|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
posted January 03, 2014 02:51 PM |
|
|
artu said:
Quote:
1) Getting to TRULY (= ABSOLUTELY) know them is POSSIBLE, which would mean 2) 100% prediction quota for behavior.
Once again, you are handling a matter of gradual change with absolutes. Of course, you can not know a person 100 percent, including yourself. But you can have meaningful amount of knowledge and you can only have that through some time.(And not just to protect yourself or take control too, just so that we're clear on that.)I'm not necessarily talking about 50 years, an emotionally or eventfully very compressed month can have similar results. It's not black and white, life is not full of two kind of people, ones who will die for each other blindly no matter what and pragmatic robots who calculate everything.
You seem to wilfully disregard the part after the quote that caters for the fact that the absolute things are not possible anyway. I point to that part.
Quote:
Do you consider yourself lovestruck at first sight and if yes, did it happen only once? Nothing we said necessarily indicates that love will be eternal (till death do us part) or once in a life time. How repeatable is the thing you are talking about?
Btw, there is nothing wrong or cold about having actual, clear reasons for loving someone, it doesn't have to be mystical to be true or romantic.
Well. What I ACTUALLY think now, being fairly old with 56, is, that people KNOW when it's REALLY love at first sight, as mystical that may sound - and the only thing I can say for the flipside is, that if you do NOT know, it ISN'T (because in that case you would know). It's somewhat comparable with an orgasm - you will KNOW, if you have one, if you don't KNOW it wasn't one, wouldn't be too bad a description here.
I'd say that it will last for a lifetime, if it's mutual (which I would expect this to be, since the mutual part is part of the "hit"), and probably even longer, should that be part of the equation for whatever the reason.
The only thing I would answer with a shrug is whether it's repeatable, should something untoward happen.
Now, I absolutely know that this is a somewhat, well, "elitist" opinion, since it boils down to rejecting opportunities for lasting relationships, when there is even a modicum of doubt. Also, this works somewhat against the natural cycle of things, even though TODAY there is nothing wrong with committing and getting children late, so there is a lot of time to look around.
From the perspective I have now, love is something like a rocket aiming to overcome the gravitational pull of the Earth: in order to make it, the rocket must accelerate hard in order to reach the critical speed and NOT being pulled back by the gravitational pull (of life with all its challenges) - so you need that rocket start of "love at first sight", which is a lot more than just immediate desire or the pull of sheer physical attractiveness.
This MIGHT express itself - as I already wrote somewhere - as the feeling of already knowing the other person from somewhere.
So from YOUR perspective, it would simply feel like you'd already know SOME INDEFINITE TIME.
If you personally think, bollocks, imposssible, romantic nonsense, no problem, but this discussion makes no sense insofar, that there's nothing to gain from it. You do not have to believe in it, you don't have to change your life or anything, it would just be a pity if something like that happened to you, but you would reject it as delusional or desire or whatever and not act accordingly.
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted January 03, 2014 02:59 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Drinking works like hypnotizing; being drunk doesn't make you do things you don't want to; it just makes you do the things you DO want to, but don't under normal circumstances.
That's just not true. I'm sure you've heard of people getting into fights when they're drunk - would you say that it's what they really want? Drinking impairs people's judgment and can cause them to do things that they wouldn't want to do otherwise. Why else would people regret what they do when they're drunk?Quote:
what you call successful longtime relationship was completely conditional and based on certain circumstances only, which I wouldn't call SUCCESSFUL, but only convenient or comfortably. It can't be, what artu calls "deep", if it breaks after a slight challenge.
Having a child or getting into financial difficulties are more than slight challenges. They can reveal something previously not known about the partners, which can be something undesirable. Alternatively, the circumstances can make the people themselves change.Quote:
It's a "minor character flaw": so what would that be? She sometimes laughs at the wrong point? She's a bit too tidy or untidy for your liking? Well didn't you talk about that at some point? What happened?
It can be something like that, or it can be a different kind of character flaw, such as minor dishonesty. It can be something that becomes more irritating over time - first you ignore it, but gradually it becomes something you can't ignore, maybe it becomes less tolerable or it just gets worse, etc, and it eventually becomes so irritating (or worse, depending on the flaw) that it's better to end the relationship. Maybe you've talked about it, but it's a habit that's not going away - maybe your partner can't do anything about it, maybe they're not willing to do what it takes to fix it, maybe they don't take your problem with it seriously... Or maybe there was a failure to communicate. That can happen even in an otherwise good relationship.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted January 03, 2014 03:16 PM |
|
|
Quote:
You seem to wilfully disregard the part after the quote that caters for the fact that the absolute things are not possible anyway. I point to that part.
