Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site decwrl.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxj!ihnp4!zehntel!dual!decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-kirk!williams
From: williams@kirk.DEC (John Williams 223-3402)
Newsgroups: net.singles
Subject: Sunny side up/down
Message-ID: <4017@decwrl.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 26-Oct-84 13:19:16 EST
Article-I.D.: decwrl.4017
Posted: Fri Oct 26 13:19:16 1984
Date-Received: Sun, 28-Oct-84 05:49:49 EST
Sender: daemon@decwrl.UUCP
Organization: DEC Engineering Network
Lines: 64



> The reason the SO is always one of the most critical people in
> your life, is the way mating occurs.  Everyone walks around with
> a mental and emotional template of how their "mate" should be. 
> But who we actually meet are just real people like ourselves, not
> ideals like  our own personal ideal or the madison ave ideal. 
> Often when we say "I love you" what we really mean is: "You're
> pretty close to the ideal I love".  When we base relationships on
> the "I'll be as close as I can be to your ideal, if you'll try to
> embody mine" principle, we have to expect feedback like
> 'suggested areas I should "work on"'. 

	In modern psychology, this is called the anima and 
animus. It leads to problems. You find this is exploited by 
advertizing trying to create an attractive image. The important 
thing to remember is that those people are not real. The 
marketing types who fill your head with fantasy are. In Boston, 
there is a radio station, WBCN, that regularly plays false 
commercials. I wonder whether they get public service announcement
credit for them. BTW, 'BCN is AOR ( all over the road ).

> The real trick is to try to love each other as we "are", and try
> not to project your "ideals" and then relate to them, but to
> relate instead to the persons themselves.  When relationships are
> built on unconditional love, rather than the conditional variety
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
           ?????????????    You must be Kidding!

> (I love you {when,if} you...), then true security can occur. 
                                           ^^^^^^^^

	You would have to find a BIG insurance company to absorb 
that risk for you. Never have I seen, nor experienced 
UNCONDITIONAL LOVE. Why not walk up to the first stranger you see 
and get married? C'mon, be realistic! The major problem I've had 
with relationships is that people try too hard to be accepting, 
and as a result, hold in the resentment too long to talk about it 
reasonably. If something bothers you about your partner, Speak 
up! Now! While it doesn't bother too much. Otherwise, hold your 
breath and wait for something to happen.

> Once you can feel secure in being loved for yourself, rather than
> feeling insecure for being loved according to how well you are
> doing at matching some "ideal", then you can avoid more easily
> the mode of trying to live to ideals, be they madison ave or your
> SO's. 

	Not only is it important what you are, it is important as 
to what you are becoming. You WILL change. Will it be convergent 
or divergent? You shouldn't be so static. ( <- There, I said it )

	As for ideals, they're for popularity contests. Ideals 
change as quickly as popularity changes hands. Playing `` King of 
the Bell Curve '' is fun until you get pushed off.

					----{ john williams }----

	< Are you ready to play the REAL game >

(DEC E-NET)	KIRK::WILLIAMS
(UUCP)		{decvax, ucbvax, allegra}!decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-kirk!williams
(ARPA)		williams%kirk.DEC@decwrl.ARPA
		williams%kirk.DEC@Purdue-Merlin.ARPA