Darn white snowpremisists.
Snowflakes rioting all over Utah.
Is this why people want to defund ICE?

"Truly in love" with them?

Kinda depends on the abuse.


Going 70 mph in a 65 mph zone is abusing the law.
Eating fried foods are abusing your health/system.

If I get to define what is "abuse," then no, I would not be in a relationship with an "abuser."

If you/society gets to define what is "abuse," then I might/probably would be in a relationship with an "abuser."

There are basically 6 types.

1. Cougar. They're looking for young "meat."
To devour and move on to their next meal.
They don't date for long.

2. Older women seeking social relevance. Mid life crisis. They want to know they're still desirable and relevant, wanted, have social value.

3.Desperation to procreate, seeking out the best genes. Younger looks healthier.

4. Dominance or fetishized. Younger is seen as less smart, less secure, more easily controlled. To be a mommy figure with benefits.

5. Single moms that never grew up, just stopped developing as soon as their responsibility was someone else. Possibly have a sugar daddy or a bunch of child support payments from the different daddies but are now looking for the "real" love.

6. Married for most of their lives. Newly divorced or widowed. Stopped developing mentally and/or emotionally after marriage so just "get along better" with those younger, or think that dating is like build-a-bear and find that younger have more of the attributes/traits they "really" value.

Can be a combination.


That has more to do with being online, IMO, than anything else.

They may be blocking any guy that even hints at being a scammer.
They may be blocking anyone that doesn't live close to them.
They may be blocking anyone that doesn't match their height requirements, or what they're looking for.
They may be blocking anyone that is younger, or too much older.
They could be a scammer and just blocking anyone that doesn't fit their profile of whom they can scam.
They may be in a relationship with someone else on here, or just messing around on here, and are just blocking everyone.
A lot of people get mad at anyone that intrudes in their online space.
A lot of people get mad at anyone that doesn't match the criteria they are looking for, whether or not it's posted in their profile.

They aren't absolutely mutually exclusive.

Choosing "love" doesn't mean your relationship will last more than a week.

Choosing "arranged marriage" doesn't mean you will never love or feel love from your partner.

Are you trying to ask something more like "personal freedom, or social responsibility and security, which is more important to you?"

On that spectrum, I lean more towards personal freedom, but I'm well aware I am only willing to accept a certain level of risk, cost, expectations, and consequences the further I get away from the converse.

Depending on the consequences, I would absolutely choose an "arranged marriage."

I think "RIGHT or WRONG" is too simplistic.

I think it would be important to know the reasons "why" she is trying to "go for a Second Marriage immediately after her Husband's Death."

I mean there's a huge difference between:
1. An 18 year old stripper married a 98 year old oil tycoon and he croaks a day after their marriage. Then she immediately decides she's "bi" and marries the dead guys ex-wife.

2. A woman in an arranged marriage that lives in a society where marriage offers a lot of protection.

3. A 20 year old woman that married their middle school sweetheart when she turned 19, and the day after he dies she's begging some random internet stranger her age to marry her, or joining sugar baby dot com the next day to find a 98 year old oil tycoon.

4. A woman who is 20, been married 16 times, and each guy has died under "mysterious" circumstances.

I mean in some contexts her behavior or reasoning is something that "society" would want to judge as "wrong" to try and discontinue.

Other situations or contexts are warning signs that should show that something is "Wrong" and she needs help.

Other situations or contexts are simply indications of the "right" tools for that society.

Yes.

Their chickens could all be jerks.

Wait...no...no...nooooooo!

Maybe.

I'm willing to pay more if I perceive an increase in value in what I'm getting?

One restaurant I used to frequent was owned by a famous chef who retired locally.
Sometimes, some special occasions or holidays, he'd come in and (extremely) limit seating and operation, rearrange placement (where each table had a view of the mountains or river, or sunset, but they were all kinda private). Extending invitations or allowing reservations only from a few well known regulars.
He'd either prepare a giant multi course dinner where everyone was offered the same thing, or he'd personally prepare each table's/couples dishes.

I've seen where restaurants like Applebees offer a "Valentines Date Special!"
They limit the menu but they either only offer their most popular regular dishes (like "2 entrees, an app, and dessert!"), or stick to cliche offerings like steak and lobster, shrimp cocktail, and chocolate cake.
But they'd charge, sometimes, double their normal menu prices.

