I don't know -- I've never tried to change any of my partners, other than to get them to understand why I don't want them trying to change me.

I mean, here's the thing -- if I like someone, if I like them the way they are, if I like them enough that I WANT a relationship with them, then it seems to me that there's no point in my trying to change them. If I felt they needed changing, I would avoid a relationship.

Apparently, I'm the only one who thinks this way.

He wasnt complaining bout his life, just about bein annoyed with cliche.

I think he will soon pop.

I think it's time that those of us who are actually here for (hopefully) something more than pointless blatherings about what we would do to the person above us, called a moratorium on the endless string of useless cliches that seem to infest our forum posts like an epidemic of mental corrosion.

Three examples:

1. "It always shows up when you stop looking." Wrong. It does NOT ALWAYS show up. I'm living proof. Now, I'm not saying it NEVER happens that way -- any student of non-zero possibilities knows that it MUST occasionally happen that way, simply due to mathematical laws. Something with a zero possibility (i.e., "my dog will turn into a kayak next Thursday") will never happen, but something with a non-zero possibility (the classical example in physics is that of all the air molecules in a room moving to one side of the room -- it's unlikely, but there is nothing in the laws of physics which disallows it) most likely WILL happen if you wait long enough.

But "It always shows up when you stop looking" is not an inevitable law of nature. It's a cliche, it's wishful thinking, and it may sometimes be accurate. But it is by no means universal.

2. "The common denominator in all your failed relationships is you." There has always been something about this statement that struck me as specious, but it took me awhile to figure it out.

And here it is -- the common denominator in ALL OF YOUR ENTIRE LIFE'S EXPERIENCES is you. What does that mean, insofar as cause-and-effect is concerned? Not much! Let's say you've been a passenger in five different cars that were involved in five different accidents in your life. Well, sure, you've been unlucky, but....

There's a sort of implicit blame game going on in "the common denominator in all of your failed relationships is you" -- in other words, since you were involved in all of these, then it's your own fault -- there's something inherently wrong with you, otherwise you could not possibly have engendered so many failures.

Is it your fault that you were in the five accident-bound cars? (Other than that you chose to ride in those cars in the first place, for whatever reason?)

See, the problem with "the common denominator in all of your failed relationships is you" is that it completely ignores the possibility that the other party may have had some responsibility for the failure of the relationship. Rather than deal with "we just weren't compatible" or "they changed after awhile," or whatever, it turns into "Hey, it's your fault that none of them worked out."

But what if those exes, the ones who were "your fault," had just as bad a track record in THEIR other relationships? So now "the common denominator in all of your failed relationships is you" applies to both parties, but you can't really sustain accusatory blame ("you're the common denominator"!) with the obligatory stigma if it's spread around to all involved.

I think we need to see this one for what it is -- it's just shorthand for "I'm too lazy to think up any useful comment or advice, so I'll just say something to make you feel bad about yourself." Yes, that's helpful.

3. "I like to see the glass as half full." It doesn't make any difference. If it's half full, it's also half empty; this is simple math. Whether you choose to put a positive spin on the imagery, it doesn't change the amount of fluid in the container. Also, it's one of those phrases that shows up in profiles almost as often as "I'm laid back and easy going," which is about as informative as the UPC code on the Shredded Wheat box.

There are more. Lots more. They don't help, they don't provide anything in the way of relevant information or communication enhancement. They need to be retired.

...but you can't really sustain accusatory blame ("you're the common denominator"!) with the obligatory stigma if it's spread around to all involved.

3. "I like to see the glass as half full." It doesn't make any difference. If it's half full, it's also half empty; this is simple math. Whether you choose to put a positive spin on the imagery, it doesn't change the amount of fluid in the container. Also, it's one of those phrases that shows up in profiles almost as often as "I'm laid back and easy going," which is about as informative as the UPC code on the Shredded Wheat box.

There are more. Lots more. They don't help, they don't provide anything in the way of relevant information or communication enhancement. They need to be retired.

If it weren't for bad luck, you'd have no luck at all. Misery loves company, and all is fair in love and war. I think its time to give them a taste of their own medicine; and quickly, because time is money; and therefore time is the root of all evil.



(this message intentionally nonsensical)

(Well, there's a switch.)

What exactly, if anything, are you trying to prove, other than you apparently cannot comprehend...anything?

The key word there is 'if'. If only we'd all keep those all important 'ifs' in mind, and not just say them; we'd temper our tendencies to rush forward along presumptive lings of thought.

