"Well-grounded". Like the Libyan Air force.
You stay up until 5 am chatting with them?
Having sex with them? Doing drugs with them? Sure. Chatting online? Christ, no.
I mean, I do with you guys. But you're hardly *new* love interests.
But you're hardly *new* love interests.
Maybe if you bought us some nice clothes! [Sobs, runs into bedroom, slams door.]
Passionate about sleep, perhaps?
But what's the latest you've been up refreshing an unfogged comment thread?
Or dates that last for days?
Paging Di Kotimy. Di Kotimy to the white courtesy phone.
5: I don't think we need Di to tell us about the wonders of Tupperware.
I've done the IM at 5:00 AM thing, but that was because there were some serious time-zone differences involved.
Never done the IM'ing until 5 am, but in the past two weeks I've shut down at least 4 different restaurants (including two in one night on our second date).
Passionate about sleep, perhaps?
That would generally describe me.
Also, congratulations Josh.
I've done the IMing thing, but it was in college. Now that I have responsibilities I'd call it a night at 10 or 11 pm. Being coherent for my job is way more important than dating (although perhaps it's easy to say this now that I'm married).
I still think back on one time when I talked all night on the phone to a love interest and then went to work all day as a lab tech. I have no idea how I did that.
It's not that exciting: Josh is dating a health inspector.
Josh carries the throwdown roach.
||
Is anybody surprised that Newt Gingrich is a Duke fan? (NB: #8)
|>
It's not that exciting: Josh is dating a health inspector.
I assumed he was one himself.
There's some R&B song from the past ten years with the line "You hang up. No, you hang up. On three, hang up," except the meter in which he sings it is totally unlike the meter in which two people would actually have that conversation. Emphasis in all random places. I love it.
16: This one? Does it totally suck or am I old?
Actually, that's not it. Must be a popular line.
Nope, no IMing last time I was falling in love. Chatting in person mixed in with other activities, yes.
Here it is! Satisfyingly, the lyric is within the first 35 seconds.
The Dwarf Lord and I burned a really embarrassing amount of gas while one of us was half-out of the car being dropped off, but leaning back in for one last word. Also, the engine noise annoyed the neighbors. This went on particularly long in the months, months! before we kissed each other. After that we turned the car off, got out, and scared the owls while leaning against it.
As LizSpigot says, I can't for the life of me understand how I was productive at work at the same time, but I was a barn-burner. Still in my twenties and floating on all the good hormones, I guess.
14.last.
That list is bullshit. No way are there seven teams with worse fans than Duke.
Also, West Virginia is totally maligned at #3. Mountaineer fans might indulge in a little bit of post-game arson now and again (and really, who among us is without sin?). But they are famously gracious to opposing teams. Provided those teams aren't representing Pitt or Penn State. Or Virginia Tech. Or Marshall. Oh, all right, they're famously gracious to their bowl game opponents.
And what list of obnoxious sports fans omits Harvard?
The Dwarf Lord and I burned a really embarrassing amount of gas while one of us was half-out of the car being dropped off, but leaning back in for one last word. Also, the engine noise annoyed the neighbors. This went on particularly long in the months, months! before we kissed each other. After that we turned the car off, got out, and scared the owls while leaning against it.
... soon they are in one of those situations where he gives her a ride home and they get to talking so much that he has to turn the engine off. (That act--turning the key in the ignition--is the often-overlooked first step in most adulteries.)
No way are there seven teams with worse fans than Duke.
Well, keep in mind that this is the same publication that ranked Duke the #2 Douchiest school in America with the caveat: "They're probably number one. But we'd rather not rank Duke number one at anything."
I wish somebody would IM with me, but the only person who will be on my buddy list is Mom. Not that she isn't great, don't get me wrong. But a guy gets lonely, you know?
(including two in one night on our second date)
I assume you were IMing from two separate restaurants with the same closing time.
21: I discovered that my car will, charmingly, alert me to the fact that the battery is getting low if we've been sitting there with the radio going for too long. (It takes at least an hour to get to that point, though.)
I was sorry to see that Trinity wasn't more highly ranked than it was in that douche list. I knew a lot of people from high school (boarding school, no less) who went there and it's douche central.
Doesn't hold a candle to Duke in the douchiness sweepstakes, of course.
Thank you, Apostropher, for that douchiest schools list!
Hm, because of the time difference in my long-distance relationship and a general unwillingness to say goodbye, ever, yep - this does happen all the time But to him, not to me. Instead I just get up early, which I think deserves it own special category.
I didn't know that () was in a long-distance relationship. Is that because I'm not around enough lately? Or just cold and heartless?
Yay right back at you, Paren. (And thanks, the rest of you.)
34: No, I have barely just mentioned it recently. It's a relatively new and happy thing. Also, please excuse the horrible errors in 32; I am at a conference, presented this morning, and am apparently incapable of reading, typing, and writing.
||
Does anyone know why I might be having trouble reading the newly-posted comments in the "Cry me a river thread"?
|>
37: Yes! I opened it from the "Comments (196)" link but the last one was 194. I refreshed and saw the new ones, but I've never had to do that before.
37, 39: It's like the blog software doesn't even care.
And what list of obnoxious sports fans omits Harvard?
34: I didn't know that () was in a long-distance relationship.
OK, time for a buddy check (with details if they are any good).
I'll go first: Married for a long time.
Next?
I'm at the part of the new-ish relationship where I'm being called upon this afternoon to install speakers in her car.
W00t Josh!
Hurrah ()!
Dates that last for days are awesome. Having to wait weeks or even months until the next one, however, sucks. Extended texting/IMing is fantastic for the initial swoony flirtation phase, less ideal for meaningful discussions of important topics. And that's pretty much all I've learned about dating and romance in 38 years.
42: Just to clarify, Paren isn't the Health Inspector.
45: You will be pleased to know, Stanley, that I made a reference the other day to having dined with you and your lady friend and Rory promptly confirmed, "Thundersnow, right?" Maybe I need to drag Rory out to Cville one of these days...
Still single. Feeling the urge to go out dancing, which is often unwise.
I had a really long date (4.5 hours, nothing on Josh) recently, after which I mostly felt like it was kind of too long.
I've ALSO had some really frustrating exchanges with emusic customer support recently! I fear that my latest inquiry ("Can you read?") is not likely to be any more satisfactorily answered than my previous.
47 -- way to kill my joke. And congrats to you and ().
I was dating someone for a while this fall who was super into long text message conversations. Man what a pain in the ass. At least I could watch TV in between the annoying buzzing sounds from the Iphone. I don't know how you folks in long distance relationships stand it; isn't the whole point to have someone to touch? If I want to inflict my random, stupid thoughts in poor writing and bad grammar, I have you guys.
I'm with Halford. I've long had an anti-LDR policy.
I have decided that I'm very pro-dating, however. Who doesn't like (a) having dinner; (b) talking to someone pretty interesting for a while and (c) having sex? It's like you get to combine all three! Awesome.
I think the most important determinant of whether dating is nice or awful is your relationship with yourself. If you hate yourself, dating isn't going to be fun.
I'm in full agreement with Halford's policy. Pretty much the same way I was in full agreement with Emerson's policy.
51: I'm feeling conflicted about emusic; my account renews next month. I find the dollar-value system much more stressful than the old system. OTOH, it's a nice way to commit to some degree of Supporting The Artists, which is important to me, what with my large-scale DLing of unlicensed copies. Grump grump.
I find the dollar-value system much more stressful than the old system.
At least it rolls over now.
It does? I didn't realize. Oh. Hrm.
Eh, sometimes you meet the right person, and they live far away, so you make it work. It won't stay long-distance for long.
60: What with the earthquakes and all.
60: Indeed. Funny to think how much more bearable I found the long-distance aspect when I was dating UNG.
I'm at the point where I actually can't imagine having a conversation with someone that could go on indefinitely (well, in a good way), but in the imaginary world where that's possible, the idea of staying with text messages and IM the whole time sounds kind of horrible. As much as I hate the phone, unless there's some compelling reason to stay quiet, I just don't see a substitute for voice when someone's close but not right there.
On the other hand, the immediacy of IM must be an improvement on having a long, drawn out e-mail correspondence where the lack of immediacy obscures the fact that it's actually a terrible mistake and a huge drain of energy. I don't actually have a policy against long-distance relationships; I just despair and things don't lead anywhere. It wouldn't be a bad strategy if short-distance relationships would work instead.
Another vote for lengthy phone conversations here. Whenever I've found myself increasingly emailing a particular person -- certainly if it gets to the point at which we're exchanging multiple emails every day, throughout the day -- we switch to phone calling eventually.
IMing for hours just seems weird. There can be reasons for not picking up the phone instead, but it's not my preference.
Some people like communicating via text,* I'm told. But also, there's the whole lovely world of Skype and web cams, so you can talk and talk and have visuals!
*I don't mean text message, that can be difficult in my mind.
||
What kind of bank writes an email confirmation of your recent application to open an account which includes the line:
"Remember, if you have any questions or need assistance at any time, 24x7, please contact a Customer Service Representative"
?