I'd pay more if the "dine out" place added value and offered something "special."

I would not pay more if a restaurant was simply exploiting a holiday to charge extra for the same crap just rearranged or because they got a "good deal" from a guy in a van on 2000 lbs of frozen shrimp and Valentines is a great time to move it.

For me it's kinda like any other holiday.
As a kid it was awesome.
As an adult, meh.


I enjoy keeping that tradition alive.
There are billions of people on the planet.
I will always have someone.

I especially enjoy sending the anonymous box of candy and card to random strangers on Valentines Day.
One of those giant 4 ft by 2 ft cards with something special written in calligraphy like:
"I want you to know how special and loved you are. That box of candy could easily have been a bomb. Or poisoned. But I care! Happy Valentines Day!"

There is no "best" thing.

There's only what you want.

What do you want.

Do you want a "relationship" (whatever that means), or do you want a "friendship" (whatever that means)?

And however you define it, does the person, you're wanting one with, define it the same way?

Because you both may want a "relationship" (or "friendship") but you both have different understandings of what that means.

Even if there was some hypothetical "best thing," it doesn't mean it's the "best thing" for you personally, or that you (or the person you're interested in) are even capable of that "best thing" with each other.


I have no idea what your life situation is.
For all I know from the perspective of, say, your therapist, a "friendship" is the best thing for you.
For all I know from the perspective of, say, your mother, a "relationship" would be the best thing for you.
For all I know from the perspective of, say, the universe, neither would be the best thing for anyone.


"Friendship first" is best in hindsight.
When you meet someone and your interaction and time spent together is so organic and natural that you never really question "where is this going? Where do I stand? What are we? What's going on? We need to do this, that, the other, work on, if this doesn't happen or they don't say that then it must mean, blah blah blah."
You take natural and organic "steps" that you aren't really questioning or analyzing because they're obvious and don't need analyzing as they circumvent your insecurities.

"Friendship 1st before a relationship" as a conscious proactive choice, where you're trying to control the "steps" of the relationship are a bad idea.
It then just becomes power and control games, with a high potential of manipulation.


Not between people that are mentally and emotionally healthy.


It not only depends on what you want (not what the internet thinks is "best"), but why you want it.
Some people want to build a family, grow into their community.
A lot of people are simply seeking a palliative and are using other people.

Who says it has to have an "opposite?"

It's usually a sign of something negative when people attempt to force things to be put into either/or, black/white, binary systems/boxes/labels.


To me this is like asking "what's the opposite of car?
Rollerblade's? Or Wheelchair?"

Love, hate, apathy, they aren't mutually exclusive, nor are they perpetual states.

World and people are more complex than that.

I've gone to pretty much all online banking at this point.

Every (issuing) bank where I've cashed a check or money order, though, has asked to see I.D. before they'd give me cash.

I've even been asked for I.D. when exchanging rolled coins for paper money.


Could mean a lot of things.

- your bank was bought out, and the parent bank has new policy and procedure guidelines that all tellers are supposed to follow, like asking for i.d. on any transaction of withdrawal.
Kind of like in some retail stores where the pin pad doesn't ask for your pin number (when using your debit card) if the transaction is less than 20 bucks or you aren't asking for money back, but if you want to "take money out" or it's a big enough transaction, then they ask for your pin # "i.d."

- they've had instances of fraud where someone comes in and is mistaken for a "regular" and had their accounts cleared out. (e.g. twin, sibling, son or daughter). So they've instituted an "everyone!" policy of checking if you're really you.
Like a CYA. Kind of like using a credit card at the gas pump, when they ask for the billing zip code/cvv.
That's not really for "your" protection, it's for the gas stations protection.
If your card is reported stolen or as a fraud transaction, and they asked for your zip code/cvv, then the credit card company eats the cost. Not the gas station, as they followed the TOS for the credit card company. They made a "best reasonable effort" to avoid fraud.

- New tellers come in with training from other banks or institutions that they implement.

- may be updating or collecting information. Do they just look at your i.d.? Do they enter in information? Do they ask you to swipe it through the pin pad?