I disregarded the rest because I don't propose you claim absolute knowledge, you made it sound like I did and I wasn't.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted January 03, 2014 04:41 PM |
|
|
mvassilev said:
Quote:
Drinking works like hypnotizing; being drunk doesn't make you do things you don't want to; it just makes you do the things you DO want to, but don't under normal circumstances.
That's just not true. I'm sure you've heard of people getting into fights when they're drunk - would you say that it's what they really want? Drinking impairs people's judgment and can cause them to do things that they wouldn't want to do otherwise. Why else would people regret what they do when they're drunk?
You see that wrong, because there are things you are TEMPTED to do, would like to try or secretly desire, but don't have the guts to risk or reason says it may end not well and so on. THIS is where alcohol may tip the scales.
Quote:
Quote:
what you call successful longtime relationship was completely conditional and based on certain circumstances only, which I wouldn't call SUCCESSFUL, but only convenient or comfortably. It can't be, what artu calls "deep", if it breaks after a slight challenge.
Having a child or getting into financial difficulties are more than slight challenges. They can reveal something previously not known about the partners, which can be something undesirable. Alternatively, the circumstances can make the people themselves change.
Yes, but thr point is that none of this (children, financial trouble) is something completely unreasonable or improbable, and if something like that kills the relationship it cannlot be classified as successful, only as shallow. It wasn't worth much in the first place.
Quote:
Quote:
It's a "minor character flaw": so what would that be? She sometimes laughs at the wrong point? She's a bit too tidy or untidy for your liking? Well didn't you talk about that at some point? What happened?
It can be something like that, or it can be a different kind of character flaw, such as minor dishonesty. It can be something that becomes more irritating over time - first you ignore it, but gradually it becomes something you can't ignore, maybe it becomes less tolerable or it just gets worse, etc, and it eventually becomes so irritating (or worse, depending on the flaw) that it's better to end the relationship. Maybe you've talked about it, but it's a habit that's not going away - maybe your partner can't do anything about it, maybe they're not willing to do what it takes to fix it, maybe they don't take your problem with it seriously... Or maybe there was a failure to communicate. That can happen even in an otherwise good relationship.
No, that canNOT happen in a GOOD relationship - not to mention a SUCCESSFUL one. If there's something bothering you, then it's a problem. If you cannot solve the problem as a pair, then, since the "flaw" was apparent to you right away, the relazionship never was successful, since you were unable to solve the problem, until it became so big that it destroyed things for good.
I mean, if you try something, KNOWING about a flaw, you clearly expect that you will either be able to correct or ignore it, and if both doesn't come to pass, then your expectation was wrong: you erred.
@ artu
You used absolute terms; I first called you on them; then I sketched what is left when you reduce your terms to more realistic relative terms, which is the part you ignored. It's not me who threw in "true knowledge", and "irreplacability".
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted January 03, 2014 04:47 PM |
|
|
Quote:
You used absolute terms; I first called you on them; then I sketched what is left when you reduce your terms to more realistic relative terms, which is the part you ignored. It's not me who threw in "true knowledge", and "irreplacability".
True knowledge doesn't have to be absolute, it can still be gradual. And for someone to feel irreplaceable to you, you don't have to know EVERYTHING about her but you still have to know a meaning1ful amount. The meaningful amount I point to is not absolute and I never claimed it was.
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted January 03, 2014 05:28 PM |
|
|
Quote:
there are things you are TEMPTED to do, would like to try or secretly desire, but don't have the guts to risk or reason says it may end not well and so on
So people secretly desire to get into fights? No, what happens is that something gets them mad while they're drunk, and they get into a fight, and when they're sober, they regret it (if they remember it and aren't hooligans). It's true that sometimes the actions of people are the result of alcohol removing inhibitions and letting people do what they want, but often it causes people to act in a way that is contrary to what they really want - it makes them temporarily forget about important things, for example.Quote:
thr point is that none of this (children, financial trouble) is something completely unreasonable or improbable, and if something like that kills the relationship it cannlot be classified as successful, only as shallow
The problems themselves are not unreasonable or improbable, but people can sometimes act in ways that would even be surprising to themselves, let alone their partners. Sometimes they reveal new things about people, and sometimes the situation causes people to change in unwelcome ways. For example, someone hits hard times and becomes an alcoholic, which ruins the relationship. Does that mean the relationship was shallow earlier, before the guy became an alcoholic? No, of course not.