24x7? What if I'm 80 and have no idea what you're talking about? Who's writing your blurbs, man?
|>
there's the whole lovely world of Skype and web cams, so you can talk and talk and have visuals!
I don't know that "talk" is necessarily the right verb there...
Old people have different numbers of hours in a day or something?
I was using "phone" in the broad sense to include anything that allows voice (which can be accompanied by anything else, of course).
But since it's all imaginary to me, I can say things like I'd consider the exclusive use of text when there's no need to until 5 am grounds for breaking up.
On the other hand, I wish my crazy roommate last summer would have made more use of text-only channels of communication.
IMing is a good solution if, say, one of you has a 'tween (who is herself busily texting friends as you sit together after dinner) and you want to connect to one another without being totally disconnected from said 'tween.
Text messaging is useful, say, to touch base during the commute on the train where you'd rather not annoy your fellow passengers with telephone voice.
Emails are great for the sort of person who processes her thoughts better in writing when you want to give deeper consideration to meatier issues. It's also a great way to assess the writing skills of your paramour. Because, really, could you spend the rest of your life with a bad writer?
Skype. Even for plain old voice communication, it's amazing how superior it is to the telephone.
24 x 7 -- if you are communicating with your bank via email, chances are good you are already familiar with this expression, even if you are an octogenarian. Also, it's not all that cryptic, even for someone who has never heard it before.
Well, I recall that many years ago when I first heard the phase "24-7" I had no idea what it meant. If my mother (aged 70) was any indication, a lot of older people wouldn't either. Blurb-writing is an art! You must take into account a wide variety of potential recipients!
No big deal, of course, but it did make me smile, professionally speaking. (We make use of a good 20 or 30 pre-written blurbs at the shop, which are tweaked on an ongoing basis to account for international customers, etc.)
Skype annoys me, for work-related calls at least, because people want to use video and then I have to be in my office wearing normal clothes instead of home in my pajamas.
73: "Sorry, I can't get the webcam working properly. The audio is fine, though."
I can say things like I'd consider the exclusive use of text when there's no need to until 5 am grounds for breaking up.
I don't know if I'd call it a deal-breaker, but I'd find it very odd indeed. It might mean we were not well suited.
I endorse everything Di says in 71, though I don't have a tween - there are other reasons why IM can be useful.
Hence "unless there's some compelling reason."
I'm thinking that, if you consider texting until 5 a.m. grounds for breaking up, chances are you won't find yourself texting until 5 a.m. Even via text, it's remarkably easy to say, "Okay, I really need to get some sleep. Talk to you tomorrow." If you hate texting and find yourself in lengthy text conversations, perhaps you might try speaking up!
Oh, sure, if you want to think about it using the terms of reality.
In reality, one would obviously speak up. If the person for some reason still didn't seem inclined to switch to the phone, then there would be a problem.
I wound up dropping a datee who just kept wanting to email -- at 10 p.m. -- to ask if, say, I felt like going for a drive. Like, now. Well, no, I'd say, it's too little notice and I'm working tomorrow, and it'll take you 45 minutes to get here in the first place. Phone? Nah, he'd reply, that's alright, but what are you up to lately?
And so on. This was not at all the only reason we wound up dropping things -- maybe I was too unspontaneous! -- but it's definitely the case that the methods of communication weren't working.
Having had a long-distance relationship that 1) went on for many years and stayed long-distance, and that 2) was conducted most frequently over the telephone, I am now knee-jerk anti-telephone.
The other karlstorbahnhof thing was me. Of course. When you're asking random philosophy majoring frauLeins whether brian leiter totally looks like craig finn... Perhaps you don't have had too much to drink
81: Did it involve many blog comments of the form "Jackmormon, check you voicemail?"
Voicemail, ha. This was back when I had a landline, dial-up, and an answering machine.
I am now knee-jerk anti-telephone
Because of: false promises? Too much of teh sexy? Require the person in body, or nothing (except relatively safe and plausibly impersonal text communication)?
Another vote for lengthy phone conversations here.
But what about the long-distance charges?!?!
Perhaps it's not wanting ever again to accept it as a substitute. The longer a long-distance relationship goes on, the more the medium of communication becomes the defining fact of the relationship. You're not in a relationship with a person whom you see and touch and spend time with; you're in a relationship with an hour-long phone call at a set period of the day.
I should say that I do answer my phone and even chat now and again on it. After about ten minutes, though, I want to know what the plan to meet up is.
I loved my rotary phone! It's safely lodged at my parents' house. Those things are indestructible.
But what about the long-distance charges?!?!
I went through so many fucking phone cards my first year of college. NOTE TO PAST SELF: long-distance relationships are no fun, and you are in college! Dumbass.
90: Yeah, I understand. I don't think there's no place for phoning at all, that's all.
Pay attention to me! K thx bye. Omg i'm pauly. Omg.
I use the google voice chat thing to talk to my parents, since I can just call their landline or cell phones and it's still free within Canada and the US. Using skype usually involves calling first and then moving to skype.
This thread is confirming my sense that I really really don't want a long distance relationship, especially one that essentially starts out that way, but (for a while, at least) anything's better than what I have now.
I never got the hang of long phone conversations. I blame high school, when everyone I knew was a long-distance call at twenty cents a minute or something similarly ridiculous.
This thread is confirming my sense that I really really don't want a long distance relationship
As () pointed out, sometimes you meet the right person and have to deal with the fact that they live far away. I really, really do not want to be in a long-distance relationship. But I also really, really want to be in a relationship with someone who (for the time being) lives really far away.
This thread is confirming my sense that I really really don't want a long distance relationship
As () pointed out, sometimes you meet the right person and have to deal with the fact that they live far away. I really, really do not want to be in a long-distance relationship. But I also really, really want to be in a relationship with someone who (for the time being) lives really far away.
Long distance relationships that start off that way run the risk of both parties romanticizing the relationship, big time.
Someone I knew a while ago felt strongly that any such thing that didn't move to an in-person exchange (ahem) within 2 months or so didn't stand a chance.
In terms of long-distance, I really think it depends on the people involved* and if you have an actionable plan for making it no longer long-distance.
*Just call me captain obvious.
I think I should just start seconding everything Di says in this thread.
Long distance relationships that start off that way run the risk of both parties romanticizing the relationship, big time.
Fixed that for you.
Long distance relationships that start off that way run the risk of both parties romanticizing the relationship, big time.
Fixed that for you.
Apparently I'm already seconding myself, Paren... But I think I'm just repeating everything you say anyway.
99: If I'm reading this correctly, you seems to be talking about relationships that begin over a distance between people who've not actually met in person?
102, 103: It's really less of a risk if you know one another in person on a regular basis.
Long distance relationships can work out fine, if you see each other regularly. I sustained one throughout college, though we broke up a couple of times before we got back together. They're not a doomed thing at all, but they're definitely more prone to romanticizing if they started out long distance.
On preview, to 105: Right.
"Perhaps you don't have had too much to drink"
This is a pleasing thing.
I met my wife [in the pub] and we spent 6 months living relatively close [Oxford/London] and spending most weekends together, and then 18 months in different countries before we got married. It wasn't that bad. We still spent quite a lot of time together, it was just all or nothing time. A week together, and then nothing for six weeks. Or three or four weeks together and then ten or twelve weeks of phoning/emailing.
It's a sign of how geeky some of my friends were, though, who immediately assumed we'd met long-distance [via IRC, or email]. That said, I do know a couple of long long term couples who originally met online.
I don't doubt that long distance relationships can work (that is, be fine as long-distance, or be long-distance for only a short time, and so on) and haven't really been saying anything about stuff that applies to anyone other than me. Because I'm a solipsist.
What could be more solipsistic than this blog entirely composed of comments written by one 47-year-old balding guy in a basement?
What could be more solipsistic than this blog entirely composed of comments written by one 47-year-old balding guy in a basement?
All blogs being entirely composed of comments written by me?
Also, I'm thinking of situations like, didn't know each other before, meet in person, have less than a month or so before moving long distances away. That's what I've run into. Six months in the same general area would be great. But I apparently find myself in more promising social situations only when I'm somewhere I'm not planning to stay.
Bonsaisue and I had a LDR for a fair chunk o time before we could be colocated. But we had known/known of each other since JR high... and got together when I was beginning grad school.
115: How's the paragliding (?) situation these days, now that spring is anon?
I've had up new relationship talks staying up till 5am about the tractatus. because I'm a giant nerd.
Kids today! My wife and I kept a relationship going for five years by writing letters. The kind written in pen or sometimes typed on an electric typewriter, no microchips. Then we would hike two miles uphill both ways to buy stamps.
The telephone had been invented, but we didn't use it much. Eventually we found our way to the same city so it worked out. We tried writing letters again recently but it didn't work.
Because, really, could you spend the rest of your life with a bad writer?
This.