- if they're opposite sex they may be interested in you. They may be trying to extend the conversation. Kind of like when young cashiers ask older people buying alcohol or cigarettes for their i.d.

- they may be terrible employees, the bank doesn't train them that well, or they're new, so they're doing what they think they're supposed to or want to.
Maybe the bank has a policy regarding "regulars" and not requiring id all the time, but the "bad" employee doesn't really remember you. Or they just stuck them out there after watching a couple of videos and a couple of online training exercises, or they forgot their training and can't remember if they're supposed to i.d. or not.

- could be a vast government conspiracy where the treasury and fed are involved in getting people used to the idea of being asked for their "papers" now so when they start roving patrols of secret police asking for vaccination papers it's complied with.

How far down the rabbit hole of "what does it mean" do you want to go?

Beats me.
Have you not dated anyone yet because you haven't ever talked to anyone, but you like to follow people around and hide in the bushes while giggling?

Are you really a 13 year old telling the site you're 18 and once you tell people your real age they disappear?

Do you actually show up to a date, but you're just not feeling it, so you jump up on the table and yell for all to hear "I decree that this doesn't count!" pulling up the hood to your unicorn Kigurumi before jumping down and running out the door while clacking two coconut halves together?

Are you 82 years old and have wandered the world, invisible, in another dimension, and only learned recently you could actually interact with other people through this site's forums?

Are you 30, 40, 60, whatever, but you keep waiting for the people you think should approach you to approach you, chase you down, throw you over their pedestal, and drag you into dating?

An oversimplified question, but eh.

It can be. But it may not be something you want, or it might actually be a sign of something that's actually negative from a macro perspective.

The more control you have or convenient of a choice happiness is? It means the more ignorant you need to be. Ignorance is bliss.

You ever hear of the McGurk effect? There's a video going around the internet highlighting it.
Among many other things (like Pareidolia, but not really talking about misophonia, just average general people), your brain also performs something called "filling."

Your senses are on all the time. Bringing information into the brain.
You are constantly bombarded by new information, information that can conflict between senses and understanding.
Your brain fills it in, translates it based on experience, and it may not be true.

You have natural implicit bias.

You ever notice how people start setting routines?
You ever drive the same way to work over and over and over again? For years?
Off the top of your head do you remember every single billboard or road sign along the route (probably more relevant to those in the U.S., especially in larger cities)? People generally don't (and there are a lot of people who think they can, but in reality they can't).

When things are consistent, they stop paying too much attention to anything that isn't personally relevant, or is considered a big enough change.

When you search the internet on how to choose happiness what do the links generally tell you?
"Be more mindful in the moment! Enjoy the little things! Get rid of toxic people, network positive people in your life!"

Crap like that.

Or IOW "control your environment. Create an echo chamber. Feed your pleasurable implicit biases. Stop paying attention to newness or diversity or real change (although support the illusion of change if you're one of those 'self help' people). Only do those things that engender happiness."

Basically, pursue ignorance. Stop seeking anything that really changes.
Make sure the input you get from your senses are pretty much the same and consistent over time.
Establish happiness as a delusion, and make sure nothing can pop your bubble.

So,

Yes. And that can be a problem that causes unhappiness to a lot of other people, and as they react making it seem like they want to cause your unhappiness.

People protect their bubbles. Ask any old person "set in their ways."

Also, because of this, "Happiness" can be subverted to a lot of less pleasant emotional states as people try to protect the things they thought they chose to make them "happy."

Stuff and things, burdens and joys?


Ohhhh...okay.
I wish I had Someone with whom I could Share .......... (insert websters dictionary or wikipedia here)

Communication, cooperation, and imagination.

All sorts of things.
Can you be more specific?

This is confusing:

With people living in their own worlds...what am I observing?
Not much in regards to other people...since they're in their own worlds?
Or not much, outside my own world?

I don't know.
It would depend on too many things.

But I would actually like to do that on a date.
Pizza eating contest.
Followed by maybe a Tums and stool softener eating contest.
Then go into the family bathroom and hold hands under the stall as we basically unload pounds of mozzavelveeta.


Other than that, I think the most I've personally eaten was about 20 "slices" of pizza in one sitting. Of course each "slice" was about 1 inch square.