As for flaws, a flaw may be ignored at first, then tolerated, then it can become intolerable. That can also sometimes be affected by circumstances, and sometimes just by the passing of time.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted January 03, 2014 08:27 PM |
|
|
I get the feeling we are talking different languages here.
mvassilev said:
Quote:
there are things you are TEMPTED to do, would like to try or secretly desire, but don't have the guts to risk or reason says it may end not well and so on
So people secretly desire to get into fights? No, what happens is that something gets them mad while they're drunk, and they get into a fight, and when they're sober, they regret it (if they remember it and aren't hooligans). It's true that sometimes the actions of people are the result of alcohol removing inhibitions and letting people do what they want, but often it causes people to act in a way that is contrary to what they really want - it makes them temporarily forget about important things, for example.
No, you are wrong. If someone gets mad when they are drunk, then uit's because they are ANGRY (about something/anything, but generally something they can't vent, maybe because they can't articulate what they are angry about, or they feel shame for the reason they are angry the reason why they are angry - or they may be unable to resolve conflicts, there are such people).
Quote:
Quote:
thr point is that none of this (children, financial trouble) is something completely unreasonable or improbable, and if something like that kills the relationship it cannlot be classified as successful, only as shallow
The problems themselves are not unreasonable or improbable, but people can sometimes act in ways that would even be surprising to themselves, let alone their partners. Sometimes they reveal new things about people, and sometimes the situation causes people to change in unwelcome ways. For example, someone hits hard times and becomes an alcoholic, which ruins the relationship. Does that mean the relationship was shallow earlier, before the guy became an alcoholic? No, of course not.
YES, OF COURSE. Because it means you would have better off being alone. It seems you are somewhat blind to what is absolutely obvious. People in happy relationships simply don't become alcoholics, do not freak out or change in unwelcome ways. DOESN'T HAPPEN.
{quote]As for flaws, a flaw may be ignored at first, then tolerated, then it can become intolerable. That can also sometimes be affected by circumstances, and sometimes just by the passing of time.
You do not TOLERATE something when you love a person, because tolerating something is a one-sided favor that will be called in, when the situation becomes critical. It is VERY unwise to do so. It's also dishonest - you wouldn't want someone you are very c lose with to TOLERATE part of your behavior - a relationship involving this is as such UNSUCCESSFUL.
@ artu
Quote:
True knowledge doesn't have to be absolute, it can still be gradual. And for someone to feel irreplaceable to you, you don't have to know EVERYTHING about her but you still have to know a meaning1ful amount. The meaningful amount I point to is not absolute and I never claimed it was.
You are tap-dancing. True means true, nor probably true, partially true or maybe true, but TRUE. Of it's "gradual' that can only be meant as not complete - that is, you know true tidbits, which isn't that meaningful. "Irreplacable" is absolute as well. You do not have to know everything, but it's an sbolute statement - and one that is pretty assuming
I repeat - in my post I relativized the absoluteness of your language - but then there wasn't left much beside what I was talking.
It's also bad method: you can't use wortds like true and irreplacable as foundation for your conclusions and then relativize without relativizing your consclusions as well.
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted January 03, 2014 10:01 PM |
|
|
Quote:
If someone gets mad when they are drunk, then uit's because they are ANGRY
We're not talking about someone just getting angry, we're talking about someone getting into a fight. Someone may be angry but still have no desire to fight, unless alcohol is involved. It's also worth mentioning that some people get mad more easily when they're drunk - and not all of them are people who walk around quietly angry all of the time, they just get angry when they're drunk. Alcohol doesn't only remove inhibitions, sometimes it actually changes people's desires and/or temperament.Quote:
People in happy relationships simply don't become alcoholics, do not freak out or change in unwelcome ways. DOESN'T HAPPEN.
It happens much less often to people in happy relationships, but "less often" is not "never". There are circumstances outside the relationship that can cause unwelcome changes - a job loss, an illness, a child (to the extent that a child can be considered "outside the relationship"), etc. Unless you're redefining "happy relationships" to mean "a relationship in which people don't change in unwelcome ways", but then you're not saying anything.Quote:
You do not TOLERATE something when you love a person, because tolerating something is a one-sided favor that will be called in, when the situation becomes critical. It is VERY unwise to do so.