So a box just appeared on my Facebook page purporting to tell me my "Friends' Popular Places". And the only entry is Durham Regional Hospital.
I at one point managed to spend more money on long distance charges than rent. Not that hard when rent was $200 and the phone calls ran $1.20/min. And yes it was a rotary phone, one with its own finicky AI that depending on its mood would either not call anywhere, call random numbers, or fixate on some random number. About five percent of the time it would actually call the number you were dialing. I hated that fucking antique piece of equipment.
My dad had a red rotary phone that was apparently permanently flecked with white paint. It belonged to his office, though, and went back when he retired. For a long time, it was dedicated to a modem line.
I just realized that I was invited to a party tonight (via mass facebook invite). It's St. Patrick's themed, the description of it is almost completely filled with references to music and pop culture that I don't understand (mostly because of the music), and people are encouraged to bring dancing shoes and a towel (it's not clear if this is serious). I think I'll skip it.
67: Inspecting Google Books, the phrase "24 hours a day, 7 days a week" seems to have been in use throughout the 20th century. I don't think it's too hard for an elderly person to figure it out based on that, and even if it's gibberish to them, it says "at any time" right before.
I don't think it's too hard for an elderly person to figure it out
I'm not sure. Ask NickS.
My objection is roughly that "24x7" is one step away from putting texting abbreviations in a formal letter. Naturally I disapprove!
Sounds more informal to me; something for an internal memo, so to speak. A formal communication would say "as soon as possible."
People are obviously free to use something like "24x7" in a formal letter if they wish, but it looks damn weird to me. Too idiomatic or something.
I'm at work, so I'm not inclined to construct a bullet-proof case for this.
128 to 126.
127: I'm also thinking that maximum clarity is the goal, and someone whose English isn't great may have trouble parsing 24/7 as well as 24x7, and running it through an online translator isn't going to work. Hence, with form letters and blurbs, the preferability of avoiding idiomatic usage.
I've got to get back to work now.
someone whose English isn't great may have trouble parsing 24/7 as well as 24x7
What, like, someone from Mars? Their day isn't *that* much longer than ours.
What if I'm 80 and have no idea what you're talking about?
...
My objection is roughly that "24x7" is one step away from putting texting abbreviations in a formal letter.
May I interest you in a set of wheels for your goalposts?
Who thinks we can get this up to 1000?
132: If you really meant it you would have said "one thousand".
Stwnged, kind of on the semi-pwnage acknwngement.
131: May I interest you in a set of wheels for your goalposts?
I don't see how I've moved the goalposts. My 72 made the claim that You must take into account a wide variety of potential recipients! and 129 reiterated that maximum clarity is the goal.
One such pool of potential recipients is comprised of those who are less likely to be up-to-date on jargon; hence my reference to texting abbreviations. Another such pool would be those whose English isn't great. Yet another would be those who feel that formality is called for in certain contexts. These groups can overlap, of course.
I claim that "24x7" is an informal jargony abbreviation that's better avoided in formal financial communications. Since I wasn't trying to make the case that "24x7" as used in that particular bank email was absolutely meaningless to those over 80, but rather that it could be strange, perhaps off-putting, the fact that the phrase "24 hours a day, 7 days a week" has been in use throughout the 20th century has nothing to do with it: say "24 hours a day, 7 days a week," then.
It isn't an educational tract Parsi, I think. It is a sales and customer retention document, therefore the document has a different purpose.
Right, it's not educational, which is why one doesn't need to educate those who find "24x7" odd as to its meaning, by acquainting them with it. As a customer relations document, it shouldn't invite questions, other than to inform the customer that he or she can call, you know, 24x7.
Really, practically speaking, having edited email blurbs over time that have gone out to tens of thousands of book buyers at this point: you're much better off realizing that the recipient may not necessarily grok what you're saying, or may find it overly casual, etc.
I've changed "the book will go out to you" to "the book will be shipped out to you" to "the book will be shipped [no "out"] to you." This is after receiving polite replies from people in Italy, say, asking in choppy English -- after I told them via blurb that the book would go out to them -- whether the book was being dispatched.
This just doesn't seem very controversial to me.
And, of course, some bank customers might find an overly formal email from their bank off-putting. Perhaps more casual jargon creates a more personal tone that makes the customer feel as if he or she is receiving email from a trusted friend. In my own professional experience, maximum formality does not always correlate with maximum clarity.
I'll be looking forward to an email from my bank with the opening "Hey, babe."
142: sexxy. Free lovechecking rules.
I feel like maximum clarity is often incompatible with maximum formality, in written English. Or at least with maximum politeness. I run in to this a lot trying to email students (and sometimes professor types) who have very weak English skills, but with whom I am not friends and am trying to be formally polite. It's very hard to say things in English clearly, using simple grammatical structures, without sounding (to myself at least) like an angry unmannered jerk.
142: Wouldn't hurt clarity though, right?
144: It's very hard to say things in English clearly, using simple grammatical structures, without sounding (to myself at least) like an angry unmannered jerk.
Yeah. It is. My emailed blurbs from work now sound (to my ears) rather stiff. Not angry, I wouldn't say; just really stand-offish. I tailor and soften the reply to the tone of previous exchanges when applicable.
I don't really see that as incompatible with clarity per se, though. Maybe it gets in the way of politeness. But that's where the tailoring comes in.
||So how important is it that the person you love also love the kid that's #1 in you life? Super important.
A little Btocked? Me? Maybe. But WTF?|>
I'm a bit btocked as well, and didn't notice you had given "super important" as your answer too. What happened?
Wanted to go visit him with Rory. Suboptimal response.
This is probably one of those occasions that calls for sympathy more than argument, but I would think being asked to love the kid right away could be difficult. Like her and want to spend more time getting to know her, super important, I would agree. "Love" just seems like a strong word and something that might not automatically materialize.
151: I'm sorry, Di. I know that if I were in his position that might feel like a lot to live up to. If that's the issue, maybe it would be less stressful meeting/spending time with Rory on a visit to you guys, where it wouldn't also incumbent upon him (not that he minds, I'm sure, but you know, it's a lot of work) to be the Dude In Charge Of Ensuring An Awesome Visit.
152 was before seeing 151, which I guess makes it sound like "wanting to spend more time getting to know her" is part of the problem. Sorry.
I think I may be liveblogging my breakup.
I'm willing to spend time with Rory, Di.
In light of 158, 159 seems a little inappropriate.
Too hasty! No breaking up after midnight! That's always a bad policy. If that's the inevitable outcome, it can wait until after sleep and daylight and reflection.
You don't know why he is reluctant to meet Rory, or how long that will last or what pressure he feels. Too soon to break up over this! Wait for more info!
He's met Rory! He liked Rory! She even like him! But is suggested us both coming down to visit... And I guess that's not fun. Fuuuuuuck.
I was going to suggest it could indicate an excess of caution on his part, but given he's already met her and given your interpretation of events, I have to say I'm sorry, Di.
OTOH, I'm drunk and know almost nothing about anything.
I don't even know. I just don't even know. Aren't you people supposed to stop me before I let myself fall this far???!!!!
Emerson doesn't hang around here anymore.
Dude, I'm stopping you right now. You are reading too much into this.
Look, he would prefer a weekend with only you right now. That's 'cause he has a crush on you and wants to spend very intense time with you, with no one else in the room. Not because he doesn't want to interact with your teen daughter, but because people who have crushes want to be alone with their crush.
Wanting to spend a weekend alone with you is not a rejection of your daughter, or the importance of your daughter. It is what he wants right now for reasons we don't know but could be as simple as besottedness. It is not who he IS, or what he'll always want. He has met her and it sounds like you guys are planning to move close. He knows she's part of the deal.
No overreacting! No live-blogging breaking up. Drink more, then go to sleep. No phone calls. Turn your phone off and put it somewhere hard to reach.
But now is probably a good time to put the phone/IM window away, have another drink, and see what tomorrow brings. Everyone's allowed one fuckup; maybe Leo will come to his senses.
I'm sorry, Di. Is it possible that he's just never hosted a visit with a kid before and is apprehensive about it?
Megan may have gotten there first, but I was pithier!
Thanks, guys.
Thank you for the words of wisdom.
I hate feeling so goddamned much. I miss the days when I felt nothing.
That's what booze and sleep are for. You ready for bed?
171.last: Aw, hang in there. Yeah, feeling nothing cuts you off from the lows; it also cuts you off from the highs. And that's no way to live. (Ask me how I know!)
And that's no way to live.
Well, it's not a great way to live, but it's not so bad, either.
To him? No no! No relationship talks after midnight. That's one of my top rules.
Yeah, i think I could give up the highs if it meant no more lows...
Di, have you told him how his response made you feel and asked him to explain his reluctance to host you and Rory? If so, and if he failed to give a reasonable answer, I'm really sorry. But if not, maybe you should do that before deciding that you're going to break up with him. I mean, you've seemed pretty happy lately, and that's not nothing, not to mention that he might have a good reason for acting as he did.