Thank you for clarifying, my darling.

I think it's time that those of us who are actually here for (hopefully) something more than pointless blatherings about what we would do to the person above us, called a moratorium on the endless string of useless cliches that seem to infest our forum posts like an epidemic of mental corrosion.

Three examples:

1. "It always shows up when you stop looking." Wrong. It does NOT ALWAYS show up. I'm living proof. Now, I'm not saying it NEVER happens that way -- any student of non-zero possibilities knows that it MUST occasionally happen that way, simply due to mathematical laws. Something with a zero possibility (i.e., "my dog will turn into a kayak next Thursday") will never happen, but something with a non-zero possibility (the classical example in physics is that of all the air molecules in a room moving to one side of the room -- it's unlikely, but there is nothing in the laws of physics which disallows it) most likely WILL happen if you wait long enough.

But "It always shows up when you stop looking" is not an inevitable law of nature. It's a cliche, it's wishful thinking, and it may sometimes be accurate. But it is by no means universal.

2. "The common denominator in all your failed relationships is you." There has always been something about this statement that struck me as specious, but it took me awhile to figure it out.

And here it is -- the common denominator in ALL OF YOUR ENTIRE LIFE'S EXPERIENCES is you. What does that mean, insofar as cause-and-effect is concerned? Not much! Let's say you've been a passenger in five different cars that were involved in five different accidents in your life. Well, sure, you've been unlucky, but....

There's a sort of implicit blame game going on in "the common denominator in all of your failed relationships is you" -- in other words, since you were involved in all of these, then it's your own fault -- there's something inherently wrong with you, otherwise you could not possibly have engendered so many failures.

Is it your fault that you were in the five accident-bound cars? (Other than that you chose to ride in those cars in the first place, for whatever reason?)

See, the problem with "the common denominator in all of your failed relationships is you" is that it completely ignores the possibility that the other party may have had some responsibility for the failure of the relationship. Rather than deal with "we just weren't compatible" or "they changed after awhile," or whatever, it turns into "Hey, it's your fault that none of them worked out."

But what if those exes, the ones who were "your fault," had just as bad a track record in THEIR other relationships? So now "the common denominator in all of your failed relationships is you" applies to both parties, but you can't really sustain accusatory blame ("you're the common denominator"!) with the obligatory stigma if it's spread around to all involved.

I think we need to see this one for what it is -- it's just shorthand for "I'm too lazy to think up any useful comment or advice, so I'll just say something to make you feel bad about yourself." Yes, that's helpful.

3. "I like to see the glass as half full." It doesn't make any difference. If it's half full, it's also half empty; this is simple math. Whether you choose to put a positive spin on the imagery, it doesn't change the amount of fluid in the container. Also, it's one of those phrases that shows up in profiles almost as often as "I'm laid back and easy going," which is about as informative as the UPC code on the Shredded Wheat box.

There are more. Lots more. They don't help, they don't provide anything in the way of relevant information or communication enhancement. They need to be retired.

I disagree Lex.

That response is totally correct and perfectly appropriate when given as a response to a person incapable of seeing their paticipation in any of their relationships and prefers to bemoan the ill fortunes heaped upon their innocent selves.

I find it is not relevant to anyone with an IQ above a Nicaraguan Gnat, or those of us who have the capacity to be remotely aware they were actually IN a relationship.

The above statement is also appropriate for all the SUCCESSFUL relationships people have, had or will have.

Writing is different, naturally--good writing should avoid cliché, of course. But most people are not good, or even average, writers. Most people verge on illiteracy.

Although, I suppose I should be polite and agree that that particular phrase in indeed quite useless. But again, that is what an idiom is: It is a phrase that, if examined literally, becomes nonsensical.

So, you're a realist.

I personally would rather see the glass as half-filled with coffee, but then who drinks coffee from a glass? That's just not right.

It totally does make a difference, in this case: One can see the physical emptiness, the void, in the glass or one can see the physical liquid--both of which are evident. Perspective can change everything, because our interaction with physical reality comes chiefly through how we interpret our perception, no? We can control, within limits, how we interpret what we perceive. We can often control certain aspects of physical reality: We can drink from the glass. We can fill it. We can break it. But we might not do anything but decide "my opinion cannot change anything" if we do not pursue one more decisive, more provocative motivation or another (positivity, negativity, etc.).

Again, that will never, ever happen; the English language is so riddled with idioms that no amount of effort could extract them completely. Just sayin'.

]

You need to be a little more laid back and easygoing!



Ba da bump...tssssss