It's never a good thing, but it's not as bad as you seem to think. You can tolerate something minor, some minor habit of your partner's, and not love them any less because of it. The problem is when you stop being able to tolerate whatever you're tolerating, or if it starts wearing on you. For example, you can tolerate your partner taking a long time to brush their teeth, or their kleptomania. Both are examples of toleration. But one is likely to cause problems and the other isn't.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted January 03, 2014 11:03 PM |
|
|
mvassilev said:
Quote:
If someone gets mad when they are drunk, then uit's because they are ANGRY
We're not talking about someone just getting angry, we're talking about someone getting into a fight. Someone may be angry but still have no desire to fight, unless alcohol is involved. It's also worth mentioning that some people get mad more easily when they're drunk - and not all of them are people who walk around quietly angry all of the time, they just get angry when they're drunk. Alcohol doesn't only remove inhibitions, sometimes it actually changes people's desires and/or temperament.
No. It doesn't. You just have no idea what you are talking about, and you prefer not to read other people's post. When someone gets into a fight when he's drunk, he is ANGRY. About something he isn't supposed or afraid to be angry. He might, for example, be TOLERATING something, for fear of losing his partner if he doesn't.
Quote:
Quote:
People in happy relationships simply don't become alcoholics, do not freak out or change in unwelcome ways. DOESN'T HAPPEN.
It happens much less often to people in happy relationships, but "less often" is not "never". There are circumstances outside the relationship that can cause unwelcome changes - a job loss, an illness, a child (to the extent that a child can be considered "outside the relationship"), etc. Unless you're redefining "happy relationships" to mean "a relationship in which people don't change in unwelcome ways", but then you're not saying anything.
Yet again, you are just claiming something. IN A HAPPY RELATIONSHIP PEOPLE DO NOT CHANGE IN UNWELCOME WAYS. If they do, it was an UNCHALLENGED relationship, but not a happy one.
Quote:
Quote:
You do not TOLERATE something when you love a person, because tolerating something is a one-sided favor that will be called in, when the situation becomes critical. It is VERY unwise to do so.
It's never a good thing, but it's not as bad as you seem to think. You can tolerate something minor, some minor habit of your partner's, and not love them any less because of it. The problem is when you stop being able to tolerate whatever you're tolerating, or if it starts wearing on you. For example, you can tolerate your partner taking a long time to brush their teeth, or their kleptomania. Both are examples of toleration. But one is likely to cause problems and the other isn't.
No, you are WRONG. It is a lot worse then I can make you understand. You are not supposed to TOLERATE anything with your partner. Tolerating is condescending. You do no one a favor with this. By the way if it takes tolerance to bear the teeth brushing time of your partner, it's you who has the problem. And if you "tolerate" her kleptomania, you do not love her.
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted January 03, 2014 11:29 PM |
|
|
Quote:
When someone gets into a fight when he's drunk, he is ANGRY. About something he isn't supposed or afraid to be angry.
Or he got angry while he was drunk. You've never seen a drunk person get angry? They aren't necessarily angry to begin with, it's that the alcohol temporarily changes their personality. I'm sure you've heard of "happy drunks", "angry drunks", etc. Often, it's not because they're suppressing anything, but because of actual changes brought on by alcohol.Quote:
If they do, it was an UNCHALLENGED relationship, but not a happy one.
The two aren't mutually exclusive - a happy relationship is one that makes the people in it happy, which is orthogonal to whether it's been challenged or not. Unless, as I said earlier, you're redefining what "happy relationship" means.Quote:
By the way if it takes tolerance to bear the teeth brushing time of your partner, it's you who has the problem.
Maybe, maybe not. When someone is in the wrong, they're the ones who have the problem, but here no one is in the wrong, it's just a minor incompatibility that's being tolerated. It's not wrong to brush your teeth for a long time, but it's also not wrong to be bothered by it. But it's a really minor issue, probably not worth mentioning, and extremely unlikely to become a relationship-ending problem. So it's an example of toleration that isn't bad.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
smithey
Promising
Supreme Hero
Yes im red, choke on it !!!
|
|
posted January 03, 2014 11:41 PM |
|
|
1. Alcoholism - I have a friend who is 3 years sober (proud of him) and he turned to alcohol after a car crash during which he lost his leg, he turned to alcohol to cope with him "no longer being a man" even though he was in a happy relationship, furthermore from my experience alcoholism rarely ever derives from failed relationships but more from issues an individual has with him/herself...
