to tell you about it"?
One also wonders whether such an agreement would make it easier to stray.
It all depends on just how guilty you feel, and whether your partner seems hurt by your indulgences. Anyway, I think that works for me.
Big positive on that is that I'm not jealous or possessive, so a sexual fling alone has no big emotional impact. I've BTDT with a lot of partners who revealed affairs (usually not keeping them secret long), and the fact that I didn't blow up on them probably helped things out.
That's fine for you. Most people I know don't go into marriage with that attitude. (Actually, nobody that I personally know.)
You don't know enough people then :-) However, seriously, not everyone goes out and advertises that decision, or attitude. But I've known quite a few, but in part that might just be from being one of them. Much easier to find people like yourself to talk about unusual subjects with.
But honestly, I've run into quite a few open relationship friends and acquaintances. It isn't a rare thing, even if it isn't the majority. There are also a fair number of marriages where, when the infidelity happens, the other partner forgives pretty easily, rather than ending the relationship.
Let's say you asked your wife how she felt about your having a casual liaison with someone else, and she told you something like: "I won't freak out, but I'd prefer that you didn't. I think I might feel hurt by it and I really can't say how it would affect my feelings on our long-term stability." Would you or wouldn't you?
I'd tend to avoid casual liasons if that happened. Which it more or less did :-) (Though it was more a matter of both of us thinking the same thing).
If not, why not? Is it wrong to expect the same kind of consideration from your spouse as you'd give her?
Certainly, but conversely, what if I was the one who felt that way, but she was worried that having one partner would miss out on something essential to her?
One essential is partners of the same sex (or opposite, if you are in a same sex relationship with a bisexual partner). Maybe, it isn't essential, but it is definitely something that you cannot provide, sexually.
Worst case, and I'm willing to live with the risk, is that an openly revealed affair would end up breaking up the relationship. But I'd much rather have it end on an open note of trust than have the good parts of the relationship spoiled by a web of deception at the end.
No argument here.
I've had mostly happy endings that way, and even the deceptions seemed short-term enough, or not important enough to me, that I could overcome it. That doesn't mean that it doesn't hurt, but the pain is amplified by being hurt over and over.
I mean, it is all well and good to make promises, but if you can't keep them, how do you handle that situation?
I suspect that for most cases, through lies and deceit, alas.
I also suspect that. But then, it seems so much easier to some people to just lie, believing they won't get caught, and what the other person doesn't know won't hurt them.
That is exactly why I see getting caught in the lie as sufficient justification for ending a marriage. How can you ever know that the one you caught isn't just the tip of the iceberg?
Yes, but you need to figure out circumstances, especially if you aren't perfectly honest in all things.
Maybe, some people just can't take honesty? I mean, little white lies add up, until the bigger lies seem just as acceptable. A tight relationship has an implicit kind of trust and absolute honesty in it, but that is really intense. If your partner doesn't accept you as you are, then lying seems like a valid solution if you are to stay together?
Then again, a spouse who would lie is even less acceptable to me. I can overlook a lot of things (I think I can, anyway, but I suppose most people would say the same, whether others agreed or not), but lack of honesty is not one of them. A marriage in which I can't trust my spouse isn't worth much, IMO.
I think that is how it is for a lot of people. If you cannot trust your friends, they aren't friends. A partner is much more than just a friend, so the need for trust is even greater.
OTOH, my parents stayed together "for the kids" so I have a somewhat skewed view of the subject. It would be so much better if marriages would break up before the kids got involved in this. Messing up two lives is much nicer than three or more.
Interestingly, I've read an article about a study showed that staying together for the kids are better for the kids than breaking up into a single-parent unit. I haven't read the study itself, but I suspect that too much depends on upon the individual circumstances to be able to draw a general conclusion.
It is a hard thing to judge. If the parents can manage to stick together without abusing the children (counting loud arguments and guilt-trip games as abuse, when repeated, even if the children aren't directly attacked), that may work. But it doesn't mean it won't be hard on the kids.
But I do think that finding out early in a relationship that it might not work out is best.
In a related vein, I'm of a generation where living together is an ordinary sort of thing, no marriage needed to share a home. Some people get married without having any clue how to live with someone and get along, or even keep their own place. The relationship quickly gets strained.
I think that if you aren't sure the marriage is really happy and stable, having kids isn't very smart. OTOH, I decided quite young that I wasn't going to go out and get married early, but would wait until after I graduated from college and was settled. Not everyone thinks that way (nor did I all the time, but my bouts of desire for eternal commitment didn't last).
Jeff
Web site at http://www.asstr.org/~jeffzephyr/ For FTP, ftp://ftp.asstr.org/pub/Authors/jeffzephyr/
There is nothing more important than petting the cat.
Note that all the comments archived here were culled from active discussions occuring in the Usenet newsgroup alt.sex.stories.d. If you want to contribute to the discussion, please join us in ASSD and say your piece. Everyone is welcome.
If you do not know how to read Usenet newsgroups, there is a nice, free web interface on Google: http://groups.google.com/. If you have any problems, send us email. If we're lucky, we'll get you set up and contributing in no time!
If you have not done so, please read the Comment Guidelines. We ask that all comments include two positive remarks and two suggestions for improvement. Please, try not to repeat!
From: Anoninsac
Re: The Way to Pittsburgh, by Mat Twassel
Date: 7 Nov 2001 09:12:11 -0800
desdmona22@aol.com (Desdmona22) wrote in message news:<20011105164430.23739.00001342@mb-fj.aol.com> ...
Ok I changed the rules. But I'm the writer of this so I can have my own rules lol.
Mat really pissed me off with this story. It started out light and airy with a romantic feel. The language maintained that all the way thru. Then the sucker makes it unbearably sad. That's a hell of a way to screw with the reader's emotions. The juxtaposition of the language and the story line made it even sadder when you realize what is happening. The language pulls you in and opens you up to the emotional impact of the story. When the protagonist reads the note from his wife to her lover it was like a knife in the heart. The ending with the little girl just further drove home the point and made it even more poignent: he has lost all and has no way 'there' anymore. Hey, I don't read boff stories to have my emotions screwed with like that.
Good job.