Look, he would prefer a weekend with only you right now. That's 'cause he has a crush on you and wants to spend very intense time with you, with no one else in the room. Not because he doesn't want to interact with your teen daughter, but because people who have crushes want to be alone with their crush.
This was certainly my first thought.
This is no time for clichéd bumper sticker quotes, neB.
Well, I'm going to bed anyway. NO ONE BREAK UP WITH ANYONE TONIGHT. There's plenty of time for that after you've slept on it and had a good breakfast, if you absolutely must (although honestly, I haven't heard sufficient cause).
I'm with Megan, though that sort of depends on how much alone time vs. you + Rory time there is. Wanting at least some of the visits in a LDR to be just you, especially when it's in an early phase seems normal. Not wanting to spend significant time with Rory would be something else. It could be much worse. A woman I knew in college completely freaked out when in response to a question at a party her boyfriend affirmed that he probably wants kids someday, but not anytime soon. She said she never wants anybody she's dating/married to to have kids because that would take away their focus on her and threatened to break up with the guy over the hypothetical kids in his vague distant future plans.
@158: it sure beats liveblogging a meltdown.
Megan! Listen to Megan! Even if you didn't listen to Megan, break ups never take on the first try. As I explained my own experience to Smearcase, it's like tipping over a coke machine - you have to build up proper momentum. You still have time to reflect / get more info, etc.
I really hope this is not a worst case scenario (and as a kid who had an unenthused step parent, yeah, if he's hardcore on that, it should be a dealbreaker), bc it did seem like he made you happy.
But listen to Megan!
it's like tipping over a coke machine
Break-ups may cause serious bladder injuries or death.
I was too late to weigh in last night, but Megan et al. are right. Too ambiguous, not enough information about what not wanting Rory on a particular visit means. I can think of a number of reasons why he'd want just you there that wouldn't mean anything negative about his feelings about Rory, and I'm sure I haven't exhausted the possibilities.
Don't break up until you're absolutely sure you're communicating clearly and his feelings are a problem.
Also, he could just have had a bad moment. Or, he is not Oscar Wilde. Or, he just got a call from some nagging relative. To go on one sub-optimal reply is, well, kinda sub-optimal.
It all made sense last night; this morning, my head just hurts.
And Guido? Yeah, I was totally reacting to a single, suboptimal moment. Because I'm totally that sort of perfection-demanding, unforgiving, shallow bitch. Boy do you have me pegged.
Di I imagine Guido was responding to the facts as presented in this thread. It would be difficult for him to know things about your situation that you haven't told him.
Thanks Sifu and indeed Di, I did not mean anything negative. Really, I didn't. I would be depressed if it happened to me.
But if this sub-optimal response was one of many, I am not so sure of Megan's advise as, normally, he should have felt the awkwardness and if he felt it - and got more than one chance of feeling it - and is not talking about it then he's probably a dick.
That being said: what do I know?
151
Wanted to go visit him with Rory. Suboptimal response.
I take it the objection was to Rory's presence not the visit itself (otherwise there could be any number of reasons). In which case I don't think his response is any great mystery. It is as if you wanted to bring your mother along. It isn't that he doesn't like your mother or wouldn't get along with her fine if you were married just that she doesn't fit into his fantasies of a wild weekend with lots of sex.
In general I think your fixation on your daughter is a bit unhealthy and likely to cause you grief when she reaches the age at which she needs to start pulling away from you.
Also, other people's kids are fucking scary. Especially the intelligent, perceptive ones, because they're always paying attention. You really do have to make allowances for people getting unsettled by them. It's natural; they're intimidating.
Di, I really, really hope it's not as bad as it looks. I can't imagine how disorienting it must be to find out this awesome dude you love (I think? I don't know / remember) is in fact so clueless / dickish abt the most important thing ever.
I am instead hoping his hesitation or reluctance can be chalked up to...anxiety? Anxiety seems like a good bet. Something fixable, is what I'm getting at.
Also, when it comes to your kid, I think having a hair trigger on certain things is actually kind of a good thing.
What Apo said, with the added bonus of: if he does grok how big the kid is, ohmygod that is terrifying. Extra double terrifying w a smart kid.
And, James, wow. Just wow. New heights in unprovoked dickishness disguised as personal advice. Also you're wrong.
thanks Apo -- that's a fair point. i forget how scary kids can be.
also, thanks for the backup dq. fortunately, i know better than to take seriously thoughts from shearer on what is or isn't emotionally healthy.
(As an aside, James, I don't even think you were specifically trying to be a dick in this particular instance. And yet you managed it so impressively. I'm honestly kind of puzzled on this one. I want to say it has to do with a willingness to make judgments with utter moral certainty about situations you couldn't possible know much about, but this is the internet and we all do that. More importantly, I'd like to reserve my own right to do that in the future. Maybe it's just the severity of the situation -- you picked the most personal and important thing in someone's life, and made a casual, summary judgment based on having zero experience with that thing (a single mother's relationship with her teenage daughter; I am confident you are not a single mother, nor have ever been a teenage girl, please correct me if I'm in error), and you did this at the very moment when that someone had come here in an emotionally vulnerable state. What the fuck, dude?)
Not to take this thread away from Di. I hope it gets better.
by all means, take it away. this will get better, or it won't. advice definitely appreciated (except yours, james -- totally useless), but no need to focus on my romantic tribulations,
He had to know it was an all or nothing proposition from the beginning. Maybe he's just starting to get his head around that. I wouldn't expect there to be no bumps in the road, if only bc it is such a big deal.
Also, totally unrelated: have any of the 4 people reading on a sunday morning heard of Amanda Hocking? I would link but I'm on my blackberry, and it is a piece of shit. Anyway: how long could it possibly take the Mineshaft to produce a similar, yet better, work, using a sort of choose your own adventure approach? There's money there, people.
He had to know it was an all or nothing proposition from the beginning. Maybe he's just starting to get his head around that. I wouldn't expect there to be no bumps in the road, if only bc it is such a big deal.
Also, totally unrelated: have any of the 4 people reading on a sunday morning heard of Amanda Hocking? I would link but I'm on my blackberry, and it is a piece of shit. Anyway: how long could it possibly take the Mineshaft to produce a similar, yet better, work, using a sort of choose your own adventure approach? There's money there, people.
Let me by the way apologize for having barged in on this one. I hope you give yourself a 2nd chance as most seem to advise you and I hope, when you do so, that he proves he deserved the 2nd chance as well.
Di, without knowing more than what you've said here, I do hope a second chance is in the making, in part because of all the happiness you've been showing over the last few months, but also because I think the prospect of step-parenting is a difficult one. Making a mistake early might help teach him how to go about it better in the future to come, and I think some hesitancy is better than gung-ho charging in with the idea that step-parenting is easy. (I say this only as a step-child and, as well, one subjected to a series of boyfriends. You of course are in a position to judge better than I.) I also trust Megan's instincts here, that past midnight and glasses of wine in are not conducive to the best conditions for good relationship conversations. Best of luck and we'll be here either way!
Just want to register agreement with Megan, Apo, & DQ, and to express general sympathy. One difficulty with LDRs is certainly the pressure to make visits absolutely perfect, which can be super stressful even if both people have almost exactly matching views of what absolutely perfect would entail.
Pointing out that everything I said can be derived from the first law, which is Don't talk about relationships after midnight. Everything else is just application.
If I were wise, I would have realized I don't like honey before I took up beekeeping.
I've heard there's a difference in taste between really fresh straight-from-the-comb honey and "regular" honey. Is this not the case? (Or do you not like either variety?)
It is also true that different bee fodder makes for different-tasting concentrated bee poop.
Don't talk about relationships after midnight.
Or substitute appropriate variant: Don't talk about relationships when drunk / when hungry / when tired (no matter the time of day!).
Ogged (pbuh) used to say, "Don't comment when hungry." Such a stern taskmaster.
208: I had a thin, greenish, grassy-tasting honey right off the comb once, bought from Roma by the side of a road in Eastern Europe. It was OK, he typed, purposely snipping the fuse of a potential bourgeois foodie enthusiasm bomb.
I had a freshman roommate whose family had orange groves in which they also made honey. They'd mail it up to us super fresh from FL and ho-lee shit was that honey good.
Different commenter food makes for differently concentrated comments.
Honey is bee barf, not bee poop.
Yeah, the flavor changes, Bonsaisue. You'd probably have to talk like a wine person to describe it, but something something subtler notes, echoes of something or other, a faint tone of springtime and Bambi. But it tastes harsher and more homogenous over time. But that's not why I hate it.
I hate it because it is sticky, heavy, balky, recalcitrant, messy, annoying and I never even eat that much.
Don't talk about relationships when drunk / when hungry / when tired (no matter the time of day!).
Thus leaving about 30 minutes per day in which they can be discussed.
I don't know if you want to go there, Megan. Ben knows a thing or two about biology.
217: Is emesis excretion?
* Let's take the exegesis joke as read.
216: 30 minutes? If you add in "when distracted," quite possibly.