2. My other friend who never had a gf would fall in love every other month and then suffer due to his failure to get the said girl(s) he was sure his feelings were intense and real even though I would each time say - "bro, its just a crush, once you get an actual gf and fall in love you will understand the difference", he was hurt coz I was "dismissing his pain".... three years later (when he did fall in love - they're still together - 6 years and counting  ), he told me I was right. The point being - you cant argue with Mvass coz he cant understand your pov JJ as he's yet to be in a place you are at (hope it makes sense)....
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted January 03, 2014 11:47 PM |
|
|
smithey said:
three years later (when he did fall in love - they're still together - 6 years and counting ), he told me I was right. The point being - you cant argue with Mvass
You know you just agreed with me, right?
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
meroe
Supreme Hero
Basically Smurfette
|
|
posted January 03, 2014 11:49 PM |
|
|
I really don't think he did, Mvass.
____________
Meroe is definetely out, sweet
as she sounds sometimes, she'd
definetely castrate you with a
rusted razror and forcefeed
your genitals to you in a
blink of an eye - Kipshasz
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted January 03, 2014 11:53 PM |
|
|
Artu and I are arguing that there's a difference between initial infatuation and the feeling one has in a long-term relationship. This is agreement with that position.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
smithey
Promising
Supreme Hero
Yes im red, choke on it !!!
|
|
posted January 04, 2014 12:00 AM |
|
Edited by smithey at 00:53, 04 Jan 2014.
|
mvassilev said:
smithey said:
three years later (when he did fall in love - they're still together - 6 years and counting ), he told me I was right. The point being - you cant argue with Mvass
You know you just agreed with me, right?
Agreed with you on the alcohol thingy, on the other thingy, claimed you still have a mountain or two to climb, and only then you will understand JJ's point...
edit - Not sure about Artu's involvement, was referring to mvass/JJ exchange of posts
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted January 04, 2014 12:07 AM |
|
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted January 04, 2014 12:11 AM |
|
|
People, about drugs/alcohol ... if somepne loses a leg AND has a happy relationship the problem is, that the lost leg would seem to change the relationship (for the person who lost it). In this case alcohol has a different function: the handicapped person has decided that something is wrong and the relationship is doomed and tries to forget this.
If you have a quesstion about drugs, ASK. Don't assume.
|
|
smithey
Promising
Supreme Hero
Yes im red, choke on it !!!
|
|
posted January 04, 2014 12:25 AM |
|
|
JollyJoker said:
People, about drugs/alcohol ... if somepne loses a leg AND has a happy relationship the problem is, that the lost leg would seem to change the relationship (for the person who lost it). In this case alcohol has a different function: the handicapped person has decided that something is wrong and the relationship is doomed and tries to forget this.
If you have a quesstion about drugs, ASK. Don't assume.
Wait, are you talking about a relationship one has with himself or with his significant other ? Or are you assuming that everything in your life derives from a relationship you're in, in which case I think you're wrong, many people are in a great relationship yet at the same time not in a dependant one - I view a happy relationship as one in which both people have an actual life outside the realtionship as well, furthermore I view it as an important aspect of any healthy relationship otherwise clingy comes to mind and that is not healthy....
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted January 04, 2014 07:00 AM |
|
|
Quote:
You are tap-dancing. True means true, nor probably true, partially true or maybe true, but TRUE. Of it's "gradual' that can only be meant as not complete - that is, you know true tidbits, which isn't that meaningful. "Irreplacable" is absolute as well. You do not have to know everything, but it's an sbolute statement - and one that is pretty assuming
I repeat - in my post I relativized the absoluteness of your language - but then there wasn't left much beside what I was talking.
It's also bad method: you can't use wortds like true and irreplacable as foundation for your conclusions and then relativize without relativizing your consclusions as well.
This is false. Knowledge about people is not binary, so gradualizing it is not relativizing it. The qualitative difference between meaningful amount of knowledge about a person and her being a stranger is not about your knowledge being right or wrong (as in 1 or 0) but it is about it being enough or not enough.