The least was 1 (besides 0, when I didn't eat the pizza because it had nasty toppings), but it was a giant Chicago deep dish slice of pizza, about the size of a small child's head.

Depends a little bit on the details.

I mean can I turn anything other than my body invisible?
Will my clothes turn invisible and anything I put in my pockets be invisible?
Or if I'm invisible and drink some orange juice will it show, so if I walk around people just see this ball of orange juice being invisibly digested, or food turning into new poop?

Or if I turn the device on while driving will my car turn invisible?
If my clothes turn invisible when I do, can I turn my phone or objects invisible while I'm touching them?
If I can turn my phone/camera invisible then if I take a picture, is the flash invisible too?

Also, what's going on with the battery?
If I turn on the device on day 1 and it turns me invisible, does that mean I'm invisible for 100 days and can't turn it off/go visible until the battery runs out?

Or can I turn it on/off at will, becoming visible when I want to, but the battery will only last for 100 days whether I use it or not?


Other than that, depending on some of the rules (such as being able to turn a bag invisible which I can load up at a bank vault), I would probably sneak through an airport, sneak onto planes, then proceed to rob a lot of places, possibly all over the world. Or try to find a bunch of crack houses and steal as much money as possible, possibly raid a military base and see if I can get like grenades and rocket launchers, those would be fun to play with.

Plus a lot of peeping. Probably a lot of weird Winslow Jones stuff like standing in a pizza parlor and ventriloquising the dough "yeah tommy, spin me around, yeah, I'm knotty dough, kneed me, deeper, deeper tommy, harder, yeeeeah, cover me with that sauce, you're dirty, too bad you don't get health insurance at this minimum wage job so you can't get tested for schizophrenia, more cheese tommy, I said more!"

Sort of.
It was mostly self directed trial and error figuring out "how to keep mom/dad from blowing a gasket, maintain the status quo, or get that sweet sweet validation."

e.g. "you don't want your g.i. joes run over by the mower, stop leaving them in the yard."
Or "Clean your room, I'm tired of stepping on your lego's. Don't just shove everything under your bed, now you can't find your shoes. Do you want to go to school without shoes? I'm late for work! Where are your shoes?! Hurry up!
Oh, you made me a mothers day cake? And you didn't burn down the house or destroy the kitchen?! And you cleaned the bathroom and your room?! You're the best children I love you so much. That's so thoughtful!"


There's always more to learn.


I had a lot of different roommates when younger. Men, women, roommates are all ultimately horrible.

Some roommates were similar. They refused to clean up after themselves, or in a timely fashion (e.g. crusty dishes in the sink for days until too many silverfish sightings, not understanding carpets need vacuuming).

I figured out that a lot of them knew how to take care of themselves, tidy, clean, cook, whatever.
They just refused to do it.

For a lot of people it's an image or power game.

Like if it was just them living alone, they'd clean the bathroom every day.
But living with 3 people, they'd refuse to clean the bathroom because ultimately they didn't want to clean up after other people.
If they cleaned the bathroom they felt it would then be expected of them to do it. That it forced them into a "lower" social position.

And then there was living with the "kids" that just left home.
They had to clean, tidy, whatever at home, but now they were "free" they wanted to express their "freedom," to show they weren't "kids" anymore and could do "what they want," or not do what they didn't want to do. Testing boundaries, pushing their image.

And then there were those that were basically losers, depressed, lonely, or pot heads.
They didn't want to clean up, tidy, cook, whatever, because if they didn't do it they could manipulate a reaction from the roommates.
They could get someone else to do it, they could get someone angry at them, chase them down, to yell at them, cause drama.
Their lives were empty, they could use the drama to get that feeling that someone gave a crap about them. Negative attention is still attention.

Your standard power, control, image, and social hierarchy games.

Of course sometimes it was just a matter of tolerance.
Like I'm comfortable with washing sheets and cleaning my bathroom once a week.
Some people do it every day, others are fine with once a month, or only if they expect company.
I would judge those that would do it monthly, the daily cleaners would judge me, "a bit slack."

Other than that, the normal people I lived with that actually had no clue how to do it simply worked on figuring it out themselves and took any new information willingly.
Otherwise, they had enough income to do things like eat out every night, hire a maid, and take their laundry to the cleaners, so didn't care they couldn't do it.

Enough?