Per the theme of the original post, those 3- or 5- or 8-hour-long engrossing conversations are often the ones that end with, "I really like you!" Even if it does come out after midnight.
Since this is the, er, open thread, I'll say again that I'm rather bummed about the NYT new online subscription model. 20 articles/month before having to pay $15/month just leaves out a realm of casual but not at all voracious readers who are just not going to pay -- quite possibly because they can't afford -- that $180/year. It's not particularly a personal affront, but rather that the NYT thereby walls itself off from less affluent readers, diminishing its journalistic voice across the nation.
That is all.
Beekeeping rules. My dad had a couple hives and I would get to suit up and work the smoker. I still think there's a larger scale application of that concept using weed that would be awesome for human crowd control.
Megan got it exactly right in this thread.
Also,
I'm rather bummed about the NYT new online subscription model.
You're not the only one (the Felix Salmon article quoted in the second link is quite good).
having to pay $15/month just leaves out a realm of casual but not at all voracious readers who are just not going to pay
That would be me. I am a voracious reader of many things, but a decidedly causual reader of the NYT. I'm actually somewhat happy to have a mechanism that cuts me off of their crap.
I felt better about it learning visits via links will still be effectively free - it won't hurt blogging much, at least.
224: Hm. I'll check what DeLong has to say. I'd just looked at this NYT piece on the issue, which links to this on the topic.
My solution: allow subscription to certain sections. I'd subscribe to the Op-Ed, Politics, World, and U.S. National for $5/month readily. I don't need Sports, Theater, Arts, Movies, Television, Real Estate, Travel or a myriad of other sections.
217: Is emesis excretion?
My Latin dictionary defines "excernere" (excrevi, excretus) as "sift out, separate", and that's what's going on in emesis, ain't it? Cf. OED: "Of animals and plants or their organs: To separate (chiefly waste matters) from the vital fluids preparatory to discharging from the system; to separate and expel from the system through the emunctory organs; often used with reference to the process of expulsion merely." Puking would seem to be canonical.
"Emunctory" looks to be a real winner: "A.a Of or pertaining to the blowing of the nose.; b. That has the function of conveying waste matters from the body.; B. A cleansing organ or canal; a term applied to the excretory ducts and organs of the body' ( New Sydenham Soc. Lexicon) Also fig.".
In general I am in favor of the application of the word "ducts" to the body.
It's probably been a couple of years since I've read more than 20 New York Times articles per month, but I don't track my usage. Also, I'm not all that informed. In a lot of cases where I used to go to the longer-form newspaper articles, a wire report is good enough for me.
229: Ducts? Why is it always ducts?
In a lot of cases where I used to go to the longer-form newspaper articles, a wire report is good enough for me.
Ah. I've been wondering where else I should go for news, aside from attending to bloggers' pointing.
Check out McClatchydc for national political stuff.
233: Yes, I'd forgotten. Thanks. Weirdly, one of their reporters on Arab affairs has the same unusual name as one of my college roommates, not that that's important, but it brings things home.
Megan gets it right with Heebie-like frequency.
235: Does that mean you talked again? If so, wooooo!
I'll pay with little grumbling. Unlike many here, I really like the Times, and there's also the various useful stuff if you're a New Yorker. Not just local news but also reviews and similar stuff. I'd go through the twenty article limit in two days, easily. Until about four or five years ago I'd consistently buy the daily paper, now I'm down to maybe once or twice a week. The way I see it this still works out cheaper than it used to be. What did piss me off was that the subscription price was more expensive than the newsstand one, though I'd regularly get the three month intro special, cancel, and then reup again three months later.
The Felix Salmon article points out that for some types of usage, weekend edition + free included digital access can be the less expensive route. I wonder if part of the Times strategy is actually to try to get people to subscribe to or stop unsubscribing from the print version. Apparently, that's still where they get the big ad revenue.
Checking the subscription prices, not so much. The cheapest option is M-F for $6.20 a week. Their prices do seem to be significantly lower relative to the newsstand price than before when it was a shade above what you'd pay buying it every day. Currently the full subscription is $11.30 a week while retail would work out to $17.00./wk.
Just for comparison, the online subscription for Le Monde is 15.00 Euros and FAZ is 30.00 Euros. So more and much more. Le Monde went up from 6.00 several months ago, FAZ until at least a year or two ago was still requiring people to subscribe to the paper version if you wanted full access. For someone in the US that worked out to northwards of a thousand bucks a year.
237: I don't know what it means, except that it's never a bad idea to follow Megan's advice. Relationships are hard.
On the plus side, I bought a new charcoal smoker. Chili, unlike relationships, is easy.
We get Sunday only home delivery. But it's technically my roommate's subscription so I don't actually know how much it costs and it is weirdly hard to find out. (I'm logged into their website, since I'm the only one who ever looks at the internet in our house. But I still don't see any "Sunday only" options or price lists or anything).
Relatedly, but in a much more absurdly whiny vein: Oh my god, it is so irritating to have the Sunday crossword on the recto instead of the verso page. It is because it is at the back of the magazine, and now it is well-nigh impossible to flip the page back and write on it. This is a terrible, terrible design flaw that I hope is resolved immediately.
228: They seem distinguishable to me: respectively, an interruption of digestion and the removal of digestive waste.
/Something about your mom.
I would tell you how much Sunday delivery costs if I knew, neb. But I just don't. I'm sorry.
Certainly they're distinguishable, indeed, distinguishable in just the way you mention (though perhaps the question is complicated in the apian case, since the production of honey is a normal thing for them, not an interruption of their digestive processes—innit?). But the question wasn't whether they're distinguishable in just any way but whether they're distinguishable insofar as being excretion is concerned. You have yet to establish the relevance of your distinction to that question.
It's not even the case that everything expelled from the anus is digestive waste matter; digestible but undigested things do make it through intact on occasion (whole blueberries and corn kernels are widely attested). Eaters of "off" shellfish and others whose stools tend to the higher-numbered end of the Bristol scale, too, know that their productions haven't spent enough time in their bellies to be properly worked over; what comes out, not long after coming in, is for them too ill characterized as waste matter.
Of course, I am far too charitable an interpreter to put much weight on these latter considerations; I know what you meant, after all.
It's not even the case that everything expelled from the anus is digestive waste matter;
This raises the question of gaseous expulsions ("all that is solid melts into air"—most especially beans). Digestive waste matter? Digestive byproduct, anyway.
Digestive waste matter?
Well it certainly is matter. Not digestive waste concepts. Though sometimes when I read philosophy, that does seem plausible.
So sorry to hear that, Di Kotimy. It sounds like a difficult situation. I don't know if this advice would be at all useful to you, but even given that Rory is your highest priority, being on hair trigger alert isn't always the best thing -- it's good in emergencies, but if you do it too much it can get in the way of you seeing the big picture (i.e., understanding how this guy is relating to Rory).
Shorter advice: don't panic.
The question, you pettifogging niggler, was whether it is digestive waste matter, not whether it is digestive waste something else.
If it is digestive waste matter, then it seems that up-through-persons-traveling gas, i.e., burps, should also count as digestive waste matter. This establishes that matter expelled per os can be, by (what is apparently) your criterion, excreta. And, if you admit that interruptions in the digestive process (as experienced by the eater of the bad mussel) expelled per culum can also be excretions, then, it seems pure arbitrary willfulness to deny that such interruptions expelled per os can't be.
Just to clarify, I adore the hell out of Rory and am not going to let even my best shot at long-term sweaty monkeysex intefere with being the mom she deserves. But I am hardly on a hair trigger.
I cannot be the only one alive to the ever-present lurking danger of the paradox of the heap.
I am, to be honest, not entirely certain in what way that is supposed to threaten here.
Revelation! Regarding the NYT. A good friend subscribes to the print edition, so I'll just nab his subscription data for online access.
252: you pettifogging niggler
Ratiocinationist!
pettifogging niggler
That's both redundant and amazingly unself-aware.
unself-aware
I like when hyphenation works out like this. Yes, I am extremely aware of my unself, thank you very much.
259: Or given the first characteristic, hyperself-aware.
I take it that you mean that the epithet applies as much (or more) to me as (or than) to you. Were that the case, though, my application of the epithet to you wouldn't indicate that I was not aware that it applies as much (or more) to me.
We don't know how the pot feels about being black.
The pot however cannot comment (or chooses not to), yet you do. I believe I can infer your chagrin.
This is the thread where I decided I loved neb.
Well, at this point, I'm speaking from more first-hand experience on the topic of honey. I'm very sure of my conclusions about honey. Horrid stuff. Avoid it whenever possible.
Honey's good in oatmeal -- just a little bit. It's very good in homemade granola, essential even. I don't find use for it otherwise.
This is the thread where I decided I loved neb.
For me it was either his post about the fashionable love of bacon or his post welcoming NYT readers.
My previous comment on the subject is lost in the hoohole, but I can attest to the horrid taste of buckwheat honey, if the jar I bought is representative. It's like acrid, metallic, super-concentrated dirt.