Btw, on the alcohol thing, you guys both can be right. If someone gets in a fight while drunk it can mean he found himself in a stupid situation he couldn't handle or it can mean he has repressed anger issues. If someone is constantly getting in fights while drunk, it definitely means he has repressed aggression. However, the source of aggression can be something else. A drunk person can easily be mad at his boss and take it out on his wife, because he'll be reckless. Anyway, I think you spend too much time in this detail, because real love does not necessarily mean things will work out perfectly. You seem to assume a functionality that love automatically produces. Not always.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted January 04, 2014 08:47 AM |
|
|
artu said:
This is false. Knowledge about people is not binary, so gradualizing it is not relativizing it. The qualitative difference between meaningful amount of knowledge about a person and her being a stranger is not about your knowledge being right or wrong (as in 1 or 0) but it is about it being enough or not enough.
If that's your opinion, then don't use words like TRUE or REAL, because these are BINARY words. Something is TRUE or NOT. Something is REAL or not. When you speak of TRUE knowledge and REAL love, you use these words in order to express a quality difference between your kind of knowledge and your kind of love and other knowledge/love. Since you are not using these words with the meaning they actually have, your statements are not worth anything, though.
Nor is it possible to determine what a MEANINGFUL amount of knowledge about a person is. Meaningful, in this context, is utterly subjective, and obviously so.
@ Smithey
Quote:
Wait, are you talking about a relationship one has with himself or with his significant other ? Or are you assuming that everything in your life derives from a relationship you're in, in which case I think you're wrong, many people are in a great relationship yet at the same time not in a dependant one - I view a happy relationship as one in which both people have an actual life outside the realtionship as well, furthermore I view it as an important aspect of any healthy relationship otherwise clingy comes to mind and that is not healthy....
A happy, working relationship is supposed to ... anchor you. Somewhat. When people marry - supposedly until death parts them -, they say something like, "in good times as well as in bad times". They are supposed to not just babble that along, but mean it (and if they don't mean it, they shouldn't marry).
So the relationship should be something that you can RELY upon, when things are taking a bad turn.
You can have as much of a "life" outside a relationship as you want, that has nothing to do with the relationship as such.
In any case, if someone loses a leg, the trouble is, they will feel inadequate. Deficient. A man will not feel like a man anymore. A woman will feel unattractive, even ugly. In effect, you are a cripple, after losing a leg, and your problem is, that you will be asking yourself whether this incident didn't change you in a way that makes it impossible for your partner (or anyone else, for that matter) to still love you. After all, you are somewhat "less" than before, aren't you?
You have to come to grips with what happened, make the most of it, and simply see what happens.
This is quite obviously much easier said than done, though. If the crash was your own fault, self-loathing will inevitably be a factor. You'll curse yourself anytime you are remembered about how you could do this and that with two legs and now you are struggling. If the crash was someone else's fault you will alternate between self-pity and wishing the guilty person the plague.
All that is rather frustrating, and anti-depressants may become part of the diet.
Then there is the problem with work. A lost leg may lead to not being able to work in your job anymore. That's another massive problem. Turning to alcohol in such a situation is not unheard of, obviously not.
The point was this: if this happens, then the relationship is not working. Why not? The actual change is losing the leg by accident. Basically, for the partner, there are two possibilities (and THIS is now an example for Mvass's "ignoring or tolerating a flaw", although it's not one the relationship started with). Partner does best to make a decision.
1) Partner isn't turned off by the lost leg or at least not turned off in any meaningful way. The person is still there, hopefully. In that case partner must communicate that. If it's a good relationship, the crash victim will believe her and NOT think it's pity that makes him/her stay. This will help him/her come to grips; life doesn't end after losing a leg.
2) Partner is turned off (for whatever the reason). This is of course a problem, and one that's not easy to solve.
Married or not - a decision must be made, and it's not an easy one, that much is clear, because breaking things up will end with a lot of guilt. Professional help may be necessary.
Now, the problem with your case, Smithey, is this: you said the guy was 3 years sober. I would need to know more to say more (who was guilty about the crash, how long do they know each other), only that much: if you've been an addict, bad twists of fate (or screwing up), have the tendency to re-acquaint a person with their addiction, because of the constant self-pity/loathing. Alcohol makes you forget and shuts the voices in your head up, that berate you. Don't forget that an addict already has had a big love - and one that eagerly awaits their rushing back to her.
All very delicate and emotionally difficult.
|
| |
|
|
This Popular Thread is pages long: 