It is a surprisingly nice liquid for light frying. I did not expect it at all, but my Greek buddy suggested it and it can be excellent.
264, 268: not the chicken picture?!? You people are extremely weird.
The pot however cannot comment (or chooses not to), yet you do.
Absurd. The pot is the very paradigm of one who comments.
A little honey, a little crystallized ginger, and several walnut halves dispersed through a moderate quantity of Greek yogurt is a fine thing.
It is a surprisingly nice liquid for light frying. I did not expect it at all, but my Greek buddy suggested it and it can be excellent.
I am fascinated. Tell me more about how this works. It sounds very sticky.
269 Buckwheat honey is great in black tea. Also really good in yogurt. I prefer Armenian Lebni to the Greek stuff - cheaper and better. On its own on bread, buckwheat honey is a bit strong but not like what you describe. Also good, forest honey from mountainous areas. And many, many others. On the other hand standard US clover honey - cloying bland blech.
A little honey, a little crystallized ginger, and several walnut halves dispersed through a moderate quantity of Greek yogurt is a fine thing.
I agree. I haven't been having Greek yogurt much lately, because it is so exciting to me to have access to Strauss yogurt, so I just eat that instead. If I were more diligent, I might take some Strauss yogurt and drain it, that it might be Strauss and Greek style.
I got some very tasty christmas berry honey but I have so much fucking jam and jelly I feel as if I have no reason to ever actually use honey.
The NYT paywall interests me, just to see how it works out, but as one of the three people left who gets daily home delivery, it's not going to affect me beyond having to remember to toss in a username and password occasionally.
Also, I've started eating some honey made by my uncle, and given away to various far-flung family members as gifts, in 1977. It's still pretty good.
I got some very tasty christmas berry honey but I have so much fucking jam and jelly I feel as if I have no reason to ever actually use honey.
This also applies to me, and jam is good in yogurt too.
I love honey. My latest obsession is the stuff one of my friends made in his backyard (well, his bees made it, obviously), which I find all light and delicate.
standard US clover honey - cloying bland blech
I didn't quite realize that different flowers --> different honey until faced with the wall of honey at a German grocery store. I can report that linden honey has an odd taste I didn't quite like, and 'spring flowers' honey (with pictures of pansies and violas on the front, but who knows what it's actually from) is amazing.
Is this the thread for honey oneupsmanship? On Saturday I bought Fleur a liter of black cumin flower mountain honey from Yemen.
No idea if it's any good. It's supposed to be a delicacy. I'm a little worried about it surviving the trip home.
285: A lot of European-Americans beat themselves up over black cumin. It's probably fine.
Is this the thread for being stuck at the top of the tejon pass in a blizzard? If this goes on any longer, I may start a twitter account. #Stuckintejonwiththedonnerbluesagain
I had the most amazing honey a few years ago at a bliny place in St. Petersburg. It was nearly pure white, and although it was kind of crystalized, the flavor was just incredible -- rich and not too sweet. I assume it was fairly local and unpasteurized by default; I don't know what kind of flowers the bees up there get into, but damn. Since then, I've bought random jars of artisanal honey at farmers' markets but haven't found anything that could compare.
I don't eat honey very often, but the last time I did I wondered why not. Then I forgot about it. I think it must have been with tea.
288: I've been a bit confused by your Zuckbook messages: what exactly does that situation entail? Are you stuck in a car? In a hotel room?
Sorry. I didn't realize the honey thing was actually still happening.
291. Car. I seem to be within pissing distance of a Flying J, but no cars seem to be getting off there. Granted pissing distance is starting to get impressive, as I haven't decided how to deal with that particular situation.
Nope. Right near there, heading south.
A liter is a lot of honey, dude.
Not necessarily in a household with children. I haven't tracked our honey consumption—it's high in any case—but the last gallon of maple syrup my mom sent disappeared in about three months.
On the topic of k-sky and Z-book, I've just been urged to friend a mutual friend of k-sky and another Z-book friend of mine. We've been doing this two-degrees-of-Z-book kind of thing.
Putting honey in drinks makes me feel like I'm getting sick and mucousy. Dissolving sugar crystals never has this effect. Honey in tea is even worse when I'm *Actually* sick. I really never use it unless I'm out of maple syrup.
There are some services there, if the blizzard hasn't shut them down.
A liter is a lot of honey, dude.
Nothing is too good for my Fleur, and how dare you suggest otherwise!
And, errrmmm, it didn't come in smaller containers.
298: thanks. I just walked over to the side of the road, to pee and soak my shoes in west precipitation much. The hotel parking lot had no traffic in it, which makes me think is there some problem with the exit up ahead. The fact that no cars seem to be getting off this highway or going anywhere also confirmed that suspicion.
I think that if I can get to gorman, I will be moving fast enough to actually get the other 70 miles home.
Side note: this comment brought to you by google voice recognition.
296: Z-book is weird. I was convinced Thundersnow and I would have an overlap with () or Dutch Cookie, but: nope. Instead, it's some dude who lived in my dorm during second year. My only memory of him was his organizing of flashmob events, but he and I are still friendz.
296: this is a new 1 right? There have already been two between us.
Who's "Z-book"? What did I miss over this weekend?
soak my shoes in west precipitation much.
At least google voice recognition can recognize the words "google voice recognition".
301: I'm pretty marginalized in the corner of the world that Thundersnow and I would share. I'd make more friends, but, eh, I like the ones I have and that would take effort.
Facebook recently told me that "these five friends have found friends with the facebook friend finder" or something to that effect. I appreciated the alliteration, but didn't use the friend finder.
302: No, it's Mellis. I can't remember the woman's name at the moment; at first I thought it was it was one of those friend-this-cute-woman things, but she appears to be real.
306 cont.: Nina, I think.
305: Isn't that "these friends blah blah friend finder" just a big fat lie? I don't believe that the friends alleged to have used the friend finder actually have.
There are "friend-this-cute-woman" things?
Those women aren't real, essear.
So, this is a bit of a surprise: the pass is simply closed closed closed and I am headed 30 miles north to bakersfield. Bah!
Well, there are the "who's looked for you on facebook" ads that are invariably accompanied by a photos of buxom hotties, and there are ads featuring specific buxom hotties who want you to friend them and are supposedly friends of your friends. I may not have seen the latter kind on facebook itself, now that I think about it.
Yesterday I was happily eating pickled herring on lavash—is there any other way to eat pickled herring on lavash?—and I thought, "You know what? I'll bet pickled herring has a facebook page." Which it did indeed, so I liked it.
Bave, perhaps that was whipped honey?
What's green, hangs out on a friend of a friend's wall, and sings? Friend the friend of a friend to find out!
The only unexpected zbook coincidence in my world puts Leo at one degree separation from unfogged.
TThere is a boutique hotel in Bakersfield. I am in it.
There's a honey guy at our farmers' market with different floral honeys. They all taste different, and I like almost all of them, except bamboo, which tastes like they spilled the honey on a sweaty horse and scraped it back off before jarring it.
Honey: not an excretion product. If any sort of product, then a digestion product: the bees add an enzyme. But not a waste product: the bees keep it in case someone gets peckish later. Regurgitated, yes. Very good on toast with butter.
Phrase of the day: "Malphigian tubules".
LB, what are you doing up at 4:37 am?
Being in a timezone where that comment was posted somewhere around seven.
Still damn early to be blogging. Do they have half hour time zones in whatever cave the Unfogged server is hidden, or does the 2.5 hour difference indicated that said server's clock is crackered?
Ah. Also, I think we're in that odd time of year where there's only four hours difference between London and NY. So, LB: shouldn't you be at work by now?
On honey (and not particularly artisinal stuff),
I always liked the liquid kind, but in Manitoba, people like this white creamy spreadable stuff. I don't care for it, but my BF's Dad doesn't really like the other kind.
Sweet jesus, these kids need to get off my lawn. Apparently it's that time of year again where the half-block-away high school has its high-stakes-exit tests, and so they set up a thumping music-and-beer party immediately outside the gate to greet the triumphant test-takers. They're so full of youth and optimism--I can't bear it.
Also, wow. Exciting stuff over there. Did everyone else know that Yemen has basically the same population as Saudi Arabia? Because I totally didn't.
325. Yeah, we seem to have got ourselves a situation there. Must admit I didn't necessarily expect that - wonder where the Saudis stand on this.
Brings the Libyan intervention (is that what we're calling it?) into a different light.
Um. AT&T buying T-mobile. Will someone knowledgable tell me how this isn't a terrible, terrible thing?
328: I know nothing, but I'll tell you it's not a terrible, terrible thing. Just an ordinary not-good thing.
I wonder if they'll keep their European operations or sell them off.
They're only selling the T-Mobile USA part.
Good, I'm quite happy with them here.
the Libyan intervention (is that what we're calling it?)
I like it. It sounds like we sit Gaddafi down for a serious talk to try to get him to admit he has a killing-civilians problem and needs to go to rehab.
Perhaps this is a good time to remind folks that, for most of you, you can probably get a better deal with prepaid plans than the normal "postpaid" ones. Here's a roundup for voice/text; here's one for data. Eg: $25 for 300 mins, unlimited text/data, w/ Virgin Mobile.
you can probably get a better deal with prepaid plans
Why would anybody use anything else?
Not everyone is as enlightened as we are, chris. Sad but true.
Ah, you mean Pay-as-you-go? OK. I don't, I have a monthly subscription.
Dunno what x means. I mean every so often when I remember I text T-Mobile with the last four digits of my card and put a few quid on my phone. What do you mean?
What's the benefit of a monthly bill?
In the US, the main operators push very heavily--both through advertising and through heavy handset subsidies--to get customers to sign 2-year contracts. These contracts are typically much more expensive per month than the pay-as-you-go plans; the latter are sold both by the main operators and 'virtual' networks who resell access to the big ones' networks.
339: and yes, I mean the same thing, but the concept is broader, too--it also includes things where you e.g. text them and get the next 30 days unlimited data for €10, or X minutes for $X, etc. It's basically defined by a lack of contract and the concomitant lack of (any significant) handset subsidy.
Of course, when I bought an iPhone a few years ago, I had to pay a huge amount for an unsubsidized phone and sign a contract. And also pay a huge deposit because I had, at the time, no credit rating. So I was shelling out over $1k up front.
essear, you should maybe see somebody about your impulse control, or lack of it.
re: 340
Well, at the time I would have had to pay a lot of money up front to get the phone I wanted on pay as you go. I did a bit of shopping around and paid a bit up front, to get a cheaper monthly tariff, but much less up front than if I'd bought the phone outright. I worked it out at the time, and I'd have save a little by buying up front, but not that much. I used to also be quite a heavy user [although I'm not anymore] so there was a time when pay monthly was cheaper for me [if I used all of my allocation].
essear, you should maybe see somebody about your impulse control, or lack of it.
Sure, just as soon as I finish spending the day commenting on blogs instead of working.
268: I have looked for the post welcoming NYT readers but wasn't sure quite what to search for. Now I really want to read the bacon thread because ARGH SHUT UP WE ALL LIKE BACON IT DOESN'T MAKE YOU SPECIAL which I'm guessing is what the posting you mention was about maybe?
I find it hard to believe that pay-as-I-go would be cheaper than my monthly bill now that I have an unlimited data plan. At the very least, I'd have to stop checking Unfogged comments when I sneak away to pee freshen up at a restaurant.
I think it has as much chance of success as a classical intervention, but w/o gaddafi running around naked on tv looking for more meth. So, little upside. (Besides avoidance of immediate bloodletting. There is that.)
The bacon post is the first google hit on the site for "Straight girls kissing". Which is essentially why it was a lovely bit of curmudgeonliness.
347: "Welcome, New York Times readers!"
but w/o gaddafi running around naked on tv looking for more meth
But wait! Maybe Gaddafi would give up on his dictatorial ambitions if we instead offered to let him take over for Charlie Sheen on that stupid TV show?
And again to 347, the bacon post, and alameida's followup shortly afterwards.
the bees add an enzyme
The other day I was reflecting on what a great title for a book Surprised by Sin is and it occurred to me that it more or less offers a schema for good book titles—namely, "Xed by Y". What, dear reader, was the first instantiation of the schema I thought of, by way of a test? Nothing else but Delighted by Enzymes.
I've had enzymes on my mind, I guess.
Speaking of nosflow, I've just lost a grammar argument about fewer/less. This was a count-noun situation ("flights") and the correct answer was clearly "fewer". However, the interlocutor insisted, "I like 'less'". She then remained unmoved from this utterly wrongheaded position. How maddening.
Those I remember. What's the chicken picture mentioned by Tweety?
356: It's more the sort of thing that should be linked by apo.
re: 355
I don't know if it's losing if the other person is just implacably wrong.
356: The reason that Buck is still vaguely dubious about all of you people.
355: You didn't lose the argument. Your interlocuter just refuses to admit defeat.
356: The original post is here but, alas, neither of the links works any longer.
and it occurred to me that it more or less offers a schema for good book titles--namely, "Xed by Y".
Puts me in mind of all those fucking tv-series and movie titles Gerund Direct Object or sometimes Ambiguous Gerund Direct Object unless Subject. Grnkh. Makes me irritable.
What's the benefit of a monthly bill?
I've never thought about that before. Everyone has a monthly bill.
The NYT post is really frustrating because there are (a) lots of annoying misspellings and (b) some parts I can't read without knowing that when I wrote them I had specific allusions in mind which now I can't for the life of me figure out.
I can't remember if the chicken was raw or cooked. I'm not sure why this seems important; probably I should be happy that the image is no longer in my brain.
361: Starting sentences with gerunds really annoys me. Speaking as a former editor.
367: Raw. The crab was, I think, cooked, or at least red.
||
redfoxtailshrub: I just ordered some new prunes that I'm excited about.
I got apricots from them a couple of years ago and those were delicious,
|>
FIN
After all that, he gets attacked by a dolphin? That's some crap luck.
No, Stanley. After all that, he found five dollars.
Despite my intense dislike of draining and jarring honey, I am decided to have two hives this year instead of just one. Which is why I'm super psyched that my friend and I caught a swarm at lunch time.
Super convenient swarm, that I detected early (from seeing shadows on the picnic table, no less). Called her right away; she's had a box prepped and ready in her car for a week in hopes of getting a call about a swarm. She showed up just a few minutes after the swarm coallesced on a hip-height branch right next to an empty parking spot.
Big gentle Italians, with light yellow coloring. We feel very pleased with ourselves and our all-pro swarm collection.
For the record, I am sober as a judge, it's before midnight, and I am another step closer to done. Out of deference to Megan's good advice, supra, I will try my damndest to sleep on it before making the call. But I was better off when I was a committed to the Church of Emerson.
Definitely not happy making. Sympathies and support.
Oh no! What happened? Ignore me if I'm being too nosy.
Wait, what? I missed the previous revelation of drama. That blows. Definitely sleep on things.
Oh, Di, I'm so sorry.
Aw, Di. Im sorry. Im rooting for you.
thanks guys. kind of bittersweet that you guys are more responsive, despite my burying this in a long-since retired thread, than he is to how i am feeling. my heart is truly broken.
(And if he's unresponsive to a broken heart, it does sound like maybe it is time to cut him loose. Sorry, i know that doesnt help, and i really dont know enough about the situation, but just...yeah. Another hug, then.)
(That is to say: you deserve better. Certainly better than non-responsiveness. And now back to bed.)
On the plus side, Jesus, I guess I don't need to talk to that canon lawyer buddy of yours about the annulment.
Good luck with whatever you decide to do upon waking, Di. I do want to say, as I've said before, that people who don't have kids themselves have 0% understanding of what parents mean when they say just about anything about their kids, or how important they are to them. The best I could ever do, despite totally adoring my bf's kids and them adoring me, was fake my way to an understanding of what he was going through as a single parent. I couldn't understand how he could swing, in five minutes, from saying, "Wow, it's so great to have an adult weekend without the boys" to bursting into tears because he missed them too much. If I got along with the kids too well, he felt I was "playing house," and if I didn't, he thought I wasn't trying. It wasn't clear to either of us how he, or the kids, wanted me to relate to them, and it was just something I wasn't permitted to have an opinion about, so while I loved them very much, it was the area in my relationship in which I felt completely powerless, which is appropriate, and yet difficult if you've never had a kid yourself. My fear, which came true, was that I would love them terribly and then never get to say goodbye.
I'm not trying to say that one can overlook these failures and resentments in a childless partner. Childless people simply have no idea how to be around our partners' kids. It's confusing and frightening, and even if we love them, it feels like there's no right way to be. Are we trying too hard? Not hard enough? Are we playing Mommy/Daddy too much? Being too buddy-buddy? Too formal? Too inappropriate? We have no idea. I think you've said you've had conversations with the BF about this before, which may just mean that he isn't learning, and that learning curve needs to be steeper.
I just don't think you can assume that the BF doesn't love the kid. I don't know the guy and I can't say how he feels, but I can say that he probably finds it a lot easier to be with you alone because that's what he knows how to do; it's how he feels competent in your relationship. That is probably not good enough for you, and in that sense I wasn't good enough either. Maybe it's not that you can only date someone who has kids of his own, but watching someone bumble their way through figuring it out seems too painful.
That is to say, obviously, the childless partner's worries and concerns are petty compared to, say, the parent's concern about the well-being of a child. I just don't think that having these worries and concerns means he doesn't love your child, possibly even very much. He just doesn't know.
Without knowing the details of the current situation, 395 and 396 seem wise.
Also, if he is really invested in Rory's happiness and future, he is going to have opinions about parenting decisions. I think this is something that has come up between you before (?), and my guess is that keeping Rory at arm's length is not about Rory, but about trying not to get tempted into caring too much about her future, because then he is going to have opinions about how to get her there, and he knows this is inappropriate. Again: not your fault. But childless-person thinking about relationships works on the basis that the more invested we are in a relationship, the more we care about shaping its future, and relationships with other people's kids just don't follow that logic at all.
Yes, also offering virtual hugs and distant sympathy. I also think AWB in 395/6/8 sounds extremely wise.
which may just mean that he isn't learning
Or he may be finding it too much. Which I know from experience hurts, but it's also a reasonable and understandable (from a distance) reaction. Dating with kids is tricky and fraught because the other person will never ever be your most important relationship, or even a close second, and they know it.
But don't let this spook you from getting back on the horse. It's a big world full of people.
I hadn't seen this thread previously. I'm sorry to hear all of this, Di. It sounds very tough. I feel sad for you.
If he's not meshing well with Rory, that could be reasonably be dealt with in couples counseling to establish some useful expectations and ground rules in weird new territory. That's the best use of couples' counseling, actually: two cooperative adults trying to navigate something difficult together. That is, if both parties otherwise want the relationship to move forward.
Obviously I've got zero actual information about this situation, though.
I know this has been said, but you guys are the best. I was going to note that your emotional generosity and compassion are making me a little weepy. But let's face it, pretty much anything is going to make me weepy today. I am genuinely moved.
AWB, Apo: Good points and sound advice. Without going into detail (a level of discretion from me that surely tells you just how deeply I love/d this guy...) the problems go well beyond Rory at this point.
Heebie: Absolutely agree that couple's counseling would be helpful and appropriate. Reasonably certain that it won't happen, though.
Feeling too much like I'm back on a relationship I have tread too many times before.
It's a cliche, but it's true-- better to love and lose than not to love.
It's possible to have a sort of life that's solitary (in the adult sense, bonds with your won kid are different), but it's a mistake to live that way. It's better to let other people in, even if they're flawed. Sympathies.
This sounds awfully hard, Di, and I totally recognize that despair of realizing you're making the same mistake you've made before when you thought at least you might be making new mistakes, for novelty's sake. But I don't think you're ever wrong for being optimistic, even if it breaks your heart. Luckily you've got a great kid (and friends!) if you need a reminder of how lovable you are.
I used to think there was nothing worse than making the same mistake twice. However, sometimes the changes you would have to make to avoid making the same mistake aren't worth it. When I need to be reminded of this point I read the Zobeide city from Invisible Cities which captures this point very well.
One of those friends is his sister, who apparently said some pretty awful things to him last night in response. Ugh. They've never gotten along all that well, but now I am feeling really awful about creating/contributing to family discord.
However, sometimes the changes you would have to make to avoid making the same mistake aren't worth it.
Yeah, this is true. The price of admission for relationships is knowing that most of them end. Which doesn't make the relationship a mistake, to channel Dan Savage.
For family fights, there are always lots of pretexts, anything can bring suppressed disputes to the surface. Not your fault unless you previously explained to the sister how she could become a better person.
Aw . . . geez.
My sympathies. I think 400 and 405 get it right -- sometimes it's worth the attempt even when it doesn't succeed, but the pain and frustration are obvious in 403.
Take care.
Di, for what it's worth, it seems like recognizing the emergence of familiar patterns earlier on in the pattern is the only kind of progress that anyone can realistically expect to make. That is, incremental.
I know we don't have a lot of details on this, but it seems like you're setting boundaries and expectations and making difficult but appropriate choices when the boundaries get crossed, or the expectations disappointed. And I gotta think that that's good for Rory to see, even given that she'll see it from a distance or a remove. Like, those are good things to learn, you know? Not everyone gets to see adults making difficult but healthy choices and coping with the result in a non-crazy way.
So. There's that.
and coping with the result in a non-crazy way
I sometimes forget that you haven't know me quite as long as some here... "non-crazy" isn't exactly my M.O.
Well, for a given value of crazy?
Are we talking, like, the colloquial "crazy" meaning dramatic and emotional? Or, like, BPD, writing letters to exes in your own blood and faking a pregnancy crazy? (I've known interesting people!)
Um. Obviously, feel free not to answer that. But I do not get the sense so far that you are Crazy. And I think colloquial crazy is ok, too, and helpful for a kid to see when dealt with non-destructively. (Clearly I'm talking about myself at this point, because goddamn it would have been useful for me to see that, assuming it would have saved me the trouble of reinventing the wheel.)
Lots of ways to live a good life-- controlled and practical always is problematic. Real crazy leads to irreparable damage, not just transient disturbance. Perfectionists tend to be hard on themselves.
(Also, crazy during a break up /= crazy during normal times. I mean, right? This is not just a delusion of mine excusing my own behavior?)
Sorry to hear about your bad news, Di.
Oh yay! Everyone wants to talk about bees and honey all of a sudden!
I don't really "know" you Di, but I have been reading this blog for a while, and "crazy" seems really unduly harsh on yourself.
(Clearly I'm talking about myself at this point, because goddamn it would have been useful for me to see that, assuming it would have saved me the trouble of reinventing the wheel.)
Oh hell yes. This.
Unduly harsh on myself is my particular brand of crazy?
Sorry, this kind of got away from me. Just that you seem to be dealing with stuff well, and I think there's something to be said for that.
Also what others have said. And I'm just sorry your heart is broken, because that shit is just awful.
(Um, Megan, I am a big fan of yours, too. Bees!)
417: you saw that messed up story a few months back about the bees eating maraschino cherry juice? Bad honey!
I understood how those bees feel. It is hard for a grown-up to admit, but I love love love maraschino cherries.
Also, I'm sorry to hear it, Di. The good parts sounded really good, so I wish that were all the parts.
Oh yay! Everyone wants to talk about bees and honey all of a sudden!
By the way, Ttam was trolling you in the other thread, saying that the UK has the best produce in the world.
Megan, do you feed your bees lots of weird shit to see what it does to the honey? Because that is exactly what I would do. I want to really, really encourage you to do this. Start a crazy honey of the month club. Do it.
Or antifreeze! Honey that pours like a liquid!
Oh man, you could actually just buy artificial flavoring and add it to sugar water or something, right? You could put all kinds of stuff in there.
Maybe I should keep bees. I mean, swarm hunting sounds like fun.
Ah, I'm sorry Di. On the plus side, more Unfogged time?
Smokey mesquite honey! I am, for some completely unknown reason, really into this honey flavor engineering. Possibly it has to do with all the work I have to do.
Possibly.
I've had a cocktail made with liquid smoke and honey that was completely delicious, so I think this is a solid plan.
WHAT? Which thread?! This shall not stand!
I didn't really mean to hijack Di's thread. I shall take my bee talk over to the thread where I sweetly and conclusively explain things to ttaM.
I always want to run different liquids through the coffee machine and see what you get. I suppose they don't steam quite as nicely as water. But still, like Chocovine!
Oh man, you could actually just buy artificial flavoring and add it to sugar water or something, right? You could put all kinds of stuff in there.
Couldn't you just add the artificial flavoring directly to the honey, after it was made?
Di, I am still being supportive in my mind, and can be supportive in writing again, too.
437: Yes, but it loses...something, no? Specifically, it loses the coolness. And a marketing opportunity.
run different liquids through the coffee machine and see what you get
Urine gets you a stinky kitchen.
435.2 Oh goodness, no. I am a thread communist -- the thread belongs to us all. Honestly, I hadn't really expected quite so many of you to pick up on my middle-of-the-night gnashing and wailing on an old thread -- though I am totally heartened that you have and for everyone's support.
Talk of gardening and honey bees is probably more cheering than letting me keep wallowing anyway. For instance, I have dug out a nice little 150 sq. ft. garden for myself in the yard and just sowed some carrots and lettuce and onions on Monday. I am very excited and plan to go buy heirloom seedlings over the weekend.
428: Or antifreeze! Honey that pours like a liquid!
And tastes like Dr. Pepper.
heirloom seedlings
Di will be harvesting end tables, chest-of-drawers and old necklaces by the 4th of July.
Do bees get drunk? What about, like, margarita honey? Maybe just some tequila and agave water? A little lime?
http://io9.com/#!5646143/honey-bees-can-get-drunk-just-like-humans
I think I might have a latent genius for honey farming.
Or something.
Assassin's Honey?
You can make poison honey if your bees feed on poisonous plants.
It pays to be facebook friends with Mithradates Eupator.
||
150 years ago. Seriously. You'd think that would be a long time.
|>
You can make poison honey if your bees feed on poisonous plants.
Hmmm. But honey gets all over during harvesting; I can vouch that the instinctive reaction is to lick a drop off the back of your hand. This sounds dangerous. Only the alert and disciplined should try this at home.
451: A considerate and presumably delicious suicide by proxy method is born. This blog adds value.
You can make poison honey if your bees feed on poisonous plants
I've wondered about that. There's loads of daphne around here, and presumably daphne honey would be delicious--the flowers "smell like a French whorehouse," according to a friend's mother--but deadly.